LBGT Groups Picket Russian Embassy in London

By Greg Hall
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe 

LONDON, England – Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals picketed the Russian Emabassy in London on July 1 urging Russia’s voting rights at the Council of Europe be suspended because of the country’s violations of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).  On October 21, 2010, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that banning gay pride events violated the right to freedom of assembly. It also ruled that Moscow authorities had unlawfully discriminated against activist Nikolay Aleksandrovich Alekseyev and the organizers of gay pride events on the basis of sexual orientation, and had subsequently denied them a remedy.

LGBT supporters protest outside the Russian Embassy in London (Photo Courtesy of Pink Paper).

The year after the court ruling, Moscow authorities banned the pride event.  Four different applications were made and all four of them were denied.  Eighteen people attempted to defy the ban and hold the event.  However, they were aggressively arrested and persecuted by homophobic groups and religious counter-protesters, just as has happened in the previous six years.

As a consequence of violating the ruling of the European Court on Human Rights, the picketers called for Russia’s voting rights in the Council of Europe to be suspended.  Five people were arrested for picketing a Russian Embassy in France when they went to deliver a petition signed by 14,000 people opposing Russia’s defiance.

Moscow’s Deputy Mayor told the event organizer, Nikolai Alekseyev, that his application to hold the event had been rejected due to the large numbers of objections it had received from members of the public.  However, Nicola Duckworth, Director of Amnesty International’s Europe and Central Asia Programme, responded, “The Moscow City Authorities must overturn their decision to ban this year’s Moscow Gay Pride.  So-called public morality concerns can never be used to justify restrictions on the freedom of expression of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people”.

A poll released in June found that 61 percent of Russians oppose gay pride marches in Russia.  A year ago, 82 percent said that they disapproved.  Human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell said: “The arrest, mistreatment and detention of LGBT activists is illegal under Russia’s constitution, which guarantees the right to peaceful assembly.  It is alarming that this homophobic repression is taking place in Russia’s most liberal city, St Petersburg.  The Council of Europe must take disciplinary action against Russia over its further violation of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Russian government must not be allowed to defy the ECHR with impunity.”

For More Information Please See:

Pride Source — LGBTs Picket Russian Embassy in London — 14 July 2011

Pink Paper — Five People Arrested Outside Russian Embassy in Paris — 11 July 2011

Pink Paper — Russian Police Arrest 14 People in Demonstration Row — 27 June 2011

Peter Tachel — Gay Activist Will Defy Ban — 25 May 2011

Amnesty International — Moscow Authorities Ban Gay Pride Event — 18 May 2011

UNHCR — Russia: European Court Rules Gay Pride Ban Unlawful — 21 October 2010


New Egyptian Government Takes Shape as Protests Continue

By Zach Waksman
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

CAIRO, Egypt – On Tuesday, the military announced that it was planning to adopt a “declaration of basic principles” that would oversee the drafting of a new Egyptian constitution.  But even as the ruling military council begins this process, public concerns remain over whether the revolution of January 25 has brought about the reforms it sought to achieve.

Despite this apparent show of good faith, thousands of protesters gathered in Cairo’s Tahrir Square on Friday, referred to as “The Friday of Final Warning,” to repeat the demands that spurred the ouster of former president Hosni Mubarak.  This time, however, their anger was aimed at Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, head of the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF), and interim Prime Minister Essam Sharaf.  Once they finished their prayers, the dissidents chanted, “The Military Council is illegitimate” and “Down with Tantawi,” while also using poetry, song, caricature, and graffiti to express displeasure with the current regime.

As of Thursday, at least a dozen Tahrir protesters were in the midst of a hunger strike.  One of the strikers, Mohamed Fawzy, said that he would not accept treatment until the protesters’ demands have been met.  Those demands include the public trial of all officers who participated in killing protesters during the revolution and a public trial of the Mubarak family and other symbols of his regime.  They also want limits on the SCAF’s power and a purge of all government and state institutions, including banks and the media, of corrupt members of the previous regime.

To some, putting new people in power will not be enough.  Mohamed El-Baradei, a former director of the International Atomic Energy Agency who is running for president, opined that the government will have to change its policies.  “The revolution’s demands are clear.  We need an empowered government and a change of policies,” he wrote on his Twitter page.

Even after Tuesday’s announcement, the primary concern among the protesters is that the declaration will provide the military with a broad mission that could limit democracy in the name of preserving a secular state.  Tahani el-Gebali, a judge who is assisting in drafting the declaration, supports a broad role in the new government for the armed forces.  She believes that “[t]he military’s legacy gives it a special credibility.”  This credibility justifies its level of responsibility in protecting the new constitution’s legitimacy.  The military has traditionally had almost total autonomy in Egypt, including a budget that was not disclosed to the Parliament.

Ibrahim Dawrish, who helped create a new constitution that reduced the political role of Turkish armed forces, and who had taken on a broad mandate after a coup in 1980, told the New York Times that the SCAF seemed to be trying to imitate the Turkish model, which created political turmoil in Turkey for years.  “The constitution can’t be monopolized by one institution,” Dawrish said.  “It is Parliament that makes the constitution, not the other way around.”

Frustration appears to be growing within the military.  Even as anger towards them increases, the SCAF remains steadfast in its claim of being only a temporary regime.  Major General Mamdouh Shaheen, a council member, told a news conference that the military would remain in power until an elected government was in place, adding that the SCAF “does not want to stay in power.”

Whether that is true remains to be seen.  The final version of the declaration will provide some answers to that question, but will raise new questions as well.

For more information, please see:

Al-Masry Al-Youm – El-Baradei: Revolution wants policies, not people, changed – 17 July 2011

Ikhwanweb – As Protests Continue, Egyptians Determined to Fulfill Revolution’s Demands – 17 July 2011

New York Times – Egypt Military Moves to Cement a Muscular Role in Government – 16 July 2011

Daily News Egypt – Thousands in Tahrir on ‘Final Warning Friday’ – 15 July 2011

Al-Ahram Weekly – Must do better – 14 July 2011

Al-Ahram Weekly – Protesters’ demands –14 July 2011

Al-Ahram Weekly – Together we stand – 14 July 2011

Human Rights Watch Calls For United States To Investigate Bush, Other Top Officials For Torture

Originally published by Human Rights Watch
11 July 2011

(Washington, DC) – Overwhelming evidence of torture by the Bush administration obliges President Barack Obama to order a criminal investigation into allegations of detainee abuse authorized by former President George W. Bush and other senior officials, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. The Obama administration has failed to meet US obligations under the Convention against Torture to investigate acts of torture and other ill-treatment of detainees, Human Rights Watch said.

The 107-page report, “Getting Away with Torture: The Bush Administration and Mistreatment of Detainees,” presents substantial information warranting criminal investigations of Bush and senior administration officials, including former Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and CIA Director George Tenet, for ordering practices such as “waterboarding,” the use of secret CIA prisons, and the transfer of detainees to countries where they were tortured.

“There are solid grounds to investigate Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Tenet for authorizing torture and war crimes,” said Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch. “President Obama has treated torture as an unfortunate policy choice rather than a crime. His decision to end abusive interrogation practices will remain easily reversible unless the legal prohibition against torture is clearly reestablished.”

If the US government does not pursue credible criminal investigations, other countries should prosecute US officials involved in crimes against detainees in accordance with international law, Human Rights Watch said.

“The US has a legal obligation to investigate these crimes,” Roth said. “If the US doesn’t act on them, other countries should.”

In August 2009, US Attorney General Eric Holder appointed Assistant US Attorney John Durham to investigate detainee abuse but limited the probe to “unauthorized” acts. That meant the investigation could not cover acts of torture, such as waterboarding, and other ill-treatment authorized by Bush administration lawyers, even if the acts violated domestic and international law. On June 30, Holder accepted Durham’s recommendation to carry out full investigations of two deaths in CIA custody, reportedly from Iraq and Afghanistan. Human Rights Watch said that the narrow scope of Durham’s inquiry failed to address the systemic nature of the abuses.

“The US government’s pattern of abuse across several countries did not result from the acts of individuals who broke the rules,” Roth said. “It resulted from decisions made by senior US officials to bend, ignore, or cast the rules aside.”

In citing the four top-level Bush administration officials, Human Rights Watch said that:

  • President Bush publicly admitted that in two cases he approved the use of waterboarding, a form of mock execution involving near-drowning that the United States has long prosecuted as a type of torture. Bush also authorized the illegal CIA secret detention and renditions programs, under which detainees were held incommunicado and frequently transferred to countries such as Egypt and Syria where they were likely to be tortured;
  • Vice President Cheney was the driving force behind the establishment of illegal detention and interrogation policies, chairing key meetings at which specific CIA operations were discussed, including the waterboarding of one detainee, Abu Zubaydah, in 2002;
  • Defense Secretary Rumsfeld approved illegal interrogation methods and closely followed the interrogation of Mohamed al-Qahtani, who was subjected to a six-week regime of coercive interrogation at Guantanamo that cumulatively appears to have amounted to torture;
  • CIA Director Tenet authorized and oversaw the CIA’s use of waterboarding, stress positions, light and noise bombardment, sleep deprivation, and other abusive interrogation methods, as well as the CIA rendition program.

In media interviews, Bush has sought to justify his authorization of waterboarding on the ground that Justice Department lawyers said it was legal. While Bush should have recognized that waterboarding constituted torture without consulting a lawyer, there is also substantial information that senior administration officials, including Cheney, sought to influence the lawyers’ judgment, Human Rights Watch said.

“Senior Bush officials shouldn’t be able to shape and hand-pick legal advice and then hide behind it as if it were autonomously delivered,” Roth said.

Human Rights Watch said the criminal investigation should include an examination of the preparation of the Justice Department memos that were used to justify the unlawful treatment of detainees.

Human Rights Watch also said that victims of torture should receive fair and adequate compensation as required by the Convention against Torture. Both the Bush and Obama administrations have successfully kept courts from considering the merits of torture allegations in civil lawsuits by making broad use of legal doctrines such as state secrets and official immunity.

An independent, nonpartisan commission, along the lines of the 9-11 Commission, should be established to examine the actions of the executive branch, the CIA, the military, and Congress, with regard to Bush administration policies and practices that led to detainee abuse, Human Rights Watch said. Such a commission should make recommendations to ensure that the systematic abuses of the Bush administration are not repeated.

In February 2011, Bush cancelled a trip to Switzerland, where alleged victims of torture had intended to file a criminal complaint against him. An investigation implicating US officials in torture is under way in Spain. Documents made public by Wikileaks revealed that US pressure on Spanish authorities to drop the case has continued under the Obama administration.

Human Rights Watch said that the US government’s failure to investigate US officials for the torture and ill-treatment of detainees undermines US efforts to press for accountability for human rights violations abroad.

“The US is right to call for justice when serious international crimes are committed in places like Darfur, Libya, and Sri Lanka, but there should be no double standards,” Roth said. “When the US government shields its own officials from investigation and prosecution, it makes it easier for others to dismiss global efforts to bring violators of serious crimes to justice.”

—–

To download the report “Getting Away With Torture” or view other related materials, please visit the HRW page.