Landmark rulings expose Romanian and Lithuanian complicity in CIA secret detention programme

Landmark rulings expose Romanian and Lithuanian complicity in CIA secret detention programme

The European Court of Human Rights has found that Romania and Lithuania violated the human rights of Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri and Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn, also known as Abu Zubaydah.

The court underlined both countries’ complicity in the ill-treatment of the pair while they were held in US secret detention facilities in these countries.

The judgments are a key milestone in holding European governments accountable for their involvement in illegal CIA activities in the aftermath of the 11 September 2001 attacks.

“The US could not have operated the rendition and secret detention programme without its European allies. Today’s landmark rulings break the conspiracy of silence that has surrounded the presence of these secret sites in Lithuania and Romania, and publicly underlines European governments’ widespread complicity,” said Julia Hall, Amnesty International’s expert on counter-terrorism and human rights.

“The rulings are an important milestone of accountability for victims of these flagrantly illegal practices.”

Al-Nashiri and Abu Zubaydah, currently in the US Guantánamo Bay detention facility, were subjected to enforced disappearance and torture as part of the rendition programme.

The European Court held that both governments are responsible for the men’s unlawful detention and ill-treatment in CIA ‘black sites’.

A December 2014 report by the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence included details of al-Nashiri and Abu Zubaydah’s torture, but the names of the countries where people were held in secret sites were redacted. Courts in the USA have declined to hear cases related to the CIA operations deferring to US government claims that information about the sites should be protected as “state secrets”. There has been virtually no accountability for such abuses in the US.

“These rulings are a further step towards establishing the truth about European complicity in renditions and secret detentions, and holding European states accountable for their involvement. But the Lithuanian and Romanian governments were not alone. Many other European governments colluded with the US to illegally transfer, ‘disappear’ and torture people during rendition operations and must also be held accountable,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the International Commission of Jurists’ (ICJ’s) Europe and Central Asia Programme.

Amnesty International and ICJ intervened in both proceedings (see Al-Nashiri and Abu Zubaydah). The organizations submitted evidence, context and expert opinion in light of precedents within the court and elsewhere.

On 13 March 2018, at the US naval base in Guantánamo Bay, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri began his 800th week in US custody. Abu Zubaydah is also imprisoned there, but has not been charged with any crime.

Amnesty International and ICJ have repeatedly called for the closure of the facility and the fair trial or release of those detained.

The judgments follow previous rulings against Poland, Italy, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia for their roles in the illegal rendition, torture, including waterboarding and mock execution, and enforced disappearance of alleged suspects at the hands of the CIA.

The Judgment

Based on numerous expert opinions and a 2014 US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence report on the CIA programme, the Court identified detention facilities “Detention Site Black” in Romania and “Detention Site Violet” in Lithuania.

The Court also held that both governments violated the prohibition on non-refoulement by allowing the men’s unlawful rendition to other countries despite the risk of further violations of the prohibition on torture and other ill-treatment.

In addition to the complicity in their unlawful detention and ill-treatment while detained in their respective countries, the Court held that both governments violated the prohibition on non-refoulement, which obliges states not to return anyone to a territory where they would be at risk of persecution or other serious human rights violations, by allowing the men’s unlawful rendition to other countries.

It found that Romania had violated its human rights obligations by assisting Al-Nashiri’s transfer out of Romania, despite the risk that he would face a flagrant denial of justice upon prosecution in a US Military Commission trial at Guantanamo Bay.

It also found that Romania violated Al-Nashiri’s right to life by facilitating his transfer despite the substantial and foreseeable risk that he would be facing the death penalty.

In both cases, the court held that neither state satisfied their obligation to carry out an effective investigation. 

Contact

Olivier van Bogaert, Director Media & Communications at ICJ, t: +41 22 979 38 08 ; e: olivier.vanbogaert(a)icj.org

Europe-Renditions Rom & Lit-News-press release-2018-ENG (full story in PDF)

 

Third party intervention to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child: collective expulsion of a child from Spain to Morocco

Third party intervention to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child: collective expulsion of a child from Spain to Morocco

The ICJ together with ECRE, the AIRE Center and the Dutch Council for Refugees submitted a third party intervention to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in case D.D. v Spain 4/2016 pending in front of the Committee.

The case concerns a collective expulsion of a child from a Spanish enclave of Melilla to Morocco. The case has been declared admissible by the Committee in June 2017.

The UN CRC allows for individual complaints since April 2014 for children against countries that ratified its Third Optional Protocol on a Communications Procedure.

The current submission of the ICJ and partner organisations is focusing in particular on State’s jurisdiction (CRC article 2.1), access to the territory and non-refoulement (CRC articles 3.1, 6, 20, 37), specific safeguards for children (CRC articles 3.1, 12 and 22) and collective expulsions (CRC articles 3.1, 20 and 22).

The intervention analyses the legal principles and jurisprudence related to scope and content of States Parties’ obligations, without reference to the particular facts of the case before the Committee.

The submission will also be considered by the Committee when examining the case. It is also now being transmitted to both parties for comments, in accordance with Rule 23.2 of the Committee’s Rules of procedure on the OPIC.

The intervening organisations argue that:

  • A State has jurisdiction over children who are subject to its authority or effective control on or at its land border, whether within or outside its territory. When a State Party exercises its jurisdiction over a child, its responsibility is engaged and it is required to comply with its international obligations of human rights protection, including under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), particularly as regards the assessment of the best interests of the child and the child’s right to be heard. Where a State Party is an EU Member State, it is additionally obliged to ensure the respect of the child’s best interests, protection and care necessary for the child’s well-being as well as the other child-specific guarantees under EU law.
  • Children who are subject to the authority or effective control of a State on or at its land border must be granted access to the territory as a prerequisite to the initial assessment process and further afforded the opportunity to meaningfully raise objections to their transfer, as the principle of non-refoulementand the prohibition on collective expulsions require. The prohibition of refoulement on certain grounds is of an absolute nature in international human rights law and entails positive duties on the part of States, including to grant children the possibility to present the reasons against their return, to ensure their access to legal assistance and to a guardian, and to perform an individualized assessment to verify and evaluate the risk of refoulement.
  • The prohibition of collective expulsion requires a thorough and rigorous assessment, including the examination of the particular circumstances of those forming part of the group of non-nationals concerned by the measure. This obligation also entails their effective identification and registration as well as information about, and access to applicable protection procedures and remedies where relevant. These safeguards apply whenever the individuals concerned fall within State Parties’ jurisdiction, including in circumstances when jurisdiction is exercised extraterritorially and irrespective of their migration status.
  • When children are involved, the prohibition of collective expulsion additionally requires compliance with child-specific rights and corresponding tailored procedural safeguards. Collective expulsion entails a violation of the primary obligation to assess the best interest of the child in each individual case, which must be carried out prior to any decision to return or refuse entry or any other decision affecting children and must be adequately reflected in this decision.

UN-Third-party-intervention-DD-v-Spain-Rights-of-the-Child-May-2018-ENG(full PDF in Eng)

Training materials on access to justice for migrant children

Training materials on access to justice for migrant children

The ICJ has published today a set of training materials on access to justice for migrant children that were developed as part of the FAIR (Fostering Access to Immigrant children’s Rights) project.

These training modules should help lawyers when representing migrant children to increase their knowledge of the rights of the migrant children, to increase their understanding of the use of international redress mechanisms for violations of human rights of migrant children and give some advice on how to effectively communicate with child clients.

The materials include the following training modules:

0. Guiding principles and definitions,

I. Access to fair procedures including the right to be heard and to participate in proceedings,

II. Access to justice in detention,

III. Access to justice for economic, social and cultural rights,

IV. Access to justice in the protection of their right to private and family life,

V. Redress through international human rights bodies and mechanisms,

VI. Practical handbook for lawyers when representing a child.

These materials have been used in national trainings for lawyers organised by the ICJ-EI in Spain, Italy, Greece, Malta, Bulgaria, Ireland and Germany and include also practical training tools, such as case studies and warm-up questionnaires to guide possible future trainings.

They will be translated into five other languages: Spanish, Greek, Bulgarian, German and Italian.

You can download the materials here:

In English

Europe-FAIR module 0-Training modules-2018-ENG

Europe-FAIR module 1-Training modules-2018-ENG

Europe-FAIR module 2-Training modules-2018-ENG

Europe-FAIR module 3-Training modules-2018-ENG

Europe-FAIR module 4-Training modules-2018-ENG

Europe-FAIR module 5-Training modules-2018-ENG

Europe-FAIR module 6-Training modules-2018-ENG

In Bulgarian

Europe-FAIR module 0-Training modules-2018-BUL

Europe-FAIR module 1-Training modules-2018-BUL

Europe-FAIR module 2-Training modules-2018-BUL

Europe-FAIR module 3-Training modules-2018-BUL

Europe-FAIR module 4-Training modules-2018-BUL

Europe-FAIR module 5-Training modules-2018-BUL

Europe-FAIR module 6-Training modules-2018-BUL

In German

Europe-FAIR module 0-Training modules-2018-GER

Europe-FAIR module 1-Training modules-2018-GER

Europe-FAIR module 2-Training modules-2018-GER

Europe-FAIR module 3-Training modules-2018-GER

Europe-FAIR module 4-Training modules-2018-GER

Europe-FAIR module 5-Training modules-2018-GER

Europe-FAIR module 6-Training modules-2018-GER

In Greek

Europe-FAIR module 0-Training modules-2018-GRE

Europe-FAIR module 1-Training modules-2018-GRE

Europe-FAIR module 2-Training modules-2018-GRE

Europe-FAIR module 3-Training modules-2018-GRE

Europe-FAIR module 4-Training modules-2018-GRE

Europe-FAIR module 5-Training modules-2018-GRE

Europe-FAIR module 6-Training modules-2018-GRE

In Italian

Europe-FAIR module 0-Training modules-2018-ITA

Europe-FAIR module 1-Training modules-2018-ITA

Europe-FAIR module 2-Training modules-2018-ITA

Europe-FAIR module 3-Training modules-2018-ITA

Europe-FAIR module 4-Training modules-2018-ITA

Europe-FAIR module 5-Training modules-2018-ITA

Europe-FAIR module 6-Training modules-2018-ITA

In Spanish

Download here

 

Denmark: ICJ co-sponsors conference on the Danish Presidency of the Council of Europe

Denmark: ICJ co-sponsors conference on the Danish Presidency of the Council of Europe

Today, the ICJ is co-sponsoring a conference in Copenhagen to mark the conclusion of the Danish Presidency of the Council of Europe, and take stock of its contribution to protection of human rights in the Council of Europe region. 

The conference, Copenhagen, Elsinore and the Future of Europe: Assessing the Danish Chairmanship of the Council of Europe is organized by iCourts and the University of Copenhagen in collaboration with the Danish Chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the ICJ and the Danish Institute for Human Rights.

This conference will assess what has been achieved during the Danish Chairmanship – and what can still be achieved at the final high-level conference in Elsinore where the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the 47 member states will meet and are scheduled to adopt a decision on the future of the Council of Europe. The conference will focus on the priorities of the Danish Chairmanship, including:

  • Reform of the European Court of Human Rights and the Copenhagen Declaration
  • Equal opportunities
  • Involvement of children and young people in democracy
  • Changing attitudes and prejudices about persons with disabilities
  • Combating torture.

At the conference, the ICJ will present its analysis of the recent Copenhagen Declaration on  the future of the European Convention on Human Rights system, and its recommendations for how its conclusions and recommendations should be taken forward.

The programme is available here:  http://jura.ku.dk/icourts/calendar/copenhagen-elsinore-future-of-europe/

Turkey: Seminar on legal protection of rights of migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers

Turkey: Seminar on legal protection of rights of migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers

Today begins in Istanbul (Turkey) a two-day seminar for lawyers and CSO practitioners representing and working with migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers.

This event is organized by ICJ, in cooperation with its partners Refugee Rights Turkey, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), Mülteci-Der (MD) and ICJ-EI, as part of the EU co-financed project Fostering Access to Rights for Migrants, Refugees and Asylum-Seekers in Turkey.

40 lawyers and civil society practitioners – representing different bar associations and relevant organisations from the all over Turkey – are taking part in the seminar on 12 and 13 May.

The seminar aims to update lawyers and CSOs on the international law mechanisms in the United Nations and the Council of Europe, deputed to the protection of the rights of refugees, migrants and asylum-seekers . It aims at an effective implementation of the Turkish legal framework on asylum and migration.

The training will use as a basis the draft training materials prepared by the ICJ and its partners (to be published an the end of 2019) and, among other sources, the ICJ Practitioners Guide no. 6: Migration and International Human Rights Law.

The project “Fostering Access to Rights for Migrants, Refugees and Asylum-Seekers in Turkey” is funded by the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) of the European Union.

Turkey-Seminar-Istanbul-MigrationAsylum-Agenda-2018-eng (download the agenda)

Translate »