German Foreign Ministry advises against travel to Turkey

By: Sara Adams 
Impunity Watch News Reporter, Europe 

Germany’s Foreign Minister speaks at a press conference on July 20. Image courtesy of AP.

BERLIN, Germany – German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel advised citizens against traveling to Turkey, in a time of rising tension between the two countries.

The tension comes from Turkey’s actions since the failed coup against the government in 2016. In the past year, the Turkish government has arrested at least 50,000 people, including journalists and opposition members. Of those, 22 have been German citizens.

German-Turkish journalist Deniz Yucel was among those arrested in the past year. He was detained on terror charges in February. Six of the human rights activists arrested in June were jailed in Turkey on July 18 while they await trial.

The jailing of the activists is what some are saying triggered Berlin to issue a warning against travel to Turkey.

Relations between Turkey and Germany have become a key topic as Germany approaches a general election in September. Foreign Minister Gabriel is part of the Social Democrats, a rival to Chancellor Merkel’s Christian Democrats.

Despite the rivalry, Chancellor Merkel has backed the Foreign Minister’s warning against traveling to Turkey.

Foreign Minister Gabriel is reviewing the relations between the two countries. While he says that Germany “wants Turkey to become part of the west,” he also urged that “it takes two to tango.”

Germany is considering review of an export credits system that benefits Turkey. They are also considering how to handle Turkey’s bid to join the European Union.

Meanwhile, Turkey has stated that it will “reciprocate” what it calls “blackmail and threats” by Berlin. The Turkish Foreign Ministry blames the tensions on Germany’s “double-standard attitude” toward Turkey.

Counsel of Europe’s Secretary General Throbjorn Jagland joins the calls for freeing the prisoners in Turkey.

“Human rights defenders should be able to fulfill their activities freely without being subject to arbitrary interferences by the authorities,” he said in a statement on June 20.

Continuing, the Secretary General stated that the lack of evidence against those jailed can lead to “fear, self-censorship and a chilling effect on Turkish civil society.”

Even so, the government in Ankara continues to hold steadfast to their own judicial processes.

A statement released by the Turkish Foreign Ministry insisted that “the independent Turkish judiciary must be trusted.”

The Ministry strongly condemned any suggestion that German citizens were not safe when traveling to Turkey.

“There is no such thing,” the Turkish Foreign Minister said. “as far as the judiciary could establish [those arrested were] not ordinary visitors, [but] people who engaged in illegal or suspicious activities.”

For more information, please see: 

BBC News – Germany warns citizens of Turkey risks amid arrests – 20 July 2017 

The Washington Post – The Latest: Turkey says it would reciprocate German threats – 20 July 2017 

Reuters – Germany warns citizens to be more careful in traveling to Turkey – 20 July 2017 

AP News – Germany raises pressure on Turkey after activists jailed – 20 July 2017 

LA Times – Turkish court jails an Amnesty director and 5 other human rights activists pending trial – 18 July 2017 

The Guardian – ‘Assault on freedom of expression’: Die Welt journalist’s arrest in Turkey – 28 February 2017  

Syria Justice and Accountability Centre: Responding to Misconceptions Regarding the IIIM

SJAC Update | August 2, 2017
Responding to Misconceptions Regarding the IIIM
 
The following article was written through the cooperation of three non-governmental organizations: Syria Justice and Accountability Centre, Syrians for Truth and Justice, and the Violations Documentation Center in Syria. Its content reflects the joint views of these entities.
 The International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism (IIIM) to Assist in the Investigation and Prosecution of Those Responsible for the Most Serious Crimes in Syria was established by UN General Assembly resolution in December 2016. On July 3, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres appointed Catherine Marchi-Uhel as Head of IIIM. Marchi-Uhel is a former French judge with broad international experience trying and adjudicating war crimes. During her 27-year career, Marchi-Uhel has provided legal support to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the UN Mission in Liberia, and the UN Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo. She has also adjudicated for the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and currently serves as Ombudsperson to the UN Security Council’s 1267 Committee – reviewing requests for delisting from the Committee’s Sanction List. Her appointment signals the beginning of IIIM’s substantive work.
Since IIIM’s inception, Syrian civil society has worked to support the Mechanism and to clarify its aims and means. In February, several Syrian NGOs sent a letter to the General Assembly noting questions and recommendations that would help the IIIM understand Syrians’ priorities and increase local buy-in. In May, a meeting between the IIIM start-up team and a wide range of Syria civil society organizations was held in Lausanne, Switzerland. The meeting provided an excellent platform to exchange views, provide recommendations, and establish a common understanding between both sides.
Despite these positive steps, some Syrian people, activists, and civil society groups still have questions regarding the IIIM’s purpose and potential for advancing accountability in Syria.
In June, the Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights’ (OHCHR) hosted a human rights reference group meeting in Turkey with Syrian NGOs to discuss the latest in human rights developments – including the IIIM’s progress. The meeting led to a greater understanding of the IIIM’s mandate. Since the meeting was not open to the public, we have identified five of the most prominent concerns voiced by Syrians and clarified them below for wider public understanding.
READ MORE
The Syria Justice and Accountability Centre (SJAC) is a Syrian-led and multilaterally supported nonprofit that envisions a Syria where people live in a state defined by justice, respect for human rights, and rule of law. SJAC collects, analyzes, and preserves human rights law violations by all parties in the conflict — creating a central repository to strengthen accountability and support transitional justice and peace-building efforts. SJAC also conducts research to better understand Syrian opinions and perspectives, provides expertise and resources, conducts awareness-raising activities, and contributes to the development of locally appropriate transitional justice and accountability mechanisms. Contact us at info@syriaaccountability.org.
This email was sent to dmcrane@law.syr.edu
why did I get this?    unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences
Syria Justice and Accountability Centre · Laan Van Meerdervoort 70 · Den Haag, 2517 AN · Netherlands

Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp

Violations Documentation Center in Syria: Responding to Misconceptions Regarding the IIIM

Responding to Misconceptions Regarding the IIIM
View this email in your browser
Responding to Misconceptions Regarding the IIIM (English)

Arabic version

Share
Tweet
Forward
Follow us
VDC on Facebook
Visit VDC-Sy.info
Copyright © 2017 Violations Documentation Center In Syria, All rights reserved.

