Tagged: illegal migrants Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos 12:09 pm on July 30, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , illegal migrants, , , , , , , , , ,   

    Pro Igual and Ferrocarril Clandestino present a communication to the UN Commision on Women 

    Within the framework of our work on the rights of migrants in Spain, Pro Igual has cooperated with Ferrocarril Clandestino and prepared a joint communication to the UN Commission on Women on the Human Rights Violations of Migrant Women in Spain: Detention in CIEs.

    The communication draws the UN Comission´s attention to singling out of migrant women through ethnic profiling and disproportionate use of deprivation of liberty for migrant women for mere administrative infractions, such as not having paperwork in order. Migrant women in CIEs suffer a range of human rights abuses, ranging from absent due process or legal counsel to separation from families and small children and lack of healthcare even for pregnant women.

    Pro Igual and Ferrocarril Clandestino put forth recommendations to the Spanish authorities to remedy this situation.

    The text of the submission is available here.

    Advertisements
     
  • Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos 4:17 pm on June 1, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , illegal migrants, , , , , , , , ,   

    ¿Hacer visible lo invisible? #15J 

    Varias organizaciones queremos poner en marcha una propuesta, una que sume a muchas más. El día 15 de junio os proponemos realizar un “DIA CONTRA LOS CENTROS DE INTERNAMIENTO DE EXTRANJEROS”.

    ¿De qué se trata?

    Es un día en el que muchas organizaciones nos sumamos a hacer actividades que den visibilidad a la existencia de estos centros. Si aún no sabes lo que son y quieres información puedes consultar las páginas de muchas organizaciones y los informes que se han elaborado al respecto

    ¿Para qué?

    Para hacer visible lo invisible. Los Centros de Internamiento de Extranjeros son cárceles racistas que atentan contra el Estado de Derecho. El objetivo es visibilizar esta realidad tan desconocida aún, que afecta a vecinas y vecinos de nuestros barrios. Las organizaciones que trabajamos en esto nos damos cuenta de lo difícil que es darla a conocer. El primer paso para cambiar algo es hacerlo visible. Firma apoyo.

    ¿Cómo?

    Las propuestas pueden ser individuales o grupales. Os ponemos algunos ejemplos para que no os quedéis en blanco:

    • Si tienes un grupo folclórico puedes salir y tocar contra los CIE.
    • Si sabes, puedes bailar un tango, milonga contra los CIE.
    • Si lo tuyo es el hip hop, la salsa ¿Por qué no un certamen anti-CIE?
    • Puedes escribir una poesía, una canción, un texto.
    • Si eres profe puedes dedicar un día a hablar de esto a tu alumnado, de cualquier nivel.
    • Si tienes medios puedes convocar un concurso (de escritos, de diseño, etc.)
    • Si tienes un blog, facebook, tweeter, puedes ayudar a difundir e impulsar que otras personas lo hagan.
    • Si eres religioso puedes compartirlo con tu comunidad.
    • Si sois muchas personas podéis hacer una concentración o un pasacalles.
    • Si sois pocas personas podéis hacer un acto simbólico, poner un muro de expresión, una mesa informativa.
    • Si estáis en una radio o una televisión podéis crear una cuña o un anuncio publicitario.
    • Si estáis en la universidad podéis proponer una charla, una exposición, repartir panfletos e informar.
    • Si tenéis vocación periodística podéis escribir un pequeño artículo o hacer una entrevista.
    • Si estáis compartiendo piso, se lo podéis contar al resto o a vuestra familia.
    • Si sois una asociación cultural podéis hacer un videoforum.
    • Si tenéis talento para el street art y el graffiti podéis animaros a crear.
    • Si sois más fiesteros podéis hacer una fiesta.
    • Si estás en un centro de salud, en una escuela o cualquier centro público, puedes colgar un cartel.
    • Si tienes un negocio también puedes colgar material gráfico.

    En definitiva ¡Todo lo que se os ocurra! Esperamos vuestras propuestas y si queréis os ayudamos a pensarlas. También crearemos materiales para que podáis utilizar en la difusión si queréis.

    Escribe tu propuesta aquí o mándala a cerremosloscie@gmail.com .

