Impunity Watch: North America

Immigration and Nationality Act Leads to Civil and Human Rights Abuses and Violations

By Brenda Lopez Romero
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) authorized more local police enforcement to use section 287(g) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. 287(g) allows state and local authorities to have some of their officers trained to enforce immigration laws. Many advocates believed that the Obama administration would end this program, because they believe that 287(g) is arbitrary and punitive. Civil and human rights organizations argue that this program leads to multiple violations of the law and the Constitution because it is so susceptible to abuse by law enforcement officials.

In the beginning of this year, the Government Accountability Office found that the program lacked internal controls, with the result that 287(g) officers were detaining traffic-offenders rather than genuinely criminal aliens.

Advocates argue that the program makes immigrant communities less safe, including those that are U.S. citizens and legal residents, due to the strained relationship between local police authorities and the people. In fact, Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa County in Arizona is now being investigated by the Justice Department on allegations that include racial profiling and due process violations.

 (PHOTO: The Economist)

Another strong supporter of “tough” immigration enforcement includes the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), a group that the Southern Poverty Law Center designated as a hate group in part for its support of xenophobic hate speech.

Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, expects immigration work to restart in Congress in 2010. "As of right now, I have not been convinced that comprehensive immigration reform cannot move in 2010, so it needs to move," Saenz said. "If that is not possible, then I'm interested in discussing this idea of down payments with a commitment to fulfill the obligation through comprehensive immigration reform that is not postponed indefinitely."

"Part of President Obama's mandate coming in, particularly in the high levels of support that he received from Latino voters in critical states, I think a significant part of his mandate was about comprehensive immigration reform," Saenz said. However, Saenz is convinced that a good start is ending 287(g), a statute that has in effect created unsafe communities, and has essentially condoned civil rights abuses.  

In New York, a multilingual religious group of Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim and Yoruba that took part in the prayer service and made a call for justice for hardworking, taxpaying communities, because "the need for comprehensive immigration reform remains as pressing as ever," the religious leaders said in a written statement. "Our communities continue to suffer because of raids, anti-immigrant press, hate crimes against the immigrant community, and a broken immigration system that keeps at least twelve million people undocumented." Reverend Donna Schaper stated that “this is un-American” and that family values did not stop at the borders. 

The Federal Bureau of Investigation statistics prove the claims that hate crimes are an increasing nationwide problem, particularly assaults against Latinos. 

For more information, please see:

The Associated Press - AP Interview: Leader Has Back-Up Immigration Plan - 26 September  2009

The Economist - The Continuing Crackdown - 17 September 2009

The NY Daily News - Anti-Immigration Group FAIR Mars Smart Reform Push by Faith Groups - 17 September 2009

Prisoner's Suicide Being Investigated

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WILKES BARRE, Pennsylvania - The attorney who represented deceased murderer Matthew Bullock has opened his estate to commence proceedings against the prison guards that allegedly verbally abused Bullock. Bullock committed suicide at the State Correctional Institution in Dallas on August 24, 2009. 

Matthew Bullock was found guilty of third degree murder in the death of his girlfriend in 2003. However, a jury found that Bullock was mentally ill at the time of the murder. He was also convicted of voluntary manslaughter but mentally ill in the death of his girlfriend's fetus. Bullock's girlfriend was twenty-two months pregnant at the time of her death. He was sentenced to twenty to sixty years at a secure mental health facility in late 2003.

Before being transferred to the State Correctional Institute in Dallas, Bullock resided at the State Correctional Institute at Waymart which is a secure mental health facility. The Dallas prison is not a secure mental health facility. 

On August 24, prison guards making rounds found Bullock had passed away in his cell. His death was deemed a suicide. According to prisoner testimony whose cells were near Bullock's, prison guards at the Dallas institute "facilitated and encouraged" Bullock to commit suicide. One prisoner's statement said that the guards would kick on his door and yell derogatory comments to Bullock provoking his suicide. Also, Bullock was moved from a cell with a video camera to a cell without monitoring capabilities. He was not placed on suicide watch despite stating that he was going to commit suicide. 

Questions are now being raised by Bullock's lawyer and prisoner rights watch group Fed Up! about Bullock's treatment. According to Brett Grote, an investigator at Fed Up!, there have been eighty five complaints of abuse filed by fifty two prisoners at the Dallas facility to the Pennsylvania Attorney General's Office. Also, the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections is being questioned on why Bullock was moved from a secured mental facility to an unsecured facility. Department of Corrections officials stated that they ultimately determine where prisoners reside and will only take the judge's sentencing order as a recommendation. Prisoner rights groups argue that the sentencing judge's order is a mandate that the Department of Corrections should follow.

For more information, please see:

Times Leader - Lawsuit in Inmate Suicide Possible - 29 September 2009

Patriot News - Suicide Raises Questions About Prison Treatment - 19 September 2009

Citizens Voice - Convicted Killer Takes Own Life at SCI Dallas - 25 August 2009

Canadian Terror Suspect Sues Canada for Their Role in His Detention in Sudan

By William Miller

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

OTTAWA, Canada - Abousfian Abdelrazik has filed a lawsuit against the Canadian government and Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon claiming that they violated his rights as a Canadian citizen when they denied him flying credentials back to Canada after he had been placed on the UN no-fly list at the request of the United States government. He is suing Ottawa for twenty-three million Canadian dollars for a list of charges including false imprisonment, negligence, and breach of his rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He further accuses Cannon of misfeasance in public office, intentional infliction of emotional distress and breaches of his rights under the Canadian Charter and is suing him for three million dollars. 

Abdelrazik is a Muslim living in Canada with dual citizenship in both Canada and his home country of Sudan. He first came to Canada in 1990 as a refugee in fear of prosecution for his opposition to the Sudan government. He became a Canadian Citizen in 1995. In 2003, Abdelrazik returned to Sudan to visit his sick mother and was promptly arrested by authorities. He was detained for twelve days and later imprisoned for eleven months. Abdelrazik claims he was tortured during his detention and was visited by agents of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service who refused to help him and told him he was no longer wanted in Canada. He claims that while imprisoned in Sudan, Canadian government officials questioned him about his connections to terrorist groups but told his late wife they did not know where he was.

 

Abdelrazik was released in July of 2004 only to find out he could not return to Canada because his passport had expired while he was in prison and the Canadian government refused to issue him new travel documentation. As a result, he was stranded in Sudan and was ultimately imprisoned again for nine months. Abdelrazik claims he was again visited by Canadian officials during his imprisonment who refused to help him and only wanted to know about his possible connections to terrorist agencies. After his release Abdelrazik was granted safe haven at the Canadian Embassy in Sudan where he remained for over a year. In March 2009 a Canadian Federal Judge ruled that Canada had violated Abdelrazik's right under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms by not helping him return to Canada. Abdelrazik was issued an emergency passport and returned to Canada in June.

 

Abdelrazik is also seeking his removal from the UN terrorist watch list. He admits to traveling to many war torn regions but claims he did so to promote humanitarian efforts. He adamantly denies any connection with terrorist organizations. Canadian federal police and spy agencies have investigated his alleged ties to terrorist cells in Montreal and connections to Ahmed Ressam who is currently in prison for his attempt to bomb an airport in Los Angeles. The RCMP and other agencies however, admit that they do not have evidence to charge Abdelrazik with any crimes and no charges have ever been filed against Abdelrazik for his involvement with any terrorist group.

 

Abdelrazik does have scarring on his back which is consistent with his claims that he was tortured while imprisoned in Sudan. His allegations that Canadian officials visited him in prison and refused to help him have yet to be proven.

Abousfian Abdelrazik is suing the Canadian Government for failing to help him return to Canada after he became stranded in Sudan. (PHOTO: AFP)

For more information please see:

Globe and Mail - Abdelrazik's Lost Years - 28 September 2009

AFP - Canadian Torture Suspect Sues Over Alleged Torture in Sudan - 24 September 2009

National Post - Abdelrazik Sues Canada for $27 Million - 24 September 2009

Canada.com - Abdelrazik Demands Canada Remove Him From UN Terror List -23 July 2009

Canadian Foreign Minister Protests Iran Head of State by Walking Out on Speech

By William Miller

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

NEW YORK, United States - Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and other Canadian officials boycotted a speech given by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the United Nations General Assembly to protest Iran’s human rights violations and President Ahmadinejad’s anti-Semitic remarks. Canada was joined in the boycott by Israel who was also not present for Ahmadinejad’s speech. Other nations, including the US, were present when the Iranian head of state began his speech but walked out as the speech took on more anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli tones.

A spokeswoman for Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon told the Canadian press that Cannon would not attend Ahmadinejad’s speech because Ahmadinejad is hostile to Canada’s ally Israel, continuously delivers anti-Semitic speeches, and commits countless human rights violations against his own people. The spokeswoman specifically cited the violent acts by the Iranian government towards election protestors in Iran who protested the results of the Iranian presidential election claiming the results were fraudulent. Opposition groups say there where at least seventy-two protestors killed by the Iranian government in the aftermath of the election. Iranian government officials, however, claim only thirty-six were killed. Hundreds of others remain imprisoned for their part in the protests.

Cannon himself also pointed to Iran’s detention of an Iranian-Canadian citizen as one of his reasons for not attending Ahmadinejad’s speech in an interview with Fox News. Iran has resisted all attempts by Canada to negotiate his release, claiming that the detainee was involved in a plot against the government although no charges have been brought against him. Iran has also denied his Canadian citizenship.

Iranian President Mahmaud Ahamadinejad (PHOTO: Canadian Press)

President Ahmadinejad has a reputation for making anti-Semitic speeches for some time and has incited walkouts at UN events before. Diplomats from nations including the US, Britain, and France have protested his speeches in the past. He has called Israel "the most cruel and repressive racist regime" and has called for their destruction. He has also angered world leaders by claiming the Holocaust was fabricated and never actually took place. Although President Ahmadinejad’s speeches are condemned by the leaders of many nations he maintains a right as head of state to speak at the U.N. General Assembly and has been hailed by some world leaders who share his hostilities towards Israel.

For more information pleas see:

Canadian Press – Canada to Boycott Ahmadinejad’s UN Speech – 24 September 2009

Fox News – Canadian Walkout on Ahmadinejad – 24 September 2009

Reuters – Ahmadinejad Prompts Walkout From UN Racism Summit – 20 April 2009

Nicaragua's Highest Court Rules on Military Violation

By Brenda Lopez Romero

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

MANAGUA, Nicaragua - The Constitution of Nicaragua provides the right to search and receive information from its government. Based on this constitutional right, the Justices of the Nicaraguan Supreme Court found that the Military of Nicaragua had violated Article 66 of the Magna Carta (Nicaraguan Constitution). The Article reads that Nicaraguans have the right to truthful information. This right encompasses the liberty to search, receive and diffuse information and ideas, orally, in writing, by graphics, or by any other process of its election.

In its opinion, the Court stated that the Armed Forces more or less perverted the governmental institutions through its impunity, in part, due to the culture of secrecy that it continues to promote. Furthermore, the Act of Access to Public Information was also violated when the Military refused to reveal the statistics on the number of young men that had lost their lives during service in the Patriotic Military Service in the 1980s. 

The news agency, el Diario La Prensa, made the request for the information based on the enabling Act.

Gabriel Alvarez, constitutional rights scholar, stated that the Military's refusal can be brought to the Constitutional Hall of the Supreme Court and then to the Hall of Administrative Contention of the Supreme Court to seek relief and leave to enforce the constitutional right.

Most citizens do not have the resources or confidence in the judicial institution to continue the procedure, but Alvarez believes it is indispensable to continue the pursuit in order to change most of the country's institutional culture of secrecy in all branches and to a certain extent, its sense of impunity. According to Alvarez, officers routinely violate laws operating under the presumption that they will not be challenged before the law and the people. He warns officials to remember that the right of citizens to information and its equitable distribution is fundamental to sustain democracies. Some former military officers that specialize in security and human rights think that the resistance is due more in part to political protection of high ranking officials. 

Cairo Manuel Lopez, constitutional scholar and former president of the National Assembly also believes the Military violated the Constitution. Lopez indicated that the institutional culture of secrecy was inherited from the entrenched French culture of a strong central and secretive government.

Public Relations Director, Adolfo Zepeda, responds to requests for public information (PHOTO: La Prensa)

For more information, please see:

El Diario La Prensa - Ejército también viola Constitución - 26 Septiembre 2009

El Diario La Prensa - Ejército oculta cifra de muertos en SMP - 25 Septiembre 2009

El Diario La Prensa - Ejército debe “lavarse la cara” y revelar cifras - 31 Agosto 2009 

Panama Dismantles a Protest Camp Site of Naso People as They Seek Protection of Their Land and Human Rights

By Brenda Lopez Romero
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

PANAMA CITY, Panama - An Indigenous group of Panama, Naso, established a permanent camp site (“street sit-in”) in front of the Cathedral Plaza of San Felipe, until yesterday when it was dismantled by police units under the direction of the Ministry of Government and Justice. 

Naso protesting at their camp site (PHOTO: The Star of Panama)

Luis Gamarra, activist for Indigenous rights, gave an interview where he indicated that the Director of the National Police, Gustavo Perez, approached the camp site to request they abandon the camp site, because it gave the place and the city a negative image. Perez stated he had orders from the Ministry of Government and Justice and that in exchange for the abandonment, on Wednesday, there would be a negotiation meeting to hear their grievances. The director of Indigenous Policy also placed pressure on the group to leave the camp site on the condition of a meeting. 

However, on Wednesday, the meeting was canceled and postponed to Thursday. The Wednesday timeline to abandon the camp site by the Naso, however, was not postponed, and the National Police started the dismantling of their camp site.   

Naso marching (PHOTO: The Star of Panama)

The Naso people argue that their Indigenous rights are being trampled by the Government. The claim includes disrespect of their ancestral rights, an end to Ganader Bocas activities on their lands, and a suspension of concessions to hydroelectric plants that are encroaching on their land.  The United Nations has stated that Panama has violated the rights of indigenous peoples by allowing concessions to AES Changuinola to build a hydroelectric plant without the consent of the communities living nearby, and for forcibly removing Naso residents from their land.

Furthermore, the Naso want the legislation “Comarca Naso” (demarcation of their lands), that is pending in the Commission of Indigenous Affairs in the National Assembly of Representatives, to be debated openly and inclusive of the Naso people. The Environmental Defender Law Center is bringing a case against the Government for its failure to grant all its Indigenous peoples the right to their traditional lands. Pursuant to the Panama Constituion and the American Convention on Human Rights, which Panama ratified, Indigenous peoples of Panama are entitled to a legal mechanism to be able to hold land title.

The Inter-American Court of Human Rights (CIDH) has on two occasions found Panama in violation of human rights. The Court will, again, consider claims regarding violations of twelve articles of the American Convention of Human Rights

The Naso people have being waiting for the legislation “Comarca Naso” since early 2005. Gamarra warned that if the Government continues to turn deaf ears to their demands “this would reach extreme consequences.”  

