Showing posts with label Uruguay. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Uruguay. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 27, 2018

LGC Newsletter – February 2018



Guantánamo Bay

The new US ambassador to Australia is US Pacific Commander Admiral Harry Harris, who has served 39 years in the US military. However, there have been controversies during this time, including at Guantánamo, where in March 2006, “he assumed command of the joint task force at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. During his command, three prisoners – Mani Shaman Turki al-Habardi al-Utaybi, Salah Ali Abdullah Ahmed al-Salami and Yasser Talal al Zahrani – died in the custody of US forces. US Defence reported the deaths as suicides. Harris ordered a full investigation by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, which published its report in a heavily redacted version in August 2008.

Days after Donald Trump’s executive order to keep Guantánamo open, which would involve Defence Secretary James Mattis looking into a new policy on the detention of combatants and possible transfers to Guantánamo within 90 days, Mattis fired two top officials at Guantánamo Bay, citing a “loss of confidence”: Harvey Rishikof, Director of the Office of the Convening Authority for Military Commissions and Convening Authority for Military Commissions, and Gary Brown, his legal advisor. Temporary replacements have been assigned. A Pentagon spokesperson reported that the firings had no impact on ongoing pre-trial hearings.
Pentagon statement:
Today, Secretary of Defense James N. Mattis rescinded the designations of Harvey Rishikof as the Director of the Office of the Convening Authority for Military Commissions and as the Convening Authority for Military Commissions. Additionally, William S. Castle, acting General Counsel, rescinded the designation of Gary Brown as the Legal Advisor to the Convening Authority.
Secretary Mattis appointed Jim Coyne as Acting Convening Authority. Coyne currently serves as the General Counsel at the Defense Logistics Agency. Mr. Castle appointed Mark Toole as Acting Legal Advisor to the Convening Authority for all military commissions except for the case of U.S. v. al-Nashiri, and appointed U.S. Air Force Colonel Matthew van Dalen as Acting Legal Advisor to the Convening Authority for the al-Nashiri commission. Toole previously served as the Deputy Legal Advisor to the Convening Authority and van Dalen was previously an assistant legal advisor to the Convening Authority.
These personnel actions do not impact ongoing OMC hearings and proceedings.
Tom Crosson, Pentagon spokesman
It shortly thereafter transpired that before he was unexpectedly fired, Rishikof had been exploring plea deals “to end the long-delayed prosecution of five suspects in the Sept. 11 attacks, a move that would foreclose the possibility of execution, according to several people familiar with the matter. No deal was imminent, the people said, but the talks were active and contemplated the defendants — including Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described architect of the attacks — pleading guilty and probably receiving life sentences. Most of the people spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive deliberations.
According to the New York Times, “Guilty pleas would offer a way out of a complex case that has been mired in years of pretrial hearings and is certain to face many more years of appeals if it ever gets to trial and results in convictions. Taxpayers have already spent hundreds of millions of dollars pursuing the case, and plea deals would bring earlier closure to victims’ families.
But striking such a deal would mean giving up on winning death sentences against defendants accused of aiding the murder of nearly 3,000 people, and could amount to surrender over the idea of using military commissions to prosecute terrorism cases.
In addition, in 2017, Rishikof’s office had rejected possible charges against three prisoners in relation to a 2002 bombing in Bali, Indonesia.
No official reason has been given for the dismissal of these two senior officials.
As pre-trial hearings in the case of the five men alleged to be linked to the 2001 9/11 attacks resumed at the end of February, the judge in the case said he would order James Mattis to explain why he fired Rishikof and set a 19 March deadline for a response.

The government of Uruguay has agreed to extend the economic assistance given to six former Guantánamo prisoners who arrived in the country to be resettled as refugees in 2014. According to the government’s mediator with the former prisoners, Christian Mirza, they will receive a minimum wage payment of around $450 per month for another year, to January 2019, as well as rent and money for training, therapy and language learning.
The men have struggled to find work and adjust to life in Uruguay. However, this has not been assisted by the constant media scrutiny of their private lives and the stigma attached to being ex-prisoners, which is then not helped by the negative publicity surrounding them, all of which is speculative, particularly as none of the men were ever charged or tried by the US.
In addition, two prisoners sent to Ghana for two years in 2016 have now been recognised as refugees by the country and have been granted permission to remain there by the Ghanaian parliament. The two Yemeni nationals cannot return home due to the war and cannot be sent to the US.

The Pentagon has asked for $69 million to replace the top-secret camp 7 where the 9/11 case defendants and 10 other so-called high-value (i.e. tortured for several years in CIA secret prisons) prisoners are held. The request warned that the currently facility is “at risk of mechanical, electrical and secure-communications failure, which would be risky to the U.S. Army guards who work there.” and that the proposed new maximum-security facility should last for around 40 years. According to the Miami Herald: “With its current 15-captive population, building costs work out to $4.6 million per prisoner. As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump made two Guantánamo-related pledges: To “load it up with bad dudes,” and to reduce operational costs to “peanuts.” So far, neither has happened.” As the current camp is top secret and classified, very little is known about it, including the cost and condition, and even military access to the site is restricted.

Ahead of the resumption of pre-trial hearings in the case of Abd Al-Nashiri, accused of involvement in the bombing of a US naval vessel off the coast of Yemen in 2000, Judge Air Force Col. Vance Spath ordered warrants for the effective arrest of two civilian defence lawyers who resigned from the case and ignored his previous orders to attend the court. Rosa Eliades and Mary Spears resigned from the case in October over an ethical issue. The resignation of his legal team has left Al-Nashiri facing a death penalty case without a lawyer with expertise in such cases, and only one defence lawyer.
In the end, however, at the end of a week of proceedings, on 16 February, the judge cancelled the proceedings going forward indefinitely due to his inability to get the defence lawyers to return to the case, stating: “I am abating these proceedings indefinitely,” he said twice, at one point adding: “We’re done until a superior court tells me to keep going.”
On the other hand, Al-Nashiri's remaining defence lawyer, Navy Lt. Alaric Piette, said “the best move for the country and for justice is for the government to withdraw the charges.”
On 21 February, prosecutor Mark Miller filed notice of an appeal against this decision with the judge to be presented to the Court of Military Commissions Review, although no basis for the appeal was provided.

In Morocco, former prisoner Younes Chekkouri, who was released from Guantánamo in September 2015 to immediate arrest and detention in Morocco, was released after the Court of Appeal in Rabat acquitted him of a 5-year sentence he was given in May 2017 by the Criminal Court for “setting up a criminal gang and undermining the internal security of the State.”
https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2018/02/240799/rabats-court-appeal-acquits-former-moroccan-guantanamo-detainee-younes-chekkouri/

As part of the plea bargain made with Saudi prisoner, Ahmed Al-Darbi, who pleaded guilty to various charges relating to an attack on a French tanker off the coast of Yemen in 2002, after having been tortured physically, mentally and sexually, and agreed to provide testimony against two other prisoners facing trial, he was due to be repatriated to Saudi Arabia on 20 February 2018, the deadline set in his 2014 plea deal. Although the US Defence Department has stated that it hopes he will be repatriated soon, this comes soon after the indefinite adjournment of the Al-Nashiri case, further undermining the military commissions system, when it cannot even bind the US government to act in accordance with its orders.
Here is the full response of Navy Cmdr. Sarah Higgins, spokeswoman for Detainee Affairs and the Office of Military Commissions, to a Feb. 20, 2018, query from the Miami Herald:
“Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed Haza al Darbi’s transfer from Guantanamo detention to Saudi Arabia will not take place today.
“Al Darbi’s plea agreement stipulated his transfer would occur after serving four years in U.S. custody. Today marks four years since he signed the agreement. We await assurances from the Saudi Arabian government to move forward on his departure.
“Al Darbi will remain at Guantanamo until all transfer details are concluded. Thus far, al Darbi has complied with all terms of his plea agreement. DOD [Department of Defense] hopes the transfer will take place soon.”
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/guantanamo/article201086884.html

