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) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

88–613 PDF 2003

S. HRG. 107–973

THE DETENTION AND TREATMENT OF HAITIAN

ASYLUM SEEKERS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

OCTOBER 1, 2002

Serial No. J–107–107

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts 

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware 

HERBERT KOHL, Wisconsin 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD, Wisconsin 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

STROM THURMOND, South Carolina 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

JON KYL, Arizona 

MIKE DEWINE, Ohio 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

MITCH MCCONNELL, Kentucky 

BRUCE A. COHEN, Majority Chief Counsel and Staff Director 

SHARON PROST, Minority Chief Counsel 

MAKAN DELRAHIM, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts, Chairman 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

CHARLES E. SCHUMER, New York 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

JOHN EDWARDS, North Carolina 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa 

JON KYL, Arizona 

MIKE DEWINE, Ohio 

MELODY BARNES, Majority Chief Counsel 

STUART ANDERSON, Minority Chief Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Page

Brownback, Hon. Sam, a U.S. Senator from the State of Kansas ....................... 2

Conyers, Hon. John, Jr., a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Michigan [ex officio] ............................................................................................. 7

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 27

Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Massachusetts ... 1

WITNESSES 

Johnson, Stephen C., Policy Analyst for Latin America, Heritage Foundation, 

Washington, D.C. ................................................................................................. 12

Little, Cheryl, Executive Director, Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, 

Miami, Florida ...................................................................................................... 10

Ocean, Marie Jocely, Haitian asylee and former detainee, Miami, Florida ....... 8

Parks, Dina Paul, Executive Director, National Coalition for Haitian Rights, 

New York, New York ........................................................................................... 13

Wenski, Thomas G., Auxiliary Bishop of Miami, Florida, and Chairman, U.S. 

Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Migration, Miami, Florida .... 5

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD 

American Civil Liberties Union, Lida Rodriguez-Taseff, President, MiamiDade County Chapter, Miami, Florida, statement ............................................ 22

American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Oganizations, 

Washington, D.C., statement .............................................................................. 24

Carey-Shuler, Barbara M., County Commissioner, Miami-Dade County Board 

of County Commissioners, Miami, Florida, statement ...................................... 25

Department of Justice, Daniel J. Bryant, Assistant Attorney General, Office 

of Legislative Affairs, Washington, D.C. ............................................................ 30

Glover, Danny, Miami, Florida, statement ............................................................ 33

Graham, Hon. Bob., a U.S. Senator from the State of Florida, statement ......... 35

Johnson, Stephen C., Policy Analyst for Latin America, Heritage Foundation, 

Washington, D.C., prepared statement .............................................................. 38

Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Massachusetts, 

and Hon. Sam Brownback, a U.S. Senator from the State of Kansas, joint 

letter ...................................................................................................................... 45

Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, Anwen Hughes, Staff Attorney, Washington, D.C., statement ........................................................................................ 47

Little, Cheryl, Executive Director, Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, 

Miami, Florida, prepared statement ................................................................... 59

Miami-Dade County Community Relations Board, Adora Obi Nweze, Chair, 

Community Relations Board, position statement .............................................. 73

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Brad Brown, 

President, Miami-Dade Branch of the NAACP, Miami, Florida ...................... 74

Nelson, Hon. Bill, a U.S. Senator from the State of Florida, statement ............. 82

Ocean, Marie Jocelyn, Haitian asylee and former INS detainee, prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 83

O’Laughlin, Sister Jeanne, OP, President, Barry University, Broward County, 

Florida, statement ................................................................................................ 86

Parks, Dina Paul, Executive Director, National Coalition for Haitian Rights, 

New York, New York, prepared statement ........................................................ 87

Ros-Lehtinen, Hon. Ileana, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Florida, statement ................................................................................................ 99

Page

IV

Russo, Monica, President, SEIU 1199 Florida, AFL–CIO, International Executive Board, Service Employees Interational Union, Florida, statement .......... 101

United Caribbean African Alliance, Inc., Bernier Lauredan, M.D., Chairman, 

Washington, D.C., statement .............................................................................. 103

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Guenet Guebre-Christos, 

Regional Representative, Washington, D.C., statement ................................... 105

United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami 

Division ................................................................................................................. 112

Wenski, Thomas G., Auxiliary Bishop of Miami, Florida, and Chairman, U.S. 

Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Committee on Migration, Miami, Florida, 

prepared statement .............................................................................................. 118

Women’s Commission for Refugee Women and Children, Wendy A. Young, 

Director of Government Relations, New York, New York, statement ............. 127

(1)

THE DETENTION AND TREATMENT OF 

HAITIAN ASYLUM SEEKERS 

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 1, 2002

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D.C. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:46 p.m., in room 

SD–226, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Edward M. Kennedy, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Kennedy, Brownback, and Representative Conyers [ex officio.] 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD M. KENNEDY, A U.S. 

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS 

Chairman KENNEDY. Thank you for your patience. We look forward to our hearing today. 

Senator Brownback and I had our consultation with the State 

Department on the number of immigrants and we are disappointed 

with the administration’s decisions in terms of the total numbers, 

but we are going to work with them to try and see if we can’t persuade the administration to respond to the great human tragedy 

that is being experienced by refugees all over the world and for 

many who meet the criteria which both the United States and the 

international community have defined as being the criteria under 

which they would be welcomed here into the United States. 

I want to welcome some special guests who are longstanding advocates for Haitian rights. We have representatives here from Massachusetts, Florida, New York, and Connecticut. I thank all of you 

for your leadership and commitment and your support for the fair 

treatment of Haitian refugees. 

Many of us are troubled by the detention policy of the Department of Justice. On December 3, 2001, a refugee boat carrying 187 

Haitians ran aground off the coast of Florida. The Coast Guard rescued 167 persons and they were detained and placed in removal 

proceedings by the Department of Justice. 

The INS Deputy Commissioner instructed the INS field officers 

to implement a new parole policy in cases of all Haitians arriving 

by boat in Florida after December 2001. The instructions stated 

that no Haitian should be paroled from detention without approval 

from Washington. 

One of the express purposes of this new policy is the deterrence 

of future Haitian arrivals by sea. Last week, in a letter from the 

Justice Department, they confirmed their change in policy and exVerDate 0ct 09 2002 13:18 Aug 12, 2003 Jkt 088613 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\HEARINGS\88613.TXT SJUD4 PsN: CMORC
2

plained their reasons for the change, that detention was needed to 

‘‘prevent against a potential mass migration to the United States.’’

A major concern is that such a policy violates well-established 

international refugee standards which are the basis of U.S. law. As 

an advisory opinion of the United Nations High Commissioner for 

Refugees states, ‘‘[t]he detention of asylum seekers...to deter future 

arrivals does not fall within any of the exceptional grounds for detention and is contrary to the principle underlying the international refugee protection regime.’’

Another major concern is whether this detention policy is discriminatory. It appears to be a policy based on the national origin 

of the detainee, with no regard for the person’s individual record 

or circumstances. The policy applies only to Haitian asylum seekers. Similarly situated asylum seekers of other nationalities are 

routinely released. 

Most of the Haitians in question have demonstrated a credible 

fear of persecution, have family or community contacts willing to 

sponsor them, do not pose a flight risk, and would not pose a danger to the community. These factors would normally have resulted 

in grants or parole from detention and are the same factors currently used to parole other nationals from detention. Yet, the Haitians have been singled out for more restrictive treatment. Such a 

policy appears to violate U.S. law, which according to a 1995 Supreme Court decision, must be based on individualized parole determinations without regard to race or national origin. 

Prolonged detention has also interfered with the ability of Haitians to present their asylum claims. Few of the Haitians can afford to retain private counsel, and few legal service providers have 

the staff and resources to represent all of the detainees. 

As a result, many Haitians have been forced to appear in immigration courts unrepresented. In some cases, they have relied on 

INS officers to assist them in completing their asylum applications, 

a clear conflict of interest. Despite these problems, requests from 

local legal service organizations for adequate time and access to 

Haitian detainees has at times been denied. 

As of last week, only 16 of the 167 detainees from the December 

2001 boat have been granted asylum, despite a majority having initially passed the credible fear interview. Fifty of the detainees have 

been deported and another 54 are awaiting removal. Given the current escalation of violence in Haiti, the life and death implications 

of improper detention practices and inadequate access to representation are very troubling. 

The committee invited the Justice Department to testify today. 

Unfortunately, the Department did not send a representative to 

participate in this hearing to defend or explain the policy they initiated, implemented, and stand behind. I regret the Department’s 

absence and I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses. 

Senator Brownback? 

STATEMENT OF HON. SAM BROWNBACK, A U.S. SENATOR 

FROM THE STATE OF KANSAS 

Senator BROWNBACK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 

for calling the hearing. I too am disappointed in the numbers that 

are coming out, the refugee resettlement numbers in the United 

3

States, and we are going to continue to work together to try to get 

those numbers up and to get a larger number of refugees into the 

United States. We need to; it is the right thing for us to do. 

There are a number of people sitting in very difficult, extraordinarily hostile circumstances in refugee camps around the world 

and we really need to help these people out. I know we have had 

difficulties after last September 11. Those are well-known and documented, but it doesn’t remove our need to be able to help people 

that are in the most dire of circumstances. 

I think it ennobles us as a country, and it also speaks volumes 

to the rest of the world, when we open our country up to help those 

in the worst of circumstances. So I am hopeful that we can continue to put some pressure forward to get that refugee population 

number up. I am eager to hear the testimony by the witnesses here 

today. 

It needn’t be repeated, but it is always worth repeating that our 

Nation has a long and noble tradition of being a country or refuge. 

We are the world’s leader in the protection of refugees and asylum 

seekers, and I am pleased that we are and I want us to continue 

to be that. 

No other nation has made the political, financial, or spiritual 

commitment that this Nation has made to sheltering the persecuted from harm. It is the Book of Jeremiah for guidance that 

we can read. This is what the Lord says: ‘‘Do what is just and 

right. Rescue from the hand of the oppressor the one who has been 

robbed. Do no wrong or violence to the alien.’’ Then you can even 

look in the Book of Matthew: ‘‘For I was hungry and he gave me 

something to eat. I was thirsty and he gave me something to drink. 

I was a stranger and you invited me in.’’

Our Nation’s commitment extends to all refugees, irrespective of 

their race, nationality, religion, political opinion, or social group. 

Our obligation is to rescue from the hand of the oppressor, to treat 

the stranger with kindness and respect, no matter where that person comes from. 

I appreciate that with respect to Haiti, there are political and administrative considerations that guide the administration’s detention policies and have done so with prior administrations. However, 

the detention of Haitian asylum seekers is neither a new topic nor 

an unfamiliar controversy. To the contrary, it appears to be a 

chronic concern that crosses administrations. 

Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses 

and welcome their insights. I appreciate the passion and compassion that they will bring to the issue. I hope that with their help, 

we can bring the NGO community and the administration together 

to work out a meaningful and lasting solution to the problems that 

will be detailed before us today, and that there will not be a prejudice based upon one certain group or another or other considerations. We need to consider and treat everybody as equal and the 

same in regard to refugee policy and asylum seekers seeking asylum or refuge in the United States. 

Mr. Chairman, as the administration is not here to testify today, 

I would like to submit for the record a document that represents 

the administration’s position. The correspondence is from the Assistant Attorney General, Daniel Bryant. It is dated September 25 

4

and it is chronicling the development of the current policy toward 

Haitian asylum seekers. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to the testimony we are 

going to hear today, and I do hope we can start to move forward 

toward some resolution of this chronic problem. 

Chairman KENNEDY. Thank you very much. We will include in 

the record. 

I would like to have our panel come up. 

Bishop Thomas Wenski is the Auxiliary Bishop of Miami, Florida, and Chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ 

Committee on Migration. He is also Director of Catholic Charities 

for the Archdiocese of Miami. For more than 20 years, Bishop 

Wenski has been an eloquent and powerful voice for refugees fleeing persecution. 

Bishop Wenski speaks Creole and is especially well-known both 

in the United States and Haiti as a defender of the rights of Haitians, and I am honored to welcome him and look forward to his 

testimony. 

I would also like to welcome Marie Ocean, who is a Haitian 

asylee and a former INS detainee at the Turner Guilford Knight 

Correctional Center. Marie Ocean fled her native Haiti after he father and brother were already assassinated by political opponents 

and she feared for her life. She is one of the original December 

2001 boat refugees. 

Ms. Ocean, I would like to thank you very much for being here. 

I know it took a lot of courage to share your story with us. I also 

want to thank Gepsie Metellus, who will be translating for you. 

Cheryl Little is the Executive Director of the Florida Immigrant 

Advocacy Center in Miami. Ms. Little co-founded the Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center that provides free legal help to immigrants 

of all nationalities. FIAC serves the most vulnerable immigrants, 

including asylum seekers, the homeless, and victims of domestic violence. Ms. Little is a nationally recognized, tireless advocate deeply committed to safeguarding the rights of asylum seekers and refugees. I look forward to her testimony. 

I would like to welcome Stephen Johnson, a former State Department officer who has worked in the Bureau of Inter-American Affairs and Public Affairs. He is a currently the Latin American policy analyst at the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for 

International Studies at the Heritage Foundation. 

During his time at the State Department, Mr. Johnson was a 

writer and researcher, serving as the Director of the Central American Staff Working Group, and later as the Chief of the Editorial 

Division in the Public Affairs Bureau. We welcome him and thank 

him for testifying. I look forward to your views. 

Dina Paul Parks is the Executive Director of the National Coalition for Haitian Rights, in New York City. She helps to develop policy and recommendations on immigration, human rights, and Haitian American community development. NCHR was established in 

1982 in response to the waves of refugees fleeing the oppressive 

Duvalier regime. For over 20 years, the NCHR has promoted 

human rights and democracy in Haiti, while advocating for fair 

treatment and policies for Haitian refugees. I am pleased that she 

will be testifying today. 

5

We will hear from Bishop Wenski. 

STATEMENT OF THOMAS G. WENSKI, AUXILIARY BISHOP OF 

MIAMI, FLORIDA, AND CHAIRMAN, UNITED STATES CONFERENCE OF CATHOLIC BISHOPS’ COMMITTEE ON MIGRATION, MIAMI, FLORIDA

Bishop WENSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting me to 

testify today. First, I would like to thank you and your subcommittee for holding this hearing today. I thank you for your 

longstanding commitment to immigrants and refugees in this Nation. 

