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

75–388PDF 2012

SEEKING FREEDOM FOR AMERICAN TRAPPED IN

BOLIVIAN PRISON

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, 

AND HUMAN RIGHTS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

AUGUST 1, 2012

Serial No. 112–172

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/ or

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

RON PAUL, Texas 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

DAVID RIVERA, Florida 

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania 

TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York 

RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina 

ROBERT TURNER, New York 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

DENNIS CARDOZA, California 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

FREDERICA WILSON, Florida 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

YLEEM D.S. POBLETE, Staff Director 

RICHARD J. KESSLER, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, AND HUMAN RIGHTS

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, Chairman 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York 

ROBERT TURNER, New York 

KAREN BASS, California 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

Mr. Yimy Montan ̃ o Villagomez, attorney for Jacob Ostreicher ........................... 6

Mr. Jerjes Justiniano Atala ́, attorney for Jacob Ostreicher ................................. 11

Ms. Miriam Ungar, wife of Jacob Ostreicher ........................................................ 25

Ms. Chaya Gitty Weinberger, daughter of Jacob Ostreicher ............................... 30

Mr. Steve Moore, Special Agent (retired), Federal Bureau of Investigations ..... 34

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

Mr. Yimy Montan ̃ o Villagomez: Prepared statement ........................................... 8

Mr. Jerjes Justiniano Atala ́: Prepared statement ................................................. 13

Ms. Miriam Ungar: Prepared statement ............................................................... 27

Ms. Chaya Gitty Weinberger: Prepared statement ............................................... 32

Mr. Steve Moore, Special Agent (retired): Prepared statement ........................... 37

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 56

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 57

(1)

SEEKING FREEDOM FOR AMERICAN TRAPPED 

IN BOLIVIAN PRISON 

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 1, 2012

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICA, GLOBAL HEALTH, AND HUMAN RIGHTS, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:49 p.m., in room 

2172 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Christopher H. Smith 

(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. SMITH. The hearing will come to order, and I want to thank 

you all for joining us as the subcommittee continues to shine the 

spotlight on and to search for a resolution to the extreme injustice 

being perpetrated by the Bolivian Government officials against 

Jacob Ostreicher, an American trapped in the infamous Palmasola 

Prison, charged with crimes for which the Bolivian Government 

has produced no evidence, either of the crimes themselves or that 

Mr. Ostreicher committed either one. 

He is being denied the most fundamental due process and human 

rights both under Bolivian law and international human rights 

standards. 

On June 9, Sheri Rickert, my staff director on the subcommittee 

and I went to Bolivia to meet with Mr. Ostreicher and to attend 

a court hearing for his release on bail which had been repeatedly 

delayed since September of last year. 

The testimony presented at the subcommittee at the June 6 

hearing about this case revealed that repeated due process violations were being committed by Bolivian officials. 

On June 11, I had the opportunity to witness some of that myself. Two attorneys from the Bolivian Ministry of Government, who 

I understand should not be intervening in the case in the first 

place, aggressively threatened to take legal action against the 

judge if he refused to recuse himself. Although the judge rightly rejected the ludicrous reasons for which the Ministry of Government 

attorneys based their threat, they accomplished their goal of having the hearing postponed, and Mr. Ostreicher returned to prison. 

To underline the absurdity of the Bolivian judicial system, Mr. 

Ostreicher’s case was then referred to a court where the judge is 

detained in the same prison as Mr. Ostreicher. It took fully 6 

weeks for the hearing to be rescheduled. Remember, this is a bail 

hearing in another court that has a judge. 

I’ve been informed that, unfortunately, the same scenario occurred on June 11 at the hearing that took place, and again on 

2

July 23. The Ministry of Government attorneys injected themselves 

into the hearing and aggressively threatened the judge if she failed 

to recuse herself. The judge rejected out of hand the basis asserted 

for the threat, and again postponed the hearing and returned Mr. 

Ostreicher to jail. 

While in Bolivia I met with Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, 

Juan Carlos Alurralde, the Minister of Government Carlos Romero, 

and Minister of Justice Cecilia Ayllo ́n Quinteros to advocate for 

Ostreicher’s release. Each one of them have made commitments 

with respect to this case but sadly have not followed through. 

And in the meantime, Mr. Ostreicher continues to face daily 

threats to his life in the violent, unsanitary, drug infested 

Palmasola Prison. 

He has been on a hunger strike, as we know, since April 15, and 

he was already extremely frail and weak when I saw him over a 

month ago. A private and a Bolivian Government doctor have examined Mr. Ostreicher and recommended that he be referred to a 

medical clinic for evaluation. Given everything else that has happened in this case, it is highly suspicious that the prison officials 

are unable to find police escorts to take him there. 

Although our own State Department officials are finally acknowledging that Ostreicher’s due process rights are being violated, they 

continue to seem hesitant and uncertain about what action to take 

on his behalf. The State Department was invited to testify at this 

hearing, but indicated that they were not available to do so this 

week. 

I do look forward to arranging a follow-up hearing at the earliest 

possible date when they are prepared to discuss their efforts in this 

case. 

Since undertaking my own advocacy efforts on behalf of Mr. 

Ostreicher in early June, I have received reports about several 

Americans who are imprisoned overseas and are being denied their 

fundamental due process and human rights. 

Out of a sense of obligation to do all I can to help Mr. Ostreicher, 

but also to assist other U.S. citizens in similar situations, I will introducing legislation this Friday that will hold accountable those 

foreign government officials who are responsible for the violation of 

due process and human rights of imprisoned Americans. 

The legislation is entitled Justice for Imprisoned Americans 

Overseas Act, or Jacob’s Law. 

It is premised on the principle that foreign government officials 

responsible for violations of fundamental due process and human 

rights of imprisoned U.S. citizens as well as their immediate family 

members should not have the privilege of traveling to the United 

States while our citizens are unjustly languishing in prisons and 

they are responsible for them. 

The bill would prohibit the issuance of a visa and deny entry to 

any foreign government official who is violating or failing to fulfill 

a responsibility to uphold the rights of imprisoned Americans. 

The legislation would also deny entry to such officials for 10 

years if the American dies from any cause while imprisoned. These 

visa and entry prohibitions would likewise apply to these officials’ 

immediate family members. 

3

Entry into the United States would be denied only when an 

American’s fundamental rights are being violated. Americans who 

violate the legitimate laws of a foreign country must accept the 

consequences of their crimes, but the United States cannot stand 

by and simply monitor the cases when our citizens are being held 

hostage contrary to international human rights standards. 

I would emphasize that already under current law, 22 U.S. Code 

Section 1731, the President must demand the release of any citizen 

who has been unjustly deprived of his liberty by or under the authority of any foreign government, and to undertake appropriate 

means to obtain the release of such citizen. We’re not talking about 

just monitoring the release of that person. 

This legislation provides the State Department with a tool that 

it should welcome in order to help it fulfill that responsibility. 

We are privileged to have with us today two attorneys who are 

representing Mr. Ostreicher in the Santa Cruz courts. I would like 

to thank them for coming all the way from Bolivia to participate 

in this hearing on Mr. Ostreicher’s behalf. 

We will also receive an update about the case from Mr. 

Ostreicher’s wife, Ms. Miriam Ungar, and his daughter, a constituent of mine from New Jersey, Ms. Chaya Weinberger. 

Finally, I would like to express my appreciate to Mr. Steven 

Moore, a retired FBI Special Agent who has spent considerable 

time and effort investigating Mr. Ostreicher’s case, and who interrupted his book tour in Washington State just to be with us today. 

Thank you for that sacrifice, and thank you for the tremendous 

work that you have done. 

I’d like to now yield to my friend and colleague, Ms. Bass, the 

ranking member, for any opening comments she might have. 

Ms. BASS. Mr. Chairman, thank you for continuing to focus on 

Mr. Jacob Ostreicher, the U.S. citizen and businessman held in 

custody in Bolivia for over 14 months. And let me just take the opportunity to commend you for your aggressive action of taking the 

time out and going directly to Bolivia. And as I understand in reports from that there was concerns for your physical safety, but 

you took it upon yourself to do that, anyway. 

I regret that no meaningful progress has been made toward this 

release since our last hearing on June 6, as his forced detention becomes more troubling each day and each minute that he remains 

incarcerated. 

