FOR many kababayans visiting the United States, the most dreaded part of the trip is going through the immigration inspection. The recent news about a 63-year old Filipina being harassed and intimidated by Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) officers in the point of entry in Seattle, Washington just validated the fear and apprehension of such routine procedure.
Why was she denied admission when she had a valid visa? Could the decision by the CBP officer to deport her be reversed? Could something be done about this abusive treatment that Grande suffered?
After all, Carina Yonzon Grande was traveling with complete valid documents. She had a passport with a 10-year US visa valid until 2017, round trip plane tickets, and even shuttle vouchers. She used to work for the Asian Development Bank, and has had the pleasure of traveling to many other exciting parts of the world. This trip should have been her 13th visit to the United States.
Yet last October 1, this grandma, who just wanted to attend her daughter’s wedding in America, was subjected to what she described as a traumatic six-hour interrogation in a small room without food or water. She claimed she was insulted, called a liar, intimidated and was forced to admit she wanted to enter the United States to seek employment, which she said could not be farther from the truth.
Grande said she was given two options by the CBP officer: be deported to the Philippines on the next flight of the same day or be put in jail and barred from entering the US for 5 years. “Exhausted, hungry, and sleep-deprived, I chose option one,” Grande said.
Many kababayans were moved by this ordeal experienced by Grande because they knew they could very well be in her position in their next trip to the United States.
To answer our readers’ questions, I interviewed two leading Fil-Am immigration lawyers for their legal opinion: Balitang America’s Pinoy Panawagan Legal Counsel Atty. Lou Tancinco, and Human Rights and International law Independent Consultant Atty. Arnedo Valera.
First of all, the State Department clarifies in its website that “a visa does not guarantee entry into the US A visa allows a foreign citizen to travel to the US port-of-entry, and the Department of Homeland Security US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) immigration inspector authorizes or denies admission to the United States.”
This is why the CBP inspector, operating under the assumption that Grande would be a TNT who would be working in the US illegally, was not allowed to enter the port of entry.
Unfortunately as a visitor, Grande would not have a right of legal representation. Atty. Lou Tancinco said, “Technically, one who is in the process of being interrogated at the port of entry means that the person is still outside the United States.”
“So even if she is detained, she will still not be given a lawyer. This is different from a green card holder who may request for a hearing and be represented by an immigration lawyer,” Atty. Lou added.
Atty. Lou Tancinco explained that an individual like Grande who was put on secondary proceedings will be given the option to withdraw the application for admission or accept an order of removal. It was stated in the report that she accepted an order of removal which is often referred to as the “airport-to-airport.”
“The expedited removal will bar her from entering the US for five years. The withdrawal of admission will have no bar, but she will still need to depart,” Atty. Lou explained. “She should just have chosen an application for withdrawal of admission.”
Couldn’t she have applied for humanitarian parole to enter the US? Atty. Tancinco said “she could be paroled to enter for deferred inspection but this would have to go through a very strict process.”
Humanitarian parole of an inadmissible alien is a privilege and not a right. It is used sparingly to bring someone who is otherwise inadmissible into the United States for a temporary period of time due to a compelling emergency, or if there is a significant public benefit. Humanitarian parole is granted by US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS).
Humanitarian parole can also be issued by US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) if the traveler seeking the parole is at the US border.
It is also not intended to be used to circumvent normal visa issuing procedures, bypass delays in visa issuance, or immigrate to the United States.
But according to both Atty. Lou Tancinco and Atty. Arnedo Valera, based on her narrative of what happened, the harassment that Grande experienced from the Immigration inspectors was not acceptable. She could file a complaint or seek redress with the Department of Homeland Security because it is expected that Homeland Security officers conduct their interviews and examinations with utmost professionalism and courtesy.
Atty. Arnedo Valera explained that the 5th Amendment (due process) of our US constitution protects all persons (including those entering the U.S) against arbitrary and abusive government conduct. He said there are numerous cases decided by the United Supreme Court providing protection against coercive interrogation, deprivation of basic human needs (like food, water), and other inhumane treatment that amounts to punishment.
Valera said: “Our claim here based on the facts is that the CBP practices such as we have observed violates the constitution. Even non-US citizens like her [Grande], at the very least, is entitled to fair and humane treatment and due process.”
The nonprofit public service Fil-Am organization Migrant Heritage Commission (MHC) has offered to help the Grande family (pro bono) file a complaint and request for investigation of abuse of power, coercion and lack of due process by CBP agents at port of entry, addressed to the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General in Washington D.C.
“It would be good that aside from the Philippines’ Department of Foreign Affairs, we can submit [Grande’s] affidavit [of what happened] to the U.S Department of Homeland Security Office of the Inspector General, for investigation of the alleged misconduct,” Atty. Valera said.
Valera told Grande’s daughter Stephanie: “We have to push that this incident be properly investigated and we hope that this horrible experience of your mom will never happen again to any Filipino or other nationalities. We need to stress that US Immigration agents must always be respectful and subject any person regardless of their nationality or immigration status with humane treatment and respect to his or her human rights and accorded due process. “
As Co-Executive Director of MHC in Washington DC, Atty Valera said, “The Migrant Heritage Commission strongly believes that her rights were violated. And we wanted our U.S government to rectify and recommend changes in the execution of policies of their agents at the border There are existing guidelines for enforcing and executing immigration laws and this involves according respect for human rights of all persons entering the United States. “
Valera clarified that this complaint is not a legal action intended to seek compensatory damages, but to put pressure on the Department of Homeland Security to investigate the incident so that policy changes can be made.
As he communicated to Grande’s family: “This is to serve the national interest of the United States in relation to fair execution and implementation of their immigration policies, and for our kababayans who share the same experience but do not have the courage like your mom have, in asserting her fundamental human right to travel and be accorded with fair and humane treatment.”
* * *
Gel Santos Relos is the anchor of TFC’s “Balitang America.” Views and opinions expressed by the author in this column are are solely those of the author and not of Asian Journal and ABS-CBN-TFC. For comments, go to www.TheFil-AmPerspective.com, https://www.facebook.com/Gel.Santos.Relos
I had a similar instance in 2014. Although the officer didn’t take me into a room or confine me; he did abuse me calling me a liar and putting his hand in my face (close to my face) when I tried to ask him what the issue was. What could I have done in such a situation? Could I have called him names back? In a democratic country verbal retaliation to abuse ought to be fair and square right…could they have arrested me for verbally defending myself. Since the officer’s behavior was anything but courteous! Any comments?