U.S.-IMMIGRATION: Human Rights Advocates Blast Asylum Bill

By Haider Rizvi Reprint | | Print |

Haider Rizvi

WASHINGTON, Jan 24 1996 (IPS) - Obsessed with the notion that immigrants are taking jobs away from nationals, the U.S. Congress may soon pass a law that makes it difficult for victims of political repression to gain asylum in the “land of the free”.

The proposed legislation, introduced by Republican Senator Alan Simpson last June, is part of the wider Immigration Reform Bill. It states that all asylum-seekers should file their applications within 30 days of arrival in the United States. Failure to do so would result in deportations.

Supporters of the bill say it will substantially reduce the fraudulent claims for asylum that have created a backlog of over 400,000 cases.

But Amnesty International and dozens of other human rights groups contend that the one-month limit would seriously undermine the rights of applicants.

“It’s unrealistic,” says Patricia Rangel of Amnesty International. “We want this provision to be removed (from the Immigration Reform Bill. It’s extremely difficult for anyone to come to the United States and file an application in just one month.”

“If passed, many genuine refugees will be affected by this provision, especially women who, in cases of torture and rape, will be in a kind of disadvantageous position,” she adds. “Being victims of rape or physical abuse, they need time to recover before they can even begin to think about applying for asylum.”

More than 50,000 refugees applied for asylum in the United States last year, and some 8,000 were granted political asylum, according to the U.S. Immigration and Naturalisation Service (INS).

Refugees who flee political victimisation in their countries are currently barred from working in the United States while their cases are in progress.

Human Rights groups say that to check the flow of illegal immigrants to the United States, authorities should take effective steps to enforce existing laws rather than enact new ones.

“Asylum is not an immigration issue, it’s a human rights issue,” says Michele Pistone of the Washington-based Lawyers Committee for Human Rights. “It’s virtually impossible for anyone to apply for asylum within 30 days.”

Amnesty International and 70 other U.S.-based human rights groups recently formed an umbrella body called the ‘Coalition to Preserve Asylum’ to oppose the legislation. The coalition is urging Simpson and others to withdraw the asylum provision from the Immigration Reform Bill.

But there is as yet no sign of flexibility on the part of the bill’s sponsors, the coalition members say.

“We have tried many times to convince them, but it seems they don’t really know anything about the impact of the bill.” says Pistone.

She and other human rights activists argue that many refugees arrive in the United States without understanding the process of applying for asylum.

“They need a lawyer, a human rights organisation to help them,” Pistone says.

According to John Solsberg who runs the Centre for Victims of Torture here, “Many of my patients who genuinely deserve asylum would not be in a position to tell their stories to the immigration authorities.”

Allan Keller, professor of clinical medicine at New York University describes the 30-day deadline as “totally unreasonable”.

“Forcing individuals to recount their experiences shortly after arriving in the U.S. and not providing the survivors of torture with adequate time to emotionally prepare for this can be psychologically devastating,” he argues.

Keller, who runs two rehabilitation centres for torture victims in New York, says he recently saw a patient who had been in the United States for several years but would not apply for asylum because she was afraid of facing men in uniform.

“She is from an African country where she had participated in an anti-government demonstration,” said Keller. “In jail, she was repeatedly gang-raped by soldiers. She hates to talk about these events — so much so that she did not want to apply for asylum because she would have to describe the trauma once more.”

Most refugees enter the United States on a tourists’ visa, and it is only when they have found food and shelter that they try to determine if they can apply for asylum, refugee rights advocates say.

“Nearly all the applicants I have seen have required psychiatric treatment,” says Gerard Coste, professor at Harvard University School of Medicine. “To require such victims of torture to present a formal asylum application within 30 days ignores the reality of being a victim of torture.”

“Most have fled their country without valid documents,” says Coste. “In some cases, it is only by using false identification papers that an applicant is able to escape. Time restrictions would discriminate against the people who have suffered the most.”

From a medical perspective, physicians say the 30-day deadline is unrealistic. For one thing, several weeks are required to schedule medical consultations and tests.

“The entire process takes 10 or 12 weeks and occasionally longer,” says Michael Newman, a clinical professor of medicine at George Washington University here.

Dick Day, a spokesman for Senator Simpson, disagrees.

“Most of the people who file asylum cases live here for months,” he says. “How much time do you want for them? Three months, six months ?”

Human rights groups contend that the one-month condition may make it more difficult to locate undocumented persons. They argue that once a person misses the deadline, he or she will lack any incentive to come forward and risk deportation. Furthermore, the new stipulation may actually help those with fraudulent claims, they say.

“The resourceful will have all the documentation ready in one month, whereas the poor but genuine victim of persecution would remain helpless,” argues one member of the coalition.