Posts Tagged ‘Russia’

« Older posts
Newer posts »

Ukrainian woman human rights defender and writer Viktoria Amelina killed in Russian missile strike on Kramatorsk

July 20, 2023

On 1 July 2023, woman human rights defender and author Viktoria Amelina died in hospital in Dnipro, Ukraine after sustaining fatal injuries during the Russian missile attack on Kramatorsk, Ukraine on 27 June 2023. PEN Ukraine reported the death of the woman human rights defender on 3 July 2023 with the consent of her relatives. Viktoria is survived by her husband and 10-year old son.

Viktoria Amelina was a woman human rights defender and writer. In June 2022, after the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022, she joined the Ukrainian human rights organisation Truth Hounds to document war crimes. She had been documenting apparent Russian war crimes in the liberated territories of eastern, southern and northern Ukraine, and particularly the village of Kapytolivka in Kharkiv region. During one of her missions, Viktoria Amelina discovered a diary of Volodymyr Vakulenko, a Ukrainian writer who was abducted and killed by the Russian military. She was also working on a non-fiction project “War and Justice Diary: Looking at Women Looking at War”, a research project about the Ukrainian women human rights defenders documenting and investigating war crimes committed by the Russian military. Before joining Truth Hounds, Viktoria Amelina actively campaigned for the liberation of Oleh Sentsov, a Ukrainian film director from Crimea who was a political prisoner of the Russian authorities from 2014 to 2019.

Viktoria Amelina won the Joseph Conrad Literature Prize for her prose works, including the novels Dom’s Dream Kingdom and Fall Syndrome, and was a finalist for the European Union Prize for Literature. In 2021, she founded the New York book festival in the Donetsk region of Ukraine, where New York refers to a village in Donetsk that is very close to the military frontline.

On 27 June 2023, the woman human rights defender Viktoria Amelina was in Kramatorsk, in the Donetsk region of Ukraine, accompanying a delegation of Colombian writers and journalists who represented #AguantaUcrania, a group that raises awareness about Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in Latin America. Before coming to Kramatorsk, the group took part in a prominent Ukraninan literary fair “Book Arsenal.” They all arrived to Kramatorsk to document the situation in Ukrainian cities in the Donetsk region to support the visibility work of #AguantaUcrania.

On the evening of 27 June 2023, the group was having dinner in the Ria Lounge restaurant in Kramatorsk, when a Russian missile hit the building in which the restaurant was located. This missile killed 13 civilians and injured a further 60. As a result of the missile strike, Viktoria Amelina suffered a severe head injury and was hospitalised in Kramatorsk, before being transferred to the hospital in Dnipro. The woman human rights defender died in the hospital in Dnipro three days later, on 1 June 2023.

Truth Hounds and PEN Ukraine reported that, in the aftermath of the attack, Russian state propaganda media falsely claimed that the target of the missile was the temporary headquarters of one of the Ukrainian Armed Forces brigades. In reality, the Ria Lounge restaurant in Kramatorsk was one of the most popular restaurants in the city and was frequented by Ukrainian and international human rights and civil society actors, humanitarian volunteers, and media and film crews. Truth Hounds and PEN Ukraine’s report stated that there were no military objectives that the Russian military could have have been targetting with a missile attack that day. Together, the human rights organisations made a public statement concerning the strike, stating that the precision of the Iskander missiles leads them to believe that the missile strike was an attack against the civilian population.

In light of the death of the woman human rights defender Viktoria Amelina, Front Line Defenders once again reiterates its grave concern about the killings of Ukrainian human rights defenders, civil society activists, humanitarian volunteers and other community leaders as a result of Russia’s full-scale invasion in Ukraine. According to Front Line Defenders’ HRD Memorial, at least 50 human rights defenders were killed in Ukraine in 2022, including humanitarian actors and human rights journalists, as a result of the activities of the Russian military forces.

Front Line Defenders strongly condemns the killing of the woman human rights defender Viktoria Amelina and urges the authorities of the Russian Federation to cease targeting civilian objects in accordance with Russia’s international humanitarian and human rights law obligations, recalling that the deliberate targeting of civilians is prohibited under the Fourth Geneva Convention. The attack on the Ria Lounge restaurant may qualify as a war crime pursuant to Article 8(2)(b)(ii) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) – “intentionally directing attacks against civilian objects.” Alternatively, such an attack may be qualified under Article 8(2)(b)(i) – “intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population”; or Article 8(2)(b)(iii) – “intentionally directing attacks against personnel, installations, material, units or vehicles involved in a humanitarian assistance […] mission.” Front Line Defenders calls for an impartial and independent investigation into the killing of human rights defender Viktoria Amelina while she was on mission conducting her human rights work. All those involved in the commission of this crime must be brought to justice.

https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/statement-report/ukrainian-woman-human-rights-defender-and-writer-viktoria-amelina-killed-russian

Posted in Front Line, human rights | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Journalist Elena Milashina and lawyer Alexander Nemov severely attacked in Chechnya

July 10, 2023

Rights defenders are sure of Chechen law enforcers’ involvement in attack on Milashina says Roman Kuzhev, СK correspondent

The attack on the journalist Elena Milashina and the advocate Alexander Nemov has to do with Milashina’s publications in which she wrote about human rights violations in Chechnya, human rights defenders have noted.

The “Caucasian Knot” reported that on July 4, Elena Milashina, a journalist of the “Novaya Gazeta” outlet, and Alexander Nemov, an advocate for Zarema Musaeva, were attacked in Chechnya. They were beaten up by masked gunmen when they were on the way from the airport to Grozny, where the verdict in the case of Zarema Musaeva was to be announced. The head of Chechnya, Ramzan Kadyrov, has promised to “sort things out”; and Akhmed Dudaev, the head of the Chechen Press Ministry, have pointed out that “the style of Western intelligence services” is seen in the attack.

Svetlana Gannushkina, the head of the “Civic Assistance” Committee, is sure that the attack had to do with Milashina’s human rights activities. “They were waiting for her there to beat her for her so much writing on human rights issues, conducts inquiries and shows the real Chechnya,” Ms Gannushkina has stated.

According to her version, the attackers are definitely law enforcers. Gannushkina* has also added that the attackers would not be identified and punished. Oyub Titiev, a human rights defender, is also sure that Milashina was the attackers’ target. “Only law enforcers can beat a woman so openly and with such cruelty,” he has stated.

Ruslan Kutaev, the president of the Assembly of Caucasian Nations, is sure that Milashina would have been attacked at any moment while in Grozny.

A criminal case on the attack on Milashina and Nemov can be initiated under several articles, said Galina Tarasova, a lawyer. According to her story, the case should have been transferred to the central office of the Investigating Committee of the Russian Federation (ICRF).

This article was originally published on the Russian page of 24/7 Internet agency ‘Caucasian Knot’ on July 5, 2023 at 08:07 pm MSK. https://eng.kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/62817

Many other human rights groups reported on this:

https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/en/case/human-rights-defenders-aleksandr-nemov-and-elena-milashina-attacked-and-severely-beaten-0

https://www.democracynow.org/2023/7/6/elena_milashina_attack

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/07/04/journalist-and-human-rights-lawyer-viciously-attacked-chechnya

https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/07/russia-un-experts-dismayed-violent-attack-against-journalist-yelena

Posted in Front Line, HRW, human rights | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Human Rights Defenders issues at the 53rd Session of the UN Human Rights Council

June 20, 2023

The 53rd session of the UN Human Rights Council started 19 June (to end on 14 July 2023). Thanks to the – as usual – excellent documentation prepared by the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) I will highlight the themes mostly affecting HRDs.

To stay up-to-date you can follow @ISHRglobal and #HRC53 on Twitter, and look out for its Human Rights Council Monitor. During the session, follow the live-updated programme of work on Sched.

See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2023/05/09/hrc52-civil-society-presents-key-takeaways-from-human-rights-council/

Here are some highlights of the session’s thematic discussions

Human rights of migrants

The Council will consider a resolution on the human rights of migrants this session, where a big problem is the criminalisation of the provision of solidarity and support, including rescues at sea, by migrant rights defenders.

Reprisals

..States raising cases is an important aspect of seeking accountability and ending impunity for acts of reprisal and intimidation against defenders engaging with the UN. It can also send a powerful message of solidarity to defenders, supporting and sustaining their work in repressive environments.

