Highlights of legislation

Rules for a military commission:

. A defendant would be selected for prosecution and assigned a military defense counsel. The defendant could retain civilian counsel if the counsel is eligible to have access classified information.

. Statements obtained by torture would not be admissible as evidence.

. Statements obtained using interrogation methods that violate a 2005 ban on “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” would be admissible as evidence if they were taken before the ban went into effect and a judge found the statements to be reliable and would serve the “interests of justice.”

. The commission could determine the punishment, including death.

. A defendant would be allowed to examine and respond to any evidence given to a jury. If classified information were needed for prosecution, an unclassified summary would be provided.

. When the government wanted to protect classified information and an unclassified substitute was not available, the government could decide to drop the charges. Under the laws of war, the president would not be required to release the combatant.

. Defendants would be barred from protesting their detention or treatment in civilian courts.

Who is covered:

. The system would apply to “unlawful enemy combatants” selected by the government for prosecution. Such a combatant is a person “who has engaged in hostilities or who has purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the United States or its co-belligerents.”

. The court would not be used to prosecute U.S. citizens or individuals who fight in foreign forces on behalf of a sovereign state.

. The phrase “purposefully and materially” is intended to clarify that a person must knowingly support terrorist networks to be deemed an unlawful enemy combatant.

Interrogation techniques:

. Specific war crimes are outlined. These include torture, cruel or inhuman treatment, murder, mutilation or maiming, serious bodily injury, sexual abuse, taking hostages, rape and biological experiments. An extensive definition of each crime is provided.

. The president would not be allowed to authorize any interrogation technique that amounted to a war crime.

. The bill does not include a provision the president wanted interpreting U.S. obligations under the Geneva Conventions, which set international standards on prisoner treatment. Bush wanted a provision that stated an existing 2005 ban on “cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment” was enough to satisfy the treaty’s obligations. Republican senators said this would look like the United States was redefining the standard, which is much broader.

. The president could “interpret the meaning and application” of Geneva Convention standards applied to less severe interrogation procedures. Such a provision is intended to allow him to authorize methods that might otherwise be seen as illegal by international courts.