For more information, please see:

La Estrella de Panamá - Pueblo Naso en pie de guerra, 25 Septiembre 2009

AFP - Indígenas panameños caminan 500 km para pedir fin a proyectos energéticos, 17 Septiembre 2009

La Prensa - Denuncian operativos contra los nasos en Bocas, 5 Abril 2009

Feingold Amendment Would Limit Patriot Act

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Senator Russell Feingold (WI-D) introduced new legislation that would extend certain provisions of the Patriot Act. The roving wiretaps provision, the library records provision and the lone wolf provision of the Act are set to expire on December 31. However, the bill would narrow certain provisions of the Patriot Act and surveillance laws.

Previously, the roving wiretap provision allowed the F.B.I. to follow and trace different phone numbers that were used by suspected terrorists. The library records provision allowed the F.B.I. to attain court orders to examine any tangible things, such as a person's library records or banking transactions, that were relevant to a terrorist investigation. The lone wolf provision allowed the F.B.I. under a court order to wiretap a terrorist who was not affiliated with any country or with any terrorist group.

Entitled the Justice Act, the legislation would insert privacy and civil liberty protections into the Patriot Act and the FISA amendments. The Justice Act would amend the National Security Letter provision by making it more difficult for the F.B.I. to gain access from Internet Service Providers, banks, and other financial institutions of private customer records. The legislation also takes away the immunity from civil liability that private companies enjoyed under the expiring provisions of the Patriot Act.

The Justice Act would also restrict parts of the FISA amendments that were passed in 2008. It would limit the wiretapping provision by restricting the bulk collection of communications coming into the United States. It also would place limitations on bag searches and grant great protection for those engaged in civil disobedience.

Congressional hearings began this week to debate the reauthorization of the three expiring Patriot Act provisions. At a Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on September 23, Assistant Attorney General David Kris was asked if the Obama administration would support more congressional oversight in the execution of the Act. Kris was less than forthcoming with how the administration would welcome more oversight. Kris would not answer questions on whether the new provisions would limit the Justice Departments' current investigations. Also, Kris stated that at this time the Obama administration was not ready to comment on any bill or amendments concerning the Act's reauthorization

David Kris (left) speaking on the new Justice Act (PHOTO: CNN)

For more information, please see:

Washington Post - Talking Transparency Isn't the Same as Seeing Through It - 24 September 2009

Philadelphia Inquirer - Reining in the Patriot Act - 21 September 2009

New York Times - Battle Looms Over the Patriot Act - 19 September 2009

ACLU - Bill Introduced to Reform Patriot Act - 17 September 2009

Political Unrest in Honduras After the Surprise Appearance of Deposed President Zelaya

By Brenda Lopez Romero
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras – After a surprise return of the deposed President Jose Manuel Zelaya, the current Honduran government implemented a nationwide curfew. 

Honduran troops surround the Brazilian Embassy in the capital, Tegucigalpa, on Tuesday (PHOTO: CNN)

Zelaya was ousted on June 28, and despite international political, diplomatic and economic isolation, the interim President Roberto Micheletti has unwaveringly resisted said pressure to allow Zelaya to return to power. Micheletti contends that there was no coup, but rather a constitutional transfer of power. Zelaya faces charges of violating the constitution relating to a proposed referendum to allow a second consecutive term for presidency that was at the center of his ouster.  Zelaya’s term ends in January and he would not have benefited from any referendum adopted by the constitutional assembly.

Nonetheless, Honduras’ Supreme Court held the ballot initiative was illegal and Congress had decreed Zelaya couldn't hold it.

On Monday, Zelaya’s appearance, in the Brazilian Embassy in the capital of Tegucigalpa, took everyone by surprise, including the Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Luiz Nunes Amorim. As a result, Micheletti issued a nationwide curfew for that same day in order to halt violence that erupted with the return of the country's deposed president. 

Honduras media reported that the government will announce today, on radio and television, that the curfew will be lifted at six in the morning on Thursday; thus, businesses, schools, and the government will return to normal operating hours.

