African Court Rules on Tanzanian Rights Violations

By: Hannah Gabbard
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

DODOMA, Tanzania – On Friday, September 18th the African Court on Human and Peoples Rights (AfCHPR) issued decisions of their 50th Ordinary Session. All applications were filed against the Attorney General of the United Republic of Tanzania.

African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights. Photo Courtesy of AfCHPR.

It was originally reported that judgements would be issued on three pending cases, however only two decisions were finalized and published by the court. The court published judgements on the matters of Anaclet Paulo and Diocles William.

Anaclet Paulo filed an application to AfCHPR alleging that the United Republic of Tanzania had violated the African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights by denying his right to be heard, right to legal aid, and right to bail. Paulo was originally sentenced to 30 years in prison for armed robbery and violence in 1997.

AfCHPR unanimously held that the United Republic of Tanzania did not violate Paulo’s rights to freedom, right to be heard, and the Charter was not violated by the original conviction. The court ruled that Paulo’s right to defense was violated and ordered the Tanzania to pay Paulo 300,000 Tanzanian shillings (approximately $130 USD) as fair compensation for unfair access to legal representation.

In the second judgement, the court ruled on the matter of Diocles William. William was convicted in 2010 to 30 years in prison and 12 strokes of the cane for raping a minor. William alleged that the United Republic of Tanzania violated his right to be heard, right to legal aid, and right to equal representation.

AfCHPR ruled unanimously that the violation of equal rights wasn’t established by the William but Tanzania did violate the Charter by not providing legal aid, failing to hear defense witnesses, and convicting William with both insufficient evidence and contradicting witness statements. The court ordered the United Republic of Tanzania to reopen the case and guarantee a fair trial.

For further information, please see:

Habarileo – African Court to Adjudicate on Cases Against Republic – 20 September 2018

African Union – The Matter of Anaclet Paulo v. United Republic of Tanzania – 21 September 2018African

Union – The Matter of Diocles William v. United Republic of Tanzania – 21 September 2018

Concerns of Injustice in Boko Haram Trials

By: Hannah Gabbard
Impunity Watch Reporter, Africa

ABUJA, Nigeria – In a statement published by Human Rights Watch on September 17, 2018 the Nigerian government was called upon to prosecute Boko Haram suspects by standards of international law and to prioritize the prosecution of those responsible for the organization’s atrocities.

Handcuffed Boko Haram suspects. Photo Courtesy of Getty Images.

In October 2017, Nigerian authorities began conducting mass trials for suspects of Boko Haram, the terrorist organization responsible for over 27,000 deaths in northeastern Nigeria since 2009. There have been reports that these trials have focused on prosecuting suspects who provided support to Boko Haram and have denied suspects a fair trial and due process. Additionally, many of those tried have been detained since the Boko Haram insurgency began in 2009.

Concerns of fair trial and due process stem from the short length of the proceedings, ambiguous charges, and lack of official translators and appropriate legal defense. Since October 2017, nearly 1,700 suspects have been prosecuted in makeshift courts outside of Abuja where the detention centers were located.

The Human Rights Watch report highlights the importance of prosecuting Boko Haram suspects under international law standards and particularly cites the risk of increasing recruitment by the terrorist organization if due process procedures are not followed. Other groups monitoring the trials, including the National Human Rights Commission, share similar concerns to Human Rights Watch in the errors in trial procedure and treatment of Boko Haram suspects.

Human Rights Watch draws attention to lack of implementation of the recent policy adopted by the Nigerian government in 2017 which aims to prevent and counter Boko Haram extremism. Though this report notes that there is increased international support for Nigeria’s counterterrorism policies, they emphasize the importance of conducting these trials in a manner that limits extremism and prioritizes correct trial procedure and due process.  

For further information, please see:

Times Live – Due process concerns over Boko Haram trials in Nigeria – 17 September 2018
Financial Express – Due process concerns over Boko Haram trials, says rights group – 17 September 2018
Human Rights Watch – Nigeria: Flawed Trials of Boko Haram Suspects – 17 September 2018

Trial Delayed for Murder of Honduran Activist, Berta Cáceres

By: Zoe Whitehouse
Impunity Watch Reporter, South America

TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras – The Honduran Supreme Court has delayed the criminal trial regarding the murder of Berta Cáceres. Cáceres, an internationally known environmental and indigenous activist, was shot to death inside her home in La Esperanza in Western Honduras on March 2, 2016.

Amid claims of impartiality, international lawyers representing the family of Berta Cáceres have filed to suspend the trial. Attorneys allege the presiding judges have abused their authority. During pre-trial, judicial decisions and omissions had violated the due process rights of the victim’s family. In one instance, the Court had failed to sanction the public prosecutor for ignoring a court order to provide evidence to the family’s legal team. The attorneys have argued this demonstrated a “disregard for the rule of law,” and have requested the recusal and replacement of three presiding judges.

Lawyers for the Cáceres family have also filed five injunctions with the appellate court. One injunction challenges the court’s decision to reject witnesses, experts, and documentary evidence. The legal team believes this evidence would demonstrate a greater criminal conspiracy.

Cáceres was a vocal critic regarding hydroelectric-dam construction in Western Honduras. In 2015, a year before her death, she was awarded the Goldman Environmental Prize for her efforts to stop the Agua Zarca project along the Gualcarque River. Cáceres had filed complaints, organized local assemblies, and led protests regarding the negative impact of the proposed dam for indigenous communities. Her campaign reached greater international recognition when she brought the case to the Inter-American Human Rights Commission.

Farmers carry photo of Cáceres. Image courtesy of Jorge Cabrera. 

While Cáceres garnered international acclaim for her efforts, military officials and high-profile business associates continued to issue death threats against her. Cáceres had reported receiving 33 death threats for her campaign against the Agua Zarca dam. In early 2017, Roberto David Castillo Mejia, the former CEO of Desarrollos Energéticos S.A., the Honduran company responsible for the Agua Zarca dam project, was arrested and charged. Prosecutors alleged Castillo Mejia acted as the “intellectual author” of Cáceres’s murder. He is not currently part of the suspended trial.

For further information, please see: 

Al Jazeera – Trial for murder of Honduran activist Berta Caceres delayed – 17 September 2018

The Guardian – Berta Cáceres murder trial delayed after judges accused of abusing authority – 17 September 2018

The New York Times – Trial for Murder of Honduran Environmental Activist Delayed – 17 September 2018

After Landmark Ruling, Gay Sex Legalized in India

By: Jenilyn Brhel
Impunity Watch News Reporter, Asia

NEW DELHI, India – A landmark ruling legalizing gay sex was passed down from India’s highest court on September 6th, putting an end to more than a century’s worth of anti-LGBT legislation.

Celebrations erupted after the landmark decision. Photo courtesy of Piyal Adhikary.

Introduced in the 1860s, the colonial-era law in question, Section 377 of the Indian penal code, criminalized gay sex. Violators could face a maximum sentence of life in prison.

Prior to Section 377’s repeal, Indian courts had been reluctant to rule on the issue. In 2009, the Delhi High Court found the law unconstitutional, but the Supreme Court overturned its decision four years later.

Lawyers questioned the constitutional basis of the 2013 ruling. In that ruling, the court stated that because it believed only “a miniscule fraction of the country’s population constitute lesbians, gays, bisexuals or transgenders” that the law was “legally unsustainable” to repeal.

Lawyers in the latest hearings questioned that stance and its constitutional basis.

Colin Gonsalves, one of the attorneys representing the dozen-plus litigants in the case, called the decision “a wrong judgment. It was not legal and it was based wrongly on the tenets of the constitution.”

Celebrations spread throughout the country with news of the repeal. Crowds outside the supreme court erupted in cheers and tears of relief as the decision was announced. Marches and parades took place across the country.

“I was turning into a cynical human being with very little belief in the system, but honestly that has really shown once again that we are a functional democracy where freedom of choice, speech and rights still exist” said Ritu Dalmia, one of the campaigners.

