Unwelcome mat
CALL HER Grace. She's a typical asylum-seeker. She was politically active in her country of origin. As a result she was placed in jail, beaten, and tortured. While on work duty she escaped and kept on running. She did not go home because she did not want to place her family at risk -- if she had been caught with them she would have been executed. Friends helped arrange her escape from the country. There was no time to gather documents, no time to say goodbye. When she came to the United States, she had trouble telling her story. She had difficulty trusting others.
This story, though fictitious, is not unlike those of a number of asylum seekers. If a bill proposed in the US House becomes law, someone like Grace could be sent back to the country she came from to be further persecuted or killed. This is in conflict with the Convention Against Torture signed by the United States, which states, ''No state party shall expel, return . . . or extradite a person to another state when there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture." The fact that someone has been in the United States may in and of itself cause one to be arrested if deported.
The bill proposes that an asylum case without corroborating documents can be denied. As with Grace, it might be unsafe to carry documents. People might try to leave the country under an assumed name, so having documents could place them at risk. There might not be time to go home to gather documents, or it might be dangerous to do so. In the frenzy of escaping, documents can be lost. It might be dangerous for family to obtain documents after one's escape or mail documents out of the country, as it raises suspicion -- particularly if torture has been committed. We have had family members detained and arrested when attempting to get police documents. Generally speaking, countries practicing human rights violations refrain from documentation of abuses and often use psychological torture so as not to leave a trace. When one is escaping rebel groups or religious persecution, government documents might not even exist.
The bill also proposes that a case with any inconsistency in the statements can be denied. Head trauma is one of the most common forms of torture. This can result in cognitive difficulty. Depression and post-traumatic stress disorder can result from trauma, torture, and loss. Both can be associated with attention and memory problems. Asylum-seekers often leave their families behind, which is a source of great sadness. Instead of protecting those most worthy of asylum because of the trauma they have experienced, this bill, if passed, potentially places them at greater risk, as they may not be able to cogently present their story.
The bill proposes that a suspicious demeanor can be grounds for denial. It can be overwhelming to speak with a government representative when one has been persecuted by one's government. It can serve as a trigger to relive what has happened, thereby making someone look distant or hyper-aroused. At the same time, there are differences cross-culturally as to how one shows respect to authority. In some cultures, one may intentionally not look at authority figures, as it is impolite to do so. It may be both foreign and difficult to talk to strangers about intimate details of one's life. Furthermore, the ability to trust can be affected by trauma, making someone look suspicious.
Even if a case is denied, our immigration law allows for an appeal. In the new rendition, if the appeal does not occur quickly enough, an asylum seeker may be deported. There is already pressure on immigration judges now. The appeals process before the Board of Immigration Appeals and then the federal court is a check for the system. Using the immigration judges not as independent evaluators but as homeland security screeners is not the solution to terrorism. We have to look at the causes of terrorism rather than screen out people who are fighting for democracy in their own countries. As it is now, the pass rate is low, particularly if someone does not have legal representation. The system needs support to make it work, not greater demands to make it less functional.
The legislation does not allow due process, which is fundamental to American justice and a necessity for democracy. With the globalization of human rights, what happens in the United States greatly influences what happens around the world. Asylum-seekers who have fled due to violations of their human rights often come to the United States because they think this is where human rights are highly valued. What are we saying to other countries that consistently do not respect individual rights? Trying to limit the process of asylum as called for in this bill would threaten the basis of human rights. Creating an asylum system based on fear would challenge the rule of law.
It is important not only to look at this issue from the standpoint of the group of asylum-seekers but rather the potential impact on one asylum-seeker at a time.
Dr. Lin Piwowarczyk is co-director of the Boston Center for Refugee Health and Human Rights. 