The curfew was ignored by Zelaya supporters who assembled outside the Brazilian Embassy. The Micheletti administration stated, on television broadcast Tuesday, that 2,500 demonstrators were dispersed without deaths. But Marcial Torres, a journalist for La Tribuna newspaper, said a doctor had informed him of at least eighty people that were admitted in an area hospital with injuries. Today, the Police announced that two men were killed in the disturbance. Police and soldiers maintained a security perimeter around the Brazilian embassy, disbanding pro-Zelaya supporters, whom remains confined inside the embassy.
  

The streets of Tegucigalpa (PHOTO: La Prensa)

"The country is paralyzed," with a “tense calm” in the nearly deserted streets of the capital, Torres said. The tension is fueled by uncertainty of how events will develop between a steadfast Micheletti and his potential response to Zelaya, who stated he returned for "homeland, restitution or death."

All businesses, schools, and universities were closed. Additionally, all four of Honduras’ international airports in and outbound flights were canceled Tuesday and remain closed.

U.S. Department of State spokesman Ian Kelly confirmed to reporters in Washington, that Micheletti's government isolated the embassy by cutting water, power and phone lines to the building, and Nunes Amorim, noted this action was a "very serious" move by Micheletti that violated international law. 

The Brazilian foreign minister said he spoke with Zelaya and asked him not to use inflammatory language.  Kelly as well reported, "The United States calls on all parties to remain calm and avoid actions that might provoke violence in Honduras and place individuals at risk or harm. We urge that all parties refrain from actions that would lead to further unrest." U.S. diplomats and Brazil remained in contact with both sides in the conflict and support dialogue. Food delivered on Tuesday was believed to have been brought by the Americans, Torres said. However, Micheletti said in an interview with local network Televicentro, that Zelaya's sudden appearance would not revive negotiations. Micheletti insisted in a letter to Brazilian authorities that they either give Zelaya asylum or turn him over to Honduran authorities. 

A looted store in the capital (PHOTO:  The Associated Press)

On Wednesday, when the curfew was temporarily lifted hungry Hondurans went through looted stores and lined up for food. Lila Armendia, a thirty-eight year-old seamstress has been unable to work and said it was "like being in jail." Many Hondurans feel caught in the middle of a fight between two leaders — neither of whom they support said Edie Eguigure, fourty-seven, waiting in a long line to buy food for his family: "It's time for Micheletti and Zelaya to sit down to negotiate to end this problem that is affecting more than anything the poorest of the poor."

Micheletti vowed Monday night to stay in power despite Zelaya's return.

Zelaya did not provide details on how he got into the country except that it was a fifteen to sixteen hour trip he journeyed "with the help of Hondurans." 

For more information, please see:

The Associated Press - Curfew-trapped Hondurans seek food amid crisis, 23 September 2009

La Prensa - Policía informa de 2 muertos tras los disturbios, 23 Septiembre 2009

La Prensa - Toque de queda se suspenderá a las 6:00 a.m – 23 Septiembre 2009

CNN - Honduran military uses tear gas on ousted leader's supporters, 22 September 2009

Mexican School Children Threatened With Expulsion

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

DEL RIO, Texas - Kelt Cooper, superintendent for the San Felipe Del Rio school distract, has imposed new regulations for school children who cross the border from Ciudad Acuna, Mexico every day for their education. The new regulation requires the students or their parents to prove residency within the Del Rio school district, even if they can prove their United States citizenship. Parents will now have to show either a utility bill or lease in order to prove their residency within the school district. If they cannot show proof, then their children will either be expelled from the school or pay tuition in order to continue their education.

Welcome sign to Del Rio (PHOTO: Wikipedia)

The new regulation stems from Cooper's observance of many vehicles with Mexican license plates dropping their children off at certain schools. He then asked Border Patrol agents to count the number of school children that crossed the border between the two cities on a certain day. Border Patrol reported that they counted 550 school children on that day of which 150 had student visas. School officials were then directed to pass out letters informing children and their parents that they had to provide documentation of residence in order to attend public school in the district.

