By Jane Sutton
MIAMI, Dec 12 (Reuters) - The U.S. military judge overseeing
the Guantanamo prosecution of five alleged conspirators in the
Sept. 11 attacks has issued an order maintaining secrecy over
the defendants' experiences in clandestine CIA prisons.
The protective order safeguarding classified information in
the case was signed on Dec. 6 by the judge, Army Colonel James
Pohl, and unsealed on Wednesday.
It is not limited to documents formally labeled "Top Secret"
by the CIA or produced by the government, but also prohibits
disclosure of the defendants' own "observations and experiences"
in the secret CIA detention, rendition and interrogation
program.
Pohl is the chief judge overseeing the war crimes tribunals
established by the United States to try foreign captives on
terrorism-related charges at the Guantanamo Bay U.S. Naval Base
in Cuba.
The defendants in the 9/11 case, including the alleged
mastermind of the hijacked plane plot, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed
and four other Pakistani, Yemeni and Saudi captives, face
charges that could lead to their execution.
All five were held in secret CIA prisons from the time of
their capture in 2002 and 2003 until they were sent to
Guantanamo in 2006. All have said they were tortured by their
U.S. captors and the CIA has acknowledged it subjected Mohammed
to the simulated drowning technique of waterboarding 183 times.
Pohl's order prohibits public disclosure of any information
that would reveal where the defendants were held; the names,
identities and physical descriptions of anyone involved in their
capture, transfer, detention or interrogation; and details about
the interrogation techniques used on them.
Prosecutors had asked for the order and said it was needed to
prevent disclosure of information that could cause grave harm to
the security of the United States and its allies.
"By imposing a protective order, he has done what all courts
do to responsibly handle national security information while
also ensuring both that the accused will receive a fair trial
and that the proceedings will be as open and public as
possible," a Defense Department spokesman said in response to
the ruling.
Defense lawyers and civil liberties advocates called the
order an attempt to conceal torture and censor the defendants'
own memories. They said the CIA made its interrogation
techniques public once it disclosed them to the defendants.
The ruling comes as the Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence weighs whether to release a 6,000-plus-page report
analyzing the CIA detention and interrogation program that was
launched after the 9/11 attacks.
The report is expected to shed light on whether torture
produced information that led to the discovery of Osama bin
Laden's whereabouts. U.S. special forces killed the al Qaeda
leader during a raid at a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, in
2011.
Confessions obtained through torture cannot be used as
evidence at Guantanamo or in any U.S. court.
Pohl also issued an order maintaining the use of a 40-second
delay on the audio feed to the Guantanamo courtroom spectators'
gallery.
Journalists, observers and victims' relatives watch the
hearings live from behind a soundproof glass wall but the audio
is piped in on a delay that gives the court security officer
time to muffle the sound if someone mentions information that
might be secret.
A consortium of news outlets, including Reuters, argued in
October that the delay violated the American public's
constitutional right to hear the testimony and failed to meet a
requirement that censorship be narrowly tailored.
The American Civil Liberties Union, which also challenged
the use of the "censorship chamber," said it would seek further
review of Pohl's ruling.
"The government wanted to ensure that the American public
would never hear the defendants' accounts of illegal CIA
torture, rendition and detention, and the military judge has
gone along with that shameful plan," said Hina Shamsi, director
of the ACLU's National Security Program.
"The decision undermines the government's claim that the
military commission system is transparent and deals a grave blow
to its legitimacy."
Follow us on Twitter @ReutersLegal | Like us on Facebook