Advocacy Committee Fall 2006 Memo

MEMORANDUM

To: Interested and Invested Parties

From: Kristin Connor and Sarah Fick, Co-Chairs

RE: Summary of Advocacy Committee Activities, Fall 2006

Date: January 9, 2007

Law Students for Human Rights – Advocacy Committee

Mission and Organization

The Advocacy Committee of Law Students for Human Rights is charged with developing rights-based advocacy skills of the student membership and serving the needs of specific populations by collaborating with NGO initiatives at home and abroad. As law students, we are uniquely positioned to provide certain services towards the promotion of human rights, including:

§ Legal research and writing in the form of internal memos, contributions to scholarly articles, or material for amicus briefs

§ Policy advocacy in the form of legislative drafting or compiling position statements for issue-based lobbying coalitions

§ Public education and training in the form of fact sheets, op-eds, posters/flyers

Advocacy Committee Co-Chairs direct and oversee all the activities of the Committee. They are responsible for logistics of meetings and programming that develops the rights-based advocacy skills of the membership. Kristin Connor (kconnor@nyu.edu) and Sarah Fick (sarah.fick@nyu.edu) are the 2006-07 Advocacy Committee Co-Chairs.

The bulk of the Advocacy Committee body is composed of 1Ls, although this academic year has been marked by substantial participation by 2 Ls who often take on leadership roles within the Committee. While the Committee offers opportunities for students at each stage of the law school education, the distinct advantages for first-year students (exposure to the human rights field and access to skills training specific to international law, which is, for the time being, grossly lacking in the first-year curriculum) compel many of them to stay involved with LSHR. LSHR embraces this trend, and seeks to harness their energy and intellectual passion. At the same time, we continue to recruit and welcome the active and ongoing participation of LLMs and graduating 3Ls.

Each Advocacy Committee project is assigned to a particular Project Team, made up of one or more Project Leaders, and a varying number of Project Members depending on the size and organization of the project. Many projects also have a Project Mentor, a 2L, 3L, or LLM student who is available to answer Project Members’ questions. In addition, each project is supervised by one of the Committee’s Co-Chairs, and we are starting an initiative to have a Faculty Mentor for each project in the spring semester. Finally, most Advocacy Committee Project Teams work for or with an NGO Partner and develop contacts at the organization.

Projects come to LSHR through contacts made by our members; by the co-chairs in the summer before the school year; by NGOs for whom we have worked in the past or who have heard of our work; by conversations with speakers at LSHR Education Events; and often, from Professors Meg Satterthwaite and Smita Narula of the Center for Human Rights and Global Justice and the Human Rights Clinic (often including work that is beyond the capacity of the Clinic itself).

The Co-Chairs of the Advocacy Committee, in collaboration with the Project Leaders, ensure that reasonable progress is made according to an agreed upon timeline. They should be copied in all correspondence between Faculty Mentors, NGO Partners, and Project Members and should make themselves available to provide input and direction if needed.

The bulk of substantive responsibility of projects is concentrated in the Project Leaders. Each project has at least one Project Leader. Project Leaders are typically students who either come up with the idea for a project or are able to commit themselves significantly. They will be responsible for developing NGO contacts and relationships, assessing needs, drafting concrete goals, and coordinating the completion of substantive tasks. Some of this may be initiated by the Committee Co-Chairs early on in a semester, but projects should be handed over to Project Leaders as soon as practicable.

Project Leaders should be supported by Project Members, who assist in carrying out the substantive work of the team. Aside from the fact that Project Leaders may have more organizational roles and larger time commitments, Project Members should all feel ownership over a project – working relationships should remain egalitarian. We expect there to be and welcome varying levels of experience within a team – there is no single path to a career in human rights, and every individual brings something different to the table. Members may also want to work on more than on project. However, once a student has committed to being a member of a Project Team, she is expected to follow the project through to completion.

LSHR Advocacy Committee considers producing quality work a top priority. As such, any important communication or paper for external purposes should undergo a review process. At a minimum, each external substantive communication will be reviewed by the Project Leader. While LSHR does not intend to “censor” the work of the Project Teams, the Steering Committee of LSHR must be generally aware of what gets the “LSHR” name on it. In addition, any final work product to be submitted to NGOs, especially those that will eventually be circulated beyond the NGO, should undergo an additional level of review by an Advocacy Committee co-Chair. This is necessary to cultivate the reputation of LSHR as producing high-quality work, which will hopefully speak for itself in the longer run, and draw more NGOs to solicit help from our members.

One of the foundational purposes of the Advocacy Committee is to support the work, and build the capacity, of NGO Partners. For this reason, we welcome the proposal of projects from NGOs, even those with no prior experience working with LSHR or any law student group before. Collaborating on a project is a fruitful way of generating interest in the organization or a specific issue that deserves more attention by the human rights community, and also for recruiting students for term-time and summer internships with the confidence that they are reliable and committed. We ask only that an individual at the NGO be available for the students the way someone would be available to supervise a single part-time internship. It is discouraging for students, once mobilized and ready to be of service, to have barely any contact and guidance from advocates in the field.

There are situations, particularly with respect to short-term projects or those with particularly limited scope, where this proposed structure will be less appropriate. It may be that no additional team members are necessary. Project Leaders and Advocacy Committee Co-Chairs will consult with the various parties, consider human resource limitations, and deviate from this proposal where it makes sense to do so.

Meetings

The Advocacy Committee will generally meet as an entire group once a month. Meetings are announced and meeting minutes and agendas are circulated over the Advocacy listserve.

All-Committee meetings will be used as time to come together and learn about each other’s projects, exchange lessons learned, and brainstorm how to proceed. Project Leaders might be prompted to submit brief updates on projects with points for discussion prior to the meeting to facilitate productive and efficient meetings.

Listserve

The Advocacy Committee also maintains an invitation-only listserve (run by the Co-Chairs) for purposes of coordinating our work. It is smaller than the larger self-subscribing LSHR listserve, so that we don’t clutter the inboxes of the many people who subscribe to the larger listserve to receive information about human rights news and events. The Advocacy listserve address is law-lshr-advocacy@forums.nyu.edu.

Training and Career Advice

The Advocacy Committee offered training in international research sponsored by Lexis and Westlaw. In the spring semester, a more extensive international research training will be led by Mirela Roznovschi (reference librarian for international and foreign law).

In collaboration with the Careers chair, the Advocacy Committee also held a human rights career panel to help members assess the pros and cons of NYU’s international fellowship program (which accepts students several months before most summer internships begin hiring). 2L and 3L members discussed how they chose and obtained their summer positions, the pros and cons of working abroad, and the features of various types of human rights work.

Advocacy Committee Projects

In the fall semester of 2006, over 100 active Advocacy Committee members contributed to 15 successful projects, most of which will continue in the spring semester. The projects undertaken during the fall semester were:

1.	Guantanamo Cases – World Organization for Human Rights
	Project leader: Charlie Wait (3L) – cw864@nyu.edu
	Project mentor: Xinying Chi (3L) – ying.chi@nyu.edu
	Description: This project continued a two-year old collaboration with WOHR on providing research for pending cases brought by Guantanamo Bay detainees. The group’s research on the jurisdictional and suspension clause issues raised by the Military Commissions Act (MCA) was incorporated into WOHR’s brief, which they filed on October 18th. The group completed additional research for a brief filed by WOHR in the Al Marri case in the 4th Circuit on December 12th. The group also worked on challenging portions of the MCA which purport to rewrite the Geneva Conventions. The Project will continue in the spring, and WOHR may bring a challenge based on the Convention Against Torture and its implementing regulations.

2.	Ali al Marri detainee cases – Brennan Center for Public Policy
	Project leaders: Jason Rylander (2L) – jasonrylander@nyu.edu; Gunjan Sharma (1L) – gujubrit@gmail.com
	Project mentor: Sarah Parady (3L) – sarah.parady@nyu.edu
	Description: This project is supporting the Brennan Center in its case against the government on behalf of a detainee labeled by Bush as an "enemy combatant". The group primarily worked on two issues related to the dismissal of al Marri's habeas petition, which is now being appealed: 1) whether the President has the authority to detain indefinitely a non-citizen who is legally in the United States by labeling him an "enemy combatant", and, assuming the right to detain, 2) what process is due to such an individual, including the ability to challenge the factual basis for the detention. The group wrote several memos addressing: previous terrorism prosecutions since 9/11; the AUMF, PATRIOT Act, and the newly-passed Military Commissions Act (MCA); hearsay and the right to confront witnesses; and the possible retroactivity and applicability of the MCA to this case. The group C&Sed the Brennan Center's 62-page brief, which was due November 13th. The project will almost certainly continue in the spring.

3.	Rendition to torture – World Organization for Human Rights
	Project mentor: Xinying Chi (3L) – ying.chi@nyu.edu
	Description: This project got off to a slow start, but was able to begin research on the following questions in relation to the Kiyemba case (Uighurs detained in Gtmo): 1) Does the MCA apply to Kiyemba plaintiffs?, 2) If it does, what kind of legal remedy do they have, 3) To what extent can the Government rely on diplomatic assurances, and 4) Does CAT prohibit rendition-to-torture under U.S. law? The group submitted our research in the form of a draft brief to WOHR and will continue refining the argument next semester.

4.	Impact of the Bush Administration – Center for Constitutional Rights
	Project leader: Sarah Fick (2L) – sarah.fick@nyu.edu, Craig Bolton (2L) – cebolton@nyu.edu
	Description: This group researched the impact of the Bush administration on the Constitutional balance of powers, focusing on four areas: signing statements, domestic surveillance, court stripping, and the State Secrets doctrine. The research has been completed, and the group will submit a summary of our findings in January.

5.	Anti-terrorism & Human Rights – Human Rights Watch
	Project leader: Tafadzwa Pasipanodya (2L) – tafadzwa@nyu.edu
	Description: This project completed its assignment for HRW in October. The ten members, including some LLMs who were kind enough to jump in at the last minute with language and legal expertise, developed memos on various aspects of “glorification of terrorism” and “incitement to terrorism” crimes. The group translated and summarized a Spanish case and a Dutch case that each involved the conviction of minorities for glorifying or promoting terrorism. The group also provided a human rights analysis of these decisions by comparing the reasoning in each case with case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, conventions against terrorism, and non-governmental policies on the balance between freedom of speech and national security. Some members also researched case-law in France, Denmark and Spain in order to find new cases on incitement or glorification of terrorism.

6.	Women refugee rights – World Organization for Human Rights
	Project leader: Kristin Connor (2L) – kconnor@nyu.edu
	Project mentor: Alexa Silver (2L) – alexa.silver@nyu.edu
	Description: The group is working with WOHR on various asylum claims brought by women belonging to the particular social group of women threatened with and opposed to forced marriage. In October, the group submitted to WOHR an argument outlines in preparation for writing a draft brief on a case (Gao) that was recently denied rehearing by the 2d Cir. In last part of the semester, the group compiled country condition and international legal norms research for a brief to be filed in a similar asylum case that the 2d Cir. remanded to the Immigration Judge. The group will continue working on this case (brief due on February 1st, preparing witnesses, hearing before the IJ in April) and perhaps others next semester.

7.	ATCA lawsuit against Yahoo – World Organization for Human Rights
	Project leader: Delia Hou (2L) – delia@nyu.edu
	Project mentor: Peter Devlin (2L) – ped208@nyu.edu
	Description: Several journalists in China have been detained and tortured after Yahoo provided internet subscription information to the government. The group’s main project is to write a brief in opposition to the motion to dismiss that Yahoo will file once WOHR files their complaint near the end of October. However, the group’s current task writing an amicus brief for a case on appeal in the 9th Circuit because it will become precedent for our Yahoo case. The group submitted a draft brief to WOHR and will incorporate WOHR’s comments next semester; the amicus brief is to be filed in early February. In trying to establish corporate liability for torture under the Alien Tort Claims Act and Torture Victim Protection Act, we are dealing with two main issues: how private actors can be liable for torture rather than only state actors, and alternatively, how corporations can be held accountable for aiding and abetting the government activity.

8.	ATCA lawsuit against Talisman Oil – Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR)
	Project leaders: Dan Firger (1L) – firger@nyu.edu; Rosalia Gitau (1L) – rosaliagitau@gmail.com
	Description: The defendant in this project’s case was granted summary judgment by a judge in the Southern District of NY in September 16. CCR is now preparing an appeal, and the group is looking into the working definitions of aiding and abetting and conspiracy used by the ICC, ICTY and ICTR. Specifically, the group is going through ICTY appeal judgments and writing case summaries that pull out the relevant international law rule on aiding and abetting liability for genocide in order to inform the appeal of the Talisman ATCA claim. This information will also be incorporated into an amicus brief CCR is preparing to go along with the appeal to the 2nd circuit. The project will probably continue in the spring.

9.	ATCA lawsuit against Royal Dutch Petroleum (Shell) – CCR
	Project leader: Kristen Berg (2L) – kbt215@nyu.edu
	Project mentor: Sarah Parady (3L) – sarah.parady@nyu.edu
	Description: The Wiwa group has been researching questions regarding the ATCA for a final memo that CCR will use when preparing for pre-trial motion practice and the potential trial in the SDNY. Specifically, the group has researched the standard for review in ATCA cases, the current definition of torture, and the impact the Detainee Treatment Bill will have on ATCA torture cases. We will continue this project into next semester.

10.	State Constitutional Human Rights Training Manual – NESRI
	Project Leader: Liz Kukura (1L) – kukura@nyu.edu
	Description: This project began its organizing phase this semester, beginning with looking at the draft manual NESRI has and thinking about how the group can contribute to it. The group pick up on this next semester.

11.	Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW) Campaign against McDonalds – NESRI
	Project leader: Tom Fritzsche (1L) – tom.fritzsche@nyu.edu
	Project mentor: Peter Devlin (2L) – ped208@nyu.edu
	Description: The farmworkers' rights advocacy project is working with the Florida-based Coalition of Immokalee Workers and the National Economic and Social Rights Initiative on a brief outlining a stakeholder right to participation. The group worked on a brief outlining a stakeholder right to participation which will be submitted to the Norwegian Petroleum Fund's Council on Ethics in order to encourage it to include participation as a human right under its Ethical Guidelines for investment. After it adopts this guideline, together the group will encourage the Fund to use its investment in McDonald's as leverage to pressure the company to increase wages paid to the tomato pickers who work for its suppliers. The group’s primary challenge has been the lack of precedent for a human right to participation. However, it's an exciting project because some kind of action and results are expected early next semester.

12.	Natural gas buses – West Harlem Environmental Action (WE ACT)
	Project leader: Annie Dwight (2L) – adwight@nyu.edu
	Description: This group completed the following tasks: 1. Research on issues that affect the Transportation Workers Union members’ exposure to diesel pollution, including Occupational Safety and Health Act regulations and possible Workers’ Compensation Benefits; 2. Research on ways to control residents’ and transportation workers exposure to these fumes, including best available control technology for installation in bus depots and environmental regulations that govern emissions from bus depots; 3. Preparing residents to testify at the City Council Hearing. The hearing was held on Wednesday, October 18th. This project was completed and will not continue next semester.

13.	Transitional justice in Peru – PRAXIS
	Project leader: Rebecca Bers (2L) – rab416@nyu.edu
	Description: This group is working on a reconciliation research project by defining reconciliation, reviewing the existing literature, and paying close attention to issues that are applicable in Peru. The group completed a bibliography and will write a memo on the same research topics next semester.

14.	Refugee and IDP Law project – International Refugee Rights Initiative
	Project leader: Tammy Shoranick (2L) - tammy.shoranick@nyu.edu
	Description: The group is working with the International Refugee Rights Initiative (IRRI), a small New York and Uganda based NGO. The project is focused on building on the progress made through the International Conference on the Great Lakes region to protect the rights of the displaced in the region. The group’s task was to identify the state of the law at the moment, in order to compare that to the legal structures envisioned by the conference process, with a view to identifying areas where advocacy based on the protocols might be particularly helpful. The group researched current law relating to IDPs and also the property rights of returnees. Some questions the group tried to answer included: Is there a specific IDP law or national policy? Are there particular legal obstacles facing IDPs? Similarly, is property law constructed in such a way as to facilitate recovery or compensation for property after return? This research will help IRRI to see what they can do to encourage implementation of the commitments agreed to by countries as part of the conference process.

15.	Indigent capital defense – Louisiana Capital Assistance Center
	Project leaders: Robyn Mar (2L) – robynmar@nyu.edu; Kate Baer-Truer (2L) – kbt215@nyu.edu
	Description: The group spent the semester researching prosecutorial misconduct in closing arguments. The group focused on Louisiana state law (both cases and statutes) but also looked to federal law (with an emphasis on the decisions by the Supreme Court and the Fifth Circuit) and to other states (cases and statutes). The group have organized the types of misconduct uncovered (i.e. referring to the defendant's failure to testify or calling the defendant an "animal") according to the legal reasoning underlying each prohibition (i.e. it unfairly appeals to emotion and racial bias and thereby distracts the jury from conducting a logical, well-reasoned analysis of the individual facts of the case). Next semester, the group will edit our findings to make them ready for publication in the Louisiana State Defender's Manual.

In the spring semester of 2007, we anticipate at least one new project, research for Scholars at Risk on academic freedom in certain countries. We also hope to complete at least one project in conjunction with the NYU Human Rights Clinic and another one with the Brennan Center for Public Policy.

