New law has gray areas

Recently, as another part of the domestic war on terrorism, Attorney General John Ashcroft pushed through a new exception that would allow prison officials to listen in on conversations between inmates and their lawyers, and disreguard the attorney-client priviledge.\n Attorney-client privilege is a tool used by every lawyer to make sure he or she can get all the facts straight before going to court. It's something defendants use to feel completely comfortable when they are talking to their lawyers. It's something that has been a part of civil liberties for many years, and it is something we should not to tamper with. Like many parts of the new anti-terrorist legislation that was recently pushed through, this too is a very frightening attack on our rights.\nAccording to the Los Angeles Times, "whenever there is a 'reasonable suspicion' that inmates will 'pass messages through their attorneys' that could further a terrorist plot, the government will listen in, Ashcroft said." \nA reasonable idea, and in case there is actually a terrorist trying to commit a terrorist act through communications with his attorney, it might save a lot of lives.\nBut there are a lot of gray areas here. What exactly is 'reasonable suspicion'? And who is to say that they won't start using this power to listen in on other conversations between an attorney and his client? So far, there are already 13 inmates being affected by this new law, none of which were detained since the Sept. 11 attacks.\nThere is already an exception to the attorney client privilege that permits the lawyer to reveal any information divulged about a client's undertaking to commit a crime or fraud. If a client tells his attorney he is going to kill someone or blow up a building, the client is not protected.\nBut supporters of the new allowance say the inmates might not be the only ones involved in the terrorist plots. "Just because you have a law degree doesn't mean you won't be sympathetic to [Osama] bin Laden and Al Qaeda," said Stewart A. Baker in the LA Times article. Baker served in both the Bush and Clinton administrations.\nAgain, there is currently a law in place that allows for wiretapping between a client and his attorney if the government has probable cause. Officials simply have to convince a judge that the two are involved in a plot. The new rule, like many others passed after Sept. 11, circumvents the normal investigative process. They do not need probable cause to listen in on those conversations anymore, just 'reasonable suspicion.'\nIn America, we pride our justice system on giving everyone a fair chance. In theory, we never arrest anyone without some prior evidence, and we assume people are innocent until proven guilty. By pushing this kind of measure through, Ashcroft is choosing to ignore the basis of our justice system and our civil liberties.\nStaff vote: 10 - 5 - 1\nyes - no - abstain