Latest news with #ConventionagainstTorture
See - Sada Elbalad
3 days ago
- Politics
- See - Sada Elbalad
ICE Officers, Deportees Trapped in Djibouti Shipping Container
Taarek Refaat US federal court documents reveal that approximately 12 Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers (ICE) and eight deportees are suffering from illnesses and living in harsh conditions inside a metal shipping container in Djibouti. More than two weeks ago, Boston federal judge Brian E. Murphy halted a deportation flight transporting migrants from Cuba, Vietnam, Myanmar, Laos, and Mexico to South Sudan, ruling that the operation violated his April injunction, which prohibits deporting people to countries other than their home countries without giving them an opportunity to seek humanitarian protection. The judge ordered the responsible authorities to conduct humanitarian protection screenings in accordance with the Convention against Torture. Instead of returning them to the United States, authorities transported the migrants to Djibouti, where a shipping container was converted into a temporary detention center inside the only US military base in Africa, Camp Lemonnier. Melissa Harper, a senior immigration official, testified in court that three officers and eight detainees arrived at the base unprepared for potential hazards, such as extreme temperatures, air pollution, and the security threat from Yemen. She added that the officers were not provided with protective clothing or equipment, despite advance warnings of "an imminent threat of rocket attacks from groups in Yemen." Harper added that daytime temperatures exceed 100 degrees Fahrenheit, while at night, a "dense fog" formed from smoke from burning trash and human waste around the base, causing symptoms of acute respiratory infections in the officers and detainees, such as coughing, difficulty breathing, fever, and joint pain. read more Gold prices rise, 21 Karat at EGP 3685 NATO's Role in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict US Expresses 'Strong Opposition' to New Turkish Military Operation in Syria Shoukry Meets Director-General of FAO Lavrov: confrontation bet. nuclear powers must be avoided News Iran Summons French Ambassador over Foreign Minister Remarks News Aboul Gheit Condemns Israeli Escalation in West Bank News Greek PM: Athens Plays Key Role in Improving Energy Security in Region News One Person Injured in Explosion at Ukrainian Embassy in Madrid News China Launches Largest Ever Aircraft Carrier Sports Former Al Zamalek Player Ibrahim Shika Passes away after Long Battle with Cancer Lifestyle Get to Know 2025 Eid Al Adha Prayer Times in Egypt Sports Neymar Announced for Brazil's Preliminary List for 2026 FIFA World Cup Qualifiers News Prime Minister Moustafa Madbouly Inaugurates Two Indian Companies Arts & Culture New Archaeological Discovery from 26th Dynasty Uncovered in Karnak Temple Business Fear & Greed Index Plummets to Lowest Level Ever Recorded amid Global Trade War Arts & Culture Zahi Hawass: Claims of Columns Beneath the Pyramid of Khafre Are Lies News Flights suspended at Port Sudan Airport after Drone Attacks News Shell Unveils Cost-Cutting, LNG Growth Plan
Epoch Times
09-05-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
Federal Judge Strikes Down Rule Affecting Illegal Immigrants Seeking Asylum
An immigration rule affecting illegal immigrants, which was finalized at the direction of former President Joe Biden, violates federal law, U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras The rule had several parts. It forced illegal immigrants seeking asylum, or protection against deportation because of fear of danger if they were sent to their home country, to schedule a time to appear at a port of entry to request asylum. If they didn't, they would not be eligible for asylum, with limited exceptions. The rule also required illegal immigrants to alert border officers of concerns if they were removed, made it harder for an illegal immigrant to show they're eligible for other forms of deportation protection, and narrowed the window for asylum seekers in U.S. custody to consult with attorneys from 24 hours to four hours. Contreras vacated the A DHS spokesperson told The Epoch Times in response to the ruling: 'The Trump administration is committed to restoring the rule of law and common sense to our immigration system, and will continue to fight for the arrest, detention, and removal of aliens who have no right to be in this country.' Contreras said that most of the components of the rule violate the Immigration and Nationality Act, a law Congress passed that governs major portions of the immigration system, or the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which requires that officials not impose arbitrary and capricious requirements, Contreras said. Related Stories 5/6/2025 