War on Terror



War on Terror

Introduction

Habeas Corpus is the writ, which means “you have the body” (Hall, 2008, p.528), it is the fundamental right for the citizens of United States that every individual or prisoner, if detained in jail or custody under any law enforcement agency, Habeas Corpus ensures that they have right to brought to the court and to be presented in front of judge. It is the court that has right to decide whether an individual or prisoner should be kept in custody or not. There are only certain conditions in which this writ can be suspended, such as threat for the state and life of civilians. History of United States reveals that this writ has been revoked since the civil war, 9/11 and in various other circumstances when prisoners were detained in the custody during war on terror. War on terrorism and Bush's attempt to keep detainees resulted in Supreme Court's order that prisoners for the war on terror are not allowed to exercise their right of Habeas Corpus. This resulted in enduing the hope for such prisoners as there is no end to this war; however these detainees are allowed to apply for the petitions and for further trials in judicial courts. There are various cases for the suspension of this writ such as Guantanamo case and various other such circumstances under the name of 'War on Terror'. Guantanamo Bay cases, proves habeas corpus as a check on unlawful executive power (Federman, 2010, p.234).The detainees have right to appeal under Habeas corpus and it is court to decide whether prisoners should be detained.

Discussion

Historical Evolution, Traditions and Relation with Civil Liberties

Habeas Corpus was practiced in English Law during thirteenth and fourteenth century and first time implemented in the Magna Charta. During nineteenth century, English Common Law practice allowed to use this writ prior to conviction. Same law was incorporated in the United States during the time of colonization and it followed unaltered until the time of civil war, after which, this writ used as post-conviction (Federman, 2010, p.16-18). This resulted in creating major issues for the prisoners and law as there are dual systems of state and federal courts, due to which even convict can be freed, or innocent can face problems in getting freedom. Along with the powers and problems of dual courts there is also collision in the constitutional right and laws provided under the administration of criminal justice. Supreme Court also preserves the powers to the federal court to free the criminals according to the situation.

During twentieth century there are various right provided under the criminal procedure that the writ is considered only for the unlawful detention, and in order to provide justice most of the people were benefitted under this writ, mostly those who were detained unlawfully (Federman, 2010, p.16-18). There are a number of different limitations to this writ on the basis of constitution of United States. In the fourteenth amendment, it is clearly mentioned that no state can detain the property ...