Atty. Glenn Rose, Feb 14, 2007
(from Philippine News)
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is proposing to nearly double the filing fees for people applying for U.S. citizenship and drastically increase the filing fees for people trying to get a green card.
The Immigration Service (a division of the DHS) announced last week that it wants to raise the filing fees for citizenship from $330 to $595 (almost double) and add an $80 fingerprint fee on top of that. The filing fee for applications for green cards will increase dramatically from $325 to $905 plus the $80 fingerprint fee.
The Immigration Service claims that the new fees would reduce processing times by 20% and provide money for increased background checks. The Service expects to raise more than $2 billion over the next two years due to the fee increases. In addition to the claim of better service, the money is to be spent on improving immigration offices, technology, and hiring and training of workers. Other filing fees for work permits, replacement of green cards, and family petitions are also expected to rise substantially. The amount of fee increases for some of the other petitions have not yet been announced.
The largest jumps in filing fees are for entrepreneurs who want to immigrate to the United States to invest in business and create jobs. The fees for their applications will jump from $475 to a staggering $2,850. Fees for people applying to become legal residents under the 1986 law granting amnesty will significantly rise from $180 to $1,370.
The last major increase in fees was put into effect in the spring of 2004. Fees were also increased by $10 for most petitions on October 26, 2005 to cover the increased costs due to inflation. The Service is required to do a cost analysis every two years to determine if immigration costs are covered by the fee structure. The Service claims that the present fee structure does not cover the costs of administrating immigration.
Presently, the average of cumulated fees for all applications is about $264. The average will now rise to $438. Most immigration advocates compare the plan to increase the cost of applications as tantamount to highway robbery. Immigrants have no choice but to pay these fees. Advocates complain that this giant jump will put immigration benefits “out of reach” for those in low paying jobs.
Last week, Senator Ted Kennedy highly criticized the fee increases saying they would “price the American Dream out of reach for some qualified immigrants.” On the other hand, anti-immigrant lawmakers claim that taxpayers should not bear the burden of paying for the costs of immigration. Representative Lamar Smith from Texas, the top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said that “it was right for the people who benefit to pay the cost of that benefit, not [the] taxpayer.”
Some members of Congress want to review the Immigration Service’s cost analysis. However, unless Congress passes an oversight law, the Service’s fee increases are not subject to Congressional approval. Any immigration legislation passed by Congress during 2007 is likely to include a guest worker program. The new fee increases do not include the cost of administrating a guest worker program.
Constant fee increases will be a fact of life in the next several years. The present fee schedule will probably be increased drastically sometime in June of 2007. Persons who want to apply for citizenship or a green card should apply now before the fees go up. They should always work with a qualified immigration attorney when filing any (but the simplest) applications. An immigration lawyer can file applications much more efficiently because of their experience.
Attorney Glenn Rose is experienced in successfully filing all types of immigration applications. He was born in the Philippines, and immigrated to the U.S. at the age of six. He is a naturalized citizen. His law office is located in downtown San Francisco at 580 California St. (415) 283-3281. He is a member of the American Bar Association (ABA) and American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA).
1 of 1
Friday, February 23, 2007
New tactic: ICE officers posing as police
New tactic: ICE officers posing as police
Atty. Glenn Rose, Feb 21, 2007
(From Philippine News)
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers are now posing as local police in order to gain entry into the homes of immigrants. This new tactic is causing great concern among civil liberty advocates because it breaks down the relationship between immigrants and real local police officers.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) claims that the title immigration officers may use the title of police because they are federal law enforcement officers and their function is to police illegal immigrants. However, the DHS strategy is a ploy to get immigrants to open their doors to ICE officers trying to make a bust on immigrants who they believe are illegal.
It needs to be noted that ICE arrests are really called detainment because of the violation of immigration laws. Violation of immigration laws is not a criminal act that falls under the scope of traditional police activities. Illegal immigration is an administrative violation of the terms of the Immigration and Nationality Act passed by Congress and regularly revised. Although the consequences of arrest by immigration officers are similar to a regular police arrest, being detained by immigration officers is not considered an arrest based on a criminal act.
The fact that federal agents are now posing as police to make busts, makes it much more difficult for immigrants to understand the legal system in the United States, and undermines their fragile trust in the local police. Immigration officers misidentify themselves to gain entry into private homes, usually, in the early morning hours because it is proven that people are more likely to open their doors to the local police.
Recently, there have been success stories about immigrant cooperation with the local police. The ICE bust procedures threaten to undermine the police-immigrant relationships in many cities and towns. ICE public relations spokesperson, Lori Haley, recently defended the use of the word “police” by stating that immigrants who don’t understand English generally understand the word “police.” She also stated that the term is fair since ICE agents are technically federal police. However, this is not the term used for any federal law enforcement officer. Traditionally, the term “police” has always applied to local law enforcement officers.
People who are detained by ICE officers are taken away in handcuffs and detained at local city and county jails awaiting administrative deportation by the DHS, or, in about 40% of cases, by an Immigration Court. ICE officers will typically check out all other persons in the house or vicinity when looking for an individual immigrant. This is called collateral activity, because the bystanders will also be detained (arrested) if they cannot prove they are in the U.S. legally. This new tactic has created a lot of fear in the immigrant community.
ICE agents usually try to apprehend illegal immigrants in their homes between 6 a.m. and 10 a.m. in the morning. Immigrants need to know that they do not have to open the door unless the officer has either an arrest or search warrant. If the door is opened, even by a crack, the ICE officers are allowed to enter the home and arrest the person who they are looking for and any other person in the house who is illegal. Immigrants should be very wary of opening a door to strangers. ICE officers do not wear uniforms and are dressed in civilian clothes. If the person knocking at the door insists on coming in, persons in the home may refuse to open the door. They should ask them to slip the arrest warrant or search warrant under the door. Usually, ICE officers do not carry warrants with them. Any document that may be slipped under the door must have the word “Warrant” on it and be signed by a judge. Normally, the ICE officers will yell and threaten, and then go away. But, they will come back another day. Any immigrant in this predicament should call an experienced immigration attorney.
Attorney Glenn Rose was born in the Philippines and immigrated to the United States as a small child. He is a naturalized citizen. Attorney Rose is experienced as a lawyer in Immigration Courts and representing clients with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) branch. His office is located in downtown San Francisco at 580 California St., (415) 283-3281. He is a member of the American Bar Association and American Immigration Lawyers Association.
1 of 1
Atty. Glenn Rose, Feb 21, 2007
(From Philippine News)
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers are now posing as local police in order to gain entry into the homes of immigrants. This new tactic is causing great concern among civil liberty advocates because it breaks down the relationship between immigrants and real local police officers.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) claims that the title immigration officers may use the title of police because they are federal law enforcement officers and their function is to police illegal immigrants. However, the DHS strategy is a ploy to get immigrants to open their doors to ICE officers trying to make a bust on immigrants who they believe are illegal.
It needs to be noted that ICE arrests are really called detainment because of the violation of immigration laws. Violation of immigration laws is not a criminal act that falls under the scope of traditional police activities. Illegal immigration is an administrative violation of the terms of the Immigration and Nationality Act passed by Congress and regularly revised. Although the consequences of arrest by immigration officers are similar to a regular police arrest, being detained by immigration officers is not considered an arrest based on a criminal act.
The fact that federal agents are now posing as police to make busts, makes it much more difficult for immigrants to understand the legal system in the United States, and undermines their fragile trust in the local police. Immigration officers misidentify themselves to gain entry into private homes, usually, in the early morning hours because it is proven that people are more likely to open their doors to the local police.
Recently, there have been success stories about immigrant cooperation with the local police. The ICE bust procedures threaten to undermine the police-immigrant relationships in many cities and towns. ICE public relations spokesperson, Lori Haley, recently defended the use of the word “police” by stating that immigrants who don’t understand English generally understand the word “police.” She also stated that the term is fair since ICE agents are technically federal police. However, this is not the term used for any federal law enforcement officer. Traditionally, the term “police” has always applied to local law enforcement officers.
People who are detained by ICE officers are taken away in handcuffs and detained at local city and county jails awaiting administrative deportation by the DHS, or, in about 40% of cases, by an Immigration Court. ICE officers will typically check out all other persons in the house or vicinity when looking for an individual immigrant. This is called collateral activity, because the bystanders will also be detained (arrested) if they cannot prove they are in the U.S. legally. This new tactic has created a lot of fear in the immigrant community.
ICE agents usually try to apprehend illegal immigrants in their homes between 6 a.m. and 10 a.m. in the morning. Immigrants need to know that they do not have to open the door unless the officer has either an arrest or search warrant. If the door is opened, even by a crack, the ICE officers are allowed to enter the home and arrest the person who they are looking for and any other person in the house who is illegal. Immigrants should be very wary of opening a door to strangers. ICE officers do not wear uniforms and are dressed in civilian clothes. If the person knocking at the door insists on coming in, persons in the home may refuse to open the door. They should ask them to slip the arrest warrant or search warrant under the door. Usually, ICE officers do not carry warrants with them. Any document that may be slipped under the door must have the word “Warrant” on it and be signed by a judge. Normally, the ICE officers will yell and threaten, and then go away. But, they will come back another day. Any immigrant in this predicament should call an experienced immigration attorney.
Attorney Glenn Rose was born in the Philippines and immigrated to the United States as a small child. He is a naturalized citizen. Attorney Rose is experienced as a lawyer in Immigration Courts and representing clients with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) branch. His office is located in downtown San Francisco at 580 California St., (415) 283-3281. He is a member of the American Bar Association and American Immigration Lawyers Association.
1 of 1
‘Immigrants Bring Crime’ Is a Myth
‘Immigrants Bring Crime’ Is a Myth
New America Media, Commentary, Walter Ewing, Posted: Feb 22, 2007
Editor’s Note: Government and academic studies prove decisively that the common belief that immigrants, especially undocumented ones, bring criminality is based on a big lie. Walter Ewing is a Research Associate at the Immigration Policy Center. IMMIGRATION MATTERS regularly features the views of the nation's leading immigrant rights advocates.
******
Among the many troubling aspects of the public debate over immigration is the power of myths over facts. One of the most enduring myths about immigration, despite literally decades of evidence to the contrary, is the belief that immigrants are more likely to commit crime than the native-born.
This myth is so widespread and unquestioned that it has been the catalyst for scores of local governments to consider anti-immigrant ordinances over the past year. These calls to crack down on undocumented immigrants, the employers who hire them and the landlords who rent to them, are framed in part as “anti-crime” ordinances.
The city council of Hazleton, Pennsylvania, for instance, passed an ordinance last September claiming that “illegal immigration leads to higher crime rates” and that the council therefore must protect legal residents of the city from “crimes committed by illegal aliens.”
Because most of the undocumented immigrants in Hazleton and other communities throughout the United States are young men from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, and elsewhere in Latin America, who have little money or formal education, it is assumed that they are more likely to commit crimes than the native-born.
Government and academic studies, however, have demonstrated repeatedly for over a century that immigrants actually are less likely to commit crimes than the native-born. Even though immigration has increased dramatically over the past decade and a half, the crime rate in the United States has declined.
Since 1994, the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has more than doubled to 12 million. Immigrants, both legal and undocumented, now comprise just under 13 percent of the population. Yet, according to the FBI, between 1994 and 2005 the violent crime rate (murder, robbery, rape, assault) fell 34.2 percent and the property crime rate (burglary, theft) dropped 26.4 percent.
Cities with large and growing immigrant populations such as Los Angeles, New York, Miami and Chicago also experienced this downward trend in crime. If immigration—either legal or undocumented—were associated with crime, then crime rates should be rising.
An upcoming report from the Immigration Policy Center further dispels the notion that immigration and crime are connected. Using data from the 2000 Census, the report shows that immigrants are less likely than the native-born to be behind bars. Among men age 18 to 39 (who comprise the vast majority of inmates in federal and state prisons and local jails), immigrants were five times less likely to be incarcerated than the native-born in 2000.
About 3.5 percent of native-born men were in prison, compared with 0.7 percent of foreign-born men. Immigrants from Mexico, El Salvador and Guatemala were much less likely to be in prison than native-born, non-Hispanic whites. Roughly 0.7 percent of foreign-born Mexican men and 0.5 percent of foreign-born Salvadoran and Guatemalan men were in prison, compared with 1.7 percent of native-born, non-Hispanic white men.
These findings are not new. Three government commissions investigated the relationship between immigration and crime during the last era of large-scale immigration to the United States during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when millions of immigrants arrived from Italy, Ireland, Russia, Poland, and other nations in Europe. All three commissions came to the same conclusion: immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than natives.
As the [Dillingham] Immigration Commission of 1911 concluded: “No satisfactory evidence has yet been produced to show that immigration has resulted in an increase in crime disproportionate to the increase in adult population. Such comparable statistics of crime and population as it has been possible to obtain indicate that immigrants are less prone to commit crime than are native Americans.”
Despite a century’s worth of evidence that immigration does not breed crime, the stereotype of immigrants as criminals continues to flourish in the media and among policymakers. Popular movies and television shows often feature gun-wielding, drug-dealing criminals from south of the border. News reports of violent crimes committed by gangs such as the Salvadoran Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) often overshadow the fact that an extraordinarily small number of immigrants are in gangs and that gangs are found in every ethnic group among both natives and the foreign-born.
Adding insult to injury, many politicians regularly declare their resolve to stem the criminal tide allegedly unleashed by undocumented immigrants. Even President Bush, who favors immigration reform that creates more legal channels for immigration to the United States, declared in a May 15, 2006 address to the nation that illegal immigration “brings crime to our communities.”
There is no denying that crime is a serious problem in the United States. But it is not a problem created or even aggravated by immigration. Quite the opposite, in fact. Immigrants are less likely to commit crimes of all types than the native-born. This suggests that crime is linked not to one’s place of birth, but to the many other forces which foster crime in this country, especially in relatively poor communities: high rates of divorce and family disintegration, high rates of alcohol and drug abuse, etc.
The solution to crime does not lie in immigration policy. And the solution to undocumented immigration does not lie in misguided “get tough” policies that scapegoat immigrants as criminals.
See More Immigration Matters
New America Media, Commentary, Walter Ewing, Posted: Feb 22, 2007
Editor’s Note: Government and academic studies prove decisively that the common belief that immigrants, especially undocumented ones, bring criminality is based on a big lie. Walter Ewing is a Research Associate at the Immigration Policy Center. IMMIGRATION MATTERS regularly features the views of the nation's leading immigrant rights advocates.
******
Among the many troubling aspects of the public debate over immigration is the power of myths over facts. One of the most enduring myths about immigration, despite literally decades of evidence to the contrary, is the belief that immigrants are more likely to commit crime than the native-born.
This myth is so widespread and unquestioned that it has been the catalyst for scores of local governments to consider anti-immigrant ordinances over the past year. These calls to crack down on undocumented immigrants, the employers who hire them and the landlords who rent to them, are framed in part as “anti-crime” ordinances.
The city council of Hazleton, Pennsylvania, for instance, passed an ordinance last September claiming that “illegal immigration leads to higher crime rates” and that the council therefore must protect legal residents of the city from “crimes committed by illegal aliens.”
Because most of the undocumented immigrants in Hazleton and other communities throughout the United States are young men from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, and elsewhere in Latin America, who have little money or formal education, it is assumed that they are more likely to commit crimes than the native-born.
Government and academic studies, however, have demonstrated repeatedly for over a century that immigrants actually are less likely to commit crimes than the native-born. Even though immigration has increased dramatically over the past decade and a half, the crime rate in the United States has declined.
Since 1994, the number of undocumented immigrants in the United States has more than doubled to 12 million. Immigrants, both legal and undocumented, now comprise just under 13 percent of the population. Yet, according to the FBI, between 1994 and 2005 the violent crime rate (murder, robbery, rape, assault) fell 34.2 percent and the property crime rate (burglary, theft) dropped 26.4 percent.
Cities with large and growing immigrant populations such as Los Angeles, New York, Miami and Chicago also experienced this downward trend in crime. If immigration—either legal or undocumented—were associated with crime, then crime rates should be rising.
An upcoming report from the Immigration Policy Center further dispels the notion that immigration and crime are connected. Using data from the 2000 Census, the report shows that immigrants are less likely than the native-born to be behind bars. Among men age 18 to 39 (who comprise the vast majority of inmates in federal and state prisons and local jails), immigrants were five times less likely to be incarcerated than the native-born in 2000.
About 3.5 percent of native-born men were in prison, compared with 0.7 percent of foreign-born men. Immigrants from Mexico, El Salvador and Guatemala were much less likely to be in prison than native-born, non-Hispanic whites. Roughly 0.7 percent of foreign-born Mexican men and 0.5 percent of foreign-born Salvadoran and Guatemalan men were in prison, compared with 1.7 percent of native-born, non-Hispanic white men.
These findings are not new. Three government commissions investigated the relationship between immigration and crime during the last era of large-scale immigration to the United States during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when millions of immigrants arrived from Italy, Ireland, Russia, Poland, and other nations in Europe. All three commissions came to the same conclusion: immigrants are less likely to commit crimes than natives.
As the [Dillingham] Immigration Commission of 1911 concluded: “No satisfactory evidence has yet been produced to show that immigration has resulted in an increase in crime disproportionate to the increase in adult population. Such comparable statistics of crime and population as it has been possible to obtain indicate that immigrants are less prone to commit crime than are native Americans.”
Despite a century’s worth of evidence that immigration does not breed crime, the stereotype of immigrants as criminals continues to flourish in the media and among policymakers. Popular movies and television shows often feature gun-wielding, drug-dealing criminals from south of the border. News reports of violent crimes committed by gangs such as the Salvadoran Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13) often overshadow the fact that an extraordinarily small number of immigrants are in gangs and that gangs are found in every ethnic group among both natives and the foreign-born.
Adding insult to injury, many politicians regularly declare their resolve to stem the criminal tide allegedly unleashed by undocumented immigrants. Even President Bush, who favors immigration reform that creates more legal channels for immigration to the United States, declared in a May 15, 2006 address to the nation that illegal immigration “brings crime to our communities.”
There is no denying that crime is a serious problem in the United States. But it is not a problem created or even aggravated by immigration. Quite the opposite, in fact. Immigrants are less likely to commit crimes of all types than the native-born. This suggests that crime is linked not to one’s place of birth, but to the many other forces which foster crime in this country, especially in relatively poor communities: high rates of divorce and family disintegration, high rates of alcohol and drug abuse, etc.
The solution to crime does not lie in immigration policy. And the solution to undocumented immigration does not lie in misguided “get tough” policies that scapegoat immigrants as criminals.
See More Immigration Matters
Resisting Anti-Immigrant Racism at NYU
please forward widely..
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Hundreds of Students Rally
Against Racist, Xenophobic Stunt of College Republicans
New York / February 20, 2007 // -
On Thursday, February 22nd hundreds of NYU students will rally against a publicity stunt organized by the NYU College Republicans where a mock illegal immigrant will be hunted in Washington Square Park. NYU College Republicans have titled the stunt "Find the Illegal Immigrant." At the event, one of the Republicans wearing the name tag "illegal immigrant" will be hidden amongst the crowd in Washington Square Park and members wearing "INS" name tags will hunt for the "illegal" in the park. The university club will give the first person who catches the "illegal immigrant" a $50 to $100 prize.
Over 400 NYU students from various student-run organizations and academic disciplines across the political spectrum have rallied together to protest the event as it happens from 11:00AM to 2:00PM at Washington Place and Washington Square East. Students are protesting the College Republicans crass manner in handling a rather sensitive topic in American politics. One in particular, Karen Lopez, has gone on record as stating that the event is "ignorant and offensive event" and reflects poorly upon the university. The students are not affiliated with any single entity or political cause, and were rallied together through the website Facebook.com by what some students have labeled a "troubling", "racist" and "dehumanizing" publicity stunt.
During the protest, the pro-immigrant students will hold signs and pass out flyers explaining their position on immigration issues.
The NYU College Republicans is the NYU's student run organization for members of the Republican Party [GOP]. Like all student groups, any of its actions do not reflect the policy, beliefs, or wishes of New York University.
Media Contact: Dalia Yedidia
(415) 216-8844
dy382@nyu.edu
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Hundreds of Students Rally
Against Racist, Xenophobic Stunt of College Republicans
New York / February 20, 2007 // -
On Thursday, February 22nd hundreds of NYU students will rally against a publicity stunt organized by the NYU College Republicans where a mock illegal immigrant will be hunted in Washington Square Park. NYU College Republicans have titled the stunt "Find the Illegal Immigrant." At the event, one of the Republicans wearing the name tag "illegal immigrant" will be hidden amongst the crowd in Washington Square Park and members wearing "INS" name tags will hunt for the "illegal" in the park. The university club will give the first person who catches the "illegal immigrant" a $50 to $100 prize.
Over 400 NYU students from various student-run organizations and academic disciplines across the political spectrum have rallied together to protest the event as it happens from 11:00AM to 2:00PM at Washington Place and Washington Square East. Students are protesting the College Republicans crass manner in handling a rather sensitive topic in American politics. One in particular, Karen Lopez, has gone on record as stating that the event is "ignorant and offensive event" and reflects poorly upon the university. The students are not affiliated with any single entity or political cause, and were rallied together through the website Facebook.com by what some students have labeled a "troubling", "racist" and "dehumanizing" publicity stunt.
During the protest, the pro-immigrant students will hold signs and pass out flyers explaining their position on immigration issues.
The NYU College Republicans is the NYU's student run organization for members of the Republican Party [GOP]. Like all student groups, any of its actions do not reflect the policy, beliefs, or wishes of New York University.
Media Contact: Dalia Yedidia
(415) 216-8844
dy382@nyu.edu
U.N.: Philippines military responsible for killings
Find this article at: http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/02/20/philippines.killings.reut/
U.N.: Philippines military responsible for killings
MANILA, Philippines (Reuters) -- Extra-judicial killings in the Philippines are distressingly high and the military appeared to be responsible for a number of them, a United Nations investigator said on Wednesday. Philip Alston, an Australian law professor and U.N. special rapporteur on extra-judicial executions, delivered the strong indictment of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's government at a news conference after a 10-day investigation in the southeast Asian nation. Local rights group Karapatan has claimed more than 800 people, mostly left-wing activists, have been murdered or reported missing since Arroyo came to power in 2001. But the military says most of the deaths could be attributed to internal fighting in the communist New People's Army. Alston said he did not know how many had died, but added: "I am certain the number is high enough to be distressing. "The impact of even a limited number of killings of the type alleged is corrosive in many ways," he said. "It intimidates vast numbers of civil society actors, it sends a message of vulnerability to all but the most well-connected, and it severely undermines the political discourse which is central to a resolution of the problems confronting this country." There was no immediate comment from the government or the military. "The armed forces remain in a state of almost total denial of its need to respond effectively and authentically to the significant number of killings which have been convincingly attributed to them," Alston said. He added however that there did not appear to be any state sanction for the killings. "I do not believe that there's a policy at the top designed to direct that these killings to take place. I'm clear on that." The Philippines, also fighting Muslim insurgencies, has been battling the NPA since 1969 in a conflict that has killed more than 40,000 people. Arroyo declared an "all out war" on the communist insurgents last year. Military chief Gen. Hermogenes Esperon has told Reuters that communist rebels were the top security threat to the nation but said troops did not use extra-judicial killings to counter them. He said he will prosecute any soldier found doing so.
Unconvincing
Alston said he asked Arroyo "to persuade the military that its reputation and effectiveness will be considerably enhanced, rather than undermined, by acknowledging the facts and taking genuine steps to investigate". He said the military must begin to investigate the killings seriously and "not in a way that simply protects its own officers". The military's claims of an internal purge within the New People's Army were unconvincing, he said. Arroyo appointed a retired Supreme Court Justice, Jose Melo, to investigate the killings last year but has refused to make his report public. Melo has told Reuters that elements in the military were behind many of the killings. Arroyo has called for the creation of special courts to deal with the political killings and asked the armed forces to update its rules on command responsibility. She also asked the Melo Commission to submit supplemental reports from time to time and said the Department of Foreign Affairs would formally ask the European Union, Spain, Finland and Sweden to send investigators to assist it. Alston said the Melo report must be made public and left-wing groups given space to enter the political mainstream. "The various measures ordered by the president in response to Melo constitute important first steps, but there is a huge amount that remains to be done," he said.
Copyright 2007 Reuters . All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
U.N.: Philippines military responsible for killings
MANILA, Philippines (Reuters) -- Extra-judicial killings in the Philippines are distressingly high and the military appeared to be responsible for a number of them, a United Nations investigator said on Wednesday. Philip Alston, an Australian law professor and U.N. special rapporteur on extra-judicial executions, delivered the strong indictment of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's government at a news conference after a 10-day investigation in the southeast Asian nation. Local rights group Karapatan has claimed more than 800 people, mostly left-wing activists, have been murdered or reported missing since Arroyo came to power in 2001. But the military says most of the deaths could be attributed to internal fighting in the communist New People's Army. Alston said he did not know how many had died, but added: "I am certain the number is high enough to be distressing. "The impact of even a limited number of killings of the type alleged is corrosive in many ways," he said. "It intimidates vast numbers of civil society actors, it sends a message of vulnerability to all but the most well-connected, and it severely undermines the political discourse which is central to a resolution of the problems confronting this country." There was no immediate comment from the government or the military. "The armed forces remain in a state of almost total denial of its need to respond effectively and authentically to the significant number of killings which have been convincingly attributed to them," Alston said. He added however that there did not appear to be any state sanction for the killings. "I do not believe that there's a policy at the top designed to direct that these killings to take place. I'm clear on that." The Philippines, also fighting Muslim insurgencies, has been battling the NPA since 1969 in a conflict that has killed more than 40,000 people. Arroyo declared an "all out war" on the communist insurgents last year. Military chief Gen. Hermogenes Esperon has told Reuters that communist rebels were the top security threat to the nation but said troops did not use extra-judicial killings to counter them. He said he will prosecute any soldier found doing so.
Unconvincing
Alston said he asked Arroyo "to persuade the military that its reputation and effectiveness will be considerably enhanced, rather than undermined, by acknowledging the facts and taking genuine steps to investigate". He said the military must begin to investigate the killings seriously and "not in a way that simply protects its own officers". The military's claims of an internal purge within the New People's Army were unconvincing, he said. Arroyo appointed a retired Supreme Court Justice, Jose Melo, to investigate the killings last year but has refused to make his report public. Melo has told Reuters that elements in the military were behind many of the killings. Arroyo has called for the creation of special courts to deal with the political killings and asked the armed forces to update its rules on command responsibility. She also asked the Melo Commission to submit supplemental reports from time to time and said the Department of Foreign Affairs would formally ask the European Union, Spain, Finland and Sweden to send investigators to assist it. Alston said the Melo report must be made public and left-wing groups given space to enter the political mainstream. "The various measures ordered by the president in response to Melo constitute important first steps, but there is a huge amount that remains to be done," he said.
Copyright 2007 Reuters
Monday, February 19, 2007
Antiterrorism bill 101
Antiterrorism bill 101
By DJ Yap, TJ Burgonio, Nancy C. Carvajal
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Last updated 03:52am (Mla time) 02/19/2007
MANILA, Philippines -- Lawyer Maria Socorro Diokno cites a hostage-taking incident to illustrate what to her is the conundrum of the antiterrorism bill that is likely to overcome its final hurdle in Congress Monday before it is sent to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to be signed into law.
The Senate version of the bill was adopted earlier this month by the bicameral conference committee. The Senate later passed the bill. On Monday, the House in plenary is likewise expected to approve it.
The antiterrorism bill penalizes any person who commits any of 12 crimes under the Revised Penal Code and other criminal laws and causes “widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand.”
The crimes enumerated include illegal possession of firearms, murder, rebellion, mutiny in the high seas, arson, piracy, robbery, kidnapping and serious illegal detention. Under the bill, these crimes are punishable by 40 years’ imprisonment without parole.
Diokno mentions during a forum an incident two years ago in which a man took his wife and child hostage and threatened to harm them unless the government stopped the demolition of his house, causing panic in the neighborhood.
“Is that considered terrorism?” Diokno asks. “Possibly yes, which is absolutely ridiculous ... that is how difficult this bill is to understand.”
Diokno, secretary general of the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG), points to the lack of standards and the subjective notion of what constitutes “fear and panic” in the antiterrorism bill, titled the “Human Security Act of 2007” (HSA).
“The crime of terrorism is defined by results,” she says. “In other words, a murder has to have been committed and the murder must be found to have sown widespread fear and panic. Otherwise, what makes a regular murder a terrorist act and what makes it a murder?” she asks.
Murder under the Revised Penal Code is punishable by reclusion perpetua -- 20 years to life in prison with the possibility of parole.
The security act will be enforced by an antiterrorism council composed of Cabinet members with support from the Anti-Money Laundering Council, the police and other law enforcement agencies.
Militant groups already are scrutinizing the impact of the bill in the light of concerns that have surfaced even at the outset of its introduction -- in various versions -- in the Senate and House of Representatives over its draconian overtones.
Offshoot of 9/11
The bill was an offshoot of 9/11, the ensuing US-led global war on terror and the emergence in the Philippines of al-Qaida-linked terrorist groups such as the Abu Sayyaf and the Indonesia-based Jemaah Islamiyah, blamed for recent deadly bombings and kidnappings in the country.
The concerns have also been fueled by the Philippine military’s history of human rights abuses during the Ferdinand Marcos regime, a continuing anti-insurgency campaign that intensified following Ms Arroyo’s directive to end the communist threat before the end of her term in 2010, and an opposition campaign to unseat her over alleged cheating during the 2004 presidential election.
Senators led by Aquilino Pimentel Jr., Franklin Drilon, Joker Arroyo and Edgardo Angara have managed to introduce some safeguards into the antiterrorism bill.
“It was a threat to human rights when it was introduced,” says Angara. “It has undergone practically an overhaul. It’s a better bill [now].”
Angara said the measure was better than the Patriot Act of US President George W. Bush, or the antiterrorism measures in Britain.
“In the UK, or even here, you can go to any judge and get a warrant,” says Angara.
He says only trained law enforcement agencies can enforce the Philippines’ antiterrorism act. “No Tom, Dick or Harry of a judge can issue a warrant,” he says, pointing out that this will be the responsibility of the Court of Appeals.
He also says that blunders in the implementation of the law can result in 10 to 12 years’ imprisonment of the enforcing authority. He says the “Hello Garci” wiretapping controversy will now be history because of built-in safeguards in intelligence eavesdropping.
Pimentel’s 98 amendments
Pimentel introduced 98 amendments to the Senate version of the bill. Of these, 96 were approved. Now, says the Senate minority leader, the human security act is “a little more humane.”
Among the amendments adopted were:
• Requiring a show of probable cause before anyone is tagged a terrorist.
• Approval by the Court of Appeals before police could place people under surveillance or tap their telephones, e-mails and other communications.
• Requiring the police to immediately bring an arrested person before a judicial authority (whose meaning was expanded to include human rights officials to make sure that there is always a check on police abuses right from the moment the arrested person is picked up).
• Exempting journalists and their sources from making compulsory disclosures to the police or judicial authorities, for that matter, lawyers and their clients, doctors and their patients as well.
• Compelling police to report to judicial authorities the results of their surveillance.
• Compensating victims of illegal or unfounded arrests P500,000 a day for wrongful detention.
• Making the law effective two months after the May elections and suspending its effectivity one month before and two months after every election.
“In any event, I also know from experience that no matter how good a law is, it may be abused,” says Pimentel, who was imprisoned during the martial law years.
‘Basic fear’
“That’s my basic fear. And it is not an empty one, considering the experience of our people. We are not legislating in a vacuum. We have to input the fears and the apprehensions of our people into the enactment of laws that we craft.
“Knowing then that illegal arrests are prohibited by the Constitution and the Revised Penal Code and still they happen -- all this without any anti-terror law, I can only hope for the best,” says Pimentel.
“I would have wanted that the acts now punished as terrorism, since they are already penalized in the Revised Penal Code, be punished under the code or under the special laws that define certain crimes that are included as predicate offenses in the HSA,” he says.
“Had my idea been adopted, there would be less danger of abuse and less chance that our people’s rights would be violated under the pretext of fighting terrorism,” says Pimentel.
‘It’s sufficient’
Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, author of the anti-terror bill, expressed satisfaction that the bill meets the needs of national security. “As far as I am concerned, it’s sufficient. We will see if it’s enough after it’s implemented. You can never tell. Society is dynamic.”
Enrile, defense minister under the late dictator Marcos, says there’s one item in the bill that he wants refined. He says the P500,000 fine for every day of wrongful detention of a suspect is too heavy. He says it should be reduced to P50,000.
He says he agreed to Pimentel’s proposal just to end the long debate. “We can amend it. We’ll see first if there’s grounds to amend it.”
Jamby’s objection
But Sen. Anna Consuelo “Jamby” Madrigal remains opposed and plans to question the bill before the Supreme Court, pointing to some provisions which she describes as unconstitutional.
“The bill is not about national security because we don’t have terrorism problems,” says Madrigal. She points out that what the nation needs is tighter implementation of existing laws and more intelligence gathering. “The bill is about legitimizing Gloria Arroyo’s muzzling her political enemies.”
She points to the so-called “Tagaytay 5” -- suspected communist insurgents who were arrested for allegedly attempting to sow terror during the May 1 celebration last year -- and the case of Anakpawis party-list Rep. Crispin Beltran, who is facing rebellion charges.
“They are in jail on mere suspicion,” she says. “If they say you look like a terrorist, they can detain you.”
Copyright 2007 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
By DJ Yap, TJ Burgonio, Nancy C. Carvajal
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Last updated 03:52am (Mla time) 02/19/2007
MANILA, Philippines -- Lawyer Maria Socorro Diokno cites a hostage-taking incident to illustrate what to her is the conundrum of the antiterrorism bill that is likely to overcome its final hurdle in Congress Monday before it is sent to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to be signed into law.
The Senate version of the bill was adopted earlier this month by the bicameral conference committee. The Senate later passed the bill. On Monday, the House in plenary is likewise expected to approve it.
The antiterrorism bill penalizes any person who commits any of 12 crimes under the Revised Penal Code and other criminal laws and causes “widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand.”
The crimes enumerated include illegal possession of firearms, murder, rebellion, mutiny in the high seas, arson, piracy, robbery, kidnapping and serious illegal detention. Under the bill, these crimes are punishable by 40 years’ imprisonment without parole.
Diokno mentions during a forum an incident two years ago in which a man took his wife and child hostage and threatened to harm them unless the government stopped the demolition of his house, causing panic in the neighborhood.
“Is that considered terrorism?” Diokno asks. “Possibly yes, which is absolutely ridiculous ... that is how difficult this bill is to understand.”
Diokno, secretary general of the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG), points to the lack of standards and the subjective notion of what constitutes “fear and panic” in the antiterrorism bill, titled the “Human Security Act of 2007” (HSA).
“The crime of terrorism is defined by results,” she says. “In other words, a murder has to have been committed and the murder must be found to have sown widespread fear and panic. Otherwise, what makes a regular murder a terrorist act and what makes it a murder?” she asks.
Murder under the Revised Penal Code is punishable by reclusion perpetua -- 20 years to life in prison with the possibility of parole.
The security act will be enforced by an antiterrorism council composed of Cabinet members with support from the Anti-Money Laundering Council, the police and other law enforcement agencies.
Militant groups already are scrutinizing the impact of the bill in the light of concerns that have surfaced even at the outset of its introduction -- in various versions -- in the Senate and House of Representatives over its draconian overtones.
Offshoot of 9/11
The bill was an offshoot of 9/11, the ensuing US-led global war on terror and the emergence in the Philippines of al-Qaida-linked terrorist groups such as the Abu Sayyaf and the Indonesia-based Jemaah Islamiyah, blamed for recent deadly bombings and kidnappings in the country.
The concerns have also been fueled by the Philippine military’s history of human rights abuses during the Ferdinand Marcos regime, a continuing anti-insurgency campaign that intensified following Ms Arroyo’s directive to end the communist threat before the end of her term in 2010, and an opposition campaign to unseat her over alleged cheating during the 2004 presidential election.
Senators led by Aquilino Pimentel Jr., Franklin Drilon, Joker Arroyo and Edgardo Angara have managed to introduce some safeguards into the antiterrorism bill.
“It was a threat to human rights when it was introduced,” says Angara. “It has undergone practically an overhaul. It’s a better bill [now].”
Angara said the measure was better than the Patriot Act of US President George W. Bush, or the antiterrorism measures in Britain.
“In the UK, or even here, you can go to any judge and get a warrant,” says Angara.
He says only trained law enforcement agencies can enforce the Philippines’ antiterrorism act. “No Tom, Dick or Harry of a judge can issue a warrant,” he says, pointing out that this will be the responsibility of the Court of Appeals.
He also says that blunders in the implementation of the law can result in 10 to 12 years’ imprisonment of the enforcing authority. He says the “Hello Garci” wiretapping controversy will now be history because of built-in safeguards in intelligence eavesdropping.
Pimentel’s 98 amendments
Pimentel introduced 98 amendments to the Senate version of the bill. Of these, 96 were approved. Now, says the Senate minority leader, the human security act is “a little more humane.”
Among the amendments adopted were:
• Requiring a show of probable cause before anyone is tagged a terrorist.
• Approval by the Court of Appeals before police could place people under surveillance or tap their telephones, e-mails and other communications.
• Requiring the police to immediately bring an arrested person before a judicial authority (whose meaning was expanded to include human rights officials to make sure that there is always a check on police abuses right from the moment the arrested person is picked up).
• Exempting journalists and their sources from making compulsory disclosures to the police or judicial authorities, for that matter, lawyers and their clients, doctors and their patients as well.
• Compelling police to report to judicial authorities the results of their surveillance.
• Compensating victims of illegal or unfounded arrests P500,000 a day for wrongful detention.
• Making the law effective two months after the May elections and suspending its effectivity one month before and two months after every election.
“In any event, I also know from experience that no matter how good a law is, it may be abused,” says Pimentel, who was imprisoned during the martial law years.
‘Basic fear’
“That’s my basic fear. And it is not an empty one, considering the experience of our people. We are not legislating in a vacuum. We have to input the fears and the apprehensions of our people into the enactment of laws that we craft.
“Knowing then that illegal arrests are prohibited by the Constitution and the Revised Penal Code and still they happen -- all this without any anti-terror law, I can only hope for the best,” says Pimentel.
“I would have wanted that the acts now punished as terrorism, since they are already penalized in the Revised Penal Code, be punished under the code or under the special laws that define certain crimes that are included as predicate offenses in the HSA,” he says.
“Had my idea been adopted, there would be less danger of abuse and less chance that our people’s rights would be violated under the pretext of fighting terrorism,” says Pimentel.
‘It’s sufficient’
Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, author of the anti-terror bill, expressed satisfaction that the bill meets the needs of national security. “As far as I am concerned, it’s sufficient. We will see if it’s enough after it’s implemented. You can never tell. Society is dynamic.”
Enrile, defense minister under the late dictator Marcos, says there’s one item in the bill that he wants refined. He says the P500,000 fine for every day of wrongful detention of a suspect is too heavy. He says it should be reduced to P50,000.
He says he agreed to Pimentel’s proposal just to end the long debate. “We can amend it. We’ll see first if there’s grounds to amend it.”
Jamby’s objection
But Sen. Anna Consuelo “Jamby” Madrigal remains opposed and plans to question the bill before the Supreme Court, pointing to some provisions which she describes as unconstitutional.
“The bill is not about national security because we don’t have terrorism problems,” says Madrigal. She points out that what the nation needs is tighter implementation of existing laws and more intelligence gathering. “The bill is about legitimizing Gloria Arroyo’s muzzling her political enemies.”
She points to the so-called “Tagaytay 5” -- suspected communist insurgents who were arrested for allegedly attempting to sow terror during the May 1 celebration last year -- and the case of Anakpawis party-list Rep. Crispin Beltran, who is facing rebellion charges.
“They are in jail on mere suspicion,” she says. “If they say you look like a terrorist, they can detain you.”
Copyright 2007 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
‘They’re supposed to be our protectors’ When the state is the terrorist
By Phoebe Zoe Sanchez, Jamir Niño Ocampo
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Last updated 03:36am (Mla time) 02/19/2007
(First of two parts)
(Editor’s note: Sanchez is assistant professor at the University of the Philippines Visayas working on her Ph.D. in Sociology; Ocampo is with the UP School of Economics. The two were invited by Taripnon, an ecology group in the Cagayan Valley, to study the impact of a military presence as a form of terrorism. Following is their report.)
“Palpasin niyo da kame uray ku pinatay yu diay maymaysak nga baru (Better still, kill us all. You have just killed my only son!),” the old man cried in anguish as he cradled his dying son Nelson Asucena in his arms.
