Difference between revisions of "Indefinite detention"

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(linkify)
(NDAA)
Line 24: Line 24:
 
{{Quote box
 
{{Quote box
 
| quote  = Regarding U.S. Citizens accused of supporting [[terrorism]], senator [[Lindsey Graham]] has stated before the senate, "When they say, ‘I want my lawyer,’ you tell them: ‘Shut up. You don’t get a lawyer. You are an enemy combatant, and we are going to talk to you about why you joined [[Al Qaeda]].’"
 
| quote  = Regarding U.S. Citizens accused of supporting [[terrorism]], senator [[Lindsey Graham]] has stated before the senate, "When they say, ‘I want my lawyer,’ you tell them: ‘Shut up. You don’t get a lawyer. You are an enemy combatant, and we are going to talk to you about why you joined [[Al Qaeda]].’"
−
| source = – ''[[United States Senate|U.S. Senator]] [[Lindsey Graham]], 2011''<ref name="nytimes.com">Savage, Charlie, "Senate Declines to Clarify Rights of American Qaeda Suspects Arrested in U.S.," ''[[The New York Times]]'', 1 December 2011:[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/us/senate-declines-to-resolve-issue-of-american-qaeda-suspects-arrested-in-us.html?ref=us].</ref>
+
| source = – ''U.S. Senator [[Lindsey Graham]], 2011''<ref name="nytimes.com">Savage, Charlie, "Senate Declines to Clarify Rights of American Qaeda Suspects Arrested in U.S.," ''[[The New York Times]]'', 1 December 2011:[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/us/senate-declines-to-resolve-issue-of-american-qaeda-suspects-arrested-in-us.html?ref=us].</ref>
 
  | width = 40%
 
  | width = 40%
 
  | align = right
 
  | align = right
Line 30: Line 30:
 
In the United States, indefinite detention has been publicly admitted as regards so-called "[[terrorism|terror suspects]]".<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/01/02/indefinite_detention_of_suspects_in_terror_cases_under_us_review/</ref> According to the [[American Civil Liberties Union]], section 412 of the [[USA PATRIOT act]] permits indefinite detention of immigrants;<ref>http://www.aclu.org/natsec/emergpowers/12483leg20011023.html</ref> one of the most highly publicized cases has been that of [[Jose Padilla (prisoner)|Jose Padilla]],<ref>http://books.google.com/books?id=DzLOLY6SVQUC&pg=PA91&dq=%22indefinite+detention%22&ie=ISO-8859-1&output=html</ref> whose ultimate prosecution and conviction in the United States have also been highly controversial.<ref>[http://www.revcom.us/a/100/padilla-en.html Jose Padilla Convicted-The Expanding U.S. Machinery of Repression: ?Thought Crimes,? Preventive Detention, and Torture]</ref> The [[International Red Cross]] has criticized the indefinite detention of prisoners at [[Guantanamo Bay camp|Guantanamo Bay]].<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9802EFDF143FF933A25753C1A9659C8B63</ref>   
 
In the United States, indefinite detention has been publicly admitted as regards so-called "[[terrorism|terror suspects]]".<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/01/02/indefinite_detention_of_suspects_in_terror_cases_under_us_review/</ref> According to the [[American Civil Liberties Union]], section 412 of the [[USA PATRIOT act]] permits indefinite detention of immigrants;<ref>http://www.aclu.org/natsec/emergpowers/12483leg20011023.html</ref> one of the most highly publicized cases has been that of [[Jose Padilla (prisoner)|Jose Padilla]],<ref>http://books.google.com/books?id=DzLOLY6SVQUC&pg=PA91&dq=%22indefinite+detention%22&ie=ISO-8859-1&output=html</ref> whose ultimate prosecution and conviction in the United States have also been highly controversial.<ref>[http://www.revcom.us/a/100/padilla-en.html Jose Padilla Convicted-The Expanding U.S. Machinery of Repression: ?Thought Crimes,? Preventive Detention, and Torture]</ref> The [[International Red Cross]] has criticized the indefinite detention of prisoners at [[Guantanamo Bay camp|Guantanamo Bay]].<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9802EFDF143FF933A25753C1A9659C8B63</ref>   
  
