Document - United States of America: Maze of injustice: The failure to protect indigenous women from violence

Acknowledgements

Amnesty International is indebted to all the survivors of sexual violence who courageously came forward to share their stories and to those who provided support to survivors before and after they spoke with Amnesty International. This report seeks to represent the voices of survivors of sexual violence and is underpinned by a conviction that their perspectives must inform all actions taken to end violence against Indigenous women.

Amnesty International is grateful to Native American and Alaska Native organizations, experts and individuals who provided advice and guidance on research methodology for this report and on the report itself, and who have generously shared information. This report cannot provide a full picture of the important and innovative work Indigenous women are carrying out to end sexual violence. However, we hope that it reflects how Indigenous women all over the USA are working with determination and hope for a future where their dignity and security are respected.

Amnesty International hopes that this report can contribute to and support the work of the many Native American and Alaska Native women’s organizations and activists who have been at the forefront of efforts to protect and serve women. In 2005 these efforts resulted in Congress passing the Violence Against Women Act (2005) which for the first time contains a specific Tribal Title that seeks to improve safety and justice for Native American and Alaska Native women (see page 82). By supporting initiatives developed and directed by Indigenous women, Amnesty International seeks to provide an additional platform for discussion about sexual violence against Indigenous women.

Preface

This study

This report is based on research carried out during 2005 and 2006 by Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) in consultation with Native American and Alaska Native organizations and individuals. The research draws on Amnesty International’s interviews with survivors of sexual violence and their families, activists, support workers, service providers and health workers. A number of women spoke to Amnesty International on condition that their anonymity was guaranteed. Some have asked that certain details not be made public. In order to respect their wishes, details of names and locations on file with Amnesty International have been withheld.

Amnesty International also interviewed officials across the USA, including tribal, state and federal law enforcement officials and prosecutors, as well as tribal judges. Amnesty International met representatives from the federal agencies which share responsibility with tribal authorities for addressing or responding to crimes in Indian Country (defined as reservations, trust land, and communities) 1. Amnesty International sent questionnaires to the 93 individual US Attorneys, who prosecute crimes within Indian Country at federal level, seeking information on prosecution rates for crimes of sexual violence committed against Indigenous women. Amnesty International was informed by the Executive Office of US Attorneys that individual US attorneys would not be permitted to participate in the survey.

Amnesty International conducted a review of existing government and non-governmental reports, including studies conducted by the US Department of Justice, law review articles and media reports of sexual violence against Native American and Alaska Native women. It also reviewed federal and state case law and legislation.

Amnesty International conducted detailed research in three locations with different policing and judicial arrangements (see Chapter 4: Issues of jurisdiction): the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North and South Dakota, the State of Oklahoma and the State of Alaska. Each location was selected for its specific jurisdictional characteristics. The Standing Rock Sioux Reservation illustrates the challenges involved in policing a vast, rural reservation where tribal and federal authorities have jurisdiction. Oklahoma presents a very different situation, composed for the most part of parcels of tribal lands intersected by state land where tribal, state or federal authorities may have jurisdiction. In Alaska, federal authorities have transferred their jurisdiction to state authorities so that only tribal and state authorities have jurisdiction.

Amnesty International has focused its research on response to crimes of sexual violence on tribal lands and in neighbouring areas. The experiences of Indigenous women living far from tribal lands or in urban settings, therefore, are not reflected extensively in this report. According to the 2000 US Census, 56 per cent of Native American and Alaska Native people live outside Indian Country.2 Just under 10 per cent of Native Americans live in large urban centres.3 The available information points to high rates of sexual violence and a lack of culturally appropriate services in towns and cities. This is of sufficient concern to merit urgent further research.

A note on terminology

Amnesty International strives to use terminology which respects the wishes of the peoples concerned. It recognizes that this report cannot portray the experiences and diversity of Indigenous peoples in the USA.

There are more than 550 federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native tribes in the USA. However, not all Indigenous peoples within the USA and its overseas territories have been accorded this status, including, for example, the Indigenous peoples of Hawaii. Some peoples are recognized by states but not by the federal government.4 Individuals may identify as Indigenous even if they are not recognized as tribal members by federal or state authorities.

It is important to note that no single term is universally accepted by all Indigenous peoples in the USA. Various terms are used throughout the report where they seem most suited to the context. However, these choices are in no way intended to minimize or ignore the great diversity of Indigenous cultures, languages and nationalities that exist within the USA, nor to generalize their experiences. The decisions on terminology in this report have been guided by a number of factors, including the need to ensure that the report is as accessible as possible to diverse audiences both within the USA and around the world. Amnesty International has been advised that by alternating the terms used, readers will better understand the diversity of Indigenous peoples and cultures in the USA.

The terms American Indian, Native American and Alaska Native are widely used within the USA itself, as are the terms tribe, tribal, tribal nation and Alaska Native village. These have been retained in this report to refer to Indigenous peoples and institutions. Certain terms such as Indian, Indian Country and tribal member are used in legal and other discourses in the USA and have been retained in this report where this seems most appropriate in sections dealing with US legislation and court decisions. The term Indian should be read as referring to American Indian and Alaska Native unless the legal context or parameters of a particular study indicate otherwise. While some terms may have specific legal meanings it must also be acknowledged that many may be used in a broader political or cultural context.

The term Indigenous is increasingly used in international human rights standards and in the commentary of UN and regional human rights bodies. It is also the term most frequently used by Indigenous peoples’ organizations when they represent themselves internationally, and by specialized non-governmental organizations working in the field.

List of terms/abbreviations

BIA The Bureau of Indian Affairs, a federal government agency charged with supporting tribal police forces, courts and governments
District Attorney A state prosecutor
FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation
Indian Country Federal law defines Indian Country as: "All land within the limits of any Indian reservation", "all dependent Indian communities within the borders of the United States" and "all Indian allotments, the titles to which have not been extinguished."
IHS Indian Health Service, part of the US Department of Health and Human Services, operates health facilities for American Indian and Alaska Native peoples
ILO Convention 1989 International Labour Organization Convention concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries
Public Law 280 transferred legal authority (jurisdiction) from the federal government to certain state governments.
SANE Sexual assault nurse examiner
SRPD Standing Rock Police Department
State land is used in this report to denote land outside Indian Country.
State police is used to include state, city and local law enforcement agencies.
US Attorney A federal prosecutor
VPO Alaska Village Police Officers
VPSO Alaska Village Public Safety Officers
[Quotes]
"I don’t know what to do anymore. I don’t get any answers."
Relative of a young woman who was raped nine months earlier
[End of quotes]

Chapter 1: Introduction

In July 2006 an Alaska Native woman in Fairbanks reported to the police that she had been raped by a non-Native man. She gave a description of the alleged perpetrator and city police officers told her that they were going to look for him. She waited for the police to return and when they failed to do so, she went to the emergency room for treatment. A support worker told Amnesty International that the woman had bruises all over her body and was so traumatized that she was talking very quickly. She said that, although the woman was not drunk, the Sexual Assault Response Team nevertheless "treated her like a drunk Native woman first and a rape victim second". The support worker described how the woman was given some painkillers and some money to go to a non-Native shelter, which turned her away because they also assumed that she was drunk: "This is why Native women don’t report. It’s creating a breeding ground for sexual predators."

"Violence against Indian women occurs as a gauntlet in the lives of Indian women: at one end verbal abuse and at the other murder. Most Indian women do not report such crimes because of the belief that nothing will be done."
Juana Majel, National Congress of American Indians, and Karen Artichoker, Cangleska, Inc.-Sacred Circle6

"Most women who are beaten or raped don’t report to the police. They just shower and go to the clinic [for treatment]."
Native American survivor of sexual violence (identity withheld), February 2006

"Women don’t report because it doesn’t make a difference. Why report when you are just going to be revictimized?"
Pauline Musgrove, Executive Director of the Spirits of Hope Coalition, October 2005

"Indigenous women or women from racially or ethnically marginalized groups may fear State authority, if the police have traditionally used coercive and violent means of criminal enforcement in their communities."
Radhika Coomaraswamy, then UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women, July 200112

Della Brown, a 33-year-old Alaska Native woman, was raped, mutilated and murdered. Her body was discovered in an abandoned shed in Anchorage in September 2000. Her skull was so pulverized the coroner compared her head to a "bag of ice". Police believe a number of people walked through the shed, lighting matches in order to view her battered remains, but did not report the murder to the Anchorage police. To date, no one has been brought to justice for the rape and murder of Della Brown.19

Rhea, a Native American woman from the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation (North and South Dakota) told Amnesty International about the experience of her friend, a 21-year-old Native American woman, who was raped and severely beaten by four men in February 2003. She said her friend was initially brought to the Indian Health Service hospital in Fort Yates but was transferred to a hospital in Bismarck, North Dakota, in a critical condition, having taken an overdose of anti-diabetic medication that she found in the house where she had been raped with the apparent intention of committing suicide. Rhea said: "she just lay there all beat up, with big black eyes." According to Rhea, a Standing Rock Police Department (SRPD) officer came to the hospital and questioned her friend while she could still talk. She died two weeks after the rape. Rhea says she spoke to the police officer a year later; he told her the rape case was closed. "The perpetrators are still walking around," she told Amnesty International, "I don’t know why." The Chief of Police of SRPD told Amnesty International that they have been unable to find any record of the case.
Interview with Rhea, 2006 (details withheld)

"Before asking ‘what happened,’ police ask: ‘Was it in our jurisdiction? Was the perpetrator Native American?’"
Support worker for Native American survivors of sexual violence, May 2005

• Federal and state governments should consult and co-operate with Indigenous nations, and Indigenous women in particular, to institute plans of action to stop violence against Indigenous women.
• Federal, state and tribal authorities should, in consultation with Indigenous peoples, collect and publish detailed and comprehensive data on rape and other sexual violence that shows the Indigenous or other status of victims and perpetrators and the localities where such offences take place, the number of cases referred for prosecution, the number declined by prosecutors and the reasons why.
• The US Congress should recognize that tribal authorities have jurisdiction over all offenders who commit crimes on tribal land, regardless of their Indigenous or other identity and the authority to impose sentences commensurate with the crime which are consistent with international human rights standards. Federal authorities should also take additional steps, in agreement with tribal authorities, to make available the necessary funding and other resources to enable tribal authorities to develop their courts so that they have the capacity to operate effectively and in accordance with international standards.
• All law enforcement officials should respond promptly to reports of sexual violence, take effective steps to protect survivors from further abuse, and undertake thorough investigations. Federal authorities must take urgent steps to make available adequate resources to police forces in Indian Country and Alaska Native villages. In order to fulfil their responsibilities effectively, all police forces should work closely with Indigenous women’s organizations to develop and implement appropriate investigation protocols for dealing with cases of sexual violence. Particular attention should be paid to improving coverage in rural areas with poor transport and communications infrastructures.
• Law enforcement agencies and health service providers should ensure that all Indigenous women survivors of sexual violence have access to adequate and timely sexual assault forensic examinations without charge to the survivor and at a facility within a reasonable distance.
• Prosecutors should vigorously prosecute cases of sexual violence against Indigenous women, and should be sufficiently resourced to ensure that the cases are treated with the appropriate priority and processed without undue delay. Any decision not to proceed with a case, together with the rationale for the decision, should be promptly communicated to the survivor of sexual violence and any other prosecutor with jurisdiction.
• Federal and state governments should take effective measures, in consultation and co-operation with Native American and Alaska Native peoples, to combat prejudice and eliminate stereotyping of and discrimination against Indigenous peoples.

• Indian tribes require additional criminal justice and victim services resources to respond to violent assaults against women; and
• The unique legal relationship of the United States to Indian tribes creates a federal trust responsibility to assist tribal governments in safeguarding the lives of Indian women."

Chapter 2: Legacy of the past

"As the nation looked to the West for more land, this agency participated in the ethnic cleansing that befell the western tribes... it must be acknowledged that the deliberate spread of disease… and the cowardly killing of women and children made for tragedy on a scale so ghastly that it cannot be dismissed as merely the inevitable consequence of the clash of competing ways of life…
"…After the devastation of tribal economies and the deliberate creation of tribal dependence on the services provided by this agency, this agency set out to destroy all things Indian. This agency forbade the speaking of Indian languages, prohibited the conduct of traditional religious activities, outlawed traditional government, and made Indian people ashamed of who they were. Worst of all, the Bureau of Indian Affairs committed these acts against the children entrusted to its boarding schools, brutalizing them emotionally, psychologically, physically, and spiritually... the legacy of these misdeeds haunts us."
Kevin Gover, then Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs, US Department of the Interior, at the Ceremony Acknowledging the 175th Anniversary of the Establishment of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 8 September 200021

Sexual violence as a tool of conquest

"Sexual assault rates and violence against Native American women did not just drop from the sky. They are a process of history."
Jacqueline Agtuca, Alaska Native Women’s Conference, Anchorage, Alaska, 24 May 2005

Chapter 3: International human rights law

This report addresses violence against Indigenous women as a human rights issue. The concept of human rights is based on the recognition of the inherent dignity and worth of every human being. Through ratification of binding international human rights treaties, and through the adoption of declarations by intergovernmental bodies such as the United Nations (UN) and the Organization of American States (OAS), governments have committed themselves to ensuring that all people can enjoy certain universal rights and freedoms.

Sexual violence against women results in violations of a variety of rights.31 These include: the right not to be tortured or ill-treated;32 the right to liberty and security of the person;33 and the right to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. 34 In addition, the erosion of tribal governmental authority and resources to protect Indigenous women from crimes of sexual violence is inconsistent with international human rights standards, including international standards on the rights of Indigenous peoples.

As is explored in more detail below, sexual and gender-based violence is also a form of discrimination against women35 and, in the case of Native American and Alaska Native women who are disproportionately victims of sexual violence, is a form of discrimination on the basis of Indigenous identity.36 When a state fails to act with sufficient diligence in responding to sexual violence against women – by using the criminal justice system and providing reparation – this often violates women’s right to equality before the law. The USA has ratified many of the key human rights treaties that guarantee these fundamental rights, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; and the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.


Due diligence
International law obliges governments to use their power to protect and fulfil human rights.37 This includes not only ensuring that their own officials comply with human rights standards, but also acting with "due diligence" to address abuses committed by private individuals (non-state actors). When states know, or ought to know, about violations of human rights and fail to take appropriate steps to prevent them, they, as well as the perpetrators, bear responsibility. The principle of due diligence includes obligations to prevent human rights violations, investigate and punish them when they occur, and provide compensation and support services for victims.38

It is important to emphasize that state responsibility to exercise due diligence does not in any way lessen the criminal responsibility of those who carry out acts of violence, including sexual violence, against women. The perpetrator of sexual violence is the person liable under criminal law for this act and should be brought to justice. However, the state also bears a responsibility if it fails to prevent or investigate and address the crime appropriately. This report clearly demonstrates that the US authorities are failing to exercise due diligence when it comes to sexual violence against Native American and Alaska Native women.

Human rights of Indigenous peoples
Over the last two decades, international human rights law has become more responsive to the values, needs and aspirations of Indigenous peoples as distinct and often persecuted cultures. Human rights standards specific to Indigenous peoples include the 1989 International Labour Organization Convention concern-ing Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries (ILO Convention No.169) and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Specific rights of Indigenous peoples have also been affirmed by the expert bodies charged with the interpretation of state obligations under key human rights treaties in the UN and OAS. These evolving norms and standards are consistent in recognizing that Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain their distinct collective identities and, towards that end, must have greater control over their own lives and futures.

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, which monitors states’ compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, has called on states to "recognize and respect indigenous peoples’ distinct culture, history, language and way of life as an enrichment of the State’s cultural identity and to promote its preservation" and ensure that "no decisions directly relating to their rights and interests are taken without their informed consent."39

In 2001, the UN Human Rights Committee appointed a Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people. In his first report, he identified a number of particular issues which deserve special attention. These included human rights issues for Indigenous peoples in the realm of the administration of justice; the participation of Indigenous peoples in decision-making processes, governance and policy-making; and discrimination against Indigenous peoples within a gender perspective.40

"The widespread lack of access to the formal justice system due to ingrained
direct or indirect discrimination against indigenous peoples is a major feature
of the human rights protection gap… Given the discrimination existing in the

national judicial systems it is not surprising that many indigenous peoples distrust it and that many ask for greater control over family, civil and criminal matters …
"Countries that have been able to incorporate respect for customary indigenous law in their formal legal systems find that justice is handled more effectively."
Rodolfo Stavenhagen, Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, report submitted to the Commission on Human Rights, 26 January 2004

• Indigenous peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. (Article 3)
• Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous functions. (Article 4)
• Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social and cultural institutions. (Article 5)
• States shall take measures, in conjunction with indigenous peoples, to ensure that indigenous women… enjoy the full protection and guarantees against all forms of violence and discrimination. (Article 22(2))
• Indigenous individuals have an equal right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health. States shall take the necessary steps with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of this right. (Article 24(2))

Chapter 4: Issues of jurisdiction

Support workers told Amnesty International about the rapes of two Native American women in 2005 in Oklahoma. In both cases the women were raped by three non-Native men. Other similarities between the crimes were reported: the alleged perpetrators, who wore condoms, blindfolded the victims and made them take a bath. Because the women were blindfolded, support workers were concerned that the women would be unable to say whether the rapes took place on federal, state or tribal land. There was concern that, because of the jurisdictional complexities in Oklahoma, uncertainty about exactly where these crimes took place might affect the ability of these women to obtain justice.
Interviews with support workers (identity withheld), May 2005

