A report from a trial where two of Hicks’ three counsels were summarily thrown out of the courtroom. Hicks has pled guilty
to one of two specifications of his charge of ‘providing material support for terrorism’. The specification alleges that between December 2000 and December 2001, Hicks intentionally provided material support for al Qa’ida, and that this conduct took place in the context of an armed conflict. Yet the international armed conflict in Afghanistan only began in October 2001. The Military Commissions Act effectively backdates the ‘war on terror’ to make offences committed even before 11 September 2001 triable by military commission.
David Hicks pleaded not guilty to a second specification, namely that during the same time period, he provided material support or resources for an act of terrorism.
Hicks should have been detained for aiding al Qaeda. I don’t buy the "lost soul" argument. He was knowingly supporting a terrorist group that killed thousands of innocents. But being detained without due process or any process for a crime committed nearly seven years ago is not exactly a sign of a fair or adequately functioning system. The conduct of the court is also deeply suspect. More analysis later. Stay tuned.
The Dish 