|
| Volume 3, Issue 10 -- May 26, 2006 |
|
From the JPIC Office It’s another full issue of the newsletter this week with good news to share. From Washington legislation on immigration to grassroots mobilization in Lomas de Poleo, there are signs of hope that justice could be won. Internationally we see that people around the world are pushing for economic alternatives and ways to protect the environment and ensure safe quality food for all people. In this Easter season, as we await the descent of the Holy Spirit through the celebration of Pentecost, it feels at times that the journey is lonely and the path is uncertain in this endless search for peace and justice. However, these signs of hope are reminders that we are not alone. They are signs that we await a new beginning where peace and justice reign.
Message from the Border While waiting for our weekly meeting to begin last week a couple of the neighbors from Lomas de Poleo were projecting their chances for success in their struggle for land. One man was negative and kept mentioning how rich and powerful the Zaragozas were and how corrupt and subject to influence the various government agencies are. Palano, who works on our construction team, replied with energy "We're not alone in this. The church and the human rights groups and the other NGOs are all continuing to support us. They even know about our struggle in other countries!". I was very happy with his response and went on to affirm that, indeed, the people of Lomas are not alone. In addition to all the support the people have been receiving from you and so many others, the young lawyer from the Agrarian Attorney General's office, Carlos Avitia, continues to push the case of the people forward relentlessly. As mentioned in the last update, an agrarian magistrate was scheduled to come to Juarez last week. At the last minute they called to say "there are not sufficient resources for the judge to travel from Chihuahua (state capital) to Juarez". We all interpreted that as being the result of someone tampering with the process and either threatening or paying off someone to ensure the judge would never arrive. The response of the people was, since our hearings are already scheduled with this magistrate, if he won't come here we'll go there. And they did. Of the 87 who were scheduled May 15-19, about 70 actually arrived in Chihuahua and had their 'day in court' with the agrarian magistrate. The first group of 20 left Juarez on Monday morning at 4am. to make the five hour trek to Chihuahua, crowded into a pick up truck and a van loaned to us by the El Paso del Norte Human Rights Center. When they arrived at the offices of the Agrarian Tribunal they were told by the magistrates secretary to go back home, they had all the wrong papers, no audience would be given. When their lawyer arrived, the above mentioned Carlos Avitia, he entered into some serious confrontation with the secretary, quoting the pertinent laws and the fact that the audiences had already been published in the Official Diary of the Agrarian Tribunal. He asked the secretary if the reason the people weren't being seen was because of the "mano negra" (influence) or "mordida" (bribe) had preceded them. The secretary, after four trips over to the judge’s chambers finally came back and said with no joy, "yes, the judge will receive you". And so, one by one, with their lawyer present, these materially poor people, some of whom have struggled for over thirty years, were finally having their cries for justice heard by the state authorities. Throughout the week they went, leaving Juarez at 4am. and arriving home at 10 or 11pm. At the general meeting on Saturday they recounted their stories and especially the bold defense put forward by their advocate, Avitia. The Zaragoza family has been subpoenaed by the same magistrate and must present their claims on July 3. Twenty working days after all the arguments have been made, the judge will render his decision in each case. On Sunday the human rights lawyer said the state human rights commission had received and believed the recent complaint made by the people in Lomas re. lack of public security. They forwarded this complaint to the nation office in Mexico, and it has been received by Dr. Soberanes there. While the commission contemplates its decision, it has issued an order to the local and state authorities to provide police protection to the people. It remains to be seen whether or not they will comply. The "guardias blancas" of the Zaragozas continue to man the gates, often with municipal police trucks parked there and the cops talking amicably with the vigilantes. So continues the intimidation while the municipal authorities continue to patrol, prohibiting the people from building or improving their homes. The Zaragoza lawyers continue to harass the people with subpoenas in which they are trying to get judges in the district courts in Juarez to nullify letters of possession given to the residents of Lomas previous to the Zaragoza's attempts to claim the land. What is beginning to surface in more detail is the involvement of individuals and groups on the US side of the border, in El Paso and New Mexico, who are powerful investors, business people and politicians, including Zaragoza, Eloy Valliana, and other prinicpals on the Mexican side, all salivating over the potential profits to be made by going forward with the San Jeronimo-Santa Teresa project. Grupo Verde and the so-called "Binational City" have been developed with much secrecy among the elites and politicians and grass-roots attempts to stop or slow them down have been met with the same degree of impunity and corruption that has marked these plans from their inception. It is ironic that the people struggling for their moral, legal and constitutional rights to their land in Lomas de Poleo, and the various church and civil groups that are walking with them, are continuing to hold the flagrant corruption and abuse of the powerful up to the light. A project billions of dollars in scope, of which the people in Lomas were seen to be a mere pebble in the road, have now become a stumbling block of larger proportion. God alone knows how this story will end, but one thing is sure: the people of the mesa and their friends of faith and supporters from near and afar will be accompanying them on their journey to justice, until they arrive securely at their destination. On behalf of all the neighbors on the mesa in Lomas de Poleo: thank you and be assured that you and yours remain in our prayers. Migration Every summer for the past three years, the Border Working Group has prepared a series of informative pieces that explore the relationship between U.S. immigration policy and the lives of migrants entering in to the U.S. across the Southwest border with Mexico. This year, as the immigration debate is at the forefront of national consciousness, the JPIC office would like to share these one page resources with you that explore topics generally explored in mainstream media. A new feature of the resource will include an interview with a migrant who has crossed the border within the last five years, that is, post- 9/11. We hope you find these pieces informative and useful. We will include a PDF version which can be downloaded, printed and shared easily in your local community. Border Working Group Summer Series #1: Overview The War on Terror has eroded U.S. credibility as a defender of human rights. Scandals in Iraq and Guantanamo, secret prisons in Eastern Europe, and warantless wire tapping at home all contribute to this decline. Now, Congress is debating an immigration and border security reform bill that could further knock our credibility as a nation that is concerned about human rights. Migrant deaths at the US-Mexico border already constitute one of the largest human rights concerns in our hemisphere. In 2005, 463 people died trying to enter the U.S., and over 2000 people have died in the past five years. Current border security policies are calculated on risk assessment – if the Border Patrol closes down urban routes into the U.S., migrants will not risk their lives crossing into the country through dangerous desert territory. This premise has been proven wrong, and the rising death count is the clearest indication that migrants are willing to risk their lives to work here. Congressional attempts to further tighten our border security within the context of immigration reform represent a continuation of current policies, and will most likely lead to an increase in migrant deaths at our border:
None of the plans currently being debated by Congress attempt to achieve 100% operational control over the border. They continue to base their strategy on the premise that migrants will not risk their lives in dangerous territory in order to work in the US – a premise that the loss of over 2000 lives has disproved. While Senate proposals also increase border security, the guest worker approach taken there has the possibility to truly reduce migrant deaths. By offering migrants a safe, legal, and dignified way to enter the U.S., it eliminates the need for dangerous border crossings, and offers the biggest hope for reducing migrant deaths. Over the course of the summer, as the immigration debate continues and migrant deaths become more visible, the Washington-based Border Working Group will provide you with bi-monthly information on migrant deaths, and how policy is affecting migrants’ lives. With each policy piece, we will be including transcripts from an interview with a migrant who has recently crossed the border, to give better perspective to the strong motivations people have, and the risks they are willing to take, to come to the U.S. We hope these pieces will be of use to you over the course of the legislative year. The Latin America Working Group, along with the Border Working Group, circulates letters to all members of Congress twice a month, focusing on the plight of real migrants. The letters include policy statements that advocate for immigration reform. This is one of our recent stories: Age: 22 Years Sex: Female Nationality: El Salvadoran City of Residence: Hyattsville, MD
