Noting in files shows that the US army quickly concluded that the children were innocent. He said one of these children, Yasser, 16, had committed suicide.
Quoting doctor at the Camp Delta, a temporary hospital inside Guantanamo, he said many detainees were suffering from acute depression, and many attempted suicide. Obaidullah was 19 when he was arrested from his home in eastern Afghanistan in He completed 12 years in prison. They also found a borrowed van in the compound, with bloodstains on the back seat. Derek Poteet, a US Marine, who visited Afghanistan thrice to collect evidence, found something shocking.
Poteet said two days before the boy was arrested, he had borrowed the van to transport his pregnant wife to the hospital. She went into labor on the way and delivered a girl in the van.
Hence, the bloodstains were on the seat. Nazakat said the US military officials acknowledged that some prisoners were simply at the wrong place at the wrong time.
In the fog of war, many innocents became suspects and terrorists. Some were arrested for wearing the Casio FW watch, which was seen as a sign of al-Qaeda. The CIA officials concluded that bin Laden had trained recruits to use this watch as timers in bombs.
At least 22 Uyghur detainees at Gitmo had also a similar story. Detainees are required to use the lawyers assigned to them. They are not allowed to see all the evidence against them. Only two-thirds of a jury is required to convict, and even in cases of acquittal, release is not guaranteed. Many of the detainees at Guantanamo were first held in black sites by the CIA or elsewhere by the US military and were tortured before being transferred to Guantanamo.
Those records are largely still secret and lawyers who represent detainees are required to enter non-disclosure agreements that prevent them from publicly describing the torture suffered by their clients. In June, a military judge for the first time publicly agreed to allow information obtained through torture to be used in a military case against Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri , a Saudi accused of planning the bomb attack on the USS Cole in that killed 17 US Navy sailors.
The US government has acknowledged torture took place in a number of cases, among them that of Abu Zubaydah , a Palestinian man captured by the US in Pakistan and tortured for years in a series of secret CIA prisons, as detailed in a US Senate report.
Another is Mohammed al-Qahtani, a Saudi whose military charges were dismissed because he had been tortured at Guantanamo but who remains imprisoned despite mental illness.
Human rights advocates and lawyers for detainees say the Biden administration will be under increasing pressure to bring Guantanamo to a close. The White House announced in February that it is conducting an internal review of how to close Guantanamo.
Biden can ask Congress to repeal its prohibitions on Guantanamo detainees entering the US for purposes of serving prison terms. Biden is considering naming a special envoy at the US Department of State for closing Guantanamo, a position created by Obama but eliminated during the Trump administration. The Pakistani prisoner has been held there since on suspected ties to al-Qaeda, although he has never been charged.
Rumsfeld: Yes, indeed, individually. Q: So you know which are al Qaeda and which are Taliban? And there they will go through a longer process of interrogation. Rumsfeld: Right. Footnotes omitted. In June , they decided to continue this task as a group because the situation falls under the scope of each of the mandates.
It is also based on information available in the public domain, including reports prepared by non-governmental organizations NGOs , information contained in declassified official United States documents and media reports. Although the United States is not a party to the Additional Protocols I and II to the Geneva Conventions, some of their provisions — in particular article 75 of Additional Protocol I — are regarded as applicable as they have been recognized as declaratory of customary international law.
The complementarity of international humanitarian law and human rights law The application of international humanitarian law and of international human rights law are not mutually exclusive, but are complementary. As stated by the Human Rights Committee in general comment No. It allows suspects to be detained indefinitely without charge or trial, or to be tried before a military commission.
Detention is not an act of punishment but of security and military necessity. Indeed, this principle encapsulates a fundamental difference between the laws of war and human rights law with regard to deprivation of liberty. In the context of armed conflicts covered by international humanitarian law, this rule constitutes the lex specialis justifying deprivation of liberty which would otherwise, under human rights law as enshrined by article 9 of ICCPR, constitute a violation of the right to personal liberty.
In this context, it is to be noted that the global struggle against international terrorism does not, as such, constitute an armed conflict for the purposes of the applicability of international humanitarian law. Once the international armed conflict has come to an end, prisoners of war and internees must be released, although prisoners of war and civilian internees against whom criminal proceedings for an indictable offence are pending may be detained until the end of such proceedings.
