Web pages about "France"

End rendition and secret detention: Europe’s duty

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:38:49 +0100

European states have been implicated in the US-led rendition and secret detention programme, in which people have been unlawfully detained and transferred from one country to another outside of any judicial process.

Some have been transferred from US custody to countries where torture and other ill-treatment is known to accompany interrogation; others have been transferred into US custody and subsequently held in detention centres in Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

A number of individuals have been subjected to enforced disappearance, including in secret CIA detention, and the whereabouts of some three dozen people remain unknown. Every one of the victims of rendition interviewed by Amnesty International has said they were tortured or otherwise ill-treated in custody.

Investigations by the Council of Europe and the European Parliament have recommended that Member States take measures to prevent such human rights violations occurring in the future and to ensure redress, including reparation, to the victims.

These recommendations have not been implemented to date.

Europe moves to protect trafficked people

Fri, 01 Feb 2008 16:40:36 +0000

Europe has taken a further step towards protecting people who have been trafficked with the entry into force of a new convention on Friday. The 14 states that have so far become parties to the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings have committed themselves to ensuring greater respect and protection of the rights of trafficked persons.

Amnesty International, Anti-Slavery International and La Strada International welcomed this major step for people trapped in a modern form of slavery, for which Amnesty International has been campaigning for years. The organizations called on the other 33 member states of the Council of Europe, as well as the European Union, to follow the others' lead.

Trafficked persons, when they come to the attention of the authorities, are rarely treated as victims of heinous crimes. Typically, they are treated as criminals, unlawful aliens or, in cases in which the authorities seek to pursue their trafficker, useful tools of the criminal justice system. The psychological, medical and social consequences of their ordeal and the underlying root causes are rarely addressed.

Assistance, when offered to trafficked people to recover from their ordeal, is frequently made conditional on their agreement to cooperate in prosecutions against their traffickers. Such cooperation often places trafficked persons and members of their families in further danger at the hands of the traffickers.

The parties to the Convention – Albania, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, France, Georgia, Malta, Moldova, Norway, Romania and Slovakia – have committed themselves to taking a different approach. They have agreed to take individual and collective action to criminalise trafficking as well as a range of other minimum steps necessary to respect and protect the rights of trafficked persons.

These steps include ensuring that:

a mechanism is in place for the accurate identification of trafficked persons;
persons reasonably believed to have been trafficked are granted time to recover and are offered assistance and protection—regardless of whether they agree to participate in any proceedings the authorities may decide to pursue against those responsible for their ordeal;
trafficked persons have access to redress, including compensation.

Why is Amnesty International in Davos?

Fri, 25 Jan 2008 18:03:45 +0000

An Amnesty International delegation, led by Secretary General Irene Khan, arrived in Davos on for the World Economic Forum 2008, this year entitled The Power of Collaborative Innovation.

Among the sessions Irene Khan will be attending are: The Role of Women in the Business Environment of the 21st Century, Political Islam and Democracy and Tackling Global Issues through Corporate Global Citizenship.

Judit Arenas, advisor to the Secretary General gives an insight into the real conversations happening in Davos, which occur outside the meetings, in coffee shops and corridors:

"The World Economic Forum in Davos is by now well underway and the key question Amnesty International keeps getting is 'why are you here?'

"The answer is simple: we firmly believe in talking to those that can take steps to improve human rights. And in today's world this means not just governments, but also companies.

"But, while we may be 'inside' Davos, let's also be clear that this in no way means we compromise on our principles to speak truth to power and to seek change.

"So far, the discussions and input has been varied – of course, there's a lot of interest in Pakistan (including some very interesting 'advice' from President Musharraf to Bangladesh's Chief Adviser Fakhruddin Ahmed), the Middle East and the global economy.

"But, sadly, the World Economic Forum is far from being a multi-stakeholder initiative where all the stakeholders are equal and many of the global issues are still sorely lacking in representation on the formal agenda."

On the side: the USA, UK and France discuss Myanmar yet arrests continue
"Everyone knows that it's the side meetings that count in Davos, and government leaders are not exempt.

"The US Secretary of State and the foreign ministers of the United Kingdom and France issued a statement on democracy and human rights in Burma (now known as Myanmar).

