A United States Pentagon's appeals panel recently upheld a judge's ruling that prohibits using the confession of Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri in the U.S.S. Cole bombing case, stating it was obtained through torture, according to New York Times.
The U.S. Court of Military Commission Review's decision, which remains sealed, rejected the government's attempt to reinstate the confession for the upcoming trial, scheduled for October 6.
Nashiri is accused of orchestrating the 2000 suicide bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, which resulted in the deaths of 17 soldiers and injuries to many others, marking a significant event in U.S. military history.
The ruling poses a challenge for prosecutors who aimed to build cases without relying on confessions obtained through torture, especially given the history of Nashiri's interrogations.
After being arrested in 2002, Nashiri endured four years in secret C.I.A. prisons where he was subjected to severe torture techniques, including waterboarding and physical abuse, to extract information.
In 2007, when Nashiri was interrogated by federal agents, he claimed his participation was voluntary, but the judge emphasized that his ability to provide a voluntary statement was compromised by his prior torture experiences.
The implications of this ruling extend beyond Nashiri's case, as another judge is currently considering whether to suppress a confession from a defendant linked to the September 11 attacks, highlighting ongoing legal challenges in military commissions.