Lawyers: Judge's removal political.

Brownback was removed no doubt because he was unreliable. The U.S. authorities want a judge who can be relied upon to convict. Brownback has showed he has a certain independent streak. Best he go back into retirement. Too bad the opposition is not up to forcing this present government to retire. The Harper government repeats the same old saw about not interfering in the U.S. justice system. The fact that the Guantanamo process is a travesty of justice doesn't seem to matter. Here is the tired refrain:
The parliamentary secretary to the Foreign Affairs minister responded with the same three media lines that Conservative members have used to answer all Khadr-related questions -- Khadr is facing a “serious charges,” Canada has sought and received assurances that he is treated humanely and they will not interfere in the U.S legal process, MP Deepak Obhrai responded.
So even though the Guantanamo process is unjust the Canadian government nevertheless sent interrogators to Guanatanamo to question Khadr. The Supreme Court decided this violated Khadr's rights but this doesn't matter. Not only Liberals can sit on their hands and do nothing when they feel like it. The Conservatives can mouth platitudes and do nothing just as well.


Judge’s removal political: lawyers TheStar.com - News - Judge’s removal political: lawyers


.
'Deck is clearly stacked' against a fair trial, Liberal MP charges
May 30, 2008 Michelle ShephardNational Security Reporter The abrupt retirement of the judge presiding over Omar Khadr’s war crimes trial has prompted Canada’s opposition groups to call again for government intervention and provided critics of the military trials fuel for their argument that Guantanamo’s trials are unraveling.
A spokesperson from Guantanamo’s Office of the Military Commission said Friday that U.S. Army Col. Peter Brownback, who has presided over Khadr’s trial since late 2006, has decided to retire mid-way through the Toronto detainee’s trial.
“Col. Brownback was directed by the Army in 2004 to come back on active duty from retirement based on his previous experience as a military judge. He has been serving on a retired recall status for the past four years,” Air Force Capt. André Kok wrote in an emailed statement. “After this period of service, it was a mutual decision between Col. Brownback and the Army that he revert to his retired status when his current active duty orders expire in June.”
Brownback has refused comment.
The announcement of his shocking dismissal came from the chief judge for Guantanamo’s military commissions, Marine Col. Raph Kohlmann, in an email late Thursday. The note simply said that he was assigning U.S. Army Col. Patrick Parrish to replace Brownback.
Khadr’s lawyers charged that Brownback’s dismissal was political, since he had frustrated the prosecution’s attempt to set a trial date at a time when the Pentagon is pushing to have at least one Guantanamo trial completed by this fall’s U.S. presidential election. All three candidates have vowed to shut the U.S. prison on Cuba’s southeast shore.
Prosecutor Marine Major Jeff Groharing disputed any suggestion that there was any push from his office to have Brownback replaced.
“The prosecution does not have any involvement in assignment of military judges and certainly didn’t have anything to do with a new judge being assigned to this case,” Groharing told the Toronto Star. “Despite the insinuation in the press release filed by defense counsel, the prosecution has always acted ethically and transparently in this case and any suggestion otherwise is reckless and irresponsible.”
In Ottawa, Liberal MP Larry Bagnell pressed the federal government Friday to respond to Brownback’s departure by demanding that Khadr be sent home.
“The military commission pressing charges against Omar Khadr at Guantanamo Bay fired the judge overseeing the trial. Unbelievable,” Bagnell said. “How can the government continue to show confidence in this process when the deck is so clearly stacked against Mr. Khadr ever receiving a fair trial?”
The parliamentary secretary to the Foreign Affairs minister responded with the same three media lines that Conservative members have used to answer all Khadr-related questions -- Khadr is facing a “serious charges,” Canada has sought and received assurances that he is treated humanely and they will not interfere in the U.S legal process, MP Deepak Obhrai responded.
Bagnell countered, “It is nice to read a prepared sheet that was prepared before the new information came out. When will this government stop ignoring what is happening? When will it bring Mr. Khadr back to Canada to face justice here?”
Obhrai repeated the same answers.
The American Civil Liberties Union and New York-based Human Rights Watch, who have both sent observers to witness all the Guantanamo hearings, issued statements Friday decrying the lack of information about a military judge’s dismissal.
“While this decision is not surprising, it once again demonstrates the inherent flaws in a system that lacks impartiality and is subject to political influence,” wrote Jamil Dakwar, Director of the ACLU’s Human Rights Program. “The message of the Pentagon’s decision seems to be that it is unwilling to let judges exercise independence if it means a ruling against the government.”
Khadr is scheduled to appear before a military court again next month, although it’s unclear now if a new judge will delay those pre-trial hearings. The Toronto-born detainee was 15 when he was captured in Afghanistan after a firefight where the Pentagon alleges he fatally wounded Delta Force soldier Christopher Speer. Now 21, he is on trial for five war crimes, including murder for Speer’s death.
Khadr’s Canadian lawyers won a partial victory in the Supreme Court last week when the high court justices ordered the government to turn over information concerning his case – but limited the disclosure to only information resulting from interrogations by Canadian agents.
A federal court is now vetting the information for national security concerns and is expected to turn over documents to Khadr’s lawyers as early as next week.
The Star filed a motion to intervene in that case today, arguing that the public should have access to the information since the treatment of a Canadian detainee in Guantanamo and the participation of Canadian officials in that process “raises matters of great public interest.”