EDITORIAL – Human rights violations checked and balanced by Supreme Court

In a victory for human-rights advocates – and, well, anyone with common sense – the… In a victory for human-rights advocates – and, well, anyone with common sense – the right-leaning Supreme Court ruled last Thursday in favor of embracing Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions.

According to a report from the Associated Press, the Supreme Court’s ruling just might be the worst news that the Bush administration could get regarding their “war on terror.” The Supreme Court is embracing international law that prohibits “outrages upon personal dignity” and “humiliating and degrading treatment.” The ruling found military tribunals set up by the administration to be in conflict with international and domestic laws regarding treatment of prisoners.

The ruling is in response to a case against Osama Bin Laden’s ex-driver, Salim Ahmed Hamdan, charged with conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism, who was set to stand trial in military tribunals.

Hamdan accused the United States of violating the Geneva Conventions, arguing that there is no international law against conspiracy and that military commissions were acting in violation by not letting the defendant see evidence against him.

The Bush administration has maintained all along that suspected terrorists are not eligible for Geneva Accords protection. In light of the ruling, the administration plans to find alternate avenues to prosecuting detainees.

“To the extent that there is latitude to work with the Congress to determine whether or not the military tribunals will be an avenue in which to give people their day in court, we will do so,” Bush said in a BBC report.

So what does this mean for the United States? For starters, it means that men and women in the armed forces could be accused of war crimes. Crimes include torture, murder and other serious human rights violations.

If these soldiers are guilty of crimes against others, by all means, prosecute them. And don’t stop with the soldiers; work up the chain of command and hold everyone accountable from the top down.

This isn’t something Republicans want to hear during an election year. It’s bad news for tribunal supporters in Congress who are rallying to push through measures that will make Bush’s tribunals legal. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a former military lawyer, is leading the campaign in Congress to come up with new ways to create tribunals.

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., introduced the “Unprivileged Combatant Act” which would balance, according to the senator, “the need for national security with the need to afford detainees with sufficient due process.”

The Supreme Court’s ruling won’t shut down the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, although the Bush administration might try to scare you into thinking that it would be a bad thing if it happened. Guantanamo is a prison housing 460 suspected terrorists or conspirers – mostly without charge – who would have been tried by the disputed tribunals.

The Bush administration is trying to skew public perception of the court’s decision, saying that they are going to do everything in their power not to let the terrorists walk free – insinuating that the Supreme Court is acting irresponsibly and without concern for United States citizens.

Excuse us, Mr. President, but contrary to your beliefs, there are no gray areas when it comes to human rights violations. Crimes at Guantanamo have been overlooked for too long and it’s time for accountability.

Congratulations to the Supreme Court for defying expectations and speaking out against the Bush administration. It’s refreshing to see that checks and balances are still functional in our government and the partisan politics aren’t omnipotent.

It’s time that we hold ourselves accountable to international laws. With any luck Congress won’t find a way to sneak around the Geneva Conventions – everyone deserves due process and to be treated with dignity.