United States
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNITED STATES Human Rights Developments During the year, human rights violations relating to immigration practices, police abuse, custodial treatment and conditions, the death penalty, and issues of discrimination continued in the United States. The effects of new laws restricting the rights of asylum seekers arriving in the country, prisoners seeking to challenge unconstitutional treatment or conditions, and defendants in capital cases became apparent. Meanwhile, a torture allegation made by a Haitian immigrant against New York City police officers in August alarmed city residents, with even the most stalwart supporters of the police acknowledging abuse and accountability problems within the force. And, for the first time since four Vietnam anti-war protesters were shot and killed at Kent State University in 1970, a U.S. citizen was shot dead on U.S. soil by on-duty military personnelCthis time by Marines on anti-drug patrol near the U.S.-Mexico border. Immigration Policy and Practice Implementation of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 began in April, causing widespread confusion. The law=s new expedited removal provisions hindered the ability of asylum seekers to exercise their internationally protected right to seek and enjoy asylum and undermined the prohibition on the expulsion or return (refoulement) of refugees as set out in international human rights treaties and U.S. law. Individuals arriving at a port of entry during 1997 with fraudulent documents, or none, were questioned by immigration inspectors to ascertain whether they should be allowed to make cases of credible fear of return to their countries. The asylum seeker was not allowed access to legal counsel at the time of this determination, which took place on the spot after typically long international flights and, in some cases, immediately following traumatic experiences. Despite requests from several nongovernmental organizations and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) did not allow access or independent monitoring during this critical decision-making process. If asylum seekers were allowed to make a credible-fear claim, they were required to prepare their cases in a very short time (sometimes days) while in detention, without essential documentation or guarantees of legal advice. During the credible-fear interview, asylum seekers have a right to counsel, but in many instances these representatives were not allowed to participate. Human Rights Watch learned of individuals with credible claims who had been returned to their countries of origin following these determinations. If an individual was successful in the credible-fear hearing, he or she would usually be detained for an undetermined time pending an asylum hearing. During the year, Congress considered legislation to focus on the plight of religiously persecuted groups around the world, and the bills included provisions to allow those persecuted on religious grounds to bypass the new expedited removal proceedings, thus apparently acknowledging the lack of appropriate protections for those seeking asylum under the new law. Critics of the legislation also opposed its preferential treatment for one group of asylum seekers over all others. The 1996 immigration law also promoted the use of detention of immigrants and refugees as a central aspect of U.S. policy. The bill provided for the detention of most individuals arriving at ports of entry without proper documentation, and created new categories of immigrants with criminal backgrounds whose detention was mandatory. The increased numbers of detainees strained existing detention facilities, leading the INS to house almost half of all its detainees in local jails. The increasing reliance on privately run contract facilities or local jails to hold individuals in INS custody raised serious questions about INS oversight and standards required of the facilities. Human Rights Watch visited jails holding INS detainees, and among their complaints were poor physical conditions, inadequate access to legal assistance, inadequate information from the INS regarding their status, mixing with criminal populations in the jails, poor health care, physical mistreatment, and isolation from families as they were often detained in remote areas thousands of miles from where they were originally apprehended. Treatment of minors in INS custody raised human rights concerns, as the rights of hundreds of detained children in California and Arizona were violated. Human Rights Watch found that INS treatment of minor children detained with no responsible adult present ignored both international law and INS regulations and policy by its failure to inform detained children of their legal rights, interference with children=s attempts to obtain legal representation, and long-term detention of children in high-security facilities with prison-like conditions. Human rights violations, such as unjustified shootings, sexual assaults, and beatings, continued to be committed by the U.S. Border Patrol and other immigration officials along the U.S.-Mexico border. A Citizens= Advisory Panel was appointed by the Justice Department to recommend long-overdue reforms and monitor implementation, yet after more than two years of existence, the panel failed to submit a report to the U.S. attorney general with its recommendations, although in October the INS claimed that a report would be issued shortly. It was not clear whether the panel, or a similar yet differently staffed advisory committee, would continue to meet to hold more hearings or make recommendations for reform on this issue. The panel=s inability to complete its task confirmed the view of many human rights groups that external, independent citizen review of complaints against INS personnel was the only way to gauge the extent of abusive conduct and to ensure accountability when violations occur. In the meantime, the number of Border Patrol agents increased dramatically during 1997, from approximately 3,400 agents in fiscal year 1993 to a force of 6,000; the force was projected to grow to 10,000 agents by the year 2001. This was cause for some concern, as hiring surges in the past had resulted in the rushed recruitment of individuals unsuitable for any law enforcement work, and in long delays in checking recruits= qualifications and background; under such circumstances, ill-qualified or violent recruits remain undiscovered until beyond the probationary period and become almost impossible to dismiss later. Furthermore, as thousands of new agents were quickly put in place, INS officials acknowledged that agents being promoted to supervisor positions were not receiving adequate training. As a result of policy-reform suggestions from Human Rights Watch and others, the Justice Department stated that it was considering hiring an undisclosed number of new Office of the Inspector General investigators (who are responsible for investigating some abuse allegations) whose staff had not increased as the Border Patrol grew exponentially for years. And in response to Human Rights Watch=s request for information on disciplinary actions taken against Border Patrol agents, the Justice Department disclosed that thirty INS employees, including Border Patrol agents stationed along the southwest border, had been disciplined during a twenty-eight month period, with punishments ranging from counseling to termination. While the disclosure of even this limited amount of disciplinary information was unprecedented, it remained impossible to assess whether disciplinary actions were taken in deserving cases. On May 20, eighteen-year-old high school student Esequiel Hernández was shot dead by U.S. Marines patrolling the border near Redford, Texas as he tended his family=s goats. Texas Rangers investigating the shooting complained that the Marines failed to provide investigators with even basic information about what had taken place, and noted that the physical evidence did not support the Marines= accounts. The shooting sparked community criticism of military deployment in populated areas and led to a temporary suspension of anti-drug border operations by the Marines, working in conjunction with the Border Patrol along the U.S.-Mexico border. In August, a grand jury (which reportedly included a Border Patrol supervisor on duty the night of the incident, the wife of a Border Patrol agent, and a retired Border Patrol agent) chose not to indict the Marine who shot Hernández; in August, a similar consent degree was reached with the Steubenville, Ohio police force Police Abuse Incidents of police abuse continued unabated during the year; the torture allegations by Haitian immigrant Abner Louima against officers of the New York City Police Department renewed calls for effective oversight of that police force. Observers questioned whether the signals sent by high-level police and city officials regarding Azero tolerance@ for criminals had encouraged officers to engage in brutal treatment. Among the troubling facts surrounding the case were: the habitual Acode of silence@ among police officers who refused to cooperate with investigators even after the police commissioner and the city=s mayor publicly urged them to do so; the force=s internal affairs unit=s improper handling of the timely complaint filed by a nurse at the hospital where Louima was taken; and the apparent nonchalance displayed by the involved officers on the night of the incident, indicating that