Patriot Act Report
One of the provisions of the original Patriot Act (Section 1001) requires reporting from the Department of Justice (DOJ) every six months with respect to complaints of violations by the DOJ of civil rights and civil liberties. The latest report to Congress issued August 15, 2005. It's relatively short (by government standards), but it still makes for some interesting reading. Almost from the start, the DOJ Office of Inspector General (OIG) issues some caveats.
Section 1001 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Patriot Act), Public Law 107-56, directs the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ or Department) to undertake a series of actions related to claims of civil rights or civil liberties violations allegedly committed by DOJ employees.
It also requires the OIG to provide semiannual reports to Congress on the implementation of the OIG’s responsibilities under Section 1001. This report – the seventh since enactment of the legislation in October 2001 – summarizes the OIG’s Section 1001-related activities from January 1, 2005, through June 30, 2005.
Given the number of complaints received compared to its limited resources, the OIG does not investigate all allegations of misconduct against DOJ employees. The OIG refers many complaints involving DOJ employees to internal affairs offices in DOJ components such as the FBI Inspection Division, the DEA Office of Professional Responsibility, and the BOP [Bureau of Prisons]Office of Internal Affairs (OIA) for appropriate handling. In certain referrals, the OIG requires the components to report the results of their investigations to the OIG. In most cases, the OIG notifies the complainant of the referral.
Many complaints received by the OIG involve matters outside our jurisdiction. The ones that identify a specific issue for investigation are forwarded to the appropriate investigative entity. For example, complaints of mistreatment by airport security staff are sent to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) OIG. We also have forwarded complaints to the OIGs at the Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of State, United States Postal Service, Department of Defense, Central Intelligence Agency, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In addition, we have referred complainants to a variety of police department internal affairs offices that have jurisdiction over the subject of the complaints.
The caveat actually is important, given the numbers cited in the report:
Complaints processed: 834
Unrelated complaints: 624
Complaints within OIG’s jurisdiction warranting review: 210
Non-Section 1001 matters
Management issues: 186
Referred to DOJ components for investigation: 7
OIG unsuccessfully sought further details: 4
Section 1001 matters warranting review: 13
My first impression on reading the numbers was that for six months they seemed awfully high. It got worse when I recalled that there are provisions within the Patriot Act that allow the FBI to obtain records on citizens without the citizens being aware of that action. In other words, if Americans knew that their reading habits were being monitored by the government, there might have been even more complaints.
The report is fairly detailed on the cases that the DOJ-OIG actually investigated. Here is just a sample of one of them.
The OIG continues an investigation of the FBI’s conduct in connection with the erroneous identification of a latent fingerprint found on evidence from the March 2004 Madrid train bombing as belonging to Brandon Mayfield, an attorney in Portland, Oregon. As a result of the identification, the FBI initiated an investigation of Mayfield that resulted in his arrest as a “material witness” and his detention for approximately 2 weeks. Mayfield was released when Spanish National Police matched the fingerprints on the evidence to an Algerian national. The OIG is examining the cause of the erroneous identification and the FBI’s handling of the matter. The Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility is reviewing the conduct of the prosecutors in the case.
Because most Americans don't know if their civil rights or liberties have been abused under the Patriot Act, most of the cases involve those who are currently detained. Here is another section of the report dealing with that:
1. Review of FBI Conduct Relating to Detainees in Military Facilities in Guantanamo Bay and Iraq:
In December 2004, the OIG initiated a review of FBI employees’ observations and actions regarding alleged abuse of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib prison, and other venues controlled by the U.S. military. The OIG is examining whether FBI employees participated in any incident of detainee abuse, whether FBI employees witnessed incidents of abuse, whether FBI employees reported any abuse, and how those reports were handled by the FBI. In addition, our review will investigate whether the FBI took inappropriate action or inappropriately retaliated against any FBI employee who reported any incident of abuse.
2. Supplemental Report on September 11 Detainees’ Allegations of Abuse at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York:
We concluded that certain MDC staff members abused some of the detainees, and we found systemic problems in the way detainees were treated at the MDC. In December 2003, we provided the results of our investigation to the BOP (Bureau of Prisons) for its review and appropriate disciplinary action.
Unfortunately, because this report is only from the DOH-OIG, there is no information as to what results there actually were for those cases referred to other federal agencies (e.g., the BOP). As a result, the report looks in many respects as very tame, nothing to worry about. Unfortunately, given this Congress, that is exactly the conclusion that will be reached.
