NCARL 2000 Newsletters

December 2000

It's time for the year end review. Concerns over the process of how votes are counted, and whether people are disenfranchised shines a larger light on the role of people in their governance. As you might expect, that gives me encouragement. Many of you, on the other hand, have been steeped in politics up to your hubcaps longer than I've been around and that's heading toward 50 years.

So this is a good time for taking stock. For NCARL that means a big transition, along with the First Amendment Foundation (FAF), our non-profit sister organization. Frank Wilkinson, Executive Director Emeritus of NCARL and Executive Director of the Foundation, is in transition to be the Education Director of FAF. We will be moving the main office of FAF and NCARL to Washington DC, and are heading toward having me be the Executive Director of FAF. Both Frank and I are strongly in favor of keeping NCARL alive and kicking. That'll take your continued support to have it work.

NCARL has played a key role over the decades as legislative advocate on key civil liberties measures and threats. S1, McCarran-Walter, the FBI First Amendment Protection Act, the Antiterrorism & Effective Death Penalty Act, and the Secret Evidence Repeal Act, are just a few of the dozens (and ask Esther Herst, probably hundreds) of measures NCARL has affected. Don't even mention virtually all crime bills that have come up in the last 30-35 years.

This last year we've carried the ball on the Secret Evidence Repeal Act. Really only a small handful of individuals were at the heart of the campaign, and NCARL was right there. We were able to mobilize NCARL activists, ACLU folks, an array of 40 or more national and regional organizations, and especially the Arab American and Muslim communities around the country. Together we took the bill from being the "this is an impossible ideal" to almost reality, where the Republican leadership kept the bill off the floor to prevent what they perceived as a Democratic win. It was an ironic twist to an amazing journey. And the journey's not done. We'll reintroduce the bill first thing next Congress and move for quick passage with your help.

In looking around Washington these days, many of the organizations which initiated plans with us in opposing civil liberties threats and defending the right of political expression over the last decade or so have disappeared or transmogrified to other priorities. While we can find friends on specific campaigns for and against particular bills, only NCARL and the ACLU tend to be initiators of these campaigns. Frank and I think it is crucial that NCARL stick around here a while longer as the only national organization with its main focus on defending political dissent. But it's not enough that Frank and I think it's a good idea.

You are what matters. You can provide the funding to keep us going in Washington. You can say we've done enough or there's more to do. Let us know with your sustainer pledge, with your one time contribution, with your bequest, or even with your voice. We look forward to hearing the vote (and hopefully it won't be as difficult to count as with some other elections...). Thank you all for your many years and often decades of dedication.

November 2000

WE'VE COME A LONG WAY
There I was minding my own business, watching the second presidential debate, when George Bush said essentially that he criticized the use of secret evidence and racial profiling. It was a little muddled, but the concern came out clearly. I started yelling - he finally did it! Then in the next week, Al Gore came out with a letter and a statement to Arab American and Muslim activists in Michigan, expressing his concern about secret evidence as well. Was this just because they've read a few articles in a few newspapers? Hardly.

There's been a concerted campaign, which you've joined, to raise crucial civil liberties to the attention of candidates for political office up to the presidential level. And it's obviously worked. You know the old media campaign joke - tell ABC that CBS is interested in covering an event and then tell CBS that ABC's maybe coming and you'll get them both. Well, people were pushing on both parties and established party candidates to get them to take the plunge and oppose secret evidence. In particular we tried to get them to support H.R. 2121, the Secret Evidence Repeal Act. At the end, they both sort of did. Attached are some of these statements, written and oral. Various handlers also gave us mixed messages about how strongly the respective candidates explicitly endorsed the bill - to give the true flavor of how politics is played.

SO CLOSE TO GETTING A VOTE ON THE BILL
Now to the bill itself, speaking of complexities of politics. You may remember that the bill was favorably reported out of the House Judiciary Committee in a unanimous voice vote. The significant amendment to it passed 26-2 - which would include a provision that somewhat mirrors the Classified Information Procedures Act - to have a federal judge approve an unclassified summary of the classified information in the deportation process. That summary would be what the immigration judge, defendant, and lawyers would see, and that the government would use in the proceeding.

