Jose Luis Bernal

Sitting in his fifth-floor office just north of MacArthur Park, Jose Luis Bernal admits his job as consul general of Mexico isn’t a typical diplomatic post. With an estimated 3 million Mexicans calling Los Angeles home, his office is considered among the most powerful consulates in the world.

Besides overseeing such consular business as issuing passports and hosting visiting Mexican dignitaries, Bernal sometimes finds himself the flash point for U.S.-Mexico relations. When Mexican police broke up a student strike at the country’s largest university, he took some of the heat. There is also the controversial question of allowing Mexican nationals living abroad to vote in Mexico’s elections.

Unlike his predecessors, however, Bernal is here at a time when relations between California and Mexico are on the mend after nearly a decade of strained ties. Those tensions reached a peak when state voters approved Proposition 187, the anti-immigrant initiative, in 1994. Still, there are many sources of tension between Sacramento and California. For example, Bernal must deal with questions of police abuse against Mexican nationals, and there is the constant friction produced by immigration laws.

Indeed, Bernal became embroiled in a controversy over immigrants’ rights to contact their consular officers. The California Legislature recently amended state law to ensure that immigrants were apprised of their rights. The controversy stemmed from several cases, including one in Texas, in which foreign nationals were arrested and convicted in U.S. courts but were never allowed to contact their consulates.

A native of Mexicali, Bernal has an undergraduate degree in international relations and a masters in economics. In 1979, he joined the Mexican Foreign Affairs Ministry. In 1985, he was transferred to Washington, where he became a liaison between the U.S. Congress and Mexico’s embassy. Bernal was also instrumental in negotiating Mexico’s interest in the North American Free Trade Agreement.

In 1993, he returned to Mexico and spent two years working in the foreign ministry, eventually heading up the country’s foreign service. Three years later, he was named Mexico’s permanent representative to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris. He remained there until October, when he moved with his wife, daughter and son to Los Angeles to head up Mexico’s largest and busiest consular office.

During a recent conversation, Bernal addressed some of the issues facing him.

Question: How would you characterize the relationship between California and Mexico?

Answer: I think the relationship is becoming more positive. The change in the government of California has already had an effect. . . . New avenues of dialogue between Mexico and California have been opened. . . . President Ernesto Zedillo’s trip to California [last year] marked a historical change in how Mexico views this part of the U.S. . . . Now we feel that we need to promote additional trade between California and Mexico. There is always the example of Texas. Texas has a very close economic relationship with Mexico. We hope that with the tradition of Mexican relations, with the presence of Mexican companies here and because of the interest in the Pacific region, we believe we can--and should--develop better and closer economic relationships.

Q: What part of the Texas model would you like to see replicated in California?

A: The amount of trade. We see a lot of opportunities for both Mexican and California companies to exchange goods and services. With Texas, we are talking about $20 billion worth; with California, it is only about $9 billion. . . .

Sandra Hernandez, a former staff writer for LA Weekly, has written extensively about immigration and Latino issues.

Q: One of the most important issues your office deals with are questions of immigration and the protection of the rights of Mexican immigrants in Los Angeles. One complaint constantly raised by activists and immigration attorneys is that people detained by local law enforcement or the Immigration and Naturalization Service are rarely told they have the right to contact their consular officer. What is your office doing to address the problem?

A: There was a legal controversy in the U.S. about the obligation, according to international treaty, to notify individuals. Because Mexico is part of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, we say that every Mexican national should be notified. The controversy was over whether a [law-enforcement] authority was obliged to notify a [detained] person or the consulate. Well, they say they are notifying persons, but in many cases, the person doesn’t speak English. The reality was, [immigrants] weren’t really being told. In cases involving a [possible] death penalty, we had been arguing that [the authorities] never notified the consulate, and we were successful in a few cases.

Last year, the California Legislature amended the [state] law, so now there is an obligation [on the part of] every [state] authority to tell persons who appear to be foreign-born that they have the right to contact their consular officer. It didn’t take effect until January. We feel we now have an additional tool in California.

Q: But what is your office doing in Los Angeles to ensure that officials comply with that law and that immigrants are notified in a straightforward manner?

A: We have been visiting various detention centers and prisons and working with the [Los Angeles] sheriff’s office to ensure that either the [detained] individual is notified or the consulate is notified. We have also put signs up. These signs are [printed on paper] the color of the Mexican flag, and there is a flyer that says a person can contact their consulate at such and such number.

