The Washington Independent » indefinite detention

Muslim Disillusionment With Obama Accelerates

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 15:46:34 +0000

From the brand-new Pew poll of international attitudes (PDF), just released half an hour ago:

Among Muslim publics – except in Indonesia where Obama lived for several years as a child – the modest levels of confidence and approval observed in 2009 have slipped markedly. In Egypt the percentage of Muslims expressing confidence in Obama fell from 41% to 31% and in Turkey from 33% to 23%. Last year only 13% of Pakistani Muslims expressed confidence in Obama, but this year even fewer (8%) hold this view. And while views of Obama are still more positive than were attitudes toward President Bush among most Muslim publics, significant percentages continue to worry that the U.S. could become a military threat to their country.

Imagine how much further the drop will be when the fallout from the Gaza flotilla debacle registers, to say nothing of the inability to close Guantanamo Bay, a prospective new indefinite detention system that in practice targets only Muslims, the accelerated war in Afghanistan, etc. And notice that the drop in Pakistani favorable attitudes comes after the passage of the largest Pakistan civilian aid package the U.S. government has ever enacted, the $7.5 billion, five-year Kerry-Lugar-Berman plan.

Holder: We’re Still Working on Indefinite Detention

Spencer Ackerman — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:23:04 +0000

After confirming that the administration has determined 48 detainees at Guantanamo who are “not feasible to transfer [and] too dangerous to prosecute,” Attorney General Eric Holder conceded that the administration still doesn’t have a structure in place for handling their indefinite detention without trial. Holder told Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) that the administration would not object to those detainees challenging their detention in habeas corpus proceedings before a federal judge, and for those who lose their habeas cases and remain detained, there “has to be some kind of ongoing review mechanism put in place” for determining someone is still a threat.

“We’re still working through [this issue] in the interagency and, frankly, working with Sen. Graham as well,” Holder said. “Hopefully we will have something to share, and, more importantly, put into place” in the next several months, he said, later clarifying that he believes the administration can finalize that process by the end of the year. “There is a symbolic significance to this review process,” Holder added, comparing it to the negative symbolism posed by the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay.

Civil Liberties Groups Oppose Obama’s Plan to Close Gitmo, Absent Serious Changes

Spencer Ackerman — Thu, 08 Apr 2010 16:51:44 +0000

In an indication of the full-spectrum pressure that the Obama administration is facing on its plan to close Guantanamo Bay, today a coalition of major civil liberties groups — the very groups that have led the charge to close the island detention facility since its 2002 inception — sent a pained letter to Congress urging members to oppose the planned closure unless President Obama drastically modifies his approach.

The Pentagon is seeking about $350 million in its Afghanistan funding authorization to buy the Thomson Correction Center in Illinois. According to a senior administration official who briefed reporters on the plan to close Guantanamo in December, the facility will house detainees either convicted by military commissions or held in some form of indefinite detention without charge. To civil libertarians, that would entrench some of the most intolerable legal abuses of Guantanamo Bay in the name of ending it, rendering the shutdown of the facility Pyrrhic at best and misleading at worst. Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), the Senate GOP leader, no fan of closing Guantanamo, has questioned the value of exporting Guantanamo practices to Illinois instead of ending them outright.

In the new and delicately worded letter, eight civil libertarian organizations come to the same reluctant conclusion, and urge legislators to vote against the Thomson purchase unless they also pass a “permanent, statutory ban on using the Thomson facility for indefinite detention without charge or trial or for military commission-related detention.” That would earn the blessing of a coalition that “strongly support[s] the responsible closing of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility” and takes pains to praise “many of the steps the Obama Administration has taken” to close Guantanamo “the right way,” either through “repatriation and resettling” of detainees or trying them federal civilian court.

“Bringing the practice of indefinite detention without charge or trial to any location within the United States will further harm the rule of law and adherence to the Constitution,” reads a letter signed by the Alliance for Justice, American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty International USA, Center for Constitutional Rights, Japanese American Citizens League, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Physicians for Human Rights, and the United Methodist Church’s General Board of Church and Society. “The current statutory ban on transferring detainees to the United States for purposes of indefinite detention without charge or trial expires at the end of the current fiscal year. Congress should not move forward with the Thomson purchase until and unless it permanently prohibits indefinite detention and military commission-related detention at the Thomson facility.”

The letter is the first concerted forceful statement of position to Congress from civil libertarians who have expressed months’ worth of discomfort with the contours of the Thomson-based Guantanamo closure plan — or what detractors call “Gitmo North.” But it evidently did not win the support of other prominent civil liberties groups like the Constitution Project, Human Rights Watch and Human Rights First.

Here’s the full text:

TO: Members of the U.S. Senate
Members of the U.S. House of Representatives

FROM: Alliance for Justice
American Civil Liberties Union
Amnesty International USA
Center for Constitutional Rights
Japanese American Citizens League
National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
Physicians for Human Rights
United Methodist Church, General Board of Church and Society

DATE: April 8, 2010

RE: Opposition to the Purchase of the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson,
Illinois—Unless Congress Also Enacts a Permanent, Statutory Ban on Using the Thomson Prison for Indefinitely Detaining Persons Without Charge or Trial, or for Holding Persons During Military Commission Trials or for Serving Sentences Imposed by Military Commissions

We urge you to oppose legislation authorizing, or appropriating federal funds for, the purchase of the Thomson Correctional Center in Thomson, Illinois, unless Congress, at the same time, also enacts a permanent, statutory ban on using the Thomson prison for indefinitely detaining persons without charge or trial, or for holding persons during military commission trials or for serving sentences imposed by military commissions. All of our organizations strongly support the responsible closing of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, and we would support using the Thomson facility for holding any detainees now at Guantanamo who may be charged, tried, or sentenced in federal criminal court. However, we strongly oppose transporting the worst of Guantanamo policies—indefinite detention without charge or trial and military commissions—to a prison within the United States itself. If used for one or both of these purposes, the purchase of the Thomson prison could result in institutionalizing and perpetuating policies that should instead end.

