 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
||||
|
Human Rights Institute
|
|
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contemporary Issues in Human Rights This weekly electronic newsletter is researched and written by students in Professor Rachel Taylor's Contemporary Issues in Human Rights class. The contributors read widely in their areas of focus and choose the week's most important human rights stories to highlight. Information in the write-ups comes from the sources provided and has not been independently verified.
March 21, 2007
Thematic Roundup
International Criminal Law: Tribunal Update This week’s top three stories in international criminal law traverse nine time zones and hail from the Hague, Phnom Penh, and Baghdad. ICTY: Last Indictment Revealed The conclusion of the ICTY mandate is looming, and this week the Tribunal publicly unsealed its last indictment. On December 22, 2004, Ljube Boskovski and Johan Tarculovski were indicted on charges of murder, cruel treatment, and wanton destruction related to the 2001 violence in Macedonia between ethnic Macedonians and ethnic Albanians. Tarculovski’s alleged crimes rest on individual responsibility and joint criminal enterprise, and Boskovski’s rest on both individual and command responsibility. Boskovski, the former Minister of the Interior, is currently in Croatian custody on local charges related to the 2002 deaths of seven South Asian immigrants; Tarculovski, a senior police official, has been arrested and is currently being held in Skopje. Release of the indictments comes the same week that EU foreign ministers decided to postpone Croatia’s EU accession talks on grounds that that country has been slow to cooperate with ICTY efforts to apprehend indictees. (See the BBC News story and the ICTY indictment.) Extraordinary Chambers in the Court of Cambodia (ECCC): £2500 Bar Fees Threaten Another Tribunal Derailment Just as Cambodian and international judges concluded 10 days of talks this week regarding tribunal procedure and appeared to resolve outstanding issues at the heart of previous delays, the Cambodian Bar Association announced that it will require international attorneys serving with the tribunal to pay £2500 each in bar fees. Most attorneys are refusing to pay. Observers worry that if too many international attorneys pull out, defendants’ “fair trial” rights will be in jeopardy. Though the first Khmer Rogue trials had been expected to begin months ago, procedural and structural delays have plagued the tribunal for this first year of its three-year plan. Many worry that each delay diminishes the chances of Khmer Rouge members ever facing the tribunal. (See article from The Guardian.) Iraqi High Tribunal: Second Highest Ranking Indictee Hanged Saddam Hussein’s former Vice-President, Taha Yassin Ramadan, was hanged just before dawn on March 20th. Ramadan was the second highest-ranking Iraqi official to be charged by the tribunal (only Saddam Hussein held a higher rank) and is the forth former official to be put to death for his role in the deaths of 148 Shiites in 1982. Critics of the Iraqi High Tribunal have been very outspoken against the use of death sentences; death sentences have not been used in international tribunals since Nuremberg and the death penalty is outlawed completely in many countries. Ramadan’s execution came almost exactly four years to the hour after the start of the United States’ military campaign in Iraq. Worried about potential violence, the United States tried last month to delay the execution. At about the same time, Louise Arbour, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, filed a legal brief with the Tribunal pleading for a reduction in the sentence on the grounds that any execution would violate the ICCPR (International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights). Despite these efforts, the trial chamber confirmed the sentence in late February. (See articles from CNN and the Wall Street Journal) Human Trafficking U.S. House of Representatives Holds Hearing on Immigrants and Human Trafficking On March 15, 2007, the U.S. House Committee on Subcommittee on Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism held a hearing on Immigrants and Human Trafficking. The hearing addressed the current measures in place to protect against children being trafficked as well as the question of what can be done to prevent this problem. In addition, on March 27, 2006, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law will hold a hearing on “Legal Options to Stop Human Trafficking.” (A transcript of the hearing is available in the March 15 edition of Congressional Quarterly.) Governments Around the World Taking Steps to Eliminate Trafficking On March 20, the Indonesian House of Representatives approved a bill on eliminating trafficking. On March 19, Zimbabwe and Angola signed a public order and security cooperation agreement concerning human trafficking and other issues. Trafficking is a huge problem in the region and the countries have recently seen an increase in the number of women and children trafficked. (See article in Africa News.) India and the United Arab Emirates are working together to fight human trafficking. The Director General of the Police of Kerala appointed a special officer to work on eliminating trafficking of women from Kerala to the Gulf region. They have been in meetings with the government of the United Arab Emirates to crack down on the traffickers. (See article in the Khaleej Times.) This month, the United Kingdom launched a new 11-member police unit dedicated to fighting human trafficking. The team will target the criminals perpetrating trafficking by going after their financial activities and shutting