A Voice for the Voiceless

PNG Faces Controversial Ombudsman Bill That May Induce Corruption

By Cindy Trinh
Impunity Watch Reporter, Oceania

PORT MORESBY, Papua New Guinea – People of Papua New Guinea (PNG) have signed a petition calling on Parliament to reject the proposed Ombudsman Commission Amendment Bill. They fear that the Bill will allow senior politicians in PNG to be free of investigation. The Governor of PNG’s National Capital District has offered to organize a meeting to discuss the controversial bill.

The PNG government’s draft of the Bill is designed by politicians to allow the Ombudsman Commission funds to be cut. People in PNG fear that this bill will prevent the Ombudsman’s Office from investigating senior politicians.

Under the proposed legislation, the Ombudsman Commission would not longer be able to refer politicians to the Leadership Tribunal, or prevent MPs from using Electoral Development Funds for anything by earmarked projects in their electorates.

PNG’s Media Council president, Joe Kanekane, reported that he was given the petition opposing the Bill. Kanekane, who is also the co-chair of the Community Coalition Against Corruption, also reported that the petition was signed by more than 500 people in Aiyura Valley, including representatives from Southern Highlands, Hela, Western Highlands, Jiwaka, Chimbu, and Eastern Highlands.

The petition was an unexpected outcome of a 3-day media literacy workshop that was conducted by the Media Council from April 14-16 for the Highlands region, which was attended by 40 participants.

The workshop included a forum on the awareness of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and PNG’s performance, which then attracted more than 500 people.

Media Council’s executive director, Nimo Walter Kama, who launched the workshop, stated: “None of the forum participants had any idea of what the MDGs were. They did not even know the targets that were supposed to be achieved and were concerned that 10 years had already gone without any real achievements.”

Kama further stated: “But most forum respondents recognized that the MDG targets of ending hunger and poverty, achieving universal primary education, promoting gender equality and empowering women, reducing child deaths, improving maternal health, curbing HIV/AIDS, malaria and other preventable diseases, and ensuring environmental sustainability, would transform rural communities.”

Kama reported that during a question and answer session in the forum, a petition to Parliament was proposed to focus on key developmental issues. The petition focused on the concern that PNG, as a signatory to the MDGs, had downgraded their efforts to tackle on the developmental issues that PNG people face. There was a lot of enthusiasm to sign the petition.

In light of the strong advocacy for the petition, the Governor of PNG’s National Capital District, Powes Parkop, has offered to organize a meeting between NGOs and MP Moses Maladina to discuss the parliamentary bill.

Parkop reported that he wants to play the middle-man because he does not want to see a planned protest march against the bill to occur in Port Moresby. He fears of the potential destruction if protestors lose control.

However, Parkop’s fear of a march has already been in progress. A march is being planned by the Community Coalition Against Corruption. The NGO group is concerned over what they see as a move to weaken the Ombudsman’s powers.

Parkop responded by stating that while some of the proposed amendments should be changed, some provisions do have merit, and thus the bill should be scrutinized properly.

Students from the University of Papua New Guinea sign the petition calling on Parliament to reject the proposed amendment
Students from the University of Papua New Guinea sign the petition calling on Parliament to reject the proposed amendment

For more information, please see:
Radio New Zealand International – Governor of PNG capital offers to organize dialogue over controversial Ombudsman bill – 29 April 2010

Pacific Islands Media Association (Pima Nius) – Media Council receives petition opposing Ombudsman fund-cutting bill – 27 April 2010

Pacific.Scoop – Media Council receives petition opposing Ombudsman fund-cutting bill – 27 April 2010

Omar Khadr Boycotts Second Day of Hearings

By William Miller
Impunity Watch Reporter, North America

GUANTANAMO BAY, Cuba – Canadian Citizen Omar Khadr was not present for the second day of hearings to decide if any of the evidence against him should be suppressed. Khadr who was just fifteen when he was arrested in Afghanistan is to be tried for war crimes in a military tribunal. He decided to boycott the proceedings because military officials required him to wear sensory deprivation equipment while he was being transported from the jail to the court house.

Omar Khadr at age 15 when he was captured and at age 22 (PHOTO: Miami Herald)
Omar Khadr at age 15 when he was captured and at age 22 (PHOTO: Miami Herald)

Khadr was born in Canada to Al Qaeda supporters. He was taken to Afghanistan when he was just ten. During his time in Afghanistan he stayed in Al Qaeda camps and assisted in building road side bombs.

Khadr was just fifteen years old when he was arrested by U.S. Forces in Afghanistan for allegedly throwing a grenade that killed a United States medic. Prosecution witness FBI agent Robert Fuller testified to an account of the incident he says Khadr gave him when he was sixteen.

