Personal test of principles

It started as a lofty exercise in constitutional law. It ended with a hug.

That the bear-lock was laid on a starch-shirted Seattle corporate lawyer by none other than Osama bin Laden's former chauffeur — now convicted of supporting al-Qaida — sums up the surreal scene last week at the first American war-crimes trial since World War II.

"A wild experience," says Joe McMillan, who normally fights intellectual-property battles for Seattle's largest firm, Perkins Coie.

"Journey of a lifetime," echoes Harry Schneider, also a corporate litigator for Perkins, and the one who got the hug.

For four years, Schneider and McMillan have worked free of charge on behalf of a Yemeni man, Salim Hamdan, held since 2001 at the infamous Guantánamo Bay prison. Hamdan was the personal driver for terrorist mastermind bin Laden at the time of 9/11.

The story of how an elite Seattle law firm ended up among the first to challenge the trampling of the rights of detainees has been told before.

I continue to find it extraordinary that it wasn't only lefty ACLU types who took on this issue. Perkins Coie was the first, but now dozens of U.S. blue-chip firms represent Gitmo detainees, free of charge.

To do so, they have sued their own government in a time of war, all because they think it's un-American to deny anyone a fair trial. Even terrorists.

McMillan and Schneider saw their patriotism questioned a few times. But the work was initially far removed from any actual terrorists.

"We were thousands of miles from Guantánamo, arguing lofty principles before the Supreme Court," Schneider laughs. "Then they call us up and say, 'OK, now they're going to try him. Will you defend him? Are you still on board?' "

The lawyers said yes. The first time they met Hamdan, in his Gitmo cell with his leg shackled to the floor, Schneider admits he had doubts.

"I'm sitting with a guy who is accused of being a member of al-Qaida," Schneider said. "I'm there to defend him, to try to get him freed. It wasn't so academic anymore."

After two years of reviewing evidence and hundreds of hours of visiting with Hamdan, both lawyers became convinced the case was overblown. He was a low-level bin Laden employee, yes, but no terrorist. Both even found themselves growing fond of him.

"He's not ideological," McMillan says. "He was the driver, who drove where he was told."

That sums up their defense. A jury of six military officers acquitted Hamdan of the most serious charge — conspiracy — but convicted him of "material support" of terrorism.

They sentenced him to only five more months — seen as a rebuke to the Bush administration, which wanted 30 years, but also as a sign the tribunals aren't the railroad jobs critics have alleged.

Was justice done? Like everything at Gitmo, that's murky. Now the government can simply refuse to release Hamdan, even after his sentence is up.

Still, remember when the crude cry was "You're either with us or with the terrorists"? The story of the lawyers and bin Laden's driver says we've come a long way since then.

Danny Westneat's column appears Wednesday and Sunday. Reach him at 206-464-2086 or dwestneat@seattletimes.com.