down their operations. They will also work with charities and non-profits to help trafficked persons. Team members have varied backgrounds and have worked with the kidnap unit, the murder unit, and the clubs and vice unit. Along with this effort, a fact-finding mission has been undertaken in Lithuania, where many of the trafficked persons originate. (See articles from CNN and from the BBC.) Counterterrorism and Human Rights Guantanamo Detainee Alleges Abuse While in American Custody David Hicks, an Australian citizen presently detained in Guantanamo Bay, has alleged that during his five years in American custody, he was abused and witnessed the abuse of other detainees. In an affidavit supporting his request for British citizenship filed in London, Hicks asserted that his abuse began when he was captured and interrogated in Afghanistan in 2001. He alleges that he was then beaten while on board amphibious assault ships and abused and humiliated at Kandahar. Among the allegations are that soldiers inserted a plastic object into his rectum, shaved his body hair, and forced Hicks and other detainees to lie face down in the mud while their backs were trampled on. Hicks also alleges that he was threatened with extraordinary rendition to Egypt. Commander J.D. Gordon, a spokesman for the military commission trying Hicks, denied the allegations. (See article in the New York Times.) Center for Constitutional Rights Produces Report on Released Guantanamo Detainees The Center for Constitutional Rights has produced “The Saudi Repatriates Report” about released Guantánamo detainees. The report examines the 53 Saudi detainees that have been repatriated thus far and the reasons for their release. The report is based on information gleaned from Department of Defense documents, including detainee hearing transcripts. The authors Anant Raut and Jill Friedman examine the accusations against the repatriated detainees and note that individuals tended to be released for diplomatic reasons or because they no longer posed a sufficient threat to warrant continued detention. The authors tackle the vexing problem of why the United States took nearly five years to release these individuals when they would eventually be determined to pose no threat. They conclude that the factors leading to this situation include an atmosphere of unchecked executive authority after September 11, systemic failures in the Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) process, and absence of a review process for reevaluating and expurgating discredited allegations. Legislation Would Restore Habeas Rights to War on Terror Detainees On March 8, Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) introduced two pieces of legislation: the “Habeas Restoration Act of 2007” and the “Restoring the Constitution Act of 2007.” Both are intended to undo aspects of the recently passed Military Commissions Act of 2006. The first piece of legislation aims to restore habeas corpus rights to detainees in military custody; the second would grant habeas rights to detainees, introduce a new definition of “enemy combatant,” and prohibit the use of evidence obtained through coercion. Both pieces of legislation would allow litigants to raise claims concerning U.S. violations of the Geneva Conventions in court. (See also this Human Rights Watch release.) Women’s Human Rights United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon Expresses Support for Creation of New U.N. Agency for Women The proposed new U.N. Agency for Women would consolidate the U.N. Development Fund for Women, the Office of the Special Adviser on Gender Issues, and the U.N. Division for the Advancement of Women. It would be headed by a U.N. Under-Secretary general, the third highest-ranking post in the world body. The General Assembly must approve the creation of the new agency. A coalition of more than 140 non-governmental organizations called for the General Assembly to take action on the issue during its current session, which ends in early September. (See article from the Mail and Guardian.) Spain Makes Record-Breaking Contribution to the United Nations Trust Fund to End Violence against Women The United Nations Development Fund for Women, UNIFEM, reports that Spain has signed a Memorandum of Understanding with its executive director to give $3.9 million to the United Nations Trust Fund to End Violence against Women. This is the largest contribution the Trust Fund has received since it was established 10 years ago. The Trust Fund receives contributions from governments, nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, and individuals, but the demand for grants amounts to over $100 million each year and far outstrips available funds. (For more from UNIFEM, click here and here.) Women Soldiers in the Iraq War Face Sexual Harassment An unprecedented number of women soldiers, more than 160,000, have been deployed in Iraq. In a 2003 report financed by the Department of Defense, nearly one-third of female veterans reported experiencing rape or attempted rape during service. A report by the Veterans Administration found that women exposed to sexual assault are more likely to develop post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) than those exposed to combat. As women who have served in Iraq return to civilian life, more will become known about the development and impact of PTSD on female veterans. (See article from the New York Times.) Minority Rights Banning Head Scarves in Britain Britain’s Education Secretary, Alan Johnson, has announced that he expects all Head Teachers in the country to ban schoolchildren from wearing full Muslim veils, citing concerns about safety, security, and teaching capabilities. Johnson’s plan