By: Candice Balmori, Esq.[1]
In the context of President Obama’s December 2014 statement regarding the re-establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba, the expansion of the sales and exports of certain goods, and the undertaking of other initiatives discussed therein, an intrigue in the opening of other prospective avenues presently unavailable to U.S. citizens seems to have awakened, particularly with regard to U.S. business interests. December’s statements set forth a media firestorm regarding the potential left largely unexplored since the enactment over five decades ago of U.S. legislation limiting transactions with the island nation. Novelty of concept aside, understanding some of the risky realities associated with entering the Cuban market should be a critical factor in the rhetoric and analysis of any perceived incentive to expand engagement in business transactions. There are two basic realities of engagement by foreign investors in Cuba that cannot be discounted: (1) the cumbersome nature of doing business in a bureaucratic command economy, reluctant to follow any free market reforms, and (2) the legal exposure associated with foreign investment in a totalitarian jurisdiction. These realities are highlighted by Cuba’s recently-revised foreign investment law, Ley No. 118.
With an economy predicated upon bureaucratic centralized power, the Cuban nation has been largely sustained over the last five and a half decades by foreign subsidies and preferential trade agreements. During the Special Period of the 1990s following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba’s struggle to reorient its weak economy was particularly palpable and gave drastic rise to a “black market,” or informal economy, which ordinary Cubans depended on to meet their basic needs and which the Cuban government arguably cannibalized as it subsequently incorporated the practice into its own brand of top-down mixed economy. Thereafter, Venezuela—another ideologically-aligned trade partner—began subsidizing the Cuban economy in an amount estimated at approximately $13 billion a year, inclusive of 100,000 barrels of oil per day, half of which were re-exported and sold in Spain.[1] With the value of Venezuela’s oil aid decreasing as a result of the decline in oil prices and the erosion of a delicate political and economic environment in Venezuela, Cuba recently started entertaining economic alternatives in order to keep itself afloat in a sea of otherwise unfinanced ideology.
In March of 2014, the Cuban National Assembly adopted a new foreign investment law, Ley No. 118,[2] which has been billed as offering greater incentives for foreign direct investment under terms more favorable than the previous Ley No. 77, enacted in 1995, which it supersedes. “The new law offers much better terms. It cuts the tax on profits in half—from 30 percent to 15 percent for most industries—and eliminates the old 25 percent tax on labor costs. The new law allows 100 percent foreign ownership, which, though previously legal, was never allowed in practice. Investors in joint ventures get an eight-year exemption from all taxes on profits.”[3] These revisions to Cuban law in particular aim to make a more attractive landscape for the foreign investor. Notwithstanding several projects undertaken for largely political reasons, this potential, however, has not thus far materialized. There is a sizable gap in Cuba’s reported growth of just 0.6 percent in the first half of 2014 and its goal to reach annual growth targets of above 5 percent by attracting a minimum of $2.5 billion per year in foreign direct investment. The reality is that foreign investors to date have been cold on Cuba, at least in part, if not in great part, as a result of the reasons set forth herein. Estimations indicate that just $5 billion has been invested in Cuba over the last 20 years.[4]
There are two aspects of Cuban law, however, that remain wholly unchanged despite the revisions made by 2014’s Ley No. 118—first, that major projects will still require approval by the Council of State or Council of Ministers; and second, that investors will still need to hire workers through the state’s labor exchange rather than hiring them directly.[5] The approval of Cuba’s heavy-handed bureaucratic mechanism has proven incredibly cumbersome, as the delays associated with obtaining requisite authorizations linger well beyond the most generous of plausible projections. Additionally, investment proposals under negotiation “still must be approved by the highest level of the Cuban government [and] include projects in light manufacturing, packaging, alternative energy, pharmaceuticals and warehouse shipping logistics.”[6] The disadvantages presented by the cumbersome reality of dealing with a bureaucratic state that has not relinquished control of certain elements otherwise basic to doing business in a free-market economy unquestionably hinders the pace, progress, and control of the foreign business investor’s undertaking and, in many instances, frustrates the purpose of the enterprise as a whole.
