DOCSLIB.ORG

Omar Deghayes.Qxd

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Omar Deghayes.Qxd June 2005 AI Index: AMR 51/088/2005 USA Who are the Guantánamo detainees? CASE SHEET 9 Libyan citizen/UK resident: Omar Deghayes Full name: Omar Deghayes Nationality: Libyan citizen/UK resident Age: 35 Family status: Married with a three- year-old son © Private Occupation: Lawyer Background in Brighton and studied law in British universities. A devout Muslim, Omar Deghayes visited prisoners to “If torture and abuse had a smell, offer them support. Omar Deghayes’ ambition was none of the American soldiers would to be a human rights lawyer. be able to sit next to anyone else.” In 2001, Omar Deghayes decided to travel with Omar Deghayes a friend and look for work. He went to Malaysia, Pakistan and eventually Afghanistan, where he married In March 1980 Amnesty International issued an Urgent and had a son. Action featuring a Libyan trade union leader and political When the international conflict in Afghanistan opponent of Colonel Mu’ammar al-Gaddafi. He had been started after the 11 September 2001 attacks in the arrested by Libyan secret police and was executed three USA, Omar Deghayes fled to Pakistan with his wife days later. The Urgent Action stated that the man had and baby. They were planning to return to the UK five children. One of those children is Omar Deghayes. when they were arrested in Lahore in April 2002, Omar Deghayes and his family managed to flee reportedly for a bounty of US$5,000. persecution in Libya and were eventually granted Omar Deghayes was caught up as an “enemy political asylum in the UK. Omar Deghayes grew up combatant” and eventually transferred to Guantánamo USA: Who are the Guantánamo detainees? Bay via Afghanistan. In all, four governments have been z being chained to the wall and suspended by the complicit in his detention, alleged ill-treatment and wrists. torture, and in denying him justice for over three years. z Omar Deghayes states that the “guards forced Torture allegations petrol and benzene up the anuses of prisoners. This would burn horribly”. “I underwent systematic beatings In Guantánamo Bay, where Omar Deghayes was every night for three days. transferred in September 2002, he has reportedly been Each time, when I was nearly targeted for ill-treatment because he has legal training unconscious, I would be thrown and has spoken out against abuses through his lawyer. back into the cell to await more.” The alleged abuses include: Omar Deghayes z he and other detainees were sexually In Pakistan, Omar Deghayes alleges that he was assaulted during a strip search, and when tortured in custody. He was told he was being held he challenged the guards he was repeatedly in Pakistan at the behest of the USA. Omar Deghayes pepper-sprayed in the eyes and face, and a says that he was: guard forced his finger into one of Omar’s eyes, leaving him blind in that eye; z subjected to “systematic beatings”; z a jet of high pressure water was sprayed up his z forced into stress positions; nose until he thought he would suffocate; z kept in a dimly lit room full of glass boxes with z he was kept in solitary confinement for over “very large snakes”, and threatened with being left eight months; in the room after the snakes had been released; z on 9 and 11 September 2004 he was z submerged under water until he believed he interrogated by Libyan intelligence agents who would drown. threatened him with violence and death. In addition, British intelligence agents are reported In Afghanistan, Omar Deghayes likened the US-run to have interrogated Omar Deghayes up to seven prison at Bagram air base to “Nazi camps that I saw times while in Bagram and Guantánamo. in films”. When asked by his lawyer about beatings in Bagram, Omar Deghayes replied, “Of course, beating Family and torture is considered normal [there]”. Omar said he was also subjected to: “[The letters] are heavily censored – z forced nudity; they just say things like ‘how are you?’ and ‘I’m fine’” z food deprivation; Taher Deghayes, Omar Deghayes’ brother. z being locked in a box with very little air for Omar Deghayes’ family has found it difficult to deal prolonged periods; with his long, indefinite captivity and the gruesome Amnesty International allegations of torture. For most of the three years, the government’s argument that the detainees have their only contact with Omar Deghayes has been no substantive rights, and held that the detainees had through heavily censored letters delivered by the Red the US constitutional right not to be deprived of liberty Cross. Omar Deghayes’ wife is distraught, and Omar without due process of law. The government is seeking Deghayes has not seen his son, who is now three, to have a higher court, the US Court of Appeals for the since he was a couple of months old. District of Columbia Circuit, resolve the difference of Omar Deghayes’ family is convinced this is a opinion between the two judges in its favour. Mean- case of mistaken identity. Omar Deghayes’ name while, the legal limbo of the detainees continues, with appeared on the FBI’s Most Wanted list, and the none having had the lawfulness of his detention accompanying picture was taken from a training judicially reviewed. video of a Chechen separatist group. According to Whatever the Court of Appeals decides, the case the family, the person in the video looks nothing is likely to be sent for appeal to the US Supreme like Omar Deghayes, a view supported by facial Court. This would keep the detainees in their legal recognition experts. limbo and leave the lawfulness of their detention unreviewed by the courts. Legal issues In June 2004 the US Supreme Court ruled, in Citizenship Rasul v Bush, that the federal courts have jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus petitions from foreign nationals “The biggest fear is if they detained in Guantánamo Bay. Yet none of the detainees send him back to Libya.” still held there has had the lawfulness of his detention Taher Deghayes, Omar Deghayes’ brother judicially reviewed. Instead, the administration set up Combatant Status Review Tribunals to determine if each Omar Deghayes’ situation is worsened by his detainee was an “enemy combatant”. For this process, citizenship status. He has had refugee status in the the detainee had no access to secret evidence used UK since 1987, and his family are all British citizens. against him or to legal counsel. Meanwhile, the tribunals Omar Deghayes had applied for citizenship, but were allowed to draw on evidence extracted under missed an interview because he was abroad. The torture or other ill-treatment. UK has argued that under international law it can Omar Deghayes was notified that one of these only intervene on behalf of British citizens. Omar tribunals had found him to be an “enemy Deghayes still has a Libyan passport, which means combatant”, and that “the United States may it is left to the Libyan government, the same continue to detain you”. government that executed his father and threatened After the June 2004 ruling, lawyers representing Omar Deghayes with torture, to make diplomatic Guantánamo detainees filed habeas corpus petitions representations on his behalf. with the US District Court in Washington DC. The first This raises the concern that, if released from judge on the DC District Court to interpret the Rasul v Guantánamo Bay, the US authorities will send Bush decision, Judge Richard Leon, ruled in favour of Omar Deghayes to Libya where he will be at risk the executive authority of the US President during war- of further torture. One of the Libyan agents who time, holding that the Guantánamo detainees had no interrogated him in Guantánamo Bay allegedly said: right to challenge the lawfulness of their detention. “You will be brought to judgement in Libya. In here Two weeks later, Federal District Judge Joyce I cannot do anything but if I meet you [later] I will Hens Green gave a different opinion. She rejected kill you.” TAKE ACTION FOR OOMMAARR DDEEGGHHAAYYEESS Write to the US authorities: z Stating that Omar Deghayes and all other detainees must be given full and fair trials or released; z Calling for a full and impartial investigation into the allegations of torture and ill-treatment of Omar Deghayes while in US custody, and that all those found responsible will be brought to justice; z Reminding the US authorities that they cannot forcibly return anyone to a country where they might be tortured or ill-treated; z Calling for the US government to set up a commission of inquiry into all aspects of the USA’s “war on terror” detention policies and practices. Write to the UK authorities: z Calling on them to make representations on behalf of Omar Deghayes as a British resident with refugee status, and ensure that his family are being kept fully informed of his legal status and welfare; z Seeking assurances that the allegations of torture and ill-treatment while in US custody have been raised with the US authorities; z Calling on them to make sure that Omar Deghayes is not transferred to a country where he will face further torture and ill-treatment; z Seeking assurances that he may be returned to the UK, and that he will be released or charged with a recognizably criminal offence and given a full and fair trial, and that evidence gained through torture would not be used against him. WRITE TO: Alberto Gonzales Rt Hon Jack Straw MP Attorney General Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs US Department of Justice Foreign and Commonwealth Office 950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW King Charles Street Washington, DC 20530-0001, USA London, SW1A 2AH Fax: + 1 202 307 6777 United Kingdom Email: [email protected] If you want to take further action on this case, please contact your national AI office Amnesty International, International Secretariat, Peter Benenson House, 1 Easton Street, London WC1X 0DW, UK.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Who Are the Guantánamo Detainees? CASE SHEET 15 Yemeni National: Abdulsalam Al-Hela 11 January 2005 AI Index: AMR 51/206/2005
