Showing posts with label Mohammad Jawad. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mohammad Jawad. Show all posts

November 21, 2008

Federal judge orders five Guantanamo detainees released

Jaclyn Belczyk at 12:37 PM ET


Photo source or description
[JURIST] A judge for the US District Court for the District of Columbia [official website] on Thursday ordered the release [order, PDF] of five Algerian Guantanamo Bay [JURIST news archive] detainees. In the first ruling on detainees' rights since the June Supreme Court decision in Boumediene v. Bush [opinion, PDF; JURIST report], Judge Richard Leon [official profile] decided [Washington Post report] that the government's evidence was insufficient to persuade him that the men were planning to travel to Afghanistan to join al Qaeda and therefore properly classed as "enemy combatants:"
[W]hile the information in the classified intelligence report, relating to the credibility and reliability of the source, was undoubtedly sufficient for the intelligence purposes for which it was prepared, it is not sufficient for the purposes for which a habeas court must now evaluate it. To allow enemy combatancy to rest on so thin a reed would be inconsistent with this Court's obligation under the Supreme Court's decision in Hamdi to protect petitioners from the risk of erroneous detention. [emphasis in original]

Leon ordered that a sixth detainee, Belkacem ben Sayah, remain in custody because the government's evidence against him was sufficient to label him an enemy combatant. US Justice Department officials issued a statement [text] indicating that they were "pleased" with the court's decision to detain ben Sayah, but "disappointed" with the court's decision to release the other detainees.

Leon began habeas corpus hearings [JURIST report] for the six Algerians earlier this month. In October, he ruled [order, PDF; JURIST report] that in order to be validly held as "enemy combatants," Guantanamo Bay detainees [JURIST news archive] must have directly supported hostilities against the US or its allies, setting the standard which the government must use to justify their detention.

In a related development Wednesday, a military judge at Guantanamo Bay rejected [ACLU press release] evidence against detainee Mohammed Jawad [DOD materials; JURIST news archive], finding that it had been obtained through torture. Other evidence against Jawad for his pending trial by military commission was excluded [JURIST report] in October, also because it had allegedly been obtained through torture.

You can read the full decision at this link, too:

http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/guantanamo/20081120-order-to-release-detainees.pdf

June 26, 2008

"Detainee" kangaroo courts update

Judge threatens to suspend war court trial


crosenberg@MiamiHerald.com

GUANTANAMO BAY NAVY BASE, Cuba -- A military judge in the trial of Canadian captive Omar Khadr threatened Thursday to suspend the terror trial unless the prison camp releases a detailed log of Khadr's treatment in more than five years of detention as an alleged al Qaeda terrorist.

Khadr, 21, is accused of throwing a hand grenade in a July 2002 firefight between U.S. forces and al Qaeda suspects in Afghanistan. A Special Forces medic, Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Speer, 28, of Albuquerque, N.M., died of his wounds. Khadr was 15.

His attorney, Navy Lt. Cmdr. William Kuebler, wants the log in a pretrial effort to limit the scope of evidence given to a jury of U.S. military officers at his upcoming trial, expected in late summer. He argues the circumstances of some interrogations would exclude some of his statements from the trial.

Thursday morning, the military judge, Army Col. Peter E. Brownback III, agreed with the defense that it should get copies of the log entries from the prison camp's Detainee Information Management System, or DIMS.

Brownback is believed to be the first war court judge to threaten to ''abate'' the proceedings if the prison camp's command staff does not turn over the evidence.

''I find that this is relevant because it shows the day-by-day, hour-by-hour track of Mr. Khadr throughout his detention here at Guantánamo Bay,'' the colonel said.

The extensive document is "a method of determining how he went through the system.''

The hearing took place in the original military commissions courtroom, an old air traffic control tower on a hill overlooking "Camp Justice.''

A day earlier, war court staff retreated from the Pentagon's showcase $12 million ''Expeditionary Legal Complex'' following a series of technical glitches, including a power outage, in a first test use of a maximum-security, snoop-proof court created for the trial of six alleged 9/11 conspirators.

The long the Khadr defense team seeks would draw back a layer of secrecy surrounding Khadr's treatment at this offshore Navy base, where the Toronto-born teen grew into bushy-bearded, six-foot-two adulthood behind the razor wire of Camp Delta.

A statement Thursday evening from the prison camps command staff, called the Joint Task Force, or JTF, said the commanders were "working closely with the prosecutors to redact the records for release.''

Redaction is a process of censorship that blacks out information that the Pentagon or other government agencies don't think the public should see.

''This entails a significant effort to redact information which would put JTF personnel at risk,'' the statement added, without elaborating on the nature of the risk.

Defense lawyers argue that Khadr, the son of an alleged senior al Qaeda financier, has been subjected to repeated mistreatment at Guantánamo to reinforce a confession he gave in detention at the Bagram air base in Afghanistan.

They say he was coerced into a confession soon after his capture, injured with two bullet wounds in his back -- and punished here if he didn't stick to that first account.

