U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

71–853 PDF 2012

S. HRG. 111–1114 

NO SAFE HAVEN: ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HUMAN 

RIGHTS VIOLATORS, PART II 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE LAW 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

OCTOBER 6, 2009 

Serial No. J–111–53 

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman 

HERB KOHL, Wisconsin 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

EDWARD E. KAUFMAN, Delaware 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

JON KYL, Arizona 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

BRUCE A. COHEN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

MATTHEW S. MINER, Republican Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE LAW

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois, Chairman 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

EDWARD E. KAUFMAN, Delaware 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

JOSEPH ZOGBY, Chief Counsel 

BROOKE BACAK, Republican Chief Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS 

Page 

Coburn, Hon. Tom, a U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma ........................ 3 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 84 

Durbin, Hon. Richard J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Illinois .................... 1 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 104 

Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 114 

WITNESSES 

Breuer, Lanny A., Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department 

of Justice, Washington, DC ................................................................................. 4 

Cummings, Arthur M., Executive Assistant Director, National Security 

Branch, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, DC ............................. 11 

Donahue, David T., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Visa Services, Bureau 

of Consular Affairs, Department of State, Washington, DC ............................ 9 

Morton, John T., Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC ............................ 7 

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 

Responses of Lanny A. Breuer to questions submitted by Senator Coburn ....... 23 

Responses of Arthur M. Cummings to questions submitted by Senator 

Coburn ................................................................................................................... 48 

Responses of David T. Donahue to questions submitted by Senator Coburn ..... 54 

Responses of John T. Morton to questions submitted by Senator Coburn ......... 63 

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

Advocates for Human Rights, Robin Phillips, Executive Director, Minneapolis, 

Minnesota, statement .......................................................................................... 67 

Breuer, Lanny A., Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division, Department 

of Justice, Washington, DC, statement .............................................................. 74 

Crimes Against Humanity Act, June 24, 2009, letter .......................................... 86 

Cummings, Arthur M., Executive Assistant Director, National Security 

Branch, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Washington, DC, statement .......... 88 

Donahue, David T., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Visa Services, Bureau 

of Consular Affairs, Department of State, Washington, DC, statement ......... 91 

Human Rights First, Washington, DC, statement ................................................ 107 

Human Rights Watch, Elise Keppler, International Justice Senior Counsel, 

New York, New York, statement ........................................................................ 110 

Morton, John T., Assistant Secretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC, statement ......... 115 

(1) 

NO SAFE HAVEN: ACCOUNTABILITY FOR 

HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATORS, PART II 

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 2009 

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE LAW, 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m., in 

room SD–226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard J. 

Durbin, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Durbin, Feingold, Franken, and Coburn. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS 

Chairman DURBIN. Good morning, everybody, and welcome to 

this hearing of the Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law 

of the Senate Judiciary Committee. This hearing will come to 

order. Today, we are going to consider ‘‘No Safe Haven: Accountability for Human Rights Violators in the United States, Part II.’’ 

Two years ago, this Subcommittee held the first ever Congressional hearing on the enforcement of human rights laws in the 

United States. At that hearing, we learned that the Government 

was investigating over 1,000 suspected human rights violators from 

almost 90 countries who have found safe haven in our country. 

Today, we will examine what the Government has done since that 

hearing and what more we can do. 

For decades, the United States has led the fight for human rights 

around the world. But when human rights violators are able to live 

freely in our country, America’s credibility is threatened. 

Throughout our history, America has provided sanctuary to victims of persecution. Sadly, some refugees arrive from distant 

shores to begin a new life, only to encounter those who tortured 

them or killed their loved ones. 

Two years ago, this Subcommittee heard compelling testimony, 

which I still remember to this day, from Dr. Juan Romagoza. He 

endured a 22-day ordeal of torture at the hands of the National 

Guard in El Salvador. As you may remember, those of you who 

have followed it, he has a clinic here in town where he helps poor 

people. Dr. Romagoza sought asylum in our country and received 

it, but later learned that the two generals who were responsible for 

his torture had also fled to the United States. While he had his 

clinic helping poor people, his hands had been deformed and mangled by his torturers so that he could no longer be a surgeon. 

2 

Mean-while, these two generals responsible for his imprisonment 

were drinking Cuban coffee and buying lottery tickets in Miami. 

The Human Rights Subcommittee has worked to ensure our Government has the authority and resources to bring perpetrators to 

justice and to vindicate the rights of people like Dr. Romagoza. 

Since our hearing 2 years ago, this Subcommittee has produced 

landmark legislation to reform and modernize our human rights 

laws. And I want to thank my colleague Senator Coburn. We do not 

agree on a lot of things, but we sure agree on some of these things. 

And I think that—— 

Senator COBURN. We agree on a lot more than everybody thinks 

we do. 

Chairman DURBIN. A lot more. It kind of surprises people. A real 

odd couple here. 

The Genocide Accountability Act, the Child Soldiers Accountability Act, and the Trafficking in Persons Accountability Act, three 

bills which we co-authored, have all been signed into law. These 

laws give the Government the authority to prosecute perpetrators 

of genocide, child soldier recruitment, and human trafficking. This 

builds on the Anti-Atrocity Alien Deportation Act, important legislation authored by Judiciary Committee Chairman Pat Leahy in 

2004 that allows the Government to deport perpetrators of torture 

and extrajudicial killing. 

I worked with Senator Mikulski and Senator Shelby on the Appropriations Committee to secure funds for the FBI and the Justice 

Department to hire additional agents and attorneys to investigate 

and prosecute human rights abuses. The fiscal year ended last 

week, and I was disappointed to learn that the FBI has not yet 

hired any new agents to investigate human rights violations. 

I want to commend Immigration and Customs Enforcement and 

the Justice Department for their success over the last 2 years in 

bringing human rights violators to justice. 

Since our hearing, ICE has deported a number of human rights 

violators. In addition to these significant cases, I was especially 

pleased to learn that last Friday ICE filed charges against the two 

generals in Miami responsible for the torture of Dr. Romagoza. Dr. 

Coburn and I have been urging the Government to deport the generals since our hearing 2 years ago. I look forward to the day when 

they are no longer in the United States. 

In May, the Government deported John Demjanjuk to Germany, 

where he will be tried for his involvement in the murder of more 

than 29,000 people at the Sobibor extermination camp in Nazi-occupied Poland. I want to commend the Justice Department for prevailing in a long and difficult legal struggle so that he will face the 

judgment that he truly deserves. This case sends a message that 

the United States is determined to bring human rights violators to 

justice, even if decades have passed since they committed their 

crimes. 

In another important victory, last year the Justice Department 

obtained the first ever Federal conviction for a human rights offense. Chuckie Taylor, the son of former Liberian president Charles 

Taylor, was sentenced to 97 years in prison for committing torture 

in Liberia. 

3 

This was a groundbreaking case, but one case is not enough. We 

must ask ourselves why so many human rights abusers are still 

able to find safe haven in the United States of America. 

Unfortunately, there are still legal loopholes that allow human 

rights violators to escape accountability. For example, under current law, perpetrators of crimes against humanity who find safe 

haven in our country cannot be prosecuted. So Marko Boskic, who 

participated in the Srebrenica massacre in Bosnia and was living 

in Massachusetts, was charged with visa fraud, rather than crimes 

against humanity. Earlier this year, I introduced the Crimes 

Against Humanity Act, which would make it a violation of U.S. law 

to commit a crime against humanity. I look forward to working 

with my colleagues to pass this bill. 

