What About Jawad?
One of the most puzzling things about yesterday's news of the dismissal of charges against five Guantánamo detainees is that Mohammed Jawad was not among the five to have his charges dismissed. This is odd because it was Jawad's case that Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld resigned over after protesting the withholding of exculpatory evidence—evidence that could prove Jawad's innocence—from the defense.
Well, it looks like ProPublica's Eric Umansky has chased down the reason why Jawad's charges weren't dismissed:
We spoke with Jawad's military lawyer, Maj. David Frakt, who said that Jawad's case is both much further along and more troubled than the others. Frakt argued that the government is going to end up dismissing the charges against Jawad, and unlike the other cases, will be unlikely to re-file them.You'll recall that Jawad was a teenager when he was captured, and Frakt has argued all along that Jawad should have been treated as a child solider and rehabilitated instead of incarcerated. Last month, the judge in Jawad's case substantiated the defense's claims (PDF) of abusive treatment—namely, the now-infamous "Frequent Flyer" sleep-deprivation program—Jawad suffered while in U.S. military custody.
"Jawad is really on a separate track," Frakt told us. "The judge has specifically rejected the government's theory in the case." Last month, the judge ruled that the mere status of being an enemy combatant isn't a war crime (PDF). Though the government still has an opportunity to bring new allegations against Jawad, what amounts to the enemy combatant charge has so far been the basis of the government's case.
Jawad's trial is currently set to start Jan. 5. But Frakt doesn't see it coming to that. "The case is dead in the water," he said.
Pentagon officials say they dropped the charges just so they can start fresh and refile the charges against these detainees. In the meantime, these detainees have no hope of being released, charges against them or not. It's what makes the military commissions, and the mere existence of Guantánamo, so very unconstitutional.
Oct 23rd, 2008 at 1:56am
Extreme solitary confinement is a base on which other forms of "abusive treatment" become torture. The frequent flyer program used this psychologically lethal mix, and Jawad attempted suicide twice, and is possibly mentally unfit for trial. It's time we stopped calling extreme solitary confinement and the deprivation regimens that go with it (sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation, noise and light bombardment) "abuse", or "abusive treatment". They should be called torture, they fit the definition in the CATCIDT to a tee. And the Committee Against Torture has cited the U.S. for it at our supermax prisons (2006). It causes paranoia, abnormal sensitivity to light and sounds, visual and auditory hallucinations, loss of impulse control, and intrusive thoughts and ideations, panic attacks, loss of memory and difficulty thinking or concentrating, and permanent damage to socialization skills. (Grassian 1993).
What part of "procedures calculated to disrupt profoundly the senses or the personality" (U.S.C. Title 18,2340(2)(B)) does that miss? What part of "severe mental pain and suffering" does attempted suicide miss?
Please, please, call it what it is.
Post new comment