On 12 March 2024 the recently appointed UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism, Ben Saul, warned that two decades of prolific global efforts to counter terrorism have not been matched by an equally robust commitment to human rights.
In his first report to the Human Rights Council, the Special Rapporteur painted a counter-terrorism landscape strewn with human rights violations, including unlawful killings, arbitrary detention, torture, unfair trials, privacy infringements from mass surveillance, and the criminalisation of freedoms of expression, assembly, association and political participation. For earlier posts on this topic, see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/anti-terrorism-legislation/
“The misuse of counter-terrorism measures not only violates the rights of suspected criminals but can also jeopardise the freedoms of the innocent,” Saul said.
He condemned the rampant weaponisation of overly-broad terrorism offences against civil society, including political opponents, activists, human rights defenders, journalists, minorities, and students. Unjustified and protracted states of emergency continue to undermine human rights, the expert warned.
“Excessive military violence in response to terrorism also destroys fundamental rights, including through violations of international humanitarian law and international criminal law,” Saul said. “Cross-border military violence is increasingly used by states even when it is not justified under the international law of self-defence.”
“Many states have also failed to address the root causes of terrorism, including state violations of human rights – while impunity for those violations is endemic,” he said.
Saul said regrettably, the UN has been part of the problem, by encouraging authoritarian regimes to strengthen counter-terrorism laws in the absence of a rule of law culture or human rights safeguards. “The UN must also do better to meaningfully consult civil society on counter-terrorism,” he said.
Announcing his priorities for his three-year term, the Special Rapporteur said his focus would include ensuring regional organisations respect human rights when countering terrorism; all coercive administrative measures used to prevent terrorism comply with human rights; and States are held accountable for large-scale violations of human rights resulting from counter terrorism – and victims receive full and effective remedies.
Saul will also continue the efforts of his predecessor on preventing the abuse of counter-terrorism measures against civil society; protecting the 70,000 people arbitrarily detained in north-east Syria in the conflict against ISIL; protecting detainees and transferees from the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba; ensuring that the UN safeguards human rights in its counter-terrorism work, regulating new technologies used in counter-terrorism; and protecting the victims of terrorism.
“Human rights in counter-terrorism are at increased risk because of rising authoritarianism, surging domestic polarisation and extremism, geopolitical competition, dysfunction in the Security Council and new tools, including social media, for fuelling dehumanisation, vilification, incitement and misinformation,” the Special Rapporteur warned.
“Double standards and selectivity by major powers in the enforcement of human rights is also eroding public confidence in the credibility of the international human rights system,” he said. “States must move beyond rhetorical commitment to human rights and instead place human rights at the heart of all counter-terrorism measures.”
Amnesty International, C&SN and HRW accuse Indian government of harassing human rights activists and NGOs; the organisations seek FATF’s intervention days before the India’s performance with respect to action taken against money laundering and terrorist funding is up for review
On 6 November 2023, The Hindu newspaper (TH) reports that NGOs are accusing the Indian government of prosecuting, intimidating, and harassing human rights defenders, activists, and non-profit organisations on the pretext of countering terrorist financing, Thus Amnesty International, Charity & Security Network (C&SN), and Human Rights Watch (HRW) have sought the intervention of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).
FATF mutual evaluations are in-depth country reports analysing the implementation and effectiveness of measures to combat money laundering, terrorist and proliferation financing. The reports are peer reviews, where members from different countries assess another country. Mutual evaluations provide an in-depth description and analysis of a country’s anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing system, as well as focused recommendations to further strengthen its system. During a mutual evaluation, the assessed country must demonstrate that it has an effective framework to protect the financial system from abuse.
The FATF conducts peer reviews of each member on an ongoing basis to assess levels of implementation of the FATF Recommendations, providing an in-depth description and analysis of each country’s system for preventing criminal abuse of the financial system.