• The Major Crimes Act (1885) granted the federal authorities jurisdiction over certain serious crimes, including rape and murder, committed in Indian Country.51 There is a widespread misconception that under the Act only the federal authorities have the authority to prosecute major crimes.52 In fact, tribal authorities retain concurrent jurisdiction over Indigenous perpetrators. Nevertheless the impact of the Act in practice has been that fewer major crimes have been pursued through the tribal justice system.
• Most state authorities do not exercise criminal jurisdiction over Native Americans in Indian Country. However, Public Law 280 (1953) transferred federal criminal jurisdiction over all offences involving Native Americans in Indian Country to state governments in some states.53 The US Congress gave these states – California, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, Wisconsin and Alaska upon statehood— extensive criminal and civil jurisdiction over Indian Country. Public Law 280 also permitted certain additional states — Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Washington — to acquire jurisdiction if they wished, and while a number of states originally opted to do so, currently only Florida has full Public Law 280 jurisdiction.54 Where Public Law 280 is applied, both tribal and state authorities have concurrent jurisdiction over crimes committed on tribal land by American Indians or Alaska Natives. Public Law 280 is seen by many Indigenous peoples as an affront to tribal sovereignty, not least because states have the option to assume and to relinquish jurisdiction, a power not extended to the Indigenous peoples affected. In addition, Congress failed to provide additional funds to Public Law 280 states to support the law enforcement activities they had assumed. The BIA, however, reduced funding to tribal authorities as a result of the shift in jurisdiction. This has led to a situation where tribal and state authorities have not received sufficient funds to assume their respective law enforcement responsibilities, resulting in a sense of "lawlessness" in some communities and difficult relations between tribal and state officials.55
• The Indian Civil Rights Act (1968) limits the penalty which can be imposed by tribal courts for any offence – including murder or rape — to a maximum of one year’s imprisonment and a US$5,000 fine.57 The message sent by this law is that, in practice, tribal justice systems are only equipped to handle less serious crimes. As a result of this limitation on their custodial sentencing powers, some tribal courts are less likely to prosecute serious crimes, such as sexual violence.
• In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled that tribal courts could not exercise criminal jurisdiction over non-Indian US citizens.58 This ruling in the case of Oliphant v Suquamish effectively strips tribal authorities of the power to prosecute crimes committed by non-Indian perpetrators on tribal land. This decision raises issues of sovereignty which are beyond the scope of this report. It also denies victims of sexual violence due process and the equal protection of the law. Jurisdictional distinctions based on the race or ethnicity of the accused, such as the jurisdictional limitation here, have the effect in many cases of depriving victims of access to justice, in violation of international law and US constitutional guarantees. (Tribal courts are the most appropriate forums for adjudicating cases that arise on tribal land, and, as this report finds, state and federal authorities often do not prosecute those cases of sexual violence that arise on tribal land and fall within their exclusive jurisdiction.) This situation is of particular concern given the number of reported crimes of sexual violence against American Indian women involving non-Indian men. In such situations, either federal or state authorities have the authority to intervene. Reportedly, the apparent gap in jurisdiction or enforcement has encouraged non-Indian individuals to pursue criminal activities of various kinds in Indian Country.59 Tribal police do have limited powers of arrest over non-Indian suspects in some states.60 They also retain the power to detain non-Indian suspects in Indian Country in order to transfer them to either federal or state authorities, but this is not generally understood by tribal, state or federal officials.

The mother of a survivor of sexual violence from the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation told Amnesty International how she returned home in September 2005 to find her 16-year-old daughter lying half-naked and unconscious on the floor. She took her daughter to the hospital in Mobridge, South Dakota, where a sexual assault forensic examination was performed. She described how the suspected perpetrator fled to Rapid City, South Dakota, which is outside the jurisdiction of the Standing Rock Police Department (SRPD). He returned to the Reservation in early 2006 and was held by police for 10 days, although both mother and daughter only discovered this when they rang the SRPD to ask about the status of the case. They found out that the suspect was to go before a tribal court, but the mother told Amnesty International that to get this information, she had to go to Fort Yates and ask them in person. She told Amnesty International that she hoped that the case would be referred to the federal authorities because this would mean a lengthier sentence for the perpetrator. She said that, months after the attack, a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) officer and a BIA Special Investigator arrived unannounced. As the daughter was not home at the time, the mother told them where to find her. However, she never heard from them again. Federal prosecutors did eventually pick up the case and in December 2006 the perpetrator entered into a plea bargain and was awaiting sentencing at the time this report was written.
Interview with mother of survivor (identity withheld)

"There is so much stigma... People will just say ‘you asked for it.’"
Former prosecutor (identity withheld), February 2006

"[N]on-Native perpetrators often seek out a reservation place because they know they can inflict violence without much happening to them."
Andrea Smith, Assistant Professor of Native Studies, University of Michigan70

Oklahoma

"When an emergency call comes in, the sheriff will say ‘but this is Indian land.’ Tribal police will show up and say the reverse. Then, they just bicker and don’t do the job. Many times, this is what occurs. And it doesn’t always get resolved, which means no rape [sexual assault evidence] kit, etc."
Juskwa Burnett, support worker for Native American survivors of sexual violence, May 2005

determination."
Assistant US Attorney (identity withheld)

and better serve all Alaskans."
Initial Report and Recommendations of the Alaska Rural Justice and Law

"The US Government is not protecting Alaska Native women enough. What is wrong with the leadership of Alaska to allow this to happen? Shame on them!"
Juana Majel-Dixon, Secretary of National Congress of American Indians, Alaska Native Women’s Coalition Conference, May 2005

Some tribal, state and federal law enforcement agencies address these jurisdictional complexities by entering into co-operation agreements. These may take the form of cross-deputization agreements, which allow law enforcement officials to respond to crimes that would otherwise be outside their jurisdiction. For example, when tribal and state agencies enter into such agreements, certain tribal police officers may respond to crimes, including those involving non-Indian perpetrators, committed on state land and certain state police officers may respond to crimes committed by American Indian perpetrators on tribal land. When tribal agencies enter into such agreements with the federal government, certain tribal officers can exercise federal jurisdiction over non-Indian perpetrators of crimes on tribal land.

In Standing Rock, the SRPD and state agencies have explored co-operation through cross-deputization agreements that empower SRPD officers to arrest and detain individuals for crimes committed on state land and enable state police officers to arrest individuals for crimes committed by Native Americans on tribal land. Particularly in areas where law enforcement agencies have few officers, such co-operation agreements have the potential to allow improved responses to reports of sexual violence by increasing the number of potential responding officers.

In Oklahoma, co-operation occurs primarily between tribal and state law enforcement officials. Officers indicated that cross-deputization diminished jurisdictional challenges, increasing their ability to help all victims. The degree to which agencies in Oklahoma enter into such agreements varies around the state. For example, while the Choctaw Nation has reportedly entered into 38 agreements, many tribal, federal and state agencies have not entered into any.

For those agencies wishing to enter into cross-deputization agreements, the process to date has been complicated. To address this problem, in 2006 the BIA, the Oklahoma Association of Chiefs of Police and tribal law enforcement agencies drew up an agreement that would make it substantially easier for different law enforcement agencies to enter into cross-deputization relationships. A number of cross-deputization agreements have been filed since this came into effect.

In Alaska, the Alaska Rural Justice and Law Enforcement Commission also recommended the cross-deputization of law enforcement officials. In other words, tribes could individually negotiate with state law enforcement officials an agreement to allow for co-operation and collaboration between the two law enforcement agencies.

A second form of agreement addresses situations in which a perpetrator seeks to escape prosecution by fleeing to another jurisdiction. Flights by criminals occur in both directions – away from and to tribal land. To reduce the chance of escape, tribal and state authorities may enter into extradition agreements, in which each agrees to allow the other to return fleeing perpetrators to the jurisdiction of the crime.

"It’s only about a mile from town to the bridge. Once they cross the bridge [to the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation], there’s not much we can do… We’ve had people actually stop after they’ve crossed and laugh at us. We couldn’t do anything."
Walworth County Sheriff Duane Mohr, The Rapid City Journal, 21 December 2005

Summary of jurisdictions

The following summary highlights the current status of the criminal jurisdiction of tribal, federal and state authorities over crimes of sexual violence.

Tribal police, prosecutors and courts
Tribal police and prosecutors can investigate and prosecute all crimes committed by Indian individuals in areas including but not limited to Indian Country.

Tribal police and prosecutors have concurrent jurisdiction with federal police and prosecutors (or state police and prosecutors where Public Law 280 is applied) over major crimes by Indians on tribal land.

Tribal police and prosecutors cannot investigate61 and prosecute crimes committed by non-Native perpetrators on tribal land.

Tribal authority to sentence offenders is limited to a maximum of one year’s imprisonment and a US$5,000 fine for each offence.

Federal police and prosecutors
Federal police and prosecutors have exclusive jurisdiction to investigate62 and prosecute crimes committed by non-Native perpetrators in Indian Country (except where Public Law 280 is applied).
Federal police and prosecutors have concurrent jurisdiction with tribal police and prosecutors to investigate and prosecute major crimes committed by Indigenous people in Indian Country (except where Public Law 280 is applied).

State police and prosecutors
Where Public Law 280 is applied, state police and prosecutors have exclusive jurisdiction to investigate63 and prosecute crimes committed by non-Native perpetrators on tribal land.
Where Public Law 280 is applied, state police and prosecutors have concurrent jurisdiction with tribal police and prosecutors to investigate and prosecute crimes committed by Indigenous perpetrators on tribal land.

If a crime takes place on state land, state police and prosecutors have exclusive jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute.


[Photo caption]
At least a third of all Alaska Native villages that are not accessible by road have no law enforcement presence at all.

Standing Rock Sioux Reservation.Often a very small number of police officers have to cover large territories and face difficult decisions about how to prioritize their initial responses to reports of crime.

Chapter 5: Problems of policing

"It feels as though the reservation has become lawless."
Round-table interview, Standing Rock Sioux Reservation (identity withheld), 22 February 2006

In October 2005, in the village of Nunam Iqua in Alaska, an Alaska Native man became violent, beating his wife with a shotgun and attempting to fire it at her and striking a friend in the head with the butt of another gun. He then barricaded himself in a house with four children. As the village had no law enforcement presence, residents called State Troopers (state police officers) in Bethel, 150 miles away, at 5.30am to report the violence. Troopers had to charter a plane to get to the village because their own was being serviced and arrived at approximately 10am. A Trooper reported that, in the more than four hours it took them to reach the village, the man had raped a 13-year-old Alaska Native girl on a bed with an infant crying beside her and her five-year-old brother and seven-year-old cousin watching. After raping the girl, the man fired a shotgun, reportedly missing her by inches. The man faced 19 charges, including three counts of attempted murder, first-degree sexual assault and first-degree sexual abuse of a minor. In September 2006 he was convicted and sentenced to 27 years’ imprisonment, with 18 to be served and nine suspended.
"Village Man Arrested After Eight-Hour Rampage", Anchorage Daily News, 25 October 2005

crucial evidence."
Jeannette J Lee, "Fleeing Violence Can be Difficult in Bush", Associated

"[State Troopers] value moose more than Alaska Native women."
Eleanor David, former co-chair of the Alaska Native Women’s Coalition, May

drinking?’"
Support worker for Native American survivors of sexual violence (identity

standing by her couch looking at her.
Interview (identity withheld), February 2006

"It would be good if non-Native American police could be trained on how to work with Native Americans and to understand cultural norms, for example, that one does not look elders in the eye. It makes police suspicious when Native Americans don’t make eye contact with them because they don’t understand. It would help if the BIA would require standards on cultural sensitivity training."
Support worker for Native American survivors of sexual violence (identity withheld), May 2005

Chapter 6: Forensic examinations

A support worker told Amnesty International how in 2004 she was called to the hospital to assist a Native American woman who had been beaten and raped by more than one perpetrator. She told Amnesty International "the brutality of it was shocking… [the woman] was in a state of shock and confusion. She didn’t know what to do and was crying. She wanted to call her sister, her family… [Hospital staff] none of which were Indian… couldn’t convince her to sit down or do anything… [They] saw an Indian woman being belligerent and didn’t want to touch her – there was no empathy."
Interview (identity withheld), 22 February 2006

"Every effort should be made to facilitate treatment and evidence collection (if the patient agrees), regardless of whether the decision to report has been made at the time of the exam."
National Protocol for Sexual Assault Medical Forensic Examinations97

Jami Rozell, a Cherokee woman living in Tahlequah, Oklahoma, told Amnesty International that she decided to seek prosecution five months after she was raped on state land in 2003. After attending a preliminary hearing, it was revealed that her sexual assault forensic examination — including the sexual assault nurse examiner’s report, photographs, and the clothing she had been wearing — had been destroyed. She was told by the police department that the evidence had been destroyed as a routine part of cleaning their evidence storage room because she had initially declined to press charges. Because the evidence had been destroyed, the District Attorney advised her to drop the complaint.

An Alaska Native girl told Amnesty International that her sexual assault forensic examination was performed by a young white male doctor, even after she had asked for a woman. She said that the doctor told her that he had never done a sexual assault forensic examination before and asked her if this was the first time that she had been raped.

Who should pay?

"We need to start paying for [sexual assault forensic examinations]. When people know that offenders will be held accountable, report levels will go up."
Alaska state official (identity withheld), May 2005

Chapter 7: Barriers to prosecution

"To a sexual predator, the failure to prosecute sex crimes against American Indian women is an invitation to prey with impunity."
Dr David Lisak, Associate Professor of Psychology, University of Massachusetts, 29 September 2003

"In Oklahoma, prosecution of sexual assault is last, least and left behind."
Jennifer McLaughlin, Sexual Assault Specialist, Oklahoma Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, September 2005

"While the federal government has a significant responsibility for law enforcement in much of Indian country, tribal justice systems are ultimately the most appropriate institutions for maintaining order in tribal communities. They are local institutions, closest to the people they serve. With adequate resources and training, they are most capable of crime prevention and peace keeping. Fulfilling the federal government’s trust responsibility to Indian nations means not only adequate federal law enforcement in Indian country, but enhancement of tribal justice systems as well."
Janet Reno, former US Attorney General105

In May 2004, a man raped a 16-year-old Native American girl in Grand Forks, North Dakota. Her mother told Amnesty International that, although there was a warrant for the suspect’s arrest and although he had been in and out of jail on different charges, he was not arrested for the rape. She said that after the suspect called her daughter in spring 2006, she repeatedly called the state prosecutor, seeking action on her daughter’s case. After numerous calls to the police by the mother, the perpetrator was eventually arrested in late 2006 and, following a plea bargain with prosecutors, received a five-year prison sentence, with three years suspended, followed by five years’ parole. The mother told Amnesty International of her concerns about reporting the rape because of her experience in 1993 when her older daughter, who was 14 at the time, was raped on the Blackfeet Reservation in Montana. Tribal police were unwilling to take on the case and told her to contact the FBI in Great Falls, about 125 miles away. She said that although FBI agents met with her daughter several times, she felt they were not serious about pursuing the case; they never brought the suspect in for questioning and did not search his home for evidence for over a month. When she questioned the FBI about the case, she was told: "This case isn’t on the top of our list."

An Indigenous woman told Amnesty International how in 2001 she was beaten and raped by a former boyfriend. Her attacker went to the police and confessed that he had raped her three times and forced her to perform oral sex. As she was under 18 at the time of the rape, the crime constituted statutory rape under the law of the state where it took place. However, he was allowed to plead guilty to reduced charges and was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment of which he reportedly served a year and three months. After the rape, the young woman reportedly engaged in increasingly self-destructive behaviour. Her mother told Amnesty International that she begged the state authorities to provide her with a counsellor, but to no avail. She said her daughter served a longer sentence for stealing and destroying a relative’s car than her attacker had for rape.

A Native American woman told Amnesty International that she was raped by a white man and woman on state land in August 2004. After having a non-alcoholic drink with the couple, she began to feel "funny," developed a headache and was very drowsy. She was taken to a motel room, where she passed out. When she came to, she was naked and the room was darkened. She said that over the next hour, the woman held her down while the man raped her vaginally and anally, and the man held her while the woman inserted a beer bottle into her vagina. Both suspects were charged with rape and the case was referred to a county prosecuting attorney. The victim/witness co-ordinator noted that the survivor was "very sensitive," and that it was "necessary to reassure her repeatedly that what happened was not her fault." However, the co-ordinator went on to note "I did not get the feeling that her reluctance was due to fear or trauma as in some cases I have worked in the past," concluding that she "may have been intoxicated." The survivor told Amnesty International that she does not drink but that her English is not fluent, which may have contributed to communication difficulties.

At a preliminary hearing, the case was dismissed. According to the prosecuting office, the survivor did not appear for the court hearing. However, the survivor told Amnesty International that she was at the court waiting in the corridor. When the judge asked whether the prosecutor wanted a continuance (adjournment) because the victim was not present, the prosecutor declined, reportedly following a discussion with the victim/witness co-ordinator who again noted that the survivor was, in her opinion, "intoxicated" when she spoke to her on the phone. The prosecuting attorney’s office has strongly denied that they were aware of the survivor’s Native American identity or that negative stereotyping could have influenced the decision not to pursue the case. However, the police report indicates that both suspects referred to the survivor as having a "dark" complexion and her forensic medical examination report lists her as Native American.
Attempts by tribal support workers to have the case reinstated have been denied by the District Attorney. The survivor said that after the case was dismissed her calls to the victim co-ordinator were not answered: "All I want is justice."

Amnesty International learned of the case of a Native American woman who in 2003 accepted a ride home from two white men who raped and beat her and then threw her off a bridge. She sustained serious injuries, but survived. A support worker for victims of sexual violence described how, "People said she was asking for it because she was hitchhiking late at night." The case went to trial in a state court but the jurors were unable to agree on whether the suspects were guilty. A juror who was asked why replied: "She was just another drunk Indian." Because the jury failed to reach a verdict, the case was retried. The second trial resulted in a 60-year sentence for the primary perpetrator, who had reportedly previously raped at least four other women, and a 10-year sentence for the second perpetrator.117

Lack of communication

"One [Native American] woman I work with told me that she reported her sexual assault two years ago and that she didn’t know if the case had been investigated or prosecuted. I researched the case and discovered it had been declined, but no one had told the woman."
Support worker for Native American survivors of sexual violence (identity withheld), January 2006

Sexual Assault Response Teams

Sexual Assault Response Teams (SARTs) consist of law enforcement officers, sexual assault nurse examiners (SANEs), support workers and prosecutors. Their overall aim is to increase reporting of and convictions for sexual violence, as well as to support survivors through informed and appropriate responses. In a recent survey of SARTs across the USA, the National Sexual Violence Resource Center found that 17 of 258 respondents served tribal communities.119There are currently no SARTs working on or around the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. While there were reports that relations and co-ordination between service providers and police have improved in some areas, Amnesty International’s findings suggest that coordination between agencies and communication with survivors is inadequate. The extent to which SARTs operate in Oklahoma is unclear. However, none of the police departments Amnesty International interviewed in Oklahoma had formal policies regarding their relationships with those who could provide services on behalf of victims. Alaska has a statewide protocol for SARTs and there are currently nine SART programmes.120 One of the main problems reported to Amnesty International is recruiting and retaining qualified staff for these positions.


[Photo captions]
"You don’t know this, but today is your last day because I am going to kill you."
X endured years of escalating physical and sexual violence. Her former husband was charged in a state court with maiming and attempted murder, but the case never reached trial. He entered into a plea agreement with prosecution authorities and received approximately five years’ probation and a restraining order for life.

