In a significant ruling that could impact the legal proceedings related to the September 11, 2001 attacks, a U.S. military appeals court has decided that plea agreements involving the alleged mastermind of the 9/11 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and two of his accomplices can move forward. This decision comes after a challenge from U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, who had previously sought to invalidate the deals.
The appeals court ruling late Monday upholds a previous decision by a military judge, who determined that Austin’s efforts to revoke the plea agreements were untimely. The court’s order affirms that the agreements, which were made between the Pentagon and the three detainees at Guantanamo Bay, remain in effect.
In August 2024, Secretary Austin rescinded the plea deals, which had been negotiated by the Pentagon under the Trump administration. The agreements would have allowed the men, including Mohammed, to plead guilty to their involvement in the 9/11 attacks in exchange for avoiding the death penalty. However, after Austin’s move to invalidate the deals, a military judge ruled in November that the rescinding was too late, thus preserving the legality of the agreements.
The Pentagon has refrained from commenting on the ruling. Previously, officials stated that Austin was unaware of the plea negotiations and that the process is typically handled independently of the Defense Secretary’s office.
Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, widely known as the most prominent detainee at the Guantanamo Bay detention facility, is accused of orchestrating the tragic 9/11 attacks, which resulted in the deaths of nearly 3,000 people. The attacks, which involved hijacking commercial airplanes and crashing them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, led the U.S. into a prolonged war in Afghanistan.
Mohammed, along with his co-defendants, had been detained at Guantanamo Bay since 2002, where the U.S. government began holding foreign detainees suspected of terrorism-related offenses in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.
Guantanamo Bay has long been a subject of controversy due to allegations of torture and inhumane treatment of detainees. Human rights organizations, including the United Nations, have condemned the U.S. for its use of torture during the “war on terror,” a stance that has drawn significant international criticism. In 2014, former President Barack Obama acknowledged that the U.S. engaged in torture and stated that such practices were “contrary to our values.”
The ongoing legal battle regarding the 9/11 plotters and their potential plea deals has brought renewed attention to the broader debate over the treatment of detainees at Guantanamo Bay.
In a separate development on Monday, the Pentagon announced the repatriation of Ridah Bin Saleh Al-Yazidi, one of the longest-held detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Al-Yazidi, who had been held without charge for more than two decades, was transferred to his home country of Tunisia. Currently, 26 detainees remain at the facility, with 14 of them eligible for transfer.
The legal proceedings surrounding the 9/11 plotters continue to unfold, and the latest appeals court decision marks an important chapter in the long-running saga of Guantanamo Bay detainees. As the case progresses, it is likely to raise further questions about the intersection of national security, human rights, and legal procedures in the U.S. justice system.
Read more: