Outside the U.S. government, President Obama's order to kill American
citizen Anwar al-Awlaki without due process has proved controversial,
with experts in law and war reaching different conclusions. Inside the
Obama Administration, however, disagreement was apparently absent, or so
say anonymous sources quoted by the Washington Post. "The Justice
Department wrote a secret memorandum authorizing the lethal targeting of
Anwar al-Aulaqi, the American-born radical cleric who was killed by a
U.S. drone strike Friday, according to administration officials," the
newspaper reported. "The document was produced following a review of the
legal issues raised by striking a U.S. citizen and involved senior
lawyers from across the administration. There was no dissent about the
legality of killing Aulaqi, the officials said."
Isn't that interesting? Months ago, the Obama Administration revealed
that it would target al-Awlaki. It even managed to wriggle out of a
lawsuit filed by his father to prevent the assassination. But the actual
legal reasoning the Department of Justice used to authorize the strike?
It's secret. Classified. Information that the public isn't permitted to
read, mull over, or challenge.
Why? What justification can there be for President Obama and his
lawyers to keep secret what they're asserting is a matter of sound law?
This isn't a military secret. It isn't an instance of protecting CIA
field assets, or shielding a domestic vulnerability to terrorism from
public view. This is an analysis of the power that the Constitution and
Congress' post September 11 authorization of military force gives the
executive branch. This is a president exploiting official secrecy so
that he can claim legal justification for his actions without having to
expose his specific reasoning to scrutiny. As the Post put it, "The
administration officials refused to disclose the exact legal analysis
used to authorize targeting Aulaqi, or how they considered any Fifth
Amendment right to due process."
Obama hasn't just set a new precedent about killing Americans without
due process. He has done so in a way that deliberately shields from
public view the precise nature of the important precedent he has set.
It's time for the president who promised to create "a White House that's
more transparent and accountable than anything we've seen before" to
release the DOJ memo. As David Shipler writes, "The legal questions are
far from clearcut, and the country needs to have this difficult
discussion." And then there's the fact that "a good many Obama
supporters thought that secret legal opinions by the Justice Department
-- rationalizing torture and domestic military arrests, for example --
had gone out the door along with the Bush administration," he adds. "But
now comes a momentous change in policy with serious implications for
the Constitution's restraint on executive power, and Obama refuses to
allow his lawyers' arguments to be laid out on the table for the
American public to examine." What doesn't he want to get out?
As a general matter, it would be entirely lawful for the United States to target high-level leaders of enemy forces, regardless of their nationality, who are plotting to kill Americans both under the authority provided by Congress in its use of military force in the armed conflict with al-Qaeda, the Taliban, and associated forces as well as established international law that recognizes our right of self-defense,” an administration official said in a statement Friday.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/aulaqi-killing-reignites-debate-on-limits-of-executive-power/2011/09/30/gIQAx1bUAL_story.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/10/the-secret-memo-that-explains-why-obama-can-kill-americans/246004/
0 comments:
Post a Comment