Judge Orders Police Department Files on Preconvention Surveillance Opened

NY TIMES
A federal magistrate judge yesterday released about 600 pages of secret documents relating to police preparations for the 2004 Republican National Convention, held in New York.

On May 4, the magistrate judge, James C. Francis IV, granted a request by the New York Civil Liberties Union and The New York Times to make the documents public, but also granted a 10-day stay to give the city time to file an appeal.

But in a letter to the judge dated Tuesday, a lawyer for the city, Peter G. Farrell, wrote that the city would not appeal, “in light of the documents’ prior disclosure and corresponding press coverage.”

The city had originally opposed the release of the documents because, it insisted, news organizations and legal groups would “fixate upon and sensationalize them,” and thus taint the potential pool of jurors who might later be asked to decide cases brought in connection with some of the nearly 2,000 arrests during the convention.

The Times reported in March that the Police Department had conducted wide-ranging surveillance of political groups and activists who were planning to attend the convention. While a small number appeared to be bent on creating trouble, the authorities said that most of those who came apparently had no plans to break the law. The surveillance was necessary, police officials have said, to head off possible terrorism or violent protests.

The documents that were unsealed yesterday during a conference in Federal District Court in Manhattan consisted of summary reports filed by detectives involved in police surveillance operations leading to the convention.

A second batch of documents contains raw intelligence reports produced by detectives upon which the summary reports were based. A sampling of those unfiltered reports reviewed by The Times shows that they include more detailed information about the groups and individuals that were watched and in some cases disclose how the undercover officers conducted the surveillance.

Judge Francis said that he would rule next week on motions from the city objecting to the release of that material to the plaintiffs.

The summary reports released yesterday and other raw intelligence reports that have not yet been made public show that before the convention, detectives traveled to at least 15 places, including cities in Canada and Europe, where they often posed as activists or sympathizers while participating in political meetings held by church groups, antiwar organizations and environmentalists, among others. The police have said that they needed to find out about what they called dangerous groups that they said were intent on disrupting the convention and breaking the law.

“I think a close examination of the documents will show that the New York City Police Department did an outstanding job of protecting this city during the Republican National Convention,” Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly said yesterday. “People wanted to come here to shut down the city, to replicate what happened in Seattle and Montreal and Genoa, and we simply did not let that happen.”

Civil rights lawyers have said that the records show that the police monitored many law-abiding citizens who were engaged in legally protected activities.

“This is an important first step toward exposing the N.Y.P.D.’s surveillance of political groups planning demonstrations at the convention,” said Christopher Dunn, associate legal director of the New York Civil Liberties Union.

“There are many more documents that remain secret, however, and this controversy will continue until the city releases all the documents.”

The judge also suggested that “the city might consider whether or not they want to proceed” with its request for a special inquiry into the sources for a New York Times article about the surveillance program.

City lawyers initially accused the civil liberties union lawyers of leaking the information, then dropped that charge and conceded that they did not know who had provided the information.

In his letter to the judge, Mr. Farrell wrote that the city will continue to seek “relief due to the disclosure of the intelligence documents in violation of the protective order,” under which the records were once sealed.