INS VIOLATES CONFIDENTIALITY OF ASYLUM APPLICATION
The
case of an asylum seeker from Morocco has raised serious questions about the
confidentiality in which the INS holds the information obtained in asylum
applications. Last month, and
Immigration Judge finally granted asylum to a person identified only as Mr. M,
who had spent 18 months in detention after arriving in the US.
Mr. M suffered a lifetime of persecution at the instigation of the Moroccan
government because of his father’s political activities.
Mr. M was imprisoned and tortured, and his right to work and go obtain an
education was severely restricted. He
was eventually charged with apostasy, with the government claiming he had
converted to Judaism. Mr. M
provided extensive evidence corroborating his claims, including a summons to
appear in court, and medical records confirming his past torture.
Despite the strength of his claim, Mr. M was not released from detention.
He became increasingly depressed, eventually attempting suicide.
Rather than provide him with psychological counseling, the INS placed him
in solitary confinement for three months.
After the hearing, while waiting for a decision from the Immigration Judge, the
INS announced that it had obtained new evidence. At the request of the INS, a US Consul in Morocco met with a
religious judge to confirm Mr. M’s claim.
The consul showed the summons to the judge, revealing his identity to
those he claimed were persecuting him. The
religious judge denied that Mr. M had been charged with anything.
Mr. M and his attorneys were deeply upset by the government’s actions, arguing
that they clearly violated the confidentiality guarantees dealing with asylum
applications. The information
provided in asylum applications is deemed confidential according to US asylum
laws and regulations, United Nations Protocols and general international law.
The government, however, argued that since it did not reveal that Mr. M
was seeking asylum, there was no issue.
Eventually, the Immigration Judge granted Mr. M asylum.
In the opinion, the Judge stated that it was clear that the disclosures
made by the consul violated the promise of confidentiality, as well as increased
Mr. M’s reasonable fear of persecution if returned to Morocco.
Mr. M was released after the decision, but his situation is still not final.
The INS has announced that it is appealing the case.
FAMILY
CLAIMS MAN SEVERELY BEATEN DURING IMMIGRATION RAID
SISKIND'S IMMIGRATION BULLETIN