CHIEF PROSECUTOR MARK MARTINS
REMARKS AT GUANTANAMO BAY
19 OCTOBER 2016
Good afternoon. Today the Military Commission convened to try the charges against
Abd Al Rahim Hussayn Muhammad Al Nashiri completed another series of pre-trial sessions to
resolve disputes regarding outstanding legal and evidentiary issues. Before I briefly summarize
these matters, I emphasize that the charges against the Accused are only allegations. The
Accused is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
Matters under consideration by a military commission in this or any other particular case are
authoritatively dealt with by the presiding Judge. Any comments addressing systemic issues that
are the subject of frequent questions by interested observers should always be understood to
defer to specific judicial rulings, if applicable.
Matters Addressed by the Commission
This week the Commission addressed several matters by examining the parties’ written
briefs, hearing oral argument, and taking testimony from three witnesses in nearly seven hours of
testimony. Specifically, the Commission:
•

took testimony from three witnesses on Appellate Exhibit 332X, a renewed defense
motion to dismiss the case on unlawful-influence grounds.

•

heard oral argument on Appellate Exhibit 357, a defense motion to abate the
proceedings while the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces reviews another case.
The Commission denied the motion. AE 357B.

•

heard additional oral argument on Appellate Exhibit 355, a defense motion to compel
the government to produce ex parte communications. The Commission granted the
motion with respect to two communications.

•

heard argument on Appellate Exhibit 332AA, a defense motion to compel discovery
regarding Appellate Exhibit 332X discussed above.

•

heard oral argument on Appellate Exhibit 362, a defense motion to compel funding
for an attorney “to prevent systemic ineffectiveness of counsel.” The Judge took the
motion under advisement.

•

heard initial oral argument on Appellate Exhibit 359B, a defense motion to compel
discovery regarding a defense motion for the Accused to be housed at the
Expeditionary Legal Center during commission sessions.

1

 Work Completed to Date Reflects Methodical Implementation of Law
To date, the government has provided more than 265,000 pages of discovery to the
defense. The parties have briefed in writing some 431 substantive motions and have orally
argued some 324 motions. Of the 431 motions briefed, 54 have been mooted, dismissed, or
withdrawn; 320 have been ruled on by the Judge; and 19 have been submitted for and are
pending decision. The Commission has received testimony from 18 witnesses in nearly 30 hours
of testimony, with all witnesses subject to cross-examination to assist it in deciding pre-trial
motions. The parties have filed 38 exhibits and more than 29 declarations alleging facts and
providing references to inform the Judge’s consideration of these issues. This information, while
never meant to imply that justice can be quantified, nonetheless reflects methodical and
deliberate movement toward trial.
As I mentioned at the beginning of the week, on 30 September 2016 the government
notified the Military Commission in Appellate Exhibit 120AAAAAA that the United States is
now in compliance with the Commission’s 24 June 2014 Order (AE 120AA) and with its
affirmative discovery obligations. The Order had directed the government to produce
discoverable information relating to the Central Intelligence Agency’s former Rendition,
Detention, and Interrogation Program within a ten-category construct. For eight of the ten
categories, the Commission has approved requests for substitutions and other relief under the
Military Commissions Act to prevent damage to national security. While Accused and counsel
will be receiving additional forms of discovery as trial approaches, and while large amounts of
classified discovery that are subject to government requests for substitutions and other relief will
yet require an undetermined period of review by the Commission, the government’s notice in
Appellate Exhibit 120AAAAAA provides the Military Judge key information that should better
equip him to prescribe the timing, manner, and order of these proceedings, including trial on the
merits. This marks a significant milestone.
*

*

*

*

For their tireless support to these proceedings, I commend and thank the Soldiers, Sailors,
Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and government civilians of Joint Base Andrews, Joint
Task Force Guantanamo, and Naval Station Guantanamo Bay.

2