As the rationale for the detention of combatants not enjoying prisoner of war status is to prevent them from taking up arms against the detaining power again, the same rule should be applied to them. In other words, non-privileged belligerents must be released or charged once the international armed conflict is over.
The indefinite detention of prisoners of war and civilian internees for purposes of continued interrogation is inconsistent with the provisions of the Geneva Conventions. The Chairperson of the Working Group and the Special Rapporteur note that, while United States Armed Forces continue to be engaged in combat operations in Afghanistan as well as in other countries, they are not currently engaged in an international armed conflict between two Parties to the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions.
In the ongoing non-international armed conflicts involving United States forces, the lex specialis authorizing detention without respect for the guarantees set forth in article 9 of ICCPR therefore can no longer serve as a basis for that detention. The case of the six men of Algerian origin detained in Bosnia and Herzegovina in October is a well-known and well-documented example, but also numerous other detainees have been arrested under similar circumstances where international humanitarian law did not apply.
The legal provision allowing the United States to hold belligerents without charges or access to counsel for the duration of hostilities can therefore not be invoked to justify their detention. Indeed, international obligations regarding the struggle against terrorism might make the apprehension and detention of some of these persons a duty for all States.
Such deprivation of liberty is, however, governed by human rights law […]. This includes the right to challenge the legality of detention before a court in proceedings affording fundamental due process rights, such as guarantees of independence and impartiality, the right to be informed of the reasons for arrest, the right to be informed about the evidence underlying these reasons, the right to assistance by counsel and the right to a trial within a reasonable time or to release.
Any person deprived of his or her liberty must enjoy continued and effective access to habeas corpus proceedings, and any limitations to this right should be viewed with utmost concern. It is important to recall the context of the Guantanamo detentions. The war against Al Qaida and its affiliates is a real not a rhetorical war. The United States is engaged in a continuing armed conflict against Al Qaida, and customary law of war applies to the conduct of that war and related detention operations.
The Report acknowledges that both lawful and unlawful combatants may be detained without charges, trial or counsel until the end of active hostilities […]. The Report also acknowledges that the law applicable in armed conflict is the lex specialis […].
This is incorrect: the existence of an armed conflict is determined inter alia by the intensity, and scope and duration of hostilities, not by whether the situation is afforded Geneva Convention protection. Prisoners of war may be detained until the end of active hostilities, and in recognition of battlefield conditions, investigation and prosecution of combatant detainees is not required unless they are charged with a crime. The Report does not question this well-established precept of international humanitarian law, yet nevertheless assails the United States for applying a similar detention regime to unlawful combatants, who are not eligible for POW status due to their failure to heed the basic law of war.
The approach called for by the Report is unprecedented, and indeed would turn international humanitarian law on its head by affording greater protections to unlawful combatants than to lawful ones. This is not, and cannot be, the law. To the contrary, it is the view of the United States Government that we cannot have an international legal system in which honorable soldiers who abide by the law of armed conflict and are captured on the battlefield may be detained and held until the end of a war without access to courts or counsel, but terrorist combatants who violate those very laws must be given special privileges or released and allowed to continue their belligerent or terrorist activities.
Such a legal regime would signal to the international community that it is acceptable for armies to behave like terrorists. Armed Forces, ordered the U. Armed Forces to initiate action in self-defense against the terrorists and the Taliban regime that harbored them in Afghanistan. The United States was joined in the operation by the United Kingdom and coalition forces, comprising as of December 5, international military personnel from 32 countries.
Al Qaida also had orchestrated the bombings in August of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that killed at least individuals and injured more than 5, Al Qaida trained, equipped, and supported fighters and have planned and executed attacks around the world against the United States on a scale that far exceeds criminal activity.
Despite coalition successes in Afghanistan and around the world, the war is far from over. The Al Qaida network today is a multinational enterprise that has a global reach that exceeds that of any previous transnational group.
The continuing military operations undertaken against the United States and its nationals by the Al Qaida organization both before and after September 11 necessitate a military response by the armed forces of the United States.
