Sixth Amendment - Essay Example

A ruling in a federal court backed the president's powers to confine an American citizen without trial for security purposes or when seen as aiding terrorist attacks, on a closer consideration of the sixth amendment the above action by the president is a gross violation of human rights as stipulated in the bill of rights (Shea, 58). The failure of the state to accord Padilla a speedy trial as allowed in the sixth amendment. Through the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment, which protects the, defendant from delayed trial since the time of indictment to the beginning of the case.

The constitution allows a period of six months within which the prosecution should commence trial on all felonies, apart from murder cases; however, Padilla went through unlawful confinement for more than three years this indeed was a violation of the law. Padilla denial of the right to assistance of counsel or any attorney representative, in 2003 Paul.D.Clement then the deputy solicitor general. Stated in court that the accused had no right to a counsel assistance. On his attempt to challenge the president's declaration of him as an enemy combatant.

He went on to argue that the laws of war do not recognize the rights of such an individual as in ordinary criminal law:, however, this was a complete contradiction. To the precedents of a similar situation where president Washington. Granted Major John Andre who was a British spymaster also Benedict Arnolds intelligence handler a public trial. According to Abadinsky in his book he stipulates well that going by to the practice of the judicial system an individual should stand trial in the state and district where the crime took place, however, while, in different detention centers, it was unknown where he could stand trial.

Padilla went through solitary confinement, sleep deprivation among other inhumane treatments. Padilla faced enhanced interrogation, which also torture by international law. This was a gross violation of civil liberties in the pretext of safeguarding national security (Howard Abadinsky, 129). For the whole time in prison, Padilla faced of with witnesses against him which is not in line with the sixth amendment. Who's clause on confrontation provides the accused with the right of confrontation.

To enable him meet with the witnesses face to face for cross examination. Through detention and denial of a speedy and public trial. Padilla did not exercise his right to call his own witness to counter the accusations as provided by the sixth amendment. In the compulsory process clause, which allows defendants. To introduce their own case during the trial, this would have compelled the prosecution to release evidence. For the benefit of Padilla prior to trial creating a fair chance of defense.

Such violation in its own stance could qualify for the reversal of any conviction made before the defendant. Though the president claimed to have gained the powers from the congress. Through various resolutions, they become effected when the country is at war; however, it is worth considering that. The so-called war on terror was not war rather it was just a rhetoric. Since the congress is the only chamber that declares war, and it has never done so since world war two. In my own conclusion, it is evident that the unlawful detention of Padilla was a precedent to the abolition of the right to trial