Think racial profiling — using a person’s race, color, ethnicity or national origin to determine whether to stop, search or investigate him or her for alleged criminal activity — is wrong and ineffective? So do President Barack Obama, Attorney General Eric Holder, former President George W. Bush, and former Attorney General John Ashcroft.
So why did the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD, the independent group of experts that oversees compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, a treaty the U.S ratified 15 years ago) "note with concern" that racial profiling "continues to be widespread" in the United States? Indeed, when reviewing the United States government’s track record on racial discrimination, the Committee highlighted the persistence of racial profiling as an especially troubling issue.
A new report by the ACLU and the Rights Working Group shows just how pervasive the problem is. The report, submitted today to the Committee, includes information about racial profiling in 22 states and under a variety of federal programs. It tells the story, for example, of how the 287(g) program, designed to permit local police departments to enforce immigration law, has given police officers license to stop, question, harass and detain anyone who looks "foreign." The report also highlights the discriminatory ways in which special registration programs, border stops, airline profiling and other government initiatives have victimized people who are (or appear to be) Arab, Muslim and South Asian. These policies and practices have wrought destruction on individuals, families and communities, tearing them apart through unjust detentions, deportations, raids and more.
We rely on the police to protect us from harm and to promote fairness and justice in our communities. The despicable practice of racial profiling, however, has led countless people to live in fear and created a system of law enforcement that casts entire communities as suspect. Surely the land of the free can do better.
Read the ACLU/RWG report, which includes a long list of recommendations for truly eradicating this troubling (and, study after study shows, ineffective) law enforcement technique.
Listen to a podcast with Dennis Parker, director of the ACLU Racial Justice Program.
And learn more about the ACLU’s work to end racial profiling at our website.
(Originally posted on Daily Kos.)
Today marks the anniversary of the day that the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) came into effect. CAT is an international human rights treaty dealing exclusively with torture and other forms of cruel and inhuman treatment. Countries that have signed CAT are obligated to prohibit and prevent torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and punishment. Governments are also required to investigate all allegations of torture, to hold perpetrators accountable and provide meaningful remedies to victims of such practices. (Learn more about the nuances between "torture" and "cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment" in this video with ACLU Human Rights Program Director Jamil Dakwar).
So what does that mean for us in the States? The U.S. ratified CAT in October 1994. By ratifying CAT, the U.S. is therefore obligated to comply with the provisions of the treaty just as it would any other domestic law — the U.S. Constitution makes clear that such treaties are "the Supreme law of the Land." Although the Bush administration tried to convince the American people and the rest of the world otherwise, CAT applies to all U.S. actions and wherever the U.S. exercises effective control — both at home and abroad. That means, CAT applies to the actions of U.S. officials at U.S.-run detention facilities, including Guantánamo, and other U.S. detention facilities in Iraq and Afghanistan. As one of the countries that helped write CAT and as a signatory to the torture treaty, it is the United States’ obligation to ensure that no one is subject to torture or other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment on our watch.
So how do we ensure that the U.S. upholds its obligations under the treaty? The actual "implementation" of CAT is overseen by the Committee against Torture. This Committee is a U.N.-based body of independent human rights experts that reviews countries that have ratified the treaty and ensures that these countries comply with treaty obligations.
The Committee requires countries, including the U.S., to submit periodic reports detailing their compliance to the treaty. Most recently, the United States submitted a report about compliance under the CAT treaty in May 2005. Based on their review of the U.S.’ report, as well as shadow reports issued by the organizations like the ACLU, the Committee posed questions about the U.S. government fulfillment of treaty obligations before a delegation of government representatives. In July 2006, the committee issued its conclusions, and while these recommendations are not legally binding, they are recognized around the world as an important moral obligation on governments to comply with treaty commitments before the nations of the world.
In its Conclusions and Recommendations, the Committee identified several areas of improvement for the U.S. to concentrate their efforts on. These included, but were not limited to:
It is clear today — on the 22nd anniversary of CAT, and the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture — that the government of the United States has much to do to fully address these areas of concern and to comply with CAT. Although those U.S. officials responsible for authorizing and implementing the torture program would have you believe otherwise, the U.S. government must investigate all allegations of torture, hold accountable those responsible and provide meaningful remedies to the program’s many victims.
CAT requires no less.
Today, the ACLU’s Human Rights Program and Alkarama for Human Rights sent a request to two U.N. Special Rapporteurs (human rights experts) asking them to investigate the “extraordinary rendition”, detention and torture of Italian citizen Abou Elkassim Britel.