Prison camp commanders have consistently denied that Khadr has been mistreated and say all enemy combatants are treated with safety and humanely.

Khadr was sent here in 2002 after his 16th birthday and has been held in the cellblocks with other adult prisoners classified as ''enemy combatants,'' -- not at Iguana House, a special prison camp set up for juvenile combatants since sent home.

Brownback noted that Khadr's defense attorneys -- Kuebler and Rebecca Snyder, a civilian Pentagon lawyer -- are cleared to see any sensitive national security information that might be included in the log.

He set a deadline of 5 p.m. May 22 for authorities to turn over the log or find a remedy for the standoff over access to the details of Khadr's confinement.

''If not,'' Brownback said, "we stop.''

After the hearing, Air Force Maj. Gail Crawford, a military commissions legal expert, said there has been no abatement so far at the war court, which is now receiving pretrial motions in six cases and has charge sheets for seven more in the wings.

''If you can't get discovery, you can't go forward,'' Crawford said.

Brownback's ultimate remedy after abatement, she said, would be to dismiss the charges entirely.

In early 2005, his attorneys sought a criminal investigation into allegations that guards used Khadr as a human mop to clean up an interrogation room at the prison camps.

According to their description, Khadr had been left shackled so long in an interrogation booth in March 2003 that he urinated on himself. To clean it up, they claimed, guards poured a cleaning solvent on his soiled prison camp uniform and dragged him across the floor to wipe it up.

In March, a Pentagon spokesman, Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey Gordon, said there ``was no evidence to substantiate these claims."

Different war court judges have been struggling with their authority to issues orders related to the running of the prison, a razor-wire-ringed series of camps that sprawl across a bluff overlooking the Caribbean -- several miles from the tribunal building.

The judge in the case of Osama bin Laden's driver, expected to be the first at trial, has set late May for a hearing on the conditions of confinement of the driver, Salim Ahmed Hamdan.

Hamdan's lawyers say he is so emotionally unstable after years of isolation in the camps that he is not competent to assist in his defense.

Last week the driver declared he would boycott the proceedings after the judge, Navy Capt. Keith Allred, postponed a hearing on the topic.

''I don't have any control over the conditions of your confinement,'' Allred told Hamdan. "I've read in the newspapers that you and others are unhappy with them, and I understand that.''

Then Wednesday, a defense attorney in the case of Afghan detainee Mohammed Jawad, captured at 17, point blank asked Brownback whether he had the authority to intervene in the circumstances of his client's captivity. Brownback hedged a reply.

Jawad is accused of throwing a grenade into a U.S. military jeep at a bazaar in Kabul and injuring two American soldiers and their interpreter. He claims he was punished for refusing to come to his war court arraignment in March.

In order to get him there, his lawyer said, guards dragged him from his cell. In March, he was brought into the court in leg shackles, a war court first.

''I believe that some court should have some supervisory power over the administration of the detention facility. Up until now, it has been an empire unto itself,'' said Jawad's attorney, Air Force Reserves Maj. David J.R. Frakt, who is in civilian life a California law professor.


The crimes and cruelty of Buschco never cease, do they?

Guantánamo (from Miami Herald)


In this courtroom sketch, Omar Khadr attends his war-crimes trial in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba Thursday, May 8, 2008.
JANET HAMLIN / COURTESY CBC
In this courtroom sketch, Omar Khadr attends his war-crimes trial in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba Thursday, May 8, 2008.

March 15, 2008

WHAT IS HAPPENING IN GUANTANAMO BAY

Jawad Asks for Justice and Fairness; Says Military Commission Trials Are Illegal


Reuters North American News Service

by Kevin Lanigan, Director of Law and Security Program, Human Rights First


[Editor's Note: this blog entry was written at Guantanamo Bay]

Two weeks ago, Attorney General Michael Mukasey visited Guantánamo for about six hours. Among other things, he met with prosecution officials down here, but he did not see any proceedings because none were in session. He should have been here yesterday.

On Wednesday, March 12, Mohammed Jawad, a young Afghan man, was arraigned on military commission charges enacted into law in 2006, accusing him of throwing a hand grenade into a vehicle carrying two U.S. Army non-commissioned officers and their Afghan interpreter, wounding all three of them. Jawad was 16 years old at the time of the alleged offense in December 2002. He has been in U.S. military custody ever since then—now for more than 5 years—first at the detention facility at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, and then at Guantánamo.

We had heard rumors since the night before that Jawad’s arraignment might not happen. Still, we were told Wednesday morning that the arraignment would begin at 1 p.m. After going through the external security checkpoints and being in place by the appointed hour, three more hours passed with nothing happening, as the media representatives and the NGO observers sat outside at picnic tables, sheltered from the sun by a tarp.

Finally, at nearly 4 p.m., we were ushered through the final security checkpoint and into the courtroom for an arraignment that should have taken fifteen minutes, but actually took two hours. By the time we were seated, Jawad was already in the courtroom, dressed in his orange prison jumpsuit with his feet in chains, alternately holding his head in his hands and lying his head on his crossed arms on the table.

Marine Colonel Ralph Coleman, the military judge in Jawad’s case, began the proceedings by announcing that he had two things to put on the record. First, Coleman reported that Jawad had refused to leave his cell yesterday morning to come to the arraignment, describing at length his analysis of the military commission rules and the various steps he and others took to get Jawad to the courtroom. (After the proceedings were over, Army Colonel J. Michael Sawyers, Jawad’s detailed military defense counsel, told us that Jawad had to be forcibly carried from his cell). And second, Col. Coleman chided defense counsel for failing to have Jawad dressed in civilian clothes for court, so that no negative inference could be drawn from his appearance in prison garb.

Then Col. Coleman asked Jawad whether he accepted Col. Sawyers as his defense counsel. (This inquiry was interrupted when Col. Coleman realized that Jawad’s headset—through which the proceedings were to be translated into Jawad’s native Pashto—was not working. After replacing the headset, the proceedings began again). Col. Coleman explained to Jawad his right to counsel in these proceedings, in language very similar to what any regular viewer of our police procedural television shows would easily recognize. But Jawad, raised in the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan, and with no more than an elementary-level religious education, has never seen those shows. Col. Coleman repeated his explanation of Jawad’s right to counsel, asking again and again if Jawad would accept Sawyers as his attorney, if he wanted another military counsel detailed, if he knew a civilian attorney he would prefer, or if he wanted to represent himself.

Through the court interpreter, Jawad said he did not understand what Col. Coleman was saying, that he wanted no counsel and no trial, and that he had things to say that he wanted Col. Coleman and the journalists to hear:

I’ve been treated unfairly since my arrest. I’m innocent. I’ve been tortured. (See Human Rights First report entitled Tortured Justice). I’m a human being. I’ve not infringed anyone’s rights. What is being done to me is illegal. I was brought here illegally…When I was arrested I was only 16. I don’t know court. I don’t know a judge’s job…I’m very glad if these words get out today. I’m glad there are journalists to hear me. Before if I said anything it would not get outside my cell…Is it in the United States Constitution to be treated this way? I want justice and fairness. That is all I have to say.

Jawad said that, as a child, he read in books and newspapers of the American government’s criticism of Taliban cruelty in Afghanistan, and that the Taliban would kill and imprison people without trial and did not respect human rights. But Jawad also said that he was arrested by the Americans more than five years ago with no trial, and that, while he was held in Bagram, Americans killed three Afghans in custody there. (See Human Rights First report entitled Command’s Responsibility, and description of the movie Taxi to the Dark Side).

During the course of this statement by Jawad, Col. Coleman tried to continue questioning Jawad about acceptance of counsel, but also gave him some leeway to say what he wanted. In the end, Jawad essentially shut down, saying he had a terrible headache, refusing to accept Col. Sawyers or any other military counsel, saying he knew no civilian lawyer to take his case, and saying he did not want to represent himself and did not want a trial. Col. Coleman told Jawad that the proceedings would continue nonetheless and ordered Col. Sawyers to continue as Jawad’s counsel for the time being.

After the prosecutor, Army Lieutenant Colonel Darrel Vandeveld, read a summary of the charges, Col. Coleman asked Jawad for a plea. Since entering any plea would cut off the defense’s right to file certain motions under commission rules, Sawyers said they would enter no plea. Thus ended the arraignment.

After the arraignment, Col. Coleman considered a request for excusal by Col. Sawyers. Some observers predicted this request was based on Jawad’s unwillingness to be represented by a uniformed U.S. military lawyer—a not-uncommon situation in Guantánamo. But this was different. The military commissions’ defense office, it seems, is relying increasingly on reserve officers called to active duty on one-year orders. Sawyers—who has met with Jawad numerous times over the last five months and even traveled to Afghanistan to help prepare the defense—leaves active duty and returns to civilian life on March 18, when he will no longer be able to serve as Jawad’s counsel. This is yet another variable in a military commission system that is being made up along the way.

Attorney General Mukasey should have seen all this. When he was here in February, he reportedly focused on preparations for the trials of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other “high value” detainees. But what we saw yesterday was an inherently limited system, not well equipped to deal even with predictable issues arising at the simplest stage of the proceeding. Depending on your perspective yesterday, you might have viewed Jawad as keenly aware of his audience or obviously damaged by five years of isolation and abuse. Either way, it is hard to conceive of this military commissions system being able to cope effectively anytime soon with the “high value” detainees.

also see:

Abuse allegations from U.S. prison in Afghanistan cast shadow over 3 Guantanamo hearings

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20080314-1345-guantanamo-bagramsshadow.html

as well as:

http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/346379

http://wiredispatch.com/news/?id=83320

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/voices.php/2008/03/13/i_m_a_human_being_young_guantanamo_priso


ShareThis