Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (CCPR)

The case

In May 2008, a joint individual communication was lodged by TRIAL and the organization Al-Karama for Human Rights before the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of Mussa Ali Mussa Benali, acting for his brother, Abdeladim Ali Mussa Benali.

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

On 16th February 2005, Mr. Benali was arrested a second time by ISA members. His relatives received no news about him until the beginning of 2006, when they were informed that he was kept in Abu Slim prison (a well-known facility near Tripoli where thousands of political prisoners have been kept). They were allowed to visit him once a month up until the autumn of that year, when all visits were suspended as a collective punishment for a riot which had taken place in the prison at the beginning of October 2006. During those disturbances, which were bloodily suppressed, Mr. Benali played a key role in avoiding an escalation of the violence, by using a cell phone that he had hidden from the guards to acquaint external sources of the incident.

Mr. Benali disappeared from the Abu Slim prison on 23rd March 2007, and there is every reason to fear that he has been abducted by the authorities in reprisal for the above act.

Both during his first and his second detention Mr Benali was subjected on many occasions to various kinds of grave torture, including brutal beatings, prolonged isolation (up to two years) in a sparse, unhealthy underground cell, and deprived of sufficient food.

Mr Benali has never been charged with any offence. In fact, throughout the almost ten years spent in custody he has never been brought before any judicial authority.

All judicial and other legal remedies provided for by Libyan legislation are de facto unavailable to victims of crimes perpetrated for political reasons, due to the high risk, or even certainty, of severe reprisals against those who would bring accusations against the State and also the great difficulty (due to the widespread terror prevailing in Libya) that such persons would have in obtaining the assistance of a lawyer. In addition, such legal action would have no chance of success, in view of the lack of independence of the national tribunals.

The author of the communication requests the Committee to recognize that, based on the facts described above, Libya has violated:

  • the rights of Abdeladim Ali Mussa Benali to life; to an effective remedy; to freedom and security of his person; to be treated with respect for his human dignity whilst in detention; not to be subject to torture or ill-treatment and to be recognized in all circumstances as a legal person (articles 2 § 3, 6 § 1, 7, 9 §§ 1, 2, 3 and 4, 10 § 1, and 16 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights),
  • the rights of the author of the communication himself, to an effective remedy and not to be subject to torture or ill-treatment (articles 2 § 3 and 7).

 

The general context

These facts come within the context of the relentless repression exerted by the regime of Colonel Gaddafi, who has ruled the country with an iron fist for well nigh 40 years. The security forces – especially the ISA – have notoriously committed the worst abuses, on a large scale and with total impunity. Opponents of the government, real or perceived, are the main targets of such practices.

Scores of citizens have been victims of arrests, carried out in all illegality, followed by extremely long detentions, with no judicial monitoring and often in solitary confinement without their family being informed.

 

The decision

In December 2012, the Human Rights Committee communicated its decision (called “views” in the UN language).

The Committee held that Libya violated Articles 6 § 1, 7, 9, 10 § 1 and 16 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights with regard to Abdeladim Ali Mussa Benali. The Committee further found a violation of Article 2 § 3 of the Covenant, read in conjunction with Articles 6 § 1, 7, 9, 10 § 1 and 16.

The Committee also held that Libya violated Article 7 of the ICCPR, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 2 § 3, with regards to the author of the communication.

The Committee requested Libya to provide the author with an effective remedy, including freeing Abdeladim Ali Mussa Benali immediately, if he is still being detained or returning his remains to his family if he died in custodyy; conducting a thorough and effective investigation into his disappearance and any ill-treatment that he suffered in detention; providing the author and Abdeladim Ali Mussa Benali with detailed information on the results of its investigations; and prosecuting, trying, and punishing those responsible for the enforced disappearance or other ill-treatment.

Libya is also under an obligation to provide appropriate compensation to the author and Abdeladim Ali Mussa Benali for the violations that they suffered and to take measures to prevent similar violations in the future.

 

Introduction

TRIAL lodged an individual complaint before the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of Mrs Khaourkha Marouf, spouse Azizi, in January 2009. She acts in the name of her husband, Abdelkrim Azizi, and her son, Abdessamad Azizi, both kidnapped on September 22, 1994 in Algers and missing since. The victims disappeared during a widespread campaign of forced disappearances in Algeria between 1992 and 1998.

During the night of September 22, 1994, Abdelkrim and Abdessamad Azizi were arbitrarily arrested by members of the Algerian police force at their home. During this arrest, Abdelkrim Azizi was tortured by his assailants and his family was forced to witness his torment. Furthermore, the police officers pillaged the family’s home and adjoining store. Abdelkrim and Abdessamad Azizi were taken away to an undisclosed location and the whereabouts have remained unknown to their family since then.

Despite Khaourkha Marouf’s repeated pleas for information, the Algerian authorities have refused to admit that Abdelkrim and Abdessamad Azizi were in their custody or to give their family any information as to their situation.

A former police officer has that Abdelkrim and Abdessamad Azizi were detained at the “cité de la Montagne” police station in Bourouba and alleged that they were there tortured to death. The detention of Abdelkrim and Abdessamad Azizi was also confirmed by former cellmates.

In her complaint before the UN Human Rights Committee, Mrs Khaourkha Marouf requests that her husband and son be recognized as victims of forced disappearance and that Algeria be found in violation of the following rights in regards to its treatment of Abdelkrim and Abdessamad Azizi: to life; not to be subjected to torture; to liberty and security of the person; to be treated with humanity and dignity while in detention; to recognition as a person before the law; to be free from arbitrary or unlawful interference with one’s privacy and family; to the protection of the family and to an effective remedy when such rights are violated (articles 6 § 1, 7, 9 §§ 1, 2, 3 et 4, 10 § 1, 16, 17, 23 § 1 and 2 § 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights).

Furthermore, the Committee is asked to recognize the Algerian authorities’ actions towards Khaourkha Marouf and her family as violations of the rights to be free from cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; to be free from arbitrary or unlawful interference with one’s privacy and family; to the protection of the family and to an effective remedy when such rights are violated (articles 7, 17 et 23 § 1 and 2 § 3 of the Covenant) considering the psychological pain and suffering endured by the author and her family during the years of uncertainty since the arrest of her husband and son.

Mrs Marouf also asks that an investigation be initiated into the alleged violations and that the responsible parties be brough t to justice.

The proceedings are currently underway before the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

 

General Context

These events occurred during the Algerian civil war during which thousands of civilians were kidnapped. It is reported that between 7,000 and 20,000 people were disappeared by the Algerian police forces between 1992 and 1998. Secret detentions during long periods were a common instrument of repression in Algeria during this time. The use of torture was also very prevalent and often led to deaths of detainees. The members of the police forces acted with complete impunity. Since the implementation of the Charter for National Peace and Reconciliation in 2006, these forces have officially received amnesty for their acts during the civil war. It is now illegal to bring a complaint for crimes or exactions like the ones Abdelkrim and Abdessamad Azizi suffered.

 

The decision

In July 2013, the Human Rights Committee adopted its decision in the case of Azizi father and son.

The Committee held that Algeria violated several articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, especially rights to:

  • life (art. 6 alone or in conjunction with art. 2 & 3)
  • liberty and security (art. 9 alone or conjunction with art. 2 & 3)
  • adequate detention conditions (art. 10 alone or conjunction with art. 2 & 3)
  • interdiction of torture (art. 7 alone or conjunction with art. 2 & 3)
  • recognition of the legal personality (art.16 alone or conjunction with art. 2 & 3)
  • not be subjected to arbitrary interference in one’s private life (art. 17 alone or conjunction with art. 2 & 3)

 

Moreover, the Committee found other violations of the Covenant regarding the victim’s spouse :

  • interdiction of inhumane treatment (art. 7 alone and in conjunction with art. 2 & 3)
  • not be subjected to arbitrary interference in one’s private life (art. 17 alone and in conjunction with art. 2 & 3

The Committee requests Algeria to:

  • conduct an investigation into the disappearance of Abdelkrim and Abdessamad Azizi
  • free the victims if they are still being secretly detained or, if they are deceased, to return their remains to their family
  • ensure adequate access to investigation for the victim’s relatives
  • In addition, Algeria has the obligation to:
  • prosecute, judge and punish those responsible for the violations committed
  • provide compensation to the victim’s relatives for the violations endured

 

Introudction

In May 2008, TRIAL submitted an individual communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of Hafsa Boudjemai, acting on behalf of her son, Djaafar Sahbi. The latter was abducted in Algiers on the 3rd of July 1995 around 10 am. He has not been seen since then. This incident occurred within the general context of the enforced disappearance of thousands of Algerian citizens at the hands of the army or various other security organs of the State between 1992 and 1998.

Djaafar Sahbi was kidnapped when leaving the Mustapha Bacha hospital where he was employed and where he had taken his 8 year old daughter for a doctor’s appointment. As they were coming out of the hospital, two policemen gave orders to follow them. Djaafar Sahbi and his daughter were taken away in a car. The girl was later brought back to her father’s office in the hospital by the policemen.

Three days later, policemen broke into the residence of the Sahbi family when no one was present. The police officers forced open several doors, at the entrance and inside the house, and took away personal effects and documents belonging to Mr. Sahbi.

Since his arrest, his family has been unable to learn anything about his fate, despite persistent attempts to do so.

Sahbi’s relatives, especially his brother Youcef, have turned to all the competent authorities in order to find him and ensure he is put under the protection of the law.

In particular, Sahbi’s case was submitted to the Public Prosecutor of the Republic of Algeria, to the Public Prosecutor of the Court of El Harrach and to the General Prosecutor of the Court of Algiers. Those requests were left unanswered. The family also turned to several governmental and administrative institutions, in particular to the President of Republic and the Minister of Justice, but all in vain.

Finally, Djaafar Sahbi’s case was also submitted to the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. This special procedure was also unsuccessful in clarifying the situation with respect to Sahbi’s disappearance, since the Algerian State simply omitted to respond to the requests laid before it.

Furthermore, since the promulgation of Order n° 6/01 concerning the implementation of the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation in February 2006, the family faces a legal barrier in bringing its case to justice. Any person who contravenes this Order faces a prison term, and Algerian tribunals are bound to declare such a case inadmissible.

The author of the submission therefore requests the Committee to recognise Djaafar Sahbi as a victim of enforced disappearance. This crime affects the most fundamental rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR). It is submitted that the situation gives rise to violations of articles 2 § 3, 6 § 1, 7, 9 §§ 1, 2, 3 and 4, 10 § 1, 16 and 17 § 1 of the ICCPR in respect of Djaafar Sahbi and articles 2 § 3 and 7 of the ICCPR in respect of the author, as a result of the psychological suffering he has endured for so many years, caused by uncertainty as to the fate of her son.

 

General Context

According to several sources, between 7,000 to 20,000 individuals have gone missing after being arrested or abducted by the various different Algerian security services as well as by government armed militias between 1992 and 1998.

Until today, none of the families of such victims of enforced disappearances has received any information concerning the fate of their loved ones. No investigations have been opened up as a result of complaints they have lodged or other procedures taken. Despite the fact that the perpetrators of the crimes and those behind them are well known, no one has been put under investigation or brought to prosecution.

 

The decision

In June 2013, the Human Rights Committee communicated its decision (called “views” in the UN language).

The Committee held that Algeria violated Articles 6 § 1, 7, 9, 10 § 1, 16 and 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights taken alone or in conjunction with Article 2 § 3 of the Covenant with regards to M. Djaafar Sahbi.

The Committee also held that Algeria violated Article 7 and 17 of the ICCPR, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 2 § 3 with regards to the victim’s family.

The Committee requested Algeria to conduct a deep and rigorous investigation into the disappearance of Djafaar Sahbi, 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, try and sanction those responsible for the violations committed. Algeria was also required to pay an adequate compensation to the family of the victim for the violations endured.

 

The Case

In March 2008, TRIAL submitted a communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of Aîssa Mezine, acting for his brother Bouzid Mezine. The latter was kidnapped in Algiers on 11 August 1996 between 1h30 and 2h00 am, following a police operation. He is reported to have been missing since then. This incident has occurred within the general context of the enforced disappearance of thousands of Algerian citizens at the hands of the army or security corps of the State between 1992 and 1998.

Bouzid Mezine was taken from his home, in the presence of his family, by a military detachment in the context of a police operation in the neighbourhood. The soldiers also proceeded to search his apartment.

Since his arrest, his family has never succeeded in discovering his fate, despite persistent attempts to do so. A former detainee of the military prison of Blida reportedly saw him two months after the arrest – this information was confirmed to the family by a member of the military.

Mezine’s relatives have turned to all the competent authorities in order to find him and to make sure he is under the protection of law. At the end of the time limit for police custody, they enquired about him at several military camps, police stations and prosecutor’s offices, with no success. Bouzid Mezine’s father has referred his son’s case to the prosecutors of the Hussein Dey and Algiers tribunals, as well as to the military prosecutor of Blida. The latter is believed to have opened an official enquiry, but has in fact never brought to fruition any reliable enquiry concerning the enforced disappearance of Bouzid Mezine.

His family has turned to several governmental authorities, including the Médiateur de la République, the President of the Observatoire national des droits de l’homme, the President of the Republic and the Minister of Justice. None of them have given the family any information about the victim’s fate.

Finally, Bouzid Mezine’s case has also been submitted to the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. This special procedure did not assist in clarifying the disappeared’s situation, as the State decided not to answer the requests.

Furthermore, since the promulgation of Order n° 6/01 concerning the implementation of the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation in February 2006, the family faces a legal barrier to bringing its case to justice. Any person who contravenes this Order faces a prison term, and Algerian tribunals are bound to declare such a case inadmissible.

The author of this submission requests the Committee to recognise Bouzid Mezine as a victim of enforced disappearance. This crime affects the most fundamental rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). It is submitted that the situation gives rise to violations of articles 2 § 3, 6 § 1, 7, 9 §§ 1, 2, 3 and 4, 10 § 1, 16 and 17 § 1 of the ICCPR in respect of Bouzid Mezine and articles 2 § 3 and 7 of the ICCPR in respect of the author, as a result of the psychological suffering he has endured for so many years, caused by uncertainty as to the fate of his son. The case is pending.

 

The general context

According to different sources, between 7,000 and 20,000 people have been arrested or kidnapped and then made to disappear by the different Algerian security services or by government-armed militias between 1992 and 1998.

To date, none of the families of the victims of these enforced disappearances have received any information on the fate of their relatives. No investigations have been initiated pursuant to the lodging of criminal complaints or other procedures. Although the identity of the persons who committed and planned these crimes is widely known, none of them has been prosecuted.

 

The decision

In December 2012, the Human Rights Committee communicated its decision (called “views” in the UN language).

The Committee held that Algeria violated Articles 6 § 1, 7, 9, 10 § 1, 16 and 17 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 2 § 3 of the Covenant with regards to the victim.

The Committee also held that Algeria violated Articles 7 and 17 of the ICCPR, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 2 § 3, with regards to the victim’s mother.

The Committee requested Algeria to “”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 insisted 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.

 

Introduction

In February 2008, TRIAL submitted an individual communication to the Human Rights Committee on behalf of Fatma Zohra Berzig, a widow acting on behalf of her son, Kamel Djebrouni. The latter was kidnapped in Algiers during the night of 19-20 November 1994 and has never been seen since. His disappearance took place within the context of thousands of other disappearances which took place at the hands of the army and various security forces in the country between 1992 and 1998.

Kamel Djebrouni was abducted from his home by a group of soldiers in the presence of his mother and his brothers. Since his arrest, his family has been unable to trace his whereabouts or to have any information concerning his fate despite significant efforts on their part. The only information available was from a former detainee, whom the family were unable to question directly, who said that he saw him in an unidentified detention centre at the beginning of 1995.

Nevertheless, Mr. Djebrouni’s close relatives had already made enquiries to all of the relevant state institutions about his fate. Immediately after his abduction, his brother went to the police station in the 8th arrondissment of Algiers. However, the police officers were unable to provide any information concerning his brother and simply advised him to await his release after the end of the legal limit of police custody.

As a first step, Djebrouni’s family addressed their enquiries to the police and the various different courts in Algiers, in order to determine if he had been brought before a prosecutor. They then requested the National Human Rights Observatory (NHRO) to initiate inquiries with a view to finding the whereabouts of Kamel Djebrouni.

It was only four years after this, and after being prompted on several occasions by the family, that the gendarmerie summoned them to give testimony. Scarcely two days later was the enquiry brought to a close with no new information being brought forward to allow the victim to be located. After several months the NHRO reported back to the family its conclusion which was essentially that Kamel Djebrouni had not been arrested, for the simple reason that there was no official arrest warrant issued against him.

With help from a well known NGO, the family took their case to the Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances. This special procedure also did not help to solve the situation with respect to Mr. Djebrouni, given that the State did not take the trouble to reply to the questions addressed to it.

To make matters worse, with the promulgation in February 2006 of Regulation No 6/01 concerning the implementation of the Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation, the family were confronted with a legal ban on bringing its case before the courts at the risk of incurring a prison term if they did so. In any case, all Algerian courts would be bound to declare such a case as inadmissible.

The Communication recently submitted asks the Human Rights Committee to recognise that Kamel Djebrouni has been a victim of a forced disappearance, a crime which infringes the most fundamental of those rights guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The plaintiff requests that violations of articles 2 § 3, 6 § 1, 7, 9 1, § 2, § 3 and § 4, 10 § 1 and 16 of the ICCPR against Kamel Djebrouni be recognised, as well as violations of articles 2 § 3 and 7 of the ICCPR against the plaintiff as a result of the psychological suffering she has endured over the many years of uncertainty concerning the fate of her son.

 

General Context

According to several sources, from 7,000 to 20,000 individuals have gone missing after having been arrested or abducted by the various different Algerian security services as well as by government armed militias between 1992 and 1998.

Until today, none of the families having victims of enforced disappearances have received any information concerning the fate of their loved ones. No investigations have been opened up as a result of complaints they have lodged or other procedures taken. Despite the fact that the perpetrators of the crimes and those behind them are well known, no one has been put under investigation or been prosecuted.

 

The decision

In December 2011, the Human Rights Committee communicated its decision (called “views” in the UN language).

The Committee held that Algeria violated Articles 6 § 1, 7, 9, 10 § 1 and 16 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 2 § 3 of the Covenant with regards to the victim.

The Committee also held that Algeria violated Article 7 of the ICCPR, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 2 § 3, with regards to the victim’s mother.

The Committee requested Algeria to “conduct a deep and rigorous investigation into the disappearance of Kamel Djebrouni”, 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 mother of the victim for the violations endured.

 

The Case

In November 2007, TRIAL lodged an application before the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of Kamel Rakik. The ACT acts as a representative for Mrs. Guezout and M. Abdelrahim and Bachir Rakik, respectively the mother and the brothers of the victim. Kamel Rakik was arrested on May, 6, 1996, in Ouled Moussa, and has been reported missing ever since. This disappearance occurred in the context of the massive enforced disappearances which took place in Algeria between 1992 and 1998.

Kamel Rakik was arrested at his home, around thirty kilometers outside of Algiers, by officers of the judiciary police of Algiers’ wilaya. The policemen burst in his house, using violence and threatening to kill his wife, who they later used as a human shield in order to get to him. Even though nobody in the house was armed, they opened fire on the people present injuring Kamel Rakik. He and his wife and sister-in-law were then taken away, separately.

The three of them were taken to the Chateauneuf police officers’ school, an infamous centre for torture and incommunicado detention, in order to be questioned. After five days of detention, both women – and four other members of their family arrested on the same day – were transferred to another cell where, to their surprise, they discovered Kamel Rakik. He told them that he had been tortured, then taken to a military hospital under a false name, before being tortured again.

Rakik’s wife and sister-in-law were released after 35 days of detention.

Following Rakik’s arrest, his father, Tahar Rakik, convinced that his son had died in the attack, went on to look for him in hospitals and mortuaries. He also turned to different police stations but nobody seemed to be aware of his son’s arrest.

As his daughter-in-law returned home, Tahar Rakik contacted the public prosecutor of the Boudouaou’s tribunal to notify him his son’s disappearance and request that he be placed under protection of the law. This first request was dismissed, as were all the numerous complaints, letters and requests that Tahar Rakik kept addressing him thereafter. The public prosecutor informed him, in June 1998, that his son had been arrested by members of the security services and taken to Algiers’ police station, but kept dismissing his complaints. The public prosecutor made it clear that he was not going to prosecute the police.

Kamel Rakik’s father wrote several letters to the relevant authorities, among whom the Minister of Justice, the Minister of the Interior and the Ombudsman. However, he never received any answer from any of these authorities.

Tahar Rakik died on February 5, 2003 without ever having received any information on the fate of his son who had been reported missing for seven years at that time.

In 2006, the security services suggested Kamel Rakik’s mother to take the appropriate administrative measures in order to obtain reparation, in accordance with the ‘national reconciliation’ ordinance adopted that same year. However, the process implies that an official certificate of death be established, something that Mme Guezout refused to do, and so she kept asking for the truth about her son to be made.

The authors of the communication ask the Committee to recognize that Kamel Rakik was a victim of enforced disappearance, a crime that infringes the most fundamental rights guaranteed in the International covenant on civil and political rights (ICCPR), and of several other violations, due, among other reasons, to the violence he was subjected to during his arrest, and to the torture he underwent while in detention. The complainants request that violations of articles 2 (3), 6 (1), 7, 9 (1), (2), (3) and (4), 10 (1) and 16 of the ICCPR be found as regards Kamel Rakik. They also request that violations of articles 2 (3) and 7 of the ICCPR be found as regards themselves for the psychological suffering they underwent during the many years of uncertainty as regards their son and brother’s fate.

 

General context

According to different sources, as many as 7,000 to 20,000 persons were arrested or abducted by the Algerians security services as well as by the militias armed by the government between 1992 and 1998, and are reported missing.

As of today, none of the families of victims of enforced disappearance has ever received any information on the fate of their relatives, no investigation has ever been open as a result of the complaints and measures they have taken, and, even though the authors and their backer are known, none of them has ever been prosecuted or even put under investigation for those actions.

 

The decision

In September 2012, the Human Rights Committee communicated its decision (called “views” in the UN language).

The Committee held that Algeria violated Articles 6 § 1, 7, 9, 10 § 1 and 16 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 2 § 3 of the Covenant with regards to the victim.

The Committee also held that Algeria violated Article 7 of the ICCPR, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 2 § 3, with regards to the victim’s mother and brothers.

The Committee requested Algeria to “conduct a deep and rigorous investigation into the disappearance of Kamel Rakik”, 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 mother and two brothers of the victim for the violations endured.

 

The case

TRIAL lodged an individual complaint before the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of Mériem Zarzi, spouse Aouabdia, in October 2007. She acts in the name of her husband, kidnapped on 30 May 1994 in Constantine, and missing since. He disappeared during a widespread campaign of forced disappearances in Algeria between 1992 and 1998.

Brahim Aouabdia was arrested on his workplace by the police of Constantine in the presence of witnesses. He was driven to the main police station of the city with many other persons arrested in the same circumstances.

Following his arrest, his wife went to the police station and the law court for several days in the hope of seeing her husband. She also asked regularly about his situation at the Prosecutor’s Office. Thereafter, she lodged a criminal complaint for abduction and illegal confinement, for which she never got any answer, and continued to alert all the competent authorities.

It is only three years later that she learned from the police that her husband had been transferred to the Territorial Research and Investigation Centre (TRIC) of the 5th military region of Constantine on 13 July 1994. Nevertheless, no one there ever admitted having seen Brahim Aouabdia at the TRIC.

Mrs Zarzi and her children never stopped to search for him and undertook all action to know the truth about his fate. Brahim Aouabdia’s disappearance also caused them a lot of administrative burden, leading Mrs Zarazi to apply for a death certificate for her husband, in the framework of the 2006 Charter for peace and national reconciliation.

In her complaint before the UN Human Rights Committee, Mrs Zarazi requests that her husband be recognized as a victim of forced disappearance and that Algeria be found in violation of articles 2 § 3, 6 § 1, 7, 9 § 1, 2, 3, and 4, and of articles 10 and 16 of theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights – ICCPR – (right to an effective remedy, right to life, prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment , right to life and security of person, prohibition of inhuman treatment for all persons deprived of their liberty and right to recognition as a person before the law). She also asks for the violation of the articles 2 § 3 and 7 of the ICCPR to be recognized for herself and her children, the disappearance of her husband being the cause of a long and painful uncertainty for all the family.

 

General context

According to different information sources, 7.000 to 20.000 persons had been arrested or abducted by all corps of Algerian security services and the militia armed by the government between 1992 and 1998, and are missing.

To date, none of the victims’ families got information about their relatives, no investigation has ever been opened as a result of the criminal complaint and the procedure they have completed, and, thought the persons who committed the crimes and the backers are known, none of them have ever been prosecuted or troubled.

 

The decision

In May 2011, the Human Rights Committee adopted its decision in the case (called “views” in the UN language).

The Committee held that Algeria violated Articles 6 § 1, 7, 9, 10 § 1 and 16 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, taken alone or in conjunction with Article 2 § 3 of the Covenant, with regards to the victim.

The Committee also held that Algeria violated Article 7 of the ICCPR, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 2 § 3, with regards to the victim’s wife and their six children.

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.

 

Mr Hom Bahadur Bagale, a policeman from Nepal, experienced several episodes of arbitrary detention and torture from 2002 to 2006. All his attempts to obtain justice and punishment of the perpetrators failed, and in fact exposed him to more violations. To end this circle of threats and abuses, TRIAL International took his case before the United Nations Human Rights Committee. And won.

Mr Bagale was placed in solitary confinement and had no contact with the outside world. ©UN Photo/ Martine Perret

Mr Hom Bahadur Bagale served in the Nepalese police from 1984 to 2006. In 2002, he was wrongly accused by his hierarchical superior to have stolen gold. Upon his refusal to “confess”, his superior ordered his deprivation of liberty. Mr Bagale was not informed of the reasons for his arrest or of any charges formally pressed against him. The procedures prescribed under Nepalese legislation to carry out an arrest and to detain a person were not respected.

Mr Bagale was kept in a custody room of Hanumandhoka Police Range, in Kathmandu. He was handcuffed and forced to wear a hood. He was placed in solitary confinement and had no contact with the outside world. He was not provided any food or water and the conditions of detention were inhumane: the room was dark and dirty, filled with bugs and with no toilet.

While being held, Mr Bagale was subjected to repeated interrogations, always aiming at obtaining information on his alleged involvement in the theft of gold. On the occasion of these interrogations, he was tortured and subjected to severe ill-treatment. Abuses were committed outside of the police premises too: policemen conducted a search at Mr Bagale’s home without any warrant. The victim’s relatives (in particular his wife and daughter) were harassed, verbally and sexually, and threatened with death.

 

All legal avenues blocked

Mr Bagale was eventually freed but continued to be threatened by his superiors. Despite the risks and continuous intimidations, he lodged a complaint before domestic judicial bodies. Nothing happened – in fact, the threats intensified and he has deprived of his liberty once again – so Mr Bagale filed a complaint before the National Human Rights Commission, requesting the latter to protect his life. The National Human Rights Commission did not take any action upon Mr Bagale’s complaint, due to the fact that his case was already sub judice in court.

In 2004, the Kathmandu District Court rejected Mr Bagale’s complaint, holding that the author’s claims could not be substantiated, pursuant to the definition of torture provided by the applicable Nepalese legislation. Mr Bagale appealed against this decision, but the Appellate Court upheld the ruling. Seized on the matter, the Supreme Court of Nepal also upheld the rulings of the lower courts.

 

New episodes of violence

In 2006, Mr Bagale attempted to resign from the Nepalese Police and applied for retirement, triggering further threats and pressures to withdraw his previous complaints. He was once again arbitrarily deprived of his liberty, beaten and held incommunicado in inhumane conditions.

Although this time the Supreme Court recognized Mr Bagale’s arrest and detention to be arbitrary, and ordered his release, it did not pronounce itself on the alleged torture and ill-treatment suffered by Mr Bagale. A little later, the Kathmandu District Court recognized the acts of torture but denied taking action against the perpetrators. Moreover, the victim never received the determined compensation sum.

As a consequence of the ill-treatment inflicted on him, Mr Bagale is facing serious psychological consequences (including depression, anxiety, paranoia, and personality disorders). No one has been prosecuted and sanctioned for his arbitrary detention and torture.

 

Bringing the case to the international level

On 10 December 2015, supported by TRIAL International, Mr Bagale brought his case before the United Nations Human Rights Committee (HRC). In his complaint, he alleges to be victim of a violation of Articles 2, 7, 9, 10 and 17 (respectively, right to an effective remedy, prohibition of torture, right to personal liberty, right to be treated humanely while in detention and right to privacy and family life) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Nepal is party. He requested the HRC to establish that Nepal is under an obligation to investigate the facts, punish those responsible and offer him integral reparations including protection measures, full medical and psychological care and public acknowledgment of, and apology for the crimes.

On 2 November 2020, the HRC sided with TRIAL International and Mr Bagale and recognized that Nepal had violated its international obligations and should take steps to prevent the occurrence of similar violations in the future. Moreover, Nepal should ensure that its legislation effectively criminalizes torture and provides for appropriate sanctions and remedies commensurate with the gravity of the crimes.

It is now up to the domestic authorities to enforce the HRC’s recommendations – in all likelihood a long and arduous task in which TRIAL International will continue to support the victim.

The case

In April 2008, a joint individual communication was lodged by TRIAL and the organization Al-Karama for Human Rights before the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of Tahar Mohamed Aboufaied, who acts for his brothers, Idriss and Juma Aboufaied.

Idriss and Juma Aboufaied have been arbitrarily arrested by members of the Libyan Internal Security Agency (ISA) and held incommunicado for long periods. Mr. Idriss Aboufaied has been subjected to torture while in custody. He may face the death penalty at the end of an ongoing judicial procedure which lacks the most elementary guarantees of fairness and equity. His brother, Juma Aboufaied, who has not been able to communicate with his relatives, remains in detention in an unacknowledged location. No grounds have been given for his detention and no charge has been laid against him.

Idriss Aboufaied is a renowned Libyan human rights activist who has openly called for political reform in his country. After 16 years in Switzerland as a refugee, he returned to Libya, following Colonel Khaddafi’s promises not to persecute exiled political opponents who were willing to return. He was interrogated by ISA agents upon his arrival at Tripoli Airport on 30 September 2006, and his passport was confiscated.

On 5 November 2006 he was arbitrarily arrested and held in incommunicado detention for the next 54 days, until he was freed on 29 December 2006. While in detention, he had to be transferred to a hospital as a result of the torture inflicted by his captors. After his release, having declared his determination to continue his struggle for democracy, he and other critics of the regime undertook to organise a peaceful demonstration, which was to take place on 17 February 2007 and aimed at calling for the rule of law and the respect of human rights in Libya.

The day before the date of the planned demonstration, internal security agents once again arrested Idriss Aboufaied and 11 other co-organisers of the demonstration, namely Jamal Alhaji, Fareed Azway, Almahdi Hmeed, Assadiq Hmeed, Faraj Hmeed, Adel Hmeed, Ali Hmeed, Ala Adrisi, Assadiq Gashoot, Bashir Alharis and Ahmad Alabeedi. They have all been in prison since then and have made allegations of torture.

Immediately after Idriss Aboufaied’s second detention, his brother, Juma Aboufaied, telephonically informed persons abroad about the incident. Three hours later, he was detained by internal security agents, in all likelihood in connection with these phone calls.

Another Libyan citizen, Abdelrahman Al-Gteewi, was also arrested. Neither he nor Juma Aboufaied has had any possibility of contact with the outside world. Neither of them has been charged, and the authorities have refused to deliver any information about their fate and whereabouts.

Two months after their arrest, criminal charges were laid against the 12 men detained in connection with the demonstration planned for 17 February 2007. They are currently being tried by the Revolutionary Security Court, a special tribunal for opponents of the regime. After several months of an ostensibly unfair procedure, the Court has announced that the final verdict will be pronounced on 15 April 2008. The accused may face the death penalty.

All judicial and other legal remedies provided for by Libyan legislation are de factounavailable to victims of crimes perpetrated for political reasons, due to the high risk – almost certainty – of severe reprisals against those who would bring accusations against the State and the great difficulty (within the context of the generalized terror prevailing in Libya) that such persons would have in availing themselves of the assistance of a lawyer. In addition, such legal actions would have no chance of success, owing to the lack of independence of the national tribunals.

The author of the communication requests the Committee to recognize that Libya has violated, as a result of the facts described above:

  • with regard to Idriss Aboufaied: his rights to an effective remedy; to life; not to be subject to torture or ill-treatment; to freedom and security of the person; to be treated with respect for his human dignity while in detention; to freedom of movement; to a fair trial, and to be recognized in all circumstances as a legal person (articles 2 § 3, 6 § 1, 7, 9 §§ 1, 2, 3 and 4, 10 § 1, 12 § 2, 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights),
  • as to Juma Aboufaied: the rights to an effective remedy; to life; not to be subject to torture or ill-treatment; to freedom and security of the person; to be treated with respect for his human dignity while in detention; and to be recognized in all circumstances as a legal person (articles 2 § 3, 6 § 1, 7, 9 §§ 1, 2, 3 and 4, 10 § 1 and 16 of the Covenant) and,
  • finally, regarding the author himself, the rights to an effective remedy and not to be subject to torture or ill-treatment (articles 2 § 3 and 7).

 

The general context

These facts come within the context of the relentless repression suffered by those who dare to criticize the regime of Colonel Khadafi, who has ruled the country with an iron fist for nearly 40 years now. The security forces – especially the Internal Security Agency – have notoriously committed the worst abuses on a large scale and with total impunity. Opponents of the government are the main targets of such practices.

Heavy punishments imposed after procedures which grossly disregard basic procedural guarantees – such as the ongoing trial against the abovementioned 12 accused men – constitute a common instrument of repression against dissidents in Libya.

The practice of incommunicado detention for long periods is also common, and past experiences can only give rise to pessimism concerning the fate of Juma Aboufaied and Abdelrahman Al-Gteewi, who still remain missing today.

 

The decision

In May 2012, the Human Rights Committee communicated its decision (called “views” in the UN language).

The Committee held that Libya violated Articles 7, 9, 10 § 1 and 16 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights with regard to Idriss and Juma Aboufaied. It also found a violation of Articles 12 § 2 and 14 § 1, 3(a) and 3(d) vis-à-vis Idriss Aboufaied. The Committee further found a violation of Article 2 § 3 of the Covenant, read in conjunction with Articles 6 § 1, 7, 9, 10 § 1, 12 § 2 and 16.

The Committee also held that Libya violated Article 7 of the ICCPR, taken alone and in conjunction with Article 2 § 3, with regards to the author of the communication.

The Committee requested Libya to provide the author and his brothers with an effective remedy, including “a thorough and effective investigation into the disappearance of Idriss and Juma Aboufaied and any ill-treatment that they suffered in detention”, to give them “detailed information on the results of its investigation” and to prosecute, try and punish those responsible for the disappearance or other ill-treatment of Idriss and Juma Aboufaied. Libya was also required to pay an appropriate compensation to the author and his brothers for the violations endured.

 

The case

In September 2012, TRIAL submitted a communication to the UN Human Rights Committee concerning the alleged arbitrary killing and the subsequent removal and concealment of the remains of Mrs. Anđa Lale and Mrs. Staka Popović in the municipality of Trnovo in August 1992. TRIAL acts on behalf of Mr. Vide Lale and Mrs. Milojka Blagojević, who are respectively the son of Mrs. Anđa Lale and the daughter of Mrs. Staka Popović.

Following the Bosnian military attack against the town of Trnovo in mid-July 1992, Mrs. Anđa Lale and Mrs. Staka Popović, together with other six people, fled the town and reached the nearby village of Širokari seeking refuge in a weekend cottage they found empty in the village. On the 2nd August 1992, as they were setting out to have dinner in the weekend cottage in Širokari, Mr. Rajko Lale – another son of Mrs. Anđa Lale who was himself in the house – heard and saw dozens of Bosnian soldiers approaching. When Mr. Rajko Lale realised that the soldiers were about to reach and enter the house, he escaped through the window and hid in a bush very close to the cottage. He stayed in the bush all night, he was frightened and petrified and the only thing he could see was that the weekend house was set on fire by soldiers. He thought that all the persons had been burned inside the house. There was no trace of them in the cottage the following morning.

The fate and whereabouts of Mrs. Anđa Lale and Mrs. Staka Popović remain unknown since then and they are officially registered as ‘missing persons’ before domestic and international institutions. More than 20 years after the events, no investigation has been launched to establish what happened to Mrs. Anđa Lale and Mrs. Staka Popović nor to identify, judge and sanction those responsible for their alleged arbitrary killing and the subsequent removal and concealment of their remains.

Since 1992, Mr. Vide Lale and Mrs. Milojka Blagojević have been suffering from deep and severe psychological distress trying to cope with what has happened to their mothers, the lacerating uncertainty of their fate and whereabouts, the State’s attitude of indifference towards their plight and the absence of compensation or reparations. Moreover their family life was disrupted as a consequence of the arbitrary killing of their mothers and the subsequent concealment of their mortal remains, which have prevented the authors from burying their mothers in accordance with their religious customs and beliefs.

On 13 July 2005 the Constitutional Court of Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH), seized by several families of missing persons, including Mr. Vide Lale and Mrs. Milojka Blagojević, declared that BiH violated the right not to be subjected to torture and inhuman and degrading treatment and the right to respect for private and family life of the relatives of missing persons. Accordingly, the Court ordered the domestic institutions concerned to disclose all available information on the fate and whereabouts of the missing people, including Mrs. Anđa Lale and Mrs. Staka Popović. To date, Mr. Vide Lale and Mrs. Milojka Blagojević have not received any relevant information about their mothers from the institutions concerned.

In September 2012, TRIAL therefore submitted an individual communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee asking it:

to find that Mrs. Anđa Lale and Mrs. Staka Popović are victims of a violation of Art. 6 (right to life) in conjunction with Art. 2.3 (right to a remedy) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights due to the ongoing failure of BiH authorities to conduct an ex officio, prompt, impartial, independent and thorough investigation on their alleged arbitrary killing and the subsequent concealment of their mortal remains in order to establish their whereabouts and to locate, exhume, identify and return their mortal remains to the respective families, as well as to identify those responsible for these crimes and to prosecute, judge and sanction them.

To find that Mr. Vide Lale and Mrs. Milojka Blagojević are victims of a violation of Art. 7 (prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment) in conjunction with Art. 2.3 (right to a remedy) of the Covenant because of the severe mental distress and anguish caused by the alleged arbitrary killing and the subsequent concealment of the mortal remains of Mrs. Anđa Lale and Mrs. Staka Popović. Moreover, Mr. Vide Lale and Mrs. Milojka Blagojević allege that the above mentioned provisions are violated also in conjunction with Art. 17 and 23.1 of the Covenant, because of the disruption of their family life as a consequence of the arbitrary killing of their mothers and the subsequent concealment of their mortal remains, which have prevented the authors from burying their mothers in accordance with their religious customs and beliefs.

to request BiH to order independent investigations as a matter of urgency with a view to establishing the fate and whereabouts of Mrs. Anđa Lale and Mrs. Staka Popović and to locate, exhume, identify and respect their mortal remains and to return them to the authors of the communication.

to request BiH to bring the perpetrators of the alleged arbitrary killing and the subsequent concealment of the mortal remains of Mrs. Anđa Lale and Mrs. Staka Popović before the competent authorities for prosecution, judgment and sanction without any further delay.

to request BiH to ensure that Mr. Vide Lale and Mrs. Milojka Blagojević obtain integral reparation and prompt, fair and adequate compensation.

 

The General Context

It is estimated that between 100,000 and 200,000 persons died as a consequence of the conflict (1992-1995) in BiH and that between 25,000 and 30,000 were victims of enforced disappearance. Approximately 10,000 people remain missing to date.

The alleged arbitrary killing and the subsequent removal and concealment of the remains of Mrs. Anđa Lale and Mrs. Staka Popović took place in the context of the military operations between the Bosnian Serb Army and the Green Berets in the municipality of Trnovo during the summer 1992.

 

The Decision

On 17 March 2017 the UN Human Rights Committee issued a decision on the case, finding BiH responsible for the violation of several provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. In particular, it declared a violation of the right to life and the right to an effective remedy with regard to Mrs. Lale and Mrs. Blagojević, due to the lack of information on their fate and whereabouts. Moreover, the Committee found that this entails a form of inhuman and degrading treatment for their relatives.

The Committee requested BiH to:

  • Intensify its investigation to establish the fate and whereabouts of Mrs. Lale and Mrs. Blagojević;
  • Bring to justice those responsible for the crimes committed against Mrs. Lale and Mrs. Blagojević;
  • Provide the relatives of Mrs. Lale and Mrs. Blagojević with adequate compensation and measures of satisfaction;
  • Provide the relatives of Lale and Mrs. Blagojević with the necessary psychological rehabilitation and medical care;
  • Prevent similar violations in the future and ensure that investigations into allegations of enforced disappearance and arbitrary executions are accessible to the families of victims.

BiH has now 180 days to inform the Committee about the measures taken to implement this decision.

 

The case

In March 2012, TRIAL submitted a communication to the UN Human Rights Committee concerning the enforced disappearance of Mr. Salih Dovadžija occurred in October 1992. TRIAL acts on behalf of Mrs. Sakiba Dovadžija and Ms. Dalisa Dovadžija, who are respectively the wife and the daughter of Mr. Salih Dovadžija.

On or around 10 August 1992, Mr. Salih Dovadžija was seen for the last time alive by his wife and his daughter (at the time 5-month old), while he was serving as a member of the Territorial Defence of the BiH Army. According to eye-witnesses, Mr. Salih Dovadžija was seen for the last time alive in October 1992 at the frontline in Žuč. He was held by members of the Bosnian Serb forces (VRS) in life-threatening circumstances, subjected to ill-treatment and forced labour. The fate and whereabouts of Mr. Salih Dovadžija remain unknown since then and he is officially registered as a missing person before domestic and international institutions. To date, no one has been judged and sanctioned for the enforced disappearance of Mr. Salih Dovadžija.

Almost 20 years after the events, no ex officio, prompt, impartial, thorough and independent investigation has been undertaken by BiH authorities to locate the mortal remains of Mr. Salih Dovadžija or to identify, prosecute and sanction those responsible for the mentioned crimes. Mrs. Sakiba Dovadžija and Ms. Dalisa Dovadžija have undertaken several steps to obtain information about their loved one.

Since 1992 Mrs. Sakiba Dovadžija and Ms. Dalisa Dovadžija are undergoing deep and severe psychological stress to try to cope with what has happened to their family and the lacerating uncertainty on the whereabouts of Mr. Salih Dovadžija. As a consequence of her precarious state of health, Mrs. Sakiba Dovadžija has been diagnosed and is being treated for “mixed dissociative conversion disorder”. In the case of Ms. Dalisa Dovadžija, who was a few months old when these tragic events took place, she was forced to grow up without her father and even in the impossibility to adequately mourn him. This situation has affected her whole family life.

On 16 July 2007, the Constitutional Court of BiH, seized by several families of missing persons, including Mrs. Sakiba Dovadžija, declared that BiH violated the right not to be subjected to torture and inhuman and degrading treatment and the right to respect for private and family life of the relatives of missing persons.Accordingly, the Court ordered the domestic institutions concerned to disclose all available information on the fate and whereabouts of the missing people, including Mr. Salih Dovadžija.

In March 2011, TRIAL therefore submitted an individual communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee asking it:

  • to find that Mr. Salih Dovadžija is a victim of a violation of Article 2.3 (right to a remedy) in conjunction with Articles 6 (right to life), 7 (prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment), 9 (right to liberty and security of person), 10 (right to human treatment of people deprived of their liberty), and 16 (right to be recognized as a person before the law) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, due to the ongoing failure of BiH authorities to conduct an ex officio, prompt, impartial, independent and thorough investigation on his arbitrary deprivation of liberty, ill-treatment, and subsequent enforced disappearance, in order to establish his fate and whereabouts, as well as to identify those responsible for these crimes and to prosecute, judge and sanction them;
  • to find that they are victims of a violation by BiH of Article 2.3 (right to a remedy) in conjunction with Article 7 (prohibition of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment) of the Covenant, because of the severe mental distress and anguish caused by the violations committed against Mr. Salih Dovadžija and the ongoing lack of information about the causes and circumstances of these events as well as on the progress and results of the investigations carried out by BiH authorities. Moreover, Mrs. Sakiba Dovadžija and Ms. Dalisa Dovadžija allege that the mentioned provisions are violated also in conjunction with Articles 17 and 23.1 of the Covenant, because of the disruption of their family life as a consequence of the arbitrary deprivation of liberty and the subsequent enforced disappearance of Mr. Salih Dovadžija. The mentioned violations have prevented Mrs. Sakiba Dovadžija and Ms. Dalisa Dovadžija from burying their loved one in accordance with their religious customs and beliefs. In the case of Ms. Dalisa Dovadžija, until 31 March 2010, all the mentioned provisions were violated in conjunction with Article 24.1 of the Covenant, as she was a minor.
  • to request BiH to order independent investigations as a matter of urgency with a view to exhume, identify, respect and return to the family the mortal remains of Mr. Salih Dovadžija;
  • to request BiH to bring the perpetrators of the arbitrary deprivation of liberty, ill-treatment, and subsequent enforced disappearance Mr. Salih Dovadžija before the competent ordinary tribunals for prosecution, judgment and sanction without any further delay; and
  • to request BiH to ensure that Mrs. Sakiba Dovadžija and Ms. Dalisa Dovadžija obtain integral reparation and prompt, fair and adequate compensation for the harm suffered.

 

The Decision

On 22 July 2015 the UN Human Rights Committee issued a decision on the case,finding BiH responsible for the violation of several provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the rights to life, personal liberty, and the prohibition of torture with regard to Mr. Salih Dovadžija. The Committee declared that the State is responsible for not providing information on the progress of the investigation into Mr. Dovadžija’s disappearance to his loved ones. The failure of the State to unveil the truth on Mr. Dovadžija’s fate and whereabouts exposed his wife and daughter to anguish and distress amounting to inhumane and degrading treatment.

The Committee requested BiH to:

  • Establish the fate and whereabouts of Mr. Salih Dovadžija;
  • Bring to justice without unnecessary delay those responsible for Mr. Dovadžija’s enforced disappearance;
  • Provide the wife and daughter of Mr. Dovadžija with adequate compensation and measures of satisfaction;
  • Provide the wife and daughter of Mr. Dovadžija with the necessary psychological rehabilitation and medical care;
  • Prevent similar violations in the future and ensure that investigations into allegations of enforced disappearance are accessible to the families of missing persons.

In early 2016, the remains of Mr. Salih Dovadžija were found in Pale, near Sarajevo. In November 2016, his wife and daughter were finally able to bury him.

Since then, Ms Dovadžija has also been allowed a monthly pension.

 

The General Context

It is estimated that between 100,000 and 200,000 persons died as a consequence of the conflict (1992-1995) in BiH and that between 25,000 and 30,000 were victims of enforced disappearance. Approximately 10,000 people remain missing to date.

To date no one has been convicted, prosecuted and sanctioned for the enforced disappearance of Mr. Salih Dovadžija, thus fostering an overall climate of impunity. Up to this day, Mrs. Sakiba Dovadžija and Ms. Dalisa Dovadžija have not received any information on whereabouts of the mortal remains of Mr. Salih Dovadžija and they have not had the possibility to mourn and bury him in accordance with their religious customs and beliefs.

 

Introduction

In November 2010, TRIAL submitted an individual communication before the United Nations Human Rights Committee regarding the enforced disappearance of Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif in 1990.

Izzat Al-Maqrif was a high profile member of the opposition to the Libyan regime. He remained member of the Libyan army until 1973 when he was accused of taking part in an attempt coup to overthrow the government of Colonel Gaddafi. He was held in prison for almost one year after which he was released and discharged from the army. Izzat Al-Maqrif and his family fled the country in 1981 and settled in Cairo, Egypt, in 1984. While in Cairo, Mr. Al-Maqrif was a senior member of the Executive Committee of the National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL), an opposition mouvement.

On 4 or 5 March 1990, agents of the State Security Investigation Bureau came to Izzat Al-Maqrif’s home in Heliopolis, Cairo. They took him and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar – another opposition figure living in exile in Cairo – to the headquarters of the State Security Investigation Bureau.

Upon arriving, Mr. Al-Maqrif and Mr. Matar were interrogated by agents of the State Security Investigation. They were released by the Egyptian authorities, but their passports were confiscated. On 12 march 1990, Egyptian authorities returned and took the two men from their respective homes. The two were detained and not allowed to return home. On that day, their families saw them for the last time.

According to letters the two men managed to smuggle out of prison, their relatives were informed that after their arrest, the two men were taken to the headquarters of the Egyptian Military Security for further interrogation and then transferred to Libya by plane from Cairo airport to Tripoli. From there, they were taken to Abu Salim prison.

Izzat Al-Maqrif was never brought before a judge nor given the possibility to challenge the legality of his detention. No charges against him were ever presented. His family was never informed by the authorities about the fate or whereabouts of their loved one. To this day, it remains unclear whether Izzat Al-Maqrif is still alive.

In November 2010, TRIAL therefore submitted an individual communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of the Izzat Al-Maqrif’s son asking the Committee, amongst other:

  •  to find that Libya has breached numerous articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in relation to the disappearance of Izzat Al-Maqrif and to the way it has treated his family;
  •  to request that Libya undertake all necessary action to:
    • conduct independent investigations as a matter of urgency with a view to locatingIzzat Al-Maqrif and, in the event of his death, exhuming, identifying, respecting and returning his mortal remains to his family;
    • fully investigate the circumstances of the alleged violations and take all appropriate steps to bring to justice and sanction those responsible before the competent civilian authorities;
    • adopt all necessary measures to ensure that Izzat Al-Maqrif’s family receive integral reparation and prompt, fair and adequate compensation. Reparations shall include measures aiming at granting restitution; rehabilitation; satisfaction, including restoration of dignity and reputation; and guarantees of non-repetition.

 

Context

Since the coup that brought Colonel Gaddafi to power in 1969, many opposition groups to his regime were 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. 

 

The Decision

The Human Rights Committee decided to deal jointly with the communications concerning the cases of Mr. Izzat Al-Maqrif and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar.

In March 2014, the Human Rights Committee communicated its decision (called “views” in the UN language). The Committee held that Libya violated Arts. 6, para. 1 (right to life); 7 (prohibition of torture); 9 (right to personal liberty); 10, para. 1 (right to humane treatment); and 16 (right to juridical personality), of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, alone and in conjunction with Art. 2, para. 3 (right to an effective remedy); with regard to Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar. The Committee also found a violation of Art. 7, read alone and in conjunction with Art. 2, para. 3, of the Covenant with respect to the authors of the communications because of the suffering inflicted on them by the enforced disappearance of their fathers. In the case of Mr. Youcif Almegaryaf, the Committee found also a violation of Art. 24, para. 1 (rights of the child), of the Covenant, given that he was 6 years old when his father was subjected to enforced disappearance and Libya failed to adopt the special measures of protection he was entitled to as a minor.

The Committee requested Libya to: (a) conduct a thorough and effective investigation into the disappearance of the two men; (b) provide the authors and their families with detailed information on the results of its investigation; (c) release Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar immediately, if they are still being detained incommunicado, or, in the event of their death, hand over their remains to their families; (d) prosecute, try and punish those responsible for the violations committed; and (e) provide adequate compensation. Libya must also publish the decision of the Committee and widely disseminate it.

Libya must inform the Committee within 180 days about the measures taken to implement the decision.

 

Introduction

In November 2010, TRIAL submitted an individual communication before the United Nations Human Rights Committee regarding the enforced disappearance of Jaballa Hamed Matar in 1990.

