Solitary hell in Arizona: cruel, inhumane, and illegal.

 

AMNESTY Report HERE

Thanks to our friends at Amnesty International for flying out last summer - Chuck Ryan wouldn't let them in to see the prisoners, but he couldn't keep them away from the rest of us... 

and thanks again to Bob Ortega, who refuses to let up shining the light in the darkness of our state prisons.

------------------

Amnesty International accuses Arizona of abuse in prisons

by Bob Ortega

Arizona Republic 

Apr. 3, 2012 12:01 AM

Arizona's state prisons overuse solitary confinement in cruel, inhumane and illegal ways, particularly for mentally ill prisoners and juveniles as young as 14, the human-rights group Amnesty International charges in a report to be released today.

According to the report, which is to be delivered to the governor and state lawmakers, Arizona prisons use solitary confinement as a punishment more than most other states or the federal government.

Report | ACLU lawsuit | Suit: Inmates denied adequate care

The group found that some inmates are held in isolation for months and sometimes years, and it called on the state to use the practice only as a last resort and only for a short duration.

In addition, it asked that the practice not be used against children or people who are mentally ill or have behavioral disabilities. The group also called on state officials to improve conditions for prisoners in solitary confinement and to act to reduce the high number of suicides in Arizona's prisons.

Arizona Department of Corrections officials said they had not read the report Monday and were unable to comment.

According to the DOC, 3,130 inmates, or 8 percent of the state prison population, were being held in the highest-security, maximum-custody units as of Friday, and most were confined alone.

Although maximum-security inmates include those who are violent and may represent a threat to other inmates or staff, Amnesty noted that Arizona's own figures show that 35 percent of inmates in maximum security were committed for non-violent crimes.

Amnesty International's report cited sources who said prisoners are regularly assigned to maximum security for relatively minor rule violations or disruptive behavior, often because they have mental-health or behavioral problems.

The report noted cases of Arizona inmates who have been in solitary confinement continuously for 15 years. Amnesty said that various international human-rights treaties and experts, including the United Nations' Special Rapporteur on Torture, have called on states to limit the use of solitary confinement to exceptional circumstances, for short periods and to prohibit solitary confinement of children 17 and younger.

Amnesty's report found that 14 children 14 to 17 years old had been held in maximum custody at the Rincon unit in the Tucson state prison, under conditions similar to those of adults: 22 to 24 hours a day in their cells, limited exercise alone in a small cage and with no recreational activities.

Because children and adolescents are not fully developed physically and emotionally, they are less equipped to tolerate the effects of isolation, according to studies cited in the report.

Some charges in the Amnesty report echo those raised in a federal lawsuit filed by the Americal Civil Liberties Union and the Prison Law Office last month, alleging that Arizona's Department of Corrections doesn't provide adequate mental-health and medical care.

The state has not responded to that suit, and the Corrections spokesman said the department wouldn't respond to any parts of the Amnesty report that related to that litigation.

Last July, Corrections officials declined to meet with Amnesty representatives from London who were visiting Arizona, nor allow them to visit the Eyman state prison, which houses about 1,950 maximum-security inmates.

A spokesman said Corrections Director Charles Ryan had other commitments. In a letter to Amnesty, Ryan cited security concerns in declining their visit request. On that same tour, Texas and California correctional officials met with Amnesty's representatives, and California permitted them to visit maximum-custody units.
About 1 percent of federal inmates are held in conditions similar to Arizona's, according to data from the Federal Bureau of Prisons.

The U.S. holds more prisoners in solitary confinement than any other country in the world, Amnesty said.
With more than 8 percent of Arizona's inmate population in maximum security and a large portion of those inmates in solitary, the state's rate puts it at the high end among U.S. states, most of which hold from 1 to 3 percent of their inmates in some form of solitary confinement.

Most Arizona maximum-security inmates are isolated in "special management units," windowless cells that, contrary to the U.N. Standard Minimum Rules for Treatment of Prisoners, have no direct access to sunlight or fresh air, and have lighting that is dimmed at night but left on 24 hours a day, the Amnesty report said.

Inmates in SMU units are not allowed to work. They typically receive two daily meals in their cells, have no contact with other inmates and are allowed out of their cell no more than three times a week for two hours for exercise and showers, in many cases in a windowless room with nothing except tall walls and a mesh over the roof.

Amnesty cited allegations that the cells are no longer steam-cleaned between inmates, so that food, urine and feces are stuck on the walls and food slots.

