| | |  Americas & Beyond | August 2008 
US Military Jury Finds Hamdan Guilty on One Terrorism Charge
 Agence France-Presse
go to original
| | Salim Hamdan. (Artwork: Janet Hamlin | | |
US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba - Military jurors found Osama bin Laden's former driver Salim Hamdan not guilty Wednesday on terrorist conspiracy charges but convicted him on the lesser charge of providing material support to terrorism.
The split verdict marked a dramatic conclusion of the first trial before the special tribunals created by President George W. Bush to try suspects in the "war on terror."
The jury must now set a sentence for Hamdan, who faces a possible maximum term of life in prison.
His trial was seen as an important test of the controversial military commission system, which has been widely criticized by human rights groups as unfair.
The White House welcomed the verdict shortly after it was announced.
"We're pleased that Salim Hamdan received a fair trial," spokesman Tony Fratto said.
Clad in a white turban and tan coat, Hamdan, stood with a solemn expression and then bowed his head as the verdict was read out by the head of the jury in a makeshift courtroom at the remote US naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
On the single count of support for terrorism, Hamdan was found guilty of five specifications under the charge, alleging he served as a driver for bin Laden and provided assistance to the al-Qaeda network.
Prosecutors said from 1998 to 2001 Hamdan ferried weapons for al-Qaeda and was fully aware that bin Laden's organization engaged in terrorism.
"This military commission finds you on charge number one (conspiracy) not guilty ... of charge two (material support for terrorism), guilty," announced the head of the jury, a Navy officer whose identity was withheld.
But rejecting the conspiracy charge showed prosecutors were not able to prove to the jury Hamdan plotted and planned al-Qaeda attacks on civilians or other targets.
Defense lawyers said they would appeal the verdict after questioning whether Hamdan's role as a driver qualifies as a war crime. They also allege dubious evidence was presented in the case from coercive interrogations.
"Is material support a war crime? The defense believes it is not," one of Hamdan's lawyers, Michael Berrigan, told reporters after the verdict. "That issue will go forward on appeal."
Berrigan said it was a "travesty" that Hamdan was convicted under a law adopted in 2006, which established the military commissions, long after he was detained.
Other inmates at Guantanamo face similar conspiracy charges and rights advocates said those cases could falter as well for lack of evidence.
"This verdict will complicate the administration's plans to prosecute dozens of detainees in Guantanamo Bay," Ben Wizner of the American Civil Liberties Union told AFP after watching the trial's conclusion.
"I think you see even in a flawed system the administration's positions in the so-called war on terror are too extreme even for American military officers," he said of the jury's verdict.
During two weeks of proceedings, prosecutor John Murphy described Hamdan as among an inner circle of bin Laden's henchmen.
"He's an al-Qaeda warrior. He has wounded, and the people he has worked with have wounded the world," Murphy told the jury.
But the defense argued that although he was bin Laden's driver, Hamdan was a minor figure without a role in terrorist plots. His lawyers invoked the Nuremberg trials, saying Adolf Hitler's driver was never prosecuted for war crimes.
New York-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) slammed the proceedings as marred by irregularities favoring the prosecution, making it all but impossible for Hamdan to get a fair hearing.
"The verdict was in long before the jury began to deliberate," said HRW's Carol Chodroff.
Under the US Military Commissions Act of 2006, it takes a two-thirds majority - or four of the six officers on the jury panel - to convict. It was not clear how the jurors voted in the case.
The military commissions have faced repeated legal challenges and Hamdan's appeal could affect future trials.
In 2006, the Supreme Court invalidated the commissions, which were restored a few months later by the US Congress. |
|
| |
Vallarta Weddings
Tell a Friend
Site Map
Print this Page
Email Us