archive-org.com » ORG » C » CHARITYANDSECURITY.ORG

Total: 1481

Choose link from "Titles, links and description words view":

Or switch to "Titles and links view".
  • UN Report Urges for More Transparency During De-Listing Process | Charity & Security Network
    cooperation by UN member countries and other changes throughout the process The Security Council said the Ombudsperson position is likely to be extended beyond its initial 18 month mandate and that a response to its report would be issued in June As part of UN Resolution 1904 the Ombudsperson position was created in 2009 and was charged with improving the process by which individuals or groups could be removed from the UN s consolidated terrorist lists Improvements for the de listing process recommended by the Ombudsperson include Increasing cooperation from all UN countries in evaluating de listing applications including identifying the source that proposed the listing Ensuring persons or entities either de listed or incorrectly included on a list e g person with the same name as a listed person are unburdened from financial and travel restrictions Improving notification process to de listed parties including providing a reason for the delisting Resolution 1904 improves upon Resolution 1267 which created the Consolidation List of those suspected of being involved with Osama bin Laden Al Qaeda or the Taliban Sanctions imposed on those listed include the freezing of assets and travel restrictions The listing process has been criticized for violating human rights including the right to adequate notice and opportunity to defend Resolution 1904 sought to cure these problems by making changes in the listing and delisting process and by requiring periodic review of the list to remove deceased persons and others who should no longer be on it Issues Humanitarian Access Material Support Financial Action Task Force FATF Financial Access Peacebuilding Countering Violent Extremism Click Here For More Issues Solutions Principles to Guide Solutions Models to Draw On Proposed Solutions News The latest headlines Resources Litigation Analysis Background Legislation Studies Reports Experts Blog About Us Staff Contact Search form Search Stay

    Original URL path: http://www.charityandsecurity.org/news/UN_Report_Transparency_During_DeListing_Process (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive


  • State Department’s Decision about De-Listing MEK to be Made Before Year’s End | Charity & Security Network
    group appeal its designation It s been past 120 days it s now 230 days is the State Department going to take them off the list And if they are when And if they re not when When are you all going to make a decision Poe asked Benjamin replied that the State Department is working as expeditiously as possible to complete the review that the U S Court of Appeals ordered and an answer was likely to be made in less than six months He added As recently as April 6th we received new material from MEK counsel And we are reviewing it And just as fast as we can we are going to get a recommendation package to the Secretary and have a decision made Despite Poe describing the problem as one the State Department can resolve and is within the State Department s power to resolve Poe introduced a bill HR 60 in January that calls on the Secretary of State to take the MEK off the FTO list The introduction of the bill underscores the red flags civil rights and civil liberties advocates have raised about the fundamental problems with the listing process both at State and at the Treasury Department Significant due process violations including improper designations and illegal seizure of private property in Treasury s investigations of two U S charities KindHearts for Charitable and Humanitarian Development and Al Haramain Oregon have been recognized by federal courts In both cases a U S District Court ruled that Treasury s action violated the organizations Fifth Amendment rights and potentially their Fourth Amendment rights as well After Treasury s actions both charities have been effectively shut down despite neither facing criminal charges The counterterrorism legal framework denies charities due process exposing them to mistake and abuse

    Original URL path: http://www.charityandsecurity.org/news/State_Decision_DeListing_MEK_ (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Government Tells Judges Giving Reasons for Shutting Down Charities "Too Burdensome” | Charity & Security Network
    potentially their Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable seizure of its assets The case involved multiple issues and both sides appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals The primary questions on appeal listed in the Appellant s opening brief Whether Treasury s failure to provide Al Haramain Islamic Foundation Inc AHIF Oregon with notice and a meaningful opportunity to respond in connection with the indefinite freeze of all its assets was a violation of fundamental due process rights was excusable as harmless Whether indefinite freezing of assets without a court order violated the Fourth Amendment Whether Treasury s reliance on classified evidence without arrangements for AHIF s attorneys to view it violated due process During the argument which can viewed on CSPAN U S Attorney David Letter told the court it would be too burdensome view video at 41 15 to notify every one of the estimated 10 000 people and groups on the terrorist lists of the reasons for the listing Two of the three judges questioned him about this with Judge Sidney Thomas asking Why should I have to guess In rebuttal Prof David Cole attorney for AHIF said the vast majority of people and groups on the list are not tied to the U S and due process requirements do not apply to them There are less than 50 charities worldwide on the lists and only nine U S based charities have been shut down Letter also told the court that AHIF is a key supporter of Al Qaida a claim the group denies Cole told the court All we are seeking is a fair shot Further details of the argument can be found in this Associated Pre s s story Issues Humanitarian Access Material Support Financial Action Task Force FATF Financial Access Peacebuilding Countering Violent Extremism

    Original URL path: http://www.charityandsecurity.org/news/Government_Tells_Judges_Charities_Too_Burdensome (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Al-Haramain v. Obama Decision Holds Wiretap of Charity Illegal | Charity & Security Network
    included a classified document indicating the telephone conversations between the plaintiffs Six weeks later the government realized its mistake and sent FBI agents to retrieve the document however two AHIF officials in Saudi Arabia retained their copies A copy of the document was filed with the original complaint however in a subsequent decision by the Ninth Circuit Court in 2009 the document was excluded from the complaint entirely After the District Court accepted an amended complaint without the document Judge Walker ruled that there was no genuine issue to be decided at trial and that AHIF succeeded on the merits of their claim The court now is waiting for a submission by AHIF on whether to proceed with the other claims in the case or to dismiss the claims and proceed to a request for damages from the government Al Haramain is one of dozens of lawsuits derived from the Terrorist Surveillance Program TSP which authorized warrantless wiretapping of United States citizens during the Bush administration but is the only one to survive dismissal by the courts The Impact of the Case The case marked the first time the Obama administration invoked the States Secret Privilege SSP a tactic often used by the Bush administration in lawsuits over various post 9 11 programs Invoking the SSP over reasons of national security was the Obama administrations attempt to dismiss the lawsuit rather than deal with difficult questions of the legality of the TSP Many liberals were outraged when the Obama administration adopted the same position as the Bush administration in the case after Senator Obama declared as a presidential candidate that warrantless surveillance of Americans was unconstitutional and illegal Now it remains to be seen how the DOJ will proceed with the case facing a very difficult decision to risk an

    Original URL path: http://www.charityandsecurity.org/background/Al_Haramain_v_Obama_Illegal_Wiretapping_Charitys_Lawyers (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • UN Approves Reforms for Listing and Delisting on Terrorist List | Charity & Security Network
    improves upon Resolution 1267 which created the Consolidation List of those suspected of being involved with Osama bin Laden Al Qaeda or the Taliban Sanctions imposed on those listed include asset freezes and travel restrictions The listing process has been criticized for violating human rights including the right to adequate notice and opportunity to defend In 2008 the European Court of Justice ruled the process violated is human rights standards in Kadi Al Barakaat v Council of the European Union and EC Commission Resolution 1904 seeks to cure these problems by making changes in the listing and delisting process and by requiring periodic review of the list to remove deceased persons and others who should no longer be on it It also provides for expedited consideration of humanitarian exemptions Changes to the listing process include Ensuring that member states provided the Sanctions Committee with as much relevant information as possible to ensure accurate listing A requirement that the UN s Sanctions Committee post a narrative summary of reasons for listing on its website Changes to the delisting process are the most significant part of the Resolution including Periodic review of list which would Complete a review of all names on the list by the Sanctions Committee by June 30 2010 and conduct annual review of names that have not been reviewed in over 3 years after that point Extend the New York Monitoring team established in 2004 for 18 additional months Create an Office of Ombudsperson for an initial 18 months to assist Sanctions Committee in de listing individuals The Ombudsperson will be selected by the Security General and be an eminent individual of high moral character impartiality and integrity with high qualifications and experience in relevant fields such as legal human rights counter terrorism and sanctions Detailed procedures for