Our Government should also use existing authority and resources more efficiently to increase the likelihood that human 

rights violators will be held accountable. Senator Coburn and I introduced the Human Rights Enforcement Act, which would combine the two offices in the Department of Justice with jurisdiction 

over human rights violations. 

I was pleased to learn that the Justice Department is planning 

such a consolidation. 

We have made great progress in the last 2 years, but there is a 

lot more to do. The United States is still that city on the hill. The 

world is watching us closely. When we bring human rights violators to justice, foreign governments are spurred into action, victims 

take heart, and future perpetrators may think twice. 

I now want to recognize my friend and colleague on this Committee, Senator Coburn, for an opening statement. Then we will 

turn to our witnesses. 

STATEMENT OF HON. TOM COBURN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM 

THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA 

Senator COBURN. Well, thank you, Senator Durbin, and I thank 

the witnesses for being here. This is an issue of prime importance, 

and you can see, when Senator Durbin and I can work and accomplish through our colleagues in the Senate and the House, what 

has happened over the last 2 years. 

I have a statement for the record that I would like for it to be 

accepted. 

Also, in reviewing our testimony 2 years ago, one of the things 

that we did not see was what is the estimated number. I am not 

sure we got a handle on that, the number of people that are here 

that fall under this definition. And so I would like to hear about 

that. I am glad that we have both the FBI and the State Department here today because I think that gives us the complement that 

we need in addressing the problem. 

The other thing I would note is I did not think anybody could be 

any worse than the Bush administration on timeliness. But 7 

o’clock is when we got the last testimony last night, and that may 

not be the witnesses’ problems, but it certainly is a problem for me 

if I am going to prepare for a hearing. With me being on five major 

committees, it is difficult. And I know that may be an OMB issue, 

but I would appreciate your taking it back. This hearing has been 

noticed for a while, and we should not have to get testimony at 7 

4 

o’clock last night when it violates our rules. And if I were Chairman, I would have canceled the hearing and we would have had 

the time to read more thoroughly the testimony. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Coburn appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman DURBIN. Thank you very much. 

We are going to turn to our witnesses for opening statements. 

Each witness will have 5 minutes, and their complete written 

statements will be made part of the record. I would like to ask the 

witnesses now if they would please stand and take an oath. 

Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give is the 

truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God? 

Mr. BREUER. I do. 

Mr. MORTON. I do. 

Mr. DONAHUE. I do. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I do. 

Chairman DURBIN. Let the record reflect that all the witnesses 

have answered in the affirmative. 

Our first witness, Lanny Breuer, is Assistant Attorney General 

of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, where he oversees 

the two Justice Department offices responsible for prosecuting 

human rights violators. Previously, Mr. Breuer was a partner in 

the law firm of Covington & Burling and special counsel to President Clinton. He received a B.A. and J.D. from Columbia University. 

Mr. Breuer, when we first met after your nomination, you told 

me prosecuting human rights violators was personal for you because your parents were Holocaust survivors. I understand that 

your mother, Lilo Breuer, is here with you today and that she is 

commemorating two special anniversaries. Today is her 89th birthday, and 70 years ago, she fled Nazi Europe after losing both of her 

parents in the Holocaust. 

Mr. Breuer, would you please introduce your mother? 

Mr. BREUER. Mr. Chairman, thank you. And here is my mother, 

Lilo Breuer. And you are right, Senator, this is actually her birthday today. 

[Applause.] 

Chairman DURBIN. Mrs. Breuer, what an honor it is to have you 

here today, and I am sure you are proud of your son. 

Mr. BREUER. Thank you. 

Chairman DURBIN. We are delighted that you are here. 

I also want to recognize and thank the following Justice Department officials for their dedication to prosecuting human rights violators: Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein, Office 

of Special Investigations Director Eli Rosenbaum, and the Domestic 

Security Section Chief Teresa McHenry. 

Mr. Breuer, thank you for joining us today, and the floor is 

yours. 

STATEMENT OF LANNY A. BREUER, ASSISTANT ATTORNEY 

GENERAL, CRIMINAL DIVISION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. BREUER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

5 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Coburn, Senator Franken, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the 

continuing efforts of the Department of Justice to pursue justice on 

behalf of the victims of human rights violations and war crimes. 

Today I would like to update the Subcommittee on some of the 

Department’s major human rights law enforcement activities and 

accomplishments since we last presented testimony before the Subcommittee and on our plans to strengthen further the Department’s 

already extremely robust enforcement program. 

As you know, we pursue our human rights on multiple fronts. 

The first of these is located at our borders where the U.S. Government attempts to prevent human rights violators from ever entering the United States. Even after perpetrators have gained entry 

into the United States, however, we have a wide range of tools at 

our disposal to bring them to justice, including criminal prosecution 

for substantive human rights violations, criminal prosecution for 

other offenses, immigration litigation including denaturalization 

and removal, and cooperation with our foreign partners to ensure 

that justice can be done when a suspect has been extradited or removed. 

We have had successes along all of these fronts, and I would like 

to highlight just a few for you. 

Last year, we secured the first ever conviction under the U.S. 

torture statute in the case of Roy Belfast, also known as ‘‘Chuckie 

Taylor,’’ son of former Liberian dictator Charles Taylor. Belfast was 

sentenced to 97 years in prison. 

In May of this year, the Department, along with our investigative partners, obtained the conviction of former army soldier Steven 

D. Green on 16 counts, including premeditated murder and aggravated sexual abuse arising out of the rape of a 14-year-old Iraqi 

girl and the murder of the girl and the murder of her entire family 

in Iraq. Green was sentenced to five concurrent terms of life imprisonment. 

And, finally, on May 11th of this year, John Demjanjuk was removed to Germany by ICE agents. Immediately upon arrival in 

Germany, he was arrested and charged as an accessory to the murders of more than 29,000 Jews in the Sobibor extermination center 

in Nazi-occupied Poland. 

These and all of our successes would not be possible without 

close coordination. The Department works closely with our friends 

and colleagues at ICE and the FBI and the State Department and 

our valued partners in nongovernmental organizations to ensure 

that we use all available tools to the U.S. Government. Moreover, 

we are actively engaged with our foreign law enforcement partners 

to ensure that the U.S. and the global community are adequately 

equipped to pursue violators through extradition, mutual legal assistance requests, international training assistance, and capacity 

building. 

Although the Department is proud of all our efforts to prosecute 

human rights violators and build global capacity to address these 

atrocities, we can and will do more to pursue justice and achieve 

deterrence in these cases. We have reviewed the Human Rights 

Enforcement Act of 2009, which, Mr. Chairman, you and Senator 

Coburn have introduced, and which would combine the two offices 

6 

in the Criminal Division with jurisdiction over human rights violations to create a new consolidated and streamlined Human Rights 

Enforcement Section. 

