Latest News

Corner House/Global Witness

Published April 30 2012
Summary: Former Governor of Delta State in Nigeria is sentenced to 13 years in jail for theft of £157 million of public funds

On 20th April 2012 at Southwark Crown Court James Ibori, the former governor of Delta State in Nigeria, was sentenced to 13 years in jail for fraud and the theft of an estimated £157 million of public funds.

Mr Ibori’s conviction followed an investigation by the London Metropolitan Police’s Proceeds of Crime Unit, which is funded by the UK Department for International Development (DfID). But it has now emerged that CDC Group, a private sector development fund owned by the Department for International Development, has financed three Nigerian companies that are said to have acted as money-laundering fronts for Ibori. CDC’s investments in the companies were made through Emerging Capital Partners, a US private equity fund.

DfID was alerted in confidence to evidence against the fund by a Nigerian whistleblower, Dotun Oloko. In January, DfID issued an unreserved apology to Mr Oloko after it was forced by a BBC Newsnight investigation to admit that it betrayed Mr Oloko’s name to Emerging Capital Partners, which then placed him and his family under covert surveillance. Mr Oloko was assisted in his case by SRT grantee Corner House and Campagna per La Riforma della Banca Mondiale.

SRT grantee Global Witness has called for an investigation into British banks including HSBC, Barclays and Citibank for their alleged roles in Ibori’s money laundering. Robert Palmer of Global Witness said, “By doing business with Ibori and his associates, these banks facilitated his corrupt behaviour and allowed him to spend diverted state assets on a luxury lifestyle, including a private jet and expensive London houses, while many Nigerians continue to live in poverty.”

UPDATE: On 5th May 2012 Dotun Oloko announced that he has submitted a complaint to the British Parliamentary Ombudsman accusing the Department for International Development and the CDC Group of maladministration.

Press release from Corner House: http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/resource/uk-development-fund-implicated-money-laundering-investigation

Press release from Global Witness: http://www.globalwitness.org/library/sentencing-former-nigerian-politician-highlights-role-british-and-us-banks-money-laundering

Published April 27 2012
Human Rights Watch urges investigation into the beating of a prominent Russian journalist

On 5th April 2012 Elena Milashina, a prominent Russian journalist and human rights defender, was attacked by unknown assailants near her home in Moscow. Milashina, who works for the leading independent newspaper Novaya Gazeta, reported that she was kicked and punched in the head, suffered multiple bruises and lost a tooth (a friend who was with her was also attacked). The police were called straight away but did not arrive for 90 minutes.

Milashina has reported on human rights abuses in the North Caucasus, and conducted an independent investigation into the killing of fellow journalist Natalia Estemirova in July 2009. Her employers Novaya Gazeta say that they ‘do not exclude the possibility’ that she was attacked because of her journalistic activity.

Former SRT grantee Human Rights Watch is calling for a full and impartial investigation into the attack on Milashina. Hugh Williamson of Human Rights Watch said, “When a courageous journalist who works in a hostile environment is attacked, the authorities need to examine whether what may look like common mugging could be linked to her professional activity. In either case, the authorities need to take immediate steps to identify the attackers and hold them to account.”

Milashina’s condition has improved and she is now back at work.

Full statement from Human Rights Watch: http://www.hrw.org/node/106318

American Civil Liberties Union

Published April 03 2012
Summary: US judge allows lawsuit challenging the government’s seizure of computer equipment belonging to freedom of information campaigner

On 28th March 2012 a federal judge denied the US government's motion to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the search and seizure of electronic devices belonging to freedom of information activist David House.

Department of Homeland Security agents stopped House at O'Hare International Airport in Chicago in November 2010 and questioned him about his political activities and beliefs. Officials then confiscated his laptop computer, camera and a USB drive and did not return them for nearly seven weeks.

SRT grantee the American Civil Liberties Union is representing House in a suit charging that the government targeted him based on his association with the Bradley Manning Support Network, an organisation created to raise funds for the legal defense of the soldier accused of leaking material to WikiLeaks. The government had asked the court to dismiss the case, arguing that it has broad powers to search and seize electronic devices at the border without any justification.

While the court held that the government does not need suspicion to search a laptop at the border, it also held that the power to search was not unlimited, and that the fact the initial search occurred at the border did not strip House of his First Amendment rights.

"This ruling affirms that the constitution is still alive at the US border," said Catherine Crump, a staff attorney with the ACLU. "Despite the government's broad assertions that it can take and search any laptop, diary or smartphone without any reasonable suspicion, the court said the government cannot use that power to target political speech."

Full text of the ruling:
www.aclu.org/files/assets/house_v._napolitano_-_ruling_on_motion_to_dismiss.pdf <http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/house_v._napolitano_-_ruling_on_motion_to_dismiss.pdf>

Full press release from the ACLU:
www.aclu.org/national-security/judge-rules-favor-bradley-manning-supporter-allows-lawsuit-challenging-laptop <http://www.aclu.org/national-security/judge-rules-favor-bradley-manning-supporter-allows-lawsuit-challenging-laptop>

Southall Black Sisters

Published March 23 2012
Summary: Southall Black Sisters launches campaign to criminalise inciting suicide

Following concerns about the police’s failure to investigate the cases of women who kill themselves after suffering violence or abuse, SRT grantee Southall Black Sisters has announced the launch of a campaign for a new homicide law covering ‘suicide aggravated by harassment or violence’. There is currently no law against inciting someone to take their own life, and only coroners’ courts can authorise investigation into the circumstances of a suicide.

According to the Home Office around 10 women in the UK kill themselves every week after suffering repeated abuse, and the suicide rate is more than three times higher among young Asian women. SBS decided to launch their campaign after taking on the case of Nosheen Azam, a Pakistani woman who was found in flames in her garden in Sheffield in 2005. Azam had previously claimed that she was being abused by members of her husband’s family, and told her parents that she was frightened for her life. She remains in a coma after suffering 60 percent burns.

Pragna Patel of Southall Black Sisters said, “In our experience, in the face of violence or abuse, many women feel that they have no option but to self-harm or kill themselves. This state of affairs is especially disturbing in the context of a complete absence of any … effective criminal prosecutions of perpetrators of abuse who are demonstrably culpable in causing a woman or vulnerable person to commit suicide."

Statement on campaign launch from Southall Black Sisters’ website: http://www.southallblacksisters.org.uk/nosheen-azam-campaign-launch

Coalition for the International Criminal Court/Women's Initiatives for Gender Justice

Published March 16 2012
Summary: International Criminal Court delivers ruling in its first landmark trial

On 14th March 2012 the International Criminal Court delivered a guilty verdict in the trial of Congolese warlord Thomas Lubanga, who was accused of recruiting children under 15 and using them to participate in hostilities in the Democratic Republic of Congo between 2002 and 2003. This is the first verdict delivered by the Court since it was founded 10 years ago, and is one of only a few international criminal cases in history to charge an individual with acts of enlistment and conscription of child soldiers. 129 victims took part in the case via seven legal representatives. The ICC judges may now order reparations to be paid to victims.

William R Pace, the Convenor of SRT grantee the Coalition for the International Criminal Court, said, “Depending on whether an appeal is made and on its outcome, today’s decision should be remembered as a critical turning point in the fight against impunity for the most serious crimes known to humankind.”

SRT grantee Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice (WIGJ) worked on the Lubanga case for six years, and in 2006 submitted a dossier to the Office of the Prosecutor, including interviews with 31 survivors of gender-based crimes allegedly committed by Lubanga's UPC militia group. Brigid Inder of WIGJ said, “The conviction today is very important in demonstrating that no-one is beyond the reach of the law and that militia leaders operating in remote areas can be held accountable.”

Press release from the Coalition for the International Criminal Court: http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=8758bcde31bc78a5c32ceee50&id=32280f9292

Press release from WIGJ: http://www.iccwomen.org/documents/Press-Statement-on-Lubanga-conviction.pdf

Campaign Against Arms Trade

Published March 15 2012
Summary: Campaign Against Arms Trade improves public access to information on UK arms exports

On 8th March 2012, SRT grantee Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) announced the launch of a new web application which will give the public improved access to information on UK arms export licences. The information has until now only been available via the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills, and was difficult to access, use and understand. CAAT’s database will allow open access, so that anyone can view and search the data without registering. Users will also be able to search for export licences by region or type of weaponry, identify which licences have been revoked, and download the full data as a spreadsheet.

CAAT regards the web application as a first step in making the data more accessible and transparent, and intends to develop it further in response to feedback. They hope that this will take place alongside an improvement in the government’s arms data provision. Ian Pritchard of CAAT said, “It is hard to think of an area of government activity that demands transparency more than arms export licensing. The new web app provides official information in a format that substantially increases transparency of the licensing system and, hopefully, will lead to greater accountability.”

The web application is available via CAAT’s website at http://www.caat.org.uk/resources/export-licences/.

