http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/03/20/weu20.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/03/20/ixworld.html
Police arrested a leading investigative journalist yesterday on the orders of the European Union, seizing his computers, address books and archive of files in a move that stunned Euro-MPs.

Hans-Martin Tillack, the Brussels correspondent for Germany's Stern magazine, said he was held for 10 hours without access to a lawyer by the Belgian police after his office and home were raided by six officers.

"They asked me to tell them who my sources were. I replied that was something I would never do. Now they have all my sensitive files, so I suppose they'll find out anyway," he said last night.

"The police said I was lucky I wasn't in Burma or central Africa, where journalists get the real treatment," he added.

Mr Tillack said the raid was triggered by a complaint from the EU's anti-fraud office, OLAF. He was accused of paying money to obtain a leaked OLAF dossier two years ago, which he denies.

The European Ombudsman has already come to his defence, issuing a harsh criticism of OLAF's campaign to silence him.

Mr Tillack, who describes himself as a "pro-European federalist", has been OLAF's most vocal critic, accusing it of covering up abuses within the EU system.

As the author of a recent book on EU corruption, he has the greatest archive of investigative files of any journalist working in Brussels.

OLAF was created to replace the old fraud office UCLAF, which was accused of covering up abuses by the disgraced Santer Commission. Many UCLAF staff were transferred to OLAF.

so instead of fixing their shit, or running a tighter ship where people don't leak classified info, they harass this guy for exposing their problems?

i'm sure there's another side to the story (there always is)
but so far it looks pretty bad. i'd never expect it from a western country

however, if he did print classified info, which would be an offence, i suppose, then he should be punished

The European Ombudsman has already come to his defence

What was your point again truth?
Dee Cee

Oh and the Patriot Acts are so NOT fascist! In the US you can say goodbye to the staple of western law, Habeus Corpus. Men in the US have been known to stay up to months without legal aid. So before you call Europeans Gestapo's do look in the mirror. It may amaze you!

Hey undecided- you might find it interesting to read some Howard Zinn. In a wee book of some essays i read yesterday, he often mentions times when the US gvt has chucked out the first amendment and a variey of other things that normal citizens take for granted.

AS for the EU,. well, its what i would have expected. fortunately, as Dee CEe pointed out, its raised a bit of a ruckus, however, i am not optimistic about real changes happening from this.

he often mentions times when the US gvt has chucked out the first amendment and a variey of other things that normal citizens take for granted.

Against whom though? When? It is very interesting indeed...

Oh and the Patriot Acts are so NOT fascist! In the US you can say goodbye to the staple of western law, Habeus Corpus. Men in the US have been known to stay up to months without legal aid. So before you call Europeans Gestapo's do look in the mirror. It may amaze you!

I never said anything concerning the Patriot Act, thank you for pointing out the irony of so many looking at the EU as a model saint and protector of rights. I disagree with the Patriot Act. The laws contained therein are all things that were on the table before, but 9/11 got it all pushed to the forefront. Yes, sadly, as in Spain, the terrorists affected our society and people reacted by passing the Patriot Act.

I never said anything concerning the Patriot Act, thank you for pointing out the irony of so many looking at the EU as a model saint and protector of rights.

The level of extrajudicial activity btwn the US and the EU, there is really no compare. The US has forfeited its civil liberties, and now you complain about the Europeans. Pot+kettle...

The laws contained therein are all things that were on the table before, but 9/11 got it all pushed to the forefront.

What do you by this though? Put on the table? Whose table? Before 9.11 there was no need for this law, do explain.

Undecided, it's "habeas" with an a, not a u, and... what does this "great staple" have to do with "legal aid"?
I assume that you mean counsel by "legal aid," and, well, 'you should have the body' (http://encyclopedia.com/html/h1/habeasco.asp) has jack to do with the right to counsel.

If you're not talking about the right to counsel, but about the real meaning of habeas corpus, then... well... it takes time for a writ to go through and be approved. That's why it takes months in some cases.



Recently, however, I did take a look at a text of the Patriot Acts, and I'm sorry to admit that a few of the anti-terroristic measures do seem constitutionally dubious... :bugeye:

What I meant to have a right to have a trail in the approiate time ,and to have the right legal conucil which are being denied to American citizens who are believed to be part of terrorist organizations:

http://web.amnesty.org/pages/guantanamobay-index-eng


Detentions in the USA in the aftermath of the 11 September 2001 attacks

Some 1,200 foreign nationals – most of them Muslim men of Arab or South Asian origin – were arrested during investigations into the 11 September attacks. More than 700 were held for routine visa violations, many under a regulation allowing the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) to hold individuals for an extended period without charge. Many were denied prompt access to attorneys and some remained in custody for months pending "clearance" by the government even after immigration judges had granted them bail or issued them with deportation or "voluntary departure" orders. There were also reports of ill-treatment of detainees, including verbal and physical abuse, prolonged solitary confinement, and heavy shackling of detainees during visits and court appearances.

There was continued concern at the secrecy surrounding the detentions. In August, a federal judge ordered the government to release the names and places of detention of all INS detainees held in the post-September 11 investigations, in a case brought by a consortium of human rights groups, including AI, under the Freedom of Information Act. The order was stayed pending an appeal by the government.

In October a federal appeals court ruled that the government had acted lawfully in ordering hundreds of deportation hearings to be held behind closed doors in so-called "special interest" cases. Legal challenges to this process continued.

In September the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights requested that the US government take urgent "precautionary measures" to "protect the fundamental rights of the 9/11 detainees ordered deported or granted voluntary departure".

An inquiry set up by the Justice Department's Office of Inspector General into the treatment of the detainees had still not reported by the end of the year. Their probe included a review of conditions in two New Jersey jails, which an AI delegation had visited in February and reported on, and in the federal Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC), New York, where more than 40 detainees were held in an isolation unit. The authorities rejected AI's request to visit the MDC.

By the end of the year most detainees arrested during the initial sweeps had been deported or released or were charged with crimes which were unrelated to 11 September or to "terrorism". The Justice Department reported in early December that only six of the 765 people detained on immigration charges in the above sweeps remained in custody and 500 had been deported; 134 others were arrested on federal criminal charges and 99 convicted. An earlier review by the Washington Post found that at least 44 people had been arrested and detained in the probes as "material witnesses" but no information was provided by the Justice Department on these cases. Some people were deported to countries, including Pakistan, Egypt and Yemen, where it was feared they were at risk of human rights abuses, including incommunicado detention and torture.

Human rights and immigrant groups expressed concern about the discriminatory nature of a new federal order requiring males aged 16 and over from designated Arab and Muslim countries and North Korea who did not have permanent US resident status to register with the INS to be interviewed, fingerprinted and photographed. Several hundred Middle Eastern men and boys who complied with the first round of registrations in December were detained for alleged visa irregularities and many were subjected to harsh treatment, including being placed in handcuffs and leg shackles and held in cold cells with inadequate clothing or blankets; some were reportedly moved around different facilities without an opportunity to contact lawyers or relatives. Although most were released after a few days, many faced deportation hearings, including people who reportedly had a claim to lawful status at the time of their arrest.


http://web.amnesty.org/report2003/Usa-summary-eng

"but so far it looks pretty bad. i'd never expect it from a western country"

I think, the only country that may not do such things could be UK to its white folks. Rest are fair game in these days due to the decline of Judeo-Christian values. People are nastier these days everywhere, growing up in a one family or no family environment. In Oklahoma, the divorce rate is 70% and people stay mad or drunk 24/7.