Archive for March, 2012
March 30th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
Date: 4 April 2012
Time: 7:00PM – 8:30PM
Venue: 13 Norfolk Place, London, W2 1QJ
The recent KONY 2012 campaign video has been met with strong criticism, but nobody can question its effectiveness in reaching a mass audience, attaining over 100 million views in a week.
Despite its inaccuracies, this documentary has created wider awareness about Joseph Kony and the Lord’s Resistance Army than any news report or campaign that has come before it. On April’s first Wednesday, the Frontline Club will debate whether the KONY 2012 campaign is a force for good or a worrying development in campaigning.
Hosted by Paddy O’Connell of BBC Radio 4′s Broadcasting House, with:
- Benjamin Chesterton, radio documentary and photofilm producer, co-founder of the production company duckrabbit and the website A Developing Story.
- Amanda Weisbaum, Programmes Director at War Child, who works on the ground with communities affected by the LRA in Northern Uganda and Central African Republic.
- Musa Okwonga, a football writer, poet and musician of Ugandan descent. He is author of A Cultured Left Foot which was nominated for the William Hill Sports Book of the Year Award and Will You Manage?. He is one half of The King’s Will, an electronica outfit that blends poetry, music, and animated videos.
You can follow the discussion on
Twitter at
#fckony2012
March 30th, 2012 by Julien Maton
Coalition for the ICC member REDRESS recently submitted observations to ICC Pre-Trial Chamber (PTC) III on a potential collective approach to victims’ participation in the case against Laurent Gbagbo, the former president of Côte d’Ivoire, suspected of crimes against humanity. REDRESS limited its submission to relevant comparative practice and challenges which may be relevant to PTC III in its consideration of the issue. It has refrained from providing observations on whether a collective approach is merited or in line with the ICC’s legal texts.
REDRESS started by highlighting the inherent diversity of victims’ views, who may agree on a general strategy during trial but may want different reparations or have different perspectives in relation to the aggravating and extenuating circumstances relevant to the guilt of the accused.
The human rights organisation also advanced logistical and related difficulties, such as challenging terrain, poor infrastructure and transportation which can impede victims from communicating with each other and organising themselves. More than that, victims of the same group may not all speak the same language or may relocate to a different region inside or outside of the country, often without leaving contact details. In order to address logistical hurdles, REDRESS drew attention to NGOs’ programmes through which they invite the victims to scheduled meetings with others while providing them logistical support and reimbursement.
Finally, numerous persons may claim to speak “on behalf of a group”. Where victims’ groups are already constituted, legitimacy concerns have sometimes arisen with regards to who the group purports to represent, and whether the person representing the group is a legitimate representative. Victims’ groups may be dominated by political figures with certain issues treated as important only when they serve political ends. Added to that, victims’ poverty and illiteracy make them susceptible to manipulation.
On 8 March, PTC III had granted REDRESS leave to submit observations on victims’ collective application processes and practices. On 2 March, PTC III had invited observations from the Prosecution and Defence involved in the Gbagbo case on a proposal by the ICC Registry for a partly collective application form for victims’ participation. One of the major innovations of the Rome Statute, the International Criminal Court’s founding treaty, is the ability of victims to participate in proceedings.
March 29th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
Date: 21 March 2012 – 30 March 2012
Venue: Ritzy Cinema, Brixton Oval, Coldharbour Lane, Brixton, London SW2 1 JG
What is this event about?
Through its Film Festival, Human Rights Watch bears witness to human rights violations and create a forum for courageous individuals on both sides of the lens to empower audiences with the knowledge that personal commitment can make a difference. The festival brings to life human rights abuses through storytelling in a way that challenges each individual to empathize and demand justice for all people. In selecting films for the festival, Human Rights Watch concentrates equally on artistic merit and human rights content. The festival encourages filmmakers around the world to address human rights subject matter in their work and presents films from both new and established international filmmakers.
