Africa

ECHR Rules Spain Did Not Breach the Convention in Returning Migrants to Morocco

By: Nadia Abed

Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor

STRASBOURG, France — On February 13, 2020, the European Court of Human Rights (“ECHR”) ruled that Spain did not breach the European Convention on Human Rights (“the Convention”) in returning migrants to Morocco for attempting to cross the fences onto European Union territory in the case of N.D. and N.T. v. Spain.

Police office scales fence climbed by migrants at Melilla border. Photo Courtesy of AFP.

On August 13, 2014, hundreds of migrants attempted to storm their way onto European Union territory by scaling fences to reach the city of Melilla, a Spanish enclave surrounded by Moroccan territory. Moroccan police were able to prevent about 500 migrants from scaling the outer fence, but around a hundred migrants succeeded, with 75 migrants reaching the top of the fence and a few landing on the other side on Spanish soil. Those who reached the soil were met by members of the Guardia Civil, the Spanish law enforcement, while others remained at the top of the fence.

Two individuals, N.D., a national of Mali, and N.T., a national of Côte d’Ivoire (“the applicants”), were of the few that remained at the top of the fence. After a few hours, the two climbed down and were apprehended by the Guardia Civil who “reportedly handcuffed them, took them back to Morocco and handed them over to the Moroccan authorities.”

The applicants lodged applications with the ECHR on February 12, 2015 alleging that there had been a violation of Protocol No. 4 Article 4 which prohibits collective expulsion of aliens and Article 13 which secures the right to an effective remedy. Through both Articles, the applicants claim that they were forced back to Morocco with “no chance to explain their circumstances, no chance to request asylum, and no chance to appeal their expulsion.”

On October 2, 2017, in its Chamber judgment, the Court held that there was a violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 and a violation of Article 13 in conjunction with Article 4 of Protocol No. 4. On December 14, 2017, the Spanish Government requested the case be referred to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 of the Convention. On January 29, 2018 the Grand Chamber accepted and a hearing was held on September 26, 2018.

The Court reasoned that the applicants had attempted to enter Spanish territory in an unauthorized manner by taking advantage of a large crowd. In accordance with the Convention, States are required to “make available genuine and effective access to means of legal entry [and] should allow all persons who faced persecution to submit an application for protection.” As a result of not using the proper channels, States can refuse entry to their territories to aliens and asylum-seekers who fail, without convincing reason, to follow such requirements.

Regarding the applicants Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 claim, the Court noted that Spanish law had several possible means available to those seeking admission to their territory, such as applications for visas or international protection, therefore the State had provided genuine and effective access to its territory. Applicants’ did not allege they tried to enter Spanish territory by any legal means. The court concluded that the applicants had “placed themselves in jeopardy by participating in the storming of the border fences [and their expulsion was a] consequence of their own conduct.”

Regarding the applicants’ Article 13 claim taken in conjunction with Article 4 of Protocol No. 4, the Court explains that “the lack of an [individualized] procedure for [the applicants’] procedure for their removal had been the consequence of the applicants’ own conduct in placing themselves in an unlawful situation by crossing the Melilla border protection structures… at an [unauthorized] location.” Further, the Court concluded that there had not been a violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 or Article 13 in conjunction with Article 4 of Protocol No. 4.

European Court of Human Rights – Forthcoming Grand Chamber judgment in a case concerning the immediate return of two migrants who tried to enter Spain by climbing the fences of the Melilla enclave – 6 Feb. 2020

European Court of Human Rights – Spain did not breach the Convention in returning migrants to Morocco who had attempted to cross the fences of the Melilla enclave – 12 Feb. 2020

European Court of Human Rights – Case of N.D. and N.T. v. Spain – 12 Feb. 2020

The Local Spain – Spain cleared by European Court of Human Rights over Removal of migrants at border fence – 13 Feb. 2020

Barred Access to African Court For Tanzanian Citizens and NGOs

By: Eronmwon Joyce Irogue

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

ARUSHA, Tanzania – In early December 2019, the Tanzanian government announced its withdrawal for the right of individuals to directly institute an action at the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Ironically, this Court is a regional human rights court is permanently located in Arusha, Tanzania.

Tanzanian President John Magufuli. Photo Courtesy of DW.

This new development may not be shocking due to the lingering incidence of human rights abuses prevalent under the tenure of President John Magufuli. However, this current occurrence deprives Tanzanian citizens of their right to seek justice before the court on issues of human rights. The timing of the withdrawal of the right to file cases at the Court amplified the fears of both human rights organizations and Tanzanian citizens concerning the dilapidating state of human rights in Tanzania.

The African Court is a regional court established by the African Union to address legal issues such as the protection of the rights for citizens in signatory states. Signatory states are bound by the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Since the Court is located in Tanzania, NGOs and individuals have sought recourse in the Court for human rights violations. In cases brought against the Tanzanian government, the Court has often ruled against the government, causing the decision for the withdrawal. The Tanzanian government has sought to prevent the condemnation of the human rights violations of President Magufuli’s regime such as violations of freedom.

In preventing individuals from bringing cases before the Court, the president has breached the Optional Declaration which was signed to give the protected citizens the right which the Tanzanian government now violates.  The request to withdraw undermines the Court’s authority and legitimacy as the enforcer of international law on the African continent. This decision may signal to other states which have signed the Optional Declaration to withdraw and disregard human rights violations without the possibility of regional redress for their citizens. This action puts the region one more step behind amongst its counterparts in other parts of the world.

For further information, please see:

Fair Planet – Tanzania Bars Citizens From Seeking Justice at the African Court – 8 Jan. 2020

Anadolu Agency – US bans Tanzanian politician over human rights abuse – 2 Jan. 2020

DW – Africa’s rights court suffer setback as Tanzania blocks cases – 12 June 2019

Human Rights Watch – Tanzania – 2018

ICC to Allow Victim Participation in Ntaganda Appeal

By: Andrew Kramer

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

THE HAGUE, Netherlands – On February 13, 2020, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) issued a decision authorizing the 2,129 victims who participated at the trial of Bosco Ntaganda to present their views and concerns regarding his appeal.  The victims, through their legal representatives, have 30 days to file their observations in respect to their personal interests in the issues on appeal.

Former Congolese military leader Bosco Ntaganda sitting before the International Criminal Court. Photo Courtesy of The Guardian.

Article 68(3) of the Rome Statute allows for victim participation at all stages of proceedings in the ICC, however it defers to the Court to determine what stages are appropriate for each case.  According to the Statute, victim participation must not be prejudicial to or inconsistent with the rights of the accused and a fair and impartial trial.

Victim participation is a crucial aspect of the ICC judicial process, however it carries great risk.  Participation gives victims a voice in proceedings, and allows the Court to gather a better understanding of the truth.  In the context of sentencing decisions, participation provides the Court with a firsthand account of the magnitude of a convict’s actions.  Because of this, victims may be subject to intimidation and violence. While the ICC does employ protective measures for witnesses and victims in the courtroom,  the witness protection program is limited. The Court often operates far from the home countries of witnesses and victims, and protection after proceedings largely relies on agreements between the ICC and national security programs.

After victim observations have been filed, Ntaganda and the Prosecutor will have an opportunity to respond to them, and the appellate process will move forward.  The Appellate Chamber of the ICC consists of a panel of five judges.  Among their responsibilities, the appeals judges may confirm, reverse, or amend a decision of guilt or innocence, ensure the sentence is proportionate to the crimes, and revise a final judgement of conviction or sentence if new evidence is later found.

Ntaganda is appealing the entirety of his conviction decision, as well as his sentence. On July 8, 2019, Trial Chamber VI convicted the former Congolese general of 18 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity, committed in Ituri, Democratic Republic of the Congo, from 2002-2003.  He is only the fourth person to be convicted of international crimes by the ICC, and the first to be convicted of sexual slavery. On November 7, 2019, he was sentenced to a total of 30 years of imprisonment.

The Prosecution has also filed an appeal, asserting the Trial Chamber made errors of law which led to the acquittal of Ntaganda of criminal responsibility for attacks of a church in Sayo and a hospital in Mongbwalu.

For further information, please see:

International Criminal Court – Case Information Sheet: Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo – 7 Nov. 2019

International Criminal Court – Prosecution Notice of Appeal – 9 Sept. 2019

International Justice Monitor – Ntaganda to Appeal ICC Conviction – 11 July 2019

BBC – DR Congo’s Bosco Ntaganda Convicted of War Crimes by ICC – 8 July 2019 

Coalition for the International Criminal Court – Is Enough Being Done to Protect ICC Witnesses? – 18 May 2015

Separatist Movement In Cameroon has International Consequences

By: Jordan Broadbent

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

YAOUNDE, Cameroon —  On November 1, 2019, Cameroon language barriers and crackdowns incited violence and human rights abuses that have captured international attention. 

Map depicting the Anglophone region in Cameroon. Photo Courtesy of the Washington Post.

Cameroon, a former French colony, is divided between 80% French speakers and 20% English speakers and for decades the two lived in relative peace. However, since 2017 that peace has been disturbed. Along the Nigerian border an armed group of armed English-speaking separatists have demanded independence from Cameroon to form Ambazonia, an English-speaking country. The separatists claim that the Cameroon government has killed hundreds of unarmed civilians in a series of raids. They further claim that government troops came in to the area, burned down a village, killed hundreds of people and have displaced hundreds of others in an attempt to keep the anglophones under their control.

The UN embassy in Cameroon stated that in a series of raids in February and March 2019 the Cameroon government started to disappear several leaders in the separatists’ movement. The Cameroon government has claimed that these separatist groups have terrorized civilians and disrupted peace in the country that has sparked a government crackdown. The government has denied the claims of killing civilians and burning down villages, stating instead that the troops are stationed in the west to protect Cameroonians.

The United Nations and Amnesty International warned Cameroon that this military crackdown would lead to unrest. Since the warning, tens of thousands of refugees have fled to Nigeria to avoid the violence that is erupting in western Cameroon. The African Union has pleaded with both parties to end the violence as the influx of refugees continues to grow.

Cameroon is an ally of the United States and a key player in the fight against Boko Haram, a terrorist organization in western Africa. The United States Department of Defense issued a warning to Cameroon that the destabilization of the country could hurt the fight against the terrorist group.

The United States Department of Defense and State Department have worked with both groups in an attempt to end the violence in the region. Cameroon’s failure to make an attempt to stop the perceived human rights violations sparked reactions from the United States. As recently as at November 1, 2019, President Trump announced he will will remove Cameroon from a trade program that allows several African countries to trade duty free with the United States, citing human rights violations. If Cameroon does not take measures to change the current situation, Cameroon will be removed from the program on January 1, 2020. The Cameroon government has yet to respond to President Trump’s announcement. 

For further information, please see:

Washington Post- Trump Ends Trade Benefits for Cameroon over “persistent  human rights violations” – 1 Nov. 2019

Committee to Protect Justice – African Union Must Act on Cameroons Human Rights Violation – 29 Oct. 2019

Washington Post-Divided by Language – 5 Feb. 2019

UN Experts to Travel to Gambia Amid Increase in Human Trafficking Issues

By: Jordan Broadbent

Impunity Watch Staff Writer

BANJUL, Gambia — On June 20,2019, the Trafficking in Persons Report prepared by the U.S. Department of State ranked Gambia a Tier 3 country prompting the United Nations to send in experts to assess the situation.

Secretary of State Pompeo. Photo Courtesy of AP.

Tier 3 countries are those that do not comply with the minimum standards set by the U.S. Department of States’ Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons and are not making significant efforts to meet those standards. The United States monitoring and ranking systems are internationally accepted.

Gambia was ranked Tier 3 after the publication of a five year long report that focuses on the use of Gambia as a central hub for human trafficking. Women and girls are trafficked through Gambia for the purposes of child marriages and sex trafficking and young boys are sold and trafficked through the country to be sold in to forced labor. The report shows that the number of people being trafficked through the country has increased in recent years.

Gambia’s capitol, Banjul, was highlighted in the report as a hotbed for child trafficking. The State Department’s study reported that tourists came to Banjul from all over the world to find child sex tourism rings.

Despite being continually criticized for the high rates of sex and human trafficking, the Gambian government has taken only modest steps in remedying the issue. In 2010, Gambia’s legislative body passed the Trafficking Persons Act which instituted a sentence ranging from 50 years to life in prison in addition to a fine as punishment to anyone found guilty of human trafficking. However, the Gambian government has failed to prosecute a single person for human trafficking in the past two years. The Gambian government has also failed to investigate child sex tourism, failed to identify and assist trafficking victims, and has not raised awareness on the issue on a national level for the past five years.

Due to the governments lack of action on the issue, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights sent a special reporter to Gambia to monitor the issue. The Special Reporter will issue a report at the end of the visit at the state of Gambia’s government actions on human trafficking and child sex tourism within the country. The report will be published at the end of October.

For further information, please see:

United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commission- Sale and Sexual Exploitations of Children: UN Export Visits Gambia- 18 Oct. 2019

U.S. Department of State – 2019 Trafficking in Persons Report-  20 June 2019

United States Embassy in Gambia- Press Release: Trafficking in Persons Report 2019- 20 June 2019

Refworld – 2018 trafficking in Persons Report in Gambia- 28 June 2018