Kiyemba v. Obama Historic Case

At a Glance

Date Filed: 

July 29, 2005

Current Status 

The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case on April 18, 2011.

Client(s) 

17 innocent Uighur men

Case Description 

Kiyemba v. Obama is a habeas corpus petition filed in the D.C. District Court on behalf of 17 innocent Uighur men who had been imprisoned in Guantánamo Bay for almost seven years at the time of filing. The government acknowledged as early as 2003 that the imprisoned Uighurs were improperly detained and eligible for release. They remained imprisoned because a transfer to China would have been illegal as they would have been at grave risk of torture or other forms of persecution, and the U.S. government both refused to accept the men into the U.S. and was, at the time of filing, unwilling or unable to find other countries willing to accept them.

The United States government imprisoned nearly 800 men at Guantánamo Bay. Many of these men were imprisoned because, in the chaos of war, they were turned over to the U.S. military in response to promises of large bounties. These men included 17 Uighurs.

Uighurs are an ethnic minority population that has historically been discriminated against by the Chinese government. To escape persecution, many Uighurs have fled China seeking refuge in other countries. The Uighurs held in Guantánamo fled China and resettled in small villages in Afghanistan, where they lived peacefully until the outbreak of war in 2002 when their villages were bombed and they were forced to flee their homes once again. Escaping to Pakistan, they were arrested by Pakistani authorities crossing the border.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Rasul v. Bush in 2004, which first recognized that Guantánamo detainees had the right to an attorney and the right to file a habeas corpus petition to contest their imprisonment, CCR and pro bono attorneys from Bingham McCutchen LLP, Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP, and Miller & Chevalier, as well as private attorney Elizabeth P. Gilson filed habeas corpus petitions on behalf of all of the Uighurs at Guantánamo.

As early as 2003, U.S. government officials recognized that the Uighurs at Guantánamo had been wrongly detained and should be released. In 2004, 5 of the original 22 Uighurs were officially declared non-enemy combatants and were subsequently transferred in 2006 to Albania, the only country willing to take them in and grant them refugee status. In 2006, the remaining 17 continued to languish in Guantánamo, often held in harsh conditions and solitary confinement, and despite having virtually identical facts to those released and now living as recognized refugees. Unable to return to China, but with no country willing to offer them refuge, these innocent men remained stranded.

Learn more about the Uighurs and other refugees stranded in Guantanamo

Case Timeline

April 18, 2011

United States Supreme Court announces it will not hear case

April 18, 2011

United States Supreme Court announces it will not hear case

The decision follows the Court's refusal to hear three other detainee cases on April 4, 2011.

March 1, 2010

Supreme Court announces it will not immediately review appeals court decision

March 1, 2010

Supreme Court announces it will not immediately review appeals court decision

December 4, 2009
Uighurs submit opening brief to Supreme Court
October 20, 2009
Supreme Court grants Uighurs' cert petition
October 20, 2009
Supreme Court grants Uighurs' cert petition
February 18, 2009
D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reverses October 2008 judgment of D.C. District Court ordering 17 non-enemy combatant Uighurs unlawfully detained at Guantanamo released into U.S.
February 18, 2009
D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reverses October 2008 judgment of D.C. District Court ordering 17 non-enemy combatant Uighurs unlawfully detained at Guantanamo released into U.S.
The Circuit Court remands the case back to the District Court for reconsideration.
October 24, 2008
Circuit Court denies Uighurs' petition for rehearing en banc of panel's order granting stay pending appeal
October 24, 2008
Circuit Court denies Uighurs' petition for rehearing en banc of panel's order granting stay pending appeal
Judges Rodgers and Brown go on record as in favor of granting the petition.
October 24, 2008
The government filed their appeal brief in the Circuit Court.
October 24, 2008
The government filed their appeal brief in the Circuit Court.
October 21, 2008

Counsel for Uighurs file petition asking for rehearing en banc of panel's order granting stay pending appeal

