Search News


Browse Archives

News

No Convictions for Al-Arian

December 7, 2005

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Sami Al-Arian, who was fired in 2003 by the University of South Florida, was cleared of some charges while a jury deadlocked on others Tuesday. He was not convicted of anything -- raising new questions about whether the university was justified in taking away his tenured position.

Al-Arian remains in jail while federal prosecutors -- who charged him with involvement with terrorist groups -- decide whether to seek a new trial on the charges on which the jury deadlocked.

The university issued a brief statement Tuesday, indicating that Al-Arian would not be returning to South Florida. "The University of South Florida is watching the recent legal developments. USF ended Sami Al-Arian's employment nearly three years ago, and we do not expect anything to change that," the university said, adding that officials would not elaborate.

Al-Arian's dismissal, following years of skirmishes over his employment at South Florida, angered many faculty members as a violation of his academic freedom. But while the university's handling of the case was repeatedly derided by experts on due process and academic freedom, the indictment two years ago quieted much of the criticism.

The university first suspended Al-Arian shortly after 9/11, when comments he made on a television show struck some people as supporting terrorism (an interpretation he denied), and USF first said that he needed to stay off the campus for his own safety, and later because of the disruption his presence might create. As time passed, Al-Arian and others charged that the suspension was becoming the equivalent of a dismissal and that he was effectively losing his job -- without due process -- because he had expressed unpopular views.

The university tried without success to get a court order allowing it to fire Al-Arian. Many Florida political leaders, alarmed by reports suggesting that a tenured professor had supported terrorism, called on the university to fire him.

Al-Arian was fired shortly after he was indicted, with the university saying that the indictment had confirmed its view that he had been using his university position inappropriately.

Roy Weatherford, president of the university's chapter of the United Faculty of Florida -- a union affiliated with both the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association -- said that the union and most faculty members had been deeply troubled about how the university had treated Al-Arian, especially prior to his indictment.

"The way they initially tried to fire him was so ludicrous and unjustifiable that it was widely seen as a violation of academic freedom," said Weatherford, a professor of philosophy.

He said that the eventual firing -- after Al-Arian was jailed -- was more complicated. Besides the fact that there were formal, serious charges against Al-Arian, Weatherford noted that "he was incarcerated so he couldn't physically do his duties."

Weatherford said he was concerned about the university's statement Tuesday that it did not expect any change in Al-Arian's employment status. He said that if the additional charges are dropped, or if they are pursued and Al-Arian is found not guilty, the university should reconsider its dismissal of him. "If the university persists in its view that the judgment of the court is irrelevant to what they have done, a lot of people will be very angry," he said.

The American Association of University Professors has also raised questions about how the university treated Al-Arian. In a report in 2003, the association's Committee A on Academic Freedom found numerous problems with the way Al-Arian was treated before his indictment. Among them, the association said, were denial of due process, failure to provide a hearing prior to imposing sanctions, and suspending him "without demonstrable cause." The association report acknowledged that the indictments complicated the situation, but added, that it "does not view the professor's arrest and incarceration as excusing the administration's grave departures from association-supported standards of academic due process."

Jonathan Knight, director of the Department of Academic Freedom and Governance at the AAUP, said that the university's latest statement was "quite disappointing," given that Al-Arian has not been convicted of anything. "It underscores the deeply problematic nature of the administration's dismissal of him," Knight said.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on No Convictions for Al-Arian

  • An Academic Debate
  • Posted by John K. Wilson on December 7, 2005 at 9:31am EST
  • Of course, this debate doesn't matter for Al-Arian because even if he is not re-tried and convicted, he will certainly be deported. But the principles matter.

    Even though some feel that the indictment of Al-Arian means that he deserves to be fired, the University of South Florida should be censured for the grounds upon which it suspended Al-Arian and the violation of due process. Both the AAUP and FIRE objected to the procedure.

    The USF administration for a year made the outrageous claim that death threats against Al-Arian alone justified his dismissal. They suspended Al-Arian indefinitely without following a modicum of due process. They even filed a preemptive lawsuit asserting their right to fire Al-Arian.

    Although USF officials now promise to consult with faculty before firing anyone, there has been no change in the fundamentally flawed contract or procedures used to punish faculty at USF. Al-Arian was dismissed without a hearing or any effort to allow him to defend himself.

    There is no serious allegation that Al-Arian ever planned or ordered any terrorist actions, only that he funneled money to an organization involved in terrorism, Islamic Jihad. While fundraising for groups that murder innocent people is despicable, it is extremely difficult for colleges to ban people who support terrorist groups. Oliver North and Henry Kissinger are both guilty of funneling money to those who murdered innocent people; yet neither one should be banned from college campuses, nor fired if they held a tenured position. Until a criminal conviction is obtained, Al-Arian’s guilt is in doubt; until USF changes its procedures, it is violating the tenets of academic freedom.

  • Posted by Larry on December 7, 2005 at 10:11am EST
  • John, Why do you think he will be deported ? Since he has not been convicted of a felony, I don’t see why he would be eligible for deportation. Perhaps you can provide specifics.

  • Whoa, hoss!
  • Posted by Bob A. on December 7, 2005 at 12:59pm EST
  • " .. Oliver North and Henry Kissinger are both guilty of funneling money to those who murdered innocent people .."

    I could care less about Lt. Col. North and Dr. K -- but could you provide the specific cites/references on their convictions? Thanks.

  • North's convictions
  • Posted by Larry on December 7, 2005 at 2:12pm EST
  • Dr. K. wasn't convicted (or indicted). North was convicted -- of accepting an illegal gratuity, aiding and abetting in the obstruction of a congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents -- but the DC Circuit overturned his convictions.

  • To Bob
  • Posted by Home on the Range on December 9, 2005 at 9:52pm EST
  • Bob or Homer (or Whichever Name You're Choosing This Time), the "Whoah Hoss" is getting old--especially when your comments are systematically debunked when you get on the board. Please do your homework before posting thoughtless comments so that we don't feel like we're on Bonanza getting commentary from Little Joe! :)

  • Posted by Larry on December 10, 2005 at 9:45am EST
  • Home on the Range, Bob's comments were valid. In fact, he was right to point out that Dr. K wasn't convicted, and likely it is unfair to claim that Ollie is a convict.