Thursday, Jun 19, 2003
Thursday, Jun 19, 2003 |
| International | ||||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | International
By Sridhar Krishnaswami
By a two to one margin, a Federal Appeals Court for the District of Colombia Circuit took the stand that giving away such information could jeopardise the ongoing Government's investigation and give invaluable insights to terrorists in the process. According to the Circuit Court Judge, David Sentelle, judges are in an "extremely poor position to second guess" the Executive's judgment in the realm of national security. "America faces an enemy just as real as its former Cold War foes with capabilities beyond the capacity of the judiciary to explore," Mr. Justice Sentelle, an appointee of the former President, Ronald Reagan, wrote. The Appeals Court essentially rejected the petition of public interest groups that the Justice Department should give names of the detainees publicly and that of their lawyers along with the dates the detainees were picked up and the reasons for it. The ruling of the Circuit Court is a major shot in the arm for this Republican administration as it is trying to enforce its surveillance laws in the aftermath of terror attacks. This Government has by and large withstood pressures on such issues as closed immigration hearings and the use of enemy combatant laws to come down on American citizens accused of having ties with terrorists. Conservatives have hailed the ruling with the Attorney-General, John Ashcroft, saying that this was a "victory for the Justice Department's careful measures to safeguard sensitive information about our terrorism investigations."
Tough words
The White House has welcomed the ruling as well, maintaining that it showed the Justice Department was "protective of the national security needs while making certain that it's all done within the Constitution". But the dissenting judge had some tough words for his colleagues as well as for the administration. Judge David Tatel, an appointee of the former President, Bill Clinton, took on his colleagues for their "uncritical deference to the Government's vague, poorly explained arguments for withholding broad categories of information about the detainees". At issue was information on about 760 foreigners who were in the U.S. illegally at the time of the terror attacks of September 2001 and were detained by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. About 500 are said to have been deported so far. But a recent investigation by the Justice Department's Inspector-General had found some "significant problems" with the detentions including instances of physical abuse. And civil rights groups have generally made the argument that with the exception of Zacarias Moussaoui, no one among the detained has been charged on any terrorism related charges. The Attorney-General had recently made the argument that some of the detained foreign nationals had "strong links" to terrorists and that in some cases the information was simply too sensitive to be presented in public courts. Law-makers on Capitol Hill, especially Democrats, are not too happy with how some of the terrorism related laws are being enforced and this is expected to be a major point of contention when the Senate Judiciary Committee has a hearing on the Detentions Policy next week.
Printer friendly
page
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | The Hindu eBooks | Home |
Copyright © 2003, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|
