Lebanon Registers its First Civil Marriage

By Ali Al-Bassam
Impunity Watch Reporter, Middle East

BEIRUT, Lebanon — On April 25, history was made in Lebanon, when the Lebanese Ministry Interior registered the marriage contract of Kholud Succariyeh, a Sunni Muslim, and Nidal Darwishon, a Shia Muslim.  The registration of their contract was regarded as the first civil marriage contract “made in Lebanon.”

The registration of Sukkarieh and Darwish’s wedding is seen as an accomplishment by human rights groups. (Photo Courtesy of Al-Monitor)

Prior to then, Lebanon, a country with more than eighteen different religious sects, had no institutional civil marriage.  The contract was finally registered after a year-long campaign took place in the country to grant such unions.  Institutional civil marriages were banned in Lebanon since 1936, when a French mandate granted religious communities to govern personal matters, also governing marriage.

Just over four months ago,  Succariyeh and Darwishon initiated their campaign to promote institutionalized civil unions to the Lebanese government.  Religious clerics attempted to prevent their marriage, who, on January 28, 2013, issued a fatwa saying: “Every Muslim official, whether a deputy or a minister, who supports the legalization of civil marriage, even if it is optional, is an apostate and outside the Islamic religion.  [Such officials] would not be washed, not be wrapped in a [burial] shroud, would not have prayers for their soul in line with Islamic rules, and would not be buried in a Muslim cemetery.”

After Succariyeh and Darwishon’s union was registered, religious activists quickly denounced the move.  Sheikh Sharif Tutayo of the Islamic Labor Front , considered the Interior Ministry’s approval a “blatant defiance of Islamic and Christian religious references.”

Regardless of the outspoken criticism by clerics and politicians, the couple garnered support for their cause by many public figures, including President Michel Sleiman.  Sleiman even took to Twitter to support the two on their marriage.

Lebanese law never prevented Succariyeh and Darwishon from the registration of their marriage, but since religious communities are in charge of governing the marriage, a legal problem may arise in terms what party or sect will govern the couple’s affairs with regards to inheritance, adoption, and divorce.  Lebanese spouses that come from different sects typically chose to marry outside of Lebanon, and later register their marriage with Lebanese authorities.  Therefore, when conflicts arose, Lebanese courts would settle disputes by applying the personal status law of the country they were married in.

Darwish said of the registration, that it was “the first victory for the civil state in Lebanon, the state we all dream of.”  Sukkarieh added that, “this is Lebanon’s first historic step towards institutionalizing civil marriage.”  Sukkarieh and Darwish’s marriage registration might seem like a small step for a secular Lebanon, but advocates believe it had a major impact.

For further information, please see:

Al Jazeera — Lebanon Civil Marriage Raises Hope for Change — 2 May 2013

The Voice of Russia — Lebanon’s First Civil Marriage Registered — 30 April 2013

The Daily Star — Qortbawi Lauds Charbel for Civil Marriage Move — 27 April 2013

Al Arabiya — Lebanon’s First Civil Marriage Registered, Agency says  — 25 April 2013

Al-Monitor — Lebanon’s First Civil Marriage A Sign of Change — 25 April 2013

Susan Eisenhower’s Speech at the U.S. Holocaust Museum

The Holocaust Museum at 20: My Tribute to Europe’s Liberators and Survivors

Would you or I have shown the same courage, humanity and enduring spirit? That was the question I asked on Sunday, April 28 at the Holocaust Museum’s 20th Anniversary dinner. I was honored to receive the Elie Wiesel Award on behalf of the World War II veterans who defeated Nazi power and liberated the concentration camps. Many of them were in the audience, as well as hundreds of concentration camp survivors.

This magnificent award gave me the opportunity to reflect on our veterans’ bravery, but also on the many Jews who saved the lives of other Jews during the Holocaust.

***

Chairman Bernstein, Vice Chairman Bolton, Elie Wiesel, distinguished veterans and survivors – I am honored to accept this award on behalf of the World War II veterans. It is especially meaningful that it bears the name of Elie Wiesel.

I am also pleased to be here this evening to help celebrate the Holocaust Museum’s 20th anniversary. A remarkable set of accomplishments have been achieved in the last two decades. And what an appropriate place to think about what happened nearly seventy years ago and to reflect on what it means today.

After the terrorist attacks in Boston much has been written on why, in the face of the explosion, some people rushed in to help while others ran away. It has been rightly pointed out that no one can really know what he or she would do until faced with a crisis. Would one rise to the occasion or back away?