This month ISHR launched a new campaign regarding five cases. ISHR urges States to raise these cases in their statements:

  • Anexa Alfred Cunningham (Nicaragua), a Miskitu Indigenous leader, woman human rights defender, lawyer and expert on Indigenous peoples rights from Nicaragua, who has been denied entry back into her country since July 2022, when she participated in a session of a group of United Nations experts on the rights of Indigenous Peoples. States should demand that Anexa be permitted to return to her country, community and family and enabled to continue her work safely and without restriction.
  • Vanessa Mendoza (Andorra), a psychologist and the president of Associació Stop Violències, which focuses on gender-based violence, sexual and reproductive rights, and advocates for safe and legal abortion in Andorra. After engaging with CEDAW in 2019, Vanessa was charged with ‘slander with publicity’, ‘slander against the co-princes’ and ‘crimes against the prestige of the institutions’. She has been indicted for the alleged “crimes against the prestige of the institutions” involving a potentially heavy fine (up to 30,000 euros) and a criminal record if convicted. States should demand that the authorities in Andorra unconditionally drop all charges against Vanessa and amend laws which violate the rights to freedom of expression and association.
  • Kadar Abdi Ibrahim (Djibouti) is a human rights defender and journalist from Djibouti. He is also the Secretary-General of the political party Movement for Democracy and Freedom (MoDEL). Days after returning from Geneva, where Kadar carried out advocacy activities ahead of Djibouti’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR), intelligence service agents raided his house and confiscated his passport. He has thus been banned from travel for five years. States should call on the authorities in Djibouti to lift the travel ban and return Kadar’s passport immediately and unconditionally.
  • Hong Kong civil society (Hong Kong): Until 2020, civil society in Hong Kong was vibrant and had engaged consistently and constructively with the UN. This engagement came to a screeching halt after the imposition by Beijing of the National Security Law for Hong Kong (NSL), which entered into force on 1 July 2020. States should urge the Hong Kong authorities to repeal the offensive National Security Law and desist from criminalizing cooperation with the UN and other work to defend human rights.
  • Maryam al-Balushi and Amina al-Abduli (United Arab Emirates), Amina Al-Abdouli used to work as a school teacher. She was advocating for the Arab Spring and the Syrian uprising. She is a mother of five. Maryam Al Balushi was a student at the College of Technology. They were arrested for their human rights work, and held in incommunicado detention, tortured and forced into self-incriminatory confessions. After the UN Special Procedures mandate holders sent a letter to the UAE authorities raising concerns about their torture and ill treatment in detention in 2019, the UAE charged Amina and Maryam with three additional crimes. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found their detention arbitrary and a clear case of reprisals for communicating with Special Procedures. In April 2021, a court sentenced them to three additional years of prison for “publishing false information that disturbs the public order”. States should demand that authorities in the UAE immediately and unconditionally release Maryam and Amina and provide them with reparations for their arbitrary detention and ill-treatment.

Other thematic reports

At this 53rd session, the Council will discuss a range of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights through dedicated debates with the mandate holders and the High Commissioner, including:

  • The Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association
  • The Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity
  • The Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of expression
  • The Special Rapporteur on the right to health
  • The Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary of arbitrary executions
  • The Special Rapporteur on promotion and protection of human rights in the context of climate change
  • The Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance
  • The Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises
  • The High Commissioner on the importance of casualty recording for the promotion and protection of human rights
  • The Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide

In addition, the Council will hold dedicated debates on the rights of specific groups including:

  • The Working Group on discrimination against women and girls
  • The Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences
  • The Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants
  • The Special Rapporteur on trafficking in persons, especially women and children
  • The Special Rapporteur on independence of judges and lawyers

#HRC53 | Country-specific developments

Afghanistan

The Human Rights Council will hold its Enhanced Interactive Dialogue on Afghanistan, with the Special Rapporteur on the situation in Afghanistan and the Working Group on Discrimination against Women in Law and Practice. The joint report of the two mandates follows up from an urgent debate held last year on the situation of women and girls in the country. Their visit to the country concluded that there exist manifestations of systemic discrimination violating human rights and fundamental freedoms in both public and private lives. ISHR has joined many around the world to argue that the situation amounts to gender apartheid, and welcomes the call of the two mandate holders to develop normative standards and tools to address this as “an institutionalised system of discrimination, segregation, humiliation and exclusion of women and girls”. The gravity and severity is urgent, and requires that States act on the ongoing calls by Afghan civil society to establish an accountability mechanism for crimes against humanity.

Algeria

On 15 June, fifteen activists and peaceful protesters will face trial in Algiers on the basis of unfounded charges which include ‘enrolment in a terrorist or subversive organisation active abroad or in Algeria’ and ‘propaganda likely to harm the national interest, of foreign origin or inspiration’. The activists were arrested between 23 and 27 April 2021, and arbitrarily prosecuted within one criminal case. If convicted of these charges, they face a prison sentence of up to twenty years. This case includes HRDs Kaddour Chouicha, Jamila Loukil and Said Boudour who were members of the LADDH before its dissolution by the Administrative Court of Algiers following a complaint filed by the Interior Ministry on 29 June 2022.  We urge States to monitor the prosecution closely, including by attending the trial. We also urge States to demand that Algeria, a HRC member, end its crackdown on human rights defenders and civil society organisations, amend laws used to silence peaceful dissent and stifle civil society, and immediately and unconditionally release arbitrarily detained human rights defenders.

China

The recent findings of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in March, the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women in May, and the seven key benchmarks on Xinjiang by 15 Special Rapporteurs add up to wide range of UN expert voices that have collectively raised profound concern at the Chinese government’s treatment of Uyghurs, Tibetans, Hong Kongers and HRDs in mainland China. Seldom has the gap between the breadth of UN documentation on crimes against humanity and other grave violations and the lack of action by the Human Rights Council in response to such overwhelming evidence been so flagrant: the Council’s credibility is at stake. ISHR calls on the Council to promptly adopt a resolution requesting updated information on the human rights situation in Xinjiang, and a dialogue among all stakeholders on the matter. Governments from all regions should avoid selectivity, put an end to China’s exceptionalism, and provide a meaningful response to atrocity crimes on the basis of impartial UN-corroborated information.

The recent convictions of prominent rights defenders Ding Jiaxi and Xu Zhiyong to 12 and 14 years in jail respectively, and the recent detention of 2022 Martin Ennals awardee Yu Wensheng and his wife Xu Yan for ‘subversion of State power’ a year after his release, point to the need for sustained attention to the fate of HRDs in China. States should address in a joint statement the abuse of national security and other root causes of violations that commonly affect Uyghurs, Tibetans, Hong Kongers and mainland Chinese HRDs. States should also ask for the prompt release of human rights defenders, including human rights lawyers Chang Weiping, Yu Wensheng and Ding Jiaxi, legal scholar Xu Zhiyong, feminist activists Huang Xueqin and Li Qiaochu, Uyghur doctor Gulshan Abbas, Hong Kong lawyer Chow Hang-tung, and Tibetan climate activist A-nya Sengdra.

Egypt

Since the joint statement delivered by States in March 2021 at the HRC, there has been no significant improvement in the human rights situation in Egypt despite the launching of the national human rights strategy and the national dialogue. The Egyptian government has failed to address, adequately or at all, the repeated serious concerns expressed by several UN Special Procedures over the broad and expansive definition of “terrorism”, which enables the conflation of civil disobedience and peaceful criticism with “terrorism”. The Human Rights Committee raised its concerns “that these laws are used, in combination with restrictive legislation on fundamental freedoms, to silence actual or perceived critics of the Government, including peaceful protesters, lawyers, journalists, political opponents and human rights defenders”. Egyptian and international civil society organisations have been calling on the HRC to establish a monitoring and reporting mechanism on the human rights situation in Egypt, applying objective criteria and in light of the Egyptian government’s absolute lack of genuine will to acknowledge, let alone address, the country’s deep-rooted human rights crisis.

Israel and OPT

Civil society continues to call on the OHCHR to implement, in full, the mandate provided by HRC resolution 31/36 of March 2016 with regards to the UN database of businesses involved in Israel’s illegal settlement industry. The resolution mandated the release of a report containing the names of the companies involved in Israel’s settlement enterprise, to be annually updated. The initial report containing a list of 112 companies was released by the OHCHR in February 2020, three years after the mandated release date and despite undue political pressure. Since then, the UN database has not been updated. UN member states should continue to call on the OHCHR to implement the mandate in full and publish an annual update, as this represents a question of credibility of the Office of the High Commissioner and the Council.

The Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel will present its second report to the Council on 20 June. Member states should continue to support the work of the CoI to investigate the root causes of the situation in line with its mandate with a view to putting an end to 75 years of denial of the Palestinian’s people inalienable rights to self-determination and return. As the Palestinian people commemorate 75 years of Nakba (the destruction of Palestinian homeland and society), the CoI needs to address the root causes of the situation, including by investigating the ongoing denial of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination and the return of refugees, as well as the ongoing forcible displacement of Palestinians on both sides of the Green Line in the context of Israel’s imposition of a system of colonial apartheid.

In addition, on 10 July, the Council will hold an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967.

Saudi Arabia

In light of the ongoing diplomatic rehabilitation of crown prince and de facto ruler Mohammed bin Salman, the Saudi authorities’ brazen repression continues to intensify, as ALQST has documented. Some notable recent trends include, but are not limited to: the further harsh sentencing of activists for peaceful social media use, such as women activists Salma al-Shehab (27 years), Fatima al-Shawarbi (30 years and six months) and Sukaynah al-Aithan (40 years); the ongoing detention of prisoners of conscience beyond the expiry of their sentences, some of whom continue to be held incommunicado such as human rights defenders Mohammed al-Qahtani and Essa al-Nukheifi, and; regressive developments in relation to the death penalty, including a wave of new death sentences passed and a surge in executions (47 individuals were executed from March-May 2023), raising concerns for those currently on death row, including several young men at risk for crimes they allegedly committed as minors. We call on the HRC to respond to the calls of NGOs from around the world to create a monitoring and reporting mechanism on the ever-deteriorating human rights situation in Saudi Arabia.

Nicaragua

Continued attention should be paid by States at the HRC to the steadily worsening situation in Nicaragua. On 2 June, the spokesperson for the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights raised ‘growing concerns that the authorities in Nicaragua are actively silencing any critical or dissenting voices in the country and are using the justice system to this end’. The OHCHR reports 63 individuals arbitrarily detained in May alone, with 55 charged with ‘conspiracy to undermine national integrity’ and ‘spreading false news’ within one single night, without access to a lawyer of their choosing. States should express support for the monitoring and investigation work of the OHCHR and the Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua (GHREN), and call on the Nicaraguan government to release the remaining 46 political prisoners, revoke its decision to strip deported political prisoners off their nationality, and take meaningful measures to prevent, address and investigate violence by armed settlers against Indigenous Peoples and Afro-descendants.

Russia

Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has also been accompanied by a domestic war of repression against human rights defenders, independent journalists and political dissent. Most recently, Russia has adopted a sweeping new law criminalising assistance to or cooperation with a range of international bodies, including the International Criminal Court, ad hoc tribunals, foreign courts and arguably even the UN Human Rights Council itself. This law is manifestly incompatible with the right to communicate and cooperate with international bodies, and a flagrant and institutionalised case of reprisal. With Russian authorities having been found by a UN-mandated Commission of Inquiry to be possibly responsible for crimes against humanity and war crimes, and having a closed and highly repressive environment for civil society (ranking 17/100 in the CIVICUS Monitor), Russia is plainly unfit to be elected to the UN Human Rights Council and should be regarded as an illegitimate candidate. States should support and cooperate with the mandate of the new Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Russia, as well as with the Commission of Inquiry into human rights violations and abuses associated with Russia’s illegal war of aggression against Ukraine.

Sudan

Since the beginning of the war in Sudan on 15 April 2023, increasing numbers of Sudanese WHRDs are receiving threats and subject to grave danger. WHRDs are facing challenges in evacuating from Sudan and face further protection risks in neighboring countries. Sudanese women groups and WHRDs are risking their lives to provide support, solidarity, and report on the rising numbers of sexual and gender-based violence crimes. Many survivors are trapped in fighting areas unable to access support, and the occupation of hospitals by RSF is hindering women’s access to health services. The Council must urgently establish an international investigation in Sudan with sufficient resources, including to investigate the threats and reprisals against WHRDs for their work, and to document sexual and gender-based violence. During the debate with the High Commissioner and designated expert on Sudan on 19 June, we urge States to condemn sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV). States should highlight the impacts of the war on women and girls, including sexual and reproductive health as well as lack of support services for survivors of SGBV. States should reaffirm the importance of participation of women and their demands, and amplify the critical work of WHRDs on the ground despite the imminent risks to their lives and safety. States should also condemn the increasing threats against WHRDs and demand their effective protection.

Venezuela

On 5 July, the High Commissioner will present his report on the human rights situation in Venezuela, which will include an assessment of the level of implementation of UN recommendations already made to the State. The Council focus on Venezuela remains critical at a time when some States’ efforts to normalize relations with Venezuela risk erasing human rights from key agendas. Council members and observers should actively engage in the interactive dialogue with the High Commissioner to make evident that the human rights situation in the country remains at the heart of their concerns. The human rights and humanitarian situation in the country remains grave. Human rights defenders face ongoing and potentially increasing restrictions. We urge States to:

  • Express concern about the NGO bill, sitting with the Venezuelan National Assembly, and call for it to be withdrawn. The potential implications of this bill are to drastically shrink civic space, including by criminalising the work of human rights defenders;
  • Call for the release of all those detained arbitrarily – including defender Javier Tarazona who has been held since July 2021 and whose state of health is deteriorating;
  • Call for the rights of human rights defenders and journalists to be respected including during electoral periods, with a mind to Presidential elections next year; and
  • Call on Venezuela to engage fully with all UN agencies and mechanisms, including OHCHR, and develop a clear plan for the implementation of UN human rights recommendations made to it.

Tunisia

Civil society organisations have raised alarm at the escalating pattern of human rights violations and the rapidly worsening situation in Tunisia following President Kais Saied’s power grab on 25 July 2021 leading to the erosion of the rule of law, attacks on the independence of the judiciary, a crackdown on peaceful political opposition and abusive use of “counter-terrorism” law, as well as attacks on freedom of expression. The High Commissioner has addressed the deteriorating situation in the three latest global updates to the HRC. Special Procedures issued at least 8 communications in less than one year addressing attacks against the independence of the judiciary, as well as attacks against freedom of expression and assembly. Despite the fact that in 2011 Tunisia extended a standing invitation to all UN Special Procedures, and received 16 visits by UN Special Procedures since, Tunisia’s recent postponement of the visit of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, is another sign of Tunisia disengaging from international human rights mechanisms and declining levels of cooperation. The upcoming session provides a window of opportunity for the Council to exercise its prevention mandate and address the situation before the imminent risk of closure of civic space in Tunisia and regress in Tunisia’s engagement with the HRC and its mechanisms is complete.  

Syria

On 5 July, the Council will hold an interactive dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on Syria. In a report to the Human Rights Council in 2021, the Commission of Inquiry on Syria called for the establishment of a mechanism to reveal the fate of the missing and disappeared. On 28 March 2023, during the 77th session of the UN General Assembly, the Secretary-General and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights briefed UN Member States on the situation of the missing in Syria, and the findings of the study conducted by the Secretary-General as mandated by Resolution UNGA 76/228. The study concluded that in order to address the situation of the missing in Syria and its impact on families’ lives, it is necessary to create an institution to reveal the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared and to provide support to their families. As discussions are taking place in the UNGA to adopt a resolution establishing a humanitarian institution to reveal the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared, civil society, led by the Truth and Justice Charter, urges States to support the families of the missing to know the truth about the fate and whereabouts of their loved ones by voting in favour of the resolution at the UNGA.

Other country situations

The High Commissioner will present the annual report on 19 June. The Council will hold an interactive dialogue on the High Commissioner’s annual report on 20 June 2023. The Council will hold debates on and is expected to consider resolutions addressing a range of country situations, in some instances involving the renewal of the relevant expert mandates. These include:

  • Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Eritrea
  • Interactive Dialogues with the High Commissioner and the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar
  • Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Burundi
  • Interactive Dialogue with the High Commissioner on Ukraine
  • Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Belarus
  • Interactive Dialogue with the Fact-Finding Mission on Iran
  • Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Expert on Central African Republic

Appointment of mandate holders

The President of the Human Rights Council has proposed candidates for the following mandates:

  1. Special Rapporteur on minority issues (Mr Nicolas Levrat, Switzerland)
  2. Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants (Ms Anna Triandafyllidou, Greece)
  3. Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism (Mr Ben Saul, Australia).

Resolutions to be presented to the Council’s 53rd session

At the organisational meeting on 5 June the following resolutions (selected) were announced (States leading the resolution in brackets):

  1. Human rights situation in Syria (Germany, France, Italy, Jordan, Netherlands, Qatar, Turkey, USA, UK)
  2. New and emerging digital technologies and human rights (Austria, Brazil, Denmark, South Korea, Morocco, Singapore)
  3. Civil society space (Chile, Ireland, Japan, Sierra Leone, Tunisia)
  4. Independence and impartiality of the judiciary, jurors and assessors, and the independence of lawyers – mandate renewal (Australia, Botswana, Hungary, Maldives, Mexico, Thailand)
  5. Human rights of migrants (Mexico)
  6. Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Belarus – mandate renewal (EU)
  7. Mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Eritrea – mandate renewal (EU)
  8. Business and human rights – mandate renewal (Russian Federation, Ghana, Argentina and Switzerland)
  9. Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions – mandate renewal (Finland, Sweden)
  10. Situation of human rights of Rohiynga muslims and other minorities in Myanmar (Pakistan on behalf of OIC)

Adoption of Universal Periodic Review (UPR) reports

During this session, the Council will adopt the UPR working group reports on Argentina, Benin, Czechia, Gabon, Ghana, Guatemala, Japan, Pakistan, Peru, Republic of Korea, Sri Lanka, Switzerland and Zambia.

Panel discussions

During each Council session, panel discussions are held to provide member States and NGOs with opportunities to hear from subject-matter experts and raise questions. 5 panel discussions are scheduled for this upcoming session:

  1. Panel discussion on the measures necessary to find durable solutions to the Rohingya crisis and to end all forms of human rights violations and abuses against Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar
  2. Annual full-day discussion on the human rights of women [accessible panel]. Theme: Gender-based violence against women and girls in public and political life
  3. Annual full-day discussion on the human rights of women [accessible panel]. Theme: Social protection: women’s participation and leadership
  4. Annual panel discussion on the adverse impacts of climate change on human rights [accessible panel]. Theme: Adverse impact of climate change on the full realisation of the right to food
  5. Panel discussion on the role of digital, media and information literacy in the promotion and enjoyment of the right to freedom of opinion and expression [accessible panel]

https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/hrc53-key-issues-on-agenda-of-june-2023-session-of-the-human-rights-council/

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/un-rights-chief-seeks-establish-presence-china-india-2023-06-19/

https://forum-asia.org/?p=38297

Posted in human rights | 2 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

China and Russia Fail to Defund UN Human Rights Work

February 23, 2023

On 14 February, 2023 Louis Charbonneau, HRW United Nations Director, reported that the UN General Assembly achieved a funding breakthrough by agreeing to fully fund UN human rights mechanisms that China, Russia, and their allies had sought to defund in the 2023 budget. All these efforts failed. The Czech Republic as European Union president countered by proposing full funding for human rights mechanisms at the level proposed by Secretary-General António Guterres. The resolution passed by a sizable majority.

There’s more good news. Not only did the defunding efforts fail, but the highly problematic recommendations put forward by the UN Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions were rejected. The Advisory Committee is supposed to be an independent body of experts, but in recent years, its “experts” from countries like China and Russia have been pushing their governments’ anti-human rights agendas and advocating for sharp cuts in funding for human rights work, with no good reasons. Due to divisions between western countries and developing states, the standard UN funding compromise had become accepting the non-binding Advisory Committee recommendations. For example, if its recommendations had been adopted, the staff and budget for the Iran commission of inquiry would have been cut in half.

This should set a precedent for UN human rights funding in the future.

https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/02/14/china-and-russia-fail-defund-un-human-rights-work

Posted in HRW, OHCHR, UN | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , ,

Now it is the turn of the Moscow Helsinki Group to be liquidated

January 3, 2023

Tanya Lokshina, Associate Director, Europe and Central Asia Division, reported on 21 December 2022 on how the Moscow Helsinki Group MHG), Russia’s oldest Human Rights Group, faces ‘Liquidation’

Moscow Helsinki Group’s logo
Moscow Helsinki Group’s logo.  © 2022 Moscow Helsinki Group

Last week, Russia’s Justice Ministry filed a petition with the Moscow City Court seeking “liquidation” of the Moscow Helsinki Group (MHG), a leading Russian human rights organization.

On 12 May Tanya Lokshina received one of MHG’s annual awards for contributions to human rights and the Russian human rights movement. She writes: “By then, in the aftermath of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the authorities had shut down Human Rights Watch’s Moscow office, along with the offices of 14 other foreign nongovernmental organizations. I had already left the country with the rest of our team, and my 9-year-old son received the beautifully framed award on my behalf. I first saw it several weeks later, when he joined me in Tbilisi, Georgia, where I had relocated to continue my work. I generally don’t display awards and diplomas, but receiving one from MHG was so special that it now hangs on my wall.”

MHG was founded in 1976 by Soviet dissidents to expose governmental repression. It lasted nine months before the government jailed or forced practically all its members into exile. After the USSR’s collapse, the group revived in the 1990’s under the leadership of Lyudmilla Alexeeva, a legendary human rights defender, and has been working tirelessly to expose abuses, build up a country-wide human rights movement in Russia, and advocate for the rule of law. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2018/12/10/russian-human-rights-defender-ludmila-mikhailovna-alexeeva-is-no-longer/]

The liquidation lawsuit is based on the Justice Ministry’s ad hoc inspection of MHG. The liquidation petition cites several supposed violations of Russia’s stifling legislation on nongovernmental organizations, including the group being registered in Moscow but operating elsewhere in Russia, and the group’s charter lacking information on the location of its executive body. These are obviously bureaucratic pretexts that could not justify such a drastic move.

This year, Moscow courts liquidated four other major human rights groups in addition to Memorial, so it’s hard to find optimism for a fair trial for MHG. But it’s not hard to be optimistic about Russia’s human rights movement. It outlasted the Soviet Union; it will outlast today’s oppressors. See: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/12/12/foreign-agent-law-in-russia-from-bad-to-worse/.

And it goes on, the Andrei Sakharov Foundation, see: 24 January 2023 HRW post: https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/01/24/russia-designates-another-rights-organization-undesirable

https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/12/21/russias-oldest-human-rights-group-faces-liquidation

Posted in HRW, human rights | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Foreign Agent law in Russia from bad to worse

December 12, 2022

A new law entered into force in Russia that drastically expands the country’s oppressive and vast “foreign agents” legislation, Human Rights Watch said on 1 December 2022. The law is yet another attack on free expression and legitimate civic activism in Russia, and should be repealed:

Adopted in July 2022, the law’s entry into force was delayed until December 1. The law expands the definition of foreign agent to a point at which almost any person or entity, regardless of nationality or location, who engages in civic activism or even expresses opinions about Russian policies or officials’ conduct could be designated a foreign agent, so long as the authorities claim they are under “foreign influence.” It also excludes “foreign agents” from key aspects of civic life. 

“For more than a decade, Russian authorities have used ‘foreign agents’ laws to smear and punish independent voices,” said Rachel Denber, deputy Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “This new tool in the government’s already crowded toolbox makes it even easier to threaten critics, impose harsh restrictions on their legitimate activities and even ban them. It makes thoughtful public discussion about Russia’s past, present, and future simply impossible.” See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/05/21/kasparov-and-khodorkovsky-are-now-also-foreign-agents/

In Russia, the term “foreign agent” is tantamount “spy” or “traitor.” The foreign agent designation remains extra-judicial, with no possibility to contest it in court before the designation is made. Those designated must comply with all requirements the day after the authorities add them to the registry, even if they challenge the designation in court.

When the first foreign agent law was adopted in 2012, only registered organizations could be designated “foreign agents.” Successive amendments gradually expanded the application from registered organizations, to media, to other categories of individuals, and to associations without legal entities.

The July law, On Control Over Activities of Entities/Persons Under Foreign Influence, replaces these with a consolidated, simplified, but endlessly broad definition to cover any person – Russian, foreign or stateless; any legal entity, domestic or international; or any group without official registration, if they are considered to have received foreign support and/or are considered to be “under foreign influence” and engaged in activities that Russian authorities would deem to be “political.” It also covers anyone who gathers information about Russia’s military activities or military capabilities, or creates or publicly disseminates information or funds such activities.

The law defines “foreign influence” as “support” from foreign sources that includes funding, technical assistance, or other undefined kinds of assistance and/or open-ended “impact” that constitutes coercion, persuasion, and/or “other means.”

Under this definition, any interaction with a foreign element can potentially be construed as “foreign influence,” Human Rights Watch said. There is also no requirement for any causal link between “foreign influence” and the “political” or other activities for the designation to be applicable.

Foreign sources include not only foreign states or foreign entities, but also international organizations, presumably including such multilateral organizations as the United Nations. The law considers Russian nationals or organizations “foreign sources” if they are respectively considered by the Russian authorities to be under “foreign influence” or to be beneficiaries of “foreign funding.”

To avoid the “foreign agent” label, an organization needs to ensure that no source of any donation was at any stage “tainted” by “foreign influence,” including indirectly.

In defining what constitutes “political” activities of a foreign agent, the law consolidates provisions of earlier iterations of “foreign agent” amendments to include “opinions about public authorities’ decisions or policies.” For example, a journalist who publishes a commentary about urban development plans could fall under the definition of foreign agent activity.

The new law also excludes “foreign agents” from key aspects of public life. These include bans on joining the civil service, participating in electoral commissions, acting in an advisory or expert capacity in official or public environmental impact assessments, in independent anti-corruption expertise of draft laws and by-laws, or electoral campaigns or even donating to such campaigns or to political parties.

Foreign agents are also banned from teaching or engaging in other education activities for minors or producing informational materials for them. They cannot participate in organizing public assemblies or support them through donations and are barred from a number of other activities.

The law expands the notion of a person or entity affiliated with a “foreign agent,” which was first introduced in 2021 in relation to electoral candidates. A person remains “affiliated” up to two years after they sever ties with the foreign agent, even if the “affiliation” started before the law entered into force, and even if the “affiliation” started before the entity was designated a foreign agent.

Since the adoption of the first “foreign agents” law, hundreds of civic groups and activists, including those that work on human rights, the environment, election monitoring, and anti-corruption, have been designated “foreign agents.” A large number of organizations had to close down because they either sought to avoid the toxic label or were unable to bear the hefty fines imposed for not complying with the law’s burdensome, arbitrary labelling and reporting requirements. The authorities used the “foreign agents” law as a legal pretext to close down other groups, such as the human rights group Memorial, one of the 2022 Nobel Peace Prize laureates. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/12/29/russias-supreme-court-orders-closure-emblematic-memorial/

“This new ‘foreign agents’ law is an unrestrained attack on Russian civil society aimed at gagging any public criticism of state policies,” Denber said. “It should be scrapped.”

https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/12/01/russia-new-restrictions-foreign-agents

Posted in HRW, human rights, Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,

Criticizing Kremlin leads to treason charges

October 8, 2022
Opposition activist Vladimir Kara-Murza in Moscow.
Opposition activist Vladimir Kara-Murza in Moscow. © 2021 AP Photo/Alexander Zemlianichenko

On 7 October 2022 Human Rights Watch criticised sharply the Russian charge of high treason against an opposition politician, Vladimir Kara-Murza. It is “a blatant attempt to quash any criticism of the Kremlin and deter contact with the international community“, Human Rights Watch said. 

This is the third baseless criminal charge against Kara-Murza since he was detained in April 2022. He has already been indicted for spreading “fake news” about the Russian Armed Forces because he publicly criticized Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and for alleged involvement with an “undesirable” foreign organization. He now risks an additional sentence of up 20 years if convicted on high treason charges. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/04/14/human-rights-defender-vladimir-kara-murza-arrested-in-russia/]

“Vladimir Kara-Murza is a longstanding proponent of democratic values and has been a vocal opponent of Vladimir  Putin and Russia’s war on Ukraine,” said Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “It is painfully obvious that the Kremlin sees Kara-Murza as a direct and imminent threat.  These charges against him and his prolonged detention are a travesty of justice. Russian authorities should immediately and unconditionally free Kara-Murza and drop all charges against him.” See also: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/34e43b60-3236-11ea-b4d5-37ffeeddd006

Vadim Prokhorov, Kara-Murza’s lawyer, said the high treason charges relate to Kara-Murza’s  public criticism of the Russian authorities in international forums.

Kara-Murza has called for sanctions against the Kremlin and has spoken in person before national political bodies throughout Europe and in the United States, and at many international and intergovernmental forums, including at the United Nations. He was a key figure advocating for the US Magnitsky Act that gave rise to the Global Magnitsky sanctions regime for serious human rights violations.

Kara-Murza was also a close friend of the murdered Russian opposition politician Boris Nemtsov. He survived two near-fatal poisonings, in 2015 and 2017, which Bellingcat investigative journalists reported was most likely orchestrated by the Russian Federal Security Service and which the Russian authorities have failed to investigate. 

Since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine started in February, the Russian authorities have expanded their repressive toolbox. In March, Russian authorities criminalized calls for sanctions against Russia, and in July also criminalized “confidential cooperation” with foreign states, international or foreign organizations as well as public calls for action that are “against national interests.”

These new provisions cannot be applied retroactively to the years of advocacy by Kara-Murza, Human Rights Watch said, and so he is being charged with high treason under Russia’s criminal code, which was expanded in November 2012. The definition was expanded to include consultations or any other assistance to a foreign state or international or foreign organizations…

Russia’s rules on prosecution and trial of treason cases also breach human rights safeguards, in particular fair trial guarantees. For example, the criminal case materials in such proceedings are classified so that the defense team may not have access to key pieces of evidence, and the trial takes place behind closed doors, preventing public scrutiny.

Ivan Safronov, a journalist, was recently convicted of high treason and sentenced to 22 years in maximum security prison and given a substantial fine for his journalistic investigations of defense contracts, spotlighting how treason cases are handled.  He was tried behind closed doors, key evidence obtained by fellow journalists was not accepted by the court, and his defense team came under immense pressure. Two of his lawyers had to flee the country, and a third was detained on accusations of spreading false information and remains in detention.

“Sadly, it is unrealistic to expect that fair trial standards will be observed in Kara-Murza’s case,” Williamson said. “By jailing leaders like him, Russian authorities are attempting to instill fear in the Russian people and eradicate any opportunity for civil society to mobilize and oppose the Kremlin and its war.” 

https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/10/07/russia-first-treason-charges-criticizing-kremlin

Posted in HRW, Human Rights Defenders | Leave a Comment »
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Nobel Peace Prize 2022 goes to well-recognised human rights defenders

October 7, 2022

On 7 September 2022 The Norwegian Nobel Committee decided to award the Nobel Peace Prize for 2022 to one individual and two organisations, who represent civil society in their home countries. They have for many years promoted the right to criticise power and protect the fundamental rights of citizens. They have made an outstanding effort to document war crimes, human right abuses and the abuse of power. Together they demonstrate the significance of civil society for peace and democracy.

This year’s Peace Prize is awarded to human rights advocate Ales Bialiatski from Belarus, the Russian human rights organisation Memorial and the Ukrainian human rights organisation Center for Civil Liberties. The first two are well-known and received many important human rights awards.

Ales Bialiatski was the winner of 11 other awards, see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/72682FFF-628F-4A5D-B6B3-52A776FF0E47, while Memorial got 7 awards earlier [see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/BD12D9CE-37AA-7A35-9A32-F37A0EA8C407], Oleksandra Matviichuk, the chair of the Ukrainian Center for Civil Liberties received a few days ago the Right livelihood award [see: https://www.trueheroesfilms.org/thedigest/laureates/75690f04-7a51-4591-8e18-0826b93959b3]

Ales Bialiatski founded the organisation Viasna (Spring) in 1996 in response to the controversial constitutional amendments that gave the president dictatorial powers and that triggered widespread demonstrations. In the years that followed, Viasna evolved into a broad-based human rights organisation that documented and protested against the authorities’ use of torture against political prisoners. Government authorities have repeatedly sought to silence Ales Bialiatski. He was imprisoned from 2011 to 2014. Following large-scale demonstrations against the regime in 2020, he was again arrested. He is still detained without trial. Despite tremendous personal hardship, Mr Bialiatski has not yielded an inch in his fight for human rights and democracy in Belarus. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/viasna-human-rights-centre/

The human rights organisation Memorial was established in 1987 by human rights activists in the former Soviet Union who wanted to ensure that the victims of the communist regime’s oppression would never be forgotten. Nobel Peace Prize laureate Andrei Sakharov and human rights advocate Svetlana Gannushkina were among the founders. Memorial is based on the notion that confronting past crimes is essential in preventing new ones. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Memorial grew to become the largest human rights organisation in Russia. In addition to establishing a centre of documentation on victims of the Stalinist era, Memorial compiled and systematised information on political oppression and human rights violations in Russia. Memorial became the most authoritative source of information on political prisoners in Russian detention facilities. The organisation has also been standing at the forefront of efforts to combat militarism and promote human rights and government based on rule of law. During the Chechen wars, Memorial gathered and verified information on abuses and war crimes perpetrated on the civilian population by Russian and pro-Russian forces. In 2009, the head of Memorial’s branch in Chechnya, Natalia Estemirova, was killed because of this work. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/07/15/ngos-remember-10th-anniversary-of-natalia-estemirovas-murder/]

Civil society actors in Russia have been subjected to threats, imprisonment, disappearance and murder for many years. As part of the government’s harassment of Memorial, the organisation was stamped early on as a “foreign agent”. In December 2021, the authorities decided that Memorial was to be forcibly liquidated and the documentation centre was to be closed permanently. The closures became effective in the following months, but the people behind Memorial refuse to be shut down. In a comment on the forced dissolution, chairman Yan Rachinsky stated, “Nobody plans to give up.” [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/12/29/russias-supreme-court-orders-closure-emblematic-memorial/]

The Center for Civil Liberties was founded in Kyiv in 2007 for the purpose of advancing human rights and democracy in Ukraine. The center has taken a stand to strengthen Ukrainian civil society and pressure the authorities to make Ukraine a full-fledged democracy. To develop Ukraine into a state governed by rule of law, Center for Civil Liberties has actively advocated that Ukraine become affiliated with the International Criminal Court. After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Center for Civil Liberties has engaged in efforts to identify and document Russian war crimes against the Ukrainian civilian population. In collaboration with international partners, the center is playing a pioneering role with a view to holding the guilty parties accountable for their crimes.

By awarding this Nobel Peace Prize for 2022 the Norwegian Nobel Committee is honouring outstanding champions of human rights and consistent efforts in favour of humanist values, anti-militarism and principles of law.

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/peace/2022/press-release/

Posted in Human Rights Defenders | 2 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Human rights defenders at the 51st session of the UN Human Rights Council

September 20, 2022

The 51st session of the UN Human Rights Council has started well and good on 12 September and will last until 7 October. I am awfully delayed in extracting from the – as always excellent – guide – produced by the team of the ISHR – the issues most directly affecting human rights defenders. Apologies.

Readthe full Alert to the session online here and to stay up-to-date, follow @ISHRglobal and #HRC51 on Twitter. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/09/15/new-high-commissioner-for-human-rights-volker-turk-the-man-for-an-impossible-job/

Throughout the session ISHR is calling on States to #EndReprisals against human rights defenders and civil society groups who engage with the United Nations!

Some Thematic areas

Reprisals On 29 September, Ilze Brands Kehris, the Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights will present the Secretary-General’s annual report on Cooperation with the United Nations, its representatives and mechanisms in the field of human rights (also known as ‘the Reprisals Report’) to the Council in her capacity as UN senior official on reprisals. The presentation of the report will be followed by a dedicated interactive dialogue, as mandated by the September 2017 resolution on reprisals. ISHR remains deeply concerned about reprisals against civil society actors who engage or seek to engage with UN bodies mechanisms. The dedicated dialogue is a key opportunity for States to raise concerns about specific cases of reprisals and demand that Governments provide an update on any investigation or action taken toward accountability. An increasing number of States have raised concerns in recent sessions about individual cases of reprisals, including in Egypt, Nicaragua, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Bahrain, Yemen, Burundi, China and Venezuela, Egypt, Burundi, Lao and China, Belarus, Iran, Turkmenistan, and the Philippines. During its 48th session, the Council adopted a resolution on reprisals. The text, which was adopted by consensus, invited the UN Secretary-General to submit an annual report on reprisals and intimidation to the UN General Assembly. Once again, the resolution listed key trends including that acts of intimidation and reprisals can signal patterns, increasing self-censorship, and the use of national security arguments and counter-terrorism strategies by States as justification for blocking access to the UN. The resolution also acknowledged the specific risks to individuals in vulnerable situations or belonging to marginalised groups, and called on the UN to implement gender-responsive policies to end reprisals. The Council called on States to combat impunity by conducting prompt, impartial and independent investigations and ensuring accountability for all acts of intimidation or reprisal, both online and offline, by condemning all such acts publicly, providing access to effective remedies for victims, and preventing any recurrence.

Other thematic reports At this 51st session, the Council will discuss a range of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights and issues through dedicated debates, including

Special Rapporteur on truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence

Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and consequences 

Working Group on Arbitrary Detention Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order.

Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances

Special Rapporteur on the implications for human rights of the environmentally sound management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes 

In addition, the Council will hold dedicated debates on the rights of specific groups including with the: Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples and the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

The Council will also consider various other reports, see the full list here.  

Country-specific developments
Afghanistan The Council will hold an interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan and enhanced interactive dialogue on the human rights situation of women and girls in Afghanistan on 12 September. While a Special Rapporteur mandate is necessary to monitor and report on the human rights situation in Afghanistan, the dire situation in the country and the atrocities affecting women and girls warrant a more robust and systematic response. ISHR together with other NGOs call on the Council to establish in parallel an ongoing accountability mechanism with the specific mandate: To investigate all alleged violations and abuses of human rights law amounting to crimes under international law in Afghanistan, in particular against women and girls, To collect, consolidate and analyse evidence of such violations and abuses, including their gender dimension, and to systematically record and preserve all information, documentation and evidence, including interviews, witness testimony and forensic material, consistent with international law standards, in view of any future legal proceedings; To document and verify relevant information and evidence, including through field engagement, and to cooperate with judicial and other entities, national and international, as appropriate; To identify, where possible, those individuals and entities responsible for all alleged violations and abuses of human rights law amounting to crimes under international law in Afghanistan, in particular against women and girls, with a view to ensuring that those responsible are held accountable.

China  Despite significant pressure, the UN human rights office (OHCHR) has published its human rights assessment on the Uyghur region (Xinjiang). The report highlights ‘serious human rights violations’, including torture and sexual and gender-based violence, stressing that existing ‘highly securitised and discriminatory’ re-education camps ‘provide fertile ground for such violations to take place on a broad scale.’ The OHCHR found that the ‘arbitrary and discriminatory detention of members of Uyghur and other predominantly Muslim group […] may constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity.’ It also warns that ‘conditions remain in place for serious violations to continue and recur’, calling for ‘urgent attention’ by the international community.  The Human Rights Council, and all governments that are genuinely committed to rights protection globally, cannot turn a blind eye to the severity and scale of evidence verified by the UN.  In line with ‘objective criteria’ for Human Rights Council action, ISHR calls on:  The Council to hold a formal discussion on China’s human rights crisis, including the human rights situations in the Uyghur region (Xinjiang), the Tibetan region, Hong Kong, and on human rights defenders;  States to initiate and support efforts to establish an independent international mechanism to monitor and report on the human rights situation in China, in line with the call by 50 UN Special Procedures experts. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/09/01/finally-the-long-awaited-un-report-on-china/

Burundi The Council will hold an Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Burundi on 22 September.  Since the Special Rapporteur’s mandate was operationalised, the human rights situation in Burundi has not changed in a substantial or sustainable way. The limited improvements since President Évariste Ndayishimiye was sworn in, in June 2020, as well as the positive signals he sent, particularly with regard to freedom of the press and promises of justice, have not materialised into long-term reforms. All the structural issues the CoI and other human rights actors identified remain in place. These include arbitrary arrests of political opponents or those perceived as such, acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, sexual and genderbased violence, undue restrictions to freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly and association, and violations of economic, social and cultural rights that are intertwined with the economic underpinnings of the State. In the absence of structural improvements and as grave human rights violations and abuses continue to be committed with impunity, the Council should adopt a resolution that reflects realities on the ground and ensures continued monitoring, reporting, and public debates on Burundi’s human rights situation. It should grant the Special Rapporteur the time he needs to fulfill his mandate and urge Burundi to cooperate with him, including by granting him access to the country. At its 51st session, the Council should adopt a resolution that extends the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Burundi for a further year.

