Russia moves one step closer to death penalty abolition
Amnesty International has welcomed a decision by Russia’s Constitutional Court that brings the country a step closer to full abolition of the death penalty.
The Court decided on Thursday to extend the current moratorium on executions, which was due to expire in January, and recommended abolishing the death penalty completely.
“By taking this decision, the court frees the people of Russia from the fear of being put to death by their government. As long as Russia remains execution free, the inherent dangers of the wrongful use of the death penalty are removed,” said Nicola Duckworth, Europe and Central Asia Director at Amnesty International.
A moratorium has been in place since 1999 and was due to expire when all regions of the Russian Federation had introduced jury trials. This is set to happen on 1 January 2010 when jury trials are introduced in Chechnya.
The Court has now extended that moratorium, stating that: “The path towards the full abolition of the death penalty is irreversible."
Amnesty International has now called on the Russian authorities to remove the death penalty from law and ratify Protocol 6 to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
“Russia has long been a supporter of abolition in the international arena and it is high time the country undertakes the last step and removes the death penalty in law," said Nicola Duckworth.
When Russia joined the Council of Europe in 1996, it promised to abolish the death penalty by 1999. The country stopped imposing the death penalty in 1998 and the Constitutional Court ordered a moratorium in 1999.
China: Sham Trial of Veteran Human Rights Activist
(New York) – The conviction of veteran human rights activist Huang Qi on state secrets charges on November 23, 2009, demonstrates the Chinese government’s intent to use the judicial apparatus to crush whistleblowers without regard to minimum standards of fairness, Human Rights Watch said today.
Danish government must arrest Sudanese President if he attends climate conference
Amnesty International has learned that the Danish government has invited Sudanese President al Bashir, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur, to attend a meeting in Copenhagen on climate change in December.
“Denmark needs to make it clear that it will arrest President al Bashir if he travels to Copenhagen,” said Christopher Keith Hall, Senior Legal Adviser at Amnesty International.
“The International Criminal Court needs the cooperation of its member states. Under the Rome Statute, which established the ICC, Denmark has a duty to arrest and surrender any person within its territory who is subject to an arrest warrant issued by the ICC.”
“Denmark can and must demonstrate its leadership on bringing alleged perpetrators of the worst crimes to justice by acknowledging its duty to arrest,” said Christopher Keith Hall.
Amnesty International received the information during a meeting of member states to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.
The ICC issued an arrest warrant for President al Bashir for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur earlier this year.
Serbia: Combat Homophobia
(New York) – Serbia’s government should quickly take visible steps to end a spate of violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, Human Rights Watch said in a letter sent November 16, 2009, to President Boris Tadic. Human Rights Watch called on the government to fully protect the rights of the country’s lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people.
Soldiers convicted for ill-treatment of conscientious objector in Turkey
Amnesty International has welcomed the conviction of three Turkish soldiers for “intentionally wounding” a conscientious objector while he was in military custody.
A military court in Istanbul sentenced the soldiers to three months and 10 days’ imprisonment on 13 November for the “intentional wounding” of Mehmet Bal in June 2008.
Mehmet Bal was arrested for evading military service on 8 June and detained at Hasdal Military Prison in Istanbul.
His lawyers told Amnesty International that the next day, a senior military officer took Mehmet Bal into a prison ward and ordered military prisoners to “do what is necessary to remind him of prison rules”.
Prisoners in the cell then kicked Mehmet Bal and beat his face and body with a plank of wood.
After the attack, Mehmet Bal was taken to Gümü?suyu Military Hospital for treatment. He was then sent back to Hasdal Military Prison on 10 June, reportedly without having fully recovered from his injuries. Mehmet Bal was eventually released on 24 June and found not guilty of the charges against him in December 2008.
The three soldiers convicted of intentional wounding were all prisoners being held in the cell at the time of Mehmet Bal’s detention.
No charges have been brought against the military officer who allegedly instructed the prisoners to beat Mehmet Bal, nor against any other official at the prison.
Lawyers representing Mehmet Bal have appealed the verdict on the grounds that the men should have been convicted of the more serious offence of "torment" (eziyet).
“We welcome the fact that soldiers who ill-treated Mehmet Bal have been convicted. However, Mehmet Bal should never have been detained in the first place for simply exercising his right to freedom of conscience in refusing to perform military service,” said Andrew Gardner, Amnesty International’s researcher on Turkey.
Conscientious objectors are frequently ill-treated in Turkish military custody after being arrested and detained for their refusal to perform military service.
Amnesty International has repeatedly called on the Turkish authorities to stop the prosecutions of conscientious objectors and to introduce a civilian alternative to military service in line with European and international standards and recommendations
Legislation allowing the repeated prosecution and conviction of conscientious objectors for their refusal to perform military service remains in force despite a European Court of Human Rights ruling that such practices represent a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights (prohibition of torture or other ill-treatment).
In the vast majority of cases, effective investigations are not held following allegations of torture and other ill-treatment by state officials and those responsible are not brought to justice.
US: Ban Landmines
(Washington, DC) – The United States should commit to join the international treaty banning antipersonnel landmines when it attends a milestone meeting of the agreement beginning November 29, 2009, Human Rights Watch said today.
Egyptian Military Court of Appeals fails to rectify injustice
Amnesty International condemns the failure of Egypt’s military appeals court to overturn sentences imposed on leading members of the banned Muslim Brotherhood organization after unfair trials and calls on the authorities to stop trying civilians in military tribunals.
“The decision of the Supreme Court of Military Appeals to confirm the sentences of up to seven years’ imprisonment imposed on 18 Muslim Brotherhood members – all of them civilians – is a stark failure to remedy the injustice done after a grossly unfair trial,” said Malcolm Smart, director of Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa programme.
The appeal court’s decision on Tuesday means that five of the 18 who remain imprisoned – the others were released in July by order of an administrative court – must now serve the remainder of their prison sentences. The five include Khairat al-Shatir, the third highest ranking Muslim Brotherhood leader, who was sentenced to seven years in prison.
On 17 November, the Supreme Court of Military Appeals rejected the appeals filed by all 18 defendants after they were convicted and sentenced to prison terms on 15 February 2008 after an unfair trial before the Supreme Military Court of Haikstip, northern Cairo. Seven others who had escaped arrest were tried in their absence at the same time and sentenced to up to 10 years in prison.
“Trying civilians before military courts, whose judges are serving members of the military, flouts international standards of fair trial and is inherently unjust, regardless of whether the defendants are allowed a right of appeal or not.”
A total of 25 defendants were sentenced on terrorism and money-laundering charges in connection with their membership of the Muslim Brotherhood. Fifteen others were acquitted. All denied the charges. Their trial opened on 26 April 2007, after President Mubarak ordered in February 2007 that they should be tried before a military court. Earlier, a civilian court had thrown out charges against 17 of them.
International observers sent by Amnesty International and other organizations were prevented from attending the trial sessions by the Egyptian authorities.
The Supreme Court of Military Appeals ruling came a month after the UN’s leading expert on human rights and counter terrorism, Martin Scheinin, issued a damning report calling on the Egyptian authorities to stop trying civilians before military courts.
Another UN group, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, ruled in 2008 that the detention of 26 members of the Muslim Brotherhood arrested between December 2006 and January 2007 was arbitrary and urged the authorities to release them. Fourteen of the 26 were among those whose appeals were rejected on Tuesday.
Amnesty International has repeatedly called on the Egyptian government to stop trying civilians before military courts. The procedures of military trials violate the right to a fair and public hearing before a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.
In military court trials, the right to appeal to a higher tribunal is limited to hearings before the Supreme Court for Military Appeals which is composed exclusively of military officers and which only examines the law, its interpretation and procedural issues, rather than the evidence itself or the factual basis of the charges.
“All of those who remain imprisoned as a result of this unfair trial and appeal process should be immediately retried by a civilian court that conforms to international fair trial standards or else released,” said Malcolm Smart.
Singapore defamation case threatens press freedom
The Singaporean parliament should enact new legislation protecting freedom of expression, Amnesty International said on Wednesday, after a magazine and its editor agreed to pay S$405,000 (Approximately US$290,000) following a fine by the country’s highest court for alleged defamation.
The Dow Jones Company-owned Far Eastern Economic Review (FEER) magazine and its editor Hugo Restal had published an article critical of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and his father, former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew.
The 2006 article entitled "Singapore’s ‘Martyr’, Chee Soon Juan", contained allegations against the two leaders, including of corruption, which the Singapore Court of Appeal ruled as defamatory.
Dow Jones Company denied any wrongdoing but said they had to pay the fine.
In its ruling, the Singapore Court of Appeal held that “constitutional free speech in Singapore is conferred on Singapore citizens only.” It further held that Singapore does not recognize a special function for the press as a "watchdog".
“Laws that allow the authorities to impose restrictions on freedom of expression together with a pattern of politically motivated defamation suits, have created a climate of political intimidation and self-censorship in Singapore.” said Sam Zarifi, Amnesty International’s Asia Pacific Director. “This ruling further illustrates how press freedom is under threat in Singapore and sets a dangerous precedent for freedom of expression and journalism in the region.”
Amnesty International urges the Singapore parliament to enact legislation that would ensure the media’s ability to perform its vital function as a watchdog while removing discrimination and undue restrictions from the laws on freedom of expression, to bring them into line with international law and standards.
The government of Singapore has a history of using civil defamation actions to stifle political opposition. Such defamation suits place unreasonable restrictions on the right of Singaporeans to peacefully express their opinions and to participate fully in public life.
Amnesty International remains concerned about the continuing use of restrictive laws and civil defamation suits in Singapore to penalise and silence peaceful critics of the government.
"If Singapore has pretensions to being an international commercial center, especially in the age of the internet, its legislature must immediately act to bring the country in line with commonly accepted concepts of free expression and media activity,"
said Sam Zarifi.
Journalists are finding it increasingly difficult to work without interference from the governing People’s Action Party.
Background
International law recognizes limitations to the right to freedom of expression as enshrined in Article 19 of Universal Declaration on Human Rights however these restrictions must be demonstrably necessary for and proportionate to certain permissible purposes. The permissible purposes for such restrictions include “securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.”
However, it is well established under international law that public officials must tolerate more, rather than less, criticism than private individuals.
Iranian authorities must investigate death of detention centre doctor
The Iranian authorities must carry out a full and independent investigation into the death of a young doctor who had worked at the Kahrizak detention centre south of Tehran, Amnesty International said on Wednesday.
Dr Ramin Pourandarjani’s body was discovered in his room at a health centre in Tehran’s Police headquarters on 10 November.
Iran’s Chief of Police said on Wednesday that Dr Pourandarjani had committed suicide as a result of depression, as he had been summoned to court and was facing a possible five-year prison term.
His father, Reza-Qoli Pourandarjani has questioned suicide as a cause of death. He told the Associated Press that he was initially told that his son had broken his leg in a car accident and needed his consent for surgery, only for his family to be confronted with his dead body when they travelled to Tehran.
He said his son had been in good spirits when he spoke to him the previous night.
On Monday, the Tehran Prosecutor’s office had said that Dr Pourandarjani’s death was being investigated.
During the unrest in the summer following the disputed presidential election, Dr Pourandarjani, 26, was serving his required military service at Kahrizak as its resident physician.
Before his death he had allegedly received threats to deter him from revealing the extent of the abuse that had taken place at Kahrizak. He was said to have told friends he feared for his life.
Kahrizak detention centre had been used to hold post-election protestors. Iranian officials have confirmed that torture took place there and that at least three men died as a result.
As the detention centre doctor, Ramin Pourandarjani would have treated inmates that had been tortured on his weekly visits.
One of these victims was Mohsen Rouholamini, the son of a conservative Iranian politician whose death drew widespread attention to the torture and killings in Kahrizak.
Kahrizak was closed in July on orders of Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, after allegations of abuses against detainees said to have been held in inhumane conditions.
According to media reports, Iran is to continue its review of abuses in the wake of the disputed June presidential election.
The head of a special parliamentary committee charged with investigating allegations of abuses during the unrest – which had interviewed Dr Pourandarjani about conditions in Kahrizak – is reported to have met with the head of the Judicial Organization of the Armed Forces in order to discuss Dr Pourandarjani’s death.
Amnesty International said the investigation should comply fully with the UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions.
Future of Guantánamo detainees must be resolved
The US government must redouble efforts to resolve the future of detainees still held at the military facility in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, Amnesty International said after President Barack Obama acknowledged his administration would not meet his deadline for its closure.
"Over recent months, US authorities have allowed the Guantánamo detentions to become a political football, and the politics of fear to trump human rights," said Susan Lee, Director of the Amnesty International’s Americas Regional Programme.
"Now, as should have been the case from day one, the government should resolve these detentions by either bringing the detainees to fair trial or immediately releasing them," Susan Lee said.
On 22 January 2009, President Obama signed an executive order committing his administration to resolving the cases of the detainees held at Guantánamo "as promptly as possible", and to closing the detention facility "no later than one year from the date of this order."
In his comments on Wednesday, President Obama would not put an exact new date on closure, stating only that he anticipated it would happen sometime later next year, and adding that it would “depend on cooperation from Congress."
Hopes for an end to the Guantánamo detentions this year have receded over recent months as members of Congress sought to block the closure of the facility, and the administration has been slow to charge detainees.
At the same time, diplomatic efforts to find solutions for detainees who cannot be returned to their home countries for fear of the human rights violations they would face there have been undermined by the refusal of the US authorities to release any in mainland USA.
Amnesty International has long called for the Guantánamo detainees to be brought to trial in an independent and impartial court – not a military commission – or immediately released.
It has also repeatedly called for the USA not to seek the death penalty in any case.
Since President Obama took office, 26 detainees have been transferred out of Guantánamo, leaving 215 still there.
One detainee has been transferred to face trial in a federal court in New York and the administration has announced that another five will also be transferred to the city for such trials, with the likelihood that the death penalty will be sought against them.
The US Attorney General has also said the administration has decided to refer another five cases back to the Pentagon for trial by military commission.
In his 22 January order requiring his administration to ensure "prompt and appropriate" resolution of each and every Guantánamo case and to close the Guantánamo facility within a year, President Obama pointed to the "significant concerns raised by these detentions, both within the United States and internationally".
"Those concerns have not gone away, and will be reignited by President Obama’s comments today", Susan Lee said.