would allow head teachers to prohibit the scarves under a new uniform policy, that, before implementation, must be put out for consultation among parents. Johnson argued that concerns about safety and teacher performance are paramount, so much so as to make them over-ride the importance of religious tolerance. After Johnson initiates the policy guidance, teachers will be permitted to make determinations about the effect the scarves have on their ability to teach effectively and safely. The guidance comes after a significant controversy last year, when the House of Lords overturned an appeals court ruling that said that barring Shabina Begum from wearing full Islamic dress in school was a violation of her human rights. (See article from the Guardian, the House of Lords opinion in the Begum case, and the Court of Appeals opinion in the Begum case.) Poland to Prohibit Discussion of Homosexuality in Schools On March 13, Poland’s deputy minister of education, Miroslaw Orzechowski, announced that the government is formulating legislation that would “punish anyone who promotes homosexuality” in schools, including openly gay teachers, HIV/AIDS educators, and LGBT student groups. While the government claims to be protecting families through the legislation, which is being fast-tracked and could be approved by the end of this month, human rights advocates are concerned about the issues raised regarding free speech, as well as the discrimination and repression of sexual minorities. Poland’s Prime Minister, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, and the President, Lech Kaczynski, both support the legislation. Polish officials have consistently made efforts restricting homosexual minorities from assembling, and the State Prosecutor’s office encouraged investigations into the conduct of homosexuals on unspecified claims of pedophilia last June. In December 2005, the European Commission held that “homophobia is not in accordance with the principles of the EU and is a severe violation of human rights.” Human Rights Watch has written a letter to the Prime Minister asking him to halt the progress of this legislation. (See release from Human Rights Watch, letter from Human Rights Watch to Poland's PM, and the European Commission's official position on discrimination.) Attack on Thai School Kills Three Late last Saturday, three teen-aged students were killed, and seven others injured, in an attack on an Islamic school in the Songkhla province of Thailand. Police have blamed the attacks on Islamic separatists trying to stir up dissent in the region, but local villagers are suspicious of these official accusations. Given the increased presence of sanctioned semi-official paramilitary forces in the region, some Muslims in the area feel that these forces are responsible not only for the recent shootings, but also for disappearances and other instances of violence that have been blamed on insurgents. Although insurgents in the area may be responsible for some of the violence, including a bus explosion last Wednesday that police say claimed the lives of nine Buddhists, the rare targeting of an Islamic school seems to cast doubt on police claims in this case. About 2,000 people have died since violence and turmoil began in the region in January 2004. Thailand’s turbulent southern region is predominantly Muslim, while the rest of the country is majority Buddhist. (See the BBC for an article and background on the conflict.) Migration and Human Rights Advocacy Groups Allege Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Detains Immigrant Children in Inhuman Conditions On February 22, two advocacy groups, the Women’s Commission for Refugee Women and Children and the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, issued a report alleging that detention facilities in Texas and Pennsylvania house young children in jail-like conditions when their parent’s immigration appeals are being reviewed. The groups allege that some families have been detained for over two years. The findings are based on visits to the sites and interviews with detainees. On March 6, the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit on behalf of 10 children being held at the T. Don Hutto detention center in Taylor, Texas, arguing that the children are being held in substandard conditions and should be released to religious groups or charities. DHS maintains that the detention facilities are modern, safe, secure, and necessary. (See the Women’s Commission for Refugee Women and Children's website, report, and press release; the Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service website, the ACLU release and legal background, the Department of Homeland Security profile on Hutto Detention Center, and articles from the Hartford Courant, News 8 Austin, Taylor Daily Press, the Boston Globe, the North County Times, and Fox News.) Refugee Crisis Plagues Iraq The war in Iraq, now in its fifth year, has forced almost four million Iraqi refugees from their homes; two million have fled to neighboring countries and 1.7 million have been internally displaced. This migration is putting a severe strain on the resources of the world’s non-profit organizations and on Iraq’s neighbors. Specifically, each month, 40,000 Iraqis are entering Syria. Europe took in 40,000 Iraqi refugees last year, and the United States has agreed to admit 7,000 this year, up from a mere 466 last year. At the same time, growing numbers of Iraqis are fleeing without the means to support themselves and are being forced into inhospitable refugee camps. (See UNHCR, the World Food Program, and news articles from MSNBC, The Star, MSNBC, the Scripps Howard News Service, the Daily Star Egypt, the Morning Call, and ABC.)
Australia Sends Asylum-Seekers to Remote Island of Nauru On February 21, 2007, the Australian government intercepted 83 asylum seekers from Sri Lanka. The asylum seekers were sent to Christmas Island, which is an Australian territory that is outside Australian jurisdiction for immigration purposes. Australia indicated that it would not grant the asylum seekers residency and said that it planned on persuading a third country to accept them. Initially, the asylum seekers were to be returned to Indonesia, their departure point, but Indonesia indicated that they would be returned to Sri Lanka without processing of their asylum claims. Ultimately, the Australian government shipped 82 of the asylum seekers to the island country Nauru, where they will be detained until a third country can be found to take them. Nauru receives payments from Australia to hold such asylum seekers temporarily, but in practice, asylum seekers have been detained on the island for years. This week, Nauru declared that the Sri Lankans would only be held for six-months and that Australia must process their claims within that time period. (See the Age, Amnesty International, the Refugee Council of Australia, and the Refugee Action Committee.) Human Rights Defenders Professor Philip Alston, UN Human Rights Council Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial Executions, Issues Report Professor Philip Alston, the UN Special Rapporteur for extrajudicial killings, visited the Philippines to evaluate reports of extrajudicial killings. In his preliminary report, Professor Alston expressed dissatisfaction at the Armed Forces of the Philippines’s (AFP’s) near total denial of the extrajudicial killings attributed to its members. Professor Alston also noted that the government’s reasons for refusing to publish a report by an Independent Commission set up to address media and activist killings were unconvincing (though Professor Alston did not evaluate the report himself). Professor Alston also pointed to the need to restore accountability in government, strengthen witness protection, provide legitimate political space for leftist groups, and reevaluate the government’s counter-insurgency strategy. “U.S. Lawmakers Told of Philippine Murders” The U.S. Foreign Relations Asia Sub-Committee heard on March 14 that more than 800 activists have been killed in the Philippines by government personnel since Gloria Arroyo assumed the presidency in 2001. In testimony before the sub-committee, a human rights defender accused the Philippine government of making “no distinction between armed guerrillas and unarmed activists, making the latter fair targets of political assassinations and abductions by suspected state-organized death squads.” (See Yahoo News) “Amnesty International Says U.S. Foreign Policy Hinders Human Rights Work” In a press release coinciding with the release of the U.S. Department of State’s Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, Amnesty International USA (AIUSA) noted that U.S. foreign policy may be harming the interests of some human rights defenders around the world. For example, AIUSA said that Egypt, whose human rights record is criticized in the State Department report, continues to receive large amounts of foreign aid from the United States and is a key destination of U.S. extraordinary renditions. At the same time, according to AIUSA, Egypt has cracked down on freedom of speech and expression, and on NGOs.
Freedom of Expression US Supreme Court Hears “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” Case Washington DC: The United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Morse v. Fredrick on March 19, 2007. Joseph Fredrick, a high school student, claimed that his right to freedom of expression was violated when he was suspended for holding up a 10 foot poster with the words “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” at a televised event celebrating the Olympic torch relay in 2002. The case implicated issues concerning the first amendment rights of students that were last raised during the Vietnam era protests. Although the Supreme Court has held that students do not lose their rights of self expression at the school door, it has also said that students’ speech and actions must not be disruptive. Freedom of expression is protected by Article 19 of the ICCPR. (See Briefs and Transcript of Oral Arguments, and news reports by Slate and CNN.) Man on Trial for Defacing Posters Featuring the King of Thailand Bangkok: A Swiss citizen was arrested on a charge of lèse majesté (crime against a sovereign) after he spray-painted over several posters of Thai monarch, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, while drunk. Oliver Jufer was recorded by video cameras defacing the posters on December 5, the King’s birthday and a national holiday, and has subsequently pled guilty to the offense before a Thai court. He now faces a maximum sentence of seventy-five years in prison, but, according to his lawyer, may get off with the statutory minimum of seven and a half years. Foreigners previously accused of this offense have usually been permitted to eventually leave the country. Although Thailand is a constitutional monarchy and the King has a limited official role, he is venerated by an overwhelming majority of the population and wields enormous influence. King Bhumibol has himself spoken out against the laws on lèse majesté saying that he should not be held above criticism. (See articles from the BBC here and here.) Pakistani Police Smash TV Station Premises Islamabad: On March 17, police raided the offices of Geo News, a private TV channel, destroying equipment and property and firing tear gas shells into the building. According to eyewitnesses, Mohammad Ali Durrani, Pakistan’s Media Minister, arrived on the scene shortly after the incident began but was unable to exert any influence over the police; he later apologized to the press for the incident. The incident was condemned by public officials including President Musharraf who promised to bring the culprits to justice. Since that time 14 low ranking police officials have been suspended and face a judicial enquiry. However, the context of the police action as well as recent state action against the media has created skepticism regarding the government’s explanations. The day before the incident, the government banned Geo TV’s popular late night talk show, and earlier in the week three other channels were briefly taken off the air to prevent them from televising clashes between the police and lawyers who were protesting the dismissal of the Pakistan’s Chief Justice. (See the BBC, Dawn, and Zee News.)
New S&P Financial Indexes Track Companies Dedicated to Clean Energy, Water, and Infrastructure Development Standard & Poor’s, best known for its S&P 500 financial index, has recently announced the launch of its Global Thematic Index Series. The new indexes – the S&P Global Clean Energy Index, the S&P Global Water Index, and the S&P Global Infrastructure Index – will measure the performance of numerous international companies who focus their operations on clean energy, water, and infrastructure development. These new indexes are S&P’s attempt to respond to what it calls “the emergence of new investment themes… that may span across multiple industries.” The “investment themes” indicate a heightened interest among investors in funding companies which focus upon development. The emergence of an index to track the financial performance of the stocks of such companies, moreover, highlights a recognition by the market that commitment to development and the preservation of human rights – be they environmental or economic – is not only a good idea, but also a profitable one. (See article on Social Funds website.) Nigerian Human Rights Plaintiffs Find Reason to Cheer Even as US Judge Dismisses RICO Claims Against Chevron On March 14, U.S. District Court Judge Susan Illston dismissed racketeering charges filed against Chevron by nine Nigerian plaintiffs. Nonetheless, her partial dismissal of the case included language interpreted by the plaintiffs’ attorneys as favorable to their human rights-related claims, several of which are still pending. The decision, the plaintiffs’ attorneys say, “vindicates the plaintiffs’ claims that Chevron paid Nigerian soldiers, who attacked protestors, then lied about it” during a clash between military security forces and Nigerians in 1998 and 1999. Most notably, the ruling seemed to acknowledge a link between the conduct of Chevron, a United States corporation, and the attacks carried out in Nigeria; the link found ran through Chevron Nigeria Limited, a Nigerian affiliate of Chevron. The U.S. Director for EarthRights International, assisting in the representation, expressed great confidence that “Chevron… will be held to account for its complicity in human rights abuses.” (See EarthRights.) UN Human Rights Report Finds That International Human Rights Law Does Not Bind Multinational Corporations A report to be delivered to the U.N. Human Rights Council states that human rights norms provided in international human rights instruments do not impose “direct legal responsibilities” upon multinational corporations. The report, commissioned in 2005 by then-Secretary General Kofi Annan, will be delivered by John Ruggie, the UN’s special representative for business and human rights. Despite its seemingly disappointing findings, the report nevertheless recognizes the “growing scrutiny” being utilized by numerous organizations and consumers to attempt to bind corporations to standards voluntarily adopted by them. (See article in the Financial Times.) Trade, Development, and Human Rights Building Sustainable Futures for Farmers Globally U.S. agricultural subsidies are criticized worldwide for contributing to overproduction and the dumping of its agricultural goods in developing countries. U.S. agricultural conglomerates receive the lion’s share of price support. This support allows them to keep commodity prices low and sell their goods in other countries at prices below the cost of production. Depressed prices create an incentive to overproduce and create a cycle of low prices. Smaller farmers are vulnerable to the potential effects of eliminating these subsidies and this encourages the concentration of small farmers into larger groups. Under a campaign of “Building Sustainable Futures for Farmers Globally,” several groups launched a new comprehensive platform for the 2007 U.S. Farm Bill as a basis for moving away from the current policy of agricultural market and trade deregulation, and towards an alternative vision for food and agriculture based on what they call “food sovereignty.” They have five goals: Trade Deregulation and Gender Women face particular challenges as a result of trade deregulation and market concentration in food and agriculture. It is harder for women to get good land, loans, training, and access to markets. Thus, women face greater rates of displacement. Many women work in the non-traditional agricultural export sector and in factories as pickers, sorters, graders and packers. Women farmers are faced with increased pressure to expand production at the expense of growing food for their families. They are the main producers of the world’s staple crops, providing up to 90 percent of the rural poor’s food intake. Developing countries are now importing crops they were once able to grow themselves because countries like the U.S. subsidize their farmers and keep commodity prices low. Many NGOs are calling for specific exemptions for certain food crops in the ongoing Doha Round negotiations of the WTO. Articles 3, 11 and 14 of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women guarantee the advancement of women, the right to work on an equal basis as men, and access to agricultural credit and loans for women in rural areas. (See Alexandra Spieldoch, “A Roe to Hoe: The Gender Impact of Trade Liberalization on Our Food System, Agricultural Markets and Women’s Human Rights,” International Gender and Trade Network, 2007.) Economic Partnership Agreements The negotiation of the Economic Partnership Agreements between the European Union (EU) and the African, Caribbean, and Pacific countries will provide greater protection of intellectual property rights. The draft Eastern and Southern Africa partnership agreement declares principles and objectives to maintain special treatment of least developed countries (LDCs) and the need for implementation and enforcement of intellectual property rights based on the level of development of the ESA countries. The EU proposal is essentially attempting to sidestep the protections of the TRIPS Agreement by refusing to balance the interests of developing countries. It expands the application of special border measures to include goods that infringe a patent, a plant variety right, a design and geographic indications. And unlike the TRIPS Agreement, the EU proposal requires pecuniary compensation against persons who did not ‘knowingly’ engage in violations. Article 25 of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights provides that everyone has the right to security in the event of sickness and to an adequate standard of living. Article 12 of the ICESCR requires states to take steps to prevent, treat and control diseases. The application of TRIPS to prescription drugs would implicate this provision.
Regional Roundup Human Rights in Africa This week’s update takes us around the continent from Egypt to Zimbabwe to Sudan to explore human rights issues of concern in Africa. Egypt & Constitutional Debates First, in Egypt, that country’s Parliament approved constitutional amendments on Monday that were hailed as reforms from President Hosni Mubarak’s ruling National Democratic Party and denounced by Amnesty International as “the greatest erosion of human rights” since 1981 emergency laws were put in place. Nearly 100 mainly Islamic lawmakers boycotted the Parliamentary vote. Controversial amendments include those that grant heightened powers of arrest to the police and emergency powers to bypass ordinary courts for suspects of terrorism. The amendments will now be considered on April 4 by popular referendum. (See Egypt’s Al-Ahram paper, the Amnesty International report, Al-Jazeera, and the Economist.) Zimbabwe & the Role of International Organizations With domestic and international pressure against President Mugabe’s administration growing in the wake of the arrest and alleged beating of opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, calls are mounting for international organizations to take action. Britain’s U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones-Parry has called for the Security Council to focus on the situation in Zimbabwe, and the African Union chairman Alpha Oumar Konare urged Zimbabwe to respect human rights, breaking the silence of this institution on the subject of its member state. (See AllAfrica.com, the BBC surveys African media on President Mugabe, and The Guardian.) Sudan & the Human Rights Council The United Nations Human Rights Council concluded debate over the special report on alleged human rights abuses in Darfur. The report by Nobel peace prize winner Jody Williams has been critiqued as partial and illegitimate by the Sudan Liberation Movement leader Abdel Wahid Al-Nur, and the Sudanese government has decided to suspend all cooperation with the International Criminal Court in the wake of the report’s accusations. (See the International Herald Tribune editorial by Archbishop Desmond Tutu, U.N. Summaries of the debate, and
Human Rights in Asia Police Use Force Against Protesters in West Bengal, India Police in India’s West Bengal state have reportedly killed 14 farmers who were protesting the state’s decision to build an industrial park on their land. (See Amnesty International, CNN, the Boston Herald, Earth Times, Forbes, and the Los Angeles Times. Armed Groups In Sri Lanka's Refugee Camps Rights Advocates Under Attack As China's People’s Congress in Session
Human Rights and the Middle East Human Rights Lawyer Faces Continued Imprisonment in Tunisia Mohamed Abbou, a distinguished human rights defender and activist, completed his second year in prison on March 1, 2007, for exposing the Tunisian government’s practice of torture in prisons. According to Human Rights First and others, Mohamed Abbou has been held in “harsh conditions” and has suffered continuous beatings inside prison. In April 2005, after an unfair trial, Mohamed Abbou was sentenced to three and a half years in prison. The Tunisian court convicted him for writing an article that “insulted the judiciary” and “was likely to disturb the public order.” The International Freedom of Expression Exchange called the hearing a “sham” since the accused and witnesses were not heard and the defense lawyers “were expelled from the courtroom, unable to plead their case.” March 1, 2007 was declared the “International Day of Action for Mohamed Abbou” and many human rights organizations worked to build awareness of the plight of this human rights defender. The major human rights at play in this case are freedom of expression, torture, and violations of due process. Tunisia has signed and ratified both the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention Against Torture without any reservations. Accordingly, by criminalizing Mohamed Abbou’s freedom of expression, Tunisia has violated its obligations under Article 19 of ICCPR that guarantees the right to freedom of expression. Through having a “sham hearing,” Tunisia has also violated its obligations under Article 14 guaranteeing individuals fundamental due process requirements “in the determination of any criminal charge.” Finally, by recognizing the meaning of “torture” under Article 1 of the Convention Against Torture and understanding the conventional duties that follow as a whole, the Tunisian authorities have a responsibility to intervene and stop the physical and mental sufferings experienced by Mohamed Abbou in prison. (See information from Human Rights First here, here, and here. See information from Human Rights Watch here. See information from the International Freedom of Expression Exchange here. See information from Front Line here and here. See article from Arabic News here. See U.S. Department of State: Country Reports on Human Rights Practices (Tunisia). See information from the World Association of Newspapers here. See information from Reporters Without Borders here. See information from Amnesty International here. See information from INDEX here.) Concern Regarding Ethnic Minorities in Iran The ethnic minorities of Iran are facing what Amnesty International calls a “new wave of human rights violations.” These groups include but are not limited to Iranian Azerbaijanis, Kurds, Baluchis and Arabs. A plethora of human rights violations by the Islamic Republic, including denial of cultural rights, arbitrary detention, torture, and executions, have taken place in recent years. On February 16, 2007, in a Kurdish demonstration in Mahabad, three Kurds were killed and “dozens” injured by the Islamic Republic military forces. Gaining information about persecuted ethnic minorities is difficult since, as Human Rights Watch observes, “unlike Iran's persecuted religious minorities, the situations of its ethnic minorities are not closely monitored by international support groups.” There is also an issue of access to the Iranian ethnic minorities persecuted. Having an established legal and extralegal repressive infrastructure, Iran is equipped with secret prisons, Revolutionary Guards, and tribunals that conduct secret trials and executions. A recent report published by the British Ahwazi Friendship Society indicated that ten Ahwazi men were secretly convicted of “waging war on God” by the Islamic Republic and were executed. In January 2007, three U.N. human rights experts appointed by the Human Rights Council called upon the Islamic Republic of Iran to stop these unfair trials. The experts sent two letters of concern regarding these “secret trials” to the Islamic Government, but the government disregarded the letters and executed the first three men in mid-December 2006. According to the experts, the only elements of the trial not in secrecy were the Ahwazi men’s confessions on public television. The experts concluded that these confessions were extracted under a great deal of torture. In regards to ethnic minorities in Iran and their human rights, legal documents such as CERD, ICCPR, ICESCR, and CAT provide the legal grounds necessary to protect these rights. The Islamic Republic of Iran has ratified CERD, ICCPR, and ICESCR with no reservations. There are a number of articles within these legal documents that can be used to ensure the protection of Iranian ethnic minorities’ rights. Iran is not a state party to the Convention Against Torture. But using Article 7 of the ICCPR that addresses torture and Article 5 of UDHR—on the grounds of customary international law—can be a substitute for protecting Iranian ethnic minorities in the face of torture. See Amnesty International, the British Ahwazi Friendship Society, the United Nations Press Release: Letter of Appointed Experts to Islamic Republic of Iran, information from the U.S. Department of State, information from Human Rights Watch here and here, and information from the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organization (UNPO). Egyptian Bloggers In February, Kareem Nabil Sulaiman, an Egyptian blogger, was sentenced to four years in prison for insulting Islam and Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president. He was the first blogger to face such a sentence. Guardian Unlimited reports that in the beginning of the trial, the former student of Al-Azhar University faced a strong possibility of being convicted for ten years in prison. Kareem pleaded innocent to the charges and stated, “I don’t see what I have done... I expressed my opinion...” With this court decision came a forceful setback to the advances made in the virtual realm for Egyptian bloggers in exercising their right to free expression. The number of Egyptian bloggers is estimated at 6,000 and many have become involved through an Egyptian Bloggers Community Campaign titled “Free Kareem!” The charges against Kareem were embodied in Articles 102, 176, and 179 of the Egyptian Penal Code significantly limiting his freedom of expression. Meanwhile, Egypt has responded negatively to international criticism of its actions. In a related case, another activist blogger, Muhammad al-Sharqawi, was arrested in May 2006 when he was leaving a peaceful demonstration in Cairo. He was severely tortured and raped “according to a written statement he smuggled out of prison.” In a follow-up report regarding his conditions after release, Human Rights Watch reported on Monday that “despite repeated requests,” the Egyptian authorities have taken no action in investigating those accountable for Muhammad al-Sharqawi’s sufferings. The human rights issues are violations of freedom of expression, torture, rape, and arbitrary detention. The legal documents that will protect the human rights of Egyptian bloggers are most notably CAT and ICCPR. Article 19 of ICCPR guarantees the right to freedom of expression. Egypt is a party to ICCPR and has no reservations to this international treaty. Egypt’s argument that the bloggers’ conduct falls under protection of national security and public order [Article 19(3)] is not acceptable. Egypt has also ratified the Convention Against Torture which can be used as a binding treaty in ensuring the protection against torture. (See the Guardian; BBC News articles here, here, and here; the U.S. Department of State; the Washington Post; and Human Rights Watch reports here, here, and here.)
Human Rights in Europe France and Europe Restrict the Right of Asylum On March 13, France’s Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Person (Opfra) released a report confirming that applications for asylum in France decreased by 38.3% in 2006. This number confirms a trend that started in 2004, after a law on immigration was passed in 2003. The French government says this drop reflects its fight against illegal immigration. Also on March 13, the French Coordination for the Asylum Right (FCAR) published a counter-report (in French) denouncing the measures the government has taken to restrict the right of asylum in France. The FCAR report points out a series of measures that restrict the right of asylum, including the complexity of the procedure, the lack of information, and the reduction of the eligibility criteria. As a result, 16 percent of cases in which Opfra denies asylum are overturned on appeal every year, and this number grows annually. The French attitude concerning asylum rights reflects a current European trend. In March 2006, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees severely criticized the restrictive measures being adopted in rich countries on the subject of asylum. (See UN High Commissioner for Refugees: the State of the World’s Refugees in 2006) Council of Europe's Anti-Torture Committee Publishes Report on Croatia “The Council of Europe's Committee for the prevention of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (CPT) has published its report on the 2nd periodic visit to Croatia in 2003, together with the authorities’ response.” The report states that ill-treatment of persons in police custody continues to be a serious problem. However, the CPT found that such ill-treatment was less common than in 1998. The CPT made the same statement concerning the treatment of prisoners by staff. The Croatian government gave its approval for this report to be public, and responded by listing a series of measures that it will take to address these issues. France Signs Extradition Treaty with China On March 20, France signed an extradition treaty with China. This treaty still has to be ratified by France’s Parliament after the coming elections in June. In the agreement, China pledges that it will not issue the death penalty for suspects handed over by France, and that it will not seek extraditions in political cases. Human rights organizations fear that China will nonetheless use this tool to put its hands on political refugees. On January 4, Amnesty International France asked France not to sign this treaty because of the serious violations of human rights that take place in China and because of concerns over the role of politics in the Chinese justice system. Nothing in the agreement ensures that a Chinese deportee will not later face the death penalty on unrelated, and possibly fictitious, charges.
