La Lettre

FIDH Newsletter

Human Rights Watch, FIDH and the International Commission of Jurists declared that this law, which puts into practice the principle of ³universal jurisdiction, is essential to stop those responsible for grave crimes against international law escaping justice. Adopted in 1993, modified in 1999, it givs Belgian courts jurisdiction to hear proceedings against any person accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes independent of any criminal connection with Belgium and without the need for the person charged to be present on Belgian territory.

Universal Justice
³The Belgian law is part of a general movement to bring to justice those who commit atrocities² added the three organisations. ³Criminal proceedings based on universal competence are essential to the construction of a universal justice system. They are important if we are to be able to finally put an end to the impunity which the tyrants and torturers orchestrate themselves in their own countries.² After this law came into effect, complaints were made in Belgium against a significant number of criminals suspected of grave human rights violations, in particular against the Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, and the former dictator of Chad, Hissene Habre. In an historic trial, four Rwandanese were sentenced on 8 June 2001 by a Belgian jury that found them guilty of taking part in the genocide which turned their country into a bloodbath.

However, the law has become the focus of recent criticism and attacks based on three main criteria. Firstly, Belgian politicians complain that the opportunities offered by the law have drawn legal proceedings against human rights violations to Belgium from all over the world. In addition, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has attacked Belgium before the International Court of Justice maintaining that an arrest warrant issued against one of its ex-ministers for foreign affairs violated international law. Finally, on Wednesday 24 November, a court of appeal was to hear the arguments of the lawyers of Sharon and of the Congolese minister who insist that the law can only apply if the people being pursued are present on Belgian territory.

Like the law which permitted the arrest of General Augusto Pinochet in London for crimes committed for the most part in Chile, as a result of an order issued by a Spanish judge, the Belgian law is based on the principle of ³universal jurisdiction², which applies to the most shocking of atrocities. This principle (...) establishes that every country has an interest in bringing to justice those responsible for the most serious crimes against international law, wherever the crime was committed and whatever the nationality of those responsible or their victims. (...)

According to the supporting organisations, one way of avoiding all the complaints being lodged in Belgium would be for other countries to adopt similar laws on ³universal jurisdiction² instead of systematically attacking the Belgian law. Several other countries have in fact already adopted equivalent laws by incorporating into their national law the measures contained in the Statute of Rome 1998 relating to the creation of an International Criminal Court. (...) Courts in Austria, Germany, Denmark, France, and even in Switzerland, have already applied the principle of universal competence to people accused of crimes committed during the conflicts in Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

The international organisations point out that the case of Hissene Habre illustrates perfectly the importance of the Belgian law in bringing to justice those responsible for the worst crimes against international law. In February 2000, a judge from Senegal, the country of exile of Hissene Habre, charged the ex-dictator, who led Chad from 1982 until 1990, with involvement in crimes against humanity and complicity in acts of torture and barbarity and placed him under house surveillance. For the first time, a former African head of state had been charged under the legal system of another African country. But on 20 March 2001, the Senegalese Court of Appeal declared the jurisdictions of this country incompetent to try crimes committed in Chad in the absence of the laws necessary to process the case. However, a number of victims of the former dictator, including several Belgian nationals, are now seeking to have Habre extradited to Belgium to be judged. The Senegalese president, Abdoulaye Wade, recently committed himself, after a demand made by the Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, to keep Habre in Senegal while they wait for an extradition demand from the Belgian authorities. Mr Daniel Fransen, a magistrate with the Brussels court of first instance, has now been instructed to lead the case.

The Belgian law on universal jurisdiction represents a remarkable step forward and is an invaluable tool in the struggle against impunity.

Extracts from a joint communique (HRW, FIDH, IJC) distributed 22.11.2001

During the year 2001, important changes have taken place in the Emirate of Bahrain.

After the death of his father on 6 March 1999, the new Emir, Ahmed Ben Al Khalifa Al-Thani, carried out some significant reforms. He created a national commission with the task of drawing up the first draft of a new national charter. This commission is made up of 57 people, including members of the Emir¹s family, ministers, governors, members of the Al-Shura consultative committee, representatives of associations, trade unionists, lawyers and academics. Five of these people are genuine pillars of the opposition, in order to ensure a certain amount of pluralism in the commission. The National Charter was voted on 14 and 15 February 2001 by all Bahrainis, including women, who up to that point had been excluded from public life, the and envisages several reforms, including two constitutional changes:

• the emir will become a king and the emirate of Bahrain will become a kingdom
• legislative powers will be conferred on two bodies ­ the legislative assembly and a council nominated by the emir.

Important measures
The charter does not define the powers and responsibilities of the non-elected council. There are many who want its role to be purely consultative and for it to have no legislative power. The legislative assembly is to be composed of forty elected members and a number of ministers, not exceeding 15 to be nominated by the emir. The national security law, as well as the jurisdiction with the responsibility of applying it have been repealed. This repeal was seen as a decisive sign, because this tool was at the root of systematic and flagrant human rights violations. But while these measures are important they are not enough to complete the transition from an authoritarian regime to a democracy which respects human rights. For example, to do this, it would be necessary to repeal more than one hundred articles in the penal code which criminalise citizens for making use of rights guaranteed by the Constitution, such as freedom of association, assembly or expression.

Disapproval
Some sectors at the heart of the government do not look favourably on these winds of change and the state apparatus remains practically unchanged. The only change has been the transfer of the office of the attorney general of the republic from the home office to the ministry of justice, an encouraging sign but insufficient: the office of the attorney general is still composed of former police officers and not of professional judges. Moreover, the naturalisation of hundreds of expatriates, who under the dictatorship were instrumental in the application of the law of defence and national security is confusing because in the past they were used to suppress opponents and now they will still be a source of support for the government. In spite of the disapproval and the obstacles, several positive decisions have been taken by the emir. For example, he released all political prisoners, all refugees were able to return without conditions, and Bahraini citizenship was granted to all the bedouin ­ stateless people who had been living in Bahrain for generations.

An embryonic civil society
Subjected in the past to a very tight surveillance, civil society in Bahrain was embryonic as a result, but with the arrival of the new emir, associations received his direct authorisation before the new law on the freedom of association had even been established. Thus, in November 2000, the Bahrain Society for Human Rights was created, whose role to observe human rights violations in Bahrain seemed to be encouraged by the emir. With public debate no longer subject to authorisation, an unprecedented atmosphere of openness was born in Bahrain, facilitated by the return of hundred of refugees who have contributed to the development of an independent civil society. As a result of this liberalisation, the opposition has been able to emerge from the shadows and there has been a complete change in its relationship with the government, which had been deeply marked by thirty years of repression.

Associations can deal with political issues, and organise programmes and forums. However, these new developments hide certain weaknesses, such as the creation of associations on the basis of ethnicity, which puts at risk the current cohesion of civil society. The ban on political parties still applies, with the approval of the emir who, being sunni when the rest of the population is shiite, fears that any society-led polarisation could bring the authority of the ruling family into question.

Impunity?
While in the space of two years Bahrain has seen some positive changes in the field of human rights, for very many victims of the dictatorship, there can be no national reconciliation until they have had justice. In spite of the thousands of requests sent to the emir, nothing has been undertaken in response to their case because the decree of amnesty passed by the emir denies the victims the right to lodge a complaint. The past cannot be erased­ to turn the page, you have to have read it. Bahrainis have to decide how they are going to respond to the expectations of the victims. Whatever method is undertaken, the human rights violations perpetrated for so many years cannot remain unpunished.

>> Alirio Uribe is a member of the Collectivo de Abogados, (which is affiliated to the FIDH in Columbia) and vice president of the FIDH

In your opinion, is it possible for the military services to work alongside the legal services in the fight against terrorism?

Humanity requires justice. Faced with the tragic drama of the attacks of 11th September, we must insist that the whole truth be told and justice done. There must be mandatory sanctions against terrorist acts in the structure of national and international law.

However, calls for blind vengeance must be rejected as this can lead to the punishment of innocents people. Anti-terrorist rhetoric should never have been used to raise an international army. Consequently the solution lies in understanding the phenomenon of terrorism in its context, and in dealing with it through legal channels. If it is State terrorism, punishment should be administered in the framework of crimes against humanity, while terrorism by armed groups should be punished as war crimes.

But is there really no danger if the legal processes deal with terrorism?

Organisations for the defence of human rights must be vigilant when faced with the political exploitation of the fight against terrorism. Following the example of the United States, each country is taking advantage of the terrorist horror to protect itself with a mighty legal arsenal capable of criminalizing any revolt, protest or rebellion against the established political or economic order. We are coming dangerously close to a situation where every act of opposition to the prevailing powers is considered to be the activity of terrorists. By trying to establish by all possible means the political status quo, the international community is in the process of threatening the right of peoples to resistance and self-determination.

We must not forget that there are two forms of terrorism: that exerted against a state, and that exerted by a state. It is vital that the international community deal with both these forms to take effective control over the fight against terrorism. Nevertheless the search for an international legal and economic order capable of generating democratic security must not be allowed to undermine the exercise of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights.

Latin America is aware of a certain number of 'terrorist' groups which are still operating. What are the possible consequences of the events of 11th September in that region?

The repercussions of the New York attack are already visible in the Americas and in particular in the Andean region. After 11th September various protagonists in Plan Colombia and the Andean Initiative asked for anti-terrorist action to be reinforced.

Some people are even beginning to talk about extending these plans to the whole of Latin America.

Even so, the focussing of the international community on Afghanistan is worrying. Observers from the United Nations, the international NGO's and the Peace Brigades try often in vain, to awaken consciences about the numerous massacres perpetrated especially in Colombia, a country which harbours three of the 29 terrorist groups listed by the United States.

But these governments are also going to take advantage of this new climate of tension to revise their legislation on terrorism with the aim of suppressing all forms of protest and political opposition. In other countries in the region, as in Peru, anti-terrorist norms were put in place in the past. These norms are going to be published afresh, and not only in this region, but also in the northern countries.

Should combatting terrorism become a major issue for the democracies?

I believe that the fight against terrorism can be organised by an international mechanism of control and suppression made up of representatives of all the peoples of the world. But once again I say, we must fight against all forms of terrorism.

It is important to remember that on the 11th September 35,000 children in the world starved to death. Their fate should affect us just as deeply as the fate of the victims in the World Trade Center. The existence of millions of people living in poverty through lack of food, work, health and education services is just as diabolical as the criminal violence of a fanatical group. It is very important to fight for global safety, for peace and democracy, or to put it differently, for safety achieved through democracy, because these are the only means of preventing violent conflicts.