PROVIDENCE — Expressing concerns over how state corrections authorities will implement a federal rapid deportation program, the Rhode Island Affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union is requesting that inmates “at minimum” be allowed access to immigration counsel before deciding to participate.

Governor Carcieri announced last week that, in accordance with his March executive order on illegal immigration, the state and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement had signed an agreement for a “Rapid REPAT program.” The program allows early release for some illegal immigrants serving time for nonviolent crimes and who are facing final deportation orders.

An inmate in those circumstances who agrees to go back to his or her home country gets released early, and the state consequently saves money on the prisoner’s supervision. But if the parolee then returns illegally to the United States, he or she could face another 20 years in prison.

One of the ACLU’s main concerns is that there may not be sufficient safeguards to ensure an inmate “has freely and voluntarily waived all administrative appellate rights” before signing on the dotted line. And if not, the inmate may forego pressing valid legal grounds for remaining in the country.

“This is a crucial aspect of the program, but one that we fear — in particular light of language barriers and the complexities surrounding immigration law” — may not occur, said ACLU executive director Steven Brown in a letter to Ashbel T. Wall, director of the state Department of Corrections.

Brown also said that “despite repeated comments from the governor,” the program “is not limited to so-called ‘illegal’ immigrants,” but also applies to lawful permanent residents and other non-citizens of lawful status “who face deportation solely due to their conviction for a non-violent crime.”

Wall said his department is now reviewing the ACLU’s concerns.

“I have asked our lawyers to look at it, and also to review the federal statutes that are mentioned so we can understand the context of the letter,” said Wall. “Once they’ve completed that review, we’ll be discussing any issues that the letter raises with ICE officials so that we can be sure that we have a process that passes constitutional muster.”

Wall said the corrections department will rely on Immigration and Customs Enforcement “to know who is subject to deportation and what the status of the case is.” He added, “Our understanding is that the paperwork that would be provided to the inmate and signed off by the inmate is developed by ICE.”

He added, “We have a Memorandum of Understanding, and now we’ll be writing the rules and procedures so that the corrections department, the parole board and ICE can put together a plan and put it into effect. I don’t expect it will take a long time, but we want to proceed deliberately.”

Last week, the governor said his objective is to improve communication between corrections and immigration officials and speed deportation of some illegal immigrants. (The Rapid REPAT program does not apply to inmates serving sentences for violent crimes who are in the country illegally. They remain imprisoned until they finish their sentences, and then are turned over to ICE custody.)

But Brown, the ACLU director, said the governor has misstated the scope of the program.

“The governor at every chance he gets keeps on repeating that all his policies are aimed solely at immigrants who are in this country illegally. That has been untrue in many of past immigration initiatives, and it is definitely untrue in the context of this particular program. Legal residents are directly affected by the program. That’s the first major point,” Brown said.

Michael W. Gilhooly, Northeast regional spokesman for ICE, said the order applies “to former permanent residents, meaning those who have lost their status by virtue of an order of removal.” Brown said people in that category have appellate rights that could reinstate their status.

A second major concern “is that immigrants who have lawful remedies for remaining in this country may unknowingly waive them if they participate in the program, and that’s why we are urging that steps be taken to make sure the agreement is followed as it’s supposed to be, which is that any agreements made by inmates are made freely and voluntarily.”

Said Brown, “It could very well be inmates are vaguely told about the program … told they will be released if they leave the country and asked to sign on the dotted line. I can certainly see many inmates jumping at the opportunity, without realizing they have legal rights to remain in this country if their case were considered before an immigration court.”

Among those, he said, are that the inmate might qualify for asylum based on conditions in his or her home country or on the reasons he or she left it, or protection based on the Convention Against Torture.

kziner@projo.com