I myself, as I promised I would, have recently completed a comprehensive review of the Criminal Division’s efforts in human 

rights enforcement. While no structural reform can take place without the approval of the Office of Management and Budget and notification to the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, based 

on my review I have recommended to the Attorney General that already outstanding efforts in this area would be enhanced by a 

merger of the Domestic Security Section and the Office of Special 

Investigations into a new section with responsibility for human 

rights enforcement, MEJA and SMTJ cases, and alien smuggling 

and related matters. That new section would be called the ‘‘Human 

Rights and Special Prosecutions Section.’’ The Attorney General 

has indicated his support for this change and the Department’s 

strong commitment to enforcing human rights, and we expect to 

move forward on this. I truly believe that the new section will take 

our already outstanding human rights enforcement program to 

even greater heights. 

Mr. Chairman, as you have pointed out, I personally am extraordinarily committed to these kinds of cases. I believe they are in my 

DNA. And the Department of Justice is firmly committed to ensuring that no human rights violator or war criminal ever again finds 

safe haven in the United States. And we look forward to working 

with you to achieve that goal. 

I thank you for this opportunity to testify and would be pleased 

to take all your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Breuer appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman DURBIN. Thank you, Mr. Breuer. 

Our next witness is John Morton, Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. He oversees the Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Unit, the DHS 

office responsible for investigating human rights violators. Previously, Mr. Morton served in the Justice Department’s Criminal 

Division as Acting Chief of the Domestic Security Section and Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General, where he focused on 

human rights prosecutions. He has also served as an Assistant U.S. 

Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia, and is a graduate of 

the University of Virginia Law School. 

Since the Human Rights Subcommittee’s inception in January 

2007, we have worked closely with Mr. Morton, who has advised 

us on human rights investigations and prosecutions. We thank you 

for your valuable assistance. 

I also want to recognize and thank the following ICE officials for 

their commitment to denying safe haven to human rights violators: 

Erik Barnett, Mona Ragheb, Tom Annello, and Rick Butler. Mr. 

Barnett also worked as a detailee on my Judiciary Committee staff, 

and it is nice that he is here today. 

Mr. Morton, we look forward to your testimony. 

7 

STATEMENT OF JOHN T. MORTON, ASSISTANT SECRETARY 

FOR IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. MORTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

Coburn, and Senator Franken. Thank you very much for inviting 

me to this hearing and for the opportunity to present Immigration 

and Customs Enforcement’s recent efforts to hold human rights 

violators accountable and to deny them safe haven in the United 

States. 

As the primary criminal investigative arm of the Department of 

Homeland Security, ICE remains firmly committed to this mission, 

and you can be assured that I will personally promote aggressive 

human rights enforcement during my time as Assistant Secretary. 

The human rights program at ICE, while young, is healthy and 

growing. Since fiscal year 2004, ICE has successfully removed more 

than 300 suspected or known human rights violators from the 

United States. As I speak, we are pursuing more than 180 human 

rights-related investigations—investigations which could ultimately 

support criminal or civil charges. 

In addition, we have more than 1,000 cases in immigration proceedings. These removal cases are at various stages of investigation 

and litigation and involve individuals known or suspected to have 

been involved in human rights violations in over 95 different countries. 

Let me highlight our commitment to this important work by addressing two cases of longstanding concern for this Committee—the 

cases that the Chairman just mentioned—that of Carlos Eugenio 

Vides-Casanova and Jose Guillermo Garcia. As the Subcommittee 

knows quite well, these two gentlemen are former Salvadoran defense ministers who now reside in the United States as lawful permanent residents and were found civilly liable for torture in Federal court in 2006. And while I cannot discuss the details of our 

efforts against these two men, I can confirm what the Chairman 

said today, which is we have charged these two individuals; we 

have put them in proceedings; we are going to try to remove them 

from the United States; and there are pending removal proceedings 

in Florida. We are going to move smartly on those two cases. 

Let me also briefly highlight the cooperation in a few cases—just 

to let the Chairman and the members of the Committee know that 

there really is a pretty strong sense of partnership in this particular area and a recognition that there is a need to get to work. 

First, the case of Chuckie Taylor. While it is only one case, it was 

a very, very important case, because it set the tone for what I hope 

is going to be aggressive enforcement in the future. It also represented an extraordinary level of cooperation between ICE and the 

FBI—the two investigative agencies involved—and an extremely 

strong commitment from the Department of Justice in the form of 

the Criminal Division and the U.S. Attorney’s Office. 

Next, John Demjanjuk—again, referred to by the chairman—a 

tremendous effort by OSI at the Department of Justice over literally decades to see that this gentleman ultimately saw justice, 

even at the end of his life, for some horrific crimes in Nazi Germany. I am very pleased that ICE was able to support the ultimate 

removal effort. And with some difficulty, as everyone knows, we ulVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:10 Jan 06, 2012 Jkt 071853 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\GPO\HEARINGS\71853.TXT SJUD1 PsN: CMORC
8 

timately were able to remove him to Germany where he faces justice at long last. 

Finally, the case of Carlos de Graca Lopes, a citizen of Cape 

Verde, who entered the United States on a fraudulently obtained 

visitor’s visa. An indictment was issued against him in his home 

country for various crimes, including the torture of prisoners that 

were in his care. He fled; he entered the United States. ICE agents 

arrested him; the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Boston charged him 

with 14 counts of visa fraud, false statements, and perjury. He recently pled guilty. He is completing his term in Federal prison, at 

which point we intend to remove him to Cape Verde where he faces 

prosecution for torture. 

Our recent efforts include more than casework, however. Let me 

just briefly note that we have established last year a pilot project 

to create a human rights violators and war crimes center. I will not 

belabor the point, but just to let the Chairman and the Committee 

know that I have made that permanent, and we are going to staff 

it appropriately. We have a total of 23 people now in headquarters—agents, attorneys, and historians—devoted to the work of 

the center, and I am looking very hard at how within the existing 

resources we can continue to augment that effort, so that is a work 

in progress. 

My time is coming short here, so let me close with two things. 

First, I want to let the Committee know how much I support the 

recent decision that Mr. Breuer has announced to merge OSI and 

DSS. As someone who worked in DSS for a long time in the Criminal Division and has worked very closely with OSI, I know these 

are two very proud institutions. And I am very confident that the 

combination of those two institutions is going to lead to a much 

stronger whole. I can tell you without any question that the merger 

of those two institutions is going to lead to a much better and closer worker relationship with ICE. We are committed to investigating the cases that the Department of Justice charges. 

Let me also say how much I appreciate your leadership on these 

important issues. I congratulate you both on the enactment of the 

Child Soldiers Accountability Act, the Genocide Accountability Act, 

and the Trafficking Victims Act. I can say with all sincerity that 

the cause of human rights enforcement and accountability worldwide has been greatly advanced by the creation of this Subcommittee and by its work. 

Let me also thank the Subcommittee for the professional conduct 

of its staff. They are a pleasure to deal with and very committed 

to the Subcommittee’s work. It is very nice to be in a situation in 

Washington in which you have highly motivated and professional 

staff working with our staff in the executive branch. 

I thank you and I look forward to answering any questions you 

may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Morton appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman DURBIN. Thanks, Mr. Morton. 

Our next witness, David Donahue, is here to represent the State 

Department. Mr. Donahue is the Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Visa Services in the Bureau of Consular Affairs. Previously, he was 

Director of the Office of Policy Coordination of Public Affairs in the 

9 

Bureau of Consular Affairs. He has served in the State Department 

for over 25 years. Mr. Donahue graduated from St. Meinrad College in Indiana—on whose campus I once camped out as a Boy 

Scout. 

[Laughter.] 

Chairman DURBIN. Mr. Donahue, thank you for—— 

Mr. DONAHUE. It has never been the same since. 

Chairman DURBIN. Never been the same. Mr. Donahue, thank 

you for joining us. Please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF DAVID T. DONAHUE, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR VISA SERVICES, BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. DONAHUE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 

Coburn, and Senator Franken. I am pleased to be here today to discuss the matter of visas and human rights violators. 

Within the Department of State, the Bureau of Democracy, 

Human Rights, and Labor has the overall lead on human rights 

issues. Information on human rights violators is gathered by Foreign Service personnel at our embassies abroad. I am here to discuss the role of the Bureau of Consular Affairs, which issues and 

denies visas according to statute using information obtained 

through a visa interview and database checks. 

Our consular officers at over 200 visa processing posts review applications for over 8 million potential travelers each year. They 

take their roles as the first line of defense in preventing ineligible 

persons or those who may want to harm us from traveling to the 

United States very seriously. Most of our applicants are legitimate, 

and those who are not are denied visas. 

Determinations of eligibility are based on law. As the honorable 

members are aware, there is currently no broad-based visa ineligibility for human rights violators per se; however, there are several 

visa ineligibilities related to human rights concerns, including 

those for foreign government officials who have committed particularly severe violations of religious freedom; for individuals who 

have committed or conspired to commit a human-trafficking offense; for individuals involved in Nazi-related persecutions; for individuals who have engaged in genocide or for individuals who 

have committed acts of torture or extrajudicial killings; and for individuals who have engaged in the recruitment or use of a child 

soldier. 

Presidential proclamations under Section 212(f) of the Immigration and Nationality Act that suspend entry to the United States 

of those who would be detrimental to U.S. interests have been effective in denying visas to human rights violators from Burma, 

Cuba, Zimbabwe, and the Balkans—among other countries. 

Consular officers receive training on all visa ineligibilities, including those related to human rights violations. Consular officers 

use three basic tools to apply the law during a visa process: the application form itself, the interview, and interagency databases. 

Our paper and electronic applications ask whether an applicant 

has committed torture, genocide, extrajudicial or political killings, 

violations of religious freedom, Nazi-related persecutions, or other 

crimes and acts of violence. We are working to add a question 

10 

about child soldier recruitment. Applicants must answer all questions prior to interview. 

After reviewing the visa application and applying their understanding of local history and society, consular officers may issue or 

deny a visa or use the interview to ask questions that may lead to 

or confirm a suspicion of ineligibility. 

Finally, perhaps the most effective method to detect human 

rights violators is to check an applicant against interagency databases. All applicants are checked against the State Department 

Consular Lookout and Support System, CLASS database, which includes many records from the Department of Homeland Security’s 

Traveler Enforcement Compliance System, TECS, as well as the 

Department of Homeland Security’s Automated Biographic Identification System, IDENT, our own facial recognition system, and the 

FBI’s Criminal Justice Information System. 

We are working with the Department’s Bureau of Democracy, 

Human Rights, and Labor to ensure that all records with personal 

identifying information in its Leahy amendment vetting database— 

this is called INVEST—will be incorporated into our CLASS database. INVEST, which is being developed now, will contain all data 

available to the Department on Leahy amendment vetting results. 

Consular officers depend on human rights officials abroad, regional bureaus, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and 

Labor, the Departments of Homeland Security and Justice, and the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation to develop information that can be 

entered into CLASS to inform our consular officers of possible ineligibilities. We recently entered 500 names from ICE into our databases of suspected human rights violators. 

Our CLASS database has lookouts for nine individuals based on 

possible participation in a severe violation of religious freedoms, 

330 individuals based on possible involvement in trafficking in persons, 12,812 based on possible involvement in Nazi-related persecutions, 3,000 individuals based on possible involvement in genocide, 

and over 700 individuals based on possible involvement in torture 

and extrajudicial killings. 

Mr. Chairman, Senator Franken, I know your Subcommittee has 

grappled with this issue for many years. Your leadership on this 

topic is admirable and inspiring. We have denied visas to hundreds 

of human rights violators, but we believe we can do more, and I 

am dedicated to ensuring that anyone who has committed violations that would make him ineligible or inadmissible does not receive a visa. 

As noted, we are looking forward to the exchange of data between INVEST and CLASS. I am instructing consular section 

chiefs to maintain regular contacts with our human rights reporting officers abroad to ensure that anyone identified by these officers as potential human rights violators has a lookout in CLASS. 

We will also remind our consular officers of the available tools to 

deny visas to human rights violators. 

With this I conclude my testimony and welcome your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Donahue appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman DURBIN. Thank you, Mr. Donahue. 

11 

Our final witness is Arthur Cummings, representing the FBI, 

where he serves as Executive Assistant Director in the National 

Security Branch. He was previously the Deputy Assistant Director 

of the Counter Terrorism Division. He has served in the FBI for 

over 20 years. He is a graduate of the University of California at 

San Diego. 

I do want to note for the record, as Senator Coburn has, that it 

puts the Subcommittee at a distinct disadvantage when we do not 

receive your testimony until 6:30 p.m. the day before. We have not 

had the time we need to reflect on it and to prepare the kinds of 

questions which I really think should have been prepared for this 

hearing for your important agency. 

I also want to recognize Paul Tiao, Special Counsel to FBI Director Robert Mueller, who like Erik Barnett, has the disadvantage of 

having served on my staff. He was a detailee on my Judiciary Committee staff. 

We appreciate, Mr. Cummings, your coming here today and 

please proceed with your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF ARTHUR M. CUMMINGS, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SECURITY BRANCH, FEDERAL 

BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, WASHINGTON, DC 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. 

Good morning, Ranking Member Coburn and Senator Franken. I 

am pleased to be here with you today to discuss the FBI’s efforts 

as they relate to human rights enforcement. For its part, the FBI 

is committed to supplementing international communities’ efforts 

to advance human rights. 

Our mission is to identify human rights violators in the United 

States and bring them to justice for violations committed within 

and outside the United States. We investigate violators of both 

human rights and traditional criminal violations. 

Since 1988 Congress has enacted a series of statutes that have 

expanded the FBI’s investigative jurisdiction of human rights 

issues in the international arena. Executive Order 13107, which 

outlined the implementation of human rights treaties, further expanded our responsibilities. 

Although our authority in this area has grown with the enactment of the aforementioned laws, our reach remains limited by 

legal restrictions. For example, for many well-known international 

human rights atrocities, the statutes of limitations have run or the 

atrocities took place before the laws were enacted, thereby implicating the ex post facto clause of the Constitution. Nonetheless, the 

FBI has had success in bringing human rights violators to justice 

and expects to have success in the future as well. 

The FBI supports the overarching U.S. Government principle 

that respect for human rights helps to secure peace and to deter 

aggression, promote the rule of law, combat crime and corruption, 

strengthen democracies, and prevent humanitarian crises. With additional funding for human rights enforcements provided by Congress in fiscal year 2009, we are expanding our investigative efforts 

in this area and further establishing a human rights offenses program. 