Because Rep. Lamar Smith, chair of the Immigration Subcommittee of Judiciary really opposed the bill, we had an unheard of two hearings in Judiciary, and then the markup, and then a stonewall on producing a written report of the bill. Eventually those favorable to the bill wrote the main report, and it was released in time for a possible vote. All the while pushing and shoving was going on with the Republican leadership to get them to schedule a vote, and with the Democrats to see what they could do to encourage the process. This was going on all the while Bush and Gore were opining on the issue. When Bush made his statement, some of the Republican leadership hesitancy on the issue dissipated. But then at the end politics reared its head. Perhaps I can summarize it as the Republicans in particular (as they have control of the scheduling process) being concerned that the Democrats would get too much credit if the bill was raised and passed. So despite efforts which continued almost to the bitter end of session, the bill was not separately scheduled for a vote or added to another big bill for passage.

In the mean time, there has been some uneasiness that this issue would fall victim to the renewed violent conflict in the Middle East. We've got two answers for this. When there is political discord at home or abroad, it is more crucial than ever to solidify First Amendment and due process rights so dissenters can know they are protected. Further, the secret evidence process is not used against people charged with crimes. If the government believes and has evidence of criminal behavior it should use the criminal process. In these secret evidence proceedings it is jailing and deporting people in immigration proceedings, often people who are dissenters. They, just as those charged with crimes, merit due process rights, and should not be targeted for their First Amendment activity. We must learn from the mistaken and painful round-up's and detentions of World War II.

So here we are. We have a decent bill. At the end of session there are 128 House co-sponsors. The Senate introduced the same bill as passed out of House Judiciary, S 3139 (Senators Abraham, Feingold and Kennedy sponsoring). Both Bush and Gore have spoken favorably about the bill. Both Republican and Democratic leadership have told us they don't object to the bill. And except for a small handful of influential people in Congress, there is no objection. Now of course the INS hates it, the Justice Department is divided on it. The FBI and probably CIA hate the bill. But look how far we've come. We started out afraid we'd get any substantial support.

Now the modified Secret Evidence Repeal Act will be introduced again when the new Congress comes in. Depending on which party controls the House and Senate, with relative alacrity the bill will be considered and pushed thru Congress. If we push hard and early we could see this accomplished early the next session, and not fall victim to partisan squabbling as it did just now.

Thank your representatives and senators if they cosponsored the bill. Let them know we'll be back soon getting this done. And thank you all.

U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

U.S. Senate
Washington, DC 20510

October 2000

Not available.

September 2000

HYDE TO HOLD VOTE ON SECRET EVIDENCE, TWO IRAQIS FREED, BOND HEARING FOR AL-NAJJAR
We have a busy fall already, and you all can help. House Judiciary Committee Henry Hyde has agreed to hold a vote in committee on H.R. 2121, the Secret Evidence Repeal Act. This came about from many hundreds of activists across the country calling, faxing and meeting with Mr. Hyde, requesting he take this action. Thank you all! Now we need to push for the vote to take place quickly when the House reconvenes, and seek that all House Judiciary Committee members vote in favor of it. Particularly if you live in the District or State of a Judiciary member, call or fax them seeking their support. Call 202-224-3121, and ask for the member's office.

Members:

JUDGE ORDERS TWO IRAQIS FREED
In a 123 page judgement, Dr. Ali Yasin Mohammed-Karim and his brother Mohammed Yassin Mohammed-Karim were ordered released from detention in California. The decision, written June 21, 2000, but just now released, and put into effect, resulted in their release Friday August 18th. They have traveled to Virginia to rejoin their mother, Judge Zakia Hakki, where the family is enjoying a long overdue reunion. Dr. Ali and Mohammed had been jailed for almost 4 years.

Reading the decision, one cannot help but be angered again by the stupidity and lack of communication which resulted in their false imprisonment. Dr. Ali was accused of not using a regional name, which Iraqi experts and friends testified was never his name. He was suspected of duplicity with Iran because his cousin was an Iranian agent, when the cousin was not an agent (as CIA agents and Iraqi opposition testified). He was condemned because he got his brother (who had serious medical and psychological difficulties) evacuated out of Iraq and Turkey to Guam using a false name, because his brother was not on the list of evacuees. Who among us would not try to save a brother? Does it make him a national security threat? It goes on like that. Four years. And on secret evidence which it took enormous effort to make public and then rebut. Like all the other cases thus far, when Dr. Ali and Mohammed and their lawyers had the information, it was a slam dunk. The charges were baseless, and would have been proven so right away if they had been made public.

