All these prisoners have asked for is a fair hearing, one in which they have the chance to learn the charges against them and to rebut the accusations before a neutral decision maker.
Wilner has been critical of the conditions under which the US holds Guantanamo detainees.[6]
Wilner also reported that interrogators have warned Guantanamo captives that the Guantanamo attorneys were all Jewish, and they couldn't trust them.[7]
On September 19, 2008 the Washington Post published a letter to the editor from Wilner in reply to a recent editorial on whether the Congress should pass legislation on how the Justice system should conduct captives' habeas corpus appeals.[3] The United States Supreme Court's ruling in Boumediene v. Bush had overturned Congress's proscription on allowing captives access to the US justice system.
SenatorsLindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman had introduced a bill "..to mandate the procedures the courts must follow in the habeas hearings for Guantanamo Bay detainees."[3] The Washington Post's editorial had applauded the Senator's proposed bill. Wilner's letter expressed concern that the bill was unnecessary, and could:
... interfere with habeas cases underway, cause confusion and raise constitutional issues that could only delay the "prompt" habeas corpus hearings ordered by the Supreme Court.
References
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Thomas Wilner.
^ abc
Thomas Wilner (2008-09-19). "Guantanamo Detainees and the Courts". Washington Post. p. A18. Retrieved 2008-09-19. The habeas corpus review ordered by the Supreme Court is modest but fundamental. It simply requires the government to demonstrate to an independent judge that it has a reasonable basis for detaining a prisoner. It is the most basic protection against arbitrary and mistaken imprisonment. U.S. courts have handled these cases since our country was founded. They are fully capable of handling these cases now without further legislation.