HIV-Positive Migrants Face Deadly Barriers | Human Rights WatchHIV-Positive Migrants Face Deadly Barriers
June 18, 2009
International groups, nations and donors should give increased attention to the protection of human rights and the HIV-prevention and treatment needs of migrants, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. The report was issued in advance of the UNAIDS Programme Coordinating Board meeting in Geneva on June 22, 2009.
The 22-page report, "Discrimination, Denial, and Deportation: Human Rights Abuses Affecting Migrants Living with HIV," describes how discrimination and human rights abuses faced by migrant populations result in increased vulnerability to HIV infection and barriers to care and treatment.
"Discriminatory laws and policies that deny migrants' access to prevention and treatment threaten progress on the global fight against AIDS," said Joseph Amon, director of the Health and Human Rights Division at Human Rights Watch. "HIV treatment interruptions can lead to more infections, the development of drug resistance, and death."
Hundreds of millions of people cross borders annually, travelling and migrating for work or school, for family reasons, or to flee persecution or natural disasters. Millions of others move within countries. Yet, even while pledging to achieve ‘universal' access to HIV prevention, treatment, care, and support by 2010, nations have largely failed to remove barriers and ensure that internal and international migrants have access to HIV services. Instead, many countries have discriminatory laws and policies that restrict the entry, stay, or residence of persons living with HIV and limit the access of internal and international migrants to treatment. Many countries deport migrants without considering whether HIV treatment will be available in their country of origin.
In its report, Human Rights Watch called on nations, international agencies and donors, and nongovernmental organizations to work jointly on law reform and provision of services to ensure freedom from discrimination and continuity of treatment for HIV-positive migrant populations worldwide.
Such discriminatory laws and policies can have devastating results. The report documents:
* The deportation of migrants who test positive for HIV in Saudi Arabia.
* How the vestiges of an internal registration system hinder access to free health care for internal migrants in China and Russia.
* The striking gap between South Africa's guarantees to refugees, asylum seekers, and especially undocumented migrants of access to health care and the harsh reality.
* How HIV-positive individuals deported from the United States often face harsh conditions and a lack of access to health care back in their country of origin.
Nations, international agencies, donors and nongovernmental organizations should continue to demand that countries that have HIV-related restrictions on entry, stay, and residence repeal them immediately and entirely, Human Rights Watch said. Restrictions on access to HIV/AIDS treatment based on origin and citizenship should be immediately eliminated, and deportation laws sending people living with HIV to countries where adequate treatment is unavailable should be reconsidered.
"Since the onset of the epidemic, the vulnerability to HIV infection faced by migrants has been well known," said Amon. "But donors and governments continue to fail to ensure that migrants can access HIV-prevention programs and neglect their urgent need for treatment. Instead of ‘universal access,' migrants face denial and deportation."
Study Finds Immigration Courtrooms Backlogged - NYTimes.comJune 18, 2009
By JULIA PRESTON
Nearly three years after the Justice Department found that the nation’s immigration courts were seriously overburdened and recommended hiring 40 new judges, only a few hirings have taken place and the case backlog is at its highest point in a decade, according to a study released Wednesday.
The report, by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a nonpartisan group that analyzes data about federal government performance, found that the shortage of judges had contributed to a 19 percent increase in the backlog of cases since 2006 and a 23 percent increase in the time it takes to resolve them.
As of April 12, Justice Department officials said, there were 234 active immigration judges, an increase of 4 judges since August 2006. At that time a review by the attorney general, Alberto R. Gonzales, determined that immigration courts were struggling with their case burden and recommended that 40 judges be brought on board.
“It’s a system at its breaking point,” said Dana L. Marks, an immigration judge in San Francisco who is president of the National Association of Immigration Judges. “How can a system function properly when it is starved from the critical basic resources it needs?”
The number of cases soared after the Bush administration hired thousands of new immigration agents and stepped up raids in factories and communities. Last year the immigration courts received 351,477 cases, also a record in the last decade.
“Promises were made and promises weren’t kept, and there is real hurt,” said David Burnham, a co-director of the clearinghouse, also known as TRAC.
Many thousands of immigrants have been affected by the delays because the authorities have started to hold many more of them in detention while the immigrants challenge deportation orders or seek political asylum through the courts.