On December 15, 2009, President Obama signed a memorandum directing the Attorney General and Secretary of Defense to acquire and activate the Thomson prison for use by the Department of Defense in holding detainees currently at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base and by the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Prisons as a federal penitentiary for holding prisoners in high security, maximum security conditions. According to a study by the Council of Economic Advisers last year, the Defense Department would control 400 of the 1600 cells at the Thomson prison. The Bureau of Prisons would control the remaining cells.

On December 15, a number of government officials provided further details on who would be, and who would not be, held in the portion of the Thomson prison designated for use by the Defense Department. In a letter and accompanying questions and answers from the Deputy Secretary of Defense to Congressman Mark Kirk, the Defense Department stated that the Thomson prison would be used to imprison Guantanamo detainees whom the government is indefinitely detaining without charge or trial under a claim of detention authority based on the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force, and also Guantanamo detainees tried before military commissions or serving sentences imposed by military commissions. However, the Deputy Secretary’s answer to Congressman Kirk’s questions stated that Guantanamo detainees charged and tried before federal criminal courts would not be housed at the Thomson prison. Further, in a briefing by a “senior administration official” on December 15, the official stated that Guantanamo detainees cleared for release would remain at Guantanamo until transferred to other countries, and would not go to Thomson.

There is a right way and a wrong way to close Guantanamo. To date, many of the steps the Obama Administration has taken—with the support of many members of Congress, including prominent congressional supporters of the Thomson purchase–have been in the direction of closing Guantanamo the right way. The Obama Administration has worked hard to make charging decisions for detainees whom the government believes should be prosecuted in federal criminal courts in the United States, has closely collaborated with important allies of the United States in repatriating and resettling detainees cleared for release, and has continued the process of clearing detainees for release or transfer. The Obama Administration should continue all of these steps until the population at Guantanamo reaches zero.

However, there are two developments over the past year that constitute closing Guantanamo the wrong way. First, the government has reinstituted the discredited military commissions. The military commissions have now gone through eight years, two statutes, four sets of rules, but have only resulted in three convictions, with two of those convicted detainees now released. By contrast, more than 400 defendants have been convicted of terrorism-related offense in federal criminal courts. The military commissions still do not have any rules based on the new statute, continue to have fundamental problems that could result in their proceedings being held illegal under the Constitution and international law, and deservedly lack credibility both at home and abroad. Second, the government continues to claim authority to indefinitely detain without charge or trial some of the Guantanamo detainees. Even if there is legal authority to continue to indefinitely detain these men, which many of our groups dispute, the government should make the policy decision that the interests of the United States are better served by either charging a detainee in federal criminal court or repatriating or resettling the detainee.

Based on the government’s own statements, it appears that the Defense Department-run portion of the Thomson prison would house only those Guantanamo detainees being held pursuant to Guantanamo policies that should end—namely, military commissions and indefinite detention without charge or trial. Congress should not authorize, or appropriate money for the acquisition of the Thomson prison unless it also enacts a permanent statutory provision that would ensure that the Thomson prison will not become a U.S.-based prison dedicated to perpetuating Guantanamo policies that should end.

Bringing the practice of indefinite detention without charge or trial to any location within the United States will further harm the rule of law and adherence to the Constitution. Shortly after President Obama took office, the government charged, tried, and convicted the only person then-held on U.S. soil indefinitely without charge or trial. At present, the number of people held within the U.S. itself indefinitely without charge or trial is zero. However, if the Thomson prison is acquired and the current statutory prohibition on transferring Guantanamo detainees for purposes other than prosecution is allowed to expire, the number of persons held on U.S. soil without charge or trial could reportedly rise to 50 or more.

Moreover, Thomson could eventually become the place to send other persons held indefinitely without charge or trial—with the prospect of detainees being transferred there from Bagram, Afghanistan or new captures brought from other locations around the globe. The unfortunate reality that we would face if Thomson opens is that it is easier to go from 50 to 51 indefinite detention prisoners than it is to go from 0 to 1. Once the indefinite detention policy is institutionalized at Thomson, it will be difficult to hold the line at former Guantanamo detainees.

We urge that you oppose the purchase of the Thomson prison unless Congress, at the same time that it authorizes or funds the purchase, also enacts a permanent, statutory ban on using the Thomson facility for indefinite detention without charge or trial or for military commission-related detention. The current statutory ban on transferring detainees to the United States for purposes of indefinite detention without charge or trial expires at the end of the current fiscal year. Congress should not move forward with the Thomson purchase until and unless it permanently prohibits indefinite detention and military commission-related detention at the Thomson facility.

We would be very interested in meeting with you or your staff to discuss this issue further.

Update, 1:06 p.m.: The Government Accountability Project is a last-minute signatory, bringing the total number of groups signing the letter to nine.

When Rahm Emanuel Opposed Indefinite Detention Without Trial

Spencer Ackerman — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:10:13 +0000

A timely reminder from FDL’s Marcy Wheeler that Rahm Emanuel lent his name to the following statement in 2007:

Since the time that captured “enemy combatants” were first brought to Guantanamo Bay in 2002, the detainment facility has undermined America’s image as the model of justice and protector of human rights around the world. Holding prisoners for an indefinite period of time, without charging them with a crime goes against our values, ideals and principles as a nation governed by the rule of law. Further, Guantanamo Bay has become a liability in the broader global war on terror, as allegations of torture, the indefinite detention of innocent men, and international objections to the treatment of enemy combatants has hurt our credibility as the beacon for freedom and justice. Its continued operation also threatens the safety of U.S. citizens and military personnel detained abroad.

Marcy’s emphasis. Now Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, is horsetrading with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) about closing the Guantanamo Bay detention facility — the consistent thread here — in exchange for a military trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and, Graham hopes, some entrenched system of indefinite detention. Of course, the Justice Department task force on Guantanamo has already recommended over 40 detainees to be held indefinitely without trial, so perhaps Graham is merely offering a quantitative addition.

