New judge of Peruvian military-police court

 Brigadier General Paola Peggy Polanco Ponce, has been sworn in as Alternate Supreme Justice of the Supreme Review Chamber of the Supreme Military-Police Court. Details here. Congratulations!

Death / disability in long-term ongoing operations led by the Indian Defence Forces cannot be excluded to refuse enhanced pension to soldiers: Indian Supreme Court

Livelaw reported the recent clarification issued by the Supreme Court of India on whether ongoing operations in Jammu and Kashmir (Operation Rakshak) and Operation Rhino (Assam) would be included under Category E(i) of a government policy which grants an enhanced form of pension, namely, War Injury Pension to soldiers who become disabled while participating in operations notified by the Government of India from time to time.

The Respondent-soldier had previously been granted War Injury Pension by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench and the High Court of Punjab and Haryana for his disability incurred while serving in a High Altitude Area in Kargil (Jammu and Kashmir) between 2002 and 2005, as part of Operation Rakshak. The Union of India challenged the order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana before the Indian Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court held the circumstances leading to death / disability mentioned in the policy as "not exhaustive" and rejected the Union of India's plea to discriminate between soldiers who become disabled / deceased in long-term running operations such as Operation Rakshak. A distinction sought to be drawn by the Union of India between those who become injured due to border skirmishes etc. and those who are disabled due to illnesses aggravated by operational conditions was also rejected. The said principle was also previously held by the Indian Supreme Court in Union of India Vs Saroj Devi.

The complete decision is available here.

AFT: IAF noncom has right to bail pending review of court-martial

India's Armed Forces Tribunal has ruled that a noncom convicted by court-martial may be released on bail pending action by statutory confirming authorities. Details here. Excerpt from The Tribune:

“The pendency of confirmation proceedings cannot be permitted to result in continued detention without due consideration of the applicant’s right to personal liberty, as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” the Tribunal’s Bench, comprising Justice Rajendra Menon and Lt Gen CP Mohanty, ruled.

“Merely because the process of confirmation of the findings and sentence awarded by a court martial is pending, the same cannot operate as an impediment to the exercise of jurisdiction by this Tribunal to consider suspension of the sentence and grant of bail,” the Bench said.

Observing that the applicant had already undergone detention for a period of 35 days, which is more than half of the total sentence of two months’ detention, the Bench said that the period of detention already undergone shall necessarily be taken into account while computing the total period of sentence.

“Taking note of the aforesaid circumstances, we are satisfied that this is a fit case in which the sentence of detention deserves to be suspended and the applicant granted bail, pending confirmation of the findings and sentence by the competent authority, the Bench ruled while directing that the execution of the sentence of detention shall remain suspended pending confirmation, and the applicant be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond.

The Bench, however, made it clear that the suspension of sentence is confined to the punishment of detention only. Insofar as the punishment of reduction in rank is concerned, the same shall be given effect immediately upon confirmation of the findings and sentence by the competent authority, in accordance with law. There shall be no stay on the implementation of the said punishment, the Bench said.

Another civiian tried by court-martial in Uganda

Uganda stil hasn't gotten the memo. Its general court-martial has tried a civilian cab driver found wearing military clothing. Details here. African Charter jurisprudence forbids the trial of civilians by military courts.

Jury Selection Is Underway in the USS Cole Bombing Case, First Capital Case at Guantanamo Bay

That is the headline for a piece by Carol Rosenberg on Just Security.

Jury selection began Monday in the first capital case at Guantanamo Bay, with the court questioning the first 18 of up-to 200 U.S. military officers about their ability to sit impartially at the trial of a Saudi prisoner who is accused of conspiring in a terror attack on a U.S. Navy ship that killed 17 American sailors a quarter-century ago.

Suicide bombers attacked the USS Cole on Oct. 12, 2000, while it was on a refueling stop in Aden, Yemen. Besides those killed, 37 other sailors on the 312-member crew were injured.

Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, 61, is accused of war crimes for allegedly helping to orchestrate the attack, and two others, at the behest of Osama bin Laden. He has been in U.S. custody since 2002 but was held by the CIA in black sites for the first four years, during which time he was tortured repeatedly. His treatment in U.S. custody has meant protracted pretrial hearings about which evidence can be used at the trial and whether he is even competent to be tried. Those pretrial hearings ended last week.

Empaneling 12 jurors and six alternates could take weeks. A total of 36 military officers were brought to the base over the weekend from a pool of 200 drawn from U.S. military bases around the world.

Monday, Col. Matthew Fitzgerald, the judge, told the first 18 candidates that the trial could last four-to-six months, or longer, but that he would recess for Thanksgiving and Christmas vacation.