You are here

HRW / Africa

Subscribe to HRW / Africa feed
Updated: 1 month 3 weeks ago

Senegal/Chad: Court Upholds Habré Conviction

Sat, 29/04/2017 - 23:01

(Nairobi) – The decision on April 27, 2017, by the Extraordinary African Chambers in Senegal to uphold the conviction of former Chadian President Hissène Habré vindicates the persistence of the victims’ struggle for justice and the fight against impunity in Africa, Human Rights Watch said today.

On May 30, 2016, the Extraordinary African Chambers in the Senegalese court system convicted Habré and sentenced him to life in prison for his role in torture, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. The chambers were inaugurated by Senegal and the African Union in February 2013 to prosecute the “person or persons” most responsible for international crimes committed in Chad between 1982 and 1990, the period when Habré ruled Chad.

“For over 26 years, the many victims of Hissène Habré’s crimes fought courageously for justice to be done,” said Richard Dicker, international justice director at Human Rights Watch. “Today, their journey ends with the conviction of a once untouchable leader confirmed and his life sentenced upheld, giving hope to victims everywhere.”

Expand

Hissene Habre

Habré’s trial, which began on July 20, 2015, was the first in the world in which the courts of one country prosecuted the former ruler of another for alleged human rights crimes. It was also the first case on the principle of universal jurisdiction to proceed to trial in Africa. The principle allows countries to try a small number of very grave crimes in their domestic courts – regardless of where the crimes were committed or the nationality of the victims.

Habré fled to Senegal in 1990 after being deposed by the current Chadian president, Idriss Déby Itno. Although Habré was first arrested and indicted in Senegal in 2000, it took a long campaign by his victims before the Extraordinary African Chambers were inaugurated in February 2013 to prosecute international crimes committed in Chad during Habré’s rule.

Habré’s one-party rule was marked by widespread atrocities, including waves of ethnic cleansing. Files from Habré’s political police, the Direction de la Documentation et de la Sécurité (DDS), which were recovered by Human Rights Watch in 2001, reveal the names of 1,208 people who were killed or died in detention, and 12,321 victims of human rights violations.

Human Rights Watch extensively documented the Habré government’s responsibility for widespread political killings, systematic torture, and thousands of arbitrary arrests. Together with Chadian victims’ groups and rights activists, Human Rights Watch worked for over 15 years to advance justice for these crimes. The African Extraordinary Chamber’s decision on April 27 marks the culmination of these efforts.

Categories: Africa

Effort to Silence Ugandan Feminist Firebrand Speaks Volumes

Sat, 29/04/2017 - 23:01
Expand

Ugandan prominent academic Stella Nyanzi (L) speaks with her lawyer during court appearance for criticising the wife of President Yoweri Museveni on social media, at Buganda Road Court, Kampala, Uganda April 10, 2017.

© 2017 Reuters

“When you hear of my arrest, prepare your most comfortable clothes for you will soon be travelling to my village-home in Kalinga to bury me in the brown earth next to my father.  When you hear of my arrest, tell the judge assigned to my case that I forgive the injustice with which the trial will be tried…”

Ugandan academic and firebrand feminist critic Dr. Stella Nyanzi posted those words on her Facebook page on March 31. On April 7, after a talk at Kampala’s Rotary Club about her campaign to raise money to buy sanitary pads for schoolgirls, her words came true; 21 days later, she remains behind bars.

For her sexually explicit stories and pointed criticism of government – in a frank and often expletive-laden mix of English and Luganda – Nyanzi grew a significant following on social media. In a conservative country, she shocked many. But she drew popular support, arguing that President Yoweri Museveni and his wife, the minister of education, had broken election promises to provide sanitary pads to school girls. After 31 years in office, she argued, Museveni was “raping” the constitution by staying in power.  

In March, she was interrogated by police, and the government blocked her from traveling to attend an international conference on March 19. State agents arrested her after the Rotary event, and police charged her under Uganda’s Computer Misuse Act for referring to Museveni as a “pair of buttocks” on Facebook.

It would be funny, if it weren’t so tragic: the most flagrant attack on free expression in many years and a vengeful use of Uganda’s justice system to silence a government critic.

Nyanzi has been denied bail, spending the Easter holidays in prison. State attorneys argue she should undergo a psychiatric examination to determine if she has an “unsound mind” – a tactic to delegitimize her criticism. Prison officials have, at times, denied her access to her lawyers, to her three young children, and to her books and writing materials.

The court is to re-hear her bail application on May 10, but, if the psychiatric examination is ordered by court, she could still face detention in an institution – even without the criminal case.

Prosecutors should drop the charges against Nyanzi. All officials should expect criticism, even if it’s rudely worded. To criticize the president, to use vulgarity and metaphor to shock or inspire, are recognized rights.

If Nyanzi isn’t granted bail or faces a psychiatric examination, it will speak volumes, and we must respond just as loudly. 

Categories: Africa

South Sudan: New Spate of Ethnic Killings

Sun, 16/04/2017 - 10:40

(Nairobi) – Government soldiers and allied militias deliberately killed at least 16 civilians in South Sudan’s western town of Wau on April 10, 2017, in what appears to be an act of collective punishment, Human Rights Watch said today. The attacks were against people presumed to support the opposition because of their ethnicity.

Expand

Christine Elia, 27, holds her twin sons at a displaced persons camp protected by U.N. peacekeepers in Wau, South Sudan, September 4, 2016. 2016. 

© 2016 Reuters

The killings followed weeks of tensions in the area, where South Sudan’s government has carried out an abusive counterinsurgency operation since late 2015. When the UN Security Council meets to discuss South Sudan later in April, it should condemn these crimes and ask the peacekeeping mission in South Sudan what steps it intends to take to deter further revenge killings in Wau and the surrounding area.

“The pattern of abuses by government forces against civilians in Wau has become predictable, with soldiers taking revenge against unarmed civilians based on their ethnicity,” said Daniel Bekele, senior director for Africa advocacy at Human Rights Watch. “The South Sudan authorities need to call a halt to the killings, investigate, and bring those responsible to justice.”

In November, a special investigation commissioned by the UN recommended that peacekeepers should move around in armored vehicles rather than remaining in their bases to better identify threats to civilian lives and prevent rapes on their doorstep. The UN is expected to release an update on steps it has taken to carry out those recommendations on April 17.

Hostilities erupted on April 8, outside of Wau, when government forces opened an offensive on opposition-controlled areas and opposition groups counter-attacked. The opposition killed two high-ranking government officers, including a prominent member of the Dinka tribe from the neighboring Lakes region.

On April 10, government soldiers and Dinka militiamen went from house to house in ethnic Fertit and Luo neighbourhoods on the southwest side of Wau, and killed at least 16 civilians, apparently in retaliation for the killing of the two men. Government authorities prevented UN peacekeepers from moving freely around the town, limiting their access to areas where the violence occurred.

The recent violence displaced nearly 8,000 people, about 3,800 of who sought safety in the Catholic church. Others have moved to a site adjacent to the United Nations’ Mission to South Sudan base, where more than 25,000 people had already gathered under UN protection.

A 26-year-old Fertit, mother-of-four, who is married to a Luo and was living in the Nazareth neighbourhood, said she was at home preparing a fire when she heard gunshots in the morning of April 10: “The attackers came over to my house. They wore civilian clothes, had their faces whitened with ashes, and carried spears and guns. I lied and told them that my husband was a Dinka and they said they would not kill me because I am their wife. They said: ‘don’t go out in the streets because we are killing people.’ When it calmed down, I went to my neighbor’s house. She had been shot in the eye. Her four children, between 3 and 15, were hiding under the bed. They were killed too. I saw their bodies.”

Human Rights Watch expressed concern about the possibility of further attacks on civilians, and urged the peacekeeping mission, UNMISS, to increase the number of troops stationed in Wau and to ensure adequate patrols of sensitive areas, such as around the Catholic church and southwest of the city. After Kenyan troops withdrew from the peacekeeping mission in 2016, the contingent in Wau has been short staffed. The UN’s response to the deteriorating situation in Wau will be an important test of the mission’s ability to improve protection of civilians in hostile environments, especially following attacks on bases in Malakal and Juba last year, Human Rights Watch said.

In Wau, the abuses have followed a familiar pattern in recent years, with hostilities between government soldiers and opposition forces followed by retaliatory attacks by mostly Dinka government forces and militias against ethnic Fertit and Luo civilians.

In May 2016, Human Rights Watch documented a surge in government abuses against civilians in Wau and surrounding villages beginning in late December 2015, after the government deployed a large numbers of new soldiers, mostly Dinka from the former states of Northern Bahr el-Ghazal and Warrap, to the area. Government soldiers were responsible for a spate of targeted killings and arbitrary detentions and abuse of ethnic Fertit and Luo civilians in February and again in June. The violence and abuses in June forced more than 70,000 to flee.

South Sudan’s government has taken little action to stop these attacks on civilians. Following each round of violence in 2016, president Salva Kiir appointed investigation committees. The first one visited Wau in March and the second in in early July. A report submitted to president Kiir on August 1 found that at least 50 civilians had been killed on June 24 and 25, more than 100 shops were looted, and tens of thousands of civilians were displaced; but no further criminal investigations or prosecutions were carried out. While the media reported that the army executed two soldiers on July 22 who had been convicted by a military court for the murder of two civilians in a residential area of Wau, no other steps were taken.

On April 12, President Kiir announced an investigation of the most recent killings. But the government’s track record of investigating these kinds of incidents in Wau and its weak judicial system raise questions about its credibility. Credible criminal investigations and transparent judicial procedures against those responsible are urgently needed, Human Rights Watch said.

The government forces’ continuing crimes against civilians in Wau and the lack of accountability underscore the urgent need for the hybrid court envisioned in the 2015 peace agreement. Despite the agreement, government soldiers have committed widespread violence against civilians, not just in Wau, but also in Juba, Malakal and the Equatorias, Human Rights Watch researchers found.

Human Rights Watch has also repeatedly called on the United Nations Security Council to impose a comprehensive arms embargo on South Sudan to reduce harm to civilians by increasing the cost of weapons used to attack them. In December 2016, an attempt to pass an arms embargo at the Security Council failed when eights members abstained. They included Egypt and Japan, which still sit on the Security Council.

“South Sudan’s military commanders have once again shown they won’t stop the abuse or hold anyone to account, and instead they obstruct peacekeepers from doing their jobs to protect civilians,” Bekele said. “The UN Security Council should make it clear that there will be a price to pay for this kind of obstruction.”

Categories: Africa

Côte d’Ivoire: Letter - Simone Gbagbo Trial Didn’t Advance Justice

Sun, 16/04/2017 - 10:40

April 13, 2017

Mr. Ange Rodrigue DADJE
Ms. Habiba TOURE

Dear Mr. Dadje and Ms. Touré,

We write in response to your press release, issued on April 4, 2017, regarding the March 28 acquittal of Simone Gbagbo in Côte d’Ivoire’s Cour d’Assises.

Human Rights Watch documented the terrible crimes committed by both pro-Gbagbo and pro-Ouattara forces during the 2010-11 post-election crisis, and we have consistently advocated for investigations and prosecutions for those most responsible from both sides.

The trial of Simone Gbagbo for war crimes and crimes against humanity did little to advance the cause of justice. The inadequacy of the investigation and the prosecution’s decision to try her in isolation from other leaders from the Gbagbo camp denied the court the opportunity to fully explore her role in the post-election crisis. At the same time, fundamental due process concerns, such as the failure to disclose prosecution evidence in a timely manner, denied Simone Gbagbo a fair trial. While the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) outstanding case against her may offer another avenue for victims, there has so far been insufficient progress—at the ICC and in Côte d’Ivoire —to deliver justice to victims of grave abuses committed by pro-Ouattara forces.

In the months leading up to Simone Gbagbo’s trial for crimes against humanity and war crimes, human rights groups, including Human Rights Watch, warned the Ivorian government about the risk of an unfair and incomplete hearing into her role in the crimes alleged. We expressed concern that the trial risked replicating Simone Gbagbo’s prior March 2015 conviction and 20-year sentence for crimes against the state. The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) stated in March 2015 that that conviction was obtained “on the basis of little credible evidence,” while Human Rights Watch said that the 2015 trial was “not conducted in accordance with international fair trial standards.”

In May 2016, on the eve of her trial for crimes against humanity and war crimes, the Ivorian government’s failure to address concerns regarding the completeness of the investigation into Simone Gbagbo, as well as the decision to try Gbagbo in isolation from other officials, led FIDH and its Ivorian partner organizations, MIDH and LIDHO, to withdraw their participation as civil parties in the trial. In explaining the decision to withdraw, FIDH expressed its belief that the trial “will not satisfy fair trial standards and will not do justice to victims.” The ultimate conduct of the trial demonstrates that these concerns were well-founded.

Simone Gbagbo’s acquittal is not necessarily a bar to prosecution at the ICC. As you know, in 2012 the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Simone Gbagbo for four counts of crimes against humanity committed during the 2010-2011 post-election crisis. The Ivorian government in 2013 challenged the admissibility of the case against her, arguing that she was being investigated domestically for similar crimes. ICC judges, however, rejected the request, stating that the investigative steps in Côte d’Ivoire into Simone Gbagbo’s responsibility were “scarce in quantity and lacking in progression.” The Ivorian government, and Simone Gbagbo herself, may now wish to again challenge her case before the ICC, arguing that she has now been tried for the same charges in Côte d’Ivoire.

However, under article 20(3) of the Rome Statute, the ICC may try an individual for the same conduct if the prior proceedings were for the purpose of “shielding the person concerned from criminal responsibility” or were “not conducted independently or impartially in accordance with the norms of due process recognized by international law and were conducted in a manner which, in the circumstances, was inconsistent with an intent to bring the person concerned to justice.” It is now for ICC judges to determine if Simone Gbagbo’s case remains admissible before the court. The incompleteness of the investigation undertaken in Côte d’Ivoire, and the resulting quality of her trial, may be relevant factors that they consider in making their decision.       

Finally, we share your concern that the proceedings against Simone Gbagbo, as well as the ongoing ICC trial of her husband, underscore the Ivorian government’s failure to hold pro-Ouattara commanders accountable for their role in human rights abuses during the post-election crisis.

At the time of the post-election crisis, Human Rights Watch documented hundreds of extrajudicial killings by pro-Ouattara forces, both in the west of Côte d’Ivoire during the Republican Forces’ offensive and during the battle for Abidjan. Human Rights Watch’s October 2011 report on abuses committed by both sides listed the names of the pro-Ouattara commanders, who, based on our research, merited further criminal investigation as key players in the abuses we had documented. Since the post-election crisis, Human Rights Watch has regularly denounced the Ivorian justice system’s failure, and that of the ICC, to hold pro-Ouattara commanders accountable in court, including in major reports published in 2013 and 2016

We understand that, as lawyers for Simone Gbagbo, your role is to advance your clients’ best interests where possible. As a human rights organization committed to the independence and impartiality of the justice process, we will continue to work with victims of Côte d’Ivoire’s devastating post-election crisis to ensure that those responsible for human rights violations from all sides are held accountable.

Yours sincerely,

Corinne Dufka
Director, West Africa
Human Rights Watch

Param-Preet Singh
Associate Director
International Justice Program
Human Rights Watch

Categories: Africa

Ethiopia: No Justice in Somali Region Killings

Fri, 07/04/2017 - 22:28

(Nairobi) Ethiopian authorities have failed to hold accountable a paramilitary force that killed at least 21 villagers in the Somali region of Ethiopia in June 2016. The government should promptly grant access to independent international monitors to investigate these killings and other reported abuses by this force, known as the “Liyu police.”

On June 5, 2016, Liyu police members entered the village of Jaamac Dubad in eastern Ethiopia’s Somali Regional State after an officer had been wounded in a dispute with local traders. The police started shooting indiscriminately, killing at least 14 men and seven women, and then looted shops and houses. Nine months later, survivors said they were not aware of any investigation into the killings and had not received any compensation.

Expand

A toddler shows a scar from the shot he sustained in the chest during the Jamaac Dubad killings, when he was 5-months-old. His mother and grandmother were killed in the incident, December 2016.

© 2016 Human Rights Watch

“Liyu police killed 21 villagers in the Somali region and devastated this vulnerable community, but there’s no sign that the government is working to bring anyone to justice for these killings,” said Felix Horne, senior Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch. “Ethiopian authorities should end their indifference to the murderous operations by this paramilitary force and work with international monitors to investigate their abuses.”

Ethiopian authorities created the Liyu (“special” in Amharic) police for the Somali region in 2007, when an armed conflict between the insurgent Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF) and the government escalated. By 2008, the Liyu police had become a prominent counterinsurgency force recruited and led by then-regional security chief Abdi Mohammed Omar, known as “Abdi Illey.” Abdi Illey became the president of Somali Regional State in 2010, and the Liyu police continue to report to him.

The Liyu police have frequently been implicated in extrajudicial killings, torture, rape, and violence against people in the Somali region, as well as in retaliatory attacks against local communities. There has also been growing evidence of attacks by the group against communities outside of the Somali region, including in the Oromia region since late December 2016, and in Somalia.

Between December and February 2017, Human Rights Watch interviewed 31 residents of Jaamac Dubad and people from nearby villages, including 10 witnesses to the June 5 killings who had fled to neighboring Somaliland.

Survivors and witnesses to the June 5 violence said that the Liyu police entered and encircled the village with vehicles, then fired randomly at people gathered in the market and at women near their homes and shops, and directly at those who tried to flee. Witnesses said that they had not seen any of their community members using firearms in response.

“The bullets were flying all over the place,” said a 40-year-old woman. “I came out of my house, saw that many people were fleeing, and saw people in uniform shooting. … With my four children, I just left my house. The Liyu police were shooting as we fled.” She said that two women running behind her were shouting that they had been hit.

During the shooting, many residents fled the village. The next day, the Liyu police prevented residents from returning to bury the 21people killed. Witnesses told Human Rights Watch that when they were able to return, they found that there had been widespread looting of shops and houses in the village, with food, goods, and money missing.

In the ensuing weeks, the Liyu police conducted a disarmament operation in neighboring villages, detaining dozens of residents and beating several.

Since 2007, the Ethiopian government has imposed tight controls on access to the Somali region for independent journalists and human rights monitors. Ethiopia’s regional and federal governments should urgently facilitate access for investigations by independent human rights investigators, including the United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial and summary executions, of the shootings at Jaamac Dubad and other alleged serious abuses by the Liyu police, Human Rights Watch said. The governments should promptly compensate those harmed and the families of those killed.

“The Liyu police’s killing of 21 people is one in a long list of serious abuses for which this force has escaped scot-free,” Horne said. “The scale of their abuses over the last decade warrants international scrutiny, and Ethiopia’s international supporters should push for access to independent investigators into the Somali region to ensure that no one else has to suffer at their hands.”

For details about Human Rights Watch’s findings, please see below.

Abuses in Ethiopia’s Somali Region

The Somali region has been the site of a low-level insurgency by the Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF) for more than a decade and a major counterinsurgency campaign since April 2007. However, the area has not been directly affected by the largely peaceful protests that have swept Ethiopia since 2015 or the government’s bloody crackdown on them.

In a June 2008 report, Human Rights Watch found that the Ethiopian National Defense Force and the ONLF had committed war crimes in the Somali region between mid-2007 and early 2008, and that the Ethiopian armed forces could be responsible for crimes against humanity. These abuses have never been independently investigated.

Expand

A toddler who at age 5 months was hit by a bullet in the leg during the Jamaac Dubad killings.  His mother and grandmother were killed in the incident, December 2016. 

© 2016 Human Rights Watch

The Liyu police was established as part of the counter-insurgency campaign. Human Rights Watch has received credible allegations of abuses by the Liyu police, including extrajudicial killings, torture, rape, and other abuses of civilians accused of being members of or sympathetic to the ONLF.

The government has responded to reports of abuses in the Somali region over the years by severely restricting or controlling access for journalists, human rights groups, and aid organizations. Criticism of the local authorities, particularly of Abdi Illey, the regional president, is not tolerated, both inside and outside of Ethiopia. Arbitrary arrests and mistreatment of family members of Ethiopian-Australians who protested Abdi Illey’s June 2016 visit to Australia illustrates the regional authorities’ ongoing repression of dissent, Human Rights Watch said.

Human Rights Watch has also found other evidence of Liyu police abuses against people in parts of the Somali region that had never been a source of support for the ONLF, including in the Gashaamo district, largely populated by the ethnic Somali Isaaq clan. In 2012, the Liyu police summarily executed 10 people and committed other serious abuses, including torture and looting, in four villages in the Gashaamo district. Human Rights Watch received credible reports of reprisal killings against civilians, including women and children, in May and June 2015, following fighting between the Liyu police and clan militia near the Somalia border. A United Nations security council monitoring group found that an estimated 30 to 40 people were killed.

Since December 2016, credible reports have emerged of Liyu police incursions into the neighboring Oromia region. While there has been sporadic fighting on both sides of the Oromia-Somali regional border areas between ethnic Oromo and Somali pastoralists, sometimes involving the Liyu police, recent incidents have been far more violent, involving armed men on both sides. Dozens of casualties have been reported to Human Rights Watch, including many civilians in Oromia. Restrictions on access have made it difficult to corroborate details.

Killings in Jaamac Dubad, June 2016

On June 5, 2016, a Liyu police officer was injured, according to second-hand sources, during a shootout between Liyu police forces and unidentified gunmen linked to local traders of khat, a stimulant grown in the Ethiopian highlands. According to residents and media reports, Liyu police members had tried to confiscate a vehicle owned by local traders after it was involved in an accident with a government ambulance. The shootout occurred near Jaamac Dubad in the Gashaamo district, when the Liyu police towed the car away.

Around midday, Liyu police vehicles entered Jaamac Dubad apparently looking for those involved in the shootout. Ten survivors and witnesses said that Liyu police began firing indiscriminately around the village and directly at fleeing people. Residents, including people who saw their relatives’ bodies, said that at least four women and two men had been shot in the upper body and head.

One community elder said Liyu police arrested him and two other elders as they headed toward the village: “We were two kilometers outside Jaamac Dubad walking toward it when the Liyu police drove by, stopped their vehicles, and grabbed us. They choked me and threw me to the ground. I broke a vertebra in my lower neck.” He showed Human Rights Watch an X-ray of the broken bone. The elder said he was later sentenced for illegally assisting khat traders and imprisoned for over two months.

While pastoralist communities such as those in and around Jaamac Dubad are likely to have small arms to protect their animals, Human Rights Watch did not find any evidence that residents in the village engaged that day in armed resistance to the Liyu police. One resident said she saw the former village administrator run into his house to pick up his gun after the Liyu police entered the village but said he was gunned down before he was able to shoot at anyone.

“Abdi,” an elderly man who was in the market when the shooting started said:

Vehicles drove quickly into town and slammed on the brakes, [Liyu] police got out, and immediately started firing at people. They weren’t firing into the air. Sometimes they would shoot directly at people, other times they were just randomly shooting at the crowds. People were running everywhere, only to find their way blocked by the Liyu police. If those running managed to make it through, the Liyu police would chase after them shooting.

An 80-year-old man saw another elderly man trying to escape toward the eastern part of the town. He said: “Dhabuke was running and was shot by a soldier from behind. He was hit in the shoulders and fell face forward. He died immediately.”

Expand

A toddler, then 5-months old, who was wounded but survived the Jamaac Dubad killings. His mother and grandmother were killed in the incident, December 4, 2016.

© 2016 Human Rights Watch

One young woman was holding her 5-month-old son when she was fatally shot. The baby was hit in the chest and leg but survived. The woman’s mother and a neighbor were also killed. A family member described the wounds she saw:

My sister had been hit on the lower arm and in the head. My mother was hit in the left side under her breast. The other woman [a neighbor] had a big [gunshot] wound, just in the middle of her chest.

During the shootings, a number of people ran into the village mosque seeking shelter. Liyu police officers pursued them and fired through the main door into the mosque. At least one elderly man, “Abdirahman,” was wounded – shot in the leg – while inside the mosque.

At least two men managed to escape through another door. Mohamed, 60, said, “My cousin ran out of the door [of the mosque] facing the market. He was shot in the side of the head. They [the Liyu police] were five meters from him, chasing him, there was two of them, behind them were two others, and behind them were two more.”

Altogether, the shooting lasted one hour.

The Liyu police detained several men and women outdoors until the following afternoon. The baby boy who was seriously injured was handed over to those detained, as the baby’s aunt later learned. She said:

There were women who were held as prisoners by the Liyu police around Jaamac Dubad. They were released at 4 p.m. [on June 6]. One of them had my nephew with her. I asked how they had found the child, and they said that a government representative from Gashaamo came to us when they were detained and gave them the child. He had told the women that the child had received first aid and that his dead mother had been holding him when they found him.

Residents fled the fighting into the countryside and neighboring villages. For almost a day after the killings, the Liyu police prevented other residents from returning to the village to bury their dead.

“Abdirahman” managed to crawl back to his home the following morning:

My macawis [Somali sarong] was full of blood and it was becoming hard, so I wanted to change it. But when I arrived at my house, I searched for my macawis and I couldn’t find any. My mattress, my mosquito net, my bed sheets, my pillows, everything was missing from my house.

He said that on the morning of June 6, while the Liyu police and Ethiopian forces were still restricting entrance into the village, he and another man who was badly injured were given first aid, and driven in a private vehicle to the nearest hospital, in the town of Gashaamo, about 25 kilometers away.

The forces allowed residents to return in the afternoon of June 6. Residents as well as people from neighboring villages came to bury the dead. The Liyu police, along with Ethiopian army officials and local officials, were present throughout the burial. Two residents said that the mayor of Gashaamo ordered the residents to be silent throughout the burial and not to cry. The residents dug a mass grave then left the village again. As one woman who lost two family members said: “We were scared, we had no time, so we buried them all in one big grave. Everyone worked to put the bodies to rest. The Liyu police were all over the place.”

Residents of Jaamac Dubad, including witnesses to the killings and people who arrived the day of the burial, all said that their shops and houses had been looted of property, food, and money after the shootings. While most had not seen the looting, they believed that the Liyu police were responsible. One man who was among the residents detained overnight in the village said he saw the Liyu police looting his shop early on the evening of June 5.

The incident occurred shortly before the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, so the shops were better stocked than usual. The aunt of the injured baby said:

My sister who was killed had come from Hargeisa [capital of Somaliland] – she had only been back in the village 10 days – she had brought a lot of food and sugar. When we went to our house we saw that they had taken the clothes and food. I also saw that they had broken into many of the shops.

Arbitrary Detention, Ill-Treatment During Disarmament

In the weeks following the June 5 killings, the Liyu police conducted a disarmament operation in the villages neighboring Jaamac Dubad, including Bodadheere, Gorgor, Ina Nur Muse, all inhabited by communities from the same sub-clans as Jaamac Dubad. They arrested dozens of people, detaining them in makeshift facilities, trying to get them to turn over their guns. Human Rights Watch spoke to nine people who were detained during operations. They said that they thought that the Liyu police feared that the local community would retaliate against them for the killings.

Several residents said that the Liyu police kicked and beat them with gun butts on their backs and shoulders when they were first detained and later in detention when they failed to produce a gun.

The Liyu police detained residents between two days and a month without charge, while the community was ordered to collect enough weapons to secure their release. Liyu police detained women to get the weapons belonging to husbands or fathers who were not there. One woman said she was detained for two days with her baby. Another woman said she was among 13 women detained in the Ina Nur Muse village school:

I was held for 13 days. There were six of us in one classroom, and seven in another. They would beat us with their gun butts, they would pull us out of the classroom to beat us and convince us to hand over guns. They would give us one meal in detention in the evening. I have five children, who I could not see during detention. My uncle in Bilincle [a village in Somaliland] sent a gun to secure my release.

Those interviewed by Human Rights Watch had fled their homes in the days following the shootings and the sweeps. Many had not returned to their homes as of December 2016 because of the violence and an ongoing drought. Some have nothing to return to. One 33-year-old woman said: “I was married with seven children and had a shop. But now my shop is looted and closed, and my husband is dead. My little baby was just 10 days old when it happened. I am very upset and don’t want to go back, but my home is there.”

Categories: Africa

Human Rights Watch Testimony at Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on African Affairs and Global Health Policy on Dodd-Frank Section 1502

Fri, 07/04/2017 - 22:28

 

Testimony to the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on African Affairs and Global Health Policy Regarding Dodd-Frank Section 1502

Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Booker and other members of the subcommittee,

Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify today on Dodd-Frank Section 1502 and its impact on addressing the trade in “Conflict Minerals.” Human Rights Watch has documented abuses in the Democratic Republic of Congo since the fall of Mobutu Sese Seko and throughout the country’s vicious civil war and the violence and abuses that continue. 

Since 2005, we have documented the pernicious effect that the trade in gold has had on civilians in eastern Congo. Numerous armed groups, foreign-backed rebels, and at times the Congolese army have killed, raped, pillaged, and forcibly conscripted child soldiers as they sought to gain or maintain control of lucrative gold mines, which in turn helped finance their abusive movements. We’ve also documented how a major mining company paid a rebel group to explore for gold in its concession area in 2005.

It is for these reasons that Human Rights Watch supported and continues to support Dodd-Frank 1502. We never saw it as a panacea to stop the abuses or violence in Congo completely. Rather, we saw it as an important tool to help address a specific goal:  stopping the flow of funds to abusive armed groups who were exploiting Congo’s lucrative mining resources through increased transparency and accountability. 

Related Content

Today, we are here because Dodd-Frank 1502 may be suspended or even revoked. We know legislation can sometimes be a blunt tool and that it can have unintended consequences. With that in mind, we welcome a discussion on how Section 1502 can fulfill its objectives more efficiently; however, we strongly believe that its suspension or revocation would be damaging for security, human rights, and for responsible companies. To be crystal clear: if the president suspends the law or if Congress revokes it, we believe that the repercussions would be very serious.

This hearing comes at a critical time in Congo. Over the past two years, government officials and security forces have carried out a brutal campaign of repression against those opposed to President Joseph Kabila’s efforts to stay in power beyond the December 19, 2016 end of his constitutionally mandated two-term limit. Scores of peaceful protesters have been killed, pro-democracy activists and opposition leaders have been imprisoned, and media outlets have been shuttered. After significant pressure from the international community —including targeted US sanctions against top officials and other strong measures backed by this Congress—President Kabila made some important concessions in an end-of-the year deal mediated by the Catholic Church.

This agreement calls for presidential elections to be held by the end of this year and says clearly that there will be no changes to the constitution or a referendum to allow Kabila to run for a third term. Yet implementation of the deal has stalled, as violence between militia groups and the Congolese security forces have escalated in many parts of the country, along with an alarming increase in human rights violations. Some of these situations are directly linked to Kabila staying in power beyond the end of his constitutional mandate. Kabila has agreed to hold elections and step down from power, and the prospects for stability likely hinge on whether he abides by that commitment. Continued US engagement and strong pressure on Kabila to do so is critical. 

Last month, two members of the UN Group of Experts on Congo, Michael Sharp, an American, and Zaida Catalán, from Sweden, were killed while investigating large-scale human rights abuses in Congo’s central Kasai region. It remains unclear who was responsible for the murders. The Group of Experts has been instrumental over the years in exposing the links between the trade in natural resources, armed groups, sanctions-busting, and the violence in Congo.

In this context, suspending or eliminating Dodd-Frank 1502 would make an already explosive situation in Congo worse. Abusive armed groups, factions of the security forces, and other opaque mafia-like networks allegedly linked to government officials could then easily return to the lucrative mines in eastern Congo to finance their activities. This could lead to new security problems throughout the volatile region—where some of Congo’s nine neighboring countries have illegally benefitted from the country’s vast mineral wealth. And it could also create direct security risks for the United States, which has a clear interest in promoting a more stable and peaceful central Africa region.

Suspending Dodd-Frank 1502 would also harm responsible American companies that have embraced the law and the principles that underpin it, including some of this country’s most successful and well-known companies, such as Apple, Intel, and Tiffany. They and others would suddenly be placed at a competitive disadvantage against other companies that prefer to operate opaquely in a way that could fund armed groups. Eliminating the rule would punish responsible companies and reward irresponsible ones by creating a “race to the bottom,” legalizing opaque sourcing of conflict minerals while disadvantaging companies that choose to keep their supply chains clean.

In the absence of 1502, it is possible that civil society groups could end up pressing for targeted sanctions on the Congolese minerals sector if it becomes clear that abusive armed groups are profiting from this trade. Such targeted sanctions are typically the approach the international community has taken in recent years to address similar problems. While understandable, this is a much more draconian approach than the transparency and auditing procedures 1502 require. These are serious consequences for Congo, for major US companies, and for human rights.   

Suspending 1502 Will Make It Easier to Fund Armed Groups Secretly

The fundamental purpose of Dodd-Frank 1502 is to keep money out of the hands of armed groups that trade in and profit from certain minerals. Human rights groups, responsible companies, and the US government have shared this goal for many years. It is important not to lose this aspect of the law: it is a rare instance where key institutions in and out of government agree on what the problems is, want to stop it, and have managed to put a law in place to help do it. That is something Congress and the administration should support.

Without the law, it would be easier for abusive armed groups to fund themselves secretly, whichcould help to further destabilize parts of Congo. In mid-March, Bloomberg news reported that the Congolese Minister of Mines, Martin Kabwelulu, wrote the US Securities and Exchange Commission, warning that eliminating 1502 would lead to an “escalation in the activities of non-state armed groups.” The US has sought for decades to help de-escalate these activities; removing a tool that can help do that undercuts longstanding US foreign policy objectives.

This problem could be exacerbated by the administration’s possible budget cuts for UN peacekeeping in Congo and by possible further cuts to other foreign assistance to Congo. The combination of suspending or eliminating 1502 while cutting support to peacekeeping and other foreign assistance could make it easier for abusive armed groups to make money from conflict minerals while simultaneously reducing funds to entities meant to curtail conflict and foster stability.

Considering Congress’ longstanding interest in Congo, the fragile situation on the ground, and the billions of dollars the US has spent on peacekeeping efforts in the country, this scenario would be extraordinarily counterproductive to US geopolitical and security interests.

While imperfect, Dodd Frank has already had some tangible positive effects for the people of eastern Congo and those seeking greater transparency. Since 2012, mining at the Kalimbi tin mine in Nyabibwe, South Kivu, for example, has had a functional traceability scheme, which allows for the continuous production of tin that benefits the local workers, and not the abusive armed groups or corrupt army or government officials.  

Global Witness reported that in 2012, the Congolese government suspended the operations of two Chinese companies because they failed to carry out proper due diligence and suspected they may be sourcing from armed groups.  But it is troubling that the same year, Global Witness reported that two Congolese army officers were caught trying to smuggle more than 1,000 pounds of minerals, including coltan. The government refused to press charges, but the officer who stopped them and tried to stop the smuggling was suspended from his post. At present, however, we have some indications that Congolese government officials are starting to take actions to prevent mineral wealth from illegally profiting armed groups or army officers.

It is also important to remember the types of groups that could be emboldened and enriched without the transparency and systems Dodd-Frank requires. Human Rights Watch and others have documented the abuses by several armed groups that benefited from this trade and the harm they have caused. This includes the armed group known as the Nduma Defense of Congo-Renové (NDC-R), one of the most abusive groups operating in eastern Congo that benefits greatly from the uncontrolled and illicit exploitation of gold there. Traceability efforts so far have had a much greater impact on tin, tantalum, and tungsten than on gold. The NDC-R has committed serious human rights violations, including the killings of dozens of civilians and recruitment of children over the past two years.

Last month, my colleagues were in eastern Congo’s Walikale territory in North Kivu and met with several former child soldiers from NDC-R and miners. They told us how the group led by Guidon Shimiray Mwissa is systemically taxing the lucrative gold trade in dozens of mining sites. By holding a monopoly on things like alcohol and cigarettes in the mining pits and illegally taxing those who work in or near the mines, Guidon is making over $20,000 a month. According to some of his former cadres, he’s also allegedly trading gold for weapons.  

