National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Congress oversees the defense budget primarily through two yearly bills: the defense authorization and defense appropriations bills. The authorization bill determines the agencies responsible for defense, establishes funding levels, and sets the policies under which money will be spent.[3][dead link]
The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2013 passed the House Armed Services Committee 56-5 on May 10. The bill as reported to the House authorizes $554.2 billion in base Pentagon spending and $88.5 billion for overseas contingency operations (OCO).[4] The bill passed the full House on May 18 by a vote of 299-120.[5]
So as to not have the Act run into the same legal trouble the 2012 version did, the US House included sections 1031 through 1033, which strike the right of habeas corpus and the Constitutional right of due process for American citizens.[citation needed] Within those sections include references to a federal appeals court decision and a Supreme Court ruling that affirm the Constitutional rights of American citizens.[1] However, there are already criticisms of the Act, especially with regard to a "readiness" and funding for an attack on Iran.[6]
Criticism has also been voiced regarding section 1033 of the bill which would state that nothing in the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) or the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 (Public Law 112-81) shall be construed to deny the availability of the writ of habeas corpus in a court ordained or established by or under Article III of the Constitution for any person who is detained in the United States pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40).[7]
Joe Wolverton noted that the 2013 NDAA does nothing to prevent the indefinite detention of Americans under the 2013 NDAA, but it only reiterates that habeas corpus is a right in courts established under Article III of the Constitution. "That such a right exists in the courts of the United States has never been the issue. The concern of millions of Americans from every band in the political spectrum is that Americans detained as “belligerents” under the terms of the NDAA will not be tried in Article III courts, but will be subject to military tribunals such as the one currently considering the case of the so-called “Gitmo Five.”"[8] The Gitmo Five are Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Ammar al-Baluchi, Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawsawi.[9]
RULES COMMITTEE PRINT 112-22
TEXT OF H.R. 4310, THE NATIONAL DEFENSE
AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment