The European media devoted heavy coverage to the relatively lenient prison sentence (five and half years) for terrorist offenses given to Salim Ahmed Hamdan, Osama Bin Laden's former driver, by a military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay August 7. But while the European media has been virtually unanimous in denouncing Guantanamo and everything to do with it, interpretations of the sentence varied widely.
The British leftish daily the Guardian and the German conservative daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung both reported the argument that the verdict could help legitimize the military tribunal. From Washington, the Guardian's Elena Schor reported that
" supporters of the tribunal process asserted that Hamdan's acquittal [on some charges] by the jury of six military officers immunized the Bush administration from criticism that Guantanamo defendants are deprived of basic legal rights."
Similarly, Frankfurter Allgemeine Washington correspondent Katja Gelinsky cited both John McCain, who said that the verdict "shows that the jurors have carefully weighed the evidence for and against," and prosecutor Lawrence Morris, who said it confirmed “the fairness and justice of the tribunal."
The tone in the Guardian and the Frankfurter Allgemeine was similar to that of an August 8 article in The New York Times. While acknowledging that the trial had raised critical questions about the military tribunals, The New York Times reported that "military prosecutors here said the sentence proved that the Bush administration's system for trying detainees was legitimate and fair."
A different line was taken by the Times of London's Washington correspondent Tim Reid, who concluded that Hamdan "will never be released" , because the Pentagon may hold enemy combatants indefinitely. This was not regarded as a foregone conclusion by the Guardian or the Frankfurter Allgemeine. The Guardian reported that
"The judge in his case, U.S. navy captain Keith Allred, told reporters at the prison camp that it is unclear what future Hamdan faces in six months but that he would likely be eligible for an administrative review of his status."
Reid also characterized the verdict as "the latest blow to the Bush Administration's efforts to justify its highly controversial military tribunal system at Guantanamo Bay." Rather than legitimizing the court, as suggested by the Guardian, the Frankfurter Allgemeine, and the New York Times, Reid reported that the verdict would
"bolster the case made by civil rights groups, and much of the international community, that holding Guantanamo Bay detainees indefinitely is unjustifiable, particularly after they have been tried."
In a commentary August 8, Reid went as far as to claim that "the five and a half year sentence was nothing short of a disaster for the Bush administration," and that "the White House has made clear for months that whatever happened to Hamdan, he would still be held indefinitely."