MAZEN AL-NAJJAR MAY HAVE A CHANCE AT RELEASE ON BOND
After his own more than 3 year jail sentence, Mazen Al-Najjar of Florida has a federal court ordered bond hearing. May 31st Federal Judge Joan Lenard required that the immigration court give Al-Najjar a hearing to confront the evidence against him. As I write this, the hearing is ongoing. But unfortunately as the hearing begins, the Immigration Judge has refused to order the Immigration and Naturalization Service to provide a meaningful unclassified summary to Al-Najjar and his crack legal team. Hardly sounds like due process. Almost inevitably this will require further federal court intervention, further delaying justice for Al-Najjar.

Please contact the House Judiciary Committee. Enough of this secret evidence. It's time for due process for everyone.

August 2000

Chicago Organizing
Over 400 people - many from the Arab American and Muslim community South of Chicago - assembled on July 16 to hear Frank Wilkinson talk about the history of how the U.S. government has sought to neutralize political dissent. Then they heard Sami Al Arian describe the current use of secret evidence to deport immigrants and the case of his brother-in-law, Mazen al Najjar. Mazen has been incarcerated almost 4 years, denied bond and the right to see and confront the evidence against him. Increasingly the Arab American community is organizing to stop these abuses, and working together with a range of ethnic rights and civil liberties organizations to strengthen these efforts.

National Organizing
The National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom held its 4th Annual meeting July 23 and 24. We established ourselves as an independent organization, and assessed our incredible progress and significant tasks. The unflagging financial support of NCARL, disproportionately subsidizing the National Coordinator of the Coalition was recognized, appreciated, and plans were initiated to ease some of the pressure on NCARL.

In the last year we have seen the release of two individuals, a preliminary decision that another two should be released, and a strong condemnation of the use of secret evidence against a fifth. National and local press on the issue has been uniformly strong and clear in recognition that this is an important problem reflecting unconstitutional treatment. The Secret Evidence Repeal Act in Congress now has 112 co-sponsors and may be introduced soon in the Senate. A symbolic bill in the House on the issue of secret evidence passed decisively earlier this summer.

While we are heading toward abolition of the use of secret evidence, a broader issue looms. First Amendment rights to engage in political dissent activity are at risk. The LA 8 face a hearing later in the year in immigration court. The Humanitarian Law Project case in California has not been received favorably in the courts. And the public is largely unaware that people can be jailed for giving humanitarian aid given knowingly to listed "foreign terrorist organizations." We have our work cut out for us, to educate people and to critique this law which goes after entire selected organizations based on their politics rather than their relative danger to society. They are chosen for elimination rather than being encouraged to engage in peaceful political change activity.

Arrests in North Carolina
As if to underscore this issue, the U.S. announced the arrest of 18 people Friday July 22. The individuals, apparently all of Lebanese descent, were arrested for cigarette smuggling. At the same time, the press carried reports that the group would be charged with providing funds to Hezbollah, a group on the list of foreign terrorist organizations, what might be the first time such a case would be brought. The NCPPF jumped right in, along with member organizations, contacting one of the lawyers, doing press, and starting to educate everyone about the nature and impact of such a case. Now, more than a week later, the group remains NOT charged with this high visibility offense. So we're seeing the government throwing charges around in an attempt to intimidate a community, without actually having to bring a case and carry thru on the charge. Nonetheless, eight of the individuals remain in jail, with bond denied, because they are immigrants charged with a crime. And the uncertainty of the full extent of the charges cannot help but unsettle a community. We are seeking to educate the local and national communities about this newer issue. And we are trying to back the government off from its scare tactics.

WHAT TO DO:
You can help. Write to the Department of Justice. Ask Attorney Janet Reno to drop the First Amendment charges against the LA 8, and not to use the Antiterrorism Act powers to criminalize non-violent activity against the individuals in North Carolina. The Arab American community should not be demonized. If individuals have committed crimes they should be charged appropriately. But they should not be used to create fear and to intimidate immigrant communities.

Attorney General Janet Reno
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
Washington, DC 20530

Thank you for all your support.

July 2000

Not available.

June 2000

House Judiciary Committee Recapitulates Judiciary Subcommittee Concern About Secret Evidence
It's been a busy week in the fight against secret evidence. Any minute we expect to hear Judge Sitgraves' final decision in the cases of Dr. Ali Karim and his brother Mohammed. They are Iraqi brothers, part of the several thousand Iraqi Kurds brought to the U.S. by the U.S. to keep Saddam Hussein from killing them as the U.S. military departed. The judge announced after separate hearings of each one in the last couple of weeks that she preliminarily had decided the men were not national security threats, merited political asylum and should be released from detention. Her decision is expected as I write this. Their release would be the fourth straight win in the courts on secret evidence, Hany Kiareldeen and Nasser Ahmed having been released last fall.

On Tuesday, April 23, the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom first held a press conference, featuring Representatives Bonior, Campbell and Barr, speaking in support of H.R. 2121, the Secret Evidence Repeal Act, and about the constitutional and real life problems of the use of secret evidence in deportations. The press conference immediately preceded a long and comprehensive full House Judiciary Committee hearing on H.R. 2121. The Committee hearing in many ways mirrored the Immigration Subcommittee hearing, held February 10th. In both cases, almost all members of the Committee who were present criticized the procedures the government is using in secret evidence deportations.

Of course Representatives David Bonior and Tom Campbell spoke eloquently in support of the bill. In particular during the questioning, Representative Jerrold Nadler was pointed in his criticism of the due process problems with secret evidence. He repeatedly called on the general counsels of the FBI and Immigration and Naturalization Service to tell him how an individual could defend against evidence him which he could not see and which the government had refused even to produce an unclassified summary. Finally Nadler admitted he was trying to get the government to admit what everyone already knew - that it was impossible to defend oneself in that circumstance.

Republicans and Democrats noted difficulties with current government practice, looking to put time limits (30 or 90 day) on how long the government could hold a person in detention based on secret evidence. Also many members looked to the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) to provide a template for these deportations. In that case an unclassified collection of the evidence is used in the trial. David Cole, lawyer for 13 of the secret evidence deportees, and Greg Nojeim (ACLU) noted that CIPA was designed to prosecute accused spies, mass murderers, etc who already had access to classified information, but wanted to blackmail the government into dropping the cases by going public with the information. They also noted that it might be unconstitutional in the deportation context to provide only a summary. Nonetheless, a "CIPA fix" and time limits are being looked to as an alternative to eliminating secret evidence altogether, as HR 2121 would do.

Other witnesses supporting the bill were Hany Kiareldeen, describing the horrible experience of his having been a secret evidence detainee, and Nahla al Arian - sister of Mazen al Najjar, detained 3 years (on May 31 a federal judge ruled his due process rights were denied thru his secret evidence based detention). Representatives of the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai Brith (ADL) and of the American Jewish Committee (AJC) joined discredited terrorism expert Steven Emerson and Steven Flatow, whose daughter was the victim of a suicide bomber in Jerusalem, in opposing H.R. 2121. Both ADL and AJC also expressed problems with the government's current practices in secret evidence deportations.

CALL NOW
We urge you to contact your member of Congress, seeking their co-sponsorship of the bill. Also we would like you to contact Judiciary Chair Henry Hyde or other Judiciary Committee members, asking them to mark-up - or vote out of committee - the Secret Evidence Repeal Act. There are already 92 co-sponsors in the House. It has momentum. We are 4 and 0 in court, assuming the Iraqi case final decision is the same as the preliminary ruling. Time is running out on this Congress as we approach party conventions this summer and the fall elections. Traditionally, little legislative work happens much after mid-summer. So many organization members of the NCPPF, as is NCARL, are now pushing for a major national lobby effort to bring the bill to a vote. Join us!

In a ruling Wednesday, May 31 U.S. District Judge Joan Lenard, Southern District of Florida called the use of secret evidence in denying bond to Dr. Mazen Al-Najjar a violation of his due process rights. In Al-Najjar's petition for habeas corpus, the judge granted Al-Najjar a new hearing to determine his eligibility for bond before an Immigration Judge, but required him to remain in detention until the redetermination. Judge Lenard limited the use of secret evidence, but refused to prohibit it outright for consideration of bond. Further she said "Mere association with a known terrorist organization is not sufficient in and of itself to support a finding of a threat to national security for bond purposes." In a new hearing, the government must show "meaningful association of a ‘degree of participation" in activities posing a threat to national security" in order for the Immigration Judge to deny bond.

May 2000

Here we are in May again. The azaleas are out in full force, tulips finishing, forest flowers poking thru old leaves and oak pollen and tear gas creating serious eye irritation. Spring in Washington. Reminders of days of old - like the 60's and 70's.

