Democracy dies in the dark

By Nat LaCour

When we look back at how the nation has handled the turbulence of the past year, there is a lot to be proud of--but some things to be concerned over as well. There is most certainly a need to balance national security and civil liberties. While it may be necessary to support some different ways of handling due process in the war against terrorism, we must resist efforts to unnecessarily trample on our constitutional rights in the name of maintaining security against terrorism.

The Bush administration is not the first administration to confront a threat to the nation's security. The United States has a long history both of being the freest nation in the world and also of slapping limits on freedom during crisis. We are not proud of some of the actions we have taken during these times of crisis--from John Adams (who instituted the Alien and Sedition Act, which made it a criminal offense to slander the president) to Abraham Lincoln (who suspended habeas corpus, which made it possible to hold prisoners indefinitely without bringing them to trial) to Woodrow Wilson (who presided over the Palmer Raids, during which some 6,000 people were arrested on little or no evidence) to Franklin Roosevelt (who, succumbing to popular hysteria, interned 120,000 Japanese-Americans for the duration of World War II).

By contrast, very few Americans have themselves been touched by the government's recent actions. The 1,200 people who were detained after Sept. 11, 2001, were primarily Muslim men with immigration problems. As such, there has been little public concern. But, it's troubling to note how many of their deportation hearings have been held in secret--with no judicial review, no right to counsel, no public disclosure. Under these circumstances, the chances for injustice are high.

I believe that democracy dies in the dark. Without the light of public scrutiny--and accountability--abusive, corrupt and anti-democratic practices begin to take hold.

A troubling pattern has begun to emerge, including limitations on the rights of U.S. citizens. So far, two American suspects have been labeled "enemy combatants," effectively removing them from the reach of the civilian judiciary and placing them under control of a secret military tribunal. Neither man commands our sympathy--one, Yasser Esam Hamdi, grew up in Saudi Arabia and was captured supporting the other side in Afghanistan; the other, Abdullah al Mujahir (also known as José Padilla), is a former Chicago gang member who was arrested on suspicion of trying to build a radioactive "dirty" bomb.

These are serious accusations, perhaps even requiring some special circumstances. Nevertheless, it sets a dangerous precedent that the executive branch feels free to arrest a U.S. citizen, deny him access to a lawyer or judicial review, and hold him indefinitely without charge or the presentation of any evidence. As Anthony Romero of the American Civil Liberties Union has said, "If a non-citizen like Zacarias Moussaoui can be tried in a regular court of law, surely a United States citizen arrested on American soil can be afforded the same access to justice." Given Moussaoui's central role as an aspiring Sept. 11 hijacker, Romero's got a point.

The system of government that our Founding Fathers sought to create was one of fair rules and limited powers, affecting only those spheres of life where action by one can cause injury to another.

Making this vision of citizen self-government and the rule of law a reality is the basis on which the labor, human and civil rights movements were founded--and it's the vision we continue to pursue: a social compact that provides safety for ourselves and our families, justice for ourselves and our fellow citizens, decent jobs for decent wages, the right to free association and to express ourselves as autonomous individuals in command of our own destinies.

In these challenging times, with all our commitment and strength--and common sense--I promise you the AFT will continue to support actions intended to keep us safe while insisting on, and working to maintain, our civil liberties and freedoms.