South America

Unaccompanied Migrant Children Continue to be Detained at the U.S. Southern Border

By: Ryan Ockenden

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

CARRIZO SPRINGS, United States of America – Within recent weeks, thousands of unaccompanied migrant children have arrived at the southern border of the United States. President Biden has agreed not to turn back unaccompanied minors in spite of Title 42, the emergency public health law invoked by former President Trump, which authorized turning away the majority of migrants due to COVID-19.

Trailers previously used to house oil workers have been turned into bunks for the unaccompanied migrant minors. Photo Courtesy of Eric Gay and Associated.

Although President Biden promised to take a more humane approach to unauthorized immigration, his administration has re-opened the controversial Carrizo Springs detention center, to house these unaccompanied minors. According to the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, minors cannot be held by border agents at these detention centers for more than 72 hours. After 72 hours, the unaccompanied minors must then be transferred to shelters while the Office of Refugee Resettlement can locate their family members in the United States and arrange for their release to the families. The Biden administration is not following this law. Due to the lag in processing, children are being held for much longer in detention centers like that in Carrizo Springs. Once unaccompanied minors arrive at the shelters, many of them are not being released to their families, despite the families being located, because of the requirement that the minors quarantine for ten days and test negative twice for COVID-19.

In the past, the Inter-American Court and Commission of Human Rights (IACHR) has asserted that detentions at the U.S. southern border must be as brief as possible. Further, the IACHR has stressed that the best interests of a child are the primary consideration in any action taken in relation to the child. COVID-19 has posed a confounding problem for the American government: whether to prioritize public health; or, to get children out of shelters and into their families’ possession as soon as possible.

Many human rights advocates feel that the Biden administration is reverting to the perverse policies under former President Trump. The advocates believe the vulnerable children are being held in unsafe facilities that do not meet their best interest: being sent to safety with their family members in the United States.

In the face of a health crisis, the Biden administration will continue to face two issues: (1) ensuring children are not held for more than 72 hours in Border Patrol custody; and, (2) whether prioritizing public health and quarantine policies over reuniting unaccompanied minors with their families is appropriate. On the first issue, the Biden administration has said that they do not want to keep the facilities open long, but they have no current alternative since they did not inherit a system that manages COVID-19 and the influx of unaccompanied minor migrants. On the second issue, the Biden administration has shown no indication to change their policy, raising questions about whether they are seeking the best interests of the children.

For further information, please see:

Amnesty International – Carrizo Springs detention facility cannot become status quo for children – 23 Feb. 2021

NPR – Biden Pledges That Border Shelter For Teens ‘Won’t Stay Open Very Long’ – 25 Feb. 2021

Pacific Standard – What laws protect detained children from mistreatment on the border? – 24 Jun. 2019

Politico – Biden promised a ‘fair and humane’ immigration overhaul. What he inherited is a mess – 26 Feb. 2021

The New York Times – Thousands of Migrant Children Detained in Resumption of Trump-Era Policies – 26 Feb. 2021

Illegal Pesticides: A Continual Growing Concern in Paraguay

By: Samuel Schimel

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

COLONIA YERUTI, Paraguay – Paraguay made history in a 2019 ruling that held Paraguay responsible for failing to safeguard its citizens from the severe environmental contamination caused by illegal chemicals used on large-scale agribusinesses. These illegal agrochemicals were found to violate the State’s international obligations to protect the rights to life and respect for private and family life and the home.

The seizure of 13,000 pounds of suspected illegal pesticides in January 2020. Photo Courtesy of The Washington Post.

The landmark case, Portillo Cáceres v. Paraguay, was held before the United Nations Human Rights Committee (Committee). This case was brought as a result of toxic chemical pollutants that caused the death of Rubén Portillo Cáceres and a myriad of serious health concerns for other community members. These symptoms included “nausea, dizziness, headaches, fever, stomach pains, vomiting, diarrhea, coughing and skin lesions.” However, the grave of effects of these chemical pollutants did not stop here. Additionally, these chemical pollutants have had devastating effects on the environment including the killing of fruit trees, crops, and farm animals.

In reaching the decision, the Committee showed its support by stating that a right to life also concerns the entitlement of individuals to enjoy a life with dignity. It does not include any acts or omissions that would cause an individual’s unnatural or premature death. Unfortunately, this case did not end the pervasive use of dangerous agrochemicals in Paraguay entirely.

In 2020, the running street value for banned pesticides in Paraguay is more than $2 million. The illegal pesticides and their strength are twice that of pesticides that are legal in Paraguay’s neighboring border country, Brazil. Much of the illegal pesticides prevalent in Brazil end up in Paraguay due to the shared massive, yet largely unmonitored, border. Pesticides are mostly produced in China and then smuggled across the Paraguay border. Roughly 287,000 tonnes of Atrazine and 63,000 tonnes of Syngnta were sold in Brazil in 2018.

Since the last two decades, illegal trafficking of pesticides has quickly heightened into one of the world’s most profitable criminal enterprises deserving of more recognition. The pesticide trade is operated akin to a narcotics trade and is often controlled by rival gangs and mafias. This has led to the introduction of counterfeit and contraband pesticides that are now in heavy circulation in both developed and underdeveloped countries. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) these pesticides carry with them extreme environmental and social consequences. There is an estimate of 3 million people poisoned and 200,000 killed each year due to exposure to these harmful and largely unregulated substances. Their use, researchers find, can poison soil, contaminate water sources and ravage entire ecosystems. These large-scale harms, of course, are supported by illegal and unregulated trade.

While the Paraguayan border is still largely unregulated leading to an influx of agrochemicals, this issue would largely be off the radar of health organizations without the 2019 ruling of Cáceres v. Paraguay. While the issue is still rampant, it is important to note that an individual’s health and safety are still protected from these dangerous agrochemicals under law and health organizations, like the WHO, which continue to advocate for agrochemical trafficking to be better policed. 

For further information, please see:

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – Views adopted by the Committee under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol, concerning communication No. 2751/2016 – 20 Sept. 2019

International Justice Resource Center – UN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE RECOGNIZES ENVIRONMENTAL HARM AS RIGHTS VIOLATION – 22 Aug. 2019

Monga bay – For European chemical giants, Brazil is an open market for toxic pesticides banned at home – 10 Sept. 2020

The Washington Post – In agricultural giant Brazil, a growing hazard: The illegal trade in pesticides – 9 Feb. 2020

United Nations Human Rights – Paraguay responsible for human rights violations in context of massive agrochemical fumigations – 14 Aug. 2019

Peru Found Guilty of Torturing Transgender Woman in Custody

By: Elizabeth Wright

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

CASA GRANDE, Peru — On April 6, 2020, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights published a decision which found the country of Peru guilty of torture and rape of a transgender woman while she was in police custody.

Azul Rojas Marin. Photo Courtesy of BBC.

Azul Rojas Marin was arrested in February 2008, for what has now been determined to be an arbitrary and discriminatory purpose. While in police custody her legal team reports that, Azul was stripped naked, beaten, and brutally raped with a police baton by three officers.

Following the incident, Azul filed an initial criminal complaint against the officers involved, but it was dismissed by the state. After hearing about her case, several human rights organizations joined to help and brought her case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. The Court ultimately found for Azul. The Court ordered Peruvian government to pay Azul damages and provide her with psychological treatment. Furthermore, the Court ordered Peru to track data regarding violence of those in the LGBT+ community, and to create protocol for investigating such violence.

Evidence shows that LGBT+ individuals experience much higher rates of violence than others. This is the first time the Inter-American Court has made a ruling on torture of any person identifying as LGBT+. Thus, many feel the verdict legal validation for transgender and LGBT+ individuals.

For further information, please see:

NY Daily News – Top Human Rights Court Finds Peru Responsible for Raping, Torturing Transgender Woman – 8 Apr. 2020

PinkNews – Peru is ‘responsible’ for Rape and Torture of Trans Woman While in Custody, Top Human Rights Court Rules – 7 Apr. 2020

BBC NEWS – Azul Rojas Marin: Peru Found Responsible for Torture of LGBT Person – 7 April 2020

Reuters – Top Americas Court Finds Peru Responsible for Torture of Trans Woman – 6 Apr. 2020

Venezuela Refers US Sanctions to ICC for Crimes Against Humanity

By: Henry Schall

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

CARACAS, Venezuela – On February 13, 2020, the Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela filed a request with the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.  This request has the purpose of seeking an investigation of United States sanctions against Venezuela, calling the sanctions “crimes against humanity.”

The current crisis in Venezuela is due to economic collapse after President Maduro took power in 2013.  This collapse caused widespread shortages in basic food and supplies causing 4.5 million people to flee. 

Strong opposition parties emerged around Maduro within the National Assembly culminating in the 2018 election, where Maduro was reelected.  This election was widely dismissed as rigged, and fifty other countries recognize the National Assembly leader Juan Guaidó as the rightful president. 

To pressure Maduro in hopes that he would step down, the United States imposed new sanctions in August 2019.  In a letter to Congress, President Trump wrote that the new sanctions were imposed due to the “continued usurpation of power by Nicolás Maduro and persons affiliated with him, as well as human rights abuses, arbitrary arrest and detention of Venezuelan citizens.”

President Trump signed an executive order which declared all property or interests in property owned by the government of Venezuela in the United States as blocked which cannot be used.   The new sanctions bar any transactions with Venezuelan officials whose assets are blocked.  President Trump’s order states, “the making of any contribution or provision of funds, goods, or services by, to, or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to this order.” 

These new sanctions expand pressure on Maduro by targeting his government, but also targeting individuals, companies, and countries doing business with the government.  The United States Security Advisor John Bolton said the new sanction could be imposed on any supporters of the Maduro government, since the sanctions would force countries and companies to choose between doing business with the United States or Venezuela.  Venezuela has long blamed the United States for the current economic crisis, but the sanctions do include exceptions for humanitarian goods, food and medicine.  

In a sixty-page brief, Venezuela referred the situation in accordance with Article 14 of the Rome Statute, declaring that the Unilateral Coercive Measures imposed impose negative impacts on the people in Venezuela.  Venezuela contends these sanctions contravene international law that prevent foreign intervention in internal affairs and have caused an enormous hardship for the people of Venezuela.  The brief further declares these sanctions as crimes against humanity, citing a study by Mark Weisbrot and Jeffrey Sachs which provides statistical evidence that sanctions amount to a death sentence for tens of thousands of Venezuelan Citizens. 

On February 19, 2020, the Presidency of the ICC referred the situation in Venezuela to Pre-Trial Chamber III.  According to the ICC, a State Party referral does not automatically lead to an investigation, but it may speed up opening the investigation.  Now, the Prosecutor must consider issues of jurisdiction, admissibility and the interests of justice in determining if an investigation should be opened. 

For further information, please see:

International Criminal Court – Annex I to the Prosecution’s Provision of the Supporting Document of the Referral Submitted by the Government of Venezuela – 4 Mar. 2020

International Criminal Court – Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Mrs Fatou Bensouda, on the referral by Venezuela regarding the situation in its own territory – 17 Feb. 2020

BBC – Venezuela crisis in 300 words – 6 Jan. 2020

BBC – US imposes sweeping sanctions on Venezuelan government – 6 Aug. 2019

Case of First Impression: Inter-American Court and Sexual Violence in School

By: Abigail Neuviller

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

QUITO, Ecuador – On January 28, 2020 the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) heard Paola Guzman Albarracin v. Ecuador, its first case pertaining to sexual violence in a school setting. Paola was a sixteen-year-old girl who took her own life after she was repeatedly sexually abused by the Vice-Principal of her school.

Petita Albarracin, mother of Paola, talking about her daughter during an interview. Photo Courtesy of the Guardian.

From the ages of fourteen to sixteen, she was sexually abused and raped by the school administrator. The sexual abuse led to a pregnancy and when her abuser took her to the school doctor for an abortion, he said he would only perform the surgery if Paola had sex with him.

Soon thereafter, Paola took her own life by ingesting phosphorus. Before she died, she told her friends on the way to school, who then alerted school authorities, but they told her to pray for forgiveness instead of seeking timely medical care.

Paola’s mother, Petita Albarracin, has continued the legal battle for over eighteen years. When she first filed suit in Ecuador, the case was dismissed. She then brought the suit to the IACtHR, an autonomous body of the Organization of American States, which rules on whether a government violated human rights.  

The IACtHR will determine whether Ecuador was responsible for failing to prevent the sexual abuse, if Paola was adequately protected from sexual violence in a state school, and if the school failed to provide her with proper medical care.

Despite this case being the first of its kind before the IACtHR, sexual harassment experienced by school students is not uncommon. In Ecuador alone, 32% of girls report experiencing some form of sexual violence while at school.

According to the United Nation’s Children’s Agency (UNICEF), three out of ten students in Latin America between the ages of thirteen and fifteen have experienced sexual harassment in school.

This sexual violence is frequently perpetrated by school teachers and administrators who take advantage of their positions of trust and authority. With students particularly, this type of violence manifests in poor school performance, high dropout rates, and social isolation.

The IACtHR is expected to rule on the case within the year. This decision will have a sweeping effect since its binding on Ecuador, but also the other twenty-two countries in Central and South America under its jurisdiction.

For further information, please see:

Center for Reproductive Rights – Center Argues Milestone Case at Inter-American Court of Human Rights – 29 Jan. 2020

The Guardian – Landmark Case Held on Alleged Sexual Abuse of Ecuadorian Schoolgirl – 29 Jan. 2020

Reuters – Americas’ Human Rights Court Hears Deadly Sexual Violence Case from Ecuador – 28 Jan. 2020

Center for Reproductive Rights – Groundbreaking Case at Inter-American Court on Human Rights Could Transform Girl’s Rights Across Latin America and Beyond – 28 Jan. 2020

Resolución del Presidente de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos – 10 Dec. 2019

Organization of American States – IACHR Takes Case Involving Ecuador to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights – 13 Feb. 2019