Search Results

التحديث الأسبوعي: أغسطس ١٣ إلى ٢٠ أغسطس تشمل الجولة الإعلامية التالية الأخبار ذات الصلة بالقضايا الدولية والسياسة الخارجية من جميع أنحاء العالم العربي ما بين الأسبوع الممتد من تاريخ ١٣ أغسطس إلى ٢٠ أغسطس. توفر جيرنيكا ٣٧ تحديثات إعلانية أسبوعية من المحكمة الجنائية الدولية والمحكمة الأوروبية لحقوق الإنسان والأمم المتحدة والاتحاد الأوروبي ومصادر أخرى. إذا كنتم ترغبون في المساهمة أو تقديم ملخص إعلامي أو مقال رأي أو مدونة ، يرجى إرسالها إلى نيناد فوتشيياك للنظر فيها. السودان: ١٧ أغسطس ٢٠١٩ وقع المجلس العسكري الانتقالي في السودان وممثلو المعارضة اتفاق تقاسم السلطة، الذي ينص على تكوين مجلس حاكم انتقالي من المدنيين والعسكريين، ويمهد الطريق نحو انتخاب حكومة مدنية. ويبدأ السودان بذلك مرحلة انتقالية جديدة، بعد أشهر من الاحتجاجات ومواجهات دامية بين متظاهرين وقوات الأمن. للمزيد هنا السودان: ١٩ أغسطس ٢٠١٩ بدأت محاكمة الرئيس السوداني المعزول عمر البشير بمفاجأة، إذ نُقل عنه قوله إنه تلقى أموالا من السعودية الإمارات. من جانبها طلبت منظمة العفو الدولية بألا يتم تجاهل التهم الموجهة إلى البشير من المحكمة الجنائية الدولية. للمزيد هنا مصر: ٢٠ اغسطس ٢٠١٩ أجلت الأمم المتحدة مؤتمرا في القاهرة بشأن التعذيب كان من المقرر عقده في سبتمبر أيلول وذلك بعد انتقادات من جماعات لحقوق الإنسان تقول إن التعذيب شائع في مصر.وعبر نشطاء حقوقيون عن غضبهم من قرار الأمم المتحدة عقد المؤتمر في مصر ويقولون إن الرئيس عبد الفتاح السيسي أشرف على أسوأ حملة قمع للحريات في تاريخ مصر الحديث. للمزيد هنا تونس: ١٤ اغسطس ٢٠١٩ قالت هيئة الانتخابات العليا المستقلة في تونس، اليوم، الأربعاء، إنها وافقت على قبول 26 مرشحا كقائمة أولية ورفضت ملفات 71 آخرين، الذين يبقى لهم الحق في تقديم الطعون لدى المحكمة الإدارية في مدة أقصاها 31 آب/أغسطس. وستبدأ الحملة الانتخابية في الأول من أيلول/سبتمبر وتستمر أسبوعين.للمزيد هنا ليبيا: ١٦ اغسطس ٢٠١٩ قالت "هيومن رايتس ووتش" اليوم إنه ينبغي لـ "الحكومة المؤقتة" في الشرق الليبيبذل جميع الجهود الممكنة لضمان عودة آمنة لسهام سرقيوة، النائبة في "مجلس النواب" التي اختُطفت من منزلها في مدينة بنغازي في شرق البلاد يوم 17 يوليو/تموز 2019. للمزيد هنا سوريا: ١٩ اغسطس ٢٠١٩ وبعد ثمانية أعوام من الحرب الأهلية، بات شمال غرب سوريا هو المعقل الكبير الأخير لمعارضي الأسد، وتشن القوات الحكومية أحدث هجماتها هناك منذ نهاية أبريل نيسان بمساعدة روسية.وتقول الأمم المتحدة إن التصعيد أدى إلى مقتل ما لا يقل عن 500 مدني ونزوح مئات الألوف الذين تقطعت السبل بعدد كبير منهم بالقرب من الحدود مع تركيا.للمزيد هنا سوريا ١٨ اغسطس ٢٠١٩ أعلنت سلطات منطقة جبل طارق البريطانية الأحد رفضها لطلب الولايات المتحدة احتجاز ناقلة النفط الإيرانية التي تستعد لمغادرة مياهها الإقليمية، موضحة أن العقوبات الأمريكية التي بموجبها ترغب واشنطن باحتجاز الناقلة غير قابلة للتطبيق في الاتحاد الأوروبي.وأوضحت سلطات جبل طارق العقوبات الأمريكية المفروضة على سوريا والتي على أساسها تريد واشنطن احتجاز السفينة أمر غير قابل للتطبيق في منطقة الاتحاد الأوروبي.للمزيد هنا فلسطين: ١٦ اغسطس ٢٠١٩ بدعم من الرئيس الأمريكي، منعت إسرائيل عضوتان في الكونجرس من السفر إليها. رشيدة وإلهان أول امرأتين مسلمتين تنتخبان في الكونغرس، وهما من الجناح التقدمي للحزب الديمقراطي، وأبدت الاثنتان دعمهما لحركة "المقاطعة وسحب الاستثمارات وفرض العقوبات" (بي دي أس) المؤيدة للفلسطينيين.للمزيد هنا تواصل معنا هنا

During 2 – 6 September 2019, Toby Cadman, Co-founder of The Guernica Group and Head of Guernica 37 International Justice Chambers, participated in English Law Week in Mexico (2-3 September 2019) and English Law Day in Colombia (5-6 September 2019). The event, organised by the Bar Council of England and Wales and the Law Society of England and Wales, brought together lawyers (barristers and solicitors) from England and Wales, Mexico and Colombia to discuss a range of topics including Arbitration, Insurance Law, Energy, Fintech, Human Rights, Anti-Corruption and Women in Law. The delegation was led by Richard Atkins QC (Chairman of the Bar) and David Greene (Vice-President of Law Society) and included an array of experts from diverse fields of domestic and international law. In Mexico City, Toby participated in the panel on Human Rights. The panel was chaired by David Greene and included Saimo Chahal QC (Hon) from Bindmans LLP, Ricardo Sepulveda, Director of Compilation and Systemization of Jurisprudence from the Mexican Supreme Court and Camila Zapata Besso, Barrister at Garden Court Chambers. Toby spoke specifically on the issue of using alternative mechanisms to ensure the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, focusing on national, regional and international human rights mechanisms. Toby specifically referred to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the UN Special Procedures and the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. The panel prompted a vigorous debate on the effectiveness on such mechanisms and that human rights lawyers must be inventive to ensure there is real accountability for human rights violations. Toby responded that there are numerous tools available to combat impunity and human rights lawyers must be vigilant in monitoring and innovative in ensuring accountability. At the end of the two-day session, a reception was held at the British Ambassador’s Residence. The British Ambassador, Ms. Corin Robertson, spoke of the importance of the relationship between Mexico and the United Kingdom and #EnglishLawWeekinMexico represented an opportunity for Mexican and British legal professionals to discuss current trends. In Bogotá, Toby chaired the panel on Anti-Corruption – A Public Law Perspective. The panel included Maria Cristina Rangel Serpa, Procuraduría General de la Nación, República de Colombia, Claudia Dangond, Barrister, DG&A, Saimo Chahal QC (Hon), Partner, Bindmans LLP and Philip Rule, Barrister, No5 Chambers. The focus of the panel was the importance, and therefore need, for an independent judiciary, and also, stressing the importance of ‘Judicial Review’ and ‘Public Inquiries’ as tools by which to minimise corruption and the abuse of State power, and seek to ensure that the Rule of Law is upheld. Opening the session, Toby spoke that the international community, in particular the Government of the United Kingdom and the European Union, have placed a great deal of emphasis on the obligation of state institutions to address political corruption and that this must be considered a priority of all State institutions to establish public confidence in its political, law enforcement and judicial institutions. He noted that the national criminal and disciplinary legislation sets out a framework that is broadly compatible with the relevant international standards and obligations to combat organized crime and political corruption. However, there is a need to implement guiding principles that include the framework established in the Colombian Criminal Code, the Anti-Corruption Statute, in addition to international standards that are applicable, such as those encompassed in the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions. Maria Cristina spoke about the work of the Procuraduría General and the challenges it faces in combatting corruption in the public sector. Claudi Dangond followed with a practical dimension of corruption in Colombia, discussing the legal and institutional framework and its effectiveness. Saimo spoke of the importance of an independent judiciary to minimise corruption and uphold the rule of law and spoke about the use of judicial review before the Courts of England and Wales, highlighting a number of important cases such as challenges to Brexit and attempts to prosecute the current Prime Minister for misleading the public during the Brexit campaign. Philip concluded the session, following on from Saimo, discussing the challenges faced and using a number of topical anecdotes, such as #Plebgate to highlight the importance of judicial review and judical scrutiny of public office holders. Colombia, as the panel observed, has taken significant steps to address corruption and transnational crime, and must continue to build upon that work, seeking to implement relevant guidelines that strengthens the institutional capacity. The panel, as Toby concluded: recognising the steps Colombia has taken so far, and its ongoing to commitment to address corruption whilst also upholding, and strengthening the Rule of Law, it must be noted that it is not solely the legal framework, it is the institutional framework and public trust in the institutions that is important in the fight to eradicate impunity. At the conclusion of #EnglishLawDayColombia, a reception hosted by the British Embassy to Colombia was held at the JW Marriott Hotel in Bogotá. The Deputy Ambassador Ambassador, Greg Houston gave the concluding remarks highlighting the important areas discussed during the day, such as infrastructure, security and the commercial interests of both countries. Guernica co-founders Toby Cadman and Almudena Bernabeu had the opportunity to brief the Deputy Ambassador on its work in Colombia addressing the #SpecialJurisdictionPeace and #TruthCommission. In addition to attending #EnglishLawDayColombia, Guernica Co-founder, Almudena Bernabeu travelled to Colombia as part of Guernica's ongoing programme of support to meet the Head of the Transitional Mechanisms, including the #SpecialJurisdictionPeace, #TruthCommission and Unit for the Disappeared in an effort to jointly conceive the ways in which Guernica can continue to support this critical part of the #PeaceAgreement, through our representation of the victims and their communities, supporting the mandates of these organisations as well as ensuring victims participation, a critically important part in the process. As part of the discussions addressing #AntiCorruption Guernica 37 was able to discuss its current work with the Procuraduría General de la Nación with whom it signed a collaboration agreement earlier this year. On 6 September 2019 a special meeting was held with the Colombian Commission of Jurists, an affiliate of the International Commission of Jurists, where a host issues were discussed including the challenges of implementing the peace agreement, strengthening an independent judiciary and ensuring accountability for the victims of human rights abuses. Our team at Guernica 37 would like to take this opportunity to thank the organisers at the Bar Council and the Law Society, the British Embassies in Mexico City and Bogotá, the Mexican Chamber of Commerce, Mexican Bar Association, Colombian Chamber of Legal Services, British & Colombian Chamber of Commerce, Procuraduría General de la Nación, República de Colombia and the Governments of Mexico and Colombia for a highly productive and educational exchange.

Lincoln’s Inn Barrister Still Missing Despite the Promises of Foreign Adviser Gowher Rizvi to Assist after Al Jazeera Head to Head Interview 9 August 2019  -  It has now been three years since Bangladeshi barrister Ahmad Bin Quasem, who has also been called to the Bar of England and Wales by the Honourable Society of Lincoln’s Inn, was forcibly abducted from his home by members of the Bangladesh Security forces. On Al Jazeera’s Head to Head Programme first broadcast on 1 March 2019, Foreign Adviser to the Prime Minister of Bangladesh, Mr. Gowher Rizvi was interviewed by Medhi Hassan and was asked about Ahmad’s case (see here) and he provided assurances that all allegations of enforced disappearance would be properly investigated and that he would personally assist in Mr. Bin Quasem’s case. Despite such assurances, it is deeply regrettable, that Mr. Rizvi has failed to respond to e-mails requesting his assistance. Those representing Mr. Bin Quasem, continue to call on Mr. Rizvi and the Bangladeshi regime as well as those with the power to influence them to look to their consciences and to work to allow Mr. Bin Quasem to return home to his wife and two young daughters. Ahmad’s abduction is just one incident in a concerning tally of human rights abuses perpetrated by the Government of Bangladesh.  The International Community and the UK political class must stand up against the repression by the ruling Awami League regime of the people of Bangladesh. The UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office has designated Bangladesh a human rights country of concern.  The United Nations, along with virtually every credible national and international human rights NGO, has highlighted the persistent and credible allegations of human rights abuses. The Government of Bangladesh operates under a system of what U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy described to in October 2017 as condoning “State Sponsored Criminality in Bangladesh”. The Government’s response, according to Senator’s statement on the Congressional Record, constituted “blanket denials, obfuscation, and even falsehoods”.  He referred to the situation in Bangladesh as one of great concern considering “enforced disappearances, arbitrary arrests, unfair trials, extrajudicial executions, and other flagrant violations of the rule of law by the government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajed.” Ahmad Bin Quasem Ahmad Bin Quasem, or Arman as he is known to friends and family, is a barrister who was representing his father Mir Quasem Ali before the International Crimes Tribunal (“ICT”) which was set up in 2010 by the ruling Awami League and Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina.  Mir Quasem Ali was convicted by the ICT in 2014 and sentenced to death becoming the seventh opposition leader to be given a capital sentence, amplifying local and international concerns that the ICT has been used to further political objectives.[1]The appeal hearings were ongoing when Arman was abducted by the government. The UN Officer of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had at that time called for the conviction to be quashed and a retrial ordered. ​ An associate of Bangladesh’s Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina confirmed that Mr Bin Quasem’s enforced disappearance by the security services was authorised by the Prime Minister[2] and in secret recordings of a high ranking RAB Officer obtained by Sveriges Radio[3] the Officer explained how enforced disappearances operate and the fact that the fate of those seized is decided by those ‘high up’ within the government. The abduction Late on 5 August 2016, a group of around 8 men came to the apartment where Mr Bin Quasem was living with his wife and two young daughters. Four of the men were wearing RAB (Rapid Action Battalion) uniforms. They introduced themselves as members of the RAB and sat with Mr Bin Quasem in the living room where they asked him basic questions about the living arrangements at the apartment and from whom it had been rented. The abduction occurred at around 11pm on the 9th of August 2016 when a group of 8 or 9 men attended the apartment and demanded that Arman’s wife and sister tell them where he was.  Mr Bin Quasem then went to the door, and the men told him that he had to come with them. They then gave Mr Bin Quasem 5 minutes with his family then began banging on the door again. The man who was in charge of the group gave a hand signal and the other men stormed into the apartment.  Despite Mr Bin Quasem’s wife and sister trying to shield him from the men and prevent them from taking him, the men pulled them away and grabbed him, dragging him to the stairs and out of the house. Mr Bin Quasem was placed in a mini-bus which was driven away. This abduction followed the exact modus operandi of other abductions by the security forces in Bangladesh. A breach of domestic and international law Mr Bin Quasem has not been charged with any offence and his abduction and continued detention by the Bangladeshi government is contrary to the Bangladeshi Constitution and Bangladesh’s obligations under international law. Unfortunately, forced disappearances are common in Bangladesh under the current Government and hundreds have been disappeared since 2009.[4] Human Rights Watch’s report, ‘We Don’t Have Him’: Secret Detentions and Enforced Disappearances in Bangladesh, found that at least 90 people were victims of enforced disappearance in 2016 alone[5] and Bangladeshi human rights group Odhikar, reports that between January 2009 and October 2017, at least 402 persons became victims of enforced disappearances in Bangladesh. Actions  The British legal community have raised their concerns about Mr Bin Quasem’s situation[6]and the international press has reported Mr Bin Quasem’s case and the problems with enforced disappearances in Bangladesh.[7] The European Union’s EEAS has also raised the issue of enforced disappearances with Bangladesh[8]and Mr Bin Quasem’s situation has also been the subject of an official UK Parliamentary question by Shabana Mahmood MP answered on 30 January 2017 by Alok Sharma MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.[9] Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have also spoken out for Arman.[10] On 24 February 2017, the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances called on Bangladesh to ‘act now to halt an increasing number of enforced disappearances in the country’ and to immediately reveal the whereabouts of Mr Bin Quasem.[11]The Working Group’s message was endorsed by the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and of Association, the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions, and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers. The Committee Against Torture adopted the concluding observations on 8 August 2019 that: The Committee is concerned at reports that police officers frequently refuse to register claims of torture or disappearance brought by victims or family members. The Committee is further concerned that victims of torture and their families who seek to complain about or publicize incidents of torture reportedly are frequently subjected to harassment, threats and retaliation by the perpetrators.[12] The Committee Against Torture also registered its regrets that Bangladesh: did not provide information regarding whether it had investigated the allegations that [Mr Bin Quasem and others] were held for lengthy periods in unacknowledged detention by law enforcement authorities, nor did it provide information concerning the status of ongoing investigations in toother cases in which its authorities were alleged to have engaged in conduct meeting the definition of enforced disappearance.[13] Despite the request from these United Nations bodies, the Bangladeshi Government has refused to respond, viewing itself as being free to operate outside the norms of international law and diplomacy. Response to Channel 4 News Broadcasts Channel 4 featured Arman’s case during its news broadcast on 28 [14]and 29 November 2017[15] and 13 December 2017[16]. The broadcast of 28 November 2017 showed the Channel 4 reporter asking questions at a public rally on 25 November 2017 to Ms Siddiq MP, the niece of Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and the Labour Party Member of Parliament for Hampstead and Kilburn, which Ms Siddiq chose not to answer. Before the show was aired on 28 November 2017 Bangladeshi police attended the family property in Dhaka where Arman’s elderly mother, sister, wife, and two young daughters were residing. It is alleged that this was seen as an attempt to intimidate them into calling for the news segment not to be broadcast. On the day following the first broadcast around 20 heavily armed police officers attended the property. After this fact was reported on Twitter they left around an hour later but not before an ominous warning was reported to have been given by the Officer in Charge: ‘This time we are going and leaving you. But we will make sure if there is any such news come next time we will not be good like this time and our face you will not get to see like today.’ Ms. Siddiq purports to be a committed human rights activist within the Labour Party having led a campaign to release Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, detained arbitrarily in Iran.  However, Ms. Siddiq and her team have refused to comment about the enforced disappearance of Arman or the allegations of intimidation against members of his family.  They have failed to take any steps to ensure that Arman’s elderly mother, sister, wife, and two young daughters are not threatened by members of the Bangladesh Security Services. Responses from the Labour Party, which has in the past had close links with the Awami League and described itself as a sister party have also been unsatisfactory with the Labour Party establishment seeming interested in discussing this matter when there is media focus on it with this interest disappearing rapidly once the media coverage subsides. This behaviour calls into questions the genuineness of the Labour Party’s pledge to ‘put human rights at the heart of foreign policy’. [17] The Commonwealth As a member of the Commonwealth, Bangladesh is required to comply with the Commonwealth Charter which expresses the commitment of member states to the development of free and democratic societies, to be committed to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to believe in the rule of law as an essential protection for the people of the Commonwealth.[18] The Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) has the power to suspend a country from the Council of the Commonwealth (as it has done on a number of occasions[19]) if they do not comply with Commonwealth’s values. Despite using this power before, as in the case of the Maldives whose human rights record at the time paled in comparison to Bangladesh, the Commonwealth has failed to speak out on enforced disappearances in Bangladesh. As the Commonwealth Secretary General Baroness Scotland QC heads of on a trip which includes a visit to Bangladesh[20]it is hoped that she will remedy her past silence and speak out for Arman as a fellow member of the English Bar and Commonwealth citizen. Conclusion The last week has involved major turmoil in Bangladesh with a mass student protests against road traffic deaths.