NEW YORK: A federal appeals court ordered the US Department of Justice to turn over key portions of a memorandum justifying the government’s targeted killing of people linked to terrorism, including Americans.
In a case pitting executive power against the public’s right to know what its government does, the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court ruling preserving the secrecy of the legal rationale for the killings, such as the death of US citizen Anwar Al Awlaki in a 2011 drone strike in Yemen.
Ruling for the New York Times, a unanimous three-judge panel said the government waived its right to secrecy by making repeated public statements justifying targeted killings. These included a Justice Department “white paper,” as well as speeches or statements by officials like Attorney General Eric Holder and former Obama administration counterterrorism adviser John Brennan, endorsing the practice.
The Times and two reporters, Charlie Savage and Scott Shane, sought the memorandum under the federal Freedom of Information Act, saying it authorised the targeting of Awlaki, a cleric who joined Al Qaeda’s Yemen affiliate and directed many attacks. “Whatever protection the legal analysis might once have had has been lost by virtue of public statements of public officials at the highest levels and official disclosure of the DOJ White Paper,” Circuit Judge Jon Newman wrote for the appeals court panel in New York.
He said it was no longer logical or plausible to argue that disclosing the legal analysis could jeopardise military plans, intelligence activities or foreign relations. The court redacted a portion of the memorandum on intelligence gathering. It is unclear whether the government will appeal, or when the memorandum might be made public. The Justice Department had no immediate comment.
David McCraw, a lawyer for the Times, said the newspaper is delighted with the decision, saying it encourages public debate on an important foreign policy and national security issue. “The court reaffirmed a bedrock principle of democracy: The people do not have to accept blindly the government’s assurances that it is operating within the bounds of the law; they get to see for themselves the legal justification that the government is working from,” McCraw said.
The decision largely reversed a January 2013 ruling by US District Judge Colleen McMahon in Manhattan. She ruled for the administration despite skepticism over its antiterrorism program, including whether it could unilaterally authorize killings outside a “hot” field of battle. “The Alice-in-Wonderland nature of this pronouncement is not lost on me,” she wrote.
Civil liberties groups have complained that the drone program, which deploys pilotless aircraft, lets the government kill Americans without constitutionally required due process. FOIA requests at issue in the 2nd Circuit case also focused on drone strikes that killed two other US citizens: Al Awlaki’s teenage son, Abdulrahman Al Awlaki, and Samir Khan, who was an editor of Inspire, an English-language Al Qaeda magazine.
McMahon ruled one month before the Justice Department released the white paper, which set out conditions to be met before lethal force in foreign countries against US citizens could be used.
Reuters
