Two New Contest Entries

I have an idea for your Lawfare contest.  As a friendly amendment to Luis Dickson's proposal, might I suggest that instead of referring KSM to the ICC, refer him to the Canadian justice system?  On its face, the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act, S.C. 2000, c. 24, would seem to apply: it creates a form of universal jurisdiction for crimes against humanity and war crimes, and it came into effect in October of 2000.  I claim no particular expertise in Canadian national security law, so I am not sure whether there might some reason the plan is not feasible as a matter of Canadian law.  However, I am prepared to say that the plan meets--just barely--the criterion of "politically conceivable on Planet Earth."

Suppose, with a fellow having been indicted and sitting at GTMO (some fellow whose initials have acquired mythic status, hypothetically) they bring in a venire to SDNY, and empanel it before an Article III judge. Defendant and counsel watch from GTMO by video. Jurors are anonymous. Defense counsel are at GTMO and in Foley Square, in touch electronically for purposes of challenges.

Once the jury is empaneled, judge, lawyers, witnesses fly to GTMO. The case is tried there. The jury remains in the SDNY and now it watches and listens by telescreen. The defendant confronts the witnesses. When the defense rests, the judge and lawyers return to the SDNY for in-person arguments and jury charge, with the defendant watching by video. The jury then deliberates and gives a verdict.