| | It may have been somewhat overshadowed in the run-up to the second presidential debate, but a major legal breakthrough occurred yesterday, thanks to a historic ruling by a U.S. federal court. After years of struggle by their lawyers and supporters, 17 innocent Uighur men were ordered released from Guantánamo Bay, where they have been imprisoned for almost seven years. According to the Center for Constitutional Rights, which has been working on behalf of the prisoners, "The men are refugees who would face persecution and imprisonment, if not death, if returned to their native China." Thus, according to the court's order, they are to be allowed into the United States. The story of these men is a classic, tragic example of how so many of the prisoners who have languished at Guantanamo got there, despite dubious connections to terrorism: The 17 men currently imprisoned at Guantánamo left China amid increasing political oppression and found their way to Afghanistan, where they lived in small Uighur communities. In late 2001, they were forced to flee the aerial bombardment of the surrounding areas. Eventually, they made their way to Pakistan in the belief that they would be safer there. After crossing into Pakistan, the Uighurs were welcomed and fed by Pakistani villagers who then turned them over for generous bounties offered by the United States. Last week, the Bush administration "finally conceded that none of these men would be treated as 'enemy combatants.'" Yet, less than 24 hours after the decision, the Department of Justice released a statement warning that the ruling "presents serious national security and separation of powers concerns," and announcing its intention to file, according to TPM Muckraker, "an emergency appeal to ensure the men stay behind bars." Clearly, as we have learned so many times, waging a "war on terror" apparently means never having to admit you're wrong. Learn more about the case here. And be sure to check out AlterNet's Rights & Liberties section for more. Thanks for reading, Liliana Segura Editor, Rights & Liberties Special Coverage | |
0 comments:
Post a Comment