Europe

Two-day Romanian Referendum Could Constitutionally Ban Gay Marriage

By: Katherine Hewitt
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

BUCHAREST, Romania – Over a 2 day referendum on 6 and 7 October 2018, Romanians have the chance to vote on a Constitutional change that would define marriage as between a man and woman.  The senate approved the referendum on 11 September.  The lower chamber approved the referendum back in June of 2017.  The referendum comes after a coalition of social conservatives, Coalition for the Family, collected 3.2 million signatures in order to submit a bill to the Parliament banning gay marriage in the Constitution.

Romanian Women marching in favor of the Constitutional change to define marriage as between a man and woman. Photo Courtesy of Robert Ghement.

In 2001, Romania decriminalized homosexuality, but gay marriage remained banned by law.  Critics say this referendum would be a further step to ensure that gay couples do not gain the right to marriage in the future. Currently, the Constitution states that marriage is between spouses.

EU officials and human rights organizations wrote to the Prime Minister of Romania, Viorica Dăncilă condemning the referendum.  The concern is that this proposed change further legitimizes discrimination and violence against those of the LGBTI community. Additionally, it leads the way towards discrimination of other minority groups in Romania.

An excerpt from the European Parliament’s letter reads: “This redefinition of family has the potential to harm children in all families by promoting the message that single parent families, non-married partners with children, grandparents raising their grandchildren, rainbow families, and all other families that do not fall under the narrow definition proposed by the referendum do not deserve to be recognized and protected.”

Additionally, there is concern over why the referendum was held over two days, rather than the typical one day.  This move could be seen as an attempt to manipulate the outcome of the referendum and to ensure the collection of the minimum number of votes needed to pass.

In order to be valid, the referendum needs a 30% turnout or roughly 5 million votes.   A poll, conducted by CURS, states that there would be a 34% turnout rate with 90% voting ‘yes’ in favor of the change.

As of the end of 6 October (the first day of voting) there was only a 6% turnout rate.  A voting observation group noted irregularities.

For more information please visit:

Balkan Insight – Romanians Vote in a Two-Day ‘Family’ Referendum – 6 October 2018

CNN – Romania votes on defining marriage as only between a man and a woman – 7 October 2018

Reuters – Romanians vote on constitutional ban on same sex marriage – 6 October 2018

Business Review- LIVE UPDATES – 7 October 2018

Business Review- LIVE UPDATES – 6 October 2018

Tensions Rise Between Serbia and Kosovo with Possible Land Swap

By: Katherine Hewitt
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

PRISTINA, KOSOVO* –  While Serbia and Kosovo signed an agreement in 2013 to normalize relations, tensions still remain between the two countries, especially in relation to borders.   In an attempt to normalize, Presidents of the two nations have discussed a land swap, which falls along ethnic lines.  Solving border disputes would also help speed up integration into the EU.

A potential swap would be handing northern Kosovo over to Serbia, which is predominately Serbian, for the Preševo Valley, which is predominately Albanian.

Protesters in Pristina. Photo Courtesy of BIRN.

Members and supporters of the opposition party took to the streets of the capital on 29 September chanting “No bargaining with national land!” to protest the potential land swap.  Opposition parties say that this land swap directly violates the territorial integrity of Kosovo.  In previous statements the head of the opposition party, Avdullah Hoti, said that nobody should have the ability to mess with the borders of Kosovo. (Kosovo’s territorial jurisdiction was laid out in a UN Resolution in 1999). It is seen that the leaders are putting territorial integrity at stake just to normalize relations and please the EU.

At the same time, President Thaci of Kosovo visited the Northern part of Kosovo under consideration for the swap.  Special police were deployed to the region as a result.  This sparked alarm in Serbia, with the Serbian officials putting Serbian police and Military on high alert.  Serbian Interior Minister called the Kosovar move, “an Albanian attack against the North of Kosovo.” Serbian news sources claimed that several Serbians had been detained.

For more information please visit:

Radio Free Europe – Thousands Protest in Kosovo Over Possible Land Swap with Serbia – 29 September 2018

Washington Post – Tension flares in Kosovo over possible land swap with Serbia – 29 September 2018

Balkan Insight – Thousands in Kosovo Protest Against ‘Border Correction’ Proposals – 29 September 2018

Background on the land swap:

The Guardian –Could land swap between Serbia and Kosovo lead to conflict? – 22 August 2018

Balkan Insight – Opposition Demands Vote to ‘Protect Kosovo’s Territory’ – 29 August 2018

*All references to Kosovo are in relation to UNSCR 1244 (99).

European Court of Human Rights Judges that UK Surveillance Violates Freedoms

By: Katherine Hewitt
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

STRASBOURG, France – In the case of Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom, the Chamber voted that some parts of the UK’s Investigatory Powers Act of 2016 violated human rights.  This is the latest occurrence in a five-year challenge directed towards the UK’s surveillance policies.

European Court of Human Rights rules that UK policies towards surveillance violate right to privacy and expression.  Photo Courtesy of European PhotoPress Agency. 

Applicants lodged complaints about the bulk interception of communications, obtaining data from communication service providers, and intelligence sharing with foreign governments.  Advocates such as Big Brother Watch note, “Under the guise of counter-terrorism, the UK has adopted the most authoritarian surveillance regime of any Western state, corroding democracy itself and the rights of the British public.”

The Chamber found that the bulk interception strategy violated Article 8 of the Convention that states individuals have a right to a private life without interference by a public authority.  The judges deemed that there was not enough oversight on filtering who was selected for interception or what communication data was read.  It is important to note that the Court did not find the idea of a bulk interception regime a violation of human rights but rather the way in which the UK was handling the strategy.  Additionally, using communication service providers to obtain data was found as a violation of privacy.

Both of these aspects were also found to violate Article 10 as well, which protects freedom of expression.  The Court ruled that there are no safeguards in place for the protection of the data that is collected.

Intelligence sharing was not found to violate Article 8 or 10.

This case involved three joined applications: Big Brother Watch and Others v. the United Kingdom, Bureau of Investigative Journalism and Alice Ross v. the United Kingdom, and 10 Human Rights Organisations and Others v. the United Kingdom.  Those included were Amnesty International, American Civil Liberties Union, Bytes for All, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, the Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights, the Hungarian Civil Liberties Union, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, the Legal Resources Centre (South Africa), Liberty and Privacy International, Open Rights Group, English PEN and Dr Constanze Kurz.

Of the case decision, activist Carolina Wilson Palow says, “Today’s judgment rightly criticises the UK’s bulk interception regime for giving far too much leeway to the intelligence agencies to choose who to spy on and when. It confirms that just because it is technically feasible to intercept all of our personal communications, it does not mean that it is lawful to do so.”

The Chambers decision is not final.  During the next three months either side has the opportunity to appeal the decision to the Grand Chamber of the Court.  There is the possibility of appeal as many activists believe that the decision did not go far enough in condemning bulk surveillance.

For more information please visit:

Amnesty International – Campaigners win vital battle against UK mass surveillance– 13 September 2018

European Court of Human Rights- Press Release: Some aspects of UK surveillance regimes violate Convention- 13 September 2018  (link to download press release)

European Court of Human Rights: Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms 

EURACTIV – UK guilty of human rights abuse, ECHR finds in groundbreaking surveillance case -14 September 2018

Emin Aslan’s appeal denied in Azerbaijani

By: Emily Green
Impunity Watch Executive Director

BAKU, Azerbaijani – Detained human rights lawyer, Emin Aslan, appealed his detention in Azerbaijani’s Court of Appeals on June 8th. None of Aslan’s eight defense motions were granted and the court rejected his appeal.

Emin Aslan at Syracuse University College of Law. Image Courtesy of Emin Aslan.

In the appeal, Aslan denied committing the alleged administrative offense. He maintained that he was detained in front of Park Boulevard Mall at 17:30, while the police report says he was detained in Narimanov Park at 23:30. Aslan’s lawyer, Elchin Sadigov, petitioned to attach testimony of a witness that corroborates Aslan’s version of events. He also sought to interrogate additional witnesses of the event and requested records from CCTV cameras in the territory. These motions were rejected.

The Court of Appeals ultimately upheld Aslan’s detention on allegations that Aslan was swearing on the phone. Friends and co-workers of Aslan say that cursing publicly and disobeying police is beyond his character, and claim that these charges are fabricated.

Aslan earned his law degree from Syracuse University a few weeks before his detainment.  On June 11th, Syracuse University College of Law released a letter of support for Aslan. The statement acknowledges him as “a person of integrity who has deep respect for human rights, civil society, and the rule of law.” It calls for a “transparent, open legal process in his case, if not his immediate and safe release.” Vice Chancellor Mike Haynie has carried a copy of this letter to the United States Department of State.

The College of Law encourages the community to share Aslan’s story on social media platforms and attract attention to his situation. Several faculty members have already shared Aslan’s story with the media. The letter states, “We will continue to follow this situation and pledge to provide Emin and his family our support.”

For more information, please see:

Turan – Emin Aslan Told About Interrogations in MDCOC – 8 June 2018

VOA – Graduate of US Law School Arrested in Azerbaijan – 7 June 2018

Human Rights Watch – Ruthlessly Silenced in Bahrain: Daily Brief – 5 June 2018

Recent Syracuse Law graduate, Emin Aslan, detained in Azerbaijan

By: Emily Green
Impunity Watch Executive Director

Emin Aslan is a human rights lawyer and native of Azerbaijan. He returned home on May 30th after completing his graduate education at Syracuse University College of Law.  After being in the country for only four days, Aslan was detained by police.

Emin Aslan with his fiancé, Nura. Image by Emin Aslan.

Aslan was in a cafe with his fiancé when he was approached by plain-clothed police officers. He was put in a car by a unit of the country’s interior ministry that purportedly deals with organized crime, and his whereabouts were unknown for more than twelve hours.

The next day, the Department for Combating Organized Crime confirmed with lawyer Elchin Sadigov that it was holding Aslan, but Sadigov was not allowed to see him. That day, Aslan was accused of “disobeying police” in local court and sentenced to a thirty day administrative detention. However, his family and friends report that Aslan fully cooperated with police so the real reason for his detention is unknown.

Aslan holds an undergraduate degree in law from Baku State University and LLM degree from Syracuse University College of Law. He has worked with a number of non-governmental organizations both in Azerbaijan and elsewhere. Also, he has worked on a range of cases for the European Court of Human Rights including freedom to assembly, torture, election, freedom of speech and others.

Outside of his work as a lawyer, Aslan has written for several Azerbaijani publications on democracy, human rights, culture and history. He has previous affiliations with Human Rights House in Tbilisi, American Bar Association, Media Rights Institute, as well as the Netherlands Institute for Multiparty Democracy.

Additionally, Aslan founded the platform “Thinking Citizen Lab” in Georgia in 2016. This initiative focused on alternative education targeting ethnic Azerbaijanis living in Georgia and served as an intellectual and cultural platform.

Although Aslan will remain in police custody for the next thirty days, the sentence of administrative detention left his family with some hope that he will be released at the end of his term.

For more information, please see:

Global Voices – Freedom abroad, fear at home: Azerbaijani human rights lawyer detained for 30 days – 5 June 2018

Syracuse – Recent SU law grad, human rights lawyer ‘abducted’ by Azerbaijan police, groups say – 5 June 2018