In the face of repression by Walaa Ramadan

BEHIND THE WALLS OF SILENCE THE CRIME OF ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCE IN

IN THE FACE OF REPRESSION HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS IN THE UAE International Coalition for Freedoms and Rights

CONTENTS Executive summary....................................................................................................... 7 Introduction................................................................................................................. 8 The important role of human rights defenders............................................................. 10 Human rights defenders in the UAE ........................................................................... 12 Abuses against human rights defenders in the UAE....................................................... 14 Some examples of crimes committed against human rights defenders in the UAE........ 16 The UAE 94 Case........................................................................................................،،، 16 Arbitrary detention and unfair trial of Professor and Lawyer Mohammad al-Roken..... 22 Arbitrary detention of Dr Nasser bin Ghaith................................................................. 23 Torture, arbitrary detention and unfair trial of Dr Ahmad al-Zaabi............................... 23 Unfair trial of Nasser al-Faresi al-Junaibi..................................................................... 24 Arbitrary detention of Omani blogger and author Mu’awiyah al-Rawahi..................... 24 Arbitrary detention and unfair trials of activist Osama al-Najjar.................................. 25 Arbitrary detention and unfair trials of human rights activist Abdullah al-Hadidi......... 26 Arbitrary detention of human rights activist Obaid Yousef al-Zaabi.............................. 27 Conclusion.................................................................................................................. 29

Executive summary The International Coalition for Freedoms and Rights (ICFR) releases its second report on the situation of human rights defenders in the Arab World (Saudi Arabia â&#x20AC;&#x201C; UAE â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Egypt). The report functions as a model which reviews the rights of individuals who have been granted immunity and due importance by the global community, enabling them to deliver their message of awakening the people and emboldening them to rise up against the repression of authorities on human rights and freedoms. The existence of human rights defenders in itself depends upon being able to enjoy certain rights which would empower them to carry out their activism in order to promote and strengthen the freedoms of people. Among these rights are the right to freedom of expression, the right to assembly and the right to form associations. Unfortunately, some nations in the Arab World, including the UAE, have placed heavy restrictions upon these rights and in certain cases have denied them completely. Consequently, human rights activists in the Arab World in general, and particularly in the UAE, have been suffering from the violation of those very rights which they seek to defend. This report attempts to illustrate the reality being experienced by human rights activists and seekers of political reforms in the United Arab Emirates through examples of real life situations; and through discussion of the legalities and security conditions they currently endure. This is to shed light on the repressions and violations of rights which are being committed upon these activists. â&#x20AC;&#x192;

Introduction The call for ‘freedom of opinion and expression’; ‘political and legal reforms’; and ‘civil, political, economic and social rights’ is a call towards claiming fundamental and indispensable rights which should be freely available to everyone. These rights can never be sustained or enforced without the existence of certain individuals who would bear the flag-post of ‘rights’ and carry the responsibility of spreading these rights on their shoulders. They would demand the authorities and rulers of their countries to abide by and/ or grant these rights; and in this context, the importance of the existence of human rights defenders is justified and exemplified. Thus, based on the aforesaid premise, it is imperative that the growth of human rights be disseminated widely throughout the world so that freedom and equality is made available to all, keeping in mind that the foundations of human rights are based on respect and dignity of human life. The exercise of freedom cannot be carried out seriously if certain conditions are not put in place, including but not limited to: guarantees on the freedom of expression, tolerance and respect for political, cultural and ideological pluralism; the provision of the right to information and data of interest to citizens concerning the state of public affairs; the right to access audio-visual media along with the provision of a public service in this regard; and combating the exhaustive monopoly of press and media imposed by financial and political groups. ICFR attempts to shed light, through this report, on the problems faced by defenders of human rights in the UAE due to the repression which is carried out against them in the form of abuses and transgressions, which compromise these defenders and their families’ well-being. The report begins by explaining the important role played by human rights defenders in accordance with international agreements and conventions, especially the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognised Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The report also discloses the legal and legislative atmosphere in which defenders of human rights function and which the state of the UAE depends upon in order to carry out its arbitrary acts against activists, politicians and advocates of human rights. The methods employed by Emirati security authorities for silencing public opinion and restricting the freedoms of human rights defenders in the country vary between: carrying out abrupt arrests and enforced disappearances; revoking nationalities; imposing laws to combat cyber-crime; litigating cases in Federal court which are not subject to appeal; freezing assets and imposing restrictions upon detainees’ families;

imposing travel bans; prosecuting immigrants; authorising the delivery of justice to security agencies; extracting forced confessions under duress; and denying a detaineeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s right to legal counsel. Lastly, the report provides examples of crimes which have been committed against defenders of human rights and their families in the UAE since the Emirati authorities have declared war upon them, the casus belli of which was the demands witnessed by the country for human rights and political reform.

