0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)
35 Ansichten10 Seiten
Legal team from the Emirates Centre for Human Rights sets out their findings on the trial of 94 political dissidents in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
Legal team from the Emirates Centre for Human Rights sets out their findings on the trial of 94 political dissidents in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Verfügbare Formate
Als PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
Legal team from the Emirates Centre for Human Rights sets out their findings on the trial of 94 political dissidents in the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Verfügbare Formate
Als PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
United Arab Emirates and the Silencing of Human Rights
Trial observaton report (Federal Supreme Court; 4 March 2013) June 2013 Trial Observation Report _|.........m.Jl q...........nl cl,|........oJl s,.....o Lmitatcs ccnttc tot numan ibts _|.........m.Jl q...........nl cl,|........oJl s,.....o Background During the summer of 2012, the state security services of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) detained scores of people, including individuals with tes to al-Islah, a non-violent Islamist group. The detainees include prominent human rights lawyers, judges and student leaders. Many of the detainees were originally detained without charge. Eventually, on 27 January 2013, they were charged with founding, organising and administering an organisaton aimed at overthrowing the government, contrary to Artcle 180 of the UAE penal code. On 4 March 2013, the detainees appeared before the Federal Supreme Court. In total, there were 94 individuals subject to prosecuton at that point (referred to as the UAE 94 throughout this report). The Emirates Centre for Human Rights sent a mission to the UAE on 4 March 2013 to observe the trial. The Mission team consisted of: Georey Robertson Q.C. Barrister and head of chambers at Doughty Street Chambers. Mr Robertson has conducted many trial observatons on behalf of other organisatons in the past, including Amnesty Internatonal. He has also worked for internatonal organisatons, such as sitng as an appeal judge at the UN Special Court for Sierra Leone Catherine Oborne Barrister at Tooks Chambers Graeme Irvine Partner and Solicitor Advocate at Irvine Thanvi Natas solicitors Ravi Naik Solicitor at Irvine Thanvi Natas solicitors 1 Lmitatcs ccnttc tot numan ibts _|.........m.Jl q...........nl cl,|........oJl s,.....o Attending the trial The Emirates Centre for Human Rights (ECHR) sent a Mission to the UAE on 4 March 2013 to observe the trial. Delegates from other organisatons such as the Internatonal Commission of Jurists, a delegaton of Turkish lawyers and former government Minsters and the Gulf Centre for Human Rights also atended to observe the trial. There were also members of the internatonal media present. It was understand that delegates from Amnesty Internatonal and Alkarama, a Geneva based human rights organisaton, were denied entry to the UAE. Despite complying with all the procedural requests, all trial observers, including the delegates of the ECHR, were refused entry to the trial on 11 March 2013. However, the ECHR was able to meet individuals who had atended the hearings to take testmony about what had occurred. The report is therefore made on the basis of: What the delegates of the ECHR were able to gather from atempts to access the Court Interviews and testmony from witnesses to the Court hearing Reports from other human rights organisatons Internatonal and local press reports 2 Violations of international law The UAE acceded to the Conventon against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (UNCAT) on 19 July 2012. In additon, the UAE has agreed to the Arab Charter on Human Rights. The UAE authorites are under an obligaton to act in compliance with the terms of these instruments. However, the Mission observed worrying trends suggestng that there are systemic and on-going violatons of the most basic human rights of the detainees that tarnish the entre Court process. Some fundamental fair trial guarantees were respected during the course of the hearing, such as the right of the detainees to be present. However, any veneer of a fair trial was severely undermined by the numerous breaches of basic fair trial rights. This includes the right to equality of arms, right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartal tribunal and the right to prepare a defence. The absence of open justce The Court proceedings have been closed to all but local media accredited by the government and family members of the detainees. Any respectable justce system is built upon openness, fairness and equality under the law. Preventng internatonal observers from entering the trial prevents accountability and transparency in these proceedings. It also fosters mistrust of the fairness of the proceedings and undermines the fairness of the detainees trial. Violatng the right to equality before the law and courts The Mission found numerous violatons to the rights to equality before the law. For example, the defence lawyer of the detainees was prevented from making legal submissions prior to the day of the trial. To compound this, the defence lawyers were prevented from bringing any materials into the Court, including case les. Furthermore, 76 detainees are represented by lawyer Abdulhamid Alkomait. To aggravate this, Mr Alkomaits assistants were not allowed to atend the hearings with him, let alone to assist Mr Alkomait during the trial. As a result, the detainees were severely jeopardised in the submissions that could be made on their behalf. This undermines claims that they have equality of arms during the Court process which in turn compromises the integrity and fairness of the trial process. A fair trial is founded on two main principles: The right of all persons to equality before the law and the courts; and, The right of all persons to a public hearing with all due guarantees before a legally-consttuted, competent, independent and impartal tribunal. Lmitatcs ccnttc tot numan ibts _|.........m.Jl q...........nl cl,|........oJl s,.....o No guarantees of a fair trial 3 Violatng the right to prepare a defence The Mission is concerned by the manner in which the defence was provided with the evidence in the trial. In partcular, the defence team were only provided with the evidence a few days before the trial. With only one defence lawyer representng the interests of the vast majority of the UAE 94, this lef no tme for the defence to take instructons from their clients on the evidence and curtailed any possibility of the defence preparing their case. The Mission is partcularly concerned that the detainees lawyer reported not knowing where the detainees in custody were being held and that he was not able to have private consultatons with them. Such circumstances severely restrict the ability of the detainees to give full and adequate