The American military tribunals set up to pass judgment on terrorism suspects at Guantánamo Bay lurched into life this week when David Hicks, the “Australian Taliban”, unexpectedly pleaded guilty. The Pentagon will be relieved that the tribunals have started to show results after five years of controversy over the status of “enemy combatants”, claims of torture, the admissibility of forced confessions and a Supreme Court ruling last year that halted an earlier version of the tribunals. Yet the Hicks case is hardly an impressive start for America's offshore justice. Critics say the 31-year-old Mr Hicks, a former kangaroo skinner and alleged al-Qaeda fighter, faces a “kangaroo court”. Two of his civilian lawyers were barred from the hearing on March 26th. His military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, has been threatened with prosecution for harshly criticising the tribunals.

   The prosecutor, Colonel Morris Davis, said the defence lawyer may have breached military law that bans officers from using “contemptuous words” against the president or senior officials. Major Mori filed a counter-charge against the prosecution, saying it was trying to intimidate him. In the end the motion will not be heard because Mr Hicks, looking pale and bedraggled, admitted the charge of “providing material support for terrorism”. A charge of “attempted murder in violation of the laws of war” was dropped. As The Economist went to press, the tribunal was due to hear details of his plea and pass sentence, which Mr Hicks is expected to serve out in Australia. His father, Terry Hicks, said his son had had “five years of absolute hell” since being captured in Afghanistan and allegedly suffering beatings, rape and forced injections in American custody—accusations rejected by the Pentagon. The guilty plea was just “a way to get home”, said Mr Hicks's father.

   Many in Australia regard Mr Hicks as more of a lost soul than a dangerous terrorist. Indeed, his charge sheet portrays him as little more than an al-Qaeda foot-soldier, and a poor one at that. His jihadi CV is pitiful compared with the evidence being given by some of the 14 “high value detainees” belatedly brought to Guantánamo from CIA secret prisons in September. They include al-Qaeda's operational chief, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who in a closed hearing to determine whether he was an “enemy combatant” earlier this month boasted that he had organised the September 11th attacks “from A to Z”, and 30 other plots. Meanwhile, Ahmed Ghalfan Ghailani and Waleed bin Atttash, from Tanzania and Yemen respectively, have admitted supplying equipment for the bombing of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.

   Many of these big names will face trial, and perhaps the death penalty. But the tribunals are expected to try only 60-80 of the more than 380 prisoners currently in Guantánamo. Over the years hundreds of detainees have been sent back to their countries, where some have been jailed and most have been released—and sometimes re-arrested. The Bush Administration says it wants to phase out and eventually close the jail. But it is unlikely to do so for some years, either because it lacks the evidence to prosecute detainees (even under the more lax military rules it is using), or because other countries are unwilling to take them back.

   注（1）：本文選自Economist, 03/29/2007

   注（2）：本文習題命題模仿對象為2004年真題Text 3（題目順序稍微調整）。

   1． What does the author intend to illustrate with the Hicks case?

    [A] The case is not encouraging in promoting justice.

    [B] The Pentagon is working effectively to try the detainees.

    [C] The detainees are not supposed to have civilian lawyers.

    [D] Talibans were involved in illegal kangaroo trade.

   2． What can we infer from the second paragraph?

    [A] Hicks’s military lawyer was also sued by the prosecutor.

    [B] The reason that Mr. Hicks pleaded guilty was to escape from the bad treatment.

    [C] Mr. Hicks has admitted guity of both charges by the prosecutor.

    [D] The Pentagon is unaware of the accusation toward the American custody.

   3． What does “kangaroo court” (Line 8, Paragraph 1) mean?

    [A] a court dealing with kangloo smuggle

    [B] a weird court

    [C] an unfair court

    [D] a military

   4． The fourth paragraph suggests that _______.

    [A] the jail in Guantánamo Bay will be closed in the new future

    [B] the government is too optimistic in closing the jail

    [C] the tribunals will eventually try all the detainees

    [D] all the detainees will be sent back to their own countries

   5． Which of the following is TRUE according to the text?

    [A] Mr. Hicks is a big name in the al-Qaeda organization.

    [B] All the detainees in Guantánamo Bay are proved guilty.

    [C] Most detainees will face permenant jail when sent back home.

    [D] It is ironic to say that the Hicks case shows America’s justice.

   篇章剖析

   本文就來自澳大利亞的塔利班恐怖分子大衛(wèi)·希克斯承認法庭對他的指控一事展開討論。第一段就整個事件的前因后果進行了簡要的討論，從�？怂拱敢�出了對于美國軍事法庭不公平性問題的討論；第二段對事件進一步展開了詳細論述，并引用了各方人士的觀點，說明了針對軍事法庭爭議的復雜性；第三段說明�？怂怪皇且粋�小角色，被關押的還有許多具有重要地位的恐怖分子；第四段則指出布什關于關閉關塔那摩基地計劃的難度所在。

   詞匯注釋

   tribunal [tri`bju:nl] n. (特等)法庭                 intimidate [in`timideit]v. 脅迫

   lurch [lE:tF] vi. 突然傾斜                      begraggled [bi`dVAgld]adj. 全身泥污的

   combatant [`kCmbEtEnt] n. 戰(zhàn)士, 戰(zhàn)斗員          injection[in`jektFEn] n. 注射, 注射劑

   halt [hC:lt] vt. 使停止                          custody [`kQstEdi]n. 監(jiān)管，保管

   skinner [`skinE] n. 皮革商                   etainee [9ditei`ni:]n. 被拘留者, 未判決囚犯

   bar [bB:] vt. 禁止, 阻擋, 妨礙                   penalty [`penElti]n. 處罰, 罰款

   breach [bri:tF] v. 違背, 破壞                     phase out 使逐步淘汰, 逐漸停止

   contemptuous [kEn`temptjuEs] adj. 輕蔑的, 侮辱的  lax [lAks]adj. 松的, 不嚴格的

   難句突破

   The American military tribunals set up to pass judgment on terrorism suspects at Guantánamo Bay lurched into life this week when David Hicks, the “Australian Taliban”, unexpectedly pleaded guilty.

   主體句式  The American military tribunals lurched into life.

   結構分析  這個句子的結構看上去比較容易讓人混淆。經(jīng)過分析，可以發(fā)現(xiàn)第一個出現(xiàn)的動詞詞組“set up”并不是謂語，而是用來修飾the American military 的過去分詞結構。這個句子真正的謂語是lurch into life。

   句子譯文  人稱“澳大利亞塔利班”的大衛(wèi)·希克斯在本周出乎人們意料地承認了法庭對他的指控，這意味著美國軍事法庭對關押在關塔那摩灣的恐怖分子嫌犯進行審判的努力終于開始發(fā)揮實際作用。

   題目分析

   1．A. 推理題。文章對應信息為第一段的“Yet the Hicks case is hardly an impressive start for America's offshore justice”。

   2．D. 推理題。文章第二段比較后希克斯的父親說the guilty plea was just “a way to get home”，而且前文提到了�？怂乖馐艿母鞣N折磨，這都暗示�？怂钩姓J自己的罪行是希望能夠逃離折磨，回到祖國。

   3．C. 語義題�！発angaroo court”的意思是“所做裁決不夠公正透明的法庭”。如果不知道這個意思也無妨，因為可以從上下文意思中推出。后一句話中提到，“Two of his civilian lawyers were barred from the hearing on March 26th. His military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, has been threatened with prosecution for harshly criticising the tribunals”，�？怂沟穆蓭煻紵o法出庭，說明這個法庭是不公正的。

   4．B. 細節(jié)題。B選項的原文對應信息為“The Bush Administration says it wants to phase out and eventually close the jail. But it is unlikely to do so for some years”，可見布什政府在這一問題上的態(tài)度過于樂觀。

