Justice, Junta-Style: Court Decision Denies Extraordinary Rendition Victims Their Day In Court

[L. Coyote]

ACLU supports the State Secrets Protection Act too, hearings cited.

=====================
Court Decision Denies Extraordinary Rendition Victims Their Day In Court (2/14/2008)
http://www.aclu.org/safefree/rendition/34121prs20080214.html

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: [e-mail]; [phone]

SAN JOSE, CA - A federal court yesterday bowed to pressure from the Bush administration and dismissed a case against Boeing subsidiary Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc. for the company’s role in the CIA’s “extraordinary rendition” program. The lawsuit, brought by the American Civil Liberties Union, charged that Jeppesen knowingly aided the program by providing flight planning and logistical support services for aircraft and crews used by the CIA to transport victims to U.S.-run prisons or foreign intelligence agencies overseas, where they were subjected to harsh interrogation techniques and torture.

The government intervened in an attempt to block the case, contending that litigation of the case would reveal “state secrets” and harm national security. However, the ACLU’s lawsuit cited abundant evidence that was already in the public domain, including a sworn affidavit by a former Jeppesen employee and flight records confirming Jeppesen’s involvement.

In another development, the Senate Judiciary Committee yesterday held a hearing on the bipartisan State Secrets Protection Act, introduced by Senators Edward Kennedy (D-MA) and Arlen Specter (R-PA), The ACLU urges passage of this law, which would require courts to examine classified evidence instead of dismissing cases on the word of the perpetrators themselves, and would prohibit any dismissal prior to discovery.

The following can be attributed to Ben Wizner, staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union:

“The court’s decision allows the government to engage in torture, declare it a state secret, and thereby escape any legal scrutiny for its actions. Government officials are quite willing to discuss the CIA’s detention and interrogation of other prisoners, most notably the six Guantánamo detainees charged this week with capital murder. Apparently, the government believes such activities are state secrets only when that claim will help the administration avoid accountability for illegal programs, but not when it will help seek the death penalty for alleged terrorists. Depriving torture victims of their day in court to prevent disclosure of information that the entire world already knows only compounds the brutal treatment our clients endured.”

[PDJane]

1. No Justice, No fair trials,

And no accountability. This administration isn't big on accountability.

[bdamomma]

2. they are not big on laws either.

they need to have their butts thrown out.

[L. Coyote]

3. times like this are why democracy was invented, and is so important

when we need to click refresh, to get a new batch of better bums in office.

[bdamomma]

4. we need better bums in Congress too.

[merh]

5. Just so everyone can keep focused on the real issue

It IS a felony to torture or to conspire to torture

Title 18 Part I Chapter 113C § 2340A. Torture

(a) Offense.— Whoever outside the United States commits or attempts to commit torture shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both, and if death results to any person from conduct prohibited by this subsection, shall be punished by death or imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

(b) Jurisdiction.— There is jurisdiction over the activity prohibited in subsection (a) if—
(1) the alleged offender is a national of the United States; or
(2) the alleged offender is present in the United States, irrespective of the nationality of the victim or alleged offender.

(c) Conspiracy.— A person who conspires to commit an offense under this section shall be subject to the same penalties (other than the penalty of death) as the penalties prescribed for the offense, the commission of which was the object of the conspiracy.

[L. Coyote]

6. Victims can bring civil actions against these companies

[merh]

7. There is the civil RICO statutes

as well as the 1983 statutes.