"One can only welcome such a statement by three permanent members of the UN Security Council, in particular the statement's categorical assertion – sadly, all too true – that '[s]everal months on, however, we find the regime has met none' of the demands of the UN Security Council.

"One such demand is the early release of all political prisoners. Amnesty International just today made public research showing that at least 96 new arrests related to the demonstrations of last autumn have taken place in Myanmar since 1 November 2007. At least 15 such prisoners of conscience have been sentenced to prison during the same three-month period, and over 80 persons remain unaccounted for, likely the victims of enforced disappearance.

"These facts flatly contradict Myanmar's claims that it would cooperate fully with the UN and would stop its politically-motivated arrests and trials.

"While we welcome and support the call made for the early release of all political prisoners, we still think it's not enough: nothing short of the immediate and unconditional release of all prisoners of conscience, at least 700 of whom are in prison on account of last autumn's crackdown on peaceful political dissent is enough.

"Amnesty International also welcomes and strongly echoes the statement's support for the UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights in Myanmar, Prof. Pinheiro, who has requested an opportunity to conduct a full-fledged fact-finding mission in Myanmar. This mission would include not only last autumn's crackdown, but also the crimes against humanity and other human rights abuses perpetrated against ethnic minorities. We can only hope that the international community will fully support Prof. Pinheiro's efforts.

"The joint statement claims that '[w]e cannot afford to forget' the people of Myanmar, revealing yet again that the situation in Myanmar is indeed a threat to international stability and security, especially pertaining to other countries in the region.

"And these words are very true: we cannot forget and we have not done so; the longstanding and widespread suppression of human rights in Myanmar affects us all."

Conference Report

Mon, 26 Nov 2007 16:40:45 +0000

Amnesty International / Reprieve Conference

The Global Struggle Against Torture: Guantánamo Bay, Bagram and Beyond, 19-21 November 2005

SUMMARY BY DATE:

Saturday, 19 November 2005

Sunday, 20 November 2005

Monday, 21 November 2005

Saturday, 19 November 2005: Torture doesn't stop terror. Torture is terror

Survivors of torture and other ill-treatment in Guantánamo Bay spoke at a conference hosted by Amnesty International (AI) and Reprieve. For several, this was the first time they had seen each other since their release. For two of them, it was the first time they had met, even though they had been held in neighbouring cages.

Eight UK nationals told their stories of how they ended up in Guantánamo and the horrors they endured. In stark contrast to US President George Bush's assertion that the USA does not torture, Moazzam Begg, a UK national who was held in the US-run detention centre, said that "torture does happen, it continues to happen, and it destroys lives."

He and other former detainees spoke of being shackled in painful stress positions, their extreme fear and exhaustion, the lack of medical care, the beatings and broken bones. They highlighted how the rule of law was denied to those in Guantánamo. One reported that, on arrival, he was told by a US soldier "you have no rights to make a phone call, to see a lawyer, to do anything except what we tell you."

With torture thriving in secrecy and the US government blocking meaningful access to Guantánamo, Clive Stafford Smith, Legal Director of Reprieve, said, "if we open Guantánamo up, they will have to close it down."

A panel of experts looked at how to challenge the practice of "outsourcing" torture and the use of "evidence" obtained from torture abroad. Governments that want to ignore the ban on sending people to countries where they risk torture or other ill-treatment have sought "diplomatic assurances" that the person will not be ill-treated on arrival. These assurances were described as not worth the paper they are written on.

Elsewhere, delegates shared their campaigning and legal strategies to combat torture.

The day ended with several family members in tears, talking about their loved ones in Guantánamo Bay.

The conference continues with detainees, family members, lawyers and other activists not only sharing stories but, as Irene Khan, AI Secretary General, said, "harnessing the voices of all who know that torture doesn't stop terror. Torture is terror."

Sunday, 20 November 2005: Torture is killing a person without them dying

"I didn't want to make a big, grand speech. I am just deeply hurt," a mother said after talking about her son detained in Guantánamo Bay. As they did yesterday at the conference hosted by Amnesty International and Reprieve, family members expressed the difficulties and desperation of not knowing if their loved one is being tortured and whether they will ever see them again.

One US research group estimates there to be some eight to 15 secret detention sites throughout the world in at least eight countries. It's believed that detainees are being moved from site to site to evade public knowledge and scrutiny and that foreign intelligence agents are being used to extract information, usually through torture and ill-treatment.

Prolonged incommunicado detention can amount to torture. A Canadian, picked up in a US Airport, sent to Jordan and then to Syria, agreed -- the 10 months and 10 days he was held alone in a dark cell 0.9 meters long by 1.8 meters deep by 2.1 meters high was torture, as were the beatings he received.

When people are held in secret detention and the authorities refuse to disclose their fate or whereabouts, they are described as having been "disappeared". Such "disappearances" often go hand-in-hand with torture and other ill-treatment.

Family members of people who have been "disappeared" are themselves being ill-treated when deliberately deprived of any information and are desperate for news. But as a panelist noted, "while the government practice of 'disappearances' may erase someone from society for a time, the memory of the person cannot be erased. This memory is what spurs family, friends, activists to search for them, no matter what. Eventually, the truth comes out."

The conference discussed the medical impact and effects of torture. One medical expert described torture as "killing a person without them dying". Juvenile detentions, problems with the repatriation of formers detainees, as well as litigation strategies and the role of the UN in defense of individuals' rights were addressed by ex-detainees, family members, lawyers and other activists.

Despite the immense challenges, participants are making new contacts, sharing ideas and strategies and exploring new approaches to combating torture together.

The conference day ended on a rousing note with an impromptu rap performed by an ex-detainee released earlier this year after more than two and a half years in Guantánamo Bay.

Monday, 21 November 2005: Guantánamo: only the tip of the iceberg

“Where is public outrage?" asked Irene Khan, Secretary General of Amnesty International, on the final day of conference the organisation has hosted with Reprieve conference.

In the past three days, the conference has highlighted Guantánamo, where many conference delegates have spent time, as the public face of authority stepping outside the rule law in the name of the "war on terror".

However, Guantánamo is only the tip of an iceberg of abuse. Secret detentions, renditions, unfair trials and "disappearances" are practices that fuel torture and create division; ultimately endangering us all.

"We are forced to grapple with a betrayal of common values, double standards and double speak," Ms. Khan said. "Only through continuing to work together: ex-detainees, families, lawyers and other activists -- using a variety of tactics, from media work to litigation, demonstrations to letter-writing -- can we end the abuse and combat impunity for torture and other ill-treatment."

"Through AI's global network of activists in 74 countries, we must galvanize public opinion to work towards achieving security through the respect of human rights and dignity. We each must take the responsibility of shattering public apathy. "

In the words of Clive Stafford-Smith, Reprieve's Legal Director: "What are YOU going to do about it?"

Control Arms Campaign: Tangible momentum and potential for real change

Fri, 12 Oct 2007 15:44:04 +0100

By Mary Robinson

On this 55th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, threats of new terrorist attacks and the dangers of weapons of mass destruction dominate the headlines.

But the real weapons of mass destruction go largely unnoticed by those of us who live far from conflict and war. Those weapons are the 639 million small arms in circulation, and at least 16 billion units of military ammunition produced every year – enough to shoot every man, woman and child on the planet twice.

Such figures on their own would mean little, if it were not for the fact that the easy availability of arms increases the incidence and impact of armed violence, and can trigger conflict and prolong wars once they break out.

During my five years as United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, I spent a huge proportion of my time meeting people who had been terrorized by armed violence.

I went to Colombia and met some of those caught in the crossfire. I witnessed the same in the Balkans, Sierra Leone, Cambodia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Time and again, a tide of weapons fed the slaughter and kept the conflict going.

So where do the weapons used to deny people their most basic human rights come from?

According to the 2003 edition of the Small Arms Survey, 1,134 companies in at least 98 countries are involved in some aspect of small arms production. At least 30 countries are regarded as significant producers, with the United States and the Russian Federation dominating the global market. Between them, these two countries account for more than 70% of total worldwide production of civilian firearms. Russia and the US, together with the three other permanent members of the UN Security Council - France, UK and China - supply 88 per cent of the world’s arms.

