Kategorie: Humans

Speaking at the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) today, Amnesty International welcomed South Sudan’s support for 210 out of 246 recommendations made during its third Universal Periodic Review (UPR). The organization regrets, however, that the country has not implemented its commitment from its previous review in 2016 to develop a human rights agenda and action plan.

It is evident from this third UPR that South Sudan is still struggling to respect, protect and fulfil its human rights

Sarah Jackson, Deputy Director for East Africa, the Horn and the Great Lakes

“It is evident from this third UPR that South Sudan is still struggling to respect, protect and fulfil its human rights obligations. The authorities must urgently adopt a human rights agenda and action plan that seeks to drastically improve the human rights situation in the country,” said Sarah Jackson, Amnesty International’s Deputy Director for East Africa, the Horn and the Great Lakes.

“Amnesty International welcomes South Sudan’s support for ratification of key human rights treaties, including 21 out of 25 recommendations on civic space and 42 out of 48 regarding accountability. The organization urges the South Sudanese authorities to implement them without delay.

Authorities must urgently adopt a human rights agenda and action plan to improve the human rights

“Amnesty International regrets that South Sudan rejected four recommendations from other states that urged the government to take concrete action to protect civic space. In its statement to the HRC, Amnesty International urged the government to reverse its decision, especially in light of possible forthcoming elections.”

Background

On 2 February 2022, Amnesty International and partners offered the Government of South Sudan recommendations for 10 human rights priorities that, at a minimum, should feature in a human rights agenda.

These priorities include human rights issues raised during this UPR and which Amnesty International highlighted in its submission to the Working Group, including violations of the right to life; the rights to freedom of expression, opinion, association and peaceful assembly; freedom from torture and other ill-treatment; concerns regarding arbitrary arrest and prolonged detention; the use of the death penalty; and impunity for crimes under international law.

The post South Sudan: Fulfil past Universal Periodic Review commitment to develop a human rights agenda and action plan appeared first on Amnesty International.

As the International Criminal Court (ICC) marks its twentieth anniversary, Amnesty International has warned that the court’s legitimacy risks being eroded by an increasingly selective approach to justice. The organization highlighted several recent decisions and practices which appear to demonstrate double standards and a willingness to be influenced by powerful states.

For example, in 2020 the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) decided not to investigate war crimes by UK forces in Iraq, despite its own finding that these crimes had been committed. This was followed by a decision in 2021 to deprioritize an investigation into war crimes in Afghanistan by US and Afghan national forces, with Prosecutor Karim Khan citing viability and budget constraints. But just six months later, the Prosecutor launched his office’s largest ever investigation in Ukraine, for which he had sought ‘voluntary’ financial assistance from member states – much of which was ‘earmarked’ by states for the Ukraine investigation.

The ICC’s budgetary excuses for inaction on Afghanistan, Nigeria and others can no longer be maintained.

Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General

“Twenty years ago the ICC opened its doors for the first time, following a historic decision to create a permanent international criminal court with jurisdiction over the most serious international crimes. For victims and survivors who had been denied justice, the ICC offered a glimmer of hope that perpetrators would be held to account,” said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s Secretary General.

“But it has appeared to veer off course in recent years, with recent decisions by the ICC Prosecutor raising concerns that the court may be heading towards a hierarchical system of international justice. There must be no doubt: the investigation in Ukraine is urgent and vital. But it shows that the ICC’s budgetary excuses for inaction on Afghanistan, Nigeria and others can no longer be maintained.

“The response to the situation in Ukraine has shown what the ICC is capable of. We now call on the Office of the Prosecutor, and on states parties, to ensure that all investigations receive the same standard of treatment, so that all victims of international crimes have equal access to justice.”

Court at risk of manipulation by powerful actors

The international community has shown unprecedented support for the ICC since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Governments who have previously opposed ICC investigations involving their own nationals or political allies have actively encouraged the OTP to investigate crimes committed in Ukraine.

Meanwhile, the ICC has recently begun accepting voluntary funding and seconded personnel clearly ‘earmarked’ for the Ukraine situation. Without exceptional caution and sufficient transparency, this approach risks allowing states parties to support only those situations which align with their interests. This exacerbates the risk of selective justice and leaves the court vulnerable to manipulation by powerful states.

Amnesty International is also concerned that the court and its principals have largely remained silent on the situation in Palestine and other investigations, in contrast to the publicity they have given to the Ukraine situation. This silence may have weakened the court’s deterrent effect, and has left a void which has been filled with political attacks on the court’s work, as well as attacks on human rights defenders. It is vital for the court’s credibility that its messaging does not appear politicized.

On this twentieth anniversary, we still believe the ICC can play a unique role in the realization of the universal rights to remedy and reparations.

Agnès Callamard

Amnesty International is calling on the ICC to ensure that all funding is allocated in a non-discriminatory way and in accordance with the interests of justice, and to ensure that all victims of international crimes have equal access to the rights to remedy and reparations. In particular, and with its increased funds, the OTP should reprioritize its investigations into crimes committed by all parties in Afghanistan. It should also request judicial authority for its hibernated Nigeria investigation, and increase its activities in other situations where it has justified minimal progress with resource constraints.

ICC states parties must ensure that all of the court’s investigations and activities are fully funded – they must not use their resources and cooperation as tools to influence which situations and parties are investigated. Meanwhile, all states who have not yet done so, including Ukraine, must ratify the Rome Statute.

“On this twentieth anniversary, we still believe the ICC can play a unique role in the realization of the universal rights to remedy and reparations,” said Agnès Callamard.

”To fulfil this role, the Prosecutor must pursue all investigations without distinction: into all perpetrators of atrocities, without fear or favour, and no matter how great the political or economic power of certain actors.”

The post The ICC at 20: Double standards have no place in international justice appeared first on Amnesty International.

• Former security chief replaces Carrie Lam as chief executive on 1 July
• Lee has announced plans to introduce more repressive laws in the city
• Chinese President Xi to mark 25^th anniversary of UK handover in Hong Kong
• UN reviews Hong Kong’s human rights performance this week

Hong Kong’s new chief executive John Lee must fundamentally shift his approach to prevent the city sinking further into human rights meltdown, Amnesty International said ahead of Lee’s inauguration in the presence of Chinese President Xi Jinping on Friday.

The former Hong Kong security chief, who oversaw the police crackdown on the 2019 mass protests and the implementation of the city’s repressive national security law, will be taking over from former leader Carrie Lam.

“John Lee’s record of repression makes this is an ominous moment for human rights in Hong Kong. As the city’s security chief, he led the assault on activists, opposition politicians and civil society under the national security law, and praised police who had used excessive force against protesters in 2019,” said Erwin van der Borght, Amnesty International’s Asia-Pacific Regional Director.

“A new government is always an opportunity to break with the past, but the future of Hong Kong’s freedoms depends on Lee’s government changing course from the hard-line stance that has caused so much suffering in the city. Specifically, it must start upholding the law in a way that strictly meets international human rights standards.”

Xi to watch inauguration of hand-picked leader

1 July marks 25 years since the handover of Hong Kong from Britain to China. It also marks two years since Hong Kong passed a national security law which came into force just before midnight on 30 June 2020, and has since undermined the freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly, association and other human rights in the city.

As Hong Kong’s security chief between 2017 and 2021 and a member of Hong Kong’s National Security Committee, Lee was a key official responsible for implementing the law, which has enabled a sweeping crackdown on dissent.

Opposition politicians, activists and journalists have been targeted with arrest and prosecution under the pretext of the vaguely worded legislation. Since the enactment of the law, around 100 civil society organizations have been forced to disband or leave the city.

The national security law was imposed by the Chinese central government led by President Xi, who is visiting Hong Kong for the first time since the 20^th anniversary of the handover on 1 July 2017.

“President Xi returns to a Hong Kong fundamentally changed from his last visit five years ago. The city has been rapidly transformed by the draconian national security law enforced by Xi’s government in 2020,” Erwin van der Borght said.

“Xi oversees the inauguration of a new leader hand-picked by the Beijing authorities in a territory where the law – and its repressive implementation – increasingly resembles that of mainland China.”

John Lee: record of repression

As Hong Kong’s Secretary for Security, Lee enforced a crackdown on the largely peaceful mass protest movement in 2019, during which Amnesty International documented evidence of torture and other ill-treatment of protesters by the Hong Kong Police Force, among other human rights violations. As superior officer, he was responsible for failing to prevent and effectively investigate the police’s unnecessary and excessive use of force.

He was later in charge of policing functions as the city’s authorities weaponized the Beijing-imposed national security law to crush all forms of dissent. Amnesty International has documented multiple human rights violations perpetrated under the law.

Lee has already indicated his plans to push through further repressive legislation as chief executive, including by introducing the notorious ‘Article 23’ of the city’s Basic Law. The legislation, which was shut down by mass protests when the government first attempted to pass it two decades ago, stipulates that the Hong Kong government should enact its own laws to prohibit treason, secession, sedition and “subversion against the central government”, among other offences.

