Mubarak Trial Poses Legitimacy Questions

Mubarak Trial Poses Legitimacy Questions

By Tyler Yates
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

CAIRO, Egypt — On August 3, in what has been called a defining moment of the Arab Spring, Hosni Mubarak, the former president of Egypt, was placed on trial for charges of financial corruption and for ordering the shooting of unarmed protesters.

The sight of Mubarak being tried is certainly a welcome, if not nearly unbelievable, image for the Middle East and world alike, but some doubt the forthcoming results.  Most Egyptians believe that Mubarak is guilty without question, however the case that has been brought against him has been called weak by many including some independent analysts.

Mubarak in his trial cage (Photo courtesy of the New Yorker).
Mubarak in his trial cage (Photo courtesy of the New Yorker).

As it stands today, the prosecutors have yet to present the court enough concrete evidence to convict Mubarak, and thus far, he has been tried separately from his minister of Interior (who directed the killings) and the police officers (who actually committed the violence).  This could lead to an issue of scapegoating the offenses.

Further, many feel that the prosecution made a mistake by rushing the case into court to dispel public outcries.  There simply was not enough time to put together a solid case with the type of evidence necessary to convict.

Others in the country feel the entire trial is illegitimate, and possibly a violation of the principles of basic human rights.  They see the imagery of Mubarak in a cage as nothing more than proof of a show trial, being for the benefit of the people with a verdict having already been decided.

A big issue with the trial is the lack of credibility of the prosecution.  Most of the prosecutors were appointed by Mubarak himself, and are part of the regime the trial is attempting to vanquish.

Still, regardless of the trial’s outcome, many feel that it is important that it is happening at all.   They see the trial as proof that no matter what happens in the future Egypt will never be the way it used to be.  This is the start of something brand new.

One thing all sides appear to be concerned with is the issue of justice.   It is only the order of the issue’s importance that differs.  As international law scholar and United Nations human rights export Richard Falk said:

“We have to question whether the procedural side of justice is or really can be the most important part of justice in a revolutionary or post-revolutionary situation, where other considerations may be equally or more important. It’s part of the liberal imagination to focus on procedural justice, often at the expense of substantive justice. In the Mubarak case, there is substantive justice inherent in bringing him to trial given his notorious public record of abuse and oppression, which necessarily makes the outcome a foregone conclusion.”

Mubarak’s trial is playing a big role on the international scene.  It may set the stage for the future actions of other threatened dictators like Qaddafi and Assad, who may now think twice before negotiating with the popular uprisings seeking their removal.  No matter the outcome this trial will usher in something different, and there is no going back.

For more information, please see:

The Nation — Mubarak behind bars: Human rights and justice — 16 Aug 2011

Ahram Online — The tables have turned: Human rights lawyer once jailed by Mubarak gets his chance to press the pharaoh in court — 15 Aug 2011

Al Jazeera — Mubarak behind bars: Human rights and justice — 15 Aug 2011

The Telegraph — Hosni Mubarak trial: swift justice v human rights — 15 Aug 2011

PRESS RELEASE REGARDING “CHOIZIL” CASE (SOMALI PIRATES)

Originally published 12 August 2011

Today the district court of Rotterdam in the Netherlands passed judgement on the case of five Somali men suspected of committing piracy. The court handed down prison sentences ranging from four and a half to seven years.

The indictments against the five suspects included, among other things, the charge that they were all involved in the hijacking of the South African sailing yacht “Choizil”. All suspects were arrested in the Gulf of Aden by a Dutch naval vessel in November 2010. Soon thereafter they were transferred to the Netherlands in order to stand trial.

Three of the five suspects were found guilty of piracy. Enacting on their premeditated plan of hijacking ships by force, they headed out on the open seas whilst navigating a couple of small boats. They were heavily armed, carrying machine guns and bazookas. Because of their timely arrest by the Dutch navy, this group of pirates had not yet hijacked any ship. Their alleged involvement in the violent capture of the Choizil could not be proven. All of the suspects were arrested two weeks after the hijacking of the Choizil, making the burden of proof more challenging for the prosecution in this matter. However, two of the five pirates could be linked directly to the hijacking of the Choizil and were thusly convicted and sentenced.

In its judgement the court has noted that pirates often use extreme violence, leading to tremendous suffering among the crew members whom they take hostage in order to collect ransom moneys. The court has emphasized that piracy in the Gulf of Aden has turned into a significant threat for all ships that frequent that region. The free and unfettered transport of cargo, resources and fuels can no longer be guaranteed. Global economic consequences can no longer be ruled out.

The court has also reflected on the particularly harsh circumstances in Somalia. Armed conflicts are a daily occurrence. Currently, the region is being hit by one of the worst cases of famine in decades. All five suspects have described to the court as to how these circumstances have also impacted their own lives. However, the court has ruled that none of those circumstances, no matter how grave, can and may be accepted as any justification for committing acts of piracy.

In considering the penalty, the court has held that the professional manner in which the piracy was organized is an aggravating circumstance. The court has considered that detention for all five suspects will for them be more demanding than detention for a random person who is arrested in the Netherlands. This mitigating circumstance has only led to a minimal reduction in the penalty. The court explained that it was, after all, the suspects’ own behaviour which led them to being arrested abroad and subsequently detained in the Netherlands.

The legal jurisdiction of the court was not challenged in these proceedings. In a previous case regarding Somali pirates, this court had already decided that such legal jurisdiction exists (LNJ BM8116). The Netherlands has vested so-called universal jurisdiction in its Criminal Code whenever piracy is involved. This is in accordance with international treaties.

Note to the press: two of the five verdicts (coded LJN BR4930 and LJN BR4931) are published on the website of the Dutch Judiciary www.rechtspraak.nl

New Alliances, Tensions Develop in Middle East as Iraq Offers Support to Syria

By Zach Waksman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

BAGHDAD, Iraq – Even as the United States and much of the Arab world condemn President Bashar al-Assad’s use of violence in cracking down on dissidents, Syria retains a small cadre of backers.  Since late July, Iran has been vocal in its support for the embattled Middle Eastern nation.  Thursday, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki spoke out in favor of more peaceful means of action by the demonstrators, blaming the protesters for the present situation.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki
Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki voiced his support for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad Thursday. (Photo courtesy of the Iraqi Prime Minister's Office)

Iran and Syria have been longtime allies in the Middle East.  On July 24, Iran’s First Vice President, Mohammad Reza Rahimi said that his country would stand strongly alongside Syria during a meeting with Syrian Oil Minister Sufian Allaw.  Rahimi declared Iran and Syria to be “…two inseparable countries and allies,” adding that “…Iran will stand by its friend under all conditions.”

Since then, both countries have strengthened their rhetoric, particularly against the United States and the Western world.  This has been especially noticeable over the past week.  On August 7, Hamed Hassan, the Syrian Ambassador to Tehran, said that he considered the present state of his country to be the result of a foreign conspiracy.

“Americans are pushing for hegemony over the region and the disintegration of regional governments is in line with the interest of the Zionist regime,” Hassan told a press roundtable on Syrian unrest at the Iran Cultural and Press Institute (ICPI).  “Syria does not pay heed to foreign hegemony and the Zionist policies in the region.”

Three days later, senior Iranian lawmaker Alaeddin Boroujerdi accused the United States of doing the same thing.  “Having lost Egypt [following the Egyptian revolution], the US is now targeting Syria,” Boroujerdi said during a meeting with Arab League Secretary-General Nabil al-Arabi.  “The US aims to defeat the resistance in order to achieve its objectives and the [objectives of the] Zionist regime [of Israel]. [Therefore] Syria must be helped to end the unrest in the country.”

Unlike Iran, Iraq has not historically been an ally of Syria’s.  When sectarian violence was rampant in Iraq following the American invasion of 2003, Syria was blamed for not doing enough to keep militants and suicide bombers out of the country.  The shift in relations began with Maliki’s rise to power in Iraq, which was due in large part to support from Iran, who urged Assad to support him.  Maliki has since won a second term as Prime Minister.

“Maliki is very reliant on Iran for his power and Iran is backing Syria all the way,” Joost Hiltermann, the International Crisis Group’s deputy program director for the Middle East, told the New York Times.  “The Iranians and the Syrians were all critical to bringing him to power a year ago and keeping him in power so he finds himself in a difficult position.”

Since then, Iraq and Syria have been working to strengthen their relations.  On July 25, the three countries signed an agreement to build a pipeline that would supply Iranian natural gas to Iraq and Syria.  The project is expected to cost an estimated $10 billion over the next three to five years.

But within Iraq, the alliance has reignited sectarian divides in Iraq and jeopardizes the government’s recently restored functionality.  Maliki’s Shiite regime claims that the Syrian protesters were Al Qaeda operatives, who would be in position to use the country as a base to launch attacks if Assad were to fall.  Within the Sunni-dominated Iraqiya bloc of the Iraqi government, the assessment is very different.

“What is happening in Syria is not because of a terrorist group, as some say, that is not accurate,” said Jaber al-Jabri, a member of the Iraquiya. “There are whole towns rising up to demonstrate against the regime. We call on the Syrian government to listen to the people’s demands and to stop violence against their people.”

The new alliance between Iraq and Syria also creates a potentially dangerous situation for Israel.  According to Hossein Ebrahimi, the deputy chairman of the Majlis (Iranian Parliament) Committee on National Security and Foreign Policy, the Jewish state is now bordered by at least three countries (Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria) that are presently in a state of revolution.  “The Zionist regime is collapsing,” he said.

For more information, please see:

New York Times — Iraqi Leader Backs Syria, With a Nudge From Iran — 12 August 2011

PressTV — Iran MP urges Pro-Syria front against US — 11 August 2011

PressTV — Defend Syria from US meddling: Iran MP — 10 August 2011

Iran Daily — Syria Envoy Blames Foreign Powers for Turmoil — 8 August 2011

Iran Daily — Iran, Iraq, Syria Sign Gas Deal — 26 July 2011

Iran Daily — Rahimi Voices Support for Assad’s Syria — 26 July 2011

PressTV — Iran Vows Support for Syria — 24 July 2011

No immunity for Rumsfeld in suit regarding tortured U.S. citizens

By Brianne Yantz
Impunity Watch Reporter,  North America

CHICAGO, United States – Two American citizens can sue former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for torture, the Seventh Circuit Court ruled on Monday.  The two men pursuing the lawsuit, Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel, allege that U.S. Forces tortured them for months after suspicions of illegal activity arose against their employer, a private Iraqi company called Shield Group Security.

Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. (Photo Courtesy of AP/BBC NEWS)
Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. (Photo Courtesy of AP/BBC News)

Court records revealed that in 2005 Vance and Ertel had begun to suspect that their employer was bribing Iraqi officials and that some employees were engaging in illegal weapons trafficking. Shortly thereafter the two men became FBI informants. In April of 2006, however, Shield Group Security confiscated their credentials and they were left trapped in the Red Zone of war-ravaged Iraq.

After calling their government contacts, Vance and Ertel were assured that U.S. Forces would rescue them. Instead, the two men were arrested and thrown in confinement. According the Herald Sun, the two allege that while detained they were subjected “to violence, sleep deprivation and extremes in light and sound.”

It was further reported by the Chicagoist that the two men were “often deprived of food and water, walled, denied medical care and subject to various forms of psychological torture.”

Vance and Ertel were eventually released; the two men were dropped off at an airport in Baghdad. They were never charged or designated as security risks. They later decided to sue Rumsfeld as well as other unnamed U.S. officials.

Immediately Rumsfeld sought to dismiss the case, arguing he “had immunity for actions taken while working as defense secretary, and that U.S. citizens [could not] sue for violations of their rights that occurred in war zone,” BBC News reported.

