Human Rights Council: ICJ oral statement during the Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on Syria

Human Rights Council: ICJ oral statement during the Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on Syria

The ICJ today delivered an oral statement at the UN Human Rights Council during the Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic concerning accountability and other measures to address the Syrian conflict.

In the statement the ICJ called upon the UN Human Rights Council and the Security Council to respond to the findings of the 10th report of the Syria Commission of Inquiry, including with a view to ensuring accountability for the serious violations of international law.

The ICJ also called upon all states to comply with their obligations under international law vis-à-vis the Syrian conflict, including by searching for all those responsible for international crimes committed in this conflict and bringing them before their own courts, and by protecting the rights of Syrian refugees and abiding by the principle of non-refoulement.

The full statement may be downloaded in PDF format, here: Syria-UN-HRC30-OralStatement-Advocay-non legal submission-2015-ENG

 

United Arab Emirates: lift travel ban on 2015 finalist Ahmed Mansoor, urges Martin Ennals Award Jury

United Arab Emirates: lift travel ban on 2015 finalist Ahmed Mansoor, urges Martin Ennals Award Jury

Ten human rights groups, including the ICJ, represented in the Jury, today called on the United Arab Emirates authorities to lift the travel ban imposed on Ahmed Mansoor, one of the three human rights defenders nominated for the 2015 Award, and to issue him a passport.

Widely respected as one of the few voices within the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to provide a credible independent assessment of human rights developments in the country, Ahmed Mansoor regularly raises concerns regarding arbitrary detention, torture or degrading treatment, and failure to meet international standards of fair trial.

He also draws attention to other human rights abuses, including against migrant workers.

As a result, Ahmed Mansoor has faced repeated intimidation, harassment, and death threats from the UAE authorities or their supporters, including arrest and imprisonment in 2011 following an unfair trial.

He and four other activists who called for democratic rights in the UAE were jailed in 2011 on the charge of “insulting officials”.

Although pardoned and released later that year, Ahmed Mansoor has been banned from travel and had his passport confiscated.

As a result of his courageous work, Ahmed Mansoor was selected as one of the three finalists of the Martin Ennals Award who will be recognized at a ceremony hosted by the city of Geneva on October 6th.

The Award is usually handed out by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

As matters stand, however, Ahmed Mansoor will be prevented from attending the ceremony because the UAE authorities have arbitrarily imposed a travel ban on him and have refused to return his passport.

Both the travel ban and the confiscation of his passport violate Ahmed Mansoor’s right under international human rights law to freedom of movement, as these measures were taken to punish him for his peaceful human rights activism.

The Martin Ennals Award Jury today noted with concern : “Ahmed Mansoor’s absence at the ceremony would mark a very disappointing position for the UAE, which is a country that prides itself as one of the hubs of international business and tourism in the Middle East, as well a safe haven in the region. As a member of the UN Human Rights Council, which is running for a second term, we expect the UAE authorities to honour their obligations to uphold human rights and protect human rights defenders. The UAE government must match its rhetoric on the international stage with meaningful actions at home, starting with immediately lifting the travel ban on Ahmed Mansoor, to returning and renewing his passport, and allowing him to travel to Geneva for the ceremony.”

Ahmed Mansoor is a member of the Advisory Committee of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa Division, as well as the Advisory Board of the Gulf Centre for Human Rights.

The following organizations are represented in the Martin Ennals Award Jury: International Commission of Jurists, Amnesty International, FIDH, Human Rights First, HURIDOCS, International Service for Human Rights, EWDE Germany, Front Line Defenders, Human Rights Watch, World Organisation Against Torture.

Contact:

Michael Khambatta, Director, Martin Ennals Foundation, t +41 79 474 8208 ; e: khambatta(a)martinennalsaward.org

UAE-MEA Jury Joint Statement Ahmed Mansoor-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text of press release in ARABIC, pdf)

Egypt: ICJ condemns the promulgation of a new, repressive Counter-Terrorism Law

Egypt: ICJ condemns the promulgation of a new, repressive Counter-Terrorism Law

The ICJ today condemned the promulgation of the Counter-Terrorism Law by the Egyptian President, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, as a new, repressive move that would erode the rule of law and brush aside fundamental legal and human rights guarantees.