instructons to their lawyer in the preparaton of their defence. The lack of independence and impartality The Mission is deeply concerned that the tribunal, made up of Presiding Judge Falah Al-Hajiri, Judge Mohamed Ahmed Abdulqader and Judge Adbulrassol Tantawy, will not be able to act independently of the executve and that they are not free to administer justce in the proceedings. In partcular, the Mission is and remains concerned by the use of contracted Judges, which means that those Judges do not have security of tenure and raises the concern that the renewal of their contracts may depend on the outcome of the hearing. Lmitatcs ccnttc tot numan ibts _|.........m.Jl q...........nl cl,|........oJl s,.....o 4 Lmitatcs ccnttc tot numan ibts _|.........m.Jl q...........nl cl,|........oJl s,.....o Torture, inhuman and degrading treatment Artcle 1 of The Conventon Against Torture (UNCAT) denes torture as: any act by which severe pain or suering, whether physical or mental, is intentonally inicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person informaton or a confessionor intmidatng or coercing him or a third personwhen such pain or suering is inicted by or at the instgaton of or acquiescence of a public ocial or other person actng in an ocial capacity. Internatonal law also prohibits mistreatment that does not meet the deniton of torture. It does so through the prohibiton on cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. If these practces are intense enough, prolonged in duraton, or combined with other measures that result in severe pain or suering, they can amount to torture. The prohibiton against torture as well as cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is not limited to acts causing physical pain or injury. It includes acts that cause mental suering. The treatment of the detainees violates internatonal law. Firstly, the Mission is concerned by the use of hooding in the context of the Court proceedings. The use of hooding has been found to consttute torture by both internatonal and domestc authorites. 5 Hooding is the practce of fully covering the head of a detainee, which prevents the detainee from seeing. Hooding disorients the detainee and also to prevent him from breathing freely. , , , , Secondly, the detainees reveal the use of abusive interrogaton techniques. During the hearing, one of the UAE 94 showed the Judge the scars on his feet that he had received during his interrogatons. This was indicatve of the abuse that the accused had suered whilst they were detained. Witnesses tested to the Mission about following abuses: Lmitatcs ccnttc tot numan ibts _|.........m.Jl q...........nl cl,|........oJl s,.....o Connement in inadequate size cells Subjecton to extreme cold in their cells Subject to sleep deprivaton, included the use of bright lights Insucient toilet facilites resultng on occasion to them soiling in the cells, which were not cleaned Detenton in solitary connement, sometmes for up to 15 days at a tme Suocaton and asphyxiaton Severe beatngs, including reports that some of the detainees have had their ngernails were extracted Blindfolded and interrogated over many hours throughout the day and night As well as physical mistreatment, the UAE 94 all display signs of severe psychological trauma. The eect of the coercive interrogaton techniques is to break the detainees, which was apparent from the manner in which the detainees carried themselves in the Court room. The cumulatve eect of the techniques exercised by the UAE authorites is undoubtedly tantamount to torture, under the thresholds recognised by both internatonal and domestc authorites. 6 Solitary connement is a special form of imprisonment in which a detainee or prisoner is isolated from any human contact, ofen except for the guards, and has to remain in ones cell for more than 22 hours daily. Denailing is the forcible extracton of the ngernails or toenails. Security services pulled of the nails of Ahmed al-Zaabi, one of the detainees Lmitatcs ccnttc tot numan ibts _|.........m.Jl q...........nl cl,|........oJl s,.....o Violating the liberty and security of the person The right to liberty and security of the person protects individuals from arbitrary arrest and detenton. Under Artcle 9(2) ICCPR, an individual who is arrested should be informed promptly of the charges against him. Artcle 9(3) ICCPR requires that those arrested or detained should be brought before a judicial authority promptly and are enttled to a trial within a reasonable tme. The Mission is concerned that the rights of the UAE 94 to liberty and security of the person are being infringed, partcularly for those detainees who are being held in custody. The Mission is partcularly concerned that, although many detainees were detained during the summer of 2012, they were not charged untl January 2013 and their appearances before the court have been intermitent. Many detainees have spent signicant periods of tme in custody without being brought before a court. Further, many detainees are held in undisclosed locatons and cannot be visited by their family members or legal representatves. 7 Recommendations The Emirates Centre for Human Rights calls on the UAE authorites to: Ensure that improvements are made to the trial process to guarantee the fair trial rights of the detainees; Prevent further mistreatment of the detainees and investgate the claims of torture that have been made to date; Protect all of the detainees from arbitrary and prolonged periods of detenton. Lmitatcs ccnttc tot numan ibts _|.........m.Jl q...........nl cl,|........oJl s,.....o Freedom from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment The Mission is deeply concerned by the clear evidence of mistreatment of the detainees. The UAE authorites therefore have the following obligatons under internatonal law: Immediately cease any torture and/or ill-treatment of the detainees (Artcle 2 UNCAT); Conduct an independent and impartal investgaton into the torture suered by the detainees (Artcle 12 UNCAT); Open criminal investgatons into all those implicated by the mistreatment of the detainees (Artcle 4 and 5 UNCAT). Liberty and security of the person The Mission is concerned that the rights of the UAE 94 to liberty and security of the person are being infringed, partcularly for those detainees who are being held in custody. The ECHR calls on the UAE to: Disclose immediately the locatons in which all of the detainees are being held; Ensure that all individuals who are arrested and/or detained are informed promptly of all charges against them; Ensure that the detainees trials are heard within a reasonable tme; Ensure that the detainees have regular court hearings at which their detenton can be reviewed. 8 twiter.com/ECHRIGHTS campaigns@echr.org.uk +447850062105 Copyright 2013 Emirates Centre for Human Rights All rights reserved. Based on the report Trial Observaton Report UAE 94 writen by Georey Robertson QC, Graeme Irvine, Catherine Oborne and Ravi Naik. www. e c h r . o r g . u k