October 21, 2008

Counsel for Uighurs file petition asking for rehearing en banc of panel's order granting stay pending appeal

October 20, 2008
D.C. Circuit Court grants stay motion and orders expedited schedule for appeal
October 20, 2008
D.C. Circuit Court grants stay motion and orders expedited schedule for appeal
Judge Rogers issues a dissenting opinion.
October 14, 2008

Counsel for Uighurs opposes government’s motion for stay pending appeal

October 14, 2008

Counsel for Uighurs opposes government’s motion for stay pending appeal

Counsel argue that a stay was inappropriate and not properly justified by the government.
October 10, 2008
Government files motion for stay pending appeal of District Court order
October 10, 2008
Government files motion for stay pending appeal of District Court order

The government seeks an expedited briefing schedule for the appeal of the lower court’s order.

October 8, 2008

Court schedules expedited briefing on government’s stay motion

October 8, 2008

Court schedules expedited briefing on government’s stay motion

The Uighurs contest the government’s motion for an emergency administrative stay. On the same day, the Circuit Court grants an emergency administrative stay of the District Court’s release order. The Circuit Court makes no statement regarding the merits of the government’s appeal or motion for stay pending appeal, and schedules expedited briefing on the government’s stay motion.

October 7, 2008

Gvernment seeks emergency stay of Judge Urbina’s release order

October 7, 2008

Gvernment seeks emergency stay of Judge Urbina’s release order

After the Uighurs in Guantánamo are notified of Judge Urbina’s release order after nearly seven years of imprisonment, the government seeks an emergency stay of the order.

October 7, 2008
Judge Urbina orders all 17 Uighur prisoners released into U.S. and brought into court Friday, October 10, 2008 at 10 am.
October 7, 2008
Judge Urbina orders all 17 Uighur prisoners released into U.S. and brought into court Friday, October 10, 2008 at 10 am.

In the second hearing before Judge Urbina after full briefing by all parties, Judge Urbina orders that all 17 Uighur prisoners be released into the United States and brought into Court Friday, October 10, 2008 at 10am. After the government’s refusal to engage in a pre-scheduled hearing regarding the conditions of release with witnesses present to testify to their willingness to receive, house, and support the Uighurs upon their release into the United States, Judge Urbina schedules a hearing regarding conditions of their release for Thursday, October 16, 2008. A formal order is entered October 8, 2008; the written opinion is entered on October 9, 2008.

September 30, 2008

Government concedes it will not assert any Uighur prisoners properly imprisoned as “enemy combatants”

September 30, 2008

Government concedes it will not assert any Uighur prisoners properly imprisoned as “enemy combatants”

In response to an order of the court, the government concedes that it will not assert that any of the Uighur prisoners are properly imprisoned as “enemy combatants”: all will be treated as non-enemy combatants with the same status as Mr. Parhat.
September 29, 2008

Government refuses the petitioners’ request to be present at hearing

September 29, 2008

Government refuses the petitioners’ request to be present at hearing

September 24, 2008
Government opposes request for Uighurs to be present at hearing
September 24, 2008
Government opposes request for Uighurs to be present at hearing
The government opposes the request that the Uighurs be allowed to be present in person or via teleconference at the October 7, 2008 hearing. The government states that the hearing would only involve legal issues, and further that the court needs to determine initially whether petitioners have a right to enter the United States, based in part on the hearing, before the court could allow them to even be present for a hearing.
September 11, 2008

Counsel seek procedures for clients to be present at hearing

September 11, 2008

Counsel seek procedures for clients to be present at hearing

Counsel for the Uighurs seek procedures for a scheduled October 7, 2008 hearing that includes the right of four petitioners to be present at the hearing in Washington D.C., and the remaining petitioners to be present at the hearing via teleconference in Guantánamo.

