UN Statement: Abuse of counter-terrorism measures against human rights defenders; no role for Egypt on UN expert mandate

UN Statement: Abuse of counter-terrorism measures against human rights defenders; no role for Egypt on UN expert mandate

The ICJ today delivered a joint oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council, addressing the abuse of counter-terrorism measures to repress human rights defenders and other civil society actors, and highlighting deep concerns about possible moves to allow Egypt a significant role over the UN’s independent expert on human rights and counter-terrorism.

The statement was delivered in an interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. The ICJ made the statement jointly on behalf of Amnesty International, Article 19, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, CIVICUS, Human Rights Watch, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), and Privacy International.

The organisations had earlier sent a joint letter to all States’ delegations to the Council in Geneva, highlighting Egypts appalling record of abuse of counter-terrorism measures, and urging States to strongly oppose any attempts to weaken the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, whether by diluting or distorting it by importing the flawed Egyptian-led approach into the Mexican-led resolution for its renewal, or any moves by longstanding leader Mexico to share co-leadership of the mandate renewal resolution with Egypt or other States with such an appalling record in relation to the very issues the mandate is to address.

The joint oral statement to the Council read as follows (check against delivery):

“Madame Special Rapporteur,

Our organizations welcome your report on the impacts of counter-terrorism and counter-extremism measures against civil society and human rights defenders (A/HRC/40/52).

We strongly concur with your findings regarding the deliberate and targeted abuse of overly broad and vague definitions of terrorism and violent extremism to criminalize and otherwise suppress human rights defenders and other civil society actors. We also appreciate your highlighting the need to prevent indirect impacts on civil society.

Among those States with a particularly appalling record of deliberate and targeted abuse, Egypt, which is mentioned in your report (paras 53 and 56), is a prominent example. As Human Rights Watch recently stated: “Using counterterrorism as a guise to crush all forms of dissent could be Egypt’s hallmark of 2018… There’s simply not much room left to peacefully challenge the government without being detained and unfairly prosecuted as a ‘terrorist’.”[1] Other examples from the reports before the Council include Turkey (para 53), Saudi Arabia (A/HRC/40/52/Add.2 paras 21-29), and China particularly as regards Uyghurs and Kazakhs (paras 55 and 57).

We share your concern about the elements lost from the previous Human Rights Council and General Assembly resolutions on “protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism” in their March 2018 merger with the deeply flawed Egyptian-led initiative on “effects of terrorism” (para 29). We reiterate our call from March 2018 for future versions of the resolution to address the relevant issues exclusively and comprehensively from the perspective of the effective protection of human rights.[2] We strongly oppose any attempts to dilute your mandate, including by importing the flawed Egyptian-led approach into the resolution for its renewal, or any sharing of co-leadership of the mandate renewal resolution with States that have such an appalling record in relation to the very issues the mandate is to address.

Madame Rapporteur, beyond the particular cases mentioned in your report (para 53), what are your views on the broader situation within Egypt in terms of abuse of counter-terrorism measures and what can States, the United Nations, civil society, and other stakeholders do to stop such abuses in the name of counter-terrorism in Egypt and other egregious situations?

Thank you.

[1] https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/01/17/egypt-new-moves-crush-dissent (17 January 2019). See also among others: Human Rights Watch World Report 2019, https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/egypt; EuroMed Rights, Egypt – Finding Scapegoats: Crackdown on Human Rights Defenders and Freedoms in the Name of Counter-terrorism and Security (Feb 2018) https://euromedrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/EuroMed-Rights-Report-on-Counter-terrorism-and-Human-Rights.pdf; Joint NGO Statement, Egypt: Civil society faces existential threat (23 June 2016) https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Egypt-Advocacy-JointNGOStatement-2016.pdf.

[2] Joint NGO end-of-session statement (23 March 2018) https://www.icj.org/hrc37-endofsession/.”

The statement can be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC40-JointOralStatement-SRCTHR-2019-EN

For more information email un(a)icj.org.

On Video: At 70 Years, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights remains “a common standard of achievement for all”

On Video: At 70 Years, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights remains “a common standard of achievement for all”

Today, 10 December 2018 marks the 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Developed as a universal standard setting out the rights to be enjoyed by everyone, the elaboration of the UDHR was one of the first actions undertaken by the newly established UN in carrying out its human rights mandate.

