5.4.1 At Guantanamo Bay
On January 6, 2002, the US started moving Taliban and al-Qaida prisoners to the American base of Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. They were flown there - a 20-hour journey- on military transport airplanes. For security reasons they were hooded, immobilised with shackles on their legs, chained to their seat, and drugged with Valium. Once in Guantanamo Bay they were locked in a series of six-by-eight foot cells made of chain-link fencing, more like open air dog cages with a wooden roof to protect them from the rain. The floor is made of concrete slabs; there was no running water but a container for a toilet, and mats for bed. They were given a neutral diet. Military police with dogs monitor them days and nights. Permanent facilities will be built later on. They were going to be interrogated but it was not yet clear at that time if they will be brought before a Court of Justice, Civil or Military. Twenty prisoners, treated as if they were wild animals, arrived in Cuba on January 11. There is no excuse to treat human beings this way, especially in the 21st century. We still blame the Germans for their concentration camps. What is this? Of course, the Americans have the experience of how they treated the Native Americans first, and then the US citizens of Japanese origin during the Second World War. Blair should get out of this immediately, it is a shame on all of us and participating in it is dirty! Is it an acceptable way to treat these prisoners? Each of us must decide and drew their own conclusions on what to believe about the USA and its leaders.

On Tuesday January 15 about 30 more Taliban or al-Qaida prisoners were flown to the US Guantanamo Bay military base. As the first ones, they were chained together, their legs and arms were restrained, and they were handcuffed to their seats. Is this a human way to treat them? Now the US, the President and the Defence Secretary among others, said that they were treated fairly -good food, showers, some walking time, ... But they are still put into 6 by 8 feet cages, open to the wind and rain, and with a corrugated roof. Even if Cuba is a Caribbean island, it is cold there during the night, it is windy during the winter, and it is raining sometimes.

Now, according to the Americans, they are not prisoners of war and, as such, not protected by the United Nations rules and the Geneva Conventions. Now, this is strange. The American media and all the higher US authorities have been repeating "ad nausea" that America is at war with Afghanistan, the Taliban, and al-Qaida. How is it then possible to negate them the qualification of prisoners of war? Because, if they are not prisoners of war, then there was no war, and the obvious consequence is that the US military action in Afghanistan was really State Terrorism! They cannot have it both ways.

Now, on January 16, 2002, the United Nation, through Mrs Robinson, the ex-Irish Prime Minister now head of the competent department, added her voice to the Humanitarian Associations -Amnesty International, Human Rights groups, etc- to protest at the way the prisoners were transferred to Cuba as well as to their accommodation and treatment there. Of course, Tony Blair said to the British Parliament that, in his opinion, the prisoners are fairly treated! Poor Tony, he is really in no position to stop licking the boots to the Americans and join his voice to the American public that agrees, as usual, to everything their Government does and says. What would be their opinion if one single American were treated like this? And it could happen soon! In fact an Alabama man on a humanitarian mission in Afghanistan seems to have been kidnapped by a tribal warlord for a $25,000 ransom. It is starting!

As of January 17, there were 110 Taliban/al-Qaida prisoners at Guantanamo. On that day the Red Cross inspected the camp; their report is widely expected outside the US where criticism about the conditions in which they are kept are increasing every day.

More and more people outside the US -including the European Union on January 21- complained at the way the US treats the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. On January 22 2002, the US insisted that they were not prisoners of war, but unlawful combatants. If this were true, then what would be the right way to describe the American and British action in Afghanistan? An unlawful intervention!! Even in the US, part of the media reported some dissensions among the intellectuals and the lawyers. After all, you cannot claim loud and clear that you are at war, and add that the prisoners are not "prisoners of war". The alternative would be to admit that they have been illegally kidnapped!

On Thursday, February 7, 2002, President Bush changed his mind and decided that the Taliban prisoners at Guantanamo Bay would be treated like prisoners of war, although the US will not formally recognise them as such. What is the logic in this statement? The al-Qaida prisoners will continue to be officially described as terrorists, and not as prisoners of war.

Some members of the British Parliament were complaining while Blair insisted that the prisoners were treated correctly. The US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, issued one of his stupid statement: "How can they judge if the prisoners' treatment is good or not, 5,000 miles away." Forgetting that he is about 2,000 miles away himself. One can expect that in the near future some terrorists, somewhere, will capture a few Americans, and put them in cages too. What will the American authorities and people then say?

At Guantanamo Bay the prisoners are interrogated but "there is no torture, no whips, no bright light, and no drugging" according to Brigadier General Michael Lehnert, adding, "We -the USA- are a nation of law". At least something positive, if true (unfortunately the future will show that he was lying too)! On February 5, there were 158 prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, and the capacity of the temporary prison has been increased to 320 "cages". More prisoners were brought to Guantanamo Bay a few days later, the total then being close to 180.

On February 20, 2002, there were about 300 Taliban and al-Qaida prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, all in cages in the open air. The Taliban are now treated like Prisoners of War but without this statute. What does that means legally is not clear at all, and Donald Rumsfeld is not the man able to give a reasonable answer. The members of al-Qaida are treated as terrorists, and nothing else. On February 21 a Federal Court in Los Angeles rejected a recourse by an American humanitarian groups demanding that the US Government publish the charges against the prisoners being held at Guantanamo Bay. The judge's argument to reject the claim was that Guantanamo is outside the US sovereignty and, as a result, the judge had no jurisdiction over them. In addition to about 300 prisoners from 26 countries at camp X-Ray in Guantanamo Bay, 196 are still held somewhere in Afghanistan. Some of these chained prisoners in orange suits, shuffling around between American soldiers, perhaps deserve to be in prison. However, from a legal and public relations points of view, USA and, by association Great Britain, do not look very good. The US Defence Department has been forced to admit that the interrogation of all the prisoners did not give many relevant information and they have not found any evidence to send a single one in front of the military tribunal created by President Bush. In other words, the interrogators have not found any proof of war crimes. The Pentagon promised the legal basis under which these tribunals would operate two months ago, but nothing has been heard on this subject since. It is the worldwide opinion -excluding the US and the British government- that a competent tribunal should decide the status of the prisoners and, if not guilty of any crime, they should be sent home as the war in Afghanistan is over. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld would like to keep them in prison as long as necessary, that is forever, so that they would not be able to join al-Qaida again to fight the US. He also said that the war against terrorism could last for decades. Does he intend to keep these people in jail without charges for such a long period of time? He also said that he would be ready to send most of the prisoners back to their country of origin if these countries agreed to keep them in jail, and to allow the US authorities to interrogate them again in the future, if necessary. But how can he expect a country of law such as Great Britain, for instance, to keep some of his nationals in jail without charge and without trial? International laws exist and the Americans are bound by them, as well as every other country that signed the relevant treaties.

In February 2002 it is believed that five British nationals are kept prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and their lawyers, supported by the British Law Society and the Bar Council's Human Rights Committee, are asking that they be given immediate access to legal advice, be officially charged and brought in front of a competent tribunal, or sent free. Affidavits to this effect and writ of habeas corpus have already been sent to President Bush, Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and to the director of Camps X-Ray Colonel Terry Carrilo. The lawyers also complain that the British prisoners are badly affected by the heat in their open cell-cages and by the quality of the food, with the result that they are loosing weight. The same lawyers are threatening the British Government with legal action for aiding and abetting the US Government in their illegal actions, and for allowing the detainees to be interrogated by MI5 -the British Secret Service- that passed the information to the US authorities.

In the last days of February 2002, some of the 300 prisoners at Guantanamo Bay went on a hunger strike. Apparently, one guard objected when a Muslim prisoner put a headband during prayer time, and tore it off. The prisoners who saw what happened complained, and twenty of them refused to eat their breakfast. At lunchtime one hundred still refused to eat, and in the evening they were two hundred. The following day they were told that they could wear a headband, but the camp authorities reserved their right to check that no arm were hidden below!

The fate of the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay was not clear in February 2002. The American authorities said that a military tribunal would try many. However, the US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that even if they were acquitted, they would not be released until the war on terrorism is over, and this could take years. This is American justice.

In March 2002, Pakistan is sending some intelligence officers to Guantanamo Bay to help the Americans interrogate their Muslim prisoners. There is no limit to the hypocrisy of the US.

In March 2002, Amnesty International repeated that the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and in Afghanistan were badly treated and were held in cruel, inhuman, and degrading conditions. Amnesty asked again for access to these prisoners to whom the US deny lawyers, despite submitting them to interrogations that may lead to prosecution, and for refusing them to challenge the lawfulness of their detention in courts. Among these prisoners are people captured outside Afghanistan in particular six Algerians were arrested in Bosnia. This is American justice as applied to foreigners!! And they claim that the US is a land of freedom!!

On the last day of April 2002 we are told that the Guantanamo Bay's prisoners have been transferred, under heavy escort, to a permanent jail three miles away from the temporary cages where they have been held until now. There are now room for four hundred and eighty prisoners. This move could mean that the Taliban and al-Qaida prisoners could be held for a very long period of time against all international conventions. But as it is known, the US does not feel bonded by them, but only by their own selfish interest.

About thirty more prisoners have been flown to Guantanamo Bay in May 2002. However their interrogation does not produce any visible result. One of them has been flown home, as he is schizophrenic!!

At the end of May 2002, a group of civil right lawyers led by Stephen Yagman took the US Government to Court for violating the American and international laws by detaining the Guantanamo Bay prisoners without charge. Yagman was horrified by a newspaper photograph of hooded prisoners at Camp X-Ray: "In bringing the detainees to Guantanamo Bay and in housing them in small cages, the US has violated the basic principles of international human right laws that are binding on the US, because it has ratified the treaties. Is the US government free to violate the law, immune from accountability in any court?" He firmly believes the answer is NO. He lost a similar court case before because the judge then said that he was not asked to represent the detainees, and because the laws of the US do not apply in Guantanamo Bay since it is not in the USA. Now he will ask the court to clarify the previous decision: or the US laws apply, or the Cuban's. He put together a coalition of experienced civil right lawyers and academics, including Professor Erwin Chemerinsky, the former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark, and the rabbis Steven Jacob and Haim Dow Beloak.

At the end of July 2002 a US Federal judge ruled on the case of two British citizens and one Australian captured in Afghanistan and held at Guantanamo Bay. The lawyers representing the US government said that they have been caught fighting with the Taliban and al-Qaida forces. The judge ruled that the US legal system has no jurisdiction over detainees held in Cuba, and that the writ of Habeas corpus used by the detainees' lawyers did not apply to aliens held outside US territory. This is pure hypocrisy as Guantanamo has been an American military base for about 40 years. There is no doubt that the judge is a Republican, probably nominated by one of the Bushes. There will be an appeal and, if it fails too, the defence lawyer could ask the Cuban authorities to release his clients.

