Journal of Global Rights and Organizations, Associate Articles Editor
THE HAGUE, The Netherlands – On March 1, 2024, the Republic of Nicaragua filed an Application commencing proceedings before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the Federal Republic of Germany regarding Germany’s aid and support of Israel.
The International Court of Justice, located at The Hague. | Photo courtesy of the ICJ.
In its Application, Nicaragua alleges that, by providing aid to Israel and defunding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian refugees, “Germany is facilitating the commission of genocide and, in any case has failed in its obligations to do everything possible to prevent the commission of genocide.” Such obligations, Nicaragua argues, stem from being a member to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the Geneva Convention of 1949, and the basic rights afforded by general international and humanitarian law. Nicaragua claims that, by providing, political, financial, and military support to Israel, Germany is allegedly contributing the death, displacement, and starvation of Palestinians.
Though the ICJ has yet to render a determination on whether genocide has occurred, Nicaragua claims that there is, at the very least, a recognizable risk of genocide against the Palestinian population. Nicaragua’s claim against Germany is along a similar vein as South Africa’s case against Israel. Nicaragua, much like South Africa, is pursuing urgent provisional measures to be released by the Court while they await adjudication of the claim’s merits.
The International Court of Justice has yet to set a date for this hearing. However, the ICJ usually sets hearing dates for emergency provisional measures within weeks of filing the case, and so, the Court is expected to set a date in the near future.
SAN JOSE, Costa Rica – The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) recently issued Resolution 7/2024, granting precautionary measures for three individuals held in Nicaragua. The resolution directly benefits Eddy Antonio Castillo Muñoz, Nelly Griselda López García, and Juan Carlos Baquedano, who are allegedly being attacked, denied access to necessary medical care, and detained in multiple prisons in substandard conditions, according to the Commission press release.
Crosses are seen on top of a Nicaraguan flag during a demonstration to commemorate Nicaragua’s National Day of Peace. | Photo courtesy of Jose Cordero / AFP via Getty Images)AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES.
The IACHR serves as an advisory body on human rights issues and is made up of seven independent members elected by the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (OAS). The precautionary measures requested by the Commission include providing access to medical care and medication, facilitating communication with family members and legal representatives, ensuring the safety and well-being of the beneficiaries, and considering alternative measures to detention. These measures are intended to mitigate the risks faced by individuals and prevent further violations of their rights.
Precautionary measures are granted to highlight the urgency of addressing the reported human rights violations in Nicaragua, without prejudging any potential petitions that may be filed to the inter-American system. As required by the OAS Charter and the American Convention on Human Rights, it is part of a broader effort to promote the observance and defense of human rights in the area.
Due to ongoing concerns about political repression and human rights abuses in Nicaragua, the situation has drawn international attention. The involvement of the IACHR highlights the significance of independent oversight mechanisms in ensuring that governments are held accountable for their actions and safeguarding the rights of individuals, particularly those who are vulnerable to discrimination or persecution.
In addition to the IACHR’s resolution, several organizations such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights have reported on the situation and challenges faced by the people of Nicaragua.
Human Rights Watch has reported cases of judicial harassment and political persecution targeting opposition leaders and government opponents. Similarly, Amnesty International’s annual reports on Nicaragua highlighted attacks on human rights defenders, censorship and arbitrary arrests and The United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has demanded independent investigations into allegations of abuses of human rights in Nicaragua.
STRASBOURG, France – On January 18, 2024, the European Parliament adopted three resolutions regarding recent human rights violations in China, Sudan, and Tajikistan. Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) condemned the repression of religious freedom in China, the ongoing conflict and resulting food insecurity in Sudan, and Tajikistan’s crackdown on independent media.
Members of the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France. | Photo courtesy of the European Federation of Journalists.
According to the European Parliament’s resolution, China has engaged in systematic persecution of the religious group Falun Gong since 1999. This includes frequent unwarranted detainment and reported exposure to psychological abuse, physical torture, and organ harvesting.
On May 12, 2023, Falun Gong practitioners Ding Yuande and his wife Ma Ruimei were arrested without a warrant. While Ma Ruimei was released on bail, Ding Yuande remained incarcerated for eight months before being sentenced to three years in prison. The European Parliament’s resolution called for the unconditional release of Ding Yuande and all wrongfully detained Falun Gong and the end of persecution of all religious minorities in China, including the Falun Gong, Uyghurs, and Tibetans. It implored EU member states to pursue punitive measures for entities contributing to religious repression in China. This included banishment from EU territories, imposing sanctions, refusing visas, freezing assets, and suspending extradition treaties.
Additionally, MEPs called for an immediate ceasefire between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces in Sudan, as their conflict continues to be the primary driver of food insecurity and other human rights abuses in the country. In Sudan, over 5 million people suffer from emergency levels of hunger and 7.5 million are internally displaced. Recent increases in attacks on Sudan’s Masalit community have raised the risk of ethnic cleansing.
In its resolution, MEPs strongly deplored the continuous attacks on humanitarian workers and civilians and the use of sexual violence in the conflict. MEPs asked international actors contributing to the war to refrain from interference. The resolution then called on the UN to expand their arms embargo on Dafar to the rest of Iran due to the use of alleged Iranian-supplied weapons in the war.
Finally, the European Parliament adopted a resolution addressing the declining role of independent media in Tajikistan, stating that “Tajikistan’s media are in their worst state since independence in 1991.” In the last two years, Tajikistan’s authorities have incarcerated several journalists for reporting on human rights abuses in the country. The two primary independent media outlets regularly face threats by government authorities, while other independent media sources are consistently shut down.
The European Parliament condemned Tajikistan’s regulation of its media, including the closure of websites, persecution of journalists, and politically motivated sentencing of government critics, human rights activists, and independent lawyers. The resolution called for the fair treatment of the prisoners, investigations into the conditions of their detainment, release for those wrongfully detained, a safe environment for independent media outlets, increased international support for independent media sources in Tajikistan, and increased monitoring of media repression in Tajikistan by international organizations.
European Union citizens directly elect MEPs, so the Parliament represents the general opinion of EU Member States. All three resolutions passed by a majority vote, underscoring the EU’s continued commitment to protecting global human rights. The Parliament instructed its President to forward the resolutions to the other EU institutions.
STRASBOURG, France – On February 22, 2024, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) ruled that Hungary violated Article 5 § 1 of the European Convention of Human Rights, the right to liberty and security, by detaining two child migrants applying for asylum.
A migrant child is escorted by a police officer in Hungary. | Photo courtesy of Deutsche Welle.
The case, M.S. and S.B v. Hungary, involves two of 13 migrant children who were detained in Hungary in 2016. The minors were discovered during an inspection by the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, a local NGO human rights organization and a member of the International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights and the European Council on Refugees and Exiles. The organization’s concern was that the children were in prison-like facilities rather than the Children’s Home for Unaccompanied Minors in the town of Fót.
Both children were 16 years old. The first child, identified as M.H., was apprehended in May 2016 while illegally crossing the border on a route from Afghanistan into Hungary. He said he wanted to seek asylum and was fleeing from the Taliban. In the first interview, he lied about his age, fearing he would be separated from the community he was travelling with. Three days later, he produced his Afghan identity papers showing he was a minor. Authorities did not conduct translation or a physical age assessment. After reporting his age as 20 during a government interview, authorities told M.H. that he would have to cover costs of a physical exam to determine his age. He was detained for three months.
The second minor involved in the case, S.B., was also detained after illegally crossing the border. He was accompanied by a cousin, also a minor, and fled after his father and two cousins were killed by terrorist groups, who then threatened other family members. Authorities deemed him an adult and, like M.H., said he would be responsible for the costs for a physical assessment to determine his age. A few weeks into his detention he said he would pay the cost but was told the exam was not possible. He was detained for two months.
In both cases, the Kiskunhalas District Court in Hungary supported the continued detentions under the Asylum Act, specifically II (1)(d), which states that “the person seeking recognition in the absence of authentic documents suitable for identification shall be required to make best efforts for the clarification of his/her identity, thus, in particular, to contact his/her family members, relatives, legal representative, and – in the event of non-state or non-state linked actors of persecution – with the authorities of his/her country of origin.”
In ruling against Hungary, the ECHR said, “the court finds it particularly concerning that the domestic authorities, instead of giving the benefit of the doubt to the applicants and considering their best interests … presumed them to be adults simply on the account of their having changed their statements as to their age. They moreover placed the burden of rebutting that presumption on them … in disregard of the fact that for detained asylum-seekers, let alone children, obtaining the necessary evidence to prove their age could be a challenging and potentially even impossible task…”
In late January, the ECHR heard a similar case involving a youth migrant from Iraq, who Hungarian authorities forcibly deported back into Serbia. In that case, the court said, “the court cannot ignore that at the time of his removal, the applicant was an unaccompanied minor, and therefore in a situation of extreme vulnerability,” it added, noting that the age of asylum seekers “should take precedence” over the child’s status as an illegal migrant.
While refugee advocates and NGOs applaud the court’s decisions, policy in Hungary regarding unaccompanied minors continues to be scrutinized. This includes recent passage of the Act on the Entry and Stay of Third Country Nationals, a law that classifies migrants over 16 as adults and declares detention lawful.
GHANA – On February 27, 2024, the Parliament of Ghana passed legislation that severely restricts and penalizes the LGBTQ+ community. Ghana is the latest to impose hefty penalties against those who identify as LGBTQ, as part of a growing opposition to LGBTQ rights in conservative West Africa.
A same sex-couple sitting together during a session on LGBTQ rights in Accra, Ghana. | Photo Courtesy of Francis Kokoroko/Reuters.
The bill seeks to punish those who engage in LGBTQ sexual acts as well as those who advocate for their rights with prison sentences ranging from six months to three years. It also imposes a three-to-five-year sentence for wilful promotion, sponsorship, or support of LGBTQ activities. This new legislation will take effect if signed into law by President Nana Akufo-Addo.
Human rights activists across the world have expressed discontent, calling the bill a set-back for human rights while urging President Akufo-Addo to reject it. However, the bill has received backing from Muslim, Christian, and Ghanaian traditional leaders who form a large part of the Ghanaian Parliament.
In 2022, the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR), Africa’s human rights watchdog, rejected applications by three Human Rights Organizations (HROs) for Observer Status on the ground that “sexual orientation is not an expressly recognized right or freedom under the African Charter” and is ‘contrary to the virtues of African values.” The groups, two of which were founded in Africa were Alternative Côte d’Ivoire, Human Rights First Rwanda, andSynergia–Initiatives for Human Rights. In their statement, the organizations expressed their dismay over the decision of the African Commission which, they said, departs from measures to protect the LGBTQ people and violates the African Charter’s principles of non-discrimination and tolerance.
Article 2 of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights provides that:
“Every individual shall be entitled to the enjoyment of the rights and freedoms recognized and guaranteed in the present Charter without distinction of any kind such as race, ethnic group, color, sex, language, religion, political or any other opinion, national and social origin, fortune, birth or other status.”
The HROs argue that “other status,” as used in the Charter, is not limited to the grounds indicated in the Charter but extends to others, including sexual orientation.
According to Amnesty International, 31 African countries currently criminalize same-sex consensual sexual activities. As of March 4, the bill had not yet reached President Akufo-Addo.