(Full disclosure: My personal blog appears on FDL.)

Civil Libertarians Reject Obama’s Guantanamo Closure Plan

Spencer Ackerman — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:00:38 +0000

Detainees at Guantanamo Bay (The Toronto Star/ZUMApress.com)

If there was any doubt that Republicans in Congress will oppose this year’s push from President Obama to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Sen. Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) speech Wednesday to the Heritage Foundation ought to have laid it to rest. In the course of a half hour’s worth of invective against the administration’s counterterrorism policies, the Senate minority leader pledged to block funding for any efforts at giving terrorism detainees trials in civilian courts. But he held out a special reverence for the much-vilified locus for military commissions and indefinite detention. “Thankfully, Gitmo is still open for business,” McConnell said.

[Security1] McConnell then turned, briefly, to an argument that is starting to be shared by McConnell’s typical political enemies — and which could seriously complicate the administration’s plans for the final closure of Guantanamo Bay. If Obama simply moves the military commissions and indefinite detentions featured at Guantanamo to a new detention facility in Thomson, Ill. — as the administration currently plans –then there is “no doubt” that al-Qaeda will use Thomson “for the same recruiting and propaganda purposes” it’s used toward Guantanamo, McConnell said, a prospect that “eliminates the administration’s only justification for closing Guantanamo.”

With reluctance, many in the civil-liberties community think McConnell has a point. They have no patience for McConnell’s argument that terrorism detainees should not receive civilian trials. But the administration’s plan to close Guantanamo, from their perspective, merely transfers its most offensive practices to the middle of Illinois. In what they see as a tragic irony, the cohort that led the charge during the Bush administration to shutter the Guantanamo facility is increasingly vocal in opposing Obama’s already-imperiled path to shutting it down.

“What’s the point of simply moving Guantanamo on shore?” said Shayana Kadidal, an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights. Chris Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said flatly, “We oppose any legislative proposal that links the purchase of Thomson to indefinite detention without charge and the use of military commissions.”

The coalescing civil-libertarian opposition to the Thomson plan now has a legislative target. Robert Hale, the Pentagon’s comptroller, announced on Monday that the $159 billion funding request for next year’s operations in Iraq and Afghanistan will contain a $350 million “transfer fund” for detainee operations that will authorize the administration to “let us open the Thomson, Illinois, site.” Placing the money for buying Thomson from Illinois — a necessary step toward transferring those Guantanamo detainees that will not be tried in federal civilian court to the prison –effectively dares critics to face accusations of not supporting the troops in Afghanistan if they try to block funding for for the Guantanamo closure.

At least one question about Thomson that civil libertarians consider crucial remains unanswered by the Obama administration. The administration has stated clearly that Thomson is designed to house detainees tried before military commissions, as occurs at Guantanamo. But it has been much vaguer about embracing or renouncing the even more contentious prospect of indefinite detention, Guantanamo’s other chief feature.

Last month, a year-long interagency task force on Guantanamo detainees recommended to the White House that the administration ought to continue to hold about 50 detainees indefinitely without charge, claiming simultaneously that there is insufficient evidence to convict them before either civilian or military courts but that their release would jeopardize national security. An administration official who would not discuss ongoing deliberations on the record said that the National Security Council is still reviewing the task force’s recommendations. “You should not consider them already accepted,” the official said, but cautioned that there is no timetable for formal adoption, rejection or modification of the recommendations, since “detainees’ status’ could change, based on the status of their habeas case [or] the situation on the ground in a receiving country” to which the detainees’ might be transferred.

With the arrival of a funding mechanism for Thomson on Capitol Hill, that vagueness leaves the civil liberties community unable to say that the administration has ruled out holding detainees indefinitely without charge, a bedrock principle of every civil libertarian organization, and unable to distinguish Thomson’s planned activities from Guantanamo’s objectionable ones. “If all we’re doing is exporting Guantanamo to Thomson for purposes of military commissions and indefinite detention,” said Virginia Sloan, president of the Constitution Project, “we’re very strongly opposed to that.”

Devon Chaffee, who handles national-security issues for Human Rights First, cautioned that the contours of the Thomson legislation were not yet fully defined. But, she said, “Human Rights First will continue to oppose indefinite detention without trial and the use of a flawed military commission procedure regardless of where it’s implemented. As long as the U.S. continues those policies, it will fail to overcome the policy mistakes that made Guantanamo a stigma. Those are two positions of ours that are not going to change.”

As a result of the administration’s vagueness about continuing to hold detainees at Thomson indefinitely without charge, the $350 million funding vehicle could unite liberal congressional opponents of indefinite detention with conservative congressional advocates of it. And the Obama administration does not have much legislative margin for error, even on a request as normally politically sacrosanct as war funding. Like with the defense budget overall, the Iraq and Afghanistan money for next year, formally known as the Overseas Contingency Operations Fund, must be authorized by the Senate and House armed-services committees before the formal appropriation is taken up by the Senate and House appropriations committees, all preceding full votes before the Senate and House. Republicans in the Senate proved willing in December to filibuster the defense appropriations bill in a failed bid to stop Obama’s health-care reform package. A potential alliance of convenience between Republicans who want to keep Guantanamo open and liberal Democrats who want to prevent Thomson from becoming a new Guantanamo could jeopardize the measure’s passage.

Anders said that if the Thomson plan was “reconfigured for the pre-trial detention and post-conviction sentencing of people tried in [federal] courts we might very well take a very different position,” holding out the prospect of the administration earning civil libertarian support by shuttering both Guantanamo and its policies. But, he added, “that’s not how it’s being set up.”

