FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Kidnapping in Miami

by RICARDO ALARCÓN

After years of efforts, without much success, trying to let people know the truth about the five young Cubans unjustly incarcerated in the US for fighting Miami-based terrorism, a surprising light appeared on July 14. It came in a news dispatch by AP from Geneva and, in parallel on the same date, from the BBC news service. A UN panel has declared arbitrary and in violation of international law the detention and trial in Miami of Antonio Guerrero, Fernando González, Gerardo Hernandez, Ramón Labañino and René González.

It was important news on its own merits. Never before has a UN body pronounced itself in such a manner on this matter. And it has been infrequent, to say the least, for such media outlets to even mention the Cuban five.

Apparently some people became nervous in Washington and the big lies machine was put into action.

According to a story that appeared on July 20 in The Miami Herald, based on quotes from an unidentified high official at the State Department, the UN action was “orchestrated” by the Cuban government instead of coming from individual complaints.

The facts are quite different and clearly reflected in the UN document. They are as follows. Adriana Pérez ­ Gerardo’s wife ­ and Olga Salanueva ­ René’s wife – (what the Report refers to as “the source”) raised the issue personally with UN officials in Geneva early in the spring of 2004. The UN conveyed that complaint to the US Government (its first communication dated, April 8, 2004) and then went back and forth between the two parties and asking their own questions (the UN’s panel) to both.

In other words, there was a Government involved in the process, only one Government. And that happens to be the United States. That is duly and politely recognized by the UN panel in its report.

In paragraph 2: “The Working Group conveys its appreciation to the Government for having forwarded the requisite information in good time.”

In paragraph 4: “The Working Group welcomes the cooperation of the Government”.

In paragraph 5: “The Working Group considered this case and decided to request additional information. It has received responses both from the Government and the source”.

And in paragraph 24: “The Working Group decided in its fortieth session to address the Government of the United States and the petitioners on three issues that would facilitate the work of the Group: The Working Group has received information from both the Government and the source on these issues.”

It was on the basis of these exchanges and their own considerations in a process that lasted more than a year that the UN panel stated in its final decision, adopted on May 27, 2005:

“Following their arrest they were kept in solitary confinement for 17 months, during which communications with their attorneys and access to evidence and thus, possibilities to an adequate defense were weakened.”

“The Government has not contested the fact that defense lawyers had very limited access to evidence negatively affecting their ability to present counter evidence.”

“The Government has not denied that the climate of bias and prejudice against the accused in Miami persisted and helped to present the accused as guilty from the beginning. It was not contested by the Government that one year later it admitted that Miami was an unsuitable place for a trial where it proved almost impossible to select an impartial jury in a case linked with Cuba.”

On this basis “the Working Group concludes that the three elements that were enunciated above, combined together, are of such gravity that they confer the deprivation of liberty of these five persons an arbitrary character”, declares that “The deprivation of Iiberty of Messrs. Antonio Guerrero Rodriguez, Mr. Fernando González Llort, Mr Gerardo Hernández Nordelo, Mr. Ramón Labañino Salazar and Mr. René González Sehweret is arbitrary, being in contravention of article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights” and consequently “the Working Group requests the Government to adopt the necessary steps to remedy the situation.”

The members of the UN panel perform their duties in a strictly personal capacity and they do not represent any Government. The five members are: Ms. Manuela Carmena Castrillo (Spain), Ms. Leïla Zerrougui (Algeria), Ms. Soledad Villagra (Paraguay), Mr. Tamás Ban (Hungary), and Mr. Seyed Mohammad Hashemi (Iran). There are no Cubans involved in that Group or in the UN Human Rights Secretariat.

The US should answer the specific request it has received since May. It is duty bound “to adopt the necessary steps to remedy the situation” instead of pretending to ignore the UN Working Group and slandering it. The deprivation of liberty of any human being, when it is arbitrary and contrary to the law, is tantamount to kidnapping. In this case the kidnappers are the US authorities and their victims have been detained under such conditions for almost seven years. It is high time to free the Five.

Ricardo Alarcon Quesada is Cuba’s Vice President and President of its National Assembly.

 

Ricardo Alarcón de Quesada has served as Cuba’s UN ambassador, Foreign Minister and president of the National Assembly.

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

January 23, 2017
John Wight
Trump’s Inauguration: Hail Caesar!
Mark Schuller
So What am I Doing Here? Reflections on the Inauguration Day Protests
Patrick Cockburn
The Rise of Trump and Isis Have More in Common Than You Might Think
Binoy Kampmark
Ignored Ironies: Women, Protest and Donald Trump
Gregory Barrett
Flag, Cap and Screen: Hollywood’s Propaganda Machine
Gareth Porter
US Intervention in Syria? Not Under Trump
L. Ali Khan
Trump’s Holy War against Islam
Gary Leupp
An Al-Qaeda Attack in Mali:  Just Another Ripple of the Endless, Bogus “War on Terror”
Norman Pollack
America: Banana Republic? Far Worse
Bob Fitrakis - Harvey Wasserman
We Mourn, But We March!
Kim Nicolini
Trump Dump: One Woman March and Personal Shit as Political
William Hawes
We Are on Our Own Now
Martin Billheimer
Last Tango in Moscow
Colin Todhunter
Development and India: Why GM Mustard Really Matters
Mel Gurtov
Trump’s America—and Ours
David Mattson
Fog of Science II: Apples, Oranges and Grizzly Bear Numbers
Clancy Sigal
Who’s Up for This Long War?
Weekend Edition
January 20, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Divide and Rule: Class, Hate, and the 2016 Election
Andrew Levine
When Was America Great?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: This Ain’t a Dream No More, It’s the Real Thing
Yoav Litvin
Making Israel Greater Again: Justice for Palestinians in the Age of Trump
Linda Pentz Gunter
Nuclear Fiddling While the Planet Burns
Ruth Fowler
Standing With Standing Rock: Of Pipelines and Protests
David Green
Why Trump Won: the 50 Percenters Have Spoken
Dave Lindorff
Imagining a Sanders Presidency Beginning on Jan. 20
Pete Dolack
Eight People Own as Much as Half the World
Roger Harris
Too Many People in the World: Names Named
Steve Horn
Under Tillerson, Exxon Maintained Ties with Saudi Arabia, Despite Dismal Human Rights Record
John Berger
The Nature of Mass Demonstrations
Stephen Zielinski
It’s the End of the World as We Know It
David Swanson
Six Things We Should Do Better As Everything Gets Worse
Alci Rengifo
Trump Rex: Ancient Rome’s Shadow Over the Oval Office
Brian Cloughley
What Money Can Buy: the Quiet British-Israeli Scandal
Mel Gurtov
Donald Trump’s Lies And Team Trump’s Headaches
Kent Paterson
Mexico’s Great Winter of Discontent
Norman Solomon
Trump, the Democrats and the Logan Act
David Macaray
Attention, Feminists
Yves Engler
Demanding More From Our Media
James A Haught
Religious Madness in Ulster
Dean Baker
The Economics of the Affordable Care Act
Patrick Bond
Tripping Up Trumpism Through Global Boycott Divestment Sanctions
Robert Fisk
How a Trump Presidency Could Have Been Avoided
Robert Fantina
Trump: What Changes and What Remains the Same
David Rosen
Globalization vs. Empire: Can Trump Contain the Growing Split?
Elliot Sperber
Dystopia
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail