Author: Communication Department

Geneva 5 July 2011

The United Nations Committee against Torture has condemned Algeria for the death under torture of Mr. Djilali Hanafi, a 32 year old shopkeeper and father of two children who was arrested on 1 November 1998 in Mechra Sfa. Mr. Hanafi had been released on 3 November, only to die a few hours later at his home as a result of the torture inflicted upon him at the gendarmerie headquarters in Mecchra Sfa. This condemnation is the first ever to be handed down by the Committee against Torture concerning Algeria.

For years the relatives of the victim have tried to obtain justice. However no enquiry whatsoever was ever opened up, since the authorities asserted that the victim had died of natural causes. In April 2008, TRIAL brought the case before the Committee against Torture, the UN body in charge of overseeing the respect of the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, ratified by Algeria in 1989

In its June 2011 decision, which has just been made public, the Committee decided that the facts did indeed “constitute torture” under the terms of the Convention, and that the demise of the victim was the direct outcome of such torture. According to this UN agency, “during the whole time the victim was detained and despite corroborative evidence from witnesses indicating that he had been tortured, at no time did the authorities institute proceedings nor did they order a doctor to check the state of his health despite the fact that his fellow prisoners had alerted the guards that the victim was in a critical state. Furthermore, despite the fact that the death certificate made mention of ‘death under suspicious circumstances’ at no time did the public prosecutor take up the case”.

Only within the context of the procedure brought before the Committee did the family at last have access to the autopsy report carried out just before the victim was buried. The report concluded that the victim had died as a result of heart failure. TRIAL however submitted this report to several legal medical experts who for their part noted its incomplete and dubious nature, which could not allow a conclusion on the real cause of his death.

Contrary to the terms of the Convention against Torture, none of the torturers has been put on trial or punished. The Committee considered in this respect that “no impartial and serious criminal inquiry whatsoever was ever instituted in order to shed light on the death of the plaintiff’s husband despite the passing of 12 years since the events occurred, a fact not contested by the State party. The absence of any enquiry is even more inexplicable given that the death certificate issued in April 2006 made reference to the suspicious circumstances surrounding the death of the victim”!

The UN organ therefore concluded that Algeria was in violation of articles 1, 2 paragraphs 1, 11 12, 13 and 14 of the Convention against Torture. Moreover, the Committee denounced as “inacceptable”, and incompatible with the Convention, the practice of interrogating former fellow prisoners as well as the family of the deceased with the intended purpose of making them withdraw their previous testimony before the Committee.

According to Philip Grant, Director of TRIAL, “Algeria cannot continue its policy of impunity. The victims of torture and other serious violations committed during the civil war have the right to know the truth and to obtain justice. The Committee against Torture has handed down a verdict which sets an important legal precedent”. For Mr. Grant “cases of torture like that of Djilali Hanafi must be the subject of a thorough enquiry and the authors of these acts must be prosecuted and punished. A true criminal investigation should be opened immediately”

Under the terms of the decision, Algeria is under the obligation to initiate an impartial enquiry into the events in question with the aim of bringing to justice the persons responsible for the treatment inflicted on the victim. Algeria has been given 90 days to inform the Committee on measures taken, including the compensation awarded to the wife of the deceased.

TRIAL is currently handling 64 cases before different international instances (European Court of Human Rights, the Human Rights Committee and the Committee against Torture) concerning cases of enforced disappearances, extra judicial executions and torture in several countries including Algeria, Bosnia Herzegovina, Libya and Nepal. Sixteen of these cases concern Algeria.

General Context

The events concerning the case in question occurred within the context of the violence that devastated Algeria during the 1990s. Under cover of the fight against terrorism, the Algerian government set in place a repressive system of exceptional violence. Summary executions, enforced disappearances, arbitrary detention, torture and other violent acts committed by the State security apparatus between 1992 and 1998 can be counted in tens of thousands.

Nevertheless, Algeria has never accepted (and far less given reparations) the consequences of such violations. Indeed the State has never taken upon itself to render justice for such crimes, to bring proceedings against and punish those responsible and to provide proper reparations for the victims or their close relatives. On the contrary, a real policy of impunity continues to apply and has even been legalized with the promulgation of the Ordinance bringing into application the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation in February 2006, which forbids victims of exactions committed during this period from taking legal action with a view to obtaining justice.

In June 2012, TRIAL submitted an alternative alternative report to the UN Human Rights Committee.

In July 2011, TRIAL submitted an alternative alternative report to the UN Human Rights Committee.

The reports describe the human rights situation prevailing in Kenya’s Mont Elgon disctrict, notably the massive violations committed there in 2008 and the enduring and complete state of impunity that still lingers.

The reports point out the mutliple violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights committed by Kenya.

Geneva, 27 May 2011. The United Nations Human Rights Committee has recently condemned Algeria for the enforced disappearance of M. Brahim Aouabdia, a tailor of 50 years of age, married and father of six children, living in Constantine at the time of his disappearance. On 30 May 1994, M. Aouabdia was arrested at his workplace. Many other individuals were also arrested in Constantine in the days prior to and after his arrest.
RTEmagicC_Aouabdia_18.jpgM. Aouabdia has never been seen since. His spouse has moved heaven and earth to uncover news about his fate, but to no avail.

In its decision, the Human Rights Committee affirmed that Algeria, through its enforced disappearance of Mr. Aouabdia, violated numerous rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, one of the most important conventions of the United Nations, notably the rights to life and not to be subject to torture or to inhumane treatment. Algeria was also found to have inflicted an inadmissible treatment on his spouse and his children by subjecting them to great anxiety and distress.

In particular, the Committee requested Algeria to “conduct a deep and rigorous investigation into the disappearance of Brahim Aouabdia”, to “furnish his family with detailed information concerning the results of its investigation”, to free him immediately if he is still being secretly detained or, if he is deceased, to return his mortal remains to his family. Moreover, the Committee insisted on Algeria’s obligation to “indict, put on trial and punish those responsible for the violations committed”. Algeria was also required to pay an adequate compensation to the spouse and family of the victim for the violations endured.

TRIAL expressed its great satisfaction following this decision by the Committee. For Philip Grant, Director of the organisation, “17 years after the event, this decision clearly and finally recognizes the responsibility of Algeria in the disappearance of an individual, Mr. Aouabdia, among the thousands of others who have suffered the same fate. Algeria has institutionalized impunity for the crimes committed during the civil war, even validating it through its laws. None of those responsible have ever been brought to justice. The United Nations has reminded Algeria in the strictest terms that such a system inadmissibly violates international law”. Mr. Grant added that “such crimes must not sink into oblivion. Algeria is now obliged to rapidly conduct an investigation and punish the authors. It is imperative that the international community should finally require this State to respect the conventions it has ratified”.

TRIAL is currently handling some 63 cases before different international instances (European Court of Human Rights, Human Rights Committee and Committee against Torture), concerning cases of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial executions and torture in several countries including Algeria, Bosnia Herzegovina, Libya and Nepal. Fifteen of these cases concern Algeria.

The Aouabdia v. Algeria case is the first case handled by TRIAL leading to a decision.

General context

Some 7000 to 20.000 persons, depending on different sources of information, have been arrested or abducted by the combined Algerian security services as well as by militia forces armed by the government between 1992 and 1998, and are still missing.

To date, none of the families of the victims of enforced disappearances have received information about the whereabouts of their relatives. No investigations have ever been conducted as a result of a criminal complaint or other procedure being lodged and though the authors and sponsors of the crimes are known, none of them has ever been investigated or brought to trial.

For more information

TRIAL submits twenty individual cases along with a report on Kenya to the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances.

Today, TRIAL (Swiss association against impunity), in partnership with Western Kenyan Human Rights Watch, submitted to the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (UNWGEID) twenty individual cases of enforced disappearances attributed to the military in Kenya that occurred in March 2008 in the context of a military operation in Mt. Elgon district.

Under its mandate, individuals may report cases of enforced disappearances to the UNWGEID, who then transmits these individual reports to the governments, thus acting as a channel of communication between the families of the victims and the government concerned with a view to ensuring that individual cases are investigated and the whereabouts of the disappeared persons clarified.

At the end of 2006, the Sabaot Land Defence Forces (SLDF) armed group emerged in Mount Elgon district in Western Kenya to resist what they considered unfair land-allocation attempts by the government. Over the years, the SLDF increased its control over the region, driving out the unwanted population and committing numerous atrocities in doing so. The response of the government, initially lacklustre, was stepped up in March 2008 with a joint police-military operation called Okoa Maisha (“Save Lives” in Swahili). Initially pleased, the population was quickly alienated by the government’s strategy consisting of indiscriminately detaining all men and boys and torturing them sometimes to death, to identify SLDF members. Despite numerous reports by NGOs, the government categorically denied the commission of any human rights violations. More than three years after the operation took place, hundreds of men and boys remain unaccounted for. No investigation into these crimes has been initiated and families of the victims are denied their rights to know the truth, to justice and to reparations, enduring a permanent state of anguish, frustration, distress and uncertainty.

Despite being the competent thematic mandate within United Nations to deal with enforced disappearances, the UNWGEID has of yet never received any cases that occurred in Kenya. This must be seen in the general context of the under-reporting of cases from the African continent, over which the UNWGEID has expressed deep concern.

In addition to the individual cases, TRIAL today submitted to the UNWGEID a 35-pages report (called a «general allegation») about the existing obstacles in Kenya to the implementation of 1992 UN Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, requesting the Group to transmit the allegations to the government, inviting it to comment thereon and to undertake all necessary measures to address existing problems.

In the general allegation, TRIAL analyzes the existing legal framework on enforced disappearances as well as the administrative and judicial initiatives undertaken by Kenya and their compatibility with the 1992 Declaration. Accordingly, TRIAL appeals to the UNWGEID to inter alia:

  • call on Kenya to take all necessary measures to ensure the right to know the truthof relatives of disappeared people, to carry out thorough, prompt, impartial andindependent investigations over the cause and circumstances of the disappearance, to identify, judge and sanction those responsible, as well as tolocate, respect and return the mortal remains;
  • evaluate the compatibility of the Kenyan legislation with the 1992 Declaration and remind the Kenyan authorities that enforced disappearance shall be autonomous crime in domestic legislation (neither a part of other offences nor a crime only when committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against any civilian population); an ongoing crime (until the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared person are established with certainty).

Finally, TRIAL suggests that a country visit of the UNWGEID to Kenya would greatly contribute to maintaining the subject of enforced disappearances on the agenda, until relatives of disappeared people are granted their rights to justice, truth and integral reparation. Therefore, TRIAL requests the UNWGEID to solicit an invitation to carry out such visit to the government of Kenya.

The general allegation will be examined by the UNWGEID later this year.

To learn more:

Sarajevo/Geneva, 11 May 2011

Today TRIAL and twelve organizations from BiH dealing with the subject of rape or other forms of sexual violence during the war (the Women’s Section of the Association of Concentration Camp Detainees, the Centre for Legal Assistance to Women Zenica, the Association for Rehabilitation of Torture Victims – Centre for Torture Victims, the Foundation of Local Democracy, the Association of Women-Victims of War, Infoteka – Women’s Information and Documentation Centre, Medica Zenica, Through Heart to Peace, the Society for Threatened Peoples, Sumejja Gerc, Viktorija 99 and Vive Žene Tuzla) submitted a general allegation to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences alleging human rights violations which these victims are facing today and the international obligations which BiH fails to enforce with regard to this category of victims.

The general allegation aims at providing a sound analysis of the existing obstacles for the full implementation of BiH’s international obligations with regard to women victims of rape or other forms of sexual violence during the war. In this view, numerous concrete examples are referred to, as well as recommendations to improve the situation.

Among the main problems singled out in the allegation there is the inadequacy of the existing criminal legislation to deal 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 heinous crimes, who are often subjected to harassment and threats; and the failure to provide victims of these crimes with integral reparation and prompt, fair and adequate compensation for the harm suffered.

Finally, also considering that on 7 May 2010 BiH issued a standing invitation to all United Nations thematic procedures, by this means announcing that it will always accept requests to visit from special procedures, TRIAL and the other twelve associations subscribing the general allegation call on the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, its Causes and Consequences to request to BiH to carry out a country visit. Such mission in the field would enable the Special Rapporteur to gather first hand information on the situation of this category of people and to issue a set of comprehensive recommendations in this regard.

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 twenty people have been convicted for these crimes by national courts and eighteen by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. 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 further information

ECCHR-Dossier confirms allegations against the Sri Lankan diplomat accused of committing numerous war crimes.

3 May 2011 (Berlin/Bern/Geneva). ECCHR has today published a new dossier which substantiates allegations of war crimes committed by the 57 Division of the Sri Lankan Army under the command of Jagath Dias (available at www.ecchr.eu). Jagath Dias was Major General of the Sri Lankan Army during the final offensive against the rebel group Tamil Tigers (LTTE) in 2009. According to a recent report by the United Nations, approximately 40.000 civilians died according during this phase of the conflict. Since September 2009, Dias has been an accredited diplomat in the Sri Lankan embassy in Berlin for Germany, Switzerland and Vatican.

In January 2011, ECCHR presented the detailed dossier to the German Federal Foreign Office, and then jointly with the Society for Threatened Peoples and TRIAL to the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs and finally to the Vatican in April 2011. On each occasion, ECCHR and its partner organizations urged the countries to withdraw the diplomatic visa of Jagath Dias and to declare him as a persona non grata. Meetings to discuss this matter were proposed; but to date none have taken place. In spite of the grave allegations of war crimes faced by Jagath Dias at the time of his accreditation in 2009, he was issued diplomatic visas by the German, Swiss and Vatican governments.

The now-released ECCHR-Dossier details numerous crimes committed by the 57 Division, focusing in particular on the targeted shelling of the civilian population in no-fire zones, hospitals, humanitarian objects and religious sites. The research is based on official Sri Lankan government sources, numerous witness statements and reports by international NGOs. However, no genuine investigations have been initiated. Just last week, a UN panel of experts echoed two years of demands by international NGOs and called for independent international investigations. ECCHR, the Society for Threatened Peoples and TRIAL have supported the UN panel by providing witness statements, a submission on sexual violence in armed conflicts and a study on criminal accountability in Sri Lanka.

ECCHR program manager Andreas Schüller says: “The German and the Swiss governments are now called upon to follow up the numerous and credible allegations of grave crimes committed against civilians in the conflict zone and to lift the diplomatic protection accorded to Jagath Dias.”

“The United Nations expert report recommends international inquiries into war crimes in Sri Lanka. Now it is up to the governments of Germany, Switzerland and the Vatican to declare Jagath Dias as a persona non grata“, said Christoph Wiedmer, Director of the Society for Threatened Peoples.

According to Philip Grant, TRIAL director, “since Sri Lanka does not intend to investigate any war crimes allegations, it falls to the countries where the alleged perpetrators are present to open up prompt, independent and effective investigations. The time for action has come. German, Swiss and Holy See authorities must now firmly assume their international responsibilities. “

In May 2011, TRIAL and 12 local associations from all sides, active in the support of victims of sexual violence during the war, submitted a 62-page document (entitled a “General Allegation” to the United Nations Special Rapport on Violence Against Women, it’s Causes and Consequences.

Read the press release.

In May 2011, TRIAL submitted a General Allegation to the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID).

In May 2011, TRIAL also filed twenty individual communications before the WGEID.

In July 2011, twenty new cases were filed before the WGEID.

In November 2012, twenty new individual cases were filed before the WGEID.

Nairobi/Geneva, 19 April 2011.

 

TRIAL (Track Impunity Always) and the EPAF (Peruvian Forensic Anthropology Team) act to seek redress for the victims of enforced disappearance in Kenya’s Mount Elgon District 2008 violence.

Hundreds of men taken by the military during the operation Okoa Maisha (“Save Lives” in Swahili) in Mount Elgon district in Kenya remain unaccounted for. Their families, twice victimized – by the armed group Sabaot Land Defence Forces (SLDF) and by Government forces –, continue being terrorized by former SLDF members turned government informers. Fear and lack of information on the means available to them internationally to seek justice have led to inaction by the families, perpetuating impunity in Mount Elgon. Numerous mass graves are known to exist, but strong military presence in the region prevents access to them. To date, no real investigation has been carried out and no human rights offender has been brought to justice.

Earlier this month, TRIAL and EPAF concluded a three-day workshop on international mechanisms to submit individual complaints for human rights violations and on the collection of ante-mortem data to effectively investigate enforced disappearances. Numerous lawyers and field monitors of Western Kenya Human Rights Watch (WKHRW) and other local organisations attended the workshop. WKHRW, a local NGObased in Bungoma, has been documenting human rights abuses and offering legal aid to the victims of torture, enforced disappearances and other violations committed by SLDF and State security forces in Mount Elgon district.

Since it emerged in 2006 to resist what they considered unfair land-allocation attempts by the government, the SLDF has been increasing its control over the villages in Mount Elgon district, occupying the land it claimed, levying taxes over the already impoverished population and terrorizing those who failed to follow their orders or join their ranks. Multiple cases of inhumane treatment, sexual violence and mutilation have been documented.

The response of the government to the abuses by the SLDF was initially lacklustre, fostering a climate of impunity. In March 2008, the government launched Okoa Maisha a joint military-police operation called to clamp down the activities of the SLDF. The population initially welcomed this operation but was quickly alienated by a strategy consisting of rounding up nearly all men in Mount Elgon district, taking them to military camps and torturing them sometimes to death to force them to identify members of the SLDF, or the location of weapons, later disposing of their bodies in the forest. Despite having taken place in the context of the general post-election violence, the abuses committed during operation Okoa Maisha were considered by the government a separate conflict and thus left out of the scope of the investigations and recommendations of the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC) and of the Commission of Inquiry into the Post-Election Violence (CIPEV).

The TRIAL-EPAF training is part of a larger project to assist the families of the disappeared in seeking justice before international human rights organisms. Concretely, TRIAL together with WKHRW will soon submit numerous individual cases of enforced disappearances before the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (UNWGEID). These will be the first Kenyan cases submitted to the Working Group. The EPAF will simultaneously continue training local human rights monitors on the collection of ante-mortem data, with a view to establishing a database with a finite universe of disappeared persons and to map the location of mass graves. 

For more information:

“All the Men Have Gone” – War Crimes in Kenya’s Mt. Elgon Conflict, Human Rights Watch July 2008 Report

Geneva, 18 April 2011

More than three years after a criminal complaint was lodged against a former chief of the Guatemalan National Police, a Swiss-Guatemalan double citizen living in Geneva, there is still no progress in the investigations.

In January 2008, the Geneva’s union action community (CGAS), ACAT-Switzerland (Action by Christians Against Torture), and the union Uniterre filed a criminal complaint against Mr. Erwin Sperisen, chief of the National Civil Police of Guatemala (PNC) from 2004 to 2007, in Geneva. The aforementioned organisations urged the authorities to investigate into Mr. Sperisen’s role in the evacuation of  the Nueva Linda Finca carried out by the PNC, and during which nine peasants and three policemen were killed.

Very serious crimes

Thereafter, TRIAL (Swiss association against impunity), and subsequently OMCT (World Organisation Against Torture), joined the criminal complaint. Important complementary elements were added to the proceeding, documenting notably the use of extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, torture, and sexual violence by the PNC during the mandate of Mr. Sperisen.

Only after over two years Geneva’s public prosecutor did hand the file over to the investigative judge in order to carry out an in-depth investigation.

International arrest warrant

At the same time, the Guatemalan authorities on their turn issued an arrest warrant for Mr. Sperisen and 17 other persons in August 2010, for their alleged participation in extrajudicial executions in two particular events, one of which has already been the object of the criminal complaint in Geneva. Given his citizenship, Mr. Sperisen can not be extradited to Guatemala, and therefore the canton of Geneva is competent to set up a preliminary inquiry.

In November 2010, the authorities of Geneva announced that a rogatory letter was being addressed to Guatemala.

Evidence in Guatemala

The organisations initiators of the complaint do not have the possibility to be joint plaintiff, and therefore have not access to the file. They can only note that, despite the seriousness of the crimes, almost 40 months have passed without any major advances in the investigation. The Guatemalan authorities, who declared their willingness to cooperate fully with the Geneva’s authorities, have not been called on yet.  The file in Guatemala remains forgotten.

If the crimes of which Mr. Sperisen is suspected rest on sufficient evidence, he must be handed over to the justice and a trial should be held in Geneva. Impunity is a scourge that wears down and destroys the Guatemalan society. Geneva should not be part of this.

For more information:

RTEmagicC_logos_04.jpg

Following the announcement that the former President of the United States of America was going to come to Geneva on 12 February 2011 for personal reasons, TRIAL has been requested on several occasions to participate in the proceedings against George W. Bush.

The organisation believes that it is likely that international crimes (namely torture, enforced disappearances and war crimes) were perpetrated by the Bush administration and that, on an international scale, George W. Bush could be held accountable on grounds of individual criminal responsibility.

The only thing that remained was to find a place to investigate this and potentially try the perpetrators, including George W. Bush.

This place should be the United States of America (USA).

However, up to now, the USA has not been willing to begin proceedings in accordance with their international obligations.

Several organisations, including victims (of which some are still being held in Guantanamo Bay), would like to use the legal mechanisms provided for by international law to get justice elsewhere, in particular by applying the principle of universal jurisdiction.

Owing to the announcement that George W. Bush will be in Switzerland on 12 February 2011, Switzerland has proved to be competent to start criminal proceedings, at the very least by applying the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

Due to the specific nature of the case, TRIAL has decided not to take part directly in the legal proceedings. Being aware of the risk linked to proceedings that are poorly carried or argued, which may lead to legal decisions contrary to the interests of the victims and block all investigations for this case and for any future cases, TRIAL has supported the legal actions led by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and the European Centre for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECHR) by providing them with legal assistance.

These organisations have been working for years to put an end to impunity regarding practices by the administration of the United States that contravene international law. As soon as the actions were to be carried out, it appeared that the best way for TRIAL to fulfil its role in the fight against impunity for the most serious crimes was to provide expert advice, and leave it to others to start suitable legal procedures.

Given George W. Bush’s cancelling of his trip to Geneva, the complaints could not be lodged.

 

For more information:

TRIAL has recently submitted two individual communications to the United Nations Human Rights Committee regarding the enforced disappearance and torture of Jit Man Basnet in Nepal in February 2004 and regarding the arbitrary arrest, ill-treatment and execution of Ermin Kadiric in Bosnia-Herzegovina July 1992.

Jit Man Basnet is a journalist and a lawyer in Kathmandu. On 4 February 2004, he was arrested by security forces and brought to a detention camp known as Bairabnath Battalion barracks.

During the first three days of detention Jit Man Basnet was extensively tortured and beaten. There was no fixed routine, the soldiers would come for him at any time of night or day. Beyond the physical pain inflicted by the severe beatings, not knowing when they would come again provoked an ongoing mental distress. The guard accused him having contacts with the Maoists, when he explained he had no information about Maoists, the torture would only get worse. The detention conditions were inhuman. During 258 days Jit Man Basnet was continuously blindfolded and handcuffed.

From 2001, he recourse to enforced disappearances, torture, summary executions and arbitrary detentions by State agents and Maoists was generalized. Arbitrary detention and torture were used years after the end of the state of emergency against all those suspected of affiliation with the Maoists. It is within this context that Jit Man Basnet was detained and disappeared for over 8 months.

  • For more information on the Basnet case, please click here.

*   *    *

In January 2011, TRIAL submitted an application concerning the case of Ermin Kadirić who was arrested by members of the Bosnian Serb forces (Vojska Republike Srpske – VRS) and of paramilitary groups in July 1992. Together with other men from the neighborhood, he was ill-treated for hours and eventually executed by members of the VRS. In son and wife have been living in a lacerating situation of uncertainty as they were never informed about his whereabouts, as his body has disappeared, nor about the progress and results of any investigation.

  • For more information on the Kadirić case, please click here. 

Geneva/Bern, 30 December 2010

As of January 1, 2011, Switzerland will enjoy a new law enabeling it to better participate in the prosecution of gencoide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. Federal authorities must however provide the necessary means to actively participate in the growing struggle against impunity.

The full press release is not available in English.

Please check the French or German versions of this page to read the full press release in these languages.

 

For more information

  • Loi fédérale portant modification de lois fédérales en vue de la mise en oeuvre du Statut de Rome de la Cour pénale internationale, FF 2010 3889
  • Philip Grant, Pour une unité spécialisée traquant les crimes de guerre, Plaidoyer 4/10
  • REDRESS/FIDH, The Practice of Specialised War Crimes Units, December 2010
  • Trial Watch database

Enforced disappearances constitute not only grave violations of human rights but are also international crimes. The arrest, the detention or the abduction of a person, when not acknowledged by the State, terribly affects the relatives who remain in the dark about the fate of their loved one and fear the worst. On 23 December 2010, a new step has been taken in the struggle against this scourge.

 

For more, please see the press release in French or German, as it has not been translated into English.

Thank you for your understanding.

Geneva, 15 December 2010. In 2007, the Federal Court, Switzerland’s highest judicial authority, rejected a claim from a Tunisian victim of torture, to bring an action for damages against Tunisia and a former minister of the Interior. The European Court of Human Rights has just made it clear it might not agree.

In April 1992, while living in Italy, Mr. Abdennacer Naït-Liman was arrested and handed over to the Tunisian authorities. For forty days he was arbitrarily detained and subjected to various forms of torture; deprived of sleep, he was beaten and attached for the entirety of his detention to an iron bar positioned between two tables. Mr. Naït-Liman went through that hellish experience within the very premises of the Republic of Tunisia’s Ministry of the Interior.

In 1995, Mr. Abdennacer Naït-Liman was granted asylum in Switzerland due to the torture inflicted upon him during the forty days of his detention. He is now the chair of the Association of Torture Victims from Tunisia.

In February 2001, Tunisia’s former minister of the Interior, Mr. Abdallah Kallel, was in Geneva. Taking advantage of the situation, Mr. Naït-Liman filed a criminal complaint against Mr. Kallel for serious bodily injuries. He accused him of having ordered the physical and psychological torture to which he was subjected in the premises of the Ministry of the Interior. The former minister managed, however, to leave Switzerland just before Geneva’s judiciary could act.

In July 2004, and with the support of TRIAL, Mr. Naït-Liman began legal action aimed at securing compensation from Mr. Kallel and Tunisia for the injuries sustained as a result of the torture. Defended by Mr. François Membrez, TRIAL’s Vice-president, Mr. Naït-Liman filed his claim before the Geneva courts, since a return to his country would put him at risk of serious threats to his life. The only place where he could assert his rights was Geneva, where he had been living for many years.

Correctly summoned, the respondents refused to take part in the proceedings. Both the court of first instance and then the appelate court, however, ruled that the petition was inadmissible, either because of Mr. Kallel’s immunity for the acts committed within the scope of his duties, or because of an insufficient connection with Geneva.

Mr. Naït-Liman therefore appealed to the Federal court, wanting acknowledgement that “emergency jurisdiction” existed in Geneva, as allowed for by Article 3 of the federal code on private international law. According to that provision, jurisdiction should be asserted in Switzerland when “proceedings abroad are impossible or cannot be reasonably required to be brought”, thus granting judicial authorities “at the place with which the facts of the case are sufficiently connected” the necessary jurisdiction.

In a ruling on 22 May 2007, the Federal court rejected the appeal because of an insufficient connection, thus leaving open the question of whether the former minister of the Interior’s immunity could also be invoked.

On 20 November 2007, an application against Switzerland was introduced before the European Court of Human Rights on the ground that Article 6 §1 of the European Convention of Human Rights, which guarantees in particular the right to have access to a tribunal to assert one’s civil rights, had been violated. The applicant claimed that, regarding torture in particular, international law argues that victims can obtain compensation from their torturer, and that only Switzerland could adjucate the matter.

The European Court of Human Rights has just communicated to the Swiss Government, requesting that it gives it view on the case. In practice, rarely are applications “communicated” to Governments. This suggests that the case should be declared admissible and that the Court will render a ruling on the merits, stating whether or not the applicant’s right to have a Swiss court examine his claim was violated.

According to Mr. François Membrez, “the fact that the European Court is forging ahead is a strong indication that, when it comes to torture, justice can no longer be sidetracked by issues of immunity. Torture is an international crime, and each State should play its part in putting an end to it, including using civil action”. TRIAL, whose mission is to put the law at the service of victims of the most serious crimes, is satisfied with the latest developments. Philip Grant, TRIAL’s Director, said that “this case potentially carries great hope for victims of torture. The European Court must now declare that the law is on their side, and not on the torturers’ ”.

The European Court, based in Strasbourg, submitted to Switzerland the following question : “By refusing to examine the compensation claim directed against A.K., former minister of the Interior of the Republic of Tunisia, for the moral wrong suffered due to acts of torture, on the grounds that A.K. benefitted from legal immunity and that national courts were lacking jurisdiction in light of where the acts were committed, have those courts violated the claimant’s right to access a tribunal provided for by article 6 §1 of the Convention?”

Switzerland has until 21 March 2011 to answer that question. No date has been set for the Court’s ruling.

For more information:

10 December 2010 – On the occasion of the International Human Rights Day, the anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, TRIAL continues its fight against impunity around the globe and is submitting three new cases from Nepal, Algeria and Bosnia and Herzegovina to the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

Thousands of families of victims of enforced disappearances are deprived of any information regarding the fate of their loved ones. Condemned to a life of uncertainty, each day torn between doubt and hope, these families are ignored by public authorities and the perpetrators of these crimes remain unpunished. This is why TRIAL continues to use international instruments to denounce violations of human rights across the world, and is presenting to the Committee today three new cases concerning Nepal, Algeria and Bosnia and Herzegovina. The subject of human rights is by nature universal and transcends borders. By submitting three cases in the names of the victims from three continents, TRIAL is demonstrating that the fight against impunity is far from over.

