CHIEF PROSECUTOR MARK MARTINS
REMARKS AT GUANTANAMO BAY
27 JUNE 2017

Good evening. This week, the Military Commission convened to try the charges against
Abd al Hadi al-Iraqi will hold its twelfth pre-trial session without panel members present. Abd al
Hadi is charged with committing serious violations of the law of war as a senior member of al
Qaeda in a series of unlawful attacks and other offenses in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and elsewhere
from 2001 to 2006. These attacks and other offenses allegedly killed or injured U.S. and
coalition service members and civilians, while also destroying property.
The charges against Abd al Hadi 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. Although I will not comment on the specifics of any motions pending
before a military commission, I will provide background for this week’s pre-trial sessions.
The Docketing Order for this week’s pre-trial session is Appellate Exhibit 87, which
should be available on the Office of Military Commission’s website soon. According to the
Docketing Order, the Commission will hear argument with respect to several motions. The
Military Judge has directed that tomorrow’s work will commence with Government and Defense
Counsel gathering alone with him to discuss the use, relevance, and admissibility of certain
classified information to which the Defense has notified the Government it intends to refer during
a future session of the Commission. Such a proceeding to discuss use, relevance, and
admissibility of classified information is called an “M.C.R.E. 505(h) hearing” after the Military
Commission Rule of Evidence which authorizes it and requires it to be conducted in camera, or
without the public present, in order to protect the classified information from disclosure. As this
M.C.R.E. 505(h) hearing will also be conducted outside the presence of Abd al Hadi, the Military
Judge’s decision to sequence the proceedings in this way precludes any disruption of the
Accused’s observation of Eid al-Fitr. Today is the last day of Eid al-Fitr, the feast at the end of
Ramadan, the Muslim holy month of fasting.
Other business on the Docket includes Appellate Exhibit 70RR, a motion by the
Government for the appropriate relief with respect to Appellate Exhibit 70I. Appellate Exhibit
70I is an order by the Military Commission granting the in-court deposition of Ahmed
Mohammad Ahmed Haza Al Darbi. In Appellate Exhibit 70RR, the Commission will consider
appropriate safeguards for use during the deposition, which is currently scheduled to take place
this coming August.
Appellate Exhibit 83 is a defense motion to allow the Accused to be present at closed
sessions. The Defense argues that the Accused has a statutory right under the Military
Commissions Act to attend pretrial sessions even if those sessions involve classified

1

 information. The Government maintains that the Defense misconstrues the statutory
provisions in question.
Appellate Exhibit 84 is a defense motion for appropriate relief for a privileged
communication order. The Defense argues that a memorandum issued on March 3, 2014 by
the Commander of Joint Task Force Guantanamo is too restrictive regarding communications
between the Accused and his defense counsel.
Appellate Exhibit 85 is a defense motion to dismiss the charges. The Defense argues
that Congress lacks the authority under the Constitution to limit the jurisdiction of law of war
military commissions to non-citizens.
Appellate Exhibit 86 is a defense motion to require the convening authority to accept ex
parte requests for expert assistance and other resources, meaning such requests would be
hidden from the Prosecution. The Defense argues that filing requests for expert assistance
under existing procedures provides the Prosecution an opportunity to preview defense
strategies. The Prosecution maintains that the law properly limits ex parte requests to unusual
circumstances and that abuse of this limitation undermines the proper functioning of the
system by which the parties are intended to bring evidence and witnesses to trial.
In part because the briefing cycle for some of these motions is just finishing, some of
the filings have not yet posted to the military commissions website. They will be posted as
soon as possible.
*

*

*

*

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

2