• Posted on Wednesday, September 26, 2012
  • Bookmark and Share
  • email
  • |
  • print
  • |
  • rss

tool name

close
tool goes here

Pentagon prosecutors moving away from gag order on 9/11 suspects at Guantanamo

email this story print this story jump to comments

Defense lawyers in the Sept. 11 case said Tuesday that the Pentagon prosecutor is backing away from a national security doctrine that reflexively gags anything the accused 9/11 plotters say to anyone at Guantánamo.

At issue is the controversial theory of “presumptive classification.” Because the accused 9/11 conspirators were held for years in secret custody by the CIA, and are now confined to a secret prison at Guantánamo, anything they say starts off classified as a national security secret.

They are facing a death-penalty trial at the Guantánamo war court, and their defense lawyers have argued that the interpretation has straight-jacketed their trial preparation.

Moreover, the American Civil Liberties Union disputes the concept of “presumptive classification” as being at odds with the public’s right to know what happened to the captives in secret U.S. custody. Agents seized the men in 2002 and 2003, and then turned them over to the military at Guantánamo in 2006.

“Today, the prosecution in the 9/11 military commission filed a document retreating from its argument for ‘presumptive classification’ of all detainee statements, regardless of their topic,” said James Connell, lawyer for Ammar al Baluchi, the nephew of alleged mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. “Defense attorneys have vigorously opposed the practice of presumptive classification.”

A military judge is set to consider the legality of the doctrine during hearings at Guantánamo Oct. 15-19.

The chief prosecutor declined to say whether or how he had retreated from the doctrine in the filing. Under war court rules, it was filed under seal — lawyers get to read it, the public cannot — until U.S. intelligence authorities decide which portions to redact.

“The government is committed to considering every reasonable and appropriate measure that could help facilitate the attorney-client relationship,” the prosecutor, Army Brig. Gen. Mark Martins, said in statement.

Martins’ remarks suggest that defense lawyers will now be able to discuss certain off-limit topics with the accused terrorists. Left unclear was whether the lawyers will now be allowed to talk publicly about their conversations with their clients.

Attorney Cheryl Bohrmann, defending alleged al Qaida lieutenant Walid bin Attash, explained the rules this way in May: “Everything is presumptively Top Secret. So if my client had a tuna fish sandwich for lunch, I couldn’t tell you that.”

  • Bookmark and Share
  • email
  • |
  • print
  • |
  • rss

tool name

close
tool goes here
JOIN THE DISCUSSION

We welcome comments. To post one, you must sign in using either your McClatchyDC login or your login for Facebook, Twitter or Disqus. Just click the appropriate box below.

Please keep your comment civil, short and to the point. Obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. If you find a comment abusive or inappropriate, please flag it for the moderator by placing your cursor on the comment, then clicking the "flag" link that appears. Thanks for your participation.

Stay Connected

Sign up for email newsletters RSS
Follow us on your iPhone Follow us on your Android device
Follow us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Follow us using Google Currents

SPECIAL REPORT: BEYOND THE LAW

guantanamo
  • An eight-month McClatchy investigation of the detention system created after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks found that the U.S. imprisoned innocent men, subjected them to abuse, stripped them of their legal rights and allowed Islamic militants to turn the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba into a school for jihad.