|
In American law, providing material support for terrorism is a crime prohibited by the USA PATRIOT Act and codified in title 18 of the United States Code, sections (2339A ) and (2339B ). It applies primarily to groups designated as terrorists by the State Department. The four types of support described are “training,” “expert advice or assistance,” “service,” and “personnel.” In June 2010, the United States Supreme Court upheld the law in an as-applied challenge in the case ''Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project'', but also left open the door for other as-applied challenges.〔http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1498.pdf〕 The plaintiffs in the case had sought to help the Kurdistan Workers’ Party in Turkey and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam learn means of peacefully resolving conflicts.〔Adam Liptak, (Court Affirms Ban on Aiding Groups Tied to Terror ), The New York Times, June 21, 2010.〕 == Criticism == The material support provisions have been criticized by rights groups as violating the First Amendment, as they criminalize activities like the distribution of literature, engaging in political advocacy, participating in peace conferences, training in human rights advocacy, and donating cash and humanitarian assistance, even when the support is intended only to promote lawful and non-violent activities.〔http://ccrjustice.org/learn-more/faqs/factsheet%3A-material-support〕 The provisions are vague and wide-ranging, and impose guilt by association by punishing people not for their own acts but for the acts of those they have supported.〔http://ccrjustice.org/learn-more/faqs/factsheet%3A-material-support〕 The Secretary of State's power to designate groups as terrorist has also been criticized as being too broad, giving the Executive too much discretionary power to label groups as "terrorist" and criminalize their supporters.〔http://ccrjustice.org/learn-more/faqs/factsheet%3A-material-support〕 The American Civil Liberties Union note that: “Federal “material support” and conspiracy statutes allow the government to secure convictions without having to show that any specific act of terrorism has taken place, or is being planned, or even that a defendant intended to further terrorism.”〔https://www.aclu.org/files/assets/acalltocourage.pdf〕 David Cole, in his book ''Terrorism and the Constitution'', stated that: Professor Jeanne Theoharis describes the measures in equally critical terms: U.S. State Senator Patrick Leahy sent a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton regarding humanitarian relief in Somalia in 2011. “I have long urged reform of our laws governing so-called material support for terrorism. The current law is so broad as to be unworkable. Aid workers trying to provide relief to starving Somalis fear they could be prosecuted if some of it were to end up in the hands of al-Shabab, an al-Qaeda affiliate that controls parts of Somalia. And so while the situation in Somalia grows more desperate each day, with children dying needlessly, the delivery of food and medicines is hampered, first by al-Shabab, which is denying access to broad swaths of Somali territory, and secondly, by our overly restrictive laws. The Secretary of State has the power to grant exemptions where the purpose is not to engage in terrorist activity. She should use that authority immediately to ensure aid can reach as many Somalis as possible.”〔http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/comment-of-senator-patrick-leahy-on-application-of-material-support-laws-to-humanitarian-relief-in-somalia〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Providing material support for terrorism」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|