[21] Many of those protesting ended up being attacked by government aligned militias whilst law enforcement looked on or actively assisted the militia.[22] Since this time,  many students have been apprehended by the security services and there are fears that they will be subject to torture or disappearance. Speaking out about the government response to the student protests was the well-known photojournalist Shahidul Alam[23] who commented on Al Jazeera Television[24]about the Government’s repression of the protestors and other heavy-handed actions such as limiting the availability of the internet in an attempt to prevent the dissemination of videos of the attacks on protestors.  He stated ‘I think the Government has miscalculated. It certainly felt that fear was enough, repression would have been enough, but I think you cannot tame an entire nation in this manner.’ In the perfect example of the very repression that he was describing in the interview, shortly afterwards, a large number of Detective Branch Police Officers dragged him from his home and refused to tell his wife where they were taking him.[25] Although Mr Alam has now been brought before the court and charged with making ‘provocative comments’[26] it seems that he may have suffered torture in the interim period. This attempt to intimidate those who dare to speak out against Bangladeshi government repression is not unique. In July, Mahmudur Rahman, a former newspaper editor was set upon by 100s of ruling party activists[27] after being released on bail in a case where he is charged with defamation for making ‘derogatory remarks’[28] against the Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and her niece, Tulip Siddiq MP. This behaviour by the government and those operating on their behalf is part of the same series of intimidatory behaviour suffered by Mr Bin Quasem and his family, with the aim of trying to ensure that nobody challenges the government, the Prime Minister, or her family out of fear for their own safety and the safety of their family.  This unlawful and unconscionable behaviour resulted in Mr Bin Quasem’s enforced disappearance in August 2016 and has left his two young daughters without a father and his wife without her husband. Surely now the time has come for those who claim to believe in human rights and the rule of law, whether that be the Commonwealth, the Labour Party, or other states, to speak out against this repression and to help Mr Bin Quasem, his family, and all others suffering under an increasingly illiberal and vicious regime. We repeat our call to the United Nations to demand the Government of Bangladesh to provide information on the whereabouts Mr Bin Quasem and to require the Government of Bangladesh to provide a full explanation of the circumstances of his disappearance. We repeat our call on those with the power to influence to the Government of Bangladesh to demand the release Mr Bin Quasem, to ensure that he is returned to his family unharmed. We further respectfully request that a full independent investigation is conducted into the circumstances of Mr Bin Quasem’s abduction, detention, and treatment in custody. Michael Polak Barrister Church Court Chambers Toby Cadman                                                             Barrister Guernica 37 International Justice Chambers Note: Toby Cadman and Michael Polak act as Counsel to Mir Ahmad Bin Quasem and his family and have filed Communications with the UN Special Procedures Branch in Geneva.  Please see www.freearman.comfor updates on the campaign. Media enquiries may be made to: clerks@guernica37.organd m.polak@churchcourtchambers.co.uk [1] There has been widespread criticism of the ICT for a lack of fairness and due process by groups such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. [2]https://thewire.in/south-asia/secret-detentions-bangladesh-intelligence-sheikhs-hasina [3]https://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=83&artikel=6665807 [4]https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/12/disappearances-plague-bangladesh-171208160532558.html;https://www.voanews.com/a/human-rights-group-for-missing-persons-in-bangladesh/4141462.html [5]https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/07/06/we-dont-have-him/secret-detentions-and-enforced-disappearances-bangladesh [6]http://www.barcouncil.org.uk/media-centre/news-and-press-releases/2016/august/bhrc-and-bar-council-raise-concerns-over-abduction-of-bangladeshi-lawyer [7]http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/12/16/bangladesh-is-vanishing-the-opposition/; http://churchcourtchambers.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/2389_001-2-2.pdf [8]https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/17657/eu-bangladesh-sub-group-good-governance-and-human-rights_en [9]http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-questions-answers/?page=1&max=20&questiontype=AllQuestions&house=commons%2clords&member=3914 [10]https://www.amnesty.org/en/press-releases/2017/03/bangladesh-man-released-from-long-secret-detention/ [11]http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=21220&LangID=E) [12]https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/treaties/cat/shared%20Documents/BGD/CAT_C_BGD_CO_1_35737_E.pdf [13]Ibid [14]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=E5_jIpcu0_0&app=desktop [15]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8SklwN-ss8&feature=share&app=desktop [16]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMUSqjSaSYA [17]https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwjk-8f2oeHcAhVhEpoKHaJtC44QFjABegQICBAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.policyforum.labour.org.uk%2Fuploads%2Feditor%2Ffiles%2FWhat_Labour_Stands_For.pdf&usg=AOvVaw122Td2JRBjQwykrfV1gId4 [18]http://thecommonwealth.org/sites/default/files/page/documents/CharteroftheCommonwealth.pdf [19]http://thecommonwealth.org/sites/default/files/inline/SuspensionHistory.pdf [20]http://thecommonwealth.org/media/news/commonwealth-secretary-general-visit-bangladesh-brunei-and-sri-lanka [21]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-45080129 [22]https://en.prothomalo.com/bangladesh/news/181143/How-BCL-attacks-were-carried-out [23]https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/08/the-guardian-view-on-shahidul-alam-bangladesh-should-let-him-go [24]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9j3EgLm62Q [25]https://bdnews24.com/bangladesh/2018/08/06/driks-shahidul-alam-detained-by-police-family-claim [26]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/aug/06/famed-bangladeshi-photographer-held-over-road-protest-comments [27]https://rsf.org/en/news/bangladeshi-opposition-journalist-nearly-lynched-ruling-party-activists [28]https://en.prothomalo.com/bangladesh/news/180209/BCL-men-attack-Mahmudur-Rahman-in-Kushtia

LONDON, 2 August 2019 –The International Legal Team instructed by Mr. Ahmed Adeeb Abdul Ghafoor, issued the following statement in response to reports that the former Vice-President is being held in the Port of Tuticorin in the State of Tamil-Nadu. The International Legal Team confirms that the former Vice-President is being questioned today by Officials from the Central Government and the State Government of Tamil-Nadu amid reports that Law Enforcement Officials from the Republic of Maldives are heading to Chennai to take custody of the former Vice-President. It is repeated that theformer Vice-President of the Republic of Maldives, Mr. Ahmed Adeeb Abdul Ghafoor, has sought the protection of India and has initiated the process of claiming asylum, the Indian authorities are therefore under an obligation to consider his request and to ensure that he is not arbitrarily handed over to the authorities of the Republic of Maldives where he is at risk of ill-treatment. The former Vice-President was previously detained for a period of three years after having been convicted of charges over which he denies any involvement and charges for which the Supreme Court has overturned all convictions as being politically motivated. It is important to emphasise that he was acquitted by the Supreme Court yet held under house arrest and used as a political pawn by the State Security Forces to implicate members of the previous administration. It is of note that the state authorities in Maldives forced the former Vice-President to sign an agreement by which he would provide implicate members of the previous administration in criminal conduct and that the provision of necessary medical care was withheld until he signed the Agreement. The International Legal Team has received the Agreement and confirm its contents. Such coercive actions by the organs of the State are unlawful and constitute further evidence as to the nature of the allegations against the former Vice-President. We would therefore remind the Indian Government of its obligations under international law, in that it is required to respect the principle of ‘non-refoulement’, and thus, it is unlawful to return a person to the place where their life or freedom would be threatened. All persons have the Right to Liberty, and, Security of Person, and further, all persons who seek asylum ought to be able to expect to be protected by the host nation upon being identified as such. It matters not that the former Vice-President may have entered the country illegally, once a claim of asylum is made, the appropriate authorities are required to consider it. India as a nation can rightly be proud of its history in protecting those fleeing to safety and it would therefore be unconscionable to tarnish that reputation now. To return the former Vice-President to the Republic of Maldives, where there is credible evidence that he will be mistreated, is not only unlawful, but, sets a very dangerous precedent for any other individual that seeks to flee to safety. It has been reported that law enforcement officials from the Republic of Maldives are expected to arrive in Chennai imminently. We would remind the Governments of both India and Maldives that there is an established legal process that must be followed and anything short of that will constitute rendition which is unlawful in both States. Accordingly, there is a very real and demonstrable risk that his fundamental rights and freedoms will be violated, Adeeb is at risk of becoming a victim of a politically motivated justice system. Head of the International Legal Team, Toby Cadman stated: Following reports that representatives of the Maldives Police Service are en route to India to take custody of the former Vice President, Ahmed Adeeb Abdul Ghafoor, and return him to the Maldives where he is likely to be detained without charge, we remind both the Governments of India and Maldives that such a process would be unlawful and a direct circumvention of the Rule of Law, something that would seriously damage the reputation of both States and fundamentally undermine the legal process that they both purport to uphold. We therefore call upon the Government of India to consider the application in an appropriate manner and offer Adeeb protection whilst his claim is under review. We repeat our call to the UN Office of the High Commission for Refugees to act with diligence in considering his application and we call upon the UN Office of the High Commission for Human Rights to ensure that his rights are protected.

