White House Drafts Executive Order For Indefinite Detention

President Barack Obama delivers an address on Guantanamo at the National Archives on May 21, 2009, during which he said that "a thorough process of periodic review" was needed to ensure that "any prolonged detention is carefully evaluated and justified." (Official White House photo by Pete Souza)

This story was reported by ProPublica’s Dafna Linzer.

The White House is preparing an Executive Order on indefinite detention that will provide periodic reviews of evidence against dozens of prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay, according to several administration officials.

The draft order, a version of which was first considered nearly 18 months ago, is expected to be signed by President Obama early in the New Year. The order allows for the possibility that detainees from countries like Yemen might be released if circumstances there change.

But the order establishes indefinite detention as a long-term Obama administration policy and makes clear that the White House alone will manage a review process for those it chooses to hold without charge or trial.

Nearly two years after Obama’s pledge to close the prison at Guantanamo, more inmates there are formally facing the prospect of lifelong detention and fewer are facing charges than the day Obama was elected.

That is in part because Congress has made it difficult to move detainees to the United States for trial. But it also stems from the president’s embrace of indefinite detention and his assertion that the congressional authorization for military force, passed after the 2001 terrorist attacks, allows for such detention.

After taking office, the Obama administration reviewed the detainee population at Guantanamo Bay and chose 48 prisoners for indefinite detention. Officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said that number will likely increase in coming months as some detainees are moved from a transfer category to a continued detention category.

If signed by President Obama, the new order will provide added review for detainees designated for long-term detention. The order, which is being drafted jointly by White House staff in the National Security council and the White House counsel, will offer detainees in this category a minimal review every six months and then a more lengthy annual review. Detainees will have access to an attorney, to some evidence against them and the ability to challenge their continued detention.

Prisoners who have been deemed “high-value detainees,” including the alleged conspirators of the 2001 attacks, have been designated for prosecution in civilian or military courts.

“It’s been clear for a while that the government would need to put in place some sort of periodic review, and that it would want it to improve on the annual review procedures used during the previous administration,” said Matthew Waxman, a professor at Columbia Law School who worked on detainee issues during the Bush administration.

A White House official, who asked to speak on the condition of anonymity, later confirmed that the draft order has not yet been given to the president. The official had few details but said the order “would set up periodic review of the detention status of those detainees who cannot be tried,” in either military commissions or federal courts.

In 2008, Guantanamo detainees won the right to challenge the lawfulness of their detention in court. The executive order aims to create an executive branch review which would occur separately from the court review and would weigh the necessity of the detention, rather than its lawfulness, officials said.

“Perhaps the dangerousness of the detainee’s country of origin could change, or the group that the detainee is affiliated with could cease to exist,” one official explained.

Some detainees from Yemen may be sent home if security conditions there improve. Currently, there is a moratorium on transfers from Guantanamo to Yemen.

The official described the draft order as “an important piece of the government’s approach to Guantanamo.”

At a speech on Guantanamo in May 2009, Obama said that “a thorough process of periodic review,” was needed to ensure that “any prolonged detention is carefully evaluated and justified.”

The White House first began work on an Executive Order in the spring of 2009 that was the subject of a joint story by ProPublica and the Washington Post in June 2009. An administration official at the time said the order was under consideration but had not yet been completed. Civil rights groups which oppose indefinite detention came out strongly against the possibility of an executive order.

Weeks later, administration officials said the White House had decided to work with Congress on indefinite detention, rather than through Executive Order. But by the end of 2009, the White House had said it would not support legislation.

Then, in 2010, a government task force on Guantanamo completed a year-long review that placed 48 detainees in long-term detention. In its report, task force members said those detainees would be “subject to periodic Executive Branch review.”

Bobby Chesney, a law professor at the University of Texas who worked briefly on the administration’s detention task force, said an executive order would provide detainees which an additional layer of review. He also said it offered a compromise since an executive order can be withdrawn at anytime.

“The order takes on additional restraints and lasts as long as the president wants. The White House gets just what it wants, no more or less. And, unlike with legislation, the order doesn’t have staying power if the next administration doesn’t want it.”

Jameel Jaffer, a national security lawyer at the American Civil Liberties Union, agreed that “more review is better.” But he said that an executive order would only “normalize and institutionalize indefinite detention and other policies,” that were set in place by the Bush administration.

Article Tools:  Print   Email

7 Responses for “White House Drafts Executive Order For Indefinite Detention”

  1. Dabooda says:

    So much for the Fifth and Sixth Amendments to the Constitution. Here’s the change we can believe in: If the President decides to throw you in a cage forever — without a trial, a jury or even a lawyer — now it’s all legal. Be thankful that he isn’t — yet — claiming the right to torture you to death. On the other hand, he’s not prosecuting Bush for doing just that.

  2. seth says:

    So much for Obama’s promise to close Guantanamo. I don’t know why anyone believed he would

  3. MFunkibut says:

    It’s always interesting to look not at where political parties disagree but at where they agree. And it’s always prudent to look at what politiicans actually do as opposed to what they say.

    Look at the policies of George W. Bush that Obama denounced but continued. Sometimes he didn’t do anything to stop them [warrantless wiretaps]. Sometimes he kept on with gusto [Guantanamo].

    THAT my friends is where you find the real American politic. And it has so little to do with the values that got the hype in school. A pity.

  4. absurd says:

    Under this order, all detainees will have access to legal council. This is a big deal considering they’ve been unable to have anyone to talk to about their cases in upwards of 6 years.
    You can’t close a place like Gitmo overnight, and captured combatants have to be placed somewhere until you can determine whether or not they’re lawful or unlawful, and whether or not they intend to continue any aggression.
    It’s very complicated.
    Oh, and the 5th and 6th amendment applies to citizens and other residents. Not enemy combatants. Please stop being ignorant about things like that if you’re going to spout off on the interwebs.

  5. seth says:

    well I wasn’t expecting it to be closed overnight, but I thought he would at least meet his own deadline. I mean there is no end in site and his self made deadline was a year ago.

  6. Does an executive order have the constitutional power to erase the Bill of Rights and 8 centuries of rule of law ? Looks like Julian Assange is the only Robin Hood in working order nowadays!

  7. drklassen says:

    absurd: Bzzzzt! Thanks for playing though. The 5th and 6th amendments apply to everyone, not just citizens—in fact the word citizen does not appear in either of them. The 5th says “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury…” and the 6th says “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury…”

    So, yes, Bush broke them and Obama continues to break them.

    And, yes, he could have closed Gitmo overnight; simply move everyone to federal prisons before Congress got their panties in a twist and then tell prosecutors to charge or release. Done. But he was too cowardly to do it.

Leave a Reply

Article Tools:  Print   Email
Copyright © 2008 The Public Record. All rights reserved. Branding services provided by Quantcast