To conclude otherwise is to permit an armed group to wage war unlawfully against a sovereign state while precluding that state from using lawful measures to defend itself. During the course of hostilities in Afghanistan, the United States military and its allies have captured or secured the surrender of thousands of individuals fighting as part of the Al Qaida terrorist network or who supported, protected or defended the Al Qaida terrorists. These were individuals captured in connection with the ongoing armed conflict.
Their capture and detention were lawful and necessary to prevent them from returning to the battlefield or reengaging in armed conflict. Examples of detainees held under U.
Terrorists who taught or received training on arms and explosives, surveillance, and interrogation resistance techniques at Al Qaida camps. Terrorists who continue to express their desire to kill Americans if released.
Terrorists who have sworn personal allegiance to Usama bin Laden. Terrorists linked to several Al Qaida operational plans, including the targeting of U. Representative examples of specific Guantanamo detainees include: An Al Qaida explosives trainer who has provided information on the September assassination of Northern Alliance leader Masood.
An individual captured on the battlefield with links to a financier of the September llth plots and who attempted to enter the United States in August to meet hijacker Mohammed Atta. Two individuals associated with senior Al Qaida members developing remotely detonated explosive devices for use against U. An Al Qaida member who plotted to attack oil tankers in the Persian Gulf. An individual who served as a bodyguard for Usama Bin Laden.
An Al Qaida member who served as an explosives trainer for Al Qaida and designed a prototype shoe bomb and a magnetic mine. An individual who trained Al Qaida associates in the use of explosives and worked on a plot to use cell phones to detonate bombs. Lex specialis The law of armed conflict is the lex specialis governing the international law obligations of the United States regarding the status and treatment of persons detained during armed conflict — a legal principle with which the Report agrees.
To be sure, many of the principles of humane treatment found in the law of armed conflict find similar expression in human rights law. Further, some of the principles of the law of armed conflict may be explicated by analogy or by reference to human rights principles.
However, similarity of principles in certain respects does not mean identical or controlling principles, doctrine, or jurisprudence. For instance, application of principles developed in the context of human rights law would allow all enemy combatants detained in armed conflict to have access to courts to challenge their detention.
This result is directly at odds with well-settled law of war that would throw the centuries-old, unchallenged practice of detaining enemy combatants into complete disarray. Indeed, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has recognized that international humanitarian law the law of war is the lex specialis that may govern the issues surrounding Guantanamo detention. The law of war allows the United States — and any other country engaged in armed conflict — to hold enemy combatants without charges or access to counsel for the duration of active hostilities.
Sensitive to this reality, the United States evaluates each Guantanamo detainee individually, to determine whether he no longer poses a serious danger of returning to hostilities against us. This concept of an individual analysis has some support in historical practices that contemplate parole, as well as releases of enemy combatants held for extended periods, based on individualized determinations that the combatant does not present a continuing threat.
Discussion I. Qualification of the conflict How would you qualify the conflict in Afghanistan between the Taliban and the United States in ? Does the non-recognition of the Taliban regime as the legitimate government of Afghanistan influence the qualification of the conflict Document I?
Can the Taliban be seen as a rebel group opposing an internationally recognized government, even though they had de facto control over most of the country, including the capital? Does IHL deal with issues of recognition? How would you qualify the fighting between al-Qaeda and the United States in Afghanistan?
As an international police operation? An armed conflict? An international armed conflict? Does IHL apply to that fighting? Does it apply because there is an armed conflict between al-Qaeda and the United States? Or because there already is an armed conflict on the territory of Afghanistan between the United States and the Taliban?
How would you qualify the conflict in Afghanistan between the Taliban, on the one hand, and the United States and its NATO allies, on the other, in ? The Pakistani prisoner has been held there since on suspected ties to al-Qaeda, although he has never been charged.
New book by Washington Post reporters claims Trump asked if detainment camp could be used to house infected. Moroccan prisoner Abdul Latif Nasser had been held by the US since without being charged with a crime.
By Mohammed Haddad. Published On 7 Sep Where is Guantanamo Bay? Detainees by nationality Since January 11, , at least detainees from 48 countries have been held in Guantanamo Bay. What happened to the detainees? More from News.
0コメント