By Samuel Miller
Desk Reporter, North America and Oceania

WASHINGTON, D.C., United States of America — On Monday, President Obama announced a ban on solitary confinement for juvenile offenders in the federal prison system, stating the practice is overused and has the potential for devastating psychological consequences. President Obama said he came to his decision after a review by the Justice Department determined the practice reduces the chances that prisoners can be rehabilitated into society.

The reforms would affect about 10,000 inmates who are serving time in isolation in the federal system.

The department review yielded a series of recommendations and 50 guiding principles, which officials have said would aim to ensure solitary confinement was an increasingly rare punishment, to be used only as an option of last resort when inmates posed a danger to staff, other inmates or themselves. The new rules also dictate that the longest a prisoner can be punished with solitary confinement for a first offense is 60 days, rather than the current maximum of 365 days.

Obama said he would take a number of other executive actions, including banning the use of confinement as a punishment for inmates who commit low-level infractions. The president is also directing federal wardens to expand out-of-cell time for all inmates and ensure those in protective custody are housed in less restrictive conditions.

“The United States is a nation of second chances, but the experience of solitary confinement too often undercuts that second chance,” Obama wrote in an op-ed for the Washington Post. “Those who do make it out often have trouble holding down jobs, reuniting with family and becoming productive members of society. Imagine having served your time and then being unable to hand change over to a customer or look your wife in the eye or hug your children.”

The President’s decision follows similar actions in some states, as leaders rethink their correctional practices for the first time in decades.

For example, California settled a landmark lawsuit last year by agreeing to an overhaul of its prison system that included strict limits on the prolonged isolation of inmates. Additionally, Colorado and New Mexico have reduced the number of people in solitary confinement.

In recent weeks, Illinois and Oregon have announced they will exclude seriously mentally ill inmates from solitary confinement, and last month New York State reached a five-year, $62 million settlement with the New York Civil Liberties Union, in which it pledged to significantly cut the number of prisoners in solitary as well as the maximum time they could stay there.

Said President Obama: “We believe that when people make mistakes, they deserve the opportunity to remake their lives. And if we can give them the hope of a better future, and a way to get back on their feet, then we will leave our children with a country that is safer, stronger and worthy of our highest ideals.”

In his final year in office, Obama has said that he’d redouble his efforts on criminal justice reform, including improving conditions in federal prisons and encouraging states to adopt new rules that hew more closely to updated research on corrections facilities.

The executive order will only apply to federal prisons; most inmates in the US, however, are held in state prisons.

For more information, please see:

BBC News — Obama bans solitary confinement for juveniles and low-level offenders – 26 January 2016

CNN — Obama bans solitary confinement for juveniles in federal prison – 26 January 2016

Daily Caller — Obama Bans Solitary Confinement For Juvenile Prisoners – 26 January 2016

Washington Post — Obama bans solitary confinement for juveniles in federal prisons – 26 January 2016

NY Times — Obama Bans Solitary Confinement of Juveniles in Federal Prisons – 25 January 2016

The Hill — Obama bans solitary confinement for federal juvenile inmates – 25 January 2016

US News and World Report — Obama Bans Solitary Confinement for Kids in Federal Jails – 25 January 2016

USA Today — Obama restricts use of solitary confinement – 25 January 2016

By Samuel Miller
Desk Reporter, North America and Oceania

OTTAWA, Canada — The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled on Tuesday the federal government has discriminated against First Nation children on reserves by failing to provide the same level of child welfare services that exist elsewhere. In its ruling, the tribunal found First Nations are adversely impacted by the services provided by the government and, in some cases, denied services as a result of the government’s involvement.

The government is committing to “significantly increase” funding for First Nations child welfare programs.

In its ruling, the tribunal found that funding formula used by the federal First Nations Child and Family Services Program and related agreements with the provinces and territories have resulted in the denial of child welfare services on reserves. The tribunal also found cases in which there was a financial incentive for the government to remove children living on reserves from their parents’ care and place them in foster care, even though that’s not the standard of care off reserves.

The decision was hailed as a “win not only for First Nations but for all of Canada” by Carrier Sekani Family Services director Mary Teegee.

“If you don’t give a child a good start at life, they don’t have that good of a chance to become strong adults…and if we are not providing what they need to live up to their human potential, that’s a loss not only for Canada but for the world,” Teegee said.

The decision goes on to state the government must cease the discriminatory practice and take measures to redress and prevent it. Furthermore, it calls for the redesign of the child welfare system and its funding model, urging the use of experts to ensure First Nations are given culturally appropriate services.

The quasi-judicial body was ruling on a 2007 complaint from the Assembly of First Nations and The First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada (FNCFCSC), who had argued the federal government failed to provide First Nations children the same level of services that exist elsewhere.

Funding for on-reserve child welfare services has been pegged at 22 to 34 per cent lower than for provincially-funded off-reserve counterparts, the FNCFCSC said in a press release.

Assembly of First Nations National Chief Perry Bellegarde said the tribunal’s ruling presents an immediate opportunity to fix the system. He said he expects to see the funding gap addressed in the upcoming federal budget.

“In this great country there is no room for discrimination and racism. To all the young children that have gone through the failed system, we want to ensure them they’re not forgotten.” Bellegarde said during a news conference.

For more information, please see:

BBC News — Canada short-changed First Nation children – court ruling – 26 January 2016

CBC News — Canada discriminates against children on reserves, tribunal rules – 26 January 2016

CTV News — Ottawa to increase funding for First Nations children after human rights ruling – 26 January 2016

National Post — Federal government discriminated against First Nations children through welfare funding: human rights tribunal – 26 January 2016

Prince George Citizen — Tribunal rules in favour of First Nations on child welfare complaint – 26 January 2016

Reuters — Canada government discriminated against aboriginal children: tribunal – 26 January 2016

Toronto Sun — Federal government discriminated against First Nations children: Tribunal – 26 January 2016

By Samuel Miller
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America and Oceania

WASHINGTON, D.C., United States of America — The Supreme Court on Tuesday said it will decide whether President Obama has the authority to declare that millions of illegal immigrants be allowed to remain and work in the United States without fear of deportation. The justices also added a question on whether Obama’s action violated the Constitutional provision that he sees the laws be faithfully executed.

The court will most likely hear the case sometime in April, with a ruling before the court adjourns in June.

If the court rules by this spring in favor of the White House, President Obama could begin putting the changes into effect during his final months in office. But if the administration loses, court battles could keep the program on hold for several more years.

With Congress deadlocked over an immigration overhaul, in November 2014, President Obama cited his executive authority in making changes in immigration policy to give a temporary reprieve to illegal immigrants whose children hold U.S. citizenship or permanent residency. The plan sought to prioritize removal of serious criminals while allowing parents of children to work without fear of deportation.

The president’s program, called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA), would allow illegal immigrants in those categories to remain in the country and apply for work permits if they have been here for at least five years and have not committed felonies or repeated misdemeanors.

Texas and 25 other states filed suit to invalidate the President’s proposed program. Fifteen states and the District of Columbia, along with leaders of major cities including Houston, Los Angeles and New York, have backed the administration.

Previously, in 2015, a federal district judge in Texas halted the immigration plan, a decision upheld by the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. In each case, the lower courts found the administration had not followed proper administrative procedures in issuing the regulations.

In a statement, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton welcomed the Supreme Court’s review.

“In deciding to hear this case, the Supreme Court recognizes the importance of the separation of powers. As federal courts have already ruled three times, there are limits to the President’s authority, and those limits enacted by Congress were exceeded when the President unilaterally sought to grant ‘lawful presence’ to more than 4 million unauthorized aliens who are in this country unlawfully.”

Additionally, the court added an additional question to the case. The court asked the parties to address whether the immigration plan violates the Take Care Clause of the Constitution. That is the provision directing the president to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

Experts said the addition of the Constitutional issue could simply signal a desire to make sure the parties address all legal issues that could be relevant to the case. But the added question could be seen as signaling that some justices don’t agree with the Justice Department’s claim that the states’ interests haven’t been impacted sufficiently to give them legal standing to sue over the immigration initiatives.

“In deciding to hear this case, the Supreme Court recognizes the importance of the separation of powers,” said Paxton.

For more information, please see:

BBC News — Barack Obama’s migrant plan taken up by US Supreme Court – 19 January 2016

CNN — Supreme Court to take up Obama immigration actions – 19 January 2016

NBC News — Supreme Court to Consider Obama Immigration Rules – 19 January 2016

Politico — Supreme Court to rule on Obama immigration orders – 19 January 2016

USA Today — Supreme Court will rule on President Obama’s immigration plan – 19 January 2016

Wall Street Journal — Supreme Court to Rule on Obama’s Bid to Block Deportations – 19 January 2016

Washington Post — Supreme Court to review Obama’s power on deportation policy – 19 January 2016

By Samuel Miller
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America and Oceania

TEHRAN, Iran — Less than a day after 10 U.S. Navy sailors were detained in Iran when their boats drifted into Iranian waters, the sailors and their vessels were back safely Wednesday with the American fleet. The release appears to have ended a potential flash point, as Iran and world powers move toward the next steps in a landmark nuclear deal that limits Tehran’s atomic program in exchange for the easing of international economic sanctions.

The sailors were detained on Tuesday when one of their two vessels broke down while training in the Gulf.

CBS News correspondent Charlie D’Agata reported the American sailors were said to have been interrogated Wednesday morning by Revolutionary Guard forces on Farsi Island.

A senior defense official said the sailors were not harmed but would undergo medical evaluations and a debriefing in the Persian Gulf nation of Qatar. Meanwhile, their vessels were taken by another American crew to Bahrain, their original destination and home to the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet.

The Revolutionary Guard’s official website published images of the U.S. sailors before their release, showing them sitting on the floor of a room. They look mostly bored or annoyed, though at least one of the sailors appears to be smiling.

U.S. Defense Secretary Ash Carter thanked Kerry after the sailors’ release and couched the incident in humanitarian terms, noting that “the U.S. Navy routinely provides assistance to foreign sailors in distress.”

Secretary of State John Kerry credited diplomatic strength and newly developed ties with Iran in helping secure the quick and safe release of the sailors.

“These are always situations as everybody here knows which have an ability, if not properly guided, to get out of control,” said Kerry in a speech at the National Defense University. “I’m appreciative for the quick and appropriate response of the Iranian authorities. All indications suggest or tell us that our sailors were well taken care of, provided with blankets and food and assisted with their return to the fleet earlier today.”

The rapid resolution also was a victory for moderate President Hassan Rouhani, who has promoted greater openness with the outside world despite strident opposition from deeply entrenched hard-liners at home.

Kerry said things might not have gone as smoothly before the U.S. opened dialogue with the country over its nuclear program, culminating in a deal to curb its operations reached between Iran and the U.S. along with five other world powers in July.

“I think we can all imagine how a similar situation might have played out three or four years ago,” said Kerry.

For more information, please see:

BBC News — US thanks Iran for swift release of 10 Navy sailors – 13 January 2016

CBS News – Iran frees U.S. sailors captured in Persian Gulf – 13 January 2016

Chicago Tribune — U.S. Navy sailors detained, released unharmed by Iran in less than a day – 13 January 2016

CNN — 10 U.S. sailors detained by Iran freed – 13 January 2016

TIME — Iran Releases 10 U.S. Sailors as the Sun Rises Over the Persian Gulf – 13 January 2016

USA Today — No apologies as Iran releases U.S. Navy sailors – 13 January 2016

Washington Post — Iran releases captured U.S. Navy crew members — 13 January 2016

By Samuel Miller
Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, North America and Oceania

GUATEMALA CITY, Guatemala — Guatemalan authorities have detained 14 former military officials on charges of human rights abuses during the country’s 36-year armed conflict. The prosecutors brought charges against officials suspected of involvement in the 1982 massacre at Plan de Sanchez, Baja Verapaz department, in which soldiers and militia members tortured, sexually abused, and killed local residents.

Many of those who were detained had allegedly worked where a mass grave was unearthed.

Among those detained was Manuel Benedicto Lucas Garcia, a former general and brother of former president Fernando Romeo Lucas Garcia. Manuel Benedicto Lucas Garcia is a former army commander said to have been involved in founding Guatemala’s paramilitary groups.

The Guatemalan attorney general, Thelma Aldana, said the officials were being detained in connection with the disappearance of at least 558 indigenous people between 1981 and 1988 in a military zone. Military Zone 21 currently houses a military training center, but in 2012, four mass graves were found containing the bodies of “non-combatant civilians identified by survivors”, said Mrs. Aldana.

According to prosecutors, survivors said the army had killed, in one massacre alone, 256 indigenous people. This group was comprised mostly of women, children and old people from the Mayan Achi ethnic group.

Guatemala’s 36-year armed conflict ended in 1996 after a peace agreement. During the last 10 years, Guatemala has attempted to prosecute human rights violators, but only a few high-level officials have actually been jailed. After over a decade following the Civil War, violence continues to be a major problem in both political and civilian life.

U.S. involvement in the country was also one of the key factors contributing to human rights violations, which included the training of officers in counterinsurgency techniques, as well as providing assistance to the national intelligence apparatus.

A UN-backed truth commission said the armed forces carried out more than 80% of the human rights abuses during the conflict.

For more information, please see:

Latin American Herald Tribune — Guatemala Charges Ex-General, 13 Others with Civil-War Crimes – 8 January 2016

BBC News — Guatemala ex-military officials held over massacres – 7 January 2016

JURIST — Guatemala prosecutors arrest 17 accused of civil war abuses – 7 January 2016

Latin One — Guatemala Detains 14 Ex-Military Officials – 7 January 2016

NY Times — Guatemala Arrests Former Military Officers in Connection With Massacres – 6 January 2016