The festival is ongoing, and closes this Friday at 6.30PM with a Lebanese movie called “Where Do We Go Now?“
“Where Do We Go Now?” by Nadine Labaki
On the edge of a cratered road, a cortège-like procession of women solemnly makes its way towards the village cemetery. Takla, Amale, Yvonne, Afaf and Saydeh stoically brave the oppressive midday heat, clutching photographic effigies of their beloved menfolk, lost to a futile, protracted and distant war. Some of the women are veiled, others bear wooden crosses, but all are clad in black and united by a sense of shared grief. As they arrive at the cemetery gates, the procession divides into two congregations; one Muslim, the other Christian. Set against the backdrop of a war-torn country, Where Do We Go Now? tells the heart-warming tale of a group of women determined to protect their isolated, mine-encircled, community from the pervasive and divisive outside forces that threaten to destroy it from within. United by a common cause, the women’s unwavering friendship transcends, against all the odds, the religious fault lines which criss-cross their society and hatch some extraordinarily inventive, and often comical, plans in order to distract the village’s menfolk and defuse any sign of inter-religious tension. A series of chaotic incidents tests the women’s ingenuity as they manage to successfully stave off the fall-out from the distant war. But when events take a tragic turn, just how far will the women go in order to prevent bloodshed and turmoil?
Courtesy of Revolver Entertainment. UK theatrical release Summer 2012.
People’s Choice Award Toronto International Film Festival 2011
March 29th, 2012 by Julien Maton
by Niki Frencken
March 14th 2012 marks a historic day for the International Criminal Court. Thomas Lubanga is no longer suspected of recruiting and using child soldiers, but convicted of the crime. The ICC’s first verdict has been met with both excitement and criticism. Safe to say is that it raises many questions, one of which concerns the deterrent effect of the Court and the Lubanga case. Anecdotal evidence abounds that the Lubanga case has generated a fear of arrest amongst Congolese militia leaders. This fear has been dubbed the ‘Lubanga syndrome’. Yet, the question remains whether the ICC and the Lubanga case can contribute to deterrence and whether the ‘Lubanga syndrome’ truly exists.
Deterrence in (post) Conflict Situations
Within an already wide varied pallet of peace-building instruments, the threat of international prosecution is increasingly considered as a means to pressure leaders to put an end to hostilities as was seen in Libya and Côte d’Ivoire. Inherent to this faith that the ICC can contribute to peace and security, is the belief in the deterrent effect of (the threat of) international prosecution. This is underlined by the preambles of the Rome Statute: ‘[d]etermined to put an end to impunity for the perpetrators of these crimes and thus to contribute to the prevention of such crimes’ and contribute to peace, security and the well-being of the world.
Due to the material jurisdiction of the Court and its permanent nature, prosecutorial interventions often take place in a context of ongoing (non-)international armed conflict. On top of the already disputed nature of deterrence at the national level, these volatile contexts add an extra dimension to the relation between ICC prosecution and its contribution to deterring leaders from committing crimes. These politically unstable situations are inherently complex, making it difficult for the Court’s prosecutions to deter individuals from committing crimes.
Essentially, deterrence is aimed at preventing crimes based on the fear of the consequences of engaging in criminal behaviour. According to the deterrence theory, individuals will refrain from engaging in criminal action if the likelihood of the materialization of the costs outweighs the expected benefits of crime. Whilst leaders plausibly engage in rational calculations, the dynamics of violent conflict and immediate needs of warfare make it unlikely that the remote costs of prosecution penetrate or override strategic military and political decisions that lead to crime. There are, however, a number of factors that affect this cost-benefit calculation, amongst which are the certainty of apprehension, knowledge of consistent rule enforcement, different approaches to justice and the legitimacy of the Court.
Continue reading ‘The International Criminal Court and Deterrence – The ‘Lubanga Syndrome’’
March 28th, 2012 by Julien Maton
With the completion last week of testimony by the last Prosecution witness in the trial of Jean-Pierre Bemba at the International Criminal Court, judges Sylvia Steiner, Joyce Aluoch, and Kuniko Ozaki held a status conference this Tuesday to schedule the hearing of evidence from selected victims participating in the trial and the start of the Defence case.
Defence lawyer Peter Haynes told the Court that they expected to call about the same number of witnesses as those called by the Prosecution. The Prosecution has called 38 witnesses over the course of the last 16 months following the opening of the trial in November 2010. Mr. Haynes asserted that unlike the Prosecution, the Defence would call witnesses with “tangible knowledge” of the five-month long operations of Mr. Bemba’s soldiers in the 2002-2003 armed conflict in the Central African Republic (CAR). The first Defence witness will be called in August, after the Court recess.
“We have some clear idea of the sort of witnesses that the Defence is going to bring before the Chamber […] They will be witnesses who have a direct first-hand knowledge of the operation in Central Africa […] and one can anticipate that those sorts of witnesses will take rather longer than those called by the Prosecution whose knowledge of events was second-hand and partial”, said Mr. Haynes.
Meanwhile, Legal Representatives of Victims also indicated the modalities for their witnesses to give testimony. The trial judges permitted 5 out of the 2,751 victims participating in the trial to present evidence. The Legal Representatives will start their case on April 23 and estimate that it will last approximately 20 days.
Jean-Pierre Bemba, former vice-president of Congo, is accused of three war crimes (murder, rape, and pillaging) and two crimes against humanity (murder and rape) arising from the alleged behaviour of his Mouvement de Libération du Congo troops against the Central African civilian population between October 2002 and March 2003. Mr. Bemba’s troops were among the armed forces assisting CAR former president Ange-Félix Patassé to fight off an armed rebellion led by current president François Bozizé. Mr. Bemba has denied all charges against him, claiming that he maintained no effective control over his troops, which fell under the command of the Central African authorities.
March 28th, 2012 by Julien Maton
The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) transferred the case of Charles Sikubwabo to the High Court of Rwanda. The order was made following a Prosecutor’s Request in November for the referral of the case to Rwanda pursuant to Rule 11bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence, which authorizes the transfer of cases to appropriate national jurisdictions.
Charles Sikubwabo, a former mayor of Gishyita in the western Kibuye prefecture, has been charged with genocide or, in the alternative complicity in genocide, as well as conspiracy to commit genocide and crimes against humanity. The accused is still at large.
The Referral Chamber requested that the Rwandan government reports on a regular basis to the ICTR or the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals until such time as Sikubwabo is arrested or it receives confirmation of his death. The Chamber added that in accepting referrals from the Tribunal, it is to be hoped that Rwanda will respect its commitments of good faith and willingness to enforce the highest standards of international justice.
Sikubwabo is the last of the cases included in the November application and referred to the Republic of Rwanda. The first transfer was that of pastor Jean-Bosco Uwinkindi last June. Uwinkindi has been charged with genocide and crimes against humanity. In February, the Chamber transferred the second case of Fulgence Kayishema, also fleeing and charged with genocide, complicity in genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide and crime against humanity.
March 28th, 2012 by Julien Maton
Amnesty International urged EU member states to make a renewed commitment to investigate their own roles in CIA rendition program of forced transfer and secret detention. During hearings before the European Parliament (EP) on Tuesday, the group suggested that the EU members must work harder to reconsider their involvement in that program. These hearings are intended to create the foundation of an EP report that will reveal details of a five-year investigation into each nation’s involvement in supporting CIA renditions.
“How can the EU, which portrays itself as a human rights standard-bearer, presume to tell other governments, notably those involved in the Arab Spring, how important human rights are when it steadfastly refuses to investigate its own alleged complicity in torture and disappearance?”, said Amnesty’s expert Julia Hall.
Amnesty argued that the report on the illegal transfer, disappearance, and torture of detainees in Europe should recommend a resolution through which member states would be bound to afford effective redress to victims and reform any agency or system which led to the abuses.
In recent years, some European nations have already admitted hosting secret CIA prisons and other human rights organizations have accused them to suppress evidence of their roles.
March 27th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
Date: 26 April 2012
Time: 7:00PM – 8:30PM
Address: Frontline Club, 13 Norfolk Place, London, W2 1QJ
What is this event about?
Channel 4 News‘ international editor Lindsey Hilsum will be discussing Libya and her new book charting the country’s history from the beginnings of Muammar Gaddafi’s regime to the dictator’s squalid end.
Sandstorm, Libya in the Time of Revolution is an insightful account of the overthrow of the Arab world’s most bizarre dictator brought down by his own people with the aid of NATO aircraft.
Hilsum will be covering the history of Gaddafi’s strange regime from its early days when he had looks, charisma and popular appeal – to its paranoid, corrupt final state. She will also be bringing alive the stories of the Libyan people who overcame fear and disillusionment and found the strength to rebel.
To book a place at this event, click here.
March 26th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
In response to the confirmation of charges of post-election violence (PEV) against William Ruto, Uhuru Kenyatta, Francis Muthaura and Joshua arap Sang, the four Kenyans known as the “Ocampo Four”, the Kenyan government, on advice of a committee of legal experts, has called for the appointment of an independent Special Prosecutor to investigate on these cases.
A recent article found that this proposal came as a result of failed attempts by the government to establish a local tribunal, mainly because Parliament was unable to pass the pre-requisite laws. The legal committee has advised that the Special Prosecutor should undertake as a priority an audit of all PEV cases, including those involving the four accused against whom charges have been confirmed by the International Criminal Court (ICC).
The experts have also recommended the strenghtening of the Kenyan Witness Protection Programme, which, it said, should be fully operational in order to guarantee that there will be no impediment in the way of investigation or trial of any person suspected of involvement in the post election violence. The committee finally highlighted that Kenya has been fully cooperating with the ICC and invited the government to continue doing so.
On 31 March 2011 the Kenyan Government had petitioned the International Criminal Court that these cases be declared inadmissible, arguing that the adoption of the new Constitution and associated legal reforms have opened the way for Kenya to conduct its own prosecutions for the post-election violence. Judges of Pre-Trial Chamber II (“PTC II”) had to determine if the cases could be tried at the Court, based on the arguments contained in the government petition. On 30 May 2011, PTC II rejected the Kenyan government’s challenges to the admissibility of the cases (decision re. William Ruto & Joshua arap Sang, decision re. Uhuru Kenyatta & Francis Muthaura), which was confirmed by the ICC Appeals Chamber on 30 August 2011 (decision re. William Ruto & Joshua arap Sang, decision re. Uhuru Kenyatta & Francis Muthaura).
Given the confirmation of charges, a second attempt by the Government to stop the Court from prosecuting the four constitutes a difficult task, as it has to establish exceptional circumstances.
March 26th, 2012 by Julien Maton
The ICTY has published its Annual Outreach Report for 2011, setting out its activities and achievements during one of the most ambitious and dynamic periods for the programme since its inception.
The report reflects various aspects of the Tribunal’s enhanced outreach strategy at a defining moment in the Tribunal’s history as the end of its mandate approaches.
The report presents the full range of the Outreach Programme’s activities – from youth and media outreach to work with grass-root communities and judicial capacity building. Particular highlights range from a groundbreaking youth outreach project, in which 3,000 young people from high schools and universities across the former Yugoslavia will reflect with ICTY officials on the Tribunal’s contribution to justice in their communities, to the production of a feature-length documentary on the ICTY’s pioneering prosecution of wartime sexual violence. An analysis of the impact of Outreach’s enhanced presence on the Web through its new social media platforms is also presented.
The Outreach Programme was created in 1999 for the purpose of improving the understanding of the work of the Tribunal and its relevance in the territory of the former Yugoslavia. As the first programme of its kind, the Tribunal’s Outreach Programme set a precedent for other criminal tribunals which have since set up similar initiatives.
March 26th, 2012 by Julien Maton
by The Human Security Division (HSD) of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, the Swiss Federal Archives (SFA) and Swisspeace
Date: 25 April 2012, 9:00h – 18:00h
Venue: Bern, PROGR (Auditorium, 1st floor), Speichergasse 4.
The conference will bring together up to 50 practitioners, policy-makers and researchers working in the area of the documentation of human rights violations in order to address the preservation, access and use of records and archives related to dealing with the past processes. The goal of the conference is to discuss the importance and potential of records and archives in dealing with the past and to exchange on best practice. The conference discussions shall contribute to enhancing the dialogue between archival and Dealing with the Past experts and the creation of a community of practitioners.
The HSD, the SFA and Swisspeace will also take the occasion of this conference to officially launch their joint project “Archives and Dealing with the Past”.
For more details about the conference, click here.
If you would like to participate, please register by April 15th 2012 with: naomi.kunz@swisspeace.ch
March 25th, 2012 by Julien Maton
Is Russia losing patience with Syria? After having vetoed two UN Security Council resolutions on the crisis, Russia is now criticising the Syrian government for dragging its heels on reform and is fully supporting envoy Kofi Annan’s peace mission in Syria.
Russian President Dmitri Medvedev offered his cooperation on all levels, in what could be the last chance for Syria to avoid an interminable civil war and embark on a political process. Kofi Annan has proposed a six-point peace plan, which urges the government forces and the armed rebels to immediately put an end to the attacks and allow access to those in need of humanitarian assistance.
However, this seems unlikely to happen, as testimonies claim that Syrian government forces have used local residents as human shields, forcing them to march in front of the army during recent arrest operations in areas held by the opposition.
March 25th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
by the British Institute of International and Comparative Law, in cooperation with The Human Rights Centre and the University of Essex
Date: Monday 26 March 2012, 17:30 to 19:00
Venue: British Institute of International and Comparative Law
Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London, WC1B 5JP
Chair: Professor Malcolm Evans OBE, Bristol University
Key note speaker: Dr Ahmed Shaheed, UN Special Rapporteur for Iran
Discussion panel:
• Scott Sheeran LLM, Lecturer and Co-Director LLM International Human Rights Law, School of Law and Human Rights Centre, University of Essex
• Shadi Sadr, Iranian Lawyer and women’s rights defender
• Mohammed H. Nayyeri LLM, Attorney at Law, Iranian Bar Association
• Dr Nazial Ghanea-Hercock, University of Oxford, Religion and International
Human Rights Law
Dr Shaheed will discuss the nature and scope of the human rights issues in Iran, and the role of his mandate. The panellists will discuss the difficult and challenging relationship between religion and international human rights law including in Iran.
To register to attend this event click here.
March 25th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
According to a report in The Independent, Bangladesh created, on 22 March 2012, a second tribunal to try suspects of crimes against humanity committed during the 1971 Liberation War. This recent development arrives at a time when the trial of eight high-profile 
suspects belonging to the country’s largest Islamist party, Jamaat-e-Islami, and to the main opposition Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP), is currently underway. The suspects are detained for alleged crimes against humanity, including mass killings, arson, looting and rapes.
The first International Crimes Tribunal in Bangladesh, created two years ago, is made up of three members. This second tribunal will also include three members: Justice ATM Fazle Kabir as its chairman, and registrar M Shahinur Islam, along with Justice Obaidul Hassan. The new tribunal is expected to start its work from March 25.
March 25th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
Date: 20 April 2012 – 21 April 2012
Time:
• Friday, 20 April: 10:00 – 17:30 hours (Registration commences 09:30)
• Saturday, 21 April: 09:30 – 14:00 hours
Venue: University of Nottingham School of Law
Location: The University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK
Programme Committee:
• Professor Mary Footer (Chair),
• Professor Nigel White,
• Professor Dino Kritsiotis,
• Mr Sandesh Sivakumaran,
• Mr Michael Bowman,
• Dr Marko Milanovic,
• Dr Edward Goodwin,
• Ms Sangeeta Shah,
• Professor Robert McCorquodale.
The Conference theme encompasses issues of human, political, military, socio-economic, environmental and energy security and raises two questions: to what extent can international law address the types of natural and man-made security risks and challenges that threaten our livelihood, or very existence, in the 21st Century? Where does international law fall short in meeting the problems that arise in different situations of insecurity and how should such shortcomings be addressed?
The Conference will consist of a mixture of plenary and parallel panels under the following sub-themes: human security; nuclear security; maritime security and piracy; security in international humanitarian law and R2P; security and counter terrorism; economic security on land and sea; self-defence in international peace and security; the UN Security Council and the Arab Spring; security of natural resources.
The full conference programme is available here. For on-line registration, click here.
March 25th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
In an article for The Guardian, journalist James Ross comments on how the “corrupt judicial system” in Burma is standing in the way of the Burmese transition to democracy.
Relying on a UN Human Rights Council report published on 7 March 2012, that concluded that ” (Burma) lacks an independent, impartial and effective judiciary”, and that “(the Human Rights Council) noted limited acknowledgement of challenges and gaps in capacity or functioning, and a lack of willingness” to address options for reform, Ross comments that ”the problem in Burma today is not that judges are struggling to be independent against a heavy-handed regime, but rather that judges are part and parcel of decades of a military governing system. Judges routinely impose unjustified sentences in political cases, allowing them to keep their jobs and access to the benefits of a corrupt system.”