Full press release from CAAT: http://www.caat.org.uk/press/archive.php?url=20120308prs

International Accountability Project

Published March 10 2012
Summary: UN experts warn that Bangladesh open-pit coal mine threatens fundamental human rights

On 28th February 2012, a group of United Nations independent experts called for an immediate halt to a proposed open-pit coal mine in Phulbari, north-western Bangladesh, claiming that it has the potential to displace many thousands of people and violate fundamental human rights. Their statement follows an Urgent Appeal for Action submitted to the UN in September 2011 by SRT grantee the International Accountability Project.

The seven UN Special Rapporteurs stated in a press release that the Phulbari development would potentially displace 50,000 to 130,000 people (including entire villages of Santal, Munda, Mahili and Pahan indigenous peoples), threaten around 12,000 hectares of agricultural land, and destroy waterways supporting over 1,000 fisheries and nearly 50,000 fruit trees. The land under threat is located in Bangladesh’s most fertile agricultural region and supports the entire country’s food needs (nearly half the Bangladeshi population is food insecure, and nearly one quarter severely food insecure). Up to 220,000 people could also lose access to safe drinking water as a result of the development.

As well as recommending an immediate halt to the Phulbari project, the Rapporteurs are calling on the Bangladeshi government to ensure that its policy on open pit coal mining includes safeguards to protect human rights. Magdalena Sepulveda, the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, said: “By incorporating human rights principles into the national development strategy and fulfilling their human rights obligations, the government is more likely to reduce poverty. Human rights and development policies are mutually reinforcing.”

Full text of the UN Special Rapporteurs’ press release: http://accountabilityproject.org/article.php?id=688

Article by the IAP's Senior Research Fellow about the UN action: http://bicusa.org/en/Article.12604.aspx

Oakland Institute

Published February 23 2012
Summary: Iowa State University withdraws from Tanzania land investment deal which is set to displace 162,000 people

On 10th February 2012 Iowa State University announced it was withdrawing from a controversial land deal in Tanzania which is likely to displace over 162,000 people from their homes. The project, led by US-based energy company AgriSol, aims to develop three large tracts of land for the commercial production of crops, livestock and biofuels, creating a likely profit of $272 million a year (nearly equal to the total budget of the Tanzanian Ministry of Agriculture). The land currently contains three camps inhabited by Burundian refugees who fled to Tanzania in 1972, and have been living and farming there ever since. The Tanzanian government is offering them citizenship, but only on the condition that they move to make way for AgriSol's commercial activities (the former Minister of Home Affairs, Lawrence Masha, who was in charge of the refugee camps when the relocation plan was decided, has since been hired as a 'legal advisor' to AgriSol).

Iowa State University had been providing key support for the project by conducting feasibility studies including soil sampling and climate analysis and providing legitimacy to the project to potential investors. Its role was first uncovered by SRT grantee the Oakland Institute in June 2011, in a brief that questioned its ties to the project and to Bruce Rastetter, Managing Director of AgriSol and an important donor to the university. Following pressure from the Oakland Institute, and media and campus activism, the university has cut all its ties to AgriSol. Anuradha Mittal, the Oakland Institute's Director, said, "In over 40 years the Burundians have built a robust and productive farming community; it would demonstrate support of Iowa State University's mission to help 'small farmers and families struggling against poverty and hunger,' to ensure that they are not forcibly moved."

Full story from the Oakland Institute's website: http://www.oaklandinstitute.org/tanzania-us-university-withdraws-land-grab-deal

Sherpa

Published February 15 2012
Summary: French authorities investigate the ‘ill-gotten gains’ of three African leaders and their families

The French authorities, assisted by anti-corruption NGOs including SRT grantee Sherpa, are investigating claims that three African leaders have embezzled state funds to pay for assets including houses, luxury cars, designer clothes and private jets.

The late Gabon leader Omar Bongo and his son Ali, the Congo-Brazzaville leader Denis Sassou-Nguesso and his family, and the president of Equatorial Guinea, Teodoro Obiang, and his son are accused of owning EUR160 million of assets in France accrued through money-laundering, embezzlement and misuse of public funds. The leaders and their families deny the charges.

Congo-Brazzaville is one of the poorest countries in the world, with 87% of its population living on less than two dollars a day according to the UNDP. Despite being oil-rich, Gabon and Equatorial Guinea also have a high proportion of citizens living in poverty.

The case may have an impact on other countries where serving leaders have placed their wealth, including the USA and the UK (the USA has already moved to seize assets belonging to Teodoro Obiang’s son).

Article from the Guardian on the seizure of the leaders’ assets: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/06/france-africa-autocrats-corruption-inquiry?INTCMP=SRCH

ILGA Europe

Published February 03 2012
Summary: Right-wing MEPs attack European Commission’s funding of ILGA-Europe

One of the largest European LGBTI rights organisations, SRT grantee ILGA-Europe, has reported that it is the subject of an ongoing campaign by some right-wing members of the European Parliament, who are questioning the funding it receives from the EU and private donors.

Since December 2011 Godfrey Bloom of the UK Independence Party and Konrad Szymanski, a Polish MEP from the Law & Justice Party, have tabled six questions between them to the European Commission, asking it to justify the grants given to ILGA-Europe and implying that because ILGA is not funded by its member organisations, it cannot legitimately represent LGBT people. Mr Bloom (who was ejected from the European Parliament chamber in 2010 for quoting a Nazi slogan at a senior German politician) tabled five of the questions, and Mr Szymanski one. The questions are as follows:

· Subject: ILGA-Europe (International Lesbian and Gay Association) funding
According to information published by the organisation ILGA-Europe (International Lesbian and Gay Association) on its own website, its forecast budget for 2011 was EUR 1 824 000, EUR 1 252 600 (i.e. 67.7%) of which consisted in grants received from the European Commission and a further EUR 50 000 of which was granted by the Dutch Government, bringing the share of public money in ILGA-Europe’s budget to more than 70%.
Was the Commission aware of the figures mentioned above?
Given the proportion of its own contribution to financing ILGA-Europe, does the Commission believe that ILGA-Europe can be described as a ‘non-governmental organisation’ or as part of ‘civil society’?
· Subject: ILGA funding
Is the Commission aware that of the remaining EUR 521 400 in ILGA’s budget, EUR 402 400 were donated by three wealthy individuals (George Soros/OSI, Sigrid Rausing and an anonymous donor)?
Does the Commission know of any significant contribution to ILGA’s budget being made by those whom the organisation claims to represent, i.e. gay and lesbian persons?
Also, how does the Commission view the influence that wealthy individuals may exert over the NGOs they are subsidising?
Is there a risk that persons such as George Soros could ‘buy’ themselves one or more NGOs that are economically dependent on their donations?
How does the Commission view the impact of this particular type of ‘philanthropy’ on democracy?
· Subject: ILGA funding via EuropeAid
Is the Commission aware that, according to the organisation’s budget forecast for 2012, a further grant request by ILGA (for EUR 1 million spread over three years) is pending with EuropeAid?
How does the Commission intend to reply to this request?
· Subject: ILGA funding and other lobby groups
Are there many other lobby groups that receive a similar proportion of their budget from the Commission? Or is ILGA a unique case?
· Subject: ILGA-Europe funding and UN standards
Is the Commission aware that among the requirements for NGOs that seek accreditation to obtain consultative status at the UN (http://csonet.org/?menu=83), one is that 'the major portion of the organisation's funds should be derived from contributions from national affiliates, individual members, or other non-governmental components'?
Does the EU apply similar requirements to NGOs? If so, does the Commission agree that this requirement is not met by ILGA-Europe?
· Subject: Commission funding for the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association
The Commission has been one of the main sponsors of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA) for some years now. From 2007 to 2010, ILGA received from the Commission a total amount of EUR 4 107 457.12, i.e. more than EUR 1 million per annum. The main part of this sum derives from a DG EMPL funding programme called PROGRESS, from which ILGA receives an operational grant covering up to 80 % of its running costs.
ILGA's main activity is to influence the legislation in order to guarantee rights to lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex persons, in particular in the field of marriage and substitutes for marriage.
In reality, the EU has no competences as regards the recognition of marriages or family law.
1. On what legal basis is the Commission giving out operational grants to associations whose main activities are outside the scope of the EU's competences?
2. Why has the Commission decided to support associations whose activities are directed towards changing Member State law, this being especially questionable in the case of countries such as Poland, which is under this kind of lobbying pressure regarding its family law and which has declared its legislative independence in that sphere (see the Declaration by the Republic of Poland on the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union)?
3. Does the Commission recognise that by becoming a major sponsor for the above lobby, active in Poland as well as in other Member States, it is acting outside its competences and is actually breaching the principle of subsidiarity enshrined in the Treaties (Article 5(3) TEU)?

In response to the MEPs’ questioning, ILGA-Europe have explained that they do not receive membership fees because their member organisations pay these directly to the parent organisation, ILGA-World.

ILGA-Europe have also published more detailed information about their funding on their website. They stress that their accounts are public and audited twice a year, and that their financial reports are also publically available.

Article from the European Parliament’s Intergroup on LGBT Rights: http://www.lgbt-ep.eu/press-releases/homophobic-mep-quizzes-commission-on-equality-funding/

Further information on ILGA-Europe’s funding: http://www.ilga-europe.org/home/about_us/ilga_europe_funding

Corner House

Published January 26 2012
Summary: UK government apologises to corruption whistleblower after disclosing his identity

On 19th January 2012 the UK International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell offered an unreserved apology to Dotun Oloko, a British-born Nigerian campaigner whose identity was disclosed to a private equity firm he had previously alleged was involved in corruption.

In 2009 Mr Oloko, requesting anonymity and using a pseudonym, provided the Department for International Development with information on alleged corruption involving funds from the Commonwealth Development Corporation (a UK government-owned development fund) and a US private equity firm acting as a financial intermediary. DfID passed Mr Oloko’s details to the Commonwealth Development Corporation, who then forwarded them to the private equity firm. As a result Mr Oloko was placed under surveillance by private investigators who followed him to his home, his church and his children’s school, and contacted his family and friends. He says he is now afraid to return to his home, and his business has suffered ‘irreparable damage’ as a result of the investigation.

Mr Oloko’s case was taken up by his MP Caroline Lucas along with SRT grantee Corner House. Despite repeated denials that it was responsible for disclosing Mr Oloko’s identity, the Department for International Development finally admitted responsibility and offered him an unreserved apology. The International Development Secretary has also announced a review of the department’s procedures for dealing with corruption whistleblowers.

Link to BBC Newsnight story on Dotun Oloko: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/9682677.stm

Reprieve

Published January 26 2012
Summary: British government abandons Gibson Inquiry into the UK’s alleged role in torture and rendition

On 18th January 2012 the UK government announced that it was scrapping the Gibson Inquiry, which was to have investigated Britain’s alleged role in the torture and rendition of detainees following the September 11th attacks. Human rights groups, including SRT grantee Reprieve, had previously announced their decision to boycott the inquiry, criticising the decision to hold much of it in secret. Lawyers representing rendition and torture victims had also stated their intention to take part in the boycott.

Fresh criminal investigations were launched last week into claims that British intelligence agencies were involved in the rendition of two Libyans back to Gaddafi’s regime in 2004. Both men allege they were tortured on their return to Libya. As these investigations would have further delayed the start of the Gibson Inquiry, the Justice Secretary Ken Clarke took the decision to disband it.

Reprieve’s Director, Clare Algar, said, “While it is crucial that an inquiry is held into UK involvement in rendition and torture, the Gibson Inquiry simply did not have the powers or the independence to get to the truth. Reprieve has said consistently that the Inquiry, as established, would not have achieved the Government’s stated aim of removing the stain on Britain’s international reputation. For that reason, it is welcome that the ministers have decided to think again”

Full statement on Reprieve’s website: http://www.reprieve.org.uk/press/2012_01_18_Gibson_inquiry_scrapped/

Guardian article on the abandoning of the Gibson Enquiry: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/jan/18/gibson-inquiry-torture-collusion-abandoned

Bahrain Centre for Human Rights/Gulf Centre for Human Rights

Published January 11 2012
Summary: Human rights defender is severely beaten by security forces in Bahrain

On 6th January 2012 Nabeel Rajab, the President of SRT grantees the Gulf Centre for Human Rights and the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights, was apparently severely beaten by police during a peaceful protest in Bahrain’s capital, Manama.

Mr Rajab stated that riot police beat him all over his body with sticks, particularly on the back and face. He was later taken to hospital where he was treated for concussion, back pain and bruising. His lawyer was prevented from seeing him in the hospital, although they were able to communicate by telephone.

In a statement on 6th January the Gulf Centre for Human Rights and the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights, along with SRT grantee the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies said, “We condemn in the strongest possible terms this vicious attack on a well known human rights figure inside Bahrain and on the regional and international levels. [We] are gravely concerned for the physical and psychological integrity of Nabeel Rajab and hold the government of Bahrain responsible for his safety.”

Mr Rajab has now left hospital and is recovering at home.

Further information on the attack from the Bahrain Center for Human Rights’ website: http://www.bahrainrights.org/en/node/4949

Reprieve

Published December 19 2011
Summary: British government ordered to release rendered prisoner detained for eight years without trial

On 14th December 2011 the British government was ordered by the Court of Appeal to secure the release of a prisoner held without charge or trial since 2004 in the US military prison at Bagram Airbase, Afghanistan.

Yunus Rahmatullah was seized by British forces in Iraq in February 2004, handed to the US and illegally rendered to Afghanistan, where he has been held beyond the rule of law for eight years. The decision marks the first time any civilian legal system has penetrated Bagram, where nearly three thousand prisoners have been unlawfully held by the US military for up to a decade.

In response to a habeas corpus application by SRT grantee Reprieve, the Court of Appeal this morning ordered the release of Yunus, a Pakistani who has only recently been able to make telephone contact with his family, and whose physical and mental state has been described as ‘catastrophic’.

The UK government has repeatedly declined to state on what legal basis Yunus was rendered. The rendition is a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions, which the UK authorities appear to have known in advance. The Court of Appeal acknowledges this, and has said the UK may be required under international law to get Yunus out of Bagram - or face being in breach of the Geneva Conventions. The government now has seven days to secure Yunus's release, or to explain to the court why they cannot.

Cori Crider, Legal Director of Reprieve, said, “The United Kingdom must now do whatever it takes to send Yunus home to his mother. The Court is quite right - once the UK takes a prisoner it cannot simply wash its hands of him, or of the Geneva Conventions. The government stands warned - failure to get Yunus out of Bagram now may be to aid and abet a war crime.”

Full statement from Reprieve: http://www.reprieve.org.uk/press/2011_12_14_Yunus_appeal_judgement/

Global Witness

Published December 12 2011
Summary: Global Witness to leave the Kimberley Process over concerns that it has failed to tackle the blood diamond trade

On 5th December 2011 SRT grantee Global Witness announced that it was leaving the Kimberley Process, the international certification scheme established to stop the trade in blood diamonds (diamonds mined in conflict zones and used to finance war or insurgency). Global Witness was the first organisation to expose the issue of blood diamonds, and subsequently helped establish the Kimberley Process. However it now believes that the scheme, although it has done much that is useful, has ultimately been unsuccessful.

Among their concerns, Global Witness cited the Kimberley Process’s decision to authorise exports from two companies operating in the Marange diamond fields in Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwean army seized control of this area in 2008, killing around 200 miners. Mining concessions were allegedly granted, in legally questionable circumstances, to companies associated with senior figures in Robert Mugabe’s Zanu-PF party.

In a statement Charmian Gooch, one of the Founding Directors of Global Witness, argued that the diamond industry should be required to demonstrate that the diamonds it sells are not fuelling abuses – by complying with international standards on minerals supply chain controls, including independent third party audits and regular public disclosure. She said, “Consumers have a right to know what they’re buying, and what was done to obtain it. The diamond industry must finally take responsibility for its supply chains and prove that the stones it sells are clean.”

Full press release from Global Witness: http://www.globalwitness.org/library/global-witness-leaves-kimberley-process-calls-diamond-trade-be-held-accountable

Article from Huffington Post by Ed Zwick, a member of Global Witness’s Advisory Board: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/edward-zwick/blood-diamonds-kimberley-process_b_1128070.html

Medical Justice Network

Published December 05 2011
Summary: Court dismisses the UK Border Agency’s appeal on the removal of vulnerable immigrants from the UK with little or no notice

On 22nd November 2011, the Court of Appeal affirmed the High Court’s ruling that the UK Border Agency’s practice of removing individuals from the UK without proper notice is illegal. The High Court originally made this ruling in July 2010, following a case brought against the Border Agency by SRT grantee Medical Justice. The Border Agency policy applied to several vulnerable categories of people, including unaccompanied children and those considered to be a suicide risk. Immigration officers were known to visit their targets’ houses late at night and transport them under guard to early morning flights a few hours later, denying them the chance to contact a legal representative and challenge their removal.

Normal Border Agency policy states that 72 hours’ notice must be given to immigrants of their removal from the UK, but the Agency was able to use exceptions to this rule to reduce the notice period, in some cases to a few hours. The High Court’s decision, which the Court of Appeal has now upheld, was that if less than 72 hours’ notice of removal is given, an immigrant has “no realistic chance” of challenging the removal legally.

Medical Justice and their legal representatives the Public Law Project welcomed the Court’s decision, as did the Law Society, who said in a statement that, “the UKBA’s failure to observe its own procedural safeguards…undermined its position, leading not only to today’s challenge but in some cases to migrants having been removed then being returned to this country at the taxpayer’s expense."

Full statement from Medical Justice’s website: http://www.medicaljustice.org.uk/news/mj-news/1918-ukba-loose-their-appeal-in-court-of-appeal-against-the-medical-justice-win-on-zero-notice-removals-221111.html

Bytes for All
Published December 1 2011

Further to our news item from 23rd September 2011, Bytes for All have issued a public statement in response to the Pakistani Telecommunications Authority's increasing efforts to restrict digital communications. The statement can be viewed on Bytes for All's website at http://content.bytesforall.pk/node/30.

Disability Rights International

Published November 25 2011
Summary: The Massachusetts Department of Developmental Services adopts new regulations restricting the use of pain as a form of treatment for children and young adults with disabilities

On 30th October 2011, the Massachusetts department of Developmental Services (DDS) adopted new regulations that restrict the intentional use of pain as a form of treatment - including the use of electric shock, seclusion, and restraints - on young people with disabilities. As documented by a recent report by SRT grantee Disability Rights International, Torture Not Treatment, the Judge Rotenberg Center (JRC), based in Massachusetts, has used these practices (called ‘aversive treatment’) for decades.

Facilities licensed by the DDS in Massachusetts including the Judge Rotenberg Center can no longer subject new admissions to severe behavioural interventions that pose a risk of psychological harm. However the new policy does not stop the Center from using these interventions on children already placed there.

Disability Rights International believes that in permitting such practices at the Judge Rotenberg Center, the United States is violating its obligations under international law as defined by the UN Convention Against Torture. In a statement issued on 7th November they applauded Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick on taking a “courageous stand” by issuing an executive order for the Massachusetts DDS to review their policies regarding electric shock and other severe aversives.

Disability Rights International are now calling for a nationwide blanket ban on the use of electric shock as treatment for children or adults with disabilities.

Full statement from Disability Rights International: http://www.disabilityrightsintl.org/2011/11/07/an-end-to-electric-shock-punishments-at-jrc/

Global Witness/Sherpa

Published November 08 2011
Summary: US Department of Justice moves to seize the assets of the son of the President of Equatorial Guinea on the grounds that they were bought with embezzled public funds.

On 25th October 2011, the US Department of Justice made an asset forfeiture claim against a house in Malibu, a private jet and other assets owned by Teodorin Obiang, the son of the President of Equatorial Guinea, claiming that they were bought with the proceeds of corruption. SRT grantee Global Witness has been investigating this case for some years, and was the first to reveal, in 2006, that Obiang owned the house in question.

The Department of Justice claims that the $70.8m worth of Mr Obiang’s assets were derived from “the misappropriation, theft, or embezzlement of public funds by or for the benefit of a public official”. Obiang is the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry in his father’s government, but leads an extravagant lifestyle despite his modest official income. He is dogged by corruption allegations, and in 2006 admitted to a South African court that it was usual practice for ministers in Equatorial Guinea to end up with a sizeable chunk of any government contract in their bank account.

The action by the Department of Justice comes only weeks after the French police seized $5m worth of Obiang’s sports cars in Paris. This was part of a court case brought by French NGOs Sherpa (also an SRT grantee) and Transparency International-France, claiming that the wealth of three African leaders, including President Teodoro Obiang, was illicitly earned.

In a recent press release, Global Witness reported that they were pleased the US was taking action to seize Mr Obiang’s assets. Robert Palmer of Global Witness said, “By taking action to seize this house, the U.S. is finally starting to send a strong message that it does not want to be a safe haven for ill-gotten loot and vast, unexplained wealth.”

Full press release from Global Witness: http://www.globalwitness.org/library/us-takes-welcome-action-seize-dictator%E2%80%99s-son%E2%80%99s-haul

Bytes for All

Published September 23 2011
Summary: Pakistani human rights groups speak out against restrictions to free expression in the name of national security.

Human rights and freedom of expression activists are becoming increasingly concerned at the Pakistani government’s attempts to restrict internet communications on national security grounds. The government has stated that it is considering blocking all access to Google, YouTube and other sites to prevent terrorists from using them to share intelligence, and on 19th September 2011 the Pakistani High Court ordered the Ministry of Information and Technology to comply with the court’s orders of 28th February and block access to Facebook on the grounds that it is ‘spreading blasphemous content’.

The Pakistan Telecommunications Authority has also recently ordered all internet service providers operating within the country to ban internet encryption, and to report any users sending encrypted information over the internet. This will potentially allow the government to monitor its citizens’ internet use, including the e-mails they send and the websites they visit.

Freedom of Expression groups, including Article 19 and SRT grantee Bytes for All, have expressed their concern at these restrictions to free expression and the right to privacy. In a recent press release, they stated that national security should not be used as a “pretext for imposing vague or arbitrary limitations” on free expression. Bytes for All and Article 19 claim that the restriction of internet communications will have an adverse effect on human rights groups’ ability to organise, and that the ban on encryption will be especially dangerous for minorities, women and human rights defenders as they may be more vulnerable to attacks or reprisals if they are unable to communicate securely.

Full text of statement from Article 19 and Bytes for All: http://www.article19.org/resources.php/resource/2719/en/index.php?lang=en

Article in the Pakistan Express Tribune giving further details: http://tribune.com.pk/story/255705/big-brother-wants-access-to-your-gmail-account/

Index on Censorship

Published September 8 2011
Summary: The Royal Bank of Scotland has announced that it will no longer sell Belarus government bonds following a campaign by human rights groups.

Following a meeting with Free Belarus Now and SRT grantee Index on Censorship, the Royal Bank of Scotland announced on 29th August 2011 that it will no longer sell Belarusian government bonds or engage in ‘any type of capital-raising’ on behalf of the government of Belarus. This follows widespread international concern about alleged human rights abuses by the regime of President Aleksandr Lukashenko, including unlawful detention, torture, the violent break-up of peaceful protests, and the restriction of political, religious and journalistic activity.

RBS, along with Sberbank (Russia), BNP Paribas (France), and Deutsche Bank (Germany), was part of a syndicate which sold $1 billion of Belarusian bonds in August 2010, followed by a further $850 million in January 2011. Index on Censorship and Free Belarus were concerned that these sales continued even after the post general-election crackdown in Belarus in December 2010, in which seven of the nine presidential candidates were arrested and 43 political prisoners were held.

Index on Censorship, which was the first NGO to report allegations of torture in Belarus in December last year, has confirmed that the campaign will continue and pressure will now be put on the three banks who are continuing to sell Belarus government bonds.

UPDATE: As of 26th October Deutsche Bank and BNP Paribas have also announced they will stop selling Belarus government bonds.

Further information from Index on Censorship’s website: http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2011/08/rbs-pulls-out-of-belarus-after-index-campaign

Reprieve

Published September 7 2011
Summary: Reprieve has uncovered extensive new information about the structure and management of the CIA’s ‘extraordinary renditions’ programme

On 1st September 2011, SRT grantee Reprieve revealed a collection of 1500 documents giving new and detailed information about the CIA’s international renditions programme. The operational and legal papers, disclosed as part of a New York business dispute between two aviation companies, were discovered by Reprieve investigators.

The documents provide a comprehensive overview of how the CIA’s programme of ‘extraordinary renditions’ (the illegal transfer of a person from one state to another for the purpose of torture) was structured and managed. They show the routes flown by over 55 rendition flights to Guantanamo Bay, Kabul, Bangkok and other destinations, and confirm the involvement of private companies in the renditions programme. The plane used for these renditions – a Gulfstream jet owned by Liverpool FC owner Phillip Morse - frequently passed through British and Irish airports including Shannon, Glasgow, Edinburgh and London Luton.

Reprieve will continue looking into the private companies which facilitated rendition, and following up leads produced by these documents. They are also working to identify prisoners who might be connected with the newly-revealed rendition flights.

More information from Reprieve’s website: http://www.reprieve.org.uk/press/2011_08_31_rendition_documents

Article in the Guardian by Reprieve Director Clare Algar: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/31/documents-reveal-renditions-programme-business

Reprieve

Published August 9 2011
Summary: Reprieve and other leading human rights organisations have announced that they will be boycotting the Gibson Inquiry into the UK government’s alleged use of torture and rendition

On 4th August a coalition of 10 leading human rights organisations, including SRT grantee Reprieve, announced that they would not be taking part in the government's inquiry into collusion in torture and rendition by British security services.

Key sessions of the Gibson Inquiry will be held in secret, and the Cabinet Secretary will have the final say as to what information is released. Foreign intelligence agencies will not be questioned, and the alleged victims of torture and rendition will not have the opportunity to question members of the British security services.

In a letter to the Inquiry, the coalition states that, “the process currently proposed does not have the credibility or transparency” to establish the truth about the UK’s involvement.

Reprieve has stated that it specifically objects to the failure to ensure meaningful participation by detainees, as well as the reliance on the government to determine what material is made public.

Full press release from Reprieve: http://www.reprieve.org.uk/press/2011_08_04_withdrawal_from_inquiry/

Women’s Link Worldwide/ Center for Justice and Accountability

Published July 29 2011
Summary: The Spanish National Court, in its hearings on the Guatemalan genocide, has heard for the first time evidence of gender-based violence carried out against indigenous Mayan women.

