Cuba:
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices
2004
Released by
the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and
Labor. February 28, 2005. (FULL
REPORT)
Cuba is a totalitarian state
controlled by Fidel Castro, who is chief
of state with the titles of president, head
of government, first secretary of the Communist
Party (CP), and commander in chief of the
armed forces. The regime exercises control
over all aspects of life through the CP
and its affiliated mass organizations, the
government bureaucracy headed by the Council
of State, and the state security apparatus.
In March 2003, he declared his intent to
remain in power for life. The CP is the
only legal political entity, and President
Castro personally chooses the membership
of the Politburo, the select group that
heads the CP. There are no contested elections
for the 609 member National Assembly of
People's Power (ANPP), which meets twice
a year for several days to rubber stamp
decisions and policies previously decided
by the governing Council of State. In 2003,
government supporters won all 609 ANPP seats
in uncontested elections. In 2003, the Government
also held a referendum making the socialist
character of the constitution "untouchable."
The CP controls all government positions,
including judicial offices. The judiciary
is completely subordinate to the Government
and to the CP.
The Ministry of Interior is the principal
instrument of state security and control.
Officers of the Revolutionary Armed Forces,
which are led by Fidel Castro's brother,
General Raul Castro, have occupied the majority
of key positions in the Ministry of Interior
during the past 15 years. In addition to
the routine law enforcement functions of
regulating migration and controlling the
Border Guard and the regular police forces,
the Interior Ministry's Department of State
Security investigated and suppressed political
opposition and dissent. It maintained a
pervasive system of surveillance through
undercover agents, informers, rapid response
brigades (RRBs), and neighborhood based
Committees for the Defense of the Revolution
(CDRs). The Government traditionally has
used the CDRs to mobilize citizens against
dissenters, impose ideological conformity,
and root out "counterrevolutionary"
behavior. RRBs consisted of workers from
a particular brigade such as construction
or factory workers organized by the CP to
react forcefully to any situation of social
unrest. The Government on occasion used
RRBs instead of the police or military during
such situations. Members of the security
forces committed numerous, serious human
rights abuses.
The economy was centrally planned, with
some elements of state managed capitalism
in sectors such as tourism and mining. The
country's population was approximately 11
million. Exports largely were restricted
to primary products such as sugar and minerals,
but tourism and emigre remittances were
key sources of hard currency. Inefficiency,
outdated infrastructure, and natural disasters
led to the lowest sugar harvest in 70 years
in 2003, with only a slight recovery during
the year and continued low yields projected
for 2005. The Government announced economic
growth of 5 percent during the year using
a new, unique way of calculating gross domestic
product that ostensibly gives greater weight
to social programs.
The State controlled approximately 90 percent
of the formal economy, and the Government
continued to harass citizens working in
the underground economy. Less than 2 percent
of citizens worked in the highly regulated
private sector. In August, the Government
issued a resolution allowing citizens with
certain private sector licenses to exercise
the right to work in the licensed field
only after completing a full day of work
in their regular government job. In October,
the Government began a policy of cancelling
the issuance of new work licenses in 40
private sector categories.
Government policy officially was aimed
at preventing economic disparity, but citizens
with access to foreign currency enjoyed
a significantly higher standard of living
than those with only pesos. In November,
after 9 years as legal tender, the Government
disallowed the use of the U.S. dollar and
began charging a 10 percent surcharge to
exchange dollars to "convertible pesos."
A convertible peso is equivalent to one
U.S. dollar. The vast majority of citizens
earned their salaries in pesos and only
had access to convertible pesos if they
worked in the tourist sector or received
remittances from abroad. A system of "tourism
apartheid" continued, whereby citizens
often were denied access to hotels, beaches,
and resorts reserved for foreigners.
The Government's human rights record remained
poor, and the Government continued to commit
numerous, serious abuses. Citizens did not
have the right to change their government
peacefully. Although the Constitution allows
legislative proposals backed by at least
10,000 citizens to be submitted directly
to the ANPP, in 2002 and 2003, the Government
rejected 2 petitions, known as the Varela
Project, with more than 25,000 signatures,
calling for a national referendum on political
and economic reforms. CP affiliated mass
organizations tightly controlled elections
to provincial and national legislative bodies,
resulting in the selection of single, government
approved candidates. In March 2003, the
Government arrested 75 human rights activists,
subjected them to summary trials, and sentenced
them to prison terms ranging from 6 to 28
years. During the year, authorities arrested
an additional 22 human rights activists
and sentenced them for acts such as contempt
for authority.
Members of the security forces and prison
officials continued to beat and abuse detainees
and prisoners, including human rights activists.
The Government failed to prosecute or sanction
adequately members of the security forces
and prison guards who committed abuses.
Prison conditions remained harsh and life
threatening, and the Government restricted
medical care to some prisoners as a method
of control. Prisoners died in jail due to
lack of medical care. The authorities routinely
continued to harass, threaten, arbitrarily
arrest, detain, imprison, and defame human
rights advocates and members of independent
professional associations, including journalists,
economists, doctors, and lawyers. The Government
denied political dissidents and human rights
advocates due process and subjected them
to unfair trials. The Government infringed
on citizens' privacy rights. The Government
denied citizens the freedoms of speech,
press, assembly, and association and closely
monitored domestic and international journalists
through physical and electronic surveillance.
It limited the distribution of foreign publications
and news, restricted access to the Internet,
and strictly censored news and information.
The Government restricted some religious
activities but permitted others. The Government
limited the entry of religious workers to
the country. The Government tightly restricted
freedom of movement, including foreign travel,
and did not allow some citizens to leave
the country. The Government controlled internal
movements and used external exile to punish
dissenters. The Government did not permit
domestic human rights groups to function
legally, sharply and publicly rejected all
criticism of its human rights practices,
and discouraged foreign contacts with human
rights activists. Violence against women,
especially domestic violence, and underage
prostitution were problems. Racial discrimination
was a problem. The Government severely restricted
worker rights, including the right to form
independent unions.
RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
Section 1 Respect for the Integrity of
the Person, Including Freedom From:
a. Arbitrary or Unlawful Deprivation of
Life
There were no reports of the arbitrary
or unlawful deprivation of life committed
by the Government or its agents.
Unlike in 2003, there were no reports during
the year of the Government summarily executing
its citizens.
b. Disappearance
There were no reports of politically motivated
disappearances.
c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment
The Constitution prohibits abusive treatment
of detainees and prisoners; however, members
of the security forces sometimes beat and
otherwise abused human rights advocates,
detainees, and prisoners. The Government
took no steps to curb these abuses. There
continued to be numerous reports of disproportionate
police harassment of black youths (see Section
5).
On August 2, Nivaldo Diaz Castello, a Varela
Project leader, was detained by State Security
agents, threatened, and stripped of all
his belongings before being released.
The Government continued to subject persons
who disagreed with it to what it called
acts of repudiation. At government instigation,
members of state controlled mass organizations,
fellow workers, or neighbors of intended
victims were obliged to stage public protests
against those who dissented from the Government's
policies, shouting obscenities and often
causing damage to the homes and property
of those targeted; physical attacks on the
victims sometimes occurred. Police and State
Security agents often were present but took
no action to prevent or end the attacks.
Those who refused to participate in these
actions faced disciplinary action, including
loss of employment.
On March 5 and March 17, an unknown group
stoned the house of activists Tomas Gonzalez
Coya Rodriguez and Beatriz Pacheco Nunez,
of Santa Clara, breaking down the front
door. The stones were wrapped in paper on
which obscenities were written. The family
also received anonymous death threats via
phone.
On April 19, assailants pelted the Havana
home of Henry Samuel, President of the Republican
Alternative Movement, with jars of human
excrement. Samuel reported the incident
to the National Revolutionary Police (PNR),
which took no action.
On September 8, Elsa Morejon reported that
on several occasions during the year, large
groups of people had gathered around her
home to yell profanities and insult her
husband, human rights activist Dr. Oscar
Elias Biscet, who was arrested in 2002 for
"acts against the independence or the
territorial integrity of the State."
Prison conditions continued to be harsh
and life threatening, and conditions in
detention facilities also were harsh. The
Government claimed that prisoners enjoyed
rights such as family visitation, adequate
nutrition, pay for work, the right to request
parole, and the right to petition the prison
director. Police and prison officials, however,
often denied these rights in practice, and
beat, neglected, isolated, and denied medical
treatment to detainees and prisoners, including
those convicted of political crimes or those
who persisted in expressing their views.
Political prisoners in particular often
were held at facilities hundreds of miles
from their families, placing an undue hardship
on many families' time and financial resources.
The Penal Code prohibits the use of corporal
punishment on prisoners and the use of any
means to humiliate prisoners or to lessen
their dignity; however, the Code fails to
establish penalties for committing such
acts, and they continued to occur in practice.
Detainees and prisoners, both common and
political, often were subjected to repeated,
vigorous interrogations designed to coerce
them into signing incriminating statements,
to force collaboration with authorities,
or to intimidate victims. Some endured physical
and sexual abuse, typically by other inmates
with the acquiescence of guards, or long
periods in punitive isolation cells. Pretrial
detainees were generally held separately
from convicted prisoners, although some
long term detainees, including political
detainees, were held with convicted prisoners.
In Havana, there were two detention centers;
once sentenced, persons were transferred
to a prison.
Fabio Prieto Llorente, one of the 75 activists
arrested in March 2003, reported he was
held in a small cell with leaky walls and
a cement slab for a bed. The cell was infested
with rats, frogs, and insects. Prieto was
serving a 20 year sentence for "acts
against the independence or the territorial
integrity of the State."
Prisoners sometimes were held in "punishment
cells," which usually were located
in the basement of a prison, with continuous
semi dark conditions, no available water,
and a hole for a toilet. Reading materials,
including Bibles, were not allowed, and
unlike in previous years, authorities denied
visits to families of political prisoners
while they were held in these cells. Prisoners
in punishment cells had no access to lawyers.
On January 1, Jose Daniel Ferrer Garcia,
a Varela Project leader and one of the 75
activists arrested in March 2003, reported
serving 45 days in a punishment cell for
protesting the suspension of correspondence
and the delivery of food and medical supplies
from his family. He did not receive food
or water during the first 3 days of his
confinement and slept on a cement floor.
Authorities confiscated his Bible and prohibited
any contact with other prisoners. Ferrer
was serving a 25 year sentence for "acts
against the independence or the territorial
integrity of the State."
On July 5, Elsa Morejon reported that her
husband, Dr. Biscet, was sent to a punishment
cell for refusing to eat in the prison cafeteria,
wear the uniform of common prisoners, and
stand at attention when guards entered his
cell. He was not permitted to read, write,
or leave his cell to get exercise. In addition,
prison authorities refused to accept food
and medical supplies brought by Morejon
or permit anyone to bring him food. As a
result, Biscet found himself on a virtual
hunger strike.
Prison guards and State Security officials
subjected human rights and pro democracy
activists to threats of physical violence,
to systematic psychological intimidation,
and to detention or imprisonment in cells
with common and violent criminals, sexually
aggressive inmates, or State Security agents
posing as prisoners.
On January 21, Yeni Veloz Oquendo, wife
of common prisoner Estany Rodriguez Preval,
reported that jailers at Valle Grande prison
had sexually abused her husband.
On June 17, Ana Aguililla, wife of political
prisoner Francisco Chaviano, arrested in
May 1994 for "revealing state security
secrets," reported that prison authorities
forced Chaviano from his cell, stripped
him, and publicly beat him.
On July 6, family members of political
prisoner Jorge Luis Garcia Perez, arrested
in 1990 for articulating "enemy propaganda,"
reported being beaten along with Garcia
during a prison visit. Authorities handcuffed
and beat Garcia and later punched his sister
and kicked his girlfriend's 9 year old son
after the visitors protested the harsh treatment.
On August 3, Yarai Reyes, wife of Normando
Hernandez Gonzalez, 1 of the 75 political
prisoners arrested in March 2003, reported
that prison authorities incited common prisoners
to beat her husband. Hernandez was serving
a 25 year sentence for "acts against
the independence or the territorial integrity
of the State."
The Government regularly failed to provide
adequate nutrition and medical attention,
and approximately 10 to 20 prisoners reportedly
died due to lack of medical attention. Both
the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
(IACHR) and the Representative for Cuba
of the High Commissioner for Human Rights,
as well as other human rights monitoring
organizations, have reported the widespread
incidence in prisons of tuberculosis, scabies,
hepatitis, parasitic infections, and malnutrition.
In April, Amnesty International (AI) and
Human Rights Watch (HRW) issued reports
expressing concern regarding the poor health
of numerous political prisoners, the limitations
on family visits for some political prisoners,
and the incarceration of many political
prisoners far from their home provinces.
The Government did not respond to AI or
HRW.
Oscar Espinosa Chepe, a political prisoner
released during the year, reported that
prison officials regularly denied him adequate
medical treatment during his 20-month incarceration.
On April 13, Jorge Luis Garcia Perez reported
the deaths of three common prisoners, Vidal
Caerencio de la Hoz Avila, Felix Hernandez
Soa, and Didier Marrero Pereira, because
they had not received emergency medical
attention.
On June 14, Masiel Gutierrez, wife of Rolando
Jimenez Posada, a human rights activist
arrested in April 2003 without any formal
charges, reported that her husband had been
beaten and placed in a punishment cell for
demanding his asthma medication.
On August 29, Barbara Rojo Arias, wife
of Omar Ruiz Hernandez, an independent journalist
and 1 of the 75 human rights activists arrested
in March 2003, reported that her husband
was denied access to required medications
for his heart condition and stomach problems.
Ruiz was serving an 18 year sentence for
"acts against the independence or the
territorial integrity of the State."
During the year, the Government released
18 political prisoners, reportedly for medical
reasons.
Prison officials regularly denied prisoners
other rights, such as the right to correspondence,
and continued to confiscate medications
and food brought by family members for political
prisoners. Some prison directors routinely
denied religious workers access to detainees
and prisoners.
On March 11, in a letter to his wife Gisela
Sanchez Verdecia, Antonio Diaz Sanchez complained
that prison authorities confiscated and
censored his correspondence.
Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello, a political
prisoner released during the year, reported
that prison authorities denied her access
to religious workers during her entire 16
month incarceration. She also stated that
prison authorities offered religious services
to common prisoners but threatened prisoners
who exercised this right with denial of
privileges, such as visits and correspondence.
There were separate prison facilities for
women and for minors. Human rights activists
believed that conditions in these facilities
were poor. The law provides that pretrial
detainees are held separately from convicted
prisoners; however, the law was seldom enforced
in practice, often because of a lack of
facilities.
The Government did not permit independent
monitoring of prison conditions by international
or national human rights monitoring groups.
The Government has refused to allow prison
visits by the International Committee of
the Red Cross (ICRC) since 1989. In April,
for the first time in 15 years, the Government
invited a group of international journalists
to visit two selected prison hospital wards.
Many participants dismissed the visits as
staged propaganda.
d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention
Arbitrary arrest and detention continued
to be problems, and they remained the Government's
most effective and commonly used tactics
for harassing opponents. The Law of Penal
Procedures requires police to file formal
charges and either release a detainee or
bring the case before a prosecutor within
96 hours of arrest. It also requires the
authorities to provide suspects with access
to a lawyer within 7 days of arrest. However,
the Constitution states that all legally
recognized civil liberties can be denied
to anyone who actively opposes the decision
of the people to build socialism. The authorities
routinely invoked this sweeping authority
to deny due process to those detained on
purported state security grounds.
The Ministry of the Interior exercises
control over police and internal security
forces. The PNR is the primary law enforcement
organization and generally was effective
in investigating common crimes. Specialized
units of the Ministry of the Interior are
responsible for monitoring, infiltrating,
and suppressing opposition political groups.
The PNR plays a supporting role by carrying
out house searches and providing interrogation
facilities for State Security agents. There
were some reports in both the independent
and official press of bribery and corruption
within the security forces.
The authorities routinely engaged in arbitrary
arrest and detention of human rights advocates,
subjecting them to interrogations, threats,
degrading treatment, and unsanitary conditions
for hours or days at a time. Police frequently
lacked warrants when carrying out arrests
or issued warrants themselves at the time
of arrest. Authorities sometimes employed
false charges of common crimes to arrest
political opponents. Detainees often were
not informed of the charges against them.
The authorities continued to detain human
rights activists and independent journalists
for short periods, including house arrest,
often to prevent them from attending or
participating in events related to human
rights issues (see Sections 2.a. and 2.b.).
Time in detention before trial counted
toward time served if convicted. Bail was
available and usually was low and more equivalent
to a fine.
During the year, authorities arrested 22
human rights activists, including 3 Varela
Project organizers and an independent librarian.
By year's end, 13 of the 22 had been tried
and sentenced.
On February 4, authorities arrested independent
librarian Jose Agramonte Leiva for contempt
for authority, specifically for having yelled,
"Down with Fidel!" At year's end,
he remained incarcerated awaiting trial
(see Section 2.a.).
On April 19, authorities arrested Alexis
Garcia Pena and Walter Lopez Gonzalez of
the Christian Liberation Movement for their
activities in promotion of the Varela Project.
In March 2003, authorities arrested 75
human rights activists, journalists, and
opposition political figures, charging them
with violating national security and aiding
a foreign power, among other crimes. The
U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights
expressed concern regarding the arrests
and summary trials, as did many governments,
international organizations, and public
figures. During the year, the Government
released 14 of the 75 activists, including
Martha Beatriz Roque Cabello of the Assembly
to Promote Civil Society, independent journalist
Raul Rivero, independent journalist and
economist Oscar Espinosa Chepe, and independent
journalist and poet Manuel Vasquez Portal.
At year's end, the other 61 activists remained
in prison.
During the year, the 15 remaining persons
arrested near the Mexican Embassy in 2002
remained in prison awaiting trial, which
was scheduled for January 2005.
At year's end, at least 13 political detainees
were awaiting trial, many of whom had been
held for more than 1 year.
The Government often held persons without
charges for months. On April 27, after more
than 25 months in prison, authorities sentenced
10 human rights activists and independent
journalists arrested in 2002, including
blind human rights activist Juan Carlos
Gonzalez Leyva (see Section 1.e). Gonzalez
Levya subsequently was released conditionally
and told he could not leave his home province
of Ciego de Avila without express government
permission.
The Government also often released activists
after months of detention without charges.
On June 8, authorities released Leonardo
Bruzon Avila, Carlos Alberto Dominguez,
Emilio Leyva Perez, and Lazaro Rodriguez
Capote after 28 months of imprisonment without
trial.
The authorities sometimes detained independent
journalists to question them about contacts
with foreigners or to prevent them from
covering sensitive issues or criticizing
the Government (see Section 2.a.).
The Penal Code includes the concept of
"dangerousness," defined as the
"special proclivity of a person to
commit crimes, demonstrated by his conduct
in manifest contradiction of socialist norms."
If the police decide that a person exhibits
signs of dangerousness, they may bring the
offender before a court or subject him to
therapy or political reeducation. Government
authorities regularly threatened prosecution
under this provision. Both the U.N. Commission
on Human Rights (UNCHR) and the IACHR criticized
this tactic for its arbitrariness, the summary
nature of the judicial proceedings employed,
the lack of legal safeguards, and the political
considerations behind its application. According
to the IACHR, the so called special inclination
to commit crimes referred to in the Penal
Code amounted to a subjective criterion
used by the Government to justify violations
of individual freedoms and due process for
persons whose sole crime was to hold a view
different from the official view.
e. Denial of Fair Public Trial
The Constitution provides for independent
courts; however, it explicitly subordinates
the courts to the ANPP and the Council of
State. The ANPP and its lower level counterparts
choose all judges. The subordination of
the courts to the CP, which the Constitution
designates as the superior directive force
of society and the State, further compromises
the judiciary's independence. The courts
undermined the right to a fair trial by
restricting the right to a defense and often
failed to observe the few due process rights
available to defendants.
Civilian courts existed at the municipal,
provincial, and supreme court levels. Panels
composed of a mix of professionally certified
and lay judges presided over them. There
was a right to appeal, access to counsel,
and charges were generally known to the
defendant, although many political detainees
subjected to summary trials in April 2003
were unaware of the charges against them
until moments before trial. The law presumes
the innocence of the accused, but the authorities
often ignored this right in practice.
The law and trial practices did not meet
international standards for fair public
trials. Almost all cases were tried in less
than 1 day; there were no jury trials. While
most trials were public, trials were closed
when there were alleged violations of state
security. Prosecutors may introduce testimony
from a CDR member about the revolutionary
background of a defendant, which may contribute
to either a longer or shorter sentence.
The law recognizes the right of appeal in
municipal courts but limits it in provincial
courts to cases such as those involving
maximum prison terms or the death penalty.
Appeals in capital cases are automatic.
The Council of State ultimately must affirm
capital punishment.
Criteria for presenting evidence, especially
in cases involving human rights advocates,
were arbitrary and discriminatory. Often
the sole evidence provided, particularly
in political cases, was the defendant's
confession, usually obtained under duress
and without the legal advice or knowledge
of a defense lawyer (see Section 1.c.).
The authorities regularly denied defendants
access to their lawyers until the day of
the trial. Several dissidents who served
prison terms reported that they were tried
and sentenced without counsel and were not
allowed to speak on their own behalf.
On April 27, after 25 months in prison,
the Government tried Juan Carlos Gonzalez
Leyva, of the Cuban Foundation of Human
Rights, and sentenced him to 4 years in
prison. He was released conditionally with
credit for time served, but told he could
not leave the province of Ciego de Avila
without government permission. Gonzalez
was arrested in 2002 after an "illegal
gathering" in support of an independent
journalist who had been beaten by State
Security agents.
On April 27, the Government tried Antonio
and Enrique Garcia Morejon of the Christian
Liberation Movement and sentenced them to
3 1/2 years' imprisonment each for attending
the same gathering as Gonzalez Leyva.