In August 2002, Pakistan asked the USA to release 58 of its citizens held at Guantanamo Bay. None of the 598 prisoners now held there are al-Qaida leaders, but only foot soldiers without any useful knowledge of al-Qaida's plans. Washington has refused to identify the prisoners, but it is known that they are from 38 countries, including seven Britons. The British government is satisfied with the way they are treated, their family less so. The US has classified them "enemy combatants", denying them in this way the prisoners of war status. They are kept in cells measuring 2.5 meters by 2 meters and are given two 15 minutes exercise sessions a week. About 200 went on hunger strike before and at least 30 harmed themselves, four of which were suicide attempts. They are also regularly interrogated without lawyers present.

On September 20, 2002, the US is saying that the seven British detainees at Guantanamo Bay are still a threat and that their trial must wait, probably until the war on terror is over! And the US still proclaims to be the best democratic country in the world while keeping people, not prisoners of war according to them, in prison without charge, without access to a lawyer, and without trial!!

In October 2002, four photos have been published showing how the terror suspects were treated during their flight to Cuba. They were handcuffed, their heads covered with black hoods, and they were bound to the floor of the US C-130 cargo military planes. Other photos published before showed these same prisoners bound and kneeling on their arrival in Guantanamo. If this is the American ways of treating defeated enemies, then the ex-German Justice minister was not so wrong in comparing Bush's methods with Hitler's.

Attorneys for 16 Guantanamo Bay detainees from Australia, Britain and Kuwait appealed again to a US federal appeal court on December 2, 2002. They claim that their clients, kept in prison for more than one year now, have the right to consult an attorney, be charged, judged by an impartial court, or released.

It was revealed on January 13, 2003, that the International Red Cross delivered 3,300 letters from their families to the suspected Taliban and al-Qaida fighters held at the US Naval base at Guantanamo Bay. The first of these prisoners - from 40 nationalities- arrived in Guantanamo Bay on January 11, 2002. They are banned from making phone calls, or having any other contacts with the outside world. They can only communicate with their family through mail delivered by the US Postal Service, or the Red Cross. God Bless the Land of the so-called Free!! They need it.

On February 6, 2003, we were told that quite a few prisoners in Guantanamo Bay tried to commit suicide. Amnesty International believes that there were ten attempts in 2002, and already five in January 2003. According to this organisation, the suicide attempts are due to the prolonged detention, the continuous interrogations, and the uncertainty faced by the prisoners. And the country that proclaims to be based on freedom of the individual does all this! But perhaps foreigners are not considered human beings by the hypocrite country.

On April 23, 2003, it was revealed, and confirmed by the American authorities, that at least three children, 13 or 15 years old, were held as "enemy combatants" in Guantanamo Bay prison. They are held separately from the other 660 inmates from more than 40 countries. They receive specialist mental health care and some basic education -they are taught to write and read. They will be detained until it is decided that they are no more a threat to the USA, that there are no pending accusations against them, and that they are no longer of intelligence value! And they are young children! Amnesty International said, "Holding children that age was wholly repugnant and contrary to basic principles of human rights"; it also contravenes UN rules accepted by most countries, but not the USA, regarding the treatment of juvenile. The USA and Somalia are the only members of the UN that have not ratified the Conventions on the Children Rights although the US signed it. It is a real shame and shows that the USA is not a country of law. It is repugnant as Amnesty International said.

On May 5, 2003, the USA, under international pressure, said that it would probably release the children held at Guantanamo Bay. All together between 12 and 24 prisoners, mostly Afghans, could be released in the near future, including the 3 boys. Since the prison opened at the beginning of 2002, 23 prisoners have been released, mainly old and mentally ill men.

On June 20, 2003, US soldiers clashed with British journalists at Camp Delta in Guantanamo Bay after inmates tried to pass messages to a BBC Panorama team who had been authorised to visit the prison. The British journalists were taken away, while other journalists were able to finish the tour. The US soldiers also seized an audio recording made by the Panorama team. About 680 prisoners, including 8 Britons, are held there as part of the Bush administration's war on terror.

On July 3, 2003, the USA said that the American military tribunal created by President Bush would soon try six al-Qaida suspects held in Guantanamo Bay. They could face the death penalty and rumours have it that an execution chamber is being built. These prisoners are in a limbo: they have not been charged, they have been refused access to a lawyer, and they are not treated as prisoners of war (in which case they would be covered by the Geneva Conventions) but as "enemy combatants". Civil rights organisations have asked that they be released or charged, and given access to a lawyer. Among the six people who could be tried there are two British, and probably an Australian. The judge, the prosecutors, the jury, and the defence lawyers will be military personnel. And this is again the land of the free, of justice, and of democracy!

By July 4, 2003, the parents of two British prisoners, as well as the media and support group such as "Fair Trials Abroad (although for this group, any trial of British subjects abroad is unfair as, by principle, British are always good and well behaved) were worried. And they should, as Big Boy America wants revenge for having been through September 11, 2001. No military tribunal can be independent, and this is especially the case here where members are soldiers working for the government. The only good thing could be that among the six so-called terrorists there are two Britons and one Australian. Could it be that the US wants to do a favour to their best allies?

At the beginning of July 2003, there are about 700 so-called al-Qaida and Taliban prisoners from 42 countries at Camp Delta. Most have claimed that they had no connection with these organisations but nobody listens to them. Outside the USA, this prison is considered illegal and a shame. Twenty-eight suicide attempts involving 18 prisoners have been reported as the men kept in these inhuman conditions suffer psychological problems. They are kept in cells 2.4 metres long, 2 meters wide and 2.4 meter high; they receive 3 "culturally appropriate" meals a day. All the prisoners are non-American citizens, and are suspected to be Taliban or members of al-Qaida -or to have trained in their camps in Afghanistan. There are about 150 from Saudi Arabia, 80 Yemenis, and more that 50 Pakistanis. Despite the end of the war in Afghanistan, new prisoners are still brought in. They range in age from 15 to more than 70. About 35 prisoners have been released until now, mainly Afghans. Sleep deprivation is used during interrogation. If they were sent to trial, a lawyer chosen by the US authorities would assist them, but the prosecutors will be authorised to listen to any discussion between them and their lawyer. There will be no appeal against the convictions.

Now on July 5, 2003, the American Justice showed its true face when they gave the two Britons chosen to be among the first six detainees to go to court, a clear choice: plead guilty, and accept a 20-year prison sentence, or be executed if found guilty. If they are guilty of any crime, they should be punished. But if they are not guilty, what kind of choice do they have? And this again is American justice in the land of freedom and democracy!! However the worst thing about this is the way the British government sold himself to the Americans, accepting anything that their master chose to do. It is a shame really.

On July 11, 2003, the media reported that two businessmen residents in Britain - but not British subjects- had been sent to Guantanamo Bay. The Iraqi Bisher al-Rawi and the Jordanian Jamil al-Banna were first arrested by the British police at Gatwick Airport in November 2002 when they tried to board a plane to Gambia, where they had some business going on. The police had no reason to keep them, and they were released. They then flew to Gambia where they were arrested again on suspicion that they were helping terrorist organisations. The Gambians handed them to the Americans who first flew them to Bagram airbase in Afghanistan, and then to Guantanamo Bay where they are held under suspicion of being al-Qaida followers after being classified as enemy combatants. The British government said that they couldn't help them, as they are not British subjects.

On July 11, Blair was frantic to bring home the two Britons held in Guantanamo Bay chosen to be among the first to be judged by a military court. Blair hoped to get a positive answer from the USA before flying to Washington next week to see Bush and to deliver a speech to a joint meeting of the US Congress. But neither he, nor the British government, can guarantee that they will be tried in Britain. The decision would be made by the Crow Prosecution Service and, given the poor evidence available, in addition to the fact that they were kept in prison 18 months without charges nor access to a lawyer, they would probably be set free immediately. The Americans are not ready to accept this. Moreover if Bush makes an exception for the Britons, other countries will ask that their citizens be sent home too. For all these reasons the ceremony to give Blair the Congressional Gold badge of Honour has been postponed. On July 14, 2003, the UK gave up the idea of having the two British prisoners at Guantanamo Bay brought back home for trial.

On July 17, 2003, it was clear that the rules imposed by the US in Guantanamo Bay make it impossible for the Britons facing a military tribunal to have access to civilian lawyers. Only a special dispensation from President Bush to his best ally, Blair, could remove the difficulties. At the present time, any civil lawyer allowed to defend a prisoner must be an US citizen, swear to keep all he heard secret, accept to have the conversations with his client recorded, and pay all the costs (including security clearance, travel to Cuba, etc); moreover he could not leave the island after the trial unless authorised by the presiding officer.

Another prisoner tried to hang himself on July 16, the 29th attempt since the camp was opened.

On July 17, 2003, the USA freed 11 Pakistani prisoners who had been held in Guantanamo Bay for about 2 years. No reason was given for their release and their names was kept secret.

On July 19, 2003, following the visit of Blair to Washington, Bush decided to halt the trial of the two British men held at Guantanamo Bay. They should have been tried together with four other prisoners. The US did not agree to let them go back to Britain, as it was more or less certain that any British Court would freed them due to the way they were treated for the last 18 months without access to lawyers and with proof, if any, obtained in secret interrogations. The British Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, will go soon to Washington to sort out the details. On July 21, Blair accepted -or better, had to accept- that a US military tribunal would try the two British, but the death penalty would not be required against the British prisoners. This decision does apply only to the British citizens held at Guantanamo Bay at the exclusion of all the other prisoners. This is American justice for those who like it!

Following the agreement between Bush and Blair to treat differently, and better, the British Guantanamo Bay prisoners from those of other nationalities, some complaints were beginning to be heard on July 21, 2003. Of the 680 prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, nine will have a special treatment while the others will be dealt justice in the worst possible way. The Arab world is not happy, and this is understandable to all but not to the Americans whose sense of justice is different: justice is for American citizens only, the others are expandable!!

On August 1, 2003, it was revealed that a third man resident in Britain was kept prisoner at Guantanamo Bay on suspicion of terrorism. Jamal Abdullah, 24, has been held in Cuba since November 2002, but his family has only been informed recently by the Foreign Office. Abdullah is a former Roman Catholic who converted to Islam after visiting the Finsbury Park mosque while a student. The mosque was then controlled by the militant cleric Abu Hamza. Some of the nine British citizen and the two other residents in the UK were also linked to the same mosque. Not being British -he is from Uganda- but only resident in Britain the Foreign Office cannot do anything for him, or for the other two residents.

On August 6, 2003, we were told that an Australian held prisoner at Guantanamo Bay, Mamdouh Habib, was cleared by Australian police as no threat to security one month before being arrested in Pakistan two years ago. He has been under investigation by the US and Australian authorities for about 10 years, but he was never charged. The members of his prayer group thought that he was a CIA mole, and a member of the extremist Islamic Youth Movement attacked him. The Australian government now refuse to intervene in his case because he is suspected of being linked to terrorist groups while the opposite seems to be closer to the truth. Nobody bothers to check if he is guilty of anything at all, with the result that a probable innocent man has been in jail for nearly two years. And this by the same people that claim that theirs is the land of Freedom and justice.

