User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/habeas/Al Shareef v. Bush
Al Shareef v. Bush
(Civil Action No. 05-cv-2458)
is a writ of habeas corpus filed on behalf of Guantanamo detainees Fahd Umar Abdulmajid Al Shareef and Hani Saeed Mohammed Banan Al-Kalf Al-Gamdi before US District Court Judge Richard W. Roberts.[1]
Contents
Seizure of privileged lawyer-client documents
On June 10, 2006 the Department of Defense reported that three captives died in custody. The Department of Defense stated the three men committed suicide. Camp authorities called the deaths "an act of asymmetric warfare", and suspected plans had been coordinated by the captive's attorneys -- so they seized all the captives' documents, including the captives' copies of their habeas documents.[2] Since the habeas documents were privileged lawyer-client communication the Department of Justice was compelled to file documents about the document seizures. Hani Saeed Mohammed Banan Al-Kalf Al-Gamdi's privileged attorney-client documents were among those seized.[1] Justice Robert's protective order on their behalf was cited in other protective orders filed on behalf of other Guantanamo captives, because it set a precedent that captives could have protective orders filed, even though the Detainee Treatment Act put restrictions on Guantanamo captives' use of habeas corpus.
Protective order
A protective order was filed on behalf of the two men in December 2006, requiring the Bush administration to give their attorneys thirty days notice of plans to transfer them from Guantanamo.
Military Commissions Act
The Military Commissions Act of 2006 mandated that Guantanamo captives were no longer entitled to access the US civil justice system, so all outstanding habeas corpus petitions were stayed.[3]
Boumediene v. Bush
On June 12, 2008 the United States Supreme Court ruled, in Boumediene v. Bush, that the Military Commissions Act could not remove the right for Guantanamo captives to access the US Federal Court system. And all previous Guantanamo captives' habeas petitions were eligible to be re-instated. The judges considering the captives' habeas petitions would be considering whether the evidence used to compile the allegations the men and boys were enemy combatants justified a classification of "enemy combatant".[4]
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Richard W. Roberts (2006-12-08). "Fahd Umar Abdulmajid Al-Shareef v. George W. Bush -- Civil Action No. 05-cv-2458 (RWR)". United States Department of Justice. http://www.websupp.org/data/DDC/1:05-cv-02458-28-DDC.pdf. Retrieved 2008-12-10. mirror
- ↑ "Respondents' response to Court's August 7, 2006 order". United States Department of Defense. August 15, 2006. http://www.pegc.us/archive/OK_v_Bush/govt_resp_to_GK_20060815.pdf. Retrieved 2008-06-23. mirror
- ↑ Peter D. Keisler, Douglas N. Letter (2006-10-16). "NOTICE OF MILITARY COMMISSIONS ACT OF 2006". United States Department of Justice. http://natseclaw.typepad.com/natseclaw/files/Hamdan.28j.letter.pdf. Retrieved 2008-09-30. mirror
- ↑ Farah Stockman (2008-10-24). "Lawyers debate 'enemy combatant'". Boston Globe. http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/10/24/lawyers_debate_enemy_combatant/. Retrieved 2008-10-24. mirror
{{case-law-stub}}
