Historic war crimes trial should be seen

Guantanamo Bay, Cuba - By staging the first Military Commission trial since World War II and banning television coverage of the proceedings, the U.S. Government is in danger of proving the old saying that a tree that falls unseen in the forest makes no sound.

The government had intended that the war crimes trial of Osama bin Laden's former driver, Salim Hamdan, would be closely followed around the world. This was to be the first trial of an alleged terrorist by one of the Military Commissions created by Congress and the Bush Administration, and the government hoped that madia coverage of the trial would persuade the world that the process was fair and just.

In fact, for those of us who are observing the trial, it is clear that the government is ernestly attempting to conduct a fair trial that deserves the approval of the world. The proceedings are very similar to trials in the civilian courts. The military judge is even-handed, and has issued several rulings adverse to the prosecution. The defense lawyers are first-class. Hamdan is treated with the utmost respect. (The judge calls a break several times each day so the defendant can pray.)

The problem is, the case lacks pizzaz, and it is not being widely covered around the world. The major television networks are not here. CNN has a correspondent here, and we of "In Session" are the only other American television network to broadcast from the scene. A number of print journalists are here, but their dispatches are not being given prominent coverage.

The pity is that if this trial was being televised, it would be a huge hit with TV audiences around the world. As I sat in the courtroom yestereday, I kept thinking that if the multitudes could see it they would be fascinated–and pesuaded that the government was doing justice.

I recalled that I had written a letter years ago to then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, asking that when the first trial was held, television should be permitted to present it to the world. The answer was no, and it was a mistake.

–Fred Graham, In Session senior editor