Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Targeted Killings pose a rapidly growing challenge to the international rule of law. While over
forty states already have this so called drone technology, the United States is the dominant
user of drones to kill. According to news reports the defense department and CIA have
both compiled lists of people whom they want to kill. And some of these people are US citizens.
(News clipping showing of New York Times titled Targeted Killing...) There's a range of information
out there in terms of newspaper reports and statements from public officials that has
made it clear that Anwar is on a Kill List. The case we are bringing is not about Al-Aulaqis
character or even about his alleged crime... it's an effort to defend the right that all
of us should hold dear. The right to due process of law. Everybody recognizes that the government
has the authority to use lethal force in actual zones of armed conflict in Iraq for example
in Afghanistan. But what we're talking about here is the use of lethal force against people
who are located far away from those zones. The United States in particular argues that
the quote Law of 911, enables it legally to use force in the territory of any other state
against certain quote terrorist, as part of its inherent right to self-defense. Under
International Law lethal force can be used against civilians only in narrow circumstances
only when it's a last resort, and only against true imminent threat. What we are talking
about here is a bureaucratized program. We want a court to issue ruling as to the Constitutionality
of this plan. We want the court to issue a ruling as to whether this plan violates International
Law. And more importantly want the government to be clear on what criteria its using. In
terms of determining who it's going to kill, who it wants to kill and how it's going to
happen. It's critical that we believe that we are doing things that are Constitutional
that we are doing the right things. But it's also critical that the rest of the world understand
why we do what it is that we do. that we have standards that we abide by. Because this program
remains shrouded with official's secrecy the International Community does not know when
and where the CIA is authorized to kill the criteria for individuals who may be killed
how it ensures killings are legal. One of the dangers with this kind of program a targeted
killing program is that we will end up killing the wrong people. Dozens of times we've detained
people as terrorist only to find out later that the evidence was weak nonexistent or
wrong. At least with detentions there is the possibility of a court challenge or the possibility
of appeal. But there's no appeal from a drone. There's no appeal from a death sentence after
its imposed. I think it is absolutely fair to characterize these as death sentences without
due process. We don't know whether or not they're guilty and we don't have any transparency
in the government to confirm that they are. If we were to set the precedent of going around
the world and killing people that the United States thinks are suspects, that would be
sending probably one of the most dangerous precedence out there because their would be
nothing to stop. For example China from targeting its citizens in the United States. The power
to kill somebody without charge without trial without due process... that's an immense power
we should be very wary of putting that kind of power into the hands of any administration.
And maybe you trust this particular administration but you have to ask yourself will you trust
the next one. When the whole world is looking for solution of how to deal with a terrorist
threat. The one thing that we can't do in this country is abandon our principles because
it's the principals of International human rights that will get the word through this.
If we abandon them we can't hold anybody else to them. The we will be in trouble for years
and years to come. To learn more go to: aclu.org/targetedkillings