The important role of human rights defenders Over the past two decades, there has been a growing acknowledgement of the importance of human rights defenders as elements of change and the importance of protecting their rights for the purpose of enabling them to carry out their duties in a secure and active manner. In 1990, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the declaration on Human Rights Defenders. 1 Since then, countries have established several international, regional and national mechanisms in order to protect human rights defenders. Human rights defenders view the world and carry out their functions in many different ways. Each individual defender has their own unique way of reacting to threats. They possess different levels of flexibility and endurance and they have their own way of dealing with fatigue and stress. Each defender develops a different mechanism to adapt to personal and sociological adjustments and each has a different understanding of risks and dangers – where all their understanding is gleaned through social and cultural standards and values. Indeed, they are unique individuals. The existence of human rights defenders in itself depends upon being able to enjoy certain rights which would enable members to carry out their activism in order to promote and strengthen the freedoms of people. Among these rights are the right to freedom of expression, the right to assembly and the right to form associations. Unfortunately, some nations in the Middle East and North Africa have placed heavy restrictions upon these rights and in some cases have denied them completely. Consequently, human rights activists in the Arab World in general, and particularly in the UAE, have been suffering from the violation of those very rights which they seek to defend. Some of the human rights organisations established in the region to promote freedom of association and other fundamental rights have been raided and closed down by the authorities, and their members have been threatened and prosecuted. Meanwhile, activists and journalists who seek to publicise human rights abuses and demand political and social reform face an array of repressive measures intended to silence them for exercising their right to freedom of expression. Lawyers who try to uphold the rights of their clients not to be tortured or arbitrarily detained, to have access to legal counsel and to receive fair trials, often find themselves victimised by similar abuses. People who demonstrate peacefully in support of demands for improved rights for women, workers and minority communities risk arrest, imprisonment, beatings or even assassination by government security forces simply for exercising their right to freedom of assembly2. 1 Its official name is ‘ Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; see http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/arab/hrdef.html, last visit: 29 Aug, 2015 2 See Amnesty International Report ‘Facing Repression: Human Rights Defenders in the Middle East and North Africa’

In the context of encouraging the important role of ‘individuals, groups and associations in contributing to the effective elimination of all violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms of peoples and individuals’3 and acknowledging the ‘right and the responsibility of individuals, groups and associations to promote respect for and foster knowledge of human rights and fundamental freedoms at the national and international levels’ 4, the United Nations issued a declaration on human rights defenders in December, 1998 which was called, “The Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognised Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms”. It contained 20 articles pertaining to the various roles of human rights defenders which included: ‘the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the right to form associations, the right to assembly, the right to protest, the right to obtain financial aid, the right to have access to and communicate with international bodies, the right to protection, the right to benefit from an effective remedy and the right to develop and discuss new human rights ideas and principles and to advocate their acceptance5.’ The Human Rights Council reiterates ‘the grave concerns expressed by the General Assembly in its resolution 66/164 with regard to the serious nature of risks faced by human rights defenders due to threats, attacks and acts of intimidation against them’, ‘the cause of such concern also being that in some instances, national security and counter-terrorism legislation and other measures, such as laws regulating civil society organisations, have been misused to target human rights defenders or have hindered their work and endangered their safety in a manner contrary to international law.’ ‘The council also recognises the urgent need to address, and to take concrete steps to prevent and stop the use of legislation to hinder or limit unduly the ability of human rights defenders to exercise their work.’ The Human Rights Council adopted its resolution 6/22 for the protection of human rights defenders which ‘Stresses that legislation affecting the activities of human rights defenders and its application must be consistent with international human rights law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and guided by the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognised Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and, in this regard, condemns the imposition of any limitations on the work and activities of human rights defenders enforced in contravention of international human rights law.’

3 Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognised Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, adopted by General Assembly resolution 53/144 of 9 December 1998 and included in the list of international acts adopted by the United Nations for Human Rights, page 2 4 http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/53/144&referer=http://www.un.org/depts/dhl/resguide/r53_ en.shtml&Lang=A 5 Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council, 22/6, Protecting human rights defenders, 12 April 2013, www. humanrightshouse.org/noop/file.php?id=20007

Human rights defenders in the UAE A document which was signed by Emirati activists and human rights advocates was submitted on 9 March 2011 to the leader of the state al-Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan demanding the election of all members of the UAE Federal National Council through direct vote in addition to strengthening the powers of this body which currently holds no legislative or regulatory authority6. The petitioners, 133 of them, who come from various ideological backgrounds, asserted their adherence to the system of government in the UAE in the petition which was sent to the president and was also posted on the internet. They indicated towards the presence of ‘a complete harmony between the leadership and the people’ and that ‘participation in the decision-making process is considered to be a part of the traditions and customs of this country7.’ Most of the petitioners were academics, journalists and human rights activists who demanded the ‘election of all members of the Federal National Council through universal suffrage similar to what is followed by all democratic nations across the world.’ The group demanded reform of legislation governing the work of parliament to include legislative and monitoring authorities and called for necessary constitutional amendments to ensure this. The petitioners stressed upon the fact that they are sending this petition to the leader of the state considering an urgent need to develop a process for national participation in light of escalating international and regional developments, according to them, in an apparent indication towards protests for change and reform currently taking place in Middle Eastern states8. This did not go down well with the Emirati authorities who, since then, have remained committed to launch unprecedented repressive attacks against demonstrations in the country; their first target being those who had put forth demands for reform. Scores of arrests and detentions have taken place and detainees have been subjected to enforced disappearances, torture and various other types of ill-treatment. Grossly unfair trials have been conducted and long prison sentences have been imposed on government critics, and there has been continuous harassment and persecution of their families. In some cases, authorities have arbitrarily withdrawn individuals’ UAE citizenship, depriving them of the rights and privileges associated with that status in the UAE and rendering them stateless. They have also exiled two activists and deported a number of foreign journalists. In other cases, authorities have banned 6 See Aljazeera.net, Emiratis demanding election of parliament http://goo.gl/Op8R10, last visit: 12 September, 2015 7 See UAE Protests, Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia https://goo.gl/yb9fh2, last visit: 12 September, 2015 8 Ibid

individuals from traveling abroad or harassed them through other means, such as the cancellation of their personal bank accounts, terminating their employment or hindering university studies9. They have subjected some critics and reformists to oppressive surveillance, or publicly denigrated them as ‘Islamists’ in smear campaigns in the local media and on social media platforms that aim to delegitimise their calls for political accountability and reform. The government has also introduced new ‘cybercrimes’ legislation to penalise criticism and dissent, and a repressive new anti-terrorism law that can be used to imprison peaceful activists10. More than 100 peaceful activists and critics of the government have been prosecuted or jailed on broad and sweeping national security-related or ‘cybercrimes’ charges in the UAE since the current crackdown began in 2011. As of November 2014, at least 76 of these activists remain in prison11.

