By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON D.C., United States – The United States Department of Justice released a report on Friday regarding the conduct of two Bush administration lawyers during the War on Terror.  The lawyers, Jay Bybee and John Yoo, wrote legal memoranda arguing for the use of certain interrogation techniques by U.S. intelligence officials.  While the report questioned their reasoning, it stated that the lawyers should not face any disciplinary action.

Jay Bybee was the head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel and Yoo was his deputy during the beginning of the War on Terror.  They wrote legal memoranda authorizing the use of certain interrogation tactics such as water boarding.  The memos also stated that the President may not follow laws prohibiting torture. They argued that those who used the interrogation tactics be shielded from prosecution. The substance of the memos was discovered in 2004 and caused a stir among many elected officials in Washington D.C. Many investigations began in 2004 examining the legal reasoning used in the memos.

The Justice Department’s Office of Professional Responsibility originally found Bybee and Yoo did not follow past precedents against torture and gave poor legal advice.  It found that the lawyers engaged in “professional misconduct.”  The ethics report also stated that the lawyers were pressured by Bush Administration officials to find legal authority allowing for the use of the interrogation techniques.

Despite the findings of the Office of Professional Responsibility, the Justice Department determined that Bybee and Yoo did not engage in professional misconduct but exercised poor judgment.  The report, written by Associate Deputy Attorney General David Margolis, stated that the lawyers were under pressure at the time they wrote the memos.  The pressure affected their judgment and legal analysis.  However, their actions did not amount to professional misconduct and disciplinary sanctions and proceedings should not be pursued against them for exercising poor judgment.

The report was sent to both the House of Representatives and the Senate.  House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers stated that the report shows that the Bush Administration curtailed domestic and international law in allowing torture.  The same sentiment was echoed by Chairman Patrick Leahy of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Currently, Bybee is a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  Yoo is a professor of law at the University of California, Berkley.

For more information, please see:

Wall Street Journal – Lawyers Cleared Over 9/11 Memos – 20 February 2010

MSNBC – No misconduct by interrogation lawyers – 19 February 2010

NY Times – Justice Department Report Finds John Yoo and Jay Bybee Not Guilty of Misconduct – 19 February 2010

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

PENNSYLVANIA, United States – This week a student and his parents filed a lawsuit against a school district in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The student claims that employees of the Lower Merion School District spied on him at his home through a school-issued laptop computer. The student attends Harriton High School which is part of the Lower Merion School District.

The lawsuit stems from the school district’s policy of issuing each one of its students a laptop computer. All two thousand three hundred students in the school district receive laptops to conduct school work. Cameras and microphone systems are some of the features the laptops offer. The devices can be turned on through remote-activation software by people other than the user. The software can then relate information from the computer to outside parties.

The student claims that the software was used improperly by the school district. In November of 2009, he was accused of using his school-issued computer improperly by a school administrator. The administrator told him that he had an improper photograph on his computer. The school district did not inform students or their parents that they could activate the camera or recording device while the computer was at a student’s home.

In defense, the school district stated that it only used remote activation to locate missing laptops. The school district admitted to activating forty-two students’ cameras over a fourteen month period for that purpose. Subsequently, the school district has suspended its ability to remotely activate the laptops.

Privacy advocates, students, and parents were disturbed by the school district’s policy. They were fearful of placing such a powerful tool in the hands of school administrators. Parents and students argued that school officials had the ability to watch and find students and parents in potentially embarrassing situations.

The United States Supreme Court has previously held that privacy in ones home is a protected right. Therefore, the government needs to have reasonable suspicion or probable cause in order to search a person’s home. Justice Scalia wrote in a 2001 opinion that the Supreme Court has traditionally found that a government’s intrusion into a person’s privacy “draws a firm line at the entrance to the house.” In that case, the Supreme Court found that a police department’s use of infrared technology to detect marijuana within a person’s home was unconstitutional.

The FBI and the local district attorney also have started investigations against the school district. Both law enforcement agencies will investigate whether the school district broke any wiretap or computer intrusion laws.

For more information, please see:

Washington Post – Official: FBI probing Pa. school webcam spy case – 19 February 2010

MSNBC – Suit: School spied on student via webcams – 18 February 2010

Philadelphia Daily News – Lower Merion School District sued for cyber spying on students – 18 February 2010

By William Miller

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

TORONTO, Canada – A Toronto woman was awarded $25,000 by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal for racial abuse she suffered at the hands of her former employer. Cheryl Khan, a former employee at Lynx Trucking Transportation brought the suit claiming she was subjected to repeated racial slurs by the owner of the company Lynn Tompkins

Khan is a thirty-six year old single mother with two sons ages seven and fourteen. She was hired by Lynx Trucking and Transportation in 2007.

Khan, along with several other Lynx employees testified in front of the Human Rights Tribunal that during her employment Tompkins repeatedly referred to her as a “Paki.” Khan further testified that Tompkins would often refer to Khans two sons as “half nigger babies” and repeatedly told her “that’s what you get for sleeping with a black man.”

Khan also said that she was not the only person of South Asian decent to be ridiculed by Tompkins. Tompkins would often refer to truck drivers as stupid immigrants and would often ask if there were any good white people he could hire.

Khan’s employment with Lynx ended on January 30 after she took two days off to take care of her youngest son who had been hospitalized because doctors feared he might have liver cancer. After being fired Khan filed a Human Rights complaint.

Earlier this month Adjudicator Eric Whist found for Khan. In a written opinion Whist said “”Having weighed the evidence before me I find, on a balance (of) probabilities, that (Tompkins) did repeatedly use the terms “Paki” and “nigger” as well as making other offensive comments to the applicant that he knew would be unwelcome.”

Whist ordered Tompkins to pay Khan $25,000 for discrimination as well as $6,750 in lost wages. He further ordered Tompkins to create an anti harassment policy and to undergo sensitivity training.

Khan has since found new employment. Tompkins maintains his innocence and says that while he may have been a tough employer who yelled from time to time he never used racial slurs.

For more information, Please see:

Rediff – Canadian Employer Fined $25,000 for Racial Slur – 18 February 2010

Toronto Star – Racist Taunts Cost Boss $25000 – 17 Feb 2010

Vancouver Sun – Toronto Woman Awarded $25,000 After Boss Used Racial Epithets – 17 February 2010

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti – A Haitian judge released eight of the ten American missionaries being held on charges of child kidnapping from jail today.  They have been held for the last three weeks on the charges.  The eight were released on bail and did not have to place bond.  They were allowed to leave on their own word.  Also, the judge ruled that they were free to leave the country.  The other two missionaries, Laura Silsby and Charisa Coulter were not released.  The judge kept the two for further questioning.

The missionaries were accused of child kidnapping on January 29, 2010 when they tried to take Haitian children devastated by the earthquake across the border into the Dominican Republic.  However, they did not have proper identification needed in order to take the children.  Many of the missionaries believed that the children were orphans.  Later, it was discovered that some of the children were not orphans but had parents.  In the hope of providing better care for the children, many of the parents voluntarily gave their children to the missionaries.

The Haitian government thanked the U.S. for not interfering in the investigation.  At the beginning of the investigation, the Haitian government promised to respect the rights of the missionaries and to conduct a thorough investigation.  Haiti’s Secretary for Penal Affairs stated “I commend the U.S. government for not interfering with the ongoing judicial proceedings in Haiti about the Americans.”

Silsby and Coulter were not released by the Haitian judge.  He wanted to question them about their trip to Haiti in December 2009. Silsby is considered the leader of the missionary group who claimed that they were helping the children of Haiti after the earthquake.

The missionaries were also apologetic about their relationship with Jorge Puello, a man wanted by the United States Marshall Service and Interpol.  Puello is accused of child trafficking of young women into prostitution in El Salvador.  He is also wanted in Vermont for smuggling illegal immigrants into the U.S.  Puello provided food and medical assistance to the missionaries.  He also acted as their legal advisor and spokesperson for a period of time after the missionaries were arrested.

For more information, please see:

CNN – 8 Americans Detained in Haiti Freed on Bail, 2 Others Remain – 17 February 2010

MSNBC – Haiti Frees Eight of the 10 Detained Americans – 17 February 2010

Reuters – Haitian Judge Frees Eight Americans, Holds Two – 17 February 2010

By Brenda Lopez Romero
Impunity Watch Reporter – North America desk

TLAXCALA, Mexico – The governor, Héctor Israel Ortiz Ortiz, was urged by over 40 organizations to project a women’s right to choose in the state Congress by vetoing legislation that promotes the right to life primarily because it also seeks to penalize abortions.

The groups said in a letter to state governments that the government should be for the people and not the Vatican.  They emphasized a need for a secular government because a religious moral code should not be forced onto people nor turned into civil law.  Elsa Conde, a former legislator, said that a belief in sin could not become a crime.

Beatriz Paredes Rangel, president of the national party, Institutional Revolutionary Party, was asked to urge her party to vote against all bills that leaves women with no other recourse than to seek unsafe clandestine abortions.

There was also a protest organized by the group Women for the Right to Choose in the Federal District.  They denounce that 18 state legislators are changing state constitution without considering the indignation of women.

Conde said in regards to similar legislation “all these are beginning to criminalize women restricting their right to choose over their life, body, and parenthood.  This reform signifies a grave setback for the rights of women and makes vulnerable the secular government by casting doubt on scientific research and advancement.”

For more information, please see:

La Jornada – Exigen ONG al gobierno de Tlaxcala vetar la iniciativa contra el aborto –
16 February 2010

Radio Formula – Congreso Tlaxcala termina sesión sin votos para aprobar ley antiaborto – 16 February 2010