What Should Claimants And Cuba Make Of Biden Administration Exclusion Of Property Rights From Its First Human Rights Report? Is There Animus? Towards Whom?
Department Of State Had 70 Days To Consider
How Does Report Reflect Family Experiences Of Five Members Of Biden Administration Cabinet?
What Would Ambassador Eizenstat Think?
On 16 July 2020, from then-United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (2018-2021): “It’s important for every American, and for every American diplomat, to recognize how our founders understood unalienable rights. Foremost among these rights are property rights and religious liberty.”
On 30 March 2021, the only mention of the word “property” in the forty-page 2020 Cuba Human Rights Report from the Biden Administration is in section b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association- “The persons targeted by this harassment at times suffered physical assault or property damage.”
On 30 March 2021, reporting from Mr. Matt Lee of Associated Press: In a sharp rebuke to Trump-era policies, Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Tuesday formally scrapped a blueprint championed by his predecessor to limit U.S. promotion of human rights abroad to causes favored by conservatives like religious freedom and property matters while dismissing reproductive and LGBTQ rights.
On 1 April 2021, this question posed to the United States Department of State: Is the United States Department of State now shifting its position, downgrading, property rights (hold, own, sell, right to operate, etc.) as a “human right.”? What is the new position, if any? In the second of a two-part response, a State Department spokesperson replied: “As Secretary Blinken explained, ‘Human rights are also co-equal; there is no hierarchy that makes some rights more important than others.’ That includes human rights related to property, notably those set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
That second sentence was not included in any public statements from the Biden Administration nor in documents published by the United States Department of State relating to the 2020 Human Rights Report.
On 10 December 1948, the New York, New York-based United Nations (UN) adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which references the word “property” three times in the eight-page document: Article 2- Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Article 17- 1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others. 2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
The Honorable Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security, and member of the Biden Administration Cabinet is of Cuban descent (and Jewish descent) and reminds the public how his family experiences preceding, during and after the 1959 Cuban Revolution shaped his worldview. This narrative is also true for the ten members of the 117th United States Congress who are of Cuban descent- and those on both sides of the aisle who often support them. United States Senate: The Honorable Robert Menendez (D- New Jersey), The Honorable Ted Cruz (R- Texas), The Honorable Marco Rubio (R- Florida). United States House of Representatives: The Honorable Albio Sires (New Jersey; D- 8th), The Honorable Alex Mooney (West Virginia; R- 2nd), The Honorable Anthony González (Ohio; R- 16th), The Honorable Mario Díaz-Balart (Florida; R- 25th), The Honorable Carlos Gimenez (Florida; R- 26th), The Honorable Maria Elvira Salazar (Florida; R- 27th) and The Honorable Nicole Malliotakis (New York; R- 11th).
The five members of the twenty-five member Biden Administration Cabinet who are of Jewish descent remind the public how their family experiences preceding, during and after World War II have shaped their worldview: The Honorable Janet Yellen, Secretary of the Treasury; The Honorable Avril Haines, Director of National Intelligence; The Honorable Alejandro Mayorkas, Secretary of Homeland Security; The Honorable Antony Blinken, Secretary of State; and The Honorable Ron Klain, Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff. The Honorable Kamala Harris, Vice President of the United States and member of the Cabinet; her husband is of Jewish descent.
The law firm profile of The Honorable Stuart Eizenstat, who has extensive experience with issues of property rights, references property as first in a list of negotiated agreements: “Much of the interest in providing belated justice for victims of the Holocaust and other victims of Nazi tyranny during World War II was the result of his leadership of the Clinton Administration as Special Representative of the President and Secretary of State on Holocaust-Era Issues. He successfully negotiated major agreements with the Swiss, Germans, Austrian and French, and other European countries, covering restitution of property, payment for slave and forced laborers, recovery of looted art, bank accounts, and payment of insurance policies.”
There is one important issue of connectivity among those of Jewish descent and those of Cuban descent- the taking of property absent compensation. Surprising then on its first outing the Biden Administration would not publicly reference property rights as an integral component of how The White House will implement its human rights policies.
The Biden Administration policy of encouraging entrepreneurial activity in the Republic of Cuba need rest upon a property rights perspective. That is, the rights of those who start a business to securely own the fruits of their efforts free of arbitrary prohibitions and revocations of permits, seizures of assets, and terminations and confiscations of property interests, etc. That is not a controversial perspective for any country.
For the 5,913 certified claimants (United States nationals) whose expropriated assets total more than US$1.9 billion and the estimated, as shared in 2019 by the United States Department of State, of a potential of 200,000 non-certified claimants (Republic of Cuba nationals at the time of expropriation), what is to be thought by both the companies and the individuals, particularly those who are litigants in the thirty-six Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996 (Libertad Act) Title III lawsuits filed since 2 May 2019 in United States District Courts throughout the United States? Title III authorizes lawsuits in United States District Courts against companies and individuals who are using a certified claim or non-certified claim where the owner of the certified claim or non-certified claim has not received compensation from the Republic of Cuba or from a third-party who is using (“trafficking”) the asset.
The Biden Administration had seventy (70) days to review the Republic of Cuba 2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices data provided by the Trump Administration. The first message from the Biden Administration to individuals and companies with claims against the Republic of Cuba? Not worth mentioning. Not a priority.
United States Department of State
Washington DC
31 March 2021
Question: Is the United States Department of State now shifting its position, downgrading, property rights (hold, own, sell, right to operate, etc.) as a “human right.”? What is the new position, if any.
Good afternoon [redacted], In response to your query, I direct you to Secretary Blinken's remarks yesterday on the release of the 2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices (https://www.state.gov/secretary-antony-j-blinken-on-release-of-the-2020-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/). Some excerpts that pertain to your query are:
"One of the core principles of human rights is that they are universal. All people are entitled to these rights, no matter where they’re born, what they believe, whom they love, or any other characteristic. Human rights are also co-equal; there is no hierarchy that makes some rights more important than others. Past unbalanced statements that suggest such a hierarchy, including those offered by a recently disbanded State Department advisory committee, do not represent a guiding document for this administration. At my confirmation hearing, I promised that the Biden-Harris administration would repudiate those unbalanced views. We do so decisively today."
and...
"For many years, our human rights reports contained a section on reproductive health, including information about maternal mortality, discrimination against women in accessing sexual and reproductive health care, and government policies about access to contraception and skilled health care during pregnancy and childbirth. These topics were removed from the country reports by the previous administration, so they’re not a part of the reports released today, which cover the year 2020. I’ve asked our team to release an addendum for each country report later this year that will cover these issues. And we are restoring the practice of documenting these rights in 2021 and future years."
Please also refer to his remarks to the 46th Session of the Human Rights Council on 24 February, most notably:
“The United States is placing democracy and human rights at the center of our foreign policy, because they are essential for peace and stability. This commitment is firm and grounded in our own experience as a democracy...”
...and his speech "A Foreign Policy for the American People" delivered on 3 March, most notably: “We will stand firm behind our commitment to human rights, democracy, and the rule of law – and we will stand up against injustice toward women and girls, LGBTQI people, religious minorities, and people of all races and ethnicities. Because all human beings are equal in rights and dignity, no matter where they live or who they are.”
Additionally, From A State Department Spokesperson:
Promoting and advancing respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms is a top priority for the United States. We are proud to be a leader in championing human rights across the globe, honoring the vision of previous American generations, and expressing their time-honored aspiration for all people to be free.
The United States stands for the idea that governments should protect and promote respect for human rights for each and every human being, and that they should abide by their human rights obligations and commitments.
The U.S. commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms is anchored in the belief that societies that embrace human rights are stronger, more resilient, and more capable of resolving differences in a peaceful manner.
Our aim is always to identify human rights challenges and use American influence and power to encourage every nation to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms.
There is no moral equivalency between nations that uphold the rule of law, empower women, and respect individual rights and those that brutalize and suppress their people. Through our words and deeds, the United States demonstrates a positive alternative to undemocratic and repressive forms of government.
United States Department of State
Washington DC
1 April 2021
Question: Thank you for the prompt and detailed response. I appreciate the effort. However, and please correct me, I do not see the word "property" or the phrase "property rights" in any of the words you shared.
As Secretary Blinken explained, “Human rights are also co-equal; there is no hierarchy that makes some rights more important than others.” That includes human rights related to property, notably those set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
2020 Country Reports On Human Rights Practices
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, And Labor
Preface
Antony Blinken
Secretary of State
Excerpts:
“I am honored to release the 45th annual Country Reports on Human Rights Practices and to reaffirm the United States’ commitment to placing human rights at the center of our foreign policy. The cause of human rights, freedom, and dignity is close to the American heart. As President Biden emphasized, “We must start with diplomacy rooted in America’s most cherished democratic values: defending freedom, championing opportunity, upholding universal rights, respecting the rule of law, and treating every person with dignity.” Transparency and accountability are integral to this process. By documenting the status of human rights around the world each year, the U.S. Department of State provides objective and comprehensive information to Congress, civil society, academics, activists, and people everywhere – all of whom have roles to play in promoting human rights and accountability for rights abuses and violations.”
“Meanwhile in Cuba, government restrictions continued to suppress the freedoms of expression, association, religion or belief, and movement.”
2020 Country Reports On Human Rights Practices
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, And Labor
Appendix A
Notes on Preparation of the Country Reports and Explanatory Material
Excerpts:
Acts of Congress mandate the annual submission of the Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. The Country Reports on Human Rights Practices cover internationally recognized civil and political rights, including those set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as worker rights. These include the prohibition on torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment and the rights not to be subjected to arbitrary detention; disappearance or clandestine detention; and other violations of the right to life, liberty, and the security of person.
The Department strives to make the reports comprehensive, objective, and uniform in scope. We seek a high standard of consistency in the reports despite the multiplicity of sources and the diversity of countries. For purposes of focus and streamlining, the reports select a few illustrative examples of alleged abuses and follow up in most instances only on the previous year’s high-profile unresolved cases. In recent years, the Department’s annual instructions on the update of the Reports changed the requirement that information be provided even when no abuse was alleged. An example is a reduction in information on prison conditions when there have not been allegations of inadequate conditions. For example, if there has been no allegation concerning the unavailability of potable water, then the Reports need not include information on that condition. It is only an allegation about the absence of potable water that would raise prison condition concerns and thus should be mentioned. This change allowed the reports to increase the focus on reported abuses.
Additionally, the Department’s annual instructions also made changes to sharpen the focus on reports of violations and abuses of internationally recognized human rights and each government’s actions regarding such violations and abuses.
While we continue to report on societal conditions, including discrimination, that can affect the enjoyment of internationally recognized human rights, we have reduced the amount of statistical data in each of the subsections of the report illustrating those conditions. In the age of the Internet, the underlying data is generally available. We have provided links to relevant sources rather than repeat the data in the text of the reports. Such links are consolidated in Appendix C.
Evaluating the credibility of reports of human rights violations and abuses remains difficult. Most governments and opposition groups deny they commit human rights violations or abuses and occasionally go to great lengths to conceal any wrongdoing. There may be few eyewitnesses to specific alleged violations or buses. Frequently, eyewitnesses are intimidated or prevented from reporting what they know. On the other hand, individuals and groups opposed to a government may have incentive to exaggerate or fabricate abuses. In similar fashion, some governments may distort or exaggerate abuses attributed to opposition groups. The Department seeks to identify those groups (for example, government forces) or individuals for whom available, credible evidence indicates probable involvement in human rights violations or abuses or other problematic conduct.
Many governments that profess to respect human rights in principle may in fact secretly order or tacitly condone violations or abuses. Consequently, the reports look beyond statements of policy or intent to examine what a government actually did to protect human rights and promote accountability, including the extent to which it investigated, brought to trial, or punished those responsible for any violations or abuses.
The Reports describe facts relevant to human rights concerns as they have been reported by the sources identified above. Notwithstanding terms that may be used in them, they do not state or reach legal conclusions with respect to domestic or international law.
Occasionally the Reports state that a country “generally respected” the rights of individuals. The Department uses the phrase “generally respected” because the protection and promotion of human rights is a dynamic endeavor. It cannot be stated with absolute accuracy that any government fully respects these rights at all times without qualification, even in the best of circumstances. Accordingly, the reports use “generally respected” as a standard phrase to describe countries that attempt to protect and promote human rights in the fullest sense, and it is thus the highest level of respect for human rights assigned by these reports.
The following notes on specific sections in each country report provide an overview of the key problems covered, but they are not intended to be comprehensive descriptions:
Denial of Fair Public Trial: Notes whether there is an independent and impartial judiciary free of corruption or political influence and whether trials are fair and public and afford criminal defendants the minimum guarantees recognized internationally as necessary for a criminal defense (failure to hold any trial under Arbitrary Arrest or Detention). The subsection Political Prisoners and Detainees covers persons convicted, imprisoned, or detained essentially for political beliefs or nonviolent acts of dissent or expression, particularly based on overly broad and sweeping charges intended to stifle the exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms. The subsection Civil Procedures and Remedies notes whether there is access to an independent and impartial court or other competent authority to seek a remedy, whether damages for, or cessation of, an alleged human rights violation. [Emphasis Added] The optional subsection Property Restitution is included if there is a systemic failure of a government to enforce court orders with respect to restitution or compensation for the taking of private property under domestic law. This subsection is not intended to discuss or evaluate individual claims.
The subsection examines, among other matters, whether there is violence or discrimination against members of resident stateless populations in employment, education, housing, health services, marriage or birth registration, access to courts, or the [Emphasis added] owning of property.
2020 Executive Summary
“Cuba is an authoritarian state with former president Raul Castro serving as the first secretary of the Cuban Communist Party, the highest political entity of the state by law, and Miguel Diaz-Canel serving as president of the republic. A new constitution ratified in February 2019 codifies that Cuba remains a one-party system in which the Communist Party is the only legal political party. Elections were neither free nor fair nor competitive.”
”The Ministry of Interior controls police, internal security forces, and the prison system. The ministry’s National Revolutionary Police are the primary law enforcement organization. Specialized units of the ministry’s state security branch are responsible for monitoring, infiltrating, and suppressing independent political activity. The national leadership, including members of the military, maintained effective control over the security forces. Members of the security forces committed numerous abuses.”
2020 C. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
There were recurring reports that members of the security forces and their agents harassed, intimidated, and physically assaulted human rights and prodemocracy advocates, political dissidents, and peaceful demonstrators, and that they did so with impunity. Some detainees and prisoners endured physical abuse by prison officials or other inmates at the instigation of guards. Although the law prohibits coercion during investigative interrogations, police and security forces at times used aggressive and physically abusive tactics, threats, and harassment during questioning. Detainees reported officers intimidated them with threats of long-term detention, loss of child-custody rights, denial of permission to depart the country, and other punishments.
State security officials frequently deployed to countries such as Venezuela and Nicaragua, where they trained and supported other organizations in their use of repressive tactics and human rights abuses and sometimes participated in the abuses directly. For instance, Cuban security force members were embedded in the Maduro regime’s security and intelligence services in Venezuela and were instrumental in transforming Venezuela’s Directorate General of Military Counterintelligence (DGCIM) from a small organization focused on external threats to a much larger organization focused on surveilling Venezuelans and suppressing dissent. UN reports accused the DGCIM of torture, and many former Venezuelan prisoners said that Cubans, identified by their distinctive accents, supervised while DGCIM personnel tortured prisoners.
A December 2019 report from the Casla Institute, a Czech Republic-based NGO focused on governance in Latin America, stated the Cuban ambassador in Venezuela was personally involved in organizing this training. The Casla Institute report also stated, “Cubans constantly instruct members of the FANB [Venezuelan armed forces] and intelligence in techniques of repression, intimidation, and monitoring, so that they carry out investigation work and spy on their own colleagues and their families and political and social leaders, and directly intervene in social unrest.”
Impunity was pervasive. There were no known cases of prosecution of government officials for any human rights abuses, including torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.
2019 C. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
There were reports that members of the security forces intimidated and physically assaulted human rights and prodemocracy advocates, political dissidents, and other detainees and prisoners during detention and imprisonment, and that they did so with impunity. Some detainees and prisoners also endured physical abuse by prison officials or by other inmates with the acquiescence of guards.
There were reports police assaulted detainees or were complicit in public harassment of and physical assaults on peaceful demonstrators (see section 2.b.). For example, in August several videos showed police attacking with police dogs and truncheons persons assembled for carnivals, despite receiving little resistance. Police also were recorded severely beating a private taxi driver in a separate August incident as part of a campaign against persons working for themselves.
On August 12, authorities prevented evangelical Christian activist Adrian del Sol from departing the country for a workshop of Christian Solidarity Worldwide, a religious freedom organization, as part of a broader policy of arbitrarily preventing certain individuals from leaving the country (see section 2.d.). In response, Adrian’s father Guillermo del Sol–an activist himself–started a hunger strike against the policy on August 12. On September 20, on the 40th day of his hunger strike, del Sol was admitted to Arnaldo Milian Castro Provincial State University Hospital for medical treatment and received intravenous nutrients and other care for several hours. On September 21, a state doctor pronounced him in perfect health, despite his being in obviously ill health and suffering from several chronic conditions exacerbated by his hunger strike. Police agents dragged the emaciated del Sol to a van from the Brigada Especial, a Ministry of Interior unit responsible for repressing dissidents. The van took him to his home, which was surrounded by police. According to del Sol, one of the security agents told him the order to remove him from the hospital came from the very top: “General Raul Castro gave us the order to take you to die in your home, and you will die like the anticommunist dog that you are.” Several activists who attempted to visit him were arrested and fined, and the family’s telephones were confiscated.
When authorities did allow Nelva Ismarays Ortega Tamayo, the wife of Jose Daniel Ferrer (see section 1.b.), to visit him in prison, she found him emaciated with signs of repeated physical torture. He was reportedly unable to lift his arms and recounted daily psychological trauma inflicted at the instruction of his jailers. State security officials frequently deployed to countries such as Venezuela and Nicaragua, where they trained and supported other organizations in their use of repressive tactics and human rights abuses, and sometimes participated in them directly.
For instance, Cubans were instrumental in transforming Venezuela’s Directorate General of Military Counterintelligence (DGCIM) from a small organization focused on external threats to a much larger organization focused on surveilling the Venezuelan armed forces in order to suppress dissent and ensure loyalty to the Maduro regime.
A July 5 UN report accused the DGCIM of torture, and many former prisoners said that Cubans, identified by their distinctive accents, supervised as DGCIM personnel tortured them.
2018 C. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The law prohibits abusive treatment of detainees and prisoners. There were reports, however, that members of the security forces intimidated and physically assaulted human rights and prodemocracy advocates, political dissidents, and other detainees and prisoners during detention and imprisonment, and that they did so with impunity. Some detainees and prisoners also endured physical abuse by prison officials or by other inmates with the acquiescence of guards.
There were reports of police assaulting detainees or being complicit in public harassment of and physical assaults on peaceful demonstrators (see section 2.b.). Ivan Hernandez Carrillo of the Independent Union Association of Cuba reported police severely beat, kicked, and punched him during his arrest on March 25.
On October 31, Radio Marti reported two political prisoners were beaten while in police custody. Alberto Valle Perez was beaten by fellow inmates in the Holguin prison. Zacchaeus Baez, coordinator of the Patriotic Union of Cuba (UNPACU) in Havana, said Valle Perez told his family prison guards ordered other inmates to beat him. On October 27, officers of the Combinado del Este Prison in Havana beat Carlos Manuel Figueroa Alvarez. According to Baez, guards sprayed pepper spray in Figueroa’s mouth while he was handcuffed and later took him to a solitary confinement cell.
2017 C. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The law prohibits abusive treatment of detainees and prisoners. There were reports, however, that members of the security forces intimidated and physically assaulted human rights and prodemocracy advocates, political dissidents, and other detainees and prisoners during detention and imprisonment, and that they did so with impunity. Some detainees and prisoners also endured physical abuse by other inmates with the acquiescence of guards.
There were reports of police assaulting detainees or being complicit in public harassment of and physical assaults on peaceful demonstrators (see section 2.b.).
State security forces held graffiti artist and political dissident Danilo Maldonado from November 26, 2016 to January 21 for spray-painting “se fue” (he’s gone) on a building the night of Fidel Castro’s death. According to Maldonado, prison authorities stripped him naked and held him in solitary confinement on International Human Rights Day, laced his food with sedatives, beat and gagged him on at least one occasion, and perpetuated a rumor that he would be shot and killed in a staged escape attempt. He said authorities moved him to six different prisons over the eight-week period to make it difficult for his family and girlfriend to visit him; routinely cancelled, denied, or changed visits; and did not provide adequate medical treatment.
2016 C. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The law prohibits abusive treatment of detainees and prisoners. There were reports, however, that members of the security forces intimidated and physically assaulted human rights and prodemocracy advocates, dissidents, and other detainees and prisoners during detention and imprisonment, and that they did so with impunity. Some detainees and prisoners endured physical abuse, sometimes by other inmates, with the acquiescence of guards.
