AWAITING TRIAL

American's Two Years In Latin Jail

A fish importer from Jacksonville, Fla., has been held in a prison in
Ecuador without trial for nearly two years in what he says began as a
campaign by FBI agents to pressure him into testifying against a suspecte
d
drug trafficker.

In the United States such punishment without due process of law would be
a
violation of constitutional rights. But James Williams is not in the Unit
ed
States. And US officials say they have no intention of interfering in the
sovereign workings of the Ecuadoran justice system.

International law experts say Mr. Williams is stuck in a kind of
constitutional twilight zone, where American drug agents working behind t
he
scenes through Ecuadoran proxies could do almost anything they want to
increase the pressure on an imprisoned US citizen.

"It comes down to this issue: Whether the US government can prompt foreig
n
governments to do things that the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments [to
the US Constitution] would forbid our government from doing," says
Christopher Blakesley, a law professor at Louisiana State University in
Baton Rouge. "They think that now the way they can resolve all the
constitutional problems they face is to get foreign countries to do their
dirty work."

The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and federal prosecutors deny an
y
wrongdoing. They insist Williams's situation in Ecuador is the result of
independent actions taken by Ecuadoran officials without US involvement.
In
a November 1997 letter to a member of Congress, DEA chief Thomas
Constantine wrote in part: "The investigation itself was conducted
unilaterally by the Ecuadoran National Police Narcotics Division."

Court documents tell a different story. A letter found in a court file by
Williams's lawyer suggests the DEA requested the Williams investigation a
nd
his eventual arrest in Ecuador. And a State Department report acknowledge
s
that the investigation was conducted with US assistance.

Mr. Constantine insists that the DEA letter was written simply in respons
e
to a request by Ecuadoran officials for information about Williams.

The case raises fundamental questions of how much due-process protection
Williams should get. In 1957, the Supreme Court ruled that constitutional
protections under the Bill of Rights apply when US citizens face US
government law-enforcement action in foreign countries.

"When the government reaches out to punish a citizen who is abroad, the
shield which the Bill of Rights and other parts of the Constitution provi
de
to protect his life and liberty should not be stripped away just because
he
happens to be in another land," the ruling says in part.

Experts say the Williams case takes the issue into a new area - one the
court hasn't addressed. "What rights does an American citizen have when a
foreign jurisdiction has acted at the behest of the United States? The
answer is none," says Wilmer Parker, a defense lawyer in Atlanta and a
former federal prosecutor.

Origins Of The Case

Williams's ordeal began in April 1996, when he was contacted by FBI agent
s
seeking his testimony. The agents told him that one of his fish suppliers
in Colombia, JosE9 Castrillon, was a drug trafficker. They wanted Willia
ms
to testify against him.

Williams said that as far as he knew, Mr. Castrillon was a legitimate fis
h
seller. He said he had no knowledge of drug trafficking or any other
illegal operations.

The agents didn't believe him. Williams invited the agents to investigate
his business, including the traceable wire transfers used in all his
financial dealings with Castrillon. He turned over more than five boxes o
f
business records, according to his lawyer.

(photo caption) PRISON LIFE: James Williams awaits trial in this Ecuador
jail. He has been in prison since 1996 and says the US is pressuring him
to
testify against a suspected drug dealer. (COURTESY OF ROBIN WILLIAMS)

By July 1996, Williams hadn't heard from the 3D46BI and wanted to finish
a
pending project in Ecuador. His lawyer checked with the FBI and was told
that the bureau had no objection to Williams traveling to Ecuador.

A month later, on Aug. 14, 1996, a DEA agent based in Ecuador wrote a
letter to Ecuadoran counter-narcotics officials in which he identified
James Williams and five other men as being members of a "narcotrafficking
organization." The letter does not say Williams is a suspect, rather it
says that investigations have "established" his membership in the crimina
l
organization. No specific evidence is offered. The letter concludes with
a
request that Williams and the others be investigated "and steps be taken,
as the case may require, for the purposes of disarming this international
drug-trafficking organization."

When Williams arrived in Ecuador in September 1996, he assumed the FBI ha
d
investigated him and that he was free to continue conducting his fish
business. But within days of his arrival, he was arrested by Ecuadoran
narcotics policemen. He says he was interrogated for three days before
anyone was allowed to see him.

