North America & Oceania

Australian Orders Investigation into Allegation of Abuse at Nauru Refugee Facility

By Max Bartels 

Impunity Watch Reporter, Oceania

 

Canberra, Australia

Asylum seekers attempting to reach Australia are intercepted by Australian border agents and sent to one of two refugee camps, either on Papua New Guinea or Nauru. The UN and other human rights groups have heavily criticized this Australian immigration policy. The conditions in these refugee camps are reported to be below standards and the refugees have little hope of getting clearance to enter into Australia. Adding to the scrutiny of these camps, it has recently been reported that there are accusations of sexual abuse and other forms of misconduct by Australian immigration guards against refugees held in the Nauru facility.

Demonstrators shout slogans against the government during a rally in support of asylum seekers in central Sydney
Rights groups protest the Australian Immigration polices. (Photo curtesy of Al Jazeera)

The Australian Minister of Immigration, Scott Morrison, has ordered an investigation into the accusation. The accusations against the guards of the facility are reported to include requiring sexual favors for female refugees to use the showers and forcing children to engage in sexual acts for entertainment. Morrison has stated that if true these acts would be abhorrent and would work to completely undermine Australian immigration policy. There have been additional reports that employees of service providers for the Nauru center have been misusing reports, encouraging the use of children in protests and coaching those detained on the island to engage in self- harm. Morrison has stated that whatever their political views, the reports of these employees encouraging protests and self- harm are unacceptable.

Many children on Nauru have engaged in the practice of sewing their lips together and refusing food or water in protest for their indefinite detention in the camp. Morrison stated that 10 workers of the Save the Children Charity have been removed from working on the island. Both Morrison and the charity deny any allegations that these employees had anything to do with the sexual abuse or misconduct investigation. It has been reported that Save the Children was the first to report the children sewing their lips together.

The investigation is not being undertaken by the Australian immigration agency but by a independent party. The interim report of the investigation is due to be issued in several weeks and the full report by the end of the year. At the present moment there is a finger pointing battle between the government and other groups working on Nauru as to who is responsible for the alleged abuses.

For more information, please see:

Al Jazeera — Australia Probes Sexual Abuse Claims on Nauru — 3 October 2014

Yahoo News — Australia Orders Inquiry into Nauru Refugee Camp — 3 October 2014

Reuters — Australia to Probe Sexual Abuse Claims at Nauru Refugee Center — 2 October 2014

BBC News — Australia Orders Inquiry into Nauru Abuse Claims — 3 October 2014

Florida Supreme Court Rules Warrantless Cellphone Searches Violate Fourth Amendment

By Lyndsey Kelly
Impunity Watch Report, North America

WASHINGTON D.C., United States of America – On Thursday, 16 October 2014, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that police must obtain warrants prior to tracking criminal suspects through cellphone location signals. Federal appeals courts around the country have recently debated cell phone privacy, as opponents to the practice believe it violates the Fourth Amendment Constitutional right which protects American citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.

A Florida Supreme Court ruling has struck down warrantless cellphone searches by police stating that is violates the protections provided in the Fourth Amendment (Photo Courtesy of Reuters).

Chief Justice Jorge Labarga wrote in a 5-2 decision, “…cell phone tracking can easily invade the right to privacy in one’s home or other private areas.” The case came before the Florida Supreme Court when defendant Shawn Tracey accused the Broward County Sheriff’s department of lacking probable cause for a court order to obtain cellphone data of cite locations. Justice Labarga reasoned, “regardless of Tracey’s location on public roads, the use of his cell site location information emanating from his cell phone in order to track him in real time was a search with the purview of the Fourth Amendment for which probable cause was required.”

The majority of the court agreed in stating that cellphones are a routine way of life, and Floridians should expect a certain level of privacy in how they use them. The justices stated that it is unreasonable to expect citizens to turn off their cell phones to avoid their movements being tracked, ”requiring a cellphone user to turn off the cellphone just to assure privacy from governmental searches…places an unreasonable burden on the user to forego necessary use of his cellphone, a device now considered essential.”

The American Civil Liberties Union supported the ruling stating that technology is changing at a rapid rate and that the Constitution’s protects must keep up with the changing times. Justice Charles Canady wrote in his decent that most individuals know how cellphones work and that they communicate with a cellphone tower that records their location.

 

For more information, please see the following:

 ABC NEWS – Florida High Court Puts Limits on Phone Tracking – 16 Oct. 2014.

CBS LOCAL MIAMI – Supreme Court Rejects Cell Phone Tracking By Police – 16 Oct. 2014

FOX NEWS – Florida Supreme Court Puts Limits On Police Tracking People Through Their Cellphones – 16 Oct. 2014.

REUTERS – Florida High Court Says Police Need Warrants To Track Cellphones – 16 Oct. 2014.

 

Asylum Seekers Allegedly Turned Away At U.S. Border

By Lyndsey Kelly
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON D.C., United States of America – Border Agents have failed to identify individuals who may have potential claims to asylum, allowing them to be deported back to their native country where they may face dangerous conditions. A report by Human Rights Watch details the stories of men and women who have claimed to have fled violence in their homeland. The number of undocumented immigrants being apprehended in the United States who have traveled from El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala has risen in the most recent years.

Human Rights Watch accuses U.S. Border Patrol agents of turning away immigrants with credible claims of asylum (Photo Courtesy of L.A. Times).

Human Rights Watch interviewed 35 migrants, including 25 deportees in Honduras. Some migrants stated that gang members have been extorting a war tax from citizens and threatening to kill or kidnap their families if they failed to pay the “debt.” Others have claimed that they were witnesses in gang violence and are currently hiding from the members for fear of their lives. Most of the interviewed immigrants stated that they were never asked about their fear of returning home.

A U.S. immigration researcher at Human Rights Watch stated, “in its frenzy to stem the tide of migrants from Central America, the US is sending asylum seekers back to the threat of murder, rape, and other violence.” Human Rights Watch argued that the U.S. has failed in its duty under international law to give the immigrants’ cases sufficient scrutiny in determining whether they have a credible claim for asylum. International law which is binding on the United States prohibits any immigrants return to a country where they fact serious risks t their lives or safety. Detention of asylum seekers is also discouraged where as detention or migrant children is prohibited under international law.

After apprehending an individual, border agents are required to determine whether the undocumented immigrant is fearful of returning to his or her native country. An asylum officer or an immigration judge later determines whether that fear is valid. Even if immigrants to receive a credible fear interview, a very small proportion of immigrants are found eligible for asylum.

The human rights group obtained data for the 2011 and 2012 fiscal year, which indicated that the Border Patrol agents were flagging a suspiciously low number of Central Americans as possible asylum seekers. The data indicated that at least 80 percent of asylum seekers were put on the fast track to deportation. While immigrants can voice their concerns with returning home to Immigrations and Customs Enforcement when they are placed in detention. However, ICE agents are not required to ask immigrants about the potential risks of retuning to their native countries.

A statement issued by the U.S. custom and Border Protection agency states that all border patrol officers are trained to recognize circumstances that would require a credible fear interview. The agency said that they are taking these allegations seriously and are investigating the issues.

The report recommends that the government stop fast-track removals of immigrants to endure that those who are entitled to asylum receive it.  It also calls for an end to family detention, which is currently being used instead of releasing the undocumented immigrants on bond with the condition of wearing ankle bracelets. Lastly, the report suggests that the government increase access to legal counsel.

 

For more information, please see the following:

HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH – US: Migrants Returned To Danger – 16 Oct. 2014

HUFFINGTON POST – U.S. Deportation Practices Put Asylum Seekers At Risk, Human Rights Watch Says – 16 Oct. 2014.

L.A. TIMES –Is The U.S. turning People Away At The Border Who’ve Been Threatened With Rape and Murder? – 16 Oct. 2014.

WASHINGTON POST – Hondurans Flee Violence, Then Are Deported By U.S. To Face More, rights Group Charges – 16 Oct. 2014.

Protests Continue in Ferguson, Missouri After Another Fatal Police Shooting

By Lyndsey Kelly
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

 WASHINGTON, D.C., United States of America – Last weekend thousands of citizens staged protests, consisting of marches, vigils, and other demonstrations in St. Louis, Missouri. The demonstrations were sparked by a national campaign being called, Ferguson October. The campaign consists of four days of events, which started Friday afternoon outside the St. Louis County prosecutor’s office in Clayton.