"Sexual assault is very low on the priority list for law enforcement. Women’s issues all around are low. It is hard to get them to pick up rape kits [forensic sexual assault examinations], let alone process and prosecute."
Mary Jo Cole, Help in Crisis, which provides support services and runs a shelter in Oklahoma for women who have been victims of sexual violence

"I asked our grand-mother spirits what I could do to get all 39 tribes on board to fight sexual assault in Oklahoma Indian Country, the vision of using the logos came to me in a dream..."
Pauline K Musgrove, Executive Director of Spirits of Hope

Georgia Little Shield, Executive Director of Pretty Bird Woman House, Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. The programme does not yet have a shelter facility or funding for direct services for its clients, but helps women to access services off the Reservation.
[End of photo captions]

Chapter 8: Support services for survivors

"She was terrified, grabbing my hand. She was so humiliated. She was clinging to me like she was drowning."
Support worker (identity withheld) on the experience of sitting through a rape examination with a Native American woman at a state hospital, February 2006

"[The USA’s] lengthy history of failing to keep its promises to Native Americans includes the failure of Congress to provide the resources necessary to create and maintain an effective health care system for Native Americans."
US Commission on Civil Rights, Broken Promises: Evaluating the Native American Health Care System, September 2004

"This disparity in spending is amplified by the poorer health conditions of many in the Native American community and represents a direct affront to the legal and moral obligation the nation has to improve Indian health status."
US Commission on Civil Rights, A Quiet Crisis: Federal Funding and Unmet

more tense and uncomfortable."
Juskwa Burnett, support worker for Native American survivors of sexual

"Here in Alaska, we’re so distant from each other. We’re off the road system and our highway is the river. It is really important to have programs like this in the villages because a lot of our Native people don’t like to leave their homes."
Lenora Hootch, Director, Emmonak Women’s Shelter, Office for Victims of Crime, US Department of Justice, Promising Practices in Indian Country, 2004

Violence Against Women Act

Campaigning by tribal governments and Native American and Alaska Native activists and organizations – including Sacred Circle, Clan Star, National Congress of American Indians Task Force on Violence Against Women, and Mending the Sacred Hoop – has encouraged the federal government to take important steps to address sexual violence against Native American and Alaska Native women. Perhaps the most significant federal initiative to date is the 2005 reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. The Act, first passed by Congress in 1994, is a collection of funding programmes, initiatives and actions designed to improve criminal justice and community-based responses to violence against women, including sexual violence, in the USA.124 The expanded and reauthorized 2005 version of the Act contains, for the first time, a specific Tribal Title (Title IX), which seeks to improve safety and justice for Native American and Alaska Native women. The Tribal Title includes provisions for annual consultation sessions between the US Department of Justice and tribal governments regarding distribution of tribal funds;125 authorization for Indian law enforcement agencies to access national criminal information databases; and the creation of a national tribal sex offender registry and a national registry containing protection orders issued by Indian tribes. It also directs the Attorney General to conduct a national study to examine violence against Native American and Alaska Native women and to evaluate the effectiveness of tribal, federal, state and local responses. The Department of Health and Human Services is also directed to conduct a study on the number of cases involving violence against Native American and Alaska Native women and the cost of providing related health services.The reauthorized Violence Against Women Act mandates that 10 per cent of funds allocated by the STOP (Services, Training, Officers and Prosecutors) grant programme be set aside for tribal programmes. An additional 10 per cent of funding for direct services for victims of sexual violence is set aside for state, territorial and tribal coalitions.126 The method by which tribal nations apply for funding is to be streamlined. In addition, the 2005 reauthorization of the Act allows for increased punishment through federal prosecutions for repeat domestic violence offenders who have at least two tribal convictions. While these measures are welcome, as of January 2007, President George W Bush had not requested any funding for new provisions of the reauthorized Violence Against Women Act. Inadequate funding, therefore, threatens to detract substantially from its effectiveness. Such an outcome would be emblematic of federal efforts to address sexual violence against Native American and Alaska Native women, which has tended to be inconsistent in their funding levels and lacking in comprehensive and uniform solutions.

Chapter 9: Recommendations

This report highlights how the high rate of sexual violence against Indigenous women in the USA is directly linked to the failure of the authorities to bring those responsible for these crimes to justice. The report details some of the causes of this impunity and sets out steps which need to be taken to ensure justice for survivors.

The legal relationship that exists between the US federal government and tribes (trust responsibility) places on the US government a unique legal obligation to ensure the protection of the rights and wellbeing of American Indian and Alaska Native peoples. The federal government must honour this trust responsibility by removing the barriers to justice created by jurisdictional confusion and complexity and by putting an end to the erosion of tribal authority and the chronic under-resourcing of tribal law enforcement agencies and justice systems.

Addressing sexual violence against Native American and Alaska Native women requires a holistic and integrated approach. It involves challenging discrimination on the grounds of gender and Indigenous identity in society at large and in the institutions charged with upholding and delivering justice.

Amnesty International calls on the authorities to fulfil their obligation to investigate, prosecute and punish these abuses and to promote the fundamental human rights of Indigenous women. In doing so it draws on the legacy of groundbreaking work by American Indian and Alaska Native women in demanding justice and respect.

Develop comprehensive plans of action to stop violence against Indigenous women
1 Federal and state governments should consult and co-operate with Indigenous nations, and Indigenous women in particular, to institute plans of action to stop violence against Indigenous women.
2 Tribal, state and federal authorities should, in consultation with Indigenous peoples, develop the necessary methodologies to obtain comprehensive and accurate data on sexual violence against Indigenous women. Such data should include the Indigenous or other status of victims and perpetrators and the localities where offences take place; the number of cases referred for prosecution; and the number declined by prosecutors and the reasons why.
3 All appropriate agencies – health service providers, law enforcement agencies, prosecutors and support services assisting survivors of sexual violence – should participate in the formation and implementation of Sexual Assault Response Teams.
4 Prosecutors should vigorously prosecute cases of sexual violence against Indigenous women, and should be sufficiently resourced to ensure that the cases are treated with the appropriate priority and processed without undue delay. Any decision not to proceed with a case, together with the rationale for the decision, should be promptly communicated to the survivor of sexual violence and any other prosecutor with jurisdiction.
5 The federal government should take steps – including by providing sufficient funding – to ensure the full implementation of the 2005 reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, particularly Title IX (Tribal Programs).

End discrimination on the basis of Indigenous status and gender
6 Federal and state governments should take effective measures, in consultation and co-operation with Native American and Alaska Native peoples, to combat prejudice and eliminate stereotyping of and discrimination against Indigenous peoples.
7 All authorities should ensure that a gender perspective is fully integrated into all programmes of action to address discrimination against Indigenous peoples and that steps are taken to deal with the ways in which such discrimination impacts on Indigenous women.
8 Federal authorities should work with Indigenous women’s organizations in the USA to articulate an Indigenous concept of gender-based violence and Indigenous anti-violence strategies in order to more rigorously respect, protect and fulfil the rights of Native American and Alaska Native women.
9 Federal and state authorities, in consultation and collaboration with Indigenous tribal governments, should strengthen and expand public education programmes that acknowledge and address the history of dispossession, marginalization and forced assimilation of Indigenous peoples and their unique political and legal relationship with the US government.

Ensure accountability
10 All law enforcement bodies, prosecutors, courts and health service providers should develop policies and protocols which are available to the public. They should maintain systems of accountability, including transparent grievance systems, through which Indigenous women survivors of sexual violence can file complaints of inappropriate conduct. These bodies should also keep detailed statistics on complaints received, indicating the nature of complaints and the gender and Indigenous status of complainants.
11 Independent and representative bodies should be established to ensure that complaints are properly investigated. Law enforcement officials found to have failed to act on reports of sexual violence or to have carried out biased or inadequate investigations should be held accountable and appropriate disciplinary or other measures taken against them.
12 All law enforcement agencies, prosecutors and courts should maintain clear and widely published policies addressing procedures for tackling conflicts of interest.

Increase federal funding
13 The federal government should ensure that procedures for obtaining federal funding are not unduly complicated and that the provision of essential services for victims of sexual violence is not adversely affected or delayed by the requirements of federal grant cycles.
14 The federal government should permanently increase funding for law enforcement coverage in Indian Country and Alaska Native villages, including in Public Law 280 states.
15 The federal government should permanently increase funding for the Indian Health Service to improve and further develop facilities and services, and increase permanent staffing in both urban and rural areas in order to ensure adequate levels of medical attention.

End impunity for abusers
16 Law enforcement authorities should establish effective processes for responding to reports of sexual violence so that victims, relatives and witnesses can make reports without fear of reprisal and in full confidence that they will be taken seriously and that the authorities will act properly and impartially. Investigating and prosecuting authorities should take into account the particular difficulties faced by Indigenous women victims of alleged sexual violence in pursuing their cases.
17 Law enforcement agencies should recognize in policy and practice that all police officers have the authority to take action in response to reports of sexual violence, including rape, within their jurisdiction and to apprehend the alleged perpetrators in order to transfer them to the appropriate authorities for investigation and prosecution. In particular, where sexual violence is committed in Indian Country and in Alaska Native villages, tribal law enforcement officials must be recognized as having the authority to apprehend both Native and non-Native suspects.
18 All law enforcement agencies should co-operate with, and expect co-operation from, neighbouring law enforcement bodies on the basis of mutual respect and genuine collaboration to ensure protection of survivors and those at risk of sexual violence, including rape, and to ensure that perpetrators are brought to justice.
19 Throughout all stages of investigation, prosecution and trial, the authorities should ensure that translation and interpreting services are available for those who need them.
20 In states where criminal jurisdiction on tribal land has been transferred from federal to state authorities (including Public Law 280 states), Congress should ensure that tribal governments, like state governments, have the option to transfer jurisdiction back from the state to the federal authorities.

Ensure appropriate, effective policing
21 Federal and state authorities must take urgent steps to make available adequate resources to police forces in Indian Country and Alaska Native villages. Particular attention should be paid to improving coverage in rural areas with poor transport and communications infrastructures.
22 Federal authorities should ensure that tribal police forces have access to federal funding to enable them to recruit, train, equip and retain sufficient law enforcement officers to provide adequate law enforcement coverage which is responsive to the needs of the Indigenous peoples they serve.
23 Federal, state and tribal authorities should work to achieve adequate representation of both men and women, including Indigenous women and men, in law enforcement agencies and that as far as possible duty rosters and deployment should be arranged to ensure that female law enforcement officers are available in all areas and at most times.
24 All law enforcement officials should ensure that reports of sexual violence are responded to promptly, that effective steps are taken to protect survivors from further abuse and that thorough investigations are undertaken.
25 All law enforcement agencies should work closely with Indigenous women’s organizations to develop and implement appropriate and effective investigation protocols for dealing with cases of sexual violence, including complying with any requests from survivors of sexual violence to have their statements taken by a woman law enforcement official.
26 All law enforcement agencies should ensure that law enforcement officers complete thorough and detailed written reports of investigations and provide them to prosecuting authorities.
27 Law enforcement agencies should establish and implement clear policies and practices for timely and regular provision of information to all victims of sexual violence, including whether a case is being referred for prosecution, which prosecuting authority is undertaking the case, and an explanation of any decision not to proceed with a case.
28 Federal, state and tribal law enforcement agencies must be provided with adequate resources and clear guidance to ensure that all officials have sufficient knowledge and appreciation of local Indigenous cultures, values and histories in order to understand and establish trust with the peoples they serve. Human rights training programmes for police and other officials should include training on sexual violence against women from the perspective of Indigenous women. Towards this end, training in cultural norms and practices for police officers should be subject to independent evaluation and devised in collaboration with Indigenous peoples. Training should also include the role of policing in implementing international human rights standards in practice.

Ensure access to sexual assault forensic examinations
29 All women who report to a health service provider or law enforcement official that they have been sexually assaulted should be offered an adequate and timely sexual assault forensic examination, without charge to the survivor, regardless of whether at that point they have decided they wish the case to be investigated by law enforcement bodies and referred for prosecution.
30 Health service providers and law enforcement agencies must ensure that all women reporting sexual violence to them are provided with transport to Indian Health Service or other appropriate health facilities where they can receive a sexual assault forensic examination and any medical attention they may need. Transport should be provided at no cost to the victim.
31 Sexual assault forensic examinations should be conducted promptly by suitably trained health professionals in a manner which is sensitive to the needs and wishes of the victim. For example, requests for a woman health worker to perform the test should be complied with. Such examinations should be carried out at no cost to the victim.
32 Law enforcement agencies and health service providers should establish and implement appropriate procedures for handling and storing evidence from sexual assault forensic examinations. All such evidence must be stored in a manner preserving its integrity, regardless of whether the victim has made a decision about reporting to police.
33 Under no circumstances should such evidence be discarded before the statute of limitations expires or without the express and informed consent of the survivor.

Provide support services for survivors
34 All governments should support and ensure adequate funding for support services, including shelters. All shelters and rape crisis centres should provide culturally appropriate, sensitive and non-discriminatory support to Indigenous women and ensure that their staff are trained to provide services to this standard.
35 The Indian Health Service and other health service providers need to make available to survivors of sexual violence gender-specific, culturally appropriate responses, including guaranteed access to sexual and reproductive health services and supplies, planned and administered in co-operation with Indigenous peoples, taking into account their social and cultural norms, traditional preventive care, healing practices and medicines, and their economic and geographic conditions.
36 The Indian Health Service and other health service providers should develop standardized policies and protocols, which are made publicly available and posted within health facilities in view of the public, on responding to reports of sexual violence. Such policies and protocols should require staff to provide full and comprehensive information on and access to measures such as emergency contraception, testing and treatment for sexually transmitted infections, and should emphasize the need for confidentiality.
37 The Indian Health Service and other health service providers, and specifically all nurses, doctors and support staff should be trained in sexual assault protocols, including screening for and identifying sexual violence, and in culturally appropriate skills to deal sensitively with survivors of sexual violence.
38 The Indian Health Service and other health service providers should ensure that Indigenous women who are victims of or at risk of sexual violence are given information about and have effective access to support services such as shelters and ongoing counselling or peer-based support.
39 The Indian Health Service and other health service providers should prioritize the creation of sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE) programmes and explore other ways of addressing the shortage and retention of qualified SANEs.

Ensure that prosecution and judicial practices deliver justice
40 The US Congress should recognize the concurrent jurisdiction of tribal authorities over all crimes committed on tribal land, regardless of the Indigenous identity of the accused, including by legislatively overriding the US Supreme Court’s decision in Oliphant v Suquamish.
41 The US Congress should amend the Indian Civil Rights Act to recognize the authority of tribal courts to impose penalties proportionate to the offences within the context of a trial and sentencing process that conforms to international fair trial standards.
42 The US government should, in co-operation with Indigenous legal experts, ensure that national judicial systems take account of the human rights of Indigenous peoples, and in particular of Indigenous women, and incorporate traditional Indigenous justice processes into national judicial systems when dealing with offences committed by Native Americans and Alaska Natives.
43 Federal authorities should make available the necessary funding and resources to tribal governments to develop and maintain tribal court and legal systems which comply with international human rights standards, including with regard to the right to a remedy, to non-discrimination and to fair trials, while also reflecting the cultural and social norms of their peoples.
44 Prosecutors in the different jurisdictions should vigorously prosecute cases of sexual violence against Indigenous women, and should be sufficiently resourced to ensure that the cases are treated with the appropriate priority and dealt with without undue delay.
45 Prosecutors in the different jurisdictions should establish clear policies and practices regarding timely and regular provision of information to victims of sexual violence, including whether a prosecution is being undertaken, details on any negotiations related to sentencing and on any decisions not to proceed with a case.
46 Prosecutors in the different jurisdictions should provide each other with information on the status of cases of sexual violence against Native American and Alaska Native women on a regular basis. When prosecutors decline to prosecute cases of sexual violence against Native American or Alaska Native women, other courts and prosecutors with jurisdiction should be notified promptly in writing, with reasons why this decision was made.
47 All judicial authorities, in collaboration with Indigenous women’s organizations, should establish and implement training programmes to ensure that court and prosecution officials are competent to deal with sexual and domestic violence and Indigenous issues.
48 Federal and state prosecution and judicial authorities should take steps to ensure appropriate representation of Indigenous peoples, in particular women, in agencies responsible for the administration of justice in and around Indian Country and Alaska Native villages.

Integrate a human rights perspective
49 The US government should ratify without delay the following international human rights treaties:
the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women;
the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights;
the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women ("Convention of Belém do Pará");
the ILO Convention No.169, concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent Countries; and
It should also implement the provisions of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples adopted in June 2006 by the UN Human Rights Council.
50 The US government should include information on the individual and collective rights of Indigenous peoples and specifically on sexual violence against Indigenous women in their reports to UN treaty bodies and should implement their recommendations.
51 Federal, state and tribal authorities should ensure that they advance public policies to eliminate all forms of discrimination against Indigenous women by endorsing and implementing international human rights standards on violence against women.
52 The federal government should invite relevant UN special procedures – in particular the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences – and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Women to visit the country in order to examine patterns of violence against Native American and Alaska Native women in the USA and provide detailed recommendations on how to address the issues raised.
53 Federal, state and tribal legislation and judicial systems should uphold international human rights standards at all levels, including in the definition of crimes; the response to and vigorous investigation of reports of rape or other acts of sexual violence; the prosecution of those suspected of such crimes in trials that conform to international fair trial standards; the appropriate punishment of those found guilty; and the guarantee to survivors of full reparations, including restitution, satisfaction, rehabilitation and guarantees of non-repetition.

