Civil Liberties

Guantanamo Detainee Mohammed Jawad Released

|

Today the Obama administration sent Guantanamo detainee Mohammed Jawad back to Afghanistan after nearly seven years of imprisonment. Arrested as a young teenager, Jawad was accused of throwing a grenade at two American servicemen and their translator. The case against him fell apart last fall when a military judge ruled that his confession was inadmissible because it had been obtained through torture and death threats. Last month the federal judge hearing Jawad's habeas corpus petition ordered his release, but the Justice Department had indicated it might want him transferred to civilian custody for trial in federal court. Both the Afghan government and Jawad's former military prosecutor had called for his release. The Obama administration deserves credit for cutting its losses and letting Jawad go, although it's sad that obeying a judge's order and declining to pursue "prolonged detention" by other means count as progress.

Previous Reason  coverage of the Jawad case here. The ACLU, which represented Jawad, has background here.

NEXT: Last Week's Top 5 Hit & Run Posts

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I guess I should be grateful for small things.

    That’s what this is.

  2. But the conventional wisdom is going to be that the ACLU hates America, right?

  3. It’s about time. I hope he’ll get a giant pile of gold to take home, as a “sorry for the inconvenience” gesture.

  4. Wow, torturing children…. Cheney is proud, I am sure.

  5. It’s about time.

    If we weren’t going to shoot him for being a war criminal, we should release him into his native environment. So that’s good.

    I hope he’ll get a giant pile of gold to take home, as a “sorry for the inconvenience” gesture.

    Nah. His actual damages are whatever he would have earned while imprisoned. So, double that. Hell, triple it.

  6. The reaction to this saddens me, but reading comments on this site generally saddens me. It seems the Internet is full of idiots – who knew?

    This ‘child’ was captured on an active battlefield with a grenade in his possession, immediately after a grenade was thrown at our troops, causing death and injury.

    In a proper war he would have been shot right there.

    Instead, we decided to do the ‘humane’ thing and take him prisoner. He was then subjected to such horrible ‘abuse’ as being yelled at and threatened with what should have happened to him in the first place – being killed.

    He then confessed.

    While recanting his confession, he confessed AGAIN.

    Yet because we are a nation full of weepy, holier-than-thou, look-how-forgiving-I-can-be lames, we’re supposed to feel bad for this person? Why? He’s the enemy.

    And you wonder why we can’t win a war anymore?

  7. Commenter at 3:46pm –

    Please drop the word atheist from your handle. It’s difficult enough to convince the populace that we aren’t a bunch of amoral asswipes as it is.

    Thank you for your cooperation.

  8. The reaction to this saddens me, but reading comments on this site generally saddens me.

    Then don’t read it, you fuck.

  9. The word ‘amoral’ means without morals. I have morals – I believe in and support my country. I also believe and support the rule of law, but am intelligent and unemotional enough to know that the rule of law is different in civilian and military theaters.

    Knowing the facts of the case prove this ‘child’ to have been an active enemy combatant your best defense is that, somehow, properly engaging in an active war is ‘amoral’, that his guilt is meaningless because he had a rough time, and that we should set him free with an apology and a big cash prize so he can go back to the jihad.

    The enemy kills our soldiers, openly states their intent do destroy us. We apologize and flatter them and bow and scrape and send them home. With beliefs like yours running rampant it’s no wonder Afghanistan has become a quagmire. You need to figure out who’s side you’re on.

  10. reading comments on this site generally saddens me

    You poor, delicate little flower.

  11. Why should I care about the circumstances of his confession, seeing as how there wasn’t a confession needed in the first place? I’m confused, how did we get all of those Germans to confess before shooting them on D-Day? The paperwork must have been astounding.

  12. And I have to say I’m kind of shocked at the response of the libertarians on this page. Our American soldiers in Afghanistan (you know, the one that everyone at least pretends to believe in) deposing one of the most despicable and most anti-liberty regimes on the planet (which was heavily involved with an actual major attack against our country) while attempting to introduce participatory government. This fucker tried to kill them. In front of their eyes. On the battlefield. And we’ll cheer his being freed because he wasn’t Mirandized? Sorry, I’m all for limits on government power but troops in a war zone should just be killing guys like him. He is the enemy.

  13. “And we’ll cheer his being freed because he wasn’t Mirandized? Sorry, I’m all for limits on government power but troops in a war zone should just be killing guys like him. He is the enemy.” (Italics added.)

    Man thy must have really slipped that declaration of war through on the sly. I sure missed that.

  14. Yeah, if only the Taliban had realized we were at war with them.

  15. As an veteran of Afghanistan with one little brother and dozens of friends fighting over there, if this little fucking piece of shit is responsible for so much as one stitch on an allied soldier, I am going to personally kick some ass and take some fucking names down at the ACLU, and I aint talking about the figurative ass kicking.

  16. “””which was heavily involved with an actual major attack against our country””

    Bullshit. The only reason we attacked the Taliban and Afghanistan is because they refused to hand over OBL. Bush even gave them a change to hand him over, with a threat if they didn’t comply. They didn’t and Bush honored his threat.

    Neither Afghanistan nor the Taliban was involved with 9/11. If the Taliban would have handed OBL to the US, we wouldn’t have invaded.

    I’m a firm believer that you shoot your enemies in combat. So why is the kid alive? Maybe the story isn’t as true as claimed.

  17. Oh please. You’re engaging in semantics. The Taliban was closely intertwined with Bin Laden and protected him after 9/11. That’s not a good enough criteria any more? I don’t see what right we had to attack “Germany” in the 40’s. It was the Nazi party and German military that actually invaded Europe.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.