free for all blog

Labor activist Liu Ping (center) with her campaign banner and supporters in 2011. Her banner says: ”Fighting fake [things] should start with elections. One person, one vote will change China.” Photo courtesy Liu Ping.

Human rights groups are increasingly concerned about well-known Chinese human rights defender Liu Ping who was “criminally detained” in Xinyu, Jiangxi province on May 7th. According to her lawyer, Ms. Liu was charged with “inciting subversion of state power” after being held incommunicado by police since April 27th.

A former factory worker, Ms. Liu, 48, attempted to run as a local delegate to the National People’s Congress in 2011; her efforts were blocked by local authorities who intimidated her supporters, cut off power to her home, summoned her for questioning and confiscated campaign materials. In her declaration to her constituents that accompanied her application for candidacy, Liu promised, if elected, to “do everything in my power to reflect the voice of ordinary people.” She had gained popular support for her advocacy of workers’ rights and the rights of the laid-off and retired.

A well known advocate for democracy, human and women’s rights in China, since late 2012 she has been pushing for Communist Party officials to make public their assets, following Chinese President Xi Jinping’s call for a crackdown on corruption. On May 7th 2013, Zhang Xuezhong, a lawyer who filed to represent Liu Ping, was informed of the charges she is facing and a request he made to meet her was denied by the authorities. It is believed she is being held incommunicado at Xinyu City Detention Center.

Ms. Liu is among 10 rights defenders who were taken into custody on April 27th following their protest on April 23th near Liu’s home in Xinyu, Jiangxi Province, calling for public disclosure of officials’ assets. The protestors also called for the release of political prisoners and the Beijing rights defenders who were recently detained for demanding disclosure of officials’ assets. They were reportedly taken from their homes by unidentified men. According to Hong Kong-based Human Rights in China, as of May 9th, five have been released, including Ms. Li Xizhen, who reported on her microblog that she was beaten by police during her time in custody. The authorities have provided no further information on the remaining four individuals still in custody: Wei Zhongping, Zou Guiqin, Su Meisheng, and Li Sihua.

Ms. Liu has been under police surveillance for her activities and the subject of harassment since running for office. In March 2012 Liu Ping was forcibly returned from Beijing to Jiangxi province  by security guards dispatched by her state-owned former employer, the state-owned Xinyu City Steel Group. She was strip-searched, beaten and detained and monitored in a padded room for more than ten days before being blindfolded and returned home.

According to the Chinese Human Rights Defenders, at the time of her arrest last year, “her belongings were confiscated, and she was held temporarily in a black jail…her captors forced Liu into a car and drove her back to Jiangxi.” Wang Songlian of Chinese Human Rights Defenders, described her arrest as typical of crackdowns made each year after the National’s People Congress.

In Jiangxi, Liu was detained in a windowless padded room equipped with surveillance cameras and monitored daily by three women and three men working in two shifts. After about 10 days in confinement, Liu reportedly suffered an inflamed gall bladder, which caused vomiting, a fever, and throat ulcers, but guards refused her request to seek medical treatment. On March 19th, guards blindfolded Liu, tied up her hands, and returned Liu to her home, where authorities installed surveillance cameras at the entrance.

This abhorrent incident from 2012 unfortunately serves as an example for how Ms. Liu may be currently treated while in custody. International human rights organization Front Line Defenders condemned the detention of Liu Ping and the most recent charges she is facing, and, given the precedent for ill-treatment as well as the lack of access to her lawyer, believes that the conditions of her detention do not meet the standards set out by international law. Front Line Defenders views the charges as part of a pattern of ongoing harassment against Liu Ping, and is seriously concerned for her physical and psychological integrity.

Photo of Kenneth Bae courtesy of ”Remember Ken Bae, Detained in North Korea” facebook page, photo posted December 28th 2012.

North Korea’s Supreme Court in Pyongyang reportedly sentenced on May 2nd a United States national of Korean origin to 15 years of hard labor in the country’s infamous prison camps  after finding him guilty of various unspecified crimes against the nation.

Pae Jun-Ho (also known as Kenneth Bae), 44, was arrested in November 2012 in the north-eastern port city of Rason, a special economic zone near North Korea’s border with China. He had been operating as a tour guide for a group of five European nationals, who were immediately deported. Since his arrest, he had been held in solitary confinement and had limited consular support. The North Korean government had previously said that he was charged with “hostile acts” against the state.

Rajiv Narayan, Amnesty International’s North Korea Researcher, said: “The North Korean justice system makes a mockery of international fair trial standards – this case appears to be no exception. Kenneth Bae had no access to a lawyer. It is not even known what he was charged with.”

“Kenneth Bae should be released, unless he is charged with an internationally recognizable criminal offence and retried by a competent, independent and impartial court,” he added.

U.S. State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell called for the North Koreans to ”grant him amnesty and to allow for his immediate release, full stop” at a press briefing today. He said that the U.S. has had ”longstanding concerns about the lack of transparency and due process in the North Korean legal system.”

Mr. Ventrell also said that the facts are not clear: ”There hasn’t been transparency in the case.  So while some of the facts are limited – to our knowledge we don’t know all of the facts – we are concerned broadly speaking about the transparency and due process in North Korea and we think he should be released,” he said.

Mr. Narayan of Amnesty added: “If sent to one of those detention facilities, Bae would be subject to torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, including forced hard labour and denial of food as punishment, and even the possibility of extrajudicial execution. Many prisoners also die from the sheer hardships of day to day life in the camps, including due to inadequate access to food or basic medical supplies.”

The riverine Rohingya village of Zailya Para in Minbya Township burns after attacks by Arakanese mobs in October 2012. Private photo courtesy of Human Rights Watch.

Burmese authorities and members of Arakanese groups have committed crimes against humanity in a campaign of ethnic cleansing against Rohingya Muslims in Arakan State since June 2012, Human Rights Watch (HRW) said in a new report released today which details the escalating humanitarian crisis. HRW also has new evidence of the existence of four mass-grave sites in Arakan State.

The 153-page report, “‘All You Can Do is Pray’: Crimes Against Humanity and Ethnic Cleansing of Rohingya Muslims in Burma’s Arakan State,” is based on more than 100 interviews with Rohingya and Kaman Muslims, Arakanese, and others in

Burma. It describes how Arakanese political party operatives, the Arakanese Buddhist sangha (order of monks), and ordinary citizens cooperated in violence against Muslims, at times supported by government officials and state security forces. Entire Muslim villages, homes, businesses, and mosques were razed and scores of Rohingya men, women, and children were killed.

The report describes the role of the Burmese government and local authorities in the forcible displacement of more than 125,000 Rohingya and other Muslims and the ongoing humanitarian crisis. Burmese officials, community leaders, and Buddhist monks organized and encouraged ethnic Arakanese backed by state security forces to conduct coordinated attacks on Muslim neighborhoods and villages in October 2012 to terrorize and forcibly relocate the population. The tens of thousands of displaced have been denied access to humanitarian aid and been unable to return home.

The Rohingya have been effectively denied citizenship under Burma’s 1982 Citizenship Law, rendering them stateless. At least 125,000 Rohingya are living in overcrowded camps that lack adequate food, shelter, water and sanitation, and medical care, and tens of thousands of others have fled the country by sea.

Many of the crimes documented in this report amount to crimes against humanity carried out as part of a campaign of ethnic cleansing. HRW calls on the Burmese government to urgently end abuses by state security forces and punish those responsible, ensure access to humanitarian organizations, and amend discriminatory provisions in its citizenship law.

“The Burmese government engaged in a campaign of ethnic cleansing against the Rohingya that continues today through the denial of aid and restrictions on movement,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The government needs to put an immediate stop to the abuses and hold the perpetrators accountable or it will be responsible for further violence against ethnic and religious minorities in the country.”

Following sectarian violence between Arakanese and Rohingya in June 2012, government authorities destroyed mosques, conducted violent mass arrests, and blocked aid to displaced Muslims, Human Rights Watch said. On October 23rd, after months of meetings and public statements promoting ethnic cleansing, Arakanese mobs attacked Muslim communities in nine townships, razing villages and killing residents while security forces stood aside or assisted the assailants. Some of the dead were buried in mass graves, further impeding accountability.

HRW traveled to Arakan State following the waves of violence and abuses in June and October, visiting sites of attacks and every major displaced person camp, as well as unofficial displacement sites. The report draws on more than 100 interviews with Rohingya and non-Rohingya Muslims and Arakanese who suffered or witnessed abuses, as well as some organizers and perpetrators of the violence.

All of the state security forces operating in Arakan State are implicated in failing to prevent atrocities or directly participating in them, including local police, Lon Thein riot police, the inter-agency border control force called Nasaka, and the army and navy. One soldier told a Muslim man who was pleading for protection as his village was being burned: “The only thing you can do is pray to save your lives.”

Displaced Rohingya told HRW how in October security forces stood by or joined with large groups of Arakanese men armed with machetes, swords, homemade guns, and Molotov cocktails who descended upon and attacked their villages. In some cases, attacks occurred simultaneously in townships separated by considerable distance.

Satellite images obtained by HRW from just 5 of the 13 townships that experienced violence since June show 27 unique zones of destruction, including the destruction of 4,862 structures covering 348 acres of mostly Muslim-owned residential property.

A police officer points his rifle at street level in Sittwe in June 2012. The government claims a total of 211 people died in the June and October violence; Human Rights Watch research indicates far greater loss of life. Private photo courtesy of Human Rights Watch.

In the deadliest incident, on October 23rd, at least 70 Rohingya were killed in a daylong massacre in Yan Thei village in Mrauk-U Township. Despite advance warning of the attack, only a small number of riot police, local police, and army soldiers were on duty to provide security, but they assisted the killings by disarming the Rohingya of their sticks and other rudimentary weapons they carried to defend themselves.

Included in the death toll were 28 children who were hacked to death, including 13 under age 5. “First the soldiers told us, ‘Do not do anything, we will protect you, we will save you,’ so we trusted them,” a 25-year-old survivor told HRW. “But later they broke that promise. The Arakanese beat and killed us very easily. The security did not protect us from them.”

“In October, security forces either looked the other way as Arakanese mobs attacked Muslim settlements or joined in the bloodletting and arson,” Robertson said. “Six months later, the government still blames ‘communal violence’ for the deaths and destruction when, in truth, the government knew what was happening and could have stopped it.”

