(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Children's Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "gov.uscourts.dcd.116163"

Case 1:05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 1 of 33 



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 



Ahmed "Doe" (Last Name Being Unknown), 
Detainee, 

Guantanamo Bay Naval Station 
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; 

Omar Deghayes, 

as Next Friend of Ahmed "Doe"; 

Petitioners/Plaintiffs, 



GEORGE W. BUSH, 

President of the United States 
The White House 
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20500; 

DONALD RUMSFELD, 

Secretary, United States 
Department of Defense 
1000 Defense Pentagon 
Washington, D.C. 20301-1000; 

ARMY BRIG. GEN. JAY HOOD, 

Commander, Joint Task Force - GTMO 

JTF-GTMO 

APO AE 09360; and 

ARMY COL. MIKE BUMGARNER, 
Commander, Joint Detention 

Operations Group - JTF-GTMO, 
JTF-GTMO 
APO AE 09360, 



PETITION FOR WRIT 
OF HABEAS CORPUS 



Respondents/Defendants. 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 2 of 33 



PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 

Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" (last name being unknown) seeks the Great Writ. A citizen of 
Libya, he acts on his own behalf and through his Next Friend, Omar Deghayes, his friend. He is 
a civilian wrongly classified as an "enemy combatant" by the President of the United States, and 
is being held virtually incommunicado in military custody at the United States Naval Station at 
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba ("Guantanamo"), without basis, without charge, without access to 
counsel and without being afforded any fair process by which he might challenge his detention. 
Petitioner is being held by color and authority of the Executive, and in violation of the 
Constitution, laws and treaties of the United States as well as customary international law. 
Accordingly, this Court should issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus compelling Respondents either to 
release Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" or to establish in this Court a lawful basis for Petitioner Ahmed 
"Doe'"s detention. This Court should also order injunctive and declaratory relief. 

Pursuant to the President's authority as Commander-in-Chief, his authority under the 
laws and usages of war, or under the November 1 3 Executive Order, Respondents George W. 
Bush, President of the United States, Donald H. Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense, Army 
Brigadier General Jay Hood, Commander of Joint Task Force-GTMO, and Army Colonel Mike 
Bumgarner, Commander, Joint Detention Operations Group, Joint Task Force-GTMO, are either 
ultimately responsible for or have been charged with the responsibility of maintaining the 
custody and control of the detained Petitioner at Guantanamo. 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 3 of 33 



I. 
JURISDICTION 

Petitioners bring this action under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2241(c)(1) and (c)(3) and 2242. 

Petitioners further invoke this Court's jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1350, 1651, 

2201, and 2202; 5 U.S.C. § 702; Articles 1 and II of, and the Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth 

Amendments to, the United States Constitution. Because they seek declaratory relief, 

Petitioners also rely on Fed. R. Civ. P. 57. 

This Court is empowered under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to grant this Writ of Habeas Corpus, 

and to entertain the Petition filed by Omar Deghayes, the Next Friend of Petitioner 

Ahmed "Doe", under 28 U.S.C. § 2242. This Court is further empowered to declare the 

rights and other legal relations of the parties herein by 28 U.S.C. § 2201, and to 

effectuate and enforce declaratory relief by all necessary and proper means by 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2202, as this case involves an actual controversy within the Court's jurisdiction, and to 

issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of its jurisdiction by 28 U.S.C. § 1651. 

II. 
PARTIES 

Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is a Libyan citizen who is presently incarcerated at Guantanamo 

and held in Respondents' unlawful custody and control. See Affidavit of Omar Deghayes 

("Deghayes Aff"). 

Petitioner Omar Deghayes is Petitioner Ahmed "Doe'"s friend. Id. He is a resident of 

Britain. Because his friend has been denied access to legal counsel and to the courts of 

the United States, Omar Deghayes acts as his Next Friend. Id. On his own and through 

the help of friends, Ahmed "Doe" has tried repeatedly to contact his friend and speak to 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 4 of 33 



authorities about his condition and unlawful custody. Id. While he has periodically 
received some correspondence from his friend, he has not been able to speak with him 
nor verify his health, condition or well being. Id. 

Respondent George W. Bush is the President of the United States and Commander-in- 
Chief of the United States Military. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is being detained pursuant 
to President Bush's authority as Commander-in-Chief, under the laws and usages of war 
or, alternatively, pursuant to the Executive Order of November 13, 2001, Detention, 
Treatment, and Trial of Certain Non-Citizens in the War Against Terrorism, 66 Fed. Reg. 
57,833 (November 13, 2001) ("Executive Order"). President Bush is responsible for 
Petitioner Ahmed "Doe'"s unlawful detention and is sued in his official capacity. 
Respondent Donald Rumsfeld is the Secretary of the United States Department of 
Defense. Pursuant to the President's authority as Commander-in-Chief, under the laws 
and usages of war or, alternatively pursuant to the Executive Order, Respondent 
Rumsfeld has been charged with the responsibility of maintaining the custody and 
control of Petitioner Ahmed "Doe". He is sued in his official capacity. 
Respondent Brigadier Gen. Jay Hood is the Commander of Joint Task Force-GTMO, the 
task force running the detention operation at Guantanamo Bay. He has supervisory 
responsibility for Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" and is sued in his official capacity. 
Respondent Army Col. Mike Bumgarner is the Commander of the Joint Detention 
Operations Group and the JTF-GTMO detention camps, including the U.S. facility where 
Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is presently held. He is the immediate custodian responsible for 
Petitioner Ahmed "Doe'"s detention and is sued in his official capacity. 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 5 of 33 



9. Respondents are directly responsible for any activities undertaken by or under the 
supervision of any agents or employees acting on their behalf, or of agents or employees 
of private contractors ("contractor employees") with whom any agency under 
Respondents' authority or supervision has contracted for the provision of services at 
Guantanamo. All references to Respondents' actions in this Petition include activities 
performed by Respondents' agents or employees, other government agents or employees 
or contractor employees. 