Endnotes

1 The Bureau of Indian Affairs’ Office of Law Enforcement Services; the Federal Bureau of Investigations’ Indian Country Unit; the US Department of Justice’s Office of Tribal Justice; the Executive Office of US Attorneys (federal prosecutors); the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Liaison (which sets policy and protocol for US Attorneys in prosecuting crimes in Indian Country); the US Department of Justice’s Office on Violence Against Women; and the Indian Health Service.
2 Steven W Perry, Census of Tribal Justice Statistics in Indian Country, 2002, Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Department of Justice, December 2005, NCJ 205332, at 3, available at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/ctjaic02.htm.
3 US Census Bureau, The American Indian and Alaska Native Population: 2000, February 2002, p6, available at http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/c2kbr01-15.pdf visited 9 May 2006.
4 See, for example, Federally Recognized Tribes, National Conference of State Legislatures, August 2005, at http://www.ncsl.org/programs/statetribe/tribes.htm, visited 29 December 2006.
5 See http://www.tribal-institute.org/lists/federally_recognized_ nations.htm for a list of federally recognized nations.
6 Restoration of Native Sovereignty – Restoration of Safety for Native Women, National Congress of American Indians, National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women, VAWA Public Law 109-162, Volume V, September 2006.
7 American Indians have been treated as a racial group for certain statistical purposes, including the Census and crime victimization studies, where racial designations are based on self-reports. However, the US Supreme Court considers laws singling out American Indians and Alaska Natives as classifications based on political affiliation with particular tribes rather than racial classifications. Morton v Mancari, 417 U.S. 535 (1974).
8 Steven W Perry, American Indians and Crime – A BJS Statistical Profile 1992-2002, Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, December 2004, available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/aic02.pdf, visited 30 November 2006.
9 Patricia Tjaden & Nancy Thoennes, US Department of Justice, Full Report of the Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women, 2000.
10 For example, the authors of the US Department of Justice study Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Rape Victimization, note that it "under-estimates the true number of rapes committed each year, because [it] excludes rapes of children and adolescents, as well as… anyone living in… households without telephones."
11 Indian Tribal Justice Support Act 25 U.S.C.A. §3601(2) (1994).
12 A/CONF.189/PC.3/5, 27 July 2001, para5.
13 Because several studies were based on telephone interviews, it is probable that urban Native American and Alaska Native residents were over-represented in the pool of participants as they were more likely to have access to telephones than are Native American and Alaska Native people living on reservations or in rural areas.
14 See, for example, Restoration of Native Sovereignty – Restoration of Safety for Native Women, National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic ViolenceAgainst Women, VAWA Public Law 109-162, Volume V, September 2006.
15 See for example, Steven W Perry, American Indians and Crime – A BJS Statistical Profile 1992–2002, Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, December 2004, available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/aic02.pdf, visited 30 November 2006 and Department of Justice Table 42: Percent distribution of single-offender victimizations, by type of crime and perceived race of offender, Bureau of Justice Statistics, US Department of Justice, 2004, available at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cvus/current/cv0442.pdf.
16 This includes 1.6 million who consider themselves part Native American. US Census Bureau, The American Indian and Alaska Native Population: 2000, February 2002, available at http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/c2kbr01-15.pdf, visited 30 November 2006.
17 A Rosay, Descriptive Analysis of Sexual Assault in Anchorage, Alaska. Alaska Justice Statistical Analysis Center, Justice Center, University of Alaska Anchorage, 2003, available at: http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/publications/pdf/0107sexualassaults.pdf.
18 Ronet Bachman, The Epidemiology of Rape and Sexual Assaults Against American Indian Women: An Analysis of NCVS Data, presented to a federal and tribal working group on sexual assault against Native women, 29 September 2003, referenced in Sarah Deer, "Sovereignty of the Soul: Exploring the Intersection of Rape Law Reform and Federal Indian Law" 38 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 455 (2005).
19 Interview with Sergeant Markowitz, Anchorage Police Department, 2 November 2006.
20 Bureau of Justice Statistics Bulletin, Felony Sentences in State Courts, 2002, December 2004, NCJ 206916, available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fssc02.pdf, visited 30 November 2006.
21 Available at http://www.tribal-institute.org/lists/kevin_gover.htm (visited 31 May 2006).
22 See, for example, Sarah Deer, "Toward an Indigenous Jurisprudence of Rape", 14 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy 121, 129-130 and Andrea Smith, Conquest: Sexual Violence and American Indian Genocide, South End Press, Cambridge, MA, 2005.
23 See, for example, John Demos, "The Tried and the True: Native American Women Confronting Colonization", in Nancy F Cott, ed., No Small Courage: A History of Women in the United States, Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 2000.
24 In recent years there has been increasing recognition of the way that in conflicts in countries around the world, rape has been used to humiliate, punish, control, inflict fear, and destroy the social fabric of the communities attacked. The international community has recognized that rape has been used as a weapon of war, including during the Second World War and in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan. In recent years, courts around the world have begun to prosecute these offences. See, for example, Article 3(g), Article 4(e) of the Statute for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and Akayesu (Trial Chamber), 2 September 1998, para 731.
25 Kelly D Lynn, "Seeking Environmental Justice for Cultural Minorities: The South Lawrence Trafficway of Lawrence", Kansas, 12 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy, 221, 222 (2003).
26 Matt Kelley, "American Indians Describe School Beatings", Associated Press, 24 April 1999.
27 Gray v US, 394 F.2d 96, 98 (9th Cir. 1968).
28 See, for example, Sarah Deer, "Toward an Indigenous Jurisprudence of Rape", 14 Kansas Journal of Law & Public Policy 121, 129-130.
29 See US General Accounting Office, Summary of Information Obtained: Medical Research Involving Indian Subjects, November 1975, available at http://archive.gao.gov/f0402/100493.pdf, visited 11 May 2006.
30 Charles R England, "A Look at the Indian Health Service Policy of Sterilization, 1972-1976", available at http://www.dickshovel.com/IHSSterPol.html, visited 11 May 2006.
31 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, General Recommendation 19, 1992, which articulates ways in which sexual violence is a violation of rights contained in treaties which have been ratified by the USA.
32 See Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and Article 2(1) of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
33 See Article 9(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
34 See Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which the USA has signed but not ratified.
35 See Article 2 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and General Recommendation 19 of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.
36 See Article 2 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination.
37 See, for example, Article 2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
38 See, for example, Human Rights Committee, the expert committee that monitors states’ implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, General Comment 31. See also Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, General Comment 19.
39 Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, General Recommendation 23.
40 Text available at http://www.ohchr.org/english/issues/indigenous/rapporteur/, visited 4 January 2007.
41 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, General Recommendation 19.
42 See Beijing Declaration of Indigenous Women, NGO Forum United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women, Beijing, People’s Republic of China, September 1995.
43 The current Cuban government is excluded from participating in the Organization of American States.
44 Mairin Iwanka Raya. Indigenous women stand against violence, A Companion Report to the United Nations Secretary-General’s Study on Violence Against Women, International Indigenous Women’s Forum, FIMI, 2006, pp32-33.
45 Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, General Recommendation 24, which articulates the content of rights contained in treaties ratified by the USA.
46 Report to the UN General Assembly of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Human rights situations: human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms available at: http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N04/543/38/PDF/N0454338.pdf?OpenElement, visited 29 December 2006.
47 Violence Against Women Act (2005), Section 901, Findings.
48 Chris Chaney, Deputy Bureau Director, BIA, 8 March 2006.
49 Bureau of Justice Statistics, Fact Sheet: Tribal Law Enforcement, 2000.
50 Testimony of Mary T Wynne, Chief Judge, Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Nespelem, Washington before the United States Senate Committee on Indian Affairs (1998), available at: http://indian.senate.gov/1998hrgs/0407_mw.htm, visited 24 August 2006.
51 Act of 3 March 1885, § 8, codified as amended at 18 U.S.C. § 1153.
52 Decision of the Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs Regarding the Major Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. §1153, April 1987 (on file with AIUSA), United States Department of the Interior regarding Washoe Tribal Council Resolution No. 83-W-32, included in correspondence from Ross Swimmer, Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs, April, 1987.
53 Pub. L. No. 83-280, 67 Stat. 588 (1953), codified as amended at 18 U.S.C. § 1162, 28 U.S.C. § 1360, and 25 U.S.C. §§ 1321-26. Although individual states may have been excluded from the application of the statute in the first place, a number of tribes (including all tribes in New York and several in the north-east and Texas) are subject to state criminal jurisdiction as a result of special congressional acts, outside the framework of Public Law 280. (Correspondence with Carole Goldberg, Professor of Law, UCLA, 18 December 2006.) Furthermore, there are some tribes in Public Law 280 states that were excluded from application of the statute.
54 Correspondence with Carole Goldberg, Professor of Law, UCLA, 18 December 2006.
55 See, for example, Ada Pecos Melton and Jerry Gardner, Public Law 280: Issues and Concerns for Victims of Crime in Indian Country, available at http://www.tribal institute.org/articles/gardner1.htm, visited 29 March 2006.
56 See Carole Goldberg, Questions and Answers about Public Law 280, available at http://www.tribal-institute.org/articles/goldberg.htm, visited 27 March 2006.
57 The Indian Civil Rights Act was included as title II of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, Pub. L. No. 96-88, 81 Stat. 787 (1968), and is codified as amended at 25 U.S.C. §§ 1301-1303.
58 Oliphant v Suquamish Indian Tribe, 435 U.S. 191 (1978).
59 "Through Indian Lands, Drugs’ Shadowy Trail", New York Times, 19 February 2006.
60 Depending on the particular state, tribal police may have full arrest authority over non-Native individuals. For example, the State of Arizona recognizes tribal police and has through legislation commissioned them with State Peace Officer authority once a tribal police officer completes a State Police Academy. At the other end of the spectrum, the State of California does not recognize tribal police officers at all. Throughout the USA, tribal police authority to arrest non-Native perpetrators often depends on the whim of a county sheriff and/or other delegating authority.
61 Tribal law enforcement has the authority to undertake investigations in cases involving non-Indian perpetrators on tribal land in instances in which they have been commissioned by or have entered into co-operation agreements with federal or state law enforcement agencies.
62 Tribal law enforcement officers may share authority to investigate in such cases if they have been federally commissioned.
63 Tribal law enforcement officers may share authority to investigate in such cases if state and tribal agencies have entered into co-operation agreements.
64 See http://www.mnisose.org/profiles/strock.htm.
65 US Department of Transportation, Tribal Transportation: Standing Rock Sioux, available at: www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/tribaltrans/standingrock.htm, visited 8 May 2006.
66 The University of Kansas, Kansas Center for Community Economic Development Policy Research Institute, Economic Trends Report: Standing Rock Counties, September 2003.
67 Institute for Women’s Policy Research, The Status of Women in the States, available at http://www.iwpr.org/States2004/PDFs/National.pdf, visited 30 November 2006.
68 See Luke Middleton, Economic Trends Report: Standing Rock Counties, Kansas Center for Community Economic Development, Policy Research Institute, Technical Report Series, Report No. 72, September 2003, at 20, available at http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/resrep/pdf/r70.pdf, visited 30 November 2006.
69 Although South Dakota has attempted to accept partial jurisdiction over Indian Country under Public Law 280, the South Dakota Supreme Court has held that the state lacks Public Law 280 jurisdiction. State v Cummings, 2004 SD 56 (2004).
70 Jodi Rave, "South Dakota Tribal-City Police Department a National Model for Handling Domestic Abuse", The Missoulian, 24 September 2006.
71 US Census Bureau: http://www.census.gov/PressRelease/www/releases/archives/facts_for_features/001492.html, visited 30 November 2006.
72 FBI Uniform Crime Reports, Crime in the United States 2005, available at: www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm, visited 4 January 2007.
73 See US Census Bureau at: http://www.census.gov/population/cen2000/phc-t2/tab01.pdf, visited 30 November 2006.
74 This number does not include those who identify as part Alaska Native.
75 Andre Rosay, Descriptive Analysis of Sexual Assaults in Anchorage, Alaska: 2002/2003 Update Final Report to the Anchorage Police Department, Justice Center, University of Alaska Anchorage, February 2006, available at http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/research/2000/0107sxassaultupdate/0107-02sexualassault.pdf, visited 30 November 2006.
76 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Alaska Inter-Tribal Council et al v State et al, 25 October 1999.
77 See Alaska v Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government, 522 U.S. 520 (1998).
78 The court found that Public Law 280 did not give the state court jurisdiction because Public Law 280 extended state law jurisdiction into Indian Country. However, Alaska courts could exercise concurrent jurisdiction because there was no Indian Country from which the state might be excluded.
79 See Native Village of Perryville v John Tague, No. 3AN-00-12245 (Alaska Superior Court 19 November 2003).
80 25 C.F.R. §83.2 (1994).
81 Cabazon Band of Mission Indians v. Smith, 388 F.3d 691 (9th Cir., 2004).
82 S Wakeling, M Jorgensen, S Michaelson, M Begay, Policing on American Indian Reservations: A Report to the National Institute of Justice, Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, at vii, July 2001, available at: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/188095.pdf.
83 US Commission on Civil Rights, A Quiet Crisis: Federal Funding and Unmet Needs in Indian Country, July 2003.
84 According to US Department of Justice guidelines, federal prosecutors are encouraged and authorized to accept investigative reports directly from tribal or BIA police. United States Attorneys Criminal Resource Manual, Title 9, 675, available at: http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00675.htm. See also M Wesley Clark, "Enforcing Criminal Law on Native American Lands", FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, April 2005.
85 Alaska Advisory Committee to the US Commission on Civil Rights, Racism’s Frontier: The Untold Story of Discrimination and Division in Alaska, April 2002.
86 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Alaska Inter-Tribal Council et al v State et al, 25 October 1999.
87 State Troopers receive 1,130 hours of training; VPSOs receive 200 hours, while VPOs only receive 48 hours of training.
88 Amnesty International interview with Katie Tepas, Department of Public Safety, 26 May 2005.
89 Some 165 off-road communities lack "certified" police officers, 136 of which are Alaska Native villages. Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Alaska Inter-Tribal Council et al v State et al, 25 October 1999.
90 Alaska Advisory Committee to the US Commission on Civil Rights, Racism’s Frontier: The Untold Story of Discrimination and Division in Alaska, April 2002.
91 Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, Alaska Inter-Tribal Council et al v State et al, 25 October 1999.
92 Initial Report and Recommendations of the Alaska Rural Justice and Law Enforcement Commission 2006.
93 S. 1585, 108th Cong. § 109 (2004).
94 Amnesty International interview with Ezell Grigsby, Supervisory Special Agent, Indian Country Unit, FBI, 8 March 2006.
95 Amnesty International interview with Jeanie Nelson, Director of State of Oklahoma Council on Law Enforcement Education and Training, 26 September 2005.
96 Amnesty International interview with Gerald White, Special Agent, SRPD, 24 February 2006.
97 See www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/ovw/206554.pdf, visited 4 January 2007.
98 See http://www.ihs.gov/MedicalPrograms/MCH/V/DV09.cfm, visited 30 November 2006.
99 Native American Women’s Health Education Resource Centre, Indigenous Women’s Reproductive Justice: A Survey of Sexual Assault Policies and Protocols within Indian Health Service Emergency Rooms, 6 January 2005.
100 Indian Health Service, Indian Health Manual, Part 3 – Professional Services, 3-13.8 Sexual Abuse, available at: http://www.ihs.gov/PublicInfo/Publications/IHSManual/, visited 11 July 2006.
101 See, for example, National Congress of American Indians. "Testimony of the National Congress of American Indians on FY2003 Appropriations for the Indian Health Service", 5 April 2002. Available at http://www.ncai.org/ncai/advocacy/otherissue/docs/IHS03.pdf, visited 30 November 2005.
102 Native American Women’s Health Education Resource Centre, Indigenous Women’s Reproductive Justice: A Survey of Sexual Assault Policies and Protocols within Indian Health Service Emergency Rooms, 6 January 2005.
103 Louisa Kakianaaq Riley, Board Member, Alaska Native Women’s Coalition and Arctic Women In Crisis, Barrow, 7 December 2005.
104 Steve Miller, "Reservation Borders Frustrate Some Prosecutors, Law Enforcement Agencies and Crime Victims", The Rapid City Journal, 12 December 2005, available at: http://www.rapidcityjournal.com/articles/2005/12/21/news/local/news01.txt, visited 30 November 2006.
105 "A Federal Commitment to Tribal Justice System", Judicature, Volume 79, Number 3, Nov–Dec 1995, available at: http://www.tribal-institute.org/articles/reno.htm.
106 The Navajo judicial system handles about 90,000 cases per year. See Honorable Robert Yazzie, "Navajo Nation Courts", at http://www.lapahie.com/Courts.cfm, visited 26 April 2006.
107 US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, 2003, available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cfjs03.pdf, visited 26 April 2006.
108 US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, 2003, available at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cfjs03.pdf at 33, visited 30 November 2006.
109 Eight out of the 84 involved male victims, non-Native victims or victims of an unspecified age.
110 Letter to Amnesty International in response to the organization’s survey of federal prosecutors and the Executive Office for US Attorneys, US Department of Justice, 24 February 2006.
111 Criminal Code of the Paiute Shoshone Tribe, Chapter 7, Criminal Offenses, Section 1, available at http://www.narf.org/nill/Codes/ftmdecode/ftmcdtoc.htm, visited 30 November 2006.
112 US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justics Statistics, Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, available athttp://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cfjs0302.pdf.
113 Letter from Ross Swimmer, Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs, US Department of the Interior, April 1987.
114 Amnesty International interview with Theresa Foster, Assistant Attorney General, Department of Law, Fairbanks, 19 December 2005.
115 Interview with Alaska health services providers (identities withheld), 27 May 2005.
116 See Kevin K Washburn, "American Indians, Crime and the Law", 104 Mich. L. Rev. 709, 752-755, 2006.
117 Based on interviews with Anne Lowarance and Renee Brewer, May 2005 and with a District Attorney (details withheld), and "Trial Starts in Rape Case", The Daily Oklahoman, 16 September 2004.
118 Department of Justice, Criminal Justice in Indian Country, Audit Report 96-16 (9/96), available at: http://www.usdoj.gov/oig/reports/plus/a9616/index.htm.
119 National Sexual Violence Resource Center, Report on the National Needs Assessment of Sexual Assault Response Teams, 1 March 2006, available at: http://www.nsvrc.org/resources/strategies/OVC%20Approved%20Needs%20Assessment%20Report.pdf, visited 23 June 2006.
120 SART programmes are located in Anchorage, Bethel, Dillingham, Fairbanks, Homer, Kenai, Kodiak, Kotzebue and Nome.
121 According to IHS officials, the vacancy rate is about 10 per cent for physicians and about 14 per cent for nurses.
122 US Commission on Civil Rights, Broken Promises: Evaluating the Native American Health Care System, 2004.
123 Urban Indian Health Institute, "New Report Shows Impact of Health Disparities on Urban American Indians and Alaska Natives", available at: http://www.uihi.org/news/newsrelease.asp, visited 27 May 2006.
124 For more information about the Violence Against Women Act, see the National Task Force to End Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Against Women at http://www.vawa2005.org, visited 30 November 2006.
125 The first meeting took place on 19 September 2006 and was the first ever government to government consultation to discuss safety for Native American women. Jodi Rave, "Tribal Leaders Making Strides to Protect Women", The Missoulian, 1 October 2006.
126 The 2005 Violence Against Women Act authorizes US$50 million per year (2007-2011) for victims’ services to be distributed by the US Department of Justice. Funds from this grant programme are used to support direct services for victims of sexual assault and resources for tribal sexual assault coalitions. Violence Against Women Act, Title 2, Public Law No. 109-162 (2005).

[Map on inside back cover]

American Indians and Alaska Natives in Alaska
Adapted from the US Census Bureau map 2000

[End of inside back cover map]

[Back cover]

[AI Logo]

MAZE OF INJUSTICE

The failure to protect Indigenous women from sexual violence in the USAMore than one in three Native American or Alaska Native women will be raped at some point in their lives. Most do not seek justice because they know they will be met with inaction or indifference. As one support worker said, "Women don’t report because it doesn’t make a difference. Why report when you are just going to be revictimized?" Sexual violence against women is not only a criminal or social issue, it is a human rights abuse. This report unravels some of the reasons why Indigenous women in the USA are at such risk of sexual violence and why survivors are so frequently denied justice. Chronic under-resourcing of law enforcement and health services, confusion over jurisdiction, erosion of tribal authority, discrimination in law and practice, and indifference – all these factors play a part. None of this is inevitable or irreversible. The voices of Indigenous women throughout this report send a message of courage and hope that change can and will happen.

ISBN 0 780862 104245

AI Index: AMR 51/ 035/ 2007-03-30

[End of back cover]

********



Amnesty International, International Secretariat, 1 Easton Street, WC1X 0DW, London, United Kingdom