This directive converts the attorney-client privilege from an essential protection in our system of justice that governs the scope of disclosures during actual litigation under judicial supervision into a sword justifying government interference with the heart of the attorney-client relationship. Ostensible safeguards of notice and limited disclosure will not temper this new rule's profound chilling effect and its intrusive reach well beyond the detection of potential terrorism.

Meanwhile, since Sept. 11, the government has detained over 1,000 persons with little and arbitrary public disclosure of their identities, the charges against them and the purposes of this dragnet We do know that this selective enforcement of minor offenses and immigration status is largely predicated on ethnicity, a disturbing echo of the disgraceful treatment of American citizens of Japanese descent during World War II. In America, we do not "round up the usual suspects," yet the government acknowledges that it believes that at most a handful of those detained have any connection with the Sept, 11 atrocities.

The president also has issued an executive order decreeing that non-citizens he selects who are arrested in connection with "terrorism" within or outside our borders will be tried in non-public trials, before special new military tribunals, barred from access to courts, denied review of evidence used against them at the prosecutor's discretion, subject to evidence that does not meet even civil court requirements and exposed to conviction and sentence-including capital punishment-upon the decision of two-thirds of a panel composed of military officers who are subordinate to the government officials who select the defendants and oversee the prosecutors, and who alone can entertain an appeal.

This order betrays an unwarranted lack of faith in our nation's criminal justice system, which has ably and constitutionally served as the venue for trials of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers, Timothy McVeigh and Manuel Noriega, among many others of the same ilk. And the new tribunals fall well short of the standards of openness and due process that have governed the International Court of Justice at The Hague, the Nuremberg trials following World War 11 and even our usual, longstanding system of military justice. And the new order could reach not merely the captured leadership of recognized terrorist groups, but any non-citizen deemed connected with "terrorism," undefined; 20 million non-citizens dwell in our country today. Loose applications of such terms have provided purported justification for violations of the civil liberties of champions of workers throughout the world, from Martin Luther King Jr. to Nelson Mandela.

As our Convention begins, we also team that the Justice Department may-again unilaterally-modify longstanding restrictions on FBI surveillance of political and religious organizations that were imposed 25 years ago to end decades of violations of citizens' First and Fourth Amendment rights, and to prevent their recurrence. Such domestic spying could eventually sweep in unions and citizens organizations and threaten independent political and social activism. Even if existing policies merit review, there must be a deliberative process with congressional involvement and a full public airing and debate before any new policy is adopted.

Our history teaches that external and internal threats can prompt repression of citizens and abuses of power. We must show other countries that we can and will treat their nationals as we have always, rightly, insisted that they treat ours. And we cannot accept excessive secrecy and unaccountable power that deny Americans the ability to question the authority and evaluate the conduct of their government. America will prevail, and impress our adversaries with the futility of their plans, only if we uphold our traditional liberties and standards of justice with the same decisiveness and vigor that we bring to our military efforts. The AFL-CIO urges the Administration to reconsider and relinquish hastily adopted policies that debase our constitutional traditions.

Statement of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, Washington, D.C.

OUR LIBERTY AND FREEDOMS TODAY

As we take steps to increase national security and mourn the loss of the thousands killed in the recent terrorist attacks, the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) is deeply concerned about recent government actions. These actions threaten our fundamental Constitutional guarantees and protections that set our nation apart from others. While every step must be taken to protect the American public from further terrorist acts, those steps must not trample on the Constitution

and on those basic rights and protections which make American democracy so unique and precious and gives us needed legitimacy within our country and in the world.

The Department of Justice is engaged in a critically important law enforcement effort. AILA supports every effort to identify, prosecute and bring to justice the perpetrators of the heinous crimes of September 11, 2001. However, the arrest and continued detention of more than 1000 individuals in the wake of September 11 concerns us. Reliable reports of violations of due process failure to provide access to counsel, constant delays in hearings, failure to release in a timely fashion individuals for whom an immigration judge has set bond, hearings conducted in secret in the name of "protecting the public interest" for individuals who are only charged with technical immigration violations- are heightened by the failure of the Department of Justice to provide the most basic shred of information about the detainees. Who is being detained? What is the nature of the charges? How many detainees remain unrepresented by counsel? These and other questions remain unanswered two months after the initial arrests and despite repeated inquiries and the filing of formal FOIA requests. This silence is unacceptable.