Human Rights in the Americas Chiquita Admits to Paying Colombian Terrorist Organization On March 19, 2007 Chiquita, a multinational corporation headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio, plead guilty to charges of bribery before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. As part of a plea agreement, Chiquita has agreed to pay a $25 million criminal fine to the Department of Justice. From 1997-2004 Chiquita made over 100 payments to the “Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia” (AUC) totaling approximately $1.7 million. The U.S. government designated the AUC as a terrorist organization in 2001 for its role in at least 75 massacres as well as the disappearance and prosecution of political dissidents. Originally, bribe payments were made through a wholly owned Colombian subsidiary, Banadex, until 2002, when they were made directly by Chiquita. Fernando Aguirre, Chiquta’s CEO, declared that the “payments made by the company were always motivated by our good faith concern for the safety of our employees.” Colombian President Alvaro Uribe now seeks the extradition of top officials involved. (See release by the U.S. Department of Justice, statement of US Embassy in Bogota (in Spanish): AUC designated as a terrorist organization, CNN's report on Colombian President Alvaro Uribe’s Response, the Council on Foreign Relations’ description of the AUC, a BBC report, and articles from the New York Times and Washington Post.) Uribe’s Government Faces Corruption Charges Colombian President Alvaro Uribe is widely praised for his role in brokering a peace agreement between leftist rebels and right-wing paramilitary groups. Over 31,000 paramilitaries have been disarmed, and militia leaders are testifying to their crimes. However, former paramilitaries continue to pose a significant problem for the country. Colombia currently faces what has been termed as a “para-politics” scandal. Eight senators associated with Uribe’s government were arrested for their association with paramilitary groups. More recently, Uribe’s Foreign Minister, Maria Consuelo Arajo, resigned last month when her father (a regional power broker) and her brother (a senator) were linked to the kidnapping of a political rival. That same week, Uribe’s former domestic intelligence chief, Jorge Noguera, was arrested for supplying paramilitary groups with the names of human rights groups. Despite the fallout of key allies, the president continues to enjoy wide support. According to a recent Gallup poll, 73% of Colombians support Uribe. Corruption charges have also reached the opposition Liberal Party. Trino Luna, the governor of the province of Magdalena, was arrested for alleged ties to Hernan Giraldo. Giraldo is reputed to be one of the largest drug traffickers in Colombia. The current political crisis faced by Colombia threatens their receipt of a 3.9 billion U.S. aid package as well as Congressional ratification of a free trade agreement with the United States. (See Human Rights Watch, letter to Uribe re: Justice and Peace Law; Detailed history of the paramilitary conflict: Jose E. Arvelo, International Law and Conflict Resolution in Colombia: Balancing Peace and Justice in the Paramilitary Demobilization Process, 37 Geo. J. Int’l L. 411 (2006), available at Westlaw 37 GEOJIL 411; Critical View of the Justice and Peace Law: Douglas Jacobson, A Break with the Past or Justice in Pieces: Divergent Paths on the Question of Amensty in Argentina and Colombia, Ga. J. Int’l & Comp.L. (2006), available at Westlaw 35 GAJICL 175; the Christian Science Monitor on consequences of the scandal; the Economist on confessions by paramilitary groups; CNN articles on the corruption charges here and here and here and here; and reports from the Christian Science Monitor and the New York Times here and here.) Bush Tours Latin America Faced with the visible opposition of President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela and a growing leftist movement in the south, President George Bush led a tour through Latin America that ended on March 14. He visited five countries in seven days. During his first stop in Sao Paulo Brazil, he declared: “My trip is to explain as clearly as I can that our nation is generous and compassionate -- that when we see poverty, we care; that when we see illiteracy, we want to do something about it; that when we find there to be a deficiency in health care, we’ll help to the extent we can.” Throughout the tour, Bush spoke of “social justice,” health care, education, and aid, signaling a new approach to U.S. relations with the region. During his presidency, Bush boasted, the United States nearly doubled its aid to Latin America, which now totals $1.6 million. Meanwhile, Chavez led a counter-tour promoting the Alternativa Bolivariana para las Américas (ALBA) as an alternative to U.S. led free-trade agreements that focuses on social development rather than economic liberalization, which he argues, only favors the rich and the multi-national corporations. Chavez promised aid totaling $5.5 billion. Chavez, declared The Economist, is “outspending and out-promising” Bush. (See the Economist on the parallel tours; CNN for an overview of Bush’s tour; and reports by ABC and the BBC.)
Revised March 23, 2007 |
|
|||
 |
||||||