7 Countries of concern
169. This section of our Report is not intended
to be a comprehensive list of countries where human rights are
of concern. Instead, we focus on countries where there have been
significant developments that we have not covered in our previous
annual Reports. In a number of cases we indicate that we intend
to make comments on the human rights situation in specific countries
in other Reports which we expect to publish in the near future.
Afghanistan
170. We deal with human rights issues in relation
to Afghanistan in our forthcoming Report on Global Security:
Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Burma (Myanmar)
171. The FCO report comments that the human rights
situation in Burma deteriorated still further during 2008, particularly
towards the end of the year when harsh sentences were given to
over 200 democracy activists:
The picture continues to be characterised by the
persistent denial of almost all fundamental rights, including
the ability of Burma's citizens to have any say in the country's
future. The referendum on a new constitution in May [2008] was
deeply flawed. […] Despite its natural resources, Burma remains
one of the poorest countries in the world, and faces a range of
humanitarian challenges.[295]
172. The FCO's report details the extent of human
rights abuses in Burma. These include repression and intimidation
of opposition activists, with severe sentences passed in 2008
on more than 200 political prisoners; continuing discrimination
against ethnic minority communities and religious groups, such
as the Muslim Rohingya in the west of the country; absence of
measures to avert a famine affecting the Chin community on the
border with India, despite this arising from a plague of rats
which occurs on a wholly predictable 50-year cycle; and other
problems arising from poor governance, economic mismanagement,
and lack of civic participation.[296]
173. The contribution of the international community
to alleviating the devastation caused in May 2008 by Cyclone Nargis,
which killed some 130,000 people, was impeded by the refusal of
the regime to permit access by foreigners to the affected areas.[297]
The Government notes that "UK relief for Cyclone Nargis is
delivered through the UN, Red Cross and international and local
non-governmental organisations. We make every effort to ensure
that all UK aid - both for cyclone relief and for our main aid
programme - is delivered in compliance with EU sanctions."[298]
174. The plight of the pro-democracy campaigner
Daw Aung San Suu Kyi under house arrest has continued to attract
international attention. In June 2008 the Prime Minister and President
Sarkozy of France wrote her a joint open letter reaffirming the
two countries' commitment to her struggle to achieve democracy
in Burma. On 18 May 2009 Ms Suu Kyi was put on trial in Rangoon,
charged with breaching the terms of her house arrest, because
of a visit by an American man who swam across a lake to her house
earlier in May. Court proceedings have been repeatedly adjourned.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon visited Burma in July 2009 and
called on the Burmese military junta to release Ms Suu Kyi and
other political prisoners. However, his request to meet Ms Suu
Kyi was denied.[299]
175. Human Rights Watch praises the FCO report's
account of the situation in Burma, which it says mirrors its own
reporting and analysis.[300]
Tom Porteous, London Director of Human Rights Watch, told us that
"we, Amnesty and the UK Government are all extremely concerned
about the situation, particularly in the run-up to the so-called
elections, which the Burmese authorities are holding as a result
of their sham political reform process". He noted that the
UK had limited leverage in respect of Burma, and that Burma's
own neighbours, China, India and Thailand, have considerable economic
interests in the country, which has led to a reluctance to criticise
the Burmese regime.[301]
176. We conclude that the scale
of human rights abuses in Burma, and the extent of suffering caused
to the Burmese people by their government's economic and political
mismanagement, is intolerable. The Burmese government's indifference
to the welfare of its own people was demonstrated by its handling
of Cyclone Nargis in 2008. We recommend that the British Government
continues to exercise the strictest vigilance in ensuring that
aid supplied to Burma is not misused by the authorities. We further
recommend that the UK encourages Burma's regional neighbours,
in particular China, India and Thailand, to bring pressure on
the regime to improve its human rights record.
China
177. Despite the rapid economic development of
the People's Republic of China, the country's human rights record
has continued to give cause for concern. The FCO assesses that
"China has made little progress towards greater respect for
human rights in 2008". They draw attention to two key developments:
the crackdown in Tibet in March 2008 (which we deal with in a
separate sub-section below), and the holding of the Olympic Games
in Beijing in August 2008, which led to human rights defenders
being detained or expelled from the city. On a more positive note,
the FCO comments that China ratified the International Covenant
on the Rights of Disabled People (in conjunction with its hosting
of the Paralympic Games in September 2008); and that certain reductions
in restrictions on foreign journalists, put in place before the
Olympics, have subsequently been made permanent.[302]
178. These positive developments have to be set
against the background of the continuing human rights concerns
listed by the FCO. They include widespread use of the death penalty
(with at least 470 people executed during 2007, according to published
media reports—although the FCO considers the true figure
likely to be "much higher"); torture; the lack of an
independent judiciary; arbitrary detention; ill-treatment of prisoners;
failure to protect human rights defenders; harassment of religious
practitioners and Falun Gong adherents; and limitations on freedom
of expression and association.[303]
179. Amnesty International likewise concludes
that the human rights situation in China has seen little improvement.
It comments that:
China's hosting of the Olympics brought heightened
repression throughout the country as the authorities tightened
control over human rights activists, religious practitioners,
ethnic minorities, lawyers and journalists. Hundreds of people
remain in detention or unaccounted for after the protests and
unrest in Tibet. The Chinese authorities have launched sweeping
crackdowns on the Uighur population in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous
Region. Tight control continues to be exercised over the flow
of information, with many websites blocked, and journalists and
internet users harassed and imprisoned.[304]
180. In November 2008 we published a Report on
Global Security: Japan and Korea. One issue we addressed
in that Report was that of China's treatment of emigrants from
North Korea.[305] Large
numbers of North Koreans have fled from their own country to China,
either with the intention of settling there or of travelling through
China en route to further destinations. The Chinese authorities
regard these people as illegal economic migrants, and when caught
they are returned to North Korea, where they reportedly face punishments
including prison, labour or prison camp, torture, execution and,
for women who have become pregnant by Chinese men, forced abortion.[306]
181. The Government's policy regarding human
rights in China continues to be based on a mix of high-level engagement
(the FCO's report lists expressions of concern about Tibet and
other matters made by UK Ministers during 2008), through the "UK-China
Human Rights Dialogue" (under which one meeting was held
in 2008) and through project work on the ground (including monitoring
of prison conditions and of the impact of the new foreign media
regulations).[307]
182. Amnesty International is critical of the
British Government's strategy towards China. It argues that the
Government's focus on addressing China's emergence as a global
economic and political force counts for more in determining UK
policy than its professed concern for human rights. Amnesty claims
that there is little evidence that the Government's policy of
"engagement and co-operation" in its promotion of human
rights with China is achieving tangible results. Amnesty notes
that commitments made by China during its Universal Periodic Review
process and in its newly published human rights action plan include
some concrete targets for 2010, and recommends that the Government
"should incorporate the delivery of these commitments into
the objectives of its dialogue with China".[308]
183. We conclude that there
remains little evidence that the British Government's policy of
constructive dialogue with China has led to any significant improvements
in the human rights situation. We recommend that the Government
sets benchmarks and specific targets for making progress in this
dialogue; these should take account of but not be restricted to
the time-specific commitments given by China itself during its
Universal Periodic Review process. We further recommend that in
its response to this Report, the Government informs us of what
action it is proposing to take in this regard.
184. We reiterate the conclusions
of our 2008 Report on Global Security: Japan and Korea
that China is in breach of its obligations under the 1951 Refugee
Convention as regards its treatment of North Korean migrants.
We remain particularly exercised by China's continuing failure
to allow the UN High Commission on Refugees access to its border
region with North Korea, and by its practice of forcible repatriation
of North Koreans who have not had access to a determination-of-status
process. We recommend that the Government should urge the UN High
Commissioner on Refugees to give a high priority to the issue
of the treatment of North Korean migrants in China. We further
recommend that the Government works internationally and more actively
to encourage China to find ways of fulfilling its international
obligations on this issue as part of the process of becoming a
responsible global power.