Considerable local organizing preceded and backed October’s attacks, HRW said. The two groups most influential in organizing anti-Rohingya activities were the local order of Buddhist monks (the sangha) and the regionally powerful Rakhine Nationalities Development Party (RNDP), which was founded in 2010 by Arakanese nationalists. Between June and October, these groups and others issued numerous anti-Rohingya pamphlets and public statements, explicitly or implicitly denying the existence of the Rohingya ethnicity, demonizing them, and calling for their removal from the country, at times using the phrase “ethnic cleansing.”

The statements frequently were released in connection with organized meetings and in full view of local, state, and national authorities who raised no concerns. Local authorities, politicians, and monks also acted, often through public statements and force, to deny Muslims their rights to freedom of movement, opportunities to earn a living, and access to markets and to humanitarian aid. The apparent goal has been to coerce them to abandon their homes and leave the area.

“Local officials and community leaders engaged in an organized effort to demonize and isolate the Muslim population as a prelude to murderous mob attacks,” Robertson said. “Moreover, since the bloodshed, the central government has taken no action to punish those responsible or reverse the ethnic cleansing of the forcibly displaced Muslims.”

HRW uncovered evidence of four mass-grave sites in Arakan State – three dating from the immediate aftermath of the June violence and one from the October violence. Security

forces actively impeded accountability and justice by digging mass graves to destroy evidence of crimes, HRW said.

For instance, on June 13th, a government truck dumped 18 naked and half-clothed bodies near a Rohingya displaced person camp outside of Sittwe, the state capital. Some of the victims had been “hogtied” with string or plastic strips before being executed. By leaving the bodies near a camp for displaced Rohingya, the soldiers were sending a message – consistent with a policy of ethnic cleansing – that the Rohingya should leave permanently.

“They dropped the bodies right here,” said a Rohingya man, who saw the bodies being dumped. “Three bodies had gunshot wounds. Some had burns, some had stab wounds. One gunshot wound was on the forehead, one on the chest.”

Arakan State faces a major humanitarian crisis brought on by the Burmese government’s systematic restrictions on humanitarian aid to displaced Rohingya.

An overpopulated IDP camp outside Sittwe. Tens of thousands of Rohingya who fled their homes in June 2012 now reside in such camps. The government constructed semi-permanent shelters in some camps, raising concerns about the government’s willingness to respect the rights of the displaced persons to return home. Photo © 2012 Human Rights Watch.

More than 125,000 Rohingya and non-Rohingya Muslims, and a smaller number of Arakanese, have been in displaced person camps in Arakan State since June. While President Thein Sein’s government has hosted high-profile diplomatic visits to displacement sites, it has also obstructed the effective delivery of humanitarian aid. Many of the displaced Muslims have been living in overcrowded camps that lack adequate food, shelter, water and sanitation, schools, and medical care. Security forces in some areas have provided protection to displaced Muslims, but more typically they have acted as their jailers, preventing access to markets, livelihoods, and humanitarian assistance, for which many are in desperate need.

Tens of thousands of Rohingya face a range of deadly waterborne diseases if they are not moved to higher ground before the rainy season begins in May, HRW said.

“The problem with aid delivery in Arakan State is not a failure of coordination, but a failure of leadership by the government to allow displaced Muslims access to aid and freedom of movement,” Robertson said. “An entirely predictable and preventable humanitarian crisis is just weeks away when the rains fall and camps flood, spreading waterborne diseases.”

Lacking aid, protection, and facing violence and abuses, tens of thousands of Rohingya have fled the country by sea since June with hopes of reaching Bangladesh, Malaysia, or Thailand, and many thousands more appear ready to do the same – several hundred people have already died at sea.

Under international law, crimes against humanity are crimes committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack by a government or organization on a civilian population. Among the crimes against humanity committed against the Rohingya since June were murder, deportation and forcible transfer of the population, and persecution.

Central to the persecution of the Rohingya is the 1982 Citizenship Law, which effectively denies Burmese citizenship to Rohingya on discriminatory ethnic grounds, HRW said. Because the law does not consider the Rohingya to be one of the eight recognized “national races,” which would entitle them to full citizenship, they must provide “conclusive evidence” that their ancestors settled in Burma before independence in 1948, a difficult if not impossible task for most Rohingya families. The government and Burmese society openly consider the Rohingya to be illegal immigrants from what is now Bangladesh and not a distinct “national race” of Burma, denying them consideration for full citizenship.

HRW urged the Burmese government to urgently amend the 1982 Citizenship Act to eliminate discriminatory provisions and to ensure that Rohingya children have the right to acquire a nationality where otherwise they would be stateless.

“Burma should accept an independent international commission to investigate crimes against humanity in Arakan State, locate victims, and provide redress,” said Robertson. “Burma’s donors need to wake up and realize the seriousness of the Rohingya’s plight, and demand that the government urgently stop abuses, promote the safe return of displaced Muslims, and ensure accountability to end the deadly cycle of violence in Arakan State.”

Vo Van Ai speaking at the Hearing in Washington DC on April 11th 2013.

Mr. Vo Van Ai, President of Paris-based Vietnam Committee for Human Rights and International Spokesman of the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam (UBCV) called on the United States today to raise issues of religious repression against the UBCV at the coming U.S.-Vietnam human rights dialogue that takes place in Hanoi this week. The annual dialogue, which is held alternately in Washington D.C. and Hanoi, was scheduled for late 2012, but postponed by the U.S. due to lack of human rights progress inVietnam.

Mr. Ai was speaking at a Hearing in the U.S. Congress on “Highlighting Vietnamese Government Human Rights Violations in Advance of the U.S.-Vietnam Dialogue” before the House Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organizations chaired by Congressman Chris Smith. Other witnesses testified on issues of human trafficking and abuses against Christian Montagnards, Catholics and other religious communities in Vietnam.

In his testimony, Mr. Ai expressed concern that the State Department underestimated the unabated harassment and intimidation suffered by UBCV Buddhists in all aspects of their daily lives. He described the cases of UBCV youth leader Le Cong Cau, Buddhist blogger Huynh Ngoc Tuan, and the plight of UBCV Patriarch Thich Quang Do, who has spent decades under detention without justification or charge. Mr. Ai called on the U.S. to “look beyond Hanoi’s veneer of State-sponsored freedom of worship, and recognize the full extent of religious repression against the UBCV and other non-recognized religions in Vietnam”.

On the upcoming human rights dialogue, Mr. Ai noted that “dialogue is only relevant if it leads to substantive progress”. He urged the U.S. to set concrete benchmarks and a time-frame for implementation to ensure that Vietnam did not “use the human rights dialogue as shield to deflect international scrutiny from its egregious religious freedom and human rights abuses”. Specifically, at the dialogue in Hanoi, he called on the U.S. to press Vietnam to release Thich Quang Do and other UBCV prisoners of conscience and re-establish the UBCV’s legal status; bring religious legislation into line with international law; and set a date for the visit of the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, to which Vietnam has agreed in principle.

In his recommendations, Mr. Ai urged President Obama to re-designate Vietnam as a Country of Particular Concern for its violations of religious freedom and related human rights; mandate the U.S. Ambassador-at-large to visit Vietnam and meet with “a wide range of stakeholders, including religious dissidents and members of “non-recognized” religious bodies; and not support Vietnam’s candidacy of the UN Human Rights Council for the 2014-2016 term unless substantial human rights progress is made.

When U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry visits China this weekend, he should convey a clear message to the Chinese leadership that a good working relationship with the United States will depend in part on the government’s respect for universal human rights, Freedom House and seven other human rights groups urged in a joint letter submitted to the State Department on Wednesday, April 10th.

“Hillary Clinton’s first trip to China as Secretary of State in which she claimed that human rights discussions should not interfere with cooperation in other areas set a poor precedent. Despite toughened rhetoric in subsequent engagements, her statement reduced the administration’s leverage and disappointed those in China who share these universal values,” said David J. Kramer, president of Freedom House. “We urge John Kerry to avoid making the same mistake during his visit that will set the tone for U.S.-China relations in President Obama’s second term.”

The letter maintains that it is impossible to untangle human rights from other policy priorities and U.S. interests in China, including cyber security, environmental protection, food and product safety, and a level economic playing field for U.S. businesses. As such, Secretary Kerry should prominently raise human rights concerns in their own right and also for their spillover effects on other interests.

“The Chinese authorities note the soft-pedaling of human rights principles and perceive it as weakness, validating their sense of a changing power dynamic between the two countries and their belief that U.S. human rights policy is more political than principled,” states the letter. “To accomplish its goals in China, the U.S. must raise—with equal prominence and confidence—human rights issues alongside economic, strategic, and diplomatic concerns.”

The letter also notes that Kerry’s visit is an especially opportune time to reinforce growing demands by Chinese citizens for greater freedoms.

“We hope that you will seize this opportunity to … demonstrate that Chinese activists and citizens can continue to rely on the United States to speak up on their behalf and to endorse the universal human rights they aspire to enjoy,” it states.

The appeal was signed by Freedom House, Amnesty International, Reporters without Borders, China Aid, Human Rights in China, the International Campaign for Tibet, the Uyghur American Association and the World Uyghur Congress.

China is one of the world’s worst human rights abusers, rated Not Free in Freedom in the World 2013, Freedom House’s survey of political rights and civil liberties, Not Free in Freedom of the Press 2012 and Not Free in Freedom on the Net 2012.

The Representative (second from left) of the People’s Democratic Republic of Korea (DPRK) addresses the Final UN Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), expressing his country’s objection to the draft Treaty. March 28th, 2013. UN Photo/Rick Bajornas

In what Amnesty International calls a deeply cynical move, international pariah states Iran, North Korea and Syria have thwarted the adoption of an Arms Trade Treaty aimed at prohibiting states from transferring conventional weapons to countries when they know those weapons will be used to commit or facilitate genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes, the human rights organization said Thursday from the United Nations in New York.

The treaty would would have established effective common standards to regulate the international trade in conventional arms. All three countries are under some form of sanctions, including arms embargoes, and have abysmal human rights records – having even used arms against their own citizens. The atrocities they have committed are precisely the type that the draft treaty aims to prevent.

“While the President of the Diplomatic Conference will be able to take the draft treaty to the General Assembly for adoption during the current session, Iran, North Korea and Syria’s decision to prevent it being adopted unanimously at the treaty conference is unconscionable,” said Brian Wood, Head of Arms Control and Human Rights at Amnesty International.

Armed violence kills more than half a million people each year, including 66,000 women and girls. In addition, between 2000 and 2010, almost 800 humanitarian workers were killed in armed attacks and another 689 injured, according to the UN Office for Disarmament Affairs.

Virtually all international trade in goods is regulated, but no globally agreed standards exist for the international arms trade. The result can be the misuse of transferred weaponry by government forces, or diversion of arms into illegal markets, where they end up in the hands of criminals, gangs, war lords and terrorists. The draft treaty would obligate all governments to assess the risk of transferring arms, ammunition or components to another country where they could be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. Where that overriding risk is real and cannot be mitigated, states have agreed the transfer will not go forward.

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today said he was deeply disappointed with the failure of the Final United Nations Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT) to reach an agreement among all 193 Member States on a treaty text during the last day of the conference.

“The treaty had been within reach, thanks to the tireless work and spirit of compromise among Member States,” the Secretary-General said in a statement which also commended civil society and the majority of States for their active support. Mr. Ban had said on March 16th that he was “confident” that the would pass.

Some 2,000 representatives of Governments, international and regional organizations and civil society had gathered in New York since March 18th to hammer out the details of what was seen as the most important initiative ever regarding conventional arms regulation within the UN.

Some light and heavy weapons collected from fighters under a disarmament program. UN Photo/S. Waak

If passed, the treaty would have applied to all conventional arms within the following categories: battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, large-caliber artillery systems, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, warships, missiles and missile launchers, and small arms and light weapons, according to the draft text.

“By vetoing this historic document, Iran, North Korea and Syria demonstrate the challenges civil society and supportive governments faced during the negotiations. In campaigning for this treaty, we called upon states to save lives and reduce human suffering and, fortunately, most governments heeded the call,” said Widney Brown, Senior Director of International Law and Policy at Amnesty International.

It is expected that the draft treaty will be adopted by the General Assembly during the current session, but by destroying consensus, Iran, North Korea and Syria showed how fragile these agreements are.

Despite overwhelming support for the treaty, some states still use huge economic interest, the exercise of political power and even claims of sovereignty to justify acts that are patently reprehensible such as the targeting and killing of their own citizens.

The previous attempts to reach a consensus on the treaty ended without success in July 2012.

Mr. Ban “has consistently said that a strong and robust arms trade treaty will have a real impact on the lives of those millions of people suffering from the consequences of armed conflict, repression and armed violence,” his spokesperson Martin Nesirky said on March 26th in advance of Thursday’s vote.

According to the conference’s website, the proposed treaty will not interfere with the domestic arms trade and the way a country regulates civilian possession; ban, or prohibit the export of, any type of weapons; impair States’ legitimate right to self-defense; or lower arms regulation standards in countries where these are already at a high level.

“States must move forward with adopting this treaty as soon as possible. The resolution which created this diplomatic conference envisioned that if states failed to reach consensus, the General Assembly would act on this matter. Kenya, speaking on behalf of 11 other key states, has endorsed precisely this action,” Mr. Wood added.

Protesters gather outside the Phnom Penh courthouse on March 27th awaiting the ruling on Bopha’s case. Photo courtesy Free the 15.

Cambodian non-profit organizations today expressed their deep disappointment at the Supreme Court’s failure to release Boeung Kak land rights activist Yorm Bopha on bail. Bopha’s request was heard this morning by the Supreme Court, while some 100 community activists from Boeung Kak and other communities under threat of eviction rallied outside the Phnom Penh courthouse. Bopha’s young son, husband Lous Sakorn and mother were also among the crowd.

Although the hearing itself finished at around 9:00 am, the crowd waited until almost midday in sweltering heat for the ruling. The Supreme Court then denied bail, citing the seriousness of Bopha’s conviction and the lack of evidence of health problems. Following reports of the ruling, the crowd outside expressed their anger by burning a scale of justice replica, before marching to the Royal Palace to call for the Cambodian King to intervene in the case.

The 29-year-old mother is an outspoken land rights activist, and a central figure in her community’s long-running campaign against forced eviction who has been beaten during protests and shocked at least twice by electric stun batons while protesting peacefully. She is designated by Amnesty International as a prisoner of conscience.

LICADHO, Sahmakum Teang Tnaut (STT), Equitable Cambodia (EC), and the Community Legal Education Center (CLEC) say that the Supreme Court’s ruling comes as no surprise. Just over a week before Bopha’s appearance at the Court, Prime Minister Hun Sen publicly stated in a televised speech that her case had nothing to do with land issues and that she instead had acted “violently and unjustly in the eyes of the government.”

“The procedural and substantive flaws in Bopha’s original trial were so dramatic, so blatant, that it’s impossible to conclude that this conviction isn’t politically motivated,” said LICADHO Director Naly Pilorge. “How else do you explain a conviction for ‘intentional violence’ against a person who never laid a finger on anyone?”

Bopha has now spent 204 days in jail since her initial detention in early September 2012. On December 27th 2012, she was sentenced to three years imprisonment on the trumped up charge of intentional violence with aggravating circumstances following a trial in which no incriminating evidence was provided against Bopha.

Yorm Bopha participates in a land protest in an undated photo. RFA Photo.

