"Due process of law does not permit the arbitrary detention of individuals, particularly at the hands of a president like Donald Trump, who has pledged to prevent any releases from Guantanamo," said CCR's Baher Azmy. (Photo: Justin Norman/flickr/cc)
Jul 11, 2018
Lawyers representing a group of men held for over a decade without charge at Guantanamo asked a federal court on Wednesday to provide judicial intervention to stop the men's arbitrary and unlawful imprisonment--continued detention, the legal team says, that is fueled by President Donald Trump's "executive hubris and raw animus."
\u201cHistoric Guant\u00e1namo hearing begins in Washington D.C. in an hour. Why is it important? Reprieve Guant\u00e1namo attorney Shelby Sullivan-Bennis explains #Guantanamo #HumanRights\u201d— Reprieve (@Reprieve) 1531317062
"Our dangerous experiment in indefinite detention, after 16 years, has run its course," said Baher Azmy, legal director at the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), who argued before Judge Thomas Hogan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
\u201cWe\u2019re in court tomorrow to argue for Gtmo detainees that their detention w/o charge for 16 years is illegal and they should be released. If release after 16 years in prison w/o charge sounds controversial, it\u2019s only because we have totally lost our way in these times\u201d— Pardiss Kebriaei (@Pardiss Kebriaei) 1531252173
CCR, human rights organization Reprieve, and other counsel filed on January 11--the offshore prison's 16th anniversary--a challenge to the men's indefinite detention. The habeas corpus motion (pdf) references the "devastating psychological and physiological consequences" and "conditions devised to break human beings" the men continue to experience. In addition to violating the constitutional right to due process, the motion argues:
[Trump's] defiant policy exceeds his authority under the 2001 Authorization for "Use of Military Force ("AUMF"), which permits detention only for the narrow purpose of preventing the return of detainees to the battlefield. Instead, the policy is a symbolic, indifferentiated assertion of this president's expectation of absolute executive authority and a rejection of the policy framework that has governed Guantanamo detentions for years. Not least, it is a demonstration of his antipathy to ward this prisoner population, all foreign-born Muslim men, and toward Muslims more broadly, of the kind courts have properly rejected in recent months.
"The government says my detention is legal because of the indefinite war against terrorism. When terrorism ends, the war will end. So, never," said 43-year-old Sharqawi Al Hajj, a Yemeni who's been detained without charge since 2002. His is among the separate 8 motions Judge Hogan heard.
Al Hajj and the other petitioners, however, were not allowed to listen to their own hearing. The government, which spends over $10 million a year per detainee at Guantanamo, said it didn't have a room to accommodate all the shackled men listening to a live feed. The court agreed with the government that a transcript would suffice.
According to a press statement from Reprieve, Judge Hogan asked U.S. Justice Department attorney Ronald Wiltsie if the AUMF justification would allow the government to detain the men for 116 years.
"Yes," Wiltsie said. "We are still engaged with the same battle foes in the same battle space."
As Azmy stressed, "Due process of law does not permit the arbitrary detention of individuals, particularly at the hands of a president like Donald Trump, who has pledged to prevent any releases from Guantanamo. That position is based not on a meaningful assessment of any actual threat, but on Trump's animosity towards Muslims, including these foreign-born prisoners at Guantanamo--the height of arbitrariness. Short of judicial intervention, Trump will succeed."
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Lawyers representing a group of men held for over a decade without charge at Guantanamo asked a federal court on Wednesday to provide judicial intervention to stop the men's arbitrary and unlawful imprisonment--continued detention, the legal team says, that is fueled by President Donald Trump's "executive hubris and raw animus."
\u201cHistoric Guant\u00e1namo hearing begins in Washington D.C. in an hour. Why is it important? Reprieve Guant\u00e1namo attorney Shelby Sullivan-Bennis explains #Guantanamo #HumanRights\u201d— Reprieve (@Reprieve) 1531317062
"Our dangerous experiment in indefinite detention, after 16 years, has run its course," said Baher Azmy, legal director at the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), who argued before Judge Thomas Hogan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
\u201cWe\u2019re in court tomorrow to argue for Gtmo detainees that their detention w/o charge for 16 years is illegal and they should be released. If release after 16 years in prison w/o charge sounds controversial, it\u2019s only because we have totally lost our way in these times\u201d— Pardiss Kebriaei (@Pardiss Kebriaei) 1531252173
CCR, human rights organization Reprieve, and other counsel filed on January 11--the offshore prison's 16th anniversary--a challenge to the men's indefinite detention. The habeas corpus motion (pdf) references the "devastating psychological and physiological consequences" and "conditions devised to break human beings" the men continue to experience. In addition to violating the constitutional right to due process, the motion argues:
[Trump's] defiant policy exceeds his authority under the 2001 Authorization for "Use of Military Force ("AUMF"), which permits detention only for the narrow purpose of preventing the return of detainees to the battlefield. Instead, the policy is a symbolic, indifferentiated assertion of this president's expectation of absolute executive authority and a rejection of the policy framework that has governed Guantanamo detentions for years. Not least, it is a demonstration of his antipathy to ward this prisoner population, all foreign-born Muslim men, and toward Muslims more broadly, of the kind courts have properly rejected in recent months.
