AFTERSHOCKS:

THE HUMAN IMPACT OF
U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO
POST-EARTHQUAKE

University of Miami School of Law
Immigration Clinic

University of Miami School of Law
Human Rights Clinic

University of Chicago Law School
International Human Rights Clinic

AUTHORS
University of Miami School of Law Immigration Clinic

The Immigration Clinic represents low-income immigrants in a wide variety
of immigration proceedings and works in collaboration with community and
advocacy groups to reform the law and advance the cause of social justice for
immigrants. The Clinic’s projects are designed to bring awareness to important
issues facing immigrants and their families.
University of Miami School of Law Human Rights Clinic

The Human Rights Clinic uses international human rights law to address
circumstances of global injustice and propose solutions to systemic human rights
violations in the United States and abroad. Students learn to practice law in the
international and cross-cultural context of human rights litigation, advocacy,
research, and fieldwork at the local, national, and international levels.

Copyright © 2015
University of Miami
School of Law,
Immigration Clinic and
Human Rights Clinic.
All rights reserved.
Report design by
Elizabeth Estefan.
Cover photograph was
taken by Bess Adler at
the Port-au-Prince airport
tarmac as deportees
arrived by bus from a
U.S. charter flight.
All rights reserved.
Used with permission.

University of Chicago Law School International Human Rights Clinic

The International Human Rights Clinic works for the promotion of human rights
and social and economic justice in the United States and globally. The Clinic
uses international human rights laws and norms as well as other substantive laws
and strategies to draw attention to human rights violations, develop practical
solutions to those problems using interdisciplinary methodologies, and promote
accountability on the part of state and non-state actors.
KEY COLLABORATORS
Alternative Chance/Chans Altenativ

Based in Haiti and New York, Alternative Chance is a self-help, peer counseling,
limited reentry program founded in Haiti in 1996 by Michelle Karshan together
with four young men who were deported because of a criminal conviction. The
program works with those facing deportation and those already deported to Haiti
because of a criminal conviction in the United States or elsewhere.
Americans for Immigrant Justice (AI Justice)

Americans for Immigrant Justice is a legal services organization based in Miami,
Florida that is dedicated to protecting and promoting the basic human rights
of immigrants through a unique combination of free direct services, impact
litigation, policy reform, and public education at local, state, and national levels.
Haitian Women of Miami (FANM)

For almost 25 years, Fanm Ayisyen Nan Miyami, Inc. (FANM)/Haitian Women of
Miami has been a major catalyst for addressing social service, health, education,
economic development and human and civil rights issues that affect immigrant
Haitian women and their families in the United States. Located in the heart of
little Haiti in Miami, Florida, FANM’s mission is to empower Haitian women and
their families socially, economically and politically and facilitate their adjustments
to South Florida and the United States.
The Institute for Justice & Democracy in Haiti (IJDH)

IJDH works with the people of Haiti in their non-violent struggle for democracy,
justice, and human rights by distributing information on human rights conditions in
Haiti, pursuing legal cases, and cooperating with human rights and solidarity groups
in Haiti and abroad. IJDH is based in Boston, Massachusetts. Its Haiti-based partner,
Bureau des Avocats Internationaux, is located in Port-au-Prince, Haiti.

FEATURED
PHOTOGRAPHY
Bess Adler,

www.BessAdler.com,
is a photojournalist
based in New York City
who is working on an
ongoing photo story on
deportations to Haiti.
Ms. Adler’s photographs
are featured throughout
the report, including on
the cover.
Magnus Länje,

www.magnusphoto.com,
is a photographer based
in Stockholm, Sweden
whose portrait of the
family of a deportee
appears in this report.
Darcy Padilla

of Agence VU,
www.darcypadilla.com,
graciously permitted
the authors to use a
photograph she took
at Mars and Kline
Psychiatric Center in
Port-au-Prince.

This report is dedicated to
Wildrick Guerrier
(1976-2011)
and the many others who have
lost their lives or who
continue to suffer after
being deported to
post-earthquake Haiti.

Port-au-Prince

Contents
Foreword § i
Acknowledgements § ii
Acronyms and Abbreviations § iii
Executive Summary § v
Key Recommendations for the United States § xiv
Methodology § xv

Chapter 1

Introduction & Background § 1

Chapter 2

Factual Findings § 15

Chapter 3

International Law Prohibits Deportations to
Post-Earthquake Haiti § 40

Chapter 4

Recommendations to the United States, Haiti,
and the International Community § 47
Endnotes § 53

Foreword

By Edwidge Danticat

A few years ago, on a Father’s Day in 2007, I published an opinion piece in The New York Times called
“Impounded Fathers,” about fathers—mostly heads of households—who had been suddenly rounded up and
deported to their home countries, leaving spouses and small children behind. Nearly a decade later, these
types of deportations have increased to an average of 400,000 a year during the current administration.
These deportations affect not only fathers, but also mothers and single people. They also impact the
physically and mentally ill, the disabled, and even in some cases the dying.
This report, Aftershocks:The Human Impact of U.S. Deportations to Post-Earthquake Haiti, focuses on
deportations that took place after Haiti suffered the worst natural disaster in its history. As the earth shook
and up to 300,000 Haitians lost their lives, also shattered were the hopes and dreams of many families who
had hoped for a reprieve from being expelled to a devastated country.
In the past five years, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has deported approximately
1,500 people to Haiti who, due to a criminal record, do not qualify for immigration relief called Temporary
Protected Status. This includes individuals with chronic and terminal illnesses, as well as people who were
born in a third country and had never set foot in Haiti. The United States continues to deport people in spite
of the fact that Haiti has been suffering from a massive post-earthquake humanitarian crisis in which 1.5
million people became homeless and nearly a million were affected by a cholera epidemic introduced to the
country by United Nations troops.
When they arrive in Haiti, deportees become outcasts because of the stigma attached to being a
deportee with a criminal history. These men and women are targets for violence, harassment, and extortion
by the police and society at large. Those deportees without family connections are doomed to homelessness
or other precarious living situations. Female deportees are particularly vulnerable to sexual assault if they
have no family or community support.
Back in the United States, many families plunge into financial and emotional decline once a loved one
is deported. These families must carry on without a primary breadwinner, while also providing financial
support for the deported family member in Haiti. Children whose parents have been deported are often
left flailing. I once attended the funeral of a young man who had started acting erratically after his father
was deported. He was once asked why his behavior had changed so much and he said that he, a U.S. citizen,
missed his father so much that he wanted to be deported too.
As this report explains, the United States is not taking into consideration the continuing humanitarian,
and increasingly political, crisis in Haiti, as ICE continues to deport more and more people to Haiti. The
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, guided by international human rights law, demands that
countries respect an individual's “right to life, physical, and mental integrity,” as well as their right to a
establish and maintain a family. The deportations outlined in this report are not following even these most
basic standards. This must change. And it must stop. Please read on to find out why and how.

SOURCES
1.	 Impounded Fathers, Edwidge Danticat—http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/17/opinion/17danticat.html.
2. 	 The Obama Administration’s Two Millions Deportations Explained, Mother Jones, http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/
obama-administration-record-deportations.
i

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

Acknowledgements
The introduction, background and factual findings of this report were authored by University of Miami School
of Law Human Rights Clinic and Immigration Clinic students Lauren Geraghty, Geoffrey Louden, and Stephanie
Rosendorf, under the supervision of Professor Kelleen Corrigan, Professor Romy Lerner, and Professor Rebecca
Sharpless.
The section on international human rights law was authored by University of Chicago Law School International
Human Rights Clinic student Yuan Yuan, with feedback from student Matthew Marthaler, and under the supervision
of Professor Caroline Bettinger-Lopez and Professor Brian Citro. All authors wrote the executive summary and
recommendations.
This report was written in collaboration with Michelle Karshan of Alternative Chance/Chans Altenativ, Cheryl
Little of Americans for Immigrant Justice, Marleine Bastien of FANM, and Brian Concannon of the IJDH.
This report incorporates the research and writing of numerous former clinical students from the University of
Miami School of Law and builds upon briefs and reports submitted to the Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights and the United Nations: Miami Law Human Rights Clinic—Drew Aiken, Averil Andrews, Lea Dartevelle, Farrah
Elchahal, Kenosha Ferrell, Margaret Jordan, Jennifer Jurney, Erin Lewis, Ashley Matthews, Liam McGivern, Rachel
Oostendorp, Justin Ortiz, Miya Patel, Shelley Pessa, Miraisy Rodriguez, Jessica Sblendorio, Monika Siwiec, James
Slater, Michael Stevenson, and Beatriz Carta Wagman; Miami Law Immigration Clinic: Stephanie Almirola, Gueter
Aurelien, Eric Baum,Theresa Breslin, Lia Calabro, Saul Cardenas, Kathryn DeMarco, Morgan France-Ramirez, Natalie
Garrett, Niyala Harrison, Tiffany Hawks, Adam Hoock, Haley Kornfield, Francesse Lucius, Alanna McCoy, Thomas
Oglesby, Nathalie Remelus, Elizabeth Rieser-Murphy, Misato Sawada, Kathleen Schulman, Dana Turjman, Nneka Utti,
and Brittany Young. University of Chicago Law School student Lindsay Gus also assisted with research for the report.
The following individuals have previously partnered with the authors to document the issues discussed in this
report: Joseph Anderson, Farrin Anello, Susana Barciela, Jamil Dakwar, Nancy Francillon, Laila Hlass, Hiroko Kusuda,
Sarah Mehta, Sunita Patel, William Quigley, Judy Rabinovitz, Laura Raymond, Corina Salazar, Pam Spees, and
Christina Zampas.
Preliminary drafts of this report were circulated for comment to Farrin Anello, Sabi Ardalan, Virginia Benzan,
Holly Cooper, Meghan Heesch, Sital Kalantry, Ira Kurzban, Helena Olea, and Moria Paz, all of whom provided
valuable feedback.
The authors are appreciative of the officials from the White House, U.S Department of Homeland Security,
U.S. Department of State, and U.S. Embassy in Port-au-Prince who met with the authors and partners on several
occasions. The authors also thank officials from the Haitian government who met with the authors and partners during
their visits to Haiti.
The authors thank Le Groupe d’Appui aux Rapatriés et Réfugiés/Support Group for Returnees and Refugees
(GARR) for use of their offices while in Haiti.
The authors deeply appreciate the contributions of clinic paralegals Roseliris Dominguez and Danny Vargas,
without whose assistance this report would not have been possible. The authors also thank Dean Patricia White of the
University of Miami School of Law for her support of this project.
Finally, and most importantly, the authors wish to thank the many deportees and their families who generously
shared their stories of loss and hardship.
While the authors are grateful for the assistance of the individuals and organizations listed above, the authors and
collaborators are solely responsible for the findings, legal analysis, and recommendations in this report.

ii

Acronyms and Abbreviations
AILA		

American Immigration Lawyers Association

CAT		

Convention Against Torture

CDC		

Center for Disease Control and Prevention

DCPJ 		

Direction Centrale de la Police Judiciaire (Haitian Central Directorate of Judicial Police)

DHS		

U.S. Department of Homeland Security

DOS		

U.S. Department of State

ERO	 	

U.S. Enforcement and Removal Operations

FANM		

Fanm Ayisyen Nan Miyami (Haitian Women of Miami)

FRAKKA	

Fòs Refleksyon ak Aksyon sou Koze Kay (Force for Reflection and Action on Housing)

FOIA		

Freedom of Information Act

IACHR	

Inter-American Commission on Human Rights

ICCPR		

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

ICE		

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement

IDP		

Internally Displaced Person

IJDH		

Institute for Justice & Democracy in Haiti

IOM		

International Organization for Migration

LGBT		

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender

LPR		

Lawful Permanent Resident

MINUSTAH	 United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti
NGO		

Non-Governmental Organization

OHCHR	

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

ONM		

Office National de la Migration (Haitian Office of National Migration)

TPS		

Temporary Protected Status

UN		

United Nations

UNHCR	

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

USAID		

U.S. Agency for International Development

USCIS		

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services

iii

This report documents
the stories of the men
and women deported
from the United States
to post-earthquake Haiti
on account of a criminal
history.

Executive Summary
Haiti still reels from the devastating effects of the
January 12, 2010 earthquake that killed up to
300,000 people, rendered one in seven Haitians
homeless, and wreaked $9 billion in damage in a
country whose 2009 GDP was only $7 billion. At
least 85,000 people still live in internally displaced
person camps (IDP camps) and many have moved
back into shoddy structures that would not survive
another earthquake. The cholera epidemic that
struck Haiti in the wake of the earthquake has
been characterized by the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (CDC) as “the worst
cholera outbreak in recent history,” killing at least
8,721 people and sickening over 700,000 in all
parts of the country. Medicine, medical care, and
mental health care remain in scarce supply and
largely unavailable to individuals who are poor,
disenfranchised, or live in rural areas. Political
instability is widespread. The rebuilding of Haiti
proceeds at a glacial pace. Only a fraction of the
international aid that was designated to address
the humanitarian crisis and subsequent human
rights violations has been allocated and spent, and
an even smaller fraction of that aid has helped the
people for whom it was intended.
In light of this humanitarian crisis,
in
January 2010, the United States granted
Temporary Protected Status (TPS)—a temporary
immigration status—to qualifying Haitian
nationals living in the United States on the
date of the earthquake who lacked other lawful
status. TPS remains in effect today for qualifying
Haitian beneficiaries. People who have been
convicted of two misdemeanors or one felony
offense, however, fall outside the scope of
TPS protection and can be deported. Over the
past five years, the United States has forcibly
returned to Haiti approximately 1,500 men and
women who are categorically barred from TPS

protection on account of their criminal histories.
Most of these individuals have significant family
ties in the United States and many suffer from
serious physical and mental health conditions
and illnesses. U.S. Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) has carried out these
deportations despite the U.S. Department of
State’s admonitions against U.S. citizen travel to
Haiti in light of the country’s instability and weak
medical facilities, and despite ICE’s knowledge of
the acute dangers facing Haitian nationals who are
deported from the United States. The result has
been utterly devastating for deportees in Haiti and
the families they leave behind in the United States.

People who have
been convicted of two
misdemeanors or one felony
offense fall outside the scope
of TPS protection and can be
deported.
This report documents the stories of the
men and women deported from the United
States to post-earthquake Haiti on account of a
criminal history. Through extensive fieldwork and
research, this report details the experiences of
deportees—some of whom refer to themselves
as “strangers in a strange land”—and their
U.S.-based family members. The report argues
that the United States violates the fundamental
human rights of Haitian nationals and their family
members when it deports them to Haiti without
due consideration of the deportees’ individual
circumstances and the humanitarian crisis in
Haiti. It concludes by making recommendations
to the United States, Haiti, and the international
community.
v

JANUARY 2010: HAITI FALLS AND THE
UNITED STATES RESPONDS
In January 2010, in recognition of the sheer
ruin that had befallen Haiti and in accordance
with its international human rights obligations,
the United States immediately halted all
deportations to Haiti. This action was taken to
avoid adding to the burden of a country in crisis
and to avoid placing deportees in life-threatening
circumstances. Other countries, including Canada,
France, and Mexico, also stopped all forced
returns to Haiti on humanitarian grounds.
In the fall of 2010, despite news of the
devastating cholera outbreak, ICE authorities
began quietly rounding up and detaining Haitian
nationals with final orders of deportation who did
not qualify for TPS because they had been convicted
of two misdemeanors or one felony. Many of these
individuals were living with their families and
leading productive lives. ICE authorities shipped
hundreds of men and women to remote county jails
and private prisons in Louisiana, in close proximity
to an airport where private deportation flights
contracted by the U.S. government leave for Haiti.

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

The United States forcibly
deported 27 men to Haiti on
January 20, 2011. Upon their
arrival, all were jailed. Wildrick
Guerrier fell ill and died ten
days later of cholera-like
symptoms.
Advocates and community groups raised
concerns for the deportees’ well-being in light of
the October 2010 cholera outbreak and Haiti’s
longstanding practice of jailing deportees with
criminal histories in life-threatening conditions.
Brushing aside safety concerns, the United States
forcibly deported 27 men to Haiti on January 20,
2011. Upon their arrival, all were detained in
cramped jail cells and exposed to feces, blood, and
vomit. Wildrick Guerrier, a healthy 34-year old
man, fell ill and died ten days later of cholera-like
vi

Wildrick Guerrier 1976 – 2011

Wildrick Guerrier died after a week in
Haitian jail after being deported.

symptoms. In response, the United States halted
deportations for about two months. In April 2011,
the United States resumed deportations. These
deportations continue today, with flights leaving
from Louisiana every month.
Many of the men and women deported to
Haiti are lawful permanent residents (LPRs) who
lived in the United States for many years, if not
most of their lives. In fact, some were born in
another country and had never set foot in Haiti
prior to their deportations, but were deported to
Haiti because their parents are Haitian nationals.
Most deportees have family members in the
United States, including U.S. citizen children
and other loved ones. A substantial number have
terminal diseases, chronic mental and physical
conditions, and permanent disabilities. Many were
deported for only minor or nonviolent criminal
offenses, and have stories similar to that of Conrad,
a mentally ill man who was deported on account
of two misdemeanors: failing to return a rental
car on time and giving false information to a law
enforcement official.

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

n THE UNJUST DEPORTATION OF CONRAD
Conrad is a 59-year-old Haitian man who was deported
by U.S. authorities in 2011 after having resided legally in
the United States for more than 25 years.1 Nearly his entire
family lives in the United States, including his U.S. citizen
mother, siblings, and children.
Since his deportation to Haiti, Conrad has been
confined in a private mental health institution he refers to as
“death row” because he is forced
to live in lockdown without
access to needed medications and care. His family in the
United States pays for him to
live at the institution because
they fear he will be harmed in the outside world. Conrad’s
brother, David, is afraid that if Conrad walked around freely
in Haiti, “he would be robbed, beaten, kidnapped, or killed”
because of his mental illness.

should have balanced Conrad’s serious mental and physical
illnesses, strong family ties to the United States, and positive
contributions as a community member against his relatively
minor criminal history.Yet despite his many equities, in July
2011, ICE deported Conrad to Haiti.
Since his deportation to Haiti, Conrad’s mental
and
physical health has deteriorated. In addition to his mental
illness, Conrad also has a number of physical ailments,
including high blood pressure, stomach problems,
hypoglycemia, and prostate issues. He has lost weight,
experiences hallucinations and paranoia, and is not receiving
sufficient medical or mental health care at the institution.
His family also fears that the food at the facility, which
Conrad describes as “dog food,” is affecting his health
because it is too salty and lacks nutrition. When family
members visit Conrad to bring him extra food, he is often
in tears.
Conrad’s family also fears for his physical safety, even
at
the facility. On at least one occasion, another patient
attacked Conrad, beating him on his head and ears, causing
him difficulty hearing in one ear.
Conrad regularly begs his family to secure his return
to
the United States, where he can be surrounded by loved
ones and receive proper care for his physical and mental
health conditions. The family dreads that Conrad will
suffer further harm in the facility: “Who knows,” said his
siblings, “They might just go find him dead at the facility.”
But Conrad’s family knows that the inevitable alternatives
in Haiti— suffering at an even more horrific public mental
health facility or facing attacks on the streets due to the
stigma against both deportees and the mentally ill—are
even more grave. n
The mother of Conrad holds a photograph of her son with other family members.
| Photo by Bess Adler

Deportee Conrad is now confined to a mental health institution.
| Photo by Bess Adler

Conrad first came to the United States in the mid-80s
and became an LPR. During more than two decades in the
United States, Conrad studied, worked as a pastor, and
devoted himself to the church and his ministry.
However, in the late 1980s, Conrad began to suffer
from the effects of serious mental illness, including
schizophrenia. He was later convicted of a few minor
nonviolent crimes. Subsequently, Conrad was detained and
ordered deported, despite his mental illness and lack of
access to a lawyer or his family members. Records show that
ICE was aware that Conrad suffered from mental illness.
ICE’s own policies required that immigration authorities

n DEPORTED DESPITE
INTERNATIONAL
PROTECTION

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

Billy received "precautionary
measures" from the IACHR but
the United States nevertheless
deported him in November
2011.2 Billy, who now lives in
Port-au-Prince, has no kneecap
and the bones in his leg painfully
rub together. Billy had numerous
surgeries on his leg and knee
and was awaiting an implant
when ICE officials deported him
to Haiti. He cannot afford any
medical treatment in Haiti. Billy
has five children in the United
States, whom he was previously
supporting through disability
benefits. They are currently being
supported by Billy’s mother, who
is struggling financially. n

viii

the beneficiaries, the IACHR issued “precautionary
measures” to protect 62 men and women from
forcible return to Haiti by the United States.
Ignoring many of these precautionary measures,
the United States deported at least 19 of the
protected men and women to Haiti.
In 2012, the UN Independent Expert on the
Situation of Human Rights in Haiti, Michel Forst,
advised that countries “should refrain from any and
all forced returns to Haiti” because “individuals
returned to Haiti are vulnerable to human rights
violations, especially the fundamental rights to life,
health, and family.”
On March 14, 2014, Walter Kälin, a member
of the United Nations Human Rights Committee,
expressed serious concern to a U.S. government
delegation in Geneva about the United States’
decision to deport people with medical conditions
to post-earthquake Haiti.
The United States has failed to heed these
myriad calls for a fundamental shift in its Haiti
deportation policy.

INTERNATIONAL CONDEMNATION OF
POST-EARTHQUAKE DEPORTATIONS
TO HAITI

U.S. RESPONSE: ICE’S APRIL 1, 2011
POLICY AND THE USAID
REINTEGRATION PROGRAM

The international community has exhorted
the United States and other countries to halt
deportations to Haiti during the post-earthquake
humanitarian crisis. In 2010 and 2011, the United
Nations Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights (OHCHR) and the United Nations
High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)
issued joint statements calling on countries to
suspend all forced returns to Haiti. The most
recent statement has not been retracted or
replaced.
Starting in 2011, the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights (IACHR)—the
regional human rights body for the Americas—
found that deportations to Haiti constituted urgent
and irreparable harm to numerous deportees.
Citing compelling health and family concerns of

When the United States resumed deportations
to Haiti after Wildrick Guerrier’s death, it did
so under a policy announced on April 1, 2011
that promised that deportations to Haiti would
be “as safe, humane, and minimally disruptive”
as possible. The policy provided that ICE would
balance Haitian nationals’ criminal records against
“equities” such as “duration of residence in the
United States, family ties, or significant medical
issues” prior to removal. Where “compelling
medical, humanitarian, or other relevant factors”
weigh against removal, ICE pledged to exercise its
discretion to halt an individual’s deportation.
Decisions made under the April 1 Policy
are entirely at ICE’s discretion and lack notice,
transparency, or judicial review. As documented
in this report, the U.S. government’s ongoing

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

Marcus, who was deported in August 2013, sleeps on sheets on the ground and burns paper at night to try and keep the mosquitoes at bay.
| Photo by Bess Adler

deportation of Haitian nationals with serious
physical and mental health problems, strong
family ties to the United States, and other equities
demonstrates that ICE is not abiding by the April
1 Policy. The policy thus does not accomplish its
stated goals.
The April 1 Policy justifies deportations to
Haiti, in part, on the existence of a U.S.-funded
“reintegration strategy that encompasses a range
of services for returned Haitians to smooth
their transition into Haitian society, including
healthcare assistance and skills training to enhance
employment prospects.” A reintegration program
was funded by the U.S. Agency for International
Development (USAID), administered by the
International Organization for Migration (IOM),
and then channeled through the Haitian Office of
National Migration (ONM) and other Haitian nongovernmental organization (NGO) partners.

Starting in 2012, the United States began
to reduce funding and logistical support for the
deportee reintegration program. As of April 2014,
U.S. funding for the reintegration program stopped
completely, even though ICE continues to use the
program to justify its claims that deportations to
Haiti will be conducted safely and humanely.
Even when it was fully implemented, the
reintegration program failed to live up to its stated
goals. Critically ill deportees failed to receive
adequate health care and medication. Individuals
with serious mental disabilities were locked
up in jail-like public mental health institutions.
Numerous deportees who participated in trainings
and submitted "livelihood plans" received no
materials or equipment. Some were given
materials they were unable to use. Others could
not reach the implementing partners to follow up.
Despite the end of the reintegration program
Executive Summary

ix

and the continued devastating conditions in Haiti,
the United States continues to deport people
to Haiti on a monthly basis. The lack of a fully
functioning, sufficiently funded, accountable, and
transparent reintegration program in Haiti to
meet the basic life needs of deportees places these
vulnerable individuals at even greater risk.

DEPORTEES AS HAITI’S SCAPEGOATS
Deportees from the United States with
criminal histories are scapegoats in Haiti.
Deportees experience a wide range of threats
to their lives and well-being, including physical
violence, arbitrary detention, stigmatization,
malnourishment, unemployment, insufficient
access to identification documents, unstable and
unsafe housing, and the inability to access medical
and mental health care and medicine. Although
Haitian authorities have ceased the routine jailing of
arriving deportees, Haitian officials acknowledge
that they have and will continue to detain some
deportees. Haitian authorities and the public
unfairly characterize deportees as dangerous
individuals who perpetrate violence in the country.
Haitian police attack, mistreat, and wrongfully
arrest deportees and refuse to assist deportees
when they are the victims of crime.

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

HOUSING INSECURITY AND
UNEMPLOYMENT
The severe stigmatization and financial
hardship that deportees face prevent them
from finding adequate or stable housing and
employment. Housing in Haiti is scarce and many
deportees lack the family networks needed to
find a safe place to live. Many deportees must
rely upon the generosity of family or friends
for temporary housing solutions, which often
include moving from place to place, or staying
in dangerous and impoverished neighborhoods.
Many deportees become itinerant or homeless.
x

Moreover, finding gainful employment is out of
reach for many deportees. In a country with a
high general unemployment rate, deportees face
additional challenges due to discrimination, lack
of contacts, and language and cultural barriers.
Many deportees do not speak fluent Creole or
speak Creole with an accent that is recognizably
“American.” For deportees with physical or mental
health conditions, disabilities, women without
immediate family, or individuals who identify as
lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender (LGBT), the
risks are even more acute.

HEALTH VULNERABILITIES
Even before the earthquake, Haiti lacked
the infrastructure to provide adequate medical
care to its people. The earthquake damaged
and overwhelmed Haiti’s already-fragile health
system. It left the country particularly illequipped to provide earthquake-related trauma
and disability services and to address a persistent

Some mentally ill deportees
are held against their will
in inhumane conditions in
mental institutions, where
they are forcibly injected with
psychotropic drugs.
cholera epidemic. Today, almost half of Haiti’s
population lacks access to even basic health care.
Medical care for many chronic or significant
illnesses and for mental health issues is practically
nonexistent. Medication is often unavailable and
is too costly for most of Haiti’s population. While
the number of cholera infections has surged
in recent months, the number of treatment
centers is dwindling. Deportees are uniquely
vulnerable to the lack of available health services
in Haiti. Many lack family ties or other social
support in Haiti and are often unaware of what
limited health services exist. Because deportees

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

are largely unemployed, few are able to afford
medical care or medication. Deportees with
mental health conditions and physical disabilities
face stigmatization and extreme health risks.
Some mentally ill deportees are held against
their will in inhumane conditions in mental
institutions, where they are forcibly injected with
psychotropic drugs.

area outside of Port-au-Prince. This precarious
situation places them at high risk of sexual assault
and homelessness.

AT HEIGHTENED RISK:
WOMEN & LGBT DEPORTEES

LGBT deportees also encounter extreme
violence and hardship—including harassment,
beatings, murders, and other forms of
violence—upon return to Haiti. LGBT
individuals often refrain from reporting abuses,
fearing that the perpetrators will retaliate
and the police will either fail to respond
or will attack the victim. During the UN
Human Rights Committee’s 2014 review of
Haiti’s human rights record, the Committee
expressed concern about violence against LGBT
individuals.
Anti-gay sentiment has grown in the years
since the earthquake. Some anti-gay organizations
and religious leaders blamed LGBT individuals
for the earthquake, on the grounds that “immoral
acts” had invoked the wrath of God. In the years
following the earthquake, these groups have
been responsible for multiple violent attacks on
LGBT individuals and for arson against LGBT
organizations' offices. In the summer of 2013
alone, a mob committed 47 attacks on LGBT
individuals with weapons such as knives, machetes,
and cement blocks.
LGBT deportees are particularly vulnerable
to harm because many lack family ties and preestablished support networks in Haiti. Many end
up homeless or living in poorer neighborhoods,
where rates of crime and violence are high. LGBT
deportees may also be more exposed to attacks
from the community and the police because of
their perceived Americanized mannerisms. This is
particularly true of women who are perceived as
masculine or androgynous and men who appear
effeminate.

Women and LGBT deportees from the
United States are marginalized and thus face
particular risk due to alarming rates of genderbased violence in Haitian society. From 2010 to
2012, approximately 70% of Haitian women and
girls experienced some form of gender-based
violence.
The police and neighborhood
men threatened to rape deportee
Stephanie, a lesbian.

One aid organization for rape survivors in
Port-au-Prince reported in 2012 that it was
receiving five reports of rape a day. NGOs have
widely documented lax police attitudes toward
sexual violence, and the UN Human Rights
Committee recently raised concerns about weak
legal protections for women victims.
An employee of a temporary shelter
for deportees in the outskirts of
Port-au-Prince assaulted deportee
Francine, the only female deportee in
the shelter.

Female deportees are at heightened risk on
account of both their gender and deportee status.
Recently-arrived female deportees without
family in Haiti are especially vulnerable, and
often are placed in an informal, governmentrun temporary shelter located in a remote

Merlene, a homeless, mentally ill
deportee, reportedly resorted to
survival sex, a form of transactional
sex performed in exchange for
economic resources or protection.

Executive Summary

xi

THE DEVASTATING IMPACT OF
FAMILY SEPARATION

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

Deportations to Haiti take a tremendous toll on
both deportees and the family members—especially
U.S. citizen children—whom they leave behind.
Deportees and their U.S.-based families experience
severe psychological and financial effects due to
family separation. Family members in the United
States suffer not only from the distance and sense of
loss, but also from the worry and fear for their loved
one’s safety. The financial impact is equally grave.
In many cases, deportees’ families not only lose the
primary breadwinner, but must also send money to
their family members in Haiti to help them survive.
Even those families with money to travel to Haiti
have little means of minimizing the family separation
because current conditions often do not permit safe
visits.
For children affected by deportations,
the psychological, behavioral, and emotional
consequences can be particularly severe. In one
study documenting the effects of family separation
due to deportations, children from Haitian
families reported the highest level of psychological
symptoms, particularly depression, as compared
to children of Chinese, Dominican, Mexican and
Central American families.
Jimmy’s young son, a U.S. citizen,
developed anger issues and
behavioral problems after his father
was deported to Haiti. The child’s
mother reported that her son had
developed a defiant attitude towards
authority, saying things like, “You are
not my dad.” The child became so
emotionally disturbed that he was
institutionalized three times under
Florida’s involuntary civil commitment
statute and had to be medicated.
The family began collecting public
assistance in 2011 because of the
absence of Jimmy, the primary
breadwinner.
xii

Sandy, age 13, holds a picture of her mother, Sonia,
who was deported in 2012. | Photo by Bess Adler

DEPORTATIONS TO
POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI
VIOLATE INTERNATIONAL
HUMAN RIGHTS LAW
The United States violates international
human rights law when it deports men and
women to post-earthquake Haiti without
due consideration of 1) the humanitarian
and human rights crisis in Haiti, and 2) the
individual circumstances of the deportees and
their families. International human rights law
provides robust protections for individuals at
risk of deportation, including limitations on the
ability of host countries to deport individuals
based on a criminal history or unlawful presence.
International human rights law increasingly

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

requires decision-makers to balance adverse
factors, such as the severity and number of
criminal convictions, against equities of the
non-national, such as duration of residence in
the host country, family ties in the host and
home countries, significant medical issues, and
conditions in the home country.3
In particular, the deportation of Haitian
nationals to post-earthquake Haiti violates the
rights to family and private life by separating
deportees from their families, including their
minor children, in the United States. The process
of deportation also fails to provide deportees’
children with special protections or take the best
interests of children into account, in violation
of international human rights law. In addition,
the United States must respect Haitian nationals’
rights to life, security, integrity, and health during
the deportation process. The United States is
responsible for violations of these rights due to
its knowledge of the specific vulnerabilities and
hardships deportees face in Haiti, including a
woefully inadequate health system, deportees’
lack of family or social ties, and the violence,
discrimination, and stigmatization deportees as
a class face in Haiti. Finally, due process norms
under international law afford Haitian nationals
the right to have deportation determinations
adjudicated by a neutral decision maker who
applies an individualized balancing test on a caseby-case basis. Due process also includes the right
to judicial review of the initial decision to be
deported. Deficiencies in U.S. immigration law
and in the April 1 Policy constitute a failure on the
part of the United States to guarantee the right
to due process during the deportation of Haitian
nationals. n

Executive Summary

xiii

Recommendations

Key Recommendations
for the United States
The United States should fully adhere to its international and domestic legal obligations by taking the
following measures.
To protect Haitian nationals from being returned to a situation where they face severe human rights
violations, the United States should:
§§ Halt Deportations to Haiti. The United States should refrain from deporting any individual
to Haiti, unless and until the current humanitarian crisis in Haiti significantly improves such that
deportees from the United States can survive and lead safe and dignified lives in Haiti.
§§ Extend Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to All Haitian Nationals. The United States
should extend TPS to all Haitian nationals currently living in the United States, regardless of criminal
history and regardless of their date of arrival in the United States, for the post-earthquake duration of
the humanitarian crisis in Haiti.

