Arkin Mahmud

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Arkin Mahmud
Born: July 1, 1964(1964-07-01)
Ghulja, China
Detained at: Guantanamo
ID number: 103
Conviction(s): no charge, held in extrajudicial detention

Arkin Mahmud is a citizen of China held in extrajudicial detention in the United States Guantanamo Bay detention camps, in Cuba.[1] His Guantanamo Internee Security Number is 103. Joint Task Force Guantanamo counter-terrorism analysts reports Mahmud was born on July 1, 1964, in Ghulja, China.

He is one of approximately twenty-two captives from the Uighur ethnic group.[2]

Main article: Uighur detainees in Guantanamo

Contents

[edit] Identity

Captive 103 was identified inconsistently on official Department of Defense documents:

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

He is one of approximately two dozen Uyghur detainees accused of membership in the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement.[2]

Documents released in response to the writ of habeas corpus Hassan Anvar v. George W. Bush contained a December 30 2004 memo which provided one-paragraph biographies of 22 Uyghur captives, and asserted they were all caught at an "ETIM training camp".[3]

The brief biography of Arkin Mahmud stated:

Arkin Mahmud is a 40-year-old Chinese citizen, who is an ethnic Uighur from the Ghulja province of China. Mahmud was last interviewed in the end of 2002. He had disciplinary action on 4 March 2003 when he participated in a block riot and reportedly threw water, milk, food, body fluids and feces at guards. Other reports indicate that discipline issues occurred on 5 March 2003 for spitting on a guard's face and neck, 21 April 2003 for spitting on a guard, on 1 September 2004 for threatening to kill an MP and threatening to President Bush, and on 4 September for lunging at a guard with his body and fist. As reported in his discipline history, he refused to return to his bay after a disturbance, threatening bodily harm to the detainees already inside the bay. Mahmud is suspected as being a probable member of the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM). He is suspected of having received training in an ETIM training camp in Afghanistan.

[edit] Combatant Status Review Tribunal

Combatant Status Review Tribunals were held in a trailer the size of a large RV. The captive sat on a plastic garden chair, with his hands and feet shackled to a bolt in the floor. Three chairs were reserved for members of the press, but only 37 of the 574 Tribunals were observed. The neutrality of this section is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page.(December 2007)Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved.
Combatant Status Review Tribunals were held in a trailer the size of a large RV. The captive sat on a plastic garden chair, with his hands and feet shackled to a bolt in the floor.[15][16] Three chairs were reserved for members of the press, but only 37 of the 574 Tribunals were observed.[17]
The neutrality of this section is disputed.
Please see the discussion on the talk page.(December 2007)
Please do not remove this message until the dispute is resolved.

Initially the Bush administration asserted that they could withhold all the protections of the Geneva Conventions to captives from the war on terror. This policy was challenged before the Judicial branch. Critics argued that the USA could not evade its obligation to conduct a competent tribunals to determine whether captives are, or are not, entitled to the protections of prisoner of war status.

Subsequently the Department of Defense instituted the Combatant Status Review Tribunals. The Tribunals, however, were not authorized to determine whether the captives were lawful combatants -- rather they were merely empowered to make a recommendation as to whether the captive had previously been correctly determined to match the Bush administration's definition of an enemy combatant.

[edit] Summary of Evidence memo

A Summary of Evidence memo was prepared for Arkin Mahmud's Combatant Status Review Tribunal, on 9 November 2004.[11] [12] The memo listed the following allegations against him:

a. The detainee is associated with forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners:
  1. The detainee traveled from China in August 2001 and arrived in Afghanistan in September 2001.
  2. The detainee stayed at a guesthouse in Kabul, Afghanistan for approximately six weeks.
  3. The detainee was in Afghanistan when the U.S. bombing campaign began.
  4. The detainee traveled with an individual who may be involved with the East Turkistan Islamic Party (ETIP) aka East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM).
  5. The East Turkistan Islamic Movement is listed in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Terrorist Organization Reference Guide, as being one [sic] the most militant groups and has ties to al Qaida.
  6. The detainee fled from Kabul to Konduz, Afghanistan when the U.S. bombing campaign started.
  7. The detainee was captured by the Northern Alliance in Mazar-E-Sharif [sic] .
  8. The detainee was present during the Mazar-E-Sharif [sic] prison uprising.

