Havana, Sept 29 ( AIN ) The federal prosecutor's office in Miami requested that the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals of Atlanta reconsider -with the participation of all the Court's judges- its ruling in favor of the five Cuban political prisoners held in the US.

Last August, a panel of three judges appointed by the Atlanta Court of Appeals accepted the defense's case that the five Cubans did not receive a fair and impartial trial in Miami -a city notorious for its anti-Cuban fervor and highly influenced by ultra-rightwing Cuban-American groups.

According to the Cubadebate website-a space devoted to the exchange of information about terrorism and mass media campaigns against Cuba-, Alexander Acosta, the Chief Federal Prosecutor of Miami, requested that the Atlanta court reconsider the case with the full panel of twelve judges, because he believes that the decision contradicts other decisions by the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeals itself.

According to a statement made public by the Miami Federal Prosecutors Office, "a full panel review is necessary to maintain uniformity," though it did not offer any other details about the basis for the request.

Gerardo Hernandez, Ramon Labanino, Antonio Guerrero, Fernando Gonzales and Rene Gonzalez were declared guilty in a trial that was considered by legal experts, a UN panel and the Atlanta Court of Appeals as significantly irregular and prejudiced.

The trial ended in December of 2001, handing out harsh sentences to the five Cubans: three received life imprisonment; one, 19 years; and the other, 15 years.

The five Cubans admitted to being in Miami to investigate terrorist activities organized and financed by extremist groups based there, whose activities have been tolerated by the US Government.

In a thoroughly documented, 93-page decision handed down in August, the Atlanta Court of Appeals overturned the sentence and ordered a new trial, based on the venue where the trial had took place.

The Miami trial was profoundly influenced by an extensive and aggressive media campaign -from the first day of the arrest- that labeled the five Cubans as spies. Several potential jury members testified that they could not comply with their duties as they could not be impartial in a Miami court where it would be the Cuban government on trial.

Since their detainment in September of 1998, the five Cubans have been subjected to inhumane conditions; their treatment was heavily criticized in a May 27th report by the UN Human Rights Commission's Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions.

Both the Atlanta Court of Appeals and the UN group stated that the trial didn't take place in the required climate of objectivity and impartiality, and declared the city of Miami not an adequate venue for a trial, as it has been proven that it is nearly impossible to select an impartial jury in this city in any case related to Cuba.

Furthermore, the defense attorneys had very limited access to evidence, as the US government had resorted to classifying much of the material involved, something that undermined the necessary balance between the prosecution and the defense, and seriously hampered the defense's case.

An additional factor that affected the fairness of the trial was that the five Cubans were placed in solitary confinement for 17 months, during which time their contact with their defense attorneys was greatly limited.