Post-9/11 Overreaction and Fallacies Regarding War and Defense, Guantanamo, the Status of Persons, Treatment, Judicial Review of Detention, and Due Process in Military Commissions
16 Pages Posted: 19 Jun 2014
Date Written: 2004
This article addresses several of the Post-9/11 fallacies offered by the Bush-Cheney Administration in their effort to effectuate a “common plan” of secret detention and torture and cruel, inhumane treatment of other human beings – fallacies that do not obviate international criminal responsibility of those who authorized or facilitated the common plan. Particular attention is paid to the fact that 9/11 did not create a gap in international legal protections under either the laws of war or human rights law, much less other relevant international criminal law; that there was no “legal no-man’s land” where no legal protections pertained; that human rights law and Geneva law reached any person who was detained; that secret arrests and detentions are forced disappearance; and that the prohibitions of torture and cruel and inhuman treatment are absolute.
Keywords: American Declaration, Bush, Cheney, common article 3, common plan, complicity, crime, cruel, detention, disappearance, Geneva Convention, human right, ICCPR, inhuman, judicial review, law of war, no gap, terrorism, torture, secret detention, U.N. Charter, war crime
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation