officer not educated in the law, to make this type of determination? It is even more difficult for a victim to determine where offenses should be reported. Do they call the sheriff, the FBI, or the tribal police? How would this committee like to be constantly getting the runaround when you do report a crime? This is the result as no one can be sure in whose jurisdiction the problem lies. Certainly not the victim. The whole system looks like it was put together by a drunk in a dark basement. The entire system was established unilaterally by Congress and the Washington legislature over the protest of the Yakima Nation.

The Washington assumption statutes, and the resulting system is so indefinite that it fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence information where he can get protection of his person and property and fails to give a person of ordinary intelligence notice of what conduct is forbidden by statute. Also, title of land where an offender is standing, determines whether or not he is entitled to certain civil rights.

For example, if he is on trust property and not within the eight categories, he is entitled to a grand jury, Federal Bail Act and many federal protections. If he is not, then he is not entitled to these protections in State court. We believe this unworkable system fostered by the enactment of Public Law 83-280 does not meet adequate standards of a satisfactory law and order system even if the state authorities were willing or able to provide protection for our people or other residents of the Yakima Reservation.

This breakdown of law and order may be statistically demonstrated with an increase of crime and decrease of state arrests since State assumption in 1963 on the Yakima Reservation. Offenses on the Yakima Reservation have increased many times in excess of an increase in neighboring off-reservation areas. State authorities have acknowledged the breakdown of law and order on Indian Reservations under this unilateral state assumption of jurisdiction permitted by Public Law 83-280.

The report of a joint task force of the Governor's Advisory Council on Urban Affairs and the Governor's Indian Advisory Committee of the State of Washington, seriously criticized State law and order on Indian Reservations and recommended that the State legislature enact legislation that would have a similar effect as Subsection (i), Section 161.

"We recommend that: The State Legislature pass a bill outlining the procedure for retrocession. Retrocession would return to the State's Indian Tribes whatever degree of law and order authority over their reservations that the individual tribes agree they can assume. This type of legislation would include provision for the tribes to assume full jurisdiction over law and order, or would provide for the tribe to assume with the State concurrent jurisdiction if the tribe preferred, or would permit the tribe to assume just those areas of jurisdiction which the Tribe whose to pay for and administer." (Page 22 of the report).

By executive request, Governor Evans proposed such legislation, but the Washington State legislature failed to agree.

In the State of Washington's comprehensive plan for law enforcement (1972) the conclusion was that:

"Although the State assumed jurisdiction over major crimes and juvenile delinquency on reservations, counties have not been provided with resources to effectively assume the responsibilities of patrol, apprehension and investigation of offenses committed on reservations."

The Office of Program Research of the House of Representatives, State of Washington, has documented the failure of the State to provide adequate services for juvenile dependents and delinquents and the resultant destruction of Indian cultural integrity in the foster care situation. Thanks to the action of Congress in the passage of Public Law 95-608, Indian Child Welfare Act, at least some relief is possible in this important area. We have petitioned under this Act for return of jurisdiction over our dependent children. However, the problem still remains regarding delinquent children.

The Yakima Nation wants to accept its responsibility to provide law and order on its reservation. Even now the Yakima Nation appropriating its own funds for law and order in an amount that exceeds the per capita cost of any community in the Nation. This is in an attempt to do the best we can under the present unworkable system of justice. However, to be effective we must have authority to deal with crime on our reservation returned to us. We request the return of the same authority that is possessed by other Indian tribes not within Public Law 83-280 or similar statutes. Give us this chance. Allow us to systematically

take ourselves out from under Public Law 83-280. This statute had as its basis the discredited termination policy of the 1950's. The basis having been discredited and the effect having been demonstrated as disastrous, it would seem to us that there can be no reason why the Indian wishes cannot be granted and Subsection (i), Section 161 of S-1722 be speedily enacted. The responsibility clearly rests with Congress.

Mr. Hovis. Mr. Chairman, I would like to take a moment and say that the testimony today shows very clearly, not only from Indian testimony but from that of the Department of Justice, that there is a genuine problem on Indian reservations.

It also shows that there is a genuine problem of the number of cases that the U.S. attorneys have failed to prosecute. It is the Department of Justice's own records that indicate it.

I might say, Mr. Chairman, that I have had the honor of representing the Yakima Indian Nation for 27 years. I am a country lawyer from the city of Yakima, close to the reservation, and I represent people throughout the entire economic structure within the Ỹakima Indian Reservation.

The Yakima Nation is not having any difficulty with its residents on the reservation. It has a sincere respect for the people who reside there. They are making a better contribution toward law and order than any other community, and more financial sacrifice than any other community, in the United States of America. They are spending, if you please, almost $500 of their own money per capita for law and order on their reservation.

They are having some good results. To be practical about the matter, yesterday the attorney general from the State of Washington was talking about concepts and the like. I want to say to you that we are doing a job there, and we need some help. In a 1-year period, of class I crimes we had 225 crimes reported to our tribal police and we had 61 clearings, which is a much better record than any other police department is having.

However, out of the 50 people who were charged with the crimes, 47 were not within our jurisdiction. Consequently, 94 percent of the people we are processing through our police department are not the responsibility of the Yakima Tribe.

The problem that we have is that we need some assistance, and when we come to the Federal Government to ask for assistance they talk to us about it being a State problem. When we go to the State and ask them for some assistance, they talk about it being a Federal Government problem. They would not even pass our bill in the State legislature which called for matching Federal funds.

We have 56 or 60 people in our police department. There are more non-Indians on the reservation than there are Indians, but the State has only six people in their department in the county who are detailed to the reservation.

One of the problems with regard to agreements is that the attorney general of the State has said publicly that he would try to work out an agreement with the Yakima Nation and other tribes regarding juveniles provided we gave something in return. He was, in other words, using our children as hostages in the making of agreements. This is one of the problems we have with the agreements under discussion.

