June 29, 2006
Notes on Israel's Invasion of Gaza
Yesterday, Israel invaded the Gaza Strip, from where they had withdrawn 9 months ago. Isralei forces have Access for journalists was restricted in anticipation of the invasion. Israeli forces arrested a third of the Palestinian parliament, and have Several organizations have issued statements condemning it.
Here are some news and statements on the invasion.
Derechos Human Rights strongly condemns the invasion, the restrictions on press freedom and the violations to the democratic process.
Israeli Troops and Armor Surge Into Gaza
By Laura King and Ken Ellingwood
The Los Angeles Times
Wednesday 28 June 2006
The Jewish state presses for release of a soldier captured by militants. Officials say there is no plan to seize the Palestinian territory.
Gaza City - Israeli troops and tanks, backed by fierce aerial bombardment, punched their way into the southern Gaza Strip early today, hours after Israel declared that time was running out for Palestinian militants to free an Israeli soldier seized in a cross-border raid.
The offensive was by far the largest since Israel unilaterally pulled its troops out of the seaside territory more than nine months ago. In the intervening months, Israel has responded to Palestinian militants' rocket attacks with airstrikes and artillery barrages.
But this is the first time since the withdrawal that large concentrations of Israeli forces have entered the restive, densely populated coastal territory.
The attack began late Tuesday when Israeli warplanes blew up a bridge in central Gaza, with loud booms reverberating across Gaza City - a move Israeli military officials said was meant to prevent the captors of Cpl. Gilad Shalit, 19, from moving him.
Later, two other bridges and a power plant were struck, sending billows of white smoke into a night sky lighted by flames and flares.
The air offensive in effect sliced Gaza into three sectors and knocked out power to large swaths, though electricity was restored at least temporarily in Gaza City and other northern areas. There was no immediate word on any Palestinian casualties or the number of Israeli troops that crossed into Gaza.
Military analysts said the incursion was the first phase of an operation that would intensify, possibly to include targeting Hamas leaders, unless Shalit is released.
"We are trying to make it clear to the Palestinian Authority and terrorist organizations that we're very serious about this and about Cpl. Shalit's safety and quick return home," said Capt. Noa Meir, an Israeli military spokeswoman.
Officials said Israel did not want to seize the Gaza Strip, which it occupied for 38 years.
"We have no interest in returning to a place we have left. We seek dialogue, not a bloodbath," Israel's infrastructure minister, Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, said early today. "If they return the soldier, sit down at the negotiating table - we're out. There's nothing for us there."
In the hours before the strike, Palestinians girded for attack, topping bulldozed mounds of sand along urban thoroughfares with barbed wire and laying what appeared to be homemade explosives in the expected path of Israeli tanks massed just across the border.
Against the backdrop of battle preparations by both sides, the Palestinians' ruling Hamas movement and the rival Fatah faction announced Tuesday that they had tentatively agreed on a political platform that could lead to negotiations with Israel.
However, the move appeared to be more of an effort to present a symbolic united front at a time of crisis than to genuinely alter the hard-line stance that has led to the Hamas-dominated government's diplomatic and economic isolation. The Islamist Hamas movement emphasized that it was still not willing to acknowledge Israel's right to exist.
The offensive was sparked by an audacious cross-border raid Sunday in which Palestinian militants captured Shalit and killed two other soldiers. Two of the Palestinian attackers were killed.
The consortium of Hamas-linked groups claiming to hold Shalit warned Tuesday against any attempt to rescue him, saying it would result in failure and bloodshed. That was a chilling and probably deliberate reminder to Israelis that the last time Palestinian militants managed to seize an Israeli soldier, in 1994, he was subsequently killed in an Israeli rescue raid.
"The soldier is in a secure location to which the Zionists' reach does not extend," Mohammed Abdelal, a spokesman for the Popular Resistance Committees, one of three groups thought to have taken part in the raid, told reporters in Gaza City.
The purported captors have demanded the release of Palestinian prisoners who are female or younger than 18 in exchange for information about Shalit, but have provided no proof he is alive.
Israel said no prisoner exchange was being contemplated.
Israeli military sources said they believed Shalit was being held in southern Gaza, a stronghold for militant Palestinian groups that have engaged in abductions of foreigners and Palestinian political rivals.
The Israeli troop incursion was concentrated east of the southern border town of Rafah. But the scale and intended duration of the military push were not clear.
In the initial offensive, Israeli soldiers did not enter Gaza City or its immediate environs, where in some neighborhoods masked militants flooded the streets and mosque loudspeakers called on people to resist.
"Take up your rifles and fight!" a senior leader of Hamas' military wing, Nizar Rayan, said in a broadcast exhortation.
Complex mediation efforts led by Egypt continued Tuesday. Because Shalit holds dual French-Israeli citizenship, French diplomats were also involved, but they were close-mouthed about their role.
The United States also urged restraint on Israel's part.
"There really needs to be an effort now to try and calm the situation," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters en route to Pakistan.
Seeking to step up the pressure on the Hamas government, Israel closed its border crossings with Gaza on Monday. Combined with a naval blockade, the closure has effectively barred the importation of food, fuel and other goods. Israeli media reported that government leaders also were considering cutting off electricity and water.
Vice Premier Shimon Peres said Israel was asking governments to withhold donations to the Palestinian Authority until the soldier is freed.
Peres also said it appeared that Hamas' political leader, Khaled Meshaal, a hard-liner who is based in Damascus, the Syrian capital, was responsible for Sunday's attack - the most explicit public accusation against Meshaal from a senior Israeli official.
"It's clear that Khaled Meshaal gave the order for this operation, and he wants to destroy prospects for peace," Peres told reporters after visiting Shalit's parents in the Galilee region.
In the streets of Gaza City on Tuesday, the mood was one of anger and defiance, with many saying that Palestinians should not free the Israeli soldier without getting something in return.
Atop makeshift barricades of sand, concrete blocks and debris, young Palestinian boys played with toy rifles. Aerial drones and other aircraft could be heard circling overhead, and Israeli gunships were visible through the heat haze offshore in the Mediterranean.
Adding to the jittery atmosphere, a car exploded Tuesday close to the Gaza City residence of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who was not in the building at the time.
One man, described as a Hamas militant, was killed and several others were wounded. Palestinians called it an assassination by Israel, but the Israeli military denied any involvement.
The announcement of a political agreement by Hamas and Fatah came after weeks of negotiations, and after Abbas said last month that he would put the question of whether to recognize Israel to Palestinian voters in a referendum.
Under the tentative agreement, Abbas would be empowered to hold negotiations with Israel but any agreements reached would require the approval of the Hamas-dominated parliament.
The document appeared to fall far short of international and Israeli demands on Hamas. Israel dismissed the accord as a "diplomatic non-starter."
The negotiations over a Hamas-Fatah political pact and the capture of Shalit have laid bare the divisions within Hamas.
The group's military wing, thought to report primarily to exiled leaders in Damascus, said it took part in the raid that brought about the soldier's capture. The Hamas-led government, meanwhile, urged that the soldier not be harmed.
"We … don't want to reach a situation of bloodshed," government spokesman Ghazi Hamad, who speaks fluent Hebrew, told Israel's Army Radio.
Defense Minister Amir Peretz said during a visit Tuesday to the agricultural community of Kerem Shalom, where the Palestinian attack took place, that Israel had no choice but to respond decisively to a raid on its soil.
---------
King reported from Gaza City and Ellingwood from Jerusalem.
Hamas Leaders Arrested; Israeli Executed The Associated Press
Wednesday 28 June 2006
Gaza City, Gaza Strip - Israeli forces arrested one-third of the Hamas-led Palestinian Cabinet and 20 lawmakers early Thursday and pressed their incursion into Gaza, responding to the abduction of one of its soldiers.
Israeli warplanes also buzzed the summer home of Syria's president, accused by Israel of harboring the hard-line Hamas leaders its blames for masterminding the kidnapping.
Palestinian witnesses told The Associated Press that Israeli tanks and bulldozers entered northern Gaza before daybreak Thursday, adding a second front to the Israeli action in Gaza that began early Wednesday when thousands of Israeli troops crossed into southern Gaza.
The Israeli military denied it moved into northern Gaza.
Adding to the tension, a Palestinian militant group said it killed an 18-year-old Jewish settler kidnapped in the West Bank. Israeli security officials said Eliahu Asheri's body was found buried near Ramallah. They said he was shot in the head, apparently soon after he was abducted on Sunday.
Army Radio said the arrested Hamas leaders might be used to trade for the captured soldier. Israel had refused earlier to trade prisoners for the soldier's release.
Palestinian security officials said eight ministers of the 24-member Hamas-led Cabinet and 20 lawmakers were arrested, among them Deputy Prime Minister Nasser Shaer and Labor Minister Mohammed Barghouti.
No deaths or injuries were reported in the Israeli actions. But the warplanes knocked out Gaza's electric power plant, raising the specter of a humanitarian crisis. The Hamas-led government warned of "epidemics and health disasters" because of damaged water pipes to central Gaza and the lack of power to pump water.
Although the Israeli action was sparked by the abduction of the soldier, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's government also is alarmed by the firing of homemade rockets on Israeli communities around Gaza and support for Hamas in the Arab world, especially from Syria.
In a clear warning to Syrian President Bashar Assad, Israeli airplanes flew ovecr his seaside home near the Mediterranean port city of Latakia in northwestern Syria, military officials confirmed, citing the "direct link" between his government and Hamas. Israeli television reports said four planes were involved in the low-altitude flight, and that Assad was there at the time.
Syria confirmed Israeli warplanes entered its airspace, but said its air defenses forced the Israeli aircraft to flee.
In Gaza late Wednesday, Israeli missiles also hit two empty Hamas training camps, a rocket-building factory and several roads. Warplanes flew low over the coastal strip, rocking it with sonic booms and shattering windows. Troops in Israel backed up the assault with artillery fire.
The area's normally bustling streets were eerily deserted, with people taking refuge inside their homes.
Witnesses reported heavy shelling around Gaza's long-closed airport, which Israeli troops took over. Dozens of people living near the airport fled to nearby Rafah.
The militant Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades said it fired a rocket with a chemical warhead at the Israeli town of Sderot Wednesday night, the first such claim. The Israeli military said it did not detect a rocket fired then. Al Aqsa is linked to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah faction.
In Rafah, Nivine Abu Shbeke, a 23-year-old mother of three, hoarded bags of flour, boxes of vegetables and other supplies. "We're worried about how long the food will last," she said. "The children devour everything."
Prior to the latest incursion into northern Gaza, the Israeli army dropped leaflets warning residents of impending military activity.
Dozens of Palestinian militants - armed with automatic weapons and grenades - took up positions, bracing for the attack.
Anxious Palestinians pondered whether the incursion, the first large-scale ground offensive since Israel withdrew from Gaza last year, was essentially a "shock and awe" display designed to intimidate militants, or the prelude to a full-scale invasion.
Olmert threatened harsher action, though he said there was no plan to reoccupy Gaza. Abbas deplored the incursion as a "crime against humanity."
The Israeli assault came as diplomatic efforts to free the 19-year-old Israeli soldier, Cpl. Gilad Shalit, bogged down with Hamas demanding a prisoner swap and Israel refusing, demanding Shalit's unconditional release. Shalit was abducted by Hamas-linked militants on Sunday and is believed to be in southern Gaza.
"We won't hesitate to carry out extreme action to bring Gilad back to his family," Olmert declared.
Abbas and Egyptian dignitaries urged Assad to use his influence with Khaled Mashaal, the Hamas leader exiled in Syria, to free Shalit. Assad agreed, but without results, said a senior Abbas aide.
As for Mashaal, Israeli Justice Minister Haim Ramon said the hard-line Hamas leader, who appears to be increasingly at odds with more moderate Hamas politicians in Gaza, is in Israel's sights for assassination.
"Khaled Mashaal, as someone who is overseeing, actually commanding the terror acts, is definitely a target," Ramon told Army Radio.
Israel tried to kill Mashaal in a botched assassination attempt in Jordan in 1997. Two Mossad agents injected Mashaal with poison, but were caught. As Mashaal lay in a Jordanian hospital, King Hussein of Jordan forced Israel to provide the antidote in return for the release of the Mossad agents.
The United Nations and European Union on Wednesday urged both Israel and the Palestinians to step back from the brink and, echoing a statement from Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, to give diplomacy a chance.
The White House kept up its pressure on Hamas, saying the Palestinian government must "stop all acts of violence and terror." But the U.S. also urged Israel to show restraint.
"In any actions the government of Israel may undertake, the United States urges that it ensures that innocent civilians are not harmed, and also that it avoid the unnecessary destruction of property and infrastructure," said White House press secretary Tony Snow.
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan urged restraint in a phone call to Olmert, saying he had spoken with Assad and Abbas and asked them to do everything possible to release the soldier. Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa called on the U.S. to assume its role as "honest broker" and to make the Palestinian-Israeli conflict its top priority in the Middle East.
Hamas' negotiators' tentative acceptance Tuesday of a document that Abbas allies claimed implicitly recognizes Israel appeared beside the point a day later, with Israel saying no political agreement can substitute for Shalit's freedom.
On Wednesday, Palestinian militants braced for a major strike, fanning out across neighborhoods, taking up positions behind sand embankments and firing several rockets into Israeli communities bordering Gaza. Civilians stockpiled food, water, batteries and candles after warplanes destroyed the coastal strip's only power plant, and main roads linking north to south.
Gaza's economy was already in the doldrums before the Israeli assault, a result of five years of Israeli-Palestinian violence and an international aid boycott that followed Hamas' parliamentary election victory in January. The Israeli assault threatened to turn a bad situation into a disaster - underscoring the extent to which hopes have been dashed following the optimism that accompanied Israel's pullout.
Palestinian plans for high-rise apartments, sports complexes and industrial parks in lands evacuated by Israel have given way to despair, with rising poverty, increasingly violent relations with Israel and a looming threat of civil war.
****** AdvocacyNet News Bulletin 69, June 29, 2006 ******
ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN ADVOCACY GROUP CONDEMNS GAZA INVASION
June 29, 2006, Jerusalem and Washington, DC: The Alternative Information Center (AIC), a joint Palestinian-Israeli organization, has demanded that the Israeli army immediately withdraw from Gaza.
A statement released Thursday by the AIC, a partner of the Advocacy Project, describes the invasion as part of a larger plan by the Israeli government to overthrow the new Hamas-led Palestinian government. The statement also calls for the withdrawal of Israeli settlers from the Palestinian Occupied Territories and the release of Palestinian prisoners.
According to reports, the Israeli authorities arrested more than 60 Hamas officials Thursday, including Palestinian Deputy Prime Minister Nasser Shaer.
AIC's statement follows, unedited:
Stop the Attack in Gaza Immediately
The Alternative Information Center (AIC) strongly condemns the Israeli army's invasion of the Gaza Strip. This invasion is a punishment for the results of the democratic Palestinian elections held in January and is irrelevant to the security of the state of Israel and that of its citizens. Moreover, in the course of this invasion, civilians have been, and will continue to be, killed by Israeli soldiers, Palestinian infrastructure has been destroyed and houses demolished. These practices are in violation of the Geneva Convention and should be considered crimes of war.
Since the Palestinian elections, Israel has consistently escalated the military tension, assassinating, injuring and kidnapping Palestinians. Since January, Israel has assassinated 172 Palestinians, mostly unarmed civilians, 50 of whom were killed during the month of June alone.
Israeli attacks against the Palestinians were especially felt in Gaza, which has suffered massive artillery bombing and a continued siege by Israeli forces. Only a few dozen trucks have been allowed to pass through the Karni crossing each day, to feed a population of over 1.3 million people (who normally require hundreds of trucks per day for a steady food supply). So far, even threats of starvation have failed to convince the Palestinian people to overthrow its democratically elected government.
Israeli attacks on the Palestinian population have nothing to do with the security of Israeli citizens, but rather are part of Prime Minister Olmert's war against a democratically elected government, with the objective to overthrow it.
The kidnapping of 8 Palestinian ministers and 21 members of Parliament, as well as threats to assassinate Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Hanie, make it clear that Israeli Prime Minister Olmert and his Minister of Defense Amir Peretz plan to forcibly topple the Palestinian government.
The current incursion in the Gaza Strip does not concern the safety of POW Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier. This incursion unnecessarily risks Shalit's life and safety. The use of force prior to even considering an exchange of prisoners demonstrates that Israel's political goals are of higher priority than Shalit's life.
The Alternative Information Center maintains that the only way to peace in the region is through the complete withdrawal of the Israeli army and Israeli settlers from all of the Palestinian Occupied Territories, including occupied Jerusalem; the liberation of all Palestinian political prisoners; recognition of the Right of Return of the Palestinian refugees according to UN Resolutions 194 and 242; and full respect for the individual and national rights of the Palestinian people.
The Alternative Information Center calls on the international community to condemn the Israeli occupation of the Gaza Strip and to demand their immediate withdrawal.
* For the Alternative Information Center, visit http://www.alternativenews.org/
* For AP intern Sarah Sach's blogs from Jerusalem, visit http://www.advocacynet.org/cpage_view/06aic_SarahsBlogs_67_430.html
* For AP's work on civil society in Palestine, visit http://www.advocacynet.org/cpage_view/palestine_palestinehome_16_55.html
#
The Advocacy Project is based in Washington DC. Phone +1 202 332 3900; fax +1 202 332 4600. To visit the AP web site for information about our current projects and to make a donation online, please go to: www.advocacynet.org. For questions or comments about the AP and its projects, please email us at info@advocacynet.org.
Using the capture of one of its soldiers as the pretext, the Israeli Occupation Forces (IOF) launched a brutal assault on the entire population of Gaza in the early morning hours of June 28. U.S.-supplied F-16 fighter-bombers destroyed the main power station in Gaza and destroyed bridges on the only major roads linking the northern and southern sections of the region. The people of Gaza are now without water and electricity -- and many will die. The use of U.S. planes and other military goods against illegally occupied territories is a violation of both international and U.S. law.
Israel is also threatening to widen the war, sending war planes over Syria to “buzz” the home of Syrian President Bashir al-Assad, whose government the U.S. has been actively working to bring down for more than two years.
The Palestinian population of Gaza, one of the poorest and most densely populated areas of the world, was already suffering severe shortages of food, medicine and other necessities due to Israel’s blockade of Gaza and the cut-off of international aid to the West Bank and Gaza, in effect since January 2006. The new Israeli assault has resulted in the cut-off of power, water and food supplies to most of the people in Gaza. The situation constitutes a deliberately created humanitarian disaster.
The A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition (http://www.answercoalition.org/ ), which has organized the largest anti-war protests in Washington, DC and in other U.S. cities over the past five years, including the historic demonstration of over 100,000 people supporting Palestinian rights in Washington on April 20, 2002, is calling for and supporting protests at Israeli embassies, consulates and U.S. federal buildings, to demand:
The immediate end to the U.S.-supplied Israeli assault on Gaza
The release of all Palestinian political prisoners from Israeli jails
An end to all U.S. aid to Israel
An end to colonial occupation, support for self-determination for the Palestinian people including the right of return.
No new U.S.-Israeli war against Syria.
A.N.S.W.E.R is also calling on justice-minded individuals and organizations to contact Congress and the White House demanding an immediate end to U.S. aid to Israel. Click here to send your message. For more information go to http://www.answercoalition.org/
The ANSWER Coalition and the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation are initiating a protest/press conference at 12 noon at the Israeli Embassy in Washington DC. For more information, contact ANSWER at 202-544-3389 or or MAS Freedom Foundation at 202-396-1288.
A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition
Act Now to Stop War & End Racism
http://www.answercoalition.org/
dc@internationalanswer.org
National Office in Washington DC: 202-544-3389
ALERT - ISRAEL/PALESTINE
27 June 2006
Israeli authorities restrict Gaza press access
SOURCE: Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), New York
(CPJ/IFEX) - The following is a CPJ press release:
Israeli authorities restrict Gaza press access
New York, June 27, 2006 - The Committee to Protect Journalists is deeply concerned about Israeli government restrictions on journalists attempting to report from the Gaza Strip.
The Israel Defense Forces announced on Monday that Israeli passport holders and dual nationals would be prohibited from entering Gaza. "Due to the current security assessments journalists with Israeli citizenship or those holding a dual citizenship cannot enter the Gaza Strip at the present time," a statement said.
The restriction followed an attack on Sunday by Palestinian militants on an Israeli military post in which two soldiers were killed and a third abducted. Citing security concerns, Israeli authorities that day closed to all media the Erez crossing, the main passage from Israel into the Gaza Strip. The travel ban was lifted on Monday morning after protests from foreign journalists and the Foreign Press Association in Israel.
Authorities have often banned Israeli citizens from entering the West Bank and Gaza, but journalists are typically allowed to cross the border if they sign waivers absolving Israeli authorities of responsibility.
"While we appreciate Israel's security concerns in light of Sunday's attack, there can be no justification for keeping journalists from doing their jobs," CPJ Executive Director Ann Cooper said. "We call on Israel to put an immediate end to all restrictions on journalists seeking to cover Gaza."
CPJ is a New York-based, independent, nonprofit organization that works to safeguard press freedom worldwide. For more information, visit http://www.cpj.org
For further information, contact Joel Campagna (x103) or Ivan Karakashian (x104) at CPJ, 330 Seventh Ave., New York, NY 10001, U.S.A., tel: +1 212 465 1004, fax: +1 212 465 9568, e-mail: mideast@cpj.org, jcampagna@cpj.org, ivan@cpj.org; Internet: http://www.cpj.org
Detention of Iranian Scholar
Derechos Human Rights sent a letter today to Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi, Iran's minister of justice, to protest the detention without charges of internationally reknown scholar Professor Ramin Jahanbegloo. Prof. Jahanbegloo was arrested on April, when he was about to board a plane to attend an international conference.
Human rights organizations, academic institutions and academics have all asked the Iranian government to set him freed, so far to no avail. We urge you to continue applying pressure on the Iranian government.
June 29, 2006
DERECHOS HUMAN RIGHTS
46 Estabrook St.
San Leandro, CA 94577
USA
510-483-4005
His Excellency Ayatollah Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi
Ministry of Justice
Park-e Shahr,
Tehran
Islamic Republic of Iran
Your Excellency,
I am writing to express my organization's concern with the arrest and detention without charge of Iranian scholar Professor Ramin Jahanbegloo, the head of the Department of Contemporary Studies at the Cultural Research Bureau in Tehran. Prof. Jahanbegloo is an internationally respected political theorist and philosopher who has earned praise for his efforts to disseminate information about Iran's complex society and its rich contributions to world history.
On April 27, Prof. Jahanbegloo was arrested at Mehrabad Airport outside of Tehran while attempting to travel to an international conference. His arrest was confirmed on May 6 by the Iranian Minister of Intelligence. Formal charges have not been levied against him and he has not been allowed to confer with a lawyer.
Mr. Jahanbegloo detention without charges violates the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Iran is a party.
We respectfully request that you secure Professor Jahanbegloo's immediate release or charge him with a crime. In that case, we request that he receive a fair trial in accordance with international standards. We also seek assurances of Professor Jahanbegloo's physical well being while he is in custody pending any release or proceedings.
We look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Margarita Lacabe
Executive Director
Derechos Human Rights
ICTR seeks Ireland's help in tracking down genocide suspects
The United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda has sought Ireland's assistance in tracking down suspects who remain on the run in Europe and Africa and who are wanted in relation to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda.
At least 10 "most-wanted" genocide suspects are on the tribunal's list, including Felicien Kabuga, said to have been the main financier of the April-June 1994 killings, estimated by the Rwandan government to have claimed 937,000 lives. ICTR Prosecutor Hassan Jallow made the appeal on Tuesday in the northern Tanzania town of Arusha, the tribunal's headquarters, during a tour of the UN court by visiting Irish President Mary McAleese. The Irish leader promised to look into the request. [Full story: here ]
Travel Restriction of HR Defender
Derechos Human Rights sent a letter today to the Syrian Ambassador to the US regarding the violations of freedom of movement of Mr. Radwan Ziadeh, a human rights defender who was not allowed to leave the country in order to present a paper at a human rights conference in Jordan. Human rights defenders in Syria have often been the subject of restrictions and harassment.
Please write similar letters to the Syrian authorities.
June 29, 2006
DERECHOS HUMAN RIGHTS
46 Estabrook St.
San Leandro, CA 94577
USA
510-483-4005
Mr. Imad Moustapha
The Embassy of Syria
2215 Wyoming Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20008
syrembas@syrembassy.net
Dear Mr. Moustapha,
I am writing to express my organization's concern with the treatment of Radwan Ziadeh, Director of the Damascus Centre for Human Rights Studies. Mr. Ziadeh was prevented by security forces from leaving Syria on June 26, 2006. He was to attend the conference "Human rights within the framework of Criminal Justice: current challenges and needed strategies in the Arab World" in Amman, Jordan.
As you know, this restriction on Mr. Ziadeh's freedom of movement is a violation of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 9, 1998, which guarantees the right of human rights defenders to freely associate with others and to publish, disseminate and discuss information and views on human rights at the national and international level.
We request that the Syrian government put an end to all forms of harassment and restrictions against Mr. Ziadeh. We also request that the rights of all human rights defenders in Syria to research, analyze and report on issues of human rights and human rights abuses be respected. Finally, we request that the Syrian government respect and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms in Syria in accordance with international human rights standards.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Margarita Lacabe
Executive Director
Derechos Human Rights
Other authorities:
- M. Bashar al-ASAD, President of the Republic, Presidential Palace, Abu Rummaneh, Al-Rashid Street Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic. Tel/ Fax : + 963 11 33 23 410
- Général Basam ABD AL-MAJID, Ministry of the Interior, Merjeh Circle, Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic. Tel/Fax : +963 11 222 34 28; Email: admin@civilaffair-moi.gov.sy
- M. Muhammad al-GHAFRI, Ministry of Justice, Al Nasr street, Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic. Tel/Fax : +963 11 224 62 50
- M. Walid MU’ALLIM, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, al-Rashid Street, Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic. Fax: + 963 11 332 76 20
- His Excellence Ambassador Mr. Bashar JA’AFARI, Permanent Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic to the United Nations in Geneva, Rue de Lausanne 72 (3rd floor), 1202 Geneva, Switzerland, Fax: +41 22 715 45 60, Email: mission.syria@ties.itu.int
- Ambassador Mr. Badi Khattab, Diplomatic Mission of the Syrian Arab Republic in Brussels, 1 avenue F.D. Roosevelt, 1050 Brussels, Belgium, Tel: + 32 2 554 19 22; Fax: + 32 2 648 14 85
ACIJLP's Comment on Egypt's Draft Judiciary Authority Law
ACIJLP has been following the stages of issuing Egypt's Judiciary Authority Law amendments. This law is especially important because it organizes the work of judges who are in charge of taking the final decision concerning the lives, freedoms, rights, duties and property of citizens. As a result, there is a need for the Judiciary Authority to have complete power over all issue of a judiciary nature. The Judiciary Authority is also solely responsible for settling all matters related to its members, following the remarks of legal jurisprudents and judges. Consequently, the Arab Center for the Independence of the Judiciary and the Legal Profession (ACIJLP) expresses its comments on the Draft Judiciary Authority Law presented to Egypt's parliament at this time.
ACIJLP believes that, although the law includes some positive points demanded by Egypt's judges and civil society institutions, there are many comments that should obtain complete consideration in order for the law to be in line with international criteria relevant to the independence of the Judiciary Authority, particularly the UN basic principles concerning the independence of the Judiciary Authority approved through the UN General Assembly decisions number 40/23 on 29 November 1985 an number 40/146 on 13 December 1985.
1. The draft law did not address at all the text that includes objective criteria for selection and appointment in the Judiciary despite the issues raised about the failure of authorities in charge of appointment to adhere to the criteria of fairness and transparency to the point of litigation before the State Council demanding the cancellation of many appointments and the subsequent exclusion of many efficient judges and depriving Egyptian women from a constitutional right that guarantees her equality in occupying public positions. The Judiciary Authority law should include text stating that those selected to occupy judiciary positions should enjoy honesty, integrity and efficiency, in addition to having obtained suitable legal training or qualifications. There should be no discrimination between candidates to judiciary positions on the basis of gender, color, religion, political or other opinions, national or social origin, possessions, birth or position.
2. The draft law did not mention the right of judges to freely establish or form associations or other organizations that can represent their interests, organize professional training and defend their judiciary independence, as well as their freedom to join such associations or organizations and the independence of the associations or organizations of any other than the Judiciary Authority. This is a widely acknowledged and enforced right in democratic systems. It is also a right prescribed by Article 9 of the UN basic principles concerning the independence of the Judiciary Authority.
3. The draft law did not address some issues related to sound justice procedures and practices, an interest worthy of consideration, such as the enforcement of court rulings. Failure to enforce the rulings constitutes a violation to the independence of the Judiciary, breaches justice and renders court rulings worthless. The draft law also failed to find a legislative solution to such an issue, such as establishing a judiciary police subject to the Judiciary Authority to guarantee the enforcement and respect of court rulings.
4. The draft law did not provide clear articles or text to address the position of public prosecution and its separation from the Executive Authority to be under the Judiciary Authority. The draft law did not point out any objective criteria in the selection of the prosecutor general. Public prosecution continues to combine the authorities of issuing charges and investigation when public prosecution should, as is the case in democratic systems and to guarantee the independence of the Judiciary Authority, be in charge of accusation as long as it is affiliated to the Executive Authority in which case it should leave investigation to the Judiciary Authority. It should only be authorized to perform both issuing charges and investigation in case it is affiliated to the Judiciary Authority represented in Supreme Judiciary Councils.
5. The draft law lacked any objective principles that govern the distribution of work in courts, such as putting each court's general assembly in charge of this issue and preventing general assemblies from delegating decisions related to the assemblies to heads of courts. The draft law allows head of courts to assign specific judges to cases, which breaches the right of citizens to resort to their natural judges and casts doubt on the presence of unjustified interference with judiciary procedures. Article 14 of the UN basic principles concerning the independence of the Judiciary states that assigning judges to cases within the framework of the court to which they belong is an internal issue, the concern of judiciary administration.
6. Although the draft law conditioned assigning the minister's assistant, his deputies and heads of primary courts to perform Judiciary inspection issues on the approval of the Supreme Judiciary Council, the draft law gave the Justice Minister the sole authority to interfere with issues that fall under the pure jurisdiction of the Judiciary Authority, such as the fact that judiciary inspection continues to be under the Justice Minister although judiciary inspection in Egypt's other judiciary bodies does not fall under the jurisdiction of the Justice Ministry.
7. The draft law kept the system whereby judges are seconded to perform non-judiciary jobs –despite the large number of outstanding lawsuits and cases and the lack of qualified judges to try the existing cases. The draft law raised the period of seconding judges to non-judiciary jobs from three years in accordance with Article 64 of the current law to six years, although this system of seconding judges to entities affiliated to the Executive Authority breaches the independence of the Judiciary and contradicts with the judiciary principles that prohibit a person from acting as both adversary and judge. Article 66 of the draft law did not state a maximum period for seconding judges to jobs as first assistant to the minister, assistants to the minister for judiciary inspection and legislation, as well as to the minister's technical office and the judiciary inspection and legislation departments.
8. Despite the increase in the period of seconding judges, the draft law lacked any predetermined objective principles that govern the issue, which may be used in actual cases as a means of threat or reward thus compromising the independence of the Judiciary.
9. The draft law did not observe the rights of the Judiciary in matters of discipline, litigation over two degrees and the ability to challenge disciplinary decisions issued against judges before a higher court. Article 83m of the draft law only mentions the reasons allowing challenges before the Court of Cassation: if the challenged ruling contradicted the law, involved a faulty implementation or interpretation or if the ruling or procedures involved a fundamental fault that affected the ruling. Thus, the second degree court for judges is a legal court that does not address the litigated issue itself. Thus, litigation over two degree as stated in Article 83 of the draft law is void of content as the second degree court may not address the issue or consider it in a fair and public manner. Litigation in cases of disciplining judges remains a one degree process from the practical perspective. The text newly introduced to the draft law does not achieve a minimum guarantee for a fair trial.
10. The draft law violates the right of judges to recruit the help of a lawyer, a constitutional right for all citizens, also prescribed in international instruments where there is a consensus over the need for suitable procedures to guide the speedy and urgent consideration of charges or complaints against a judge in his professional capacity. articles 85 and 106 of the draft law prohibit judges, once they challenge a disciplining decision or once a judge stands before a disciplinary court to recruit the help of a lawyer (…..to present a written defense or through a deputy who is a current or former member of the judiciary that does not hold a job or profession).
11. The draft law eliminates the condition for judges to be nominated for the general assemblies of the Court of Cassation and the Cairo Court of Appeals to form the Supreme Judiciary Council. The draft law continues to consider seniority the basis for forming the Council, although this criteria is not taken into consideration when appointing the prosecutor general, heads of primary courts and the head of the Court of Cassation.
ACIJLP recommends presenting the draft law to Egypt's judges to be guided by their opinion concerning the draft law regulating their profession, the provisions of which address them as they are the most capable –through practice and real life experience- to understand the minute details that support or disturb their independence.
"When preparing the framework of their legislation and national practices, governments should observe and respect the basic principles for the independence of the Judiciary Authority. Governments should present such principles to judges, lawyers, members of the Legislative and Executive authorities and the public in general," according to the UN basic principles concerning the independence of the Judiciary Authority.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Nasser Amin
General Director
The Arab Center for Independence of the Judiciary and the Legal Profession (ACIJLP)
8/10 Mathaf El Manial St., Manial El Roda,
Cairo, Egypt
Telefax: (202) 5310027 - 3620732 - 3643888
Mobile: (2)0123112420
E-mail: acijlp@thewayout.net
Website: www.acijlp.org
June 28, 2006
Continuing human rights violations in Sudan
Despite the "peace agreements", the civilian population of Darfur continues being victims of torture, arbitrary arrests and harassment by government security organs. The following OMCT urgent action details violations against specific individuals.
Case SDN 270606
Arbitrary arrest / Torture / Harassment
The International Secretariat of the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) requests your URGENT intervention in the following situation in Sudan.
Brief description of the situation
The International Secretariat of OMCT has been informed by the Sudan Organisation Against Torture (SOAT), a member of OMCT network, about the continuing torture, arbitrary arrests and harassment of the civilian population in Darfur by government security organs despite the signing of the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA).
According to the information received, on 11 June 2006, five police officers from the Central Reserve Police arrested Mr. Sideeg Musa Saed (20 yrs), a student, and Mr. Ismail Musa Abdel Gadeem (26 yrs), a teacher, from Alsouque Alshabi central market in Nyala on suspicion of supporting the Sudan Liberation Army/Movement (SLA), a faction of which is signatory to the DPA. The men who belong to the Zaghawa tribe were taken to the offices of the reserve police in Nyala where they were reportedly subjected to torture. The men were beaten with the butt of the officers’ guns on their heads and backs and flogged all over their body. Mr. Saead sustained serious injuries to his eye. On the same day, Mr. Sideeg Musa Saed and Mr. Ismail Musa Abdel Gadeem were transferred to Nyala Wasat Police station where they were officially charged with articles 50 (Undermining the Constitutional System) and 51 (Waging war against the State) of the 1991 Penal code. SOAT Lawyers Network in Nyala is providing legal aid to the two men.
Moreover, on 11 June 2006 at approximately 08.00 am, armed militias, reportedly the Janjaweed militias, allegedly attacked Mr. Musa Ahmed Abdel Nour (50 yrs), from the Dago tribe and resident at Dereig IDP camp whilst he was escorting two elderly women to collect firewood outside the camp. During the attack the militias threatened Mr. Abdel Nour with a gun before kidnapping him and taking his horse and forcing the two women to walk back to the camp. Mr. Abdel Nour was released on the same day at 14.00 pm. Following his release, Mr. Abdel Nour left Dereig camp and is now staying at Kalma camp.
Furthermore it is reported that on 6 June 2006, three armed militias, reportedly the Janjaweed militias, attacked Mr. Abdullah Ahmed Adam (50 yrs), Dago tribe, from Kalma IDP camp. Mr. Adam was attacked 2 km north of the camp; he was threatened by the militias after which they took his horse.
The International Secretariat of OMCT urges the Sudanese authorities to immediately implement its obligations as agreed in the DPA. The International Secretariat of OMCT together with SOAT expresses its grave concern over the continued targeting of the civilian population by the Janjaweed militias and the arrests and detention on suspicion of supporting the SLA.
It should be recalled that article 27(315) of the DPA requires the Government of Sudan to “restrict all Janjaweed/armed militia and PDF to their headquarters, garrisons, cantonment sites or communities and take other steps to contain, reduce and ultimately eliminate the threat posed by such forces”. Furthermore, article 27 (317) states that “Government of Sudan, with support from AMIS, shall take all other steps required to completely eliminate the threat posed by Janjaweed/armed militia to the civilian population....”.
Action Requested
Please write to the authorities in Sudan urging them to:
Guarantee the physical and psychological integrity of Mr. Sideeg Musa Saed and Mr. Ismail Musa Abdel Gadeem;
Order their immediate release in the absence of valid legal charges, and if such charges exist, to ensure that they are given a prompt and fair trial, in which their procedural rights are guaranteed at all times;
Order a thorough and impartial investigation into all these events, in order to identify all those responsible, bring them to trial and apply the civil, penal and/or administrative sanctions as provided by law;
Guarantee that adequate compensation is awarded to Mr. Sideeg Musa Saed, Mr. Ismail Musa Abdel Gadeem, Mr. Musa Ahmed Abdel Nour and Mr. Abdullah Ahmed Adam;
Guarantee the respect of human rights and the fundamental freedoms throughout the country in accordance with national laws and international human rights standards.
Addresses
His Excellency Lieutenant General Omar Hassan al-Bashir, President of the Republic of Sudan, Presidential Palace, PO Box 281, Khartoum, Sudan, Fax: +249 183 783 223
His Excellency Salva Kiir Mayardit, First Vice-President, People’s Palace, PO Box 281, Khartoum, Sudan, Fax: + 249 11 779977 / 771025
His Excellency Ali Osman Mohamed Taha, Vice-President, People’s Palace, PO Box 281, Khartoum, Sudan, Fax: + 249 183 77 10 25
Mr Ali Mohamed Osman Yassin, Minister of Justice and Attorney General, Ministry of Justice, Khartoum, Sudan, Fax: + 249 183 78 07 96
Mr Lam Akol Ajawin, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs/External Relations, PO Box 873, Khartoum, Sudan, Fax: + 249 183 77 93 83
Mr. Al Zubeir Beshir Taha, Minister of Internal Affairs, Ministry of Interior, PO Box 873, Khartoum, Sudan, Fax: +249 183 77 93 83
Dr Nafie Ali Nafie, Minister of Federal Government, Office of the Presidents People’s Palace, PO Box 281, Khartoum, Sudan, Fax: +249 117 71 651/ 78 32 23
Dr Yasir Sid Ahmed, Head of the Advisory Council for Human Rights PO Box 302, Khartoum, Sudan, Fax: +249 183 770 883
Dr Abdelmuneim Osman Mohamed Taha, Advisory Council for Human Rights, Rapporteur, PO Box 302, Khartoum, Sudan, Fax: +249 183 77 08 83
Prof. Ali Mohamed Ali Shommou, The National Press and Publications Council, P O Box 11111, Osman Digna St., Khartoum East Sudan, Fax: + 249 183 77 19 25
His Excellency Ambassador Mr. Mohamed Elhassan Ahmed Elhaj, Permanent Mission of the Republic of Sudan to the United Nations in Geneva, Avenue Blanc 47, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland, Tel: +41 22 731 26 63, Fax: +41 22 731 26 56, Email: mission.sudan@bluewin.ch / mission.sudan@ties.itu.int
The Embassy of Sudan in Brussels, Mr. Ali Yousif Ahmed, Av. F.D. Roosevelt, 124, 1050 Brussels, Belgium. Tel.: + 32 2 647 51 59 / 94 94, Fax: + 32 (2) 648 34 99, Email: sudanbx@yahoo.com
Please also write to the embassies of Sudan in your respective country.
***
Geneva, 27 June 2006
Kindly inform us of any action undertaken quoting the code of this appeal in your reply.
Apologies have power
The following is an op-ed by Canadian writer Erna Paris in response to the Canadian media's reactions to Canada's apology to Chinese-Canadians who were abused in Canada.
---
Apologies have power
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
ERNA PARIS
After Prime Minister Stephen Harper apologized to Chinese-Canadians last week, a barrage of criticism focused on the prospect of "victims" lining up at the public trough. Most missed the central point: confirmation that human rights still matter in this country.