III. 
STATEMENT OF FACTS 

10. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is not, nor has he ever been, an enemy alien, lawful or unlawful 
belligerent, or combatant of any kind under any definition adopted by the government in 
any civil or military proceeding. 

1 1 . Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is not, nor has he ever been, an "enemy combatant" who was 
"part of or supporting forces hostile to the United States or coalition partners in 
Afghanistan and who were engaged in an armed conflict against the United States there." 
Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 124 S.Ct. 2633, 2639 (U.S., June 28, 2004). 

12. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" seeks to enforce his right to a judicial determination by an 
appropriate and lawful authority that there is a factual and legal basis for Respondents' 
determination that he is either an "enemy combatant" as defined by the United States 
Supreme Court in Hamdi or an "enemy combatant" as that term is defined and used by 
the Executive in the Combatant Status Review Tribunals. 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 6 of 33 



13. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" has been held in U.S. custody at Guantanamo and, upon 
information and belief he has been tortured and abused. 

14. To Omar Deghayes' knowledge, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" has never been engaged in any 
combat against the United States and was never part of any forces hostile to the United 
States. 

15. To Omar Deghayes' knowledge, at the time of his seizure and detention, Petitioner 
Ahmed "Doe" was not a member of the Taliban Government's armed forces or Al 
Qaeda. He did not cause or attempt to cause any harm to American personnel or property 
prior to his detention. He remains incarcerated at the U.S. Naval base at Guantanamo, 
Cuba, a territory over which the United States exercises exclusive jurisdiction and 
control. 

16. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" requested that the United States provide him with access to his 
family and legal counsel. To date, his only outside contact has been through letters to his 
friends and family. 

17. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" has not been afforded any procedures that would satisfy his 
rights under the most fundamental common law notions of due process, the U.S. 
Constitution, the laws and treaties of the United States, or customary international law. 

18. Upon information and belief, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" desires to pursue in United States 
courts every available legal challenge to the lawfulness of his detention. 

The Joint Resolution 

19. In the wake of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, the United States, at 
the direction of President Bush, began a massive military campaign against the Taliban 

6 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 7 of 33 



government, then in power in Afghanistan. On September 18, 2001, a Joint Resolution 
of Congress authorized President Bush to use force against the "nations, organizations, or 
persons" that "planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks on 
September 11, 2001, or [that] harbored such organizations or persons." Joint Resolution 
23, Authorization for Use of Military Force, Public Law 107-40, 115 Stat. 224 (Jan. 18, 
2001) ("Joint Resolution"). 

20. As Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" did not participate in the armed conflict at any point in time, 
he is not properly detained pursuant to President Bush's authority as Commander-in- 
Chief, under the laws and usages of war, or under the Joint Resolution. 

21 . Upon information and belief, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is not, and has never been, a 
member of Al Qaeda or any other terrorist group. Prior to his detention, he did not 
commit any violent act against any American person or espouse any violent act against 
any American person or property. He had no involvement, direct or indirect, in the 
terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001, or any act of international 
terrorism attributed by the United States to Al Qaeda or any other terrorist group. He is 
not properly subject to the detention order issued by President Bush. As he did not 
participate in the armed conflict at any point in time, he is not properly subject to 
President Bush's authority as Commander-in-Chief or under the laws and usages of war. 

The Executive Order 

22. On November 13, 2001, Respondent Bush issued an Executive Order authorizing 
Respondent Rumsfeld to detain indefinitely anyone Respondent Bush has "reason to 
believe": 

7 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 8 of 33 



i. is or was a member of the organization known as al Qaeda; 

ii. has engaged in, aided or abetted, or conspired to commit, acts of international 
terrorism, or acts in preparation therefor, that have caused, threaten to cause, or 
have as their aim to cause, injury to or adverse effects on the United States, its 
citizens, national security, foreign policy, or economy; or 

iii. has knowingly harbored one or more individuals described in subparagraphs 
(i) and (ii). 

See Executive Order, 66 Fed. Reg. 57,833, §2 (November 13, 2001). President Bush 

must make this determination in writing. The Executive Order was neither authorized 

nor directed by Congress, and is beyond the scope of the Joint Resolution of September 

18,2001. 

23. The Executive Order purports to vest President Bush with the sole discretion to identify 
individuals who fall within its purview. It establishes no standards governing the 
exercise of his discretion. Once a person has been detained, the Executive Order contains 
no provision for that person to be notified of the charges he may face. The Executive 
Order authorizes detainees to be confined indefinitely without charges. It contains no 
provision for a detainee to be notified of his rights under domestic and international law, 
and provides neither the right to counsel, nor the rights to notice of consular protection or 
to consular access at the detainee's request. It provides no right to appear before a 
neutral tribunal to review the legality of a detainee's continued detention and contains no 
provision for recourse to an Article III court. In fact, the Executive Order expressly bars 
review by any court. The Executive Order authorizes indefinite and unreviewable 
detention, based on nothing more than the President Bush's written determination that an 
individual is subject to its terms. 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 9 of 33 



24. The Executive Order was promulgated in the United States and in this judicial district, 
the decision to incarcerate Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" was made by Respondents in the 
United States and in this judicial district, the decision to detain Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" 
at Guantanamo was made in the United States and in this judicial district, and the 
decision to continue detaining Petitioner Ahmed "Doe", was, and is, being made by 
Respondents in the United States and in this judicial district. 

25 President Bush has never certified or determined in any manner, in writing or otherwise, 
that Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is subject to the Executive Order. 

26. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is not properly subject to the Executive Order. 

27. Petitioner has not been, and is not being, detained lawfully either pursuant to the 
Executive Order, President Bush's authority as Commander-in-Chief and/or under the 
laws and usages of war. Petitioner was not arrested or detained by the United States in 
the course of an armed conflict. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is not properly detained under 
President Bush's authority as Commander-in-Chief or under the laws and usages of war. 

Guantanamo Bay Naval Station 

28. On or about January 1 1 , 2002, the United States military began transporting prisoners 
captured in Afghanistan to Camp X-Ray at the United States Naval Base in Guantanamo 
Bay, Cuba. In April 2002, all prisoners were transferred to a Camp Delta, a more 
permanent prison facility at Guantanamo. Currently, prisoners are housed in Camp Delta 
and Camp Five, an additional maximum-security interrogation and detention center. 

29. Prisoners incarcerated at Guantanamo are entitled to test the legality of their detention in 
the federal courts. Rasul v. Bush, 542 U.S. __, 124 S.Ct. 2686, 2698 (June 28, 2004). 



Case 1 :05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 10 of 33 



30. By at least 2002, [the precise date being unknown to counsel, but known to 

Respondents,] the United States military transferred Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" to 
Guantanamo, where he has been held ever since, in the custody and control of 
Respondents. 

The Conditions of Detention at Guantanamo 

31 Since gaining control of Petitioner Ahmed "Doe", the United States military has held him 
virtually incommunicado. 

32. Upon information and belief, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" has been or will be forced to 

provide involuntary statements to Respondents' agents at Guantanamo and has been or 
will be interrogated repeatedly by agents of the United States Departments of Defense 
and Justice, and the Central Intelligence Agency, though he has not been charged with an 
offense and has not been notified of any pending or contemplated charges. He has not 
appeared before a lawful military or civilian tribunal, and has not been provided access to 
counsel or the means to contact and secure counsel. He has not been adequately 
informed of his rights under the United States Constitution, the regulations of the United 
States Military, the Geneva Convention, the International Covenant on Civil and Political 
Rights, the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man, the 1954 Convention 
Relating to the Status of Refugees or customary international law. Indeed, Respondents 
have taken the position that Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" should not be informed of these 
rights. As a result, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" lacks any ability to protect or to vindicate 
his rights under domestic and international law. 



10 



Case 1:05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 11 of 33 



33. Upon information and belief, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" has been forced to provide 
involuntary statements to Respondents' agents, employees, and/or contract employees at 
Guantanamo. 

34. Upon information and belief, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" has been held under conditions 
that violate his constitutional and international rights to dignity and freedom from torture 
and from cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. See, e.g., United 
Nations Press Release, "United Nations Human Rights Experts Express Continued 
Concern About Situation of Guantanamo Bay Detainees," Feb. 4, 2005; International 
Committee of the Red Cross, Press Release, "The ICRC's Work at Guantanamo Bay," 
Nov. 30, 2004; International Committee of the Red Cross, Operational Update, "US 
Detention Related to the Events of September 11, 2001 and Its Aftermath - the Role of 
the ICRC," July 26, 2004; Amnesty International, United States of America: Human 
Dignity Denied: Torture and Accountability in the 'War on Terror ', at 22 (Oct. 27, 2004) 
(available at http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR 51 1452004); see also Barry 
C. Scheck, Abuse of Detainees at Guantanamo Bay, The Nat'l Assoc, of Criminal 
Defense Lawyers Champion, Nov. 2004, at 4-5. Indeed, many of these violations - 
including isolation for up to 30 days, 28-hour interrogations, extreme and prolonged 
stress positions, sleep deprivation, sensory assaults, removal of clothing, hooding, and 
the use of dogs to create anxiety and terror - were actually interrogation techniques 
approved for use at Guantanamo by the most senior Department of Defense lawyer. See 
Action Memo from William J. Haynes II, General Counsel, DOD, to Secretary of 
Defense (Nov. 27, 2002); Pentagon Working Group Report on Detainee Interrogations 

11 



Case 1:05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 12 of 33 



in the Global War on Terrorism: Assessment of Legal, Historical, Policy and 
Operational Considerations, at 62-65 (Apr. 4, 2003).' 
35. In a confidential report to the United States government, the ICRC charged the U.S. 