On August 12, 2003, it became clear that Washington was ready to make new concessions in relation to the nine British citizens kept in jail at Guantanamo Bay. William Haynes, the Pentagon's most senior lawyer, during a visit to London, said that he was ready to give further "assurances" about the controversial trial. On the same day we were told that Moazzam Begg and Feroz Abassi were ready to plead guilty to war crimes, and to renounce terrorism in exchange for a shorter prison term. However Lord Goldsmith said that he had not discussed plea bargain with Mr Haynes.

On October 10, 2003, judges and lawyers from many counties and the International Bar Association condemned the treatment of the Muslim detainees at Guantanamo Bay as being in violation of International Law. Military courts, without possibility of appeal, will try them. According to international laws, or they are prisoners of war and they should be protected by the Geneva conventions, or they are civilians and they should be treated according to the laws of the USA. There is, legally, nothing in between, but Bush and his right wing backers do not care about the law, they behave like the lawless cowboys of the 19th century; the prisoners are not American citizens, only expandable foreigners. The International Bar Association is even saying that the invasion of Iraq was illegal. Of course, the Americans will say that they could not care less, and will go on ignoring the laws.

On November 10, 2003, the US Supreme Court accepted to hear an appeal by 16 foreign prisoners (British, Australians and Kuwaiti) held prisoner at Guantanamo Bay. They argue that their detention without charges, trials, and access to lawyers is illegal. Unfortunately the court will only look at a very limited aspect of the problem faced by over 600 detainees: the legality of keeping foreigners at Guantanamo Bay in these conditions. If the court finds that it is illegal, the prisoners will have to go back to court to have a trial, or be freed.

A US Army Colonel, Jackie Duane Farr, has been arrested for security breach at Guantanamo Bay. He is accused of two violations of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice, making a false statement, and failure to follow orders. Classified material has been found in his possession when he was leaving the base. He could be condemned to 7 years in prison. Already two Arabic translators, Ahmed Halabi and Ahmed Mehalba, and a Muslim chaplain, Army Captain James "Yousseff" Yee, have been arrested. On December 20, we were told that 13 of the 30 charges against Halabi were dropped, including the most important ones, "aiding the enemy", sending email information about detainees, and committing espionage by transmitting information to unauthorised recipients.

At the end of November 2003 the USA could release about 100 prisoners from Guantanamo Bay -including a few children. Half of them should be released in December 2003 and the remaining in January 2004. Until now 88 people have already been released.

On December 3, 2003, an Australian prisoner at Guantanamo Bay, David Hick, will become the first foreign terrorist suspect to be given a US military lawyer, Marine Corps Maj. Michael Mori.

After visiting Guantanamo Bay prison in December 2003, three US Senators, John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Maria Cantwell, wrote to the Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, saying that it was time to release all the 660 prisoners, or try them. They added that, in their opinion, the prisoners were treated humanely.

On December 18, 2003, the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeal in San Francisco ruled that the prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay should have access to lawyers and to the American Courts. The US Supreme Court will intervene in appeal by the US government. Being a political body with a majority of Republican appointed judges (see Bush election), it will probably reverse that decision.

On December 30, 2003, the Pentagon said that the retired general and former senior Army lawyer, John D. Altenburg Jr., would oversee the trial of the Guantanamo Bay detainees. The Pentagon also created a four-member review panel to hear appeals of cases. Altenburg must approve the charges against detainees, refer the cases to trial, and negotiate any conflicts during trials. Until now no detainee has been charged, but one should be soon. Two detainees, Salim Ahmed Hamdan of Yemen and David Hicks of Australia, have been assigned defence lawyers in early December.

On January 19, 2004, the US authorities revealed that one month before September 11, 2001, the so-called 20th hijacker, al-Qahtani was prevented from entering the USA at Orlando International Airport. Border agent Jose Melendez-Perez turned him away after questioning. Al-Qahtani was later arrested in Afghanistan as a combatant and sent to Guantanamo Bay, where he is still being held.

On January 29, 2004, the USA freed three teenage boys (aged from 13 to 17) after keeping them more than one year at Guantanamo Bay on suspicion that they helped the Taliban. They were sent back to Afghanistan.

On February 20, 2004, we were told that five of the nine British citizens held at Guantanamo Bay for up to two years will be send back to Britain. They are: Rhuhel Ahmed, Asif Iqbal, Shafiq Rasul, Terek Dergoul, and Jamel Udeen. They are held by the Americans on suspicion that they had links with al-Qaida, but they were never charged, had no access to a lawyer, and were not tried. It is believed that their release is motivated by the fact that the Bush administration is afraid that the US Supreme Court, that agreed to hear the detainees' case, will say that their detention was illegal, and declare that Guantanamo Bay is under the US courts jurisdiction. Of course, the question now is why it took so long to take this decision as nothing new emerged within the last two years. It is one of the worst aspects of the US leadership that is treating non-US citizens outside the law. If the prisoners are guilty of a crime, they should be punished, but it looks like they were kept in prison without any justification making the USA look undemocratic and their judicial system, despicable. The British anti-terrorist police will interrogate the five men once they arrive in England before deciding what to do with them. But it will be difficult to prosecute them for suspected offences done outside the UK, and without any evidence to show their responsibilities. Jack Straw, the British Foreign Secretary, said that talks are still going on for the release of the remaining four Britons; he asked their relatives to be patient. The five prisoners who will soon be liberated face a difficult and uncertain future in Britain according to their families and many qualified experts. They certainly have been traumatised by their ordeal, and could have difficulties to adapt to a normal life outside Guantanamo camp. They will also be always seen with suspicion by the British authorities as well as within their communities.

On February 24, 2004, the US charged two Guantanamo Bay prisoners with conspiracy to commit war crimes. Ali Hamza Ahmed Sulayman al Bahlul of Yemen and Ibrahim Ahmed Mahmoud al Qosi of Sudan are the first Guantanamo Bay prisoners to face charges. The first is an alleged propagandist and the other a paymaster for al-Qaida. They will not face death penalty if convicted. They are thought to have attended al-Qaida training camps, and being bodyguards to Osama bin Laden.

On March 4, 2004, Terry Whaite, the formal hostage held in Lebanon, accused the Bush administration of behaving in Guantanamo Bay like the Islamic militants who kept him prisoners for 1,763 days after his kidnapping in 1987. He is travelling to the USA to support the families of the nine British prisoners. He said: "The US is adopting the methods of the terrorists to deal with terrorism, and it will fail".

On March 6, 2004, The Guardian published an article in which the children liberated from Guantanamo Bay some time ago are saying that they enjoyed their stay in Cuba: they were well fed, received useful teaching, and were treated well. They only hated the twice-monthly interrogation in which they had nothing to say. It is a pleasure to hear that, but will the adults say the same?

On March 7, 2004, the British Home Secretary, David Blunkett, on his way to Washington DC, said that he will ask a fair deal for the four British subjects that the Americans refuse to free from Guantanamo Bay prison. The Americans say that these four people are too dangerous to be released because that they are still a threat to the USA and Britain. According to them, they met Osama bin Laden and received terrorist training. Mr Blunket added that keeping them indefinitely without charges and access to lawyers was contrary to any sense of justice.

On March 8, 2004, the families of some of the four Britons who will not be liberated from Guantanamo Bay were in Washington DC to try to induce the US authorities to give all the detainees some kind of justice. Five other British detainees are expected to be liberated in the next 24 hours and sent back to Britain where they will be interrogated by the antiterrorist services. One father denounced a leak from the Bush administration to the Daily Telegraph newspaper alleging that his son trained at an al-Qaida's camp where he possibly learned to make bombs. The families disagreed with these accusations and added that, if their relatives admitted them, it must have been done under duress and psychological pressure resulting from being kept in prison for two years.

On March 9, 2004, the Americans released five British subjects who were detained at Guantanamo Bay for over two years. They were flown back to England in a C17 RAF plane accompanied by military and anti-terrorist policemen, a medical team, and two Muslins. On their arrival at RAF Northolt airport, four of them were formally arrested. The fifth man, Jamal Udeen, was held, and then released within hours without charge. He was arrested in Afghanistan by the Americans while prisoner in a Taliban jail. He was probably a tourist. The other four, Shafiq Rasul, Tarek Dergoul, Asif Iqbal and Rhuhel Ahmed were driven to the safe Paddington Green police station where they can be interrogated for a maximum of 14 days without being charged, but with their solicitors present. The four men were set free on March 10 without charge. It took 24 hours for the British to act on them, and more than two years for the Americans. The first information released indicates that they refused to give any information to the British police before being set free. They described the interrogations as meaningless, a charade, and the police only going "through the motions". It will be interesting to know what they have to say about Guantanamo Bay prison or, better, concentration camp. On March 12, the men said that they had been "tortured," both physically and psychologically in the US prisons in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay. They were interrogated at gunpoint and, if this is true, obviously the American interrogators ignored their human rights. US Secretary of State Colin Powell said that the US treated their prisoners "in a very humanitarian way" adding "because we are Americans, we don't abuse people in our care". However, even a man formerly so well respected as he was, lied to the UN Security Council about the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Can he be trusted now?

The British Guantanamo Bay prisoners released a few days ago are talking, of course, and what they have to say is not very nice for the Americans or the British government. On March 14, 2004, The Observer revealed that their treatment was, if possible, even worse that what was thought, and that the British MI5 and MI6 were involved all the time in their interrogation with the CIA, FBI and DIA (Defence Intelligence Agency). The three men from Tipton, Ruhal Ahmed, Asif Iqbal and Shafiq Rasul, said that they were interrogated by all the agencies as soon as they arrived in Guantanamo Bay in January 2002. What they said could be summarised as follow:
- Soon after they were arrested in Afghanistan, they survived a massacre by the Northern Alliance troops who put hundred prisoners in sealed lorry containers where most of them died. Only about 20 of the 300 men loaded in each container survived, but only because the soldiers fired at the containers with machine guns, killing many prisoners, but making holes through which a few succeeded to breath.
- In addition to the known Guantanamo Bay complex, Camp Delta, there is a secret super-maximum security facility, called camp Echo, where prisoners are kept in very small cells in solitary confinement, guarded all the time by military policemen. Two of the four Britons still at Guantanamo Bay, Moazzem Begg and Feroz Abbasi, and the Australian David Hicks, are kept there.
- All three were kept in solitary confinement at Camp Delta because the Americans thought they appeared in a video tape with Osama bin Laden and Mohamed Atta, the leader of the September 11, 2001, attacks on the USA. They were in Britain at that time and they were only taken out of isolation when the MI5 showed that they were telling the truth.
- American soldiers, MI5 and SAS personnel first interrogated them in December 2001 and January 2002 in Afghanistan. There, American soldiers held guns at their heads while interrogating them. They were beaten and physically abused as well as starved to death by their jailers from the Northern Alliance. Ruhal Ahmed, described how, while he was interrogated in Afghanistan by a MI5 officer and another man who said he was from the British Foreign Office, he was kneeling with a man standing on the back of his legs and another pointing a gun at him. All the time the MI5 man was accusing him - falsely according to Ahmed- of links with terrorism.
- The three men believe that few of the over 600 Guantanamo Bay prisoners are real terrorists, with the exception of a few Mullahs who were loyal to the Taliban.
- They are afraid that, based on their own experience, Begg and Abbasi, will not get any fair trial.