The full article appears on The Guardian’s website.
March 24th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
An article by Fabiana Frayssinet for the Inter Press Service (IPS) highlights the attempts of young Brazilian prosecutors to get around the legal hurdle of amnesty laws, that prevent the investigation and prosecution of human rights violations committed during its 21-year military dictatorship, and bring its previous dictators to justice for the heinous crimes committed during their reign.
The article refers specifically to the crime of forced disappearances, and notes that the work of these young lawyers is based on classifying this crime as an ongoing crime. According to prosecutor Ivan Cláudio Marx of the southern state of Rio Grande do Sul:
“In these cases, the crime of kidnapping is ongoing until the victim appears, dead or alive. And if those responsible for the forced disappearance refuse to provide information on the whereabouts of the body, they continue to practice the crime of hiding the corpse.”
The full article appears on IPS’ website.
March 24th, 2012 by Anna Bonini
Earlier this week, Vojislav Šešelj concluded his closing argument before the ICTY Trial Chamber. The Serb Radical Party leader reiterated his view that the proceedings against him are politically motivated and that he is being subjected to political persecution.
The Prosecution had previously asked that Šešelj be sentenced to 28 years in prison for his role in the ethnic cleansing of non-Serbs in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Vojvodina. He is charged with 11 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Contrary to general practice, the Prosecution decided in this case not to respond to Mr Šešelj’s argument.
Šešelj turned himself to the court shortly after it indicted him in early 2003, and has been incarcerated ever since. The trial against Mr Šešelj initially commenced on 27 November 2006 in the absence of the accused, who had been on a hunger strike for 26 days. Due to Mr Šešelj’s health, the trial was adjourned until 7 November 2007. The presentation of evidence commenced on 11 December 2007. Since then, the trial has been suspended twice due to contempt cases and has been one of the longest trials in the history of the ICTY.
The iLawyer Team members are grateful to Florian Richter for the correction and have amended the blog accordingly.
March 24th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
by the British Institute of International and Comparative Law
Date: Tuesday 3 April 2012, 17:30 to 19:00
Venue: British Institute of International and Comparative Law
Charles Clore House, 17 Russell Square, London, WC1B 5JP
Chair: Dr Andraz Zidar, British Institute of International and Comparative Law
Speakers:
- Associate Professor Olympia Bekou, University of Nottingham School of Law
- Dr Conor McCarthy, Doughty Street Chambers
- Professor Robert Cryer, University of Birmingham Law School
- Stephanie Barbour, Amnesty International
On 14 March 2012 the International Criminal Court delivered its first judgment. The Court found Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, a leader of the Patriotic Force for the Liberation of the Congo, guilty of the war crimes of enlisting and conscripting children under the age of 15 and using them to participate actively in hostilities in DR Congo. This is a historic moment not only because of the Court’s inaugural judgment but also because the Court put down principles on criminalization of the use of child soldiers. The judgment will also serve as a basis for the principles to be applied to reparations for victims. The Institute organizes this rapid response seminar with participation of prominent experts on international criminal justice to shed light on different aspects of this important judgment.
To register to attend this event, click here.
March 24th, 2012 by Dina Mahmoud
An article by the International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX) confirms reports that, on 14 March 2012, China’s National People’s Congress adopted new draft criminal provisions granting new police powers to detain in undisclosed locations, for a period 
of up to 6 months without charge, suspects deemed a threat to national security, described as “persons who discuss sensitive national issues”.
At the same time, Chinese authorities released public statements to the effect that the practice of transplanting organs from executed prisoners will soon be put to an end. Human rights groups have long criticized organ transplant procedures in China for creating an incentive for prisons to execute prisoners and sell their organs. Another concern has been whether prisoners and their families give informed consent, without inappropriate pressure from prison officials, for the use of organs. Families of executed prisoners sometimes complain that no one gave permission but that they were given back bodies that were sewn up after the removal of organs. An estimated 65% of China’s annual organ donations is currently estimated to come from prisoners. China doesn’t publicly report execution figures, but San Francisco-based human-rights group Dui Hua Foundation estimates that 4,000 prisoners were executed in 2011. Further details on these developments can be found in recent articles published by The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and BBC News.
March 23rd, 2012 by Anna Bonini
The European Union has agreed to expand its mission against Somali pirates, BBC News and The Guardian report. The extension will be both in time, allowing the mission to continue until at least December 2014, and in scope, as military forces will be allowed to attack land targets as well as those at sea.
The mission has, since its launch in 2008, successfully contributed to the fight against piracy in Somalia, a country at high terrorism risk given the capillary presence of al-Shabab militants (who recently joined with al-Qaeda) in large part of the territory. The mission also performs crucial humanitarian tasks in the area, particularly through the protection of vessels of the World Food Programme delivering food aid to displaced people in Somalia,
March 23rd, 2012 by Anna Bonini
The UN Security Council issued a statement giving full support to the efforts of the Joint Special Envoy for the United Nations and the Arab League to solve the critical situation in Syria.
The statement came after several weeks of impasse within the Council, due largely to the reluctance of China and Russia to take action concerning the Syrian crisis. Last Wednesday, a compromise solution was reached with the two nations agreeing to endorse a ‘presidential statement’ issued through the Security Council. Unlike a resolution, this kind of document is not legally binding. The statement expressed concerns at the deteriorating human rights and humanitarian situation in Syria and gave full support for Mr Kofi Annan’s action plan, which demands an immediate cessation of violence from all sides and the creation of humanitarian aid corridors.
However, according to Alastair Beach of The Independent, it remains a ‘heavily diluted compromise statement’. It sets no timeframe for the measures to be implemented and is directed indisctintly at ‘all parties’ in the conflict, essentially equating the conduct of rebel fighters and regime forces. Whether such a compromise statement will produce any tangible effect remains therefore to be seen.
March 23rd, 2012 by Anna Bonini
On 22 March 2012, the Human Rights Council adopted a Resolution opening its first investigation into Israel’s settlements in the occupied territories.
An independent international fact-finding mission will be dispatched to investigate the implications of the settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem. As confirmed by Financial Times’s Tobias Buck, Israel’s settlements are widely perceived as ‘a crucial obstacle towards a peace agreement and a big hindrance towards creating an independent Palestinian state’.
In the same session, the Council also adopted separate resolutions calling upon Israel to desist from its continuous building of settlements, particularly in the Syrian Golan, and from imposing Israeli citizenship on the Syrian population in the area (Resolution A/HRC/19/L.3), reaffirming the inalienable, permanent and unqualified right of the Palestinian people to self-determination (Resolution A/HRC/19/L.33) and demanding Israel to comply with the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 (Resolution A/HRC/19/L.34).
The Resolutions sparked an angry response from the Israeli Government, with the Foreign Minister threatening to remove Israel’s ambassador to the Human Rights Council, according to The Jerusalem Post.
March 23rd, 2012 by Anna Bonini
The UN Human Rights Council has passed a Resolution on promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka. The Council noted with concern reports that Sri Lanka is not adequately addressing serious allegations of violations of international law made in the Report of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission.
The Council requested the Government of Sri Lanka to present a comprehensive action plan concerning implementation of the recommendations made in the Commission’s report and to address alleged violations of international law. It also encouraged the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and other UN human rights envoys to assist Sri Lanka in implementing these steps.
According to Human Rights Watch, the recent Resolution demonstrates strong international support for accountability for abuses committed in Sri Lanka’s armed conflict.
March 22nd, 2012 by Anna Bonini
According to a recent article circulated by the Hirondelle News Agency, the ICC could charge some intermediaries for inciting witnesses to make false testimonies in the Lubanga trial. Due to security concerns, the Prosecution hired intermediaries (non-court staff) to assist with the investigation and preparation of the Lubanga case. Such intermediaries identified witnesses who were subsequently interviewed by the Prosecution, called to testify at trial and found by the Trial Chamber, in its recent Lubanga Judgment, to have given false testimony. Intermediaries 121, 143 and 316 are suspected of having persuaded children to lie as to their involvement as child soldiers within the UPC and of having promised them financial and other benefits in exchange for their testimony.
