Reprisals against Persons Cooperating with the UN: Towards a Strengthened Institutional Response
Side Event during the UN Human Rights Council’s 16th Session
Wednesday, 16 March 2011
Organised by the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), co-sponsored by, among others, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS), Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Amnesty International (AI)
Panelists:
• Orest Nowosad, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
• Sunanda Deshapriya, journalist from Sri Lanka presenting cases of reprisals in India and Sri Lanka
• Florian Irminger, Human Rights House Foundation, presenting cases of reprisals against lawyers
and human rights organisations in Belarus
• Updates of the cases from Venezuela, Kenya, Bahrain and Rwanda
• Moderator: Björn Pettersson, ISHR
Björn Pettersson stated that the reason behind this panel is not just to update on previous cases, but also to discuss how to move forward, and identify steps in order to improve the response to cases of reprisals. The SG report is quite unknown for people on the ground and thus awareness could be one of the steps towards improving responses. Additionally, other sections of the OHCHR could be more involved in this issue. We also need to stress on the need not to lose track of old cases and find an efficient follow-up mechanism. e.g. in an annex to the SG annual report.
How does the Council perceive this report – how does the Council/member states handle this report? How to get more continuity on the issue of reprisals?
Sunanda Deshapriya spoke about his personal experince as a case of a blatant reprisal as a direct result of interaction with UN mechansims. in June 2009, and following his attendance in a UNHRC special session on Sri Lanka in which he spoke asking for an investigation to be opened, Mr. Deshpriya was labeled a traitor in his country, his family received death threats, and there were demands to expel him from Sri Lanka . A number of human rights defenders continue to be victims of similar reprisals, as the image of the UN in general continue to deteriorate in Sri Lanka with the state labelling those who engage with international mechanisms as “traitors.”
Florian Irminger gave a presentation of reprisals in Belarus, especially in the aftermath of the elections in 2010. He spoke of two different kinds of reprisals cases: i) retaliation against lawyers who work with international law, e.g. who work with human rights defenders or who have written complaints to the Human Rights Council; ii) organisations or individuals who send communications to UN Special Procedures.
Orest Nowosad spoke about the tools inside the UN to deal with the issue of reprisals. He emphasised that the Secretary-General’s report is not the only vehicle that exists in this context. He stresses that the issue should also be dealt with in the field, raising the awareness of the report and of the possibility to submit cases of reprisals to the OHCHR all year around.
From the floor Laila Matar from CIHRS gave an update on cases of reprisals from Bahrain. These cases were presented previously on a side event during the Human Rights Council’s 15th session by two Bahraini human rights defenders, one of which made his statement over web cast for fear of reprisals. Ms. Matar gave a follow-up on the case of the 23 individuals who were accused of being part of an alleged terrorist network. Many of these individuals are prominent human rights defenders and several of them had interacted with international mechanisms. They were initially arrested without charge, but were later charged with, among other things, defaming Bahrain abroad and for having been involved with International Organizations. During their time in detention, several of them were subjected to torture. Another blatant case of reprisals is the case of Mr. Abdelrahman Al-Gasim from Sudan. He was directly threatened by the Sudanese government not to be involved with the UN while he was speaking at a side event in the Human Rights Council. Mr. Abdelrahman Al-Gasim was later arrested in Sudan, held incommunicado, and tortured during detention. He has now been released, but continues to receive threats to his life and has to continuously report to the National Intelligence and State Security.
Invitation attached
Share this Post