I would also like to thank Senator Brownback for his support of 

fair access for asylum seekers seeking protection in the United 

States. Senator Brownback also took time out of his busy schedule 

to visit with the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops’ 

Committee on Migration several weeks ago. At that time, Senator 

Brownback spoke of his concern at the treatment accorded Korean 

asylum seekers in China. I think today’s proceedings might point 

out some unfortunate parallels between the way China treats 

North Korean asylum seekers and our own policy toward asylum 

seekers from Haiti. 

Before being ordained a bishop, I worked as a parish priest 

among the Haitian population in South Florida for almost 20 years. 

During that time, my pastoral duties included visiting Haitians detained at the INS Krome processing center. 

The present policy, which holds a group of 160 Haitian nationals 

in indefinite detention since December of last year, recalls the illfated detention policies of the early 1980’s when thousands of Haitians were held in detention at Krome and in other places for more 

than a year, until the Federal courts forced the INS to release 

them. 

At that time, USCCB’s Migration and Refugees Services assisted 

the Government in helping these detainees reunite with family 

members in the United States, seek legal advice and counsel, and 

to comply with periodic reporting to INS while their applications 

for asylum were being processed. 

In my work with Haitians in South Florida, I have found them 

to be hard-working, honest, and God-fearing members of our communities. They have been a positive influence in South Florida and 

elsewhere. In recent years, Haitian Americans have distinguished 

themselves in all areas of our community’s life, and indeed today 

several are elected public officials. In other words, whatever fears 

there might have been that led to the early policies of the 1980’s 

have not been realized. They were unfounded. So one must ask 

why do we return now to a policy that is unfair and unjust? 

The present policy is unfair because it singles out Haitians for 

disparate treatment. Other groups of asylum seekers similarly situated who arrive on the shores of South Florida are not subjected 

to indefinite detention. Except for a few cases, nearly all Haitians 

arriving by sea to Miami have been detained, while more than 90 

percent of other nationalities arriving the same way during the 

same period have been released while their claims are adjudicated. 

6

The present policy is unjust, for the indefinite detention of asylum seekers erodes refugee rights provided for under international 

law. In my written statement I submitted to the committee, the appropriate references to international laws are cited. 

As we have done since the mid-1970’s, the United States Bishops 

call for an end to a policy that unfairly and unjustly discriminates 

against Haitian asylum seekers. Once again, we call for a reexamination of current interdiction policies. Haitians stopped on the 

high seas or in airports must not be denied the opportunity to request asylum and to be heard fairly. 

Once again, we call for the reversal of the current policy of indefinite detention of Haitian asylum seekers. Those already found 

to have met credible fear criteria should be immediately released 

and afforded a reasonable time to secure counsel and to petition for 

asylum. 

Once again, we offer our assistance to INS in helping to resettle 

asylum seekers from Haiti while their cases go forward. In the 

early 1980’s when we collaborated with INS in facilitating the release of Haitians, we helped them to report their whereabouts to 

INS and to appear at their hearings. They did not abscond, they 

did not pose a flight risk. 

USCCB’s MRS has long collaborated with INS and ORR in helping Haitian and Cuban entrants process through Krome for over 20 

years. This offers a way that builds upon the successes of the past, 

that serves the interests of justice, and provides a cost-effective alternative to indefinite detention. 

I remember how 1 day in the early 1980’s officials from INS in 

Miami contacted me at my church. They requested that I accompany them to the home of a woman in Fort Lauderdale. Her son 

was detained in Krome for several months after arriving from Haiti 

after a harrowing voyage in a rickety boat. Fearing for his life if 

forcibly deported to Haiti and despairing of ever leaving the monotony of a then seriously overcrowded facility, he committed suicide 

in Krome. The INS officials asked me to interpret for them as they 

presented their condolences to his mother. 

Today, whether in Krome where the men are held or the TGK 

correctional facilities, the county jail where the women are held, 

the present revival of the old and cruel policy of indefinite detention has recreated those same conditions that breed fear and despair, and portend further tragedy. Mr. Chairman, this is not worthy of the United States of America. 

[The prepared statement of Bishop Wenski appears as a submission for the record.] 

Chairman KENNEDY. Thank you very much, Bishop. 

We are joined by Congressman Conyers, who has been a great 

leader nationally on this issue. Certainly, if he had a word to say, 

we would welcome it, and we would invite him, as well, if he had 

the time, to listen to the rest of our witnesses as someone who 

cares very deeply about this issue. We always welcome our colleagues from the other side, and more particularly welcome a 

friend. 

7

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN CONYERS, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN 

Representative CONYERS. Mr. Chairman, I am honored, first of 

all, to sit with you anywhere, but in the U.S. Senate it is even better, and at a committee that you are chairing is even better yet. 

So please know that I am happy to be with you. 

I would be happy wherever I was sitting, especially with the witnesses that you have on this panel. Cheryl Little and Marie Ocean 

and, our friend, Ms. Parks have all done incredible work on this 

subject. It is a labor of love, and I am very privileged to join with 

you, Bishop Wenski, in merely discussing this subject for a couple 

of minutes. 

I am going to put my statement in the record, and so what I 

would like to do now is just lift up the main problem here, which 

is that Haitian arrivals into this country, particularly through Florida, seeking asylum are treated differently from everybody else 

that comes to the United States—everybody. 

There is a policy of, number one, turning them away right on the 

spot, no questions asked. They turn the boats around. You may 

say, do they need food or nourishment, or are they sick, or is their 

little raft capable of going back? They turn it around. That is it, 

no questions asked. That is in violation, of course, of our immigration laws, but it more seriously contravenes any spirit of the treatment that human beings should be afforded anywhere in the world, 

much less coming to the shores of the United States. 

The other point is about Krome itself, which is a nightmare. I 

was talking to the acting superintendent there. Here are some of 

the problems encountered during this visit. 

[The information referred to appears as a submission for the 

record.] 

Representative CONYERS. The discriminatory process of the Immigration and Naturalization Service has to end, and I sure hope 

that they are scheduled to come before you today or sometime soon. 

I would sure like to hear their statements under oath about some 

of the things that are going on there. The separation of mothers 

from their children is disgraceful. 

Then the final point that occurs to me is the way the lawyers 

representing Haitian asylum seekers are treated in the INS courts. 

It is shabby, it is disrespectful, and it is not in keeping with any 

sense of fairness that we try to operate our system of laws with. 

So I am delighted and congratulate you, Mr. Chairman, for holding these hearings and I am very pleased to see all of these witnesses with us. Thank you. 

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

for the record.] 

Chairman KENNEDY. Thank you very much. We might join and 

ask the American Bar Association to do a study about how the attorneys are treated and give a report back to us. 

Representative CONYERS. I would like to join you in such a request. 

Chairman KENNEDY. We might join with Senator Brownback and 

others and see if it might make some sense. 

Marie Ocean, we thank you for being here. We thank you for 

coming and we know it is not easy to talk about the struggles in 

8

one’s life as you have had, and so we are very grateful to you for 

telling us your story. By telling us your story, we will try and make 

sure it doesn’t happen to other people. 

STATEMENT OF MARIE JOCELYN OCEAN, HAITIAN ASYLEE 

AND FORMER DETAINEE, MIAMI, FLORIDA 

Ms. OCEAN. [speaking through an interpreter.] Good afternoon, 

ladies and gentlemen. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. My name is 

Marie Jocelyn Ocean. I am from Haiti and I am here because of 

my difficulties, my problems, with Lavalas. 

I suffered quite a few shocks, I suffered several shocks as a result of Lavalas. They killed a brother of mine. They beat up one 

of my brother’s children. Fifteen days after my brother’s funeral, 

my father was killed. Subsequent to that, another brother of mine 

was beaten and abused and suffered a stab wound right above his 

eyebrow. 

They came after me subsequently, but I ran. Because they did 

not find me, they beat up on my 9-year-old girl. This year, she is 

10 years old. And these are the reasons that I fled the country by 

boat—I along with the many other women who are still detained 

for the same reasons. 

I am not alone to have suffered this problem. My problem is also 

the problem of the other women who are still detained. We were 

detained by the Immigration and Nationalization Service on December 3. I was taken to jail, I along with the other women detainees. I was held in a motel that served like a jail along with other 

women and we were not treated well at all. 

We were in a room. Essentially, it had no windows and we were 

not able to see the outside at all. We could not breathe. The only 

opportunity to enjoy the outdoors was on our trips to the court. 

And there was also a 7-year-old youngster also locked up with us. 

A 7-year-old should not be detained in such circumstances. 

I was summoned by an official at the jail, supposedly because I 

was going to court, and I found myself being transferred to another 

facility, a jail, TGK. Upon my arrival at TGK, I was strip-searched. 

I along with the other women were equally strip-searched, and this 

process of being strip-searched was absolutely humiliating and we 

were handcuffed and escorted into the jail. 

At the jail, one of the experiences was the evening check-ups 

when the guards would come around to check the cells and to make 

sure that all the detainees were in place. The locking of the doors, 

the banging on the jail doors, and the flashlights was absolutely 

traumatizing. The flashlights interrupting our sleep that way was 

traumatizing and that made us even more fearful, and that contributed to taking us back to the experience we had in Haiti. 

And certainly we were taken before a judge, but not being able 

to speak English, not understanding the process, the procedures, 

we were helpless. Among the other women detainees, I was the 

only fortunate one to have been benefited from the legal assistance 

of a FIAC attorney, and this attorney accompanied me and represented me before the immigration judge at TGK. 

On May 31, 2002, I went before the judge and I was granted asylum in the United States. I was very happy to receive asylum, but 

I was still troubled. I was troubled for the other women detainees 

9

because we were in the same boat together, so to speak, because 

when we were all captured we did not know where we would end 

up. 

They were moved from one detention facility to another, and I 

think that these women should not have been detained in that 

manner. And all of the other nationals who subsequently requested 

asylum were released, while the Haitians were kept and were denied every time. All of us have the same blood flowing through our 

veins and we are all God’s children; we are children of the same 

God. 

We thought that coming before Americans, coming before America with the problems we endured, with the troubles we had to experience, and that if we came with our troubles before America, 

America would consider this treatment we experienced, as well as 

the torture we experienced. Unfortunately, this was not the outcome that we anticipated or expected. 

We were treated worse than common criminals because the facility in which these women are detained is a jail facility for criminals. They will have been there 10 months now. They should not 

have been there for such a long time because they are not criminals. They did not kill anyone. 

I acknowledge that we arrived illegally, but we are not to be 

blamed because conditions in our country forced us to flee. According to the laws of this country, while it is true that we arrived illegally and we could have been detained to be punished for breaking 

those laws, we should not been punished or detained for such a 

long time. 

We were absolutely humiliated. We were devaluated as human 

beings. Certainly, the authorities do not view it that way, but we 

detainees certainly feel and experience it that way because when 

an adult cries, certainly there are problems, and he cries because 

he has problems. 

Since my arrival in the United States, since my and the other 

detainees’ arrivals, we have not experienced the same difficulties 

as in Haiti, because the conditions under which I fled Haiti are certainly different from the conditions I live in today. I am no longer 

afraid for my life. 

I appear before you today to testify and to appeal to you to help 

these women detainees because we are all one and the same, because we must hang in there together, put our heads together so 

that they too can be freed. 

Thank you very much for the opportunity to appear before you 

to testify on my behalf as well as on behalf of the other women detainees. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Ocean appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman KENNEDY. Thank you for that extraordinary story of 

incredible pain, anguish and misery. No one should have to undergo that kind of treatment here in the United States. It is an absolutely despicable kind of treatment, and we certainly find it as 

shocking an injustice as you do and we will see what we can do 

to try to bring that kind of treatment to a halt. It is very powerful 

testimony and we appreciate very much your willingness to share 

it with us. 

10

Ms. Little? 

STATEMENT OF CHERYL LITTLE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

FLORIDA IMMIGRANT ADVOCACY CENTER, MIAMI, FLORIDA 

Ms. LITTLE. On behalf of the Florida Immigrant Advocacy Center, I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Senator Brownback 

for inviting me to testify today. 

And it is always good to see Congressman Conyers. I saw him, 

recently in Miami when he was visiting the detention centers there 

and meeting with many of the Haitians. I want to thank each of 

you for your leadership in defending immigrants’ basic rights. 

My testimony today is supported by the Women’s Commission for 

Refugee Women and Children. 

In December 2001, following the December 3 arrival of 167 Haitians who fled Haiti by boat, the Acting Deputy INS Commissioner 

adopted a secret policy directed solely at Haitians which resulted 

in the detention of virtually all Haitian asylum seekers in South 

Florida, regardless of how they arrived in the United States and 

whether they had demonstrated a credible fear of persecution, 

which all but two did. 

While adopting the Haitian policy, the INS continued to routinely 

release those asylum seekers of other nationalities who had passed 

their INS credible fear interviews. The INS policy expressly applied 

to Haitian asylum seekers arriving both by plane and by boat. 

The effect of the December policy was dramatic and immediate. 

The released rate for Haitians who had passed their credible fear 

interviews dropped from 96 percent in November 2001 to 6 percent 

between December 14, 2001, and March 18, 2002. Even Haitians 

who had been granted asylum and could no longer be legally detained by INS were not immediately released. 

As a result of the Haitian policy, the INS refused to release over 

240 Haitian asylum seekers, while it continued to release asylum 

seekers of all other nationalities in the Miami District at an extremely high rate. The Haitian policy represents a radical departure from INS’ prior policy, which did not make distinctions based 

on nationality or race and which expressly permitted the release of 

asylum seekers of all nationalities who pass their credible fear 

interviews in the Miami District. 

For months after the Haitian policy was adopted, INS officials 

denied the existence of the policy to advocates and community leaders. Only in March 2002 did INS officials finally acknowledge that 

they had indeed adopted a policy of detaining Haitians. 

According to Acting INS Commissioner Becraft, the INS adopted 

the policy because of concerns that there was going to be a mass 

migration of people arriving by boat from Haiti rivaling that of the 

Cuban Mariel exodus and the significant number of refugees held 

at Guantanamo in 1994. 

Yet the overall number of Haitian interdictions in 2001 simply 

do not indicate a mass migration, nor do Coast Guard interdiction 

statistics for 2002. Indeed, only 1,956 Haitians were interdicted at 

sea by the Coast Guard in 2001. This number is significantly 

smaller than the 1980 Mariel boatlift, during which 125,000 Cubans arrived in the United States, as well as in 1994, when over 

25,000 Haitians and over 37,000 Cubans were detained there. 

11

On March 15, 2002, a class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of 

all the detained Haitians in the Southern District of Florida who 

arrived on or after December 3 and had passed their credible fear 

interviews. The district court summarily dismissed the case without an evidentiary hearing, saying it was up to politicians, not the 

courts, to determine the Haitians’ fate. An appeal to the Eleventh 

Circuit Court of Appeals is pending. 

After the lawsuit was filed, INS changed its detention policy to 

permit the release of certain Haitian asylum seekers who arrived 

at the Miami Airport or other ports of entry. However, the vast majority of Haitians who arrived by boat on December 3 continue to 

languish in INS detention and suffer irreparable harm as a result. 

Unlike released asylum seekers of other nationalities, they are 

forced to prepare for their asylum cases in an expedited, Haitianonly docket and have limited access to counsel. Few agencies are 

able to provide free legal help to the Haitians and most are unrepresented. Without attorneys, the Haitians are far less likely to win 

asylum than those with attorneys. 

A study conducted by Georgetown University in 2000 indicated 

that asylum seekers in detention are more than twice as likely as 

those who aren’t detained to be without legal representation, and 

persons with attorneys are four to six times more likely to be 

granted asylum. 

Most of the Haitians speak no English and are forced to complete 

asylum applications in English. Their cases are expedited and 

those attorneys who have agreed to represent them face multiple 

barriers in gaining access to their clients. INS itself admitted that 

it lacks adequate visitation space to meet the needs of attorneys assisting the Haitians. 

The conditions in the facilities in which Haitians have been detained further compromise their ability to seek asylum. These facilities have been terribly overcrowded, unsanitary, and traumatizing for many. Families have been separated into different detention centers, sometimes thousands of miles apart. 

From December 2001 through August 2002, the Haitian women 

were held in a maximum-security county jail and subject to frequent strip-searches, lock-downs, and hourly interruptions of sleep 

during the night. In June of this year, a Haitian asylum seeker at 

Krome attempted suicide. 

In conclusion, FIAC is gravely concerned about the safety of 

those Haitians already deported and about the likely deportation of 

107 of the Haitian asylum seekers who remain in INS custody after 

10 months in the United States. Virtually all of the Haitians on 

board the December 3 boat are from Raboteau, a section of 

Gonaives which has been the epicenter of recent political violence 

and unrest in Haiti. 

Our responsibility to protect persons among us who have fled political persecution should not depend on politics. Haitian asylum 

seekers come to the United States seeking refuge from persecution. 

They expect to be treated fairly and equally by the world’s leading 

democracy and defender of human rights. 

While we certainly understand the need after September 11 to 

protect our borders, to indefinitely detain Haitian asylum seekers 

in the Miami District who have committed no crime and treat them 

12

differently than any other group is a perplexing waste of precious 

resources and a waste of U.S. taxpayers’ money. 

To flee from persecution is not a crime; it is a basic human right. 

It is the Government’s responsibility now to treat the Haitian asylum seekers as they treat asylum seekers from other countries. 

Haitians deserve no less. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Little appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman KENNEDY. We will include all the statements in the 

record. 

Mr. Johnson? 

STATEMENT OF STEPHEN C. JOHNSON, POLICY ANALYST FOR 

LATIN AMERICA, HERITAGE FOUNDATION, WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Mr. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the 

subcommittee, I feel honored today by your invitation to allow me 

to speak to you on the political and economic conditions in Haiti. 

I do not study immigration or refugee policy, and therefore cannot provide expertise on the immediate issue that you are considering, but welcome the opportunity to address some of the conditions that encourage Haitians to leave their home. I am also keenly 

aware that many of you have experience on this issue that far predates my own. 

One could conclude that Haiti has had a history of political turbulence since independence almost 200 years ago, and that has left 

little space for the development of durable institutions and the idea 

that government is supposed to serve the people as opposed to the 

people serving it. 

Such rule has periodically triggered waves of immigrants and migrants that impact Haiti’s close neighbors, the Dominican Republic 

particularly, which shares the same island, Cuba, the Bahamas, 

and the United States. These migrations continue today and are 

likely to continue into the near future as long as Haitians and their 

leaders fail to agree on a social contract and develop a society that 

honors the dignity of each individual, the concept of cooperation, 

and free choice. 

Haiti is not alone in its problems. In the 1980’s, Central Americans fled wars and civil conflicts impacting the United States. 

Today, families are leaving Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, and Argentina to flee violence or economic disaster. 

My view is that asylum decisions can only be made fairly when 

heavy migratory pressures are alleviated, and migration numbers 

can only be reduced by helping to resolve the problems that trigger 

flight to begin with in the country of origin. 

Haiti is a country that has an abundance of democratic thinkers 

and a wealth of people with entrepreneurial skills who understand 

the virtues of consensus and compromise. The problem seems to be 

that the playing field has always been arranged by those who wish 

to act with an iron fist. Their preoccupation with control has produced a legacy of impunity, corruption, and criminality that belies 

the inherent goodness of the Haitian people. 

Political leaders have traditionally fought each other using partisan mobs. Papa Doc Duvalier created an entire army of them 

called the Tontons Macoutes. Supporters of President Jean 

13

Bertrand Aristide’s Lavalas Party now carry out attacks in a similar manner against political opponents and journalists using rocks, 

guns, and machetes, whether he wants them to or not. 

Human Rights Watch and the U.S. State Department report that 

the judicial system and police, into which the United States poured 

nearly $100 million after President Aristide was restored to power 

in 1994, are essentially dysfunctional. Of the 6,000 police trained 

when the new Haitian National Police was organized, only about 

3,000 remain, and many of them are sympathizers of the Lavalas 

Party. 

Haiti has a population of about 7.8 million people. By way of 

comparison, El Salvador has 6 million people and a civilian police 

force of 19,000, and that is barely adequate to deal with common 

crime and drug trafficking. 

On economic terms, Haiti’s gross domestic product fell, on average, 2.5 percent during the last 10 years. That is 2.5 percent every 

year. Gross domestic product per capita is about $370, according to 

the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom. Eighty percent of the water is contaminated. Half of the adult population is 

illiterate, 60 percent are out of work. Aside from the millions who 

eke out a living in subsistence agriculture on environmentally degraded land, only about 30,000 have jobs in industry. As you can 

see, thousands, if not millions more, are needed. 

A commitment to good governance would solve a number of Haiti’s problems and unlock direct assistance from international donors. But without progress on governance, such aid would be wasted. To help current efforts gain traction, Haiti must look to some 

kind of international oversight to help establish a safe environment 

for fair elections to help develop good citizenship and government 

from the grass roots up and to check authoritarian impulses of any 

leader who would unfairly interpret his wishes as being those of 

the people. 

This is not something that is going to be solved overnight. It is 

not going to be solved in a matter of weeks, months, years. Most 

likely, it will be solved in a matter of decades, and U.S. policymakers and lawmakers, I think, need to be prepared for that long 

challenge. 

Haiti does deserve our help. We should help Haiti resolve its 

problems. We need to look at the long term and be realistic about 

what it will take, but we must also think about the fact that, along 

with Haiti, there are other countries experiencing conflict in Latin 

America that present U.S. lawmakers and policymakers with an 

extremely daunting task, and I respect your initiative and your 

willingness to take this on. 

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

for the record.] 

Chairman KENNEDY. Thank you very much. 

Dina Paul Parks? 

STATEMENT OF DINA PAUL PARKS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

NATIONAL COALITION FOR HAITIAN RIGHTS, NEW YORK, 

NEW YORK 

Ms. PARKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the opportunity to be here, and I am particularly honored to address the 

14

committee under your leadership, which has been so instrumental 

in establishing and fighting to uphold this Nation’s refugee protection laws. 

I would also like to acknowledge Senator Brownback for his demonstrated commitment to the plight of the most vulnerable immigrants and refugees, and the Haitian asylum seekers who are the 

subject of this hearing today, I think, would certainly belong in 

that category. 

You have heard from several of our guests here about the basic 

and most salient facts of this latest INS policy. As you have 

learned by now, it is the just the latest in a very long history of 

double-standard treatment for Haitians by the U.S. Government. 

Unfortunately, the corollary element to this dynamic is the very 

long, painful tradition of political violence and repression of human 

rights in Haiti, and it is that that over the next few minutes I will 

focus on. 

The latest bout of political violence and gridlock harkens back to 

the flawed elections of May 2000. Since then, the government and 

opposition have been locked in a political stalemate in which neither side recognizes the legitimacy of the other, and both sides 

have also rebuffed serious negotiations, despite the intervention of 

the OAS in over 20 trips to settle the dispute. 

Additionally, in June of 2001 President Aristide instituted what 

was called a zero-tolerance policy. This basically legitimizes the 

lynching of delinquents or those accused as such and has been used 

as a pretext for these groups to threaten or harass anyone perceived as a menace to Lavalas. 

This was taken to the extreme on December 17, 2001, the day 

of the attack on the national palace, branded as an alleged coup attempt by the Aristide government. Less than 2 hours after this attack, around of Port-au-Prince and in various locations around the 

country, bands of armed Lavalas supporters, known commonly as 

popular organizations, occasionally accompanied by elected Lavalas 

officials, attacked and burned down the homes and offices of opposition party members and supporters, attacked journalists, and 

began to force the censure of the reporting of these incidents by the 

independent Haitian media. 

Beginning in November and throughout December, journalists 

and human rights defenders were threatened and attacked on a 

daily basis. One journalist sympathetic to the opposition named 

Brignol Lindor was lynched and assassinated on December 2 by a 

crowd who claimed to be getting revenge for an anonymous attack 

on a Lavalas supporter a few days earlier. 

Shortly afterward, approximately 30 journalists, particularly 

those from radio stations who did not auto-censure their broadcasts 

after the attacks, fled Haiti. In addition, in early 2002 a small 

number of high-profile judges and social and political activists have 

continued to flee Haiti as pressure, harassment, and attacks 

against person, family, and property have continued. 

A report on the investigation of the December 17 attack by the 

Inter-American Commission for Human Rights of the OAS issued 

on July 1 of this year concluded that the attack was not a coup attempt and that the violent mobs had to have had fore-knowledge 

15

of what was expected of them in order to retaliate in such a manner. 

However, as more recent incidents have shown, these armed 

gangs are loyal to members of various factions of the Lavalas government and not exclusively to one central figure. They are disparate and operate chaotically, vying for power, and some are beginning to lose their privileges. This is seen as a betrayal by the 

gangs, resulting in increasing verbal and other backlash against 

the Lavalas movement, which, although fomented this violence, has 

to some degree lost control of it as it has taken on a life of its own. 

The U.S. Department of State, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty 

International, and NCHR have considered Aristide’s human rights 

record in this second term as poor for a democracy. The biggest 

problems identified include impunity for those claiming to act on 

behalf or in support of the government, a politicized police force, 

the lack of independence of the judiciary, and the harassment and 

persecution of members of the opposition, those journalists who do 

not self-censure, human rights defenders, and other outspoken critics of the government, its policies, and the armed popular organizations. 

To run down a few of the recent developments and violations in 

the past few months, in July a journalist, Israel Jacky Cantave, 

and his cousin disappeared on the way home from work. They were 

found beaten and injured several days later by neighbors of the 

building where they were being held. 

July through September: student protests against the government for attacking the foundation of the Independent Haitian University and retaliation against those student protestors. The government unilaterally and without warning decided to dismiss the 

vice chancellor of the university and suspend all student and faculty elections and appoint its own directors. 

August 2: the jailbreak of Amiot ‘‘Cubain’’ Metayer out of a prison in Raboteau, Gonaives, which is a word that you have heard before and we will hear again. Cubain is a former Aristide ally who 

was arrested for his role in the December 17, 2001, attacks on the 

opposition. The jailbreak also freed close to 160 other prisoners and 

these armed gangs continue to roam the streets in Raboteau. 

September: a week-long gang war in the Cite Soleil slum over a 

cache of arms resulted in at least 20 dead and 100 wounded. September 19: Haitian National Police shut down the concert of a popular band for playing a song deemed critical of Aristide. ‘‘Revolution’’ lists some of the country’s ills and says ‘‘Mr. President, I am 

talking to you...’’ Although government officials declared it had not 

ordered the shut-down, no action has been taken to offer an apology to the band or its organizers, or to sanction the police officers 

responsible. 

September 20: The disappearance of a popular pro-Aristide community leader and two associates after being arrested by the police 

over a traffic dispute with government officials sparked tire-burning and violent protests in the streets of Carrefour Feuilles for several days. 

Heavily armed gang members demanded the release of Felix 

Bien-Aime, and heavily armed members of the police retaliated by 

firing tear gas and bullets into the popular neighborhood. At least 

16

one journalist reported being assaulted by the police, while other 

casualties included one death and several injuries. A week later, 

there had been several attempts to burn down the police station. 

September 26: Three popular independent radio stations—Radio 

Kiskeya, Radio Caraibes, and Radio Ibo—shut down after receiving 

serious and credible threats by armed men. Just days later, President Aristide is cited to have said that if the Haitian press continued to repeat what the international press is saying, it is a clear 

continuation of the damage of the 1991 coup. This type of statement is just what has incited people to act within the guidelines 

of the zero-tolerance policy. 

In spite of these recent and ongoing developments, there are a 

lot of differences between what is happening in Haiti now and 

what has been behind the mass exodus of the 1970’s and 1980’s, 

and it is very important to outline those differences. 

First, refugees from the 1980’s and during the coup d’etat of the 

early 1990’s show that the numbers of refugees identified and 

interdicted are beyond comparison. From some 24,000 throughout 

the 1980’s to 60,000 in just 3 years in the early 1990’s, these figures have dropped to a scant 1,400 since October 2001. 

During this period, according to its own website, the U.S. 

Coast Guard reports only one or zero interdictions in the months 

of October, January, February, June, and August, meaning that 

even in the months before the INS policy on Haitian refugees was 

known as such, the Coast Guard picked up no boat people in January or February of 2002, despite the intense turbulence the country 

experienced in December 2001 following the attack on the national 

palace and the reprisal attacks on members of the opposition. 

