|
American
Justice, Ashcroft-Style
Keith Feldman
The
Bush administration's large-scale detentions of Arab and Muslim
men -- without charge -- and draconian immigration restrictions
are only two of its initiatives to erode civil liberties, civil
rights and norms of procedural justice under cover of the "war
on terrorism." Many initiatives were enabled by the Uniting
and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required
to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act, signed into law by George
W. Bush on October 26, 2001, after little public debate and no public
hearing. The USA PATRIOT Act, approaching its first anniversary
on the books, passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 356
to 66. Only one senator, Russell Feingold (D-WI), voted to stop
it.
Enemy Combatants
To date, over 500 "enemy
combatants" captured in Afghanistan and elsewhere outside the
US have been shipped to the US naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
The holding pen there known as Camp X-Ray, in operation since January,
has drawn the fire of human rights groups for refusing to grant
access to legal counsel, refusing to grant access to courts where
detainees could offer legal challenges, and transferring suspects
to countries where they may be subjected to torture and other interrogation
techniques normally prohibited by US law. Camp X-Ray has recently
been replaced by the permanent facility known as Camp Delta, which
can house up to 2,000 people. Under international law, an independent
tribunal should decide whether each individual combatant should
be detained as a prisoner of war or repatriated. No such tribunal
has been created for those at Guantanamo Bay. The indefinite detention
which has resulted violates the Geneva Conventions. A group of civil
rights lawyers, academics and clergymen is arguing before a panel
of federal judges that the government has no right to declare these
detainees off-limits to civilian courts. Their argument was tossed
from a lower court, which cited the simple fact that Guantanamo
Bay is technically outside the US, but this ruling is under appeal.
José Padilla (Abdallah al-Muhajir), the alleged "dirty bomber"
apprehended at the beginning of May, was declared an enemy combatant
by Attorney General John Ashcroft personally. Ashcroft waited to
announce the arrest until mid-June, amidst press murmurings about
FBI whistleblower Colleen Rowley's unheeded warnings about the September
11 hijackers. No formal charges have been brought against Padilla,
a US citizen born in Brooklyn, but he remains imprisoned in a navy
brig with no timeline for appearing before a judge, even after Federal
officials admitted in August that he is a "small fish"
with no proven ties to an al-Qaeda plot. Padilla, like fellow "enemy
combatant" and US citizen Yasser Hamdi, is presently without
constitutional protections.
Military Tribunals
In its annual human rights
reports, the State Department regularly blasts Egypt, Sudan, Turkey
and other countries for trying civilians -- including alleged terrorists
-- in state security courts which lack due process for defendants.
But on November 13, Bush signed a military order allowing US military
commissions to prosecute foreign nationals designated as members
of al-Qaeda, others involved in terrorism against the US or those
who knowingly harbored such persons. A Defense Department fact sheet
released in March noted that the president and the secretary of
defense would have the power to name who will be tried and who will
sit on the commissions. They would appoint the prosecutorial and
defense attorneys, decide which aspects of each case will be tried
in secret and which in public, and approve all findings and sentences
before they are deemed final. They could alter trial procedures
at any time and for any reason.
No one as yet has been tried
through this tribunal system, though Abu Zubayda, the highest-ranking
member of al-Qaeda to be captured by US forces, may be a test case.
Following Bush's lead, Britain's Home Office introduced a bill to
permit military tribunals for alleged terrorists.
|
Resources
on Civil Liberties and Arab and Muslim Americans
Many
organizations devoted to civil liberties, human rights and
Arab and Muslim community advocacy have chronicled post-September
11 “homeland security” initiatives and analyzed their effects
on Arab and Muslim Americans. A partial list is below.
American
Civil Liberties Union
The
ACLU has devoted a section of their website to information
on post-September 11 civil liberties violations. “Safe and
Free in a Time of Crisis” can be viewed at: http://www.aclu.org/safeandfree/index.html
American
Immigrant Lawyers Association
AILA
has put out several informative issue papers, including “Immigration
and Homeland Security,” at: http://www.aila.org/contentViewer.aspx?bc=9,722,887
and
“Immigration, Security, and Civil Liberties,” at: http://www.aila.org/contentViewer.aspx?bc=9,722,808
Amnesty
International
AI
has released several major reports on civil liberties violations
in the US and abroad. Two important reports are “Amnesty International’s
concerns regarding post-September 11 detentions in the USA”:
http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/AMR510442002
and
“Memorandum to the US Government on the rights of people in
US custody in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay,” which can be
viewed at: http://web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/AMR510532002
Arab
American Institute
“Healing
the Nation” is AAI’s report on the Arab-American experience
a year after September 11: http://www.aaiusa.org/PDF/healing_the_nation.pdf
Center
for Constitutional Rights
CCR
is maintaining an up-to-date site devoted to civil liberties
issues after September 11: http://www.ccr-ny.org/whatsnew/september11_new.asp
A
senior litigation attorney at CCR critiques the USA PATRIOT
Act: http://www.ccr-ny.org/whatsnew/usa_patriot_act.asp
Council
on Arab-Islamic Relations
In
their annual report “The Status of Muslim Civil Rights in
2001,” CAIR documents an increase in complaints of intolerance
from the Muslim community, especially since September 11.
The report can be viewed at: http://www.cair-net.org/civilrights/2001_Civil_Rights_Report.pdf
FindLaw
FindLaw
is maintaining a comprehensive index of all submissions made
public in civil and criminal cases related to the post-September
11 “war on terrorism.” The index can be viewed at: http://news.findlaw.com/legalnews/us/terrorism/cases/index.html
Human
Rights Watch
HRW
is continually updating a section of their website regarding
questions of human rights after September 11. The index can
be viewed at: http://www.humanrightswatch.org/campaigns/september11/
The
comprehensive HRW report, “Presumption of Guilt,” is accessible
at: http://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/us911/
Lawyers
Committee for Human Rights
LCHR
has a section of their site devoted to post-9/11 issues: http://www.lchr.org/aftersept/aftersept_main.htm
--
Compiled by Keith Feldman |
Profiling
During a 2000 presidential
debate, Bush averred: "I can't imagine what it would be like
to be singled out because of race and harassed. That's just flat
wrong…. I do think we need to find out where racial profiling occurs
and say to the local folks, get it done and if you can't, there'll
be a federal consequence." Soon after being confirmed as attorney
general, Ashcroft intoned that "to treat people based solely
on their race is in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment of the
United States Constitution." But after September 11 profiling
has made a comeback. In an April 2002 report, the Council on American-Islamic
Relations documented that complaints of discrimination at airports
increased by 13 times, from 2 percent of all complaints the previous
year to more than a quarter since September 11. Between October
2001 and June 2002, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee
received reports involving over 100 Arab-Americans being removed
from aircraft they had boarded. In June, four civil rights lawsuits
were filed in federal courts accusing four major airlines of blatant
discrimination against five men who had been removed solely based
on their presumed ethnicity. In December, Bush ordered the closure
of several Muslim charities, with the vague suggestion that they
might be aiding and abetting terrorist organizations. The Holy Land
Foundation for Relief and Development, the Global Relief Foundation
and the Benevolence International Foundation have all been forced
to close, though the government has yet to file criminal charges
against any of the three. Roughly 50,000 donors were affected by
these closures, organizations that initiated development projects
in at-risk locations and aided refugees and victims of natural disasters.
Recently, the US Customs Service shifted its supercomputer program
known as the Numerically Integrated Profiling System away from tracking
drug trafficking to monitoring more than 500 Muslim and Arab small
businesses in the United States -- on suspicion of generating money
for Hamas, Hizballah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine.