A Foreign office spokesman refused to comment on the three men's claim that British officials in Afghanistan interrogated them. It is well known, however, that MI5 and MI6 had access to the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. Their interrogations aimed to get information to improve British national security. All the same, if what the three men are saying is true, then not only the USA, but also Britain, behaved in an inhuman way. On March 18, 2004, an MP, Adrian Bailey, and a lawyer for the Britons released from Guantanamo Bay, accused the USA of "propaganda" after the US authorities told the British Sun newspaper that four of the five men released had received weapon training by al-Qaida, or the Taliban, and that they had been caught with Taliban forces in Afghanistan. The four men dismissed these American claims as retaliation after they told newspapers of the way they were treated -beatings and psychological torture- while detained by the Americans. They accepted that they gave some information to their jailers, but only to stop being interrogated under duress. The British Home Secretary, David Blunkett, confirmed that he feels the five men released are not a threat to Britain. On March 20, a US pathologist, William Haglund, working for the UN, confirmed that the Northern Alliance had killed many prisoners the way described by the three Britons released from Guantanamo Bay. He analysed a sample of 15 corpses in the region; an autopsy of their bodies showed that they died of suffocation.

On March 15, 2004, the lawyer for two of the British men still held at Guantanamo Bay, Feroz Abbasi and Martin Mubanga, threatened the British government with legal action if it did not end its "complicity and participation" in their detention.

On March 24, 2004, a US military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, representing a detainee at Guantanamo Bay, said that his client, the Australian David Hicks, could not receive fair justice under the current military commission system imposed by the US government. Mr Mori was appointed by the Pentagon, not chosen by Mr Hicks.

On April 20, 2004, the US Supreme Court will hear for the first time about the detention of the 600 foreign prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay. There are in fact three different challenges in front of the Supreme Court. The first case was brought by 14 detainees -two of them were sent home to Britain a month ago- who were arrested in the autumn of 2001 in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The lawyers will tell the court that they are only guilty to have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, and that holding them without access to lawyers, without charge, and without judicial review is all wrong and against all rules of law. The following week the Supreme Court will hear the case of two US citizens held in military prisons in the same conditions.

On May 27, 2004, we were told that some Chinese intelligence officers went to Guantanamo Bay to help in the interrogation of Muslim Chinese held there. If these prisoners were sent back to China, they would most probably be killed. The Americans do not know what to do with them.

On June 4, 2004, it is believed that four of the seven French citizens held at Guantanamo Bay will soon be sent home. The Americans want more time to interrogate the other three.

On June 26, 2004, The Guardian told us that Blair personally made a secret request to Bush to have the four remaining British Guantanamo Bay prisoners sent back to Britain. This is a consequence of a legal action brought by the lawyers of two of them seeking a court order obliging Britain to formally ask for their return. The British Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, said a few days ago that the military tribunals created by the US military to try the Guantanamo Bay prisoners broke international standards.

On July 7, 2004, the Pentagon lawyers were doing all they could to prevent the Guantanamo Bay prisoners going to a civil US court represented by a lawyer of their choice as allowed by the US Supreme Court. The Pentagon announced the creation of military review panels to check the legality of the detention of every prisoner. The prisoners have not been informed of the court decision. Detainees will be called before the panel and, in principle, they could call witnesses, but their chosen lawyers will not represent them and the hearing will not be open to the public. No doubt the Supreme Court will be involved again.

On July 9, 2004, it became known that the Pentagon intended to confirm the indefinite confinement of some unnamed prisoners at Guantanamo Bay and exclude them from the promised annual review. This shows that, like at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, the USA is keeping "ghost detainees" at Guantanamo Bay. They are under CIA control and never listed in the prison books. This could change following the US Supreme Court decision but the Pentagon will do its best to continue hiding some of the prisoners.

On July 14, 2004, the US government charged a fourth detainee held at Guantanamo Bay prison. Salim Ahmed Hamdan from Yemen was at one time Osama bin Laden's driver and, possibly, bodyguard between 1996 and 2001. He is accused of terrorist conspiracy to attack civilians and acts of terrorism. Hamdan admitted that he was bin Laden's driver but rejected the accusation of terrorism. A Swedish former prisoner at Guantanamo bay said that he had been tortured almost everyday. Mehdi Ghezali added that he was chained and exposed to freezing cold, noise, and bright light for two years and a half.

On July 23, 2004, the US said that one of the Britons held at Guantanamo Bay, Feroz Abassi, had travelled to Afghanistan to train fighting in a Holy War and pledged loyalty to Osama bin Laden before September 11, 2001. The details of his training were revealed at the trial of Abu Hamza in London. The Americans describe all four remaining Britons held there as "unlawful enemy Combatants." A former follower of Abu Hamza, James Ujaama, told the court that he escorted Feroz Abassi to Afghanistan where, at the request of Abu Hamza, he introduced him to the Taliban. Feroz Abassi was captured by the Northern Alliance soldiers on December 19, 2001 near Kandahar and handed to the Americans who put him in jail at Bagram Airport before transferring him to Guantanamo Bay.

On August 3, 2004, three former British detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Rhuhel Ahmed, Shafiq Rasul and Asif Iqbal, produced a report describing what they went through in detention. In a few words, they said that they were questioned at gunpoint, repeatedly beaten, deprived of sleep, shackled in painful positions, submitted to strobe lights, and humiliated by being forced to pose naked to be photographed. This was not only at the hands of the American soldiers but British agents too were involved in these abuses. British SAS soldiers interrogated them while American guards pointed a gun at their heads. As a result they were ready to confess what they were told to say, even if it meant lying. The report will be published in the USA on August 4. And the Americans are saying that they are treating them well!

On August 4, 2004, the International Red Cross in Geneva said that if the three British citizens released from Guantanamo Bay are saying the truth, then these actions could be described as war crimes. The Red Cross added that the abuses and torture described are contrary to the Third Geneva convention and that not only the guards involved, but also the US authorities, could be accused of war crimes. At least, an organisation that dare to say what many people outside the US are thinking!

On August 4, 2004, the families of the four Britons still held at Guantanamo Bay asked for their immediate release. The allegations of torture and abuses revealed by those freed in March make them fear for their mental and physical health. They could also be condemned to long prison terms following false confessions obtained under torture and abuses. God Bless America, it needs it!

On August 25, 2004, a US investigation found no evidence that two Australian al Qaida suspects, Hicks and Habib, held at Guantanamo Bay were abused by their American captors. Hicks, a 29-year-old Islam convert arrested in late 2001 during the US-led war in Afghanistan, was the second al Qaida suspect held at the US navy base at Guantanamo Bay to face a military tribunal on August 24. Hicks pleaded not guilty to charges of attempted murder, aiding the enemy, and conspiracy to commit war crimes. The trial was scheduled for January 10, 2005. Hick's father, Terry, who travelled to Guantanamo Bay for the hearing, said his son had told him in two brief meetings that he had been beaten and tortured by US soldiers in Afghanistan. Egyptian-born Habib, in his late-40s and a father-of-four was arrested crossing from Pakistan into Afghanistan three weeks after the September 11, 2001, attacks. He also claims he was tortured and abused by his US captors. Habib is part of a second group of Guantanamo Bay detainees who will be charged. A US Department of Defence letter to Australia's ambassador to the United States said the investigation into Habib's abuse claims found he was forcibly removed from his cell at Guantanamo Bay four times by an Initial Response Force (IRF) as a consequence of his threatening and disruptive behaviour and his refusal to comply voluntarily with the orders given by the guards.

The United States on Wednesday September 22, 2004, released 11 Afghan detainees held at Guantanamo Bay. The total number of detainees who have left Guantanamo Bay has now risen to 202, and approximately 539 detainees are still being held there. Previously, the United States has already transferred 191 detainees to their respective governments - 135 for release and 56 for continued detention. Most of the remaining prisoners from about 40 countries were captured during the US-led war in Afghanistan, and have been held there without charges or access to a lawyer for more than two years.

A former inmate at Guantanamo Bay who had been sent back to Afghanistan rejoined the Taliban as a key commander; he was killed on September 25, 2004, along with two fellow fighters in a raid by Afghan security forces. Maulvi Abdul Ghaffar died along with his two comrades in a gun battle in Uruzgan, a southern province. Intelligence revealed that Ghaffar was hiding in a village called Pishi and was planning an attack against the government troops. Security forces launched the raid after surrounding the house where the militants were hiding. No Afghan soldier was hurt. Ghaffar had been a senior Taliban commander in northern Afghanistan and was arrested about two months after the US-led coalition drove the Taliban from power in late 2001. He was held for eight months at Guantanamo Bay before his release and return to Afghanistan. US military officials said they could not immediately confirm Ghaffar had once been in US custody.

The first uncensored letter from a Briton held at Guantanamo Bay was delivered to his family, his lawyers claimed on October 1, 2004. Moazzam Begg, 36, has been detained at the US military base for two-and-a-half years. In it he said he had been tortured, threatened with death, and kept in solitary confinement since early 2003. The US military authorities have always denied abuses at the camp, but they also claim that the interrogation of the detainees had provided "vital" information about al-Qaida. The two statements could be contradictory. His legal team will ask a US court to oblige the US Government to declassify details that currently cannot be revealed about torture allegations made by Mr Begg and others. Mr Begg's letter was an "absolute cry for help", directed straight at the British Government; he may have written hundreds before which never got out of the prison.

On October 18, 2004, there are still about 549 detainees from about 40 countries at the Guantanamo Bay detention centre -down from the peak of about 680 in the middle of last year. The controversy surrounding the prison has hardly diminished at all with the Bush administration's detention policies being perhaps the most consistently controversial aspect of its "global war on terrorism". It's an issue that just won't go away. The critics allege that the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay are being denied basic human rights and justice by being held for so long without trial. Guantanamo Bay became involved into the wider row over prisoner abuse; Pentagon officials acknowledge that more arduous interrogation techniques than normal were first authorised and then revoked. They insist no torture was ever authorised at Guantanamo despite numerous allegations to the contrary from released detainees; they insist the prisoners are treated humanely and, when mistreatment was discovered, the guards concerned have been punished.