Each judge in the immigration courts is sharing a law clerk, on average, with three other judges, the report found. In federal district courts, by contrast, each judge normally is assigned more than one clerk. In one week last year that the clearinghouse examined, an immigration judge typically handled 69 hearings. Yet according to the report, 186,342 cases were pending in the immigration courts at the end of the 2008 fiscal year, the highest number in a decade.
The courts that decide immigration matters have generally had lower visibility than the federal courts because they are not part of the judiciary. Instead, they are run by an agency, the Executive Office for Immigration Review, which is part of the Justice Department. Judges are appointed by the attorney general.
A spokesman for the Justice Department, Charles Miller, said the increased time to resolve cases did not mean that the courts were overwhelmed or inefficient. “For example, the case may involve significant legal or unusual issues,” Mr. Miller said.
But he said the department was hiring 19 new immigration judges and had requested 28 more judges and 28 clerks for 2010.
Unlike criminal defendants, immigrants in court do not have a right to be represented by a lawyer. In many cases, the judge is expected to explain basic rights and procedures. But according to the TRAC report, 78 percent of the immigrants that came before the courts since 2006 required a translator.
National Briefing - Washington - Immigration Agents to Get Expanded Powers - NYTimes.comJune 18, 2009
National Briefing | Washington
By GINGER THOMPSON
In an expansion of its crackdown on drug cartels, the Obama administration plans to announce Thursday that it will give Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents the authority to investigate drug crimes. Justice Department officials refused to divulge details of their plans, saying they did not want to pre-empt the news conference. But officials familiar with the plan said it would settle a long-running turf battle between the immigration agency and the Drug Enforcement Administration that has seriously undermined the efforts of both. The decision came amid drug-related violence that left more than 6,000 people dead in Mexico last year. Senator Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, called the Justice Department’s decision “welcome news,” saying, “The cartels that smuggle drugs and illegal immigrants have integrated their activities, and now the federal agencies will have a better integrated response.”
Fiscalía de Cádiz pide siete años y medio para los dos supuestos patrones de una patera con 40 inmigrantes - Yahoo! Noticias
miércoles, 17 de junio, 15.15
Europa Press
El juicio celebrado en la Audiencia Provincial a dos personas de origen marroquí como presuntos patrones de una embarcación interceptada con 40 inmigrantes a bordo quedó visto para sentencia, solicitando la Fiscalía para ellos una condena de siete años y medio de cárcel.
En la vista oral, ambos acusados negaron ser los patrones de la embarcación, mientras que uno de los guardia civiles que actuó en el rescate de los inmigrantes señaló que los propios inmigrantes señalaron a los dos acusados como patrones de la patera.
Según el escrito de calificación fiscal al que tuvo acceso Europa Press, los hechos se produjeron el 6 de septiembre de 2008 cuando agentes del Servicio Marítimo de la Guardia Civil interceptaron a una embarcación con intención de alcanzar las costas españolas de manera ilegal.
La embarcación había partido horas antes de ser interceptada de la costa marroquí, concretamente de la localidad de Monali Bouslam, siendo patroneada, según la Fiscalía, por los dos acusados, que actuaron movidos por la intención de obtener un beneficio patrimonial ilícito procedente del dinero pagado por los inmigrantes, a razón de 1.000 euros por persona.
Por su parte, la defensa mostró su negativa al hecho de que ambos acusados fueron movidos por ánimo de lucro, afirmando que ese hecho no fue acreditado, ya que según el testimonio de inmigrantes que iban en la embarcación, el dinero fue abonado a personas que se quedaron en tierra y no a los acusados, que viajaban con la misma intención de quedarse en España.
Asimismo, la Fiscalía también hizo constar que la embarcación carecía de cualquier medida de seguridad y los ocupantes no disponían de chalecos salvavidas, además de no proveer a ninguno de alimentos y bebidas aunque el viaje podría durar más de 24 horas, suponiendo todo ello un riesgo para la vida y la integridad física de los ocupantes.
American Civil Liberties Union : Senate Overturns Obama Decision Wednesday To Rescind Flawed Bush “No-Match” Immigration Rule (7/9/2009)
Vitter Amendment Requires Employers To Fire Workers Unable to Resolve Discrepancies In Social Security Records
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT: (202) 675-2312; media@dcaclu.org
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Senate passed by voice vote today an amendment offered by Senate David Vitter (R-LA) requiring employers to fire workers, including U.S. citizens, who are unable to resolve discrepancies in their Social Security records. The Senate vote seeks to overturn President Obama’s decision Wednesday to rescind the fatally flawed Bush administration Social Security no-match rule by prohibiting the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) from implementing any changes to it.
In passing the Vitter amendment, the Senate has taken a dangerous step that would threaten the jobs of tens of thousands of U.S. workers at a time when our economy is in great peril. The Social Security no-match rule, promulgated by the Bush administration in 2007, has been strongly opposed by groups across the political spectrum – business, labor, immigration, civil rights, and civil libertarian groups. Due to a federal injunction issued in 2007 as a result of a lawsuit filed on behalf of the ACLU and other groups, the no-match rule has not gone into effect.
“While the Senate might think it has taken a step to fix illegal immigration, it has actually set into motion a rule that will jeopardize the jobs of tens of thousands of U.S. citizens who could be unjustly fired under the rule due to SSA database errors,” said Joanne Lin, ACLU Legislative Counsel.
The no-match rule would unlawfully use the error-ridden Social Security database for immigration enforcement purposes by requiring employers to fire workers, including U.S. citizens, who are unable to resolve discrepancies in their Social Security records within 90 days of receipt of a no-match letter. If an employer does not resolve a data mismatch, DHS may conclude that the employer had “constructive knowledge” that an employee is not authorized to work, and may prosecute the employer accordingly.
“Social Security no-match letters were never designed to be immigration enforcement tools, and they cannot and will not solve the problem of illegal immigration,” added Lin. “Moreover, the no-match rule will harm people with disabilities and senior citizens by forcing them to deal with longer waits and more bureaucratic hassles in order to get their Social Security benefits checks. At a time of great economic instability, the Senate has taken a step towards jeopardizing the livelihood of U.S. workers, senior citizens, and people with disabilities.”
In 2007, a federal court blocked the no-match rule after the ACLU, AFL-CIO, and National Immigration Law Center sued DHS. The court concluded that the no-match rule would affect more than eight million workers nationwide and lead to the firing of tens of thousands of U.S. citizens. According to the Social Security Administration’s own Inspector General, more than 70 percent of the discrepancies in the SSA database belong to U.S. citizens. An economist hired by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimates that the total number of authorized workers who will be fired under the no-match rule because of their inability to resolve the data mismatch could top 165,000.
Frantic quest for asylum-seekers | The Australian
Paul Maley and Stephen Fitzpatrick | July 10, 2009
Article from: The Australian
AUSTRALIAN officials were last night frantically trying to ascertain the fate of up to 74 asylum-seekers aboard a stricken fishing boat, after Foreign Minister Stephen Smith conceded reports that the Indonesian navy had rescued the boat were wrong.
Mr Smith's admission came as Indonesian officials expressed frustration over what they described as "inaccurate" information from the Australian Federal Police regarding the boat's supposed sinking.
In a statement released late last night, Mr Smith said an assurance he offered on the ABC's Lateline program 24 hours earlier -- that the boat had been rescued after the AFP tipped off Indonesian authorities -- was wrong.
Mr Smith said his advice was based on reports conveyed by the Indonesians to Australian officials in Jakarta.
He conceded that Australian officials had no idea what had become of the Australia-bound vessel, understood to contain a number of women and children.
Mr Smith's comments mark the latest chapter in an extraordinary rescue attempt, which began with a text message sent by one of the boat's passengers to a contact in Pakistan.
That message was then relayed to Australian refugee advocate Ian Rintoul, who, after contacting passengers aboard the boat, alerted Australia's Border Protection Command.
Border Protection Command is understood to have alerted the AFP, who sent a text message to Indonesian authorities.
Border Protection Command yesterday refused to confirm it had been contacted by Mr Rintoul.
The AFP confirmed it was aware of reports of a vessel in distress but declined to comment further, saying the incident occurred in Indonesian waters and was the responsibility of Indonesian authorities.
Mr Rintoul said he had three conversations with passengers on the boat after he received the message at 5am on Wednesday.
"They kept saying, 'We need help, we need help, there are people in distress, we're taking on water," Mr Rintoul told The Australian.
"I kept saying, 'Where are you, where are you?' but I couldn't make any sense of it."
Mr Rintoul said he received four or five text messages from one of the passengers.
The last one read: "I dont know da location. My mb has no power now. I cnt contact u anymore. May God help us."
Mr Rintoul said he had since received a text message from his contact in Pakistan, who had been in contact with passengers aboard the boat.
The passengers said they were on an island, indicating the boat made land and did not sink.
That conclusion was supported by Indonesian authorities, who said yesterday they had called off their search for the 74 Afghans and Indonesian boat crew members.
Okto George Riwu, from police headquarters in East Nusa Tenggara province, where the asylum-seekers were reported to have landed, described the situation as "confusing".
"The information we received was certainly inaccurate," Mr Riwu said. "We conducted our search and rescue operation based on what it said, and didn't find anything. All the islands in this area have been thoroughly combed."
Juzgan hoy a tres acusados de transportar a 70 inmigrantes a Gran Canaria de los que uno falleció - Yahoo! Noticias
jueves, 9 de julio, 07.23
Europa Press
La Sección Segunda de la Audiencia Provincial de Las Palmas celebrará hoy (12.00 horas) el juicio contra tres acusados de ser los patrones de un cayuco que arribó al sur de Gran Canaria en diciembre de 2008 con 70 inmigrantes a bordo, de los que uno falleció por hipotermia.
La Fiscalía ha solicitado imponer una pena de ocho de cárcel para L.K., O.F. y L.Y., mayores de edad, naturales de Gambia y en situación irregular en España, acusados de presuntos delitos contra los derechos de los ciudadanos extranjeros y homicidio imprudente, según el escrito de conclusiones del Ministerio Público al que ha tenido acceso Europa Press.
Dicho escrito recuerda que sobre las 01.50 horas del 7 de diciembre del pasado año llegó al Puerto de Arguineguín, en Mogán, el buque de salvamento marítimo Menkalinan con todos los integrantes del referido cayuco que había zarpado cuatro días antes desde Noadhibou (Mauritania), patroneada por los procesados.
Según Fiscalía, los acusados manejaron el cayuco desde las costas mauritanas valiéndose de sus conocimientos de navegación y la embarcación fue interceptada a 120 millas náuticas del sur de Gran Canaria, siendo posteriormente remolcados. Los procesados, patronearon, así el cayuco con "una clara intención de introducir clandestinamente ciudadanos extranjeros en territorio español", de forma que en la barcaza eran transportados un total de 70 inmigrantes subsaharianos todos indocumentados y que habían pagado distintas cantidades de dinero por el viaje.
FALTA DE COMIDA Y AGUA
De los 70 inmigrantes tres resultaron ser menores de edad. Como consecuencia de la dureza de las condiciones del viaje en el cayuco, así como la falta de comida y agua en cantidad suficiente, uno de los inmigrantes falleció como consecuencia de una hipotermia.
El Ministerio Fiscal sostiene que la referida embarcación es empleada en las costas occidentales de África para la pesca de bajura y es totalmente inadecuada para el transporte de personas en una travesía desde el continente africano hasta Canarias. Igualmente, carecía de las mínimas condiciones de seguridad, de algún instrumento que sirviera para comunicarse con el exterior en caso necesario, así como de chalecos salvavidas para todos los viajeros o cualquier otro elemento que permitirá prevenir cualquier contingencia que pudiera presentarse.
Por ello, reclama imponer a cada uno de los acusados la pena de seis años de prisión por el supuesto delito contra los derechos de los ciudadanos extranjeros, así como dos años de cárcel para cada uno por el presunto delito de homicidio imprudente.
El Tribunal de la UE condena a España por no trasponer una directiva sobre asilo - Yahoo! Noticias
jueves, 9 de julio, 13.27
EFE
Bruselas, 9 jul (EFE).- El Tribunal de Justicia de la UE condenó hoy a España por no trasponer a tiempo una directiva comunitaria que establece los requisitos mínimos para el reconocimiento y el estatuto de refugiados o persona que necesitan asilo.
Esas medidas, incluidas en una norma comunitaria de 2004, no han sido aplicadas aún al ordenamiento jurídico español, según constataron los jueces de Luxemburgo al aceptar los argumentos planteados en la denuncia que presentó en 2007 la Comisión Europea.
El Tribunal rechazó el argumento español de que las disposiciones vigentes en la actualidad se ajustan a esa directiva, aunque no garantizan una adaptación completa de la norma, según indicaron fuentes jurídicas.
El proyecto de ley de asilo se aprobó en el Congreso de los Diputados a finales de junio y se espera su aprobación en el Senado para después del verano, según indicaron fuentes españolas.
Posts
