Charges Dismissed Against El Sawah Without Prejudice
Back in March, the Convening Authority dismissed the charges against Guantanamo detainee Tarek Mahmoud El Sawah of conspiracy to commit acts attacking civilians, attacking civilian objects, murder in violation of the law of war, destruction of property in violation of the law of war, hazarding a vessel, terrorism and for providing material support to an international terrorist organization engaged in hostilities with the United States.
The redacted filing was made available today.
Why, you ask, would the Convening Authority do such a thing?
Don't get too excited.
It's because El Sawah was
Published by The Lawfare Institute
in Cooperation With
Back in March, the Convening Authority dismissed the charges against Guantanamo detainee Tarek Mahmoud El Sawah of conspiracy to commit acts attacking civilians, attacking civilian objects, murder in violation of the law of war, destruction of property in violation of the law of war, hazarding a vessel, terrorism and for providing material support to an international terrorist organization engaged in hostilities with the United States.
The redacted filing was made available today.
Why, you ask, would the Convening Authority do such a thing?
Don't get too excited.
It's because El Sawah was charged back in 2008 under the Military Commissions Act of 2006, and so the prosecution asked that the case be dismissed so that the prosecution could then charge him and try him under the more recent Act, which was passed in 2009 and now supersedes the 2006 MCA.
El Sawah's defense counsel argued that the charges either be dismissed with prejudice or El Sawah be provided with a speedy trial. Here's what the prosecutor had to say about that:
In our view, the constitutional right to a speedy trial does not apply to Military Commissions cases. Further, RMC 707, "Timeliness", is not triggered until after referral of charges, which has not occurred. Consequently, I recommend you deny the defense request and instead dismiss the charges without prejudice as I am requesting. That action will eliminate the existence of sworn charges as the defense requests without preventing future prosecution if and when appropriate. There is no reason to prevent future prosecution by dismissing with prejudice.Read the Legal Advisor's Pretrial Advice, direction of the Convening Authority, memo requesting that the charges be dismissed and the original charge sheet here.
Raffaela Wakeman is a Senior Director at In-Q-Tel. She started her career at the Brookings Institution, where she spent five years conducting research on national security, election reform, and Congress. During this time she was also the Associate Editor of Lawfare. From there, Raffaela practiced law at the U.S. Department of Defense for four years, advising her clients on privacy and surveillance law, cybersecurity, and foreign liaison relationships. She departed DoD in 2019 to join the Majority Staff of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where she oversaw the Intelligence Community’s science and technology portfolios, cybersecurity, and surveillance activities. She left HPSCI in May 2021 to join IQT.
Raffaela received her BS and MS in Political Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2009 and her law degree from Georgetown University Law Center in 2015, where she was recognized for her commitment to public service with the Joyce Chiang Memorial Award. While at the Department of Defense, she was the inaugural recipient of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s General Counsel Award for exhibiting the highest standards of leadership, professional conduct, and integrity.
-final.png?sfvrsn=b70826ae_3)
