Les anglonautes

Anglonautes | Search | Grammaire | Vocabulary - Encyclopaedia | Learning English | News - History | Images | Arts | Press | Audio - Video | Travel

Previous Home Up Next

 


 

 

 

A "Camp Justice" sign is seen near high-security courtroom

which will hold the pre-trial sessions for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his four co-defendants

on charges related to the 9/11 attacks at Camp Justice,

on the U.S. Naval Base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba,

Monday, Dec. 8, 2008.

AP Photo/Mandel Ngan,Pool

The Boston Globe > The Big Picture > Scenes from Guantánamo Bay        December 10, 2008
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/12/scenes_from_guantanamo_bay.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

enemy combatant

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/us/04gitmo.html

 

 

 

detainee

http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2010/jul/14/torture-classified-documents-disclosed

 

 

 

Guantánamo Bay > Omar Deghayes

For nearly six years, British resident Omar Deghayes was imprisoned in Guantánamo

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/omar-deghayes

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/21/i-fought-to-survive-guantanamo

 

 

 

Guantánamo Bay > Shaker Aamer

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/03/guantanamo-torture-lawyer-british

 

 

 

Guantánamo Bay > Omar Khadr

Omar Khadr, a Canadian, was 15 when he was accused in 2002
of killing a United States soldier in Afghanistan during a battle.
He was subsequently imprisoned and interrogated in Afghanistan
and at the Guantánamo Bay detention center in Cuba.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/omar_khadr/index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/28/us/28gitmo.html
http://www.defense.gov/news/commissionsKhadr.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/24/opinion/24mon1.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/16/world/16khadr.html

 

 

 

Guantánamo Bay > Mohammed Jawad        2009

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/j/mohammed_jawad/index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/31/us/31gitmo.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/us/29gitmo.html

 

 

 

Guantánamo Bay > Binyam Mohamed

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/binyam-mohamed
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/m/binyam_mohamed/index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/11/world/europe/11britain.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/feb/10/binyam-mohamed-judge-deleted-ruling
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/11/binyam-mohamed-mi5-torture-claims
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/24/guantanamo-binyam-mohamed
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/cartoon/2009/feb/24/binyam-mohamed-guantanamo
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/22/binyam-mohamed-injuries
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/20/guantanamo-civil-liberties-binyam-mohamed
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/05/binyam-mohamed-profile

 

 

 

Senator Graham's Draft Legislation for Detainee Laws

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina,
was in talks earlier this year
[ 2010]
with the Obama administration over his proposal for a comprehensive overhaul of detainee laws
that establish clearer legal authority and habeas-corpus standards
for holding terrorism suspects without trial as wartime prisoners,
including those captured years in the future,
and ensuring that any such detainee who is ordered released by a court
would not be released into the United States.
The senator is now planning to introduce his legislation without White House support.

http://documents.nytimes.com/senator-grahams-draft-legislation-for-detainee-laws

 

 

 

Obama to close Guantánamo? > Cagle cartoons        2009

http://www.cagle.msnbc.com/news/ObamaGuantanamo/main.asp

 

 

 

the US Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/guantanamo-bay
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/national/usstatesterritoriesandpossessions/
guantanamobaynavalbasecuba/index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/us/politics/26gitmo.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/us/politics/29gitmo.html
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/pdf/GTMOtaskforcereport_052810.pdf?sid=ST2010052803890
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/25/us/25gitmo.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/31/us/31gitmo.html
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/12/scenes_from_guantanamo_bay.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/22/us/politics/22obama.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/cartoon/2009/feb/24/binyam-mohamed-guantanamo
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/02/23/world/international-us-britain-guantanamo-detainee.html
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/01/21/washington/news-us-guantanamo-trials.html
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/national/
usstatesterritoriesandpossessions/guantanamobaynavalbasecuba/index.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/14/guantanamo-torture-pentagon-crawford-tribunal-qahtani
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/14/barack-obama-guantanamo-human-rights
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2008/dec/04/guantanamo-bay?picture=340338259
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/09/us/09gitmo.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/us/21guantanamo.html?hp
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/03/us/03gitmo.html?hp
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/08/guantanamo.humanrights
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/08/washington/08detain.html?hp
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/14/guantanamo.afghanistan
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1645985220080717
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSN1538025320080716
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1530598920080715
http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSN1441480520080714
http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN0348453420080703
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2008-07-15-gitmo-videotape_N.htm
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/first-video-of-guantanamo-interrogation-released-867964.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,2224408,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3019221.ece
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article2903264.ece
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-03-30-guantanamo-hicks_N.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-03-30-gitmo-hicks_N.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,2046874,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,1988228,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/flash/0,,1987124,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/slideshow/page/0,,1987294,00.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-01-06-sheehan-cuba_x.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,1886236,00.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-09-23-gitmo-jail_x.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,1814907,00.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-06-29-gitmo-decision_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-06-14-bush-gitmo_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-06-11-saudi-doubts_x.htm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-2220935,00.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-06-10-guantanamo-suicides_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-05-29-guantanamo_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-05-21-rice_x.htm
http://www.ohchr.org/english/bodies/cat/docs/AdvanceVersions/CAT.C.USA.CO.2.pdf
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,1779397,00.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-05-19-guantanamo-clash_x.htm
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2188260,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,1778948,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,1779063,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,1778948,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2175663,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2175790,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,1772632,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,1772226,00.html
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,1769383,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,1723019,00.html
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1406987,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,13743,1303294,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/0,13743,1000982,00.html

