Guantanamo Canadian case dropped
A US military judge has dropped charges against a Canadian held at Guantanamo Bay, saying he could not be tried under new laws governing military tribunals.
Omar Khadr was just 15 years old when he was captured in Afghanistan.
He appeared in court charged with murder, attempted murder, conspiracy and providing support for terrorism.
But the judge ruled he could not be tried under current laws because he was not classified as an "unlawful" enemy combatant in previous hearings.
The charges were dismissed "without prejudice", said Col Peter Brownback, the presiding judge.
His decision deals a big blow to the trial system, says the BBC's Justin Webb, in Washington.
Mr Khadr had been classified as an "enemy combatant" under a previous tribunal system that was eventually thrown out in 2006 by the US Supreme Court.
But under new legislation approved by President George W Bush, only detainees classified as "unlawful enemy combatants" can face trial at Guantanamo Bay.
(cont'd at link above)
Now, I'm not going to rock the boat by complaining. Anything that makes the Guantanamo "tribunal" b.s. any better is to be encouraged.
But what's the difference between "enemy combatant" and "unlawful enemy combatant?" Who is a LAWFUL enemy combatant?
Can't we just admit they're prisoners of war and be done with it?