human rights violations

  • Malawi: CIVICUS calls for the immediate release of activist and journalist Vitus-Gregory Gondwe

    CIVICUS calls on the Malawian authorities to immediately release Vitus-Gregory Gondwe, a journalist and activist based in Malawi, for his work that exposes government corruption and urges  Malawian authorities to act against individuals involved in corruption. 
  • Malaysia: Government should respect human rights as it seeks UN Human Rights Council membership

    YAB Dato Sri Ismail Sabri Yaakob
    Prime Minister of Malaysia
    Pejabat Perdana Menteri, Blok Utama, Bangunan Perdana Putra, Pusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan, 62502 Putrajaya, Malaysia

    Dear Prime Minister,

    We, the undersigned international human rights organisations—ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation—call on the new government of Malaysia to implement a comprehensive program of reform to strengthen human rights in Malaysia, especially the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly, as a prospective member of the UN Human Rights Council. Malaysia must also sign and ratify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and demonstrate that it is committed to protect human rights.

    During the Human Rights Council pledging session on 8 September 2021, organised by Amnesty International and International Service for Human Rights, H.E. Dr Ahmad Faisal Muhamad expressed Malaysia’s unequivocal commitment to advancing human rights for all, noting the domestic legislation in place to enable citizens to “exercise rights and freedoms responsible and not to suppress them.” However, over the last two years there has been a deterioration in the state of human rights and fundamental freedoms under the former Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s government. This has included violations of the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly, the failure to ratify key international human rights treaties, including the ICCPR, together with the government’s dismal record of cooperating with the UN human rights system.

    As the government seeks membership to the UN Human Rights Council and has made public pledges to uphold human rights, it is imperative that the new government takes sincere and concrete action to improve its rights record at home. The new government has a unique opportunity to reverse the rights-violating actions of its predecessors and shift to a new rights-respecting approach. Legal and policy reform are pivotal to attain this and would demonstrate a genuine intention from the new government to meet its international human rights obligations.

    Without overhauling the violations and abuse of human rights in its country, Malaysia cannot be a valuable and effective member of the Human Rights Council.

    Freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association
    Several laws in Malaysia unduly fetter the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association. In order to fulfil its pledges made to the Human Rights Council, Malaysia must repeal or substantially revise the following laws:

    • The Sedition Act 1948 – Despite the former government’s commitment to conduct a study and a review of the security laws, including the Sedition Act, the authorities aggressively applied the law, primarily against government critics. Between January and August 2021, NGOs documented the investigation of 17 cases involving 37 individuals under the Sedition Act. The recent investigation of the #Lawan protest organisers under the Sedition Act is worrying and runs contrary to Malaysia’s international human rights obligations. The new government must follow-through with its pledge to review this archaic colonial law and should ultimately repeal it, noting that it has no place in a rights-respecting democracy.

    • The Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 – Under the former government, the Communications and Multimedia Act continued to be used as the primary tool to censor human rights defenders, journalists, artists, political opponents, and ordinary members of the public who have been critical of government officials or Malaysian royalty or shared opinions about issues deemed sensitive, such as race and religion. We are encouraged to hear H.E. Dr Ahmad Faisal Muhamad state during the Human Rights Council pledging session on 8 September 2021 that, “the government is in the midst of amending the Communications and Multimedia Act.” The new government must ensure the Act is adequately reformed in consultation with stakeholders so it can no longer be used by authorities as a weapon to silence expression.

    • The Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 – In its pledges to the Human Rights Council, the government committed to a review of the problematic Peaceful Assembly Act. It is imperative that this review leads to legislative reform of this law, which authorities have used to target protest organisers and discourage assemblies. The space for peaceful protests shrank considerably under the previous administration, who disrupted gatherings critical of authorities and arbitrarily arrested peaceful protesters under the guise of dealing with the pandemic. We urge the new government to reverse this approach and ensure adequate protection for the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.

    • The Societies Act 1966 – Muhyiddin’s government utilised the broad powers of the Societies Act to delay and even rejectthe formation of new political parties, undermining the right to freedom of association, which is critical in a functioning democracy. While not included in its written pledges, we encourage the government to substantively revise this law, ceasing its use as a barrier to the exercise of the freedom of association.

    • Other legislation routinely used to silence dissent includes Sections 504 and 505b of the Penal Code, the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, the Film Censorship Act 2002, Section 114 of the Evidence Act 1950, and the Official Secrets Act 1972. Wholesale reform of these laws is required to ensure that the right to freedom of expression can be exercised in the country without fear.

    The reform or repeal of the aforementioned laws have been repeatedly raised by the Malaysian human rights commission, human rights groups, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Special Rapporteurs, and other States as essential to safeguarding human rights in the country. Encouragingly, during the pledging session, H.E. Dr Ahmad Faisal Muhamad stated that “the government is cognizant of the need to continuously review these acts to make sure that they continue to be efficient, continue to be relevant, and in line with international standards.” To demonstrate that this commitment is sincere, the government must prioritise meaningful legislative reform of all laws impeding on the rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly.

    Undermining accountability mechanisms
    ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS are further concerned that domestic accountability mechanisms have been weakened in Malaysia. While the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) retains its “A” status as a National Human Rights Institution, SUHAKAM’s yearly reports have been largely ignored by the government. Although SUHAKAM’s 2018 report was debated for the first time in parliament after 19 years under the previous Pakatan Harapan government in December 2019, there was a lack of follow-through by Muhyiddin’s government.

    Concerningly, on 8 August 2021 SUHAKAM announced that its commissioners have been called in for police questioning over their attendance as monitors at the #Lawan protest. Two SUHAKAM commissioners, Jerald Joseph and Dato Mah Weng Kai, were investigated on 5 August at the Dang Wangi District Police Headquarters under Section 21A of the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases Act 1988 and the Peaceful Assembly Act.

    In presenting its candidacy for membership of the UN Human Rights Council, Malaysia made the voluntary commitment to “[c]ontinue to strengthen human rights institutions and mechanisms in Malaysia.” The government pledged funding support, law review, and more government agency engagement with SUHAKAM. A crucial requirement for fulfilling this pledge is for the government to meaningfully engage with SUHAKAM, viewing them as a key partner in upholding human rights.

    Discrimination
    In its pledges to the Human Rights Council, the government stated that it would “continue to promote diversity,” and that it “firmly embraces the values of inclusivity, acceptance, and understanding in ensuring harmony and peaceful coexistence.” The government asserted that it will take a “whole-of-society approach in the promotion and protection of human rights in the country.”

    Despite legislative protections in Malaysia, namely Article 8(2) of the Malaysian Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, descent, place of birth or gender, systemic discrimination against minorities persists. ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS are concerned about homophobic and discriminatory language and actions directed at LGBTQI communities, refugees, migrants, and religious minorities in Malaysia. Any form of national unity must include the rights of minorities, and there is a crucial need for more inclusive and non-discriminatory policies in place.

    Police reform
    While the government made no reference to police reform in its pledges to the Human Rights Council, ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS note that it is a pivotal aspect of improving rights protection in Malaysia. Police reform should be prioritised alongside legal reform, as the arbitrary implementation of rights-respecting laws can still lead to human rights violations.

    ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS have recorded dozens of incidents of harassment and intimidation by police against activists, human rights defenders and ordinary citizens because of the exercise of their right to freedom of expression. Without police reform, existing restrictive legal provisions will continue to be used to intimidate vocal critics and to shrink civic space in Malaysia.

    The new government must reform the Royal Malaysia Police and establish a dedicated Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) with a mandate to receive and investigate complaints about police misconduct and abuse. The IPCMC should be given the necessary powers to investigate abuses, compel cooperation from witnesses and government agencies, subpoena documents, and submit cases for prosecution.

    Commitments to the UN human rights mechanisms
    It is encouraging to hear Malaysia’s pledge to assess, monitor and implement its Universal Periodic Review (UPR) recommendations. The government has committed to work closely with the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the UN in Malaysia to jointly develop a UPR “Monitoring Matrix” to measure the implementation of UPR recommendations that Malaysia has accepted. It has also committed to a “multi-stakeholder biannual consultation” with involvement from civil society and the UN to follow up on UPR recommendations. If adequately acted upon, these commitments could give rise to far-reaching improvements to human rights in Malaysia.

    Despite this, the government’s cooperation with mechanisms of the UN Human Rights Council has historically been incredibly poor. Civil society groups working on the UPR process in Malaysia, in their 2021 midterm UPR report, concluded that steps towards ratifying the core human rights instruments, including the ICCPR, have progressed extremely slowly despite commitments made since the first UPR cycle in 2009. ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS hope the new administration will speed up the process of ratification to illustrate its commitment to human rights as it seeks Human Rights Council membership.

    In 2019, the Pakatan Harapan government implemented a policy of standing open invitations for visits by the UN Special Procedures. Malaysia has previously hosted various Special Rapporteurs including on the sale and sexual exploitation of children, on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, and on extreme poverty and human rights. The new government should uphold this policy of open invitations, and in particular extend invitations to the Special Rapporteurs on the Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association, on the Promotion and Protection of the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression, and on Freedom of Religion or Belief. ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS urge the new government to respond to individual communications from Special Procedures and enter into meaningful dialogues with UN experts rather than deny allegations outright as previous governments have.

    Recommendations
    To demonstrate its commitment to human rights as a prospective member of the UN Human Rights Council, ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS make the following recommendations to the Malaysian government:

    • Ratify the core human rights instruments and their optional protocols, including the ICCPR, and rescind reservations to existing treaties that are contrary to their objectives and principles;
    • Extend a standing invitation to all UN Special Procedures, and act swiftly to facilitate visits by the mandates on freedom of expression and on freedom of peaceful assembly and association;
    • Implement all recommendations made by UN Member States during the previous cycle of Malaysia’s UPR, in particular those relating to civic space;
    • Repeal the Sedition Act 1948, the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, Official Secrets Act 1972, and the Film Censorship Act 1998;
    • Reform the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, in particular Section 233(1)(a), to ensure it fully complies with international freedom of expression law and standards;
    • Reform the Penal Code, including Sections 504 and 505b, the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012, Section 114 of the Evidence Act, and the Societies Act 1966 in accordance with international law and standards;
    • Drop all investigations and charges against those exercising their right to freedom of expression, including social media users;
    • Ensure authorities do not harass or instigate arbitrary criminal investigations and proceedings against human rights defenders, protesters, activists, media workers, or opposition political figures;
    • Consult with civil society organisations on the shortcomings of Malaysia’s legal framework as they relate to freedom of expression and access to information;
    • Establish an IPCMC to investigate police abuses as per the recommendations of the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysia;
    • Should Malaysia be granted membership to the Human Rights Council, ensure it exercises earnest efforts to defend and enhance international human rights standards and ensure accountability for human rights violations and abuses in other countries in Southeast Asia and worldwide.

    ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS express sincere hope that the new government will take these steps to address the human rights concerns highlighted above and stand ready to engage in constructive dialogue to support such efforts. We hope to hear from you regarding this matter as soon as possible.

    Yours sincerely,

    ARTICLE 19 and CIVICUS.

    Cc. Permanent Mission of Malaysia to the United Nations Office and other international organizations in Geneva
    International Center Cointrin
    Bloc H
    Route de Pré-Bois 20
    1215 Geneva 15

    For more information, contact:

    David Diaz-Jogeix, ARTICLE 19 Senior Director of Programmes, , or
    Josef Benedict, CIVICUS Civic Space Researcher, .

    Civic space in Malaysia is rated as obstructed by the CIVICUS Monitor.

     
  • Malaysia: IPCC bill is a step backwards for police accountability

    Today, we—Amnesty International Malaysia, ARTICLE 19, CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation and Human Rights Watch—call on Members of Parliament in Malaysia to reject the deeply flawed Independent Police Conduct Commission (IPCC) bill and move quickly to table a bill to establish a police accountability mechanism that is truly independent and capable of ensuring adequate police oversight.

    The IPCC bill is expected to be tabled in Parliament during this Parliamentary sitting for its second reading. While there is little doubt that Malaysia desperately needs an independent oversight commission for the police, the IPCC bill, first tabled in August 2020, further weakens the already anaemic oversight mechanism currently in place and must be rejected.

    The bill fails to address widespread public concerns about police misconduct, ongoing misuse of power against government critics, and custodial deaths. If passed, the bill would not, as the government states, promote accountability, but rather shield police officers from scrutiny and independent oversight.

    Police abuse of power in Malaysia

    Malaysia has a long history of police abuse, including the excessive use of force, torture, ill-treatment, harassment, and deaths in custody. Human rights violations by police officers have been documented by both national and international non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

    The police have also abused their power to restrict freedom of expression and assembly in Malaysia. The space for peaceful protests has shrunk considerably. Police personnel continue to harass those criticising governmentofficials and have arbitrarily arrested peaceful protesters under the guise of dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic.

    The aggressive application of the Sedition Act 1948, in particular against government critics, is another abuse of police power frequently witnessed. Between January and August 2021, NGOs documented investigations under the Sedition Act being opened by police in 17 cases involving 37 individuals in total. The recent investigations of the #Lawan protest organisers under the Sedition Act are another worrying example of police overstep to the detriment of human rights.

    The Communications and Multimedia Act is also frequently used by the police to censor human rights defenders, journalists, artists, political opponents, and ordinary members of the public who have been critical of the police, government officials or Malaysian royalty, or shared opinions about issues deemed sensitive by the government, such as race and religion.

    Police misconduct and violence

    This year alone we have seen multiple alarming custodial deaths. In January, former police volunteer reservist Mohd Afis Ahmad died from blunt force trauma to the head just a day after he was arrested. In another case in April, milk trader A Ganapathy was admitted to the Intensive Care Unit upon his release following 12 days in police custody, where he later died. Autopsy results revealed he died from complications arising from injuries on his legs and shoulders, believed to have been sustained while in police custody. In May, security guard S Sivabalan died about 70 minutes after he was arrested by police, allegedly of a heart attack. Promised investigations into each of the above cases appear not to have made any progress.

    Police misconduct is not limited to deaths in custody. Allegations of corruption, abuse of power and links to criminal elements have also been raised in recent years. In March this year we were alarmed by allegations from the former Inspector General of Police (IGP) Abdul Hamid Bador that there is a movement of corrupt young police officers or ‘cartels’ within the police force whose ambition is to dominate the police force enabling them to carry out ‘dirty work’ for their own personal interests.

    The allegations from the former IGP have shocked the public and highlighted how crucial it is to establish an independent body to investigate these claims and to reform the police force. An independent and effective oversight commission is not going to solve all these problems, but it is an important first step, given the lack of accountability within the police force in Malaysia.

    Independent Police Conduct Commission (IPCC)

    Despite these concerns, the tabled IPCC bill is not a move towards police accountability but the opposite. The bill further weakens the limited police oversight provided by the current system under the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC). Our key concerns with the bill are as follows:

    1. No powers of search and seizure- The EAIC, for all its weaknesses, has the power to perform searches and seizures in its investigations of wrongdoing, including custodial deaths. The IPCC does not and as such would weaken the ability to conduct meaningful and effective investigations into police misconduct.
    1. Limited powers to compel documents and no provisions for hearingsUnder the IPCC, documents or evidence can be withheld if deemed ‘prejudicial to national security or national interest,’ a vaguely defined clause that is open to abuse. Unlike the EAIC, the IPCC does not provide for a hearing. Hearings would allow commissioners to fully explore and examine complaints, ensure greater transparency to victims of abuses and their families, and inform the public and decision makers around police procedures and policies.
    1. Prior notice requirement for site visits- The IPCC commissioners cannot visit police premises, lockups, or places of detention without prior notice to the head of department. Experience from the National Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) shows that authorities may treat early notice requirements as permission requirements, diluting the power of site visits.
    1. Limited investigation power - Even if the IPCC commissioners are able to successfully carry out investigations despite the above limitations, its powers are limited to making recommendations to a relevant body such as the Police Force Commission, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission or other relevant authorities. Given how recommendations by bodies such as the EAIC and SUHAKAM have been consistently ignored, it is not unreasonable to expect the IPCC will face the same blue brick wall. The IPCC is also exempt from investigating any act provided for in the Inspector-General Standing Orders (IGSO) (Sections 96 and 97 of the Police Act 1967). The standing orders generally govern issues such as the conduct of arrests, the treatment of detainees, and on matters related to permissible use of weapons, amongst others.
    1. Appointment process lacks independence and is unclear- Under the IPCC, as with the EAIC, members of the Commission will be appointed and dismissed by the King on the advice of the Prime Minister, calling into question the independence of the body. Moreover, appointed members may themselves be police officers. The Chief Executive Officer of the Commission is appointed by the Minister of Home Affairs, which further undermines the principle of independence and impartiality.

    The need for an independent police oversight body

    The idea of an independent police oversight body was first proposed in 2005, as part of 125 recommendations made by the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysian Police. The commission was composed of prominent public figures, including a former IGP. The police force also made its submissions as did the Retired Senior Police Officers' Association of Malaysia.

    A key recommendation was the establishment of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) to investigate police abuses and discipline those responsible. A proposed bill was drafted as part of the report. Yet, more than 16 years later, Malaysia seems to be moving ever further away from meaningful police reform.

    Police leadership has resisted independent oversight and the IPCMC has not yet been established, despite vigorous and sustained campaigning from civil society and human rights organisations. The previous Pakatan Harapan government tabledan IPCMC bill in July 2019 although it was criticised by human rights groups for being insufficient.

    Malaysia needs an independent oversight body that is truly independent and impartial from the State and the police, to avoid a conflict of interests. To be effective, the oversight body must possess real powers and responsibilities to investigate and take concrete action against police officers responsible for serious abuses. It is long overdue for the Malaysian government to treat the matter of custodial deaths and other police misconduct with the urgency it warrants. The families of those who have died while in police detention deserve answers and justice for their loved ones. People in Malaysia need to be assured that these deaths will not continue to occur with impunity and that those who abuse their positions of power and responsibility will be held accountable.

    Therefore, we urge the government to drop the IPCC bill and instead urgently table a bill that establishes an oversight commission that is truly independent, with sufficient powers to effectively investigate and take action against police misconduct. The rule of law applies to all, even the police.

    Endorsed by

    1. Amnesty International Malaysia
    2. ARTICLE 19
    3. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
    4. Human Rights Watch

    Civic space in Malaysia is rated as ‘obstructed’ by the CIVICUS Monitor.
  • Malaysia: Two years on, still no protection & accountability for Rohingya HRD Zafar Ahmad from harassment and threats

    We, the undersigned organisations, are deeply concerned about the situation of stateless Rohingya refugee and human rights defender Zafar Ahmad Abdul Ghani, President of Myanmar Ethnic Rohingya Human Rights Organization (MERHROM), who has been vilified and has received death threats since April 2020 after he was falsely accused of demanding Malaysian citizenship and equal rights for the Rohingya in Malaysia during the COVID-19 pandemic.
  • MEXICO: ‘The problem of insecurity is paramount, but it cannot be solved with militarisation’

    CIVICUS speaks about the militarisation of security in Mexico and its implications for civil society with Sofía de Robina, a lawyer with Centro de Derechos Humanos Miguel Agustín pro Juárez-Centro Prodh.

    Centro Prodh is a Mexican civil society organisation (CSO) founded in 1988 by the Society of Jesus with the aim of defending victims of serious human rights violations and promoting structural changes to allow all people in Mexico to enjoy and exercise the full range of their human rights equally. Its work focuses specifically on Indigenous peoples and groups, women, migrants and victims of repression.

    SofiadeRobina

    What trends do you see in the militarisation of public security in Mexico?

    At Centro Prodh we have seen that starting in 2006, with the deployment of the armed forces in the fight against drug trafficking, there has been an increased focus on the use of force by elements of the military sector instead of on strengthening the civilian police with a focus on prevention and prioritising access to justice and the fight against the corruption of authorities linked to organised crime. Consequently, rather than decreasing, violence increased, as did human rights violations.

    The presence of the army and its responsibility for human rights violations dates a long way back – it was involved in the so-called ‘dirty war’ of the 1960s and 1970s. However, this trend deepened under the administration of President Felipe Calderón of the National Action Party, continued under President Enrique Peña Nieto of the Institutional Revolutionary Party and further intensified under the current government of MORENA’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

    Over 80 per cent of the current members of the National Guard – created in 2019 through a constitutional reform and initially under the civilian command of the Ministry of Public Security – come from the military. According to the National Guard Law, the institution performs tasks of migration review and supervision, surveillance and investigation. This is extremely worrying as it is becoming a military body. Practically all of its commanders, both administrative and operational, come from the Ministry of National Defence (SEDENA), which means the National Guard is increasingly subordinate to the army.

    Congress recently approved an executive initiative to reform the National Guard Law, transferring its operational and territorial command to SEDENA. This is contrary to the constitution, which establishes that public security should be the responsibility of civilian institutions, as ratified by the Supreme Court.

    In addition, in 2020 it was established that the armed forces could continue to carry out tasks related to public security, without making clear how they would comply with the principles of exceptional, extraordinary, subsidiary, complementary and supervised intervention. Initially it was agreed that they would do so until 2024, but Congress has just approved a reform to extend the deadline until 2028, without providing any justification.

    All these decisions are evidence of the government’s commitment to militarised security instead of strengthening civilian police forces and state and federal prosecutors’ offices, which we believe would be more appropriate if the objective is to investigate crimes and human rights violations.

    Moreover, military presence has been strengthened not only in the area of public security, but also in other areas of public administration, such as customs and ports, as well as in the construction of public works. The armed forces have one of the largest budgets in the public administration and are not subject to adequate controls, even though they have historically been characterised by a lack of transparency and accountability.

    The National Human Rights Commission has shown no signs of true autonomy when it comes to military oversight. This is evidenced by the small number of recommendations it has issued despite the abundance of complaints involving the National Guard, as well as its refusal to challenge the unconstitutional legal changes.

    The attorney general’s office has also failed to carry out relevant investigations into the matter, perpetuating impunity. Oversight bodies are clearly not a sufficient counterweight to SEDENA’s growing power.

    Why has this trend developed?

    It is undeniable that the current context is one of unprecedented violence and that organised crime carries great weight in Mexico. It is responsible for many human rights violations, often in collusion or at least with the acquiescence of authorities at all levels. In some places, removing the armed forces overnight would not be the most appropriate measure to take.

    It is understandable that both the government and society are concerned about security: it is one of the problems that most affects Mexicans. However, the government has opted for militarisation, indicating that there are no other options available. Meanwhile, it has not taken any steps to strengthen adequate investigations to dismantle corruption and organised crime networks.

    The militarisation of security has not yielded good results. It has failed to reduce violence and has perpetuated human rights violations. For this reason, international organisations promote a ‘programmatic’ or gradual withdrawal of armed forces, while civilian forces and access to justice are strengthened. However, these recommendations are not being heeded and the role of the armed forces continues to be increased.

    We can’t emphasise enough that action must be taken to tackle insecurity. But it is important to discuss what measures should be employed. We believe it should be done by strengthening the civilian police and improving access to justice, and not by means of militarisation.

    How is Centro Prodh working on the impacts of militarisation?

    Centro Prodh defends and supports people who have been victims of serious human rights violations, mostly enforced disappearances, torture and extrajudicial executions. We work from a comprehensive defence perspective that includes legal defence, organisational and educational support for communities and organisations, international litigation, campaigns and public policy advocacy.

    Militarisation is one of the main focuses of our work because it has a great impact on human rights, especially for people in vulnerable situations and historically excluded people who are at the centre of our attention: poor people, migrants, Indigenous people and women.

    Although militarisation has deepened in recent years, Centro Prodh has long worked on cases of serious rights violations due to military involvement in public security. These types of abuses have always occurred, and we do not foresee them stopping any time soon.

    It is common that, as in the Tlatlaya case – where it’s alleged senior army officers ordered soldiers to kill suspected members of criminal gangs and survivors were tortured, and which remains unpunished – the armed forces carry out detentions making a disproportionate use of force and resort to torture to fabricate evidence, without being held accountable for it.

    We have worked on cases that have reached the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), such as the case of the Campesinos Ecologistas (‘environmental peasants’), two peasants who were defending their land and were arbitrarily detained and tortured by military forces. In 2010, the IACtHR ordered the Mexican state to redress the violations suffered by the two activists and implement structural changes to eradicate the causes of the abuses: to maintain an updated register of detainees with accessible information and control mechanisms, investigate allegations of torture and reform the Code of Military Justice to ensure that military jurisdiction does not apply to cases of human rights violations.

    We have also worked domestically on case of torture committed the armed forces – and specifically by SEDENA and the navy – which have often included sexual violence against women, including cases brought by Claudia Medina and Korina Utrera, Denis Blanco and Charly Hernández.

    In working with the families of the 43 students who were disappeared in Ayotzinapa in 2014, we have also observed the resistance of the armed forces to hand over information and be held accountable.

    In short, our concern about the militarisation of public security stems from our work to document and support action on cases of serious human rights violations committed by the armed forces.

    How is civil society responding to militarisation?

    Civil society has mobilised against militarisation for many years, and not just under the current government. This has been a longstanding and ongoing concern.

    Organisations working on the ground throughout Mexico have documented the impacts of militarisation. The Women’s Human Rights Centre in Chihuahua has done crucial work documenting violations, particularly disappearances perpetrated by the armed forces, and obtained a recent IACtHR ruling in the case of Alvarado v. Mexico, which established that ‘the intervention of the armed forces in public security activities must be based on criteria of strict proportionality, exceptionality and due diligence to safeguard the guarantees established in the Convention, because the fundamental role of the military forces cannot be conciliated with the essential functions of the civil authorities’.

    Organisations such as Tlachinollan have highlighted the repercussions of the presence of the armed forces in Indigenous and poor territories. They have worked on cases such as that of Inés Fernández and Valentina Rosendo, two Indigenous women who survived sexual torture by the armed forces, which led to a ruling by the IACtHR.

    Many local organisations, such as Fray Matías de Córdova Human Rights Centre in the south of Mexico and Casa del Migrante de Saltillo in the north, have expressed concern about the militarisation of the borders and the National Guard’s conduct in migration-related tasks .

    International human rights organisations have expressed similar concerns. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has been vocal on the issue since its first visit to Mexico in 1996. It has issued constant recommendations to successive governments ever since.

    So have various United Nations’ (UN) human right experts, such as the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions. The Committee on Enforced Disappearances recently visited Mexico and referred to militarisation as one of the main reasons why we currently have more than 105,000 disappeared people.

    The Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has also consistently and emphatically expressed its concern about the military presence and resulting human rights violations.

    What alternatives is civil society proposing?

    Civil society stands in line with the recommendations made by international organisations, which are very clear: a programmatic withdrawal of the armed forces should be undertaken and civilian institutions should be strengthened – by means of training, funding and a public security strategy that addresses the root causes of the problem – alongside investigative institutions to ensure access to justice.

    Unfortunately, instead of following these recommendations, the government has deepened militarisation not only de facto but also de jure, through the creation of a dense legal and institutional framework. This indicates that the trend will be difficult to reverse and will have long-term consequences. SEDENA has always resisted controls and will not voluntarily give back the power it has gained, and it will not be easy for future governments to take it away from it. The possible erosion of the military’s subordination to civilian power opens up a question mark over the future of democracy.

    What kind of support could the international community provide?

    It is very important for the international community to keep an eye on what is happening in Mexico, monitor the decisions being made, defend civil society in the face of a government that has repeatedly restricted its work and that of independent journalists, and offer support to victims. We need their help so that human rights are placed at the centre of our politicians’ decisions.

    Our criticisms are not personal or partisan attacks. Over the years we have looked at the faces of people who have suffered the consequences of militarisation first-hand. The work we do is indispensable in any democracy.

    Civic space in Mexico is rated ‘repressed’ by theCIVICUS Monitor.

    Contact Centro Prodh through itswebsite orFacebook page, and follow@SofiadeRo and@CentroProdh on Twitter.
  • MEXICO: ‘When climate activism threatens powerful interests, it is labelled on the same level as terrorists and drug traffickers’

    MariaReyes CIVICUS speaks about the role of civil society and its expectations for the upcoming COP28 climate summit with María Reyes, a young human rights and environmental activist from the Mexican state of Puebla.

    María is part of the Indigenous Figures (Futuros Indígenas) collective, made up of peoples, including young people, from Mexico and Central America. She participates in the global south division of Fridays for Future (FFF), an organisation that fights for environmental justice and advocates for action in the face of the climate emergency.

    What are Mexico’s main environmental problems?

    Generally speaking, Mexico is very vulnerable to the climate crisis. Water scarcity is a central issue, partly caused by droughts, but also by infrastructure problems, as many people do not have access to piped drinking water, and by very poor distribution and overexploitation of aquifers by private companies. If we add to the existing drought the fact that in many communities there are companies that obtain concessions through non-legal and non-transparent means and appropriate the little water that is left, the situation for people becomes unbearable.

    Mexico is one of the most dangerous countries to be an activist and environmental defender. In the southeast of Mexico there is a series of transnational extractive megaprojects, such as the Interoceanic Corridor and the ‘Mayan Train’, which threaten the environment through logging and water extraction, and displace wildlife, expropriate territories and resources, harm people and commit human rights violations. Local communities, particularly Indigenous communities, are criminalised when they oppose these megaprojects that are imposed on their territories without any consultation and without their consent or through the staging of rigged consultations.
  • Mexico: Criminalisation and arbitrary detention of the human rights defender Kenia Hernández

    To:

    Mr. Andrés Manuel López Obrador

     President of the United Mexican States 

    Dr Adán Augusto

     Interior Minister  

    Ms. Evelyn Salgado Pineda

    Constitutional Governor of the State of Guerrero  

    Mr Alfredo del Mazo
    Constitutional Governor of the State of Mexico 

    Mr. Alejandro Gertz Manero

    Attorney General of the Republic 

     

     

    In Geneva-Paris, May 11, 2022

    Warm greetings from the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (the Observatory), a joint program of the World Organization Against Torture (OMCT) and FIDH; the Mesoamerican Initiative of Women Human Rights Defenders (IM-Defensoras); Front Line Defenders (FLD); CIVICUS; and the National Network of Women Human Rights Defenders in Mexico (“Red Nacional de Defensoras de Derechos Humanos en México, RNDDHM”).

    On this occasion, the Observatory, IM-Defensoras, FLD, CIVICUS, and the National Network of Women Human Rights Defenders in Mexico address you to express our deep concern about the continued criminalisation and arbitrary detention of Ms Kenia Inés Hernández Montalván, as well as the discrimination based on her gender and her belonging to the indigenous Amuzga people in the legal proceedings against her.

    The undersigned organisations have repeatedly called on the Mexican authorities to release Ms Kenya Hernández and halt the legal proceedings against her, believing that her detention is part of the criminalisation of social protest and human rights defenders in Guerrero throughout Mexico. 

    Kenia Hernández, an indigenous Amuzga woman and lawyer from Xochistlahuaca, Guerrero, advocates for women's rights, land rights, and indigenous rights. As coordinator of the Collective Libertarian “Zapata Vive”, co-founder and member of the Movement for the Freedom of Political Prisoners of the state of Guerrero (“Movimiento por la Libertad de Los Presos Políticos del Estado de Guerrero”, MOLPEG), Ms Kenya Hernández accompanies survivors of male violence and relatives of victims of feminicide, defends the rights of the unjustly imprisoned and of people affected by the activities of multinational extraction companies on Mexican territory. However, precisely because of her legitimate work in defence of human rights, Ms Kenya Hernández has been held in solitary confinement in the maximum-security prison in the state of Morelos since October 2020. To date, for bureaucratic reasons, she has been denied access to her legal representatives, as well as in-person participation in the hearings of the various legal cases pending against her, on the grounds that she is a maximum-security prisoner. In addition, Ms Kenya Hernández was denied the right to visit her relatives on the grounds of COVID-19 prevention. As a result of these facts, Ms Kenya Hernández went on hunger strike twice in May and October 2021 for two months, which exacerbated her vulnerability and risk. 

    The Observatory, IM-Defensoras, FLD, CIVICUS and the National Network of Women Human Rights Defenders in Mexico have followed with great dismay the criminalisation processes that have been underway since June 2020 against Ms Kenya Hernández for the alleged commission of "attacks on public roads as a gang" and "robbery with violence using a weapon" to the detriment of Caminos y Puentes Federales (CAPUFE) and Autovías Concesionaria Mexiquenses. Of the nine criminal cases against her, two are being tried at the local level in the state of Mexico, and the other seven at the federal level in the states of Guerrero, Guanajuato and Morelos. Ms Kenya Hernández was sentenced to 11 years and 3 months and 10 years and six months in prison, respectively, in two of these cases. Both sentences are currently under appeal.

    These criminalisation processes, linked to multinational extraction companies, aim to punish and put an end to the legitimate work in defence of human rights of Ms Kenya Hernández, especially her peaceful participation in demonstrations demanding the appearance of the life of human rights lawyer Arnulfo Cerón, the release of human rights defenders and members of the Council of Ejidos and Communities Against the Dam of La Parota (CECOP), and the protection of women victims of male violence in the Costa Chica region of Guerrero.

    It should be noted that the status of Ms Kenya Hernández as a human rights defender has been recognised both by the Mechanism for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders and Journalists, which she joined in 2019, due to death threats she received for her work and by the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH), which has repeatedly called for her right to due process to be respected.

    The organisations signing this letter express their concern about the discrimination to which Ms Kenya Hernández is subjected due to her status as an indigenous woman. Throughout the trial, the human rights defender repeatedly requested that she be provided with an interpreter for the Amuzgo language, which was denied by the judge in charge, who considered that translation was not necessary because she had studied and spoken Spanish, in violation of Article 2 of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States. Also, Ms Kenia Hernández's request to apply a gender perspective throughout the judicial proceedings was rejected by the judge on the grounds that this only applied to "submissive women" or women who had been victims of gender-based violence in the domestic environment.

    Similarly, the arbitrary deprivation of liberty of Ms Kenya Hernandez, as a mother and sole provider for her minor children, violates the United Nations Rules for the Treatment of Women Prisoners (the Bangkok Rules), specifically Rules 4, 26, and 64, which provide, that female prisoners be placed in detention facilities close to their homes, taking into account their care responsibilities; that they are allowed contact with their families, including their children, by all reasonable means; and that women with dependent children be given priority for non-custodial sentences. 

    The undersigned organisations note with concern the restrictions on the right to social protest and the misuse of criminal law against Ms Kenya Hernández and call on the Mexican authorities to take the necessary measures to end her arbitrary detention and the numerous criminalisation proceedings against her.  

    The undersigned organisations also hope that the right to a fair and impartial trial, with a gender perspective and taking into account the cultural specificities of Ms Kenya Hernández as an indigenous woman, will be guaranteed throughout the legal proceedings against her.

    We thank you in advance for your attention, and we are at your disposal for any further information.

    Yours sincerely,

    - World Organization against Torture, within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

    - FIDH, within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders

    - CIVICUS

    - Mesoamerican Initiative of Women Human Rights Defenders (IM-Defensoras)

    - Front Line Defenders (FLD)

    - National Network of Women Human Rights Defenders in Mexico (“Red Nacional de Defensoras de Derechos Humanos en México”, RNDDHM)

    References:

    - IM-Defensoras Urgent Alert, February 10, 2022, available here; FLD Urgent Alerts available here; CIVICUS interview with Kenya Hernandez's attorney, Antonio Lara Duque, March 9, 2022, available here.

      
  • MYANMAR: ASEAN must move beyond consensus in facilitating cross-border humanitarian aid

    In the lead up to the high-level meeting on ASEAN humanitarian assistance to Myanmar, civil society organisations voiced their grave concerns in a webinar titled ‘Beyond ASEAN’s Five Point Consensus: Humanitarian Assistance in Myanmar’ held last Thursday, 5 May.
  • Myanmar: Hold the junta accountable

    Human Rights Defenders call on ASEAN and the international community to hold the junta accountable for grave human rights violations and atrocity crimes in Myanmar.
  • Myanmar: Regional bloc must move beyond the failed consensus

    One year on, since adopting the Five-Point Consensus on Myanmar, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its member states have not achieved any progress in addressing the human rights and humanitarian crisis perpetrated by the military junta.
  • Myanmar: States must ensure that rhetoric at the UN translates to action on the ground

    Statement at the 48th Session of the UN Human Rights Council

     Interactive Dialogue with Special Rapporteur on Myanmar

    Delivered by Lisa Majumdar

    We thank the Special Rapporteur for his progress report.

    More than a thousand civilians have been killed in Myanmar since February’s coup. The junta has continued its terror campaign against human rights defenders. Many have been forced into hiding. Many others, unable to flee, have been arbitrarily arrested, including environmental and labour rights defenders and student activists. Some have been tortured or ill-treated.

    Arbitrary amendments of the penal code by the junta, outlawing so-called ‘false news,’ has effectively made independent journalism a crime. The threat of arrest has driven many news organisations to close their offices and forced journalists underground or into exile. Two journalists were arrested just last month at an apartment where they had been hiding in Yangon. Authorities have banned satellite media and imposed rolling restrictions on the internet.

    The situation in Myanmar cannot be forgotten and its fragile democratic gains lost to history. Dictatorship must not be allowed to remain in place through inadequacy of the international response.

    The Special Rapporteur has already made urgent calls on States:

    • To outlaw the export of arms to the Myanmar military, as called for by the General Assembly;
    • To impose systemic sanctions, targeting military-controlled enterprises;
    • To cordinate investigations of ongoing crimes under universal jurisdiction;
    • To increase humanitarian aid through the National Unity Government, local humanitarian networks and community-based organisations;
    • And to reject any claims of legitimacy that the junta may try to assert.

    We call on States to take these steps to ensure that rhetoric at the UN translates to action to provide the support so desperately needed by those on the ground.

    Thank you.

    Civic space in Myanmar is rated as repressed by the CIVICUS Monitor
  • Myanmar: Urgent need to ensure accountability and justice for crimes against humanity

    Statement at the 48th Session of the UN Human Rights Council

    Interactive Dialogue on report of the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar

    Delivered by Lisa Majumdar

    Thank you, Madame President.

    We thank the Mechanism for their report. In a year which has seen a coup perpetrated by a military junta which has been implicated in crimes against humanity, the work carried out by this mandate to facilitate justice and accountability for past serious crimes and contribute to the deterrence of further atrocities has never been more critical.

    Indeed, the report concludes that the Myanmar junta has committed serious international crimes since seizing power on 1 February 2021, continuing a cycle of impunity, violence and deaths. Among the serious crimes noted has been the use of lethal force, including the use of live ammunition, against protesters in multiple locations.

    The Mechanism itself highlights that its work to collect, consolidate, preserve and analyse evidence is a contribution towards what must be a wider effort towards criminal accountability and justice. We call on Member States to take measures to ensure that such an accountability process takes place, including by referring Myanmar to the International Criminal Court or an independent tribunal. Failing to do so would be a grave abdication of responsibility to the victims of grave human rights violations, their families and communities, who have deserved accountability and justice for so long.

    The work of the mechanism would not be possible without participation from witnesses and victims of violations and civil society activists. The courage of those who do cannot be overstated. We therefore further call on Member States to facilitate the protection of witnesses and prevent any reprisals for cooperation with the Mechanism.

    We ask the Mechanism what steps it is taking to systematize engagement with civil society, and what steps it is taking to ensure sustainability in the event of budget restrictions?

    Civic space in Myanmar is rated as repressed by the CIVUCUS Monitor
  • New report reveals extent of media repression and human rights violations in Equatorial Guinea

  • Nicaragua: Systematic repression of civil society and human rights defenders continues

    Statement at the 54th Session of the UN Human Rights Council 

    Interactive Debate on Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)'s Report on Nicaragua

    Delivered by Róisín Dunbar, CIVICUS

    Thank you, Mr President,

    CIVICUS welcomes the report by OHCHR on the human rights situation in Nicaragua, which documents the systematic repression of civic space as also reported by CIVICUS.

    The seizure of the Central American University (UCA) is yet another example of the Nicaraguan authorities flouting of the right to freedom of expression and the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. We condemn the continued misuse of counterterrorism legislation to repress dissenting voices. 

    While the authorities released 222 political prisoners in February, the practice of arbitrary arrests and detention has continued in Nicaragua, including on accusations of conspiracy, treason and spreading of fake news. We are also concerned by the chilling effect such measures have had on Nicaraguan society, as noted by OHCHR in this report.  

    Werepeat our call on the government of Nicaragua to immediately and unconditionally release all political prisoners and to fully respect the fundamental civic freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression. 

    The revocation of the legal personality of 1,988organisations within 10 months as reported by OHCHR is also of grave concern. We urge the Nicaraguan authorities to repeal Laws No. 1040 on foreign agents and General Law No. 115 on the regulation of non-profitorganisations, and respect individuals right to freely associate.

    High Commissioner, in light of Nicaragua’s complete lack of engagement with Human Rights Council mechanisms, couldyou pleaseadvisehow Statescanprotect academic freedom and support civil society actors documenting and reporting on human rights violations and abuses?

    Civic space in Nicaragua is rated as 'closed' by the CIVICUS Monitor 
  • Nicaragua: Urgent call to stop judicial persecution of HRD Medardo Mairena Sequeira

    Medardo Mairena Sequeira, who appeared in court yesterday to face trumped charges, was found guilty of conspiracy to undermine National integrity.
  • Now is the time for greater transparency and broader participation

    Statement at the 50th Session of the UN Human Rights Council

    Interactive Dialogue onthe High Commissioner’s Annual Report

    Delivered byLisa Majumdar

    We thank the High Commissioner for her report, and for her work during her term.

    We fully agree that these are times for greater – not less - transparency and broader space for civic engagement and participation. Too many States are falling short in these respects.

    We see this in China, where civic space is closed and space for dissent is all but non-existent. Activists have been detained and indicted for speaking up, and thousands have been detained in legalised form of enforced disappearance.

    In Russia, a systematic dismantling of dissent has created an internal environment in which aggression can thrive. It has become all too clear that repression does not engender security, but rather its opposite.

    In these situations, it is even more important that the international human rights institutions, including this Council and your office, steps up in support. No country can be above effective scrutiny, regardless of the geopolitical power they wield.

    We stress again that civil society restrictions can and should be seen as early warnings for further deterioration in human rights protections. We look particularly at India, where increasing restrictions threaten the ability of civil society to carry out its work and where authorities continue to suppress peaceful protests.

    With a focus this session on the rights that protect civic space, we call on States to speak out on country situations where patterns of restrictions are evident, and to use this session to take action on the most egregious of these.

    We ask the High Commissioner, as your term draws to a close – what action should be taken by the Council and its members in these cases of systematic repression of civil society?

    Civic space ratings from the CIVICUS Monitor

    OPEN NARROWED OBSTRUCTED  REPRESSED CLOSED
  • Open call to all international actors: Do more to stop internet shutdowns shrouding torchings and killings in Myanmar

    Content note: this statement contains references to violence, murder, and potential war crimes.
  • Open Letter to ASEAN Defence Ministers

    To:
    H.E. General Tea Banh, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Defence, Cambodia 

    His Majesty Sultan Haji Hassanal Bolkiah Mu'izzaddin Waddaulahibni Al-Marhum, Minister of Defense, Brunei Darussalam

    H.E. Prabowo Subianto, Minister of Defence, Indoensia

    H.E. General Chansamone Chanyalath, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of National Defence, Lao PDR

    The Honourable Dato' Seri Hishammuddin bin Tun Hussein, Senior Minister of Defence, Malaysia

    H.E. Delfin N. Lorenzana, Secretary of National Defense, Philippines

    H.E. Dr Ng Eng Hen, Minister for Defence, Singapore

    H.E. General Prayut Chan-o-cha, Prime Minister and Minister of Defence, Thailand

    H.E. General Phan Van Giang, Minister of National Defence, Viet Nam

     

    June 15 2022

    Re: Myanmar junta participation in ADMM

    Your Excellencies,

    We, the undersigned 677 Myanmar, regional and international civil society organizations, appeal to you not to extend an invitation to the Myanmar military junta's Minister of Defence at the upcoming ASEAN Defence Ministers' Meeting (ADMM). 

    The Myanmar military junta's acts meet the definition of terror under international and national law and are responsible for ongoing violations of international human rights and humanitarian law following the military's illegal coup attempt. Since the military's illicit attempt coup, almost 700,000 people have been forcibly displaced as the junta waged a terror campaign against the Myanmar people. In the face of mass public resistance, the junta has murdered more than 1,900 people, arbitrarily arrested over 14,000 more, committed widespread torture, indiscriminate airstrikes and shelling, burnt villages and looted public property. 

    In the upcoming 16th ADMM, scheduled for June 22, we understand that the Junta defence minister General Mya Tun Oo will be representing Myanmar. General Mya Tun Oo plays a leading role in managing the military, responsible for committing ongoing atrocity crimes with total impunity. Mya Tun Oo's direct responsibility for international law violations has been recognized by the USA, U.K., EU, Canada and New Zealand, which sanctioned him. In its designation, the U.K. stated that Mya Tun Oo has "command responsibility for these violations and can therefore be held responsible for these actions." Mya Tun Oo is also a member of the State Administration Council (SAC). The E.U. recognized that "as a member of the SAC, General Mya Tun Oo has been directly involved in and responsible for decision making concerning state functions and is therefore responsible for undermining democracy and the rule of law". Mya Tun Oo should be held accountable for his role in the military's attempted coup and the junta's atrocity crimes and not rewarded through participation in ADMM.

    We welcome ASEAN's exclusion of Senior General Min Aung Hlaing from the 2021 ASEAN Summit and the exclusion of the junta foreign minister Wunna Maung Lwin from the 2022 Foreign Ministers' Retreat. However, we note with concern that ADMM has invited the junta to participate in meetings, including at the ministerial level, since its illegal coup attempt, which is inconsistent with decisions made by ASEAN not to invite General Min Aung Hlaing and Wunna Maung Lwin. ADMM's engagement with the junta, which has included military exercises, may likely amount to aiding and abetting the junta's war crimes and crimes against humanity.  

    It is imperative that ASEAN does not award legitimacy to the Myanmar military junta, upholds its charter and respects international human rights and humanitarian law by excluding the junta from ADMM. In allowing the junta to participate in ADMM, ASEAN is further risking complicity in the junta's atrocity crimes by providing support and legitimacy to the military and encouraging a military that is waging a nationwide campaign of terror. 

    As ASEAN defence ministers, we appeal to you to disinvite Mya Tun Oo from the 16th ADMM and all future meetings. Engage with the National Unity Government as the legitimate government of Myanmar, and work to resolve the crisis in Myanmar. 

    For any further inquiries, please contact:

    Khin Ohmar, Progressive Voice,  

    Debbie Stothard, ALTSEAN-Burma,  

    Salai Za Uk Ling, Chin Human Rights Organization,  

     

    List of Signatories

    The list of signatories below includes 299 Myanmar, regional and international organizations and 378 Myanmar civil society organizations that have chosen not to disclose their names.

    Signed by: 

    1. "Do" farmer Organization

    2. 8888 Generation (New Zealand)

    3. 8888 New Generation (Mohnyin)

    4. Action Against Myanmar Military Coup (Sydney)

    5. Action Committee for Democracy Development

    6. Active Youths (Kalaymyo)

    7. Ah Nah podcast- Conversation with Myanmar

    8. Ah. La. Ka (12) Hta Khwe, Primary Education Student Union

    9. All Arakan Students and Youths' Congress

    10. All Burma Democratic Face in New Zealand

    11. All Burma Student Democratic Front - Australia Branch

    12. All Religions Strike Column

    13. All Young Burmese League (AYBL)

    14. Alliance for Free Burma Solidarity

    15. Alternative Solutions for Rural Communities (ASORCOM)

    16. ALTSEAN-Burma

    17. Anti Dictatorship in Burma DC Metropolitan Area

    18. Anti-Myanmar Dictatorship Movement

    19. Anti-Myanmar Military Dictatorship Network (AMMDN)

    20. Arakan CSO Network

    21. Arakan Humanitarian Coordination Team- AHCT

    22. ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR)

    23. Asia Justice and Rights (AJAR)

    24. Asia Pacific Solidarity Coalition

    25. Asian Cultural Forum on Development (ACFOD) Philippines

    26. Asian Cultural Forum on Development Foundation (ACFOD) Thailand

    27. Asian Dignity Initiative

    28. Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development

    29. Association for Advancement of Freedom of Religion or Belief in Vietnam (AAFORB-VN)

    30. Association of Human Rights Defenders and Promoters

    31. Athan - Freedom of Expression Activist Organization

    32. Auckland Kachin Community N.Z.

    33. Auckland Zomi Community

    34. Aung Myay Thar Zan Education Schools Strike Column

    35. Aung Pin Lae Main Strike Column

    36. Australia Burma Friendship Association, Northern Territory

    37. Australia Karen Organization WA Inc.

    38. Australia Myanmar Doctors, Nurses and Friends

    39. Australia Myanmar Youth Alliance (AMYA)

    40. Australian Burmese Muslim Organisation

    41. Australian Chin Community (Eastern Melbourne Inc)

    42. Australian Karen Organisation (AKO)

    43. Australian Karen Organisation Inc

    44. Back Pack Health Workers Team

    45. Bamar Community Tasmania

    46. BCC (စစ်ကိုင်း)

    47. Blood Money Campaign

    48. Buddhist Solidarity Association

    49. Burma Action Ireland

    50. Burma Campaign U.K. 

    51. Burma Human Rights Network

    52. Burma Lawyers' Council (BLC)

    53. Burma Medical Association

    54. Burma Soumalaiset (Finland)

    55. Burmese Community - South Australia

    56. Burmese Community Development Collaboration (BCDC)

    57. Burmese Community Group (Manawatu, N.Z.)

    58. Burmese Community Support Group (BCSG)

    59. Burmese Friendship Association

    60. Burmese Medical Association Australia (BMAA)

    61. Burmese Rohingya Organisation U.K. 

    62. Burmese Rohingya Welfare Organisation New Zealand

    63. Burmese Women's Union

    64. Cambodian Americans and Friends for Democracy and Human Rights Advocate

    65. Campaign for a New Myanmar

    66. Canberra Karen Association

    67. CDM Support Team Mandalay (CSTM)

    68. Chan Mya Thar Si Township People Strike Column

    69. Chin Community - South Australia

    70. Chin Community of Auckland

    71. Chin Community of Western Australia Inc.

    72. Chin Community Tasmania

    73. Chin Human Rights Organization

    74. Chin MATA Working Group

    75. Chin Resources Center

    76. Chin Youth Organization (Matupi)

    77. Citizen of Burma Award - New Zealand

    78. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation

    79. Committee Representing Mandalay Region Hluttaw

    80. Cooperative University Student Strike Column 

    81. CRPH & NUG Supporters Ireland

    82. CRPH Funding Ireland

    83. CRPH Support Group, Norway

    84. CRPH, NUG Support Team Germany - Deutschland

    85. CRPH/NUG support group Australia

    86. Dawei Development Association

    87. Dawei Probono Lawyer Network

    88. Democracy for Myanmar - Working Group (N.Z.)

    89. Democracy, Peace and Women's Organization

    90. Democratic Youth Council

    91. Doh Atu - Ensemble pour le Myanmar

    92. Dragon Dawn

    93. Education and health care for Myanmar-Thailand Association

    94. Education Family (Anti - Fascists Education Strike Columns Coordination Committee) 

    95. Educational Initiatives Myanmar

    96. Equality Myanmar

    97. Ethnic Youth General Strike Committee

    98. Falam Community - South Australia

    99. Federal Myanmar Benevolence Group (N.Z.)

    100. Foundation of Khmer Samaki

    101. Free Burma Campaign (South Africa)

    102. Free Expression Myanmar (FEM)

    103. Free Rohingya Coalition

    104. Future Light Center

    105. Future Thanlwin

    106. General Strike Committee of Nationalities - GSCN

    107. Generation Wave

    108. Generations (မျိုးဆက်)

    109. GenY For Revolution Japan

    110. German Solidarity with Myanmar Democracy e.V.

    111. Global Myanmar Spring Revolution 

    112. Global Myanmar Spring Revolution - Japan

    113. Global Myanmar Spring Revolution - Korea

    114. Golden Heart Organization

    115. Grass-root People

    116. Human Rights Educators' Network

    117. Human Rights Foundation of Monland

    118. In Defense of Human Rights and Dignity Movement (iDEFEND) Philippines

    119. India For Myanmar

    120. Industrial Training Centre (ITC) Family Sydney

    121. Info Birmanie

    122. Initiatives for International Dialogue

    123. Institute for Asian Democracy

    124. Inter Pares

    125. Interfaith Youth Coalition on Aids in Myanmar (IYCA-Myanmar)

    126. International Campaign for the Rohingya

    127. International Karen Organisation

    128. JASS Southeast Asia

    129. Joint Action Committee for Democracy in Burma (JACDB)

    130. Justice 4 Myanmar - Hope & Development

    131. Justice Movement for Community-Innlay

    132. Justice For Myanmar

    133. Kachin Association Australia

    134. Kachin Association of Australia WA Inc.

    135. Kachin Human Rights Watch

    136. Kachin State Women Network

    137. Kachin Women's Association Thailand

    138. Kachin Women's Union

    139. Kadu Youth Development Association (KYDA)

    140. Kalyarna Metta Association (Khin U)

    141. Kanbung Youth (Matupi)

    142. Kanpetlet Land Development Organization

    143. Karen Community - South Australia

    144. Karen Human Rights Group

    145. Karen Peace Support Network

    146. Karen Swedish Community (KSC)

    147. Karen Women's Organization

    148. Karenni Community of Western Australia Inc.

    149. Karenni Federation of Australia

    150. Karenni Human Rights Group

    151. Karenni Society New Zealand

    152. Kayan Internally Displacement Supervising Committee (KIDSC)

    153. Kayan Women’s Organization

    154. Kayin Community Tasmania

    155. Keng Tung Youth

    156. Khanthar Farmers Network

    157. Khumzup Local Development Committee

    158. Kurawal Foundation

    159. Kyauktada Strike Committee

    160. LA COMMUNAUTÉ BIRMANE DE FRANCE

    161. LGBTIQ Strike of Mandalay

    162. Maha Aung Myay Township People Collective Strike Column

    163. Mandalar University Student Strike  Column 

    164. Mandalay Alliance Strike Collective Column 

    165. Mandalay Based People Strike Column 

    166. Mandalay Civil Society Organizations 

    167. Mandalay Engineer Group

    168. Mandalay Engineer United Force

    169. Mandalay University Student Alumni Union 

    170. Mandalay Wholesale Strike Column

    171. Mandalay Youth Association

    172. Mandalay Youth Strike Column

    173. MATA Sagaing Region

    174. Matu Chin Community - South Australia

    175. Matu Forum Committee

    176. Matu Women Association

    177. Medical Family – Mandalay

    178. Metta Campaign Mandalay

    179. MIIT Student Strike Column

    180. MilkTeaAlliance Calendar

    181. MilkTeaAlliance Galleries

    182. Mindanao Peacebuilding Institute Foundation, Inc. (MPI)

    183. Mindat Chin Community NSW

    184. Mindat Community - South Australia

    185. Mindat Emergency Response Team (MERT)

    186. Mizo Community - South Australia

    187. Mon Families Group

    188. Mon National Council (MNC)

    189. Mung Chying Rawt Jat (MRJ) 

    190. Muslim Youth Network

    191. Muslim Youth Union 

    192. Mya Taung Strike Column

    193. Myanmar Accountability Project

    194. Myanmar Action Group Denmark

    195. Myanmar Alliance for Transparency and Accountability 

    196. Myanmar Buddhist Community of South Australia

    197. Myanmar Community Coffs Harbour (MCC)

    198. Myanmar Cultural Research Society (MCRS)

    199. Myanmar Democracy and Peace Committee (Australia)

    200. Myanmar Democratic Movement (MDM)

    201. Myanmar Diaspora Group Finland

    202. Myanmar Engineering Association of Australia (MEAA)

    203. Myanmar Engineers - New Zealand

    204. Myanmar Gonye (New Zealand)

    205. Myanmar People Alliance (Shan State)

    206. Myanmar People from Ireland

    207. Myanmar People Residing in Canberra

    208. Myanmar Professionals Association Australia (MPAA)

    209. Myanmar Railway, Region (3) CDM Strike Column

    210. Myanmar Students' Association Australia (MSAA)

    211. Myanmar Students' Union in New Zealand

    212. Netherlands Myanmar Solidarity Platform

    213. Network for Advocacy Action

    214. Network for Human Rights Documentation Burma (ND-Burma)

    215. New Zealand Doctors for NUG

    216. New Zealand Karen Association

    217. New Zealand Zo Community Inc.

    218. NLD Solidarity Association (Australia)

    219. No 7 State High School Alumni Strike Column 

    220. No Business With Genocide

    221. Northern Spectrum Youth Association

    222. NSW Karenni (Kayah) Communities

    223. OCTOPUS (Youth Organization)

    224. Open Development Foundation

    225. Overseas Mon Association, New Zealand

    226. Pan Pa Wash People Strike Column

    227. Patriotic War Vetrans of Burma (PWVB)

    228. Peace and Culture Foundation

    229. People's Hope Spring Revolution

    230. Phayagye Peace Strike Column

    231. Private Pre-school Teachers Association 

    232. Progressive Voice

    233. Pusat Komas 

    234. Pyi Gyi Ta Gon Strike 

    235. Pyithu Gonye (New Zealand)

    236. Queensland Kachin Community (QKC)

    237. Queensland Myanmar Youth Collective (QMYC

    238. Queensland Rohingya Community

    239. Rohingya Action Ireland

    240. Rvwang Community Association New Zealand

    241. Sangha Samaga Strike Column