 

 

 

Guantánamo / Gitmo
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2007-01-06-sheehan-cuba_x.htm

 

 

 

Q&A: Guantánamo Bay
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jan/10/guantanamo.alqaida

 

 

 

Guantánamo > The Detainees
Of the 779 people who have been detained at Guantánamo,
at least 520 have been transferred and approximately 255 remain,
according to the U.S. Department of Defense.
http://projects.nytimes.com/guantanamo
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/us/politics/29gitmo.html
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/pdf/GTMOtaskforcereport_052810.pdf?sid=ST2010052803890

 

 

 

Inside Guantánamo Bay > Pictures
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2008/dec/04/guantanamo-bay?picture=340336155

 

 

 

Guantánamo > Supreme Court > Pentagon Memorandum        7.7.2006
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/politics/060711pentagon_memo.pdf

 

 

 

Guantánamo > Supreme Court > HAMDAN v. RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, et al.
certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the district of columbia circuit
No. 05-184. Argued March 28, 2006--Decided June 29, 2006
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=000&invol=05-184&friend=nytimes

 

 

 

Military Commissions
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/d/detainees/military_commissions/index.html
http://www.defense.gov/news/commissionsacts.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/28/us/28gitmo.html

 

 

 

evidence
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/us/politics/29gitmo.html
http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/nation/pdf/GTMOtaskforcereport_052810.pdf?sid=ST2010052803890

 

 

 

torture
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/opinion/27fri1.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Legacy of Torture

 

August 26, 2010
The New York Times

 

The Bush administration insisted that “enhanced interrogation techniques” — torture — were necessary to extract information from prisoners and keep Americans safe from terrorist attacks. Never mind that it was immoral, did huge damage to this country’s global standing and produced little important intelligence. Now, as we had feared, it is also making it much harder to try and convict accused terrorists.

Because federal judges cannot trust the confessions of prisoners obtained by intense coercion, they are regularly throwing out the government’s cases against Guantánamo Bay prisoners.

A new report prepared jointly by ProPublica and the National Law Journal showed that the government has lost more than half the cases where Guantánamo prisoners have challenged their detention because they were forcibly interrogated. In some cases the physical coercion was applied by foreign agents working at the behest of the United States; in other cases it was by United States agents.

Even in cases where the government later went back and tried to obtain confessions using “clean,” non-coercive methods, judges are saying those confessions too are tainted by the earlier forcible methods. In most cases, the prisoners have not actually walked free because the government is appealing the decisions. But the trend suggests that the government will continue to have a hard time proving its case even against those prisoners who should be detained.

In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled that Guantánamo prisoners could challenge their detention as enemy combatants in federal court, under the constitutional right of habeas corpus. Since then, the government has lost 37 of the 53 habeas cases that have been decided, largely because it could not prove the prisoners were terrorists.

In the 15 cases where prisoners have alleged coercive interrogations, according to the ProPublica report, judges have sided with the prisoners eight times. (There are probably more cases than these, but the judges’ opinions have been too heavily redacted by the government to tell.) Only three detainees in habeas cases have actually been let go.

In one compelling example, Judge Gladys Kessler of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in November threw out the case against Farhi Saeed bin Mohammed, captured in Pakistan in 2001. The government described Mr. Mohammed as a fighter for Al Qaeda, and Judge Kessler acknowledged there was some evidence he had associated with terrorists.

But the main evidence that he was an active terrorist was supplied by another prisoner, Binyam Mohamed, who Judge Kessler said was repeatedly tortured for two years while being held in Pakistan and Morocco at the behest of the United States. His genitals were mutilated; he was deprived of sleep and food; he was held in stress positions and forced to listen to piercingly loud music.

Because the government did not dispute Binyam Mohamed’s torture — and could not otherwise prove that Farhi Mohammed was actively engaged in fighting for Al Qaeda or the Taliban — she ordered him released. The government is appealing.

At least 50 other Guantánamo prisoners have filed habeas lawsuits. Torture could also affect the trial, if there is one, of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, who planned the 9/11 attack.

The decisions speak well of the federal judges who are adhering to civilized legal standards even when the decision to release prisoners is difficult. We hope this demonstrated respect for due process will help repair this country’s battered reputation. Had Bush-era interrogators held to similar standards, there would be fewer dubious detention cases at Guantánamo, and the government would have a much stronger case against those prisoners who are there legitimately.

    Legacy of Torture, NYT, 26.8.2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/opinion/27fri1.html

 

 

 

 

 

Appeals Court Sides With Detainee

 

July 3, 2010
The New York Times
By CHARLIE SAVAGE

 

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court has sided with a Guantánamo prisoner whose case prompted a major internal argument among Obama administration legal advisers last year over how broadly to define terrorism suspects who may be detained without trial.

Belkacem Bensayah, an Algerian who was arrested in Bosnia in 2001 and accused of helping people who wanted to travel to Afghanistan and join Al Qaeda, cannot be considered part of the terrorist organization based on the evidence the government presented against him, a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has ruled.

“The government presented no direct evidence of actual communication between Bensayah and any Al Qaeda member, much less evidence suggesting Bensayah communicated with” anyone else to facilitate travel by an Al Qaeda member, Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg wrote in a 17-page opinion that was declassified late last week. Parts of the ruling were censored by the government.

Mark Fleming, a partner at the law firm Wilmer Hale who is representing Mr. Bensayah, praised the ruling and called on the Obama administration to send his client back to Bosnia, where his wife and daughters live.

“We’re very happy with the decision of the Court of Appeals recognizing that the evidence does not justify treating Mr. Bensayah as an enemy combatant,” Mr. Fleming said. “We hope the United States will now do the right thing and release Mr. Bensayah so he can begin to rebuild his life after his long captivity.”

A Justice Department spokesman said the Obama administration was reviewing the ruling and had not yet decided how to respond.

The decision sends Mr. Bensayah’s case for reconsideration by a district judge, Richard J. Leon, who in late 2008 ruled that Mr. Bensayah could be held indefinitely and without trial as a wartime prisoner because he had provided “direct support” to Al Qaeda by trying to facilitate travel. In that same ruling, Judge Leon ordered the release of five other detainees arrested with Mr. Bensayah in Bosnia, saying the government had failed to show that they planned to travel to Afghanistan to fight the United States.

The appeals court’s reversal of Judge Leon’s ruling has added significance because it followed two policy changes about the case that the Obama administration made after taking over from the Bush administration.

In September 2009, just before the appeals court heard arguments in the case, the Obama administration abandoned the argument that Mr. Bensayah could be detained as a substantial “supporter” of Al Qaeda. Instead, it portrayed him as functionally “part” of the terrorist organization — a narrower definition.

That switch followed an internal debate between senior State Department and Pentagon lawyers over whether the Geneva Conventions allow mere supporters of an enemy force, picked up far from any combat zone, to be treated just like members of the enemy organization.

The dispute ended without a clear resolution. But as a compromise, the administration decided not to argue that Mr. Bensayah, at least, could be detained as a supporter, while holding open the theoretical possibility of making that argument in other cases.

Still, Judge Ginsburg’s opinion suggested that the appeals court ruling turned less on the recategorization of Mr. Bensayah’s alleged ties to Al Qaeda than on skepticism about the basic credibility of the evidence the government presented against him.

While the appeal was still pending last year, the Justice Department withdrew its reliance on certain evidence it had presented to Judge Leon, but about which the government had lost confidence for undisclosed reasons, Judge Ginsburg’s opinion said.

The nature of that evidence was redacted from the ruling, but it may have related to accusations that Mr. Bensayah had contact with Abu Zubaydah, another Guantánamo detainee who was once portrayed as a senior member of Al Qaeda, although officials have since lowered their estimation of his importance. A 2004 military document about Mr. Bensayah had accused him of having had phone conversations with Mr. Zubaydah about passports.