On October 27, 2004, the four British citizen who were freed at the beginning of 2004 after nearly three years in Guantanamo Bay are suing the US government and more specifically Donald Rumsfelf, the US Defence Secretary, General Richard Myers the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the former head of the camp, Major General Geoffrey Miller. The action is based on the Alien Tort Claims Act, a part of the Geneva conventions. The action is supported by the New York based Centre for Constitutional Rights.

On October 31, 2004, two detainees at Guantanamo Bay are challenging the USA for the way they are treated. Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni who was one of Osama bin Laden's driver and David Hicks, an Australian who joined the Taliban, are asking the court to dismiss the charges of terrorism against them. If they succeed it could prevent the trial of all prisoners.

On November 3, 2004, the trial of David Hicks, an Australian held at Guantanamo Bay accused of fighting for the Taliban was delayed to give more time to his lawyers to interrogate witnesses and review the evidences. His trial will now take place on March 15, 2005, instead of January 10.

In the USA, on November 8, 2004, a federal judge, US District Judge James Robertson, said that the trial by a special tribunal of a Guantanamo Bay prisoner -an ex-bin Laden's driver- does not protect his rights the way it is conducted. According to the judge the trial cannot continue as the detainee may be a prisoner of war and, as such, protected by the Geneva conventions. This is, of course, a set back to the Bush administration.

On November 10, 2004, we were told that Guantanamo Bay detainees continued to be brought before military tribunals despite a judicial ruling that could halt the proceedings and future trials.

On December 30, 2004, we were told that the special tribunal created by the Pentagon to review the case of the Guantanamo Bay prisoners -after a decision of the US Supreme Court that they are illegal- has already seen 525 detainees. Only two have been released as a result, while the others saw their detention confirmed.

On January 11, 2005, the USA said that five Guantanamo Bay detainees, four Britons and one Australian would be sent back to their countries. It is possible that these five prisoners are released because their countries are supporting the USA in Iraq. If they are guilty, they should be kept like the others. Is it believable that, by pure coincidence, they are the only non-guilty Guantanamo Bay's prisoners? Probably the Americans people will believe it, whist the others will insist that most prisoners are not guilty under international laws.

On January 25, 2005, we were told that 23 prisoners at Guantanamo Bay tried to commit suicide during a weeklong protest. These prisoners tried to hang or to strangle themselves. In 2003 there about 350 "self harm" incidents including what is called by the US authorities "hanging gestures."

The four British prisoners who were freed from Guantanamo Bay after nearly three years there were held for a day by the British police at their return on January 24, 2005. They were released without charge the next day. They are: Moazzam Begg, Mubanga and Richard Belmar, and Feroz Abbasi.

On January 28, 2005, Australian Mamdouh Habid -of Egyptian origin- returned to Sidney after three years of detention at Guantanamo Bay. He was arrested in Pakistan more than three years ago on suspicion of terrorism. He will not be charged of anything in Australia.

On January 31, 2005, a US Federal judge, Joyce Hens Green, ruled that the special military tribunals at Guantanamo Bay were illegal. It is seen as a victory by the present 450 prisoners still held there, as well as by the civil right organisations that brought the suit. In principle, all the prisoners should get their day in court, which alone will decide, case by case, if their detention is justified. According to the judge these prisoners are entitled to the protection of the US Constitution and the Geneva Conventions even during the war on terror.

On February 5, 2005, a British terror suspect held in Guantanamo Bay for 33 months said he plans to sue the British government. Martin Mubanga claimed that an MI6 officer played a key role in consigning him to the US camp in Cuba. He said he was sent there after being interrogated by a British man who said he was from MI6, shortly after his arrest in Zambia in March 2002. He was brutally interrogated and daubed with urine at the camp. The home secretary said he would not launch an investigation, and that the media was not "well informed". Mr Mubanga said he had been in Afghanistan and Pakistan to study Islam. But he said he had been unable to return to the UK because he had lost his British passport. Having also a Zambian passport, he flew to Zambia instead. Mr Mubanga said the "MI6 agent" told him his passport had been found in a cave in Afghanistan along with documents listing Jewish groups in New York. The agent suggested he had been on an al-Qaida reconnaissance mission. Mr Mubanga said the man, and an American female defence official also present, tried to recruit him as an agent, but he refused; within three weeks he was told he would be sent to Guantanamo Bay.

The British government, on February 14, 2005, denied a passport to two of the British men freed from Guantanamo Bay. A letter sent to Martin Mubanga said that he would not be issued a British passport in the light of evidence gathered against him by the US. This suggested he was likely to take part in action against UK or allied targets if he left Britain. An identical letter was also sent to Feroz Abbasi, the men's solicitor said. It is not known whether the other two men released from the Cuba detention camp in January - Richard Belmar and Moazzam Begg - have also received such letters. The government is implementing a rarely used Royal Prerogative in order to withdraw the men's passports. It is only the 13th time this power has been used since 1947 - the last time was in 1976.

On March 11, 2005, we were told that the Pentagon is seeking to enlist help from the US State Department and other agencies in a plan to cut by more than half the population at its detention facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in part by transferring hundreds of suspected terrorists to prisons in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and Yemen. The transfers would be similar to the renditions, or transfers of captives to other countries, carried out by the CIA, but they are subject to stricter approval within the government, and face potential opposition from the CIA as well as the State and Justice Departments. Administration officials say those agencies have resisted some previous handovers, out of concern that transferring the prisoners to foreign governments could harm American security or subject the prisoners to mistreatment. The proposal comes as the Bush administration reviews the future of the naval base at Guantanamo as a detention centre, after court decisions and shifts in public opinion have raised legal and political questions about the use of the facility. The White House first embraced using Guantanamo as a holding place for terrorism suspects taken in Afghanistan, in part because the base was seen as beyond the jurisdiction of US law.

On March 14, 2005, a US judge blocked the transfer of 13 Yemeni prisoners from Guantanamo Bay to their country, because their lawyers argued the men could face torture, or be held indefinitely if they were sent back to Yemen, or moved to another country. The men will stay at the US base in Cuba until the court considers a motion requiring authorities to give lawyers 30 days' notice before moving them. The Pentagon wants to reduce the number of prisoners at the military prison. There are still about 540 detainees at Guantanamo Bay, including more than 100 each from Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen. The Pentagon wants to transfer hundreds of them to their home countries, for release or continued detention. However, previous such attempts have failed because of concerns about security and prisoner mistreatment. Most prisoners at Guantanamo are held without charge and are no longer considered to be of any intelligence value.

On April 19, 2005, The United States has returned 17 men from Guantanamo Bay prison to Afghanistan. The group has been turned over to local security officials, who will decide whether to free them or hold them in jail. Afghan government officials say the 17 men, who have already arrived in Kabul, are in custody awaiting a decision on their future.

A Briton, Moazzam Begg, freed from Guantanamo Bay four years after he was seized by the CIA, has launched a campaign for the release of the five UK residents still held in Cuba on April 21, 2005. He believes that there was "some onus" on the government to repatriate the five. During his detention he had met two of the men, including Bisher al-Rawi, who had facial marks and showed the "remnants of a beating". He added: "Although these people are not British citizens, their families certainly are, their children are." "The fact that the British government had given them leave to stay or the status as political refugees, I think there is some onus on them, some duty to work for their repatriation and their rights."

On May 16, 2005, US magazine Newsweek has said it erred in reporting that a copy of the Koran had been flushed down a toilet at Guantanamo Bay by US interrogators. It said a US military investigation had failed to corroborate the story and apologised for carrying the report. At least 15 people have been killed in anti-US riots in Afghanistan following the article's publication last week. Former inmates of the US facility in Cuba have made several claims of desecration of the Koran. As well as the deaths in Afghanistan, more than 100 people have been injured in violent protests across the Muslim world, from Pakistan to Indonesia. In Pakistan, an alliance of six conservative Islamic parties has already rejected Newsweek's retraction. Alliance leader, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, said it was "a crude attempt, both by the weekly magazine and the American authorities to defuse the anger of the Muslims across the world". What must we believe: Newsweek's original story or the retraction?

On August 6, 2005, Amnesty International has strongly opposed the US decision to transfer Afghan detainees from Guantanamo Bay prison to Afghanistan. "Guantanamo Bay detainees who are returned to Afghanistan may be at risk of torture, ill-treatment and other human right abuses," the London-based watchdog warned in the statement. The statement issued after the announcement of Washington to hand over some 110 Afghan detainees languishing at the notorious US Naval base detention centre of Guantanamo Bay over the past three and half years on charge of alleged links with Taliban and al-Qaida networks. US administration would also adopt similar approach with detainees from Saudi Arabia and Yemen and send them to their homeland for further trial. The US has so far released over 200 Afghan detainees from Guantanamo Bay after prosecution and punishment, but this time would hand the prisoners over to their government for interrogation. Amnesty International in its press release also said that prisoners were beaten, tortured or denied adequate food in the post-war nation. "The US should close Guantanamo and either charge the detainees under US law or release them," the statement said.

The US is negotiating the transfer of nearly 70 percent of the prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay back to their home countries in an attempt to dramatically reduce the number of "enemy combatants" in US custody, it emerged on Friday August 5, 2005. Earlier this week, the Bush administration formally agreed to the transfer of 110 detainees from the prison camp in Cuba to Afghanistan, and the US is pursuing similar agreements with Saudi Arabia and Yemen. The deal with Afghanistan also includes handing over 350 detainees being held by the US at Bagram air base near Kabul. The US was working to send 129 Saudis and 107 Yemenis from Guantanamo to the custody of their home countries. Added to the Afghan prisoner returns, that would mean a drop in the population of the prison camp from 510 to 164. The move is not a precursor to closing the controversial facility.

The US has transferred to Afghanistan five prisoners from the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, which holds terror suspects and is negotiating with other countries the departure of 120 more detainees. Some 120 detainees whom the federal Government has determined as eligible for transfer remain at Guantanamo; their departure is a subject of ongoing negotiations between Washington and other capitals. About 315 detainees have already departed to countries including Afghanistan, Australia, Egypt, France, Germany, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Pakistan, Russia and Saudi Arabia. Approximately 445 detainees still remain at the naval facility in Guantanamo.

Seven Afghan men arrived in their home country Saturday December 16, 2006 -weary, angry and proclaiming their innocence- after years of imprisonment in the US military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. With long, unkempt beards, the men appeared at a news conference. All seven men said they were wrongly arrested, but that they were not beaten or mistreated in any way while imprisoned. One claimed he was forced to join the Taliban, while another said he was arrested merely for being Muslim.