The prospect of entertaining any investment that necessitates the use of Cuban labor also poses numerous disadvantages for the foreign investor. Presently, no foreign investor can hire labor in Cuba directly (with very limited exceptions). Therefore, the foreign investor must procure the labor force needed for its joint ventures from a government employment agency, “which charges a fee for such services and pays the employee’s salary in Cuban pesos (CUP) while charging the investors in convertible currency (CUC). This salary is negotiated with the foreign investor on the basis of the minimum pay equivalent to the national average salary, which [as of 2014] amount[ed] to 456.00 CUP (1 CUC= 25 CUP; 1 CUC = $1).”[7] The Cuban state has effectively positioned itself as the island nation’s largest employment placement agency, profiting directly from every employment agreement entered into while paying only a fraction of the salary negotiated with the foreign investor in convertible currency to the worker in Cuban pesos. In seeking to bolster its economy through foreign investment, Cuba seems to have found one of its most profitable trades at present to be the human capital of its people.
Furthermore, Cuba’s laws present significant legal risks to be weighed by corporate foreign investors. The prohibition of foreign investors from hiring or firing employees directly[8], for example, obligates companies to submit labor disputes to a state agency for resolution. Additionally, under Article 4.1 of Chapter III of the new Ley No. 118, foreign investment can also be expropriated for reasons of public utility or social interest. In several cases, conflict resolution is even governed by local courts rather than an international court of arbitration or any other resolution term bargained for at arms-length. Given the axiomatic totalitarian nature of the Cuban system, and the lack of a transparent legal system in which the rights of investors may find protection, the legal exposure associated with foreign investment requires profound consideration. In fact, just last year, the executive of the Canadian-based Tokmakjian Group, one of the more successful foreign companies in Cuba selling transportation equipment, was sentenced by a Cuban court to 15 years in prison for bribery and other economic charges (which the Tokmakjian Group has vehemently denied) after the Cuban government seized $100 million worth of the company’s assets.[9] Though only charged last year, Tokmakjian had been detained for more than three years in prison, under house arrest, or in a military hospital.[10] While it is unclear what prompted the Cuban government to release the seventy-four year old executive only recently in February 2015, allowing him to finally return to Canada, it is certainly a cautionary tale of the potential cost of availing oneself or one’s business to Cuba’s legal jurisdiction.
The irony of depending on the capital of direct foreign investment at the expense of its labor force by a regime whose centralized economy adheres to a self-proclaimed Marxist Leninist doctrine is certainly not lost. That incongruity is second only to the use of the Port of Mariel[11] as the location of Cuba’s new “Special Development Zone”—a project undertaken by the Cuban government in an effort to appeal to and draw in interest from potential foreign investors. By its adoption of Ley No. 118, the Cuban government now seeks to incentivize certain aspects of investment in an effort to overcome the disadvantages still inherent in its economic climate—an economy whose ceiling is imposed upon citizen and foreign investor alike by the lack of free-market reforms that would themselves incentivize investment. Instead, Cuba’s present foreign investment laws present its populace with a policy designed primarily for the maintenance of the regime at both the expense of its workforce and the unwary foreign investor.
References
[1] Carlos Alberto Montaner, “Cuba: The Selling of a Nation,” Miami Herald, February 3, 2014, available at, http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/carlos-alberto-montaner/article1959938.html.
[2] Full text of Ley No. 118 available at: http://www.granma.cu/file/pdf/2014/04/16/G_2014041609.pdf
[3] William M. Leogrande, “Cuba’s New Foreign Investment Law is a Bet on the Future,” World Politics Review, April 2, 2014, available at, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/WPR-Cuba-s-New-Foreign-Investment-Law-Is-a-Bet-on-the-Future.pdf.
[4] Marc Frank, “Cuba Struggles to Attract Investors Despite Reforms,” Reuters, August 21, 2014, available at, http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/21/cuba-investment-idUSL2N0QP1K320140821.
[5] Supra note 4.
[6] Supra note 5.
[7] Raul Valdes-Fauli, “What the New Cuban Foreign Investment Law Means,” Business Insights: Cuba, August 2014, available at, http://www.foxrothschild.com/newspubs/newspubsArticle.aspx?id=15032395045.
[8] See supra note 8, “The foreign investor may discharge the employees hired through the employment agency, but it is required to pay the agency the compensation amount established by the Ministry of Labor and Social Security.”
[9] Claire Brownell, “Cuba Releases Canadian Managers of Tokakjian Group Held on Corruption Charges,” Financial Post, March 5, 2015, available at, http://business.financialpost.com/2015/03/05/cuba-releases-canadian-managers-of-tokmakjian-group-held-on-corruption-charges/
[10] Id.
[11] The Port of Mariel bore witness to a mass exodus of approximately 125,000 Cuban citizens seeking asylum in 1980 in response to the poor political and economic climate of the Cuban nation. To ease the crisis confronting the Cuban state by the thousands of Cubans cramming into the Peruvian embassy in Havana within only a matter of days to seek asylum, the Cuban government permitted the would-be emigrants who could coordinate a boatlift to leave for the United States from the Port of Mariel.
Newly Paved Foreign Investment Avenues in Cuba: Potholes and Pitfalls
/in Blog /by roar_adminBy: Candice Balmori, Esq.[1]
In the context of President Obama’s December 2014 statement regarding the re-establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and Cuba, the expansion of the sales and exports of certain goods, and the undertaking of other initiatives discussed therein, an intrigue in the opening of other prospective avenues presently unavailable to U.S. citizens seems to have awakened, particularly with regard to U.S. business interests. December’s statements set forth a media firestorm regarding the potential left largely unexplored since the enactment over five decades ago of U.S. legislation limiting transactions with the island nation. Novelty of concept aside, understanding some of the risky realities associated with entering the Cuban market should be a critical factor in the rhetoric and analysis of any perceived incentive to expand engagement in business transactions. There are two basic realities of engagement by foreign investors in Cuba that cannot be discounted: (1) the cumbersome nature of doing business in a bureaucratic command economy, reluctant to follow any free market reforms, and (2) the legal exposure associated with foreign investment in a totalitarian jurisdiction. These realities are highlighted by Cuba’s recently-revised foreign investment law, Ley No. 118.
With an economy predicated upon bureaucratic centralized power, the Cuban nation has been largely sustained over the last five and a half decades by foreign subsidies and preferential trade agreements. During the Special Period of the 1990s following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Cuba’s struggle to reorient its weak economy was particularly palpable and gave drastic rise to a “black market,” or informal economy, which ordinary Cubans depended on to meet their basic needs and which the Cuban government arguably cannibalized as it subsequently incorporated the practice into its own brand of top-down mixed economy. Thereafter, Venezuela—another ideologically-aligned trade partner—began subsidizing the Cuban economy in an amount estimated at approximately $13 billion a year, inclusive of 100,000 barrels of oil per day, half of which were re-exported and sold in Spain.[1] With the value of Venezuela’s oil aid decreasing as a result of the decline in oil prices and the erosion of a delicate political and economic environment in Venezuela, Cuba recently started entertaining economic alternatives in order to keep itself afloat in a sea of otherwise unfinanced ideology.
In March of 2014, the Cuban National Assembly adopted a new foreign investment law, Ley No. 118,[2] which has been billed as offering greater incentives for foreign direct investment under terms more favorable than the previous Ley No. 77, enacted in 1995, which it supersedes. “The new law offers much better terms. It cuts the tax on profits in half—from 30 percent to 15 percent for most industries—and eliminates the old 25 percent tax on labor costs. The new law allows 100 percent foreign ownership, which, though previously legal, was never allowed in practice. Investors in joint ventures get an eight-year exemption from all taxes on profits.”[3] These revisions to Cuban law in particular aim to make a more attractive landscape for the foreign investor. Notwithstanding several projects undertaken for largely political reasons, this potential, however, has not thus far materialized. There is a sizable gap in Cuba’s reported growth of just 0.6 percent in the first half of 2014 and its goal to reach annual growth targets of above 5 percent by attracting a minimum of $2.5 billion per year in foreign direct investment. The reality is that foreign investors to date have been cold on Cuba, at least in part, if not in great part, as a result of the reasons set forth herein. Estimations indicate that just $5 billion has been invested in Cuba over the last 20 years.[4]
There are two aspects of Cuban law, however, that remain wholly unchanged despite the revisions made by 2014’s Ley No. 118—first, that major projects will still require approval by the Council of State or Council of Ministers; and second, that investors will still need to hire workers through the state’s labor exchange rather than hiring them directly.[5] The approval of Cuba’s heavy-handed bureaucratic mechanism has proven incredibly cumbersome, as the delays associated with obtaining requisite authorizations linger well beyond the most generous of plausible projections. Additionally, investment proposals under negotiation “still must be approved by the highest level of the Cuban government [and] include projects in light manufacturing, packaging, alternative energy, pharmaceuticals and warehouse shipping logistics.”[6] The disadvantages presented by the cumbersome reality of dealing with a bureaucratic state that has not relinquished control of certain elements otherwise basic to doing business in a free-market economy unquestionably hinders the pace, progress, and control of the foreign business investor’s undertaking and, in many instances, frustrates the purpose of the enterprise as a whole.
The prospect of entertaining any investment that necessitates the use of Cuban labor also poses numerous disadvantages for the foreign investor. Presently, no foreign investor can hire labor in Cuba directly (with very limited exceptions). Therefore, the foreign investor must procure the labor force needed for its joint ventures from a government employment agency, “which charges a fee for such services and pays the employee’s salary in Cuban pesos (CUP) while charging the investors in convertible currency (CUC). This salary is negotiated with the foreign investor on the basis of the minimum pay equivalent to the national average salary, which [as of 2014] amount[ed] to 456.00 CUP (1 CUC= 25 CUP; 1 CUC = $1).”[7] The Cuban state has effectively positioned itself as the island nation’s largest employment placement agency, profiting directly from every employment agreement entered into while paying only a fraction of the salary negotiated with the foreign investor in convertible currency to the worker in Cuban pesos. In seeking to bolster its economy through foreign investment, Cuba seems to have found one of its most profitable trades at present to be the human capital of its people.
Furthermore, Cuba’s laws present significant legal risks to be weighed by corporate foreign investors. The prohibition of foreign investors from hiring or firing employees directly[8], for example, obligates companies to submit labor disputes to a state agency for resolution. Additionally, under Article 4.1 of Chapter III of the new Ley No. 118, foreign investment can also be expropriated for reasons of public utility or social interest. In several cases, conflict resolution is even governed by local courts rather than an international court of arbitration or any other resolution term bargained for at arms-length. Given the axiomatic totalitarian nature of the Cuban system, and the lack of a transparent legal system in which the rights of investors may find protection, the legal exposure associated with foreign investment requires profound consideration. In fact, just last year, the executive of the Canadian-based Tokmakjian Group, one of the more successful foreign companies in Cuba selling transportation equipment, was sentenced by a Cuban court to 15 years in prison for bribery and other economic charges (which the Tokmakjian Group has vehemently denied) after the Cuban government seized $100 million worth of the company’s assets.[9] Though only charged last year, Tokmakjian had been detained for more than three years in prison, under house arrest, or in a military hospital.[10] While it is unclear what prompted the Cuban government to release the seventy-four year old executive only recently in February 2015, allowing him to finally return to Canada, it is certainly a cautionary tale of the potential cost of availing oneself or one’s business to Cuba’s legal jurisdiction.
The irony of depending on the capital of direct foreign investment at the expense of its labor force by a regime whose centralized economy adheres to a self-proclaimed Marxist Leninist doctrine is certainly not lost. That incongruity is second only to the use of the Port of Mariel[11] as the location of Cuba’s new “Special Development Zone”—a project undertaken by the Cuban government in an effort to appeal to and draw in interest from potential foreign investors. By its adoption of Ley No. 118, the Cuban government now seeks to incentivize certain aspects of investment in an effort to overcome the disadvantages still inherent in its economic climate—an economy whose ceiling is imposed upon citizen and foreign investor alike by the lack of free-market reforms that would themselves incentivize investment. Instead, Cuba’s present foreign investment laws present its populace with a policy designed primarily for the maintenance of the regime at both the expense of its workforce and the unwary foreign investor.
References
[1] Carlos Alberto Montaner, “Cuba: The Selling of a Nation,” Miami Herald, February 3, 2014, available at, http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/carlos-alberto-montaner/article1959938.html.
[2] Full text of Ley No. 118 available at: http://www.granma.cu/file/pdf/2014/04/16/G_2014041609.pdf
[3] William M. Leogrande, “Cuba’s New Foreign Investment Law is a Bet on the Future,” World Politics Review, April 2, 2014, available at, http://www.american.edu/clals/upload/WPR-Cuba-s-New-Foreign-Investment-Law-Is-a-Bet-on-the-Future.pdf.
[4] Marc Frank, “Cuba Struggles to Attract Investors Despite Reforms,” Reuters, August 21, 2014, available at, http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/21/cuba-investment-idUSL2N0QP1K320140821.
[5] Supra note 4.
[6] Supra note 5.
[7] Raul Valdes-Fauli, “What the New Cuban Foreign Investment Law Means,” Business Insights: Cuba, August 2014, available at, http://www.foxrothschild.com/newspubs/newspubsArticle.aspx?id=15032395045.
[8] See supra note 8, “The foreign investor may discharge the employees hired through the employment agency, but it is required to pay the agency the compensation amount established by the Ministry of Labor and Social Security.”
[9] Claire Brownell, “Cuba Releases Canadian Managers of Tokakjian Group Held on Corruption Charges,” Financial Post, March 5, 2015, available at, http://business.financialpost.com/2015/03/05/cuba-releases-canadian-managers-of-tokmakjian-group-held-on-corruption-charges/
[10] Id.
[11] The Port of Mariel bore witness to a mass exodus of approximately 125,000 Cuban citizens seeking asylum in 1980 in response to the poor political and economic climate of the Cuban nation. To ease the crisis confronting the Cuban state by the thousands of Cubans cramming into the Peruvian embassy in Havana within only a matter of days to seek asylum, the Cuban government permitted the would-be emigrants who could coordinate a boatlift to leave for the United States from the Port of Mariel.
All That Glitters is Not Gold
/in Blog /by roar_adminOppression is defined as: (1) An act of cruelty, severity, unlawful exaction, or excessive use of authority; (2) An act of subjecting to cruel and unjust hardship; (3) An act of domination. Black’s Law Dictionary, 10th Ed. (2015). Julie Kaye—a journalist with the Daily Business Review in Miami who joined over thirty lawyer members of the Florida Bar International Law Section on their trip to Cuba—has a much more detailed definition as her article demonstrates.
If after reading her article shock is what you are feeling, then it is because you have probably been dismissing our messages as outdated. The Cuban government is still one of the world’s most oppressive regimes. It continues to this day to deny the most basic human rights to its citizens. If the regime was successful in just 72 hours to make Americans (lawyers at that) feel compelled to ask a journalist to change her story out of fear of retaliation, imagine what it is like to be a dissident on the island. Imagine the terror they must endure every time they decide to speak on issues not in conformity with the regime’s agenda. Then, think about what it must be like to be an average Cuban citizen. The fact is, there are two Cubas in this world. The first is the Cuba that the regime wants us to see. It is a place with gorgeous beaches, a lush tropical landscape, and great food and music that can make just about anyone dance. I suppose that is what Julie’s tour guide attempted to remind her was the “spirit of the tour.” The second is the real Cuba—a place where its citizens live in fear of their own neighbors and the government has absolute control over most things.
In his letter warning those lawyers that participated in the trip to not let the glitter of an island paradise fool them, CABA’s President, Manny Crespo, spelled out a number of atrocities that are being carried out today by the Cuban regime on its own people.[1]
CABA’s mission is merely to educate, and remind those embarking on the journey to not be blinded by the falsities portrayed by a regime that survives only on oppression, fear and intimidation. If we can guide our resources to helping end those vehicles of succession rather than celebrating them, then rest assured that our brethren on the island will one day enjoy the everyday rights that many of us may take for granted, nothing more, nothing less.[2]
[1] See CABA’s open letter to Florida Bar International Section at www.cabaonline
[2] The Florida Bar’s International Section’s Chair was given the opportunity to respond to Ms. Kaye’s article. At the time of press, no response to the request has been received.
Resources
[1] See CABA’s open letter to Florida Bar International Section at www.cabaonline
[1] The Florida Bar’s International Section’s Chair was given the opportunity to respond to Ms. Kaye’s article. At the time of press, no response to the request has been received.
Cori Lopez Castro
/in Uncategorized /by roar_adminCABA Installation Gala 2006
Manny Garcia-Linares
/in Uncategorized /by roar_adminMentoring Event
Membership Appreciation Event
In the News
Misc.
Sandra Ferrera
/in Uncategorized /by roar_adminCC
/in Uncategorized /by roar_adminCABA Celebrates Supreme Court Decision In Obergefell V. Hodges
/in Announcements /by roar_adminMIAMI – June 26, 2015 – The United States Supreme Court, in a vote of 5-4, rules that the Constitution’s guarantees of due process and equal protection under the law mean that states cannot ban same-sex marriages thereby paving the way for legalization of gay marriage in all of our 50 states.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion and noted that gay Americans wishing to marry need not be “condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.”
Manny Crespo, Jr., President of the Cuban American Bar Association, who is openly gay, said:
“CABA is thrilled that the Supreme Court has recognized that same sex American couples are entitled to equal protection and due process under the 14th amendment when intending to marry. CABA stands by every individual seeking equality under the law, and this decision moves this great country another step forward into a future where every American will be entitled to live their life with unqualified and unrestricted dignity in the eyes of the law.”
