New Administration Backs Bush Secrecy Policy

[Henk Elegeert]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=100497730

"
New Administration Backs Bush Secrecy Policy

Morning Edition, February 10, 2009 · In the first major national
security case of the Obama administration, lawyers representing the
government took the exact same position as the Bush administration.
Government attorneys asked a judge to throw out a torture case, citing
the need to preserve state secrets. Some human rights activists now
say they feel betrayed by an administration that had promised greater
openness and transparency.

Five former terrorism detainees brought the lawsuit, Mohammed et al.
vs. Jeppesen DataPlan Inc. The men accuse Jeppesen, a Boeing
subsidiary, of providing logistical support to the CIA for "torture
flights" to overseas prisons.

Bush administration lawyers had argued there was no way to try this
case without revealing state secrets. Activist groups and newspaper
editorial pages hammered the Justice Department for taking that
position, but a trial judge agreed and threw the case out.

As the government prepared to argue the case again before three judges
at an appeals court Monday, observers wondered whether the Justice
Department would change course now that there is a new president and a
new attorney general. The government did not change course.

ACLU attorney Ben Wizner, who represents the detainees, said in a
phone interview after arguments, "The Obama administration, which came
to office on a promise of greater transparency — on a promise of
ending these practices — stood up and made exactly the same arguments
that were made by Bush lawyers to throw out torture victims' lawsuits.
And that's a profound disappointment."

Amanda Frost, an American University law professor who has studied and
written about state secrets, says the government's position that the
entire case is covered by the state secrets privilege is an "extreme
position."

"There are far more moderate positions they could take that would
protect classified information," Frost said. She points out that the
federal government acknowledges engaging in extraordinary rendition,
"so while there may be individual pieces of evidence that need for
state secret reasons to be kept secret, it is simply ludicrous to
declare that the very subject matter of the case is a state secret."

Many senior Obama nominees for national security positions have not
yet been confirmed. Robert Raben, a former U.S. assistant attorney
general during the Clinton administration, believes the
administration's position on state secrets may evolve once those
people arrive. "I just don't think there's been enough time," Raben
said. "I don't think every computer has been turned on in the
executive branch, I don't think every seat has been warmed by the
smarties that will sit down and figure out what the policy will be.

"I think people need to stay calm," said Raben.

He points out that President Obama has taken steps to break from
President Bush on national security policies. Obama has issued an
executive order to close Guantanamo within a year, and he has said all
interrogations will comply with the Geneva Conventions.

ACLU attorney Wizner takes the point. "It's a good thing that
President Obama has shut down the secret prisons, it's a good thing
that he's ordered the end of torture. It's very, very disappointing
that he's standing in the way of accountability against perpetrators
and compensation for victims," Wizner said.

On the same day as arguments in the Jeppesen case, Attorney General
Eric Holder ordered senior Justice Department officials to review all
of the Bush administration's assertions of the state secret privilege.

"It is vital we protect information that, if released, could
jeopardize national security, but the Justice Department will make
sure that the privilege is not invoked to hide from the American
people information about their government's actions that they have a
right to know," department spokesman Matthew Miller said. He said the
attorney general intends to make sure the privilege is only invoked in
"legally appropriate" situations.
"

Keren ze nu wel of niet terug ´from the basics of evil´?
Being evil is truly a lifestyle unto itself, dus daar moet je dan wel
vanaf zien te komen ...

Henk Elegeert

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********