Again, I would like to remind the committee that these are the 

Coast Guard’s own numbers and they do not support the notion of 

a mass exodus. The interdictions from 1984 to 1989, and then from 

1991 to 1995, far exceed these statistics. 

However, the reasons for the lack of a larger wave of refugees 

are not merely to be found in the statistics. With regard to Haiti, 

there are great distinctions to be made between the political and 

human rights situations under the Duvaliers, for example, the de 

facto Cedras regime that overthrew Aristide, and the current administration. 

Under the previous regimes, the forces of government and repression were strictly regimented and part of a clear, organized, 

and well-known hierarchy. Under the Duvaliers, they were the 

military and the macouts, used to balance out each other’s power. 

Under Cedras, the military’s power is complemented by both the 

military group FRAPH and an elaborate system of rural ‘‘chefs de 

section’’ and ‘‘attaches.’’

However, under the current administration no such organization 

or consolidated, centralized power exists. In fact, many human 

rights organizations, activists, and political observers diagnose 

chaos and disorder instead. Haiti’s 7-year-old police force is politicized and corrupt, with staffing far below the original 5,000 recruits, primarily due to attrition. 

The country’s many armed gangs, the popular organizations, are 

primarily loyal to the Aristide government, but not necessarily to 

Aristide himself. They are loyal to other popular or local leaders 

17

within Lavalas, such as Senator Dany Toussaint, a former military 

officer, and Senator Medard Joseph of Gonaives, whose loyal gangs 

include the Cannibal Army, responsible for August’s spectacular 

jailbreak. 

Chairman KENNEDY. This is a fascinating story because it tells 

with great authenticity what was happening in the country by relating it to the flow of immigrants. It is very, very powerful because 

generally the dialogue lacks that kind of sophistication and understanding of these forces. I think it is enormously compelling. 

We will put it all in the record and I think it is going to be helpful to us as we are trying to get some justice for the Haitian detainees. I think it is going to be very helpful to us in making that case. 

I would like you maybe just to summarize and I will put it all 

in the record. You have done a lot of background and study of this. 

It is an incredible work product. I am very impressed with all of 

it, but if you could summarize, I want to get some questions in. 

Ms. PARKS. Absolutely. I will summarize by just saying a few 

words, if I could, about the contributions of Haitian Americans to 

this country. 

Despite the treatment that sometimes we receive in this country, 

our community has produced individuals such as Pierre-Richard 

Prosper, the U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues; Dr. 

Rose-Marie Toussaint, the first African American woman to head 

a liver transplant service in the world; Mr. Dumas Simeus, Chairman and CEO of Simeus Food International, the largest blackowned business in Texas and one of the top in the country; Mario 

Elie, the power guard that helped the Houston Rockets to back-toback NBA championships in the mid-1990’s. 

We are doctors, taxi drivers, lawyers, home health aides, journalists, entertainers. And we are elected officials—Marie Ceflau in 

Massachusetts, Philip Brutus in Florida, Jose Listan, mayor of 

North Miami. We are even executives, like our own Board Chair, 

Eddy Bayardelle, First Vice President for Global Philanthropy at 

Merrill Lynch. 

We are a people who love our country, but when forced to leave 

it, we make an extraordinary impact where we land and the community is enriched for it. There is simply no reason that year after 

year, decade after decade, we always, always, always are treated 

like second-class citizens. 

Again, I thank you for the opportunity to address this committee, 

and I am confident that you and your colleagues will exercise due 

diligence in addressing our concerns that these Haitian asylum 

seekers be treated in a fair and humane manner, consistent with 

U.S. and international law. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Parks appears as a submission 

for the record.] 

Chairman KENNEDY. Thank you very much for an excellent history. 

I was just asking my staff to both listen to you and read your 

testimony and remember the various fact. We certainly saw in July 

2001, the student protests against the government and the suspension of student election; in August, the jailbreaks of an Aristide 

ally and 160 other prisoners; the September gang wars, 20 dead, 

18

100 wounded; the resignation of two ministers. Then, in December, 

the boat leaves. 

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to understand what is 

happening at this time. And then to try and force people to go 

through these hoops is mind-boggling. I think it is fair to go on 

through these points that you raise and ask whether these were 

motivating factors or not. I am sure there are other considerations, 

but it certainly describes a horrific situation. I think putting those 

numbers from the past about the ebb and flow of the numbers, too, 

is important for us to understand. That is incredibly important. So 

I am grateful to you for this. 

I was interested in the legality of the detention policy. What was 

your sense about the legality of these detention policies? Would you 

comment on that? 

Ms. LITTLE. Yes. We filed a lawsuit on the basis that the detention policy is illegal. 

Chairman KENNEDY. We will include the lawsuit in the file, not 

the record. 

Ms. LITTLE. We believe that the policy is illegal for a number of 

reasons. First of all, the parole provisions of the Immigration and 

Nationality Act call for facially neutral parole decisions to be made. 

In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court in Jean v. Nelson held that parole 

decisions must be made without regard to race or national origin, 

and that decision still stands. 

Also, U.S. law is based on the 1951 Refugee Convention, and fundamental to that Convention is the principle of refoulement, or 

non-return, the idea that asylum seekers are not to be persecuted 

for irregular entry. Certainly, the Haitians that we are speaking of 

are being punished and penalized by virtue of their indefinite detention because they attempted to come here and pursue asylum 

claims. 

We also believe that international law is being violated as a result of this policy. I believe, Senator Kennedy, you referenced the 

UNHCR advisory opinion. The UNHCR recently said that to detain 

asylum seekers in order to deter them is a violation of international law. They also said that to detain certain nationalities 

while releasing other nationalities is a violation of international 

norms of refugee law. So for a whole lot of reasons, including equal 

protection provisions of the U.S. Constitution, we believe that this 

policy is illegal. 

Senator BROWNBACK. Mr. Chairman, I am going to have to go on, 

unfortunately, to another meeting, but thank you for holding this 

hearing. I appreciate the statements of the people on the panel. 

If you don’t mind me making a brief statement here, I think it 

is very clear what the situation is. This isn’t new information. The 

bishop, I think, articulated it probably best when he said ‘‘this 

time, and again and again.’’ I really hope that maybe we can move 

past this mistreatment of one group and let’s start to get this policy 

right. 

I appreciate the articulate statements that each of you put forward. Marie, thank you very much for coming here, in particular, 

with the difficulty that your family has been through. Hopefully, 

maybe we can join in a letter or some advocacy together so that 

we can try to press to get this policy changed so that everybody is 

19

treated the same, because this is well-known and well-documented, 

and it is time to move past it. So I would certainly give my help 

to do that. 

Chairman KENNEDY. Well, I want to thank Senator Brownback 

because he certainly will be a very powerful ally in helping us deal 

with this. 

I want to thank you very much, Sam, for being here today and 

for all your support. 

Finally, a few points. Ms. Little, tell us about the problems that 

your organization has in getting legal representation. How difficult 

is it to find pro bono attorneys? 

