Witness to Abuse - Human Rights Watch

More documents

Recommendations

Info

WTC [World Trade Center] smoke? You’re gone. How would you like to die? With the electric chair?” 132 One of the material witnesses, Tony Oulai, a citizen of the Ivory Coast, claims interrogators beat him while he was detained in Baker County Detention Center, Florida. 133 The other cases of physical abuse typically occurred at the hands of prison staff. For example, Khan told HRW/ACLU that: When I arrived, the guards said “these are the guys involved with the WTC.” I had rough treatment, I was thrown on walls, there was pushing on either side as they hand and leg cuffed me. I was strip and cavity searched in front of four or five guards. 134 [Whenever I was taken out of my cell] they would twist my hands. My feet were shackled and guards would step on chains. I got a deep cut on my feet. I was stripped too many times to remember and hit on the back. I would be pushed against the wall. Whenever they took me to the FBI, guards would twist my hands and fingers and tell me to “Just shut up.” 135 In addition, Awadallah alleged physical abuse at Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan: After being examined, a guard caused his hand to bleed by pushing him into a door and a wall while he was handcuffed. The same guard also kicked his leg shackles and pulled him by the hair to force him to face an American flag. The next day, October 2, 2001, the marshals transported Awadallah to this Court. With his hands cuffed behind his back and bound to his feet, the transporting marshals pinched his upper arms so hard that they were 132 HRW/ACLU telephone interview with Ayub Ali Khan, Hyderabad, India, April 2, 2004 (Interview with Ayub Ali Khan). 133 “Presumption of Guilt,” p. 74. 134 Interview with Ayub Ali Khan. 135 Ibid. HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH VOL. 17, NO. 2(G) 44
uised. See id. In the elevator, the marshals made his left foot bleed by kicking it and the supervising marshal threatened to kill him. 136 In April 2003, the Inspector General of the Department of Justice issued a report documenting physical abuse endured by detainees swept up in the government’s post- September 11 investigation, including the abuse of material witness Ayub Ali Khan. 137 V. Bypassing Judicial Review Judicial review is the paramount protection against arbitrary detention and is recognized as such by international human rights law 138 as well as U.S. domestic law. 139 Judicial review in the material witness context should offer an important safeguard against arbitrary arrest and prolonged detention. However, after extensive investigation, we are not aware of a single instance in which a court has denied a government application for a material witness warrant related to the post-September 11 investigation. There are likely a number of factors that have contributed to the government’s success in securing material witness warrants. One significant reason has been a general reluctance by some courts to scrutinize closely the government’s proffered reasons for needing to arrest and detain witnesses. An additional reason has likely been the fact that the government sought arrest warrants for almost all of the seventy material witnesses we document in this report in connection with grand jury proceedings, which are preliminary investigatory proceedings controlled by the prosecution and conducted largely in secret. The grand jury context has made it extremely difficult for courts to conduct meaningful scrutiny of whether a witness has material information. 136 United States v. Awadallah, 202 F.Supp.2d 17 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). 137 DOJ, OIG, The September 11 Detainees. 138 Under international law, anyone who is deprived of his or her liberty has the right to appear before a court without delay and to ask the court to determine the legality of the detention. ICCPR, article 9(4). The ICCPR in article 2(3) requires that all persons whose rights have been violated “have an effective remedy” determined by a competent authority. The Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment 31 on Nature of the General Legal Obligation on States Parties to the Covenant (2004), said that states must “ensure that individuals also have accessible and effective remedies to vindicate those rights.” Moreover, “anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation.” ICCPR, article 9(5). 139 See, e.g., Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, 124 S.Ct. 2633, (2004) (recognizing “citizen[s] core rights to challenge meaningfully the Government's case and to be heard by an impartial adjudicator); Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 333 (1976) ("The right to be heard before being condemned to suffer grievous loss of any kind, even though it may not involve the stigma and hardships of a criminal conviction, is a principle basic to our society.”). 45 HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH VOL. 17, NO. 2(G)
Page 1 and 2: Human Rights Watch June 2005 Vol. 1
Page 3 and 4: Summary After I got in the cell I w
Page 5 and 6: were almost all the witnesses Musli
Page 7 and 8: combination with having worked in t
Page 9 and 10: Recommendations The recommendations
Page 11 and 12: o requiring the government to infor
Page 13 and 14: eflects a compromise between an ind
Page 15 and 16: the witness for immigration or prob
Page 17 and 18: those suspected of committing a cri
Page 19 and 20: Arizona, and Florida, where the nin
Page 21 and 22: testimony—you get fingerprints, y
Page 23 and 24: The FBI appeared to believe that Ma
Page 25 and 26: interrogating him, without counsel,
Page 27 and 28: Jose Padilla On May 8, 2002, the Ju
Page 29 and 30: The Justice Department has often st
Page 31 and 32: criticism on the conduct of Assista
Page 33 and 34: government failed to take Diab’s
Page 35 and 36: Eric Sears, a former federal prosec
Page 37 and 38: sentencing. The judge finally got a
Page 39 and 40: accompanied by extensive searches c
Page 41 and 42: and young children. 121 He was deta
Page 43 and 44: High Security Conditions of Detenti
Page 45: Harassment and Abuse in Jail Many m
Page 49 and 50: In practice, then, court approval o
Page 51 and 52: I kept asking what am I being charg
Page 53 and 54: As Mark Foster, the lawyer for one
Page 55 and 56: Federal marshals transferred the ei
Page 57 and 58: [T]he government filed all their pa
Page 59 and 60: Federal agents have also refused to
Page 61 and 62: In many cases, the trauma of forcef
Page 63 and 64: In January 2002, another hotel gues
Page 65 and 66: abuse, international human rights 2
Page 67 and 68: It is not clear why the courts have
Page 69 and 70: Things go on behind those doors tha
Page 71 and 72: providing interviews, submitting to
Page 73 and 74: Detaining Witnesses Who Cooperate w
Page 75 and 76: stayed with the FBI agents for eigh
Page 77 and 78: government, “I’m not coming.”
Page 79 and 80: armed forces for several years and
Page 81 and 82: Congress included the deposition re
Page 83 and 84: X. Haste, Incompetence, Prejudice:
Page 85 and 86: government’s basis was weak. Thes
Page 87 and 88: target, 272 the state police ordere
Page 89 and 90: Khan and Azmath were deported in Ja
Page 91 and 92: told them I told them I had no idea
Page 93 and 94: y subletting their apartment. Altho
Page 95 and 96: The post-scripts to the stories of
Page 97 and 98:
I could not ask questions. What’s
Page 99 and 100:
Ayub Ali Khan and Mohammad Azmath A
Page 101 and 102:
get all these kinds of questions—
Page 103:
Human Rights Watch and the American
show all

Witness to Abuse - Human Rights Watch

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?