Lynne Stewart
Lynne Stewart (born October 8, 1939) is an American attorney practising in New York who is known for her political views and her willingness to defend the rights of controversial clients, including those accused of terrorism.
On 10 February, 2005, Stewart was convicted of illegally providing material support to terrorists when acting as counsel to Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind Egyptian cleric who was convicted in 1996 of plotting terrorist attacks against various sites in the New York City area.
Stewart was indicted for alleged criminal activity in April 2002, accused of providing material aid to terrorists, perjury and defrauding the federal government. All the allegations stemmed from an apparent violation of Special Administrative Measures to which Abdel Rahman and his counsel were subject. These measures, which Stewart had accepted in writing in order to be allowed to meet with Abdel Rahman in prison, provided that she would not, "use [their] meetings, correspondence, or phone calls with Abdel Rahman to pass messages between third parties (including, but not limited to, the media) and Abdel Rahman."
Stewart was accused of using her meetings with Abdel Rahman to facilitate communications between Abdel Rahman and members of the Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya (Islamic Group), an Egyptian movement classified as a terrorist organization by the Department of State. Stewart was alleged to have allowed her Arabic translator and co-defendant, Mohammed Yousry, to use her meetings with Abdel Rahman to receive communications to be passed to followers. She was also charged for a press conference at which she released a statement from her client that he was withdrawing support for a cease-fire that Al-Gama'a had previously declared with respect to its efforts against the Egyptian government.
Supporters of Stewart alleged that the Government was charging her for her defense and speech for the rights of her client. They believed that Stewart’s efforts to release communications from her client were part of an appropriate defense method of trying to gain public awareness and support. They also expressed alarm that wiretraps and hidden cameras authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act had been used by the Government in order to gather evidence against Stewart, which they called a violation of attorney-client privilege. Some of Stewart’s supporters have included the Center for Constitutional Rights and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, who both filed amicus briefs in support of Stewart. They expressed fear that the prosecution for zealous defense tactics could cause attorneys to become fearful of defending alleged terrorists and deprive individuals of their constitutional right to due process. [1]
The government countered that Stewart had agreed to the Special Administrative Measures in question and simply violated them rather than litigating against them if she considered them to be unconstitutional. Government attorneys stated that Stewart risked the security of the United States by relying solely upon her opinion and disobeying the measures that were deemed necessary to protect against a threat posed by Abdel Rahman. They supported this claim by presenting testimony about assassinations carried out after Stewart's press conference, and argued that her role in communicating from Abdel Rahman through the press to the assassins was significant in carrying out those operations. They also stated that attorney-client privilege does not include communications to plot illegal activity, and that legitimate attorney-client privileged materials were held back from the prosecutors.
Following a seven-month trial and thirteen days of jury deliberations, Stewart was convicted of all charges. Co-defendants Mohammed Yousry and Ahmed Sattar were also convicted on all charges. The maximum sentence that Stewart could receive amounts to several decades of imprisonment. Due to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v. Booker, however, the judge has considerable discretion that allows for a sentence as lenient as probation. Under New York law, she is subject to automatic disbarment for a felony conviction.
At a press conference at the courthouse following her conviction, Stewart stated, "I hope it will be a wakeup call to all of the citizens of this country and all of the people who live here that you can't lock up the lawyers." Critics responded that lawyers remained free to defend clients, but that Stewart's unique case involved a lawyer who violated all boundaries to the point of becoming complicit in the crimes of her client. Stewart, meanwhile, believes that she was merely helping her client express his views and that the work of an attorney requires more discretion than the government allowed. She stated that she believes that she did nothing wrong and would like to believe that she would do it again. Not surprisingly, she intends to appeal her conviction.
A protegé of renowned trial lawyer William Kunstler, Stewart makes no secret of her radical politics. In a 1995 New York Times interview she stated, "I don't believe in anarchistic violence, but in directed violence. That would be violence directed at the institutions which perpetuate capitalism, racism, and sexism, and at the people who are the appointed guardians of those institutions, and accompanied by popular support."
External Links
- LynneStewart.org - Supporters of Lynne Stewart