12 

As part of this program the FBI will utilize four key strategies— 

joint investigations, training, intelligence collection, and assistance 

to international investigative bodies—to fulfill our commitment to 

the enforcement of human rights laws and the promotion of human 

rights principles. 

First, utilizing rule-of-law principles, the FBI will together with 

our domestic and international law enforcement partners investigate priority human rights cases using established investigative 

techniques and protocols. 

Second, the FBI will train its own personnel and those of our foreign counterparts to ensure that human rights investigations are 

conducted in a manner consistent with rule-of-law principles. This 

training will strengthen our investigative efforts and promote institutionalized respect for human rights. 

Third, the FBI will collect domestic and international intelligence 

on human rights violators and violations through its 56 field offices, 60 foreign legal attache ́s, network of sources within and outside the United States, and relationships with domestic and international law enforcement partners. 

Fourth, in response to requests from international and foreign investigative bodies, the FBI will continue to provide assistance that 

advances efforts to enforce human rights laws in foreign and international legal fora. The FBI has personnel at FBI headquarters 

dedicated to the management of its human rights offenses program. 

A program manager will ensure that the FBI’s domestic field offices and foreign legal attache ́s are fully engaged in advancing our 

human rights mission. 

In addition, FBI plans to dedicate a number of additional personnel at headquarters to support the program. With this dedicated 

corps of personnel, the FBI intends to issue human rights intelligence requirements to its 56 domestic field offices and its 60 foreign legal attache ́s. We will develop performance measures and 

hold periodic reviews to ensure that agents and analysts in the 

field are actively addressing human rights cases. 

We also plan to identify human rights coordinators in each office 

and work with the Department of Justice’s Criminal Division to 

conduct training that will enable us to develop a body of experts 

who are dedicated to the investigation and prosecution of human 

rights abuses. 

Eventually, the FBI believes that based on its domain analysis 

it will be in a position to forward deploy dedicated assistant legal 

attache ́s in countries with a history of human rights violations that 

fall within the scope of U.S. human rights laws. These ALATs 

would be expected to establish contacts with human rights officials 

in the embassies and local nongovernmental organizations, collect 

intelligence on human rights abuses, and support human rights investigations. 

Chairman Durbin, Ranking Member Coburn, and Senator 

Franken, I appreciate this opportunity to come before you today to 

share the work of the FBI, what we were doing and what we plan 

to do in the future, to address human rights violations. I am certainly happy to answer your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cummings appears as a submission for the record.] 

13 

Chairman DURBIN. Thank you, Mr. Cummings. 

We will now turn to questions for the witnesses, and each Senator will have 7 minutes. 

I would like to ask Mr. Morton—I am glad that there is an effort 

afoot to hold these two generals who are responsible for the torture 

of Dr. Romagoza accountable. While removing them from the 

United States is important, it is not the same as prosecuting them 

for human rights crimes. Unfortunately, it is not possible to prosecute the two generals for Dr. Romagoza’s torture because it took 

place before our torture law was enacted. 

Now, is it your understanding, Mr. Morton, that these individuals will be prosecuted in El Salvador? 

Mr. MORTON. It is my understanding that we are going to inform 

the Salvadorans of what we are doing, work with them to come— 

make sure that they receive these two gentlemen—assuming we 

are successful, obviously; we have a removal proceeding first to go 

through—and that we are going to be fully cooperative with them 

in sharing all the information and evidence that we have. 

As to whether or not they will ultimately prosecute these two individuals, I cannot say. 

Chairman DURBIN. Does your agency consider the likelihood a 

human rights violator will be prosecuted upon return to his home 

country when deciding whether to remove him? 

Mr. MORTON. We do. Part of that calculation comes in up front 

with—I mean, we look at the priorities this way: wherever we can 

bring a substantive offense ourselves working with Mr. Breuer and 

the U.S. Attorney’s Offices at the Department of Justice, that is 

where we want to start. 

As you have already alluded to and some of the other witnesses 

have alluded to, the law as it presently stands does not allow us 

to do that. Where we can, then, we have uniform priority on at 

least removing the people from the United States, and we want to 

promote prosecution in the home countries if prosecution is not possible here. 

Chairman DURBIN. Mr. Cummings, I am disappointed the FBI 

has not yet hired any agents to investigate human rights violations 

with the funds we specifically provided you in the fiscal year 2009 

appropriation. I would like for you to explain this delay. And I understand that currently there are no FBI agents dedicated to investigating human rights violations. I would like to know if that is correct. 

I also understand that the FBI currently has only six human 

rights cases while ICE in comparison has over 1,000 human rights 

cases. How do you explain this discrepancy? 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Senator, you are correct in that there are only 

six human rights cases currently being worked by the FBI within 

those categories. The fact that we have not hired additional personnel does not in any way imply or state that the work is not 

being done. 

Currently, our human rights program, the torture, genocide, 

child soldier side of that, outside of the human trafficking work 

that we do, is a reactive program. We receive referrals. The great 

work that ICE does—we receive referrals from ICE, we receive 

14 

sometimes complaints from citizens and sometimes actually information we get from the State Department. 

Those referrals are acted upon, each and every one, looking for 

that which would satisfy the elements of the crime and allow us 

to work that. So while there is not a single case agent working just 

human rights violations, there are agents working it in a number 

of different areas. 

It is not a program that stands by itself yet. We are working in 

that direction. We are working to move from what has been traditionally a reactive program, case-based, referral-based program, to 

that which will be an intelligence-led program, meaning what we 

are looking to do with your $1.5 million is to actually build the program. That is undergirded by collection in those areas where these 

atrocities happen, where we will gain that intelligence, where we 

will then begin to collect information that will inform those cases. 

As it stands right now, the cases are informed by referrals. 

Chairman DURBIN. And let me follow up on that. If I understand 

correctly, the FBI plans to use these resources that Congress provided to hire assistant legal attache ́s who will be based in foreign 

countries. Can you explain to the Committee how FBI officials 

based in foreign countries will help identify human rights violators 

in our country? 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Yes, I can. The atrocities, the witnesses, most of 

the information regarding those individuals that may be in the 

United States will start with the countries overseas. The intelligence that leads us to either a witness or a victim or a perpetrator will almost always be in those foreign countries. We have to 

understand where those are, where those atrocities took place. We 

have to fully understand the collection environment there. How do 

we gain that information? 

In other words, right now we work on a reactive pace. That is 

not, I do not believe, going to satisfy your Committee. It certainly 

does not satisfy me and it would not satisfy the Director of the FBI 

if we are going to expand this program, and we have committed to 

doing so. 

So as we expand the program, if we do not have the reach overseas, we do not understand the intelligence that will force us to 

gain that information, we will not increase our caseload, and we 

will not on our own find those perpetrators, witnesses, or victims. 

Chairman DURBIN. Mr. Donahue, Assistant Secretary Morton 

testified about ICE’s efforts to bring to justice Juan Rivera-Rondon 

and Telmo Hurtado-Hurtado, two Peruvians who led the 

Accomarca massacre of 67 unarmed men, women, and children. Rivera-Rondon was removed to Peru, where he is in custody awaiting 

trial, while Hurtado is awaiting extradition. 