Both Amnesty International and inmates contacted by The Arizona Republic expressed concern that the conditions in solitary may contribute to Arizona's high prison suicide rate, which was double the national average last fiscal year. Seven of the 10 most recent suicides in state prisons were by inmates being held in solitary in maximum-security cells, according to Corrections death reports.

While many states, including California, New York, Massachusetts, Vermont, Ohio, Mississippi and Wisconsin, bar placing seriously mentally ill inmates in solitary because the social isolation and sensory deprivation can lead to further psychological deterioration, Arizona does not.

Amnesty cited reports that serious mental illnesses often go undiagnosed in Arizona prisons because of a lack of mental-health staff and inadequate screening and monitoring.

Amnesty reported that mental-health staff don't have weekly rounds, visiting maximum-security inmates only when there's a crisis, and consulting with them at their cell door.

It noted the ACLU lawsuit, which alleges that prisoners in solitary wait an average of six to eight months to see a psychologist, with some waiting more than a year. One prisoner diagnosed with serious mental illness spent two years in solitary without seeing a psychiatrist despite repeated requests and referrals by staff, according to the suit.

Amnesty noted 43 suicides listed by Corrections from October 2005 to April 2011 and said that of the 37 cases in which it was able to collect information, 22 -- or 60 percent -- took place in maximum-custody solitary units. There have been at least eight more suicides since April 2011 and 16 other deaths that the department described only as "under investigation."

In letters to The Republic, inmates have raised concerns similar to those in the Amnesty report. "While on suicide watch here at SMU-1, the lights stay on all night and make it impossible to sleep -- all day, all night," wrote Dustin Brislan, an inmate with a serious mental illness in solitary confinement at Eyman.

"Lack of contact, of seeing the outside, seeing any bit of sunlight, smelling fresh air, all of that has increased my mental illness. I'm only allowed recreation every other day, where I'm put in a windowless cell off area."

The Eyman prison is the only one in Arizona not accredited by the National Commission on Correctional Health Care, which requires that prisoners being held in solitary confinement have at least weekly contact with mental-health staff.

By contrast, North Dakota's prison system hasn't had a suicide in 12 years, and none in maximum security since the early 1990s, according to that state's director of corrections and rehabilitation, Leann Bertsch.

"People with mental illness do very poorly in isolation," she said, "so we work with them intensively because we don't want them staying in isolation for long."

That means constant supervision, daily visits with behavioral counselors, and other interventions by trained staff as part of a comprehensive suicide-prevention policy.

The Amnesty report also questioned why Arizona's Corrections Department requires all prisoners sentenced to life to spend at least their first two years in solitary confinement, regardless of whether they pose a threat to other inmates or guards.

"There appears to be no valid reason," the report said. American Bar Association standards call for prisoners to be kept in solitary more than a year only if the prisoner poses a "continuing, serious threat."

Many states have reduced solitary confinement in recent years, often under court order, only to find that their costs drop and prisoners behave better when they aren't in solitary.

Mississippi cut the use of solitary by 80 percent in 2007, and Maine by 60 percent last year.

Amnesty International said Arizona should:

Reduce the number of prisoners in isolation to only those who are a serious and continuing threat.

Improve overall conditions, provide more out-of-cell time, better exercise facilities, meaningful education and rehabilitation programs.

Introduce measures to allow some group interactions and association to benefit inmates' mental health and provide incentives for better behavior.

Remove all serious mentally ill prisoners from solitary and prohibit them from being placed in solitary.

Improve mental-health monitoring; take steps to reduce suicide, including more humane conditions in suicide watch cells; and prohibit solitary confinement of prisoners under 18.

Aung San Suu Kyi is free! Now free Burma!

It's about time the junta set her free. Of course, they waited until after the elections. Maybe Arizona will consider doing the same thing, now that the powers that be think they've won the war: maybe Pearce and Brewer will set all of our political prisoners free...

Here's hoping.

-------------------------from Amnesty International----------------------------

Myanmar should free all prisoners of conscience following Aung San Suu Kyi’s release

Amnesty International today welcomes the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, but calls on the government of Myanmar to immediately release all of the prisoners of conscience in the country.

Aung San Suu Kyi, Myanmar’s best-known prisoner of conscience, has spent more than 15 of the past 21 years under house arrest. She was one of more than 2,200 political prisoners, including prisoners of conscience , currently being held in deplorable conditions for simply exercising their right to peaceful protest.

“While Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s release is certainly welcome, it only marks the end of an unfair sentence that was illegally extended, and is by no means a concession on the part of the authorities”, said Amnesty International’s Secretary General, Salil Shetty.

“The fact remains that authorities should never have arrested her or the many other prisoners of conscience in Myanmar in the first place, locking them out of the political process."

The Nobel Peace laureate had been detained since 30 May 2003 after government-backed thugs attacked her motorcade in Depayin, killing an unknown number of people, and injuring scores. This was the third time she was held under house arrest, having previously been detained from 1989 to 1995, and from 2000 to 2002.

“This time the authorities must ensure Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s security”, said Salil Shetty.

“It is high time the government of Myanmar put an end to the ongoing injustice of political imprisonment in the country, while the international community—including China, India, ASEAN and the UN—must act together to prevent Myanmar from abusing its legal system to penalize peaceful opponents. The release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi must not make them forget other prisoners of conscience”.

There are more than 2,200 political prisoners in Myanmar still held under vague laws frequently used by the government to criminalize peaceful political dissent.

They are being held in grim conditions, with inadequate food and sanitation. Many are in poor health and do not receive proper medical treatment.

Many were tortured during their initial interrogation and detention, and still risk torture as a punishment at the hands of prison officers.

Amnesty International believes the vast majority of those held are prisoners of conscience who are being punished merely for peacefully exercising their rights to free expression, assembly, and association.

Many of those still being held took part in the 2007 Saffron Revolution, sparked by protests against sharp fuel and commodity price rises.

In the past three years, hundreds of political prisoners have been moved to extremely remote prisons, restricting their access to relatives, lawyers and medical care. Reports of torture and other ill-treatment are rife.

The International Committee of the Red Cross has been denied access to prisons in Myanmar since December 2005.

Background

Just two weeks before her detention order was due to expire in 2009, Aung San Suu Kyi was again arrested and charged with violating the terms of her house arrest. On 11 August 2009, after a trial widely condemned by the international community, she was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment, which was later commuted to 18 months’ house arrest.

Her release comes just six days after the first general elections in Myanmar in 20 years, which were held against a backdrop of political repression. Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy party won the majority of seats in those 1990 elections, but were prevented from taking power by Myanmar military leaders who have controlled the country for decades.

Amnesty International is also calling for the release of all prisoners of conscience, including:

• Former student leader and pro-democracy activist Min Ko Naing, 47, serving a prison sentence of 65 years for his part in demonstrations in 2007.
• U Gambira of the All Burma Monks Alliance (ABMA), sentenced to 63 years for his part in monk-led demonstrations in 2007.
• U Khun Htun Oo, 67, chair of the Shan Nationalities League for Democracy (SNLD), sentenced to 93 years' imprisonment for disagreeing with the government’s plans for a new constitution. He suffers from diabetes and high blood pressure.

Aung San Suu Kyi won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991.

Amnesty International won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1977.

Happy Birthday, Aung San Suu Kyi.

America remembers you and your comrades today. Thank you for all you have collectively done for the cause of human liberation. We hope you will all be free, too, someday soon.

-------------------

Dear Margaret, Aung San Suu Kyi's last birthday was spent in the infamous Insein (pronounced "insane") prison – notorious for its foul conditions and unrelenting use of torture. Today, more than 2,100 political prisoners are being held in Myanmar (formerly known as Burma), many of whom are hidden away in the prison's darkest corners. But in honor of Suu Kyi's 65th birthday on June 19th, we're doing all we can to fill those corners with light and expose Myanmar's treatment of political dissents for what it really is…insane. Help drive our ongoing work to protect human rights in Myanmar. Less than a month ago, a youth member of the former National League for Democracy, the political party headed by Aung San Suu Kyi, had his sentence in Insein prison extended by 10 years.

Life without human rights is insane Myanmar's Insein Prison, where thousands of political prisoners are believed to be held.

His original offense - distributing a portrait of Aung San Suu Kyi. This blatant manipulation of laws and outright injustice has got to stop. We've fought tirelessly on behalf of Aung San Suu Kyi for the past 2 decades and such abuse of human rights only fuels our desire to bring violators to justice once and for all. Our team of researchers and experts are observing Myanmar closely and reporting back whenever there are new developments and opportunities for action. And given that national elections are planned for later this year, our teams are remaining particularly vigilant to ensure that no person is improperly detained during election-related crackdowns without setting off major alarms across the human rights spectrum. But we need your help. This kind of in-depth reporting is done by few, but requires resources and the support of many. Please say that you'll join the fight to protect political dissidents in Myanmar. Stand with us as we stand with Suu Kyi and the more than 2,100 political prisoners in Myanmar. Let Myanmar's government know that a light still shines for human rights even in the darkest corners. Thank you for your support, Michael O'Reilly Senior Campaign Director, Individuals at Risk Amnesty International USA

Mother's Day: Sentencing and the War on Drugs.

                 

Women in Prison: A Fact Sheet

The Issue: Sentencing and the War on Drugs

Amnesty International-USA (2007)

The Department of Justice found that women were over represented among low level drug offenders who were non-violent, had minimal or no prior criminal history, and were not principal figures in criminal organizations or activities, but nevertheless received sentences similar to “high level” drug offenders under the mandatory sentencing policies. From 1986 to 1996 the number of women sentenced to state prison for drug crimes increased ten-fold. Nationally one in three women in prison and one in four women in jail are incarcerated for violating a drug law. (Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics Prisoners in 1997)

·  According to The Boston Globe, "nearly 26% of the nearly 2000 men and women crowding Massachusetts prisons for  drug crimes are first-time offenders…. Worse, nearly three out of four drug traffickers who do get charged in major cases, but agree to forfeit substantial drug money to prosecutors, bargain their way out of the long sentences…. The result: those with no money or information to trade face the hard mandatory sentences."

·     From 1986 to 1996, the number of women sentenced to state prison for drug crimes increased from 2,370 to 23,700.  (Bureau of Justice Statistics, Washington DC Prisoners in 1997)

·  In 1986, 12.0% of women in prison were drug offenders. In 1991, 32.8% of women in prison were incarcerated for  drug offenses.  (Women in Prison, Survey of State Prison Inmates, 1991. US Department of Justice, March 1994, NCJ 145321)

The Issue: Sexual Assault and Misconduct Against Women in Prison

The imbalance of power between inmates and guards involves the use of direct physical force and indirect force based on the prisoners’ total dependency on officers for basic necessities and the guards’ ability to withhold privileges. Some women are coerced into sex for favors such as extra

food or personal hygiene products, or to avoid punishment.   

·  Powerlessness and Humiliation

There are 148,200 women in state and federal prisons. In federal women’s correctional facilities, 70% of guards are male.  Records show correctional officials have subjected female inmates to rape, other sexual assault, sexual extortion, and groping during body searches. Male correctional officials watch women undressing, in the shower or the toilet. Male correctional officials retaliate, often brutally, against female inmates who complain about sexual assault and harassment

·  Retaliation and Fear

In many states guards have access to and are encouraged to review the inmates’ personal history files (this includes any  record of complaints against themselves or other prison authorities). Guards threaten the prisoner’s children and visitation rights as a means of silencing the women. Guards issue rule infraction tickets, which extend the woman’s  stay in prison if she speaks out. Prisoners who complain are frequently placed in administration segregation.

·  Impunity 

Ineffective formal procedures, legislation and reporting capacity within US jails and prisons account for much of the  ongoing sexual abuse of women. In 1997, according to the US Justice Department only 10 prison employees in the  entire federal system were disciplined, and only 7 were prosecuted. If a prison official is found guilty, he is often simply transferred (“walked off the yard”) to another facility instead of being fired. The inmate may also be transferred. 

The Issue: Medical Neglect of Women in US Prisons

Women are denied essential medical resources and treatments, especially during times of pregnancy and/or chronic and degenerative diseases.

·  Failure to refer seriously ill inmates for treatment and delays in treatment

Women inmates suffering from treatable diseases such as asthma, diabetes, sickle cell anemia, cancer, late-term miscarriages, and seizures have little or no access to medical attention, sometimes resulting in permanent injury or death. Instances of failure to deliver life-saving drugs for inmates with HIV/AIDS have also been noted.  

·  Lack of qualified personnel and resources and use of non-medical staff

There is too few staff to meet physical and mental health needs. This often results in long delays in obtaining medical attention; disrupted and poor quality treatment causing physical deterioration of prisoners with chronic and degenerative diseases, like cancer; overmedication of prisoners with psychotropic drugs; and lack of mental health treatment. The use of  non-medical staff to screen requests for treatment is also common. 

·  Charges for medical attention

In violation of international standards, many prisons/jails charge inmates for medical attention, arguing that the charge deters prisoners from seeking medical attention for minor matters or because they want to avoid work. In some supermaximum prisons, where prisoners cannot work at all, the US Justice Dept. expressed concern that charging prisoners impedes their access to health care.

