By Kit Fitzgerald
The timing of the lecture “Against the Winds of Tyranny” was accidental but fit the current environment.
Brian Farrell, the director of the College of Law’s Citizen Lawyer Program, delivered a lecture Thursday night as a launch for his book, Habeas Corpus in International Law.
“Habeas corpus is a key tool to maintain the rule of law,” Farrell said. “The thing is, though, it can carry a lot of baggage and has different connotations for different countries.”
Farrell said habeas corpus is the judicial review of the legality of a person’s detention.
He initially was interested in habeas corpus because of judges and their “role as checks on the executive branch.”
The concept originated from the creativity of the judges because under habeas corpus they had more power. This concept also meant people who were wrongfully arrested or imprisoned could defend themselves in court.
In the state of emergency, the international human rights guarantees of habeas corpus cannot be suspended.
“Generally, most legislation is made to restrict, rather than strengthen, habeas corpus,” Farrell said. “But the suspension of habeas corpus would mean no balance for political branches.”
Throughout history, the concept has changed from defending peasants under a monarch’s rule to freeing prisoners of war and journalists being detained in states of conflict. Its main purpose is to ensure the executive branch is bound by established laws.
The most recent example of judges being used as checks on an executive order would be Judge Ann Donnelly’s stay on President Trump’s immigration ban. The stay was ordered Jan. 28, five days before the lecture.
This lecture, however, was not a response to the stay.
“This was planned two months ago, although it is interesting timing,” Farrell said. “I think people are making the assumption the two events are related.”
The immigration ban, related to the lecture or not, has been relevant for many UI students.
Monzer (Moe) Shakally, an intern at the Iowa City Foreign Relations Council, is originally from Damascus, Syria.
He can’t leave the country, even though he hasn’t seen his family in three years.
“It’s confusing,” he said. “I really don’t know what’s going to happen.”
Any initial victories will produce momentum, he said. Any other executive orders that are controversial will be challenged.
Farrell, even though his lecture was not about the newest exercise of habeas corpus, had something to say on the matter.
“This topic is historical,” he said. “This topic is not new [and], the themes are consistent.”
It served in India in the 1970s, in Latin America in the 1980s, Guantánamo Bay in the 2000s. These are just dramatic moments in an ongoing story, he said.
“It was very interesting,” said UI student Sabareen Mohamed, a member of Farrell’s Introduction to Human Rights class. “It’s not really a topic that I’m well aware of.”
“We need to more firmly define and strengthen habeas corpus,” Farrell said. “If we can take someone and hurry them away, that is one of the most chilling and dangerous things a state can do.”
[Clarification: In the Feb. 3 article “A Timely Lecture, Accidentally,” The Daily Iowan made a factual error saying, “The concept was originally included in the Magna Carta so people who were wrongfully arrested or imprisoned could defend themselves in court. The judges at the time used the power they held under habeas corpus, giving themselves more say in government”. Instead, there is misconception that the concept originated from the Magna Carta, when really it come from the creativity of the judges. There was another error: “Even in a state of emergency, such as war, natural disaster, terrorism, or strikes, habeas corpus cannot be suspended.” Instead, the international human rights guarantees of habeas corpus cannot be suspended in the state of emergency. A corrected version has been posted. The DI regrets the errors.]