Amnesty Int'l cites media protection

Amnesty International, citing a federal court ruling, said it has the same protection against revealing sources as journalists do when it reports on human rights abuses.

The human rights organization on Wednesday praised a decision by Magistrate Judge Viktor V. Pohorelsky, saying he had affirmed its right to protect its confidential sources and investigative research under journalists' privilege.

In his Monday ruling, Pohorelsky decided what The New York Times and Amnesty International must reveal to lawyers for Sept. 11 detainees who sued a federal lockup in Brooklyn. The lawyers claim the government unfairly eavesdropped on their conversations with clients.

Lawyers for government officials responsible for the jail sought testimony and evidence from The Times and Amnesty International to try to prove that defense lawyers knew about the surveillance more than three years before they sued. They hoped to show the statute of limitations had expired.

Pohorelsky did not have to decide whether Amnesty International was protected by privilege; lawyers in the case agreed that it was. But he did consider what evidence would be turned over using legal factors required by journalists' privilege.

Wallace Neel, a lawyer representing Amnesty International, said the decision would set a precedent for human rights groups that must rely on help from victims of abuse. In researching the subject, he said, he found no other court had addressed the issue.

"This is the first judicial recognition of what they have long believed was their right, the right of any journalist to protect their confidential sources," Neel said. "With that protection in place, their ability to fulfill their mission is greatly aided."

New York Times lawyer David McCraw said the newspaper had not decided whether to appeal the magistrate judge's finding that a reporter might have to testify on whether the term "watchful eye" uttered by a lawyer might indicate the lawyer knew surveillance existed.

Raymond Granger, a lawyer for the defendant, a former regional director of the federal prison, said he was pleased the judge "found that we had overcome the assertions of privilege with respect to some of the information and materials we had sought."

The First Amendment privilege protects journalists from litigants who Pohorelsky said might want to rummage through press files when lawyers think information held by reporters might help their cases.

___

On the Net:

http://www.amnesty.org/