Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

NYTimes and LATimes Editorials condemning secret detentions

Expand Messages
  • Islamic News and Information Network
    Assalamu alaikum, NEW TORK TIMES (Editorial): Ending Secret Detentions August 6, 2002 One of the most disturbing elements of the Bush administration s
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 8, 2002

      NEW TORK TIMES (Editorial): Ending Secret Detentions

      August 6, 2002

      One of the most disturbing elements of the Bush administration's
      post-Sept.-11 policies has been its detention of hundreds of people whose
      identities have not been revealed. Judge Gladys Kessler of Federal
      District Court in Washington was right to declare last week that such
      secret arrests are "odious to a democratic society," and to order the
      government to release the names of those it has detained since the
      terrorist attacks.

      The hundreds detained - the government has never given an exact number -
      fall into three categories: those charged with federal crimes, those
      facing immigration charges and those being held as material witnesses. The
      government has released the names of almost all the detainees charged with
      federal crimes, but has refused to identify those in the two other groups.

      There are two main flaws in the government's position. First, many of the
      detainees probably have no connection to terrorism. The government would
      like the public to think of the detainees as a group as linked to
      terrorism, but the documents filed in court do not make the case. The
      affidavits from key officials avoid saying that all, or even a significant
      number, of those detained are involved with terrorism. Nor has the
      government explained how it decided to detain the particular people it

      Second, the government's assertions that terrorist groups could exploit
      the release of the names are specious. The government argues that
      releasing the names will allow terrorist groups to learn that some of
      their operatives are in custody. But since detainees are allowed to notify
      anyone they want that they are being held, it is hard to believe that any
      actual terrorists have not found a way of informing their organizations of
      their capture.

      Judge Kessler was not blind to the impact that release of information
      could have on law enforcement. The civil liberties groups that brought the
      suit also asked for other data about the detainees, including the dates
      and locations of their arrests. The court, in turning down the request,
      accepted the government's argument that the information would help anyone
      looking for patterns in law enforcement's antiterrorism investigation and

      Civil liberties advocates worry that whatever victories they manage to eke
      out at the trial court level will be reversed by more conservative appeals
      courts. That has already happened in the case of Yasser Esam Hamdi, an
      American labeled an "enemy combatant" who was given the right by a trial
      judge to meet with his lawyer and was later denied that right on appeal.

      Judge Kessler's decision is correct on the law, and helps define a sphere
      of freedom that, even in these difficult times, the government must
      respect. The Justice Department should comply with her order. If it
      appeals, her decision should be affirmed.


      LOS ANGELES TIMES (EDITORIAL): Secrecy vs. the Republic Information
      blackout on arrests in post-9/11 sweep undermines American values.

      August 6 2002

      A federal judge in Washington had no hesitation last week in ordering the
      Justice Department to reveal the names of almost 1,200 people it jailed
      after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. "Secret arrests are 'a concept
      odious to a democratic society,' and profoundly antithetical to the
      bedrock values that characterize a free and open one such as ours," said
      U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler, quoting an earlier ruling in her own

      Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft should let the matter rest there. He's likely to
      appeal, however, just as he has in related challenges since the

      Lawyers with two dozen human rights and civil liberties groups filed the
      Freedom of Information Act challenge late last year after the Justice
      Department rebuffed request after request to say whom it had rounded up
      and why, and where it had jailed these men and women.

      The department insisted--and continues to insist--that secrecy was
      necessary to keep information from Osama bin Laden and other terrorists
      still at large. If terrorists don't know who's in jail, such logic goes,
      they can't know what the government knows about their plans for attacks.

      Kessler, like most people who care about civil liberties, didn't buy that
      argument. The vast majority of those swept up after the World Trade Center
      and Pentagon attacks have been released from jail or deported on
      immigration violations. None of those rounded up, including the 73
      believed to remain behind bars, have been charged publicly with
      terrorism-related crimes.

      But even if the U.S. had nabbed Bin Laden himself, the ends don't justify
      the means. Americans depend on the transparency of their legal and
      political institutions to protect what Kessler called America's "core
      values of openness, government accountability and the rule of law." For
      that reason, "the public's interest in learning the identity of those
      arrested and detained is essential to verifying whether the government is
      operating within the bounds of law."

      Kessler gave the Justice Department 15 days to turn over a list of the
      people jailed since 9/11. She said she would consider requests to keep
      some names under wraps if prosecutors could demonstrate that a detainee
      had knowledge of a terrorist conspiracy or specifically requested secrecy.

      In recent months, federal judges in Detroit and New Jersey have ordered an
      end to secret deportation hearings, and a Manhattan federal judge in April
      limited the government's use of the federal material witness law to hold
      suspects indefinitely and secretly.

      Ashcroft has appealed each decision.

      Right after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, it was
      impossible to know what else terrorists might be planning. There was an
      understandable impulse to cast a broad net for people and information. But
      the post-Sept. 11 emergency does not justify long-term changes that would
      snuff out the light and openness that distinguish our democracy from the
      tyrannies that would destroy it.

      ININ List Archives Found Here: http://www.egroups.com/messages/inin

      TO SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE PLEASE VISIT: http://www.inin.net/subscribe.htm



    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.