−
On December 5, 2008, the [[United States Supreme Court]] claimed that it would rule on the legality of indefinite detention.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/05/AR2008120501884.html</ref> On November 29, 2011, the [[United States Senate]] rejected a proposed amendment to the [[National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012]] ("NDAA") that would have banned indefinite detention by the United States government of its own citizens,<ref name="nytimes.com"/> leading to criticism that [[Habeas corpus in the United States]] has been undermined.<ref>Khaki, Ategah, "Senate Rejects Amendment Banning Indefinite Detention," ''[[ACLU]] Blog of Rights'', 29 November 2011: [http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/NDAA].</ref><ref>Carter, Tom "US Senators back law authorizing indefinite military detention without trial or charge," ''[[World Socialist Web Site]]'', 2 December 2011: [http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/dec2011/sena-d02.shtml].</ref> Congress and Senate approved the [[National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012|National Defense Authorization Act]] in December 2011 and President [[Barack Obama]] signed it December 31, 2011.<ref>Julie Pace, [http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0101/Obama-signs-defense-bill-despite-serious-reservations Obama signs defense bill despite 'serious reservations'], [[Associated Press]], January 1, 2012.</ref> The new indefinite detention provision of the law was decried as a "historic assault on American liberty."<ref>Jonathan Turley, [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/jan/02/ndaa-historic-assault-american-liberty?newsfeed=true The NDAA's historic assault on American liberty], [[The Guardian]], January 2, 2012.</ref> The [[American Civil Liberties Union]] stated that "President Obama's action today is a blight on his legacy because he will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law."<ref>[http://www.aclu.org/national-security/president-obama-signs-indefinite-detention-bill-law Press release, December 31, 2011] from [[American Civil Liberties Union]].</ref> On May 16, 2012, in response to a lawsuit filed by journalist [[Chris Hedges]], [[Noam Chomsky]], [[Naomi Wolf]] and others,<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/mar/28/helping-chris-hedges-lawsuit-ndaa</ref> [[United States District Judge]] [[Katherine B. Forrest]] ruled the indefinite detention section of the law (1021) likely violates the 1st and 5th Amendments and issued a [[preliminary injunction]] preventing the US government from enforcing it.<ref>http://nysd.uscourts.gov/cases/show.php?db=special&id=174</ref><ref>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-16/military-detention-law-blocked-by-new-york-judge.html</ref><ref>http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/05/16/46550.htm</ref><ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/indefinite-detention-blocked-ndaa-ruling_n_1522654.html</ref><ref>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/federal_court_enjoins_ndaa/singleton/</ref>
+
On December 5, 2008, the [[United States Supreme Court]] claimed that it would rule on the legality of indefinite detention.<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/05/AR2008120501884.html</ref> On November 29, 2011, the [[United States Senate]] rejected a proposed amendment to the [[National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012]] ("NDAA") that would have banned indefinite detention by the United States government of its own citizens,<ref name="nytimes.com"/> leading to criticism that [[Habeas corpus in the United States]] has been undermined.<ref>Khaki, Ategah, "Senate Rejects Amendment Banning Indefinite Detention," ''[[ACLU]] Blog of Rights'', 29 November 2011: [http://www.aclu.org/blog/tag/NDAA].</ref><ref>Carter, Tom "US Senators back law authorizing indefinite military detention without trial or charge," ''[[World Socialist Web Site]]'', 2 December 2011: [http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/dec2011/sena-d02.shtml].</ref> Congress and Senate approved the [[National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012|National Defense Authorization Act]] in December 2011 and President [[Barack Obama]] signed it December 31, 2011.<ref>Julie Pace, [http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2012/0101/Obama-signs-defense-bill-despite-serious-reservations Obama signs defense bill despite 'serious reservations'], [[Associated Press]], January 1, 2012.</ref> The new indefinite detention provision of the law was decried as a "historic assault on American liberty."<ref>Jonathan Turley, [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/jan/02/ndaa-historic-assault-american-liberty?newsfeed=true The NDAA's historic assault on American liberty], [[The Guardian]], January 2, 2012.</ref> The [[American Civil Liberties Union]] stated that "President Obama's action today is a blight on his legacy because he will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law."<ref>[http://www.aclu.org/national-security/president-obama-signs-indefinite-detention-bill-law Press release, December 31, 2011] from [[American Civil Liberties Union]].</ref> On May 16, 2012, in response to a lawsuit filed by journalist [[Chris Hedges]], [[Noam Chomsky]], [[Naomi Wolf]] and others,<ref>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/mar/28/helping-chris-hedges-lawsuit-ndaa</ref> [[United States District Judge]] [[Katherine B. Forrest]] ruled the indefinite detention section of the law (1021) likely violates the 1st and 5th Amendments and issued a [[preliminary injunction]] preventing the US government from enforcing it.<ref>http://nysd.uscourts.gov/cases/show.php?db=special&id=174</ref><ref>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-16/military-detention-law-blocked-by-new-york-judge.html</ref><ref>http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/05/16/46550.htm</ref><ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/indefinite-detention-blocked-ndaa-ruling_n_1522654.html</ref><ref>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/federal_court_enjoins_ndaa/singleton/</ref> However, in 2014, the US Supreme Court effectively allowed indefinite detention by declaring that the 2012 NDAA act was ''not'' unconsitutional.
  
