Posted on 04/07/2006 7:26:04 PM PDT by SandRat
NAVAL STATION GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba, April 7, 2006 – Defense and prosecution attorneys in the military commissions case of an accused al Qaeda propagandist continued the argument here today about whether the detainee has the right to represent himself. Ali Hamza Ahmad Sulayman al Bahlul, a Yemeni believed to be a close associate of Osama bin Laden, did not appear at his commissions hearing today, leaving Army Maj. Thomas Fleener, his appointed military defender, alone at the table.
Bahlul asked to represent himself in August 2004, but a ruling by John D. Altenburg Jr., the appointing authority for the Defense Department's Office of Military Commissions, ruled that self-representation in a military commission is "impracticable."
Fleener has since filed a motion requesting the presiding officer, Army Col. Peter Brownback III, to allow Bahlul to represent himself, or to refer the issue to Altenburg for review.
Arguing for his motion today, Fleener cited briefs from ethics lawyers and related cases, and said that the right to self-representation is a fundamental common law recognized internationally. Denying the accused detainees the right to self-representation would go against the president's military order governing the detention, treatment and trial of noncitizens in the war on terror, which states the accused must receive a full and fair trial, he said.
"Mr. al Bahlul and I don't want to be together," Fleener said. "We can't help it if the secretary of defense and his delagees have messed this up, but they have. They're not following the president's mandate."
The previous decision to deny Bahlul's request for self-representation was based mainly on the question of whether Bahlul would do a good job, Fleener said. How Bahlul conducts his own defense is not important and not what guarantees a full and fair trial, he said.
"The test isn't whether a guy's going to do a good job, it's whether he has the right," he said.
The prosecution countered Fleener's argument by saying that his briefs came from attorneys, not ethical experts. Also, the compelling interest in this case is that it deals with national security issues, the prosecution attorney said, because classified information will be involved, and issued a reminder that the country is at war.
The prosecution also questioned whether Brownback has the authority to give Bahlul the right to represent himself, since a decision has already been made about this issue.
Brownback said he would rule on the matter of self-representation in due course.
The issue of self-representation has arisen several times throughout the military commissions process. Several detainees have said they do not trust Americans, and specifically servicemembers, and therefore wish to act as their own lawyers.
OK all you Sea Lawyers! Have Fun!!!
To argue for self-representation based on a distrust of Americans is logically inconsistent, since the Judge and Jury are all Americans. If Americans are not trustworthy, what does it matter who the lawyer is?
Guess I don't see that he has the right here, but I'd be for it. LOL!
The guy is a moron for sure.
They will never allow it.
Thus, it would make for a far more persuasive argument to contend that lawyers are not trustworthy.
Who would argue otherwise...???
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.