[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 4 (Thursday, January 27, 2000)]
[House]
[Page H14]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 SUPPORT CITIZENSHIP FOR ELIAN GONZALEZ

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen) is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, as a Member of Congress who represents 
the Congressional District of Florida where Elian Gonzalez currently 
resides, as the mother of two young daughters, and as someone who knows 
all too well about Castro's brutal tyrannical regime, I ask my 
colleagues today to support the bill which was introduced by the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. McCollum) on Monday which would bestow 
citizenship upon 6-year-old Elian Gonzalez.
  As a Cuban refugee and as a naturalized American myself, I know what 
an honor it is to be a United States citizen. Elian's mother Elizabeth 
drowned in her voyage to freedom, but she had a dying wish, to have her 
5-year-old son reach the shores of freedom. To honor that deathbed 
declaration, we are promoting this legislation to grant citizenship to 
Elian, which will also have the practical effect of taking the case out 
of INS hands and placing it where it properly belongs, as a delicate 
custody issue to be handled by Florida State courts.
  Some will argue that Congress should not be involved because it is a 
custody issue. And those of us who support the bill agree, this is a 
custody issue and as such it should have been allowed to play out in a 
court of law. As in every other custody case, a hearing should be held. 
The parents and the relatives should be afforded an opportunity to 
testify. Medical experts should render their assessment. Other experts 
should be granted a forum to present testimony about the conditions in 
which the child would live and be subjected to in Cuba. And, most 
importantly, the child would be able to state freely and openly for the 
record what his desires are and with whom he wishes to live.
  However, INS has prevented this orderly process from taking place. It 
has made a mockery of our laws by making a unilateral summary judgment 
to return Elian to Cuba and, in so doing, have defamed the principles 
of justice, of fairness, and of equality under the law which are really 
the fabric of our society.
  Originally, on December 1, 1999, INS quoted to the family, to the 
attorneys and to the press, ``Although it had no role in the family 
custody decision, we have discussed this case with State of Florida 
officials who have confirmed that the issue of legal custody must be 
decided by its State court. However, Elian will remain in the U.S. 
while the issues surrounding his custody are resolved.''
  However, this was not to be. INS soon recanted this statement, 
decided to apply Cuban law instead to this case, and ordered that the 
boy be returned to Cuba without any semblance of our due process. Faced 
with this reality, my colleagues and I were compelled to act to protect 
and uphold Elian's rights as a person under the law; rights not only 
guaranteed by our constitution and legal system but rights protected by 
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
  Article 6 of this convention states, ``Everyone has the right to 
recognition everywhere as a person before the law.'' Article 7 states, 
``All are equal before the law and are entitled without any 
discrimination to equal protection of the law.'' And Article 14, 
``Everyone has the rights to seek and enjoy in other countries asylum 
from persecution.''
  This last provision is particularly telling, as INS, in denying Elian 
his rights and defending only the father's rights under Cuban law, 
rejected various asylum applications for Elian and unilaterally 
withdrew his application for admission into the U.S.
  There are those who will ignore these arguments and discount the fact 
that the U.S. and international law requires that the custody issue be 
resolved in a court of law and simplifies this case to a question of 
merely returning the boy to his father. But appropriate steps have not 
been taken to ascertain whether this in fact is in the boy's best 
interests, and that should be the guiding standard.
  To those advocates who say, no, let us not advocate for that, I ask 
if they are aware that Castro's laws require that children and youth 
must prepare themselves for the defense of the country, honoring the 
principles of proletariat internationalism and combat solidarity? That 
is a quote from their code. It requires that children under the age of 
11 to work long hours in farm labor camps. It mandates society and 
State work for the efficient protection of youth, and this is a quote, 
against all influences contrary to their Communist formation.
  And the latter one applies even to parents. Just ask Gladys Ibarra-
Lugo, age 15, who has for years been denied access to her parents 
because of their support of Democratic principles and human rights. 
Their support was contrary to the dictums of the Communist State. 
Gladys' parents are Amnesty International prisoners of conscience.
  I wonder if those who simply say forget the court hearing have really 
read the testimony of Francisco Garcia. This testimony was included in 
a report distributed by the United Nations NGO Group for the Convention 
of the Rights of the Child. Francisco tells of his experience as a 
child in Cuba, and I commend it to my colleagues.
  For Elian's present and future, for the sake of justice, liberty, and 
equality, I ask my colleagues to support the citizenship bill.

                          ____________________