Khaled el-Masri's case moves to the Supreme Court. Will accountability carry the day?

Khaled el-Masri

i've been kinda sorta following el-masri's case (here and here) for a number of reasons... one, el-masri was abducted and subjected to rendition in macedonia in early 2004, during a short window of time between my first and my second (out of a total of 6) engagements there, so his story hits a bit close to home, as it were... two, germany, following italy's example (italy is trying the cia agents involved in abu omar's abduction in absentia), issued arrest warrants last june for the cia agents involved in his abduction... third, el-masri was released without ever being charged, and fourth, he is a german citizen... it would seem to me that if anyone is entitled to legal redress, it would be el-masri... last march, the u.s. court of appeals in richmond, va, ruled that el-masri was not entitled to redress because his lawsuit would expose state secrets... i was hoping the case would make it to the supreme court and it looks like that's happening this week...

The Supreme Court is set to decide as early as Tuesday whether the government can invoke the doctrine of "state secrets" to quash a legal claim that CIA bungling resulted in a man being abducted, imprisoned and tortured.

After five months of such treatment, CIA agents apparently realized that the man in custody, Khaled el-Masri, a German citizen of Lebanese descent, was not the wanted terrorist Khalid al-Masri.

The case has attracted wide public attention in Europe, but El-Masri has been unable to gain a court hearing in the United States because the government has so far successfully invoked the argument that it cannot be taken to court when doing so might expose state secrets.

For his appeal to get an airing in the Supreme Court, four of the nine justices will have to agree to hear it. The justices have been closely split in cases that challenge the administration's handling of the war on terrorism.

That El-Masri is the victim of a case of mistaken identity does not seem to be in doubt.

the last paragraph in the following is particularly noteworthy...

Though the Supreme Court has not directly ruled on the state-secrets privilege in more than 50 years, the rule has been invoked regularly in the lower courts. The Bush administration has used it to block suits involving whistle-blowers, wiretapping and the firing of CIA agents.

Lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union are urging the high court to take up El-Masri's case. They say the privilege has been transformed from a limited protection for military secrets to a broad shield for the government to hide behind when confronted with allegations of "grave executive misconduct."

It is particularly strange, they say, to allow the Bush administration to "invoke state secrets to protect the nation against the disclosure of information that the entire world already knows."

will accountability carry the day...? color me skeptical...

Submit To Propeller
Tweet