Q: But what about those who might feel intimidated or have other difficulties in reading the sign?

A: Because of the [change] in the law, we are going to publicize the fact that this law requires authorities to contact us. We are in the process of making a small card, the size of a credit card. On it, we will print the rights of a Mexican citizen if he or she is detained by the INS or by another authority, including Miranda rights and . . . the right to contact their consulate. We will distribute them everywhere. The card includes what the police must tell you and how to respond.

In addition, we have been working with the public defender’s office. We are publicizing the rights of Mexican nationals so [public defenders] know that if their clients are Mexican nationals, they need to contact us. We also sponsored a series of seminars on Mexican culture with the public defender’s office. . . . I also signed an agreement with the juvenile court to work together to deal with cases of abused children of Mexican families. There are differences we need to clarify in Mexican culture.

Q: One of the most controversial and far-reaching changes in the 1996 immigration-reform law was expanding the criminal definition of aggravated assaults to include such things as drunk driving. That new law is being applied retroactively and has resulted in the deportation of hundreds of immigrants. As a result, families are being torn apart, and countries like Mexico are particularly affected. How is your office dealing with this situation?

A: Most of the risks [attached to] the law affected immigrants in California, especially given its three-strikes law. What we can do is work with communities to help [immigrants]. We need to warn [immigrants] that they need to be responsible and to educate them and advise them that they need to exercise their rights with more responsibility. How do we do that? We are working on radio campaigns, community meetings and bringing experts to meet with parents and children. . . . In the consulate, we are working with five legal firms to help out. . . . About 40 different attorneys provide their services free of charge. . . . They have expertise in different areas, from immigration to police abuse, and family court law. . . . We need five firms because each day a different firm [attorney] is present to deal with a particular type of case. We are providing legal services directly at the consulate. [The lawyers] are here for about three hours. We plan to expand the program when I have more resources.

Q: The question of giving Mexican nationals living abroad the right to vote in Mexican elections is a hotly debated issue. Where do you stand on this question?

A: Currently, no Mexican living abroad is allowed to vote. That applies even to diplomats or consulate officers living outside the country. [Voting rights legislation] was sent to the Senate, and from there it was sent to the Federal Electoral Institute. But there is no final decision.

Q: Do you personally support allowing Mexican nationals living abroad to vote in your country’s elections?

A: It isn’t a matter of my personal opinion. We must support whatever the Mexican government decides.

Q: Given the important economic role that Mexicans living abroad play, including remittances they send home, how can your country not grant the vote?

A: I prefer not to engage in this debate. . . . The number of people really interested in voting isn’t that high. The pressure was there maybe a year ago, but it isn’t great now [after] it was decided to delay [consideration].

Q: The United States has not opened the border to Mexican trucks carrying international cargo, as NAFTA mandates. The Mexican trucking industry wants to retaliate. What’s happening to ease this situation?

A: We feel that in this case the U.S. isn’t complying with the commitment it made [in NAFTA]. We have asked for bilateral consultation. Since the U.S. isn’t allowing the entry of Mexican trucks, we are asking for the establishment of a panel to review this according to NAFTA and the World Trade Organization. This panel would include Canadian authorities. . . . This issue has become politicized in the U.S. mainly by the unions, which are trying to prevent Mexican drivers from coming into the U.S. But we are confident, and the message should be that we [Mexico] have the binational mechanisms to deal with this problem. We are confident this will work out either through NAFTA or through the World Trade Organization.

In other times, we would have had to deal with this situation through political mechanisms, and wait for years. But now we feel this will resolve itself quickly.

Q: Recent reports indicate that CRASH anti-gang units at Rampart routinely targeted immigrants and illegally turned them over to INS agents for deportation. Were any Mexican nationals involved? What would be your response?

A: We have been following this case very closely and have requested information from both the INS and [Police] Chief [Bernard C. Parks] so we can determine if Mexicans were involved or targeted. We are working with the sheriff’s office to get information. And we have developed a very good relationship with the INS to obtain information about any actions it may be taking on this investigation. [The Rampart scandal] is very worrisome to us. However, we haven’t received a response yet, and we must wait until we know what the investigation turns up before we can act.