By Mark O’Brien
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

OTTAWA, Canada — The Canadian government pledged to spend hundreds of millions of dollars in addressing at least some of the demands by First Nations communities, which have protested for better treatment.

Talks between Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and a group of native chiefs ended Friday, leading to a promise to spend C$330.8 million during the next two years to improve water systems on aboriginal lands.  The government also promised further “high-level dialogue.”

“Our Government is committed to addressing water and wastewater issues on reserves to ensure that First Nations communities have access to safe drinking water,” said Aboriginal Affairs Minister John Duncan in a statement.

The government’s pledge will improve water systems in more than 50 First Nations communities on reservations where complaints target poor infrastructure and housing.

Since November 2012, natives have held protests in a movement called “Idle No More,” which quickly spread.  The demonstrations are aimed at attacking a proposed legislative budget bill called “Bill C-45,” which would change the Navigable Protection Act and the Indian Act, leading many to believe it would breach aboriginal treaty rights.

Native leaders have demanded more federal money, a greater say over what happens to resources on their land, and more respect from the federal government.  Protestors have held demonstrations in a movement called “Idle No More” since November.  At times, the protests have blocked roads and included hunger strikes, including the liquid-only diet of Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence since December 11.

Prior to Friday’s talks, native groups warned that the protest was large enough to hurt Canada’s national economy unless the government addressed natives’ deplorable living conditions and high jobless rates.

“We have the warriors that are standing up now, that are willing to go that far,” Grand Chief Derek Nepinak from Manitoba said on Thursday before the talks.  “We’re not here to make requests; we’re here to demand attention.

“We have had enough,” Nepinak added.  “Our young people have had enough.  Our women have had enough.  We have nothing else to lose.”

Aboriginal leaders claimed that the federal government has ignored treaties signed with British settlers and explorers that granted their people rights over their territory.

Canada has 1.2 million natives and more than 600 indigenous reserves dating back to 1763.  The Canadian government spends roughly C$11 billion every year on its aboriginal population, but many reserves are plagued by poverty.  Living conditions on the reservations are low, and some communities have high rates of addiction, unemployment, and suicide.

For further information, please see:

Reuters — Canada Pledges Better Water for Aboriginals Amid Blockade Threat — 13 January 2013

CBC News — Idle No More Protests Go on After PM Meets AFN Leaders — 12 January 2013

BBC News — Canada Native Meeting Ends with Pledge of Further Talks — 11 January 2013

PressTV — Canada Chief Warns of Native Retaliation — 11 January 2013

By Mark O’Brien
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

HAVANA, Cuba — A human rights group at the United Nations urged Cuba this week to free an American held captive for more than three years.

The lawyer for Alan Gross publicly released a 12-page report by the U.N. Human Rights Council imprisonment watchdog on Tuesday.  The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention called Gross’s imprisonment arbitrary and Cuba’s judicial system biased.

Gross, an American contractor, is serving a 15-year sentence for delivering computer and communications equipment to Cuba’s Jewish community.  The equipment was used to access the Internet by bypassing government controls.  U.S. government programs paid for the tools, which were aimed at spreading democracy across the communist country.

The island nation outlawed all cooperation with the American programs, describing them as designed to snuff out communism.  Gross was charged with a crime against the state by acting against the country’s “sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

But the report criticized Cuba’s judiciary as lacking independence, and it said that the nature of the alleged crime was imprecise.  And while the report said the failure of the courts to grant bail to Gross rendered his punishment arbitrary, it rejected complaints by Gross’s attorney that the process violated Gross’s due process rights or that the charges violated Gross’s free speech rights.

“By virtue of what has been set out, the Working Group asks the Government of Cuba to immediately release Mr. Alan Phillip Gross,” the report stated.

The Working Group has no enforcement powers; however, the ruling could pressure Cuban leaders to release Gross.

The Cuban government arrested Gross in December 2009 and convicted him in 2011.  Some have called his arrest an obstacle in efforts to improve relations between the United States and Cuba.

Gross’s family hired Jared Genser, an international human rights lawyer, to argue that both Gross’s arrest and conviction amounted to human rights abuse.

Cuba scoffed at the report’s conclusion last month, blaming the U.S. government for pressuring the UN group to take action.  The Cuban government reiterated that Gross received a fair trial.

Efforts to free Gross have been ongoing since his arrest.  Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.), now President Obama’s nominee for Secretary of State, reportedly had a secret meeting in 2010 with Cuba’s foreign minister in New York.

According to Havana Times.org, Gross’s release was to be conditioned on ending the pro-democracy destabilization programs.  The Cuban-American Florida lobby, however, reportedly blocked those plans.

For further information, please see:

The Miami Herald — A U.N. Human Rights Group Has Urged Cuba to Free Alan Gross — 10 January 2013

CBS Local — UN Report Calls on Cuba to Release Alan Gross — 9 January 2013

Havana Times.org — Cuba: Failed Attempts to Free Alan Gross — 9 January 2013

JTA — U.N. Imprisonment Watchdog Calls on Cuba to Release Alan Gross — 8 January 2013

By Mark O’Brien
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, United States — A Senate committee released the findings of a three-year investigation this week, and officials said the report had “startling details” on the Central Intelligence Agency’s use of counterterrorism efforts.

The 6,000-page report is the most detailed, independent examination of the agency’s methods to “break” dozens of detainees through physical and psychological duress.  But declassifying the report to prepare for its release to the public could take months, if not longer.

“The report . . . raises critical questions about intelligence operations and oversight,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) in a statement.  She chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, which voted 9-6 on Thursday to approve the report.

“I strongly believe that the creation of long-term, clandestine ‘black sites’ and the use of so-called ‘enhanced-interrogation techniques’ were terrible mistakes,” she added.  “The majority of the committee agrees.”

Those familiar with the report’s findings said it makes a detailed case that the interrogation techniques never produced any counter-terrorism breakthroughs.  In some cases, such as the campaign against al-Qaeda, subjecting prisoners to the techniques were counterproductive.

Republicans had largely boycotted the investigation because of inaccuracies, and they faulted Democrats for calling too few witnesses.  Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) was the lone Republican who supported approving the report, joining the committee’s eight Democrats.

The report includes information on every detainee in CIA custody, the conditions under which they were held, the interrogation techniques used on them, the intelligence they provided, and the accuracy of CIA descriptions of the program to the White House.  More than 6 million pages of documents were reviewed, containing data on post-9/11 interrogation techniques such as waterboarding.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), the committee’s ranking Republican, said in a statement that the report “contains a number of significant errors and omissions about the history and utility of the CIA’s detention program,” noting that the investigation did not interview “any of the people involved.”

High-ranking officials from the George W. Bush administration, including former Vice President Dick Cheney and former CIA Director Michael Hayden, have defended the use of waterboarding, sleep deprivation, and other measures.  They argued that the techniques provided critical clues to help find Osama bin Laden, who was killed in a U.S. raid in May 2011.  But Sen. Feinstein and Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) dismissed that suggestion earlier this year.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has long opposed the United States’ use of torture based on his experience as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, issued a statement that the committee’s work shows that “cruel” treatment of prisoners “is not only wrong in principle and a stain on our country’s conscience, but also an ineffective and unreliable means of gathering intelligence.”

The report now goes to President Barack Obama and other officials for review.  Feinstein said the committee would receive their comments until February 15, at which time it would make the decision on whether to declassify the report for public release.

For further information, please see:

Press TV — Report Finds Harsh CIA Interrogations Ineffective — 15 December 2012

Chicago Tribune — Senate Committee Approves Report on CIA Interrogations, Revives Torture Debate — 13 December 2012

The Huffington Post — CIA Torture Report Approved by Senate Intelligence Committee — 13 December 2012

The Washington Post — Report Finds Harsh CIA Interrogations Ineffective — 13 December 2012

By Mark O’Brien
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, United States — The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to consider, during its current term, two challenges to federal and state laws that only permit marriage between a man and a woman.

The high court announced on Friday that it would hear a case challenging a federal law that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman, as well as a case challenging California’s Proposition 8, or Prop 8, a gay marriage ban that voters approved in 2008.

These cases mark the first time the Supreme Court will consider the issue of same-sex marriage.  The hearings are expected to take place in March, with the justices delivering their opinions by the end of June.

The issue has become a politically charged debate in recent years.  Just last month, three states joined a small number of states where gay marriage is legal.  Voters in Maine, Maryland, and Washington passed laws legalizing gay marriage, bringing the total to nine states plus the District of Columbia.  Of the other 41 states, 31 have passed constitutional amendments banning it.

And even where it is legal, married same-sex couples do not qualify for many federal benefits because the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, only recognizes marriages between a man and a woman.

Edith Windsor was “delirious with joy” upon hearing the Supreme Court would hear her DOMA case, reports The Guardian.   Windsor, 83, was forced to pay more than $363,000 in federal estate taxes after her the death of her spouse, Thea Spyer, in 2009 because federal law did not recognize their marriage.

“I think DOMA is wrong for all of the various ways in which it discriminates against same-sex married couples and against gays altogether,” Windsor said.  “It’s enormously satisfying and fulfilling and exciting to be where we are now.”

Four lower federal courts and two federal appellate courts have ruled against DOMA.  Last October, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld a lower court ruling in Windsor’s case that a portion of DOMA was unconstitutional.  The provision in question, Section 3, denies gays and lesbians married under state laws benefits such as Social Security survivor payments and the right to file joint federal tax returns.

The Prop 8 case involves a review of California’s voter-approved gay marriage ban.  It passed in November 2008, months after a state supreme court ruled that same-sex marriages were legal.

Earlier this year, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that Prop 8 was unconstitutional.  The reasoning was that California could not take away the right to same-sex marriage after previously allowing it.  But the judges’ ruling was narrow; it only affected California and not any other states.

Supreme Court observers said it is unlikely that the justices will recognize a federal right to marriage equality.  Instead, many expect the high court’s ruling will be in the same narrow fashion—applying it only to California, regardless of the outcome.

For further information, please see:

The Guardian — US Supreme Court Agrees to Take up Two Gay Marriage Cases — 7 December 2012

Reuters — Supreme Court Takes up Same-Sex Marriage for First Time — 7 December 2012

SCOTUSblog.com — On Same-Sex Marriage, Options Open — 7 December 2012

The Washington Times — High Court Sets up Showdown over Gay Marriage — 7 December 2012

By Mark O’Brien
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

WASHINGTON, United States — Church leaders in California are not backing down from plans to host a Muslim convention despite receiving hate mail and threats from across the country.

All Saints Church in Pasadena will host the 12th annual Muslim Public Affairs Council convention on Dec. 15.  The event is expected to draw about 1,000 people.

Officials for the church, known for its liberal positions, said the 25 messages they have received since Friday are unlike other criticisms the church usually receives.

One message called Muslims “Body Snatchers” and compared them to Nazis, said Rev. Susan Russell.  Another message warned the church was “[c]onsorting with the Enemy that is Killing Christians Worldwide.

Russell said the church’s rector described the messages as “some of the most vile, mean-spirited emails” he’d ever read, especially the ones about the church participating in terrorism.  But she said All Saints hoped that hosting the event would send the opposite message.

“We want to light a candle of hope as Christians this Advent season that people of different faiths can stand in solidarity against polarization and for mobilization around our common values,” Russell said.

MPAC, a Muslim civil rights group, is hosting its annual convention at a church for the first time.  The group’s president, Salam al-Marayati, said the reason for doing so was to promote an interfaith dialogue.

“When we approached Rev. Ed Bacon to have the convention [at All Saints Church], he opened this church, which to us is a safe space for conversations,” al-Marayati said.

Church leaders said the hate mail was prompted, in part, by an online posting from the conservative Institute for Religion and Democracy.  The Contra Costa Times published a criticism posted on the Institute’s website that said, “Yet again, the Islamists are taking advantage of naïve Christians with a desire to show off their tolerance.”

But organizers said they would not let opponents get in their way of holding the convention.

“This is what we have to say to the fear mongers: We want to convert you,” al-Marayati said.

“We don’t want to convert you to our religions, but we want to convert you so we can remove hatred and prejudice in your hearts and replace it with understanding and security,” he continued.

Church leaders said they were working with the Federal Bureau of Investigations and the Department of Homeland Security to make sure the convention is a safe place from the threats.

For further information, please see:

Contra Costa Times — Pasadena Episcopal Church Hosting Muslim Convention Gets Hate Emails — 6 December 2012

KTLA News — Pasadena Church Gets Threats over Muslim Convention — 6 December 2012

LAist.com — Hate Mail to Pasadena Church Hosting Muslim Event Calls Islamists ‘Body Snatchers,’ ‘The Enemy’ — 6 December 2012

Pasadena Sun — All Saints Church Receives Threats over Muslim Convention — 6 December 2012