Click amount to donate direct to CounterPunch
  • $25
  • $50
  • $100
  • $500
  • $other
  • use PayPal
Support Our Annual Fund Drive! We only shake you down once a year, but when we do we really mean it. It costs a lot to keep the site afloat, and our growing audience, well over TWO million unique viewers a month, eats up a lot of bandwidth — and bandwidth isn’t free. We aren’t supported by corporate donors, advertisers or big foundations. We survive solely on your support.
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.

2016 Fund Drive
Smart. Fierce. Uncompromised. Support CounterPunch Now!

  • cp-store
  • donate paypal

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

September 29, 2016
Robert Fisk
The Butcher of Qana: Shimon Peres Was No Peacemaker
James Rose
Politics in the Echo Chamber: How Trump Becomes President
Russell Mokhiber
The Corporate Vice Grip on the Presidential Debates
Daniel Kato
Rethinking the Race over Race: What Clinton Should do Now About ‘Super-Predators’
Peter Certo
Clinton’s Awkward Stumbles on Trade
Fran Shor
Demonizing the Green Party Vote
Rev. William Alberts
Trump’s Road Rage to the White House
Luke O'Brien
Because We Couldn’t Have Sanders, You’ll Get Trump
Michael J. Sainato
How the Payday Loan Industry is Obstructing Reform
Robert Fantina
You Can’t Have War Without Racism
Gregory Barrett
Bad Theater at the United Nations (Starring Kerry, Power, and Obama
James A Haught
The Long, Long Journey to Female Equality
Thomas Knapp
US Military Aid: Thai-ed to Torture
Jack Smith
Must They be Enemies? Russia, Putin and the US
Gilbert Mercier
Clinton vs Trump: Lesser of Two Evils or the Devil You Know
Tom H. Hastings
Manifesting the Worst Old Norms
George Ella Lyons
This Just in From Rancho Politico
September 28, 2016
Eric Draitser
Stop Trump! Stop Clinton!! Stop the Madness (and Let Me Get Off)!
Ted Rall
The Thrilla at Hofstra: How Trump Won the Debate
Robert Fisk
Cliché and Banality at the Debates: Trump and Clinton on the Middle East
Patrick Cockburn
Cracks in the Kingdom: Saudi Arabia Rocked by Financial Strains
Lowell Flanders
Donald Trump, Islamophobia and Immigrants
Shane Burley
Defining the Alt Right and the New American Fascism
Jan Oberg
Ukraine as the Border of NATO Expansion
Ramzy Baroud
Ban Ki-Moon’s Legacy in Palestine: Failure in Words and Deeds
David Swanson
How We Could End the Permanent War State
Sam Husseini
Debate Night’s Biggest Lie Was Told by Lester Holt
Laura Carlsen
Ayotzinapa’s Message to the World: Organize!
Binoy Kampmark
The Triumph of Momentum: Re-Electing Jeremy Corbyn
David Macaray
When the Saints Go Marching In
Seth Oelbaum
All Black Lives Will Never Matter for Clinton and Trump
Adam Parsons
Standing in Solidarity for a Humanity Without Borders
Cesar Chelala
The Trump Bubble
September 27, 2016
Louisa Willcox
The Tribal Fight for Nature: From the Grizzly to the Black Snake of the Dakota Pipeline
Paul Street
The Roots are in the System: Charlotte and Beyond
Jeffrey St. Clair
Idiot Winds at Hofstra: Notes on the Not-So-Great Debate
Mark Harris
Clinton, Trump, and the Death of Idealism
Mike Whitney
Putin Ups the Ante: Ceasefire Sabotage Triggers Major Offensive in Aleppo
Anthony DiMaggio
The Debates as Democratic Façade: Voter “Rationality” in American Elections
Binoy Kampmark
Punishing the Punished: the Torments of Chelsea Manning
Paul Buhle
Why “Snowden” is Important (or How Kafka Foresaw the Juggernaut State)
Jack Rasmus
Hillary’s Ghosts
Brian Cloughley
Billions Down the Afghan Drain
Lawrence Davidson
True Believers and the U.S. Election
Matt Peppe
Taking a Knee: Resisting Enforced Patriotism
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail
[i]
[i]
[i]
[i]