THE FORMER VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF MALDIVES, AHMED ADEEB ABDUL GHAFOOR, SEEKS POLITICAL ASYLUM IN THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA AFTER FLEEING THE MALDIVES IN FEAR OF HIS LIFE. LONDON, 1 August 2019 – The International Legal Team instructed by Mr. Ahmed Adeeb Abdul Ghafoor, issued the following statement in response to inaccurate reports in the media that the former Vice-President has been arrested in India after having fled the Maldives. The International Legal Team confirms that it has today initiated contact with the UN Office of the High Commission for Refugees and the UN Office of the High Commission for Human Rights. The former Vice-President of the Republic of Maldives, Mr. Ahmed Adeeb Abdul Ghafoor, has today sought the protection of India and has initiated the process of claiming asylum, having been subjected to a series of politically motivated prosecutions, and attempts to coerce him into making false statements by the Maldives Security Services. Ahmed Adeeb served as the Vice-President of the Maldives for a short period in 2015, previously holding the position of Minister of Tourism, Arts, and Culture. Upon falling out of favour with the then President Abdulla Yameen, the former Vice-President was investigated in connection with an alleged bomb plot to assassinate Yameen, and thereafter, various allegations of corruption, resulting in him being imprisoned for a period of 3 years, despite him denying all offences. Adeeb was released from prison at the end of 2018, the Supreme Court acquitting him of all offences earlier in 2019, citing the clear political influence exercised over the trials. Despite being acquitted, Adeeb has remained under house arrest following an appeal being lodged by the Prosecutor General against that acquittal. It is of particular concern that following this the authorities forced him to sign an agreement with a clause that he could only receive necessary medical treatment if he signed the agreement. During this period, Adeeb has still been subject to overt political influence, with the Maldivian Security Services seeking to coerce him into signing documents that would amount to a false admission of guilt and put his life and the life of members of his family in danger. Accordingly, there is a very real and demonstrable risk that his fundamental rights and freedoms will be violated, Adeeb is at risk of becoming a victim of a politically motivated justice system. Therefore, Adeeb has sought asylum in a safe country, namely India. Having claimed asylum, India are reminded that they must consider that claim in accordance with relevant national and international rules, he cannot simply be returned to the Maldives, regardless of any relationship the two states may have. An individual’s rights and freedoms are at the forefront of any decision, political, diplomatic, or any other interests are not for consideration. We therefore call upon the Government of India to consider the application in an appropriate manner and offer Adeeb protection whilst his claim is under review. We further call upon the UN Office of the High Commission for Refugees to act with diligence in considering his application and we call upon the UN Office of the High Commission for Human Rights to ensure that his rights are protected.

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL TEAM AT GUERNICA 37 IJC EXPRESSES SERIOUS CONCERN OVER THE WELL-BEING OF DUA AND DALA KHALID IN THEIR ATTEMPTS TO SEEK RESETTLEMENT IN A SAFE THIRD STATE. LONDON, 21 June 2019 – The International Legal Team at Guernica 37 International Justice Chambers instructed by Doaa Khalid and Dalal Khalid, two young women having fled the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia due to the documented claims of persecution and abuse they have repeatedly suffered over prolonged period, have sought the protection of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees in Turkey, based on a well-founded fear of ill-treatment in their home State are now seeking resettlement in an unnamed safe third country. The two young women were forced to flee to Turkey where they are now under the protection of the United Nations until their request for resettlement is granted. The Government of Turkey is reminded of their obligations under National and International Law, in that they are now obliged to protect the sisters, and observe the principle of ‘non-refoulement’. In early June of 2019, two sisters, Doaa and Dalal Khalid, fled the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, seeking to escape the abuse and oppression they suffered at the hands of members of their family and the systematic abuse that prevails against women in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The sisters describe how they were being forced to marry “older, religious men”, and that one of them had been sexually assaulted. The sisters published their story by way of video, in which they described the years of domestic abuse that they had suffered, and further, that they simply wanted to be free and live their lives. The two young women fled to Turkey where they have now registered with the UN High Commission for Refugees, and are hopeful of being allowed to settle in as yet unnamed, safe third country, as there is a clear and demonstrable risk to their safety and wellbeing should be they return to the Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia. It has now transpired that there may be attempts from members of their family to seek to compel the Turkish authorities to illegally return the two to their family in Saudi Arabia. We would therefore remind the Turkish Government of its obligations under national and international law, in that it is required to respect the principle of ‘non-refoulement’, and thus, it is unlawful to return a refugee to the place where their life or freedom would be threatened. This is an obligation that we expect the Turkish authorities to take seriously and ensure that the two young women come to no harm. All refugees have the Right to Liberty, and, Security of Person, and further, all refugees ought to be able to expect to be protected by the host nation upon being identified as such. Turkey as a nation can rightly be proud of its history in protecting those fleeing to safety, particularly over recent years and the exodus of civilians from Syria, it would therefore be unconscionable to tarnish that reputation now. To return the two to Saudi Arabia, where there is credible evidence that they will be mistreated and abused, is not only unlawful, but, sets a very dangerous precedent for any other individual that seeks to flee to safety.

AFRO-DESCENDANT COMMUNITIES FROM NORTHERN CAUCA AND BUENAVENTURA FILE REPORTS ON INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY COMMITTED IN THEIR TERRITORIES BEFORE THE SPECIAL JURISDICTION FOR PEACE Bogotá, Colombia, 21 June 2019 – As collective victims of the Colombian armed conflict, Afro-descendant communities of Northern Cauca and Buenaventura have filed reports before the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz, JEP), alleging criminal responsibility of the Security Forces as well as third parties —civilians and non-military State agents— for crimes against humanity committed in their territories. These reports are the result of a comprehensive two-year investigation conducted with the legal and technical support of The Guernica Group. Through these reports, ethnic communities confirm their genuine willingness to participate in the Comprehensive System of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Non-Repetition in order to defend victims’ rights, placing them at the centre and at the forefront of the Colombian transitional process. · Community Councils (Consejos Comunitarios) from the municipalities of Buenos Aires (Cauca) and Buenaventura (Valle del Cauca) have completed these reports through a collective exercise of case-prioritization, confirming the territorial and community legitimacy of the documentation. · The criminal events described in the reports were committed between 2000 and 2005 by members of the paramilitary group Bloque Calima of the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia, AUC) in the territory of the Community Councils. · The communities of Buenos Aires invite the JEP to recognize the Cauca river as a legal subject and victim of the armed conflict, as it suffered a violations of its rights when the bodies of countless victims, who were systematically executed on the banks of the river, were thrown into its waters during the war. This would open a new jurisprudential precedent consistent with the eco-centric vision of the ethnic communities. In mid-2000, members of the Bloque Calima of the AUC carried out their first violent incursion into the territories of Northern Cauca and Buenaventura. This marked the beginning of the most serious and continuous attack against the civilian population that the Afro-descendant communities of these municipalities have ever faced. During the following four years, the AUC members set up permanent paramilitary camps where they brought countless victims to be executed, following systematic patterns of criminal behavior. This permanent presence among the communities, together with the extreme level of cruelty and publicity of the violence used by the paramilitary group, as well as the ethnocide that led to the destruction of ancestral cultural practices and the social fabric of the communities, prove the perpetration of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of these territories. Through documentary evidence and witness testimony, and with Guernica’s accompaniment and support, the communities claim that this attack forms part of a policy or plan —justified in counter-insurgent grounds, but economically-motivated— through which the Colombian Security Forces, as well as unarmed third parties that financed the paramilitary violence, sought to exercise and maintain social and territorial control over both regions. With these reports, the communities have requested the JEP to investigate the criminal responsibility of these actors, in accordance with international standards and the case law of the International Criminal Court and ad hoc international tribunals. The Communities’ innovative approach aims at bringing light to the criminal plan behind the paramilitary violence, instead of focusing on isolated criminal events. These reports were not only produced through a community-based methodology, but also use statistical and cartographical studies to demonstrate the gravity of the events presented. Additionally, the communities lay out the deep and lasting damage and collective and territorial impact caused by paramilitary violence. Thus, the communities maintain that it is impossible to know, in depth, the dynamics of the Colombian armed conflict, and reach an authentic reconciliation in the territories, without investigating and providing a system of truth and justice for these deeply reprehensible crimes. The reports were presented to the Magistrates of the Chamber for the Recognition of Truth, Responsibility and the Determination of Facts and Conducts of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, through a private hearing in which Afro-descendant leaders have explained to the Magistrates the results of their investigations. This private hearing was followed by a public act commemorating the victims, celebrated at 10.30am in the Auditorio Marino Troncoso of the University Javeriana of Bogotá. The reports presented by the communities of Buenos Aires fall within case no. 005, on Northern Cauca, which is already under investigation at the JEP. Considering the absence of accountability with regards to the roots of the violence in Colombia and the growing insecurity in the territories, the Afro-descendant leaders request the Special Jurisdiction for Peace: "To defend our rights to truth, justice, reparation and non-repetition, while respecting the autonomy and differential rights of the black communities” Almudena Bernabéu, director of The Guernica Group, stated: “There is no complete, real, nor honest transitional process that does not generate the space that the victims need and deserve. Two years ago, Guernica bet for a case-prioritization and investigation methodology defined for the victims, and with the victims, which would allow them to determine what to bring before the transitional mechanisms, with the maximum legal rigor. It has been an extraordinary joint effort in which the process counts as much—or even more—than the result. Today we have the honor of accompanying the victims and their communities—who have ceased to be victims, at least in an inactive manner—to become members of the Afro-descendant community who know their reality, who have collectively faced what they have suffered and who are clear and certain about their demands of truth and justice. On behalf of everyone in Guernica, I can only feel grateful to have had the opportunity to lead this effort, hoping that the voice of the victims is really the voice that leads and sustains this process of transition in Colombia” Mauricio Hernández Communications Manager +34 633 052 287 mauricioh@guernica37.org Guernica 37 International Justice Chambers The Bloomsbury Building 10 Bloomsbury Way London WC1A 2SL https://www.guernicagroup.org https://guernica37.org NOTA DE PRENSA COMUNIDADES AFRODESCENDIENTES DEL NORTE DEL CAUCA Y BUENAVENTURA PRESENTAN ANTE LA JURISDICCIÓN ESPECIAL PARA LA PAZ INFORMES SOBRE RESPONSABILIDAD PENAL INTERNACIONAL POR CRÍMENES DE LESA HUMANIDAD COMETIDOS EN SUS TERRITORIOS Bogotá, Colombia, 21 de junio de 2019 – Como víctimas colectivas del conflicto armado colombiano, comunidades afrodescendientes del Norte del Cauca y Buenaventura han presentado hoy informes sobre responsabilidad penal internacional de integrantes de la Fuerza Pública, así como de otros agentes del Estado y terceros civiles, por crímenes de lesa humanidad cometidos en sus territorios. Estos informes son el resultado de dos años de investigación en los que han contado con el acompañamiento jurídico y técnico del Grupo Guernica. A través de estos informes, las comunidades afirman su voluntad de participar en el Sistema Integral de Verdad, Justicia, Reparación y No Repetición con el fin de defender los derechos de las víctimas y situarse al centro y al frente del proceso transicional colombiano. · Los Consejos Comunitarios, procedentes del municipio de Buenos Aires (Cauca) y de Buenaventura (Valle del Cauca), han realizado un ejercicio colectivo de priorización de casos cometidos en el marco del conflicto armado, lo que confirma la legitimidad territorial y comunitaria de estos informes. · Los hechos descritos se centran en el periodo temporal 2000-2005, coincidente con la presencia del Bloque Calima de las Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (AUC) en el territorio de los Consejos Comunitarios. · Las comunidades de Buenos Aires solicitan a la JEP que reconozca como sujeto de derechos, y víctima del conflicto armado, al río Cauca, que sufrió una profunda vulneración de sus derechos al ser arrojados a sus aguas los cuerpos de un sinnúmero de víctimas ejecutadas sistemáticamente a las orillas de su cauce. Con esta decisión, la JEP respaldaría la visión eco-céntrica de las comunidades étnicas. A mediados del año 2000, miembros del Bloque Calima de las AUC realizaron sus primeras incursiones violentas en el Norte del Cauca y Buenaventura, dando comienzo al ataque contra la población, más grave y continuado que han tenido que enfrentar las comunidades afrocolombianas de estos municipios. Durante los siguientes cuatro años, las AUC instalaron campamentos permanentes a los que condujeron a cientos de personas para ser ejecutadas, siguiendo patrones de conducta criminal que se reproducían de manera sistemática. Esta presencia permanente entre las comunidades, la extrema crueldad de la violencia ejercida por el grupo paramilitar, así como el etnocidio que llevó a la destrucción de las prácticas culturales ancestrales y el tejido social de las comunidades, demuestran la existencia de un ataque sistemático y generalizado contra la población civil de estos territorios. Mediante pruebas documentales y testificales y con el acompañamiento técnico de Guernica, las comunidades sostienen que dicho ataque formaría parte de un plan supuestamente contra-insurgente pero realmente destinado a defender intereses económicos, mediante el cual la Fuerza Pública, así como otros agentes del Estado (no militares) y personas particulares (terceros civiles) que financiaron la violencia en ambos departamentos, buscaron apropiarse del territorio y asegurar su control. Con estos informes, las comunidades se presentaron ante la JEP para solicitar que se investigue la responsabilidad penal por los hechos expuestos de acuerdo con estándares internacionales y la jurisprudencia emitida por la Corte Penal Internacional. La innovadora invitación de las comunidades a la JEP estriba en perseguir el plan criminal detrás de los hechos expuestos, superando las investigaciones aisladas efectuadas hasta ahora sobre algunos de los hechos particulares. La gravedad y representatividad de los hechos expuestos parte de la metodología utilizada por las comunidades para seleccionar los casos, argumentos de carácter estadístico y estudios cartográficos, así como de los profundos y duraderos impactos colectivos y territoriales ocasionados por la violencia paramilitar, lo que justifica su priorización por parte de la JEP. Las comunidades mantienen que es imposible conocer en profundidad las dinámicas del conflicto armado colombiano, y alcanzar una auténtica reconciliación en los territorios, sin investigar y proveer justicia por lo expuesto en estos informes. Los informes han sido presentados ante magistrados de la Sala de Reconocimiento de Verdad, de Responsabilidad y de Determinación de los Hechos y Conductas de la JEP, mediante una audiencia privada en la que los líderes afrodescendientes explicaron los resultados de la investigación; A esta audiencia le ha seguido un acto público de conmemoración a las víctimas, que ha sido celebrado en el Auditorio Marino Troncoso de la Universidad Javeriana de Bogotá. Los informes de las comunidades de Buenos Aires han sido presentados en el marco del caso 005, relativo al Norte del Cauca, que ya adelanta la Sala de Reconocimiento. Ante la falta de respuestas sobre las raíces profundas de la violencia, el elevado nivel de impunidad existente respecto a los hechos expuestos, y la creciente inseguridad en los territorios, los líderes territoriales solicitan a la Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz: “que, respetando la autonomía y los derechos diferenciales de las comunidades negras, garantice nuestros derechos a la verdad, la justicia, la reparación y la no repetición, colocando a las víctimas en el centro del proceso”. Almudena Bernabéu, directora del Grupo Guernica, declara que: “No hay proceso transicional completo, real, ni honesto que no genere el espacio que las víctimas necesitan y merecen. Guernica apostó, hace algo más de dos años, por una metodología de trabajo definida para las víctimas y con las víctimas, que permitiera determinar qué presentar ante los mecanismos transicionales con el máximo rigor jurídico. Ha sido un esfuerzo conjunto extraordinario en el que el proceso cuenta tanto, o más, que el resultado. Hoy tenemos el honor de acompañar a las víctimas y sus comunidades que han dejado de serlo, al menos de una manera inactiva para convertirse en miembros de la comunidad afrodescendiente que conocen su realidad, que han enfrentado colectivamente lo sufrido y que tienen claras sus demandas de verdad y justicia. Solo puedo, en nombre de todos en Guernica, agradecer haber tenido la oportunidad de liderar este esfuerzo y esperar que la voz de las víctimas sea realmente la voz que lidere y sostenga este proceso de transición en Colombia”. Mauricio Hernández Responsable de Comunicaciones +34 633 052 287 mauricioh@guernica37.org Guernica 37 International Justice Chambers The Bloomsbury Building 10 Bloomsbury Way London WC1A 2SL https://www.guernicagroup.org https://guernica37.org