TIBET
185. In last year's report we commented in detail
on the protests which took place in Tibet in March 2008 against
Chinese rule, and China's response which involved sending troops
into Tibet to restore order. We reported on the evidence session
we had held with His Holiness the Dalai Lama in May 2008. We concluded
that China's policies towards Tibet have fostered a culture of
repression, and we condemned the use of violence either by Tibetans
or the Chinese government during the recent disturbances. We recommended
that the British Government should press the Chinese authorities
to allow an independent and international investigation to take
place in Tibet, and to impress on the Chinese government that
they should recognise there is currently a significant window
of opportunity to make progress in resolving the dispute over
Tibet, based on the demand by the Dalai Lama for "genuine
autonomy", not independence.[309]
186. In its report the FCO concludes that "freedom
of religion, expression and association of Tibetans continues
to be severely restricted", and that it "remain[s] extremely
concerned about the current situation in Tibet and its surrounding
regions". The FCO notes that the 8th Round of Dialogue between
Tibetan and Chinese representatives, held in Beijing in late October/early
November 2008, ended in acrimony, with the Chinese refusing even
to discuss the proposals presented by the Tibetans.[310]
The British Government has urged the Chinese to allow the UN Special
Rapporteur for Freedom of Religion and Belief, and other representatives
of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, to visit
Tibet to allow an independent assessment of the situation there.[311]
187. Amnesty International reports that "hundreds
of people remain in detention or unaccounted for after the protests
and unrest in Tibet".[312]
188. In October 2008 the Foreign Secretary announced
a change in the British position on the status of Tibet. Since
1914 successive governments had recognised China's "suzerainty"
over Tibet, but "on the understanding that Tibet was autonomous".
Mr Miliband stated that:
Our ability to get our points across has sometimes
been clouded by the position the UK took at the start of the 20th
century on the status of Tibet, a position based on the geopolitics
of the time. Our recognition of China's "special position"
in Tibet developed from the outdated concept of suzerainty. Some
have used this to cast doubt on the aims we are pursuing and to
claim that we are denying Chinese sovereignty over a large part
of its own territory. We have made clear to the Chinese Government,
and publicly, that we do not support Tibetan independence. Like
every other EU member state, and the United States, we regard
Tibet as part as part of the People's Republic of China. Our interest
is in long-term stability, which can only be achieved through
respect for human rights and greater autonomy for the Tibetans.[313]
189. We questioned the Foreign Secretary about
this policy shift in December 2008. He told us: "our previous
policy […] was getting in the way of a serious discussion
about human rights in Tibet and good relations and engagement
with China. The concept of suzerainty is not accepted or understood
by anyone in the diplomatic world."[314]
190. We conclude that the absence
of any momentum towards resolving the dispute over Tibet is a
matter of grave concern. We recommend that the Government continues
to press its Chinese counterparts to lift restrictions on access
to Tibet, to allow an independent assessment of the human rights
situation there to be carried out by representatives of the UN
High Commissioner for Human Rights.
XINJIANG
191. The FCO states that "we are […]
concerned about allegations of a crackdown on religious practices
in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region, preventing individuals
from displaying symbols of religious belief and observing religious
festivals".[315]
There has been longstanding tension in the western province of
Xinjiang between the Chinese authorities and the mainly Muslim
indigenous Uighur community. On 6 July 2009 Chinese state media
reported that violence in Urumqi, the capital city of Xinjiang,
had left at least 140 people dead and more than 800 people injured,
with several hundred also having been arrested. The BBC reported
that the violence appears to have arisen following street protests
prompted by a deadly fight between Uighurs and Han Chinese in
southern China last month. It added that "if the numbers
of dead are to be believed—and state media say they may
rise—this looks like the bloodiest violence in China since
Tiananmen Square 20 years ago".[316]
It was subsequently reported that vigilante mobs of Han Chinese
had sought to carry out revenge attacks on Uighars, and that thousands
of troops were on the streets of Urumqi to secure order.[317]
192. During the disturbances in Tibet in 2008,
the Chinese authorities pursued a vigorous policy of excluding
foreign journalists from affected areas. By contrast, following
the recent protests in Xinjiang, the authorities appear to have
adopted a policy of allowing the foreign media free access. As
at 8 July 2009, it was reported that 60 foreign media organisations
had sent representatives to Xinjiang and that the regional government
local authorities were not seeking to restrict their movements
or reporting.[318]
193. We conclude that the developing
situation in Xinjiang, with significant violence arising from
long-standing ethnic tensions between Uighurs and Han Chinese,
gives cause for concern. We recommend that the Government, acting
in conjunction with its EU partners, should monitor the situation
and urge restraint upon the Chinese government. We further conclude
that what appears to be a change in Chinese policy towards foreign
media, allowing journalists free access to Xinjiang, is—if
confirmed as events develop—to be welcomed.
Colombia
194. As in previous years, the FCO continues
to be concerned about the human rights situation in Colombia,
which it attributes to the decades-long internal armed conflict
driven by control of the illegal drugs trade. It states that human
rights defenders, trade unions and other civilians have been the
victims of threats, intimidation, kidnappings, murders and forced
displacement. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights estimates
that 3 million people have been internally displaced by the conflict,
the second highest number in the world after Sudan.
195. The FCO notes some recent improvements in
the situation, commenting that in some respects Colombia is much
safer than previously, but adding that it still faces huge challenges:
"to stem the flow of cocaine; to bring to justice the armed
groups that threaten Colombia's future; to tackle impunity; to
reduce and eliminate abuses, including those committed or condoned
by Colombia's armed forces and police; and to build a strong civil
society".[319]
196. Human Rights Watch criticises the FCO report
for downplaying the extent of corruption within the Colombian
establishment:
paramilitaries and their successors have infiltrated
some of the highest levels of government. More than seventy members
of the Colombian Congress—including approximately 35% of
the Senate—are under investigation or have been convicted
for rigging elections or collaborating with paramilitary groups.
Nearly all the congresspersons under investigation are members
of President Uribe's coalition. The Uribe administration has repeatedly
taken steps that could undermine the investigations and keep the
influence of these mafias in the political system intact. High-level
government officials, including Uribe himself, have repeatedly
attacked the Colombian Supreme Court, which started what are known
as the "parapolitics" investigations.[320]
197. Human Rights Watch argues that "this
problem should be an important focus of UK policy, as it will
define the future of the rule of law and democracy in Colombia",
and it draws attention to "the frequent practice of extrajudicial
executions of civilians by the Colombian Army".[321]
198. Tom Porteous of Human Rights Watch told
us that "there is no doubt that Colombia is by far the most
dangerous place in Latin America at the moment. I would not want
to make a comparison about whether it is more dangerous now than
it was a year ago. It is very, very dangerous, particularly for
journalists, trade unionists and human rights defenders."[322]
199. Mr Porteous called for greater clarity about
British military assistance to Colombia:
the main reason why the British Government are providing
this military aid to Colombia is that they are simply following
the dictates of the strategic alliance with Washington. Colombia
has been a good ally of the United States, particularly under
the Bush Administration. Here is the interesting thing: since
the Democrats gained control of the US Congress a couple of years
ago, US military aid to Colombia has become much more transparent:
we know where it's going. The Democrats have managed to hold up
some of that aid. In the UK, it is still an accountability-free
zone. We would like to see much more transparency over UK military
aid to Colombia.[323]
200. The Ambassador of Columbia, HE Noemi Sanin
Posada, wrote to us in June 2009 to draw attention to what he
argued were recent improvements in the human rights situation
in Colombia. Noting that although Columbia is a long-standing
democracy, "we have also been afflicted by severe violence
for 52 years", he claimed that there had been significant
reductions in recent years in the level of serious abuse. In particular,
he stated that between 2002 and 2008 there had been a reduction
in:
- The number of homicides by
44%
- The number of victims of massacres
by 75%
- The number of extortive kidnappings
by 88.5%
- The number of homicides of
indigenous people by 66%
- That of journalists by 100%
- And that of union members by
80%.[324]
201. However, the Ambassador acknowledged that
"as a result of the appalling terrorist violence and the
weakness of the state, more than 2.5 million have been internally
displaced", and that, "in this respect, we have to painfully
recognise that human rights abuses still remain".[325]
202. Mr Miliband told us that "there are
massive human rights issues in Colombia, but it is not legitimate
to say that British engagement is party to human rights abuses
in Colombia". He argued that "military aid" was
a "very loaded" phrase, because it suggested "bombs,
bullets and soldiers", whereas UK assistance to Colombia
involved demining and human rights training for the Colombian
army. The UK's demining work was part of a multilateral process,
while the human rights training programme had been concluded.
Mr Miliband said that that training meant that:
the Colombian army, for the first time ever, has
a set of human rights commitments that it is meant to adhere to—I
say "meant to" adhere to—partly as a result of
the engagement that we have had. It has never had that before.[326]
203. On 30 March 2009 the Government announced
that the UK had reprioritised its financial assistance to Colombia.
It stated that "our bilateral human rights projects with
the Colombian Ministry of Defence will cease", and that funding
would henceforward be channelled towards demining, counter-narcotics,
tackling impunity, and projects in areas such as freedom of speech,
democracy and tackling discrimination. The Government added that:
Projects already approved for the next financial
year and beyond total almost £1 million and a further £170,000
is to be allocated for human rights projects. With British trade
union partners, we will continue to look at ways in which the
UK can promote labour relations in Colombia.[327]
204. We conclude that, despite
some recent improvements, human rights abuses in Colombia remain
systemic and widespread, with considerable evidence of complicity
by the Colombia authorities, police and armed forces. We note
that, in particular, it is an extremely dangerous place to be
a trade unionist. We recommend that, in its response to this Report,
the Government supplies us with a detailed breakdown of its current
and planned future aid to Colombia, with full costings, and information
as to how this spending will be used to exert leverage on the
Colombian government to improve its human rights record. We further
recommend that the Government at the same time supplies us with
any internal assessment that has been carried out of the effectiveness
of its human rights training programme for the Colombian army;
and that it informs us whether that programme was scheduled to
finish when it did, or whether it was abandoned because of concerns
about the scale of the army's continuing participation in abuses.
Iran
205. In March 2008 we published a Report on Global
Security: Iran which considered Iran's human rights record.[328]
We noted that during our visit to Iran in November 2007, we had
had a "robust exchange" of views with the head of human
rights in Iran's judiciary, Dr Mohammad Javad Larijani, and we
expressed serious concern about the way that "senior figures
within the Iranian regime used their religious and ideological
beliefs to justify severe abuses of human rights in their country".[329]
Our overall conclusion was that Iran's human rights record was
"shocking". We recommended that the Government should
ensure that human rights were not treated as a secondary concern
to the nuclear issue in its dealings with Iran.[330]
206. In its reply to our Report, published in
May 2008, the Government commented:
The Iranian Government often claims that international
concern about human rights in the country is an attempt to discredit
and undermine the Islamic Republic, rather than a reflection of
its failure to meet its freely undertaken human rights commitments.
In that context the Government is grateful for the Committee's
analysis of the situation, as an independent Parliamentary body,
and we greatly welcome the fact that the Committee raised its
own concerns with Iranian interlocutors during the course of the
members' visit to Iran.[331]
207. In its most recent human rights report,
the FCO states that Iran's record is "dismal". It notes
that Iran has the highest execution rate per capita in
the world, with at least 320 people being executed in 2008. Executions
have been carried out in public, and sentences such as stoning
to death and "being thrown from a height" continue to
be handed down by judges. The death penalty remains on the statute
books for adultery and consenting same-sex relations. Iran continues
to execute juveniles: at least 130 young offenders are on death
row.[332]
208. The FCO states that in 2008, Iran continued
to harass activists and human rights defenders and clamped down
rigidly on any form of dissent, opposition or organised protest,
using charges such as "propaganda against the Islamic republic",
"acting against national security" or "organising
illegal gatherings". Religious and ethnic minorities, including
members of the Bahá'í faith and converts to Christianity,
have been persecuted. A draft penal code currently under consideration
in the Iranian Parliament provides that "apostasy",
"heresy" and "witchcraft" should be punishable
by death. Gender inequality is widespread, and sustained by Iranian
law. Trade unionists and campaigners for women's rights have been
harassed.[333]
209. The FCO's report was produced before the
disputed Iranian presidential elections in June 2009. At the time
of producing our present Report, the events set in train by those
elections are continuing to unravel. The Iranian government's
restrictions on reporting by foreign news agencies following the
elections make it difficult to arrive at a full assessment of
the situation. However, it is clear that large numbers of people
in Iran were outraged by what they considered to be deliberate
manipulation of the election result, and do not now regard the
government headed by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as legitimate; that there
were significant differences of opinion within the regime itself
on this issue; and that the Supreme Leader's address on 19 June
gave the green light for a policy of massive repression of the
popular protests. The BBC has reported that there have been many
arrests, and "scores—possibly hundreds—of opposition
supporters and prominent reformists remain in prison".[334]
Locally recruited staff of the British Embassy in Tehran have
been particularly targeted, in line with the regime's policy of
claiming that the protests were instigated by foreign powers,
particularly the UK. Several staff members were arrested and,
at the time of producing this Report, one (Hossein Rassam) remains
in custody, charged with acting against national security.[335]
Meanwhile, the stifling of free reporting has continued, with
foreign correspondents expelled or confined to their quarters,
and with sophisticated efforts being made to prevent electronic
dissemination of information to the wider world by means of mobile
phones, emails, or Internet media such as Twitter.
210. We conclude that the events
of June and July 2009 in Iran have revealed the extent of the
desire amongst millions of Iranians for a fairer electoral process,
as well as for greater personal freedoms and a normalisation of
relations between Iran and the wider world, and that those events
have also demonstrated the capacity of the present Iranian regime
to respond with ruthless force in suppressing expressions of dissent.
We further conclude that Iran's overall human rights record remains
appalling. We recommend that the Government continues to act with
firmness, in conjunction with its European partners and the wider
international community, in pressing for the Iranian regime to
respect the human rights obligations it has entered into, and
in actively encouraging Iran to adopt a more civilised approach
to the rights of its own citizens.
211. We conclude that the detention
of British Embassy staff by the Iranian authorities is deplorable,
and we recommend that the FCO should keep us informed as this
situation develops. We propose to return to the issues of the
safety of Embassy staff and the extent to which they are protected
by diplomatic immunity as part of our forthcoming inquiry into
the FCO's Annual Report for 2008-09.
Iraq
212. The FCO's report states that "Iraq,
a country where for so long human rights violations were endemic,
is undertaking a long and difficult transition".[336]
The report claims that "Iraqis are arguably freer now than
at any time in the country's history", and that "the
security situation in Iraq has improved vastly in the last few
years, which has in turn improved the living conditions of the
citizens of Iraq immeasurably, including women".[337]
The FCO notes particularly the improvements in everyday life in
Basra following the Iraqi-led Charge of the Knights operation
in March 2008.[338]
213. However, the FCO report acknowledges that
"significant challenges" in the field of human rights
remain. It draws attention to allegations of abuse and over-crowding
in Iraqi prisons, and to the large numbers of people detained
without trial because of lack of capacity in the prison system.
It notes continuing use of the death penalty, and the abuse of
women's rights, both through violence (including so-called "honour
killings") and through deprivation of opportunities in the
fields of education, health care and employment. The FCO cites
the estimate of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees that more
than two million Iraqis are currently displaced internally and
a similar number have fled to nearby countries. It notes that
minorities, including Christians, have come under attack.[339]
214. Amnesty International comments that:
- Despite a marked reduction
in violence in Iraq, civilians continue to be killed or injured
by armed groups as well as the MNF and Iraqi government forces.
The MNF and Iraqi authorities hold thousands of detainees, most
without charge or trial—some for up to five years. The Iraqi
authorities hold some detainees incommunicado in secret detention
facilities. Iraqi forces continue to commit gross human rights
violations. Prison guards and security forces are reported to
commit torture; detainees held by Interior Ministry officials
are particularly at risk.
- There is extensive use of the
death penalty. Most death sentences follow flawed criminal procedures,
with reports that 'confessions' are obtained under torture or
other duress. Trials of former officials have been marred by political
interference.
- Violence against women remains
serious, with women threatened and attacked for not complying
with strict codes of behaviour, including dress codes. The Iraqi
authorities continue to fail to provide adequate protection against
violence. Several million Iraqis remain displaced, both internally
and abroad.[340]
215. Human Rights Watch argue that there are
systemic problems in Iraq's criminal justice system, including
the abuse of detainees with the aim of extracting confessions.[341]
The FCO's report confirms that the Iraqi system has traditionally
relied on confessional evidence to secure convictions, which all
too easily leads to abuses taking place during the process. For
this reason, the FCO comments, the UK is assisting Iraq by running
a National Forensics Project, with the aim of developing forensic
capacity to create a more professional investigative process and
protect the rights of those under interrogation.[342]
216. Human Rights Watch criticises the FCO's
report for making no mention of the FCO's handling of sexual abuse
allegations concerning female Iraqi contractors at the British
Embassy in Baghdad.[343]
We discuss this matter in paragraphs 114 to 125 above.
217. We conclude that with the
departure of most British troops from southern Iraq, and the withdrawal
of US troops from Iraqi towns and cities, the responsibility for
creating security, which is an essential precondition of human
rights, has passed decisively to the Iraqi government. We further
conclude that many grave human rights concerns remain in a country
which is, as the FCO puts it, making a "difficult transition".
The plight of Iraqi refugees, both within Iraq and beyond its
borders, and the discrimination suffered by women, contrary to
the Iraqi constitution, are of particular concern. We recommend
that the British Government continues to discharge its responsibility
to the Iraqi people by offering their government and Parliament
full and effective assistance, both practical and financial,
in creating the institutions and attitudes necessary to underpin
the effective upholding of human rights.
Israel and the Occupied Palestinian
Territories
218. We deal with human rights issues in relation
to Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories in our forthcoming
Report on Global Security: Israel and the Occupied Palestinians
Territories.