    USA Who are the Guantánamo detainees? CASE SHEET 15 Yemeni national: Abdulsalam al-Hela 11 January 2005 AI Index: AMR 51/206/2005 Full name: Abdulsalam al-Hela Nationality: Yemeni Occupation: Businessman Age: 34 Family status: Married with two children “Contact with him suddenly stopped…when we called him, his mobile phone rang but there was no answer”. Abdulsalam al-Hela’s brother, talking of his brother’s “disappearance” Abdulsalam al-Hela is a businessman from Sana’a, Yemen. In September 2002 he is believed to have travelled to Egypt for a meeting with Arab Contractors, an Egyptian construction firm for which he was the Yemeni representative. While there he phoned his family regularly. On the last occasion he called, his brother stated that he sounded nervous and worried, and that he had to go to a meeting. He was unwilling to say any more over the telephone. It was last time Abdulsalam al-Hela’s family would hear from him for over a year, and then it would be through a letter smuggled out of a prison in Afghanistan. Abdulsalam al-Hela appears to have been abducted by the Egyptian authorities and handed over to US officials. Abdulsalam al-Hela is convinced that the USA and Egypt conspired to lure him to Egypt with the express intention of “disappearing” him in order to interrogate him about his contacts in Yemen. As a result he became a victim of the US practice of rendition and secret detention, being taken from country to country without any recourse to a court, access to lawyers or contact with his family.
    [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]
  • Omar Khadr's Legal Odyssey: the Erasure of Child Soldier As a Legal
    GEORGIA JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW(DO NOT DELETE) 4/18/2018 1:10 PM OMAR KHADR’S LEGAL ODYSSEY: THE ERASURE OF CHILD SOLDIER AS A LEGAL CATEGORY M. Mehdi Ali* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 348 II. FACTS .............................................................................................. 349 III. LEGAL BACKGROUND ..................................................................... 351 IV. LEGAL ARGUMENTS ........................................................................ 359 V. CONCLUSION ................................................................................... 367 * J.D., Stanford Law School; M.A., Stanford University; B.A., Stanford University. I am deeply grateful to my parents, Nisar and Mehnaz, and my wife, Sarah, for always encouraging me throughout my academic career. I am also thankful to my siblings, Hadi and Heraa, for their unwavering support, and for their excellent comments and suggestions to an earlier draft of this Article. Lastly, it was a great privilege to work with the editors at the Georgia Journal of International and Comparative Law, and I am indebted to them for their hard work and thoughtful feedback. 347 GEORGIA JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW (DO NOT DELETE) 4/18/2018 1:10 PM 348 GA. J. INT’L & COMP. L. [Vol. 46:347 I. INTRODUCTION After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, U.S. officials warned the American public that they were facing a “new kind of war.”1 The scale of the attacks, conducted by a foreign enemy on the American homeland, allowed the administration to exceed institutional restraints built into the political system. In the name of security, the government launched two wars, rounded up thousands of individuals on the basis of national origin, and dramatically altered long-held notions of liberty and due process.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Court Eastern District Of
    Case 2:15-cv-00286-JLQ ECF No. 239 filed 08/07/17 PageID.9393 Page 1 of 43 1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 4 5 SULEIMAN ABDULLAH SALIM, et al., ) ) 6 ) No. CV-15-0286-JLQ Plaintiffs, ) 7 ) MEMORANDUM OPINION ) RE: MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY 8 vs. ) JUDGMENT ) 9 ) JAMES E. MITCHELL and JOHN ) 10 JESSEN, ) ) 11 Defendants. ) ___________________________________ ) 12 BEFORE THE COURT are Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 13 169), Plaintiffs’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 178), and Defendants’ 14 Motion to Exclude (ECF No. 198). Response and Reply briefs have been filed and 15 considered. The parties have submitted a voluminous record of over 4,000 pages of 16 evidentiary exhibits. The court heard oral argument on the Motions on July 28, 2017. 17 James Smith, Henry Schuelke, III, Brian Paszamant, and Christopher Tompkins appeared 18 for Defendants James Mitchell and John Jessen. Hina Shamsi, Steven Watt, Dror Ladin, 19 Lawrence Lustberg, and Jeffry Finer appeared for Plaintiffs Suleiman Abdullah Salim, 20 Mohamed Ahmed Ben Soud, and Obaid Ullah. The court issued its preliminary oral 21 ruling. This Opinion memorializes and supplements the court’s oral ruling. 22 I. Introduction and Factual Allegations from Complaint 23 The Complaint in this matter alleges Plaintiffs Suleiman Abdullah Salim (“Salim”), 24 Mohamed Ahmed Ben Soud (“Soud”), and Gul Rahman (“Rahman”)1(collectively herein 25 Plaintiffs) were the victims of psychological and physical torture. Plaintiffs are all 26 27 1Obaid Ullah is the personal representative of the Estate of Gul Rahman. 28 ORDER - 1 Case 2:15-cv-00286-JLQ ECF No.
