AP photographer imprisoned in Iraq 5 mos without charges

[spike]

A beacon of freedom we've become.

The U.S. military in Iraq has imprisoned an Associated Press photographer for five months, accusing him of being a security threat but never filing charges or permitting a public hearing.

Military officials said Bilal Hussein, an Iraqi citizen, was being held for "imperative reasons of security" under United Nations resolutions. AP executives said the news cooperative's review of Hussein's work did not find anything to indicate inappropriate contact with insurgents, and any evidence against him should be brought to the Iraqi criminal justice system.

Hussein, 35, is a native of Fallujah who began work for the AP in September 2004. He photographed events in Fallujah and Ramadi until he was detained on April 12 of this year.

"We want the rule of law to prevail. He either needs to be charged or released. Indefinite detention is not acceptable," said Tom Curley, AP's president and chief executive officer. "We've come to the conclusion that this is unacceptable under Iraqi law, or Geneva Conventions, or any military procedure."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060917/ap_on_re_mi_ea/photographer_detained

 

[Gato_Solo]

So what?

 

[2minkey]

So what?

strangely enough that was kinda my thought, too.

 

[Professur]

So ... the AP CEO is now an expert on Iraqi law? Who knew. The article says that "a review of his work" found nothing. It says nothing about his pirvate life. I dunno about Iraq, but here, your private life is usually 16 hours a day.

 

[MrBishop]

So ... the AP CEO is now an expert on Iraqi law? Who knew. The article says that "a review of his work" found nothing. It says nothing about his pirvate life.

The CEO doesn't have to be...The Photographer wasn't detained under Iraqi law by Iraqi citizens, he's not in an Iraqi jail.

Basically: He either needs to be charged or released. If you don't have enough to charge him...too bad for you. Release him!

 

[Professur]

The CEO doesn't have to be...The Photographer wasn't detained under Iraqi law by Iraqi citizens, he's not in an Iraqi jail.

"We want the rule of law to prevail. He either needs to be charged or released. Indefinite detention is not acceptable," said Tom Curley, AP's president and chief executive officer. "We've come to the conclusion that this is unacceptable under Iraqi law, or Geneva Conventions, or any military procedure."[/quote]

come again?

Basically: He either needs to be charged or released. If you don't have enough to charge him...too bad for you. Release him!

Funny thing about that. He's not being detained by any US police force either. I'm at a bit of a loss to understand why anyone thinks their proceedures would apply. He's being held ... period. That's all the article says. As it is now, he's not being charged. Depending on why he's being held, that may well be a good thing for him. If he's charged, they have to go ahead with trying and punishing him. As it is, he may well be being held until whatever trouble or issue they imprisoned him for is past. Not that the US military can charge him in the first place.

Sitting thumping your chest, attributing US citizen rights to an Iraqi is silly to begin with. Making demands without information is folly.

I must say, it amuses me to no end when people act like the military are some sort of police force. They're paid killers. Might want to remember that.

 

[MrBishop]

Article (35):

1st --

(a) The freedom and dignity of a person are protected.

(b) No one may be detained or investigated unless by judicial decision.

Article (19):

1st -- The judiciary is independent, with no power above it other than the law.

2nd -- There is no crime and no punishment except by the text (of law). And there is no punishment except for an act that the law considers a crime at the time of its commission. No punishment can be enacted that is heavier than the punishment allowed at the time of the crime's commission.

3rd -- Trial by judiciary is a right protected and guaranteed to all.

4th -- The right to defense is holy and guaranteed in all stages of investigation and trial.

5th -- The accused is innocent until his guilt is proven in a just, legal court. The accused cannot be tried for the same accusation again after he has been freed unless new evidence appears.

6th -- Every individual has the right to be treated in a just manner in all judicial and administrative procedures.

7th -- Court sessions will be open unless the court decides to make them secret.

8th -- Punishment is for individuals.

9th -- Laws do not apply retroactively unless otherwise has been legislated, and this exception does not include laws of taxes and duties.

