The instruction of October 16, 1950, has been revised, and a copy of the new instruction relating to detentions, parole and parole supervision, setting forth the procedures to be followed, the criteria to be observed in fixing condition of parole or parole supervision, and so forth, has been given to you, I believe, as exhibit 2.

Section 23 (a) of the Internal Security Act of 1950 gives the alien under deportation proceedings the right to designate the country to which he shall be deported. Therefore in the case of each unexecuted warrant of deportation as well as in the case of every alien under proceedings it has become necessary to ascertain the alien's choice of country of deportation. Our experience has been that the majority of aliens under deportation proceedings or under orders of deportation, who come from non-Western Hemisphere countries, select countries of deportation other than those to which they can readily be deported. Some of these selections grow out of a genuine desire on the part of the alien to be deported to some Western Hemisphere country rather than to be returned to the European countries of their nationality or last residence, but it is obvious that many designations are made solely as delaying tactics. Such designations by the alien necessitate the Service presenting to some foreign governments a request for permission to deport to such countries aliens who are not nationals thereof.

So far a procedure has been worked out with the Government of Canada under which the cases are presented and responses received with a minimum of delay and an effort is presently being made to work out similar arrangements with the Governments of Mexico and Cuba.

However, the State Department has required that requests to all other countries for permission to deport must be presented through the State Department in order that several political desks may have an opportunity to examine such requests, with the result that costly delays can be anticipated in effecting the deportation of many aliens because of this provision of the act.

Mr. ARENS. May I just interpose this question right here. Under the law the Attorney General is supposed to run this section. Why does the Immigration Service defer to the request of the State Department and the political desks of the State Department in undertaking to find out what country will take the alien?

Mr. DIANA. The alien specifies the country. We then present his application to the local consul for decision as to whether or not he will be permitted to enter its territory. If we receive a denial from the local consul, we then present it to the home office of the government to which he desires to go through the State Department. We are not permitted to deal directly with embassies or foreign governments. Mr. ARENS. What is the occasion for this delay that you speak of? I understood you to say a moment ago there was some type of delay. Mr. DIANA. From our past experience we find that it takes at least from 7 to 8 weeks before we get a reply through the State Department. Mr. ARENS. Who sees it in the State Department? Who works on it in the State Department?

Mr. DIANA. These applications are sent to Mr. L'Heureux's office and they then prepare communications to their offices in the countries that the aliens are applying to go to.

Mr. ARENS. Now what step in this procedure does the political desks have?

Mr. DIANA. I may say this with regard to Mexico. In order to expedite decisions from the Mexican Government we did take it up through the political desk, Mexican political desk.

Mr. ARENS. In the State Department?

Mr. DIANA. In the State Department; so that they may ask for these decisions, telegraphically or by cable.

Mr. ARENS. Let us take a hypothetical case here. I do not have this clear in my mind. Here is a man who has selected Poland as the country to which he would like to go. He is a national of Poland, we will say. The Immigration Service then communicates with the Chief of the Visa Division in the Department of State-is that right? Mr. DIANA. No, sir.

Mr. ARENS. What happens?

Mr. DIANA. As soon as we apply to the local consul in the area in which the alien resides for traveling documents to proceed to Poland

Mr. ARENS. That would be the Polish consul here in Washington? Mr. DIANA. Yes. If the Polish consul refuses to issue a travel document, we then present the facts to the State Department for them to present to the seat of the government for further reconsideration as to whether or not a travel document will be issued in that particular

case.

Mr. ARENS. Any delay is not attributed in this respect to the State Department; it is attributed to the fact that the man has been turned down once and the representation is made to a higher level; is that right?

Mr. DIANA. That is correct; but the reason it is put in this manner is the fact that if the alien had not been given a choice to select this country, we would have been in a better position to deport him to the country of his nationality where we probably have appropriate travel documents.

Mr. ARENS. I understand; but this delay you are talking about is not a delay that is caused by somebody in the State Department being inert?

Mr. DIANA. No, sir. I am sorry; we did not mean to infer that at all.

Mr. ARENS. I got that implication from what you said. I probably misconstrued what you said.

Mr. DIANA. The provision of the act referred to in the foregoing has made it necessary to amend all unexecuted orders of deportation with the attendant requirement that each alien must be interviewed and afforded the opportunity of selecting a country of deportation. These orders have been amended by a blanket order sent to all field districts, but it is nevertheless required that in addition to specifying the country of deportation the alien be duly apprised of his rights, if any, to discretionary relief and accorded the right which is also provided by section 23 of the act to litigate any claim he may make that he will be physically persecuted if deported to a specified country. Mr. ARENS. Why does he have a right to litigate that? The act invests this determination in the Attorney General.

Mr. DIANA. That was a conclusion reached by the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Mr. ARENS. What is the nature of the litigation on that point? Mr. DIANA. To determine whether or not he will be physically perecuted.

Mr. ARENS. You say litigated. You mean within the administrative framework?

Mr. DIANA. Within the administrative framework.

Mr. ARENS. You mean only then, do you not, that the alien is entitled and accorded the privilege of presenting to the administrative authorities those facts which would in his judgment indicate that he would be physically persecuted?

Mr. DIANA. Yes, sir.

Section 23 of the Internal Security Act of 1950 provides that any alien against whom an order of deportation is outstanding under the immigration law relating to criminals, prostitutes, procurers, or other immoral class, anarchists, subversives, and similar classes, who shall willfully fail or refuse to depart from the United States within a period of 6 months from the date of such order of deportation or shall willfully fail or refuse to make timely application in good faith for travel documents necessary to his departure, or take any other action designed to prevent or hamper, or with the purpose of preventing or hampering, his departure pursuant to such order of deportation, or who shall willfully fail or refuse to present himself for deportation at the time and place required, shall upon conviction be guilty of a felony and shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years.

Therefore if it appears that a willful violation of section 23 (c) has occurred, an investigation is conducted and the facts developed presented to the United States Attorney for possible prosecution.

Despite the new problems which were created by the Internal Security Act, despite the unusual delay in getting duly authorized personnel on duty, 3,367 aliens were deported from the date of the passage of the act on January 31, 1951. This compares with a total of 6,662 deported during the entire fiscal year 1950.

What I have presented here today, Mr. Arens, are more or less the highlights of some of the difficulties we are encountering at this time. I have not entered into the result of investigations where willful violations have occurred as to whether or not we will be successful in prosecuting these aliens for the various violations.

Mr. ARENS. Now is there any other observation or comment you care to make, Mr. Diana?

Mr. DIANA. I believe if we were given a little more time to observe this act, the results and the experience received there form, I would be in a better position to give you more details.

Mr. ARENS. Are you familiar with the other provisions of the Internal Security Act which pertain to immigration?

Mr. DIANA. No, sir.

Mr. ARENS. What is your over-all appraisal of the Internal Security Act with reference to those sections on which you have intimate information and experience?

Mr. DIANA. With the exceptions I have made, I think it is going to be a great help in enforcing the immigration and naturalization laws. It has put more teeth in the law and we will have supervision of all aliens illegally residing in the United States.

Mr. ARENS. Thank you, sir.

TESTIMONY OF WILFRED W. WIGGINS, CHIEF, INVESTIGATIONS SECTION, ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE

(The witness was previously sworn by Senator O'Conor as follows:)

Senator O'CONOR. In the presence of Almighty God do you solemnly swear that the evidence you will give in this proceeding will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; so help you God?

Mr. WIGGINS. I do.

Mr. ARENS. NOW, Mr. Wiggins, you have previously been sworn? Mr. WIGGINS. Yes, sir.

Mr. ARENS. Would you kindly identify yourself by position in the Immigration Service?"

Mr. WIGGINS. I am Chief of the Investigations Section, Enforcement Division, Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Mr. ARENS. How long have you been so engaged?

Mr. WIGGINS. Since approximately July 1948, when the Investigations Section was started in the central office.

Mr. ARENS. What was your assignment prior to the time you became Chief of the Investigations Section?

Mr. WIGGINS. Part of that time I was an operations adviser, part of that time I was Chief Supervisor of Naturalization, and prior to coming to the central office I was 18 years in the field in various offices, divisional director, naturalization examiner, and so forth.

Mr. ARENS. Will you kindly give us just a résumé of the structure and organization of your section?

Mr. WIGGINS. In our section in the central office I have an assistant and 10 investigators. We have our section broken into three units. One unit is the Antisubversive Unit. One unit is the Intelligence Unit, and the other unit is the Smuggling Unit.

Mr. ARENS. How many men are employed in each of these three units or how many individuals are employed?

Mr. WIGGINS. I have four investigators and two employees whose titles are examiners in the Subversive Unit.

Mr. ARENS. What is the function of the Subversive Unit?

Mr. WIGGINS. The Subversive Unit supervises all the investigations looking toward the deportation of aliens under the act of October 16, 1918, as amended, and the cancellation of the naturalization of aliens on subversive grounds; the liaison with the various intelligence agencies in Washington and the transmission to the field of all intelligence information relating to subversives received.

We also supervise the issuance of warrants in subversive cases and supervise the hearings in subversive cases, supply the necessary expert witnesses, etc.

Mr. ARENS. Now your work in the Antisubversive Unit of your section is what might be regarded as supervisory over the work in the field in the various district offices; is that not true?

Mr. WIGGINS. That is true.

Mr. ARENS. Your investigators do not get out in the field to actually do investigations?

Mr. WIGGINS. Occasionally they do. Occassionally they go out in the field in the more important subversive cases and present the cases to the hearing examiners.

Mr. ARENS. The thought occurred to me that four men in an Antisubversive Section to cover the United States is a very small number of

men.

Mr. WIGGINS. That is true; they do not actually conduct the investigations in the field.

Mr. ARENS. They are more supervisory investigators; is that right? Mr. WIGGINS. That is right.

Mr. ARENS. Now let us, if you please, Mr. Wiggins, confine our observations, until directed into other channels, to the Subversive Unit. What is the set-up in the district offices which would be comparable to the set-up in your Investigations Section?

Mr. WIGGINS. In the larger offices where we have enough investigators to have such units we have investigators who devote their time exclusively to the investigation of subversives looking toward the deportation of subversive aliens or the cancellation of naturalization of subversive aliens.

Mr. ARENS. Does your unit concern itself with the exclusion of subversive aliens or only the deportation of subversive aliens?

Mr. WIGGINS. We also concern ourselves with the exclusion of subversive aliens under section 5 which provides-

Mr. ARENS. That would be section 22 of the Internal Security Act? Mr. WIGGINS. Section 22, yes, of the Internal Security Act.

Mr. ARENS. Which, among other things, amends section 5 of the act of October 16, 1918?

Mr. WIGGINS. That is right.

Mr. ARENS. Then we have our pattern set pretty well. Now may I inquire first of all with reference to the exclusion phase on subversives under the Internal Security Act. What are your statistics on that? Mr. WIGGINS. Since the Internal Security Act we have had 2,216 temporary exclusions of which number 124 were made permanent. I think I should explain that.

Mr. ARENS. These are in the subversive categories?

Mr. WIGGINS. That is right. I think I should explain that by stating that a great number of these temporary exclusions were persons who were only so-called nominal members of organizations and were admitted under the ninth proviso after temporary exclusion. It was necessary for us to make a security check on each one of those temporary exclusions and our Public Law 14 will take care of a great number

of those.

Mr. ARENS. How many cases do you have under investigation in the subversive category?

Mr. WIGGINS. As of April 1, 1951, we had 2,113 under investigation looking toward possible deportation as subversives. That compares with 1,324 pending on September 30, 1950. Since September 30, 1950, we have had 1,755 new investigations of that category, and since September 30, 1950, we have completed 995 of such investigations.

Mr. ARENS. Of those investigations that have been completed, 995, what was the outcome?

Mr. WIGGINS. We have issued warrants of arrest in 36 of such cases. We have had 26 warrants of deportation issued since September 30,

Mr. ARENS. What happened to the others?