ACLU-RDI 583 p.1 UNCLASSIFIED SUMMARY OF BASIS FOR TRIBUNAL DECISION DODDON UNCLASSIFIED//FOU0

Similar documents
UNCLASSIFIED OPENING OATH SESSION 1

Case 1:04-cv AKH Document Filed 02/15/11 Page 1 of 5 EXHIBIT 39

The Torture Papers CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS THE ROAD TO ABU GHRAIB. Edited by Karen J. Greenberg. Joshua L. Dratel. Introduction by Anthony Lewis

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ABDUL RAZAK ALI, PETITIONER BARACK H. OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, ET AL.

Summarized Sworn Detainee Statement

Case 1:05-cv RJL Document 109 Filed 01/05/2009 Page 1 of Petitioner,

CONSIDERATION OF REPORTS SUBMITTED BY STATES PARTIES UNDER ARTICLE 19 OF THE CONVENTION

Amnesty International August l993 AI Index: EUR 45/10/93

s E c RE T // NOFORN I I

Consolidated Guidance to Intelligence Officers and Service Personnel on the Detention and Interviewing of Detainees Overseas, and on the Passing and

UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO. The Tribunal President caued for a brief recess to allow the Detainee to he removed from the Tribunal room.

Resolution Adopted by APA on August 19, 2007

JTF GTMO Detainee Assessment

The government moves for reconsideration of part of my Opinion and Order of September

JTF GTMO Detainee Assessment

Case 1:18-cv UA Document 1 Filed 02/14/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK INTRODUCTION

the Central Intelligence Agency s Motion for Summary Judgment.

CHICAGO MAN CHARGED WITH PROVIDING MATERIAL SUPPORT TO AL QAEDA BY ATTEMPTING TO SEND FUNDS OVERSEAS

Case 1:09-cv EGS Document 55 Filed 05/24/12 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

amnesty international

COMPLETE ALL QUESTIONS AND MARGIN NOTES

Q.1 Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the international policies of President George W. Bush?

Q.1 Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the international policies of President George W. Bush?

POLICY STATEMENT PROVISION OF PERMITS TO VETERINARIANS TO PROVIDE SERVICES IN THE NEW SOUTH WALES THOROUGHBRED RACING INDUSTRY

MARIST COLLEGE INFRACTIONS REPORT. By the NCAA Committee on Infractions. MISSION, KANSAS--This report is organized as follows: I. Introduction.

JTF GTMO Detainee Assessment

Appeals Court Rules in Maher Arar Case: Innocent Victims of Extraordinary Rendition Cannot Sue in US Courts

President Obama Announces Death Of Osama Bin Laden

UNCLASSIFIED/IPOVO. Tribunal President: Right. Injust a few minutes we'll allow you to provide an oral statement as well.

DCS Disaster Plan CAT Printable Slides and Script

APPENDIX 5 TO ANNEX B TO MNC-I OPORD HUMAN INTELLIGENCE (HUMINT) TAB B TO APPENDIX 5 TO ANNEX B TO OPORD INTERROGATION AND OTHER

Statement of. Alberto J. Mora. Senate Committee on Armed Services Hearing on the Treatment of Detainees in U.S. Custody

National. The officials said the attorney general and the F.B.I. director had also. What s Popular Now. 1 of :51

In the Supreme Court of the United States

Case 1:05-cv UNA Document Filed 12/05/2008 Page 1 of 24 EXHIBIT A

JTF GTMO Detainee Assessment

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. Alexandria Division STATEMENT OF FACTS

New York Court to Hear Case Against Psychologist Accused of Torture in Guantánamo Interrogations

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 11/29/18 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

CITIZENS INDICTMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ITS AGENTS AND OF THE CITY OF CHICAGO, CITY OF CHICAGO POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THEIR AGENTS

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

SHADOW REPORT To the COMMITTEE AGAINST TORTURE

Case 2:16-mc JLQ Document 62-4 Filed 02/06/17 EXHIBIT DD

JTF GTMO Detainee Assessment

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) Ci"f,t. Action No. (RHO) v. Defendant.

Banksia Securities Limited ACN: (Receivers and Managers Appointed)(In Liquidation) ("BSL")

Case 1:17-cv PAE Document 29 Filed 09/01/17 Page 1 of 6

The Saudi Repatriates Report

OLD SCHOOL CELEBRITY NAME GAME CONTEST OFFICIAL CONTEST RULES

6. Officials should maintain a high level of personal hygiene and should maintain a professional appearance at all times.

MILITARY TRAINING LESSON PLAN: PRIME TIME TORTURE

article 22 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,

Accountability for Torture: Questions and Answers May 2009

JTF GTMO Detainee Assessment

"Fighting Terrorism In Africa"

Disciplinary Commission. Case No April 28, Decision of the ISU Disciplinary Commission. against. and

The 93.9 WKYS Rock The Bells Scavenger Hunt OFFICIAL CONTEST RULES

PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS January 8-11, 2010 NEWS INTEREST INDEX OMNIBUS SURVEY FINAL TOPLINE N=1,043.

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

Guantanamo Bay. Guantanamo Bay is a facility stationed in Cuba that holds persons suspected of terrorism.

Thurby Classic Sweepstakes

Panel: Mr Rui Botica Santos (Portugal), President; Mr Jehangir Baglari (Islamic Republic of Iran); Mr Raymond Hack (South Africa)

BRIDPORT RUGBY FOOTBALL CLUB DISCIPLINE POLICY

Goals of the WBA with respect to Judicial and Executive Endorsements

Statement of Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin Obama Administration s Handling of Terrorist Suspects February 24, 2010

JTF GTMO Detainee Assessment

Case 1:15-cv EGS Document 52-7 Filed 04/14/17 Page 1 of 7. Exhibit 7

MAJIC SONGS OF THE DAY OFFICIAL RULES

GPT NOTICE OF DETERMINATION.

Olympic Weightlifting New Zealand s Selection Policy for Senior, Junior & Youth 2019 International Weightlifting Events

UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO. Detainee: Because it might take a while. UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO. Summarized Detainee Statement

JTF GTMO Detainee Assessment

Case 2:15-cv JLQ Document Filed 06/26/17. Exhibit 2

JTF GTMO Detainee Assessment

Communication No 6/1990 : Spain. 09/06/95. CAT/C/14/D/6/1990. (Jurisprudence)

[ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED] No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case: Document: Filed: 05/06/2010 Page: 1 UNCLASSIFIEDIIFOR PUBLIC RELEASE. No.10-S048

ISU Disciplinary Commission. Case No Decision of the ISU Disciplinary Commission. In the matter of. against.

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE D/STRICT OF COLUMB/A. v. ) Civil Action No. 04-CV-1135 (ESH) ) DECLARATION OF JAMES R. CRISFIELD JR.

H U M A N R I G H T S A N D T O R T U R E

HAUT-COMMISSARIAT AUX DROITS DE L HOMME OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS PALAIS DES NATIONS 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND

Do Police Interrogation Techniques Produce False Confessions Pdf

QUALIFICATIONS OF GRADUATES

Returned & Services League of Australia Limited

Disciplinary Commission. Case No Decision of the ISU Disciplinary Commission. In the matter of. against. and

Jamberoo Touch Incorporated Judiciary Rules & Procedures

Case 1:13-cv JEB Document 20 Filed 05/15/14 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

(OAL Decision: V. : COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION

Arbitration CAS ad hoc Division (O.G. Sydney) 00/015 Mihaela Melinte / International Amateur Athletic Federation (IAAF), award of 29 September 2000

HAUT-COMMISSARIAT AUX DROITS DE L HOMME OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS PALAIS DES NATIONS 1211 GENEVA 10, SWITZERLAND

Disciplinary Commission. Case No Final Decision in the matter of. against. and

This document is downloaded from DR-NTU, Nanyang Technological University Library, Singapore.