    [Show full text]
  • Enemy Combatants, the Courts, and the Constitution
    Oklahoma Law Review Volume 56 Number 3 1-1-2003 Enemy Combatants, the Courts, and the Constitution Roberto Iraola Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr Part of the Criminal Procedure Commons, International Law Commons, and the Military, War, and Peace Commons Recommended Citation Roberto Iraola, Enemy Combatants, the Courts, and the Constitution, 56 OKLA. L. REV. 565 (2003), https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/olr/vol56/iss3/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Oklahoma Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OKLAHOMA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 56 FALL 2003 NUMBER 3 ENEMY COMBATANTS, THE COURTS, AND THE CONSTITUTION ROBERTO IRAOLA* L Introduction Three days after the September 11 attacks, when al Qaeda terrorists hijacked and crashed four commercial jetliners into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the Pennsylvania countryside, killing over 3100 people,' Congress passed a joint resolution authorizing the use of military force against those responsible.2 President George W. Bush responded by sending troops to Afghanistan to fight al Qaeda and its supporter, the Taliban regime.' During the military operation that ensued, thousands of prisoners were captured by allied and American forces.4 Many of those captured are * Senior Advisor to the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Law Enforcement and Security, Department of the Interior. J.D., 1983, Catholic University Law School. The views expressed herein are solely those of the author.
    [Show full text]
  • Al-Qaeda & Taliban Unlawful Combatant
    AL-QAEDA & TALIBAN UNLAWFUL COMBATANT DETAINEES,..., 55 A.F. L. Rev. 1 55 A.F. L. Rev. 1 Air Force Law Review 2004 Article AL-QAEDA & TALIBAN UNLAWFUL COMBATANT DETAINEES, UNLAWFUL BELLIGERENCY, AND THE INTERNATIONAL LAWS OF ARMED CONFLICT Lieutenant Colonel (s) Joseph P. “Dutch” Bialkea1 Copyright © 2004 by Lieutenant Colonel (s) Joseph P. “Dutch” Bialke I. INTRODUCTION International Obligations & Responsibilities and the International Rule of Law The United States (U.S.) is currently detaining several hundred al-Qaeda and Taliban unlawful enemy combatants from more than 40 countries at a multi-million dollar maximum-security detention facility at the U.S. Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. These enemy detainees were captured while engaged in hostilities against the U.S. and its allies during the post-September 11, 2001 international armed conflict centered primarily in Afghanistan. The conflict now involves an ongoing concerted international campaign in collective self-defense against a common stateless enemy dispersed throughout the world. Domestic and international human rights organizations and other groups have criticized the U.S.,1 arguing that al-Qaeda and Taliban detainees in Cuba should be granted Geneva Convention III prisoner of war (POW)2status. They contend broadly that pursuant to the international laws of armed conflict (LOAC), combatants captured during armed conflict must be treated equally and conferred POWstatus. However, no such blanket obligation exists in international law. There is no legal or moral equivalence in LOAC between lawful combatants and unlawful combatants, or between lawful belligerency *2 and unlawful belligerency (also referred to as lawful combatantry and unlawful combatantry).