Protests continue in Ferguson, Missouri (Photo Courtesy of Reuters).

The St. Louis area has seen an increasing number of protests since the fatal shooting of an African American teenager in August. A grand jury is currently reviewing the case, and the Justice Department has opened a civil rights investigation. Since August, three other fatal police shootings of black males have occurred in the St. Louis area of Missouri. The most recent fatality occurred on Wednesday when an off-duty officer working for security patrol shot and killed 18-year-old Vonderrrit D. Myers. The officer has alleged that the teen opened fire and only then did the officer respond by firing 17 rounds.

This months protest campaign started with a ½ mile march through downtown St. Louis. Organizations such as Hands Up Unite led the demonstration. The crowd started by gathering around a memorial where Michael Brown was fatally shot in August. The protests continued onto Saturday night when more than 30 demonstrators gathered outside the Bush Stadium, where the St. Louis Cardinals were playing the San Francisco Giants in the fist game of the National League Championship Series.

It was not until Sunday, 12 October 2014, that the protests turned violent. A video transmitted by a witness showed a small protest in Shaw, Missouri. The video depicted dozens of individuals sitting on the ground outside a convenience store. Police dressed in riot-gear then arrested at least 17 demonstrators after they refused to disperse from the sit-in. Some witnesses stated that the protestors were hit with pepper spray and tear gas, but these allegations have not been confirmed.

 

For more information, please see:

 

CHICAGO TRIBUNE – Thousands March In St. Louis To Protest Police Violence – 11 Oct. 2014.

FOX NEWS –  Thousands in St. Louis To Protest Fatal Police Shooting – 11 Oct. 2014

REUTERS – Thousands March In St. Louis To Protest Police Violence – 11 Oct. 2014.

REUTERS – St. Louis Area Police Arrest At Least 17 During Weekend Of Protests – 11 Oct. 2014.

Appeals Court To Hear Claim for Secrecy Demands for Telecom Records

By Lyndsey Kelly
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

 

WASHINGTON, D.C., United States of America – On 8 October 2014, the United States Court of Appeals addressed a lawsuit challenging the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s ability to force Internet and telecommunications firms to produce customer records without revealing the reasoning behind the governments demand.

At the hearing, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit considered the First Amendment as it relates to national security matters. A lower court in San Francisco, previously reviewed the question of whether recipients of national security letters can discuss their nature under the First Amendment. The lower court held that such gag orders by the government were unconstitutional.

The government contends that secrecy is vital to the national security of the United States, because cases dealing with such could have the potential effect of endangering an individual’s physical safety. Additionally, an attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice, Douglas Letter, stated that the FBI does not have the appropriate resources to review every case, which may have a national security interest to determine whether or not secrecy is warranted. Requiring such strict review would render the agency unable to function.

The plaintiff in the case before the 9th Circuit, claimed that the FBI’s gag order surrounding national security letters represents an “unprecedented grant of authority” and violates the First Amendment of the Constitution. Other tech companies have also filed suit against the government regarding how much information the companies can disclose about government surveillance. The companies include: Google Inc., Microsoft Corp, Facebook Inc., and Twitter Inc.

Judge Sandra Ikuta, who sat on the 9th circuit panel, states that the law may not violate the Frist Amendment right to free speech because the government only sought secrecy for information that impacts national security, it does not prohibit speech about information someone received independently.

 

 

For more information, please see the following:

BUSINESS INSIDER – U.S. Court To Hear Appeal Over Keeping U.S. Demands For Telecom Records Secret – 8 Oct. 2014.

REUTERS – Update 1 – Appeals Court Wrestles With Secret U.S. Demands For Telecom Records – 8 Oct. 2014.

REUTERS – U.S. Court To Hear Appeal Over Keeping U.S. Demands For Telecom Records Secret – 8 Oct. 2014.

YAHOO NEWS – Appeals Court Wrestles With Secret U.S. Demands For Telecom Records – 8 Oct. 2014.