A proposal to allow those responsible for the 9/11 attacks to plead guilty to avoid the death penalty confronts the families of the victims with a heartbreaking dilemma: move on or wait any longer to shed light on this tragedy.

In a letter earlier this month to the families of the nearly 3,000 victims of the deadliest attack in US history, military prosecutors presented an agreement to end years of proceedings at the Military Court of Guantanamo, without a trial.

Some families believe that this agreement would mean that the ultimate truth about the 2001 attacks, including the alleged role of Saudi officials, would never be known.

But for others, the more time passes, the more relatives of the victims will die without ever having obtained justice, the aging defendants also risking dying out before being judged.

“All 9/11 families want justice and accountability. Too many of us have died over the past two decades without getting either,” says the 9/11 Families group. September 11 for Peaceful Tomorrows (September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows), in favor of the agreement.

An agreement, “which could be reached now, would offer us the end of the Military Commission on 9/11, a clear confession of guilt, life sentences without possible release”, they believe.

But for Dennis McGinley, member of the group Justice sur le 9/11 (9/11 Justice), “an agreement would only prevent the holding of a trial where Khaled Sheikh Mohammed will finally have to spit the piece”, about the self-proclaimed architect of 9/11.

The agreement, which took two years to prepare, covers proceedings against Khaled Sheikh Mohammed, Ammar al-Baluchi, Walid bin Attash, Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Moustafa al-Hawsawi.

Detained for more than 16 years at the US base in Guantanamo, Cuba, these suspects are among the last 30 prisoners of this jail – which counted up to nearly 800 following 9/11 – criticized by organizations international.

These denounced in particular extrajudicial detentions, degrading living conditions and confessions obtained under torture, a last point which could have significant repercussions in the event of a trial.

A US military magistrate ruled last week that the confessions of a man suspected of being linked to an al-Qaeda attack on the USS Cole in 2000 in Yemen could not be used as evidence because they had been obtained under torture.

Under the terms of the agreement, the defendants “would accept criminal responsibility for their actions and plead guilty to the charges against them and in exchange would not be sentenced to death”, according to the letter.

In addition, the defendants should participate in a reconstitution of the “facts” which would make it possible to detail the preparation of the attacks and to specify the role of each.

Although prosecutors say no deal has been finalized, their letter demonstrates the direction this legal saga is taking that may otherwise never end.

But an agreement to plead guilty resulting in a conviction without trial and without the death penalty could arouse strong reactions in a country still shocked by these Al-Qaeda attacks which marked the new century with a hot iron.

“Khaled Sheikh Mohammed and the other perpetrators of 9/11 should never be offered a deal. They should face justice for their actions and therefore the death penalty,” said Mike Lawler, an elected official in the state. of New York in the House of Representatives.

But for Terry Rockefeller, a member of the “peaceful aftermath” group, the agreement remains the best way forward, particularly because of the “failure” of the military commissions on 9/11.

“No trial will result in the death penalty because of the issue of torture,” said Ms. Rockefeller.

Dennis McGinley, on the other hand, considers that the debate is not so much about the severity of the sanction, life imprisonment or the death penalty, but about the truth of the attacks and more particularly the presumed role of Saudi officials.

If Ryad has always denied any link with the attackers, suspicions remain on the financing of some of them by Saudi funds.

But an agreement would allow Washington to keep sensitive information about it secret, argues Mr. McGinley, accusing US authorities of “mistreating” the 9/11 families.

27/08/2023 11:05:31 –         Washington (AFP) –         © 2023 AFP