Commentary>The Monitor's View
from the June 20, 2002 edition

Detaining Justice

Word this week that Pakistan had detained at least two more Americans suspected of involvement with Al Qaeda underscored a dilemma for Washington: how to treat US citizens on the wrong side of the war against terrorism.
E-mail this story
Write a letter to the Editor
Printer-friendly version

Get all the Monitor's headlines by e-mail.
Subscribe for free.

The detainees are believed to be Afghan-Americans not connected to Osama bin Laden's group. But the detentions highlight once again the difficulty of balancing civil rights with national security.

The Bush administration upset many legal scholars and liberal civil rights activists with its recent announcement that Jose Padilla, a Brooklyn-born former convict, was being detained without a lawyer or access to court review on suspicion he was plotting to set off a radioactive bomb.

Mr. Padilla, a convert to a militant interpretation of Islam, is said to have clear ties to Al Qaeda, and that alone tags him as an "enemy combatant" (or "belligerent") and thus subject to special legal handling under previous Supreme Court rulings. That's also the case for Yasser Esam Hamdi, another citizen being held as an "enemy combatant."

John Walker Lindh, meanwhile, the so-called American Taliban, is being accorded full legal rights in a trial. The same is true for noncitizen Zacarias Moussaoui, alleged to have been the 20th hijacker, arrested prior to September's attacks.

The government, understandably, wants to take these possible enemy soldiers out of commission and see what it can learn from them. But even the most dangerous American citizen has a basic civil right to have a judge review his detention. Otherwise, the United States could drift toward unchecked arrests of any citizen by the executive branch.

To safeguard both the war effort and civil rights, the Bush administration should allow the detainees to go before a judge in a secret setting to challenge their "combatant" status.

Federal judges can be trusted just as much as Pentagon or Justice Department officials to sift through the same intelligence information and find reasonable suspicion of a security threat. And the methods of how the intelligence data were collected can also be protected by a federal judge.

The risk of eroding civil freedoms and the risk of another terrorist attack can both be reduced if all three branches of government can be trusted to do the right balancing act.




Get Monitor stories by e-mail:
(Your e-mail address will be protected by csmonitor.com's tough privacy policy.)
(Mary Knox Merrill/Staff)
EDITOR'S PICK Five cities that will rise in the New Economy
From Seattle to Huntsville, Ala., five cities are poised to prosper in the New Economy because of exports, innovation, clean technology, and healthcare.

In Pictures:
Get ready for gridlock
POLITICS Patchwork Nation
The American voter beyond red and blue

Daily podcast

Monitor Reports

Discussions with Monitor reporters from around the world


Today

Peter Grier

The Monitor's Peter Grier talks with reporter Ron Scherer about how Black Friday will effect the economy this year.




Making a difference
Making a Difference

What happens when ordinary people decide to pay it forward? Extraordinary change. See how individuals are making a difference, finding solutions, overcoming adversity, and giving back globally.

Batdorj Gongor convinces residents to set up savings groups as a way of teaching them the power they gain by banding together in neighborhoods.

Lee Lawrence

People making a difference: Batdorj Gongor

In Mongolia, he shows former nomads how working together benefits everyone.