Foreign AffairsWritten evidence from Amnesty International UK
Summary of Rrecommendations:
1. The UK’s role in the promotion and protection of human rights.
Amnesty International UK recommends that:
The FAC asks the UK Government to clarify the timetable for ratification of the Council of Europe’s Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence.
The FAC urges the UK Government to cease the pursuit of diplomatic assurances that are aimed at circumventing international human rights law and standards.
The FAC asks the UK Government what measures it is taking to work with EU countries to table a resolution at the UN Human Rights Council on Bahrain.
The UK Government provides an update about negotiations around EU accession to the Convention and explains what, if any, its objections are.
The FAC asks the UK Government how progress in implementing the UN Guiding Principles on business and human rights will be monitored and how shortcomings will be dealt with.
The FAC asks the FCO how and if it advocates human rights with other departments.
2. The FCO’s efforts to strengthen the ability of states to counter terrorism whilst working to protect human rights in those states, as described by the Secretary of State in his speech on 14 February 2013 on Countering Terrorism Overseas.
Amnesty International UK recommends that:
The UK Government to investigate and, where appropriate, try individuals suspected of terrorism-related activities, rather than establish and use procedures such as Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures that circumvent and undermine the ordinary criminal justice procedure.
The FAC asks the FCO what measures are taken to ensure that UK domestic legislation cannot be quoted by other governments to justify repressive measures.
The UK Government to make public the specific legislative changes that would be necessary to allow ratification of the (Enforced Disappearances) Convention.
The UK Government articulates how it actively supports civil society organisations, human rights defenders as well as non-judicial institutions (eg National Human Rights Institutions) specifically as part of its approach to strengthening the ability of states to counter terrorism.
The UK Government to cease seeking, using and relying on unreliable diplomatic assurances against torture and other ill-treatment to forcibly return persons to places where they are at risk of such abuses.
The UK Government to publish the interim report from the UK Detainee Inquiry without further delay.
The UK Government to establish a human rights compliant inquiry on alleged UK involvement in human rights violations, including torture and other ill-treatment of detainees held overseas, that ensures real accountability, and that conforms with and fully discharges the UK’s obligations under international human rights law.
The FAC asks the UK Government to what extent it has sought to engage with civil society groups in Somalia, including women’s groups.
3. The 11 April declaration by G8 Foreign Ministers on the prevention of sexual violence in conflict, and the impact of the FCO’s Preventing Sexual Violence Initiative, launched in May 2012.
Amnesty International UK recommends that:
The UK Government should outline indicators in the National Action Plan (on women, peace and security) to measure success, budget, ensure effective consultations in country and joining up with the NAPs of other countries.
The UK Government identifies specific and measurable improvements in the funding, political intervention and other forms of support given to WHRDs, particularly those working outside of Kabul.
The UK Government (with EU partners and the UN Special Rapporteurs on Human Rights Defenders and Violence Against Women) lobby for the Afghan Government to issue an open invitation to the United Nations Special Rapporteurs to make a country visit before the end of 2014.
The UK Government to more effectively and publicly advocate for Afghan women to be meaningfully represented in both planning stages and during peace and reconciliation talks in all forums, including in the trilateral talks hosted by the UK.
The UK Government to ensure that its £70 million contribution to supporting the Afghan National Army and police (2015–2017) specifically address women’s recruitment in the security sector.
The FAC asks the FCO whether the UK Government will lobby for the next phase of the UNDP/Law and Order Trust Fund for Afghanistan (LOTFA) to include a stronger focus on women’s recruitment into the police.
The FAC enquires about the implementation of Tokyo Mutual Accountability Framework, specifically how the UK government intends to meet the commitments to tackle gender-based violence and whether (and what) benchmarks have been set.
The FAC seeks clarification from the FCO regarding how gender perspectives are integrated across government departments, including Ministry of Defence doctrine, training and practice.
4. Threats to freedom of expression through the media, including the jamming of broadcasts and the growing trend of imposing controls on access to the internet.