Jaballa Matar was a colonel in the Libyan army and became a key member of the opposition to the government after the 1969 coup. Mr. Matar was arrested in 1970 and detained for 6 months. After his release, he worked a few years for the government and then resigned his position because of policy disagreement. He worked as a businessman from 1973 to 1978 in Libya but realising it was no longer safe to live there, Jaballa Matar and his family left the country in 1979 to settle in Egypt, where they spent 11 years in exile. While in Cairo, Jaballa Matar was a member of the Executive Committee of the National Front for the Salvation of Libya (NFSL), an opposition mouvement. As such, he wrote many articles calling for democracy, the rule of law and justice in Libya.

On 4 or 5 March 1990, agents of the State Security Investigation Bureau came to Jaballa Matar’s home in the district of Mohandessin, Cairo. They took him and Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif – another opposition figure living in exile in Cairo – to the headquarters of the State Security Investigation Bureau.

Upon arriving, Mr. Matar and Mr. Al-Maqrif were interrogated by agents of the State Security Investigation. They were released by the Egyptian authorities, but their passports were confiscated. On 12 March 1990, Egyptian authorities returned and took the two men from their respective homes. The two were detained and not allowed to return home. Their families never saw them again.

According to letters the two men managed to smuggle out of prison, their relatives were informed that after their arrest, the two men were taken to the headquarters of the Egyptian Military Security for further interrogation and then transferred to Libya by plane from Cairo airport to Tripoli. From there, they were taken to Abu Salim prison.

Jaballa Matar was never brought before a judge nor given the possibility to challenge the legality of his detention. No charges against him were ever presented. His family was never informed by the authorities about the fate or whereabouts of their loved one. To this day, it remains unclear whether Jaballa Matar is still alive.

In November 2010, TRIAL therefore submitted an individual communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of the Jaballa Matar’s son asking the Committee, amongst other:

  • to find that Libya has breached numerous articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in relation to the disappearances of Jaballa Matar and to the way it has treated his family;
  • to request that Libya undertake all necessary action to:
    • conduct independent investigations as a matter of urgency with a view to locatingJaballa Matar and, in the event of his death, exhuming, identifying, respecting and returning his mortal remains to his family;
    • fully investigate the circumstances of the alleged violations and take all appropriate steps to bring to justice and sanction those responsible before the competent civilian authorities;
    • adopt all necessary measures to ensure that Jaballa Matar’s family receive integral reparation and prompt, fair and adequate compensation. Reparations shall include measures aiming at granting restitution; rehabilitation; satisfaction, including restoration of dignity and reputation; and guarantees of non-repetition;

 

Context

Since the coup that brought Colonel Gaddafi to power in 1969, many opposition groups to his regime were 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. Jaballa Hamed Matar and Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif, 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.

 

The Decision

The Human Rights Committee decided to deal jointly with the communications concerning the cases of Mr. Izzat Al-Maqrif and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar.

In March 2014, the Human Rights Committee communicated its decision (called “views” in the UN language). The Committee held that Libya violated Arts. 6, para. 1 (right to life); 7 (prohibition of torture); 9 (right to personal liberty); 10, para. 1 (right to humane treatment); and 16 (right to juridical personality), of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, alone and in conjunction with Art. 2, para. 3 (right to an effective remedy); with regard to Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar. The Committee also found a violation of Art. 7, read alone and in conjunction with Art. 2, para. 3, of the Covenant with respect to the authors of the communications because of the suffering inflicted on them by the enforced disappearance of their fathers. In the case of Mr. Youcif Almegaryaf, the Committee found also a violation of Art. 24, para. 1 (rights of the child), of the Covenant, given that he was 6 years old when his father was subjected to enforced disappearance and Libya failed to adopt the special measures of protection he was entitled to as a minor.

The Committee requested Libya to: (a) conduct a thorough and effective investigation into the disappearance of the two men; (b) provide the authors and their families with detailed information on the results of its investigation; (c) release Mr. Izzat Yousef Al-Maqrif and Mr. Jaballa Hamed Matar immediately, if they are still being detained incommunicado, or, in the event of their death, hand over their remains to their families; (d) prosecute, try and punish those responsible for the violations committed; and (e) provide adequate compensation. Libya must also publish the decision of the Committee and widely disseminate it.

Libya must inform the Committee within 180 days about the measures taken to implement the decision.

 

Story

In October 2010, TRIAL submitted a complaint to the United Nations Human Rights Committee on behalf of Chakra Bahadur Katwal, victim of enforced disappearance in 2001.

Katwal was the headmaster of Shree Kuibhir Secondary School (Kuibhirtar, Okhalkdhunga District), where he also taught science. He was married and the father of four children. On 9 December 2001, Chakra Katwal received a letter at his school asking him to go to the district’s education office in the Okhaldhunga village in order to respond to an inquiry. When Katwal arrived at Okhaldhunga a few days later, an employee of the education office told him that he had to go to the district police office in order to answer some questions. From there, Katwal was allegedly forced into one of the army buildings. The following day, witnesses saw soldiers carrying him by his arms and legs. Chakra Katwal seemed unconscious, his clothes were covered in blood and his body showed signs of beating. The victim was transported into the police buildings and has never been seen since.

Since Chakra Katwal’s disappearance, his spouse has not ceased to seek the truth about his fate and whereabouts. Not only have her efforts proved to be in vain, but she has also suffered from harassment by the Nepalese army. She was also abused during her arrest and detention in 2005, which aimed at silencing her on the issue of the army’s involvement in the enforced disappearance of her husband. Her daughter equally suffered from severe physical and psychological abuse during the six weeks in which she was arbitrarily detained by the army. She had to be hospitalized and is still suffering from significant long-term consequences despite medical treatment.

 

 

Case

In July 2006, Chakra Katwal’s relatives petitioned Nepal’s Supreme Court. On 1st July 2007, the Supreme Court confirmed that Katwal had been arbitrarily arrested and detained by the Nepalese army and police and that the torture he was subjected to had led to his death. The Supreme Court ordered that the people involved in this case and who were cited in the inquiry report be prosecuted. To date, however, the Nepalese authorities have not followed-up on the decision and impunity continues to reign. Katwal’s family still does not know what has happened to his body.

On 27 October 2010, TRIAL therefore submitted a complaint to the United Nations Human Rights Committee asking it to :

  • Recognize that Nepal violated numerous articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights subsequently to Chakra Katwal’s enforced disappearance;
  • Require an independent inquiry in order to precisely locate the place of his remains and to exhume them in order to allow the family to organize a funeral according to their traditions;
  • Ask Nepal to prosecute the people responsible for Katwal’s disappearance;
  • Declare that Nepal also violated the Covenant with regard to the suffering caused by Katwal’s spouse and family owing to his disappearance;
  • Require that Nepal offer integral, prompt, just and adequate reparation for the suffering and the loss due to Katwal’s disappearance and to pay for the exhumation and funeral costs;
  • Ask Nepal to provide the necessary guarantees for the non-repetition of similar acts to those suffered by Katwal and for his family’s safety during the course of the procedure.

 

Decision

In 2012, the UN Human Rights Committee declared the complaint admissible, holding that Chakra Katwal’s wife had used all available remedies without obtaining justice and redress and clarifying that she did not have to wait until domestic transitional justice mechanisms were in place before referring her case to the Committee. Transitional justice mechanisms, such as truth commissions, are important tools for the establishment of the truth, but cannot replace criminal prosecution.

On 1 April 2015 the Human Rights Committee issued a decision on the case, finding Nepal internationally responsible for the violation of several provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the rights to life, juridical personality, and personal liberty and the prohibition of torture. In particular, the Committee declared that the State is responsible for the arbitrary deprivation of liberty, ill-treatment, and enforced disappearance of Chakra Bahadur Katwal, for not having investigated such violations and not having duly prosecuted and sanctioned those responsible, and also for having subjected his wife to inhumane and degrading treatment because it has not unveiled the truth about Katwal’s fate and whereabouts.

The Committee requested Nepal to:

Investigate and locate the remains of Katwal, and return them to his family;

Identify, prosecute and sanction those responsible;

Ensure that the Katwal’s wife receives effective reparation, including adequate compensation and satisfaction for the harm suffered;

Prevent similar violations in the future, making sure that torture and enforced disappearance are duly codified under domestic criminal legislation.

Nepal has now 180 days to inform the Committee about the measures taken to implement this decision.

 

The case

In December 2001, TRIAL lodged an application before the UN Human Rights Committee on behalf of Ram Bhandari concerning the enforced disappearance of his father Tej Bhandari in December 2001. The enforced disappearance of Tej Bhandari is part of the context of a state of emergency that was declared by the Nepalese government in November 2001.

On 27 December 2001, while her husband was away, Ms. Bhandari was visited by a group of policemen and army personnel who were looking for Mr. Bhandari. They threatened her and warned that her husband had to report back to the Chief District Officer (CDO) on the day after for an enquiry.

On the following day, Mr. Bhandari followed the instructions given and headed to the CDO’s office. The officer in charge there asked him to come again on the following Monday, adding that nothing would happen to him. Two days later, Mr. Bhandari thus boarded the bus to Besisahar with the intention to go to the CDO’s office again.

Upon arrival at the bus station, a group of men in uniform was waiting for him. They immediately arrested him, without giving any reason, then beat him on the street in front of travelers and bystanders. As Mr. Bhandari lay unconscious, one of the men tied his hands behind his back and blindfolded him. Then he was pushed in a police van and taken away to an unknown destination.

His relatives, especially his spouse and his son, took numerous steps in order to find him. In the days following the arrest, they met with the competent authorities, which first claimed that they had never arrested Mr. Bhandari, before later admitting that an investigation about him was ongoing. His family waited in vain for his release.

One month after the arrest, the victim’s son sent an application to the National Human Rights Commission in Nepal to have the truth established about the reasons and circumstances of his father disappearance. After having received from the authorities information that was in sheer contradiction with witnesses’ statements he had gathered, Mr. Tej Bhandari’s son submitted the case twice to the Supreme Court of Nepal.

The police has constantly refused to register Mr. Ram Bhandari’s complaint and to open an investigation. Furthermore, Mr. Ram Bhandari was subjected to threats and pressure from high level officers of the army who wanted to stop his activism.

TRIAL thus submitted an individual communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee asking it:

  • to recognise that Nepal violated numerous articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights subsequently to Mr. Bhandari’s enforced disappearance;
  • to require an independent inquiry in order to precisely locate the place of his Mr. Bhandari’s remains;
  • to ask Nepal to prosecute the people responsible for Mr. Bhandari’s disappearance;
  • to declare that Nepal also violated the Covenant with regard to the suffering caused by Mr. Bhandari’s family owing to his disappearance;
  • to require that Nepal offers integral, prompt, just and adequate reparation for the suffering and the loss due to Mr. Bhandari’s disappearance;
  • and to ask Nepal to provide the necessary guarantees for the non-repetition of similar acts to those suffered by Mr. Bhandari and his family’s safety during the course of the procedure.