Extraordinary Rendition
In a case brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) on behalf of three Iraqi former Abu Ghraib prisoners against the private contractor CACI, a Virginia federal judge ruled that the treatment of the three men constitutes torture, war crimes, and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, based on a thorough review of U.S. domestic and international law; “The ruling also held that the men have sufficiently alleged that employees of private military contractor CACI Premier Technology conspired to commit and aided and abetted these crimes.” The case was brought almost 10 years ago by the CCR. It stated: “The decision is a historic judicial rebuke to the Bush administration’s torture paradigm, which had sought to evade the well-established prohibitions against torture, and is one of the clearest statements in the post-9/11 era that victims of torture and grave human rights abuses can access the courts for a remedy. The court confirmed what was plain to the eye: that the horrific treatment our clients endured at Abu Ghraib was unlawful and that, in a country operating under the rule of law, those responsible can be held accountable.”
According to its press release: “Today’s opinion includes a detailed account of what happened to CCR’s clients, Suhail A1 Shimari, Asa’ad Al-Zuba’e, and Salah Al-Ejaili, including:
[being] subjected to repeated stress positions, including at least one that made [Plaintiff Al-Ejaili] vomit black liquid; sexually-related humiliation; disruptive sleeping patterns and long periods of being kept naked or without food or water; and multiple instances of being threatened with dogs…being doused with hot and cold liquids…sexual assault and threats of rape; being left in a cold shower until [Plaintiff Zuba’e] was unable to stand; dog bites and repeated beatings, including with sticks and to the genitals…at least one [stress position] that lasted an entire day and resulted in [Zuba’e] urinating and defecating on himself; and threats that his family would be brought to Abu Ghraib…systematic beatings…with a baton and rifle, [being] he was hit against the wall; [being] forced to kneel on sharp stones, causing lasting damage to [Plaintiff Al Shimari’s] legs; …being kept in a dark cell and with loud music nearby; threats of being shot… electric shocks; being dragged around the prison by a rope tied around [Al Shimari’s] neck; and having fingers inserted into [Al Shimari’s] rectum.
The Court concluded: “it is clear that the abuse suffered by plaintiffs was intended to inflict severe pain or suffering and rises to the level of torture.””

LGC Activities:
The LGC has produced a new video showcasing the last twelve years of its protests against Guantánamo outside the US Embassy in Grosvenor Square, which closed in January: 


The LGC will start its monthly Shut Guantánamo! demos outside the new Nine Elms Embassy on Thursday 1st March at 12-2pm. The address is 33 Nine Elms Ln, London SW11 7US, nearest underground: Vauxhall. More details available at: https://www.facebook.com/events/975903689224552/ All are welcome to join us.


Sunday, July 30, 2017

LGC Newsletter – July 2017



NEWS:
Guantánamo Bay
On 5 July, the Canadian government of Justin Trudeau announced that it had reached a settlement with former Guantánamo prisoner Omar Khadr, 30. It agreed to pay him CAN$10.5 million (£6 million) and give him an apology, ending a lawsuit filed by his lawyers while he was still in Guantánamo. They sued the Canadian government for its complicity in his torture by the US and the breach of his constitutional rights when he was still a teenager. This was backed by a Canadian Supreme Court ruling in 2010 that Canadian government officials had participated in interrogations knowing that Khadr has been tortured, as shown in the documentary film You Don’t like the Truth: Four Days inside Guantánamo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9I5R3qkYnaI 
The payment was expedited ahead of a court case brought in Canada by the widow of the US army sergeant he is alleged to have killed and another soldier who claims Khadr blinded him. Khadr pleaded guilty to the murder in a secret plea bargain in 2010 that would see him leave Guantánamo in 2012; it was his only way out of the prison. The court case aimed to block the payment to Khadr for them to receive the funds, following their award of $134 million (£103 million) in 2015 in a US lawsuit they filed against Khadr. Lawyers for the couple filed the case in the Canadian courts in anticipation that Khadr would settle his previous case with the Canadian government. However, when their case went to court on 13 July, a judge in Toronto dismissed the claim to have Khadr’s assets frozen. The judge called the request “extraordinary”.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/omar-khadr-accounts-1.4203035
The settlement, which is an admission of wrongdoing by the Canadian government, has provoked a storm of controversy among supporters of the right-wing government responsible for the abuse of Omar Khadr’s human rights.
On 7 July, US Attorney General Jeff Sessions visited Guantánamo Bay with his deputy to show support for the continuing existence of the detention camp. He had previously called the facility “a very fine place”. Although it was his first visit to Guantánamo as attorney general, he had visited in 2005 under George Bush’s administration.
The visit had raised expectations that President Trump might send new prisoners to Guantánamo as he has said he would, however on 21 July, rather than send a foreign prisoner to Guantánamo, an Algerian-Irish terrorism suspect was extradited from Spain to face trial in a US federal court, suggesting that Trump may not fill up Guantánamo with new prisoners after all.