North Korea
219. We commented on the human rights situation
in North Korea (the Democratic People's Republic of Korea) in
our Report on Global Security: Japan and Korea, published
in November 2008. Our conclusions were as follows:[344]
We conclude that the North Korean regime is one of
the worst human rights abusers in the world, that its human rights
practice is an affront to the international community, and that
the main reason that the issue is not the subject of a larger
international outcry is because it remains too little known. We
conclude that the work of the FCO in attempting to address North
Korean human rights, both bilaterally and with international partners,
is to be commended. Although we conclude that human rights abuses
are deeply linked to the nature of the North Korean regime, we
recommend that the Government's efforts to address North Korea's
human rights abuses should avoid language which Pyongyang might
construe as threatening, and should be couched in terms of reference
to specific obligations under international instruments to which
North Korea has signed up. We further recommend that enabling
the acquisition of more human rights information from inside North
Korea should be a major goal of the Government's work, and that
efforts should focus in particular on securing access for the
UN Special Rapporteur. We further recommend that the Government
should seek to co-ordinate its work on North Korean human rights
with that of the South Korean Government, as Seoul's new willingness
to raise human rights issues with Pyongyang may come to represent
an important strengthening of the international effort in this
field.[345]
Given the failure of UN mechanisms so far to achieve
any significant improvement in North Korea's human rights practice,
we conclude that the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) which North
Korea is to undergo at the UN Human Rights Council in December
2009 offers a major opportunity to advance the international effort
to secure improvements in North Korean human rights, as well as
to establish the credibility of the UPR process. We recommend
that the Government should engage actively with Pyongyang and
with international official and non-governmental partners to ensure
that the potential of North Korea's UPR process is realised to
the maximum extent possible.[346]
220. Since the publication of our Report, the
political and diplomatic relationship between North Korea and
the wider world has continued to deteriorate with the resumption
of nuclear testing and long-range ballistic missile launches,
and the decision by North Korea to withdraw from the Six-Party
Talks and to declare that it no longer regards itself as bound
by the 1953 armistice with South Korea that ended the Korean War.
221. In this context, it is unsurprising that
the human rights situation in North Korea , insofar as it can
be assessed by outsiders, remains extremely bleak. The FCO's report
notes that:
There is no freedom of expression, assembly, association,
movement or information. There are no free and fair elections.
The state tightly controls all media. […] There is no independent
human rights monitoring organisation. […] The use of the
death penalty, including public executions and extra-judicial
killings, and the lack of transparency around this, also gives
grave cause for concern. During the last year, the number of public
executions seems to have risen markedly. […]
North Koreans are subject to arrest and detention
without trial. Depending on the offence, authorities can detain
or punish entire families for the crimes of one member. […]
Women do not enjoy equal rights. […] The government does
not provide adequate nutrition and health services for all children.[347]
222. The FCO comments that large numbers of North
Koreans cross the northern border with China for economic and
political reasons—it is estimated that there may currently
be between 20,000 and 40,000 such migrants in China's border provinces.
The Chinese consider these people to be illegal economic migrants,
and if caught they risk being forcibly repatriated to North Korea
where they are subject to harsh penalties, including imprisonment,
torture and execution. The FCO observes that in February 2008,
"it was reported that a large group of people who had returned
after having crossed the border were executed near the Chinese
border".[348]
We comment further on this issue in the section of this Report
dealing with China (see paragraphs 180 and 184 above).
223. North Korea's human rights practice was
highlighted—and its relations with the US further strained—when
in June 2009 a closed North Korean court sentenced two US journalists
to 12 years in labour camp for an unspecified "grave crime"
and for allegedly illegally crossing into North Korea from China,
where they were reporting on the issue of North Korean emigrants.
224. We reiterate the conclusions
of our 2008 Report on Global Security: Japan and Korea
as regards North Korean human rights and British Government policy
on the issue, including our conclusions that the North Korean
regime is one of the worst human rights abusers in the world and
that the Universal Periodic Review which North Korea is to undergo
at the UN Human Rights Council in December 2009 offers a major
opportunity to advance the international effort to secure improvements
in human rights in the country. We recommend that in its response
to this Report the FCO sets out what steps it is taking to achieve
this advance. We further recommend that the Government provides
an assessment of any ways in which its work on North Korean human
rights issues is being affected by the deterioration of North
Korea's relations with the West and with the other participants
in the Six-Party Talks.
Pakistan
225. In February 2008 a civilian government was
elected in Pakistan, bringing to an end eight years of military
rule. The FCO in its report points out that the new government
faces challenges "including serious human rights issues,
often related to weak state institutions".[349]
226. In our forthcoming Report on Global Security:
Afghanistan and Pakistan we discuss specific human rights
issues relating to the imposition of Shari'a law in Swat and other
districts of north-western Pakistan, and the subsequent campaign
by Pakistani armed forces against Islamist militants in that region.[350]
Earlier in this report we discuss allegations that the UK was
complicit in the torture of British nationals in Pakistan (see
Chapter 3 above).
227. The FCO draws attention to wider problems
of human rights in Pakistan, listing:
Issues of poor access to justice, impunity, discrimination
and violence against vulnerable groups, including women and minorities,
non-implementation of legislation relating to rights of children,
arbitrary application of Islamic penal and blasphemy legislation,
arbitrary application of the death penalty, extra-judicial killings,
arbitrary detention and the use of torture, abuse of power by
law enforcement officials and enforced disappearances.[351]
228. The FCO adds that:
Sectarian and terrorist acts in Pakistan caused by
extremists include indiscriminate killing, inadequate justice
through impromptu Shari'a courts, and the destruction of girls'
schools.[352]
229. The situation with regard to women's rights
in Pakistan continues to be disturbing. Pakistan has a very low
placing in the UN Gender Empowerment Index, at 82nd out of 93.[353]
The FCO report draws attention horrific examples of "honour
killings" such as the burial alive of five women in Baluchistan
in August 2008 for planning to marry without family consent.[354]
230. During our visit to Pakistan in April/May
2009, we received a briefing on the work of the British High Commission's
Forced Marriages Unit in Islamabad. We were told that forced marriages
account for a large part of consular work at this Post, with 44
"rescue visits" since the establishment of the unit,
and 124 cases investigated in the previous 12 months. We were
told that every report from either a victim or a third party is
followed up. At an operational level, staff from the consular
division try to establish direct contact with anyone they feel
is at risk, using a combination of planned visits and "cold-calling".
Although the unit can approach the courts to request legal protection
for victims, we were told that the unit has successfully used
more low-key and nuanced approaches, including persuasion, to
positive effect.
231. Human Rights Watch praises the FCO for including
Pakistan as a "major country of concern" in this year's
human rights report, and describes the entry for Pakistan as "generally
good". However, it criticises the Government for mentioning
abuses by the intelligence and policy authorities while "conspicuously
fail[ing] to mention allegations of UK complicity in any of those
abuses".[355]
232. Despite Pakistan's record of human rights
abuses, the country retains a vigorous civil society and press,
which can act as a positive influence. This is illustrated by
the "long march" of summer 2008, in which thousands
of lawyers and civil society activists took part in a country
wide protest to demand the restoration to office of senior judges
dismissed by then President Musharraf. Amnesty International commended
"important work" done by the British Government in promoting
an independent judiciary in Pakistan.[356]
233. We conclude that human
rights abuses in Pakistan continue to be widespread. In particular,
women and girls continue to be subjected to violence and discrimination.
234. We conclude that the work
of the Forced Marriages and Child Abduction Unit at the British
High Commission in Islamabad is to be commended. We recommend
that in its response to this Report, the FCO should supply us
with an update on the work of the Unit, and on the implementation
of the UK/Pakistan Judicial Protocol on Child Abduction, and
detail its plans for supporting and promoting the work of the
Unit in future.
Russia
235. In our Report on Global Security: Russia,
published in November 2007, we considered Russia's human rights
record in detail.[357]
We concluded that "the trend overall in Russia in recent
years has been towards a less open and plural political environment,
combined with continuing serious human rights concerns".[358]
We recommended that the British Government could improve the effectiveness
of its human rights dialogue with Russia by stressing to a greater
extent that the political and human rights standards at issue
are not Western, but international, that they are not foreign
impositions but commitments to which Russia has voluntarily signed
up, and that it was in Russia's interests to be taken seriously
as an international actor which respects its international commitments.[359]
236. The FCO report makes an attempt to accentuate
the positive, by stating that "the UK welcomes and supports
new President Dmitri Medvedev's stated agenda of promoting the
rule of law in Russia".[360]
However, it also draws attention to concerns over media freedom,
safety of journalists, civil society, racism and xenophobia, and
the penal system. The FCO comments that the security situation
in the North Caucasus remains fragile, with a particular deterioration
in security in Ingushetia and Dagestan. It notes allegations that
in those areas a culture of impunity on the part of federal law
enforcement bodies is fuelling further human rights allegations
including abductions, torture and extra-judicial killings.[361]
237. Political and diplomatic relations between
the UK and Russia have been strained in recent years. In our Report
on Global Security: Russia, published in November 2007,
we discussed the consequences of the "Litvinenko case"
(the murder of former Russian intelligence agent Alexander Litvinenko
in London in 2006).[362]
In our Report on the FCO's annual report for 2007-08, we detailed
the difficulties which have been faced by the British Council
in Russia in recent years.[363]
238. The UK participates in six-monthly EU-Russia
human rights consultations, and a UK-Russia bilateral consultation
took place in January 2009. In 2008-09 the UK spent £1.5
million on projects supporting human rights and conflict prevention
in Russia. These include work in the field of penal reform and
support for NGOs working to promote media freedom. The FCO is
encouraging Russia to engage constructively with the UN Universal
Periodic Review mechanism.[364]
239. Human Rights Watch told us that the FCO's
comments on Russia "could have been more hard-hitting".
They noted that "Russia is one of the most dangerous countries
in the world for journalists, with more than 14 outstanding unsolved
murders of journalists in the last nine years". They criticise
the FCO entry for lacking "any serious discussion of economic
or social rights issues, the lack of democratic accountability,
corruption (including the weakened judiciary) and Russia's lack
of co-operation with international institutions".[365]
240. In a report published in July 2009, Amnesty
International considered the human rights situation in the North
Caucasus.[366] The
report commented:
On 16 April 2009 the Russian authorities declared
an end to the counter-terrorism operation in Chechnya. Yet serious
human rights violations continue to be committed in a climate
of impunity in Chechnya and other parts of the North Caucasus,
in particular in Ingushetia, Dagestan and Kabardino-Balkaria.
The civilian population continues to live in an atmosphere of
lawlessness that engenders fear and insecurity. Armed opposition
groups in the region continue to mount attacks. Law enforcement
officials conduct counter-terrorism measures which, in many instances,
entail serious human rights violations. A legitimate aim—that
of tackling violence by armed groups and bringing stability to
the North Caucasus—is still being pursued by means which
violate international human rights law.[367]
241. We conclude that President
Medvedev's commitment to promoting the rule of law in Russia is
undermined by continuing human rights violations. The extent of
the threat to press freedom arising from intimidation and even
murder of journalists is particularly worrying, as is the rise
in xenophobia and racism. We further conclude that there is substantial
evidence of major human rights abuses in the republics of the
Russian Federation in the North Caucasus. We recommend that the
British Government continues to work with its international partners
to maintain a constructive relationship with Russia, whilst at
the same time taking effective steps to encourage that country
to develop a human rights culture which reflects more closely
the international norms and commitments to which Russia has voluntarily
signed up.
Saudi Arabia
242. The UK has expressed concern to Saudi Arabia
over use of the death penalty, corporal punishment, and the quality
of judicial procedure. However, the FCO's report comments that
"many of our concerns regard punishments proscribed [sic][368]
by Islamic Shari'a law, a legal system supported by most Saudis".[369]
The report also claims that the "severe restrictions"
on women "have the support of the majority of Saudi men and
women". The FCO states that the UK "take[s] every opportunity
to urge Saudi Arabia to pursue laws and practices that foster
tolerance and mutual respect".[370]
It has run projects in the country that have supported shelters
for victims of domestic violence and delivered training to women
in the charity sector.
243. Human Rights Watch comments that "the
UK continues to tread carefully around the issue of human rights
in Saudi Arabia". It argues that the FCO's comment about
Shari'a law is misplaced, because the Saudi government allows
no debate about the meaning of Shari'a law and blocks all alternative
interpretations to its own exceptionally harsh one:
The report suggests that support for Shari'a equates
with support for the harshest punishments. Yet many other Muslim
countries which implement Shari'a manage to do so without chopping
off hands and heads.[371]
244. Human Rights Watch refers to "the poor
quality of the judicial system" in Saudi Arabia, and claims
that "many of the most abusive features of the Saudi justice
system are contrary to Shari'a". Tom Porteous told us that
there had been a little progress, not least that Human Rights
Watch itself is now admitted to Saudi Arabia on official visits.
245. Kate Allen of Amnesty International told
us that she had found the section on women in Saudi Arabia in
this year's FCO report difficult reading:
It was apologist in tone, and seemed to imply that
[…] men and women in Saudi Arabia were pretty happy with
the institutionalised nature of the discrimination that takes
place against women. It talked about the ability of richer women
to reclaim their rights by leaving Saudi Arabia, which does not
really feel like progress in terms of women's rights. We at Amnesty
continue to document women being treated as second-rate citizens,
subordinate to men under family law, denied equal opportunities,
not allowed to drive. […] And the latest case, this year,
of an eight-year-old being offered to a 60-year-old man in marriage—only
this year. This is still happening and this is still how women's
rights are being treated..[372]
246. We commented in last year's Report that
"the human rights situation in Saudi Arabia is one of the
worst in the world", and recommended that the UK's dialogue
with the country should have measurable and time-limited objectives.[373]
The Government did not directly address this recommendation in
its response. Whilst stating that it shared the Committee's concerns,
the Government commented that it
disagrees that our policy of assisting with gradual
reform is not adequate. Sustainable reform cannot be imposed on
a country. […] Whilst reform in Saudi Arabia is not at the
pace which we would like to see, recent announcements on the reform
of judiciary are significant and should be welcomed. These changes
will improve access to the judicial system, including for women.
247. We conclude that human
rights continue to be violated on a massive scale in Saudi Arabia.
We consider that the FCO's latest report pulls its punches on
this matter. Although it lists Saudi Arabia as a "country
of concern", it lays emphasis on the degree of cultural acceptance
of severe punishments and of discrimination against women. Whilst
we agree with the Government that "sustainable reform cannot
be imposed on a country", we conclude that the current policy
of "assisting with gradual reform" has borne very little
fruit. The fact that Saudi Arabia is a strategic ally of the UK
should not lead to an official policy of turning a blind eye to
its human rights failings. We repeat our recommendation in last
year's Report that the UK's ongoing dialogue with Saudi Arabia
should have measurable and time-limited objectives in relation
to human rights, and specifically in relation to women's rights,
and that the Government informs us of these objectives in its
response to this Report.
Somalia
248. The protection of human rights in Somalia
has been impeded for many years by the lack of strong state institutions.
The international community has supported the Transitional Federal
Government (TFG) in its civil conflict with Islamist militants.
In January 2007, Ethiopian military forces entered the country
and toppled the militants who had seized control of the capital
Mogadishu. In January 2009 the mandate of the TFG was extended
till 2011, at which time it is anticipated national elections
will be held. As a consequence, Ethiopian forces have now withdrawn
from Somalia.
249. Last year we criticised the FCO for its
handling of Somalia in its human rights report for 2007. Somalia
was not listed as a "country of concern", it received
mention only in three paragraphs in a chapter on conflict prevention,
and the report did not refer to alleged abuses carried out by
Ethiopian troops in the country. We noted that "strong denials
by the Ethiopian government are not sufficient cause for omitting
these allegations". We recommended that the Government should
ensure that human rights are central to its approach in Somalia,
and that it should be included as a country of concern in next
year's report.[374]
250. In its latest report the FCO has listed
Somalia as a country of concern.[375]
It comments that Somalia's human rights record remains poor, with
violence and fighting continuing throughout most of the country,
particularly in Mogadishu and other areas of southern and central
Somalia. Violence against women, including sexual violence, is
widespread. The FCO notes an incident in which a 13-year-old girl
who had been raped was stoned to death, accused of adultery. It
comments that this incident "has led to many Somali people
protesting and questioning the use of such punishments within
their own community".[376]
251. The FCO argues that the UK is "leading
the international effort to re-build the Somali state", shaping
UN Security Council policy and "continually press[ing] for
greater focus on human rights capacity-building in Somalia".
The UK is the second largest bilateral humanitarian and development
donor. It has "raised its concerns with the Ethiopian government
regarding alleged human rights abuses by its troops in Somalia".[377]
However, the FCO comments on the lack of available information
about the human-rights situation in Somalia, arguing that "there
is little opportunity to monitor the limited institutional system,
to gather and verify facts or to understand fully what's actually
happening on the ground".[378]
252. The Government states that it supports the
establishment of a UN commission of inquiry to investigate alleged
human rights. However, it argues that "the timing must right",
and that to launch an inquiry at the wrong time "could have
unintended consequences and increase the threat to the humanitarian
community and the UN". It notes the difficulty of gathering
verifiable information about abuses.[379]
253. Human Rights Watch remains critical of the
FCO for continuing to describe abuses committed by insurgent fighters
in Somalia as fact, but abuses by Ethiopian and TFG security forces
as "reported". Human Rights Watch argues that:
In reality the evidence of war crimes and other serious
abuses by Ethiopian and TFG forces in Somalia from late 2006 through
the end of 2008 is overwhelming and undeniable. […] The UK
government cannot engage effectively around these issues with
either the Ethiopian government or the TFG unless it takes the
position that these serious abuses have without question occurred.[380]
254. Human Rights Watch also claims that assistance
to the TFG police from the UK and other donors has been "alarmingly
free of human rights conditionalities". They argue that
TGF policy forces have "committed serious conflict-related
abuses and violent acts of criminality against civilians in Mogadishu",
and the current Commissioner of Police, Abdi Qeybdid, "is
implicated in serious abuses and should be replaced as a condition
of any further donor assistance to the police forces".[381]
255. The Government's support in principle for
a UN commission of inquiry is welcomed by Human Rights Watch.
However, they argue that the FCO report's concern about the timing
of any commission is "overblown", on the grounds that
the job of collecting evidence will be a major one and needs to
begin as soon as possible, before the trail goes cold.[382]
256. We conclude that the FCO
is to be commended for including Somalia as a "country of
concern" in its latest report, following our previous recommendation.
We further conclude that serious human rights abuses, including
violence against women, are continuing across much of Somalia,
particularly in Mogadishu and in central and southern Somalia.
We conclude that the Government's support for a UN commission
of inquiry into abuses in Somalia is to be welcomed, though we
do not accept its view that the time is not yet right for such
a commission to be established. We recommend that, in its response
to this Report, the FCO states what conditions must be satisfied
before the time is deemed to be right for a commission to be set
up. We further recommend that, in that response, the FCO indicates
what steps it is taking to ensure that UK aid is not supplied
to Somali police forces where there is reason to suppose that
those forces have been complicit in human rights abuses.
Sri Lanka
257. President Rajapakse took office in Sri Lanka
in November 2005 in the context of a 2002 ceasefire agreement
with the Tamil Tigers (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) that
was already crumbling and political negotiations on a peace agreement
that had gone nowhere. Government and Tamil Tiger militants clashed
regularly during 2006 and 2007. By this point the ceasefire agreement
was dead in all but name. During 2008 the Government finally declared
it dead and launched a massive military offensive against the
Tigers, which has now led to what appears to be their complete
defeat.
258. On 18 May 2009 the Sri Lankan military reported
that the leader of the Tigers, Velupillai Prabhakaran, had been
killed. The head of the Sri Lankan army, Lt Gen Sarath Fonseka,
said the military had defeated the rebels and "liberated
the entire country". The BBC noted that this claim cannot
be verified as reporters are barred from the war zone.[383]
259. Aid agencies have expressed concern about
an acute humanitarian emergency in northern Sri Lanka as large
number of civilians have fled the fighting, while others have
remained trapped in the so-called safe zone which has been subject
to heavy bombardment. Both sides in the conflict have been accused
of human rights abuses, including the recruitment and deployment
of child soldiers. There have been allegations, which the authorities
deny, that the armed forces have used cluster munitions. The LTTE
have been accused of using civilians as human shields on a massive
scale.
260. Some observers worry that the growing triumphalism
of the government is being accompanied by increased intolerance
towards independent critics. On 8 January, the editor of the Sunday
Leader newspaper, Lasantha Wickramatunga, was shot dead in Colombo.
Prior to his death, he wrote an open letter in which he stated
that, if he was assassinated, he expected that it would be by
elements from within the state.
261. During the earlier fighting, the Foreign
Secretary called for a ceasefire. This call was greeted with hostility
by supporters of the Sri Lankan government. On 17 May a large
crowd demonstrated outside the British High Commission in Colombo
and burnt an effigy of Mr Miliband.
262. In its report, the FCO noted that "allegations
of extra-judicial killings, abductions, disappearances and violence
and intimidation against the media continue. There has been little
progress in the investigation of those incidents. The prevalent
culture of impunity is one of the main obstacles to peace in Sri
Lanka."[384] However,
Sri Lanka is not one of the "countries of concern" singled
out for special attention in the FCO's report.
263. On 14 May the International Committee of
the Red Cross announced that thousands of people remained trapped
in a small area along the coast within the conflict zone:
As fighting goes on unabated, civilians are forced
to seek protection in hand-dug bunkers, making it even more difficult
to fetch scarce drinking water and food. "Our staff are witnessing
an unimaginable humanitarian catastrophe," said the ICRC's
director of operations, Pierre Krähenbühl, from the
ICRC's headquarters in Geneva today. "Despite high-level
assurances, the lack of security on the ground means that our
sea operations continue to be stalled, and this is unacceptable,"
added Mr Krähenbühl. "No humanitarian organization
can help them in the current circumstances. People are left to
their own devices."[385]
264. The following day Rt Hon Douglas Alexander,
the Secretary of State for International Development, commented
that he was "utterly appalled" that the ICRC is unable
to evacuate war wounded to safety or provide aid to the 50,000
civilians trapped in the conflict zone.[386]
265. On 18 May, the Foreign Secretary along with
other EU Foreign Ministers issued a statement stating that they
were "appalled by the loss of innocent civilian lives as
a result of the conflict" and called on the Government of
Sri Lanka and the LTTE to take "all necessary steps to prevent
further loss of life".[387]
266. As noted earlier in this Report, on 27 May
the UN Human Rights Council passed a resolution praising the Sri
Lankan government in its military campaign against Tamil Tiger
insurgents, and describing the conflict as a domestic matter that
did not warrant outside interference. The motion, proposed by
the Sri Lankan government, was supported by 29 countries including
China, India, Egypt and Cuba. It was opposed by 12 countries including
the UK.[388]
267. However, Navi Pillay, the UN High Commissioner
for Human Rights, has called for an international war crimes inquiry,
saying she believed that both sides might be guilty of war crimes.
The UN Secretary-General has been reported to be privately supportive
of this approach:
Ban Ki-moon, at a closed-door briefing for Security
Council members [on 5 June], called for a credible inquiry to
be undertaken with international backing and full support from
Sri Lanka's government. He declined to elaborate on exactly how
the inquiry should be done, but he urged an examination of what
he said were serious allegations of violations of international
humanitarian laws, according to diplomats and U.N. officials who
attended.[389]
268. On 10 June Tom Porteous of Human Rights
Watch told us that "it is very difficult to get a very accurate
picture of what is going on", but that "terrible loss
of life and destruction" had taken place. He added:
Sri Lanka should be included as a country of concern,
perhaps in next year's report. The human rights situation is about
not just the behaviour of the Sri Lankan Government forces and
the Tamil Tigers in the zone of conflict in the north, but the
overall situation in the country. Critics of the Government—whether
they are in the north or the south—tend to get into trouble.
They are targeted in one way or another, and that is a source
of real concern.[390]
269. Mr Miliband told us on 16 June that the
reason why Sri Lanka was not listed as a "country of concern"
in the FCO's report was the timing of writing the report: "obviously
at the height of the fighting in March and April there would have
been very serious concern".[391]
He subsequently informed us that it will definitely feature as
a country of concern in next year's report.[392]
270. Mr Miliband stated that the test for Sri
Lanka was whether it could live up to the commitments that President
Rajapakse had given immediately after the cessation of hostilities:
"to find a way of giving an inclusive political role to all
the communities in Sri Lanka". He also noted that there is
a massive problem of internally displaced persons (IDPs), with
270,000 IDPs needing to be resettled; and a huge task of demining
to be carried out.[393]
271. On 14 July the Government supplied Parliament
with its latest assessment of the humanitarian situation in Sri
Lanka. It concluded that the situation was stabilising but that
there was still a population of almost 284,000 IDPs held in camps.
Conditions in the camps were continuing to improve, but the Government
remained concerned about high levels of malnutrition, particularly
among children, overcrowding and inadequate sanitation facilities.
The Government also expressed concern about the lack of freedom
of movement of internally displaced people (IDPs).[394]
272. On 19 July the Prime Minister, giving evidence
to the Liaison Committee, said that:
I have talked to the President of Sri Lanka on a
number of occasions. I have been very concerned about the humanitarian
problems that have arisen from the numbers of internally displaced
people. We think the number is about 280,000. […] There are
high levels of malnutrition, overcrowding and inadequate water
and sanitation facilities […] We are concerned about the
lack of freedom of movement of the people in the camps, the restrictions
that are put on activities.