    No se os olvide sacar fotos y hacer un pequeño resumen para compartir
    Iremos subiendo todas vuestras propuestas, mapeando la ciudad de Madrid de norte a sur con vuestras colaboraciones.

    Al final del día haremos una propuesta en la que poder reunirnos y vernos las caras el máximo número de personas posibles. tenemos algunas ideas pero también esperamos las vuestras.

    POR EL CIERRE DE LOS CIE, ¿QUÉ DECIS? ¿HACEMOS ALGO?
    Consulta las Propuestas recibidas y los Apoyos con los que contamos.
     
  • Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos 5:17 pm on March 30, 2013 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , illegal migrants, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Pro Igual submission toward the OSCE Hate Crimes Report 2012 

    The 2013 Pro Igual submission for the OSCE-ODIHR Annual Report on Hate Crimes highlights the deficient Spanish legislative framework regulating political parties whose goals and activities contravene democratic values of the Spanish Constitution. As a result, political parties which openly propagate xenophobia and intolerance are allowed to exist and operate, gain adepts and even attain legislative seats.

    As in previous years, Pro Igual calls to attention of the national authorities and international monitoring bodies that hate crimes are not isolated incidents and do not take place in a vacuum. Activities of the legally permitted extreme right parties in Spain are one of the strongest factors contributing to a fertile climate for xenophobic hate crimes. It should come as no surprise that the hate crimes committed by adherents of extreme right and neo-Nazi ideology are becoming ever more brazen and premeditated.

    Notwithstanding some steps taken by the Spanish State to address hate crimes, even despite the simultaneous decrease of net immigrant population, the number of such crimes in Spain does not diminishes but continues to steadily rise.

    The Pro Igual Report is available here.

     
  • Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos 6:39 pm on August 27, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , illegal migrants, , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Extreme right and xenophobic parties in Spain, Part II 

    By Daria Terradez Salom, CIDH Pro Igual

    This is Part II of the article analyzing Spanish extreme right and xenophobic parties. It continues the Pro Igual series of blogs exploring the connection between the extreme right movement and hate crimes in Spain. 

    Party pluralism is a barometer of the political health of a state, as well as a fundamental pillar of the democracy. The very first article of the Spanish Constitution affirms “political pluralism” as one of the “superior values” of the Spanish political system. That said, it is unfortunate that under the guise of freedom of expression and that same political pluralism, the forces are surging that propagate racism, xenophobia and exaggerated protection of the “Spanishness” in face of supposed invasion of foreigners “threatening” national stability, social tradition and culture in Spain. This analysis sheds light on the apparent discord between the legal existence of hate-mongering parties and organizations, on the one hand, and the democratic system and the rule of law, on the other. We seek to explain, by analyzing the existing legal framework, how such political parties manage to legally exist, take part in elections and enjoy participation in local organs of the government.

    We must stress that the present analysis by no means pretends to play down the importance freedom of expression, association or political pluralism. However, we do believe that from the point of view of active democracy there must be reasonable limits on the abuse of fundamental rights, for the sake of democracy itself.

    Constitution

    In addition to Article 1 of the 1978 Spanish Constitution listing political pluralism among the “supreme values,” Article 6 states: “Political parties express democratic pluralism, assist in the formulation and manifestation of the popular will, and are a basic instrument for political participation. Their creation and the exercise of their activity are free within the observance of the Constitution and the laws.” (“Emphasis added.)

    The Constitution envisions a rather flexible regulatory framework for political parties. But if apparently there are minimal limits on the creation of political parties to guarantee political pluralism, the constitutional limit acquires even greater importance. Freedom to form political parties is bound to respect the supreme norms, and one of such norms is respect for fundamental rights, including nondiscrimination established in Article 14 of the Constitution, as well as human dignity outlined in Article 10, paragraph 1, as a basis for public order and social peace. Article 6 is also closely related to Article 22, which establishes the fundamental right to association, and to Article 16, which guarantees freedom of ideology and beliefs.

    Political parties play an enormously important role in the democratic life of the state. They are a sign of political pluralism and of respect for the fundamental freedoms of ideology and association. They are not random formations, but are communities of like-minded individuals, who can take part in the elections and represent the wishes of their voters. That means they can end up in the state´s representative organs, which obligates them to firmly respect the Constitution and the legal norms regulating their activities.