On 7th June 2011, lawyers Patricia Sellers and Maria Eugenia Solis testified at the Spanish National Court in Madrid regarding violence against Mayan women in Guatemala during the civil war. This marks the first time that a national court will investigate the alleged human rights abuses committed against women in that country.

Over 200,000 Guatemalans were killed or disappeared during the country’s 36-year internal conflict. The violence peaked in the early 1980s, when the indigenous Mayan community was targeted by government forces who claimed that the Mayans were part of a communist plot to overthrow them. During this time it is alleged that Mayan women suffered rape, sexual slavery, foeticide, mutilation and forced sterilisation.

In its report on the genocide in Guatemala, “Memory of Silence”, the Commission for Historical Clarification (CEH) reported a total of 1,465 rapes against women, of which over 88% of the victims were of Mayan origin. However this gender-based violence has never been properly investigated.

SRT grantees the Center for Justice and Accountability and Women’s Link Worldwide are leading efforts to include the allegations of gender-based violence in the Court hearings, and have presented an amended complaint to the Court asking it to consider charges for gender-based crimes.

Women’s Link Worldwide attorney Paloma Soria explains, “To address and understand the scale of the atrocities that were committed in Guatemala, the courts need to consider the gender crimes. Such crimes were widespread and systematic during the conflict, and intended to destroy the Mayan population not only through the physical destruction of Mayan women, but also the breakdown of the social structure.”

Full press release from Women's Link Worldwide (in Spanish only):

Womens-Link-Worldwide.pdf (Adobe PDF - 102Kb)

Environmental Defender Law Centre/ LAMMP

Published July 29 2011
Summary: Settlement reached in historic corporate accountability case over torture of Peruvian mining opponents by English mining company

In July 2011 Monterrico Metals, a UK-based multinational mining company, reached a financial settlement with a group of 33 Peruvian protesters over allegations that they were detained and tortured at the company’s instigation in 2005. This marks the first time that a European corporation has been sued for torture.

Monterrico is trying to develop Peru’s second-largest copper mine in an environmentally-sensitive area. Following a mass protest against the mine in July 2005, a group of 33 people was arrested and detained for three days at the mine site, which is operated by a subsidiary of Monterrico called Rio Blanco Copper SA. The protesters claim that they were tied up and hooded before being beaten, whipped and threatened with death. Five protesters were allegedly shot, and two women were sexually assaulted. Photographs later emerged from an anonymous source confirming the truth of the protesters’ allegations. SRT grantee the Latin American Mining Monitoring Programme (LAMMP) has provided practical and financial help to the two female protesters, and has assisted them in publicising their experiences.

The protesters brought a case against Monterrico at the High Court in London in 2009, accusing them of complicity in their torture and mistreatment by the police. They were helped in this by SRT grantee the Environmental Defender Law Center, who put them in touch with British solicitors Leigh Day & Co. In the course of the solicitors’ investigations, other witnesses emerged who claimed that the company had engaged in more widespread intimidation and violent repression of protesters. After a two-day hearing, the High Court ruled that these other acts could be considered “as evidence that the mistreatment in 2005 was ordered and orchestrated by Monterrico/Rio Blanco, and as showing that the actions of the officers of Monterrico/Rio Blanco in July 2005 were part of a larger strategy of intimidation and violence directed against mine opponents.”
The main court hearing was due to take place in October 2011, but the parties reached a confidential settlement this month with the victims receiving an undisclosed amount of compensation.

More information on the background to the case: http://www.edlc.org/cases/corporate-accountability/peru-mining-opponents-tortured

Hotline for Migrant Workers

Published May 31 2011
Summary: After a six-year legal battle, the Israeli Supreme Court has ruled that migrant worker women who give birth in Israel are entitled to keep their work permits and will no longer be subject to deportation

On April 13, 2011, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that female migrant workers who give birth in Israel will no longer have their work permits or legal status revoked. This is the result of a petition filed six years ago by SRT grantee the Hotline for Migrant Workers and several other Israeli human rights organisations, requesting that foreign workers who give birth be allowed to remain in Israel with their children and complete the full 63 months of employment that Israeli law allows migrants.

Before this ruling, Israeli Interior Ministry regulations meant that migrant workers who gave birth in Israel were stripped of their right to work and deported to their home countries three months after the birth. The women were allowed to return to work in Israel after a two-year waiting period, but were not allowed to bring their children with them. As a result, according to the Hotline for Migrant Workers, hundreds of women were forced to choose between earning a living and being with their families.

In her ruling on 13th April, Judge Ayala Procaccia stated that this regulation violates international agreements that call for the protection of migrant workers' rights, and discriminates against employees who are pregnant and who have children (a breach of employment equality law). She instructed the Interior Ministry to determine new procedures that would not harm the rights of migrant workers or their children.

News article about the ruling from the Jerusalem Post: http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Article.aspx?id=216415

Raid/Global Witness/CCIJ

Published May 11 2011
Summary: the Superior Court of Quebec rules that the case against Canadian corporation Anvil Mining Limited, relating to their alleged involvement in the killing of civilians in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2004, can proceed to the next stage.

On 27th April 2011 the Superior Court of Quebec ruled that the case against Canadian corporation Anvil Mining Limited in relation to their alleged involvement in a 2004 massacre in the Democratic Republic of Congo can proceed to the next stage. The class action against Anvil Mining was filed in the District of Montreal on 8 November 2010 by the Canadian Association against Impunity (ACCI), an organisation representing survivors and families of victims of the massacre. The ACCI is an international coalition of six NGOs, including Sigrid Rausing Trust grantees Rights and Accountability in Development (RAID), Global Witness and the Canadian Centre for International Justice.

Anvil Mining is accused of providing logistical support to the Congolese army, who allegedly committed serious human rights violations while suppressing a rebel uprising in the fishing town of Kilwa in October 2004. According to the United Nations, at least 73 civilians died as a direct result of the military action, including some who were executed and thrown in mass graves. It is alleged that Anvil Mining provided trucks to the Congolese military which were used to reach Kilwa, and later to transport civilians outside the town for execution. The firm does not deny that it supplied the vehicles, but claims that they were requisitioned by the government and it had no choice but to agree to the request.

Three Anvil employees were initially charged with complicity in war crimes and were tried in a military court in the DRC, but they were acquitted in June 2007. The United Nations claim the trial did not meet international standards of fairness.

In his decision, Judge Benoît Emery dismissed Anvil Mining’s attempt to have the case thrown out and concluded that there were sufficient links to Quebec to found the Quebec court’s jurisdiction over the case. Judge Emery also dismissed Anvil Mining’s argument that Quebec was not the appropriate forum and that the case should rather be brought in the DRC or Australia (the company was Australian-owned at the time the incident occurred).

The court will now consider whether the case should be certified as a class action, allowing those affected by the events in Kilwa to bring claims against Anvil Mining. A hearing on the class certification is scheduled for June 2011.

Link to statement from the Canadian Association Against Impunity: http://raid-uk.org/docs/KilwaClassAction/PR_28_April_2011.pdf

Omega Research Foundation

Published April 18 2011
Summary: UK and France revoke arms export licenses to the Middle East after research into the use of British and French-made equipment in the suppression of protests

In February 2011, the UK and France revoked arms export licences to Libya and Bahrain after a public outcry over equipment being used in the suppression of protests. SRT grantee the Omega Research Foundation (a UK-based group which researches the human rights impact of the international arms trade) has used images from news agencies, NGOs and social media outlets to identify the equipment used during the protests in the Middle East, and highlight equipment of concern.

The equipment identified by Omega as being of European or US origin includes UK riot control vehicles (and associated police riot control training) in Libya; US-made CS gas canisters in Bahrain, Egypt and Yemen; US-made rubber multi-baton rounds in Bahrain; and French CS gas grenades and grenade launchers in Bahrain.

Omega has also supplied information about the origin of this equipment to NGOs, campaigners and media outlets, enabling them to identify and question those who authorised such transactions, and to lobby the governments of the countries involved. This led to the revoking of export licences by the UK and France, and a commitment to review export licensing policy. Licenses revoked were for riot control equipment including tear gas, launchers and shotgun ammunition.

Omega are continuing to monitor the situation in multiple countries in order to influence international opinion, and hope to prevent future transfers of such equipment to the Middle East or to other states with a history of excessive use of force and violent suppression of protests.

Nizkor UK

Published: Apr 5, 2011
Summary: Spanish oil company Repsol pays Guarani Indians $15.5 million in recognition of their land rights

At the end of December 2010, the Spanish oil giant Repsol and its partners signed a landmark settlement agreement with the Gurani Indians of Itika Guazu in Bolivia. The Guranis were represented by SRT grantee Equipo Nizkor, a Belgium-based NGO which campaigns against human rights violations in Spain and Latin America. The agreement follows five years of negotiation by Nizkor’s team, and represents the first acknowledgement by Repsol that the land in the Itika Guazu territory, where they are extracting 2.3 million cubic metres of natural gas a day, is owned by the Guarani people.

Repsol have accepted their obligations in the event of environmental damage, physical injury or death on Guarani land as a result of their operations. They have paid the Guarani community $15.5 million in a cash lump sum, the principal of which will be held in an investment fund. The interest generated will be spent on housing, health and education projects to benefit the Guarani community.

The offer originally made by Repsol to the Guaranis in 2006 contained no obligation for a minimum compensation payment and no recognition of the Guaranis’ ownership rights. The Assembly of the Gurani People of Itika Guazu (APG IG) believe that this is the first settlement of its kind signed by a multinational oil company in Latin America.

The settlement was opposed both by the oil companies involved and the Bolivian government, and Nizkor allege that intimidatory tactics were used including the beating and shooting at of one of the community leaders.

Further details about the case from Nizkor's website: http://www.derechos.org/nizkor/bolivia/doc/fund.html

Interights

Published: Mar 26 2011
Summary: The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that it is unlawful to refuse a residence permit to a foreign national on the grounds that they are HIV positive

On 10th March 2011, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in a landmark case that refusing a residence permit to a foreign national solely on the basis of their HIV positive status amounts to unlawful discrimination.

The case was brought by Mr Kiyutin, an Uzbek national living in Russia with his wife and child. His residence permit application was rejected by the Russian authorities simply because of his HIV positive status, even though his wife is a Russian national. This is in accordance with current Russian legislation which states that foreign nationals must prove they are HIV negative in order to stay in the country for longer than three months.

The Court acknowledged that the protection of public health is a legitimate aim, but it rejected the idea that this could be used as justification for excluding people with HIV from residence. It concluded that the restrictions imposed by the Russian authorities had ‘no reasonable and objective justification’, and that Mr Kiyutin was therefore a victim of discrimination.

Interights, who submitted third-party evidence to the hearing, view the case as a landmark in that it explicitly recognises that people with HIV are protected as a ‘vulnerable group’ against the infringement of their fundamental human rights.

In a press release on 11th March 2011, Interights said, “…the potential impact of the Court’s judgment extends beyond the Council of Europe, being the first authoritative condemnation of such measures by an international or regional human rights adjudicator. Moreover, the arguments put forth by the Court lend strong support to arguments against rights restrictions of [people living with HIV] in areas other than migration, such as health care or employment.”

More information from Interights’ website: http://www.interights.org/kiyutin

Corner House/ Platform

Published: Mar 18, 2011
Summary: UK government rules that BP is violating human rights in its operations on the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline

On 9th March 2011 the British government ruled that a consortium led by BP is breaking international rules governing the human rights responsibilities of multinational companies in its operations on the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline. This ruling follows a complaint lodged in 2003 by six human rights and environmental groups, including SRT grantees Corner House and Platform, under the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises.

Since the project was first conceived 10 years ago, campaigners have highlighted the concerns of local residents complaining of intimidation by the security forces assigned to guard the pipeline. The government’s ruling has found that even though BP were aware of this ‘heightened risk of intimidation’ they did not respond to or investigate the locals’ complaints.

The ruling sets a major precedent in that multinational companies will now have to take human rights concerns into account when designing their corporate complaint mechanisms. Such mechanisms will need to be strong enough to ensure that people can report intimidation without the threat of reprisals or further abuse.

Nick Hildyard of Corner House said, "Public funders knew about the intimidation, but failed to check whether BP had adequate procedures in place to address and remedy it."

Full story from Corner House’s website: http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/resource/bp-violating-human-rights-rules-says-uk-government#fn005

Hotline for Migrant Workers

Published: Mar 7, 2011
Summary: The Hotline for Migrant Workers has released a report documenting the abuses suffered by African asylum seekers trying to reach Israel

In February 2011 the Hotline for Migrant Workers released a report based on the testimonies of 60 mainly Eritrean asylum seekers who were held to ransom and abused by people-smugglers while trying to reach Israel. Around 12,000 people were smuggled to Israel via Egypt in 2010.

The report reveals that a large number of Eritrean and Ethiopian asylum seekers were held hostage and tortured in an attempt to extort ransom payments from family members in wealthy countries. Several victims were allegedly murdered by their traffickers or starved to death. The victims also report physical abuse, psychological torture, humiliation, threats and rape.

In a statement released on 16th February, the Hotline for Migrant Workers called on Israel to “invest the necessary resources to bring to trial smugglers' collaborators who reside in Israel and assist the Egyptians in taking action against the traffickers along the border”. They also called on the international community to put pressure on the Egyptian authorities to stop the ‘horrifying and illegal’ actions allegedly being committed by their citizens against asylum seekers.

The Hotline for Migrant Workers report in full: http://cts.vresp.com/c/?HotlineforMigrantWor/a1cb7174ba/c6ae19c90f/7f3a9811a0

A New York Times article about the report: http://cts.vresp.com/c/?HotlineforMigrantWor/a1cb7174ba/c6ae19c90f/3265e5cbe8/_r=1&ref=world

Reprieve

Published: Feb 8, 2011
Summary: Reprieve exposes the use of British-made drugs in executions in the USA

In January 2011 Reprieve, who have been fighting for some months to prevent UK drugs being used for executions in the US, revealed that west London-based company Dream Pharma has been supplying the state of Georgia and others with sodium thiopental, pancuronium bromide and potassium chloride for use in lethal injections.

Reprieve alleges that the Managing Director of Dream Pharma, Matt Alavi, was aware of how the drugs were being used despite previously denying knowledge.

On 26th January Emanuel Hammond was executed in Georgia using drugs supplied by Dream Pharma. The execution was delayed for four hours while the US Supreme Court decided whether to postpone it indefinitely in light of new evidence. Dr Mark Heath, a leading expert in lethal injection as a method of execution, filed a sworn declaration stating that he believed the sodium thiopental supplied by Dream Pharma may have ‘lacked efficacy’. Sodium thiopental is an anaesthetic, and if it does not work properly death by legal injection is likely to be agonising. Mr Hammond’s execution eventually went ahead in spite of these concerns.

Reprieve contacted Mr Alavi to ask for his help in preventing Mr Hammond’s execution, but he did not respond. Reprieve Director Clive Stafford-Smith said:
“It is shocking that Britain has allowed a fly-by-night company in the back of a driving academy to export these drugs. Apparently they were not stored, exported or used in a proper way, so that the prisoners are dying excruciating deaths. The British government must initiate an immediate inquiry into how this can happen.
“I knew Emanuel Hammond, and surely even those who wished him dead would not advocate that society inflict needless pain and suffering on him, on top of the 23 years he spent on death row.”

Press releases from Reprieve giving further information:
http://www.reprieve.org.uk/2011_01_24_dream_pharma_knew
http://www.reprieve.org.uk/2011_01_26_dream_pharma_execution

Human Rights Watch

Published: Feb 7, 2011
Summary: Human rights activists detained in Cairo by Egyptian security forces

On the afternoon of 3rd February 2011 a number of Egyptian and international human rights activists, lawyers and journalists were arrested during a raid on the Hisham Mubarak Law Center in Cairo. Among them was Dan Williams, a researcher for Human Rights Watch, and two researchers for Amnesty International. Eyewitnesses to the raid said that those arrested were taken away by military escort.

It is believed that the group was taken to Camp 75, a military camp on the outskirts of Cairo. Dan Williams was released on 4th February along with the two Amnesty International researchers and two foreign journalists, but their Egyptian colleagues remain in detention. Said Haddadi, a French national who works for Amnesty, alleges that while he was detained the group were kept bound or blindfolded for much of the time and were made to sleep in the open air.
On 4th February Human Rights Watch issued a statement expressing their delight that Dan and his international colleagues have been freed, and calling for the immediate release of the remaining detainees. Kenneth Roth, the Director of Human Rights Watch, said:
“The Egyptian government should never have arrested human rights monitors and journalists in the first place. The Egyptians still being held have a vital role to play as Egypt's crisis and serious human right abuses continue. The authorities need to free them without further delay."

For further information:

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2011/02/04/egypt-foreign-rights-activists-freed-egyptian-activists-still-held

Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe/ Centre for Applied Human Rights, University of York

Published: Jan 31, 2011
Summary: LGBT rights activist David Kato murdered at his home in Uganda

On 26th January 2011 David Kato, a well-known Ugandan LGBT rights activist and the Advocacy Officer for Sexual Minorities of Uganda (SMUG), was severely beaten at his home in Mukono and later died on the way to hospital. David had been receiving death threats since his picture, name and address were published last year by Ugandan local newspaper Rolling Stone under a headline calling for gay people to be hanged.

The motive for his murder has not yet been officially established, and the Ugandan police claim that it was not linked to his activism.

David’s death comes only three weeks after the Ugandan High Court issued an injunction against Rolling Stone, ruling that their article breached the human rights of the individuals, including David, whose details they published.