The government stuck with other evidence, including a raw intelligence report whose contents were largely redacted from the opinion, as well as accusations that Mr. Bensayah had used fraudulent documents and might have lied about his travel in the early 1990s. But Judge Ginsburg said “the evidence, viewed in isolation or together, is insufficiently corroborative” of the accusation that Mr. Bensayah was part of Al Qaeda.

The uncertainty about his travel history, the judge wrote, “at most undermines Bensayah’s own credibility; no account of his whereabouts ties him to Al Qaeda or suggests he facilitated anyone’s travel during that time. These ‘questions’ in no way demonstrate that Bensayah had ties to and facilitated travel for Al Qaeda in 2001.”

    Appeals Court Sides With Detainee, NYT, 3.7.2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/us/04gitmo.html

 

 

 

 

 

Closing Guantánamo Fades as a Priority

 

June 25, 2010
The New York Times
By CHARLIE SAVAGE

 

WASHINGTON — Stymied by political opposition and focused on competing priorities, the Obama administration has sidelined efforts to close the Guantánamo prison, making it unlikely that President Obama will fulfill his promise to close it before his term ends in 2013.

When the White House acknowledged last year that it would miss Mr. Obama’s initial January 2010 deadline for shutting the prison, it also declared that the detainees would eventually be moved to one in Illinois. But impediments to that plan have mounted in Congress, and the administration is doing little to overcome them.

“There is a lot of inertia” against closing the prison, “and the administration is not putting a lot of energy behind their position that I can see,” said Senator Carl Levin, the Michigan Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and supports the Illinois plan. He added that “the odds are that it will still be open” by the next presidential inauguration.

And Senator Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican who also supports shutting it, said the effort is “on life support and it’s unlikely to close any time soon.” He attributed the collapse to some fellow Republicans’ “demagoguery” and the administration’s poor planning and decision-making “paralysis.”

The White House insists it is still determined to shutter the prison. The administration argues that Guantánamo is a symbol in the Muslim world of past detainee abuses, citing military views that its continued operation helps terrorists.

“Our commanders have made clear that closing the detention facility at Guantánamo is a national security imperative, and the president remains committed to achieving that goal,” said a White House spokesman, Ben LaBolt.

Still, some senior officials say privately that the administration has done its part, including identifying the Illinois prison — an empty maximum-security center in Thomson, 150 miles west of Chicago — where the detainees could be held. They blame Congress for failing to execute that endgame.

“The president can’t just wave a magic wand to say that Gitmo will be closed,” said a senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss internal thinking on a sensitive issue.

The politics of closing the prison have clearly soured following the attempted bombings on a plane on Dec. 25 and in Times Square in May, as well as Republican criticism that imprisoning detainees in the United States would endanger Americans. When Mr. Obama took office a slight majority supported closing it. By a March 2010 poll, 60 percent wanted it to stay open.

One administration official argued that the White House was still trying. On May 26, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, James Jones, sent a letter to the House Appropriations Committee reiterating the case.

But Mr. Levin portrayed the administration as unwilling to make a serious effort to exert its influence, contrasting its muted response to legislative hurdles to closing Guantánamo with “very vocal” threats to veto financing for a fighter jet engine it opposes.

Last year, for example, the administration stood aside as lawmakers restricted the transfer of detainees into the United States except for prosecution. And its response was silence several weeks ago, Mr. Levin said, as the House and Senate Armed Services Committees voted to block money for renovating the Illinois prison to accommodate detainees, and to restrict transfers from Guantánamo to other countries — including, in the Senate version, a bar on Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somalia. About 130 of the 181 detainees are from those countries.

“They are not really putting their shoulder to the wheel on this issue,” Mr. Levin said of White House officials. “It’s pretty dormant in terms of their public positions.”

Several administration officials expressed hope that political winds might shift if, for example, high-level Qaeda leaders are killed, or if lawmakers focus on how expensive it is to operate a prison at the isolated base.

A recent Pentagon study, obtained by The New York Times, shows taxpayers spent more than $2 billion between 2002 and 2009 on the prison. Administration officials believe taxpayers would save about $180 million a year in operating costs if Guantánamo detainees were held at Thomson, which they hope Congress will allow the Justice Department to buy from the State of Illinois at least for federal inmates.

But in a sign that some may be making peace with keeping Guantánamo open, officials also praise improvements at the prison. An interagency review team brought order to scattered files. Mr. Obama banned brutal interrogations. Congress overhauled military commissions to give defendants more safeguards.

One category — detainees cleared for release who cannot be repatriated for their own safety — is on a path to extinction: allies have accepted 33, and just 22 await resettlement. Another — those who will be held without trials — has been narrowed to 48.

Still, the administration has faced a worsening problem in dealing with the prison’s large Yemeni population, including 58 low-level detainees who would already have been repatriated had they been from a more stable country, officials say.

The administration asked Saudi Arabia to put some Yemenis through a program aimed at rehabilitating jihadists but was rebuffed, officials said. And Mr. Obama imposed a moratorium on Yemen transfers after the failed Dec. 25 attack, planned by a Yemen-based branch of Al Qaeda whose members include two former Guantánamo detainees from Saudi Arabia.

As a result, the Obama administration has been further entangled in practices many of its officials lamented during the Bush administration. A judge this month ordered the government to release a 26-year-old Yemeni imprisoned since 2002, citing overwhelming evidence of his innocence. The Obama team decided last year to release the man, but shifted course after the moratorium. This week, the National Security Council decided to send the man to Yemen in a one-time exception, an official said on Friday.

Meanwhile, discussions have faltered between Mr. Graham and the White House aimed at crafting a bipartisan legislative package that would close Guantánamo while bolstering legal authorities for detaining terrorism suspects without trial.

Mr. Graham said such legislation would build confidence about holding detainees, including future captures, in an untainted prison inside the United States. But the talks lapsed.

“We can’t get anyone to give us a final answer,” he said. “It just goes into a black hole. I don’t know what happens.”

In any case, one senior official said, even if the administration concludes that it will never close the prison, it cannot acknowledge that because it would revive Guantánamo as America’s image in the Muslim world.

“Guantánamo is a negative symbol, but it is much diminished because we are seen as trying to close it,” the official said. “Closing Guantánamo is good, but fighting to close Guantánamo is O.K. Admitting you failed would be the worst.”


Thom Shanker contributed reporting.

    Closing Guantánamo Fades as a Priority, NYT, 25.6.2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/26/us/politics/26gitmo.html

 

 

 

 

 

No Terror Evidence Against Some Detainees

 

May 28, 2010
The New York Times
By CHARLIE SAVAGE

 

WASHINGTON — The 48 Guantánamo Bay detainees whom the Obama administration has decided to keep holding without trial include several for whom there is no evidence of involvement in any specific terrorist plot, according to a report disclosed Friday.

The report was a 32-page summary of the findings of a task force whose members were drawn from national security agencies across the executive branch. The group worked throughout 2009 to evaluate each of the 240 detainees held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, when the Obama administration took office and to decide their fates.

The task force’s general findings have been known since its report was completed in January. But the report itself was not made public. It was obtained Friday by The Washington Post, which posted the report on its Web site.

Of the 240 detainees, it recommended transferring 126 home or to a third country, prosecuting 36 for crimes, and holding 48 without trial under the laws of war because they are believed to be members of an enemy force. Thirty were Yemenis who have been deemed safe to release as individuals but will continue to be held until security conditions in Yemen stabilize.

About 180 detainees remain at the base today. Of that group, the 48 whom the administration has designated for continued indefinite detention without trial have attracted the greatest controversy, in part because many Democrats sharply criticized that policy when the Bush administration created it after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The report said most such detainees fell into at least one of four categories: they had had a significant organizational role in Al Qaeda or the Taliban; “advanced training or experience” in matters like explosives; they had “expressly stated or otherwise exhibited an intent to reengage in extremist activity upon release;” or they had a “history of engaging in extremist activities or particularly strong ties (either directly or through family members) to extremist organizations.”

The report also cited two primary reasons why the 48 detainees could not be prosecuted. First, it said, the vast majority were captured in combat zones when the focus was warfare, not court cases. While the intelligence against them was deemed credible, it said, evidence was not collected or preserved about them in a form that would be deemed admissible in court or that could prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

“One common problem is that for many of the detainees, there are no witnesses who are available to testify in any proceeding against them,” it said.

Legal limitations also posed a problem for prosecutions, the report said. For example, the task force found no evidence that some detainees had “participated in a specific terrorist plot” or that they had acted to support Al Qaeda after October 2001, when laws criminalizing the general provision of material support to a terrorist group were extended to apply to foreigners overseas. Furthermore, it noted, the statute of limitations for providing material support to terrorists expires after eight years.

The report’s disclosure comes as the Senate Armed Services Committee said it had voted to bar the construction of a military detention facility in Thomson, Ill., in a further blow to the Obama administration’s fading hopes to shutter the Guantánamo prison.

    No Terror Evidence Against Some Detainees, NYT, 29.5.2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/us/politics/29gitmo.html

 

 

 

 

 

Tainted Justice

 

May 23, 2010
The New York Times

 

If the Obama administration wants to demonstrate that it is practical and just to try some terrorism suspects in military tribunals instead of federal courts, it is off to a very poor start.

Justice Department and Pentagon officials have chosen a troubling case for the first trial under the revisions that were adopted to the Military Commissions Act in 2009 — a Toronto-born Guantánamo Bay detainee named Omar Khadr. Mr. Khadr, 23, has been in detention since he was 15, when he allegedly threw a hand grenade during a firefight in Afghanistan that fatally wounded Sgt. First Class Christopher Speer.

Mr. Khadr was not a mere bystander. He was indoctrinated into armed conflict by his father, a member of Osama bin Laden’s circle who was killed by Pakistani forces in 2003. But if his trial goes forward this summer as scheduled, he will be the first person in decades to be tried by a Western nation for war crimes allegedly committed as a child.

That has drawn justified criticism from United Nations officials and civil liberties and human rights groups. The conditions of Mr. Khadr’s imprisonment have been in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions and international accords on the treatment of children.

During a recent pretrial hearing at Guantánamo, it emerged that his initial questioning at Afghanistan’s Bagram prison occurred while he was sedated for pain and shackled to a stretcher following his hospitalization for severe wounds suffered in the fighting.

His first interrogator, identified at the hearing only as Interrogator One, was an Army sergeant later convicted of detainee abuse in another case. He used threats of rape and death to frighten the teenaged Omar Khadr into talking. Another witness recalled seeing him hooded and handcuffed to his cell with his arms held painfully above his shoulders. When the hood was removed, he testified, he could see that the teenager was crying.

In January, the Supreme Court of Canada condemned the questioning of Mr. Khadr by a Canadian official who then shared the results with American prosecutors. The ruling cited Mr. Khadr’s lack of access to counsel and his inclusion in the military’s notorious “frequent flier” program, which used sleep deprivation to elicit statements about serious criminal charges.

A ruling from the military judge on the admissibility of Mr. Khadr’s statements is not expected for several weeks. But there’s already a bad lingering taste from the hearing, which began just hours after Defense Secretary Robert Gates formally approved a new set of rules for the tribunals and before Mr. Khadr’s lawyers or the judge had a chance to review them. The rules are an improvement over those that governed the Bush commissions, but they have flaws, including the use of hearsay.

During the hearing, the Pentagon barred four reporters from covering any military commission because they printed the name of Interrogator One, even though it has been public for years and is readily available on the Internet. The administration needs to restore the reporters’ credentials.

It also needs to press forward with negotiations on a plea deal. The evidence that Mr. Khadr threw the deadly hand grenade is not clear-cut. Even if it were, it would be impossible to overlook his abuse in custody, and status as a juvenile, which deprived him of mature judgment.

After Mr. Khadr’s eight-year ordeal, it would be no disrespect to Sergeant Speer to return Mr. Khadr to his home country under terms designed to protect public safety and strive for his rehabilitation.

    Tainted Justice, NYT, 23.5.2010, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/24/opinion/24mon1.html

 

 

 

 

 

Judge Orders Guantánamo Detainee to Be Freed

 

July 31, 2009
The New York Times
By WILLIAM GLABERSON

 

WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Thursday ordered that one of the youngest detainees at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, be released by late August in a case that drew wide attention because of rulings that he had been tortured by Afghan officials and abused in American custody.

“Enough has been imposed on this young man to date,” the judge, Ellen Segal Huvelle, said in a courtroom crowded with people drawn by what had become a confrontation between the judge and the Obama administration.

But it was not clear Thursday whether Judge Huvelle’s order will mean freedom for the detainee, Mohammed Jawad, who has long faced American charges that, as a teenager, he threw a hand grenade in Kabul in 2002 that injured two American servicemen and their Afghan interpreter.

The ruling on Thursday came after a concession by the government last week that it could no longer defend Mr. Jawad’s military detention in the habeas corpus case before Judge Huvelle. She had declared that the administration’s case for continuing his detention after nearly seven years was “riddled with holes” and that virtually all of the government’s evidence came from confessions he made after being threatened with death.

Justice Department officials said they were studying whether to file civilian criminal charges against Mr. Jawad. If they do, officials say, he could be transferred to the United States to face charges, instead of being sent to Afghanistan, where his lawyers say he would be released to his mother.

“It is a very real possibility,” a Justice Department official said in an interview, “but whether we can compile enough evidence to support a case is a question we don’t yet know the answer to.” The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the department does not discuss investigations.