FISA DOPING HEARING PANEL IN THE MATTER OF: Anastasia FATINA and Anastasia KARABELSHCHIKOVA

1294 th meeting (September 2017) (DH)

United Nations Committee against Torture

Interrogations and Recordings: Relevant 9/11 Commission Requests and CIA Responses

JTF GTMO Detainee Assessment

Transcription:

UNCLASSIFIED SUMMARY OF BASIS FOR TRIBUNAL DECISION (Enclosure (1) to Combatant Stains Review Tribunal Decision Report) TRIBUNAL P : #20 ISN #: 1. Introduction As the CoMbatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) Decision Report indicates, the Tribunal has determined that this Detainee is properly classified as an enemy combatant and was pan of or supporting Taliban or Al Qaida forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. In reaching its conclusions, the Tribunal considered both classified and unclassified information. The following is an account of the unclassified evidence considered by the Tribunal and other pertinent information. Classified evidence considered by the Tribunal is discussed in Enclosure (2) to the CSRT Decision Report. 2. Synopsis of Proceedings The Tribunal held this hearing on 13 November 2004. The Recorder presented Exhibits R-1 through R-4 during the unclassified portion of the Tribunal. The primary exhibit, the Unclassified Stunmary of Evidence (Exhibit R-1), indicates, among other things, that: The Detainee is a member of Al Qaida and other affiliated terrorist organizations; the Detainee recruited individuals to attend Al Qaida run terrorist training camps in Afghanistan; the Detainee provided money and material support to Al Qaida terrorist training camps; and that the Detainee has received extensive training at Al Qaida run terrorist training camps since 1993. The Detainee has been trained on the AK-47, rocket propelled grenades (RPGs), handguns, ambush theory, detection of land mines and the manufacture of improvised grenades; the Detainee provided support to Al Qaida terrorists by providing shelter for their families while the Al Qaida members committed terrorist acts; the Detainee engaged in hostile acts against the United States or its coalition Partners; the Detainee was armed and prepared to fight on the frontlines against US and allied forces alongside Taliban and Al Qaida fighters; the Detainee retreated to the Tom Bora Afghanistan along with other Taliban and Al Qaida fighters; the Detainee engaged in these hostile actions while neither he nor his fellow fighters wore distinctive military emblems on their clothes, nor followed a typical chain of command; the Detainee provided support to Mama Bin Laden's Al Qaida terrorist network with full knowledge that Bin Laden had issued a declaration of war against the United States and that the Al Qaida network had committed mime:pus terrorist attacks against the United States and its citizens. The Recorder called no witnesses. The Detainee initially indicated that he would attend and participate in the Tribunal. However, on the morning of the Tribunal, the Detainee refused to attend, citing ISNIN Enclosure (1) Pagel of5 30920 NOV00124 ACLU-RDI 583 p.1 DODDON-000526

Cme.1.:04=t;u44-147.-RMP--tXtrtl'METZ13CP2 Filed 12/30/2004 Page 14 of 30 instructions from his attorney. His decision is reflected on the Detainee Election Form (Exhibit D-a). The Personal Representative presented Exhibits D-b through D-g, and provided a summary of those exhibits that is provided at Enclosure (3) to the CSRT Decision Report The Personal Representative called no witnesses on behalf of the Detainee. During the classified session of the Tribunal, the Recorder presented Exhibits R-5 through R-27 without comment The Personal Representative presented Exhibit D-h and provided a brief explanation. After considering all of the classified and unclassified evidence, the Tribunal determined that the Detainee is properly classified as an enemy combatant 3. Evidence Considered by the Tribunal The Tribunal considered the following evidence in reaching its conclusions: a. Exhibits: R-1 through R-27, and D-a through D-b. b. Testimony of the following persons: None. But, the Detainee did provide a witness statement, which was submitted by the Personal Representative as Exhibit D-g. c. Sworn statement of the Detainee: None. But, the Detainee did provide a statement, which was submitted by the Personal Representativeas Exhibit D-e. 4. Rulings by the Tribunal on Detainee Requests for Evidence or Witnesses The Detainee requested the following witnesses: a. Shahid Abassi. This request was denied on the ground that the witness was not reasonably available. The Detainee did not provide enough detail regarding the witness' whereabouts to enable U.S. and Pakistani authorities to locate the witness. See page I of b. His wife,41111111111.and his wife11.1111111111and Abdul Wahid. The witness request for these United Kingdom residents was approved by the Tribunal President The Department of Sate and United Kingdom authorities did successfully contact the witnesses. However, the witnesses failed to reply to the U.S. Embassy in the U.K. on whether they would make themselves available for the hearing. The witnesses did not appear at the hearing or provide written statements. See pages 1 and 2 of c. A Sudanese in charge of p. The Tribunal was able to identify this individual as lir Detainee interviewed by the Personal Representative. Detainee lined to participate in the hearing as a witness, but he UNCLASSIFIED//F0110 ISN Enclosure a Page2of5 NOVO 012 5 30 9 z ACLU-RDI 583 p.2 DODDON-000527

Case 104-rif-ni1n f1m11---ttauti1uil111u-2 Plied 12/30/2004 Page 15 of 30 UNCLASSIFEEDNFOU0 did agree to submit a statement, which was accepted as Exhibit D-f See page 2 of d. Patrick Hamilton andlillit The Detainee requested these individuals for the purpose of verifying that at one point, the Detainee, was classified as a prisoner of war. The request was originally approved. However, upon consultation with the legal adviser and farther reflection, the Tribunal President concluded that the witnesses were not relevant, and so the request was disapproved. The information that the witnesses were to provide was determined to be irrelevant because the fact, if established, that the Detainee was at one time classified as a prisoner of war is not germane to the question before -the Trio anal, namely whether the Detainee was part of or supporting Taliban or Al Qaida forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. See pages 2 and 3 of Sm.:Insure (5) to the CSRT Decision Report e. The Tribunal President made a determination that security considerations 11111.11111 pre de this witness' presence at the hearing. Therefore, the witness request was denied on the ground that the witness was not reasonably available. Prior to the hearing, thedetainee requested that a statement from his attorney be submitted as evidence. During the hearing, the Detainee, through his Personal Representative, submitted documents from two of his attorneys. These documents are the affidavits described in paragraph 5.a., below. See also page 2 of Enclosure (5) to the CSRT Decision Report. The Detainee did request from the Tribunal prior to the hearing a definition of Al Qaida and a list of associated forces, as that phrase is used in Exhibit R-1, the Unclassified Summary of Evidence. Responsive answers to both inquiries were provided to the Detainee through his Personal Representative prior to the scheduled hearing date. See pages 1, 4 and 5 of The Detainee requested from the Tribunal prior to the hearing that he be administered a polygraph as a means of bolstering his claim of innocence. The Tribunal President concluded that she did not have the authority to grant such a request, as there are no polygraphers attached to the Tribunals Moreover, given the nature of polygraphy, especially in a cross-cultural setting such as this, the Tribunal doubted the helpfulness of such an examination, even if it were to show no deception to relevant questions. The Tribunal preferred instead to rely upon the testimony of the Detainee, were he to offer any, and the documents submitted by the Recorder and the Perscinal Representative. Therefore, the request was denied. See page 2 of Enclosure (5) to the CSRT Decision Report 5. Discussion of Unclassified Evidence...... UNCLASSIFEED//FOU0 ISN AB Faulosare (1) Page 3 of S NOVO 012 6 3 0 9 Z Z- ACLU-RDI 583 p.3 DODDON-000528

