Prosecuting Terrorists: The Prosecutors’ Perspectives

New York, NY – The New York City Bar International Human Rights Committee and Human Rights First are co-sponsoring a panel discussion with leading federal prosecutors on the prosecution of terrorism suspects. Ever since the first detainees began arriving at Guantanamo Bay in 2002, there has been debate about the proper forum in which to prosecute suspected terrorists. Now, with the conclusion of the first military commission trial at Guantanamo, the debate is more important than ever. Can the United States successfully try accused terrorists in the federal courts or do we need special purpose tribunals? Over the past fifteen years, zealous prosecutors have tried the Oklahoma City bombers, the World Trade Center bombers and those responsible for the destruction of US embassies in East Africa. Some critics have argued that federal criminal courts are ill-equipped to handle the challenges posed by international terrorism cases. These critics either endorse the use of the military commission system or propose creating “national security courts”. Some argue for the power to detain without criminal charges or trials. What works? What doesn’t? Experienced prosecutors share and discuss their varying perspectives. Where: The House of the New York City Bar, 42 West 44th Street When: Monday, September 8th, 6:00-7:30 p.m. Who: James J. Benjamin, Jr., Former AUSA; Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP Andrew McCarthy, Former AUSA; led the prosecution against Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman Mary Jo White, Former US Attorney; Debevoise & Plimpton, LLP Richard B. Zabel, Former AUSA; Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP Moderated by Hon. Benjamin Civiletti, Former Attorney General of the United States; Venable LLP Chaired by Mark R. Shulman, Pace Law School This event is free and open to the public.

Press

Published on September 8, 2008

Share

Take action

Urge Congress to pass the Afghan Adjustment Act