5cjxburmr

nationality. 85 The procedures of such courts may deviate from those applicable during ordinaryproceedings, but deviations should be warranted by practical need. 8617.4.4 Reintegration Programs and Amnesty. States have used reconciliation andreintegration programs during hostilities as alternatives to prosecution to seek to de-radicalizeand rehabilitate violent extremists. 87Although amnesty is normally left to the discretion of the State, AP II provides that, atthe end of hostilities, the authorities in power shall endeavor to grant the broadest possibleamnesty to persons who have participated in the armed conflict, or those deprived of their libertyfor reasons related to the armed conflict, whether they are interned or detained. 8885 For example, 10 U.S.C. § 948b (“(a) Purpose. –This chapter establishes procedures governing the use of militarycommissions to try alien unprivileged enemy belligerents for violations of the law of war and other offenses triableby military commission.”) (emphasis added).86 See Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557, 632-33 (2006) (“The Government offers only a cursory defense ofHamdan's military commission in light of Common Article 3. As Justice Kennedy explains, that defense failsbecause ‘[t]he regular military courts in our system are the courts-martial established by congressional statutes.’ Ata minimum, a military commission ‘can be ‘regularly constituted’ by the standards of our military justice systemonly if some practical need explains deviations from court-martial practice.’ As we have explained, no such needhas been demonstrated here.”) (internal citations omitted); id. at 645-46 (Kennedy, J., concurring) (“At a minimum amilitary commission like the one at issue--a commission specially convened by the President to try specific personswithout express congressional authorization--can be ‘regularly constituted’ by the standards of our military justicesystem only if some practical need explains deviations from court-martial practice. … Relevant concerns, as notedearlier, relate to logistical constraints, accommodation of witnesses, security of the proceedings, and the like, notmere expedience or convenience. This determination, of course, must be made with due regard for the constitutionalprinciple that congressional statutes can be controlling, including the congressional direction that the law of war hasa bearing on the determination.”).87 For example, Charles A. Allen, Deputy General Counsel, Department of Defense, Alternatives to Prosecution forWar Crimes in the War on Terrorism, 17 TRANSNATIONAL LAW & CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS 121, 131-34 (2008)(“In Pakistan, there is a reintegration program akin to the idea of ‘it takes a village.’ Village loyalties areparamount, and Pakistani leaders have found that returning a former combatant to his village and holding the villageresponsible for his conduct is a successful way to ensure that the person does not return to violence. Under thisprogram, a village must agree to accept the return of the person and must pay the Government of Pakistan a‘retainer’ equal to about $5000 that it forfeits if the individual returns to hostilities. … The Kingdom of SaudiArabia uses a similar program, referred to as a ‘counseling program,’ to ‘de-radicalize’ and reintegrate formersecurity prisoners back into society. … Prisoners who have not committed capital crimes or killings enter theprogram immediately after they are captured. Upon release, the former prisoners are then reconnected with theirfamilies and given psychological evaluation and counseling. After a few months of rehabilitation, they are broughtinto contact with moderate Islamic scholars and encouraged to enter into discussions about their beliefs. Themoderate scholars are able to counter extremist views with the Koran and other authoritative texts to explainalternative interpretations that the former prisoner may not have heard before. Along with the counseling program,the Saudis try to convince the former combatants that they have a stake in a peaceful and stable government byencouraging them to marry, paying for their weddings and subsequent education for their children, and helping themto find suitable employment and housing.”).88 Consider AP II art. 6(5) (“At the end of hostilities, the authorities in power shall endeavour to grant the broadestpossible amnesty to persons who have participated in the armed conflict, or those deprived of their liberty forreasons related to the armed conflict, whether they are interned or detained.”).1028