Month: December 2024

Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

A copy of the indictment can be found here.

An indictment was unsealed today in the Northern District of Illinois charging two high-ranking Syrian officials under former President Bashar al-Assad with war crimes. The indictment charges the former Syrian intelligence officials with engaging in a conspiracy to commit cruel and inhuman treatment of civilian detainees, including U.S. citizens, during the course of the Syrian civil war.

Former Syrian Air Force Intelligence officers Jamil Hassan, 72, and Abdul Salam Mahmoud, 65, were each charged in connection with a conspiracy to commit war crimes through the infliction of cruel and inhuman treatment on detainees under their control, including U.S. citizens, in detention facilities at the Mezzeh Military Airport (Mezzeh Prison), near Damascus, Syria. Warrants for the defendants’ arrest have been issued, and they remain at large.

“The perpetrators of the Assad regime’s atrocities against American citizens and other civilians during the Syrian civil war must answer for their heinous crimes,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “As alleged, these Assad regime intelligence officials whipped, kicked, electrocuted, and burned their victims; hung them by their wrists for prolonged periods of time; threatened them with rape and death; and falsely told them that their family members had been killed. The Justice Department has a long memory, and we will never stop working to find and bring to justice those who tortured Americans.”

“The Assad regime may have fallen, but our commitment to accountability continues unabated,” said Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. “For the second time in a year, the Department of Justice has brought charges against those who committed war crimes against U.S. citizens, deploying a previously unused federal law to hold accountable individuals who engaged in cruel and inhuman atrocities during armed conflict.”

“Hassan and Mahmoud allegedly oversaw the systematic use of cruel and inhumane treatment on perceived enemies of the Syrian regime, including American citizens,” said FBI Director Christopher Wray. “The FBI is fully committed to working with our law enforcement partners around the world to ensure these alleged war criminals are held accountable for their actions and justice is brought to the victims of these atrocities.”

“The defendants are alleged to have committed atrocities against political dissidents, including U.S. citizens, opposing a brutal and now-deposed dictatorial regime,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Nicole M. Argentieri, head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “War crimes such as the torture described in this indictment strike at the basic human rights that we all share. This historic indictment — the second brought under the U.S. War Crimes statute — demonstrates the Justice Department’s commitment to pursue accountability for those who commit war crimes and other atrocities wherever they may occur.”

“The serious human rights abuses set forth in this indictment must not go unpunished,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Morris Pasqual for the Northern District of Illinois. “The United States Attorney’s Office in Chicago remains steadfastly committed to bringing justice to the victims of these heinous crimes, no matter where the perpetrators are or how long it takes.”

“Human rights abuses are among the most egregious crimes that the FBI investigates, and this historic indictment memorializes our commitment to accountability and justice,” said Special Agent in Charge Douglas S. DePodesta of the FBI Chicago Field Office. “This multi-year investigation is the culmination of the tireless work by FBI personnel, both in the United States and overseas, and the courage of countless victims and witnesses affected by the Assad Regime in Syria.”

According to the indictment, Hassan was the Director of Syrian Air Force Intelligence and oversaw a network of detention facilities, including the Mezzeh Prison in Damascus, where civilians perceived to be opponents of the Syrian regime were detained and subjected to cruel and inhuman treatment. Mahmoud was a Brigadier General in the Syrian Air Force Intelligence and directed operations at the Mezzeh Prison.

The indictment alleges that, between January 2012 and July 2019, Hassan and Mahmoud conspired to identify, intimidate, threaten, punish, and kill people detained at Mezzeh Prison suspected of aiding or supporting opponents of the regime, such as those who protested, provided medical aid to opponents of the regime, or publicly criticized the regime. According to the indictment, detainees in the defendants’ custody, including U.S. citizens, were mercilessly beaten, electrocuted, and had their toenails removed. Detainees were also allegedly hung from the ceiling by their wrists and were burned with acid. The defendants allegedly conspired to create an atmosphere of terror at Mezzeh, forcing detainees to listen to the screams of tortured prisoners and share cells with the dead bodies of other detainees, while guards threatened to kill and sexually assault their family members. The detainees were also allegedly deprived of adequate food, water, and medical care.

The defendants are charged with one count of conspiracy to commit the war crime of cruel and inhuman treatment. If convicted, the defendants each face a maximum sentence of life in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

The FBI Chicago Field Office investigated the war crimes allegations in partnership with the Criminal Division’s Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section (HRSP), U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Illinois, and Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs. The Justice Department thanks the United Nations International, Impartial, and Independent Mechanism for Syria, as well as French authorities, for their assistance.

HRSP Trial Attorneys Elizabeth Nielsen and Frank Rangoussis and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Steven Dollear, Barry Jonas, and Ann Marie Ursini for the Northern District of Illinois are prosecuting the case. HRSP historian Phil Hoffman provided substantial assistance in the investigation and prosecution.

Members of the public who have information about human rights violators in the United States or the location of the defendants named in this indictment are urged to contact the FBI at 1-800-CALL-FBI (800-225-5324) or through the FBI online tip form. All are staffed around the clock, and tips may be provided anonymously.

An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

The Justice Department sued the State of South Carolina today for unnecessarily segregating adults with mental illness in adult care homes, in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Supreme Court’s decision in Olmstead v. L.C. The department previously notified South Carolina of its findings of civil rights violations in a July 2023 letter, which identified steps that the state should take to remedy the violations.

“People with disabilities in South Carolina can and must be able to receive services in their own homes, rather than being isolated in institutions,” said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “The Civil Rights Division will continue to ensure that people with disabilities can receive the services necessary to enable and empower them to leave institutions, and participate fully in community life.”

“The ADA requires public entities to administer services, programs and activities in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities,” said U.S. Attorney Adair F. Boroughs for the District of South Carolina. “South Carolina must remedy the alleged violations identified by the Justice Department so that these individuals can obtain services in their own communities, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act.”

The ADA and Olmstead decision require state and local governments to ensure that the services for adults with mental illness are provided in the most integrated setting appropriate. Community-based services, such as Assertive Community Treatment and supportive housing, are effective in supporting people in their own homes and communities rather than institutional settings. Absent these services, many South Carolinians with mental illness who could live in the community remain in, and continue to enter, adult care homes.

The lawsuit alleges that South Carolina violates the ADA by failing to provide community-based services to prevent the unnecessary segregation of adults with mental illness in adult care homes. As a result, over a thousand adults with mental illness are segregated in adult care homes for years, and more continue to enter these facilities each month.

The Civil Rights Division’s Special Litigation Section investigated this case with assistance from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of South Carolina. Individuals with information relevant to this matter can contact the department by emailing Community.SouthCarolina@usdoj.gov.                                                          

For more information on the ADA, please call the department’s toll-free ADA Information Line at 1-800-514-0301 (TDD 800-514-0383) or visit www.ada.gov/topics/community-integration/.

For more information on the Civil Rights Division, please visit www.justice.gov/crt.

Source: United States Department of Justice Criminal Division

The Justice Department announced today it will hold Tribal consultations around its consideration of legislative proposals to address the balance of jurisdiction in Indian country that was upended by the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta.

Indian country is a legal term that generally describes Tribal reservations, lands, communities, and allotments that fall under the jurisdiction of the United States.

Until two years ago, there was a long-held understanding, shared by the federal government and Tribes, that a law passed by Congress, the General Crimes Act, limited a state’s authority to prosecute some crimes committed in Indian country, namely those crimes committed by non-Indian defendants against Indian victims. Those crimes could be prosecuted only by federal or Tribal authorities. In Castro-Huerta, the Supreme Court rejected that understanding.

Instead, the Supreme Court ruled that the General Crimes Act does not limit a state’s inherent jurisdiction to prosecute non-Indian defendants who commit crimes against Indian victims in Indian country. In other words, based on the Supreme Court’s decision, the federal government, states, and Tribes now have concurrent jurisdiction to prosecute these types of crimes throughout the United States.

Because the Supreme Court’s decision was based on the language in a statute, Congress, exercising its constitutional plenary power over Indian affairs, could pass legislation restoring the previous balance of jurisdiction in Indian country.

“The Department of Justice is committed to working with Native communities to advance our shared goal of Tribal safety while respecting and uplifting Tribal sovereignty,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “These upcoming consultations are consistent with the Department’s longstanding practice of working collaboratively with our Tribal partners to promote safe communities throughout Indian country.”

The Justice Department and the Department of the Interior (DOI) held joint listening sessions on Sept. 26-27, 2022, to discuss with Tribal representatives the implications of the Castro-Huerta decision and the impact on Tribal communities. More than 500 Tribal leaders and other Tribal representatives participated in these discussions. Several clear themes emerged, including a view from Tribes that the Castro-Huerta decision diminished Tribal sovereignty, injected confusion into a complex legal and operational landscape, and presented long-term implications for state interference in Tribal affairs. A common view emerged that legislation and clarifying federal guidance were in order.

Several Tribes also reported that Castro-Huerta has negatively impacted their cross-deputization, cross-jurisdictional, and other cooperative law enforcement agreements with states, which prior to Castro-Huerta were an important part of successful law enforcement and criminal justice schemes on many reservations.

Based on those listening sessions, other feedback, and experience over the past two years, the Justice Department is now considering whether to support a legislative proposal to restore the previous balance of jurisdiction in Indian country and, if so, what form that legislation should take. Two draft proposals are presented for Tribal review and consideration.

Both proposals make clear that states lack jurisdiction over crimes within Indian country committed by or against Indians, unless expressly authorized by federal statute. Both proposals also state that unless otherwise authorized by federal statute, states must, before exercising such jurisdiction, (1) ensure compliance with the procedures for obtaining Tribal consent of the impacted Indian Tribe, and (2) where applicable, comply with a procedure to amend the state constitution or laws

The Department is releasing a framing paper, which will be available on the Department’s Tribal Justice and Safety website and includes additional background and the two legislative proposals.  The Justice Department plans to hold consultations in January 2025.

Source: United States Department of Justice 2

The Justice Department sued the State of South Carolina today for unnecessarily segregating adults with mental illness in adult care homes, in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Supreme Court’s decision in Olmstead v. L.C. The department previously notified South Carolina of its findings of civil rights violations in a July 2023 letter, which identified steps that the state should take to remedy the violations.

“People with disabilities in South Carolina can and must be able to receive services in their own homes, rather than being isolated in institutions,” said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “The Civil Rights Division will continue to ensure that people with disabilities can receive the services necessary to enable and empower them to leave institutions, and participate fully in community life.”

“The ADA requires public entities to administer services, programs and activities in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities,” said U.S. Attorney Adair F. Boroughs for the District of South Carolina. “South Carolina must remedy the alleged violations identified by the Justice Department so that these individuals can obtain services in their own communities, as required by the Americans with Disabilities Act.”

The ADA and Olmstead decision require state and local governments to ensure that the services for adults with mental illness are provided in the most integrated setting appropriate. Community-based services, such as Assertive Community Treatment and supportive housing, are effective in supporting people in their own homes and communities rather than institutional settings. Absent these services, many South Carolinians with mental illness who could live in the community remain in, and continue to enter, adult care homes.

The lawsuit alleges that South Carolina violates the ADA by failing to provide community-based services to prevent the unnecessary segregation of adults with mental illness in adult care homes. As a result, over a thousand adults with mental illness are segregated in adult care homes for years, and more continue to enter these facilities each month.

The Civil Rights Division’s Special Litigation Section investigated this case with assistance from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of South Carolina. Individuals with information relevant to this matter can contact the department by emailing Community.SouthCarolina@usdoj.gov.                                                          

For more information on the ADA, please call the department’s toll-free ADA Information Line at 1-800-514-0301 (TDD 800-514-0383) or visit www.ada.gov/topics/community-integration/.

For more information on the Civil Rights Division, please visit www.justice.gov/crt.

Source: United States Department of Justice 2

The Justice Department announced today it will hold Tribal consultations around its consideration of legislative proposals to address the balance of jurisdiction in Indian country that was upended by the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta.

Indian country is a legal term that generally describes Tribal reservations, lands, communities, and allotments that fall under the jurisdiction of the United States.

Until two years ago, there was a long-held understanding, shared by the federal government and Tribes, that a law passed by Congress, the General Crimes Act, limited a state’s authority to prosecute some crimes committed in Indian country, namely those crimes committed by non-Indian defendants against Indian victims. Those crimes could be prosecuted only by federal or Tribal authorities. In Castro-Huerta, the Supreme Court rejected that understanding.

Instead, the Supreme Court ruled that the General Crimes Act does not limit a state’s inherent jurisdiction to prosecute non-Indian defendants who commit crimes against Indian victims in Indian country. In other words, based on the Supreme Court’s decision, the federal government, states, and Tribes now have concurrent jurisdiction to prosecute these types of crimes throughout the United States.

Because the Supreme Court’s decision was based on the language in a statute, Congress, exercising its constitutional plenary power over Indian affairs, could pass legislation restoring the previous balance of jurisdiction in Indian country.

“The Department of Justice is committed to working with Native communities to advance our shared goal of Tribal safety while respecting and uplifting Tribal sovereignty,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “These upcoming consultations are consistent with the Department’s longstanding practice of working collaboratively with our Tribal partners to promote safe communities throughout Indian country.”

The Justice Department and the Department of the Interior (DOI) held joint listening sessions on Sept. 26-27, 2022, to discuss with Tribal representatives the implications of the Castro-Huerta decision and the impact on Tribal communities. More than 500 Tribal leaders and other Tribal representatives participated in these discussions. Several clear themes emerged, including a view from Tribes that the Castro-Huerta decision diminished Tribal sovereignty, injected confusion into a complex legal and operational landscape, and presented long-term implications for state interference in Tribal affairs. A common view emerged that legislation and clarifying federal guidance were in order.

Several Tribes also reported that Castro-Huerta has negatively impacted their cross-deputization, cross-jurisdictional, and other cooperative law enforcement agreements with states, which prior to Castro-Huerta were an important part of successful law enforcement and criminal justice schemes on many reservations.

Based on those listening sessions, other feedback, and experience over the past two years, the Justice Department is now considering whether to support a legislative proposal to restore the previous balance of jurisdiction in Indian country and, if so, what form that legislation should take. Two draft proposals are presented for Tribal review and consideration.

Both proposals make clear that states lack jurisdiction over crimes within Indian country committed by or against Indians, unless expressly authorized by federal statute. Both proposals also state that unless otherwise authorized by federal statute, states must, before exercising such jurisdiction, (1) ensure compliance with the procedures for obtaining Tribal consent of the impacted Indian Tribe, and (2) where applicable, comply with a procedure to amend the state constitution or laws

The Department is releasing a framing paper, which will be available on the Department’s Tribal Justice and Safety website and includes additional background and the two legislative proposals.  The Justice Department plans to hold consultations in January 2025.