CSRT Decision: Abdul Nasir (ISN 874)

<p>Tribunal determined that the detainee in question has been accurately classified as an enemy combatant and that he engaged in hostilities against the United States by attacking the Shkin firebase. Detainee claimed that he had been tricked into participating in the attack. He stated that he willingly explained everything to Afghan soldiers and was then taken into custody by U.S. personnel. Detainee called one witness to the Tribunal who could not be located. Detainee claims he was physically abused by U.S. personnel in a facility in Bagram, Afghanistan. Although the detainee's name is redacted, his identity as Abdul Nasir is apparent based on a comparison to publicly available information (see related links to the right).</p>

Doc_type: 
CSRT
Doc_date: 
Friday, December 17, 2004
Doc_rel_date: 
Tuesday, November 29, 2005
Doc_text: 

UNCLASSIFIED//FOU0 • UNCLASSIFIED SUMMARY OF BASIS FOR TRIBUNAL DECISION (Enclosure (I) to Combatant Status Review Tribunal Decision Report) TRIBUNAL PANEL: .#26 ISN #: 1. Introduction As the Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) Decision Report indicates, the Tribunal has determined that-this detainee is properly classified as an enemy combatant andis a member of, or affiliated with, the Taliban. In teaching its conclusions, the Tribunal considered both classified and unclassified information. The following is an accmmt of the unclassified evidence considered by the Tribunal and other pertinent information. Classified evidence considered by the Tribunal is discussed in Enclosure (2) to the CSRT Decision Report 2. Synopsis of Proceedings The Tribunal held this hearing on 17 December 2004. The Recorder presented Exhibit R-1 during the unclassified portion of the Tribunal. That Exhibit, the Unclassified Summary of Evidence, indicates, among other things, that the detainee is associated with the Taliban; the detainee engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners; the detainee was part of a group that attacked the Shkin firebase with AK-47 rifles, PK machine guns, grenades,and rocket-propelled grenade launchers; and the detainee was armed for this attack with grenades and an AK-47 rifler The Recorder called no witnesses. The detainee participated actively in the Tribunal proceedings. He began by responding to each of the allegations on the Unclassified Summary of Evidence and answered questions from the Personal Representative and the Tribunal members. The detainee's sworn testimony and his answers to the questions posed to him are summarized in Enclosure (3) to the CSRT Decision Report. The detainee called one witness, . The Tribunal President ruled that the requested witness not reasonably available, and that alternative means of producing the witness's testimony were also not reasonably available. The detainee presented no other evidence nor requested any document be produced. The Tribunal President's evidentiary and witness rulings are explained in paragraph 4, below. During the classified session of the Tribunal, the Recorder presented Exhibits R-2 through R-11, identifying those exhibits that directly addressed the allegations in the Unclassified Summary of Evidence and those that provided amplifying information. The Personal Representative neither presented classified documents nor commented on the classified evidence. After considering all of the classified and unclassified evidence, the Tribunal determined that thedetainee is properly classified as an enemy combatant. UNCLASSIFIED//FOLIO 1SN Enclosure R Page I of 4 3 12 4 0 NOV00140 .4P DODDON-000542 •w ! UNCLASSIFIED//FOUO 3. Evidence Considered by the Tribunal The Tribunal considered the following evidence in reaching its conclusions: a. Exhibits: D-a and R-1 through R-11. b. Sworn statement of the detainee: See Enclosure (3) to the CSRT Decision Report. 