Author: Communication Department

TRIAL, in collaboration with the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the International Federation of Action by Christians for the Abolition of Torture (FIACAT), ACAT-France and the Collective of Families of Disappeared Persons in Algeria (CFDA) submitted an alternative report on the implementation by France of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons against Enforced Disappearance to the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances.

On 11 and 12 April 2013 France will be the first State to be examined by the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances. This new Committee is responsible for monitoring the proper implementation of the provisions of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons against Enforced Disappearance.

On this occasion TRIAL, together with other four human rights NGOs, submitted the first alternative report to the Committee concerning France. This report highlights the weaknesses of the current legislation and practice by French authorities regarding the definition of the crime of enforced disappearance. The report also provides an analysis of the existing measures to prevent, investigate and punish this crime and to provide appropriate redress to victims.

The five organizations suggested specific and concrete recommendations in order for French authorities to adopt measures to guarantee the respect for their obligations under the Convention.

TRIAL will present this report to the Committee on Enforced Disappearances on April 9, 2013.

Context

As a global network of organizations of families of disappeared and NGOs, the International Coalition against Enforced Disappearances (ICAED) aims at putting an end to the practice of enforced disappearances at the local, national and international levels.

TRIAL is an ICAED member since 2008. The swiss NGO currently represents more than 300 victims of enforced disappearances within more than 100 individual procedures submitted to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances and the European Court of Human Rights.

Alkarama, the Collective of families of disappeared persons in Algeria (CFDA) and TRIAL keep up their efforts for victims of grave human rights violations in Algeria.

 

The United Nations Human Rights Committee will meet on Monday, March 25, 2013 in order to monitor the implementation of its decisions in cases of human rights violations. In preparation for this meeting, the three afore-mentioned organizations draws the attention of the Committee on Algeria by denouncing the complete lack of implementation of sixteen decisions issued by the Committee condemning the Algerian government. Speaking with one voice, the three organizations call for the adoption of stringent measures of follow-up to ensure that Algerian authorities finally initiate effective investigations into crimes of forced disappearance and summary execution committed during the “black decade” in order to shed light on what happened and identify, prosecute and punish the perpetrators. The victims and their families, who keep living in pain and looking for answers, must have access to an effective remedy and appropriate reparation without delay.

For Rachid Mesli, “the families of the disappeared have placed their trust in the Human Rights Committee when submitting the cases of serious human rights violations they had been victims of. They now expect that the Committee’s decisions, that recognize their suffering and establish the responsibility of the Algerian state, will be finally implemented effectively.”

Nassera Dutour notes that “families have been waiting twenty years for the return of their children and still face the silence of the authorities. The refusal of the Algerian government to implement the Committee’s decisions is even more painful as it tarnishes the memory of the victims. It is high time for the Algerian authorities to seriously deal with the suffering of the families of the disappeared and to take appropriate and concrete steps to uphold their rights.”

Philip Grant recalls that “the United Nations Human Rights Committee ruled in favor of the victims in these sixteen cases after a thorough and impartial review of their complaints. Algerian authorities must therefore comply with the Committee’s findings and uphold their international obligations urgently. Impunity for serious human rights violations must end, and victims and their families must be fully restored in their rights. They have suffered enough!”

Amnesty for Worst Crimes Violates International Law

(Kathmandu, March 22, 2013) – The inclusion of an amnesty provision, which could cover the worst possible crimes, in Nepal’s new Truth, Reconciliation and Disappearance Ordinance, will make it impossible for thousands of victims of gross human rights violations to obtain justice, a coalition of international human rights organizations said today.

The Asian Centre for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), and TRIAL pointed to fundamental flaws in Nepal’s new law, passed by President Ram Baran Yadav on March 14, 2013.

“The new ordinance leaves open the door to amnesties for persons implicated in gross human rights violations and crimes under international law,” said Ben Schonveld, ICJ’s South Asia director in Kathmandu. “Amnesties for serious rights violations are prohibited under international law and betray the victims, who would be denied justice in the name of political expediency.”

At least 13,000 people were killed and over 1,300 subjected to enforced disappearance in Nepal’s decade-long conflict between government forces and Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) combatants. The fighting ended with the signing of the 2006 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, consolidating a series of commitments to human rights.

“Nepal has had years to investigate some 1,300 suspected enforced disappearances during the conflict and thousands of other human rights violations, but it has failed to deliver any credible or effective investigations. The provisions on prosecution contained in this ordinance don’t appear to be strong enough to overcome Nepal’s entrenched practices of safeguarding impunity by withdrawing cases or failing to pursue credible allegations. It does not leave victims with much faith that the commission will fulfill its mandate to end impunity.” Philip Grant, TRIAL Director

However, the government has yet to take steps to ensure that those responsible for crimes under international law during the fighting are identified and prosecuted. International and local human rights groups have consistently decried the government’s efforts to side-step promises of justice and accountability, represented most recently by this new ordinance.

The revised ordinance calls for the formation of a high-level commission to investigate serious human rights violations committed during Nepal’s armed conflict from 1996 to 2006. It grants the commission discretion to recommend amnesty for a perpetrator if the grounds for that determination are deemed reasonable. The government then decides whether to grant an amnesty. There is no definition of what is reasonable.

Confusion over scope of amnesty provision

The ordinance states that “serious crimes,” including rape, cannot be recommended for an amnesty, but it does not define what other “serious crimes” are not subject to an amnesty. Gross violations of human rights, such as extrajudicial killing, torture and enforced disappearance, are not mentioned. Torture and enforced disappearance are not specific crimes under Nepali domestic criminal law.

The organizations expressed concern that the commission’s powers to recommend prosecution may mean little without crimes being adequately defined in law. The final decision on whether to prosecute can only be made by the attorney general, a political appointee of the government, instead of an independent entity. Human Rights Watch, ICJ and TRIAL have previously documented the systematic failures of the Nepali criminal law system to address serious human rights violations.

“Nepal has had years to investigate some 1,300 suspected enforced disappearances during the conflict and thousands of other human rights violations, but it has failed to deliver any credible or effective investigations,” said TRIAL Director Philip Grant in Geneva. “The provisions on prosecution contained in this ordinance don’t appear to be strong enough to overcome Nepal’s entrenched practices of safeguarding impunity by withdrawing cases or failing to pursue credible allegations. It does not leave victims with much faith that the commission will fulfill its mandate to end impunity.”

Call for review and consultation

The organizations called upon the government to establish a mechanism to review and amend the legislation in consultation with victims of human rights abuses and representatives of civil society.

“This ordinance was signed by the prime minister and president in record time without any consultation with conflict victims and civil society,” said Schonveld. “If the government had carried out proper consultations, the result would have been different, and we wouldn’t have an ordinance that entrenches impunity.”

The rights organizations also expressed concern about the ordinance’s heavy emphasis on reconciliation at the possible expense of justice for victims. The ordinance cedes authority to the commission to implement “inter-personal reconciliation” between victim and perpetrator, even if neither the victim nor the perpetrator requests it, which could result in pressure being placed on a victim to give up any claims against a perpetrator. Although the ordinance mentions the need for victim and witness protection, there are no specific safeguards to ensure the safety and security of victims who become involved in reconciliation processes.

Violation of international obligation for political expediency

Under international law, Nepal is obliged to take effective measures to protect human rights, including the right to life and freedom from torture and other ill-treatment. Where a violation occurs, Nepali authorities must investigate, institute criminal proceedings, and ensure victims are afforded access to effective remedy and reparations.

“The passage of this ordinance is just the latest example of the Nepali government’s cynical willingness to trade meaningful justice and accountability for political expediency,” said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The government is kidding itself if it thinks it can ignore the voices of Nepal’s thousands of victims of human rights abuses. Nepal needs meaningful government initiatives to address its human rights problems, not the veneer of justice that this flawed ordinance represents.”

The United Nations Human Rights Committee condemned Libya in a new case concerning serious human rights violations committed against Abdeladim Ali Mussa Benali. According to the decision issued by the Committee, the Libyan authorities are required to conduct a thorough investigation to shed light on the enforced disappearances as well as the torture he was subjected to while in detention. The Libyan authorities should free him immediately if he is still being detained, or return his remains to his family if he died in custody. Investigations should also be aimed at punishing the perpetrators of these crimes and granting appropriate compensation to the victim. TRIAL and Alkarama, the organisations representing the victim, call again on Libya to comply with the decision of the Human Rights Committee and to work towards the establishment of genuine rule of law in the country.

Abdeladim Ali Mussa Benali was first arrested on 9 August 1995 by members of the Libyan Internal Security Agency (ISA) and held in detention until 15 October 2002. During his first five years of detention he was deprived of any contact with the outside world and his family was never informed of his situation and whereabouts.

On 16 February 2005, Mr Benali was arrested a second time by ISA agents. This time, his relatives received no news about him until the beginning of 2006, when they were informed that he was being kept in Abu Slim prison, near Tripoli. They were allowed to visit him once a month until the autumn of that year. All visits were then suspended as a collective punishment for a riot which took place in the prison at the beginning of October 2006. The prison protests were met with brutal repression. To avoid a bigger massacre, Mr Benali used a hidden cell phone to acquaint external sources of the incident.

Mr Benali disappeared from the Abu Slim prison on 23 March 2007. His disappearance is probably a reprisal measure from the authorities in response to the role he took during the October 2006 events inside Abu Slim Prison During both detentions, Mr Benali was subjected on many occasions to various kinds of serious torture, years-long isolation periods in a sparse, unhealthy underground cell In almost 10 years of detention, Mr Benali was never charged with any offense and he was never brought before any judicial authority.

In its decision, the Human Rights Committee condemned Libya for multiple violations of the basic human rights contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Committee found that Abdeladim Ali Mussa Benali has twice been victim of enforced disappearance, unlawful arrest, torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. The Committee also noted that Libya subjected Abdeladim’s brother Mussa Ali Mussa Benali to ill-treatment through the severe mental distress and anguish he was forced to endure because the state refused to release any information about Abdeladim’s fate or his whereabouts for several years.

The Committee obliged Libya to immediately release Abdeladim Ali Mussa Benali, if he is still in detention, or to return his remains to his family if he died in custody. Likewise, Libya is requested to conduct a thorough and effective investigation into his disappearance and the torture he suffered in detention. The Committee also underlined Libya’s obligation to prosecute, try and punish those responsible for the abuses committed, to provide adequate compensation to the victims and to guarantee the non-repetition of those crimes in the future.

TRIAL and Alkarama welcome the recent decision hoping that it may lead to finally establishing the truth about the serious human rights violations committed during the past regime and piercing the veil of impunity that protects the perpetrators of these heinous acts.

This case represents the third case jointly submitted by TRIAL and Alkarama resulting in a final decision. In May 2012 and earlier in February 2013 the Human Rights Committee already condemned Libya for other two cases of multiple human rights violations, including torture and enforced disappearance.

Libya has a period of six months to inform the Committee of the actions taken to implement the Committee’s decision. Both organisations will follow the implementation of the decision by Libya closely to ensure that the victims’ rights and dignity are finally restored.

For more information:

The United Nations Human Rights Committee recently condemned Libya following serious human rights violations committed against one of its nationals. According to the decision issued by the Committee, the Libyan authorities are required to conduct a thorough and effective investigation to shed light on the enforced disappearances of Abdussalam Il Khwildy as well as the torture inflicted on him while in detention. Investigations should be carried out in view of to punishing the perpetrators of these crimes and granting appropriate compensation to the victim. TRIAL and Alkarama, the organisations representing the victim, call on Libya to comply with the decision of the Human Rights Committee and to work towards the establishment of genuine rule of law in the country.

Abdussalam Il Khwildy was arrested a first time in April 1998, together with his father and three brothers. After the rest of his family members were released, Abdussalam Il Khwildy was kept in secret detention for years without his family ever being informed about his fate and whereabouts. They later learned that he was ill-treated and regularly subjected to torture. He was eventually released in May 2003, without ever having been brought before a judge or a court.