military with intentional use during interrogations of psychological and physical coercion 
on prisoners at Guantanamo that is "tantamount to torture." See Neil A. Lewis, "Red 
Cross Finds Detainee Abuse in Guantanamo," New York Times, Nov. 30, 2004, at Al . 
The report includes claims that doctors and other medical workers at Guantanamo 
participated in planning for interrogations. Id.; see also M. Gregg Bloche and Jonathan 
H. Marks, "When Doctors Go to War," New England Journal of Medicine, Jan. 6, 2005, 
at 3-4. Since details of the ICRC's report emerged, new revelations of abuse and torture 
at Guantanamo have appeared, including FBI memos detailing torture and "highly 
aggressive interrogation techniques" including 24-plus hour interrogations involving 
temperature extremes, dogs, prolonged isolation, and loud music. See Guantanamo: An 
Icon of Lawlessness, Amnesty International, Jan. 6, 2005, at 3-5; see also Neil A. Lewis, 
"Fresh Details Emerge on Harsh Methods at Guantanamo," New York Times, Jan. 1, 
2005, at Al 1; Carol D. Leonnig, "Further Detainee Abuse Alleged; Guantanamo Prison 
Cited in FBI Memos," Washington Post, Dec. 26, 2004, at Al; Neil A. Lewis and David 
Johnston, "New F.B.I. Memos Describe Abuses of Iraq Inmates," New York Times, Dec. 



1 Additional details of the cruel and degrading conditions suffered by detainees at Guantanamo are 
set out at length in a statement by numerous released British detainees. See Shafiq Rasul, Asif Iqbal 
& Rhuhel Ahmed, Composite Statement: Detention in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, 300, at 
http://www.ccr-ny.org/v2/reports/docs/Gitmo-compositestatementFINAL23 july04.pdf). The 
Department of Defense also informed the Associated Press that a number of interrogators at 
Guantanamo have been demoted or reprimanded after investigations into accusations of abuse at the 
facility. See Report Details Guantanamo Abuses, Assoc. Press, Nov. 4, 2004. 

12 



Case 1 :05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 13 of 33 



21, 2004, at Al; Dan Eggen and R. Jeffrey Smith, "FBI Agents Allege Abuse of 
Detainees at Guantanamo Bay," Washington Post, Dec. 21, 2004, at Al; Neil A. Lewis, 
"F.B.I. Memos Criticized Practices at Guantanamo," New York Times, Dec. 7, 2004, at 
A19. Even more recently, the Associated Press has reported allegations that female 
Guantanamo interrogators have used sexual taunting, including smearing fake menstrual 
blood on a detainee's face, to try to break Muslim detainees. Associated Press, Gitmo 
Soldier Details Sexual Tactics, Jan. 27, 2005. 

36. The unlawful and unconstitutional interrogation techniques used by Respondents at 
Guantanamo include not only physical and psychological abuse but also other 
impermissible conduct contrary to due process requirements, including, upon information 
and belief, having agents of the Government present themselves as lawyers for the 
detainees during meetings with the detainees, for the purpose of extracting information 
from the detainees. See Sam Hannel, "Lawyers Describe Guantanamo Detainees," 
Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Jan. 19, 2005. 

37. Respondents, acting individually or through their agents, have stated that whatever 
limitations apply on coercive interrogation techniques used by U.S. military officials 
under the auspices of the Department of Defense do not apply to interrogations 
conducted by agents of the CIA or other entities under President Bush. Eric Lichtblau, 
"Gonzales Says '02 Policy on Detainees "Doe"sn't Bind CIA," New York Times, Jan. 19, 
2005, at A17; Dan Eggen and Charles Babington, "Torture by U.S. Personnel Illegal, 
Gonzales Tells Senate," Washington Post, Jan. 18, 2005, at A4. 



13 



Case 1:05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 14 of 33 



38. In published statements, President Bush and Secretary Rumsfeld, and predecessors of 
Hood and Gyurisko, respectively, Lenhert and Carrico, have proclaimed that the United 
States may hold the detainees under their current conditions indefinitely. See, e.g., 
Roland Watson, The Times (London), Jan. 18, 2002 ("Donald Rumsfeld, the U.S. 
Defense Secretary, suggested last night that Al-Qaeda prisoners could be held 
indefinitely at the base. He said that the detention of some would be open-ended as the 
United States tried to build a case against them."); Lyme Sladky, Assoc. Press, Jan. 22, 
2002 ("Marine Brig. Gen. Mike Lehnert, who is in charge of the detention mission, 
defended the temporary cells where detainees are being held .... 'We have to look at 
Camp X-ray as a work in progress . . .' Lehnert told CNN. Lehnert said plans are to 
build a more permanent prison 'exactly in accordance with federal prison standards . . . 
."); John Mintz, "Extended Detention in Cuba Mulled," The Washington Post, February 
13, 2002. ("As the Bush Administration nears completion of new rules for conducting 
military trials of foreign detainees, U.S. officials say they envision the naval base at 
Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as a site for the tribunals and as a terrorist penal colony for 
many years to come."). 
39. According to the Department of Defense, even detainees who are adjudged innocent of 
all charges by a military commission may nevertheless be kept in detention at 
Guantanamo indefinitely. See Department of Defense Press Background Briefing of July 
3, 2003, at http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20030703-0323.html (last 
visited Feb. 14,2005). 



