by Hibberd Kline
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

COLOMBO, Sri Lanka– On Tuesday, human rights group Amnesty International released a report alleging ongoing, routine, human rights abuses against ethnic Tamils in Sri Lanka by the Sri Lankan Government.

According to Amnesty, hundreds of people remain in arbitrary detention despite the end of the 26-year long civil war between the government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), also known as the Tamil Tigers. A recent statement by Sri Lankan Foreign Minister Gamini Lakshman Peiris, put the number of Tamil Tiger ex-combatants still in detention at 750. However, Amnesty believes that ex-combatants are not the only ones being detained in post-war Sri Lanka.

Amnesty’s report alleges that constitutional and legal protections of individuals against wrongful incarceration and unfair prosecution have been replaced by anti-terrorism laws and emergency measures, which undermine human rights and the rule of law. Amnesty has stated that these laws were enacted during the war for the purpose of combating the Tamil Tigers, but that their post-war legacy undermines human rights.

The report further alleges that Tamils are routinely detained and abducted, denied due process, intimidated, solicited for bribes, tortured and subjected to other abuses by police and paramilitary groups. The report concedes that some of those who face unlawful detention are likely Tamil perpetrators of human rights abuses and war crimes. However, it further elaborates that many of those detained are innocent.

The report linked secret detentions and abductions in Sri Lanka to “a climate of impunity where human rights violations of all types go uninvestigated and unpunished.”

In recent months, reports of abductions have skyrocketed. Human rights advocates put the number of unexplained, reported abductions between October and February at 32. Of the 32 abductions, 5 have successfully escaped, 7 have been found dead and 20 have simply vanished.

Reports indicate that the abductions have targeted not only Tamils, but also Sinhalese and the island’s muslim minority. Those targeted include human rights activists, journalists and businessmen.

Those who have witnessed abductions often report that unidentified, armed gangs forced their victims into unmarked, white vans. Rumors have been circulating that the vans belong to the Sri Lankan Government or armed groups working on its behalf.

One unnamed senior police officer in the capital allegedly told reporters of government preparations to deal with possible protests. He said; “we have arranged to bring tear gas, and we have plenty of white vans in Sri Lanka.”

According to cabinet member Vasudeva Nanayakkara, the government “…can’t say we don’t know about it.” Nanayakkara told reporters that the military is undermining Sri Lanka’s democracy by becoming too involved in civil affairs.

Opposition member of parliament Jayalath Jayawardana also recently weighed in on the issue, saying that “Jungle law is prevailing… Without the protection or blessings of the government in power or the security forces these type of things cannot take place.”

However, as a whole, the government and security forces deny responsibility for the abductions.

According to police spokesman Superintendant Ajith Rohana; “There are abductions. It happens. But generally we are conducting investigations into the matter.” Superintendant Rohana told reporters that special teams have been assigned to investigate the abductions.

In spite of the superintendant’s assurances, abductions appear to be increasing in both number and audacity. One abduction successfully targeted a prisoner who was being escorted by guards right outside the law courts in Colombo.

According to Amnesty USA’s executive director Susan Nossel, “if Sri Lanka is serious about moving from war to peace, it needs to ensure that the rule of law is not a matter of lip-service, but is the lifeblood of the nation’s justice system.”

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), which is currently meeting in Geneva, will vote next week on a resolution proposed by the United States urging Sri Lanka’s government to investigate allegations of war crimes and other human rights abuses. The resolution is further expected to call upon the Sri Lankan Government to seek reconciliation with ethnic Tamils.

A similar resolution passed in the United States Senate on March 1.

A recent statement from the Sri Lankan Defense Ministry laid out the government’s stance regarding the alleged abuses; “The Ministry of Defense rejects all allegations of human rights violations… it is able to prove with valid evidence that it was the LTTE that committed gross violations of human rights over the past three decades.”

The ethnic Sinhalese-dominated Sri Lankan government views outside pressure over human rights issues as a violation of Sri Lanka’s sovereignty and has responded to news of the proposed resolution by orchestrating protests across the country against the resolution. In Colombo, more than 10,000 people marched in protest of the resolution, while smaller groups petitioned U.N. and European officials at various embassies throughout the capital.