Calls to revise the draft Counter-Terrorism Law by the ICJ and other international and national human rights organizations and stakeholders, including Egypt’s quasi-governmental National Human Rights Council, were disregarded.

“The promulgation of the Counter-Terrorism Law by President el-Sisi expands the list of repressive laws and decrees that aim to stifle dissent and the exercise of fundamental freedoms,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme.

“Egypt’s authorities must ensure the law is not used as a tool of repression and, to this end, comprehensively revise it so that it fully complies with international human rights law and standards,” he added.

In a position paper published on 9 July, the ICJ detailed how the law is inconsistent with, and in numerous ways violates, Egypt’s obligations under international law, including those relating to the right to life, the right to liberty and not to be subjected to arbitrary detention, the right to privacy, and fair trial rights.

Further, the law gives state officials broad immunity from criminal responsibility for the use of force in the course of their duties, including the use of lethal force when it is not strictly necessary to protect lives, grants sweeping surveillance and detention powers to prosecutors, entrenches terrorism circuits within the court system (which have in the past frequently involved fair trial violations), and grants the President far-reaching, discretionary powers to “take the necessary measures” to maintain public security, where there is a “danger of terrorist crimes.”

Contact:

Alice Goodenough, Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +44 7815 570 834; e: alice.goodenough(a)icj.org

Nader Diab, Associate Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 229 793 804; e: nader.diab(a)icj.org

Egypt-Counter-Terrorism Law Promulgated-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text in pdf, ARABIC)

Egypt: impunity prevails two years after Rabaa’ and Nahda Square killings

Egypt: impunity prevails two years after Rabaa’ and Nahda Square killings

Today, on the second anniversary of the killing by the armed and security forces of more than 1,000 individuals during the dispersal of the Rabaa’ Al-Adawyia and Al Nahda Square sit-ins, the ICJ calls on the Egyptian authorities to end its policy of impunity for serious human rights violations.

The authorities must conduct thorough, effective, independent and impartial investigations into protestor deaths with a view to holding to account all those responsible for unlawful killings and other human rights violations committed in the course of the demonstrations, the ICJ says.

“It is a measure of the total disregard for victims’ rights and the absolute impunity of the armed and security services that in the two years that have passed, no effective investigations in line with international standards have taken place and not a single person has been brought to justice for the mass killings of protestors,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme.

“The victims of human rights violations and their family members have been left without any effective remedies or reparation, including an acknowledgment by the Egyptian authorities of their responsibility for the hundreds of killings and injuries that day,” he added.

Although fact-finding initiatives were conducted by Egypt’s quasi-governmental National Human Rights Council and by a government-appointed commission, the ICJ considers these investigations to be deeply flawed and ineffective.

The ICJ says both had inadequate access to first hand or physical evidence from the scene, because they did not begin their work until weeks or months after the events took place; lacked the ability to compel State authorities to testify and provide evidence; failed to document the full extent of human rights violations that took place; and neither led to any form of criminal investigation, much less prosecution of those responsible for these violations.

Further, while the government-appointed commission found that over 700 people had been killed during the Rabaa’ and Nahda dispersals, the shambolic report it issued dedicated just 9 pages to these two dispersals, concluding summarily and without substantiation that the police had been justified in violently dispersing the protest and blaming primarily the organizers of the sit-ins as well as the protestors for the high death toll.

There are credible allegations that in dispersing these demonstrations the armed and security forces unlawfully resorted to excessive and disproportionate use of force, the ICJ adds.

“By turning a blind eye to gross human rights violations committed by the armed and security forces, and by shielding their members from any form of criminal accountability, the Egyptian authorities are fostering the structural impunity that prevails in Egypt instead of combatting it,” said Benarbia.

“To meet their obligations under international law, the authorities must dismantle such policies and practices and establish the truth about the sit-ins’ dispersal,” he added.

Under international law lethal force may never be used unless strictly necessary to protect life.

States are obliged to provide access to an effective remedy and reparation to victims of human right violations.

They are also required to conduct prompt, thorough and impartial investigations, with a view to holding criminally accountable persons responsible for serious human rights violations, particularly those involving a denial of the right to life.

Contact:

Alice Goodenough, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +44 7815 570 834; e: alice.goodenough(a)icj.org

Nader Diab, Associate Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 229 793 804; e: nader.diab(a)icj.org

Egypt-Impunity Rabaa Sq-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text in pdf, ARABIC)

Libya: unfair trial of Saif Al-Islam Gadhafi and others a missed opportunity to establish truth, violates right to life

Libya: unfair trial of Saif Al-Islam Gadhafi and others a missed opportunity to establish truth, violates right to life

The ICJ today expressed its serious concerns about the trial, conviction and sentencing to death of Saif al Islam Gadhafi, Abdallah al Senussi, as well as seven officials of the Gadhafi regime by the Tripoli Criminal Court.

The ICJ is deeply concerned that the trial of the officials of the Gadhafi regime failed to scrupulously respect the guarantees of fair trial as required by Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Libya is a state party.

The imposition of the death penalty following such an unfair trial violates the right to life.

The ICJ opposes the death penalty in all circumstances as a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

“Libyan authorities must comply with their obligations under international law, refrain from implementing the death sentences against Saif al Islam and 8 former Libyan officials, and ensure that all defendants are retried before an independent and impartial tribunal and in full compliance with international fair trial standards,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the MENA programme at the ICJ.

“The trial is a lost opportunity to make a break from decades of unfair trials in Libya. It is also a missed opportunity to establish the truth about the legacy of alleged gross human rights violations committed during the 40-year reign of Moammar Gadhafi, including summary executions, enforced disappearances, torture and other ill-treatment, and arbitrary detention,” Benarbia added.

Fair trial violations included severe limitations on the defendants’ rights to access a lawyer, to adequate time and facilities to prepare a defence, and to be represented and communicate with a lawyer of their own choosing, the ICJ says.

23 other defendants were sentenced to prison terms ranging from life imprisonment to 5 years.

The charges against the officials included: “murdering and bombarding civilians during the 2011 revolution,” “inciting, participating and assisting in the murder of Libyans,”  “recruiting mercenaries and establishing brigades and then providing them with weapons, uniforms and money to fight the protesters.”

Some defendants, including Saif al Islam Gadhafi, who continues to be held in militia custody in Zintan, were not present during the trial, though were connected by video link at times.

The ICJ is also concerned that the defendants’ rights to appeal are limited in numerous ways.

Convictions by the Tripoli Criminal Court will be reviewed before the cassation chamber of the Supreme Court.

The chamber only examines the proper application of the law by the lower courts and does not review the merits of the case.

In accordance with Libya’s obligations under international law, including the ICCPR, the defendants have the right to have their convictions and sentences reviewed by an independent higher tribunal.

Such review must concern both the legal and material aspects of the defendants’ convictions and sentences.

The ICJ is concerned that political and security instability in Libya continues to undermine the ability of the judiciary to function and administer justice independently and impartially.

In reviewing the situation in the context of the Saif al Islam Gadhafi case, the International Criminal Court (ICC), expressed concern about the inability of the judicial and governmental authorities to obtain testimony or to provide witness protection.

It found that Libya was unable to conduct a fair prosecution and trial of Gadhafi.

The ICC issued a warrant for his arrest to answer allegation of crimes against humanity.

The ICJ calls on the Libyan authorities to annul the unfair proceedings; to fully cooperate with, and surrender Saif al Islam Gadhafi to the ICC; and to ensure the fair re-trial of the other accused.

Contact:
Doireann Ansbro, Associate Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +216 71 841 701, e: doireann.ansbro(a)icj.org

Libya-Saif Gadhafi sentence-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text of press releases in Arabic, PDF)

Photo: Ahmed Jadallah / Reuters

Translate »