·  Inadequate Reproductive Health Care

In 1994, the National Institute of Corrections stated that provision of gynecological services for women in prison is inadequate.  Only half of the state prison systems surveyed offer female-specific services such as mammograms and Pap smears, and often entail a long wait to be seen.

·  Shackling During Pregnancy

Shackling of all prisoners, including pregnant prisoners, is standard policy in federal prisons and in the US Marshall Service and exists in almost all state prisons. Shackling during labor may cause complications during delivery such as hemorrhage or decreased fetal heart rate. If a caesarian section is needed, a delay of even 5 minutes may result in permanent brain damage to the baby.

  

·  Lack of treatment for substance abuse

The gap between services available and treatment needs continues to grow. The number of prisoners with histories of drug abuse is growing, but the proportion of prisoners receiving treatment declined from 40% in 1991 to 18% in 1997.  

·  Lack of Adequate or Appropriate Mental Health Services

 48-88% of women inmates suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder due to sexual or physical abuse experienced prior to coming to prison.  Very few prison systems provide counseling. Women attempting to access mental health services are routinely given medication without opportunity to undergo psychotherapeutic treatment.  

The Issue: Discrimination Based On Gender, Race and Sexual Orientation

The growth in incarceration has had its greatest impact on minorities, particularly African Americans. Women are most vulnerable to different forms of discrimination, including sexual harrasment or abuse. Women that do not fit the “norm”, such as lesbians, are more succeptable to torture and abuse.

Discrimination Based on Race:

·  Over a five-year period, the incarceration rate of African American women increased by 828%. (NAACP LDF Equal Justice Spring 1998.) An African American woman is eight times more likely than a European American woman is to be imprisoned.  African American women make up nearly half of the nation’s female prison population, with most serving sentences for nonviolent drug or property related offenses. 

·  Latina women experience nearly four times the rates of incarceration as European American women.

·  State and federal laws mandate minimum sentences for all drug offenders.  This eliminates the option for judges to refer first time non-violent offenders to drug treatment, counseling and education programs.  The racial disparity revealed by the crack v. powder cocaine sentences insures that more African American women will land in prison.

Although 2/3 of crack users are white or Hispanic, defendants convicted of crack cocaine possession in 1994 were 84.5% African American.  Crack is the only drug that carries a mandatory prison sentence for first time possession in the federal system. 

Discrimination Based On Sexual Orientation:

·   Human Rights Watch has documented categories of women who are likely targets for sexual abuse. Perceived or actual sexual orientation is one of four categories that make a female prisoner a more likely target for sexual abuse, as well as a target for retaliation when she reports that abuse.

·  If a woman is a lesbian, her criminal defense becomes more challenging.  Jurors in the US were polled as to what factors would make them most biased against a defendant, and perceived sexual orientation was chosen as the most likely personal characteristic to bias a juror against a defendant, three times greater than race. (National Law Journal November 2, 1998.)

·  The case of Robin Lucas depicts how sexual identity may subject a woman to further abuse or torture by a guard. She was placed in a men’s prison where male guards allowed male inmates to rape her.  The male guards taunted her about her same sex relationship, saying to her “maybe we can change your mind”.  

For more information on issues affecting women in prison and other women’s human rights issues, please visit the Women’s Human Rights Program website at www.amnestyusa.org/women or contact us at AIUSA 5 Penn Plaza-16th floor, New York, NY 10001 or at (212) 633-4292.

Free Amnesty's Ambassador of Conscience. Write today.

A very loud tribute to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi in Dublin

U2 announce Daw Aung San Suu Kyi award. Dublin, 27 July 2009. © Press Association

By Benjamin Zawacki, Amnesty International researcher on Myanmar

I arrived back in Bangkok this afternoon with ears still ringing but most of the jet-lag cancelled out by nearly back-to-back return flights. “Nearly”, because in between were some of the most memorable moments of my almost two years as Amnesty’s Myanmar specialist and almost 20 years as one of U2’s most devoted fans.

On their massive “360 Degrees” tour in their hometown of Dublin on Monday night, U2 announced that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi had been recognized with Amnesty International’s Ambassador of Conscience Award for 2009. Hearing this was gratifying, but hearing—and seeing—what came next, was enough to stir the conscience as well as the senses.

A full-voice rendition of U2’s “Walk On” (which they wrote for her), accompanied by photos of her on their enormous 360 Degrees screen, and dozens of Amnesty International volunteers taking the circular stage with the band wearing Daw Suu Kyi masks.

And more than that: 80,000 people standing, singing, swaying, and raising their voices with the band so loudly that one wondered if Daw Suu Kyi herself couldn’t hear them in faraway Yangon.  With her trial for allegedly breaching the conditions of her house arrest scheduled to conclude the following day—and a verdict expected this Friday—it’s doubtful she knows of her latest award. But that she should inspire the world’s most spectacular rock band to make her a focus of their 360 Degrees tour is testament to why she has won it.

The Ambassador of Conscience Award recognizes outstanding witness to human rights, and though having spent more than 13 of the past 20 years behind walls or bars, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s personal witness to human rights has been singularly irrepressible.

Through what she has done and refused to do, what she has said and refused to say—through simply bearing witness—Daw Suu Kyi has demonstrated time and again that you cannot silence the voice of human rights simply by locking it up and trying to throw away the key.

And witness is contagious. Though I had no clear answer to press queries before the show as to whether the award would have an effect on Daw Suu Kyi’s immediate situation, what I do know is that her witness to human rights has inspired countless others to do the same.  Among them are more than 2,100 other political prisoners in Myanmar, who should also be freed.

And, as of Monday night, 80,000 other people were among them as well. Far from being silenced, their voices were raised. It was beautiful and it was powerful. But most importantly, it was loud. It was very, very loud.

Published by kevin.darling on 29 July 2009 in myanmar

----------------------------- 

Aung San Suu Kyi was convicted of violating the terms of her house arrest because of that stupid American, who she's been very kind to. She was originally sentenced to 3 years of hard labor in prison, but the junta wanted to look just and merciful to the international community, so they cut the sentence in half and I think she'll be back under house arrest. Amnesty's website is out of date - I just got an email about an urgent action asking for money to send 20,000 postcards to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) by September 1st, but I couldn't find the appeal or the address posted on their site so I can send one myself. That doesn't make me want to give them money. I don't even have any. I have a card and can cover air mail, that's it.

There are some things that Amnesty does right, though, so sign up for the Urgent Action Network and help prisoners of conscience around the world, all for the price of a few stamps and postcards. If you're writing directly to prisoners, Syracuse Cultural Workers has some great cards and postcards. As does one of my favorite artists, Ricardo Levins Morales, who's freelancing now that the Northland Poster Collective is dissolved. This is one of his, made for political prisoners of course. It just comes in a poster now, but I'm sure he'd make cards if enough people asked.


Anyway, to help Daw Suu Kyi (that's her website - run by comrades, I'm sure, but her voice is definitely there) you don't need a cool postcard, because you'll be writing to the president of ASEAN. What follows is Amnesty's email appeal, which I'm posting just so you get the context - why the time to do this is now...I just don't know why they don't call the place Burma.

---------------------------------- 

News broke last Friday that senior Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) officials had met to discuss stepping up pressure on Than Shwe, head of Myanmar's military junta, to release Nobel Laureate and pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.

We called on you last week to send 10,000 postcards to ASEAN to urge them to raise their calls for the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and all other prisoners of conscience in Myanmar.

And within 24 hours, you responded by pledging to send more than 15,000 cards. We want to match your enthusiasm during this critical moment by doubling our original goal and sending ASEAN 20,000 appeals by our September 1st deadline.

Our calls come at a crucial time. Myanmar's Than Shwe is counting on ASEAN to stick its head in the sand and wait for the storm of public outcry over Suu Kyi's conviction to blow over.

Than Shwe knows that in a little more than a month, Thailand will hand over ASEAN chairmanship to Vietnam, which has been complicit with Myanmar and other ASEAN nations in undermining human rights in the region.

But in the remaining weeks of its chairmanship, Thailand is building support behind the scenes for ASEAN to finally show Myanmar that it means business and won't continue to stand idly by while Than Shwe keeps Aung San Suu Kyi and thousands of other political prisoners under lock and key.

ASEAN needs to know that the world community stands firmly in its corner. We can demonstrate that support by flooding ASEAN with calls to step up its pressure on Than Shwe to release Aung San Suu Kyi and all other prisoners of conscience in Myanmar.

Through mobilizing our global human rights network, Amnesty can help bring this pressure to bear during this critical moment.

Thank you for standing with us in urging ASEAN to show leadership on human rights by calling on Than Shwe to release Aung San Suu Kyi and and all other prisoners of conscience in Myanmar.