He was again arbitrarily arrested on 17 October 2004, kept in detention and, sentenced to two years imprisonment by a special court on 7 August 2006 following a judicial procedure conducted in complete disregard of the most basic fair trial guarantees. On 19 October 2006, as Abdussalam was about to be freed, he disappeared within the prison system. Again, his parents were left without news about his fate and completely lost track of his whereabouts. The Libyan authorities denied his detention and refused to give any information other than that he had been released.

In May 2008, Abdussalam Il Khwildy was finally permitted to call his family and inform them that he was in Abou Slim Prison. The victim remained in detention until he was released on 22 August 2011 after the regime change in Libya.

In its decision, the Human Rights Committee condemned Libya for multiple violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, one of the most important UN human rights conventions. The Committee found that Abdussalam Il Khwildy has been twice victim of enforced disappearance, as well as torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. The Committee also noted that Libya subjected Abdussalam’s brother Khaled Il Khwildy to ill-treatment through the severe mental distress and anguish he was forced to endure because the state refused to release any information about Abdussalam’s fate or his whereabouts for years.

The Committee obliged Libya to conduct a thorough and effective investigation into the disappearance of Abdussalam Il Khwildy and on the torture he suffered in detention. The Committee also underlined Libya’s obligation to prosecute, try and punish those responsible for the abuses committed and to provide adequate compensation to the victims.

TRIAL (Track Impunity Always) and Alkarama, the organisations representing the victims before the Human Rights Committee, welcome the outcome of the procedure. TRIAL director, Philip Grant, stated: “Libya must now commit to the rule of law and swiftly implement the UN’s decision”. For Rachid Mesli, director of the legal department at Alkarama, “It is high time Libya faced its past and rejected impunity for such crimes”.

Libya has a period of six months to inform the Committee of the actions taken to implement the Committee’s decision. Both organisations will closely follow the implementation of the decision to ensure that the victims’ rights and dignity are finally restored.

For more information:

Geneva / Sarajevo, 7 February 2013

For ten years now, TRIAL (Swiss association against impunity) has been fighting against the impunity of perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Towards that goal, TRIAL undertakes various activities, including the submission of cases to the authorities of countries which can exercise “universal jurisdiction” to investigate and prosecute suspected war criminals residing on their territory. To date, numerous countries, including Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland, the UK and the Scandinavian countries have successfully investigated, judged and sentenced offenders who sought to escape justice by fleeing their home countries.

In accordance with its role in helping victims obtain justice, promoting the importance of fair trials and the rule of law and its belief in the equality of all victims, regardless of their ethnicity of nationality, TRIAL has started a project in the Balkan region aimed at gathering information on suspected perpetrators who have moved to other countries where they are currently enjoying impunity. TRIAL will strive to collect and analyze information from victims, victims associations, witnesses and other reliable sources and develop dossiers regarding suspected perpetrators, with a view to submitting them to the competent authorities for further investigation and prosecutions.

RTEmagicC_war_crimes_balkan_01.png

On 23 January 2013, the Global Journal issued its second annual ranking of the Top 100 NGOs worldwide. TRIAL confirms its presence in the ranking and strengthens its position in comparison to 2012.

The Global Journal is an independent media outlet based in Geneva and New York and dedicated to global governance and international politics. For the second consecutive year it releases the only international ranking of NGOs assigning them a position on the basis of their impact, innovation and sustainability.

Already last year TRIAL ranked among the world’s top 100 NGOs. In the 2013 edition, TRIAL not only confirms its presence among the world best NGOs, it also gained 10 places, reaching 83rd place.

According to the ranking, TRIAL stands fourth among the NGOs working in the “law and justice” sector worldwide.

This award represents a recognition of TRIAL’s thorough and innovative approach to international justice and the fight against impunity and the positive impact of TRIAL’s activities in helping victims of international crimes obtain justice and redress.

One example is TRIAL’s litigation capacities. Overall, the organization has defended more than 300 victims of grave human rights violations, initiated over 125 procedures at the international level, lodged a dozen criminal complaints before Swiss authorities and is increasingly offering legal support to victims in conflict countries.

From Algeria to Nepal, from Bosnia-Herzegovina to Burundi, and from Guatemala to Switzerland, in 2012 TRIAL has been more active than ever in submitting cases and reports to national and international courts and human rights bodies, obtaining positive rulings and decisions, and gaining media and political attention.

But 2013 has even more in store: new possibilities to defend victims’ rights and to ensure justice and accountability will be taken up. TRIAL will improve its investigative capacities to be able to handle more universal jurisdiction. New criminal complaints are about to be filed and a growing number of cases are being investigated, including several cases concerning corporations.

These activities would not be possible without the support of TRIAL’s donors, members and supporters. Supporting TRIAL means engaging with a high-impact and innovative organization fighting for justice and against impunity.

So a warm thank you from the whole TRIAL team!

  • Click here to have more information on the TOP 100 NGOs ranking

RTEmagicC_TRIAL83.png

On 18 January 2013, the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) and The REDRESS Trust (REDRESS) submitted an amicus curiae brief to the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Mujkanović et al. v. Bosnia Herzegovina lodged by TRIAL.

The case concerns 11 applications submitted by TRIAL to the Court between September 2008 and December 2010 regarding the disappearance of individuals during the 1992-1995 war in the former Yugoslavia.

The applicants complain, on behalf of their missing relatives, that Bosnia and Herzegovina has failed to fulfil its procedural obligation to investigate their enforced disappearance, torture and death. Among other things, they further submit that the authorities have, for many years, refused to engage, acknowledge or assist in their efforts to find out what happened to their loved ones, and that this amounts to a violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the prohibition of torture and ill-treatment.

The applicants also allege violations of Articles 6, 8, 13 and 14 of the Convention.

OMCT and REDRESS intervened in this case in order to address the following legal issues:

(a) The nature of the link between enforced disappearance and the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment; and

(b) The relationship between the continuing nature of enforced disappearance and the content of effective remedy and reparation for relatives of those who have been disappeared.

For further information:

  • Read the amicus curiae brief
  • Read the facts of the case as stated by the ECHR
  • Take a look at TRIAL’s applications in this case

The United Nations Human Rights Committee just recently condemned Algeria in yet again another case of enforced disappearance. In August 1996, Mr. Bouzid Mezine, a 32-years old taxi driver, was forcibly disappeared in the context of a police operation in his neighborhood. He has not been seen since. The case is the sixth that TRIAL has won against Algeria.

For over a decade Mr. Mezine’s relatives have turned to all the competent authorities in order to shed light on his fate but with no success. A former detainee of the military prison of Blida reportedly saw him two months after the arrest. But despite the family’s persistent attempts, Algerian authorities have failed to give any information about Mr. Mezine’s fate, no effective investigation has been opened and no one has ever been prosecuted for his enforced disappearance.

1-Photo_mezine_bouzid_04The arrest and disappearance of Mr. Mezine occurred within the general context of the enforced disappearance of thousands of Algerian citizens at the hands of the army or the State security forces during Algerian civil war from 1992 to 2002.

Since the promulgation of the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation in February 2006, the victim’s family is faced with a legal barrier to bringing its case to justice since, pursuant to that law, any case related to the civil war period is declared inadmissible by the Algerian judicial system.

In its decision, the Human Rights Committee holds that, because of the disappearance of Bouzid Mezine, Algeria breached several provisions of theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the right to life and the right to be free from torture and other forms of ill-treatment. In doing so, Algeria also inflicted upon the family members of the disappeared person an inadmissible treatment through the severe mental distress and anguish they had to go through.

The Committee now requests Algeria “to conduct a deep and rigorous investigation into the disappearance of Mr. Bouzid Mezine”. Algeria is also requested to “provide the authors with detailed information concerning the results of its investigation”, “to free the victim immediately if he is still being secretly detained” or, “if he is deceased, to return his mortal remains to his family”. Moreover, the Committee insists on Algeria’s obligation to “indict, try and punish those responsible for the violations committed” and to pay an appropriate compensation to the family of the victim for the violations committed.

Algeria is further requested to guarantee the effectiveness of the domestic justice system, especially with respect to victims of torture, extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearance and to take steps to avoid the recurrence of similar violations.

TRIAL welcomes the Committee’s recent decision hoping that it may lead to finally establish the truth about the grave human rights violations committed during the internal conflict in Algeria and pierce the veil of impunity that cloaks the perpetrators of these heinous acts.

According to Philip Grant, Director of the organisation, “because impunity has been erected as a cornerstone of Algeria’s policies in the last decade, victims of atrocities committed during the civil war have no other option than to resort to international mechanisms or to seek justice abroad. Again and again, legal bodies and courts condemn Algeria for its complete lack of compliance with international law. It is now time that Algerian authorities comply with the rule of law, undertake effective investigations on these human rights violations in order to finally disclose the truth about these tragedies, try and sanction those responsible for the crimes and grant proper redress to the victims. Impunity for these crimes cannot be the rule any more in Algeria”.

Context

This cases represents the sixth case submitted by TRIAL resulting in a final decision. In 2011 and 2012 the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture had already condemned Algeria for, respectively, four cases of enforced disappearances cases and one of death under torture. Thirteen other cases brought by TRIAL are currently pending before the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture concerning Algeria.

In total, TRIAL has submitted more than 130 cases before different international bodies (European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights Committee, Committee against Torture) related to instances of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial executions and torture in Algeria, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Burundi, Libya and Nepal.

For further information

TRIAL (Swiss Association against Impunity) welcomes the arrest of Nepalese Colonel Kumar Lama in the United Kingdom on suspicion of torture. Following the condemnation of the arrest by senior figures in the Nepalese government, the organisation calls on Nepal to show solidarity with victims of the conflict and fully cooperate with the UK investigation of Col. Lama.

TRIAL noted that Article 9 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (to which Nepal is a party since 14 May 1991), establishes that States Parties shall afford one another the greatest measure of assistance in connection with criminal proceedings brought in respect of alleged perpetrators of torture, including the supply of all evidence at their disposal necessary for the proceedings.

In recent days, senior members of the government of Nepal deemed the UK’s arrest of the accused colonel an attack on the nation’s sovereignty and demanded his immediate release, disregarding its own obligation to cooperate with the UK and the international legal obligations on all States to prosecute or extradite suspected torturers.

“The arrest of Col. Lama in the UK is fully in line with international law and is the natural consequence of the government of Nepal’s failure -more than six years after the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement- to investigate and bring to trial those responsible for committing serious human rights violations during the conflict” said Philip Grant.

In its outcry over the arrest, Nepalese officials also alluded to the fact that the country is undergoing a transitional period during which bills are being discussed to create mechanisms that address past incidents of human rights violations.

In November 2012, the United Nations Human Rights Committee established that“there is no certainty that the bills on this matter will be passed as laws and if yes, when they will be passed as laws and the consequences for the victims”. At the beginning of January 2013 the UN Human Rights High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed deep concern for the Ordinance on Investigation of Disappeared People, which would empower a planned Truth and Reconciliation Commission to grant amnesties to perpetrators of crimes and gross violations committed during the conflict. High Commissioner Navy Pillay stated that this would be contrary to international law. It is thus clear that transitional justice mechanisms in Nepal that can be considered in line with international standards unfortunately will not be established soon. “Before such transitional justice mechanisms are fully functional, additional years of State idleness will have passed. Justice already too long delayed will be irrevocably denied to thousands of victims of Nepal’s conflict,” added Grant.

The large number of communications against Nepal pending before the UN Human Rights Committee concerning violations committed during the conflict, as well as numerous reports by national and international organisations highlighting the entrenched impunity in the country are a sad indication that there is little prospect of success of an investigation and prosecution of perpetrators in the country’s domestic criminal justice system.