Partnership-Building

We deepened connections this semester with two of LSHR’s sister organizations: Lawyers Without Borders (LWOB) at New York Law School, and the Public Interest Law Student Association at Cardozo. We helped LWOB develop by sharing some of our projects with them and helping them build connections with NGOs that will hopefully grow into lasting relationships. Students from LWOB worked for the National Economic and Social Rights Initiative developing a report on human rights violations within New York’s state workers’ compensation system, and a separate project preparing a delegation of Katrina victims for a meeting in Asia with tsunami survivors (providing them with the legal perspective of the government response to Katrina). They also worked on project for the World Organization for Human Rights conducting a survey of state labor laws in preparation for a new litigation strategy. Students from Cardozo worked alongside NYU students on two of our projects: the State Constitutional Human Rights Training Manual, and the Refugee and IDP Law project.

ASB Participant Information

ASB Participant Information Sheet

Program Overview:

The Alternative Spring Break program (ASB) is a unique program new to NYU Law School and coordinated by LSHR. ASB affords the opportunity to: participate in a week-long internship with a public interest organization; experience new cultures; work directly with pressing legal issues; bond with a diverse group of NYU School of Law students; and network with NYU alumni and public interest practitioners. This year, a total of 36 NYU students will participate in the program with 12 students on each site. Participation in the program includes funds to cover the cost of travel and to subsidize the cost of food. The 2006-2007 sites are:

Urban Justice, Bronx County, NY: Bronx County is the poorest urban county in our country and third poorest county overall. In 2003, statistics showed that 26.8 % of the total Bronx County population lived below the poverty line. NYU students will work with several prominent Bronx legal service organizations over spring break, including the Bronx Defenders, Legal Services New York and Legal Aid Society.

Immigrant Rights, Miami: Over 51% of the population in Miami-Dade is foreign born. Despite the enormity of the immigrant population, Florida immigrants continue to face discrimination and abusive prosecution. NYU students in Miami will advocate for immigrant rights with nationally renowned organizations such as FIAC, Catholic Charities Legal Services, St. Thomas Human Rights Coalition, and Church World Service. Spanish language skills are recommended but not required.

Hurricane Rebuilding, New Orleans: Last year, NYU students in New Orleans assisted along a broad spectrum of relief and rebuilding efforts, from advocating for voters rights to investigating allegations of police misconduct. The legal questions and problems facing the individuals and communities throughout the Gulf Coast region remain monumental in scale, and will persist for months and years to come. Through our partnership with Student Hurricane Network, NYU students will again work with a variety of legal services organizations in New Orleans to assist with rebuilding efforts.

Participant Expectations:

The most important part of Alternative Spring break is participating fully in your internship over spring break. Although specific duties will vary, participants are expected to work a full work week (~ 40 hours) from March 12th to16th. Participants should also expect to partake in group activities during that week. Although travel will likely be coordinated with other group members, please note that participants may arrive anytime on Sunday, March 11th and to leave anytime on Saturday, March 17th. Each site will have a minimum of 3 site meetings in advance of spring break in order to plan logistics, facilitate group bonding, and learn about legal issues relevant to your site’s work and participants are also expected to attend as many of these meetings as possible.

ASB Participant Application

The NYU LAW Alternative Spring Break Program
Participant Application

Name:_________________________________________

Phone: __________________ Year: __________________

Email:_________________________________________

School Mailbox Number: ________ Birthday: ____________

Indicate your preferred site on a 1 to 3 scale (1 being the highest). If you are not willing to serve as the site leader for any particular site, do not rank it.

Bronx Co., NY: _______

Miami, FL: _______

New Orleans, LA: _______

Language Skills:

Please list your current NYU School of Law activities (student groups, journals, clinics, etc.) and any substantial commitments outside of school (jobs, internships, community groups, etc.). Feel free to briefly elaborate if an activity is unusual or confusing:

************************************************************************

Please respond to the essay question below on a separate piece of paper. DO NOT include your name on the attached paper but please include your BIRTHDAY in the header. DO NOT exceed 500 words.

Why are you interested in participating in the ASB program generally? Why are you interested in your preferred site(s) specifically? Feel free to include any relevant information about yourself, for example areas of legal interest, connection to a location, past volunteer experiences, etc.

ALL APPLICATIONS ARE DUE BY MIDNIGHT ON THURS., JAN 18th.

Email your application to lshr.nyu@gmail.com or submit a hard copy to Mimi Franke’s clinical mailbox on the 5th floor of Furman.