A military judge has set June 5, 2028, as the provisional trial date for four men accused of helping plan and carry out the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
The defendants include Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged architect of the plot that killed nearly 3,000 people. The other defendants are Walid bin Attash, Ammar al-Baluchi and Mustafa Ahmad al-Hawsawi.
All four have been held for years at the U.S. detention facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and could face the death penalty if convicted.
Lt. Col. Michael Schrama, the fifth military judge assigned to the case, issued the scheduling order Wednesday. He rejected a prosecution request to begin the trial as early as January, determining that additional time is needed to resolve evidence disputes and other pretrial motions.
The case has been stalled since the defendants were arraigned before a military commission in 2012. A central legal issue involves statements obtained while the men were held in secret CIA prisons, where they were subjected to torture, abuse and prolonged isolation.
Defense attorneys have challenged the use of those statements and argued that government assertions of national security have prevented them from obtaining information needed to prepare their cases.
Prosecutors accuse bin Attash of operating an Afghanistan training camp. Al-Baluchi, Mohammed’s nephew, allegedly helped finance the operation and enroll hijackers in flight school. Al-Hawsawi is accused of providing money, credit cards and clothing to people involved in the plot.
A fifth original defendant, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, was found mentally incompetent to stand trial because of post-traumatic stress disorder linked to abusive interrogations. His case is proceeding separately.
Mohammed, bin Attash and al-Hawsawi have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to restore plea agreements that would have exchanged guilty pleas for life sentences. Then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin blocked those agreements in 2024.
The proposed deals divided relatives of 9/11 victims. Some viewed them as a way to resolve the long-delayed case, while others argued that the defendants should face trial and possible execution.
Source: The Guardian