HUMAN RIGHTS FEATURES

(Voice of the Asia-Pacific Human Rights Network)

(A joint initiative of SAHRDC and HRDC)

B-6/6 Safdarjung Enclave Extension, New Delhi 110 029, India

Tel: +91-11-619 2717, 619 2706, 619 1120; Fax: 619 1120

E-mail: hrdc_online@hotmail.com  

EDITORIAL----------------------------------------------------

A Steady Hand In Uncertain Times

In condemning the 11 September 2001 attacks, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson stated that they “could only be seen as crimes against humanity and an affront to human rights.” Yet, in just a few months, she finds herself at the forefront of defending the rights of suspected Al-Qaeda and Taliban prisoners.

By her principled pronouncements, she has underlined the fact that human rights often mean protecting the rights of those whose views we utterly abhor. Whether making a vocal plea to stop US bombing in civilian areas in Afghanistan to allow more food aid or bluntly stating that Afghans who abuse the rights of captured Taliban should be barred from any future administration or calling for an international inquiry into the killing of hundreds of prisoners near Mazar-e-Sharif, Ms Robinson has put the human rights agenda first.

The treatment of the Al-Qaeda and Taliban prisoners at Camp X-Ray has shocked the world. Prisoners were blindfolded, shackled, manacled, and sedated before being put onto the long flight from Afghanistan to Cuba. On arrival, prisoners were caged in 1.8m by 2.4m open-sided wire cells. Prisoners were photographed wearing orange jump suits, shackled and kneeling, with goggles over their eyes and masks over their mouths and noses. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's statements that the US plans to treat the prisoners “for the most part” in a manner that is “reasonably consistent” with the Geneva Conventions is unacceptable.

In order to give itself the greatest arch of discretion in treatment of the prisoners, the US has conjured the term, “battlefield detainees.” The High Commissioner has told the Americans that they are, at least presumptively, to be treated as prisoners of war under the Geneva Conventions. The same has been reiterated by the European Union. The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) has chosen to subtly make public its view of the prisoners' status by stating that distributing the pictures of the prisoners violated the Geneva Convention on POWs.

President Bush's order to try suspected terrorists in military tribunals rather than the regular US court system raises deep concerns for the international human rights system. Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which the USA is a party prohibits the types of tribunals seemingly envisioned by the US Administration. The US has itself condemned military tribunal trials of its citizens in other countries, such as that of Lori Berenson, who was convicted of aiding terrorists in Peru and is presently being held in a Peruvian prison. If the US wants to diverge from the ICCPR - or do to the ICCPR what it is doing to the Geneva Conventions, by following the treaty in “the most part” - the government is obligated to submit an official communication derogating from the treaty.

Given the will among State parties to combat terrorism, an international tribunal to try the suspected Al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorists should not be a difficult proposition. However, this would imply holding the trials in public, a presumption of innocence, protection against self-incrimination, right to the defence counsel of one's choice, to be told of the prosecution's charges and evidence, and the right to a meaningful appeal.

On a wider plane, many governments, taking advantage of the 11 September attacks, have introduced draconian measures to suppress legitimate dissent. These threats call for a reconsideration of Ms Robinson’s decision to resign in October 2002.

In one of her more recent accomplishments, Ms Robinson single-handedly rescued the World Conference Against Racism despite the incompetence of her top WCAR aides and the lack of commitment on the part of many States. Now, she needs to lead the fight against purportedly anti-terrorist measures which strike at the root of hard won gains enshrined in the International Bill of Rights.