The Foreign Service Journal, April 2010

14 F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L / A P R I L 2 0 1 0 I n a recent cable, the Department of State tightened up its regula- tions on the use of DNA (deoxyri- bonucleic acid) testing in immigrant visa processing, specifically by address- ing security weaknesses in the chain of custody of samples. These improve- ments are necessary, though they will exact a cost in scarce staff and time. However, merely changing the process obscures the more basic prob- lem, which is that DNA tests are seen as a last resort rather than the founda- tion of a 21st-century system. This at- titude needs to change. To better fight fraud and adjudicate cases, we need to re-examine the reason, and re-imagine the way, we use DNA testing to adju- dicate immigrant visas. How does DNA evidence speed processing, and why is it used? Getting the Benefit of the Doubt When American citizens petition for spouses and relatives, Department of Homeland Security adjudicators and State Department consular offi- cers need to be able to determine the validity of the claimed relationships. For the purpose of validating a mar- riage, DNA evidence is useless, of course; officers must rely chiefly on in- terviews and documents. For parental or sibling relationships, however, it is increasingly conclusive. In many developed countries, ap- plicants can adduce reliable, generally truthful, contemporaneous civil docu- ments (for instance marriage, adop- tion, birth or death certificates) in support of their cases. But in poor or corrupt societies, a high percentage of applicants lack any credible documentary evidence to back up their claimed relationship to the petitioner. Sometimes this is due to poor infrastructure or record-keep- ing, in which case it is no fault of the applicant. But often it is due to efforts to hide the truth to obtain an un- earned benefit. In high-fraud countries, it is com- mon for IV applicants to claim to have lost all their documents and photos in a theft, fire or flood. When docu- ments are available, they are often is- sued many years after the event requiring proof, thus casting serious doubt on their legitimacy. Furthermore, evidentiary docu- ments can easily be forged — or gen- uinely issued, but on the basis of false information — or purchased cheaply. To get such “genuine fakes,” applicants submit affidavits to the local authorities, from friends or relatives, swearing to the claimed fact or relationship. Appli- cants routinely submit equally unveri- fiable affidavits of their own to consular officers. Such circumstances create a mas- sive workload for consular fraud pre- vention units, which cannot possibly investigate every case in the field. Though split interviews and other tech- niques can be effective, they are very time-consuming and don’t always pro- duce actionable results. Triage therefore has to be done. While egregious cases might be stop- ped, most dubious visas are eventually issued because of a lack of hard evi- dence that the relationship is invalid or fraudulent. Even though the interview and the officer’s experience indicate fraud, pressure to issue (or make an un- challengeable refusal) frompetitioners, applicants and congressional offices is relentless. By attempting due diligence in all cases, FPU resources are diverted to cases where they are not needed — e.g., blood relationships where DNA evidence could be conclusive — and away from those where they could make a difference, such as spousal or fi- ancé relationships. DNA: The Future of Immigrant Visa Processing B Y S IMON H ANKINSON S PEAKING O UT Attempting due diligence in all cases diverts resources from cases where they could make a difference to ones where they are not needed.