Even though I felt sorry for the people of New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina, there was one place that I hoped was flooded by the hurricane. It was my great-great-grandfather’s house. Why would I want my ancestor’s house to be flooded?
My ancestor was Confederate Gen. Pierre Gustave Toutant Beauregard, who fired on Fort Sumter, starting the Civil War. He lived in New Orleans at 1113 Chartres St. after the war, from 1865 to 1867. He was a glorious war hero to Southerners, even though their side and their cause had lost. Because of Beauregard’s heroic status, the home that he rented was restored to its antebellum glory in the 20th century and is now a tourist attraction known as the Beauregard-Keyes House.
I had always hated the fact that through my veins coursed the blood of a general who fought to preserve a way of life that had enslaved my other ancestors. So in September 2005, I hoped that his house was buried deep beneath the floodwaters—tourist attraction no more. But it was located in the French Quarter—the high ground. This house was spared, while the modern-day descendants of so many slaves who lived on the low ground lost everything.
There is one part of Beauregard’s legacy that I have accepted. His family originally came from France, and my family, the black descendants, have always learned French. My study of French turned into a career as an international lawyer and, now, a law professor. So when I saw dark-skinned people wading through floodwaters after Hurricane Katrina, I looked at the tragedy with the eyes of an international lawyer. Some commentators called Katrina victims "refugees." After all, they did resemble the poor, homeless, and hungry unfortunates in such places as the Sudan. Nonetheless, because the evacuees did not flee outside their national boundaries, they are technically called "internally displaced persons" under international law.
The United Nations developed the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement in 1998. Those principles do not rise to the level of a binding treaty that nations are obligated to follow. It should be noted, however, that many of the rights mentioned in the principles are binding on the United States because the same concepts appear in the binding treaties. Furthermore, in 2005 the United Nations General Assembly stated that it recognized the principles as an "important international framework for the protection of internally displaced people."
Under Principle 1, internally displaced people are entitled to the full rights that all other persons in the country enjoy. The principle does not limit itself to citizens but applies to all persons. This is important because there were thousands of permanent residents, lawful temporary residents and undocumented people in the areas affected by Katrina. Undocumented immigrants were eligible for short-term disaster relief. Yet the Department of Homeland Security made it clear that such people would have no immunity from deportation. Many were detained, and deportation proceedings were started against them.
Under Principle 3, it is the primary obligation of the national authorities to implement the rights afforded to internally displaced persons. While local authorities would certainly be involved, the ultimate responsibility in the United States would be on the federal level. It is clear that in the case of Katrina, a disproportionate number of black people and poor people could not, and many still cannot, exercise those rights because of government failures at the local, state and federal levels.
According to Principle 4, certain groups are especially entitled to protection, including children, pregnant mothers, persons with disabilities and the elderly. Once again, it is evident that our government failed these specially protected groups. How many newborns died in the aftermath of the hurricane? How many pregnant women miscarried? We heard of the tragic story of a nursing home where the bodies of 34 elderly people were found, and cases where the elderly would not leave their homes and died as a result.
Under Principle 6, displacement should also not last longer than required. Yet, there are numerous examples of people waiting many months for Federal Emergency Management Agency trailers, which could provide temporary housing as they rebuild or repair their homes.
Principle 7 makes clear that the authorities are supposed to provide proper accommodations with adequate safety, nutrition, health and hygiene. The failure of the government to provide transportation to relocate people before the hurricane struck was one failure related to this principle. Even days later when transportation was brought in, the people on the buses did not have proper food or water, nor were they told where they were going. According to Principle 7, family members should not be separated. Yet, many family members remained separated for months.
Internally displaced persons also have a right to dignity and physical and mental integrity under Principle 11. I remember the images of dead bodies lying for days in front of distraught and hungry black people. It is hard to imagine the nightmares that the children who witnessed such horrors are having. Are they getting psychotherapy or other proper medical treatment?
Under Principle 11, people also should be protected against gender-specific violence, such as rape and assault. Yet there were apparently various incidents of this kind, both inside and outside of the convention center and the Superdome.
Principle 16 is one of the most touching. Under that principle, the displaced have a right to know the fate of missing relatives, and the state should collect and identify remains and return them to the next of kin. Months after the disaster, there are still many unclaimed remains and more than several thousand missing persons. The media, rather than the government, have often taken the lead in locating missing persons and, sadly, helping to match survivors with remains of loved ones.
Under Principle 18, displaced persons are also entitled to an adequate standard of living. The principle quantifies this vague term by stating that, at a minimum, the authorities should provide access to food, shelter, water, housing, clothing and health care.
Medical care is of special concern under Principle 19. Many people did not have the proper access to medication for their chronic conditions. Moving from place to place or living in crowded temporary housing cannot be conducive to appropriate medical care. Additionally, many people must be experiencing mild to severe depression because they may have lost everything—including family members. Their psychological needs could be the most pressing, yet least likely to be treated. Principle 19 also mentions the special needs of women, including reproductive care and counseling for victims of sexual abuse.
Principle 20 concerns the responsibility of the government to provide necessary documentation to displaced people. How many people have not been able to get the documents they need to start new lives? To start most jobs, one must show proof of work authorization: a U.S. birth certificate or passport, or a foreign passport and work visa, for example. To rent an apartment, identification must be provided in most instances. Documents such as marriage licenses, voter cards, driver's licenses, birth and death certificates, and child support and divorce records could all be needed for people transitioning to new communities.
Principle 21 states that no one should be arbitrarily deprived of property or possessions. It appears that landlords may have unceremoniously dumped people’s belongings on the street without attempting to find the tenants, in order to rent the apartments out for higher prices. Moreover, there is great fear that the city of New Orleans may bulldoze properties without giving proper notice.
Principle 22 states that there should be no discrimination in the right to vote or to participate in community and public affairs. Fall elections in New Orleans were postponed until the spring. Many are worried about the ability of evacuees to vote in person or by absentee ballot.
Principle 23 concerns the right to education. Ironically, many evacuees may get a better education now that they have abandoned the failed New Orleans school system. On the other hand, problems have occurred in the Houston schools, as local students resent the New Orleans students. How many of these New Orleans children will be neglected in classes there because they are just too far behind their peers? How many teachers will mistake depression for stupidity and ignore them?
The final area that the principles cover is protection after displacement: return, resettlement and reintegration. Principle 28 requires the government to help establish the conditions necessary to allow displaced persons to either return to their areas or residence or be resettled voluntarily. The displaced themselves are supposed to participate in the planning and management of their return. Many people now forced to live outside the Big Easy are worried that they and their needs are being excluded from the redevelopment plans for the area.
According to Principle 29, the displaced are not to be discriminated against in the provision of services, whether they return home or live elsewhere. Unfortunately, it appears that after an initial groundswell of sympathy in many places, the evacuees may have worn out their welcome. Race, class and cultural differences coupled with pre-existing stereotypes have led to discrimination at many levels.
The authorities are also supposed to help the displaced recover their property and possessions. If this is not possible, the authorities must "provide or assist those personsin obtaining appropriate compensation or another form of just reparation," according to Principle 29. Many homeowners lost everything but did not have proper insurance coverage for flooding. Will the federal government make the insurance companies pay up anyway, or cover the losses from federal funds? If a bank foreclosed on a devastated property after the initial three-month hiatus on collecting mortgage payments, is the federal government stepping in to prevent that or to cover the payments? Many people were renters and lacked insurance that would cover this disaster. Will the government step in to replace their valuables or prevent them from being evicted or rent-gouged?
The Guiding Principles provide a comprehensive framework for all levels of government in the United States still grappling with providing services in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. As a society, we must vigilantly monitor the long-term human-rights status and treatment of the Katrina victims wherever they may be located. National, state and local governments must be made to live up to their various domestic and international legal obligations over the years to come.
Adrien Katherine Wing is the Bessie Dutton Murray Distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Iowa College of Law. This article originally appeared in the Gulf Coast Reconstruction Watch report, "One Year After Katrina: The State of New Orleans and the Gulf Coast." The photo by Mary Beth Black comes courtesy of New Orleans Independent Media Center .
This is cache, read story here
