U.S. Army Captain Michael Kelvington, commander of the Battle company, 1-508 Parachute Infantry battalion, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 82nd Airborne Division, bows next to remains of Gulam Dostager, a member of Afghan Local Police who was killed in the blast of an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) during the joint Tor Janda (Black Flag in Pashtu) operation, in Zahri district of Kandahar province, southern Afghanistan May 25, 2012.  REUTERS/Shamil Zhumatov  (AFGHANISTAN - Tags: MILITARY CIVIL UNREST CONFLICT TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Members of the U.S. Navy Blue Angels fly over the World Trade Center in lower Manhattan as part of the 25th annual Fleet Week celebration in New York, May 23, 2012.  REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz (UNITED STATES - Tags: MILITARY ANNIVERSARY TPX IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Fleet Week

The U.S. Navy takes Manhattan for a week.  Slideshow 

Photo

The SpaceX mission

A privately owned unmanned rocket blasts off on a mission to be the first commercial flight to the International Space Station.  Slideshow 

U.N. experts join criticism of Arizona immigration law

Related Topics

GENEVA | Tue May 11, 2010 12:38pm EDT

GENEVA (Reuters) - United Nations human rights experts added their voices to criticism of a new immigration law in Arizona, saying it may lead to police targeting people on the basis of ethnic origin, a violation of international law.

In a joint statement, five independent U.N. experts expressed concern that Hispanics could be subject to discriminatory treatment in the border state.

"The law may lead to detaining and subjecting to interrogation persons primarily on the basis of their perceived ethnic characteristics," they said.

"In Arizona, persons who appear to be of Mexican, Latin American or indigenous origin are especially at risk of being targeted under the law."

The U.N. experts decried a "disturbing pattern of legislative activity hostile to ethnic minorities and immigrants" in Arizona, which passed the United States' toughest immigration law last month.

The Arizona law requires police to determine if people are in the country illegally, previously a function carried out by U.S. federal immigration police and some local forces.

Critics of the law argue it is unconstitutional and a mandate for racial profiling, and fear it will destroy trust between Hispanic communities and law enforcement in Arizona.

Supporters say the law is needed to curb crime in the state, home to 460,000 illegal immigrants and a major corridor for drug and migrant smugglers from Mexico.

The U.N. experts voiced concern at the "vague standards and sweeping language" of Arizona's law, saying it raised "serious doubts about the law's compatibility with relevant international human rights treaties to which the United States is a party."

"States are required to respect and ensure the human rights of all persons subject to their jurisdiction, without discrimination," they said.

They urged authorities in Arizona and the federal government to "take all measures necessary to ensure that the immigration law is in line with international human rights standards."

They cited the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), a 1966 treaty ratified by the United States under the Clinton administration.

President Barack Obama said last week he wanted to begin work on immigration reform this year and that U.S. officials would monitor the Arizona law for civil rights implications.

The U.N. experts report to the U.N. Human Rights Council, a Geneva forum whose 47 members include the United States. Their mandates cover human rights of migrants, indigenous people, minorities, contemporary forms of racism and cultural rights.

(Editing by Andrew Roche)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (14)
Joesmithson wrote:
Being here illegially would not be accpeted in any other country. Arizona is doing whats best for its state by a vote of almost 65%. This law will help and until the Federal goverment steps up to secure our borders.

May 11, 2010 1:08pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
WEREFEAT wrote:
What you expect from one of the principle forces in the NWO?

May 11, 2010 1:37pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SamSmilie wrote:
I guess this should be expected from the UN, as they seem to consistently attempt to reduce national sovereignty. However, our own politicans have also erroneously said that the law is unconstitutional and racsist. The law specifically states that officers cannot use checking for immigration status as a reason for contact. The people being questioned would have had to do something else illegal before law enforcement could inquire about their immigration status.

People of all stripes, from President Obama to the UN simply refuse to read the law; if so no intelligent person could state that it was unconstitutional or rascist. The law is only about 17 pages; far shorter that the health care bill – which does have serious constitutional problems.

Bottom line though, if the Federal Government were doing its job in protecting our borders, states like Arizona would not need to take matters into their hands. The Federal Governement is not, regrettably, do its job. And has not for sometime.

May 11, 2010 1:37pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.