Many detainees locked up at Guantanamo were innocent men swept up by US forces unable to distinguish enemies from non-combatants, a former Bush administration official, Lawrence B. Wilkerson, a Republican who was chief of staff to then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, said Thursday March 19, 2009. Wilkerson learned from briefings and by communicating with military commanders that the US soon realized many Guantanamo detainees were innocent but nevertheless held them in hopes they could provide information for a "mosaic" of intelligence.

5.4.2 Prisoners held by the Americans in the USA and in Afghanistan
i- The first man to go to court in relation with the terrorist attacks on New York City and Washington DC is a French citizen of Moroccan origin, Zacarias Moussaoui. He could be the missing 20th member of the gang that took over four planes on September 11, 2001. In each plane there were five terrorists with the exception of the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania where there were only four terrorists. At that time Moussaoui was in prison in the US on an immigration charge. The American authorities believe that he followed the same training as the other nineteen, including taking flying lessons. He was taken to Court in Alexandria, Virginia, on January 2, 2001, and his trial was scheduled for October 15, 2001.

Zacarias Moussaoui tried to plead guilty at a pre-trial hearing at the US Court in Alexandria, Virginia, on July 18, 2002. The judge refused the plea, asking him to think it over for a week. Moussaoui, defending himself, did not seem to be very coherent or well balanced; he gave the impression to be mentally disturbed, or limited. If the plea is finally accepted, hundred of journalists of all over the world who applied to follow the trial will be unhappy. However a week later, he changed his mind and took back his guilty plea.

The American authorities thought of transferring Zacarias Moussaoui from his Federal prison to Guantanamo Bay, as his civilian prosecution is difficult, if not impossible. Transferring him in Guantanamo Bay would allow the American to have him tried by a military court that does not requires the same proofs to condemn a suspect. American justice again!!

Ramzi Binaslsshibh, the suspected coordinator of the September attack, said that the Frenchman Zacarias Moussaoui was linked to the people involved in the attacks. According to him, Massaoui met the mastermind, Khalid Sheik Mohammed in Afghanistan in the winter of 2000.

On December 3, 2003, US Federal appeal judges were deliberating if Zacarias Moussaoui can receive a fair trial while the US government refuses to let him call some al-Qaida witnesses who, according to him, could exonerate him. These witnesses, Ramzi Binalshibh and Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, are in US custody, possibly at Guantanamo Bay. The government said that their testimony could endanger US security, and that if he insists, they will re-classify him as enemy-combatant and, in this case, he wouldn't have access to a lawyer or be brought before a civil court. Is not that blackmail?

On December 30, 2003, a federal appeal court ruled that the al-Qaida suspect, Zacarias Moussaoui, cannot defend himself and that he must have a defence lawyer.

On Friday April 22, 2005, a US court will hear a guilty plea from the only man charged in the US over the attacks. Zacarias Moussaoui, who was born in France to Moroccan parents, has been charged with conspiracy. He could face the death penalty if convicted.

The US government said on April 23, 2005, that it will seek the death penalty for Zacarias Moussaoui. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales made the announcement after Moussaoui pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges. However, Moussaoui said he had no part in the 9/11 plot itself, but he admitted being involved in a wider conspiracy to attack the White House. He said he will fight the death penalty. The judge has to rule on whether a jury will decide the issue.

ii- The twenty-year-old American, John Lindh Walker, was taken prisoner in Afghanistan while helping the Taliban. He survived the massacre by the Northern Alliance soldiers that took place in a fort near Mazar-e-Sharif on November 25, 2001; he was then taken in charge by the American authorities on December 2. He was kept prisoner for a few weeks on the USS Bataan where he was interrogated while the authorities decided if he is a traitor, and as such he could be condemned to death, or a poor American who made a wrong choice, or only another classical Californian nut. Apparently, it is President Bush who must decide. This too is American justice!

The American authorities flew him back to the USA on January 23, 2002 where he will appear before a civilian Court in Virginia accused, not of treason for which he could have been condemned to death, but of aiding foreign terrorist groups to kill US citizens in the Afghanistan's conflict. For this he could be condemned to life in prison.

John Walker Lindh admitted that he had been attending an al-Qaida training camp. However he is not going to prison in Guantanamo Bay like the other Taliban prisoners -another proof that this place is not fit for Americans, only good enough for foreigners- but to a prison in Virginia. He will appear in Court there.

His defence lawyers said that he was tortured while in temporary custody in a US Army Base near Kandahar in Afghanistan last December. They are showing pictures of him naked, handcuffed, blindfolded, and in a metal container similar to a coffin. At the same time the Federal prosecutors admit that they have no evidence that he killed any Americans, or that he conspired to do so. If they treat their own nationals this way, it is normal to ask how they treat foreign prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and inside Afghanistan.

John Lindh's attorneys will not be able to talk to potential witnesses detained at Guantanamo Bay. They claim that some of the detainees could confirm that John Lindh was fighting with the Taliban against the Northern Alliance, and not against the US. On July 9, 2002, John Walker Lindh reached a deal with the authorities. He pleaded guilty to two of the ten charges he faced: illegally helping the Taliban and carrying explosives. In exchange the government dropped eight charges, one of them, conspiring to murder Americans that could have led him to receive a life sentence without possibility of parole. He was sentenced on October 4, 2002, to 20 years in prison.

Iii- A terrorist, an English man of Jamaican origin, Richard Reid, was caught on a plane from Paris to Miami with 197 people on board on December 22, 2001, trying to ignite some explosive hidden in his shoes. Fortunately an airhostess noticed what he was doing and, with the help of some travellers, he was immobilised. The American Airlines plane did an emergency landing at Boston where Reid was arrested. He appeared in court and was kept in custody.

Richard Reid pleaded guilty to all charges. He said that he was a follower of bin Laden and an enemy of the US: "Basically, I got on the plane with a bomb. I tried to ignite it. I am a follower of Osama bin Laden. I am an enemy of the US". He will be sentenced in January 2003 and he risks from 60 years to life in prison.

On January 22, 2003, it was revealed that Richard Reid tried six times to set fire to the bomb he carried in his shoes before he was subdued by some flight attendants and passengers. On January 30, 2003, he was sentenced to life in prison.

iv- Around February 5, 2002, the former Taliban Foreign Minister drove from Pakistan where he had found a safe hiding place and surrendered to the Afghan authorities. He was handed to the Americans for interrogation. Probably, he had reached a deal with them: safety for information. In any case he was held in a deluxe cell in Kandahar, a much nicer cell that those given to the ordinary Taliban, or al-Qaida soldiers.

v- The British newspapers expressed some concerns about the prisoners in American hands in Guantanamo Bay and in Afghanistan. A British citizen of Pakistani origin, Moazzam Begg, formerly living and teaching in Afghanistan, and then a refugee in Islamabad, was arrested there by Pakistani policemen and American soldiers at the beginning of February 2002. He was thrown in a car boot and driven to Afghanistan where he was held prisoner near Kandahar. His family was not informed, no lawyer can get in touch with him, and he was not formally charged of any offence. This case shows that many prisoners were not necessarily "combatant" members of the Taliban or al-Qaida, as the US authorities are saying. It is believed that many of them have been taken prisoners on the base of their nationality or race. It is known that more than 100 British Muslim families immigrated to Afghanistan before September 11, 2001, to live what they consider a true Muslim life. Later on, Moazzam Begg was transferred to Guantanamo Bay.

vi- On April 6, 2002, a second US citizen, Yasser Esam Hambi from Baton Rouge Louisiana, was held prisoner at Guantanamo Bay. His parents came from Saudi Arabia, but he was born in the USA where he will be transferred. He too was captured last November after the revolt in the fort at Mazar-I-Sharif. He was fighting with the Taliban's northern army and he surrendered with 400 other foreign volunteers after being trapped in Kunduz. Although he always claimed to be an US citizen, it took four months to the US authorities to confirm his nationality.

vii- On September 21, 2003, we were told that a Muslim US Army chaplain who worked with the detainees at Guantanamo Bay had been arrested and put in jail on September 10 for espionage and giving "improper assistance" to the detainees. He has not yet been charged. Captain James Yee was caught carrying classified documents, including maps of the base and prisoners' names. He was arrested in Jacksonville, Florida, and jailed in Charleston, South Carolina. In the same prison there is also Jose Padilla, the suspected "dirty bomber" and Yaser Esam Hamdi, the American-born of Saudi origin accused of fighting with the Taliban.

On December 9, 2003, US Army Captain James Yee was formally charged of carrying a list of the prisoners held at Guantanamo Bay and their interrogators. An immigration officer in Jacksonville, Florida, found the list in his luggage on September 10, 2003. Captain Yee will appear before a military court at Fort Benning, Georgia, to decide if he should face a court-martial on charges such as mishandling classified documents and adultery.

On April 14, 2004, a US military court dropped all charges against the Guantanamo Bay Muslin chaplain, Captain James Yee. He was found guilty of much lesser sex related charges.

viii- On September 24, 2003, a military interpreter, Syrian born Senior Airman Ahmad al-Halabi, was arrested and charged with espionage while working at the Guantanamo Bay naval base in Cuba. He could face the death penalty. On September 24, we were told that three other military personnel were being interrogated. According to some unconfirmed information, James Jousef Yee, the Muslin chaplain arrested a few days ago, and al-Halabi were working for the Syrians, but this was denied by the Syrian authorities.

ix- On September 30, 2003, a third person working as an interpreter at Guantanamo Bay has been arrested for false testimony. His name was not revealed. Two other militaries have already been arrested and accused of spying.

x- In Chicago an Islamic charity leader, Enaam Arnaout, accused of funding Osama bin Laden's organisation, will go on trial on February 4, 2003.

xi- Jose Padilla, who changed his name to Abdullah al-Muhajir, was held in military prison in Charleston, South Carolina, after he was arrested in Chicago on May 8, 2002, on his return from Pakistan. He is accused of masterminding an alleged plot to detonate a radioactive "dirty Bomb". He was declared an enemy combatant and sent to an army jail without charge and without access to a lawyer.

On December 4, 2002, a federal judge ruled that Padilla should have access to a lawyer. Padilla, an American citizen in jail since May 2002, was declared an enemy combatant by president Bush, and kept in a military prison without possibility to talk to his lawyer. Now, he will be able to do it, but with conditions. On the other hand, the foreign prisoners at Guantanamo Bay do not have this possibility. The American laws discriminate against foreigners. On December 18, 2003, the 2d US Circuit Court of Appeal in New York ordered his release, within 30 days. According to the court he must be released, or tried in a civilian court.

On January 16, 2004, the Bush administration asked a Federal Court not to force the release of the suspected terrorist, Padilla, although he is US-born; they immediately appealed the case to the Supreme Court.

xii- On December 11, 2002, the US administration said that most of the 900 people arrested in the USA without charge after September 11, 2001, have been released, deported, or convicted of minor crimes not related to terrorism. Only 6 people were still in jail.