Jim Roberts
Country Specialist for Myanmar
Amnesty International USA

------------------------------------- 
The Secretary-General of ASEAN, Dr. Surin Pitsuwan is from Thailand and is supposed to serve 2008-2012, so at least he's there when they lose the Chair. In their organizational chart the Secretary-General is at the top, so let's just write to him. He's sympathethic already: on August 11 he issued a statement critical of Burma because of Daw Suu Kyi's conviction. Human rights activists have been trying for years to get ASEAN to take a position on Burma's political prisoners.  I had to hunt forever to find their main address - I got it from a job posting - so someone else out there better write. Here

Dr. Surin Pitsuwan

Secretary-General

ASEAN Secretariat

70A Jalan
Sisingamangaraja, Jakarta 12110

This is the email to their Political Security Community Department, if you want to hit them with a cc. Just make sure to snail mail that letter to the Secretary-General first: apsc.dept@asean.org

By the way, the Burma Campaign (UK) has a great page on Daw Suu Kyi, and it's a great site for those who want more history on human rights issues in Burma.

 

Happy Birthday Aung San Suu Kyi: FREE BURMA!

America has plenty of company when it comes to incarcerating political prisoners. Please click on Aung San Suu Kyi's picture to the left to connect with Amnesty International's campaign to free the leader of Burma's democratic opposition.

Aung San Suu Kyi, a nobel peace prize winner, has been detained 13 of the past 19 years under house arrest or in prison due to her political resistance to Burma's ruling military junta and the tremendous popularity she has with the Burmese masses. Her party claims to be the legitimate victors of the last democratically held elections in Burma in 1990.

With the military junta seeking to run and win the latest round of elections (none of which have been considered legitimately won by any of them), Suu Kyi is suddenly on trial again, and being held in the infamous maximum security Insein prison (yes, that's pronounced "insane") in Rangoon. She has just turned 64.

Burma - renamed Myanmar in 1989 by the junta - presently has an estimated 2,000 political prisoners detained, and has murdered countless others. Burma is the site of the Saffron Revolution in which there were mass protests in 2007 by Buddhist monks whose blood spilled everywhere in the streets following the brutal government crackdown.

Blessings to all the good people of Burma. May your country someday be free.

Why We Write

There are many worthy causes needing urgent attention; this is but one that validates the whole letter-writing thing.

From May 26, 2009

"Puerto Rican political prisoner Carlos Alberto Torres appeared this morning with his attorney Jan Susler at FCI Pekin, Illinois at a videoconference hearing with U.S. Parole Commission hearing examiner Larry Glenn.

The hearing took place after Carlos Alberto had served over 29 years in prison, and 15 years after his initial parole hearing in 1994, when the Parole Commission told him to come back after serving another 15 years…

For some 45 minutes, the examiner posed questions, including some very pointed political questions about Carlos Alberto’s views on the relationship between the United States and Puerto Rico, and whether his thoughts on this issue have changed throughout his years in custody. He reviewed his accomplishments in prison and asked about his plans if he were to be released: to open a pottery studio in Puerto Rico.

Significantly, Glenn noted “the large number of documents showing community support sent to the parole commission.” He was referring to the thousands of letters and resolutions from all of Puerto Rico’s civil society, as well as from supporters throughout the U.S. and Mexico.

After a brief break, Glenn announced his recommendation: a presumptive parole date of April 3, 2010.... which would mark the 30th anniversary of Carlos Alberto’s imprisonment.

The parole commission has 21 days to issue a decision, by June 16. Should the commission adopt the examiner’s recommendation, Carlos Alberto would be eligible for transfer to a halfway house 180 days before April 3, or on October 3, 2009.

Letters urging the commission to adopt the hearing examiner’s recommendation should arrive no later than June 17 at the office of Jan Susler, Attorney, People’s Law Office, 1180 N. Milwaukee, Chicago, IL 60622, jsusler@aol.com."

---------------

Sample Letter

To the United States Parole Commission:

We are writing to urge that you adopt the May 26, 2009, recommendation of the hearing examiner to set a presumptive parole date of April 3, 2010 for Carlos Alberto Torres.

We support his release and are anxious to welcome him home.

Yours truly,

from: http://www.prolibertadweb.com

Write a Letter. Save a Life.

I have an old Amnesty International poster I've been lugging around for 20 years now; I always hang it on the wall in front of my desk, so I see it when I look over the top of my computer screen. It's a black and white photograph of an old Royal typewriter, with the caption at the bottom reading: "This is one of the most powerful weapons in the fight for human rights. Write a letter. Save a life."

