Submission to the United Nations Universal Periodic Review of Yemen

Mwatana for Human Rights (Mwatana), the Columbia Law School Human Rights Clinic (the clinic), Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS), International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), and the Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR) submit this report to inform the examination of Yemen during its third Universal Periodic Review (UPR). This submission focuses on international human rights and humanitarian law violations by the Government of Yemen and by the armed group Ansar Allah (the Houthis)

Should Compensated Surrogacy Be Permitted or Prohibited?

Surrogacy provides a way for infertile people, as well as same-sex couples and single individuals, to become parents. Surrogacy is permitted in most states in the United States. In New York, however, surrogacy contracts are void and unenforceable according to a 1992 law. The Child-Parent Security Act of 2017 (the CPSA) would repeal this prohibition, make surrogacy agreements enforceable, and permit surrogates to be compensated for the gestational care they provide. In this report, we review the landscape of state laws in the United States, laws around the world, moral concerns that led to the adoption of the current New York law, and international human rights considerations that are relevant to evaluating the CPSA. Based on this review, we support the CPSA and suggest some possible additional protections based on practices in other jurisdictions

The Puerto Rico-Chicago Connection: Cross-Boundary Drug-Treatment in the United States (2016)

1. The John Marshall Law School International Human Rights Clinic is a law school student-practice clinic that is committed to the investigation of human rights abuses, the publication of abuses, and the protection against abuses within the United States and around the world. 2. The International Human Rights Clinic has been investigating human rights abuses arising out of a systematic practice of government officials and cooperating private individuals to relocate homeless, drug-addicted persons to putative drug-treatment centers in Chicago, Illinois. In fact, these so-called drug-treatment centers deprive individuals of their physical liberty; fail to provide adequate food, shelter, and other necessities; engage in abusive and degrading treatment; and fail to provide adequate medical treatment to victims. 3. Officials of Puerto Rico, an island territory within the jurisdiction of the United States of America, engage in a systematic practice of relocating homeless, drug-addicted Puerto Ricans to sites within the continental United States, including Chicago, for drug treatment. 4. Officials and cooperating private individuals arrange for transportation of these victims from Puerto Rico to the continental United States. Officials and cooperating private individuals also arrange for housing in putative residential drug-treatment centers. These so-called drug treatment centers are often located in overcrowded and uninhabitable or substandard facilities. They are not licensed or regulated. 5. Private operators who run these so-called drug-treatment centers often take their victims’ identification and restrict their victims’ physical liberty. New arrivals are not permitted to leave the premises for 30 days; if they do, they cannot come back. Operators also charge victims a fee, forcing victims to work, or at least to earn money, in exchange for their housing and “treatment.” 6. These so-called drug-treatment centers fail to provide appropriate medical treatment for the victims, resulting in torture or ill-treatment of the victims in violation of the Convention Against Torture. Moreover, these so-called treatment centers frequently deny victims access to adequate food and water. Several victims have died. 7. This practice is well known and actively supported by officials in Puerto Rico and at least several of its municipalities. The practice is well known by officials in the City of Chicago, the State of Illinois, and the U.S. government. 8. This practice constitutes a violation of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the “CAT”)

Concerning the Use of Solitary Confinement in Immigrant Detention Facilities in the United States of America (2013)

This report relates to the situation of immigrant detainees who are held in solitary confinement in detention facilities in the United States. It is submitted in response to the United States’ fourth periodic report and specifically addresses the widespread use of solitary confinement in immigrant detention as it violates immigrant detainees’ rights to due process and judicial remedies, violations of minimum standards of the right to humane treatment, and the right to personal liberty. The report discusses the policies and practices of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that support the use of solitary confinement to show that the United States’ failure to protect the rights of immigrant detainees represents a violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The report seeks to urge the Human Rights Committee to recognize that the United States must adhere to its obligations under the ICCPR by limiting the use of solitary confinement and strictly permitting its use as a last resort

Public Acknowledgement and Investigations of U.S. “Targeted Killings” and Drone Strikes

The United Nations, local and international human rights organizations, and journalists have investigated and reported numerous cases in which there is credible evidence of harm to Yemeni, Pakistani, and other civilians from U.S. strikes carried out in secret, often using drones. The families of those individuals are still seeking redress and accountability, and the continued refusal of your administration even to officially acknowledge their losses compounds their sufferin

Joint Submission to the Human Rights Committee: Draft General Comment 36 on Article 6, on the Right to Life

Columbia Law School’s Human Rights Clinic, the International Commission of Jurists, the Open Society Justice Initiative, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Rights Watch (UK) welcome the opportunity to provide the Human Rights Committee (the Committee) with the following observations on its draft General Comment on Article 6 (the draft) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (the Covenant) on the right to life, ahead of its second reading

Women In Prison In Argentina: Causes, Conditions, and Consequences

In many countries around the world, including Argentina, the number of women who are deprived of their liberty has risen over time and has increased disproportionately in comparison to male prisoners. In Argentina, the number of female prisoners within the federal system increased 193%, while the male population rose 111% from 1990 to 2012. Nonetheless, little research has been done to understand why there has been such a dramatic increase in women’s incarceration. At the same time, international and domestic laws governing prisons and prison policies and practices have traditionally been designed for men. In 2010, however, the United Nations adopted the first international standards relating specifically to women prisoners – the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Female Prisoners and Non-Custodial Measures for Women Offenders (Bangkok Rules) The Bangkok Rules specifically call for research to be conducted on (among other things) the causes of women’s imprisonment, the characteristics of women in prison, and the impact on children. This Report focuses particularly on the causes and conditions of women’s imprisonment, and consequences for children of incarcerated mothers in Argentina. In undertaking research for this Report, the authors developed two surveys, a General Prison Population Survey that was administered to nearly 30% of all women prisoners (246 women) in Argentina’s federal prison system (attached as Annex 1) and a Co-Residence Program Survey which received responses from 26 women residing with their children in prison (attached as Annex 2); conducted site visits to two women’s prisons in Buenos Aires, Argentina; and interviewed women prisoners, judges, academics and civil society members. Justice Elena Highton de Nolasco, the Vice President of the Supreme Court of Argentina, invited us to conduct this study and provided us with full and open access and cooperation. This Report focuses solely on the federal prison system in Argentina, known as the Servicio Penitenciaro Federal (SPF), while the vast majority of the people deprived of their liberty are held in provincial jails across the country. As of April 2012, the SPF detained 9,693 prisoners in 34 federal prisons. Of these, 9% (or approximately 872 SPF prisoners) were women

Promoting Clinical Legal Education in India: A Case Study of the Citizen Participation Clinic

This Report is the product of a unique collaboration between the Good Governance and Citizen Participation Clinic at Jindal Global Law School and the Cornell International Human Rights Clinic at Cornell Law School. Students based in the Jindal Global Law School (Sonipat, India) and Cornell Law School (Ithaca, N.Y.) participated in a joint class using videoconferencing technology from January to May, 2012 and worked on preparing the Report. The Report points out that most law schools in India lack robust clinical legal education programs. Clinical legal education is essential to preparing law students to practice law effectively and promoting access to justice for marginalized groups. The report recommends that law schools mandate that trained faculty directly supervise students undertaking legal work, provide credit to students who engage in legal aid services, and ensure low student-teacher ratios in skills-based classes. Additionally, the report recommends that the Bar Council repeal its prohibition against professors and students practicing law before courts in India. The Report describes the key features of the Citizen Participation Clinic at Jindal. That clinic aims to address the disconnect between the Indian Constitution’s promise for a dignified life for every citizen and the reality of undignified human existence for the majority of the population, particularly in rural areas. That Clinic is one important example of a successful clinical model that can be adopted by other law schools in India to engage with their neighboring communities and to train law students in important lawyering skills

Promoting Clinical Legal Education in India: A Case Study of the Citizen Participation Clinic

This Report is the product of a unique collaboration between the Good Governance and Citizen Participation Clinic at Jindal Global Law School and the Cornell International Human Rights Clinic at Cornell Law School. Students based in the Jindal Global Law School (Sonipat, India) and Cornell Law School (Ithaca, N.Y.) participated in a joint class using videoconferencing technology from January to May, 2012 and worked on preparing the Report. The Report points out that most law schools in India lack robust clinical legal education programs. Clinical legal education is essential to preparing law students to practice law effectively and promoting access to justice for marginalized groups. The report recommends that law schools mandate that trained faculty directly supervise students undertaking legal work, provide credit to students who engage in legal aid services, and ensure low student-teacher ratios in skills-based classes. Additionally, the report recommends that the Bar Council repeal its prohibition against professors and students practicing law before courts in India. The Report describes the key features of the Citizen Participation Clinic at Jindal. That clinic aims to address the disconnect between the Indian Constitution’s promise for a dignified life for every citizen and the reality of undignified human existence for the majority of the population, particularly in rural areas. That Clinic is one important example of a successful clinical model that can be adopted by other law schools in India to engage with their neighboring communities and to train law students in important lawyering skills