Publication Date:
Source:
Author:
The San Francisco Chronicle ran a commentary on the International Human Rights Clinic's defense of an Afghani journalist who was detained by the United States government. Clinic Director and Visiting Professor Barbara Olshansky is quoted commenting on the legal aspects of the case:
The Chronicle's Anna Sussman says: "The trend is not only potentially disruptive to efforts to promote democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also may be illegal, particularly in the light of a recent Guantanamo ruling that held at least one offshore detention center accountable to the U.S. Constitution."
That's why the Stanford Law School International Human Rights Clinic has filed a lawsuit on behalf of Ahmad against the U.S. government. Clinic project leader and attorney Barbara Olshansky said that Ahmad committed no crime, and that his detention is a threat to both the rule of law, and to free speech.
"In the United States, we believe that freedom of the press is an essential component of our democracy, but it appears that under military order, the U.S. government is detaining foreign journalists without basis and without due process," Olshansky said. "That runs afoul of our beliefs and the law. It also interferes with our ability as citizens to get uncensored press reports from combat zones."
The Stanford Human Rights Clinic is petitioning for Ahmad's right to a fair trial.
Olshansky, who has been litigating Guantanamo cases since their inception, said the Bagram detention center is an even "darker, larger black hole than Guantanamo." Prisoners there report torture and beatings, she said.
...
"It is not illegal under U.S. law to have contacts with an enemy. Reporters need it to have a story; that's how the news works," Olshansky said.