Source: https://casebook.icrc.org/print/20780
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 02:45:22
Document Index: 182911749

Matched Legal Cases: ['§950', '§948', 'Art. 3', '§949', '§949', '§948', '§948', '§950', '§950']

Home > United States, Military Commissions
[See United States, President’s Military Order [1]; and United States, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [2]]
[Source: United States Department of Defense, “Military Commission Act of 2006”, 17 October 2006; available at http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/PL-109-366.pdf [3]]
[Source: United States Department of Defense, “Military Commission Act of 2009”, 28 October 2009; available at http://www.defense.gov/news/2009%20MCA%20Pub%20%20Law%20111-84.pdf [4]]
Does the second category mean that persons merely supporting hostilities can be defined as “unprivileged enemy belligerents”? Under IHL, can someone supporting a party to a conflict be automatically considered as participating in hostilities? Can such persons be treated as belligerents? [See ICRC, Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities [5]]
What does the third category of persons mean (i.e. persons who were “part of al Qaeda at the time of the alleged offense”)? Does it mean that the new military commissions are authorized to prosecute all al-Qaeda members, even though they have not been involved in any armed conflict within the meaning of IHL? Would IHL apply to them? (See also 2009 Act, §950p(c)) [See ICRC, Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities [5]]
Why can military commissions, according to both Acts, only prosecute foreign nationals? Before which instances are American citizens to be prosecuted if they commit the same offences as those listed in the Acts? Do you agree that there should be two different processes, one for foreign nationals and one for American citizens? Does IHL say anything about persons fighting against their State of nationality? What would be the status of such persons under IHL? [See United States, Trial of John Phillip Walker Lindh [6]]
(2006 Act, §948b(f)) Why does the 2006 Act state that the military commissions are “regularly constituted” and afford all the necessary “judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples”? Is it sufficient to say that the military commissions meet the requirements of Art. 3 common to the Conventions for them to actually do so? Would such a provision have prevented US courts from declaring military commissions unlawful? Why did the drafters of the 2009 Act remove this provision? Do you agree that the military commissions of 2006 afford all necessary judicial guarantees? (See also 2006 Act, §949j; 2009 Act, §949j; United States, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [2])
(2006 Act, §948b(g); 2009 Act, §948b(e)) What is the difference between the two provisions? Does the provision in the 2006 Act mean that the Geneva Conventions do not confer any right on individuals? What does the 2009 provision mean (i.e. that the Geneva Conventions do not establish a private right of action)? Do you agree that the Geneva Conventions do not establish any private right of action? [See also United States, United States v. Noriega [7]]
Is conspiracy to commit a war crime a war crime? Is the fact that it is listed in both Acts in keeping with the Supreme Court’s conclusion in Hamdan? [See United States, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld [2]]
(2006 Act, §950v(b)(15); 2009 Act, §950t (b)(15)) Is murder of a combatant by a civilian a war crime? Can the United States try enemy civilians for acts other than war crimes? Can it try them before military commissions? [See ICRC, Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities [5]]
(2006 Act, Sec.7) What do you think of the provision on habeas corpus matters? Can Guantanamo detainees apply for a writ of habeas corpus? Why did the drafters of the 2009 Act remove this provision? [See United States, Habeas Corpus for Guantanamo Detainees [8]]
Source URL: https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/united-states-military-commissions
[1] https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/united-states-presidents-military-order
[3] http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/PL-109-366.pdf
[4] http://www.defense.gov/news/2009%20MCA%20Pub%20%20Law%20111-84.pdf
[5] https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/icrc-interpretive-guidance-notion-direct-participation-hostilities
[6] https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/united-states-trial-john-phillip-walker-lindh
[7] https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/united-states-united-states-v-noriega
[8] https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/united-states-habeas-corpus-guantanamo-detainees