In April of 1945, it was a crucial period at Allied headquarters as General Eisenhower, Supreme Commander of Allied Forces Europe, was engrossed in decisions about Berlin and other crucial matters. On the morning of the 12, Eisenhower visited the salt mines in Germany where the Nazis had hidden stolen art work. Later that evening he received the news that Franklin Roosevelt had died. As Eisenhower wrote in Crusade in Europe:

“The same day, I saw my first horror camp [Ohrdruf]. It was near the town of Gotha. I have never felt able to describe my emotional reactions when I first came face to face with indisputable evidence of Nazi brutality… Up to that time I had known about it only generally or through secondary sources. I am certain, however that I have never at any other time experienced an equal sense of shock. I visited every nook and cranny of the camp because I felt it my duty to be in a position from then on to testify first-hand about these things in case there ever grew up at home the belief or assumption that the stories of Nazi brutality were just propaganda. Some members of the visiting party were unable to go through with the ordeal. I not only did so but as soon as I returned to Patton’s headquarters that evening I sent communications to both Washington and London, urging the two governments to send instantly to Germany a random group of newspaper editors and representative groups from the national legislatures. I felt that the evidence should be immediately placed before the American and British publics in a fashion that would leave no room for cynical doubt.”

Dwight Eisenhower showed extraordinary presence of mind. Instinctively he could imagine, even in the pressure of the moment, that someday — at some distant time— there would be people who might try to deny such heinous crimes. What would you or I have done at such a moment? Most people at the time thought his insistence on documenting the camps was unnecessary. Yet Eisenhower’s immediate response has had a lasting, historic impact. Imagine today trying to counter the Holocaust deniers, including Iranian President Ahmadinejad, without having the historic evidence Eisenhower demanded.

My father, John S.D. Eisenhower, was serving in the European Theater at that time. He saw his father the day after his visit to Ohrdruf. Based on Ike’s account, a few days later John visited Buchenwald to bear witness as well.

A month later, on June 18, General Eisenhower held a press conference at the Pentagon. The press corps asked him about his determination to shine a light on the atrocities.

“When I found the first camps like that I think I never was so angry in my life,” Eisenhower replied. “The bestiality displayed there… and the horrors I really would not even want to describe… I think people should know about such things…I think the people at home ought to know what they are fighting for…”

From North Africa and Italy, to the beaches of Normandy through France and into Germany, those armed forces fought hard, demonstrating legandary courage and tenacity. At the same press conference, Eisenhower spoke in emotional terms about the sacrifice of the American fighting men. He told of the more than 10,000 of them who had volunteered to fill out important divisions before the decisive Battle of the Bulge. 2,600 of them were American blacks.

“These are America’s fighting men!!” They did their duty, the general said, with “cheerfulness under conditions of unbelievable hardship.”

What would you and I have done in their places? And would we have responded, when the call for volunteers had gone out? We honor our veterans, and salute those who are here with us tonight.

There are many other people from all walks of life who exhibited uncommon bravery during the war. But there is a specific group that has not been given the attention it so richly deserves. They are the Jews in the ghettos and in the camps who risked their lives to save other Jews. I was moved by a recent story in the Washington Post by Menachem Z. Rosensaft. He told his mother’s story – of the tragic loss of her parents, her husband and small son in the Holocaust. Despite this, Hadassah Rosensaft never gave up. While at Bergen-Belsen she and her other campmates found countless ways to save lives—by stealing food, smuggling medicine, and nurturing the orphaned children. She and others like her gave those terrified children not just songs and comfort – but more importantly – hope.

Hadassah Rosensaft and a handful of campmates helped to keep as many as 149 children alive throughout the winter and spring of 1945.

Later, she reflected on the inmates of Bergen-Belsen:

“For the greater part of the liberated Jews of Bergen-Belsen there was no ecstasy, no joy at our liberation. We had lost our families, our homes. We had no place to go, nobody to hug, and nobody who was waiting for us, anywhere. We had been liberated from death and from the fear of death, but we were not free from the fear of life.”

What would you and I have done? With courage and conviction, survivors of the Holocaust rebuilt their lives, and those same people worked hard to help make the United States the free world’s global superpower.

I cannot say it strongly enough: this Museum is more than a place for the remembrance of the victims of the Holocaust and those who liberated them. It is a monument to the indomitable human spirit.

U.S. Demands the Release of a U.S. Citizen Currently Detained in North Korea

By Irving Feng
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

PYONGYANG, North Korea – The U.S. demanded North Korea to release a captive American citizen who was recently sentenced to 15 years of hard labor for the alleged crime of attempting to overthrow the central North Korean government.

Pictured above, a photo of the detained, Kenneth Bae. (Photo Courtesy of Reuters)

Kenneth Bae (44), also known as Pae Jun-Ho, was born in South Korea, studied psychology for two years at the University of Oregon, and is a naturalized citizen of the United States.  Mr. Bae has been detained by the North Korean government since he entered the north as a tourist last year.

He was arrested in November of last year after entering North Korean through the north eastern port city of Rason which is part of a special economic zone near the North Korean-Chinese border.  There is speculation that Mr. Bae was acting as a tour operator when he was taken into custody by authorities.

South Korean activists speculate that Mr. Bae was detained by North Korean authorities because he had been taking photographs of starving children.  Patrick Ventrell, a spokesperson for the U.S. State Department expressed concerns regarding the due process aspects of North Korea’s legal system.

One of the gravest concerns is whether or not North Korea’s legal system is actually providing defendants with a fair trial due to the lack of transparency that surrounds their courts.  Reports state that Mr. Bae had received legal counsel from Sweden since Sweden represented the U.S. in their absence in this ordeal due to a lack of diplomatic ties with North Korea.

Now that Mr. Bae has run the full gauntlet of the DPRK’s legal system, the U.S.is asking that Mr. Bae be granted amnesty for the alleged anti-government crimes that he has committed against the communist state.  The U.S. demands that Mr. Bae be released immediately.

Mr. Bae’s April 30th sentence could not have come at a worse time since the U.S. and North Korea have been deadlocked in a diplomatic quagmire regarding Pyongyang’s third nuclear test.  The U.S. doled out harsher sanctions on Pyongyang after its latest nuclear test in February which followed a December long range rocket test.

Pyongyang responded to the U.S. sanctions by threatening to launch a full scale military attack on U.S. military bases and also cut shaky ties with their democratic, southern brother.  Pundits suggest that North Korea is holding Mr. Bae hostage as leverage in future negotiations.

Though Mr. Bae has been sentenced to 15 years in a hard labor camp, he will most likely be housed in a separate, less harsh facility, designed specifically for foreign detainees.

For further information, please see:

BBC – US urges N Korea to grant amnesty to Kenneth Bae – 2 May 2013

Reuters – U.S. seeks North Korean amnesty for American jailed for 15 years – 2 May 2013

The Telegraph – US demands ‘immediate release’ of American imprisoned in North Korea 2- May 2013

Al Jazeera – North Korea to put US citizen on trial – 27 April 2013

Syrian Network for Human Rights: Death Toll in April 2013

The highest rate of torture murder and children killed this month: 123 citizens were tortured to death, 3313 citizens were killed (an average of 138 people a day, 6 people an hour), 377 children killed (an average of 13 children a day), and 176 tortured to death (an average of 6 people a day).
The Syrian government’s Armed Forces through the daily shelling, raids, massacres and torturing of detainees to death, in addition to causalities of armed rebels through clashes killed 3313 citizens, included 176 people who were tortured to death. Among the 3313 citizens: 2330 civilians, 983 Armed rebels. And Among the 2330 civilians SNHR documented:
1-     337 child victims with an average of 13 children a day, and the proportion of children killed is 16%, a very high rate and strict evidence that the Syrian Government’s Armed Forces target civilians;
2-      226 female victims, where the proportion of the women victims is 9%, another high rate and strict evidence that the Syrian Government’s Armed Forces targeting the civilians;
3-     176 tortured to death, an average of 6 people a day tortured to death in official or unofficial detention centers.
SNHR would like to indicate that this what we could document by our deployed members in all of the Syrian provinces classified by names date and place, photo or video .
We couldn’t document many cases of massacres and killing for many reasons, including procedures repeatedly and systematically made by Syrian Government’s Armed Forces, who disconnect our communications and blockade areas for many days.  This makes the aforementioned statistics higher than stated, not to mention, the Syrian government has prevented human rights organizations from performing their duties on its territory.
The total numbers of victims dispersed all across  provinces of Syria as follows:
Damascus and countryside: 1141
Aleppo: 633
Homs: 427
Daraa: 316
Idlib: 269
Hama: 225
Deir Alzour: 159
Hasaka: 56
Raqqa: 41
Qunaitra: 31
Lattakia: 10
Tartous: 3
Swidaa: 2
Legal conclusions
1-     SNHR is certain that Syrian Government’s Armed Groups and Shabiha violated Previsions of Human Rights International Law which protects the right of life, in addition to dozens of cases considered to be war crimes (murder cases).
Undoubted Evidence of hundreds of eyewitness stories, that more than 90% of expanded and individual attacks directed against civilians, all contrary to the Syrian Government’s claims that they are fighting Al-Qaeda and other terrorists cells.
2-     SNHR also indicates the documented events to be crimes against humanity, where the condition of widespread and systematic direct attacks against civilian population groups in most cases of murder were achieved.
Condemnation and Responsibilities:
Responsibility of states for internationally wrongful acts, similarly Customary IHL, states that the state is responsible for all acts committed by a members of its military and security forces. Thus, states are responsible of wrongful acts committed by its military and security forces, including crimes against humanity.
SNHR holds the Syrian President and Commander in Chief of the Syrian army, Bashar al-Assad, responsible for all acts of homicide, torture, and massacres perpetrated in Syria, as he holds the primary responsibility for giving the orders for these acts. SNHR considers all Syrian regime members and heads of the security and military bodies directly complied in those acts. By the same token, SNHR considers the Iranian government and Hezbullah as direct partners in the acts of homicide, and are legally and judicially liable,  along with anyone who funds and supports the Syrian regime which systematically commit massacres on a daily basis. SNHR holds all aforementioned parties responsible for all consequences and potential reactions from the Syrian people in general, and the families of the victims in particular.
Recommendations:
Human rights council
 
1-    Request the security council and relevant organizations to take upon their responsibility towards what’s happening to the Syrian children, who are consistently victimized by the Syrian government’s acts of  nonstop killing even;
2-    Exert pressure on the Syrian government to stop random and deliberate shelling on civilians;
3-    Hold the allies and supporters of the Syrian government: Russia, Iran, China, for their moral and physical responsibility for the killings in Syria;
4-    Heed serious attention to the disastrous situation and give it high priority, and try to take care of victims’ children and families.
Security Council :
1-    Refer all the criminals and others involved to the ICC;
2-    Warn the Syrian Government of the repercussions of using brutal methods and systematic killing and send clear messages to show that they will not be tolerated.
Arab League  :
1-    Demand the Human Rights Council and United Nations to give this serious issue the right attention and to follow up;
2-    Apply political and diplomatic pressure on the Syrian Government Government’s Armed Forces and it’s central allies – Russia, Iran, and China – to prevent them from continuously providing cover and international and political protection for all the crimes committed against the Syrian people, and hold them morally and physically responsible for all the excess violence brought about by the Syrian Government’s Armed Forces.

A Guantanamo Detainee’s Perspective

From the Americas Section of the International Committee of the Red Cross:

Sami El-haj was working as a cameraman with Al Jazeera when he was captured and consequently detained at Guantanamo. He spent six years at the facility and is now the Manager the of Public Liberties and Human Rights Department at Al-Jazeera Network. 

This article by Mr. El-haj was originally published by theInternational Review of the Red Cross earlier this Spring.

My story of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is not exceptional. It more or less reflects the situation of all those who have languished or are languishing in the depths of Guantanamo or any dark prisons of injustice. However, it is my hope that, by telling this story and by clarifying certain notions and presenting some proposals, I may help to improve the ICRC’s humanitarian services and its relations with detainees.

Photo Courtesy of ICRC.

The history of this time-honoured organization and its role in alleviating the suffering of victims of war, torture, and imprisonment are too well known to require an introduction. As for me, I regard the ICRC as having been born on the day that I came to know it and it came to know me, when I came to accept it – after rejecting it for a long time, because I was unaware of what it did and how, when it presented to me its system of values, which I had previously failed to understand.

Thus, my story began in January 2002, with a blank sheet of paper handed to me by the American investigator at Bagram who requested that I write a letter to my family and specify their address. I distrusted this request because I thought it was part of the investigation. My fellow prisoners and I felt the same distrust for the second time that year during our encounter with the ICRC in Kandahar prison when its delegates asked us to give them an account of how we had been detained and transferred there. The first instance of positive appreciation came shortly before the Eid al-Adha (Feast of the Sacrifice) when the ICRC presented us with copies of the Holy Qur’an that it had brought to Kandahar prison. It also brought us dishes of mutton from ritually sacrificed sheep, which had a highly positive effect on us. Someone had remembered us during the Eid and compensated us to a certain extent for our privation on that great occasion.

I received the first letter from my family, through the Qatar Red Crescent, in September 2002. It enclosed a photograph of my baby son Muhammad, whom I had left while he was taking his first faltering steps. The feeling was indescribable: a strange mixture of solace and sadness; tears were my first reaction. All my fellow prisoners in the neighbouring cells also broke into tears because they thought that something bad had happened to my family. This continued for more than an hour during which time I was unable to explain the situation or even to read the letter. The mere fact that I had received it, together with that photograph, had a tremendous impact, and not only on me!

Subsequently, there was a regular exchange of letters with my family through the ICRC, and my trust in it, and in its role, increased with the arrival of the first Arab delegate, from the Arab Maghreb, in whom we had even greater confidence when we found that he knew the Qur’an by heart. My reason for mentioning this is to draw attention to the prevalent notion among the detainees that an organization displaying a cross as its emblem must be a crusader organization. The fact that the ICRC delegate was a Muslim who had memorized the Qur’an rectified the misconceptions that we were harbouring concerning the organization with which we had not previously had any dealings in our countries.

He was followed by a succession of Arab delegates, which had a very positive effect on our attitude towards the ICRC insofar as their presence made us feel comfortable and confident since they were fellow Arabs with whom we could communicate more easily. At the very least, we could understand their facial expressions in which we perceived genuine feelings and a sympathy that seemed more authentic to us because of cultural similarities.

Later, the ICRC brought specialists and doctors. The availability of medical care gave us a feeling of relief and this feeling became stronger with the arrival of jurists who answered our questions. The provision of a library was even more welcome since the ICRC supplied more than 10,000 books, ranging from the principal Islamic reference works to the best detective stories. We were able to take advantage of this store of knowledge in order to organize a programme between the sunset and evening prayers. During these evening sessions one of us would read a book and summarize it for the others. We read to those who did not know how to read, and some of them began to master the Arabic language. Even more importantly, reading and exercising our imagination was very helpful in enabling us to preserve our sanity. In this connection, it is noteworthy that a consultant from the prison’s administration – this time of Arabic origin – deprived us of these books by warning the prison administration that it was ‘training theologians’. After that we started receiving Tintin and Milou stories and books bearing offensive titles such as A Donkey from the East!

The ICRC improved its interaction with the detainees by developing the means of communication between them and their families to include the Internet and a telephone line.

In the light of my above-mentioned experiences, I can point out some negative aspects that could have been avoided in the ICRC’s contacts with the detainees:

1. The dispatch of non-Arab delegates created a psychological barrier because of cultural and linguistic differences, resulting in a lack of trust in the ICRC on the part of the detainees.

2. Regarding the ICRC’s emblem, it would obviously be unreasonable to ask the organization to change its emblem in order to build bridges of confidence with the recipients of its humanitarian services. However, it would be extremely helpful if the ICRC could pay attention to this point and endeavour to clarify the issue of the emblem by giving a historical explanation in order to dispel people’s misconceptions, and especially those of people from Islamic backgrounds who might be unaware of the true facts.

In accordance with its confidential approach, the ICRC does not make public its observations from inside Guantanamo. At first sight, the services that the ICRC has succeeded in providing for the detainees seem to merit this heavy price. However, as a former detainee, I would venture to suggest that the ICRC’s silence should be limited and not absolute since there are aspects that could and should be criticized frankly and openly in the media. Clear examples of this are the refusal to allow the detainees at Guantanamo to benefit from the privileges provided for in the Geneva Conventions, including the right to study and receive appropriate medical care. It is paradoxical that we sometimes felt that we were the ones who were protecting the ICRC delegates and not vice versa. Their silence rendered them weak in the eyes of our jailers, while we wanted them to be accorded respect as persons of note.

The ICRC should therefore establish a mechanism for fruitful cooperation with the international media in order to expose all violations of the Geneva Conventions that degrade human dignity. Although we certainly applaud the Red Cross’s success in gaining access to Guantanamo, at a time when leading personalities are loudly advocating for democracy and human rights, it is no longer acceptable to remain silent about Guantanamo’s very existence, let alone what is happening inside its walls.