About 400 Muslim men were arrested in mid-December 2002 mainly in south California without access to a lawyer, or to a court of law. These Muslims were obliged to report to the INS (Immigration and Naturalisation Service) as required by the new law against terrorism. As they presented themselves during the last days, they were arrested while their background was checked. By Christmas most of them were released, but the Washington based "Council on American-Islamic Relations" and other similar organisations presented a class action in court for discrimination and false arrest.

On January 12, 2004, the US Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal by the Centre for National Security Studies, the American Civil Liberties Union, and several media organisations. These organisations challenged the secrecy surrounding the arrest and detention of hundreds of people, mainly Muslims, after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The Bush administration refused to release information about the detainees who had no access to lawyers. The suit claimed that this was a violation of the Freedom of Information Act and the constitutional guarantee of freedom of the press. The Supreme Court disagreed and refused to intervene, which means that the US government can continue its practice.

On January 26, 2004, a federal judge declared unconstitutional a section of the USA Patriotic Act that bars giving expert advice or assistance to group designated foreign terrorist organisations.

xiii- One of six men charged with being part of a terrorist sleeping cell in Buffalo, New York state, Faysal Galab, pleaded guilty on January 10, 2003, to supporting al-Qaida by attending one of its training camps in Afghanistan before September 11, 2001. He admitted contributing to support Osama bin Laden's organisation. For this he could be condemned to one to ten years in prison. He also said that he and his fellow terrorists were awaiting orders from Osama bin Laden to carry out an attack in the USA.

On December 3, 2003, a federal judge sentenced the Yemeni-American, Muktar al-Bakri, to 10 years in prison for supporting a terrorist organisation. He was accused to have met Osama bin Laden in an al-Qaida camp he attended in Afghanistan. He is one of the six men of what is described as being a sleeping al-Qaida cell in Buffalo, NY. A second member of the same cell known as "Lackawanna" was sentenced the next day to 8 year in prison for supporting terrorism. Yasein Taher admitted that he trained with al-Qaida in Afghanistan before September 11, 2001.

xiv- The US government transferred a Qatari man, Ali Saleh Kahlah al-Marri from an American jail to the custody of the Pentagon on June 23, 2003. He is believed to be an al-Qaida operative helping other members to settle in the USA to prepare other attacks after September 11, 2001. President Bush declared Mr al-Marri an enemy combatant.

xv- Yaser Esam Hamdi, an American-born Saudi accused of fighting with the Taliban was held in military prison in Charleston, South Carolina. He is being held as "enemy combatant" since November 2001 and, according to the Bush administration, this denies his right to a lawyer, or a trial. On December 2, 2003, the Pentagon decided to allow Yaser Esam Hamdi access to a lawyer after the Supreme Court has been asked to decide if the US government has unconstitutionally imprisoned Hamdi without access to a lawyer and without charges. On December 3, 2003, the Bush administration repeated that enemy-combatants do not have access to lawyers; however, an exception was made for the US-born Yaser Esam Hamdi. On January 9, 2004, the US Supreme Court agreed to hear his case - he is a US-born man captured in November 2001 during the fighting in Afghanistan and held without charge since. Yaser Esam Hamdi is suspected to be a Taliban foot soldier; he is now held in a military prison in Charleston, SC, after spending sometime at Guantanamo Bay. Although he is an US citizen, the USA said that he was an "enemy combatant" and, as such, had no access to a lawyer and had no legal protection.

On August 28, 2004, a US judge reprimanded the authorities for failing to explain why they have held incommunicado an American citizen labelled as an "enemy combatant". Yasir Hamdi, who was born in Louisiana and raised in Saudi Arabia, was detained in 2001 and held with other accused Taliban fighters at the US Navy base in Guantanamo Bay. He was later, in April 2002, transferred to a naval prison in South Carolina, where he has been held in solitary confinement.

A US citizen held prisoner since his capture by US forces in Afghanistan in 2001 is due to be sent to Saudi Arabia as part of a deal securing his release (September 23, 2004). The Justice Department agreed to free Yaser Esam Hamdi on the condition that he gives up his US citizenship. Mr Hamdi, who is of Saudi descent, was allegedly captured while fighting US forces alongside the Taliban militia. Designated an "enemy combatant" by the Bush administration, Mr Hamdi was never charged with any offence and has spent more than two years in prisons run by the US military. He was initially shipped to the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, but was transferred to jails in Virginia and South Carolina after it became known that he was a US citizen.

xvi- On March 7, 2003, some British newspapers reported that Afghan prisoners have been beaten to death at US military bases in Afghanistan. Officially two prisoners died in December 2002 while being held for interrogation in the US military base in Bagram. According to a US military pathologist's report, they have been beaten to death. The usual investigation is underway. The autopsy speaks of "blunt force injury" and both deaths are treated as homicide. Former prisoners claim that they were chained to the ceiling, shackled so tightly that their blood flow stopped, they were kept naked, hooded and kicked to keep them awake for days on end. It is well known that the US interrogate its prisoners in foreign countries where they can treat them as they want, the US laws being not applicable outside the USA. And this is the land of freedom and justice!!

On December 1, 2003, Amnesty International criticised the USA for not telling the result of an internal inquiry about the death of two Afghans, Mullah Habibullah and Dilawar, at the US Air Base at Bagram, Afghanistan, one year ago. The two men died while in US custody and the autopsy said that it was homicide as blunt force injuries were seen on their bodies.

xvii- On August 21, 2004, the American military authorities were requested by the UN to open their detention centres to independent inspectors. There are about 300 to 400 detainees held at Bagram Air Base near the capital, Kabul, and in Kandahar. One of the issues was the military's treatment of detainees in Afghanistan. In addition to holding detainees in these two main centres, the US has numerous holding centres in the field where even agents of the International Committee of the Red Cross were denied access.

xviii- On August 25, 2004, it became known that Afghans now being held in US detention centres in Afghanistan will be tried and sentenced by the Afghan authorities. But because Afghanistan barely has a functioning judicial and prison system, the detainees will remain in US custody indefinitely. This decision acknowledges that the detainees do not represent an international security threat. Those who do have been moved to Guantanamo Bay; they will face trial there. Coalition officials have not provided an exact figure on the number of Afghans in US detention, but it is believed to be in the hundreds.

xix- On January 16, 2005, we were told that the US freed 81 Afghan prisoners as a gesture of goodwill, and to mark the beginning of a reconciliation programme in Afghanistan. Other prisoners should be freed in the next future.

xx- A German citizen was transferred by the Central Intelligence Agency out of Macedonia in 2003 and imprisoned in Afghanistan for six months even though half way through his detention it became clear he was innocent, we were told on April 22, 2005. Khalid al-Masri was held in secret at an Afghani prison, nicknamed the Salt Pit, for three months while Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) agents considered what to do with him until Condoleezza Rice, who was then national security adviser to President George Bush, ordered him set free. Al-Masri's case highlights the highly controversial practice of so-called rendition used by US officials to capture people they suspect of terrorism and jail them in countries where their treatment is unconstrained by US laws. Macedonian authorities first detained al-Masri in late December 2002, because his name matched someone who had trained in an al-Qaida camp and he had a fake passport. The Macedonians contacted the CIA and al-Masri said he was kidnapped and flown by US officials to Afghanistan where he was kept in harsh conditions until his release in late May 2004.

xxi- The US military released 86 suspected Taliban militants on Sunday May 1, 2005, from its Bagram and other detention centres in Afghanistan. US forces in Afghanistan have been stepping up releases of prisoners who are not seen as security threats, in line with efforts to encourage reconciliation in the country.

xxii- A confidential Army file released on May 20, 2005, details the brutal deaths of two Afghan prisoners at the hands of U.S. military interrogators in Bagram, Afghanistan. Seven U.S. soldiers face charges over the deaths, which the military initially said were the result of "natural causes."

xxiii- Twenty detainees were released from US detention facilities in Afghan capital Kabul on Saturday July 16, 2005, as part of the Afghan government's strengthening peace program. The detainees were given a medical examination and their personal effects and transferred from the coalition custody in Bagram Airfield to the Afghan government. A total of 199 detainees have agreed to participate in the program. The first group of 57 were released on July 2 and 76 were released July 9. The rest of the participants will be released in the near future. In the efforts to end Taliban-led militancy and stabilize security in the war-torn nation, Afghan President Hamid karzai hasannounced amnesty for all armed opposition groups except Taliban' s chief Mullah Mohammad Omar and his close aids and commanders numbering 150. Under the policy, over 200 suspected Taliban detainees have been released this year, while over 400 Afghans with the suspicionof having links with Taliban and al-Qaida are still in some 23 US detention centers in Afghanistan.

xxiv- On Thursday February 17, 2005, we were told that US soldiers in Afghanistan posed before cameras while threatening to shoot prisoners in the head, shoving a detainee into a wall, and in "trophy shots" with the corpse of an enemy fighter who invaded their camp last year. Most photos were destroyed but some remaining images were discovered by chance last year during the routine cleaning of a captain's office at Bagram airfield in Afghanistan. The photos were apparently shot at a small base in Afghanistan. This led to preliminary charges against eight soldiers for dereliction of duty after the army decided that more serious assault charges would not hold up.

Two US soldiers have been charged with allegedly assaulting two detainees held at a US-led coalition base in southern Afghanistan, the military said on Sunday October 30, 2005. They allegedly punched the detainees on the chest, shoulders and stomach while they were being held at a base in Uruzgan province. The charges include conspiracy to maltreat, assault, and dereliction of duty. The allegations, if substantiated, could lead to disciplinary action.

The U.S. military holds some 500 terror suspects at a prison in Bagram, Afghanistan, indefinitely and without charges we were told on February 26, 2006. Some of the detainees have been held at Bagram, some 60 km north of the Afghan capital of Kabul, for as long as two or three years, and unlike those at Guantanamo, they have no access to lawyers, no right to hear the allegations against them and only rudimentary reviews of their status as "enemy combatants," military officials were quoted as saying.

5.4.3 Prisoners held by the Afghans
On November 26, 2001, hundred of Taliban and al-Qaida prisoners kept in an old fort near Mazar-e-Sharif revolted. The Northern Alliance soldiers killed most of them -only 60 to 80 survived from an initial number of 5 to 600.

A mass grave that could contain the remains of one thousand Taliban has been discovered in the desert near Shiberghan in northern Afghanistan. These soldiers were taken prisoners by the Northern Alliance troops in Kunduz. From there they were sent to Shiberghan in closed shipping containers with up to 300 men in each container. Many died of thirst. It also looks like many others were shot and buried at the same place. This put the USA on the spot as US Special Forces were advising the Afghans. Apparently the US soldiers refused to see what was going on. The Afghan authorities have promised an inquest to clarify what went on.

