Release Hejaaz Hizbullah and Others Denied Due Process under Abusive Law

Release Hejaaz Hizbullah and Others Denied Due Process under Abusive Law

The ICJ and other human rights organisations express deep concern for the ongoing detention of lawyer and minority and civic rights activist Hejaaz Hizbullah, who has been held under Sri Lanka’s notorious Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) for 15 months. In the absence of any credible evidence presented before a court of law, Hejaaz Hizbullah should be released immediately and unconditionally.

Egypt: ICJ and CIHRS side-event at UN HRC47 on the use of “counter-terrorism” laws to target human rights defenders

Egypt: ICJ and CIHRS side-event at UN HRC47 on the use of “counter-terrorism” laws to target human rights defenders

The Egyptian authorities systematically abuse “counter-terrorism” laws against human rights defenders, setting a dangerous model for other countries around the world to follow.

On 23 June, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS) jointly organized an online event on the sidelines of 47th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council to denounce Egypt’s targeting of human rights defenders through the country’s “counter-terrorism” laws.

Titled ‘Weaponizing Counter Terrorism Laws to Silence Human Rights Defenders’, the interactive online webinar aimed to highlight how the Egyptian authorities use “counter-terrorism” laws to target human rights defenders, including by placing lawyers and human rights activists on Egypt’s “terrorist list”, a recent practice resulting in serious human rights violations.

The event was moderated by Bahey Eldin Hassan, CIHRS Director, who stressed that the abuse of the “counter-terrorism” laws was not only employed against human rights defenders, and is not a phenomenon limited to Egypt.

The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism, Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, pointed out that repressive regimes take advantage of the lack of a globally agreed definition of terrorism when legislating for counter terrorism purposes. As a result, they get to place whomever they like under the “terrorism label” at the national level, with no meaningful oversight or penalties.

“The United Nations Security Council has taken on a massive legislative role on counter terrorism, which has given cover to and enabled State repression at the national level,” Ní Aoláin noted addressing the role of the international community.

“This is not an accident or a ‘bad apple’ problem, the misuse of counter-terrorism is embedded in the practised national legal systems,” Ní Aoláin added. “That abuse is part of the DNA of State practice in many countries.”

“We are at a pivotal moment.  States must ask themselves what 20 years of abuse of counter terrorism laws have done,” Ní Aoláin urged. “It has weakened protections and made us less safe in many ways. This is a time for States to stand up and ensure pressure for change of this situation.”

Brian Dooley, Senior Advisor to the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders, noted that for authorities to imprison a human rights defender “with a straight face” for a long period of time, they have to use major accusations such as terrorism.

“The Egyptian authorities know that these human rights defenders are not terrorists,” Dooley said. “In most of the cases we have seen, where defenders were sentenced to ten years or more in prison, the relevant authorities use some sort of anti-terrorism, national security, or treason laws to justify putting a human rights defender away in prison for 10 or more years.”

Said Benarbia, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Director, began by naming some of the most prominent human rights defenders who remain in pre-trial detention facing “terrorism-related charges” in Egypt.

Among those Benarbia mentioned are: Alaa Abdelfattah, a blogger and a human rights activist; Mahienour al-Masri, a human rights lawyer; Mohammad al-Baqer, a lawyer and the director of the independent NGO, Adalah; and Amr Imam, a lawyer at the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information.

“In most of the cases the ICJ documented human rights defenders face charges of ‘joining a terrorist group’,” but the State security prosecution has consistently failed to even name the terrorist organization or group concerned,” Benarbia said. “In most of the cases, prosecutions were initiated with the sole purpose of intimidating and silencing human rights defenders.”

Benarbia emphasized that prosecuting individuals despite a total lack of evidence to support the charges is contrary to both the Egyptian and international law and standards.

“Any country that, like Egypt, uses ‘counter terrorism’ legislation to clamp down on basic freedoms and retaliate against human rights defenders and create open-air prisons should not have a say in setting international standards on terrorism,” Benarbia added.

Human Rights Defender, Celine Lebrun Shaath, delivered a passionate statement about her husband, Ramy Shaath, an Egyptian Palestinian human rights defender who has been detained since July 2019. Shaath, who herself was deported from Egypt in the wake of her husband’s arrest, mentioned that the online event was taking place on Ramy Shaath’s birthday; the second since his imprisonment. “I would rather not be here today,” she added, lamenting what had happened to her husband.

“We do not know to what terrorist group Ramy is supposed to be belonging,” Shaath said. “He is accused of spreading ‘fake news’, but we don’t know which news or where he had spread them.”

Shaath expressed her hope that the Egyptian government would heed the call for her husband’s release and free Ramy and all the political prisoners.

“[Human Rights Defenders] should be looked at as a wealth for this country. They are the future, they are not a threat, dissent is not terrorism, dissent is a vibrant part of democracy that should be cherished and protected,” Shaath underscored.

On 12 March 2021, 31 UN Member States signed a joint declaration condemning the human rights situation in Egypt, which Finland delivered on their behalf at the Human Rights Council’s 46th session. The joint letter focused primarily on “the restrictions on freedom of expression and the right to peaceful assembly, the constrained space for civil society and political opposition, and the application of terrorism legislation against peaceful critics.”

The event was cosponsored by Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the International Service for Human Rights and the International Federation for Human Rights.

You can watch the entire event here.