I think your interest, sir, in law and order for everybody on the reservation is joined by the Yakima Nation. What we need to have is some provision-in a magistrates bill or an amendment of the justice bill that all crimes within the reservation are Federal crimes, so that where the State will not act, there can be some prosecution of the offenders.

There must also be for responsible tribes-like the Yakima Tribesome return of their jurisdiction because they are doing the job. The Governor of the State of Washington has been in favor of it. We have had past Governors who were in favor of it who have asked for executive legislation and have been turned down by the legislature. They get into a committee and get pigeonholed.

We have been coming here testifying on S. 2010. We are back here today. We have been terribly interested in this problem, but we are getting no relief, or at least no answer.

I think you saw today the kind of thing from the Department of Justice that we are constantly up against. Their answer to us and their help to us is not very worthwhile.

On the other side of the fence, the BIA testified yesterday that if there were a retrocession back to the tribes, it would cost another $8 million. They spend that much money playing Tom Mix in some areas where crime breaks out into total disruption rather than coming in to try to do the job with responsible people who are trying to carry their own responsibility.

Mr. Chairman, the thing that my people asked me, as their representative, was: What more can we do? What can we do to get some relief for this very important problem we have? We come to the Bureau of Indian Affairs. We come to the Department of Justice. We come to Congress. We go to the State legislature. We go to the Governor. What more can we do to get some relief for what is already admitted by everyone to be a serious problem?

I am sorry, but it is an emotional thing with me, Mr. Chairman. It is also an emotional thing for Indians and non-Indians on the Yakima Reservation because we are getting so little help from the State and Federal Governments. The only help we are getting is from the tribal government.

It is a real question how much longer these people, who are tribal members in a low-income group, can spend $500 or $600 per capita for law and order on their reservation. How long can they continue to do that when they are handling someone else's responsibility? They are getting no response from anyone with regard to their problems. Senator MELCHER. Thank you very much.

Mr. MENINICK. Mr. Chairman, I would just comment briefly on the magistrate's concept. We have been faced with this problem for quite some time. I believe we also had an amendment proposed 2 or 3 years ago which failed.

The problem we had with S. 1152, S. 1164, and S. 1165 was that we do the enforcement from the tribe. We spend approximately $2 million directly on enforcement and $2 million on enforcement-related situations. What happens is that any time we arrest a violator, we have to go through the assistant U.S. attorney and then through the magistrate's court system. The revenue derived from that goes directly to the Government.

Our problem with the amendment of the bill is that when we make the arrest, we have to go through the entire process but we often get no prosecution of the case. Also the assimilative crimes situation is very vague and we cannot totally use the magistrate's system until all these questions are corrected.

We hope your committee will take a look at those situations. It would be worthwhile to look into some of the testimony presented by other tribes.

I stand ready to answer any questions you may have. If you care to ask any in the future you may give us a call. We have our number on our testimony. If there is any further information you need we will make ourselves available to you.

Senator MELCHER. Thank you very much.

Does that conclude your testimony? Thank you all very much.

The committee will have to stand adjourned now. We have no time between now and 12 to hear from another witness.

We have yet to hear from Mr. Manuelito, Phillip Martin, and Barry Ernstoff. I have two committees in which bills are to be voted upon, so I will have to leave.

The committee will stand adjourned subject to the call of the Chair. The committee is endeavoring to set a continuation of the hearing. It will endeavor to have a committee member here between 1 and 1:15 to hear the additional testimony.

The committee is adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 12 noon, the committee stood in recess until 1:15

p.m.]

AFTERNOON SESSION

Senator COHEN [acting chairman]. The committee will come to order.

I hope you will accept my apologies on behalf of the committee for detaining you well past the 1 o'clock meeting time.

We have three witnesses remaining this afternoon. I believe we can complete the testimony prior to 2 o'clock when I must be at another hearing and this room has to be vacated.

I assume we will have a minimum of questions from the Chair.

I will call Henry Manuelito, the Director of Planning, Division of Public Safety, Navajo Nation, Arizona.

STATEMENT OF HENRY C. MANUELITO, PUBLIC SAFETY PLANNER, DIVISION OF PUBLIC SAFETY, NAVAJO NATION

Mr. MANUELITO. Mr. Chairman, my name is Henry C. Manuelito. I am the public safety planner for the Navajo Tribe's division of public safety which is headquartered in Window Rock, Ariz. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify before the committee today.

I am from the Navajo Indian Reservation which is situated in three States-Arizona, New Mexico and Utah-and is approximately 24,000 square miles in size or approximately the size of the State of West Virginia. The population of the area consists of approximately 150,000 Navajo people and 20,000 non-Indians working and residing within the exterior boundaries of the Navajo Indian Reservation.

The Navajo Tribe's division of public safety is a function of the tribal government consisting of police services, highway safety services, and a proposed fire prevention services program. I represent the police services function of the Navajo Tribe.

The Navajo Division of Public Safety's police services program presently has a compliment of 286 police officers and 143 civilian employees. Our main function is to enforce various criminal and traffic regulations as mandated by the Navajo Tribal Council, plus provide other nonenforcement functions as deemed necessary.

In addition, the Navajo Division of Public Safety has a working agreement with the U.S. attorneys of Arizona and New Mexico, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs in handling various Federal crimes committed on the Navajo Indian Reservation.

In an effort to provide adequate training for Navajo police officers the Navajo Division of Public Safety has instituted its own basic police academy. The police academy is currently certified by the Arizona Law Enforcement Officers Advisory Council and the New Mexico State Law Enforcement Academy for Police Officer Certification. We are currently negotiating with the State of Utah for similar certification.

(371)