As the survey points out, “The majority of countries involved in the small arms trade still fail to provide comprehensive official data on their annual arms exports and imports. A significant proportion of the global trade in small arms is conducted in secrecy, reinforcing an environment in which corruption and black markets thrive.”

The lack of data on the arms trade also makes it easy for many of the weapons traded legally to end up in the wrong hands. Almost all (80-90 percent) small arms start off in the legal sphere - they are manufactured legally and their initial trade is state-sanctioned. Yet many get into the wrong hands where they fuel conflict and abuse in the most unstable areas of the world.

Added to this significant problem, the situation has become worse since the terrible attacks in the United States on 11th September 2001. In the name of fighting a "war on terror", more arms have been supplied to regimes that have poor human rights records. Some of the recipients of increased US military aid are armed forces that have committed grave violations of human rights, and which the US state department itself has identified as being amongst the worst human rights violators.

In the year after the 11th September attacks, security assistance from the US to Uzbekistan, for example, increased by $45 million, despite the continuation of systematic human rights violations in the former Soviet state.

Several other countries, including the UK, have cleared for export increasing numbers of arms to countries in which human rights violations continue. For example, UK arms sales to Indonesia grew by 20 times from 2000 to 2002.

The displacement and deaths of millions of innocent civilians are not the only human rights consequences of such exports. Governments in countries at war are also much less able to meet long-term commitments to education, healthcare and housing - all of which are fundamental human rights.

Despite the deadly nature of the trade, there are currently no binding international laws to regulate the arms industry.

Over the last five years, the problem of the illicit proliferation of small arms has been recognized and there have been small steps towards international controls. The UN Program of Action on small arms and light weapons, adopted in July 2001, contains some positive provisions including measures to monitor progress on collection and destruction of arms. However, it does not mention human rights, makes few references to international humanitarian law, and doesn’t provide a mandate for creation of a binding law.

Responsibility for controlling the arms trade lies with all exporting and importing countries. As the world’s largest exporters of arms, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council must face up to their role in fuelling the conflicts that destroy people’s livelihoods and trap countries in a cycle of violence and poverty.

The need for strong action by Security Council members was highlighted by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in his 2002 report to the Council. For example, he recommended that the Council support the development of an international weapons marking and tracing instrument and also mentioned the need to enhance transparency in armaments.

The urgently required international action, recognized by the United Nations, is the subject of a new Control Arms campaign, launched by Oxfam, Amnesty International and the International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA).

The organizations have banded together to press for regulation in the form of an Arms Trade Treaty. The proposed treaty includes legally binding criteria based on existing international law, to stop the flow of arms to human rights abusers, repressive governments and criminals. Governments would be required not to sell arms where they would be used to violate human rights or international humanitarian law, at last injecting regulation into a dangerously unregulated trade.

Though the campaign was only launched two months ago, numerous governments from Macedonia to Mali, Cambodia to Costa Rica have all expressed their support for an Arms Trade Treaty. With key influential leaders such as President Lula of Brazil also backing the campaign, there is tangible momentum and potential for real change.

After World War Two, countries pledged support for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in order to stop the “barbarous acts” that had outraged the world’s conscience. But atrocities continue and it is now time to control the arms fuelling these violations.

This can only be achieved by the creation of a new universal declaration – an Arms Trade Treaty.

Mary Robinson is a former President of Ireland and United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. She is now Honorary President of Oxfam International and heads the Ethical Globalization Initiative.

Human Rights Council elections 2008 - France

Mon, 28 Apr 2008 18:22:04 +0100

Amnesty International is concerned that individuals continue to be deported from France to countries where they may be at risk of serious human rights violations, including torture, in violation of France’s obligations under international law.

Despite modifications introduced by the law on immigration, integration and asylum (loi relatif à la maîtrise de l’immigration, à l’intégration et à l’asile) in November 2007, appeals procedures for asylum claims made at the border or claims being heard under the accelerated procedure fail to meet international standards for full and fair review with suspensive effect by an independent body.

For several years, Amnesty International has documented the authorities’ inadequate response to allegations of torture or other ill-treatment and of excessive use of force, including possible unlawful killings, by law enforcement officials. Amnesty International has recorded a large number of cases in which ineffective internal police investigations into allegations of torture and other ill-treatment have led to such investigations being closed by the judicial or prosecutorial authorities without ever coming to trial, even in cases where there was credible evidence that a violation had occurred.

In the few cases that have come to trial, convictions have been rare or sentences have been nominal. Amnesty International has analyzed some of these cases in its 2005 report, The Search for Justice (listed below), including the case of 16-year-old Yacine where the prosecutor requested acquittal of the officers involved despite the serious injuries suffered by the minor.

Furthermore, although the French Penal Code criminalises the act of “torture”, it does not define this term. The lack of a legal definition of torture in accordance with that set out in Article 1 of the UN Convention against Torture is an obstacle to the effective prosecution and prevention of such crimes.

Racism is a major element in many of the cases of torture and other ill-treatment by police examined by Amnesty International. Almost all the cases which have come to the organization’s attention involve persons of non-European origin, most commonly of North African or sub-Saharan extraction.

Amnesty International considers that the continued failure of the authorities to address these violations effectively has led to a climate of impunity for law enforcement officials.

Amnesty International is concerned that legislation passed in 2006 (Law 2006-64) violates the right of detainees to effective legal counsel. Under this legislation, individuals detained on suspicion of terrorism-related offences may access a lawyer only once after 72 hours in custody, once after 96 hours, and once after 120 hours.

Amnesty International has repeatedly highlighted the problem of violence against women in France. Official data from 2006 recorded 127 women killed by their partner, an average of more than one woman killed every three days. Almost one in 10 women in France has been the victim of domestic violence. The procedures for women to access justice are slow and complex and migrant women face additional difficulties.

Recent Amnesty International statements and reports:

General

Amnesty International Annual Report extracts for France, 2005-2007

Ratification of International Treaties

Treaty	Status	Recognition of specific competences of Treaty Bodies	Reservations/Declarations
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR)	Acceded	None	Entered
Optional Protocol to the ICCPR	Acceded		Entered
Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR on the death penalty	Acceded
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights	Acceded		Entered
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW)	Ratified		Entered
Optional Protocol to CEDAW	Ratified	Arts. 8 and 9 (inquiry procedure)
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination	Acceded	Art. 14 (individual complaints)	Entered
Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT)	Ratified	Art. 20 (inquiry procedure) Art. 21 (inter-state complaints) Art. 22 (individual complaints)	Entered
Optional Protocol to CAT	Signed
Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)	Ratified		Entered
Optional Protocol to the CRC on children in armed conflict	Ratified		Entered
Optional Protocol to the CRC on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography	Ratified
International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families
International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance	Signed
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court	Ratified		Entered
Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees	Ratified		Entered
Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees	Acceded
The Four Geneva Conventions	Ratified
Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts	Ratified
Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts	Ratified
Protocol III to the Geneva Conventions relating to the Adoption of an Additional Distinctive Emblem	Signed

Compliance with Reporting Obligations

Total Overdue Reports	Up to 5 years overdue	5-10 years overdue	10 years or more overdue
None

Cooperation with the Special Procedures

Extension of a standing invitation	Outstanding visit requests (year requested)	Forthcoming visits (dates if available)	Missions carried out between May 2007 and April 2008
All Special Procedures	None	None	Independent expert on minority issues (Sept. 2007)

Sources:

Compilation prepared by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, in Accordance with Paragraph 15 (B) of the Annex to Human Rights Council Resolution 5/1– 10 April 2008 (A/HRC/WG.6/2/FRA/2)
Official Website of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights – http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/ratification/index.htm
http://www.unhchr.ch/
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/chr/special/countryvisitsf-m.htm
Official Website of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees – http://www.unhcr.org/protect/3c0762ea4.html
Official Website of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court – http://untreaty.un.org/ENGLISH/bible/englishinternetbible/partI/chapterXVIII/treaty11.asp
Official Website of the International Committee of the Red Cross – http://www.cicr.org/ihl.nsf/Pays?ReadForm