Mr. Chairman, allow me to again express my deepest concern for 

Mr. Ostreicher and his family who have endured such a great deal 

since his June 2011 detention. Mr. Ostreicher, as has been noted, 

has been held in detention for well over a year without due process. 

Hearings on this case have been postponed numerous times including the most recent only on July 23. I must ask the Bolivian 

Government why do they continue to stall on this case? 

I am aware that the Bolivian justice system allows for up to 18 

months before an individual is charged. It’s my understanding that 

this is far from the norm, and in many cases far exceed this time 

frame. 

Although the difficulty of assessing justice in Bolivia is clearly a 

problem that extends beyond the case of Mr. Ostreicher, I would 

hope that this case, to be one of these that I would hope that the 

4

necessary diplomatic and political pressures would be applied to resolve this case. 

Let me take the time to urge the U.S. officials to do all that is 

possible to find a solution to what is a crisis that divides a family, 

and robbed a mother, wife, children of a son, husband, and father. 

Ms. Ungar, I empathize with the frustration that you, your husband, and your family have endured. I say I empathized, I can’t 

say that I know exactly how you feel because I don’t think anybody 

knows how you feel unless they have been in that exact situation. 

But let me say again that we have not forgotten your husband and 

we, too, are worried about his mental and physical health and well 

being. 

I once again encourage you and all parties involved to keep channels of communication open so that every effort to bring transparency and progress to this very serious crisis can be resolved. 

I hope that you are able to keep the faith and believe that your 

husband will be returned to you, and that you will soon be able to 

put this tragedy behind you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to hearing from 

today’s witnesses. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Ms. Bass. I’d like to now turn 

to Mr. Turner, the gentleman from New York. 

Mr. TURNER. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass, thank you 

for calling this hearing today. 

Chairman Smith, let me applaud you for your effort on behalf of 

Jacob Ostreicher. I also want to thank Jacob’s wife and daughter 

for coming to Washington again to share their thoughts with us. 

A little over a month ago we had a similar hearing and it was 

entitled, ‘‘The State Department’s Inadequate Response to Human 

Rights Concerns in Bolivia.’’ Frankly, this hearing could now be entitled, ‘‘The State Department’s Inadequate Response to Human 

Rights Concerns in Bolivia Part II.’’

And perhaps even that is not completely accurate because unlike 

movie sequels, nothing has changed. 

Jacob has still not been formally charged, he has been denied a 

hearing, he continues to live in squalor, and in constant fear for his 

life, and his health continues to deteriorate. 

The State Department’s response is still inadequate. 

They have been invited but they have declined to testify claiming 

that it is better to work behind the scenes. This strategy has been 

employed for over a year, and I ask what are the results. So, if the 

State Department were here I would have one question; what are 

you doing to help him? He has been detained without a hearing, 

no trial, no jury, no verdict, no due process, Mr. Chairman. I believe Jacob’s family deserves to know what is going on, and I hope 

the State Department will answer that question. 

Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Turner, thank you very much. I now recognize 

the gentlelady from New York, Ann Marie Buerkle. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, let me begin by saying thank you to all of our witnesses and to Mr. Ostreicher’s family for being here today. I know 

how difficult this is, but we need you to help us raise awareness 

about the issue and all of the challenges that he faces, so thank 

5

you very much for your courage to be here and to help us do our 

job even better. 

I just want to thank the chairman. We are very fortunate to have 

a chairman such as Mr. Smith who has the courage to continue to 

focus on these human rights violations throughout the world, and 

who has been steadfast. And as was mentioned by the ranking 

member, by his trip to Bolivia, and again the courage it takes to 

call attention and to remain vigilant on behalf of not only Mr. 

Ostreicher but also his family. 

I look forward to hearing your testimony today. It’s going to take 

all of Congress and this administration, it’s going to take a concerted effort for us to get him the liberty and the freedom that he 

needs, and we want to pledge that to you. We will remain steadfast, and we will continue to work on his behalf as well as your’s. 

I thank you very much, and I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Ms. Buerkle. 

I’d like to now welcome to the witness table our very distinguished witnesses beginning first with Yimy Montan ̃ o Villagomez 

who obtained his legal license at the Universidad and a Master’s 

degree as well, both in Santa Cruz in Bolivia. He is admitted to 

the Bolivian bar. He has been the principal at the law firm of 

Montan ̃ o & Associates for the past 2 years, and has represented 

Mr. Ostreicher since January 2012. 

We will then hear from Jerjes Justiniano who attended the 

school of Universidad, the Adventist University of Chile, and obtained his license in law as well in Santa Cruz. He has completed 

a Master’s program in criminal law and is awaiting to present his 

thesis. He is also admitted to the Bolivian bar and has been a partner in the firm that he heads since 2000. Mr. Justiniano has represented Mr. Ostreicher in this case since November and December 

2011, and again since March 2012. 

We’ll then hear from Ms. Miriam Ungar, who is the wife of Mr. 

Jacob Ostreicher. She has visited Mr. Ostreicher in Bolivia numerous times both prior to and after his arrest. She has gone from having the normal life of a resident of Brooklyn, New York to being 

the lead advocate for her husband imprisoned in a foreign country 

with a different language, different culture, and an incomprehensible disregard for fundamental human rights and legal due process. She has striven to help her husband maintain his physical well 

being and mental sanity in horrendous prison conditions. 

Ms. Ungar, once again I commend you and thank you for your 

courage and your fidelity to your husband. When Sheri and I met 

with him, he spoke about you, Chaya, and rest of the family almost 

non-stop, about how much he just longs to be with you both of you. 

And it was really extraordinary how much he misses you and cherishes the family, and both of you. 

We’ll then hear from Ms. Chaya Weinberger, the daughter of Mr. 

Ostreicher. Ms. Weinberger is married and the mother of five small 

children. She is a resident of Lakewood, New Jersey in the district 

which I have the honor of representing, and she’s also visited her 

father in the notorious Palmasola Prison in Bolivia, and has attended several of his hearings. We are deeply appreciative of her 

willingness, and again to the both of you, thank you so much. 

6

We then will hear from Mr. Steven Moore who served as FBI 

Special Agent and Supervisory Special Agent in the FBI for 25 

years retiring in 2008. Mr. Moore led the investigations of many 

high profile crimes in Los Angeles, including the first ever conviction for an anthrax threat and the Buford Furrow shooting murder 

spree at the Los Angeles Jewish Community Center. 

He spent several years on SWAT, and was a case agent for Los 

Angeles 9/11 investigation, and later chosen to supervise all alQaeda investigations for the Los Angeles FBI. 

In 2003, Mr. Moore stood up the FBI squad in charge of responding to acts of terrorism against the U.S. in Asia and Pakistan, including the bombings of the U.S. consulate in Karachi, and the JW 

Marriott Hotel in Jakarta. He established liaison and worked closely with the CIA and the U.S. Department of State in several countries, conducting investigations at at least six U.S. Embassies. Mr. 

Moore also served a term as assistant legal attache at the U.S. Embassy in Nassau, Bahamas during the summer of 2004. 

In his retirement, Mr. Moore has written a book entitled, ‘‘Special Agent Man: My Life in the FBI as a Terrorist Hunter, Helicopter Pilot, and Certified Sniper,’’ which was just recently released. He also has voluntarily undertaken to use his enormous 

skills and experience that he acquired as an FBI Special Agent to 

help exonerate Americans wrongly incarcerated abroad, including 

Amanda Knox who was convicted in 2009 in Italy of murdering her 

roommate. Of course, because of his work largely, the evidence was 

shown to be bogus and she is now free. 

He went to Bolivia in early April 2012 to visit Mr. Ostreicher and 

to investigate his case, and we welcome him back, as well. 

Mr. Montan ̃ o, if you would proceed with your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF MR. YIMY MONTAN ̃ O VILLAGOMEZ, ATTORNEY 

FOR JACOB OSTREICHER 

[The following testimony was delivered through an interpreter.] 

Mr. MONTAN ̃ O VILLAGOMEZ. I thank this committee for the opportunity. I come here to transmit to you very important news which 

is that a citizen of yours, of this country, is dying in a Bolivian 

prison. I know his case entirely, and I have absolutely no doubt regarding Mr. Ostreicher’s innocence. 

