|
|
|
 |
||
 |
||
|
Columns
/ Current
Issue / Goldberg
File / Nota
Bene / Subscribe
/ Ad
Info / Washington
Bulletin / Home
|
||
|
4.13.00 4.13.00 4.11.00 4.11.00 4.07.00 4.05.00 4.04.00 4.03.00 4.03.00 3.28.00 3.24.00 3.20.00 3.20.00 3.17.00
|
 |
 |
|
|
4/13/00
1:30 p.m. |
|||
|
National Review: At this point, with the 2 o’clock deadline, what are the legal options for the Miami Gonzalez family? Garcia-Pedrosa: We don’t accept Ms. Reno’s deadlines. NR: In the meantime, what are you doing? Garcia-Pedrosa: We really don’t have to do anything. There’s no law — I hope some of you begin to report this properly — there is no law. I keep hearing her say, “We have to follow the law.” It’s an outrage. There is no law that says that this boy has to be given to his father or be taken to Cuba. There is no court ruling that says either of those things has to happen. The only ruling that there has been is the judge’s order that the attorney general was entitled to make those decisions, which, incidentally, she could have made just as easily the other way. So, we’re on appeal on that ruling because we think even that ruling is incorrect. We don’t recognize any deadlines. They can come get the boy if they want to. NR: The case is, isn’t it, that the courts have never heard of this case? Has Elián’s future ever been mapped out? Garcia-Pedrosa: No. The only issue in front of the federal judge is whether the attorney general had the right to do what she did. The threshold issue is whether Elián had the statute or the right to file a petition for asylum and the issue there is one of statutory construction, phrased “any alien,” which, curiously, the INS general counsel, Bo Cooper, had opined as part of the record, does not impose any age-based limitations, meaning “any alien” means any alien. We agree with that. That gives Elián an individual right to file a petition for asylum and have a jury case. The judge found contrary to both sides’ position, even though both sides agreed on that. He disagreed and found that “any alien” excludes minors. And having so found, he decided that the attorney general had the right to decide that the father speaks for the son because the son, despite what the statute says, doesn’t have the right to petition for asylum. NR: Elián’s great-uncle has been quoted as saying that federal officials will have to take Elián by force… Garcia-Pedrosa: No, no, no. That’s another thing the media keeps getting wrong. He didn’t say “by force.” The door won’t be locked. He won’t interfere. We’ve told them a million times, “You come get the boy. Take him away.” Not a matter of force. NR: Do you anticipate that federal officials will go down to the house and take him today? Garcia-Pedrosa: No. NR: Any time in the week or so? Garcia-Pedrosa: I don’t know. My strong suspicion is that they’re going to try to get a court order to try — for the first time — to get an order that speaks to this issue, but that’s just speculation. I don’t want to speak for them. They’re going to have to decide on their own what they’re going to do. NR: There was talk days ago — even Vice President Gore got into it — that Elián could be granted resident status and that it could be brought into a family court. Are there any moves for that to happen at this point? Garcia-Pedrosa: I don’t know. I’m a lawyer and we don’t really have the pulse of the congressional sentiment. My understanding is that no, but I don’t want to opine on that. NR: In your position, in your best estimation, what would be the best place for Elián to get a hearing at this point? Garcia-Pedrosa: No question about it: to go to family court. First of all, that’s what INS said on December 1st. They had it right the first time — before Castro intimidated the United States government into changing its position completely on this. They issued a press release on December 1st saying that this was a family-court issue. The reason that that’s important for us is that the standard for adjudication in family court is the best interest of the child — which is something that the federal government and immigration has steadfastly refused to consider. We think we’ll win that case. NR: What is in the best interest of Elián Gonzalez? Garcia-Pedrosa: To go to family court and have both sides heard. We think we’ll win because the father is an unfit father. He’s an abusive father. He’s a hothead. We know that even from his ABC News Nightline statements that he wanted to come to Miami with a rifle and start killing people. Elián’s father and mother divorced even before he was born because he used to beat her up in front of the child. So, we have no doubt that from the standpoint of the father’s fitness. And the boy is afraid to go to his father for those reasons — he’s afraid that the father will beat him up again. From the standpoint of the fitness of the country, if you will, that’s a no-brainer. There’s nothing in Cuba except misery unless you happen to be among the ruling class. NR: So, Elián has been beaten by his father in the past? Garcia-Pedrosa: Yes, he has. He’s been complaining about that. Finally those issues are out in the open. Regrettably, we were not permitted to talk about those issues early on. We wish we had because, you know, I think American public opinion would have been different if it had been addressed. Nevertheless, we have to follow what our client dictates and he didn’t want the father attacked. His position was, “This is my family. I’m not going to let you do that.” Now, of course, he sees that the situation has taken a very difficult position and has changed his directions to us. The problem with that is one of credibility, but the way out of that problem is to do what we have urged the United States government to do, which is hiring psychiatrists. We’ve shamed them into hiring psychiatrists and psychologists, which they weren’t even going to do. Now that you have them, ask them the right questions, which are: “Is this in the best interest of the child? Is this going to damage or cause harm to the child?” They refused to ask the psychiatrist to examine the boy and the parties for that purpose. They have limited the engagement — and I’m not even sure it’s ethical, although I guess it is since they’ve done it — to how they should implement the decision that they’ve already made. NR: Has the family in Miami gotten fair treatment, in terms of media coverage and public opinion? Garcia-Pedrosa: First of all, there is enormous ignorance about Cuba and Castro. This is a man who has a miserable human rights record and has just again been condemned by our State Department and our international human rights organizations last November just before Elián got here. He has blood on his hands. He’s killed many people. This is not a Czechoslovakian-in-the-1980s regime. This is a highly ideological, rigid, totalitarian system. Beyond that, I think, as I say, the result of our failure to address the fitness of the father issue early on — for the reason stated — has also led American public opinion to take a rather simplistic view of things. “Father alive, mother dead. Elián goes with father.” Not knowing about the father, because we didn’t tell them until now, and not understanding what it means to go to Cuba for a child like this — by and large, this is the consciousness of a lot of Americans. |
|||
|
|||
|
 |
Columns
/ Current
Issue / Goldberg
File / Nota
Bene |
|
|
National Review 215 Lexington Avenue
New York, New York 10016 212-679-7330 Customer Service: 815-734-1232.
Contact
Us.
|
||
ose Garcia-Pedrosa
is an attorney to the Gonzalez family in Miami.