According to an article written by Human Rights Watch deputy director for Asia Elaine Pearson, several human rights groups and victims of human rights abuses in Sri Lanka have cancelled their plans to travel to Geneva for the UNHRC’s meeting due to fear of reprisal by the Sri Lankan Government.

In spite of the political saber-rattling inspired by the proposed resolution, next week’s vote is expected to be largely symbolic as the UNHRC has no power to implement an independent investigation.

Both the Tamil Tigers and Sri Lankan government forces have been accused of committing war crimes during the final stages of the counrty’s 26-year long civil war, which ended when a Sri Lankan military campaign crushed the Tigers in 2009.

For more information, please see:

CBS News — Tamil Lawmakers Want UN Pressure on Sri Lanka — 15 March 2012

Human Rights Watch — With Sri Lanka Resolution, Indonesia Has Chance to Show International Leadership –14 March 2012

Al Jazeera — Amnesty Alleges Illegal Detentions in Sri Lanka —  13 March 2012

Amnesty International — Sri Lanka’s Shameful Record on Detention without Trial — 13 March 2012

Amnesty International — Locked Away: Sri Lanka’s Security Detainees — 13 March 2012

BBC News — Amnesty Accuses Sri Lanka of ‘Post-War Abuses’ — 13 March 2012

BBC News — Sri Lanka’s Sinister White Van Abductions — 13 March 2012

Jurist — Rights Group Details Claim of Sri Lanka Detention Abuses — 13 March 2012

NPR — US Sri Lanka Should Reconcile with Tamils — 13 March 2012

Voice of America — Lawmakers Pressure Indian Government on Alleged Sri Lanka War Crimes — 13 March 2012

Human Rights Watch — Sri Lanka: US Senate Calls for Justice — 07 March 2012

by Hibberd Kline
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BEIJING, China– Three Tibetan activists marked the twenty-first day of what they have announced to be an “indefinite hunger strike” in front of the United Nations headquarters in New York City today.

The three say that they are fasting in protest of the continuing crackdown by Chinese authorities in Tibet.

No action by the United Nations or the Chinese Government to ease the situation in Tibet yet appears to be forthcoming.

However, the three human rights activists, who are confined to wheelchairs due to famine-induced weakness, cannot help but attract headlines and have succeeded in garnering a significant amount of attention.

The three activists claim to have been visited on Monday by top United Nations human rights official Ivan Simonovich, whom they purport to have told that they wish to see “concrete action” by the Chinese Government to ease the crackdown on dissent in their distant homeland. The strikers say that they shall continue their fast “indfinitely” until the Chinese Government takes such action.

Mr. Simonovich’s visit was apparently followed up today by an expression of concern for the health of the strikers from Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. Nonetheless, the Secretary General stated that he “affirms the right of all people to peaceful protest.”

The strikers hope to bring pressure to bear upon the United Nations to take action and have delivered a petition with five demands to that effect. The core demands included a request for a fact-finding mission into the situation in Tibet. The strikers also called upon China to open up the region to journalists, to end martial law in areas with large Tibetan populations and to release all political prisoners.

One of the activists, 69-year old Dorjee Gyalpo, informed journalists that he is prepared to give his life to achieve the goals of the group’s petition. The other two strikers explained that their goal is not merely to bring awareness to the Tibetan cause, but to resolve the situation.

The United Nations has informed the media that it has received the petition and is investigating the matter.

Elsewhere in New York City, on Saturday an estimated 2,000-4,000 local Tibetans marched in solidarity with protestors in Tibet and to mark the 53rd anniversary of a failed 1959 uprising against Chinese rule. Similar marches by hundreds of Tibetan exiles also occured in cities and towns in India, which houses the Tibetan Government in exile.

The protests have taken place against the backdrop of ongoing, muffled protests in Tibet itself. Human rights organizations estimate that some two dozen Tibetans, mostly Budhist monks, have set themselves on fire in China in recent months in protest of Chinese rule. Tibetan protestors also seek the safe return of their exiled spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama.

Chinese authorities have responded to the protests by branding the self-immolators as terrorists and vastly increasing the number of police and security personnel in the region. Additionally, the authorities have clamped down tightly on the internet and mobile phones in the region, in some areas reportedly blocking these forms of communication entirely.

Tibetan activists and human rights groups say that the Chinese authorities in parts of China with a sizeable Tibetan population suppress Tibet’s culture and religion and crush all public displays of dissent.

Tibet has been under varying degrees of Chinese rule ever since Chinese troops occupied the region in 1950.

For more information, please see:

Huffington Post — Self Immolations in Tibet, Hunger Strikers in New York — 14 March 2012

Voice of America — UN Chief Voices Concern for Tibetan Hunger Strikers — 14 March 2012

Al Jazeera — Fasting for Tibet outside the UN — 13 March 2012

The Telegraph India — Tibetans Decry Chinese Outrage — 11 March 2012

NBC New York — Tibetans, Activists March and Rally in NYC — 10 March 2012

Voice of America — Tibetans on Hunger Strike Demand UN Action — 09 March 2012

by Hibberd Kline
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BEIJING, China – Human rights lawyers and activists hailed proposed revisions to China’s Criminal Procedure Law, which were unveiled on the fourth day of the National People’s Congress in Beijing last Thursday, with cautious optimism.

The revisions passed today with overwhelming support from what many analysts believe to be a “rubber stamp” congress, which has never rejected a proposed draft law.

However, the revisions are seen as controversial and have been the subject of unusually fierce public debate inside China since they were first publicly announced last August. The crux of the controversy surrounded the issue of secret detentions by China’s police forces.

Proponents of China’s increasingly powerful, hard-line, state security apparatus took a position favoring an amendment that critics claimed would simply legalize existing police practices of “disappearances” and secret detention without implementing oversight or guidelines. Supporters of the amendment are believed to be concerned with the growing number of strikes, protests and public dissent across China. Many in China’s government fear the emergence of a widespread Chinese version of the “Arab Spring.” They believe that increased police powers are necessary in order for the Communist Party to maintain order and control.

On the other side of the controversy,  human rights activists, political reformers and a sizeable portion of China’s legal community decried the proposed amendment, known as Article 73. Reformists have been able to harness an unusually large and vocal showing of public support, including tens of thousands of online complaints about the proposed amendment.

Support for the reformist stance is thought to partially be a backlash against what a report by Hong Kong-based human rights organization Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) recently labeled in its annual report as “…a year of harsh crackdowns for human rights defenders, characterized by lengthy prison sentences, extensive use of extralegal detention, and enforced disappearance and torture.”

According to CHRD’s report, almost 4,000 political campaigners were detained in China last year. The report indicated that at least 150 of the detainees had been tortured and at least 20 had been “dissapeared” for weeks or months without their families being informed by the authorities.

Additionally, the Chinese Government has increased it’s security and police presence in its restive province of Xinjiang and areas with large Tibetan populations. Human rights groups say that the Chinese Government suppresses traditional religion and culture in these regions and that it regularly carries out secret detentions and disappearances in order to maintain control there.

However, China maintains a virtual stranglehold on the flow of information out of Xinjiang and Tibet, making it difficult to determine whether repression in those regions had a significant impact on the debate over revisions to China’s detention laws.

An earlier draft of Article 73 would have allowed for China’s police forces to affect secret detentions without informing detainees’ families. Though the legality of secret detentions and “disappearances” under Chinese law was questionable prior to today’s passage of the revisions, it is widely believed that these practices were already commonplace in China.

However, haggling over the proposed amendments has yielded a compromise, which many view as a small victory for reformers. Last week the proposed amendment was modified in a highly unusual attempt to ease concerns over human rights.  The amendment provides police with the power to detain dissidents for up to 6 months in “residential surveillance” at their homes or at other locations such as hotels. It also gives police the power to hold people in “secret detention centers,” often referred to as “black jails.” However, the amendment now comes with a caveat requiring the authorities to inform detainees’ families within 24 hours after the start of detention.

Human rights groups have been quick to point out that the law provides exceptions to the “24 hour rule” in situations when informing the family would be impossible or in situations involving “state security” or “terrorism.” State security is widely viewed as a catch-all phrase that covers vaguely defined crimes such as “subversion” in order to provide a mechanism for detaining dissidents critical of the Chinese Communist Party.

Rights groups have further asserted that the amendment gives a legal justification for existing police practices that violate human rights, which they argue will likely increase now that the amendment has passed. Activists have often brought allegations of torture and other abuses committed by police during “residential surveillance” or secret detention.

Aside from the secret detention issue, the revisions have been praised for taking a surprisingly humanitarian tone.

According to China’s official Xinhua news agency, the amendment explicitly states for the first time that trials are to exclude “confessions extorted through illegal means such as torture.” Furthermore, Chinese defense attorneys have praised provisions of the amendment that they say will likely allow them more access to suspects and defendants. Additionally, in a statement on its website, human rights group Amnesty International praised the amendment’s “…improved legal protections for minors and the mentally ill…”

However, Amnesty and other rights groups have indicated that they do not believe that the reforms go far enough and fear that legal protections may not be effective in practice. Amnesty has urged the adoption of a “right to silence,” a presumption of innocence and protection from arbitrary “technical surveillance” such as wiretaps.

China is a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which it has yet to ratify. The ICCPR provides that “anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that that court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his detention and order his release if the detention is not lawful.”

According to Human Rights Watch, even though China has not yet ratified the ICCPR, China is obligated under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties “to refrain from acts which would undermine the object and purpose” of a treaty to which it is a signatory.

Overall, activists have applauded the reforms as a positive first step in human rights reform and have noted the importance of increasing public input in the Chinese political process.

As the National People’s Congress’s annual session drew to a close today, out-going President Wen Jiabao called for further political reform and increased openness inside China. Without reform, Wen said that “such historic tragedies like the Cultural Revolution [which was characterized by human rights abuses on a massive scale] may happen again.”

For more information, please see:

Al Jazeera — China Premier Calls for Political Reforms — 14 March 2012

The Washington Post — China’s Wen Jiabao Calls for Reforms Even as Legislature Strengthens Detention Law — 14 March 2012

Financial Times — China to Enact New Secret Detention Law —  13 March 2012

BBC —  China Rights Situation Deteriorating, Say Activists — 09 March 2012

Chinese Human rights Defenders — “We Can Dig a Pit and Bury You Alive” Annual Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in China, 2011 — 09 March 2012

BBC —  China Unveils New Legislation on Police Detention Power — 08 March 2012

NPR — China to Restrict Secret Detentions on Paper — 08 March 2012

Reuters — China Parliament Unveils Dissident Detention Powers — 08 March 2012

Time Magazine — Changes to Detention Rules Are Small Victory for Activists in China — 08 March 2012

Voice of America — China Drops Plan to Legalize Secret Detentions — 08 March 2012

Amnesty International —  China Must Not Legalize “Disappearances” and “Two-Track Justice,” Says Amnesty International — 06 March 2012

Human Rights Watch —  China: Don’t Legalize Secret Detention — 01 September 2011

By: Jessica Ties
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BEIJING, China – On March 5, 2012 the National People’s Congress approved a measure to boost spending on domestic security by 11.5 percent bringing the total budget to 111.4 billion U.S. dollars.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao pledged that the increase in spending would be used to pursue modernization and expansion of the Chinese law enforcement agencies including the People’s Armed Police which is responsible for controlling domestic riots.

The approval of increased spending has caused some to fear that the “stability maintenance” measures undertaken this year ahead of leadership transition could become a permanent program.

In his annual address, Wen stated that the most important task for the Chinese military “…is to win local wars under information-age conditions.”

The statement was likely prompted by the Chinese government’s recent experiences with domestic unrest, including a string of twenty-five self-immolations that have occurred in the past year.

In addition, approximately one-hundred petitioners were detained earlier this week after traveling to Beijing to express their grievances with Chinese authorities.

Those detained were taken to unofficial detention centers known as “black jails” where detainees are often held until they can be taken back to their home town by local officials.

Other activists complained that after attempting to deliver petitioning letters to the National People’s Congress building, they were taken by police and told that such activity was illegal.

In addition to concerns about the affect of increased domestic security spending on dissidents, some have expressed frustration that the money is not being used to provide other services.

The new budget for domestic security, for the second consecutive year, exceeds the 106.4 billion dollar budget implemented for national defense.

This statistic prompted Liu Kaiming, head of the Local Social observation Research Institute, to state that the “…cost of maintaining public security is greater than the defense of the country…this shows that our society is actually very unstable, if so much has to be spent on maintaining stability.”

Liu continued to also express his belief that the Chinese government is not expending a sufficient amount of its resources on social security, health insurance or education.

In 2010 the number of unrest recorded by the Chinese government was approximately 90,000 illustrating a growth from the 8,700 incidents recorded in 1993.

Although data about the number of protests in China has not been released since 2010, an economist and senior adviser to the State Council, Niu Wenyuan, stated that there is an average of 500 protests each day equating to 180,000 per year.

Some have expressed that the exceedingly high number of protests facing China should be seen as an illustration of structural flaws present in the Chinese government.

 

For more information, please see:

Vancouver Sun – China Fears Unrest at Home More Than Foreign War – 7 March 2012

Merco Press – China Boosts Domestic Security Budget to Face Growing Unrest – 6 March 2012

Radio Free Asia – China Boosts Domestic Security Forces – 6 March 2012

Reuters – China Domestic Security Spending Rises to $111 Billion – 5 March 2012

By Greg Donaldson
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia 

YANGON, Myanmar – During President Thein Sein’s inauguration speech, the new president promised “sweeping democratic reform, and vowed to respect the role of the media.” One year later all signs indicate that President Sein is keeping his promise. Last month an article was published in the Yangon weekly Health Journal which described the poor living conditions prisoners faced in local jails.

The article explained that prison authorities attempted to cure an outbreak of scabies by having prisoners take their clothes off as prison employees wiped the naked inmates with medicine-laden brooms. Not only did the article raise alarming ethical questions about the treatment of prisoners but also displayed the poverty of both the nation’s prisons and healthcare system.

Zaw Thet, who wrote the article, was a political prisoner until last January. He explained “in the past it would’ve been a very dangerous thing to publish… it wasn’t allowed.” In the past journalists had been threatened, jailed, blacklisted, and beaten for writing articles the government did not want published.

While the government continues to censor reporting about “sensitive subjects” such as politics, censorship has ended on many subjects. Journalists are free to write on topics such as health, entertainment, fashion, and sports. Many reporters are interested in testing the recently gained limited freedom to find out what other topics the government will allow them to write about.

Thiha Saw, chief editor of a news weekly called Open News, said he’s now able to write freely about fires, murders, and natural disaster. He explained at various times in the past each had been prohibited.

Media groups who have been exiled in the past are interested at the prospect of returning to Myanmar. However, these groups hesitant to ensure that the current regime will not change its views on censorship in the future.

Aung Zaw, founder of the Irrawaddy news website based in Thailand, escaped Myanmar in 1988 after a popular uprising was “brutally crushed” by the previous government. After making his first trip back to Myanmar Zaw explained “it is our dream to publish a publication or online magazine inside Burma.”

The government has further promised to end censorship altogether once the parliament passes a new media law later this year. The legislation, which is currently being drafted, would allow Myanmar’s independent press to publish daily for the first time in decades.

For more information, please see:

Taipei Times – Myanmar’s Exiled Media Lured Back Home by Reform – 28 February 2012

Washington Post – Myanmar Eases Restrictions on media, Vows Full End to Censorship as Reporters Test New Limits – 28 February 2012