The announcement by President Bush that military tribunals will be convened to try suspected non-citizen terrorists, both in the U.S. and abroad, is alarming and unprecedented in the absence of a Congressional declaration of war and, with no input from Congress, appears to be an end run around the legislative branch of government. The democratic institutions of a democracy have time and again proven themselves strong enough to prosecute and bring to justice drug traffickers, mafia kingpins, terrorists like Timothy McVeigh and those responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center and the Kenyan and Tanzanian Embassy bombings. Our institutions are strong enough to bring to justice any terrorists responsible for the heinous crimes of September 11. The American people have demonstrated in the weeks since September 11 that they have ample courage to serve on juries and to prosecute and judge such acts. In the international arena, the U.S. has long supported international tribunals to try war criminals such as Slobodan Milosovic and opposed the use of secret military tribunals as they have been used by repressive regimes around the world. We should lead by example and strengthen international institutions, not undermine them.

The interim regulations the Administration subsequently issued which provide for eavesdropping without warrant on protected attorney-client communication, and which also provide for automatic stays of immigration judge bond decisions, violate fundamental protections provided by the Constitution of the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary and the right to counsel.

Finally, the announcement this week that 5,000 individuals have been identified for questioning (males between the ages of 18 and 33 who entered the U.S. after January 1, 2000 and who came from countries where terrorist acts were planned or committed) also is cause for concern. While this questioning may assist the Department of Justice to compile information critical to the current investigation, every care must be taken to assure that the questioning is voluntary, that individuals be afforded the opportunity to have counsel present if they desire, and that no aura of suspicion is cast which would instill fear and distrust within the very individuals and communities whose cooperation the Department of Justice seeks in its investigation. An over-wide net runs the danger of amounting to discriminatory profiling. Care must be taken to assure that the proper balance is maintained between legitimate law enforcement and overzealous sweeping fishing expeditions.

In the next months and years, our nation will face many challenges. We must stand vigilant and not compromise our freedoms. Doing so will damage our liberty here and our credibility in the world.

Statement of Amnesty International USA, New York, New York

HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATION URGES REVOCATION OF EXECUTIVE ORDER
PERMITTING MILITARY COMMISSIONS

(WASHINGTON, DC) Amnesty International, the world's largest grassroots human rights organization, today urged Congressional leaders to preserve human rights and civil rights protections as law enforcement officials seek the perpetrators and accomplices of the September 11 attacks. The organization also announced that it has mobilized its worldwide membership to oppose the use of military commissions in response to the attacks in New York and Washington.

"Indefinite detention of alleged suspects, ethnic and racial profiling, and secret military trials are not acceptable law enforcement responses, even to events as reprehensible as the September 11 attacks," Curt Goering, Amnesty International USA's Senior Deputy Executive Director, said as the Senate Judiciary Committee convened hearings on the Bush Administration's law enforcement efforts. "Eroding fundamental human rights principles at home will damage US efforts to exert leadership abroad, perhaps irrevocably."

In an Urgent Action appeal sent Tuesday, Amnesty International asked its members worldwide to contact President Bush, Secretary of State Colin Powell and Attorney General John Ashcroft urging that the executive order permitting military commissions be revoked. The appeal noted that use of such commissions would undermine international cooperative efforts, citing Spain's refusal to extradite suspects to face military trials.

In a 26-page memo to Attorney General Ashcroft, also sent Tuesday, Amnesty International detailed a range of concerns about recent actions taken by the Department of Justice. "Amnesty International recognizes the government's obligation to take all necessary measures to investigate the crimes of September 11 and protect national security," wrote Susan Lee, Program Director, Americas, in a letter accompanying the memo. "However, we share the concerns expressed by many individuals and organizations that the government may be violating its equal obligation to ensure that any such measures include safeguards for the protection of the fundamental rights of those arrested or detained.”

