|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
By Sam Chu LinA number of documents the federal government considered a risk to national security from the Wen Ho Lee case have been unsealed and Asian Pacific Islander American civil rights lawyers are declaring this a big victory. In December of 1999, the United States charged Lee, a U.S. citizen born in Taiwan, with 59 counts of mishandling classified information. In what has become one of the most controversial events in recent APIA history, Lee was kept in solitary confinement, denied bail and shackled with leg irons and chains for almost nine months. Widespread suspicion of racial profiling during Lees case was supported by even prominent individuals in the counterintelligence community who had worked on the investigation. In August of 2000, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Asian Law Caucus filed briefs in support of Lees motion to seek government evidence of race-based or selective prosecution. In this case, the government was ordered to produce the pre-trial documents by Sept. 15, 2000. But on Sept. 13, 2000 just two days before the deadline, the government dropped all but one of the 59 charges and entered into a plea bargain with Lee that sealed all documents. A little more than one year later, on Oct. 2, 2001, in a federal court hearing in Albuquerque, New Mexico, Judge James Parker, with the permission of Lees attorney and the government, approved the unsealing of 20 declassified documents used in the scientists case and allowed two other documents to remain sealed. It was only in response to our motion and a response of the court setting the hearing date that the government finally agreed that the vast majority of these documents should never have been sealed in the first place, stated Roger Myers, attorney for San Francisco-based civil rights group Chinese for Affirmative Action (CAA). Nothing prevented the government, except the government, from maintaining these documents under seal, Diane Chin, executive director of CAA, said. Nothing prevented the government but the government, from reviewing them for confidential information. . . and from releasing these documents. Once they receive copies of the unsealed documents, attorneys representing the civil rights organization will try to determine if Lee was a victim of selective prosecution or racial profiling. We want to examine this case to determine whether there might be things going on that are improper in the way the FBI investigates cases, in terms of the way the U.S. Attorneys office prosecutes cases, commented Bob Kim, attorney for the ACLU of Northern California. I think its healthy to look back and to examine what happened. Hope Eckert, representing the ACLU in New Mexico, added, Our contention all along is the way these things have been sealed didnt follow the proper procedure. Brian Sun, attorney for Lee, was not at the hearing, but he applauded the results. We think its in the interest of both the public and Dr. Lees family that more information come out about his being singled out for investigation, the Santa Monica lawyer said. During this latest Wen Ho Lee-related hearing, there was no mention of the FBI, but the agency was on the minds of many of the people. [Judge Parker] himself, when he issued his apology at the end of the [original] case, cited numerous incidents of misconduct, Chin declared. There were FBI agents who misstated testimony, misstated facts during testimony to justify keeping Dr. Lee in solitary confinement for nine months. According to Sun, depositions will soon be collected from former Attorney General Janet Reno, former FBI Director Louis Freeh, and former Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson. The civil trial of United States vs. Wen Ho Lee, which questions leaks in the scientists original case, is slated to get underway soon. Sun added, There will probably and ultimately be closer scrutiny on how the FBI has handled not only this matter and other matters that involve counterintelligence, espionage, things of that nature. Thats why it is important to have the truth come out about how his case was handled.
©2001 AsianWeek. The information you receive on-line from AsianWeek is protected by the copyright laws of the United States. The copyright laws prohibit any copying, redistributing, retransmitting, or repurposing of any copyright protected material. Privacy Statement |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||