    242. Save and Care Organization for Women at Border Areas

    243. SAVE MYANMAR - USA

    244. Save Myanmar Fundraising Group (New Zealand)

    245. Sein Pan Strike Column

    246. Shan Community (New Zealand)

    247. Shan MATA

    248. Shan Women Development Network

    249. Shape-Sea

    250. Shwe Youth Democratic Alliance (SYDA)

    251. Shwechinthae Farmers Network

    252. Sisters 2 Sisters

    253. Sitt Nyein Pann Foundation

    254. Social Garden 

    255. Southeast Asia Freedom of Expression Network (SAFEnet)

    256. Southern Youth Development Organization

    257. Strike Column of Representatives of Arbitrarily Arrested People

    258. Strike Column of Teachers from Universities and Degree Colleges of Mandalay 

    259. Students & Youth Congress of Burma (SYCB)

    260. Support for Myanmar

    261. Swedish Burma Committee

    262. Swedish Foundation for Human Rights

    263. Sydney Friends for Myanmar Unity

    264. Ta'ang Women's Organization

    265. Taekwando Sport Association 

    266. Tanintharyi MATA

    267. Tanintharyi Nationalities Congress

    268. Tanintharyi People's Voice

    269. Tanintharyi Women's Network

    270. Thai Action Committee for Democracy in Burma (TACDB)

    271. Thapaynyo News Letter

    272. The Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS)

    273. The Institution of Professional Engineers Myanmar (IPEM)

    274. Together Thanlyin

    275. Twitter Team for Revolution

    276. U.S. Campaign for Burma

    277. Uakthon Local Social Development Organization

    278. United Myanmar Community of South Australia  

    279. Victorian Burmese Care Community (VBCC)

    280. Victorian Myanmar Youth (VMY)

    281. Way Way Nay

    282. We Pledge CDM (Australia)

    283. Western Australia Myanmar Community (WAMC)

    284. Western Australia Myanmar Democratic Network (WAMDN)

    285. Winemaw Civil Society Network

    286. Winemaw Lisu Development Association

    287. Women Activists Myanmar (WAM)

    288. Women Advocacy Coalition-Myanmar

    289. Women's League of Burma

    290. Women's Peace Network

    291. Zo Community - South Australia

    292. Zomi Association Australia Inc.

    293. Zomi Community - South Australia

    294. Zomi Community Queensland

    295. ခုနစ်စင်ကြယ်အဖွဲ့

    296. ဒို့မြေကွန်ရက် (LIOH)

    297. ဒေါင်းစစ်သည်

    298. ပွင့်ဖြူလယ်ယာမြေကွန်ရက်

    299. ပဲခူး MATA
  • Open letter to the Emirati authorities to free HRD, Ahmed Mansoor on his 50th Birthday

    On 22 October, Ahmed Mansoor will turn 50 in prison so CIVICUS and partners have organised a series of actions to help #FreeAhmed and offer #BirthdayWishes4Ahmed. The United Arab Emirates authorities have convicted and imprisoned him for 10 years solely for his human rights work and for exercising his right to freedom of expression.  We are looking for signatories to a joint letter calling upon the Emirates government to immediately and unconditionally release the human rights defender Ahmed Mansoor, whose life we believe may be at risk following beatings and hunger strikes to protest deplorable and inhumane prison conditions. 

    Please add your signature to this letter at either the bottom of this page or at the following link by 14 October: http://eepurl.com/gFtjJr

    You can find information about protests worldwide (NYC, DC, Toronto, London and more) at: https://www.facebook.com/FriendsofAhmedMansoor/

    Le 22 octobre, Ahmed Mansoor célèbrera ses 50 ans en prison, nous avons donc organisé une série d'actions pour aider à sa libération #FreeAhmed et lui offrir nos voeux #BirthdayWishes4Ahmed. Les autorités l'ont condamné et emprisonné pendant 10 ans uniquement pour son travail en faveur des droits humains et pour avoir exercé son droit à la liberté d'expression. Nous recherchons des signataires pour une lettre commune commune (en anglais) appelant le gouvernement des Émirats Arabes Unis à libérer immédiatement et sans condition le défenseur des droits humains Ahmed Mansoor, dont nous pensons que la vie pourrait être en danger à la suite de brutalités et des grèves de la faim entreprises pour dénoncer des conditions carcérales déplorables et inhumaines.

    Merci d'ajouter votre signature à cette lettre au bas de cette page ou sur le lien (en anglais) suivant avant le 14 octobre: http://eepurl.com/gFtjJr

    Vous pouvez trouver des informations sur les manifestations dans le monde entier (NYC, DC, Toronto, Londres, etc.) en anglais sur: https://www.facebook.com/FriendsofAhmedMansoor/

    El 22 de octubre, Ahmed Mansoor celebrará sus 50 años en la cárcel, por lo que hemos organizado una serie de acciones para ayudar a su liberación #FreeAhmed y felicitarle #BirthdayWishes4Ahmed. Las autoridades lo han condenado y encarcelado durante 10 años únicamente por su labor en el ámbito de los derechos humanos y por ejercer su derecho a la libertad de expresión. Estamos buscando signatarios para una carta conjunta (en inglés) en la que se pide al gobierno de los Emiratos Árabes Unidos que libere inmediata e incondicionalmente al defensor de los derechos humanos Ahmed Mansoor, cuya vida creemos que puede correr peligro tras las agresiones y las huelgas de hambre emprendidas con el fin de protestar contra las condiciones deplorables e inhumanas que sufre en prisión.

    Por favor agregue su firma a esta carta al final de esta página o en el siguiente enlace (en inglés) antes del 14 de octubre:  http://eepurl.com/gFtjJr

    Puede encontrar información sobre las protestas en todo el mundo (NYC, DC, Toronto, Londres y más) en inglés en: https://www.facebook.com/FriendsofAhmedMansoor/


     في 22 أكتوبر/تشرين الأول، سيبلغ أحمد 50 عاماً وهو في السجن، لذلك قمنا بتنظيم سلسلة من الإجراأت للمساعدة في إطلاق سراح أحمد وتقديم الأمنيات له عن طريق الوسوم

    #FreeAhmed و#BirthdayWishes4Ahmed

    لقد أدانته السلطات الإماراتية وحُكم عليه بالسجن 10 سنوات بسبب عمله في مجال حقوق الإنسان وممارسته حقه في حرية التعبير. نحن نبحث عن موقعين على الرسالة المشتركة التي تدعو حكومة الإمارات إلى الإفراج فوراً ودون شرط عن المدافع عن حقوق الإنسان أحمد منصور، حيث أن حياته في خطر بعد تعرضه للضرب وإضرابه المتكرر عن الطعام للاحتجاج على ظروف السجن المزرية وغير الإنسانية

    يرجى توقيع هذه الرسالة المفتوحة في أسفل هذه الصفحة أو على هذا الرابط بحلول 14 أكتوبر

    يمكنكم العثور على معلومات حول الاحتجاجات في جميع أنحاء العالم (نيويورك، واشنطن، تورنتو، لندن وغيرهم) باللغة الإنجليزية على

    https://www.facebook.com/FriendsofAhmedMansoor/

     

    Sign the letter

    * indicates required
    Do you want to receive updates on this campaign?
     
     
     
  • Open letter: Pope Francis' visit to Mozambique presents an opportunity to address human rights violations

    Read it in Portuguese | Italian

    JOINT OPEN LETTER

    Your Holiness, Pope Francis
    Apostolic Palace
    00120 Vatican City

    Re: Open letter on human rights to Pope Francis from Civil Society groups on his visit to Mozambique

    Your Holiness, Pope Francis

    We, the undersigned, are writing as a group of non-governmental organisations working to promote and defend human rights in many countries around the world, including Mozambique. Ahead of your visit to Mozambique scheduled to take place between 4 and 6 September 2019, we would like to bring to your attention a number of human rights issues of concern and to urge you to use your visit as an opportunity to publicly support our call for the protection and promotion of human rights particularly as the country prepares to hold its 6th general elections in October 2019, since the end of the civil war in 1992.

    We are gravely concerned by the increasing intimidation and harassment of human rights defenders, activists, civil society organisations and media, the deterioration of the human rights situation in Cabo Delgado, the lack of accountability, justice and effective remedies for victims of human rights violations and abuses as well as violations of the rights of refugees and asylum seekers.

    Crackdown on freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, and media freedom

    In the past year, there has been an increasing crackdown on dissent particularly the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, freedom of expression, and media freedom by the Mozambican government. Freedom of movement of Human Rights Defenders (HRD’s), political actors, journalists and civil society groups has also come under increasing attack.

    In the aftermath of the October 2018 municipal elections, several human rights defenders, civil society activists and local journalists received anonymous death threats, intimidating phone calls and messages. This was in apparent retaliation for their participation in the election process, which included monitoring polling stations and publishing live municipal elections results.[1]

    Among those targeted for their participation in monitoring the 2018 municipal election were priests Father Benvindo Tapua and Father Cantífulas de Castro, Director and Deputy Director of Radio Encontro respectively.[2] Journalists from Catholic run radio stations, Watana and Radio Encontro, were intimidated and harrassed. Others were assaulted, including a reporter for Miramar television station who was attacked by a member of the main opposition party, the Mozambique National Resistance’s (RENAMO), when he was covering a riot at the local RENAMO’s office in Chimoio, Manica province.[3]

    We have also seen repression by Mozambican authorities of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association. From 21 to 24 January 2019, the police surrounded the office of the Centre for Public Integrity (CIP), an independent civil society organisation, which launched a campaign against the repayment of alleged illegally acquired secret loans amounting to USD2.2 billion which were taken under former president Armando Guebuza. The police also ordered people to remove campaign T-shirts and CIP’s employees to stop distributing the T-shirts.[4]

    In March 2019, authorities disrupted one march and initially blocked another both in the capital Maputo. On March 1, police officers armed with rifles disrupted a march organized by a local primary school to mark the city’s annual carnival. Four days later, the mayor of Maputo rejected plans for Mozambique’s leading women’s rights group, Forum Mulher, to march against domestic violence on International Women’s Day.[5]

    We fear escalation of the crackdown and climate of repression of the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association and media freedom ahead of the forthcoming general elections.

    Human Rights violations and abuses in the Cabo Delgado province

    Since October 2017, the northern districts of Cabo Delgado province have experienced appalling attacks by individuals believed to be members of an armed group known as “Al-Shabaab”. The attackers have invaded villages, set houses on fire, hacked villagers to death with machetes and looted their food. In response, the government increased military presence in the region, however, the authorities’ response has been concerning. Security forces have reportedly intimidated, harassed, arbitrarily arrested and detained people on suspicion of belonging to the armed group. In addition, there are allegations of the detainees being subjected to torture and other ill-treatment. Deeply concerning are reports of cases of summary executions. Security forces have also intimidated, detained and even charged journalists and human right defenders and researchers who have been investigating the humanitarian crisis as well as the violations and abuses by state security forces.[6]

    On 5 January 2019, journalist Amade Abubacar was arrested by police officers of Macomia district without a warrant while he was interviewing villagers who had fled their homes due to intensified attacks carried out by individuals believed to be members of an armed group.[7] Amade was held in pre-trial detention for nearly 100 days, including 12 days in incommunicado military detention.[8] On 23 April, Amade was granted provisional release from Mieze prison in Pemba city.[9] He is still facing accusations of crimes of “public incitement through electronic media” and “incitement” and “injury against public officials”.[10]

    In December 2018, Estacio Valoi, an investigative journalist, and David Matsinhe, a researcher at Amnesty International, were arrested by the military and held incommunicado for two days in Mocímboa da Praia district, accused of spying and aiding and abetting the armed group “Al-Shabaab”. They were released without charges, but their equipment remains confiscated by the military for “further investigation.”[11] The area remains a virtual no-go area for the press, with negative implications for citizens’ right to know.

    Accountability and justice for victims of human rights violations and abuses

    We are very concerned about the continued impunity for human rights crimes, including extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearance, torture and other ill-treatment which has created an environment of public fear and insecurity. Several organizations have documented numerous cases which remain unresolved, including:

    On 8 October 2016, Jeremias Pondeca, a senior member of the Mozambique National Resistance opposition party (RENAMO) and was also part of the mediation team seeking to end the clashes between RENAMO and the government, was shot dead in Maputo by unknown men suspected of being part of a death squad composed of state security officers.[12]

    On 27 March 2018, unknown gunmen abducted human rights lawyer Ericino de Salema outside the offices of the Mozambican Union of Journalists in Maputo.[13] The men then beat and abandoned him on the Maputo Ring Road. As a result of the assault, Mr. Salema suffered serious fractures to his arms and legs. At the time of the attack, Mr. Salema was the resident political commentator on the television show, STV’s Pontos de Vista, on which he has often taken positions critical of the government’s policies. It is feared that the attack was likely in retaliation for his critical views in the course of his professional duties.

    On 4 October 2017, an unidentified gunman assassinated the then mayor of Nampula City, Mahamudo Amurane, at his home.[14] Since his election as mayor of Nampula in 2013, Mahamudo Amurane had embarked on a public quest to root out alleged corruption in the city’s administration and revitalize public infrastructure.

    Violations of the rights of refugees and asylum seekers

    Despite the government’s international commitment to respect and protect the rights of refugees and asylum seekers, we documented worrying reports of arbitrary arrests and deportation of refugees by the state security forces and immigration officers.

    On 17 January 2019, police and immigration officers arrested 15 refugees and asylum seekers (14 men and one woman) from the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and one male refugee from Ethiopia who were at the time residing in Maratane Camp in Nampula province. According to their testimonies, they were arrested without a warrant, hand-cuffed and beaten. They were not immediately informed of the reasons for their arrest and detention.[15]

    The 16 refugees and asylum seekers are currently detained at the Third Police Station in Pemba. The 16 people have been held for more than seven months, and they have not been notified of the reason for their detention or of any criminal charges against them. They have also not been brought before a court. According to interviews conducted with the detainees by Amnesty International, they are being held in inhumane conditions. The detainees were forced to dig a hole in the police station’s patio to use as a toilet. They have been drinking possibly contaminated water that is yellow in colour from the cell’s sink. Sometimes those who can afford it pay someone to buy them bottled water.[16]

    On 23 January 2019, the government of Mozambique deported seven men from the group of 16 refugees and asylum seekers, who were originally from the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). They were not notified of a deportation order, nor were they permitted to challenge their deportation in court. According to testimony from the seven men, the immigration officers forced them to board a flight to Kinshasa, DRC. When they arrived at the Kinshasa airport, the immigration officer denied them entry and ordered their return to Mozambique. They were returned to Pemba city on 26 January and taken to the Third Police Station, where they are still being detained.

    In light of the above, we are calling on Your Holiness to raise these human rights concerns with the Government of Mozambique and request that the government immediately look into the matters and take concrete and meaningful steps to respect, protect, promote and fulfill human rights.

    In addition, we ask that Your Holiness reiterate to the government that it must ensure that members of civil society including journalists, researchers and lawyers can carry out their work freely and without fear of attacks, intimidation, harassment. The government must also ensure prompt, thorough, impartial and independent investigations into cases of extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detention and other cases of human rights violations and abuses and that those suspected to be responsible are brought to justice in fair trials.

    We hope that Your Holiness’ visit to Mozambique presents a genuine opportunity to the government of Mozambique to reaffirm its commitment to upholding the human rights enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic, as well as the government’s regional and international human rights obligations and commitments.

    Thank you for your consideration of this letter.

    Yours Sincerely,

    African Freedom of Expression Exchange (AFEX)

    Africans Rising

    Amnesty International

    CIVICUS

    Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ)

    Federation of Journalists of Portuguese Language (FJLP)

    Human Rights Watch

    IFEX

    International Press Institute (IPI)

    MISA-Mozambique

    Parlamento Juvenil – Moçambique

    Reporters Sans Frontiers

    Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC)

    Solidariedade Moçambique (SOLDMOZ-ADS)

    #ReageMoçambique

     

    [1] Amnesty International (19 October 2018) Mozambique: Journalists and Activists Threatened – AFR 41/9263/2018. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr41/9263/2018/en/. Amnesty International (17 October 2018) Mozambique: Journalists and activists face death threats and intimidation in post-election witch-hunt. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/10/mozambique-journalists-and-activists-face-death-threats-and-intimidation-in-post-election-witch-hunt/.

    [2] Amnesty International (19 October 2018) Mozambique: Journalists and Activists Threatened – AFR 41/9263/2018.Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr41/9263/2018/en/.

    [3] All Africa (3 May 2019) Mozambique: Misa warns of deteriorating press freedom.Available at: https://allafrica.com/stories/201905030729.html

    [4] Amnesty International (29 January 2019) Mozambique: Woman human rights defender facing threats online: Fátima Mimbire.Available at:https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr41/9744/2019/en/

    [5] Human Rights Watch (13 March 2019) Armed police break up Mozambique Children’s march – Women’s day protest proceeds after initial ban.Available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/03/13/armed-police-break-mozambique-childrens-march

    [6] Human Rights Watch (4 December 2018) Mozambique: Security forces abusing suspected insurgents. Available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/12/04/mozambique-security-forces-abusing-suspected-insurgents

    American Bar Association (11 April 2019) Mozambique: Effective counter-terrorism strategies do not include arresting journalists. Available at: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/human_rights/reports/ArrestsInCaboDelgado/

    [7] Amnesty International (11 January 2019) Mozambique: Journalist Arbitrarily detained incommunicado: Amade Abubacar. Available: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr41/9674/2019/en/

    [8] Amnesty International (5 February 2019) Mozambique: Further Information: Detained journalist denied family visits: Amade Abubacar. Available: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr41/9792/2019/en/

    [9] Reporters Without Borders (23 April 2019) Two Mozambican journalists freed after being held for months. Available at: https://rsf.org/en/news/two-mozambican-journalists-freed-after-being-held-months

    [10] Amnesty International (19 August 2019) Mozambique: Further information: Journalist awaits prosecutor’s decision: Amade Abubacar. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr41/0890/2019/en/

    [11] Committee to Protect Journalists, Mozambican journalist arrested, held in military prison,9 January 2019. Available: https://cpj.org/2019/01/mozambican-journalist-arrested-held-in-military-pr.php

    [12] Human Rights Watch (11 October 2016) Mozambique: Prominent opposition leader killed. Available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/10/11/mozambique-prominent-opposition-leader-killed

    [13] Committee to Protect Journalists (28 March 2018) Mozambique journalist abducted, assaulted. Available at: https://cpj.org/2018/03/mozambique-journalist-abducted-assaulted.php

    [14] Amnesty International (5 October 2017) Mozambique: Killing of anti-corruption mayor must be investigated.Available at:https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2017/10/mozambique-killing-of-anti-corruption-mayor-must-be-investigated/

    [15] Amnesty International, Mozambique: refugees, asylum seekers held arbitrarily, 13 June 2019. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr41/0465/2019/en/

    [16] Amnesty International, Mozambique: Further information: refugees, asylum seekers held without charge, 16 August 2019. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/afr41/0880/2019/en/

Page 4 sur 6

COMMUNIQUEZ AVEC NOUS

Canaux numériques

Siège social
25  Owl Street, 6th Floor
Johannesbourg,
Afrique du Sud,
2092
Tél: +27 (0)11 833 5959
Fax: +27 (0)11 833 7997

Bureau pour l’onu: New-York
CIVICUS, c/o We Work
450 Lexington Ave
New-York
NY 10017
Etats-Unis

Bureau pour l’onu : Geneve
11 Avenue de la Paix
Genève
Suisse
CH-1202
Tél: +41.79.910.34.28