Guantanamo prisoner boycotts U.S. war tribunal

By Jane Sutton

GUANTANAMO BAY U.S. NAVAL BASE, Cuba (Reuters) – A Yemeni
accused of being a bodyguard for Osama bin Laden went before a
U.S. military tribunal on Wednesday and said he would boycott
his war crimes trial because he did not recognize the
tribunal’s authority.

Yemeni Ali Hamza al Bahlul, who has acknowledged that he is
“from al Qaeda,” is one of only nine Guantanamo prisoners
charged with crimes. Most of the 500 or so detainees have been
held without charges for years in the U.S. war on terrorism.
The hearing began on the fourth anniversary of the camp’s
opening.

Bahlul is accused of conspiring to commit war crimes by
acting as a bin Laden bodyguard and making recruiting videos
for al Qaeda. He was escorted by two officers into a courtroom
at the remote U.S. military base in Cuba for pretrial arguments
and said he did not recognize the tribunal’s authority.

“There’s going to be a tribunal of God on the day of
judgment,” Bahlul told the court. “Do what you have to do and
rule however you have to rule … God will rule based on
justice.” His comments were made in Arabic.

Bahlul ended his participation in the proceedings with one
word in English “Boycott,” and presiding officer, Army Col.
Peter Brownback set his trial tentatively for May 15.

A separate tribunal of U.S. military officers was scheduled
to convene later Wednesday in the murder case against Canadian
prisoner Omar Khadr, 19. He is accused of killing an Army medic
with a grenade during a firefight at a suspected al Qaeda
compound in Afghanistan when he was just 15.

The Pentagon is proceeding with the two cases even though
U.S. courts have halted the trials of other Guantanamo
prisoners pending a U.S. Supreme Court ruling on whether
President George W. Bush had authority to establish the
tribunals. The high court will hear arguments in the case in
March.

Bahlul, with a short beard and mustache and wearing khaki
pants and a dark blue shirt, was not shackled or handcuffed in
the courtroom.

Earlier in the hearing he read a list of nine reasons why
he refused to be represented by a military lawyer or to
participate further, including the treatment of Palestinians by
U.S. ally Israel — “your allies, the Jews,” he said — and
because his native Yemen had been accused in the bombing of the
USS Cole.

TORTURE ALLEGATIONS

Bahlul also said Guantanamo prisoners had been tortured and
that the Britons who had been held there were not subject to
military tribunals. He objected to the potential use of secret
evidence and to the U.S. characterization of the prisoners as
illegal belligerents.

“We are prisoners of war and legal combatants based on our
religion and our religious law,” he said. “We do not care about
anything that you call us.”

Brownback rejected Bahlul’s request to represent himself
and Bahlul refused to meet with Army Reserve Maj. Tom Fleener,
the lawyer appointed by the military to defend him.

Smiling and thanking Brownback, he held up a sheet of paper
scrawled with the word ‘Boycott’ in English and Arabic. He
removed the earphones that had enabled him to listen to an
Arabic translation of the proceedings, and refused to enter a
plea or to stand when the charges were read.

Bahlul and Khadr could face life in prison if convicted by
the tribunals, which were authorized by Bush to try foreign
terrorism suspects after the September 11 attacks.

The United States has faced criticism at home and abroad
for its treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo since the first
group arrived from Afghanistan, shackled and wearing black-out
goggles and surgical masks, on January 11, 2002.

Fleener has called the tribunals a sham and said he
believes it is an ethical violation for him to represent a
prisoner who has rejected his services. Brownback ordered him
to defend Bahlul anyway.

Human rights groups have criticized rules allowing the use
of evidence that may have been obtained through torture.

Chief prosecutor Col. Moe Davis said the tribunal system
was designed to provide a fair trial while addressing an al
Qaeda enemy whose actions had not been anticipated under
existing law.