 
{{SMWDocs}}
 
{{SMWDocs}}

Revision as of 15:47, 6 May 2014


Indefinite detention, termed by Wikipedia as "controversial", breaches a multitude of national and international laws, including human rights laws.[1] In recent years, national governments have begun removing legal obstacles to indefinite detention, often beginning first with low status minorities such as immigrants or alleged terrorists.

Australia

In 1994, indefinite detention was introduced to Australia, removing an earlier 273 day limit on Vietnamese, Chinese, and Cambodian refugees. Previous laws had also allowed for the indefinite detention of specified people.[2] In 2004, Australia's high court ruled in the case Al-Kateb v Godwin that the indefinite detention of a stateless person is lawful. All states and territories (except New South Wales) allow for indefinite detention of violent or sexual offenders who are considered unacceptably likely to reoffend.[2]

Malaysia

The Internal Security Act an act enforced since 1960 is a preventive detention law enforced in Malaysia which allows indefinite detention without trial for 2 years and further extension as needed.

Singapore

In Singapore, the Internal Security Act allows the government to arrest and indefinitely detain individuals whom the government deems pose a threat to "national security".[3]

Switzerland

In Switzerland, local laws related to 'dangerousness' can be evoked to incarcerate persons without charge. The highest profile case was Egyptian refugee Mohamed El Ghanem, who was indefinitely detained after refusing to work as an informant for Swiss police.

United Kingdom

In 2004, the House of Lords ruled that indefinite detention violates the Human Rights Act and the European Convention on Human Rights.[1] In fact, within the three provisions of the Magna Carta which are still in effect, indefinite detention is forbidden. However, in 2006 the government passed a law allowing for indefinite detention, and many immigrants have been are being detained indefinitely for years as a result.[4]

United States

See also: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013

Regarding U.S. Citizens accused of supporting terrorism, senator Lindsey Graham has stated before the senate, "When they say, ‘I want my lawyer,’ you tell them: ‘Shut up. You don’t get a lawyer. You are an enemy combatant, and we are going to talk to you about why you joined Al Qaeda.’"

– U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham, 2011[5]

In the United States, indefinite detention has been publicly admitted as regards so-called "terror suspects".[6] According to the American Civil Liberties Union, section 412 of the USA PATRIOT act permits indefinite detention of immigrants;[7] one of the most highly publicized cases has been that of Jose Padilla,[8] whose ultimate prosecution and conviction in the United States have also been highly controversial.[9] The International Red Cross has criticized the indefinite detention of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay.[10]

