Amnesty Says Australia Must Establish Human Rights Act

Amnesty Says Australia Must Establish Human Rights Act

By Eileen Gould
Impunity Watch Reporter, Oceania

CANBERRA, Australia – Amnesty International recently expressed disappointment over Australia’s failure to introduce human rights legislation.

Amnesty stated that it is “high time for the Government to clarify its intentions with regard to protecting human rights in this country.”

Last October, Australia’s Attorney General, Robert McClelland commenced a consultation process, whereby the National Human Rights Consultation Committee advised the Government that it should adopt a Human Rights Act.  For months, the federal government has not indicated whether or not it plans to establish a human rights charter.

Amnesty International claims that Australia has breached its international obligations by not providing adequate protection of human rights.  Australia must adopt an act which reflects its international legal obligations.

Claire Mallinson, Amnesty International Australia’ National Director, stated, “It’s not good enough to commit to these international treaties and disregard them inside Australia.”

Furthermore, Amnesty representatives believe that if Australia wants to be a leader in the global community on human rights issues, it must show leadership in such issues domestically.

Those who oppose a human rights charter believe it will give unelected judges too much authority.  Opponents have urged the cabinet not to institute a charter.

29,153 individuals out of a total of 35,014 who participated in the nationwide consultation process believed there should be a Human Rights Act.  In a separate poll conducted in 2009 by Amnesty International, 81 percent of the participants also believed Australia should introduce human rights legislation.

Amnesty International Australia claims it is the Attorney General’s responsibility to ensure that the Government complies with its international law and to protect the human rights of all.

The Attorney General has not responded to Amnesty International’s claims.

To date, Australia is the only western democracy who has yet to establish a charter of human rights.

For more information please see:
Anglican Media Melbourne – Amnesty International: Australian Government must show leadership by introducing a Human Rights Act – 19 February 2010

Amnesty International  Australia – Government must show leadership by introducing a Human Rights Act – 18 February 2010

Sydney Morning Herald – Rudd govt mum on rights charter report – 18 February 2010

Reforms Passed to Tackle Tremendous Backlog at the European Court of Human Rights

By Elizabeth A. Conger
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

The European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg, France [Source: AP]
The European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg, France - Source: AP
INTERLAKEN, Switzerland – The Council of Europe has announced plans to streamline procedures at the European Court of Human Rights. The reforms, designed to alleviate the court’s current backlog of 120,000 cases, were agreed upon by ministers from the Council of Europe’s forty seven member states at a meeting in Interlaken on Friday.

Embodied in Protocol 14, the reforms allow for one judge, rather than three, to decide on a case’s admissibility. Furthermore, cases similar to those previously brought before the court will be decided by a three-judge panel, rather than the original seven-member panel. Judges will be able to strike off the record those cases with similarities to those already decided, and reject those cases where the applicant has suffered no “significant disadvantage.” Protocol 14’s reforms will also allow the Committee of Ministers, charged with supervision of the enforcement of judgments, to work more effectively in ensuring that national governments enforce compliance with court decisions.

Judgments at the Court of Human Rights have taken an average of six years or more. Without reform, it is estimated that the current backlog in cases would remain on the docket until 2056.

More than 27,000 of the pending cases originate in Russia, and deal primarily with alleged abuses by Russian security forces in Chechnya involving extra-judicial killings, torture, disappearances, and dismal prison conditions. Russia had initially resisted the reforms, viewing the court as anti-Russian. However, Russia finally agreed to the reforms in January after the Council of Europe agreed to a provision stating that a Russian judge would participate in any decisions about Russia.

Initially created in 1959 as a court of last resort for Europeans who believed that their fundamental rights had been infringed in their home country, the European Court of Human Rights underwent reform on November 1, 1998.  The reform of the court established it as a full time entity, and allowed for the hiring of full-time judges. Most of cases in recent years have come from Russia, Turkey, Ukraine and Romania. It has delivered more than 10,000 judgments since 1998, and has handled a wide array of issues such as book banning in Turkey, crucifixes in Italian classrooms, the right of homosexuals to serve in the British Army, and the disappearances of Chechen rebels.

Karina Moskalenko, a Russian lawyer who runs a civil justice organization to aid Russians seeking to have their cases heard in Strasbourg, told Deutsche Welle that although it is not ideal having to go to France to get a fair hearing, the unreliability of the current justice system in Russia leaves no other option. She said:

“It would be much better if our citizens were protected by Russian courts or authorities, but as long as that is not the case, it’s good that people know who they can turn to.”

The first measures of Protocol 14 are scheduled for implementation in June of 2011, and a review of the reforms will be made in five years.

For more information, please see:

BBC – Mammoth backlog prompts European rights court reforms – 19 February, 2010

Swissinfo.ch – Ministers agree to reform European rights court – 19 February, 2010

Deutsch Welle – Strasbourg, the great white hope for human rights – 18 February 2010

VOA – European Court Facing Huge Backlog – 18 February 2010

Niger Junta Face a Choice on Democracy

By Jennifer M. Haralambides
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

NIAMEY, Niger – United States, African Union, and United Nations want Niger’s military junta to act quickly on pledges to restore democracy, saying sanctions could be lifted following moves to establish civilian rule.

During Thursday’s military coup, President Mamadou Tandja was taken into custody and the government was dissolved.  Because of this, the African Union imposed sanctions on Niger and demanded that they return to constitutional rule.

Ban Ki-Moon, the United Nations Secretary General condemned the coup and appealed for the respect for human rights.

Colonel Goukoye Abdul Karimou, a junta spokesman, said that the situation was “under control” and that there was no “single voice of dissension” in the West African State.

“We are taking care of [Tandja] – remember he is one of our elder soldiers,” he said.

He also reassured reporters that most of the cabinet ministers captured along with the president had been released and returned home.  The three who remain captured will be freed in a couple of days.

The coup took place on Thursday when troops stormed the palace during a cabinet meeting seizing Mr. Tandja and his ministers before announcing that they were suspending the constitution and dissolving all state institutions.

Those supporting the coup call themselves the Supreme Council for the Restoration of Democracy (CSRD).  This coalition is made up of political parties, trade unions and human rights groups formed last year to protest against the constitutional changes.

The leaders of this council promised to turn Niger into an example of “democracy and good governance” and to save its people from “poverty, deception and corruption.”

The United States said it believed the coup had been triggered by Mr. Tandja’s actions late August, when he held a controversial referendum to abolish term limits on the presidency.

Deputy Assistant Secretary of State William Fitzgerald said that the US position is clear:  they have to show as soon as possible that they are genuinely seeking to restore the constitution and move to a return to democratic and civilian rule.

Even though the African Union and regional group ECOWAS have condemned the takeover by force, there have been few kind words for Tanjda who’s rule was controversial and subject to sanction.

For more information, please see:

Al Jazeera – Niger Demonstrators Celebrate Coup – 20 February 2010

BBC – African Union Suspends Niger After Military Coup – 20 February 2010

National Post – Niger Coup Serves as Wake-Up Call – 20 February 2010

Reuters – US Says Niger Junta Faces Choice on Democracy – 20 February 2010

Reuters – Niger Opposition Rally Pressures Junta for Elections – 20 February 2010

Police Officer Beats Indian Woman

By M.E. Dodge
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

AMETHI, India – Multiple television channels broadcast a clip of a policeman beat a woman. The officer was suspended after millions viewed recorded attack.

Photograph of Sangeeta Kumar. Image courtesy of BBC World News.

Footage of the incident shows a policeman slapping a woman and pushing her to the ground, after which he punched and kicked her. The officer, Kailashnath Dwivedi of the Musafirkhana police station, claims he did it to force a confession after Sangeeta Kumar was accused of murdering her husband, Deepak Kumar. Correspondents say that the beating highlights the widespread problem of police brutality in India.

The woman, a member of the low-caste Dalit community, is accused of murdering her husband, whose strangulated body was found in their house on Tuesday. The footage appears to show an inspector assaulting the 26-year-old woman outside their home.

The woman was rounded up after some time and allegedly confessed to the crime, reported official, Satyendra Veer Singh. Despite the confession, Inspector Kailash Nath Dubey, however, beat her up while a second, subordinate female officer looked on. Condemning the incident, Singh said, “This kind of behaviour was really uncalled for. The lady had already confessed to the crime that she had murdered her husband….There was absolutely no need of beating up this lady so mercilessly.”

Singh went on to say that, “It was total brutality on part of the inspector. Finding him guilty, we have put him under suspension. A departmental inquiry is on. We will take necessary action against him.”

Subsequent to Singh’s announcement, a statement was issued addressing the gravity of the incident, and stated that the government has decided to terminate Dwivedi’s services, and would take immediate effect.

According to Indian law, there are strict guidelines on the arrest of a woman. A woman suspect can only be handled by a woman police officer and male policemen are not allowed to touch her. A policewoman has to be present at all times, including during interrogations. But most of these guidelines are regularly flouted by policemen in India.

Human rights activists are “appalled by this brutal attack on a woman.”


For more information, please see:

BBC World News – Indian policeman suspended over beating video – 18 February 2010

The Times of India – Inspector sacked for beating up Dalit woman – 18 February 2010

The Indian Express – Inspector suspended for thrashing woman before media – 17 February 2010

Press Trust of India – Cong slams Mayawati for police atrocity on Dalit woman -18 February 2010

School Accused of Spying on Student at Home

By Stephen Kopko

Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

PENNSYLVANIA, United States – This week a student and his parents filed a lawsuit against a school district in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The student claims that employees of the Lower Merion School District spied on him at his home through a school-issued laptop computer. The student attends Harriton High School which is part of the Lower Merion School District.

The lawsuit stems from the school district’s policy of issuing each one of its students a laptop computer. All two thousand three hundred students in the school district receive laptops to conduct school work. Cameras and microphone systems are some of the features the laptops offer. The devices can be turned on through remote-activation software by people other than the user. The software can then relate information from the computer to outside parties.

The student claims that the software was used improperly by the school district. In November of 2009, he was accused of using his school-issued computer improperly by a school administrator. The administrator told him that he had an improper photograph on his computer. The school district did not inform students or their parents that they could activate the camera or recording device while the computer was at a student’s home.

In defense, the school district stated that it only used remote activation to locate missing laptops. The school district admitted to activating forty-two students’ cameras over a fourteen month period for that purpose. Subsequently, the school district has suspended its ability to remotely activate the laptops.

Privacy advocates, students, and parents were disturbed by the school district’s policy. They were fearful of placing such a powerful tool in the hands of school administrators. Parents and students argued that school officials had the ability to watch and find students and parents in potentially embarrassing situations.

The United States Supreme Court has previously held that privacy in ones home is a protected right. Therefore, the government needs to have reasonable suspicion or probable cause in order to search a person’s home. Justice Scalia wrote in a 2001 opinion that the Supreme Court has traditionally found that a government’s intrusion into a person’s privacy “draws a firm line at the entrance to the house.” In that case, the Supreme Court found that a police department’s use of infrared technology to detect marijuana within a person’s home was unconstitutional.

The FBI and the local district attorney also have started investigations against the school district. Both law enforcement agencies will investigate whether the school district broke any wiretap or computer intrusion laws.

For more information, please see:

Washington Post – Official: FBI probing Pa. school webcam spy case – 19 February 2010

MSNBC – Suit: School spied on student via webcams – 18 February 2010

Philadelphia Daily News – Lower Merion School District sued for cyber spying on students – 18 February 2010