LAW FROM THE CENTER

A few hours ago, Reuters reports that more military defense lawyers are speaking out against the imminent tribunals that will take place. Two days ago, President Bush ordered two Guantanomo detainees to stand trial. Now, their appointed counsel are speaking up.

Army Maj. Mark Bridges said he and Sundel plan a defense case that not only challenges evidence presented against al Bahlul, but attacks the foundation of the tribunal process.

"We do envision raising a lot of motions related to the rules and the procedures themselves," Bridges said in an interview.

But he doubted these motions will not get a fair hearing because the rules do not permit a truly independent review. He said the same Pentagon official who approved the charges against his client also may rule on these types of motions.

Prosecuting JAGs disagree.

"I think military commissions provide a full and fair process," said Maj. John Smith, a lawyer and spokesman for the Pentagon's office of military tribunals.

"We have the presumption of innocence. We have the highest burden of proof in criminal court -- proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We have representation by zealous defense counsel. They have the ability to present evidence and call witnesses."

Marine Major Michael Mori, the "Marine with Balls" I told you about here, obviously disagrees.

Marine Corps Maj. Michael Mori, who represents Australian Guantanamo prisoner David Hicks, echoed the criticism. Hicks, one of four Guantanamo prisoners given lawyers, has not yet been charged.

"When you use an unfair system, all you do is risk convicting the innocent and providing somebody who's truly guilty with a valid complaint to attack his conviction. It doesn't help anybody. It only helps the people who created the system to predict the outcome," Mori said.

ANALYSIS: As I told you here, the defense attorneys who are representing these detainees are showing amazing zealousness of representation, perhaps in violation of military policy. Even when defending soldiers who are US citizens, military attorneys generally have to keep their mouths shut in the media while defending their clients due to military regulations. These attorneys are risking their careers by not only defending their clients in the court of public opinion, but putting the policies of their bosses on trial as well. These are potentially career-ending moves on their part.