Subscribe
Editor’s note: This is the first in a two part series concerning the Joint Task Force Guantanamo commissions. The Wire staff will review the outcome of these commissions in next week’s edition.
GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba - The military commissions building at the U.S. Naval Station Guantanamo Bay has hosted legal proceedings related to the future trials of Khalid Shaikh Mohammad, Walid Muhammad Salih Mubarak Bin ‘Attash, Ramzi Bin al Shibh, Ali Abdul Aziz Ali, and Mustafa Ahmed Adam al Hasawi, otherwise known as the “9/11 Five,” for the past two weeks. They are being tried together for their respective roles in bringing about the attacks that took place on 9/11, although each has their own legal defense team.
The courtroom is nearly twice the size of a normal U.S. criminal courtroom. It has white ceiling tiles and plain white walls. Military service emblems hang behind the judge’s bench. There is a jury box on the right, but it remains empty for now, as legal teams work on preliminary legal questions for the judge. It is too soon to select a panel, the military term for a jury.
Directly in front of the judge are desks for the court personnel. There are two sets of wooden desks. On the left, there are six rows which seat a group of legal defense personnel, and on the right, the prosecution staff fills one to two seats in each of their four rows.
Each row on the left represents one of these detainees, who are ushered to their seats and then received by their respective attorneys. Both the defense and prosecution teams consist of civilians and military personnel from all service branches. Some of the women wear scarves while others the full jilbab.
Many of the legal personnel wear their military uniforms and the rest wear courtroom-appropriate suits. Some people stand, some sit, but all wait for the military judge to enter the courtroom. As a visitor, you would sit in the gallery in back of the courtroom, behind three panes of glass designed to muffle all sound from the courtroom. Other visitors may include some of the victims’ family members, media, and representatives from non-governmental organizations, who all come to observe the proceedings. They listen in on the proceedings through a speaker system with a 40-second time delay to protect classified information from inadvertent disclosure. The door opens to let the court support personnel in, this is the cue that the judge is about to take to the bench.
“All arise,” said a court officer as the judge entered. Army Col. James L. Pohl, presiding judge for commissions took his seat, attached his microphone to his robe and called the commission to order. He summarized where the court proceedings left off during the previous session and moved forward on the agenda. He will decide what charges will eventually be provided to a panel to decide guilt or innocence.
According to the Office of Military Commissions website, www.mc.mil, following the 9/11 attacks, President George W. Bush issued a Military Order directing the Secretary of Defense to establish military commissions to try certain individuals. From 2002 to 2004, the secretary of defense issued instructions for how to try individuals brought forth by the commission. Following that, Congress enacted the Military Commissions Act of 2006. The MCA authorized the trial by military commission of alien unlawful enemy combatants engaged in hostilities against the U.S. for violations of the law of war and other offenses triable by military commission. In 2009, the Military Commissions Act of 2009 was passed by Congress. It remains in effect today. One of the missions of the Joint Task Force Guantanamo is to provide support to the OMC, which includes the commissions process.
“The OMC, which is part of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, has been designed to bring certain criminal cases to court,” said the OMC south executive director. “It has four major sections with competing interests: The Office of Convening Authority, the Office of the Chief Prosecutor, the Military Commissions Defense Office, and the Office of the Trial Judiciary.”
Think about checks and balances: The competing interests are the prosecutor’s office, which present the cases on behalf of the people of the U.S. to seek convictions. The defense office, seeks to gain favorable outcomes for their clients. The trial judiciary impartially presides over the commissions, ensuring all processes are followed in order that a fair hearing is afforded to the detainees.
Back in the courtroom, during day five of the current commissions events, lawyers for the defense and prosecution stepped up to the podium to argue their motions and objections in order for Pohl to rule.
The judge issued his determination on one of the many motions currently before the court and closed the session. “All arise,” said the court officer as the judge walked toward the exit.
Everyone stood as Pohl exited the court. Legal counsel gathered to speak, and some exited the building. Visitors were escorted out through the maze of security checkpoints through which they entered.
This series of commissions events for the 9/11 Five: Khalid Shaikh Mohammad et al. have ended for the day. While there will be no judgment against the accused during these two weeks, some progress has been made. Pohl said several times during the proceedings that they are “prepping the field forward” for how the commissions will take place in the future.
| Date Taken: | 10.30.2015 |
| Date Posted: | 03.01.2016 11:30 |
| Story ID: | 190663 |
| Location: | GUANTANAMO BAY, CU |
| Web Views: | 34 |
| Downloads: | 0 |
This work, An observer’s perspective on the commissions process, by 2LT Christopher Garibay, identified by DVIDS, must comply with the restrictions shown on https://www.dvidshub.net/about/copyright.