14 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 1 5 of 33 



40. Counsel for Respondents have also consistently maintained that the United States has 
reserved the right to hold the detained Petitioners under their current conditions 
indefinitely. In re Guantdnamo Detainee Cases, Nos. 02-CV-0299 (CKK), et al, 
(D.D.C.), Tr. of Dec. 1, 2004 Or. Argument on Mot. to Dismiss at 22-24, statements of 
Principle Deputy Associate Att'y Gen. Brian Boyle; see also Dana Priest, "Long-Term 
Plan Sought for Terror Suspects," Wash. Post, Jan. 2, 2005, at Al. Moreover, the 
Government has recently acknowledged plans to begin constructing a new, more 
permanent facility at Guantanamo. Christopher Cooper, "In Guantanamo, Prisoners 
Languish in a Sea of Red Tape," Wall Street Journal, Jan. 26, 2005, at Al; Associated 
Press, "Guantanamo Takes on the Look of Permanency," Jan. 9, 2005. 

Rendition 

41. During interrogations, detainees have also been threatened with rendition or transfer to 
countries that routinely practice torture. Upon information and belief, the United States 
has secretly transferred detainees to such countries without complying with the 
applicable legal requirements for extradition. This practice, known as "rendition" or 
"extraordinary rendition," is used to facilitate interrogation by subjecting detainees to 
torture. See Jane Mayer, "Outsourcing Torture: The Secret History of American's 
"Extraordinary Rendition" Program, The New Yorker, Feb. 14, 2005, at 106. 

42. The U.S. government's practice of rendition has been well documented by various major 
American and international news organizations, including, inter alia, the Washington 
Post, The Los Angeles Times, and the British Broadcasting Corporation (the "BBC"). 
According to new accounts, 

15 



Case 1:05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 16 of 33 



Since September 1 1, the U.S. government has secretly transported dozens 
of people suspected of links to terrorists to countries other than the United 
States bypassing extradition procedures and legal formalities, according to 
Western diplomats and intelligence source. The suspects have been taken 
to countries, . . . whose intelligence services have close ties to the CIA and 
where they can be subjected to interrogation tactics — including torture 
and threats to families -- that are illegal in the United States, the sources 
said. In some cases, U.S. intelligence agents remain closely involved in 
the interrogations, the sources said. 

Rajiv Chanrasekaran & Peter Finn, "U.S. Behind Secret Transfer of Terror Suspects," 

Wash. Post, Mar. 1 1 , 2002, at Al ; see also Dana Priest, "Long Term Plan Sought for 

Terror Suspects," Wash. Post, Jan. 2, 2005, at Al ("The transfers, called 'renditions,' 

depend on arrangements between the United States and other countries, such as Egypt . . 

., that agree to have local security services hold certain suspects in their facilities for 

interrogation by CIA and foreign liaison officers."). 

43. Upon information and belief, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is at risk of being 

rendered, expelled or returned without lawful procedures to a country that engages in 

torture during interrogations and incarceration. 

IV. 
CAUSES OF ACTION 

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(COMMON LAW DUE PROCESS AND DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT 
TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES - 
UNLAWFUL DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY^ 

44. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

45. By the actions described above, Respondents, acting under color of law, have violated 
and continue to violate common law principles of due process as well the Due Process 
Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. President Bush 



16 



Case 1 :05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 17 of 33 



has ordered the prolonged, indefinite, and arbitrary detention of individuals, without due 
process of law, and the remaining Respondents have implemented those orders. 
Respondents' actions deny Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" the process accorded to persons 
seized and detained by the United States military in times of armed conflict as 
established by, inter alia, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, Army Regulation 190-8, 
Articles 3 and 5 of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions, and customary 
international law as reflected, expressed, and defined in multilateral treaties and other 
international instruments, international and domestic judicial decisions, and other 
authorities. 

46. To the extent that Petitioner Ahmed "Doe'"s detention purports to be authorized by the 
Executive Order, that Order violates the Fifth Amendment on its face and as applied to 
Petitioner. 

47. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive 

relief, as well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(DUE PROCESS CLAUSE OF THE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF 
THE UNITED STATES - UNLAWFUL CONDITIONS OF CONFINEMENT) 

48. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

49. By the actions described above, Respondents, acting under color of law, have violated 
and continue to violate the right of Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" to be free from unlawful 
conditions of confinement, in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth 
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. 



17 



Case 1:05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 18 of 33 



50. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief as 

well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(GENEVA CONVENTIONS - ARBITRARY DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS) 

5 1 . Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

52. By the actions described above, Respondents, acting under color of law, have denied and 
continue to deny Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" the process accorded to persons seized and 
detained by the United States military in times of armed conflict as established by 
specific provisions of the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions. 

53. Violations of the Geneva Conventions are direct treaty violations, are violations of 
customary international law, and constitute an enforceable claim under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 
(c)(3). 

54. Respondents are liable for this conduct described above, insofar as they set the 
conditions, directly and/or indirectly facilitated, ordered, acquiesced, confirmed, ratified, 
and/or conspired to violate the Geneva Conventions. 

55. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive 

relief, as well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 

FOURTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN AND HUMAN RIGHTS LAW - ARBITRARY 
DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS) 

56. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 



Case 1 :05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 19 of 33 



57. By the actions described above, Respondents have denied and continue to deny Petitioner 
Ahmed "Doe" the due process accorded to persons seized and detained by the United 
States military in times of armed conflict as establish by customary international 
humanitarian and human rights law as reflected, expressed, and defined in multilateral 
treaties and other international instruments and domestic judicial decisions, and other 
authorities. 

58. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive 

relief, as well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 

FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(ALIEN TORT STATUTE - TORTURE) 

59. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

60. By the actions described above, the Respondents directed, ordered, confirmed, ratified, 
and/or conspired to bring about acts that deliberately and intentionally inflicted severe 
physical and psychological abuse and agony upon Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" in order to 
obtain coerced information or confessions from him, punish or intimidate Petitioner 
Ahmed "Doe" or for other purposes. Among other abuses, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" has 
been held in conditions of isolation; placed in constant vulnerability to repeated 
interrogation and severe beatings; kept in cages with no privacy; shackled with heavy 
chains and irons; placed in solitary confinement for minor rule infractions for prolonged 
periods of time; interrogated while shackled and chained in painful positions; exposed to 
extremes of temperature; subjected to violent behavior or the threat of violence; 
threatened with rendition to countries that practice torture; sexually humiliated; denied 



19 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 20 of 33 



access to counsel and family; deprived of adequate medical care; and subjected to 
repeated psychological abuse. 

61. The acts described herein constitute torture in violation of the law of nations under the 
Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, in that the acts violated customary international law 
prohibiting torture as reflected, expressed, and defined in multilateral treaties and other 
international instruments, international and domestic judicial decisions, and other 
authorities. 

62. Respondents are liable for said conduct because they directed, ordered, confirmed, 
ratified, and/or conspired together and with others to commit the acts of torture against 
Petitioner Ahmed "Doe". 

63. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" was forced to suffer severe physical and psychological abuse 

and agony and is entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive relief, and other relief to 

be determined at trial. 

SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
( ALIEN TORT STATUE - WAR CRIMES) 

60. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

61. By the actions described above, Respondents' acts directing, ordering, confirming, 
ratifying, and/or conspiring to bring about the torture and other inhumane treatment of 
Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" constitute war crimes and/or crimes against humanity in 
violation of the law of nations under the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, in that 
the acts violated, among others, the Fourth Geneva Convention, Common Article III of 
the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocols I and II of the Geneva Conventions 



20 



Case 1:05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 21 of 33 



as well as customary international law prohibiting war crimes as reflected, expressed, 
and defined in other multilateral treaties and international instruments, international 
and domestic judicial decision, and other authorities. 

62. As a result of Respondents' unlawful conduct, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" has been and is 

forced to suffer severe physical and psychological abuse and agony, and is therefore 

entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive relief, and such other relief as the court 

may deem appropriate. 

SEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
( ALIEN TORT STATUTE - CRUEL. INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT ) 

65. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

66. The acts described herein had the intent and the effect of grossly humiliating and 
debasing Petitioner Ahmed "Doe", forcing him to act against his will and conscience, 
inciting fear and anguish, and breaking his physical or moral resistance. 

67. The acts described herein constitute crue, inhuman or degrading treatment in violation ofi 
the law of nations under the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C.§, in that the acts violated 
customary international law prohibiting cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as 
reflected, expressed, and defined in multilateral treaties and other international 
instruments, international and domestic judicial decisions, and other authorities. 

68. Respondents are liable for said conduct in that they directed, ordered, confirmed, ratified, 
and/or conspired together and with others to cause the cruel, inhuman or degrading 
treatment of Petitioner Ahmed "Doe". 



21 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 22 of 33 



69. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" was forced to suffer severe physical and psychological abuse and 
agony and is entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as other relief to be 
determined at trial. 

EIGHTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 

f ALIEN TORT STATUTE - 

ARBITRARY ARREST AND PROLONGED ARBITRARY DETENTION) 

70. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

71. The acts described herein constitute arbitrary arrest and detention of Petitioner Ahmed 
"Doe" in violation of the law of nations under the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, in 
that the acts violated customary international law prohibiting arbitrary detention as 
reflected, expressed, and defined in multilateral treaties and other international 
instruments, international and domestic judicial decisions, and other authorities. 

72. Respondents are liable for said conduct in that they directed, ordered, confirmed, ratified, 
and/or conspired together and with others to bring about the arbitrary arrest and prolonged 
arbitrary detention of Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" in violation of the law of nations under the 
Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, in that the acts violated customary international law 
prohibiting arbitrary arrest and prolonged arbitrary detention as reflected, expressed, and 
defined in multilateral treaties and other international instruments, international and 
domestic judicial decisions, and other authorities. 

73. As a result of Respondents' unlawful conduct, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" has been and is 
deprived of his freedom, separated from his family, and forced to suffer severe physical 



22 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 23 of 33 



and mental abuse, and is therefore entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive relief, 

and such other relief as the court may deem appropriate. 

NINTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(ALIEN TORT STATUTE- ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE) 

74. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

75. By the actions described above, the Respondents directed, ordered, confirmed, ratified, 

and/or conspired to bring about the enforced disappearance of Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" in 
violation of the law of nations under the Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350, in that the 
acts violated customary international law prohibiting enforced disappearances as reflected, 
expressed, and defined in multilateral treaties and other international instruments, 
international and domestic judicial decisions, and other authorities. 

76. As a result of Respondents' unlawful conduct, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" has been and is 

deprived of his freedom, separated from his family, and forced to suffer severe physical 
and mental abuse, and is therefore entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief and such 
other relief as the court may deem appropriate. 

TENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(ARTICLE II OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION- 
UNLAWFUL DETENTION) 

77. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

78. Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is not, nor has he ever been, an enemy alien, lawful or unlawful 
belligerent, or combatant of any kind. The Executive lacks the authority to order or direct 
military officials to detain civilians who are seized far from the theater of war or occupied 

23 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 24 of 33 



territory or who were not "carrying a weapon against American troops on a foreign 
battlefield." Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 124 S.Ct. 2633, 2642 n.l (2004). 

79. By the actions described above, President Bush has exceeded and continues to exceed the 
Executive's authority under Article II of the United States Constitution by authorizing, 
ordering and directing that military officials seize Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" and transfer 
him to military detention, and by authorizing and ordering their continued military 
detention at Guantanamo. All of the Respondents acted and continue to act without lawful 
authority by directing, ordering, and/or supervising the seizure and military detention of 
Petitioner Ahmed "Doe". 

80. The military seizure and detention of Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" by the Respondents is ultra 
vires and illegal because it violates Article II of the United States Constitution. To the 
extent that the Executive asserts that Petitioner's detention is authorized by the Executive 
Order, that Order exceeds the Executive's authority under Article II and is ultra vires and 
void on its face and as applied to Petitioner. 

81. To the extent that Respondents assert that their authority to detain Petitioner Ahmed 
"Doe" derives from a source other than the Executive Order, including without limitation 
the Executive's inherent authority to conduct foreign affairs or to serve as Commander-in- 
Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, whether from Article II of the Constitution or otherwise, 
Respondents lack that authority as a matter of fact and law. 

82. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive 
relief, as well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 



24 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 25 of 33 



ELEVENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(VIOLATION OF THE APA - ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS UNLAWFUL DETENTION) 

83. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

84. Army Regulation 1 90-8 prohibits the detention of civilians who were seized away from 
the field of battle or outside occupied territory or who were not engaged in combat against 
the United States. See, e.g., Army Reg. 190-8 at l-6(g) ("Persons who have been 
determined by a competent tribunal not to be entitled to prisoner of war status may not be 
executed, imprisoned, or otherwise penalized without further proceedings to determine 
what acts they have committed and what penalty should be imposed."). 

85 . By arbitrarily and capriciously detaining Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" in military custody for 
over three years in the manner described above, Respondents have acted and continue to 
act ultra vires and unlawfully in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. 
§ 706(2). 

86. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive 

relief, as well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 

TWELFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(VIOLATION OF THE APA - ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS ) 

87. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

88. By the actions described above, Respondents, acting under color of law, have arbitrarily 
and capriciously denied and continue to deny Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" the process 
accorded to persons seized and detained by the United States military in times of armed 
conflict as established by Army Regulation 190-8 in violation of the Administrative 
Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2). 

25 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 26 of 33 

89. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive 

relief as well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 

THIRTEENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(VIOLATION OF THE APA - TORTURE AND CRUEL. INHUMAN OR DEGRADING 

TREATMENT) 

90. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

91 . By the actions described above, the Respondents have acted and continue to act arbitrarily 
and capriciously by directing, ordering, confirming, ratifying, and/or conspiring to 
unlawfully subject Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" to torture and/or cruel, inhuman or degrading 
treatment in violation of Army Regulation 190-8 and the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 
U.S.C. § 706(2). 

92. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive 

relief, as well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 

FOURTEENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(VIOLATION OF THE RIGHT TO COUNSEL AND TO ACCESS TO THE COURTS) 

93. Petitioner incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

94. Respondents, purportedly acting from a concern for national security, consistently have 
contrived to intrude upon Petitioner Ahmed "Doe'"s right to consult with counsel by 
conditioning counsel's access to Petitioner on unreasonable terms, including 
classification/declassification procedures, all in violation of Petitioner Ahmed "Doe'"s 
attorney-client privilege, his work product privilege, and the Fifth and Sixth Amendments 
to the U.S. Constitution. 



26 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 27 of 33 



95. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to habeas, declaratory, and injunctive 
relief, as well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 

FOURTEENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
fDUE PROCESS CLAUSE - RENDITION) 

96. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

97. Upon information and belief, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is at risk of being rendered, 
expelled or returned without lawful procedures to a country that engages in torture. The 
transfer of the Petitioner to a country that creates a foreseeable and direct risk that he will 
be subjected to torture constitutes a violation of Petitioner's rights under the Due Process 
Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 

98. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief, as 

well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 

FIFTEENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 

(-CONVENTION AGAINST TORTURE AND 

CONVENTION RELATING TO THE STATUS OF REFUGEES - RENDITION) 

99. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

100. Upon information and belief, Petitioner is at risk of being rendered, expelled or returned 
without lawful procedures to a country that engages in torture. The transfer of the 
Petitioner to a country that creates a foreseeable and direct risk that he will be subjected to 
torture constitutes a direct violation of Petitioner's rights under the Covenant Against 
Torture and the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 19 U.S.T. 6259, 189 
U.N.T.S. 150 entered into force Apr. 22, 1954. 



27 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 28 of 33 



101. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief, as 

well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate. 

SIXTEENTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF 
(ALIEN TORT STATUTE- RENDITION) 

1 02. Petitioners incorporate by reference all preceding paragraphs as if set forth fully herein. 

103. Upon information and belief, Petitioner is at risk of being rendered, expelled or returned 
without lawful procedures to a country that engages in torture. The transfer of the 
Petitioner to a country that creates a foreseeable and direct risk that he will be subjected to 
torture constitutes a violation of Petitioner's rights under customary international law, 
which may be vindicated under the Alien Tort Statute. 

1 04. Accordingly, Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" is entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief, as 
well as any other relief the court may deem appropriate 

V. 
PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

WHEREFORE, Petitioners pray for relief as follows: 

1 . Designate Omar Deghayes as Next Friend of Ahmed "Doe"; 

2. Grant the Writ of Habeas Corpus and order Respondent to release Petitioner Ahmed 
"Doe" from his current unlawful detention; 

3. Order that Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" be brought before the Court or before a Magistrate 
Judge assigned by the Court to conduct proceedings under the supervision of the Court to 
vindicate his rights; 



28 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 29 of 33 

4. Order that Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" cannot be transferred to any other country without the 
specific written agreement of Petitioner and Petitioner's counsel while this action is 
pending; 

5. Order that Petitioner Ahmed "Doe" cannot be delivered, returned, or rendered to a country 
where there is a foreseeable and imminent risk that Petition will be subject to torture 

6. Order Respondents to allow counsel to meet and confer with Petitioner Ahmed "Doe", in 
private and unmonitored attorney-client conversations; 

7. Order Respondents to cease all interrogations of Petitioner Ahmed "Doe", direct or 
indirect, while this litigation is pending; 

8. Order Respondents to cease all acts of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment 
of Petitioner Ahmed "Doe"; 

9. Order and declare the Executive Order of November 13, 2001 is ultra vires and unlawful 
in violation of Article II of the United States Constitution, the Fifth Amendment to the 
U.S. Constitution, the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the Administrative Procedures 
Act, 5 U.S.C. § 702, the treaties of the United States and customary international law; 

10. Order and declare that the prolonged, indefinite, and restrictive detention of Petitioner 
Ahmed "Doe" without due process is arbitrary and unlawful and a deprivation of liberty 
without due process in violation of common law principles of due process, the Due 
Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, the regulations 
of the United States military, the treaties of the United States, and customary international 
humanitarian law; and 



29 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 30 of 33 



1 1 . Grant such other relief as the Court may deem necessary and appropriate to protect 

Petitioner's rights under the common law, the United States Constitution, federal statutory 
law, and international law. 



Dated: July 11, 2005 



Respectfully submitted, 
Counsel for Petitioners: 



Louis A. Ruprecht, Esq. 
RUPRECHT, HART & WEEKS, LLP 
306 Main Street 
Millburn,NJ 07041 
(973)379-2400 

Barbara Olshansky (NY0057) 

CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 

666 Broadway, 7* Floor 

New York, New York 10012 



Tel: (212)614-6439 
Fax: (212)614-6499 



30 



Case 1:05-cv-01458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 31 of 33 



CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATION WITHOUT COMPENSATION 

Counsel for Petitioner certify, pursuant to L. Cv. R. 83.2(g), that they are representing 
Petitioner without compensation. 

Dated: July 1 1 , 2005 'Vj—^ I 2 — - 



Louis A. Ruprecht, Esq. 
RUPRECHT, HART & WEEKS, LLP 
306 Main Street 
Millburn, NJ 07041 
(973) 379-2400 



CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE BY CERTIFIED MAIL 

Counsel for Petitioner certify that the within Petition was served by Certified Mail, Return 
Receipt Requested on July 11, 2005 from the U.S. Postal Service, Millburn, New Jersey Branch 
upon: 

Kenneth L. Wainstein, Esq. 

U.S. Attorney, District of Columbia District 

Judiciary Center 

555 4* Street, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20530 

Alberto G. Gonzales, Esq. 

Attorney General of the United States 

U.S. Department of Justice 

Room 5111 

Robert F. Kennedy Building 

Tenth Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20530 

George W. Bush, President 
United States of America 
The White House 
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20301-1000 

31 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-UNA-AK Document 1 Filed 07/22/2005 Page 32 of 33 



Mr. Donald Rumsfeld 

Secretary, United States Department of Defense 

1000 Defense Pentagon 

Washington, D.C. 20301-1000 

Army Brig. General Jay Hood 

Commander, Joint Task Force-GTMO 

JTF-GTMO 

APO AE 09360 

Army Col. Brice Gyurisko 
Commander, JDOG 
JTF-GTMO 
APO AE 09360 



Dated: July 11, 2005 



Louis A. Ruprecht, Esq. (NJ BarNo.:LR 8487) 
RUPRECHT, HART & WEEKS, LLP 
306 Main Street 
Millburn, NJ 07041 
(973) 379-2400 



32 



Case 1 :05-cv-01 458-l^A-AK Document 1 Filed 07/2^005 Page 33 of 33 

; i&kMi?- ?£- y^^^^y^^'' - 

Ar-fe^ivM v^j^jl*vc„<V^ - VWv? f2k£TE-.& ±D3X4 

•^mm^ ^K-rt-fti^&li) __C£^ ii. LJJKL*. 

J ]f>£ b ^ &*»>£_ . (^5«**JX - . - • - __ flftaf -"H" ^^ 

Fv*A« G>*^ - - w^^ Ja3CL* 

SMS £M/nA) C^^PA tlH* 

M»\^w««««».{<2vm0.. . c*sy , .-4 ^ 1S 1* 

!; gf»^ jvlftK-c^ 2eaS\ ._■■ -■- — — - ■-