Extensions of Remarks 22189 Extensions of Remarks

August 20, 1980 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 22189 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS SHCHARANSKY TRIAL sent him. I have also submitted the argu that Shcharansky had access to military se REMEMBERED ment to the court that has jurisdiction to crets is for that nation's leaders to boast hear an appeal from Shcharansky's convic that they are defying the express conditions tion. <A more detailed and technical legal under which they have been allowed to HON. ROBERT F. DRINAN brief will be submitted as well.) import computer technology. If this pros OF MASSACHUSETTS HONORABLE JUDGES: I am here to speak on ecution succeeds, it cannot be long before IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES behalf of a man who has already been de the American Congress revokes the Soviet clared guilty by the official Soviet press and Union's privilege to import American tech Wednesday, August 20, 1980 by numerous high ranking officials of the nology for military uses expressly forbidden e Mr. DRINAN. Mr. Speaker, just 5 Soviet communist Party and Government. by American law. days prior to the opening of the 1980 But under Soviet law, Anatoly Shcharansky The prosecutor has made much of the in summer Olympics in Moscow, the is entitled to a fair trial and an unbiased formation that Shcharansky gave to Robert verdict from Your Honors. I am acutely Toth, the reporter for the Los Angeles second anniversary of the trial of Ana aware of the burden under which you labor: Times. But there is nothing secret either toly Shcharansky was remembered I know-as you know only too well-that no about the information or about the fact across from the Soviet Embassy. Over judge in the half century of this nation's that Shcharansky turned it over to Toth. 100. concerned individuals gathered to history has ever voted to acquit a defendant Shcharansky never gave background or off protest Soviet inaction in his case. charged with a political crime such as trea the-record interviews to the press; he was As a leader of the Helsinki Monitor son. But I ask you to throw off your yokes always identified by name in the press re ing Group in Moscow, Shcharansky es and to act as honorable members of the ports as the source of the information. tablished himself as a human rights legal profession: by rendering a true and Indeed, on one occasion when an American honest judgment. newsman came to pick him up for an inter activist and committed proponent of Who was the defendant, Anatoly Shchar view in a small family car, Shcharansky in Soviet compliance with the Helsinki ansky, before his arrest on April15, 1977? sisted that the reporter return in the large Final Act. In a year when the cosigna Anatoly Shcharansky was the voice of the American car which was clearly identified as tors of the Helsinki accords will meet Jewish Emigration movement. It was he belonging to an American newspaper. Are to review each nation's record of com who served as the public communication these the actions of a secret spy trying to pliance, it is indeed disturbing that link between the Jewish refusniks-those conceal his relationship to the press? Shcharansky remains incarcerated in whose requests to emigrate from the Soviet And what was the nature of the informa a Soviet labor camp. Union had not been granted-and the out tion he turned over to Toth and others? It side world. His every act was out in the was simply the names and places of employ In recalling the trial, one is struck open: it was his purpose to let the Soviet au ment of refusniks whose emigration re by the insensitivity of the Soviet au thorities know that his voice-which, in re quests had been turned down by the Soviet thorities to the requirements of Soviet ality, was the articulate translation of thou emigration authorities on the ground that and international law to protect the sands of other refusnik voices-was being they had worked in jobs involving state se defendant against unfair prosecution. listened to in Europe and in the United crets. Each such refusnik had received a no As one example of Soviet disregard for States. He did nothing in secret: that was tification from the Soviet authorities and minimum standards of judicial proce neither his method nor his purpose. each was free to communicate that fact to dure, Soviet officials refused to allow The Soviet authorities now claim that this the press-as many did. All Shcharansky did open, public spokesperson was, in reality, a was to collate this public information and Shcharansky's lawyer, Harvard law secret operative of the American Central In transmit it-in convenient form-to the professor Alan Dershowitz, to repre telligence Agency, that he was stealing American press in order to demonstrate sent him at the trial. Dershowitz did, Soviet military secrets and covertly passing that no state secrets were involved, that the however, submit testimony to the them on to American agents, diplomats and Soviet excuses for denying exit visas were Soviet court on Shcharansky's behalf. reporters. pretextual. This was his right under Soviet With the Madrid review conference If the charges were not so serious, they law and under the Helsinki Accords. the of the Helsinki accords in mind, I would be comic indeed. Imagine how incom irony is that if any Soviet secrets were re bring to the attention of my col petent an American intelligence agency vealed at all-and Toth denies that any leagues the closing statement that would have to be to have engaged someone were-they were revealed by the Soviet emi like Shcharansky as a spy. His phone obvi gration authorities themselves when they Prof. Alan Dershowitz submitted to ously tapped, his every movement openly sent public notices to refusniks declaring the Soviet court. In his statement, surveilled, his roommate a KGB plant, that the factories, research ships, and labo Dershowitz concludes that the signifi Shcharansky was the worst possible candi ratories in which these refusniks had cance of the court's decision goes date for the espionage game. Imagine how worked were involved in "state secrets". beyond its immediate imps.ct on incompetent the Soviet counterespionage Shcharansky cannot legally be convicted of Shcharansky himself to the implica apparatus would have to be to have let revealing "secrets" that had already been tions that it has for the integrity of someone like Shcharansky-a man who had revealed by the Soviet authorities. the entire Soviet judicial system. publicly declared his allegiance to Israel and But what of Anatoly Shcharansky, the who had demanded the right to emigrate man, the husband, the son? We do not know The statement follows: there-have access to military secrets. what remains of the 29 year old smiling THE CLOSING .ARGUMENT BY ANATOLY Shcharansky was not a spy. United States man who was carried away to a KGB prison SHCHARANSKY'S LAWYER IN ABSENTIA President Carter did not lie when he public on March 15, 1977. Between that date and Shortly after the arrest of Anatoly ly assured the world that he had inquired July 10, 1978-a period of nearly 16 Shcharansky, his wife-Avital-asked me to deeply within the C.I.A. and the State De months-Anatoly Shcharansky was a non serve as his American lawyer. I accepted partment and had determined that Shchar person in the Soviet Union. Nobody-not his with a profound sense of responsibility but ansky never had any connection with the mother, not his lawyer, not his wife-was al with little hope of affecting the outcome of C.I.A. Shcharansky did not work for the lowed to communicate with him in any way; the case. Shortly thereafter, Shcharansky's C.I.A., not did he have access to any mili nobody knew his physical or mental condi mother, Ida Milgrom, sent me a written tary secrets. tion; nobody knew what his captors were message from the Soviet Union asking me to The only information to which he had doing to him in the secrecy of this KGB for try to represent Shcharansky at his Moscow any access at all was computer technology, tress. Nobody knew, for sure, whether he trial. I agreed to try, but again without since that was the field in which he had was alive or dead. much hope. My pessimism, it turns out, was worked several years prior to his arrest. But Then, on July 10, 1978, he ·was taken to a well founded: repeated requests to attend the Soviet Union imports virtually all of its courtroom for his trial-a trial which under Shcharansky's trial and appeal have been computer technology from the United Soviet law must be open to the public. But rebuked. I have decided, however, to submit States, under an assurance-made binding who has been allowed to attend this public to the Soviet Court the following closing ar by American law-that this technology will trial? Not the American or western press, gument that I would have made on Shchar never be put to any direct or indirect mili though Shcharansky has become a house ansky's behalf had I been allowed to repre- tary use. For the Soviet Union now to claim hold word through much of the world. Not e This "bullet" symbol identifies statements or insertions which are not spoken by the Member on the floor. CXXVI--1395-Pa.rt 17 22190 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS August 20, 1980 American diplomats, though that country is Wednesday, August 13, 1980, into the Soviet Union.

Load more