The Muzzling Of Free Speech, The Silencing Of Dissent

In 2003, the Bush administration attacked freedom of speech yet again, in an unpublicized, backhanded way. It was not a grandiose Patriot Act, nor the double-speak “Free-Speech Zones”. It was perhaps a more insidious act – prosecuting an organization for what its members did.

On April 2002, two Greenpeace activists boarded a ship off the coast of Florida. The ship was illegally exporting wood from the Brazilian Amazon. They hung a banner off of the side of the ship, and were promptly arrested. After a weekend in jail, they pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor, and were released with ‘time served’.

Fifteen months later, Greenpeace received an indictment from the Justice Department. The non-profit organization was charged under an obscure 1872 law, originally intended to stop shop and tavern owners from boarding ships to lure sailors to the shore. This law had only been used twice before. It was last used in 1890.

If Greenpeace had been convicted under this archaic law, they would of been put onto probation, would have been required to report to the government of all their activities, and possibly lose tax-exempt status. A fine of $10,000 could of also been levied.

This month, May 2004, the judge ruling in the case dismissed because of lack of evidence.

The fact that the government felt the need to go after the two protestors, instead of the boat which was trafficking in illegal goods, is troubling enough. But the extent to which the government went is more troubling indeed. The trouble with which the Justice Department went though to muzzle Greenpeace is indicative of their lack of respect for the first amendment. This had been the first time the government had prosecuted an advocacy group for a free-speech related activity.

Al Gore has called the case “highly disturbing,” and Senator Patrick Leahy warned that a successfully prosecution would “have a chilling effect on free-speech and activism of all kinds.”

What exactly is at stake when a government begins to prosecute the organizations whose members participate in free-speech and peaceful dissent? What type of risk does such wanton indictment carry with it? Where does the loss of civil liberties end?

We can be thankful that our judicial system did not fail us this time. But what about the next time that this administration will try a similar course of action? What archaic and outdated law will be pulled out to silence another organization?