   5．D. 推理題。文章從頭到尾所傳達的信息都是，�？怂挂话复嬖诤芏嗖还�正因��。A、B、C選項都能在文中找到意思相反的對應信息。

   參考譯文

   人稱“澳大利亞塔利班”的大衛(wèi)·�？怂乖诒局艹龊跞藗円饬系爻姓J了法庭對他的指控，這意味著美國軍事法庭對關押在關塔那摩灣的恐怖分子嫌犯進行審判的努力終于開始發(fā)揮實際作用。五角大樓將會對軍事法庭初步顯示出的結果感到輕松，因為其五年來一直受到所謂“敵對戰(zhàn)斗人員”身份的爭議困擾，即從去年開始用所謂的拷打、縱容逼供和比較高法院等方式取代之前的軍事法庭進行審判。盡管如此，對于美國的國際正義來說，�？怂沟陌讣�還很難說是一個另人振奮的開端。評論家們稱，31歲的希克斯先生曾經(jīng)是袋鼠皮革商人和所謂的基地組織戰(zhàn)士，他現(xiàn)在面對的是一個不公正的法庭。他的兩位民事律師被禁止在3月26號聽訟。而其軍事律師，少校邁克爾·莫里則因為對軍事法庭的尖刻批評將面臨被起訴的威脅。

    公訴人莫利斯·戴維上校稱辯護律師可能已違背軍法中關于禁止軍官針對主席或者高級官員使用侮辱性詞語的條例。而莫里少校針對該起訴也提出了一個反向指控，認為起訴意在脅迫他�，F(xiàn)在我們比較終不會再聽到類似這樣的傳聞，因為看上去面色蒼白精神頹廢的希克斯先生已經(jīng)承認了關于“提供資源支持恐怖分子”的指控。而法庭已經(jīng)放棄了另一個關于“違背戰(zhàn)爭法的謀殺未遂”指控。當本刊發(fā)行之時，從軍事法庭即將聽到更多他的懇求和宣判細節(jié)，人們普遍認為�？怂瓜壬鷮�會在澳大利亞服��。他的父親特里·�？怂孤暦Q其子自從在阿富汗被捕以來經(jīng)歷了地獄般的五年生活，期間遭受了毆打、強奸和強迫注射等——盡管這些指控已被五角大樓駁回。�？怂瓜壬�的父親說承認有罪不過是一種得以回家的方法罷了。

   在澳大利亞有很多人認為�？怂瓜壬�更像一個喪失靈魂的人而并非危險的恐怖分子。確實，案件記錄他被描述成一個基地組織的普通步兵，一個可憐的小角色。同9月份從中情局秘密監(jiān)獄轉到關塔那摩的14名具有極高價值的囚犯相比，�？怂沟慕芄�迪履歷看起來非常令人同情。前者包括基地組織的行動首領哈立德·謝赫·穆罕默德，他在本月早期一個確定其是否為敵對戰(zhàn)斗人員身份的聽訟會中，自夸他從頭到尾策劃了911襲擊和30個其他秘密計劃。與此同時，分別來自坦桑尼亞和也門的Ahmed Ghalfan Ghailani 和Waleed bin Atttash也承認自己為1998年肯尼亞和坦桑尼亞美國大使館的爆炸事件提供了相應設備。

    這些鼎鼎大名的恐怖分子很多即將面臨審判，而且可能被判死刑。但是軍事法庭目前只會審判380多名關塔那摩囚犯中的60-80名。幾年來，囚禁者中已有成百人被遣送回了自己的國家，他們有被繼續(xù)監(jiān)禁，大多數(shù)則被釋放——不過有時又被重新逮捕。布什行政當局宣稱有必要逐漸減少人員并比較終關閉這個監(jiān)獄。但看很難在幾年內做到這一點，一方面是因為缺乏起訴這些囚禁者的證據(jù)（即使是在不夠嚴謹?shù)能姺�框架下��，另一方面則是因為其他國家事實上并不愿意將那些囚犯帶回。