5/6/2025 'Congress could not have been more clear that asylum is available to noncitizens who enter the United States outside ports of entry. Every court to consider the issue agrees,' the judge said. Government officials had pointed to how Congress stated in the law that they could impose limitations and conditions on asylum, but the same law says those limits must be consistent with the rest of the law. The requirement that illegal immigrants bring up fear of return is also illegal because it's arbitrary and capricious, according to the ruling. Government officials said that the previous standard, which mandated that officers ask each illegal immigrant if they were afraid of what would happen to them in their home country if they were deported, was 'unduly suggestive.' 'That may be true. Even so, DHS and DOJ were obligated to replace that procedure with one that complies with the APA,' the judge said. Narrowing the minimum window for speaking to an attorney or another person of their choosing also violates the APA because the government has not provided evidence showing that a four-hour period provides enough time to speak to that person, Contreras wrote. The judge did side with the government on the heightened standard for showing eligibility for deportation protection through a Convention against Torture or withholding of removal order, since the Immigration and Nationality Act does not require a specific standard for those orders. The judge said that his ruling was unlikely to have much impact at this time, given how President Donald Trump ordered the shutdown of the application with which illegal immigrants could make appointments at ports of entry, and how border agent encounters with illegal immigrants have plunged in Trump's second term. 'Defendants request that the Court stay operation of any order granting Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment for fourteen days to allow for review in the Court of Appeals,' he wrote. 'Because President Trump has separately shut down asylum applications at the southern border, the effects of the Court's order are unlikely to be disruptive. The Court will not stay operation of its order.'
1News
05-05-2025
- 1News
Lake Alice survivor legally challenges Crown redress
A Flaxmere man tortured as a child at the Lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital is taking the Crown to court, arguing its redress framework is unlawful. Malcolm Richards will file a claim in the High Court at Wellington later this morning, seeking a judicial review of Cabinet's redress decision. Those tortured at the Manawatū psychiatric facility had until last week to choose a rapid payment of $150,000 or head to arbitration. The redress scheme only applies to survivors who are still alive that had been subjected to electric shocks and/or paraldehyde injections. Some have already welcomed the money, but Richards has refused the redress on principle. "No way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence." Richards was 15-years-old when he went to Lake Alice and said he still lived with the impacts of being drugged, raped, beaten and shocked all over his body. He was the second survivor to successfully argue his case at the United Nations committee that urged the New Zealand government to compensate him. Richards believes December's redress package breaches Article 14 of the United Nations' Torture Convention, which New Zealand ratified in 1989. This article states each country must ensure in its legal system that victims of torture obtain redress and have an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full a rehabilitation as possible. It also states that if a victim of torture dies, their dependants are entitled to compensation. Richards' lawyer Chris Griggs said Cabinet's redress decision hasn't been legislated, excludes survivors who were tortured by means other than shocks and injections and provides ex-gratia compensation that can't be enforced or effectively challenged in court. New Zealand ratified the Convention against Torture in 1989 but with a reservation, that the government reserves the right to award compensation to torture victims only at the discretion of the Attorney-General of New Zealand. The government has said New Zealand is the first country in the world to acknowledge torture of children and provide compensation to recognise their suffering. Griggs said the case was a simple one that boiled down to the government needing to comply with international human rights laws. "A lot of survivors are telling me what's happening is like a serious crime has been committed by the government so the government goes into a room with the victim and tells them this is what the penalty will be and no correspondence will be entered into. "That's not justice. So we're challenging it." Griggs said he would be asking the court to essentially "quash" Cabinet's decision and declare the government needed to comply with international minimum standards. While the United Nations didn't have any teeth by way of enforcing these standards, Griggs said it was New Zealand's reputation on the line. "New Zealand holds itself out to be a champion of human rights. We're a defender of human rights. We're the first country to speak out on breaches of human rights standards overseas. "And yet, when it comes to our own country, what do we do? We don't comply with the International minimum standards for remedying torture." "I have heard stories of children being lined up against a wall with their backs to the staff and having syringes full of paraldehyde thrown at their bottoms like a dartboard. That happened in this country. "We have to take a stand. New Zealand must live up to what happened and the only way we can do that is by complying with the international minimum standards laid down by the Torture Convention." Griggs has drafted a bill to set up an independent tribunal to assess torture claims and compensation and says there's already precedent for this type of arrangement. "You might remember many years ago we had a big problem in New Zealand with leaky buildings, so the government set up the water weathertight homes tribunal to deal with that problem. "Here we have a situation where the government has tortured a whole bunch of New Zealanders over a number of years and international law requires there to be an equivalent process. "All we're saying is just treat the survivors of Lake Alice and the other institutions in New Zealand where people have been tortured in the same way you've treated people who've had problems with the weather tightness of their homes. It's not a big ask." Prime Minister Christopher Luxon told Morning Report no amount of money could make up for what survivors endured. "Their stories of abuse were harrowing and heartbreaking. Obviously the UN made a determination on Lake Alice quite rightly around torture, we've worked hard to make sure we've put in place a redress system to make sure people are compensated for that. "Whatever we do, no amount of money frankly makes up for what survivors have endured." The government's focus was on making sure it acknowledged and formally apologised, supported survivors with a better redress system and prevent abuse through improving the operating practices of key government agencies, Luxon said. Richards has taken up woodworking in his shed as a means of coping with stress and trauma, creating wooden trinkets he sells online. "It's just what I found that I can lose myself in and when things become too much, I just go out to my shed and start cutting out stuff and making stuff." He does not see the point in taking the rapid payment that has been offered by the Crown. "[The Minister responsible Erica Stanford] rang me before she made that announcement and I told her no way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence," Richards said. "What's the point of taking $150,000 and living with this... it gets so much for me that I've gotta go out and lock myself in the shed away from my family." Richards said he had been trying to access support through ACC for special items like screwing teeth — normal dentures give him flashbacks to being gagged at Lake Alice — and a phone plan — he is forgetful and uses his phone to remind him about appointments and medications. But challenging the Crown's redress was about more than just money, he said. "There's more to this than $150,000 cash, the rehab is just as important. The investigation is the most important thing." The Lake Alice redress scheme is separate from Cabinet decisions about the wider redress system for those abused in state care.
Otago Daily Times
04-05-2025
- Otago Daily Times
Lake Alice survivor legally challenges Crown redress
By Anneke Smith of RNZ A Flaxmere man tortured as a child at the Lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital is taking the Crown to court, arguing its redress framework is unlawful. Malcolm Richards will file a claim in the High Court at Wellington later this morning, seeking a judicial review of Cabinet's redress decision. Those tortured at the Manawatū psychiatric facility had until last week to choose a rapid payment of $150,000 or head to arbitration. The redress scheme only applies to survivors who are still alive that had been subjected to electric shocks and/or paraldehyde injections. Some have already welcomed the money but Richards has refused the redress on principle. "No way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence." Richards was 15-years-old when he went to Lake Alice and said he still lived with the impacts of being drugged, raped, beaten and shocked all over his body. He was the second survivor to successfully