Talk:Military commission

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

Could you please explain...[edit]

(moved from User talk:Jnestorius)

Could you please explain why you redirected Military Commission to Military Justice?

Were you unaware that one of the huge controversies over the USA's use of military commissions to try the Guantanamo captives was that they were a new distinct system, separate from its traditional military justice system? The Military Commission system had no established rules of evidence, no established precedents. This is why rather than being the speedy system that was promised, these cases have dragged on for almost a decade.

Legal critics predicted these problems back when Bush tried to create the new Military Commission system. They pointed out that the USA already had two perfectly adequate justice systems, its civilian justice system and its military justice system. The military commission system, they pointed out, was a brand new, third justice system.

One of David Hicks's lawyers described, with disgust, why he wasn't available to give Hicks his advice, when Hicks's was presented with a plea bargain deal on the eve of his commission. Hicks's lawyer who had flown all the way to Guantanamo, from Australia, described being told he could not participate any further in Hicks's defense, unless he signed a draconian document that would have imposed heavy punishment upon him, if he broke any of the commission's rules and procedures. Fine, he says, please let me read those rules. He then described his shock and outrage when he was told that he couldn't be given a copy of the commission's rules and procedures because they hadn't been written yet.

Did you make this redirect on your own, sole judgment, or was it made after discussion with others?

Frankly I think this redirection was a bad idea, very misleading. Geo Swan (talk) 22:15, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The explanation is here. The phrase "military commission" exists in other countries besides the US. The redirect is hardly misleading given that there are hatnotes at military justice pointing to both Military tribunals in the United States and Guantanamo military commissions. There is an argument for making military commission a disambiguation page but not for giving the current US meaning priority. jnestorius^(talk) 22:49, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote: "The phrase 'military commission' exists in other countries beside the US." While I am aware of the term "commission" being used to refer to an officers instrument of rank, I am not aware of any other nations that operate a trial like procedure, and call it a "military commission". I looked for such, and couldn't find them. If you are aware of other nations that apply the term "military commission" to a court like procedure I call upon you to name those nations. If you made the redirection based on the use of the term commission for an instrument of rank, then I remain concerned that the redirection was very misleading. Geo Swan (talk) 19:17, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've made it a disambiguation now. jnestorius^(talk) 20:05, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]