Enforced disappearance in UAE

Page 1



en en



HEINOUS PRACTICES

SYSTEMATIC FORCED DISAPPEARANCES IN THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES International Coalition for Freedoms and Rights


6

The phenomenon of enforced disappearance has traditionally been associated with military dictatorships, but this exclusive link has been gradually eroded by an expanding array of cases in which states all over the world have become directly involved in the disappearance of certain individuals, especially in relation to organised crime or terrorism. Many other countries have resorted to forced disappearances to suppress political opponents and any activities related to the defence of human rights. The UN Secretary General remarked in a message to mark the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances, which is observed annually on 30 August, that: “Enforced disappearance was once employed mainly by military dictatorships. Increasingly, it has become a tool of many states around the world, some operating under counter-terror strategies, or fighting organised crime, and others seeking to quash dissent and human rights activism. On this solemn Day, I reiterate in the strongest possible terms that under international law, no one should be kept in secret detention. Any person deprived of his or her liberty must be held safely in officially recognised and supervised locations that observe the rule of law. States should provide full information about the whereabouts of persons who have been disappeared. And they must effectively implement the right to the truth, justice and reparation for all victims and their families.�


7

Contents Executive Summary............................................................................................................. 8 Introduction:....................................................................................................................... 9 UAE COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOURTEEN UNDERTAKINGS AIMED AT ENDING FORCED DISAPPEARANCE................................................................................................................. 11 First: Ratification of international agreements and international accountability.................. 11 Second: Official condemnation........................................................................................... 12 Third: Prohibiting forced disappearances through local laws and legislations...................... 14 Fourth: Making information about arrests and releases available, not holding anyone in secret locations, and providing access and protection to prisoners..................................... 15 Examples of cases of forced disappearance in the UAE: ..................................................... 15 Fifth: Conducting immediate, effective and transparent investigations into cases of forced disappearance and brining those responsible to justice and compensating the victims....... 18 Sixth: Individual criminal responsibility, banning forced disappearances and restricting detention orders to security forces..................................................................................... 19 Conclusions........................................................................................................................ 22


8

Executive Summary The International Coalition for Freedoms and Rights (ICFR) herein presents a report about cases of enforced disappearance in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The report aims to tackle the crime of enforced disappearance as an example of crimes against humanity perpetrated by many Arab regimes. The report seeks to examine the role these crimes play in suppressing demands for political reforms in the UAE. The report adopts as its point of departure the 14 criteria adopted by international organisations, such as Amnesty International, in addressing state compliance with international provisions on forced disappearance and their willingness to prevent these crimes from occurring on their territories. The report offers evidence documented by international organisations proving that the UAE has time and again violated these 14 criteria and adopted forced disappearance as a systematic form of abuse that violates all international laws and agreements that the UAE is party to.

 


9

Introduction: Enforced disappearance of individuals as practiced by some state actors constitutes a glaring and unacceptable breach of human rights. Equally unacceptable are the acts of forced disappearance puts individuals at the risk of death or torture. In addition to causing immense suffering to the victims and their loved ones, enforced disappearance creates a climate of terror among citizens.

1

According to Article (1) of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance: “Any act of enforced disappearance places the persons subjected thereto outside the protection of the law and inflicts severe suffering on them and their families. It constitutes a violation of the rules of international law guaranteeing, inter alia, the right to recognition as a person before the law, the right to liberty and security of the person and the right not to be subjected to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. It also violates or constitutes a grave threat to the right to life.”

2

International Law regards enforced disappearance as a crime, whose perpetrators are rarely held accountable, and a violation of the humanity of victims who are rarely released, leaving their fate unknown to families who continue to suffer. Forced disappearances are especially traumatising for women and children who bear the brunt of the abduction of fathers and husbands.

