A year ago, battered women's advocates began urging Attorney General Janet Reno to take action to save the life of Rodi Adali Alvarado Pe a, who came to the U.S. in 1995 to escape brutal domestic violence that nearly claimed her life in her native Guatemala. Because the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) reversed a lower court that had granted Alvarado asylum, she could be forced to return to her native Guatemala. There, she would face certain death from a husband who has made no secret of the fact that he intends to kill her.

A year later and with the Clinton Administration winding down, Attorney General Reno has failed to vacate the BIA ruling in the Alvarado case, Matter of R.A.

"Countless other immigrant women who came to this country to escape brutal and life-threatening domestic or sexual violence are in grave peril," said Family Violence Prevention Fund (FVPF) Executive Director Esta Soler. "We need the Attorney General to reverse this ruling now."

Rodi Alvarado

Rodi Alvarado came to the U.S. as a last resort. For ten years after her marriage at age 16, she suffered vicious rapes and brutal beatings from her husband. A career soldier, he attempted to abort their second child by kicking her until she hemorrhaged. He broke windows and mirrors with her head. He threatened her with a machete. Each time she fled, he found her and forced her to return home. Then he beat her until she lost consciousness, in front of the children.

Alvarado knew of no shelters for battered women, and the legal system provided no protection. Because her husband was in the military, the police would not arrest him. He failed to appear at court hearings. When Alvarado went to court, the judge told her that domestic violence was a private matter and he would not intervene.

In Guatemala, a husband's consent was required to obtain a divorce so Alvarado was forced to remain married to her abuser. Finally, she left her two children with relatives and, knowing that they were safe, fled to the U.S.

Immigration Court Rulings

At first, it seemed a wise choice. Shortly after Alvarado arrived, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) issued guidelines that recognize gender-based persecution as a legitimate basis for asylum. The guidelines are non-binding, but they note that women are often victims of persecution that is particular to their gender, including rape and domestic assault. The guidelines contemplate that gender-based abuses can serve as the basis for asylum claims.

Unfortunately, immigration courts have been inconsistent in gender-based cases. In 1996, the INS' highest court the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) granted asylum to a Togolese refugee who would have faced genital mutilation if she returned home. The gender guidelines were a consideration, but not the basis for the court's decision.

In 1996, a judge granted Alvarado asylum based, in part, on those guidelines. But the INS appealed the ruling. The case went to the BIA.

In a ten to five ruling in June, the BIA denied Alvarado asylum. The judges did not question that Alvarado has suffered; in fact, they strongly deplored her husband's vicious conduct. But they ruled that she should be deported because the persecution she suffered was not based on her race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a social group.

Matter of R.A. contradicts the BIA's ruling in the case of the woman from Togo, where the court ruled that a social group can be defined by gender together with other factors. "It also renders the INS gender guidelines virtually meaningless. It discounts gender-based violence. And it could condemn Alvarado, and women like her, to death," said FVPF Associate Director Leni Marin. "The BIA decision sets the dangerous precedent that a foreign woman fleeing domestic or sexual violence cannot gain asylum here, even if she will lose her life in her home country because authorities there will not protect her."

International human rights law recognizes that violations can be committed by individuals and private groups as well as by agents for the state. Decisions in Canada and the United Kingdom have recognized gender persecution as valid grounds for granting asylum. But the United States has not yet done so.

Other Immigrant Women At Risk

Other cases have now been decided based on the BIA ruling in the Matter of R.A.:

Ms. O, a young woman from a former Soviet Republic, was abducted by an organized crime leader who wanted her to engage in sexual relations with him. When she refused, she was raped by this man and gang-raped by his friends. He told her, "you're now working for me, and you're my property." Ms. O was then forced to have sex nightly with her abductor's friends and guests in his home, including the police chief and the mayor. She escaped to the U.S., where an immigration judge denied her asylum, telling her attorney that he was barred from granting a gender social group claim by Matter of R.A.

Ms. A is a Jordanian woman who fears becoming a victim of an honor killing by her family. Honor killing is a well-documented and horrific practice in Jordan, and Ms. A. presented credible evidence to support her claim. Yet an immigration judge and the BIA dismissed her request for protection in the U.S. as being a "personal family dispute" not subject to protection under the asylum laws. The INS has agreed to stay the appeal in the case, pending a possible decision by the Attorney General on Matter of R..A.

Ms. M is a young Chinese woman who faced sexual advances from her manager at the hotel where she was employed. One night he began to sexually assault her. Afraid that she would be raped, she stabbed him in the leg with a pair of scissors. Police held her for 30 days. Without a trial, she was told that she would be sentenced to three years in jail. When her parents begged the manager to drop the charges, he demanded money and offered to let her work off the debt at a hair salon. It turned out to be a brothel run with police cooperation. Ms. M was not permitted to leave. Eventually, she escaped to the United States where an immigration judge granted her asylum. The INS is appealing that decision.

Action Needed

The Attorney General has the power to vacate Matter of R.A. Yet, to date, she has not done so.

"The BIA ruling in Matter of R.A. devalues women's lives and treats domestic violence and sexual assault as less serious crimes than other types of violence," Marin said. "It is an insult to our nation's proud history of compassionate and fair public policies, and belies recent progress in addressing violence against women. We need Janet Reno to uphold international human rights norms, reaffirm women's right to be free of domestic and sexual violence, and restore fairness and justice to our nation's refugee and asylum policies. Women victimized by domestic and sexual violence should not face deportation."

Advocates who wish to write Attorney General Reno and urge her to save the lives of Rodi Alvarado and other immigrant women who are fleeing domestic and sexual violence can send letters to: Attorney General Janet Reno, U.S. Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite #5111, Washington, D.C. 20530.

Please send a copy (a blind cc) of your letter to Mariama Diao by fax to 202/371-9142 or by email to speakingup@prsolutionsdc.com. Thank you!