Economic Justice As the Administration finds its free trade agenda facing ever increasing resistance both domestically and internationally, new alternatives for regional integration, trade and investment are beginning to emerge. Considering the moral implications of international trade because of its profound impact on the lives of people and the very world we live in, the faith communities that form the Interfaith Working Group on Trade and Investment have actively joined in the discussion, offering an ‘Interfaith Statement on International Trade and Investment’ as an ethical sounding board. As civil society and left-leaning governments put forth their own proposals, a consensus has begun to form, rejecting the NAFTA-based model of trade and calling instead for a just and people-centered, rather than profit-centered, trade policy. The Interfaith Statement, put forth as both a critique of current policies and a vision for a more just and sustainable alternative, lists five guiding principles:
Calling for a more holistic approach to trade and investment, the Interfaith Statement prioritizes the rights and needs of people over markets, respect and care for the natural world, and meaningful participation and transparency. Facing ever growing disparity between the rich and poor, the have’s and have-not’s, the statement seeks to redefine trade and investment from a moral and spiritual point of departure. Responding to the social movement that swept him to power, newly elected president of Bolivia Evo Morales has firmly rejected the idea of a NAFTA-model free trade agreement with the United States, such as the one Peru recently signed with the U.S. In April 2006, Morales released a statement outlining his government's proposal for a just and people-centered trade policy that reiterates many of the elements of the Interfaith statement, but adapted to the specific context of Bolivia. According to ‘A People’s Trade Agreement’ (PTA), Bolivia should be able to open itself to the world in such a way that will promote its sustainable national development, maintain national sovereignty and food security, strengthen small-scale farmers and entrepreneurs, and leave basic services like water in public hands and not privatized, depriving millions of people access to this basic human right. Rather than competition and exploitation that lead to a mutual race to the bottom, the PTA prioritizes cooperation and solidarity. Particular attention is given to the participation of civil society, and the rights of indigenous peoples. Thus, "Bolivia can achieve a true integration which transcends merely commercial and economic spheres – its philosophy is to achieve a development which is profoundly just and substantiated in communitarian principles which take into account national differences in relation to population, area, production, access to infrastructure, resources and history." Read the full text of "A People's Trade Agreement" at quest.quixote.org/node/295 Genetic Engineering The eighth meeting of countries signatory to the United Nation’s Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) held in March in Curitiba, Brazil became a rallying point for the movement to uphold the ban on so-called terminator seeds. Terminator technology creates plants that are genetically modified to produce sterile seeds. Farmers would thus be prevented from saving and replanting seeds, forcing them to buy new seeds every year. While creating a guaranteed market for large agribusiness companies, many small-scale farmers in developing countries who are dependent on being able to save and replant seed would find their livelihood at risk. According to the ETC Group, the cost of new seeds alone will impose a burden of billions of extra dollars on some of the world's poorest nations. In the lead-up to the Brazil meet, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, with the support of the United States and several large bio-technology companies, attempted to overturn the international moratorium on terminator technology. Hoping to open up the possibility of field-testing, they pushed for a case-by-case risk assessment approach without prior research into the possible environmental and socio-economic ramifications. However, facing daily protests of thousands of farmers outside the Brazil meetings, the CBD countries unanimously rejected this proposal. The focus now shifts to the national level. It is up to individual countries to pass specific bans on this technology. Brazil and India have already done so. Other countries are considering such legislation. According to the International Ban Terminator Campaign, terminator technology can be commercialized unless national governments prevent it. In the following statement, the World Council of Churches offers its support for the moratorium on terminator technology, and asks people of faith to stand in solidarity with small-scale farmers and others whose livelihoods would be threatened.
