"Imams' suit risks 'chill' on security"

Friday, March 16, 2007

Imams' suit risks 'chill' on security
By Audrey Hudson
The Washington (DC) Times


Six imams who are suing an airline and an airport for removing them from a
flight also have aimed the lawsuit at passengers who the imams believe
reported some of their activities. 

The suit filed this week in U.S. District Court in Minneapolis names as
defendants "John Does" who "contacted US Airways to report the alleged
suspicious behavior" of the imams before the Nov. 20 flight -- an inclusion
some lawyers, who are not connected to the litigation, say will have a
"chilling effect" on airline security.
 
"If such a suit could proceed, it would have a chilling effect on the
willingness of people to provide information that authorities need to act
when people are engaged in wrongdoing," said Mark Behrens, a liability
defense lawyer with the Washington firm of Shook, Hardy & Bacon. 

"If reporting suspicious behavior becomes actionable, that could have a
dangerous precedent for reporting other crimes, like child abuse and
abductions," Mr. Behrens said. "It's certainly a form of intimidation to go
after passengers." 

The lawsuit primarily targets US Airways and the Minneapolis-St. Paul
Metropolitan Airports Commission, but suing passengers who report suspicious
behavior "sends a terrible message if we are at all concerned about the
threat of terrorism," said Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the Manhattan
Institute and author of several books on litigation in the U.S. 

"The implications are that if you appear to just buzz about what you
perceive to be a security threat then you are a legal wrongdoer and
responsible for damages, even if all you did was notify the authorities. And
that would have a tremendous chilling effect, win or lose. 

"Unless this is thrown out of court early, the lesson learned will be that
next time someone sees something, it may be safer to stay quiet and hope
someone else reports it. Even if the charges get thrown out or dropped, this
is an announcement that you could be caught up in litigation for years and
spending your savings on lawyers." 

The lawsuit sets out that "plaintiffs are unaware of the true names and
capacities of defendants sued herein as John Does and therefore sue said
defendants by such fictitious names. Plaintiffs will seek leave to amend
this complaint to allege true names, capacities, and circumstances
supporting the liability of said defendants at such time as plaintiffs
ascertain the same." 

Three of the imams said they "noticed an older couple was sitting behind
them and purposely turning around to watch the other plaintiffs as they
prayed together" and that the man "picked up his cellular phone and made a
phone call while watching the plaintiffs pray." 

"Defendant John Doe moved to a corner near Gate C9. While observing the
plaintiffs discreetly, he kept talking into his cellular phone," the lawsuit
sets out. 

The plaintiffs' lawyer, Omar Mohammedi, declined to comment except to say
they are not naming passengers at this time.
 
"Once you have discovery or find out what happened, then we will name them,
then you will know who these people are," he said. "I'm not saying
passengers, not saying employees or anything at this point. It is our
decision at some point if we have enough grounds or evidence to go after
them, or whether there is not enough grounds." 

The imams' prayer was reported by the gate agent, who told police "I was
suspicious by the way they were praying very loud." Another flight attendant
said she noticed three to four people praying but did not consider it
unusual. 

One passenger said the men were near the ticket counter and "seemed angry,"
and engaged in a "heated discussion" about the U.S. "killing Saddam"
Hussein, and then shouting "Allah, Allah, Allah" when called for boarding. 

Passengers and the flight crew say the men were disruptive and did not take
their assigned seats and formed a pattern similar to the September 11
hijackers. Some of the men asked for seat-belt extensions they did not need,
criticized the war in Iraq and President Bush, and talked about al Qaeda and
Osama bin Laden. 

The men were escorted off Flight 300 to Phoenix, handcuffed briefly, then
searched and questioned for several hours by airport police and members of
the Joint Terrorism Task Force. 

The lawsuit does not address the actual claims made by passengers and the
flight crew in reports filed by law-enforcement officers, except for the
request of seat-belt extenders. The questions presented in the lawsuit
reflect specific charges of each man's behavior reported by passengers and
the flight crew. 

The imams who filed the lawsuit are Omar Shahin, Ahmed Shqeirat, Didmar
Faja, Mahmoud Sulaiman and Marwan Sadeddin of Arizona, and Mohamed Ibrahim
of California. 

The lawsuit says each man was asked separately whether they liked President
Bush and whether they "would like the president to be harmed," and all
responded no. 

Mr. Shqeirat was asked "questions about his background including where he
was from, his Social Security number, address and whether he did anything
out of the ordinary at the airport." He was further asked "whether he moved
from his seat," the lawsuit said. 

Mr. Shahin was asked "about his background and inquired into his national
origin, his citizenship and the school in which he taught in Jordan. They
asked him about the conference he was attending in Minneapolis. The Secret
Service asked Plaintiff Shahin whether he had discussed Saddam Hussein and
Iraq while on the plane. 

"The FBI asked Mr. Faja about himself, including his activities and the
mosques to which he belonged." The FBI asked Mr. Sadeddin if he was blind,
based on the report by a flight attendant that he "pretended to be blind." 

The lawsuit further said: "The FBI read [Mr. Sadeddin] his rights and asked
him about his life, activities, where he was born, where he prayed, where he
lived in the Middle East and when he got his citizenship. They also asked
him about his views on U.S. foreign policy and Saddam Hussein. 

"The FBI and Secret Service repeated the same procedure with Plaintiffs
Ibrahim and Sulaiman each time questioning them about their backgrounds and
asking them whether they wanted to see the U.S. President harmed." 

 Do you have an opinion about this story?
Share it with other readers in our CAA Discussion Forums

http://www.californiaaviation.org/dcfp/dcboard.php


*****************************************