His untimely death comes after a background of unlawful detention, physical abuse, torture, and a judicial process that failed to protect his fair trial rights. In learning of his death, Guernica members condemn the Sisi Government for its part in the events, and further, call upon the international community to take action against the dictatorial and oppressive regime. Dr. Mohamed Morsi the first democratically elected President of Egypt was removed from power following a military coup d’état led by the now President, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. Having been removed from power at what was in reality, the barrel of a gun, he was then, on 29 June 2013, arrested and detained to await trial in respect of a number of politically motivated charges. Dr. Morsi had been held for almost 6 years, the initial element of that detention, a period of 5 months, being incommunicado. This flagrant breach of his fair trial, and due process rights, was replicated throughout the trial process, wherein, Dr. Morsi was: Held in an ‘opaque cage’ and thereby infringing of the right to the presumption of innocence Prevented from hearing the evidence presented against him, on account of the sound in the aforementioned ‘cage’ being controlled by the presiding Judge; Prevented from having private consultation with his legal Counsel; Only allowed minimal visits; Prevented from seeing copies of any Prosecution evidence; Prevented from providing his Counsel with any documents in furtherance of his defence; and Given the restrictions placed on legal consultation Dr. Morsi was prevented from putting his defence and prevented from taking an active part in the process. The derogation from international standards did not end with the trial process itself however; Dr. Morsi was forced to endure standards of detention that have no place in any State, much less one that purports to respect the principles of democracy and fairness. Over the past 6 years of detention Dr. Morsi had been: Held in solitary confinement, and for the main part, incommunicado; conditions that can, and as has been previously held the UN Special Procedures Branch, do, amount to torture and/or inhuman and degrading treatment; Forced to eat spoiled food, or food otherwise than is fit for human consumption; and Denied medicine and medical treatment for health conditions, including diabetes, that had resulted in those conditions becoming exacerbated, to the extent that he had on more than one occasion fallen into a diabetic coma, and further, is losing his sight in one eye. Nelson Mandela famously opined “It is said that no one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails. A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but its lowest ones.”, and it is here where Egypt can be judged. Such were the flagrant abuses meted out to Dr. Morsi, that members of his family instructed members of Guernica 37 International Justice Chambers to draft and file a petition of complaint with the UN Special Procedures Branch requesting an immediate investigation. The warnings that had been given previously, have thus come to pass, Mohammed Morsi has now died; his death no doubt being as a result of the treatment he has been forced to endure. It is very likely that the true contributing factors that led to his death will never be known. It is unlikely in the extreme that the Sisi Government will allow a truly independent examination of the body, and instead, will seek to rely upon mistruths and obfuscation that have become the hallmarks of his oppressive and dictatorial regime. Upon learning of his death, Toby Cadman and Carl Buckey, members of the International Legal Team at Guernica 37 and authors of the petition to the United Nations, stated: The international community can be under no illusions that Sisi is a dictator who has no respect for the Rule of Law, and rather than allow an individual their democratic and fair trial rights, he will remove any and all protections to ensure his grasp on power continuesn a democracy, proponents and detractors of a ruling party are essential in providing a system of checks and balances to government power. In leading the coup again Morsi, and his overt policies of oppression thereafter, President Sisi has shown himself to only be concerned with power, and the removal of any threat to it. The Sisi regime, is one that has imprisoned tens of thousands of innocent civilians, their crimes, where detention is admitted, being purported offences of terrorism. The reality, is that the vast majority of these individuals have been arrested because they have vocalised opposition to the ruling Sisi regime, or to put in another way, they have expressed their right to free expression, free speech, free association, and a number of other inalienable rights, that any citizen ought to be free to express in a democracy. Mohammed Morsi should have been afforded these rights, instead he was arbitrarily detained because he was seen as a threat by the Sisi regime, a regime that is intent on imprisoning and executing its opponents. In the case of Mohammed Morsi however, rather than execute him, they instead merely left him to die, and thus Egypt’s nascent democracy ended as quickly as it had begun.

Weekly update: 31 May - 11 June The following media round up of international legal and foreign policy issues from around the world for the week of 31 May - 11 June 2019. The Guernica Group will provide weekly media updates from the International Criminal Court, European Court of Human Rights, United Nations, European Union and other sources. Should you wish to contribute or submit a media summary, opinion piece or blog, please send to Nenad Vucijak for consideration. Brazil: 10 May 2019 An analysis of data released under Freedom of Information request reveals that courts have been slow to implement new legal protections for mothers and pregnant women, in some cases ignoring them entirely. https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/05/10/brazil-mothers-risk-illegal-detention EL Salvador: 31 May 2019 The Salvadoran Congress are called upon to comply with the ruling of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ordering them to suspend consideration of a “transitional justice” bill. https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/05/31/el-salvador-fix-flawed-transitional-justice-bill Chile: 5 June 2019 Chile’s ‘Clean Air’ ruling offers hope on World Environmental Day. Landmark ruling confirms constitutional right to a healthy environment. https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/06/05/chiles-clean-air-ruling-offers-hope-world-environment-day Honduras: 6 June 2019 The total ban in Honduras on abortion in all circumstances puts women and girls in danger and violates their rights, states Human Rights Watch. Abortion is illegal in all circumstances, including rape and incest, when a woman’s life is in danger, and when the fetus will not survive outside the womb. https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/06/06/honduras-abortion-bans-dire-consequences Phillipines: 10th June 2019 UN rights experts called on the UN to enact an independent investigation into human rights violations in the Philippines, citing an increase of unlawful killings and attacks on individuals and institutions defending human rights. The report directly addresses the President of the Phillippines, Rodrigo Duterte for publicly intimidating human rights defenders, UN Special Rapporteurs, and Supreme Court Judges. https://www.jurist.org/news/2019/06/un-experts-call-for-investigation-into-philippines-human-rights-violations/ Nicaragua: 11th June 2019 Nicaragua has released dozen of political prisoners under a new law that frees people arrested amid a year of anti-government protests. Fifty prisoners jailed for their role in anti-government protests were released alongside two journalists. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/11/nicaragua-political-prisoners-released-new-law USA: 11 June 2019 Testimony before US Concress on Ortega’s crackdown in Nicaragua https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/06/11/testimony-us-congress-ortegas-crackdown-nicaragua Cambodia: 9 June 2019 Human Rights Watch states that holding an Asian media meeting Cambodia makes a mockery of freedom of expression and press freedom and urges summit participants to publicly call for an end to Cambodian government suppression of the print and electronic media. https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/06/09/cambodia-holding-media-summit-without-media-freedom Egypt: 28 May 2019 Egyptian forces and militants in the Sinai are responsible for crimes against humanity. The Egyptian government is accused of carrying out enforced disappearances, killings, tortures and other illegal acts. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-48431912 Kazakhstan: 6th June 2019 Censorship of the media reaches new heights with the passing of a new Media Law. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/odr/press-freedom-kazakhstan-en/ Senegal: 11 June 2019 A 71-page report is published by Human Rights Watch and the Platform for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights stating that severe abuse, exploitation and neglect of talibés children is continuing at an alarming rate in Quarnic schools. https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/06/11/senegal-unchecked-abuses-quranic-schools Sudan: 11 June 2019 The United Nations Security Council is called upon to halt the withdrawal of the UN- African peacekeeping mission from Darfur in view of the political instability in Sudan and continuing insecurity for civilians. Uzbekistan: 11 June 2019 Uzbekistan authorities are called upon to immediately release retired Uzbek diplomat, Kadyr Yusupov, who has been detained in a pre-trial detention facility since December 2018. https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/06/11/uzbekistan-release-retired-diplomat