10th -- Punitive law shall not be applied retroactively unless it is best for the defendant.

11th -- The court shall appoint an attorney to defend defendants charged with a felony or a misdemeanor who don't have an attorney and it shall be at the state's expense.

12th --

(a) (Arbitrary) detention shall not be allowed.

(b) Arrest or imprisonment is not allowed in places other than those designated for that according to prison laws that are covered by health and social services and are under the control of the state.

13th -- Preliminary investigation papers shall be shown to the concerned judge no later than 24 hours from the time of the detention of the accused and cannot be extended except once and for same duration.

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2005-08/2005-08-24-voa39.cfm?CFID=31186352&CFTOKEN=18576542

It's fairly simple. Either he's being 'detained' through Iraqi law or through International law. Neither allow for detention without representation and due process.

 

[Professur]

Either he's being 'detained' through Iraqi law or through International law.

Really? And where did you get that nugget from?

Just out of curiosity ... what status do US bases in Iraq hold? Embassy? US soil? DMZ?

Last time I checked, a foreign national standing inside an embassy had no legal rights ... anywhere. In fact, they can be shot on sight. Within the walls, the Ambassador holds GOD power, answerable only to his head of state.

 

[MrBishop]

Really? And where did you get that nugget from?

Just out of curiosity ... what status do US bases in Iraq hold? Embassy? US soil? DMZ?

Last time I checked, a foreign national standing inside an embassy had no legal rights ... anywhere. In fact, they can be shot on sight. Within the walls, the Ambassador holds GOD power, answerable only to his head of state.

OK...you tell me.

Which law applies and which country has such laws that allow for detention of people without trial, representation or being charged indefinitely?

Is it
a) US Soil - American laws apply
b) Iraqi soil - Iraqi laws apply
c) DMZ - International laws apply (Geneva convention et al)

 

[Gato_Solo]

OK...you tell me.

Which law applies and which country has such laws that allow for detention of people without trial, representation or being charged indefinitely?

Is it
a) US Soil - American laws apply
b) Iraqi soil - Iraqi laws apply
c) DMZ - International laws apply (Geneva convention et al)

That should answer your question. It also applies in international, if you invoke the GC. All you need do is take a picture of the wrong thing, or at the wrong time, and...presto...you're a spy.

 

[MrBishop]

Then if Iraqi laws apply - detention without representation should apply as well...

Why is everyone bitching about this guy's boss asking for his employee's rights to be followed?

If people are saying that they want to bring democracy to Iraq - then lead by example.

Ditto goes for the Gitmo 'detainees' in another country (Cuba) where those who defend its (the prison) presence want 'democracy'.

 

[Professur]

Noone's bitching about it. I clearly said ... Not enough information to render an intelligent opinion.


And to answer your question ... I've no idea who's laws apply. Again NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION!!!

In a war zone ... the GC applies .... to soldiers. Ununiformed combatants do not get protection under it. The Gitmo detainees fall into that catagory. This reporter may well as well. As Gato said .... spy treatment. In the field that's a bullet to the head ... in case you were wondering.

Which law applies and which country has such laws that allow for detention of people without trial, representation or being charged indefinitely?

Every single one to the best of my knowledge .... under the guise of it's intelligence apparatus.

 

[Gato_Solo]

Then if Iraqi laws apply - detention without representation should apply as well...

I don't know Iraqi law...and niether do you, so your point is moot.

Why is everyone bitching about this guy's boss asking for his employee's rights to be followed?

Because he was hired by a US company, so whining might actually work...

If people are saying that they want to bring democracy to Iraq - then lead by example.

Ditto goes for the Gitmo 'detainees' in another country (Cuba) where those who defend its (the prison) presence want 'democracy'.

The military is not a democracy. Never was.

 

[MrBishop]

I don't know Iraqi law...and niether do you, so your point is moot.
.

I just posted a link about it... the mother of all laws. The constitution.