[edit] Testimony

Mahmud chose to participate in his Combatant Status Review Tribunal.[18] On March 3, 2006, in response to a court order from Jed Rakoff the Department of Defense published a three page summarized transcripts from his Combatant Status Review Tribunal.[19] Mahmud acknowledged traveling to Afghanistan, staying at a guesthouse, and being present during the American bombing campaign.

Mahmud acknowledged that he may have traveled with someone who may have been involved with an East Turkistan Party, without his knowledge.

He denied any knowledge of the East Turkistan Party.

He acknowledged fleeing the US bombing. He didn't know who captured him. He acknowledged being present during the uprising at Mazari Sharif.

[edit] Arkina Amahmud v. George W. Bush

A writ of habeas corpus, Arkina Amahmud v. George W. Bush, was submitted on Arkina Amahmud's behalf.[14] In response, on 20 September 2005 the Department of Defense released 22 pages of unclassified documents related to his Combatant Status Review Tribunal.

[edit] Administrative Review Board hearing

Hearing room where Guantanamo captive's annual Administrative Review Board hearings convened for captives whose Combatant Status Review Tribunal had already determined they were an "enemy combatant".
Hearing room where Guantanamo captive's annual Administrative Review Board hearings convened for captives whose Combatant Status Review Tribunal had already determined they were an "enemy combatant".[20]

Detainees who were determined to have been properly classified as "enemy combatants" were scheduled to have their dossier reviewed at annual Administrative Review Board hearings. The Administrative Review Boards weren't authorized to review whether a detainee qualified for POW status, and they weren't authorized to review whether a detainee should have been classified as an "enemy combatant".

They were authorized to consider whether a detainee should continue to be detained by the United States, because they continued to pose a threat -- or whether they could safely be repatriated to the custody of their home country, or whether they could be set free.

[edit] Summary of Evidence memo

A Summary of Evidence memo was prepared for Arkin Mahmud's Administrative Review Board, on 30 November 2005.[13] The memo listed factors for and against his continued detention.

[edit] The following factors favor continued detention:

a. Connections/Associations
  1. The detainee claimed he was extremely surprised to find out his brother had gone to a training camp.
b Detainee Actions and Statements
  1. The detainee departed from his village in China on 21 August 2001, after his brother had called home telling his family that the brother was traveling to Pakistan.
  2. The detainee traveled from China to Karachi, Pakistan. From Karachi, the detainee made his way to Kabul, Afghanistan.
  3. The detainee stayed one and a half months in guesthouse in Kabul.
  4. The detainee was told he had to leave the Kabul guesthouse. The detainee traveled to a house in Konduz.
  5. Shortly after the bombing started, the detainee was informed he needed to travel to Kandahar.
  6. The detainee boarded a truck he though (sic) was going to Kandahar with about 30 other occupants. However, instead of going to Kandahar, the truck drove to Mazar-e-Sharif [sic] , and all the occupants were imprisoned.
c Other Relevant Data
  1. The detainee witnessed the Qual Jangi uprising [sic] .

[edit] The following primary factors favor release or transfer:

a.

The detainee stated he does not have a bad opinion of the United States. The detainee understands why he is here and thinks the United States is justified in conducting the investigation. The detainee understands the process of an investigation takes time and believes he will be found innocent.
b.

The detainee thinks he made a mistake by traveling to Afghanistan to find his brother. If he had the opportunity to change anything, he would have not traveled to Afghanistan.
c.

When asked if he had plans to attack the United States, the detainee laughed and stated, “No, of course not.” The detainee explained that he hoped to have the support of the United States if and when Turkistan separated from China.
d.

The detainee laments the deaths of so many innocent people in the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. The detainee hates Usama bin Laden and blames him for his imprisonment in Cuba. The detainee understands why the United States invaded Afghanistan. The detainee believes the United States has been just and fair.

