1370) Um novo codigo penal para punir terroristas

O pai do jornalista Daniel Pearl, correspondente do Wall Street Journal barbaramente trucidado por terroristas islâmicos no Paquistão, propõe um novo quadro jurídico para lidar com o fenômeno do terrorismo, não apenas o da Al Quaeda ou islâmico, mas qualquer terrorismo. Endosso plenamente suas recomendações, feitas ao seu governo, mas que devem ser consideradas como universais.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

We Need a New Legal Regime to Fight the War on Terror
An open letter to the attorney general.
By JUDEA PEARL
The Wall Street Journal, Opinion, September 12, 2009

As Americans commemorate the eighth anniversary of the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, many of us are conscious of another symbol of the war on terror: the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, whose fate is still uncertain. If the crumbling twin towers conjure memories of America's shock and pain, Guantanamo is a monument to our nation's reaction after 9/11—and the moral dilemmas we face in this difficult new era.

On Jan. 22, 2009, President Barack Obama set up three task forces to review and recommend strategies concerning various aspects of the Guantanamo detention facility. They met with families of terror victims in June and issued a preliminary report in July, which called for the use of both military and federal courts for the disposition of detainees held at Guantanamo.

I met with the members of the task forces, along with many families of terror victims. We focused primarily on the legal dilemmas facing the U.S. government as it seeks to balance the security needs of the American people with the rights of potentially dangerous detainees.

There was much bitterness expressed at that meeting. The words "it is all politics" were repeated again and again, as victims' families expressed their frustration at what they viewed as the government's indecision and lack of moral clarity. Family members spoke passionately about lost loved ones who had not been "given their human rights to argue for their innocence." The sadness and rage expressed in that room still ring in my ears today.

After that meeting, on June 21, 2009, I wrote a letter to the three task forces. I am now making an edited version of the letter public, with the hope that it gets the attention of Attorney General Eric Holder before he makes his final recommendations to President Obama.
***

My name is Judea Pearl. I am the father of Daniel Pearl, the Wall Street Journal South Asia bureau chief who was abducted and brutally murdered in Karachi, Pakistan, Jan. 31, 2002.

If there is one thing that could soothe the pain of those of us whose loved ones were murdered by terrorists, it is the knowledge that our losses were not in vain, but have been channeled towards eradicating the evil of terrorism from the face of the earth.

Let me be clear: We are less concerned about details—like where these men will serve their sentences—that seem to dominate the public debate. We care most about the message our government projects about its determination in this struggle.

The message from our government should reach the ears of several audiences: terrorists, their sympathizers, their potential recruits, the world at large, and, most importantly, the next generation of Americans.

First and foremost, it must proclaim unequivocally that America is still committed to the war on terror, and that this war includes not just active combatants or members of recognized terrorist organizations, but the ideology of terror itself. In other words, America should affirm its commitment to fight any ideology that licences the targeting of innocent civilians to transmit political messages.

In the same way that our medical research institutions have declared a war on cancer—not on one tumor or another—your message should make it clear that America is not merely at war with al Qaeda or individual perpetrators of the crimes. It is the ideology of terrorism in its various incarnations that is our most fierce enemy.

With this objective in mind, you should recommend that detainees suspected of terror be classified as a new legal category. Existing categories derived from criminal law and conventional warfare are not equipped to deal with the threat democracies now face.

America must muster the courage to define a new category and deal with it on its own terms. This is perhaps the most important recommendation that your task forces could make.

By crafting the Geneva Conventions at the end of World War II, the international community demonstrated the necessity of creating new legal frameworks to deal with new realities. That same need should now compel the international community to embrace a legal category to deal with the new phenomena of a war with no foreseen ending; an army with no honor and no respect for human life; an army with no uniform, no country and no government; and an army that does not reciprocate agreements.

I am constantly reminded of the case of piracy, which was a menace until the mid-19th century, when the international community got together and eradicated in just a few years. This was only possible because of a radical change in international law that proclaimed it a crime not against a particular state, but against all mankind. It is this kind of sweeping legal innovation that we and the entire civilized world hope to see you propose.

Whatever decisions you make regarding the physical and legal handling of the current detainees, it is imperative that going forward every potential terrorist would know that, if caught, he will not be entitled to privileges under existing legal categories but subject to a new set of restrictions.

In addition to placing detainees in this new category, you should also recommend that they are tried in closed sessions. Detainees should not be given a platform to broadcast messages to their comrades or recruits back home. There is nothing more enticing to a would-be terrorist than the prospect of becoming the center of world attention, able to broadcast his alleged grievances to every living room on this planet.

Our son was murdered—and his beheading videotaped—to satisfy this craving for publicity. Your recommendations must make it clear to every would-be terrorist that, if captured, he will go down the path of total oblivion to the extent allowed by law.

The question of freedom of speech might enter into this issue, especially if media gag orders are considered. Here I am reminded of child pornography, which is not protected by the First Amendment, not for the purpose of limiting consumption, but for the purpose of curbing production. We live in a world where a sizable segment of the population is aroused by cruelty. To prevent this cruelty from spreading, we must impose blackouts on much of what these detainees may wish to boast about in their testimonies.

We who are living the war on terror every minute of our lives wish you success in your difficult, yet historic task. The future of civilized society may depend on your decisions.

Mr. Pearl, a professor of computer science at UCLA, is president of the Daniel Pearl Foundation, founded in memory of his son to promote cross-cultural understanding.