Controversial ruling may allow defendants to avoid death penalty in Guantanamo Bay court
In a decision that could dramatically alter the course of one of the most consequential terrorism prosecutions in U.S. history, a military judge has ruled that plea deals for 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and two co-defendants are valid. The ruling reverses Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s attempt to nullify the deals, which would spare the defendants from the death penalty in exchange for guilty pleas.
Judge’s ruling overrules Pentagon chief’s veto
Military Judge Air Force Col. Matthew McCall found that Austin’s order to void the plea agreements lacked legal authority. This conclusion, shared by a government official on the condition of anonymity, means that unless the plea agreements are challenged again, the three defendants could soon enter guilty pleas in a U.S. military courtroom at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The agreements, once finalized, would be a significant development in the prolonged prosecution of Mohammed, Walid bin Attash, and Mustafa al-Hawsawi. Together, they face charges related to the September 11, 2001, attacks that claimed nearly 3,000 lives.
The case has been mired in legal challenges, including ongoing pretrial hearings to determine the admissibility of statements made by the defendants after years of CIA custody, which involved the use of torture.
Pentagon reviews controversial decision
Pentagon spokesperson Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder confirmed the ruling and stated that the Pentagon is reviewing the decision, with no immediate comment on its next steps.
The decision has not yet been officially published but was reported by a legal blog specializing in Guantanamo Bay military commission proceedings.
According to the blog, Lawdragon, McCall’s 29-page ruling describes the timing of Austin’s order as “fatal,” as it was issued after the top official at the Guantanamo military commission had approved the deals. McCall reportedly warned that complying with Austin’s veto would grant the defense secretary “absolute veto power” over independent decisions made by the presiding judge in the Guantanamo trials.
Political and legal complexities surround plea deals
The plea agreements, revealed earlier this year, sparked immediate backlash from Republican lawmakers and others who argued that sparing the death penalty in a case of such gravity should be a decision made solely by the defense secretary. In response to the criticism, Austin issued an order canceling the deals, citing the severity of the 9/11 attacks.
However, legal experts note that the defendants’ history of torture while in CIA custody has introduced complex legal hurdles that could impact any trial, sentencing, or appeals process. Some family members of 9/11 victims have advocated for trials and potential death sentences, while others believe the plea agreements might be the only feasible way to conclude the long-delayed case.
The fate of the plea deals now rests on whether government prosecutors will mount another challenge or allow the guilty pleas to proceed. If upheld, the ruling could bring the nearly two-decade prosecution closer to resolution, though legal appeals are expected to follow if death penalties are pursued.
Guantanamo’s troubled history with the 9/11 case
The case has endured years of delays, with numerous legal obstacles including issues over destroyed CIA interrogation tapes, the legitimacy of “clean team” FBI interrogations, and whether torture-tainted evidence can be admitted in court. If the 9/11 cases eventually go to trial, it is likely that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit would review these issues extensively, particularly in cases involving potential death sentences.
The impact of McCall’s ruling
McCall’s decision signals a shift toward judicial independence at the Guantanamo military commission, setting a precedent for the autonomy of its presiding officials from external executive pressures. Whether this move accelerates the conclusion of the 9/11 prosecutions remains uncertain, but it brings the possibility of guilty pleas and an end to a historic legal battle that has lasted more than two decades.