Suspending Dodd-Frank 1502 would make it easier for other abusive armed groups and corrupt officials to enrich themselves the way Guidon is by making the trade even more opaque and easier to do business with armed groups. This would make an already bad situation even worse.

Suspending or Eliminating Dodd-Frank 1502 Will Disadvantage Responsible US Companies

Suspending or revoking Dodd-Frank 1502 would hurt some of the United States’ leading companies, such as Tiffany, Intel, and Apple.  These firms have taken meaningful steps to keep their supply chains free from links to abuses in Congo and would be placed at a competitive disadvantage against companies inclined to operate less responsibly. 

Responsible companies have worked hard to comply with the requirements of 1502. In March 2016, Apple announced that 100 percent of its conflict mineral supply chain had been audited to ensure compliance with Dodd-Frank 1502. That move was widely praised by human rights groups. While its supplies were not fully conflict-free, it has achieved the kind of oversight needed to eliminate conflict minerals from its supply chain. It took the company about six years of steady work on the ground and with its suppliers to meet this goal. But Apple is not just focusing on its legal requirements; it is also trying to clean up its cobalt supply chain after facing scrutiny over problems in it.

Intel began to examine conflict minerals in 2008 and has reported that its microprocessors have been conflict free since 2013. The company has said that it was on track to make its entire product base conflict-free. It took several years for the company to get control over its supply chains and build the capacity to source from properly audited mines.  

Also, Intel commissioned an important study on Millennials’ attitudes towards conflict minerals. The survey provides useful insights into the minds of key consumers. 97 percent of those surveyed believed that companies should “act in a way that benefits society.” Almost 70 percent would avoid companies that they think are not socially responsible. About 70 percent cared about conflict minerals once they learned about them, and a similar percentage said that how a company dealt with conflict minerals would influence whether they bought its products. Dodd-Frank 1502 gives consumers the information they need to make decisions, helps companies meet those expectations, and isolates companies that do not.

Tiffany & Co., one of the world’s most recognizable and prestigious jewelry companies, has also invested a considerable amount of time and resources to ensure that it monitors its supply chain to exclude conflict minerals.  It conducts detailed reviews of its global supply chains.  It works, like other companies, with programs to support conflict-free smelters and other initiatives. The company has made the investment to ensure its products are conflict-free.

Each of these companies is an American icon and a leader in their industries. And each of them does not want Dodd-Frank 1502 or comparable regulation to go away. 

When it became apparent that 1502 might be suspended, Tiffany issued a statement noting “we firmly believe that the continued existence of Federal regulation that addresses the sourcing of conflict minerals provides an important framework for industry, laying the foundation for protection of human rights and responsible sourcing efforts in Congo and beyond. We urge Congress to support legislation that effectively promotes due diligence and transparency for the sourcing of all conflict metals and gemstones.”

Richline Group, a jeweler owned by Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway, has also come out in support of 1502 and noted that “Section 1502 has proven to be an important and effective first step in the effort to create a conflict-free mining industry in Congo that benefits legitimate business rather than extortion and violence” and said “we fully support the continued implementation of Section 1502.”

From personal experience, I know that the CEO of one of these companies had strong reservations against Dodd-Frank 1502 when it first became law, but ultimately saw that it was something the company could and would implement it in part because it was far less costly and laborious than he originally expected and because it was the right thing for the company to do. 

The support from major companies highlights a perverse consequence that suspending or repealing Dodd-Frank would cause:  it would create an uneven playing field placing major US companies at a competitive disadvantage relative to companies that did not want to disclose their supply chains, or worse still, do not care whether their activities led to the secret funding of armed groups in Congo. In this sense repealing 1502 would create a perverse incentive to behave less responsibly, and would harm the efforts of responsible companies. Tiffany, Apple, Intel, and Richline have said they believe keeping conflict minerals out of their supply chain is the right thing to do and that they will continue to do it. But without regulation, they will bear a steep cost for being responsible. Dodd-Frank levels the playing field and makes sure responsible companies are not penalized for doing the right thing while requiring others to meet minimum standards. 

Additionally, 129 investors with assets worth approximately $5 trillion under management have also urged the US government to keep the law in place and to ensure its continued implementation and enforcement.

The US should maintain the same path it has successfully pursued over decades:  be the first country to enact a strong law ensuring that companies act responsibly and then work diligently to make sure others do the same. This is what the US did with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. It passed the law in 1977, worked to get other countries to pass similar statutes, and now there is an important global anti-corruption regime that includes many countries with strong anti-corruption laws of their own. Multilateral institutions like the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the UN have also developed their own standards. The US played a leading role in these efforts—in part because it led by example.

This approach has also been true with 1502. US adoption of 1502 led the EU and OECD, for example, to start developing their own standards on conflict minerals that will, at least in the case of the EU, apply to a broad swath of companies beyond US jurisdiction. Just this March, the European Parliament approved new conflict minerals regulations. That approach creates a race to the top where US companies lead, versus suspending 1502 and creating a race to the bottom where US companies are hurt.

Five years after the rules went into force, there is progress. There are more than 200 conflict-free smelters and major companies, as noted previously, are working towards full compliance and do not want the rule to end. And other jurisdictions are developing their own, similar, rules. 

Internationally, the London Bullion Market Association and the Dubai Multi-Commodities Center are putting policies into place to deal with illicit funds derived from minerals. In Congo, the International Tin Supply Chain Initiative is also working to support company due diligence. These are relatively new initiatives and their efficacy is not yet known, but they are examples of the momentum 1502 is creating and what could be lost if is eliminated.

On the ground, significant parts of Congolese civil society generally support the law. As Dr. Denis Mukwege wrote in the New York Times in 2015, “A conflict-free minerals industry would greatly benefit the people of Congo and contribute to ending the unspeakable violence they have endured for years. The legislative tools to help make this a reality are available to international policy makers, but they must be enacted and enforced.” Those views are echoed by a number of civil society groups.

Challenges with Dodd-Frank 1502

There are very compelling reasons to keep 1502, but we do not want to downplay the fact that this law has had its challenges, claim that implementation of the law has been perfect, or suggest that it is the sole answer to conflict and abuse in eastern Congo.

During the period after Dodd Frank became law in 2010 and before its implementing rules were finalized in 2012, uncertainty, misinformation, and other factors led to adverse consequences on the ground. That uncertainty before the final rules were issued led to a de facto boycott as companies avoided sourcing from Congo. There is also evidence that mineral-related violence during that time did not subside. 

However, those problems are not solely due to Dodd-Frank 1502. The Kabila government exacerbated the negative economic impacts when it ordered a six-month halt to all mining in the Kivus in 2010. Between 2010 and 2012, the period between enactment of 1502 and implementation of its final rules, companies chose to boycott Congo since nothing in the law required that companies stop doing business with Congo. These measures, coupled with the uncertainty over Dodd-Frank’s final rules, created problems.

There are still reports of problems facing artisanal miners ranging from low prices affecting artisanal coltan miners.

Another key issue is that US companies are still slow to comply with the law. In 2015, Global Witness and Amnesty International reported that as much as 80 percent of covered companies were not properly disclosing and auditing their conflict minerals supply chain. This is an important area for growth and development—as it could help strengthen the positive impact of the law and enable a more level playing field for all companies down the road.

The Way Forward

We support constructive proposals to ensure Dodd-Frank 1502 is more efficient and effective.  Suspending or scrapping the law will not do this and will instead disadvantage responsible companies, while likely creating more instability in parts of Congo and making it easier for abusive armed groups to pay for their activities. 

If industry groups or companies have specific ideas on how to make 1502 more efficient or effective, you should make sure they are sharing them. There are already indications that costs of implementing 1502 are decreasing significantly as new tools are developed to make it easier to comply. ELM Sustainability Partners did an assessment of the law and found that the total industry costs are about 15-26 percent of the original costs that the SEC reported. Meanwhile, eastern Congo reported record highs for conflict-free exports of tin and tantalum in 2016.

You should also request a study—perhaps from the GAO—on how to promote conflict-free minerals on the ground, and stronger incentives to promote and reward responsible companies.

Unfortunately, the main industry critics, namely the National Association of Manufacturers, have not put forward specific proposals that would tweak 1502 to make it more effective. Many organizations are regularly discussing implementation with key companies and have listened closely to their concerns and challenges.

As a general principal, we believe that responsible companies in any sector should be rewarded for safeguarding human rights in their operations and others should be incentivized to do the same. Broadly, the cost of capital should be lower for responsible compliant companies than noncompliant ones and the opportunities for responsible companies should be greater. 

In that context, we would encourage you to support proposals that have been made by industry associations to advantage 1502 compliant companies in government procurement and efforts by responsible investors to favor and support those companies over others. And while we are not experts on tax policy, it is worth Congress and others examining how to use tax credits or comparable incentives to help support 1502 implementation because it could help lower the costs of implementation for companies.

Finally, we suggest Congress encourage efforts to support and promote conflict-free smelters on the ground. The principal way to do this is to make sure more companies are complying and sourcing from responsible mining and smelting sources. Given that the US is still the largest donor to the World Bank, it would be worth examining how that institution can help the Congolese government and industry grow a conflict-free market.

Conclusion

The situation in Congo is complex. But it is highly likely that suspending Dodd-Frank 1502 or eliminating it will contribute to greater instability, create a competitive disadvantage for responsible companies, and it could create a troubling paradox where, as US aid to Congo and UN peacekeeping may decline, the opportunity for abusive armed groups to make money off from conflict minerals will increase. The US would also fall behind its peers on an issue where it set the global example–this is not what Congress should seek to encourage or support.  

Instead, we hope the administration and Congress will seek to refine 1502, support responsible companies, and look at holistic approaches to keeping conflict mineral revenues out of the hands of abusive armed groups, whether they be militias, rebels, mafias, or government.

Categories: Africa

Rwanda: Government Repression in Land Cases

Fri, 31/03/2017 - 10:19

(Nairobi) – Military and civilian authorities in western Rwanda have arrested, beaten, or threatened people who challenged recent government decisions to force residents off their land, Human Rights Watch said today.

Expand

The arrest of Oscar Hakundimana in Nyamyumba, on December 7, 2016, after he voiced objection to a government decision to force 30 families off their lands. 

© 2016 Private

One case involves a long-standing land dispute in Nyamyumba, Rubavu district, where local authorities have begun forcing residents off their agricultural land in favor of another family with a disputed claim to the land. The other involves the construction of a new so-called “model village” in Kivumu, Rutsiro district, where some residents who will be forced to leave their land raised concerns about what they see as insufficient compensation.

“Threats, arrests or beatings are no way to handle a situation in which people are losing their land and livelihoods,” said Ida Sawyer, Central Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “The government’s goals to settle land disputes and modernize villages are legitimate, but trampling on the rights of those most affected who express their fears for their land and their livelihood is not.”

Between January and March 2017, Human Rights Watch interviewed more than 20 residents of Kivumu and Nyamyumba and others knowledgeable about the cases, and observed and analyzed court proceedings relating to the cases.

The government intimidated, threatened, or, on some occasions, beat the few residents who criticized the government, even moderately. Officials arrested prominent community members and charged them with inciting insurrection, warning other residents not to speak out and generating a chilling effect throughout the community.

Many people who work their land for a living fear that the government-imposed solution would threaten their livelihoods. In the two cases in Nyamyumba and Kivumu, the local government imposed a solution without the full informed consent or participation of residents, and without the involvement of any judicial or otherwise independent authority to provide a fair process for adjudicating disputes, Human Rights Watch found.

In Nyamyumba, although a powerful family had longtime claims to the land, residents who farmed the land had in recent years been given land titles. One of them won a court case against the family. But in November 2016, the mayor of the district of Rubavu ordered 30 families to leave their land. Several meetings were held in the area, in which residents were threatened and prevented from speaking out. Local civilian and military authorities accused farmers who fled their villages in fear of arrest of being rebels.

When a community leader, Oscar Hakundimana, objected to the mayor’s decision, he was arrested on December 7 and charged with rebellion and inciting insurrection. Residents who protested his arrest were beaten. His trial started on March 28, 2017.

