Letter to AG Mukasey Regarding Special Administrative Measures on Syed Fahad Hashmi

Sayed Fahad Hashmi, a 28 year-old Amer­ican of Pakistani decent who was raised in Queens, a borough of New York City, moved to London follow­ing his gradu­ation from Brook­lyn College.  On June 6, 2006, almost three years after moving to London, Mr. Hashmi was arres­ted in the United King­dom based on alleg­a­tions of mater­ial support of terror­ism.  Mr. Hashmi was extra­dited to the United States on May 25, 2007.  Held in pre-trial deten­tion and not sched­uled to appear in court until the spring of 2009, Mr. Hashmi is exper­i­en­cing the cumu­lat­ive psycho­lo­gical impact of solit­ary confine­ment, a condi­tion he has exper­i­enced for the entirety of his confine­ment.  The Bren­nan Center is concerned that the Special Admin­is­trat­ive Meas­ures (“SAMs”) imposed on Mr. Hashmi contin­ues and intens­i­fies the negat­ive effects of his deten­tion on his mental health.  In the Octo­ber 20, 2008 letter to Attor­ney General Muka­sey, which can be found below, the Bren­nan Center urges the AG not to renew the SAMs placed on Mr. Hashmi when they run out on Octo­ber 29, 2008. 

 

Down­load a copy of the letter here.

 

---

Attor­ney General Michael B. Muka­sey

US Depart­ment of Justice  
950

Pennsylvania Ave., NW  
Wash­ing­ton, DC 20530–2000

 

Re:  Reim­pos­i­tion of Special Admin­is­trat­ive Meas­ures on Syed Fahad Hashmi, #60011–054

 

Dear Attor­ney General Muka­sey,

 

The Bren­nan Center for Justice, an organ­iz­a­tion commit­ted to both indi­vidual rights and a safe and free Amer­ica, is gravely concerned about the Special Admin­is­trat­ive Meas­ures (“SAMs”) imposed on Syed Fahad Hashmi and the prospect of their renewal for another calen­dar year.  We ask that you decline to extend the SAMs beyond their current expir­a­tion date of Octo­ber 29, 2008, or, at a minimum, that you decline to extend their most extreme elements, and mitig­ate them to account for their effect on Mr. Hashmi.

 

Mr. Hashmi was arres­ted on June 6, 2006, in the United King­dom, and extra­dited to the United States on May 25, 2007, based on alleg­a­tions of mater­ial support of terror­ism.  He has been in pre-trial deten­tion now for 28 months.  His trial is not sched­uled until the spring of 2009.

 

During the last twelve months of his pretrial confine­ment, Mr. Hashmi has been subject to a highly restrict­ive and de facto punit­ive regime of SAMs.[1]  We are concerned that the cumu­lat­ive psycho­lo­gical impact of the regu­la­tions is so great as to pose a threat to the mental health of any person. 

 

Mr. Hashmi, we under­stand, has been in solit­ary confine­ment for the entirety of his time at the Metro­pol­itan Correc­tional Center, isol­a­tion that the SAMs regime has both contin­ued and intens­i­fied.  The SAMs preclude contact with any visitor except for his attor­neys and his imme­di­ate family.  Permit­ted contact is severely circum­scribed and subject to constant surveil­lance.  His inter­ac­tion with the outside world is severely limited in other ways.  He may not inter­act with the media either directly or through a third party, nor may he listen to tele­vi­sion or radio news programs.  Even his news­pa­pers are delivered on a 30-day delay when he is permit­ted to receive them at all.  In addi­tion to the restric­tions on contact with the world beyond the deten­tion center walls, Mr. Hashmi is forbid­den from commu­nic­at­ing, shar­ing a cell, or worship­ping with fellow inmates.  Indeed, the SAMs provide that he “shall be kept separ­ated from other inmates as much as possible.” 

 

The net effect of these meas­ures has been to condemn Mr. Hashmi to a year of solit­ary confine­ment.  The troub­ling consequence of the SAMs is thus extreme isol­a­tion with predict­able psycho­lo­gical damage and inap­pro­pri­ately coer­cive effects. 

 

Experts and courts alike repeatedly have recog­nized the devast­at­ing effects on an inmate’s mental health wreaked by exten­ded solit­ary confine­ment.  Indeed, the evid­ence that prolonged isol­a­tion can cause severe and irre­vers­ible mental harm is over­whelm­ing.[2]  Absent a lift­ing of or mitig­a­tion of the SAMs, Mr. Hash­mi’s near-abso­lute isol­a­tion will likely continue for some time as he contin­ues to await trial for many months yet. 

 

Further­more, we are concerned that the harsh meas­ures thus far imposed on Mr. Hash­mi’s pretrial deten­tion may, whether inten­tion­ally or inad­vert­ently, have the prac­tical effect of pres­sur­ing him into accept­ing a plea-bargain to which he other­wise might not agree.  SAMs are inten­ded to address partic­u­lar­ized safety-related concerns.  It is highly inap­pro­pri­ate for SAMs to become, either inten­tion­ally or collat­er­ally, a bargain­ing chip in plea nego­ti­ations because they provide the govern­ment with lever­age unre­lated to the scope of crim­inal liab­il­ity that might be imposed at trial.  Further, the SAMs may have the addi­tional consequence of creat­ing an incent­ive to plead guilty so as to secure a post-convic­tion impris­on­ment regime that does not include SAMs.[3] 

 

Pursu­ant to exist­ing regu­la­tions, a renewal of SAMs requires a find­ing that there contin­ues to “be a substan­tial risk that [Mr. Hash­mi’s] commu­nic­a­tions or contact with others could result in death or seri­ous bodily injury to persons, or substan­tial damage to prop­erty that would entail the risk of death or seri­ous bodily injury to persons.”[4]  The mere fact a defend­ant is alleged to have commit­ted a crime that has terror­ism connec­tions, of course, is not and should not be the basis for such a find­ing.  And there is a substan­tial ques­tion whether the facts of the offenses of which Mr. Hashmi alleges bespeak such a risk at all. 

 

It is vital to recall that our Consti­tu­tion compels the conclu­sion that Mr. Hashmi remains inno­cent of the alleg­a­tions leveled against him until proven other­wise, and must be treated as such.  Yet the SAMs create condi­tions of confine­ment that appear noth­ing if not punit­ive.  Because of the severe nature of the SAMs imposed on Mr. Hashmi and their likely detri­mental effect on his mental health we encour­age you to consider care­fully the decision whether their renewal is truly neces­sary. 

 

Thank you for your consid­er­a­tion of our views. 

 

Sincerely,

 

Aziz Huq

Director, Liberty and National Secur­ity

Project