Project Hamad Blog » 2007

November 2007

Hamad granted new Tribunal

Adel Hamad’s lawyers have been working on two fronts simultaneously on his behalf. The first front, which we have discussed previously here at Project Hamad, is the attempt to expedite his release. It involved traveling to Sudan to discuss his situation with the Sudanese government. It prompted the Sudanese State Minister for Foreign Affairs to travel to the U.S. on behalf of the Sudanese detainees. It also raised the profile of Adel Hamad in his home country. During a visit to the Sudanese Embassy in Washington D.C., William Teesdale was shown a United States government document revealing that Hamad was approved for transfer to Sudan in November 2005, now two years ago, a fact that the U.S. government kept from Hamad’s own defense team.

The second front is the attempt to clear his name and remove the designation of “enemy combatant.” The Federal Public Defenders Office of Oregon filed a formal petition under the Detainee Treatment Act in D.C. court of appeals to challenge Mr. Hamad’s indefinite detention. They obtained a statement from the Army Major who sat on Hamad’s CSRT (and the CSRT of 48 others), calling his detention “unconscionable”. This Major gave sworn testimony in D.C. district court that was not only damning to the legitimacy of Adel Hamad’s detention, but to the entire Tribunal process’ legitimacy. Among other things, he cited that evidence in favor of detainees’ innocence was never reviewed, no training was given in how to weigh evidence, and pressure was applied from above to declare detainees as enemy combatants, so much so that detainees who were ruled non-enemy combatants were given new CSRTs to have the decisions reversed.

The pleading includee a new statement from Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham, another officer formerly assigned to assist with the gathering of government information to be used in the tribunal review process. Below are two excerpts from his testimony:

“Not only was no independent effort ever made to verify or disprove claims of innocence, the detainees were unable to obtain evidence from witnesses they themselves identified.”

“Detainee claims of innocence often could have been corroborated or disproved by a few simple inquiries. For example, if a detainee told interrogators that he had worked at a hospital in Afghanistan, OARDEC could have required that an agency with regional or functional purview locate and obtain records from the hospital and interview personnel there.”

This new evidence was presented in November of 2006. Just now, a full year later, the circuit court granted oral arguments on Hamad’s case. The government responded by deciding to grant him a new CSRT and moved to stay the briefing. The timing is telling and consistent with other maneuvers by the government to forestall or avoid rulings that would inhibit Executive power. Only after the courts granted oral arguments did the government agree to grant a new CSRT. They apparently did not want these arguments to be made in court, and with the new CSRT they are again entirely in control of the process.

Thus, Adel Hamad remains in legal limbo. For the two years he has been on a transfer list. His lawyers attempts to get him a new CSRT hearing to clear his name went unheeded under the argument that he was being transferred soon, a statement belied by the sober fact that Hamad remains imprisoned to this day.. Now that the judicial system is ready to hear arguments that are damning to the administration’s position they are, all of a sudden,wanting to do a new CSRT in an attempt to make the arguments against them moot. It is unclear if the administration must adhere to any timetable with regards to Hamad’s new tribunal but we can hope that continued pressure from his legal team and from the public will make it that much more difficult to hold an innocent man for much longer.

To learn more:

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/abraham-takes-on-top-security-echelon/#more-6143

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/a-new-critique-of-pentagon-detainee-panels/#more-5935

— David