Attorney-Client Privilege
Beginning in late October,
the Justice Department, sidestepping Congress altogether, authorized
the monitoring of communications between attorneys and clients when
there is "reasonable suspicion" that the inmate will use
these communications to further terrorist activity. The government
is currently testing its ability to breach attorney-client privilege
in its case against New York attorney Lynne Stewart, who represented
Sheikh Omar Abd al-Rahman, and her Arabic-language translator Mohammed
Yousry. Stewart and Yousry were charged with aiding Abd al-Rahman,
who is serving a life sentence plus 65 years in prison for his role
in the 1993 World Trade Center attack, in communicating to the radical
Islamic Group outside prison. The indictment alleges that Stewart
distracted prison guards with legalese while Abd al-Rahman gave
instructions for the group to Yousry in Arabic. Lawyers for Zacarias
Moussaoui, the so-called "twentieth hijacker," are also
filing court motions alleging breach of attorney-client privilege.
His questions, notes, legal discussions and mail are all being closely
monitored by prison authorities.
Surveillance
Relaxed regulation of government
surveillance under the USA PATRIOT Act grants new wiretapping and
enhanced Internet monitoring powers to Federal authorities. In June,
Ashcroft set aside guidelines restricting FBI surveillance of religious
and political organizations. Such surveillance can be initiated
by a field agent without clearance or oversight from Washington.
The most Orwellian twist
is the proposed Operation TIPS, the Terror Information and Protection
System. TIPS is a branch of the recently founded Citizencorps, itself
an offshoot of the Justice Department. It is meant to provide millions
of utility workers, mail carriers, cable installers and others who
by nature of their jobs have access to private homes with the necessary
training to report "suspicious activity" directly to the
Justice Department, essentially enabling the government to search
people's homes without permission or a warrant. Whether TIPS will
get beyond the pilot stage is uncertain, as House Majority Leader
Dick Armey (R-TX) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), chairman of the
Senate Judiciary Committee, have both opposed the proposal. The
United States Postal Service, after much waffling, instructed its
carriers not to use the TIPS system. Facing this opposition, the
Justice Department has scaled back the scope of TIPS, saying that
"the [Operation TIPS] hotline number will not be shared with
any workers, including postal and utility workers, whose work puts
them in contact with homes and private property." Those involved
in "transportation, trucking, shipping, maritime and mass transit
industries" will still be called upon to contribute their intelligence,
though at the expense of the private sector. Meanwhile, as recently
reported in the online magazine Salon, the Justice Department
has been forwarding incoming TIPS calls to the hotline for the "America's
Most Wanted" television series. ACLU Legislative Counsel Rachel
King likened the relationship to "retaining Arthur Andersen
to do all of the SEC's accounting."
Secrecy
After months of discussion,
Bush signed Executive Order 13233 last November, further limiting
public access to presidential papers. Both current and former presidents
are now given unlimited veto power over the release of presidential
records. In order to overrule such a veto, the order explicitly
requires a legal process by which a "demonstrated, specific
need" must be established. Otherwise, the records at issue,
which include any papers produced by the president, the vice president
or any aides, will remain closed indefinitely. The springboard for
the order came from the expiration in January 2001 of the 12-year
period during which President Ronald Reagan's papers were kept private.
The National Archives and Records Administration, as dictated by
law, requested the release of 68,000 pages of correspondence between
Reagan and his advisers. The Bush administration refused their release.
Archivist Steven Hensen wrote in a Washington Post editorial
that "the order effectively blocks access to information that
enables Americans to hold our presidents accountable for their actions."
Also in November, Ashcroft released a memorandum directing US agency
heads to exercise caution when responding to requests under the
Freedom of Information Act, a law meant to provide citizens a window
into the workings of government. "When you carefully consider
FOIA requests and decide to withhold records, in whole or in part,"
the memo read, "you can be assured that the Department of Justice
will defend your decisions unless they lack a sound legal basis
or present an unwarranted risk of adverse impact on the ability
of other agencies to protect other important records." In other
words, release the records only if the requester can make a stink.
|