DOCSLIB.ORG

Khadr Petition

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Khadr Petition No. 10-____ IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM 2010 ___________ OMAR KHADR, ET AL. (AND CONSOLIDATED CASES), Petitioners, v. BARACK OBAMA, ET AL., Respondents. _____________ PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _____________ Shayana D. Kadidal David H. Remes J. Wells Dixon Counsel of Record CENTER FOR APPEAL FOR JUSTICE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 1106 Noyes Drive 666 Broadway, 7th Floor Silver Spring, MD 20910 New York, NY 10012 (202) 669-6508 (212) 614-6464 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Counsel for Petitioners QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether, in a habeas corpus action brought by an individual held in United States territory, includ- ing Guantánamo, (a) Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674 (2008), requires, and (b) Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (2008), the Suspension Clause, and the Due Process Clause permit, the district court to give conclusive effect to the gov- ernment’s assertion that the individual is unlikely to be tortured if transferred to a particular country, dis- abling the individual from challenging his transfer on the ground that he will likely be tortured there, and the court from fashioning an equitable remedy.1 2. Whether, in a habeas corpus action brought by an individual held in Guantánamo: (a) Section 242(a)(4) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act, 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(4), bars “judi- cial review of any cause or claim under the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment,” except in appeals from final orders of deportation. 1 This question is also presented in Mohammed v. Obama, No. 10-___ (filed Nov. 5, 2010) (motion for leave to file under seal pending). The Government has made available a public version of the Mohammed petition. See Lyle Denniston, “Munaf test now in open,” SCOTUSblog, http://www.scotusblog.Com/2010/ 11/munaf-test-now-in-open/ (Nov. 23, 2010). i (b) If so construed, Section 242(a)(4) violates the Equal Protection Clause and the Suspension Clause. ii PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING The parties to the proceeding are set forth after the signature page. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INDEX OF PERTINENT DECISIONS .................. viii DECISIONS BELOW............................................................1 JURISDICTION.....................................................................1 RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF LAW ..................................1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE ..............................................2 REASONS FOR GRANTING THE WRIT ...........................6 CONCLUSION ......................................................................9 APPENDIX A - PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDING ...... 1a APPENDIX B - DECISIONS BELOW .........................24a iv TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page CASES Abdah v. Obama, D.D.C. No. 04-1254 (HHK) ................................... 4 Abdah v. Obama, D.C. Cir. No. 05-5224........................................ 3, 9 Boumediene v. Bush, 553 U.S. 723 (2008)......................................passim INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289 (2001) .......................... 8 In Re: Guantánamo Bay Detainee Litigation, Misc. No. 08-442 (TFH) ........................................ 2 Kiyemba v. Obama, 555 F.3d 1022 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (“Kiyemba I”) ......................................................... 2 Kiyemba v. Obama, 561 F.3d 509 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (“Kiyemba II”)....................passim Kiyemba v. Obama, 605 F.3d 1046 (D.C. Cir. 2010) (“Kiyemba III”) ........................... 2 Lindaastuty v. Attorney General, 186 Fed. Appx. 294, 2006 WL 1759556 (3d Cir. 2006) ....... 8 Mohammed v. Obama, No. 10-___ (filed Nov. 5, 2010) ............................................ i, 6 v Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674 (2008)......................................passim Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. 466 (2004) .......................... 3 Sale v. Haitian Ctrs. Council, 509 U.S. 155 (1993) .................................................................... 7 Swain v. Pressley, 430 U.S. 372 (1977)...................... 9 United States v. Hayman, 342 U.S. 205 (1952) ........ 