Bleeding from M16 and M14 bullet wounds, Nelson made his last wish for his father Hipolito to take care of his family -- his wife Marifel and 3-year-old daughter Lyka.
Asucena, 19, Sangguniang Kabataan (youth council) chair of Barangay San Juan, Zinundungan Valley, thus became the 821st victim of extrajudicial killings, according to Karapatan, a human rights group (261st by the Philippine Daily Inquirer count), since President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo became president in 2001.
The elder Asucena pointed to Lt. Marcelo Pascua, Alpha company commander of the 21st Infantry Battalion (IB), as the man primarily responsible for the death of his son, a daily companion who helped him plow the fields and shared with him the hardships of peasant life.
He talked with a fact-finding mission that visited the area last month to look into the situation in the Cagayan Valley region. The mission included representatives of Bayan Muna, Karapatan, a church-based organization in Cagayan and other nongovernment organizations.
The 51-year-old Hipolito recounts vividly how the night of Dec. 13, 2006, turned into a nightmare.
“Bot (Nelson’s nickname), umay kami man (may we come in),” the unexpected caller said thrice.
Nelson rose from his bed but was stopped by his wife. “It is Lieutenant Pascua,” Nelson whispered.
“How do you know?” she asked.
“It is his voice,” he replied.
Asucena walked to the door while his father lit a gas lamp. Hipolito followed his son. Before Nelson opened the door, Hipolito patted his son’s back and asked who was calling him. “It is Lieutenant Pascua,” Nelson repeated.
The two men stepped outside the house to meet with the visitors. Pascua was wearing a camouflage uniform. He was with five hooded men in black carrying long firearms.
‘They are protectors’
“Bring that lamp back. I don’t want to be in the light,” Pascua told Hipolito in Ilocano.
“Cook for us,” Pascua ordered. Hipolito and his wife Catalina began to comply when Pascua changed his mind and said he just wanted a cup of coffee.
Hipolito brought the glasses and a pitcher of water to the men outside, while Nelson stayed inside the house. Doubt never entered the minds of the Asucenas.
Pascua had been a friend. Nelson once sought medication for an injured leg and Pascua’s soldiers provided it.
“Why should we fear them? They are soldiers. They are supposed to be our protectors,” said Marifel.
After Hipolito gave some water to the visitors and went back inside the house, another voice called Nelson: “Bot, come here and get the glasses.”
Nelson came out, alone.
A few seconds later, the family heard the cracking sounds of firearms being loaded followed by the terrified voice of Nelson crying, “Ay! Ay!” Rapid gunfire bursts followed.
The family rushed outside and found Nelson lying face up, his left hand on top of his right rib.
The father shrieked, grabbed his son and watched helplessly as Pascua and his men fled under cover of darkness.
Daughter Lyka came out and embraced her bleeding father, sobbing silently. Relatives and neighbors soon came to mourn the fallen youth.
Agrarian unrest
The Asucenas are among the millions of poor Filipino peasants who dream of owning at least a household farm to live on.
Barangay San Juan has blessed the Asucenas with land suitable for farming and livelihood. But since the Spanish colonial era, San Juan, like other villages in the region, has been engulfed in agitation by peasant movements seeking land for landless tillers.
The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its armed component, the New People’s Army (NPA), emerged in the region as farmers stepped up demands for the redistribution of the land.
This earned the ire of the landlords who for a time had felt helpless, especially those who had property in areas considered hot spots of CPP-NPA operations -- particularly in the Marag, Paco and Zinundungan triangle.
From the late ’80s to the middle of the ’90s these areas were declared “no man’s land” as the military went after guerrillas of the CPP-NPA. Human rights abuses surged.
‘Hamleting’
Military operations eased in the late ’90s. “Hamleting” -- a failed US strategy during the Vietnam War that called for relocating villages away from sensitive zones -- was lifted between 1996 and 2000.
San Juan is located in the Zinundungan Valley, and it may have been unfortunate for Hipolito and his family to have been caught in the middle of the conflict between the military and the NPAs.
It was also this conflict that brought Hipolito to San Juan when his family was displaced by military operations in their original home in Marag.
In 1982, Hipolito Asucena saw big trouble ahead when the military again evacuated his family from San Juan to Masi, leaving behind their houses and cultivated farms.
Eight months in Masi’s “concentration camp” pushed the Asucenas back to San Juan. Many children died from diseases in the evacuation area.
The elder Asucena recounted alleged abuses: Soldiers raping women, defecating in communal water catchments, beating peasants during questioning about the NPA presence.
‘They beat us just the same’
“The military would ask us if we had seen NPAs in our place, and when we say ‘yes,’ they say that we are members of the NPA so they beat us. But when we say ‘no,’ they accuse us of covering up for the NPAs and then beat us just the same,” said Hipolito.
There were other bitter memories. He recalled how in 1983, the military burned his house and stole his chickens.
Once, he added, he was told to go to the capital of Cagayan to be presented to the media as one of the NPA “surrenderers.”
In 2003, during a resurgent anticommunist campaign, the military took pictures of the people in San Juan and asked them to write down their names on a document, purportedly to be used in clearing their records as NPA members.
‘Land 6 feet under ground’
In 2004, a military squad stayed in Hipolito’s house for about two months.
On Nov. 24, 2006, soldiers of the 21st IB gathered the people of San Juan in a community meeting for a “census.” Here, a soldier who identified himself as Army de la Cruz declared: “Ex-Mayor Baloran owns the land being given to you by the NPAs. Your only land is six feet below the ground.”
Hipolito says he felt weak and defenseless as the military tightened control of everyday life. Military abuses became rife. It was only on that tragic December night that Hipolito realized his son would give up his life for the festering land dispute.
At the age of 9, Nelson was allegedly already included in the order of battle, a list of people monitored by the Philippine Army suspected of being members of the CPP-NPA.
Most victims of extrajudicial killings were in the AFP order of battle.
On Nov. 26, 2006, Marifel had a premonition of Nelson’s death when she overheard a conversation between Pascua and her husband: “Surrender to us,” Pascua told Nelson after an exchange of jokes.
“What shall I surrender, sir, my plow and my bolo? I am just a farmer,” Nelson replied.
“Watch out for yourself,” Pascua reportedly said.
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Last updated 03:36am (Mla time) 02/19/2007
(First of two parts)
(Editor’s note: Sanchez is assistant professor at the University of the Philippines Visayas working on her Ph.D. in Sociology; Ocampo is with the UP School of Economics. The two were invited by Taripnon, an ecology group in the Cagayan Valley, to study the impact of a military presence as a form of terrorism. Following is their report.)
“Palpasin niyo da kame uray ku pinatay yu diay maymaysak nga baru (Better still, kill us all. You have just killed my only son!),” the old man cried in anguish as he cradled his dying son Nelson Asucena in his arms.
Bleeding from M16 and M14 bullet wounds, Nelson made his last wish for his father Hipolito to take care of his family -- his wife Marifel and 3-year-old daughter Lyka.
Asucena, 19, Sangguniang Kabataan (youth council) chair of Barangay San Juan, Zinundungan Valley, thus became the 821st victim of extrajudicial killings, according to Karapatan, a human rights group (261st by the Philippine Daily Inquirer count), since President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo became president in 2001.
The elder Asucena pointed to Lt. Marcelo Pascua, Alpha company commander of the 21st Infantry Battalion (IB), as the man primarily responsible for the death of his son, a daily companion who helped him plow the fields and shared with him the hardships of peasant life.
He talked with a fact-finding mission that visited the area last month to look into the situation in the Cagayan Valley region. The mission included representatives of Bayan Muna, Karapatan, a church-based organization in Cagayan and other nongovernment organizations.
The 51-year-old Hipolito recounts vividly how the night of Dec. 13, 2006, turned into a nightmare.
“Bot (Nelson’s nickname), umay kami man (may we come in),” the unexpected caller said thrice.
Nelson rose from his bed but was stopped by his wife. “It is Lieutenant Pascua,” Nelson whispered.
“How do you know?” she asked.
“It is his voice,” he replied.
Asucena walked to the door while his father lit a gas lamp. Hipolito followed his son. Before Nelson opened the door, Hipolito patted his son’s back and asked who was calling him. “It is Lieutenant Pascua,” Nelson repeated.
The two men stepped outside the house to meet with the visitors. Pascua was wearing a camouflage uniform. He was with five hooded men in black carrying long firearms.
‘They are protectors’
“Bring that lamp back. I don’t want to be in the light,” Pascua told Hipolito in Ilocano.
“Cook for us,” Pascua ordered. Hipolito and his wife Catalina began to comply when Pascua changed his mind and said he just wanted a cup of coffee.
Hipolito brought the glasses and a pitcher of water to the men outside, while Nelson stayed inside the house. Doubt never entered the minds of the Asucenas.
Pascua had been a friend. Nelson once sought medication for an injured leg and Pascua’s soldiers provided it.
“Why should we fear them? They are soldiers. They are supposed to be our protectors,” said Marifel.
After Hipolito gave some water to the visitors and went back inside the house, another voice called Nelson: “Bot, come here and get the glasses.”
Nelson came out, alone.
A few seconds later, the family heard the cracking sounds of firearms being loaded followed by the terrified voice of Nelson crying, “Ay! Ay!” Rapid gunfire bursts followed.
The family rushed outside and found Nelson lying face up, his left hand on top of his right rib.
The father shrieked, grabbed his son and watched helplessly as Pascua and his men fled under cover of darkness.
Daughter Lyka came out and embraced her bleeding father, sobbing silently. Relatives and neighbors soon came to mourn the fallen youth.
Agrarian unrest
The Asucenas are among the millions of poor Filipino peasants who dream of owning at least a household farm to live on.
Barangay San Juan has blessed the Asucenas with land suitable for farming and livelihood. But since the Spanish colonial era, San Juan, like other villages in the region, has been engulfed in agitation by peasant movements seeking land for landless tillers.
The Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its armed component, the New People’s Army (NPA), emerged in the region as farmers stepped up demands for the redistribution of the land.
This earned the ire of the landlords who for a time had felt helpless, especially those who had property in areas considered hot spots of CPP-NPA operations -- particularly in the Marag, Paco and Zinundungan triangle.
From the late ’80s to the middle of the ’90s these areas were declared “no man’s land” as the military went after guerrillas of the CPP-NPA. Human rights abuses surged.