So, when Amnesty asks me to sign a petition, send an email, or write a prisoner a card, I often do. I write even if it looks my letter will be just one of thousands going to an embassy mailroom. Even if it looks like my letter may be just one of a handful drowned out by the silence of millions, I write. And I write even if it seems like it won't really matter, because for all I know that letter could be just what was needed for the collective conscience to finally register a resounding "no!" to torture, rape, genocide, slavery, and the death penalty.

As a result of organizing by Amnesty, the NAACP, and several other international groups and celebrities, a couple of congressmen from Georgia are looking at drafting legislation specifically to stop the execution of Troy Anthony Davis. The Supreme Court is giving the case one final look - they've refused to consider it several times already. In the meantime, the NAACP is training 300 organizers to take up the PR campaign to get Georgia - or someone - to stop the execution and give him a new trial.

The link at the bottom of the column to the left goes to Amnesty International's website about Troy. Whatever else one thinks about the death penalty, we have a principle of justice in America that precludes us from executing the innocent, and if Troy Davis' jury had available to them then what we have now, they never would have found him guilty - much less sentenced him to die.

I don't believe in the death penalty for either the innocent or the guilty, but I hope this campaign saves Troy's life, and that it leads to the truth about innocence. Troy's case may not be all that exceptional. In one prominent study, 68% of all death sentences were reversed on appeal because of serious errors in the original trial. Black men have been found to be mistakenly identified as guilty parties in cross-racial identifications more often than white men. Black men are also intentionally portrayed as criminals to deflect attention from white people's crimes. And then there are the Baldus studies, which demonstrated that in Georgia defendants convicted of killing whites were 4.3 times more likely to get the death penalty than anyone convicted of killing blacks - evidence that the state values the lives of white people more than it values the lives of blacks. That pattern has been repeated in studies across the country.

Need I say that Troy - an African American man - was convicted of killing a white police officer?

I'm inclined to agree with Thurgood Marshall: that if most Americans really knew the truth about the death penalty, it would be so disturbing to them that capital punishment would be abolished. Specifically, we would find it "shocking, unjust, and unacceptable..." Yes, it costs a lot more money to prosecute someone under the death penalty than it does to just send them to prison for life. And yes, sometimes the innocent are condemned and executed. But that's not what Justice Marshall found so repugnant about it. It's that it's outright racist, and has a long history of racist application across the country. Out of the approximately 16,000 executions conducted in America from 1608-1945, only 30 were of whites for crimes against blacks. Thirty. Now look at the Baldus findings, presented to the Supreme Court in the McCleskey v. Kemp case in 1987. By a 5-4 majority the Court ruled that evidence of institutionalized racism isn't enough to show that one's consitutional rights are violated by discrimination. As Powell essentially argued in the majority opinion, if we give an inch on the death penalty, the legitimacy of the whole criminal justice system is in question. In retirement he said that was one decision he would rule differently on now, by the way. Think of what that might have changed...

So I have concerns about the direction of death penalty abolition campaigns these days, though I understand the temptation of an open door where there was once a stone wall. A campaign emphasizing abolition because of the risk of executing the innocent implies that executing the "guilty" is okay, leaving open the use of capital punishment in cases where evidence of guilt is "incontrovertible". Having abandoned the whole principle of humanity and dignity, then, where are we on arguing it's cruel and unusual to execute anyone?

Then there's the economic argument - some bills are getting pushed through to repeal the death penalty because implementing it is so expensive. A few states, though, did what I'd expect death penalty adherents to do: they tried changing their laws to expedite the capital punishment process, making it cheaper to ultimately execute someone. The economic argument would suggest skipping the appeals process altogether and having everyone summarily shot once sentenced. That would save money.

But it's not like I'm the one in there fighting on this one - I just write letters, sign petitions, and try to spread the word. I want to make it clear why I oppose the death penalty, though: it's racist and it brutalizes us as a people. I hope the folks leading the charge to abolish it don't let us forget those very basic things. If Americans abolish it because it's too expensive or needs to be tweaked, then there's room for improvement. State executions, we should maintain, cannot be "improved"; there's no such thing as a good death penalty.

It may be awhile yet before the death penalty is abolished across the country. In the meantime there are people like Troy Davis. Even the Innocence Project has taken up his case. So, if you get a minute, visit Amnesty's site, and write a letter today; save a life.