All look same and sound like Apu

The prosecution of various Indian store owners swept up by Operation Meth Merchant has run into some problems. For one thing, they’re having a hard time demonstrating intent on the part of the store owners:

when a government informant told store clerks that he needed the cold medicine, matches and camping fuel to “finish up a cook,” some of them said they figured he must have meant something about barbecue.

In some cases, the language barriers seem obvious – one videotape shows cold medicine stacked next to a sign saying, “Cheek your change before you leave a counter.” Investigators footnoted court papers to explain that the clue the informants dropped most often – that they were doing “a cook” – is a “common term” meth makers use. Lawyers argue that if the courts could not be expected to understand what this meant, neither could immigrants with a limited grasp of English.

“This is not even slang language like ‘gonna,’ ‘wanna,’ ” said Malvika Patel, who spent three days in jail before being cleared this month. ” ‘Cook’ is very clear; it means food.” And in this context, she said, some of the items the government wants stores to monitor would not set off any alarms. “When I do barbecue, I have four families. I never have enough aluminum foil.” [NYT]

Honestly, even having grown up in the US and knowing something about drug culture, I don’t know whether I would have caught the word “Cook” as drug slang in this context. The deeper root of the problem here, however, is that it’s very hard to write an effective law that says that something is legal unless it’s meant to be used to nefarious purposes. Sudafed, matches, camping fuel are either legal or illegal. You shouldn’t foist the burden on a convenience store owner to figure out how such common items will be used.

Another problem was that the prosecutors kept mixing up the different (unrelated) Patels involved:

Prosecutors have had to drop charges against one defendant they misidentified, presuming that the Indian woman inside the store must be the same Indian woman whose name appeared on the registration for a van parked outside, and lawyers have gathered evidence arguing that another defendant is the wrong Patel.  [NYT]
Continue reading

It’s safe over there now

My friend Anji M. alerts me to the case of Gokal and Sheila Kapoor. The couple and their son came to America in 1997 illegally in order to escape persecution by the Taliban. Gokal then filed papers appealing for political asylum. Surely a Hindu fleeing from a brutal fundamentalist regime would qualify, no? Newsweek reports:

…four years after his case first made its way into the system, it was finally dismissed on the basis that the TalibanÂ’s removal from power meant that the family did not have a well-founded fear of future persecution. By then the septuagenarian had a Social Security number, worked as a baggage handler at Dulles Airport, paid taxes and had hoped to be included in a U.S. program that routinely granted asylum to Hindu refugees from Afghanistan. What he didnÂ’t take into account was the extra scrutiny he would receive in the post-9/11 world.

The immigration judge who initially turned down his application was critical of the fact that KapoorÂ’s prominent brother, Dr. Wishwa Kapoor, chief of general internal medicine at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, did not attend the immigration hearing. For this reason, the judge apparently believed he must have aided and abetted his brotherÂ’s illegal entry into the United States.

The judge was wrong on both counts. Hindus do not believe they can live in Afghanistan without being persecuted, and there are so few left in the country itÂ’s hard to prove otherwise. And Dr. Kapoor didnÂ’t testify because his older brother, now 70, was too proud to ask him. The judge could have summoned the doctor to testify, rather than smear him, a man of impeccable reputation who was not there to defend himself, let alone his brother.

Ten days ago, Dr. Kapoor got a 10 p.m. call from his sister in Virginia to say that their brother and his wife, Shiela, 69, had been taken from their home by immigration officials. The officials told the coupleÂ’s son–who had graduated from high school earlier that day–that his parents would be back in a few hours. They were not, and it took two days before a lawyer hired by Dr. Kapoor found out that the couple were in Pamunkey prison, north of Richmond, Va.

Well sure. Everyone knows we’ve won the war against terror in Afghanistan so they should be just fine. Continue reading

Posted in Law

Punishing the Victim II: Hindus do it too

We’ve had a string of posts (1, 2, 3) concerning Imrana, the poor woman in UP who has been ordered to marry the man she accused of being her rapist. Most of the discussion on this topic has blamed Islamic law and the lack of a uniform civil code in India for this horrifying outcome. Well, guess what – here’s a very similar case, except that the rapist and victim were Hindus:

The Chhattisgarh Government on Thursday ordered a probe into a village panchayat’s alleged directive to a rape victim, who was delivered of the child of the accused, to stay with his family until she reached marriageable age and then get married to him. [cite]

In this case, her parents demanded that the rapist be punished but the local council over-ruled them:

Though the victim’s family members were demanding action against the accused, the panchayat directed the boy’s family, also a Dalit, to keep the girl as his wife. It asked both sides to enter into an agreement, signed on a stamp paper, that the boy’s family would keep the girl and her child, villagers said. [cite]

Very twisted stuff here. I wonder how widespread this very messed up rural desi practice is?