Pre-trial hearings at Guantánamo in the case of five men accused of involvement in the September 2001 attacks in New York have been put on indefinite hold over a dispute between the judge, Army Colonel James Pohl, and military officials about how he travels to Guantánamo Bay. He says that he must be kept separate from other participants in the proceedings, including lawyers, family members and journalists who travel over by plane. He has used a speedboat to travel over to Guantánamo. However, a change of policy in June means no longer has access to the boat. He then ordered the hearings be put on holding until the issue is resolved. The next set of pre-trial hearings are set for late August and it is unclear that they will go ahead.
The judge in the death penalty case of Abd Al-Nashiri, Air Force Colonel Vance Spath, has issued a similar order halting proceedings.
A resolution to the problem is currently being studied.

 An appeal against the conviction of former Sudanese prisoner Ibrahim Al Qosi was halted shortly after it started after a dispute over his legal representation before the military tribunal. Al Qosi was convicted through a plea bargain in 2010 of being a driver for Osama Bin Laden. He was transferred to Sudan in 2012 after release. He has since “disappeared” and media claims have been made that he has joined Al Qaeda based on alleged videos although there is no substantive evidence of this or his whereabouts. The appeal tribunal, the Court of Military Commission Review, sent the case to a lower court to find out whether Al Qosi wants to appeal and to determine whether he has taken up arms against the US. During the hearing, the prosecution argued that only the original lawyer in his case, one of the lawyers who filed the appeal Suzanne Lachelier, was able to represent him and that he may not be aware than an appeal was under way; it argued a unilateral appeal cannot be brought in his defence. Defence lawyers stated that they can bring the case even though they have no contact with Al Qosi. The appeal case against a Guantánamo military tribunal conviction is being heard by the same judge hearing cases before the military tribunal. According to one of the defence lawyers, “The reality of this dilemma is that we’re in new territory. This has never been done.”

On 20 July, former French prisoners Mourad Benchellali and Nizar Sassi filed a request to have former US president George W. Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld summoned to France to be questioned in their case against the arbitrary detention and torture they faced in US hands. Both men were released without charge and returned to France in 2005, where they filed a complaint immediately against the treatment they received. On 19 April, the Paris public prosecutor’s office requested the dismissal of the case as no US official has been prosecuted or brought for questioning. It is up to the judge to decide whether to drop the case. Lawyers for the two men have asked the judge to issue an arrest warrant for Major Geoffrey Miller, who commanded Guantánamo from November 2002 to April 2004.

Former prisoner Syrian refugee Jihad Dhiab was deported from Morocco on 22 July back to Uruguay after he made another attempt to leave the country and reunite with his family who are refugees in Turkey. Officials in Uruguay apparently did not know that he had left the country as he travelled on a fake Tunisian passport which was detected when he arrived for a stopover in Morocco. Promised by his lawyers and officials that he would be reunited with his family when he left Guantánamo in 2014, Dhiab has not seen his wife in over 16 years. His family are also refugees from the current conflict in Syria. This was his fourth attempt to leave Uruguay, following previous attempted visits to Brazil, South Africa and Russia. He was questioned by Interpol on his return to the country and later released.

Extraordinary Rendition:
On 28 July, a judge in Washington ruled that a case against two CIA contractors who designed the extraordinary rendition’s torture programme can go ahead in September, in spite of various arguments brought up by them, including some of the defences Nazis used during the Nuremberg trials. The case was brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of three victims. If successful, the case is likely to lead to other victims bringing claims as well.

LGC Activities:
The July Shut Guantánamo! monthly demonstration was on 6 July. Our next monthly demonstration is on Thursday 3 August at 12-1pm outside the US Embassy, Grosvenor Square, W1A, and 1.15-2.15pm outside Speaker’s Corner, Hyde Park, opposite Marble Arch: https://www.facebook.com/events/288464181622576/