WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court announced Monday that it would hear a challenge to the Bush administration's plan to try accused foreign terrorists in special military courts, setting the stage for a ruling on whether the Geneva Convention trumps the president in the war on terrorism.
The case, to be heard in the spring, will set the rules for the first war-crimes trials for foreign prisoners since World War II.
At issue is whether accused terrorists are entitled to the legal rules that are standard in a criminal trial or a court-martial of United States military personnel.
The Geneva Convention says prisoners who are captured during war and charged with crimes are entitled to be tried under the standard laws of the host country.
For instance, does the defendant have the right to participate in his trial, to see all the evidence against him and to confront his accusers? The government contends that in some cases, he may not, since some of the material being discussed may be classified.
The Bush administration said in November 2001 that foreign fighters captured in the U.S.-declared war on terrorism were not entitled to the Geneva Convention's protections for prisoners of war because terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda were not government entities or signatories to the 1949 treaty.
The Defense Department also has refused to account for all the foreigners being held by the United States or to allow international inspectors, such as representatives from the International Committee of the Red Cross, to check on the conditions of every terrorism suspect in U.S. custody.
Although the Constitution does give Congress the power to "make rules concerning captures on land and water," lawmakers have not passed any rules on the handling of prisoners captured in the war on terrorism.
Last year, the Supreme Court took a first step toward reining in the White House over its handling of foreign detainees held at the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The administration had maintained that these men were outside the jurisdiction of U.S. courts because they were outside U.S. territory.
Disagreeing, the Supreme Court said the Constitution gave these prisoners -- and indeed all persons held in U.S. custody -- a right to challenge their detentions in court. Some of the men held at Guantanamo Bay had described themselves as innocent victims of warlords in Afghanistan, and said they should have a chance to prove their innocence.