"The government says my detention is legal because of the indefinite war against terrorism. When terrorism ends, the war will end. So, never," said 43-year-old Sharqawi Al Hajj, a Yemeni who's been detained without charge since 2002. His is among the separate 8 motions Judge Hogan heard.
Al Hajj and the other petitioners, however, were not allowed to listen to their own hearing. The government, which spends over $10 million a year per detainee at Guantanamo, said it didn't have a room to accommodate all the shackled men listening to a live feed. The court agreed with the government that a transcript would suffice.
According to a press statement from Reprieve, Judge Hogan asked U.S. Justice Department attorney Ronald Wiltsie if the AUMF justification would allow the government to detain the men for 116 years.
"Yes," Wiltsie said. "We are still engaged with the same battle foes in the same battle space."
As Azmy stressed, "Due process of law does not permit the arbitrary detention of individuals, particularly at the hands of a president like Donald Trump, who has pledged to prevent any releases from Guantanamo. That position is based not on a meaningful assessment of any actual threat, but on Trump's animosity towards Muslims, including these foreign-born prisoners at Guantanamo--the height of arbitrariness. Short of judicial intervention, Trump will succeed."
Lawyers representing a group of men held for over a decade without charge at Guantanamo asked a federal court on Wednesday to provide judicial intervention to stop the men's arbitrary and unlawful imprisonment--continued detention, the legal team says, that is fueled by President Donald Trump's "executive hubris and raw animus."
\u201cHistoric Guant\u00e1namo hearing begins in Washington D.C. in an hour. Why is it important? Reprieve Guant\u00e1namo attorney Shelby Sullivan-Bennis explains #Guantanamo #HumanRights\u201d— Reprieve (@Reprieve) 1531317062
"Our dangerous experiment in indefinite detention, after 16 years, has run its course," said Baher Azmy, legal director at the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), who argued before Judge Thomas Hogan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
\u201cWe\u2019re in court tomorrow to argue for Gtmo detainees that their detention w/o charge for 16 years is illegal and they should be released. If release after 16 years in prison w/o charge sounds controversial, it\u2019s only because we have totally lost our way in these times\u201d— Pardiss Kebriaei (@Pardiss Kebriaei) 1531252173
CCR, human rights organization Reprieve, and other counsel filed on January 11--the offshore prison's 16th anniversary--a challenge to the men's indefinite detention. The habeas corpus motion (pdf) references the "devastating psychological and physiological consequences" and "conditions devised to break human beings" the men continue to experience. In addition to violating the constitutional right to due process, the motion argues:
[Trump's] defiant policy exceeds his authority under the 2001 Authorization for "Use of Military Force ("AUMF"), which permits detention only for the narrow purpose of preventing the return of detainees to the battlefield. Instead, the policy is a symbolic, indifferentiated assertion of this president's expectation of absolute executive authority and a rejection of the policy framework that has governed Guantanamo detentions for years. Not least, it is a demonstration of his antipathy to ward this prisoner population, all foreign-born Muslim men, and toward Muslims more broadly, of the kind courts have properly rejected in recent months.
"The government says my detention is legal because of the indefinite war against terrorism. When terrorism ends, the war will end. So, never," said 43-year-old Sharqawi Al Hajj, a Yemeni who's been detained without charge since 2002. His is among the separate 8 motions Judge Hogan heard.
Al Hajj and the other petitioners, however, were not allowed to listen to their own hearing. The government, which spends over $10 million a year per detainee at Guantanamo, said it didn't have a room to accommodate all the shackled men listening to a live feed. The court agreed with the government that a transcript would suffice.
According to a press statement from Reprieve, Judge Hogan asked U.S. Justice Department attorney Ronald Wiltsie if the AUMF justification would allow the government to detain the men for 116 years.
"Yes," Wiltsie said. "We are still engaged with the same battle foes in the same battle space."
As Azmy stressed, "Due process of law does not permit the arbitrary detention of individuals, particularly at the hands of a president like Donald Trump, who has pledged to prevent any releases from Guantanamo. That position is based not on a meaningful assessment of any actual threat, but on Trump's animosity towards Muslims, including these foreign-born prisoners at Guantanamo--the height of arbitrariness. Short of judicial intervention, Trump will succeed."
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.