World Council of Churches Urges Ban on Terminator Seeds The General Secretary of the World Council of Churches, Rev. Dr Samuel Kobia, called upon churches and ecumenical partners to take action to stop "terminator technology". "Applying technology to design sterile seeds turns life, which is a gift from God, into a commodity. Preventing farmers from re-planting saved seed will increase economic injustice all over the world and add to the burdens of those already living in hardship," stated Kobia. He underlined: "Terminator technology locates food sovereignty, once the very backbone of community, in the hands of technologists and large corporations. The UN Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that 1.4 billion people depend on farmer-saved seed as their primary seed source. All Christians pray "Give us this day our daily bread" (Matt 6:11). That this profoundly material request appears in this profoundly spiritual prayer, signals for us the centrality of food in our lives, as well as the indivisibility of the material and spiritual in the eyes of God. It is of great concern to me that life itself is now often thought of and used as a commodity." Governments upheld the international de facto moratorium on "Terminator technology," which refers to plants that are genetically engineered to produce sterile seeds, about a month ago at the Eighth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP8) to the UN's Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) held in Curitiba, Brazil. They finally gave in to strong pressure by social movements and civil society groups and a number of governmental delegations supporting their claims. The UN conference was held in Brazil only weeks after the WCC's 9th General Assembly in Porto Alegre, Brazil, where delegates urged the WCC to respond to the challenges posed by science and technology. The call for a ban on sterile-seed technology had taken center stage at the two-week meeting in Curitiba. Thousands of peasant farmers, including those from Brazil's Landless Workers Movement (Movimento Sem Terra), protested daily outside the conference center to demand a ban. The women of the international peasant farmers' organization Via Campesina staged a silent protest inside the plenary hall on 23 March, holding hand-painted signs with the words "Terminar Terminator con la Vida" ("Terminate Terminator with Life"). Brazil and India have already passed national laws to ban Terminator - and other campaigns to prevent commercialization of seed sterilization technologies will follow in various countries around the world. Protestant churches in Germany lobby for a national law and European Union legislation to ban terminator seeds. They also argue against the patenting of terminator technologies. "Though the international moratorium on Terminator was upheld at COP8, the battle to block the technology is now moving to the national level. This requires us to alert our member churches and ecumenical partners to be vigilant in their respective countries," explains the WCC general secretary who is confident that this concern unites Christian churches and people of other faiths who care for small scale farmers and God's creation. For more information about the Ban Terminator Seeds Campaign, please visit: www.banterminator.org/. Action Alerts Immigration Reform Update As of this writing, the Senate is preparing to vote on the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (CIRA). A final vote is anticipated for this evening, and all signs point to its passage. Despite the urgency of the issue, the mass mobilizations and the cries for justice from the immigrant community, we are faced with a weak bill that in spite of an overemphasis on security will not stop undocumented migration, needless migrant deaths in the desert or the abuse of migrant workers. Advocates for immigrants’ rights have felt particularly torn over this bill. We know the urgent need for meaningful reform, but as we watch amendments pass that water-down the potential benefits of the reform, and security measures are added that will harm future migrants, we wonder if inadequate legislation is really better than no legislation? In addition to authorizing 400 miles of fencing along the border, amendments have also been passed to send the National Guard to the border and making English the national language. The guest-worker program has been cut in half from its original 400,000 visas, with flexibility depending on demand, down to a strict 200,000 visas per year. Undocumented migrants are now divided into three tiers depending on when they arrived in the U.S., and will have different requirements to get residency. For example, if a man came to the U.S. five years ago, he will be allowed to stay here and apply for residency. If his wife came three years ago, she can also stay, but will first need to “touch base” in Mexico before getting her visa. Finally, if the man’s parents came to the U.S. last year, they will be forced to return to their home country with no guarantees that they will be able to return. As disappointing as we find the final Senate product, passage is all but assured this evening. But that is not the end of the story. The bill will then move to conference between the House and the Senate where legislators will try to iron out their differences. We expect that this debate will happen in early June. The original bill passed by the House is much worse than the one currently being deliberated by the Senate, making a compromise between the two almost certainly unacceptable. Although this paints a rather bleak picture for immigration reform, we have not given up the fight. While we do not agree that any bill is better than no bill, we also know that there is an urgent need for real, meaningful change. We look forward to the November elections with the hope that a newly reconstituted Congress would again take up the debate and give us a stronger immigration reform package than is currently on the table. We will keep you posted on the ongoing discussion, and let you when the moment for action arrives. We do not want to accept a weak and harmful bill approved for the sake of political expediency, but instead continue to hope for real progress and ultimately for legislation that will translate into profound improvements in the lives of undocumented migrants in this country. Contact Us
We welcome submissions, comments and suggestions. |