Continue reading

Not depressing. At all.

As previously discussed on this blog, a woman in Uttar Pradesh was violated by her father-in-law and then ordered to marry him via an outrageous fatwa, much to the horror of sentient beings everywhere. Unfortunately, this story doesn’t have a great ending:

“Me and my husband are willing to abide by the fatwa if the Darul Uloom Muftis want us to,” Imrana said.
Mufti Habibur Rehman of Darul Uloom Deoband said in a fatwa on Sunday that the Imrana’s life with her husband Noor Ilahi has become untenable as per Islamic law after the alleged rape on June 3.
Reacting to the ruling, Imrana, who has been staying with her parents at Kukra village, on Sunday said she has full faith in the Shariyat. Noor Ilahi also said he would take steps as per the fatwa.

You do remember why she was ordered to go home, right? To purify her. Tell me, dear readers, how do you “take steps” so that your wife transitions to the role of stepmother? I’d think about it myself, but I can’t stop shaking my head and I’ve gone dizzy.

Despite the disapproval of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board and the work of women activists, it looks like the local panchayat will win. The victim’s own brothers are fine with the fatwa. While at the protest at the Pakistani Embassy last week, I heard activists discussing how Mukhtaran Mai’s mother supported her as she commenced her quest for justice. I wish Imrana’s family had reacted similarly. If she was brave enough to report this assault to the authorities in the first place, I can’t help but think that she has a flicker of defiance within her. If only someone close to her could fan that tiny flame…

It saddens me to the point of migraine that here’s where the story ends. Though the magistrate who heard this case denied the alleged rapist/father-in-law’s bail, to me, even if he’s convicted of the crime he’s been accused of, it sounds like his daughter-in-law and future wife will never win. Continue reading

Posted in Law

Jailing “witnesses” indefinitely

Last year I blogged about the Justice Department’s abuse of material witness statutes following 9/11. For over a year HRW lawyer Anjana Malhotra has been flying around the country interviewing those thrown into jail indefinitely as “material witnesses,” to terrorist activities. Now a full report [Witness to Abuse: Human Rights Abuses under the Material Witness Law since September 11] has just been released on this practice. Newsweek reports:

Since 9/11, the Justice Department has used a little-known legal tactic to secretly lock up at least 70 terror suspects—almost all of them Muslim men—and hold them without charges as “material witnesses” to crimes, in some cases for months. A report to be released this week by two civil-liberties groups finds nearly 90 percent of these suspects were never linked to any terrorism acts, resulting in prosecutors and FBI agents issuing at least 13 apologies for wrongful arrest.

The report cites instances in which agents used what it calls “flimsy” evidence to make arrests. A 68-year-old Virginia doctor named Tajammul Bhatti was arrested by the FBI in June 2002 after neighbors found magazines about flying and a phone number of a Pakistani nuclear scientist in his apartment. It turned out he had served in the U.S. Air Force National Guard and the Pakistani scientist was a childhood friend. Another “tip” led to the arrest of eight restaurant workers in Evansville, Ind., who were shackled and taken to a detention facility in Chicago. The FBI later apologized—but never disclosed the basis for their detention. “The law was never designed to be used this way,” says Anjana Malhotra, the prime author of the report.

The New York Times has more:

The new study sought to catalogue and quantify the treatment of the witnesses, and it found that a third of the 70 material witnesses it identified were jailed for at least two months. The study found that there might well have been more than 70 material witnesses, but secrecy provisions prevented a definitive tally. Of the 70 who were positively identified, 42 were released without any charges being filed, 20 were charged with non-terrorist offenses like bank or credit card fraud, four were convicted of supporting terrorism, and three others are awaiting trial on terrorism charges. More than a third were ultimately deported. None are still known to be held as witnesses.

Few of the material witnesses made national headlines. Among the notable exceptions were Zacarias Moussaoui, recently convicted of terrorism in connection with the Sept. 11 attacks; Jose Padilla, who was later declared an enemy combatant after authorities accused him of plotting to build a “dirty bomb;” and Brandon Mayfield, a Muslim lawyer in Portland who was jailed in connection with the 2004 Madrid train bombings after the F.B.I. mistakenly matched a fingerprint of his to the scene.

NPR features this on Monday as well.

[disclosure: Malhotra is a friend] Continue reading

Posted in Law

Join in the chant: “Women’s rights NOT F-16s!”

samia.JPG Yesterday I wrote about a protest on behalf of Mukhtaran Bibi; today, over fifty people and half-a-dozen news organizations (including CNN, Dawn and VOA) showed up at the Pakistani embassy. Samia Khan, a Development Manager for MDRI (Mental Disability Rights International) and a NAPAWF (National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum) volunteer who was at the epicenter of today’s event agreed to answer three questions for the Mutiny. You have no idea how sweet this woman is– she had other plans and she shelved them just so you guys could get the latest knowledge on “the movement”. Samia, you’re my heroine.

Samia speaks:

Was it a success?

It was a success in terms of visibility and raising awareness of the issue and involving different organizations. There were at least 6-7 institutions that got involved, it was a multi-ethnic effort, too. It was a strong beginning.
It would be great if Mukhtaran Mai is free, if she gets her passport and can travel thatÂ’s wonderful, but itÂ’s important to remember that sheÂ’s one voice, that there are thousands of cases like her, and that if policies donÂ’t change thereÂ’s going to continue to be lip service to the international communityÂ…but nothing will change things for women.

WhatÂ’s next?

The follow-up to this needs to involve putting more pressure on the government of Pakistan, the international community as well as the administration here. They need to start holding Mushharaf accountable for having respect for humanÂ’s rights, for women. The U.S. is turning a blind eye by giving him aid, but not questioning his policies towards woman and even children.

Continue reading

Protecting Florida’s children

The Tampa Tribune has been reporting (thanks to Chaina Turna for the tip) on the case of 22 year old Parita Patel who has been visiting the U.S. and is reportedly staying with some friends (while her husband and family remain in India).

paritapatel.jpg

Tears streamed down her face, a few falling to her lime green punjabi before she could wipe them away. Her friends tried to comfort her, patting her back and whispering condolences in Gujarati outside the courtroom at the 13th Judicial Circuit Court.

Parita Patel, 22, just wanted her baby daughter. And she thought Friday she’d walk out holding little Krinna in her arms. She just had to get past a dependency hearing.

A visit with Krinna on Monday, arranged at a Florida Department of Children and Families office, may have given her false hope.

“I have not been sleeping,” she said. “I say to myself, `Tomorrow my baby may come with me.’ I wonder why this situation?”

In a matter of minutes, the hearing was over. Krinna wasn’t there. They weren’t going home together.

So what’s up? Why did the 13th order her baby into the system? Florida’s Department of Children and Families (DCF) accused her of putting her baby in harms way.

Continue reading

Posted in Law

Going legit at NASABA

Note to self: The next time that you are granted a Press Pass to an event as a representative of Sepia Mutiny, at the very least you should bring a pen to take notes. That way you look more legit.

nasaba.jpg

Yesterday I attended the North American South Asian Bar Association (NASABA) conference in D.C. I had to sheepishly admit to people who asked that I was not in fact an attorney like one of them. My “personal injury lawyer” cover was totally blown as evidenced by one very cute district court clerk from Chicago who called me out on it. No longer would I be able to walk amongst the lawyers and speak legalese with the reckless abandon that had served me so well in years past.

The general buzz at the conference was that the most compelling panel from Friday had been the one titled, 9/11 Commission Effects on the South Asian Community. Unfortunately I arrived in D.C. too late to attend. The panel that I was most looking forward to was the one titled, Politics, Identity, and Mobilization: South Asian Lawyers in Election 2004. This panel consisted of Democrats Reshma Saujani and Ro Khanna, as well as Republicans Dino Teppara, and Suhail Khan. The moderator was Deepa Iyer. I sat in the very front row and made eye contact just long enough to try and make the two Republicans feel uncomfortable. I kid, I kid. If I was a jerk I would have brought my laptop and started typing furiously whenever someone said something provocative or something that I disagreed with. I even thought about putting a sign on the cover of my laptop that read “I’m blogging about YOU right NOW,” but I needed people to trust me in order to get the story and cultivate future sources.

Continue reading

Posted in Law