Further supplementary written evidence
submitted by Amnesty International UK
1. Further to our appearance before the
Foreign Affairs Committee on 21 December, this supplementary submission
provides additional information on the human rights situation
in Turkey and Uganda.
TURKEY (PP
15, 101-3, 174, 185, 233, 236-7, 244)
2. Amnesty International UK agrees that
the prospect of accession to the EU is prompting Turkey to address
human rights weaknesses in the country, especially in its laws
and institutions. It is our contention, however, that these reforms
need continued and substantial support if they are to be effective.
Certainly, some legal reforms have been made and some improvements
in the treatment of certain groups has been recorded, but the
implementation of the reforms has been patchy and broad restrictions
to the exercise of fundamental rights remain in law. In addition,
torture and ill-treatment by security forces and restrictions
on freedom of association and expression continue to trouble us
deeply. In particular, women are subjected to violence and there
is a failure by state officials to implement mechanisms to protect
women and punish perpetrators, even where such mechanisms exist
in law.
3. The UK government works with Turkey on
human rights reform bilaterally and though the EU. Amnesty International
UK asks therefore that it takes full advantage of this relationship
and of its forthcoming presidency of the EU to strengthen even
further its support for human rights reform in the country, especially
now that accession negotiations are open. The following points
raise our main areas of concern.
Constitutional and legal restrictions
4. The Turkish government has indeed introduced
reforms with the aim of bringing Turkish law into line with international
standards. Many significant constitutional and legal changes were
introduced throughout the year, including the placing of international
conventions above domestic law. Other important laws passed through
the year were a new Press Law; a new Law on Associations; a new
Criminal Procedure Law and a new Turkish Penal Code. All of these
laws contain positive developments and were often less restrictive
than their predecessors.
5. Two factors concern us however, with
regard to these reforms. Firstly, many of these new laws still
contain provisions that could be used to restrict fundamental
rights unnecessarily. Of great concern is the fact that individuals
can still be prosecuted for exercising their rights under the
European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Likewise, despite
being found in breach of the ECHR by the European Court in its
old Penal Code, Turkey has in its new Penal Code allowed for the
prosecution of individuals for "insults" to state institutions.
Secondly, as the FCO itself points out, the implementation of
these reforms by the authorities, remains inconsistent. In addition,
we would say that they are indeed resisted by state officials.
6. Amnesty International UK asks that the
UK government raises our concerns about constitutional and legal
reform with the Turkish government and works with them to remove
such restrictions and malpractice as part of accession negotiations.
A key to the implementation of human rights reform is, we believe,
the development of institutions and mechanisms that can scrutinise
and investigate patterns of abuse. Such bodies must be independent,
impartial and effective, with the ability to access the information
their investigations require and with the mandate to investigate
reports as well as complaints of human rights violations.
Killings in disputed circumstances, torture and
ill-treatment
7. The Turkish government continues to hold
to its stated policy of "zero tolerance for torture"
and detention regulations that better protect detainees have led
to an apparent reduction in the use of some torture techniques.
However, despite positive changes to detention regulations, torture
and ill-treatment by security forces—and the use of disproportionate
force against demonstrators—continues to be a serious concern.
In addition, non-marking methods apparently designed to circumvent
new detention regulations are widely reported—as is the
fact that such abuses are carried out outside of official detention
settings, with no records of persons being detained. In addition,
in south-eastern and eastern provinces, up to 20 civilians were
reportedly shot dead by security forces, on the grounds, it is
said, that they failed to heed orders to stop when asked.
8. There also remains an absence of mechanisms
that can effectively monitor the implementation of detention regulations
and investigate patterns of abuse by security forces. Although
there have been steps taken to change the make-up of the Provincial
and Regional Human Rights Boards attached to the Prime Ministry,
they have failed to demonstrate impartiality and independence
and numerous incidents have been reported which they failed to
effectively investigate. In addition, trials of individuals accused
of torture and ill-treatment are usually slow, with proceedings
in torture trials dropped through reaching the statute of limitations.
This has been extended, but is still maintained under the new
Turkish Penal Code.
9. The UK government states in the FCO report
that it condemns torture in all its forms. Amnesty International
UK suggests that it insists therefore that all such activity should
be halted by Turkish officials with immediate effect. In addition,
torture, as a crime against humanity, should not have a statue
of limitations applied against its prosecution. A Police Complaints
Commission, or Human Rights Ombudsmen is especially needed, as
at the moment there are no bodies which can carry out unannounced
ad hoc visits to police stations and present their reports publicly.
The UK government could share its experiences in developing such
a body with the Turkish government.