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

If and when conditions in Haiti improve to such a degree that some deportations might be justified, the
United States should:
§§ Adopt a Humanitarian Balancing Test. The United States should balance, on a case-by-case
basis, equitable factors against the nature and severity of the criminal activity. This balancing test
should apply to people regardless of immigration status or criminal record and include analysis
of family and community ties, the length of time in the United States, medical and mental health
needs, and conditions in Haiti.
§§ Adhere to Due Process and Fair Trial Principles. The United States should ensure that
the humanitarian balancing test is carried out by an immigration judge and incorporates all fair
trial and due process principles, including adequate notice, ability to present evidence, and the
opportunity for appeal. These legal proceedings should not be purely discretionary or conducted by
an immigration enforcement officer, as provided by the current April 1 Policy.
§§ Provide Special Protection for Children and Ensure Their Best Interests are Given
Primary Consideration. The United States should provide children with special protection
during deportation proceedings and ensure their best interests are taken into account during each
stage of the process.
§§ Ensure the Existence of a Robust, Fully-Functioning, Sufficiently-Funded,
Accountable, and Transparent Reintegration Program in Haiti. The reintegration
program must be tailored to the individual circumstances of each deportee.
§§ Encourage the Government of Haiti to Officially and Publicly Issue a No-Detention
Policy. The United States should encourage Haiti to adopt a no-detention policy stating that
Haitian authorities shall not detain deportees from the United States except in accordance with
Haitian law, which requires probable cause that the deportee has committed a crime in Haiti and
requires that detainees be brought before a judge within 48 hours.
A full list of recommendations, including recommendations directed at the Government of Haiti and the international
community, is included at the end of this report.4
xiv

Methodology
This report is the culmination of four years
of research by the authors—in collaboration
with numerous partners—since late 2010, when
the authors learned that the United States was
planning to resume deportations to Haiti after the
January 12, 2010 earthquake.
Professors and students from the University
of Miami School of Law Human Rights Clinic
and Immigration Clinic, as well as representatives
from FANM and Alternative Chance, traveled to
Haiti to conduct interviews on four occasions:
February 2011, February 2012, December 2013,
and October 2014. Professors and students
from the Immigration Clinic and Human Rights
Clinic and an attorney from AI Justice also
conducted interviews in February 2011 at three
detention centers in Louisiana where Haitian
men and women are held immediately before
being deported. Professors and students from the
Human Rights Clinic and Immigration Clinic also
interviewed Haitian men and women detained by
U.S. immigration authorities in several locations in
South Florida.
This report is based on interviews and
correspondence with numerous people in
the United States and Haiti, both in person,
on the telephone, and via email or other
correspondence. These include Haitian nationals
detained in the United States; people who have
been deported to Haiti; family members of
detained and deported Haitians; Haitian and
U.S. government officials; advocates, lawyers
and other members of civil society; members of
United Nations (UN) agencies and international
NGOs; and physicians and other technical
professionals.

INTERVIEWS WITH AFFECTED PERSONS
All people whose stories are reflected in this
report agreed to be interviewed or otherwise
participate in this research. Interviews were
conducted in private. Most interviews were
conducted in English. A few interviews were
conducted with the aid of a Haitian Creole or
French interpreter. When an NGO partner,
interpreter, or other individual was present in an
interview, their presence was explained to the
interviewee and consent was received prior to the
interview. The researchers provided no incentives
to interviewees, but did provide transportation
reimbursement and an inexpensive meal for
deportees who needed to travel to the interview
site in Port-au-Prince, Haiti.
DEPORTEES IN HAITI

The authors and their partners interviewed
more than one hundred individuals who have
been forcibly returned to Haiti. The vast majority
of these individuals were deported from the
United States to Haiti after the 2010 earthquake.
The authors also conducted a limited number of
interviews with individuals deported to Haiti prior
to the 2010 earthquake and individuals deported
by other countries to Haiti. Interviewees included
men and women; people of Haitian descent born
in Haiti, Bahamas, Cuba, the Democratic Republic
of the Congo, and the Dominican Republic; and
people of varying ages, physical and mental health
statuses, and sexual orientations. All interviewees
had a U.S. criminal history, which ranged from
minor to more severe.
Most of the interviews in Haiti were
conducted in Port-au-Prince at the offices of a
local NGO where confidentiality was assured. The
authors also visited other facilities in and around
xv

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

University of Miami Clinic student Lauren Geraghty talks with a deportee in Port-au-Prince. | Photo by Kelleen Corrigan

xvi

Port-au-Prince, where they spoke with deportees.
The locations of interviews included hotel
conference rooms, the temporary homeless shelter
run by Haiti’s Office of National Migration, mental
health facilities, as well as the airport tarmac
during processing after a deportation flight in
December 2013. The authors also spoke to some
deportees over the telephone.

Facility in Jena, Louisiana; and South Louisiana
Correctional Center in Basile, Louisiana. Some
of the interviewees were eventually deported,
while others were not. Those who were not
deported were permitted by U.S. immigration
authorities to remain in the United States under
the discretionary April 1, 2011 policy, described in
this report.

HAITIANS DETAINED IN THE UNITED STATES AND
FACING DEPORTATION

FAMILY MEMBERS OF HAITIAN DETAINEES AND
DEPORTEES

The authors and their partners also
interviewed over 250 Haitians detained in the
United States who were or are facing deportation.
These interviews took place at the following
detention facilities: Glades County Detention
Center, in Moore Haven, Florida; Krome
Service Processing Center in Miami, Florida;
Monroe County Detention Center in Key
West, Florida; Tensas Parish Detention Center
in Waterproof, Louisiana; Lasalle Detention

The authors and their partners also conducted
interviews with family members of Haitians
who were detained and awaiting deportation
or who had already been deported. The people
interviewed included mothers, fathers, husbands,
wives, fiancées, children, and other close family
and friends. All interviews with children under
age 18 were carried out with the approval of their
parents.
A few interviewees and family members

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

asked that their names be published in this report.
Others requested the use of a pseudonym. Where
there is any concern about the safety or security
of an individual, a pseudonym is used and some
identifying information is withheld.

INTERVIEWS WITH
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS
UNITED STATES OFFICIALS

The authors and collaborators have had formal
and informal discussions with numerous officials
from the United States government since 2010.
These include officials from the White House, the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the
U.S. Department of State (DOS), The U.S. Agency
for International Development (USAID), and the
U.S. Embassy in Haiti. These interviews took place
in both the United States and in Haiti, in person
and by telephone. In addition, some of the authors
spoke with U.S. government officials in Geneva,
Switzerland in March 2014 and November 2014
in the context of reviews of the United States by
the United Nations Human Rights Committee and
Committee Against Torture, respectively.
One meeting with officials from the White
House and DHS took place on January 28, 2011 in
Washington, DC and focused on the Department’s
decision to resume deportations and the risks
facing the deportees. Another meeting with
DHS officials occurred on January 29, 2014 in
Washington, DC. This meeting focused on the
April 1, 2011 policy, including the procedures
utilized by ICE to determine which individuals
would be deported each month.
Additional information on U.S. government
policies was gathered through a Freedom of
Information Act (FOIA) request made by
Americans for Immigrant Justice.
The authors met with U.S. government
officials as part of ongoing litigation brought by
the authors and partners before the IACHR. None
of the information contained in this report comes
from these confidential meetings.

HAITIAN OFFICIALS

The authors met with numerous Haitian
officials while in Haiti, including officials from the
Office of Citizen Protection (Florence Elie and JeanClaude Prevost ), the National Migration Office,
the Central Directorate of Judicial Police (DCPJ),
and Dr. Louis Marc Jeanny Girard, MSPP (Medical
Director, Mars and Kline Psychiatric Center).
In October 2014, the authors met with the
former Haitian Minister of Justice, Renal Sanon, as
well as an official from the Office of Public Security.
The authors sent letters requesting meetings with
the Minister of Public Health and the Minister of the
Interior but did not receive replies to these requests.

INTERVIEWS WITH OTHER
STAKEHOLDERS
The authors also interviewed dozens of third
parties with relevant expertise or experience
concerning deportees in Haiti. Among the
interviewees were representatives from
international NGOs and UN agencies, including the
International Organization on Migration (IOM),
UNHCR, the UN Independent Expert on Haiti,
Partners in Health, and others. The authors also
consulted with medical experts in the United States
and Haiti, including Dr. Arthur Fournier from
University of Miami Miller School of Medicine's
Project Medishare, Dr. John May from Health
Through Walls, and Dr. Patrick Joseph from Les
Centres GHESKIO, as well as experts in the field
of psychology who have conducted research and
other work in Haiti, including Dr. Jessy Devieux
(Florida International University), Dr. Marjory
Clermont Mathieu (Haiti State University), and
Dr. Marie Guerda Nicolas (University of Miami).
Finally, the authors conferred with local advocacy
organizations in Haiti and the United States,
including Ellie Happel (NYU Global Justice Clinic,
based in Haiti), Jackson Doliscar (Field Educator/
Activist with Fòs Refleksyon ak Aksyon sou Koze
Kay (FRAKKA)), Meena Jagannath (Florida Legal
Services Community Justice Project), and others. n
METHODOLOGY

xvii

CHAPTER 1

Introduction & Background
THE EARTHQUAKE
On January 12, 2010 the earth moved,
and Haiti fell. Originating from a previously
unknown fault line, the earthquake’s epicenter
was located only 16 miles from the capital, Portau-Prince.5 As one survivor recounted, “I saw a
lot of people crying for help, a lot of buildings
collapsed…[there were] a lot of people without
help, people bleeding. I saw a movie theatre, a
supermarket, a cybercafe, an apartment building,
which collapsed…[P]eople were falling in the
streets.”6 Registering at a magnitude of 7.0 on
the Richter scale and lasting for 35 seconds,
the earthquake damaged or destroyed 13 of the
country’s 15 ministerial buildings, 60% of the
country’s hospitals, and 4,200 schools.7 The
onslaught of over 50 aftershocks that day wrought
further destruction on the already weakened
country.8 The earthquake compromised Haiti’s
basic infrastructure, including roads, electricity,
water, and communications.9 As many as 300,000
people may have perished.10 Of those who died,
1,200 were teachers, over 500 were health
care professionals, and one in three were civil
servants.11 One in seven Haitians became homeless
as a result of the earthquake.12 Earthquakerelated damages totaled $9 billion U.S. dollars.
In comparison, Haiti’s 2009 GDP was only $7
billion.13
On January 13, 2010, the day after the
earthquake, the Secretary of DHS and the
Assistant Secretary for ICE announced a halt
of all deportations to Haiti in response to the
earthquake.14 Other countries, including Canada,
France, and Mexico, also stopped all forced
returns to Haiti on humanitarian grounds.15
A short time later, the DHS Secretary
authorized TPS for certain Haitian nationals who

were in the United States as of January 12, 2010.16
U.S. law authorizes the DHS Secretary to designate
TPS status to foreign nationals from countries that
are experiencing armed conflict, environmental
disasters, or that are “unable, temporarily, to handle
adequately the return to the state of aliens who are
nationals of the state.”17 After Haiti’s addition to the
list of TPS countries, eligible Haitian nationals could
apply to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services
(USCIS) for TPS. However, Haitian nationals
convicted of at least two misdemeanors or one
felony offense in the United States were statutorily
ineligible for TPS status.18 The grant of TPS to
Haitian nationals present in the United States at the
time of the earthquake initially ran through July 22,
2012.19 It was later extended to include those in the
United States as of January 12, 2011, and continues
to be in place today.
In addition to the earthquake devastation,
Haiti has suffered an outbreak of cholera that, as of
2014, has killed 8,721 Haitian people and infected
over 700,000.20 The Haiti National Public Health
Laboratory confirmed the first case of cholera on
October 22, 2010, with hospitalizations beginning
on October 17, 2010.21 The Centers for Disease
Control and others found that the outbreak
stemmed from poor sanitation conditions at the
UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH)
troops’ camp, which resulted in the inadvertent
introduction of cholera into the Méyè tributary,
the Artibonite River, and ultimately, other water
sources throughout the country.22
The cholera outbreak continues to the present
day. Populations most vulnerable to contracting
cholera include those living in areas without clean
water and functioning sanitation systems, like
slums or camps for internally displaced persons.23
Children and the elderly are also particularly
vulnerable.24
1

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

n U.S. DEPORTATION LAW: A BRIEF OVERVIEW

2

Over the last 20 years, the United States has increasingly rolled back the
ability of noncitizens who have been convicted of crimes to successfully defend
themselves against deportation (or “removal”). Under current U.S. immigration
law, even long-term lawful permanent residents (LPRs) with U.S. citizen spouses
and children can be deported for certain crimes, including misdemeanors.25
Congress has amended U.S. law multiple times to expand the criminal grounds of
deportation and eliminate defenses that were historically available.26 As the U.S.
Supreme Court has observed, the “dramatic” 1996 reform in U.S. immigration
law has rendered deportation “practically inevitable” for anyone convicted of an
offense which falls within a removal ground.27
A brief consideration of common forms of immigration relief available in
immigration court proceedings illustrates how so few people with criminal
records, including Haitian nationals, are able to successfully halt their
deportations.
Cancellation of removal for certain permanent residents (LPR
cancellation) is a defense to deportation for LPRs facing deportation
on account of criminal convictions and other deportable acts.28 It is not
available to LPRs who have certain convictions29 or who
fail to meet stringent
continuous residence requirements.30 The crimes that bar LPR cancellation are
called “aggravated felonies,” even though
this category includes relatively minor
offenses.31 Immigration judges lack discretion to grant cancellation of removal
to those who do not meet these requirements, no matter how compelling their
life circumstances.32
Cancellation of removal for non-permanent residents (non-LPR
cancellation) is a defense to deportation for non-LPRs, including people
without immigration status.33 Non-LPRs are only eligible if they meet a strict
“good moral character” requirement,34 have been present in the United States
continuously for ten years,35 and can establish “exceptional and extremely
unusual hardship” to immediate LPR or U.S. citizen family members if they
were to be removed.36 Grants are capped at 4,000
per year.37 As with LPR
cancellation, a judge may not grant this relief unless the individual strictly
meets all of the requirements.
Asylum, withholding of removal, and relief under the
Convention Against Torture (CAT) are defenses to deportation for people
who fear torture or other forms of persecution in their home countries.38
Individuals with criminal records are often statutorily ineligible for asylum and
withholding of removal.39 Moreover, U.S. courts have narrowly interpreted
persecution in ways that exclude
many individuals from protection.40 With
few exceptions, an individual must file for asylum within one year of arriving
in the United States.41 An individual may apply for withholding of removal if
he or she is filing outside the one-year deadline, but the standard of proof for
withholding cases is higher than for asylum.42 While there is no criminal bar to
deferral of removal under CAT, the Board of Immigration Appeals and some
U.S. courts have held that even life-threatening conditions faced by deportees
in Haiti do not qualify as torture, unless there is a showing that Haitian
authorities, or those acting with their acquiescence, purposefully inflict “severe
pain or suffering.”43 The narrow judicial interpretation of CAT makes this form
of relief largely unavailable to individuals facing deportation to Haiti.44 n

The rebuilding of Haiti proceeds at a glacial
pace.45 Only a fraction of the international aid that
was designated to address the humanitarian crisis
has been allocated and spent, and only an even
smaller portion of that aid has helped the people
for whom it was intended.46 Political instability
further thwarts rebuilding efforts.47

U.S. POST-EARTHQUAKE
DEPORTATION POLICIES AND
PRACTICES
THE RUSH TO RESUME REMOVALS

Despite the extension of TPS to Haiti after
the earthquake, internal DHS records indicate
that U.S. officials were actively discussing the
resumption of deportations of Haitians with
criminal convictions, despite knowledge that
Haiti’s infrastructure had been destroyed. On
February 18, 2010, the then Senior Counsel to
ICE sent an email to colleagues asking “what is
your sense of working with GoH [Government of
Haiti] to slowly begin criminal removals?”48 A little
over one month later, ICE proposed to approach
the government of Haiti to resume removals of
individuals who entered the United States after
the TPS cutoff date and individuals with criminal
convictions.49
In November 2010, less than three weeks
after USAID informed ICE of Haiti’s cholera
outbreak, ICE lifted the temporary suspension of
deportations to Haiti and instructed ICE to begin
re-apprehending Haitians who had previously been
released from detention in the United States.50
Without any public announcement, ICE officers
began quietly rounding up and detaining Haitian
nationals with criminal convictions, including
many who had been on supervised release from
immigration detention following the earthquake.
An email exchange between ICE’s Assistant
Director and the Acting Deputy Director suggests,
however, that the United States had deported
over 100 Haitian nationals even before making
the official decision to resume deportations.51 The

whereabouts and identities of these deportees are
unclear.
In December 2010, advocates, including the
authors of and contributors to this report, learned
of ICE’s decision to resume deportations. They
petitioned President Obama and staged protests
to express concerns about the danger of deporting
individuals to post-earthquake Haiti, in light of
the devastating humanitarian conditions, including
the cholera outbreak, and Haiti’s longstanding
practice of detaining U.S. deportees in horrific jail
conditions upon arrival in Haiti.52 The advocates’
calls fell on deaf ears.
On January 6, 2011, immigrants’ rights
advocates, including this report’s authors and
contributors, filed a request for precautionary
measures (similar to injunctive relief) with
the IACHR, a human rights body within
the Organization of American States.53 The
precautionary measures petition, filed on behalf of
five named Haitian nationals who faced imminent
deportation to Haiti, asked the IACHR to order the
United States to halt post-earthquake deportations
to Haiti. Carrying out such deportations, the
petition argued, would be tantamount to a death
sentence and would violate several rights guaranteed
by the American Declaration on the Rights and
Duties of Man, including the rights to life, health,
family unity, due process, and special protections
for children.54 280 organizations and individuals
submitted a letter to the IACHR in support of the
precautionary measures request.55

JANUARY 20, 2011:
THE FIRST FLIGHT BACK
Despite these exhortations, on January 20,
2011, the U.S. government deported 27 men
to Haiti, the first deportations following DHS’s
official announcement that it was lifting the
post-earthquake suspension.56 That same day, the
U.S. State Department issued a travel warning
to U.S. citizens “strongly advising” against all but
essential travel to Haiti due to “the critical crime
Introduction & Background

3

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

level, cholera outbreak, frequent and violent
disturbances…lack of adequate medical facilities,
and limited police protection.”57 Upon arrival in
Haiti, all of the deportees were detained for an
indefinite period in a jail under life-threatening
conditions, pursuant to a longstanding practice of
the Haitian government.58
Eight days later, a group of advocates,
including this report’s authors and contributors,
met with White House officials and urged them to
reconsider their decision to resume deportations,
expressing concern that someone might die
given the conditions in Haiti.59 Within hours of
the meeting, the advocates learned that a young
man on the January 20 flight, Wildrick Guerrier,
had fallen gravely ill while detained in a Haitian
jail. Wildrick and other detainees were jailed in
overcrowded cells which deportees later described
as being filled with feces, vomit, and blood, and
lacking clean water or sanitation.60 The deportees
were crammed into small cells.61 There was not
enough room for everyone in the cell to sleep
on the floor at the same time, so the deportees
took turns.62 Despite begging for help, Wildrick
received no medical treatment during the week
he was jailed and died of cholera-like symptoms
shortly after being released.63 He is survived by his
fiancé, Claudine Magloire, a son, his mother, and
two brothers in the United States.64
Wildrick’s death made headlines.65 On
February 6, 2011, the IACHR granted the
precautionary measures request that had been filed
on behalf of the five Haitian men.66 The IACHR
requested that the United States postpone the
deportations of the five men until “[c]onditions
are in place in Haiti to guarantee that detention
conditions and access to medical care for persons
in custody comply with applicable minimum
standards; and [t]he procedures in place to decide
upon and review the deportation of those named
take adequately into account their right to family
life and their family ties in the United States.”67
In response to the outcry over Wildrick’s
death, the United States temporarily halted
deportations to Haiti until April 2011.
4

U.S. RESPONSE: THE APRIL 1 POLICY
On March 7, 2011, ICE issued a proposed
policy on the resumption of deportations to
Haiti.68 The policy called for “limited removal of
criminal aliens with a focus on serious offenders
such as violent felons.”69 The policy applied to
Haitian nationals “with a final order of removal
who pose a threat to the public safety given their
previous serious criminal offense or history.”70
Threats to public safety were deemed to include,
but were not limited to, convictions of “homicide,
rape, sexual assault, robbery, sex offense against
children, aggravated assault, assault, kidnapping,
false imprisonment, sale of cocaine, smuggling
cocaine, sale of marijuana, and larceny.”71 The
policy called for case-by-case review before
removal.72 ICE requested feedback on the policy,
but gave the public only five days to submit
comments.73
Reaction was swift. Over two hundred
organizations and individuals criticized the lack
of transparency with which ICE had developed
the proposed policy and the short period of time
allowed for comment; ICE’s willingness to return
people to life-threatening conditions in Haiti;
and ICE’s faulty public safety justification for the
resumption of deportations.74
On April 15, 2011, ICE released the final
policy (which was retro-dated to April 1) for
resumed removals to Haiti. The “April 1 Policy”
applied to Haitian nationals living in the United
States who had been ordered deported due to
a criminal conviction.75 The policy directed
removal efforts to focus on Haitian nationals
with “significant criminal records,” downgraded
from the previously proposed language of
“serious offenders such as violent felons.”76 The
April 1 Policy expanded on the initial policy’s
proposal requiring case-by-case consideration by
introducing a balancing test to determine whether
a person would be deported to Haiti. Under the
test, ICE pledged to consider “adverse factors,
such as the severity, number of convictions, and
dates since convictions, and balance these against

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

Claudine Magloire,Wildrick Guerrier’s fiancé, disagrees with the United States’ decision to deport people to Haiti. | Photo by Bess Adler

n REMEMBERING WILDRICK
“He was my soulmate,” said Claudine Magloire, reflecting on her fiancé Wildrick Guerrier who died on January 30, 2011
after a week in a Haitian jail.77 In addition to Claudine, Wildrick left behind his mother, two younger brothers, and a nine-yearold son, all of whom are U.S. citizens or LPRs. Claudine and Wildrick met in 1998 and were friends before they started dating
in 2006. Wildrick was a father figure to Claudine’s teenage son and well-respected in his community. “He was a wonderful
person, always tried to make peace, make you happy and smile,” remembers Claudine, who still thinks about him every day.
Wildrick, who was an LPR but had not yet become a U.S. citizen, was slated for deportation after completing his
criminal sentence.78 While detained by U.S. authorities, Wildrick became known as “Black Jesus” because of his peacemaking
skills. The deportees again gave him this moniker
at the jail in Haiti, where he cared for the more feeble inmates, and
undertook efforts to clean the filthy facility—efforts which ironically may have precipitated his death.
While detained in the United States, Wildrick told an interviewer that he was afraid of the conditions in Haiti.79 Medical
staff at the facility certified that he was healthy and cleared him for a deportation flight on January 20, 2011.80
Upon deportation, Haitian officials detained Wildrick and over 20 other men in a filthy police cell, where they were
exposed to feces, blood, and vomit. The jail was “not a place even for an animal,” recalled Claudine. Concerned about
Wildrick’s well-being, Claudine called the jail authorities, who assured her that he was fine. In reality, Wildrick had begun
to experience severe diarrhea and vomiting days after being jailed in Haiti. He was not given medical treatment. Haitian jail
authorities released Wildrick after about a week, but it was too late. He “didn’t last 24 hours,” said Claudine.
“It has been a tough journey,” says Claudine, who has struggled in the years since Wildrick’s death. She was laid off from
her job at a bank and only recently found work at an accounting firm. A single mother, she has had to work hard and rely on
the generosity of her two sisters to pay her rent and electrical bills. Asked whether U.S. officials should be sending people
back to Haiti at this time, Claudine said “what they are doing is not right...They need to stop.” n
Introduction & Background

5

any equities…such as duration of residence
in the United States, family ties, or significant
medical issues.”81 The policy stated that “where
there are compelling medical, humanitarian,
or other relevant factors, supervised release or
other alternatives to detention programs may be
appropriate.”82
ADVOCATES CRY FOUL: RESPONSE TO THE
APRIL 1 POLICY

Advocates reacted swiftly to the April 1 Policy.
On the day the policy was released, the authors
and contributors to this report issued a statement
“call[ing] on the Obama Administration for an
immediate halt to all removals to Haiti and the
release of all Haitians being held with final orders
of removal.”83 Four days later, nearly 3,400 people
sent a letter to President Obama, Secretary of
State Clinton and DHS Secretary Napolitano
urging an immediate “halt [to] these inhumane
and cruel deportations to Haiti.”84 In July 2011,
over 100 organizations and individuals sent an
additional letter to DHS Secretary Napolitano
citing serious problems and inconsistencies with the
implementation of the April 1 Policy.85

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

THE UNITED STATES ACKNOWLEDGES
CONTINUED RISK: TPS EXTENSIONS AND HAITI
TRAVEL WARNINGS

Since the earthquake, the Secretary of
Homeland Security has twice extended TPS, and
the protection remains in force today. In May
2011, approximately five months after the U.S.
government authorized the first post-earthquake
deportation flight, the Secretary extended and
redesignated TPS for Haitian nationals.86 The
extension was to January 22, 2013 and the redesignation allowed otherwise-eligible Haitians
who had arrived within a year of the earthquake
to apply for TPS.87 The rationale for the extension
was the continued “devastating effects of the
January 2010 earthquake that prevent Haitians
from returning to their country in safety.”88
In March 2014, the State Department updated
its Haiti travel warning and the DHS Secretary
6

extended TPS a second time.89 The extension
was to January 22, 2016 and was justified by the
“substantial, but temporary, disruption of living
conditions in Haiti based upon extraordinary and
temporary conditions in that country that prevent
Haitians who have TPS from safely returning.”90
On December 4, 2014, the State Department
updated its Haiti travel warning again, urging U.S.
citizens to exercise caution when visiting Haiti and
explaining that “medical facilities […]
are particularly weak” and that “[individuals] with
serious health concerns have been unable to find
necessary medical care in Haiti and have had to
arrange and pay for medical evacuation to the
United States.”91
Although the United States continues to
recognize the devastation that has befallen Haiti,
the continued humanitarian crisis, and the unsafe
conditions for U.S. citizens traveling there, it has
chartered at least one deportation flight per month
since April 2011.

THE APRIL 1 POLICY’S FAILURE
TO ADEQUATELY CONSIDER
HUMANITARIAN FACTORS
As documented in this report, the U.S.
government’s ongoing deportation of Haitian
nationals with serious physical and mental health
problems, strong family ties to the United States,
and other factors demonstrates that ICE is not
abiding by the April 1 Policy. The policy requires
ICE to conduct a “balancing test” that weighs ICE’s
enforcement priorities against a non-citizen’s
humanitarian and hardship factors prior to
deportation.92 Specifically, ICE must consider “the
severity and number of criminal convictions, dates
since the convictions, duration of residence in the
United States, family ties, or significant medical
issues.”93 The policy also instructs that “where
there are compelling medical, humanitarian,
or other relevant factors, supervised release or
other alternatives to detention programs may be
appropriate” in lieu of deportation.94 The April 1

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

Policy requires that ICE officials apply a balancing
test to all Haitian men and women subject to
deportation, LPRs and non-lawful permanent
residents alike.95
PROCEDURAL DEFICIENCIES

The April 1 Policy, as implemented, suffers
from significant defects. Initial decisions under
the balancing test are made by ICE deportation
officers, whose function is case management and
ensuring individual compliance with deportation
orders.96 Although ICE has claimed that officers
assess every case under the policy, there is no
way to ensure that cases are reviewed and no
transparency to the review, even when it takes
place.97 There is no written decision, no review of
ICE’s decision by an independent adjudicator, and
no right to appeal.98

Decisions made under the
April 1 Policy are entirely at
ICE’s discretion, and there is
no notice, transparency, or
judicial review.
Although ICE has told advocates that its
deportation officers are required under the April
1 Policy to interview each Haitian national about
his or her humanitarian factors, an ICE official
stated in January 2014 that regular interviews had
only recently begun.99 By that time, the policy
had been in place for almost three years and
countless Haitians had already been deported.
No publicly available guidance has been issued to
ICE’s field offices requiring that officers conduct
interviews; ICE officials have acknowledged that
they do not know if interviews are taking place
in all cases.100 ICE has also stated that Haitians
facing deportation are not given written notice of
the policy or informed that the interview would
be used to determine whether they should be
permitted to remain in the United States.101 In
fact, officials opposed giving deportees notice on
the grounds that such transparency would provide

a “road map to avoid deportation.”102 As a result,
even if potential deportees are interviewed, they
do not have a meaningful opportunity to prepare a
defense to deportation.
ICE’s procedures for assessing whether
an individual with a physical or mental illness
should be deported are flawed. ICE officials have
stated that they will deport individuals if they are
medically stable at the time of deportation.103 In
doing so, ICE ignores the reality that the physical
and mental health of individuals will likely
deteriorate upon return to Haiti because they will
not have access to medical care or stable and safe
living conditions.104 According to an ICE health
official, ICE determines whether or not a deportee
will have access to needed medications by calling
the World Health Organization, pharmacies, or
pharmaceutical companies to find out whether
medication for a particular illness exists in Haiti.105
But this process fails to account for the fact that
many medications are in extremely short supply in
Haiti and are too costly for most deportees.106

WHO IS BEING DEPORTED
Since the adoption of the April 1 Policy, men
and women whose compelling equities outweigh
their criminal histories and who precisely fit the
profile in the policy have been deported to Haiti.
The United States has deported approximately
1,500 men and women on account of a criminal
record.107 In the nine months following adoption
of the April 1 Policy, ICE returned approximately
20 to 40 individuals per month.108 The
deportations continued with increasing numbers in
2012 and 2013, reaching monthly averages of 50
people.109 Today, ICE continues to deport Haitians
on a monthly basis, with flights averaging around
20-30 individuals.110
ICE has deported 19 individuals to whom the
IACHR extended precautionary measures because
of their serious medical conditions or strong family
ties in the United States. Many of the men and
women deported to Haiti were LPRs who had
Introduction & Background

7

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

lived in the United States for many years, if not
most of their lives.111 Most deportees have family
members in the United States, including U.S.
citizen children and other loved ones. The United
States has deported individuals with terminal
diseases, chronic mental and physical conditions
requiring daily medication, and permanent
disabilities requiring major accommodations.112
Men and women are deported even for minor
or nonviolent criminal offenses. For example, of
the individuals that the United States deported to
Haiti in two months for which the authors have
ICE flight manifests listing deportees’ crimes,
approximately 50 percent of the deportees had
nonviolent drug convictions.113
The United States has deported people
like Conrad, who suffers from multiple serious
medical conditions, including a psychotic disorder,
dangerously high blood pressure, and prostate
complications.114 He was deported in July 2011
for two nonviolent misdemeanor crimes despite
his serious illnesses and the fact that his family,
including three children, his mother, and his four
siblings, are all living lawfully in the United States.
He is now deteriorating physically and mentally at
a substandard mental institution in Port-au-Prince.
The United States has also deported
individuals with at least one Haitian parent who
had never set foot in Haiti because they were born
in another country. Because Haitian law confers
citizenship on any child born to a Haitian parent,
the United States deports to Haiti people born
to Haitian parents in other countries, like the
Bahamas.115 The United States has deported people
to Haiti even when the order of removal has
specified another country.116

“BUT I WASN’T BORN IN HAITI!”

The United States has forcibly returned people
who were not born in Haiti but who have a parent
who was born there. One Bahamian-born man’s
story was captured by Dr. Sue Weishar of Loyola
University, who reported on Loyola Law students’
interviews with detained Haitians on the brink of
deportation:
Of all the tragic stories that were
shared with Loyola Law School Clinic
volunteers…, perhaps none were
more wrenching than those from
young men born in the Bahamas to
Haitian parents, who then grew up
in the U.S. They are not considered
nationals of either the U.S. or the
Bahamas. Imagine being deported
to a Haitian prison at this time, having
never lived in Haiti, with no family
ties, and barely able to speak the
language. Where is the humanity
in an immigration policy that would
subject a person to such a fate? A
young man of Haitian descent born
in the Bahamas who was being
deported for two drug possessions
pleaded with a volunteer, “This is
destroying my family. My son is
without a father. [My] wife is without
a husband. I am different at 26 than
I was at 19. I know I’ve done wrong.
I am not a U.S. citizen but I am a
human being. I love my family.”117

PUBLIC SAFETY CONTRADICTIONS IN
THE APRIL 1 POLICY
ICE has publicly justified its decision to
resume deportations to Haiti on a faulty public
safety rationale that is undermined by the United
States' own historic practices. Ten years ago, the
U.S. Supreme Court ruled that in most cases,
detention of individuals beyond 180 days after

8

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

n DEPORTEE CARL
Carl is a former LPR who
suffers from schizophrenia.118 He
is married to a U.S. citizen. ICE
released him from detention in
2009. Four and a half years later,
ICE inexplicably re-detained and
deported him, despite the fact that
he had been ordered deported
based on a nonviolent drug offense
for which he had served his time,
and he had committed no new
crimes.119

As Roxana Bacon, former
Chief Counsel to USCIS, has
acknowledged, “[t]he United
States regularly refuses to
remove even the most violent
offenders when there are
compelling reasons not to
exercise deportation,” as in
the case of Cuba.
THE U.S.-FUNDED REINTEGRATION
PROGRAM

issuance of a final order of removal is unlawful.
In general, ICE must release from detention
individuals it cannot deport within that time
frame.121 ICE has justified its resumption of
deportations to Haiti on the ground that it cannot
detain Haitian nationals with criminal convictions
indefinitely and that releasing them from detention
in the United States “poses a significant threat to
the American public.”122
For years, however, ICE has successfully
used supervised release programs for
Cubans and citizens of other countries with
whom the United States lacks repatriation
agreements.123As Roxana Bacon, former Chief
Counsel to USCIS, has acknowledged, “[t]
he United States regularly refuses to remove
even the most violent offenders when there
are compelling reasons not to exercise
deportation,” as in the case of Cuba.124 Under
supervised release, people are allowed to leave
immigration detention under close monitoring
requirements, such as regular reporting to
deportation officers.125 While ICE officials have
used supervised release as an alternative to
deportation for some Haitians, they have also
detained and deported Haitian nationals with
compelling equities, including people who had
previously been successfully living with their
families in the United States on supervised
release, such as Carl, profiled above.
120

The United States further justified its decision
to restart deportations to Haiti by claiming in the
April 1 Policy that it would “resume removals in as
safe, humane, and minimally disruptive a manner as
possible.”126 This claim was predicated in large part
on the existence of a U.S.-funded “comprehensive
reintegration strategy” for deportees which was
supposed to provide “a range of services for
returned Haitians to smooth their transition into
Haitian society, including healthcare assistance and
skills training to enhance employment prospects.”127
The reintegration program was funded by USAID,
administered by the IOM, and then channeled
through ONM and other Haitian NGO partners.
The United States began scaling back its deportee
reintegration program in 2012 and eliminated it
entirely in April 2014.128 In ending the funding
and the program, the United States lost a primary
justification for resuming deportations to Haiti
under the April 1 Policy.129

The United States began
scaling back its deportee
reintegration program in 2012
and eliminated it entirely in
April 2014.
Even at its apex in 2011 and early 2012—
when the United States was providing funds for
cultural and skills training, cell phones, medical
Introduction & Background

9

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

If the temporary homeless shelter reaches capacity, newly arrived deportees sleep outside under a tent,
exposed to the elements. | Photo by Miami Law Clinic Student

care, and livelihoods programs—deportees
complained that they could not access the
program’s services. Deportees were adamant that
they were unable to access any or most benefits,
calling the program “fake”130 and “useless,”131
and complaining about being given “the run
around.”132 Deportees received cellphones and
some deportees were able to attend orientation
or training sessions, but many English-speaking
deportees had difficulties understanding the
trainings held in Creole.133 Deportees in 2012
reported receiving little follow up and being
unable to get the equipment they had requested
through the livelihoods program.134
One deportee, Augustine, planned to start
a small business related to food service since he
had worked in the U.S. restaurant industry.135
He provided the USAID reintegration program’s
Haitian NGO partner with a list of materials he
needed. However, he did not receive the supplies
he requested and was unable to reach the NGO
10

partner despite repeated calls.136 Deportees who
did manage to receive some livelihoods supplies
found that they were being given unusable
equipment—such as a computer with a broken
charger—or were told to start businesses that
required skills they did not possess.137 For
example, Reginald, a deportee who had submitted
a business plan involving transport of goods,
was offered some goats and in-kind assistance
instead.138
Several deportees felt that the local NGOs
that implemented the program only contacted
deportees when they needed to increase their
numbers to justify continued funding.139 Deportees
recall having their photos taken in an orientation
session or with the equipment they were given
but complained of being unable to reach the NGO
partners or to implement their projects due to
insufficient equipment, training, or follow-up.140
Deportee Clifford reported that he was told to
pretend to be working at a barber shop when

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

n INTERNATIONAL CONDEMNATION
OF THE DEPORTATIONS
The international community has called upon the United States to
halt or significantly reduce forced returns to Haiti in light of the ongoing
humanitarian crisis precipitated by the 2010 earthquake. In February
2010, and again in June 2011, the OHCHR and the UNHCR issued a joint
statement urging countries to suspend all forced returns to Haiti due to
the post-earthquake humanitarian crisis.141 The joint statement also advised
countries that chose to continue deportations to give “special consideration
and refrain from returning to Haiti persons with special protection needs,”
including persons living with disabilities or severe medical conditions,
and to “[p]revent situations where returns lead to separation of family
members.”142 This advisory has not been revoked or replaced.
As described above, in 2011, the IACHR issued a press release
stating that the deportation of “seriously ill persons” to Haiti presented
urgent and irreparable harm that “could jeopardize [Haitians’] lives,
considering the humanitarian crisis that persists in the country.”143 The
IACHR has since found that the compelling health and family concerns
in cases of at least 62 men and women warranted protection from
deportation and issued formal precautionary measures on their behalf.144
In granting these precautionary measures, the IACHR pressed the United
States to halt deportations until “the United States has procedures in
place that adequately take U.S. family ties into account in deportation
determinations.”145 The United States, however, disregarded some of the
precautionary measures, deporting at least 19 protected individuals.
In 2012, the U.N. Independent Expert on the Situation of Human
Rights in Haiti, Michel Forst, advised that all States “should refrain
from any and all forced returns to Haiti” because deportations to Haiti
“threaten the rights to life, health, family, equality, and due process.”146
While the Independent Expert urged that “all forced returns to Haiti
be indefinitely halted,” he stated that countries who choose to deport
“should ensure the existence of appeal procedures, the guarantee of due
process of law, and the consideration of family and other humanitarian
factors prior to deportation.”147 He raised specific concerns about
deportations of vulnerable groups of individuals, such as “persons living
with disabilities or suffering from severe medical conditions…victims
of sexual or gender based violence, persons whose deportation would
lead to the separation of family members, persons not born in Haiti, and
persons with no known family members in Haiti.”148
On March 14, 2014, the UN Human Rights Committee reviewed
the U.S. government’s compliance with the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), an international human rights treaty
binding upon the United States.149 At the review, Walter Kälin, a member
of the Committee, asked the United States delegation how it justifies
deportations to Haiti of people with medical conditions in light of the
problematic country conditions since the earthquake.150 The United
States government representative pointed to the aid money the United
States has put toward development in Haiti since the earthquake and then
mentioned the U.S.-funded reintegration program.151 n

11

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

some “people [] came” to visit the site.152 Deportee
Frantz had his photo taken with car washing
materials he had been given but was not able to
wash more than one car and one bike because he
lacked funds to complete his project.153 Milton
remembers having photos taken of his orientation
but he had not been given the equipment needed
to implement his business plan.154 He believes the
photos were used to prop up the program as a
success.155
The reintegration program also purported
to provide certain health care services. The
authors are aware of one case from 2012 in
which a deportee who had blood pooling in his
brain received emergency brain surgery in Haiti
arranged by the reintegration program. ICE
had deported this critically ill deportee despite
being aware of his multiple and serious medical
conditions.156 USAID considered the care provided
to this deportee an exception and advised the
deportee to go to the Dominican Republic so
that he could receive better medical care.157
The positive intervention seems to have been
an isolated case, as many more deportees have
complained about being unable to access adequate
health care or medications.158 As discussed below,
individuals with serious mental health needs have
not been given appropriate treatment or assistance
but instead have been sent to Mars and Kline
Psychiatric Center, a jail-like public mental health
institution.159
The post-earthquake reintegration program
was not the first time a U.S.-funded reintegration
program had fallen short in Haiti. A similar
program had been in place from 2006 to 2009 and
was defunded for similar reasons.160 The program,
which was started by the UN and later partially
funded by the United States, was touted by the
U.S. government as being “a model” for other
countries.161 In March 2009, the U.S. Embassy
in Port-au-Prince commented in a cable that the
cultural orientation courses and micro-enterprise
support was a “critical resource” for deportees,
who, after living for years or even decades in the
United States, return to a country that is only
12

“nominally theirs.”162 However, complaints among
deportees were frequent. The United States was
aware of serious problems with the program,
noting in a 2009 cable that, among other things,
“criminal deportees claim that [the] program is
unresponsive to the needs of assistance recipients
and that local employees are corrupt.”163 The
pre-earthquake reintegration program ended in
2009.164
Rather than provide additional funds and
oversight to improve and strengthen the postearthquake reintegration program, the United
States defunded it. By late 2013, only remnants
of the reintegration services remained. On
December 17, 2013, this report’s authors and
contributors observed the arrival in Haiti of
deportees from the United States. Deportees
were given only a cell phone.165 Local NGOs
provided deportees with brochures indicating
that they should have access to physical and
mental health services and free transportation
for those relocating outside of Port-au-Prince.166
Deportees reported being unable to access
the described benefits. For example, one HIVpositive deportee with other serious medical
complications was simply told upon arrival that
he should find a doctor.167 Deportees did not
receive any orientation about how to survive
in post-earthquake Haiti or information about
whether they could access any other reintegration
benefits.168 In addition, deportees were
surrounded by more than a half dozen heavilyarmed soldiers with balaclavas and SWAT-style
uniforms and were likely too intimidated to
ask any questions about these and other critical
issues.169
Months later, however, the United States
continued to tout the program as a success, using
it to justify ongoing deportations to Haiti. In
March 2014, the United States appeared before
the UN Human Rights Committee to be reviewed
for compliance with its international human rights
obligations. When questioned by a member of the
UN Committee about the justification for U.S.
deportations to Haiti in light of the humanitarian

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

crisis, the DHS Officer for Civil Rights and Civil
Liberties cited the U.S.-funded reintegration
program, stating that “the U.S. government has
worked with nongovernmental organizations to
establish humanitarian procedures for reception
and reintegration of these returning individuals”
and that the “U.S. government continues to be
committed to humanitarian reintegration, working
with the Haitian government.”170
Without U.S. funding, the Haitian government
is now solely responsible for any continued
reintegration programming. In October 2014,
the Minister of Justice expressed the need for
a reintegration program, but acknowledged it
would be an insurmountable “resource problem”
for Haiti.171 The sole remaining component of the
reintegration program is a temporary homeless
shelter run by ONM. The shelter is used for
deportees who do not have family or friends
to act as “reference contacts” to be responsible
for the deportees upon arrival in Haiti.172 The
maximum amount of time a deportee is generally
allowed to stay at the shelter is 30 days.173 If the
center reaches capacity, newly-arrived deportees
must sleep outside under a tent, exposed to the
elements.174
The shelter is located in a remote
neighborhood, far removed from the urban
center of Port-au-Prince and reliable public
transportation.175 There are no services to assist
deportees with securing housing, healthcare, or
emergency medical treatment.176 No telephone
or other form of communication is available
to deportees, unless they have their own cell
phones.177 Former deportees run the center
with little supervision from ONM, which has
raised concerns about physical safety at the
facility.178 Women and LGBT deportees are
especially vulnerable at the shelter, as discussed
below. n

Introduction & Background

13

Deportee Sidney’s tattoo marks the loss of his parents who died when Sidney was young. | Photo by Bess Adler

CHAPTER 2

Factual Findings
DEPORTEES AS SCAPEGOATS:
PHYSICAL HARM, DETENTION,
STIGMATIZATION, AND
DISCRIMINATION
Deportees live under the near-constant threat
of physical violence and arbitrary arrest because
of a commonly held, but incorrect, belief that
they are the primary perpetrators of violence in
Haiti.179 The Haitian government has reinforced
this stereotype and encouraged stigmatization of
deportees.180 Haitian authorities have attacked,
mistreated, and arrested deportees, who are easily
identifiable by their manner of dress, the way they
walk, how they speak, other physical traits like
tattoos or dreadlocks, and their sudden arrival in
neighborhoods.181 In a June 2013 press conference,
Lucmane Delille, then Government Commissioner
of Port-au-Prince announced that police would
cite and arrest people for “mauvais comportment,” or
bad behavior, such as wearing “sagging pants” and
“walking funny.”182
Governmental antipathy toward deportees
is reflected in the Haitian authorities’ initial
processing of them upon arrival in Haiti. For
years, the Haitian government systematically,
and without cause, detained all deportees from
the United States with criminal records in lifethreatening conditions.183 Even though U.S.
deportees are no longer routinely jailed upon
arrival in Haiti, high-level authorities confirmed
as recently as October 2014 that the Haitian
government has detained and will continue to
detain some deportees upon arrival from the
United States.184 After a charter flight carrying
deportees lands in Haiti, Haitian authorities take
the deportees to the DCPJ and require them to
provide a “reference contact” before they will be
released from custody.185 The requirement that

families sign deportees out of detention upon
their arrival contributes to the stigmatization
of deportees and reflects the government’s
expectation that deportees will commit crimes or
otherwise require monitoring.
Once they are released into Haitian society,
deportees from the United States experience
harm, stigma, and discrimination at the hands of
Haitian authorities.186
When Deportee Smith checked in at a local
police station as he had been instructed upon
deportation, the officer told him: “The deportees
come out here to give us problems” and arbitrarily
detained him for 30 minutes.187 Deportee Magnum
reports that even though he keeps to himself as
much as possible, the police stop, question, and
search him a couple of times a month on the
street.188
Haitian police often decline to assist
deportees who experience forcible gang
recruitment or other crimes. Deportee
Ferdinard was unable to access police protection
from gang members who tried to recruit him.189
One day, members of a criminal gang came to
Ferdinard’s home in Port-au-Prince and pressed
him to join them. After they left, Ferdinard
went to the police and asked for protection
from the gang. The police refused to help him.
Later, several gang members returned to his
home. When Ferdinard refused to join them,
the gang members began to savagely beat him
in front of his wife and child. He was saved
only by the intervention of his neighbors who
witnessed the ordeal. Knowing the police would
not protect him due to his criminal deportee
status, Ferdinard was forced to permanently flee
his home.
Haitian authorities further hamper
deportees’ integration into Haitian society
15

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

n DEPORTEE FELIX
by making it difficult to obtain Haitian
national identification documents.190 Delays
are common, and deportees may be asked
to pay a bribe to obtain such documents.191
Because it is illegal in Haiti to not produce
identification upon request by a police officer,
deportees without identification face arrest.193
For example, police arrested and beat one
deportee, Wilky, because he did not have an
identification document.193 Without Haitian
identification, deportees cannot work legally
or acquire a passport.194 Even when a deportee
is able to obtain a passport, it is stamped with
the following restriction: “This passport valid
for travel anywhere except the United States,”
marking the bearer as having been deported for
a crime.195
Members of the public also scapegoat and
attack deportees because of the stigma against
them.196 Deportees report staying indoors as
much as they can to avoid being the victim of
violence by people in their communities.197 Mob
justice is not uncommon in Haiti. The OHCHR
has noted that vigilante justice and lynching
is widespread in Haiti—with 121 lynchings
in 2012 alone.198 Perpetrators attack victims
for a number of reasons, including that they
“are unknown to the area and are suspected of
being ill-intentioned.”199 According to the UN
Independent Expert on Haiti, Gustavo Gallón,
the uptick in lynchings reflects Haitians’ “lack of
confidence in justice.”200 Moreover, the OHCHR
and MINUSTAH found that Haitian “authorities’
efforts to prevent and suppress lynching
remain largely insufficient.”201 The rhetoric and
discrimination against deportees makes them
potential targets for such attacks.
The United States has long been aware
of the policies and practices of the Haitian
government that punish, stigmatize, and fail
to protect deportees with criminal histories.
In a 2009 cable, officials at the U.S. Embassy
in Port-au-Prince recognized that “criminal
deportees ...encounter [obstacles] directly
arising from their deportee status, including
16

Deportee Felix experienced
a particularly harrowing
encounter with the Haitian
National Police.202 After an officer
was killed near Felix’s house,
police conducted a sweep of the
neighborhood and residents.
Instead of running from the
officers, Felix stood still with
his hands up to show he was not
a threat. Despite his peaceful
stance, a police officer ran at him,
pointed the barrel of his rifle
at Felix’s chest, and struck him
repeatedly. The officer forced
Felix into the back of a truck
and took him to a police station.
There, the officer made Felix
face a wall, while several officers
proceeded to beat him with the
butts of their rifles. After the
beating, Felix was placed in a cell
until a family member could pick
him up.

social marginalization and discrimination, false
accusations to police, and police abuse.”203 The
Embassy further cited deportees’ complaints
of being scapegoated, stating that even when
they do nothing wrong, “we’re blamed anyway,
just because we’re deportees.”204 The Embassy
cable opined that “[m]ore efforts to help
criminal deportees re-integrate into Haitian
society would not only benefit this small
group of people, but also would likely make
Haiti more receptive to greater numbers of
deportations.”205

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

Felix demonstrates for the authors how he
was forced to stand up against a wall before
officers beat him with the butts of their rifles.
| Photo by Geoffrey Louden

Factual Findings

17

Carrying machine guns and wearing
balaclavas and bulletproof vests,
Haitian police make a show of force
at the Port-au-Prince airport tarmac
when deportees arrive from the
United States. | Photo by Bess Adler

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

n JAILING DEPORTEES UPON ARRIVAL IN HAITI
Until recently, Haitian authorities have systematically jailed deportees with U.S. criminal histories upon arrival for
indefinite periods of time and in life-threatening conditions.206 In 2007, the State Department (DOS) criticized this practice
in its annual human rights report on Haiti: “citizens deported [to Haiti] after completing prison sentences in foreign
countries were often detained, although they had not violated any domestic laws.”207 The DOS emphasized that this practice
contravened both international and Haitian law, which prohibits arbitrary arrests and detentions and provides for procedural
due process.208 The jailings continued even after a Haitian court ruled in 2006 that the detention of deportees was illegal.209
Haiti’s law enforcement authorities have a long history of abusing people in their custody. In 2004, the DOS Country
Report on Human Rights Practices in Haiti described widespread physical abuse of detainees at the hands of the Haitian
National Police, such as burning with cigarettes, choking, kalot marassa (severe boxing of the ears that can lead to eardrum
damage), and electric shock.210 Treatment of incarcerated persons has not improved in more recent years. The 2012
State Department report recognized that Haitian prisons “remained overcrowded, poorly maintained, and unsanitary,”
and subjected prisoners to “physical abuse by correctional officers,” “corruption[,] and neglect.”211 The 2013 report cited
instances of “corrections officers using physical punishment and psychological abuse to mistreat prisoners.”212 The report
further documented incidents in which “the HNP allegedly beat or otherwise abused detainees and suspects.”213 Due to
stigmatization, detained people with mental illness are particularly at risk.214 Utility closets are used to put people in
isolation.215 Jailers beat the mentally ill or individuals with intellectual disabilities if they act out or are disruptive due to a
failure to receive required medication or other reasons.216
Moreover, “many prisoners and detainees suffered from a lack of basic hygiene, malnutrition, poor quality health care, and
illness caused by lack of access to clean water.”217 Some prisoners were forced to “defecate[] into plastic bags.”218 Moreover, the 2013
report stated that “there were several reports [that the Haitian National Police] beat or otherwise abused detainees and suspects.”219
18

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

People who are detained in Haitian prisons and jails—both deportees and other Haitians—generally do not have access
to food, potable water, beds, hygienic products, working toilets, or medical care.220 In the DCPJ, the Haitian National
Judicial Police station in Port-au-Prince, deportees were held in small cells with 60 to 80 other detainees and were forced
to take turns sleeping on the floor.221 The jail’s cells provide no ventilation or sunlight and the insect- and rodent-infested
cement floors are covered in feces, dirt, vomit and blood.222 Deportees with family in Haiti who were detained at the DCPJ
were entirely dependent on their family members to provide food and other basic necessities to survive.223 Those without
relatives in Haiti would rely upon the generosity of other deportees’ families.224
In 2011, following the death of deportee Wildrick Guerrier presumably due to conditions in the jails, the Haitian
government shortened detention periods for arriving deportees to approximately two weeks.225 Detention conditions
remained horrific, especially in light of the overcrowding in those facilities that remained standing after the earthquake,
which had destroyed several of the country’s jails and prisons.226 In 2012, DOS announced that the practice of automatic
detention of arriving deportees had declined throughout the year and had stopped by the end of the year.227
Today, although Haitian authorities have ceased the routine detention of arriving deportees, the possibility of detention still
poses a looming threat to deportees. Over the past year, Haitian authorities have detained certain deportees upon arrival and
required some deportees to report to authorities through regular check-ins.228 Haitian officials have articulated the current
detention policy in different ways.229 According to the Minister of Justice, the Haitian government retains the authority to
detain returning deportees for up to two weeks and there is no set list of permissible reasons for exercising this authority.230 The
Minister stated that deportees could be detained if they do not have family members in Haiti who agree to take responsibility for
them.231 The DCPJ Police Inspector gave different reasons for detaining arriving deportees. The Inspector told Michelle Karshan,
a collaborator on this report, that deportees are held if they are being investigated because they are wanted on a warrant in Haiti
and that deportees with drug convictions are detained until they are interrogated by police. It is clear that the Haitian authorities
still detain deportees, although the current criteria for detention is unclear. Moreover, although Haitian law mandates that people in
pretrial detention see a magistrate within 48 hours, detained deportees are not brought before a judge.232

On the Port-au-Prince airport tarmac,
deportees arrive by bus from a U.S.
charter flight. | Photo by Bess Adler

Factual Findings

19

Deportee Evans bears scars from
extreme exposure to mosquitoes
while he was illegally jailed
upon arrival in Haiti.
| Photo by Rebecca Sharpless

Corrupt Haitian authorities have extorted large sums of money from deportees and their families
in exchange for release or security.233 When Deportee Alex was deported in 2013, Haitian authorities
demanded approximately $1,000 USD from his uncle.234 The government jail authorities told Alex
that if the family did not pay, he would die in jail and he would be just another person who got lost in
the system.235 The family of another deportee, Auguste, profiled later in this report, was asked to pay
$3,000.236
Haitian government officials document incoming deportees through a process of fingerprinting and
photographing deportees and reviewing records from ICE.237 Authorities interview deportees and ask
questions about their criminal record, private life, and familiarity with firearms.238 n

Many in Port-au-Prince live in tents and other precarious structures. | Photo by Rebecca Sharpless

HOUSING INSECURITY AND
UNEMPLOYMENT
In addition to suffering arbitrary detention,
physical harm, and other forms of discrimination
and stigmatization, deportees struggle to provide
for their basic needs, including securing housing and
employment. Without work, it is difficult to afford
housing. Without housing, it is difficult to hold
down a steady job. The obstacles deportees face in
obtaining Haitian identification further complicates
their ability to apply for housing and employment.
DEPORTEES FACE DIFFICULTIES
SECURING HOUSING

Safe and affordable housing is scarce in
Haiti, even for those living without the stigma

of deportee status. The earthquake initially
forced approximately 1.5 million Haitians into
IDP camps.239 The approximately 85,000 people
who still live in the official IDP camps endure
overcrowded conditions, live under plastic
sheeting, and lack regular access to toilets
or drinking water.240 Many of those initially
displaced have since left the camps but have
moved into other shoddy structures that would
not survive another earthquake.241 Others
continue to reside in camps which have been
removed from the “official” list of IDP camps
at the government’s request.242 Some people
have been evicted from these camps by force.243
Others received short-term rental subsidies but
could not afford to stay in their apartments after
the grants ended.244 Most post-earthquake aid
Factual Findings

21

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

has been earmarked for rebuilding middle class
single-family homes.245 These programs exclude
renters and other members of Haiti’s poorer
communities, including most deportees.246
Complicated and irregular land title issues
in Haiti make any significant social housing
developments for the poor unlikely in the near
future.247
As a result, deportees are vulnerable to
homelessness, a life in the slums, or an itinerant
lifestyle that involves constantly moving from
house-to-house to live with friends or distant
relatives. Upon deportation, many Haitians rely
upon money from U.S.-based family members to
help them survive.248
Deportee Alex has been forced to rely
on his father in the United States to send him
money because he has been consistently refused
employment since his deportation in 2013.249 His
father can only occasionally send approximately
$200. In order to survive, Alex converted to
Seventh Day Adventism to receive assistance and
housing from parishioners.
Deportee Clifford, age 22, has no family in
Haiti to help him meet his basic needs or find
employment.250 He is only able to survive on the
limited amount of money that his U.S.-based
mother can occasionally send.
Some deportees end up living on the street
while others move from one temporary housing
situation to another.251 Deportees who manage to
scrape together enough money to rent a place may
encounter difficulties finding housing because of
stigmatization by landlords based on their deportee
status.252 Deportees fortunate enough to secure
housing are also often forced to reside in poor,
dangerous communities and are sometimes targeted
for robbery. One deportee, Gary, reported having
his small one-room dwelling burglarized while
he was away. Nearly all of his belongings were
stolen.253 When Gary went to report the break-in
to the police, they refused to help him.254 Another
deportee, Augustine, moved into his father’s home
upon deportation to Haiti.255 Shortly thereafter,
the home was robbed and Augustine was tied up.
22

His father had to pay the armed thieves livestock
to release his son. Due to threats from the thieves,
Augustine went to reside with another family
member and started to keep a low profile.
Those deportees who end up residing with
relatives or others in Haiti often face a precarious
situation if they are unable to contribute to
the household income. Deportees sometimes
encounter resentment or may be vulnerable to
mistreatment by their Haiti-based hosts because
they have no other housing options.256
DEPORTEES FACE DIFFICULTIES SECURING
EMPLOYMENT

Haiti remains the poorest country in the
Western Hemisphere.257 Even before the
earthquake, 80 percent of the population was
living in poverty, with 54 percent in abject
poverty.258 Seventy-six percent of the population
was earning less than $2 USD a day, with 60
percent receiving less than $1 USD.259 Today,
unemployment is between 40 and 60 percent,
making it 192nd out of 203 countries in terms
of unemployment.260 While the economic and
employment situation is dire for many Haitians,
deportees experience additional obstacles to
finding employment because of stigmatization and
discrimination, lack of a national identification
card, language issues, no or few networking
contacts, and little knowledge of the Haitian
employment system.
The UN Independent Expert on Haiti
found in his report on forced returns to
Haiti that:
	
Few Haitian nationals forcibly
returned from the United States…
have been able to find jobs despite
their notable efforts, skills, and
levels of education. This is due
to high unemployment rates and
stigmatization of deportees…and
lack of community and family
connections. Deportees stand out in
Haitian society by the way they dress,

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

A Haitian police officer destroying a "pepe" stand on a street in Port-au-Prince. | Photo by Geoffrey Louden
carry themselves, and style their hair.
Some had stable jobs or careers in
the countries from which they were
removed and now face bleak job
prospects in Haiti. Without access
to work, deportees have difficulty
paying for food, clothing, housing and
other basic needs and are unable to
support dependents.261

Many deportees remain unemployed for
years, despite repeated attempts to find jobs.
Deportees report that revealing their status as
deportees results in discrimination that prevents
them from finding work, regardless of professional
qualifications, English language skills, and a U.S.
education.
Deportee Colson has been unable to find
a job in Haiti since being deported in 2012.
During his 27 years in the United States, he
Factual Findings

23

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

sold car insurance, served as a notary public,
and provided medical transportation services.262
Since his deportation to Haiti, Colson has
repeatedly filled out job applications but has
not received any responses. He believes this is
because of his deportee status and the fact that
many applications require him to list his arrest
history.
Even if an employer does not specifically
request a criminal history, a requirement to
list previous work experience can work against
deportees. One man noted how potential
employers reject him after seeing his resume
because it contains jobs in the United States,
revealing his status as a deportee.263 Others
believe that their appearance makes it obvious they
are deportees.264 Deportee Magnum explained
that despite being a plumber by trade, he has
encountered serious difficulties finding a job.265
“[T]he people in Haiti aren’t going to give you a
chance,” said Magnum, who has dreadlocks, a gold
tooth, and tattoos.266 “They look at me like I’m a
threat.”267
Deportees who have no family support
in Haiti are even more susceptible to longterm unemployment and poverty. “Without
family or independent support, we deportees
are doomed,” said Wilky, an unemployed
deportee.268 To survive, deportees often try
to pick up odd jobs like cleaning out wells,
tutoring children, or selling second-hand
merchandise from the United States,"pepe,"
on the street.269 But because of their status as
deportees, these activities in the informal sector
make them even more vulnerable to violence or
arbitrary arrests by police.
U.S. and Haitian officials have recognized the
tremendous risks and obstacles facing deportees in
Haiti as well as the need for professional livelihood
training and support. However, as detailed above,
the U.S. post-earthquake reintegration program
fell short of its goals and funding ended altogether
in April 2014.270

24

GRAVE THREATS TO PHYSICAL AND
MENTAL HEALTH
Deportees face significant and even lifethreatening risks in Haiti because of the ongoing
cholera epidemic and lack of access to adequate
medical care and medication. Since the earthquake,
over 700,000 Haitians have been sickened
by cholera and “mental health needs [have]
skyrocketed.”271 Yet five years after the earthquake,
healthcare “remain[s] woefully inadequate”
in Haiti.272 Haiti still lacks the infrastructure
necessary to properly treat most significant
physical and mental illnesses. Approximately
half of Haiti’s population lacks access to even
basic care, with the disabled, mentally ill, poor,
and those living in rural areas facing the greatest
barriers.273 Deportees are especially vulnerable
because of their isolation, stigmatization, and
poverty. The United States nonetheless continues
to deport Haitian nationals who suffer from
significant physical or mental health issues, putting
them at risk of deterioration, and even death.

On just one returning flight
to Haiti this year, there were
two deportees with HIV, six
with mental illness, nine with
hypertension, five with diabetes,
and one who had polio.
The physical conditions and disabilities of
deported persons have included: HIV, hepatitis,
kidney disease, blindness, diabetes, sickle cell
anemia, hypertension, a tear in the heart,
hypothyroidism, seizures, a partially-amputated
foot, a missing kneecap, migraines, severe
insomnia, colon problems, open head wounds,
and borderline mental retardation.274 Mental
health conditions have included: schizophrenia,
bipolar disorder, suicidal ideation, anxiety, and
depression.275 On just one returning flight to Haiti
in 2014, there were two deportees with HIV, six
with mental illness, nine with hypertension, five
with diabetes, and one who had polio.276

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

INADEQUATE MEDICAL AND
MENTAL HEALTH CARE

Medical services in Haiti are extremely limited
due to a lack of resources and a “critical” shortage
of health professionals.277 According to the PanAmerican Health Organization, “the country’s
health system faces complex organizational and
managerial problems which have resulted in
services of limited availability and poor quality.”278
The U.S. State Department’s travel warnings
have acknowledged that “[m]edical facilities…
are particularly weak” and have noted that “U.S.
citizens injured in accidents and others with
serious health concerns have been unable to find
necessary medical care in Haiti.”279 The Haitian
health system lacks the capacity to treat chronic
health problems and complicated conditions.280
The system, for example, cannot adequately
support services for dialysis or heart surgery.281
The lack of proper treatment for chronic diseases
can lead to both acute medical catastrophes,
such as heart attacks and strokes, and long-term
consequences such as kidney failure.282
According to estimates, only about half of
Haiti’s population has access to basic medical care.283
The fact that the health system is largely privatized
creates barriers to care for the poor.284 Health care
services are largely provided by NGOs, which
are overburdened and cannot meet the needs of
the entire country.285 Further, many international
NGOs which provided emergency relief after
the earthquake have ceased their operations.286
Haiti’s small public health sector provides only the
most basic medical services and does not provide
medication.287 The cost of care in the for-profit
sector is unaffordable for the majority of the
population, including most of deportees.288
Obtaining mental health care in Haiti is
particularly challenging. The country has only
around 20 psychiatrists—about one for every
500,000 people—and only approximately five
work in the public health system.289 Most of
Haiti’s mental health professionals are located in
Port-au-Prince, creating an even more acute lack
of access to care in other areas of the country.290

Haiti’s education system gives doctors and nurses
little training on mental health issues, unless they
choose to specialize in that area.291 Those who do
are often inadequately trained and prepared.292
Moreover, the Haitian government allocates a
mere one percent of its total health budget to mental
health.293 Because doctors lack sufficient training,
mentally ill patients in Haiti are often simply
medicated with tranquilizers instead of being
properly diagnosed and treated.294
The availability of medication is extremely
poor in Haiti.295 Medicine for chronic conditions,
such as diabetes and hypertension, as well as
antipsychotics and other drugs for the treatment of
mental illness, are in particularly scarce supply.296
Researchers from the University of California,
San Francisco found that a significant number of
medicines were not available in any private retail,
nonprofit, public or mixed medicine outlet they
surveyed.297 For those medicines that are available,
high costs make them inaccessible to many
Haitians.298
For deportees, most of whom are
unemployed, the cost of medical care is often
prohibitive. Few of the deportees in need of care
whom the authors and contributors interviewed
have been able to access it. The vast majority
reported that they have been unable to obtain
medical or mental health care and/or medicine in
Haiti, either because of the cost or because they
could not find the medication.299
Deportee Peterson was not able to take
the medication he requires for his hypertension
because he found it was not always available,
and when he was able to find it, it was too
expensive.300 Without treatment, he faces a
serious risk of heart attack or stroke.301 Multiple
deportees suffering from psychotic disorders,
major depression and anxiety have reported
similar problems accessing treatment.
Alex, a deportee with post-traumatic stress
and major depressive disorders, has not been able
to obtain the anti-depressants he needs.302
Deportee Carl is schizophrenic and is prone
to hypercoagulation, which can lead to lifeFactual Findings

25

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

threatening pulmonary embolisms.303 Although a
local NGO has helped Carl to find a doctor and
medicine, he does not have the money to continue
paying for his treatment and regular trips to Portau-Prince to see his doctors.
When the U.S.-funded reintegration
program was in effect, a few deportees received
some assistance with medical care.304 Yet the
vast majority of individuals were unable to
access care.305 One deportee, for example,
contacted IOM, a USAID partner, for help
obtaining psychotropic medication he had been
prescribed.306 However, he did not receive
any assistance and has been unable to pay for
the drugs himself.307 During the reintegration
program, IOM staff told the authors that
deportees had access to medical insurance but
would have to pay for it themselves.308 In April
2014, the United States stopped funding the
reintegration program altogether.309
Deportees express feeling left in the dark
about how to access the medical care that exists.
Many have few or no connections in Haiti and
are unfamiliar with the country. Navigating the
system alone to attempt to access limited care
is nearly impossible. Because mere survival
is a challenge each day, many deportees may
also lack the physical and emotional reserves
necessary to find the resources to address their
health needs.
Finally, the stigma associated with being
a deportee also creates a barrier to care. One
advocate reports that deportees have been turned
away from medical centers because of their status
as deportees and have been treated with disdain
even by health care workers.310 The advocate has
had to intervene on multiple occasions to ensure
that deportees receive care.311
Shortly after his arrival in Haiti in 2011,
deportee Magnum found himself suffering
from a fever and continuous vomiting, which
are symptoms of cholera.312 Magnum went to a
treatment center, but was turned away. He was
admitted only when a foreign advocate came to
the facility and insisted that he be seen. When
26

Magnum went to a clinic run by an international
NGO for follow up care, the security guard at
the gate refused to let him in. The advocate again
intervened and Magnum was permitted to enter
the facility, only to be told by a staff person that
he would have to pay the highest amount on their
sliding scale despite his poverty. He was only able
to see a doctor when the advocate became involved
again.
Several months later, Magnum contacted IOM
for medical assistance. IOM directed him to a local
hospital. Magnum had worn an ankle brace to help
him walk in the United States after he tore several
ligaments in his heel in a motorcycle accident. He
was also prescribed Xanax and Clonopin for severe
anxiety. However, the hospital told Magnum that
there was nothing that could be done for him in
Haiti for either of his medical issues.
MISTREATMENT AND STIGMATIZATION OF THE
MENTALLY ILL

Mentally ill deportees face significant additional
risks and harm in Haiti. Mental illness has long
been stigmatized in Haiti.313 The mentally ill are
neglected and abused even by family members.314
One deportee’s family member says she fears for
her schizophrenic brother-in-law because many of
the people she knows do not understand mental
illness and she is aware “of many people being
beaten or even killed in the neighborhood because
people think they are vampires or other evil beings
doing voodoo.”315 Many individuals do not even seek
treatment for mental health conditions because of
the shame associated with such illness.316 Because
deportees as a whole are stigmatized, a deportee
who is also mentally ill faces an extraordinary
amount of stigma.
Many mentally ill individuals end up in
Haiti’s prison system.317 Poor mentally ill Haitians
deemed to require institutionalization, including
deportees, also are confined at one of two public
mental health institutions. Mars and Kline
Psychiatric Center in Port-au-Prince is designed
for short-term treatment.318 Défilé de Beude in
Croix-des-Bouquets, a Port-au-Prince suburb,

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

People institutionalized at Mars and Kline Psychiatric
Center in Port-au-Prince walk naked and live in filth.
| Photo by Darcy Padilla/AgenceVU

is a long-term facility.319 Both institutions are
in extremely poor condition, with dangerous
living conditions and a lack of crucial staff and
services.320 A psychologist with experience
working with mentally ill patients in Haiti stated
that “the mental health institutions are worse than
warehouses, and are probably not fit to house
humans.”321
In a September 2013 photo essay, Time
magazine showed a series of photos from Défilé de
Beude. The photographer reported that patients
sleep “on concrete slabs in barred cells” which he
referred to as “cages.”322 At the time of the shoot,
the facility was housing 250 people, 100 people
above its maximum capacity.323 During the ten
days he visited the hospital, the photographer saw
only one doctor, but never once saw him interact
with any patients in the facility.324
Mars and Kline Psychiatric Center,
where Haitian officials with ONM have
institutionalized multiple U.S. deportees, also

resembles a jail.325 The facility is meant to hold
no more than 60 people, but was holding twice
that number as of October 2014.326 Although
the facility’s maximum stay is 90 days, in some
cases treated patients remain stuck at the facility
for much longer because no one comes forward
to claim them.327 Mentally ill deportees with no
family or friends to care for them may languish
at Mars and Kline indefinitely.

DISABLED DEPORTEES FACE SEVERE
PROBLEMS
Disabled deportees are particularly
vulnerable to harm in Haiti. Life for disabled
persons after the earthquake in Haiti has been
described as “many circles of hell.”328 Estimates
are that 300,000 people were injured during
the January 2010 earthquake. Experts believe
that “2,000 to 4,000 people survived with
Factual Findings

27

Deportee Merlene, who was institutionalized at Mars and Kline for over a year, was deported with a leg injury that is now infected and untreated.
| Photo by Bess Adler

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

n TRAPPED AT MARS AND KLINE PSYCHIATRIC CENTER
Merlene, a female deportee, was held at Mars and Kline Psychiatric Center for over one year,
from September 2013 through November 2014.329 ONM brought her to the facility and kept her there
because she suffers from severe mental illness and has no family or friends in Haiti to care for her.
In December 2013, she was being forcibly injected with an antipsychotic. When the authors visited
the facility in October 2014, Merlene was rambling and incoherent. During that visit, the authors
accompanied Merlene inside the facility, up to the locked living quarters. The dank building is divided
into two sections for men and women, with dark surroundings and iron bars. The living quarters smell
overwhelmingly of urine and feces. The men’s section was not visible because it was obscured by a
concrete wall with a lone door. The women’s section resembled a cage with metal bars. Because of the
bars anyone, including men, can see inside. Two patients in one room were sprawled on the concrete
floor with nothing but a blanket beneath them. In another room, there were several iron beds without
any mattresses. Without resources, the hospital is unlikely to improve in the near future, as the facility
remained in virtually the same state of disarray that it had been right after the earthquake.
Merlene was released from Mars and Kline Psychiatric Center in November 2014, but remains
homeless.330 She lives in a tent outside the temporary shelter for homeless deportees.331 Merlene is suffering
from a serious infection on her leg and is not getting medical treatment.332 n
28

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

amputations, more than 200 survived with
spinal cord injuries (SCI), and thousands had
fractures.”333 An estimated 200,000 people
will have long-term disabilities as a result of
the earthquake,334 adding significantly to the
“already large number of Haitians living with
disabilities.”335 While some initial emergency aid
was earmarked for these issues, there are now a
much larger number of disabled persons in Haiti
and insufficient resources to help them.336 A
population study undertaken in 2012 in Port-auPrince showed that almost one in six households
included a person with a disability.337 Yet fewer
than half of the people who reported needing
rehabilitative medical assistance received such
care.338 The same study also found that people
with disabilities do not participate equally in
employment or education, and they have poorer
access to healthcare.339 Hospitals and clinics lack
the funding, space, and human resources to treat
the disabled, and the few existing rehabilitative
and treatment facilities have substandard
conditions.340 Moreover, Haiti generally lacks
disabled-accessible institutions, infrastructure,
and transportation.341
In addition to the barriers mentioned above,
disabled individuals face stigmatization, neglect,
and abuse in Haiti.342 One study, for example,
found that community members subjected
the disabled to verbal attacks or avoided any
contact with them to prevent “contamination.”343
Negative attitudes toward the disabled
contributed to the persistence of discrimination
in all areas of life: education, employment, health
and even family.344 For disabled persons who are
also deportees, the stigma, marginalization, and
physical vulnerability is compounded by their
dual status.
One physically disabled deportee put at high
risk is Billy. Billy, who has no kneecap, was taking
pain medication and awaiting surgery for his knee
while he was in the United States.345 However,
in November 2011, he was deported to Haiti
without having had surgery and despite having
been the beneficiary of precautionary measures

from the IACHR. As of December 2013, he had
not been able to see a doctor and could not afford
medication or the necessary physical therapy for
his knee in Haiti. Due to the pain in his knee, Billy
is only able to walk for short periods of time and
walks no more than two blocks a day.

CONTINUED EFFECTS OF THE
CHOLERA OUTBREAK
The post-earthquake cholera outbreak
continues to pose a significant threat to many
Haitians, particularly for those who live in areas
with poor sanitation and a lack of clean water.
This includes many deportees. As of December
2, 2014, there had been 717,203 cholera cases in
the country and 8,721 cholera related deaths.346
Haiti’s prison system is currently experiencing
an outbreak of the disease.347 Moreover, since
September 2014 there has been a dramatic
increase in the number of new cases over the first
three quarters of the year.348
At the same time, access to treatment for
cholera has been dwindling. In November 2014,
Doctors Without Borders reported that there
were insufficient beds available to treat cholera
victims.349 The Haitian health system still confronts
inadequate funding, human resources, and
medicine necessary to treat cholera patients.350
Many of the international nonprofit groups
running cholera treatments centers have pulled
out of the country, shrinking the number of these
facilities by more than two thirds.351 At the same
time, the percentage of cholera patients who die
at the remaining treatment centers is increasing.352
This rise has been attributed to “weakness in the
capacity of health centers to provide timely and
adequate health services”353 and treatment delays
caused by the longer travel time resulting from
facility closures.354
Clean drinking water and sanitation
remains scarce in Haiti.355 Haiti lacks—and the
international community has failed to provide—
the funds necessary to build that infrastructure.356
Factual Findings

29

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

Polluted waterways, like this one in Port-au-Prince, increase the risk of contracting cholera or other waterborne diseases. | Photo by Bess Adler

Deportees may be at particular risk of
contracting cholera and other communicable
diseases because they often face homelessness or
live in substandard or unsafe housing.357 Fragile
living situations often involve lack of sanitation
and insufficient clean water.358 Additionally,
deportees may become infected more easily
because they have not developed “herd immunity,”
or immunity as a result of prior exposure.359
Those deportees with medical issues or who
are confined to mental health facilities may face
heightened risks as well, since “[m]ore
than 30% of the health care centers have no
access to safe water, and even though 80% of
them have pit latrines, only half of these meet
sanitation requirements.”360 Deportees who are
detained in prisons or jails are also more likely to
contract the disease.

30

WOMEN’S VULNERABILITY TO
SEXUAL VIOLENCE, AND SOCIAL
AND ECONOMIC HARM
Female deportees face particularly grave
prospects upon return to post-earthquake
Haiti. Sexual and gender-based violence is an
unfortunate reality for many women in Haiti and
has worsened since the earthquake.361 During
the period 2010 to 2012, approximately 70%
of women and girls in Haiti experienced some
form of gender-based violence.362 Between
July 2009 and June 2011, a coalition of four
nongovernmental organizations reported 672
incidents of sexual violence, 90% of which
included reports of rape.363 Sexual violence has
reached an alarming level after the earthquake.
One aid organization for rape survivors in Portau-Prince received an average of five reports of
rape per day in 2012.364

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

Haiti’s legal system does not provide adequate
protections for women.365 Until 2005, Haitian
law considered rape to be only an “assault on
morals” and an attack on the victim’s honor rather
than a crime against a woman’s right to physical
integrity.366 In the October 2014 review of Haiti’s
compliance with the ICCPR, the UN Human
Rights Committee raised concerns about the
weak protections of women against gender-based
violence, including rape.367
Gender-based violence generally goes
unreported because Haitian women have little
faith in the justice system. Haitian authorities
provide little assurance that assailants will
be arrested and prosecuted, and in fact often
demonize and blame the victim for the assault.368
Haitian authorities are all-too-often implicated in
acts of sexual violence themselves. Poor and
uneducated women infrequently report sexual
violence because they face systemic barriers

such as low literacy and education rates, a lack
of disposable income and poor access to public
transportation that impede their access to legal
aid and justice systems.369
Women in Haiti face social and economic
exclusion, gender stereotyping, and cultural
and legal discrimination, all of which create
an environment that allows violence against
women to continue as an accepted practice.370
Women in Haiti generally have fewer economic
opportunities than men and are in fewer
positions of authority.371 As a result, women are
often forced to depend upon men for economic
support or to succumb to sexual exploitation for
economic survival.372
Female deportees are particularly at risk
because the discrimination they experience as
deportees in Haiti further limits the resources
and opportunities available to them.373 According
to a leading women’s rights activist in Haiti,

Deportees Brenda and Nadine holding hands | Photo by Bess Adler

Factual Findings

31

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

women deportees are “very vulnerable to
the current conditions of Haiti, and [can] be
susceptible to sexual assault.”374 For female
deportees without family in Haiti, the threat of
gender-based violence is especially high because
they often lack safe and stable shelter and a family
support system.375
Recently-arrived female deportees without
family have no choice but to be placed in an
informal, government-run temporary shelter
located in a remote area outside of Port-auPrince.376 Since the shelter is run by untrained
male former deportees paid by the Haitian
government with little oversight from ONM,
female deportees are at heightened risk.377 For
example, deportee Francin had no choice but
to seek shelter at the temporary shelter, where
she suffered an assault at the hands of a shelter
employee.378 Another deportee, Kettie, was so
afraid at the shelter that she had trouble sleeping.379
She says, “one guy threatened to violate me. He
would try to touch my breasts…and I made him
stop.”380
Such precarious situations for female
deportees also may lead to homelessness.381 For
instance, another deportee, Merlene, fell victim to
gender-related violence. Homeless and suffering
from mental illness, she reportedly was forced to
resort to survival sex, a form of transactional sex
performed in exchange for economic resources
or protection.382 These conditions, taken in their
totality, create an often-insurmountable barrier for
women deportees, especially those without family
ties or other sources of support and protection.

LGBT DEPORTEES’ VULNERABILITY TO
VIOLENCE AND HARDSHIP
LGBT deportees encounter violence and
hardship upon return to Haiti on account of a
pervasive hetero-normative societal attitude and
the lack of legal protections afforded to LGBT
individuals.383 Haitian society has long rejected
LGBT individuals because of the country’s strict
32

conservative social and religious values.384 The
operations director at SEROvie, an LGBT activist
organization in Port-au-Prince, has summarized
the experience of LGBT individuals in Haiti as
follows: “lesbian and gay people are beaten in the
street… They are discriminated against by health
professionals [and] abandoned by their families.”385
LGBT deportees live in constant fear of
being harmed. Haitian LGBT organizations
“have documented physical attacks, robberies,
and murders committed on the basis of victims’
gender-nonconforming demeanor, style of dress,
or association at private gatherings with other
LGBT members in the community.386 LGBT
individuals often refrain from reporting abuses
because of a fear that the perpetrators will retaliate
and the police will either fail to respond or will
attack the victim.387 Haitian police officers “have
verbally and physically attacked LGBT people
who have reported violent crimes committed
against them.”388 These acts of violence reportedly
have included gang rapes of lesbians by police
officers.389
During the UN Human Rights Committee’s
2014 review of Haiti’s human rights record, the
Committee expressed concern about violence
against LGBT individuals.390 The Committee
recommended that Haiti ensure documentation of
discrimination and compensation for victims, and
that Haiti adopt a national awareness campaign to
fight stereotypes based on sexual identity.391
Anti-gay sentiment has grown in the years
since the earthquake. The earthquake set back
prospects for gains for LGBT individuals by
destroying aid organizations’ offices and spaces
used for services and support networks.392 Some
blamed LGBT individuals for the earthquake,
leading to heightened violence on the grounds that
“immoral acts” had invoked the wrath of God.393
The earthquake ushered a rise in “corrective rape”
and increased harassment due to the vulnerability
of LGBT individuals who were displaced and living
in flimsy shelters.394
The high level of hostility toward LGBT
individuals, compounded by the destruction of

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

For LGBT deportees, the
experience of danger and
hardship in Haiti is twofold
because LGBT deportees
face structural barriers and
violence as a consequence
of both LGBT- and deporteerelated stigma and
discrimination.
the earthquake, has stunted LGBT activism and
increased the public backlash directed toward
LGBT individuals in Haiti.395 In the summer
of 2013, Haitians flooded the streets of Portau-Prince to participate in an anti-gay protest
organized by an anti-gay “coalition of moral and
religious organizations.”396 The street protests
quickly escalated to violence and chaos.397
Members of the public ransacked and looted
LGBT aid organization offices, delivered death
threats to employees, and even committed arson
against organization offices.398 This violence
included 47 attacks on actual or assumed LGBT
individuals with weapons such as knives, machetes,
and cement blocks.399
For LGBT deportees, the experience of danger
and hardship in Haiti is twofold because LGBT
deportees face structural barriers and violence
as a consequence of both LGBT- and deporteerelated stigma and discrimination. Because of the
culture of secrecy and hostility toward LGBT
individuals in Haiti, they must often establish a
tight-knit support network of trusted friends
or family to assist in securing safe housing and
avoiding harm.400 Given that many deportees lack
family ties or pre-established support networks in
Haiti, LGBT deportees are even more vulnerable
to harm. Moreover, since deportees often end up
homeless or living in poorer neighborhoods where
rates of crime and violence are higher, safe housing
is often unattainable for LGBT deportees. LGBT
deportees may also be more exposed to attacks
from the community and the police because of
their perceived Americanized mannerisms. This is
particularly true of women who are perceived as

masculine or androgynous and men who appear
effeminate.401
Deportee Stephanie, a lesbian, experienced
threats because she is perceived to have a
masculine appearance.402 Stephanie recounts one
incident when she was standing outside of her
aunt’s house in Haiti: “Three men passed by…and
said they better not catch me late at night because
they [would] show everyone that I’m a female and
not a man. Basically they [were] saying [that they
were going to] rape me.”
Since being deported in 2013, Stephanie has
endured threats not only from the community,
but also from police officers. Stephanie explains,
“even the police [are] like that. If I tell the police,
they’ll tell the person who [threatened me] and
that person will retaliate [against me]. You can’t
rely on the police to help you.” On another
occasion, Stephanie was threatened by a police
officer who was aware that she is a lesbian and
repeatedly made vulgar sexual advances towards
her.

THE DEVASTATING IMPACT OF
FAMILY SEPARATION
Deportation leads to the separation of
families, resulting in psychological, emotional,
and financial harms for both deportees and
the family members left behind in the United
States. In the case of deportations to Haiti, the
consequences are often particularly severe.
Family members in the United States suffer not
only from the separation and sense of loss but
also from the worry and fear for the loved one’s
safety. The financial impact is equally grave. In
many cases, deportees’ families not only lose the
primary breadwinner but must also send money
to their deported loved ones to help them survive
in Haiti. While virtually all deportees arrive
in Haiti with an immense sense of loneliness,
isolation, and uncertainty about the future, those
without family or friends in Haiti face an even
bleaker situation.
Factual Findings

33

When single mother Sonia was deported in 2012, her children had to be split up between two of her sisters. | Photos by Bess Adler

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

n A FAMILY PULLED APART BY DEPORTATION
In 2012, the United States deported Sonia, age 34, to Haiti on account of a criminal record.403 Sonia is the single mother
of three U.S. citizen children—two sons (Gabriel, age 17 and Gregory, age 11) and a daughter (Sandy, age 13). Before her
deportation, Sonia worked as a home healthcare aide to provide the sole source of financial support to her family. An LPR,
she had lived in the United States since she was seven years old.
Sonia’s son, Gabriel, vividly remembers the last time he was with his mother. It was around Christmas of 2010 and
Gabriel was in seventh grade. His mother had left the house to buy a red shirt for his school band concert the next day. She
never returned home. Gabriel explained that “she called and said she wouldn’t be coming back…that was the last time I saw
her.” He later found out that immigration authorities had detained Sonia while she was driving.
Gabriel was not able to see his mother before she was deported, except via video monitor at her final immigration
court hearing, during which he was not allowed to speak with her. The hardest part, Gabriel said, was that “I didn’t get to
say goodbye to her… that was the part that really killed me [when] she said she was in Haiti and I didn’t even know she was
gone.”
After the United States deported Sonia, her children were forced to live with their grandmother, Ruth, and Ruth’s two
teenage sons. Ruth suffers from glaucoma and struggled to support the children financially. Eventually, the family was forced
to split the children between Sonia’s sisters, Roselin and Rene, because neither is financially stable enough to care for all three
children.
The children’s education has been disrupted by their mother’s deportation. Peter is suffering academically because he
has not been able to focus in school since his mother was deported. Gabriel, currently a junior in high school, has started
to think about college. When asked what his plans were for life after graduation, Gabriel replied: “Go to college…I want
to go up North maybe…[I] just want to come back and surprise my family and come back with something good…I want
34

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

to become [an] architect or an engineer.” But, as his aunt Rene points out, college may not be a
realistic option for him because the family cannot pay for it. In his mother’s absence, Gabriel was
forced to take on responsibilities for his siblings. “I have to be there for my brother and sister,” he
said. “I have to be there for myself, and I have to be the bigger person now.”
The children all experience a deep sense of loss. Gabriel and Sandy regarded their mother as
their best friend. Gabriel explains that, “when I’m talking to her, it’s like I’m talking to my friend,
not just my mom. I tell her everything, [and] joke around. I never lived with my dad, so I never
had a father figure around. But my mom was my best friend, so she would always be there for me
whenever I needed her.”
The children have not seen their mother since she was detained in 2010. Sometimes talking to
her over the phone makes it even harder knowing that they cannot see her and be with her in person.
Gabriel described the last time he spoke with his mother on the phone: “I had a cold… [so] she was
telling me what medicine to [take] and she was telling me what she would have done if she was there.
And it kinda hit me when she said that because, if she was here, she would’ve taken care of me and
gotten me medicine.”
Since her deportation, Sonia has been unable to find work in Haiti. Instead, she has had to rely
entirely on her family in the United States for support. Sonia’s father, who is receiving social security
benefits, sends money to Sonia from his limited social security income.The rest of her family in the
United States is too poor to help very much. n
Deportee Sonia worked as a home healthcare aide in the United States but now has no means of supporting herself in Haiti..
| Photo by Bess Adler

Factual Findings

35

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

Family separation due to deportation
damages the physical and mental health of
parents, spouses, siblings, children, and other
relatives of deportees. One study of the family
impact of deportations in general estimated
that when primary earners are deported, their
partners who remain in the United States lose
an average of 2.2 years off their estimated
lifespan due to an increase in health problems,
stress, occupational challenges, and economic
hardship.404 Families of Haitian deportees must
not only grapple with the economic burdens, but
they also are confronted with the constant fear
that their loved one may not survive the violence
and discrimination against deportees in postearthquake Haiti.
The mother of deportee Andre describes
symptoms of insomnia following the deportation of
her son, saying, “I don’t sleep, I cannot sleep. Even if
I try, it wakes me up.”405
Deportee Daniel left behind his mother and
his two aunts in the United States, all three of
whom are deaf and mute.406 While in the United
States, Daniel was both the main caretaker and
sole custodian for his mother and his aunts. Daniel
provided financial assistance for all three and
handled all matters regarding their medical care.
Since Daniel’s deportation, his mother and aunts
are struggling to adapt to life without him. They
are also struggling to financially support Daniel in
Haiti and are extremely worried about his safety
and well-being.
Since the deportation of Evans in 2012, his
mother has encountered immense emotional
and financial difficulties.407 For a short time
after he was deported, Evans’ sister and mother
occasionally sent him small amounts of money.
Now they are barely able to cope without Evans’
financial support. Evans’ mother can no longer
pay the household bills and is facing eviction from
the home she shared with Evans and his sister. She
cries frequently and has lost a significant amount
of weight. Once, after speaking to Evans on the
phone and hearing of his difficulties in Haiti, she
attempted to hang herself.
36

Henry, the brother of deportee Evans, has
endured both emotional and financial hardships
since his brother was deported in 2011.408
Evans, whom Henry described as a “cool guy,
nonviolent, and well-mannered [with] an
addiction problem,” was deported for simple
drug possession-related crimes. Since Evans was
deported to Haiti, Henry worries about his wellbeing: “His future is hopeless… he is hungry. I
have to send him money just to sustain [him]. I
send whatever I can [but] it is a huge financial
strain. It is hard to cope.” Henry also expressed
fears that his brother will die in Haiti and he
will not be able to pay for any type of funeral or
burial services: “If anything happened to him, I
wouldn’t want them to just dig a hole.”
For children affected by deportations,
the psychological, behavioral, and emotional
consequences can be far-reaching and pervasive,
especially in the case of deportations to Haiti.409
In a study documenting the effects of family
separation due to deportations, children from
Haitian families reported the highest level of
psychological symptoms, particularly depression,
as compared to children of Chinese, Dominican,
Mexican and Central American families.410
The 19 year-old daughter of deportee
Augustine expressed the sadness and trauma
of losing her father to deportation in 2011: "A
family is built of a father, a mother, and kids.
The government has taken away my father, my
best friend. He has always been help for me, our
support system."411
This young woman and her family have gone
without enough food for days. In an effort to keep
the family afloat after her father's deportation, she
took on financial responsibilities for the family. She
was forced to drop out of college and put on hold
her dream of becoming an attorney for battered
Haitian women.412
As children struggle to cope with the loss
of a loved one to deportation, they can develop
serious behavioral and educational issues.413
Following the deportation of Jimmy, his young
son, a U.S. citizen, developed anger issues and

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

The wife and five U.S. citizen children of
deportee Augustine have struggled emotionally
and financially since ICE deported him in 2011.
| Photo by Magnus Lanje

This fifteen-year-old daughter of a deportee describes the impact of her father’s deportation on her and her family.

Factual Findings

37

Deportee Carl holds hands with his wife Christina. | Photo by Kelleen Corrigan

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

n A HEARTBREAKING DEPORTATION
Christina, the U.S. citizen wife of deportee Carl, has struggled to cope after the United States
deported her husband in September 2014 for a drug crime.414 Both she and her husband suffer from
mental illness. Carl has schizophrenia and was hospitalized when he had a relapse in 2013. Carl also
sometimes suffers from excessive blood clotting, which puts him at risk for experiencing a lifethreatening pulmonary embolism. Christina struggles with bipolar and schizoaffective disorder.
Since U.S. immigration authorities detained Carl, Christina has had many sleepless nights and
Deportee Carl, who suffers
constantly
fears that she will relapse. Before Carl was deported, Christina and Carl supported each
from mental illness, is pictured
other when they experienced episodes related to their illnesses. Christina explains that “in the
here in graduation robes.
U.S., when I looked like I was going to have a relapse, Carl would take me to the doctor. We did
everything together. He reminded me to take my medication and to go to doctors’ appointments.”
Christina is particularly worried for Carl’s safety and well-being because Carl was over-medicated while detained by ICE in
the United States. Christina recalls that “it took him a year and half to recuperate from all of the medication they gave him.” She
is afraid that something similar or worse will happen in Haiti. Christina reports sadness and fear for her husband’s safety in Haiti.
“The hardest thing for me is being away from him, being scared that he might have a relapse, that [in Haiti, the authorities] might
kill him because they don’t understand mental disabilit[ies],” she said.
Since Carl’s deportation, Christina has been forced to look to her parents for help and money to provide housing for
Carl in Haiti. Christina, however, “can’t count on family forever because everyone is struggling.” Christina’s father had open
heart surgery and her mother is in and out of the hospital.
Christina does not know how Carl is going to pay for and access medical care, because medical care and medication is
expensive and he has to travel to Port-au-Prince to see a doctor. As to his outlook on the future, Carl states: “There is no
future
I’m afraidTHE
oneHUMAN
day I might
a relapse
[and I] might
lose my wife.” HAITI
n
38 here.
AFTERSHOCKS:
IMPACThave
OF U.S.
DEPORTATIONS
TO POST-EARTHQUAKE

behavioral problems.415 His mother reported that
her son had developed a defiant attitude towards
authority, saying things like, “You are not my
dad.”416 The child became so emotionally disturbed
that he was institutionalized three times under
Florida’s involuntary civil commitment statute and
had to be medicated.417 The family had to start
collecting public assistance in 2011 because of
the deportation and the child’s serious emotional
issues that followed.418
Deportations to Haiti typically impose
extreme financial hardship on both the deportees
and their families in the United States. In many
cases, the loss of a primary financial provider to
deportation causes a household income to drop
below the poverty line.419 In a 2010 report, the
Urban Institute found that family separation due
to detention and deportation had particularly
severe economic consequences for Haitian
families residing in Miami.420 Within six months
of deportation, Haitian household incomes were
reduced by an average of 58%.421 In the absence
of a primary breadwinner, family members in the
United States try to make ends meet by working
extra hours, going without the basic necessities,
or relying on public assistance. Sixty-seven
percent of previously-unenrolled Haitian families
began receiving food stamps in the year following
one family member’s detention or deportation to
Haiti.422
U.S.-based family members of deportees face
the impossible choice of moving to an insecure
situation in Haiti to reunite with their family
members or staying in the United States without
their loved one. Despite the numerous security,
financial, and emotional risks, families sometimes
decide to relocate to Haiti to keep the family
together.
In the case of deportee Frantz, the expenses
related to his deportation put extraordinary
financial strains on his U.S. citizen fiancé,
Maria, and their 10-year-old U.S. citizen
son.423 Before Frantz's deportation, he has
been the primary breadwinner and had started
a construction business to financially support

the family. Following his deportation in 2011,
Maria struggled to pay the most basic household
expenses. Because Frantz was unable to find a
job in Haiti, Maria had to send him money so he
could survive. But the emotional consequences
of the separation were the most painful. As a
result, Maria decided to move with their son
to Haiti in the fall of 2011. Although it was a
difficult decision, Maria and Frantz decided the
move would be best for their son so he could
grow up with his father in his life.
The children of deportee Auguste, a single
father, have experienced severe financial and
legal problems as a result of their father’s
deportation.424 Auguste was initially detained
in a Haitian jail upon deportation. While in
the facility, officials refused to release him
until his family paid money. Fearing for their
father’s life, his children sent $2,600 USD to
Haiti. However, this meant foregoing their rent
money. Without the funds to pay for rent, the
family of five was forced to leave their home
in Florida and move to New York to live with
another relative. Auguste’s oldest daughter,
age 22, reported that a government social
service agency in New York told her she must
assume guardianship over her four younger
siblings or risk having the family separated.
The deportation has left her confused and
overwhelmed by having to assume all familial
responsibilities.
As these stories illustrate, deportation to
post-earthquake Haiti inflicts devastating effects on
families, particularly children. Because of the dire
post-earthquake conditions in Haiti, deportation
constitutes permanent family separation in
virtually all cases. The psychological harm of this
separation is long-lasting and the financial impact
is severe. n

Factual Findings

39

CHAPTER 3

International Law Prohibits
Deportations to Post-Earthquake Haiti
INTRODUCTION

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

The U.S. government violates the human rights
of Haitian deportees under international law when
it sends them to post-earthquake Haiti without due
consideration of the continuing humanitarian and
human rights crisis in the country and the individual
circumstances of the deportees and their families.
International human rights law provides robust
protections for individuals at risk of deportation,
including limitations on the ability of host countries
to deport individuals based on a criminal history
or unlawful presence. Some international human
rights bodies have categorically banned deportations
(also referred to as “expulsions,” “removals,” or
“forced returns”) in particular circumstances, while
others have established specific criteria that govern
deportation decisions.425
International human rights law recognizes the
following rights and standards in several contexts,
including deportations:
§§ The rights to family unity and private life;
§§ The rights of children to “special
protections” and to have their “best
interests” considered when their family
members are at risk of deportation;
§§ The right to life;
§§ The rights to personal security, integrity,
and health; and
§§ The rights to due process and a fair
hearing during the process of deportation.
International human rights law, including
the language of international and regional human
rights instruments and the interpretation of
these instruments by international human rights
40

bodies, should guide U.S. policy and practice
concerning deportations to post-earthquake
Haiti.426 International human rights law
increasingly requires decision-makers to balance
adverse factors, such as the severity and number
of criminal convictions, against equitable factors of
the non-national, such as duration of residence in
the host country, family ties in the host and home
countries, significant medical issues, and other
conditions in the home country. In certain cases—
such as when a deportation is likely to result in a
violation of the right to life or the right to be free
from torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading
treatment or punishment—human rights law
imposes a categorical ban on deportation.427
The United States should, pursuant to its
international human rights law obligations and
the exhortations of international experts,428
immediately halt deportations to Haiti, extend
Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to all Haitian
nationals in the United States, and permit the
return of already-deported individuals to the
United States. If and when conditions in Haiti
improve to such a degree that some deportations
might be justified, international law requires
the United States to adopt laws, procedures,
and programs designed to address the particular
needs and vulnerabilities of Haitian nationals
and to ensure respect for their human rights
both in the United States during the process
of deportation and upon their return to Haiti.
More generally, the United States should adhere
to the pronouncements of international human
rights bodies that compel countries, including the
United States, to expand their participation in the
international protection regime. One important
step in this direction is to adopt a “Universal

TPS” or other protection policy that permits all
non-citizens—regardless of nationality, criminal
record, residency status, or date of arrival in the
United States—to remain lawfully in the United
States for the duration of humanitarian and human
rights crises brought on by natural or human-made
disasters in their home countries, such as that in
post-earthquake Haiti.

THE DEPORTATION PROCESS MUST
TAKE FAMILY SEPARATION AND THE
BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD INTO
ACCOUNT
International human rights law requires
countries to protect non-nationals against
interference in family and private life during the
process of deportation. It establishes that children
have the right to special protections and requires
countries to consider children’s “best interests”
during the process of deportation. It further
prohibits countries from separating children from
their parents, except as a last resort.
The deportation of Haitian nationals to postearthquake Haiti violates their rights to family
and private life by separating them from their
families, including their minor children, in the
United States. The current process of deportation
also fails to provide deportees’ children with
special protections or take their best interests
into account, in violation of international human
rights law.
THE RIGHTS TO FAMILY AND PRIVATE LIFE

The American Declaration on the Rights and
Duties of Man (American Declaration) establishes
the rights to private and family life, including the
right to establish a family and receive protection
for that family under the law.429 The International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR),
which the United States has ratified and is legally
bound by, establishes a similar right to be free
from “arbitrary or unlawful interference” with
one’s family.430 The American Convention likewise

contains protections for the rights of the family
and the right to privacy.431
The Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights has declared that “removal proceedings
for non-citizens must take due consideration of
the best interest of the non-citizens’ children
and a deportee’s rights to family, in accordance
with international law.”432 In Smith & Armendariz
v. U.S., the Commission held that the United
States violated the rights to family and private
life because U.S. law does not permit an
immigration judge, in most cases, to “consider
on an individualized basis [petitioners’] rights
to family and the best interest of their children”
during removal proceedings.433 The Commission
declared that countries must conduct an
individualized balancing test during the process of
deportation that considers “the extent of hardship
the non-citizen’s deportation poses for the
family in the host state.”434 In a separate report,
the Commission announced that deportation
that results in the separation of family members
“may only be justified where necessary to meet a
pressing need to protect public order, and where
the means are proportional to that end.”435
Along similar lines, the UN Human Rights
Committee has found that a country must weigh
the degree of hardship a family would encounter
as a result of a deportation against the country’s
reason for the deportation.436 Factors to be
considered include the duration of residence in
the host country and whether the non-national’s
spouse and children speak the language of the
country of origin.437 The European Court of
Human Rights (European Court) has held that
countries must strike a “fair balance” between
the right to family life and the prevention of
crime or disorder when determining whether
to deport a non-national.438 In applying this
test, the European Court held that a man who
had committed a violent crime could not be
deported because his wife had no ties to his
home country, even though she spoke one of the
main languages used there.439 The Court also
considered the length of time since the crime was

International Law Prohibits Deportations to Post-Earthquake Haiti

41

committed and the good behavior of the nonnational following the crime.440 In another case,
the European Court held that the right to respect
for family life would be violated if Denmark
deported a man convicted of a serious drug
offense because his wife and child would face
“serious difficulties” if they were to follow him to
his home country.441

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

SPECIAL PROTECTIONS FOR CHILDREN

The American Declaration establishes that
“all children have the right to special protection,
care, and aid.”442 The Inter-American Commission
has interpreted this provision in line with the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child, which
states that in all actions concerning children, the
“best interests of the child shall be a primary
consideration.”443 The Inter-American Court
of Human Rights has emphasized that “any
immigration policy that respects human rights…
must give priority to the assessment, determination,
consideration and protection of the best interest of
the child” and must prioritize “the right of the child
to be heard and to participate in the different stages
of the proceedings.”444 The UN Committee on the
Rights of the Child has defined “best interests” to
mean “a larger weight must be attached to what
serves the child best,” especially when an action of
the State “has an undeniable impact” on the child.445
It has further declared that separating children from
their parents “should only occur as a last resort
measure.”446
In Smith & Armendariz, the Inter-American
Commission determined (1) that the wife
of one of the petitioners had struggled to
support the couple’s child and pay basic living
expenses following his deportation, and (2)
that the petitioner’s child lost the moral and
emotional support of her father.447 As a result,
the Commission found that the United States had
violated the American Declaration because it failed
to consider the best interests of the non-citizen’s
child prior to deportation.448
The European Court has halted the
deportation of a parent based solely on the
42

best interests of her children, even though
the non-citizen would have been eligible to
return to the host country two years after
her removal and despite the fact that the
citizen father had already been granted full
custody of the child.449 In a case involving the
deportation of two parents, the UN Human
Rights Committee found that Australia needed
to demonstrate “additional factors justifying the
removal” beyond the “simple enforcement of its
immigration law,” since the child had grown up
entirely in the host country and developed social
relationships there.450
This case law underscores the importance
of an equitable balancing test that weighs the
rights of children and their families against factors
adverse to the non-national. In the case of postearthquake deportations from the United States
to Haiti, many Haitian deportees have U.S.-based
family members, including children who are U.S.
citizens or lawful permanent residents. Deportees
were often the primary providers for their
families. As a result, their spouses and children
face significant financial and emotional hardship
following deportation. Moreover, circumstances
in Haiti make it difficult for family members
to live or even travel there. Many children of
deportees do not speak French or Creole and thus
cannot attend school in Haiti. Children’s health
also could be severely compromised by exposure
to new diseases to which they have not built an
immunity. U.S.-based spouses and family members
would face similar health risks, and may also not
speak Creole or French, making it especially
difficult for them to find work in a country with
40-60% unemployment.451 These circumstances
make family reunification impossible for many
deportees, and weigh heavily in favor of not
deporting Haitian nationals to post-earthquake
Haiti.
International human rights experts have
urged respect for the right to family life and the
rights of children who would be left behind,
including their right to education, in the context
of deportations to post-earthquake Haiti.

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

The UN High Commissioners for Refugees
and Human Rights have urged countries to
“prevent situations where returns lead to
separation from family members.”452 The UN
Independent Expert on the Situation of Human
Rights in Haiti emphasized that countries
should ensure “the consideration of family”
prior to deportation for all Haitian nationals.453
The Inter-American Commission issued
precautionary measures urging the United States
to suspend deportations of Haitian nationals
until procedures are in place that “adequately
take into account their right to family life and
their family ties in the United States.”454

THE DEPORTATION PROCESS MUST
TAKE INTO ACCOUNT POTENTIAL
VIOLATIONS OF THE RIGHTS TO LIFE,
SECURITY, INTEGRITY, AND HEALTH IN
THE HOME COUNTRY
International human rights law requires
countries to respect the rights to life, security,
integrity, and health during deportation
determinations. As discussed below, host
countries may violate international human rights
law when they deport a non-national with the
knowledge that there is a significant risk that the
non-national will experience infringements of
these rights in their home countries. In the case
of post-earthquake Haiti, the United States has
full knowledge of the specific vulnerabilities and
hardships deportees face in Haiti, including a
woefully inadequate health system, deportees’
lack of family or social ties, and the violence,
discrimination and stigmatization deportees as a
class face in Haiti. As a result, the United States
violates deportees’ rights to life, security, integrity,
and health when it returns them to Haiti.
The American Declaration states that
“every human being has the right to life, liberty
and the security of…person.”455 The InterAmerican Commission has interpreted this
provision to include the right of every person

“to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity
respected.”456 The Inter-American Court has
further interpreted the right to life to mean
the right to a “dignified life” and to “not be
prevented from having access to the conditions
that guarantee a dignified existence.”457 The
ICCPR establishes similar rights to life, security,
and integrity.458 The American Declaration
further states that “every person has the right to
the preservation of his health through sanitary
and social measures relating to food, clothing,
housing and medical care.”459
The Inter-American Commission has
declared that a country’s immigration policy
“must respect the right to life, physical and
mental integrity.”460 The Commission has further
held that exposing individuals to a “genuine and
foreseeable risk of death” by returning them to
their country of origin constitutes a violation
of the right to life.461 Even when the risk of
death is not “so imminent,” the Commission
has found that a deportation that would likely
result in the termination of critical medication
would violate Article 26 of the American
Declaration, which guarantees individuals the
right “not to receive cruel, infamous or unusual
punishment.”462 The Commission has also
recognized a violation to the right of security
when deportation affects a person’s “enjoyment
of his life, his limbs, his body, his health, and his
reputation.”463 The Inter-American Court held
that a country violated a family’s right to moral
and mental integrity when, among other things,
it expelled the family to its home country
despite the family’s fear and uncertainty about
the consequences of returning home, where the
parents had suffered inhumane treatment at the
hands of the authorities in the past.464 Similarly,
General Comment No. 31 of the UN Human
Rights Committee imposes upon countries “an
obligation not to extradite, deport, expel or
otherwise remove a person from their territory,
where there are substantial grounds for
believing that there is a real risk of irreparable
harm, such as that contemplated by articles 6

International Law Prohibits Deportations to Post-Earthquake Haiti

43

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

[right to life] and 7 [torture or cruel, inhuman
or degrading treatment] of the [ICCPR],
either in the country to which removal is to be
effected or in any country to which the person
may subsequently be removed…” 465
In Mortlock v. United States, the InterAmerican Commission found that deporting an
individual living with HIV/AIDS to her home
country where she would be unable to obtain
proper treatment would amount to “protracted
suffering and a premature death” in violation of
her rights under the American Declaration.466
The Commission laid out a balancing test for
deportees with health problems and those
likely to face health problems upon arrival in
their home country. The test considers whether
deportation “will create extraordinary hardship
to the deportee and her family and may well
amount to a death sentence given two principal
considerations: (1) the availability of medical care
in the receiving country and (2) the availability
of social services and support, in particular the
presence of close relatives.”467
Similarly, in D. v.The United Kingdom, the
European Court held that the U.K.’s forcible
return of a terminally-ill individual to his home
country where he was not likely to receive
adequate treatment for HIV/AIDS would amount
to inhuman treatment under the European
Convention on Human Rights.468 In B.B. v.
France, an HIV-positive prisoner appealed to
the European Commission on Human Rights
to remain in a French prison, where he was
receiving treatment, and not to be deported
to the Congo, where he would not be able to
access treatment.469 In view of the petitioner’s
deteriorating health and the impossibility of
receiving treatment in the Congo, the European
Commission referred the case to the European
Court. The Commission asserted that deportation
would violate the prohibition on torture,
inhuman, or degrading treatment in the European
Convention on Human Rights.470
The European Court has broadly construed
the prohibition on forced returns to protect
44

individuals from being forcibly returned to
countries plagued by general violence, particularly
non-citizens who are members of groups that are
systematically exposed to ill-treatment.471 In N.A.
v. United Kingdom, the European Court held that
in order to qualify for protection from general
violence, the ill-treatment an individual alleges he
will face if returned “must attain a minimum level
of severity.”472 It further held that the protection
would be granted even when “the danger emanates
from persons or groups of persons who are not
public officials.”473 In an earlier case, the Court
held that the deportation of a man related to
charges of terrorism would violate the noncitizen’s human rights due to “serious allegations
of human rights abuses” by security forces in the
man’s home country directed toward members of
his religious group.474
The rights to life, security, integrity and
health must be taken into consideration prior
to deporting individuals to post-earthquake
Haiti. Deportees with physical or mental
health conditions often lack access to necessary
medicines and health services in Haiti. The risk
of contracting cholera and other communicable
diseases is especially high for deportees given
the likelihood that they will live in unsafe
housing conditions and/or be detained by
Haitian authorities. This is especially true for
deportees with compromised immune systems
or disabilities. The UN Independent Expert
on Haiti and the UN High Commissioners
for Refugees and Human Rights have urged
governments not to send individuals with
serious medical conditions back to Haiti, given
the lack of medicines and medical care in the
country.475
Deportees as a class also experience
violence and stigmatization that leave them
particularly vulnerable to threats to life,
security, integrity, and health, and that generally
threaten their human dignity. Many deportees
live in fear of verbal and physical attacks, from
both Haitian authorities and the community
at large. Some groups of deportees, including

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

women and LGBT individuals, are particularly
vulnerable to sexual assault and other forms
of violence. Victims of sexual violence lack
access to effective legal mechanisms to
ensure perpetrators are caught and punished.
Moreover, deportees often lack social, cultural
and economic ties in Haiti, making it difficult
or impossible to secure food, housing, and
employment, thereby placing them at greater
risk. The United States must weigh all of these
factors, as the Commission did in Mortlock,
prior to conducting any deportation. Given the
devastating conditions in post-earthquake Haiti,
especially for deportees, this balancing test
weighs in favor of not forcibly returning anyone
to Haiti at this moment in time, regardless of
criminal history.
As discussed above, U.S. courts have
narrowly interpreted persecution in ways that
exclude many individuals from protection.476
While the U.S. has ratified and is thus bound
by the UN Convention Against Torture, it has
included an understanding that limits the U.S.
interpretation of the prohibition on the forced
return of people who are likely to be tortured.477
This understanding has resulted in a narrow
interpretation of torture, including in the
context of Haitian nationals applying for CAT
protection to stop their deportation to Haiti.
Specifically, the Board of Immigration Appeals
and some U.S. courts have held that even lifethreatening conditions faced by deportees in
Haiti do not qualify as torture, unless there is a
showing that Haitian authorities, or those acting
with their acquiescence, purposefully inflict
“severe pain or suffering.”478 This narrow judicial
interpretation of CAT imposes a high burden
on applicants, making this form of relief largely
unavailable to individuals facing deportation to
Haiti.479 By not including a balancing test that
weighs criminal history against equities and by
narrowly construing CAT protection, the U.S.
legal regime fails to comply with international
standards.

THE DEPORTATION PROCESS MUST
FOLLOW INTERNATIONAL DUE
PROCESS NORMS
International human rights law requires
countries to protect the rights to due process
and fair trial during the process of deportation.
Deficiencies in U.S. immigration law and in the
implementation of the April 1 Policy constitute a
failure on the part of the United States to respect
the rights to due process and fair trial during the
process of deportation of Haitian nationals.
The American Declaration provides robust due
process protections, establishing the rights to “resort
to the courts to ensure respect for…legal rights”
and “to be given an impartial and public hearing.”480
Both the Inter-American Commission and InterAmerican Court have interpreted these provisions
to require countries to provide “effective and
appropriate judicial guarantees” during all kinds of
proceedings, including administrative matters.481 The
Inter-American Court has specifically emphasized
that the “full range of basic guarantees of due process”
are applicable during deportation proceedings.482
Similarly, the Inter-American Commission has
declared that a country’s “immigration policy must
guarantee to all an individual decision with the
guarantees of due process.”483
Due process guarantees are especially
important when children’s interests are
concerned.484 The Inter-American Court has
emphasized “the right of the child to be heard
and to participate in the different stages” of
immigration proceedings.485
In the Case of the Pacheco Tineo Family v. Bolivia,
the Inter-American Court held that “a proceeding
that may lead to the expulsion or deportation of an
alien must be of an individual nature, in order to
allow the personal circumstances of each person
to be assessed.”486 Children whose parents are
subject to deportation proceedings, the Court
found, must be treated as interested, active parties
to the proceedings themselves, not “as subjects,
conditioned by and limited to the rights of their
parents.”487 The Court subsequently held in Case of

International Law Prohibits Deportations to Post-Earthquake Haiti

45

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

Dominican and Haitian People Expelled v. Dominican
Republic that the lack of access to administrative or
judicial review in deportation proceedings, as well
as the absence of a right to appeal the decision,
constituted a violation of the right to due process.488
In Smith & Armendariz v. United States, the InterAmerican Commission declared that “heightened
due process protections apply” in the context of
deportation because of the fundamental rights that
are, oftentimes irreversibly, at stake.489 The United
States violated an individual’s due process rights
under the American Declaration, the Commission
found, when it failed to provide that individual
and his family a “judicial mechanism to present
their humanitarian defenses.”490 The Commission
underscored that immigration removal
proceedings must be conducted by a neutral
decision maker and that a balancing test flexible to
the facts of each case is the “only mechanism” by
which to reach a fair decision.491
In Smith & Armendariz, the
Commission identified the
following factors as relevant for an
individualized determination regarding
deportation:492
	
[T]he age at which the non-citizen
immigrated to the host state; the
non-citizen’s length of residence in
the host state; the non-citizen’s family
ties in the host state; the extent of
hardship the non-citizen’s deportation
poses for the family in the host state;
the extent of the non-citizen’s links
to the country of origin; the noncitizen’s ability to speak the principal
language(s) of the country of origin;
the nature and severity of the noncitizen’s criminal offense(s); the noncitizen’s age at the time of the criminal
offense(s) was/were committed; the
time span of the non-citizen’s criminal
activity; evidence of the non-citizen’s
rehabilitation from criminal activity;
and the non-citizen’s efforts to gain
citizenship in the host state.493
46

As detailed above, U.S. immigration law,
in most circumstances, does not permit an
immigration judge to conduct such a balancing
of humanitarian equities against adverse factors
weighing in favor of deportation.494 The April
1 Policy concerning U.S. deportations to Haiti
directs ICE to conduct a balancing test that weighs
the United States’ interest in deportation against
the non-national’s equities, but it lacks clear
guidelines, and decisions are made entirely at
the discretion of ICE officers. Moreover, there is
no clear notification process or opportunity for
the non-national to respond. The determination
is not reviewed by an immigration judge or
other independent adjudicator. There is no right
to appeal. This stands in stark contrast to the
requirements laid out in Smith & Armendariz.
The United States should adopt a deportation
legal regime that comports with international
due process standards and that includes all the
hallmarks of due process and fair trial principles,
including transparency, a fair hearing before an
immigration judge, notice, the opportunity to
receive legal representation, and a balancing of all
of equitable factors described above. Additionally,
courts must take the best interests of the child
into account during any removal proceeding
involving his/her parent(s). These guarantees are
especially important in the case of deportations to
post-earthquake Haiti due to the heightened and
unique risks laid out in this report. Moreover, the
determination laid out above must not be purely
discretionary and must be subject to appeal and
judicial review. All legal proceedings should be
conducted by an immigration judge and not by an
immigration enforcement officer, as the current
April 1 Policy provides. n

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

Recommendations

CHAPTER 4

Recommendations to the United States,
Haiti, and the International Community
495

UNITED STATES
WITH RESPECT TO HAITIAN NATIONALS, THE UNITED STATES SHOULD:

1.	 Halt Deportations to Haiti. The United States should refrain from deporting any individual
to Haiti, unless and until the current humanitarian crisis in Haiti significantly improves such that
deportees from the United States can survive and lead safe and dignified lives in Haiti.
2.	 Extend Temporary Protected Status (TPS) to All Haitian Nationals. The United States
should extend TPS to all Haitian nationals currently living in the United States, regardless of
criminal history and regardless of date of arrival in the United States, for the duration of the
humanitarian crisis in Haiti.
3. 	 Adopt a Humanitarian Balancing Test, If and When Conditions in Haiti Improve to
Such a Degree That Some Deportations Might Be Justified. The United States should
balance, on a case-by-case basis, equitable factors against the nature and severity of the criminal
activity. This balancing test should apply to people regardless of immigration status or criminal
record, should not be purely discretionary, and should be subject to appeal and judicial review.
The balancing test should be conducted by an immigration judge and not by an immigration
enforcement officer, as the current April 1 Policy provides. Equitable factors include:
§§ Hardship if deportation were to occur, including but not limited to consideration of the
following factors:
»» Whether the noncitizen or U.S.-based family member suffers from a disability, physical
or mental health condition, or illness;
»» The availability and accessibility of medicine and medical care, social services, housing,
employment, and other forms of support;
»» The exposure to health risks (e.g., cholera) or other threats to life or well-being on
account of the general country conditions in Haiti or the particular vulnerability of the
noncitizen or his/her family;
»» Family, community, work, language, cultural, or other ties;
»» The noncitizen and any accompanying family members’ ability to speak Haitian Creole;
»» The impact of deportation on the noncitizen’s immediate family members, especially
minor children;
»» Whether the individual is a member of a vulnerable group; and
»» Whether the individual was born in the country of deportation.

47

Recommendations

§§ Conditions in the country of deportation;
§§ Specific vulnerabilities to those conditions of the noncitizen and any accompanying family
member;
§§ U.S. property or business ties;
§§ Duration of residence in the United States;
§§ Value and service to the community;
§§ Rehabilitation and good character, if a criminal record exists;
§§ Service in the U.S. Armed Forces; and
§§ Any other equities the individual may have.
4.	 Ensure the Existence of a Robust, Fully-Functioning, Sufficiently-Funded,
Accountable, and Transparent Reintegration Program in Haiti to Meet the
Basic Life Needs of Deportees. The reintegration program must be tailored to the
individual circumstances of each deportee and funds should be appropriated consistent with
an individual’s needs and abilities. Critical components of such a reintegration program
include: (1) providing necessary financial aid and in-kind assistance to deportees, based upon
an individualized assessment of each individual’s case; (2) improving collaboration between the
Haitian government, civil society, and NGOs; (3) financing educational facilities and learning
centers in Haiti which deportees can access at no cost; (4) aiding in the creation of jobs for
deportees in Haiti; (5) assisting in the provision of free or low cost healthcare for deportees
in Haiti; and (6) ensuring that all deportees receive a Haitian national identification card
immediately upon deportation and eliminations any barriers to acquiring regular (non-marked)
passports in a timely manner; and (7) working with the Haitian government to improve
negative perceptions and eliminate stigmatization of deportees. A final essential component of
a successful reintegration program is the creation of an independent monitoring body to ensure
that the reintegration program is fully implemented, effective, and complies with international
human rights standards.

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

5.	 Encourage the Government of Haiti to Officially and Publicly Issue a NoDetention Policy. The United States should encourage Haiti to adopt a no-detention policy
stating that Haitian authorities shall not detain deportees from the United States except in
accordance with Haitian law, which requires probable cause that the deportee has committed a
crime in Haiti and mandates that detainees be brought before a judge within 48 hours.
6.	 Permit the Return of Haitian Deportees. Allow individuals deported to post-earthquake
Haiti to return to the United States, since no deportation in the past five years could have meet
the standards of the humanitarian balancing test proposed in Recommendation I.3.
7.	 Engage with U.S. Civil Society in a Transparent, Meaningful, and Timely Manner.
The United States should engage with immigrants’ and human rights advocates in a transparent
and meaningful way about its decisions with respect to deportations to Haiti and other
related matters. This commitment includes, at a minimum, holding bi-annual roundtables or
stakeholder meetings.

48

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

Recommendations

8.	 Promote Increased International Aid to Haiti. The United States should work with
Haitian and international NGOs to ensure that foreign aid money allocated to Haiti is remitted
through means that are transparent and that aid money is effectively allocated in a way that
rebuilds Haiti’s infrastructure and creates sustainable positive improvements in the lives of all
Haitian people, and not just select sectors. The United States should provide targeted funds to
improve jails and detention centers in Haiti.
WITH RESPECT TO ALL NON-CITIZENS, THE UNITED STATES SHOULD:

9.	 Adopt Laws, Procedures, and Programs That Respect Human Rights of Foreign
Nationals. The United States should enact laws, procedures, and programs designed to ensure
respect for their human rights during the process of deportation, including the rights to life;
family unity and private life; personal security, integrity, and health; due process and a fair
hearing; and the rights of children to “special protections” and to have their “best interests”
considered when their family members are at risk of deportation.
10.	 Provide Special Protection for Children and Ensure Their Best Interests Are Given
Primary Consideration. The United States must provide children with special protection
during the process of deportation and ensure their best interests are taken into account
during each stage of the process. This includes providing children the right to be heard and to
participate, as appropriate, in deportation proceedings.
11.	 Eliminate or Minimize Civil Immigration Detention and Improve Existing
Detention Practices. The United States should eliminate or minimize the use of detention
in civil immigration cases. Any continued use of detention must eliminate use of remote
detention facilities so as to help ensure access to lawyers and support networks. Detention
conditions must conform to national and international standards, which should and be
codified into U.S. law.
12.	 Expand U.S. Participation in the International Protection Regime
a.	 Adopt “Universal TPS.” The United States should adopt a “Universal TPS” or other
protection policy that permits all non-citizens—regardless of nationality, criminal record,
residency status, or date of arrival in the United States—to remain lawfully in the United
States for the duration of humanitarian and human rights crises brought on by natural
or human-made disasters in their home countries, such as the crisis in post-earthquake
Haiti. The United States should look to the opinions of international human rights bodies,
legal experts, and NGOs, and experts in making a determination as to the existence and
duration of such crises.
b.	 Adopt Cartagena Declaration Standard. The United States should incorporate the
following standard from the Cartagena Declaration into U.S. law: individuals should receive
protection from forced return when their “lives, safety or freedom have been threatened
by generalized violence, foreign aggression, internal conflicts, massive violation of human
rights or other circumstances which have seriously disturbed public order.”496

Recommendations to the United States, Haiti, and the International Community

49

Recommendations

c.	 Expand Interpretation of Article 3 of the Convention Against Torture. The United
States should retract its understanding of Article 3’s protection as only applying to forms of
mistreatment that are “specifically intended” to inflict severe pain or suffering and bring the U.S.
interpretation of the scope of protection under Article 3 into conformity with international law.
d.	 Permit Complaints Under Article 22 of the Convention Against Torture.
The United States should make the necessary declaration under Article 22 of the UN
Convention Against Torture, which permits individuals to lodge complaints before the UN
CAT Committee about violations of their rights by the U.S. government.
e.	 Respect IACHR Decisions and Findings. The United States should respect the
findings and decisions of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). In
particular, the United States should utilize a presumption of non-deportability in any case in
which the IACHR has issued precautionary measures.

THE GOVERNMENT OF HAITI SHOULD:
1.	 End Detention of Deportees. Haiti should end the practice of detaining deportees for
any length of time unless there is probable cause to believe the individual committed a crime
in Haiti. The government should issue an official policy announcing the permanent and
unequivocal cessation of this practice.
2.	 Improve Detention Conditions. Haiti should ensure that conditions in jails, prisons, and
detention facilities meet international human rights standards. Detainees—both deportees and
the general population—should not be subjected to physical harm at the hands of jail officials
or other inmates. Detainees should only be kept in safe and sanitary detention conditions,
which includes, at a minimum, potable water, edible food, and medical and mental health care.
Officials who demand bribes to ensure detainee safety or security should be held accountable.

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

3.	 Eliminate “Sign Out” of Custody Requirement. Haiti should eliminate the current
requirement that family members or others sign the deportee out of custody upon arrival in
Haiti and take responsibility for the deportee.
4.	 Ensure Availability of ID Cards and Passports. Haiti should ensure distribution of
national identification cards to Haitian deportees immediately upon their return to Haiti, and
ensure deportees’ timely access to regular (unmarked) Haitian passports.
5.	 Remove Stigmatization of Deportees. Haiti should take affirmative steps to change
negative public perceptions toward and violence against deportees and remove any
institutionalized forms of stigmatization against deportees. Haiti should investigate and sanction
any government officials who engage in this type of stigmatization.

50

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

Recommendations

6.	 Protect Vulnerable Deportees. Haiti should take steps to protect deportees who are
especially vulnerable in Haitian society, including women, LGBT individuals, and those with
physical or mental illness or disability.
7.	 Ensure Basic Life Needs of Deportees. Haiti should work with the United States to ensure
that fully-functioning, sufficiently-funded, accountable, and transparent reintegration, housing,
and healthcare programs are in place in Haiti to meet the basic life needs of deportees.

THE UNITED NATIONS SHOULD:
1.	 Reissue Advisory on Haiti. The UN should reissue, through the Office of the High
Commissioner for Human Rights, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, and
the Independent Expert on Haiti, advisories and reports calling upon all UN member states to
halt forced returns to Haiti in light of the continuing humanitarian crisis.
2.	 Issue General Comment. The UN should issue a general comment, through one of the UN
human rights treaty monitoring bodies, on the duties of UN member states under international
human rights law not to engage in forced returns during a humanitarian crisis.
3.	 Issue Strong Rebuke. The UN should issue a strong rebuke to the United States during the
Universal Periodic Review in 2015 for its continued deportations to post-earthquake Haiti.

THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS (IACHR) SHOULD:
1.	 Monitor Deportations to Haiti. The IACHR should continue to monitor the situation
of post-earthquake deportations from the United States to Haiti through hearings, working
meetings, reports, and public decisions.
2.	 Endorse Balancing Test Set Forth Above. Endorse the balancing test set forth in
Recommendation 3 to the United States. as applicable to both LPRs and non-LPRs of all
nationalities in general and, at the very least, to Haitian LPRs and non-LPRs.
3.	 Expand the Balancing Test in Smith & Armendariz and Mortlock. The IACHR should
expand the balancing test in Smith & Armendariz v. U.S. and Mortlock v. U.S. to include all of the
factors listed in the balancing text in Recommendation 3., including the risk of being exposed
to new threats to life and health in the country of origin, the availability and accessibility of
housing and employment, and the impact of these hardships on the non-citizen’s children and
other family members and loved ones. n

Recommendations to the United States, Haiti, and the International Community

51

Endnotes
1	

The information in this section came from the following
sources: Interview with Beverly, Dominique, & David, in
Miramar, Florida (Nov. 8, 2014); Interview with Elie, sister
in-law of deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct. 6, 2014);
Interview with Conrad, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 18, 2013); ICE Records (on file with authors).
2	 Interview of Billy, deportee, Port-au-Prince (Dec. 15, 2013).
3	 See, e.g., Mortlock v. United States, Case 12.534, Inter-Am.
Comm’n H.R., Report No. 63/08, OEA/Ser. L/V/II.134,
doc. 5 rev. 1 (July 25, 2008); Smith & Armendariz, et al. v. United
States, Case 12.562, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No.
81/10 OEA/Ser.L/V/II.139, doc. 5 rev. 1 (Mar. 7, 2011).
4	 See discussion infra at pp. 47-51.
5	 Jean-Germain Gross, State Failure, Underdevelopment, and Foreign
Intervention in Haiti 168 (2011).
6	 Haiti Earthquake:‘Thousands Poured Out, Crying and Carrying
Bodies,’ The Guardian, Jan. 13, 2010, http://www.
theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/13/haiti-earthquakeeyewitness-stories.
7	 Maureen Taft Morales & Rhoda Margesson, Cong. Research
Serv., R41023, Haiti Earthquake: Crisis & Response 1 (2010);
Int’l Monetary Fund, Haiti: 2012 Article IV Consultation and
Fifth Review Under the Extended Credit Facility 5 (2013), http://
www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2013/cr1390.pdf.
8	Morales, supra n. 7 at 1.
9	 Id.
10	 Tectonic Shifts: Haiti Since the Earthquake 1 (Mark Schuller &
Pablo Morales eds., 2012).
11	 Int’l Monetary Fund, Haiti: 2012 Article IV Consultation and
Fifth Review Under the Extended Credit Facility supra n. 7 at 5.
12	 Tectonic Shifts: Haiti Since the Earthquake, supra n. 10 at 1.
13	 Int’l Monetary Fund, supra n. 6 at 5; Jean-Germain Gross,
supra n. 5 at 73.
14	 Statement of Deputy Press Secretary Matt Chandler, Jan. 13, 2010,
http://www.dhs.gov/news/2010/01/13/statement-deputypress-secretary-matt-chandler.
15	 UN Indep. Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in Haiti,
Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti, Addendum: Forced Returns of Haitians by Third States, Human
Rights Council, UN Doc A/HRC/20/35/Add.1 (June
4, 2012), ¶¶ 18-23 http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/
HRBodies/HRCouncil/RegularSession/Session20/A-HRC20-35-Add1_en.pdf [hereinafter Rep. of the Independent Expert
on the Situation of Human Rights in Haiti].
16	 Designation of Haiti for Temporary Protected Status, 75 Fed.
Reg. 3476 (Jan. 21, 2010).
17	 8 U.S.C. § 1254a(b)(1)(A)-(B) (2012).
18	 8 U.S.C. § 1254a(c)(2)(B)(ii) (2012).
19	 Designation of Haiti for Temporary Protected Status, 75 Fed.
Reg. 3476 (Jan. 21, 2010).
20	 Epidemiological Update-Cholera, PAHO, 1 (Dec. 02, 2014),
http://www.paho.org/hq/index.php?option=com_

21	

22	
23	
24	
25	

26	

27	
28	
29	
30	

31	

32	

33	
34	
35	
36	

docman&task=doc_view&gid=28391+&Itemid=999999&lan
g=en.
Alejandro Cravioto, et al., Final Report of the Independent
Panel of Experts on the Cholera Outbreak in Haiti 3 (2011),
available at https://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/haiti/
UN-cholera-report-final.pdf.
Id. at 4.
Cholera, Fact Sheet No. 107, World Health Org., http://www.
who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs107/en/ (last updated
Feb. 2014).
Cholera Risk Factors, Mayo Clinic, http://www.mayoclinic.
org/diseases-conditions/cholera/basics/risk-factors/con20031469 (last updated Apr. 5, 2014).
8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2) (2012) (criminal grounds of
deportability); 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(2) (2012) (criminal
grounds of inadmissibility); see also Nancy Morawetz,
Understanding the Impact of the 1996 Deportation Laws and the
Limited Scope of Proposed Reforms, 113 Harv. L. Rev. 1936, 1938
(2000).
See Bill Ong Hing, Re-examining the Zero-Tolerance Approach to
Deporting Aggravated Felons: Restoring DiscretionaryWaivers and
Developing New Tools, 8 Harv. L. & Pol’y Rev. 141, 145-164
(2014).
Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 360-64 (2010).
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a) (2012).
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(3) (2012) (requiring that the individual
“has not been convicted of any aggravated felony); see also 8
U.S.C. §1101(a)(43) (2012) (defining aggravated felony).
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(1) (2012) (requiring that the individual
“has been an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence
for not less than 5 years”) and 8 U.S.C. § 1229b(a)(2) (2012)
(requiring that the individual “has resided in the United States
continuously for 7 years after having been admitted”).
For example, current law defines theft as an aggravated felony
if the sentence imposed is one year, even if the sentence is
suspended. See 8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(43)(G)(2012); 8 U.S.C.
§1101(a)(48)(B)(2012). Such crimes are misdemeanors in
many states. See Morawetz, supra n. 28 at 1940.
A predecessor statute, Immigration and Nationality Act
section 212(c) permitted LPRs with aggravated felonies to
apply for relief from removal. Section 212(c), however, was
repealed in 1997 and remains available only to individuals
convicted while 212(c) was still in effect. See Matter of
Abdelghany, 26 I&N Dec. 254, 268 (BIA 2014).
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(2012).
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(B)-(C)(2012); see also 8 U.S.C. §
1011(f) (2012) (defining good moral character).
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(A)(2012).
8 U.S.C. § 1229b(b)(1)(D)(2012). The Board of Immigration
Appeals has interpreted “exceptional and extremely unusual
hardship” to require showing suffering that is “‘substantially’”
beyond the ordinary hardship that would be expected when a

53

37	
38	

39	
40	

41	
42	

43	

44	

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

45	

46	

54

close family member leaves this country.” Matter of MonrealAguinaga, 23 I. & N. Dec. 56, 62 (BIA 2001).
8 U.S.C. § 1229(e)(1) (2012).
8 U.S.C. § 1158 (2012) (asylum); 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)
(2012), 8 C.F.R. § 208.16 (2012) (witholding of removal);
8 C.F.R. § 208.18 (2012) (deferral of removal under the
Convention Against Torture).
8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(2)(A)(ii)-(iii) (2012) (criminal bars to
asylum); 8 U.S.C. § 1231(b)(3)(B)(ii)-(iii) (2012) (criminal
bars to withholding).
In order to be granted asylum or withholding of removal,
persecution must be on account of “race, religion, nationality,
membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.”
8 U.S.C. § 1158(b)(1)(B)(i) (2012) (asylum); 8 U.S.C. §
1231(b)(3)(A) (withholding of removal); 8 U.S.C. 1101(42)
(A) (2012)(defining refugee for purposes of asylum and
withholding of removal). Persecution is not defined by the
Immigration and Nationality Act. Courts have held that
general conditions that affect all people alike do not rise to the
level of persecution for purposes of asylum and withholding
of removal. See, e.g. Capric v. Ashcroft, 355 F.3d 1075, 1084 (7th
Cir. 2004).
8 C.F.R. § 208.4(a) (2012).
An individual applying for withholding of removal based on
fear of future persecution alone must demonstrate “it is more
likely than not” that his or her “life or freedom would be
threatened.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.16(b)(2) (2012). An individual
applying for asylum need only show “a reasonably possibility”
of persecution. 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b)(2)(i)(B) (2012).
8 C.F.R. § 208.18(a)(1); In re J-E, the Board of Immigration
Appeals found that, based on the record presented by
the applicant, “substandard prison conditions in Haiti do
not constitute torture within the meaning of 8 C.F.R. §
208.18(a)…” In re J-E, 23 I. & N. Dec. 291, 291 (BIA 2002);
see also Pierre v. Attorney General, 528 F.3d 180, 189 (3d Cir.
2008) (finding that lack of medical care and resultant pain
Pierre would suffer in Haitian jail did not constitute torture
for purposes of CAT); see generally Mary Holper, Specific
Intent and the Purposeful Narrowing ofVictim Protection Under the
Convention Against Torture, 88 Or. L. Rev. 777 (2009).
See Exec. Office of Immigration Review, U.S. Dep’t. of
Justice, FY2012 StatisticalYear Book M1 (Mar. 2013), available
at http://www.justice.gov/eoir/statspub/fy12syb.pdf (of the
29,796 CAT applications, 643 were granted and 9,710 were
denied. 736 were deemed abandoned, 6,327 were withdrawn,
and another 12,380 were listed as “other.”).
CCTV America, Americas Now This Week: Haiti’s Reconstruction
Slowed By Corruption (Oct. 29, 2014), http://www.cctvamerica.com/2014/10/29/americas-now-this-week-haitisreconstruction-slowed-by-corruption-and-bribery; The
Stream Team, Aljazeera America, Haiti: 4 Years After the Quake
(Jan. 10, 2014), http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/
shows/the-stream/the-latest/2014/1/10/haiti-4-yearsafterthequake.html (“[P]rogress in Haiti is slow at best…Many
of the infrastructure projects USAID had promised have been
scaled down or halted.”).
U.S. Government Accountability Office, Haiti
Reconstruction: USAID Infrastructure Projects Have Mixed
Results and Face Sustainability Challenges, GAO-13-558
(June 18, 2013), http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-

47	

48	

49	

50	

51	

13-558?source=ra (as of March 31, 2013 “most funds ha[d]
not been disbursed”); The Stream Team, Aljazeera America,
supra n. 25 (noting that “[t]he largest recipient of government
funding for Haiti’s reconstruction has been U.S.-based
companies” and that “less than one percent [] of contracts went
to Haitian companies”).
Report of the Ad Hoc Advisory Group on Haiti, E/2014/95,
¶¶ 13-15, 49 (Oct. 8, 2014), available at http://www.un.org/
ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=E/2014/95&referer=/
english/&Lang=E.
After receiving a response, the Senior Counsel to ICE
informed ICE Director John Morton that two weeks prior,
ICE’s Office of Detention and Removal Operations had
reached out to a U.S. Department of State contact at the
U.S. Embassy in Port-au-Prince to inquire when the State
Department thought ICE could resume removals to Haiti.
See Email from Beth Gibson, Senior Counsel, Immigration
and Customs Enforcement, to John Morton, Dir.,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Feb. 18, 2010)
(records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act
request) (on file with authors). Gibson promised Morton to
“keep working it.” Id.
Email from Beth Gibson, Senior Counsel, Immigration
and Customs Enforcement copying John Morton, Dir.,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Feb. 18, 2010)
(records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act
request) (on file with authors).
Email from Undisclosed Sender to John Morton, Dir.,
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Oct. 22, 2010)
(records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act
request) (on file with authors) (describing an outbreak of
“an extremely virulent” strain of cholera); Email from John
Sandweg, Acting Dir. Immigration and Customs Enforcement,
to Beth Gibson, Asst. Deputy Dir., Immigration and Customs
Enforcement & Suzanne Barr, Chief of Staff to Secretary
Napolitano, Department of Homeland Security (Nov. 10,
2010) (records obtained through a Freedom of Information
Act request) (on file with authors) (informing the recipients
that the suspension “policy was lifted” and they “should begin
to re-apprehend [Haitians] previously released.”).
In an email chain regarding a December 2010 congressional
inquiry into the decision to resume removals, the following
exchange took place between ICE Enforcement Assistant
Deputy Director Beth Gibson and ICE Acting Deputy
Director, Daniel Ragsdale:
Gibson: ERO provided me figures today [December 27,
2010]—110 Haitian removals since earthquake. One of
the 110 was a removal to France. But, the number seems
high where all the material says no removals since the
earthquake. Maybe all VR? Stew on it. I may need your
help to think it through after a full briefing from ERO
and OPLA on Thursday.
Ragsdale: 10-4. We can always asked [sic] them to scrub the
manifests? I-216’s? That does seem high.
Gibson: They are scrubbing for Thursday. I’ll keep you posted.
Trying not to pre-judge.
The manifests presumably refer to the Haiti flight
manifests. “Maybe all VR?” may refer to the practice of
voluntary removal. Emails between Beth Gibson, Asst. Deputy
Dir., Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and Daniel

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

Ragsdale, Acting Deputy Dir., Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (Dec. 27, 2010) (records obtained through a
Freedom of Information Act request) (on file with authors).
52	 Letter from Vincent Warren and Bill Quigley, Ctr. for
Constitutional Rights, to Barack Obama, U.S. President
(Dec. 16, 2010), http://ccrjustice.org/files/FINAL%20
Letter%20to%20President_Haiti%20Deporatations%20(2).
pdf; Gary Nelson, Protests Surround Planned Deportations To
Haiti, CBS Miami (Dec. 20, 2010, 6:09 PM), http://miami.
cbslocal.com/2010/12/20/protests-surround-planneddeportations-to-haiti/#comments; see also Kirk Semple,
Haitians in U.S. Brace for Deportations to Resume, N.Y. Times,
Dec. 19, 2010, at A20.
53	 Request for Precautionary Measures Before the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights, U. of Miami Sch. of Law Human
Rights and Immigration Clinics 1 (2011), available at http://
www.law.miami.edu/clinics/pdf/2011/summary-ofinteramerican-petition-for-precautionary-measures-feb2011.
pdf.
54	 Id. at 2.
55	 Letter in Support of Precautionary Measures to Stop
Imminent Deportations of Haitians from the United States
to Dr. Santiago Canton, Executive Secretary, Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights (Jan. 10, 2011), available
at http://ccrjustice.org/files/IACHR%20Haitian%20
Deportations%20FINAL%20Sign-on%20Ltr.pdf.
56	 Tom Brown, U.S. Resumes Deportations to Quake-Ravaged Haiti,
Reuters, Jan. 20, 2011, available at http://www.reuters.
com/article/2011/01/21/us-usa-haiti-deportationsidUSTRE70K08P20110121.
57	 TravelWarning: Haiti, U.S. Dep’t of State (Jan. 20, 2010),
https://www.osac.gov/pages/ContentReportDetails.
aspx?cid=10315.
58	 See discussion infra at pp. 18-19.
59	 Meeting Between Immigration Advocates and U.S. Gov’t
Officials, in Washington, D.C. (Jan. 28, 2011) (U.S.
government officials at this meeting included Assistant Deputy
Director of ICE Beth Gibson. Advocates included Marleine
Bastien, Clarel Cyriaque, Cheryl Little, Randy McGrorty, and
Rebecca Sharpless).
60	 Jacob Kushner, U.S. Deportees to Haiti, JailedWithout Cause, Face
Severe Health Risks, Florida Center for Investigative Reporting,
Nov. 13, 2011, http://fcir.org/2011/11/13/u-s-deporteesto-haiti-jailed-without-cause-face-severe-health-risk/; see also
Jennifer Kay, Hatian Deportee Dies After Cholera-like Symptoms,
Miami Herald (Feb. 1, 2011), http://www.miamiherald.
com/2011/02/01/v-print/2044410/hatian-deportations.
61	Kushner, supra n. 60.
62	 Id.
63	 Id.
64	 Michael Miller, Updated: Confusion Over Haitian Deportations
AfterVictim’s Fiance Blames US Gov For Death, Miami New
Times Riptide Blog (Feb. 3, 2011 6:56 PM), http://blogs.
miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2011/02/claudine_magloire_
fiance_of_ha.php.
65	 Deported Haitian Man Dies in Jail, Miami (CBS4), (Feb. 1,
2011), available at http://miami.cbslocal.com/2011/02/01/
deported-haitian-man-dies-in-jail/.
66	 PM 5/11—Gary Resil, Harry Mocombe, Roland Joseph, Evel
Camelien, and Pierre Louis, United States, Inter-Am. Comm’n

67	
68	

69	
70	
71	
72	
73	
74	

75	
76	
77	
78	
79	
80	
81	
82	
83	

84	

H.R. (2011) http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/decisions/
precautionary.asp [hereinafter “IACHR, Precautionary
Measures”].
Id.
Policy for Resumed Removals to Haiti, U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement (Apr. 1, 2011), https://www.ice.
gov/news/releases/policy-resumed-removals-haiti; U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement, AILA InfoNet
at Doc. No. 11030722, Policy for Resumed Removals to
Haiti (Mar. 7, 2010), http://www.aila.org/content/default.
aspx?bc=1016%7C6715%7C8412%7C34771 [hereinafter
Policy for Resumed Removals to Haiti].
Id.
Id.
Id.
Id.
Id.
Letter from Caroline Bettinger-Lopez et al., Univ. of Miami
School of Law Human Rights Clinic, to Barack Obama, U.S.
President (Mar. 18, 2011), http://www.ccrjustice.org/
files/2011%2003%2018%20Sign-on%20letter-FINAL.
pdf; ICE Should Halt Deportations To Haiti, Says ACLU, Am.
Civil Liberties Union (Mar. 11, 2011), https://www.aclu.
org/human-rights-immigrants-rights/ice-should-haltdeportations-haiti-says-aclu.; Letter from Thomas M. Susman,
Dir., Governmental Affairs Office, Am. Bar Assoc. to U.S.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Mar. 11, 2011),
http://www.ccrjustice.org/files/American%20Bar%20
Association%20Letter%20Removals%20to%20Haiti%20
3-11-11.pdf; Am. Immigration Lawyers Assoc., AILA InfoNet
Doc. No. 11031462, Statement of the American Immigration
Lawyers Association In Opposition to the U.S. Government’s
Resumption of Deportations to Haiti and Comments on the ICE
Draft “Policy for Resumed Removals to Haiti” 4-6 (Mar. 11, 2011),
http://www.aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=34838;
see generally Haiti: IACHR—Haitian Removals, Ctr. for
Constitutional Rights, http://www.ccrjustice.org/ourcases/
current-cases/iachr-haitian-removals.
Policy for Resumed Removals to Haiti, supra n. 68.
Id.
All information in this section came from interviews with
Claudine Magloire between January 2011 and November
2014, unless otherwise indicated.
Wildrick Guerrier was deported on account of convictions
for possession of a firearm and battery on a law enforcement
officer.
Interview with Wildrick Guerrier by La. Law Ctr.
Immigration Clinic, in Baton Rouge, La. (Dec. 28, 2010).
Medical Summary of Federal Prisoner/Alien In Transit, U.S.
Dep’t of Justice (Jan. 19, 2011) (on file with authors).
Policy for Resumed Removals to Haiti, supra n. 68.
Id.
Press Release, Centr. for Constitutional Rights, ICE Begins
Second Round of Deportations to Haiti During Humanitarian
Crisis (April 15, 2011), http://www.ccrjustice.org/files/
Statement_April%2015%20Deportations%20to%20
Haiti%20Final2%2010.58am.pdf.
Letter from the Univ. of Miami Immigration and Human
Rights Clinics, the Ctr. for Constitutional Rights, Florida
Immigrant Advocacy Ctr., FAMN and Alternative Chance,
Endnotes

55

85	

86	

87	
88	
89	

90	
91	
92	
93	
94	
95	
96	
97	
98	
99	
100	
101	
102	
103	
104	
105	

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

106	
107	

108	
109	

56

to Barack Obama, U.S. President (Apr. 19, 2011), http://
ccrjustice.org/files/Final%20Petition%20Deportations.pdf.
Letter from African and Caribbean Network Limited et al.,
to Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Homeland Sec., U.S. Dep’t
of Homeland Sec. (July 15, 2011), http://ccrjustice.org/
files/Joint%20Letter%20on%20Haitian%20returns_final%20
7%2020%2011.pdf.
Extension and Redesignation of Haiti for Temporary
Protected Status, 76 Fed. Reg. 29000 (May 19, 2011) (“The
redesignation of Haiti allows additional individuals who have
been continuously residing in the United States since January
12, 2011, to obtain TPS, if eligible, including certain Haitians
who arrived in the United States following the January 12,
2010 earthquake in Haiti”).
Id.
Id.
Haiti TravelWarning, Bureau of Consular Affairs, U.S. Passports
and Int’l Travel, U.S. Dep’t of State (Mar. 14, 2014), available
at http://travel.state.gov/content/passports/english/
alertswarnings/haiti-travel-warning.html.
Extension of the Designation of Haiti for Temporary Protected
Status, 79 Fed. Reg. 11808 (March 3, 2014).
Haiti TravelWarning, supra n. 89.
Policy for Resumed Removals to Haiti, supra n. 68.
Id.
Id.
Id.
Meeting between Immigration Advocates and Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, Washington. D.C. (Jan. 29, 2014).
Id.
Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 53.
Meeting between Immigration Advocates and Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, Washington. D.C. (Jan. 29, 2014).
Id.
Id.
Id.
Id.
See discussion infra at pp. 24-27.
Meeting between Immigration Advocates and Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, Washington. D.C. (Jan. 29, 2014).
See discussion infra at pp. 24-27.
The U.S. deported approximately 349 individuals between
April 2011 and December 2011 and over 500 individuals both
in 2012 and 2013 to Haiti. See Rep. of the Independent Expert
on the Situation of Human Rights in Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶¶ 41
& 46 (stating that the United States “forcibly returned 376
individuals to Haiti between January and December 2011”
and continued “to deport approximately 40-50 persons to
Haiti each month” in the 2012 year); U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., ICE Air
Charter (unpublished manifests containing names of people
on monthly deportation flights to Haiti April-December
2011, June-December 2012, February-September 2013,
and September 2014) (on file with authors) [hereinafter
unpublished manifests].
Id.
Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights
in Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶¶ 41 & 46; U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., ICE

110	
111	
112	

113	

114	
115	
116	

117	
118	
119	
120	
121	
122	
123	

124	
125	
126	
127	

Air Charter (unpublished manifests of monthly deportation
flights to Haiti, April-December 2011, June-December 2012,
February-September 2013, and September 2014) (on file with
authors).
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Dep’t of
Homeland Sec., ICE Air Charter (Sept. 2014) (unpublished
manifest of deportation flight to Haiti) (on file with authors).
The authors make this conclusion based on interviews with
over a hundred deportees and their family members.
Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights
in Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶¶ 41 & 46; U.S. Immigration and
Customs Enforcement, U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., ICE
Air Charter (unpublished manifests of monthly deportation
flights to Haiti, April-December 2011, June-December 2012,
February-September 2013, and September 2014) (on file with
authors).
The July 2012 flight on which percentage is based totaled 47
and the September 2014 flight totaled 27. U.S. Immigration
and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., ICE
Air Charter (July 2012, Sept. 2014) (unpublished manifest of
monthly deportation flights to Haiti showing crimes) (on file
with authors).
See discussion supra at p. vii.
Const. de la Republique D’ Haïti, 1987, arts. 10-12 (The
principle of jus sanguinas confers citizenship to any child of a
native-born Haitian mother).
Such deportations are contrary to U.S. and international law,
unless the U.S. government notifies the noncitizen of their
intention to deport to a country other than the one listed on
the removal order and gives the noncitizen an opportunity to
file for asylum, withholding of removal, or relief under Article
3 of CAT. See Immigration and Nationality Act §§ 241(b)(1)(2),(b)(3)(B), 8 U.S.C. §§ 1231(b)(1)-(2), (b)(3)(B)(2011);
Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, art. 33, 1951 189
U.N.T.S. 137; Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1967,
606 U.N.T.S. 267; Interview with Bernard, deportee, in Portau-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 15, 2013).
Sue Weishar, U.S. Resumes Deportations to Haiti, Just South
E-Newsletter (Jan. 12, 2011), http://www.loyno.edu/jsri/
us-resumes-deportations-haiti.
Interview with Carl, deportee, & his wife, Christina, in Portau-Prince, Haiti (Oct. 5, 2014).
Id.
Zadvydas v. United States, 533 U.S. 678, 701 (2001).
Id.
Policy for Resumed Removals to Haiti, supra n. 68.
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Responses to
Information Requests (Jan. 31, 2008), http://www.justice.
gov/eoir/vll/country/canada_coi/cuba/ZZZ102626.E.pdf
(describing how the United States routinely releases Cuban
from detention on orders of supervision if they cannot be
deported).
Roxana Bacon, Taking IssueWith Homeland Security On Haiti, 47
Ariz. Att’y 8 (June 2011), available at https://www.myazbar.
org/AZAttorney/PDF_Articles/0611Soundoff.pdf
Id. (“a variety of protections are available, including supervised
release and electronic monitoring devices, to ensure the
public’s safety”).
Policy for Resumed Removals to Haiti, supra n. 68.
Id.

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

128	 Telephone interview with former staff member of
International Organization on Migration (Oct. 6, 2014).
129	 Policy for Resumed Removals to Haiti, supra n. 68 (stating that
the United States has been working with partners “to resume
removals in as safe, humane, and minimally disruptive
a manner as possible and to develop a comprehensive
reintegration strategy that encompasses a range of services
for returned Haitians to smooth their transition into Haitian
society, including healthcare assistance and skills training to
enhance employment prospects.”).
130	 Interview with Olson, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb.
2012).
131	 Interview with Raymond, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012).
132	 Interview with Milton, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012).
133	 Interview with Reginald, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012).
134	 See, e.g., Interview with Augustine, deportee, in Port-auPrince, Haiti (Feb. 2012); Interview with Richard, deportee,
in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb. 2012); Interview with Magnum,
deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb. 2012); Interview
with Samuel, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb. 2012);
Interview with Milton, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012; see also Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation
of Human Rights in Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 79.
135	 Interview with Augustine, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012).
136	 Id.
137	 Interview with Gary, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb.
2012).
138	 Interview with Reginald, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012).
139	 See, e.g., Interview with Gary, deportee, in Port-au-Prince,
Haiti (Feb. 2012) (commenting that he was only given a
piece of livelihoods equipment when visitors came to see the
progress of the program).
140	 See, e.g., Interview with Richard, deportee, in Port-au-Prince,
Haiti (Feb. 2012) (stating that he handed in a livelihoods
proposal and tried following up in person and by telephone,
but could not reach anyone at IOM or the NGO partners);
Interview with Wesley, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012) (noting that he attended a meeting in his
hometown outside Port-au-Prince but was unable to get
livelihoods equipment or follow up).
141	 UN High Comm’r for Refugees, OHCHR/UNHCR Urge
Extending Suspension of Returns to Haiti (Feb. 12, 2010), http://
www.unhcr.org/4b7543026.html; UN High Comm’r for
Refugees, Joint UNHCR-OHCHR Return Advisory Update on
Haiti (June 9, 2011), http://www.unhcr.org/4e0305666.
html [hereinafter both of these documents will be referred to
together as “UN High Comissioners for Refugees and Human
Rights Joint Communications”].
142	 Id.
143	 Press Release, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., IACHR Urges
United States to Suspend Deportations to Haiti, Press
Release No. 6/11 (Feb. 4, 2011), http://www.cidh.oas.org/
Comunicados/English/2011/6-11eng.htm.
144	 IACHR, Precautionary Measures, supra n. 66.
145	 Id.

146	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights
in Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶¶ 74 & 93(a); see also UN Indep.
Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in Haiti, Report of
the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in Haiti,
Human Rights Council, UN Doc. A/HRC/20/35 ¶ ¶ 89-90
(Apr. 23, 2012), http://ijdh.org/wordpress/wp-content/
uploads/2012/06/Report-of-the-Independent-Expert-onthe-situation-of-human-rights-in-Haiti-Michel-Forst.pdf
147	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 54.
148	 Id. at ¶ 93(h)-(i).
149	 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, adopted
Dec. 16, 1966, S. Treaty Doc. No. 95-20, 999 U.N.T.S. 171,
(ratified June 8, 1992), available at http://indicators.ohchr.
org/.
150	 Kälin Questioning, infra n. 170.
151	 Mack Response, infra n. 170.
152	 Interview with Clifford, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012).
153	 Interview with Frantz, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012).
154	 Interview with Milton, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012).
155	 Id.
156	 Medical Summary of Federal Prisoner/Alien In Transit, U.S.
Dep’t of Justice (April 14, 2011) (on file with authors).
157	 Email from USAID staff to Michelle Karshan (Sept. 12, 2012).
158	 See, e.g., Interview with Augustine, deportee, in Port-auPrince, Haiti (Feb. 2012); Interview with Richard, deportee,
in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb. 2012); see also Rep. of the
Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in Haiti, supra
n. 15 at ¶ 78.
159	 Brochure for Returning Deportees, Office National de la
Migration (on file with authors); Interview with Dr. Louis
Jeanny Girard, M.D., Mars and Kline Psychiatric Center, in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct. 7, 2014).
160	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights
in Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 78. Even before the earthquake,
the United States government had recognized the need for
reintegration services for deportees to Haiti.
161	 Program for Haitian Deportees Serves as Model for the
Caribbean, by Eric Green, USINFO, Aug. 7, 2007,
available at http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/
article/2007/08/200708031159511xeneerg0.9294702.
html#axzz3LhcAcmb6.
162	 Cable from U.S. Embassy in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, Haitian
Criminal Deportees (Part Two) Reintegration Program, ¶
8 (Mar. 31, 2009), available at http://www.wikileaks.org/
plusd/cables/09PORTAUPRINCE348_a.html.
163	 Id.
164	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 78.
165	 Observation of Deportee Processing by Members of the Univ.
of Miami Sch. of Law Human Rights & Immigration Clinics, in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 17, 2013).
166	 Id.
167	 Telephone interview with Eddy, deportee (Dec. 27, 2013).
168	 Observation of Deportee Processing by Members of the Univ.
of Miami Sch. of Law Human Rights & Immigration Clinics, in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 17, 2013).
Endnotes

57

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

169	 Id.
170	 Walter Kälin, Member, UN Human Rights Comm.,
Questioning of the United States at the 3044th Meeting of
the United Nations Human Rights Committee (Mar. 13,
2014) (transcript on file with authors) available at http://
www.treatybodywebcast.org/hrctte-110-session-unitedstates/ (download “HRCtte 110 session: United States Part
2”) [hereinafter Kälin Questioning]; Megan Mack, Officer
for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, Dep’t of Homeland
Sec., Response to Questioning at the 3045th Meeting of the
United Nations Human Rights Committee (Mar. 14, 2014)
(transcript on file with authors), available at http://www.
treatybodywebcast.org/hrctte-110-session-united-states/
(download “HRCtte 110 session: United States Part 3”)
[hereinafter Mack Response].
171	 Interview with Jean Renal Sanon, Minister of Justice and Public
Security of the Republic of Haiti, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct.
7, 2014). Despite the discontinuation of funds from the United
States, the Haitian government continues to run the temporary
homeless shelter for deportees without family and reportedly
may still provide assistance in discrete exceptional cases.
172	 Interview with Jean Renal Sanon, supra n. 171.
173	 Id.
174	 Visit to Temporary Homeless Shelter by Univ. of Miami Sch.
of Law Human Rights & Immigration Clinics, Port-au-Prince,
Haiti (Dec. 18, 2013).
175	 Id.
176	 Id.
177	 Id.
178	 Id.; Interview with Francin, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 18, 2013).
179	 Embassy Obtains Resumption Of Criminal Deportee Flights To
Haiti, ¶6 (May 27, 2009), http://cablegatesearch.net/cable.
php?id=09PORTAUPRINCE506&q=deportees%20haiti%20
(describing “Haiti’s historic reluctance to take in criminal
deportees” based upon the Haitian government’s insistence
that deportees “pose a criminal threat…and that Haiti does
not have the resources or capacity to reintegrate them.”); see
also Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights
in Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 71 (“Deportees are highly stigmatized
in Haitian society.”).
180	 Embassy Obtains Resumption Of Criminal Deportee Flights To
Haiti, supra n. 179 at ¶6 (finding that the Haitian authorities’
“reluctance” to accept deportees with criminal convictions “is
that they pose a criminal threat—an assertion not supported
by statistics or specific cases”).
181	 See discussion infra pp. 15-16.
182	 Haiti Commissioner: Police to Issue Citations For Sagging Pants,
Sentinel Haiti, June 18, 2013, http://www.defend.ht/
politics/articles/defense/4559-commissioner-to-issuecitations-for-sagging-pants.
183	 Ruth Morris, For Haitian Deportees, A Flashy Smile Signals a
Telltale History, Sun Sentinel, (Dec. 29, 2006), http://articles.
sun-sentinel.com/2006-12-29/news/0612281255_1_
deportees-grill-streets; see also Embassy Obtains Resumption Of
Criminal Deportee Flights To Haiti, supra n. 179 at ¶ 6; see also
discussion infra at pp. 18-19.
184	 Interview with Jean Renal Sanon, supra n. 171; Interview with
Advisor at the Office of Public Security, in Port-au-Prince,
Haiti (Oct. 7, 2014).
58

185	 Interview with Jean Renal Sanon, supra n. 171.
186	 Interview with Felix, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct.
5, 2014); Telephone interview with Ferdinard, deportee (Oct.
1, 2014); Interview with Gary, deportee, in Port-au-Prince,
Haiti (Dec. 15, 2013); Interview with Alex, deportee, in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 5. 2013); Interview with Smith,
deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb. 19, 2011); see also
Interview with Peterson, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 2013)
(reporting that the police frequently stop him because of his
dreadlocks, tattoos and American accent); Interview with
Stanley, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 14, 2013) (stating that
[i]f the police know you are a deportee, if a bad crime happens
then the first person they go to is the deportee.”); Interview
with Auguste, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb. 18, 2011) (stating
that “whatever happens in my neighborhood, I’m a target…
they [the police] said anything happens in the neighborhood,
I would be the first suspect); Haitian Criminal Deportees
(Part Three): An Overview of Deportee Associations and Concerns,
¶16 (Mar. 31, 2009), http://www.wikileaks.org/plusd/
cables/09PORTAUPRINCE347_a.html (noting that the U.S.
Embassy sees repeated “police abuse” as one of significant
obstacles affecting deportees in Haiti).
187	 Interview with Smith, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb.
19, 2011).
188	 Telephone interview with Magnum, deportee (Dec. 15,
2014).
189	 Telephone interview with Ferdinard, deportee (Oct. 1, 2014).
190	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 80; Haitian Criminal Deportees (Part Three):
An Overview of Deportee Associations and Concerns, supra n. 186
at ¶ 13; see also Interview with Wilky, deportee, in Port-auPrince, Haiti (Dec. 16, 2013) (reporting he did not get his
identification card for eighteen months).
191	 Interview of Jimmy, deportee in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb.
2012).
192	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶78; Interview with Jean Renal Sanon,
supra n. 158.; Interview with Bernard, supra n. 116 (police
threatened Bernard, a deportee, with arrest because he did
not have identification); Interview with Wilky, deportee in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 16, 2013).
193	 Interview with Wilky, deportee in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec.
16, 2013).
194	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 80; Interview with Jimmy, deportee in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Feb. 2012).
195	 Haitian Criminal Deportees (Part Three): An Overview of
Deportee Associations and Concerns, supra n. 186 at ¶13; 2012
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, Bureau of
Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S. Dep’t of State, 5
(April 19, 2013), available at http://www.state.gov/j/drl/
rls/hrrpt/2012/wha/204458.htm (“New passports issued to
deportees contain a stamp invalidating them for travel to the
country from which the person was deported.”).
196	 Telephone interview with Sonia, deportee (Oct. 7, 2014);
Interview with Rubin, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 15, 2013); Interview with Mozart, deportee, in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 14, 2013); Interview with
Evans, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 2013);
Telephone Interview with Moise, deportee (Dec. 17,

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

197	

198	
199	
200	

201	

202	
203	
204	
205	
206	

207	

208	

2013); Telephone interview with Nedor, deportee (Dec.
16, 2013); see also Haitian Criminal Deportees (Part Three): An
Overview of Deportee Associations and Concerns, supra n. 186
at ¶16 (citing “social marginalization and discrimination,
false accusations to police” as significant obstacles affecting
deportees in Haiti); 2009 Country Reports on Human
Rights Practices—Haiti, Bureau of Democracy, Human
Rights and Labor, U.S. Dep’t of State, 5 (Mar. 11, 2010),
available at http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2009/
wha/136116.htm (stating that deportees “alleged
corruption, widespread discrimination, and social abuse”
upon deportation and noting that they suffered “false
accusations about their activities to local police”).
Interview with Stanley, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 14, 2013); Interview with Carl, deportee, in Port-auPrince, Haiti (Oct. 5, 2014); Interview with Felix, deportee,
in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 15, 2013); Telephone interview
with Moise, deportee (Dec. 17, 2013); Interview with Rubin,
deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 2013).
An End to Mob Justice in Haiti, Office of the High Comm’r. for
Human Rights (May 8, 2013), http://www.ohchr.org/EN/
NewsEvents/Pages/LynchingInHaiti.aspx.
Id.
Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights
in Haiti, Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of
Human Rights in Haiti (by Gustavo Gallón) ¶ 50, Human
Rights Council, UN Doc. A/HRC/25/71 (Feb. 7, 2014).
[hereinafter “Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of
Human Rights in Haiti (Gallon)”].
Bi-Annual Report on Human Rights in Haiti: January – June 2013,
MINUSTAH/OHCHR, (Sep. 2013), http://www.google.
com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=
3&ved=0CC0QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F.
Interview with Felix, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct.
5, 2014).
Haitian Criminal Deportees (Part Three): An Overview of Deportee
Associations and Concerns, supra n. 186 at ¶ 16.
Id.
Id.
Haiti: Information on conditions in Haitian Prisons and Treatment of
Criminal Deportees (2nd Response), The Resource Info. Ctr., U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Serv. (Feb. 12, 2002), available at
http://www.refworld.org/docid/3dec98224.html.
(admitting that although some of those returned may be
deportees with more serious convictions, “others are not.
Often unable to speak Creole, with no friends or relatives
to provide support, little hope of due process, little or no
immunity from Haiti’s tropical diseases and parasitic ailments,
and forced to endure appalling conditions in jail, they are
extraordinarily vulnerable”).
2006 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, Bureau
of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, U.S. Dep’t of State
(Mar. 6, 2007), available at http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/
hrrpt/2006/78895.htm.
The Haitian Constitution states that “except where the
perpetrator of a crime is caught in the act, no one may be
arrested or detained other than by written order of a legally
competent official” when the following requirements are
satisfied the order “must formally state the reason…for the
arrest or detention and the provision of the law that provides

for punishment…legal notice must be given…the accused
must be notified of his right to be assisted by counsel at all
phases...and no one may be arrested in the place of another.”
Const. de la Republique D’ Haïti, 1987, art. 24 [Haiti]; see also
2012 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra
n. 195.
209	 2006 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra n.
207.
210	 2003 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, Bureau
of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S. Dep’t of State
(Feb. 25, 2004), available at http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/
hrrpt/2004/41764.htm.
211	 2012 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra
n. 195 at 5.
212	 2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti,
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S.
Dep’t of State 4 (Feb. 27, 2014), available at http://www.
state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/humanrightsreport/index.
htm?year=2013&dlid=220451#wrapper.
213	 Id.
214	 See discussion infra at pp. 24-27.
215	 Telephone interview with Michelle Karshan (Dec. 16, 2014).
216	 Id.
217	 2011 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, Bureau
of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, U.S. Dep’t of State,
5 (May 24, 2012), available at http://www.state.gov/j/drl/
rls/hrrpt/2011/wha/186522.htm.
218	 Id. (describing conditions in a prison facility in Les Cayes).
219	 2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra n.
212 at 4.
220	Kushner, supra n. 60.
221	 U.S. Reviews Care of Deported HaitianWho Died, Wall St. J.
(Sept. 20, 2011), available at http://online.wsj.com/article/
APc100abc244db4732b2ac6a25eaa31172.html; Haiti:
Information on conditions in Haitian Prisons and Treatment of
Criminal Deportees (2nd Response), supra n. 206.
222	 Haiti: Information on conditions in Haitian Prisons and Treatment of
Criminal Deportees (2nd Response), supra n. 206.
223	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti (Gallon), supra n. 200.
224	 Interview with Auguste, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 12, 2011).
225	 Id.
226	 2012 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra
n. 195 at 5 (stating that “the prison system had not recovered
from the 2010 earthquake that damaged its principal
facilities”); see also 2013 Country Reports on Human Rights
Practices—Haiti, supra at 212 at 5 (explaining that “prisons
and detention centers throughout the country remained
overcrowded, poorly maintained, and unsanitary…following
the destruction of numerous correctional facilities in the 2010
earthquake, prison and detention center overcrowding was
severe…many prison facilities lacked basic services such as
plumbing, sanitation, waste disposal, medical services, potable
water, electricity, and isolation units for contagious patients”).
227	 2012 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra
n. 195 at 10.
228	 Interview with Jean Renel Sanon, supra n. 171.
229	 Id.
230	 Id.
Endnotes

59

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

231	 Id.
232	 Article 26 of Haiti’s Constitution states: “No one may be
kept under arrest more than forty-eight (48) hours unless he
has appeared before a judge asked to rule on the legality of
the arrest and the judge has confirmed the arrest by a wellfounded decision.” See Interview with Moise, deportee, in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct. 13, 2014).
233	 2011 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra n.
217 at 10.
234	 Interview with Alex, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct.
6, 2014).
235	 Id.
236	 Interview with Auguste, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 12, 2011).
237	 Id.
238	 Interview with Jean Renel Sanon, supra n. 171.
239	 Shelter and Housing, U.S. Agency for Int’l Dev., http://www.
usaid.gov/haiti/shelter-and-housing (last updated Feb. 10, 2014).
240	 Displacement Tracking Matrix, IOM/IASC, (Sep. 2014)
http://iomhaitidataportal.info/dtm/; Report of the ad
Hoc Advisory Group on Haiti, supra n. 47; Amnesty Int’l,
Document—Haiti: Displaced People Still Leave In Despair FourYears
After Devastating Earthquake, AI Index AMR 36/003/2014
(Jan. 9, 2014), http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/
asset/AMR36/003/2014/en/417ef25a-8a00-403c-bbb436730189233c/amr360032014en.html (citing to IOM data
from October 2013 finding that only 8% of camps (26) have
water, 54% of camps (166 sites) have latrines, and the average
number of people per latrine is 114); Int’l Org. for Migration,
IOM Seeks End to Displacement in Haiti, http://haiti.iom.int/
iom-seeks-end-displacement-haiti.
241	 Shelter and Housing, supra n. 239; Rep. of the Independent Expert
on the Situation of Human Rights in Haiti (Gallon) supra n. 200 at
¶ 73; Int’l Org. for Migration, Number of Haitians Living in PostEarthquake Camps Drops Sharply, http://haiti.iom.int/numberhaitians-living-post-earthquake-camps-drops-sharply.
242	 Displacement Tracking Matrix, V2.0 Update, IOM/IASC,
(Sep. 30, 2013), http://www.eshelter-cccmhaiti.info/
jl/images/dtm%20v2%20report%20oct%202013%20
eng—.pdf (showing that three camps, totaling about 64,378
individuals, were taken off the official IDP camps list in
2013 after the Haitian government requested their removal
because the “characteristics of these settlements are those of
‘... new neighborhoods needing urban planning with a long
term view ...’, not of IDP sites.”); IOM Reports Big Drop in IDP
Population after Removing 3 Areas from “Official” Camp List, Center
for Economic and Policy Research, (Oct. 22, 2013), http://
www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/relief-and-reconstructionwatch/iom-reports-big-drop-in-idp-population-afterremoving-3-areas-from-official-camp-list.
243	 Haitian Civil Society 2013 Report on Forced Evictions in the
Port-au-Prince Metropolitan Area, Collective of Housing
Rights Organizations: GARR, POHDH, PAPDA, SRJ-Haiti,
FRAKKA, (Dec. 30, 2013), http://undertentshaiti.com/
wp-content/uploads/2014/04/2013_Evictions_Report_
Collective_of_Housing_Rights_Organizations.pdf; Haiti:
Hundreds FaceViolent Forced Eviction, Amnesty International,
(Oct. 18, 2013), http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/
asset/AMR36/020/2013/en/30106c67-6430-4e1a-a0ec082284b658f1/amr360202013en.html.
60

244	 Angela Sherwood et al., Supporting Durable Solutions to
Urban, Post-Disaster Displacement: Challenges And Opportunities
In Haiti, Brookings Inst. & Int’l Org. for Migration 16
(2014), available at http://www.brookings.edu/~/
media/research/files/reports/2014/02/07%20haiti%20
displacement/supporting%20durable%20solutions%20
to%20displacementhaiti%20march%204%202014.pdf; see
Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights
in Haiti (Gallon), supra n. 200 at ¶ 73 (“The people who have
left the camps in the past two years (over 1.85 million) have
not necessarily resolved their housing problem. Most have
received a grant to help them find shelter for about a year, but
this cannot be considered a sustainable solution.”).
245	 Tectonic Shifts: Haiti Since the Earthquake, supra n. 10 at 101.
246	 Id.
247	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti (Gallon), supra n. 200 at ¶ ¶ 15, 45.
248	 See discussion infra at pp. 21-24.
249	 Interview with Alex, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct.
5, 2014).
250	 Interview with Clifford, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 15, 2013).
251	 Interview with Evans, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Oct. 5, 2014); Interview with Mozart, deportee, in Port-auPrince, Haiti (Dec. 15, 2014).
252	 Interview with Daniel, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Oct. 5, 2014).
253	 Interview with Gary, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec.
15, 2013).
254	 Id.
255	 Interview with Augustine, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2012).
256	 Interview with Colson, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct.
5, 2014); Telephone interview with Kettie (Dec. 15, 2013).
257	 Haiti Overview, The World Bank, http://www.worldbank.org/
en/country/haiti/overview (last visited Dec. 2, 2014).
258	 The World Factbook, Haiti, Central Intelligence Agency,
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worldfactbook/geos/ha.html.
259	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti (Gallon), supra n. 200 at ¶ 11.
260	 Id. at ¶ 14; The World Factbook, Haiti, supra n. 258.
261	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 72.
262	 Interview with Colson, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Oct. 5, 2014).
263	 Interview with Evans, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Oct. 5, 2014).
264	Morris, supra n. 183.
265	 Interview with Magnum, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Feb. 2011).
266	 Id.
267	 Id.
268	 Interview with Wilky, a deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Oct. 4, 2014); see also telephone interview with Sonia, a
deportee (Dec. 18, 2013) (stating that an individual needs
connections to obtain employment in Haiti); Telephone
interview with Moise, deportee (Dec. 17, 2013) (stating that
his mother is retiring soon and he does not know what he will
do when she can no longer support him).

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

269	 Interview with Felix, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct.
5, 2014); Interview with Daniel, deportee, in Port-au-Prince,
Haiti (Oct. 5, 2014); Interview with Francisco, deportee, in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct. 6, 2014).
270	 See discussion supra at pp. 9-13.
271	 Epidemiological Update-Cholera, supra n. 20; Fabio Bucciarelli
& Megan Gibson, Frustration and Suffering in Haiti’s Mental
Facilities, Time Mag. (Sept. 19, 2013), www.lightbox.time.
com/2013/09/19/frustration-and-suffering-in-haitis-mentalfacilities/#1; see also Cath Turner, Examining Mental Health in
Haiti, Al Jazeera (Feb. 10, 2014), http://blogs.aljazeera.com/
blog/americas/examining-mental-health-haiti.
272	 FourYears after Earthquake, Housing, Sanitation, Health Care are
Still Pressing Needs in Haiti, Ctr. for Econ. & Policy Research
(Jan. 09, 2014), http://www.cepr.net/index.php/pressreleases/press-releases/four-years-after-earthquake-housingsanitation-health-care-are-still-pressing-needs-in-haiti.
273	 Health Response to the Earthquake in Haiti, PAHO, 4 (2011),
available at http://new.paho.org/disasters/dmdocuments/
HealthResponseHaitiEarthq.pdf.
274	 See Unpublished Manifests, supra n. 107; see also interview
with Evans, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct. 5, 2014);
Interview with Billy, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec.
15, 2013); Interview with Sonia, deportee, in Port-auPrince, Haiti (Dec. 18, 27, 31, 2013); Interview with Stanley,
deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 14, 2013); Interview
with Marckenson, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec.
15, 2013); Interview with Peterson, deportee, in Port-auPrince, Haiti (Dec. 15, 2013); Interview with Eddy, deportee,
in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 27, 2013); Interview with
Phillip, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec 15,2013).
275	 See Unpublished Manifests, supra n. 107; see also, Interview
with Carl, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct. 5, 2014);
Interview with Alex, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec.
14, 2013 & Oct. 5, 2014); Interview with Evans, deportee, in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 2013 & Oct. 5, 2014); Interview
with Beverly, in Miramar, Fla. (Nov. 8, 2014); Interview with
Dominique, in Miramar, Fla. (Nov. 8, 2014); Interview with
David, in Miramar, Fla. (Nov. 8, 2014); Telephone interview
with Kettie, deportee (Dec. 15, 2013).
276	 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Dep’t
of Homeland Sec., ICE Air Charter March 19, 2013
(unpublished manifest of monthly deportation flights to
Haiti) (on file with authors); Diseases & Conditions, Post-Polio
Syndrome, Mayo Clinic, http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseasesconditions/post-polio-syndrome/basics/definition/con20021725 (up to half of individuals who had polio at a young
age may develop post polio syndrome, the complications
of which include respiratory failure) (last updated June 11,
2014).
277	 Health in the Americas: Haiti, World Health Org.
& Pan Am. Health Org., http://www.paho.org/
saludenlasamericas/index.php?option=com_
content&view=article&id=38&Itemid=36&lang=en (last
updated Apr. 11, 2013).
278	 Id.
279	 Haiti TravelWarning, supra n. 89.
280	 Interview with Dr. Patrick Joseph, M.D., Gheskio, in Portau-Prince, Haiti (Oct. 8, 2014); Declaration of Dr. Arthur
Fournier (Dec. 2014) (on file with the authors).

281	 Interview with Dr. Patrick Joseph, M.D. supra n. 280.
282	 Declaration of Dr. Arthur Fournier (Dec. 2014), supra n. 280.
283	 Health Response to the Earthquake in Haiti, PAHO, 4 (2011),
available at http://new.paho.org/disasters/dmdocuments/
HealthResponseHaitiEarthq.pdf.
284	 See International Activity Report 2013-Haiti, Medecins San
Frontieres (Dec. 31, 2013) (“Healthcare in Haiti remains
largely privatized and most people do not have the financial
means to pay for it”); Health in the Americas: Haiti, supra n. 277
www.msf.org/international-activity-report-2013-haiti
[hereinafter, MSF International Activity Report].
285	 Health Response to the Earthquake in Haiti, supra n. 283 at 4;
Declaration of Dr. Arthur Fournier, supra n. 280.
286	 Report of the Ad Hoc Advisory Group on Haiti, supra n. 47 at
¶ 23.
287	 Interview with Dr. Patrick Joseph, M.D., supra 280; see
also Harinder Singh Chahal, et. al., Availability, Prices and
Affordability of Essential Medicines in Haiti, 3 J. of Global Health
1, 5-7 (2013); Health in the Americas: Haiti, supra n. 277.
288	MSF International Activity Report, supra n. 284; see also Health in
the Americas: Haiti, supra n. 277.
289	 Telephone interview with Dr. Jessy Devieux, Ph.D., Assoc.
Professor, Fla. Int’l Univ. (Oct. 28, 2014); see also 2011
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra n.
217 at 6; Corrections Update, Department of Peacekeeping
Operations, United Nations, Volume 4, 15 (Dec. 2012);
http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/publications/cljas/
Corrections2012.pdf.
290	 See Le Systeme de Sante Mental en Haiti, IESM-OMS 16-17
(2011), available at http://www.who.int/mental_health/
who_aims_country_reports/who_aims_report_haiti_fr.pdf.
291	 Id. at 22.
292	 Id.; see also Telephone interview with Dr. Jessy Devieux,
Ph.D., supra n. 289; see also Jennifer Severe, M.D., Challenges
of Becoming a Psychiatrist in Haiti-Partners in Health: an Emerging
Model to Train Generalist Physicians, 9 The Residents’ J. 5, 5-7
(May 2014), http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/pb/assets/
raw/journals/residents-journal/2014/May_2014.pdf.
(“Overall, the limitations in psychiatric training and treatment
that exist in Haiti serve to reduce motivation for training in
psychiatry.”).
293	 Le Systeme de Sante Mental en Haiti, supra n. 290 at 11.
294	 Telephone interview with Dr. Jessy Devieux, supra n. 289.
295	 Chahal, et. al., supra n. 287 at 5-7; Health in the Americas: Haiti,
supra n. 277.
296	 Chahal, et. al., supra n. 287; Telephone interview with Dr.
Marie Guerda Nicolas, Ph.D., Assoc. Professor, Univ. of
Miami (Dec. 10, 2014).
297	 Chahal, et. al., supra n. 287.
298	 Chahal, et. al., supra n. 287; Health in the Americas: Haiti, supra
n. 277.
299	 See, e.g. Interview with Evans, deportee, in Port-au-Prince,
Haiti (Dec. 2013 & Oct. 5, 2014); Interview with Billy,
deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 15, 2013); Interview
with Sonia, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 18, 27,
31, 2013); Interview with Marckenson, deportee, in Portau-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 15, 2013); Interview with Peterson,
deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 15, 2013); Interview
with Eddy, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 27,
2013); Interview with Phillip, deportee, in Port-au-Prince,
Endnotes

61

300	
301	
302	
303	
304	
305	
306	
307	
308	
309	
310	
311	
312	

313	

314	

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

315	

316	
317	
318	

319	
320	
62

Haiti (Dec 15, 2013); Interview with William, deportee, in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 2013); Interview with Magnum,
deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 2013 & Dec. 15,
2014); Interview with Randal, deportee, in Port-au-Prince,
Haiti (Dec. 2013); Interview with Stanley, deportee, in
Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec. 14, 2013); Interview with Wilky,
deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (December 14, 2013 &
Oct. 5 2014).
Interview with Peterson, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 15, 2013).
High Blood Pressure (hypertension), Mayo Clinic (Sept. 6, 2014),
http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/high-bloodpressure/basics/complications/con-20019580.
Interview with Alex, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec.
14, 2013 & Oct. 5, 2014).
Interview with Carl, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct.
5, 2014).
See discussion supra at pp. 9-13.
Id.
Interview with Stanley, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 14, 2013).
Id.
Interview with IOM staff member, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 17, 2013).
Telephone interview with former staff member of
International Organization on Migration (Oct. 6, 2014).
Telephone interview with Michelle Karshan (Dec. 14, 2014).
Id.
The information about this incident is taken from a telephone
interview with Magnum (December 15, 2014) and a
telephone interview with Michelle Karshan (December 14,
2014).
Culture and Mental Health in Haiti: A Literature Review, WHO/
MSD/MER/10.1, World Health Org. & Pan Am. Health Org.,
12 (2010), available at http://www.who.int/mental_health/
emergencies/culture_mental_health_haiti_eng.pdf; 2012
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra n. 195 at
31. (“As a group, people with mental illness or developmental
disabilities were consistently marginalized, neglected, and
abused in [Haiti].”).
2011 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra
n. 217 at 29-30 (“family members frequently tied up persons
with cognitive disabilities or mental illness for long periods of
time).
Interview with Elie, sister-in-law of deportee, in Port-auPrince, Haiti (Oct. 6, 2014). See also 2011 Country Reports
on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra n. 217 at 30 (stating
that neglect and abuse of the mentally ill stems from a lack of
understanding of mental illness).
Telephone interview with Dr. Marjory Clermont-Mathieu,
Ph.D., Professor, Haiti State Univ. (Dec. 4, 2014).
Interview with Michelle Karshan (Dec. 16 2014).
Le Systeme de Sante Mental en Haiti, supra n. 290 at 22; Visit to
Mars and Kline Psychiatric Hospital by Univ. of Miami Sch.
of Law Human Rights & Immigration Clinics, Port-au-Prince
(Dec. 18, 2013 & Oct. 7, 2014); Telephone interview with Dr.
Marie Guerda Nicolas, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Univ. of
Miami (Dec. 10, 2014).
Id.
2011 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra n.

217 at 29 (“conditions in the state hospital for mental illness
were well below international standards, with patients often
living in harsh conditions. Patients were frequently restrained
in order to keep them from wandering, and many of them
were kept isolated in small rooms without windows and
without adequate or regular access to hygiene. Staff in the
hospitals were insufficient to meet patients’ needs and were
often untrained for providing mental health services.).
321	 Telephone interview with Dr. Jessy Devieux, Ph.D., supra n.
289.
322	Bucciarelli, supra n. 271.
323	 Id.
324	 Id.
325	 Visit to Mars and Kline Psychiatric Hospital by Univ. of Miami
Sch. of Law Human Rights & Immigration Clinics, Port-auPrince (Dec. 18, 2013 & Oct. 7, 2014).
326	 Interview with Dr. Louis Jeanny Girard, M.D., Mars and
Kline, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Oct. 7, 2014).
327	 Id.
328	 Anne-christine d’Adesky & PotoFanm+Fi, Beyond Shock:
Charting the Landscape of SexualViolence in Post-Quake Haiti:
Progress, Challenges & Emerging Trends 2010-2012, Abridged
Version, 107 (2012), available at http://potofi.files.
wordpress.com/2012/12/beyond-shock-abridged-versionhaiti-gbv-progress-report-nov-2012.pdf.
329	 Unless otherwise indicated, the information in this section
came from the authors’ visits to Mars and Kline Psychiatric
Center on October 7, 2014 and December 18, 2013.
See also Deborah Sontag, In Haiti, Mental Health System
is in Collapse, N.Y. Times (Mar. 19, 2010) http://www.
nytimes.com/2010/03/20/world/americas/20haiti.
html?pagewanted=all&_r=0. (at Mars and Kline “patients,
padlocked in tiny concrete cells, clutched the bars and howled
for attention. Feces clotted the gutter outside a ward where
urine pooled under metal cots without mattresses.”).
330	 Email from Bess Adler, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti to Rebecca
Sharpless (Dec. 8, 2014).
331	 Id.
332	 Id.
333	 Michael D. Landry, PT, PhD, Physical Therapists in PostEarthquake Haiti: Seeking a Balance Between Humanitarian Service
and Research, 90 Physical Therapy J. 974, 974 (2010) (citing
Colleen O’Connell, Aleema Shivji, and Thomas Calvot,
Handicap International Report—Preliminary findings about persons
with injuries—Haiti Earthquake 12 January 2010, Handicap
Int’l, at 2-8 (Jan. 29, 2010), available at www.reliefweb.int/
sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/724BE5476ED089AA852
576BE005BC5C7-Full_Report.pdf.).
334	 United Nations, Disability, Natural Disasters, and Emergency
Situations, http://www.un.org/disabilities/default.
asp?id=1546.
335	Landry, supra n. 333 at 974.
336	 2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra n.
212 at 40.
337	 Aude Brus, Lisa Danquah, Pierre Gallien, Claire Perrin
Houdon, Hannah Kuper, Islay Mactaggart, & Sarah Polack,
Patric Senia, Disability in Post-Earthquake Haiti: Prevalence and
Inequality in Access to Services, Handicap International, 1, 3
(Sept. 2014) (on file with authors).
338	 Id at 7.

