From a Critic of Tribunals to Top Judge?

Original Artical: New York Times

On the front page of the New York Times today is an article about a paper criticizing the use of military tribunals. What makes this paper different than others, however, is that it was written by Judge Kohlmann in 2002, now the chief judge of military commissions in Guantanamo.

Having just conducted substantial research on military tribunals myself, I must agree that I am not fond of the military tribunals we have today. Kholmann writes, “even a good military tribunal is a bad idea.” Here is where I must dissent. A "good" military tribunal would be created by Congress and subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice - i.e., due process would be provided in accordance with what is provided to POW's. A "good" military tribunal, therefore, would be reflective of what the citizens of this country think is needed to ensure our security.

My problem with today's tribunals are that they were created by the President, and have not been checked by the other branches of government. Congress has started to question the situation, ruling in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld that citizens have a right to challenge their detainment order, and in Hamden v. Rumsfeld that the military commission is illegal because it does not comply with the UCMJ.

To that I say.. no, really?!

This is what happens when we depart from the Constitution. Congress needs to check the President rather than acquiescing to him. But then again, this isn't new with President Bush - the same thing happened under FDR. Who am I to expect now what was never done over 60 years ago?