3

Many women and children face other types of sexual and physical

abuse following the disappearance of their male relatives. 4 Observers have long noted that these crimes often occur under dictatorial regimes seeking to suppress any form of opposition and demands for public freedoms and the protection of human rights.5 The International community has acknowledged the need for UN member states to adopt measures aimed at addressing these crimes. Each case of forced disappearance violates a number of human rights: • Right to security and dignity of person; • Right not to be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; • Right to humane conditions of detention; • Right to a legal personality; • Right to a fair trial; 1  See Amnesty International Report on Forced Disappearance and Impunity. 2  http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/47/a47r133.htm 3  Report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G09/177/04/PDF/G0917704.pdf?OpenElement 4  http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/G09/177/04/PDF/G0917704.pdf?OpenElement 5  Ibid


10

• Right to a family life; • Right to life (if the disappeared person is killed or their fate is unknown).

International Law and human rights agencies have listed a number of undertakings which should be respected to put an end of the crime of forced disappearance. These are: 1. Official condemnation of the crime of forced disappearance. 2. The existence of strict security orders that prohibit forced disappearances. 3. Making information about arrests and releases readily available. 4. The existence of mechanisms for the protection of prisoners. 5. Refraining from holding individual prisoners in secret locations. 6. Restricting detention and arrest orders to security officials. 7. Providing access to prisoners. 8. Enacting legislations that prohibit enforced disappearances. 9. Holding individuals accountable for this crime 10. Conducting immediate, effective and transparent investigation into incidences of forced disappearance. 11. Bringing those responsible to justice. 12. Providing victims with reparations and rehabilitation. 13. Ratifying human rights conventions. 14. Universal jurisdiction over these crimes. Those following the human rights situation in the UAE have observed that human rights abuses are rampant but the political ones, especially those related to freedom of expression, tend to be the most dominant. The UAE has also been the scene of many crimes prohibited by international law such as torture, human trafficking, and forced labour. The government also imposes many restrictions on the entry of human rights defenders into the country. This report examines UAE compliance with the fourteen undertakings mentioned above. Each one will be separately explored.


11

UAE COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOURTEEN UNDERTAKINGS AIMED AT ENDING FORCED DISAPPEARANCE First: Ratification of international agreements and international accountability All states are under an obligation to ratify international agreements that protect individuals from forced disappearance. These agreements and conventions include: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the optional protocol thereof, and the UN Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. Governments have a duty to comply with the provisions of both agreements and other international instruments, and to comply with international recommendations regarding any violations thereof. Governments should also do their utmost to act as mediators with the governments of countries where incidents of forced disappearance have been reported to ensure that that the army, police and other security apparatuses are not complicit in these acts of forced disappearance. No individual shall be extradited to a country where he could face the threat of forced disappearance. The UAE has ratified several UN human rights agreements: International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (1974), Convention on the Elimination of All forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) (2004), and Convention on the Rights of the Child (1997). 6 The UAE also ratified six international labour organisation agreements: Agreements number 29 and 105 on slavery and forced labour (1982 and 1997), agreements 100 and 111 on Equality and Discrimination in the workplace, (1997 and 2001), agreements number 182 and 183 on banning child labour (1998 and 2001). 7 The UAE announced that its ratification of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination excludes any recognition of Israel. It also made several reservations to CEDAW: • Article 2 (f) because it violates the rules of inheritance established in accordance with the precepts of the Shariah. • Article (9) because it considers the acquisition of nationality an internal matter which is governed by national legislation. 6  http://www.arabhumanrights.org/countries/country.aspx?cid=21 7  Ibid


12

• Article 15 (f) because it considers this paragraph in conflict with the precepts of the Shariah regarding legal capacity, testimony and the right to conclude contracts. • Article (16) because it considers that the payment of a dower and of support after divorce is an obligation of the husband, and the husband has the right to divorce, just as the wife has her independent financial security and her full rights to her property and is not required to pay her husband’s or her own expenses out of her own property. The Shariah makes a woman’s right to divorce conditional on a judicial decision, in a case in which she has been harmed. • Article 29 (1) which is related to submitting disputes over the interpretation of the convention to arbitration. Convention on the Rights of the Child also saw some adjustments. The UAE expressed reservations to: • Articles 7 (1) and 7 (2) related to the acquisition of nationality because it deems that a matter governed by national legislations • Article (14) on the freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs, restricting it to Islam. • Article (17) on the right of the child to have access to information and material from a diversity of national and international sources. • Article (21) which permits adoption (Islam does not permit adoption). The UAE has never joined or ratified any conventions or agreements related to forced disappearance. Although states have the right to make reservations about some international human rights agreements, they are, by virtue of being UN members, obliged to observe and protect human rights. Being UN members and ratifying international human rights agreements is legally binding for states and they must comply with the provisions thereof in accordance with article 26 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties which stipulates that: “Every treaty in force is binding upon the parties to it and must be performed by them in good faith.” 8

Second: Official condemnation The highest authority in the country must explicitly oppose and condemn without any reservations forced disappearances. It is also obliged to make it clear to members of its security apparatuses that it would never sanction forced disappearances nor allow anyone who commits these crimes to act with impunity. UAE officials’ statements have denied there had been any cases of forced disappearance in the country and have gone as far as attacking local and international human rights organisations that object to UAE security measures, including forced disappearance. 8  http://www.oas.org/legal/english/docs/Vienna%20Convention%20Treaties.htm


13

In the course of responding to an Amnesty International report entitled “There is no Freedom Here: Silencing Dissent in the United Arab Emirates” which tackled the issue of forced disappearance in the UAE, the president of the Civil Court in Dubai, judge Ahmed Yusuf, described the report as ‘unrealistic’ and criticised it for containing many false allegations with hidden agendas. “Laws have guaranteed freedom of expression as long as that does not break the law or infringe on the rights of others. In the 20 years I have worked as a lawyer and judge, no cases related to freedom of expression have ever been brought to trial. UAE judiciary is fair and transparent. Trials are open to the public and the media,” Yusuf remarked. He pointed out that the best response to the report was “UAE laws which protect the rights of individuals, adding that the Supreme Court and the Court of Cassation are responsible for ensuring that trials proceed according to the rule of the law and overturn verdicts which result from faulty proceedings. This reflects the stringent nature of our legal system in protecting the rights of all individuals, as opposed to the claims made by the Amnesty International report.” 9 President of the Court of Appeal in Sharjah, Ahmed Al-Mulla, made similar remarks and stressed that the constitution of the UAE guaranteed judicial independence. He added that judges enjoy complete freedom without undue influence from any party. He referred to the fact that UAE legislations guarantee justice for all, both nationals and foreign residents. Al-Mulla belittled the findings of the Amnesty International report and described it as a false representation of the reality on the ground. He stressed that trials in the UAE are held in public and that the law guaranteed the rights of defendants and their lawyers. Minister of state for federal national council affairs and minister of state for foreign affairs, Dr Anwar Bin Mohammed Qarqash, tweeted that the furor surrounding the list of terrorist organisations released by the UAE can be traced to organisations that support the Muslim Brotherhood and aim to incite hatred and encourage extremism. 10 Former UN special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Gabriela Knaul, called on the UAE to form a fact-finding mission to investigate allegations of torture, abuse and forced disappearance at UAE prisons, adding that the country should spare no effort in guaranteeing human rights. The UAE responded by sending a letter to Amnesty International on 30 October 2014 denying allegations that detainees had been tortured or disappeared in UAE prisons, and added that its positions are supported by the Emirates Human Rights Association (EHRA), which is closely linked to the UAE authorities. According to the latter, representations from EHRA visited prisons and found no evidence of human right abuses; a fact which they claimed was confirmed by the detainees whom they interviewed. 11

9  http://alkhaleej.ae/alkhaleej/page/4867b21e-d15d-432e-a870-acab139d5e04#sthash.gDgcympz.zshqwGXF.dpuf 10  Ibid 11  http://www.amnestymena.org/ar/magazine/ISSUE22/SilencingDissentEmirates.aspx?articleID=1159


