GUANTANAMO BAY, CUBA — A Saudi prisoner Wednesday denounced the war crimes case against him as a politically motivated "sham" and had himself removed from the courtroom in symbolic protest.
Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed Haza Al-Darbi, whose brother-in-law was among the Sept. 11 hijackers, informed the military judge hearing his terrorism conspiracy case that he wanted neither legal representation nor to be present at his trial.
Al-Darbi, 33, has been charged with conspiracy and material support for terrorism for allegedly training with Al Qaeda and plotting to attack ships in the Strait of Hormuz.
Al-Darbi, whose war crimes case is one of seven inching their way toward trial by the military tribunal at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, has yet to enter a plea and made clear he wouldn't be returning for future sessions.
He arrived in court in the white tunic and blue canvas shoes denoting a compliant detainee and politely told the judge, Army Col. James Pohl, that he did not want to be represented by the military lawyer assigned to his case nor by any civilian attorney.
"History will record these trials as a scandal," Al-Darbi said. "I advise you, the judge, and everyone else who is present to not continue with this play, this sham."
Last month, a detainee charged with attempted murder in a grenade attack that wounded two U.S. national guardsmen in Afghanistan also refused to cooperate. Mohammed Jawad, a 23-year-old Afghan who had to be dragged from his cell for a March 12 arraignment, said he would boycott proceedings he considered illegitimate.
Pretrial hearings have begun for two other defendants, and three await arraignment, including another one this week.
Prosecutors have announced their intentions to try seven other Guantanamo prisoners but have yet to serve them with the war crimes charges announced as long as two months ago. Among those awaiting activation are the capital cases against self-professed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and five others accused of roles in those attacks.
The Army lawyer assigned to defend Al-Darbi, Lt. Col. Bryan Broyles, is required by the military tribunal's rules to represent the absent defendant anyway.
But Broyles said he would seek guidance from his bar association in Kentucky, as well as from the Army Judge Advocate General's Corps, on whether ethical standards would prohibit his representation of a client who doesn't want him.
