In December 2001, the Department of the Treasury named the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation (HLF), at that time the nation’s largest Muslim charity, as a terrorist organization. The government seized HLF’s assets and shut it down. Thus, freezing millions of dollars in religiously obligated donations, made for the purposes of feeding the poor, the orphan and the indigent.

After three years of investigation, the government "revised" its allegations and a federal grand jury issued a 42-count indictment against seven individuals associated with HLF. The indictment alleges that these individuals were part of a conspiracy to provide material support to organizations linked to Hamas (designated as a terrorist organization by the State Department).

Almost six years later, HLF is finally getting its day in court, as trial is underway in a Dallas courthouse.

The government’s trial brief argues that HLF gave donations to 12 Israeli-licensed, Palestinian charities that were allegedly "associated" with Hamas. However, the U.S. government has not identified these Palestinian charities as supporting terrorism or banned them from receiving American donations. In fact, one of these charities received aid from the U.S. government.

In an unusual, and some would say un-American move, prosecutors publicly named 306 individuals and organizations as "unindicted co-conspirators" (UCC) relating to the HLF case.

Among those listed are three major American Muslim organizations – The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), The North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Collectively, these groups represent the interests and viewpoints of the mainstream American Muslim community.

Listing a person or group as a UCC is not a legal designation of wrongdoing on the part of those named. The UCC designation allows for an exception to the hearsay rule making "co-conspirator" statements admissible during trial.

This practice, in which the named parties have no legal recourse, is controversial and seemingly un-American. Prof. Ira P. Robbins of American University recently wrote in the Federal Courts Law Review: "[The] practice of naming individuals as unindicted co-conspirators...appears to be an anomaly in United States law, in that it violates the Fifth Amendment guarantee that no person shall...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Three federal prosecutors asked by the Los Angeles Times about the practice of publicly naming unindicted co-conspirators called it "improper" and "unfair."

This McCarthyite political move violates the Justice Department’s own guidelines, which indicate that such lists are to remain sealed to prevent the unfair and un-American labeling of those who are not facing any criminal charges. The Justice Department’s manual for prosecutors says, "In all public filings and proceedings, federal prosecutors should remain sensitive to the privacy and reputation interests of uncharged third-parties." The guidelines further state that when co-conspirator lists have to be filed in court, prosecutors should seek to file them under seal.

CAIR has filed an amicus brief asking the court to remove the names of several hundred Muslim individuals and institutions, from a list of so-called "unindicted co-conspirators" related to the HLF case. The National Association of Muslim Lawyers and the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys sent a letter to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales objecting to the list and saying it could lead to increased discrimination against American Muslims.

CAIR’s brief, filed by attorney William B. Moffitt, alleges that the listing of the organizations and individuals violates Justice Department guidelines and violates the uncharged parties’ First and Fifth Amendment rights. The brief states in part:

"The Fifth Amendment was violated because the public naming of the unindicted co-conspirators damaged their reputation, good name, and economic well-being, without offering a forum for vindication, and without a legitimate governmental reason for doing so. The First Amendment was violated because the governmental action of publicly naming the unindicted co-conspirators chilled the expressive associational activities of the unindicted co-conspirators and the government does not have a substantially related compelling interest for their action. . .

Undoubtedly, the practice of naming unindicted co-conspirators needs to be proscribed from the outset. Such a practice should be per se unconstitutional, because once the government publicizes the names of the unindicted co-conspirators, the damage to their reputations, economic well-being, and expressive associations is done. . .

In this case, the government had nothing to lose by violating the Department of Justice guidelines and the Constitution, as their stigmatizing of these ‘unpopular’ groups and persons could not be undone. . ."

In a recent Washington Post article, Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski opined that the "war on terror" has caused America more harm than anything that the terrorists ever imagined. It has created a culture of fear in America. "The atmosphere generated by the "war on terror" has encouraged legal and political harassment of Arab Americans (generally loyal Americans) for conduct that has not been unique to them."

Given the growing fear of Islam and Muslims among the American public (one-in-four admit to being prejudiced against Muslims), it has become easy to smear Islamic organizations. Without legal recourse to challenge such smear, the constitutional rights of American Muslims suffer through guilt by association and guilt by mere accusation. This effectively puts a chill on the First Amendment rights of American Muslims.

It is our duty as Americans to demand that the due process rights of all citizens be preserved and protected. At a time when most experts are recommending the strengthening of American Muslim institutions to serve as bridges of understanding between America and the Muslim world, the smearing of these American Muslim institutions undermine the very cause that ought to unite us as Americans. Liberty and justice for all cannot be a mere slogan. In order to reclaim our global leadership America needs to work with its Muslim citizens to prevent the downward spiral of misunderstanding and hostility that threatens to engulf our world.

Parvez Ahmed is the chairman of the board for the Council on American-Islamic Relations. He is also an associate professor at the University of North Florida. His e-mail address is This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it