Almost two decades after his confinement in the United States military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, the purported orchestrator of the 9/11 terror attacks, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, coupled with two of his coconspirators, have consented to plead guilty. This agreement would carry a sentence of lifetime imprisonment, forgoing the chance of a death-penalty trial. The plea deal with the Pentagon, disclosed on Wednesday, imparts a degree of resolution to a decades-long legal battle fraught with complexities and delays.
The ramifications of the 9/11 tragedy continue to reverberate strongly, with almost 3,000 victims leaving behind grieving family members. Many among them have strongly advocated for the execution of the individuals charged with the attacks. Nevertheless, with the uncertainties surrounding a trial, plea bargains have been perceived as the only viable solution by many legal observers and the recent settlements are a manifestation of this reality, a concession accepted by the U.S. Defense Department.
Mohammed, together with his accomplices Walid bin Attash and Mustafa al-Hawsawi, who are alleged to have been key figures in devising the 9/11 attacks, will plead guilty to the serious accusations of conspiracy and murder as part of the plea bargain. It is anticipated that their sentencing will lead to a lifetime behind bars.
The ultimate resolution had been pending for over two years, with initial roadblocks emerging after some stipulations brought forth by the defense lawyers were turned down by the Biden administration. These included a plea against solitary confinement for the defendants and a call for medical attention for their enduring afflictions.
The accused, who were subjected to severe interrogation techniques in undercover intelligence facilities infamously known as ‘black sites,’ sought medical help for their sustained injuries inflicted during their confinement. Their prior mistreatment has largely contributed to overextending the case, leading to protracted debates between the prosecution and defense on the lawfulness of evidence procured under distressing conditions.
In a recent, related case concerning the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole warship, a judgment looked unfavorably upon 9/11 prosecutors. A confession, which was allegedly extracted through torture, was dismissed by the judge, casting significant doubt upon the evidentiary strength of 9/11 trials. The unfolding legal scenario might have been instrumental in steering the U.S. government towards a plea bargain resolution of the case.
There is ongoing ambiguity about where Mohammed, bin Attash, and al-Hawsawi will be serving their sentences. A prevailing law states that they are prohibited from setting foot on U.S. soil for any purpose, even for an incarceration in a supermax facility. As things stand, they might continue their life sentences at Guantánamo Bay.
In a dialogue with NPR, Terry Rockefeller, who lost her sister, Laura, in the World Trade Center attacks, discussed the recent plea deals as ‘the commencement of the finale in an exceptionally lengthy course of action.’ She pointed out that plea deals are conclusive and non-appealable. In her view, this denouement brings a degree of judicial certainty, a factor she holds in high regard.
However, it’s worth noting that the path to justice has been sadly out of reach for many of the affected parties. Rockefeller expressed her profound sorrow for the innumerable relatives of victims who could not survive to witness the much-awaited day of decision.
On the other side of the opinion spectrum, Brett Eagleson, who lost his father in the World Trade Center assault, shared a statement from a group dubbed ‘9/11 Justice.’ The statement expressed deep concern over the recent plea agreements, which they interpret as the outcome of opaque negotiations that withheld vital information from the families of the victims, depriving them of their right to know the entire truth.
The group is specifically interested in understanding Saudi Arabia’s involvement in the terror attacks. To accommodate these concerns, part of the plea agreements stipulates that the defendants must provide clarifications to questions posed by the victims’ relatives about the conception and execution of the attacks.
According to Guantánamo prosecutors, the defendants might formally admit their guilt as early as the following week. However, the judicial process is far from concluding. Sentencing for the detainees will occur at a later hearing, not scheduled any earlier than September 2025, as per the communication from prosecution to the victims’ families.
In this protracted legal drama, there remain two defendants in the 9/11 case, Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Ammar al-Baluchi, whose cases are yet to be settled. Bin al-Shibh was deemed mentally unfit for trial last year, and al-Baluchi is holding out for a plea agreement that includes post-torture healthcare, according to one of his attorneys, Alka Pradhan. Despite the lingering issues, Scott Roehm, an advocate at the Center for Victims of Torture, hailed the plea deals as ‘a significant accomplishment, a crucial move towards conclusively shutting Guantánamo and providing a semblance of justice to the families of 9/11 victims, and ultimately putting a close to the unfortunate journey of the military commissions.’