Legal terror

Last week, President Bush, with his lapdog Senate at his side, passed a bill making his controversial treatment of foreign detainees into law.\nCall me naive, but I was truly expecting the Senate to be more discerning. Wasn't it just six weeks ago that the country was aflame with outrage at the exposure of secret prisons and possible torture? \nSix weeks ago, there were major, worrisome divisions within the GOP, murmurs of fracturing and Republicans fleeing to the other side in apparent disgust. Six weeks ago, the Democrats were cheering as the Republican Party appeared to be crumbling. Now, six weeks later, the Republicans seem to be a united front in favor of the same tactics so many once decried. What under-the-table dealings must have occurred to change the tide so quickly, we will never know. But it's apparent that all of us who hold the Geneva Conventions and transparent justice dear celebrated prematurely as, despite the offensive nature of this bill, the Senate passed it 65-34. \nThe Senate's apparent lack of concern regarding the ideas set forth in the bill should be alarming. Red flags should fly when policymakers are faced with such concepts as intensified interrogation, indefinite detainment for any reason and no avenues for appeal. Though the bill prohibits torture, it does explicitly promote more severe interrogation techniques. And with the lack of transparency evident in this law, how can we be sure our government is not conducting terrorist tactics in our names? No one in the public will be able to hold these interrogators responsible, as all proceedings in these cases will be turned over to military tribunals. Everything will be classified, zero transparency. It is obvious that there is too much room for abuse in these provisions. Yes, it is outlined in the language of the bill that the bounds of interrogation will exclude methods considered war crimes (sexual abuse, experimentation, mutilation, etc.), but who would ever know? \nConstitutionalists should also be concerned as this law extends presidential power without providing the appropriate checks our system relies on. Because this bill transfers the matter to the military, the president, as commander in chief, has the final say as to who gets held indefinitely for any reason. There is no explicit provision for habeas corpus and no avenue for appeals to a nonmilitary judiciary. That loophole limits any judicial review of the conditions or legality of a subject's detention, thus castrating a vital check on the executive. \nThis potentially abusive law must be overturned through a shift of power in Congress. Come election time in this round and the next, push for an administration committed to transparency in justice because though procuring our safety and punishing the guilty are noble endeavors, they can be achieved without the deprivation human rights. Terrorism will not defeat terrorism, but honest, patient justice will win the war for right.