|
Writers Articles And Opinions |
|
|
|
24 May 2010
By Stephen
Lendman
Writing on May
12 in Alternet.org, Mariam Abu Ali headlined, "My
Brother Faces a Lifetime of Solitary Confinement on a
Spurious Terror Conviction," saying:
He "spent the
past five years in solitary confinement, under 23-hour
lockdown, in a 7 x 12 cell," and overall has been
treated horrifically "in a dungeon, over 20 meters
beneath the ground."
An April article
by this writer explained what they're like - http://sjlendman.blogspot.com/2010/04/harmful-effects-of-prolonged-isolated.html.
Material from it is repeated below.
Abu Ali wasn't
charged or convicted for violence. He's not at
Guantanamo or secret detainment abroad. He's in
Florence, CO Supermax hell, like state-run facilities
the only federal one evolving from a "get tough on
crime" philosophy to keep hardened offenders separate
from others, the greater prison population safer, and
the public secure knowing these prisons are
escape-proof. Over the last two decades, nearly 60
were built in over 40 states, currently for over
20,000 inmates.
The US
Department of Justice (DOJ) National Institute of
Corrections calls the term "supermax" the most common
one to describe "special housing unit(s), maxi-maxi,
maximum control facilit(ies), secured housing unit(s),
intensive management unit(s), and administrative
maximum penitentiar(ies.)." It describes them as:
"a highly
restrictive, high-custody housing unit within a secure
facility....that isolates inmates from the general
prison population and from each other due to grievous
crimes, repetitive assaultive or violent institutional
behavior, the threat of escape or actual escape from
high-custody facility(s), or inciting or threatening
to incite disturbances in a correctional
institution."
Their cost to
build and operate is two to three times more than for
a conventional prison. They have high-tech security
features. Walls, floors, ceilings and doors are built
out of reinforced materials. Complex electronic
systems minimize officer-inmate contact. Moving
inmates requires multiple officers. They're confined
in windowless single cells about 7 by 12 feet for up
to 23 hours a day, with a shower and concrete bed. The
staff-to-prisoner ratio is much higher than in
conventional prisons. Inmates have few if any
programs. Very little constructive activity is offered
on a daily basis. Few visits are allowed, though
almost none directly.
Overall, there's
very little human contact. Most inmates are
incarcerated for life but other sentences are
determinate. No federal entry or release standard is
observed. Some states use Supermax facilities for
different reasons, including when a shortage of
segregation beds exist elsewhere.
Those in them
describe the experience with horror because long-term
isolation contributes to anti-social behavior and
mental illness, so released inmates may be violent and
unemployable. Yet proponents say they're the most
effective way to deal with dangerous offenders.
Opponents believe they do more harm than good, and the
expense compounds the problem.
They're for
society's most incorrigible (or ones authorities want
to punish for political or other reasons) on the
notion that solitary confinement, sensory deprivation,
and punitive treatment will change behavior, only for
the worst according to experts.
The facilities
are extremely harsh. They crush the human spirit, mind
and body through isolation and cruelty enough to turn
ordinary inmates into sociopaths. Physical abuse and
extreme deprivation are common, inflicted as
punishment. Inmate contact with staff is restricted
and none allowed with other prisoners. They're
confined in windowless cells 23 hours a day, have no
work, social contact, education, recreation,
rehabilitation or personal privacy. Nearly everything
is delivered - food, medical supplies and other
materials. Outside their cells, they're escorted by
4-man teams, painfully handcuffed and shacked. Inside,
they're treated like caged animals.
Department of
Justice (DOJ) Charges
On February 22,
2005, a DOJ press release announced a six-count
indictment, charging Abu Ali with:
-- conspiracy to
provide material support and resources to Al Qaeda;
-- providing
material support and resources to Al Qaeda;
-- conspiracy to
provide material support to terrorists;
-- providing
material support to terrorists;
-- contribution
of services to Al Qaeda; and
-- receipt of
funds and services from Al Qaeda.
It claimed he
"advised (an unnamed) co-conspirator whom he had met
on previous travels to Medina, Saudi Arabia, of his
interest in joining Al Qaeda," and that he "intended
to become a planner of terrorist operations like
Muhammad Atta and Khalid Sheik Muhammad." It also
alleges that he and another co-conspirator discussed
plans to assassinate George Bush, either close range
by gun shot or car bomb.
On November 22,
2005, he was convicted on all charges, the jury
rejecting his testimony that his Saudi captors
tortured him into confessing. Two doctors who examined
him agreed, but their testimony was suppressed - a
clear Sixth Amendment violation that assures:
"the right to a
speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury....to be
confronted with the witnesses against him; to have
compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his
favor, and to have the Assistance of (competent)
Counsel (and enough time) for (a proper) defense."
