By Karla E General
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

HONOLULU, Hawaii – The U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Hawaiian Supreme Court last week when it decided that the 1993 Official Apology Resolution issued by the Congress to the Native Hawaiians did not constitute recognition of Native Hawaiian rights to their ancestral lands. With this decision, 1.2 million acres of disputed Native Hawaiian lands will be opened for public sale.

In 2002, a Hawaiian state court initially ruled that Hawaii could sell the disputed lands. The case eventually went up to the state’s highest court in 2008, with the Hawaii Supreme Court finding that Native Hawaiians had a claim to the disputed lands. The Court then issued an injunction to prevent the sale of “ceded lands” held in trust until the outstanding aboriginal land claims had been resolved. The Hawaii Supreme Court relied on the 1993 Apology Resolution – an official acknowledgment of the illegality of the U.S. overthrowing of Hawaii’s sovereign government, creation of a provisional government, and annexation of Hawaii as a U.S. territory with the Newlands Resolution – in it’s landmark decision.

The recent Supreme Court’s ruling is extremely dangerous – it accepts the Newlands Resolution as the legal resolution of land disputes, vesting absolute title to the United States over the disputed lands – while ignoring the Congressional Apology which recognized that “the Indigenous Hawaiian people never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their national lands to the United States, either through their monarchy or through a plebiscite or referendum.” J. Kehaulani Kauanui, Associate Professor of American Studies and Anthropology at Wesleyan University, expressed frustration over the Court’s mishandling of the case: “If the Apology Resolution has no teeth in the court of the conqueror, then how is it that the Newlands Resolution that unilaterally annexed Hawaii does? This (ruling) is a legal fiction to cover up the fact that the U.S. government accepted the stolen lands from the Republic of Hawaii government that confiscated these lands after the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom.”

The U.S. Supreme Court remanded the case back to the Hawaii Supreme Court for “further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.”

For more information, please see:

Indian Country Today – U.S. Supremes Rule Against Native Hawaiians’ Land Claims – 6 April 2009

Chicago Tribune – Hawaii: Land Sale Upheld – 1 April 2009

Honolulu Star – Ceded Land Ruling Creates Quick Need for Sovereignty – 1 April 2009

New York Times – Supreme Court Backs Hawaii in Land Dispute – 31 March 2009

By Maria E. Molina
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

MEXICO CITY, Mexico – A federal tribunal has exonerated former President Luis Echeverría Álvarez of genocide charges stemming from a notorious massacre of student activists in 1968. Echeverria was the country’s interior secretary on Oct. 2, 1968, when soldiers opened fire on a student demonstration in Mexico City’s Tlatelolco Plaza before the capital hosted the Olympics.

A lower court previously ruled the massacre constituted genocide but dismissed charges of involvement against Echeverria.  The court, which issued its ruling late Thursday, rejected federal prosecutors’ argument that an army crackdown on unarmed student protesters fit the legal definition of genocide. It also upheld previous rulings that the 30-year statute of limitations for genocide had expired.

The collapse of this latest case is demonstrative of successive Mexican governments failure to address Mexico’s international human rights commitments. The government of President Calderon, in particular, has failed to acknowledge or address the legacy of human rights violations.

The massacre unfolded on the night of October 2, 1968, when Mexican security forces opened fire in a public area, La Plaza de las Tres Culturas at Tlatelolco. The public square was crowded with thousands of activists. When the shooting stopped, hundreds of people lay dead or wounded, as Army and police forces seized surviving protesters and dragged them away. No one knows for sure how many people were killed and to this day, no one has been punished for the crime.

Thursday’s ruling exhausted prosecutors’ legal possibilities in Mexico. It was not immediately clear whether they planned to appeal the decision to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in Costa Rica.

For more information, please see:

Amnesty International – Violent Crime and Insecurity in Mexico Are Rooted in Legacy of Impunity and Injustice from Past, Says Amnesty International, Commenting on Court Ruling on 1968 Student Massacre – 27 March 2009

Associated Press – Mexican court upholds ruling on 1968 massacre – 27 March 2009

The Chronicle of Higher Education – Mexican Court Exonerates Former President Accused of Genocide in Student Killings – 27 March 2009

By Karla E General
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti – Haiti has long been noted as the leader in maternal mortality rates in the Western Hemisphere, with 670 women dying from pregnancy-related factors for every 100,000 live births in Haiti in 2006. One of the major players in this phenomenon? Complete lack of, or (if the mother is fortunate enough to be admitted to a hospital), inadequate health care.

With a maternal death rate that comes nowhere near the United States’ (11 deaths for every 100,000 live births), Haiti is under attack from the international medical community to provide better services in their maternity wards. Wendy Lai of Doctors Without Borders (Holland) calls the situation “embarrassing to the Western world…[T]hese are preventable deaths.” According to Jacqueline Ramon, a maternity ward nurse at Port-Au-Prince’s General Hospital, women still must pay for all other childbirth-related costs – such as medical supplies, food and transportation – leading many to turn to untrained midwives who use traditional medicine.

Dr. Paul Farmer, a Harvard physician, expressed frustration at Haiti’s blatant denial of adequate health care to low-income pregnant women: “It’s never, ever going to work unless we say some things are not meant to be sold, and safe motherhood is one of them.” Farmer added that in rural towns where his nonprofit organization Partners in Health provides free health care, the maternal mortality rate is less than one-tenth the national average.

Comprehensive health care for all pregnant women in Haiti would cost about $40 million annually, a drop in the bucket for a basic human right.
For more information, please see:

San Francisco Chronicle – Childbirth Dangerous Business for Haiti’s Poor – 22 March 2009

Medical News Today – AP/Washington Times Examines Factors Behind High Maternal Mortality in Haiti – 19 March 2009

Washington Times – Childbirth Danger Rampant in Haiti – 17 March 2009

LONDON, U.K.- A British court says U.S. authorities asked a Guantanamo Bay detainee to drop allegations of torture in exchange for his freedom. A ruling by two British High Court judges published Monday says the U.S. offered Binyam Mohamed a plea bargain deal in October. Mohamed refused the deal and the U.S. dropped all charges against him later last year. He was released last month.

Mohamed is an Ethiopian who moved to Britain when he was a teenager. He was arrested in Pakistan in 2002 and claims he was tortured both there and in Morocco. He was transferred to Guantanamo in 2004. Mohamed alleges that he was tortured and interrogated during more than six years in detention as a terror suspect. He says his ordeal included rendition to Morocco where he was held and cut with a scalpel on his chest and penis.

Reprieve director Clive Stafford Smith, who has represented Mr Mohamed for four years, said after the release: “The facts revealed today reflect the way the US government has consistently tried to cover up the truth of Binyam Mohamed’s torture.He was being told he would never leave Guantanamo Bay unless he promised never to discuss his torture, and never sue either the Americans or the British to force disclosure of his mistreatment. Gradually the truth is leaking out, and the governments on both sides of the Atlantic should pause to consider whether they should continue to fight to keep this torture evidence secret.”

Then-U.S. military prosecutor Lt. Col. Darrel Vandeveld is quoted in the ruling as saying Mohamed would be given a date for his release if he agreed to the terms. Vandeveld, who has since resigned, had said Mohamed would need to plead guilty to two charges in exchange for a three-year sentence and to testify against other suspects, according to the court documents.

Associated Press- Court says US asked detainee to drop torture claim– 23 March 2009

Press Association- “Torture evidence” details released- 23 March 2009