More Fashion Flavor at GTMO: Defense Reply Regarding Courtroom Attire in 9/11 Case

Wells Bennett
Tuesday, June 19, 2012, 9:35 AM
Now available: the 9/11 defendants' joint reply to the "Government's Response to Motion to Cease Psychological Dislocation Techniques And Denial of Detainees' Right to Dress in the Clothes of Their Own Choosing."  Recall that various accused allegedly had been denied their choice of threads for the May arraignment before Judge Pohl; Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, for example, desired to wear a camouflage vest and turban, but Guantanamo military offic

Published by The Lawfare Institute
in Cooperation With
Brookings

Now available: the 9/11 defendants' joint reply to the "Government's Response to Motion to Cease Psychological Dislocation Techniques And Denial of Detainees' Right to Dress in the Clothes of Their Own Choosing."  Recall that various accused allegedly had been denied their choice of threads for the May arraignment before Judge Pohl; Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, for example, desired to wear a camouflage vest and turban, but Guantanamo military officials nixed that request.  Mohammed's sartorial complaint and similar ones were the subjects of the defense's motion, and an opposition filed by the government. In reply, the defense first claims that Judge Pohl, and not JTF-GTMO personnel, is responsible for determining appropriate courtroom attire.  Secondly, the lawyers say, JTF-GTMO staff designed their clothing review procedure in an arbitrary and discriminatory fashion - that is, for the 9/11 defendants alone.  The accused in another commission case, Majid Khan, had exercised his right to choose particular clothing, but he did not undergo the kind of screening challenged by the 9/11 defendants in their motion.

Wells C. Bennett was Managing Editor of Lawfare and a Fellow in National Security Law at the Brookings Institution. Before coming to Brookings, he was an Associate at Arnold & Porter LLP.

Subscribe to Lawfare