In Kivumu, preparations have begun to construct a “model village,” a centralized settlement in which four families will share a modern home that is provided with basic amenities, such as water and electricity. Residents in the area will be forced to leave their homes and farms to make way for the model village, with varying amounts of compensation. The government plans to create a model village in each of the country’s 30 districts.

While Kivumu residents have welcomed some aspects of the plan to build a modern village, many say that their rights have not been respected during the expropriations process, including the right to free expression, fair compensation, and public participation, and that they fear serious negative consequences for their food security and income when they have to leave their land. Others are not comfortable with the idea of sharing a home with other families, in a grouped settlement. Several residents who attempted to ask questions or raise concerns about the process told Human Rights Watch that local authorities intimidated or threatened them and told them to keep quiet.

Expand

Léonille Gasengayire, native of Kivumu, arrested in 2016 for voicing opposition to land expropriations, prosecuted for inciting insurrection but acquitted by a court on March 23, 2017. 

© 2016 Private

A student and political activist from the region suspected of opposing the plan, Léonille Gasengayire, was arrested in August 2016, and charged with inciting insurrection. Residents who tried to testify on her behalf at her trial were intimidated. A court acquitted and released her on March 23, 2017.

The Rutsiro district mayor told Human Rights Watch that she was not aware of any criticism of the expropriations. The Justice Ministry and other local officials did not respond to repeated requests from Human Rights Watch to discuss its research findings on these two cases.

Rwanda is the most densely populated country in continental sub-Saharan Africa. Land is a scarce resource and has been a cause of tension throughout the country’s history. In 2001, Human Rights Watch published a report on a government policy to regroup Rwandans in government-created villages, employing coercion against those who resisted, resulting in many human rights abuses. Land was often expropriated without due compensation or consultation with the residents, and many Rwandans who spoke openly against the policy or refused to obey were punished by fines or arrest.

“The Rwandan government’s intolerance for dissent goes beyond political opposition leaders, journalists, or human rights activists who dare to report on government abuses,” Sawyer said. “The government can demonstrate its genuine commitment to the basic rights of its people, rights such as freedom of opinion and expression and fair process, by releasing Oscar Hakundimana immediately. It should stop harassing others who have spoken out against the government’s land decisions.”

Land Dispute in Nyamyumba
The land dispute in Rubona cell, Nyamyumba sector, Rubavu district, is intertwined with Rwanda’s history. Following violence and large migrations into and out of Rwanda since the so-called “revolution” in 1959, when ethnic Hutu took over leadership positions after waves of ethnic violence, ownership of the land in the area has been disputed and alternated between the Munyegomba family, whose claim originates prior to 1959 and is currently supported by local authorities, and a group of 140 families who have occupied and farmed the land for many years.

  Expand

The disputed land in Nyamyumba sector, Rubavu district.

© 2017 Private

Members of the Munyegomba family fled Rwanda after 1959, and other residents occupied their land. The family returned after the genocide in 1994, when those who had occupied the land in their absence fled to the Democratic Republic of Congo. The residents who had fled returned in 1996 and 1997, to find that the land had been reoccupied.

The Munyegomba family left the land again a few years later, when armed groups with a base in Congo, commonly referred to as “infiltrators,” carried out deadly attacks in Rwanda in the late nineties. The residents who had returned from Congo successfully petitioned the national authorities to get their land back. They again started farming the land, and continued to do so until recent months.

Between 1998 and 2011, the Munyegomba family attempted to reclaim the land through judicial proceedings against a community leader – the father of Oscar Hakundimana – but failed: In appeal, a court ruled that the land belonged to Hakundimana’s father. During the national land registration process, the land of Hakundimana and other residents was registered, and the farmers were given land certificates, despite the Munyegomba family’s opposition.

At the end of 2015, however, local authorities announced during a community meeting that agricultural land belonging to 30 households – an earlier claim concerned 140 households – should be handed over to the Munyegomba family. Three people who voiced their opposition to this announcement, including Oscar Hakundimana, were arrested and released the next day.  

Several other community meetings followed in 2016, at which local authorities continued to press residents to give up their land claims. In August 2016, the police called in 30 people for questioning and briefly detained Hakundimana, who had again publicly refused in a meeting to abandon his land. A local official threatened other residents with arrest.

On November 24, the mayor of Rubavu, Jeremie Sinamenye, came to the village and announced at a community meeting that the 30 households had to leave their land before January 20, 2017. He said they had acquired the land fraudulently, that residents had agreed earlier to leave their land, and that they would have to pay rent if they refused to leave.

During the community meeting, Hakundimana criticized the mayor’s decision. A participant in the meeting later told Human Rights Watch:

Oscar said that the government should respect the law, but that there seemed to be other things going on. He said, “We have legal documents. But now you come to take them. Is it not the same government [who gave us the land titles]?” The mayor responded: “Don’t you know who I am? You have become a rebel against us. I don’t know how I can respond to you.”

The day after the meeting, residents wrote a letter to the provincial and national authorities, asking the governor of the Western province to suspend the mayor’s decision, given that the mayor had ignored their legal land titles.

In an apparent response, soldiers arrested Hakundimana on December 7, 2016. During his arrest, Hakundimana and several others were beaten. One of them later told Human Rights Watch:

The military arrested Oscar and brought him to a military camp. […] When they arrived in our village, those of us who live nearby asked the soldiers: “We’ve heard that you kill people. Did you arrest Oscar just to kill him? We know he is innocent. Why did you arrest him?” The soldiers told us that we are all rebels against the government, and that they cannot tolerate our mistakes. Then they beat us severely with wooden sticks.

Hakundimana has been in pretrial detention ever since. Human Rights Watch research indicates that he was beaten and threatened in prison, in an apparent effort to force him to leave his land.

The prosecutor’s office accused him of asking during the meeting with the mayor which branch of government the mayor represented, and of saying that the Rwandan government detests its population, so the population should also detest the government. During a hearing on March 28, the prosecution also accused him of speaking to the media. Hakundimana denies the accusations and told the judges during a pretrial hearing that he was arrested because of the land dispute and his insistence that his father won a court case about this land, so he could not now surrender his claims to the land.

After Hakundimana’s arrest, several residents fled their homes for several days, fearing arrest. “Police and military are looking for us,” one resident told Human Rights Watch while in hiding. “We feel targeted. We cannot access our fields because the police and military are there. If they find us, they won’t take us to the police; they’ll kill us.”

Residents told Human Rights Watch that they were concerned about the independence of the authorities and afraid of being arrested. One said:

Our opponents come to our farm land and destroy our crops. When we ask questions about this to the authorities, they don’t respond. These other people [who also claim the land] have more power than us. They are supported by the government and can take our crops. We are afraid that, even today, we can be arrested. They accuse us of being members of political parties that are outside of the government.

After some had gone into hiding, the local military commander accused them in a community meeting of joining the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), a largely Rwandan Hutu armed group, based in eastern Congo.

The wife of one of the residents who was targeted said:

It is a problem of money. Our opponents are rich people who have a lot of money, and they are backed by the military and the authorities. They persecute us to get our land. […] They registered my husband on a list of a political party, the PS-Imberakuri [an unregistered opposition party]. But he doesn’t know how this happened. They do this to find evidence to persecute people, to say that they are against the government.

Several residents spoke to the media about their situation and they now fear that the fact they spoke to the media was part of the reason for the repression against them. One was quoted in Kigali Today, a news outlet sympathetic to the government, saying: “We can leave if they compensate us with other land. But how can we give them these lands, as it is those lands that allow us to live?”

Another resident spoke to Voice of America about Hakundimana’s arrest:

These charges that they accused him of are lies. How can he provoke insurrection of
the population against the state when he participates in a meeting by the authorities? They just want to accuse him of false accusations to frighten the other residents.

Hakundimana has been charged with “rebellion” and “inciting insurrection or trouble among the population.” His trial began on March 28, 2017. The judgment is expected on April 26.

In response to a letter from residents, the governor of the Western province visited the area on December 21. Regarding Hakundimana’s arrest, he said, “such a thing does not happen in this country” and that residents cannot be imprisoned for expressing an opinion. He instructed the mayor of Rubavu to find a solution to the dispute. Yet, nearly three months later, the situation has not changed and Hakundimana is still in detention, while his trial is ongoing.

The Rubavu mayor visited the locality after the governor’s visit, but he has not announced how the dispute will be addressed. He did not comment on Human Rights Watch’s findings. 

‘Model Village’ in Kivumu
An area of Buyonyo cell in Rutsiro district’s Kivumu sector is designated for the construction of a new “model village.” According to the district’s performance contract, a contract signed each year between the Rwandan president and the district mayor to set the district’s objectives, the model village will be used to relocate households from zones that are deemed to be high risk for floods or landslides and from scattered settlements. Fifty-seven households were told in August 2016 that they were going to have to leave their land, which would be used to construct the new village.

Expand

Government repression in land cases.

© 2016 John Emerson for Human Rights Watch

Many residents said the compensation they were offered was insufficient. Several told Human Rights Watch that only people with larger plots received compensation, or that the compensation for their houses, land, and crops did not equal the actual value. Some were told that they would be partly compensated with a place in the model village.

Others said that the legal procedures under Rwanda’s 2015 law on expropriations were not followed. The law establishes the procedure for approving expropriations in the public interest and for determining compensation for land, activities carried out on that land, and for the disruption caused by the expropriation. Those affected must be duly informed about a decision to expropriate and must be present during the valuation procedure. The owner of the land can approve or challenge the decision reached by the assessor. The law states that “fair compensation must be paid to the expropriated person before he or she relocates.”

Some residents said that the expropriation of their property without equivalent replacement land creates serious risks for their food security and livelihood. One farmer said: “We really admire the development of our country. But the development of this country should also consider our food security. We cannot live in houses without land to provide for our food.”

Several residents said that living with four families in one house, in a centralized settlement, as will be the case for the model village, is contrary to their traditional and preferred way of living. One farmer said:

These houses in a model village are like a camp. I prefer to be alone in my house, instead of living with others. I won’t be free as before. The community prefers having one house per family, but the government refused. We can’t be against the government, so we accepted, but it’s not by our own will.

Residents told Human Rights Watch that the expropriation procedure took place in a context of insufficient information and intimidation. Several complained that they could not voice their criticism. One farmer said:

Nobody can ask questions about the compensation or the problems about the model village. Members of parliament visited our village. Nobody tried to ask questions because everybody knows that they will be chased away from the village if they ask questions. The whole population is severely intimidated.

Another resident complained about the official in charge of registering properties:

When we ask him something, he responds very angrily. He intimidates us and doesn’t understand. He does the registration by himself and gives the impression that it doesn’t concern us. […] When I asked him about something that was said during a community meeting, he responded: “I didn’t tell you to ask me questions. You shouldn’t listen to other people. I will tell you what will happen.”

When Léonille Gasengayire, a young student activist native of the area, was suspected of speaking out against the expropriation of the land and of demanding fair compensation during a private meeting in August 2016, authorities arrested her and later put her on trial for “inciting insurrection or trouble among the population,” charges she denied.

Several residents told Human Rights Watch that they were forced to testify against Gasengayire. The also said that local government officials tried to prevent defense witnesses from attending her trial.

One resident said that a local government official told them in January 2017: “Nobody has the right to go to court to be a witness for Léonille [Gasengayire]. If there are people who go, they can be killed or have other problems.” Another resident said the same government official had said that residents would not be allowed to return to their village if they had testified on her behalf.

Defense witnesses at first failed to show up during the trial, observed by Human Rights Watch, but later did testify.

Gasengayire’s name was regularly cited in community meetings in an effort to warn other residents not to speak out. One resident who attended such meetings said:

When the authorities come to the village, they say: “You saw the example of Léonille [Gasengayire]. If you refuse to do as we want, you will become like her. We are giving Léonille 18 years in prison.” Léonille has become a song that the local administration sings in front of the community.

During the pretrial hearings, Gasengayire was also accused of promoting the opposition FDU-Inkingi political party. Gasengayire is a member of the party and was briefly arrested in March 2016. Like all but one opposition party in Rwanda, the FDU-Inkingi has been unable to register as a party. While Rwandan law criminalizes the “illegal formation or leadership of a political organization,” Gasengayire was not charged with this offense and her political activities do not appear to have violated Rwandan law.

On March 23, 2017, the judge of the High Court chamber of Rusizi rejected the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and local officials, acquitted Léonille, and ordered her release after seven months in pretrial detention. Human Rights Watch observed the proceedings.

The Rutsiro district mayor told Human Rights Watch that she was not aware of any criticism about the expropriations. “We organized several meetings there and nobody complained,” she said. “Maybe these people are not happy with the value [of the compensation], but they accepted it. There were no threats.” She declined to comment on the arrest and prosecution of Gasengayire.

Categories: Africa

Touadéra One Year On: Justice Needs Urgent Kick Start

Fri, 31/03/2017 - 10:19
Expand

President Faustin Archange Touadera of the Central African Republic addresses the 71st United Nations General Assembly in New York, U.S., September 23, 2016.

© 2016 Reuters

One year ago, a rare feeling of hope took hold in the Central African Republic as the new president, Faustin-Archange Touadéra, was sworn in. His administration replaced a transition government that struggled to establish security and stop violence over the previous two years, and his election was a peaceful and legitimate transfer of power, something uncommon in the region.

But a year on the president is trying to quell fighting in the eastern Ouaka province and by some measures the situation is worse than in March 2016. Violence has spread to the northwest, where a new rebel group, called Return, Reclamation, Rehabilitation, or 3R, has killed civilians, raped, and caused large scale displacement. In the central and eastern parts of the country, human rights abuses against civilians are on the rise as fighting between various Seleka groups has increased. In October, Seleka fighters killed at least 37 civilians, wounded 57, and forced thousands to flee when they razed a camp for displaced people in Kaga-Bandoro. Thousands of students throughout Seleka controlled regions cannot study due to the presence of armed groups near their schools.

Touadéra has said repeatedly over the last year that security and justice for serious human rights abuses are priorities for his government. On both scores however, progress has been too slow.

The president took on one of the hardest jobs in the world. The Central African Republic has been in crisis since late 2012, when the mostly Muslim Seleka rebels ousted the government in a coup and committed widespread abuses. In mid-2013 anti-balaka militia formed to oppose the Seleka carried out large scale reprisal attacks against Muslim civilians in Bangui and western parts of the country. The violence killed thousands of people and displaced almost a million, and Seleks factions still control half the country.

As fighting increases, especially in the Ouaka province, the link between violence and justice cannot be overstated. Almost none of those responsible for the widespread human rights abuses have been held accountable. The cycles of impunity have fueled ongoing abuses and emboldened those who seek to take power by force.

The new government took over an overburdened and barely functioning judicial system, already weak before the 2013 outbreak of violence, which needs significant and sustained investment to rebuild. Trials for recent crimes were held under Touadéra’s watch, as well as in 2015, but they exposed serious flaws and weaknesses of the system, including in protecting victims and witnesses.

Since September 2014, the office of the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has been investigating the situation in the Central African Republic, focusing on alleged crimes in the country since August 2012, the second investigation by the ICC into crimes committed in the country. The government’s cooperation with the ICC is critical, but the ICC’s investigation, which is ongoing, will most likely only target a handful of suspects.

Another system was needed to address serious crimes and in June 2015, the Central African Republic’s then transitional president promulgated a law to establish a Special Criminal Court, consisting of national and international staff, to investigate and prosecute the gravest crimes committed in the country since 2003, including war crimes and crimes against humanity. The Special Criminal Court has the potential to help address more than a decade of serious crimes and help strengthen the justice system overall. More important, after years of impunity, the court offers a real chance to hold abusive commanders to account inside the country and send a warning to would-be abusive leaders that they are being watched.

At a donor conference on the Central African Republic in November, I listened as president Touadéra said, “reconciliation cannot be achieved at the cost of impunity.” The government has indicated its support for the court, but ultimately will need to do more to put this idea into practice. More than 18 months after the law was passed to create the court, investigations have yet to begin, let alone trials.

On February 15, the president appointed Toussaint Muntazini Mukimapa of the Democratic Republic of Congo as special prosecutor of the new court, an important step. However, there are still questions as to the national ownership of the court and the extent to which this tribunal is a priority.

As Touadéra’s reflects on his first year he will undoubtedly be concerned with the plight of civilians in the central and eastern parts of the country as they bear the brunt of continued fighting. But getting the Special Criminal Court up and running is the country’s best chance to break the impunity that drives this violence. The president should show international supporters, including the United Nations, that accountability is a priority in his second year. With a fully operational court by this time next year, abusive leaders may think twice about targeting civilians.  

Lewis Mudge is an Africa researcher at Human Rights Watch.

Categories: Africa

SADC Should Press to Resolve the DR Congo Crisis

Fri, 17/03/2017 - 21:05

This Saturday, Southern African Development Community (SADC) heads of state and government will meet in Swaziland. The subregional organization, which includes the Democratic Republic of Congo, should use this meeting to help resolve the political and human rights crisis in Congo.

On February 24, SADC foreign ministers called for the urgent nomination of a new prime minister in Congo and for a rapid application of the New Year’s Eve deal. With the appointment of the new government and implementation of the deal still largely stalled, regional heads of state and government should reiterate this call strongly and clearly.

Expand

Congolese Catholic Church (CENCO) Bishops Fidele Nsielele (left), Marcel Utembi (center), and Fridolin Ambongo (right) arrive to mediate talks between the opposition and the government of President Joseph Kabila in the Democratic Republic of Congo's capital Kinshasa, December 21, 2016.

© 2016 Reuters

They should also call on the Congolese authorities to quickly and fully implement the confidence-building measures agreed upon in the deal. Those include releasing and dropping charges against political leaders and activists targeted because of their peaceful political views or activities and opening barred media outlets.

On February 22, Congo’s Roman Catholic bishops warned that the political deadlock coupled with the escalation of conflict in parts of Congo could “plunge [the] country into an uncontrollable chaos.” Violence has intensified across the country in recent months, leaving several hundred people dead, including in the Kasai provinces, TanganyikaNorth Kivu, and Kongo Central, as well as in the capital, Kinshasa.  “Is it only by accident that this [intensified violence] occurs in this pre-electoral period?” the bishops said, adding that they feared “a design with the aim of delaying or preventing” elections.

On February 25, the United Nations Security Council called on all stakeholders in Congo “to redouble, in good faith, their efforts towards a speedy conclusion of the ongoing talks on the ‘arrangements particuliers’ of the agreement.”

The United States, which played a major role in pressing for elections and defending human rights during the Obama administration, has been rather silent on Congo under President Donald Trump. The US could, and should, be doing more, including a new round of targeted sanctions against abusive officials. As the Washington Post recently put it, “another explosion of bloodshed in Central Africa” is “something that even an ‘America First’ president should want to stop.”

The European Union, meanwhile, made a strong call for urgent implementation of the New Year’s Eve deal in its March 6 foreign affairs council conclusions on Congo. Foreign ministers also instructed High Representative Federica Mogherini to start the process for new targeted sanctions, looking at “those responsible for serious human rights violations or for incitement to violence and those who would obstruct a consensual and peaceful solution to the crisis.”

It is time for regional leaders to take a stand. Their engagement last year played a role in pressing President Joseph Kabila and others to accept the Catholic Church-mediated agreement. But continued, high-level engagement is needed to ensure that the agreement holds and that credible elections are organized, and to prevent an already explosive situation in Congo from deteriorating even further. 

Categories: Africa

Angola: Respect Women’s Right to March

Fri, 17/03/2017 - 21:05

(Johannesburg) – The Angolan government must allow protesters to exercise their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said today, ahead of a planned demonstration in Luanda for a woman’s right to have an abortion.

Expand

A general view of Luanda, Angola, where organizers are planning a demonstration for women’s right to have an abortion on March 18, 2017. 

© 2014 Reuters

The protest, scheduled for March 18, 2017, is in response to the new draft penal code currently before parliament, which punishes, without exceptions, those who have or perform an abortion with up to 10 years in prison.

“We have often seen Angolan police use unnecessary and excessive force against peaceful demonstrators,” said Deprose Muchena, Amnesty International’s regional director for Southern Africa.

Parliament approved an amendment on abortion on February 24, as part of the process of replacing Angola’s penal code from the 1886 colonial-era version. The government had proposed a bill that would criminalize abortion, except in cases of rape, or when the mother’s health is in danger. But parliament rejected that proposal and made abortion, without exceptions, illegal. The final vote on the draft penal code is slated for March 23.

Under the current penal code, abortion is also illegal. The organizers of the protest want the new code to end the ban on abortions. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch call for the decriminalization of abortion in all circumstances.

The protest organizers informed the Office of the Governor of Luanda Province, Gen. Higinio Carneiro, of their intention to march at 10 a.m. Central African Time from Santa Ana Cemetery to the Heroines Monument (Largo das Heroinas). As of March 17, the group had not received a reply.

“The right to protest is protected both under the constitution and international law, so the Angolan authorities have a duty to ensure that these protesters can march freely and without any intimidation,” said Dewa Mavhinga, Southern Africa director at Human Rights Watch.

“Especially as elections approach, authorities should show that they will tolerate dissenting views.”

Categories: Africa

US: Stand Up for Ethiopians as Government Stifles Protests, Jails Journalists

Fri, 10/03/2017 - 20:57

Human Rights Watch Statement to US House Foreign Affairs Committee, Subcommittee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights, and International Organizations

Thursday, March 9, 2017

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Bass, members of the Subcommittee: thank you for holding this important hearing on the current situation in Ethiopia and for inviting me to testify. I am pleased to be a part of it.

Ethiopia is a country of dual realities. Visitors and diplomats alike are impressed with the double-digit economic growth, the progress on development indicators, and the apparent political stability. But in many ways, this is a smokescreen: many Ethiopians live in fear. The current government – the only one since 1991 – runs the country with an almost complete grip on power, controlling almost all aspects of political, public, and even much private life. Pervasive telephone and online surveillance and an intricate network of informants allow the government to quickly curb any threats to its control; it silences critical voices through the use of arbitrary arrests and politically motivated prosecutions. These actions also prevent critical and divergent views as many who may be impacted by these harsh policies fear repercussions.

Ethiopia remains among Africa’s leading jailors of journalists. If you are or you seek to be an independent Ethiopian journalist you must choose between self-censorship, harassment, and possible arrest, or living in exile. The government blocks websites critical of the authorities and sometimes blocks the internet completely. Independent radio and television stations are regularly jammed. In short, the state tightly controls the media landscape, making it extremely challenging for Ethiopians to access information that is independent of government perspectives. As a result, Voice of America, which broadcasts in three Ethiopian languages, has become an increasingly important source of information for many Ethiopians but the government has, at times, obstructed its broadcasts as well.

Independent civil society groups face overwhelming obstructions. The 2009 Charities and Societies Proclamation has made obtaining foreign funding nearly impossible for groups working on human rights, good governance, and advocacy. Leading members of the human rights movement have been forced to flee abroad and many organizations have stopped working on human rights and good governance to avoid problems.

There have also been serious restrictions on opposition political parties. This led to the ruling coalition in the May 2015 election winning 100 percent of the seats in the federal and regional parliaments. This is despite evident anti-government sentiments in much of the country, as the protests would later illustrate. Arbitrary dentition of members and supporters, politically motivated criminal charges, and restrictions on financing ensures that opposition parties are constrained and largely ineffective.

The state systematically ensures that many of the country’s 100 million citizens are dependent on the government for their livelihoods, food security and economic future. It controls the benefits of development including access to seeds, fertilizers, jobs, health care, and humanitarian assistance, even when funded by the US or other donors. While US-funded development assistance contributes to much-needed poverty reduction efforts, it also adds to the repressive capacity of the government by bolstering Ethiopians’ reliance on the government for their livelihoods and ultimately for their survival.

There is no evidence that the ruling party rigs elections – they don’t need to. The population’s dependence on the ruling party and the limits on opposition parties leaves many citizens, particularly in rural areas, little choice but to support the ruling party come election time. As one farmer in the Amhara region told me in July 2014, “we do not like this government, but we always vote for them. We have to because we get our seeds and fertilizer from them. During times of drought, we get food aid from them. If we don’t vote for them, we can’t eat.” He went on to tell me about his neighbor who voted for the opposition in the 2010 election and shortly thereafter was denied food aid, was denied treatment at a government health clinic, and eventually was displaced from his land for an investment project run by a government cadre.

The justice system provides no check on the government. Courts have shown little independence during politically charged trials. Many opposition politicians, journalists, and activists have been convicted under the repressive 2009 anti-terrorism law and sentenced to lengthy prison terms. Acquittals are rare, credible evidence is often not presented, and trials are marred by numerous due process concerns. Mistreatment and torture are common in Ethiopia’s many places of detention. Just two weeks ago, Dr. Merera Gudina , the chair of the Oromo Federalist Congress (OFC), a legally registered political opposition party, was charged with “outrages against the constitution.” A former fellow at the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), Merera joins many other senior opposition leaders currently facing politically motivated criminal charges. Among those presently standing trial is OFC deputy chairman Bekele Gerba. Prosecutors included as ostensible evidence of his crimes a video of Bekele at an August 2016 conference here in Washington, DC, where he spoke of the importance of nonviolence and commitment to the electoral process. Like Merera, he has been a moderate voice of dissent in a highly polarized political landscape.

This begs the question: what avenues are left in Ethiopia to express dissent, to question government policies or to voice concern over abusive practices and how can the United States help strengthen free expression and association rights in Ethiopia?

I speak to you to today 16 months after large-scale and unprecedented protests started in Ethiopia’s largest region of Oromia in November 2015, spreading to the Amhara region in July 2016. Ethiopian military forces and police cracked down on these largely peaceful demonstrations, killing hundreds and detaining tens of thousands. The protests were a predictable response to the systematic and calculated suppression of fundamental rights and freedoms.

On October 2, the protest movement took a devastating turn. In Bishoftu in Ethiopia’s Oromia region, security forces mishandled a large crowd at the Irreecha cultural event causing a stampede that killed scores of people as they fled security forces. In the days that followed, angry mobs of youth destroyed government buildings and private property. Ethiopia was on the brink of chaos. One week after the Irreecha tragedy the government announced a state of emergency that remains in place. It prescribed sweeping and vaguely worded restrictions on a broad range of actions undermining rights to free expression, association, and peaceful assembly. It goes far beyond what is permissible under international human rights law and signaled a continuation of the militarized response to the expression of grievances. While the state of emergency has halted both the destruction of properties and the protests themselves, underlying grievances remain. No one should deny there are serious risks that more unrest could occur.

Since imposing the state of emergency, the Ethiopian government has repeatedly committed publicly to undertake “deep reform” and engage in dialogue with opposition parties to address grievances. In short, the authorities are saying the right things. But the only changes the government has made so far are largely cosmetic and fall dramatically short of the protesters’ calls for the protection of basic human rights.

The continuation of the state of emergency – furthering crushing the space for free expression and divergent views of governance – is not conducive for the open dialogue that is needed to address Ethiopia’s ongoing crisis. The government announced that it arrested over 20,000 people since the state of emergency began, although there has been little corroboration of these numbers, which could be higher. These mass arrests along with politically motivated trials of key opposition leaders, reinforces the message that the government is continuing along the path of suppressing dissent by force and not engaging in genuine and meaningful dialogue with opposition groups.

The Ethiopian government’s responses to all of these abuses have been consistent. The allegations are routinely denied without meaningful investigation, the government claiming they are politically motivated, while simultaneously restricting access for independent media and human rights investigators. In a report to parliament last June, the Ethiopia Human Rights Commission, a government body, concluded that the level of force used by federal security forces was proportionate to the risk they faced from protesters. This is contrary to all available evidence, including that contained in the US State Department’s recently released Human Rights Country Report for Ethiopia. No one has seen a written version of the Commission’s report that would justify such a conclusion.

While we are speaking today about the lack of accountability over the brutal crackdown in Oromia and Amhara regions over the last 16 months, Ethiopians in other regions have also been victims of serious abuses, most often without any meaningful investigations by the government. For example, Human Rights Watch documented possible crimes against humanity committed by the Ethiopian army in 2003 and 2004 in the Gambella region. There was no credible investigation into the extrajudicial executions, rape, and torture. In Ethiopia’s Somali Regional State, the Ethiopian military committed war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity between mid-2007 and 2008 during their counterinsurgency campaign against the Ogaden National Liberation Front (ONLF). The Liyu police, a paramilitary force formed in 2008 that reports to the president of the Somali Regional State, have been implicated in numerous extrajudicial killings, torture, rape, and attacks on civilians accused of backing the ONLF. No meaningful investigations have been undertaken into any of these alleged abuses in the Somali Regional State.

International scrutiny of Ethiopia’s rights record has also been lacking despite its June election to the UN Security Council, and its membership on the UN Human Rights Council – which requires it to uphold the “highest standards of human rights” and cooperate with UN monitors. Ethiopia has refused entry to all UN special rapporteurs since 2007, except the Special Rapporteur on Eritrea. There are outstanding requests from the special rapporteurs on torture, freedom of opinion and expression, and peaceful assembly, among others. In total, 11 UN Special Rapporteurs have outstanding requests for access to Ethiopia.

Despite abundant evidence of serious and growing repression by the Ethiopian government, particularly since the 2005 election, the US government has been a muted critic. Quiet diplomacy proven ineffectual and has coincided with the dramatic downward spiral in human rights and a serious constriction of political space that has led to the crisis Ethiopia is in today. It is time for a new US approach to Ethiopia in which Congress can play a leadership role in seeking a more balanced policy and requiring more deliberate oversight as it has done in other countries in crisis, including the Democratic Republic of Congo and Egypt.

As a starting point, members of Congress should speak out strongly and publicly against abuses by the Ethiopian government. House Resolution 128 and the resolutions introduced last year are steps in the right direction and contain many important elements. While non-binding, they are impactful because they let the Ethiopian government know there are repercussions for brutality against their own citizens – brutality that undermines US priorities in the Horn of Africa, including security, development, and economic growth. These partnerships are dependent on long-term stability in Ethiopia. Opposition to the ruling party’s repressive rule – as witnessed in the last 16 months – is a glaring indication that Ethiopia’s governance model marked by lack of respect for basic rights, is incapable of ensuring that stability.

International legitimacy is very important to the Ethiopian government – it wants to be a key player on the international stage and condemnation of its human rights record contradicts that image. So consistent, sustained and vocal pressure is critical.

It is crucial that the US makes it clear that if Ethiopia is going to remain a strong US partner it needs to open up legitimate political space and allow for critical voices to be heard. To begin with, members of Congress can and should call for the release of all political prisoners, including those like Bekele and Merera who should be part of any credible dialogue between the government and opposition parties. Members of Congress should also call for the release of all journalists unjustly jailed and call for the repeal or substantial amendment of repressive laws used to stifle critical voices. Any meetings with the Ethiopian ambassador to the US should include these points, as should any meetings with other Ethiopian officials, whether in DC or elsewhere. As the FY18 budget process gets underway, US support to the Ethiopian government should be conditioned on making progress in these and other areas of concern.

Members of Congress should use available opportunities to tell Ethiopia to stop hiding its own human rights record from international scrutiny. As a member of both the Human Rights Council and the Security Council, Ethiopia should cooperate fully with UN special mechanisms, in particular the rapporteurs on peaceful assembly and torture.

As expressed in House Resolution 128, members of Congress should reiterate the call of the UN high commissioner for human rights, the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, and others for an independent international investigation into the crackdown in Oromia and Amhara regions. Such action will send a powerful message to the Ethiopian government that its security forces cannot shoot and kill peaceful protesters with impunity. It will also send an important message to the victims and families, that their pleas for justice are being heard.

I’ll close by saying that I am aware of concerns expressed by some in the administration – and even here in Congress – that a more public stance on Ethiopia’s domestic situation might undermine the bilateral partnership between Addis Ababa and Washington – including cooperation on development, security and peacekeeping. But the United States has often underestimated its own leverage and been overly cautious as a result. Some of Ethiopia’s international partners have made strong public statements in the last year and these statements have not undermined their strategic partnerships. Far from it. The US may need Ethiopia – but Ethiopia needs the US too. The US should send a strong signal of support to the many Ethiopian citizens and Ethiopian Americans who seek the protection of their rights, greater political space, and democracy but whose fight for dignity and freedom has been crushed time and again through brutal force.

Thank you.

Categories: Africa

Human Rights Council: With Human Rights under Threat, a Time for Leadership

Fri, 10/03/2017 - 20:57

We share the High Commissioner’s concerns about current threats to human rights values, and to the international framework itself. Whether the Council can rise to these challenges will depend on a number of factors.

First, leadership: many important issues have escaped Council scrutiny. The High Commissioner has identified violations including torture in Egypt, China’s intimidation and groundless detention of lawyers and activists, Turkey’s campaign against critics, a new US administration that has banned entry to nationals of several Muslim-majority countries with evident discriminatory intent. States from all regions need to step up and speak out.

Second, membership in the Council should mean something. Is the killing by police and unidentified “vigilantes” of more than 7,000 people in the Philippines since President Duterte took office, or Burundi’s refusal to cooperate with a Council-appointed commission of inquiry compatible with their obligations as members?

Thirdly, human rights defenders are key stakeholders in the Human Rights Council. Yet Bahrain still imposes travel bans on those seeking to participate in the Council, Azerbaijan continues to silence civil society groups, and Russia uses various laws to limit the right to free expression, while seeking to strip even the concept of “human rights defenders” from the Council’s lexicon.

Finally, the effectiveness of this Council will be measured by the credibility of its outcomes:

  • With Myanmar’s Rohingya Muslims facing killings, rape, and burning of villages, will the Human Rights Council put in place the independent international investigation that is so desperately needed?
  • Will it take meaningful action to advance accountability for grave international crimes in North Korea and in Syria?
  • Will it respond to the numerous reports of killings, rape and torture in South Sudan by strengthening the investigative mandate of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, while supporting a hybrid court?
  • Will it put in place an independent expert in Libya to strengthen reporting and provide concrete recommendations for improving the human rights situation?
  • Will it adopt a follow-up resolution on Sri Lanka robust enough to maintain confidence that the commitments in its previous resolution will be met in full?

We’d welcome the High Commissioner’s views on further steps the Council can take to meet the global challenges he has described, while delivering effective results.

Categories: Africa

Video: Police Beat Protesters, Threaten them with Dogs in Angola

Fri, 03/03/2017 - 08:49

Amateur video shows the police striking the protesters with batons and threatening them with dogs, February 24, 2017. 

Categories: Africa

Angola: Police Beat, Set Dogs on Peaceful Protesters

Fri, 03/03/2017 - 08:49
Expand

“Samussuku” Chiconda required stitches on his forehead after police officers beat him with batons, Luanda, February 24, 2017.

© 2017 Luaty Beirao

(Johannesburg) – The Angolan government should urgently and impartially investigate police use of force to disperse a peaceful protest in the capital, Luanda. The police beat activists with batons and injured at least four protesters using police dogs.

“The Angolan authorities are responding to peaceful protests with batons and police dogs,” said Daniel Bekele, senior Africa advocacy director at Human Rights Watch. “The government needs to investigate the police crackdown on protesters and hold those responsible to account.”

On February 24, 2017, about 15 people gathered at 2 p.m. in the First of May Square (Largo Primeiro de Maio) to call for the resignation of the territorial administration minister, Bornito de Sousa. He is second on the list of candidates for the ruling Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) and would become vice president if the MPLA wins the parliamentary elections scheduled for August. Because he is in charge of the voter registration process for the elections, the protesters fear he could manipulate the election.

Witnesses to the protests, as well as several participants, told Human Rights Watch by phone that the protesters were peaceful, and carried no banners or weapons. They were walking toward the square when the police set upon them and started beating them with batons.

Video recorded by a resident in a nearby building shows the police hitting the protesters with batons and using police dogs to disperse the group. The video reveals no aggressive actions by the demonstrators.

Amateur video shows the police striking the protesters with batons and threatening them with dogs, February 24, 2017. 

