A military judge at Guantánamo Bay has set a 2028 trial date for four men accused of orchestrating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, marking the latest attempt to bring the alleged plotters to justice nearly 23 years after the assaults that killed nearly 3,000 people.
Jury selection for the trial is scheduled to begin on June 5, 2028, according to the order issued by the judge. The defendants—Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Walid bin Attash, Ammar al-Baluchi (also known as Ali Abdul Aziz Ali), and Mustafa al-Hawsawi—face charges including conspiracy, murder in violation of the law of war, terrorism, and hijacking. Prosecutors have sought the death penalty in the case.
A fifth defendant, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, was previously deemed mentally unfit to stand trial and is no longer part of the proceedings.
The prolonged pre-trial phase has drawn criticism from families of the victims, who have expressed frustration over the delays. Gordon Felt, president of Families of Flight 93 and brother of a passenger on United Airlines Flight 93, told CBS News that families continue to seek justice and accountability. "We've yet to see justice or accountability," Felt said. "The trials are still in a pre-trial phase at Guantánamo… that's been dragging on endlessly."
Legal and procedural challenges have repeatedly stalled progress in the case, including issues stemming from the defendants' detention and interrogation history. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged principal architect of the attacks, was captured in Pakistan in 2003 and held in secret CIA custody for years before being transferred to Guantánamo in 2006. His statements, which have been central to the U.S. government's case, have also posed obstacles due to concerns over their reliability and the methods used to obtain them.
Key defendants and charges
The four men slated for trial together are accused of playing distinct roles in the plot. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is alleged to have developed and directed the plan to hijack commercial aircraft and target the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Walid bin Attash, Ammar al-Baluchi, and Mustafa al-Hawsawi are accused of supporting roles, including logistical assistance and facilitation.
The charges against them include:
- Conspiracy to commit terrorism
- Murder in violation of the law of war
- Terrorism
- Hijacking aircraft
Prosecutors have pursued the death penalty in the case, though the outcome remains uncertain given the case's history of delays and legal complexities.
Legal hurdles and past attempts at resolution
Efforts to resolve the case have faced significant obstacles. A proposed plea agreement in 2024, which would have spared the defendants from execution in exchange for life imprisonment, collapsed last year. Additionally, a prior attempt to try the case in a civilian court in New York City was abandoned due to security concerns.
Legal experts have raised concerns about the admissibility of evidence obtained during the defendants' detention, including allegations of torture during their time in CIA custody. Joshua Dratel, an attorney involved in the case, described the legal landscape as "contaminated by politics and the lack of accountability on torture," highlighting the challenges of addressing the case's procedural history.
Timeline of delays
The case has faced repeated setbacks since the initial arrests and detentions in the early 2000s. Key milestones include:
- 2003: Khalid Sheikh Mohammed captured in Pakistan and held in secret CIA custody.
- 2006: Transfer to Guantánamo Bay detention camp.
- 2024: Collapse of a proposed plea agreement.
- 2028: Scheduled start of jury selection for the military tribunal trial.
The delays have left many families of victims questioning whether justice will ever be served. "After so many missed deadlines and prolonged pre-trial proceedings, will this case move forward as planned?" Felt asked, reflecting a sentiment shared by others affected by the attacks.
Broader implications of the case
The trial, if it proceeds as scheduled, would mark one of the most high-profile legal proceedings in U.S. history, nearly a quarter-century after the attacks. It also raises questions about the efficacy of military tribunals versus civilian courts in handling terrorism cases, as well as the long-term impact of detention and interrogation practices on legal proceedings.
The case remains a focal point for discussions about accountability, the rule of law, and the challenges of prosecuting complex international terrorism cases within the U.S. legal system.