August 21, 2008

Judge Urbina holds status conference in Kiyemba v. Bush

August 21, 2008

Judge Urbina holds status conference in Kiyemba v. Bush

D.C. District Court Judge Urbina holds a status conference in which the government concedes that four other imprisoned Uighurs will be treated as non-enemy combatants with the same status as Mr. Parhat.

August 18, 2008

Government moves to enter Parhat judgment in case of four other Uighur petitioners

August 18, 2008

Government moves to enter Parhat judgment in case of four other Uighur petitioners

The government moves in the Circuit Court to enter the Parhat judgment in the case of Khalid Ali, Sab’r Osman, Abdusemet, and Jalal Jallaladin.
August 4, 2008
Government informs D.C. Circuit Court it will not convene new CSRT for Houzaifa Parhat
August 4, 2008
Government informs D.C. Circuit Court it will not convene new CSRT for Houzaifa Parhat

The government effectively concedes they will not argue that he is properly detained as an “enemy combatant.”

July 23, 2008
Counsel for Houzaifa Parhat file motion for judgment on his habeas petition, seeking release into U.S., or, alternatively, interim parole
July 23, 2008
Counsel for Houzaifa Parhat file motion for judgment on his habeas petition, seeking release into U.S., or, alternatively, interim parole
July 18, 2008
Counsel for Uighurs provide D.C. District Court with status report on behalf of their clients
July 18, 2008
Counsel for Uighurs provide D.C. District Court with status report on behalf of their clients
July 10, 2008

Court orders Uighur habeas petitions consolidated

July 10, 2008

Court orders Uighur habeas petitions consolidated

D.C. District Court Chief Judge Thomas F. Hogan, the coordinating judge assigned to many Guantánamo cases, orders that all habeas petitions filed on behalf of the 17 Uighur detainees be consolidated as Kiyemba v. Bush before D.C. District Court Judge Ricardo M. Urbina.

June 20, 2008

D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decides Parhat v. Gates

June 20, 2008

D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decides Parhat v. Gates

The appellate court rules that the Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) decision that designated Houzaifa Parhat, one of the 17 Uighurs, as an “enemy combatant” was not valid, and rebukes the evidence presented by the government as insufficient, unreliable, and based on attenuated guilt-by-association reasoning. The court orders the government to “release Parhat, to transfer him, or to expeditiously convene a new Combatant Status Review Tribunal to consider evidence submitted in a manner consistent with the court’s opinion.”
June 12, 2008

Supreme Court decides Boumediene v. Bush, recognizing Guantánamo prisoners' constitutional right of habeas corpus, and ruling that right was not stripped by  Military Commissions Act (MCA)

June 12, 2008

Supreme Court decides Boumediene v. Bush, recognizing Guantánamo prisoners' constitutional right of habeas corpus, and ruling that right was not stripped by  Military Commissions Act (MCA)

January 4, 2008

Mr. Parhat moves for judgment in his DTA case

January 4, 2008

Mr. Parhat moves for judgment in his DTA case

Mr. Parhat moves for judgment in his DTA case, even without the record that the government was ordered to – but refused to – provide. Attorneys for Mr. Parhat argue that, even relying on the government’s evidence, there is no justification for Mr. Parhat’s detention as an enemy combatant
December 4, 2006
Mr. Parhat files petition in D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals under Detainee Treatment Act (DTA)
December 4, 2006
Mr. Parhat files petition in D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals under Detainee Treatment Act (DTA)
September 13, 2005
D.C. District Court orders government not transfer Mr. Parhat or other petitioners out of jurisdiction without giving advance notice
September 13, 2005
D.C. District Court orders government not transfer Mr. Parhat or other petitioners out of jurisdiction without giving advance notice
In addition, the court otherwise stays the case pending appeals in other habeas cases of Guantánamo detainees.
July 29, 2005

Houzaifa Parhat and eight other Uighurs imprisoned at Guantánamo seek habeas relief in Kiyemba v. Bush

July 29, 2005

Houzaifa Parhat and eight other Uighurs imprisoned at Guantánamo seek habeas relief in Kiyemba v. Bush