[edit] Transcript

Mahmud chose to participate in his Administrative Review Board hearing.[21]

[edit] Opening statement

Usually captives are invited to respond to each factor, one at a time, as they are read aloud. Arkin was invited to respond to the factors, once they had been all read out. Arkin responded that he had told his story so many time. What he really wanted was to learn why he had been thrown in with all these terrorists.

His Board's Presiding Officer said that that was not the purpose of the Board.

[edit] Response to Board questions

[edit] Board recommendations

In early September 2007 the Department of Defense released two heavily redacted memos, from his Board, to Gordon England, the Designated Civilian Official.[22][23] The Board's recommendation was unanimous The Board's recommendation was redacted. The Board concluded that captive 103 continued to be a threat to the USA. England authorized his transfer on January 11, 2006.

[edit] References

  1. ^ a b OARDEC (May 15, 2006). List of Individuals Detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba from January 2002 through May 15, 2006. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-09-29.
  2. ^ a b "China's Uighurs trapped at Guantanamo", Asia Times, November 4, 2004. Retrieved on 2008-03-28. 
  3. ^ a b Information paper: Uighur Detainee Population at JTF-GTMO pages 28-34. United States Department of Defense (30 October 2004). Retrieved on 2007-12-19.
  4. ^ OARDEC (April 20, 2006). List of detainee who went through complete CSRT process. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-09-29.
  5. ^ OARDEC (July 17, 2007). Index for Combatant Status Review Board unclassified summaries of evidence. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-09-29.
  6. ^ OARDEC (September 4, 2007). Index for testimony. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-09-29.
  7. ^ OARDEC (August 8, 2007). Index for CSRT Records Publicly Files in Guantanamo Detainee Cases. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-09-29.
  8. ^ OARDEC (August 9, 2007). Index of Transcripts and Certain Documents from ARB Round One. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-09-29.
  9. ^ OARDEC (August 9, 2007). Index to Summaries of Detention-Release Factors for ARB Round One. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-09-29.
  10. ^ OARDEC (July 17, 2007). Index to Transfer and Release Decision for Guantanamo Detainees. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-09-29.
  11. ^ a b OARDEC (9 November 2004). Summary of Evidence for Combatant Status Review Tribunal -- name redacted (published March 2005) page 49. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-12-18.
  12. ^ a b OARDEC (9 November 2004). Summary of Evidence for Combatant Status Review Tribunal -- Mahmud, Arkin (published September 2007) page 19. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-12-18.
  13. ^ a b OARDEC (30 November 2005). Unclassified Summary of Evidence for Administrative Review Board in the case of Mahmud, Arkin pages 35-36. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-12-16.
  14. ^ a b Arkina Amahmud v. George W. Bush pages 31-52. United States Department of Defense (20 September 2005). Retrieved on 2007-12-16.
  15. ^ Guantánamo Prisoners Getting Their Day, but Hardly in Court, New York Times, November 11, 2004 - mirror
  16. ^ Inside the Guantánamo Bay hearings: Barbarian "Justice" dispensed by KGB-style "military tribunals", Financial Times, December 11, 2004
  17. ^ Annual Administrative Review Boards for Enemy Combatants Held at Guantanamo Attributable to Senior Defense Officials. United States Department of Defense (March 6, 2007). Retrieved on 2007-09-22.
  18. ^ OARDEC (date redacted). Summarized Statement pages 22-24. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2008-03-28.
  19. ^ "US releases Guantanamo files", The Age, April 4, 2006. Retrieved on 2008-03-15. 
  20. ^ Spc Timothy Book. "Review process unprecedented", JTF-GTMO Public Affairs Office, Friday March 10, 2006, pp. pg 1. Retrieved on 2007-10-10. 
  21. ^ OARDEC (date redacted). Summary of Administrative Review Board Proceedings of ISN 103 pages 123-133. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-12-18.
  22. ^ OARDEC (January 9, 2006). Administrative Review Board assessment and recommendation ICO ISN 103 page 81. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-12-18.
  23. ^ OARDEC (15 December 2005). Classified Record of Proceedings and basis of Administrative Review Board recommendation for ISN 103 pages 82-88. United States Department of Defense. Retrieved on 2007-12-18.