Mr. Jawad’s military lawyer, Maj. David J. R. Frakt, said he would file court challenges to any effort by the administration to move his client to the United States to face charges. But Major Frakt conceded that the Aug. 21 deadline Judge Huvelle gave the government to send Mr. Jawad to Afghanistan also gave prosecutors time to work on a grand jury investigation.

“We have won the battle,” he said outside the federal courthouse here. “Have we won the war? Perhaps it remains to be seen.”

The Obama administration had asked for the 22 days to comply with a recently passed provision requiring that Congress be given 15-days notice of any detainee transfer. The administration said it needed an additional week to prepare the notice.

Mr. Jawad’s age is unknown, but his lawyers say he was 14 or 15 at the time of the grenade attack. Military prosecutors have been pursuing war crimes charges against Mr. Jawad in the military commission system at Guantánamo. But their case foundered after a military judge ruled last year that it was largely based on confessions Mr. Jawad gave after being tortured.

Justice Department lawyers told Judge Huvelle they would no longer use those statements. But they said they had additional evidence, including witnesses to the attack.

From the bench on Thursday, Judge Huvelle criticized the government for what she described as inattention to the case and a “continuing pattern” of delay both by the Bush and Obama administrations. She said any prosecution would face difficulties, including what she said was a possible denial of Mr. Jawad’s right to a speedy trial and evidence that his treatment at Guantánamo was harsher than any juvenile defendant would face in the United States.

“I hope,” Judge Huvelle said, “the government will succeed in getting him sent back home.”

    Judge Orders Guantánamo Detainee to Be Freed, NYT, 31.7.2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/31/us/31gitmo.html?hpw

 

 

 

 

 

Obama Issues Directive to Shut Down Guantánamo

 

January 22, 2009
The New York Times
By MARK MAZZETTI and WILLIAM GLABERSON

 

WASHINGTON — President Obama signed executive orders Thursday directing the Central Intelligence Agency to shut what remains of its network of secret prisons and ordering the closing of the Guantánamo detention camp within a year, government officials said.

The orders, which are the first steps in undoing detention policies of former President George W. Bush, rewrite American rules for the detention of terrorism suspects. They require an immediate review of the 245 detainees still held at the naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, to determine if they should be transferred, released or prosecuted.

And the orders bring to an end a Central Intelligence Agency program that kept terrorism suspects in secret custody for months or years, a practice that has brought fierce criticism from foreign governments and human rights activists. They will also prohibit the C.I.A. from using coercive interrogation methods, requiring the agency to follow the same rules used by the military in interrogating terrorism suspects, government officials said.

But the orders leave unresolved complex questions surrounding the closing of the Guantánamo prison, including whether, where and how many of the detainees are to be prosecuted. They could also allow Mr. Obama to reinstate the C.I.A.’s detention and interrogation operations in the future, by presidential order, as some have argued would be appropriate if Osama bin Laden or another top-level leader of Al Qaeda were captured.

The new White House counsel, Gregory B. Craig, briefed lawmakers about some elements of the orders on Wednesday evening. A Congressional official who attended the session said Mr. Craig acknowledged concerns from intelligence officials that new restrictions on C.I.A. methods might be unwise and indicated that the White House might be open to allowing the use of methods other than the 19 techniques allowed for the military.

Details of the directive involving the C.I.A. were described by government officials who insisted on anonymity so they could not be blamed for pre-empting a White House announcement. Copies of the draft order on Guantánamo were provided by people who have consulted with Mr. Obama’s transition team and requested anonymity for the same reason.

In remarks prepared for delivery at his confirmation hearings to become director of national intelligence in the Obama administration, Dennis C. Blair, a retired admiral with a long background in intelligence, endorsed the new approach and promised to enforce it rigorously. “It is not enough to set a standard and announce it,” he said.

“I believe strongly that torture is not moral, legal or effective,” he told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. “Any program of detention and interrogation must comply with the Geneva Conventions, the Conventions on Torture, and the Constitution. There must be clear standards for humane treatment that apply to all agencies of U.S. Government, including the Intelligence Community,” his written statement said.

As for closing Guantanamo, he said that would take time but must be done because it has become “a damaging symbol to the world.”

“It is a rallyingcry for terrorist recruitment and harmful to our national security, so closing it is important for our national security,” Admiral Blair’s statement said.

“The guiding principles for closing the center should beprotecting our national security, respecting the Geneva Conventions and the rule of law, and respecting the existing institutions of justice in this country. I also believe we should revitalize efforts to transfer detainees to their countries of origin or other countries whenever that would be consistent with these principles. Closing this center and satisfying these principles will take time, and is the work of many departments and agencies.”

