Friday, September 04, 2009
Reporters Without Borders - RSF is outraged by the notion of defamation of religions officially adopted by the UN, by Francis Chartrand
See United Nations - The Commission on Human Rights adopted a resolution condemning the "defamation of religions". Only Islam is specifically mentioned. You will find such explanations on why the resolution adopted March 27 is so disturbing even if it is not binding.
This resolution also reflects a complete moral bankruptcy of the United Nations, which gives more importance to such abstractions as ideologies or religions as human beings.
The concept of defamation of religions officially adopted by the Council for Human Rights United Nations, Reporters Without Borders is outraged.
Reporters Without Borders condemns once again the inability of the Council on Human Rights UN to defend the values enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
"The Council has just deal a severe blow to freedom of expression that is supposed to defend. In passing a resolution that seeks to stifle criticism of Islam, the UN rights body has just shown once again his inability to fight effectively in defense of human rights ", said Reporters Without Borders .
"This resolution is disgraceful. Under the pretext of fighting against discrimination, she blames the media 'are religious symbols and sacred persons'. Especially in the Muslim religion. Clearly, the UN asked the media not to criticize religions, including Islam in the name of the fight against incitement to hatred. It is unacceptable to all those who have at heart to defend freedom of expression and those who fight against discrimination", the organization added.
"The UN is on a dangerous slippery slope for free speech. All freedoms must be defended with equal strength. It is unacceptable that the UN take advantage of if outrageous way to freedom at the expense of another. This goes against all the fundamental principles of this organization", said Reporters Without Borders.
The Council for Human Rights UN meeting in Geneva, Switzerland, voted March 26, 2009, a resolution on the establishment of the agenda of the Durban conference on the fight against racism . The text, submitted by Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Conference, was adopted by 23 votes to 11 against (the countries of the European Union, Canada, Chile) and 13 abstentions.
The text urges member states including the United Nations to take action against "hate crimes, discrimination and intimidation resulting from defamation of religions". The document "deplores the use of electronic media, audiovisual and printed matter, including the Internet, for (...) target religious symbols and sacred persons. The resolution also states that the Council of Human Rights is "alarmed by the inaction of some States to combat discriminatory practices and recalls the need for effectively combating defamation of all religions in general and Islam and Muslims in particular. "
Link
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Freedom of expression, Islam, Religion and fanaticism, Reporters without borders, UN
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Doudou Diène blame cartoons, but not hate Muslims textbooks, by Noémie Cournoyer
The rapporteur of the UN on issues of racism promptly condemned the Danish cartoons two years ago. But he did not deign to respond to complaints of UN Watch, an NGO accredited to the UN, against hate textbooks of Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
UN Watch is a Geneva-based NGO and special consultative status by the Economic and Social Council. Its International Board of Directors includes Mr. Irwin Cotler, former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada.
UN Watch has submitted to Doudou Diene, UN Special Rapporteur on the issues of racism and intolerance, two detailed reports based on an examination of the contents of textbooks 119 Egyptian and 93 Saudi textbooks. UN Watch condemns the incitement of children to racial hatred in a systematic and sustained by the state, and asks Doudou Diène to take action. We have translated the letter from UN Watch in Diène. Read below, we propose an action to take.
The UN Watch reports were submitted in 2005. Doudou Diène has not responded to those governments whose official textbooks are promoting hatred. He had promptly criticized the Danish government for its lack of "commitment and vigilance in the fight against religious intolerance and incitement to religious hatred" because it was not fast enough to condemn a newspaper edited by a private company that published caricatures of Muhammad.
Reports submitted to Doudou Diène show that Saudi Arabia and Egypt focus the education of their youth on xenophobia, anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and hatred of the West. For example, these books refer several times to Jews and Christians as "cursed", the "infidels" and "unbelievers" and "enemies of Islam". The West is "a society in decomposition endangered", and Jews were "a wicked nation, characterized by corruption, malice, deceit, betrayal, aggressiveness, and pride."
In his letters from 2005 to Doudou Diène, UN Watch complains that "the language of textbooks is shocking indoctrination of young students" and that therefore "there is a strong likelihood that children educated in this culture will develop racist stereotypes and intolerance. "
Given the inaction of Doudou Diène, UN Watch suggests citizens to send a letter to Diène asking him to take action against the teaching of hatred and intolerance. The website offers a UN Watch letter online (in English. We offer a translation below). You can join this campaign. Just a few mouse clicks.
Take Action - Fight the teaching of prejudice
We show here a translation of the letter from UN Watch in Doudou Diène (which Diène has not deigned to answer), followed by a translation of the letter posted on the website of UN Watch that you can sign online.
UN Watch letter to Doudou Diène
Mr. Doudou Diene, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance, OHCHR - Palais des Nations 8 - 14 avenue de la Paix 1211 Geneva 10
On 7 January 2005
Dear Mr. Diène
This letter is an allegation that the textbooks distributed by the governments of Egypt and of Saudi Arabia are promoting hatred of Jews and Christians, as detailed in the attached report.
The teachings of these manuals are acts by those two governments, of contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination and intolerance associated with it. As an NGO based in Geneva and in special consultative status by the Economic and Social Council, we submit this information under the A/C.3/59/L.7lY Resolution of the General Assembly dated 24 November 2004, which provides for cooperation with NGOs.
You ask, in accordance with this resolution, to respond effectively to this serious information about the teaching of racism in the Saudi Arabian and Egyptian schools, and keep track of visits to these countries to encourage national authorities to undertake the necessary investigations and corrective actions, including the replacement of the message of hatred of those books with a message of tolerance.
The two attached reports are published by the Center for Monitoring the Impact of Peace in collaboration with the American Jewish Committee. In War and Peace, Israel and the West in Egyptian school textbooks, the contents of 119 Egyptian textbooks was examined for references to issues of peace and "Other", namely Christians, Jews and the West. In the Egyptian school textbooks, the report shows that "malice, greed, treachery, exploitation of others, fomenting strife, deceit, racism, arrogance, hypocrisy, deception, and hostility - all are presented as characteristics of Jews ". Therefore, there is a strong likelihood that children educated in this culture will develop stereotypes racist and intolerant.
The second attached report, entitled The West, Christians and Jews in the textbooks of Saudi Arabia, examining 93 Saudi textbooks. In these texts, Christians and Jews are denounced as "infidels," the West is "a society in decomposition endangered", and Jews were "a wicked nation, characterized by corruption, malice, the lies, betrayal, aggressiveness, and pride. " This language is shocking indoctrination of young students with a blatant anti-Semitism.
Our youth of the world, including that of Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Middle East, deserves an education for peace which preaches tolerance, reconciliation and respect for others. Unfortunately, the attached reports show that Saudi Arabia and Egypt rather focus the education of their youth on xenophobia, anti-Semitism, Christianophobia and hatred of the West.
In addition to the remedies requested above, we ask that you discuss this allegation and equipment attached, and any replies from the Egyptian or Saudi, in your reports to the General Assembly and the Commission Human Rights.
Hillel C. Neuer Executive Director United Nations Watch
Doudou Diène letter you can send online to the website of UN Watch
Mr. Doudou Diene Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and intolerance OHCHR - Palais des Nations 8 - 14 avenue de la Paix 1211 Geneva 10
Subject: Textbooks Semitic and anti-Christians in Egypt and Saudi Arabia
Your UN mandate requires you to speak out against racial and religious intolerance, and you have so often been commendable. To give a recent example, in November 2005, after UN Watch and 30 other organizations have sent you a complaint regarding the call by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad so that Israel be "wiped off the map", you are admirably delivered demanding that Iran is due. In January 2006, in your report (E/CN.4/2006/16), you have condemned the declaration of Iran as "a manifestation of anti-Semitism." I congratulate you and thank you for your views on this issue.
I am writing today to ask you to take action against another case of racism and intolerance: the anti-Semitism and an anti-state sponsored, in schoolbooks in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. For example, these books refer several times to Jews and Christians as "cursed", the "infidels" and "unbelievers", and "enemies of Islam". They teach students that "the Jews are a people of treachery and treason." And that "a malicious Crusader alliance of Jews and trying to eliminate Islam from all continents." Despite assurances of reform of school textbooks by the Saudis, the report by Freedom House in May 2006 entitled The curriculum of intolerance of Saudi Arabia reveals that the teaching of hatred continues.
The non-governmental organization UN Watch has sent letters of allegations regarding these textbooks, in January and May 2005. I urge you to respond to these letters without delay. Please raise these allegations with the Egyptian and Saudi governments, and request that they stop this curriculum to teach offensive and hateful.
In your last report (E/CN.4/2006/17), you criticized the Danish government for failing "engagement and vigilance in the fight against religious intolerance and incitement to religious hatred," because your opinion, it was not fast enough to condemn a newspaper published by a private company for the publication of caricatures of Muhammad. Surely governments whose official textbooks are, and for a long time, the blatant promotion of anti-Semitism and Christianophobia should merit your immediate attention and should earn a strong denunciation. Such a denunciation against the incitement of children to racial hatred in a systematic and sustained by the State should include a statement as you did for the Danish newspaper, for you and the UN Special Rapporteur for freedom of religion.
Sincerely,
Noémie Cournoyer
Labels: Egypt, Noémie Cournoyer, Religion and fanaticism, Saudi Arabia, UN
Thursday, February 12, 2009
UN: Press Senegal on Habré Trial, by Noémie Cournoyer
(Geneva) – The United Nations Human Rights Council should ask Senegal to move forward on the trial of the exiled former Chadian dictator Hissène Habré, five African and international human rights groups said today. On February 6, 2009, the council will examine Senegal’s human rights record as part of its Universal Periodic Review (UPR) procedure.
Habré, accused of mass atrocities during his 1982-1990 rule, has been living in Senegal since 1990. A Senegalese court indicted him in 2000, but higher courts blocked the prosecution. Belgium sought his extradition in 2005 to put him on trial, but Senegal refused. In May 2006, the United Nations Committee Against Torture found that Senegal had violated the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and called on Senegal to prosecute or extradite Habré.
In 2006, Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade accepted an African Union mandate to prosecute Habré in Senegal “on behalf of Africa.” But Senegal has not even begun the legal proceedings, said the Chadian Association for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights (ATPDH), the Chadian Association of Victims of Political Repression and Crime (AVCRP), the African Assembly for the Defense of Human Rights (RADDHO), Human Rights Watch, and the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH).
“Senegal has mocked us for 18 years and now it is mocking the United Nations,” said Souleymane Guengueng, founder of the Chadian Association of Victims of Political Repression and Crime, and the lead petitioner in the case that led to the UN ruling. “The Human Rights Council needs to tell Senegal to comply with the UN ruling and bring Habré to justice.”
On September 16, 2008, 14 victims filed new complaints with a Senegalese prosecutor accusing Habré of crimes against humanity and torture, in an attempt to get the case started, but the Senegalese authorities have refused to act on the complaints. In November 2008, the Committee Against Torture met with the Senegalese ambassador in Geneva to express its frustration that Senegal had not complied with its ruling.
Senegal has said that it will not move forward until it receives full international funding for all the costs of the trial, which Senegal puts at €27.4 million over three years, including €8 million to reconstruct a courthouse. The rights groups noted that the European Commission, Chad, France, Switzerland, Belgium, and the Netherlands have already agreed to help fund the trial, but are still waiting for Senegal to present a detailed budget, and that the normal procedure is to fund such trials year by year.
“It’s not the money that is lacking for Hissène Habré’s trial, but Senegal’s political will,” said Dobian Assingar, a Chadian activist with the FIDH.
“For my country to say that it won’t start proceedings until it gets three-years of funding upfront seems a lot like blackmail,” said Alioune Tine, president of the Dakar-based RADDHO.
The Universal Periodic Review is the Human Rights Council’s most innovative and ambitious instrument, with reviews of the human rights situations in all 192 UN member states over a four-year cycle. The February 6 review will be Senegal’s first.
In its May 2006 ruling in the case Guengueng v. Senegal, the UN committee found that Senegal had violated the Convention against Torture twice, first by failing to prosecute Habré when the victims first filed their case in 2000, and then by failing to prosecute or extradite him when Belgium filed an extradition request in September 2005. The committee ruled that Senegal was “obliged to submit the present case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution.” Failing that, it said, it should comply with Belgium’s extradition request, or with any other extradition request made by another country in accordance with the convention.
Background
Hissène Habré ruled Chad from 1982 until he was deposed in 1990 by President Idriss Déby Itno and fled to Senegal. His one-party regime was marked by widespread atrocities, including waves of campaigns against ethnic minorities. Files of Habré’s political police, the DDS (Direction de la Documentation et de la Sécurité), which were discovered by Human Rights Watch in 2001, reveal the names of 1,208 persons who were killed or died in detention. A total of 12,321 victims of human rights violations were mentioned in the files.
Habré was first indicted in Senegal in 2000, but then its courts ruled that he could not be tried there. His victims then turned to Belgium and, after a four-year investigation, a Belgian judge in September 2005 charged Habré with crimes against humanity, war crimes, and torture.
After Belgium made its extradition request, Senegalese authorities arrested Habré, in November 2005, but did not extradite him. The Senegalese government then asked the African Union to recommend how to try Habré. On July 2, 2006, the African Union, following the recommendation of a Committee of Eminent African Jurists, called on Senegal to prosecute Habré “in the name of Africa,” and President Wade said that it would.
Senegal has amended its laws and constitution to allow its courts to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity, torture, and war crimes committed in the past. At the same time, however, it has appointed the former coordinator of Habré’s legal defense team, Madické Niang, as minister of justice – the government official heading the agency responsible for the organization of the trial.
Link
Labels: Human Rights Watch, Noémie Cournoyer, Senegal, UN
Thursday, December 11, 2008
The UN on the road to failure, by Francis Chartrand
Editorial - Reporters Without Borders
It really was an extraordinary and ambitious idea, to ask all the countries in unison, the assembled nations of the world, to sign a founding text, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. One of its main architects, the French jurist René Cassin, had to fight in 1948 for the declaration to be “universal “and not just “international.” He was one of those who, like us, think that the suffering of victims is the same everywhere, and that an African or an Asian has as much right as a European not to be tortured.
But, 60 years later, this principle of universality is denied by many states. In Asia, for example, senior officials can often be heard extolling the merits of their “national” concept of human rights. They prefer, they say, to put the community’s well-being first whereas as we, in Europe, just think of the individual. And if a journalist, government opponent or trade unionist is imprisoned or beaten ? No, that is not a human rights violation. It is just a measure to safeguard public order and reassure decent citizens.
This way of thinking is hypocritical and unacceptable. Especially when you know that those who drafted the Universal Declaration included not only European jurists but also a Lebanese diplomat, a Chilean, and even a Chinese academic, Peng-chun Chang, the ambassador of a young nation embroiled in civil war.
It is in Geneva that the UN’s failure is most obvious. The UN system, which requires nations to be judges and judged at the same time, is schizophrenic. The UN Human Rights Commission became totally discredited in 2003 when it chose Libya’s representative to be its chairperson. It disbanded itself soon afterwards, amid the ensuing outcry, and was replaced by the UN Human Rights Council.
But the hopes placed in the UN’s new guard dog were quickly dashed. When the first council was elected in May 2006, its members included countries in which the death penalty, torture, impunity, arbitrary detention and denial of basic rights seem to be essential components of their societies. The UN put Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, Bangladesh, China, Cuba, Nigeria and Russia in charge of defending the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The machinery was still brand new but it was already beginning to squeak.
What has happened since then is just as heartening. In less than two years, the council has terminated the mandates of its independent experts - the only UN officials who escape the dictates of a government - in charge of monitoring the situation in Cuba, Belarus and even Democratic Republic of Congo, where the recent killings and flood of refugees in the east of the country indicate an impressive degree of respect for human dignity. The council also refused to appoint an expert for Turkmenistan, which - as everyone knows - is one of the world’s most open and welcoming countries.
China, Uzbekistan, Russia and others have meanwhile manoeuvred behind the scenes and struck deals to ensure that a majority of countries opposes any resolution criticising them. And the deals are effective. Votes are not cast according to the seriousness of the situation in a country but according to the possible advantages that the country or its allies can offer in return. China wins all the battles in this game. Using its enormous economic power, it ensures that it is systematically supported by countries on whom it lavishes loans, subsidies and other aid accords. Most of the countries in Africa and many of the Asian ones find out how they are going to vote in the Geneva office of the Middle Kingdom’s permanent representative.
Meant to defend the universality of values, the UN Human Rights Council has lost its way. It is used to serve the interests of governments that do not want to see themselves branded as the world’s worst human rights violators. The UN secretary-general needs to pull himself together and demand that measures be taken. The first of these measures could be to establish eligibility criteria for countries to be members of the council, criteria based on respect for human rights and support for the main international treaties and their implementation. This would not solve all the problems, but it would at least have the merit of keeping verbose autocrats away from the rostrum.
Jean-François Julliard Secretary general Reporters Without Borders International
&
François Bugingo President Reporters Without Borders Canada
Link
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Reporters without borders, UN
United Nations heading for failure on 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, by Francis Chartrand
As the world marks the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on 10 December, in a report released today Reporters Without Borders looks at the record of the Geneva-based Human Rights Council, the main UN body concerned with such matters.
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3 ?id_article=29587
The UN Human Rights Council is doing little better than its predecessor, the now-abolished Commission on Human Rights, which was completely discredited over the years, especially when it named a Libyan as its president. The Council has the failings of all UN bodies, where member-states are both judges and judged. States with repressive governments are elected to the Council and thus tasked with ensuring respect in other countries for rights they themselves are abusing on a daily basis. Until this absurd situation is ended, the United Nations cannot be said to be fulfilling its goal of protecting human rights.
The use of human rights by countries for their own purposes will not end until the UN Security Council and the whole system of world governance is reformed and enlarged. This issue has been highlighted by the present economic and environmental crisis.
If the UN does not manage to end it, the Council will fail in its mission. The Universal Periodic Review, though a good step forward, will not make up for these weaknesses.
Reporters Without Borders looks at the battle between the interests of governments and recognition of victims of human rights violations.
Link
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Reporters without borders, UN
Monday, November 10, 2008
Sudan: New Darfur Attacks Show Civilians Still at Risk, by Iba Bouramine
(New York, October 24, 2008) – Sudanese forces and government-backed militias attacked more than a dozen villages in operations against rebel forces near Muhajariya, South Darfur, between October 5 and 17, 2008, Human Rights Watch said today. The fighting, in which more than 40 civilians were killed, shows that the United Nations-African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID) still lacks the capacity to protect vulnerable civilians.
During the same period, President Omar al-Bashir told the media that life was “very normal in Darfur,” and announced a new peace initiative with much fanfare in North Darfur.
“Once again, civilians are bearing the brunt of fighting in Darfur, and the peacekeepers cannot protect them,” said Georgette Gagnon, Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “Life in Darfur is far from ‘normal.’”
According to local sources, government-backed “Janjaweed” militias attacked more than 13 villages and settlements around Muhajariya, 80 kilometers east of Nyala, the capital of South Darfur, killing more than 40 civilians, burning homes, and stealing livestock. Witnesses told Human Rights Watch that armed Janjaweed on horses and camels surrounded villages and were followed by government forces in vehicles mounted with weapons.
Muhajariya has long been a stronghold for the Minni Minawi faction of the Sudanese Liberation Army (SLA) and has been attacked many times over the course of the Darfur conflict.
Human Rights Watch has not been able to determine whether government forces clashed with rebels during these attacks. On October 5 and 7, government forces and Janjaweed attacked Sineit village, 16 kilometers southeast of Muhajariya, killing nine civilians. On October 6, Janjaweed attacked Brangal village, 12 kilometers northeast of Muhajariya, resulting in seven civilian deaths. On October 8, they attacked Kilekile and villages in the Mijelit area, northwest of Sineit, resulting in an unconfirmed number of deaths. Rebels from Unity faction of the SLA reported that they clashed with government and Janjaweed forces only after the initial attacks, between October 13 and 17.
As a result of the attacks, thousands of villagers fled to the towns of Muhajariya and Shearia, and have yet to return home. Reliable sources reported more than 40 casualties from the attacks and fighting. However, the full extent and circumstances of civilian casualties remain largely unknown. After gunmen shot at a UNAMID convoy on October 14, UNAMID forces have not tried to enter the area. In recent months, UNAMID has increasingly become the target of attacks and banditry, including in South Darfur. The mission has deployed less than half of the 26,000 military and police mandated by UN Security Council Resolution on July 31, 2007, and is still missing critical equipment, including attack helicopters.
On July 14, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court requested an arrest warrant for President al-Bashir for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur. Since then, Sudan has repeatedly tried to persuade other countries that the security situation on the ground in Darfur is improving, with the aim of securing a suspension of the case against al-Bashir by the UN Security Council.
“President Bashir’s claims about the situation in Darfur should convince no one,” said Gagnon. “But whether or not the fighting continues, the victims of past atrocities deserve to see those responsible prosecuted.”
Human Rights Watch called on UNAMID to conduct a prompt and thorough investigation into the Muhajariya attacks and urged all parties to the conflict to take all feasible measures to avoid loss of civilian life and property and to ensure that the civilian population has access to humanitarian assistance.
Link
Labels: Human Rights Watch, Iba Bouramine, Sudan, UN
Thursday, October 23, 2008
UN Urged to Ban Executions of Juvenile Offenders, by Renata Daninsky
The vast majority of states enforce the absolute prohibition on the death penalty for individuals who committed crimes as children, in compliance with international law. But the overall number of such executions has been rising. Five countries – Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Pakistan and Yemen – have carried out 32 of these executions since January 2005, and have well over 100 other juvenile offenders on death row.
“Groups from all over the world are saying that these executions are an outrage,” said Clarisa Bencomo, researcher on children’s rights for the Middle East and North Africa at Human Rights Watch. “The General Assembly should demand that countries stop these killings immediately and pass reforms so that no one is ever again executed for a crime committed as a child.”
Iran has been at the forefront of the recent rise in executions of juvenile offenders. Between 2000 and 2004, five states are known to have executed 18 juvenile offenders, with the nine executions in the United States and five in Iran accounting for the majority. The United States ended the juvenile death penalty in March 2005, but since January 2005, Iran has been responsible for 26 of the 32 executions of juvenile offenders worldwide. NGOs in all five countries that currently execute juvenile offenders are among those seeking General Assembly action, and the Iranian Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi endorsed their statement.
On October 15, 2008, the UN General Assembly will begin its annual debate on the rights of the child. Past General Assembly resolutions have included a broad call for states to comply with their international treaty obligations to end the juvenile death penalty, but with language so general that even states that execute juvenile offenders supported the measures.
The NGO petition is co-sponsored by the Child Rights Information Network and Human Rights Watch. The petition urges UN member states to recognize the urgency of the current situation by calling for an immediate moratorium on all executions of juvenile offenders and commutation of existing death sentences to custodial or other sentences in conformity with international juvenile justice standards. States that prohibit the death penalty for juvenile offenders should ensure that essential safeguards are in place so that children are not mistakenly sentenced to death. These safeguards should include legal assistance, universal birth registration and training for judges and prosecutors in juvenile justice.
The petition also calls on the General Assembly to request a report from the UN secretary-general on all states’ compliance with the absolute ban on the juvenile death penalty, including information on the number of juvenile offenders currently on death row and the number executed during the last five years. Such a study would be an important tool in identifying good practices that states can use in implementing the absolute prohibition on these executions and to set benchmarks for moving toward full compliance.
“The General Assembly should adopt strong, detailed recommendations on the steps states should take to implement the prohibition on the juvenile death penalty, and then follow up to monitor states’ actions,” Bencomo said. “It is unconscionable that, in some countries, children are facing execution because they lacked birth certificates or didn’t have lawyers during investigation and trial.”
The text of the petition and a list of the 305 groups that have signed it are available in Arabic, English, Farsi, French, Japanese, and Spanish.
Labels: Children, Human Rights Watch, Renata Daninsky, UN
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
UN: Five Countries Responsible for All Executions of Juvenile Offenders Since 2005, by Renata Daninsky
Ending executions for crimes committed by children in just five countries would result in universal implementation of the prohibition on the juvenile death penalty, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Governments should use next week’s United Nations General Assembly session opening to commit to urgently needed reforms to protect the rights of children in conflict with the law.
In the 20-page report, “The Last Holdouts: Ending the Juvenile Death Penalty in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Pakistan, and Yemen,” Human Rights Watch documents failures in law and practice that since January 2005 have resulted in 32 executions of juvenile offenders in five countries: Iran (26), Saudi Arabia (2), Sudan (2), Pakistan (1), and Yemen (1). The report also highlights cases of individuals recently executed or facing execution in the five countries, where well over 100 juvenile offenders are currently on death row, awaiting the outcome of a judicial appeal, or in some murder cases, the outcome of negotiations for pardons in exchange for financial compensation.
“We are only five states away from a complete ban on the juvenile death penalty,” said Clarisa Bencomo, Middle East children’s rights researcher for Human Rights Watch. “These few holdouts should abandon this barbaric practice so that no one ever again is executed for a crime committed as a child.”
Every state in the world has ratified or acceded to treaties obligating them to ensure that juvenile offenders – persons under 18 at the time of the crime – are never sentenced to death. The overwhelming majority of states complies with this obligation, with several states – including the United States and China – in recent years moving to ban the juvenile death penalty and strengthen juvenile justice protections.
The vast majority of executions of juvenile offenders take place in Iran, where judges can impose the death penalty in capital cases if the defendant has attained “majority,” defined in Iranian law as 9 years for girls and 15 years for boys. Iran is known to have executed six juvenile offenders so far in 2008, including two in August: Behnam Zare on August 26, 2008, and Seyyed Reza Hejazi on August 19, 2008. Over 130 other juvenile offenders are currently sentenced to death.
In Saudi Arabia judges have discretion to impose the death sentence on children from puberty or 15 years – whichever comes first. Saudi Arabia executed at least two juvenile offenders in 2007: Dhahiyan bin Rakan bin Sa`d al-Thawri al-Sibai`i on July 21, 2007, and Mu`id bin Husayn bin Abu al-Qasim bin `Ali Hakami on July 10, 2007. Hakami was only 13 years old at the time of the alleged crime, and 15 at the time of his execution. According to his father, Saudi authorities did not inform the family of the execution until days later, and did not return boy’s body.
In Sudan, the 2005 Interim National Constitution allows for the juvenile death penalty for certain crimes, including murder and armed robbery resulting in murder or rape. Vague language in Sudan’s 2004 Child Law leaves open the possibility that children can still be sentenced to death under the 1991 Penal Code, which defines an adult as “a person whose puberty has been established by definite natural features and who has completed 15 years of age ... [or] attained 18 years of age ... even if the features of puberty do not appear.” With more than 35 percent of Sudanese births not registered, even very young juvenile offenders can face execution because they have no birth certificates to prove their age at the time of the offense. Sudan executed two juvenile offenders, Mohammed Jamal Gesmallah and Imad Ali Abdullah, on August 31, 2005, and has sentenced at least four other juvenile offenders to death since January 2005.
In Pakistan, the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance of 2000 bans the death penalty for crimes committed by persons under 18 at the time of the offense, but authorities have yet to implement it in all territories. With only 29.5 percent of births registered, juvenile offenders can find it impossible to convince a judge they were children at the time of the crime. Pakistan executed one such juvenile offender, Mutabar Khan, on June 13, 2006.
In Yemen, the Penal Code sets a maximum 10-year sentence for capital crimes committed by persons under 18, but in a country with only 22 percent of births registered and minimal capacity for forensic age determinations, children can find it impossible to prove their age at the time of the crime. Yemen last executed a juvenile offender, Adil Muhammad Saif al-Ma'amari, in February 2007, despite his allegation that he was 16 at the time of the crime and had been tortured to confess. According to nongovernmental organizations and government sources, in 2007 at least 18 other juvenile offenders were on death row.
“Even states that still execute juvenile offenders acknowledge that such executions are wrong,” said Bencomo. “But changes in law and practice need to be faster.”
In the coming weeks the United Nations secretary-general will report back to the UN General Assembly on follow-up to the latter’s ground-breaking December 2007 resolution calling for a moratorium on the death penalty for all crimes. Human Right Watch calls on UN member states to request that the secretary-general issue a similar report on compliance with the absolute ban on the juvenile death penalty, including information on:
1. The number of juvenile offenders currently sentenced to death, and the number executed during the last five years;
2. Rates of birth registration; and
3. States’ implementation of relevant domestic legislation, including mechanisms ensuring juvenile offenders have legal assistance at all stages of investigation and trial.
