Jan. 31 (Bloomberg) -- A federal judge said suspected terrorists held at the U.S. Navy base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, can challenge their detention in federal court because military tribunals don't protect their rights.

U.S. District Judge Joyce Hens Green in Washington rejected the Bush administration's request to throw out lawsuits by 54 detainees protesting their imprisonment. Green said tribunals set up by the Pentagon to determine whether the prisoners are ``enemy combatants'' violate the U.S. Constitution and in some cases the Geneva Convention treaties on treatment of prisoners of war.

``It would be far easier for the government to prosecute the war on terrorism if it could imprison all suspected `enemy combatants' at Guantanamo Bay without having to acknowledge and respect any constitutional rights of detainees,'' Green wrote. That, she said, would violate ``the most basic fundamental rights for which the people of this country have fought and died for well over 200 years.''

Saying the administration has conceded the war on terrorism may last for generations, she said enemy combatants could serve life prison terms without ever being tried or convicted of a crime. Government regulations say enemy combatants can be held until the war on terrorism is over or until military authorities decide on a case-by-case basis it is safe to release a prisoner.

Rulings in Conflict

Green's decision conflicts with a Jan. 19 ruling by another federal judge in Washington, Richard Leon, who threw out seven suspected terrorists' requests for court review of their detention. Leon said he found ``no viable legal theory exists'' for a court to order the detainees' release.

``These conflicting rulings will ultimately have to be resolved by the Court of Appeals, and the department will explore options for expeditiously resolving the issues,'' the Justice Department said in a statement.

The issue is likely to be resolved by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, or possibly the Supreme Court.

About 550 inmates are being held at Guantanamo Bay. Green was brought out of retirement to consider the legal questions raised by multiple suits filed in federal court on behalf of Guantanamo detainees following a June 2004 Supreme Court ruling that the prisoners could seek court review of their imprisonment.

The government argued that federal court review was unnecessary because military tribunals are meeting the high court's demand for legal protection for the inmates. The government said the justices' ruling was limited to the question of whether U.S. courts could consider a detainee's request for release.

Access to Evidence

Green disagreed, saying the Supreme Court's decision gives the detainees a constitutional right to due process.

Green said that because detainees can't get access to classified evidence, they are denied a fair chance to challenge their classification as enemy combatants. They also aren't allowed lawyers, she said.

For example, she said, Mustafa Ait Idr was accused of associating with an unidentified al-Qaeda operative.

``If you tell the name, then I can respond and defend myself,'' the detainee said, according to Green's opinion. The head of the military tribunal replied: ``We are asking you the questions, and we need you to respond to what is on the unclassified summary.''

``The judge couldn't have provided a stronger message that the rule of law can't be violated by executive fiat,'' said Barbara Olshansky, a lawyer for some of the inmates. ``Our democratic institutions are reining in a vigilante executive.''

President's Power

Leon, an appointee of President George W. Bush, was the only federal judge in Washington to keep the Guantanamo cases assigned to him and to issue his own ruling on the legal issues Green was asked to consider.

Leon rejected the detainees' argument that the Supreme Court's decision last June guaranteed them the right to contest their imprisonment. The high court's decision merely upheld federal judges' authority to consider such claims and didn't expand the rights of enemy combatants, he said.

The justices ``chose only to answer the question of jurisdiction, and not the question of whether these same individuals possess any substantive rights on the merits of their claims,'' Leon said.

Leon said the seven detainees who pressed their claims in his court couldn't use the U.S. Constitution to challenge the lawfulness of their detention at Guantanamo.

Geneva Convention

The president's powers to wage a war authorized by Congress ``must be interpreted expansively,'' he said. It would be ``fanciful at best'' for the detainees to claim they were illegally held because Congress didn't authorize Bush to imprison people seized outside Afghanistan, which the U.S. invaded after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Green, an appointee of former President Jimmy Carter, said prisoners who fought for the ousted Taliban regime in Afghanistan, and who haven't been excluded from prisoner of war status by a military tribunal, can make valid claims under the Geneva Convention.

The Justice Department statement said the government disagreed.

``There is no basis for concluding that detainees who were indisputably not part of any uniformed force, and not subject to a traditional command structure, must be given POW rights under the Geneva Conventions pending a determination by a `tribunal' on their status,'' the Justice Department said.

Today's case is: In Re Guantanamo Detainee Cases: 02-CV- 0299, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

To contact the reporter on this story: Jeff St.Onge at jstonge@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: January 31, 2005 16:34 EST