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL TEAM FILES URGENT COMMUNICATION WITH THE UNITED NATIONS WORKING GROUP ON ARBITRARY DETENTION AND OTHER SPECIAL RAPPORTEURS AGAINST THE REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR IN RESPECT OF SWEDISH NATIONAL OLA BINI LONDON/SAN FRANCISCO/BUENOS AIRES, 5 June 2019 –The International Legal Team instructed by Mr. Ola Bini, comprising members of Guernica 37 International Justice Chambersand LMGAA Estudio Juridico, have today filed a Petition of Complaint with the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, UN Special Rapporteur on the Prevention on Torture, UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Expression, UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders and UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Privacy highlighting his ongoing unlawful, and therefore ‘Arbitrary’ detention; detention authorised despite there being a credible suggestion that the allegations are politically motivated, and in any event, without any legal foundation. Mr. Ola Bini, a Swedish National, a software programmer and privacy rights expert, described as a human rights defender, has been arbitrarily detained in Quito, Ecuador since 11 April 2019. The authorities have detained Mr. Ola Bini on vague and wholly unsubstantiated allegations. There is no evidence linking him to any allegations and given the absence of any evidence, it is submitted that his detention breaches the norms of national and international law concerning deprivation of liberty and a ruling is sought from the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the UN Special Rapporteurs. It is therefore deemed a matter of urgency that the Working Group investigate this matter, and further, call upon the Government of Ecuador to act in accordance with its domestic and international obligations to release Mr. Ola Bini immediately and terminate any criminal investigation against him. On 11 April, Mr. Ola Bini was arrested and detained at Mariscal Sucre International Airport in Ecuador, a country that he had made his home since 2013, and a country in which he had resided for six years without incident. The basis of his arrest, and his subsequent ongoing detention is yet to be specified, the only information having been disclosed by the Prosecutor in this case, is that Mr. Bini is alleged to have committed an offence relating to an “…attack on the integrity of computer systems”. It cannot be coincidence that Mr. Bini was arrested on the day that the Government of Ecuador revoked the asylum status of Mr. Julian Assange, and further, that his arrest was met with comments made by members of the Government of Ecuador purporting to suggest that ‘agents’ seeking to harm Ecuador were operating within the country, and further, that they had been identified as having links with WikiLeaks. Such comments are not only factually inaccurate, but also seek to influence the unsubstantiated allegations against Mr. Bini, and thus have directly impact on the ability of Mr. Bini to have a fair trial should the wholly unsubstantiated charges proceed. The reality, is that Mr. Bini is nothing more than a software developer, and an internationally recognised expert in ensuring an individual’s protection against unlawful digital surveillance; a subject upon which Mr. Bini has campaigned for, and advocated upon for a significant amount of time, resulting in him being termed a ‘Human Rights Defender’ concerning the right to privacy, and the right to freedom of expression. The allegations against Mr. Bini are vehemently denied, however, the Prosecution, despite having detained Mr. Bini since 11 April 2009, and therefore almost two months, are still yet to offer a shred of evidence that would substantiate the allegations being made. Further, and most disturbingly, at the most recent ‘bail’ hearing, the Prosecutor again failed to disclose any evidence substantiating the allegation, and yet, the Court refused to release Mr. Bini, using this failure to justify the decision on the basis that any damage, actual or potential, could not be justified. Such a decision cannot be sustained, given that the failure of the Prosecution ought to have been a primary basis for the grantof bail and dismissal of the case, rather than its refusal. The International Team stated: The decision however is merely the latest in a litany of failures by the Ecuadorian Security Services, and thereafter, the wider justice system, to adhere to domestic and international due process norms Upon arrest, Mr. Bini has not been held in accordance with such accepted norms; he was initially held, handcuffed, in the back of a police car for an inordinate amount of time, despite the warrant authorising his arrest not being produced until some seven hours after his initial arrest – thereby confirming that his initial period of detention was unlawful. Further, he was denied his non-derogable right to consular assistance, nor was he permitted to seek the assistance of legal counsel until after he had been detained for over 13 hours. The International Team confirmed: Such tactics not only breach domestic law, but further, they are in contravention of Ecuador’s state obligations by virtue of it being a State Party to a host of international treaties, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Accordingly, the initial, and ongoing detention of Mr. Bini is unlawful, and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention is requested to investigate and rule as such. The International Team stated: We are deeply concerned that the Ecuadorian judiciary lacks the necessary independence required by any democratic state and by the minimum standards of due process. In such a hostile environment and following a politically charged campaign, his continued detention and possible charges constitutes an abuse of process in breach of national law and Ecuador's international treaty obligations. As a result of the failures by the domestic courts the Petitioner has no option but to take this to the UN to intervene. * * * * * EQUIPO JURÍDICO INTERNACIONAL PRESENTA COMUNICACIÓN URGENTE ANTE EL GRUPO DE TRABAJO DE SOBRE LA DETENCIÓN ARBITRARIA DE NACIONES UNIDAS Y VARIOS RELATORES ESPECIALES, CONTRA LA REPÚBLICA DE ECUADOR EN RELACIÓN AL CIUDADANO SUECO OLA BINI LONDRES/SAN FRANCISCO/BUENOS AIRES, 5 de junio de 2019 – El equipo de internacional de abogados que representa a Ola Bini, conformado por Guernica 37 International Justice Chambersy LMGAA Estudio Jurídico, ha presentado una comunicación urgente ante el Grupo de Trabajo de sobre la Detención Arbitraria de Naciones Unidas; el Relator Especial sobre la tortura y otros tratos o penas crueles, inhumanos o degradantes; el Relator Especial sobre la promoción y protección del derecho a la libertad de opinión y de expresión; el Relator Especial sobre la situación de los defensores de derechos humanos; así como ante el Relator Especial sobre el Derecho a la Privacidad, denunciando la detención ilegal—y por lo tanto, arbitraria—de Ola Bini; detención autorizada a pesar de la existencia de alegaciones creíbles de que las acusaciones que enfrenta reposan sobre motivaciones políticas y, en todo caso, carecen de fundamentación jurídica El Sr. Ola Bini, de nacionalidad sueca, programador de software y experto en derechos de privacidad, reconocido como defensor de los derechos humanos, fue detenido arbitrariamente en Quito, Ecuador, el 11 de abril de 2019. Las autoridades ecuatorianas arrestaron al Sr. Ola Bini en base a acusaciones imprecisas y totalmente infundadas. No existen pruebas que lo vinculen con ninguna de las acusaciones formuladas contra él y, ante la ausencia de pruebas, se mantiene que su detención infringe las normas del derecho nacional e internacional relativas a la privación de libertad. Por ello, solicitamos al Grupo de Trabajo sobre la Detención Arbitraria y a los Relatores Especiales de las Naciones Unidas que dicten una decisión con respecto a esta situación. Por lo tanto, se considera como un asunto de máxima urgencia que el Grupo de Trabajo investigue esta cuestión y que, además, haga un llamamiento al Gobierno del Ecuador para que actúe de conformidad con sus obligaciones nacionales e internacionales, liberando inmediatamente al Sr. Ola Bini y poniendo fin a todo el procedimiento penal abierto en su contra. El 11 de abril, el sr. Ola Bini fue arrestado y detenido en el Aeropuerto Internacional Mariscal Sucre de Ecuador, un país que se convirtió en su hogar el año 2013 y en el que llevaba residiendo durante seis años sin ningún tipo de incidente. Aún no se ha especificado el motivo de su arresto y de su posterior detención, que persiste en la actualidad. La única información revelada por el Fiscal de este caso es que el sr. Bini cometió, presuntamente, un delito relacionado con un “…ataque a la integridad de los sistemas informáticos”. No es coincidencia que el sr. Bini fuera arrestado exactamente el mismo día en que el Gobierno de Ecuador revocó el asilo al sr. Julian Assange; y que, además, su arresto fuera recibido por miembros del Gobierno de Ecuador con comentarios e insinuaciones de que “agentes” que buscaban dañar a Ecuador estaban operando dentro del país, estando vinculados a WikiLeaks. Esas observaciones no son sólo factualmente incorrectas, sino que buscan influir y ahondar sobre las infundadas acusaciones contra el sr. Bini; teniendo, por lo tanto, un impacto directo en su derecho a recibir un juicio justo e imparcial, en caso de que el proceso penal continúe. El sr. Bini es un desarrollador de software, de reconocido prestigio internacional, especializado en garantizar la protección de los individuos contra la vigilancia digital ilegal; una lucha que el sr. Bini ha defendido durante largo tiempo, por lo que le considera un ‘defensor de los derechos humanos’ a la privacidad y a la libertad de expresión. Las acusaciones formuladas contra el Peticionario han sido rotundamente rechazadas por esta parte. No obstante,a pesar de que el sr. Bini ha permanecido detenido desde hace casi dos meses,la Fiscalía aún no ha presentado ninguna prueba que corrobore las acusaciones vertidas en su contra. De manera preocupante, aunque en la última audiencia sobre la concesión de ‘libertad provisional bajo fianza’, el Fiscal tampoco reveló ninguna prueba que justificara la detención del sr. Bini, el Tribunal rechazó poner en libertad al Peticionario; tomando esta decisión sin ninguna justificación y alegando, exclusivamente, la necesidad de impedir la producción, real o potencial, de cualquier daño. Esta decisión de mantener su detención no puede prolongarse, sobre todo si se tiene en cuenta que la falta de pruebas por parte de la Fiscalía justificaría el otorgamiento de libertad bajo fianza o, incluso, el archivo de la causa contra el sr. Bini; en lugar de la denegación de su libertad. Nuestro equipo jurídico internacional declara que: Esta decisión, sin embargo, no es más que el último ejemplo de la retahíla de fallos que han cometido los Servicios de Seguridad ecuatorianos y, posteriormente, el sistema judicial en general, en el cumplimiento de las normas nacionales e internacionales que rigen el debido proceso y la tutela judicial efectiva. Desde el momento de su arresto, el sr. Bini no ha sido detenido de conformidad con dichas normas, vigentes en Ecuador. El Peticionario fue inicialmente retenido y esposado en la parte trasera de un coche de policía durante un período excesivo de tiempo, a pesar de que la orden que autorizaba su detención no se presentó hasta siete horas después—lo que confirma que su detención, en este primer período, fue ilegal. Además, se le negó su derecho inderogable a recibir asistencia consular y no se le permitió acceder a asistencia letrada hasta 13 horas después de su detención. Nuestro equipo jurídico internacional confirma que: Estas tácticas no sólo violan el derecho interno de Ecuador, sino que, además, contravienen las obligaciones del Estado ecuatoriano que dimanan de su condición de Estado Parte de múltiples tratados internacionales, entre los que figura el Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos. En consecuencia, el arresto inicial y la actual detención del sr. Bini son ilegales, y se solicita al Grupo de Trabajo sobre la Detención Arbitraria que investigue estos hechos y resuelva calificándolos de tal forma. El equipo jurídico internacional ha declarado que: Nos preocupa profundamente que el poder judicial ecuatoriano carezca de la independencia necesaria que exige cualquier Estado democrático y las propias normas mínimas del debido proceso. En un entorno tan hostil y tras una grave campaña política, su detención continuada y posible acusación constituyen un grave abuso de procedimiento que viola la normativa nacional y las obligaciones contraídas por Ecuador en virtud de los tratados internacionales. Como resultado de las irregularidades que se han sucedido en los tribunales nacionales, el Peticionario no tiene otra opción que elevar su caso ante la Organización de las Naciones Unidas para solicitar su intervención.

GUERNICA 37 INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE CHAMBERS FILES URGENT COMMUNICATION WITH THE UNITED NATIONS WORKING GROUP ON ARBITRARY DETENTION AND SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON TORTURE AGAINST UNITED ARAB EMIRATES AND THE REPUBLIC OF INDIA IN RESPECT OF BRITISH NATIONAL CHRISTIAN MICHEL GENEVA, 23 April 2019 –Guernica 37 International Justice Chambers has today filed an Urgent Communication with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, on behalf of Mr. Christian Michel, a British citizen who is currently being detained in an Indian prison having been extradited from the United Arab Emirates in December 2018. It is important to note that the extradition process cannot be seen as a judicial decision independent of the executive. It is quite clear that the level of political interference with the case was such that it is devoid of an independent judicial process and can only be characterised an unlawful transfer from one state to another that is reminiscent of rendition. It is of particular note that the Petitioner was handcuffed, blindfolded and transported by private jet, clearly being taken in a hurried and unlawful manner without the ability to challenge any decision. It is quite apparent that the detention, and further, any subsequent trial, has not, and will not adhere to relevant fair trial standards, and thus again, detention in these circumstances can only be deemed as arbitrary. Mr. Michel is alleged to have been involved in the corruption concerning the sale of AgustaWestland helicopters to the Indian Government in 2010, an allegation that India maintains despite the Italian High Court having previously rejected Mr. Michel’s involvement in the scandal, ruling that there was no evidence to implicate Mr. Michel. It is alleged that Mr. Michel was extradited to India following a formal request being submitted to the United Arab Emirates. The reality is that Mr. Michel was unlawfully handed over to the Government of India, the procedure resembling more rendition than a lawful extradition process. It is alleged that Mr. Michel was handed over as part of a quid pro quofollowing the Indian authorities alleged involvement in the abduction of Sheikha Latifa bint Mohammed al Maktoum and her return to the UAE in March 2018. Having been returned to India, Mr. Michel has been held in squalid conditions that breach basic human rights conditions, subjected to repeated and prolonged interrogations aimed at securing a confession through coercion, and subjected to ill-treatment of such severity that may constitute torture at the hands of the Central Bureau of Intelligence and the Enforcement Department. Having not been charged with any criminal offence, Mr. Michel has been held in custody for a prolonged period in circumstances that can only be said to be politically motivated, and thus his detention is rendered arbitrary. The process by which Mr. Michel was extradited to India did not follow due process and further, is a clear attempt to override international protocols relating to the process. The process that led to his removal from the UAE can only be described as a flagrant denial of justice that circumvented due process and seriously undermines any purported commitment to the rule of law. Following a failed attempt to extradite Mr. Michel in 2017, as a result of India failing to provide the evidence to substantiate the request, the government reinstated the original application following a meeting between Mr. Michel and a senior official in the Central Intelligence Bureau, in January 2018. It is our submission that this request for extradition only came about following Mr. Michel’s refusal to cooperate in signing a 20-page confession incriminating himself in the alleged corruption. Whilst in prison awaiting extradition, Mr. Michel was prevented from contacting his instructed counsel in violation of national and international law. He was held in a Dubai Police Station for 135 days before being blind-folded and taken to India on a private jet. On arriving in India, Mr. Michel was interrogated by the Central Bureau of Intelligence for two weeks, with these sessions lasting 14 hours or more without any breaks. He was then moved to a cell in Tihar jail where he was forced to share with 45 other people. These are just two examples of the ill-treatment that Mr. Michel is alleged to have been subjected to and the arbitrary conditions in which he is said to be detained. The protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms ought to go beyond the political posturing of national states; human rights are universal, they are not dependent on diplomatic, trade or military allegiance, and yet governments consistently allow such factors to blinker their policies to the detriment of individuals, rather than discharge their obligation to humanity. In filing this petition of complaint, Guernica requests that the UN Special Procedures Branch examine the circumstances of Mr. Michel’s rendition, detention, and ongoing ill-treatment with a view to his release and exoneration being secured. * * * * * Guernica 37 is a specialist Barristers’ Chambers experienced in advising and assisting States as they commence a process of structural reform and transformation following periods of political instability, post-conflict, post-authoritarian regimes or prolonged periods of state institutions controlled by systemic and structural corrupt practices. Our range of clientele come from the political, institutional and economic sectors as key stakeholders in any lasting and sustainable transformation.

On 14-15 April 2019, Guernica members Toby Cadman and Carl Buckley were invited to attend the ‘International Conference on National, Regional and International Mechanisms to Combat Impunity and Ensure Accountability under International Law’ held in Doha by the Qatari National Human Rights Committee, in conjunction with the UN Office of the High Commission for Human Rights, European Parliament and the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions. The Conference Agenda can be downloaded here and the Concept NOTE here. The Conference was attended by a large number of international lawyers, diplomats and representatives of IGOs and NGOs and keynote speeches were presented by the H.E. Ali bin Samikh al Marri, Chairman of the National Human Rights Committee of Qatar, Vice-President and Secretary General of GANHRI; H.E. Pier Antonio Panzeri, Chair of the European Parliament Subcommittee on Human Rights; H.E. Michelle Bachelet, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. (Video Address); H.E Carlos Negret Mosquera, President of the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions (GANHRI); and H.E Catherine Marchi-Uhel, Head of the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism to Assist in the Investigation and Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Crimes in the Syrian Arab Republic. The Conference had a number of themes, including the Duty to Prosecute and Investigate, Victims right to an Effective Remedy, the Right to Reparation, Right of Access to Court. The various speakers focused on human rights violations around the globe, looking at the situations in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, Myanmar and the jurisdiction of international judicial and non-judicial bodies. The first day saw a number of papers presented to the conference as a whole, with the second day allowing for more nuanced discussion with three ‘workshops’ to be attended wherein specific issues were discussed. The underlying point appeared to be that regardless of the hurdles to be overcome in seeking accountability, including the position adopted by a number of governments within the international community, is that both the need and the desire for accountability is stronger now than it has ever been. It is clear that the world over, there are dedicated professionals who work tirelessly in seeking to ensure that impunity is not allowed to reign, and that victims are given a voice. The issue, is how to end that impunity, and how to ensure that those victims are heard. There is no easy answer to this question. The ICC is often seen as being the venue for all of the worlds ills, however, this is as incorrect as it is impossible. The ICC is restricted by its own Statute insofar as the exercise of its jurisdiction is concerned, although, it was encouraging to hear an ICC judge speak in one of the Working Groups about how each and every state should be encouraged to ratify the Rome Statute and thus allow the ICC to become truly global. The ICC therefore has its place, but those of us that seek redress on behalf of victims must become creative in our approach. We must look to the jurisdiction of the ICC and push its boundaries, much like Guernica has done in terms of the Rohingya with jurisdiction through Bangladesh, and more recently, as we have done in our Article 15 Communication to the ICC concerning Syria, applying the Myanmar decision to Syria through Jordan. Accountability is more than the ICC though, it is reached domestically through building the capacity of existing institutions and developing new ones, it is reached through ratification of various UN Conventions, including the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), it is reached through regional mechanisms, and it is reached through conferences such as that arranged by the NHRC of Qatar, encouraging discussion, debate, and formulating a set of demands of make of national governments so as to ensure impunity is not allowed to reign. This conference provided an essential platform for contributors from a number of professions and from a number of countries, all with the same vision, and the same aim. The NHRC of Qatar, and the State of Qatar itself ought to be applauded for facilitating what was an interesting discussion, and an essential forum. The hope that this was not just another conference, but the development of a broader discussion and movement. The Conference Closing Remarks and Conclusions can be accessed here and the session broadcast here.