By MT Akbar
http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/57291
In the most recent episode of the drama surrounding the HLF case we witnessed one of the greatest miscarriages of justice that we’ve seen in a very long time in America. In a relentless hunt to seek victories after the attacks of 9/11 against “terrorism”, the now lame duck government of George W. Bush headed by the “Justice Department” sought convictions at any cost against the HLF.
The politicized nature of this trial is obvious from the outset. Even before any charges or prosecutions, George W. Bush went in front of the American public in a White House press conference in which he declared that HLF was a front organization for Hamas. This was proven false as later the FBI admitted that they never found any evidence connecting HLF to Hamas. Instead what they later claimed was that the HLF was helping charities that were somehow associated with Hamas.
In December of 2007, a federal court of appeals found that HLF was not connected to Hamas and overturned a previous decision awarding money to the Boim family because they failed to prove a link between the death of their son in the West Bank and HLF. This further highlights the fact that HLF was not involved in supporting terrorism or violence and that the allegations were without merit.
In the first HLF trial in October of 2007, the jury, after deliberating for 19 days came back and returned zero guilty verdicts. Nearly 200 counts were read out against the defendants and the jury found that: “Mohammad El-Mezain was acquitted on 31 of 32 counts. The jury deadlocked on the 1st count, which was “conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization.” Mufid Abdulqader was acquitted on all 32 counts. Abdulrahman Odeh was acquitted on 30 of 32 counts. The jury deadlocked on the 1st count and the 11th count, which also was the “conspiracy to provide material support to a foreign terrorist organization.” Shukri Abu-Baker and Ghassan Elashi were neither acquitted nor convicted on all 36 counts. The jury deadlocked, 6-6, on every single count against them. As for the Holy Land Foundation, the jury was also split on all counts against it. These decisions were quickly altered as the judge polled jurors, three of whom said the verdict did not represent their votes. So the judge sent the jury back to their room to deliberate… When they returned to the courtroom, the judge re-polled them and concluded the following results: Mr. Abdulqader’s not guilty verdicts were changed to a hung jury on all 32 counts because only one juror believed he was guilty. Mr. Odeh’s 30 not guilty verdicts were also changed to a hung jury because a juror changed her mind. The judgments on Mr. Elashi, Mr. Abu-Baker and Mr. El-Mezain did not change from the hour before.”
The judge ruled a mistrial and the prosecutors declared their intention to retry the case. After having spent millions of tax-payers dollars, and countless hours investigating the charity the government was told that the evidence wasn’t sufficient – proving that providing humanitarian aid to those in war torn areas could not be construed as supporting terrorism. The prosecutors while admitting the HLF provided assistance to real charitable organizations still sought to pursue the case as they had invested too much into it.
The retrial of the HLF case was flawed from the beginning and disadvantaged the defense. The prosecutors having had the chance for a rare “do-over” were already familiar with the arguments of the defense (which had shown its cards in the first trial) and were able to streamline their own evidence as well as bring in more witnesses.
Prosecutors based their case on the fact that HLF supported different Zakat committees that the government assumes are controlled by Hamas. However, other aid agencies and charities such as US AID and CARE provided financial help to the same Zakat committees which the government is now saying are affiliated with Hamas; they were never designated by the US as “terrorist fronts.”
The guilty verdicts that came down were based on nothing more than hearsay evidence and the unprecedented use of emotionally charged videos that had absolutely nothing to do with the defendants. The court censored the testimony of the defense witnesses, while allowing uncensored anonymous Israeli agents to testify as “expert” witnesses against the defendants. The court extended every privilege and stretched every boundary to favor the prosecution while it restricted the defendants at every turn to present a meaningful defense. The government’s approach to this re-trial was to win at all costs then let the appellate court sort things.
This trial leaves us with more questions than it does answers: What ramifications will this have for those who seek to deliver aid to war ravaged zones that we claim have some connection to organizations that we declare illegal, are American charity organizations supposed to know that they can be charged for giving money to organizations that haven’t been designated as terrorist fronts, will American Muslim organizations and individuals labeled “maybe alleged un-indicted co-conspirators” going to finally afforded their rightful opportunity to challenge such an unconstitutional designation?
This re-trial was nothing more than the advancement of a government witch-hunt pursued in the atmosphere of Islamophobia and sparing no cost in the so-called “War on Terror.” It has led to a prosecution that when analyzed adds up to nothing more than persecution that relied upon hearsay.