The executive order on interrogations is certain to be received with some skepticism at the C.I.A., which for years has maintained that the military’s interrogation rules are insufficient to get information from senior Qaeda figures like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The Bush administration asserted that the harsh interrogation methods were instrumental in gaining valuable intelligence on Qaeda operations.

The intelligence agency built a network of secret prisons in 2002 to house and interrogate senior Qaeda figures captured overseas. The exact number of suspects to have moved through the prisons is unknown, although Michael V. Hayden, the departing director of the agency, has in the past put the number at “fewer than 100.”

The secret detentions brought international condemnation, and in September 2006, President Bush ordered that the remaining 14 detainees in C.I.A. custody be transferred to Guantánamo Bay and tried by military tribunals.

But Mr. Bush made clear then that he was not shutting down the C.I.A. detention system, and in the last two years, two Qaeda operatives are believed to have been detained in agency prisons for several months each before being sent to Guantánamo.

A government official said Mr. Obama’s order on the C.I.A. would still allow its officers abroad to temporarily detain terrorism suspects and transfer them to other agencies, but would no longer allow the agency to carry out long-term detentions.

Since the early days after the 2001 attacks, the intelligence agency’s role in detaining terrorism suspects has been significantly scaled back, as has the severity of interrogation methods the agency is permitted to use. The most controversial practice, the simulated drowning technique known as water-boarding, was used on three suspects but has not been used since 2003, C.I.A. officials said.

But at the urging of the Bush administration, Congress in 2006 authorized the agency to continue using harsher interrogation methods than those permitted for use by other agencies, including the military. Those exact methods remain classified. The order on Guantánamo says that the camp, which received its first hooded and chained detainees seven years ago this month, “shall be closed as soon as practicable, and no later than one year from the date of this order.”

The order calls for a cabinet-level panel to grapple with issues including where in the United States prisoners might be moved and what courts they could be tried in. It also provides for a new diplomatic effort to transfer some of the remaining men, including more than 60 that the Bush administration had cleared for release.

The order also directs an immediate assessment of the prison itself to ensure that the men are held in conditions that meet the humanitarian requirements of the Geneva Convention. That provision appeared to be a pointed embrace of the international treaties that the Bush administration often argued did not apply to detainees captured in the war against terrorism.

The seven years of the detention camp have included four suicides, hunger strikes by scores of detainees, and accusations of extensive use of solitary confinement and abusive interrogations, which the Department of Defense has long denied. Last week a senior Pentagon official said she had concluded that interrogators at Guantánamo had tortured one detainee, who officials have said was a would-be “20th hijacker” in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The report of Thursday’s announcement came after the new administration late Tuesday night ordered an immediate halt to the military commission proceedings for prosecuting detainees at Guantánamo and filed a request in Federal District Court in Washington to stay habeas corpus proceedings there. Government lawyers described both delays as necessary for the administration to make a broad assessment of detention policy.

The cases immediately affected include those of five detainees charged as the coordinators of the 2001 attacks, including the case against Mr. Mohammed, the self-described mastermind.

The decision to stop the commissions was described by the military prosecutors as a pause in the war-crimes system “to permit the newly inaugurated president and his administration time to review the military commission process generally and the cases currently pending before the military commissions, specifically.”

More than 200 detainees’ habeas corpus cases have been filed in federal court, and lawyers said they expected that all of the cases would be stayed.

Mr. Obama had suggested in the campaign that, in place of military commissions, he would prefer prosecutions in federal courts or, perhaps, in the existing military justice system, which provides legal guarantees similar to those of American civilian courts.

Some human rights groups and lawyers for detainees said they were concerned about the one-year timetable. “It only took days to put these men in Guantánamo; it shouldn’t take a year to get them out,” said Vincent Warren, the executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York, which has coordinated detainees’ lawyers.

But several groups that had criticized the Bush administration’s policies applauded the rapid moves by the new administration. Mr. Obama’s actions “reaffirmed American values and are a ray of light after eight long, dark years,” said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union.

 

Mark Mazzetti reported from Washington, and William Glaberson from New York. Carl Hulse contributed reporting from Washington.

    Obama Issues Directive to Shut Down Guantánamo, NYT, 22.1.2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/22/us/politics/22gitmo.html

 

 

www.anglonautes.com   
 Ce site est jumelé avec www.intairnet.be

Le site "Les anglonautes"  forme une base de données protégée par le Code de la propriété intellectuelle (art. L.112-3) - Anglonautes © ®