 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
June 9, 2005 Testing
limits of free speech When most people think of terrorism, they envision car bombs exploding at military checkpoints and suicide bombers on pedestrian buses. But in a landmark case heard in Trenton, six animal-rights activists are being tried for terrorism, reportedly for encouraging illegal activity at a New Jersey-based animal-testing lab. The expected eight-week trial of alleged members of the U.S. chapter of Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) involves federal charges under the expanded 2002 Animal Enterprise Protection Act. But it actually will test the limits of what is - and is not - protected free speech. The government has accused the defendants of threats and harassment aimed at closing Huntingdon Life Sciences Ltd., a British company whose lab in East Millstone, N.J., tests chemicals and drugs on dogs, monkeys and rats and other animals. The charges include operating a Web site, publishing a newsletter, and organizing demonstrations. Assistant U.S. Attorney Charles McKenna contends the defendants are guilty of a criminal conspiracy to economically harm Huntingdon. The stakes are high: up to 23 years in jail for each of the accused. In our post-9/11, Patriot Act era, a wide range of activities have been branded with the "terrorist" label, including political activism - particularly activism on behalf of animal rights. At a congressional hearing in May, animal and environmental activists were declared the nation's top domestic terrorist organizations, despite the fact that neither group has harmed a single person in their decades-long histories. Right-wing groups, whose supporters have murdered abortion doctors, blown up federal buildings, and brutalized African Americans, received barely a mention. The activists standing trial in Trenton have not done anything so threatening. A federal indictment, handed down in May 2004, alleges that the defendants encouraged illegal activity against Huntingdon by publishing news reports about demonstrations, vandalism, and other actions taken against Huntingdon and its business partners. The indictment also alleges that the defendants' organized, four-year protest campaign has economically hurt Huntingdon by convincing numerous investors and customers to stop working with the lab. While this is true - the lab currently is $84 million in debt - we need look no further than the rich tradition of boycotts that helped secure the rights of migrant workers, sweatshop laborers, and African Americans to realize that First Amendment activity that harms a business economically is still protected activity. And it is - unless your cause is animal rights. The growing crackdown on free speech is not just limited to the defendants in Trenton. I should know: In October my home was raided by 16 armed Joint Terrorism Task Force and FBI agents. Seven months later, the computers, poetry, photos, passport, and other personal items that they took still have not been returned. The FBI refuses to reveal why the raid was done, stating that I am "under investigation" but not saying what the investigation is about. I am an organizer with a local animal-rights group called Hugs for Puppies, and I know the raid has to do with my work conducting demonstrations on behalf of animals. Other animal advocates in the Philadelphia area have received visits from the FBI, been detained at airports by the Department of Homeland Security, had their telephones and e-mail accounts tapped, and had undercover agents enter their homes. The Pennsylvania Senate is even considering an "ecoterrorism" bill that would declare as terrorism any action that disrupts the activities of a business using animals. The trial of the SHAC activists will be watched closely by civil-liberties advocates and political activists of all stripes. When protected speech and protest activity are assailed as terrorism, and federal charges carrying two decades in jail are levied against those who fail to fall in line, we as a country have reached a low point in our protection of those rights we claim to hold so dearly. As Franklin D. Roosevelt said, "If the fires of freedom and civil liberties burn low in other lands, they must be made brighter in our own. If in other lands the press and books and literature of all kinds are censored, we must redouble our efforts here to keep them free."
|