Me? I'm worried. Very worried.
Section 1001 of the USA PATRIOT Act (Patriot Act), Public Law 107-56, directs the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ or Department) to undertake a series of actions related to claims of civil rights or civil liberties violations allegedly committed by DOJ employees.
It also requires the OIG to provide semiannual reports to Congress on the implementation of the OIG’s responsibilities under Section 1001. This report – the seventh since enactment of the legislation in October 2001 – summarizes the OIG’s Section 1001-related activities from January 1, 2005, through June 30, 2005.
Given the number of complaints received compared to its limited resources, the OIG does not investigate all allegations of misconduct against DOJ employees. The OIG refers many complaints involving DOJ employees to internal affairs offices in DOJ components such as the FBI Inspection Division, the DEA Office of Professional Responsibility, and the BOP [Bureau of Prisons]Office of Internal Affairs (OIA) for appropriate handling. In certain referrals, the OIG requires the components to report the results of their investigations to the OIG. In most cases, the OIG notifies the complainant of the referral.
Many complaints received by the OIG involve matters outside our jurisdiction. The ones that identify a specific issue for investigation are forwarded to the appropriate investigative entity. For example, complaints of mistreatment by airport security staff are sent to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) OIG. We also have forwarded complaints to the OIGs at the Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of State, United States Postal Service, Department of Defense, Central Intelligence Agency, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In addition, we have referred complainants to a variety of police department internal affairs offices that have jurisdiction over the subject of the complaints.
The caveat actually is important, given the numbers cited in the report:
Complaints processed: 834
Unrelated complaints: 624
Complaints within OIG’s jurisdiction warranting review: 210
Non-Section 1001 matters
Management issues: 186
Referred to DOJ components for investigation: 7
OIG unsuccessfully sought further details: 4
Section 1001 matters warranting review: 13
My first impression on reading the numbers was that for six months they seemed awfully high. It got worse when I recalled that there are provisions within the Patriot Act that allow the FBI to obtain records on citizens without the citizens being aware of that action. In other words, if Americans knew that their reading habits were being monitored by the government, there might have been even more complaints.
The report is fairly detailed on the cases that the DOJ-OIG actually investigated. Here is just a sample of one of them.
The OIG continues an investigation of the FBI’s conduct in connection with the erroneous identification of a latent fingerprint found on evidence from the March 2004 Madrid train bombing as belonging to Brandon Mayfield, an attorney in Portland, Oregon. As a result of the identification, the FBI initiated an investigation of Mayfield that resulted in his arrest as a “material witness” and his detention for approximately 2 weeks. Mayfield was released when Spanish National Police matched the fingerprints on the evidence to an Algerian national. The OIG is examining the cause of the erroneous identification and the FBI’s handling of the matter. The Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility is reviewing the conduct of the prosecutors in the case.
Because most Americans don't know if their civil rights or liberties have been abused under the Patriot Act, most of the cases involve those who are currently detained. Here is another section of the report dealing with that:
1. Review of FBI Conduct Relating to Detainees in Military Facilities in Guantanamo Bay and Iraq:
In December 2004, the OIG initiated a review of FBI employees’ observations and actions regarding alleged abuse of detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib prison, and other venues controlled by the U.S. military. The OIG is examining whether FBI employees participated in any incident of detainee abuse, whether FBI employees witnessed incidents of abuse, whether FBI employees reported any abuse, and how those reports were handled by the FBI. In addition, our review will investigate whether the FBI took inappropriate action or inappropriately retaliated against any FBI employee who reported any incident of abuse.
2. Supplemental Report on September 11 Detainees’ Allegations of Abuse at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York:
We concluded that certain MDC staff members abused some of the detainees, and we found systemic problems in the way detainees were treated at the MDC. In December 2003, we provided the results of our investigation to the BOP (Bureau of Prisons) for its review and appropriate disciplinary action.
Unfortunately, because this report is only from the DOH-OIG, there is no information as to what results there actually were for those cases referred to other federal agencies (e.g., the BOP). As a result, the report looks in many respects as very tame, nothing to worry about. Unfortunately, given this Congress, that is exactly the conclusion that will be reached.
Me? I'm worried. Very worried.
posted by Diane at 5:13 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home