Try suspects in New York

The decision to try five high-profile terror suspects in New York City is an important step toward bringing these men to justice and reaffirming American standards of justice.

The five, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, have spent most of the past six years in legal limbo, detained at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Attorney General Eric Holder announced Nov. 13 that the detainees would be tried at a federal courthouse in lower Manhattan, less than 1,000 yards from the site of the World Trade Center's twin towers they are accused of destroying.

The announcement met with immediate objections from some, including U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. Graham and others insist that the suspects should be tried in military tribunals rather than in civilian court.

Graham, who has experience as an Air Force officer in the Judge Advocate General's Corps, worries that the trial could degenerate into a “chaos zoo trial.” But that risk likely is overblown.

There are rules in place to ensure that Mohammed and the other defendants behave in the courtroom. Outside the courtroom, New York City boasts one of the best police forces and some of the finest security systems in the world.

While critics argue that the suspects should be tried in military tribunals, they fail to note that President George W. Bush sought for years to establish such tribunals at Guantanamo. Each time, however, the plan ran afoul of the Constitution.

Some New Yorkers are apprehensive about holding the trial in Manhattan, fearing it would make the city a target once again for terrorists. But other residents embrace the idea, saying it is fitting that the suspects are tried on American soil near the site where the crime occurred.

Another fear is that the suspects' attorneys could somehow manipulate the proceedings, bringing up the harsh treatment of the prisoners at Guantanamo and forcing the judge to declare a mistrial. Justice Department officials, however, ensure that ample evidence against the suspects exists without having to rely on any forcibly coerced information.

Further, Mohammed, during hearings at Guantanamo, openly declared himself a member of al-Qaida and proudly proclaimed his involvement in the 9/11 attacks. If he behaves similarly in New York, the jury should have no trouble convicting him.

Holding this trial in a civilian court is not only the best way to convict and sentence these suspects, but it also serves to reassert America's devotion to justice. Our justice system is capable of giving these men a fair trial and assessing their guilt or innocence based on principles that have served the nation well for more than 200 years.

We hope, in fact, that Holder and the Obama administration reconsider the decision to try five other detainees before military commissions. Those suspects also should receive civilian trials or courts-martial.

Doing so would establish a standard for future trials of those accused of engaging in terrorism, supporting terrorists or joining conspiracies against the United States. The nation must move beyond the Guantanamo model, which was a legal no-man's land.

The five men who will stand trial in New York are accused of involvement in the murder of nearly 3,000 people on 9/11. Holder insists that the untainted evidence against the men is strong enough to deliver a guilty verdict and the death penalty he expects to seek.

If so, that should be a satisfactory resolution to a legal dilemma that has perplexed the nation and undermined its reputation for fairness in the eyes of the world.