“He said one of the Afghan locals was running toward their compound yelling, ‘The Americans are coming. At that time he remembers (they gathered) up personal effects — the video camera and some film — placed them into duffel bags and then (tried) to exit the compound, where they engaged U.S. forces.”

Fuller further testified that Khadr told him how he watched as the three men he exited the compound with were gunned down by U.S. Forces. Fuller then said Khadr told him he “then he retrieved a grenade, threw the grenade over the compound wall, and then said he passed out.” Khadr presumably passed out from injuries he incurred during the conflict.

Fuller said he never read Khadr his rights during the interview but defended this position saying it was FBI policy not to and that the conversations were not coercive.

Khadr refused to appear at his hearing on Thursday, April 29 after guards required him to wear earmuffs and goggles during transport which were designed to block out his sight and hearing. Although he had complained of an eye problem earlier in the day this was not why he refused the to wear them. He said that the goggles and earmuffs were humiliating.

Khadr’s lawyer, Barry Coburn said this was the first time he was forced to wear such equipment. Coburn said Khadr had only been required to wear them until he was secured in a windowless transport in the past but guards had forced him to wear them for the entire trip as an unnecessary form of punishment.

Military Judge Col. Patrick Parrish originally held that Khadr had knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appear and started the proceedings without him. After a short recess however he returned and said no one had ever advised Khadr of his right to appear and the consequences of not doing so. He ordered Khadr to be forcibly brought to the courthouse to be advised of his rights unless his defense attorney could persuade him to do so voluntarily.

The hearing Khadr has boycotted is being held to determine if confessions given by Khadr should be suppressed because they were elicited through torture. Khadr has been interrogated more than 100 times during his imprisonment. The defense also seeks to suppress a video tape of Khadr participating in the building of a roadside bomb.

Khadr who is now twenty-three has spent more than a third of his life in prison. If he is convicted he could be sentenced to life. Khadr’s attorneys say that they will appeal any decision to allow Khadr’s confessions to be used as evidence. The case has inflamed many activists who believe Khadr should be considered a child soldier and rehabilitated and sent back home to Canada.

For more information, please see:

Globe and Mail – Khadr Absent from Day Two of Hearings – 29 April 2010

Vancouver Sun – Khadr Boycotts Proceedings at Guantanamo Bay – 29 April 2010

Washington Post – Military Tribunal Opens Hearing on Guantanamo Detainee Omar Khadr – 29 April 2010

Australian Human Rights Framework Focuses on Education Initiatives


By Eileen Gould
Impunity Watch Reporter, Oceania

CANBERRA, Australia – The Australian Government has refused to incorporate human rights into the law, an action which has been criticized by the ACT Human Rights Commissioner.

A recommendation suggested that the administration of Prime Minister Kevin Rudd adopt a law, allowing judges to review Australia’s laws, practices, and policies for human rights compliance.

Instead, Julia Gillard, Minister for Education, and Robert McClelland, Attorney General, announced the Government’s initiative to educate Australians and ensure their access to information about human rights.

According to Mr. McClelland, “[e]nhancing [Australia’s] efforts to improve human rights education is critical as too many Australians are not informed about what human rights are or how they are currently protected.”

Among the education initiatives included in the framework is a provision for “greater support for human rights education across the country, including primary and secondary schools” and “investing $2 million for the development and delivery of community education and engagement programs to promote a greater understanding of human rights by non-governmental organizations (NGOs)”.

The Federal Government plans to invest a total of $12 million for human right education, including the establishment of the framework for human rights, and also includes the formation of a new Parliament committee on this issue. However, the Government refuses to set up a Bill of Rights as part of this framework, contrary to recommendations made by an expert panel.

This decision, according to Human Rights Commissioner Dr. Helen Watchirs, goes against Australia’s wishes.  A national consultation process revealed that approximately 29,000 submissions out of 35,000 favored a Human Rights Act.  The research revealed that Australians supported human rights education rather than a human rights charter, yet there is no doubt Australians would support a human rights act.

Based on the experiences of two provinces, Victoria and the Australian Capital Territory, both of which have implemented Human Rights Acts, advocates claim that a national Act would be beneficial, as it would promote a more accountable government, address poverty, and improve public services.

This new Human Rights Framework will be reviewed in 2014.

For more information please see:

Sydney Morning Herald – A charter of rights is divisive? The vast majority think not – 23 April 2010

ABC – Human Rights Framework: icing without the cake – 22 April 2010

ABC News – Govt ‘ignoring’ Australian’s wishes on human rights – 22 April 2010

Govmonitor – Australia Outlines Education Initiatives to Enhance Human Rights – 22 April 2010

Suspension of Due Process in Paraguay Criticized

By Sovereign Hager
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

Photo Courtesy of MERCO Press
Photo Courtesy of MERCO Press

ASUNCION, Paraguay- On Sunday, April 25, 2020, Paraguay’s president signed a bill into law declaring a state of emergency in five of Paraguay’s seventeen provinces. The bill includes a thirty day suspension of constitutional due process guarantees, with an aim to grant the military greater power to combat the Paraguayan People’s Army (PPA). The PPA, an armed leftist group is allegedly responsible for murders, including four police officers.

The bill affects the norther provinces of Concepcion, San Pedro, Amambay, Presidente Hayes and Alto Paraguay and permits officers to arrest any suspected members of the PPA, without warrants. Additionally, there is a ban on public gatherings and protests along with increased controls on the circulation of vehicles on highways and local roads.

The PPA established itself as an armed group after taking responsibility for the September 2004 murder of Cecilia Cubas, a daughter of a former president. Her body was discovered in 2005 after she died in captivity. The group is thought to have roughly one hundred members that operate in remote, inaccessible forested areas, with little access to technology.

Controversy over the bill took center stage when the Vice President Federico Franco declared that the objective of the emergency law is not the elimination of the PPA. It is unclear what Franco was referring to, however, rights groups are also voicing opposition. The Paraguayan Human Rights Coordinating Group (CODEHUPY) stated that the threshold for a state emergency to be declared has not been reached. Specifically, they highlighted the fact that Paraguay is neither involved in an international armed conflict nor facing a situation that could endanger any state institutions in the five affected provinces. CODEHUPY, speaking with IPS, attributed the current situation to “criminals acting outside the law who should be apprehended, charged, and sentenced under the regular legal system.”

CODEHUPY further remarked that if the armed group, they allege contains around ten individuals justifies a state of emergency, then there is a problem with the incapacity of the country’s security agencies. Similarly, a trade union federation, Central Nacional de Trabajadores, pledged to act swiftly in the event there are any violations of the public freedoms established by the constitution.

For more information, please see:

AFP-Paraguay Suspends Rights in Crackdown on Rebel Group-25 April 2010

BBC-Paraguay Suspends Rights in Crackdown on Rebels-24 April 2010

IPS-Paraguay:Controversy Over Troop Deployment-28 April 2010

US Intends to Transfer non-Afghan Bagram Detainees

By Alok Bhatt
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BAGRAM, Afghanistan – Representatives of the US military recently divulged its designs to remove and re-locate non-Afghan prisoners presently detained in Bagram Air Base.  Bagram Air Base signifies the United States’ controversial detention facility outside the capital  city of Kabul.  Since 2001, the US military has utilized Bagram Air Base to hold suspected enemy combatants, persons classified as terrorists, and other alleged malefactors.  Numerous human rights issues have been invoked since the transformation of the Air Base into a prison.  Among the most significant international law violations charged are the torture of Bagram inmates and the indiscriminate abduction and subsequent captivity of persons with unconfirmed combatant status from countries surrounding Afghanistan.

Vice-Admiral Robert Harward of Joint Task Force 435, overseer of detainees and operations concerning their imprisonment, stated that Bagram contains only a small number of non-Afghan detainees.  There are supposedly only approximately thirty to sixty foreign nationals held in Bagram.  The US military has also claimed that it is currently coordinating with the native countries of the non-Afghan detainees.  These negotiations aim to deliver non-Afghan inmates back to the legal structures of their respective home nations.

The decision to  release all non-Afghan detainees is said to have formed from Afghanistan’s requests, for they did not desire to manage persons from other states when the Afghan government assumed control of the prison.  Prior to the recent decision to ultimately relinquish control of Bagram to Afghanistan, the US military had sole rule over its operations.  However, by the end of 2010, the US military hopes to transfer the responsibility of running the prison to the Afghan government.  While Afghanistan will possess control of the institution,the US military will retain some minimal involvement.

In late 2009, the US military announced myriad reforms pertinent to the management of the Bagram Air Base.  Following the completion of expansion and renovation of the prison, it was announced that greater transparency and regard for rights would be implemented into its system.  The Afghan government will be charged with fulfilling these promises, particularly as they regard the non-Afghan nationals.  Although negotiations to transfer foreign nationals have gone underway, the ultimate fate of non-Afghan detainees, as a general matter, remains to be determined.

For more information, please see:

Al-Jazeera – US to ‘transfer Bagram detainees’ – 27 April 2010

Common Dreams – US to “transfer Bagram detainees’… – 28  April 2010

NPR – Rights Groups Descry U.S. Stand on Bagram Detainees – 15 September 2009