JURIST - Paper Chase: Sunday, November 27, 2011

[JURIST] The United Arab Emirates (UAE) Federal Supreme Court in Abu Dhabi on Sunday sentenced five pro-democracy activists to prison for participating in a campaign seeking political liberties. One activist was sentenced to three years in prison while the others were sentenced to two years in prison by the three-judge panel. The activists will not be able to appeal the convictions [AP report] and prison sentences because the cases were heard in the country's highest court. The five were charged in June under § 176 of the UAE Penal Code [text] for publicly insulting UAE president Sheikh Khalifa Bin Zayed and other government officials. Two of the five men are alleged to have used or incited violence on UAE Hewar [website, in Arabic], an online political forum. Blogger Ahmed Mansoor, one of the five, was also charged with inciting others to break the law, demonstrating and calling for an election boycott. The men have been detained since they were arrested in April after signing an online petition demanding political reforms. Upon learning of the convictions, Amnesty International (AI) [advocacy website] called on the UAE government to release the "prisoners of conscience" immediately [press release], saying the trials failed to meet the minimum standards under international law.

Rights groups have criticized the UAE recently for its conduct in the wake of calls for political reform. A trial observer appointed by a coalition of human rights groups said earlier this month that the trial of the five activists charged has been "grossly unfair" [JURIST report] and "has no basis in international law as it violates their freedom of expression." Rights groups called for the trial to end [JURIST report] in July, but the UAE nonetheless proceeded with the charges. Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] urged [press release; JURIST report] the government of the UAE in April to reverse its decision to dissolve the board of directors of the Jurist Association, a prominent civil rights group. HRW was critical of the UAE government [press release] when it arrested Mansoor in April for calling for democratic reform. HRW also urged international public institutions [HRW press release] that have a presence in the country, such as the Guggenheim, New York University (NYU), and the Agence France Museum [official websites], to publicly condemn the UAE government's detention of rights activists. HRW has continued to monitor the UAE's compliance with international human rights standards following a 2010 report [HRW report] suggesting the human rights climate in the UAE has worsened. HRW has been particularly concerned about torture, the deterioration of conditions for migrant workers, restrictions on freedoms of expression and association, and violations of women's rights. In October 2010, HRW condemned [press release; JURIST report] a ruling by the UAE Federal Supreme Court affirming a "husband['s] right to discipline his wife" as a violation of UAE treaty obligations.

[JURIST] Mexican activists on Friday filed a complaint in the International Criminal Court [official website] asking the court to investigate alleged human rights violations by the army and police resulting from the attack on drug cartels initiated by Mexican President Felipe Calderon [official website, Spanish]. The activists claim that, in addition to the nearly 470 cases of human rights abuses perpetrated by the government, Mexican drug lords have also committed crimes against humanity [AP report] since 2006, including an estimated 40,000 deaths. Joaquin "El Chapo" Guzman, a cartel leader, is also named as a defendant in the complaint. The Mexican Department of the Interior released a statement in response to the complaint, denying involvement in human rights violations [press release, in Spanish]:

The Federal Government strongly rejects that security policy may constitute an international crime. The actions of the National Security Strategy are deployed with full respect for the rule of law, to stop the activity of criminal organizations, to bring their members to justice and prevent the violence and insecurity they generate. If it had not been for the strength shown from the start of the administration, many families in various communities across the country would be at the mercy of criminals.

The government also stated that filing a complaint with the ICC was the "wrong way" to "fight crime and impunity," and that the activists should first proceed with their complaint through the national criminal justice system.

This is not the first time the security forces have been accused of committing rights abuses. Earlier this month, Human Rights Watch (HRW) [advocacy website] released a report [text, PDF] indicating that Mexican security forces have committed widespread rights abuses [JURIST report], such as torture and forced disappearances, in combating organized crime. In August, Mexico's National Human Rights Commission [official website, in Spanish] issued a report [text, PDF, in Spanish] contending that military and law enforcement officials routinely conducted illegal searches [JURIST report]. Mexico has struggled to combat the drug cartels' influence on the government and the country as a whole. There have been more than 27,000 drug-related deaths [STRATFOR report] since 2006. In 2008, a former assistant attorney general was arrested for receiving bribes and Mexico's prosecutor's office admitted that it had been infiltrated [JURIST reports] by the drug cartels.

[JURIST] The US Commission on Civil Rights [official website] announced on Tuesday that it will examine the impact that state-enacted immigration enforcement laws have on individual civil rights. The announcement stems from a unanimous vote [press release] taken at the Commission's most recent business meeting. Following the vote, Martin Castro, Commission Chairman, stated, "I believe that the enactment of these state immigration enforcement laws presents a pressing national civil rights issue that affects immigrants and US citizens alike. I'm proud that my fellow Commissioners joined me in voting unanimously and in bipartisan manner to have the Commission look into this important issue." The Commission will start by focusing its efforts on the laws in Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina in an attempt to determine whether these laws have resulted in increasing hate crimes or instances of racial profiling, among other civil rights violations.

Each of the state-enacted immigration laws has faced various legal challenges. Earlier this month, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) [official website] filed a brief [JURIST report] in the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit [official website] urging the court to strike down Alabama's immigration law [HB 56 text]. The DOJ filed its brief in response to a federal judge's September 28 ruling [opinion text] that allowed the state to enforce a provision that makes it a felony for an illegal alien to conduct business with the state, among other provisions. Also this month, the DOJ urged [JURIST report] the US Supreme Court [official website] not to hear Arizona's appeal of a decision [opinion, PDF] enjoining four provisions of the state's controversial immigration law [SB 1070 materials; JURIST news archive]. The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] upheld an injunction in April before the law ever took effect, and Arizona is now asking the high court [JURIST reports] to address whether the state law is preempted by federal immigration legislation. While the state maintains that the Ninth Circuit incorrectly concluded that the state law was facially preempted and "declined to determine whether there were constitutional applications" of the Arizona immigration legislation, the DOJ insists the court properly blocked [AP report] the provisions.

[JURIST] The UN Committee Against Torture [official website] expressed concern Friday over allegations of human rights violations in Syria, including the torture of children, and requested a report addressing these matters. Claudio Grossman, who currently heads the committee, said [press release]: "Of particular concern are reports referring to children who have suffered torture and mutilation while detained; as well as cases of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions; arbitrary detention by police forces and the military; and enforced and involuntary disappearances." The committee is composed of 10 members and is tasked with ensuring that countries comply with the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment [text], which Syria ratified in 1988. The requested report, which is due to the committee by March 9, requires Syria to outline the ways in which it is in compliance with the obligations of the Convention as well as provide information on the events that are currently taking place in the country.

Earlier this month, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) [official website] announced that the death toll of Syrian protesters had exceeded 3,500 [JURIST report] despite the recent signing of a peace plan sponsored by the League of Arab States [official website, in Arabic]. In the week prior to the announcement, approximately 60 people were killed by military and security personnel, included 19 people who were killed during the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha. Spokesperson for the OHCHR, Ravina Samdasani, said, "we are deeply concerned about the situation and by the Government's failure to take heed of international and regional calls for an end to the bloodshed." Additionally, while the Syrian government announced that 553 prisoners would be released, tens of thousands of prisoners remain in detention as dozens of protesters continue to be arrested each day. This announcement followed what have been some of the deadliest clashes of a movement that began in Syria last March [JURIST report].