Shocking Twist: Top Pentagon Official Powerless to Stop Controversial 9/11 Plea Bargains

The 9/11 attacks, carried out by the al-Qaida terrorist group, killed nearly 3,000 people on September 11, 2001, and were a key catalyst for the subsequent U.S. military invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, which were part of the broader “war on terror” campaign initiated by the George W. Bush administration.

The plea agreements, which had been the result of two years of government-approved negotiations, were officially announced late last summer. Military prosecutors and defense attorneys for Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the attacks, as well as his two co-defendants, reached the deal after prolonged discussions. The court’s decision, issued on Monday night, ensures that the legal process will move forward according to the terms of these agreements. However, the U.S. official noted that further details of the ruling remain restricted due to its confidential nature.

Supporters of the plea agreements view them as a means of finally bringing closure to the long-running and legally complex case against Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Walid bin Attash, and Mustafa al-Hawsawi at the U.S. military commission located at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. The case, which has been mired in legal challenges, has faced numerous delays and obstacles, and the plea deals are seen by some as a way to move beyond these issues. The pretrial hearings for Mohammed, bin Attash, and al-Hawsawi have been ongoing for over a decade, with the legal proceedings stretching far beyond initial expectations. These extended hearings have been marked by various legal, procedural, and political complications, which have made it difficult to reach a final resolution. The plea agreements offer a potential path forward, aiming to resolve the case after years of stalling and controversy.

Much of the attention in the pretrial arguments surrounding the case has been focused on the issue of how the men were treated during their time in CIA custody after their initial detention. Specifically, there has been significant concern about the use of torture on the defendants in the early years following their capture and how this may impact the overall evidence in the case. The defense has argued that the mistreatment could taint the reliability and admissibility of the evidence against them.

In response to news of the plea agreements reached earlier this summer, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin quickly issued an order attempting to nullify the deals. He justified his decision by emphasizing the severity of the 9/11 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people, and argued that, as the Secretary of Defense, he held the authority to make final decisions on any plea agreements that could result in the defendants avoiding the death penalty.

However, defense attorneys strongly disagreed with Austin’s move, arguing that he did not have the legal authority to overturn a decision that had already been approved by the highest-ranking authority at the Guantanamo court. They contended that his action was an unlawful interference in a case that had already progressed through the proper legal channels, marking a contentious point in the ongoing legal battle over how to handle the prosecution of the 9/11 suspects.

The military judge overseeing the 9/11 case, Air Force Colonel Matthew McCall, had previously ruled that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin did not have the authority to cancel the plea agreements once they were already in motion. This decision led to the Defense Department’s appeal to the military appeals court.

Now, Austin has the option to further pursue his efforts to overturn the plea deals by appealing to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The Pentagon has not yet provided a response to requests for comment on this matter.

In a separate development, the Pentagon announced the repatriation of one of the longest-held detainees at Guantanamo Bay, a Tunisian man named Ridah bin Saleh al-Yazidi. U.S. authorities had approved his transfer more than a decade ago. Al-Yazidi’s return to Tunisia reduces the number of detainees at Guantanamo to 26, down from a peak of approximately 700 Muslim men who were held at the prison in the years following the 9/11 attacks.

With al-Yazidi’s repatriation, 14 men remain at Guantanamo, awaiting transfer to other countries. These individuals have been cleared for release by U.S. authorities, who have waived any prosecution and determined that they no longer pose security threats.

Under pressure from human rights organizations calling for the release of detainees still held at Guantanamo Bay without charges, the Biden administration facilitated the transfer of three more men this month. The U.S. government has stated that it is actively seeking suitable and stable countries that are willing to accept the remaining 14 detainees at Guantanamo.

In a statement, the U.S. military confirmed that it had worked closely with Tunisian authorities to ensure the “responsible transfer” of Ridah bin Saleh al-Yazidi, a detainee who had been held at Guantanamo since 2002. Al-Yazidi was one of the Muslim detainees brought to the facility after being captured abroad following the 9/11 attacks. His repatriation marks a significant milestone, as he is the last of a group of twelve Tunisian men who were once detained at Guantanamo.

Regarding the detainees still at Guantanamo, seven are involved in active legal proceedings, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and his co-defendants, who are facing charges related to the 9/11 attacks. Additionally, two of the 26 remaining detainees have already been convicted and sentenced by the military commission. The U.S. continues to work on finding solutions for those still held at the facility, with an emphasis on securing their transfer to countries that meet the necessary security and legal criteria.