Lee and other senior officials have also said the new government will push for even greater powers under the national security legal regime, including laws governing state secrets, cybersecurity and “fake news”.

“Hong Kong’s Legislative Council, purged of opposition under the national security law, will effectively provide a rubber stamp for Lee’s proposals, which will likely mirror similar laws in mainland China,” Erwin van der Borght said.

“The extremely broad definition of such laws facilitates arbitrary enforcement, a fact that creates yet more uncertainty and fear for people in Hong Kong.”

UN human rights review

This week, the United Nation’s Human Rights Committee will review the Hong Kong government’s human rights performance for the first time since the implementation of the national security law.

The Hong Kong government has said its efforts to safeguard human rights are open to public scrutiny. However, Amnesty International has documented evidence of groups that have been deterred from participating in this UN review for fear of being accused of “colluding with foreign forces” under the national security law.

The civil society landscape in Hong Kong has changed drastically since the UN last formally reviewed Hong Kong’s human rights situation in 2018. Many local groups that used to facilitate civil society’s participation in UN human rights mechanisms disbanded in 2020. Several of their leaders are currently detained awaiting trial on national security charges, and others have been forced into exile.

“The upcoming UN review on Hong Kong will bring into focus the colossal failures by the government in respecting, promoting and protecting people’s human rights in recent years,” Erwin van der Borght said.

“The new government can start addressing this by ensuring that any new legislation is subject to genuine and meaningful public and political scrutiny before adoption. New laws must be clearly and narrowly defined and include adequate safeguards against abuse, in strict compliance with international human rights law and standards.”

Amnesty International has made a submission to the UN Human Rights Committee ahead of the UN’s upcoming periodic report on Hong Kong.

The post Hong Kong: New leader John Lee must change course to halt collapse of city’s freedoms appeared first on Amnesty International.

Pride isn’t a celebration for everyone. For those LGBTQ+ people living alongside the threat of violence, attending an event is an act of extraordinary bravery.

Nadia Rahman is a policy advisory and researcher in Amnesty International’s  Gender, Sexuality and Identity team. For this piece, she spoke to Mehlab Jameel, an activist for the rights of trans people, about the diverse ways people experience Pride.

Pride started as a protest movement, and it remains one today. It is an acknowledgement and a rejection of the inequalities which continue to be imposed on people with diverse sexualities and genders worldwide.

Same-sex conduct remains criminalised in over 68 countries and LGBTQ+ people still face multiple barriers which prevent them from accessing employment, healthcare, education, and housing.

The past year has marked the highest number of recorded trans killings. According to the Trans Murder Monitoring Project, 375 trans and gender diverse people were killed globally between 1 October 2020 and 30 September 2021 – although many more cases go unreported.

For some people, Pride can be a joyful celebration which honours their hard-won claims to space and visibility, and is an opportunity to come together as a community.

But for those within the LGBTQ+ community who face intersecting forms of marginalisation, the events can also be a harsh reminder of the erasure of their struggles against other systemic inequities and injustices.

For others, public acknowledgement of Pride is simply not possible or desirable at all. In many places around the world, attending a Pride event is an act of extraordinary bravery  – it means risking violence, abuse, and even prosecution.

We must recognise that for many there is a quiet revolution in just living to see another day in the face of harsh criminalisation, discrimination, and the ever-present threat of violence.

Mehlab Jameel, a queer researcher and activist from Pakistan, told Amnesty International what Pride means to her.

“I want to practice a Pride that is not violent to shame. I want to march without a shield. No weapons. No arms. Just me. And my joie de vivre. Simply stepping into my freedom. Under the open sky. To be trans and alive, to be woman and free, to be queer and brave,” Jameel said.

Her words are a rallying cry against tokenism and easy binaries, and a reminder that many people feel erased or alienated by the “glare of Pride.”

She explained how the celebrations in Pakistan after the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act of 2018 was passed “were oddly reminiscent of Pride marches elsewhere, and were easily weaved into a narrative of liberation”.

But there was a long and difficult struggle that led to that point.

The passage of the Act was the culmination of a drawn-out advocacy process involving protests, multi-sectoral dialogues between different stakeholders, and legal interventions.

Jameel asked: Why are these acts of resistance against ongoing oppression not considered demonstrations of Pride?

She described feeling exhausted by the “demand of visibility levied on trans and queer bodies at Pride marches”.

She said: “I find that in such hierarchal spaces, trans and queer bodies at multiple intersections of marginality are only given a voice as props to perform inclusivity and respectability. These real humans then only exist for consumption as a spectacle, a debate, a question.”

There is a lesson in these words for all of us. True solidarity means looking beneath the surface. It means putting LGBTQ+ people, especially those facing intersecting forms of marginalisation, at the centre of any decisions that affect them.

It means looking at LGBTQ+ issues through an antiracist and decolonising lens, and recognising and addressing the reality that the global LGBTQ+ community are facing many diverse struggles.

It requires that we listen and learn from grassroots LGBTQ+ groups and movements and honour and respect their priorities for themselves.

As we celebrate Pride season, we – LGBTQ+ people and allies –  stand in solidarity with these different struggles.

We carry the memories of all those who we have lost and honour those who are living by recognising that there is more than one way to claim ‘Pride’ as LGBTQ+ people.  

The Invisible Ones

The beautiful beings living in the cracks and shadows,

the creatures of the dark, the ones left behind,

the ones on the margins, the quiet, shy and ordinary ones,

nor raging, nor dancing,

not making speeches or performing,

the joyful and the grieving,

those tired and ailing,

those unheard and unseen,

the invisible ones.

Away from the microphone and the lens,

the glare of Pride, representation or recognition.

Abandoning addictions of traumatized collectivities

and the seduction of martyrdom.

Overcoming co-dependent sisterhoods

and the tendency to be a token.

Challenging the allure of controversies,

stepping away, disengaging, turning down.

Handling rejection and dismissal with grace

being mindful of consumption.

Abandoning the thrill of chasing an image,

or the glorified illusions of dysfunction.

No longer enforcing change

by evoking toxic shame.

No more breaking hearts

to heal yourself or your movements.

You are so close to my heart,

so special. Full of wisdom and power.

I sense your magic twinkling in your sarees,

your bodies adorned with strength and valor.

I witness you living your truths,

surviving, thriving and celebrating your fire.

I hear you telling stories, birthing new worlds,

making homes with warm food and laughter.

I see you working, resting, caring, sharing,

making offerings to every other stranger.

I feel your joy, softness, play and pleasure,

smiles in bloom, like a big sunflower.

Keeping faith. Holding space.

Eyes brimming with awe and wonder,

You are the true heroes,

the real treasure.

You matter.

This piece was originally published by Openly

The post The glare of Pride can alienate those facing ongoing violence and oppression appeared first on Amnesty International.

Responding to the Court of Justice of the European Union’s finding today that Lithuanian national law, which orders the automatic detention of people who cross irregularly into the country and effectively denies them the right to asylum, is incompatible with EU laws, Nils Muižnieks, Europe Regional Director of Amnesty International, said:

“The Court of Justice of the European Union today confirmed the conclusions in our latest report on Lithuania, which details the authorities’ flagrant violation of European and international law by not only denying the right to asylum for irregular arrivals in the country, but also arbitrarily detaining them.”

“Lithuania is duty bound by its international obligations to offer access to international protection to asylum seekers. Following today’s finding by the Court of Justice of the EU, the authorities should immediately repeal this repressive legislation. It is essential that Lithuania offers access to fair asylum procedures to all who express a need to gain international protection.

“The Lithuanian authorities must also end their cruel practice of automatically detaining refugees and migrants. Today’s judgment confirmed that depicting detention as ‘temporary accommodation’ or even an ‘alternative to detention’ does not allow any derogation from the obligation to respect refugees and migrants’ rights against arbitrary detention.”

The Lithuanian authorities must also end their cruel practice of automatically detaining refugees and migrants

Nils Muižnieks, Europe Regional Director of Amnesty International

Background

In today’s decision, the Court of Justice of the European Union found that Lithuanian national law, which allows an applicant for international protection to be denied the right to asylum and placed in automatic detention solely on the grounds that they have irregularly crossed the border, is not compatible with EU legislation.

The Court found the practice of denying the right to asylum to be in violation of EU law, including the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and debunked the Lithuanian claims that the country has the right to derogate European law in “extraordinary situations” or during the “mass influx of foreigners.”

Moreover, the Court confirmed Amnesty International’s conclusion that the measures applied in Lithuania are at all effects detention, irrespective of the authorities depicting it as “temporary accommodation” or even an “alternative to detention.”

In July 2021, as the number of people arriving at the Lithuania-Belarus border increased, lawmakers adopted new legislation that deviates from international and EU legal safeguards on the right to asylum and arbitrary detention.

The post EU/Lithuania: In milestone judgement, EU Court slams automatic detention and denial of asylum appeared first on Amnesty International.