|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America
US attorney general defends civil liberties abuses
Ashcroft dismisses report on post-911 dragnet
By Kate Randall
9 June 2003
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
US Attorney General John Ashcroft testified last Thursday before
the House Judiciary Committee, giving his first public response
to an internal Justice Department report that exposed widespread
violations of the civil liberties of immigrants detained in the
post-September 11 anti-terror dragnet.
The Justice Departments Office of the Inspector Generals
report, released June 2, detailed verbal and physical abuse, withholding
of counsel, denial of bond, and other violations against the 762
mostly Arab and Muslim men rounded up by the government.
Ashcroft treated the report by the watchdog agency of the department
he heads with undisguised contempt. We make no apologies,
he told the congressmen. The attorney general not only defended
the police-state methods decried by the inspector general, but
called for the government to be granted even more sweeping police
powers. He said the reach of the USA Patriot Actthe law
passed after the September 11, 2001 attacks that sanctions unprecedented
powers to detain, investigate and prosecute terror suspectsshould
be extended.
Ashcroft called for Congress to expand the powers of the act
to allow for the detention of terrorism suspects without pre-trial
bond, and said the penalties for some terror-related crimes should
be stiffened to include capital punishment.
Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee responded in the
most muted and cowardly fashion to Ashcrofts defiant defense
of methods that flagrantly violate constitutional safeguards.
Not one so much as hinted that his assault on democratic rights
should place a question mark over his continued tenure as attorney
general.
All of them accepted uncritically the framework of the Bush
administrations so-called war on terrorism,
and either tacitly or explicitly endorsed the strengthening of
the police powers of the state at the expense of individual rights.
Typical were the remarks of Rep. Howard L. Berman, Democrat of
California, who could only bring himself to comment: Some
of us find that the collateral damage may be greater than it needs
to be in the conduct of this war.
Rep. Robert S. Scott of Virginia went the furthest of any of
the Democrats, suggesting that evidence of civil rights violations
on the part of Justice Department employees might point to criminal
conduct and warrant the appointment of an independent counsel.
The decision to appoint an independent counsel rests with the
attorney general, and Ashcroft was not challenged when he brusquely
responded, I have no plan at this time to employ a special
counsel in this matter.
The practices exposed in the 198-page report issued by the
Justice Departments inspector general, Glenn Fine, are clearly
grounds for investigation and criminal prosecution of Ashcroft
and other Justice Department officials. While making no direct
charges of criminal conduct, the report maintains that authorities
violated the civil liberties of hundreds of detainees and demonstrated
a pattern of physical and verbal abuse, particularly
at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) in Brooklyn, New York
and the Passaic County jail in Paterson, New Jersey.
The Justice Department instituted a no bond policy
for all those rounded up in the sweep that followed the September
11 attacks. Suspects remained in jail for an average of 80 days,
most without any charges filed against them. Some were held for
as long as six months. According to the report, this hold
until cleared policy was instituted at the highest
levels of the Justice Department.
Under this policy, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
was given final say on when or if detainees were to be released.
A Justice Department lawyer told investigators that this policy
shift represented uncharted territory because it meant
a person was assumed to be linked to terrorism unless the FBI
said otherwise, a clear violation of the legal principle of innocent
until proven guilty.
The Justice Department had a policy of opposing bail for all
suspects it deemed of interestand the majority
of detainees were assigned to this category. In many cases, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) waited more than
a month before presenting detainees with charges, instead of the
stated INS policy of serving charges within 72 hours.
This policy frequently put the Justice Department at odds with
INS officials. The report says that INS lawyers warned in some
cases that delays in charging and/or releasing detainees were
creating an increased risk of litigation. When detainees
did challenge their detentions, the Justice Department moved quickly
to obtain FBI clearance for their release to avoid any possible
legal action, according to the report.
The Justice Department refused to release many detainees held
in connection with immigration violations until the FBI determined
they posed no danger to the United States, according to
the report. Some were held long after immigration judges had ordered
them deported.
The report states that the vast majority of the 762 individuals
detained had no circumstantial connection whatsoever to terrorism:
Some appear to have been arrested more by virtue of chance
encounters or tenuous connections to [an investigative] lead rather
than by any genuine indications of a possible connection with
... terrorist activity.
According to the report, FBI leads resulting in arrests were
quite general in nature, such as a landlord
reporting suspicious activity by an Arab tenant.
Not one of the 762 suspects has been charged in connection
with the September 11 attacks. Although the Bush administration
still refuses to release any details on the detainees identities,
the overwhelming majority have reportedly been deported and a
smaller number released.
Many of those suffering abuse at the hands of authorities are
no longer in the US. But investigators for the Department of Justice
inspector general found many of their allegations credible.
Many reported that they were imprisoned for months in cells
lit 24 hours a day. Some were held in lockdowns for 23 hours a
day, and then taken from their cells bound in handcuffs, leg irons
and waist chains.
Detainees were subjected to verbal taunts. Some protested their
conditions by staging hunger strikes.
Detainees at the MDC in Brooklyn asserted they were slammed
against walls, often before guards videotaped their statements.
Some charged they were dragged by their handcuffs and ankle chains,
and told, You will feel pain. Others complained that
their arms, hands, wrists and fingers were twisted.
The inspector generals office interviewed 19 detainees
at the MDC. Twelve reported physical abuse and ten reported verbal
abuse. The 12 correctional officers interviewed all denied participating
in or witnessing any abuse. Curiously, hundreds of hours of videotape
from the MDCs Special Housing Unit, where the detainees
were held, have been destroyed.
One of the most egregious violations of civil liberties documented
in the report is the denial of the right to counsel. For several
weeks following September 11, 2001, the Bureau of Prisons imposed
a communications blackout, making it virtually impossible
for detainees to contact family members or an attorney. Even after
this blackout was lifted, many were designated as witness
security inmates, frustrating efforts of families, attorneys
and even law enforcement officials to determine where
they were held, according to the report.
Some detainees were provided the names of attorneys to call,
but with wrong phone numbers. Others were given the names and
numbers of lawyers who were not willing to represent them. Detainees
were often given only one opportunity a week to contact a lawyer,
and a wrong number or busy signal would count as that attempt.
According to the report, citizens from more than 20 countries
were among those picked up in the government sweep, with the largest
number, 254, coming from Pakistan. The overwhelming majority of
these individuals were guilty, at most, of minor visa violations.
See Also:
Split verdict in Detroit terror trial
exposes government frame-up
[7 June 2003]
US prepares for military tribunals at
Guantanamo Bay
[4 June 2003]
ACLU files lawsuit challenging
no-fly list
[7 May 2003]
US: Republicans seek to make
Patriot Act provisions permanent
[15 April 2003]
US immigration authorities
detain hundreds of Middle Eastern men in Los Angeles
[23 December 2002]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |