New attempt to stop war crimes trial
on Jul 29, 2008 at 6:56 pm
One of the Guantanamo Bay detainees facing war crimes charges claiming direct roles in the Sept. 11/ 2001, terrorist attacks — Ramzi bin al-Shibh — has asked a federal judge to block his trial before a military commission. Public defender lawyers for bin al-Shibh, in papers made public on Monday, argued that his trial should be blocked so that his lawyers can go ahead with their challenge claiming that the military commission system is illegal.
“This Court,” the motion for an injunction argued, “must have the opportunity to carefully review [that challenge] and determine by what procedures, if any, [bin al-Shibh] may lawfully be tried before he is forced to undergo an unlawful trial.”
The detainee is one of the four prisoners at Guantanamo — called “high-value detainees” by the government — who have been charged with crimes growing out of the 9/11 attacks. Military prosecutors have said that bin al-Shibh was “a coordinator of the 9/11 attacks.” He was captured in September 2002 at a site that prosecutors said was “an al-Qaeda safe house.” A date for his commission trial has not been set, but his motion said it was “imminent.”
bin al-Shibh’s habeas challenge to his detention and trial is now pending before District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan (the case is bin al-Shibh v. Bush, et al., docket 06-1725). Judge Sullivan is one of two judges in Washington who have chosen to handle themselves the habeas cases before them, rather than send them to a “coordinating” judge for at least preliminary processing.
Judge Sullivan has been pressing both sides to spell out, in brief form, just why those habeas cases cannot be moved along swiftly to a conclusion.
bin al-Shibh’s attempt to stop his war crimes trial is the second such attempt by a Guantanamo detainee. Salim Ahmed Hamdan — the first to go on trial before a commission at Guantanamo (he is not a “high-value” detainee) — failed to persuade District Judge James Robertson to delay his trial.
The Justice Department, having succeeded in keeping the Hamdan trial on track, repeated in its response to bin al-Shibh’s plea for an injunction with many of the same arguments it used against Hamdan’s request.
(The documents on the injunction plea can be found on the District Court’s website, through the PACER document access system, under the docket number (06-1725).
