Habeas Corpus in English Traditions - Essay Example

Civil Liberties, Habeas Corpus, and the War on Terror Habeas corpus is a way of determining whether those that are jailed have been jailed through the legal processes and if the reason behind the jailing is legal. This paper will discuss how the administration led by Bush kept prisoners at GITMO during the war on terror. The civil rights of the prisoners were never considered since the place where they were kept was beyond the reach of the constitution of the United States of America. It was the duty of the Supreme Court to protect the rights of the prisoners by the use of Habeas Corpus and given orders of the shutting down of GITMO facility. Habeas Corpus in English Traditions The effect of Habeas Corpus was first felt when the law of Anglo-Saxon was in existence. In 1215, Habeas Corpus followed the Magna Carta before it was experienced and used by the king and the court that was under him. During the era of King Edward, Habeas Corpus was published in the form of Blackstone by a judge in England. It fought against the imprisonment of people or any one being sent to exile without the law being followed. At the time, Magna Carta was a law that was very common in England. This condition played a vital part in the making of Habeas Carter a law in the English constitution. History of Habeas Corpus in American Tradition It is not long ago since Habeas Corpus was incorporated into the system of the United States of America. This was in the year 1801 when the then president of the United States mentioned it in his speech. The president said that the people of the United States of America would be protected by Habeas Corpus so that they could continue enjoying their freedom. It was then put in the constitution of the country where it is still being used in the present day in the United States of America. Habeas Corpus has adapted the same tradition as that of the England whereby it ensures that people are imprisoned legally and for a legal reason (Gregory, 2013). United States’ Examples of the History of Suspension of Habeas Corpus The first time it was suspended in the United States of America was by the then president Abraham Lincoln. The president did this after he heard that the officials of Maryland who dealt with anti-war issues were planning to destroy the railway that was connecting the United States of America to Annapolis and Philadelphia. This rail was very important in the supplying the needs to the soldiers who were getting ready to attack and fight the south (Gregory, 2013) Lincoln only suspended it in Maryland route and was mainly influenced by the requests that the generals of the army proposed. The generals wanted military courts to be set up so that he could rein over his opponents politically. Abraham Lincoln allowed for the imprisonment of military people, prisoners captured during war and those that were suspected to be spies. Anyone suspected to be a traitor was also held for the whole period of war without being put into trials hence not considering their civil liberty. Habeas Corpus had also been suspended by the president of confederation, Jefferson Davis. The suspending happened in the Confederate States of America. Jefferson wanted to maintain order in the confederacy and facilitate the industrialization of the South. The suspension of Habeas Corpus by Jefferson was to ensure that the losses it had inflicted are compensated. The congress also met and passed a bill asking for the suspension of Habeas Corpus using its authority. Lincoln exercised his power through the authority of the congress and suspends Habeas corpus once more (Federman, 2012). Relevance of Habeas Corpus to the United States situation Habeas Corpus observes the rights of prisoners by allowing the prisoners to be taken to the court for determination whether one should be still held or released. It ensures that people are imprisoned legally and for the legal reasons and that people are taken to the court for the hearing of the cases as supposed. In the American situation, Prisoners of war such as terrorists and soldiers were imprisoned without any legal procedures without hopes of ever getting released. The state deprived the citizens their civil liberties. Habeas Corpus observed the rights of the American enemies whereby they had the right to be taken in front of an independent person for their case to be listened. The court is supposed to determine the fate of the enemy prisoners but not being illegally imprisoned without following the law. The writ benefits the enemies of the United States so much since they know that their rights will still be observed in the country. Habeas Corpus has led to the closure of Guantanamo prison that has always been seen by the prison as more than a prison. The prison denied the prisoners their legal right of being protected by the criminal justice system. The prison was put to engage in detentions that are not according to the judiciary and torture prisoners as they were being interrogated. The prisoners were put away from courts as far much as possible and the prison maximized the secrets of the state of how prisoners were treated. The introduction of Habeas Corpus has improved the situation greatly since the prisoners now have the legal right to their liberties. The Interpretation of the U. S Supreme Court of the Rights of Habeas Corpus The court saw that by protecting the privilege of Habeas would be an important tool to safeguard the liberties of the citizens. This is contained in the constitution as accorded in the bill of rights. The court allowed the suspension of writ only in the situation where there the safety of the public requires the suspension and incase of the country being invaded. The court interpreted the Habeas Corpus as only functioning within the territories that are under the control of the United States of America. The court decided that the Habeas writ could not extend to the boundaries of the enemies, that is, the terrorists who are detained abroad. This interpretation by the court becomes inconsistence for the functions of the court to approach other situations of cases that involved the application of constitution beyond their territories. The interpretations also did not regard practically the considerations that were of information to the decisions of the court to preclude the petitioners from finding Habeas Corpus (Freeman, 2008). The Functions of the Commander-in-Chief The function of the president in the Habeas Corpus and the war on terror was well exercised and shown by Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln is found to have made several decisions as the commander-in-chief. The decisions helped the country win the war and also ensured that the union is preserved and the constitution is tested. The first thing that the president did is that he increased the number of the state militias in the war and the size of the union force was also increased. He ensured that the funds allocated to the forces were increased even after the congress refused to approve. This was a violation of the constitution though the congress approved it later after they saw it was helpful (Federman, 2012). Lincoln as the commander-in-chief also gave orders for the blockade of the ports to the south. This blockade was accompanied by an increasing number of the navy of United States of America. This appeared to be one of the best tactics that Lincoln used to enhance the success of his state. The exports from the south were kept low after the United States of America successfully implementing the blockade. This ensured that their enemies did not have access to enough funding and that made it hard for them to acquire military supplies. The enemies also lacked food and other basic needs that they needed to stay on their feet. The Ability of the Congress to determine when Habeas Corpus can be suspended The congress of the United States of America put a petition on the President Lincoln and other individuals on suspending the Habeas Corpus. The president was indemnified for suspending the Habeas Corpus. However, the congress was instructed to remove the petition and indemnity and suspend the Habeas Corpus on the authority of the congress. This meant that the congress had the authority to suspend the Habeas Corpus but under certain circumstances (Federman, 2012). How the Supreme Court Protected the Rights of People This is seen when the court lays down the laws that led to the suspension of the rights enjoyed from Habeas Corpus in the war against terror. By so doing, the court protects the rights of the citizens and those of the individuals. According to the Habeas Corpus, the constitution states that there should be no imprisoning of prisoners without the legal system being followed. This legal system is where the suspects are taken to the court and the court decides their fate. The court determines whether the reason that the prisoner has been imprisoned for is legal and gives the person the chance to offer a petition (Freedman, 2008). The Habeas Corpus has been a right that has benefited many in the observation of their rights both in the United States and England. It has become of great importance since it was implemented as a law in the United States since everybody including the foreigners feels that their rights are observed. References Federman C (2012). The Body and the State: Habeas Corpus and American Jurisdiction. Sunny Press Freedman J. (2008). Civil Liberties and Terrorism: Easyread Super Large 18pt Edition. ReadHowYouWant.com Gregory A (2013). The Power of Habeas Corpus in America: From the King’s Prerogative to the War on Terror. Cambridge University, USA. Read More