At the beginning of 2002, the British soldiers in Afghanistan were handing over their captured Taliban and al-Qaida prisoners to the Afghan authorities, and not to the Americans who were claiming them. The Afghan interim leader, Hamid Karzai, promised to take care of them. They will not formally be given prisoners of war status, but they will be treated according to the Geneva Conventions. This is in complete contrast to what the US does with the prisoners in their care.

At the beginning of 2002, United Nations' representatives visited some Taliban kept prisoners in the north of the country. They reported that the prisons run by the Northern Alliance were comparable to the German concentration camps of Auswitch and Buckenwald. They asked the Afghan leader, Hamid Karzai, to do something about it but his authority is very limited.

Around March 20, 2003 the Afghan government said that they would send back home 72 Pakistani prisoners in the next few days. Those who are kept in Afghanistan are described as having had link with al-Qaida.

On February 9, 2003, the Afghan government freed about 140 Taliban prisoners (some said 320), as a goodwill gesture before the Muslim festival of Eid al-Adha. It is known that about half of them were members of the Taliban, but it is not clear if they were fighters or supporters.

On July 7, 2004, the Afghan police discovered a private prison in Kabul run by a former American special forces soldier, Jonathan Keith "Jack" Idema. In the house/prison they discovered three men hanging by their feet from the ceiling as well as five other captives. Of course, the prisoners were tortured. Idema was in fact a freelance bounty hunter hoping to be paid if he found Taliban and al-Qaida fighters wanted by the USA. The highest reward is for Osama bin Laden and is worth $25m. Idema is a product of the present American society as created by President George W Bush. Following the discovery, Afghan security forces arrested three Americans and four Afghans accused of illegally detaining and interrogating local citizens.

On July 21, 2004, "Jack" Idema the American accused of running a private interrogation centre and jail in Afghanistan went on trial. He said that he was acting under an agreement with Donald Rumsfelt's office that knew and approved what he was doing. He added that he was working for the US counter terrorist group, the Pentagon, and other US agencies. He was in contact with them by fax, phone, and emails. The US Defence department and the military authorities in Afghanistan denied Idema's claims. They added that they did not know anything about him or his activities, and that they do not employ him. On July 22, it appeared that Idema was indeed working for the American authorities. A preliminary inquiry revealed that he even handed over a suspect to the US military in Afghanistan. This suspects was then kept in jail at Bagram airbase for about a month.

On August 16, 2004, three Americans facing trial in Afghanistan for running a private counter-terrorism operation denied they tortured prisoners and accused authorities of withholding evidence that proves the U.S. military knew what they were doing. Jonathan Idema with co- defendants Brett Bennett and Edward Caraballo, accused U.S. and Afghan officials of conspiring against them and said they couldn't defend properly because they had no translation of the indictment or laws on which they are being charged. The judge accused them of wasting time. Idema says Afghan intelligence agents passed on evidence to the U.S. that proves the defendants were operating with the knowledge of the American military. According to the military, the men were freelancers operating outside the law and without their knowledge.

On August 18, 2004, the American mercenary, Jonathan "Jack" Idema, accused of kidnapping and torturing terror suspects in Afghanistan told a court in Kabul that the FBI was withholding hundreds of papers, photographs and videotapes showing that he was employed by the agency, as well as by the CIA and the US military. The American government denies all links with the former Special Forces soldier, a convicted fraudster, but has agreed to return the controversial documents, the court hearing was told. The case against Mr Idema was adjourned for a week to allow him to examine the documents and prove his alleged links with the US government. They made their second court appearance yesterday, alongside four Afghans who are accused of helping them. The hearing was a confused affair, marred by emotional outbursts from Mr Idema, rebukes from the presiding judge, Abdul Bakhtari, and poor translation.

On August 23, 2004, defence lawyers for three Americans charged with imprisoning and torturing Afghan nationals have presented evidence linking a defendant to a senior Afghan official. A videotape shows former Education Minister Yunus Qanuni congratulating accused vigilante leader Jonathan Idema. Mr. Qanuni also offers to provide security officers to assist Mr. Idema's forces. Prosecutors argue the defendants ran a private prison in Kabul and tortured several detainees. Afghan court once again adjourned the trial of three US vigilantes and their four Afghan interpreters. "About 90 percent of the hearing has been completed and the verdict will be issued next Monday, August 30," Presiding Judge Abdul Baset Bakhtiary told the audience after four-hour hearing.

On August 23, 2004, a United Nations Expert on Afghanistan said that abuses are taking place in many illegal jails. He asked for their release. Professor Cherif Bassiouni was referring to a group of 725 Taliban prisoners, out of some 3,200 persons originally detained by the Northern Alliance who were later on transferred from Shibergan to Pul-e-Charkhi prison under the authority of the Government. The expert said they were kept in inhuman conditions. He called the detention illegal, because the suspects were official combatants and therefore they must be treated as prisoners of war.

On August 24, 2004, the United States Embassy confirmed that it was monitoring the trial of three Americans accused of kidnapping, detaining and torturing Afghans to ensure that the men are treated fairly. The United States believed that the Afghan authorities had not mistreated the men in custody and that the government had the right to try them. Afghan officials have confirmed that Mr. Idema met with at least two cabinet ministers. The American military has acknowledged receiving one detainee from him, and the Pentagon has acknowledged receiving phone calls from him. But the official said that there was "no evidence whatsoever that Idema worked for us or was doing anything with the U.S. government.''

On August 24, 2004, Afghanistan agreed to repatriate 400 Pakistani prisoners accused of fighting with the Taliban and held in Afghan jails since 2001. Pakistan will in exchange return about 250 Afghan prisoners it is holding, mostly for minor offences. No date has been set yet for the exchange. Afghan President Hamid Karzai reached the agreement with Pakistani Prime Minister Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain during a two-day visit to Pakistan. This visit aimed at improving the relations between the two countries that have been strained by allegations Taliban members are carrying out attacks on Afghanistan from Pakistan. The Pakistanis to be repatriated include Taliban fighters detained by the Northern Alliance, which helped the US drive out the Taliban in 2001

On Wednesday August 25, 2004, we were told that hundreds of suspected militants held by US-led forces in Afghanistan since the overthrow of the Taliban in late 2001 will be tried in Afghan courts under local laws. Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Lieutenant-General David Barno, the overall commander of US-led troops in Afghanistan, agreed the plan earlier this month. These detainees pose no major threat. The US military was holding them until now because Afghanistan lacked prisons and its judicial system was being rebuilt. Former prisoners released from US jails in Afghanistan said they were tortured and abused while in custody, raising concerns that scandal over the mistreatment of prisoners at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison earlier this year was not an isolated episode.

The trial of three Americans charged with imprisoning and torturing Afghan nationals was postponed for 10 days, as requested by the defendants' lawyers. The hearing was scheduled to begin Monday August 30, 2004, but the judge granted newly arrived defence lawyers more time to prepare their case. Prosecutors argue the defendants ran a private prison in Kabul and tortured several detainees.

On September 8, 2004, Afghanistan's president, Hamid Karzai, ordered the release of more than 350 Taliban prisoners who were captured when the Islamic regime was toppled nearly three years ago. They were among thousands of Taliban fighters arrested by Afghan forces in the country's northern region after the collapse of the hardline regime in late 2001. President Karzai has already set free hundreds of prisoners including dozens of Pakistani nationals who came to Afghanistan to help the Taliban in their fight against the United States. The release comes weeks after a United Nations human rights expert called for more than 700 Taliban ex-fighters detained in Afghan and US holding facilities, to be freed.

On September 15, 2004, an Afghan court has sentenced three Americans to between eight and 10 years in prison for illegally running a private jail and torturing suspects in a "private war on terror". Jonathan Idema and Brent Bennett received 10-year terms while co-defendant Edward Carabello was handed an eight-year term by the special tribunal in Kabul which has been hearing the case since mid-August. Their four Afghan accomplices were sentenced to between one and five years in prison. US media have described Idema as a bounty hunter. International troops deployed in Afghanistan have confirmed that they assisted Idema on three separate raids, presuming him to be a member of the US special forces. The US-led coalition also said it had taken into custody a man presented by Idema as a terrorist suspect but had later released the man. The case has illuminated the shadowy world of private security contractors in Afghanistan and strengthened calls by rights groups for the US-led military to open its detention centres to independent inspection.

On October 1, 2004, a lawyer for one of three Americans jailed in Afghanistan for illegally running a private anti-terror campaign and secret jail has asked for a US Congressional probe to look into bringing the trio home. Robert Fogelnest, attorney for photojournalist Edward Caraballo, a New York resident, said the trial of the three was a "sham" and the case "raises many questions to which the American people deserve answers." He urged Senator Hillary Clinton and Senator Chuck Schumer to open a Congressional investigation to have the Americans "returned home, placed under oath, and afforded an opportunity, under penalty of perjury, to answer the questions put to them and present the available evidence. An Afghan court sentenced Carabello, 42, and the two others earlier this month to between eight and 10 years in prison. Jonathan "Jack" Idema, 48, and Brent Bennett, 28, received 10-year terms. Caraballo was handed an eight-year sentence by the special tribunal in Kabul. The three were arrested in July for allegedly running a private prison and counter-terrorism operation in west Kabul and jailing and torturing at least eight Afghans as part of a "private war on terror."

Afghan security forces are surrounding a notorious high-security jail where an uprising by up to 2,000 prisoners is under way on February 25, 2006. Taliban and al-Qaeda members as well as ordinary criminals are involved. Scores of Afghan soldiers have surrounded Kabul's Pul-e-Charkhi jail. Negotiation attempts seem to have failed.

More than 1,000 Afghan police and soldiers still surrounded the nation's highest security prison on February 26, 2006, after an uprising broke out in three sections containing hundreds of inmates. Prison officials said at least seven inmates were killed and others were wounded. At least three people who appeared to be U.S. soldiers were involved as well. There were Humvees parked outside, and the three were in U.S. military uniforms. Some shots could be heard from inside. A predator drone flew overhead. The sections involved included the women's block housing about 500, the political prisoners block containing as many as 900, and a criminal block housing about 700.

5.4.4 Prisoners held elsewhere
On January 3, 2002, the Pakistani arrested the former Taliban ambassador in Islamabad, Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, who acted as the Taliban spokesman during the US invasion campaign. No reason was given for his arrest. Another Taliban leader was said to be in custody since the beginning of January. He is Ibn Al-Asaykh Al-Libi, a Libyan, who ran some of the al-Qaida training camps in Afghanistan.

On April 22, 2004, a British court ordered the release of a prisoner from the high security Belmarch prison. The prisoner whose name is unknown -he is known as M- is suspected of being a terrorist. He told The Guardian that his fellow prisoners are suffering from acute psychological problems and are always thinking of suicide. They are held without access to lawyers and without charge since the end of 2001. A second prisoner known as G was also released to become the first prisoner in Britain to be held under house arrest; he was too mentally sick to be kept in prison. This is another defeat for the Home Secretary David Blunkett who fought to keep both of them in jail.