|
used on both sides to combat accused terrorists, including preventive detention and restrictions on speech and assembly. The Israeli submission to the Security Council cites laws on the books since Israel's founding that impose fines and jail time for "propaganda speeches" on behalf of terrorists or the possession of literature published by such groups. For decades, civil libertarians in Israel have urged that these statutes be rescinded.
Foreign condemnation of Israel's "extrajudicial killings" of accused terrorists has been muted since September, said Yehuda Lancry, Israel's U.N. representative. Palestinian officials say that although they have come under intense criticism for arresting dissidents without charges or published evidence, the pressure on the Palestinian Authority to stop terror attacks has now relegated such concerns to the sidelines. "The atmosphere everywhere has changed since Sept. 11," said Nasser Kidwa, the permanent Palestinian observer at the U.N. "The American people themselves are saying, 'Forget about due process, we want to stop terrorism,' and you are hearing things that would have been unmentionable here before, like military tribunals."
The prospective American military tribunals, though perhaps the single most significant change in U.S. counterterror policies since Sept. 11, are notably not highlighted in the report submitted by the U.S. government to the Security Council last month. Yet the tribunals' ultimate impact on regimes elsewhere might be greater than any other counterterror initiative by council members, human rights activists say.
In a joint letter to Bush early last month, eight leading American human rights groups said his order authorizing the tribunals--which could impose the death penalty--will be cited by foreign dictators "for decades to come" as a justification for summary executions.
|
 |
"The credibility and effectiveness of the United States in opposing such repressive procedures will be seriously harmed by this precedent," the letter said. The United States, in an embarrassment to the State Department, was voted off the Human Rights Commission in Geneva last year. The U.S. is expected to reclaim a seat on the commission when it reconvenes in March, but human rights groups that strongly supported U.S. membership say they are now concerned that Washington will be a less aggressive advocate for judicial reform and the protection of dissent.
"The State Department's last annual human rights report was filled with critical references to due-process concerns in places like Colombia, Egypt and Turkey," said the Lawyers Committee's Posner. "Whether they are going to be able to say all that again without subjecting themselves to ridicule is an open question." U.N. human rights officials say they are also concerned that the counterterror focus could pose problems for U.N. efforts to encourage independent judiciaries and free election environments in violence-racked societies such as East Timor, Sierra Leone, the Yugoslav region of Kosovo and--in the coming year--Afghanistan.
"'The terrorists pose a threat to both security and human rights, and many countries may, and rightly, resort to exceptional measures," said Ndiaye, a burly, soft-spoken Senegalese lawyer and former Amnesty International official. "But even after 9/11, defendants still deserve a fair trial, and a government's opponents still have the right of speech and assembly. These should not be restricted. If you do, you are undermining the very reason that you are fighting against them." 
|
1