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

339	 Id.
340	 2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra n.
212 at 40.
341	Landry, supra n. 333 at 974.
342	 2013 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices—Haiti, supra
n. 212 at 40; See also Women’s Refugee Comm’n PersonsWith
Disabilities and the Humanitarian Response in Haiti, (Jan. 2010),
http://www.womensrefugeecommission.org/persons-withdisabilities-and-the-humanitarian-response (the disabled are
often “shunned and stigmatized).
343	 Lisa Danqua & Aude Brus, Representation and Evaluation of
Disability in Port-au-Prince, Haiti: Methodological Report—2013,
International Centre for Evidence in Disability 85 (2013),
http://www.hiproweb.org/uploads/tx_hidrtdocs/
RS02Haiti.pdf.
344	 Id.
345	 Interview with Billy, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Dec.
15, 2013).
346	 Epidemiological Update-Cholera, supra n. 20 at 1.
347	 Email from Dr. John May to Romy Lerner (Dec. 11, 2014)
348	 Epidemiological Update-Cholera, supra n. 20 at 1; Haiti:Too Few
Beds to Treat Cholera Patients, Medicins Sans Frontieres, (Nov.
24 2014), http://www.msf.org/article/haiti-too-few-bedstreat-cholera-patients.
349	 Haiti:Too Few Beds to Treat Cholera Patients, supra at 348.
350	 Id.; see also 2014 Humanitarian Needs Overview Mid-Year Review
Haiti, UN Office of the Coordinator for Humanitarian
Affairs, 7-9 (July 2014), www.humanitarianresponse.info/
system/files/documents/files/HNO%2022%20august%20
2014.pdf.
351	 Randal C. Archibold & Somini Sengupta, UN Struggles to Stem
Haiti Cholera Epidemic, N.Y. Times (Apr. 19, 2014), available
at http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/world/americas/unstruggles-to-stem-haiti-cholera-epidemic.html.
352	 Id.
353	 UN Secretary General, Report of the Secretary General on the
United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti, ¶ 17, UN Doc.
S/2014/162 (March 7, 2014).
354	 See Haiti Cholera Response United Nations in Haiti Mid-Year
Update (January-July 2014), Office of the UN in Haiti, 4 (July
2014), http://www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/
files/documents/files/Mid-year%20cholera%20fact%20
sheet.pdf; see also 2014 Humanitarian Needs Overview Mid-Year
Review Haiti, supra n. 350 at 7-9.
355	 Archibold & Sengupta, supra n. 351; see also 2014 Humanitarian
Needs Overview Mid-Year Review Haiti, UN Office of the
Coordinator for Humanitarian Affairs, 7 (July 2014), http://
www.humanitarianresponse.info/system/files/documents/
files/HNO%2022%20august%202014.pdf.
356	 Id.
357	 See discussion supra at pp. 21-22: see also Declaration of Dr.
Arthur Fournier (Dec. 2014).
358	 Health in the Americas: Haiti, supra n. 277.
359	 Declaration of Dr. Arthur Fournier, supra n. 280.
360	 Health in the Americas: Haiti, supra n. 277.
361	 Our Bodies are Still Trembling: HaitianWomen Continue to Fight
Against Rape: OneYear Update, Inst. for Justice and Democracy
in Haiti, et al. (Jan. 2011), available at http://ijdh.org/
wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/1-Year-GBV-2011.pdf.
362	 Robert Maguire, Peace Brief 119: HaitianWomen:The Centerpost

of Reconstructing Haiti, U.S. Inst. of Peace 2 (Jan. 06, 2012),
available at http://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/
resources/PB-119.pdf.
363	 Haiti: SexualViolence againstWomen, Including Domestic Sexual
Violence; In Particular, Prevalence within and outside of Camps for
the Internally Displaced; Criminal Prosecutions (2011-May 2012),
Research Directorate, Immigration and Refugee Board of
Canada (June 08, 2012) available at http://www.irb-cisr.
gc.ca/Eng/ResRec/RirRdi/Pages/index.aspx?doc=454021
(citing Violences spécifiques faites aux femmes, Concertation
nationale contre les violences faites aux femmes 5 (Nov. 25,
2011), available at http://www.youphil.com/sites/default/
files/Concertation%20Nationale%20-%20Diffusion%20
25%20nov%2011%20(Vs%20Finale).pdf).
364	 Id.
365	 Meena Jagannath, Barriers toWomen’s Access to Justice in Haiti, 15
CUNY L. Rev. 27, 29, & 34-5 (2011).
366	 Shannon D. Lankenau, Note, Toward Effective Access to Justice
in Haiti: Eliminating the Medical Certificate Requirement in Rape
Prosecutions, 64 U. Cal. Hastings L. J. 1759, 1766, (August
2013), (citing Lisa Davis, Still Trembling: State Obligation Under
International Law to End Post-Earthquake Rape in Haiti, 65 U.
Miami L. Rev. 867, 873 (2011)); see also Benedetta Faedi
Duaramy,Women in the Aftermath of the 2010 Haitian Earthquake,
25 Emory Int’l. L. Rev. 1193, 1212 (2012) (citing Bonafice
Alexandre, Décret du 6 juillet 2005 modifiant le Régime des
Agressions Sexuelles et Elimination en la Matière les Discriminations
Contre la Femme [Decree Changing the Regulation of Sexual Assaults
and Eliminating Forms of Discrimination AgainstWomen], Le
Moniteur, 2 (Aug. 11, 2005).
367	 UN Human Rights Comm., Concluding Observations of the
Human Rights Committee: Haiti, UN Doc. CCPR/C/HTI/
CO/1 (Oct. 27, 2014); Press Release, MADRE, UN Human
Rights Committee ConfrontsViolations against HaitianWomen
and LGBT Persons (Nov. 05, 2014), available at http://www.
madre.org/page/madre-news-125/news/un-human-rightscommittee-confronts-violations-against-haitian-women-andlgbt-persons-974.html.
368	 Equality Now, et al., Ensuring HaitianWomen’s Participation
and Leadership in all stages of National Relief and Reconstruction:
A Gender Shadow Report of the 2010 Post-Disaster Needs
Assessment, Haiti Gender Equality Collective, 4 (March
31, 2010), available at http://www.genderaction.org/
publications/2010/gsr.pdf; see also Jagannath, supra n. 365 at
38-9 (2011).
369	 Ensuring HaitianWomen’s Participation and Leadership in all stages
of National Relief and Reconstruction, supra n. 368 at 4.
370	 UN Human Rights Council, Accelerating Efforts to Eliminate
all Forms ofViolence againstWomen: Ensuring Due Diligence in
Preventing, UN Doc. A/HRC/14/L.9/Rev. 1 at ¶ 11 (June
23, 2010); see also Ctr for Human Rights and Global Justice/
Global Justice Clinice, Yon Je Louvri: ReducingVulnerability to
SexualViolence in Haiti’s IDP Camps, New York: NYU School of
Law 45, 80 (Jan. 20, 2012), available at http://chrgj.org/wpcontent/uploads/2012/07/yonjelouvri.pdf.
371	“Nobody Remembers Us:” Failure to ProtectWomen’s and Girls’
Right to Health and Security in Post-Earthquake Haiti, Human
Rights Watch (2011), available at http://www.hrw.org/
sites/default/files/reports/haiti0811webwcover.pdf; see
also KOFAVIV, et al., Struggling to Survive: Sexual Exploitation
Endnotes

63

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

of DisplacedWomen and Girls in Port-au-Prince, Haiti (Jan. 20,
2012), available at http://www.law.cuny.edu/academics/
clinics/iwhr/publications/Struggling-to-survive-2012reduced.pdf; A Profile of Police and Judicial Response to Rape in
Port-au-Prince, Human Rights Section (HRS), Office of the
High Comm’r H.R. (June 2012), available at http://minustah.
org/?p=36059.
372	“Nobody Remembers Us:”Failure to ProtectWomen’s and Girls’ Right
to Health and Security in Post-Earthquake Haiti, Human Rights
Watch (2011), supra n. 371. See also telephone interview with
Kettie, deportee (Dec. 15, 2013).
373	 Accelerating Efforts to Eliminate all Forms ofViolence against
Women: Ensuring Due Diligence in Preventing, supra n. 370 at ¶ 11
(“heightened vulnerability resulted in targeted, compounded
and structural discrimination”); see also Special Rapporteur
on Violence Against Women, Its Causes and Consequences,
Rep. of the Special Rapporteur onViolence AgainstWomen, Its
Causes and Consequences, Human Rights Council, UN Doc. A/
HRC/17/26, at ¶102 (May 2, 2011) (by Rashida Manjoo);
Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti, supra n. 15.
374	 Declaration of Malya Villard Appolon,¶ 24, p. 4 (on file with
authors).
375	 Yon Je Louvri: ReducingVulnerability to SexualViolence in Haiti’s
IDP Camps, supra n. 370 at 41 (women without family and
community protections who lack access to secure housing are
most exposed to the threat of violence.).
376	 Fact-finding Missions Conducted by U. of Miami Sch. of Law
Human Rights and Immigration Clinics, Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 14-18, 2013 & Oct. 7, 2014).
377	 Fact-finding Mission Conducted by U. of Miami Sch. of Law
Human Rights and Immigration Clinics, Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 14-18, 2013).
378	 Interview with Francin, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 24, 2013).
379	 Interview with Kettie, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 15, 2013) (describing how one man at the shelter
threatened to violate her and touched her breasts and how she
was always afraid there).
380	 Id.
381	 Id.
382	 Interview with Merlene, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Dec. 17, 2013, Oct. 07, 2014).
383	 MADRE, et. al, Supplementary Information on Haiti Regarding
SexualViolence, Sexual Exploitation and Access to Education for
Women and Girls, Submission to the Country Report Task
Force, Human Rights Comm., 105th Sess., July 9-27, (2012)
(quoting The Impact of the Earthquake, and Relief and Recovery
Programs on Haitian LGBT People, International Gay and Lesbian
Human Rights Comm’n & SEROVIE (2011), available at
http://iglhrc.org/sites/iglhrc.org/files/504-1.pdf ).
384	 Joe Siegel, Haitians Launch Country’s First LGBT Organization,
The Edge Boston (Mar. 1, 2012), available at http://www.
edgeboston.com/news/local/news/130523/haitians_
launch_country’s_first_lgbt_rights_organization (“Religious
rhetoric dictates that masisi (term for homosexuals) are
mortal sinners and abominations to society.”); see also
MADRE, et. al, Fighting for Our Lives:Violence and Discrimination
againstWomen and LGBT Persons in Haiti, Submission to Human
Rights Comm., 112th Sess. Oct. 7-31, (2014), available at
64

http://www.madre.org/uploads/misc/1417531722_Haiti%20
ICCPR%20Report%20ENG%202014%20final.pdf (“[M]embers
of the LGBT community [are compelled] to live in secrecy
and isolation, under constant threat due to fear of violence,
harassment and discrimination.”).
385	 Allyn Gaestal, Haiti’s Fight for Gay Rights: As LGBT Community
Becomes MoreVisible, Anti-GayViolence Rises Too, Al Jazeera
America (Nov. 8, 2014), http://projects.aljazeera.
com/2014/haiti-lgbt/.
386	 Fighting for Our Lives:Violence and Discrimination againstWomen
and LGBT Persons in Haiti, supra n. 384; The Impact of the
Earthquake, and Relief and Recovery Programs on Haitian LGBT
People, International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Comm’n
& SEROvie (2011), available at http://iglhrc.org/sites/
iglhrc.org/files/504-1.pdf ; Nathalie Margi, In Post-Earthquake
Haiti. Activists FightViolence Based on Gender and Sexuality,
France 24 (Nov. 14, 2010), http://observers.france24.com/
content/20101114-post-earthquake-haiti-activists-fightviolence-based-gender-sexuality.
387	 Fighting for Our Lives:Violence and Discrimination againstWomen
and LGBT Persons in Haiti, supra n. 384.
388	 Id.
389	 Id.
390	 Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee,
supra n. 367; UN Human Rights Committee ConfrontsViolations against
HaitianWomen and LGBT Persons (Nov. 05, 2014), supra n. 367.
391	 Id.
392	 MADRE, et. al., RE: Submission to the Country Report
Task Force for the Adoption of Lists of Issues for Republic of
Haiti Scheduled for Review by the Human Rights Committee
during the 110th Session to be held in March 2014,
transmitted letter dated December 20, 2013, address to the
Secretariat of the UN Human Rights Comm., 110th Sess.,
March 11-28, 21 (Dec. 20, 2013).
393	 Urgent Action—Haiti: LGBTI Organization’s Office Attacked
in Haiti, Amnesty International (Nov. 26, 2013), http://
www.amnesty.org/fr/library/asset/AMR36/021/2013/
fr/0fa8890c-b08f-4fe8-9ca7-b88a1ea6d443/
amr360212013en.html; Haiti Anti-Gay Protest Draws More Than
1,000 Demonstrators, Huffington Post (July 19, 2013), http://
www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/19/haiti-anti-gayprotest_n_3625095.html.
394	 The Impact of the Earthquake, and Relief and Recovery Programs on
Haitian LGBT People, supra n. 386.
395	 First National Congress Against Homophobia in Haiti, The Haitian
Sentinel (May 23, 2012), available at http://www.defend.
ht/news/articles/community/3046-first-national-congressagainst-homophobia-in-haiti.
396	 Urgent Action—Haiti: LGBTI Organization’s Office Attacked in
Haiti, supra n. 393; see also Haiti Anti-Gay Protest Draws More
Than 1,000 Demonstrators, supra n. 393.
397	 First National Congress Against Homophobia in Haiti, The Haitian
Sentinel, supra n. 395.
398	 Urgent Action—Haiti: LGBTI Organization’s Office Attacked in
Haiti, supra n. 393; see also Haiti Anti-Gay Protest Draws More
Than 1,000 Demonstrators, supra n. 393.
399	Gaestal, supra n. 385; Organization of American States, Press
Release, IACHR Condemns RecentWave ofViolence against LGTBI
Persons in Haiti (July 30, 2013) http://www.oas.org/en/
iachr/media_center/PReleases/2013/054.asp).

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

400	 Supplementary Information on Haiti Regarding the Treatment of Lesbian,
Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Individuals (LGBT), transmitted by
letter dated April 27, 2012 address to the Secretariat of the UN
Human Rights Comm., 105th Sess., July 9-27, UN GOAR, 3
(April 27, 2012), http://www.ccprcentre.org/doc/2014/02/
INT_CCPR_ICO_HTI_16058_E.pdf; see also Fighting for Our
Lives:Violence and Discrimination againstWomen and LGBT Persons in
Haiti, supra n. 384 at 15; RE: Submission to the Country Report Task
Force for the Adoption of Lists of Issues for Republic of Haiti Scheduled for
Review by the Human Rights Committee during the 110th Session to be
held in March 2014, supra n. 392.
401	 Id.
402	 All information in this section came from an interview with
Stephanie, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti on December
16, 2013.
403	 Sonia was deported for crimes relating to theft. All
information in this section comes from interviews with Sonia
on October 7, 2014 and December 18, 27 & 31, 2013 in Haiti
and with her three children and two sisters in Lake Worth,
Florida on November 8, 2014.
404	 Sara Satinsky, et al., Family Unity, Family Health: How FamilyFocused Immigration ReformWill Mean Better Health for Children and
Families, Human Impact Partners (June 2013), http://www.
humanimpact.org/projects/hia-case-stories/family-unityfamily-health-an-inquiry-on-federal-immigration-policy/.
405	 Interview with Vanessa, 60 year-old mother of Andre,
deportee, in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. (Oct. 2, 2011).
406	 Interview with Daniel, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Oct. 5, 2014).
407	 Interview with Evans, deportee, in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
(Oct. 5, 2014).
408	 Interview with Henry, brother of Evans, deportee, in Miami,
Fla. (Oct. 22, 2011).
409	 Satinsky,et al., supra n. 404; see also Ajay Chaudray, et al.,
Facing Our Future: Children in the Aftermath of Immigration
Enforcement, The Urban Institute (Feb. 2010), http://www.
urban.org/UploadedPDF/412020_FacingOurFuture_final.
pdf. One study found that at least 5,100 children were
forced into the child welfare system due to the deportation
of a parent. See Applied Research Center, Shattered Families:
The Perilous Intersection of Immigration Enforcement and the Child
Welfare System (Nov. 2, 2011).
410	 Carola Suárez-Orozco, et al, Making up for lost time:The
experience of separation and reunification among immigrant
families, 41:4 Family Process, 625-641,634 (2002); See e.g.,
Kalina Brabeck, et al., The Psychological Impact of Detention
and Deportation on U.S. Migrant Children and Families: A
Report for the Inter-American Human Rights Court (Aug. 2013),
available at http://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/
centers/humanrights/doc/IACHR%20Report%20on%20
Pyschosocial%20Impact%20of%20Detention%20%20
Deportation-FINAL%208-16-13.pdf.
411	 Interview with Sandra, 19-year-old daughter of Augustine,
deportee, in Miami, Fla. (Oct. 19, 2011).
412	 Interview with Melissa, 15-year-old daughter of Augustine,
deportee, in Miami, Fla. (Oct. 19, 2011).
413	 Chaudray, et al., supra n. 409.
414	 The information in this section came from interviews with
Carl, deportee and his wife, Christina in Port-au-Prince, Haiti
on October 5, 2014.

415	 Interview with Michelle, partner of Jimmy, deportee, in
Miami, Fla. (Oct. 4, 2011).
416	 Id.
417	 The Florida Mental Health Act of 1971 (Fla. Stat. §§394.451394.4789 (2005), commonly known as the “Baker Act”) is
a Florida statute that allows for involuntary examination of
an individual. Judges, law enforcement officials, physicians
or mental health professionals can initiate it. There must be
evidence that the person: has a mental illness (as defined by
the Baker Act) and is harm to self or to others (as defined by
the Baker Act).
418	 Interview with Michelle, 31 year-old partner of Jimmy,
deportee, in Miami, Fla. (Oct. 4, 2011).
419	 Satinsky,et al., supra n. 404.
420	 Ajay Chaudray, et al., supra n. 409.
421	 Id.
422	 Id.
423	 The information about Frantz and his family came from an
interview with Maria in Miami, Florida on October 10, 2011.
424	 The information about Auguste and his family came from a
telephone interview with 23 year-old daughter of Auguste on
October 7, 2011 and an interview with Auguste on February
12, 2011 in Port-au-Prince, Haiti.
425	 For a thoughtful recent accounting of some of this case law,
see Moria Paz, Human Rights, Immigration, and BorderWalls
(November 17, 2014), 11, available at SSRN: http://ssrn.
com/abstract=2526521 (forthcoming draft); Jaya RamjiNogales, Undocumented Migrants and the Failures of Universal
Individualism, 47 Vanderbilt J. Transnational L. 722-39 (2014);
David Weissbrodt, The Human Rights of Noncitizens (2008); and
Moria Paz, The Tower of Babel: Human Rights and the Paradox of
Language, 25 European J. Int’l L. 473 (2014).
426	 The United States is bound by certain international and regional
treaties and instruments, such as the American Declaration on
the Rights and Duties of Man (and its corresponding treaty,
the Charter of the Organization of American States), the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR),
the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman
or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and the
International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of
Racial Discrimination (ICERD). Other sources of international
legal authority, such as the Convention on the Rights of the
Child (CRC), the American Convention on Human Rights
(American Convention), the European Convention on Human
Rights (European Convention), and the Cartagena Declaration
on Refugees, while not binding on the United States, constitute
persuasive authority. International human rights bodies—such
as the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (InterAmerican Commission), the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights (Inter-American Court), the European Court of Human
Rights (European Court), the UN Human Rights Committee,
and the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child—interpret
and apply the law contained in these treaties and instruments.
Each body has imposed clear limitations on the ability of
countries to deport non-nationals under international human
rights law.
427	 See non-derogation clauses in, e.g., American Convention on
Human Rights, art. 27, Nov. 22, 1969, O.A.S.T.S. No. 36,
1144 U.N.T.S. 123 [hereinafter “American Convention”];
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 4,
Endnotes

65

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

Dec. 19, 1966, 999 U.N.T.S. 171 [hereinafter “ICCPR”];
European Convention on Human Rights, art. 15, Nov. 4,
1950, 213 U.N.T.S. 222 [hereinafter “ECHR”].
428	 See, e.g., U.N. High Commissioners for Refugees and Human
Rights Joint Communications, supra n. 168 (urging States
to “suspend all involuntary returns to Haiti”); Rep. of the
Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in Haiti, supra
n. 15 at ¶ 68 (urging States to refrain from forcibly returning
“individuals [] to Haiti [because they] are vulnerable to human
rights violations.”); IACHR, Precautionary Measures, supra
n. 66 (urging the United States to suspend deportations of
persons to Haiti who are “seriously ill or who have family
members in the United States,” and issuing precautionary
measures on behalf of 62 Haitian nationals subject to
deportation from the United States).
429	 American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man,
O.A.S. Official Rec., OEA/Ser. L./V./II.23, doc. 21 rev. 6
(1948), reprinted in Basic Documents Pertaining to Human
Rights in the Inter-American System, OEA/Ser. L.V/II.82,
doc. 6 rev. 1, at arts. V-VI (1992) [hereinafter “American
Declaration”].
430	ICCPR, supra n. 427 at art. 17(1). See also ECHR, supra n. 427
at art. 8 (“Everyone has the right to respect for his private and
family life.”).
431	 American Convention, supra n. 427 at arts. 17, 11.
432	 Smith & Armendariz, et al. v. United States, Case 12.562, InterAm. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 81/10 OEA/Ser.L/V/
II.139, doc. 5 rev. 1, ¶ 57 (Mar. 7, 2011).
433	 Id. at ¶ 64.
434	 Id. at ¶ 54.
435	 Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report on the Situation of Human
Rights of Asylum seekers within the Canadian Refugee Determination
System, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106, doc. 40 rev., ¶ 166 (Feb. 28,
2000) [hereinafter “Canada Refugee Report”].
436	 Francesco Madafferi v. Australia, Commc’n no. 1011/2001, UN
Doc. CCPR/C/81/D/1011/2001, ¶ 9.8 (2004) (finding
that the right to family life would be violated if the petitioner
was deported because his family lived for fourteen years in
the host country and his wife and children did not speak the
language of his country of origin).
437	 Id.
438	 Boultif v. Switzerland, App. no. 54273/00, Eur. Ct. H.R., ¶ 47
(2001).
439	 Id.
440	 Id.at¶51.
441	 Amrollahi v. Denmark, App. No. 56811/00, Eur. Ct. H.R.,
¶¶41, 43-44 (2002).
442	 American Declaration, supra n. 429 at art. VII.
443	 Canada Refugee Report, supra n. 435 at ¶¶ 159-66;
Convention on the Rights of the Child, art. 3(1), Nov. 20,
1989, 1577 UNTS 3.
444	 Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Advisory Opinion
on the Rights and Guarantees of Children in the Context of
Migration and/or in Need of International Protection, OC21/14, ¶¶ 70, 116 (August 19, 2014).
445	 Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No.
14 on the Right of the Child to Have His or Her Best Interests
Taken as a Primary Consideration (art. 3, para. 1), UN Doc.
CRC/C/GC/14, ¶¶ 39, 40 (2013).
446	 Id. at ¶ 61.
66

447	 Smith & Armendariz, supra n. 432 at ¶¶ 17,44.
448	 Id. at ¶ 60.
449	 See Nunez v. Norway, App. no. 55597/09, Eur. Ct. H.R. (2011);
but see Antwi and Others v. Norway, App. no. 26940/10, Eur. Ct.
H.R. (2012) (allowing the expulsion of a Ghanaian man who
had violated Norwegian immigration law, where both he and
his wife were born and raised in Ghana).
450	 Winata v. Australia, Commc’n no. 930/2000, CCPR/
C/72/D/930/2000, ¶ 7.3 (July 26, 2001). Although the
Committee found that the removal would constitute arbitrary
interference with the petitioners’ family life, it also implied
that removal could be lawful if preceded by an examination
of the petitioners’ case with due consideration given to the
protection of the minor child.
451	 See discussion supra at pp. 21-24.
452	 UN High Commissioners for Refugees and Human Rights
Joint Communications, supra n. 141.
453	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights in
Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 54.
454	 IACHR, Precautionary measures, supra n. 66
455	 American Declaration, supra n. 429 at art. I.
456	 Report on Terrorism & Human Rights, Inter-Am. C. H. R., Doc.
OEA/Ser.L./VIII.116 doc. 5 rev. 1 corr., ¶¶149-150 (Oct. 22,
2002) (noting that while the American Declaration lacks a general
provision on the right to humane treatment, the Commission has
interpreted Art. I as containing a prohibition similar to that of Art.
5 of the American Convention, supra n. 427).
457	 Case of the Street Children (Villagrán-Morales et al.) v.
Guatemala, 1999 Inter-Am. Ct. H.R. (ser. C) No. 63, ¶
144 (Nov. 19, 1999). See generally Steven R. Keener & Javier
Vasquez, A LifeWorth Living: Enforcement of the Right to Health
Through the Right to Life in the Inter-American Court of Human
Rights, 40 Colum. Hum. Rts. L. Rev. 597 (2009).
458	ICCPR, supra note 427 at art. 6 (1)(“Every human being has
the inherent right to life. This right shall be protected by law.
No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.”); art. 9(1)
(“Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.”);
and art. 7 (“No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”).
459	 American Declaration, supra n. 429 at art. XI.
460	 Smith & Armendariz, supra n. 432 at ¶ 50 (citing Mortlock v.
United States, Case 12.534, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report
No. 63/08, OEA/Ser. L/V/II.134, doc. 5 rev. 1 (July 25,
2008), ¶ 78).
461	 Haitian Ctr. for Human Rights v. United States, Case 10.675,
Report No. 51/96, Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R.,OEA/Ser.L/V/
II.95 doc. 7 rev. ¶ 167 (1997).
462	 Mortlock v. United States, Case 12.534, Inter-Am. Comm’n
H.R., Report No. 63/08, OEA/Ser. L/V/II.134, doc. 5 rev.
1 (July 25, 2008), ¶ 90; American Declaration, supra n. 429 at
art. XXVI.
463	 Haitian Ctr. for Human Rights, supra n. 461 at ¶ 170.
464	 Case of the Pacheco Tineo Family v. Bolivia, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R.,
Series C No. 272, ¶¶ 206-208 (Nov. 25, 2013).
465	 Human Rights Committee, General Comment No.
31, CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.13, March 26, 2004
(adopted on March 29, 2004) [online] http://
sim.law.uu.nl/SIM/CaseLaw/Gen_Com.nsf/
a1053168b922584cc12568870055fbbc/
7fe15c0f9b9dc489c1256ed800498f39?OpenDocument.

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

466	 Mortlock, supra n. 462 at ¶ 94.
467	 Id. at ¶ 91.
468	 D. v. United Kingdom, App. No. 30240/96 Eur. Ct. H.R.
(1997).
469	 B.B. v. France, App. No. 30930/96, Eur. Ct. H.R. ¶¶
8-25(1998).
470	 Id. The host country quashed the deportation order before the
European Court of Human Rights heard the case.
471	 See N.A. v. United Kingdom, App. no. 25904/07, Eur. Ct. H.R.
(2008).
472	 Id. at ¶ 110.
473	 Id. See also Urgent Action: Forced Returns to Iraq Deferred, Amnesty
Int’l, (Nov. 4, 2014) http://www.amnesty.org/es/library/
asset/EUR35/004/2010/es/e04edaaf-e74b-481c-a870a32fd4c09fe3/eur350042010en.html (reporting on ECHR
decision directing that forcible returns to Baghdad should be
suspended immediately because of the deterioration in the
security situation.).
474	 Case of Chahal v. United Kingdom, App. no. 22414/93, Eur. Ct.
H.R., ¶ 107 (1996). See also MSS v. Greece and Belgium, App. no.
30696/09, f 53) Eur. Ct. H.R. (2011) ¶ 253 (prohibiting the
forced return of a non-citizen who faced extreme poverty in
his home country following deportation and holding that the
non-citizen’s expulsion was a violation of the right to be free
from degrading treatment because he was left dependent on
the government’s support in a situation of “serious deprivation
or want incompatible with human dignity” upon return to
his home country); cf Cartagena Declaration on Refugees,
Nov. 22, 1984, Annual Report of the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights, OAS Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/
II.66/doc.10, rev. 1, available at http://www.refworld.org/
docid/3ae6b36ec.html (broadly defining refugees as “persons
who have fled their country because their lives, safety or
freedom have been threatened by generalized violence, foreign
aggression, internal conflicts, massive violation of human
rights or other circumstances which have seriously disturbed
public order”).
475	 Rep. of the Independent Expert on the Situation of Human Rights
in Haiti, supra n. 15 at ¶ 42; UN High Commissioners for
Refugees and Human Rights Joint Communications, supra n.
141. See discussion supra at pp. 24-27 for more information on
the dearth of medicine and medical care in post-earthquake
Haiti.
476	 See discussion supra at p. 2.
477	 The United States ratified the treaty with the understanding
that torture, defined as“intentionally inflicted” severe pain
or suffering, must be “specifically intended” to serve as a
basis for protection under Article 3 of the Convention. See S.
Comm. on Foreign Relations, Report on Convention Against
Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment, S. Exec. Rep. No. 101-30, at 9 (1990).
478	 8 C.F.R. § 208.18(a)(1); In re J-E, the Board of
Immigration Appeals found that, based on the record
presented by the applicant, “substandard prison conditions
in Haiti do not constitute torture within the meaning of 8
C.F.R. § 208.18(a)…” In re J-E, 23 I. & N. Dec. 291, 291
(BIA 2002); see also Pierre v. Attorney General, 528 F.3d 180,
189 (3d Cir. 2008) (finding that lack of medical care and
resultant pain Pierre would suffer in Haitian jail did not
constitute torture for purposes of CAT); see generally Mary

479	

480	

481	

482	

483	
484	

485	

486	
487	
488	
489	

Holper, Specific Intent and the Purposeful Narrowing of Victim
Protection Under the Convention Against Torture, 88 Or. L. Rev.
777 (2009).
See Exec. Office of Immigration Review, U.S. Dep’t. of
Justice, FY2012 StatisticalYear Book M1 (Mar. 2013), available
at http://www.justice.gov/eoir/statspub/fy12syb.pdf (of the
29,796 CAT applications, 643 were granted and 9,710 were
denied. 736 were deemed abandoned, 6,327 were withdrawn,
and another 12,380 were listed as “other.”).
American Declaration, supra n. 429, arts. XVII, XXVI. See also
ICCPR, supra n. 427 at art. 14(1) (“everyone shall be entitled
to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and
impartial tribunal established by law”).
Benito Tide Mendez et al. v. Dominican Republic, Case 12.271,
Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 64/12, ¶277 (Mar. 29,
2012) (discussing “Judicial Guarantees”); Advisory Opinion on
Juridical Condition and Rights of the Undocumented Migrants, OC18/03, Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), 17
September 2003, ¶ 123.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Advisory Opinion
on the Rights and Guarantees of Children in the Context of
Migration and/or in Need of International Protection, OC21/14, ¶ 112 (August 19, 2014); Case of Dominican and Haitian
People Expelled v. Dominican Republic, Inter-Am. Ct. H.R.,
Series C No. 282, ¶¶ 355-58 (Aug. 28, 2014). Vélez Loor v.
Panama, preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs,
Judgment Inter-Am. Ct. H.R Series C No. 218 ¶¶ 142-43
(Nov. 23, 2010). The rights to due process and a fair hearing
include administrative procedures such as deportation,
asylum, relief under the Torture Convention, appointment of a
guardian ad litem, and determination of the best interest of the
child, among others.
Mortlock, supra note 462 at ¶ 78.
Convention on the Rights of the Child, supra n. 443 at art.
12. See also Committee on the Rights of the Child, General
Comment No. 14, supra note 445 at ¶¶43 (stating that the
“best interests of the child” standard cannot be correctly
applied if children’s due process rights are not protected in all
matters affecting the child, which would include their parents’
deportation proceedings); Inter-American Court of Human
Rights, Advisory Opinion on the Rights and Guarantees of
Children in the Context of Migration and/or in Need of
International Protection, supra n. 444 at ¶ 116 (listing specific
guarantees under international human rights law that must
govern immigration proceedings involving children).
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Advisory Opinion
on the Rights and Guarantees of Children in the Context
of Migration and/or in Need of International Protection,
supra n. 444 at ¶116 (detailing list of “guarantees that, under
international human rights law, must govern any immigration
proceedings that involve children.”).
Case of the Pacheco Tineo Family v. Bolivia, supra n. 464 at ¶ 133
(Nov. 25, 2013).
Id. at ¶ 228.
Case of Dominican and Haitian People Expelled v. Dominican
Republic, supra n. 482 ¶¶ 356-58, 390-97 (Aug. 28, 2014). See
also Benito Tide Mendez, supra n. 481 at ¶ 289 (Mar. 29, 2012).
Smith & Armendariz, supra n. 432 at ¶ 63; see also Benito
Tide Mendez, supra n. 481 ¶ 284 (citing Report on Terrorism)
(“proceedings involving detention, status or removal of aliens
Endnotes

67

490	

491	
492	

493	
494	
495	

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

496	

68

from a state’s territory by exclusion, expulsion or extradition
require individualized and careful assessment and [are] subject
to the same basic and non-derogable procedural protections
applicable in proceedings of a criminal nature”).
Smith & Armendariz, supra n. 432 at ¶¶ 62, 64 (citing Maya
Indigenous Community of Toledo District v. Belize, Case 12.053,
Inter-Am. Comm’n H.R., Report No. 40/04, OEA/
Ser.L./V/II.122, doc. 5 rev. 1 ¶ 175 (2004); see also Benito Tide
Mendez, supra n. 481 at ¶ 279 (underscoring the importance
of countries’ “obligation to provide an effective remedy to
all persons within their jurisdiction against violations of their
fundamental rights and that the Convention provides that the
guarantee recognized therein applies not just to the rights
contained in the Convention, but also to those recognized in
the constitution or laws”); Mortlock, supra n. 462, ¶¶ 83-84; see
also Report on Terrorism, supra, note 456, at ¶ 401.
Smith & Armendariz, supra n. 432 at ¶ 58; Mortlock, supra n. 462
at ¶ 78.
The Commission noted that these factors had previously been
articulated by the European Court of Human Rights and
the UN Human Rights Committee as appropriate for use in
deportation proceedings.
Smith & Armendariz, supra note 432 at ¶ 54.
See discussion supra at p. 2.
These recommendations are adapted, in part, from
recommendations offered to the Inter-American Commission
on Human Rights by the authors and collaborators (on
file with authors) as well as recommendations presented
in the report of the UN Indep. Expert on the Situation of
Human Rights in Haiti, Rep. of the Independent Expert on the
Situation of Human Rights in Haiti, Addendum: Forced Returns of
Haitians by Third States, Human Rights Council, 12, UN Doc
A/HRC/20/35/Add.1, Sec. XII (June 4, 2012), http://
www.ohchr.org/Documents/HRBodies/HRCouncil/
RegularSession/Session20/A-HRC-20-35-Add1_en.pdf.
Cartagena Declaration on Refugees, Nov. 22, 1984, Annual
Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights,
OAS Doc. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66/doc.10, rev. 1, available at
http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b36ec.html.

AFTERSHOCKS: THE HUMAN IMPACT OF U.S. DEPORTATIONS TO POST-EARTHQUAKE HAITI

MIAMILAW

MIAMILAW

Immigration
Clinic

Human Rights
Clinic

Immigration Clinic
University of Miami School of Law
1311 Miller Drive
Coral Gables, FL 33146
305.284.6092
immigrationclinic@law.miami.edu

Human Rights Clinic
University of Miami School of Law
1311 Miller Drive
Coral Gables, FL 33146
305.284.1678
hrc@law.miami.edu

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI SCHOOL OF LAW

International Human Rights Clinic
The University of Chicago Law School
6020 S. University Ave
Chicago, IL 60637
773.704.3111
citro@uchicago.edu