Paracha v. Bush


UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMAIAY with Classified Informati ecurity Officer SAIFULLAH ABDULLAH CISO 7 PARACHA, Date _ Zl gozre Petitioner, v. Civil Action No. 04-2022 (PLF) DONALD J. TRUMP, et al., Respondents. Nee mee ee ee ee ee ee ee ee” OPINION In July 2003, the United States apprehended petitioner Saifullah Paracha, a successful Pakistani businessman, on the belief that he had provided financial and other support to members of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda over the course of several years immediately before and after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Mr. Paracha was taken to Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan for interrogation and then to the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he remains to this day. More than sixteen years after his capture, Mr. Paracha has never been charged before a military commission or any other tribunal. In November 2004, Mr. Paracha filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging the government’s legal authority to detain him. See Dkt. No. 1. He amended the petition in December of that year. Dkt. No. 11. The parties have vigorously and capably litigated that petition, and the Court ultimately held a two-week long classified evidentiary hearing in October 2019, at which counsel presented hundreds of exhibits and made extensive argument on five disputed issues of material fact. Upon thorough consideration of the amended factual return, the amended traverse, the pre-hearing merits and opposition briefs, the arguments UNCLASSIFIED//FOR PUBLIC RELEASE UNCLASSIFIED//FFOR PUBLIC RELEASE and exhibits presented by counsel at the evidentiary hearing, the relevant legal authorities, and the entire record in this case, the Court will deny Mr. Paracha’s amended petition for habeas corpus. Congress has granted the President expansive legal authority to detain individuals associated with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, even those who have not directly participated in hostilities against the United States. In earlier Guantanamo Bay habeas corpus litigation, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has held that the government bears a low burden of proof to establish its detention authority. Petitioner’s objections to the prevailing standards for detention authority and the burden of proof are noted and preserved for appeal. As the law stands, however, the Court concludes that respondents possess the legal authority to detain Mr. Paracha because they have established by a preponderance of the evidence that he provided substantial support to the Taliban and to Al-Qaeda. The Court takes no position as to whether Mr. Paracha was a part of either the Taliban or Al-Qaeda, Part I of this opinion sets forth the factual and procedural background of this case. Part II presents the legal framework under which the Court analyzes habeas corpus petitions from alleged alien unprivileged enemy combatants detained at Guantanamo Bay. Under this framework, determining whether the government has the authority to detain Mr. Paracha is “a mixed question of law and fact.” Barhoumi v. Obama, 609 F.3d 416, 423 (D.C. Cir. 2010). “Whether ...

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals