According to a recent article by the Associated Press, reporters will not be allowed into the hearings of 14 suspected al-Qaida terrorists at Guantanamo Bay, including recently confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

These suspects have been denied access to their lawyers, pending their hearings, which will decide whether these suspects can be called “enemy combatants.” President Bush will then have the personal authority to decide whether the 14 will be given military trials.

The barring of the media from the hearings is troubling to many, as it leaves the American people largely uninformed about the actions of the federal government in this matter.

Some are also apprehensive that the transcripts of the hearings will be released at a later date with edited or completely removed sections of the proceedings.

David Saldana, adjunct assistant professor in the Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication and an attorney specializing in First Amendment law, said these suspects have been denied the Sixth Amendment right of the writ of habeas corpus and that it is a perversion of American law and morals.

“It’s never right to take the away the writ of habeas corpus. If the government has a reason, then they should say so,” Saldana said.

“To say that you don’t have the writ of habeas corpus, that is something a democracy doesn’t do. [The writ of habeas corpus] is the single greatest freedom benchmark in Western culture.”

Saldana added that the Military Commissions Act allows the president to decide who an enemy combatant is, and if that person or group is of noncitizen origin, the writ of habeas corpus rights are taken away and the person or group can be jailed indefinitely.

The right of due process, put forth by the Sixth Amendment, becomes limited, he said.

“It’s about the most disturbing thing you can imagine when the president can say who an enemy combatant is and tribunals can be held in secret. What’s being kept secret? A lot of shameful things are kept secret,” Saldana said.

Basil Mahayni, graduate student in political science, feels the U.S. Constitution can allow noncitizen terrorist suspects to have the unalienable rights that Americans enjoy.

“I feel that our Constitution is dynamic enough to define as to what rights convicted terrorists deserve, but to strip all rights puts us in a bad situation internationally,” Mahayni said.