A jury will soon decide if CACI International, a Virginia-based military contractor, is liable for alleged abuses inflicted on detainees at Iraq’s Abu Ghraib prison two decades ago. The civil trial, held in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, is the second this year after an earlier mistrial resulted from a hung jury. The case involves three former detainees who claim that CACI interrogators conspired with military personnel to “soften up” detainees using abusive tactics, including beatings, sexual humiliation, forced nudity, and dog attacks.

CACI, which supplied civilian interrogators to supplement U.S. military efforts at Abu Ghraib in 2003-2004, has consistently denied responsibility. While the company acknowledges that some detainees were mistreated, it disputes the plaintiffs’ specific accounts of abuse and maintains that any misconduct was under the purview of the Army, which had “complete supervision and control” over CACI personnel. CACI’s lawyers argued that the plaintiffs lack evidence directly linking CACI staff to their abuse, asserting that any harm done falls under the Army’s jurisdiction, not CACI’s.

The Abu Ghraib scandal drew global attention in 2004 when disturbing photographs emerged, showing U.S. military police abusing detainees and treating them inhumanely. Several military police were court-martialed for their roles, but no CACI interrogators were criminally charged, even though military investigations found that some CACI staff engaged in misconduct.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers argue that CACI’s contract with the Army and the Army Field Manual make clear that CACI had responsibility for supervising its personnel, not the Army. Despite CACI’s repeated motions to dismiss the case, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema has permitted it to proceed. Closing arguments are scheduled for Thursday, after which the jury will deliberate on whether CACI bears civil responsibility for the abuses suffered by the plaintiffs.

This trial marks a rare moment of accountability for private contractors in war zones, given the years of complex legal battles this case has endured. The outcome could establish precedents concerning contractor liability and oversight in military operations, particularly in instances involving human rights abuses.