Although the
Sixth Amendment doesn't specifically prohibit
attorney-client communications, doing so clearly
violates its spirit and provision for a proper
defense. More on that below.
Worse still,
government witnesses were allowed, including from
Saudi guards (translated by live satellite feed using
pseudonyms for "security reasons") who tortured him
yet they denied using it on anyone, contradicting
clear evidence the State Department acknowledges, but
the defense wasn't allowed to introduce it - a Fifth
Amendment violation that no one shall "be deprived of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law," meaning a fair trial according to established
legal standards, what prosecutors flagrantly
prohibited.
Further, Saudis
admitted that US prosecutors "ordered" certain
questions be asked, and FBI agents participated -
clear evidence that Washington engineered the entire
process, including his interrogation and torture that
took place from 8PM - 6AM on successive days, during
which he was shackled, chained, ordered to confess in
writing, then read it aloud during videotaping.
Before trial,
prosecutors called him "one of the most dangerous
terrorist threats that America faces" since 9/11. His
lawyer, John K. Zwerling, said he was in Saudi Arabia
for religious studies, now bogusly convicted of
terrorism and a plot to kill George Bush.
On March 29,
2006, a DOJ press release announced his conviction on
nine charges, three above the original six,
including:
-- a conspiracy
to kill George Bush;
-- conspiracy to
commit air piracy; and
-- conspiracy to
destroy an aircraft.
He was sentenced
to 30 years in prison, followed by 30 more on
supervised release. His co-conspirators weren't named,
yet prosecutors claimed "he received training from
members of (an Al Qaeda cell) in weapons, explosives,
and document forgery." Deputy Attorney General Paul
McNulty called his conviction "a milestone achievement
in the international effort to bring terrorists to
justice." With Abu Ali behind bars, he's "no longer a
threat to the American people."
He never was,
nor are dozens of other Muslims bogusly charged,
tried, convicted, and imprisoned for their faith and
ethnicity at the wrong time in America. When a nation
imprisons the innocent, we're all equally vulnerable,
and this country does it repeatedly and shamelessly.
His trial was a
travesty of injustice, based solely on
torture-extracted evidence, Judge Gerald Lee
suppressing a chance to prove it nor acknowledging his
denial of constitutional protections, including
against self-incrimination or right to an attorney
during questioning, let alone not to be tortured.
On appeal, the
US Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the
conviction, but overturned the sentence on grounds
that the District court deviated from federal
sentencing guidelines. Judge Lee then resentenced Abu
Ali to life in prison after which he was incarcerated
at Florence, CO Supermax.
Commenting on
the case, Amnesty International (AI) said it was:
"seriously
concerned that (his) trial may set a precedent in US
courts of according unqualified support to the
declarations of a foreign government regarding its
human rights record as a means of rendering evidence
admissible, including statements obtained by torture
and ill-treatment. In this case, the statements of
officials from Saudi Arabia, a state with a clear
record of widespread torture and ill-treatment, flatly
denying that such practices existed appear to have
been taken at face value with no serious attempts
allowed to challenge the claims when presented."
Court
proceedings were orchestrated to convict. Abu Ali
never had a chance. From the time he was arrested,
held by the Saudis and returned to America, he was
guilty as charged to be locked in prison hell for as
long as authorities wish, and be treated like a caged
animal under restrictions imposed under Special
Administrative Measures (SAMs).
Effective May
17, 1996, "the Attorney General may authorize the
Director of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to implement
'special administrative measures' (when) there is a
substantial risk that a prisoner's communications or
contact with persons could result in death or serious
bodily injury to persons."
Using vague
language, it scraps traditional attorney-client
privileges to monitor and/or restrict communications
between them - not to protect state secrets or prevent
harm, but to harass and obstruct justice.
Effective
October 2001, they may be imposed from 120 days to a
year, and if the Attorney General believes that
"reasonable suspicion exists (that) an inmate may use
communications with attorneys or their agents to
further or facilitate acts of violence or terrorism,
this rule amends the existing regulations to provide
(BOP authorities the right to) monitor mail or
communications with attorneys in order to deter such
acts...."
In other words,
on the pretext of deterring "terrorism," a
centuries-long core US legal principle was scrapped,
to include attorney-client privilege, other
communications with family, friends, other inmates,
and the media, regular correspondence and telephone
use - compounded by imposed isolation in special
residential units or solitary confinement.
From arrest to
incarceration, Abu Ali's case represents a travesty of
justice from an nation affording none to its most
vulnerable, especially Blacks, Latinos, and Muslims
determined guilty for their faith at the wrong time in
America.
Stephen
Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at
lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. Also visit his blog site
at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge
discussions with distinguished guests on the
Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio
Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and
Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are
archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour/.
EsinIslam.Com
|
Save
Add Comments To This Story