Retired Lieutenant General Jose Daniel Williams Zapata, who 

commanded Rivera-Rondon and Hurtado, has been detailed by the 

Peruvian Government to the Inter-American Defense Board, which 

is based right here in Washington, DC. In contrast to his subordinates who are facing extradition and trial for participation in a 

massacre, Williams Zapata, their commander, is living freely in the 

United States and was reportedly issued a G visa by the State Department. 

15 

I believe our staff notified you that we might ask about this case. 

Why is Williams Zapata allowed to remain in the United States, 

unlike the two men under his command at the time of the massacre? Will the State Department revoke his visa? 

Mr. DONAHUE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The visas for Mr. Zapata, both his visitor visa and his G–1 visa, have been revoked. I 

am not sure where they are in the process of removal, but he is 

no longer in the United States under a visa. 

Mr. BREUER. I can address that a little bit further, Mr. Chairman. We worked closely with the State Department. They agreed 

to revoke his visa, and he has left the country. 

Chairman DURBIN. Thank you. 

Senator Coburn. 

Senator COBURN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you— 

and, again, happy birthday, Mrs. Breuer. Happy birthday, Mrs 

Breuer. 

Mrs. Breuer. Thank you very much. 

Senator COBURN. Mr. Chairman, I have a several-page list of 

questions that I would like to submit to the record, and if you all 

take 2 or 3 weeks to get them back to us, that is fine. 

[The questions appear as questions and answers for the record.] 

Senator COBURN. I want to go in a couple of directions. One, Mr. 

Morton, there are some significant human rights abuses occurring 

on our southern border today with the people that are transporting 

foreign nationals in, and I do not know if you are familiar with the 

history and the information about the rape trees in southern Arizona and Texas. If you are not, you should become aware of it. 

But, you know, there is not a greater civil rights violation than 

to say you are transporting somebody to freedom and then rape 

them along the way and hang their underwear on trees, and the 

fact that that is occurring because we have two agencies that are 

not working together is something that I will detail in specific 

questions to you. But it is something that not only should we be 

prosecuting, but we should be doing the things to prevent it 

which—and that is in no way a reflection on ICE, I want to say. 

I think the problem is on the other side of that, and I have talked 

with former Senator Salazar, Secretary Salazar about that and 

hope that we have some resolution. 

But it is an important question because we lack credibility when 

we, within our own Government, cannot stop violation of human 

rights on our border, and yet we are proclaiming we are going to 

prosecute everybody else that is doing it outside who comes here. 

So it is an important message of consistency that we need to solve. 

Mr. Breuer, how many prosecutions have been brought under the 

new Title 18 authority relating to child soldiers which we enacted 

in the last Congress? Do you have any data on that? 

Mr. BREUER. Senator, as of today—of course, this was enacted in 

October of 2008—there have been none yet. 

Senator COBURN. OK. So do we have cases underway? 

Mr. BREUER. What I can say, Senator, is that we are aggressively 

pursuing cases with respect to all the human rights statutes, and, 

obviously, we look very closely at this kind of conduct, which is, of 

course, reprehensible; and if we have a provable cases that we can 

bring, we absolutely will. 

16 

Senator COBURN. OK. Mr. Morton testified that many of the offenses that are charged—visa fraud, naturalization fraud, false 

statements—carry only light sentences and do not have much of a 

deterrent effect. Do you agree with that, number one? And if, in 

fact, that is the case, when those charges are the only option, does 

that affect DOJ’s position as far as pursuing a case? And, finally, 

what would you recommend we do about it if that is the case? 

Mr. BREUER. OK. Senator, I think it is fair to say that when we 

look at human rights cases, we employ whatever statutes we can 

to bring them. So we may bring statutes that are not 

quintessentially considered human rights statues, but we will bring 

the full panoply of cases. 

And you are absolutely right. As my friend Assistant Secretary 

Morton said, we do have disabilities. Some can be because of statute of limitations. Some can be because of jurisdictional grounds. 

So that is the disability. It is not a reason we do not pursue the 

case. 

In fact, as the Office of Special Investigation has shown through 

its glorious history, we will pursue a case if it is a righteous case 

to bring, regardless of what the ultimate punishment is, because 

we want to make a statement. And in some cases it may simply 

be that the person can no longer stay in the United States. 

I would be delighted to work with your staff in figuring out in 

certain cases whether we need to enhance penalties or frankly, 

Senator, whether in certain circumstances it may make sense to increase the statute of limitations, both of which would empower us 

greater. 

Senator COBURN. And there is a statute of limitations presently 

on visa fraud and—— 

Mr. BREUER. There is, Senator. There is a statute of limitations 

with respect to visa fraud. I believe it is 5 years. The question is 

about how you can—how you measure that. But it is a 5-year statute. 

Senator COBURN. Thank you. 

One other question, and this really does not fall, Mr. Breuer, 

under your direct responsibility. We have all these cold civil rights 

cases. And last year or the year before last, we passed the Emmett 

Till Civil Rights Act. And I was wondering if all these researchers 

and historians that you use in collaborating and collecting the data 

in terms of the human rights cases could be cross-utilized so that 

the Justice Department could use that expertise as well in helping 

to solve these unsolved civil rights crimes within our own borders. 

Mr. BREUER. Well, Senator, candidly, I have not thought about 

that. I think that is a terrific suggestion. One of the goals of combining, of course, the two sections into one is to give our historians 

even a greater latitude about the kinds of areas that they can work 

with. I would be happy to speak with you but, more importantly, 

to speak with my colleagues in the Civil Rights Section to see if 

that could be employed. And thank you for that suggestion. 

Senator COBURN. All right. Thank you. 

I think, Mr. Chairman, the rest of my questions are going to be 

going to all the witnesses. I do have one question for Mr. Donahue, 

and then I will finish up. 

17 

Your testimony states that visa applications are referred to agencies in DC. for additional review and a security advisory opinion. 

You say that approximately 260,000 of these SAOs are processed 

every year, and these are generally used for individuals who may 

be ineligible because of human rights offenses. 

When cases are referred for an SAO, how much time does it take 

to issue the final opinion, on average? Just a guess. 

Mr. DONAHUE. Thank you for the question. They vary greatly. 

Many SAOs can be resolved in a matter of weeks, usually, if you 

do the—including all the interagency vetting. If it becomes a difficult case where there is more research that needs to be done— 

there is nothing conclusive, there are files held by different agencies. We want to check with our own bureaus of Democracy, 

Human Rights and Labor. We want to check with the embassy. 

They can take a longer amount of time. They can take months. But 

most cases are resolved in about—within a month now. 

Senator COBURN. How many of those 260,000 result in denial? 

Mr. DONAHUE. I do not have a figure. I can get that for you. 

Senator COBURN. Can you? OK. Well, I will submit all those. 

[The information appears as a submission for the record.] 

Senator COBURN. Mr. Chairman, I again want to thank you. I 

have to be on the floor for Mr. Perez’s nomination. I will submit 

these questions for the record, and I appreciate your having it. And 

I apologize for not being able to stay for the rest of the hearing. 

Chairman DURBIN. Thanks, Senator Coburn. There will be written questions sent to all the witnesses. I hope you can respond to 

them in a timely way. I thank Senator Coburn for his participation. 

I want to make a statement for the record. I am about to recognize Senator Feingold. This is not a violation of the human rights 

of Senator Franken, who was here earlier, but it turns out that 

Senator Feingold actually came before you did. And that is the tradition of the Committee. It is no reflection. And because of his prodigious seniority and early* arrival, I am now going to recognize 

Senator Feingold. 

