Legality and Implications of Due Process in Cases of International Terrorism

  The Legality and Implications of Due Process in Cases of International Terrorism In the book Due Process and International Terrorism by Roza Pati, the cases of Hirabayashi 1943 and Korematsu 1945 are discussed, shedding light on the complex intersection of national security and individual rights during times of crisis. Hirabayashi 1943 Synopsis In the case of Hirabayashi v. United States (1943), Gordon Hirabayashi, an American citizen of Japanese descent, defied curfews and internment orders during World War II. He challenged the constitutionality of these orders, arguing they violated his Fifth Amendment rights. Holding The Supreme Court upheld the curfew and internment orders, ruling that military necessity justified the government's actions despite their discriminatory nature. Korematsu 1945 Synopsis Korematsu v. United States (1945) involved Fred Korematsu, who also defied Japanese internment orders. He argued that these orders violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights to equal protection under the law. Holding The Supreme Court again sided with the government, stating that the need to protect against espionage outweighed Korematsu's individual rights. This decision has since been widely criticized as a low point in the Court's history. Comparison and Contrast Both cases dealt with infringements on civil liberties during wartime, but while Hirabayashi focused on curfews and Korematsu on internment, the key issue was the balance between national security and individual rights. The Court's decisions reflected a deference to executive authority during times of crisis, a trend seen in subsequent cases like Rasul v. Bush and Hamadi v. Rumsfeld. Rasul v. Bush and Hamadi v. Rumsfeld Synopsis Rasul v. Bush and Hamdi v. Rumsfeld centered on the detention of enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay following the 9/11 attacks. In Boumediene v. Bush, the issue was whether these detainees had the right to challenge their detention through habeas corpus petitions. Major Issues and Court Decisions The major issues included the scope of executive power in detaining individuals without trial, access to legal recourse for detainees, and the applicability of constitutional protections to non-citizens held outside U.S. territory. The Court ruled in Boumediene that detainees had the right to challenge their detention in civilian courts, affirming the principle of habeas corpus. Opinion I agree with the Court's decision in Boumediene v. Bush. Upholding habeas corpus rights for detainees is crucial in upholding the rule of law and preventing unchecked executive power, especially in cases involving national security. Department of Defense Military Commission Order No.1 Overview The Department of Defense Military Commission Order No.1 outlines procedures for trials by military commissions of non-United States citizens involved in the war against terrorism. It was established to address legal issues arising from the detention and trial of enemy combatants captured in the context of counterterrorism operations. Composition and Procedures The commission consists of military officers who serve as both judges and jurors. The procedures include rules for evidence presentation, witness testimony, legal representation for the accused, and sentencing guidelines. Rights of the Accused The accused are provided with certain rights, including the right to legal counsel, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and the right to appeal their convictions. Conviction Process and Review If a person is convicted and sentenced, there is a review procedure that allows for appeals to higher military courts and potentially civilian courts, ensuring a degree of oversight and accountability in the military justice system. In conclusion, examining these cases and legal frameworks provides valuable insights into how democracies navigate the tension between national security imperatives and individual rights in times of crisis. The evolution of legal doctrines surrounding due process in cases of international terrorism reflects a constant struggle to uphold fundamental principles while addressing security challenges effectively.  

Sample Answer