There is much to to be learnt from the recent investigations in the United Kingdom, Denmark and Germany that succeeded in preventing reportedly deadly terrorist attacks. For while the investigations highlight the existence of the ever-present terrorist threat, the successful intervention of the relevant authorities show it is possible to combine the fight against terrorism with respect for international law.
In its rapport published today, FIDH condemns the systematic use of torture in the case of the «Islamists’ Affair» in Mauritania (only available in french) In addition, FIDH last month undertook an international fact-finding mission to the Philippines that exposed the all too common use of torture against suspected terrorists, ranging from supposed members of armed so-called « leftist groups » to sympathisers with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front or the armed group Abu Sayaf.
Since 2001, the United States of America has undertaken a series of anti-terrorism measures that violate international law, including the CIA flights, illegal renditions and detention in undisclosed locations. On 24 August 2007, in support of its affiliate league in the USA, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and in partnership with other NGOs, FIDH filed an amicus curiae in the Supreme Court of the United States of America challenging the constitutionality of the Military Commissions Act of October 2006, which denies suspected terrorists from effective judicial means to challenge the validity of their detention.
While it is important for member States of the European Union to continue to work together in their fight against terrorism, it is equally necessary for those states to establish a number of safeguards that will prevent potential human rights violations. This would include stenghtening the accountability of the activities of European intelligence services and the right for those groups or individuals listed as terrorists to contest the decision before an independent body. No exceptions to the rule of law should be tolerated. As such, the refusal of the Council of the European Union to justify its decision to freeze the assets of the People’s Mujahedin of Iran is concerning and represents a dangerous precedent. Furthermore, deportation decisions must be able to be contested so as to guarantee the respect of the principle of non-refoulement preventing to return individuals to countries where they would face serious risks to their safety.
FIDH believes that the strict respect of legal norms in the fight against terrorism is an essential condition for success. To this end, FIDH reaffirms the urgence of the international community finalising the International Convention against Terrorism.
Attacks against a civilian population can in no way be justified and the perpetrators must be bought to justice based on universal norms of human rights protection. FIDH recalls the publication of its report, in October 2005, entitled "Anti-Terrorism versus Human Rights: the Key to Compatibility", which demonstrates the strong link between the success in the fight against terror and the respect for fundamental human rights. Violations of fundamental human rights undermine the legitimacy of states responsible for such practices and serve only to feed the terrorist propganda of hate.