Another campaigner, Bismaya Kumar Raula, said, “I can’t even explain how I am feeling right now. The long battle has been won. Finally we have been recognized by this country.”

Although some religious and conservative groups oppose the ruling, public opinion throughout India is largely supportive of the repeal.

Chief Justice Dipak Misra announced the decision of the court, saying “social exclusion, identity seclusion and isolation from the social mainstream are still the stark realities faced by individuals today, and it is only when each and every individual is liberated from the shackles of such bondage…that we can call ourselves a truly free society.”

For more information, please see:

BBC News – India court legalises gay sex in landmark ruling – 6 September 2018

CNN – India’s top court decriminalizes gay sex in landmark ruling – 6 September 2018

The Guardian – Campaigners celebrate as India decriminalises homosexuality – 6 September 2018

Los Angeles Times – India’s gay sex ban was a relic of the British Empire — but it’s still in place in dozens of ex-colonies – 7 September 2018

 

 

Azeri Woman First Target for UK Unexplained Wealth Order

By: Katherine Hewitt
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

LONDON, United Kingdom – A woman charged under the UK Unexplained Wealth Order lost a court case to remain anonymous.  She and her husband are the first two being charged under the new Order.  The Order allows authorities to seize £50,00 from people suspected of corruption.

Over the past 10 years, the woman in question, Zamira Hajiyeva, spent more than £16m in Harrods, a luxury department store in London.   Examples of her spending provided in court were £15,000 at a luxury jewelry, perfume, and watch store in one day.  The next day she spent £1800 on wine.  Other purchases included £100,000 on Cartier jewelry and £20,000 on luxury men’s goods.

To pay for such items she used 3 store loyalty cards and more than 30 credit cards issued by her husband’s bank.

On top of this spending, in 2013 a company registered to her name spent more than £10m to buy a golf course and estate near Ascot. In 2009, a company purchased a large home near Harrods for £11.5m.  The home owners are Mrs. Hajiyeva and her husband.

A company owned by Mrs Hijiyeva purchased a £11.5m home in London. Photo Courtesy of Simon Dawson.

A court hearing in July of 2018 determined that Zamira Hajiyeva possessed an extensive disposable income. Under the Unexplained Wealth Order, she is required to explain the source of her wealth.  If she doesn’t, she is at risk of losing her £11.5m home.

Mrs. Hajiyeva lives in the UK under a visa policy for wealthy investors.

Her husband was the Chairman of the International Bank of Azerbaijan.  Currently, he is serving 15 years in jail for a 2016 conviction for fraud and embezzlement.  He denies the allegations, stating that he fell out of favor with the Azerbaijan’s corrupt rulers.

Mrs. Hajiyeva declares she is innocent and that her husband was a legitimate banker.  She claims her husband amassed the wealth through independent businesses he owned prior to becoming chairman.

Her lawyers released a statement in relation to her case: “The decisions of the High Court upholding the grant of an Unexplained Wealth Order against Zamira Hajiyeva does not and should not be taken to imply any wrongdoing, whether on her part or that of her husbands.”  They claim the case was a show trial and does not meet the requirements of the Order.  The National Crime Agency notes that as an official Mr. Hajiyeva would not have had the ability to amass such wealth.

Director of the National Crime Agency’s economic crime department noted, “Where we cannot determine a legitimate source for the funds used to purchase assets and prime property it is absolutely right that we ask probing questions to uncover their origin.  Unexplained Wealth Orders have the potential to significantly reduce the appeal of the UK as a destination for illicit income.” Advocates for fighting corruption are glad to see the Order being used to pursue cases of corruption.

For more information please visit:

 The Independent – Woman who spent £16m at Harrods revealed in court case – 10 October 2018

 BBC- Woman who spent £16m in Harrods revealed – 10 October 2018

 AlJazeera – Woman fights UK wealth order after spending $21m at Harrods – 10 October 2018

Reuters – Azeri banker’s high-spending wife targeted by new British anti-graft powers – 10 October 2018