The ACLU represents Britel and four other men in a civil suit in the U.S. court system. The suit — Mohamed et al. v. Jeppesen — alleges that Jeppesen Dataplan, Inc., a subsidiary of Boeing, knowingly participated in the U.S. “extraordinary rendition” program by providing flight and logistical support services to the aircraft used by the CIA to transport Britel from Pakistan to Morocco in May 2002.
The request asks the two U.N. human rights experts to investigate the circumstances surrounding Britel’s apprehension, detention and interrogation in Pakistan and his clandestine transfer from that country to Morocco; his secret detention without charge or trial in Morocco; and his abusive interrogation also in Morocco. Britel is one of the few victims of the United States’ “extraordinary rendition” program whose identities are known, and the only European citizen, to our knowledge, still detained. To this day, Britel remains incarcerated in a Moroccan prison.
I recently spoke with Britel’s wife, Italian citizen Khadija Anna Lucia Pighizzini, and asked her to share their story. The following is excerpted and translated from our conversation.
Khadija Anna Lucia Pighizzini: March 10, 2002 was the last time I spoke to my husband and I remember that the phone connection was awful and scratchy. We thought we’d just continue speaking the next day. But then I didn’t hear from him — he disappeared. For 11 months I didn’t have any news. I didn’t know if he was alive or dead.
ACLU: On March 10, 2002, Britel, who was on a business tip in Pakistan, was arrested and detained in Pakistan on immigration charges. After several months in Pakistani detention, during which time he was interrogated by both Pakistani and U.S. officials, Britel was eventually transferred to the exclusive custody of U.S. officials. U.S. officials dressed Britel in a diaper and overalls and shackled and blindfolded him before flying him to Morocco for detention and further interrogation. Britel was detained incommunicado by Moroccan security services at Témara detention center, and subjected to beatings, sleep and food deprivation, and threatened with sexual torture, including sodomy with a bottle and castration Britel’s family only learned of his fate when Britel was released almost one year after his first disappearance, without charge, in February 2003.
Tragically, on his way back home to Italy in May 2003, Britel was re-arrested by Moroccan authorities, who detained him and under torture coerced him to sign a confession that he was involved in terrorist acts in Morocco. Britel was eventually convicted of terrorism-related charges and sentenced to nine years. To this day, he remains in a Moroccan prison.
Khadija Anna: On the evening of the day that Kassim was supposed to finally leave Morocco, May 16, 2003, there were terrorist attacks in Casablanca. This tragic event took 45 lives and prompted a large-scale police investigation. Kassim was picked up by Moroccan officials as he was leaving the country. His arrest was part of a wave of arrests that occurred immediately before these attacks. Once again, Kassim disappeared I had no idea where he was, I tried all over Morocco to find him. I asked the Italian embassy and the Moroccan authorities about him, but both denied they knew anything. I feared the worst because there had been a surge of disappearances by the Moroccan government; thousands were imprisoned, and others had even died during interrogations at the hands of the Moroccan police.
Later, I learned that Kassim had been secretly detained for four months at Témara; the same detention center where he had been detained and tortured only weeks before.
After four months of detention and interrogation, Kassim was whisked through a sham trial, which, according to his attorney, barely met basic fair trial standards. He was sentenced to 15 years in prison, but on appeal this sentence was reduced to nine years. Meanwhile, the Italian press heard of his story and reported that he was the mastermind behind the bombings in Casablanca — a lie that not even the Moroccan authorities would accuse him of.
Kassim is now incarcerated at Oukasha prison in Casablanca. He is only scheduled to be released in September 2012, yet he has done nothing wrong.
ACLU: In September 2006, following a six-year-long criminal investigation in Italy into Britel’s suspected involvement in terrorist activities, the examining judge dismissed his case, finding a complete lack of any evidence linking Britel with any criminal or terrorism-related activity. Since that time, members of the Italian parliament and European parliament have petitioned the government of Morocco to pardon and release Britel immediately. To date, Moroccan authorities have failed to act upon these diplomatic efforts, and since January 2007 the Italian government has done nothing further to represent Britel’s interests.
Khadija Anna: Official investigations have implicated four governments in my husband’s “extraordinary rendition” and torture. The Pakistani government tortured him so brutally that he confessed he was a terrorist. The CIA abducted and detained him in Pakistan before unlawfully rendering him to certain torture in Morocco; the Moroccan government detained and tortured him; and the Italian government was complicit in the whole affair; they knew full well what was going on and did little or nothing to help him.
The American government is influential, they must intervene to secure my husband’s release and bring him home to Italy. If the American government intervenes, I believe that Italy will call for Britel to be liberated and Morocco will comply. It’s the least they could do given their involvement in his “extraordinary rendition”. I’ve already asked the American embassy in Morocco for a meeting or for an intervention to liberate my husband. I’ve also visited the embassy twice, and spoken to the staff there. Suffice to say, my request has fallen on deaf ears and I don’t know where else to turn.