There were reports of police assaulting detainees or being complicit in public harassment of and physical assaults on peaceful demonstrators (see section 2.b.).
On January 10, activists Antonio Rodiles and Ailer Gonzalez reported state security officers injected them with an unknown substance when they participated in a public march calling for the release of political prisoners. Medical evaluations in Miami produced inconclusive results about the nature of the substance.
On March 27, police officers allegedly beat two members of the Damas de Blanco with cables, and one Dama suffered an arm sprain. Members of the Damas de Blanco reported receiving head injuries, bites, bruises, and other injuries during government-sponsored counter protests and detentions.
On July 20, Guillermo “Coco” Farinas, president of the United Anti-Totalitarian Forum (FANTU), complained of a beating by police officers that caused injuries to his ribs, abdomen, and tongue when he tried to visit a police station to check on a fellow FANTU activist.
2015 C. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The law prohibits abusive treatment of detainees and prisoners. There were reports, however, that members of the security forces intimidated and sometimes physically assaulted human rights and prodemocracy advocates, dissidents, and other detainees and prisoners both during detention and imprisonment, and that they did so with impunity. Some detainees and prisoners endured physical abuse, sometimes by other inmates, with the acquiescence of guards.
There were reports of police assaulting detainees or being complicit in public harassment of and physical assaults on peaceful demonstrators (see section 2.b.).
On April 20, Mario Alberto Leiva, from the Patriotic Union of Cuba (UNPACU), a human rights organization, reported that government agents detained, beat, and threatened him. He reported abdominal injuries, bruises, and cuts and claimed the agents threatened to kill him if he did not cease activity with the independent civil society groups such as the Damas de Blanco (Ladies in White) and the UNPACU. In a separate case, human rights activist Antonio Rodiles reportedly suffered a broken nose after being struck in the face by a security agent in the back of a vehicle while he was briefly detained in July.
2014 C. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The law prohibits abusive treatment of detainees and prisoners. There were reports, however, that members of the security forces intimidated and sometimes physically assaulted human rights and prodemocracy advocates, dissidents, and other detainees and prisoners both during detention and while imprisoned, and they did so with impunity. Some detainees and prisoners endured physical abuse, sometimes by other inmates with the acquiescence of guards.
There were reports of police assaulting detainees or being complicit in public harassment of and physical assaults on peaceful demonstrators.
2013 C. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The law prohibits abusive treatment of detainees and prisoners. There were credible reports, however, that members of the security forces intimidated and sometimes physically assaulted human rights and prodemocracy advocates, dissidents, and other detainees and prisoners both during detention and while imprisoned, and they did so with impunity. Some detainees and prisoners endured physical abuse, sometimes by other inmates with the acquiescence of guards, or long periods in isolation cells.
There were numerous reports of police assaulting detainees or standing by – and even orchestrating – government-organized harassment of peaceful demonstrators.
2012 C. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The law prohibits abusive treatment of detainees and prisoners. However, there were verified reports that members of the security forces intimidated and sometimes physically assaulted human rights and prodemocracy advocates, dissidents, other detainees, and prisoners, and they did so with impunity. Some detainees and prisoners endured physical abuse, sometimes by other inmates with the acquiescence of guards, or long periods in isolation cells.
There were numerous reports of police assaulting detainees or of police standing by, and even orchestrating, government-organized harassment of peaceful demonstrators.
2011 C. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The law prohibits abusive treatment of detainees and prisoners. However, there were verified reports that members of the security forces harassed and sometimes physically assaulted human rights and prodemocracy advocates, dissidents, other detainees, and prisoners, and they did so with impunity. Some detainees and prisoners endured physical abuse, sometimes by other inmates with the acquiescence of guards, or long periods in isolation cells.
There were numerous reports of police assaults on detainees or of police standing by, and even orchestrating, government-organized mobs to assault peaceful demonstrators.
Reports of beatings of prisoners were commonplace and included beatings by prison officials as well as among prisoners. There were some reports of prisoner-on-prisoner sexual assaults, generally due to lax security by prison guards, and at least one report of rape by prison guards.
LINK TO COMPLETE ANALYSIS IN PDF FORMAT