Egypt The continued silence of the Council on the critical human rights situation in Egypt is of great concern. As Egypt prepares to host COP27, it continues to carry out widespread and systematic violations of human rights, including freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association against Egyptian and foreign nationals.

Egyptian authorities have for years employed draconian laws, including laws on counterterrorism, cybercrimes, and civil society in order to subdue the civilian populations and stifle all forms of peaceful dissent and mobilization. Under the current government, Egypt has become among the worst three countries in the world in the numbers of jailed journalists and almost all independent media has been forced to shut down or threatened into silence. Hundreds of websites continue to be banned. Scores of civil society and media representatives have been and continue to be disappeared, tortured and/or arbitrarily detained under the pretense of counter-terrorism and national security.

While the release of a few select arbitrarily-detained activists is a sign that international pressure works, the number of releases pales in comparison to the vast numbers of individuals newly detained by the National Security Prosecution, or whose arbitrary detention has been renewed in 2022. Amongst those still in prison is well known Egyptian-British human rights defender Alaa Abdel Fattah – recently sentenced to an additional 5 years in prison by an exceptional court.  He is on hunger strike for over 150 days. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/07/07/mona-seifs-letter-a-cry-for-help-for-alaa/]We urge the Council and its Special Procedures to take action to protect and ensure the release of all those arbitrarily detained in Egypt.

Russia  Together with Russian and international human rights organisations, ISHR continues to call on the Human Rights Council to establish a dedicated international mechanism to monitor and report on the dire human rights situation in Russia. As recognised by UN human rights experts, this situation includes: the stigmatisation and criminalisation of independent civil society; the persecution of human rights defenders, peaceful protesters and political activists, including through arbitrary arrest, detention, ill-treatment and torture; the banning of independent media and the silencing of journalists; attacks against women and LGBTI persons and activists; the propagation of massive disinformation; and the systematic erosion of any semblance of the rule of law or accountability mechanisms.  As further recognised by independent UN experts, by undermining and attacking independent civil society, persecuting human rights defenders, activists, and opposition and dissenting voices, banning independent media, silencing journalists, and effectively outlawing any form of peaceful protest, the Russian authorities have created an environment that, at least in part, facilitates its war in Ukraine. The war has led to an enormous loss of civilian life, displacement of millions of Ukrainian civilians, and contributed to a global food security and energy crisis, among other developments. A dedicated Special Rapporteur mandate would independently collect, analyse and present information on the human rights situation in Russia and make recommendations to the Council and the authorities on how to address it. It would serve as a crucial lifeline between Russian human rights defenders and the international community at a time when other bridges have been cut. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/04/26/lev-ponomarev-human-rights-defender-leaves-russia/] Finally, a Special Rapporteur could speak up authoritatively against the deepening restrictions on human rights in Russia and on behalf of those facing intimidation, harassment and reprisal for their human rights work.

Israel and oPT ISHR joined over 150 organisations from all world regions demand that the international community condemns and takes action to protect seven Palestinian civil society organisations that have been subject to illegal threats, raids and closure by Israeli authorities.

On the morning of 18 August 2022, the Israeli occupying forces (IOF) raided and sealed the doorways into the offices of the seven Palestinian organisations: Addameer Prisoner Support and Human Rights Association, Al-Haq Law in the Service of Man (Al-Haq), Bisan Center for Research and Development, Defense for Children International-Palestine (DCI-P), Health Work Committees (HWC), the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC), and the Union of Palestinian Women’s Committees (UPWC). We urge States to unequivocally condemn Israel’s targeting of Palestinian civil society and tactics to further repress of freedom of expression, and to take all necessary action to support and protect Palestinian human rights defenders and ensure the continuation of their invaluable work.

We call upon States to demand that Israel immediately revoke its designations of Palestinian human rights and civil society organisations as ‘terrorist organisations’, reverse the military orders designating the organisations and closing their offices, and repeal its Anti-Terrorism Law (2016) as it does not meet basic human rights standards. See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2021/12/15/human-rights-defenders-targeted-by-israel-launch-new-joint-website/

Venezuela The HRC’s fact-finding mission on Venezuela will present its final report under its current mandate to the Human Rights Council on 26 September, followed by an interactive dialogue with States. All eyes are on Latin American states, in particular, to see whether or not they will present a resolution to renew the mission’s mandate.  While there have been significant human rights changes in Venezuela – including a reduction in extrajudicial executions between 2020 and 2021 – the human rights situation in the country remains grim, with clear retrogression in some cases. This is not the time for States to end the work of the Mission, a key accountability mechanism which during its work to date has produced evidence of likely crimes against humanity.  Not only is its work on past violations far from over, but it could play a key role in the prevention of further violations, particularly at times of instability such as is possible during upcoming Presidential elections.   ISHR has worked as part of a Coalition of Venezuelan, regional and international organisations calling for the continuation of the mandate of the Mission. These demands were recently made in a letter to States, signed by 125 other Venezuelan and international organisations. The continuation of the Mission should be a key part of foreign policy aims of states of the region, and ISHR hopes to see States step up on this front in the coming days and weeks.

Yemen ISHR joined NGOs in urging States to work toward the establishment of an independent international criminally focused investigative mechanism on Yemen in the coming period, including at HRC51. While a Yemen truce hangs in the balance, little to no progress has been made by parties to the conflict to  address ongoing and widespread violations and abuses of international human rights and humanitarian law or remedy the harms they have inflicted on civilians throughout the conflict. The humanitarian situation in Yemen remains desperate, and, in recent weeks, armed clashes have once again increased. Civilians continue to fall victim to shelling, drone strikes and other attacks.These factors attest to the urgent and critical need to reinvigorate international accountability efforts on Yemen through the establishment of an independent international investigation. After its mandate ended in October 2021, members of the GEE called on the international community to take specific initiatives at the international level in pursuit of accountability.  Continued impunity will only increase the likelihood that more children will starve, more rights defenders and journalists will be imprisoned or executed, more homes and schools will be bombed, and the cycle of violence and suffering will continue. In this context, an international independent criminal accountability mechanism for Yemen can play a critical role to deter violence, protect civilians and promote a genuine and lasting peace.  In December 2021, nearly 90 civil society organisations called on member states of the UN to move quickly and establish such a mechanism in order to  investigate and publicly report on the most serious violations and abuses of international law committed in Yemen.

Other country situations These include: Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Afghanistan and Enhanced Interactive Dialogue on the human rights situation of women and girls in Afghanistan Interactive Dialogue on the report of the High Commissioner on Nicaragua Interactive Dialogue on the report of the OHCHR on Sri Lanka Interactive Dialogue on the report of the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar, Interactive Dialogue with the SR on Myanmar, Interactive Dialogue on the OHCHR report on Myanmar, Acting High Commissioner oral update on the human rights situation in Myanmar Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia Interactive Dialogue on the oral update of OHCHR on technical assistance and capacity-building for South Sudan Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic  Interactive Dialogue on the interim oral update of the Acting High Commissioner on the situation of human rights in Belarus  Interactive Dialogue with the Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine and Interactive Dialogue on the Acting High Commissioner oral update on Ukraine Enhanced Interactive Dialogue on the report of the High Commissioner and experts on the Democratic Republic of Congo Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Cambodia and presentation of the Secretary-General’s report  Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Expert on Somalia Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Expert on the Central African Republic  Presentation of the High Commissioner’s report on cooperation with Georgia  Enhanced Interactive Dialogue on the report of the High Commissioner on the Philippines

Council programme, appointments and resolutions

States announced at least 29 proposed resolutions. Read here the reports presented this session. Appointment of mandate holders: The President of the Human Rights Council will propose candidates for:  Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons; Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers; Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, member from Eastern European States; Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance.

