|
Adressing the Key Concern Part 2 |
|
|
|
Written by JD Johannes
|
|
Saturday, 13 January 2007 |
As I stood in the corner of a cubicle that served as a hearing room for not one, but two Iraqi Judges of the Central Criminal Courts of Iraq I had hope.
The Judge was focused and aggressive, the prosecutors made their cases and the defense attorneys were less than interested.
In that particular cubicle I saw a stream of defendants I recognized--I had been with the Marines when they were origninally detained.
But one question nagged at me, why weren't the accused's confessions being admitted?
Prior to the hearing, I stold glances at each detainees case files. There was the evidence upon arrest--rockets, mortar rounds, blasting caps, disassembled two-way radios and cell phones. But, the transcripts of the questioning performed by military intelligence officers was not allowed at trial, despite the accused admitting he made IEDs and was part of an insurgent cell.
For those familiar with the hearings of the 9/11 Commission, the Wall is alive and well in Iraq.
Of the detainees I watched that day, about half, who had admitted to military intelligence officers that they were insurgents, were set free.
This is the revolving door that is hindering the Marines trying to hold, win, and build Karmah.
If intelligence materials cannot be used in trial, then an investigative, criminal law interrogation must be built into the system. Or, a mechanism built into the legalistic handling of of detainees that allows for confessions to be entered into evidence.
An insurgent who states to a military intelligence officer that he makes IEDs, should not be set free.
As long as they are, we will never be able to hold nieghborhoods.
(Next--Key Objectives: Thinking beyond terrian)
Supporting Reporting and Filmmaking in Iraq Buy a DVD
|
