Panel discusses pros and cons of Patriot Act

Panel discusses pros
and cons of Patriot Act
BY GLORIA STRAVELLI
Staff Writer

GLORIA STRAVELLI Robert A. Honecker Jr. (l) and Parastou Hassouri led a panel discussion of the Patriot Act in Middletown, which was hosted by the Monmouth County Friends of the ACLU.

The Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center created a climate that made passage of the Patriot Act possible, a specialist on immigration rights for the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey said recently at a panel discussion.

"It’s been a law enforcement wish list but was never introduced because the public climate was not right," said Parastou Hassouri, one of the panelists at a recent forum on balancing civil liberties and the U.S. Patriot Act, held at the Navesink Library in Middletown.

The panel discussion was hosted by the Monmouth County Friends of the American Civil Liberties Union.

The event, which drew a crowd of about 150, was co-sponsored by the Greater Red Bank Area League of Women Voters, the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Monmouth County, and the Quakers Shrewsbury Friends Meeting.

Panelists, in addition to Hassouri, immigrant rights project specialist for the ACLU, were Robert A. Honecker Jr., first assistant prosecutor of Monmouth County; and Grayson Barber, immediate past chair of the Individual Rights Section of the New Jersey State Bar Association. Deborah Jacobs, executive director of the ACLU, moderated the panel.

Hassouri told a standing-room-only crowd that the WTC attacks created a climate that allowed passage of the Patriot Act in October 2001 but the roots of the legislation go back further.

According to Hassouri, it’s unlikely that the lengthy, 342-page legislation which amends at least 15 other statutes was drafted so soon after 9/11.

Instead, she said the general consensus is that the impetus for the Patriot Act, and possibly the drafting of large parts of the legislation, likely followed the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City in 1994.

The Patriot Act, she said, has two major thrusts: it authorizes government action to be taken in secret and it undermines checks and balances on executive power.

Addressing the issue from the law enforcement perspective, Honecker told the panel the Patriot Act has contributed to the fight against terrorism by allowing government agencies to share information.

The act allows law enforcement agencies to engage in activities against terrorism and other individuals involved in criminal activities in the United States , he noted.

For example, he said the Patriot Act has a judicially authorized "sneak and peek" provision that allows law enforcement agencies to perform a search but delay notification for a period of up to three months.

"This opportunity is something necessary when dealing with terrorists," he said.

Honecker acknowledged that the provision "is a departure from what is traditional," and has been criticized because the U.S. Constitution bars unreasonable search and seizure.

"In my opinion," he told those in attendance, "if used in limited number of circumstances, it may save lives. Then it contributes to the safety of our citizens.

"It is important for us to take what we can from the Patriot Act and use it on a local level."

Barber, chair of the ACLU-NJ Privacy Committee, countered Honecker.

The Patriot Act, she said, amounts to government in secret because it provides for the issuance of search warrants in secret without probable cause.

The framers of the Constitution created a balance of powers by adopting the Fourth Amendment which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures, she added.

"The government must have probable cause a crime is to be committed," she said. "The Patriot Act changes that. The government doesn’t need that any more. The Patriot Act permits secret orders without probable cause to investigate people who are not suspects."

That means the government has the right to investigate people’s activities at libraries, mosques, synagogues and political rallies, she added.

Hassouri said sections of the Patriot Act permit a person suspected of being involved with a terrorist organization to be held for up to seven days.

"The charge doesn’t have to be terrorism related," she noted. "Before the Patriot Act, a person could be held for [no more than] 24 hours."

Honecker said legislators who voted to pass the Patriot Act regarded the measure as "an emergency response" and the act incorporates a sunset provision.

"In 2005 many of the controversial issues identified by the ACLU will end," he noted.

Hastily enacted, debate should take place on the issue of whether sections of the act should sunset, Honecker said. However, he said "in certain circumstances [the Patriot Act] has allowed law enforcement to save lives."

"Whether the Patriot Act extends too far is what this discussion is about," he told members of the audience, some of whom later peppered him with queries during a question and answer period that followed the panel.

Later, in response to a query from an audience member, Honecker said he was in favor of amending the act to make it consistent with the Fourth Amendment by including probable cause.

"When it comes to the safety of citizens, it has to be thought out what is fair and good for the citizens of this country.

"It has caused citizens to find themselves in secret files," retorted Jacobs. "The trouble is the Patriot Act takes our system out of balance. We had checks and balances and now we don’t."

Hassouri said since 9/11 there "have been countless attacks on immigrant rights" and the media has failed to report on these incidents.

"There’s a real climate of insecurity and fear raging in a lot of the immigrant communities," she said. "It is a dangerous path we’re going down. The notion of what it means to be an American, to be a citizen."

"Certainly in this community we will take every opportunity to guarantee individual rights for all citizens," said Honecker. "We will ... do everything we can to protect you. If that means we must go out and arrest people who want to do you harm, we will,. but we will do it within the context that respects your individual rights."

During the question and answer session, Honecker said the Patriot Act "has given us the opportunity to be more aggressive in our surveillance.

"I think law enforcement efforts since 9/11 have done a significant amount to disrupt terror activities and have deterred criminal activities," he said.

According to Honecker, members of local police departments are now trained in counter terrorism, "We never did that before 9/11," he said, "and individuals are reporting suspicious behavior. It’s a more comprehensive network post-9/11, and that mechanism in and of itself has deterred terror activities."

Honecker said the Patriot Act has had a significant impact on the way laws are enforced by the county prosecutor. Since 9/11 he spends 50 percent of his day involved in dealing with terror-related activities, he explained.

"It’s more a process of information sharing," he said, involving local citizens, local law enforcement officials, the prosecutor’s office and the FBI.

"We’re trying to share information so a piece is not missed."

Monmouth County now has five detectives assigned to homeland security, and the Office of Emergency Management has been moved into the Prosecutor’s Office to maximize coordination between the two agencies.