14

Third: Prohibiting forced disappearances through local laws and legislations. It is incumbent upon governments to prevent forced disappearances from occurring and bring to justice those who commit these acts. The prohibition on forced disappearances should not be suspended under any circumstances, including war or any other emergency. Although there are no UAE laws or legislations that explicitly prohibit forced disappearances, a careful examination of the country’s laws reveals that UAE authorities often invoke certain laws to suppress freedom of expression and crackdown on the activities of civil society institutions, even those that violate the right to free speech. 12 Upon examining the UAE penal code, it becomes evident that several gaps in the law have made it easier for authorities to suppress dissent, imprison political opponents, and commit crimes such as forced disappearance. Article 47 UAE Law of Criminal Procedure stipulates that “The judicial officer should hear the statements of the accused immediately after his arrest, and if the accused does not present anything that substantiates his innocence, he should be sent to the relevant public prosecution within 48 hours. The Public Prosecution shall question him within 24 hours and then order either his arrest or release.” 13 Yet the UAE State Security Law which came into effect in 2003 grants state security officers wideranging powers to hold detainees in custody for extended periods without charges. Article 28 of the State Security law, when examined in conjunction with article 14, allows the director of state security to detain anyone for 106 days “if there exists probable cause that the individual is involved, among other things, in activities aimed at overthrowing the government, weakening national unity, or undermining the economy, or inciting hatred against the country.” 14 State Security Law is a breach of Article 14(6) of the Arab Charter on Human Rights which stipulates that “anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to petition a competent court in order that it may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his arrest or detention and order his release if the arrest or detention is unlawful.” 15 The State Security Law exposes individuals to the risk of being forcefully disappeared when being arrested by state security officials or those working under their supervision. The link between torture and forced disappearance has long been established by international law.

12 See UAE Penal Code 13  https://www.abudhabi.ae/portal/public/en/citizens/safety_and_environment/safety/gen_info26;jsessionid=Mml2V8 dJpgr6gBQ3SvgxGDzqYlTwMbdRLqwyQydJYvldcjk1fGt7!-1315418708!1727236276?docName=ADEGP_DF_302552_ EN&_adf.ctrl-state=13x9ypb8wg_4&_afrLoop=7896406246242592#%40%3FdocName%3DADEGP_DF_302552_EN%26_ afrLoop%3D7896406246242592%26_adf.ctrl-state%3D53l1nrr0q_4 14 http://www.hrw.org/ar/news/2015/03/11 15  https://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/loas2005.html


15

Fourth: Making information about arrests and releases available, not holding anyone in secret locations, and providing access and protection to prisoners. It is incumbent upon governments to ensure that prisoners be held at officially recognised detention centres and that no individual is held in secret. A record of all prisoners must be kept up to date and available to both lawyers and judges, as well as any official bodies that look for detained persons, and organisations concerned with the protection of detainees. This principle not only protects individuals against forced disappearance, but prevents other crimes such as torture. The latter is much more likely to occur in the cases where individuals were forcefully disappeared or held incommunicado in secret locations. The Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment called for a total ban on forced disappearance, adding that “torture is usually carried out while detainees are being held isolated from the outside world. It is, therefore, imperative to ban this kind of detention and release all those who are held without contact with the outside world. Laws must also guarantee that individuals be able to seek legal counsel within 24 hours of being held.� The Human Rights Committee concluded that forced disappearance violated Article 7 of the Convention Against Torture which prohibits torture and inhuman treatment, and Article 10 which guarantees the rights of persons deprived of their freedom. The committee added that states must introduce safeguards against forced disappearance, which would necessitate imposing great restrictions on this type of detention in view of the existence of laws that permit holding individuals without charges for 15 days in terror-related cases. Holding detainees incommunicado or in secret prisons has become the norm in the UAE, especially in cases of detainees opposed to the UAE government. Forced disappearances intensified following calls for political reforms that began in 2011. Letters leaked out of prisons spoke at length about torture and other forms of abuse against detainees held at secret prisons. Many detainees mentioned during the course of their trials that they had been tortured at state security centres.

Examples of cases of forced disappearance in the UAE: Asma, Mariam, and Al Yazzyah al-Suweidi were last seen on February 15, 2015, after authorities called them to a police station in Abu Dhabi. A reliable third party told Human Rights Watch that their mother subsequently received a telephone call from an Emirati official indicating they were in detention, which indicates they may have been subject to enforced disappearance. The three had posted comments criticising the UAE authorities’ unlawful imprisonment of Emirati dissidents, including their brother, Dr Issa al-Suweidi.


16

The day before her detention, Asma al-Suweidi posted a picture on her twitter account of some of the 69 Emiratis convicted in June 2013 of attempting to overthrow the government after an unfair trial dogged by credible allegations that some of the defendants were tortured while held incommunicado in pretrial detention. Dr al-Suweidi was among those convicted and is serving a 10-year sentence in Al Razan jail in Abu Dhabi. On February 5, 2015, Asma al-Suweidi tweeted (in Arabic): “I searched and I did not read in my brother’s case any reasonable argument leading to his isolation and imprisonment that is depriving him of life for 10 years.” Al Yazzyah al-Suweidi also regularly expressed her support for the detainees and her brother on her Twitter account. On January 30 she wrote (in Arabic): “They dismantled our brother … return him to us #Issa_Al_ Suweidi #UAE_detainees #innocent_people_behind_bars.” Mariam al-Suweidi appears to have been less active on social media than her sisters, but also used the hashtag #UAE_detainees in tweets referring to her brother’s detention. The three sisters were released three months after they were first forcefully disappeared. According to prominent human rights defender Ahmed Mansour, the three sisters were taken to their home on 15 May 2015.16 On 5 March 2014, UAE authorities released Jamal Al-Hosani after being forcefully disappeared for 4 months without charges. Al-Hosani was arrested on 4 November 2013 by State Security forces and taken to a secret location. 17 The wife of Ahmed Al-Ma’adawi, an Egyptian national, revealed that she and her father, Abdurahim Mohammed Yusuf, had headed to Abu Dhabi airport to see off her husband who was travelling to Turkey. Ahmed checked in and queued to have his passport stamped. A few minutes later he called his wife and told her he had been denied a departure visa and that he had been detained by airport authorities. The phone went dead as Ahmed was speaking to his wife and despite her attempts to call him several times, his mobile phone was switched off. She called airport security who told her he had left the country but Turkish Airlines told her he never boarded the flight to Istanbul that day. She went back the next day to enquire about her husband and a man from passport control told her that her husband had not been allowed to leave the country the day before because he was wanted by the authorities. She went to Abu Dhabi police who confirmed her husband was not allowed to leave the country because he was accused of breaching the conditions of his Kafala (sponsorship) by not leaving the country when his residency expired. His wife confirmed that his flight to Turkey was scheduled for two days before his residency was due to expire. 18 UAE abuse of human rights is also evidence in the case of the activist Dr Ahmed Ghaith Al-Suwaidi, one of the UAE “94 Defendants” and one of seven activisits whose UAE nationality was revoked in 2011. He 16 https://www.amnesty.org/ar/latest/news/2015/05/uae-three-sisters-released-after-three-months-in-secret-detention 17  See ICFR report about Human Rights in the UAE http://www.icfr.info/ar/8119 18  Al-Karama Institute for Human Rightshttp://ar.alkarama.org/emirates/item/4827-2014-08-03-16-04-57


17

pleaded with the judge to protect him and his family from State Security offices who had threatened him and his family with death. He revealed he was tortured and forced to sign a false confession that al-Islah had planned to overthrow the government. Al-Suwaidi was forcefully disappeared for a year before being charged. 19 In another case, Saud Kulaib, a member of al-Islah from Ras al-Khaimah Emirate who had posted messages on Twitter in support of those detained following the mass arrests, was himself arrested on 29 December 2012 and subjected to enforced disappearance until 27 May 2013 when he was moved to al-Sadr Prison in Abu Dhabi. From there, he told members of his family and other prisoners that security officials had beaten him, cut his hand with a razor blade, held him by turns in extremely hot and cold conditions, deprived him of sleep and threatened to pull out his fingernails. He said that the authorities also tried to break him down by misleading him into believing that his wife was also detained and on hunger strike. “I was suspended several times from the legs by an iron rod in an extremely painful position between two chairs, while my hands were tied with an iron chain, leaving marks that are still visible today. I was then severely beaten on the legs for more than half an hour. Next, cold water was poured over my head and body. At times my clothes were taken off, leaving only my under-shorts, to torture me in the manner already described,” Kulaib revealed. 20 The following are examples of detainees who had been forcefully disappeared at UAE prisons: • Saeed Al-Braimi, 42, was abducted on 5 March 2013 and sentenced to five years on 2 March 2014 after being held in a secret location for 9 months. • Abdulwahi Al-Badi, 32, was sentenced to five years on 2 March 2014 after being held in a secret location for 9 months. • Obaid Al-Za’abi, was arrested and later acquitted. He was arrested twice in June and December 2013. • Waleed Al-Shahi was detained on 11 May 2013 and sentenced to 3 years after being forecefully disappeared. • Saud Kulaib was arrested on 30 December 2012 and sentenced to 3 years in February 2014. • Othman Ibrahim Al-Shahi was arrested on 2 July 2013 and sentenced to 3 years on 10 March 2014. • Khalifa Rabiaa’ was arrested on 2 July 2013 and sentenced to 3 years on 10 March 2014. • Jamal Al-Hosani, 48, was abducted on 24 November 2013. No information has been available about him. • Omar Ibrahim Mahmoud, 17, abducted on 23 September 2013 and taken to an unknown location. • Abdulaziz Mubarak Al-Suwaidi, abducted on 23 September 2013 and taken to an unknown location. 19  http://www.amnestymena.org/ar/magazine/ISSUE22/SilencingDissentEmirates.aspx?articleID=1159 20  Ibid


18

• Saleh Mubarak Al-Suwaidi, abducted on 23 September 2013 and taken to an unknown location. • Suleiman Rashed Mohammed Al-Naqbi, abducted on 23 September 2013 and taken to an unknown location. • Khalid Rashed Mohammed Al-Naqbi, abducted on 23 September 2013 and taken to an unknown location. • Abdullah Al-Hilo, abducted on 23 April 2014, abducted and taken to an unknown location. • Badr Al-Bahri, abducted in April 2014 and taken to a secret location. • Ahmed Al-Mullah, abducted on 1 May 2014 and taken to a secret location. • Osama Al-Najjar, abducted on 17 March 2014 and is currently on trial after being held in a secret location for six months.

Fifth: Conducting immediate, effective and transparent investigations into cases of forced disappearance and brining those responsible to justice and compensating the victims. Governments are obliged to investigate all claims of forced disappearance. These transparent and immediate investigations should be carried out by independent commissions with proper recourses. The findings of these commissions should be made public. Victims, witnesses and lawyers must be protected from persecution and revenge. Investigations must not be concluded until the fate of victims has been determined. Governments are also obliged to bring those who commit the crime of forced disappearance to justice, regardless of the nationality of the perpetrators or victims. There should be no statute of limitation on this crime, nor should the criminals benefit from any legal measures that could protect them against prosecution. Victims of forced disappearance must be offered proper compensation and rehabilitation services. Despite many complaints of forced disappearance over the past two years, the UAE has failed to launch any investigations into complaints of forced disappearance of political opponents, many of whom had been held in secret locations. For example, many of the defendants in case 97 told the court that members of the State Security had tortured and abused them to force them to sign bogus confessions which they later retracted in court. Despite the seriousness of these claims, the judge refused to launch an investigation into these complaints. On 3 March 2014, State Security Court sentenced the Qatari national Dr Mahmoud Al-Jaidah to seven years for supporting al-Islah group which is banned in the UAE. Al-Jaidah had been arrested without a warrant at the airport on 26 February 2013 on his way from Thailand to Qatar where he worked as a


19

director at Qatar Petroleum. He was not allowed to contact his family until 8 March 2013 to inform them he was still in the UAE. During the trial, Al-Jaidah told the judge that he had been tortured - a claim echoed by many other political detainees appearing before the Supreme Federal Court - yet the judge chose not to order an investigation into the claims and accepted the confessions that were extracted under duress as proof of the defendants’ guild. Al-Jaidah was convicted in accordance with Article 180 of the Penal Code for allegedly offering financial aid to the families of members of al-Islah who were arrested in 2012. 21 On 3 February 2014, the Home Security Circuit at the Supreme Federal Court convicted Saud Kulaib to three years in accordance with the Cybercrime Law. Kulaib was convicted of purchasing data machines containing state secrets. He was not permitted to appeal the verdict. According to Amnesty International, the court refused to investigate Kuliab’s claims of torture. Amnesty announced that Kulaib should be regarded a prisoner of conscience and called for his immediate release. 22

Sixth: Individual criminal responsibility, banning forced disappearances and restricting detention orders to security forces. Senior officers in the chain of command who issue orders to disappear detainees must be held responsible for these actions. Only those legally authorised to detain individuals should carry out arrests. These offices must be trained to reveal the names of all officials who order the abduction and forced disappearance of detainees. They should also reject any orders to hold detainees in secret locations regardless of who is issuing these orders. All those involved in the arrest and detention of individuals must be aware of the fact that it is within their rights, if not duty, to disobey any order that could leed to the forced disappearance of a detainee. No order or instruction from any public authority, civilian, military or other, may be invoked to justify an offence of enforced disappearance. It is evident that enforced disappearance has become the norm in the UAE, with the full knowledge and complicity of both senior and junior officers, especially those working at detention centres. UAE authorities have ignored all the above principles and refused to investigate claims of torture. The following are some of the cases of forced disappearance documented in the UAE: 1. Former Judge Dr Ahmed Al-Zaabi was sentenced to 10 years, followed by a 3-year probation period. Al-Zaabai was tortured by State Security officers while being held incommunicado between April 2012 and 10 March 2013, including the period he was standing trial. Dr Al-Zaabi told human rights organisations that he was hung upside down and beaten up. His interrogation sessions would sometimes last 8 hours, during which he would be blindfolded while 21  Ibid 22  http://www.amnestymena.org/ar/magazine/ISSUE22/SilencingDissentEmirates.aspx?articleID=1159


20

interrogators plucked his hair and pulled off his nails. At one point, he noticed blood in his urine due to inflicted torture. He would often be deprived of sleep with very strong lights shining into his eyes. After a while, the stress took its toll and he began to hallucinate. His prescription glasses were taken away and he was left almost naked except for a small towel. Three months after he was arrested, Al-Zaabi was interrogated by a State Security officer in July 2012. “I was interrogated about al-Islah group and they tried to force me to sign statements I had not made. I was forced to sign and my fingerprints were taken. They also threatened to revoke my citizenship.” 2. On 16 May 2014, Abu Dhabi authorities arrested the German writer Jörg Albrecht after he was caught taking photos of the Iraqi and Iranian embassies while he was exploring the city. Albrecht was beaten up and tortured. Upon his return to Germany, he gave interviews in which he spoke about his experience in detention and how he was banned from travelling. 23 3. On 29 August 2014, at least 30 Libyan nationals were arrested in the UAE, including an Al-Jazeera employee. A source close to two of the men arrested identified them as Salim al-Aradi and Mohamed al-Aradi. The source told Middle East Eye that the men were both businessmen who had been residing in the UAE for more than 10 years and that their arrest was “obviously to do with political grudges,” although they both held “no political positions.” The UAE did not confirm the arrests or provide an explanation. The Libyan ambassador in the UAE said that he had been in touch with authorities in Dubai and Abu Dhabi, and confirmed that the prisoners are safe and well. 4. In the case known as the “Emirates 94”, letters were leaked from inside the prison and published by Amnesty International and other human rights organisations detailing the abuses and torture in prison. 5. Twenty-two of the 94 trial defendants provided further information about their alleged torture and other ill-treatment in handwritten letters that they smuggled out of detention and passed to Amnesty International and other international human rights organisations in June 2013, shortly before their trial concluded on 2 July 2013. All 22 said they had been held in solitary confinement in cells that were kept brightly lit, both day and night, making sleep difficult; 16 of the 22 complained that they had been exposed to temperature extremes and were blindfolded during interrogations. Some detainees described being beaten with plastic tubes and said their interrogators had threatened to use electric shock torture against them, while others described being insulted and humiliated and hearing muffled screams, suggesting the torture of other detainees. During the trial, no less than 71 of the defendants complained that they had been subjected to torture and other ill-treatment during lengthy periods of incommunicado detention by State 23  http://www.icfr.info/ar/8119


21

Security. In its letter to Amnesty International dated 30 October 2014, the government denied that detainees had been subjected to torture and other ill-treatment and claimed that this had been confirmed by the Emirates Human Rights Association (EHRA), which has close links to the authorities, whose representatives had been allowed to visit them in detention and had “not only found no evidence of any mistreatment, but were also assured by the overwhelming majority of the accused themselves that they had not been subjected to any such mistreatment.� Similar allegations of torture and other ill-treatment in pre-trial detention to those made by the UAE 94 trial defendants were made by some of the Egyptians accused in the trial of 10 UAE nationals and 20 Egyptians that began before the State Security Chamber of the Federal Supreme Court on 5 November 2013. In handwritten letters handed to a defence lawyer in September 2013 after they had been moved out of secret detention and into al-Wathba Prison in Abu Dhabi, seven of the Egyptian detainees described the torture and ill-treatment to which they had been subjected by the State Security in secret detention. They said they had been beaten on their heads and all over their bodies with a wooden stick; forced to sit in an electric chair and subjected to electric shock to different parts of their bodies; continuously slapped and punched in the face; hung from different parts of their bodies with metal chains and cuffs; forced to hold stress positions for long periods; and subjected to extreme temperatures. The letters also said they had been interrogated while blindfolded with their hands and feet bound and while tied to a chair; held in solitary confinement for prolonged periods in undisclosed locations; and subjected to humiliating treatment including being forced to kneel on the ground while being beaten with a stick on their backs and buttocks. The detainees said interrogators had also made various threats against them including threatening to kill or rape them with instruments; infect them with HIV; falsely accuse them of being terrorists or spies; delete their children’s education records; and hold them in solitary confinement for 25 years. 6. On 11 February 2014, the families of six Emirati nationals held at Al-Razeen prison confirmed that their relatives were kept in solitary confinement without food or drink to punish them for inquiring why they could not contact their lawyers or family members. The six activists are: Ali Al-Khaja, Fahd Al-Hajiri, Abdullah Al-Hajiri, Hadef Al-Awis, Abdurahman Al-Hadidi, and Saif Al-Ajla. When the six men were brought breakfast and they refused to eat it because they were fasting, prison officials proceeded to beat them up dislocating the shoulder of one of them and injuring the hand of another. Once they were out of solitary confinement after the evening prayers, prison officials sent more than 30 Nepalese prison guards to take them back to solitary conferment without giving them reasons.


22

Conclusions The report has offered an overview of the crimes of forced disappearances, which has become systematic and rampant in the UAE. Authorities have sanctioned the abduction of political detainees and protected those who carry out this crime in a flagrant disregard for international laws and conventions.


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.