COINTELPRO Again?
Last weekend (April 13-18) brought out lots of protesters, not especially different from many Springs. The perception that weather will be good brings people out again in greater numbers than the rest of the year, tho we do tend to have demonstrations year-round for those of you who are interested in scheduling one not in conflict with 15 others, and for easier scheduling of lawyers and legal observers, if you please.

Last weekend, titled "a16" by the organizers, focused on regular meetings of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, to bring out concerns about how their very substantial funds are spent purportedly to help poor, developing nations. That explanation was for those of you completely out of reach of the media for the last weeks. It got pretty comprehensive press, even though the story you got varied from ‘rich white youth anarcho-terrorists descending on poor DC to destroy it in the name of saving the poor' to ‘DC shut down by armed force - the police - before diverse largely peaceful demonstrators got a chance- Sam Smith'

I'm trying to keep from writing the story of what happened - others are doing that and I can email those to people who are interested. The DC National Lawyers Guild and National Conference of Black Lawyers, Midnight Special Law Collective and ACLU had quite a time helping the masses of jailed people get out together in one piece, and did and will continue challenging in public and in the courts the constitutional problems with law enforcement activities around the event. I want to describe a little of that activity here.

This very hyped event had the DC mayor and police talking well in advance about how they were preparing for it. It was noted that there were huge resources arrayed to prevent the World Bank, IMF and city from being shut down. It was announced, oddly, that there were a huge number of undercover agents deployed, along with uniforms. One result of the hype was the city largely shut down for roughly a square mile around the relevant meetings. Streets were blocked off to almost everyone.

The result of the undercover law enforcement activity became clear early into the week of rallies. Police and FBI followed activists in their cars and arrested people for carrying the equipment of First Amendment activity - puppet-making materials, PVC pipes POTENTIALLY to be used to lock activists to buildings or other structures. DC officials shut down the main organizing site, citing the fire hazard (a shockingly aggressive action for an otherwise seemingly moribund city enforcement). The National Lawyers Guild immediately issued a well-reported letter to Attorney General Janet Reno, criticizing these constitutionally questionable tactics.

On Saturday, before the main demonstrations began, law enforcement rounded up 600 miscellaneous protesters, reporters, stray bystanders and held them in jail thru Sunday to effectively keep them from taking part in Sunday's demonstrations before releasing them without charge. Thruout the events, people were tear-gassed, arrested, slammed around, ridden over with horses and motorcycles, when a reason was discernable, it was sometimes for things like walking on sidewalks. While there were some scuffles that precipitated larger reactions, the protesters by all reports were largely peaceful, as much or more than in Seattle.

The activities described above look remarkably like a law enforcement effort intended to stop a demonstration rather than to keep the peace. Further, with the level of intelligence gathering - thru undercover agents infiltrated into a variety of areas, and serious overt collection of data - videotaping noted principally, it seems clear that this provided an opportunity for law enforcement to gather mountains of data on one of the main protest movements now active in the U.S. Sound familiar? What are they doing with it? What are they going to do with it in the future?

COINTELPRO: GOING PUBLIC AND HI-TECH
One difference from COINTELPRO (the FBI's Counter-Intelligence Program of the 60's and 70's) days is the increased sophistication of collection technologies. Information is no longer stored in files to be manually cross-referenced and mailed between offices. It is on huge data-banks, cross-referenced, shared instantaneously around the country and sometimes around the world. Historically, COINTELPRO was a covert program to disrupt, discredit and neutralize dissent. This time around, law enforcement is going public with both with its intentions and activity. This might make it easier to bring constitutional challenges against law enforcement.

I'm not raising this issue to scare people off from engaging in dissent. In fact the opposite. I am reminding people that it's happening. I'm reminding people that the FBI asked to remove the prohibition that it not investigate First Amendment activity and Congress agreed in 1996. The FBI said it needed that capacity in order to effectively pursue terrorist activity. Here's part of what they wanted to investigate.

Further rather than being scared off, people should now use this example to talk about the abuses. People need to complain in an organized way to the Attorney General and to their member of Congress and Senator about these abuses. We must continue to organize and protest, understanding that the First Amendment still is not adequately protected, and be careful in our statements and our work. I don't make stupid jokes (silly ones are ok) and pay my parking tickets. Perhaps the time is at hand to reintroduce the FBI First Amendment Protection Act. It's certainly needed, and perhaps there's again a critical mass to get it passed for good. NCARL's ready - are you?