The joint statement of the 3 NGOs came on November 3, days before the start of FATF’s periodic review of India’s performance with respect to the action taken against money laundering and terrorist funding. They have accused the authorities of exploiting FATF’s recommendations “to restrict civic space and stifle the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly”. “Draconian laws introduced or adapted to this end include the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA)…,” the groups said. See also: https://wordpress.com/post/humanrightsdefenders.blog/22074
“During its third FATF review, in 2010, the Indian government itself recognised the risk posed by the non-profit sector as ‘low’. However, since the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) came to power in 2014, the authorities have used overbroad provisions in domestic law to silence critics and shut down their operations, including by cancelling their foreign funding licences and prosecuting them using counterterrorism law and financial regulations,” the groups alleged.
In Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, the Netherlands and the UK, authorities have responded to climate protests with mass arrests, the passing of draconian new laws, the imposing of severe sentences for non-violent protests and the labelling of activists as hooligans, saboteurs or eco-terrorists. The crackdowns have come in spite of calls by senior human rights advocates and environmental campaigners to allow civic space for the right to non-violent protest, after a summer of record-breaking heat in southern Europe that is attributed to the effects of climate breakdown.
The UK has led the way in the crackdown, experts say, with judges recently refusing an appeal against multi-year sentences for climate activists who blocked a motorway bridge in east London. The three-year jail terms for Marcus Decker and Morgan Trowland earlier this year are thought to be the longest handed out by a British judge for non-violent protest.
“Since my appointment I have been travelling to many countries in Europe and there is a clear trend,” Forst told the Guardian. “We can see an increasing number of cases by which these climate activists are brought to court more and more often and more and more severe laws being passed to facilitate these attacks on defenders.”
He added: “I’m sure that there is European cooperation among the police forces against these kinds of activities. My concern is that when [governments] are calling these people eco-terrorists, or are using new forms of vilifications and defamation … it has a huge impact on how the population may perceive them and the cause for which these people are fighting. It is a huge concern for me.”
Amnesty International said it was investigating a continent-wide crackdown on protest. Catrinel Motoc, the organisation’s senior campaigner on civil space and right to protest in Europe, said: “People all around the world are bravely raising their voices to call for urgent actions on the climate crisis but many face dire consequences for their peaceful activism.
“Peaceful protesters are left with no choice but to stage public protests and non-violent direct actions because European countries are not doing enough to tackle the climate crisis.
“There’s alarming evidence of criminalisation, harassment, stigmatisation and negative rhetoric towards environmental defenders.”
In June, Dunja Mijatović, the Council of Europe’s commissioner for human rights, also called for an end to crackdowns on environmental activists. Last December, Volker Türk, the UN’s high commissioner for human rights, appealed to governments to protect the “civic space” for young environmental activists, and “not crack down in a way that we have seen in many parts of the world”.
There was widespread outrage this summer when France’s interior minister, Gérald Darmanin, used one of the state’s most-powerful tools to order the banning of one of the country’s leading environmental protest groups. Les Soulévements de la Terre, a collective of local environmental campaigns, had staged a series of protests, with tactics including sabotage, that ended with violent confrontations with police, and Darmanin denouncing the activists as “far left” and “ecoterrorists”.
In the Netherlands, one of a series of roadblock protests on the A12 highway in The Hague in May was dispersed by police using water cannon, with more than 1,500 arrested. Seven climate activists were convicted of sedition – a charge that had never before been levelled against climate protesters – in relation to online posts calling for people to join an earlier demonstration.
In Sweden, about two dozen members of the Återställ Våtmarker [Restore Wetlands] group were convicted of sabotage for blocking highways in the capital, Stockholm. Others were held on remand for up to four weeks for taking part in protests.
In Germany in May, police staged nationwide raids against the Letzte Generation (Last Generation) group, whose supporters had glued themselves to roads on a near-weekly basis for months, as well as targeting art galleries and other cultural spaces. On a police directive, the homepage of the group was shut down and possessions belonging to members were seized.
At the most recent count, supplied by the activists, police had made more than 4,000 arrests of supporters of Last Generation taking part in road blocks in Berlin alone.
Authorities in Italy have used anti-organised crime laws to crack down on protests, where the Ultima Generazione (also Last Generation) group has staged road blocks since last year. The Digos police unit, which specialises in counter-terrorism, in April justified the use of anti-Mafia laws to target the group by saying its civil disobedience actions had not taken place spontaneously, but were organised, discussed and weighed up by an internal hierarchy. This came along with new, stiffer penalties for protests, with activists facing fines of up to €40,000 for actions targeting artworks and other cultural heritage.
Richard Pearshouse, director of the environment division at Human Rights Watch, said: “These restrictions on environmental protest across Europe and the UK are incredibly short-sighted. These governments haven’t grasped that we all have a huge interest in more people taking to the streets to demand better environmental protection and more climate action.
“Governments need to respect the rights to assembly and expression, and ramp up their own environmental protections and climate ambitions. That’s the only way we have a chance to get out of this climate crisis with our democratic institutions intact.”
A spokesperson for the UK Home Office said: “The right to protest is a fundamental part of our democracy but we must also protect the law-abiding majority’s right to go about their daily lives.
“The Public Order Act brings in new criminal offences and proper penalties for selfish, guerrilla protest tactics.”
The French interior ministry said local officials had the right to ban demonstrations with a serious risk of disturbing public order. “These one-off bans, of which there are very few in absolute terms, are not imposed because of the reason for the demonstration.”
The Italian interior ministry referred to a statement from the culture minister Gennaro Sangiuliano in April, who said attacks on monuments cause economic damage to the community that is is expensive to clean up. “Those who cause damage must pay personally.”
The German interior ministry declined to comment. The Bavarian interior ministry referred the Guardian to the public prosecutor’s office in Munich, which provided a statement from June in which it confirmed it had authorised the tapping of phones for six of seven Last Generation members under criminal investigation.
The Swedish interior ministry declined to comment. The Dutch ministry of justice did not respond to requests for comment.
Still, the message is what matters: “Rights defenders as a whole face a number of major challenges and risks in many countries, including in Europe, but those who are currently paying the highest price are precisely environmental activists and people trying to defend their land and the climate,” said Michel Frost in an interview with Lusa.
Forst was in Portugal today to take part in the international conference of the Human Rights Platform, taking place at the Gulbenkian Foundation in Lisbon, and confessed to Lusa that he didn’t understand the reasons behind this increase in pressure.
“I don’t understand why, but the fact is that more and more politicians in more countries are comparing people who are actually peaceful demonstrators with violent terrorists,” he said, noting that he sees this “in Spain, the Netherlands, Denmark, the UK, Germany and Switzerland”.
The issue worries him a lot, he recognized, not least because different ways of attacking activists are being used in various countries.
“I toured more than 20 European Union (EU) countries to meet with activists and governments, inviting them to describe the atmosphere they face in their countries, and I can assure you that the situation is becoming very, very, very tense,” he said, pointing out that governments such as those in France or Austria classify these activists as “eco-terrorists or green Taliban”.
Michel Forst explained to Lusa that he is currently working with a group of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) “to try to better understand what is happening in Europe, with a view to guiding EU governments on how to respond to civil disobedience”.
Stressing that civil disobedience is regulated by international human rights law, the UN official said he was alarmed when he met judges from Spain, France and Germany and realized that they “didn’t understand international human rights law at all”.
Activists who engage in civil disobedience “should not be penalized”, but in reality we see that “judges and governments do not comply with international obligations”, Michel Forst pointed out.
For this reason, he explained, his aim for now is to provide documents and guidelines for states to ensure better fulfilment of their international obligations.
“Some states have been very receptive, such as Ireland and Norway, but many others have not,” he denounced, naming the example of the United Kingdom and adding that, in some cases, the police infiltrate groups in order to know what is being prepared and to be able to better control the activists.
“We now have evidence that some [environmental campaigners] have been placed under strict surveillance, with their phones being hacked and their computers being tapped,” he said.
For Michel Forst, environmental campaigners are no different from those who fight for human rights.
“It’s the same thing,” he emphasised, explaining that environmental activists are just gaining more visibility.
“They are using new forms of mobilisation that others haven’t used, like sticking their hands in the ground or handcuffing themselves to a barrier or breaking down doors to cut genetically modified maize,” he listed.
Their growing visibility leads them to face what human rights defenders were already facing, namely the fact that “civic space is shrinking in Europe,” he said, noting that this is not only his assessment, but also that of the Council of Europe and the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights.
And against this, Michel Forst expects only one thing: “A strong reaction from citizens”.
With regard to the authorities, the UN Special Rapporteur also expressed his expectations.
“We need to see the results [of the guidelines that will be issued] and then ask the most receptive.
The Pakistan Observer of August 11, 2023 carries the story which I wished Indian newspapers would also cover..:
The UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and other UN experts have expressed their serious concern at the arrest, detention and accusations brought against Kashmiri human rights defenders Irfan Mehraj and Khurram Parvez, which they said are “designed to delegitimize their human rights work and obstruct monitoring of the human rights situation in” Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir
“As we have repeatedly stressed in the past, counter-terrorism legislation should never be used to sanction human rights defenders. We express our abhorrence at the continued instrumentalization of national-security measures and discourse to undermine, obstruct and persecute those peacefully promoting, defending and seeking the advancement of human rights in the country, as well as to frustrate accountability for human rights violations.”
Disagreeing with the definition of a terrorist by the Modi government, the joint communication said, “As we previously raised in OL IND 7/2020, we are deeply concerned about the definition of ‘terrorist act’ in the UAPA, which substantially departs from the model definition offered by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism and provides broad powers to the executive, without oversight or control from the judiciary. We further remind your Excellency Government that the definition of terrorism and terrorism offences must be ‘genuinely’ terrorist in nature in accordance with the elements identified by the Security Council in its resolution 1566 (2004).”
The statement warned that “Conflation of human rights work with terrorism is inconsistent with the obligations of State affirmed by the Security Council that counter-terrorism activities by States should not conflict with other international law obligations, particularly human rights, and with the agreed consensus of Member States contained in the Global Counter-Terrorism strategy opposing the misuse of counter-terrorism measures against civil society (A/RES/60/288).”
“We also note our deep concerns about allegation of ‘terror funding’ and highlight that the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has set forth international practices and guidelines aimed at preventing global money laundering and terrorist financing. The FATF recommendations, while non-binding, provide recognized international guidance for the countering of terrorism financing. Recommendation (1) states that ‘countries should apply a risk-based approach (RBA) to ensure that measures to prevent or mitigate money laundering and terrorist financing are commensurate with the risks identified’ Recommendation (8) provides guidance to States on the laws and regulations that should be adopted to oversee and protect NPOs that have been identified as being vulnerable to terrorist financing concerns.”
“Such measures must be ‘focused and proportionate’; ‘ ‘one size fits all’ approach to address all NPOs is not appropriate.’ FATF has reaffirmed that State compliance with Recommendation (8) and the other FATF Recommendations ‘should not contravene a country’s obligations under the Charter of the United Nations and international human rights law to promote universal respect for, and observance of, fundamental human rights and freedoms, such as freedom of expression, religion or belief and freedom of peaceful assembly and of association.”
Blaming India for targeting civil society, the joint statement said, “We are concerned that these arrests appear to contravene a “risk-based” approach to countering terrorism finance and appear to demonstrate a misuse of countering terrorism finance laws and practice to disproportionately target civil society.”
It is worth mentioning here that the “communication written by the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights Defenders and other UN experts to the Government of India on 5 June 2023. The communication remained confidential for 60 days before being made public, giving the Government time to reply. Regrettably, the Government did not reply within this time frame.”
