|
The War Profiteers - War Crimes,
Kidnappings & Torture |
|
February 10th,
2009 - Under Obama, Same Stance on Rendition Suit |
|
Under Obama, Same
Stance on Rendition Suit By Bob Egelko San Francisco Chronicle February 10, 2009 San Francisco - President
Obama's Justice Department signaled in a San Francisco courtroom Monday that
the change in administrations has not changed the government's position on
secrecy and the rights of foreign prisoners - and that lawsuits by alleged victims
of CIA kidnappings and torture must be dismissed on national security
grounds. "Judges shouldn't play
with fire," Justice Department lawyer Douglas Letter told the Ninth U.S.
Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, which is considering a suit
accusing a San Jose company, Jeppesen Dataplan, of arranging so-called
extraordinary rendition flights for the CIA. Once the judges privately
examine the government's classified evidence, Letter said, "you will see
that this case cannot be litigated." Letter said the Justice
Department's position, previously argued by the administration of former
President George W. Bush, has been "thoroughly vetted with appropriate
officials of the new administration." Mixed signals He did not mention
extraordinary rendition, the practice of abducting suspected criminals and
terrorists and taking them to foreign countries or CIA prisons for
interrogation. Although Obama has issued orders banning torture and closing
secret CIA prisons, his administration has sent mixed signals on
extraordinary rendition and the legitimacy of court challenges. Obama's nominee for CIA
director, Leon Panetta, said last week that he approved of rendition for
foreign prosecution or brief CIA detention, but not for extended confinement.
Like his Bush administration predecessors, he also said he would require a
foreign government to promise not to torture a prisoner. On Monday, Justice
Department spokesman Matt Miller said Attorney General Eric Holder has ordered
a review to make sure government secrecy is invoked only to protect national
security and not "to hide from the American people information that they
have a right to know." But the American Civil
Liberties Union, which represents five men suing Jeppesen for allegedly
flying them to foreign torture chambers, said this case is the new
administration's chance to live up to its promises. "Candidate Obama ran on
a platform that would reform the abuse of state secrets, but President
Obama's Justice Department has disappointingly reneged on this important
civil liberties issue," the ACLU's executive director, Anthony Romero,
said after the hearing. Widely known secret ACLU attorney Ben Wizner
told the court that the supposedly ultra-secret rendition program is widely
known. He noted that Sweden recently awarded $450,000 in damages to one of
the plaintiffs, Ahmed Agiza, for helping the CIA transport him to Egypt,
where he is still being held and allegedly has been tortured. "The notion that you
have to close your eyes and ears to what the whole world knows is
absurd," Wizner said. Agiza and the other
plaintiffs - one now imprisoned in Morocco, one held at the U.S. Naval Base
at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and two who have been released without charges -
accuse Jeppesen of colluding in their abduction and torture. A Council of Europe report
in 2007 identified the company, a Boeing Corp. subsidiary, as the CIA's
aviation services provider. The Bush administration
persuaded U.S. District Judge James Ware to dismiss the suit last year on the
grounds that it would expose state secrets - the CIA's alleged relationship
with a private contractor, the agency's methods of interrogating terror
suspects and the alleged cooperation of foreign governments. Protecting secrets Wizner asked the appeals
court Monday to reinstate the suit and said Ware should be able to protect
any legitimate state secrets. Letter countered that the
core of the case - "their allegation that Jeppesen is complicit in a
clandestine foreign intelligence matter" - could not be examined in
court without endangering national security. One member of the
three-judge panel seemed skeptical. "You can say something
is secret even when a newspaper reporter has it?" Judge William Canby
asked Letter. Even if the men had been snatched from the streets in Missouri,
he said, "it would still be a big black hole. The plaintiffs, the
judiciary, the Constitution all have to step aside." Not so, Letter replied -
Congress can still scrutinize the program, and judges can review the
classified documents that explain the need for secrecy. External link: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/02/09/MNGS15QB5B.DTL |