Contact:

Said Benarbia, Director, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Asser Khattab, Research and Communications Officer, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, e: asser.khattab(a)icj.org

EU: counter-terrorism laws must comply with human rights obligations

EU: counter-terrorism laws must comply with human rights obligations

Four years after the EU Directive on Combating Terrorism came into force, more effort is needed to ensure it is implemented in accordance with human rights law obligations, Amnesty International, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), the European Centre for Not-for-Profit Law (ECNL) and the European Network against Racism (ENAR) said today. The organizations called for the European Commission’s review of the Directive’s implementation to prioritize scrutiny of its impact on human rights.

In assessing the value of the Directive on Combating Terrorism (Directive 2017/541) in the Member States, the European Commission must scrutinize how it has affected the human rights of victims, suspects, as well as the wider community and civil society, the organizations said.

The Directive, enacted in 2017 after an expedited legislative process, criminalizes a wide range of conduct related to terrorism. The Directive establishes an overly broad definition of terrorism and requires states to include in their criminal law offences that are often not closely linked to the perpetration of a terrorist act. These include offences of travel for the purpose of terrorism, participation in a terrorist group, and public provocation to commit acts of terrorism. Because the terms of the offences are so widely drawn, safeguards in national law and practice are essential to ensure that they are not applied where there is no clear link to a principal offence of terrorism and/or no intent to contribute to such a principal offence, to prevent arbitrary application, including action based on racial prejudices of perceived dangerousness.

However, the organizations are concerned that EU member states are applying national laws on counter-terrorism in ways that unnecessarily or disproportionately limit the exercise of human rights, including freedom of expression and association, and freedom of religion or belief, and that discriminate against some ethnic or religious groups, in particular Muslims.

The implementation of the Directive by member states is now being reviewed by the European Commission, including through a consultation process, which concludes today.

As the review of the Directive is taken forward, the organizations urge the European Commission to consider in particular:

  • Whether and how the Directive can help to ensure effective accountability for internationally recognized crimes and the right to effective remedy and reparation for victims of terrorism, both within and outside of the EU;
  • To what extent national authorities have applied international, EU, as well as domestic human rights law in their transposition and implementation of the Directive;
  • What safeguards have been or should be introduced to prevent human rights violations in practice in the implementation of the Directive, in particular regarding freedom of expression, association, peaceful assembly, rights to respect for private and family life, freedom of religion or belief, freedom of movement and rights to political participation;
  • How the right to a fair trial and the right to liberty are being upheld in the implementation of the Directive’s offences within the member states’ justice systems, and what measures are needed to strengthen protection for these rights;
  • What safeguards have been or should be introduced to protect against the discriminatory application or impact of the Directive;
  • Whether civil society, including those representing victims of terrorism and groups affected by counter-terrorism measures, have been meaningfully consulted in the implementation of the Directive.

Background

The EU Directive on Combating Terrorism (Directive 2017/541) came into force in April 2017 and was required to be transposed into member state law by September 2018.

The Commission is due to report to the European Parliament on the added value of the Directive, and whether it is fit for purpose, including on its impact on fundamental rights in October 2021.

Several of the NGOs have made submissions to the EU Consultation as part of its review.

The Fundamental Rights Agency is currently also working on a report on the impact of the EU Counter-terrorism Directive on human rights across the EU.

For further commentary on the Directive and on counter-terrorism and human rights in Europe, see:

ICJ, Counter-Terrorism and human rights in the courts: guidance for judges, prosecutors and lawyers on the application of EU Directive 2017/541 on Combatting Terrorism https://www.icj.org/eu-guidance-on-judicial-application-of-the-eu-counter-terrorism-directive/

ENAR, research on the impact of counter-terrorism and counter-radicalisation policies and measures: https://www.enar-eu.org/ENAR-research-on-the-impact-of-counter-terrorism-and-counter-radicalisation

ECNL, Civic space in the era of securitized Covid-19 responses, https://ecnl.org/publications/civic-space-era-securitised-covid-19-responses

Download the statement here: EU combating directive statement_160621_ENG-2021

 

 

 

 

Turkey: ICJ intervenes in a case concerning anti-terror laws and effective remedies

Turkey: ICJ intervenes in a case concerning anti-terror laws and effective remedies

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the Turkey Litigation Support Project (TLSP) and Human Rights Watch (HRW) have intervened before the European Court of Human Rights in a case concerning the arrest and pre-trial detention of Turkish opposition politician Selahattin Demirtaş, on a series of charges relating to the exercise of his freedom of political expression. The applicant alleges that his pre-trial detention was arbitrary and unlawful.

In the intervention, the organisations underline that restrictions on freedom of expression, widespread detention and criminal prosecution under expansive anti-terrorism laws, and the impact on democratic debate and rights protection are now well documented in Turkey. This is particularly striking, and the repercussions serious, when opposition politicians are targeted for their expressions of opinion and engagement in democratic debate.

The interveners address:

  • the nature and application of anti-terror criminal laws in Turkey and the implications for protection of the right to liberty (Article 5(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)) and freedom of expression (Article 10 ECHR) and for the limitation on use of restrictions on rights (Article 18 ECHR); and
  • the effectiveness of the individual application procedure to the Turkish Constitutional Court as a remedy in detention cases, in particular in cases concerning the exercise of freedom of expression, in light of delays, the erosion of the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, and non-compliance of lower courts with the Constitutional Court’s decisions that protect Convention rights.

Full text of the intervention can be downloaded here.

Translate »