That isn’t a consensus position among civil libertarians. David Remes, a lawyer for several Guantanamo detainees and the executive director of the Appeal for Justice, a human-rights legal practice, said he opposes Thomson under any circumstances. “Number one, I oppose preventive detention in principle, and number two, I don’t see how spending a lot of money to change the zip code moves the ball forward,” Remes said. “I’m not in favor of moving anything to Thomson. There really is no difference between being tried in Gitmo North versus Gitmo South.”

Nor has the civil libertarian community been consulted on the plan, a position that many consider to have effectively cut off the administration from potential outside messaging surrogates. “The community has been frustrated working with the administration on this because we’ve been available and more than willing to help defend policies we think are the right ways to close Guantanamo,” Sloan said. “They haven’t really done that here. We feel we’re behind the eight ball.”

Shuttering Guantanamo within one year was among of Obama’s first pledges in office. But the deadline slipped after numerous congressional missteps, including a dramatic Senate vote in May, embraced by 90 senators, to prohibit funding to “transfer, release, or incarcerate” Guantanamo detainees in the United States. Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the Democratic leader, insisted then that the vote was mostly symbolic and any administration plan to close Guantanamo would receive careful Senate consideration.

But the opposition to the administration’s plans for closing Guantanamo is increasing, even among those who ultimately want the U.S. to be rid of all forms of indefinite detention. Anders said that for the ACLU, “The goal has never been changing the geography. The goal is to close both Guantanamo and the policies that are problematic there — the use of military commissions and indefinite detention. Transferring those policies to Thomson is something we oppose.”

The Constitution Project vs. Obama’s Indefinite Detention Decision

Spencer Ackerman — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 17:38:16 +0000

In reaction to the Obama administration’s Guantanamo Bay task force recommending that about 50 detainees at Guantanamo be indefinitely detained without trial, the Constitution Project, a prominent civil-libertarian advocacy group, released the following statement:

“Even if the Obama administration continues to work to close Guantánamo, by pursuing a policy of indefinite detention without charge, the damaging policies that embody the prison will continue, as will the negative effects to American values, the rule of law, and our nation’s reputation abroad,” said Virginia Sloan, president of the Constitution Project. “The constitutional way to fulfill the president’s commitment to closing Guantánamo is to prosecute suspected terrorists in federal court, and to oppose the use of military commissions and indefinite detention without charge. There is widespread bipartisan support for closing Guantánamo in a way that returns our nation to its constitutional principles, as embodied in Beyond Guantánamo: A Bipartisan Declaration.”

After talking to some knowledgeable individuals, I think I need to revise and extend this post. I may have incorrectly suggested that the SCOTUS ruling Boumediene established a right for detainees to receive a trial, which I didn’t mean to suggest, because it doesn’t: it establishes that detainees can contest their detention by the government, a narrower class. If they lose their habeas hearings, as some have, then they’re out of luck, trial-wise. As of right now, the Supreme Court has not directly and decisively ruled on the question of whether the government has the power to detain people in the war against al-Qaeda indefinitely and without charge. (Not that I’m a lawyer … ) The point I was trying to make in the earlier post was that the vector of court rulings since 2004 has been to erode the government’s power to use the so-called “war on terror” as an all-purpose rationale for all manner of detentions.

Why Not Just Keep GTMO Open?

Spencer Ackerman — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:49:44 +0000

The Obama administration’s Guantanamo task force has concluded that there are approximately 50 detainees held at the facility in Cuba that the government should continue to detain, indefinitely, without trial. Either the task force reached that decision in Month 11 out of its 12-month operation or a senior administration official on a conference call in December passed along some incorrect information.

All this raises the question of how the powers claimed by the Bush admin– oh, sorry, the Obama administration to detain someone indefinitely can withstand a legal challenge. The Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that Guantanamo detainees have a right to habeas corpus, a decision that removed the last argument for keeping the detention facility open as a venue for holding someone without charge. Obama plans to move the remaining detainees to the Thomson Correction Center in Illinois. Does the administration expect the courts to suddenly determine that the Constitution of the United States applies less to Illinois than it does to a naval base in Cuba? The cynical view is that the administration is looking to the courts to take the political heat of determining that the detainees must either be charged in some venue — civilian trials or military commissions — or released.

But the administration still needs Congress to provide the money for it to purchase Thomson. It plans to go to Congress at some point and say, “We need money to close one facility used for indefinite detention and purchase … well, another facility we plan to use for, among other things, indefinite detention. And we’re going to start that facility over from scratch!” Why would Congress approve that money?

Will Prisoners’ Move to Thompson Expand Their Legal Rights?

Daphne Eviatar — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:47:31 +0000

Among the objections from Congressional Republicans to transferring Guantanamo detainees from Cuba to Illinois is the fear that the prisoners will suddenly have many more rights by virtue of being on U.S. soil.

But is that true?

Actually, it’s not clear, Scott Silliman, a professor at Duke University Law School and director of the Center for Law, Ethics, and National Security, tells Warren Richey of the Christian Science Monitor. After all, “we’ve never done this before,” says Silliman.

It’s not even clear what “this” is.

Is the administration going to move all of the men to military custody, or will some be moved to federal civilian custody for trial in a civilian court? The government hasn’t yet said. And will some people be held in military custody indefinitely without trial? The administration hasn’t said that yet, either. So to some extent, the speculation is premature.

What Richey does make clear in his story, however, is that there are some rights that the government will be hard-pressed to argue don’t apply to prisoners on U.S. soil, even if they may not have applied to them at Guantanamo Bay. Those include the Fifth-Amendment right to due process of law, for example, which the government argues doesn’t apply in Cuba. As I’ve explained before, however, what rights the detainees have at the prison in Cuba has never really been decided.

Some defense lawyers even worry, as Richey reports, that their clients will get worse treatment in a beyond-Supermax facility in Illinois than they do at Guantanamo, where the international focus on previous mistreatment has forced improvements.

The fears of Mitch McConnell and his fellow Republicans notwithstanding, exactly what rights any military detainee in Illinois is going to get will depend a whole lot on the status the government gives them when they’re transferred. And for now, the Obama administration hasn’t yet told us what that will be.

