NewsMine — security — terror-suspects — detainees — Viewing Item

Report critical detainee roundup { May 30 2003 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)    http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,455719,00.html http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,455719,00.html Friday, May. 30, 2003 9/11 Lawsuits for the Justice Department? The release of a report critical of the DOJ's post-Sept. 11 roundup of terror suspects could mean legal action against some officials By VIVECA NOVAK Certain employees of the Justice Department have been advised to hire lawyers to defend them in a spate of lawsuits that could be filed shortly by people who were detained in the wake of 9/11. On Monday, the department's Inspector General is expected to release a report that will be critical of the government's roundup of nearly 800 individuals on immigration charges after the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. The report, according to someone who is familiar with it, will criticize officials for holding detainees for lengthy periods even when it was increasingly clear they had nothing to do with terrorism, and for blocking many detainees from normal immigration hearing procedures. Another portion of the document will say that some detainees were not able to get access to lawyers. The Inspector General's office said last July that the report should be ready by October 2002. In January of this year, it said its findings were complete and the report should be out shortly. It's unclear why the report has taken so long to be finalized, but sources say that there were discussions within the administration about the feasibility of delaying its release. Among the officials who are most likely to be named in lawsuits, and thus who may be seeking individual counsel, are Justice Department Criminal Division head Michael Chertoff, former DOJ Assistant Attorney General Viet Dinh and former Immigration and Naturalization Service head James Ziglar, all of whom were architects of the roundup policy. Plaintiffs have been waiting for the IG report to be issued, believing — apparently accurately — that it could provide them with more ammunition for their complaints. Copyright © 2003 Time Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.

British judges criticized { November 9 2002 } Commission clears saudi arabia from 911 involvement { June 17 2004 } Court rules names secret { June 17 2003 } Court seeks details on detainee { November 5 2003 } Detainee names Detainees rights Detainees sought suicides en masse { January 25 2005 } Detainment inquiry { August 17 2002 } Detroit detainee supported { December 14 2002 } Disappeared { October 30 2001 } Doj investigation problems detainees Fears us wil use torture lite { March 5 2003 } Federal appeals court defers on national security Held 8 months { June 12 2002 } High court asks response to secret florida detainee case Hrw denounces torture Hundreds rounded california Judge says guantanmo tribunal is unconstitutional Lawyer lashes patriot act { December 23 2002 } Many gitmo detainees not accused { February 9 2006 } Massive detention { November 4 2001 } More can be held { April 25 2003 } Muslims in guantanamo were sold by warlords { May 31 2005 } New rules shorten holding time for detained immigrants { April 14 2004 } Nj american jailed { January 3 2003 } No closed hearings { May 30 2002 } Pentagon moves to bar cia holding ghost detainees { April 28 2005 } Prisoners beated to death { March 7 2003 } Red cross criticizes detention { October 10 2003 } Report critical detainee roundup { May 30 2003 } Rumsfeld defends secret detentions Secrecy dueprocess { October 25 1999 } Secret evidence { October 21 1997 } Secret evidence2 { October 21 1997 } Sedition Supreme court tests president arbitrary detention powers Tape show abuse of 911 detainees { December 19 2003 } Torture questions terrorists Tribunal rules amy deter lawyers { July 13 2003 } Files Listed: 39

Correction/submissions

CIA FOIA Archive

National Security Archives

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purpose of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.