Posted on 04/12/2003 9:15:05 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Four days ago Warblogging reported on the story of Maher (Mike) Hawash. Mr. Hawash's problems have now been the subject of an article in the New York Times. Mr. Hawash is a programmer, working at Intel, who was detained by the FBI and Joint Terrorism Task Force as a material witness. He has so far spent just about two weeks in jail without being charged with a crime and without being questioned or told why he is detained. He is being kept in solitary confinement.
Mr. Hawash was detained by FBI agents wearing helments, body armor and carrying assault rifles in an Intel Corporation parking lot as he arrived to work on Thursday, March 20. FBI agents and police officers carrying assault rifles and wearing body armor simultaneously raided his home, waking his wife and their three young children. The search warrant used to search the home and the material witness warrant used to detain Mr. Hawash are both sealed — no one knows what evidence was used to attain them, and they have yet to be challenged in court.
Mr. Hawash was born in the Palestinian Territories but gained his American citizenship more than fifteen years ago. He married an American woman and has three American children. He himself is an American.
"Our friend has fallen into some kind of `Alice in Wonderland' meets Franz Kafka," Steven McGeady, a former Intel VP and webmaster of Free Mike Hawash told the New York Times.
The fact is that the government is abusing the material witness statute to hold Mike. The material witness statute is intended to compel people to testify in court and prevent them from fleeing to avoid testimony.
An Associated Press story on Mr. Hawash said this:
Material witness laws were intended only to ensure testimony, not to hold people indefinitely, said Phil Heymann, a Harvard law professor. "It was not meant to be used this way," Heymann said, noting that the number of material witness detentions has increased since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack.
Mike hasn't even been told what he'll be asked to testify about, and there is no indication whatsoever that he would seek to avoid testifying. The New York Times article says:
Civil liberties groups say material witness statutes are being abused by the Bush administration to hold people like Mr. Hawash indefinitely. "The government doesn't have and should not have the power to arrest and detain someone without charging them," said Lucas Guttentag, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Immigrants Rights Project. "If this kind of thing is permitted, then any United States citizen can be swept off the street and locked up without being charged."
This is precisely what happened to Mike Hawash. He was literally swept up off the street and locked up without charge. He has been accused of no crime. He has not been told why he is being detained in solitary confinement. His friends, family and coworkers have been left bewildered. The Justice Department refuses to comment on his detention in any way, shape, or form except to say that there is an "ongoing investigation".
He has been in jail for two weeks without charge. He has not been questioned. Every time he leaves his cell for any reason he is strip searched when he returns.
This, my friends, is not American. This is not supposed to happen in this great country of ours. Charge this man with a crime or release him, Mr. Ashcroft.
I urge you to write letters to the editors of your local newspapers. Call your senators, call your congressmen. Call into your local radio talk shows. Make a fuss. Tell everyone who will listen about Mike Hawash. He deserves it, and so does the next one who will be dragged into this Kafka-esque nightmare.
My question is that if he is being kept in solitary confinement, how would anyone know whether he has been questioned or not? Something a little fishy with this report. Perhaps the author is exaggerating just a bit in order to push our buttons so that we cry "Injustice!"
You make that assumption, but I don't see any facts to back it up.
I agree; the problem I have is the held incommunicado, and the length of time involved. Can anyone here consider it would be alright to get locked away for two or more weeks? Those that would say it's OK must not have much of a life, or any responsibilities.
Once arrested, you must be charged. Those charges should be public, else we are just as much a dictatorship as Iraq. War may restrict some freedoms and rights; it does not negate them nor should it allow for unlimited holding of citizens without charges or arrest.
Arrest him, and charge him in court, within a 48 to 72 hour window -- no problem. To hold as a 'material witness' based on a pet judge's whims for however long some bureaucrat wants is egregious.
If not, release him. (And keep a damn close eye on him for several months at least.)
This locking people up without charge shit is scary, and I don't care who is doing it.
L
Were this the only case, or the NYSlimes the only news org reporting these types of detentions, I would not have responded as I did. Arrest and charge the guy in a reasonable (48-72hrs) timeframe, OK. To hold absent that due process is wrong, period.
Someone else on this thread mentioned that justice would eventually be done to the man. Well, I'd have to agree that something is being done to him, but it certainly doesn't resemble any justice I've heard of.
They either need to charge him or let him go. Just because we have an (undeclared) war going on doesn't mean that fedgov can just do anything it pleases any time it pleases because it is convienient to do so.
The protections guaranteed by the constitution are not there to make fedgov's job easier. They are there to guarantee they can't just walk all over someone's God-given rights because it is expident to do so.
"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." -- Marbury ~vs~ Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)
If this is not repugnant to the Constitution, I don't know what is.
You do not understand the situation. This US citizen was arrested and jailed in solitary confinement under the material witness statute. Under that statute there is no crime charged, so no Writ of Habeas Corpus will apply.
You or I may be held indefinitely - without being charge with a crime and without ever being brought before a grand jury to hear your testimony. There is no limit to how long you may be held without being brought before a grand jury and without being charged with a crime. You essentially disappear into federal custody and there is not anything you can do about it. I am not even sure if you have the right to attorney, although in this case, the man has hired a private attorney.
Words to live by. Howell Rains has a massive self loathing complex. Unfortunately that manefests itself to groups rather than himself and his pretentious newspaper. Be patient.
One point in your favor. ;-)
Do you know what the law says in cases like this, and why? Read my tag-line.
I'm glad you're a student. But that doesn't mean you know more than the judges or the U.S. Attorneys who are on this case. The fact is, you know very little about this case, no matter how extensive your knowledge of the Constitution is.
Do you, unlike the rest of us, know what this case is even about, exactly? Just what is presented on the site, and the support he has garnered from other Citizens who are vouching for him.
Damn little real information is presented on the site, or in this article...simply because it is not available.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.