The first cases ever brought against Burundi to the UN Committee against Torture were recently submitted by TRIAL. Already seven victims of torture and arbitrary detention have, with the support of TRIAL, handed their case to the UN to seek justice. In Burundi, TRIAL also works to strengthen the civil society capacities by organising training courses for lawyers and NGO representatives.

Despite the end of the civil war in Burundi, serious violations of human rights such as torture and extrajudicial executions are still regularly documented in the country and access to justice remains difficult for victims. The persistent impunity observed for the most serious crimes is a sign that the judicial system in Burundi needs to be strengthened.

The voice of the victims: “For hours, they beat me violently over my entire body with different objects. The pipes with which they beat my lower back seem to cut in half my body covered in blood. I seised the Committee against Torture in the hope of getting justice. I also want to be the spokesperson of the other victims of torture to end this scourge and to fight against impunity”.Concerning the legal trainingprovided by TRIAL, a local attorney voices his position: “The training provided by TRIAL to Burundian lawyers and human rights defenders is a rare opportunity to be informed, trained, and take concretely part in the fight against torture. After this valuable training, I am convinced that TRIAL contributes effectively to building the national capacities that are necessary to provide Burundi with a new momentum in the fight against human rights violations in general and torture in particular”.

At the request of a Burundian NGO, in 2011 TRIAL launched a project in this country in order to enable victims of torture and other crimes to assert their rights and obtain redress for their suffering. To this aim, TRIAL offers free legal support to victims of human rights violations, whose cases haven’t been handled in an effective manner by national courts, by submitting complaints on their behalf to the UN Committee against Torture (CAT), the Working Group of the United Nations on Arbitrary Detention (WGAD) and other international mechanisms for human rights protection. Within the framework of this project, TRIAL is currently representing seven victims before those institutions, six victims of torture before the CAT and one victim of arbitrary detention before the WGAD. With the support of TRIAL, other victims will shortly file their complaints to obtain justice before these bodies.

Moreover, TRIAL works for the strengthening of the capacity of Burundian civil society, lawyers and NGOs by organising legal trainings on international human rights law and the submission of complaints before international mechanisms for the protection of human rights.

In doing so, TRIAL’s project aims at reinforcing the rule of law in Burundi and in particular its judicial system by identifying shortcomings and by working towards an effective respect of international human rights law by Burundi. As part of the review of the situation in Burundi by international human rights mechanisms, such as the Human Rights Council, TRIAL submits concrete recommendations aiming in particular at strengthening the judicial system and improving the legal and institutional framework necessary for the fight against impunity.

For more informations in the media:

TRIAL participated in two experts’ seminars on sexual violence in armed conflict in Priština and Gjakova on 5 and 6 December 2012 organized by the UN Women Project Office in Kosovo.

 

The purpose of the seminars was to take stock of the situation of sexual violence in Kosovo and to share experience from Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) with the aim of inspiring further action in Kosovo to improve the status and situation of survivors of conflict-related sexual violence and torture.

The event hosted representatives of the BiH local judiciary, victims groups and NGOs providing psychological support to survivors. Human rights activists and experts from BiH, including TRIAL Human Rights Coordinator Lejla Mamut, held presentations on the right of survivors to a remedy and reparation in accordance with international law and the corresponding State obligations.

“These events demonstrated the willingness, competence and dedication of human rights organizations, international agencies and State institutions in Kosovo to address the numerous difficulties related to the situation of survivors of war-time sexual violence. I am positive that, with this kind of attitude and determination, Kosovo will be able to resolve a number of issues in a short period of time. As a representative of TRIAL, together with my colleagues from other BiH institutions and NGOs, we shared our experience and the lessons learned in BiH in addressing some of the main issues of concern such as impunity, the lack of adequate social and economic rights and psychological and medical support for survivors.”

A report summarising the main findings of the seminars will soon be drafted and there will be further communication and cooperation between TRIAL and different stakeholders in Kosovo in order to share best practices and ensure assistance to survivors of sexual violence in Kosovo.

On 4 December 2012 TRIAL Human Rights Coordinator participated as one of the speakers, along with a member of Kosovo Parliament and a representative of the Kosova Rehabilitation Center for Torture Victims, in an open dialogue organized in a coffee place “Dit e Nat” in Priština.

The event focused on the topic of conflict-related sexual violence and the issue of the lack of recognition of survivors of war-time sexual violence in Kosovo as a special category of civilian victims of war and therefore the discrimination they are subjected to in the access to State social benefits and other kind of support.

The International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP), “Amnesty International” and “TRIAL – Track Impunity Always”, published a set of joint recommendations calling on the Government of Iraq to take decisive steps to tackle and end the practice of enforced disappearance in Iraq.

The recommendations are the direct outcome of a conference, ‘No Impunity for Enforced Disappearances’ held by the ICMP in cooperation with the Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights in Baghdad, 16 and 17 September 2012 (link to press release).

With the accession to the Convention for the Protection of All Persons against Enforced Disappearance in 2010, the Government of Iraq is committed to tackle and combat the crime of enforced disappearance. The recommendations may serve as a basis for the relevant government agencies to enhance access to justice, truth and full reparation for victims of enforced disappearance. The document also aims to encourage international agencies to offer support to the Government of Iraq in its efforts to apply the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance in domestic legislation.

The recommendations will be distributed to media and among relevant Iraqi agencies, International Embassies in Iraq and international human rights organizations.

For further information:

In December 2012, TRIAL prepared a document containing recommendations in light of the upcoming exam of the human rights situation in Burundi by the Human Rights Council  in January 2013 in the framework of the Universal Periodic Review.

One of the main human rights bodies of the United Nations has just ruled that the transitional justice mechanisms envisaged by the Government of Nepal do not meet international human rights standards, as they do not offer sufficient guarantees to victims of the civil war to realise their rights to justice and truth.

 

 

On 12 October 2012 the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC) adopted its views on the admissibility of a case of an enforced disappearance submitted by TRIAL on 27 October 2010. In its decision on admissibility in the case of Yuba Kumani Katwal v. Nepal, made public this week, the HRC rejected the arguments brought forward by the Government of Nepal, hoping that the case be declared inadmissible. The HRC will thus continue examining the merits of the case, pending the Government’s comments due within the next six months.

In October 2010, TRIAL (Swiss Association against Impunity) submitted a communication to the HRC on the enforced disappearance of Mr. Katwal, which occurred in 2001. Representing Mrs. Katwal, the victim’s wife, who since the enforced disappearance has not ceased to try to establish the truth on her husband’s fate and whereabouts and to obtain justice, TRIAL argued that Nepal was violating, among others, Mr. Katwal’s right to life, the prohibition of torture and cruel and inhuman treatment, the right to liberty and security of person, the right to recognition as a person before the law, and the right to an effective remedy. TRIAL also argued that Mrs. Katwal had been the victim of a violation of the right to be treated humanely insofar as she was also arrested, harassed and abused by the Nepalese army in an effort to silence her; due to the anguish suffered as a consequence of the enforced disappearance of her husband as well as for the failure of the Government to establish the truth on her husband, guarantee justice and provide for adequate compensation.

The Government of Nepal requested that the case be declared inadmissible by the HRC arguing, among others, that cases of human rights violations occurred during the conflict will be investigated by transitional justice mechanisms that are currently under consideration by the State, namely a Truth and Reconciliation Commission and an Enforced Disappearance Commission. The Government also argued that a criminal investigation on Mr. Katwal’s disappearance was ongoing.

According to TRIAL, “the HRC brings down a central argument of the Government of Nepal, repeatedly made to victims of human rights violations committed during the conflict, that they must wait and see. This decision clearly shows that Nepal is not heading in the right direction and must quickly implement a policy aimed at providing truth and justice to the numerous victims of grave human rights violations”.

The HRC however accepted TRIAL’s counter-arguments affirming that there is no certainty as to when the proposed transitional justice mechanisms will be approved and what competences they may have and what the consequences would be for the victims and their relatives. Moreover, the HRC recognized that, even if created, such mechanisms would be non-judicial and, as such, would not be considered as an “effective remedy” that applicants have to exhaust before bringing a case before the HRC. It also declared that in the specific circumstances, Nepal failed to demonstrate that it was indeed carrying out a criminal investigation on the alleged crimes committed against Mr. Katwal. Most importantly, the HRC declared that the fact that the very concrete first steps on Mr. Katwal’s enforced disappearance were undertaken only in 2007 and that to date, eleven years after the events, the investigation is still ongoing constitutes an “unreasonably prolonged delay”.

The findings of the HRC on the nature of the potential transitional justice mechanisms is of utmost importance and show that, even if put in place, these would not be considered as offering enough guarantees to realise the rights to justice and truth of victims. Unless Nepal intends to continue breaching its international obligations, it must ensure that its authorities undertake the necessary measures to investigate without delay the violations committed during the conflict, identify those responsible, judge them before the competent ordinary courts and, where appropriate, sanction them taking into account the gravity of the crimes committed. Anything different from this would be considered as a perpetuation of the overall state of impunity and, as such, a flagrant breach of Nepal’s international obligations.

The decision also paves the way for potential new cases to be brought before the HRC.

 

For further information:

Tunis, 26 November 2012

ACAT-France and TRIAL have just organized a training in Tunis for 25 Tunisian lawyers, lasting from 22 to 24 November. The training was aimed at supporting local lawyers handling torture cases, by helping them to resort more efficiently to international law and mechanisms.

Both organisations are committed to continue working with Tunisian lawyers in their struggle against impunity for perpetrators of acts of torture. The recent revolution has not put an end to this heinous practice and deaths at the hand of security forces are still being reported. It is an imperative that that torturers be brought to justice.

The press release has not been translated into English. Please read the French version of this page for more information.

A conference was held in Wilton Park, Sussex from 12 to 14 November 2012 under the organization of the United Kingdom (UK) Foreign and Commonwealth Office in order to lay the groundwork, shape and develop the activities of the newly established UK initiative to fight against rape and sexual violence in conflict.

The conference hosted around 60 participants coming from 23 countries and representing a considerable number of different stakeholders such as UN agencies and international organizations, national politicians, independent experts, civil society organizations, prosecutors, judges and medical personnel working with survivors. Among the present were five representatives from Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), including TRIAL’s Human Rights Coordinator, Lejla Mamut and the Directress ofMedica Zenica, Sabiha Husić.

The conference addressed a number of topics related to sexual violence during armed conflicts, such as early warning indicators; international standards for effective investigations and prosecutions of cases on sexual violence; international efforts in combating and preventing rape during armed conflict; best practices in dealing with survivors of sexual violence and the importance of raising awareness about this crime. During the conference, the Directress of Medica Zenica intervened on the organisation’s best practices in providing services, protection and support for witnesses and victims of sexual violence with the aim of ensuring successful investigation and prosecution of sexual violence in conflict. Sabiha Husić also gave an interview for a video which has been published on the Wilton Park website to help raise public awareness on the situation of survivors in BiH.

The representatives from BiH at Wilton Park gave a number of interventions during the different sessions and working groups of the conference raising the main issues related to the situation of survivors in Bosnia and Herzegovina. On the final day of the conference, an informal meetingwith United Nations Goodwill Ambassador Angeline Jolie gave TRIAL and Medica Zenica a further opportunity to highlight the necessity to support victims of sexual violence in BiH and to suggest ways in which the UK initiative might represent an effective tool in addressing some of these most pressing issues. A similar message was forwarded to the UK Foreign Secretary William Hague during the last session of the conference.

At the end of the conference the Secretary announced that BiH is one of the priority countries for the intervention of the Experts Team, whose members will be visiting the country in early 2013. TRIAL, as well as other BIH civil society organizations, remains committed to further explore with the members of the Team the possibility for any project or intervention that could bring about an improvement in the situation of survivors of war-time rape and sexual violence in BiH.