“Bopha is not the one to have acted unjustly here,” said Eang Vuthyof Equitable Cambodia. “Back at the Municipal Court in December 2012, no testimony was presented in support of her guilt. Not a single witness, whether from the prosecution or the defense, at any point stated Bopha had engaged in violent actions. The victims’ witnesses provided inconsistent and doubtful testimonies, while the defense witnesses’ testimonies were…simply ignored.”

“Releasing Bopha on bail would have been the right thing to do,” said Ee Sarom, Programme Coordinator at STT. “She’s the mother of a young child and the wife of a man who, following a recent beating by the police, is now unable to work. More than anything however, all the evidence points to that she is innocent and that her continued imprisonment is a form of legal persecution due to her land rights activism.”

The denial of bail for Bopha comes just a week before her fellow Boeung Kak community activist Tep Vanny is due to be honored by US Vice President Joe Biden and former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Washington, DC. She is one of five honorees to receive the 2013 Global Leadership Award conferred by the organization Vital Voices. Vanny will take the stage on April 2nd together with other human rights luminaries including Pakistan’s Malala Yousafsai and Brazil’s Sandra Gomes Melo.

LICADHO, Sahmakum Teang Tnaut, Equitable Cambodia, and Community Legal Education Centre call on the judiciary to set the date for Yorm Bopha’s hearing at the Appeal Court, and an end to political interference in this case as well as in the Cambodian court system.

The organizations say that the Cambodian authorities have a long history of silencing critics and perceived troublemakers on trumped up charges, eased on by the dysfunctional, partisan court system. Those most at risk today are land rights activists – those who protect victimized communities against the interests of well-connected, powerful business tycoons.

Special Rapporteur Marzuki Darusman addresses the UN Human Rights Council on March 11th, 2012. UN Photo/Jean-Marc Ferré.

The International Coalition to Stop Crimes against Humanity in North Korea (ICNK) welcomed on Friday the establishment of a special three-person UN Commission of Inquiry to examine rights abuses in North Korea by the UN Human Rights Council at its 22nd session. This is a historical step towards ensuring accountability for human rights abuses in North Korea.

The persisting deterioration of the human rights situation in the DPRK and the systematic non-cooperation of North Korea with the UN human rights mechanisms – including a refusal to acknowledge or cooperate with the UN special rapporteur, or recognize UN resolutions on North Korean human rights – make the setting up of this new mechanism particularly timely.

Marzuki Darusman, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the DPRK,  told the UN Human Rights Council on March 11th that many of the systematic patterns of human rights violations documented in the DPRK may constitute crimes against humanity, Mr. Darusman’s latest report provided a comprehensive overview of the human rights situation in the country since the inception of his mandate in 2004.

It also identified nine patterns of violation in the country including: violation of the right to food; torture; arbitrary detention; violations of human rights associated with prison camps; discrimination; extensive violation of freedom of expression; violation of the right to life; restrictions on freedom of movement; and enforced disappearances.

“I believe that many, if not all, of the nine patterns of violation, identified in my present report, may amount to crimes against humanity, committed as part of systematic and/or widespread attacks against civilian population,” Mr. Darusman told the Council.

The ICNK has campaigned since its founding to see the establishment of a commission of inquiry (COI) into human rights abuses in North Korea. After weeks of discussion on the contents of a draft resolution on the situation of human rights in North Korea, the members of the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution by consensus without a vote on Thursday. The draft resolution was introduced by Mr. Takashi Okada of Japan and by Mr. Gerard Corr of Ireland on behalf of the European Union. The draft resolution called for the establishment of a COI.

Mr. So Se Pyung, the delegate from North Korea, told the council there would be ”serious consequences” if the COI was approved and claimed that the DPNK has one of the best systems for protecting human rights in the world. North Korea ”resolutely rejects the anti-DPRK draft resolution submitted to this current session,” he said. He also accused the sponsors of the draft of being politically motivated. Despite this opposition, the resolution called for North Korea to facilitate visits to the country by the COI team and the Special Rapporteur.

The Commission of Inquiry (COI) will give all the victims of human rights abuses in North Korea an opportunity to ensure their voices experiences reach decision makers in the UN and the international arena. In this way, the COI will serve as an entry point to ensure that North Korea’s human rights record – and the issue of accountability for those abuses – will be increasingly placed at the core of the international community’s approach vis-à-vis North Korea.

The ICNK believes that the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry, with the leadership of the current UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in the DPRK, Marzuki Darusman, represents a critical turning point in international efforts to promote and improve North Korean human rights. The UN will appoint two additional independent experts to join Mr. Darusman in carrying out an in-depth investigation of egregious human rights violations committed by the North Korean government.

As defined by the resolution on North Korea, the Commission of Inquiry will have a mandate to “investigate all systematic, widespread and grave violations of human rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.” The resolution made particular note of “the use of torture and labor camps against political prisoners and repatriated citizens of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” and “the unresolved questions of international concern relating to abductions of nationals of other states.” The resolution empowers the commission to undertake a one-year investigation into the “violation of the right to food, the violations associated with prison camps, torture and inhuman treatment, arbitrary detention, discrimination, violations of freedom of expression, violations of the right to life, violations of freedom of movement, and enforced disappearances, including in the form of abductions of nationals of other states, with a view to ensuring full accountability, in particular where these violations may amount to crimes against humanity.”

The commission will report to the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly, and will be tasked to examine the issue of accountability for any crimes against humanity and other rights violations it finds. The Commission’s work will represent an important step forward in the legal analysis on the abuses committed by the North Korean Government, looking at both institutional and personal accountability, in particular if evidence is gathered which proves that crimes against humanity have been committed in the DPRK.

Part of the problem is not only the seriousness of the violations but the lack of information about them. The COI is expected to provide more detailed figures showing the number of prisoners who are still in the political camps and the number of persons who have been released. By collecting the testimonies of victims, their families, survivors and witnesses and gathering all other available information, the Commission should produce a highly authoritative account on the patterns of abuse in North Korea that can inform further future actions towards accountability.

You can watch Thursday’s debate about the establishment of the COI at the United Nations here:

The Vietnam Committee on Human Rights (VCHR) is deeply concerned for the security of prominent Buddhist youth leader and writer Le Cong Cau who has been threatened with prosecution by Security Police after his articles criticizing the Communist Party’s policies on Buddhism and territorial disputes with China were posted on the Internet. He is accused of violating Article 87 of the Vietnamese Criminal Code for “undermining the unity policy” and Article 88 for “circulating anti-state propaganda.” These offenses carry prison sentences of up to twenty years.

Le Cong Cau, 62, is Head of the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam’s Buddhist Youth Movement Commission and an active coordinator of UBCV activities in the central province of Thua Thien-Hue. The Buddhist Youth Movement (Gia đình Phật tử Việt Nam) is an educational organization affiliated to the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam (UBCV). Although the UBCV is effectively banned by the communist authorities, the Youth movement has a semi-official status because of its widespread social, humanitarian and educational activities which are tolerated by government. It has some 500,000 members in Vietnam.

On March 12th, Le Cong Cau was summoned by Vietnamese Security Police to come for a “working session” at the Truong An district Police station at 8:00 am the following day. For the next two and a half days (March 13-15th) he was subjected to intense interrogations. Before releasing him, police declared that they had obtained “sufficient evidence” to prosecute him under Articles 87 and 88 of the Criminal Code.

Le Cong Cau reported his ordeal to UBCV leader Thich Quang Do and Deputy leader Thich Vien Dinh. Alarmed by the gravity of the police accusations, the UBCV leadership forwarded the report today to Vietnam Committee on Human Rights President Vo Van Ai, urging him to mobilize international support to protect Le Cong Cau. The VCHR is alerting the UN High Commission on Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Council which is currently holding its 22nd session in Geneva.

Le Cong Cau’s report gives a detailed account of the police interrogation. Unusually, it was not conducted by local police, but by an official from the Provincial Security Police, Nguyen Huu Chung, and two members of the Hue municipal Security Police. They began by showing Le Cong Cau several articles downloaded from the Internet which, they said, “slandered the regime and spread propaganda about an illegal organization named the UBCV”. They asked if he had written them and posted them on the Internet. Le Cong Cau affirmed he had written them all. He had not, however, posted them on the Internet himself, but sent them to the UBCV leadership who had forwarded them to the UBCV’s information office in Paris, the International Buddhist Information Bureau.

Specifically, the police accused Le Cong Cau of criticizing the Vietnamese Communist Party (VCP) and calling for political change; advocating on behalf of the UBCV; and denouncing the State-sponsored Vietnam Buddhist Sangha as a political tool of the regime. While admitting he had written on all these subjects, Le Cong Cau declared that he was expressing legitimate peaceful opinions, and thereby had committed no crime. The following extracts from his report give the tone of the exchange:

Officer Nguyen Huu Chung: Your articles slander the VCP and undermine the government’s prestige. In your “Appeal to Boycott Chinese Goods”, you say that the VCP is submissive, that it cowtows and grovels to the Chinese and has sold off Vietnamese territories and waters. Do you admit your errors?

Le Cong Cau: No, these are not errors. It was Pham Van Dong who gave up [the Spratley and Paracel islands] to China with his diplomatic note in 1958. Now, when the Chinese shoot dead, imprison or plunder our fishermen, all you do is to send a feeble protest for form’s sake, you don’t even dare reprimand the Chinese Ambassador. I call that submissive and groveling. Why don’t you take action like the Philippines [to bring China to court for violating the UNCLOS] or fight like our ancestors to protect our lands? You bring shame to our country. I will never accept that.

Officer Chung: Did you mastermind the UBCV’s call for anti-China demonstrations in July 2012? Don’t you know that it’s illegal to demonstrate without permission? Do you recognize your faults?

Le Cong Cau: The UBCV leadership called for demonstrations. I followed by urging members of the Buddhist Youth Movement to demonstrate in Hue, so we could match with the demonstrations in Hanoi and Saigon. The Constitution guarantees the right to demonstrate, so what have I done wrong?

Officer Chung: You know that the UBCV is an illegal organization. You are an intellectual, why do you persist in supporting the UBCV and opposing the state on the UBCV’s behalf? We know you are poor and in bad health. You live frugally on a diet of vegetarian sandwiches, and eat rice only once a day. What do you get out if it? What’s in it for you?

