Getty Images

San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón, pictured when he was the city's police chief

Discrimination against and profiling of Arabs, Muslims and South Asians in San Francisco are a persistent problem, according to testimony presented last night at the city’s Human Rights Commission.

The Commission held hearings at which some 100 members of the local community testified. Many said that Muslims are under a constant state of surveillance in the Bay Area. The hearings were prompted in part by Police Chief George Gascon's plan to resume an intelligence-gathering operation that was halted under pressure from civil liberties groups in 1993. Those who attended also raised concerns about the police department's continued collaboration with federal authorities.

Members of local civil rights organizations, including the ACLU and the Asian Law Caucus, and a wide array of speakers – some in suits, others in sneakers – gathered to watch the four-hour-long hearing live and on feeds on televisions in two overflow rooms in City Hall.

Many who testified said they’re frequently detained and interrogated at the airport, harassed at work, racially profiled, spied upon and falsely arrested by local police and federal agents.

Complaints of employment discrimination among Muslims nationwide have increased by 60 percent since 2005, according to recent reports, a fact reflected in testimony.

The police department did not return calls for comment late Thursday afternoon.

At the hearing, speakers called for more oversight, transparency and restrictions on police surveillance of Muslim activities and asked commissioners to ensure that local police officers are not integrated with federal law enforcement.

ACLU attorney Julia Mass said the police have been underreporting their investigations of Muslim individuals and groups.

Department protocol requires that detectives request permission from a police commissioner before initiating investigation of any group or individuals involved in constitutionally protected activities, such as protests and religious gatherings, Mass said. The department also requires a monthly review and annual audit of such investigations. But Mass said the record of such authorizations is miniscule.

“The really low number of requests raises questions,” she said.

Summer Hararah, of San Francisco’s Asian Law Caucus, suggested placing a representative to monitor interrogations, inspections and treatment of travelers at airports.

Later, during the lengthy public comment session, one 8-year-old boy, who said he aspires to become a police officer, described the humiliation of being questioned and detained at SFO.

“Why aren’t other kids put in a glass cage?” he asked.

In the South Light Court at about 7:10 p.m., 25 men and women shed their shoes in a pile and knelt for prayer. Their chants drifted into the hall, where rows of people remained riveted to the television.

After finishing, they returned to their seats until the hearing -- after more than 60 comments from the public -- ended at about 9:15 p.m.

Chair Cecilia Chung closed the testimony with the commission's recommendation that the department not reinstate the program. It was not clear Thursday when or how the police department would decide its fate.

“We want San Francisco to be safe for everyone,” Chung said. “Hopefully, we can convince our SFPD that it is not necessary to reactivate such a surveillance program.”