To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Like every authoritarian before him, Trump is working to co-opt news sources and control what the public sees and hears. Too many corporate outlets are bending the knee—but not Common Dreams. We will never be intimidated, and we will never compromise the core values that define our community: social justice, universal human rights, equality, and peace. Because we are funded by ordinary people like you, our editorial freedom is guaranteed.
We cannot afford to turn a blind eye to his plight or the plight of countless others who have been wrongfully detained and subjected to abuse.
On May 11, Saeed Bakhouche, a survivor of Guantánamo Bay, was abruptly sentenced to three years in prison and fined $2,000, taken immediately to jail from the courtroom.
An anonymous source said: "We were all stunned by the court's decision. Here's a man who spent over 21 years in Guantánamo, barely had eight months of freedom, homeless and unable to feed himself, and yet the court sends him to what is essentially another Guantánamo, if not worse."
The sentence came only two days after the United Nations experts warned that Bakhouche, 57 years old, would face terrorism charges in Algeria, not receive a fair trial, and risked renewed arbitrary detention.
From Guantánamo to Algeria, the road to justice has been littered with obstacles, with individuals like Bakhouche caught in the crossfire of geopolitical maneuvering and security theater.
The courtroom drama marked yet another chapter in the harrowing saga of Bakhouche, a man whose life has been entangled in the complex web of post-9/11 counterterrorism measures. As the gavel struck, sentencing him to three years behind bars, it was a stark reminder of the injustices that continue to plague him even after his release from Guantánamo Bay.
Bakhouche's journey from the confines of Guantánamo to the courtroom in Algeria has been marred by a litany of human rights violations, a fact that has not gone unnoticed by international observers. The recent warning issued by U.N. experts underscores the gravity of the situation, highlighting the inherent flaws in the legal proceedings against him.
In April 2022, Bakhouche was cleared for release from the notorious prison in U.S. Naval Station Guantánamo Bay after enduring over two decades of arbitrary detention and torture. His transfer to Algeria in April 2023 was accompanied by assurances of humane treatment, yet the reality has been anything but humane.
The decision to return him to his home country came with assurances from the U.S. State Department regarding his treatment upon arrival. Bakhouch's lawyer, H. Candace Gorman, was led to believe that her client would be treated humanely, with access to legal representation and support to reintegrate into society.
However, upon his arrival in Algeria, he was quickly thrown into a bewildering ordeal of imprisonment, intense interrogations, and legal limbo, resembling a nightmarish scenario of Guantánamo. Deprived of legal representation and held incommunicado, he found himself caught in a complex legal situation where the principle of innocence until proven guilty appeared to have vanished.
The charges leveled against Bakhouche under Algeria's Penal Code reek of political opportunism, a thinly veiled attempt to scapegoat a man who has already suffered immeasurable trauma at the hands of the U.S. government. His prosecution flies in the face of fundamental principles of justice and fair trial, raising serious concerns about the integrity of the legal process.
The U.N. experts' assertion that Bakhouche faces the risk of renewed arbitrary detention further underscores the urgent need for international scrutiny and intervention. His plight serves as a stark reminder of the enduring legacy of Guantánamo, where justice has often taken a backseat to political expediency.
Bakhouche's case is not an isolated one; it is emblematic of a larger pattern of abuse and impunity that has characterized the so-called "war on terror." From Guantánamo to Algeria, the road to justice has been littered with obstacles, with individuals like Bakhouche caught in the crossfire of geopolitical maneuvering and security theater.
Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, the former U.N. special rapporteur on counterterrorism and human rights, recently highlighted ongoing concerns regarding the U.S. government's handling of detainees released from Guantánamo. In her comprehensive report published in June 2023, Ní Aoláin detailed numerous rights violations stemming from the transfer of detainees to foreign countries.
Among various violations, Ní Aoláin revealed instances of torture, arbitrary detention, and disappearances among released prisoners. Shockingly, in 30% of documented cases, recipient countries deprived these individuals of proper legal status.
The U.N. report underscored the United States' involvement in these problematic transfers, emphasizing a clear legal and moral obligation for the U.S. government. It must use diplomatic and legal resources to ensure these men are relocated, providing proper assurance and support to the recipient countries.
As the Biden administration seeks to extricate itself from the dilemma of Guantánamo, it must reckon with the human cost of its actions. Bakhouche and others like him are not mere statistics; they are individuals whose lives have been irreparably altered by the machinery of state-sanctioned violence.
The recent sentencing of Bakhouche serves as a grim reminder of the urgent need for accountability and justice. It is not enough to simply close the doors of Guantánamo; we must also reckon with the legacy of injustice it has left behind. Anything less would be a betrayal of the principles we claim to uphold.
In the pursuit of justice for Bakhouche and others like him, the international community must remain vigilant. We cannot allow the shadows of Guantánamo to continue to darken the lives of innocent individuals who have already suffered far too much.
As Bakhouche begins his journey behind bars once again, in Guantánamo 2.0 this time, let us not forget the injustices that have brought him to this point. His story stands as a testament to the depravity of both the U.S. and Algerian governments, subjecting him to abuse and torture, and it is a call to action for all those who believe in the sanctity of justice and the dignity of every individual.
In closing, let us heed the words of the U.N. experts who have sounded the alarm on Bakhouche's case. Let us demand accountability, transparency, and above all, justice for those who have been failed by the very systems meant to protect them. Only then can we truly begin to heal the wounds inflicted by Guantánamo and its legacy of injustice.
Saeed Bakhouche's case underscores the urgent need for action and accountability in the pursuit of justice. It is a stark reminder of the human cost of unchecked power and the devastating impact of prolonged detention without charge or trial. We cannot afford to turn a blind eye to his plight or the plight of countless others who have been wrongfully detained and subjected to abuse.
We must demand transparency, accountability, and fair treatment for all detainees, regardless of their circumstances. We must advocate for Bakhouche's immediate release and call for reforms to ensure that such injustices never occur again. Only through collective action and unwavering commitment to human rights can we bring about meaningful change and ensure that justice prevails.
This article was first published by Cage International.
"Only by ceasing hostilities we can alleviate the immense suffering and ensure that large-scale humanitarian assistance reaches those in need," said Algeria's ambassador to the United Nations.
Russia and China on Friday vetoed a U.S. resolution at the United Nations Security Council that called a Gaza cease-fire "imperative" but stopped short of demanding a halt to Israel's monthslong assault on the besieged enclave.
Algeria, which does not have veto power, joined Russia and China in opposing the U.S. resolution, which 11 Security Council members supported. Guyana abstained.
Friday's 11-3-1 vote came just over a month after the U.S. used its veto power to tank an Algeria-led resolution demanding "an immediate humanitarian cease-fire that must be respected by all parties."
Amar Bendjama, Algeria's ambassador to the U.N., said Friday that he was speaking not only for his country "but as a representative of the whole Arab world" as he explained their shared opposition to the U.S. resolution. Bendjama said Algeria proposed edits to the U.S. draft, but the final resolution left central concerns "unaddressed."
"We echoed the demands of millions of people and humanitarian actors for an immediate cessation of hostilities," said Bendjama. "Regrettably, the draft resolution falls short of our expectations. It fails to adequately address these main issues and the immense suffering [being endured] by the Palestinian people."
"Those who believe that the Israeli occupying power will choose to uphold its international legal obligation are mistaken," he argued. "They must abandon this fiction."
Bendjama, who cited the 32,000 people killed by Israel so far and the tens of thousands more wounded or permanently disabled, said the draft of the resolution "does not convey a clear message of peace" and "tacitly allows for continuing civilian casualties and lacks clear safeguard to prevent further escalation."
Russia's ambassador to the U.N., Vassily Nebenzia, argued the U.S. resolution was "not enough" and accused the Biden administration of "deliberately misleading the international community."
Outside analysts also criticized the U.S. resolution. Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said that while the resolution is "significantly stronger" than previous U.S. drafts, "it still falls short of a clear and unequivocal demand for an unconditional cease-fire."
Craig Mokhiber, a former U.N. official who resigned in late October over the international body's failure to respond to Israel's assault on Gaza, said the U.S. measure "is not a cease-fire resolution. It is a ransom note."
Instead of clearly demanding a cease-fire, the U.S. resolution proposed more ambiguous language expressing "the imperative of an immediate and sustained cease-fire to protect civilians on all sides, allow for the delivery of essential humanitarian assistance, and alleviate humanitarian suffering."
The resolution also tied support for a cease-fire to "the release of all remaining hostages."
Parsi said in a statement Friday that "undoubtedly, Biden's rhetorical shift in favor of a ceasefire is noteworthy, but the devil is in the details."
"The unnecessarily convoluted operative clause raises concerns that this shift is less straightforward than it could and should be," Parsi added.
"We should ask ourselves: How many innocent lives must be sacrificed before the council deems it necessary to call for a cease-fire?" said the Algerian envoy to the United Nations.
As a United Nations agency halted aid deliveries in northern Gaza, where acute malnourishment is rampant among children, citing a "breakdown of social order" fueled by Israel's bombardment of and blockade on the enclave, the United States for a third time on Tuesday vetoed a cease-fire resolution at the U.N. Security Council—saying it was an inopportune time to demand that Israel end its massacre of Palestinians.
U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield said the cease-fire resolution, proposed by Algeria, would "negatively impact" negotiations for a truce that are ongoing.
Amar Bendjama, Algeria's ambassador to the U.N., said the U.S. ambassador's lone vote against the resolution "implies an endorsement of the brutal violence and collective punishment inflicted upon" Palestinians in Gaza.
Thirteen countries supported the resolution, while the U.K.—which has veto power, like the U.S., China, France, and Russia—abstained from voting.
The vote marked the third time the U.S. has vetoed a cease-fire resolution at the U.N. Security Council (UNSC). Meanwhile, the Biden administration has approved weapons transfers to Israel without the oversight of the U.S. Congress since the assault began in October, and has vehemently defended the bombardment as being focused on defeating Hamas, even as Israel has killed more than 29,000 Palestinians including more than 11,500 children.
"We should ask ourselves: How many innocent lives must be sacrificed before the council deems it necessary to call for a cease-fire?" said Bendjama. "Palestinian lives matter. Each one of us decides where to stand in this tragic chapter of history."
As the U.S. rejected the cease-fire resolution, Al Jazeera reported on the chaos that has erupted in northern Gaza as Israel has blocked aid trucks from reaching starving civilians there.
The World Food Program (WFP) said Tuesday it was pausing deliveries after crowds of desperate people overwhelmed aid workers.
As Al Jazeera reported, children collected flour that spilled from an aid truck in Gaza City, before Israeli forces began firing on the crowd.
"We want to feed our children just like everyone else," one Palestinian man told Al Jazeera, "so we went to get some flour. But then we were shot at, shells were fired, and tanks advanced at us."
The WFP and the U.N. Children's Fund said Monday that starvation is particularly severe in northern Gaza, with 1 in 6 children under age two—more than 15%—acutely malnourished. An estimated 3% of children under two are experiencing a severe form of wasting—being underweight for their age and height.
In December, 15 agencies including the WFP warned that northern Gaza is at risk for a famine by May unless conditions significantly improve.
The United States' veto of Algeria's resolution on Tuesday, said Bendjama, should be understood as "approval of starvation as a means of war against hundreds of thousands of Palestinians."
The U.S. proposed its own resolution calling for a "temporary cease-fire as soon as practicable," and warning Israel not to conduct an expected ground operation in Rafah, where more than 1.5 million people—most of whom have been forcibly displaced from other parts of Gaza—are now sheltering.
The Permanent Mission of Liechtenstein to the U.N. called on the U.N. General Assembly (UNGA) to take action to protect Palestinians.
Under Section A of Resolution 377A of the U.N. Charter, also known as "Uniting for Peace," the UNGA can convene an emergency meeting and make recommendations for collective measures, if members of the UNSC can't reach an agreement and fail to exercise their "primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security."
Hossam Baghat, executive director of the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, suggested the U.S. veto should trigger "mass resignations of U.S. diplomats and public servants from the State Department and across the administration."
Al Jazeera reported that Palestinians in Gaza expressed anger over the United States' latest veto.
"There is a great deal of pessimism and frustration. Palestinians no longer trust the international community, as we have been hearing from locals here in Gaza," correspondent Tareq Abu Azzoum reported from Rafah. "During the Security Council meeting there have been more attacks on the ground here in Gaza. People here are completely frustrated."