BEIRUT,
August 26 (IslamOnline & News Agencies) - The arrival of a
Palestinian professor controversially deported from the United States
aboard a U.S. military aircraft sparked a chorus of protest in
Lebanon, as Parliament speaker expressed his outrage that an Arab
country should become an accomplice to the deportation of a
Palestinian academic who had been detained for almost five years in
the United States before being unceremoniously expelled.
Parliament
speaker Nabih Berri expressed his anger saying that the U.S. has
invaded Beirut airport which is at the least an infiltration and a
violation of the principle of national sovereignty, reported Agence
France-Presse (AFP) on Monday, August 26.
"Has
Lebanon come to such a pretty pass that it allows a U.S. official
plane ... to invade Beirut International Airport and dump its cargo as
if nothing had happened?"
Berri
demanded to know if the plane had been given clearance to land by
airport authorities and, if so, whether they had sought the
government's go-ahead.
"If
they knew about it, then how could they deal with such an issue that
has a political and sovereignty dimension without the agreement of the
government," Berri told reporters.
"And
if they did not know about it, then how did they allow an official
American plane to land, take-off and leave a Palestinian deportee on
Lebanese territory?"
"This
operation is at the least an infiltration and a violation of the
principle of national sovereignty," he charged, demanding a
formal complaint to the U.S. ambassador.
"An
investigation has been opened into the circumstances of Mr. Mazen
al-Najjar's arrival at Beirut International Airport on Saturday,
August 24, aboard a U.S. military plane from Rome," a foreign
ministry official told AFP on Monday.
"The
ministry is awaiting the results of the inquiry to adopt the necessary
measures."
Najjar's
arrival aboard a U.S. plane which had already been turned away in the
Gulf state of Bahrain sparked howls of anger from across the political
spectrum, AFP said.
One
of Najjar's relatives in Lebanon told AFP Monday that Najjar had
"obtained an entry visa to Lebanon at Beirut International
Airport after General Security agents had interrogated him on the
reasons for his expulsion."
The
relative said Najjar did not wish to speak to the media and was
staying at his sister's home in Beirut "temporarily".
The
academic was first arrested and held without charges by U.S.
authorities in May 1997 following accusations he had links with the
Palestinian group, Islamic Jihad.
He
was released in December 2000 but was arrested again in November 2001
and held in solitary confinement, also without any charges or proof,
until his deportation.
A
Palestinian official in Lebanon who did not wish to be identified told
AFP on Monday that Najjar was not a member of Islamic Jihad, which the
U.S. claim is a terrorist organization.
Al-Najjar,
44, was originally deported abroad a special U.S. immigration
department plane to Bahrain but was refused entry there, according to
his wife, quoted in the London-based Arabic daily Asharq Al-Awsat,
AFP)reported.
After
a 25-hour wait in Rome, U.S. officials on the plane noticed he had an
entry visa to Lebanon on his passport and flew him to Beirut.
His
wife said Najjar was treated by U.S. authorities “like a parcel that
they wanted to throw out,” while family members said that the
professor was planning to leave Lebanon for an unspecified African
country within 48 hours.
Randall
Marshall of the American Civil Liberties Union said Thursday, August
22, that holding Najjar on secret evidence was unconstitutional and
that “the 10 months that he spent in solitary confinement was
nothing more than the raw exercise of government power.”
In
a statement released Thursday, August 22, Rep. David Bonior (D-MI), a
longtime supporter of Muslim and Arab causes, and personally involved
in Al-Najjar’s case, said, “The injustice of secret evidence made
possible the wrongful jailing of Dr. Al-Najjar and has now culminated
in his unjust deportation.
“We
have denied Dr. Al-Najjar his liberty and his rights based on
unsubstantiated, secret allegations. This blatant disregard for our
constitutional rights and the basic rights of due process has served
as the Justice Department’s modus operandi since the beginning of
this case.