•HRES 353 IH
Whereas James Williams, whose business was based in Jack-
sonville, Florida, is not currently under indictment for
any crime in the United States and has never been
charged with or convicted of a crime in the United
States;
Whereas the United States has concurrent jurisdiction with
Ecuador over the crime with which James Williams is
charged in Ecuador and this resolution will not protect
Mr. Williams from any prosecution by legal authorities in
the United States;
Whereas this resolution is not a determination of the guilt or
innocence of James Williams;
Whereas James Williams’ extended imprisonment without a
trial is in violation of Ecuador’s obligation under section
5 of article 7 of the American Convention on Human
Rights, Pact of San Jose, Costa Rica (November 7–22,
1969), which requires the release of a detained defendant
who has not received a trial within a reasonable period
of time;
Whereas this resolution demonstrates that the House of Rep-
resentatives supports the efforts of the Ecuadoran Con-
gress to address the deprivation of legal rights of Ameri-
cans and other prisoners in the Ecuadoran system;
Whereas, according to the 1996 Department of State Coun-
try Report on Human Rights Practices for Ecuador—
(1) ‘‘the most fundamental human rights abuse
stems from shortcomings in the politicized and ineffi-
cient legal and judicial system. People are subject to ar-
bitrary arrest; once incarcerated, they may wait years
•HRES 353 IH
before coming to trial unless they resort to paying
bribes.’’ (page 434);
(2) ‘‘The [Ecuadoran] Constitution and the Penal
Code provide that no one may be deprived of liberty
without a written order from a governmental authority,
but the authorities often violated these legal protections
against arbitrary arrest or detention.’’ (page 436);
(3) ‘‘Human rights organizations reported occa-
sional cases of incommunicado detention, although the
law prohibits this practice. Despite provisions of the
Penal Code, the police often detained suspects without
the required written order. Even when an order was ob-
tained, those charged with determining the validity of
detention often allowed frivolous charges to be brought,
either because they were overworked or because the ac-
cuser bribed them. In many instances, the system was
used as a means of harassment in civil cases in which
one party sought to have the other arrested on criminal
charges.’’ (page 437); and
(4) ‘‘The [Ecuadoran] Constitution provides for an
independent judiciary. In practice, however, the judiciary
is susceptible to outside pressure. . . The law provides
for internationally accepted due process rights for crimi-
nal defendants, but the authorities often did not observe
these rights in practice.’’ (page 437); and
•HRES 353 IH
Whereas in a diplomatic note dated November 14, 1996, the
United States ‘‘register[ed] its grave concern over the
failure of the [Ecuadoran] National Police to properly
notify the Consulate of Mr. Williams’ arrest,’’ in violation
of Article 38 of the Vienna Consular Convention and fur-
ther requested that ‘‘the [Ecuadoran] Ministry of For-
eign Affairs investigate the reports of maltreatment [of
Mr. Williams] and denial of legitimate access to legal
counsel and provide the results of its investigation to the
Embassy’’ and the Ecuadoran Government has not re-
sponded to the diplomatic note: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives de-
nounces the disregard for and violation of legal and human
rights within the Ecuadoran judicial system of United
States citizen James Gordon Williams of Jacksonville,
Florida, and any other persons who have been held with-
out cause or deprived of due process of law and supports
action by the Ecuadoran legislature to address these prob-
lems, including by means of the release of Mr. Williams
to the United States.
Æ