http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/06/opinion/the-dominican-republic-must-stop-expulsions

franco1111

Bronze
May 29, 2013
1,248
229
63
Gringo

I was hoping this would be the opinion of the NYT editorial board, but it's not. They have chosen here, to defer to authors Roxanna Altholz and Laurel E. Fletcher, who teach international human rights law at the University of California, Berkeley.

The authors say:

"Over 10 years ago, on behalf of two girls of Haitian descent, we sued the Dominican Republic in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, challenging the onerous and expensive requirements Haitian parents who sought to obtain birth certificates for their Dominican-born children faced."

I guess that means the two authors sued. In editorials, "we" typically means the author(s). Apparently individuals have standing to bring a suit before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

They (presumably the authors) got a ruling from the court:

"In 2005, the court ordered the Dominican government to recognize the nationality of these children and to seek out and issue birth certificates to all such children. But the country has barely complied."

What? In most legal matters, either the party against whom the judgement is ordered complies or they don't. Did the DR comply or did they not?

Then the authors put forth what can only be read as babble: "The word in Santo Domingo now is that the government is about to deport Haitians — and those who look Haitian — en masse." What is "the word" in Santo Domingo? Oracle? Conversation on the street? Halls of government? Aisles of IKE

If these authors could be more precise, they might be more persuasive.