Senator FRANKEN. That is OK. We had a good outcome on the 

football game last night. 

Senator FEINGOLD. Oh, I knew it. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator FEINGOLD. Dick, I know you are trying to protect me, but 

that is a little painful. 

I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do want to commend you for your 

leadership on human rights issues, however. 

Significant gains have been made in recent years to increase accountability for human rights abuses. That said, we still have a 

long way to go on this topic. We have made tremendous progress 

in the last 2 years toward passing legislation that will ensure adequate laws are in place to bring perpetrators of serious crimes to 

justice. 

But the executive branch has not done an adequate job of investigating and prosecuting perpetrators under these laws. As I know 

was mentioned, the successful prosecution of Chuckie Taylor was 

an important milestone, and I hope it will send a message to perpetrators of human rights abuses that the United States will not 

turn a blind eye toward torture and other egregious human rights 

18 

violations, but it is absolutely unacceptable that this is the only 

human rights case that has been filed by the DOJ. 

I am disappointed that the United States has not done more to 

ensure that human rights abusers are held accountable for their 

crimes. According to DHS, in 2008 potentially more than 1,000 

abusers from 89 different countries had settled in our country, and 

yet we have only had one prosecution for a human rights offense. 

In order to hold these perpetrators accountable, there needs to be 

more coordination and cooperation among DOJ, ICE, and the FBI. 

I also think that the Department of State needs to be more 

proactive when assessing visa applications to ensure that we are 

not admitting individuals from high-conflict countries who may be 

wanted for human rights abuses. 

The failure to prosecute those guilty of torture, genocide, and 

other war crimes makes it more likely that such crimes will be repeated. And I have long believed that the protection of basic 

human rights and accountability for human rights abuses must be 

a cornerstone of American foreign policy. It is not enough to give 

lip service to these principles or to simply pass laws that are never 

enforced. We need to make sure that these cases are aggressively 

and proactively investigated and prosecuted. 

By ensuring these human rights violators are punished, we send 

the message that the United States is not a safe haven for abusers 

but, more importantly, that the world will not tolerate genocide, 

torture, or crimes against humanity. And I look forward to seeing 

whether the current administration will take a more proactive approach to address this very important issue, and I hope that this 

hearing will help us find ways to hold more perpetrators accountable for their actions. 

Mr. Morton, when we held a hearing on crimes-against-humanity 

issues, I focused on one example where perpetrators of human 

rights abuses found a safe haven on American soil. In 1984, American church women who had been working with refugees in El Salvador were brutally murdered by members of the Salvadoran National Guard, and in command of these men were two Salvadoran 

generals who bear direct responsibility for this atrocity. These 

same generals that Senator Durbin mentioned in his opening statement are who we are talking about, and you were already questioned about them. 

It is my understanding from your testimony that notices to appear have finally been issued for both generals, and the Department is finally taking steps to remove these individuals from the 

country. 

Now, these individuals have been in the United States for almost 

30 years. Can you explain to me why there has been such a tremendous delay in this case? What procedures are you planning to 

put in place to reduce delays in resolving outstanding human 

rights cases? 

Mr. MORTON. I cannot speak to the 30-year process. What I can 

tell you is that I have been very aware for quite some time about 

these two cases, frankly, in large part because of the work of the 

Committee and the staff. I was aware of them when I was at the 

Department of Justice. And I am now in a position as Assistant 

Secretary to make some determinations on, you know, the people 

19 

that should go into proceedings. And we have been working very 

closely with the Department of Justice. We have put both of these 

gentlemen into proceedings this past Friday. We did so explicitly 

on the grounds that they assisted or otherwise participated in torture in El Salvador. We are not mincing our words, and we are 

going to seek to remove them from the United States. 

Is 30 years too long? Of course it is too long. But we are going 

to do what we can now, and they are in removal proceedings. And, 

you know, it is obviously my hope that the Government prevails. 

Senator FEINGOLD. What about as to procedures to avoid similar 

situations? 

Mr. MORTON. Well, I think the real—while I agree that there is 

a lot of work to be done, I will say I do think a tremendous amount 

has happened in the last 2 years. There is a very, very close working relationship between the Department of Homeland Security 

and the Department of Justice, both FBI and the Criminal Division 

and U.S. Attorney’s Offices. We need to just continue to organize 

ourselves. We need to—the work of the historians at the Department of Justice has been critical to identify these people. We need 

to get them in the databases so that they do not even get a visa 

to come here in the first place. 

We at ICE are going to try to adopt and have adopted some of 

the historian model that is at the Department of Justice to build 

up our own capability. And the people at this table need to meet 

quite regularly. We need to be aggressive. And we just—you know, 

we just do not need things to linger on the books. 

And I can tell you, I know the gentleman to my right quite well. 

I do not know the two gentlemen to my left as well, but I am confident that you are going to see a much more aggressive and 

proactive approach. But we have got to organize ourselves. The 

changes at the Department of Justice I think are going to be helpful. What we are doing at ICE is going to be helpful. And then you 

need to keep calling us up here and asking us tough questions 

about what we are doing. 

Senator FEINGOLD. Mr. Breuer, in January 2008 the Justice Department stated in response to questions regarding prosecutions 

under a theory of command responsibility that the Department has 

not had occasion to consider whether an individual could be criminally prosecuted under the torture statute under a theory of command responsibility. 

Has DOJ now had occasion to re-examine these statutes? What 

is DOJ’s policy regarding prosecution of heads of state and other 

high-ranking members of the military under a theory of command 

responsibility? 

Mr. BREUER. Senator, as you point out, command responsibility 

has not, at least in the criminal context, really been a central tenet 

of American jurisprudence. That is not to say it could not be, but 

it has not in the past. 

It seems to me, though, that these very same cases can probably 

be brought under theories of conspiracy and aiding and abetting. 

I am very willing to look hard at the command responsibility doctrine. I think given our history it is less likely that we will pursue 

that, more likely that we would pursue these very same cases 

through aiding and abetting and conspiracy. 

20 

But it is an issue that I have thought about and we will continue 

to very seriously. 

Chairman DURBIN. Mr. Donahue, the Federal Government expends significant resources removing human rights violators from 

our country. It would obviously be more efficient to stop these individuals from entering in the first place. However, it appears that 

consular officers are handicapped by limited information. 

You testified that CLASS, the consular database, contains information on the involvement of only nine individuals in violation of 

religious freedom, 330 in human trafficking, and 707 in torture or 

extrajudicial killings. By contrast, CLASS includes information on 

12,800 people involved in Nazi-related persecution. 

Unfortunately, many more than nine people around the world 

are involved in violation of religious freedom and more than 330 in 

human trafficking, certainly more than 700 in torture and 

extrajudicial killing. 

Why are these numbers so low? What can the State Department 

do to improve the information about possible human rights violators in their own database so that we can avoid the embarrassment 

of having them settle in the United States and go through the expense and time involved in removing them? 

Mr. DONAHUE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think that is a very 

good question and one that we have been working with as we prepared for this testimony. 

