"There is nothing against you. But there is no innocent person here. So, you should confess to something so you can be charged and sentenced and serve your sentence and then go back to your family and country, because you will not leave this place innocent."1 US Interrogator to Fouad al-Rabiah.

In response to the prospect of trying detainees in US federal courts, former Bush appointee, and convening authority for the Military Commissions, Susan Crawford, confirmed that torture was used against prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay and so, the evidence against them would not hold up in a regular court due to the way in which the 'evidence' was obtained2. The case of Fouad al-Rabiah has highlighted the role of torture in obtaining false information and once again calls into question everything we have been told by US officials regarding the guilt of the men held in Guantanamo Bay.

The US alleged that Mr al-Rabiah undertook fundraising activities for al-Qaeda and ran a supply depot in the Tora Bora mountains. However, further investigation revealed a much different picture regarding his trip to Afghanistan.3In his recent habeas case(PDF 65 pages), Judge Kollar-Kotelly found that meeting with Osama Bin Laden or the mere fact of being present in Tora Bora did not mean he was a member of al-Qaeda or the Taliban and also that it did not constitute support for the groups, and therefore granted al-Rabiah’s habeas petition. She concluded that he was truthful in his intentions as a relief worker. Even the CIA concluded that he was an innocent caught up in hostilities. One of the most revealing events of this case took place at the 2004 Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT). For the entire CSRT, whilst they knew the information to be untrue, the prosecution permitted ‘evidence’ obtained through torture and presented it as fact4. They also used hearsay ‘evidence’ which was also obtained though other detainees under duress. If this is true, and the Government knew of his innocence, yet he was coerced into making false statements, how can we ever believe a word that has been spoken by those accusing these men of criminal actions?

Although much of the information regarding Mr al-Rabiah’s treatment has been redacted in the ruling, sleep deprivation was noted as one of the ‘tactics’ used to elicit confessions. Mr al-Rabiah was subject to the ‘frequent flyer program’ in which he was moved from cell to cell every two hours for ‘an unspecified time’.Read more about “enhanced Interrogation Techniques” here. Judge Kollar-Kotelly noted that this left him “suffering from serious depression, losing weight in a substantial way, and very stressed because of the constant moves, deprived of sleep and seriously worried about the consequences for his children.”5 It is doubtful we will never know the horrors that Mr al-Rabiah endured due to the continued reluctance of the Obama administration to hold a full scale investigation into abuses, and the continued invocation of the ‘state secrets privilege’. The Obama Administration has also refused to release photos and footage depicting detainee abuse, which may include photos of Mr al-Rabiah.

The lesson from this case is that we must exercise caution. Every time we read, “self-confessed” or “admitted to supporting terrorism”, we must think back to Mr al-Rabiah and his confessions under torture. Whenever we hear rhetoric labelling the men held in Guantanamo Bay as terrorists, we must remember the public statements of former Bush appointee Susan Crawford and the countless prosecutors and FBI agents that have exposed the torture and abuse. When we hear of the ‘three successful prosecutions’ under the military commissions, we must remember the torture memos, and the ever mounting evidence of cruelty beyond words.

An investigation into a small number of abuses by the CIA is simply not going far enough. There must be accountability if we are to have some semblance of justice.

References:

  1. See Fouad Mahmoud Al Rabiah V United States Pg.41.

  2. Shayana Kadidal. “Torture and Timing: Explaining the Crawford Concession”

  3. See Andy Worthington, "A Truly Shocking Guantánamo Story: Judge Confirms That An Innocent Man Was Tortured To Make FalseConfessions".

  4. ibid.

  5. For more information see “Military Commissions Set to Continue”