http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/2013/04/15/justice-department-reclassifies-documents-fights-to-withhold-ground-breaking-immigration-court-decision-on-el-salvadorian-vides-casanova/
Justice Department Reclassifies Documents, Fights to Withhold Ground-breaking Immigration Court Decision on El Salvadorian Vides Casanova APRIL 15, 2013 tags: Carlos Eugenio Vides Casanova<http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/tag/carlos-eugenio-vides-casanova/> , doj <http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/tag/doj/>, FOIA<http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/tag/foia/> , freedom of information act<http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/tag/freedom-of-information-act/> , National Security Archive<http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/tag/national-security-archive/> , New York Times <http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/tag/new-york-times/>, United States <http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/tag/united-states/>, United States Department of Justice<http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/tag/united-states-department-of-justice/> by Emily Willard <http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/author/ewillard/> [image: written decision image]<http://nsarchive.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/written-decision-image.jpeg>The Department of Justice (DOJ) continues to earn its second annual Rosemary Award <http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20130315/> for Worst Open Government Performance with its abysmal performance regarding a ground breaking decision<http://cja.org/downloads/Vides%20Casanova%20Removal%20Proceedings.pdf> in an immigration case of Carlos Eugenio Vides Casanova, former defense minister of El Salvador who is implicated in dozens of cases of torture and extrajudicial execution. To withhold this information from the public the DOJ made up FOIA procedures and erroneously withheld previously declassified information in its misguided attempt to preserve secrecy surrounding the case. The New York Times filed a FOIA request, numerous appeals, and eventually filed suit against the DOJ, for copies of Judge Grims final decision regarding the U.S. Immigration Court case against Vides Casanova. Last week<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/world/us-justice-dept-releases-judges-ruling-on-salvadoran-general.html?_r=1&;>, the New York Times partially won the FOIA case by getting a copy of Judge Grims February 2012 decision released, but with redactions. Among the redactions were all of the witnesses names, even though it was a public hearing and their names are available thanks to extensive news coverage. <http://cja.org/article.php?id=1000> Additionally, the expert witness report, which includes hundreds of pages of declassified U.S. documents obtained by the National Security Archive and used as evidence in the court is being held from the public as confidential. These documents* remain confidential despite the fact that they were released through the FOIA and through President Clintons executive orders<http://nsarchive.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/statement_by_the_press_secretary_november_5_199312.pdf> * *for declassification in response to the El Salvador Truth Commission request.* [image: sample doc picture]<http://nsarchive.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/sample-doc-picture.jpeg> Example of reclassified document Reports meeting of Ambassador White and leaders of El Salvador Armed Forces during which officers attempt to deny military involvement in and subsequent cover-up of American churchwomen killings. See full document here<http://nsarchive.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/sample-document-withhled.pdf> . Here is the chronology of the New York Times battle to get the written decision of a public trial released: - *September 2012* NYT submits a FOIA for the full release of both decisions written by Judge Grim in February and August of 2012. - *October 2012* DOJ denies request claiming that the decisions were preliminary, and the agency had not issued a final agency decision. The DOJ also cited personal privacy concerns. *[This is absurd. The hearing was public, and the general outline of the decision was made public in February of 2012, while the details were withheld.]* - *November 2012 * NYT files an administrative appeal, arguing that it knew nothing about the FOIA exemption determination that would turn on the absence or existence of a final decision, arguing that the denial was improper. - *January 2013 * DOJ denies the appeal, simply citing the B6 exemption, making no reference to whether the decisions were preliminary or not. - *February 2013 *NYT submitted a letter to the DOJ stating that the denial of access is contrary to the First Amendment and common law rights of access. - *April 2, 2013 *NYT files suit<http://cja.org/downloads/NY%20Times%20v.%20DOJ,%20filed%20copy%204%202%2013.pdf> against the DOJ in the District Court of New York after receiving no response to February letter. - *April 4, 2013 * DOJ responds<http://cja.org/downloads/DOJ%20FOIA%20response%204.4.pdf> to February letter without mention of lawsuit, treating the February letter as request for reconsideration (which does not exist as a procedure of the FOIA) and releases a redacted version<http://cja.org/downloads/Vides%20Casanova%20Removal%20Proceedings.pdf> of Judge Grims February 2012 decision. The DOJ is the agency in charge of enforcing the FOIA. How can the DOJ appropriately enforce the FOIA if it does not follow the FOIA itself? This is also especially worrisome considering therosy report<http://nsarchive.wordpress.com/2013/03/13/archive-director-tom-blanton-testifies-before-senate-judiciary-committee-for-foia-assessment/> on the state of FOIA presented by Melanie Pustay, director of the Office of Information Policy at DOJ. *Why this all the more important * Carolyn Patty Blum, a human rights attorney of the Center for Justice and Accountability explains that this [Vides Casanova] may be the highest military commander of any country who has been subject to a new law stating that a commander can be ordered removed from the United States, if he has ordered, assisted or participated in torture or extrajudicial killing. Key to the ruling is that it is sufficient to know or have reason to know about the acts of subordinates and then fail to prevent or punish those acts. The New York Times reports<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/24/us/salvadoran-may-be-deported-from-us-for-80-murders-of-americans.html?_r=0> that this is the first time that a high-ranking foreign military commander will be deported under the new human rights violations law which was passed in 2004. This is also the first time to have a ruling about very specific cases of torture, extrajudicial killings and/or disappearance. Judge Grims finding that General Vides Casanova assisted or otherwise participated in the killing of four churchwomen is probably the best known case in the US. The implications that this case has on the human rights world are huge, and important precedents have been set all the more important that the DOJ moves to release the report in its entirely, along with expert witness reports and accompanying documentation, rather than going out of its way to act contrary to DOJs very own Attorney General Eric Holders memo<http://www.justice.gov/ag/foia-memo-march2009.pdf> calling agencies to act with a presumption of openness. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe: <mailto:laamn-unsubscr...@egroups.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subscribe: <mailto:laamn-subscr...@egroups.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Digest: <mailto:laamn-dig...@egroups.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Help: <mailto:laamn-ow...@egroups.com?subject=laamn> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post: <mailto:la...@egroups.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/laamn@egroups.com> --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: laamn-dig...@yahoogroups.com laamn-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: laamn-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
