Europe

ECHR Rules Lithuania Violated Prisoner’s Right by Assisting CIA in Secret Detainee Program

By: Jacob Riederer

Impunity Watch News Staff Writer

STRASBOURG, France – On January 16, 2023, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that Lithuania violated multiple articles of the European Convention on Human Rights by permitting the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to detain and mistreat prisoner, Mustafa Ahmed Adam al-Hawsawi, at a CIA facility between 2005 and 2006.

 
Inmates like al-Hawsawi were held in detention sites in Vilnius, Lithuania | Photo courtesy of Reuters.
  

Al-Hawsawi, a citizen of Saudi Arabia, was first captured in Pakistan in 2003 during the American “War on Terror,” following the September 11, 2001, Attacks. After being transferred to the custody of the United States, he was moved to a CIA facility in Lithuania, known as “Detention Site Violet.” 

While at Detention Site Violet, al-Hawsawi alleges he was subjected to physical and mental torture by the CIA. These allegations include sexual penetration by a foreign object, exposure to noise and light, continuous use of leg shackles, and solitary confinement. Al-Hawsawi claims he now suffers from many medical conditions, such as rectal hemorrhoids, hearing loss, and chronic migraines which he maintains were caused by the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques. Al-Hawsawi also alleges that he was denied access to communication with family members, counsel, and doctors during his detention. 

Al-Hawsawi asserts Lithuania enabled the alleged inhumane treatment by permitting his detention there and allowing him to be transferred to other CIA detention sites where he was subjected to similar mistreatment. The ECHR agreed with many of his complaints and found that Lithuania had violated the prohibition against inhuman and degrading treatment, as well as al-Hawsawi’s rights to a fair trial, liberty and security. The court awarded al-Hawsawi €100,000 in compensation, and Lithuania agreed to comply.

Essential to the court’s judgment was evidence from a 2014 declassified U.S. Senate Report, which gave details on the CIA’s secret detainee program.  The court also relied on prior cases including Al Nashiri v. Poland and Abu Zubaydah v. Lithuania for relevant testimony from expert witnesses.

After his time at Detention Site Violet and another facility in Afghanistan, al-Hawsawi was transferred to Guantánamo Bay, where he is currently on trial with the U.S. Military Commission for his alleged role in al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks.

For further information, please see:

European Court of Human Rights, Case of al-Hawsawi v. Lithuania, January 16, 2024 

European Court of Human Rights, Press Release, Case of al-Hawsawi v. Lithuania , January 16, 2024

Reuters, Lithuania Broke Human Rights Laws In Case Tied to CIA Detention Program, European Court Rules, January 16, 2024 

The Guardian, ECHR Rules Lithuania Allowed “Inhuman” of Alleged 9/11 Suspect by CIA, January 16, 2024

Senate Intelligence Committee, Report Of The Senate Select Committee On Intelligence Committee Study of The Central Intelligence Agency’s Detention and Interrogation Program, December 9, 2014

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, Legal Case Demands Details About How CIA Used Windowless Warehouse In Lithuania As Secret Prison, September 2, 2015

 

ECHR Holds Polish Abortion Legislation Violates European Convention on Human Rights

By: Molly Osinoff

Impunity Watch News Staff Writer

POLAND – On December 14, 2023, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) held that Poland’s legislative amendments that forced a woman to travel abroad to have an abortion breached Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects the right to respect for private and family life.

 
A protest in Krakow, Poland following abortion restrictions | Photo Courtesy of the New York Times.
  

Poland’s abortion laws are among the most restrictive in Europe. Prior to 2020, abortion was legal in Poland in only three situations: fetal abnormalities, pregnancies caused by rape or incest, and threats to the women’s life or health. In 2020, the Polish Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling restricted abortion access even further. While the latter two reasons remain legal, the Tribunal banned abortions due to fetal abnormalities, which make up approximately 98% of the abortions performed annually in Poland, reasoning that terminating a pregnancy violates the unborn child’s Constitutional guarantee to life. As a result, the 2020 ruling is effectively a total abortion ban.

The plaintiff in the recent case, M.L. v. Poland, was scheduled for a legal abortion in early 2021 in a Warsaw hospital. After becoming pregnant in late 2020, she discovered that the fetus had Trisomy 21, also known as Down Syndrome. On the day before the procedure, however, the Constitutional Court’s judgment went into effect. M.L.’s doctors informed her that she could no longer have an abortion in the facility or in any other medical institution in Poland. As a result, M.L. traveled to the Netherlands, where she had an abortion in a private clinic.

M.L. alleged that she had been forced to make a choice between giving birth to a child with Trisomy 21 and traveling abroad to have an abortion, resulting in severe emotional suffering. The ECHR held in her favor, holding that Poland’s restriction on abortion in the instance of fetal abnormality, when sought for reasons of health and well-being, came within the Article 8 scope of the right to respect for her private life. Further, the Court noted that “private life,” as meant in Article 8 of the Convention, encompasses the right to personal autonomy and personal development and concerns subjects such as gender identification, sexual orientation, sexual life, physical and psychological integrity, including the decision whether to have a child or to become genetic parents.

For further information, please see:

ECHR – M.L. v. Poland – 18 Oct. 2021.

ECHR – Woman Forced to Travel Abroad to Have an Abortion Following Legislating Amendments in Poland Breached the Convention – 14 Dec. 2023.

New York Times – Near-Total Abortion Ban Takes Effect in Poland, and Thousands Protest – 27 Jan. 2021.

New York Times – Poland Court Ruling Effectively Bans Legal Abortions – 22 Oct. 2020.

Pulitzer Center – Poland’s Abortion Ban Is Changing Maternal Health Care – 13 Oct. 2023.

 

 

Russia Sends No Representation to ECHR Grand Chamber Hearing Regarding Russian Occupation of Crimea

By: Rachel Wallisky

Impunity Watch News Staff Writer

STRASBOURG, France – On December 13, 2023, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) held a Grand Chamber Hearing in the case of Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea). However, the Russian Government failed to notify the court of the names of their representatives prior to the hearing, nor did any representatives appear on its behalf. The ECHR elected to continue with the hearing, pursuant to Rules 64 and 65 of the Rules of the Court. The Ukrainian Government is represented by Marharyta Sokorenko, Ben Emmerson, Iyrna Mudra, Andrii Luksha, and Oleksii Yakubenko.

 
The ECHR Grand Chamber Hearing of December 13, 2023, in the case of Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea) | Photo Courtesy of the ECHR.
  

The Complaints

The Hearing relates to three inter-state applications filed by Ukraine in the ECHR over the past decade. Two applications submitted to the Court by Ukraine in 2014 and 2015 were joined in 2018. The ECHR issued a decision establishing its jurisdiction over the application on December 16, 2020.

The Ukrainian Government argues in its application that Russia has exercised “effective control” over Crimea, the City of Sevastopol, and integral parts of Ukraine since February 27, 2014. By doing so, the Ukrainian Government argues that Russia has violated several Articles of the Convention including Article 2 and Article 3, the Right to Life and Prohibition of Inhuman Treatment and Torture, respectively.

Specifically, Ukraine argues that between February 27, 2014 and August 16, 2015, Russia exercised an administrative practice of “enforced disappearances” of “perceived opponents to Russia,” especially Ukrainian soldiers, ethnic Ukrainians, and Tartars, and that Russia failed to engage in any adequate investigation of those disappearances.

The Hearing

The Hearing began with a reading of a summary of the applications being considered and the complaints surrounding them. The President of the ECHR, Síofra O’Leary, noted that Russia ceased to be a party to the ECHR on September 16, 2022. However, because Russia was a member of the Counsel of Europe at the time of the complaints, it cannot escape its obligations under the Convention. President O’Leary noted that though the ECHR had maintained communication with Russia regarding the allegations made against it by Ukraine, Russia has not communicated with the Court since leaving the ECHR.

When addressing the Court, Mr. Emmerson remarked that it was “unprecedented” that a Hearing continued though only one party was present for arguments. Mr. Emmerson argued that Russia’s “enforced disappearance” practices during its occupation of Crimea fell under Article 2 because the failure of the Russian government to acknowledge that a person had been imprisoned or killed increased the likelihood that they would be subject to inhumane treatment, regardless  of if the person is later released or their killing acknowledged.

A ruling from the ECHR can be expected “at a later stage” but a recording of the Grand Chamber Hearing is available on the ECHR’s website.

For further information, please see:

ECHR – European Court of Human Rights Communicates to Russia New Inter-State Case Concerning Events in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine – 1 October 2015

ECHR – European Court of Human Rights Deals With Cases Concerning Crimea and Eastern Ukraine – 26 November 2014

ECHR – Grand Chamber Hearing on Inter-State Case Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea) – 13 Dec. 2023

ECHR – Interim Measure Granted in Inter-State Case Brought by Ukraine Against Russia – 13 March 2014

ECHR – New Inter-State Application Brought by Ukraine Against Russia – 27 August 2018

ECHR – Rules of Court – 30 October 2023

ECHR – Webcast of Grand Chamber Hearing in Ukraine v. Russia (re Crimea) (nos. 20958/14 and 38334/18) – 13 Dec. 2023

British Government Faces Domestic and International Legal Challenges to Controversial Northern Ireland Act

By: Gavin Gretsky

Impunity Watch News Staff Writer

UNITED KINGDOM – The British Government is facing multiple lawsuits both domestically and internationally that challenge the legality of the recently passed Northern Ireland Troubles Legacy Act (Act).

 
A protest outside of Westminster Square, Westminster against the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill | Photo Courtesy of Belfast Times
  

The Act, which was passed by British Parliament in September 2023, is an attempt to bring finality and closure to the Troubles in Northern Ireland. The Troubles was a three-decade long period of sectarian violence between Irish republican paramilitaries, the British army, and unionist paramilitaries which resulted in more than 3,500 deaths and over 47,000 injuries. The Troubles effectively ended with the signing of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, however over 1,000 deaths from that era remain unsolved.

The Northern Ireland Troubles Legacy Act is modeled after the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission established by Nelson Mandela after the fall of apartheid. The Act will be implemented by the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR), which will seek to find information on the circumstances of the deaths or injuries of victims of the Troubles and share the information with the families of the victims. Under the Act, perpetrators who provide truthful accounts of their actions to the ICRIR can be granted immunity from prosecution. Additionally, the Act will prevent any new civil cases and inquiries about the Troubles from starting. The Act received fierce opposition from all political parties in Northern Ireland, as well as many victims’ groups and organizations, but was supported by U.K. veteran’s groups and Britain’s governing Conservative party.

Shortly after the Act was passed in September, sixteen separate legal challenges were filed with the U.K. High Court in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Legal representatives of the parties, mostly made up of the families of victims from the Troubles, argue that the Act is unlawful because it is incompatible with international human rights standards, including the European Convention on Human Rights. The parties state that the Act interferes with the justice system by denying victims access to the courts which had been a viable avenue open to victims and their families before the Act’s passage. For example, in 2021 an inquest through the previous system found that ten individuals killed in Belfast in 1971 were unarmed at the time of their deaths and that the use of force by the British army was “clearly disproportionate.” Petitioners also indicated their intention to file applications with the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR).

In addition to domestic legal challenges, the Act is now facing challenges on the international stage. The Republic of Ireland has announced that it will be bringing a case against the United Kingdom at the ECHR. The Irish government’s main concern is the grants of immunity given under the Act which will create a barrier to any other action by victims or their families. Grants of immunity have previously been found by the ECHR to be incompatible with a country’s obligation to maintain means to investigate unnatural deaths and torture, a provision of the Good Friday Agreement signed by the United Kingdom. According to Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar, both the United Nations and the Council of Europe support Ireland’s position in bringing this challenge. Conversely, the U.K. government states that Act complies with the ECHR and the Good Friday Agreement because it balances grants of immunity with the investigative powers of the ICRIR.

Further details on the filings and decisions of these cases are forthcoming as the cases progress through their respective domestic and international channels.

For further information, please see:

Aljazeera- Ireland to Launch Legal Action Against UK over Troubles Amnesty Law- 20 Dec. 2023

BBC- Troubles Legacy Bill Enters Law After Receiving Royal Assent- 19 Sept. 2023

BBC- What is the Northern Ireland Legacy Bill? – 5 Sept. 2023

Independent- Ireland to Launch a Legal Challenge Against the UK Government Over Troubles Amnesty Bill – 20 Dec. 2023

Jurist- UK Government Publishes Response to Human Rights Decisions from European Court of Human Rights – 14 Nov. 2023

Jurist- UK High Court Hears Legal Challenges to Recently Enacted Northern Ireland Troubles Bill – 20 Sept. 2023

Sky News – Irish government launches legal challenge against UK’s Northern Ireland Legacy Bill – 20 Dec. 2023

German Court Finds Gambian Man Guilty of Crimes Against Humanity Under Universal Jurisdiction

By: Rafael Sbeghen Freitas 

Impunity Watch Staff Writer 

 CELLE, Germany – A former participant in the Gambian death squad, an infamous paramilitary group called “The Junglers,” has been handed a life sentence following the Celle Higher Regional Court’s determination of his guilt for crimes against humanity. 

 
The Gambian defendant, identified as Bai Lowe, in line with German privacy rules, holds a folder in front of his face at the Celle Higher Regional Court in Celle, Germany | Photo courtesy of Associated Press.
  

The paramilitary organization was established by the former president Yahya Jammeh in the mid-1990s. Jammeh’s 22-year regime was characterized by systematic oppression and pervasive human rights abuses, encompassing torture, extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, and sexual violence targeting both real and perceived adversaries. 

Court proceedings in Germany revolved around Bai Lowe, a 48-year-old man who was found to be the driver for the “Patrol Team,” a unit of the assassination squad in several of its attacks. Lowe was found guilty of participating in two homicides and one attempted homicide. The latter incident occurred in December 2003, when the court determined that he drove the unit to the location of the attempted assassination of a lawyer who was defending an individual who had fallen out of favor with Jammeh. The victim suffered the loss of a kidney but ultimately survived. 

In 2004, the unit, utilizing two vehicles camouflaged as taxis, was responsible for the killing of a prominent journalist, with one of the vehicles being driven by the accused, as per the court’s findings. Subsequently, before the conclusion of 2006, the unit compelled a former soldier, purportedly in opposition to Jammeh, into a vehicle operated by the defendant. They then transported him to an isolated location, where he was shot and buried, according to a court statement. 

Bai Lowe’s trial in Germany was made possible by the nation’s legal recognition of universal jurisdiction for severe crimes under international law. This allows the investigation and prosecution of such crimes regardless of where they occurred and the nationalities of the suspects or victims. Given Lowe’s residence in Germany, German authorities were obligated to pursue the case. 

The significance of universal jurisdiction cases is growing in international efforts to hold individuals accountable for atrocities, deliver justice to victims lacking alternative recourse, deter future crimes, and prevent countries from becoming safe havens for human rights violators. Numerous European countries are actively engaged in ongoing investigations and prosecutions related to egregious abuses committed abroad, spanning regions such as the Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Liberia, Syria, and Ukraine. 

It is expected that authorities in Gambia request Bai Lowe’s extradition from Germany to stand trial. However, the principle of double jeopardy (ne bis in idem) established in international law and the Gambian constitution could preclude Gambia’s judiciary system from bringing charges against him for any of the acts outlined in the current trial indictment. 

For further information, please see: 

ABC News – Gambian man convicted in Germany for role in killings under Gambia’s former ruler – November, 2023 

ECCHR – Verdict in Gambia Atrocity Case – 28 Nov. 2023

Human Rights Watch – Germany: Verdict in Gambia Atrocity Case – November, 2023 

Oberlandesgericht Celle – State security proceedings on the suspicion of crimes against humanity in Gambia – March, 2023 

The Globe and Mail – German court finds Gambian man guilty of crimes against humanity for death-squad role – November, 2023