December 4, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Salams,
Great article. It is depressing to know that if you are giving effort to a group of people you are seeking to help, and because a government may not necessarily agree with that group, you are capable of been judged and pressed to look down upon as a supporter of terrorism. Since when has it been wrong to proved relief to anyone in time in need. It is obvious that Mr. Bush is giving his last effort to show he is fighting and has been defeating the war agains terror, and so HLF has become victims of this injuctice attidute, and therefore found guilty of being servants to a hurting part of the world.
December 5, 2008 at 12:47 am
As-Salaamu-Alaikum wa-Rahmatullahi wa-Barakatuhu
Brother MT Akbar, I enjoyed reading your article. Now my questions to you are? Are Muslims to seek guidance from such an American democratic justice system which has inherent manipulative or fraudulent mechanism to deny justice? How can the American plebs defend their basic human rights or their illusory democratic rights enshrined in their constitution under such a system? If this is the situation in the American justice system, how can the British plebs expect justice when their courts and the House of Lords are handpicked on the basis of their wealth, lineage, and social status? How can the British plebs expect justice when they are still ruled by ancient customs and traditions of the ancient British elites. How can the abuse of basic human rights be challenged by unwritten laws or customs without any written Basic Law under the prevailing Islamophobia or the so-called war on terror?
These are serious challenges and very frightening indeed. I wish you all the best in your endeavour to enlighten the people of such a justice system upon which lies the peaceful growth of a nation.
It is great visiting your site.
Salaam
Sultana Afroz
December 5, 2008 at 7:52 pm
wasalaam alaykum,
Jorge, that’s on point. This seems to be the last gasp of the dying regime of King Bush and his appointed Justice Department.
It is interesting to see how the Islamophobes spin this as a victory for them, but honestly in the end truth will overcome falsehood.
Peace,
MT
December 5, 2008 at 8:12 pm
AsSalaamu Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuhu,
Dear Dr. Afroz, thank you for your visit and your great comments and important questions. These questions are certainly something for me to ponder and reflect upon and discuss.
I think American Muslims must engage the American justice system, in fact we have no choice, in order to secure our rights, freedoms and guarantees. The HLF trial is one example of the challenge ahead of us but even with the deep flaws of the system I do believe we can effect serious and long lasting change.
You’ll be surprised at the number of lawyers, bar organizations, human rights and civil rights groups that are working towards this same end with Muslims. People care about the rule of law and many are working for a better system.
The government in these last eight years under the guise of the War on Terror has been on an almost unprecedented path of undermining the Constitution and has been dealt serious blows by the Courts in many instances as well.
Take this into account:
“Since 2002, an estimated 500 cases have been brought against Muslims in America. Half of these have been dismissed as being without merit. The rest have all resulted in either acquittals or negotiated pleas on minor charges which are unrelated to the original indictment. Of the 500 cases, it is estimated that some 30 of them may have had some reasonable foundation in law.
In no other area of prosecution has the Department of Justice produced such an extraordinarily high percentage of dismissed cases and cases resulting in guilty pleas on unrelated charges. This, in itself, raises concerns that these prosecutions were informed by the fear-mongering claims of the current administration that terrorism à-la 9/11 may become an indigenous product and that American Muslims may be a new clear and present danger. Not only is this outrageously wrong, it is un-American in every respect” – Cherif Bassiouni
-MT
December 6, 2008 at 3:11 am
As-Salaamu-Alaikum wa-Rahmatullahi wa-Barakatuhu
Dear Brother MT Akbar, Jazak ALLAH Khair for your response explaining the efforts of the Muslims in America with their non-Muslims in various organizations to challenge the persecution carried out by the prosecution.
Al-Hamdulillah! I am quite aware of many of these cases through CAIR.
However, I was not referring to the Muslims in America when I asked the question whether Muslims should seek guidance from such an American democratic justice system which has inherent manipulative or fraudulent mechanism to deny justice? I was referring to the Muslims in the Muslim countries with reference to our discussion on Democracy and Islam on your Sister Gess’s blog. insha’ALLAH, I will soon respond to your comment on Gess’s blog.
The American judiciary system is really part of the elitist complex formed by the Founding Fathers of the United States of America to protect their interests from the plebs and the slaves upon which the then American plantation economy depended. As you are aware, many of the Founding fathers who wrote the constitution or were part of the constitution making body were slaveowners. Ever since the Constitution of the United States has been promulgated, the government is basically a constitutional oligarchic absolutism, whereby the democratic process so constructed (with the electoral college, the Senate, the Federal Courts with Presidentially appointed judges), contains the power of the plebs, I mean the common people, the outsiders. Added to this inherent complexity, the issue of secular liberalism has made American life and its system quite deceptive.
Salaam,
Sultana Afroz