[Peace-discuss] Re: [Foa] secret evidence and secret proceedings

[WILLIAM LAFI YOUMANS]

Just a correction, it is the LA 8, not the LA 7. Michel Shihadeh, the west
coast director of ADC, was one of them. Also, the ADC director of the
Midwest, Imad Hamad, was the victim of secret evidence proceedings. They
are two people to get in touch with. The spokespeople should decide that
I guess, since they should be in charge of strategizing. I know both of
them and will contact them to see what they can do, if people agree to
that.

What happens in these cases often is that the detainee stays in the
removal process for between 2 to 3 years, because there is no recourse
during. Only after a certain legal point could there be a way out.

Then, the detainee puts in an application for a writ of habeas corpus,
which basically says that the detainee is being wrongfully detained. At
that point the judge demands the secret evidence be presented to the
"respondent" (the immighration law term for the detainee). In most of the
previous cases, the evidence has been based on political work or on
questionable testimony by ex-wives. Some were even held on newspaper
clippings of banquets. This has been ruled unconstitutional every time.
The problem is that it is at the district court level, so the decision
does not affect the legislation. It would have to have been appealed to
the Supreme court by the government for the possibility of a law-changing
ruling. The good news is that the district courts will see that there is a
lot of precendence for BS detentions...and all of them were premised on
minor visa violations, not traditionally enough for detention or
deportation.

That was before Sep 11.

The process may be expedited since September 11, but I do not know for
sure. There is too much secrecy for the public to know, though I am sure
people close to the cases can tell you.

The existence of a campaign will not necessarily help speed things
or bring out a favorable outcome because there were high-profile campaigns
for Hany Kialardeen and Mazen Al-Najjar. They had Tom Cambell, a
congressman from California at the time, and now a law professor at
Stanford, as well as David Cole, a law professor at Georgetown, plus
congresspeople Cynthia McKinney, John Conyers, and David Bonior.
Other important players are Greg Nojeim of the ACLU, Jennifer Bailey
of Human Rights Watch, Houaida Saad an attorney from Detroit (or DC)
(These people should be contacted as well.)

To get a good view of how a secret evidence case looked before september
11, check out Hazim Bitar's video, "Uncivil Liberties: Secret Trials in
America." (the director's site is http://www.alif.com/)


On Fri, 14 Jun 2002 pfmueth at ux1.cso.uiuc.edu wrote:

> At the  Friends of Ahmed Press conf/rally this morning, the recent
> ruling by bushcroft allowing secret INS proceedings was conflated
> with the provisions almost six years old that allow for secret
> evidence .
>
> looking for some clarity . .    here's one of several short pages
> from the American Muslim Council with background. .
>
> I searched the aclu looking for some info on what I think is the
> first major use of this provision, the LA seven, but I haven't found
> details yet.
>
> What is very interesting here is that the gov't apparently hasn't
> used the court preferring to "merely" use it for detainment. . ..
>
> http://www.amconline.org/sevidence/
> What is Secret Evidence
>
> The 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act established a
> new court charged only with hearing cases in which the government
> seeks to deport aliens accused of engaging in terrorist activity
> based on secret evidence submitted in the form of classified
> information. The 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant
> Responsibility Act expanded the secret evidence court so that secret
> evidence could be more easily used to deport even lawful permanent
> residents as terrorists. It also included provisions allowing the
> government to use secret evidence to deny bond to all detained
> non-citizens and to deny various discretionary immigration benefits
> such as asylum to all non-citizens, including those not accused of
> being terrorists.
>
> Though the secret evidence court has not yet heard a case, the INS
> has moved in dozens of other proceedings to use secret evidence
> against non-citizens to deny them bond and relief from deportation,
> such as asylum. In fact, the INS attempts to use secret evidence to
> deny mandatory relief from deportation, such withholding of
> deportation, even though it has no statutory authority to do so.
>
> Virtually every recent secret evidence case that has come to public
> attention involves a Muslim or an Arab. The ACLU represents one such
> non-citizen, Nasser Ahmed, a 37-year old Egyptian who was denied
> bond, asylum and withholding based on secret evidence. The
> immigration judge who heard the evidence said that he had "no doubt"
> that Mr. Ahmed would be tortured if returned to Egypt. If the
> decision in his case had been based only on the evidence in the
> public record -- evidence that Mr. Ahmed had the chance to challenge
> -- Mr. Ahmed would be a free man today. Instead, he was held in
> solitary confinement for over three years, and is still being
> detained, without being told why and thereby given a change to refute
> the accusations against him.
>
> Secret evidence is also being used to detain in Florida without bond
> Mazen Al-Najjar, a stateless Palestinian. One day at breakfast with
> his wife as he helped his daughters get ready for school, he answered
> a knock on the door. This 18-year resident of the United States was
> immediately detained for alleged violations of the immigration laws.
> When he asked for release on bond -- which is commonly granted
> similarly-situated non-citizens who are likely to appear for their
> immigration hearings because of their strong family and community
> ties -- his request was denied, based on secret evidence. Two years
> has elapsed and Mr. Al-Najjar still does not know the basis for his
> detention.
>
> The INS is also using secret evidence in cases involving seven Iraqis
> airlifted by the U.S. from Northern Iraq because they were part of a
> failed CIA plot to destabilize the regime in Iraq headed by Saddam
> Hussein. The INS is denying them political asylum based on secret
> evidence. A legal team including former Director of Central
> Intelligence R. James Woolsey represents them. Mr. Woolsey, who was
> himself denied the opportunity to see the evidence against his
> clients, commented that secret evidence is what "one would expect to
> find in Iraq, not the U.S." Five of the seven recently agreed to be
> deported in exchange for release from custody with certain
> limitations on their liberty while they search for a foreign country
> that will accept them.