Lack of freedom of association, assembly and expression
10. Peaceful expression of non-violent opinion
continues to be subjected to investigation and prosecution, although
the Court of Appeals and some lower courts have issued landmark
judgements upholding the right to freedom of expression. Despite
various constitutional and legal reforms, however, broadcasting
in minority languages remains subjected to unnecessary and arbitrary
limitations and despite a change in the law which allows education
in minority languages at private colleges to adults, the country's
largest trade union remains under prosecution with its closure
sought for stating that it will work for mother tongue education
in its statute. In addition, politicians remain under prosecution
for making election propaganda in Kurdish—which is forbidden
under the political parties law.
11. Human rights defenders—including
lawyers, doctors and environmentalists—continue to be targeted
for their activities in defence of human rights. This is despite
the Minister of Interior issuing a circular reiterating the right
to freedom of assembly and the UN Special Representative on Human
Rights Defenders visiting Turkey and expressing her concerns.
Such harassment varies from province to province and includes
the prohibition or restriction of activities such as petitions,
reading of press statements and demonstrations as well as the
opening of large numbers of trials and investigations against
human rights defenders and their organisations. In addition, individuals
who participate in human rights activities are often subject to
professional sanctions, for example the dismissal or suspension
of academic staff or students from university.
12. Amnesty International UK recognises
the efforts of the Turkish authorities with regard to allowing
more freedoms of this nature, but believes that practice falls
far behind policy with respect to these rights. In our view, the
UK government needs to apply concerted pressure on the Turkish
government to implement internal changes such that developments
in the law are similarly matched on the ground. Again, the existence
of a Human Rights Ombudsman, independent, impartial and effective,
could be a crucial step in this regard.
Violence against Women
13. As the FCO report notes, the abuse of
women's rights is a major problem in Turkey. In particular, rates
of domestic violence are extremely high, with as many as one third
and up to one half of all women in the country estimated to be
victims of physical violence within their families. As Amnesty
International has documented in its report Turkey: Women confronting
family violence[10]
the human rights of hundreds of thousands of women in Turkey continue
to be violated in this context, through beatings, rape, murder
or forced suicide. Furthermore, state officials fail to take steps
to adequately protect women, for example failing to implement
legislation that could protect them, not investigating cases and
not punishing perpetrators sufficiently. There is also an absence
of adequate protective mechanisms, such as shelters, for women
at risk of violence.
14. As a result of concerted lobbying efforts
by women's organisations, many gender-discriminatory articles
have been removed from the draft Penal Code. Positive measures
introduced include the abolition of the possibility of a reduction,
postponement or eradication of sentence for rapists who marry
their victims, explicit recognition of marital rape as a crime
and the definition of sustained and systematic domestic violence
as "torture". However, as with the other reforms noted
above, these changes in the law now need to be translated into
changes in policy and practice. Women's organisations working
in this regard continue to need financial and technical support.
15. Amnesty International UK welcomes the
steps taken by the Turkish authorities with regard to the draft
Penal Code and its provisions relating to violence against women.
However, it requests that the UK government bilaterally and as
a member of the EU insist that all new laws be fully implemented
and communicated throughout Turkey. We also request that more
shelters be provided to protect women at risk of violence. This
should be done immediately, in cooperation with women's groups
in Turkey and in accordance with best practice.
Treatment of asylum-seekers from Turkey by the
UK government
16. Amnesty International UK understands
that the UK government would like Turkey to be placed on the "asylum
white list" following the recent decision to start accession
negotiations by the European Union. Certainly, it is the case
that, according to the Commission 2004 Progress Report on the
country, Turkey has "sufficiently fulfilled" the Copenhagen
Criteria to start negotiations with the EU. However, the same
report also documents patterns of human rights violations—specifically,
widespread torture—that it says shows that Turkey has still
some way towards fully meeting the Copenhagen Criteria at this
stage.
17. Amnesty International UK objects to
the existence of such an "asylum white list" per se,
as we maintain that international law requires that all asylum
seekers should have their cases individually examined. We therefore
disagree, in principle, to Turkey being named as part of such
a list. In addition to this, and for the reasons of abuse cited
above, we would also be greatly concerned for the safety of those
rejected asylum from Turkey on such a basis, as it is clear from
both our own research and, indeed, that of the EU, that grave
human rights abuses still take place in the country.
UGANDA (PP
123, 136, 241)
18. The UN's head of humanitarian affairs,
Jan Egland, has described the situation in northern Uganda as
the most neglected humanitarian crisis in the world.
19. The Lord's Resistance Army, under its
leader Joseph Kony, has now been fighting the Ugandan Government
for some 18 years. The rebels' actions have involved the abduction
of as many as 20,000 children since 1988 compelled, under threat
of death, to become child soldiers, sex slaves or labourers. Thousands
of Ugandan civilians have suffered execution, torture, mutilation,
rape or sexual assault at the hands of the Lord's Resistance Army,
including among the region's Acholi people that it purports to
protect. On the other side of the conflict, the Ugandan People's
Defence forces have committed extra-judicial killings, rape and
sexual assault and the recruitment of children into government
militias. As a result of the conflict overall, over one million
civilians have been displaced. Neither side has been capable of
forcing a military victory. Ugandan forces have not prevailed,
even though allowed by Sudanese authorities to attack rebel bases
in Sudan. The Lord's Resistance Army has little capacity to act
beyond the north of Uganda. A fragile cease-fire has now collapsed.
20. Despite the above, the President of
Uganda, Yoweri Museveni, has over the years systematically downplayed
the scale and seriousness of the opposition and conflict in the
north. The international community has not been willing to critically
engage the Ugandan government on this, nor look at the deeper
political or historical causes or dynamics of the conflict that
exist.
21. The fact that the conflict has been
on-going for many years serves to explain in part why the attention
of the international community has been dulled to its resolution.
No longer a "news story", the conflict in Uganda receives
little publicity in the international media. This is no doubt
compounded by the pressing problems of other flashpoints in the
region, such as the Great Lakes area and Sudan. To some extent,
this lack of media interest allows international governments,
the UK government included, to shift its focus elsewhere, not
only in its words, but also in its actions. It is not appropriate
for the UK government's policy to be led by media priorities,
however, as we have also seen in relation to the situation in
Darfur, Sudan.
22. This raises the issue of the role of
the UK government with regard to the highlighting and publicising
of human rights abuses generally. In this year's annual human
rights report, the UK government only records in the briefest
detail its support for conflict prevention work in northern Uganda,
despite the desperate situation that continues to exist. We believe
it needs to highlight the situation in that part of the country
much more comprehensively and take the lead, not follow, the media
in publicising the situation there. As Kate Allen, Director of
Amnesty International UK said in her oral evidence to the FAC
committee, the importance of listening to the information about
abuses that is made available to governments by organisations
such as ourselves is of paramount importance. Members of Parliament
and Peers, on their own initiative and through the work of select
committees, All Party Groups and international parliamentary bodies
can also play an important role in keeping situations, such as
Uganda, on the political agenda, even where media attention has
declined.
23. A further factor in the reluctance of
the international community to address the issue of human rights
violations in Uganda, relates to its progress elsewhere in terms
of international development—and specifically, its success
in addressing the issue of HIV/AIDS. On a continent where this
disease has already killed 20 million people, and where in some
countries, four out of 10 people are infected, Uganda's ability
to contain the epidemic is viewed as a considerable achievement.
The UK government itself has invested considerable resources into
the fight against HIV/AIDS, with this, rather than human rights
abuses, the priority for their assistance. This is welcome but
success in one field of endeavour should not dull attention to
other problems.
24. This illustrates a point that we made
at the outset of our initial submission to the committee, where
we talk of our concerns about whether subsuming human rights within
the work of government on other areas, specifically sustainable
development, might be narrowing the focus of the FCO's rights
work. As we stated there, we believe that the UK government should
uphold its earlier commitment to human rights as a "core"
task in its own right. The changes in funding that we also commented
upon also in our initial submission may also be contributing to
a failure to prioritise human rights work in the way that was
hitherto done.
International Criminal Court
25. In January 2004, the Ugandan government
asked the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate the
activities of the Lord's Resistance Army in northern Uganda. Amnesty
International welcomed the announcement of the investigation by
the Prosecutor of the ICC, and the fact that he will examine alleged
crimes committed by both the LRA and members of government forces.
However, Amnesty International is concerned at recent reports
that the Ugandan government is trying to withdraw the case, and
settle the long running dispute with the LRA using traditional
reconciliation mechanisms, including allowing a full pardon for
those who abandon the insurgency. Such measures do not involve
judicial determinations of innocence or guilt, will not ensure
that the full truth about crimes will be known, nor provide victims
with full reparations.
26. The UK government should support the ICC's
investigation into human rights abuses, regardless of whether
they were committed by the LRA or government forces, and urge
the Ugandan government to cooperate fully with the ICC.
Amnesty International UK
13 December 2004
10 AI Index: EUR 44/0013/2004. Back
|
