Paracha v. Biden
| Decision Date | 01 July 2022 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action 04-2022 (PLF),21-2567 (PLF) |
| Parties | SAIFULLAH PARACHA, Petitioner, v. JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., et ah, Respondents. SAIFULLAH PARACHA, Petitioner, v. JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., et al, Respondents. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia |
Petitioner Saifullah Paracha, a Pakistani national, is a detainee at the United States Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. On January 23, 2020, this Court denied Mr. Paracha's first petition for habeas corpus. Paracha v. Trump ("Paracha II"). 453 F.Supp.3d 168, 172-76 198-228 (D.D.C. 2020), appeal docketed sub nom. Paracha v. Biden, No. 20-5039 (D.C. Cir.). On October 2, 2021 Mr. Paracha filed a second petition for habeas corpus and other relief in a separate civil action, and he subsequently filed three additional motions for discovery and a more definite statement. Mr. Paracha's two civil habeas actions now have been consolidated by the Court, and his motions and respondents' motion to dismiss are fully briefed.
On June 6, 2022, after careful consideration of the parties' briefs, the relevant legal authorities, and the entire record in these consolidated cases, the Court denied Mr Paracha's second petition for habeas corpus and other relief, as well as his motions for discovery and a more definite statement, and granted respondents' motion to dismiss. See Order, Civil Action No. 21-2567 [Dkt. No. 41] appeal docketed. No. 22-5186 (D.C. Cir.). This Opinion explains the reasoning underlying that Order.[1]
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
The detailed factual and procedural background of these consolidated cases are recounted along with numerous findings of fact in the Court's prior Opinion denying Mr. Paracha's first petition for habeas corpus. See Paracha II. 453 F.Supp.3d at 172-76, 198-228. The Court sets forth here the facts and procedural background relevant to Mr. Paracha's second petition for habeas corpus and other relief and his accompanying motions for discovery and a more definite statement.
Mr. Paracha is a Pakistani national who was apprehended by the United States in July 2003 "on the belief that he had provided financial and other support to members of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda over the course of several years immediately before and after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001." Paracha II, 453 F.Supp.3d at 171-72; see 2d Habeas Pet. ¶¶ 1, 6. In September 2004, Mr. Paracha was transferred from Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan to the United States Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, where he has been continuously detained since. Sec Paracha II, 453 F.Supp.3d at 174; 2d Habeas Pet. ¶ 7. He has never been charged before a military commission or transferred for trial before another competent tribunal. See Paracha II, 453 F.Supp.3d at 174.
In November 2004, Mr. Paracha filed his first petition for habeas corpus. See Petition for Habeas Corpus, Civil Action No. 04-2022 [Dkt. No. 1]; see also Amended Petition for Habeas Corpus, Civil Action No. 04-2022 [Dkt. No. 11]. Over the next fifteen years, during which the case was stayed on two occasions for substantial periods of time, this Court resolved several potentially dispositive motions and numerous procedural matters that were raised by the parties. See Paracha II, 453 F.Supp.3d at 175. Notable for present purposes, the Court denied Mr. Paracha's third motion for summary judgment in June 2016, concluding that it lacked jurisdiction to consider Mr. Paracha's claim that certain statutes concerning detainees were unconstitutional bills of attainder. See Paracha v. Obama ("Paracha I"). 194 F.Supp.3d 7, 11 (D.D.C. 2016) ().
In October and November 2019, after the parties concluded their discovery and the Court had resolved several pre-hearing disputes, the Court held a nine-day evidentiary hearing on Mr. Paracha's first petition for habeas corpus. See Paracha II, 453 F.Supp.3d at 176. On January 23, 2020, based on the evidence presented by the parties during that hearing, the Court found that "Mr. Paracha assisted Taliban fighters by helping them to secure equipment and by providing direct financial support" and that he worked with known Al-Qaeda members "to spread [Al-Qaeda's] message with video recordings and a press release," to "safeguard[] substantial sums of Al-Qaeda money on two occasions," and to "help[] Al-Qaeda's plan to bring one of its agents to the United States." Id. at 229-30. Based on these factual findings, the Court concluded as a matter of law that Mr. Paracha had provided substantial support to both the Taliban and Al-Qaeda that was sufficient to establish the government's legal authority to detain him under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force ("AUMF"), Pub. L. No. 107-40, 115 Stat. 224 (codified at 50 U.S.C. § 1541 note), and the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 ("2012 NDAA"), Pub. L. No. 112-81, § 1021, 125 Stat. 1298, 1562 (codified at 18 U.S.C. § 801 note). See Paracha II, 453 F.Supp.3d at 230, 235-36. The Court therefore denied Mr. Paracha's first petition for habeas relief. See Id. at 237.
