August 13, 2003

(Ha)Washing Our Hands Of Due Process?

One important story I missed out on in recent days was the plea agreement of Maher "Mike" Hawash, in which for former Intel employee pled guilty to trying to help the Taliban fight against U.S. forces in Afghanistan and agreed to testify against the rest of the so-called Portland Seven, in exchange for the government dropping charges of levying war and providing support to terrorist groups.

In the immediate aftermath of this plea agreement, a resounding chorus of "Haha, we told you he was guilty" erupted from many quarters, aimed primarily at the local Left.

Missing from this response, of course, is the reality that many (if not most) of us critics of the investigation and detention of Hawash were not professing his guilt or innocence, but expressing deep concerns over whether proper due process was followed in the Hawash case.

The court system will never address that issue, now that a plea has been entered. With no trial for Hawash, there will be no questioning of the due process issues by his attorneys.

That doesn't mean the issues themselves disappear. It simply means that from a legal proceeding and determination standpoint, they are irrelevant.

Many of us continue to question whether, in this case, the government misused its powers to detain people as "material witnesses." Many of us also question the legitimacy of launching an investigation into someone because of complaints filed by neighbors (as detailed in the original Hawash affidavit) -- one of which was little more than someone telling the police that Hawash (I'm paraphrasing here) "had started to dress funny and grow one of those terrorist beards."

These questions remain -- at least for those concerns with the use and potential abuse of police powers during the "war on terrorism" -- regardless of Hawash's admitted guilt.

That so many people seem so willing to throw those issues out the window when it comes to speaking of the guilty shows little more than an abandonment of the principles upon which our legal system is meant to rest.

Whether or not there were, in fact, violations of due process (or other abuses) in the Hawash case is irrelevant to the importance of asking the questions necessary to find out. Irrelevant as well, when trying to determine matters of due process, is guilt or innocence.

So laugh while you can, monkeyboys. Some of us are actually concerned with watching out for potential abuses of power. Your glee at Hawash being guilty isn't going to suddenly make us shy away from asking the questions.

(Meanwhile, today's Willamette Week calls Hawash a traitor for giving people like Ashcroft further excuse to expand Federal police powers.)

Posted at 12:01 PM | PermalinkComments (0) | TrackBacks (1)
More In Law Enforcement & Legal Issues

« Previous Next »