About the Cuban American Bar Association
The Cuban American Bar Association is a voluntary bar association established in Miami in 1974 to promote equality of its members; serve the public interest by increasing awareness to the study of jurisprudence; foster respect for the law; preserve high standards of integrity, honor, and professional courtesy among its peers; provide equal access to and adequate representation of minorities before the courts; facilitate the administration of justice; build close relationships among its members; support Miami-Dade’s indigent community and increasing diversity in the judiciary and legal community. More information is available at www.cabaonline.com
Media Contact:
Diana Powell, Executive Director
[email protected]
(786) 210-5984
###
pour autant que leur quantité corresponde aux besoins approximatifs d’une personne pour la durée prévue du séjour. En théorie, seuls le web les médicaments qui ne constituent pas une indication vitale et qui sont pourtant interdits en Allemagne peuvent faire l’objet d’une réclamation.
What next for U.S.- Cuban Relations?
/in Blog /by roar_adminThe purpose of the CABA on Cuba Committee is to recommend to the CABA Board what CABA’s position and role, if any, would be when a political transition occurs in Cuba. It is CABA’s belief that CABA not only has a right, but the obligation, as a not-for-profit organization whose members are primarily Cuban American lawyers, to promote a peaceful transition to democracy in Cuba. The Committee’s Position Statement is reproduced below.
CABA ON CUBA POSITION STATEMENT
The Cuban American Bar Association (“CABA”) was established in Miami in 1974 by a small group of Cuban-born attorneys adapting in a different culture. They depended on each other as resources to function in a foreign legal community. Today, as an organization with over 1300 members, CABA functions similar to other voluntary bar associations, but with some significant differences. CABA engages in a broad range of pro bono activities that include a pro-bono clinic, scholarship programs for law students at various law schools, the defense of human rights in Cuba, and the active promotion of sound judicial practices and judicial sensitivity training. In keeping with its proud tradition of defending and promoting due process and human rights in the United States and Cuba, CABA has adopted this position statement on a transition to democracy in Cuba.
We, CABA members, believe that we have a right and an obligation as Cuban Americans to participate and promote a peaceful transition to democracy in Cuba. To achieve this goal, we acknowledge and support the following fundamental principles:
For more information on this committee or to join this committee, please contact the Committee Chairs or Co-Chairs directly.
Chair: Isabel Diaz [email protected]
FUNDAMENTAL TRANSITIONAL LAW OF THE REPUBLIC OF CUBA
An Overview of the Work of the CABA on Cuba Committee in Connection With the Preparation of the Draft Fundamental Transitional Law of the Republic of Cuba By Eduardo Palmer
The Cuban American Bar Association (“CABA”) created the CABA on Cuba Committee several years ago based on the conviction that as Cuban-American lawyers we have a unique responsibility to use our knowledge and experience to play a significant role in the effort to reestablish the rule of law in Cuba. To date, this Committee has focused primarily on participating in the preparation of the Draft Fundamental Transitional Law of the Republic of Cuba (“Draft Transitional Law” or “Law”). The Law sets out a proposed legal framework to reestablish the rule of law and democracy in Cuba. The purpose of the Law is to provide a suggested path towards establishing a democratic government the day that the current regime in Cuba ceases to exist and a new government, which seeks to reestablish the rule of law and democracy in Cuba, is formed. The impetus for this project was not based on any desire to dictate to the Cuban people how they should govern themselves or to impose a system of government on the Cuban people against their will, but rather to create a road map which can be used by the individuals who comprise such a new government as a starting point when forming a transition government.
One of the most remarkable aspects of this project is the creation and makeup of the group that has come together to support this endeavor, the Foro Juridico Cubano. The creation of this group marks the first time in over 50 years of opposition to the current regime that all known groups of Cuban lawyers in exile from around the world, including lawyers in the United States and Europe, have come together with the common purpose of working to help reestablish the rule of law and democracy in Cuba. The Foro Juridico Cubano was created as part of the work of the CABA on Cuba Committee and today consists of the following organizations: CABA; Colegio de Abogados de La Habana en el Exilio; Colegio Nacional de Abogados de Cuba en el Exilio; Colegio de Notarios Públicos Cubanos; and la Asociación Cubano-Española de Derecho. The group has shared its work with the leading dissident group of lawyers in Cuba, la Corriente Agramontista, because it recognizes the importance of reaching out to and requesting input from such organizations as part of this effort.
In a community often characterized as being divided by ideological and personal differences, the Foro Juridico Cubano stands out as an organization that spans various generations of Cuban lawyers, often with divergent ideologies, legal training, and life experiences, who have, through compromise and mutual respect, managed to work cooperatively toward a common goal. For example, the group includes attorneys who were educated and practiced law in Cuba prior to the current regime, attorneys who were educated and practiced law in Cuba under the current regime, and attorneys who received their legal education in the United States or Spain and have never practiced law in Cuba. The philosophy of the group is to serve as objective professionals whose sole focus is to work to reestablish the rule of law and democracy in Cuba, rather than to advance any particular ideology or partisan political agenda.
This project is also significant in that as far as we are aware, it is the first time that a group of Cuban lawyers has undertaken the task of drafting a detailed transitional law for Cuba in an effort to avoid the occurrence of an institutional vacuum should the desired transition come about as a result of an immediate collapse of the current regime. While some groups in the past have drafted constitutions and made other proposals intended to assist Cuba in its transition to democracy, no group of Cuban lawyers has ever endeavored to draft a detailed transitional law for Cuba. Although our group considered the idea of drafting a constitution, that notion was rejected because we believe that a constitution should ideally be the product of a constitutional convention where freely and democratically elected representatives of the population meet and debate the merits of various constitutional proposals. Conversely, a transitional law is by definition a temporary document that is typically drafted quickly when a government collapses in order to fill an institutional vacuum and pave the way towards self government, including the drafting and approval of a constitution.
The preparation of the Draft Transitional Law represents several years’ worth of work. The CABA on Cuba Committee was established in 2006 and the Foro Juridico Cubano was created in 2007. The Foro Juridico Cubano began its work by reviewing many of the transitional laws that have been used throughout the world in the last half century. The purpose of this review was to get a sense of the vast array of issues that are typically addressed in such laws, along with the various mechanisms that are used to deal with those issues. The group also studied Cuba’s legal culture and history, including constitutions and other laws enacted prior to and after the existence of the current regime, in order to ensure that the Draft Transitional Law comported with Cuba’s legal traditions and culture to the furthest extent possible. In addition, the group sought advice and input from public international law scholars and individuals who were involved in transitional governments in Eastern Europe and Latin America. The goal of all of these efforts was to draft a document that followed international public law norms for transitional laws and was tailored to address Cuba’s own needs and legal culture.
The Draft Transitional Law provides for a two-year period of transition during which a transitional government will work to create the necessary infrastructure to conduct free and open elections in Cuba in order to establish a democratically elected government. The Draft Transitional Law is divided into the following six main sections: Title I – Transition; Title II – Public Authorities During the Transition; Title III – Judicial Power; Title IV – Defense of the National Territory; Title V – Political Reform; and the last section, which deals with various miscellaneous issues, Transitory Dispositions. One of the main objectives of the Draft Transitional Law is to maintain order and avoid the chaos which can occur whenever there is a leadership vacuum. As a result, the Law sets out a series of general principles necessary to promote the rule of law and provides that any existing laws that conflict with such principles are abolished, but preserves all other existing laws and institutions unless the same are abolished by the transitional government. For instance, the Law incorporates by reference the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1948, and declares any existing laws contrary to the same void. The Law also seeks to strike a proper balance between the need to promote reconciliation and cohesion and the need to address injustices of the past, such as human rights violations. Another important objective of the Draft Transitional Law is to provide the necessary legal foundation to facilitate the rebuilding of Cuba’s infrastructure and promote foreign investment in order to advance the standard of living in Cuba and provide economic prosperity for the Cuban people.
The Draft Transitional Law remains a work in progress. The group intends to continue to improve and refine the current draft by working with Cuban legal scholars and intellectuals, leading organizations and individuals that have experience and expertise in this area, including bar associations from the Americas and Europe, and transitional law experts within the United Nations and others. Most importantly, the group recognizes that this work must ultimately reflect the will of the people currently living in Cuba in order for it to constitute a viable roadmap for a return to the rule of law in Cuba, and thus intends to continue its efforts to work with dissident groups within Cuba on this project. And, of course, the Law will have to be revised and adapted to deal with the particular circumstances present in Cuba when the current regime ceases to exist and the period of transition commences.
The work ahead also involves the need to disseminate the Law among the Cuban people currently living in Cuba and those in exile, as well as among those international organizations and nations that may possibly play a role in helping Cuba transition to democracy. In particular, it is important that officials within the current regime in Cuba know that this Law exits because such individuals may be in a position to actually help bring about such change. Our hope is that these individuals, to the extent that they desire a transition to democracy, will recognize that the Law is not focused on retribution and instead tries to promote reconciliation among the Cuban people. The Law, which was drafted in Spanish for obvious reasons, is available to the public on CABA’s website, along with an English translation of the same. The work on the development of the Draft Transitional Law demonstrates that even after 50 years of the absence of a government that represents the will of the Cuban people, we have not lost hope or the willingness to work and struggle to reestablish the rule of law and democracy in Cuba.
CABA Applauds The Plaintiffs In Obergefell V. Hodges
/in Announcements /by roar_adminMIAMI – May 5, 2015 – The United States Supreme Court heard two and half hours of oral arguments on Tuesday, April 28, 2015, on the issue of marriage equality. Thirty-seven states across the nation have recognized same-sex marriage, Florida being the most recent. Twenty-six of them by court decision; eight by legislative action and three by popular vote.
Manny Crespo, Jr., President of the Cuban American Bar Association, who is openly gay, said:
“This is the civil rights movement of our generation. Marriage bans produce a ‘stain of unworthiness’ and a feeling of second class citizenship amongst gay and lesbian couples who otherwise participate in all aspects modern American society. CABA has been at the forefront of equality issues, amending its mission statement several years ago to make it abundantly clear that it stands by all those seeking equality under the law, and we applaud those couples engaged in the fight for it.”
About the Cuban American Bar Association
The Cuban American Bar Association is a voluntary bar association established in Miami in 1974 to promote equality of its members; serve the public interest by increasing awareness to the study of jurisprudence; foster respect for the law; preserve high standards of integrity, honor, and professional courtesy among its peers; provide equal access to and adequate representation of minorities before the courts; facilitate the administration of justice; build close relationships among its members; support Miami-Dade’s indigent community and increasing diversity in the judiciary and legal community. More information is available at www.cabaonline.com
Media Contact:
Diana Powell, Executive Director
[email protected]
(786) 210-5984
###
Costillitas Trader Vic’s
/in Blog /by roar_adminLa Cocina de Christina
March 29, 2015
I always have had a silent respect for all things ribs. Respect for the ribs themselves – never really knowing the difference between pork and beef; not understanding if a dry rub or wet marinade was the best way to go; not doing any research, really, on costillas. All I knew is it would be an impressive dish to make, and when I picked the recipe for Costillitas Trader Vic’s, I was not sure where we were headed.
I can tell you one thing, now that I have made this dish —ribs are easy to make. You must have patience and a good attention to detail, but if you can manage that, you will impress your dinner guests.
Why Trader Vic’s? My research online shows Trader Vic’s was a chain of Polynesian-themed restaurants and bars, one of which opened in Cuba in the Havana Hilton in 1958. It is still open today as Polinesio in the same hotel, now named Habana Libre Hotel. Prior to opening the location in Cuba, Vic, “The Trader” Bergeron, traveled to Cuba to refine his skills as a bartender and explore the subtleties of rums from around the world. You can learn more at TraderVics.com.
Costillitas Trader Vic’s
3 lbs pork loin back ribs (ternilla de lomo de cerdo)
For the sauce:
½ cup soy sauce
½ cup ketchup
3 Tablespoons of light brown sugar
1 Tablespoon of freshly grated ginger
For the marinade:
½ cup of light brown sugar
2 Tablespoons of salt
2 Tablespoons of Liquid Smoke
This recipe is for 4 guests. Double and triple the recipe, depending on the number of guests you will host. I hope you have enjoyed the simplicity of this recipe. Email me at [email protected] or share your costillitas stories with us on Facebook at http://facebook.com/lacocinadechristina.
Personalul farmaciei lucrează îndeaproape cu medicii generaliști. Acest lucru se face prin intermediul FTO-urilor (Farmaco-Therapeutisch Overleg) – grupuri consultative de farmacoterapie. Aceste grupuri de medici discută metodele de farmacoterapie și definesc politica la acel loc de interacțiune între medici și farmaciști. Cele mai discutate subiecte în cadrul grupurilor FTO sunt polipragmatica, complianța pacienților și recomenzile de medicamente.