9 See Amnesty International Report ‘There is no freedom here – Silencing Dissent in the UAE’, https://www.amnesty.org/ download/.../MDE2500182014ARABIC.pdf, last visit: 12 September, 2015 10 Ibid 11 Ibid

Abuses against human rights defenders in the UAE While we are in the midst of discussing the atmosphere under which human rights defenders, journalists, lawyers and other groups which defend human rights function, it is imperative that we clarify the judicial environment within which these persons operate, and how the state of the UAE carries out its arbitrary violations against human rights activists and seekers of political reform. The methods employed by Emirati security authorities in order to silence public opinion and restrict the freedoms of human rights defenders in the country vary between carrying out arbitrary arrests and enforced disappearances, revoking nationalities, imposing laws to combat cyber-crime, litigating cases in Federal court which are not subject to appeal, freezing assets and imposing restrictions upon detainees’ families, imposing travel bans, prosecuting immigrants, authorising the delivery of justice to security agencies, extracting forced confessions under duress and denying a detainee’s right to legal counsel. This is despite Article 30 of the constitution of the UAE stipulating that, ‘Freedom of opinion and expressing it verbally, in writing or by other means of expression shall be guaranteed within the limits of law.’

Similarly, the state of UAE has ratified the Arab Charter on Human Rights which stipulates

in Article 32, ‘The present Charter guarantees the right to information and to freedom of opinion and expression, as well as the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any medium, regardless of geographical boundaries.13’ The exception here is that this fundamental deposition to respect the freedom of expression bears no impact upon the daily lives of citizens despite the constitution guaranteeing such freedoms, because the government of the UAE uses legislative, judicial and executive authorities to restrict the exercise of these rights upon its citizens. Similarly, Emirati authorities habitually use such provisions which are in conflict with human rights. These include the UAE penal law which is applied throughout the country in order to cover up the grave violations being committed against the freedom of opinion and expression; and in order to subject activists and human rights defenders to unfair trials so that they can be forever hidden inside the country’s prisons. Article 176 of the UAE Penal Code says: “Any person who insults by any means of publicity the President of the State, its flag or its national emblem shall be punishable by confinement.” The aforementioned 12 See Constitution of the UAE http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/arab/a003 13 See Arab Charter on Human Rights, http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/arab/a003

text has outlined an extremely vague picture of the word ‘insult’. It has failed to define this term and has effectively unleashed the scope of the judiciary to sentence anyone who criticises the leadership of the country to prison by perceiving his criticism to be a public insult of the president which is criminalised by law. Likewise, Article 8 of the same law opens the door to punish anyone who publicly insults the state vice-president, members of the federal supreme council, their crown princes and deputies14. Similarly, Article 180 of the UAE Penal Code stipulates that, “A punishment of temporary imprisonment shall be inflicted on any person who institutes, founds, organises or administers a society, corporation, association, organisation, group, gang, or a subsidiary thereof of whatever name, aiming at overthrowing, seizing, or opposing the basic principles supporting the government regime in the State, or publicising it where the use of force is noticeable.” 15 Article 197 states, “Shall be punishable by confinement any individual who instigates another person, by any means of publicity, to refrain from complying with the laws.” 16 All these laws have vague meanings and terminology; and despite that, the UAE security apparatus didn’t find them powerful enough to be used against human rights defenders. Instead, they resorted to withdrawing the nationalities of certain reformists, political activists and advocates of human rights. Any decision to withdraw nationalities is in violation of Article 15 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Article 29 of the Arab Charter on Human Rights, both of which prohibit the arbitrary withdrawal of an individual’s nationality. Despite this, UAE authorities have issued an order withdrawing nationalities of seven prominent citizens who are members of the UAE Reform Society after they called upon the state to initiate political reforms in the UAE. The seven citizens are: Ali Husain al-Hamadi, Shaheen Abdullah al-Husaini, the two brothers Hasan and Husain Munaif al-Jabiri, Ibrahim Hasan al-Marzuqi, Mohammad Abdul Razzaq al-Siddiq and Ahmad Ghaith al-Suwaidi. The order was issued through presidential decree by al-Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan on 4 December, 2011. The decree was numbered 2/1/7875 and it accused the seven individuals of executing actions which were considered to be a threat to the security and well-being of the state; and that they committed acts which undermined the security of the state through their connections with suspicious regional and international persons and organisations. 17

14 See UAE Penal Code, http://www.genderclearinghouse.org/upload/Assets/Documents/pdf/penalcode-emirat-ar.pdf 15 Ibid 16 Ibid 17 See UAE Penal code, a cover for human rights violations, Noon Post website, http://noonpost.net/content/6785, last visit: 12 September, 2015

