Appeals Court Finds Six-year Detainee Is Not Enemy Combatant

by sarabeth at 9:21 am on June 23rd, 2008 in Bush Man Date, War on Terror

Another federal court has just slapped the Bush administration in the face again over its detainee treatment policies.

A federal appeals court announced Monday that it has overturned the Pentagon’s classification of a Guantanamo Bay detainee as an enemy combatant.

In the first Guantanamo Bay case to be reviewed, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in favor of Huzaifa Parhat, a Chinese Muslim known as a Uighur, undermining the basis for his more than six years in detention.

The appeals court directed the U.S. military to release Parhat, to transfer him or to hold a new proceeding in light of the appeals court’s ruling.

Parhat never fought against the United States and the government concedes there’s no evidence he ever intended to. He has been held for six years because he is linked to a Chinese separatist group that the military says has some ties to the al-Qaida terrorist network.

Government attorneys say he can be held under the law authorizing military force against anyone who “planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks” of 2001.
[...]
The three-member appeals court panel that issued the ruling consisted of Chief Judge David Sentelle and judges Merrick Garland and Thomas Griffith.

Sentelle is an appointee of President Reagan, Garland was appointed by President Clinton and Griffith was appointed by President George W. Bush.

Apparently, the common sense notion that being linked to a group that “has some ties to the al-Qaida terrorist network” does not amount to planning, authorizing, committing, or aiding the 9/11 attacks has come as a huge surprise to government attorneys.

But nobody expects this bunch of clowns to go “Oops! Sorry! Ha, ha!” and release Parhat. In all likelihood, the next step will be that his lawyers will attempt to procure immediate release by filing a habeas corpus writ in District Court (as per the Supreme Court’s June 12 decision).

Comments

  1. sarabeth wrote:

    Just to be clear, this decision was not related in any way to the Supreme Court’s June 12 decision. It resulted from an Appeals Court review of the Combatant Status Review Tribunal’s decision that Parhat is an enemy combatant.

    It is, though, the first civilian court review of a Guantanamo detainee’s case.

  2. sarabeth wrote:

    Here’s the funny part: inasmuch as Parhat was unlawfully designated an enemy combatant, he is an “unlawful enemy combatant”, and therefore worthy of incarceration in Guantanamo.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*

*