Eight Suspects in Malala Yousafzai Attack Acquitted

By Christine Khamis

Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia 

 

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan– 

Pakistani officials disclosed last Friday that eight out of 10 men accused of conspiring in the attack of activist Malala Yousafzai have been acquitted and released.

Ms. Yousafzai was shot in the head and neck in October 2012 while traveling to school in the northwestern Swat Valley region of Pakistan. Prior to the shooting, Ms. Yousafzai continued to attend school despite the ongoing threat of fundamentalists opposed to the education of girls. She also had been anonymously blogging for the BBC about the realities of living in the Swat region and about the importance of education for girls.

Malala Yousafzai. (Photo courtesy of PBS)

Ms. Yousafzai survived the shooting and went on to become internationally known as an advocate for the education of girls. She was also the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in December.

Ms. Yousafzai is now 17 years old and lives in Birmingham, England with her family. She and her family are unable to return to Pakistan because of continuing threats from the Taliban.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for Ms. Yousafzai’s shooting. Pakistani officials believe that Pakistani Taliban leader Maulana Fazlullah is one of the main suspects behind the attack, along with Mr. Fazlullah’s spokesman and two other men. The suspects are believed to be hiding out in Afghanistan.

The 10 men accused of conspiring in Ms. Yousafzai’s shooting were put on trial at a military-run internment center in Swat, Pakistan. In April, a Pakistani prosecutor told journalists that all 10 men had confessed to the attack on Ms. Yousafzai and police stated that the men were convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

On Friday, the court that tried the 10 men issued its written judgment. The judgment revealed that only two of the men had been convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

Pakistan’s deputy police chief Azad Khan has stated that the eight men were released because there was not enough evidence to convict them. Mr. Khan also said that the secrecy surrounding the trial led to the mistaken reports claiming that all 10 men had been convicted. Public prosecutor Sayed Naeem, who stated in April that all 10 men had been convicted, said on Friday that reporters misquoted him at the time. Mr. Naeem also stated that he has already filed an appeal of the acquittal of the eight men.

The release of the eight men exemplifies the challenges that Pakistan’s judicial system faces. Courts in Pakistan often try Islamist militants in secret trials to maintain the safety of judges, police, and witnesses. There are poor evidentiary standards used in such trials as well as a well-documented practice of getting suspects to confess through the use of torture.

 

For more information, please see:

PBS – Men Who Planned Attack Against Malala Go Free in Pakistan – 6 June 2015

Associated Press – Pakistan Police Say 8 Men in Malala Attack Were Acquitted – 5 June 2015

CNN – Pakistan: 2 Convicted, 8 Acquitted in Connection to Malala Yousafzai Attack – 5 June 2015

New York Times – Pakistan Says Court Has Freed 8 of 10 Accused in Attack on Malala Yousafzai – 5 June 2015

Reuters – Pakistan Court Frees Eight Men Charged With Attack on Schoolgirl Malala – 5 June 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

Family of Yemeni Drone Strike Victims Files Lawsuit in US

By Brittani Howell

Impunity Watch Reporter, the Middle East

SANA’A, Yemen – On Sunday, a family member of two Yemeni men killed by a US drone strike filed a lawsuit against the United States seeking the deaths be acknowledged as unlawful. Monetary compensation is not sought; rather the families want a public apology.

Mr. Faisal bin Ali Jaber filed lawsuit in United States Federal Court on Sunday. (Photo Courtesy of The International)

In April, US President Obama publicly apologized for an inadvertent airstrike in Pakistan that killed two hostages, one American and one Italian. The lawsuit questions why, “the President has now admitted to killing innocent Americans and Italians with drones; why are the bereaved families of innocent Yemenis less entitled to the truth?”

The two men were killed in August 2012 by Hellfire missiles. Salem bin Ali Jaber, a cleric, and Waleed bin Ali Jaber, a traffic police officer, met with three young men the day they were killed. The US never publically acknowledged that the three young men were al-Qaeda members, but the operators appeared to have evidence that they were members of al-Qaeda and assumed the other two, Salem and Waleed, were too.

Days before the attack, Salem bin Ali Jaber, had given a sermon speaking against the beliefs of al-Qaeda. When the young men asked to see him after the service, family members sent them away fearing the young men were from al-Qaeda and thought the men were upset with the sermon. Salem agreed to meet the men the day of the incident and Waleed went along for protection.

The lawsuit was filed in United States Federal District Court by Faisil bin Albi Jaber with the assistance of the human rights group, Reprieve. Fasil bin Albi Jaber was the brother-in-law of Salem and the uncle of Waleed. Faisil bin Albi Jaber, filed suit as next of friend, in place of immediate family members, because he was in a better position to bring a lawsuit.

According to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, 423 civilians have been killed as a result of President Obama’s drone strike program. Mr. Jaber’s lawyer commented, “Not only were his two relatives among the hundreds of innocent civilians who have been killed by this misguided, dirty war – they were the very people we should be supporting.”

Last year, the Yemeni government compensated the families of Salem and Waleed with $155,000, which Reprieve states was from the United States government.

Letta Taylor, a senior researcher on terrorism and counter-terrorism for Human Rights Watch stated, “It’s shocking that family members would have to take a request as basic as an acknowledgement of death of loved ones to a court almost halfway around the world, simply because they aren’t American.”

For further information, please see:

New York Times- Families of Drone Strike Victims in Yemen File Suit in Washington – 8 June 2015

Reuters- Yemeni Families sue US, Allege ‘Wrongful Deaths’ From Drone Strike- 8 June 2015

The Guardian – Yemen Drone Strike Lawsuit Forces US to Face Non-Western ‘War on Terror’ Victims – 8 June 2015

The Independent – Family of US Drone Strike Victims Files Lawsuit Demanding President Obama Apologize for Yemen Killings – 8 June 2015

Press Release: Global Magnitsky Bill Intorduced in the Canadian Parliament

Press Release

For Immediate Distribution

Global Magnitsky Bill Introduced in the Canadian Parliament

12 June 2015 – Irwin Cotler, Canadian MP, former Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, and chair of the Justice for Sergei Magnitsky Inter-Parliamentary Group, has introduced the Global Magnitsky Bill to the Canadian parliament. The bill, entitled the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act [C-689], calls for sanctions on international human rights violators anywhere in the world, and is similar to the U.S. Global Magnitsky bill currently making its way through the U.S. Congress.

Explaining his new bill, Irwin Cotler MP said:

“The victims of human-rights violations in Russia and around the world… and the courageous activists who stand up to rights-violating regimes at great personal risk – were on my mind when I rose on Tuesday in the House to present my legislation… Countries that value human rights and the rule of law must use the measures at our disposal to hold violators to account and discourage future violations. Otherwise, we are exposed as having far less concern for these noble principles than our usual rhetoric.”

Introducing the legislation, Irwin Cotler MP paid an emotional tribute to his friend and advocate of Magnitsky sanctions legislation, Boris Nemtsov, who was assassinated near the Kremlin in Moscow three months ago.

“I could almost feel the presence of my late friend Boris Nemtsov, the leader of the democratic Russian opposition who was murdered near the Kremlin earlier this year,” said Irwin Cotler.

Boris Nemtsov publicly supported Irwin Cotler in 2012 when the Magnitsky legislation was first introduced in the Canadian parliament.

“Magnitsky was killed by prosecutors and prison management…Putin government supported the murderers… The idea of the [Magnitsky] Act is to implement sanctions against absolutely concrete corrupt officials and people who are responsible for killing Magnitsky,” said Boris Nemtsov.

“As a country with the low level of corruption and rule of law, Canada has to fight against criminals and against corruption. You are not against Russia, you are against corruption, against criminals. It will be very painful for Russian corrupt bureaucracy to get such kind of law from Canada. Very painful. Because corrupt system in Russia means that they have property outside of the country, they relax outside the country, they send their kids to get education outside…”

(Listen to the full speech by Boris Nemtsov in Canada in 2012, starting after introduction at 4 min.: http://www.ipolitics.ca/2015/03/02/when-nemtsov-came-to-ottawa/)

In March this year, the Canadian House of Commons unanimously supported the initiative to introduce Magnitsky sanctions on individual human-rights violators, including those involved in the 2009 detention, torture and murder of Sergei Magnitsky. A similar motion was adopted in the Canadian Senate a few weeks later. Yet, the Canadian Government has not acted on the call from parliamentarians.

“There is still time for the [Canadian] government to either take over my bill or to introduce similar legislation of its own, out of respect for the unanimous will of Canadian MPs, and out of solidarity with the victims of human-rights violations and those who struggle valiantly on their behalf, in Russia and around the world,” said Irwin Cotler, MP.

For more information, please contact:

Magnitsky Justice Campaign

+44 2074401777

e-mail: info@lawandorderinrussia.org

website: www.lawandorderinrussia.org

Twitter: @KatieFisher__

Video of Irwin Cotler MP introducing the Global Magnitsky Bill in the Canadian Parliament:


New Canadian Global Magnitsky Bill, C-689: “An Act to enact the Global Human Rights Accountability Act and to make related amendments to the Special Economic Measures Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act”

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=8035881
Original 2012 Canadian Magnitsky Bill, C-339: “An Act to condemn corruption and impunity in Russia in the case and death of Sergei Magnitsky”

http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?billId=6253662&Language=E&Mode=1
The Justice for Sergei Magnitsky Inter-Parliamentary Group website:

http://ipg-magnitsky.org/

?

?

Press Release: Parliament Calls on EU Foreign Policy Chief to Enact EU-wide Magnitsky Sanctions on Russian Human Rights Abusers

11 June 2015 – The European Parliament has adopted the Magnitsky Sanctions Motion which demands that EU Foreign Affairs chief Federica Mogherini act “without delay” and introduce sanctions on Russian officials involved in the Magnitsky case.

The motion proposed by European Parliament’s Rapporteur on the state of EU-Russia relations Gabrielius Landsbergis, MEP, was adopted by 494 votes to 135, with 69 abstentions.

The Magnitsky Sanctions motion highlights the assassinations of Boris Nemtsov, Sergey Magnitsky, Anna Politkovskaya, Natalya Estemirova, Alexander Litvinenko and others, and demands their proper, independent investigations.

 The Magnitsky Sanctions motion adopted by the European Parliament states:

 “European Parliament…reiterates its call on the Council to … adopt, upon a proposal which should be submitted without delay by the VP/HR, restrictive measures for the officials involved in the well-documented Magnitsky case.”

Previously, Ms Mogherini, EU VP/HR (Vice President and High Representative) for foreign affairs and security policy, strongly opposed the enactment of EU-wide Magnitsky sanctions, in spite of four resolutions by the European Parliament in their favour. In a letter to the European parliament members on 12 January 2015, Ms Mogherini steadfastly refused to impose sanctions on Russian officials in the Magnitsky case.

“I consider that additional sanctions targeting human rights violators would not be the appropriate response as they would risk neither triggering a change in policy nor improving the human rights situation,” said Ms Mogherini at the time in her letter.

One and a half month after Ms Mogherini’s refusal, Boris Nemtsov, the leading proponent of the EU Magnitsky sanctions, and a key Russian leader of the opposition to president Putin, was assassinated next to the Kremlin.

In his public appearances before his assassination, Boris Nemtsov stated his belief that Magnitsky sanctions, enacted by the United States under the “US Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012,” represented the “most powerful instrument against killers and cleptocrats” (see in Russian at 27 min of youtube video debate with Boris Nemtsov: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_n1AJ0oCIJE)

Boris Nemtsov campaigned for the adoption of Magnitsky sanctions by the EU and for the expansion of the US Magnitsky sanctions list.

“We owe it to the memory of the courageous Russian patriots Sergei Magnitsky and Boris Nemtsov to create consequences for those in Russia who act with impunity and continue to cover up brutal murders with a straight face in the international settings. Inaction by Ms Mogherini today, after the fifth vote by the European Parliament, is no longer acceptable,” said Bill Browder, leader of the Magnitsky Justice campaign.

 

For more information, please contact:

 Magnitsky Justice Campaign

+44 2074401777

e-mail: info@lawandorderinrussia.org

website: www.lawandorderinrussia.org

Twitter: @KatieFisher__

 

 

Syria Justice and Accountability Centre: US Issues First Apology for Syrian Civilian Deaths

US Issues First Apology for Syrian Civilian Deaths

Photo Credit: US Central Command Youtube Channel

US airstrikes on Hasakah, Syria 2015.                                       Photo Credit: US Central Command Youtube Channel

 

On May 21, the United States Central Command (CentCom) issued a statement admitting that two Syrian children died as a result of US airstrikes which targeted the Khorasan Group, an Al-Qaeda affiliate, near Aleppo last November. Six months of investigations resulted in US CentCom’s public apology, with Lieutenant General James Terry stating, “We regret the unintentional loss of lives.”

The acknowledgement of civilian casualties was the first since the United States began its campaign against the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) and other militant groups in August 2014. Lieutenant General Terry’s statement set an important precedent for the aerial operations in Syria, but his impersonal message came so late after the airstrikes that the impact has largely been lost on the local population.

During World War II, the US government passed theForeign Claims Act, which allowed non-US citizens to request compensation for damages caused by U.S. military personnel. Although the law is only applicable in situations where damage occurred outside the battlefield, CentCom has historically issued apologies and condolence payments (also known as solatia) for injuries that occurred during combat dating back to the Vietnam War. The tradition of condolence payments continued during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq when the US Department of Defense developed the Money As A Weapons System (MAAWS). Condolence payments are minimal (a maximum of $2,500 in Iraq), and the US military makes clear that the token compensation does not serve as an admission of legal liability. Rather, the US military regards the apology and accompanying compensation as a way to sympathize with victims and repair ties with the local community.

Modern warfare, however, has introduced the use of drones, whereby foreign troops are not physically present in the country and, therefore, are disconnected from local communities. In Syria, Pakistan, and Yemen, for example, the United States has conducted aerial operations that have resulted in direct harm to civilians, but the military has not extended the solatia program to these countries. Evenapologies are rare. Thus, although Lieutenant General Terry’s public apology did not accompany a condolence payment to the families of the two child victims, it set an interesting precedent that can and should be followed for the rest of the 131 civilian deaths, 42 of whom have been children, resulting from coalition airstrikes in Syria.

Under the transitional justice framework, public apologies are a symbolic form of reparations intended to provide the victims with closure or healing. Simply recognizing the harm goes a long way towards building local support and trust within the community and redressing the affected population. This has long-term benefits in contributing to peace-building within the society because it lessens the desire for revenge attacks. However, a public apology is only one type of transitional justice tool and should be not viewed as full redress to the victims and their families. In addition, public apologies can be too public — thus, impersonal — and may not even reach the families or communities that were affected. A public apology accompanied by a private letter or visit to the victim to personally provide an explanation and compensation is more likely to bring closure to victims and positively impact their ability to move forward.

Public apologies and compensation also need to be transparent and timely in order to have a meaningful impact. If there is confusion about why certain injuries result in apologies or why property damage is compensated equal to loss of life, then victims will not feel like their grievances are actually being addressed. Moreover, CentCom’s recent investigation and public apology came six months after the incident occurred, decreasing its impact as a form of recognition for harm done. In a 2007 interview, General David Petraeus explained the importance of timing, “The quicker you can do it, the more responsive you can seem to be. And of course the more concerned you are, the more valuable it is…”

Nonetheless, CentCom’s public apology provides a small measure of accountability and sets an example for the coalition to follow for the investigation and recognition of all other civilian casualties. Credible documentation groupscan contribute valuable information to these investigations and speed up the process by which militaries respond to civilian deaths. And while CentCom’s apology is an important first step for the coalition forces, it is still a long way from addressing the long-standing grievances of Syrians and the need for a holistic transitional justice process that can respond to violations committed by all parties to the conflict.

For more information and to provide feedback please email SJAC at info@syriaaccountability.org.