9 CONSTITUTION AND STATUTES U.S. Const., Amdt. V .........................................passim U.S. Const., Art. I, § 9, cl. 2 ........................ i, ii, 1, 8, 9 Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhumane, or Degrading Treatment ....................................................passim Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 ............................... 8 Foreign Affairs and Restructuring Act of 1998, 8 U.S.C. § 1231 note ......................................... 5, 7 Immigration and Naturalization Act, § 242(a)(4), 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a) .....................passim 8 U.S.C. § 101(a)(38) ............................................ 7 Military Commissions Act of 2006 ............................ 8 Real ID Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-13, 119 Stat. 302 ........................................................ 8 vi 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1)..................................................... 1 28 U.S.C. § 1361 ......................................................... 6 28 U.S.C. § 1651 ......................................................... 6 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c) ............................................. 1, 3, 5 OTHER AUTHORITIES Court, Rule 10 ............................................................ 6 H.R. Rep. No. 109-72 (2005) ...................................... 8 151 Cong. Rec. H2813, H2872 (2005) ....................... 8 Lyle Denniston, “Munaf case now in open,” SCOTUSblog, http://www.scotusblog.com/ 2010/11/munaf-test-now in open/ (Nov. 23, 2010) ...................................................................... i vii INDEX OF PERTINENT DECISIONS Kiyemba v. Obama, 561 F.3d 509 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (reversing orders in Uighur habeas cases requiring Government to give counsel 30 days’ advance notice of any intended transfer from Guantánamo) (“Kiyemba II”), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 1880 (2010). Abdah v. Obama, D.D.C. No. 04-1254 (HHK) (Mar. 31, 2005) (Docs. 146 & 147) (orders in other habeas cases requiring Government to give counsel 30 days’ advance notice of any intended transfer of detainees from Guantánamo) (“2005 notice orders”). Abdah v. Obama, D.C. Cir. No. 05-5224 (Gov- ernment’s pending appeal from 2005 notice orders), petition by petitioners for initial en banc hearing pending. In Re: Guantánamo Bay Detainee Litigation, D.D.C. Misc. No. 08-442-TFH (July 11, 2008) (Doc. 52) (order requiring Govern- ment to give counsel 30 days’ advance notice of any intended transfer of detainees from Guantánamo) (“2008 notice orders”), appearing in Khadr v. Obama, D.D.C. No. 04-1136 (July 11, 2008) (Doc. 187). viii Khadr v. Obama, No. 08-5233 and consoli- dated cases (Sept. 3, 2010) (vacating 2008 notice orders, based on Kiyemba II). Mohammed v. Obama, D.C. Cir. No. 10-5218 (July 8, 2010) (summarily reversing preliminary injunction enjoining Govern- ment from repatriating Algerian detainee to Algeria, based on Kiyemba II). Mohammed v. Obama, No. 10A52 (July 16, 2010) (denying application to stay mandate for summary reversal order pending filing of petition for certiorari). Mohammed v. Obama, No. 10-__ (filed Nov. 5, 2010) (petition for certiorari to review D.C. Circuit’s summary reversal order). ix DECISIONS BELOW The court of appeals’ decision (Pet. 24a), issued on September 3, 2010, is unreported. The district court’s order of July 11, 2008 (Pet. 31a) is unreported. JURISDICTION The jurisdiction of this Court rests on 28 U.S.C. § 1254(1). The jurisdiction of the district court rested on 28 U.S.C. § 2241(c)(1), (3), the Suspension Clause, and the Fifth Amendment. RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF LAW Suspension Clause, U.S. Const., Art. I, § 9, cl. 2: The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it. Due Process Clause, U.S. Const., Amdt. V: No person shall * * * be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law * * *. [No person shall be denied the equal protection of the laws.] Immigration and Naturalization Act, Section 242(a)(4) (8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(4)): Claims under the United Nations Convention Notwithstanding any other provision of law * * *, a petition for review filed with an appropriate court of appeals in accordance with this section shall be the sole and exclusive means for judicial review of any cause or claim under the United Nations Conv- ention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment * * * . 1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE 1. Petitioners are individuals held at the Guan- tánamo Bay detention facility who have pending pe- titions for writs of habeas corpus. This case arises out of an order of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on July 11, 2008 (Pet. 31a) requiring the Government to give counsel for Petiti- oners 30 days’ notice of any intended transfer of a detainee from Guantánamo, to give counsel a chance to object if, for example, counsel fears that the detainee will be tortured in the receiving country (“2008 notice orders”). In a per curiam order dated September 3, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the 2008 notice orders. (Pet. 24a). In pertinent part, the order reads as follows: * * * ORDERED that the district court’s order requiring advance notice of transfer, entered in Misc. No. 08-442, In Re: Guantánamo Bay Detainee Litigation (D.D.C. July 10), and in the civil actions named therein,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In the Supreme Court of the United States
    No. ________ In the Supreme Court of the United States KHALED A. F. AL ODAH, ET AL., PETITIONERS, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL., RESPONDENTS. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI DAVID J. CYNAMON THOMAS B. WILNER MATTHEW J. MACLEAN COUNSEL OF RECORD OSMAN HANDOO NEIL H. KOSLOWE PILLSBURY WINTHROP AMANDA E. SHAFER SHAW PITTMAN LLP SHERI L. SHEPHERD 2300 N Street, N.W. SHEARMAN & STERLING LLP Washington, DC 20037 801 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. 202-663-8000 Washington, DC 20004 202-508-8000 GITANJALI GUTIERREZ J. WELLS DIXON GEORGE BRENT MICKUM IV SHAYANA KADIDAL SPRIGGS & HOLLINGSWORTH CENTER FOR 1350 “I” Street N.W. CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS Washington, DC 20005 666 Broadway, 7th Floor 202-898-5800 New York, NY 10012 212-614-6438 Counsel for Petitioners Additional Counsel Listed on Inside Cover JOSEPH MARGULIES JOHN J. GIBBONS MACARTHUR JUSTICE CENTER LAWRENCE S. LUSTBERG NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY GIBBONS P.C. LAW SCHOOL One Gateway Center 357 East Chicago Avenue Newark, NJ 07102 Chicago, IL 60611 973-596-4500 312-503-0890 MARK S. SULLIVAN BAHER AZMY CHRISTOPHER G. KARAGHEUZOFF SETON HALL LAW SCHOOL JOSHUA COLANGELO-BRYAN CENTER FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP 833 McCarter Highway 250 Park Avenue Newark, NJ 07102 New York, NY 10177 973-642-8700 212-415-9200 DAVID H. REMES MARC D. FALKOFF COVINGTON & BURLING COLLEGE OF LAW 1201 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. NORTHERN ILLINOIS Washington, DC 20004 UNIVERSITY 202-662-5212 DeKalb, IL 60115 815-753-0660 PAMELA CHEPIGA SCOTT SULLIVAN ANDREW MATHESON DEREK JINKS KAREN LEE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SARAH HAVENS SCHOOL OF LAW ALLEN & OVERY LLP RULE OF LAW IN WARTIME 1221 Avenue of the Americas PROGRAM New York, NY 10020 727 E.
    [Show full text]
  • BA Oppgave.Pages
    ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! «…It’s nothing but torture» It’s time for a serious reaction to music torture ! Inger-Maren Helliksen Fjeldheim May 18th! 2018 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! "1 av "17 !Abstract For years music has been used as a method of torture in American run prisons such as Bagram and Guantanamo. The American government calls it harsh interrogation and claim the music torture is kinder and less severe as it does not inflict physical damage on the prisoner. ! It is not within our power to know whether death is worse a fate for humans than a life of trauma. !Before we know this for certain, we cannot to claim that one fate is better or worse than the other. Musicians have known for a long time that their music is used for torture, and yet there as been little to no reaction. As musicians and music lovers we cannot sit idly by while what is supposed to be a source of comfort and happiness, is used for such deplorable purpose. It is time for a serious reaction to music torture. ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! "2 av "17 Index ! Abstract 2 ! I Introduction 3 ! II Music and Torture- What it is and where it comes from 4 ! III The Use of a Song- Drowning Pool and their song Bodies 5 ! IV What happens in Guantanamo 8 ! V Discussion- Time to react 8 ! VII Bibliography 11 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! "3 av "17 Introduction Music as a phenomenon is universal to all humans and can be found in every human culture past and present.1 It has been used through history for pleasure, and for sorrow, in religion and everyday life alike.
    [Show full text]
  • In the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
    IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– x : : SUFYIAN BARHOUMI, : : Petitioner, : : v. : Civil Action No. 05-cv-1506 (RMC) : BARACK OBAMA, et al., : : Respondents. : : : ––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– x REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF EMERGENCY MOTION FOR ORDER EFFECTING RELEASE Shayana D. Kadidal (D.D.C. Bar No. 454248) Omar Farah (pursuant to LCvR 83.2(g)) J. Wells Dixon (pursuant to LCvR 83.2(g)) CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, New York 10012 (212) 614-6438 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Attorneys for Petitioner Barhoumi Sufyian Barhoumi has been detained without charge at Guantánamo for fourteen years— longer than the duration of any prior military conflict in U.S. history or, to our knowledge, the history of modern warfare. His detention has gone on for too long, and is arbitrary and perpetual by any reasonable measure. This is particularly so where, as here, the individual whose liberty has been restrained has been approved for transfer but remains in custody because of bureaucrat- ic delay rather than what he allegedly did or who he allegedly associated with more than a dec- ade ago, and where—as the government does not dispute—he will likely remain detained, at minimum for the next four years, but perhaps for life absent a timely judicial order effectuating his release from Guantánamo. Far from offering a persuasive opposition to Petitioner’s motion, the government con- cedes his essential arguments warranting relief. The government does not dispute that Petitioner has been approved for transfer because his detention is “no longer necessary,” and no longer serves the only ostensible basis for his initial capture and detention, i.e., to prevent his return to the battlefield.
    [Show full text]
  • Government Turns the Other Way As Judges Make Findings About Torture and Other Abuse
    USA SEE NO EVIL GOVERNMENT TURNS THE OTHER WAY AS JUDGES MAKE FINDINGS ABOUT TORTURE AND OTHER ABUSE Amnesty International Publications First published in February 2011 by Amnesty International Publications International Secretariat Peter Benenson House 1 Easton Street London WC1X 0DW United Kingdom www.amnesty.org Copyright Amnesty International Publications 2011 Index: AMR 51/005/2011 Original Language: English Printed by Amnesty International, International Secretariat, United Kingdom All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publishers. Amnesty International is a global movement of 2.2 million people in more than 150 countries and territories, who campaign on human rights. Our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights instruments. We research, campaign, advocate and mobilize to end abuses of human rights. Amnesty International is independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion. Our work is largely financed by contributions from our membership and donations CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 Judges point to human rights violations, executive turns away ........................................... 4 Absence
    [Show full text]
  • Ameziane V. Obama / Ameziane V. United States
    ccrjust ice.o rg http://ccrjustice.org/Ameziane Ameziane v. Obama / Ameziane v. United States Synopsis DJAMEL AMEZIANE Detained at Guantánamo since February 2002; cleared for transfer since October 2008 *Photo credits: Center for Constitutional Rights See Djamel Ameziane's short profile and learn what you can do for him. Djamel Ameziane is an Algerian ref ugee who has been detained in Guantánamo Bay since 2002. He has a pending habeas corpus petition, Ameziane v. Obama, in the D.C. District Court. He has a petition and request f or precautionary measures, Ameziane v. United States, f iled with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). Like many other habeas petitions, Mr. Ameziane’s habeas case was stayed pending the outcome of the Boumediene and Al Odah cases in the Supreme Court, which were decided June 12, 2008. The Supreme Court ruled that detainees at Guantánamo Bay have the constitutional right to have their habeas corpus petitions heard in a U.S. f ederal court. Subsequently, the stay in Mr. Ameziane’s habeas case was lif ted and the case began to move f orward rapidly. However, in June 2009, the D.C. District Court again stayed the case indef initely based on his approval f or transf er. Mr. Ameziane’s IACHR petition and request f or precautionary measures is the f irst merits petition by a person detained by the United States at Guantánamo Bay, asking the IACHR to consider the torture, abuse, and other human rights violations perpetrated against him, including his continuing indef inite detention without charge or trial.