What kind of choice is this? The Guardian reports:

The two British terrorist suspects facing a secret US military tribunal in Guantanamo Bay will be given a choice: plead guilty and accept a 20-year prison sentence, or be executed if found guilty.

American legal sources close to the process said that the prisoners' dilemma was intended to encourage maximum 'co-operation'.

A group called Fair Trials Abroad is leading the charge to have the two men returned to Britain to stand trial, where their "confessions" would be deemed involuntary and inadmissible, and where they would not face the death penalty. The group's spokesman said,

Our concern is that there will be no meaningful way of testing the evidence against these people. The US Defence Department has set itself up as prosecution, judge and defence counsel and has created the rules of trial. This is patently a kangaroo court.

The men's lawyers also cast doubt on the validity of the confessions, saying,

any confessions gathered while the men were kept without charge or access to lawyers in Bagram airbase in Afghanistan and Camp Delta in Cuba would have no status in international law and would be inadmissible in British courts.

Gareth Peirce, who acts for Moazzam Begg, said: 'Anything that any human being says or admits under threat of brutality is regarded internationally and nationally as worthless. It makes the process an abuse. Moazzam Begg had a year in Bagram airbase and then six months in Guantanamo Bay. If this treatment happened for an hour in a British police station, no evidence gathered would be admissible,' she said.

Britain's Foreign Secretary and Home Secretary are preparing to ask Secretary of State Colin Powell to repatriate the two men so they can face a trial under British law. While they're at it, how about sending Zacarias Moussaoui back to France to face a non-death penalty trial there?