View the details of all Guantanamo detainees’ habeas corpus cases at TWI’s Gitmo Habeas Scoreboard.

Gitmo Habeas Scoreboard — Government Wins

TWI — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:09:00 +0000

Detainees	U.S. Government
32	11

Below is a list of the Guantanamo habeas corpus cases in which the U.S. government won. Information compiled by Pro Publica and David Remes, legal director of Appeal for Justice.

Moath Hamza Ahmed Al Alwi

Nationality:Yemeni
Circumstances of Capture:Arrested in Pakistan by Pakistani authorities in late 2001 and transferred to US custody.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Al Alwi stayed at guesthouses and received military training at camps closely associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban, that he supported Taliban fighters (including after the U.S. forces arrived in October 2001), and that he served as a bodyguard to Osama bin Laden.
Status:Judge denied release Dec. 30, 2008. Al Alwi is appealing the decision and remains at Guantanamo.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The judge said that “more than ample evidence” proves Al Alwi stayed at Qaeda and Taliban guesthouses and trained with and supported the Taliban. This was enough to justify his indefinite detention, even without persuasive evidence that Al Alwi had taken up arms himself against the U.S. or its allies. Since this conduct alone justified his detention, the judge said, there was no need for the court to address the allegations that Al Alwi had been a bin Laden bodyguard and trained with al-Qaeda.
Court Documents:

Ghaleb Nassar Al Bihani

Nationality:Born in Saudi Arabia, citizen of Yemem
Circumstances of Capture:Surrendered to the Northern Alliance near the Pakistan-Afghanistan border in or after late November 2001; transferred to US custody in June 2002.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that sometime after May 2001 Al Bihani received military training at an al-Qaeda camp in Afghanistan and joined a Taliban military unit that fought against the Northern Alliance, retreating with that unit in late November 2001, after the U.S. and allies began bombing.
Status:Judge denied release January 2009. Al Bihani appealed the decision, but the D.C. Circuit Court ruled in favor of the government on Jan. 6.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The judge said proof that Al Bihani had served as a cook for the Taliban by itself justified his imprisonment. He said that “faithfully serving in an al-Qaeda affiliated fighting unit that is directly supporting the Taliban by helping to prepare the meals of its entire fighting force is more than sufficient ‘support’” to qualify for indefinite detention.
Court Documents:

Musa’ab al-Madhwani

Nationality:Yemeni
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that al-Madhwani went to Pakistan to join al-Qaeda and trained and traveled with al-Qaeda members. It also claims he was involved in a firefight with Pakistani authorities.
Status:Judge denied release Dec. 14, 2009. Al-Madhwani remains at Guantanamo.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The judge said there was no evidence that al-Madhwani’s testimony was tainted by abusive interrogation techniques, and that the government sufficiently proved its allegations.

Suleiman Awadh Bin Agil al-Nahdi

Fawzi Al-Odah

Nationality:Kuwaiti
Circumstances of Capture:Captured by Pakistani border guards in November 2001.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Odah admitted firing an AK-47 at a training camp in Afghanistan and carrying an AK-47 through the Tora Bora mountains for ten to 11 days during the U.S. air campaign there.
Status:Judge denied release Aug. 24, 2009.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The judge found that Odah had attended a Taliban training camp, and that “more likely than not,” he “became a part of the forces of the Taliban and Al Qaeda.”
Court Documents:

Trial Court Decision

Adham Mohammed Ali Awad

Nationality:Yemeni
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in Afghanistan in November 2001.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Awad was identified by a senior al-Qaeda leader as having participated in fighting against the U.S.
Status:Judge denied release Aug. 12, 2009.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Although the judge found the case against Awad “gossamer thin,” he ruled it was “more likely than not” that Awad was, “for some period of time, ‘part of’ Al Qaida.”
Court Documents:

Sufyian Barhoumi

Nationality:Algerian
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in Pakistan in March 2002.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Barhoumi traveled to Afghanistan in 1999 to attend weapons training in several camps, then trained others, and engaged in hostilities against the U.S.
Status:Judge denied release Sept. 3 2009.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The judge’s opinion has not yet been declassified.
Court Documents:

Belkacem Bensayah

Nationality:Algerian
Circumstances of Capture:Arrested by Bosnian authorities in October 2001 on suspicion of plotting to bomb the U.S. embassy in Sarajevo. Cleared for release January 2002, but transported to Guantanamo at request of U.S. military.
Summary of Allegations:Government alleged that Bensayah planned to travel to Afghanistan in late 2001 and to fight U.S. and allied forces, and that he was al-Qaeda’s primary facilitator and financier in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Status:Judge denied release Nov. 20, 2008. Bensayah has asked the court to reopen the case, alleging there is government evidence of his innocence that the judge didn’t see. Government has opposed his request. Bensayah remains at Guantanamo.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Although Bensayah’s five countrymen were found to be unlawfully detained, the judge said the government had produced “additional evidence that sufficiently corroborates its allegations from [an] unnamed source that Bensayah is an al-Qaida [sic] facilitator.
Court Documents:

Hedi Hammamy

Nationality:Tunisian
Circumstances of Capture:Arrested in April 2002 in Pakistan by Pakistani authorities and transferred to U.S. custody.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Hammamy fought with the Taliban or al-Qaeda against the U.S., belonged to an Italian terrorist cell supporting Islamic terrorist groups, attended a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan, and belonged to a Pakistan-based organization too secret for the government to describe.
Status:Judge denied release April 4, 2009. Hammamy is appealing the decision and remains at Guantanamo.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The judge said that evidence that Hammamy had fought the U.S. and belonged to the Italian terrorist cell justified his detention. The judge didn’t address the other allegations.

