Stewart, 65, was one of the attorneys from 1994 to 2002 for Sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was convicted on frame-up charges of conspiracy to bomb the World Trade Center in 1993 and attack other city landmarks. Abdel-Rahman was sentenced to life in prison plus 65 years, and is being held at the maximum security prison in Florence, Colorado.

Attorney General John Ashcroft himself announced the charges against Stewart on April 9, 2002, alleging that she had violated the 1996 Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, passed under the Clinton administration. Washington charged her both with “providing material support for terrorist activity” and with aiding a terrorist organization by “conspiring” to help her client. In July 2003 U.S. District Judge John Koetl threw out the latter charge.

Charged along with Stewart are Mohammed Yousry, an Arabic interpreter, and Ahmed Abdel Sattar, a paralegal to Abdel-Rahman.

The government’s case has hinged on what it calls Stewart’s “world view.” Federal prosecutor Andrew Dembar took Stewart’s remark in her testimony that she supported a “people’s revolution” and did not condemn the use of violence as evidence of violent intent. In its effort to paint her with the brush of “terrorism,” the prosecution presented to the court a written version of a 1998 CNN report that two of Abdel-Rahman’s sons were believed to have joined Osama bin Laden’s forces.

The judge twice instructed the jurors that bin Laden is not charged with Stewart as a co-conspirator in the case.

Stewart pleaded not guilty to all charges. When the case began, Stewart said, she wasn’t sure about going public, but as support for her case developed she came to “relish the fight.” If convicted on all five counts against her, she faces up to 35 years in prison. She said she was able to speak about the conditions of discrimination and oppression in the United States. She said she took particular pleasure in finding a way to mention the case of Leonard Peltier, the American Indian activist who has been held in U.S. prisons for nearly 30 years on frame-up charges of killing an FBI agent.

“The government opened the door to discussing what I stand for,” Stewart said in a November 15 interview with the Militant, “and we kicked it wide open.”

Asked in court about an interview she had given to the New York Times in 1995, Stewart said she stood by what she has said publicly about her views.

“I am a revolutionary with a small ‘R’…I do believe that basic change is necessary,” she testified in court.

“I think some of it will be accomplished nonviolently such as the fact that my granddaughter now plays NCAA basketball and maybe can play in Madison Square Garden someday. That revolution happened nonviolently,” she said, referring to the civil rights movement.

“I think to rid ourselves of the entrenched voracious type of capitalism that is in this country that perpetuates sexism and racism, I don’t think that can come nonviolently.”

When she was asked on the witness stand whether she supports “terrorist violence,” she responded, “No, because it’s basically anarchistic. It is not directed against institutions or—it is directed against civilians and therefore it cannot be excused. Those are not legitimate targets.”

Stewart said she has spoken to community organizations and others throughout the United States. The terms of her bail made it necessary for her to request permission to leave the New York area. But as the invitations for Stewart to speak started to pour in, the judge decided it would no longer be necessary for her to seek permission to travel within the continental United States, she said. Her case has won formal backing from the National Lawyers Guild, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and supporters attend the court daily to show support for her fight.

Stewart is also charged with violation of Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) that Washington has imposed on Abdel-Rahman in its effort to dehumanize and break the cleric. These measures include restrictions on his access to mail, telephones, and visitors, and a prohibition on his speaking to the media.

The prosecution is basing much of its case on a press release she issued on Abdel-Rahman’s behalf to an Egyptian journalist in 2000. Testifying in the trial of Mohammed Yousry, former attorney general Ramsey Clark, one of Abdel-Rahman’s attorneys, said he, like Stewart, had issued press statements on his client’s behalf. Clark has not been indicted.

Stewart said she is not guilty of the SAMs charge because, like Clark, she was fulfilling her obligation as an attorney to her client. By getting his message out, she said, she was able to keep his case alive and help expose both his prison conditions and the charges on which he was convicted. She pointed to the ethical rules that lawyers are required to follow to “zealously represent clients” as the basis for her actions, not any effort to promote “terrorism.”

“These SAMs regulations are used in a conscious way to silence political people,” like Abdel-Rahman, said Stewart.

When the trial began June 22 the government opened an attack on freedom of the press by issuing subpoenas to four reporters to testify in the trial. All four—from Reuters, the New York Times, and New York Newsday—challenged the validity of the government move. The prosecution’s plan was to use the reporters’ coverage of Stewart’s activities as an attorney against her. In July the judge deferred any decision on the subpoenas until later in the trial, and the issue remains open.

Wiretapping of Stewart’s communication with her client is central to the case against her. Early on prosecutors acknowledged, “intercepted calls form the backbone of the government case.” Since October 2001 the Justice Department has been allowed to conduct surveillance of those in custody with their attorneys without judicial oversight.

“Ashcroft thought I’d cave in or wouldn’t get support,” said Stewart. “Instead I’ve been able to speak out across the country, receive media coverage, and meet others who support my case.”
 
 
Related articles:
Defend Lynne Stewart!  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home