    [Show full text]
  • E-Bulletin on Counter-Terrorism and Human Rights
    International Commission of Jurists E-BULLETIN ON COUNTER-TERRORISM & HUMAN RIGHTS No. 59, January 2012 AFRICA & MIDDLE EAST Ethiopia: Swedish journalists convicted under draconian Anti-Terrorism Law Ethiopia: Five people, including journalists, convicted under repressive Anti-Terrorism Law Burundi: Journalist arrested and charged for terrorism for interview of rebel leader Kenya: Wave of arbitrary arrests hits Kenya after terrorist attacks and warnings Egypt: Military Council ends emergency law but not for “thugs” Syria: President imposes the death penalty on “terrorist” weapon smugglers Iraq/Turkey: Anti-terrorism airstrike kills 35 smugglers; authorities admit “mistake” AMERICAS USA: Calls for closure multiply, as Guantánamo detention centre turns 10 USA: Indefnite detention of terrorists signed into law with “serious reservations” by US President USA: US President asked to justify US drones strategy by NGO USA: Federal court dismisses Guantánamo torture damage lawsuits USA: CIA torture interrogations whistleblower prosecuted by Justice Department USA: Remedies for torture in court are matters for Congress, rules Appeals Court USA/Italy: No obligation to give immunity to Abu Omar kidnapper, says federal court USA/Afghanistan: Governmental report accuses US of ill-treatment of prisoners in Bagram Canada: More than two years after clearing by Federal Court, Abousfan Abdelrazik de- listed by UN Chile: President accuses indigenous people of “terrorist” arson without evidence Argentina: Generic “terrorism” aggravating circumstance introduced
    [Show full text]
  • Decision--English
    ***UNOFFIAL TRANSLATION***§ Proceedings: Preliminary Investigations 150/09 – N Offense: Torture and others ADMINISTRACION CENTRAL COURT FOR PRELIMINARY CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS DE JUSTICIA NUMBER FIVE NATIONAL COURT MADRID DECISION IN MADRID, THE TWENTY-SEVENTH OF JANUARY, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN FACTS FIRST. – The facts under investigation are defined in the April 27, 2009 decision, completed, and with regard to Iaheen Ikarrien with the petition of complaint dated September 24, 2009, which was accepted October 29, 2009, according to the April 27 Decision: FIRST. -Indictment 25/03 was initiated in this Court against Hamed Abderrahman Ahmed, Ikassrien Lahcen, Jamiel Abdul Latiff Al Banna and Omar Deghayes for alleged offenses of Involvement in the Terrorist Organization Al Qaeda. 1) Subsequently, the Criminal Division of the National Court handed down a sentence on 10/04/05, condemnatory against the first of those cited above (Hamed Abderraman Ahmed), even though the sentence of the Supreme Court dated 06/22/06 annulled [the lower court decision], acquitting the indicted party. 2) In the second case (Ikassrien Lahcen), the Criminal Division of the National Court handed down a sentence on 10/10/2006, acquitting the indicted party. 3) and 4) In the case of Mr. Al Banna and Mr. Deghayes, this Court issued European Orders for Detention dated 05/24/04, orders that were repeated on the 14 and 19 of December 2007 before the imminent arrival in the United Kingdom of said indicted § Translation provided by the Center for Constitutional Rights, www.ccrjustice.org. Page numbering differs from the original Spanish version. Please send any comments to: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • Military Commissions: a Place Outside the Law’S Reach
    MILITARY COMMISSIONS: A PLACE OUTSIDE THE LAW’S REACH JANET COOPER ALEXANDER* “We have turned our backs on the law and created what we believed was a place outside the law’s reach.” Colonel Morris D. Davis, former chief prosecutor of the Guantánamo military commissions1 Ten years after 9/11, it is hard to remember that the decision to treat the attacks as the trigger for taking the country to a state of war was not inevitable. Previous acts of terrorism had been investigated and prosecuted as crimes, even when they were carried out or planned by al Qaeda.2 But on September 12, 2001, President Bush pronounced the attacks “acts of war,”3 and he repeatedly defined himself as a “war president.”4 The war * Frederick I. Richman Professor of Law, Stanford Law School. I would like to thank participants at the 2011 Childress Lecture at Saint Louis University School of Law and a Stanford Law School faculty workshop for their comments, and Nicolas Martinez for invaluable research assistance. 1 Ed Vulliamy, Ten Years On, Former Chief Prosecutor at Guantanamo Slams ‘Camp of Torture,’ OBSERVER, Oct. 30, 2011, at 29. 2 Previous al Qaeda attacks that were prosecuted as crimes include the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the Manila Air (or Bojinka) plot to blow up a dozen jumbo jets, and the 1998 embassy bombings in East Africa. Mary Jo White, Prosecuting Terrorism in New York, MIDDLE E.Q., Spring 2001, at 11, 11–14; see also Christopher S. Wren, U.S. Jury Convicts 3 in a Conspiracy to Bomb Airliners, N.Y.
    [Show full text]
  • Download This Article As A
    YOU SAY DEFENDANT, I SAY COMBATANT: OPPORTUNISTIC TREATMENT OF TERRORISM SUSPECTS HELD IN THE UNITED STATES AND THE NEED FOR DUE PROCESSAI JESSELYN A. RADACK* "[S]hould the Government determine that the defendant has engaged in conduct proscribed by the offenses now listed.., the United States may... capture and detain the defendant as an unlawful enemy com- 1 batant." - Plea Agreement of "American Taliban" John Walker Lindh "You are not an enemy combatant-you are a terrorist. You are not a 2 soldier in any way-you are a terrorist." - U.S. District Court Judge William G. Young to "shoe bomber" Richard Reid "[Enemy combatants] are not there because they stole a car or robbed a bank .... They are not common criminals. They're enemy combatants and terrorists who are being detained for acts of war against our coun- 3 try and this is why different rules have to apply." - U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld A EDITOR'S NOTE: After this article was completely written and accepted for publication, the Supreme Court ruled in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, as author Radack proposed with great foresight, that the Mathews v. Eldridge balancing test provides the appropriate analysis for the type of process that is constitutionally due to a detainee seeking to challenge his or her classification as an "enemy combatant." See Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 124 S.Ct. 2633 (2004). *A.B., Brown University, 1992; J.D., Yale Law School, 1995. The author is Founder and Execu- tive Director of the Coalition for Civil Rights and Democratic Liberties (http://www.cradl.info).
    [Show full text]
  • Guantánamo and Its Aftermath
    Guantánamo and Its Aftermath u.s. detention and interrogation practices and their impact on former detainees November 2008 Human Rights Center International Human Rights Law Clinic In partnership with University of California, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley Center for Constitutional Rights Guantánamo and Its Aftermath u.s. detention and interrogation practices and their impact on former detainees Laurel E. Fletcher Eric Stover with Stephen Paul Smith Alexa Koenig Zulaikha Aziz Alexis Kelly Sarah Staveteig Nobuko Mizoguchi November 2008 Human Rights Center University of California, Berkeley International Human Rights Law Clinic University of California, Berkeley, School of Law In partnership with Center for Constitutional Rights ISBN# 978-0-9760677-3-3 Human Rights Center and International Human Rights Law Clinic, University of California, Berkeley Cover photos: Louie Palu/ZUMA Design: Melanie Doherty Design, San Francisco Human Rights Center, University of California, Berkeley The Human Rights Center promotes human rights and international justice worldwide and trains the next generation of human rights researchers and advocates. We believe that sustainable peace and devel- opment can be achieved only through efforts to prevent human rights abuses and hold those responsible for such crimes accountable. We use empirical research methods to investigate and expose serious viola- tions of human rights and international humanitarian law. In our studies and reports, we recommend specific policy measures that should be taken by governments and international organizations to protect vulnerable populations in times of war and political and social upheaval. For more information, please visit hrc.berkeley.edu. International Human Rights Law Clinic, University of California, Berkeley, School of Law The International Human Rights Law Clinic (IHRLC) designs and implements innovative human rights projects to advance the struggle for justice on behalf of individuals and marginalized communities through advocacy, research, and policy development.
    [Show full text]
  • Fabricating Terrorism British Complicity in Renditions and Torture TABLE of CONTENTS
    Fabricating Terrorism British Complicity in Renditions and Torture TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD by Geoffrey Bindman....................................................................................................................3 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................4 British Complicity in Rendition and Torture Overview....................................................................................7 PART ONE - RENDITIONS ....................................................................................................................................10 1. Definitions........................................................................................................................................................10 2. The responsibilities of British authorities........................................................................................................14 3. Case studies ..................................................................................................................................................21 Case 1 - Binyam Mohammed Al Habashi ......................................................................................................21 Case 2 - Jamal Al Harith ..................................................................................................................................24 Case 3 - Jamil El Banna and Bisher Al Rawi ..................................................................................................26
    [Show full text]