Thursday, July 31, 2008

The July 27 editorial "Workable Terrorism Trials" proposed a new national security court for terrorism suspects partly on the grounds that "most terrorism prosecutions" in traditional federal courts "are brought after terrorists have struck." This is untrue. In the overwhelming majority of such cases brought since Sept. 11, 2001, federal courts have prosecuted suspects for crimes such as conspiracy and providing material support for and aiding and abetting terrorist organizations before any terrorist act was committed.

The federal courts have repeatedly put dangerous people away -- and prevented attacks -- with fairness and finality. To borrow the words of President Bush, the terrorists prosecuted by our courts are no longer a problem for the United States. Meanwhile, every prisoner being held without trial at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, remains a huge problem.

If our traditional courts are working, why would we want to experiment with yet another new system for detaining these people, a system which would face additional years of legal challenge and could collapse as decisively as has the failed system at Guantanamo?

TOM MALINOWSKI

Washington Advocacy Director

Human Rights Watch

Washington