Two weeks after his arrest, Williams's lawyer in the US, Isaac Mitrani,
says he received a call from an FBI agent. The agent wondered if Williams
was ready now to cooperate, and if so, federal agents could help him get
out of prison in Ecuador. Williams refused, saying all he wanted to do wa
s
tell the truth.

Mr. Mitrani says the FBI called back a month later, this time saying that
Panama would soon file charges against Williams, and if necessary, try hi
m
in absentia. If he was inclined to cooperate, now was the time to do it,
the agent said, according to Mitrani. Charges were eventually filed in
Panama against Williams, but in late June a Panamanian judge threw them o
ut
for lack of evidence.

Meanwhile, Williams remains imprisoned in Ecuador.

The DEA works closely with Ecuadoran antinarcotics officials. Human-right
s
workers familiar with the political situation say US officials actually
helped draft Ecuador's tough antidrug law, which, for example, prohibits
bail for anyone like Williams who is arrested in a narcotics case.

'It is really some high-handed and pretty scary behavior on the part of t
he
US government.' - Joseph McNamara, a research fellow at the Hoover
Institution and a former police chief

In addition, US drug agents are well aware of the conditions that an
American or any other suspect would face once arrested in Ecuador. A US
State Department human-rights report released earlier this year paints a
sober picture:

"The most fundamental human-rights abuse stems from shortcomings in the
politicized, inefficient, and corrupt legal and judicial system. People a
re
subject to arbitrary arrest; once incarcerated, they may wait years befor
e
being convicted or acquitted unless they pay bribes."

"Those [judges] charged with determining the validity of detention often
allowed frivolous charges to be brought, either because they were
overworked or because the accuser bribed them. In many instances, the
system was used as a means of harassment in civil cases in which one part
y
sought to have the other arrested on criminal charges."

"Police continue to physically mistreat suspects and prisoners, usually
with impunity.... Victims reported that the police beat them, burned them
with cigarettes, applied electric shocks, or threatened them
psychologically."

Going It Alone

Instead of cooperating with the FBI and accepting 3D46BI help to get out
of
Ecuador, Williams attempted to fight back. He hired a lawyer in Ecuador.
He
set up a Web site to publicize his plight. His wife, Robin, appealed to
members of Congress.

The campaign gained some momentum in Washington, but never got close to
sparking oversight hearings in either the House or Senate judiciary
committees. A further setback for Williams and his supporters came on Jun
e
1, when federal prosecutors in Tampa unsealed a superseding indictment of
Castrillon that named Williams as a co-conspirator. The indictment says
Williams acted as a cocaine smuggler, cocaine distributor, and money
launderer. But it cites no specific illegal acts by Williams.

Prosecutors declined to discuss the evidence against Williams. There is n
o
legal requirement that the evidence presented to the grand jury be
disclosed in an indictment.

If he is convicted of the US conspiracy charges, Williams faces up to lif
e
in prison and $4 million in fines. In Ecuador, he faces roughly eight yea
rs
in prison if convicted.

In an interview conducted by telephone from prison, Williams says he want
s
only one thing - the chance to defend himself in a US courtroom. He says
he
is confident that once a US jury hears all the evidence in his case, he
will be acquitted. "All Robin and I have ever asked for is an opportunity
to present the truth. It can't happen here [in Ecuador]. I will be
condemned here without any proof or evidence," Williams says.

Williams says he believes he was indicted because his case was beginning
to
attract interest among some members of Congress. Federal prosecutors say
his indictment was the decision of a federal grand jury.

At first, Williams says, he and his supporters welcomed the indictment
because they thought he would be returned to the US to stand trial with
Castrillon. But prosecutors in Tampa say that Williams must complete his
Ecuador case before being returned to face the US charges.

As a result of his ordeal in Ecuador, Williams has been imprisoned since
September 1996. He has lost his business, his life savings, and a
significant portion of his extended family's life savings. He is yet to b
e
arraigned in a US court of law.

"It is really some high-handed and pretty scary behavior on the part of t
he
US government," says Joseph McNamara, a research fellow at the Hoover
Institution and a former police chief.

Williams's supporters say even if he ever gets his day in US court, he ma
y
be unable to pay for an effective defense.

"In my opinion they don't want me back in the United States right now
because I don't know anything that would hurt Castrillon, and there is a
good possibility that I might say something that could help Castrillon,"
Williams says.

"All we are asking is to bring him home and give him his right to
constitutional protections and a fair trial," says Mr. Mitrani.