In 1982, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that students could not be discriminated against because of their immigration status. Therefore, the children crossing the border to attend school in the Del Rio school district do so legally as United States citizens, permanent residents with green cards, or Mexicans with student visas. However, despite the Texas Supreme Court ruling, Texas law requires proof of residency in order to receive free public education.

Cooper understands that some United States citizens may be denied free public education because of the regulation but forms his argument in terms of residency. He stated that "citizenship is a moot point, it comes down to whether you live here." Parents from Northern Mexico send their children to American public schools so that they have a better education and access to college. They live in Mexico instead of the Del Rio school district because the cost of living is cheaper.

No students have been expelled yet because of the regulation. Nevertheless, if students are expelled for failing to prove residency, the school district tends to lose a great deal of funding from the state and federal government. Texas funds each school district based on enrollment. Therefore, if students are expelled, the school district would lose this funding. Cooper estimated that if 400 students were expelled, the Del Rio school district would lose about 2.7 million dollars.

For more information, please see

Education Week - Learning the Language:Texas Superintendent Cracks Down on Enrollment of Mexican Residents - 22 September 2009

MSNBC - Students Told to Prove Texas Residency or Leave - 21 September 2009

CNN - Texas School District Turns Away Students From Mexico - 11 September 2009

Canadian Court Hears Sentencing Arguments for First Person Convicted Under Canadian War Crimes Act

By William Miller

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

MONTREAL, Canada - A Canadian Court began hearing the first arguments in the sentencing of Desire Munyaneza, who was convicted under Canada’s Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act. Munyaneza is the first person to be convicted under the Act since it went into effect in 2000.

Desiere Munyanesza was the first person to be found guilty under Canada's Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act (PHOTO: CBC) 

Munyaneza was originally charged under the Act for his participation in the Rwandan Genocide of the Tutsi tribe in 1994. At that time, Munyaneza was a business owner in Butare, Rwanda. He was found guilty of seven charges relating to his participation in the atrocity which resulted in the death of some 800,000 Rwandans. The trial judge said Munyaneza intentionally tried to destroy the Tutsi tribe within his community. Evidence presented at trial showed that Munyaneza participated in several specific events including dozens of rapes, the murders of hundreds of Tutsis in a Rwandan church, and savage beatings of Tutsi children.

Munyaneza came to Canada in 1997 under refugee status. His status was dismissed in September, 2000 despite two attempts to appeal the decision. He was arrested at his home in Toronto Canada by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in 2005. Munyaneza was convicted on seven counts in May 2008 after a two year long trial which heard the testimony of witnesses from three continents who testified in several different languages.

Although there is no current precedent for the sentencing of those convicted under the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act, there is little ambiguity as to what sentence Munyaneza will receive. The Act carries a mandatory life sentence. Most of the Sentencing arguments were over the date which Munyaneza would first be eligible for parole. The Prosecutors argue that Munyaneza should not receive his first parole hearing for twenty-five years which is mandatory for anyone convicted for their role in planning or leading an attack. The defense is seeking parole eligibility in twenty years and argues that that Munyaneza was never charged with being involved in the planning and no mandatory parole eligibility is imposed by the Act. The judge is expected to give his decision on 29 October 2010

Munyaneza still insists that he is innocent and will appeal his guilty verdict. It is unlikely that any appeal in the case will be heard before 2010.

For more information, please see:

Canadian Press - Canada's Legal System in Uncharted Territory in War Crimes Sentencing - 16 September 2009

Montreal Gazette - Canada Should Follow War-Crimes Trial With Others -16 September 2009

Canada.com - War Criminal Will be Sentenced Oct. 29 - 15 September 2009

CBC - Rwandan War Criminal to be Sentenced in Montreal - 15 September 2009