[ad_1]
This week the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights is having its 186th Period of Sessions at UCLA. This post is made up of highlights of each of the hearings from Thursday, March 9, 2023.
Rights of Haitians in mobility in the United States
Participants: Transnational Legal Clinic University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, International Human Rights Clinic and Immigration Clinic University of Miami School of Law, Haitian Bridge Alliance, RFK Human Rights, Alternative Chance, Institute for Justice & Democracy in Haiti (IJDJ), United States
By Aizzah Adil
Contributed by Ezgi Kuyumcu & Cat Washington
This morning, the IACHR heard the concerns of civil society who described the situation of many deportees who were forcefully sent to Haiti, in many cases, without having any connection to Haiti. Concerns were also raised about how some of these deportations were a result of minor offenses. Civil society indicated that individuals who were deported suffered from human rights abuses like physical harm and lack of medical treatment during the deportation process. These deportees also continue to fear for their lives once they land in Haiti. Civil society gave a powerful message, “protection delayed is protection denied.” The US delegation referred to their current immigration procedures in relation to Haitians currently in the US and those who try to migrate to the US. They explained their work to disincentivize migration through dangerous means but acknowledged the need to improve their immigration procedures. Civil society stated that mechanisms like the availability of judicial review were not available to people facing deportation who have a criminal conviction. They explained that the current system did not help these individuals. The President of the Commission condemned the abuses against these individuals and stated that the so-called US “detention centers” where individuals are detained before deportation were more like “prisons.” The President also expressed great concern about ICE’s excessive autonomy.
Right to movement of persons in Cuba
Participants: Comité por la Integración Racial, Unión Patriótica de Cuba (UNPACU), Justicia 11J, Cubalex, Freedom House, Cadal, International Institute on Race, Equality and Human Rights, Anamely Ramos González, Iris Ruiz, Amaury Pacheco, Ana Belkis Ferrer, State of Cuba
By Braden Schumitzky
Contributed by Camila Soto
In its mid-morning hearing today, the IACHR heard multiple firsthand accounts regarding the difficulties Cubans are encountering in exiting, entering, and simply residing in Cuba without being persecuted for their activism. According to one speaker, about three hundred thousand Cubans have fled the country—and this is likely an underestimate, given that many hesitate to speak out due to fear of repercussions. For those Cubans who do manage to flee, they frequently have to leave family members behind and desperately try to get them out later. Emigrants are essentially barred from returning, with airlines refusing to even let them board a flight to Cuba. As one speaker remarked, Cuba is a beautiful country with a lot of promise, yet so many citizens are living below the poverty level, and political dissent is to a large extent prohibited.
Threat to judicial independence in Central and South America
Participants: Federación Centroamericana de Juezas y Jueces por la Democracia (FECAJUD), Representación de jueces/zas y ex-jueces/zas independientes de El Salvador, Asociación Guatemalteca de Jueces por la Integridad (AGJI), Asociación Costarricense de la Judicatura (ACOJUD), Asociación Panameña de Magistrados y Jueces (ASPAMAJ), Asociación de Jueces por la Democracia de Honduras, Independencia Judicial, Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF), Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), Incidencia Programa ACTuando Juntas (JOTAY), Plataforma Internacional contra la Impunidad, Washington Office for Latin America (WOLA), Impunity Watch Guatemala, Comisión Internacional de Juristas (CIL), Litigio e Incidencia International (IDHEAS), Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights (RFK), Políticas para América Latina, Federación Latinoamericana de Magistrados (FLAM), Asociación de Magistrados de Bolivia (AMABOL), Asociación de Magistrados del Uruguay (AMU), Cyrus R. Vance Center for International Justice, Instituto Internacional de Responsabilidad Social y Derechos Humanos (IIRESODH)
By Leigh Marie Dannhauser
In this hearing, judges from Bolivia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras, and Uruguay testified to the continuing loss of judicial independence in their countries. They testified to how legislatures and executives are making budget cuts, including salary cuts of judges of up to 35 percent, are arbitrarily promoting and firing judges, and are criminalizing and stigmatizing them for doing their jobs correctly. Some judges have had to flee their counties and live in exile.
The Commission discussed how judicial independence has been threatened in these countries both internally, with pressure from those of higher status in the judicial system, and externally, with pressure coming from the other branches of government. They agreed that such steps backwards in judicial independence makes it impossible to safeguard human rights and the rules of law. The Commission also agreed that there should be dialogue in the Inter-American system about the issue of judicial independence. Finally, the Commission posed the idea of creating a set of minimum guidelines governing topics such as the criteria for the selection and removal of judges, changes in wages, and monitoring the implementation of these minimum requirements.
Advances and challenges in forensic search in México
Participants: Movimiento Nacional por nuestros desaparecidos, Colectivo amor por los desaparecidos en Tamaulipas de Reynosa, Data Cívica, Centro de Derechos Humanos Miguel Agustín Pro Juarez, Comisión Mexicana de Defensa y Promoción de los Derechos Humanos (CMDPDH), ARTICLE 19, Fundación para la Justicia y el Estado Democrático de Derecho, Fuerzas Unidas por Nuestros Desaparecidos Nuevo León (FUNDENL), Fundación para la Justicia y el Estado democrático de Derecho (migrantes) A.C. (FJEDD), Asociación de Familiares de Migrantes Desaparecidos de Guatemala (AFAMIDEG), Comité de Familiares de Migrantes Desaparecidos del Centro de Honduras (COFAMICENH), Comité de Familiares Migrantes Desaparecidos de El Progreso (COFAMIPRO), Comité de Familiares de Migrantes Desaparecidos Amor y Fe (COFAMIDEAF), Comité de Familiares de Migrantes Desaparecidos La Guadalupe (COFAMIGUA), Asociación Comité de Familiares de Migrantes Desaparecidos y Fallecidos de El Salvador (COFAMIDE), Colectivo con Justicia y Esperanza de San Luis de la Paz (México), Consejo Nacional Ciudadano, Comisión Nacional de Búsqueda, Centro Nacional de Identificación Humana, Mecanismo Extraordinario de Identificación Forense (MEIF), Regional Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, State of Mexico
By Aizzah Adil
Contributed by Jacqueline Diaz Madrigal
The representatives from Mexico indicated their efforts to combat the challenges in identification of disappeared persons in Mexico through “institutional coordination” between the Mexican states. They explained that there was an increase in resources to address these challenges. Civil society described the need for greater transparency and were concerned about reduced participation of family members in searches. They stated that were it not for family members, they would not have made as much progress to identify disappeared persons in the past. Representatives of civil society also felt that there is still a lack of coordination among the institutions and stated that the databases still have incomplete data. The UN representative for the High Commissioner for Human Rights agreed with this and also advised Mexico to improve their strategies and to provide protection for the mothers who face dangers while searching for their loved ones. He also explained that Mexico should prioritize finding those who may still be alive and should assume that a person is still alive when conducting searches. The Commission agreed with the UN representative’s statements. The Commission acknowledged Mexico’s efforts but emphasized the need to include family members when developing policies to identify disappeared persons.
Case 13.097 – Dead in Magdalena Prison v. Argentina
Participants: Centro de Estudios Sociales y Legales (CELS), Colectivo de Acción en la Subalternidad (CIAJ), Marcel Adrian Stabile, State of Argentina
By Leigh Marie Dannhauser
Contributed by Sidonie Gruenberg
Eighteen years ago, a fire was set by prisoners in Magdalena Prison, a Buenos Aires detention center, in protest of the overcrowding and living conditions. Today, the story of the 32 prisoners who unnecessarily lost their lives due to the combination of prison guards locking the prisoners inside of the pod once the fire broke out, a non-existent fire suppression system, including no working sprinklers and faulty fire extinguishers, and no means of escape, was presented to the IACHR. For its part, Argentina, represented by a high-ranking delegation, acknowledged its responsibility for the tragedy and took responsibility for the numerous human rights violations connected to the fire including the violation of the right to life and the right to humane treatment, among other rights protected by the American Convention on Human Rights. After detailing steps it has already taken, Argentina representatives vowed to work closely with the petitioning organizations and the IACHR on a specific action plan to prevent anything similar from ever happening again and to move forward with reparations.
[ad_2]
