Opinion Martial law, American-style By Douglas Lummis	フレームで見る  英文をプリントする  脚注をプリントする
アメリカ式戒厳令 米同時多発テロが起きたとき、ブッシュ大統領は国家非常事態宣言を出した。当初は意味がはっきりしなかったその宣言は、時間がたつにつれ、だれの権利を脅かすものなのか分かってきた…。

On Sept. 14 last year, U.S. President George W. Bush declared a state of national emergency. At first, it wasn't clear what this meant. Curtailment of legal rights? A new draft law? Punishment for non-cooperators?

On Nov. 13, Bush issued another declaration: Non-citizens identified as "terrorists" would be tried by special military tribunals. This meant that, even if they were captured fighting in Afghanistan, they would not have the rights of war prisoners. (The 1949 Geneva Convention forbids trial and punishment of war prisoners.)

And though they would be tried under the authority of the U.S. government, they would also not have the rights guaranteed to criminals under the U.S. Constitution. For example, they would not have the right to meet a lawyer, the right to face their accuser, the right to see the evidence being used by the prosecution, the right of appeal, etc.

This is Martial law. But here's the interesting thing: This U.S. martial law applies only to foreigners. There is a U.S. law that prohibits trying U.S. citizens under military tribunals. That law is still in effect.

As you know, there are several hundred alleged "terrorists" being held in cages in the U.S. base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It turns out that one of those prisoners, a man named Yasser Esam Hamdi, was born in the United States, though he was raised in Saudi Arabia. So as an American citizen, "he could file a petition in federal court demanding that the government either charge him with a crime or set him free." (New York Times, April 5)

This is called the right of Habeas Corpus, a vital principle in Anglo-American law. And what we can understand from this is that the non-citizens being held at Guantanamo, and the many more being held within the United States, do not have this right.

Shortly after his citizenship was confirmed, Hamdi was transferred to a prison in Virginia. Here are some things to think about: Bush has said that the United States is in a war against terrorism, not just in one country, but wherever it exists in the world. In his State of the Union Address (Jan. 29), Bush said that while some governments are cooperating, "some governments will be timid in the face of terror. And make no mistake about it: If they do not act, America will."

This means that if there are any governments that hesitate to arrest people the United States considers to be terrorists, it will send forces into that country and arrest them. No one gave the United States the authority to arrest people in foreign countries. No other government has that power. The United Nations does not have that power.

The United States has unilaterally declared a state of martial law not over its own citizens, but over the whole world. Anyone, anywhere, who is accused by the United States of "terrorism," may now be arrested and tried under a U.S. military tribunal.

This is something new in modern history, but not altogether unprecedented. The precedent is the Roman Empire.

Shukan ST: June 14, 2002

(C) All rights reserved