Bostan v. Bush

Civil Action No. 05-cv-883is a writ of habeas corpus filed on behalf of Guantanamo captive Karim Bostan.

Publication of captives' CSR Tribunal documents

In September 2007 the Department of Justice published dossiers of unclassified documents arising from the Combatant Status Review Tribunals of 179 captives.cite web
url=http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/detainees/csrt_arb/index_publicly_filed_CSRT_records.pdf
title=Index for CSRT Records Publicly Files in Guantanamo Detainee Cases
author=OARDEC
publisher=United States Department of Defense
date=August 8 2007
accessdate=2007-09-29] Documents from Bostan Karim's CSR Tribunal were not among the 179 the Department of Defense published.

The Center for Constitutional Rights listed the lead petitioners of the Guantanamo captives' habeas petitions on January 8 2007.cite news
url=http://listproc.ucdavis.edu/archives/law-lib/law-lib.log0701/att-0174/01-GITMO_AttyList.pdf
title=Lead Petitioners' Counsel in Guantanamo Habeas Cases
publisher=Center for Constitutional Rights
date=Monday, January 8, 2007
accessdate=2008-06-11
quote= [http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistproc.ucdavis.edu%2Farchives%2Flaw-lib%2Flaw-lib.log0701%2Fatt-0174%2F01-GITMO_AttyList.pdf&date=2008-09-24 mirror] ] The Center listed
Paul M. Rashkind, a Federal public defender in Florida, and Wesley R. Powell of HUNTON & WILLIAMS LLP as the lead petitioners.

The Detainee Treatment Act and Military Commissions Act

The United States Congress passed the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 and the Military Commissions Act of 2006. Both these Acts included provisions to close of Guantanamo captives' ability to file habeas corpus petitions.cite news
url=http://www.slate.com/id/2176017/
title=The Dog Ate My Evidence: What happens when the government can't re-create the case against you?
publisher=Slate magazine
author=Dahlia Lithwick
date=2007-10-17
accessdate=2008-08-18
quote=Is the government taking the position that this evidence is both critically, vitally, and hugely important to national security, but also, um, lost? Not quite. But it is saying that the 'record' relied upon to lock up men for years is somehow so scattered among various Department of Defense 'components, and all relevant federal agencies' that it cannot be pulled together for a review. [http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slate.com%2Fid%2F2176017%2F&date=2008-08-18 mirror] ] cite news
url=http://natseclaw.typepad.com/natseclaw/files/Hamdan.28j.letter.pdf
title=NOTICE OF MILITARY COMMISSIONS ACT OF 2006
publisher=United States Department of Justice
author=Peter D. Keisler, Douglas N. Letter
date=2006-10-16
accessdate=2008-09-30
quote= [http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnatseclaw.typepad.com%2Fnatseclaw%2Ffiles%2FHamdan.28j.letter.pdf&date=2008-09-30 mirror] ]

The Detainee Treatment Act included a provision to proscribe Guantanamo captives who had not already initiated a habeas corpus petition from initiating new habeas corpus petitions. The Act included provision for an alternate, more limited form of appeal for captives. Captives were allowed to submit limited appeals to panels of three judges in a Washington DC appeals court. The appeals were limited -- they could not be based on general principles of human rights. They could only be based on arguments that their Combatant Status Review Tribunal had not followed the rules laid out for the operation of Combatant Status Review Tribunals.

Nine months later Congress passed the Military Commissions Act. This Act contained provision to close off all the remaining outstanding habeas corpus petitions. After the closure of the habeas corpus petitions some Guantanamo captives had appeals in the Washington DC court submitted on their behalf, as described in the Detainee Treatment Act.

The DTA appeals progressed very slowly. Initially the Department of Justice argued that the captive's lawyers, and the judges on the panel, needed consider no more evidence than the "Summary of Evidence memos" prepared for the captives' CSR Tribunals. By September of 2007 the Washington DC court ruled that the evidence that formed the basis of the summaries had to be made available.

The Administration then argued that it was not possible to present the evidence the Tribunals considered in 2004 -- because the evidence had not been preserved.

Only one captive, a Uyghur captive named Hufaiza Parhat, had his DTA appeal run to completion. On June 20 2008 his three judge panel concluded that his Tribunal had erred and that he never should have been confirmed as an enemy combatant.

Bostan Karim had a DTA appeal initiated on his behalf.

Boumediene v. Bush

On June 12] 2008 the United States Supreme Court ruled, in Boumediene v. Bush, that the Military Commissions Act could not remove the right for Guantanamo captives to access the US Federal Court system. And all previous Guantanamo captives' habeas petitions were eligible to be re-instated.

On July 18 2008 Michael Caruso, a Federal public defender, re-initiated Karim Bostan's habeas petition.cite web
url=http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/district-of-columbia/dcdce/1:2008mc00442/131990/132/0.pdf
title=Guantanamo Bay Detainee Litigation: Doc 132 -- Civil NO. 05-883, Karim Bostan's Status Report
publisher=United States Department of Justice
author=Michael Caruso
date=2008-07-18
accessdate=2008-08-18
quote= ]
Paul M. Rashkind, another Federal public defender, and Wesley R. Powell of the law firm of Hunton & Williams LLP are also recorded as having helped provide legal assistance to Bostan Karim.cite news
url=http://listproc.ucdavis.edu/archives/law-lib/law-lib.log0701/att-0174/01-GITMO_AttyList.pdf
title=Lead Petitioners' Counsel in Guantanamo Habeas Cases
publisher=Center for Constitutional Rights
date=Monday, January 8, 2007
accessdate=2008-06-11
quote= [http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistproc.ucdavis.edu%2Farchives%2Flaw-lib%2Flaw-lib.log0701%2Fatt-0174%2F01-GITMO_AttyList.pdf&date=2008-08-18 mirror] ]

References