Religious Freedom Report Echoes Longstanding Concerns of HIAS
Posted on Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 15:36 pm
(New York, NY) – The report of a study by the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom touches on several key issues of importance to the Jewish community, represented on immigration and refugee issues by the 124-year-old Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society HIAS.
According to the study, released this week, asylum seekers in the United States are treated poorly and wildly inconsistently from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and those without legal representation have a far higher likelihood of being denied asylum – something HIAS officials have said for years.
“This is an extremely important report coming from a non-partisan agency,” says Gideon Aronoff, vice president for government relations and public policy at HIAS. “We particularly appreciate their emphasis on keeping religious liberty issues high on the agenda, because the pursuit of religious freedom was the first reason we began rescuing refugees in 1881.”
Asylum seekers with legal representation are 30 times more likely to be granted asylum by the United States, according to the report. HIAS recommends that the government and the private sector work together to see that more asylum seekers receive representation. “This would result in better informed decisions and applicants without relief choosing not to proceed with their cases,” says Aronoff.
HIAS strongly supports another key recommendation of the report: that a central high-level DHS official be named to focus on refugee and asylum affairs. “This is a hugely complex process that would benefit greatly from coordination between the multiple agencies at DHS,” says Frank Lipiner, director of legal affairs at HIAS. “Right now, no one individual is overseeing all these disparate activities, so the system is in chaos.”
Timing of the release of the Commission’s report coincides with asylum legislation being introduced in the House by Representative F. James Sensenbrenner Jr., (R-Wisc.). Among other provisions, the Sensenbrenner bill would make it harder for refugees to get asylum. For example, the bill would make it easier to deny asylum cases based on inconsistency between statements made at the airport and statements made later during asylum proceedings. Roughly one quarter of all asylum cases that fail because of inconsistency are denied because the asylum seeker adds details to those provided at the point of arrival.
“When truly worthy asylum seekers – people fleeing bloody, horrible conditions in their home countries – arrive in the United States they already are shell-shocked from their life experiences,” says Aronoff. “Add to that the rapid-fire pace and shrill glare of our modern airports, and it’s no wonder many make differing statements to authorities. To penalize them for this is inhumane.”
“There are so many things to consider, especially in light of this new report, any legislation warrants careful thought and planning. It is dangerous to rush ahead with this legislation,” says Lipiner.
Asylum advocates are fully aware of the need for careful controls to ensure public safety and national security. “But DHS should be willing to consider parole for those asylum seekers who are known, have community ties and aren’t a danger to society,” says Aronoff. “DHS needs to remember that asylum seekers aren’t criminals and that all detained asylum seekers should be held in humane conditions consistent with their status as potential victims of persecution.”
