US Military Court Plans New Trial for 9/11 Plotters in 2028

Background: Venue at Guantánamo

Last year, the responsible military commission rejected a plea deal that would have provided life imprisonment in exchange for guilty pleas and the avoidance of the death penalty. According to the prosecution, however, the search for a compromise has not definitively failed; talks over possible conditions are continuing. The defense likewise rejected the offer and insisted on its demand for full access to the evidence.

The postponements in the proceedings are assessed differently by both sides. While the prosecution points to the complexity of the evidence and security requirements, the defense speaks of a deliberate strategy of delay. Several civilian and former military observers have described the proceedings in recent years as dysfunctional and have called for reforms of the military court system.

Procedural Issues and Evidence

The upcoming hearings are now to begin as soon as the rules of procedure for the admissibility of statements allegedly obtained under torture are finally settled. Several hearings are already scheduled, including proceedings on the question of the admissibility of certain evidence and on the role of former CIA personnel as witnesses. The defense has also requested that psychiatric evaluations be obtained regarding its clients' fitness to stand trial.

Parallel to the military proceedings, civil lawsuits by relatives of the victims against the Pakistani state and against banks suspected of having transferred funds for the attacks are still ongoing. Some of these proceedings were expanded in recent months, with individual lawsuits also referencing the activities of the defendants prior to their arrest in Pakistan.

Civil Lawsuits and International Dimension

The defendants' lawyers criticize that their clients still do not have unrestricted access to the complete CIA interrogation records. They see this as a violation of defense rights and of international standards for fair trials. The prosecution counters that a large portion of the documents is now available in revised form and that classification rules continue to redact parts of the files for reasons of national security.

Among the families of the victims, sentiment is divided. Some are calling for a swift conclusion; others insist on the death penalty as a possible consequence. Observers also see the upcoming proceedings as a litmus test for the functionality of military justice in terrorism cases.

If the proceedings begin as planned in early 2028, it would be the first substantive trial phase in several years. The responsible military commission has pledged to complete the preparatory hearings by the end of this year, provided no further motions for continuance are filed.

A spokesperson for the US Department of Justice stated that the prosecution would "weiterhin beharrlich darauf hinarbeiten, dass die Verantwortlichen für die Anschläge vom 11. September vor Gericht gestellt werden". The defense, meanwhile, announced that it would "alle verfügbaren rechtlichen Mittel" exhaust to force a fair trial.

The prosecution is remaining tight-lipped about the progress of the plea negotiations. Observers assume that any negotiation outcomes could become public no earlier than sometime next year, should both sides agree on new conditions.