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of the FBI's Involvement in and Observations of Detainee Interrogations in Guantanamo Bay, Mghanistan, and Iraq
    Case 1:04-cv-04151-AKH Document 450-5 Filed 02/15/11 Page 1 of 21 EXHIBIT 4 Case 1:04-cv-04151-AKH Document 450-5 Filed 02/15/11 Page 2 of 21 U.S. Department ofJustice Office of the Inspector General A Review of the FBI's Involvement in and Observations of Detainee Interrogations in Guantanamo Bay, Mghanistan, and Iraq Oversight and Review Division Office of the Inspector General May 2008 UNCLASSIFIED Case 1:04-cv-04151-AKH Document 450-5 Filed 02/15/11 Page 3 of 21 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .i CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 I. Introduction l II. The OIG Investigation 2 III. Prior Reports Regarding Detainee Mistreatment 3 IV. Methodology of OIG Review of Knowledge of FBI Agents Regarding Detainee Treatment · 5 A. The OIG June 2005 Survey 5 B. OIG Selection of FBI Personnel for.Interviews 7 C. OIG Treatment of Military Conduct 7 V. Organization of the OIG Report 8 CHAPTER TWO: FACTUAL BACKGROUND 11 I. The Changing Role of the FBI After September 11 11 II. FBI Headquarters Organizational Structure for Military Zones 12 A. Counterterrorism Division 13 1. International Terrorism Operations Sections 13 2. Counterterrorism Operations Response Section 14 B. Critical Incident Response Group 15 C. Office of General Counsel. 15 III. Other DOJ Entities Involved in Overseas Detainee Matters 16 IV. Inter-Agency Entities and Agreements Relating to Detainee Matters. 16 A. The Policy Coordinating Committee 16 B. Inter-Agency Memorandums of Understanding 18 V. Background Regarding the FBI's Role in the Military Zones 19 A.
    [Show full text]
  • Forensic Mental Health Evaluations in the Guantánamo Military Commissions System: an Analysis of All Detainee Cases from Inception to 2018 T ⁎ Neil Krishan Aggarwal
    International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 64 (2019) 34–39 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect International Journal of Law and Psychiatry journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijlawpsy Forensic mental health evaluations in the Guantánamo military commissions system: An analysis of all detainee cases from inception to 2018 T ⁎ Neil Krishan Aggarwal Clinical Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, Committee on Global Thought, Columbia University, New York State Psychiatric Institute, United States ABSTRACT Even though the Bush Administration opened the Guantánamo Bay detention facility in 2002 in response to the September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States, little remains known about how forensic mental health evaluations relate to the process of detainees who are charged before military commissions. This article discusses the laws governing Guantánamo's military commissions system and mental health evaluations. Notably, the US government initially treated detaineesas“unlawful enemy combatants” who were not protected under the US Constitution and the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment, allowing for the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques.” In subsequent legal documents, however, the US government has excluded evidence obtained through torture, as defined by the US Constitution and the United Nations Convention Against Torture. Using open-source document analysis, this article describes the reasons and outcomes of all forensic mental health evaluations from Guantánamo's opening to 2018. Only thirty of 779 detainees (~3.85%) have ever had charges referred against them to the military commissions, and only nine detainees (~1.16%) have ever received forensic mental health evaluations pertaining to their case.
    [Show full text]
  • Guantanamo and Citizenship: an Unjust Ticket Home
    Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law Volume 37 Issue 2 Article 19 2006 Guantanamo and Citizenship: An Unjust Ticket Home Rory T. Hood Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil Part of the International Law Commons Recommended Citation Rory T. Hood, Guantanamo and Citizenship: An Unjust Ticket Home, 37 Case W. Res. J. Int'l L. 555 (2006) Available at: https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol37/iss2/19 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Journals at Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law by an authorized administrator of Case Western Reserve University School of Law Scholarly Commons. GUANTANAMO AND CITIZENSHIP: AN UNJUST TICKET HOME? Rory T. Hood t "Trying to get Uganda to take an interest is pretty difficult; [JamalAbdul- lah Kiyemba has] been here since he was 14. 1 am asking the [Foreign Of- fice] whether they will allow him to apply for citizenship from Guan- tanamo Bay. If you are out of the countryfor more than two years, it can be counted against you. He probably has now been-but not of his own free will.' -Louise Christian - Atty. representing Jamal Abdullah Kiyemba I. INTRODUCTION Jamal Abdullah Kiyemba, Bisher al-Rawi, Jamil al-Banna, Shaker Abdur-Raheem Aamer, and Omar Deghayes are currently in the custody of the United States government at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.2 A citizen of Uganda, an Iraqi exile, a Jordanian refugee, a Saudi citizen, and a Libyan exile, respectively, these men form an unlikely group; yet, each share one common trait.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Is Shaker Aamer? Crt Briefing, 9 February 2015
    BRITAIN’S LAST GUANTÁNAMO DETAINEE: WHO IS SHAKER AAMER? CRT BRIEFING, 9 FEBRUARY 2015 INTRODUCTION It is UK government policy that Shaker Aamer, the last remaining British resident detained at Guantánamo Bay, be returned. In December 2014, newspaper stories emerged suggesting that this could soon be the case.1 At a meeting in Washington, DC, a month later, President Obama told Prime Minister David Cameron that the US would “prioritise” the case.2 Aamer, who was born in Saudi Arabia, was captured in Afghanistan in November 2001; he was sent to Guantánamo Bay in February 2002. The US government believes him to be a weapons-trained al- Qaeda fighter; Aamer’s supporters claim that he was in Afghanistan to carry out voluntary work for an Islamic charity.3 Aamer is thought to have been cleared for transfer to Saudi Arabia in June 2007 (although, as late as November 2007, Department of Defense documentation recommended that he continue to be 1 ‘Guantanamo to free last UK inmate’, The Sunday Times, 28 December 2014, available at: http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1500831.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_12_27, last visited: 29 January 2015; see also: ‘Last British inmate at Guantanamo set to be freed in the new year in fresh push by Obama to empty prison’, Daily Mail, 28 December 2014, available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2888964/Last-British- inmate-Guantanamo-set-freed-new-year-fresh-push-Obama-prison.html, last visited: 29 January 2015. 2 ‘Barack Obama to “prioritise” case of Guantánamo detainee Shaker Aamer’, The Guardian, 16 January 2015, available at: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jan/16/shaker-aamer-guantanamo-bay-prioritise-obama-case, last visited: 29 January 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • Unclassified//For Public Release Unclassified//For Public Release
    UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE --SESR-Efll-N0F0RN-­ Final Dispositions as of January 22, 2010 Guantanamo Review Dispositions Country ISN Name Decision of Origin AF 4 Abdul Haq Wasiq Continued detention pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001), as informed by principles of the laws of war. AF 6 Mullah Norullah Noori Continued detention pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001), as informed by principles of the laws of war. AF 7 Mullah Mohammed Fazl Continued detention pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001 ), as informed by principles of the laws of war. AF 560 Haji Wali Muhammed Continued detention pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001 ), as informed by principles of the laws of war, subject to further review by the Principals prior to the detainee's transfer to a detention facility in the United States. AF 579 Khairullah Said Wali Khairkhwa Continued detention pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001), as informed by principles of the laws of war. AF 753 Abdul Sahir Referred for prosecution. AF 762 Obaidullah Referred for prosecution. AF 782 Awai Gui Continued detention pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001), as informed by principles of the laws of war. AF 832 Mohammad Nabi Omari Continued detention pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force (2001 ), as informed by principles of the laws of war. AF 850 Mohammed Hashim Transfer to a country outside the United States that will implement appropriate security measures. AF 899 Shawali Khan Transfer to • subject to appropriate security measures.
