|
|
|
RESOLUTION Nº 6/82 CASE
7602 CUBA March 8, 1982 BACKGROUND:
1. In a communication dated December 15, 1980, the Commission received the following denunciation: He
arrived in the United States on May 4, and his wife María Eugenia
Calvar Rivero and his two-year old daughter Maudie Valero Calvar have
visas and money to leave for San José; the Cuban Government is refusing
to let her leave because she has a university degree, thus violating the
most elemental human rights for family reunion. He
asks you to proceed with their case through legal and official channels,
since his wife and child have been away from him a long time. She was
fired from her job because of having asked to leave the country and she
and her daughter live off the charity of relatives and friends. 2. In a note of
December 22, 1980, the Commission transmitted the relevant parts of the
denunciation to the Cuban Government, so that it might furnish the
information that it deemed appropriate. 3. In a letter
dated January 16, 1981, the claimant forwarded several documents
concerning his case. He included a letter dated September 20, 1980 from
María Calvar do Mr. Ramiro Valdes, the Minister of the Interior of Cuba
explaining her circumstances. The part relevant to this case is the
following: I
presented my request for departure from the country, together with my
husband and child, on December 16, 1979, at the immigration office of
Matanzas. This we were denied provisionally, since we were not among the
cases listed as priority for family reunion. In
April of this year, during the events in the Peruvian Embassy, my
husband got into the embassy and left the country on May 4 for the
United States, via Mariel. During that time (when I was on leave), I
received a letter firing me from my job (in the municipality of Jaguey
Grande, Matanzas Province) on April 1980; it said that I was being
dismissed from the agency (MINSAP) for having presented my request to
leave the country and trying to enter the Peruvian Embassy, and that I
was not considered suitable as a professional of the Revolution. Within
a few days, on May 8, I received through the same channels the dismissal
form FT-32 for leaving the country. Believing
in the position taken by Granma, the official organ of the Party of the
Revolution, to the effect that anyone who had a visa to enter a country
could leave voluntarily, I communicated with my husband to ask him to
take the necessary steps through any country to obtain visas for me and
for our daughter. The visas were delivered to me on August 22. With
these and the rest of the required documents, I reported to the
immigration office at Matanzas to request a passport to leave the
country. Three days after having delivered my documents, I received a
letter (returning my documents) saying that it cannot be authorized
because it is not within the parameters established by the immigration
laws. In going to determine the parameters, it was explained to me that
professionals (I am a stomatologist, graduated from the University of
Havana in July 1979) could not leave the country. I turned to National
Immigration, and the reply was the same, for which reason I find it
necessary to turn to you. 4. Additional
information supplied by the claimant on July 17, 1981 explained that María
Calvar and her daughter Maudie had had visas to leave for Costa Rica
since September 1980, but the Cuban Government had denied their
departure. The claimant furnished a copy of a letter dated April 17,
1981 from Dr. Eladio Sánchez Cartas, Director of INTERCONSULT, to Mrs.
María Calvar, giving her the following reason for having denied the
exist permit: We
hereby inform you that when your case was discussed with the DIE; we
were informed that because of your status as a professional you were not
included in the categories of persons allowed to emigrate. The
foregoing notwithstanding, your file is pending in these offices, and if
the migration regulations should change, we shall inform you
immediately, with a view to reinitiating the steps that we have taken to
date. In
a note dated September 8, 1981, the Commission reiterated its request
for information from the Cuban Government, advising it that if the
information was not received within a reasonable time, the IACHR would
consider possible application of Article 39 of the Regulations. WHEREAS: 1. To date, the
Government of Cuba has not replied to the Commission's requests of
December 22, 1980 and September 8, 1981; and 2. Article 39 of
the Regulations of the Commission provides as follows: Article
39 The
facts reported in the petition whose pertinent parts have been
transmitted to the government of the state in reference shall be
presumed to be true if, during the maximum period set by the Commission
under the provisions of Article 31, paragraph 5, the government has not
provided the pertinent information, as long as other evidence does not
lead to a different conclusion. THE
INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, RESOLVES:
1. In application
of Article 39 of the Regulations, to presume to be true the acts
denounced in the communications of December 15, 1980, regarding the
denial of the right of María Eugenia Calvar Rivero and her daughter
Maudie Valero Calvar to leave the country. 2. To declare that
the Government of Cuba violated the right to protection of the family
(Article VI of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of
Man), the right to work (Article XIV), and the right of asylum (Article
XXVII). 3. To communicate
this decision to the Government of Cuba and to the claimants. 4. To include this
resolution in the Annual Report of the Commission to the General
Assembly of the Organization of American States in accordance with
Article 18, paragraph (f) of the Statute and Article 59, paragraph (g)
of the Regulations of the Commission.
|
