The story below is that of a young man being trialed in the USA for the crime of killing an American soldier in Afghanistan. But he doesn't come from the middle-east as we all might think; he is a Canadian guy who was sent to wat at the age of 15 and now he is being judged for the things he did (intentionally or unintentionally) while there.
Youngest Guantanamo inmate, Canadian Omar Khadr, tried.
A former child combatant has gone on trial at Guantanamo Bay, the first detainee to face military justice under President Barack Obama.
Canadian citizen Omar Khadr, now 23, is accused of throwing a grenade that killed a US soldier during a gun battle in Afghanistan in 2002, when he was 15.
A UN envoy, Radhika Coomaraswamy, said the trial would set a dangerous precedent for child soldiers worldwide. However, the judge said the prosecution must show that Mr Khadr had had intent to commit a crime, and he told jurors they could consider his age in making their decision.
'Clear standards'
Military officers in the jury pool indicated that they saw no problem with trying Mr Khadr. "Does anyone believe that juveniles should not be prosecuted for violent offences? "Prosecutor Jeff Groharing asked them. "Does anyone feel the accused should be held to a different standard because he was 15 years old at the time of the alleged offences?" None said they held those beliefs. The judge, Col Patrick Parrish, said the jury could consider the age of the defendant - now a tall, broad-shouldered and bushy-bearded man - at the time of his alleged crime.
Ms Coomaraswamy, special envoy for children in armed conflict, said no child had been prosecuted for a war crime since World War II. "Juvenile justice standards are clear: children should not be tried before military tribunals," she said.
As it happens always when it comes to war-related events, we tend to focus on the horror of crimes, the horror if war, and not focus on the reasons why those events took place, or the things that were actually going wrong during the course of the conflict. I would like to point out something I find even more essential, than the actual murder being discussed here. The underlying fact that must be considered is: Why are kids sent to war? In my opinion, we cannot expect a child to be fully aware of the extent in the consequences (immediate or not) of his actions... That's why they are called "adolescents" remember? It comes from the Latin, and means "to be lacking of...". Lacking of maturity, which is not wrong at all, it is a stage of life that should be respected as they all are.
A fifteen-year-old in war makes no sense, as it does not, the fact of wanting to trial him as an adult, because in the end, this trial mught be one more, of the "somke courtains" for not discussing the errors of the US and just ointing out how "justice" is always done.
A former child combatant has gone on trial at Guantanamo Bay, the first detainee to face military justice under President Barack Obama.
I believe this is nonsense, i think the US government is doing a mistake, first of all, why the hell is there a 15 year old boy at war? As Amaro said we cannot expect that a teenager is fully mature and know the consequences of his acts, especially when he is 6 years from being an adult (in the US policies). So i believe that he cannot end up in a trial because his acts were based on an immature mind which as i said was not aware of his actions.
ReplyDeleteatte: Ricardo
(sorry it says cristina but i used the mail archivos.churchill in order to post something)