As you have stated the officers are dependent upon the information that is provided to them during the interview and in our databases. I think that, as Mr. Morton has mentioned, we need to work 

together between our different agencies, both within the State Department and within the Justice Department, the FBI, and the Department of Homeland Security, to ensure that all cases that are 

known about, all people that are known about, are added to the 

system so that a person is stopped, that the security advisory opinion is pursued, and a decision is made by people who know the details of these instances. 

But the problem right now I think is that there is not a systematic governmentwide way to do this, and I think we want to work 

to make that happen. 

Chairman DURBIN. Mr. Morton testified about Carlos Lopes, a 

former prison warden from Cape Verde who was recently convicted 

of visa fraud. Lopes obtained a non-immigrant visa while he was 

under indictment for torturing prisoners. How is it possible for 

someone under indictment for torture to obtain a visa to come to 

the United States and what can we do to prevent this? 

Mr. DONAHUE. I do not have details. I know, as Mr. Morton said, 

that it was done under visa fraud, and it may have been that—we 

do not know who he presented himself to be. We also do not know 

when the information was placed into the databases, whether we 

had the negative information in the database at the time of the 

visa interview. 

We can get more information for the Chairman if you would like 

on this particular case. 

Chairman DURBIN. I wish you would. I also understand that a 

report required by Section 556 of the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act of 2006 contained the names of approximately 700 

21 

Colombian army and security service members under investigation 

for human rights abuses. I think we notified you we might ask 

about this. 

Mr. DONAHUE. Right. 

Chairman DURBIN. Was the information in that report about Colombian human rights violators included in the CLASS database 

for consular officers so that for those people seeking visas from Colombia we would check against this list to see if they might be 

human rights violators? 

Mr. DONAHUE. We have checked a number of the names, and 

they are in our database. We continue to check them. One of the 

difficulties with lists like that is they often do not contain any 

other biographical information. 

It is very important in gathering this information that we gather 

dates of birth, places of birth. Otherwise, many, many innocent 

people are held up in their visa application process. So we will continue to work on that list. 

Chairman DURBIN. Thank you. 

Mr. Morton, Kelbessa Negewo, who was accused of serious 

human rights abuses in Ethiopia and had found safe haven in Atlanta, Georgia, was the first person to be charged under Chairman 

Leahy’s Anti-Atrocity Alien Deportation legislation enacted in 2004, 

which made torture and extrajudicial killing grounds for removal 

from the United States. 

How many other individuals have been charged under this law? 

Mr. MORTON. I do not know the answer to that, Mr. Chairman. 

We have brought seven substantive charges under the torture or 

extrajudicial provisions, and we have had five people that we have 

turned around at the border on the same theory. But under the 

specific provision for Mr. Negewo, I do not know and let me get 

back to you on that. 

Chairman DURBIN. Thank you. I would like to ask you, Mr. 

Breuer, and Mr. Cummings: One significant challenge to prosecuting human rights abusers for crimes committed in another 

country is securing and protecting witnesses. What kind of steps 

are we taking to deal with that challenge? 

Mr. BREUER. Mr. Chairman, you are right, it is an extraordinary 

burden. With respect to what we do at the Department of Justice, 

working with our friends at ICE and at the FBI and at State, is 

we—it is very labor intensive. Our own lawyers go out, often to 

very dangerous parts of the world; they meet with the witnesses 

themselves. When we can, we try to bring witnesses to the United 

States. 

But, frankly, Mr. Chairman, it is an extraordinary burden, and 

at times if we do not have the collaboration and cooperation of the 

host country, that poses a remarkable burden. 

I do not think there is an easy answer to it, it is labor intensive 

and it is costly, and some of the great career people behind me 

have worked countless hours in dealing with these very issues. 

It is a case-by-case matter. We work with our friends at ICE and 

the FBI to help us, but there are no easy answers there. 

Chairman DURBIN. I would like to thank all the witnesses for 

coming today and my colleagues for joining us, and as I said, there 

will be some written questions. 

22 

I would like to place in the record written statements from the 

following organizations and individuals: 

Advocates for Human Rights, Center for Justice and Accountability, Center for Victims of Torture, Human Rights First, Human 

Rights USA, Human Rights Watch, and Ambassador David 

Scheffer of Northwestern University Law School. 

[The statements appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman DURBIN. I would also like to enter into the record a 

letter from 30 advocacy organizations in support of the Crimes 

Against Humanity Act. Without objection they’ll be included. 

[The letter appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman DURBIN. If there are no further comments, I am going 

to bring the hearing to a close. As we close it, I would like to acknowledge one person who is here and one who is not, and that, 

of course, would be Mrs. Breuer for joining us and Dr. Romagoza 

for inspiring us in an earlier hearing. They are from different generations and from different parts of the world, but they have a 

great deal in common. They have both survived horrible human 

rights abuses, and they had the courage to flee their homes and 

find sanctuary in our home country, where they became Americans 

and made great contributions. 

We owe it to both of them and countless others like them to ensure that America never provides safe haven to those who violate 

fundamental human rights. From John Demjanjuk who helped 

massacre over 29,000 Jews during World War II to the Salvadoran 

generals responsible for the torture of Dr. Romagoza, we have a responsibility to bring human rights violators to justice. 

I thank you all for helping us in that effort, and this hearing 

stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:07 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Questions and answers and submissions for the record follow.] 

23 


71853.001
24 


71853.002
25 


71853.003
26 


71853.004
27 


71853.005
28 


71853.006
29 


71853.007
30 


71853.008
31 


71853.009
32 


71853.010
33 


71853.011
34 


71853.012
35 


71853.013
36 


71853.014
37 


71853.015
38 


71853.016
39 


71853.017
40 


71853.018
41 


71853.019
42 


71853.020
43 


71853.021
44 


71853.022
45 


71853.023
46 


71853.024
47 


71853.025
48 


71853.026
49 


71853.027
50 


71853.028
51 


71853.029
52 


71853.030
53 


71853.031
54 


71853.032
55 


71853.033
56 


71853.034
57 


71853.035
58 


71853.036
59 


71853.037
60 


71853.038
61 


71853.039
62 


71853.040
63 


71853.041
64 


71853.042
65 


71853.043
66 


71853.044
67 


71853.045
68 


71853.046
69 


71853.047
70 


71853.048
71 


71853.049
72 


71853.050
73 


71853.051
74 


71853.052
75 


71853.053
76 


71853.054
77 


71853.055
78 


71853.056
79 


71853.057
80 


71853.058
81 


71853.059
82 


71853.060
83 


71853.061
84 


71853.062
85 


71853.063
86 


71853.064
87 


71853.065
88 


71853.066
89 


71853.067
90 


71853.068
91 


71853.069
92 


71853.070
93 


71853.071
94 


71853.072
95 


71853.073
96 


71853.074
97 


71853.075
98 


71853.076
99 


71853.077
100 


71853.078
101 


71853.079
102 


71853.080
103 


71853.081
104 


71853.082
105 


71853.083
106 


71853.084
107 


71853.085
108 


71853.086
109 


71853.087
110 


71853.088
111 


71853.089
112 


71853.090
113 


71853.091
114 


71853.092
115 


71853.093
116 


71853.094
117 


71853.095
118 


71853.096
119 


71853.097
120 


71853.098
121 


71853.099
122 


71853.100
123 


71853.101
124 


71853.102
125 


71853.103
126 


71853.104
127 


71853.105
128 

Æ 


71853.106