How many Canadians knew about the punishing head tax imposed on 15,000 Chinese workers brought here to build the CPR? How many knew up to 1,000 of these men died during this back-breaking labour? Or that families were divided because Canada refused to allow wives and children of those who had raised the money to join them? Without formal recognition of injustice, the darker side of a nation's past is unlikely to make it into school history texts, which are the bedrock of the national narrative.
In an ethnically mixed society, social adhesion is threatened without a public acknowledgment that the state, itself, maltreated minorities living within its borders. Although those of us who were not affected by head taxes, residential schools, or wartime internment as "enemy aliens" may spend little time thinking about this "other" history, Canadians who were have not forgotten. The story of maltreatment is passed down from generation to generation, until the survivors, or their progeny, have the courage to demand formal redress. State-instigated human-rights abuses live in a category of their own, as the history of the 20th century makes abundantly clear. Unaddressed, they are increasingly corrosive to the body politic. When addressed, they contribute to healing and, by extension, national unity. It is no surprise an elderly Chinese-Canadian interviewed on the day of the apology declared that she finally felt she was a Canadian.
Pierre Trudeau said he and his government were not responsible for Canada's past, only its future. He was wrong. It matters not one whit whether human rights abuses were carried out yesterday, or decades ago. Those who occupy the seats of power today carry, and are responsible for addressing, yesterday's corrosive legacy, for the unreconciled past inevitably sends long tendrils into the present.
Other countries have also begun to acknowledge that at a time when human rights were undervalued, or not valued at all, their governments committed grave abuses that decades later, threaten national unity. In France, for example, President Jacques Chirac formally apologized for the actions of the collaborationist Vichy regime, which willingly assisted the Nazis in deporting 78,000 Jews to death camps. His courageous acknowledgment ended decades of official myth-making and prevarication that was taught to children as factual history. France also held criminal trials for the German Nazi, Klaus Barbie; the French Nazi, Paul Touvier; and the bureaucratic paper-pusher, Maurice Papon, who signed away thousands of lives with a flourish of his pen. This reversal in policy came about because a few survivors of the deportations never forgot that the country of their birth had betrayed them, and neither did their children. They correctly believed that France would be unable to normalize its present until it was willing to acknowledge what had been carried out in the state's name.
Japan, on the contrary, has never formally apologized to the families of those who survived the Rape of Nanking in 1937, among many other atrocities; in fact, Japan's Prime Minister makes provocative visits to a Shinto shrine where the "souls" of several convicted war criminals are glorified. This unresolved tear in the historical fabric has affected relations between Japan and China.
Canada cannot afford to ignore the state-inspired cruelty of the past. Which is not to deny that reason and balance must reign. More than half a century ago, the fledgling United Nations published the Universal Declaration of Human Rights -- the key word being "universal." These must be the foundational yardstick for assessing claims against the Canadian government.
Official acknowledgments, memorials, museums that tell the truth about the past, and token reparations to surviving victims are symbolic ways of separating the unlovely past from the present. And for promoting unity among the diverse peoples of Canada.
Erna Paris is the author of Long Shadows: Truth, Lies, and History.
HR Council Concludes Discussion on Right to Development
UN News, 26/6/2006
Press release
Human Rights Council Discusses Draft Treaties On Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and Enforced Disappearance
Human Rights Council
MORNING 27 June 2006
Council Concludes Discussion on Right to Development
The Human Rights Council this morning discussed the reports of the Working Groups on the elaboration of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and on the elaboration of a Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.
Catarina de Albuquerque, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Open-Ended Working Group to consider options regarding the elaboration of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, said an Optional Protocol would provide clear evidence that the Council considered that any human rights violation was intolerable, and demonstrate commitment to the indivisibility of all human rights, as well as the need to afford effective protection and remedies for individual victims.
She said that the situation was that of a sad reality where all too often breaches of economic, social and cultural rights were tolerated which, if they were committed against civil and political rights, would provoke expressions of horror and outrage and would lead to concerted calls for immediate remedial action.
Bernard Kessedjian, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Open-ended Working Group on a Draft Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, said the text of the draft convention prohibited the practice of enforced disappearance. That practice was defined as a crime, and a crime against humanity when it was widespread or systematic.
Mr. Kessedjian said perhaps the greatest innovation of the text was that it took account of preventive measures, in particular those relating to detention, prison registries and a ban on secret prisons. Those provisions recognized that enforced disappearances fed on gaps in the law and administrative regulations, and that legal detentions could degenerate if they were not sufficiently regulated or structured. The right of victims was also a subject of particular focus.
Also this morning, the Council concluded its debate on the right to development, hearing from Ibrahim Salama, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the Right to Development, who said that he had found that there was an increasing common ground on many fundamental issues on this topic. The divides that used to haunt the question of the right to development were narrowing. It was the one space in which human rights and economic groups came together organically and interacted. That was a paradigm shift that allowed them to inject the necessary coherence into the work of the United Nations system, where so many crosscutting issues did often complicate or cause duplication in their work.
The Philippines gave a statement on the right to development along with the representatives of the non-governmental organizations Europe-Third World Centre, Franciscans International, Indian Movement « Tupaj Amaru », and National Human Rights Commission of India.
Taking the floor on the report of the Working Group to consider options regarding the elaboration of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights were the representatives of Uruguay, Austria, on behalf of the European Union, United Kingdom, Argentina, Algeria, on behalf of the African Group, Brazil, on behalf of GRULAC, Brazil, Mexico, Russian Federation, Guatemala, Republic of Korea, Japan, India, Senegal, Philippines, Peru, South Africa, Switzerland, Morocco, Azerbaijan, Netherlands, Indonesia, United States, Portugal, Spain, Chile, Belgium, Iran and Australia.
The following non-governmental organizations also spoke: Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions (speaking in a joint statement with International Federation of Human Rights Leagues; Foodfirst Information and Action Network; Franciscans International; International Commission of Jurists; and International Women's Rights Action Watch), Europe-Third World Centre, Union d'Action Feminine, Permanent Assembly for Human Rights.
Speaking on the report of the Working Group on the elaboration of a draft legally binding convention on enforced disappearances were Austria, on behalf of the European Union, Cuba, Uruguay and Mexico.
When the Council reconvenes at noon, it will continue its debate on the elaboration of a convention on the protection of all persons from enforced disappearance. The Council is meeting non-stop today from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Statements on the Report of the Working Group on the Right to Development
JESUS ENRIQUE G. GARCIA (Philippines) said development was a fundamental human right, and was inalienable and indivisible. It was a bridge between civil and political rights on one hand, and economic, social and cultural rights on the other. The right to development was not just about mainstreaming human rights into development, but also injecting development into the human rights discourse at all relevant levels. All parties and stakeholders should aim to fully realise this right in order to enhance multilateral development cooperation and contribute to sustained economic growth.
Developing countries had the primary responsibility for their development, but their efforts should be accompanied by a conducive international environment. This meant, among other things, that developing countries should have the requisite policy space in order to adopt and pursue development policies commensurate with their needs and priorities, particularly in the context of the right to development. The report of the Working Group set out practical recommendations which were the distillation of years of discussions and debate on how to give life to the right to development, and the Council should act favourably on these recommendations.
MELIK UZDEN, of Europe-Third World Centre, said that since the adoption of the Declaration on the Right to Development 20 years ago, no real progress had been made in that area; indeed, things had gotten worse. The Working Group established in 1988 had been lost in scholastic debates such as whether the right to development was a right or a right to the "process of development". For some, development was synonymous with the right to prosperity. The Working Group had thus given in to making dissertations rather than in searching for solutions to the great challenges of our time. The Working Group had to give priority to international issues concerning the right to development and to undertake research and make proposals on, among others, making international cooperation effective, freeing sovereign countries from debt, and ensuring that international treaties and agreements supported the right to development and did not hinder it by forcing peoples to concede their sovereign rights.
YAO AGBETSE, of Franciscans International, said many steps had been taken since the 1986 Declaration on the Right to Development, and constructive discussions had led to some key substantive components. The new dynamic created by the inauguration of the Council should encourage all actors to move forward, mapping out a path leading to renewed political will, sustained commitment, energy and resource mobilisation for an effective realisation of the right to development. A new right to development vision should be centred on genuine dialogue, cooperation and accountability.
LAZARO PARY, of Indian Movement « Tupaj Amaru », said that the dominant economic thinking today was contrary to the right to development. Neo-liberal economists and experts of international financial institutions sought to justify that unequal model and its unjust effects. The impact of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank since their establishment to date – those two main financial institutions of the United Nations system – had been to constantly impose on poor countries an ultraliberal model whose ramifications were still impacting the world. That thinking advocated liberalization of trade, price freezes, and unbridled privatisation of companies. The logic of globalization meant that external debt was a scourge of global dimensions.
JUSTICE A. S. ANAND, of National Commission of Human Rights of India, said human dignity was the spine of human rights, and was the very foundation on which human rights rested. Human development had come to be accepted as an enhancement of capabilities, widening of choices, and an expansion of freedoms. It was important to appreciate that development, which had to be equitable, and could brook no discrimination in the sharing of the benefits and in the activities producing the benefits between different people, irrespective of gender or caste, religion or geographical disparities. Poverty was the biggest violator of human rights, and its eradication was vital for development. It should not be treated as merely a development project.
IBRAHIM SALAMA, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on the Right to Development, said that following yesterday's discussions, he had found that there was an increasing common ground on many fundamental issues on this topic. The divides that used to haunt the question of the right to development were narrowing. Brazil, on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States, had rightly pointed to the uniqueness of the forum of the Working Group on the Right to Development. It was the one space in which human rights and economic groups came together organically and interacted. That was a paradigm shift that allowed them to inject the necessary coherence into the work of the United Nations system, where so many cross-cutting issues did often complicate or cause duplication in their work.
Mr. Salama said that partnerships for development were necessarily of a very action-oriented nature, in fact mainstreaming the right to development into the work of other organizations. The Working Group encouraged the financial institutions to mainstream the right to development in the work of their organizations, such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. That confirmed the relevance of the right to development, it confirmed its added value, and it confirmed its viability. There was a natural alliance between globalization and the right to development, the right to development was a bridge, a melting pot, an overarching right, which gave coherence to that phenomenon.
Report of the Working Group Established to Elaborate an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
The report of the Open-Ended Working Group to Consider Options Regarding the Elaboration of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (E/CN.4/2006/47), on its third session which was held from 6 to 17 February 2006, outlines the proceedings of the session. It summarizes the opening statements by the participants, and the discussion on the scope of rights subject to a procedure and the issue of reservations to an Optional Protocol. Other issues which were discussed were admissibility criteria, including standing; merits, friendly settlement, interim measures and views; the inquiry procedure; the inter-state procedure; international cooperation and assistance; domestic decisions on resource allocations; discussion on the inter-American system; relationships with existing procedures; costs of an Optional protocol; the impact of an Optional Protocol; and options regarding the elaboration of an Optional Protocol.
Introduction of Report of Working Group on Elaborating an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
CATARINA DE ALBUQUERQUE, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Open-Ended Working Group to consider options regarding the elaboration of an optional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, said a series of relevant activities had been organised which were relevant to the work of the Working Group. The Working Group had before it the Analytical Paper that contained Elements for an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and this document provided the basis for discussion. The Working Group concluded its debates by discussing options regarding the elaboration of an Optional Protocol.
The mandate of the Working Group on an Optional Protocol should now be evaluated. The situation was that of a sad reality where all too often breaches of economic, social and cultural rights were tolerated which, if they were committed against civil and political rights, would provoke expressions of horror and outrage and would lead to concerted calls for immediate remedial action. An optional protocol would provide clear evidence that the Council considered that any human rights violation was intolerable, and demonstrate commitment to the indivisibility of all human rights, as well as the need to afford effective protection and remedies for individual victims. It would also be consistent with the main objective of United Nations reform.
RICARDO GONZALEZ ARENAS (Uruguay) said that Uruguay was convinced that greater efforts to realize civil and political human rights would not effectively ensure the human rights of Uruguayans without creating conditions that ensured the sustainable development of human rights, with equity and social justice. As stated by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, poverty continued to be the greatest violation of human rights, and, in most cases, that situation was reproduced from generation to generation.
Uruguay was in favour of the adoption of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and supported the continued mandate of the Working Group with a view to setting up such an instrument. International cooperation should continue to be the basic pillar that would help countries to realize those rights.
WOLFGANG PETRITSCH (Austria), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the universality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness of all human rights were now firmly established principles. Full and equal emphasis should be given to the realisation of economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights, since all human rights derived from the inherent dignity of the human person. The sessions of the Working Group had provided an excellent opportunity to enhance understanding about the dimensions of economic, social and cultural rights, their justiciability, and ways to improve the implementation of the Covenant.
In view of the significant progress achieved in the Working Group, it was important that the Council now take this process forward taking into account all views on an Optional Protocol to ensure that the work could advance in the most effective way.
NICK THORNE (United Kingdom) said the proposal for an Optional Protocol was a far-reaching proposition. The United Kingdom had certain concerns about the shape and scope of such a protocol. In the spirit of consensus, it recognised that there was a body of States ready to step forward to draft such a protocol, and in this spirit suggested the Working Group should begin to draft such a Protocol which could be the basis of future negotiations. However, starting drafting on the basis of a single text which did not reflect differences in approach was not the appropriate way to proceed.
The proposed changes to the mandate could only be accepted if the text were to contain proposals on the various approaches that were already clear. The United Kingdom was flexible, and hoped that its reasonable requests could be met so that the work of the Working Group could move forward in a reasonable and clear manner.
SERGIO CERDA (Argentina) said that Argentina felt that the best way to put all categories of human rights on an equal footing was to adopt an Optional Protocol to establish a system of complaints for economic, social and cultural rights. Argentina would like to see the renewal of the mandate of the Working Group on an optional protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, with the new mandate of drafting the Optional Protocol. A system of individual complaints that would cover all rights defined in the United Nations system would lead to easier access to the administration of justice and contribute to the realization of those rights that were linked closely to public policy, such as food, health and education. It was only the actual negotiation of the draft Optional Protocol that would allow for the accommodation of all delegations positions. That task could not be delayed.
IDRISS JAZAIRY (Algeria), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said the mandate of the Working Group should be extended for a further two years. Human rights were inalienable and indivisible, and economic, social and cultural rights were an integral part of the family of human rights, and all human rights should receive equal attention. The implementation and compliance with economic, social and cultural rights was no less important than those relating to civil and political rights. The international community had a key responsibility in matters pertaining to the implementation of economic, social and cultural rights and the linkage between these rights and the fight against poverty.
CLODOALDO HUGUENEY (Brazil), speaking on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States (GRULAC), said that the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights had been drawn up at the same time as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. However, civil and political rights already had a mechanism for individual complaints, whereas economic, social and cultural rights did not. The Working Group should begin negotiations on the elaboration of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. When the Working Group met in February 2006 it discussed several matters for inclusion in the Optional Protocol and those that would present challenges or difficulties. GRULAC was of the view that the only way forward was to continue negotiations on the basis of a draft Optional Protocol.
GRULAC was of the view that an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights would fill the gaps in respect of those rights that, though they might be partially covered by other instruments, were not fully covered by them. For that reason, GRULAC was not concerned by the question of duplication or overlapping of mandates. GRULAC supported the gradual development of economic, social and cultural rights, as set out in the International Covenant. It also supported the provision of technical assistance to countries to develop those rights. As all human rights were interrelated, the progressive realization of economic, social and cultural rights would serve to advance the realization of the right to development, as well as to ensure political stability and guarantee individual freedoms.
CLODOALDO HUGUENEY (Brazil) said economic, social and cultural rights were less protected in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the elaboration of an Optional Protocol, by allowing the presentation of individual complaints, would represent the redress of a historical imbalance between those rights and civil and political rights, and the possibility of a real enforcement for economic, social and cultural rights. Since it's creation, the Working Group had dedicated itself to discussions on the possible aspects of an Optional Protocol.
Brazil favoured the comprehensive approach, covering all articles of the Covenant, in order to avoid the creation of a hierarchy between economic, social and cultural rights. International assistance and cooperation were particularly needed in the case of developing countries. An Optional Protocol would constitute a tool for strengthening cooperation and dialogue among and within States. Economic, social and cultural rights were indirectly focussed in other international instruments, but a comprehensive and detailed approach to these rights was exclusively reflected in the International Covenant.
JOSE A. GUEVARA (Mexico) said that the artificial distinction between economic, social and cultural rights and political and civil rights that had permeated the work of the United Nations since 1948 had now been left behind. All human rights were interlinked and indivisible. They had to be dealt with on an equal footing and given equal attention. However, the international community lacked a mechanism to enforce economic, social and cultural rights, and, in Mexico's view, that represented an enormous debt to the victims of violations of those rights. The Working Group on an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights had satisfactorily completed its mandate. After 40 years of indebtedness to victims of violations of those rights, now was the time to begin negotiation of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. For that reason, Mexico called on the Human Rights Council to extend the mandate of the Working Group. An Optional Protocol would be a major step forward in ensuring the promotion and protection of all human rights for all.
GALINA S. KHVAN (Russian Federation) said greater attention in the Council should be given to economic, social and cultural rights, but this would be difficult. The Council, together, and in a non-politicised manner, should consider the issue and move it forward. The Optional Protocol, aimed at reducing the gap in the international system of human rights, should be moved forward. The mandate of the Working Group should be extended for another two years, under various conditions.
All countries, in a balanced and fair manner, should begin consideration of the document. Countries should have room for manoeuvre to recognise the ability of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to consider complaints. The Optional Protocol should bring economic, social and cultural rights to the same level as civil and political rights.
CARLA MARIA RODRIGUEZ MANCIA (Guatemala) said human rights were inalienable, universal and indivisible. For that reason, the realization of economic, social and cultural rights could not be seen in isolation from the other categories of human rights. The two categories of rights, the economic, social and cultural rights and civil and political rights, should be implemented on an equal footing. It was necessary to establish a separate complaints mechanism for economic, social and cultural rights. The adoption of the Optional Protocol would be a means for the implementation of a complaints mechanism. Guatemala had taken an active role in the Working Group on the drafting of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and hoped that the draft of the Optional Protocol would see its day soon. Legal and juridical measures were necessary to the progressive realization of economic, social and cultural rights.
CHANG DONG-HEE (Republic of Korea) said that the Republic of Korea had long been committed to the promotion and protection of economic, social and cultural rights. In that vein, it had participated with great interest in the open-ended Working Group on an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Yet, the Republic of Korea was still among those countries that were not fully convinced of the feasibility of the Optional Protocol. A number of significant issues arising from the nature of economic, social and cultural rights had not yet been resolved. The Republic of Korea believed that more discussion was required to further clarify those issues. The Republic of Korea realized that at the last session of the Working Group many countries had expressed their wish to move ahead into the drafting of an Optional Protocol. The Republic of Korea respected their wishes, and was willing to participate in that process constructively, but hoped that further discussion would enlighten them on the question of whether the possible Optional Protocol was the best way to ensure the realization of economic, social and cultural rights.
TETSUYA KIMURA (Japan) said great importance was attached to economic, social and cultural rights, and those rights deserved the same attention as civil and political rights, and in this regard the Working Group was useful for considering what ways were effective for implementing economic, social and cultural rights. On the Working Group's mandate, Japan was not fully convinced that an Optional Protocol was the best option for implementing those rights most effectively. However, it recognised the need to respect other positions and reach consensus.
Japan had no objection to extending the mandate of the Working Group. A working text should be used which contained the various approaches outlined in the chair's analytical paper at the next session. It was premature for the Chairperson to prepare a single coherent text for the next session. Japan believed that consensus was being reached, and hoped the resolution would be adopted without a vote.
AJAJ MALHOTRA (India) said India attached great importance to economic, social and cultural rights and it supported the drafting and the adoption of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. India, conscious of the need to advance the economic, social and cultural rights of its people, even before ratifying the Covenant, had made available the necessary infrastructure to its people. The people of India had been enjoying their economic, social and cultural rights in line with the guidelines set forth in the Covenant. India supported the debate on the need for the drafting of the Optional Protocol. India would also support the extension of the mandate of the Working Group of the drafting of the Optional Protocol.
ABDEL WAHAB AIDARA (Senegal) said that economic, social and cultural rights had not always enjoyed the same attention as civil and political rights. They were, so to speak, the poor relation of the human rights group. An international complaints instrument dedicated to economic, social and cultural rights would fill the historical gap in the system for the promotion and protection of human rights of the United Nations system. They had to do more. International cooperation and technical assistance had to be strengthened so as to buttress the efforts made by States in realizing those rights. In that spirit, Senegal was of the view that the elaboration of an Optional Protocol was the first response the Human Rights Council should take to support economic, social and cultural rights.
JESUS ENRIQUE G. GARCIA (Philippines) said the mandate of the Working Group should continue, and further discussions would help ensure that the concerns of parties to a possible Optional Protocol would be fully taken into account. Especial appreciation was given to delegations to express their views on this subject. The Working Group's deliberations invited closer examination of the constraints and concerns expressed by delegations regarding the workability of an Optional Protocol.
However, at this stage, the Philippines believed that the consideration of a detailed working text addressing the concerns, observations, and possible approaches so far expressed by delegations, rather than a draft Optional Protocol, would be more helpful in advancing the deliberations.
ELIANA BERAUN ESCUDERO (Peru) said the radicalization of extreme poverty and other causes of poverty had prompted the international community to take further measures to tackle them. The visit to Peru by the Independent Expert on extreme poverty had helped the authorities to further take measures to support national efforts. The Government had been engaged in the effort to overcome the problem of the full realization of the economic, social and cultural rights of its people. Within the context of the promotion and protection of human rights, Peru had been pursuing a policy that would eradicate poverty through the implementation of economic, social and cultural rights. The drafting of the Optional Protocol and its adoption by States would give impetus to the progressive realization of economic, social and cultural rights.
GLAUDINE J. MTSHALI (South Africa) said that South Africa aligned itself with the statement made by Algeria on behalf of the African Group and commended the work of the Working Group to elaborate an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Although States had not yet reached consensus on the content of the Optional Protocol, States appeared to agree that they should begin negotiations to elaborate such an instrument. For its part, South Africa supported the immediate start of negotiations on the drafting of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
JEAN-DANIEL VIGNY (Switzerland) said it remained committed to the universality and interdependence of all human rights. A large number of States wished to begin the formal process of elaboration of the text for the Optional Protocol. It was an innovative and difficult topic. A number of options had been considered in the Working Group, and it was still difficult to give the Working Group a mandate for drafting. It was hoped that consensus could yet be found on a compromise formulation in broad terms, which could consist of entrusting the Chairperson with the drafting of an initial draft text which would reflect the views of the participants of the Working Group as to the extent and scope of the Optional Protocol.
OMAR KADIRI (Morocco) said Morocco was convinced that the set of rights under the two Covenants: Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and Civil and Political Rights, had equal value and should not be seen as separate human rights. The discussion in the Working Group on the drafting of the Optional Protocol had manifested the wider interest of States in the realization of economic, social and cultural rights. As a basis for negotiation, an initial text of the draft should be ready for States. It was necessary that the text should attract consensus from all States in order that it be adopted.
ELCHIN AMIRBAYOV (Azerbaijan) said that the open-ended Working Group established with a view to considering options regarding the elaboration of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights represented the mechanism for an individual complaints procedure that had not yet been drawn up. The deliberations and whole process going on within the Working Group was remarkable and very pertinent as that set of rights, as opposed to civil and political rights, did not enjoy the same level of protection. That process deserved the adequate attention and continuation without gaps. The last session of the Working Group represented a further important step ahead, as an opportunity to focus discussions and to identify difficult issues. It was also crucial in terms of providing a comparison of existing mechanisms of individual complaints with elements that were supposed to be part of the draft Optional Protocol. The examination of various regional mechanisms and those outside the United Nations treaty bodies clearly indicated the value of a new mechanism.
HEDDA SAMSON (Netherlands) said the work done in the Working Group was appreciated, and the Netherlands had participated in that work in a spirit of cooperation, and had always supported international monitoring mechanisms, and firmly believed in the indivisibility of human rights, including economic, social and cultural rights. However, this did not mean that these rights could be realised in the same way. An Optional Protocol, granting the right to petition, was a far-reaching proposition. However, a large number of States were ready to move forward to start drafting.
The Netherlands supported the extension of the mandate in order to start drafting, and thought a draft should be begun, although this should include all the views that had been expressed by delegations.
JONNY SINAGA (Indonesia) said economic, social and cultural rights were a very fundamental part of human rights. Indonesia supported the work carried out by the Working Group on the drafting of the Optional Protocol to the Covenant. If the Optional Protocol was to be drafted, Indonesia wished to see the future document provide elements that addressed the root causes of the failure in achieving the provisions of the Covenant, including the prevalent poverty and foreign debt.
Given the broad scope of rights to be covered under the Covenant, Indonesia believed that the Working Group needed to carry out a more in-depth and exhaustive analysis of relevant issues, notably the capacity of different legal systems to deal with the extent of justiciablility of the Covenant rights.
VELIA DE PIRRO (United States) said that the United States could not support efforts to elaborate an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights for both procedural and substantive reasons. As a matter of process, there was no consensus within the Working Group that such a protocol would be desirable or what it should cover. That lack of consensus on fundamental issues had no doubt resulted in the notion that the Chair of the Working Group should draft the Optional Protocol rather than allowing States to negotiate the text. Such a method of work was problematic to say the least, set a poor precedent in the field, and called into question how the new body would engage the world community on global human rights issues.
As a substantive matter, the idea of elaborating an Optional Protocol modelled on other conventions was ill-advised as economic, social and cultural rights were not justiciable in the same way as other rights. The Committee could not be expected to have the capacity or experience to review the most fundamental resource allocation decisions of Governments. Those decisions, which were based on exceptionally complex facts and projections, involved everything from macroeconomic employment and monetary policy at the national level to the social welfare decisions of local governments. The Committee would be ill equipped to review those decisions, leaving it with almost limitless discretion to opine on the essential resource and regulatory decisions of nation States.
JOSE GAETANO DA COSTA PEREIRA (Portugal) said the Working Group had held rich and in-depth discussions about many aspects of economic, social and cultural rights, the benefits of a communications procedure, and elements to be included in an Optional Protocol. Despite the considerable progress that had been achieved by the Working Group, it was imperative that its current mandate be adjusted to the actual negotiation of a concrete text of a draft Optional Protocol, since the broad discussion of general elements was clearly exhausted.
Only by negotiating on the basis of a concrete text would participants be able to find compromise language which addressed the viewpoints of all. It was hoped that the Council would be able to adopt the resolution on the extension of the mandate by consensus.
CECILIA ROBLES CARTES (Spain) said the report of the Working Group was very exhaustive and comprehensive and it deserved appreciation. The normative development of standards was necessary to the implementation of human rights, including economic, social and cultural rights. Spain had sponsored the extension of the mandate of the Working Group. The Working Group should concentrate its work, highlighting the needs of the international community to implement those rights in an effective manner.
EDUARDO CHHUAILAF (Chile) said that from 1990 to date, Chile had endeavoured to combine economic development with social development, developing programmes to address issues such as health, education and employment, which had helped the country to reduce poverty and create employment. Chile had constantly supported the indivisibility, universality and interdependence of human rights. Economic, social and cultural rights should have a quasi-judicial review system at the international level, as was the case for civil and political rights. Within the context of the meetings of Working Group on an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, they had been able to examine the question in all its various aspects. Chile aligned itself with the statement made by Brazil on behalf of the Group of Latin American and Caribbean States, which supported Portugal's draft resolution to extend the mandate of the Working Group to elaborate such an Optional Protocol.
BART OUVRY (Belgium) said that the discussions in the Working Group had settled the question as to whether there should be a procedure for communications on economic, social and cultural rights, and a large number of delegations supported the idea. Discussions on justiciability had shown that the problems should be dealt with in the same way whether they were economic, social and cultural rights or civil and political rights. The practice of the Committees hitherto had already given practised solutions. National Parliaments, at the time of ratification, would be given a clear idea as to budgetary requirements.
The priority was the rights. The consideration of communications by the Committee would not only strengthen the protection of the holder of the rights, but also contribute to further understanding of the nature of the rights.
MOSTAFA ALAEI (Iran) said economic, social and cultural rights were indispensable to preserve the dignity of all human beings in all countries. Improving respect for economic, social and cultural rights was essential to ensuring the contribution of human rights to both development and peace. Iran had followed with interest the work of the Working Group to consider options regarding the elaboration of an Optional Protocol to the Covenant. Considerable progress had been made in clarifying various questions relating to an Optional Protocol to the treaty. The Working Group had fulfilled the mandate assigned to it by the Commission on Human Rights. Iran supported the extension of the Working Group's mandate to elaborate further a negotiable draft.
CAROLINE MILLER (Australia) said that as a longstanding party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Australia fully supported the promotion and protection of economic, social and cultural rights. For the following three reasons, however, Australia continued to have concerns with the proposal to elaborate an Optional Protocol to the Covenant. First, Australia strongly believed that for the treaty bodies to be more efficient and effective, they had to deliver results. It was Australia's experience that individual complaints mechanisms themselves did little to improve the situations of peoples in countries where some of the most egregious human rights abuses occurred.
Secondly, Australia firmly believed that the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Committee already offered a constructive and valuable way to encourage and assist all States parties to meet their obligations under the Covenant. And, thirdly, discussion in the Working Group had shown that there were many and divided views on the scope and modus operandi of a possible new communications mechanism. To work through the numerous, detailed questions relating to an Optional Protocol would take significant resources and Australia was not convinced that such an exercise represented the best means of promoting and protecting economic, social and cultural rights. For those reasons, Australia would like to see the option of no Optional Protocol remain open for debate.
SANDRA RATIEN, of Centre on Housing Rights and Evictions, (speaking in a joint statement with International Federation of Human Rights Leagues; Foodfirst Information and Action Network; Franciscans International; International Commission of Jurists; and International Women's Rights Action Watch) said the NGO Coalition had actively participated in the last session of the Working Group, where increased momentum in favour of the adoption of an effective instrument for a better protection of economic, social and cultural rights was evident. The proposals according to which the Chair should prepare and present a draft Optional Protocol to the next session was supported. This draft should reflect the discussions and achievements of the three first years of the Working Group, and should serve as a basis for the drafting negotiations.
MELIK OZDEN, of Europe-Third World Centre, said the world had been affirmed that all human rights were indivisible. The rights from fear and want could only be realized with the enjoyment of economic, social and cultural and civil and political rights. The drafting and adoption of an Optional Protocol would strengthen the realization of economic, social and cultural rights. The mechanisms for the monitoring and follow-up to the implementation of the two Covenants were not fully achieved. Although the Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights was adopted 40 years ago, a complaints mechanism to that treaty had never been adopted. The position of the Working Group on the elaboration of the drafting of the Optional Protocol was not clear yet.
ZAHRA OUARDI, of Union de l'action feminine, said that given the importance of the promotion and protection of economic, social and cultural rights, and in view of the right of the individual to live in dignity and to obtain the financial resources to live a decent life, in Morocco measures had been taken to improve the environment of liberty and democracy and very important measures had been undertaken to improve the economic, social and cultural status of peoples, including the establishment of greater equality between men and women, in particular to have access to employment. Nevertheless, although those measures had strengthened economic, social and cultural rights, the economic and social situation in Morocco remained difficult. The rate of education for girls was low and unemployment among women was high.
HORACIO RAVENNA, of Permanent Assembly for Human Rights, said the extension and expansion of the mandate of the Working Group was firmly supported. Economic, social and cultural rights, together with civil and political rights, formed a normative body which was single and consistent, coherent, characterised by their interdependence, indivisibility and inter-relationship. There was a fictitious ranking of rights that were at the same level. There was no mechanism for reporting complaints, and this had given States a false idea regarding the mandatory nature of compliance with these rights. The mandate of the Working Group had expired, and there had been enough discussion. States were favourably disposed to moving forward, and the phase of drafting should begin.
CATARINA DE ALBUQUERQUE, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Open-ended Working Group to Consider Options Regarding the Elaboration of an Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, recalled that conferences had been held in Mexico for the GRULAC countries and in Finland for the European countries pertaining to the elaboration of the Optional Protocol. In its work, the Working Group had drawn from the experience of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. It had also taken into consideration court cases in relation to economic, social and cultural rights. The Group had emphasized that the future protocol should guarantee the full implementation of economic, social and cultural rights.
In her view, the process of the work in the Working Group should continue. A climate of trust built in the Group was an asset that would facilitate the future elaboration of a consensus text. If the Council agreed to the extension of the mandate of the Working Group, the next session would take place in Geneva.
Report of the Working Group to Elaborate a Draft Legally Binding Normative Instrument for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance
In the report of the Intersessional Open-ended Working Group to elaborate a draft legally binding normative instrument for the protection of all persons from enforced disappearance (E/CN.4/2006/57), the Working Group undertook a complete review of the draft instrument and then transmitted it to the Commission which would have to take action. The draft instrument, whose text is available in the annex of the report, states, among other things, that no one shall be subjected to enforced disappearance; no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification for enforced disappearance; and each State Party should take appropriate measures to investigate acts of enforced disappearance and to bring those responsible to justice.
Introduction of the Report of the Working Group to Elaborate a Draft Legally Binding Instrument for the Protection of Persons from Enforced Disappearance
BERNARD KESSEDJIAN, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Open-ended Working Group on a Draft Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, presenting the report of the Working Group, said that the report was dedicated to Martha Vasquez, the Grandmother of the Plaza de Mayo, and to all victims of enforced disappearances. The basis for the work of the Working Group had been the Declaration adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1992, the work of the Sub-Commission of the Commission on Human Rights, the work of the Group of Experts on Enforced Disappearances, and the report of Professor Manfred Nowak. The text prohibited the practice of enforced disappearance. That practice was defined as a crime, and a crime against humanity when it was widespread or systematic. Perhaps the greatest innovation of the text was that it took account of preventive measures, in particular those relating to detention, prison registries and a ban on secret prisons. Those provisions recognized that enforced disappearances fed on gaps in the law and administrative regulations, and that legal detentions could degenerate if they were not sufficiently regulated or structured. The right of victims was also a subject of particular focus: for the disappeared themselves, their memory, and the restoration of their good name, but also for their families, with particular reference to their children, as enforced disappearances mean intolerable suffering by the families who lost their loved ones. Finally, following long discussions, they had established a new concept that was essential for memory and reparation: the right to know the truth. Enforced disappearance was a crime of lies and oblivion. It must be opposed by the truth and living memory. The concrete embodiment of that right was established by means of the right to information, to the freedom of information and to be informed.
The start of the Working Group's discussion was the definition of enforced disappearances. The definition had hit the difficulty of what acts constituted the crime. The real problem posed was the perpetrators of the crime. Most members agreed that the perpetrator was the State, either directly or through complicity. Yet some States pointed to acts of groups, non-State actors, outside the control of States, such as terrorists. Finally, a provision was made for those groups and assigning responsibility to them, without derogating from the State the responsibility to protect.
Statements on the Report of the Working Group to Elaborate a Draft Legally Binding Instrument for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance
ELISABETH ELLISON-KRAMER (Austria), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the Working Group had concluded its work in September 2005, and had decided that it had finished its work. The Commission had been working on the issue of enforced disappearances since the beginning of the 1980s. Despite the creation of the Working Group in 1992, the phenomenon still persisted. It was not a crime of the past. It was not limited to a specific region.
The draft Convention represented a step forward for international human rights, and it defined the crime of enforced disappearances. It organised the fight against impunity of perpetrators, at the national and international levels, and described what preventive measures should be taken. The European Union called for the prompt adoption of the Convention by the Council, and its transfer to the General Assembly this autumn.
JUAN ANTONIO FERNANDEZ PALACIOS (Cuba) said Cuba had always co-sponsored resolutions on involuntary disappearances. The draft convention would complete the efforts of the international community to bring remedy to the widespread acts of disappearance. The principle of restitution and rehabilitation of victims should be confirmed by the provisions of the convention. The perpetrators of past acts of that abhorrent crime should be punished. The practices of enforced disappearances in other countries, such as in the case of the Latin American countries should be combated. Victims of disappearances should be rehabilitated and provided with moral support. Cuba firmly supported the draft convention and the Council should adopt it by consensus
RICARDO GONZALEZ ARENAS (Uruguay) said that Uruguay firmly supported the draft international Convention on Enforced Disappearances and the continued mandate of the Working Group. Uruguay had suffered in its own flesh the effects of that crime and the wounds were still open. Uruguay was convinced that the instrument represented a major step forward in the fight for the promotion and protection of human rights.
The draft text enshrined the right to truth, concerning the rights of disappeared persons and their families. It also provided for compensation and reparation to victims. Moreover, the adoption of the International Convention would be an acknowledgement by the international community that it owed something to the disappeared and to their families and the need to ensure that that terrible violation of human rights would never, ever occur again. Finally, Uruguay paid tribute to the work of the families of those who had suffered from this crime; without their work the Convention would not be possible.
ELIA SOSA (Mexico) said the draft Convention was a legal instrument of top-notch quality. It was the outcome of a fight within the human rights movement over the last decades, which had brought the human dimension to this room and others over the years. The criminalisation of the offence of forced disappearance, the right not to disappear, the right to truth, the recognition that it was a crime against humanity, the right to justice and reparation for victims were all included in the draft.
The request that the Convention be adopted by acclamation and conveyed for adoption this year to the General Assembly was reiterated. All delegations should unite behind this effort, which gave all their dignity.
CORRIGENDUM
In press release HR/HRC/06/18 of 26 June 2006, the statement by Lebanon on page 2 should read as follows:
GEBRAN SOUFAN (Lebanon) said the Human Rights Council should implement the Commission on Human Rights resolutions and statements concerning Lebanon aimed at ensuring the release of the remaining Lebanese nationals who were taken into detention under the Israeli occupation of South Lebanon; the disclosure of the fate of Lebanese missing persons due to the Israeli occupation; and the return the Lebanese mortal remains in Israel. Lebanon reserved the right to seize the Council again for further consideration and to request the appointment of a special mechanism on the question of the Lebanese detainees and missing persons due to the Israeli occupation of South Lebanon, should this issue remain unsolved.
Lebanon cautioned against the negative outcomes of the clash between the freedom of expression and the freedom of belief, and invited the Council to benefit from Lebanon's experiment where both liberties were exercised in harmony and synergy. Lebanon proposed the establishment of a working group to study the shortcomings in international law and draw the conclusions and guidance to avoid the abuse of the rights of both freedoms and address the defamation of religion.
June 26, 2006
Statement on Human Rights Defenders
Joint oral statement of the World Organisation against Torture (OMCT) and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) in the framework of their joint programme, the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders
UN Human Rights Council First Session (19-30 June 2006)
Item 4 : Implementation of General Assembly Resolution 60/251 of 15 March 2006 entitled “Human Rights Council”
Pressing issue (5): Role of Human Rights Defenders
Geneva - Paris, June 26, 2006
Mr. Chairman,
The World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) and the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), in the framework of their joint programme, the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, express their deep concern about the fact that the repression human rights defenders are subjected to worldwide continues and indeed is growing and, consequently, point out the ongoing importance to widely recognise the legitimacy of their action and their increasing need for further protection.
In all regions of the world, in a context when human rights suffer a serious setback in the name of the fight against terrorism, human rights defenders continue to pay a heavy price for their commitment to the defence of universal rights, and the variety of means of repression against them is wide: assassinations, forced disappearances, acts of torture, ill-treatments, death threats, arbitrary arrests and detentions, judicial proceedings, adoption of restrictive legislation, etc.
Indeed, techniques of repression against defenders are becoming more and more widespread, while the authors of such violations enjoy complete impunity. Thus, in 2005, human rights defenders continued to face multiple acts of reprisals because of their activities: in its Annual Report[1], the Observatory documented the situation of 1,172 defenders repressed in about 90 countries around the world.
In 2005, human rights defenders involved in the fight against impunity were more than ever subjected to acts of retaliation. This repression is multifaceted, from assassinations (Brazil, Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), etc.), death threats (Central African Republic, Guatemala, Peru, Uzbekistan) to arbitrary detentions (Ethiopia, Iran, Tunisia).
In many countries, defenders of economic, social and cultural rights were not spared by acts of violence, in particular trade union leaders (Colombia, which continued to hold the sad world record for the number of trade activists assassinated, Djibouti, Philippines) and defenders of indigenous communities and of environmental and land rights (Chile, China, Zimbabwe). Furthermore, defenders of sexual minorities remained subjected to repeated acts of harassment and intimidation, such as in China, Guatemala, Jamaica, Mexico, Turkey and Uganda.
Furthermore, once again, in 2005, many States made extensive use of legislation in order to control the independent civil society, and in particular to toughen conditions for NGO registration, facilitate their suspension or dismantling, or limit their access to foreign financing (such as in Belarus, Iran, Nepal, Rwanda, Russian Federation, Sudan, Tunisia, Uzbekistan).
Finally, defending human rights during political or armed conflicts remained extremely dangerous: not only general insecurity rendered the defenders’ activities of monitoring and investigation very risky, but also their denunciations and protective efforts were also increasingly considered as being opposed to the government or to one of the parties to the conflict (Afghanistan, Chechnya, Colombia, Côte d’Ivoire, DRC, Iraq, Israel and the Palestinian Occupied Territories, Nepal, Philippines, Sudan).
Mr. Chairman, as no continent is immune from the phenomenon of repression against defenders, an increased mobilisation, in particular at the regional and international levels, is more than ever necessary in order to save what lies at the heart of human rights: respect for the dignity of all.
After six years of remarkably rigorous and extensive activity, Ms. Hina Jilani’s mandate as Special Representative of the Secretary General of the United Nations on Human Rights Defenders is coming to an end. Much has been achieved, yet much remains to be done: two reasons to not only renew the mechanism, but also to strengthen it with increased resources for fulfilling its mission.
Mr. Chairman, the Observatory would like to conclude by urging the Human Rights Council to:
- Support the mandate of the United Nations Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders by renewing it and providing necessary material and financial support, and ensure that there is no protection gap within the review process;
- Strengthen the role and functions of the UN Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders, notably by allowing more interaction and cooperation with the Human Rights Council, including interactive dialogues and special sessions;
- Encourage States to invite to country visits and co-operate with the UN Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders. In particular, all States that are members of the Human Rights Council should abide by their responsibilities and commitments by extending standing invitations to all Special Procedures, including the UN Special Representative on Human Rights Defenders;
- Call upon States to fully implement the principles included in the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognised Human Rights and Fundamental Freedom through the adoption of the Declaration by national parliaments, the dissemination of the Declaration, the implementation of awareness-raising and solidarity campaigns with defenders, and the developments of mechanisms that provide safe havens for those under threat;
- Urge States to ensure that national security measures, including those taken in the name of the fight against terrorism, comply with international human rights norms and standards and are not used to justify disproportionate limitations on freedoms or impair the legitimate work of human rights defenders;
- Ensure the dissemination of the Declaration at the international level by including it in the United Nations plans and training programmes for State officials, with a particular focus on the issue of women human rights defenders.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
[1] The 2005 Annual Report of the Observatory, entitled Steadfast in Protest, was published in March 2006.
June 12, 2006
Roma Advocates Sue The Danish Red Cross
ROMA ADVOCATES SUE THE DANISH RED CROSS, CLAIM THAT DETENTION OF ASYLUM SEEKERS VIOLATES THE UN TORTURE CONVENTION
An AdvocacyNet special investigation
June 12, 2006, Washington, DC: In a case that has major implications for the treatment of Roma and asylum seekers throughout Europe, Roma advocates in Denmark are suing the Danish Red Cross over the treatment of Roma from Kosovo whose appeal for asylum has been rejected.
The lawsuits are being filed by a Danish advocacy group Romano, on behalf of six Roma families in two Red Cross camps, Sandholm and Anstrup.
The suits allege that entire families have been forced to live in single rooms in the camps for several years, and subjected to a range of other pressures that violate the UN Torture Convention and the Danish Constitution.
Eric Stottrup, President of Romano, told the Advocacy Protect (AP) that 40% of the adults have psychiatric problems. "They (the Red Cross) have made these people insane," he said.
Contacted by AP, the Danish Red Cross acknowledged receipt of the law suits but expressed confidence that they would be quickly rejected by the Danish courts.
The lawsuits, which come on the eve of International Refugee day (June 20), have alarmed Roma advocates in Europe, including the International Roma Women's Network (an AP partner), because they suggest that the Danish authorities are making conditions in the camps so difficult for rejected Roma asylum seekers that they will choose to return to Kosovo - even though this is not safe.
The case has even sparked an uproar over the ethics of conducting research on the children of asylum seekers. Romano has complained to the Danish Ministry of Science and Technology that students from the Slagelse College of Social Education recently interviewed and photographed Roma children in the Avnstrup center without properly informing their parents.
Asked for a comment, Red Cross officials said the students were training under proper supervision.
- "Motivation Furthering"
The plaintiffs are among thousands of Roma who fled from Kosovo after violence erupted in the province in 1999. Those who sought asylum in Denmark were granted temporary refuge (known as a "procedural stay") until their requests for asylum could be heard.
But Danish policy towards immigrants hardened after a new government was elected in 2001, and rejected asylum seekers were given a choice between returning home and being sent to the Sandholm or Avnstrup centers. According to Romano, the two camps hold around 1,200 individuals, including about 30 Roma families from Kosovo. They include 53 Roma children.
The official description given to the treatment of camp dwellers is "motivation furthering." Mr. Stottrup suggested that this means forcing the Roma to return to Kosovo even though the UN Mission in Kosovo has warned it cannot ensure their safety.
Kosovo is currently lobbying for independence from Serbia, and some are convinced that Western governments, including Denmark, have secretly offered independence to Kosovo's politicians if they agree to take back asylum seekers. This, say advocates, could be particularly dangerous for Roma, who are viewed as pro-Serbian by many Kosovars and could be vulnerable to discrimination in an independent Kosovo. Advocates also fear that any large-scale return of Roma from Europe could destabilize the region.
- Suicide Attempts
In an interview with AP, Danish Red Cross officials rejected any suggestion that the agency is the willing instrument of an inhumane government policy, and pointed out that those living in camps can move in and out of the camps. This, they said, is not "detention."
But they did admit that conditions in the camps can cause considerable stress. Ann-Sofie Bech, a legal consultant with the agency's asylum department, said that some families have been in the camps for years. Families are not allowed to cook in their rooms, and some are required to report to the police each week.
Children in the camps are supposed to receive the same education as Danish children, but adults are prohibited from receiving language classes. Up to now there has been no official mother-tongue education for adults or children.
Ms. Bech agreed that the camps had seen a "lot" of psychiatric problems in recent years. "They were traumatized (in 1999) and have been here a long time. A lot of people are receiving psychiatric help and medicine in the center."
According to Red Cross statistics, there were two suicides and 55 attempted suicides in 2001 among a population of 7,218 asylum seekers who received assistance from the Red Cross. In 2004 - the last year for which statistics are available - there were 52 attempted or threatened suicides among 2,327.
Ms. Bech said that the availability of services is partially determined by funds and that the Red Cross receives 33,213 Danish crowns a year ($5,770) for each asylum seeker, plus a supplement for specialized services. Following a national debate over Denmark's asylum policy in recent months the agency will now receive an extra 37 million crowns ($5 million) for education, and improvements in housing and services.
Ms. Bech said that this will allow the Red Cross to provide mother-tongue language classes, but it is not clear how this will affect the Roma. Roma language (Romani) classes could be made available, she said, but services are offered on the basis of individual need and "vulnerability," as determined by the Red Cross. Roma are not considered to have special needs or rights, and - like all rejected asylum seekers - are identified by an alien ID instead of ethnicity or nationality.
Some advocates, like Roma, feel this is another strong argument for declaring Roma to be an ethnic minority in Denmark. This would entitle Roma to language and other rights.
- Controversy Over Research
This broad-ranging dispute over camp conditions has been further enflamed by reports that six students from the Slagelse College of Social Education recently interviewed Roma children over three days in the Avnstrup center, as part of studying for a degree in "social education."
Mr. Stottrup charged that the College had only made a cursory effort to get the consent of parents. On May 17, two days before the research, the children were reportedly given a letter for their parents to sign, asking for permission to photograph children but without explaining the purpose of the research. On the day of the research, they were given a further letter that read: "Six students will today bake and play bingo with the children in MiniClub. Is your child allowed to participate in this?"
The Red Cross maintained that parents who signed this were giving their consent. They defended the training as valuable for the students, who are learning to work with "children at risk," and also refreshing for the children who gained from the presence of extra day-care personnel.
But Mr. Stottrup said that several parents had complained and he accused the Red Cross of "enormous arrogance" and unethical behavior. "They (the parents) felt they could not object. They feel they are prison inmates and don't have a choice," he said, comparing the training to Nazi experiments on camp inmates during the Second World War.
Romano has complained to the Ministry of Science and Technology and called for Roma to be represented on committees that monitor such research.
Romano's energetic advocacy has mobilized the Roma in the camps and galvanized other Roma advocates in Europe. But its tone has offended Red Cross officials, who predicted that Mr. Stottrup's references to Nazi concentration camps would backfire with a population that suffered greatly in the war. After several weeks of intense national debate over asylum, Danes know enough to dismiss the comparison, they said.
Mr. Stottrup defended his tactics. He said that the dispute is indicative of a deep "racism" in Danish society, and that Romano's credentials are sound. The organization was formed in 1942 by Danish Gypsies and was part of the Liberal Danish Resistance Movement known as Holger Danske, which helped Gypsies and Jews to escape from the Nazis.
* For more information contact Heather Ratcliff: heather.advocacyproject@gmail.com
* To contact Romano, phone (0045) 49 22 28 11. Email: mail@romano.dk Web www.romano.dk
* To contact the Danish Red Cross phone (0045) 35 25 92 00 E-Mail: drk@drk.dk info@drk.dk Web: http://www.drk.dk
June 11, 2006
Bedoon: Kuwait's Dirty Little Secret
Bedoon: Kuwait's Dirty Little Secret
Kuwait, a strategic US ally, harbors a startling little-known civil rights secret: its stateless people, the Bedoon.
Bedoon means "without" in Arabic (Bedoon is different than "Bedouin" meaning nomadic/formerly nomadic tribes.) Bedoon refers to people with no nationality.
Kuwait is one of the only few countries in the world where there are citizens within the country who have no nationality. In Kuwait, Bedoon must pay to obtain any official documentation (if they are lucky enough to get that far) including: permission to marry, birth and death certificates, drivers licenses, identification, etc. They have to go to the official Kuwaiti office called the "Bedoon Council" and beg to get any rights at all. Many are not allowed to work. They can not own property. Many can't obtain travel papers. Recently, the Kuwaiti authorities agreed to issue travel documents for the religious journey, Haj, to Bedoon – on the condition that they "solve their identity problem" before returning to Kuwait (therefore not being allowed back into their country).
If a Bedoon man marries a Kuwaiti woman, their children are Bedoon (it is the opposite if a Kuwaiti man marries a Bedoon woman – both she and her children can obtain Kuwaiti citizenship). If the Bedoon man has any difficulties and wants a divorce, the Kuwaiti x-wife can not only be granted full custody of their children, but ask for alimony and child support in almost the full amount of the husband's salary, leaving him destitute. Therefore, Bedoon men are at the mercy of their Kuwaiti wives.
If you drive by Sulaybia, Kuwait, North on 5th Ring Road towards the area of Jahra, you will notice a tin shanty town which is inhabited mainly by Bedoon. Depending on the whims of the Kuwaiti government, there have been several attempts to destroy this area and "relocate" the Bedoon living there. To where? It is often said that they can "go back to their countries". Where are their countries if several generations (some going back to the 1964 census) have been born and raised in Kuwait? If a Bedoon person speaks out, he/she is ostracized and may face legal action including deportation (again – to where?).
Many Bedoon fought for Kuwait; many were in the Kuwaiti military and stayed in Kuwait, fighting as resistance. In a radio address while in exile in Saudi Arabia during the occupation of Kuwait by Iraq, the late Emir, Jaber Al-Ahmed Al-Sabah, stated that those Bedoon who fought for their country would be granted their Kuwaiti citizenship. Like the promise of women's suffrage, perhaps it is just a long time in coming, but it isn't being discussed at the top levels YET. Kuwait is openly pleased about its ties with the US and foray into world democracy, and yet the Kuwaiti Government is doing nothing to solve the inhumane Bedoon issue.
Often, you can't tell who is Bedoon and who isn't within the same tribes or families; sometimes cousins have Kuwaiti citizenship and others don't. Familial links can be easily established by DNA tests, and yet when they are conducted by the Kuwaiti Government (at the 80 KD expense per person of the Bedoon) the results are locked away and kept from the families.
The older generations of Bedoon were/are mostly proud people who blended into society without discussion of suffering or hardships. As younger generations of Bedoon are coming up, they are learning more about democracy and civil rights. They are an intensely angry group. When people face oppression, stress and psychological abuse take tolls: Petty crimes have been growing (and are likely to continue to grow) in this small country. If people feel that they have no hope, no future, no care – they become desperate. It is a tremendous security risk to an already security-strained nation.
If Kuwait strives to be a pillar of democracy in the Middle East, why not put an end to the suffering of so many of its inhabitants.
June 10, 2006
Human Rights Activists in Bahrain seek Help
Attacks against human rights groups have been in the increase worldwide. As more and more governments push towards a global estate of exception, human rights defenders and other political activists who throw a light onto and investigate the repression are often the first target. If Martin Niemöller was alive today he might well start his poem with "First they came for the human rights defenders".
As it harasses human rights activist, Bahrain is also about to pass a law greatly restricting freedom of speech and assembly. The proposed law would ban "any speech or discussion infringing on public order or morals,” leaving "public order or morals" undefined. It would also authorizes allow police presence at any public meeting and allows security officials to break up meetings if any crime is committed. I'm copying the letter sent by HRW to the Bahraini government on the topic.
Let us not be silent! Contact your representatives in your own government expressing your concerns about human rights defenders and write letters to the governments in question. I'm including some addresses, which I hope are still accurate :).
The Embassy of Bahrain in your country
http://www.helplinedatabase.com/embassy-database/country-in-other-countries/bahrain.html
The Royal Council
His Majesty the King, Sheikh Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, King of Bahrain
Fax: +973-17664587
Crown Prince Council
Sheikh Salman bin Hamad bin Isa Al-Khalifa, Crown Prince of Bahrain
Fax: +973-17664587
-----
URGENT APPEAL
FOR THE PROTECTION OF ACTIVISTS AND HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS
IN BAHRAIN
Sexual Assaults, Threats of Killings, Harassment At Work
In order to intimidate, silence and prevent them from perusing their role in disseminate, reinforce and defend human rights values, activists and human rights defenders in Bahrain are still facing all sorts of repression [1] , tyranny and threats [2] by the State Security Authorities. This systematic approach also aims to demean the defenders and their activities as well as contribute in deterring attention to the violations and issues raised by them. In addition to the police (security) trailing and privacy infiltration through communications techniques like telephones, emails, etc [3] , the following represent some of the tactics employed by the Authorities to contest activists;
Arbitrary detention [4]
Legal measures and deployment of non independent judiciary to lead fierce attack on activists and defenders of rights [5].
Physical attacks [6] , sexual assaults and blackmail of sexual attack on families of activists [7]
Framed criminal allegations [8]
Allegations of politicized activities [9]
Defamation and smear [10]
Job harassment and dismissal [11]
We, the under named, activists and defenders of rights in Bahrain, whose rights have been violated by the Authorities during our work in the promotion of human rights values. We see your swift intervention against the Authorities attacks and persistent violations to our rights. We call upon your action on the basis of the rights and responsibilities of individual, groups and civic societies in reinforcement of human rights and its basic freedoms, legitimized and protected by the UN charter for the protection of Activists and defenders of rights. We also seek your support in calling upon the reviewing Bahrain's record of human rights and the need the State to abide by the universal declarations, its pledges and treaties concerned with promotion and protection of human rights and its defenders.
Names of suffering activists:
1
Mr Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja
Trainer
Human Rights Activist
Bahrain Center for Human Rights
2
Mr Nabeel Rajab
Self-employed
Human Rights Activist
Bahrain Center for Human Rights
3
Mr Hasan Mushaima
Retired
Political Activist
HAQ Movement
4
Dr Abduljalil Alsingace
Academician
Activist
HAQ Movement
5
Mrs Layla Dashti
unemployed
Activist
Committee of Activists & Detainees of Conscience
6
Mr Nader Ebrahim
Teacher (imprisoned)
activist
Committee of Activists & Detainees of Conscience
7
Mr Hasan Abdulnabi
Employee (imprisoned)
Activist
Unemployed Committee
8
Mr Mosa Abdali
Unemployed (imprisoned)
Activist
Unemployed Committee
9
Mr Ali Mushaima
unenmployed
Activist
Unemployed Committee
10
Mr Abdulameer Madan
Student (imprisoned)
Activist
Unemployed Committee
11
Mr Hasan Al-Haddad
Nurse (imprisoned)
Independent Activist
12
Mr Abdulghani Khanjar
Teacher
Activist
National Committee for Martyrs & Victims of Torture
13
Mr Abdulraoof Al-Shayeb
Self-employed
Human Rights Activist
National Committee for Martyrs & Victims of Torture
14
Mr Abbas Omran
Engineer
Labour Activist
National Committee for Martyrs & Victims of Torture
15
Mr Jalal Fairooz
Ex-engineer at BANAGAS
Political Activist
Alwefaq Society
16
Mr Mohsen Muqdad
Self- Employed
Activist
Committee of Families of Detainees
17
Mr Ali Qamber
Technician
Activist
Committee of Families of Detainees
18
Mr Abdulla Zain
employee
Activist
Committee of Families of Detainees
[1] Front Line Press Release "Bahrain's candidacy for the UN Human Rights Council must mean better protection for human rights defenders"- 24 April 2006, http://www.frontlinedefenders.org/news/2781
[2] Country Reports on Human Rights Practices - Released by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor- US State Department- March 8, 2006-http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/hrrpt/2005/61686.htm
[3]A report "Targeting Activists"- Bahrain Center for Human Rights- January 2006
[4] Prisoners and detainees of Bahrain airport and subsequent protest incidents
[5]Abdulhadi Al-khawaja's case
[6] Attacks on unemployed near the Bahrain Royal Court on June 19th and the Elected House on July 15 th 2005.
[7] Physical and sexual attacks on unemployed committee activists Mosa Abdali and Hasan Abdulnabi
[8] Prisoners of Bahrain Airport incident, and case of Activist Abdulraoof Al-Shayeb- president of National Committee of Martyrs and Victims of Torture
[9] Members of Bahrain Center for Human Rights
[10] Defamation cases of Activists: Hasan Mushaima (HAQ Movement), Abdulraoof Al-Shayeb (National Committee of Martyrs and Victims of Torture), Nabil Rajab and Abduhadi Al-khwaja ( Bahrain Center for Human Rights), Shaikh Ali Salman (Alwefaq Society), and Ali Hasan Mushaima (Unemployed Committee)
[11]Dismissal of Dr Abduljalil Alsingace from the chairmanship of Mechanical Engineering at the University of Bahrain, and sacking of Jalal Fairooz, senior engineer at Bahrain National Gas Company-BANAGAS
Bahrain: King Should Reject Law on Public Gatherings
Government Must Revise Draft Law That Undermines Freedom of Assembly
(Washington, D.C., June 8, 2006) – The Bahraini government’s draft legislation on public meetings and demonstrations undermines the right of peaceful assembly, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter urging Bahrain’s king not sign the bill into law.
The draft law will be the first significant human rights-related legislation to come before Bahrain’s king, Shaikh Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa for final approval since the country was elected to the United Nations Human Rights Council last month. In its letter, Human Rights Watch urged the king to instruct the Ministries of Justice and Interior to revise the legislation to bring it in line with international human rights law.
“Shaikh Hamad and other Bahraini officials claim that the country is on the path to democracy, but this legislation would move Bahrain in the opposite direction,” said Joe Stork, deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa division at Human Rights Watch. “This badly flawed law has no place on the statute books of any state, much less a member of the new U.N. Human Rights Council.”
Freedom of assembly is essential to forming and expressing public participation in political affairs and a crucial component of any democratic order, Human Rights Watch said. International law allows some limitations on the exercise of this freedom, but the limitations cannot compromise the essence of the right.
In the draft law, known as Amendments to Law 18/1973, Article 6 forbids “any speech or discussion infringing on public order or morals.” But it leaves “public order and morals” undefined, inviting security officials to restrict free expression and peaceful assembly at will. Article 7 authorizes police presence at any public meeting and allows security officials to break up meetings if any crime listed in the Penal Code is committed.
“Bahrain’s Penal Code still has provisions that contradict international human rights standards,” Stork said. “This new law says the police can lawfully disrupt a public meeting even if the participants are simply exercising basic rights like freedom of expression and freedom of association.”
The draft legislation originated with the government. The elected 40-member Council of Deputies (Majlis al-Nawwab) has approved it, and the appointed 40-member Consultative Council (Majlis al-Shura) is expected to do so soon. The bill requires approval of the king to become law.
To read the letter, please visit:
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2006/06/08/bahrai13529.htm
New Suit against Coca Cola
One of the most significant human rights problems in Colombia nowdays is the repression against union activists. Companies, both national and international, have developed links to paramilitary forces who threaten and even kill union activists to keep their activities in check.
ILRF & USW Bring New Complaint Against Coca-Cola,
Alleging Complicity with The Colombian DAS
and AUC Paramilitaries In Killing of Labor Leader
June 5, 2006
Contact:
Terry Collingsworth (202) 347-4100, Ext. 104;
Daniel Kovalik (412) 562-2518
On Friday, June 2, 2006, the ILRF and USW filed a new Alien Tort Claims Act
case against the Coca-Cola Company and its Latin American Bottler, Coca-Cola
FEMSA. This new Complaint charges that managers at the Coke bottling plant
in Barranquilla, Colombia conspired with both the Colombian Administrative
Department of Security (“DAS”) and the AUC paramilitaries to intimidate,
threaten and ultimately kill SINALTRAINAL trade union leader Adolfo de Jesus
Munera on August 31, 2002. The Complaint further alleges that, despite a
number of warnings to Coca-Cola management in Atlanta that the management at the Barranquilla bottler has continued to meet with and provide plant access
to paramilitaries, the paramilitary infiltration of this bottling plant
continues unabated to this day. Meanwhile, these same paramilitaries have
continued to threaten SINALTRAINAL members and leaders with death and even
kidnapped the child of one SINALTRAINAL leader to pressure him into
refraining from his union activities.
These allegations come at a time when the DAS in Colombia has come under
fire for collaborating with paramilitary forces. In particular, credible
allegations have surfaced in recent weeks that the DAS, which has
responsibility to protect trade unionists under threat has actually been
creating and maintaining hit lists of trade union leaders and providing
these lists to the paramilitaries to act upon. These allegations also come
at a time when the Coca-Cola Company has been kicked off of numerous
campuses throughout the U.S. over allegations that it has failed to
adequately address such labor and human rights abuses in Colombia.
According to ILRF Executive Director Terry Collingsworth, “This new
Complaint underscores the need for The Coca-Cola Company to spend more of
its effort and resources in protecting the lives and well-being of its
workers in Colombia in lieu of focusing on its public relations campaign to
deflect the allegations of abuse being leveled against it.” There is no
question, however, that it is the Coca-Cola Company that is the proper
defendant in this case because it has complete control of its empire and
Coca-Cola managers have been traversing the United States claiming that the
Coca-Cola Compnay is taking all possible steps to address human rights
violations in its bottling plants in Colombia. USW Associate General Counsel
Daniel Kovalik states that “The continued assassination of trade unionists
in Colombia with the complicity of the Colombian DAS and military, as well
as corporate interests, calls into grave question the propriety of the
U.S.’s continued commitment to aid for the Colombian military forces.”
###
Campaign to Stop KILLER COKE
We are seeking your help to stop a gruesome cycle of murders, kidnappings,
and torture of union leaders and organizers involved in daily life-and-death
struggles at Coca-Cola bottling plants in Colombia, South America.
"If we lose the fight against Coca-Cola, we will first lose our union, next
our jobs and then our lives." SINALTRAINAL VIce President Juan Carlos Galvis
Please donate to the Campaign.
Learn the truth about The Coca-Cola Co.
"We believe the evidence shows that Coca-Cola and its corporate network are
rife with immorality, corruption and complicity in murder."
Campaign to Stop Killer Coke/Corporate Campaign, Inc. Director Ray Rogers
Visit www.KillerCoke.org
(718) 852-2808
(917) 779-0735
Philippines: Hundreds of boys kidnapped
We received the following articled from PREDA, an organization that works on children's rights in the Philippines.
Hundreds of Boys and teenagers kidnapped in Southern Philippines
By Mike Cohen
Manila - Philippine authorities are desperately searching the countryside in the Southern Philippine province of Sultan Kulerat for a large number of children believed to have been stolen by a cult that is allegedly abusing the children en-masse. In what is being called a massive child search and rescue operation the military and police are looking for a cave where scores of children have been brought to be members of a remote area. The Philippine Government Philippine News Agency reported "Police in Sultan Kudarat have started looking for a cave where hundreds of children were allegedly being held captive by a cult."
Authorities were alerted to the mass kidnappings after a "account by a 14-year-old boy who claimed to have escaped from the cult prompted authorities to search for the cave, possibly located in the mountains near Lutayan town" the remote hinterland province is home also to rebel groups it is unclear if the children are being kidnapped for service in the various armed bands that roam the Philippine countryside. The government run news agency reports;” The cult is believed responsible for the disappearance of children in various places, including South Cotabato, Sarangani and General Santos City". The areas are large communities where a sudden surge of disappearances has accrued.
"The boy, whose identity and address was withheld for security reasons, was brought to the Lutayan police station by residents approached by the child after fleeing from the cult." The State run news agency report said further "Police say that there have been other similar reports of this kind of crime". adding further the boys escape may shed light on the disappearance of hundreds of other young boys and teenaged men, "He told policemen that he was kidnapped several weeks ago by a group of men. They covered his nose with a substance-laced cloth and he lost consciousness. When he woke up, the boy found himself in a dark cave filled with children, who were also kidnapped."
In Manila at the National Police Headquarters operations center say they fear the cult may be a cover for a mass recruitment by kidnapping of insurgent groups who have done this before on Basilan Island in the Southern Philippines. Four insurgent groups operate in the Southern Philippines ranging from Communist rebels. Two factions of the Islamic separatist movement the MNLF and the MILF but most of these groups do not engage in kidnapping of children as fighters.
The fourth a Al Qaeda linked group of insurgents called the Abu Sayyaf who are allies of the Jemaah Islamiah and Al Qaeda. Are known to kidnap en-mass to "recruit and brainwash' young men and boys often keeping them for weeks until they join raids or crime spree's or using them as 'cannon fodder" between them and government forces.
Authorities say the last time group had been known to kidnap young men and boys was often prior to engaging in large battles. UNESCO & UNCHR have several times in the past condemned the use of child fighters in conflicts in the Philippine insurgency by armed groups in the last few years as the Philippine economy has improved it has become harder for some armed groups to find recruits claim authorities and they have been known to abduct children in a effort in increase their numbers in the field.
http://mikeinmanila.wordpress.com/2006/05/28/hunderds-of-boys-and-teenagers-kidnapped-in-southern-philippines/