The US policy on asylum and the strange deviation from it regarding Assange.
In response to a post in another thread that concerned Assange and because I am quite familiar with the US Code on this issue, I posted this.
I thought some DUers might be interested in knowing US policy on asylum in general. I think that the unusual nature of the Assange case has confused people. The US has shown courage and zeal in granting asylum to all kinds of asylum-seekers through my lifetime. I happen to be very proud of that.
So here is the information I posted.
First, the word "asylum" has a number of definitions:
a·sy·lum (-slm) n.
1. An institution for the care of people, especially those with physical or mental impairments, who require organized supervision or assistance.
2. A place offering protection and safety; a shelter.
3. A place, such as a church, formerly constituting an inviolable refuge for criminals or debtors.
4. The protection afforded by a sanctuary. See Synonyms at shelter.
(Here is the one that applies in the cases of political asylum
5. Protection and immunity from extradition granted by a government to a political refugee from another country.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/asylum
Here are some examples of grants of asylum:
Syrian Pilot Granted Asylum in Jordan
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/world/middleeast/syrian-warplane-is-reported-missing.html?_r=1
Gay Chinese man charging persecution granted U.S. asylum
http://articles.cnn.com/1999-09-29/us/9909_29_gay.chinese.asylum_1_asylum-gay-men-chinese-foreign-ministry?_s=PM:US
I won't bore you with the code, but here is our government's policy on asylum.
Asylum
Asylum status is a form of protection available to people who:
Meet the definition of refugee
Are already in the United States
Are seeking admission at a port of entry
You may apply for asylum in the United States regardless of your country of origin or your current immigration status. For more information about asylum status, see the “Asylum” section.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextchannel=1f1c3e4d77d73210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextoid=1f1c3e4d77d73210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD
The United States honors the right of asylum of individuals as specified by international and federal law. A specified number of legally defined refugees, who apply for asylum either overseas or after arriving in the U.S., are admitted annually. Refugees compose about one-tenth of the total annual immigration to the United States, though some large refugee populations are very prominent. Since World War II, more refugees have found homes in the U.S. than any other nation and more than two million refugees have arrived in the U.S. since 1980. In the years 2005 through 2007, the number of asylum seekers accepted into the U.S. was about 40,000 per year. This compared with about 30,000 per year in the UK and 25,000 in Canada, countries with much smaller populations. The U.S. accounted for 15% to 20% of all asylum-seeker acceptances in the OECD countries in recent years.
Asylum eligibility has three basic requirements. First, an asylum applicant must establish that he or she fears persecution. Second, the applicant must prove that he or she would be persecuted on account of one of five protected grounds: race, religion, nationality, political opinion, and social group. Third, an applicant must establish that the government is either involved in the persecution, or unable to control the conduct of private actors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asylum_in_the_United_States
And, of course I have mentioned the famous case of Cardinal Mindszenty in Hungary -- granted asylum in our US Embassy in Budapest where he lived for 15 years -- I repeat 15 years.
We recently granted entry into the US to a Chinese asylum-seeker. We refuse to call it asylum although our law permits granting asylum in the US. Here is Wikileaks' article on this:
Chen Guangcheng (born 12 November 1971) is a Chinese civil rights activist who worked on human rights issues in rural areas of the People's Republic of China. Blind from an early age and self-taught in the law, Chen is frequently described as a "barefoot lawyer" who advocates women's rights and the welfare of the poor. He is best known for exposing alleged abuses in official family-planning policy, often involving claims of violence and forced abortions.
In 2005, he became internationally known for organising a class-action lawsuit against the city of Linyi in Shandong for what was claimed to be excessive enforcement of the one-child policy. As a result of this lawsuit, Chen was placed under house arrest from September 2005 to March 2006, with a formal arrest in June 2006. During his trial, Chen's attorneys were forbidden access to the court, leaving him without a proper defender. On 24 August 2006, Chen was sentenced to four years and three months for "damaging property and organising a mob to disturb traffic".
. . . .
Chen's case received sustained international attention, with the U.S. State Department, the British Foreign Secretary, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International issuing appeals for his release; the latter group designated him a prisoner of conscience. Chen is a 2007 laureate of the Ramon Magsaysay Award and in 2006 was named to the Time 100.
In April 2012, Chen escaped his house arrest and fled to the U.S. Embassy in Beijing. After negotiations with the Chinese government, he left the embassy for medical treatment on early May 2012, and it was reported that China would consider allowing him to travel to the United States to study. On 19 May 2012, Chen, his wife, and his two children were granted U.S. visas and departed Beijing for New York City.
http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/08/17/state_department_the_us_does_not_recognize_the_concept_of_diplomatic_asylum
Our stance on Assange is quite dissonant with our law and our historic recognition of asylum for prisoners of conscience and the persecuted. This is another reason why some of us strongly suspect that Sweden's desire to "interview" Assange is a pretext for carrying out some sort of deal with the US.
Siding with the Brits in their escalating feud with Ecuador about the status of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, the State Department declared today that the United States does not believe in the concept of ‘diplomatic asylum' as a matter of international law.
The US wants "free trade" to the detriment of American workers but doesn't want "free information" about what the US does in its foreign policy. Yet another dissonance.
For those who are not yet tired of reading:
Foreign nationals seeking asylum must demonstrate a well-founded fear that if returned home, they will be persecuted based upon one of five characteristics: race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Foreign nationals arriving or present in the United States may apply for asylum affirmatively with the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) in the Department of Homeland Security after arrival into the
country, or they may seek asylum defensively before a Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) immigration judge during removal proceedings. Asylum claims ebbed and flowed in the 1980s and peaked in FY1996. Since FY997, affirmative asylum cases decreased by 79% and defensive asylum claims dropped by 53% by FY2009.
Asylum seekers from the People’s Republic of China (PRC) dominated both the affirmative and defensive asylum caseload in FY2009. Five of the top 10 source countries of asylum seekers were Western Hemisphere nations in FY2009: Haiti, Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Colombia. Ethiopia was the only African nation that was a top source country for asylum seekers in FY2009.
Despite the general decrease in asylum cases since the enactment of the Illegal Immigrant Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA ) in 1996, data analysis of six selected countries (the PRC, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Haiti, and Mexico) suggests that conditions in the source
countries are likely the driving force behind asylum seekers.
Roughly 30% of all asylum cases that worked through USCIS and EOIR in recent years have been approved. Affirmative asylum cases approved by USCIS more than doubled from 13,532 in FY1996 to 31,202 in FY2002, and then fell to the lowest point over the 14-year period—9,614— in FY2009. The number of defensive asylum cases that EOIR judges have approved has risen by 99% from FY1996 through FY2009. The PRC led in the number of asylum cases approved by USCIS and EOIR over the decade of FY2000-FY2009.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/homesec/R41753.pdf
Our stance on Ecuador's grant of asylum to Assange is completely inconsistent with our stated policy on asylum.
As for the fact that Sweden claims that Assange broke its law. That does not excuse the US from refusing to respect a legitimate grant of asylum by another country. Many of the people who were granted asylum in the US were accused of crimes that were pretexts for discrimination or political retaliation. The US should respect Ecuador's sovereign right to grant asylum to someone it deems a political prisoner.
Further, the US does not grant asylum in its embassy. We make deals. Ecuador chooses to grant asylum in its embassy. We should respect that choice.
