Gitmo Chief Judge in 2002: Tribunals Would Have “Credibility Problems”

The military commissions at Guantanamo Bay have plenty of critics. But here are two in particular worth mentioning.

Earlier this week, the former chief prosecutor at the tribunals, Col. Morris Davis blasted the system in an op-ed, calling the system “deeply politicized” (that same day, the administration arbitrarily barred him from testifying to Congress).

And today The New York Times has this:

Back in 2002, a master’s degree candidate at the Naval War College wrote a paper on the Bush administration’s plan to use military commissions to try Guantánamo suspects, concluding that “even a good military tribunal is a bad idea.”

It drew little notice at the time, but the paper has gained a second life because of its author’s big promotion: Col. Ralph H. Kohlmann of the Marines is now the chief judge of the military commissions at the naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

The system, Judge Kohlmann wrote in 2002, would face criticism for the “apparent lack of independence” of military judges and would have “credibility problems,” the very argument made by Guantánamo’s critics.

He said it would be better to try terrorism suspects in federal courts in the United States. “Unnecessary use of military tribunals in the face of reasonable international criticism,” he wrote, “is an ill-advised move.”…

Prior terrorism and organized crime cases, he wrote, showed that “the existing United States criminal justice system does not have to be put aside simply because the potential defendants have scary friends.”

Kohlmann appears to have taken the attitude that it’s better to work to fix the system from the inside than criticize it from outside. He hasn’t disavowed the paper, the Times reports, though he’s changed his original opinion that “President Bush’s original order establishing military commissions ‘essentially states’ that fundamental fairness would not be a part of commission trials.” Comforting.