On May 18, after 18 months in prison, the
Government sentenced Raul Arencibia Fajardo,
Orlando Zapata Tamayo, and Virgilio Marantes
Guelmes to 3 years' imprisonment for public
disorder, contempt for authority, and resistance.
The three were members of different organizations,
but were arrested together in 2002.
In April 2003, the Government arrested,
summarily tried, convicted, and sentenced
75 political activists within a period of
20 days. Authorities did not reveal the
charges against them and denied access to
counsel until the day of the trial. Much
of the evidence against the defendants consisted
of unsubstantiated or unspecified allegations
of activities against the Government on
behalf of a foreign power and vague accusations
of "counterrevolutionary" behavior.
AI determined that all 75 jailed activists
were "prisoners of conscience."
The law provides the accused with the right
to an attorney, but the control that the
Government exerted over the livelihood of
members of the state controlled lawyers'
collectives compromised their ability to
represent clients, especially those accused
of state security crimes. Attorneys reported
reluctance to defend those charged in political
cases due to fear of jeopardizing their
own careers.
Military tribunals assumed jurisdiction
for certain counterrevolutionary cases and
were governed by a special law. The military
tribunals processed civilians if a member
of the military was involved with civilians
in a crime. There was a right to appeal,
access to counsel, and the charges were
known to the defendant.
Human rights monitoring groups inside the
country estimated the number of political
prisoners at approximately 300. The authorities
imprisoned persons on charges such as disseminating
enemy propaganda, illicit association, contempt
for the authorities (usually for criticizing
President Castro), clandestine printing,
or the broad charge of rebellion, which
often was brought against advocates of peaceful
democratic change. The Government continued
to deny human rights organizations and the
ICRC access to political prisoners.
f. Arbitrary Interference with Privacy,
Family, Home, or Correspondence
The Constitution provides for the inviolability
of a citizen's home and correspondence;
however, official surveillance of private
and family affairs by government controlled
mass organizations, such as the CDRs, remained
one of the most pervasive and repressive
features of daily life. The Government employed
physical and electronic surveillance against
nonviolent political opponents. The State
assumed the right to interfere in the lives
of citizens, even those who did not oppose
the Government and its practices actively.
The authorities utilized a wide range of
social controls. The mass organizations'
ostensible purpose was to improve the citizenry,
but their real goal was to discover and
discourage nonconformity. Although official
statistics indicated that CDRs have grown
over the past decade and included 93.5 percent
of the population over the age of 14, in
reality, citizen participation in these
mass organizations declined. Economic constraints
both reduced the government's ability to
provide material incentives for their participation
and forced many persons to engage in black
market activities, which the mass organizations
were supposed to report to the authorities.
The Ministry of Interior employed an intricate
system of informants and block committees
(the CDRs) to monitor and control public
opinion. While less capable than in the
past, CDRs continued to report on suspicious
activity, including: Conspicuous consumption;
unauthorized meetings, including those with
foreigners; and defiant attitudes toward
the Government and the revolution.
The Government controlled all access to
the Internet, and censored all electronic
mail messages. Dial up Internet service
was prohibitively expensive for most citizens.
State Security often read international
correspondence and monitored overseas telephone
calls and conversations with foreigners.
The Government also monitored domestic phone
calls and correspondence, and sometimes
denied telephone service to dissidents.
Cell phones generally were not available
to average citizens.
On January 14, Barbara Lorenzo, who had
attempted to emigrate illegally, reported
that police and other State Security agents
threatened to imprison her and take away
her 3 year old daughter if she attempted
to leave the country again.
On October 18, Varela Project volunteer
Ricardo Montes Puron reported that State
Security agents threatened to take away
his granddaughter, whom he had custody of
and legally was trying to adopt, if he did
not leave the organization.
There were numerous credible reports of
forced evictions of squatters and residents
who lacked official permission to reside
in Havana.
On March 19, State Security agents forced
independent journalist Carlos Garcell Perez
to abandon his father in law's house, where
he had been living because Garcell did not
have government permission to live in the
house. Agents threatened the father in law
and informed him that his granddaughter
would lose her job if he continued to allow
Garcell to live in the house.
The Government sometimes punished family
members for the activities of their relatives.
On July 15, Dayli Tejeda Herrera, a third
year chemistry student, was expelled from
the Central University of Las Villas for
"being the daughter of a counterrevolutionary."
Her father, Miguel Tejeda Tenorio, was the
secretary general of the illegal Christian
Workers Union of Las Villas.
NEXT
|