The U.S. Supreme Court has denied review of a petition filed by lawyers on behalf of Abd al Rahim al Nashiri—accused of orchestrating al-Qaida’s October 12, 2000 suicide bombing of the USS Cole warship off the coast of Yemen—challenging the legality of his death penalty trial before a Guantánamo Bay military commission. But in what has been described as “a stunning setback” to what would have been the first death-penalty trial held before the special military tribunals established in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, the entire civilian legal team has resigned from the case amid allegations that the government was illicitly listening in on their legal meetings.

The Miami Herald reported on October 13, just three days before the Supreme Court decision, that the Chief Defense Counsel for the Military Commissions Defense Organization, Brigadier General John Baker (pictured) had “found good cause” to permit Nashiri’s defense team to withdraw from the case as a result of ethical concerns created by alleged government spying on privileged attorney-client meetings. In June 2017, Gen. Baker advised war court defense attorneys that he had lost confidence in the integrity of “all potential attorney-client meeting locations” at Guantánamo, saying that he was “not confident that the prohibition on improper monitoring of attorney-client meetings” at the detention center was being followed.

Attorney Rick Kammen, who has defended Nashiri since 2008, alleges in the Supreme Court petition that his team discovered classified information contradicting government assurances that the facilities in which they met with Nashiri were not being improperly surveilled. In the past, the spying has included, among other things, “microphones hidden in smoke detectors.” Because the information relating to the violation of the right to counsel is classified, the defense lawyers have been ordered by the judge in the case, Air Force Colonel Vance Spath, not to share the information with the public or their client.

Although Brig. Gen. Baker has released Kammen from representing Nashiri, the case cannot proceed until another experienced death-penalty defender is brought onboard. Two other civilian defense attorneys who are Pentagon employees—Rosa Eliades and Mary Spears—also quit the case with permission from Baker but remain on his staff.

The only member of Nashiri’s defense team who remains on the case is Lieutenant Alaric Piette—a former Navy SEAL who has never tried a murder case. “I am certainly not qualified as learned [death-penalty] counsel,” Lt. Piette told the Miami Herald, which he says Nashiri “is entitled to and should have … since the government is trying to kill him.”

Kammen says the defense team is “angry about being placed in an ethically untenable position, disappointed in not being able to see the case through, and devastated to leave Mr. Nashiri, whom we genuinely like and who deserves a real chance for justice.” The pretrial proceedings at the Guantánamo Bay that were scheduled to begin on October 30th are expected to be delayed for months, until learned death-penalty counsel who has received Top Secret security clearance to review the evidence in the case is appointed.

The President of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), Rick Jones, expressed dismay at the continuing pattern of attorney-client privilege violations, which he says “have plagued the Guantánamo military commissions since their inception.” Jones echoed a 2012 NACDL Ethics Advisory Committee opinion on orders that compromise attorney-client confidentiality at Guantánamo Bay in asserting that the spying undermines the fairness of criminal trials. Without attorney-client confidentiality, Jones said, “justice cannot be sought nor served.”

(C. Rosenberg, “Guantánamo’s USS Cole death-penalty case in limbo after key defense lawyer quits,” Miami Herald, October 13th, 2017; A. Funk, “General Finds Good Cause to Allow the Withdrawal of Three Members of Defense Team in U.S.S. Cole Trial at Military Commissions in Guantanamo; Proceedings Plagued by Government Violations of Attorney-Client Privilege.”) Read the petition for writ of certiorari filed in Al-Nashiri v. Trump, No. 16-8966, here, and Brig. Gen. Baker’s letter on improper monitoring of attorney-client conversations at Guantanamo here. See Guantánamo, U.S. Military, Prosecutorial Misconduct, Representation.