Bolivia is going through a very difficult time particularly in administering justice. There is still a complete concentration of power 

in the central government and this concentration of power today 

has turned completely against Mr. Ostreicher subjecting him to a 

trial, a trial which has—a prosecution which has robbed him of his 

freedom. It is attacking his life, his health. 

In this prosecution there has been not even the least respect for 

the laws and constitutional rights which as a citizen he should be 

allowed to have through the Bolivian legal system. 

This illegal and cruel prosecution of Mr. Ostreicher has been 

going on for the last 14 months. There is an innocent man who is 

in horrific conditions. His health is suffering, and for the last 20 

hearings he has not been allowed to recover his freedom. He’s not 

even been allowed the assistance of a doctor in this situation. And 

this comes about as a result of bad use and abuse of power which 

has fallen upon Mr. Ostreicher. 

7

If his rights to life and health have not been respected, how is 

it possible that he would be given due process according to the existing laws? This is reflected in the fact that there are continuing 

efforts by the Ministry of Government and the officials working for 

that Ministry who will not allow a bail hearing to be heard to see 

whether he would be able to regain his freedom. 

All of the rights, whether they be in international treaties, or 

through Bolivian laws to which he should be entitled to have been 

left on paper. We can’t imagine there being due process when 

there’s no independence of the different branches. 

The prosecutor’s office from Bolivia and the judges act at the behest of the government, and when they refuse to do so they are removed from office. His right to freedom has been continually compromised as have his life, his health, his belongings, and his right 

to be with his family. 

Although he is innocent, he continues to be detained while people 

who commit crimes, even crimes against him continue to be free. 

I don’t know what to tell you to ask exactly of your government. 

I would only plead you and encourage you to act in the most appropriate and timely fashion possible. If not, this story may not have 

a happy ending. His life is gravely compromised. He’s quite weakened, and his family needs him back so that he can be with them 

once again. 

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and to the members of the subcommittee 

for this opportunity to tell my truth. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Montan ̃ o follows:]

8


75388a-1.eps
9


75388a-2.eps
10


75388a-3.eps
11

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Montan ̃ o, thank you very much for your testimony and for your courage, both of the attorneys, to be here. You 

know, Ms. Bass and I were just talking. It shows tremendous courage and bravery for both of you to come to the United States and 

to be here knowing the impunity, especially the prosecutory impunity that currently reigns in Bolivia, and we’re seeing it with Jacob’s case, so thank you for your testimony. 

Mr. Justiniano. 

STATEMENT OF MR. JERJES JUSTINIANO ATALA ́ , ATTORNEY 

FOR JACOB OSTREICHER 

[The following testimony was delivered through an interpreter.] 

Mr. JUSTINIANO. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, and to the members 

of the subcommittee. 

I first need to tell you that in my professional career I do not 

take drug trafficking cases, so when Mr. Ostreicher asked me to 

take a look at his case and after I found no evidence to the effect 

that he was at all implicated or implicated in drug trafficking, it 

was only then that I accepted his case. 

I also have to say that unfortunately I am not particularly proud 

of the Bolivian judicial system. The levels of corruption, political 

and economic machinations, the lack of independence for the judges 

makes this system extremely weak. And I would say that just because these political characteristics, these characteristics in general 

have had a great impact on Mr. Ostreicher’s case. 

This testimony is difficult for me for two reasons. This is because 

of the political—because through the process the Bolivian Government and the Ministry of Government has directly interfered in the 

case. And it becomes difficult for me personally, as well as for political reasons because of personal ties that I have. My father has 

been named Ambassador of Bolivia in Brazil, so I have personal 

ties to the government. 

However, it’s also difficult for me because it’s hard to explain the 

situation of an American citizen in a completely different legal system. In spite of that, human rights are human rights for anybody 

and everybody. And in this particular case it’s the human rights of 

Mr. Jacob Ostreicher that have been violated. And, particularly, 

this is the case with the procedural aspects of this, so I think it 

might be hard for you to understand this fully, but in this particular case both the prosecutor and a judge have indicated that it 

is impossible to say that he has committed the crime because he 

has not proven the legality of his financing. 

The Bolivian authorities have said that he has not denied the 

ties with these other people and the illegality of the financing and, 

therefore, he is guilty. 

While they may be different, the Bolivian and the American legal 

systems, there is, in fact, one guiding principle in both of them 

which is the presumption of innocence, which means that the accuser must, in fact, prove the guilt of the party, and this has not 

happened at all in the case of Mr. Jacob Ostreicher. 

As soon as there was a quest to end the detention of Mr. 

Ostreicher and a judge reviewed the evidence provided by the defense, he decided that, in fact, there was no evidence to indicate 

that there was any illegal source of the funding, and he was grantVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:25 Oct 01, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Y:\WORK\AGH\080112\75388 HFA PsN: SHIRL
12

ed his freedom. Curiously enough, 6 days later that same judge 

without word from or to anybody changed his opinion and ordered 

his detention once again. 

As Mr. Montan ̃ o stated, there have been over 20 hearings that 

have not been held because of interference by the Bolivian Ministry 

of Government on the Bolivian justice system. I cannot give you the 

reasons behind this interference, but I can definitely say that there 

is interference by the Ministry of Government on Mr. Jacob 

Ostreicher’s case. 

I can identify public officials like Fernando Rivera and Dennis 

Rodas Limachi who have directly interfered in the government, and 

interfered in this procedure. And you, Mr. Chairman, have seen it 

yourself. 

I personally believe that it is not only Jacob Ostreicher who is 

at risk because of his health, and because of his illegal prosecution, 

but the Bolivian justice system is also at risk. 

The democracy has certain pillars and separation of powers, and 

as soon as the executive branch interferes with the judicial branch 

by threatening a judge, democracy itself is threatened. 

And, finally, I would like to state that I cannot understand why 

a U.S. citizen who decided to invest in Bolivia, and who decided to 

create jobs in Bolivia is being treated the way he is treated. Jacob 

Ostreicher’s companies would pay higher salaries than what Bolivia pays its police officers. Still, he is being held illegally with no 

reason, and through direct interference on behalf of the government. That is why I consider this not only illegal but truly unjust. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Justiniano follows:]

13


75388b-1.eps
14


75388b-2.eps
15


75388b-3.eps
16


75388b-4.eps
17


75388b-5.eps
18


75388b-6.eps
19


75388b-7.eps
20


75388b-8.eps
21


75388b-9.eps
22


75388b-10.eps
23


75388b-11.eps
24


75388b-12.eps
25

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Justiniano, thank you very much again to both 

of you. Again, I can’t underscore for the American audience how 

courageous it is for you to come here and testify. But having been 

in the courtroom and watching what I truly thought was a stellar 

representation on behalf of Jacob, despite the intimidation tactics 

that were clearly on display, and despite the judge who went from 

being confident in the morning to being a nervous wreck because 

he was so fearful about the sword of Damocles that was hanging 

over his head. And you two gentlemen were in the court standing 

up on behalf of Jacob, and have come here now to Washington. 

I would hope the people of Bolivia would realize that you have 

given a great deal of encouragement to all of us, that Bolivian democracy in the future, providing people of your stature are robustly 

involved with the democracy, has a great future. 

Very often, it is the defense attorneys and their stand for human 

rights and human dignity that determines which course a country 

takes, so I want to say how this subcommittee applauds you for the 

stellar defense you’re providing for Jacob, but also for your courage. 

Ms. Ungar. 

STATEMENT OF MS. MIRIAM UNGAR, WIFE OF JACOB 

OSTREICHER 

Ms. UNGAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee for taking the time to hear my testimony today. My 

name is Miriam Ungar and I’m the wife of Jacob Ostreicher, a 53-

year-old American citizen currently detained in Santa Cruz, Bolivia. As I’ve already testified on June 6 before this subcommittee, 

I will only give a short recap of my husband’s story. 

On December 26, 2010, Jacob went to Santa Cruz, Bolivia to take 

over management of a rice business after investors suspected that 

the local manager they hired was embezzling money from the company. When Jacob arrived in Bolivia, the local manager was nowhere to be found, and Jacob immediately hired lawyers to start 

filing criminal and civil charges against her. 

Before she fled, the local manager purchased a parcel of land 

from a man wanted in Brazil in the 1990s. When Bolivian authorities realized that the company was operating on his land, they 

raided Jacob’s office and deposed him. Even though Jacob did not 

purchase the land himself, Jacob cooperated fully with the authorities and notified the U.S. Embassy of the deposition. 

After enduring two additional depositions, Jacob was arrested on 

June 3, 2011. At the arraignment, the prosecutors alleged criminal 

organization and money laundering. It is my understanding that no 

evidence was reviewed by the judge. 

Following three postponements, on September 23, 2011, a judge 

ordered Jacob’s release on bail based on evidence submitted, only 

to reverse his decision 6 days later. Of the 22 hearings that have 

been scheduled, 19 hearings were postponed. Most of the stated excuses for these postponements were illegal. During Jacob’s last two 

scheduled hearings, the Bolivian Ministry of Government resorted 

to a new tactic to postpone Jacob’s hearings. 

Mr. Chairman, as you mentioned before, at the June 11 hearing 

the legal advisor to the Ministry of Government demanded that the 

third judge on Jacob’s case recuse himself. By law, the higher court 

26

that he referred it to must make a decision within 48 hours. They 

failed to do that. They did not follow due process. 

Forty-two days later on July 23, the 22nd scheduled hearing in 

Jacob’s case, Jacob was brought into the courtroom only to hear a 

repeat of what occurred at the June 11 hearing. The fourth judge 

on Jacob’s case was ordered to recuse herself by the Ministry of 

Government’s legal advisor. She refused. The legal advisor threatened to file charges against her. The judge refused, but referred it 

to a higher court anyway. By law, the higher court must make a 

decision within 48 hours. It is now August 1 and we are still waiting. 

Today marks 426 days and my husband, Jacob Ostreicher, has 

been incarcerated in Palmasola Prison without being formally 

charged with a crime. Palmasola is a notorious prison ruled by the 

most hardened criminals. Every day that Jacob remains in that 

prison is another day that his life remains in constant danger. 

I am beyond frustrated by the Bolivian Government’s consistent 

interference in my husband’s case resulting in a denial of his due 

process and basic human rights. Although I’m aware of the shortcomings of the Bolivian justice system, I believe that what my husband has endured is more than the average prisoner in Bolivia. 

Evidenced by the two most recent hearings in his case, the Ministry of Government is playing an active role in preventing Jacob 

from having his case heard. 

I would like to address a report I received from the U.S. Embassy on the meeting on July 5, 2012 with Roberto Desogus from 

the United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights’ office in 

Bolivia. I received a report on July 12. Following the meeting, the 

U.S. Embassy reported that it is the opinion of the UNHCHR Office in Bolivia that Jacob is not being persecuted or targeted by the 

government, but rather he is yet another victim of a brutally slow, 

inefficient, underfunded and corrupt judicial system. 

According to the UNHCHR, the procedural delays, the rotation 

of prosecutors, the recusal of judges, and the apparent lack of hard 

evidence in Jacob’s case are all factors which are common in the 

majority of cases in the Bolivian judicial system. 

As our Bolivian attorneys attested, the totality of what Jacob has 

experienced is not common. Moreover, even if it was, the 

UNHCHR, an international body charged with upholding and advocating for international standards of human rights should not sit 

idly by and accept it. Nor, in my opinion, should the U.S. Government. Jacob is a U.S. citizen and the U.S. Government should do 

everything in its power to insure respect for his rights and due 

process regardless of how unjust, slow, and corrupt the justice system in Bolivia is. 

I am utterly distraught and frustrated beyond words that it has 

been 15 months since the crisis began and we are still right where 

we are in June 2011. We have not moved forward in this case. Fifteen months in prison just seems to flow so easily from out mouths, 

but 15 months is a milestone in the life of a human being. 

In the 15 months that Jacob has been kept hostage in a foreign 

country, his grandchildren have learned to walk, to talk, and some 

even started school. These are lost milestones that can never be recovered. 

27

In summary, Mr. Chairman, Jacob’s rights are continuously 

being violated every second that he remains in prison. The last two 

hearings in his case have provided evidence that he is being targeted by the Bolivian Government and, thus, I hope that the 

United States Government will continue to advocate for and protect 

its citizen. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear before 

you and this subcommittee today. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Ungar follows:]


75388c-1.eps
28


75388c-2.eps
29


75388c-3.eps
30

Mr. SMITH. Thank you again, Ms. Ungar, for, as I said at the outset, your steadfast advocacy, so effective and aggressive, all involvement completely motivated by the love for your husband. 

Thank you for, again, your advocacy. 

Ms. Weinberger. 

STATEMENT OF MS. CHAYA GITTY WEINBERGER, DAUGHTER 

OF JACOB OSTREICHER 

Ms. WEINBERGER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and other members 

of the subcommittee for bringing my father’s plight to the forefront, 

and for scheduling this hearing. I will never forget all that you 

have done for my family during this time of crisis and will be forever grateful. 

The image of my dear innocent father accompanies me as I speak 

before you this afternoon. It is an image that causes me to shutter 

when I think of it. His face is swollen with hunger. His skin is pale 

and lifeless, but his eyes are alive. They are very much alive and 

filled with longing pleading with me to try with all my waning energy to recuse him before it’s, God forbid, too late. He still hopes 

after all these months for freedom and liberty back home in the 

land that he loves. 

I cannot let him down, and so although it is very hard for me 

to be in the limelight once again, I appeal to you, the government 

on my homeland, my father’s situation has not changed in the 

slightest since his detention 426 days ago. It has been a long painful year filled with let downs and postponed hearings, and we have 

just had enough. 

We are enraged at the injustices, lies and scandalous acts that 

are being committed against my father. We have tried going patiently through the Bolivian legal system and bearing with their 

way of governing but they have shown us that their justice system 

is flawed beyond repair. 

Rather than pursue justice for victims and the accused alike, the 

Bolivian justice system appears to be a vehicle for political maneuvering. I have been appalled by what I have witnessed firsthand 

while in attendance at one of my father’s hearings in Bolivia. 

At my father’s very first scheduled hearing the judge was texting 

on his Blackberry and even answered a phone call while the defense lawyers were arguing their case. Although I was not in attendance at my father’s most recent hearings, we have learned that 

the Ministry of Government requested that the judges should 

recuse themselves, a political maneuver to postpone my father’s 

hearing for as long as possible done in the course of a hearing for 

everyone to witness. 

How can my father possibly be receiving fair treatment in a 

country with a government that does not even bother to hide its 

corruption? How much longer must he wait and wonder when his 

salvation will come, for it will not come through the Bolivian justice system. Time has shown us that. It is clear to us that his only 

chance for liberation is if the American Government will jump into 

action and demand his freedom from his captors before it’s too late. 

He deserves to be free. 

It is my sincere belief that the only reason for his being kept hostage is because he stood for the American ideals of free enterprise 

31

and capitalism, and the Bolivian Government saw him as a threat 

to its way of life and control of the rice markets. 

The abuse and torture my innocent father is going through both 

mentally and physically would stun the mind of any sane person. 

I have seen it with my own eyes. It was so ghastly, I felt as I were 

in a horror movie. 

Sewerage runs through the streets of the huge prison. There are 

no guards to protect the inmates, and the only security comes from 

other inmates. Fistfights erupt between the prisoners often. It is a 

common occurrence for a corpse to be carried out. It is a scene from 

a nightmare and my dear father is living this nightmare daily. 

Every day that he is being kept there his basic human rights are 

being violated. 

Our Web site is being visited daily by hundreds of people who 

are praying and care very much about my father. More than 35,000 

people have signed a petition to the White House in support of his 

release from detention. These people see how the Bolivian Government has perverted justice and they are sickened by it. They want 

to see their country act on behalf of their fellow citizen. 

My father is literally clinging onto his sanity. He tells me that 

the one thought that gives him the strength to endure is the hope 

that the American Government will do everything in its power to 

secure his release. He often stares at the American flag painted on 

the wall by his cell and dreams about the day when he will proudly 

sing the song of liberty and salute to his homeland. 

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, let’s show my 

father that his dreams will become a reality. Show him and the 

world that America is what it professes to be, a country that stands 

for liberty, a land that will fight for her citizens, a country that will 

not allow its innocent citizen be kept hostage in a foreign country, 

and won’t let anyone stand in her quest for truth. Prove that American citizenship is a commodity worth having, and that the StarSpangled Banner will triumph once again over those who mock all 

she stands for; that she will not stay in my father’s cell in the 

Palmasola Prison, but will rather be carried back with my father 

to the greatest nation on earth. Let her be back where she belongs 

together with my father, dual witnesses to the supremacy of their 

country, the United States of America. Please do everything in your 

power to bring my father back to his homeland, back to his children and grandchildren before it’s too late. And for all the time and 

effort that you’re investing in this cause, may God bless you all, 

may God bless my father, and may God bless the United States of 

America. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Weinberger follows:]

32


75388d-1.eps
33


75388d-2.eps
34

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Ms. Weinberger. 

Mr. Moore. 

STATEMENT OF MR. STEVE MOORE, SPECIAL AGENT 

(RETIRED), FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONS 

Mr. MOORE. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass, and distinguished members of the committee, I want to thank you again for 

your diligence in keeping this before the American public. And I 

want to thank Mr. Justiniano and Mr. Montan ̃ o. They are brave 

men for doing this. We know what could happen in Bolivia. 

When I was in the FBI, if I did an undercover SWAT operation 

I slept at home. Nobody knew where I lived. These people go back 

to a country after appearing here and people know where they live. 

I want to thank you again. The damage that has been done to 

my confidence in the government by the inaction of the State Department has been in many ways rebuilt by the actions of this subcommittee, and Mr. Smith in particular. 

The legislation that I’ve just found out about and done as much 

research as I can here, it addresses a vast governmental blind spot 

that is costing people part of lives and entire lives. This is essential 

legislation. 

In 25 years of working for the government, I have never seen 

such egregious inaction by any department of the government as 

I’m seeing by the State Department. And I say this as somebody 

who worked in an Embassy. I don’t think it’s endemic to necessarily everybody in State. There are brave people in State, but 

there are cowards in State, too. 

I will do, Mr. Smith, whatever I can do to assist in support of 

this legislation. I am bothered by the State Department inferring 

that they’re doing something behind the scenes. Notice that they 

never said they were doing anything behind the scenes, they’re saying we prefer to do things behind the scenes. 

I would think that if the State Department was doing anything, 

even behind the scenes, they might appear in one of these hearings 

and they might give some kind of wink and a nod to a member of 

the subcommittee, but they’re not. 

We used to say in the FBI that sometimes what you didn’t see 

was better evidence than what you saw. What I don’t see is the 

best evidence I see of exactly what the State Department is not 

doing. 

When I testified before, I then followed up with an investigative 

report which was provided to the U.N. High Commissioner on 

Human Rights by Mr. Smith’s office. In that, I noted more than 

nine violations, egregious, obvious violations that are not subjective, they’re objective violations in the custody alone of Mr. 

Ostreicher. 

For instance, according to the First U.N. Congress in 1955 which 

Bolivia and the United States are participants, untried prisoners 

shall be kept separate from convicted prisoners. Mr. Ostreicher is 

kept with serial rapists, mass murderers. The person who claims 

to protect him has only killed one or two people, so I’m sure he 

feels much more reassured by that. That’s a violation of international treaty. 

35

‘‘Where sleeping accommodation is in an individual cell or rooms, 

each prisoner shall occupy by night a cell or room by himself.’’ Mr. 

Ostreicher and many of the prisoners slept outside, and many of 

the prisoners still sleep outside on garbage heaps because you have 

to pay to have a cell. 

‘‘There should be regular supervision by night in keeping with 

the nature of the institution.’’ There is not. The only monitoring I 

saw in that prison at night was when the guards fired over our 

heads to intimidate us. 

‘‘All accommodation provided for the use of prisoners and, in particular, all sleeping accommodations shall meet all minimum requirements for health due to being climatic conditions, particularly 

due to cubic content of air, minimum floor space, lighting, heating 

and ventilation.’’ There’s no such thing as that. Raw sewerage runs 

through the street. This is a squalid cesspool. Mosquitoes are everywhere. There is no hygiene. Their garbage dumps are literally 

in living spaces. 

‘‘No prisoner shall be employed, in the service of the institution, 

in any disciplinary capacity.’’ We know that lifers, murders, serial 

rapists are the internal security for that prison. That’s not a 

nuanced phrase about how things are run in there, that is the de 

facto government-approved manner of maintaining internal discipline. 

‘‘All parts of the institution regularly used by prisoners shall be 

maintained and kept scrupulously clean at all times.’’ I refer you 

to my comments on raw sewage and open garbage heaps. 

‘‘Corporal punishment, punishment by placing in a dark cell and 

all cruel, inhuman or degrading punishments shall be completely 

prohibited as punishments for disciplinary offenses.’’ Coincidentally, every single one of those practices are undertaken at 

Palmasola. 

‘‘The medical officer shall daily visit prisoners undergoing such 

punishment... .’’ There is no doctor at Palmasola. They have 

trouble getting a doctor to come into the prison because it’s so dangerous. 

This information was provided to the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights. It had to be provided by the State Department, and when the State Department met with the U.N. High 

Commissioner on Human Rights, they filed a report because they’re 

watching carefully what’s going on, and said that basically the 

legal procedure in Bolivia is corrupt, it’s brutal. These are quotes, 

these are not my adaptations of this. It is ‘‘corrupt, brutal, slow, 

inefficient, under-funded,’’ and that’s okay? 

What they said was this is their procedure; therefore, if it’s corrupt, if it’s brutally slow, inefficient, and under-funded, because 

that’s the way it is, that’s okay. What if the Bolivians were to enact 

tomorrow stoning for accused prisoners? That would be under the 

Bolivian law. Would the State Department go ahead with that? 

The fact that it is a part or claimed to be a part of law does not 

make it legitimate. And State Department hiding behind corruption in a country like Bolivia is—it’s the worst type of duplicity. 

On the State Department’s Web site today is a statement that 

says, ‘‘We work to insure that Americans are afforded due process 

under local laws.’’ I don’t believe that to be true. On the State DeVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:25 Oct 01, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Y:\WORK\AGH\080112\75388 HFA PsN: SHIRL
36

partment Web site today it also says, ‘‘The State Department is 

committed to insuring fair and humane treatment for American 

citizens imprisoned overseas.’’ I have just mentioned nine violations 

of international law that I witnessed and photographed while I was 

in Bolivia. If the State Department is committed to insuring fair 

and humane treatment for American citizens imprisoned overseas, 

what standards do they use, and how are they going to enforce it? 

When the report came back to Ms. Ungar on their meeting with 

the U.N. High Commissioner on Human Rights, not one mention 

was made of the violations of Jacob’s captivity. It was ignored. 

They discussed the legal procedure, but more than half the report 

dealt with the illegal and inhumane treatment he was receiving in 

prison; yet, it wasn’t addressed. 

We don’t have dumb people in State. They knew that more than 

half this report had to do with illegal procedures in his captivity; 

yet, they didn’t even address it. Committee members, they didn’t 

forget. These people are not fools. It did not serve their purposes 

to discuss it. 

This is embarrassing to me as somebody who served his country 

and who loves his country, who has friends in State. There are people I admire in State, but if we are depending upon other governments to tell us what’s okay for our citizens, the State Department 

is nothing more than a rubber stamp for despotic governments. 

There needs to be, as this legislation proposes, a way to hold 

State, all of State, not just the good people but the people who are 

career oriented, there needs to be a means to hold them to their 

responsibilities to the American people. 

My dad used to tell me that fences aren’t necessary until the cow 

leans up against it. I think it is important that the good people of 

State are not betrayed by the inaction of the other people in State 

who should be held in line by this type of legislation, or there 

should be an organization within State dedicated to the investigation of Americans who are held overseas. 

I agree 100 percent with Representative Smith, I put Americans 

in jail for 25 years. If an American earns his way into a prison 

overseas, fine. That’s fine. I am not so xenophobic as to say that 

all Americans in prison overseas should be released. They 

shouldn’t, but they should at least be held to some type of decent 

treatment and the legal process should be valid, because some of 

those people are really innocent. 

I’ve heard recently that 70 percent of Bolivian prison inmates, 

not jail inmates, prison inmates have not received a trial. Is that 

okay with State? 

If Jacob Ostreicher dies in Palmasola Prison, both the Bolivian 

Government and the United States Department of State will have 

the same blood on their hands. 

And, again, I want to thank the attorneys from Bolivia because 

they show us that our struggle here is not against a people, it’s not 

against a country, it’s not America gets its way, it is simply that 

we’re fighting corrupt governments and trying to help the good people of those governments reclaim the name that their countries deserve. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Moore follows:]

37


75388e-1.eps
38


75388e-2.eps
39


75388e-3.eps
40


75388e-4.eps
41


75388e-5.eps
42


75388e-6.eps
43


75388e-7.eps
44


75388e-8.eps
45

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Moore, thank you so very much. Especially given 

your background, I think you bring enormous gravitas to Jacob’s 

innocence, the denial of due process rights which has been pervasive and systemic. And, again, I thank you for taking time out of 

your work to fly here, to be here to advocate and to provide insights on behalf of Jacob Ostreicher. 

You know, it does strike me, and you made a very strong point, 

your final point, about the blood being on the hands of those both 

in the Government of Bolivia and those at State who have been 

asleep at the switch, or indifferent, or whatever it might. And I 

would have to say, you know, there were people, especially the people in the Consular Affairs that were very robust in their concerns 

about Jacob, and I mean deeply concerned about him. And even 

people within the Embassy who had knowledge, and they seemed 

to—after Miriam Ungar’s testimony and your’s, and Ms. Weinberger at the previous hearing—seemed to have gotten more up to 

speed on the policy side of State, but it doesn’t seem to go any further. And I think that’s where the huge tragedy is, because I have 

found in 32 years as a Member of Congress that despotic governments look at how high up the chain of command are the concerns 

being expressed. 

We are the legislative branch, we do write the laws, and we do 

oversight. And the fact that State is not here is disconcerting. 

Maybe they had a good reason, but I would have loved to have had 

them here. We will re-invite them. This invitation is an open one 

to them. But where is, with all due respect, President Obama? 

Where is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton when it comes to Jacob 

Ostreicher? Have they contacted Evo Morales, picked up the phone 

and said, ‘‘Mr. President, you need to personally look into this.’’

I was amazed when I met with Mr. Romero, the Minister of Government, when he said, and counsel might want to speak to this, 

that it was Jacob and his lawyers who sought delays for bail hearings. And I said, ‘‘Time out, Mr. Minister. First of all, it defies the 

straight face test,’’ as we say, ‘‘and defies all logic to suggest that 

a man would want to stay in prison and would delay a bail hearing.’’ This wasn’t about the substance of the non-case, because 

there is no evidence and there is no charges, it’s about bail. 

And I said, you know, ‘‘When you say things like that, it strains 

credulity about where are you getting your information.’’ So, you 

might want to speak to that in a moment. 

You did say, Mr. Moore, that there’s egregious inaction on the 

part of the government. And, again, where is the President? As I 

said in my opening comments, it is in law, U.S. Code 22 Section 

1732 that ‘‘the President must demand the release of any citizen 

who has been unjustly deprived of his liberty by or under the authority of any foreign government, and to undertake appropriate 

means to obtain the release of such citizen.’’

Has it gotten to the point? And, again, I wanted State to be here 

so we could ask that question. You know, it wasn’t until this subcommittee, I think, began to raise the questions that it even went 

up to an Assistant Secretary level, and that was when we did the 

letter, my colleagues and I, because a OAS meeting was being held, 

and we asked that it be raised by that official who was on her way 

there. And then that conversation we’re told was simply this, 

46

‘‘Raise Jacob’s case.’’ The person on the Bolivian side said, ‘‘That’s 

not my jurisdiction, but I’ll pass on your concerns.’’

We need to take it to a much higher level. You might want to 

speak to that, Mr. Moore. I do think if the President were to get 

on the phone, he is meeting with people—he doesn’t even have to 

meet with them. Just get on the phone and call Evo Morales and 

say, ‘‘Jacob must be free.’’ Because if he, as you said in the beginning about the—he is a dying man. I saw it myself. His health has 

deteriorated. From a purely humanitarian point of view, why 

wouldn’t the Bolivian Government want to—from a purely humanitarian point of view—put him on a plane and send him back to his 

family? 

So, if you want to speak to any of those issues, the two counsel, 

about the delays were sought by Jacob for his bail. He didn’t want 

to get out of jail, he wanted to stay in jail. It’s ludicrous. 

Mr. JUSTINIANO. Yes, Mr. Chair. As you were saying, it defies belief and is contradictory that a person who is seeking their freedom 

would, in fact, request a continuance or ask for a suspension of the 

hearings. And there have been more than 20 hearings that have 

been suspended. 

It is the case in many of the cases that go before the Bolivian 

justice system that defendants try to slow down the process; however, that is not the case of Jacob Ostreicher. 

We, the attorneys, can state that, in fact, again and again when 

a case has been continued we protest that and ask for the case to 

be heard. So, we can state that when they say that it is we, his 

attorneys and Mr. Jacob Ostreicher, who have been requesting the 

continuances, that is completely false. 

Mr. MONTAN ̃ O. Mr. Chairman, this is yet another one of the lies 

that the government will use to cover its crime. It’s another lie 

which only a person who is, in fact, trying to cover their own 

crimes would use when we’re talking about a person who has been 

detained illegally, who is innocent, for the last 15 months. They 

will use that and a million other excuses in order to cover their 

own crimes. 

Mr. SMITH. Ann Marie Buerkle, I know you have to leave for another appointment. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I guess—first of all, again thank you all for being here, and for 

your courage, and for your willingness to sit here and tell us what 

is going on. 

What is the possible motivation of the government to do this to 

an American? What—if you know, other than the corrupt—you’re 

saying there’s corruption, but what is the motivation? 

Mr. JUSTINIANO. We are unable to say exactly why the Ministry 

of Government is interfering in this particular case. But what we 

can say for sure is that it is interfering. 

Just to give you a fact, the Wall Street Journal today reported 

that Attorney Fernando Rivera is a prosecutor in the case. He is 

not a prosecutor, he works for the government. And he is directly 

interfering in the process, and we don’t know why. There is no concrete evidence as to why. What we do know for sure is that he is 

interfering. 

47

Ms. BUERKLE. Other than the obvious that we talked about and 

that the chairman so eloquently talked about the President and the 

State Department, what else can we do to—maybe, Mr. Moore, you 

can speak to this, or any of the panelists. What else can we do in 

this body? 

Mr. MOORE. I think this legislation is a fabulous start. All the 

pieces really are in place right now. There are international laws 

that say you can’t treat Jacob the way he is being treated. There 

are Bolivian laws that say that you can’t treat him the way he’s 

being treated. There are Federal laws that say that the State Department cannot ignore this, nor can the President ignore this. The 

pieces are all there. Everybody is turning their heads. Everybody 

is ignoring it. 

Legislation such as Mr. Smith is proposing is the kind of thing 

that would take it out of the discretionary area. It is like anything 

else that people don’t want to do, sometimes you have to have a 

stick that makes those who don’t want to comply, comply. And I 

think this is essential because, frankly, what Mr. Smith’s legislation is doing so well is it is forcing State to do nothing other than 

what their charter already tells them they must do, but it is holding them responsible for doing it. And, at the same time, it is not 

a blanket punishment of the Bolivian people, such as a funding cut 

or something that would be a humanitarian issue. This is making 

the people who are responsible for this, responsible for their actions. 

So, I think that’s important. And, frankly, I would very strongly 

advocate that there be a strong look at whether there needs to be 

a department within State that is tasked with following the plight 

of Americans overseas who are wrongly convicted, or who are 

wrongly held. 

Again, there needs to be some discretion so that you can say you 

know what, this is valid. But even a person who is caught with 

some drugs in their possession doesn’t deserve to be in Palmasola. 

There needs to be some type of redress of conditions, and for the 

innocent there needs to be aggressive action in their behalf. And 

that is the one thing State is not doing. 

State is, in a macro sense, operating in the greater good of America, but they are willing to sacrifice individual Americans on the 

way to their goals. That is not okay. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Turner. 

Mr. TURNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank all the witnesses. 

While we’re trying to bring some light on this matter here, what 

are the conditions in Bolivia? Is the free press seizing this? Is it 

a well known case? Is there any popular movement on the part of 

Bolivians to rectify this injustice if, indeed, they see it that way? 

Mr. JUSTINIANO. If I may, Representative, the case is slowly becoming more public and reaching more publicity. And now, unfortunately, it is being spoken about in these terms which is it’s the case 

of the gringo who’s been arrested for nothing. Because it’s quite 

clear that, in fact, there is no legal grounds for his detention. 

48

Mr. TURNER. Mr. Montan ̃ o, do you see it the same way? Do people see this as an injustice, or is there any newspaper or public figure involved? 

Mr. MONTAN ̃ O. For the 7 months that I have been working with 

Jacob, what truly motivates me is that any person who approaches 

me, any person who has any contact with me asks me about Jacob. 

The media has started to approach me and they have started to 

look for me and to ask me about Jacob. I have embraced the media, 

and I have spoken as much as possible to talk about these injustices. 

Mr. Representative, yours truly is possibly the person who is 

closest to Jacob right now. He has suffered a loss of family, and I 

am the one who is always going to visit him in the jail, in the prison. And I will continue to see him and to follow through with this, 

and I will continue fighting for him even though, as Congressman 

Smith has already recognized, we are facing difficulties. 

However, I will always be able to go whether it’s before your subcommittee or anywhere else I need to, to say that Jacob is innocent. Even if they want to prosecute or even persecute us, and if 

they say anything other than Jacob is innocent, we will continue 

to fight for his freedom. 

Upon our return to Bolivia, Mr. Jerjes and myself will be open 

to discussing exactly what we stated here. And something else, 

even those who are unofficially after Jacob have admitted that he’s 

innocent. Thank you. 

Mr. TURNER. I have another—Mr. Moore, you’ve been on this 

more than anyone. We had a question before on motive. It’s both 

political and economic, but there is a large amount of inventory, 

equipment, and money that is not only missing, will probably never 

be recovered. Could you tell us a bit? 

Mr. MOORE. Yes, Mr. Turner. It is true that the land, the crop, 

millions of dollars of combines, harvesters, I mean, very high ticket 

equipment is simply missing. It’s gone. And after confiscating tens 

of millions of pounds of bagged high-quality rice, the Bolivian Government claims, number one, not to know where the rice went. 

And, at the same time, declared a rice surplus in the country for 

the first time in years. 

Evo Morales is almost obsessively attempting to embarrass capitalism as a concept in kind of a retro Castro-esque type of political 

agenda. He has recently announced that he will throw Coca-Cola 

out of the country, and is proud that only two other countries have 

ever thrown Coca-Cola out of their country, and that’s North Korea 

and Cuba. He ran an airline—ran the state airline, Aerosur, out of 

business because it was a capitalist-based company, and their 

president, by the way, is now in hiding, I believe in Spain. I’m not 

going to give his address but he’s in Spain, and he has been 

charged with the exact same charges as Jacob. 

Evo Morales despises capitalism, is trying to make a stand 

against capitalism. The government is corrupt, they are stealing 

and then trying to stamp out the capitalist system. And, frankly, 

Jacob’s business endeavor was so successful that it would have 

completely laid the lie to Evo Morales’ particular brand of socialism. 

49

Mr. TURNER. I have one quick final question. What is the title 

of your book, and can I get it down on Kindle? 

Mr. MOORE. Yes, sir, thank you. It is called, ‘‘Special Agent 

Man.’’It’s kind of tongue in cheek. 

Mr. TURNER. Okay. 

Mr. MOORE. And it is available on Kindle, and I’ll even sign your 

Kindle. 

Mr. TURNER. Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. MOORE. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much. Let me ask the two distinguished attorneys, one thing I learned from the trip from you was 

that the presumption of innocence is guaranteed both in the criminal procedure code, as well as in the Constitution; and, yet, early 

on in Jacob’s case he was presumed in papers that were lodged to 

be guilty until proven innocent. 

Could you expand upon that? Is that frequently done, or was that 

an aberration? 

Mr. JUSTINIANO. It seems that when the prosecutor filed the 

case, by filing a complaint against Jacob, the statement was that 

he had not proven that his finances were legal. 

Later, the judge for the case stated that that particular crime did 

not have the presumption of innocence as other crimes did. He alleged that this particular crime did not fall under that category, 

and that is completely false according to the Constitution, and according to the Code of Criminal Procedure. 

It is out of the ordinary for a judge to say something like that, 

especially when addressing the crime, or rather the alleged crime 

of money laundering, as Jacob is being accused. That’s why we affirm without a doubt that he is being illegally detained and illegally prosecuted. 

Mr. MONTAN ̃ O. Mr. Chair, I took on the task of looking over other 

similar cases to see if, in fact, I could find a similar judgment. And 

believe me when I tell you that I found none because this is illegal, 

and the victim of this illegality is your citizen. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. So, when the U.N. human rights representative says, 

as you all have noted in your testimonies, that this is common to 

Bolivians, as well, this mistreatment, that is false, at least as it 

pertains to a presumption of innocence standard? 

Mr. JUSTINIANO. The situation in Bolivia, unfortunately, it is 

common that there are violations of human rights. However, Mr. 

Chairman, you have seen the Palmasola Prison. That is a true violation of human rights. And although it is true that a prison should 

not be the best place for a person to be, it should also not be the 

worst place in the world. 

In Mr. Ostreicher’s case, if we can say that there are rational levels of the violation of human rights, these levels have been exceeded and he has had his human rights violated even more. 

Mr. MONTAN ̃ O. Mr. Chair, it is common in Bolivia and it has happened with the human rights representative who has not had the 

guts to be able to face the music and talk the truth. And why 

should that which is commonplace go above and beyond what the 

law is? That is not something that an international organization 

should accept. 

50

I am sure that the person who wrote that report has this lying 

heavily on his conscience if he himself is still free. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. When I yielded to Ann Marie Buerkle you had not, 

Mr. Moore, had an opportunity to speak to the egregious inaction, 

and the fact that, if you’d like to, or Miriam, or Ms. Weinberger, 

to this apparent inability on the part of the President of the United 

States to pick up the phone and make that call. It is about equities, 

and very often human rights are at the back of the bus, especially 

with this administration. 

I was late coming to this hearing because I had a meeting with 

a man named Chen Guangcheng, and he is the blind activist Chinese lawyer that on two occasions, I’ve been working on his case 

since 2005, the U.S. Department of State was going to give him 

back to the Chinese until he himself said, ‘‘Wait a minute. I need 

to leave here. My family and I are not safe here.’’ And twice here 

we reached him in his hospital in Beijing and he made an impassioned plea to come to the United States. I believe that was a game 

changer, his plea to a Congressional hearing. 

This administration and others that preceded it don’t take 

human rights seriously. It’s a talking point. It’s an asterisk somewhere. I wrote the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, and 

I can tell you we had serious opposition to it from the Clinton administration, serious. Thankfully, it was a bipartisan bill and it got 

passed, and we had veto override strength, huge, that was huge. 

I don’t understand why this President, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, can’t protect or won’t protect Americans unjustly incarcerated, 

and it goes the same for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. 

Every single day, as has been so amply demonstrated by your 

testimonies and by the evidence from Jacob himself, his health is 

deteriorating. As Yimy said, he is a dying man. How could we 

stand idly by and go campaigning somewhere, important as this is 

with an election around the corner, when a man is in such peril? 

So, I again would ask you, I mean, egregious inaction is a very 

serious charge, and as you very diplomatically put it, the administration has other interests, but aren’t American lives preeminent? 

Aren’t they priority number one? Human rights, in general, ought 

to be priority number one. Here we’re talking about an American. 

And I would say before you answer, too, to my friends from Bolivia, I had the privilege while I was in both Santa Cruz and La 

Paz to meet with the prosecutors that are working on anti-human 

trafficking, both sex trafficking and labor trafficking issues. They 

were wonderful prosecutors. I mean, people who want to put people 

who sell and reduce women, especially, to commodities, behind 

bars, and confiscate their assets, and provide assistance to the victims. 

They, too, some of them indicated that they feared being prosecuted by rogue government people who don’t like if they go across 

a certain line. But I was deeply impressed, they gave me great 

hope. And I think that all of us think that Bolivia has a great future because there are people like the two lawyers that are here 

today, and people the likes of which I met. 

I also pointed out, and I take your point, Yimy, to heart when 

you said that you’re embracing the media. I had a press conference 

with the Bolivian media at U.S. Embassy La Paz and found them 

51

to be very responsive and empathetic, maybe not all but very 

many. I pointed out to them that I had been to two shelters where 

Bolivian girls, some as young as 12, 13, and 14 who had been sold 

into modern day slavery, sex trafficking. They had been abused, 

are now being helped by the government and by the nuns that run 

one of those shelters, that my law actually was being used to help 

them. Some of the money came from the U.S. Government, because 

we care about Bolivians too. 

You know, Bolivia deserves better than rogue prosecutors that 

are trying to intimidate as they are in the case of Jacob, and all 

these judges, a passing parade of judges who have to recuse themselves. But, Mr. Moore, if you could speak to that. And, again, I do 

think the more the Bolivian media learns about this unjust incarceration it ought to provide a pathway for reform for everyone, including Bolivians. No one should be mistreated like this. Everyone 

is entitled to universally recognized human rights. And your presence here, again, brave and courageous as it is, speaks volumes of 

the respect that I and others have for Bolivia. You are Bolivia. You 

care for the rule of law, and I would hope that the government 

would sit up and take notice and follow your lead. 

Mr. MOORE. I worked on the Amanda Knox case in Italy, and 

what I repeatedly said is that every country in the world will make 

a mistake judicially. It is not the judge—it is not the measure of 

a nation whether they will make a judicial mistake. It is the measure of a country, what they will do about it. 

I think Bolivia is a country that has a strong desire to do the 

right thing. It’s just that their government does not. I found out recently that my mother-in-law and one of my wife’s aunts go to Bolivia every year and work in a medical clinic there to provide free 

medical care for people who can’t afford it, some in the city of 

Santa Cruz near Jacob. I didn’t know this until after I had testified. Their question was can they still go, or have I ruined their 

ability to go? 

As far as the State Department’s overarching responsibilities for 

American foreign policy as opposed to individual innocent Americans in prison, I can’t help but go back to the analogy of primitive 

society who every year before planting and before harvest would 

sacrifice—would make a human sacrifice so that it would benefit 

the rest. We now see that as barbarianism. 

If we are still sacrificing individual Americans by allowing them 

to languish in prison so that our foreign policy advances, so that 

we can get bases in appropriate countries, so that we can try to reestablish relationships with countries, then are we not somewhat 

barbaric? 

There is, and I understand this. I empathize with the State Department’s dilemma. They are responsible for overarching responsibility for our foreign policy, but I remember the argument after 

9/11 when people who disagreed with the Patriot Act said are we 

giving up everything we’re trying to achieve if we go over the line 

in giving up personal freedoms? And I had to answer those questions a lot. 

I would put it to the State Department that if we allow Americans to languish in prisons, innocent Americans to languish in prison, aren’t we giving away just the thing we’re trying to gain? I 

52

think something has to be done. Hopefully, this legislation will be 

the first strong step in that direction which will force the State Department, and the good people in the State Department, I don’t dislike them, to seriously consider that one American is an American. 

One American is America. You can’t just say that for these people 

we’ll sacrifice him. That’s barbaric. 

Mr. SMITH. Miriam. 

Ms. UNGAR. Thank you. Firstly, I would tip my hat to you for 

this. I would like to thank you for Jacob’s Law. I want to thank 

you for Jacob’s Law. It’s the first two good words I’ve heard in 15 

months. I would like to give you an applause from my whole family 

for that. You were the first person to actually be proactive in this 

case, and I don’t know how to thank you for that, really. It means 

a lot to me to have you in our corner. And I also want to thank 

the two lawyers for their bravery, and their bravery should be commended. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Just a couple of questions and then we’ll conclude. 

Mr. Turner, do you have anything you want to add? Whoever 

would want to answer this, one of the questions I asked Minister 

of Government Romero was ‘‘What do you do when there’s a rogue 

prosecutor or rogue prosecutors who may themselves be benefitting 

from money, a shakedown?’’ I think that, Mr. Moore, you talked 

about it being a shakedown, even our Embassy people have talked 

about this being a shakedown. Who tracks Jacob’s assets? 

Mr. MOORE. Extortion. 

Mr. SMITH. Extortion, better word. And then the next question—

if you could speak to that issue first. And, I thought of it, one of 

the questions I asked the Minister of Justice was ‘‘Where’s the accounting for all of the stolen property?’’ I mean, first, second, third, 

fourth, and fifth is get Jacob back, but it is a concern that a huge 

theft has occurred. And I was told that there are very serious accountings of where that is. Is it there, I mean, or is it in somebody’s pocket? Rogue prosecutors, especially, that’s a concern. 

Mr. JUSTINIANO. Yes, thank you. One of the rights that has been 

affected, that has been violated of Mr. Ostreicher, in fact, does have 

to do with his patrimony. We speak about the right to his freedom, 

and to his health, but it is, in fact, the right to his patrimony and 

belongings. And one of the ironies of the case is that one of the 

prosecutors has, in fact, been named to the Ministry of Justice. It’s 

worse than that, that his patrimony is in the hands of the Ministry 

of the Government. 

And since it is the Ministry of Government which is responsible 

for the property, for his machinery, for the rice itself, it has been 

practically stolen from him, and it is in the hands of the Ministry 

of Government. 

Curiously enough, the Ministry of Government is not named in 

this trial, this prosecution in which the rice has been stolen even 

when the party responsible for that rice is the Ministry of Government itself. 

Unfortunately, somebody will have to answer for this, for the machinery, the land, and particularly the investment that Mr. 

Ostreicher has made in Bolivia. I think practically it might one or 

two prosecutors who would be asked to respond to these damages, 

but really it’s the Bolivian State. 

53

Mr. SMITH. One final question, and it’s more of a technical question. When did the clock begin on the 18 months? There was some 

disagreement. Is there disagreement? I mean, does this go until 

December or when does it go to, please? 

Mr. JUSTINIANO. As you say, this is actually a difficult question 

to ask. It’s a very tricky procedural and technical legal question. 

But what has to happen is we have to make a distinction between 

the initiation of the criminal prosecution and the investigation part 

of the prosecution. 

This prosecution was initiated on December 28, 2010. However, 

the investigative phase of the prosecution began on May 4, 2011. 

Therefore, the 18 months allowed would expire in November 2012. 

However, to date from when he was formally arrested, Mr. Jacob 

Ostreicher on June 3, 2011, almost 14 months have gone by from 

that date. 

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Moore, I understand you have to catch a plane. 

Thank you. 

Mr. MOORE. Yes, sir. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you for coming. We do appreciate it. 

Mr. MOORE. Thank you. 

Mr. SMITH. And thank you for, again, breaking off your schedule 

to come here at this hearing. 

Since I’ve returned I have spoken about Jacob to many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and there is an interest, a growing interest among Members of Congress to travel to Bolivia to 

speak out on behalf of Jacob’s freedom. Does that help? 

Mr. JUSTINIANO. One of Mr. Moore’s arguments was specifically 

that, that he had never before seen such a lack of activity on the 

part of the Secretary of State. 

In the 14 months that Jacob Ostreicher has been detained in pretrial detention, we have only seen the concern demonstrated by 

yourself and this subcommittee. However, we do believe that any 

action, any intervention whatsoever from people of your level would 

benefit Mr. Ostreicher’s case. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you. I would just note for the record that 

when any of us in government speak out on behalf of an innocent 

man and promote human rights, we have a duty to protect, a moral 

duty. We’re not doing Jacob a favor by intervening, we’re doing 

what is right and honorable. And, again, I can’t say enough how 

much I respect all of you, but to our two distinguished counselors 

who have come here, you are the future of Bolivia. And I want you 

to know on behalf of my colleagues in the U.S. Congress how much 

respect we have for you. And that we stand in solidarity with the 

Bolivian people who deserve better themselves. They deserve freedom and democracy, and a due process and respect for the rule of 

law that you represent. And I just want you to know how extraordinarily respectful I am of your efforts and who you are. So, thank 

you so very much. 

And to Miriam and to Ms. Weinberger, thank you again. Your 

love is what’s driving this, and your concern for your husband, and 

for your father. If you have anything you would like to say as I 

close the hearing, you’re welcome to do it. 

Well, thank you, and we will accelerate our efforts. We hope tomorrow to introduce Jacob’s Law. We will start building the coVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:25 Oct 01, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Y:\WORK\AGH\080112\75388 HFA PsN: SHIRL
54

sponsors for it and look for a markup of the legislation. And I can 

assure you, I can absolutely assure you from my point of view, and 

on behalf of many of my colleagues, we will not quit until Jacob 

is free. 

The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:50 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(55)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

56

f


75388n.eps
57

Æ


75388m.eps