Whereas since 2007, the Government of Ecuador has
expropriated and fined magazines, newspapers, and radio and television
stations, pursued criminal and civil legal action against journalists, media
outlets, and political opponents, and utilized legislation to broaden official
censorship powers;
Whereas, as a result of a February 6, 2011, opinion column
regarding President Correa’s involvement in a September 2010 protest by the
National Police, Correa sued El Universo executives and an opinion editor for
$80,000,000 dollars for “defamatory libel”, and the lower court’s ruling
against the El Universo defendants for 3-year jail terms and fines totaling
$40,000,000 was subsequently upheld by Ecuador’s National Court of Justice,
while the precedent from this ruling remained intact, it was not enforced as a
result of a pardon request made by President Correa;
Whereas the Inter American Press Association called the
decision by Ecuador’s National Court of Justice on President Correa’s libel
suit against El Universo a serious attack on freedom of the press and
gagging of independent journalism
, and denounced a judicial and
legal structure that is used to make reprisals against those who dissent from
official policy
;
Whereas under President Correa, the Government of Ecuador
has threatened and dismissed judges critical of or opposed to executive branch
policies and legislatively altered the judicial system in a way that Human
Rights Watch has cited “could lead to a significant increase in the
government’s influence over the appointment and dismissal of judges”;
Whereas according to the United States Department of
State’s 2011 Country Report on Human Rights Practices for Ecuador, the
judiciary was “susceptible to outside pressure and corruption”, reaching
“decisions based on media influence or political and economic pressures” while
in some cases the outcome of trials appeared
predetermined
;
Whereas the United States Department of State’s 2011
Country Report on Human Rights Practices for Ecuador described instances of
“excessive force by public security forces, restrictions on freedom of speech
and press, and official corruption” and “corruption and denial of due process
within the judicial system”;
Whereas the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression
of the Organization of American States Inter-American Commission on Human
Rights has stated that censures of expression through criminal laws like those
in Ecuador “are unnecessary, disproportionate, and cannot be justified by any
imperative social interest; they also constitute a form of indirect censorship
given their intimidating and chilling effect on the discussion of matters in
the public interest”;
Whereas according to asylum statistics provided by the
United States Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review,
Ecuadoran citizens are increasingly turning to the United States for support
and protection, applying for asylum 230 percent more in 2011 than in 2007, and
Ecuador is consistently among the top 12 nationalities applying for asylum in
the United States;
Whereas the Government of Ecuador has expropriated assets,
including in the media and energy industries;
Whereas according to the United States Department of
Commerce, “fundamental weaknesses in Ecuador’s judicial system and the rule of
law are major challenges in doing business in Ecuador” and Correa has created a
“challenging” and “uncertain” climate for business and foreign direct
investment in Ecuador;
Whereas Ecuador has withdrawn from the World Bank’s
Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and
Nationals of Other States and has stated its intention to terminate the United
States–Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT);
Whereas Ecuador has not complied with the interim award
issued by an international arbitration tribunal convened under Article 6 of the
United States–Ecuador BIT, which enjoins Ecuador whether by its
judicial, legislative or executive branches) to take all measures necessary to
suspend or cause to be suspended the enforcement and recognition within or
without Ecuador
of the $18,200,000,000 judgment by Ecuadoran courts
against the Chevron Corporation;
Whereas according to the United States Department of
State’s 2011 Investment Climate Statement on Ecuador, “systemic weakness in the
judicial system and its susceptibility to political or economic pressures
constitutes important problems faced by U.S. companies investing in or trading
with Ecuador”, “corruption is a serious problem in Ecuador”, and “Transparency
International consistently ranks Ecuador near the bottom among countries it
surveys in the region”;
Whereas although the Ecuadoran authorities report seizing
21.5 metric tons of finished cocaine in 2011, according to the United States
Department of State’s 2012 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report,
“Ecuador is a major transit country for illegal narcotics”;
Whereas, according to October 19, 2011, testimony of the
Department of State before the Senate Caucus on International Narcotics
Control, “the closure of the Forward Operating Location in Manta in 2009, the
expulsion of two Embassy officials in 2009, and the precipitous and unwarranted
expulsion of Ambassador Hodges in April”, are “Ecuadorian actions [that] were
not supportive of a positive and cooperative relationship” between the United
States and Ecuador;
Whereas Ecuador’s relationship with Iran has become closer
in recent years, most recently with the visit of Iranian President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad to Ecuador in January 2012;
Whereas sections 203(c) and (d) and 204(b)(6)(B) of the
Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) (19 U.S.C. 3202(c) and (d) and
3203)(b)(6)(B)), as amended by the Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication
Act (ATPDEA), list factors that serve as limitations, as well as other factors
to be taken into account, in deciding whether to designate a country as a
beneficiary under the ATPA; and
Whereas section 203(e) of the ATPA, as amended by the
ATPDEA, makes clear the intention of Congress that these limitations and
factors continue to be taken into account in determining whether a country
receives benefits under the ATPA, given that the President may withdraw or
suspend designation as a beneficiary country if the President determines that
as a result of changed circumstances,
a country should be
barred from designation as a beneficiary
: Now, therefore, be it
That the House of
Representatives—
(1)condemns the growing repression of
democracy and human rights in Ecuador, including the suppression of the freedom
of expression and increased government control over the judiciary;
(2)calls on the
Secretary of State to note in the 2012 and future Country Reports on Human
Rights Practices for Ecuador the limited ability to report on the full account
of human rights abuses in Ecuador due to a lack of transparency within
government institutions in Ecuador;
(3)calls on the
Secretary of State to provide to the relevant committees of the United States
Senate and House of Representatives a budget and performance review of United
States Department of State and United States Agency for International
Development activities in Ecuador funded to promote strong democratic
institutions, the rule of law, and human rights;
(4)expresses its concern regarding the lack of
high-level counternarcotics cooperation between the United States and Ecuador
and regarding aspects of Ecuador’s actions that fail to meet the intentions of
the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) and Andean Trade Promotion and Drug
Eradication Act (ATPDEA);
(5)expresses its
concern regarding the expanded relationship between Ecuador and Iran;
and
(6)expresses its disinclination to support a
renewal of the ATPA, as amended by the ATPDEA, for Ecuador based on the current
status of the concerns contained in this resolution, and calls for a careful
review of such concerns, in addition to Ecuador’s eligibility as a beneficiary
country, when considering renewal of the ATPA, as amended by the ATPDEA, which
currently expires on July 31, 2013.