A protest organizer, Luaty Beirao, said he saw about a dozen police officers when he arrived and another group of officers soon emerged with a Rottweiler and two German shepherd dogs on leashes. “We argued with them for a few minutes, before one of the commanders started chasing people away and beating people who had come to watch the situation,” Beirao said.

The police then set the dogs on the protesters. “The Rottweiler bit my left arm, while one of the German shepherds bit the right side of my waist,” Beirao said. “The wound to the waist was not as big as the one to my left arm.”

Beirao provided two photos that are consistent with his account. One photo from the protest shows him with a bloody left arm. The other, taken after the protest, shows him with deep bruising on the back, side, and buttocks, which he said was from baton strikes.
 

Expand

Activist Luaty Beirao showing bruises he sustained from baton strikes, Luanda, February 24, 2017.

© 2017 Luaty Beirao

Another activist, Samussuku Chiconda, said police officers beat him with batons and then dragged him into a police van. A photo he provided showed a deep gash on his forehead, which he said required stitches.

“I went to ask the officers why they were stopping us from getting to the square,” Chiconda said. “They threw me to the ground and started kicking me and beating me. I tried to run away, but they chased me and dragged me into the van. I think they wanted to take me to the police station but a police commander told them to release me.”

The police also used force to break up another peaceful protest against de Sousa in Angola’s western Benguela Province on February 24. Two activists in Benguela said that the police briefly detained at least two members of the Revolutionary Movement, an anti-government group, then released the protesters without charges.

Neither the Luanda nor Benguela protests were authorized by the local governments. Three activists who spoke with Human Rights Watch said that they sought permission from the authorities in Luanda, but received no reply. A document from the Benguela provincial government seen by Human Rights Watch contended that the protest could not take place because it was scheduled during the work day and near a school. Such an overbroad basis for denying a protest violates the right to peaceful assembly under international human rights law, Human Rights Watch said.

Among the people injured during the Luanda protest were three members of the group known as “15+2” – a book club inspired by Gene Sharp’s book From Dictatorship to Democracy – whose members were jailed in June 2015 after discussing peaceful protest and democracy at a meeting. A court in Luanda had convicted them in March 2016 for plotting a rebellion against the government and sentenced them to up to eight years in prison. The Supreme Court ordered the group’s conditional release in June, pending a final decision on their appeal. In September, all 17 people were released from prison following parliament’s approval of an amnesty law.

Article 47 of Angola’s Constitution allows citizens to protest without pre-authorization, provided they inform authorities in advance. But the Angolan government has consistently blocked and dispersed peaceful anti-government protests using unnecessary or excessive force and arbitrary arrests.

“Fair elections require respect for freedom of association, expression, and peaceful assembly,” Bekele said. “The police assault on these peaceful protesters sends a chilling message to others who want to criticize the government and is a red flag for the fairness of this year’s elections.”

Categories: Africa

Malawi Amends Constitution to Remove Child Marriage Loophole

Fri, 24/02/2017 - 08:45

Malawi’s parliament took a historic step towards ending child marriage last week, when it removed from its Constitution a provision allowing children between the ages of 15 and 18 to marry with parental consent.

Now, the minimum age of marriage under the Constitution is aligned with the Marriage, Divorce and Family Relations Act, a law that sets 18 as the age of marriage. While the Marriage Act was intended to stop child marriage, it could not override the country’s Constitution.

Expand

A 14-year-old girl holds her baby at her sister’s home in a village in Kanduku, in Malawi’s Mwanza district. She married in September 2013, but her husband chased her away. Her 15-year-old sister, in the background, married when she was 12. Both sisters said they married to escape poverty.

© 2014 Human Rights Watch

This change will help girls like Elina V., interviewed by Human Rights Watch for a 2014 report on child marriage in Malawi.

“I faced a lot of problems in marriage. I was young and did not know how to be a wife,” Elina V. said. At 15, Elina was forced by her mother to marry a 24-year-old man when she became pregnant “because it was her only option.” Elina spoke of the problems she faced in her abusive marriage, at a time when she was still a child herself.

Malawi has one of the highest rates of child marriage in the world, where approximately one out of every two girls marry before age 18. It has the ninth highest rate in Africa.

Girls interviewed for our report spoke of the pressure they faced to marry by family members who wanted to receive dowry payments, because they were pregnant, or because they themselves saw marriage as a means of escaping poverty.

Child marriage has detrimental consequences on the ability of women and girls to realize key human rights, including the rights to health, education, and freedom from violence. It puts girls at a greater risk of maternal mortality and other health risks. Many girls who attend school are forced to drop out when they marry. Child marriage also exposes girls and young women to violence, including marital rape, sexual and domestic violence, and emotional abuse.

In removing this legal loophole, Malawi has taken an important step in addressing a major shortfall in the country’s efforts to protect girls against the harms of child marriage. With clear and consistent laws now regulating marriage, girls in Malawi may finally have the protection they’ve desperately needed.

Categories: Africa

South African High Court Rejects ICC Withdrawal

Fri, 24/02/2017 - 08:45

South Africa’s North Gauteng High Court today ruled that the government’s attempt to withdraw from the International Criminal Court (ICC) was unconstitutional and invalid, as the government issued its withdrawal notice without consulting parliament. The court ordered President Jacob Zuma and the Ministries of Justice and Foreign Affairs to revoke the notice of withdrawal.

It’s an important ruling for international justice both in South Africa and beyond.

The judgment will compel South African officials, as they move to comply with the court’s decision, to reflect and reconsider the withdrawal notice. Rather than leave the ICC – a court South Africa played a key role in creating – they should use this opportunity to reaffirm support for it. The ruling will be welcomed by many South Africans who opposed the government’s decision to abandon the ICC, which runs counter to the country’s human rights-oriented foreign policy agenda.

The ICC has the potential to deliver justice to victims of the world’s worst crimes when national courts are unable or unwilling to prosecute. The ICC has its flaws, and its reach to more corners of the world should be expanded. Yet it remains the crucial global court of last resort and for many victims the only chance they have to see perpetrators held to account.

South Africa should follow the lead of Gambia, which recently cancelled its ICC withdrawal notice. Such a move would signal South Africa’s commitment to justice and the rights of victims. It would also restore respect for human rights and international justice to the center of its foreign policy practice.

Categories: Africa

Gambia Rejoins ICC

Sat, 18/02/2017 - 08:29

Gambia’s announcement this week that it would rejoin the International Criminal Court sends a strong message of support for the court and victims of grave international crimes. Along with Burundi – and its soaring human rights violations in the past year – South Africa is now the outlier on ICC exit.

Expand

The Permanent Premises of the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands. 

© 2016 UN Photo/Rick Bajornas

Gambia’s decision to rejoin the ICC reflects shifting priorities under newly elected President Adama Barrow, who will be inaugurated tomorrow. The departure of his predecessor, Yahya Jammeh, who left for exile on January 21 after initially refusing to accept his December election defeat, ended two decades of repressive rule.

Gambia’s decision – along with numerous expressions of support from African ICC members since South Africa first announced its withdrawal in October – belie rhetoric that Africa is headed for a mass departure from the ICC.

Botswana, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Lesotho, Mali, Malawi, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Tunisia, and Zambia are among those that have reaffirmed their support for the ICC. A number of these countries, joined by Liberia and Cape Verde, also pushed back against adoption of a so-called “ICC withdrawal strategy” at the African Union summit in January.

Gambia’s decision reflects the new government’s recognition of the important role that the court plays. The ICC is the only permanent court that has the potential to offer redress to victims of the worst crimes when national courts are unable or unwilling to prosecute.

Despite persistent claims by some African leaders that the ICC targets Africa, most ICC investigations in the continent have been opened as a result of requests from African governments themselves, or the United Nations Security Council, and offer redress for African victims.

The ICC faces steep challenges, particularly expanding its reach to crimes committed in a number of the most powerful countries. But the court still represents a rare hope for victims around the world at a time when horrific crimes continue to be perpetrated with impunity in many countries.

After years of playing a leading role on the court, South Africa opted to curtail access to the ICC for victims, instead of working to expand the ICC’s reach. This is real loss – as the Nigerian foreign minister said around the AU summit, the ICC has “an important role to play in holding leaders accountable.”

Categories: Africa

Central African Republic: Executions by Rebel Group

Sat, 18/02/2017 - 08:29

In December 2016, a rebel group in the Central African Republic executed at least 32 civilians and captured fighters after clashes with another rebel group in the Ouaka province. In the town of Bakala, rebels from the Union for Peace in the Central African Republic (l'Union pour la Paix en Centrafrique, UPC) on December 12 executed 25 people after calling them to a school for an alleged meeting. Earlier that day, UPC fighters executed seven men who were returning from a nearby gold mine. At least 29 other civilians have been killed in fighting around Bakala since late November. 

Categories: Africa

Zimbabwe’s High Court Frees Activist Pastor

Sun, 12/02/2017 - 08:21

Yesterday, Zimbabwe’s High Court freed prominent activist and pastor Evan Mawarire on US$300 bail after a week in prison. Mawarire’s arrest on February 1 at Harare International Airport after he returned from six months in the United States caused an outcry from local and international rights groups. However, the sham charges against him – subverting a constitutional government, which carries a 20-year prison sentence, inciting public violence, and insulting the national flag – remain, and are reportedly being investigated.

Expand

Zimbabwean pastor Evan Mawarire speaks on the mobile phone upon his release from Chikurubi Maximum Prison in Harare, Zimbabwe, February 9,2017.

© 2017 Reuters

It’s clear that the authorities are abusing the law to persecute Mawarire for his role as leader of the #ThisFlag campaign, which led protests against President Robert Mugabe’s government and called on authorities to address rights problems and a failing economy.

Zimbabwe’s authorities should stop their judicial harassment of Mawarire and drop the sham charges. Like all citizens, he should be free to speak out against injustice and corruption without fear of reprisals.

Categories: Africa

Ray of Light for Dadaab’s Residents

Sun, 12/02/2017 - 08:21

Early this morning, Somali friends in Dadaab, the world’s largest refugee camp that’s home to more than 300,000 people, were celebrating the selection of Mohamed Abdullahi “Farmajo” as the new president of Somalia. Residents in Dadaab have been waiting years, and in some cases decades, for Somalia to be safe enough for them to return home, and many appear to see Farmajo’s election as an encouraging sign.

Expand

An aerial view shows makeshift shelters at the Dagahaley camp in Dadaab, near the Kenya-Somalia border in Garissa County, Kenya. Photo taken April 2011. 

© 2011 Reuters

With the election victory still fresh on people’s minds, news came that Kenya’s High Court had passed an important ruling, which will help protect the rights of Somali refugees in Kenya. It ruled that recent attempts by the Kenyan government to repatriate Somali refugees back home, close Dadaab camp, and disband its Department of Refugee Affairs, are unconstitutional.

The case was brought in 2016 by two Kenyan rights organizations, Kenya National Commission on Human Rights and Kituo Cha Sheria, and supported by Amnesty International. Today, Judge Mativo ruled that plans to close Dadaab and send residents home are illegal because they discriminate against Somali refugees and violate the principle of nonrefoulement, which forbids the forced returns of refugees.

Dadaab residents have already been through months of anxiety. They’ve had the possible camp closure hanging over their heads, and increasingly restricted asylum options – in no way helped by the recent suspension of refugee resettlement by the United States. So the court’s decision may offer them a moment of respite, and the sense that they may still have a choice other than being sent back to a country which remains insecure and drought-ridden.

The Kenyan government has already said that it plans to appeal the decision. It might also just ignore the ruling – and not for the first time. In July 2013, the High Court ruled unconstitutional a government directive ordering all refugees in Nairobi and other Kenyan cities to move into the Dadaab and Kakuma camps. But one year later, the government basically re-issued the same directive.

For Dadaab refugees’ flicker of hope to become a reality, the Kenyan government should not appeal the decision, but rather move quickly to implement it. It should ensure that Somalis throughout Kenya have access to fair, transparent, and effective asylum procedures. And it should publicly tell the many Somalis in Kenya who still fear persecution, violence, or hunger back home that they are welcome to stay in Dadaab.

Categories: Africa

Pages