Le Cong Cau: The UBCV was a legal organization long before you came here. Its existence does not depend on any political regime. When the Republic of (South) Vietnam fell, the UBCV did not fall with it. I don’t support the UBCV to oppose the Communist regime. I only speak the truth. You stripped the UBCV of its legitimate status, and I demand that you restore it. What do I get out if this? I do what I do because of my ideals. I am nobody’s lackey. I am on nobody’s payroll. I am a beggar who lives according his conscience and with the help of Buddhist masters and friends.

Officer Chung: You know very well that the VCP and the government will never accept to reestablish the UBCV’s legitimate status. That is why you want to overthrow the Communist state, so you can win freedom for the UBCV. Am I right?

Le Cong Cau: You say that the VCP will never accept the UBCV’s legal status? In that case, yes, I would like the VCP’s one-Party system to give way to a regime based on the rule of law. But the UBCV is not only asking for freedom and legality for itself. Our goal is the freedom of 85 million Vietnamese. It is not written in the UBCV’s statutes, but I believe that every UBCV member feels this way. We are inspired by this spirit of freedom.

Officer Chung: The only Buddhist organization recognized by the government is the Vietnam Buddhist Sangha (VBS). Yet you have written articles denouncing the VBS as a political tool of the Communist Party. Do you realize that creating divisions between religious followers is a criminal offence?

Le Cong Cau: You believe in Marxism and you denounce capitalism. This has resulted in a fratricidal war in Vietnam that led both sides to slaughter each other for over 20 years. It’s you who have created divisions. Why are you blaming me?

On March 15th, the last day of the interrogation, Officer Chung made Le Cong Cau write a statement admitting that he had written articles accusing the VCP of selling off Vietnamese waters and lands; being submissive to China and repressive towards the Vietnamese people; persecuting religions and repressing pro-democracy activists and human rights defenders; advocating political pluralism; predicting the imminent demise of the Communist regime; and accusing the State-sponsored VBS of being a political tool of the VCP.

Le Cong Cau wrote the statement, but refused to recognize these acts as crimes. He tried to add to the statement: “I stand by my convictions and ideals. Everything I have done is in line with the rights enshrined in the Vietnamese Constitution. All those who try to prevent me are violating our Constitution. I refuse to collaborate with those who trample on the Vietnamese Constitution.” However, the security police struck these words off the statement.

In conclusion, Officer Nguyen Huu Chung told Le Cong Cau: “Today you have given us enough evidence to have you arrested and convicted under Article 87 on “sowing divisions between the religious and non-religious people” and Article 88 on “propaganda against the Communist Party and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam.” It depends on you whether your punishment is heavy or light. You had better stop, otherwise we will use heavier measures against you. Do you ask for our clemency to have a lighter sentence?”

Le Cong Cau replied: “If you arrest and sentence me, I will not ask for the clemency of the Party or the government. I accept full responsibility for my acts.”

The Vietnam Committee on Human Rights wholly endorses the right of Le Cong Cau to freely express his peaceful opinions. This right is guaranteed in Article 69 of the Vietnamese Constitution and Article 19 of the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Vietnam acceded in 1982, which enshrines the right of all people to “receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers”.

The VCHR calls on the international community to urgently press Vietnam to cease all police harassments against Le Cong Cau and guarantee his safety and security. “Vietnam cannot expect UN member states to seriously consider its bid for membership of the Human Rights Council at the UN General Assembly in September 2013 if it continues to trample so blatantly on its citizens’ basic rights,” said VCHR President Vo Van Ai.

Ieng Sary attends a court session on May 17th 2012. RFA Photo.

Khmer Rouge Tribunal proceedings must continue without unnecessary delays, Amnesty International said Thursday following the death of former Khmer Rouge foreign minister Ieng Sary.

Ieng Sary, 87, was standing trial for alleged crimes against humanity, genocide, and war crimes carried out during the period of Khmer Rouge rule in Cambodia in the 1970s.

The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, known also as the Khmer Rouge Tribunal, announced his death on Thursday morning. The two remaining accused in the case, Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan, are both over 77 years old.

Rupert Abbott, Amnesty International’s Researcher on Cambodia, in Phnom Penh, said:
“The news of Ieng Sary’s death will be difficult for the victims of the Khmer Rouge crimes who have waited so long for justice. But Ieng Sary should not be presumed guilty of the crimes alleged, as the proceedings against him were not completed and there has been no verdict.

Amnesty previously expressed concern that the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC) was moving towards dismissing the cases against additional suspects, amid an atmosphere of excessive and unnecessary secrecy, disciplinary measures jeopardizing prosecutors’ independence and reports of political intervention. The organization said that as a result, there is an increased risk of undermining the ECCC’s core mission, which is to provide justice to victims of the Khmer Rouge and to the people of Cambodia as a whole, and to leave behind a legacy of respect for the rule of law.

The Agreement between the United Nations and the government of Cambodia defines the mandate of the ECCC: “to bring to trial senior leaders of Democratic Kampuchea and those most responsible for the crimes and serious violations of Cambodian laws related to crimes, international humanitarian law and custom, and international conventions recognized by Cambodia, that were committed during the period from 17 April 1975 to 6 January 1979”.

“Amnesty International calls for an expeditious trial of the two remaining accused in this case, Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan, with fair trial rights respected. The Cambodian government and donor countries should provide the full resources required for the proceedings in this case and others to move forward, so that justice can be served,” Mr. Abbott added.