http://snipurl.com/7yke

9/11 Commission Report Takes on Patriot Act, Government Secrecy; ACLU
Outlines Civil Liberties Problems With Cabinet-Level Spymaster
July 22, 2004

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

WASHINGTON - The official 9/11 Commission report, released today, takes
aim at the USA Patriot Act and the excessive amount of official secrecy in
the Bush administration.

"Regarding civil liberties, the 9/11 Commission report essentially says
that the Justice Department and White House have not made a compelling
case for either the administration’s obsession with secrecy or its Patriot
Act," said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director. "This bipartisan
report should serve as a wake-up call for Congress that it must maintain
the sunsets in the Patriot Act."

As the report states on page 394, "The burden of proof for retaining a
particular governmental power should be on the executive, to explain (a)
that the power actually materially enhances security and (b) that there is
adequate supervision of the executive’s use of the powers to ensure
protection of civil liberties. If the power is granted, there must be
adequate guidelines and oversight to properly confine its use."

The long-awaited report, which contains the official findings of the
independent commission investigating the 9/11 terrorism attacks, contains
significant recommendations germane to the debate over civil liberties
that has raged for more than two-and-a-half years now.

The report echoes criticisms by the ACLU and others that the Justice
Department has so far failed to demonstrate why the expanded surveillance
and investigative powers in the Patriot Act are needed to fight terrorism.
The commission’s findings, the ACLU said, strongly confirm the need to
maintain the Patriot Act sunsets.

The sunset provisions - which apply to some of the Patriot Act’s most
controversial provisions - would require Congress to reconsider about a
tenth of the law in December 2005. Provisions that sunset include the
infamous "library records" provision, which reduces judicial review when
counter-intelligence agents seek secret court orders for the production of
a wide array of personal information, including library, business,
genetic, medical and even gun purchase records.

Notably, the commission does not recommend that any sunseted provisions
should be made permanent.

In addition, the commission’s report contains a list of 10 separate missed
"operational" opportunities to foil the attacks. While the report stops
short of calling the attacks preventable, it clearly shows that the
intelligence and law enforcement communities were not using their existing
counter-terrorism powers to their fullest potential.

"The administration has yet to explain why it didn’t use its already
expansive power to the fullest before 9/11," said Laura W. Murphy,
Director of the ACLU Washington Legislative Office. "The commission’s
report suggests that the White House claim that the worst parts of the
Patriot Act are needed to stop terrorism is dubious, to say the least."

The report also cites both excessive government secrecy and
overclassification as threats to open government and, more notably, as
threats to national security. The ACLU pointed to the finding as evidence
that the government should stop stonewalling the series of Freedom of
Information Act requests submitted by the ACLU and other civil liberties
groups on the Patriot Act, the Abu Ghraib scandal and other matters of
public interest.

Characterizing the current Congressional intelligence watchdog system as
"dysfunctional," the commission’s strongest recommendation is the need for
more aggressive Congressional oversight of the intelligence community,
including making the intelligence budget public. The ACLU applauded the
move but emphasized that the structure of the committee would be less
important than whether its operation was in turn open to public scrutiny.

As the report stated: "Secrecy stifles oversight, accountability and
information sharing. Unfortunately, all the current organizational
incentives encourage over-classification. This balance should change; and
as a start, open information should be provided about the overall size of
agency intelligence budgets."

Contrary to earlier reports, the commission explicitly rejects - in part,
for civil liberties reasons - the creation of a domestic intelligence
agency modeled after Britain’s MI-5. The ACLU, a critic of any domestic
intelligence activity that is not linked to law enforcement, applauded the
move.

Unfortunately, there are some recommendations that raise civil liberties
concerns; two of the most salient are calls for the backdoor creation of
national ID cards in the form of a standardized drivers licenses and a
cabinet-level intelligence czar.

"A Senate-confirmed intelligence director sitting in the White House would
be in the hip pocket of the president," Romero added.

The ACLU questioned whether pitting the FBI’s culture of case-oriented law
enforcement against the CIA’s culture of covert, subversive operations,
under one chief, would result in a further weakening of civil liberties
protections in the FBI’s intelligence work. Similarly, if the new director
were to have operational control over both domestic and foreign
intelligence work - that is, real authority over both the FBI and the CIA
- he or she could blur the lines between the agencies’ two very different
missions.

Finally, the ACLU expressed concern that if the director of national
intelligence ends up controlling the purse strings of the entire
intelligence community, there are very few contingencies that could keep
the director from exercising specific, operational control over both
domestic and foreign intelligence.


The 9-11 Commission's report can be found at:
http://www.9-11commission.gov

For more information, see:
http://www.aclu.org/safeandfree

Reply via email to