[395]
273. Asked whether it was time that the Sri Lankan
Government recognised the rights of the Tamil people to an element
of self-determination, the Prime Minister replied:
This is, if I may say, exactly the position that
I put to the President, that to have an end of military conflict
does not mean that the problem has gone away. It has got to be
dealt with politically and it has got to be dealt with by discussion
and negotiation and some form of conciliation. That is why we
are anxious that Des Browne, who is our envoy to this area, has
the chance to talk to all the different groups and that is why
we are putting as much pressure on the President as possible that
this has got to be a seen as a step towards and a mean by which
a political solution can be found.[396]
274. We conclude that the FCO's
decision to include Sri Lanka as a "country of concern"
in next year's human rights report is amply justified by recent
events in that country, and is to be welcomed. We recommend that,
notwithstanding the regrettable vote in the UN Human Rights Council
on 27 May, the Government should press for the setting up of an
international war crimes inquiry, to investigate allegations of
atrocities carried out by both sides in the Sri Lankan civil war.
We further recommend that the Government uses such leverage as
it has at its disposal to encourage the Sri Lankan government
to tackle what the FCO refers to as "the prevalent culture
of impunity".
Sudan
275. The FCO's report sets out developments in
the human rights situation in Sudan in the years since the Comprehensive
Peace Agreement (CPA) of 2005 brought to an end the civil war
between North and South Sudan. It finds that the record continues
to be poor, with a widespread culture of impunity. The FCO draws
attention to issues of concern including the death penalty; women's
rights; torture; Hudud punishments (amputation, flogging and stoning);
freedom of the media; and harassment and arrest of activists and
political figures. In the western region of Darfur in particular
there are systematic violations of human rights, and lack of respect
for international humanitarian law by government, militias and
rebel groups.[397]
276. The FCO notes some signs of progress. The
ceasefire in Southern Sudan following the 2005 agreement has been
largely observed. The joint UN-African Union Peacekeeping Force
for Darfur (UNAMID) has been deployed. In June 2008 the UN and
African Union jointly appointed a single chief mediator for the
Darfur political process.
277. However, the FCO comments that "rights
enshrined in the agreement and constitution have had little impact
on the ground. For instance, a National Human Rights Commission,
which should have been established under the CPA, has still not
been set up. UNAMID is still suffering from shortfalls in funding
and equipment, preventing its full deployment. The UK has offered
£4 million in support for training and equipping African
troop-contributing countries for UNAMID.
278. In paragraph 162 above we noted that the
International Criminal Court has been blocked in its attempts
to bring individuals to trial for alleged human rights violations
in Darfur. The Sudanese government has refused to respect arrest
warrants issued in 2007 for the Sudanese minister Ahmad Muhammad
Harun and the Janjaweed militia leader Ali Kushayb, and the warrant
issued in March 2009 in respect of the Sudanese President, Omar
al-Bashir, accused of genocide, war crimes and crimes against
humanity.
279. Human Rights Watch criticises the FCO's
report for saying nothing about the campaign led by some African
and Arab states to have the warrant for President al-Bashir deferred
by the Security Council, under Article 16 of the Rome Statute.
Human Rights Watch comments that:
Given the nature of the crimes committed in Darfur,
the clear political/military chain of command and Bashir's failure
to cooperate with the ICC on previous warrants, the UK should
make clear that a deferral of this warrant would be unjustified.
The notion that justice can be traded for peace is a false one.
The victims of abuse in Darfur have a right to justice and the
world must tackle such crimes head-on if they are to hope to prevent
future mass atrocities.[398]
280. On 2 July 2009 the African Union, at a meeting
held in Libya, resolved to halt co-operation with the ICC over
its decision to charge President al-Bashir with war crimes.[399]
281. Earlier, on 18 June, the UN Human Rights
Council had voted to continue the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur
for Human Rights in Sudan, Dr Sima Samar.[400]
The proposal was carried by 20 votes to 18, with 9 abstentions.
Sudan opposed the proposal; the UK was in favour. It was reported
that the United States, which has only just taken up a seat on
the Council, "played a key behind-the-scenes role in negotiating
the text ultimately adopted".[401]
282. Dr Samar's most recent report, presented
to the Council before this vote, concludes that:
Despite some positive legislative developments, the
human rights situation in the Sudan remains critical, with daunting
challenges in terms of securing, in particular, the rights to
life and security of the person, and the effective administration
of justice.[402]
Dr Samar draws attention to widespread arbitrary
arrest and detention, ill-treatment in custody, use of torture,
and (in Darfur) direct and indirect attacks on civilians by security
forces and government-supported militia.[403]
She states that "a key challenge to human rights protection
continues to be the lack of political will and capacity to ensure
justice and accountability for serious violations of human rights
and IHL. In most incidents authorities have failed to hold perpetrators
accountable."[404]
There are continuing reports of "violence and sexual abuse
against women and children by state, non-state, criminal groups
and bandits".[405]
Interlocutors in Khartoum and Darfur reported a climate of fear,
and an inability to exercise freedom of speech or association
for fear of reprisal.[406]
283. We conclude that continuing
widespread abuses of human rights in Sudan are a matter of great
concern. We further conclude that the recent decision of the UN
Human Rights Council, by a narrow majority, to continue the investigation
of human rights abuses in Sudan is to be welcomed. We recommend
that the British Government continues to be pro-active in offering
support for the Darfur peace process and for UN peacekeeping forces.
We further recommend that the Government works closely with its
international partners in an effort to ensure that the writ of
the International Criminal Court operates in Sudan.
Zimbabwe
284. On 30 January 2009 the National Council
of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change in Zimbabwe announced
its intention to proceed with the power-sharing deal agreed on
15 September 2008 under which Robert Mugabe would remain President
whilst Morgan Tsvangirai became Prime Minister. That decision
followed the Extraordinary Summit of the Southern African Development
Community on 26-27 January 2009, held in Pretoria, at which parties
agreed a way forward. Tsvangirai was sworn in as Prime Minister
on 11 February with a Cabinet formed two days later. His wife
was killed in an apparent road accident in March; he himself ruled
out foul play, though others have not done so.
285. On 13 May Mr Tsvangirai launched the unity
government's "100-day plan", aimed at "the implementation
of key sector reforms and the initiation of essential development
and rehabilitation programmes".[407]
However, Mr Tsvangirai has also drawn attention to repeated violations
of the power-sharing agreement by Mr Mugabe and his political
allies, including a failure to implement economic and fiscal reforms
required by the International Monetary Fund.[408]
286. The FCO report sets out in detail the extent
of human rights abuses in Zimbabwe under the Mugabe regime,
including torture; intimidation; arbitrary arrests
and detentions; forced displacements; violence; repressive legislation;
lack of freedom of expression, association and the press; and
politicisation of food. We have seen a frightening deterioration
of the situation in 2008, which has drawn criticism from across
the international community. [409]
287. The FCO notes that the 2008 elections themselves
were "characterised by intense violence, torture, abductions
and murder perpetrated by agents of the state", often militia
or so-called 'war veterans', but also the military and, to a lesser
extent, the police. The FCO estimates that from March 2008, more
than 5,000 people were victims of violence, with at least 36,000
displaced. Both rounds of elections were declared undemocratic
by the international community.[410]
288. The political crisis which followed the
disputed elections was accompanied by a developing humanitarian
crisis. NGOs withdrew from most activities before the elections
and any resumption of activities was prevented by the post-election
violence. On 4 June 2008 the Zimbabwe government announced that
it was suspending the field operations of most NGOs, a ban not
lifted till 29 August. NGOs continue to face severe challenges.[411]
289. Life expectancy in Zimbabwe is the lowest
in the world, more than 2,500 people a week are dying from AIDS-related
illnesses, there have been 1,900 deaths from cholera, over five
million people (nearly half the population) need food aid, essential
services have largely ceased to function, over 80% of the population
is unemployed, the economy is subject to hyper-inflation, and
health and education provision is on the point of collapse.[412]
290. The UK gave £45 million in aid to Zimbabwe
in 2008, and expects that "it will be necessary to give sustained
large-scale humanitarian support from the international community
for the foreseeable future". In 2008 the UK increased funding
for civil-society organisations, "including those seeking
to uphold human rights and democratic freedoms", to £3.5
million.[413]
291. Human Rights Watch criticises the FCO report
for not focussing sharply enough on "the need for increased
pressure on Zimbabwe to effectively end impunity for past human
rights abuses by ZANU-PF and its allies". It notes that the
report does not set benchmarks to be met by any new government
in Zimbabwe before development aids can flows can resume. However,
Human Rights Watch concludes that "for the time being, the
UK should maintain its high levels of humanitarian aid (but avoid
delivering aid directly to the government) and press for the retention
of targeted EU sanctions against those individuals responsible
for serious rights and governance abuses".[414]
292. On 7 June Morgan Tsvangirai began a three-week
visit to Western countries seeking "re-engagement" and
urging them to lift what he called "restrictive measures"
against Zimbabwe now that a coalition government was making progress
toward economic and democratic reform. Mr Tsvangirai told Dutch
television that he had a "workable relationship" with
Mr Mugabe. He was also quoted as saying that "As far as I
know today, there are no political prisoners in Zimbabwe. If there
is a due process of the law, it must be followed."[415]
293. Mr Miliband told us that the current position
in Zimbabwe is "a tale of two halves", with the security
forces still being in the grip of the ZANU-PF machine, but the
economic, educational and social welfare institutions of the country
being under the command of Prime Minister Tsvangirai. He stated
that the British Government was pursuing a threefold policy towards
Zimbabwe: first, to ensure that the cross-party power-sharing
agreement is actually implemented, with appropriate benchmarks
and staging posts; second, to regard the current government as
a transitional one, because the international community does not
recognise Mr Mugabe as the victor of the March 2008 elections;
and third, "to continue to stand by the commitments to support
the eventual renewal of Zimbabwe", with an internationally
supported reconstruction programme, once there is a government
in place in which the international community can have confidence.[416]
294. We conclude that the human
rights and humanitarian situation in Zimbabwe continues to be
appalling, although the participation of the opposition in a transitional
coalition government, and the recent measure of economic stabilisation,
offer glimmers of hope. We further conclude that it is difficult
to see how fundamental reforms in governance, the rule of law,
and ending human rights abuses can be achieved as long as Robert
Mugabe and his supporters are still in power and control the security
apparatus. We recommend that the Government should provide immediate
aid to Zimbabwe's suffering people, subject to safeguards against
its falling into the hands of Mr Mugabe and his supporters, of
encouraging progress towards the early holding of fair and free
elections, and of making preparations for a long-term reconstruction
package to be delivered when a genuinely democratic and representative
government is finally in place. We further recommend that the
FCO should continue to raise the gross violations of human rights
in Zimbabwe at the UN Security Council.
295 Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report
on Human Rights 2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 125 Back
296
Ibid., pp 125-26 Back
297
See Foreign Affairs Committee, Ninth Report of Session 2007-08,
Human Rights Annual Report 2007, HC 533, paras 92-94 Back
298
Government Response to Foreign Affairs Committee, Ninth Report
of Session 2007-08, Human Rights Annual Report 2007, Cm
7463 Back
299
BBC news website, "UN chief calls for Burma releases",
3 July 2009, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific Back
300
Ev 104 (paras 34-35) Back
301
Q 82 Back
302
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 127 Back
303
Ibid., pp 127, 130 Back
304
Ev 71 (para 32) Back
305
Foreign Affairs Committee, Tenth Report of Session 2007-08, Global
Security: Japan and Korea, HC 449, paras 191-210 Back
306
Ibid., para 196 Back
307
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, pp 130-31 Back
308
Ibid., para 35 Back
309
Foreign Affairs Committee, Ninth Report of Session 2007-08, Human
Rights Annual Report 2007, HC 533, para 112 Back
310
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, pp 128-29 Back
311
Ibid., p 129 Back
312
Ev 71 (para 32) Back
313
HC Deb 29 October 2008 c30-32WS Back
314
Foreign Affairs Committee, Oral and written evidence, Developments
in the European Union, Wednesday 10 December 2008, HC 79-i,
Q 52 Back
315
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 127 Back
316
BBC news website, "Scores killed in China protests",
6 July 2009, http://news.bbc.co.uk Back
317
BBC news website, "Uneasy calm in China's riot city",
9 July 2009, http://news.bbc.co.uk Back
318
BBC news website, "China seeks control through openness",
8 July 2009, http://news.bbc.co.uk Back
319
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 131 Back
320
Ev 104 (para 37) Back
321
Ev 104-05 (paras 37-38) Back
322
Q 88 Back
323
Q 88 Back
324
HR 188, pp 2-3 Back
325
HR 188, p 7 Back
326
Q 193 Back
327
Written Ministerial Statement, "Colombia", HC Deb, 30
March 2009, cols 40-42WS Back
328
Foreign Affairs Committee, Fifth Report of Session 2007-08, Global
Security: Iran, HC 142, paras 99-103 Back
329
Ibid., para 99 Back
330
Ibid., para 103 Back
331
Fifth Report of the Foreign Affairs Committee, Session 2007-08,
Global Security: Iran: Response of the Secretary of State
for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Cm 7361, para 37 Back
332
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, pp 141-42 Back
333
Ibid., pp 142-44 Back
334
"Fears grow for Iranian detainees", 3 July 2009, news.bbc.co.uk Back
335
The Times, "British embassy analyst faces prison sentence",
5 July 2009, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news Back
336
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 144 Back
337
Ibid., p 146 Back
338
Ibid., p 145 Back
339
Ibid., pp 144-48 Back
340
Ev 72 (paras 38-40) Back
341
Ev 106 (para 49) Back
342
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 147 Back
343
Ev 106 (para 50) Back
344
Foreign Affairs Committee, Tenth Report of Session 2007-08, Global
Security: Japan and Korea, HC 449 Back
345
Ibid., para 175 Back
346
Ibid., para 178 Back
347
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 140 Back
348
Ibid. pp 140-41 Back
349
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 153 Back
350
Foreign Affairs Committee, Eighth Report of Session 2008-09, Global
Security: Afghanistan and Pakistan, HC 302, paras 161-62 Back
351
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 153 Back
352
Ibid. Back
353
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 155 Back
354
Ibid. Back
355
Ev 107, para 55 Back
356
Ev 71, paras 23-26 Back
357
Foreign Affairs Committee, Second Report of Session 2007-08, Global
Security: Russia, HC 51, paras 40-91 Back
358
Ibid., para 49 Back
359
Ibid., para 70 Back
360
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 157 Back
361
Ibid., pp 159-61 Back
362
Foreign Affairs Committee, Second Report of Session 2007-08, Global
Security: Russia, HC 51, paras 110-24 Back
363
Foreign Affairs Committee, Second Report of Session 2007-08, Foreign
and Commonwealth Office Annual Report 2007-08, HC 195, paras
269-75 Back
364
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, pp 157-60 Back
365
Ev 107 (paras 57-61) Back
366
Amnesty International, Rule without law: Human rights violations
in the North Caucasus, July 2009 Back
367
Ibid., p 4 Back
368
The word intended is presumably "prescribed". Back
369
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 160 Back
370
Ibid., p 161 Back
371
Ev 107, para 62 Back
372
Q 86 Back
373
Foreign Affairs Committee, Ninth Report of Session 2007-08, Human
Rights Annual Report 2007, HC 533, para 63 Back
374
Foreign Affairs Committee, Ninth Report of Session 2007-08, Human
Rights Annual Report 2007, HC 533, para 174 Back
375
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, pp 162-63 Back
376
Ibid., p 162 Back
377
Ibid., pp 162-63 Back
378
Ibid., p 163 Back
379
Ibid., p 163 Back
380
Ev 107, para 64 Back
381
Ev 107-08, para 65 Back
382
Ibid., para 66 Back
383
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia, 18 May 2009 Back
384
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 35 Back
385
http://www.icrc.org/Web/Eng/siteeng0.nsf/htmlall/sri-lanka-news-140509 Back
386
http://www.dfid.gov.uk/Media-Room/News-Stories/2009 Back
387
http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/newsroom/newsfiles1/005-sri-lanka/ Back
388
See paras 145-46 and 152 above. Back
389
Associated Press, 6 June 2009, "UN chief urges war
crimes probe in Sri Lanka" Back
390
Q 79 Back
391
Q 183 Back
392
Q 184 Back
393
Q 183 Back
394
HC Deb, 14 July 2009, cols 12-13WS Back
395
Uncorrected transcript of oral evidence given by the Prime Minister
to the Liaison Committee, 16 July 2009, HC 257-ii, Q 305 Back
396
Ibid., Q 306 Back
397
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 164 Back
398
Ev 108, para 68 Back
399
BBC news website, "African Union in rift with court",
3 July 2009 Back
400
Associated Press, "UN rights body votes to continue Sudan
scrutiny", 18 June 2009, http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap Back
401
Reuters, "U. S. takes seat at U.N. rights forum, urges
unity", 19 June 2009, http://www.reuters.com Back
402
UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on
the Situation of Human Rights in the Sudan, Sima Samar, June
2009, para 7 Back
403
Ibid, paras 8, 11 Back
404
Ibid., para 17 Back
405
Ibid., para 48 Back
406
Ibid., para 90 Back
407
http://www.zimbabweprimeminister.org Back
408
http://www.inthenews.co.uk/news/world/international-affairs Back
409
Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Annual Report on Human Rights
2008, Cm 7557, March 2009, p 174 Back
410
Ibid., p 174 Back
411
Ibid., p 175 Back
412
Ibid., p 177 Back
413
Ibid., p 178 Back
414
Ev 110 (paras 90-93) Back
415
Zimbabwe Guardian, 8 June 2009, "There are no political
prisoners in Zimbabwe: Tsvangirai" Back
416
Q 184 Back
| 
