Chicago Indymedia : http://chicago.indymedia.org/archive
Chicago Indymedia

News :: [none]

Rabih Haddad Update: Washington Post Op Ed - Open Up.

Ten days after the Sept. 11 attacks, the administration instructed its immigration judges to keep certain proceedings closed. Not only would hearings be conducted in secret with "no visitors, no family, and no press" present, but the "record of the proceeding [was] not to be released to anyone" either -- including "confirming or denying whether such a case is on the docket or scheduled for a hearing."
"Open Up"
The Washington POst
Thursday, February 7, 2002; Page A24

TEN DAYS after the Sept. 11 attacks, the administration instructed its immigration judges to keep certain proceedings closed. Not only would hearings be conducted in secret with "no visitors, no family, and no press" present, but the "record of the proceeding [was] not to be released to anyone" either -- including "confirming or denying whether such a case is on the docket or scheduled for a hearing." The Justice Department has since been conducting its Sept. 11-related immigration cases under these indefensible rules, though the cases thus far have not involved classified evidence.


Last week two Detroit newspapers, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) and the American Civil Liberties Union challenged in court both the policy generally and the closure of one immigration case in particular -- that of a man named Rabih Haddad. Mr. Haddad, the co-founder of a Muslim charity suspected of terrorist links, was detained on immigration charges. Whatever the merits of the case against him, he has a lot of supporters, and they -- along with the press -- want to attend his immigration trial. Yet, officially, there is nothing to attend. It doesn't matter that no sensitive or classified information has been discussed at the hearings to date, the plaintiffs claim. Public access has been nonexistent anyway.


Department officials say that because lawyers for the potential deportees get full access and can talk about their cases, the secrecy isn't total and deportees' rights aren't compromised. But public access is an important value not fully served by secondhand reporting by attorneys. Preexisting rules already allowed immigration judges to close a hearing if necessary to protect sensitive information. But sealing cases in their entirety -- including the mundane procedural details that reveal the cases' existence -- is a different matter. Immigration cases carry enormous consequences for people's freedom. They should, like criminal trials, be open for public scrutiny and criticism unless there is a compelling reason to the contrary. Holding trials in secret is a tactic unworthy of a great legal system.
 
 

Donate

Views

Account Login

Media Centers

 

This site made manifest by dadaIMC software