By Carolyn Abdenour
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

MANAMA, Bahrain – On Friday, 6 April, Bahraini and Danish citizen Abdulhadi al-Khawaja began receiving intravenous fluids to combat his 58-day hunger strike when authorities moved him to the Bahrain Defence Force Hospital.  Mr. Khawaja began his hunger strike to protest the life sentence he received by a special military court for engaging in anti-government protests last year.  The court convicted him of attempting to overthrow the royal family.

Mr. Khawaja’s lawyer Mohammed al-Jishi reported his client’s health is deteriorating, and the authorities moved him to the hospital after he dropped twenty-two pounds.  Mr. Jishi stated, “His condition has worsened…his blood pressure is down, and he is getting an IV (intravenous) drip.”  He added the IV drip only contained saline and glucose, and “The doctors said this won’t be enough to keep him alive.  He is in a critical phase and he still needs to take food.”

His family fears he will die from an impending cardiac arrest and urges the government to take action to save his life.  Furthermore, Khadija Almouosawi, Mr. Khawaja’s wife, asserts the nurses and guards mistreated her husband in the military hospital.

Human rights groups are also advocating for Mr. Khawaja’s release.  Mr. Khawaja is a Danish citizen, and Denmark has requested Bahrain to transfer Mr. Khawaja into its custody for medical treatment.

Moreover, authorities detained Mr. Khawaja’s daughter Zainab on Thursday for protesting her father’s “illegal treatment”.  On Friday, the authorities transferred Zainab to a prison before releasing her on Saturday.

Furthermore, thousands of protesters calling for Mr. Khawaja’s release endured the teargas and water cannons security forces fired upon them on Friday.  These protesters have held daily rallies, and they have planned mass demonstrations supporting their fellow protester’s release.

The authorities arrested Mr. Khawaja last April after a protest at Pearl Roundabout in Manama, Bahrain’s capital.  Protests occurred in Bahrain when police and security forces confronted people peacefully occupying the roundabout.

Amnesty International asserts the court convicted Mr. Khawaja in June with a confession obtained under duress and without proper evidence demonstrating he relied on violence during the protests.  Mr. Khawaja was one of eight protestors who received life sentences for their charged crimes.  Mr. Khawaja also reported to the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry he endured tortious acts throughout his detention.

After her release, Zainab tweeted, “My father just called, he can hardly speak, and he can hardly breath(e).”

For further information, please see:

Al Jazeera – Bahrain Mulls Denmark Plan For Hunger Striker – 7 Apr 2012

Channel 4 News – Calls To Drop F1 Grow as Bahrain Hunger Striker Hotpialised – 7 Apr 2012

BBC – Bahrain Hunger-Striker al-Khawaja Moved to Hospital – 6 April 2012

Tehran Times – Bahrain Hunger Striker’s Daughter Jailed – 6 Apr 2012

By Carolyn Abdenour
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

GAZA CITY, Israel – On Tuesday, 3 April, the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) denied the Palestinian Authority’s request for the ICC to have jurisdiction within the Palestinian territories.  The Palestinian Authority wanted The Hague’s war crimes tribunal to investigate the 2008-2009 Gaza War where 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis lost their lives.

The Israeli foreign ministry commented that the country applauded the ICC’s decision although Israel is not a member of the ICC.

The Palestinian Authority declared the ICC has unilateral jurisdiction for “act committed on the territory of Palestine since 1 July 2002” in January 2009.  After reviewing the Rome Statue, the ICC’s founding treaty, ICC Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo announced the ICC did not have jurisdiction within Palestine.  Article 12 of the Rome Statue specifies only a “state” can extend the ICC’s jurisdiction to its state.

The Palestinian Authority could sign the 1998 Rome Statue after Palestine qualifies as a “state” by the “relevant bodies” by ICC member countries or at the UN.  The Palestine Liberation Organization (“PLO”) presently holds an “observer” status rather than a “non-member observer state” status at the UN although over 130 governments recognize Palestine as a state.

Amnesty International warned that this decision could deny justice to the victims of alleged crimes from Palestine and Israel that occurred during the Gaza war.

Marek Marczynski, head of the International Justice campaign, said, “This dangerous decision opens the ICC to accusations of political bias and is inconsistent with the independence of the ICC.  It also breaches the Rome Statue which clearly states that such matters should be considered by the institution’s judges.”

On Wednesday, 4 April, Chief Prosecutor Moreno-Ocampo clarified that Palestine could sign the Rome Statue if it received the UN status of non-member observer state.  The UN Security Council has not voted on the membership application Palestine submitted on 23 September 2011.  The United States asserted it would veto the application.  However, the General Assembly would likely approve an application for non-member observer state status if it submits one.

If Palestine receives this new status, Israel could avoid ICC intervention on this matter because Israeli courts have the capacity to try troops for the alleged crimes from the Gaza war.  However, the ICC could later investigate possible violations that occur within the settlements, where the Israeli courts would have less credible means to handle the matter.

Human Right Watch’s Executive Director Kenneth Roth stated, “Today’s decision appears to close the door for now on access to the ICC for victims of international crimes committed in the Palestinian Territories – at least until the General Assembly recognizes Palestinian statehood.”

For more information, please see:

BBC – ICC Prosecutor Rejects Palestinian Recognition – 4 Apr 2012

The Times of Israel – Israel Won The Battle At The ICC, But Not The War – 4 Apr 2012

Washington Post – AP Interview: Prosecutor Says Palestinians Could Join ICC As A UN Non-Member Observer State – 4 Apr 2012

The Chicago Tribune – Hague Court Rejects Palestinian Call To Take On Cases – 3 Apr 2012

 

By Adom M. Cooper
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

CAIRO, Egypt–Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, already in control of nearly half of the seats available in parliament, announced that it would field its own presidential candidate. The announcement is a reversal of an earlier decision not to do so and will escalate tensions with the nation’s ruling generals and the group’s secular and progressive critics. The Brotherhood vowed in the wake of the 2011 uprising that resulted in the ouster of Hosni Mubarak that it would not field a presidential candidate so as not to monopolize power.

Its candidate, Khairat al-Shater, is the group’s chief strategist and deputy leader. If he becomes president, he would give the Muslim Brotherhood, a formerly outlawed movement, a strong grip on both the country’s executive and legislative branches. al-Shater is a wealthy businessman, whose exploits extend from computers to furniture, and has previously spent 12 years in prison due to his connection with the Muslim Brotherhood. He was released only after last year’s uprisings began.

Before al-Shater came into the public eye, he spent many years working behind the scenes for the Muslim Brotherhood. In the advent of the uprising, his central role in driving the ideology of the Brotherhood has become much more prevalent since Mubarak has been removed from office. Western officials have expressed desires to meet with him and the International Monetary Fund team, seeking a broad consensus for a $3.2 billion loan deal, met with him for talks.

One Western diplomat described al-Shater as a calm individual who “exuded control” in one meeting but displayed traces of a “bully” in another more heated discussion.

“He needs to have grown a thick skin of self-preservation, given his time in jail.”

Mohamed Badie, the Brotherhood’s leader, shared these words with Reuters concerning the announcement.

“He is a national hero to Egypt. He created an institution from the sweat of his brow and when it was destroyed because he was in competition with the son of the toppled president, he was jailed and injustice done to him.”

The group officially announced its support of al-Shater on Saturday 31 March 2012 and it ended weeks of speculation and confusion among the group’s members. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt holds the views that Islamic principles should regulate each and every aspect of public and family life. The announcement split the group’s governing Shura council into two sides. One side favoring the selection of a candidate within the group and the other desiring an outside candidate, fearing repercussions from the rest of Egypt.

Mohamed Habib, a former Brotherhood deputy leader, shared these words through his Twitter feed about the division in the group on al-Shater’s selection.

“It is the right of the Brotherhood to field its own candidate but they should know they are losing much of their credibility and expanding the divide between them and rest of Egypt’s national groups.”

The Muslim Brotherhood says that it should form the new cabinet to reflect the parliamentary majority. But the existing constitution gives that power to the military or the newly elected president. The army has refused to back down and defended the performance of its cabinet and the army’s handling of the transition. Secretary-General Mahmoud Hussein cited the refusal to remove the cabinet and referred to “a real threat to the revolution and the democratic transition to an elected civilian government.”

Since the removal of Mubarak, Egypt has been in a state of flux and has shown glimpses of the potential for long-term stability. All of the suffering and lives lost in the demonstrations and protests cannot be forgotten as the country tries to move forward with progressive changes. One can only hope that the Muslim Brotherhood’s decision to go back on its vow is sincerely in the best interests of the people because they are the ones who need the most attention and support.

 

 

For more information, please see: 

Ahram – Brotherhood Frames Primary Components Of Constitution, Says Party MP – 1 April 2012

Al-Jazeera – Brotherhood To Run For Egypt’s Presidency – 1 April 2012

BBC – Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood Names Presidency Candidate – 1 April 2012

CNN – Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood To Field Presidential Candidate – 1 April 2012

The Guardian – Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood To Field Presidential Candidate – 1 April 2012

Reuters – Brotherhood Presidency Bid Turns Up Heat In Egypt Race – 1 April 2012

 

 

By Carolyn Abdenour
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

KABUL, Afghanistan – On Wednesday, 28 March, Human Rights Watch (HRW) released “I Had to Run Away,” a report highlighting the approximately 400 Afghan women and girls who are imprisoned in jails and juvenile detention facilities for “moral crimes.”  The authorities jailed women for escaping domestic abuse and surviving rape.

HRW Executive Director Kenneth Roth commented, “It is shocking that 10 years after the overthrow of the Taliban, women and girls are still imprisoned for running away from domestic violence or forced marriage.”

The report notes “some women and girls have been convicted of zina, sex outside of marriage, after being raped or forced into prostitution.”  Judges routinely sentence women to lengthy prison sentences, including 10 years in some cases where a zina conviction could hold a 15 year sentence.  Illiterate women often are convicted on “confessions” they “signed” without the government reading the confession to them and without a lawyer present.

The number of convictions for running away rose after the Afghan Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that women who ran away and did not immediately go to the police or a close relative would be incarcerated.  The Court recommended these women be jailed as a precautionary remedy against promiscuity and prostitution.  However, the Afghan criminal code does not define fleeing her home without permission as a crime.

The report emphasizes that President Hamid Karzai did not meet the standards prescribed by international human rights law.  Although he passed the Law on the Elimination of Violence Against Women in 2009 to protect women, President Karzai has struggled ensuring women’s rights to please the conservative religious forces.

For example, the traditional practice baad (where families give their daughters away to settle disputes), forced under-age marriage, and domestic violence remain present in Afghanistan.  President Karzai also supported a “code of conduct” submitted by the Ulema Council, a powerful council of clerics, that permitted certain situations for husbands to beat their wives, forbade women to study or work in mixed company, prohibited women from travelling without male chaperones, and stated a woman is secondary to a man.  However, President Karzai declared pardons should be given to women that left their home to marry a husband of her choosing.

HRW interviewed 58 jailed girls and women for this 120-page report.  The report details Asma W., a 36 year old women imprisoned when she ran away once her husband beat her, tossed boiling water on her, transmitted sexual diseases, and declared he intended to marry his mistress; 15 year old Fawzia sought security from a family that forced her into prostitution after they drugged her; and Farah G. is a 16 year old girl that eloped with her friend’s brother after they fell in love.

For further information, please see

Brisbane Times – Women’s Hefty Price for ‘Crimes’ – 30 Mar 2012

Pakistan Observer – Hundreds Of Women, Girls Jailed For ‘Moral Crimes’ In Afghanistan – 29 Mar 2012

BBC – Hundreds of Afghan Women Jailed For ‘Moral Crime’ – 28 Mar 2012

Irish Independent – 400 Women and Girls Held In Afghanistan For ‘Moral Crimes’ – 28 Mar 2012