Labels: Children, Human Rights Watch, Renata Daninsky, UN
France: UN Calls for Counterterrorism Reform, by Noémie Cournoyer
France should urgently carry out recommendations from a top United Nations human rights body critical of its approach to counterterrorism, Human Rights Watch said today in a letter to the French government.
“The UN has given France a roadmap to bring its counterterrorism policies into line with human rights requirements,” said Jean-Marie Fardeau, director of Human Rights Watch’s Paris office. “France sees itself as a leader on human rights. It should demonstrate that leadership by moving promptly to implement the findings of the UN’s key rights body.”
In a report issued following an in-depth review in July 2008, the UN Human Rights Committee expressed concern that France’s counterterrorism policies do not fully comply with international fair trial standards and that they put individuals at risk of being returned to nations where they could be subject to torture. The committee, composed of internationally recognized experts, assesses compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Among the problems highlighted in its report on France are:
Lack of appropriate safeguards during police custody. Terrorism suspects can be held in police custody for up to six days before being brought before a judge. They can be held for up to 72 hours before being given access to a lawyer. Like other criminal suspects in France, they are not informed of their right to remain silent under questioning. Research by Human Rights Watch has found that the lack of safeguards means that terrorism suspects in France are often subject to oppressive questioning in police custody.
Lengthy pre-trial detention. Terrorism suspects can be detained for up to four years and eight months before trial. “[T]he institutionalized practice of extended detention for investigative purposes … is difficult to reconcile with the right guaranteed in the Covenant to be tried within a reasonable time,” the committee said in its report.
Inadequate protection against removal to risk of ill-treatment. There is no provision to suspend automatically an order for deportation in national security cases when an appeal is filed, even when individuals allege that they face torture or ill-treatment in the destination country. Another UN body, the Committee against Torture, has twice criticized France since 2005 for deporting individuals who had raised fear of torture on return before their appeals had been fully examined.
“This criticism from the UN tarnishes France’s leadership on counterterrorism and its global efforts to promote respect for human rights,” said Fardeau. “If France listens to the UN and implements its recommendations, it can strengthen its position on both counts. Parliament can also help by monitoring the process.”
Similar concerns about France’s human rights safeguards in its approach to the prosecution of terrorism offenses were expressed during the May 2008 examination of France’s human rights record under the newly established universal periodic review procedure at the UN Human Rights Council.
The Human Rights Committee’s recommendations to the French government include:
Providing any suspect ordered to be forcibly removed from France with time to file for asylum, the services of a translator and a guarantee that the removal order will be suspended until the process is completed.
Informing anyone arrested on a criminal charge, including terrorism suspects, of the right to remain silent and providing a right to see a lawyer immediately. The suspect should be promptly brought before a judge.
Limiting pre-trial detention and strengthening the authority of the judges who determine whether to place someone in detention awaiting trial.
The Human Rights Committee also expressed concern about a recent law allowing detention of certain former violent offenders for one-year renewable periods after they have served their prison sentence, concluding that it called into question the right to the presumption of innocence and the right not to be punished twice for the same crime. The Committee recommended that the law be re-examined in light of France’s obligations under the ICCPR.
Labels: France, Human Rights Watch, Noémie Cournoyer, UN
Friday, June 20, 2008
United Nations - Louise Arbour condemns FITNA and calls for appropriate legal measures, by Marie-Êve Marineau
The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour issued the following statement today:
"I join the condemnation expressed by the Secretary-General and the three UN Special Reporters, the tone and content of the film FITNA by Geert Wilders, and I urge all those who legitimately feel deeply offended by his provocative message simply to denounce her hateful content by peaceful means. "
"There is a protection framework within which the resolution of the controversy that this film will generate should take place."
"I also urge legislators of all countries to fulfil their responsibilities under Articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. They should offer strong protection measures on all forms of freedom of expression, while adopting appropriate restrictions which are necessary to protect the rights of others. Similarly, they should prohibit any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence ".
Labels: Marie-Êve Marineau, UN
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]