Constitutional Court Rules Against Rally Discrimination, Yet Assembly Restrictions Remain

By Madeline Schiesser
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

MOSCOW, Russia – Last week, Russia’s Constitutional Court, while upholding the constitutionality of law passed in June restricting protest and rally organization, ruled that authorities should not discriminate against rally organizers and participants on the basis of their political views.

Russia’s restrictive rally laws limit who can organize public protests, demonstrations, and meetings. (Photo Courtesy of RT)

The Constitutional Court approved of Russian laws banning individuals with multiple administrative convictions, which include a large number of citizens, from organizing rallies, reasoning that recurring violations “cast[] doubt on the organi[z]ational ability of such individuals and, most importantly, their ability to run a peaceful public event in a manner prescribed by law.”

Members of Parliament from the Other Russia political party had challenged law, which had become Federal Law No. 65-FZ as of June 8, 2012 (see Russia Parliament Approves Peaceful Assembly Fine, Bill Awaits Putin’s Approval).  They specifically believed Paragraph A in Part 1, Article 2 to be unconstitutional.  This paragraph denied the right to organize rallies, marches and pickets, to those with outstanding convictions for offences against the foundations of the constitutional system and the security of the state, or offences against public safety, or those who have been charged with administrative offences.

Under the law, protest organizers cannot reject alternative routes that authorities propose without good reason, but are entitled to challenge the route decisions in court.  This provision was also upheld by the Court.

However, the Court stressed that authorities must apply the law equally with respect to all organizers and participants, regardless of political views.  The court stated, “Any response by a public authority to the organi[z]ation and running of meetings, rallies, demonstrations, marches and pickets must, in any case, be neutral, regardless of the political views of the organi[z]ers and participants.”

Nevertheless, the court recognized that even the minimum fines imposed by the rally law are disproportionate to the income of the Russian citizen.  Therefore, the Court order the legislator to take measures to lower the current fines.  Presently, the maximum fines stand at 300,000 roubles (~ $9,000) for individuals and 600,000 roubles (~ $20,000) for officials.

Even in light of the Court’s ruling, restrictions on meetings, rallies and protest continue to be seen throughout Russia.  In St. Petersburg, the city’s local assembly, or City Duma, this week adopted restrictions on public gatherings that will require such gatherings to have official permission and be at least 50 meters from government buildings, schools, hospitals, or police stations.

The adoption comes only a month after the bill was first introduced to the City Duma, when it was first refused in its original form.  The Yabloko Democratic Party, A Just Russia Party, Communist Party and even two members of the United Russia and Liberal Democratic Party questioned whether assembly would be possible in light of the bill.

“We’ll be left with nothing more than one-man pickets; you’ll be allowed to stand with a poster, and that’s all,” Alexander Kobrinsky, a Yabloko deputy, said.

Although the law makes special exceptions for lawmakers, religious ceremonies, sporting and cultural events, and for gatherings limited to less than 200 people in in specially designated areas, the ability to protest or demonstrate in a meaningful way and place is greatly curbed by the new law.

Yabloko leader Grigory Yavlinsky has called the law unconstitutional and promised to fight to repeal it.

The LGBT community in St. Petersburg has certainly seen the effects of tight restrictions on public rallies.  Under the June 8th law, authorities have the power to require the LGBT demonstrators move to the technical city limits to a tiny village called Novosyolki, after 15 sites the demonstration organizers suggested all were rejected because other events were taking place.

Natalya Tsymbalova, an activist with Democratic St. Petersburg and the Alliance of Straights for LGBT Equality, described the alternative location the city authorities had provided: “There is an aerodrome, a dump and a cemetery there. It looks like they have found the most remote location which is still officially part of the city.”

For further information, please see:

RFE/RL – St. Petersburg Tightly Restricts Public Gatherings – 20 February 2013

St. Petersburg Times – Gay Groups Continue to Fight Unfair Treatment – 20 February 2013

Human Rights in Russia – Constitutional Court Confirms Special Requirements for Rally Organisers – 14 February 2013

RT – Authorities Must Not Politically Discriminate Against Protesters – Constitutional Court – 14 February 2013

St. Petersburg Times – City Duma Rejects Call For Ban on Assemblies – 23 January 2013

China Acknowledges “Cancer Villages”

By Karen Diep
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BEIJING, China – After years of uncertainty regarding the effects of pollution, today, China’s Ministry of Environment Protection recognized the existence of “cancer villages.”

A child drinks water near a stream in Fuyuan County. (Photo Courtesy of RT News)

The latest report , “Guard against and control risks presented by chemicals to the environment during the 12th Five-Year period (2011-2015),” from the ministry outlined a crackdown on the use of 58 types of toxic chemicals.

According to a 2011 joint study by the ministry and the Chinese Academy of Engineering, over 90% of cities’ groundwater is polluted by varying degrees.  Furthermore, 64 out of 118 major cities possess gravely contaminated groundwater supplies.  Accordingly, it is important to note that 70% of China’s population is dependent upon groundwater as drinking water.

Although the report did not define the term “cancer village,” it shed light on other issues.  “The toxic chemicals have caused many environmental emergencies linked to water and air pollution,” read the report.  “There are even some serious cases of health and social problems like the emergence of cancer villages in individual regions,” continued the report.

According to BBC News, the widespread production and consumption of harmful chemicals forbidden in many developed nations still exist in China today.  Moreover, as China continues to experience speedy development, revelations pertaining to “cancer villages” have become more widespread.

A recent report by China Network Television deemed cancer as the country’s “top killer.”  Ma Jun, a reputable environmentalist in China, informed the Telegraph that despite China’s environmental issues and rising cancer rate, the Chinese government circumvents creating a connection between illness and pollution.

For many years, activists have believed that the cancer rates in some villages near factories and polluted waterways have increased.

In 2009, a Chinese journalist published a map finding dozens of ostensibly affected villages.  The journalist discovered high levels of poisonous heavy metals in the water and believed there was a direct correlation between occurrences of mining and cancer.

Last month, smog, which the World Health Organization considered hazardous, covered Beijing, among several other cities.  This pollution incited public uproar and debate about the costs of China’s speedy economic development.

For further information, please see:

BBC News – China acknowledges ‘cancer villages’ – 22 February 2013

Huffington Post – China Admits Existence of ‘Cancer Villages’ In Report, As Pollution Concerns Mount – 22 February 2013

RT News – China admits pollution brought about ‘cancer villages’ – 23 February 2013

Omani Pro-Reform Activists Refuse to be Silent, or eat While Detained

By Justin Dorman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

MUSCAT, Oman – Recently, both Human Rights Watch, Swiss-based Arab rights group, Alkarama, and the International Federation for Human Rights have called for the release of reform activists in Oman who have merely utilized their rights to expression and association. Twenty-four of such individuals are participating in hunger strikes while incarcerated, in order to make others aware of their cause, and hopefully persuade Oman’s Supreme Court to listen to appeals on their cases, which they have so far rejected.

Notable activists Mukhtar al-Hana’i, Bassam Abu Qasida, Basma Al-Kiyumi, Bassima Al-Rajhi, Saeed Al-Hashemi, Hamad Al-Kharusi, and others have been on a hunger strike for two weeks now after being arrested for their pro-reform efforts. (Photo Courtesy of Amnesty International)

Oman’s actions to arrest and detain individuals who peacefully protest, violates both its own laws and international law. According to Oman’s Basic Law, Article 29 guarantees individuals the freedom of speech. Additionally, under international human rights law, content-based restrictions of expression are only allowed in incredibly narrow situations. Such situations include any inflammatory speech which is directed to incite violence, or slander or libel against private citizens.

Peacefully protesting and calling for reforms to bring about a better government do not warrant restriction. Defamation against politicians is possible, however, the standard at which the defamation is judged is greater than that of the ordinary citizen. Politicians willingly submit themselves to the spotlight of the public forum. Furthermore, it has been globally recognized that the citizen’s right to hold politicians accountable leads to a greater government which better corresponds to the will of the people.

Many of those who have been detained were arrested for cybercrimes based on their Twitter tweets and Facebook posts. Their comments fell very short of calling for tyranny or death to the Sultan. Instead, they spoke of specific instances in which reform would be beneficial to the country.

For example, Ismail Al-Muqbali tweeted, “the lower house will not be able to respond to the people’s demands until it transforms its policies from mere reactions to initiatives and affirmative actions.”

Osama Al Tuwayyah blogged, while out on bail, “to everyone. . .our judicial system does nothing but protect corruption. . .To everyone. . .Our judicial system is not transparent or accountable in any form.”

Instead of being able to work towards positive reform of Oman, these individuals have been found guilty of defaming the Sultan, violating the cyber law, unlawful assembly, disturbing the public order, and illegal gathering.

Deputy Middle East director for Human Rights Watch, Joe Stork said that “Omani authorities are trying to suffocate the pro-reform movement by imprisoning these activists with laws that violate international standards, but the activists are refusing to be silent.”

Besides for refusing to be silent, they are also refusing to eat. Twenty-four activists have been partaking in a hunger strike to protest their incarcerations since February 9, 2013. Six additional violent protestors who were arrested have also joined this hunger strike. That makes a total of thirty Omani individuals who are starving for government reform.

As time passes, the conditions of these hunger strikers continue to deteriorate, almost to the point of death. Saeed Al-Hashemi was taken to the Royal Hospital in Muscat, where a neurologist said he was in dire need of treatment after taking some horrific blows to the head at a “peaceful” protest. Hamad Al-Kharusi and Bassam Abu Qasida  have also been moved to the jail’s clinic to treat their extreme exhaustion.

For further information, please see:

Human Rights Watch – Oman: Free Reform Activists – 22 February 2013

International Federation for Human Rights – Oman: Release Immediately and Unconditionally all Detained Human Rights Defenders and Activists – 21 February 2013

Alkarama – Oman: Nine Online Activists Calling for Reforms Sentenced to Prison – 9 February 2013

Amnesty International – Oman: Activist Arrests Threaten Freedom of Expression – 15 June 2012

At Least Three Protesters are Killed During a Demonstration in Yemen

By Ali Al-Bassam
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

SANA’A, Yemen — At least four demonstrators were killed last Thursday by Yemeni security forces in the southern port city of Aden.  Security forces opened fire on demonstrators who assembled t0 call for independence for Yemen’s southern region.  At least eighteen other protesters were wounded.

At least four protesters were killed during a demonstration in which people gathered to demand independence for south Yemen. (Photo Courtesy of Al Jazeera)

On the first anniversary of the uncontested election of President Abdrabuh Mansur Hadi, who succeeded the ousted theocratic leader Ali Abdullah Saleh, thousands of demonstrators gathered at a square in Aden.  Many demonstrators came to voice their support for Hadi, while many others came to show their support for the Southern Movement.

“They [the police] fired on activists trying to reach the place where the rally was being held,” said Fathi Ben Lazraq, a member of the independence seeking Southern Movement.  Officials reported that police forces were trying to stop a clash between the Southern Movement and the Al-Islah (Reform) party, who held their demonstration in support of national unity and of Hadi.  Officials also reported that at least four of those wounded during the protests were Yemeni army soldiers.  Security officials also reported that two policemen were wounded by sniper fire from buildings that surrounded the square.

Al-Islah supporters numbered in the thousands, as they gathered in the square, they were seen waving Yemeni flags and carrying portraits of Hadi.  They also held banners that exclaimed “unity is our strength,” and chanted “for dialogue, we will pursue our march.”

Southern Movement supporters also came to the square waiving flags of the former South Yemen, which unified with the north in 1990.  They were carrying portraits of Ali Salem al-Baid, the last president of the region prior to the unification of Yemen.  They chanted “Revolution in the south, occupiers go out,” as they made their way to the square.

Many from the southern Yemen region feel that they have been disenfranchised for decades, and want South Yemen to be a socialist state independent from the northern region.  Prior to its unification with the north, and following its independence from Britain, the region was formerly a secular socialist state.

Southern Movement leaders said they are open to dialogue, however a hardline separatist faction within the group led by the exiled al-Baid refuses to take part.  Abdullah al-Alimi, organizer of the Al-Islah rally, said of the Southern Movement that “the cause of the southerners is just, but it should be resolved through dialogue.”

Amnesty International urged authorities to end “the routine violent repression of protests.” “The Southern Movement and its followers have a right to protest peacefully, and the Yemeni authorities must allow them this right,” the human rights group said.

For further information, please see:

Al Jazeera — Three Killed in Yemen Ahead of Protest Rally — 22 February 2013

BBC News — Yemen Forces Fire on Aden Demonstrators — 21 February 2013

Global Post — Yemen: Protestors Killed in Pro-Secession Rallies — 21 February 2013

Naharnet — Yemen Police Kill Four at Aden Rally — 21 February 2013

Bemba’s War Crimes Trial Resumes

By Ryan Aliman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

THE HAGUE, Netherlands – The hearings in The International Criminal Court (ICC) trial of Jean-Pierre Bemba will resume on Monday, February 25.

Jean-Pierre Bemba is charged with crimes against humanity and war crimes related to the conflict in the Central African Republic from 2002 to 2003. (Photo courtesy of RNW/ANP/EPA)

Bemba, the former leader of the Movement for the Liberation of Congo, was charged with crimes against humanity and war crimes and has been in ICC custody since 2008. Bemba was accused of failing to stop his troops from committing mass rape, murder, and pillage during the 2002-2003 conflict in the Central African Republic.

ICC judges ordered a temporary suspension to the hearings last December until March 4, 2013. The suspension was necessary to allow Bemba’s lawyers to prepare additional evidence in light of a possible “legal re-characterization” of the charges.

Last year, the defense counsel argued that a possible modification of the charges will be prejudicial to their client unless the court gives them an extension. According to Bemba’s lawyers, changing the charges will require them to prepare additional evidence which they may not be able to carry out due to lack of resources, insufficient time, and lack of “valid, prompt and legally adequate notification” by the judges. Thus, on December 13, 2012, ICC Judges Sylvia Steiner, Joyce Aluoch, and Kuniko Ozaki issued a temporary suspension order in Bemba’s favor invoking the court’s power to “suspend [a] hearing and ensure that the participants have adequate time and facilities for effective preparation”.

On February 6, the ICC judges lifted the suspension and scheduled Witness D04-19 to testify via video link. However, the defense filed a request to be present at the actual location of Witness D04-19 which the prosecution opposed.

Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda contended that the presence of defense lawyers at the location where the witness would give evidence from was “unnecessary” and would “provide a distinct advantage to the defense during questioning.”

“Without knowing the defense’s particular justification, it is difficult to imagine any good reason to depart from this [common] procedure and allow the defense to be present with the witness while the prosecution and the chamber remain in The Hague,” said Bensouda.

Bensouda also argued that the ICC judges’ power to control and oversee the proceedings would be “diminished” if they allowed the defense’s request. According to her, they will not be able to monitor “the events between the defense team and the witness that might occur off-camera.”

In their February 15 ruling, the judges sided with the prosecution stating that “it is not necessary for members of the defense team to be authorized to question the witness from the location of the video-link.” The ICC judges also explained that it has been common practice in The Hague to place video link witnesses in a remote location unknown to both parties.

 

For further information, please see:

All Africa – Congo-Kinshasa: Bemba Trial to Resume Monday With Protected Defence Witness – 21 February 2013

Zapaday – ICC resumes trial of Jean-Pierre Bemba early following defense request – 20 February 2013

All Africa – Central African Republic: Bemba Trial Hearings Resume Next Week – 19 February 2013

Bemba Trial – Status Conference Discusses Bemba’s Upcoming Witness – 11 February 2013

All Africa – Congo-Kinshasa: Judges Suspend Bemba’s ICC Trial Hearings Until March 2013 – 19 December 2012