By Mark O’Brien
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

JACKSON, Mississippi — Southern Baptist leaders said Monday that a Mississippi church was wrong to prevent a black couple from getting married at the church earlier this month, and called on the church to reject racism.

Directors of the Mississippi Baptist Convention and the Southern Baptist Convention said in keeping with the Baptist tradition, the congregation needs to “chart its own course.”

“Our entire country, and especially here in Mississippi, has been on a long journey for right rational relationships,” read a statement from Jim Futral, the executive director of the Mississippi Baptist Convention board.  “Mississippi Baptists both reject racial discrimination and at the same time respect the autonomy of our local churches to deal with difficulties and disagreements under the lordship of Jesus.”

Charles and Te’Andrea Wilson found out days before their July 21 nuptials that some members of the First Baptist Church of Crystal Springs, near Jackson, complained about the black couple having a wedding there.  The church’s pastor, Rev. Stan Weatherford, married the couple at nearby church in an effort to make peace and avoid conflict.

“I didn’t want to have a controversy within the church, and I didn’t want a controversy to affect the wedding of Charles and Te’Andrea,” Weatherford said in an interview with the Huffington Post.  “I wanted to make sure their wedding day was a special day.”

Charles Wilson has said members of the congregation, nevertheless, have threatened to fire the pastor.

But some churchgoers denied that the story being played out in the media is fully accurate.  They said it has caused hardship.

“There’s a lot of people in the church that are suffering inner turmoil over this issue, said church member Ralph Miley in an interview with WAPT News.

The Jackson television station also reported on the congregation’s frustration, with one woman swinging her purse at one of the station’s reporters before entering the church for Sunday morning services.

Other congregants acknowledge the pastor was trying to do the right thing.

“He was trying to gain time to deal with racism among the few members of our church who created this situation,” said retired Southern Baptist pastor Robert Mack to WAPT News.

The state and national church leaders also said Monday they are praying for the church and are ready to help, if needed.

“We are all saddened when any sin, including the sin of racism, rears its head,” said Southern Baptist Convention spokesperson Sing Oldham.  “Part of our gospel is that we are being redeemed.  We are flawed, failed creatures, and redemption is a process.”

So far, the church has not contacted state officials for any assistance.

A community rally for racial unity was planned in Crystal Springs for Monday evening.

For further information, please see:

The Clarion-Ledger — Southern Baptists: Mississippi Church Wrong to Reject Black Couple’s Wedding — 30 July 2012

WAPT News — Baptist Bodies Call on Church to Reject Racism — 30 July 2012

The Washington Post — State and National Baptist Leaders Ask Church that Turned Down Black Wedding to Reject Racism — 30 July 2012

USA Today — Baptist Groups: Miss. Church Wrong to Not Marry Black Couple — 29 July 2012

WAPT News — Members Speak out on Crystal Springs Church Controversy — 29 July 2012

The Huffington Post — Black Couple says Racism Forced Wedding Relocation — 28 July 2012

By Mark O’Brien
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, United States — In a motion filed this week, the U.S. Justice Department requested just one federal judge decide which rules apply to lawyers representing suspects being held at the U.S. Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Government lawyers asked for Chief Judge Royce Lamberth of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia to be the decider in a growing dispute between the government and defense lawyers.

The issue is whether detainees who have lost their one-shot habeas cases can have continued access to their counsel.

“Respondents request that the instant Motions for Counsel Access be referred to a single judge for a coordinated ruling on the counsel-access issue that will govern in these and all other Guantanamo Bay habeas cases,” the motion stated.

According to Politico, Guantanamo leaders have tried “to unilaterally impose rules for lawyers’ visits to Guantanamo when no court proceedings are pending.  Lawyers for some inmates have complained that they should continue to be covered by orders issued by judges in Washington.  They argue that prisoners are free to file successive petitions for release, so the visits are directly tied to potential litigation.”

The filing stems from a case in which Yasin Qasem Muhammad Ismail, a Yemeni national detained at Guantanamo, was told he no longer had the right to see his counsel after losing his habeas petition.  An email from the Justice Department to Ismail’s lawyer reportedly said Ismail could only meet his lawyer if the lawyer signed a new “memorandum of understanding.”  Ismail’s lawyer, David Remes, described that new MOU as giving the government “absolute authority over access to counsel.”

According to Scotusblog, Remes challenged the new MOU earlier this month in federal court.

“As long as [Ismail] is detained, he retains the right to pursue any available legal avenues to obtain his release,” Remes argued, according to court papers.

As Scotusblog put it, those other avenues include “the right to file a new or amended habeas challenge, or to file a formal motion to have his case reopened in District Court.”

But this new legal challenge is not the only complaint defense lawyers have raised regarding the system for terror suspects detained at Guantanamo.

Just last week, lawyers for Saudi defendant Abd al Rahim al Nashiri alleged that the military official in charge of the tribunal attempted to rig the Guantanamo court to deliver the death sentence.  Nashiri is charged in connection with planning the al Qaeda attack on the USS Cole off the coast of Yemen in 2000, killing 17 sailors and injuring dozens more.

The defense accused retired Vice Admiral Bruce MacDonald of “unprecedented bureaucratic meddling” in instructing the judge how to carry out jury selection, something normally left to the judge alone.

The instructions would result in a jury panel “that numerically favors a death sentence,” said Lieutenant Commander Stephen Reyes, a lawyer for Nashiri.

For further information, please see:

Lawfare — On Continued Counsel Access at Gitmo and the Government’s Filing — 27 July 2012

Politico — Feds: Single Judge Should Rule on Rules for Lawyers at Guantanamo — 26 July 2012

Reuters — Defense Lawyers say Guantanamo Court Rigged to Deliver Death Sentence — 19 July 2012

The Christian Science Monitor — Guantanamo Judge Refuses to Step Aside — 17 July 2012

Scotusblog — Are “Boumediene Rights” Expiring? — 13 July 2012

By Mark O’Brien
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

KINGSTON, Jamaica — Jamaican leaders want tougher punishments for people who sexually abuse children.

Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller told the People’s National Party Women’s Movement conference this week that Justice Minister Mark Golding is looking at ways to strengthen child abuse laws.

“What you need to do is stop it,” Miller said.  “A woman represents motherhood.  A woman is now prime minister of Jamaica.  Stop it.”

The comments came after government figures showed more than 1,000 reports of sexual abuse against children through April of this year, according to the Jamaica Observer.  Between 2007 and 2011, more than 7,200 cases were reported.

Recent United Nations studies indicated only a handful of child sex abuse cases in the Caribbean and Latin America lead to convictions.  Marcelo Suarzo, the UN Populations Fund regional director, said it is unclear if the problem is with the laws or enforcement of the laws.

“What I am sure of is that impunity is the worst solution to sexual violence,” Suarzo said in an interview with the Jamaica Observer, adding that only two percent of reported cases in the region result in justice.

A school-based study conducted by the U.S. Agency for International Development in 2007 showed that one in three Jamaican girls between the ages of 10 and 15 experiences her first sexual encounter by force.  Roughly 12 percent of young girls reported having sexual intercourse before they turned 15 years old.

“The issue needs an integrated response,” Suarzo told the Observer.  “We need to strengthen our policies, make the appropriate investments and work closely to identify cases to ensure an integrated response from all the systems that are in charge of the application of justice.”

It appears the dialogue may already be having some effect.  Not only has there been a spike in the number of reported cases of child sex abuse, but there also has been a number of high-profile prosecutions.

On Friday, a former commandant of Jamaica’s Special Constabulary Force will be sentenced after he was convicted earlier this month on two counts of indecent assault on a minor.  The jury acquitted Harold Crooks, however, of carnal abuse since he and the teenage girl had sexual intercourse after she turned 16, Jamaica’s age of consent.

Earlier this month, a Kingston doctor was charged with four counts of committing sexual offenses against two teenage girls.  A report by a Jamaican police watchdog group called the Constabulary Communication Network alleged that Dr. Rakesh Thomas lured the girls, ages 14 and 15, to his office several times to engage in sexual grooming, touching, and intercourse.

And in June, a Jamaican national was sentenced in U.S. federal court to 18 months in prison for sexually abusing a minor on the cruise ship where he worked.  According to his plea agreement, Fabian Palmer befriended the 14-year-old girl and had sexual intercourse with her during a cruise last December.

At a recent meeting with Jamaica Observer editors and reporters, Jamaica’s UNICEF representative said more incidents are being reported to police “because [people] are realizing that silence is violence.”

Still, Robert Fuderich said the effort to stop the violence cannot stop there.

“There needs to be zero-tolerance,” he said.

For further information, please see:

Go Jamaica — Portia says Tougher Penalties Coming for Child Abusers — 16 July 2012

Jamaica Observer — Too Much Impunity for Sex Offenders, Says UN Official — 6 July 2012

Jamaica Observer — Former Police Commandant Found Guilty on Sex Charge — 5 July 2012

Stabroek News — Jamaican Doctor Charged with Sex Offences Against Girls — 2 July 2012

San Francisco Chronicle — Cruise Ship Worker Sentenced for Abusing Minor — 29 June 2012

By Mark O’Brien
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

MEXICO CITY, Mexico — A new report released Wednesday said Mexico is not doing enough to protect women despite increasing levels of violence and discrimination.

Human rights group Amnesty International issued the report to a United Nations committee, highlighting the rising number of crimes against women and the low success rate of Mexican authorities to convict offenders.

“The state of women’s rights in Mexico is alarming,” said Rupert Knox, a researcher at AI.  “In the past years, Mexico has approved a number of laws and institutions designed to protect women from discrimination and violence.  Much of the problem, however, lies in the lack of effective implementation of these laws and the weaknesses of the institutions.”

The report said Mexican police solve about one of every 21 rapes.  It also accused the police of having flawed procedures for documenting murders of women, including the failure of carrying out proper autopsies in many cases.

According to the report, U.N. figures show there were more than 34,000 women murdered in Mexico between 1985 and 2009.  In 2010 alone, 2,418 women were murdered, the report said.  That averaged to nearly seven murders per day.

One area that has seen a sharp increase in murders of women is the state of Chihuahua, the report said.  In 2010, one of every 11 victims was a woman, compared to one of every 14 in 2008.  Through June, there were more than 130 killings of women in Chihuahua alone.

Mexican prosecutors received nearly 15,000 complaints of rape in 2009, although AI estimates the number actually reached 74,000 since a small percentage of rapes are reported.  Of the cases prosecuted, AI said only 2,795 ended with a conviction.

“The poor quality investigations by Mexico state prosecutors also undermined the outcome of judicial proceedings, ensuring acquittals and decisions not to prosecute,” the report alleged.

To prove that point, AI referenced a 2006 case when Mexican police allegedly sexually abused 26 women arrested during protests in the town of San Salvador.  Several police officers were charged in the incident, but all were acquitted for a lack of evidence.  Nine of the women have now taken their cases to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.

AI is calling on both outgoing President Felipe Calderón and President-elect Enrique Peña Nieto to do more to stem the violence against women.

“The Mexican authorities, led by both the actual and new government to take office in December, must move to implement commitments to protect women’s rights to end abuses and impunity,” Knox said.

For further information, please see:

GlobalPost — Amnesty International: Mexico Failing to Protect Women from Violence, Discrimination — 12 July 2012

Latin American Herald Tribune — AI Criticizes Impunity for Violence Against Women in Mexico — 12 July 2012

Amnesty International — Mexico Fails to Tackle Increased Levels of Violence Against Women — 11 July 2012

Chicago Tribune — Report Chides Female Violence in State of Mexico’s President-Elect — 11 July 2012