Peoria Journal Star, January 21, 2002

Here is some of what the United States Constitution has to say about when the government can or cannot hold criminal suspects and witnesses.

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury ..."

No one shall "be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law."

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury ... and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation."

The Founding Fathers included those rights in the first 10 amendments to the Constitution because they considered them fundamental to the kind of nation they wanted to create and because they were incensed at English soldiers who plucked colonists from their homes and tossed them in jail without saying why or for how long or what they could do to regain their freedom.

The list of "oppressions" the Declaration of Independence enumerates in its case against King George III includes "send(ing) hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People"; "depriving us, in many Cases, of the Benefits of Trial by Jury"; and "transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended Offences".

In mid-December federal authorities investigating terrorism took a Bradley University student named Ali S. Al-Marri into custody. They haven't said if they suspect the 36-year-old Qatar resident of a crime or believe he knows something about a crime or if he faces trial or deportation. They moved him out of the Peoria (Ill.) County Jail recently but won't say where they took him. Al-Marri is apparently here legally, having returned this fall to his alma mater to pursue a master's degree.

Perhaps federal authorities have strong reason to suspect this married father of five did something terrible and illegal. Then he should be charged and tried. Or maybe they think he witnessed somebody planning something awful, and they want him to testify. Then he should be questioned and protected, if that is advised. Or maybe he just was unlucky enough to be from the wrong place at the wrong time. Then he should be freed.

Or maybe they don't know. That makes it tougher. But the Constitution requires that they make up their minds speedily if he is to be kept in custody. It also raises serious questions about the government's right to jail people in secret places for secret reasons. Courts have held the Constitution protects legal immigrants as well as citizens. Al-Marri is among several hundred people, most of them immigrants from Islamic countries, the federal government has jailed since Sept. 11. How many isn't clear because the government has been reluctant to say. Why is even less clear, and who is largely unknown, unless a neighbor or a family member blabs to a newspaper that a friend or loved one has been whisked away.

The U.S. government is obligated to try to protect its citizens again terrorism, and it is a gross understatement to call that a difficult job.

But it is also obligated to abide by its own Constitution, which was written by men who for good reason feared the power of government to take citizens from their homes by shadow of night and face no public accounting. The founders had it right, and the present-day keepers of the flame are perilously close to getting it wrong.