    Original URL path: http://www.charityandsecurity.org/news/UN_Approves_Reforms_Listing_Delisting_List (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Judicial Review for Charities Working in UK | Charity & Security Network
    Seevaratnam from his post as a trustee was overturned by the First tier Tribunal of London Tribunal The Charity Commission a regulator on UK based charities claimed that Seevaratnam had not adequately disassociated himself and the London area temple Sivayogam from the activities of the Tamil Tigers Despite the Tribunal determining that Seevaratnam had engaged in certain misconduct and mismanagement the decision found the evidence did not warrant his removal The Tribunal was most concerned regarding the exonerating evidence brought by Seevaratnam that was not even translated into English by the Charity Commission A spokesman for the Charity Commission said they will be issuing an inquiry report in due course Issues Humanitarian Access Material Support Financial Action Task Force FATF Financial Access Peacebuilding Countering Violent Extremism Click Here For More Issues Solutions Principles to Guide Solutions Models to Draw On Proposed Solutions News The latest headlines Resources Litigation Analysis Background Legislation Studies Reports Experts Blog About Us Staff Contact Search form Search Stay Up To Date Subscribe Publications The Latest News C SN Joins More Than 50 Orgs in Raising Concerns About UN s Work on Preventing Violent Extremism February 8 2016 New Budget Language Intended to Rein In Partner

    Original URL path: http://www.charityandsecurity.org/news/judicial_review_UK (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • Appeals Court Declines to Rule on Constitutionality of Presidential Power to Shut Down Charities | Charity & Security Network
    charities is freezing and seizing assets effectively shutting them down There is not a preliminary phase where enforcement is threatened since Treasury applies full sanctions pending investigation see KindHearts case information The court s opinion ignores this fact The court also declined to consider the constitutionality of Treasury s licensing regulations that allow it to grant exceptions to IEEPA s ban on transactions with terrorist organizations because HLP had not applied for or been denied a license to carry out its human rights programs The Secretary of Treasury s designation authority grant by EO 13224 was held not unconstitutionally vague because it is aimed at stopping aid to terrorists a purpose unrelated to the content of the expression The court also notes that a Treasury designation is subject to reconsideration after which a written decision must be furnished and are subject to judicial review These minimal legal processes were held to be a denial of due process by the court in KindHearts The court found that including the term services in the definition of prohibited material support is sufficiently clear because Treasury regulations provide examples These include legal accounting financial brokering freight forwarding transportation public relations educational or other services 31 CFR 594 406 b The court goes on to say that The examples take out the guesswork that troubled us in HLP III which considered the term service as defined in AEDPA and found it to be unconstitutionally vague In language that may provide some comfort to nonprofits the court said that HLP is concerned that the term could ensnare independent advocacy undertaken for the benefit of the PKK and LTTE It would undoubtedly offend the First Amendment if the regulations were to prohibit independent advocacy However they don t And we see no basis for supposing that they

    Original URL path: http://www.charityandsecurity.org/news/Appeals_Declines_Rule_Constitutionality_Presidential_Power_Shut_Charities (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive

  • KindHearts Settlement Ends Litigation | Charity & Security Network
    on its face in all cases it is unconstitutionally vague as applied to KindHearts The definitions of the terms services otherwise associated with and material support in IEEPA are not unconstitutionally vague The lack of an intent to support terrorism requirement in E O 13224 does not make the statute unconstitutionally vague The court s reasoning a OFAC s authority is not criminal in nature nor does it regulate free speech A successful general constitutional challenge to IEEPA must show the statute is impermissibly vague in all its applications unless the statute is of a criminal nature and implicates protected conduct under the First Amendment Citing U S v Salerno 481 U S 739 745 1987 p 45 Reasoning that there is no First Amendment right to support terrorists the court held that OFAC s blocking and designation authorities do not substantially implicate protected speech Moreover OFAC s authority results in civil as opposed to criminal sanctions Therefore in order to challenge IEEPA on its face plaintiffs must show the statute is impermissibly vague in all its applications KindHearts did not do so b OFAC s authority to block freeze assets pending investigation is not unconstitutionally vague on its face however it is unconstitutionally vague as applied to KindHearts Earlier in the decision the court found the KindHearts asset freeze was a seizure under the Fourth Amendment As a result the a pplication of the Fourth Amendment to blocks pending investigation provides the criteria otherwise unavailable under the IEEPA and E O 13224 for such seizures p 53 Because OFAC must show probable cause that KindHearts violated the prohibitions in IEEPA and E O 13224 before freezing its pending investigation the court rejected KindHeart s argument that OFAC s authority is unfettered or unconstitutionally vague in all cases However because OFAC failed to follow the Fourth Amendment in imposing the freeze pending investigation in KindHearts s case OFAC s authority was unconstitutionally vague as applied to them c The criteria for designation is not unconstitutionally vague E O 13224 Section 1 d i ii authorizes the Secretary of Treasury to designate entities that assist in sponsor or provide financial material or technological support for or financial or other services to in support of or are otherwise associated with individuals or groups designated as foreign terrorists p 53 KindHearts argued that E O 13224 is unconstitutionally vague because it lacks an intent requirement and the terms services otherwise associated with and material support in IEEPA are unconstitutionally vague on their face The court concluded lack of an intent requirement does not make an otherwise clear statute unconstitutionally vague p 60 Other courts have struck down the definition of services under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 AEDPA as unconstitutionally vague because the term included expert advice or assistance which the courts held reaches protected First Amendment activity See Humanitarian Law Project v Mukasey 509 F 3d 1122 1136 9th Cir 2007 The court noted that in contrast to AEDPA the absence of expert advice or assistance in E O 13224 s definition of services persuaded other courts adjudicating the same issue under IEEPA to uphold the constitutionality of the term against vagueness challenges See e g Al Haramain Islamic Foundation Inc v U S Dept of Treasury 585 F Supp 2d 1233 D Or 2008 Therefore the common meaning of services in E O 13224 sufficiently constrains executive discretion thereby overcoming KindHearts vagueness challenge With regard to material support the court rejected plaintiffs contention that two different definitions of the same term in the Immigration and Naturalization Act INA and AEDPA makes the term unconstitutionally vague Rather the court concludes existing case law and common meaning provide a broad concept of material support that is sufficiently clear including the giving of funds As a result the court rejected KindHeart s facial challenge Similarly the court rejected plaintiff s vagueness challenge to the term otherwise associated based on the phrase s arguable inclusion of First Amendment protected speech and association The court was satisfied that the recently adopted definition in 31 C F R 594 316 limited its applicability to protected speech and conduct That definition states the term to be otherwise associated with as used in Sec 594 201 a 4 ii means a To own or control or b To attempt or to conspire with one or more persons to act for or on behalf of or to provide financial material or technological support or financial or other services to Was KindHearts denied due process when OFAC issued a blocking order The court found that OFAC s actions regarding the KindHearts asset freezing order failed to provide meaningful notice and an opportunity to be heard in violation of KindHearts due process rights IEEPA s Section 1702 a 1 B authority to block assets pending an investigation is not unconstitutional on its face in all cases The absence of a notice requirement an opportunity to be heard or pre or post deprivation process in IEEPA is not unconstitutional on its face in all cases The court cannot yet determine the extent to which KindHearts has been prejudiced by the violation of its constitutional rights and ordered further hearings The court s reasoning While IEEPA does not require OFAC to provide any process to an American corporation before it freezes its assets IEEPA can be applied constitutionally For instance OFAC could have but did not provide adequate notice of the blocking action specify any objective criteria for blocking KindHearts assets promptly give KindHearts the unclassified administrative record on which it relied in taking its blocking action and provide a prompt post deprivation hearing Because OFAC could have provided these steps the court held that OFAC s authority under IEEPA to freeze assets pending an investigation is not unconstitutional on its face in all cases However the manner in which OFAC applied its blocking authority pending investigation to KindHearts resulted in a violation of its due process rights The court

    Original URL path: http://www.charityandsecurity.org/litigation/KindHearts_Ruling_Summary (2016-02-16)
    Open archived version from archive



  •