4. Rulings by the Tribunal on Detainee Requests for Evidence or Witnesses The Detainee requested the following witnesses be produced for the hearing: Witness. President's Decision .Testified? not reasonably available.no' IMMO ' The Tribunal President explained to the detainee, on the record, that he had determined this witness' testimony would be relevant, and asked the U.S. Government attempt to produce him. The CSRT legal advisor then used standard CSRT procedures touest that the U.S. reigtey Department of State attempt to contact this individual through the .Government The Department of State subsequently informed the CSRT legal advisor .had made a formal request on or abo 4 km • ., .1 004 to the Government of .to locate this individual. The Government of.did not respond to the request Later, when it was learned the witness is actually a.national, the CSRT legal advisor again used standard CSRT ures to request the U.S. Department of State attempt to contact this individual through the • vernment The Department of State subsequently informed the CSRT legal advisor on • P -II bet 2004 that they did not have sufficient information on the witness requested to locate him (see enclosure 6). Moreover, no individual with the name the detainee provided was in U.S. custody. Therefore, lacking sufficient information to locate the requested witness, the Tribunal President ruled that this witness not reasonably available. S. Discussion of Unclassified Evidence The detainee requested no additional evidence be produced. The Tribunal considered the following unclassified evidence in making its determinations: a. The recorder offered Exhibit R-1 into evidence during the unclassified portion of the proceeding. Exhibit R-I is the Unclassified Summary of Evidence. While this summary is helpful in that it provides a broad outline of what the Tribunal can expect to see, it is not persuasive in that it provides conclusory statements without supporting unclassified evidence. Accordingly, the Tribunal had to look to classified exhibits and to the detainee's statement forsupport for the Unclassified Summary of Evidence. UNCLASSIFIEDWOU0 ISN Enclosure! Page 2 of 4 31241 FOV00141 DODDON-000543 UNCLASSIFEED/iFOU0 b. Essentially the only unclassified evidence the Tribunal had to consider was the detainee's sworn testimony. A summarized transcript of the detainee's sworn testimony is attached as CSRT Decision Report Enclosure (3). In sum, the detainee testified that he was tricked into ioining a taoup that engaged in an attack against the Shkin firebase. He stated he t hissah, who invited him to a different Machassah in Pakistan. He waited several weeks for .to to arrive, and eventually a man he had not met before called his name and said to join him. e got into a truck with several other people, and drove into Afghanistan. On the way, he learned the group had weapons with them. They asked the detainee to take a hagetikind llets and grenades with him. The detainee stated he waited at the bottom of a hiU, whit.others launched a rocket attack against a target from the top of the hill. Everyone in the attacking party ran, but the detainee got separated from the group, leaving him with the beg of bullets and grenades. He found some Afghan soldiers, and told them everything. U.S. personnel approached him, and took him into custody. The Tribunal also relied on certain classified evidence in reaching its decision. A discussion of the classified evidence is found in Enclosure (2) to the Combatant Status Review Tribunal Decision Report 6. Consultations with the CSRT Legal Advisor The CSRT Assistant Legal Advisor was consulted regarding the witness issue discussed above. The Tribunal consulted the CSRT Assistant Legal Advisor regarding allegations made by the detainee in his testimony that U.S. personnel had physically abused him in a U.S. facility in Bagram, Afghanistan. The OARDEC Forward Officer in Charge and the OARDEC Liaison to the Criminal Investigation Tisk Force were notified of the matters on 17 December 2004. -7. Conclusions of the Tribunal Upon careful review of all the evidence presented in this matter, the Tribunal makes the following determinations: a. The detainee was mentally and physically capable of participating in the proceeding.No medical or mental health evaluation was deemed necessary. b. The detainee understood the Tribunal proceedings. He indicated that he understood the proceedings, fully participated in his hearing, asked relevant questions, and provided helpfulinformation during his sworn statement c. The detainee is properly classified as an enemy combatant and is a member of, or affiliated with, the Taliban. UNCLASSIFIED//FOLIO ISNIllt Enclosure (1 ) Page 3 of 4 31242 NOV00142 DODDON-000544 UNCLASSIFIED//FOLIO • 8. Dissenting Tribunal Member's Report None. The Tribunal reached a unanimous decision. Respectfully submitted, Tribunal President UNCLASSIFIED//FOU0 ISN Enclosure (I) Page 4 of 4 31243 NOV00143 DODDON-000545

Doc_nid: 
2875
Doc_type_num: 
649