Some examples of crimes committed against human rights defenders in the UAE The UAE 94 Case The UAE 94 Case is among the most prominent cases in the UAE. The case was principally directed towards human rights defenders and seekers of political and constitutional reforms. It began on 4 March 2014 wherein 94 accused individuals were brought before the State Security Chamber of the Federal Supreme Court. Eight among them were charged and tried in absentia. In this mass trial, the authorities accused the defendants of “establishing an organisation that aimed to overthrow the government”, a charge which they all denied. 18 It has been pointed out that this trial failed to meet international standards for a fair trial and was a subject of broad condemnation by human rights organisations and United Nation bodies, including the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. The court accepted prosecution evidence that consisted largely of ‘confessions’ made by defendants while they were in pre-trial detention. The court failed to require, before the admission of such evidence, that the prosecution prove beyond reasonable doubt that the ‘confessions’ were obtained by lawful means and voluntarily from the accused. The court also failed to take steps to investigate, or order a prompt, independent, impartial and thorough investigation of the defendants’ claims that State Security interrogators had forced them under torture or other ill-treatment, to make false ‘confessions’ incriminating themselves and others during months when they were held incommunicado in secret locations and without access to lawyers or the outside world. The defendants were also denied a right of appeal to a higher tribunal; under UAE law, Federal Supreme Court judgements are final and not subject to appeal. 19 During the trial, the authorities took steps to prevent independent reporting of the proceedings. International media and independent trial observers were not permitted access to the court. Security authorities refused to allow an independent trial observer delegated by Amnesty International entry to the UAE immediately prior to the opening of the trial. Two independent observers sent by the International Commission of Jurists were turned away by plain-clothed security officials before they reached the Federal Supreme Court building. Another international observer mandated by the International Federation for Human Rights, the Gulf Center for Human Rights, the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, and the 18 See report of New Khalij on the UAE 94 case, http://www.thenewkhalij.com/ar/node/10846, last visit: 12 September, 2015 19 See United Arab Emirates: Stop the charade and release activists convicted at the mass UAE94 trial, article from The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, http://anhri.net/?p=141614&lang=en, last visit: 12 September, 2015

Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, was also denied access to the final trial hearing on 2 July, 2013, despite an earlier indication by the UAE authorities that she would be allowed to attend. Those who were permitted to attend were harassed, detained or imprisoned after they criticised the proceedings and publicised torture allegations made by the defendants on the social media platform, Twitter. 20 In November 2013, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention issued an opinion on the UAE 94 case, concluding that the UAE government had deprived the defendants of their right to a fair trial, enshrined in Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found that the arrest and detention of the individuals had resulted from the exercise of their rights to freedom of opinion and expression and to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, guaranteed under articles 19 and 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, stating that the restrictions on those rights could not be considered to be proportionate and justified. It declared the arrest and detention of the 61 defendants who were imprisoned following the mass trial to be arbitrary, and called on the UAE authorities to release them and afford them appropriate reparation. 21 On 2 July 2013, the court convicted 69 of the 94 accused, including the eight tried in absentia and acquitted 25. The court awarded prison terms ranging between seven and 15 years to many well-known figures, including activists and human rights advocates. Others convicted at the trial include seven activists, known as the ‘UAE 7’ who had their citizenship arbitrarily withdrawn in 2011 and were asked to leave the country. Below are the details of the verdict: 22 In absentia, all of the following were sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment: 1.

Mohammed Saqr Yousef Al Zaabi

Abdulrahman Khalifa Salim bin Subaih

Saeed Nasser Saeed Nasser Al Tenaiji

Mohammed Jassem Mohammed Darwish Al Nuaimi

Ahmed Mohammed Abdullah Mohamed Al Shaiba

Hamad Mohammed Rahma Obeid Al Shamsi

Khalaf Abdulrehman Al Rumaithi

Jassim Rashid Al Shamsi

20 Ibid 21 See United Nations General Assembly, Human Rights Council, Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions, recommendations of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions in its 68th session (13-22 November, 2013) 60/UN Doc A/HRC/WGAD/2013 22 See details of verdict of the UAE 94 Case in al-Ittihad newspaper, http://www.alittihad.ae/details.php?id=63410&y=2013, last visit: 12 September, 2015

In praesentia, the following were sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment, followed by three years’ probation after the expiry of imprisonment: 1.

Sultan bin Kayed Mohammed Al Qassimi

Mohammed Ali Saleh Al Mansour Al Mansouri

Rashid Omran Ali Obaid Al Shamsi

Hussain Ali Abdullah Al Najjar Al Hammadi

Hassan Mohammed Hassan Ahmed Al Hammadi

Ahmed Ghaith Ahmad Ghaith Al Suwaidi

Ali Hussain Ahmed Ali Al Hammadi

Ali Saeed Mohammed Hassan Al Kindi

Khaled Mohammed Abdullah Al Shaiba Al Nuaimi

10.

Saif Mohammed Ali Al Ajla Al Ali

11.

Abdulsalam Mohammed Dawrish Al Ali

12.

Hamad Hassan Ali Ruqait

13.

Mohammed Abdulrazzaq Mohammed Al Siddiq Al Obaidali

14.

Hadef Rashid Abdullah Al Owais

15.

Abdullah Naseeb Karama Al Jaberi

16.

Fouad Mohammed Abdullah Hassan Al Hammadi

17.

Hussain Muneef Al Jaberi

18.

Ahmed Saif Kalf Saleh Al Matri

19.

Mohammad Abdullah Al Roken

20.

Abdul Rahim Mohammad Abdul Rahman Al Zarouni

21.

Issa Khalifa Ahmed Saif Al Al Suwaidi

22.

Juma Saeed Juma bin Darwish Al Falasi

23.

Misbah Darwish Juma bin Kadas Al Rumaithi

24.

Shaheen Abdullah Mall’allah Al Hosani

25.

Saif Mohammad Saif Mohammad Al Attar Al Dhanhani

26.

Ahmed Yusuf Abdullah Bu’atabi Al Za’abi

27.

Khalifa Hilal Khalifa Hilal Al Neiami

28.

Khalid Fazal Ahmed Jasim

29.

Salim Ali Salman Hamdoon Al Shehhi

30.

Saleh Mohammad Saleh Al Dhafeeri

31.

Salim Abdullah Rashid Sahoo Al Suwaidi

32.

Khalid Mohammad Yusuf Salim Rashid Al Yammahi

33.

Ahmed Rashid Ibrahim Al Taboor Al Nuaimi

34.

Saeed Nasir Saeed Usman Al Wahidi

35.

Ali Abdullah Mahdi Saleh

36.

Abdul Aziz Ali Saeed Harib

37.

Ibrahim Ismael Ibrahim Al Yaqoot

38.

Ahmed Saqr Mohammad Obaid Al Suwaidi

39.

Tariq Hassan Abdullah Al Qattan Al Harmoodi

40.

Rashid Khalfan Obaid Sabt Al Ali

41.

Tariq Ibrahim Abdulrahim Al Qasim

42.

Abdulrahman Ahmed Mohammad Al Hadidi Al Ali

43.

Eisa Ma’adad Abdullah Al Seri Al Muhairi

44.

Salim Mosa Farhan Al Halyan

45.

Ali Salim Mohammad Al Ghawas Al Za’abi

46.

Ali Abdullah Fath Ali Al Khaja

47.

Ahmed Hajji Sakher Al Qubaisi

48.

Ahmed Hassan Mohammad Al Rustamani

49.

Ahmed Kunaid Al Muhairi

50.

Ismail Abdullah Mallallah Al Hosani

51.

Abdulrahem Abdullah Abdul Kareem Naqi Al Bastaki

52.

Mohammed Saeed Mohammed Thiyab Al Abdouli

53.

Ibrahim Hasan Ali Al Marzouqi

54.

Hasan Munif Al Jaberi

55.

Najeeb Ahmad Abdullah Ahmad Amiri

56.

Ali Mohammed bin Hajr Al Shehhi

In praesentia, the following were sentenced to 7 years’ imprisonment: 1.

Omran Ali Hasan Al Radhwan Al Harthi

Mahmoud Hasan Mahmoud Ahmad Al Hosani

Abdullah Abdul Qader Ahmad Ali Al Hajiri

Mansour Hasan Ahmed Al Ahmadi

Fahd Abdul Qader Ahmed Ali Al Hajiri

In praesentia, all of the following were pronounced not guilty: 1.

Khamis Saeed Ali Saeed Alsam Al Zeioudi

Ahmed Awad Yaslam Salem Al Sharqi

Amina Sultan Abdullah Al Nuaimi

Mariam Mohamed Saleh Mohammed Al Zaferi

Hoda Khalfan bin Kamel Al Nuaimi

Mohammed Abdullah Mohammed Rashed Abdan Al Naqbi

Jamal Awad Yaslam Salem Al Sharqi

Adnan Abdulkarim Mohamed Jalfar

Ali Humaid Ali Rashed Al Nuaimi

10.

Bader Abdulrahman Abdullah Hussein Al Hammadi

11.

Fatima Obaid Al Salaqi

12.

Majida Fares Abdulrazeq Al Fares Al Shammari

13.

Hessa Mohammed Saleh Mohammed Al Dhafeer

14.

Fatima Hassan Mohammed Al Za’abi

15.

Najiba Mohammed Hassan Al Hosani

16.

Naeema Mohammed Yehia Abdullah

17.

Jamila Salem Obaid Al Tarifi Al Shamsi

18.

Hadya Mohammed Abdul Aziz Al Sayed

19.

Naeema Ali Hassan Abdullah Al Marzouqi

20.

Rashid Mohammed Abdullah Al Roken

21.

Tawfiq Youssef Al Shaikh Abdullah Al Mubarak

22.

Adel Ahmed Abdul Kareem Al Zarouni

23.

Mohammed Abdullah Al Sha’ami

24.

Ahmed Mohammed Saleh Abdullah Al Hammadi

25.

Najeeba Abdullah Ahmed Youssef Al Hashemi

It was further ordered by the court that the following properties should be confiscated: 1. An amount of 290,000 dirhams to be seized from the treasury located in the home of the accused, Salem Abdullah Rashid Sahoo Al Suwaidi. 2. An amount of 100,000 dirhams to be seized from the Taibah Company for Haj and Umrah in Sharjah, in the account of Issa Ma’adad Al Sarri Al Muhairi. 3.

20% of the capital of Al Salam English Private School in Abu Dhabi.

4. One million and one hundred thousand dirhams from the equity of Manazil Construction Company. 5.

Al Khatem Farm, North, No. 97, owned by Ahmed Mohammed Kaneed Al Muhairi.

Residential and Commercial Building No. 1875 in Muwaileh area, Sharjah, Plot No. 1443.

Commercial Building No. 2206 at Muwaileh area, Sharjah, Plot No. 804.

One million dirhams from Ahmed Hassan Mohammed Al Rustumani.

Devices and tools used in the crime.

10.

Closure of the following a. Al Aqel al Zaki Centre b. Al Usrah al Saeeda Centre. c. Manarat Educational Consultancy MEC in Ajman. d. Websites: i. Emirates Media & Studies Center (EMASC). ii. The Seven Emiratis website. iii. watanserb.com (Watan Yugharedo Khareja al-Serb) iv. aleslaah.net (Da’wat Al Eslah) v. www.yanabeea.net Yanabe’a Tarbawiya (educational springs).

Arbitrary detention and unfair trial of professor and lawyer Mohammad al-Roken Mohammad al-Roken is a leading human rights lawyer who provides legal assistance to victims of human rights abuses in the UAE, including fellow human rights defenders. Among the cases he has recently defended is the ‘UAE 5’ case wherein he defended human rights defenders who were convicted and sentenced to prison by a UAE court for their human rights activism in November 2011. They were subsequently released as a result of a presidential pardon. Mohammad al-Roken was among those who attended a human rights defenders summit in Dublin organised by Front Line Defenders in 2003. He was arrested again on 17 July 2012 despite receiving a presidential pardon earlier; and was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment in the mass-trial famously known as the UAE 94 case. While in detention, Dr Mohammad al-Roken was denied several basic rights like access to his lawyer. Additionally, it has been reported that he was psychologically intimidated by prison authorities. In 2014, Dr Mohammad was nominated for the 2014 Front Line Defenders Award for Human Rights Defenders at Risk. 23 23 See report of Front Line Defenders on Dr. Mohammad al-Roken, https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/ar/MohamedAl-Roken,

Arbitrary detention of Dr Nasser bin Ghaith UAE security forces arrested Dr Nasser bin Ghaith al-Marri, an international economic affairs expert on 18 August 2015, owing to a tweet he posted on the micro-blogging website Twitter. Dr Ghaith was arrested from his house because of a tweet posted on his Twitter account opposing Abu Dhabi government’s decision of giving a piece of land to Hindus for building a temple. In a separate tweet, he published a picture of a Buddhist temple where an Emirati is seen to be practicing their rituals with them and commented that: “Apparently, our society wrongly understands tolerance between religions.” Nasser bin Ghaith is an academic who has a Ph.D. in law. He specialised in international commerce and international economic law from the United Kingdom in 2007. He was previously arrested in 2011 in case no. 313/2011 (state security) after his house was raided by state security agents on the pretext of insulting the crown prince of Abu Dhabi through his commentary on online forums. 24

Torture, arbitrary detention and unfair trial of Dr Ahmad al-Zaabi Among other cases which have objectified the ubiquity of violations is that of former judge Dr Ahmad alZaabi. Al-Zaabi was sentenced to 10 years in prison followed by three years probation. He was tortured by state security officers while detained incommunicado and remained without access to legal counsel between 17 April 2012 and 10 March 2013 after the trial had already begun. He said that on or about 18 April 2012, security officials had hung him upside down and beat him on the soles of his feet until they became swollen, and on his body, causing extensive bruising. He said he was repeatedly questioned for up to eight hours at a time while blindfolded and that interrogators tore hair from his head and pulled out his fingernails. At one stage, he said he had seen blood in his urine, apparently due to the intensity of the beatings inflicted on him. He said he was deprived of sleep for long periods, with bright lights kept constantly shining in his cell, placing him under extreme stress and causing him to hallucinate. Moreover, he said that officials confiscated his spectacles and kept him partially naked, allowing him to wear only a small towel when they escorted him to the bathroom. During his first questioning by an official from the State Security Prosecution, which took place on 12 July 2012 – over three months after his arrest – Ahmad al-Zaabi said the following: “They [State Security officers] put me in a separate prison and interrogated me about the organisation [alIslah]. They used force on me to compel me to sign statements that I have no idea about. They compelled me to sign and give my fingerprints and threatened me with revocation of my nationality.”

last visit: 12 September, 2015 24 See report of The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information on the detention of Dr. Nasser bin Ghaith al-Marri, http:// anhri.net/?p=149445, last visit: 12 September, 2015

When the official questioned him about his visible injuries, he said: “I have some signs of beating on my left foot’s sole and bruises on my nails. Officers of the State Security beat me. They tied my feet with a machine that lifted both feet…to compel me to confirm the contents of their report. I was blindfolded and I did not see who inflicted the injury or who beat me.” 25

Unfair trial of Nasser al-Faresi al-Junaibi The UAE State Security Court sentenced tweep Nasser al-Faresi al-Junaibi on 29 June 2015 to three years in prison for posting tweets on Twitter. The State Security Court in the Federal Supreme Court presided over by Judge Falah al-Hajiri sentenced in praesentia Nasser Musa Abdullah al-Faresi al-Junaibi to three years in prison on 29 June 2015 in addition to imposing a fine of five hundred thousand dirhams (equivalent to $136,000) over charges pressed against him, along with the seizure of electronic devices found at the location of the crime and fully shutting down the defendant’s website. In its oral pleading, the public prosecution said that the defendant has set up and managed an account on Twitter under the name of Nasser al-Faresi (https://twitter.com/nasser_alfaresi), and the defendant posted rumours, thoughts and information through the said account which would incite hatred and disturb public order and social peace. Nasser al-Faresi, aged 27, had described the proceedings of a 2012 sedition trial as being a “judicial farce”. It appears that the charge on which al-Faresi was penalised was merely posting a tweet on the social networking website, Twitter, and whatever he posted thereon does not violate the inviolability of private life, neither does it call for violence or hatred towards any group. Therefore, this case is classified under the freedom of opinion and expression which is guaranteed by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. 26

Arbitrary detention of Omani blogger and author Mu’awiyah alRawahi On 24 February 2015, Emirati security forces intercepted Muawiyah al-Rawahi on the border and did not allow him to return. He was able to communicate with a friend who works as a human rights defender and inform him that he had been detained. Since then, no one knows the whereabouts of his detention which remains undisclosed to the outside world. There are serious concerns for his safety and well-being. 25 See Amnesty International Report, http://www.amnestymena.org/ar/magazine/ISSUE22/SilencingDissentEmirates. aspx?articleID=1159, last visit: 12 September, 2015 26 See report of The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information on the case of blogger and human rights activist Nasser alFaresi al-Junaibi, http://anhri.net/?p=146042, last visit: 12 September, 2015

Reports have confirmed that al-Rawahi’s detention came as a response to his posts on social networking media criticising the royal family of Abu Dhabi. He had been previously arrested for openly talking against Sultan Qabus and demanding reforms on the internet. He was arrested for a week in February 2015 and previously in 2011 after he published an article criticising the sultan of Oman. 27 The Monitor of Human Rights in Oman believes that Omani security agencies colluded with UAE security in sharing information for the purpose of arresting Muawiyah al-Rawahi. This was due to Omani authorities’ interest in releasing him time and again after detaining him for short periods of time mainly owing to his medical condition wherein he suffers from psychological problems. One of the main reasons for the Monitor to believe in this version of events is the frequency of al-Rawahi’s visits to and from the Emirates shortly before his arrest, without being arrested or even harassed. Therefore, this time Omani security agencies relied on his past tweets in which he had harshly criticised the UAE and the crown prince of Abu Dhabi, Mohammad bin Zayed. 28 Muawiya al-Ruwahi was been moved to a prison in Abu Dhabi, where he stood trial on 14 September 2015 before the State Security Chamber of the Federal Supreme Court. 29

Arbitrary detention and unfair trials of activist Osama al-Najjar Emirati youth Osama al-Najjar was subjected to enforced disappearance after he was arrested by UAE state security on 17 March 2014. Osama was active on social networking websites where he used to defend his father and all other reformists of the UAE 94 group. He was the first to check and disclose the poor health conditions of detainees convicted in the UAE 94 case, when they were put to trial in the Federal Supreme Court on 6 September, 2012. Since then he has been suffering from repressions and restrictions. Osama was returning home from a visit to his doctor when he was arrested on his way back home by officers of UAE State Security at around 4 pm. He was then taken to his home. When Osama’s mother returned home from a visit to Abu Dhabi prison where her husband is currently detained, she was shocked to find several government cars blocking the entrance to her house while her son Osama was sitting in the back of one of the cars. Security personnel undertook a full search of their house and confiscated all his electronic devices without presenting any judicial order allowing them to conduct a search such as this. They left the place at around 7 pm and took Osama to an unknown location. It is believed that he is currently held in the premises of the State Security Services in Abu Dhabi. It is feared that Osama’s detention shall negatively impact his health conditions since he recently underwent knee surgery and was supposed to be medically inspected. 27 See report of al-Khalij Centre for Human Rights on the detention of Muawiyah al-Rawahi, htttp://www.gc4hr.org/news/ view/947, last visit: 12 September, 2015 28 See the statement of Human Rights Monitor for Oman on the detention of Muawiyah al-Rawahi, http://goo.gl/9SfPkU Hov .dhvm, last visit: 12 September, 2015 29 See Amnesty International report, https://www.amnesty.org/ar/documents/mde25/2123/2015/ar/, last visit: 12 September, 2015

Osama’s disappearance follows the same pattern used by the State Security Services in numerous other similar cases in the United Arab Emirates where people are detained incommunicado or enforcedly disappeared / kidnapped for months and are subjected to torture and ill-treatment. They are often pressured into signing forced confessions which are then used to put them on trial and accuse them of political charges. Courts then convict them on the basis of such confessions which have been extracted under duress. 30 On 25 November, a Federal Court of the UAE sentenced Osama al-Najjar to three years’ imprisonment and a fine of half a million Dinars on terrorism-related charges. He was arrested after tweeting in defence of his father Husain alNajjar, who has been sentenced to ten years’ in prison after being convicted in the UAE 94 case. 31

Arbitrary detention and unfair trials of human rights activist Abdullah al-Hadidi On 8 April 2013, the Abu Dhabi Court of First Instance sentenced twitter activist and human rights defender Abdullah al-Hadidi to a ten-month jail term on charges of publishing a ‘dishonest account’ on Twitter of a public hearing at the Federal Supreme Court of case no. 17/2013, also known as the UAE 94 case. Originally, two charges had been pressed against Abdullah al-Hadidi, however, he was acquitted on the second charge which was the use of force against police personnel belonging to the General Command of the Abu Dhabi Police. 32 Abdullah al-Hadidi has played an important role in documenting what happened inside the courtroom, to which he had access, unlike international observers and the media who were barred from entering the court premises. The human rights defender has also played a key role in coordinating between families in order to gather defence-evidence containing videos and documents. 33 Abdullah was originally arrested in Sharjah in the very early hours of Friday 22 March 2013 from his apartment where he lives with his wife and three children. The arrest was undertaken by plain clothes security officers who did not have any official arrest warrant. The human rights defender was then taken to Sharjah police headquarters where his family tried to have him released on bail, but the request was denied by the police. 34 Later that day, Abdullah was transferred to Abu Dhabi. His family were told that he was being transferred to Al-Khalediyah police headquarters because one of the court security guards had filed a complaint against him in court. 30 See the report of al-Karama institute’s report on the detention of activist Osama al-Najjar, http://ar.alkarama.org/missiongoals/item/4803-94, last visit: 12 September, 2015 31 See New Khalij website, http://www.thenewkhalij.com/ar/node/5907, last visit: 12 September, 2015 32 See report of Front Line on the case of Abdullah al-Hadidi, https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/node/22332, last visit: 12 September, 2015 33 Ibid 34 See report of Marsad website on the case of Abdullah al-Hadidi, http://marsadpress.net/?p=8940, last visit: 12 September, 2015

The family later found out that this was the same security guard who had grabbed the human rights defender and forced him out of the courtroom during the last hearing of the UAE 94 case on 19 March 2013. 35 Front Line Defenders believes that the prison sentence against Abdullah Al-Hadidi is solely targeted to disrupt his legitimate and peaceful activism for human rights defence. The organisation views this act as part of an ongoing campaign of judicial harassment against human rights defenders in the UAE. 36

Arbitrary detention of human rights activist Obaid Yousef al-Zaabi Obaid Yousef al-Zaabi was arrested by State Security officers on 12 December 2013, hours after an interview he had given to CNN aired on television. He was interviewed about a US national who had been jailed in the UAE for making a spoof video about Dubai. 37 Authorities had accused al-Zaabi of “founding and maintenance of an electronic page on the social media website Twitter, disseminating his thought and stories that stir hate and disturb public order by libeling the State Security apparatus with torture allegations”. 38 Amnesty International has called upon activists across the world for urgent action to demand UAE authorities to release political activist Obaid al-Zaabi who has been detained by State Security apparatus despite being declared innocent by the Federal Supreme Court on 23 June 2014. His arbitrary detention continues to be in effect without any cause or evidence. 39 In his CNN interview, Obaid Yousef al-Zaabi said that he had been using social media, especially Twitter, to express his opinions and defend human rights, including cases of people detained by the State Security apparatus, and said that he was calling for political reform. Al-Zaabi describes himself on his Twitter account as a political activist. He had spent time in prison with the aforesaid film-maker earlier in the year. He had previously been arrested on 2 July after posting a series of tweets critical of the “UAE 94” trial – a mass trial of 94 government critics and reform advocates, including al-Zaabi’s brother, Ahmed Yousef alZaabi, a former judge and law professor, which violated international fair trial standards.

35 Ibid 36 See report of Front Line on the case of Abdullah al-Hadidi, https://www.frontlinedefenders.org/node/22332, last visit: 12 September, 2015 37 See statement of Amnesty International regarding the case of Obaid Yousef al-Zaabi, https://www.amnesty.org/ar/documents/ ar/2014/012/mde25, last visit: 12 September, 2015 38 Ibid 39 See New Khalij website, http://thenewkhalij.com/ar/node/1655, last visit: 12 September, 2015

Amnesty International concluded its statement by providing primary email-addresses, phone numbers and fax numbers of the ruler and crown prince of Abu Dhabi and the vice-president of UAE. It called upon activists all over the world to send letters, requests, appeals and demands to free detained political activist, Obaid al-Zaabi. â&#x20AC;&#x192;

Conclusion The International Coalition for Freedoms and Rights (ICFR) asserts that the United Arab Emirates shall not progress towards procuring a meaningful and effective position in the global arena except through respecting human rights and protecting the honour of the Emirati citizen who demands the provision of unrestricted freedom and honour in the country. From this perspective, ICFR demands from the Emirati authorities the immediate and unconditional release of all prisoners of conscience. This means the release of all those individuals who have been detained for no reason except their peaceful struggle for demanding the right to freedom of expression, the right to form associations, the right to assembly or any other legitimate and fundamental right; especially the convicts of the UAE reformistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; case, who are also known as the 94 UAE Reformists. ICFR calls towards the dropping of all charges pressed against any individual attempting to peacefully exercise his rights. The Coalition also emphasises upon the need to: (a) protect the freedom of right to expression of each individual, which includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers; (b) strongly consider the lifting of restrictions imposed by law; (c) strengthen laws which ensure the rights of NGOs to form associations.

And similarly: (a) stop the passing of legislation which imposes further restrictions upon the activism of such associations; (b) amend any law which unlawfully imposes restrictions upon the right to expression, right to association and assembly and other rights which are associated therewith; (c) amend the Penal Code; (d) amend the cybercrime law, press and publications law, law barring associations, and the new antiterrorism law.

29 These are with the aim of making laws compliant with the obligations of the United Arab Emirates in adhering to International Laws of Human Rights. ICFR calls upon the UAE to respect the rights guaranteed in the United Nations Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognised Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms; especially Article 6 which states that: “Everyone has the right, individually and in association with others: to study, discuss, form and hold opinions on the observance, both in law and in practice, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms and, through these and other appropriate means, to draw public attention to those matters.” And Clause 2 of Article 12 which states that: “The State shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection by the competent authorities of everyone, individually and in association with others, against any violence, threats, retaliation, de facto or de jure adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action as a consequence of his or her legitimate exercise of the rights referred to in the present Declaration.” ICFR would like to draw special attention to Article 5 b which stipulates that: “For the purpose of promoting and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, at the national and international levels: to meet or assemble peacefully; to form, join and participate in non-governmental organisations, associations or groups.”