Chief Judge of the Military Commissions at Guantanamo Bay Draws Criticism

By Andrew Benfield
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, United States – In 2002, while attending the Naval War College, Col. Ralph H. Kohlmann authored a paper that condemned the United States’ military tribunal process.  Kohlmann concluded that even a “good” military tribunal is a “bad idea.”  The paper’s two main criticisms were the “‘apparent lack of independence’ of military judges” and the strong presence of “credibility problems.”  These criticisms echo many sentiments of modern-day Guantanamo Bay critics. 

Today, Col. Kohlmann is the chief judge of the military commissions at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.  While Kohlmann has not outright renounced his paper’s criticism of military tribunals, Kohlmann has attempted to “correct a misstatement in his paper.”  Earlier this year, Kohlmann told several defense lawyers that his assumption that the original military commission order, “essentially states that fundamental fairness would not be a part of commission trials” was incorrect. 

The New York Times article revealing Col. Kohlmann’s past criticism of military commissions was released on the heels of the U.N. human rights investigator’s Guantanamo report on 12 December 2007.  Martin Scheinin, U.N. special investigator on counterterrorism, released a report concluding that Guantanamo Bay terror suspects are “unable to get a fair trial before the military court set up for so-called enemy combatants.”  Scheinin found “difficulties or even impossibility” of defendants ability to provide evidence for their defense.   

For more information, please see:

The New York Times – From a Critic of Tribunals to Top Judge – 13 December 2007

Voice of America – UN Expert Says Guantanamo Suspects Denied Fair Trial – 12 December 2007

Impunity Watch – Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Hamdan Appeal – 2 October 2007