April 2000

EVEN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL!
This is the make or break time for passage of the Secret Evidence Repeal Act, H.R. 2121 this year. We have enclosed a clear and brief article that appeared in the Wall Street Journal on March 22. You can use this article, by well-known reporter Gerald Seib, as you approach any member of Congress to co-sponsor the bill. As the article makes clear, one of the biggest problems with the use of secret evidence is that so few people know about this due process abomination. We can and must change this.

80 COSPONSORS AND COUNTING
We have also attached a copy of the current co-sponsors of H.R. 2121. You can see by the fact that we're up to 80 co-sponsors, that support is increasing steadily and pretty quickly. If your member has co-sponsored, thank them, and ask them to let Judiciary Chair Henry Hyde know that they want the bill reported out of committee so it can get a vote this year. If your member has not yet co-sponsored, tell them that now is a crucial time to join on the bandwagon. The fact that we have strong bipartisan support - 64 Democrats and 16 Republicans - is a measure of the seriousness of the supporters, the bill's likelihood of passage, and the unusual nature of the problem.

THE EVIDENCE AGAINST SECRET EVIDENCE
People are being detained almost indefinitely, with no ability to see and rebut the charges against them. They are being deported in many cases to countries where they would face torture or worse, and yet have no capacity to prevent that detention. The U.S. has had three years, following the passage of the antiterrorism and immigration acts of 1996, to prove that it requires a law allowing the use of secret evidence. What have been proven in the Iraqi 6, Kiareldeen and Ahmed cases are two things:
1) When an individual cannot see the evidence against them, they are completely unable to rebut the charges or discredit the source, even when the evidence is weak and the witnesses unreliable. In these cases thru persistence we obtained evidence long after the cases began. When we got it, we were able to completely overwhelm it with the facts.
2) The government, despite its claims of national security and source protection, has chosen instead in these cases to use evidence that would never be used in criminal cases. It is weak, second or third hand, inaccurate, racist. The temptation to abuse the process has been irresistible for the government.

GIVE US YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS
As NCARL evolves into the 21st century, we are making some changes. Frank and the LA office are moving into smaller quarters and downsizing staff a little. In DC, I am becoming a consultant respectively to NCARL and the First Amendment Foundation. For NCARL I am continuing to do their legislative/lobbying work. For the First Amendment Foundation, I am help them carry out their educational mandate. This will save on bookkeeping efforts for LA. In practice, however, we'll be continuing to carry out the mandate of defending political expression.

As well, just as much of the communication going out of DC to the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom supporters is electronic, we want to try the same thing for NCARL. If you have an email address, we'll be happy to send you these monthly communiques electronically. Just fill out the form below and we'll put you on the DC list. That way as well, if we have sudden alerts on legislative or other matters, occasionally we can send out such notices easily as well. But worry not, this list will only get one or two mailings a month. If you want to get more regular information, ask to be put on the NCPPF email list to receive notice of important articles, editorials, and breaking news about secret evidence, about legal decisions, and other work of the Coalition.

Thanks for all your support. You're making a real difference.

March 2000

You may remember that last month I said we had been spending our time doing important education work for immigration practitioners - getting out our book Terrorism & the Constitution. Well that was then. This last month has been a whirlwind. We finally got the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration and Claims hearing on the Secret Evidence Repeal Act, H.R. 2121. Then less than a week later, we held a Secret Evidence Summit, also held at the House - in the Cannon Caucus Room. Both were outstanding successes in their own fashion. And were we bushed!

A Remarkable Hearing
February 10th, Chairman Lamar Smith held the long-promised hearing on the secret evidence bill. Testifying for Smith - against the bill - was the FBI General Counsel, Larry Parkinson, accompanied by Bo Cooper, INS general counsel. Testifying for the bill were Nahla al Arian, sister of Mazen al Najjar, and David Cole of Georgetown Law School. The American Jewish Committee had been asked to testify against the bill, but then was disinvited at the last minute. Apparently their testimony (which was available) was too critical of current government use of secret evidence for Rep. Smith to consider them helpful to his position. A number of the Democrats on the committee (gleefully) criticized Smith for his unwillingness to allow varied positions within the opposition to the bill.