argue his case at the United Nations committee that urged the New Zealand government to compensate him. Richards believes December's redress package breaches Article 14 of the United Nations' Torture Convention, which New Zealand ratified in 1989. This article states each country must ensure in its legal system that victims of torture obtain redress and have an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full a rehabilitation as possible. It also states that if a victim of torture dies, their dependants are entitled to compensation. Richards' lawyer Chris Griggs said Cabinet's redress decision hasn't been legislated, excludes survivors who were tortured by means other than shocks and injections and provides ex-gratia compensation that can't be enforced or effectively challenged in court. New Zealand ratified the Convention against Torture in 1989 but with a reservation, that the government reserves the right to award compensation to torture victims only at the discretion of the Attorney-General of New Zealand. The government has said New Zealand is the first country in the world to acknowledge torture of children and provide compensation to recognise their suffering. 'It's the perpetrator deciding what their punishment will be' Griggs said the case was a simple one that boiled down to the government needing to comply with international human rights laws. "A lot of survivors are telling me what's happening is like a serious crime has been committed by the government so the government goes into a room with the victim and tells them this is what the penalty will be and no correspondence will be entered into. "That's not justice. So we're challenging it." Griggs said he would be asking the court to essentially "quash" Cabinet's decision and declare the government needed to comply with international minimum standards. While the United Nations didn't have any teeth by way of enforcing these standards, Griggs said it was New Zealand's reputation on the line. "New Zealand holds itself out to be a champion of human rights. We're a defender of human rights. We're the first country to speak out on breaches of human rights standards overseas. "And yet, when it comes to our own country, what do we do? We don't comply with the International minimum standards for remedying torture." "I have heard stories of children being lined up against a wall with their backs to the staff and having syringes full of paraldehyde thrown at their bottoms like a dartboard. That happened in this country. "We have to take a stand. New Zealand must live up to what happened and the only way we can do that is by complying with the international minimum standards laid down by the Torture Convention." Griggs has drafted a bill to set up an independent tribunal to assess torture claims and compensation and says there's already precedent for this type of arrangement. "You might remember many years ago we had a big problem in New Zealand with leaky buildings so the government set up the water weathertight homes tribunal to deal with that problem. "Here we have a situation where the government has tortured a whole bunch of New Zealanders over a number of years and international law requires there to be an equivalent process. "All we're saying is just treat the survivors of Lake Alice and the other institutions in New Zealand where people have been tortured in the same way you've treated people who've had problems with the weather tightness of their homes. It's not a big ask." 'What's the point of taking $150,000 and living with this' Richards has taken up woodworking in his shed as a means of coping with stress and trauma, creating wooden trinkets he sells online. "It's just what I found that I can lose myself in and when things become too much, I just go out to my shed and start cutting out stuff and making stuff." He does not see the point in taking the rapid payment that has been offered by the Crown. "[The Minister responsible Erica Stanford] rang me before she made that announcement and I told her no way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence. "What's the point of taking $150,000 and living with this... it gets so much for me that I've gotta go out and lock myself in the shed away from my family." Richards said he had been trying to access support through ACC for special items like screwing teeth - normal dentures give him flashbacks to being gagged at Lake Alice - and a phone plan - he is forgetful and uses his phone to remind him about appointments and medications. But challenging the Crown's redress was about more than just money, he said. "There's more to this than $150,000 cash, the rehab is just an important. The investigation is the most important thing." The Lake Alice redress scheme is separate from Cabinet decisions about the wider redress system for those abused in state care.
RNZ News
04-05-2025
- RNZ News
Lake Alice survivor legally challenges Crown redress
Lake Alice survivor Malcolm Richards (pictured in his shed) is legally challenging Cabinet's decision on redress for those tortured at the Manawatū psychiatric facility. Photo: RNZ / Anneke Smith A Flaxmere man tortured as a child at the Lake Alice Psychiatric Hospital is taking the Crown to court, arguing its redress framework is unlawful. Malcolm Richards will file a claim in the High Court at Wellington later this morning, seeking a judicial review of Cabinet's redress decision . Those tortured at the Manawatū psychiatric facility had until last week to choose a rapid payment of $150,000 or head to arbitration. The redress scheme only applies to survivors who are still alive that had been subjected to electric shocks and/or paraldehyde injections. Some have already welcomed the money but Richards has refused the redress on principle. "No way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence." Richards was 15-years-old when he went to Lake Alice and said he still lived with the impacts of being drugged, raped, beaten and shocked all over his body. He was the second survivor to successfully argue his case at the United Nations committee that urged the New Zealand government to compensate him. Richards believes December's redress package breaches Article 14 of the United Nations' Torture Convention, which New Zealand ratified in 1989. This article states each country must ensure in its legal system that victims of torture obtain redress and have an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full a rehabilitation as possible. It also states that if a victim of torture dies, their dependants are entitled to compensation. Richards' lawyer Chris Griggs said Cabinet's redress decision hasn't been legislated, excludes survivors who were tortured by means other than shocks and injections and provides ex-gratia compensation that can't be enforced or effectively challenged in court. New Zealand ratified the Convention against Torture in 1989 but with a reservation, that the government reserves the right to award compensation to torture victims only at the discretion of the Attorney-General of New Zealand. The government has said New Zealand is the first country in the world to acknowledge torture of children and provide compensation to recognise their suffering. Chris Griggs Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone Griggs said the case was a simple one that boiled down to the government needing to comply with international human rights laws. "A lot of survivors are telling me what's happening is like a serious crime has been committed by the government so the government goes into a room with the victim and tells them this is what the penalty will be and no correspondence will be entered into. "That's not justice. So we're challenging it." Griggs said he would be asking the court to essentially "quash" Cabinet's decision and declare the government needed to comply with international minimum standards. While the United Nations didn't have any teeth by way of enforcing these standards, Griggs said it was New Zealand's reputation on the line. "New Zealand holds itself out to be a champion of human rights. We're a defender of human rights. We're the first country to speak out on breaches of human rights standards overseas. "And yet, when it comes to our own country, what do we do? We don't comply with the International minimum standards for remedying torture." "I have heard stories of children being lined up against a wall with their backs to the staff and having syringes full of paraldehyde thrown at their bottoms like a dartboard. That happened in this country. "We have to take a stand. New Zealand must live up to what happened and the only way we can do that is by complying with the international minimum standards laid down by the Torture Convention." Griggs has drafted a bill to set up an independent tribunal to assess torture claims and compensation and says there's already precedent for this type of arrangement. "You might remember many years ago we we had a big problem in New Zealand with leaky buildings so the government set up the water weathertight homes tribunal to deal with that problem. "Here we have a situation where the government has tortured a whole bunch of New Zealanders over a number of years and international law requires there to be an equivalent process. "All we're saying is just treat the survivors of Lake Alice and the other institutions in New Zealand where people have been tortured in the same way you've treated people who've had problems with the weather tightness of their homes. It's not a big ask." Malcolm Richards says his shed is his rehab and he heads there to create timber trinkets when "things become too much". Photo: RNZ / Anneke Smith Richards has taken up woodworking in his shed as a means of coping with stress and trauma, creating wooden trinkets he sells online. "It's just what I found that I can lose myself in and when things become too much, I just go out to my shed and start cutting out stuff and making stuff." He does not see the point in taking the rapid payment that has been offered by the Crown. [The Minister responsible Erica Stanford] rang me before she made that announcement and I told her no way I'm taking part in it because it's not legal. We can't allow the perpetrator of this crime, which is the government, to set their own sentence. "What's the point of taking $150,000 and living with this... it gets so much for me that I've gotta go out and lock myself in the shed away from my family." Richards said he had been trying to access support through ACC for special items like screwing teeth - normal dentures give him flashbacks to being gagged at Lake Alice - and a phone plan - he is forgetful and uses his phone to remind him about appointments and medications. But challenging the Crown's redress was about more than just money, he said. "There's more to this than $150,000 cash, the rehab is just an important. The investigation is the most important thing." The Lake Alice redress scheme is separate from Cabinet decisions about the wider redress system for those abused in state care. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