Mr. Paracha has appealed this Court's ruling, see Notice of Appeal, Civil Action No. 04-2022 [Dkt. No. 550], and the appeal is currently being held in abeyance pending the D.C. Circuit's en banc decision in Al Hela v. Biden, No. 19-5079 (D.C. Cir.). See Order, Paracha v. Biden. No. 20-5039 (D.C. Cir. June 2, 2021) (per curiam).
On October 2, 2021, Mr. Paracha filed a second petition for habeas corpus and other relief in a new civil action. See 2d Habeas Pet. Two key developments underlie Mr. Paracha's claims for habeas relief therein. First, on May 13, 2021, the Periodic Review Board ("PRB") determined that "continued law of war detention [of Mr. Paracha] is no longer necessary to protect against a continuing significant threat to the security of the United States." See Exhibit 9 - Unclassified Summary of Final Determination ("Gov't Ex. 9"), Civil Action No. 04-2022 [Dkt. No. 569-10] at 2; see also 2d Habeas Pet. ¶ 11. Second, on August 31, 2021, the U.S. Armed Forces completed their withdrawal from Afghanistan. See 2d Habeas Pet. ¶ 10; see also Gul v. Biden. Civil Action No. 16-1462,2021 WL 5206199 (D.D.C. Nov. 9, 2021). Mr. Paracha argues that both developments independently deprive respondents of the legal authority to detain him. See 2d Habeas Pet. Suppl. at 3. He separately raises four additional claims for "other relief." See 2d Habeas Pet. at 6-10.[2]
On October 4, 2021, Mr. Paracha moved in the D.C. Circuit "for a limited remand" of the appeal of Paracha II for consideration of the same two claims for habeas relief raised in Mr. Paracha's second petition for habeas corpus, which he argued "were not available at the time the petition was filed, litigated, and decided." Appellant's Motion for Limited Remand and Continuance of the Stay of His Appeal, Paracha v. Biden, No. 20-5039, at 1-2 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 4, 2021). On November 12, 2021, finding that "permitting Mr. Paracha to pursue parallel habeas proceeding involving overlapping grounds for relief. . . would not serve the interests of judicial economy," this Court held Mr. Paracha's second petition for habeas corpus and other relief in abeyance until the court of appeals ruled on his motion for limited remand. Paracha v. Biden, Civil Action No. 21-2567, 2021 WL 5279613, at *2 (D.D.C. Nov. 12, 2021). The Court also held in abeyance three motions for discovery and a more definite statement that were filed by Mr. Paracha to aid his substantive claims for relief. See id.; see also Mot. to Show Cause; Mot. for More Def. Stmt.; Mot. for Discov.
On December 10, 2021, the D.C. Circuit ordered a limited remand of Paracha II "so appellant can present to the district court in the first instance his arguments concerning the withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan and the announced end of the war there, and his clearance for release by the Periodic Review Board." Order at 1, Paracha v. Biden, No. 20-5039 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 10, 2021). On December 30, 2021, having before it two habeas petitions that each raised seemingly identical claims for habeas relief, this Court consolidated Mr. Paracha's two civil actions for habeas relief and set forth a briefing schedule for Mr. Paracha's pending petitions and motions. See Paracha v. Biden, Civil Action No. 21-2567, 2021 WL 6196990, at *2 (D.D.C. Dec. 30,2021). The parties have completed their briefing in these consolidated cases.
II. CLAIMS FOR HABEAS RELIEF
Because this Court previously determined that Mr. Paracha provided substantial support to the Taliban and Al Qaeda such that he can be lawfully detained under the AUMF, see Paracha II, 453 F.Supp.3d at 235-36, he does not presently dispute that the government had the initial authority to detain him. Instead, Mr. Paracha argues that the authority to detain him has lapsed. He first maintains that respondents no longer have the legal authority to detain him because "the war with Afghanistan and Al Qaeda has ended." 2d Habeas Pet. Suppl. at 1. Next, he contends that there is no longer legal authority to detain him "because the U.S. Government, in clearing him for release through the [PRB], has determined his continued detention is no longer necessary under the law of war." Id. After careful consideration of the applicable legal standard, the parties' arguments, and classified and unclassified materials filed in support, the Court denied each claim for habeas relief by Order of June 6, 2022.
To continue reading
Request your trial