    Law 54/1978 on Political Parties

    The Law 54/1978, presently superseded by a newer legislation of 2002, was the first norm regulating the creation of political parties in Spain. It was promulgated in 1978, just a few days before the Constitution. The 1978 Law established essentially an absolute freedom for establishing political parties, derived from the fundamental right to association. At that time Spain was trying to shake off forty years of the dictatorship and it was crucial to maximally facilitate the creation of political parties to ensure the uttermost political pluralism and representation which up to that point simply had not existed.

    The Law 54/1978 did not establish a rigid procedure for registering parties. In practice, the only limit on the party establishment and activities was a clear intent to commit a criminal offense or to fail to respect democratic norms, nothing more. When the registration documentation was delivered to the Ministry of Interior, the latter examined the papers and if there were no indications that the entity planned to commit a criminal offense, the party was registered. If such indications were noted, the Interior forwarded the papers to the Prosecutor who re-examined them. Only if the Prosecutor also found the intent to commit illegal activities, could the party be denied registration or dissolved.

    Such initially very liberal framework resulted in proliferation of political parties, including political organizations with extreme nationalist tendencies, for example, the Basque parties demanding political independence. We must also add that, thanks to the Law 21/1976 on the Right to Political Association, Falange Española de las JONS (established in 1976) – the only legal party under the Franco regime – managed to join the democratic playfield, despite having foundations clearly contrary to the Constitutional principles that would be adopted two years later.

    The Spanish political panorama since 1978 till the derogation of the Law 54/1978 has been developing in giant steps, given an incredible ease with which new parties could be registered. It was necessary for the young democracy, which Spain was at the time, to catch up, by guaranteeing political pluralism and stressing the importance of fundamental political rights, such as freedom of expression, ideology and association.

    Organic Law 6/2002 on Political Parties

    After 25 years of the original law on political parties, there was a broad consensus that the time was ripe for a new legislation. The two main reasons, expressed in the Preamble of the new Law 6/2002 on Political Parties (hereafter, “LOPP”), were as follows. Besides being pre-constitutional, the 1978 Law was simply too brief and by then has fulfilled its objective of “establishing a simple procedure for registering political parties.” Sufficient time has passed and experience has been accumulated on functioning political parties, so as to systematize and adapt this experience to the more mature constitutional system.

    The second reason for changing the law was much more critical. It was recognition that the old norm lacked “concrete constitutional limits for the establishment and functioning of parties and for their conformity with the Constitution and the laws.” Obviously, the old law could not demand conformity with the Constitution which at that moment had not yet been adopted. And that reason alone necessitated the adoption of the new norm.

    Noting passing, this omission in the old law is responsible for allowing the registration of the PxC and Democracia Nacional (both established prior to the 2002 LOPP), parties known for their racist and xenophobic tenor. The new LOPP aimed to prevent that: “the goal is to guarantee the democratic system and fundamental liberties of the citizens and to prevent that parties, in a continued and aggravated manner, attack this democratic order based on liberties, justify racism and xenophobia or support violence and terrorist activities.”

    However, notwithstanding some convincing reasoning in the Preamble, not all of the intended constitutional boundaries entered into the text of the new LOPP. For example:

    • In the Preamble to the new LOPP, the legislator reasoned that some other (foreign) legal systems when regulating fundamental rights have “formulated much more categorically a duty of compliance and stricter subjection to the constitutional order, and moreover a positive duty to realize the active defense and pedagogy of democracy, withfailure to fulfill this duty leading to the exclusion from the legal order and democratic system.” Such “pedagogy of democracy” is not part of the constitutional doctrine in Spain where any “project or objective is deemed compatible with the Constitution so long as it does not involve activities violating democratic principles or fundamental rights of citizens.”Thus, the pedagogical aspect of democracy has been omitted from the text of the new LOPP.
    • While putting emphasis on political pluralism, the legislator seemed to forget that Article 1 of the Constitution also listed liberty, justice and equality as “superior values” of the social and democratic rule-of-law state. If we add to this the concept of human dignity, advanced in Article 10 as the basis for a political order and social peace, and affirmed by the Spanish Constitutional Tribunal (hereafter, “CT”) as a logical and ontological prius for the existence and fulfillment of all other human rights (Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional 53/1985), then parties infringing on human dignity should not be allowed to exist. Instead, the legislator added that this norm “is placed in equilibrium, carefully mediating between the high degree of freedom inherent in political pluralism and respect for the human rights and democracy.” This argument was trying to explain the reasons for excessive laxness of the law, but still left the door open to promoting pretty much “any project,” as stated in the Preamble, without articulating further limits.
    • The legislator expressed the intent to prevent that “a political party… attack the democratic order based on liberties, justify racism and xenophobia or support violence and terrorist activities.” However, the new law overlooked a small and seemingly insignificant detail. The cited paragraph of the Preamble mentions as separate activities, on the one hand, “justification of racism and xenophobia,” and on the other hand, “political support for terrorist activities,” separated by “or.” This “or” disappeared from Article 9 of the LOPP being substituted by “and.” The result of this substitution is that in order to be deemed illegal, parties or political organizations need to do both, otherwise, by default, they could continue their activities.

    While the new LOPP stipulated that “political parties could operate freely,” it did set out the boundaries on their activities: “They must respect constitutional values expressed in democratic principles and human rights.” The LOPP further outlined the motives for outlawing and potentially dissolving a political party:

    A political party shall be deemed illegal when its activities violate democratic principles, especially when it attempts to undermine or destroy the order of liberties or make impossible or eliminate the democratic system by one of the following acts, committed repeatedly and maliciously:

    a) Violate systematically fundamental rights and freedoms, by promoting, justifying or glorifying attempts on life or on integrity of persons based on ideology, religion or beliefs, nationality, race, gender or sexual orientation.

    One is left to wonder how a party like España 2000 could have passed through the filter of this norm and was legally registered, given its racist and xenophobic attitude it does not even try to conceal either in the founding documents or in public declarations of its official representatives.

    There are two more grounds for dissolution. However, this is where the legislator substituted “or” with “and” (please see above), thus requiring both clauses to be satisfied in order to ban or dissolve a party. So the apparent intention of the legislator here was not so much to ensure the existence of parties that respect the Constitution and fundamental human rights, as to outlaw political formations that supported ETA (a Basque terrorist organization).

    We do not mean to criticize this legislative intent, but wish to warn of the danger of political organizations which even though do not officially resort to violence still attack fundamental rights and the very Constitution by their discourse and attitudes. The law, in principle, should have prevented that. It is not healthy for our democracy that parties, openly propagating the inferiority of other races and calling for denying to specific groups of people some of the most fundamental human rights, enjoy the constitutional freedom to act in this manner.

    Constitutional jurisprudence

    In one of the earlier cases before the CT, the case of Violeta Friedman, concerning the revisionism and denial of the Holocaust by Leon Degrelle, a Nazi fugitive resident in Spain, the Court de facto recognized limits of the freedom of expression in the face of human dignity. It reasoned that in regards of human dignity (Article 10), there is an obligation to respect it, and “in so far as public bodies and citizens are subject to the Constitution and the rest of the legal order, this has to be demanded also of political parties.”

    However, in the case of Pedro Varela Geiss – Librería Europa (Sentencia del Tribunal Constitucional 235/2007), the CT issued a confusing decision. On the one hand, Varela´ conviction for denying the Holocaust was confirmed. On the other hand, the CT ruled unconstitutional the provisions of the Penal Code that restricted activities of political parties. The CT rejected the argument of the prosecution that the Spanish system does not follow the model of “militant democracy” and thus fundamental rights cannot be restricted even if used for unconstitutional purposes. This, by the way, was the same reasoning found in the Preamble to the 2002 LOPP. The CT did affirm that there are limits to Article 20.1 of the Constitution regarding freedom of expression when expression is “vilifying, racist or humiliating” to human dignity. The reason for declaring the provision of the Penal Code unconstitutional was its interference with the exercise of the right to freedom of expression itself.

    In the more recent case, which concerned the dissolution of a political party (Fundamento jurídico 16, Sentence 5/2004, of 16 January 2004: dissolution and banning of the Herri batasuna), it was re-affirmed in respect of political parties that those are “a medium designed for expressing pluralism and to which they serve as expression; consequently, they find in freedom of ideology the basis necessary for defining their political identity, a genuine reference for those whom they offer to represent in the process of forming the popular will.” The CT added that “restricting the liberty to create political parties amounts to trampling the rights for whose exercise … this liberty has been conceived in the first place.”

    The party in question was dissolved and banned. Yet the case served to reiterate the tremendous importance attached in the Spanish juridical system to providing protection to political parties and organizations, given their role of the guarantor of other fundamental rights and freedoms.

    Conclusions

    Analysis of Spanish legal norms and constitutional jurisprudence on the matters of political parties and freedom of speech leads to various conclusions.

    One of the conclusions is that the Spanish constitutional system seems to waver when it comes to condemning racist and xenophobic expressions and attitudes of political parties, which do no more than contaminate the quality of our rule-of-law state. Even though such parties are in minority, they still enjoy representation in the state organs of power, with all the consequences this entails.

    Another conclusion is that we cannot ignore the latent danger posed for democracy by political parties and organizations propagating racism and xenophobia. With the ongoing economic crisis, their scape-goating of immigration becomes much more extensive and socially acceptable than would be appropriate and desirable in our democratic system.

    The final conclusion is that freedom of expression should not be a catchall where every ideology could be lumped together. Human dignity is a natural and necessary limit on free speech. The Spanish state ought to adopt a more pro-active approach of “militant democracy” and constitutional pedagogy to prevent that political pluralism and freedom of expression are swayed by anti-democratic discourse.

     
  • Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos 3:06 pm on May 10, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , illegal migrants, , , , , , , , , , ,   

    No basta con solo indignarse 

    Demetrio Gomez, CIDH Pro Igual

    Siempre me he mostrado cercano al movimiento 15M. Pero no soy de los que cambian el escapulario por otros dogmas, esa acción es para mi igual de dañina. La conciencia crítica está para algo, para no ser borregos, para ser independientes y pensantes, como mucho acepto los axiomas matemáticos, esos que nos dicen que las paralelas no se cruzan en el infinito, siempre me ha parecido gracioso lo de comparar los axiomas matemáticos con los autos de fe.

    En fin, esta mañana empece a leer el artículo que os enlazo y no deja de confirmar muchas de las cuestiones que yo he planteado en infinidad de ocasiones: NO BASTA SOLO CON INDIGNARSE.

    Coincido plenamente con las ideas expuestas por el catedrático Fermín Bouza en este artículo y coinciden con muchas de mis críticas hacia el movimiento, y por favor, que nadie se rasgue las vestiduras que no hablamos de lo divino, sagrado e incuestionable sino de un movimiento y su desarrollo.

    Me ha preocupado desde el inicio que esto sea una miscelanea extraña que no se define ni de izquierdas ni de derechas, hueco que han sabido aprovechar sobretodo los grupos neofascistas que se definen a si mismos como “ni de izquierdas ni de derechas, somos la voz del pueblo” así lo expresan tanto Casa Pound como otros movimientos parecidos, sin ir más lejos la ultraderecha racista y antigitana de la Rep. Checa. Me ha inquietado por que ya hemos visto como estos grupos neofascistas aprovechan la menor rendija para contaminar movimientos, organizaciones… que no nos olvidemos de sus “marcas blancas” camufladas bajo organizaciones de defensa animal y ecologista o sus infiltraciones como las de la CGT que saltó a la prensa en agosto de 2010.

    Me asusta, cuando paseo entre los perfiles nazis y fascistas del Facebook, observar como algunos de ellos llevan colocado en su perfil una fotografía o un slogan alusorio al 15M.

    Eso lo he visto reflejado en el “todo vale”, en el uso indiscriminado de noticias provenientes de medios fascistas como “Alerta Digital” y similares que han tenido su espacio y su medio de difusión en los foros de este movimiento porque hacían crítica al, en aquel momento, gobierno socialista de Zapatero usando las armas propias de la ultraderecha, la difamación, la mentira y el populismo, con eso no quiero decir que el anterior gobierno fuera poco criticable o lo hiciera muy bien, quiero que se entienda mi postura con claridad.

    La carencia de referentes políticos y de marco han creado situaciones tan paradójicas como que en alguna asamblea un nazi se haya plantado para soltar su arenga y el grupo se haya quedado bloqueado discutiendo si era propio de la libertad de expresión permitir o no su intervención… Señores/as hablamos de ODIO, discursos que invitan al GENOCIDIO y la EXCLUSIÓN, como podemos ser tan lerdos/as.

    No se puede organizar un movimiento con seriedad y respuestas desde la presunción y la ingenuidad. Antes del 15M ya eramos muchos los que escribíamos y actuábamos en múltiples formas contra el sistema, el movimiento antisistema y creativo no nació, no se inventó, con el 15M, perder esos referentes es dejar al movimiento en pañales y carente de referencias.

    A pesar de esto, seguiré apoyando este movimiento porque es algo que surge desde el pueblo, es un revulsivo contra esta sociedad cruel y deshumanizada, porque están los sueños de otras muchas personas con deseos saludables de cambio y los esfuerzos de muchas personas que ponen lo mejor de si… pero NO TODO VALE.

     
  • Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos 8:57 pm on April 22, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , illegal migrants, , , , , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Anti-discrimination “crisis cards”: know your rights and defend them 

    Low awareness about one´s rights and opportunities for redress for rights violations can be a serious obstacle to attaining equality. Unfortunately, groups which are most likely to experience discrimination are also the ones which are least likely to know their rights and of the existing remedies. Thus, despite considerable evidence of discrimination and harassment against minorities, foreigners, and other vulnerable groups – in Spain as elsewhere, – reporting of discrimination is rather low. Known cases most probably present only a tip of the iceberg.

    In response to this problem, CIDH Pro Igual has developed anti-discrimination “crisis cards.” The AD “crisis cards” provide key information for foreigners, ethnic minorities, and other most likely victims of discrimination in Spain on steps to take if they experienced discrimination or harassment from public or private entities. The “crisis cards” are currently available on the Pro Igual website: http://www.cidh.es/ in EnglishSpanish, and  Romanian for downloading, printing, and sharing. In future, translations into other languages spoken by the principal minority and immigrant groups in Spain will be also available. In addition, Pro Igual will look into opportunities to disseminate this practice among other NGOs, as well as official bodies, and develop other thematic cards.

    USER INSTRUCTIONS: Each A4 sheet contains five cards that should be cut along the horizontal lines and folded in half, so they become a size of an average credit card. If desired, the cards can be also laminated and kept along with other cards in one´s wallet.

     
  • Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos 3:35 pm on March 28, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , illegal migrants, , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Extreme right and the Spanish police and armed forces 

    Alphia Abdikeeva, CIDH Pro Igual

    This is a new article of the Pro Igual series of blogs investigating the connection between the neo-Nazi movement and hate crimes in Spain.

    As discussed throughout the series, Spain became home to considerable numbers of high-ranking Nazis fleeing criminal prosecution in Europe after the WWII. In addition, Spain at that time itself was a fascist dictatorship. Hence it is logical that there were rather cozy relations established between the fugitive Nazis and members of the Spanish armed forces and the police. However, even after Franco´s death, following the transition and the establishment of democracy in Spain, there has never been any critical review of this historic legacy. The result is that not only does Spain lack a sufficient legal framework to address racially-motivated violence and hate crimes, but the very institutions charged with protecting society from such crimes – the police and Civil Guard – may be not entirely immune from the presence of, or infiltration by neo-Nazi/pro-fascist elements.

    In 1995 none other than the then President Adolfo Suarez admitted in an interview on the Spanish television noted that there had been no purges in the Spanish power structures from the pro-fascist elements and the very idea of such purges seemed ludicrous. And so, old and neo-Nazis, former fascists and their sympathizers were allowed to remain or to join the Spanish police, Civil guard and the army, as well as serving in various private security firms with close links to the government structures.

    It is remarkable that one of the very first cases classified as hate crime against immigrants in Spain was committed by a member of the Civil Guard, in 1992. The victim was a harmless Dominican woman, Lucrecia Perez. Among the group of other immigrant women, utterly defenseless, she was attacked under the cover of the night and shot at by four masked men, whose leader was later identified as a member of the Civil Guard with close links to the local neo-Nazi gangs and a prior record of violent racism.

    In one of the Pro Igual´s earlier blog articles we briefly highlighted the role of the Spanish police in the international hunt for Dr. Death (Aribert Heim). Because of the tip-off from someone inside the Spanish police, Heim escaped and was never captured or found again, along with some other Nazi criminals who were able to change their location and avoid imminent arrests.

    More recently, in the course of the “Operation Armor” against a major neo-Nazi structure engaged in organized crime in Valencia – including trafficking of arms from the Spanish soldiers to neo-Nazis – criminal investigators complained about constant info leaks that impeded or sabotaged the operation, so that planned searches of the suspects´ premises had to be moved forward. One of the intercepted and recorded telephone conversations presented as evidence to the court sounded like this: “Listen, so-an-so from the Government delegation called me, they´re gonna search the headquarters in two days.” Members of the Civil Guard conducting investigation also reportedly stated that some of their own colleagues turned out to be neo-Nazi moles. See, http://borreruak.blogspot.com/2010/07/entrevista-con-joan-cantarero-autor-de.html. Despite this clear evidence of insider informants, there has been no separate investigation into infiltration by the neo-Nazis of the police, Civil Guard or even in this case of the Valencian regional government.

    Extreme right/neo-Nazi elements are reported to be a regular occurrence also in the Spanish armed forces. During the 2003 US invasion of Iraq where soldiers from other NATO countries also participated, some Spanish soldiers were spotted wearing “mata moros” (“kill the moors”) pins which are traditionally associated with extreme right nationalistic organizations. Most recently, in Malaga, during the religious celebrations around Easter 2011, a swastika tattoo on the arm of an active-duty Spanish soldier caught attention of the media and caused considerable public resonance.

    Media on a regular basis report sightings of the members of the police, Civil Guard and the army – in their capacity as participants – at the pro-Nazi social events, such RAC music concerts, specific football fan gatherings, and the like.

    In recent years, a number of high-profile racially- or ideologically-motivated murders had been committed by extreme right-leaning members of the Spanish Civil Guard, the police, and the army:

    • In 2007, a Spanish soldier with links to neo-Nazis killed anti-fascist activist Carlos Palomino; the family of the victim reported sneers and mockery from the police throughout the investigation and court process.
    • In 2008, in the military quarters El Bruc, Barcelona, 10 masked Spanish soldiers beat up 3 soldiers of the immigrant background.
    • Meanwhile, the same year in Madrid, the police protected neo-Nazis holding a demonstration in a working district with large immigrant population, while battering anti-Nazi protesters; the police used batons and fire arms, at least three persons (anti-fascists) were wounded, one lost an eye, one woman was brutally stomped over by the police. Civil society activists claim it is typical that the police beat up anti-fascists but turn a blind eye to neo-Nazis, even if the latter are heavily armed, see: http://www.publico.es/espana/221064/la-policia-no-cachea-a-los-nazis-armados-en-las-manifestaciones.
    • In 2009, guards accused of particular brutality towards inmates in the infamous CIEs (Centros de Internamiento para Estranjeros) coincidentally also sported shaven heads and neo-Nazi tattoos or symbols, besides allegedly using ethnic and racial slurs characteristic of the extreme right´s jargon. (Pro Igual covered the situation in the Spanish CIEs in its past articles, see here and here.)
    • In the early 2012, the Valencian police brutally suppressed the demonstration of underage students, who were “armed” with books and protested budget cuts for education. What is interesting, in addition to Valencia being the preferred location for ex-Nazi fugitives, is that the chief of the police there does not even try to hide his sympathy towards the extreme right. See: chief of the police there does not even try to hide his sympathy towards the extreme right.

    These cases, especially taken in the context of Spanish history, are more than unrelated incidents. They suggest systematic infiltration of the power structures of the Spanish state by neo-Nazis, neo-fascists, and other extreme right elements. If not for tireless efforts of the Spanish civil society, even a greater number of racially-motivated attacks and hate crimes committed by right-wing sympathizers serving in those organs would have remained covered up and forgotten.

    The next article of the series will address specifically Spanish civil society movement and initiatives developed to address and counter hate crimes and propaganda by the Spanish extreme right.

     
  • Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos 2:58 pm on December 31, 2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , illegal migrants, , , , , , , , , ,   

    Biggest assaults on fundamental rights in Europe in 2010 

    It seems like a tradition in the end of each year to have countdowns of the top/most memorable events or objects of the finishing year. Here is our Top 5: the list of most memorable breaches of fundamental rights that occurred in 2010 in Europe. The selection is based mostly on the media coverage and social reactions, and is open to discussion.

    5. Ban on burqas in France.

    Even though invisible rights violations, such as discrimination in various areas of life, may be a much greater problem, media provided rather extensive coverage of the legislative ban on full veil (burqa) in France.

    4. Ban on burqas in Belgium.

    They are higher on the list simply because they were a few days ahead of France and the media coverage was more or less equivalent with that of the French ban.

    3. Spanish secret police circular on roundup and detention of undocumented migrants.

    The event got a considerable resonance in Spain although was hardly mentioned in the non-Spanish media.

    2. Swiss referendum on expulsions of foreigners committing a crime.

    Again, this received major media resonance and is likely to face legal challenges before international human rights tribunals.

    1. Roma expulsions from France.

    This was definitely the biggest — in our view — affront to human rights in Western Europe happening in 2010. It was also a historic chance for European institutions (particularly the Commission) to take a decisive stand for human rights. An opportunity, unfortunately, waisted.

    What will 2011 bring for human rights in Europe? Let´s hope more freedom and fewer human rights violations. Happy New Year!

     
  • Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos 8:43 am on September 19, 2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , illegal migrants, , , , , , , ,   

    Article “While France Deports Roma Gypsies, Spain Integrates Them” 

    Alphia Abdikeeva, CIDH Pro Igual

    An informative, if somewhat embellished, account of integration initiatives of Roma in Spain was presented in Time magazine in an article by Andres Cala “While France Deports Roma, Spain Integrates Them.”

    Some of the most relevant facts are as follows:

    • Spain spends c. €36 million a year on Roma integration, making good use of EU´s social funds.
    • About half of Spanish Roma are homeowners; only an estimated 5% still live in makeshift camps.
    • Practically all Roma in Spain have access to health care.
    • Practically all Roma children start elementary school (although only about one third actually finish it), and an estimated 85% of Spanish Roma are literate.

    Furthermore, the article notes:

    Spain’s two-pronged integration approach has been instrumental in those results, pairing access to mainstream social services with targeted inclusion programs. For example, Roma can have access to public housing and financial aid on the condition that they send their children to schools and health care facilities. Then there’s the Gypsy Secretariat Foundation Acceder program, which experts say is one of the best integration initiatives in Europe. The program takes young, unemployed Gypsies and teaches them technical skills and helps them earn the equivalent of a high school degree. At the end, they are placed in jobs through a series of agreements with private companies.

    While the Time article may gloss over some of rather serious issues, such as deeply rooted prejudices, discrimination and other racism-related problems Roma experience in Spain on a daily basis, the question posed by the article in the end appear a legitimate one: can the rest of Europe replicate Spain’s success?

     
  • Centro de Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos 2:31 pm on March 22, 2010 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , ethnic data, , , illegal migrants, , , , , , , , ,   

    Racially-motivated crimes are still uncounted in Spain 

    Alphia Abdikeeva, CIDH Pro Igual

    “We know how many women die every year from gender violence. We know how many young people die every weekend in road accidents. We know how many workers die in job accidents. We know how many prisoners commit suicides in jail. But we do not know how many racist crimes take place every year in Spain.” Esteban Beltran of Amnistia Internacional España, in España se niega contabilizar las agresiones racistas y xenofobas en su territorio.

    CIDH Pro Igual just submitted its contribution towards an annual OSCE-ODIHR Hate Crimes report. In its submission, CIDH ProIgual makes a recommendation addressed to the Spanish authorities to collect and make public the data on hate crimes.

    By refusing to collect data on racially-motivated crimes the Spanish state keeps these types of offences, and the scope of the problem, invisible. It is not just an affront to the victims. It is deficiency in Spain´s legal framework, which failed to have implemented the letter and spirit of its international human rights commitments and obligations, including the EU equality directives specifically prescribing that the data on racially-motivated cases be collected.

    Only when the state has the necessary data, will the true scope of the problem be understood. Only then can the state formulate a meaningful policy to deal with hate crimes. And only then will anti-racism efforts start genuinely to bear fruits.

    P

    P

    P

    P

    P

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel