Since the end of August, the presiding judge in the 9/11 military commission has decided to suppress the “confessions” of three of the four accused masterminds of the 9/11 attacks, part of a larger pattern in which governmental evidence in the 9/11 cases has proven inadmissible due to the way it was obtained. In a new piece in Just Security, CERL Advisory Council Member Benjamin Farley outlines the implications of these decisions, and lays out an overview of the legal, ethical, reputational, and financial effects of the United States’ Rendition, Detention, and Interrogation program, including the involvement of multiple agencies and the inability of the commission to create meaningful accountability for victims’ families.

Benjamin R. Farley is special counsel at the National Immigration Law Center, a Visiting (non-resident) Fellow at the University of Minnesota’s Human Rights Center, and a member of the Advisory Council of the Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law. Read his bio here.

The views expressed here are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of any organization or university.