In 2001, conflict between Nepalese government forces and Maoist insurgents increased to such an extent that a state of emergency had to be declared. During this tense time, many civilians were the targets of enforced disappearances and acts of torture, particularly by the police. Tej Bhandari, a retired teacher, was well-known locally for his involvement and role within the village of Sampari.

On 31 December 2001, on his way to the head of the district’s office where he had been summoned, he was arrested by a group of police officers when alighting the bus. He was beaten in the street in front of passers-by, before one of the police officers tied Bhandari’s hands behind his back and blindfolded him while he was unconscious. The police officers then forced him into their vehicle and headed for an unknown destination. Ever since, Tej Bhandari’s family have not received any tangible information regarding what happened to him after his arrest and the Nepalese authorities have refused to investigate the case.

TRIAL has therefore submitted this case to the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of the victim’s son, requesting Nepal be asked to look into the circumstances of his disappearance and put to an end to the impunity of those responsible.

Between 1992 and 1998, the Algerian government was involved in mass repression of any person suspected of having a connection with the Islamic Salvation Front, a political party disbanded on 4 March 1992. Within this context, thousands of people were reported missing, including Rachid Sassene, then aged 47 and father to four children.

On 18 May 1996 at 11:00pm, around twenty police officers, both in uniform and plain clothes, burst in his house and took him to the central police station of Constantina, along with his wife. Released two weeks later and given a suspended sentence for “supporting a terrorist group”, she never saw her husband again after they were detained at the police station, despite multipe steps taken before the Algerian authorities

Prevented under the threat of imprisonment from continuing her efforts at a national level, the victim’s wife has asked TRIAL to refer the case to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, so to compel Algeria to hold the perpetrators of the crime accountable and to inform the family of what happened to Rachid Sassene..

  • Bosnia and Herzegovina: enforced disappearance of Fadil ICIC

During the summer of 1992, Bosnia and Herzegovina suffered one of the most violent periods in its history. The conflict between the army of the Republika Srpska and Bosnian government forces caused the worst atrocities; ethnic cleansing, the setting up of concentration camps and further forced displacements of entire populations.

It is within this context that Fadil Ičić, 27, disappeared. While he was working in his fields, members of the Republika Srpska army arrested him and took him to the “Omarska” concentration camp, which was known for its inhumane conditions and poor treatment carried out by the guards. It was another prisoner who saw him alive for the very last time. Since then, no information has been provided regarding what happened to him. His mother, Mevlida Ičić, has carried out all possible steps in order to find out the truth about the arbitrary arrest and enforced disappearance of her son, but no information has been communicated to her.

Faced with this lack of action by the public authorities, she asked TRIAL to lay the matter before the United Nations Human Rights Committee so that Bosnia-Herzegovina puts an end to the impunity of those responsible and finally carries out a serious investigation into the case of Fadil Ičić.

(Sarajevo/Geneva, 23 November 2010) – The UN Committee against Torture (CAT) issued recommendations to BiH for resolving the problems related to missing persons and victims of rape or other forms of sexual violence during the war. These recommendations were formulated after the organization TRIAL, along with 11 local associations from all of BiH, filed a 80-page-long report last October, on the subject of enforced disappearances and rape or other forms of sexual violence during the war.

The CAT recommendations emphasized some of the progress made by the State but also highlighted the remaining obstacles to the full implementation of the UN Convention against Torture by BiH. For TRIAL, it is evident that the CAT considers that BiH does not respect its international obligations defined in the Convention against Torture and must swiftly undertake policy changes with regards to civilian victims of the war.

«The Committee does not consider that the unsolved problems of victims of sexual violence and of relatives of missing persons belong to the past», statedLejla Mamut – Abaspahić, TRIAL Coordinator for Human Rights in BiH. She added that«authorities at all levels should swiftly adapt the legal framework to international standards and provide integral reparations to civilian victims of war». Speaking about the details of the Report to the CAT, Mrs. Mamut – Abaspahić emphasized that the families of missing persons and victims of rape and other forms of sexual violence most frequently face problems such as the slow pace of tracing missing persons; the non existence of documenting of missing persons; the lack of redress for families of missing persons and victims of rape and other forms of sexual violence; persisting impunity; and the lack of witness protection and shortage of psycho-social support for victims.

The CAT clearly emphasized the obligation to bring all perpetrators of war crimes to justice. «We are particularly pleased that the UN calls on Bosnia and Herzegovina to especially prosecute authors of sexual crimes» said Selma Korjenić, TRIAL Human Rights Officer in charge of sexual violence, noting that such crimes have so far not been given the attention they deserve. Mrs. Korjenić highlighted the welcomed CAT recommendations linked to some problematic issues: the changes in the legal definition of torture and its harmonization in the entities laws; the needed modification of the definition of sexual violence; the obligation to tackle impunity; the necessity to enforce Constitutional Court judgments; the requirement to adopt a law on victims of torture and civilian victims as well as the Strategy for Transitional Justice.

TRIAL and its partner organizations have in the past repeatedly underlined the frequent lack of implementation of Constitutional Court judgments. The Committee agrees that «it is necessary to fully implement the Constitutional Court’s judgments without further delay, in particular with regard to cases on enforced disappearances, and prosecute failure to comply with such judgments». TRIAL will thus shortly write to the Constitutional Court and to the State Prosecutor to call on them to urgently and earnestly follow this important recommendation.

The Committee granted Bosnia and Herzegovina a full year to make good on its recommendations and report back to it. TRIAL will monitor this process and interact with the various national and local actors involved, and in due time will provide the Committee with the relevant information.

For more info:

  • Read CAT recommendations here.
  • Read the TRIAL report here.
  • Read the executive summary of the report here.

(Geneva, November 19, 2010) – Recently obtained documents show that Libya’s security chief blocked an investigation into the death in detention in 2006 of a man being held under questionable circumstances, the human rights groups Alkarama, TRIAL (Track Impunity Always), and Human Rights Watch said today.


RTEmagicC_AL_Khazmi_Photo_14.jpgThe organizations recently obtained a prosecutor’s report into the death of Ismail Al Khazmi, a 30-year-old engineer, showing that the public security secretary, or minister, at the time, Gen. Saleh Ragab, refused to allow the prosecution to open an investigation into the role of public security agents in the death. Al Khazmi’s case highlights the lack of accountability for Internal Security Officers, the three groups said.

“General Ragab’s refusal to allow this investigation is only the latest example of the Interior Ministry’s interference in judicial investigations into security misdeeds,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “The impunity for Libyan security services is probably the single greatest cause of disrespect for the rule of law in Libya.”

Sources in Libya who were close to Al Khazmi and who said they had direct, personal information about the circumstances surrounding his arrest told the three organizations that on June 17, 2006, the Libyan Internal Security Agency, a division of the General People’s Committee for Public Security, or Interior Ministry, arrested Al Khazmi, a petrochemical engineer, at his workplace.

The sources said officers did not show a warrant or give reasons for the arrest and that the Al Khazmi’s whereabouts were not revealed for 12 days. They said that despite numerous attempts during this time, his family was unable to get any information about his fate or place of imprisonment.

Alkarama, TRIAL, and Human Rights Watch obtained a copy of a report dated March 26, 2009, from Chief State Security Prosecutor Mostafa al-Mabrook Salama to Justice Secretary Mostafa Abdeljalil.

The report states that in April 2007, the prosecutor’s office summoned Al Khazmi’s family to receive his body for burial, and gave them a medical report dated November 15, 2006, which said he had died of natural causes from a heart attack. It says that Al Khazmi’s father refused to receive the body, insisting to the prosecutor that his son did not have a heart condition. The report said that Al Khazmi’s father filed a formal request with the prosecution on May 3 for a second forensic medical investigation.

The organizations have also obtained a copy of the report of the second autopsy, performed by a committee of three forensic medical doctors on September 11, 2007, and delivered to the prosecution on September 17, which concluded:

The death of Ismail Ibrahim Abu Bakr was injury induced, resulting from his exposure to the injuries described above in numbers 3 to 8, which were caused by blows with a hard, blunt object of some sort. These resulted in bruising and contusions all over the body, accompanied by subcutaneous hemorrhage and tearing of the muscles next to the site of injury. This caused pathological changes in the kidneys and a deficiency of fluids in the body. As a result, blood and respiratory circulation ceased.

The prosecutors had initiated an investigation into Al Khazmi’s case and sought the required permission from the public security secretary to summon three public security officers for questioning. In an April 2007 letter to the public prosecutor, General Ragab, the public security secretary, refused the request. As a result, prosecutors were unable to pursue the investigation.

Justice Secretary Abdeljalil told Human Rights Watch in April 2009 that as a matter of procedure the judiciary has no power to order an investigation of the Public Security Agency because its agents are immune from prosecution unless the secretary waives their immunity, but that he consistently refuses to do so. Human Rights Watch raised with Secretary Abdeljalil both Al Khazmi’s case and the cases of prisoners detained by Public Security in Abu Salim prison despite court orders for their release. He told Human Rights Watch that, “these prisons are affiliated to Internal Security and the Ministry of Justice has no jurisdiction over them.”

“Al Khazmi’s case highlights the fact that security agents are still above the law in Libya,” said Rachid Mesli, legal director of Alkarama. “The government must end security force impunity by allowing the Secretary of Justice and the prosecutors to do their job.”

Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Libya has a duty to respect and ensure the rights to life, freedom from torture or ill-treatment, and liberty and security of the person. Under article 2(3), it has a further duty to provide an effective remedy, and to investigate promptly, all violations of these rights. The UN Human Rights Committee’s General Comment 31 says that the failure of a state party to investigate allegations of human rights violations can itself give rise to a separate breach of the Covenant.

In addition, the UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions state that, “There shall be thorough, prompt and impartial investigation of all suspected cases of extra-legal, arbitrary and summary executions, including cases where complaints by relatives or other reliable reports suggest unnatural death in the above circumstances.”

In Libya’s Universal Periodic Review at the Human Rights Council in Geneva on November 9, Libya accepted the recommendation to “take the necessary steps to ensure that security forces are subject to legal oversight.” As a member of the Human Rights Council since June, Libya has additional obligations under General Assembly Resolution 60/251 to “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights and to fully cooperate with the Council.”

On November 6, 2008, Alkarama and TRIAL jointly submitted an individual communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee regarding Al Khazmi. His case is currently under review. On November 19, 2010, Alkarama and TRIAL submitted the 2009 prosecutor’s report and the second autopsy report to the UN Special Rapporteurs on Torture, Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, and on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers.

“This is a rare case where the evidence shows not only the crime, but the refusal to investigate and punish the perpetrators,” said Philip Grant, director of TRIAL. “We call on the UN special procedures to urgently take up the matter with the Libyan government and insist on their obligations to bring the culprits to justice.” 

The Advocacy Center – TRIAL (ACT) submitted two communications to the Human Rights Committee against Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH) concerning the enforced disappearances of Mr. Mensud Rizvanović and Mr. Husein Hamulić occurred in July 1992.

The Rizvanović and Hamulić cases

On 20 July 1992 Mr. Mensud Rizvanović was arbitrarily deprived of his liberty in Rizvanovići (BiH) by members of the army of the Republika Srpska (Vojska Republike Srpske – VRS) taking part in ethnic cleansing operations perpetrated in that area. He was afterwards taken to the detention camp Keraterm, where he was subjected to ill treatment and inhumane conditions. He was seen alive for the last time by eyewitnesses in the hands of the guards of the facility in life threatening circumstances. The fate and whereabouts of Mr. Mensud Rizvanović remain unknown since then.

On the same day, during ethnic cleansing operations in Hambarine and its surrounding area, members of the Yugoslav National Army (Jugoslovenska Narodna Armija – JNA) went to the house of the Hamulić family. Mr. Husein Hamulić tried to hide behind the house and to escape in the woods near Hambarine. Three other men trying to escape capture and who were also hiding in the woods saw there Mr. Husein Hamulić alive for the last time. To avoid looking suspicious, Mr. Husein Hamulić and the other three men decided to split up. Mr. Husein Hamulić was then allegedly apprehended by members of the JNA. His fate and whereabouts remain unknown since then.

  • More on Rizvanović case here
  • More on Hamulić case here

On the eve of the United Nations Human Rights Council review of Libya’s human rights record, TRIAL (Track Impunity Always) submitted today two new cases of enforced disappearances against Libya to the United Nations Human Rights Committee. The organization calls upon the Human Rights Council to put accountability of human rights offenders on the table.

The cases of Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif and Jaballa Hamed Matar  

Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar were both high-level opposition figures to the regime of Colonel Gaddafi. They lived in exile in Egypt until 1990, when they were arrested by Egyptian authorities, handed over to Libya and taken back to their country. They have since disappeared.

RTEmagicC_Izzat_Al-Maqrif_02.png Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif was a member of the Libyan army until 1973 when he was accused of taking part in an attempt to overthrow the government of Colonel Gaddafi and held in prison for almost one year after which he was discharged from the army. Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif and his family fled the country in 1981 and lived from 1984 onwards in Cairo, Egypt. There, he exercised activities as a senior member of the Executive Committee of the National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL).

 

Jaballah Hamed MATAR, undated photo. Jaballah Hamed Matar and Ezzat Youssef al-Maqrif were forcibly disappeared in Cairo in March 1990. Both men were prominent members of Libyan opposition group, the National Front for the Salvation of Libya, and it is thought that they were handed over to the Libyan authorities by their Egyptian counterparts.Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar was also arrested in 1970 and detained for 6 months. He worked a few years for the government and then he resigned because of a policy disagreement. He worked as a businessman from 1973 to 1978 in Libya but, realising it was no longer safe to remain in Libya, joined his family in Egypt in 1979, where they spent a further 11 years in exile. While in Cairo, Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar was a member of the Executive Committee of the NFSL. As such, he wrote many articles calling for democracy, the rule of law and justice in Libya.

Arrest in Egypt and enforced disappearance in Libya

Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar were interrogated on 4 and 5 March 1990 by agents of the Egyptian State Security Investigation Bureau, and their passports confiscated.

On 12 March 1990, they were again arrested by Egyptian security personnel, handed over to Libyan officials and transferred by plane to Libya. They were never seen again by their family.

Even though Libya has constantly denied having arrested and detained the two opposition figures, Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar have sent letters to their families written in Abu Salim prison and clandestinely smuggled out. Although their relatives have had no direct news from them since approximately 1995, information that one of them was still alive in 2002 has filtered out.

For Philip Grant, director of TRIAL, «the evidence clearly shows that the two victims were taken back to Libya and secretly imprisoned there for years. Such actions are consistent with past practices of abduction or assassination of opposition figures by the Libyan State». Enforced disappearance is a crime under international law. «The victims’ family members now deserve to know the truth», Grant added.

Universal Periodical Review

On 9 November 2010, Libya will undergo its Universal Periodical Review before the UN Human Rights Council. On this occasion, TRIAL calls upon the members of the Human Rights Council to insist upon Libya’s obligation to investigate cases of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings and torture, and bring to justice those responsible for such deeds.

Context

Since the coup that brought Colonel Gaddafi to power in 1969, many opposition groups to his regime have been created abroad. One of the most important of the opposition groups was the NFSL, which opposed military and dictatorial rule in Libya, and called for a democratic government with constitutional guarantees, free elections, a free press, and separation of powers among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches. The enforced disappearances of Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar, two high-ranking members of an opposition party operating abroad, took place in the context of the repression implemented by the Libyan government against members of those groups.

About TRIAL

TRIAL is a Geneva-based NGO active in the field of international justice, enjoying consultative status with the UN ECOSOC. TRIAL has brought close to 60 cases of enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings and torture to various human rights organs, including the European Court of Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Committee.

TRIAL has no affiliation whatsoever to any organization, party or group active in Libyan politics, in particular to the NFSL. The NGO’s sole interest lies in the upholding of human rights standards and the struggle to bring perpetrators of grave human rights violations to justice.

For more information

Q & A

Are the two victims dead or alive?

  • No one knows whether or not they are still alive. In 1996, up to 1,200 prisoners were massacred in Abu Salim prison, where both men were held. It is not known whether they were amongst those killed. Information from a former inmate has filtered out that one of the two men was still alive in 2002.

Why were the two cases not brought against Egypt as well?

  • Egypt ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1982, but not its Optional Protocol, which allows individuals to bring their case before the Human Rights Committee. Still, Egypt is bound to respect the rights enshrined in the Covenant, which it obviously did not do in the present case. As the victims have no possibility to submit their case to the Human Rights Committee, only Libya will be party to the proceedings.

What can be expected of the Human Rights Committee?

  • TRIAL expects the Human Rights Committee to rule that Libya is responsible for the enforced disappearance of Izzat Al-Maqrif and Jaballa Matar and has thus violated a number of provisions of the Covenant. If such is its conclusion, the Committee will further require Libya to take the necessary measures in order to investigate the two cases, bring the perpetrators to justice, unveil the fate and whereabouts of the victims and offer measures of reparation to their families.

Have other cases been filed against Libya before the Human Rights Committee?

  • Four previous cases have been filed against Libya by TRIAL in collaboration with Al Karama for Human Rights before the Human Rights Committee. These are cases of arbitrary detention, torture, enforced disappearance and other grave human rights violations. These cases are ongoing.
  • Libya has been found in violation of the Covenant in eight other cases so far (none of which have been filed by TRIAL).

What is the difference between the Human Rights Council and the Human Rights Committee?

  • The Human Rights Council is the political intergovernmental body within the UN system in charge of human rights issues. Its main role is to address situations of human rights violations and make recommendations concerning them.
  • The Human Rights Committee is a body of independent experts that monitors the implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by the State parties. It has multiple functions, among which is the competence to examine individual complaints regarding alleged violations of the Covenant by the State parties (where they have ratified the Optional Protocol to the Covenant).