Controversial NDAA law sparks debate at UTEP, nationwide

On Dec. 31, President Barack Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2012 into U.S. law, which authorized $662 billion in funding for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad. The law has stirred up criticism and debate both worldwide and among UTEP faculty and students.

Included in the act are controversial provisions contained in subsection 1021 of the bill, stating that "Congress affirms that the authority of the President to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force includes the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons pending disposition under the law of war." Covered persons as defined by part B of subsection 1021 include persons who substantially supported Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, or associated forces through committing belligerent acts.

"One of the problems particularly concerning many American citizens about this bill is the provision that would allow for Americans to be detained without being charged or presented without any kind of legal representation," said Charles Boehmer, associate professor of Political Science. "In particular, this is something that could be applied very broadly, because some of the other provisions in the law about how to identify a terrorist have been extremely broad and vague."

Critics have called the language of the bill vague because of the use of terms such as "all necessary and appropriate force," "associated forces" and "belligerent act" when describing terrorists. Part C of subsection 1021 allows for detention of said persons without trial.

"It's just not right. It allows the president to have unreasonable amounts of power," said Phillip Gonzales, freshman pre-business major. "World courts fight over what's right and wrong with human rights, this National Act is completely wrong; it destroys civil liberties of people. The assumption of terrorism is so vague that anyone doing any small crime from smoking weed to stealing from a store could be sent away without trail to jail."

However, in a public statement, President Obama said that his support to this bill doesn't mean that he agrees with everything in it.

"In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists. Over the last several years, my Administration has developed an effective, sustainable framework for the detention, interrogation and trial of suspected terrorists that allows us to maximize both our ability to collect intelligence and to incapacitate dangerous individuals in rapidly developing situations, and the results we have achieved are undeniable."

The bill has received criticism from multiple media outlets and politicians. Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com wrote an extensive article titled "Three myths about the detention bill," which criticized President Obama's rationalization for the controversial provisions. Congressman Ron Paul of Texas introduced HR3785 to the House, a piece of legislation that seeks to overturn section 1021 of the NDAA.

"Section 1021 essentially codifies into law the very dubious claim of presidential authority under the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force to indefinitely detain American citizens without access to legal representation or due process of law." said Paul in a statement. "Section 1021 provides for the possibility of the US military acting as a kind of police force on US soil, apprehending terror suspects–including Americans–and whisking them off to an undisclosed location indefinitely. No right to attorney, no right to trial, no day in court."

While the law is controversial, part D of section 1021 states that "Nothing in this section is intended to limit or expand the authority of the President or the scope of the Authorization for Use of Military Force."

"I'm not necessarily going to sleep better at night because the president says, oh well, this is a power that in theory we have but we're not going to use," Boehmer said. "I mean, what does that mean? Those are empty words."

Henry Arrambide may be reached at prospector@utep.edu.