The UN Charter, forged after the ravages of the Second World War, places advancement of human rights as a core purpose and principle of the UN.

Over the past 70 years, the UN and regional human rights systems have taken the UDHR as the benchmark in developing the impressive normative architecture that constitutes the present day basis of international human rights law and standards.

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) was founded in 1952, only four years after the UDHR, with a mission to advance the rule of law and legal protection of human rights. Most of the international legal human framework at that time had still not yet been developed. The founding members of the ICJ believed that the lofty human rights principles enunciated in the UDHR needed to be transformed into hard and enforceable legal obligations incumbent on all States. From its founding, the ICJ worked to develop treaties and other standards aimed to make the enjoyment of human rights real for people, and not merely aspirational.

According to Sam Zarifi, Secretary General of the ICJ, “The ICJ’s biggest contribution to the international legal framework is still to bring together jurists from around the world to defend the rule of law and the universality of human rights at the global and local level.”

“Many now established global legal instruments have the fingerprints of the ICJ all over them. Crucial regional frameworks in the African, European, and American regions were developed with the deep and sustained involvement of the ICJ, as were the creation of the post of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the International Criminal Court,” said Sam Zarifi.

The UDHR has not only inspired the work of human rights defenders, but has also been foundational for the general acceptance of the notion of human rights around the world.

From 1948 until the end of the twentieth century, there has generally been a continuous upward trajectory towards the advancement of human rights, even if there have been many pitfalls along the way.

The notion that people have rights is now universally accepted and known by people. At the Vienna Conference on Human Rights in 1993, all States of the world not only reaffirmed their commitment to the UDHR, but also agreed that “the universal nature of these rights and freedoms is beyond question.”

Over the years, there have certainly been major shortcomings in the push to achieve the realization of the human rights for all.

Some of the extreme examples include armed conflicts replete with crimes against humanity, war crimes and even genocide, followed by a failure to hold perpetrators accountable.

And there remains extreme poverty in parts of the world marked by a thorough neglect of economic and social rights.

Despite these shortfalls in implementation, it remains the case that human rights have been accepted as a key component in addressing humanity’s problems in the 70 years since the adoption of the UDHR.

“Over the years, more and more States have ratified human rights treaties, more States have incorporated human rights in their domestic law, and more courts have started to enforce human rights. At the grass roots law level, more organizations have demanded human rights as an entitlement and not just as an aspiration,” explains Ian Seiderman, Legal and Policy Director of the ICJ.

Despite, this long term trend in advancement of human rights, there are warning signs that progress is slowing and in some places has even reversed particularly in the past decade.

“We are now seeing a very strong pushback against human rights proclaimed in the UDHR from countries around the world,” says Ian Seiderman.

“Some of the pressures have come from the security angle, where even States that previously championed rights insist that rights protection must cede to security interest. More recently there has been a rise in populist authoritarian governments that don’t even pay lip service to human rights anymore. And many States have also turned their backs on the commitment to protect the most marginalized and vulnerable, such as refugees and migrants,” he adds.

Roberta Clarke, Chair of the ICJ Executive Committee:

At the normative level, there remains the notable gap in the international legal protection from transnational corporations and other business that abuse human rights and the reticence of many States to participate in good faith in the efforts at the UN to close this gap with a new business and human rights treaty.

This backlash has only redoubled the ICJ’s commitment to fight for the values originally imagined by the writers of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The ICJ and its individual Commissioners remain heavily involved in the development of human rights standards and their implementation based on the UDHR and a part of the larger human rights movement.

The ICJ continues to work to adopt human rights law to changing conditions in the modern world, develops the human rights capacities of lawyers and judges in all parts of the world, undertakes legal advocacy internationally and in many countries, and provides legal tools for human rights practitioners.

Robert Goldman, ICJ President:

On the 70th anniversary of the UDHR, it is critically important to recall why the UDHR was established in the first place, especially in light of the current regression of human rights development around the world.

The preamble of the UDHR reminds us that “ disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind.”

But more critically, it also insists that addressing these and other acts of inhuman rights require that human rights be protected by the rule of law.

This will be the ICJ’s continuing mission.

 

 

 

Translate »