Want to change how you receive these emails?

Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp

Nobel Prize Laureate Dies in China

By: Brian Kim
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia 

BEIJING, China – Chinese Nobel Prize laureate, Liu Xiaobo, died on July 13th from multiple organ failure. Liu was a prominent Chinese dissident who participated in the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy protests.

Supporters mourning Liu Xiaobo’s death in Hong Kong. Photo courtesy of CNBC.

In 2009, Liu was sentenced to 11 years in prison for his work with crafting “Chapter 08,” a manifesto calling for political reform in China. The Chinese government sentenced him to prison for “inciting subversion of state power.”

While serving his time at Jinzhou Prison in 2010, Liu was named the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize for “his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China.” However, the Chinese government did not allow him to travel to accept the award and attempted to block the news inside the country. The Nobel organizers placed his award on an empty chair during the award ceremony in his honor.

Due to his illness, Liu was transferred to a hospital in the city of Shenyang to receive treatment. Despite facing much pressure from the international community, China refused to allow Liu to travel abroad to receive treatment.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee recently condemned the Chinese government for not allowing Liu Xiaobo to receive medical treatment abroad. Berit Reiss-Andersen, the leader of the Norwegian Nobel Committee stated that “the Chinese Government bears a heavy responsibility for his premature death.”

Many people, including Amnesty International’s Nicholas Bequelin, described his death as “one of the most crude, cruel and callous political show(s) I have ever witnessed.”

Liu’s wife, Liu Xia, has been under house arrest and has not been allowed to communicate with the outside world since Liu Xiaobo received the award. Since his death, thousands of people gathered in Hong Kong to hold a vigil for Liu and asked the Chinese government to free Liu Xia.

Carl von Ossietzky, a Nobel Peace Prize winner, was the last winner to die under government surveillance. He died in Berlin in 1938.

For more information, please see: 

CNBC – Struck by liver cancer, Chinese Nobel Peace Prize-winner Liu Xiaobo dies – 13 July, 2017

Alijazeera – China’s Nobel laureate Liu Xiaobo dies: official – 14 July, 2017

CNN – Nobel laureate Liu Xiaobo, the unwitting martyr – 14 July, 2017

Reuters – Chinese Nobel laureate’s ashes scattered at sea – 14 July, 2017

Belgian ban on religious head coverings acceptable, European court rules

By: Sara Adams
Impunity Watch News Reporter, Europe

A woman wears a niqab in Brussels. Image courtesy of AP.

STRASBOURG, France – The European Court of Human Rights upheld a Belgian ban on wearing full-face religious veils in public.

The ban was implemented by the Belgian government in 2011. The full-face coverings, including the niqab and burqa, is religious headwear worn by women of the Islamic faith. Burqas cover the entire face, including the eyes, while niqabs leave the eyes open.

Punishment for wearing these veils in public are as minor as fines, to more serious jail time.

The ECHR held that the ban was not a violation of religious freedom.

It was said that the Belgian government has the right to impose restrictions that “protect the rights and freedoms of others.” They also stated that the ban was “necessary in a democratic society.”

The debate about Muslim face coverings has raged for several years. Multiple European countries have imposed or proposed a similar ban to the one in Belgium. The most recent was in Norway, where discussions began about banning full-face veils in June.

Proponents of the ban argue that it is actually conducive to women’s freedom, rather than restrictive of it. One Belgian policymaker, Daniel Bacquelaine, said that “[forbidding] the veil as a covering is to give them more freedom.” He added, “if we want to live together in a free society, we need to recognize each other.”

It is true that many women in predominantly Muslim countries do not have a choice in wearing head coverings. Saudi Arabia and Iran both require by law that women have their heads covered in public.

Yet many Muslim women in western countries have expressed that they choose to wear head coverings on their own free will. Two of these include the women who brought the Belgian ban to the ECHR.

One of the women did not leave the house for fear of breaking the law for wearing her head covering. The other took off her veil in public.

More European countries have begun support for partial or complete bans on full-face veils.

The decision by the Court can be appealed. There will be three months to bring an appeal to the higher level, where five judges will determine whether there should be a second look at the decision.

For more information, please see:

NPR – European Court of Human Rights Upholds Belgium’s Ban on Full-Face Veils – 11 July 2017

BBC News – Belgian face veil ban backed in European court ruling – 11 July 2017

Independent – European Court of Human Rights upholds Belgium’s bans on burqas and full-face Islamic veils – 11 July 2017

The Telegraph – Belgian ban on Muslim full-face veil is legal, European Court of Human Rights rules – 11 July 2017

JURIST – Europe rights court upholds Belgium burqa ban – 11 July 2017

Reuters – Norway proposes ban on full-face veils in schools – 12 June 2017

The Washington Post – MAP: Where Islamic veils are banned, and where they are mandatory – July 1, 2014