Thursday, 18 December 2014 / TRUTH-OUT.ORG
  • Homeless People: Do You Just "Walk On By"?

    Is there a helpful way to respond when you encounter one of the approximately 578,424 people who are homeless on any given night in the United States today?

  • Quiet Distress Among the (Ex) Rich

    Yves Smith: The fact that economic distress has moved pretty high up the food chain is a sign that this recovery isn't all that it is cracked up to be.

First Gitmo Conviction Invalidated By New Ruling, Attorneys Say

Thursday, 21 August 2014 10:55 By Staff, Center for Constitutional Rights | Press Release

Washington, D.C. – Today, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and co-counsel Joseph Margulies filed a motion asking the Court of Military Commission Review to vacate former Guantánamo prisoner David Hicks’s conviction in the military commissions for “material support for terrorism.”  Hicks appealed his conviction in November, following the D.C. Circuit’s 2012 decision in Hamdan v. United States, which held that material support for terrorism is not a war crime and, thus, is beyond the jurisdiction of military commissions.  Hicks’s appeal was stayed pending the ruling in Al-Bahlul v. United States, which similarly held last month that material support is not a war crime and cannot be tried by military commission.  Hicks – who was also a party to the historic Supreme Court ruling in Rasul v. Bush â€“ pled guilty in 2007, the first prisoner to be convicted in a military commission.

“The D.C. Circuit ruled unanimously that material support could not be tried in a military commission under any set of facts or theory of law before 2006.  No matter how this case is framed, David Hicks was convicted of a non-offense,” said CCR Senior Staff Attorney Wells Dixon.  “The principled and just result is to set aside his conviction without delay, as would happen in any ordinary criminal case.  David Hicks committed no crimes, but has suffered horribly from his ordeal at Guantánamo, and he deserves relief.”

In a 74-page affidavit released in 2004, Hicks detailed torture he suffered at the hands of US forces during the five and a half years he spent at Guantánamo, including beatings, forced sedation, and sexual assault.  In 2007, he pled guilty while continuing to assert his innocence.  According to Hicks, the plea was coerced and he only agreed to it because he believed it was the only way to get out of Guantánamo and escape the ongoing abuse and torture.

“I am looking forward to the day when I can finally move on with my life and put Guantánamo behind me. This is yet another step on the long road towards justice,” said Hicks.

After his release from Guantánamo, Hicks returned to his native Australia and was placed under a one-year gag order that prohibited him from speaking to the media.  As part of his plea, he was also required to withdraw allegations that the US military abused him and agree not to take legal action against the United States.

Joseph Margulies and military defense counsel Samuel Morison and Major Justin Swick are co-counsel in the case.  David Hicks is represented in Australia by Stephen Kenny.

The case is Hicks v. United States.  Read a summary of today’s filing here.

This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.

Hide Comments

blog comments powered by Disqus
GET DAILY TRUTHOUT UPDATES

FOLLOW togtorsstottofb


First Gitmo Conviction Invalidated By New Ruling, Attorneys Say

Thursday, 21 August 2014 10:55 By Staff, Center for Constitutional Rights | Press Release

Washington, D.C. – Today, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and co-counsel Joseph Margulies filed a motion asking the Court of Military Commission Review to vacate former Guantánamo prisoner David Hicks’s conviction in the military commissions for “material support for terrorism.”  Hicks appealed his conviction in November, following the D.C. Circuit’s 2012 decision in Hamdan v. United States, which held that material support for terrorism is not a war crime and, thus, is beyond the jurisdiction of military commissions.  Hicks’s appeal was stayed pending the ruling in Al-Bahlul v. United States, which similarly held last month that material support is not a war crime and cannot be tried by military commission.  Hicks – who was also a party to the historic Supreme Court ruling in Rasul v. Bush â€“ pled guilty in 2007, the first prisoner to be convicted in a military commission.

“The D.C. Circuit ruled unanimously that material support could not be tried in a military commission under any set of facts or theory of law before 2006.  No matter how this case is framed, David Hicks was convicted of a non-offense,” said CCR Senior Staff Attorney Wells Dixon.  “The principled and just result is to set aside his conviction without delay, as would happen in any ordinary criminal case.  David Hicks committed no crimes, but has suffered horribly from his ordeal at Guantánamo, and he deserves relief.”

In a 74-page affidavit released in 2004, Hicks detailed torture he suffered at the hands of US forces during the five and a half years he spent at Guantánamo, including beatings, forced sedation, and sexual assault.  In 2007, he pled guilty while continuing to assert his innocence.  According to Hicks, the plea was coerced and he only agreed to it because he believed it was the only way to get out of Guantánamo and escape the ongoing abuse and torture.

“I am looking forward to the day when I can finally move on with my life and put Guantánamo behind me. This is yet another step on the long road towards justice,” said Hicks.

After his release from Guantánamo, Hicks returned to his native Australia and was placed under a one-year gag order that prohibited him from speaking to the media.  As part of his plea, he was also required to withdraw allegations that the US military abused him and agree not to take legal action against the United States.

Joseph Margulies and military defense counsel Samuel Morison and Major Justin Swick are co-counsel in the case.  David Hicks is represented in Australia by Stephen Kenny.

The case is Hicks v. United States.  Read a summary of today’s filing here.

This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.

Hide Comments

blog comments powered by Disqus