    [Show full text]
  • FOIA) Document Clearinghouse in the World
    This document is made available through the declassification efforts and research of John Greenewald, Jr., creator of: The Black Vault The Black Vault is the largest online Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) document clearinghouse in the world. The research efforts here are responsible for the declassification of hundreds of thousands of pages released by the U.S. Government & Military. Discover the Truth at: http://www.theblackvault.com Received Received Request ID Requester Name Organization Closed Date Final Disposition Request Description Mode Date 17-F-0001 Greenewald, John The Black Vault PAL 10/3/2016 11/4/2016 Granted/Denied in Part I respectfully request a copy of records, electronic or otherwise, of all contracts past and present, that the DOD / OSD / JS has had with the British PR firm Bell Pottinger. Bell Pottinger Private (legally BPP Communications Ltd.; informally Bell Pottinger) is a British multinational public relations and marketing company headquartered in London, United Kingdom. 17-F-0002 Palma, Bethania - PAL 10/3/2016 11/4/2016 Other Reasons - No Records Contracts with Bell Pottinger for information operations and psychological operations. (Date Range for Record Search: From 01/01/2007 To 12/31/2011) 17-F-0003 Greenewald, John The Black Vault Mail 10/3/2016 1/13/2017 Other Reasons - Not a proper FOIA I respectfully request a copy of the Intellipedia category index page for the following category: request for some other reason Nuclear Weapons Glossary 17-F-0004 Jackson, Brian - Mail 10/3/2016 - - I request a copy of any available documents related to Army Intelligence's participation in an FBI counterintelligence source operation beginning in about 1959, per David Wise book, "Cassidy's Run," under the following code names: ZYRKSEEZ SHOCKER I am also interested in obtaining Army Intelligence documents authorizing, as well as policy documents guiding, the use of an Army source in an FBI operation.
    [Show full text]
  • Avertissement Liens
    AVERTISSEMENT Ce document est le fruit d’un long travail approuvé par le jury de soutenance et mis à disposition de l’ensemble de la communauté universitaire élargie. Il est soumis à la propriété intellectuelle de l’auteur : ceci implique une obligation de citation et de référencement lors de l’utilisation de ce document. D’autre part, toute contrefaçon, plagiat, reproduction illicite de ce travail expose à des poursuites pénales. Contact : [email protected] LIENS Code la Propriété Intellectuelle – Articles L. 122-4 et L. 335-1 à L. 335-10 Loi n°92-597 du 1er juillet 1992, publiée au Journal Officiel du 2 juillet 1992 http://www.cfcopies.com/V2/leg/leg-droi.php http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/infos-pratiques/droits/protection.htm ����� ������������������������� ������������������������������������� ������������� Université Toulouse 1 Capitole (UT1 Capitole) ��������������������������� M. Haroon MANNANI le 11 juillet 2014 ������� � La reconstruction de l'État-Nation en Afghanistan �������������� et �discipline ou spécialité � � ED SJP : Sciences Politiques �������������������� Centre Toulousain d'Histoire du Droit et des Idées Politiques (CTHDIP) ���������������������������� Mme DANIELLE CABANIS, professeur des universités Université Toulouse 1 Jury: M. FARKHAD ALIMUKHAMEDOV, professeur Université d'Ankara - Rapporteur du jury M. FRANÇOIS-PAUL BLANC, professeur émérite Université de Perpignan - Rapporteur du jury Mme DANIELLE CABANIS, professeur des universités Université Toulouse 1 - Directeur de recherches M. JEAN-MARIE
    [Show full text]