Read here the three year programme of work of the Council with supplementary information. Read here ISHR’s recommendations on the key issues that are or should be on the agenda of the UN Human Rights Council in 2022.

Concerning side events, the Secretariat informed the Bureau that it had developed a way to organise the time slots for the three meeting rooms in order to allow for side events to take place in the Palais des Nations during the 51st session of the Council. The time slots for side events will be allocated according to availability and on a first-come, first-served basis. In order to accommodate as many requests as possible, only one side event per requesting organiser will be accommodated and each side event would be limited to one hour in duration. Organisers are requested to strictly respect the allotted time and to leave the room on time in order to ensure the smooth organisation of the following side event. NGOs will find additional information on the modalities and the criteria at the OHCHR NGO participation web page. The Secretariat underscored that these measures will be implemented during the 51st session on a pilot basis.

See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/09/20/report-on-the-50th-session-of-the-un-hrc/

https://ishr.ch/latest-updates/hrc51-key-issues-on-agenda-of-september-2022-session/

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Council, Human Rights Defenders, ISHR, UN | 2 Comments »
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

What will happen to pending cases against Russia in the European Court of Human Rights?

August 24, 2022

By Kanstantsin Dzehtsiarou, of the University of Liverpool wrote 16 August 2022 a piece: stating that “the Range of Solutions to the Russian Cases Pending before the European Court of Human Rights [are]: Between ‘Business as Usual’ and ‘Denial of Justice’

Exactly in a month time, on 16 September 2022, Russia will no longer be a party to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR or Convention). See also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2022/03/11/russia-refuses-to-further-participate-in-the-council-of-europe/. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR, Court) will have no jurisdiction over human rights violations that will happen after that. It does not mean that the ECtHR will stop accepting applications against Russia immediately on 16 September 2022 as often victims of human rights violations have to go through national legal remedies and this can take months or even years. It will be mostly for the Court to decide how to treat the applications against Russia both pending now and those arriving after 16 September 2022. The Court already had at least five months to clarify this, but no publicly available decision has been taken yet and it will perhaps be a last-minute compromise between judges. The reason for this delay is that this question is complex in terms of its consequences for the Court, for the victims of human rights violations and for the Council of Europe as a whole.

As of 30 June 2022, there were 17,550 pending applications from Russia. Although the vast majority of these cases are most likely repetitive or inadmissible, there are some complex and high-profile cases including over a dozen of inter-state applications. So, what should the Court ‘do’ with the pending applications? The ECtHR has a few plausible solutions to this challenging problem:

1. ‘Business as usual’

The Court can continue dealing with all pending Russian cases. ..However, dealing with more important meritorious applications will be much more difficult within the ‘business as usual’ model for the following reasons: first, it is clear that the Russian authorities will not collaborate with the Court. ….

There will be no sitting judge from Russia and it is highly unlikely that anyone from the list of ad hoc judges will be willing to sit. So, the Court will have to decide cases without the Russian judge and without the input from the respondent state. A one-of departure from the rule enshrined in Article 24(4) is not perhaps catastrophic but a systematic bypassing of this norm might undermine the legitimacy of the Court’s processes.

The second reason why the ‘business as usual’ model is suboptimal is that it will take a lot of resources from the Court in the circumstances when the budget of the organisation will be significantly reduced by the departure of Russia, who has been a major contributor to the budget of the Council of Europe. The resources spent on the cases from Russia will be arguably taken from other cases in relation to situations where the Court can make a significant and meaningful impact. And this leads me to the final and perhaps the most important reason. The Russian authorities will not implement any of the judgments that entered into force after 16 March 2022. The argument that execution of these judgments can be used as a condition for the return of Russia into the organisation is not particularly convincing as there is no indication that Russia is going to come back any time soon. Moreover, there are plenty of unenforced cases at the moment and the currently available unexecuted judgments pending before the Committee of Ministers can make a solid basis for a conditional return of Russia to the Council of Europe.

Finally, I have to mention that the victim-centric approach would perhaps support the ‘business as usual’ model as in this case the ECtHR will at least confirm that human rights violations have taken place. Having said that, this acknowledgement will not lead to any tangible changes: the applicants will not even receive the monetary just satisfaction from the respondent state. This might increase the feeling of frustration and hopelessness rather than provide any satisfaction.

2. ‘Pick and choose’

Another possible solution to the Russian docket of cases at the ECtHR can be a ‘pick and choose’ model. This way, the Court will select a number of leading cases which would perhaps include inter-state cases, sensitive political cases and the cases exemplifying the structural legal problems in Russia and deliver judgments in these cases.

Within this model the Court can use the so-called Burmych scenario. The judgment in Burmych v Ukraine was a follow-up judgment to the pilot case of Ivanov v Ukraine. In this case the Court ruled that non-execution of the final national judgments is a violation of Article 6 of the ECHR and that the delay in execution should be covered by an appropriate compensation. In Burmych the Court decided that there is no point in keeping producing judgments in clone cases and transferred all applications dealing with the same issue to the Committee of Ministers. Applying this approach to the pending Russian cases, the Court can pick the key complaints on broadly defined themes, then attach similar applications to this leading case and then transfer all of them to the Committee of Ministers without giving separate judgments in each individual case. One of the drawbacks of this approach is that it will cement the questionable principle applied in Burmych as a modus operandi of the Court.

This model would highlight the key problematic areas and give some satisfaction to some victims. It would also be a less resource-consuming than the ‘business as usual’ model but this approach would not be able to solve other problems highlighted in the previous paragraph such as lack of Russian engagement and probably total short-term ineffectiveness of such judgments. It also creates a new challenge: the Court can be accused of a selection bias. The ECtHR will perhaps have to justify why some cases are selected while some others are not.

3. ‘Total freeze’

Total freeze is one of the quicker and more radical solutions available to the ECtHR. The Court can suspend the adjudication of all applications against Russia until the situation changes. The President of the ECtHR has already briefly suspended examination of Russian cases before this suspension was lifted by the Plenary of the Court. This means that suspension is a possible avenue for the Court. This suspension can take at least two forms – either a total freeze of all pending applications or a rejection of all clearly inadmissible applications and then freezing of all meritorious ones. Both of these solutions would save a lot of resources for the Court, it will remove the need for a ‘deemed to fail’ collaboration with Russia and will not require the Court to select the ‘lucky’ applications to deal with. However, no victim will get even moral satisfaction from the fact that the ECtHR found their rights violated but one can argue that this moral satisfaction is not enough for an operation of a judicial organisation. The ECtHR is not an archive that systematises the human rights violations in Russia. It is a judicial institution. The legitimacy of the Court depends on the effective implementation of its judgments and no implementation can be expected from the judgments against Russia.

4. ‘Strike out’

The clearest and the most radical solution would be striking out all the applications against Russia pending before the ECtHR. Pursuant to Article 37(1)c ECHR, the ECtHR can strike out any application for any reason if it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application. The Convention provides very wide discretion to the Court here. The ECtHR can decide that in the current situation the delivery of judgments will make no impact and therefore all of the applications should be excluded from the list of pending cases. However, this option is not very likely. It was just decided by the ECtHR that the Convention is applicable to Russia for 6 months after Russia ceased to be a member of the Council of Europe. This decision was not the only plausible interpretation of Article 58 ECHR that regulates the denunciation of the Convention. This would have been irrational if immediately after taking this decision, the Court disposed all applications, including of those which were submitted in relation to the violations that happened between 16 March and 16 September 2022. It is also unlikely that the Court would do it for political reasons – it can be seen as a complete denial of justice for a vast number of victims. So, this option is not plausible at least in the short run.

Conclusion

Neither ‘business as usual’ nor ‘strike out’ models are very plausible. It is more likely that the Court will chose some combination from the spectrum between the ‘pick and choose’ and ‘total freeze’ models. In making this decision, the Court will have to weigh the importance of symbolic judgments against Russia and the amount of resources and legitimacy that will be required to deliver these judgments. These resources might be needed in other areas and in relation to other situations.

https://www.echrblog.com/2022/08/the-range-of-solutions-to-russian-cases.html

and

https://www.echrblog.com/2022/09/russia-no-longer-party-to-echr-as-of.html

Posted in human rights, Human Rights Defenders | 1 Comment »
Tags: , , , , , ,

« Older posts
Newer posts »