On December 5, 2008, the United States Supreme Court claimed that it would rule on the legality of indefinite detention.[11] On November 29, 2011, the United States Senate rejected a proposed amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 ("NDAA") that would have banned indefinite detention by the United States government of its own citizens,[5] leading to criticism that Habeas corpus in the United States has been undermined.[12][13] Congress and Senate approved the National Defense Authorization Act in December 2011 and President Barack Obama signed it December 31, 2011.[14] The new indefinite detention provision of the law was decried as a "historic assault on American liberty."[15] The American Civil Liberties Union stated that "President Obama's action today is a blight on his legacy because he will forever be known as the president who signed indefinite detention without charge or trial into law."[16] On May 16, 2012, in response to a lawsuit filed by journalist Chris Hedges, Noam Chomsky, Naomi Wolf and others,[17] United States District Judge Katherine B. Forrest ruled the indefinite detention section of the law (1021) likely violates the 1st and 5th Amendments and issued a preliminary injunction preventing the US government from enforcing it.[18][19][20][21][22] However, in 2014, the US Supreme Court effectively allowed indefinite detention by declaring that the 2012 NDAA act was not unconsitutional.


 

Indefinite detention victims on Wikispooks

TitleDescription
Shaker AamerThe last UK national to be released from Guantanamo Bay, where he was held for 13 years and subjected to torture after refusing to spy for MI5.
Emad Abdalla HassanA person who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, sold to US for $5000 and has been subject to illegal imprisonment and torture in Guantanamo Bay for years. Cleared for release in 2010, he was transferred to Oman on June 13, 2015.
Khalid Sheikh MohammedOfficially, due to be tried in 2021
Yunis Abdurrahman ShokuriHeld in extrajudicial detention in Guantanamo Bay
Aafia SiddiquiAmerican-educated Pakistani cognitive neuroscientist, tortured and raped for years by US forces, now serving a life sentence after a trial of a highly questionable nature.
Abu ZubaydahA prisoner of the deep state, subjected to torture, denied legal process, still in detention for over 20 years.
Khaled al-Maqtari
Many thanks to our Patrons who cover ~2/3 of our hosting bill. Please join them if you can.



References

  1. ↑ a b http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2004/12/15/uk-law-lords-rule-indefinite-detention-breaches-human-rights
  2. ↑ a b http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/pdo/ll_pdo.nsf/pages/PDO_continuingdetentionorderssexoffenders
  3. ↑ http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/non_version/cgi-bin/cgi_retrieve.pl?actno=REVED-143
  4. ↑ http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/18/britain-detaining-immigrants-indefinitely
  5. ↑ a b Savage, Charlie, "Senate Declines to Clarify Rights of American Qaeda Suspects Arrested in U.S.," The New York Times, 1 December 2011:[1].
  6. ↑ http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/01/02/indefinite_detention_of_suspects_in_terror_cases_under_us_review/
  7. ↑ http://www.aclu.org/natsec/emergpowers/12483leg20011023.html
  8. ↑ http://books.google.com/books?id=DzLOLY6SVQUC&pg=PA91&dq=%22indefinite+detention%22&ie=ISO-8859-1&output=html
  9. ↑ Jose Padilla Convicted-The Expanding U.S. Machinery of Repression: ?Thought Crimes,? Preventive Detention, and Torture
  10. ↑ http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9802EFDF143FF933A25753C1A9659C8B63
  11. ↑ http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/12/05/AR2008120501884.html
  12. ↑ Khaki, Ategah, "Senate Rejects Amendment Banning Indefinite Detention," ACLU Blog of Rights, 29 November 2011: [2].
  13. ↑ Carter, Tom "US Senators back law authorizing indefinite military detention without trial or charge," World Socialist Web Site, 2 December 2011: [3].
  14. ↑ Julie Pace, Obama signs defense bill despite 'serious reservations', Associated Press, January 1, 2012.
  15. ↑ Jonathan Turley, The NDAA's historic assault on American liberty, The Guardian, January 2, 2012.
  16. ↑ Press release, December 31, 2011 from American Civil Liberties Union.
  17. ↑ http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/mar/28/helping-chris-hedges-lawsuit-ndaa
  18. ↑ http://nysd.uscourts.gov/cases/show.php?db=special&id=174
  19. ↑ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-16/military-detention-law-blocked-by-new-york-judge.html
  20. ↑ http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/05/16/46550.htm
  21. ↑ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/16/indefinite-detention-blocked-ndaa-ruling_n_1522654.html
  22. ↑ http://www.salon.com/2012/05/16/federal_court_enjoins_ndaa/singleton/
Retrieved from "https://wikispooks.com/w/index.php?title=Indefinite_detention&oldid=35262"