Attorneys Parkinson and Cooper were engaged in a squeeze play between various Republican and Democratic members attending the hearing. They got Mr. Parkinson to agree that immigrants in the U.S. are covered by U.S. Constitutional protection of due process, that the use of secret evidence is such a due process violation, and that sometimes the government must "delay" such protection for its own reasons. That admission didn't sit well with almost all those members in attendance. Even several who had not yet co-sponsored the bill spoke about their serious concerns about the use of secret evidence. The government witnesses were not clear on current statutory authorization of secret evidence, or on the way the Classified Information Procedures Act (CIPA) is used in a criminal context. No government lawyers in the audience helped them out.

Then David Cole helped everyone out. In ten minutes he summarized recent judicial decisions in the cases, clarified current and past law and case law covered (or didn't authorize) secret evidence. Then he described how the CIPA is used to make sure a defendant gets to see all the evidence used against him/her in a criminal context. Nahla al Arian then ably described the human effects of the government's 1000 day "delay" of Mazen al Najjar's constitutional rights.

Following the much longer-than-scheduled hearing, a number of us held a brief press conference summarizing what we'd heard. Hany Kiareldeen, addressed the crowd, describing his experience with secret evidence. Hany, you will remember, recently won his deportation case following 19 months of incarceration, denied bond with secret evidence. His presence at the earlier hearing was noted by several Members of Congress. Sitting quietly in the front row, he highlighted the incongruity of government claims of the national security threat which these candidates for extra-constitutional deportation pose. Nahla al Arian again made a plea for equitable treatment. The many organizations who have long been working to abolish secret evidence took heart at the unexpectedly positive and remarkable hearing.

Then a Gathering of Concern
Despite the very short organizing time, the Secret Evidence Summit, held February 16th, was an astounding success. About 700 people attended (I first thought 500, then learned the actual number of chairs set up). They filled every seat and packed every standing space. People mostly from the neighboring American Arab and Muslim communities organized to attend. Many noted how unusual this was for a largely immigrant community to come to the seat of government to express their concerns.

Those concerns were powerfully expressed. UnEqual Justice, a new documentary on secret evidence, succinctly describes both the use of secret evidence, and as a case study, the situation of Mazen al Najjar. Following the video, Dr. Nassima Haddam, wife of Dr. Anwar Haddam spoke of the difficulty of raising her small children without her husband and how he was suffering from this years' long indefinite detention. Judge Zakia Hakki described the bravery of her two sons in refusing to take the government's plea agreement. It would have had them deported, admitting they entered the country illegally. In fact the U.S. government brought the Iraqis to the U.S. to keep Saddam Hussein from killing them, after their cooperation with the CIA to try to overthrow Hussein. Nasser Ahmed then described his own detention, mostly in solitary, and how he and his able lawyers won his release by exposing and rebutting the formerly secret evidence. Lou Bograd, of the ACLU, one of those lawyers, underscored the impossibility of rebutting that which you cannot see.

Representatives David Bonior and Sheila Jackson-Lee spoke to the crowd, clearly energized and focused by the huge and enthusiastic house. More than 2 dozen speakers took part in the event over the 3 hours, reinforcing the two messages that the American Arab and Muslim community across the country must mobilize to obtain their constitutional rights, and that other communities and organizations must join them in recognition that these abuses affect us all.

Sami al Arian ably moderated the event, the American Muslim Council in particular, and several other national organizations, with the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom - yours truly staffing - made this happen. It can and should be replicated across the country. I'd recommend fewer speakers and more time to plan. But the video, a couple speakers, a little publicity and you have an excellent educational event. Sell a few copies of Terrorism & the Constitution - available from the LA office of NCARL. Contact me to get a copy of UnCivil Liberties - info@ncarl.org or 202-529-4225.

The energy coming out of these events is extraordinary. This is the critical time to push your members to co-sponsor H.R. 2121, the Secret Evidence Repeal Act. Call them at 202-224-3121. Before they get too enmeshed in conventions and re-election frenzy, help the House and Senate codify this key constitutional right.

February 2000

This last month has been a little less hectic and record-braking in a national sense. No other people have been released from detention who are facing secret evidence. We've not made national news for our work. But just as important work has been occurring.

We've received extraordinary support from you all from our end of the year appeals. Your financial, as well as substantive (especially you volunteers), and moral support really is what makes our work happen. We are humbled by your generosity, and prodded to proceed with greater energy and thought (hopefully).

