Friday, May 22, 2009

The Cuban Five: A Starkly Controversial Case

The Cuban Five: A Starkly Controversial Case
Friday, 22 May 2009, 4:31 pm
Press Release: Council on Hemispheric Affairs
- Members of the "Wasp Network," were arrested in 1998 and charged with
espionage, false
- Five men, known as the "Cuban Five", have filed an appeal of their
unusually long prison sentences, hoping to have their case reviewed by
the U.S. Supreme Court
- The U.S. judicial system and the Bush Administration have been accused
of violating the legal rights of the Cuban inmates as a result of its
Cold War mentality during the former president's tenure
- Latin American presidents, Nobel prize winners and human rights
organizations have called for their release

During Barack Obama's first three months in office, his administration
took several tentative steps toward rehabilitating the U.S. relationship
with Cuba. Up to now such ties have been dominated by unremitting
hostility towards the Castro Regime of over the last five decades since
the 1959 communist revolution as well as the installation of the U.S.
embargo in 1962. On April 13, as a sign of a political opening, Obama
lifted the restrictions that his predecessor, George Bush, had placed on
Cuban-Americans' ability to send remittances at will back home and to
visit their relatives on the island. He also relaxed rules governing the
activities of the U.S. telecommunications industry there.

Such changes in policy, despite being heralded by some as the initial
phases of a process to end the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba, in reality
fall short of accomplishing this feat. Rather, these controlled and very
modest moves can only sustain the U.S.-Cuba standoff even if they serve
to reignite a debate over the nature of Washington's relations with
Havana. With Obama's reform deserving to be seen as only a minimum
gesture of détente between the two foes. His efforts are more
representative than a Mickey and Minnie mouse de-marche than a
courageous move aimed at proving results. It is a fallacious view that
upholding the embargo will give his administration a leveraged position
with Havana. Nevertheless, Obama's recent actions are significant
because they may serve to reopen discussions regarding an enormously
important 1998 espionage case involving the apprehension, trial and
sentencing of the "Cuban Five".

The Cuban Five
The "Cuban Five," Gerardo Hernández, Ramón Labañino, Antonio Guerrero,
Fernando González, and René González were volunteer members of the
fourteen-member Wasp Network, La Red Avispa, which was headed by the
Dirección de Inteligenica (DI), a branch of Havana's foreign
intelligence service. The network was disbanded that year after FBI
agents obtained evidence that the group was engaged in illegal espionage
activities against violence prone anti-Castro organizations based in
Florida. Four Wasp members are believed to have fled to Cuba before they
could be apprehended and five other members cooperated with U.S. federal
authorities by pleading guilty to being unregistered foreign agents and
are currently serving time (29 years collectively) in federal prison.

The remaining five attracted brief media attention in the U.S. after
having plead innocent to charges ranging from false identification to
the far more serious accusation of conspiracy to commit murder. These
detainees remain imprisoned after being found guilty by a jury.
Meanwhile, the U.S. government continues to face intense international
criticism for having committed human rights violations, which were
allegedly carried out before and during the course of their trial. The
perpetrators of these gross obstructions of justice were carried out by
officials in the heavily politicized Miami Federal Attorney's office and
a Federal Branch , including Joan Lenart, which were veritable "shock"
troops for a radically right wing campaign to "get" the Cuban Five. The
defendants were denied visitation with their families, had limited
communication with their lawyers, and were also subjected to seventeen
months of solitary confinement during the trial. The fate of the five
now lies in the hands of the U.S. Supreme Court, which is due to decide
in 2010 whether or not it will hear the defendants' appeal against the
Bush administration's era charges.

The Cuban Five and Wasp Operations
A significant element of the case against the Cuban Five relates to
their interaction with the Wasp Network, which was assigned to
monitoring and infiltrating the virulent anti-Castro organization,
Brothers to the Rescue (BTTR). BTTR was founded to help rescue Cuban
refugees trying to flee the island by raft. Its tactics include
broadcasting information such as the text of the UN Declaration of Human
Rights from airplanes flying in international airspace, in order to
encourage Cubans to stand up to the authorities. On February 24, 1996,
the Wasp Network launched a fatal mission, Operation Scorpion, which was
to later form the basis of the charges of alleged conspiracy of murder
that was brought against the Cuban Five.

Having received secret radioed instructions from the DI, Hernández gave
orders to undercover operative René González and another Wasp member,
José Pablo Roque, that they were not to fly with the BTTR between
February 23 and February 27, 1996. On February 24, three BTTR planes,
flying over the Florida straits, crossed into international airspace
then purportedly into Cuban airspace. Havana, over the course of several
months, repeatedly asked the U.S. to stop the BTTR from attempting to
breach Cuban airspace due to the risk involved. In fact, U.S. officials
did communicate such information to the anti-Castro forces. While the
U.S. authorities moved to discourage such flights as a consequence of
Washington's basic inaction regarding these provocative moves, two Cuban
military aircraft were launched to intercept the three BTTR aircraft.
Two were shot down resulting in the loss of four lives. A subsequent
investigation was ordered by the International Civil Aviation Authority
to determine whether the hostile aircraft were in Cuban or international
airspace when they were downed. The operation ultimately earned Cuba a
unanimous condemnation by the UN Security Council in July 1996.

The DI, which opportunely was located in Miami, also sent Hernández to
oversee the success of Havana's efforts to penetrate U.S. military
facilities. The overarching goal of infiltrating these bases was to
report on the quantity and types of aircrafts arriving and departing
from the bases, monitor U.S. military personnel in key zones, identify
new communication devices which had been installed, establish radio
frequencies, gauge physical security procedures being followed, as well
as to identify those who could potentially be recruited as spies or
serve as subjects of interest to the Cuban intelligence services. The DI
also planned for two Wasp Network agents to penetrate the re-election
campaign of hard line Cuban-American Representative Lincoln Diaz-Balart,
who was known to be aggressively opposed to the normalization of U.S.
relations with Cuba. The purpose of this move was to gather information
that could later be used to discredit, harass or neutralize him and
other well-known Cuban-American congressional ideologues.

The FBI had been monitoring the Wasp Network since 1995, and in
September 1998, it moved to dismantle the group by apprehending its
members and unearthing the information that the intelligence
organization had collected. U.S. federal prosecutors submitted more than
1,200 pages of detailed communication reports between the DI and the
Cuban Five, which it had obtained from the computers being utilized by
Wasp members.

The Case
In certain respects, the proceedings involving the Cuban Five were the
longest of its kind in U.S. legal history. All told, 119 volumes of
testimony and more than 20,000 pages of exhibits and evidence were
presented. Great controversy surrounded the defendants' June 8, 2001
conviction on all charges. Since their 1998 arrests, they have remained
incarcerated, awaiting a decision by the Supreme Court on whether it
will review their case.

Central to the decision of the Cuban Five's defense team, led by Thomas
Goldstein, has been the decision to appeal the verdict (filed January
30, 2009), based on the argument that the selection of the jury, and the
environment in which the trial took place, prejudiced the proceedings.
The equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution states that no one
can dismiss jurors on the basis of race. In the filed appeal, defense
lawyers claimed that prosecutors unfairly removed seven potential
African American venire men from the jury pool. In the end, three
African Americans jurors were selected, but no Cuban-Americans. However,
the defense team will argue that the Cuban-American presence
nevertheless was felt throughout the trial.

Moreover, despite the increasing silhouette in international law
allowing for a person to be tried in a location different from that in
which a crime was allegedly committed, federal district judge Joan A.
Lenard, known for her right-wing proclivities, refused to grant a change
of venue from Miami, even though this would have advanced the prospects
of fair trial. The fact that Miami is home to many Cuban exiles that
hold strong opinions and sentiments against the Castro regime in Havana
failed to sway Lenard. As CNN reported at the time, the danger was that,
"The pervasive and violent anti-Castro struggle of the Miami community
would not only infect the jury with hostility but would cause jurors to
fear for their (and their families') safety, livelihoods, and community
standing if [they're] acquitted."

On its first appeal, the Court of Appeals agreed with the defense's
assessment and overturned the Cuban Five's convictions because the
appellate judges felt that the trial took place in a prejudiced
environment. In spite of this reasoning, the full Court of Appeals later
disagreed with that judgment and reinstated the convictions of the Cuban
Five, a move which now leaves the men to wait for the results from the
Supreme Court's deliberations. The new judgment also expanded the
charges pending against Hernández to include conspiracy to commit
murder, for his direct involvement in the 1996 shooting of the two BTTR
planes, and the resulting four deaths of members of that organization.
During their collective trials, the Cuban Five did not deny their covert
service in favor of Cuba's DI, but rather tried to give the impression
that, in fact it was they who were fighting against terrorism and
protecting Cuba. Their defense was that they were monitoring the
terrorist actions of Miami-based anti-Castro groups, who were actively
involved in terrorist activities, and who they feared would attack their
native country.

Guerrero, Hernández and Labaniño were all convicted of conspiring to
commit espionage in the United States. Hernández was convicted of
conspiracy to commit first-degree murder based on his role in the
February 1996 BTTR plane crashes and deaths of their four passengers
(who were all U.S. citizens). All five have been convicted of conspiracy
to act in the U.S. as agents of a foreign government without notifying
the Department of Justice, and conspiracy to defraud the United States.
Hernández has been sentenced to two life terms, Guerrero and Labaniño
each have been given one life sentence, Fernando González has been
sentenced to nineteen years and René González is currently serving a
fifteen-year sentence.

Human Rights Violations
Human rights groups such as Amnesty International have criticized the
U.S. government's policy regarding the Cuban Five and have accused it of
perpetrating human rights violations against the group. Beginning with
their arrest and subsequent trial three months later, the five Cuban
defendants have been held without bail for a period of thirty-three
months. They were incarcerated in solitary confinement cells for
seventeen months with all contact between the defendants and their
families cut off. Olga Salanueva, the spouse of René González, was
deported back to Cuba, and her request for a temporary U.S. visa was
denied. Even more disconcerting is the fact that Adriana Perez, the wife
of Gerardo Hernández, came to the U.S. with a valid visa to visit her
husband after he was imprisoned. Upon her arrival in Texas she was
detained, interrogated and summarily sent back to Cuba without being
allowed to see her husband. The U.S. government justified its draconian
treatment of the alleged culprits by stating it was exercising its
legitimate authority to protect itself against covert spies and their
affiliates. Evidence was presented at the trial, which revealed that
both wives were in fact members of, or at least affiliated with the Wasp
Network, and thus were labeled as bona fide threats to Washington's
national security.

In August 2001, upon being found guilty, the Cuban spies were remanded
to serve solitary confinement once again, this time for a period of
forty-eight days, prior to their pre-sentencing hearings, and then, in
March 2003, when they were sent to isolation cells on orders from the
Bush Department of Justice. Justice continued to claim that the Cubans
were still active threats to U.S. national security. Throughout this
period, the Cuban inmates were prohibited from receiving correspondences
from their families as well as their lawyers, which the defense
contended was a clear violation of domestic and international law. These
human rights violations have been submitted along with procedural
complaints over aspects of the original trial, as part of the basis of
the defense team's later appeal to the Supreme Court.

Cuba's Response to the Convictions
In Cuba, the defendants have become national icons and are today more
commonly known as the "Five Heroes," serving as symbols of the political
struggle between their native country and the U.S. Their images decorate
the entire country, with posters as well as block-long murals invoking
their names along with inspirational quotes from them, one of which says
"volverán," meaning, "they will return". A mural honoring their service
to Cuba was dedicated to the national heroes in Santa Clara, Cuba on
March 13, 2009. The imprisoned Cubans have been transformed into major
propaganda figures for Havana, with their personal virtues and
willingness to sacrifice for their country praised and memorialized on
postcards, factory walls, billboards, and in newspapers, as well as
being invoked during formal ceremonies and in speeches by Cuban
officials. Additionally, there are websites, such as the National
Committee to Free the Cuban Five, which points to the patent violations
of justice during their trial and the unbalanced treatment of those the
U.S. describes as spies. As a result, there is a clear sentiment in Cuba
that justice is only blind when it is conducive to U.S. ideological
interests.

