Tarek Mehanna

Gekürzt aus en.wikipedia

Der us-amerikanische Apotheker Tarek Mehanna (*Pennsylvania) wurde im April 2012 wegen Unterstützung des Terrorismus zu 17 Jahren in einem Bundesgefängnis verurteilt. Er hatte einen Text von al Qaeda übersetzt. In dem Urteil lauteten die Vorwürfe gegen ihn:

providing material support to terrorists (and conspiracy to do so), conspiracy to commit murder in a foreign country, conspiracy to make false statements to the FBI, and two counts of making false statements.

Mehanna, Kind ägyptischer Einwanderer (1980er Jahre), wuchs in der Kleinstadt Sudbury, Mass., in der Nähe von Boston auf. Im Jahre 2004 verbrachte er zwei Jahre im Jemen, wo er der Staatsanwaltschaft (Carmen Ortiz) zufolge vergeblich nach einer militärischen Ausbildung suchte, um im Irak gegen die US-Invasion und Besatzung zu kämpfen. Nach seiner Rückkehr in die USA begann er Texte zu übersetzen, die von der Staatsanwaltschaft als al Qaeda Propaganda qualifiziert wurden. Mehanna erklärte, er unterstütze das Recht der Muslime auf Selbstverteidigung. Seine Anwälte vertraten die Ansicht, dass seine Internetaktivitäten durch den Ersten Verfassungszusatz - Free Speech/Meinungsfreiheit - gedeckt gewesen seien.

Er wurde wegen vier terrorismus-bezogener Anklagepunkte und drei weiteren Anklagepunkten ("related to lying to FBI and other U.S. federal officials") verurteilt. Sein Schlusswort fand weite Verbreitung im Internet (The Real Criminals in the Tarek Mehanna Case; Federal Judge ..).

Following Mehanna's sentencing, the ACLU released a statement saying that the suppression of unpopular ideas is contrary to American values, and that the verdict undermines the First Amendment. Specifically, it stated, "Under the government's theory of the case, ordinary people--including writers and journalists, academic researchers, translators, and even ordinary web surfers--could be prosecuted for researching or translating controversial and unpopular ideas."

Mehanna appealed his case to the First Circuit Court of Appeals[11] — he lost. Judge Bruce Selya, writing for the 3-judge panel, found for the Government, saying that Mehanna had been "fairly tried, justly convicted, and lawfully sentenced." "We think it virtually unarguable that rational jurors could find that the defendant and his associates went abroad to enlist in a terrorist training camp," the opinion said. Oral argument for the appeal was held on July 30, 2013 in Boston, and the opinion issued on Nov. 13 of that year. At oral argument, Mehanna's side was argued by P. Sabin Willett, and the United States was represented by Liza Collery of the Department of Justice. Mehanna appealed his case to the Supreme Court on March 17, 2014. On March 18, 2014, Lyle Denniston of Scotusblog profiled the case, focusing on the Supreme Court appeal. The Supreme Court has the discretion to choose whether or not to review cases from lower courts, and has no obligation to explain these decisions. The Department of Justice's response brief was filed on July 25, 2014. Denniston reported that Mehanna's lawyers would argue that while Mehanna was philosophically sympathetic to the tenets of al Qaeda, his translation of the documents was spontaneous — was not done at anyone's request, and this meant the translations weren't part of al Qaeda's operations. On October 6, the Court announced that it declined to review the case, thereby upholding Mehanna's conviction.