10/25 Motions Session #7: Force Feeding Matters

Odds and ends are batted around, as some motions are deemed moot, and others are put off until the case’s December sitting.  The whittling down takes us eventually to AE158, and to Ruiz’s bid to prevent force-feeding of his client, Mustafa Al-Hawsawi.

The medical community has roundly condemned force-feeding, says the lawyer.  When asked, Ruiz says Al-Hawsawi generally has abstained from eating, though Ruiz leaves open the question of whether his client meets the criteria for a “hunger strike” under Guantanamo rules. One way or the other, he has urged the court to bar force-feeding of Al-Hawsawi; and/or to order the JTF-GTMO to provide notice whenever force-feeding will be deployed.

The court doubts: a detention facility can’t ever intervene to save a detainee’s life?  Ruiz counters with the considered judgment of the medical world, which, again, disavows force-feeding, full-stop.  So, the court asks, the medical ethics people say the detainee ought to die? There’s a pause.  Yes, when you have a human being of sound body and mind, then force-feeding is off the table, answers Ruiz.  The military judge mulls the logical conclusion of the lawyer’s position, which seems to imply a right to commit suicide during detention.  Ruiz emphasizes the need for notice: that makes for a vastly less intrusive approach than the status quo, he says.  After notice, JTF-GTMO can then ask the court for authority to force-feed.  The military judge puzzles: how could I grant such authority, if your client has a truly has a right not to be force-fed in the first place?  The circularity hangs in the room for a moment, as court and counsel debate a bit more.   Ruiz winds up.

The baton passes to CPT Michael Lebowitz, a prosecutor.  Al-Hawsawi isn’t a hunger striker, and isn’t facing down any force-feeding.  This isn’t a ripe motion at all, he argues.  That to one side, he responds to Ruiz’s claims, and in two respects.  One, medical staff will always strive to save the lives of detainees under their care, says Lebowitz.  Secondly, there’s no way to delay a life-saving medical procedure, so as to provide notice to counsel and litigation. That notion is as dangerous as it is unnecessary.  When asked by the court, Lebowitz says that designation as a hunger striker does not mean immediate and automatic force-feeding.  A bit more, and the prosecutor concludes.

Ruiz, in reply, cites various medical guidelines and manuals.  These say that a patient of sound mind and body gets to decide when to refuse food. His motion proposes to preserve that principle.  He argues a bit further, insisting that his request is reasonable, and again sits down.

Guess what?  All docketed items have either been deferred until next session, or presuppose a Rule 505(h) conference.  Judge Pohl goes so far as to suggest that the latter might be held back in D.C.  Wherever it will go down, it appears that---so far as your correspondent is concerned---our pretrial session is done.  Until next time.