ACLU: Since March 2002, Britel has been subject to physical and psychological torture and cruel treatment — including severe beatings, isolation, sleep deprivation, and death threats. Britel’s experiences are part of a larger pattern of widespread torture and abuse committed by the U.S. government under the Bush administration. Meaningful accountability for crimes committed in the name of national security must include recognition and compensation for torture victims.
Khadija Anna: Physically, Kassim is weak, and has many physical problems due to the torture and abuse he went through. This has left traces, not only on his soul but also his heart. He’s fighting to stay alive. He’s also fighting for the rights of the other prisoners detained along with him; to improve their conditions as well as his own. He’s gone on hunger strikes many times, sometimes on his own, other times with other prisoners — hoping to bring attention to the conditions inside the prison and to protest his torture.
As for me, I am always tired, and always waiting. It’s been over seven long years since Kassim disappeared. These years have been so painful, but I know that the injustice that I’ve gone through will soon be over. I haven’t given way to hate; nor has Kassim. Instead, we’re waiting for his liberation. We want to live our lives, and to reclaim our rights to live in dignity as citizens and human beings. We look towards to the future; when truth will be heard, when our rights will be restored and when justice will finally be served.
Learn more : www.giustiziaperkassim.net
Yesterday, Githu Muigai, the U.N. expert on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other related forms of intolerance presented his findings on contemporary forms of racism before the U.N. Human Rights Council. As you may remember, the former Special Rapporteur on racism was invited by the Bush administration State Department to tour the U.S. last year as part of a fact-finding mission and the Rapporteur issued his report in April.
This is the first session of the UNHRC in which the U.S. is participating as a member. After the Special Rapporteur’s presentation yesterday, the U.S. government had the opportunity to respond to his report. The U.S. praised the report’s findings, saying this nation “appreciates the Special Rapporteur’s report and its constructive spirit.”
So what did the Rapporteur have to say about the United States?
"Racism and racial discrimination have profoundly and lastingly marked and structured American society. The U.S. has made decisive progress… However, the historical, cultural and human depth of racism still permeates all dimensions of life and American society."
We couldn’t agree more!
Chandra Bhatnagar, staff attorney with the ACLU Human Rights Program, joined other human rights advocates yesterday on GRITtv with Laura Flanders. Chandra spoke of how the Special Rapporteur on racism’s findings provided a “real roadmap forward” for the United States to address racism.
Learn more about our work with the Special Rapporteur on Racism.
The Sunday collection plate is as American as religion itself. Americans are religious and generous when it comes to charitable giving. They often go together. There’s Catholic Charities and Mormons famously tithe a percentage of their income. Muslims are also big givers. One of the “five pillars” of Islam is zakat, which is a form of tithing. It is the religious duty of Muslims to help others by giving to charity. But Muslims in the U.S. are having a difficult time freely practicing this vital part of their faith. This short video, “Blocking Faith, Freezing Charity” explains why:
Anti-terrorism laws that purport to keep funds from being illegally funneled to terrorist groups actually target wholly innocent Muslim donors. While these policies are important to keep Americans safe, they are broadly applied and innocent people are prosecuted with little evidence. The result is that legitimate Muslim charities, like a women’s shelter in New York City featured in the video, are hurt because people are scared to donate. U.S. Muslims fear a knock on the door from the FBI when they write a check to a legal American charity registered with the IRS. While the charities themselves suffer, individual Muslims give up a fundamental religious tenet because of the fear. The result is a blow to all Americans who value religious freedom and the importance of charitable giving.
(Originally posted on Daily Kos.)
U.S. policies that purport to address terrorism financing are seriously undermining the Constitution’s fundamental rights to freedom of religion, freedom of association, and freedom from discrimination.
This past year, I traveled from Michigan to Texas to interview American Muslims about how terrorism finance laws interfere with their rights to practice their religion. American Muslim donors told me how the closure of some of the largest American Muslim charities in the country, widespread law enforcement interviews of Muslim donors about their donations, and surveillance of donations at mosques without suspicion, is creating a climate of fear that prevents them from making charitable donations. Terrorism financing laws leave many innocent Americans unable to fulfill a central tenet of their religion: charitable giving, or Zakat, one of the five pillars of Islam and a religious obligation for all observant Muslims.
In a new report released today, the ACLU Human Rights Program documents the chilling effects of terrorism financing policies on American Muslims’ practice of their religion through charitable giving. For example, one American Muslim quoted in the report (PDF) told me,
"I’m so scared to give charitably. They might come after me. I think when I’m giving, will they come after me? Will they put me on their hit list? There is a constant worry in the back of my mind. I fear giving more would put me on the hit list, and the government will say there is a linkage between me and the charity…. Because everything is under scrutiny, I am not able to fulfill my religious obligation to give — because I am just afraid. It affects my religious obligation to give. I am not following my faith, I’m not practicing my religion as I should. I’m like a prisoner, I can’t practice my religion the way I want to — there’s no freedom in that respect."
From Michigan to Texas, American Muslims told me that they are unable to fully practice their faith, and unable to support needy people both at home and overseas for fear that they could be interrogated by the FBI, dragged into court, lose their citizenship, or even prosecuted for donations to entirely legal Muslim charities that are registered with the IRS.
While charitable giving is an important part of all major religions — Christians practice tithing, for instance — terrorism finance laws unfairly and disproportionately target Muslim giving. In recent remarks in Cairo, President Obama recognized that American Muslims face barriers to practicing their religion, noting, "[I]n the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation." The continued intimidation of American Muslim donors tarnishes America’s reputation as a beacon of religious freedom.
In his speech in Cairo, President Obama not only acknowledged problems with the current laws, but went further, calling for and committing to change these policies and enhance protections for charitable giving. The ACLU applauds the President’s commitment and stands ready to work with him for change. Post-9/11 policies have created a climate of fear that prevents Muslims from practicing their religion, and unless the Obama administration takes action, this legacy of the Bush administration will persist. Religious freedom is a fundamental American value to be protected and honored.
Learn more about this important issue, and watch a video featuring Americans who have been negatively impacted by these unfair laws, at www.aclu.org/muslimcharities.
Tomorrow morning, the U.N. expert on racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and other related forms of intolerance, Githu Muigai, will present his annual report findings on contemporary forms of racism before the Human Rights Council. This is following a fact-finding mission in various countries, which included a visit to the U.S. by Muigai’s predecessor, Doudou Diène, that took place in May and June 2008 at the invitation of the Bush administration’s State Department.
The rapporteur’s report is available online, and highlights racism in the criminal justice system, the disparity between sentencing for crack and powder cocaine, abuses facing immigrant and African-American workers in the Gulf Coast in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and the overall vulnerability of immigrant workers and the need to meaningfully address the "school-to-prison pipeline." The report also calls on Congress to pass the End Racial Profiling Act (ERPA) and create a bipartisan commission to evaluate the on-going fight against racism.
The report’s findings also highlight U.S. failures to fight racism and protect equality for all. By abiding by the Rapportuer’s recommendations, we can address the ongoing issues of racism inside our own borders — thereby leading by example and enforcing critical civil and human rights laws.
You can watch the presentation online, starting at 9 a.m. (EDT) at: http://www.un.org/webcast/unhrc/index.asp
More information about the ACLU’s work with the special rapporteur is available online.
Today at 3:00 pm, the U.S. House of Representative’s Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security will convene a hearing on H.R. 2289, the "Juvenile Justice Accountability and Improvement Act of 2009.” This legislation would deny funding to states that refuse to offer a parole option to juvenile offenders and authorize state grants to improve legal representation for youths charged with life sentences.
It’s hard to believe that the United States still sentences children as young as 13 to spend the rest of their lives in prison without any opportunity for release. Right now, there are approximately 2,570 children serving juvenile life sentences without parole in the U.S. — the only country that allows this cruel punishment to happen.
Just last week, the ACLU, along with other human rights organizations, sent a letter to the CERD Committee, urging them to conclude that the imposition of this sentence violates the treaty obligations of the United States and fails to recognize customary international human rights law.
Young people are still developing mentally and emotionally. Their punishment needs to be focused on rehabilitation and reintegration into society. Offering a parole option to young people provides a second chance — this is in our society’s best interest.
We’ve made some progress — currently Alaska, Colorado, Kansas, Kentucky, New Mexico, Oregon and the District of Columbia forbid juvenile life sentences without parole. But we have a long way to go, and we have no time to waste.
It’s time for a change. Our youth deserve fair sentencing, and the opportunity for rehabilitation.
You can watch the hearing online and learn more about the ACLU’s work on ending juvenile life without parole at: www.aclu.org/juvenilelifewithoutparole.
On Wednesday, the United Nations independent expert on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, Special Rapporteur Philip Alston, made a presentation before the Human Rights Council on U.S. policies and practices that have led to unlawful deaths and other abuses. Alston presented his findings based on a fact-finding mission to the United States in June 2008, when he toured the country and met with federal and local government officials and representatives of non-governmental organizations.
Speaking at UN headquarters in Geneva before representatives of countries from around the world, the Special Rapporteur highlighted in the findings discussed in his report, which was made public last week. In the report, Alston spoke of ”chronic and deplorable accountability failures with respect to policies, practices and conduct that led to alleged unlawful killings.” Alston’s report highlighted the issue of unlawful deaths within the U.S. for which the government may be responsible, including flaws in the death penalty system that increase the likelihood that innocent people will be executed, and deaths in immigration detention. You may remember us blogging about his recent report findings last week, where we talked about Alston’s concern about the capital punishment system in the United States, which, he found, creates the intolerable risk that innocent people are sentenced to death.
In his presentation before the Human Rights Council, the Special Rapporteur also highlighted the lack of transparency regarding killings in American military and intelligence operations overseas that may violate international law—and may even amount to war crimes in some cases. Alston pointed to the U.S. government’s failure to track and make public the number and circumstances of civilian casualties in military operations, and said that because of the lack of transparency, there is a lack of accountability for wrongful deaths. In particular, Alston spoke of the importance of accountability for wrongful killings committed by private contractors. He said,
Despite its sophistication and the good intentions of many of its personnel, the US military justice system suffers from serious shortcomings in terms of accountability for killings which violate the applicable law. The Government has failed to effectively investigate and punish lower-ranking soldiers for such deaths, and has not held senior officers responsible under the doctrine of command responsibility. Worse, it has effectively created a zone of impunity for private contractors and civilian intelligence agents by only rarely investigating and prosecuting them.
Alston called for a special prosecutor to investigate the policies and practices that have led to unlawful deaths and other abuses in the United States’ international operations.
Alton recommended,
[T]he US Government should honour its stated commitment to transparency and accountability by establishing a national commission of inquiry to conduct an independent, systematic and sustained investigation of policies and practices that lead to deaths and other abuses. An independent special prosecutor should also be appointed to pursue any criminal activities undertaken by Government officials.
The Special Rapporteur’s report comes at a crucial time. It presents a critical opportunity for the Obama administration to examine government policies that have led to unlawful deaths at home and abroad. We are hopeful the president will take seriously the report’s findings and recommendations. If the United States is to assert leadership on the issue of human rights globally, we must first examine past U.S. government policies that have led to unlawful deaths and take action to signal a real break from the policies of the past.
Join our demand for a special prosecutor.)
You can watch Philip Alston’s testimony archived on the UN website.
- Nahal Zamani and Jennifer Turner
Last night, I participated at a press conference to unveil a human rights resolution opposing the proposed DeKalb County Marine Corp. Institute (DCMI). DCMI would expose students as young as 14 to military discipline, military culture, and military training. It will be funded in part by the Marine Corps out of its recruitment budget and could become a pipeline for targeted minority recruitment into the military.
The school was originally slated to open in August. Due to the strong community mobilization against this proposal, the DeKalb County Board of Education announced on Friday that it has postponed the opening date. While celebrating this victory yesterday evening, we called on the Board of Education not to revive this or similar proposals meant to militarize public school education.
We based this demand on the U.S. international human rights obligations. The United States has ratified the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict. Because the United States ratified the Optional Protocol in 2002, the Protocol is binding on the U.S. government and local government entities and agents, including DeKalb County.
Under a binding declaration entered by the U.S., 17 is the absolute minimum age for military recruitment (even though the prevailing international standard is to prohibit the voluntary recruitment of children under the age of 18 into the military—in fact, 89 of 128 countries that are parties to the Optional Protocol have a “straight-18” standard that sets 18 as the minimum age for recruitment).
In May 2008, the ACLU submitted a report to the Committee on Rights of the Child (CRC), the United Nations body that monitors compliance with the Optional Protocol, detailing the government’s failure to comply with its obligations under the Optional Protocol. The ACLU found that the U.S. military continues to engage in tactics designed to recruit students under the age of 17. The ACLU also found that U.S. military recruitment tactics disproportionately target low-income youth and students of color. After examining U.S. recruitment practices last year, the CRC called on the U.S. to end military training in public schools and stop targeting racial minorities or low-income children for recruitment.
Establishment of DMCI or any similar institution in DeKalb County would clearly run counter to the United States’ international human rights obligations.
After the press conference, more than 30 community members, including several DeKalb County parents, attended the DeKalb Board of Education meeting to speak against any future prospect for DMCI. One speaker also read out the human rights resolution.
Through their speaking out and reading of the human rights resolution last night, community members conveyed this message to the DeKalb County Board of Education: military training and abusive recruitment practices have no place in DeKalb County public schools; not now, not ever.
| 
