By JUAN O. TAMAYO
Herald Staff Writer
Lawyers for the U.S. government and Cuba's telephone company joined forces
in a
Miami courtroom Tuesday to block an attempt to award Cuban money to relatives
of
three Florida-based civilian pilots shot down by the Cuban air force.
Attorneys for the relatives complained that the U.S. government was playing
the
role of Lucy in the Peanuts comic strip -- snatching the football away
just as Charlie
Brown was about to kick it.
``They don't want us to kick that ball, Aaron Podhurst told U.S. District
Judge James
Lawrence King, who awarded the relatives $187.6 million in damages after
Cuban
MiGs shot down two Brothers to the Rescue planes in 1996.
The relatives want to seize the money from U.S. phone company payments
due to
Havana or Cuban funds in U.S. accounts long frozen under the U.S. embargo
against Cuba. King gave all parties 10 days to file more arguments before
he makes
the final decision.
But the hearing prompted some unusual legal maneuvers in a dispute that
features
two nations long at odds, Cuba's ETECSA telephone company, eight private
U.S.
telephone companies and the survivors of the Brothers to the Rescue victims.
Justice Department attorney David Anderson argued that a 1998 law that
would
have allowed the relatives to seize the frozen funds or telephone payments
had been
suspended by President Clinton to protect ``national security interests.
Havana has repeatedly threatened to cut off all U.S.-Cuba telephone links
if the
relatives get the telephone money -- links that Anderson said are good
for the U.S.
policy of promoting people-to-people contacts with Cuba.
Representing ETECSA, New York lawyer Eric Lieberman argued that since King's
$187 million judgment was against the Cuban government and air force, the
relatives
should not be allowed to seize money due his client, ``a private company
that has
nothing to do with the Cuban government.
Lawyers for ATT and MCI, two of the eight U.S. phone companies that pay
ETECSA for Cuba's side of U.S.-Cuba telephone links, made the same argument
but said the Cuban government owned 59 percent of ETECSA.
One MCI attorney also argued that since his firm made its payments to Havana
through a bank in Canada, that meant MCI did not have any ``debt to ETECSA
that
could be awarded to the relatives of the Brothers to the Rescue pilots.
Lawyers for the relatives called that ``a money-laundering arrangement
and noted
that for years all U.S. licenses to the U.S. phone companies doing business
with
Cuba have referred to payments ``to the Cuban government.
``Now they come and they say no, not the government, but a separate entity
called
ETECSA, Podhurst said.
Anderson came under particularly sharp questioning by King as he argued
that
Cuba's frozen funds could not be seized by the relatives because of international
treaties and prior claims by U.S. citizens whose Cuban properties were
seized by the
Castro government in the early 1960s.
``I just wonder how long we're going to have to wait. Another 40 years?
King said,
going on to ask: ``And, would the United States have protected the assets
of Adolf
Hitler from victims of the Holocaust?
Anderson went on to argue that allowing U.S. citizens to seize such foreign
funds
might also complicate a U.S. president's handling of foreign affairs.
The complications would set in ``when the president decides to normalize
relations
with countries such as Cuba . . . that's what we're looking at here, Anderson
said.
King retorted that ``when the time comes . . . I suppose we'd have to have
some
promise from that government to stop murdering our citizens.
Copyright © 1999 The Miami Herald