Follow Impunity Watch on Twitter at http://twitter.com/ImpuniTweet
Uganda police beat and torture detainees, according to report
By Polly Johnson
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa
KAMPALA, Uganda – A special unit of Uganda’s police force routinely engages in brutal torture of prisoners, according to a report released Wednesday by Human Rights Watch.
Thirteen months of research and testimony from more than one hundred interviews with former detainees, their families and members of the police unit exposed a unit that carries out torture, extortion and sometimes, extrajudicial killings, which are deliberate unlawful killings by security forces.
The R.R.U., created by President Yoweri Museveni in 2002 as an ad hoc security entity, was renamed the Rapid Response Unit in 2007. The unit makes arrests for crimes ranging from petty offenses to terrorism. Last year, it assisted the United States investigate terrorist attacks in Kampala during the World Cup, in which seventy people died.
A Human Rights Watch researcher in Uganda, Maria Burnett, said, “In cases we looked at by R.R.U., suspects were beaten until they confessed, paraded before journalists and dubbed hard-core criminals and then put on trial before military officers.”
The report stated that the R.R.U. frequently beats detainees with batons, glass bottles and metal pipes. In some cases, officers inserted pins under detainees’ fingernails. “I cannot recall the number of times they pierced my nails. My nails were destroyed. They were black, swollen, and painful. The needles were inserted under the nail, on both my hands and feet. They pierced every nail,” said a former female R.R.U. detainee charged with counterfeiting.
Though suspects in Uganda have the legal right to counsel, the report noted that “in practice, defendants do not receive a state-provided lawyer until their case is at trial and often spend years in detention before they ever meet a lawyer.” However, the absence of a lawyer during a suspect’s interrogation allows rampant torture to persist.
The report offered recommendations to various groups, including the Ugandan president and government, the police force, and other concerned governments, including those of the United States and the United Kingdom.
On Wednesday, the U.S. embassy in Uganda said that it would continue to encourage Uganda police forces to respect human rights and the rule of law.
For more information, please see:
BBC – Ugandan police use torture, Human Rights Watch reports – 23 March 2011
Human Rights Watch – Uganda: Torture, Extortion, Killings by Police Unit – 23 March 2011
New York Times – Rights Group Accuses Ugandan Police of Torture and Killings – 23 March 2011
China’s censorship reaches a new level
By Joseph Juhn
Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Asia
Google has accused the Chinese government of interfering with Gmail’s services (Photo courtesy of Reuters).
BEIJING, China– One Beijing entrepreneur called his fiancee to discuss restaurant choices during which he used the word “protest’ as he quoted Shakespeare’s Hamlet: “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.” The second time he said the word “protest,” his phone cut off, according to the New York Times article.
Using the word “protest” in any context, whether through cell phone, text messages, or other electronic devices, it is reported that people’s services get cut off instantly. In the advent of a jasmine revolution sweeping the middle east and North Africa, Chinese government was swift in heightening its censorship level to the current state.
The report said a number of evidence in the past few weeks showed that Chinese authorities were resolute to censor and police cellphone calls, electronic messages, e-mail and access to the Internet in order to quell any hint of antigovernment movement.
“The hard-liners have won the field, and now we are seeing exactly how they want to run the place,” said Russell Leigh Moses, an analyst in Beijing on China’s leadership. “I think the gloves are coming off.”
In addition, a host of other evidence suggests that the government’s computers are equipped to intercept incoming data and compare it with an ever-growing list of banned keywords or Web sites. For example, for six months or more, the censors have prevented Google searches of the English word “freedom.”
According to Peking University professor Hu Yong, the newest technology and social media have not only helped citizens spread information amongst each other on outside events, but also the government in censoring what it perceived to be new threats. “The technology is improving and the range of sensitive terms is expanding because the depth and breadth of things they [government] must manage just keeps on growing,” Mr. Hu said.
China’s censorship has been in effect ever more strictly since the 2008 Olympics, with what first appeared to be temporary ban on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter now considered permanent. Now, Google might be its next target.
On Sunday, Google accused the Chinese government of disabling its Gmail service within the country, and of wrongfully blaming the interruption on technical errors by Google. According to a Mar 4 online article of People’s Daily, China’s main communist daily, Google was accused as being “a tool of the United States government.” Like Facebook and Twitter, the article was reported to have said, Google has “played a role in manufacturing social disorder” and sought to involve itself in other nations’ politics.
Internet expert Bill Bishop suspects that the regime’s grip could only tighten in the months to come, in order to control the transition of power as the Communist Party expects to see a new leader next year. “There’s a lot more they can do,” Bishop said, “but they’ve been holding back.”
For more information, please see:
Tibetan Review – ‘Protest’ a no-no word in China – 23 March 2011
The New York Times – China Tightens Censorship of Electronic Communications – 21 March 2011
Switched – China Ramps Up Online Censorship, To No One’s Surprise – 22 March 2011
South Dakota Gov. Signs Law Requiring 3-Day Wait for Abortion
By Laura Hirahara
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America
PIERRE, South Dakota, US– South Dakota’s Republican governor Dennis Daugaard signed a bill into law today that will require a woman seeking an abortion in the state to wait 72 hours. During that 72 hours, the law requires the woman submit to two separate physician visits and counseling at a pregnancy help center, many of which focus on encouraging women to give birth and keep their child. The law, which imposes the longest wait period for abortions in the nation, also mandates screening for unnamed mental and physical ‘risk factors’ during the wait period. Governor Daugaard did not give any interviews after signing the law but did release a prepared statement in which he said, “I think everyone agrees with the goal of reducing abortion by encouraging consideration of other alternatives. . .I hope that women who are considering an abortion will use this three-day period to make good choices.”
Planned Parenthood, partnering with the American Civil Liberties Union of South Dakota, has already stated they will be challenging the constitutionality of the bill in the courts. Kathi Di Nicola, a spokesperson for Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota said, “It’s not going to do one thing to reduce unintended pregnancy or reduce abortion. . .We know women think carefully and consider all their options before making a decision like this.” Supporters of the law say Planned Parenthood, which operates the only clinic that offers abortion services in the state, does not provide adequate counseling before performing the procedure.
The state plans to publish a list of approved pregnancy help centers when the law goes into effect in July. Republican Representative Roger Hunt, one of the bills main supporters, said “Women need to just be reminded of the fact there is a natural, legal relationship between them and their child.” However, many claim the pregnancy help centers do not counsel women on all their options and are aimed primarily at dissuading a woman from choosing abortion. The National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League’s policy director, Donna Crane, stated in response to the law, “We think this is among the most dangerous times for the right to choose since Roe v. Wade.”
South Dakota has been at the heart of heated political debate about abortion in recent years. In 2006 and 2008, lawmakers passed legislation that would ban abortions in the state and both times the ballot initiatives were defeated by at least a 10 point margin. Jan Nicolay, co-chair of the South Dakota Campaign for Healthy Families, says this new law is an invasion of privacy, infringes on the doctor-patient relationship and will cost tax payers. “Now, despite the fact that South Dakotans have repeatedly spoken on issues of government interference in private decisions, we will once more be pulled into a protracted legal battle that will potentially cost the state millions in tax dollars.”
For more information, please see;
AP– SD Governor Signs 3-Day Wait for Abortion Into Law– 22 March, 2011
Christian Science Monitor– South Dakota Anti-abortion Law Breaks New Ground– 22 March, 2011
Reuters– South Dakota Law Requires 3-Day Abortion Wait– 22 march, 2011
Djibouti Bans Election Observer Group Less Than a Month Before Vote
By Laura Hirahara
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa
DJIBOUTI- Djibouti’s government has ousted Democracy International (DI), a United States based election observation and reporting agency, less than a month before the upcoming presidential election on April 8. Foreign minister Mahmoud Ali Youssouf told the Financial Times that DI had failed to maintain political neutrality by supporting opposition parties against the incumbent president Ismael Guelleh. In declaring DI ‘illegal’ earlier this month, Youssouf said the government hopes to avoid the “chaos and upheaval” seen in the protests and demonstrations of other African and Middle East countries in the last several months.
The head of DI’s operation in Djibouti, Chris Hennemeyer, has denied the group was involved in any illegal activity and asserts DI was only trying to help resolve disputes between Guelleh’s administration and opposition groups when protests began in February. That protest, which took place on February 18 of this year, attracted approximately 6,000 anti-government supporters. That rally ended violently when police fired on the crowd, many of whom were throwing rocks. Dozens were injured and at least one protesters was killed. Another opposition rally was scheduled for March 4 but did not take place after security forces filled the streets making it impossible for people to gather.
Much of the discontent is aimed at Guelleh himself. Guelleh’s family has maintained exclusive political control of Djibouti since its independence in 1977 and he has been president since 1999. In March 2010, Guelleh amended the constitution to remove the two term limit, which would have forced him from office this year, giving himself two more six-year terms. Opposition leaders are boycotting the upcoming election, saying Guelleh’s actions are illegal and the polls will be rigged. Many have demanded his resignation and as fears of violent demonstrations escalate, individuals within the opposition movements have been arrested. Four leaders of one such group were arrested and held for several hours last Friday. After being released, the group leaders said, “We warn the illegal candidate [Guelleh] against his irresponsible actions at the risk of seeing radicalization of our actions, which have up to now been peaceful. . .The opposition can no longer continue to respect the law when the ruling power itself tramples on it.”
Guelleh’s administration has extended invitations to the European Union, the African Union and the Arab League to observe Djibouti’s April 8 elections and insists they will be fair and free. However, it is unlikely any of these groups will be able to set up an adequate system to monitor the elections in time. Hennemeyer said he does not know what will happen in Djibouti, stating “I don’t see Djibouti moving backward, but I’m not sure I see it moving forward in a democratic sense either.”
For more information, please see;
Bloomberg– Djibouti Bans a US-Backed Democracy Advocacy Group One-Month Before Vote– 15 March, 2011
Sify News– Djibouti Evicts US Vote Group Ahead of Election– 21 March, 2011
Financial Times– Election Observers Quit Djibouti– 15 March, 2011