. nrse 1111 '01 Is/ I MU Uucument 86-2 Filed 12/30/2004 Page 16 of 30 The Tribunal considered the following unclassifipd evidence in making its determinations: a. The Recorder offered Exhibits R-1 through R-4 into evidence during the unclassified pardon of the proceeding. Exhibit R-1 is the Unclassified Summary of Evidence. While this summary is helpful in that it provides a broad outline of what the Tribunal can expect to see, it is not persuasive in that it provides conclusory statements without supporting unclassified evidence. Exhibits R-2 and R-3 are affidavits submitted by the Detainee's two attorneys to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia discussing aspects of the attorneys' representation of the Detainee Exhibit R-4 is the Government's motion to consolidate various habeas corpus petitions from individuals being detained by the U.S.. Exhibits R-2 through R-4 did not provide information helpful to the Tribunal on the question of whether this Detainee meets the definition of an enemy combatant Accordingly, the Tribunal had to look to other evidence to support the assertions in the Unclassified Summary of Evidence and the Tribunal's conclusions. b. As noted in paragraph 2, above, the Detainee, through his Personal. Representative, submitted Exhibits D-b through D-g in the unclassified session. Exhibit D-b is a letter to the Detainee from his lawyer. Exhibit D-c is the Detainee's habeas corpus petition. Exhibit Did is a letter from Deputy Assistant General Thomas R. Lee to the Senior Judge of the Washington D.C. federal district court providing his estimate of the time frame in which the CSRT process could be completed. Exhibit D-f is a copy of the Third Geneva Convention. While valuable to the Tribimal generally, Exhibits D-c, D-d and D-f were not directly relevant to the issue before the Tribunal. c. As noted, Exhibit D-e is the Detainee's statement Much of that exhibit is also dedicated to the discussion of issues outside the scope of the Tribunal's inquiry. However, the Detainee did emphatically and at length deny the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of Exhibit R-1, the Unclassified Summary of Evidence. The Tribunal accepted the Detainee's statements as an acknowledgement that he had some involvement with a number of terrorists and terrorist training camps, including providing financial support, but otherwise found the Detainee's testimony unpersuasive when considered in conjunction with the classified evidence. The Tribunal did note the Detainee's assertion that he signed a statement under duress, but also noted that the Detainee acknowledges that he was afforded an opportunity to edit that statement d. Exhibit D-f is a statement by anoth Detainee As discussed above, the Detainee had requested Personal Representative advised the Trammel Detainee =lined to participate as a witness, but did agree to submit a statement ersonal Representative further ' th Tribunal the statement is written by the translator, documenting Detainee' al statements. The picture on the Exhibit is that of Detainee 6. Consultations with the CSRT Legal Advisor UNCLASSIFIED/NM/0 ISN Enciosuralai Page 4 of 5 3 0 '1 2 3 NOV00127 ACLU-RDI 583 p.4 DODDON-000529

UNCLASSIFIED//FOLIO The Tribunal consulted the CSRT Assistant Legal Advisor regarding the Detainee's allegations made in his statement that he witnessed individuals in custody being abused, and that he was abused, or at least threatened with abuse, as well (see Exhibit D-e). As per instructions, the OARDEC Forward Chief of Staff and the OARDEC Liaison to the Criminal Investigation Task Force and.itf-gtmo were notified of the matters on 15 November 2004. This information had previously been passed to the OARDEC liaison on 23 September.2004. 7. Conclusions of the Tribunal Upon careful review of all the evidence presented in this matter, the Tribunal makes the following determinations: a. The Detainee chose not to participate in the Tribunal proceeding. No evidence was produced that caused the Tribunal to question whether the Detainee was mentally and physically capable of participating in the proceeding, bad he wanted to do so. Accordingly, no medical or mental health evaluation was requested or deemed necesenry. b. As indicated in Exhibit D-a, the Detainee made a conscious decision not to attend his pre-tribunal interview session with the Personal Representative. Accordingly, the Tribunal finds the Detainee made a knowing, intelligent and voluntary decision not to participate in the Tribunal process. c. The Detainee is properly classified as an enemy combatant because he was part of or supporting Taliban or Al Qaida forces, or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. 8. Dissenting Tribunal Member's report None. The Tribunal reached a unanimous decision. Res ctfult submitted lone,. Army Tribunal President UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO Enclaswe (1) Page of S 3 09 24 NOVO 012 8 ACLU-RDI 583 p.5 DODDON-000530