British Ambassador Nigel Casey thanked all the participants from Bosnia and Herzegovina for making such a strong contribution to the success of the Wilton Park Conference. ‘Following on from the Foreign Secretary’s meeting with victims’ organisations in Sarajevo last month, I’m delighted that Bosnia and Herzegovina was so well represented at this event, and that the experience gained from tackling this issue here has already helped to shape the way the UK Government will take forward this global initiative. I’m also very pleased that Bosnia and Herzegovina will be one of the first countries to be visited early next year by the newly-created UK Experts Team. This will be an opportunity to look further at how we can help support the efforts of those working hard to tackle both the appalling legacy of wartime sexual violence, and the ongoing problem of violence against women in BiH.’

Between 28 October and 5 November 2012 Ms. Rashida Manjoo, the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences, conducted for the first time in the history of the mandate an official country mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH).

 

The visit was prompted by a general allegation submitted in May 2011 by TRIAL (Swiss Association against Impunity) and 12 organizations from BiH dealing with the subject of rape or other forms of sexual violence during the war.1 The general allegation aimed at providing an analysis of the existing obstacles to the full implementation of BiH’s international obligations vis-à-vis victims of rape during the war, in particular: the inadequacy of existing criminal legislation dealing with rape; the high rate of impunity for perpetrators of rape or other forms of sexual violence during the war; the lack of adequate protection of witnesses and victims of these crimes as well as the failure to provide victims with integral reparation and prompt, fair and adequate compensation for the harm suffered.The associations subscribing to the general allegation expressly called on the Special Rapporteur to conduct a country visit to BiH to gather first hand information on the situation of women victims of rape during the war and to issue a set of comprehensive recommendations.

On 30 October 2012, Ms. Manjoo held a meeting with civil society in order to discuss the situation of women victims of sexual violence during the war. TRIAL attended the meeting, together with associations representing women from all the ethnic groups present in BiH, and highlighted the main issues contained in its general allegation.

At the end of the visit, Ms. Manjoo issued a press release containing some preliminary findings. With regard to women victims of sexual violence during the war, she declared that recent initiatives taken by national authorities could constitute a positive step forward but were nonetheless hampered by the high levels of fragmentation in legislative standards and the lack of coherence among implementing authorities that determines a concrete lack of redress for these women.

The Special Rapporteur affirmed that “it was crucial for government authorities at all levels to recognize the existence of civilian women victims of rape and torture, regardless of their ethnic or religious backgrounds, and to ensure that they have equal access to remedies and services, regardless of their physical location within the country”. She also encouraged BiH authorities to ensure that the specific forms of sexual violence and their high prevalence rates experienced by women are adequately taken into consideration when implementing any initiative to provide justice and effective remedies to victims. Ms. Manjoo reiterated that it was crucial that BiH recognizes the experiences that women faced during the war and their entitlement to justice, reparations, information and assistance on the issue of missing persons and victims of enforced disappearance.

The Special Rapporteur further noted that, while compensation and redress have not yet been guaranteed to women victims of sexual violence during the war, even access to forms of social protection remains severely limited by the lack of a homogenous social welfare system that guarantees equal access to resources and services throughout the country.

The Special Rapporteur highlighted that a prominent fear shared by many women survivors of war-time rape and torture that she met during her mission is the fact that time continues to pass by with no justice being served. In this sense, she indicated that “it was crucial to speed up efforts and achieve political solutions at State level”.

Finally, Ms. Manjoo recommended to BiH to promptly finalize the adoption of the Transitional Justice Strategy – stressing that it shall ensure the public acknowledgement and memorialization of women victims, their access to compensation, including non-material damages, and their empowerment – and of the Law on the Rights of Victims of Torture and Civilian Victims of War.

TRIAL will be actively engaged in the dissemination in BiH of the preliminary findings of the Special Rapporteur and will remain in direct contact with Ms. Manjoo to update her on all relevant developments in view of the release of the integral version of the report on the mission, which will be presented to the United Nations Human Rights Council in June 2013.

Overall Context

It is estimated that between 20,000 and 50,000 women were subjected to rape or other forms of sexual violence during the 1992-1995 war. In this context, rape was used as a means of implementing the strategy of ethnic cleansing and to increase inter-ethnic hatred. As of today, less than 100 people have been convicted for these crimes by national courts and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Impunity remains rampant. The existing legal framework in BiH does not allow victims of rape or other forms of sexual violence to obtain integral reparation and compensation for the harm suffered.

For more information:

  • See the integral version of the general allegation
  • See the executive summary of the general allegation
  • See the press release issued by the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women at the end of the visit
  • See the website of the Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women

The Human Rights Committee (HRC) adopted its concluding observations on the second periodic report on the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). Despite some progresses, numerous remain the measures to be undertaken, in particular with regard to relatives of missing persons, former camp-detainees and victims of rape or other forms of sexual violence during the conflict.

In September 2012 TRIAL (Swiss Association against Impunity), together with six associations of relatives of missing persons,1 four associations dealing with the subject of rape or other forms of sexual violence during the war,2 and seven associations or federations of associations of former camp-detainees3 submitted to the HRC an alternative report for the consideration of BiH’s second periodic report, highlighting the violations of the fundamental rights suffered by the above-mentioned categories of persons.

On 22 October 2012 TRIAL participated in a private meeting in Geneva with the HRC, together with delegations of other Bosnian and international NGOs, raising issues related to the ongoing failure to effectively investigate, judge and sanction those responsible for enforced disappearance, torture and rape during the conflict, the non implementation of the Law on Missing Persons, the systematic lack of enforcement of decisions issued by the Constitutional Court of BiH and the limitations to the freedom of expression and the right of peaceful assembly recently experienced by associations in the Prijedor area.

On 22 and 23 October 2012 the HRC examined the report submitted by BiH and the replies provided to the previously adopted “list of issues” with a delegation of the BiH government. During the session, the HRC raised the issues pointed out by TRIAL and sought explanations and clarifications from the State.

On 2 November 2012 the HRC released an advance version of its concluding observations expressing its concern at the slow pace of prosecutions of war crimes, particularly those relating to sexual violence, as well as lack of support to victims of such crimes and to witnesses at war crimes trials. The application of the criminal code of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia instead of the 2003 criminal code to try those accused of crimes committed during the war was also considered to be worrisome as it might affect consistency in the sentencing among entities, eventually resulting in undue discrimination. The HRC further raised its concerns about the fact that the Strategy on Transitional Justice and the law on the rights of victims of torture have not yet been adopted and that disability benefits received by civilian victims of war are significantly lower than those received by war veterans. Moreover, the fact that relatives of missing persons must declare their loved ones dead in order to accede and maintain a monthly disability pension was deemed not to be in line with international standards.

In light of the above, the HRC recommended BiH to, among others, expedite the prosecution of war crimes cases; ensure effective protection and psychological support for victims and witnesses during war crimes trials and promptly investigate cases of suspected intimidation or threats; take concrete measures to ensure that survivors of sexual violence and torture have access to justice and reparation and to harmonize disability benefits among entities and cantons and among civilians and veterans; expedite the investigation of all unresolved cases involving missing persons and ensure that the Missing Persons Institute is adequately funded and able to fully implement its mandate. Moreover, the HRC recommended that the freedoms of expression and assembly are fully guaranteed and called on authorities to investigate on the legality of prohibitions to conduct commemorations related to the war, in particular in the Prijedor area.

On 2 November 2013 BiH will have to submit a follow-up report on the measures adopted to implement the recommendations issued by the HRC. The conclusions and recommendations by the HRC represent a road-map for BiH authorities and shall be enforced without delay. TRIAL will actively engage in the dissemination of the contents of the concluding observations and will monitor the implementation of its recommendations, advocating with competent domestic authorities for a prompt enforcement.

For more information

  • See the report submitted by TRIAL in December 2011 in view of the adoption of the list of issues by the HRC
  • See the executive summary of the report submitted by TRIAL in December 2011 in view of the adoption of the list of issues by the HRC
  • See the alternative report submitted by TRIAL in September 2012
  • See the executive summary of the alternative report submitted by TRIAL in September 2012
  • See the press release issued at the end of the examination of BiH’s second periodic report before the HRC
  • See also TRIAL’s website in the local language: trialinternational.org/BiH

1Association of Families of Killed and Missing Defenders of the Homeland War from Bugojno Municipality, Association of Relatives of Missing Persons from Ilijaš Municipality, Association of Relatives of Missing Persons from Kalinovik- Istina-Kalinovik ’92, Association of Relatives of Missing Persons of the Sarajevo-Romanija Region; Association of Relatives of Missing Persons of the Vogošća Municipality; and Association Women from Prijedor – Izvor.

2Association of Women-Victims of War, Sumejja Gerc, Vive Žene Tuzla, and Women’s Section of the Association of Concentration Camp Torture Survivors Canton Sarajevo.

3Association of the Concentration Camp-Detainees Bosnia and Herzegovina, Association of Detained – Association of Camp Detainees of Brčko District Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatian Association of War Prisoners of the Homeland War in Canton of Central Bosnia, Croatian Association of Camp-Detainees from the Homeland War in Vareš, Prijedor 92, Regional Association of Concentration Camp-Detainees Višegrad, and Union of Concentration Camp-Detainees of Sarajevo-Romanija Region.

On 31 October and 1 November 2012, the United Nations Committee against Torture (CAT) examined and discussed the report submitted by Mexico with a delegation of the Mexican government. TRIAL participated in a private meeting with the CAT prior to its open session with the Mexican delegation in order to raise issues related to the violations by Mexico of its international obligations under the Convention against Torture.

In May 2012, TRIAL (Swiss Association against Impunity) together with nine local associations dealing with the subject of enforced disappearance in Mexico[1], submitted to the CAT an alternative report for the consideration of Mexico’s 5th and 6th periodic reports, highlighting the existing obstacles in the implementation of the Convention against Torture by Mexico, including: the failure to codify enforced disappearance as an autonomous offence in line with international standards both at the federal and the state levels and to adopt a General Law on Enforced Disappearance; the failure to adopt adequate and effective preventive measures; the lack of an adequate legal framework on universal jurisdiction; the ongoing impunity for the perpetrators of enforced disappearance; the failure to protect relatives of disappeared people, their associations and witnesses from threats and harassment; and the failure to provide compensation and integral reparation to victims of enforced disappearance and their families.

On 30 October 2012, TRIAL participated in a private meeting in Geneva with the CAT, together with delegations of Mexican and international NGOs. At this occasion TRIAL raised issues related to the above-mentioned ongoing violations by Mexico of its international obligations, stressing that enforced disappearance is a form of torture and relatives of disappeared people are subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment because of the length of time over which their ordeal is dragged out by State authorities and because of the attitude of official indifference in the face of their acute anxiety to know the fate and whereabouts of their loved ones.

On 31 October and 1 November 2012, the CAT examined the report submitted by Mexico with a delegation of the government. During the session, the CAT raised a number of issues, including those previously pointed out by TRIAL, and it sought explanations and clarifications from the State.

At the end of the month, the CAT will publish its concluding observations and recommendations which will represent a road-map for Mexican authorities in order to take further steps to effectively comply with their international obligations under the Convention against Torture.

For more information

See the alternative report submitted by TRIAL in May 2012 to the CAT [in Spanish]

See the executive summary of the alternative report submitted by TRIAL in May 2012 to the CAT

1I(dh)eas – Litigio Estratégico en Derechos Humanos; Foro Nacional para las Migraciones en Honduras – FONAMIH; Fundación para la Justicia y el Estado Democrático de Derecho; Centro Diocesano de Derechos Humanos Fray Juan de Larios, A.C.; Fuerzas Unidas por Nuestros Desaparecidos(as) en Coahuila – FUUNDEC; Comité de Familiares de Migrantes Fallecidos y Desaparecidos – El Salvador – COFAMIDE; and Asociación de Familiares de Detenidos Desaparecidos y Víctimas de Violaciones de Derechos Humanos en México – AFADEM.