GRANT OF FAF RESOURCE TO IMMIGRATION PRACTITIONERS
Frank has again been combining his travels around the country with his coordination work in LA. I've been helping implement an important grant which we received that is vitally important. The Emma Lazarus Fund gave the First Amendment Foundation a grant to give complimentary copies of the outstanding our most recent book to immigration practitioners. Terrorism & the Constitution, Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of National Security - by James X. Dempsey and David Cole - is an amazing and compact summary of law, regulation, government practice regarding political dissent. It also documents the effects on activists and their efforts to seek justice.

We've reached out to our contacts in the immigration law community - through the National Lawyers Guild National Immigration Project, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, immigration law professors, Arab American lawyers groups. Notices have appeared in newsletters, and in diverse email lists and the responses have been flooding in. We've been putting people on the mailing list to get the book, which will be going out hopefully in the next week or so. It is gratifying to see the eagerness with which practitioners have been approaching us from all over the country to obtain this important resource. Of course it's even more gratifying to hear the confirmation from those who've read and used it that Terrorism & the Constitution is an essential resource.

Remember to order a copy if you have not already. Think of others - of immigration practitioners who can receive a complimentary copy - or activists, members of the press, historians, immigrants, who need this material. It makes a great gift.

PUSH H.R. 2121 - REPEAL SECRET EVIDENCE
Also on the horizon this coming month are a big public meeting on Capitol Hill, calling for the repeal of secret evidence, and a legislative briefing, to help staffers of Members of the House of Representatives understand H.R. 2121, the Secret Evidence Repeal Act.

We are revving up pressure on members of Congress to co-sponsor H.R. 2121, to have promised formal hearings on the bill, and to proceed with its consideration. There were 63 co-sponsors at last count, and more coming. Check www.thomas.loc.gov to see if your member has co-sponsored the bill. Thank them if they have, push them to co-sponsor if they have not.

Thanks again - you all are great.

January 2000

Some people look into the next century as if it is a great threat. Others think of it as just one foot in front of the other. If you're in the business of defending political expression, maybe you feel part of both impulses. But really I think it's a third way (tongue in cheek)..

On the one hand, the Clinton Administration and the Congress have made some horrible decisions on the civil liberties front over the last 3-4 years. At the same time, and probably partly in response to this awful legislation and related government actions, just plain folks around the country have been very articulate in criticizing those moves. More national and local organizations have been coalescing on these issues, adding expertise, diversity, and strength to the ranks. The press has taken these issue to heart as well, with our help, publicizing and opining on the disastrous decision-making. After decades now of Reagan and Bush and Clinton, I sort of expect the government to act badly when it comes to political decisions about defending political dissent. Like all governments, however, these administrations respond to public pressure. Given that, we can take great strength and even hope from the breadth and success of the response. So perhaps hopefulness at the effect of tons of hard work should be what we take into the new year.

We have the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (complete misnomers, by the way) passed in 1996 and creating havoc for three years now. We have the roving wiretap amendment added without debate to the Intelligence Authorization Bill, passed and signed into law in October 1998. We have lots of new technologies and government and some popular urging to stop terrorism and crime by increasing law enforcement power. We now emphasize the punitive over the rehabilitative. We reward suspicion of those who look different, act different, even if that means we pull over people "driving while black, " "traveling while Arab." But these behaviors are becoming more criticized publicly, evaluated at the highest levels of government because of the demands by victims, demands by national groups, exposure of the ineffectiveness and unfairness of such tactics.

You all know that in areas of our particular focus, the tide is starting to turn. Hany Kiareldeen and Nasser Ahmed are out of jail. Hany is a permanent resident now with hopefully only a few legal hurdles yet to cross. Nasser must still contest his deportation, but now from his home, with most of the secret evidence made public. And Mazen al Najjar's case is now in the federal courts, where hopefully it can make more progress toward getting his release from jail, and the ability to see the evidence against him.

This happened because we all made it happen. Your nickels, dollars and hundreds. Your letters and emails and articles in your papers. Your public fora to let others know and mobilize support for defending political expression, giving immigrants constitutional rights, especially First Amendment and due process rights. And your help made the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom's continued work possible. You funded my coordination of the Coalition. That allowed our instantaneous dispersal of and reaction to legal news, our ability to coordinate and share legal information, our strategic work across lines of ethnicity, religion, politics, and geography. Thank you all.

We've enclosed a card with this monthly letter - for you to help provide us with the needed financial support to keep producing it. Also we would like you to give us your comments, on the letter or on our issues, and perhaps a few other people to whom you think we should be mailing the letter.

The best to all of you.

BACK TO TOP