As reported over NPR, the Cuban population regards the Cuban Five as
heroes who are "prisoners of the empire, unjustly held in the United
States." Cuban officials maintain that the incarcerated prisoners are
Cuban nationalists and patriots who are enduring excessively harsh
punishment, as a consequence of the ongoing hostility between the U.S.
and Cuba. Many ordinary Cubans feel that the U.S. employs a double
standard in its War on Terror, because as violent opponents of the
Castro regime sometimes kill pro-Havana militants, the U.S. government
casts a blind eye to these malicious crimes. Furthermore, these
aggressors have launched repeated criminal acts of violence against
Cuba, which have not been subject to the same rigid judicial standard as
those who are avowedly pro-Castro. Elizabeth Palmero, the wife of
Labaniño, drafted a statement defending the cause of the Cuban Five,
stating the reason why they are regarded as national heroes in Cuba, was
that, "The [five] personify the resistance of the Cuban people. They
personify the will of the Cuban people to decide their destiny to have
the government that we wish."

Domestic and International Reactions
Five Latin American presidents, ten Nobel Prize Laureates, prominent
intellectuals, religious figures, union leaders, head of legal and human
rights organizations, artists, members of parliament, and leading civic
personalities around the world have been calling for the release of the
Cuban Five. There have been petitions, which have sought to win over the
interest of both Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and President Obama.
Apologists for the actions of the jailed Cubans have hammered away at
Washington's alleged violations of international law, due process and
fair trial. All of these efforts have been focused on calling for the
pardoning and release of the jailed Cubans and the granting of
humanitarian visas to their deported wives to provide for visitation
rights for them immediately.

The recent lifting of travel restrictions for Cuban-Americans suggests
that the U.S. may slowly be trying to create a new relationship with
Cuba, replacing a policy which for so long has crippled relations
between Havana and Washington. The current Cuban president, Raúl Castro,
has suggested a prisoner swap if need be, which should be staged in a
manner that would send all of Cuba's political prisoners and their
families to the United States in exchange for the five convicted Cuban
spies. Yet it appears that quite a few of the Cuban political prisoners
do not want to be part of such a deal, reflecting a distinct spirit of
plurality that exists among the group. As the Washington Post has
recently reported, some of these prisoners "prefer to stay in their
homeland with their families and culture and fight for changes to the
political system of their own country."

Taking it to the U.S. Supreme Court
Unlike other judicial chambers, the Supreme Court is vested with the
authority to decide which cases will be heard. In a February 6, 2009
interview with their lawyer Thomas Goldstein and Democracynow.org,
Goldstein claimed that the Wasp members did not steal any American
secrets, and that its members were only trying to gather information on
people violently opposed to the Castro regime. Goldstein also asserted
in a comment to the press that the Cuban Five were "tried by jurors who
took out their instinct for revenge over their anger at the Castro
government and what they perceive it's done in Cuba." The defense team
also claims, that Hernández was wrongly convicted of a crime that he did
not commit. Furthermore, Goldstein and the defense team feel that the
defendants should have been charged as no more than unregistered aliens,
which would have greatly reduced the length of their sentence. The
Supreme Court will decide whether to hear the case in June 2009, and if
it does, it will decide the merits of the case in 2010. Until then, the
Cuban Five will be serving their time and will remain a deep source of
concern for all Cubans as they continue their struggle against what they
perceive as American political prejudices.

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Deanna Cox

Scoop: The Cuban Five: A Starkly Controversial Case (22 May 2009)

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0905/S00374.htm

No comments:

Post a Comment