LGBT rights organisations in Africa and worldwide have called on the Ugandan authorities to conduct a full and proper investigation. Gays and Lesbians of Zimbabwe (GALZ) said in a statement released on 27th January that David “dedicated himself to the cause of normalising lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in society through direct action and he was an example of the problems faced by human rights defenders in the hostile climates in which we exist […] we are stunned and horrified by the news of his death.”
In 2009-2010 David spend four months at the University of York as a Fellow of their Centre for Applied Human Rights. In a statement on 27th January the Centre’s Director, Professor Paul Gready, said, “We are all reeling from this news. David was with us in York for four months last year and he felt his time here helped him to re-focus his work in Uganda. He was a hugely popular and engaging personality and his untimely death is difficult to comprehend. We shall miss him immensely. The sexual minorities in Uganda have lost an invaluable champion.”

For the full statement issued the Centre for Applied Human Rights: http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/cahr/defenders/David%20Kato%20statement.pdf

Obituary of David Kato from the BBC news website: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12299786

Association for Civil Rights in Israel/ Gisha/ B’Tselem/ PCATI/ HaMoked

Published: Jan 21, 2011
Summary: The Knesset has approved a bill to set up a Commission of Enquiry into the funding of Israeli NGOs

On 5th January 2011 the Knesset (Israeli parliament) voted to approve the creation of a commission to investigate the funding of Israeli human rights groups and other NGOs. The bill, introduced by the nationalist Yisrael Beiteinu party, was passed by 47 votes to 16. According to its supporters, its purpose will be to look into the claim that some human rights organisations are funded by bodies with links to terrorism. Opponents, however, claim that it is ‘McCarthyite’ and designed to intimidate groups and individuals who may be critical of the Israeli government.

Although the Commission will not have the power to force private individuals or civil society organisations to give evidence or submit documents, Israeli NGOs are concerned. More than a dozen of them, including several grantees of the Sigrid Rausing Trust, have issued a joint statement condemning the plan.

Hagai El-Ad, the Director of the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, stated that the vote was a ‘severe blow’ to Israeli democracy. Quoted in the Guardian, he said that "the goal is to eventually weaken human rights groups and make them less effective in exposing, questioning and affecting government policies.”

The proposal will now be considered by the Knesset House Committee, who will also look into any objections or reservations that may be raised. It will then return to parliament for a final vote.

For the text of the joint statement issued by Israeli human rights groups: http://www.hamoked.org/Document.aspx?dID=Updates1070

Guardian article from 5th January 2011 giving further details of the situation: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/05/knesset-approves-investigation-israeli-human-rights-groups

Corner House

Published: Jan 12, 2011
Summary: The Corner House and Campaign Against Arms Trade are challenging the Serious Fraud Office over the immunity from prosecution given to BAE Systems

After being investigated for bribery, UK arms company BAE Systems was granted immunity from prosecution last year as part of its plea bargain settlement with the Serious Fraud Office (SFO). Corner House and Campaign Against the Arms Trade are seeking to challenge this.

Leigh Day & Co, the solicitors acting for both groups, have written to the Director of the SFO arguing that the immunity clause should be quashed, as it is ‘exceptional in its scope and effect’ and cannot possibly serve the public interest.
The immunity clause covers all criminal activity and is not limited to bribery, corruption and serious fraud. It is also not restricted to the specific allegations of bribery that the SFO had been investigating. The clause became public knowledge only when the terms of BAE Systems’ settlement agreement were read in open court on 21st December 2010. The presiding judge, Mr Justice Bean, was critical of the judgement, and expressed surprise that blanket immunity had been granted even for previously undisclosed offences.

The Corner House and Campaign Against Arms Trade feel that it should be unnecessary to grant BAE immunity from prosecution if they have genuinely disclosed all relevant information to the Serious Fraud Office. In a recent press release they state that, ‘it is impossible to understand how the public interest is served by the exceptional, unusual and entirely unnecessary immunity clause.’

For further information:

http://www.thecornerhouse.org.uk/resource/legal-challenge-blanket-immunity-given-bae-systems

Center for International Environmental Law

Published: Jan 11, 2011
Summary: The United States has endorsed the 2007 UN Declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples

On 16th December 2010, US President Barack Obama announced in a speech to tribal leaders that the United States now supports the United National Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). The Declaration was negotiated for decades, but was finally approved by the UN General Assembly in 2007. It states that indigenous peoples are entitled to all human rights and freedoms as recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Charter of the United Nations, and other international human rights law.
Four countries – the United States, Australia, New Zealand and Canada – originally opposed the Declaration, but all four have now reversed their position.

The Declaration has already been invoked in legal decisions involving the rights of indigenous peoples in Belize, Suriname and Japan, and it is hoped that the US’s support will lend it further weight. The Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) also hopes that US endorsement of the Declaration will help provide a more consistent international approach towards indigenous rights.

CIEL asked the United States to endorse the declaration last year, and are very pleased at President Obama’s announcement. Kristen Hite of CIEL said: ‘We can’t reverse historical injustices but we can work towards a better future, and following this declaration helps us all build a more just society’.

For more information:

http://www.ciel.org/Climate/UNDRIP_16Dec10.html

European Human Rights Advocacy Centre

Published: Jan 7, 2011
Summary: Following a court victory by the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre last year, the Georgian government is drafting legislation to allow up to 20,000 victims of Soviet political repression to claim compensation

In February 2010 the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC) and the Georgian Young Lawyers' Association won a case at the European Court of Human Rights on behalf of Klaus and Yuri Kiladze, two elderly Georgians who suffered human rights abuses under the Soviet regime. They had applied for compensation in 2005, under a 1997 law which recognised the citizens of Georgia as victims of political repression. However the domestic court rejected their claim on the grounds that another law which would have determined the damages due to them, and how they would be paid, had not been adopted.

With the support of EHRAC the Kiladzes then took their case to the European Court, which found in their favour and ruled that the Georgian government should quickly introduce the necessary legislation to ensure that everyone who is entitled to do so can exercise their rights under the 1997 law.
As a result of this ruling, the Georgian government has now announced that it is drafting a new law which will allow up to 20,000 people to claim compensation as victims of political repression.

For more information on EHRAC’s work: http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/research-units/hrsj/affiliated-centres/ehrac/

American Civil Liberties Union

Published: Dec 15, 2010
Summary: American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) asks US Supreme Court to review the ruling dismissing their suit against Jeppesen DataPlan Inc

On 8th December 2010 the ACLU filed a petition asking the US Supreme Court to review the lower court ruling dismissing their suit against Jeppesen DataPlan, Inc, an American aeronautical company, for its alleged role in the CIA ‘extraordinary rendition’ programme.

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the ACLU’s case on ‘state secrets’ grounds, claiming that further legal action would undermine national security interests. The ACLU believes this equates to ruling that the rendition programme is beyond judicial review.

The ACLU also believes that the government has misused the ‘state secrets’ privilege in order to shield those involved in torture from liability. They are pressing the Supreme Court to take up their case and therefore reaffirm the US’s commitment to the rule of law.

To view the ACLU’s full press release:

http://www.aclu.org/national-security/aclu-asks-supreme-court-hear-extraordinary-rendition-case

European Human Rights Advocacy Centre/ Memorial

Published: Dec 7, 2010
Summary: European Court orders Russia to pay 1.72m Euros in compensation for deaths and injuries in Chechnya

29 applicants from the village of Katyr-Yurt in Chechnya have been awarded 1.72m Euros in compensation by the European Court for deaths and injuries caused during Russian military bombardment of the village. On 2nd December 2010 the Court ruled that Russia had violated Article 2 of the EHCR (Right to Life) in failing to protect the 29 applicants and their relatives who were killed and injured during the bombardment which took place between 4th and 7th February 2000.

The applicants were represented by the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre (EHRAC), a London-based organisation which helps individuals, lawyers and NGOs in Russia to take cases to the European Court of Human Rights. They were assisted by the Russian NGO Memorial, which monitors human rights in Russia and other post-Soviet states.

For more information: http://www.londonmet.ac.uk/research-units/hrsj/affiliated-centres/ehrac/home.cfm

Women’s Legal Centre

Published: Jul 20, 2010
Summary: South African sex workers win equal rights to complain against unfair dismissal

On 28th May 2010, in a case litigated by the Women’s Legal Centre, the South African Labour Appeal Court found that the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration has jurisdiction to hear complaints of unfair dismissal made by sex workers employed in brothels.

The judgment confirmed that the constitutional right relating to fair labour practices applies to everyone, including sex workers. It made it clear that sex workers should not be stripped of their right to be treated with dignity either clients or by employers.

For the full text of the judgement:
http://www.wlce.co.za

Breakthrough

Published: Jun 28, 2010
Summary: Silver Lion at Cannes’s 2010 International Advertising Film Festival for films campaigning against domestic violence in India

Three short films by Breakthrough were the only entry from India to win a prestigious Lion award at the Cannes Advertising Festival. They were made as part of Breakthrough’s media campaign to halt domestic violence, Ring the Bell. The films are inspired by true stories of neighbours who hear domestic violence and make an excuse to interrupt it. They go beyond raising awareness of domestic violence to showing viewers how to take action against it.

To see Breakthrough’s films:

http://bellbajao.org/resources/media-downloads

For more information on the award: http://www.canneslions.com/work/film/entry.cfm?entryid=19839&award=3

Side by Side

Published: Jun 10, 2010
Summary: Trust grantee in Russia organizes the first LGBT film festival in Siberia, supported by the Department of Culture

The festival in Novosibirsk, which ran from 15th to 18th April 2010, drew attention from both visitors and press. A representative of the Department of Culture, Mr. Vladimir Miller, was in attendance, the first time, that a state civil servant supported an LGBT event. Mr. Miller addressed the audience, saying: "We are building an open democratic society, and are sympathetic to the theme of the festival.” During the four days of the festival around 700 people attended and articles in online media were viewed by some 15,000 people. During the festival, visitors had the opportunity to see LGBT films, debate on topics related to homophobia and the rights of LGBT people in Russia, and become acquainted with a photo exhibition by Lida Mikhailova entitled “Coming out of the Closet.”

For more information, please see: http://www.bok-o-bok.ru/news.asp?pid=25&lan=1&tid=434

Center for Justice and Accountability

Published: Jun 2, 2010
Summary: Unanimous decision by the US Supreme Court rejects immunity of former government official from civil suit in the U.S. for human rights abuses committed abroad

Former Somalian Defense Minister Ali Samantar - living currently in the US - was sued by survivors of atrocities in a US civil court under the Aliens Tort Statute and the Torture Victim Protection Act. The suit, first filed in 2004, alleged that Samantar had command responsibility for extrajudicial killing; arbitrary detention; torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; crimes against humanity and war crimes carried out by his subordinates during this period. In response, Samantar claimed head-of-state immunity.

On 1 June 2010, in a case brought by CJA and pro bono counsel, the US Supreme Court ruled unanimously that Samantar is not protected under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), which provides a foreign state with immunity from lawsuits in the US.

For more details please see: http://www.cja.org/article.php?id=834

Mental Disability Advocacy Centre

Published: May 25, 2010
Summary: European Court of Human Rights upholds the right to vote of persons with disabilities

On 20 May 2010, the Court ruled that the disenfranchisement of disabled people placed under guardianship in Hungary is contrary to the European Convention of Human Rights. Under partial guardianship since 2005, Mr K.A was prevented from voting in the 2006 general elections. Denial of his right to vote was an automatic consequence of him being under guardianship, not based on an assessment of his capacity to make decisions about political issues. Mental Disability Advocacy Centre and Mr K.A.'s legal representative Jan Fiala introduced an application with the Court in 2006.

For more information, please see: http://www.mdac.info/en/european-court-human-rights-upholds-right-vote-per

Survivor Corps

Published: May 24, 2010
Summary: Breakthrough for Survivor Corps Mine-Free Israel Campaign

In a groundbreaking move on 10 May 2010, the Israeli Knesset introduced legislation to clear Israel's minefields in recognition that these minefields endanger Israel's residents rather than protect them. Seventy-three Members of the Knesset submitted a bill establishing a mine action authority to manage the clearance of all non-operational minefields in Israel. The Mine Action Authority will have the authority to manage the clearance of Israel’s hundreds of non-operational minefields that dot the Golan Heights, the Jordan Valley and Arava Valley bordering with Jordan, the Galilee, the environs of Jerusalem, and the West Bank, and take up 1% of all the land in Israel. Survivor Corps has been a catalyst in these latest developments in Israel, convening a coalition of survivors and civil society to draw attention to Israel’s landmine problem.

For more information, please see:

http://www.landminesurvivors.org/NetCommunity/Page.aspx?pid=377&postId=1202079379217013988

ECCHR / CCC

Published: May 5, 2010
Summary: German retailer Lidl retracts misleading advertising following complaint supported by SRT grantees

Advertising by German retailer Lidl stressed that it advocated fair working conditions and opposed child labour and other human and labor rights violations in its facilities.
The company was made to withdraw these claims and engage in dialogue with its critics after European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR) and Clean Clothes Campaign (CCC) uncovered questionable practices in the factories of various of its suppliers in Bangladesh, and supported a successful complaint against the company by the Hamburg Customer Protection Agency.

For more details see:

http://www.ecchr.de/lidl-case/articles/lidl-retracts-advertisements.html

http://www.cleanclothes.org/news/german-retailer-lidl-retracts-false-claims-of-fair-working-conditions

Conectas Human Rights

Published: Apr 7, 2010
Summary: Detainees have been removed from metal containers following a Brazilian court judgement

The Brazilian Superior Court of Justice issued a decision determining that pre-trial detainees held in metal cargo containers should be removed immediately from them. This decision will benefit many detainees living in these sub-human conditions. This is a very important achievement for Conectas' work with the Brazilian prison system, more specifically in the state of Espírito Santo where detention centres have become the arena for the most serious and systemic rights violations.

See more at http://www.conectas.org/noticia.php?not_id=406&idioma=en <http://www.conectas.org/noticia.php?not_id=406&idioma=en>

Coalition for the International Criminal Court

Published: Apr 6, 2010
Summary: Bangladesh becomes the 111th State Party to the Rome Statute and the first South Asian country to join the Court

Following ten years of effort by the Coalition and civil society members in the region, Bangladesh on 23 March 2010 ratified the Rome Statute. It entered into force on 1 July 2002 and serves as the legal basis for the establishment of the Court. Since then, the Coalition and its civil society membership have led the global campaign for ratification of the Rome Statute and the effort to end impunity for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

For more details please see: http://coalitionfortheicc.org/documents/Bangladesh_Ratification_PR_March2010_en.pdf

European Roma Rights Centre

Published: Mar 19, 2010
Summary: The European Court of Human Rights finds school segregation to be unlawful discrimination

In the case of Orsus and Others v. Croatia, decided on 16 March 2010, the Court's Grand Chamber ruled that the segregation of Romani children into separate classes based on language is unlawful discrimination. The case involved 14 children attending mainstream primary schools in three different Croatian villages in Croatia. The case was represented by the European Roma Rights Centre, the Croatian Helsinki Committee and local attorney Lovorka Kusan, and Interights submitted a third party intervention.

For more information, please see: http://www.errc.org and http://www.interights.org/orsus

EHRAC

Published: Feb 9, 2010
Summary: The European Court of Human Rights has determined that denial of compensation for victims of political repression is a violation of the European Convention on Human Rights

This judgment - Kiladze v Georgia, of 2 February 2010 – was given in a case supported by the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre. It would potentially affect thousands of others in a similar position. The judgment requires the Georgian authorities to rapidly introduce the necessary measures to ensure implementation of the ruling.

For more details, please contact Kirsty Stuart, at k.stuart@londonmet.ac.uk

Minority Rights Group International

Published: Feb 1, 2010
Summary: The African Commission on Human and People’s Rights has found the Kenyan government guilty of violating the rights of the country’s indigenous Endorois community by evicting them from their lands

This decision - in a case argued by Minority Rights Group International - creates a legal precedent by recognising indigenous peoples’ rights over traditionally owned land, and their right to development. The Commission also found that in failing to provide sufficient compensation, or provide suitable alternative land for grazing after the eviction of the Endorois, Kenya’s government fell short of adequately providing for the community in the development process. The decision was adopted by the African Commission in May 2009 and approved by the African Union at its January 2010 meeting in Addis Ababa.

For more details please see: http://www.minorityrights.org/9587/press-releases/landmark-decision-rules-kenyas-removal-of-indigenous-people-from-ancestral-land-illegal.html

Liberty

Published: Jan 19, 2010
Summary: Broad police power for stop and search without suspicion violates the right to respect for private life

On 12 January 2010 the European Court of Human Rights ruled that section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 violates the right to respect for private life guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention on Human Rights.

In the case of Gillan and Quinton V the United Kingdom, represented by counsel from Liberty, the Court found that:
“…the powers of authorisation and confirmation as well as those of stop and search... are neither sufficiently circumscribed nor subject to adequate legal safeguards against abuse. ….They are not therefore “in accordance with the law”.

For more details please see: http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/news-and-events/1-press-releases/2010/12-01-10-liberty-wins-landmark-stop-and-search-case-in-court-of-human-righ.shtml

Interights

Published: Jan 14, 2010

On 7 January 2010, in a case in which Interights intervened as a third party, the Court found that Cyprus and Russia committed a number of human rights violations in relation to trafficking. In a judgment which confirmed that trafficking cannot be considered compatible with the values of the European Convention on Human Rights, or with a democratic society, the Court further clarified States’ obligations to combat trafficking.

The Court found that Cyprus had failed to protect the applicant, Ms Rantseva, from being trafficked and unlawfully detained prior to her death, and it had also failed to adequately investigate her death. Russia, the state of origin, was found by the Court to have failed to investigate how Ms Rantseva had been trafficked from its borders.

For Interights' intervention and the full text of the judgment, as well as an online version of this statement please visit http://www.interights.org/rantsev/index.htm)