Ms. LITTLE. Well, to their credit, the Executive Office of Immigration Review—Steve Lang, who heads their pro bono department, 

put out a press release trying to get pro bono lawyers to take on 

some of these cases, but unfortunately it was not successful. As a 

result, most of these Haitians have no attorneys. Because their 

cases are being expedited, access to them is paramount. Yet, we 

have faced numerous problems in trying to help the Haitians. Let 

me just give you an example of what I mean when I say expedited. 

Additional immigration judges were detailed from the Miami 

courtrooms to Krome in order to hear these cases. Some of these 

cases are scheduled for only an hour, others for half an hour—that 

is with translation—versus typically 3 hours in other cases. 

Judges are holding up to five merits hearings a day with the 

Haitian cases. Some judges have told us that they simply cannot 

grant continuances beyond 4 weeks. With other nationalities, that 

is not a problem. In one week, we had over 165 requests for assistance from the Haitians. Yet, at a time when we need more access 

than ever, access has been more restricted. 

For example, at the Krome detention center, we used to have access to our clients virtually any time during the weekends. Not 

long ago, INS officials told us that we could only visit our clients 

there between 7 and 11 a.m. This is a serious problem not only for 

us, but for private attorneys wanting to take on some of these 

cases. 

Also, we typically wait for hours at Krome to see our clients because head counts can take hours. After the counts finish, oftentimes we’re told they don’t have enough escorts to bring the Haitians meet with us. And there is not enough confidential visitation 

space for attorneys to meet with their clients. 

At the Turner Guilford Knight Correctional Center, where Ms. 

Ocean was detained for several months, we typically wait up to an 

hour for an escort. There are constantly changing requirements for 

attorneys to get permission to go to the TGK unit where the 

women are being held. We have no access at all to the hotel where 

Ms. Ocean was originally detained. In fact, the only time I have 

been there was when Congressman Conyers was in Miami and he 

visited the facility and brought some of us along. 

The problems for us are exacerbated by the fact that our clients 

are in four different facilities. The men are at Krome. The women 

have been moved from TGK to the Broward County Work Release 

Center. Women with children are at a local motel, and we also 

have clients at a facility in Berks County, Pennsylvania. 

20

I don’t think it is surprising that a number of our Haitian clients 

are extremely depressed and demoralized. As a result, they are 

having great difficulty articulating their claims. Many of their asylum applications, which have to be completed in English, consist of 

one or two sentences. The Haitians have no idea how to go about 

dealing with the asylum process, which is very complicated even 

for immigration attorneys. 

Chairman KENNEDY. Bishop Wenski, let me ask you about what 

is your own experience in providing pastoral guidance to these refugees. What amount are economic refugees and what amount are 

those that fear asylum? Let’s take the ones that you have been 

working with, I imagine, in different locations. We are interested 

obviously in the ones that you might have provided counselor services to. 

Bishop WENSKI. I think it is kind of a trick question because usually in this country when the economy goes bad, we hang the politicians. So the economic and political factors are very much interconnected, and I don’t know that we can distill somebody that is 

purely economic and somebody that is purely political without having a mixture of both groups. 

Chairman KENNEDY. Well, I am not sure I agree with you. I 

think we heard today from Ms. Ocean and that is an extremely 

powerful case that you will hear for asylum, epecially all that has 

happened to that family. It didn’t have anything to do with economics. Given what we have heard in terms of the political anarchy 

that has existed, I am not sure I accept that. 

Bishop WENSKI. Well, I would agree with you on the issue of political anarchy. 

Chairman KENNEDY. That is what we are talking about. The 

point is you are a counselor, to people like Marie, and they are parishioners. People are talking to you in ways that they wouldn’t 

talk to us. I was asking about whether these are real-life stories 

or whether this is what we will hear from opponents, saying anyone can get six witnesses to go up there and say anything. 

I listened in the Armed Services Committee about the danger of 

the Iraqis of dropping weapons of mass destruction, and one my 

colleagues said, well, Senator Kennedy, you can get six generals to 

say anything. Well, they just happened to be some of the most important generals that have led American forces. 

So we are trying to find out what the facts are here, and this is 

a serious problem and these are serious cases. This isn’t the first 

time I have heard them, but I was giving you an opportunity to 

say——

Bishop WENSKI. Well, in fact, I would say that Marie’s case is 

certainly based on fact. But even INS would say her case is based 

on fact because almost all of her companions in detention have 

been found to have a credible fear of persecution. So there is no one 

that is questioning the credibility of their basis for asylum, which 

is based on political reasons. 

The political classes of Haiti have failed their people and that is 

one of the sad realities that we have here. There is great Haitian 

proverb that describes it well [Creole saying.] You know, what does 

the flea care about if the dog is hungry? Basically, we have a failure of the political classes that the people had much hope in much 

21

expectation of. And, of course, they are paying for this in increasing 

misery and violence, and therefore are leaving their country looking for new hope. 

Chairman KENNEDY. I am going to include in the record a number of statements, one from my colleague, Senator Graham, and a 

number of other leaders in the community, leaders in various organizations. We will include those in the record. 

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

Chairman KENNEDY. I want to thank all of our panelists very, 

very much for coming. It might be said, we have known this for 

some time. We are going to try and keep after this until we get 

something done, at least I am, and so we will work with others 

that feel the same way. I believe that we can and we commit that 

we will. 

We thank our colleagues. 

The subcommittee stands in recess. 

[Whereupon, at 4 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Submissions for the record follow.]

22


88613.001
23


88613.002
24


88613.003
25


88613.004
26


88613.005
27


88613.006
28


88613.007
29


88613.008
30


88613.009
31


88613.010
32


88613.011
33


88613.012
34


88613.013
35


88613.014
36


88613.015
37


88613.016
38


88613.031
39


88613.032
40


88613.033
41


88613.034
42


88613.035
43


88613.036
44


88613.037
45


88613.038
46


88613.039
47


88613.040
48


88613.041
49


88613.042
50


88613.043
51


88613.044
52


88613.045
53


88613.046
54


88613.047
55


88613.048
56


88613.049
57


88613.050
58


88613.051
59


88613.017
60


88613.018
61


88613.019
62


88613.020
63


88613.021
64


88613.022
65


88613.023
66


88613.024
67


88613.025
68


88613.026
69


88613.027
70


88613.028
71


88613.029
72


88613.030
73


88613.052
74


88613.053
75


88613.054
76


88613.055
77


88613.056
78


88613.057
79


88613.058
80


88613.059
81


88613.060
82


88613.061
83


88613.062
84


88613.063
85


88613.064
86


88613.065
87


88613.066
88


88613.067
89


88613.068
90


88613.069
91


88613.070
92


88613.071
93


88613.072
94


88613.073
95


88613.074
96


88613.075
97


88613.076
98


88613.077
99


88613.078
100


88613.079
101


88613.080
102


88613.081
103


88613.082
104


88613.083
105


88613.084
106


88613.085
107


88613.086
108


88613.087
109


88613.088
110


88613.089
111


88613.090
112


88613.091
113


88613.092
114


88613.093
115


88613.094
116


88613.095
117


88613.096
118


88613.097
119


88613.098
120


88613.099
121


88613.100
122


88613.101
123


88613.102
124


88613.103
125


88613.104
126


88613.105
127


88613.106
128


88613.107
129


88613.108
130


88613.109
131


88613.110
132


88613.111
133


88613.112
134

Æ


88613.113