However, according to BBC News, the Seventh Circuit reasoned Rumsfeld did not have immunity because the “plaintiffs [had] alleged sufficient facts to show that Secretary Rumsfeld personally established the relevant policies that caused the alleged violations of their constitutional rights during detention.”

The Seventh Circuit’s 2-1 decision affirmed the ruling of the lower district court, which also found that Rumsfeld lacked immunity.

In an interview quoted by the Herald Sun, Vance’s lawyer, Michael Kanovitz, said of the Court’s decision, “it’s important because what the court does here is it affirms the very basis of constitutional doctrine.” He further commented that absolute discretion should not be given to the executive branch.

Meanwhile, Rumsfeld’s lawyer, David Rivkin, quickly denounced the ruling, arguing “it saps the effectiveness of the military, puts American soldiers at risk, and shackles federal officials who have a constitutional duty to protect America,” Courthouse News Service reported.

Although whether Rumsfeld will be found accountable remains to be seen, the Seventh Circuit’s decision comes a week after a district judge in Washington ruled that a former American military contractor, who also alleges he was tortured in Iraq, could sue the former defense secretary.

For more information, please see:

Chicagoist – Court Rules Citizens Allowed to Sue Rumsfeld for Torture – August 10, 2011

Courthouse News Service – U.S. Citizens Can Sue Rumsfeld for Torture – August 9, 2011

Herald Sun – Donald Rumsfeld can be held liable for alleged torture, court rules – August 9, 2011

Wall Street Journal – Donald Rumsfeld Faces Another Torture Lawsuit – August 9, 2011

BBC News – ‘Tortured’ US citizens allowed to sue Donald Rumsfeld – August 8, 2011

Kyrgtyzstan police torture victim dies two days after release

By: Jessica Ties
Impunity Watch, Asia

BISHKEK, Kyrgyzstan – Osmonjon Khalmurzaev, an ethnic Uzbek, died two days after his release from police custody during which time he was allegedly tortured in an attempt to extort money in exchange for his release.

Following June 2010 violence, pictured above, ethnic Uzbeks have been the victims of violence and extortion at the hands of police in Kyrgyzstan (Photo Courtesy of The Telegraph).
Following June 2010 interethnic violence, pictured above, ethnic Uzbek's have been the victims of violence and extortion at the hands of police in Kyrgyzstan (Photo Courtesy of The Telegraph).

According to the victim’s wife, Zulhomor, Khalmurzaev was taken from his home by three police officers dressed as civilians. The police officer’s did not show an arrest warrant and failed to tell his wife where Khalmurzaev would be taken.

After being returned home, Khalmurzaev told his wife that after arriving at the police station the police officers put a gas mask on him and beat him until he lost consciousness.

After regaining consciousness, he was told by the police that he would be framed as a participant in a violent ethnic clash that occurred last June unless he paid them 6,000 dollars. After the police agreed to accept only 680 dollars and the money was paid he was released to his wife and told that they would harm his family if he informed anybody of what had happened. Two days after his release he was taken to a hospital where he died.

A preliminary conclusion by a forensic expert stated that Khalmurzaev died as a result of a broken sternum that had caused one of his organs to rupture. Despite this finding, none of the policemen who had detained Khalmurzaev have been questioned or suspended from their work although local authorities have opened an investigation.

The attack at the Sanpa factory was part of an ethnic clash that took place last June. As a result of the clash more that 400 people were killed and many Uzbek neighborhoods were ruined. The Uzbek’s have been forbidden to rebuild their communities and have also become the victims of detention, torture and extortion at the hands of police who rarely face prosecution.

Human Rights Watch has recently documented six other cases in which police attempt to extort money from victims by threatening to frame the victim for a crime.

For more information, please see:

Eurasia Net – Kyrgyzstan Police Beat Another Uzbek to Death – 12 August 2011

The Telegraph – Human Rights Group Accuses Kyrgyz Police of Abuses Against Ethnic Uzbeks – 12 August 2011

Human rights watch – Kyrgyzstan: A Death Follows Police Torture – 11 August 2011