 

The case

In April 2011 TRIAL submitted a communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee concerning the arbitrary killing and the subsequent removal and concealment of the mortal remains of Mr. Božo Mandić.

On or around 24 June 1992 Mr. Božo Mandić was arbitrarily killed by a sniper in the suburban neighbourhood of Sarajevo known as Vojničko Polje. The mortal remains of Mr. Božo Mandić were buried by a gentleman who was forced to do so by a member of the Bosniak Territorial Defence. In 1998, exhumations were carried out in the area around Lukaviča Road and, according to the reconstruction of the facts realised by the Cantonal Prosecutor’s Office in Sarajevo, it is most probable that on such occasion also the remains of Mr. Božo Mandić were exhumed. After that, all traces of Mr. Božo Mandić’s mortal remains were lost and continue unknown as of today.

TRIAL acts on behalf of Mr. Milan Mandić, who is the son of Mr. Božo Mandić.

In spite of numerous attempts from Mr. Mandić to establish the truth regarding the circumstances of the arbitrary killing and the subsequent removal and concealment of the mortal remains of his father Mr. Božo Mandić, the fate and whereabouts of the latter and the progress and results of the investigations remain unknown.

Indeed, more than 19 years after the events, no ex officio, prompt, impartial, thorough and independent investigation has been carried out by BiH authorities and no one has been prosecuted, judged and sanctioned for the crimes concerned, thus fostering an ongoing climate of impunity. Although Mr. Milan Mandić has provided DNA samples to international mechanisms and national institutions dealing with the subject of missing persons, to date the mortal remains of Mr. Božo Mandić not been duly located, exhumed, identified and returned to the family. In addition, as of today, Mr. Milan Mandić still has not received reparation or compensation for the harm suffered by him and his father.

TRIAL therefore submitted an individual communication to the United Nation Human Rights Committee asking it:

to recognise that BiH violated numerous articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights subsequently to Mr. Božo Mandić’s arbitrary killing and the subsequent removal and concealment of his mortal remains;

to declare that BiH also violated the Covenant with regard to the suffering caused to Mr. Milan Mandić by his father arbitrary killing and the subsequent removal and concealment of his mortal remains;

to request that BiH undertake all necessary action to launch independent investigations as a matter of urgency with a view to locating the mortal remains of Mr. Božo Mandić and exhuming, identifying, respecting and returning them to the Mr. Milan Mandić;

to request that BiH undertake all necessary action to identify those responsible for the arbitrary killing and the subsequent removal and concealment of the mortal remains of Mr. Božo Mandić, and to judge and sanction them;

to request that BiH undertake all necessary actions to guarantee that Mr. Milan Mandić obtains without any further delay fair and adequate compensation and, in particular, access to medical and psychological care free of charge.

 

The General Context

It is estimated that between 100,000 and 200,000 persons died as a consequence of the conflict (1992-1995) in BiH and that between 25,000 and 30,000 were victims of enforced disappearance.

The arbitrary killing and the subsequent removal and concealment of the mortal remains of Mr. Božo Mandić took place within the general context of the siege of the city of Sarajevo and, in particular, in the area of Lukavica, in East Sarajevo.

In 2011 the International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP) and the International Committee of the Red Cross estimated that around 10,000 people remain disappeared in BiH.

 

The Decision

On 5 November 2015 the UN Human Rights Committee issued a decision on the case, finding BiH responsible for the violation of several provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the right to life and to an effective remedy with regard to Mr. Božo Mandić. The Committee declared that the State is responsible for not providing information on the progress of the investigation into the crimes committed against Mr. Mandić and for the anguish and distress caused to his loved ones by the continuing uncertainty resulting from not knowing where his mortal remains may be and the impossibility to bury him in accordance with his faith.

The failure of the State to unveil the truth on what happened to Mr. Mandić exposed his son to anguish and distress amounting to inhumane and degrading treatment.

The Committee requested BiH to:

Locate the mortal remains of Mr. Mandić;

Bring to justice without unnecessary delay those responsible for the crimes committed against Mr. Mandić;

Provide the son of Mr. Mandić with adequate compensation and measures of satisfaction;

Provide the son of Mr. Mandić with the necessary psychological rehabilitation and medical care;

Prevent similar violations in the future and ensure that investigations into allegations of arbitrary executions are accessible to the families of victims.

BiH has now 180 days to inform the Committee about the measures taken to implement this decision.

 

The Case

In January 2011, TRIAL lodged an application before the UN Human Rights Committee concerning the arbitrary arrest, ill-treatment and alleged subsequent death of Ermin Kadirić in July 1992, on behalf of Dino Kadirić and Emira Kadirić, son and wife of the victim.

On 20 July 1992, Rizvanovići members of the Bosnian Serb forces (Vojska Republike Srpske – VRS) and of paramilitary groups surrounded the village of and apprehended many civilians, including Ermin Kadirić, who was staying at his house with his wife and children, including five year old Dino. Together with other men from the neighborhood, was ill-treated for hours and eventually arbitrary killed by members of the VRS.

Before being forced to leave the area and being taken away, together with her children, to the concentration camp of Trnopolje, Mrs. Kadirić and other eyewitnesses could see the body of Ermin Kadirić lying on the ground. Allegedly, the mortal remains of her husband were subsequently removed and concealed and, to date, they have not been located, exhumed, identified and returned to his family. Ermin Kadirić is registered as “missing” before international organizations and domestic institutions, which formally consider his case “still open”.

Almost 18 years after the events, no effective investigation has been carried out by BiH authorities and no one has been prosecuted, judged or sanctioned for these crimes. In 2001, the victim’s relatives have provided institutions dealing with missing persons cases with their DNA samples. Nevertheless, to date the mortal remains of Ermin Kadirić have not been identified nor located.

Dino Kadirić and Emira Kadirić live in a lacerating situation of uncertainty as they were never informed about his whereabouts nor about the progress and results of the investigations.

In January 2011, TRIAL therefore submitted an individual communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee asking it:

to find that BiH has violated numerous articles the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights  with regard to Ermin Kadirić, due to the ongoing failure of BiH authorities to conduct an ex officio, prompt, impartial, independent and thorough investigation into the events, in order to establish the whereabouts of his body, as well as to identify those responsible for these crimes and to prosecute, judge and sanction them;

to find that BiH has violated several articles of the Covenant in respect of the victim’s wife and son;

to request BiH to order independent investigations as a matter of urgency with a view to locating, exhuming, identifying, respecting and returning the mortal remains of Mr. Ermin Kadirić to his family;

to request BiH to bring the perpetrators of the arbitrary arrest, ill-treatment, arbitrary execution and the subsequent removal and concealment of the mortal remains of Mr. Ermin Kadirić before the competent civil authorities for prosecution, judgment and sanction, and to disseminate publicly the results of this measure.

 

The General Context

It is estimated that between 100,000 and 200,000 persons died as a consequence of the conflict (1992-1995) in BiH and that between 25,000 and 30,000 were victims of enforced disappearance. Approximately 13,000 people remain disappeared to date.

The case of Ermin Kadirić occurred in the context of a first wave of enforced disappearances and “ethnic cleansing” operations perpetrated by the Serb army in the spring and summer of 1992.

Notwithstanding the existence of strong evidences on the identity of those responsible for the arbitrary arrest, ill-treatment and arbitrary execution and the subsequent concealment of the mortal remains of Ermin Kadirić, to date no one has been convicted, prosecuted and sanctioned for the mentioned crimes, thus fostering an overall climate of impunity.

 

The Decision

On 5 November 2015 the UN Human Rights Committee issued a decision on the case, finding BiH responsible for the violation of several provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the rights to life, personal liberty, and the prohibition of torture with regard to Mr. Ermin Kadirić. The Committee declared that the State is responsible for not providing information on the progress of the investigation into the crimes committed against Mr. Kadirić to his loved ones. The failure of the State to unveil the truth on what happened to Mr. Kadirić exposed his wife and son to anguish and distress amounting to inhumane and degrading treatment.

The Committee requested BiH to:

Locate the mortal remains of Mr. Ermin Kadirić;

Bring to justice without unnecessary delay those responsible for the crimes committed against Mr. Kadirić;

Provide the wife and son of Mr. Kadirić with adequate compensation and measures of satisfaction;

Provide the wife and son of Mr. Kadirić with the necessary psychological rehabilitation and medical care;

Prevent similar violations in the future and ensure that investigations into allegations of enforced disappearance and arbitrary executions are accessible to the families of victims.

BiH has now 180 days to inform the Committee about the measures taken to implement this decision.

Read the decision

 

The Facts

In December 2010, TRIAL submitted an application to theUnited Nations Human Rights Committee concerning the enforced disappearance of Fadil Ičić, on behalf of his mother, Mrs. Mevlida Ičić.

On 20 June 1992, when ethnic cleansing operations were taking place in Trnopolje (Bosnia and Herzegovina – BiH) and in the surrounding area, members of the Bosnian Serb forces arbitrarily deprived Fadil Ičić of his liberty as he was working in the field outside his house. He was taken to the concentration camp known as “Omarska”. In Omarska, Fadil Ičić and other men were living in inhumane conditions and they were frequently beaten and ill-treated. Fadil Ičić was last seen alive by another prisoner, in the hands of the guards of the concerntration camp. The fate and whereabouts of Fadil Ičić remain unknown since then.

Mrs. Mevlida Ičić lives in a lacerating situation of uncertainty, in spite of numerous attempts to establish the truth regarding the circumstances of the arbitrary deprivation of liberty, ill-treatment and enforced disappearance of Fadil Ičić, his fate and whereabouts and the progress and results of the investigations. Almost 18 years after the events, no ex officio, prompt, impartial, thorough and independent investigation has been carried out by BiH authorities and no one has been prosecuted, judged and sanctioned for the crimes concerned, thus fostering an ongoing climate of impunity. Although Mrs. Mevlida Ičić and the other members of the family have given their DNA samples to international mechanisms and national institutions dealing with the subject of missing persons, to date the mortal remains of Fadil Ičić have not been duly located, exhumed, identified and returned to the family.

Besides, Mrs. Mevlida Ičić has still not received integral reparation or compensation for the harm suffered by her and her son.

In March 2008 Mrs. Mevlida Ičić submitted an application to the Constitutional Court of BiH. On 13 May 2008 the Constitutional Court adopted a ruling on the case, finding a violation of various provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights because of the lack of information on the destiny of Fadil Ičić. Therefore it ordered the authorities to disclose all available information on the fate and whereabouts of Fadil Ičić.

As of today, Mrs. Mevlida Ičić has still not received any information. Consequently TRIAL submitted an individual communication to the United Nation Human Rights Committee asking it:

to recognise that BiH violated numerous articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights subsequently to Fadil Ičić’s enforced disappearance;

to declare that BiH also violated the Covenant with regard to the suffering caused by Fadil Ičić’s mother owing to his disappearance;

to request that BiH undertake all necessary action to launch independent investigations as a matter of urgency with a view to locating Fadil Ičić and, in the event of his death, exhuming, identifying, respecting and returning his mortal remains to the authors;

to request that BiH undertake all necessary action to identify those responsible for his arbitrary deprivation of liberty, ill-treatment and subsequent enforced disappearance, judge and sanction them;

to request that BiH undertake all necessary action to guarantee that Mrs. Mevlida Ičić obtain without any further delay fair and adequate compensation and, in particular, access to medical and psychological care free of charge.

 

The Decision

On 30 March 2015 the UN Human Rights Committee issued a decision on the case, finding BiH responsible for the violation of several provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the rights to life, personal liberty, and the prohibition of torture with regard to Mr. Fadil Ičić. The Committee declared that the State is responsible for not providing information on the progress of the investigation into Mr. Ičić’s enforced disappearance to his loved ones. The failure of the State to unveil the truth on Mr. Ičić’s fate and whereabouts exposed his mother to anguish and distress amounting to inhumane and degrading treatment. Similarly, the fact that in order to obtain social allowances Mrs. Mevlida Ičić was forced to declare her missing son dead, while there was no certainty on his fate and whereabouts, constitutes inhumane and degrading treatment.

The Committee requested BiH to:

  • Establish the fate and whereabouts of Mr. Fadil Ičić;
  • Bring to justice without unnecessary delay those responsible for Mr. Ičić’s enforced disappearance;
  • Ensure that Mrs. Mevlida Ičić receives the necessary psychological rehabilitation and medical care, adequate compensation and appropriate measures of satisfaction;
  • Prevent similar violations in the future and ensure that investigations into allegations of enforced disappearance are accessible to the families of missing persons;
  • Amend the existing legal framework so that relatives of missing persons are not forced to obtain a certificate of death of the victim as a condition to receive social benefits.

BiH has now 180 days to inform the Committee about the measures taken to implement this decision.

 

The General Context

During the summer 1992, Bosnia and Herzegovina experienced the most violent phases of its history. The armed conflict between the Bosnian Serb forces and the Bosnian government forces generated the worst atrocities : operations of ethnic cleansing took place, concentration camps were set up and entire populations were forced to internally displace.

It is estimated that between 100,000 and 200,000 persons died as a consequence of the conflict (1992-1995) in BiH and that between 25,000 and 30,000 were victims of enforced disappearance.

In 2010 the International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP) and the International Committee of the Red Cross estimated that around 10,000 people remain disappeared in BiH.

 

The case

In February 2011, TRIAL submitted an individual communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee regarding the enforced disappearance and torture of Jit Man Basnet in February 2004. In this case, TRIAL also represents the victim’s cousin, Top Bahadur Basnet.

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 this time period (2003-2004) the Bhairabnath Battalion Barracks run by the Royal Nepali Army (RNA) became notorious. In May 2006, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights published a report after an investigation of the Maharajgunj RNA barracks in Kathmandu. The Bhairabnath Battalion, quartered at these barracks, played the primary role in the arrest, illegal detention, torture, extrajudicial killing and disappearance of hundreds of people suspected of affiliation with the Maoists, in 2003 and thereafter.

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.

On 18 October 2004, Jit Man Basnet was finally released. He was strictly forbidden to reveal the existence of the barracks and was forced to sign a paper stating that he was kept in detention for only 90 days, in accordance with state of emergency laws.

More than seven years have passed and, no ex officio, prompt, impartial, thorough and independent investigation has been carried out by Nepal authorities and no one has been prosecuted, judged and sanctioned for the enforce disappearance and torture of Jit Man Basnet, thus fostering an ongoing climate of impunity

In February 2011, TRIAL thus submitted an individual communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee asking it:

to recognise that Nepal violated numerous articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights subsequently to Jit Man Basnet’s enforced disappearance and torture;

to strongly recommend that Nepal initiate immediate investigations into the role of the soldiers attached to the Bhairabnath Battalion stationed at the Maharajgunj Barracks in the period concerned and prosecute those responsible for the arbitrary arrest, enforced disappearance and torture of Jit Man Basnet;

to urge the State party to immediately suspend from office all army officials against whom there is prima facie evidence that they were involved in the Jit Man Basnet’s enforced disappearance and torture;

to declare that Nepal also violated the Covenant with regard to the suffering undergone by Jit Man Basnet’s cousin, Top Bahadur Basnet; and therefore require that Nepal grant him full and adequate reparation;

to require that Nepal offers integral, prompt, just and adequate reparation for the enforced disappearance and torture suffered by Jit Man Basnet.

 

General context

In February 1996 the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) overtly declared war against the official governmental authorities of Nepal, which at the time was ruled in the form of a constitutional monarchy.

The conflict rapidly spread all over the country. In 2001, when violence truly escalated into a civil war, a state of emergency was declared. The state of emergency allowed the State to increase its repression against persons who were suspected of helping the Maoist insurgents and to derogate from fundamental rights and liberties. The recourse to enforced disappearances, torture, summary executions and arbitrary detentions by State agents and Maoists was generalized during this period. 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.

 

The Decision

On 29 October 2014, the UN Human Rights Committee adopted its decision on the case of Mr. Jit Man Basnet. The Committee held Nepal internationally responsible for violating several provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the right to personal liberty, to humane treatment, to recognition before the law, and the prohibition of torture. In particular, the Committee found the State responsible for its lack of investigation into these crimes and for the ongoing impunity of those responsible. The Committee also condemned Nepal for violating Mr. Top Bahadur Basnet’s right to humane treatment by disregarding his acute anguish and denying that his cousin had been subject to enforced disappearance.

The Committee requested Nepal to:

  • Investigate into the facts surrounding the detention of Mr. Jit Man Basnet and prosecute, try, and sanction those responsible
  • Ensure that Mr. Jit Man Basnet and Mr. Top Bahadur Basnet receive compensation, psychological rehabilitation and medical treatment
  • Adopt measures of satisfaction, including restoration of dignity and reputation of the two men
  • Amend the existing legal framework to codify the crimes of enforced disappearance and torture
  • Translate into Nepalese and publish the Committee’s decision.
  • Nepal now has 180 days to inform the Committee of the measures taken to implement the decision.

 

The case

In November 2010, TRIAL submitted a communication to theUnited Nations Human Rights Committee concerning the enforced disappearance of Mr. Husein Hamulić.

On 20 July 1992, when ethnic cleansing operations were taking place in Hambarine and in the 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. The whole area was under the control of the JNA and paramilitary groups. Mr. Husein Hamulić was then allegedly apprehended by members of the JNA. His fate and whereabouts remain unknown since then.

In spite of numerous attempts from his relatives to establish the truth regarding the circumstances of the arbitrary deprivation of liberty and the subsequent enforced disappearance of Mr. Husein Hamulić , his fate and whereabouts and the progress and results of the investigations remain unknown. Since then, Mrs. Halima Hodžić and Mrs. Nura Hamulić, who are respectively the sister and the mother of Mr. Husein Hamulić have lived in a lacerating situation of uncertainty.

Indeed, more than 18 years after the events, no ex officio, prompt, impartial, thorough and independent investigation has been carried out by BiH authorities and no one has been prosecuted, judged and sanctioned for the disappearance of Mr. Husein Hamulić, thus fostering an ongoing climate of impunity. Although the victim’s relatives have provided DNA samples to international mechanisms and national institutions dealing with the subject of missing persons, to date the mortal remains of Mr. Husein Hamulić have not been duly located, exhumed, identified and returned to the family. In addition, as of today, Mrs. Nura Hamulić and Mrs.Halima Hodžić still have not received reparation or compensation for the harm suffered by them and their loved one.

TRIAL therefore submitted an individual communication to the United Nation Human Rights Committee asking it :

to recognise that BiH violated numerous articles of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights subsequently to Mr. Husein Hamulić’s  enforced disappearance;

to declare that BiH also violated the Covenant with regard to the suffering caused by Husein Hamulić s mother and sister owing to his disappearance;

to request that BiH undertake all necessary action to launch independent investigations as a matter of urgency with a view to locating Mr. Husein Hamulić and, in the event of his death, exhuming, identifying, respecting and returning his mortal remains to the authors;

to request that BiH undertake all necessary action to identify those responsible for his arbitrary deprivation of liberty, ill-treatment and subsequent enforced disappearance, judge and sanction them;

to request that BiH undertake all necessary action to guarantee that Mrs. Halima Hodžić and Mrs. Nura Hamulić obtain without any further delay fair and adequate compensation and, in particular, access to medical and psychological care free of charge.

 

The Decision

On 30 March 2015 the UN Human Rights Committee issued a decision on the case, finding BiH responsible for the violation of several provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, including the rights to life, personal liberty, and the prohibition of torture with regard to Mr. Husein Hamulić. The Committee declared that the State is responsible for not providing information on the progress of the investigation into Mr. Hamulić’s disappearance to his loved ones. The failure of the State to unveil the truth on Mr. Hamulić’s fate and whereabouts exposed his mother and sister to anguish and distress amounting to inhumane and degrading treatment.

The Committee requested BiH to:

  • Establish the fate and whereabouts of Mr. Husein Hamulić;
  • Bring to justice without unnecessary delay those responsible for Mr. Hamulić’s enforced disappearance;
  • Provide the mother and the sister of Mr. Hamulić with adequate compensation and measures of satisfaction;
  • Prevent similar violations in the future and ensure that investigations into allegations of enforced disappearance are accessible to the families of missing persons.

BiH has now 180 days to inform the Committee about the measures taken to implement this decision.

 

The General Context

It is estimated that between 100,000 and 200,000 persons died as a consequence of the conflict (1992-1995) in BiH and that between 25,000 and 30,000 were victims of enforced disappearance.

The disappearance of Mr. Husein Hamulić took place within the general context of the “ethnic cleansing” operations that occurred in July 1992 in the area surrounding Prijedor, including the village of Hambarine. On 20 July 1992 Hambarine, as well as other villages on the left bank of the Sana river was the object of an armed attack by Serb forces.

To date, no one has been convicted, prosecuted and punished for the enforced disappearance of Mr. Husein hamulić, thus fostering an overall climate of impunity.

In 2010 the International Commission on Missing Persons (ICMP) and the International Committee of the Red Cross estimated that around 10,000 people remain disappeared in BiH.