|
|
Bahrain
114. By letter dated 14 May 2004, the Special Rapporteur notified the Government that he had received information regarding Legislative Decree No. 56 of 2002 concerning the interpretation of provisions of Legislative Decree No. 10 of 2001 on a general amnesty for crimes affecting national security. It is reported that article 1 of Decree No. 56 effectively extends immunity for human rights violations committed by public officials, as it indicates that cases brought “before any judicial authority by reason of or on the occasion of the crimes subject to amnesty, whoever may be the person filing it and irrespective of the capacity against whom it is filed, whether he is an ordinary citizen or a civilian or military public servant and whatever may be the nature of his participation in such crimes, whether an original perpetrator or an accessory during the period prior to the effective date of this law” shall not be heard. In the light of Bahrain being a party to the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment , the Special Rapporteur recalls that amnesties are generally incompatible with the duty of States to investigate acts of torture; to guarantee freedom from such acts within their jurisdiction; and to ensure that they do not occur in the future. The Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action stipulates that “States should abrogate legislation leading to impunity for those responsible for grave violations of human rights such as torture and prosecute such violations, thereby providing a firm basis for the rule of law."
115. By letter dated 1 June 2004, the Government informed that Decree No. 56 of 2002 (issued 23 October 2002) explains and confirms certain provisions of the general amnesty contained in Decree No. 10 of 2001 (issued February 2001). This decree proclaimed a general amnesty for those convicted for a range of crimes, intended to wipe the slate clean for society as a whole as Bahrain embarked on a new democratic era pursuant to its National Action Charter of 2001 and the revised Constitution of 2002. Both decrees are consistent with amnesties declared by other Governments worldwide during the past two decades. Decree No. 56 confirmed the general nature of the amnesty. Given that the amnesty extends to those convicted for a range of crimes, it cannot logically or morally be denied to any citizen facing allegations that the Kingdom firmly believes are completely without foundation. By its very nature, a general amnesty cannot be selectively applied. To be effective, such an amnesty must apply to all individuals and sections of society that come within its terms. The granting of a general amnesty is in accordance with, and envisage by article 41 of the Constitution, and the decision was taken only after a careful consideration of all relevant factors, including the overriding need to reconcile all sections of society. Measures have been put into place to ensure fair and just compensation to any person with a well- founded grievance. In the interests of national unity and social cohesion, the Government is adopting an open and generous approach to such claims for compensation. The independent judiciary is available to take up any well- founded grievance, and has done so in a number of recent cases. Decree No. 56 (2002) and Decree No. 10 (2001) therefore fulfil an important role in wiping the slate clean for all sections of society in respect of all relevant previous acts and allegations. Measures and procedures exist in both the Constitution and criminal law to remedy any genuine claim or grievance that may be brought.
Urgent appeals
116. On 7 April 2004, the Special Rapporteur sent a joint urgent appeal with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders, regarding Abdulrauf Al-Shayeb, the official spokesperson of the National Committee for Martyrs and Victims of Torture, an organization that works on the rehabilitation of torture victims and on bringing the perpetrators to justice. According to the allegations received, on 30 March 2004, he was arrested and held until 3 April. Abdulrauf Al- Shayeb was charged with "immoral indecency". During his detention, a former high- level military officer (whose name is known to the Special Rapporteur and the Special Representative), who had been accused by the National Committee for Martyrs and Victims of Torture of being involved in the torture of detainees, threatened to "cut his tongue, which is too long". Abdulrauf Al-Shayeb is reportedly expected to present himself to the Public Prosecutor on 7 April 2004.
117. By letter dated 16 April 2004 the Government responded that on 30 March 2004, he was caught by the police in flagrante delicto, arrested and charged with trespassing on private property. In light of the evidence uncovered, the Department of Public Prosecutions decided to remand Mr. Al-Shayeb in custody for a period of seven days pursuant to article 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Full guarantees ensuring the protection of the dignity of the accused and the impartiality of the investigation were afforded, in accordance with article 61 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The lawyers for the accused filed an application for bail and, on 3 April 2004, the Department of Public Prosecutions released the accused on a bail of 100 dinars. With regard to the question about the accused person having been arrested on 30 March 2004 and remanded in custody until 3 April 2004, the Government informed that by Decree Law No. 11 of 2001, the practice of internment had been abolished. Anyone who is arrested must be turned over within 48 hours to the Department of Public Prosecutions, which must launch an investigation and issue an order for that person’s remand in custody for a period of seven days. The case files are then submitted to the courts to decide whether to extend the period in remand. The re is no truth to the allegation that the accused was subjected to inhuman treatment. All the procedures taken in his regard were implemented in accordance with the law and under judicial scrutiny. The laws relating to the arrest and interview of suspects were observed and none of the procedures in any way violated his right to freedom of expression and opinion, since the incident for which he was arrested had nothing to do with the opinions he expresses. As for his claim that a senior police officer mocked him and threatened to cut off his tongue, the investigation found no evidence to support that claim. As for the laws guaranteeing the rights of individuals and protecting them against the infliction of torture or other cruel or degrading treatment or punishment, the initial and supplementary reports that the Kingdom of Bahrain intends to submit to the Committee against Torture in accordance with the Convention provide the answers to all these questions.
118. On 1 October 2004, the Special Rapporteur sent a joint urgent appeal with the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Chairperson- Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on human rights defenders, regarding the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights (BCHR) and its executive director, Abdul-Hadi Al-Khawaja. According to the allegations received, on 26 September 2004, he was arrested at around 10. 30 p.m. at Nabee Saleh Police Station, where he was summoned two days after his participation in a symposium called "Poverty and Economic Rights in Bahrain", organized by the BCHR in the Al-Orooba Club. He was later brought to the Howdh Aljaf Detention Centre, where the Public Prosecutor remanded him in custody for a period of 45 days. Abdul-Hadi Al-Khawaja is being held in incommunicado detention and has been denied visits from his family and lawyer.
119. By letter dated 6 October 2004, the Government informed that throughout his time in custody, he has been afforded all his rights of visit, representation and welfare, including family and other visits and the offer of legal counsel which he declined. Claims that Abdul Hadi Al-Khawaja is or was detained incommunicado, or that he was subjected to any form of improper, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, are therefore without foundation. Abdul Hadi Al-Khawaja is being given all his rights as set out in the Constitution and laws as well as in relevant international human rights conventions. At no time since its inception has the Attorney General’s Office prevented a lawyer from attending any person being questioned or charged in any case. However, Abdul Hadi Al-Khawaja refused the presence of an attorney during his questioning. Nevertheless, he has received visits by family members, a representative of the Bahrain Human Rights Society, and two lawyers.
120. By letter dated 1 December 2004, the Government informed that on 21 November
2004, Abdul Hadi Al-Khawaja was sentenced in absentia to one year’s imprisonment. The
same day, the King pardoned him from serving the remainder of the sentence in light of the
time spent in custody prior to the court ruling.
Back to Contents
Bahamas
Bangladesh
This report has been published by Equipo Nizkor and Derechos Human Rights on July 12, 2005.