The communication stated that “If a reply is received it will be posted on the UN Special Procedures communications database”.
“Since the communication was sent, the detention of Mr. Mehraj and Mr. Parvez has twice been extended following petitions by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), with the latest extension granted on 27 July 2023. Both human rights defenders remain detained in Rohini Prison in Delhi”.—KMS.
“Activism is not terrorism” . . . five Filipino indigenous peoples’ leaders and advocates have been branded as “terrorist” individuals and their property and funds have been frozen. Image: CIVICUS
On 28 July, 2023 CIVICUS, a global alliance of civil society organisations, has protested to Philippine President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr in an open letter over the “judicial harassment” of human rights defenders and the designation of five indigenous rights activists as “terrorists“.
CIVICUS, representing some 15,000 members in 75 countries, says the harassment is putting the defenders “at great risk”.
It has also condemned the “draconian” Republic Act No. 11479 — the Anti-Terrorism Act — for its “weaponisation’ against political dissent and human rights work and advocacy in the Philippines.
The CIVICUS open letter said there were “dire implications on the rights to due process and against warrantless arrests, among others”.
The letter called on the Philippine authorities to:
Immediately end the judicial harassment against 10 human rights defenders by withdrawing the petition in the Quezon City Regional Trial Court Branch 84;
Repeal Resolution No. 35 (2022) designating the six human rights defenders as terrorist individuals and unfreeze their property and funds immediately and unconditionally;
Drop all charges under the ATA against activists in the Southern Tagalog region; and
Halt all forms of intimidation and attacks on human rights defenders, ensure an enabling environment for human rights defenders and enact a law for their protection.
On 18 July 2023 Front Line Defenders reported that on 4 July, a court of appeal in Algiers confirmed the three-year prison sentence of human rights defenders Slimane Bouhafs and Kamira Nait Sid, in addition to confirming the fine of DZD 100,000 (approx. EUR 660). The charges against both human rights defenders include “belonging to a terrorist organisation”; “receiving funds from abroad for the purpose of political propaganda”; “hate speech and discrimination”; “use of technology to spread false information”; and “conspiracy”, among others.
Slimane Bouhafs is a human rights defender advocating for freedom of expression and democracy in Algeria through social media. He is the Chairman of the St. Augustine Coordination of Christians in Algeria which defends minority rights and freedom of religion in the country. Kamira Nait Sid is a woman human rights defender and co-president of the World Amazigh Congress (WAC), an international NGO defending the rights of the Amazigh people. The mission of the WAC is to ensure the defence and promotion of political, economic, social, cultural, historical and civil rights of the Amazigh people.
The human rights defender Slimane Bouhafs, who was granted refugee status in Tunisia before being illegally transferred back to Algeria, received the same three-year prison sentence as the one previously handed down at the first instance. Meanwhile, the woman human rights defender Kamira Nait Sid received a three-year prison sentence, which was a two-year reduction of the original sentence handed down by the court of first instance.
Both Slimane Bouhafs and Kamira Nait Sid reject and deny all the charges against them and maintain that they have been targeted because of their peaceful human rights work and advocacy for freedom of expression and belief. The defence counsel, which represented both human rights defenders, reportedly emphasised the lack of due process and fair trial guarantees during the trial and the appeal processes, including a lack of evidence supporting the charges.
In December 2022, Slimane Bouhafs and Kamira Nait Sid were sentenced to three and five years respectively by the court of first instance mainly on the basis of an alleged association with the Movement for the Autonomy of Kabylie (MAK), classified as a terrorist group by the Algerian authorities. The human rights defenders continue to deny any involvement with the MAK group.
The two human rights defenders have been arbitrarily detained since the summer of 2021. On 25 August 2021, the human rights defender Slimane Bouhafs was abducted, subjected to ill-treatment and forcibly returned to Algeria from Tunisia, where he had been granted refugee status, in a gross violation of international law. On 24 August 2021, the woman human rights defender Kamira Nait Sid was also abducted by Algerian security forces from her home in Draa-Ben-Kheddaas in northern Algeria and detained at an unknown location. On 1 September 2021, the two human rights defenders appeared before an investigating judge in an Algerian court to be charged with several terrorism-related accusations based on an alleged connection with the MAK.
Front Line Defenders condemns the confirmation of the sentence of human rights defenders Slimane Bouhafs and Kamira Nait Sid and calls on the authorities of Algeria to immediately release them and quash their conviction as it believes that it is solely motivated by their legitimate and peaceful work in the defence of human rights. It urges the authorities to guarantee the physical and psychological security and integrity of the human rights defenders while in detention.
Front Line Defenders also calls on the authorities to cease targeting all human rights defenders in Algeria and guarantee in all circumstances that they are able to carry out their legitimate human rights activities without fear of reprisals and free of all restrictions including judicial harassment.
A group of rights activists in India have urged President Droupadi Murmu to withdraw terror-related cases against late Jesuit Father Stan Swamy and 15 other accused in the 2018 Bhima Koregaon violence case.
“It is a false case registered against Father Swamy and others and it should be withdrawn,” said Father Antony P.M, a social activist at a gathering to mark the second death anniversary of the priest, on July 5 in the eastern Jharkhand state. Tributes were paid to the Swamy across the country.
He said a group of activists is appealing to the president, who hails from an indigenous community in eastern India, to use her good office to withdraw “the totally false case registered against right defenders,” Antony told UCA News on July 6.
The activists had gathered in front of the Raj Bhavan, the official residence of the Jharkhand governor, in the state capital Ranchi. It was organized by the Shahid Father Stan Swamy Nyaya Morcha (Martyer Stan Swamy Justice Forum).
“Father Swamy, who fought for the rights of indigenous people in Jharkhand finally had to die for want of medical care as a prisoner,” said Antony, the director of Bagaicha, a Jesuit social center in Jharkhand, where Swamy lived and worked.
Murmu served as the governor of Jharkhand when Swamy’s residence in Ranchi was raided twice and the federal terror investigative agency arrested him in 2020.
He was accused of having links with outlawed Maoists along with 15 well-known human rights activists accused in a case linking them to a violent clash in Bhima-Koregaon village in western Maharashtra state in 2018.
The late priest and others including rights activists, lawyers, academicians, and writers, were also charged under the provisions of a draconian anti-terror law, the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), alleging they had conspired to unleash violence in Bhima-Koregaon.
The priest was also accused of sedition and conspiring with Maoist rebels to overthrow the federal government.
The 85-year-old activist priest died as an under trial prisoner in a private hospital in Mumbai, the capital of Maharashtra.
“We hereby request Your Excellency to take cognizance of the entire Bhima-Koregaon case wherein the intention of the state and the investigation agencies is highly suspicious and does not inspire any confidence in common citizens,” they said in a memorandum.
“Several independent investigations, including by US-based Arsenal Consultancy, have exposed how the case, based on fabricated evidence, is just a witch-hunt by the state,” it said.
“We request that all the human rights activists be immediately released on bail, the case and prosecution be withdrawn and criminal proceedings be initiated against those responsible for fabricating and planting evidence,” the memorandum added.
It also briefly provided details of the findings from Arsenal Consultancy, a digital forensic lab, that said digital evidence was planted on the computer of Father Swamy and others, leading to their arrest and incarceration.
Antony further demanded the scrapping of the draconian UAPA, under which Swamy was arrested.
“Once a person is charged under the UAPA, he/she is not treated well in jail even if there is no connection with the case remotely,” the priest said, citing the example of Swamy.
Despite suffering from Parkinson’s and other age-related diseases, Swamy was denied bail by both the trial court and the high court before his death.
“If the jail authorities cared for him well or the courts had granted bail in time, I think he would have been with us,” Antony, also a Jesuit, observed.
“The investigating agency has still not filed the charge sheet and activists are languishing in jail. This is a gross violation of human rights,” the priest said.
Indian Jesuits have approached the Mumbai High Court seeking “to clear his name from the false cases” that led to his arrest, imprisonment and death in custody.
I still stubbornly refuse to die The sad thing is that They don’t know how to kill me because I love so much The sound of growing grass
OMCT published this impressive story in calling for the immediate release of G. N. Saibaba:
These are the defiant words of Gokarakonda Naga “G. N.” Saibaba, written from his cell in Nagpur Central Jail in the Indian state of Maharashtra. A wheel-chair using, human rights activist and former university lecturer of English, Sai has endured years of cruel, inhumane solitary confinement. Still, his irrepressible resilience shines through. And Sai’s poetry fills a recently published anthology. But he did not write it in verse. In order to evade the prison’s punishing censors, and to disguise his messages of equality, positivity and love, Sai penned letters to friends and his partner of 30 years. These were transcribed, and became his book entitled, Why Do You Fear My Way So Much?
Prison conditions
Now, G. N. Saibaba is much less able to write. Since his erroneous conviction for terrorism-related crimes in 2017, and a sentence of life imprisonment, Sai’s health has progressively deteriorated. Suffering from a heart condition, a brain cyst, a lump in the abdomen and breathing difficulties, his multiple medical conditions require specialised treatment only available in New Delhi. And his disability as a result of childhood polio has been compounded by untreated nerve damage in his left arm, that has spread to his right, leaving him with no strength in his upper limbs. Sai needs support to perform any simple human function like sitting up, eating, drinking or using the toilet, a task which has been assigned to two fellow detainees. His dependency has been underlined by the constant monitoring of his cell. It was only recently – after Sai went on another hunger strike – that the prison authorities agreed to change the direction of CCTV cameras, giving him some semblance of privacy. Before that, his bed and toilet were recorded 24/7. This was a small victory. Despite repeated advocacy by the UN and human rights groups on G. N. Saibaba’s behalf, he is forced to inhabit a small, egg-shaped cell exposed to extreme weather conditions and with little space to move, particularly for someone in a wheelchair as Sai. Given his disability, some commentators believe the conditions of his detention may amount to torture.
Arrest in Delhi
It was 9th May 2014, and G. N. Saibaba was returning home for lunch from his lecturing duties at Delhi University. Without warning, a van jack-knifed in front of the car he was travelling in, forcing it to stop. Sai’s driver was pulled roughly from the vehicle, and replaced by a man in civilian clothing. Two others flanked their captive in the back. G N Saibaba was driven directly to the airport. He was never shown an arrest warrant, and nobody informed Sai’s relatives about his arrest. He was put on a plane to Nagpur, Maharashtra. On arrival, he was transported in an anti-landmine vehicle, in a convoy of commandos armed with automatic weapons. The military clearly wanted to send a message they had detained a hard-core terrorist – not a committed campaigner who has fought most of his life against discrimination and caste-based oppression, and for the rights of women and indigenous Indians.
Activism
G. N. Saibaba grew up in a small, rural community in southern India. Disabled by polio as a young child, he understood early on how unfairness and prejudice are perpetrated. Excelling in school, Sai went on to university where he became involved in student politics. His appointment as a professor of English did not dilute his outspoken criticisms of injustice.
In particular, he became a leading detractor of what became known as ‘Operation Green Hunt’ – a military campaign in central India, home to a large population of several indigenous communities (known as Adivasis), to eliminate Maoists, also called Naxals. Central India has witnessed numerous people’s movements opposing forceful occupation of indigenous land, and the exploitation of ancient forests and rich mineral resources. This military campaign against Naxals was used to quash such movements, leading to numerous human rights violations against civilians.
Conflict in this region dates back to the 1960s. ‘Operation Green Hunt’ began in 2009 – an all-out, on-going offensive by the Indian armed forces to rid the area of Naxals. G. N. Saibaba led the Forum Against War on the People – a solidarity organisation, and an attempt to shine a light on human rights abuses in the region. These atrocities – committed for the most part by the military and paramilitaries – have been well documented. They include extrajudicial killings, multiple rapes, and the deeply disturbing desecration of civilian corpses. It has been estimated more than 2,000 people have lost their lives since 2009.
Conviction
G. N. Saibaba’s advocacy certainly gave pause for thought to national and transnational mining corporations thinking about investing in the region. So, it was inevitable perhaps he would become a target. His persecution began under the Congress government – his Delhi home was raided more than once – and then continued under the BJP, and the prime ministership of Narendra Modi.
At G. N. Saibaba’s trial in 2017, with the courthouse fortified by hundreds of police officers to reinforce the impression of a dangerous extremist, he was tried under India’s anti-terror legislation – the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. With five others, Sai was convicted of alleged links to the banned Maoist organisation.
Judicial rollercoaster
In October this year, the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court ruled G. N. Saibaba’s initial trial had been flawed. The case against him was discharged. The elation he, his family and supporters felt quickly turned to disbelief. The government – infuriated, no doubt by the court’s decision to release an ‘urban Naxal’, a term regularly used to stigmatise human rights defenders – applied for a special sitting of the Supreme Court. The very next day, on a non-working day the special bench of the Supreme Court suspended the decision of the Bombay High Court. This leaves G N Saibaba still in that heavily monitored isolation cell, struggling to negotiate its curved walls in his wheelchair.
Above all, love
G. N. Saibaba’s hope of liberty has once more been dashed. Even so, his spirit is strong. The untreated infections in his hands, and the pain he experiences, means Sai cannot write more than two or three pages a month. But letters from home, especially from his partner, help sustain him.
I defeat the purpose of the solitary confinement by drowning myself in your letters of love.
On 28 October 2022 HRW reports on the continuing crackdown on human rights defenders in Turkey, where Şebnem Korur Fincancı is the latest human rights defender to be jailed as authorities pursue a bogus investigation against her for “spreading terrorist propaganda.” Korur Fincancı is head of the Turkish Medical Association, former head of the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey, and a retired professor of forensic pathology. Her work was central to the creation of the United Nations’ “Istanbul Protocol,” a landmark manual on how to identify and document signs of torture. She has also worked on the exhumation of mass graves and forensic documentation of war crimes in different countries. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2018/11/05/turkish-human-rights-defender-and-forensic-doctor-sebnem-korur-fincanci-honoured/
Korur Fincancı’s arrest and pre-trial detention followed an interview she gave to pro-Kurdish TV on October 19. Responding to allegations that the Turkish military had used chemical weapons against the armed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, Korur Fincancı said the video footage she had seen suggested use of toxic gases affecting the nervous system and that there should be a full investigation. Turkish pro-government media and President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan accused Korur Fincancı and the Turkish Medical Association of slandering the Turkish military. Prosecutors and courts rapidly responded by ordering her investigation and detention.
Korur Fincancı’s arrest is the latest in a pattern of politically motivated cases as the Erdoğan government continues its crackdown on critics and opponents. Just this week, police also detained 10 Kurdish journalists on top of 16 incarcerated in June. The Turkish authorities show all the signs of being determined to silence the voices of experts like Korur Fincancı as well as the journalists who report their words.
Authorities also appear focused on a broader plan of reshaping and taking over professional bodies that have been critical of government policies. On October 27, Turkey’s justice minister announced a plan to restructure both the Turkish Medical Association, from which Korur Fincancı will be removed as head, and the Union of Chambers of Turkish Engineers and Architects. Mücella Yapıcı, a prominent member of the latter, was convicted and jailed in April along with rights defender Osman Kavala and six others for her alleged role in the 2013 Gezi Park protests.
In the run-up to the 2023 presidential and parliamentary elections, the Turkish government is likely to continue to misuse criminal charges and detention against individuals it wants to silence and attempt to seize institutions outside its control.
Hans Thoolen on Human Rights Defenders and their awards 