‘Hamleting’
Military operations eased in the late ’90s. “Hamleting” -- a failed US strategy during the Vietnam War that called for relocating villages away from sensitive zones -- was lifted between 1996 and 2000.
San Juan is located in the Zinundungan Valley, and it may have been unfortunate for Hipolito and his family to have been caught in the middle of the conflict between the military and the NPAs.
It was also this conflict that brought Hipolito to San Juan when his family was displaced by military operations in their original home in Marag.
In 1982, Hipolito Asucena saw big trouble ahead when the military again evacuated his family from San Juan to Masi, leaving behind their houses and cultivated farms.
Eight months in Masi’s “concentration camp” pushed the Asucenas back to San Juan. Many children died from diseases in the evacuation area.
The elder Asucena recounted alleged abuses: Soldiers raping women, defecating in communal water catchments, beating peasants during questioning about the NPA presence.
‘They beat us just the same’
“The military would ask us if we had seen NPAs in our place, and when we say ‘yes,’ they say that we are members of the NPA so they beat us. But when we say ‘no,’ they accuse us of covering up for the NPAs and then beat us just the same,” said Hipolito.
There were other bitter memories. He recalled how in 1983, the military burned his house and stole his chickens.
Once, he added, he was told to go to the capital of Cagayan to be presented to the media as one of the NPA “surrenderers.”
In 2003, during a resurgent anticommunist campaign, the military took pictures of the people in San Juan and asked them to write down their names on a document, purportedly to be used in clearing their records as NPA members.
‘Land 6 feet under ground’
In 2004, a military squad stayed in Hipolito’s house for about two months.
On Nov. 24, 2006, soldiers of the 21st IB gathered the people of San Juan in a community meeting for a “census.” Here, a soldier who identified himself as Army de la Cruz declared: “Ex-Mayor Baloran owns the land being given to you by the NPAs. Your only land is six feet below the ground.”
Hipolito says he felt weak and defenseless as the military tightened control of everyday life. Military abuses became rife. It was only on that tragic December night that Hipolito realized his son would give up his life for the festering land dispute.
At the age of 9, Nelson was allegedly already included in the order of battle, a list of people monitored by the Philippine Army suspected of being members of the CPP-NPA.
Most victims of extrajudicial killings were in the AFP order of battle.
On Nov. 26, 2006, Marifel had a premonition of Nelson’s death when she overheard a conversation between Pascua and her husband: “Surrender to us,” Pascua told Nelson after an exchange of jokes.
“What shall I surrender, sir, my plow and my bolo? I am just a farmer,” Nelson replied.
“Watch out for yourself,” Pascua reportedly said.
Filipino nurses leaving Philippines for better opportunities in the US
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/southeastasia/view/257667/1/.html
Filipino nurses leaving Philippines for better opportunities in the US
By Christine Ong, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 09 February 2007 2306 hrs
More and more Filipino nurses are leaving the Philippines for better opportunities in the United States.
This exodus is causing a shortage of nurses in the country.
Doctor Juanito La Rosa is frustrated: another nurse has informed him that she will be leaving for the United States by the end of the month.
Dr Juanito La Rosa, President, Las Pinas City Medical Center, said: "On the average they leave the hospital after three or four months of staying here. The most common answer is this: look doctor, in America, after one month of working there, we already have a brand new car. You cannot buy that here. But if we raise their salaries, it will increase the overhead of the hospital. We are only a poor country."
And so Dr La Rosa has to contend with seeing the hospital's best nurses go.
Raul Cardenas is among the 15,000 Filipinos who took the US National Council Licensure Examination, or NCLEX, last year.
That's an overwhelming 65 percent increase over those who took it in 2005.
His US$150 monthly salary is just no match to the US$4,000 a month that he will be receiving in Virginia.
He said: "The work load here is heavy. In the US, they only handle a maximum of 5 patients per shift. While here, we handle as many as 12 patients in a shift. So the work load is hard and then the compensation is low. What I earn here for a year, I can get there in just a month."
The US is going one step further to woo Filipino nurses.
High-school graduates who cannot afford to take up a four-year nursing course, can now take a 15-month licensed practical nurse programme and apply for the US licensure exams.
Gregory Tyrone Howard, President, National Federation of Licensed Practical Nurses of America, said: "There is a need for licensed practical nurses in the US and this is an untapped resource by the Philippines. One of the problems is that your government does not recognise that level of nursing."
With the planned opening of the first practical nursing school in the Philippines and in Asia, Mr Howard is urging the government to also recognise licensed practical nursing in the Philippines.
Proponents of the licensed practical nursing curriculum believe that not only will they be able to increase the chances of Filipino nurses going to the US, they also hope to address the issue of brain drain in the country.
Mr Howard said: "Those nurses who start in registered nurses school, who do not complete after two years, what happened to them? They leave school with absolutely nothing and they lost money, they lost time, and they have nothing to show for."
But in the end, unless these Filipino nurses are given better salaries, they will still choose to leave the country. - CNA/ch
Filipino nurses leaving Philippines for better opportunities in the US
By Christine Ong, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 09 February 2007 2306 hrs
More and more Filipino nurses are leaving the Philippines for better opportunities in the United States.
This exodus is causing a shortage of nurses in the country.
Doctor Juanito La Rosa is frustrated: another nurse has informed him that she will be leaving for the United States by the end of the month.
Dr Juanito La Rosa, President, Las Pinas City Medical Center, said: "On the average they leave the hospital after three or four months of staying here. The most common answer is this: look doctor, in America, after one month of working there, we already have a brand new car. You cannot buy that here. But if we raise their salaries, it will increase the overhead of the hospital. We are only a poor country."
And so Dr La Rosa has to contend with seeing the hospital's best nurses go.
Raul Cardenas is among the 15,000 Filipinos who took the US National Council Licensure Examination, or NCLEX, last year.
That's an overwhelming 65 percent increase over those who took it in 2005.
His US$150 monthly salary is just no match to the US$4,000 a month that he will be receiving in Virginia.
He said: "The work load here is heavy. In the US, they only handle a maximum of 5 patients per shift. While here, we handle as many as 12 patients in a shift. So the work load is hard and then the compensation is low. What I earn here for a year, I can get there in just a month."
The US is going one step further to woo Filipino nurses.
High-school graduates who cannot afford to take up a four-year nursing course, can now take a 15-month licensed practical nurse programme and apply for the US licensure exams.
Gregory Tyrone Howard, President, National Federation of Licensed Practical Nurses of America, said: "There is a need for licensed practical nurses in the US and this is an untapped resource by the Philippines. One of the problems is that your government does not recognise that level of nursing."
With the planned opening of the first practical nursing school in the Philippines and in Asia, Mr Howard is urging the government to also recognise licensed practical nursing in the Philippines.
Proponents of the licensed practical nursing curriculum believe that not only will they be able to increase the chances of Filipino nurses going to the US, they also hope to address the issue of brain drain in the country.
Mr Howard said: "Those nurses who start in registered nurses school, who do not complete after two years, what happened to them? They leave school with absolutely nothing and they lost money, they lost time, and they have nothing to show for."
But in the end, unless these Filipino nurses are given better salaries, they will still choose to leave the country. - CNA/ch
International Ecumenical Conference on Human Rights in the Philippines
Please distribute widely to all your networks in the U.S. Thank you.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Philippine Working Group
under the auspices of Church World Service - Asia Pacific Forum
together with the
National Council of Churches in the Philippines
present the:
International Ecumenical Conference on
Human Rights in the Philippines
March 12-14, 2007
National City Christian Church
5 Thomas Circle, N.W.
Washington, DC
USA
The conference is an international ecumenical response to the disturbing escalation of human rights violations and an appalling culture of impunity in the Philippines.
It features a multi-sectoral Philippine delegation and the public release of “An Ecumenical Report on Human Rights in the Philippines.”
Conference Objectives:
arrow Study and analyze the geopolitical context, pattern and roots, of human rights violations in the Philippines, especially extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and political repression;
arrow Invite and engage churches and ecumenical and religious bodies to speak out and take concrete actions of advocacy, solidarity and accompaniment for peace and justice in the Philippines;
arrow Challenge faith communities (church, ecumenical and religious) worldwide in new and ongoing work to call on governments, and society at large, to publicly deplore the Philippine government’s failure to protect the human rights and dignity of its citizens and to uphold its domestic (national) and international human rights obligations;
arrow Support the submission of the “Ecumenical Report on Human Rights in the Philippines” to governmental and intergovernmental bodies and help find ways to redress and avert this tragic pattern of human rights violations and impunity in the Philippines; and
arrow Accompany and be in solidarity with the Filipino people and God’s prophets in their prophetic witness for human rights, justice and peace.
Register today at www.philippinesadvocacy.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Philippine Working Group
under the auspices of Church World Service - Asia Pacific Forum
together with the
National Council of Churches in the Philippines
present the:
International Ecumenical Conference on
Human Rights in the Philippines
March 12-14, 2007
National City Christian Church
5 Thomas Circle, N.W.
Washington, DC
USA
The conference is an international ecumenical response to the disturbing escalation of human rights violations and an appalling culture of impunity in the Philippines.
It features a multi-sectoral Philippine delegation and the public release of “An Ecumenical Report on Human Rights in the Philippines.”
Conference Objectives:
arrow Study and analyze the geopolitical context, pattern and roots, of human rights violations in the Philippines, especially extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and political repression;
arrow Invite and engage churches and ecumenical and religious bodies to speak out and take concrete actions of advocacy, solidarity and accompaniment for peace and justice in the Philippines;
arrow Challenge faith communities (church, ecumenical and religious) worldwide in new and ongoing work to call on governments, and society at large, to publicly deplore the Philippine government’s failure to protect the human rights and dignity of its citizens and to uphold its domestic (national) and international human rights obligations;
arrow Support the submission of the “Ecumenical Report on Human Rights in the Philippines” to governmental and intergovernmental bodies and help find ways to redress and avert this tragic pattern of human rights violations and impunity in the Philippines; and
arrow Accompany and be in solidarity with the Filipino people and God’s prophets in their prophetic witness for human rights, justice and peace.
Register today at www.philippinesadvocacy.org
Stop the Killings
> PRESS RELEASE
> February 14, 2007
>
> Church group appeals to UN Rap on Political Killings:
> Look, judge beyond Malacanang-AFP-
> February 14, 2007
>
> Church group appeals to UN Rap on Political Killings:
> Look, judge beyond Malacanang-AFP-
>
> The Promotion of Church People's Response (PCPR), a church-based human
> rights group, is appealing to Mr. Philip Alston, United Nations Special
> Rapporteur on Extra-Judicial Killings, to look, listen and judge beyond
> the
> Malacañang-AFP-
> political killings under Arroyo.
>
> The group notes, "We received information that in one of Mr. Alston's
> meeting with government representatives, the case of Bishop Alberto
> Ramento
> was cited as a plain case of robbery. The family and co-workers of Bishop
> Ramento believe that he was killed not by plain thieves but by state
> agents
> ordered to eliminate groups and personalities advocating regime change.
>
> As we have wrote to Mr. Alston earlier, the fact that Bishop Ramento and
> 24
> other church people were not spared is a glaring manifestation of extreme
> level of state repression. We respectfully ask Mr. Alston to probe into
> the
> level of official state policy pertaining to the massive vilification,
> harassment, unjust arrests and summary executions of members of
> progressive
> political parties and community activists across the nation.
>
> Beware of wolves in sheep's clothing
> "Mr. Alston must brace himself for more lies and cover-up as he
> meets with Arroyo's team of policy-makers on national security,
> particularly
> Mr. Norberto Gonzales whom he will be meeting tomorrow. On his 10-day
> mission, every encounter with Mrs Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, Exec. Sec.
> Eduardo Ermita, Mr. Norberto Gonzales and top military and police
> officials
> is like meeting wolves in sheep's clothing. The wolves are wearing
> dignified
> smiles and best attire, but in truth they are accountable for the most
> devious schemes behind the staggering number of political killings and
> persecution. We ask Mr. Alston to look and listen beyond claims of plain
> robbery, 'leftists killing leftists' and other attempts to point the blame
> on non-state entities," Fr. Jerry Sabado,OCarm, PCPR Spokesperson
> stressed.
>
> State cover-up through police, TF Usig sham investigations
> "As we have noted in documents submitted to the UN team, church
> groups are unhappy about the conduct of police and Task Force Usig
> investigations: Simply because Bishop Ramento's cellular phone and ring
> were
> discovered stolen after the incident, the Philippine National Police was
> quick to dismiss the case as a simple case of robbery with homicide. Our
> independent investigation found that the crime scene investigation by the
> police was perfunctorily finished in a speed of about two hours and
> thereafter they did not cordon off the crime scene, thus allowing everyone
> in. Except for the sworn statement of the church caretaker, Archimedes
> Ferrer, there was also no interview done on the family and the people
> close
> to Bishop Ramento after the crime scene investigation and before they
> single-
> mindedly declared it just a few hours after the crime scene investigation
> that it was a case of robbery with homicide," PCPR stated.
>
> PCPR pointed out that in the case of Rev. Edison Lapuz, police and the
> Task
> Force Usig reported last year, ""Lapuz was accused of juggling funds
> generated through pledges, donations and solicitations for the National
> Council of Churches in the Philippines.
>
> The NCCP, through Ms. Sharon Rose Joy Ruiz-Duremdes, General Secretary of
> the Council, stated, "This pronouncement is downright malicious and
> unfounded. While active in the human rights program of the NCCP, Rev.
> Lapuz
> was never given funds to manage by the organization. To our knowledge, he
> was never engaged in fund raising for the Council. The "conclusions" of
> Task
> Force Usig regarding the cause of extra judicial killings belies the
> capability of this body to come out with a credible report. To make such a
> pronouncement without consulting the NCCP which is allegedly the
> organization whose funds Rev. Lapuz embezzled, clearly shows the quality
> of
> the investigation conducted by the Task Force."
>
> PCPR shares the view of the NCCP that Task Force Usig came out with
> incredible conclusions and has made a mockery of the process of seeking
> justice for those who have been brutally felled. In a separate statement,
> the NCCP welcomed the UN Rapportuer's mission and noted, "Though the
> pattern
> of human rights violations is being compared to the dark days of martial
> law, one significant characteristic stands out: the human rights
> violations
> are carried out with impunity against members of people-oriented
> organizations, churches and political parties. The victims are unarmed and
> helpless and the inability of government to stop the executions has fueled
> public frustration and even public accusation that the Philippine
> government
> has a hand in these, if not by commission, by inaction."
>
> Finally, PCPR also urged Mr. Alston to include in his recommendation for
> the
> Supreme Court to junk the Anti-Terrorism Bill which further justify
> political killings through arbitrary terrorist labeling of activist
> groups,
> human rights organizations and even churches deeply involved in social
> concerns such as those listed by the military as 'enemies of the state.'
>
> Reference: Fr. Jerry Sabado, OCarm - Spokesperson, PCPR
> Ms Amie Dural, Secretary General, PCPR
> Contact: 4107623
>
>
>
>
>
>
> REPORT TO THE UNITED NATIONS TEAM
> February 14, 2007
>
> A multitude of concerns have been raised regarding the pattern of
> escalating
> extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and political persecution
> in
> the Philippines today. Though this pattern of human rights violations is
> being compared to the dark days of martial law, one significant
> characteristic stands out: the human rights violations are carried out
> with
> impunity against members of people-oriented organizations, churches and
> political parties. The victims are unarmed and helpless and the inability
> of
> government to stop the executions has fueled public frustration and even
> public accusation that the Philippine government has a hand in these, if
> not
> by commission, by inaction. The attacks on activists have escalated
> despite
> a pronouncement by the Commission on Human Rights that the government
> ultimately is accountable for the killings because it has a duty to
> protect
> its citizens, and amid calls from London-based Amnesty International for
> the
> administration to disband armed groups operating "with (official)
> acquiescence.
> you that as of February 12, 2007, 833 Filipinos have fallen victim to
> State
> terrorism.
>
> Church people - clergy and laity alike - have not been spared. In fact,
> they
> have been the recent targets of harassment and repression. As of today, 10
> clergy and 5 lay workers of church-based programs were extra-judicially
> killed. You must have already been told that one of the latest cases is
> the
> murder of Bishop Alberto Ramento, the former Supreme Bishop of the Iglesia
> Filipina Independiente, a church in concordat relation and communion with
> the Anglican/Episcopal, Reformed and Old Catholic churches worldwide.
> Bishop
> Ramento was a vocal human rights and peace advocate.
>
> Peace building has been the center piece program of the apostolate of the
> National Council of Churches in the Philippines (NCCP, for brevity). The
> ten
> member churches have consistently taken to task the powers and
> principalities in this country especially as regards the human rights
> record
> of the government. As could be expected, the State has not been too
> friendly
> to the Council. It has
> labeled us as a communist front and placed us in the list of the "enemies
> of
> the State." Our national headquarters continues to be under very close
> watch
> by the authorities.
>
> Last year, the churches held a Human Rights and Peace Summit to help give
> visibility to the deteriorating human rights situation under President
> Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. The churches and a number of our overseas
> partners
> called for:
> 1. the conduct of an independent investigation on these violations
> of human rights by a group of esteemed individuals from different walks of
> life such as church people, academicians, lawyers, legislators and leaders
> of peasants and workers, to be done with dispatch;
> 2. a thorough inquiry by the United Nations High Commissioner for
> Human Rights and the United Nations Human Rights Council and other
> international courts of justice to ferret out the truth and to hold
> accountable those responsible for such wrongdoings;
> 3. the government to exercise its political will to put an
> immediate end tothe extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances and
> other forms of political persecution.
> 4. the resumption of peace talks between the Government of the
> Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the National Democratic Front of the
> Philippines (NDFP).
> 5. concrete initiatives and programs to support the efforts of
> victims and families of human rights violations to rebuild their lives,
> i.e.
> scholarships, financial and livelihood assistance, etc.
>
> Allow me, on behalf of the ecumenical community in the Philippines to
> thank
> you for your concern. Indeed, you are our partners in the pursuit of peace
> based on justice.
>
> Ms. Sharon Rose Joy-Ruiz Duremdes
> General Secretary
> National Council of Churches in the Philippines (NCCP)
>
>
> --
> Promotion of Church People\'s Response (PCPR)
>
Saturday, February 17, 2007
How Anti-Terror Laws Hurt Asylum Seekers
How Anti-Terror Laws Hurt Asylum Seekers
New America Media, Commentary, Sarnata Reynolds, Posted: Feb 15, 2007
EDITOR’S NOTE: Terrorism definitions are so broad that DHS admitted they may even deny asylum to the Iraqi national who helped in the rescue of American soldier Jessica Lynch. Sarnata Reynolds is the Director of the Amnesty International USA Refugee Program, a member of Detention Watch Network. IMMIGRATION MATTERS regularly features the views of the nation's leading immigrant rights advocates.A bipartisan body, the federal Commission on International Religious Freedom, which Congress asked to review asylum procedures, recently warned that Homeland Security authorities continue to treat asylum seekers harshly.
Asylum seekers were sometimes cuffed, strip-searched and jailed, the commission found. To protect people fleeing persecution the commission called for safeguards in the system of expedited removal, which authorizes border patrol to deport people quickly and without a court hearing. However, the obstacles asylum seekers confront in their search for protection extend beyond the errors of border patrol.
Indeed, anti-terrorism laws are now so broad they hurt the victims of terrorism, punish them for being the subject of abuse, and foreclose the possibility of their attaining protection in the United States.
On January 11, 2007, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) recognized the dire consequences of these laws and agreed to provide waivers to eight discreet groups of refugees, and consider duress waivers on a case-by-case basis.
This limited concession, however, applies to a very narrow category of people and provides no remedy whatsoever to detained asylum seekers who do not fall within the waiver categories. Worse, DHS has yet to provide a procedure to apply for a waiver, so even those asylum seekers who may benefit have no way of requesting one.
Meanwhile, immigration judges are forced to refuse protection to bona fide asylum seekers, not because they are a national security threat to the U.S., but because they had some link, even if minimal and involuntary, to armed groups in their home countries.
Through swift passage of the USA Patriot Act of 2001 and the Real ID Act of 2005, Congress overhauled and greatly expanded terrorism definitions. For the first time, victims of terrorist organizations were labeled material supporters of terrorism precisely because they were targeted, tortured and enslaved by the very groups the United States is attempting to exclude.
The extremely broad definition of “material support” of terrorism includes the provision of goods or services to a group of “two or more individuals, whether organized or not, [which] engages in, or has a subgroup which engages in” activities as broad as using an “explosive, firearm or other weapon or dangerous device.”
Having been forced to provide the support—no matter how minimal -- does not exempt a person from being barred entry into the United States as a refugee, or provided status as an asylee.
As a result, Liberian women brutally raped and kidnapped by armed militias and then forced to cook for them are labeled material supporters of terrorism precisely because of their domestic enslavement.
Colombians, forced at the threat of torture or death, to provide money to armed militias are identified as material supporters of terrorism. Nepalese citizens terrorized into providing shelter or water to rebels are barred from protection because the aid is considered material support of terrorism.
Today, terrorism definitions are so broad that DHS admitted in oral argument they may even bar from protection the Iraqi national who helped secure the rescue of American soldier Jessica Lynch, because U.S. soldiers originally stationed in Iraq may constitute a terrorist organization as defined by our irrationally expansive anti-terrorism laws.
Exceedingly broad anti-terrorism definitions have a devastating effect on our allies in the war on terror and on democracy advocates around the world. Denying protection to refugees and asylum seekers because they were victimized by terrorist organizations does not advance our shared values and violates our obligations under international law.
Providing limited waivers to discreet groups of people does not begin to address the disastrous consequences of current anti-terrorism legislation. Nor has the administration demonstrated that the system could work – while it has recognized the availability of waivers, no procedure exists for people to take advantage of the waivers. In the meantime, thousands of refugees – victims of terrible human rights violations -- are stranded in refugee camps abroad and detention centers in the United States.
Correcting the law so that it expressly excludes people who acted under duress, and expressly protects individuals who assisted pro-democracy groups is the only durable solution to the quagmire of current anti-terrorism law.
See More Immigration Matters
California Considers Denying Services to the Undocumented, Again
(from Pacifica News Service)
La Opinión, Posted: Feb 17, 2007
SACRAMENTO — Public services for undocumented immigrants are once again under threat by a bill that is essentially identical to the failed Proposition 187, reports La Opinión. Proposition 187 sought to deny social services, health care and public education to undocumented immigrants. Voters passed the proposition in 1994 but it was overturned by a federal court that found the proposal unconstitutional. This week Republican Assemblyman Paul Cook of Beaumont, Calif. introduced AB271, a similar proposition that would require Californians to provide proof of citizenship when applying for public services or financial benefits. In an interview with La Opinión, Cook emphasized that the proposal is not anti-immigrant because it does not affect those who came to the country legally or are in the process of obtaining legal residency. Héctor de la Torre, Democratic Assemblyman from South Gate, Calif., disagreed, calling the proposal unconstitutional and a political move to appeal to anti-immigrant voters in Cook’s district. Cook’s proposal is the fourth so-called “anti-immigrant” bill proposed by Republican legislators in California this session, reports La Opinión. Last week, Republican Senator Tom Harman of Orange, Calif. introduced SB189 which would demand that the state verify employees’ social security numbers and work permits in the federal Basic Pilot Program. Another bill, SB3, also by Harman, would make it a crime for undocumented immigrants to occupy public and private property in California. Assembly bill AB107, proposed by Republican Assemblyman Cameron Smyth, of Northridge, Calif. would forbid the state to offer public works contracts to anyone who has hired undocumented immigrants. Last year, 10 “anti-immigrant” bills were proposed in California’s state legislature, according to La Opinión. None of them made it beyond their first committee hearing.
From the Filipino Express (Feb. 5-7, 2007)
| ||||
| ||||
|
Bush sees Borja
| |
|
|
By EDMUND M. SILVESTRE
Caesar Borja Jr., son of a World Trade Center first responder who succumbed last week to a WTC-related lung disease, got his wish to meet the United States President face-to-face.
With his mother, younger brother and sister by his side, Borja Jr. told reporters that President George W. Bush listened intently as he pressed him for more federal funding to help those suffering from exposure to Ground Zero dust.
“On behalf of all World Trade Center victims, I expressed the urgency and the desperate need for financial support for health services,” Borja Jr. said of his private meeting with Mr. Bush Wednesday afternoon at Federal Hall in Lower Manhattan, where the President earlier delivered an economic speech.
“Everything that Mr. President told me reassured me wholeheartedly,” added the 21-year-old eldest son of fallen New York Police Department Police Officer Cesar Borja, who died Jan. 23 from serious lung problems attributed to WTC
toxin.
Borja Jr., a journalism student at Hunter College, said he felt he got the message across during his meeting with the President.
He said he wasn’t nervous at all during the meeting but kept himself focused on what he saw as his duty, to speak for the victims of 9/11.
“Now is your chance to be the voice, right here in this room, and speak confidentiality with the President of the United States of America. This is your honor, and honor it well,” he said he told himself.
Borja Jr. said he showed Mr. Bush a picture of his father and gave him the Mass card from his funeral last week.
He attended the meeting with his mother, Eva, brother, Evan, 16, and sister, Nhia, 12. Nhia skipped school to attend the meeting — and the President signed a sheet of notebook paper for her, writing a note asking the teacher to excuse her because she took the time off to meet with him.
“I was able to tell the President everything he needed to know about my father and the desperate need of many others who have died or are suffering from WTC-related illnesses,” he said.
Speaking quietly but fervently about his mission to save others from his father’s fate, Borja Jr. said he told the President that the funding should be expanded not just for “the heroes” who risked their lives but also for those living in the Ground Zero area and even out of towners who came to help and had been
exposed to the toxin.
Asked how he felt the President responded to his requests, Borja Jr. said he “felt the dedication, and felt the motivation and appreciation that the President has for my father, my family, and myself for coming this far.”
About an hour before Mr. Bush delivered his economic speech, sick 9/11 workers and residents of the neighborhood gathered at the edge of Ground Zero criticizing Mr. Bush’s proposal to spend an additional $25 million to fund a health care program.
“Twenty-five million is absolutely not enough,” said Marvin Bethea, 47, pointing out that some legislators, including Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, have proposed $1.9 billion in additional funds. “That’s a big gap.”
But Borja Jr. said he left his meeting with the President feeling the $25 million put in the budget to help sick 9/11 responders and workers is just a start.
“I’m not quoting Mr. President, but what I heard is that there will be more support,” he said. “My father was fortunate to have his own health insurance and his own pension. “But there are those who have to pay out of their own wallets for health monitoring, for doctors’ appointments, for medicine.”
The President’s role was put in the spotlight by Borja Jr. after he attended the President’s State of the Union address last week in Washington as a guest of Clinton.
Hours before the address, Borja Jr. learned his father died at Mount Sinai Medical Center.
Instead of rushing back to New York, he decided to attend the speech as a way to honor his father and bring attention to those fighting WTC-related illnesses.
A day after the President’s speech, Borja Jr. publicly asked to meet with Mr. Bush, and the White House agreed.
Borja Jr. is supporting Clinton’s bill, which calls for a $1.9 billion commitment to fight 9/11 diseases among first-responders and others.
The federal government put up $75 million last year for 9/11 health programs but medical officials here say that the money will run out this summer.
He also defended the lady senator from critics who accuse her of using Borja Jr. and parading him around for her presidential bid.
“No, no one is using nobody,” he said. “Sen. Clinton is a World Trade Center advocate and what I am is a World Trade Center victim. She reached out to my family simply to help. And I thank Sen. Clinton for granting me the exposure that I needed to fight my battle that I believe is right.”
In an interview with 1010 WINS, Borja Jr. said he is overwhelmed by the attention his father’s case has generated, as well as the quick turn of events — from being invited by Clinton to the State of the Union address, to meeting the Chief Executive himself.
“Oh my God, I can’t believe it, I just can’t believe everything that’s happening,” he said.
Borja Jr. said he knows his father would have been proud of his meeting with the President.
“My father would honestly not even say anything. He would just pat me on the back once, if I’m lucky twice, smile at me, do like one of those manly hero head nods, like this,” Borja said, demonstrating the slightest nod. “And that’s it, and I would love it.”
Borja Jr. briefly interned at age 15 with the Filipino Reporter. It was his late father who brought him to the Reporter’s editorial office at the Empire State Building.
During his stint at the Reporter, he joined sports editor L.P. Pelayo and another intern, Tracy Cruz, to the New York Mets’ Asian Night at Shea Stadium and mingled with Mets’ Asian players, including then outfielder Benny Agbayani, a Filipino-American.
At his father’s wake last week, Borja Jr. hugged the publisher
of the Reporter and thanked him for writing first about his father’s plight.
Philippines to host meet on sex trafficking
(From the Philippine News)
Feb 14, 2007NEW YORK—The Philippine Mission to the United Nations is organizing a one-day international conference on Trafficking in Women and Girls on 5 March 2007 in cooperation with the Permanent Mission of Belarus, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the NGO Vital Voices Global Partnership.
“One of the most deplorable ills of human society is the continuing trade in human beings. The hardest hit victims of this crime happen to the most fragile and vulnerable—women and girls,” Ambassador Lauro L. Baja Jr., Permanent Representative of the Philippines said.
“The Conference will keep the momentum of international anti-trafficking efforts following the adoption by the UN General Assembly of the Philippines and Belarus resolutions on the issue last year,” Baja said. “The Philippines has always been in the forefront in the efforts of the international community to work out a comprehensive, well-coordinated and rights-based approach to combating human trafficking.”
The Conference will be held within the framework of the informal thematic debate of the UN General Assembly on gender equality and the empowerment of women. It will complement the round-table discussion in the Commission on the Status of Women on elimination of all forms of discrimination and violence against the girl child.
The Conference seeks to discuss the ways of ensuring holistic and comprehensive response of the international community to the challenge of trafficking in women and girls and share information about new partnerships and ways of improving the coordination of efforts against trafficking in women and girls.
It also intends to analyze the current state and degree of coordination of efforts of national governments, international organizations and civil society to fight trafficking in persons and identify gaps and obstacles on the way to an coordinated and coherent response by the international community and elaborate measures and consider further actions to improve coordination of efforts. It also seeks to advocate for gender-based and gender-sensitive anti-trafficking measures as an indispensable approach to rights-based anti-trafficking strategies.
“The President of the General Assembly and the Secretary General have confirmed their participation in the Conference and we are hoping for ministerial level attendance from member states,” Baja said. “We are in effect replicating the concept and format of our successful tripartite conference on interfaith cooperation for peace.”
1 of 1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)