In addition to objecting to the proposal to use military commissions, Amnesty International raised a number of other concerns in the memo, including the duration of detention, detainees' adequate access to legal counsel and family, and the conditions of detention. Lack of information on those detained prompted the human rights organization to join in filing a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Justice to learn the names, locations and charges against the detain

ees.

The organization made a series of recommendations, including:

Make public information on the total number of people arrested to date in connection with the September 11 investigation: dates and place of arrest; the number still detained and the reasons for the detention; length of time in detention; place of detention; and data on the race or ethnicity of those detained. Provide such information regularly on future arrests. Ensure that no one is held incommunicado while in custody.

Publicly reaffirm the US government's unequivocal opposition to the use of torture, suggesting the US government enact a law making torture a federal crime.

Ensure that INS standards for the treatment of immigration detainees and asylum seekers, introduced into some facilities earlier this year, are extended to all facilities housing such detainees and are strictly monitored and followed.

"It is precisely during challenging times such as these that governments must be especially scrupulous in their adherence to human rights principles," said Goering. "Otherwise, the very values worthy of protection themselves become casualties, diminishing all of society."

Statement of William F. Schulz, USA Executive Director, Amnesty
International, Washington, D.C.

Amnesty International urges President Bush to rescind the executive order creating secret military commissions to try suspects in the September 11 attacks. The trial of those responsible for these heinous attacks will represent one of the most important events in international justice since the Nuremberg Tribunal following World War II. Secret trials conducted with secret evidence may help sate the appetite of some who want revenge, but they will not guarantee justice. If our goal is ensuring justice and preventing similar attacks in the future-then we should do everything in our power to hold fair public trials that present the case against the accused to the victims, to the American people, and to the world.

Resorting to secret military tribunals that lack appropriate due process guarantees will only encourage others to question the legitimacy of the trials and the competency of the US justice system.

Justice can best be served through public trials in civilian courts that adhere to international standards and give the victims of these heinous crimes the opportunity to witness the proceedings and the results.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MEMORANDUM TO THE US ATTORNEY GENERAL-AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL'S CONCERNS RELATING TO THE POST 11

SEPTEMBER INVESTIGATIONS

INTRODUCTION

More than 1,100 people, mainly non-US nationals, have been taken into custody in the USA during the investigations into the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 11 September 2001. Many of them have reportedly been held under new government powers to detain people for questioning for an extended period before being presented to a court. Very little public information has been made available to date regarding the details of these detentions and information on some cases has been sealed through court orders. It is unclear at present exactly how many people remain in custody, although it is believed that hundreds may still be detained. Sources have indicated that only a small number of these individuals are being held as “material witnesses" and it remains unclear as to whether any-one has yet been charged in connection with the 11 September attacks. Many of the detainees are reported to be held on federal, state or local criminal charges unrelated to the attacks, or are detained because of alleged immigration violations.

Amnesty International recognizes the government's obligation to take all necessary measures to investigate the crimes of 11 September and protect national security. However, the organization is concerned that the government may be violating its equal obligation to ensure that any such measures include safeguards for the protection of the fundamental rights of those arrested or detained. Under international law, even in states of emergencies, certain basic rights may not be suspended, including the right of every person not to be subjected to arbitrary detention, torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or discrimination on the grounds of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin. Other rights which may not be suspended include the right of everyone charged with a criminal offence to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law, and certain fair trial rights under international humanitarian law, which must be respected even in times of armed conflict.1

Over 300 "terrorist" suspects are reported to have been detained in other countries since 11 September at the behest of the US authorities. Arnnesty International is urging the US Government to promote and protect international human rights standards in the investigation of these cases too. It is further calling on the US government to fully respect all relevant safeguards if it intends to seek the extradition of any of these individuals. In addition, the organization reiterates its opposition to the proposed military tribunals to try foreign nationals accused of links to "international terrorism”.

The USA is a state party to various international human rights treaties-including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention against Torture) whose fundamental principles Amnesty International fears are threatened in the context of the investigations into the 11 September attacks. Yet it is precisely during challenging times such as these that governments must be scrupulous in their adherence to such principles. To do otherwise undermines rather than reinforces the search for justice.

1. SAFEGUARDS RELATING TO ARREST OR DETENTION

International standards provide that all,persons who are arrested or detained (with or without charge) should be informed immediately of the reasons for the detention and notified of their rights, including the right of prompt access to and assistance of a lawyer; the right to communicate and receive visits; the right to inform family members of the detention and place of confinement; and the right of foreign nationals to contact their embassy or an international organization. Anyone arrested or detained who does not adequately understand or speak the language used by the authorities, has the right to be notified in a language they understand what their rights are and how to exercise them and to be provided with an interpreter if nec

1 Set out in the Geneva Conventions of 1949

essary.2 These rights are important safeguards against arbitrary deprivation of liberty and incommunicado detention. Incommunicado detention has been condemned by the US Government and non and intergovernmental organizations as a serious human rights violation that often leads to other abuses, including torture.

Although US law requires that a detainee be informed of the right to counsel immediately upon arrest, Amnesty International is concerned that some of those arrested after 11 September were denied prompt access to counsel and were unable to inform their families of their whereabouts. Some detainees are reported to have been denied access to counsel for up to a week-far longer than is considered acceptable under international standards, even in emergencies.3 In some cases, families have reported difficulty finding out where, or even if, their relatives have been detained.

Detainees (some of whom were later released) have also reported being held for days without being informed why they were detained and without being questioned, contrary to international standards.4 Several detainees report having been effectively cut off from the outside world for two weeks while their families searched for them. Others have reportedly been held for weeks after being cleared by the FBI of any criminal violations. Amnesty International has spoken to several lawyers who say they had difficulty in finding out why their clients were being held. The lack of information and secrecy surrounding detentions may prevent people from being able effectively to challenge their detention another important right under international law.5

Frequent transfers of detainees to different places of detention, sometimes to different US states, can also serve to perpetuate the secrecy surrounding detention and undermine the detainee's ability to receive assistance of legal counsel.6 International standards provide that detained persons have the right not only to notify their family promptly of their arrest but also of any transfer and the place to which they have been transferred.7

Concern has also been raised that foreign nationals may not have been given an opportunity in all cases to seek the assistance of their embassy or a country_representative on arrest, as provided under the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, which the USA ratified without reservations in 1969. Although they may choose not to exercise this right, all foreign nationals must be informed of their right to contact their consulate immediately upon arrest. It is the responsibility of the Department of Justice to ensure this right is protected whether or not the detainee is in federal or local custody and, where requested, to arrange without delay for contacting their consulate.

2 These rights are contained, infer alia, under article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), ratified by the USA in 1992; the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment (Body of Principles), adopted by consensus by the United Nations (UN) General Assembly in 1988; and the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, adopted by the Eighth UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders.

3 The Human Rights Committee (which monitors states' compliance with the ICCPR) has stressed that "all persons arrested must have immediate access to counsel". The Body of Principles states that access to a lawyer may be restricted in the most exceptional circumstances "to be specified by law or lawful regulations, when it is considered indispensable by a judicial or other authority to maintain security or good order" but that even here, this should not be delayed beyond a few days. The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has recommended that, as torture is most frequently practised during incommunicado detention .incommunicado detention should be made illegal and persons held incommunicado should be released without delay. Legal provisions should ensure that detainees should be given access to legal counsel within 24 hours of detention."

4 Article 9(2) of the ICCPR states that "Anyone who is arrested shall be informed, at the time of arrest, of the reasons for his arrest and shall be promptly informed of any charges against him."

5 Article 9(4) of the ICCPR states: "Anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that that court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of the detention and order his release if the detention is unlawful."

6 For example, the attorney retained in the case of three immigrants from Mauritania picked up in Ohio on immigration violations in late September still had not met with them two weeks later as they had been moved several times to jails in Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee and Louisiana.

7 Principle 16(1) of the Body of Principles states "Promptly after arrest and on each transfer from one place of detention or imprisonment to another, a detained or imprisoned person shall be entitled to notify or to require the competent authority to notify members of his family or other appropriate persons of his choice of arrest, detention or imprisonment or of the transfer and of the place where he is kept in custody."