- Current Issue
SIGN IN to access the Harper’s archive
ALERT: Usernames and passwords from the old Harpers.org will no longer work. To create a new password and add or verify your email address, please sign in to customer care and select Email/Password Information. (To learn about the change, please read our FAQ.)
The Guardian identifies the Civil Liberties Villain of the Week: a group of government lawyers that hides behind the face of anonymity as the “Department of Defense Privilege Review Team.”
Lawyers for Binyam Mohamed face the incredible prospect of a six-month jail sentence in America after writing a letter to President Obama detailing their client’s allegations of torture by US agents. The privilege review team–officials from the US department of defence who monitor and censor communication between Guantánamo prisoners and their lawyers–have previously been accused of using their powers to suppress evidence of the abuse and mistreatment of detainees. Clive Stafford Smith, director of legal charity Reprieve, and his colleague Ahmed Ghappour have been summoned to appear before a Washington court on May 11 after a complaint was made by the privilege review team.
Stafford Smith had written to the president after judges in the UK ruled against the release of US evidence detailing Mohamed’s alleged torture at Guantánamo. The letter [PDF] asked the president to reconsider the U.S. position and urged him to release the evidence into the public domain. He attached a memo summarising the case because his U.S. security clearance gives him access to the classified material. In order to comply with classification guidelines, the memo did not identify individual officers by name or specify locations of the abuse. He and Gappour submitted the memo to the privilege team for clearance but the memo was redacted to just the title, leaving the president unable to read it. Stafford Smith included the redacted copy of the memo in his letter to illustrate the extent to which it had been censored. He described it as a “bizarre reality”. “You, as commander in chief, are being denied access to material that would help prove that crimes have been committed by U.S. personnel. This decision is being made by the very people who you command.”
So, the faceless Privilege Review Team strikes again, trying to exact revenge for the public exposure of their petty manipulations in which, among other things, they concluded that the commander-in-chief was not entitled to review materials they considered too sensitive. Anyone with information as to the identity of any members of the Privilege Review Team is asked to please be in contact. I am looking for names, and information about the team members’ claims to have graduated from law schools or to have membership in bar associations. They’re long overdue for a privilege review of their own.
More from Scott Horton:
No Comment — April 12, 2013, 11:11 am
A new report from Seton Hall University exposes government surveillance of attorney-client conversations
Rashid Khalidi on how the United States sustains the failure of the Israel-Palestine peace process
Alex Gibney on his documentary investigating the Roman Catholic Church’s handling of child sex-abuse cases
Lucas Mann on hope and change in a minor-league-baseball city
Minimum number of baboons forced to smoke crack in a 1989 study testing the efficacy of cigarettes as a drug delivery device:
A reduction in distrust toward atheists was documented among pious Canadians who are reminded of the Vancouver police.
A Missouri cinema apologized for hiring an actor dressed in body armor and carrying a fake rifle to appear at a screening of Iron Man 3.
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
Winner of the 2012 Olivier Rebbot Award for best photographic reporting from abroad in magazines or books