From Persecution to Prison - Bellevue/NYU Program for Survivors of ...

Establish a Uniform National Parole Policy with Defined Standardsand Immigration Judge ReviewThe current law does not require detention after the credible fear interview.DHS should implement a nationwide policy of parole for asylumseekers. Parole had been allowed for asylum seekers after they passed thecredible fear interview, generally at the discretion of INS District Directors.The INS had issued the aforementioned guidelines, but there was noevidence of nationwide application, and in fact some districts ignored theguidelines. The result has been widely varied and inconsistent parole standardsand practices within one federal agency.A national policy could include appropriate security checks, e.g., fingerprintingand minimum standards for parole denial (outlined below). Thiswould allow the agency to develop a humane policy consistent with its securityneeds as well as due process principles and international legal standards.DHS should institute the following:• Individualized decisions regarding parole for each asylum seeker, preferablythrough a hearing with an Asylum Officer or other designated officer,who has received appropriate training.• Decisions denying parole based only on established international standards,such as when the asylum seeker is a threat to national security orpublic order.• Clear definition of key terms such as “threat to national security” and“threat to public order” and establish the evidentiary burden necessaryto find a threat to national security or public order.• Permission for the asylum seeker to appeal a decision denying parole toan Immigration Judge.• Oversight and monitoring of the parole process by asylum expertswithin DHS, such as the asylum legal experts at BCIS.Institute Regular 6-Month Reviews of Any Asylum Seeker in ProlongedDetentionAs this study documents, it is currently not uncommon for asylum seekersto remain in detention for months and even years, as their claims areprocessed. While Bellevue/NYU and Physicians for Human Rights believethis scenario should be avoided whenever possible through the appropriateuse of parole, there may be instances when certain individuals, deemedineligible for parole, are held for extended periods of time. In such cases,DHS should in regular intervals of a maximum of six months review eachasylum seeker in custody for parole and the necessity of continued detention.398 Parole denials should be reviewed by an immigration judge.398The Zadvydas decision: “Building on the US Supreme Court’s reasoning in the Zadvydasdecision recommending six months as presumptively reasonable”(see legal section).186 FROM PERSECUTION TO PRISON