A bill for establishing a National Commission on Presidential War Powers and Civil Liberties has been submitted to committees for further action. Co-sponsored by several Representatives, the Commission will investigate the Bush administration's "broad range of policies…that were undertaken under claims of unreviewable war powers."

The bill has been referred to Committee on Armed Services, and additionally to the Select Committee on Intelligence, the Judiciary, and Foreign Affairs. It was introduced by John Conyers (D-MI), Jerrod Nadler (D-NY), Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX), Steve Cohen (D-TN), Hank Johnson (D-GA), and Bill Delahunt (D-MA).

The Commission will be comprised of 9 non-governmental experts who will hold hearings, receive evidence and administer testimony under oath, if necessary. The Commission will also have the power of subpoena as they investigate "detention" policies by the United States Armed Forces and Intelligence Community members, "interrogation techniques not authorized by the Uniform Code of Military Justice", and "domestic warrantless electronic surveillance". Other issues may also be addressed.

A year after the Commission's first meeting a report will be submitted to the President and Congress containing "findings, conclusions and recommendations for corrective measures." A final report will be due 6 months after.

The entire bill can viewed here.

A charity's lawsuit contesting the Bush administration's use of wiretapping has been reinstated by a federal judge last week. The judge ruled that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) does have precedence over the state secrets privilege and said the Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation's lawsuit can proceed.

The lawsuit accuses the government of listening in to telephone calls in early 2004 between a charity officer living in Saudi Arabia and two of his Washington lawyers.

The lawsuit had been rejected in July after the court ordered transcripts mistakenly sent to the defense lawyers returned to the government. The transcripts contained congressional testimony of high ranking government officials discussing the surveillance program. The government claimed the transcripts were to remain proprietary due to national security concerns.

U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker last week said, "There is enough primary evidence showing the charity might have been the target of government-tapped telephone calls that were done without court approval under the administration's so-called Terrorist Surveillance Program."

The now defunct charity had been based in Ashland, Oregon and is currently listed as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government.

The entire ruling is available here.

An in depth article containing history, timeline of events and more is available http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/07/09/alharamain_lawsuit/index... > here.

Donors are growing increasingly weary as court decisions against charities have created an environment of suspicion for numerous Muslim charities. The decrease in contributions will lead to smaller numbers of people receiving relief.

Verdicts such as the one delivered in the Holy Land Foundation trial have caused many Muslim charities to suffer decreases in charitable giving. Since September 11, 2001, several Muslim charities have been shutdown by the government for having connections to Middle Eastern countries.

"Either you risk having your group shut down, your funds frozen and your leaders prosecuted by providing aid in international hot spots where people are neediest, or you stay away to stay safe, said Kay Guinane, Program Manager of the Charity and Security Network. "Neither choice is acceptable for a society that prides itself on its respect for human life," she added.

Another direct consequence from the uncertainty surrounding many Muslim charities is misguided relationships between the private and public sector. Explained here in greater detail, deals such as the one between USAID and The American Charities for Palestine can result in charitable groups being perceived not as independent actors, but as part of a broader U.S. foreign policy or military objective. This unnecessary entanglement with the government will lead to the politicizing of humanitarian aid and potentially dangerous situations for relief workers in conflict zones.

"This creates a fundamental catch-22 for all U.S. charities and grant-makers that do any kind of international work, Guinane said.

An article with further details is available here.

USAID has released a notice of its proposed "Partner Vetting System" (PVS) for nonprofit and charitable groups. This policy creates unnecessary and potentially dangerous barriers for humanitarian groups from providing relief in global hot spots. Its final implementation will be determined by members of the Obama administration.

Highlights from the proposed PVS:

• "USAID does not believe that it should wait for hard proof that our funds are actually flowing to terrorists" before assigning a designation of humanitarian groups as connected to terror-related activities.

• Permits "the sharing of information, provided to USAID by applicants, with the intelligence community."

• Some organizations fear "considerable dangers associated with USAID using its implementing partners for U.S. law enforcement or intelligence purposes in foreign countries…leading to retaliation by foreign governments against partner employees and employees of subs of partners."

• As proposed, the PVS is incomplete and "procedures remain to be developed".

The entire notice can be viewed here