The Dispute Over Detention

This flow traces the changing government rationale for holding Slahi and the legal challenge that exposed its uncertainty without resolving his case.

increasingBearing stren­gth in each eventdecreasing

No Criminal Charge

Detained Without a Court Moving Allegations Slahi was questioned first about the Millennium Plot, then about his contacts and the September 11 attacks. The focus shifted repeatedly, while no criminal charge was filed. A Demand for Explanation He repeatedly asked interrogators what crime he had committed. Their answers relied on suspicion, association, and the assertion that he belonged to a larger conspiracy. An Unstable Basis The lack of a clear charge became a central feature of his experience. He could neither prepare a defense nor know what information would supposedly secure his freedom.

A Habeas Petition

A Legal Question in Handwriting Filing from a Cell Slahi wrote a petition for a writ of habeas corpus by hand in his Guantánamo cell. He argued that he had committed no crimes against the United States and asked for release. A Claim to Be Heard The petition translated his repeated spoken question—why am I here?—into a formal legal challenge. It asserted that detention required justification, not indefinite reliance on suspicion. Waiting for Review The petition did not bring immediate access to court. It began a long process shaped by broader constitutional litigation over whether Guantánamo detainees could challenge their detention.

The Supreme Court Opens a Door

Habeas Rights Recognized Constitutional Ruling The Supreme Court of the United States ruled in Boumediene v. Bush that Guantánamo detainees had a constitutional right to challenge detention through habeas corpus. Slahi’s Case Advances The ruling enabled his petition to proceed before a federal district court. It created a path for judicial review after years in which detention had been insulated from ordinary court scrutiny. A Limited Victory Recognition of a legal right did not itself free Slahi or determine his status. It made the government explain its case to a judge, turning secrecy into a contested legal question.

Release Ordered

A Judge Rejects Continued Detention Review of the Record James Robertson examined the government’s evidence and concluded that it did not justify holding Slahi under the standard then applied. The court rejected the claim that isolated associations established continuing membership. An Order to Release The judge granted Slahi’s petition and ordered his release. For the first time, an independent court had evaluated the case in depth and found continued detention unlawful. Public Misrepresentation Some commentary immediately described the ruling as freeing a major September 11 figure. The court’s record, however, showed that the government had abandoned the claim that Slahi knew of the attacks.

Appeal and Remand

A Legal Victory Reversed Government Appeal The Obama administration appealed the release order days after it was issued. The case moved to the D.C. Circuit, where the legal standard for organizational membership had shifted. A Broader Test The appellate court held that the government did not need to show Slahi was carrying out al-Qaeda orders at the time he was detained. Older associations could remain relevant to whether he was part of the group. Unfinished Proceedings The court sent the case back for rehearing, and Slahi remained imprisoned. A judge had ordered release, but changing doctrine left his liberty unresolved.

2002–2003

March 2005

June 2008

March 22, 2010

March–November 2010