Hisham Sliti

Nationality:Tunisian
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in Pakistan in December 2001.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that in 2000 Sliti traveled from London to Afghanistan on a false passport as a Qaeda recruit, stayed at a Qaeda-affiliated guesthouse and mosque, received military training at a Qaeda camp, and helped start a terrorist organization with ties to al-Qaeda.
Status:Judge denied release Dec. 30, 2008. Sliti is appealing the decision and remains at Guantanamo.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The judge found that, other than for the allegation that Sliti had helped found a terrorist organization, the government had produced evidence sufficient to justify Sliti’s indefinite detention.
Court Documents:

Gitmo Habeas Scoreboard — Detainee Wins

TWI — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 20:08:53 +0000

Detainees	U.S. Government
32	9

Below is a list of the Guantanamo habeas corpus cases in which the detainee won. Information compiled by Pro Publica and David Remes, legal director of Appeal for Justice.

Click here to see the 21 detainees who have been released.

Click here to see the 11 detainees who are still in custody.

Released

Abdul Ghappar Abdul Rahman

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in December 2001 by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, transferred to US military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for release August 2003. Federal trial judge ordered Rahman released Oct. 8, 2008. The government appealed, and judge’s release order was blocked by D.C. federal appeals court. He was transferred to Palau on Oct. 31, 2009. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S.”
Court Documents:

Dawut Abdurehim

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured December 2001 in Pakistan by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, then transferred to U.S. military for$5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for release August 2003. Federal trial judge ordered Abdurehim released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. He was transferred to Palau on Oct. 31, 2009. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S.”
Court Documents:

Abdulrahim Abdul Razak Al Janko

Nationality:Syrian
Circumstances of Capture:Captured by U.S. forces in January 2002 in Kandahar, Afghanistan.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that, in early 2000, Janko spent five days at a Taliban guesthouse and trained for 18 days at a Qaeda military camp.
Status:Judge found Janko eligible for release June 22, 2009. He has since been transferred to a foreign nation, but the government will not specify which nation or reveal the date of transfer.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Judge found Janko eligible for release June 22, 2009, but the government continues to hold him at Guantanamo. Janko was eligible for release, the judge said, because by the time of his arrest in 2002 he should not have been considered to be part of the Taliban or al-Qaeda. The evidence showed that he’d been tortured by al-Qaeda and imprisoned for 18 months by the Taliban in an infamously “horrific” prison.
Court Documents:

Khalid Abdullah Mishal Al Mutairi

Nationality:Kuwaiti
Circumstances of Capture:Captured near Pakistan-Afghanistan border in November 2001
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Al Mutairi was a part of al-Qaeda or of a force associated with al-Qaeda, because, among other claims, he’d attended a training camp believed to be affiliated with al-Qaeda.
Status:On July 29, 2009, judge ordered the government to “take all necessary and appropriate steps to facilitate Al Mutairi’s release forthwith.” He was transferred to Kuwait on Oct. 13, 2009.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The judge concluded that “there is nothing in the record beyond speculation” to prove the government’s allegations. Intelligence reports were too impreciseand needed corroborating proof, she said. For instance, “one reference, in a portion of one sentence, in one interrogation report,” was not enough to prove Al Mutairi had attended a terrorist training camp, because the report didn’t clearly identify him. She rejected one self-incriminating statement from an interrogation of Al Mutairi because “he appears to have been goaded into making these statements.”
Court Documents:

Alla Bin Ali Ahmed

Nationality:Yemeni
Circumstances of Capture:Captured March 2002 at a guesthouse for Yemenis in Faisalabad, Pakistan.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Ali Ahmed had traveled and stayed with al-Qaeda and/or Taliban members in Afghanistan, and that he’d fought and trained in Afghanistan.
Status:Judge found Ali Ahmed eligible for release May 11, 2009. He was transferred to Yemen on September 26, 2009.
Reason for Court’s Decision: Judge concluded that the government had failed to present reliable evidence proving its allegations, and that certain alleged conduct — such as traveling in the company of terrorists and staying at a suspect guesthouse — wouldn’t be enough to detain Ali Ahmed even if proved.
Court Documents:

Fouad Mahmoud Al Rabiah

Nationality:Kuwaiti
Circumstances of Capture:Captured near the Afghanistan/Pakistan border in Dec. 2001.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Rabiah “provided material support to the Taliban and al Qaida,” meeting with bin Laden four times in July 2001 and delivering money to him.
Status:Judge ordered release Sept. 17, 2009. Rabiah was transferred to Kuwait on Dec. 9, 2009.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Judge ordered release Sept. 17, 2009. The judge found that the evidence against Rabiah consisted “almost exclusively on Rabiah’s ‘confessions,’” which even Rabiah’s interrogators concluded were “not believable.”
Court Documents:

Hadj Boudella

Nationality:Algerian
Circumstances of Capture:Arrested by Bosnian authorities in October 2001 on suspicion of plotting to bomb the U.S. embassy in Sarajevo. Cleared for release January 2002, but transported to Guantanamo at request of U.S. military.
Summary of Allegations:The government mainly alleged that he’d planned to travel to Afghanistan in late 2001 to fight the U.S. and allied forces.Also that he associated with al-Qaeda and other suspected terrorists and that he’d worked for a Qaeda-affiliated organization that provided material support to terrorists.
Status:Judge ordered release Nov. 20, 2008. Boudella was transferred to Bosnia and Herzegovina Dec. 16, 2008.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Judge decided the government failed to prove its allegations by a preponderance (majority) of the evidence. “[T]he Government relies exclusively on the information contained in a classified document from an unnamed source,” wrote the judge. This single piece of evidence “is not sufficient” to prove the legality of detention, he said.
Court Documents:

Lakhdar Boumediene

Nationality:Algerian
Circumstances of Capture:Arrested by Bosnian authorities in October 2001 on suspicion of plotting to bomb the U.S. embassy in Sarajevo. Cleared for release January 2002, but transported to Guantanamo at request of US military.
Summary of Allegations:The government mainly alleged that he’d planned to travel to Afghanistan in late 2001 to fight the U.S. and allied forces.Also that he associated with al-Qaeda and other suspected terrorists and that he’d worked for a Qaeda-affiliated organization that provided material support to terrorists.
Status:Judge ordered release Nov. 20, 2008. Boumediene was transferred to France May 15, 2009.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Judge decided the government failed to prove its allegations by a preponderance (majority) of the evidence. “[T]he Government relies exclusively on the information contained in a classified document from an unnamed source,” wrote the judge. This single piece of evidence “is not sufficient” to prove the legality of detention, he said.
Court Documents:

Mohammed El Gharani

Nationality:Born in Saudi Arabia, citizen of Chad
Circumstances of Capture:Arrested by Pakistani authorities and turned over to the United States in early 2002.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he’d stayed at a Qaeda-affiliated guesthouse in Afghanistan, received military training at a Qaeda camp, served as a courier for al-Qaeda members, fought the U.S. and allies at the battle of Tora Bora, and belonged to a Qaeda cell based in London.
Status:Judge found El Gharani eligible for release Jan. 13, 2009. He was transferred to Chad on June 11, 2009.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The government’s evidence was unreliable, the judge said, because it consisted chiefly of statements by two other detainees — sometimes contradicting each other — whose believability was questioned by the government itself.
Court Documents:

Anwar Hassan

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured December 2001 in Pakistan by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, then transferred to U.S. military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for release June 2003. Federal trial judge ordered Hassan released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. He was transferred to Palau on Oct. 31, 2009. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S.”
Court Documents:

Mustafa Ait Idir

Nationality:Algerian
Circumstances of Capture:Arrested by Bosnian authorities in October 2001 on suspicion of plotting to bomb the U.S. embassy in Sarajevo. Cleared for release January 2002, but transported to Guantanamo at request of US military.
Summary of Allegations:The government mainly alleged that he’d planned to travel to Afghanistan in late 2001 to fight the U.S. and allied forces.Also that he associated with al-Qaeda and other suspected terrorists and that he’d worked for a Qaeda-affiliated organization that provided material support to terrorists.
Status:Judge ordered release Nov. 20, 2008. Ait Idir was transferred to Bosnia and Herzegovina Dec. 16, 2008.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Judge decided the government failed to prove its allegations by a preponderance (majority) of the evidence. “[T]he Government relies exclusively on the information contained in a classified document from an unnamed source,” wrote the judge. This single piece of evidence “is not sufficient” to prove the legality of detention, he said.
Court Documents:

Jalal Jalaldin (aka Abdullah Abdulqadir)

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured December 2001 in Pakistan by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, then transferred to U.S. military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for release August 2003. Federal trial judge ordered Parhat released Oct. 8, 2008. The government appealed, and judge’s release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. Jalaldin nevertheless was transferred to Bermuda, June 11, 2009. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S.”
Court Documents:

Mohammed Jawad

Nationality:Afghan
Circumstances of Capture:Arrested by local officials in Afghanistan in December 2002.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that on Dec. 17, 2002, Jawad tossed a grenade in Afghanistan that seriously injured two U.S. soldiers and their local interpreter.
Status:On July 30, 2009, judge ordered that “beginning on August 21″ the government “shall promptly release petitioner Jawad.” He was transferred to Afghanistan on Aug. 24, 2009.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Technically the judge ordered Jawad released because the government said it would no longer detain him as a wartime enemy. But the government’s decision followed a scathing reprimand from the judge for continuing to detain Jawad and prosecute him in a military commission based mostly on a confession obtained by Afghan officials under death threats.
Court Documents:

Saber Lahmar

Nationality:Algerian
Circumstances of Capture:Arrested by Bosnian authorities in October 2001 on suspicion of plotting to bomb the U.S. embassy in Sarajevo. Cleared for release January 2002, but transported to Guantanamo at request of US military.
Summary of Allegations:The government mainly alleged that he’d planned to travel to Afghanistan in late 2001 to fight the U.S. and allied forces.Also that he associated with al-Qaeda and other suspected terrorists and that he’d worked for a Qaeda-affiliated organization that provided material support to terrorists.
Status:Judge ordered release Nov. 20, 2008. Lahmar was transferred to France on Nov. 30, 2009.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Judge decided the government failed to prove its allegations by a preponderance (majority) of the evidence. “[T]he Government relies exclusively on the information contained in a classified document from an unnamed source,” wrote the judge. This single piece of evidence “is not sufficient” to prove the legality of detention, he said.
Court Documents:

Edham Mamet

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in Afghanistan in November 2001.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for release August 2003. Federal trial judge ordered Mamet released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. He was transferred to Palau on Oct. 31, 2009. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S.”
Court Documents:

Abdul Nasser (aka Khaleel Mamut)

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured December 2001 in Pakistan by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, then transferred to U.S. military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for transfer November 2005. Federal trial judge ordered Nassar released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. Nasser nevertheless was transferred to Bermuda on June 11, 2009. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S.”
Court Documents:

Mohamed Nechla

Nationality:Algerian
Circumstances of Capture:Arrested by Bosnian authorities in October 2001 on suspicion of plotting to bomb the U.S. embassy in Sarajevo. Cleared for release January 2002, but transported to Guantanamo at request of US military.
Summary of Allegations:The government mainly alleged that he’d planned to travel to Afghanistan in late 2001 to fight the U.S. and allied forces.Also that he associated with al-Qaeda and other suspected terrorists and that he’d worked for a Qaeda-affiliated organization that provided material support to terrorists.
Status:Judge ordered release Nov. 20, 2008. Nechla was transferred to Bosnia and Herzegovina Dec. 16, 2008.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Judge decided the government failed to prove its allegations by a preponderance (majority) of the evidence. “[T]he Government relies exclusively on the information contained in a classified document from an unnamed source,” wrote the judge. This single piece of evidence “is not sufficient” to prove the legality of detention, he said.
Court Documents:

Adel Noori

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured December 2001 in Pakistan by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, then transferred to U.S. military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for transfer October 2005. Federal trial judge ordered Noori released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. He was transferred to Palau on Oct. 31, 2009. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S. — and that Parhat could not be held as an enemy combatant on “bare assertions.”
Court Documents:

Huzaifa Parhat

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured December 2001 in Pakistan by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, then transferred to U.S. military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for release August 2003. Federal trial judge ordered Parhat released Oct. 8, 2008. The government appealed, and judge’s release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. Parhat nevertheless was transferred to Bermuda, June 11, 2009. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S. – and that Parhat could not be held as an enemy combatant on “bare assertions.”
Court Documents:

Abdul Semet (aka Salahadin Abdulahat)

Ahmad Tourson

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in Afghanistan in November 2001.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for release December 2005. Federal trial judge ordered Tourson released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. He was transferred to Palau on Oct. 31, 2009. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S.”
Court Documents:

Still in Custody

Mohammed Al Adahi

Nationality:Yemeni
Circumstances of Capture:Captured by Pakistani authorities near the Afghanistan border in December 2001.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Adahi once helped tend to wounded Taliban soldiers during a bus trip; was present in Kabul during the U.S. air campaign there; and was in possession of the model of a watch that has been used in bombings linked to al-Qaeda.
Status:Judge ordered release Aug. 17, 2009. He remains at Guantanamo.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Judge ordered release Aug. 17, 2009. He remains at Guantanamo. The judge found “no reliable evidence” that Adahi supported, trained or fought for, or was a member of al-Qaeda, and that while Adahi acknowledged meeting Osama Bin Laden, that did not justify his detention.
Court Documents:

Khalid Ali (aka Saidullah Khalik)

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in December 2001 by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, transferred to US military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for release August 2003. Federal trial judge ordered Ali released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. Ali has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the appeals court’s decision. He remains at Guantanamo. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S. — and that Khalid could not be held as an enemy combatant on “bare assertions.”
Court Documents:

Yasin Muhammed Basardh

Nationality:Yemeni
Circumstances of Capture:Captured near the Afghanistan/Pakistan border in early 2002.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Basardh trained at a Qaeda military camp and fought for the Taliban, hiding with Osama bin Laden in the mountains of Tora Bora in late 2001.
Status:Judge found Basardh eligible for release April 15, 2009. He remains at Guantanamo, while the government appeals the decision.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Judge found Basardh eligible for release. However, he remains at Guantanamo, while the government appeals the decision. The judge said the admitted Taliban fighter could no longer be properly detained, because news reports showed that Basardh gave U.S. authorities information about numerous other suspected terrorists. “[A]ny ties with the enemy have been severed, and any realistic risk that he could rejoin the enemy has been foreclosed,” the judge wrote.
Court Documents:

Trial Court Decision

Farhi Saeed bin Mohammed

Nationality:Algerian
Circumstances of Capture:Captured by Pakistani authorities in late 2001 while attempting to cross the border from Afghanistan to Pakistan.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that Mohammed received weapons training in Afghanistan, and that he saw Osama bin Laden at a funeral in Kabul shortly after 9/11.
Status:Judge ordered release Nov. 19, 2009. Mohammed remains at Guantanamo.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The court has not yet released a declassified version of the judge’s opinion.

Saeed Hatim

Nationality:Yemeni
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in December 2001 by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, transferred to US military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:He went to Afghanistan in 2001, where he attended the al-Farouq training camp and joined Arab soldiers near Kabul.
Status:A judge granted his petition for a writ of habeas corpus on Dec. 16, 2009. He remains at Guantanamo.

Arkin Mahmud

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in Afghanistan in November 2001
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Determined by government to be eligible for transfer January 2006. Federal trial judge ordered Mahmud released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. Mahmud has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the appeals court’s decision. He remains at Guantanamo. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs? appeal of their case.
Court Documents:

Bahtiyar Mahnut

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in December 2001 by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, transferred to US military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for transfer December 2005. Federal trial judge ordered Mahnut released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. Mahnut has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the appeals court’s decision. He remains at Guantanamo. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S.”
Court Documents:

Hammad Memet (aka Ahmed Mohamed)

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in December 2001 by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, transferred to US military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for transfer May 2008. Federal trial judge ordered Memet released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. Memet has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the appeals court’s decision. He remains at Guantanamo. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Court Documents:

Sabir Osman (aka Hajiakbar Abdulghupur)

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in December 2001 by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, transferred to US military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for release August 2003. Federal trial judge ordered Osman released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. Osman has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the appeals court’s decision. He remains at Guantanamo. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S.”
Court Documents:

Abdul Razakah

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in December 2001 by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, transferred to US military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Determined by government to be eligible for transfer December 2005. Federal trial judge ordered Razakah released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. Razakah has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the appeals court’s decision. He remains at Guantanamo. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs’ appeal of their case.
Reason for Court’s Decision:The D.C. federal appeals court decided on June 20, 2008, that the government had failed to present enough reliable evidence to prove key allegations — that ETIM was linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban, and that ETIM was hostile to the U.S.”
Court Documents:

Abdul Sabour (aka Yusef Abbas)

Nationality:Chinese (Uighur)
Circumstances of Capture:Captured in December 2001 by Pakistani civilians, handed over to Pakistani authorities, transferred to US military for $5,000.
Summary of Allegations:The government alleged that he was affiliated with a Uighur (Chinese ethnic minority) independence group know as the East Turkistan Islamic Movement, from which he received weapons training. ETIM was alleged to be associated with al-Qaeda and the Taliban and engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and allies.
Status:Ordered released, remains at Gitmo.
Reason for Court’s Decision:Determined by government to be eligible for transfer November 2003. Federal trial judge ordered Sabour released Oct. 8, 2008, but the government appealed, and the release order was blocked by the D.C. federal appeals court. Sabour has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the appeals court’s decision. He remains at Guantanamo. In October, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Uighurs? appeal of their case.
Court Documents: