By William Miller
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba – Canadian Citizen Omar Khadr was not present for the second day of hearings to decide if any of the evidence against him should be suppressed. Khadr who was just fifteen when he was arrested in Afghanistan is to be tried for war crimes in a military tribunal. He decided to boycott the proceedings because military officials required him to wear sensory deprivation equipment while he was being transported from the jail to the court house.

Khadr was born in Canada to Al Qaeda supporters. He was taken to Afghanistan when he was just ten. During his time in Afghanistan he stayed in Al Qaeda camps and assisted in building road side bombs.

Khadr was just fifteen years old when he was arrested by U.S. Forces in Afghanistan for allegedly throwing a grenade that killed a United States medic. Prosecution witness FBI agent Robert Fuller testified to an account of the incident he says Khadr gave him when he was sixteen.

“He said one of the Afghan locals was running toward their compound yelling, ‘The Americans are coming. At that time he remembers (they gathered) up personal effects — the video camera and some film — placed them into duffel bags and then (tried) to exit the compound, where they engaged U.S. forces.”

Fuller further testified that Khadr told him how he watched as the three men he exited the compound with were gunned down by U.S. Forces. Fuller then said Khadr told him he “then he retrieved a grenade, threw the grenade over the compound wall, and then said he passed out.” Khadr presumably passed out from injuries he incurred during the conflict.

Fuller said he never read Khadr his rights during the interview but defended this position saying it was FBI policy not to and that the conversations were not coercive.

Khadr refused to appear at his hearing on Thursday, April 29 after guards required him to wear earmuffs and goggles during transport which were designed to block out his sight and hearing. Although he had complained of an eye problem earlier in the day this was not why he refused the to wear them. He said that the goggles and earmuffs were humiliating.

Khadr’s lawyer, Barry Coburn said this was the first time he was forced to wear such equipment. Coburn said Khadr had only been required to wear them until he was secured in a windowless transport in the past but guards had forced him to wear them for the entire trip as an unnecessary form of punishment.

Military Judge Col. Patrick Parrish originally held that Khadr had knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appear and started the proceedings without him. After a short recess however he returned and said no one had ever advised Khadr of his right to appear and the consequences of not doing so. He ordered Khadr to be forcibly brought to the courthouse to be advised of his rights unless his defense attorney could persuade him to do so voluntarily.

The hearing Khadr has boycotted is being held to determine if confessions given by Khadr should be suppressed because they were elicited through torture. Khadr has been interrogated more than 100 times during his imprisonment. The defense also seeks to suppress a video tape of Khadr participating in the building of a roadside bomb.

Khadr who is now twenty-three has spent more than a third of his life in prison. If he is convicted he could be sentenced to life. Khadr’s attorneys say that they will appeal any decision to allow Khadr’s confessions to be used as evidence. The case has inflamed many activists who believe Khadr should be considered a child soldier and rehabilitated and sent back home to Canada.

For more information, please see:

Globe and Mail – Khadr Absent from Day Two of Hearings – 29 April 2010

Vancouver Sun – Khadr Boycotts Proceedings at Guantanamo Bay – 29 April 2010

Washington Post – Military Tribunal Opens Hearing on Guantanamo Detainee Omar Khadr – 29 April 2010

By Brenda Lopez Romero
Impunity Watch reporter – North America desk

SANTA FE, Mexico – President of Somos Un Pueblo Unido, Marcela Diaz urged all families and business to boycott the state of Arizona after the Governor signed the anti-immigrant legislation S.B. 1070 that advocates claim will legally sanction racial and ethnic profiling and police abuse.  The groups are demanding federal comprehensive immigration reform be passed this year.

Diaz stated, “We’re very angry at what’s happening in Arizona. Clearly, this is a law that preys on the fear of community members and it’s divisive and it’s dangerous.”  Diaz said the dangers of the law would be “to push people further down into the shadows. It’s going to alienate people, it’s going to make people afraid in their own communities but they’ll probably end up staying because that’s where they have their roots.”

Under Arizona’s new law police can ask persons for proof of identity if they have a “reasonable suspicion” that they are an undocumented immigrant.

May 1, 2010 is the nationwide deadline for Congress to act and groups including Somos Un Pueblo Unido will hold protests and march throughout the country.

The Obama Administration is investigating possible legal action against Arizona.  Legal advocacy groups and attorneys like John Russo, an immigration attorney in Albuquerque, think the law is on shaky ground and “is going to be declared to be unconstitutional.”

For more information, please see:

Estrella TV – Immigrant Rights Org. Calls For Ariz. Boycott – 26 April 2010

Mercury News – S.F. city attorney calls for boycott of Arizona over immigration law – 26 April 2010

The Progressive – Boycott Arizona – 26 April 2010

By William Miller
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

MONTREAL, Canada – The Montreal Human Rights Tribunal awarded a Filipino family a $17,000 judgment against Lalande School in Montreal where their child attended the second grade. The Tribunal held that the school employees discriminated against eleven year old Luc Cagadoc when they criticized him for eating habits common to his culture.

Luc Cagadoc typically eats his food by using a fork and spoon to break it up. This practice is common among those of Filipino decent. Luc Cagadoc was repeatedly reprimanded by a lunch monitor for this practice during second grade.

Martine Bertrand, a lunch monitor at Lalande School repeatedly told the child that he ate like a pig and forced him to eat lunch by himself. Luc’s mother, Maria Gallardo, attempted to reason with Bertrand, telling her that the practice was common in Filipino culture, but was unable to reach a compromise. Bertrand later asked Luc if washing hands was a common practice in his culture when he forgot to on one occasion.

Ms. Gallardo also tried to reason with the school’s principal Norman Bergerson, but was again dismissed. Bergerson told her that her son needed to learn to eat like a Canadian. Ms. Gallardo then received a letter telling her that she could not return to the school.

Ms. Gallardo filed a complaint with the Human Rights Commission in 2008. The Human Rights Commission typically reviews cases before they are sent to the Tribunal. The Montreal Human Rights commission initially rejected the complaint saying that it was an isolated incident and that the child was disciplined for his table manners rather than for his cultural practices.

In March 2009, Ms. Gallardo filed a complaint with the Montreal Human Rights Tribunal. In some cases Canadians may file directly with the tribunal if they are rejected by the Commission. The Commission decided it would hear the case last fall. They issued their ruling early last week.

The Commission held that the situation was handled poorly and that the school subjected Luc to social isolation and anxiety for his traditional practices. They ordered the school board, Bergerson, and Bertrand to each pay $5,000. Bergerson was ordered to pay an extra $2,000 for lack of remorse.

Although Ms. Gallardo originally sought $24,000, she has said that she was happy with the judgment. “As a mother I am still hurting, but still seeing my little boy proudly eating with spoon and fork gives me a great pride for my heritage,” Ms. Gallardo said.

The school board has not said whether they intend to appeal the decision. They have thirty days to file an appeal.

For more information, please see:

Vancouver Sun – Montreal Family Wins Human Rights Ruling About Eating Like a Pig – 24 April 2010

CBC – Eating Habits Dispute Leads to Damage Award – 23 April 2010

CTV – Filipino Canadian Student Wins Human Rights Case – 23 April 2010

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

ARIZONA, United States-Today, the state of Arizona passed the United States’ strictest immigration law.  Under great pressure from a primary opponent, Governor Jan Brewer signed the legislation which will take effect 90 days after the current legislative session is complete.  President Obama rebuked the law in a speech at the White House today.

The Arizona law is the strictest immigration law in the United States. Entitled SB 1070, the law was sponsored by State Senator Russell Pearce.  According to the legislation, immigrants are required to carry proper immigration and identification documents at all times.  If a person is found without documentation, he or she will be charged with a misdemeanor crime.  It also grants police officers the authority to detain people they reasonably believe are in the United States without proper documentation.  The police are required to check with federal officials to determine if a person has proper immigration documents.

Governor Brewer pledged that the new law would not violate citizens’ constitutional rights.  She believes that the law is a compromise that helps Arizona deal with the problem of undocumented immigrants while balancing people’s liberty interests.  She stated; “I will not tolerate racial discrimination or racial profiling in Arizona.”

Arizona lawmakers believed they needed to take action because of the federal government’s failure to pass immigration reform.  Governor Brewer stated that Arizona has been “more than patient waiting for Washington to act.”  Also, Senator Pearce said that those who oppose the legislation were “against law enforcement, our citizens, and the rule of law.”

Before the legislation was signed into law, President Obama expressed his thoughts on it during a speech before members of the United States armed forces.  President Obama stated that the new law threatens to “undermine basic notions of fairness that we cherish as Americans, as well as the trust between police and our communities that is so crucial to keeping us safe.”  The President also has instructed the Justice Department to assess the legality of the new law. He also called upon Congress to pass immigration reform at the federal level.  Harry Reid, majority leader of the United States Senate, stated that an immigration reform proposal may be before the Senate after Memorial Day.

For more information, please see:

FOX News-Arizona Immigration Enforcement Law Spurs Obama Criticism-23 April 2010

MSNBC-Ariz. governor signs immigration bill into law-23 April 2010

NY Times-U.S’s Toughest Immigration Law Is Signed in Arizona-23 April 2010