Amnesty International UK recommends that:
The FAC asks the UK Government how it consistently engages with civil society organisations in its freedom of expression work.
The UK Government uses its influence to help secure an effective Southern African Development Community mission that can ensure space for civil society is safeguarded up to and during the election.
The FAC asks the UK Government what it is doing to tackle the misuse of “national security” and “public order” legislation.
The FAC asks the UK Government to develop a strategy to use the period between now and Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting to press the Sri Lankan Government to deliver significant improvements in human rights prior to the meeting in November.
The FAC asks the UK Government about the impact of its work in Russia and how its concerns are raised whilst seeking to build commercial partnership and security efforts such as Syria.
The FAC asks the UK Government what plans they have to use the UK/Russia Cultural year of 2014 to promote human rights.
The FAC asks the UK Government how human rights are incorporated into engagement with the Syrian opposition.
The UK Government to continue to help ease the humanitarian crisis in Syria by urgently helping to provide housing, food, water, sanitation and health care to refugees.
The UK Government to continue to press—through the UN Security Council—for the situation to be referred (including abuses by both authorities and armed opposition groups) to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.
Amnesty International UK
1. Amnesty International UK is a national section of a global movement of over three million supporters, members and activists. We represent more than 230,000 supporters in the United Kingdom. Collectively, our vision is of a world in which every person enjoys all of the human rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights instruments. Our mission is to undertake research and action focused on preventing and ending grave abuses of these rights. We are independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion.
Introduction
2. Amnesty International UK (AIUK) welcomes this opportunity to contribute to the work of the Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC) in its assessment of the UK’s human rights efforts in 2012. This submission addresses the questions asked by the FAC, but does not include all of AIUK’s observations and recommendations regarding the work of the UK Government on human rights or the Foreign and Commonwealth Office’s (FCO) report. We therefore welcome the opportunity to provide oral evidence before the FAC and would be happy to submit any additional information should the FAC find it of assistance.
1. The UK’s role in the promotion and protection of human rights:
3. As highlighted in the FCO’s report, the UK played key leadership roles in human rights issues in 2012. The UK’s signature of the Council of Europe’s Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence was welcome although the UK has not yet ratified the treaty. At the UN in March 2013, the UK was instrumental in securing an Arms Trade Treaty. The UK’s leadership on the Preventing Sexual Violence in conflict Initiative as part of its G8 Presidency is demonstrative of the UK’s influence in international affairs and its ability to garner high-level support. The success of both the Treaty and the Initiative will, of course, be in their implementation. Under the UK’s chairpersonship of the Council of Europe, AIUK welcomed the priority placed on human rights, but raised several concerns about the UK’s proposed reforms of the European Court of Human Rights. AIUK was also concerned by the continued pursuit of diplomatic assurances to circumvent the absolute prohibition on torture as well as the increasing reliance on secret evidence which leaves many victims, including those seeking effective remedy from overseas, in the dark.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the UK Government to clarify the timetable for ratification of the Council of Europe’s Convention on Preventing and Combating Violence Against Women and Domestic Violence.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC urges the UK Government to cease the pursuit of diplomatic assurances that are aimed at circumventing international human rights law and standards.
1.1 Human rights promotion through multilateral organisations
4. The FCO’s report places a strong emphasis on the UK working through networks such as the Commonwealth, the EU and the UN, with an emphasis on the UK seeking election to the UN Human Rights Council for 2014–16. The success of the UK’s human rights objectives and its ability to “turn the dial”1 in international affairs is dependent on its credibility and authority. This authority relies, inter alia, on the UK being consistent in its approach to promoting and protecting human rights. We welcome the UK’s continued support of the International Criminal Court and other international and ad hoc international criminal tribunals as this is vital for holding the perpetrators of human rights abuses to account. In addition, the UK continues to provide important support to UN agencies as well as mechanisms and procedures (such as the Universal Periodic Review and UN Special Rapporteurs). However, the UK appears to “pull its punches” on some countries. For example, we would like them to employ a more robust and critical approach to human rights abuses in Bahrain at the UN Human Rights Council, yet to date they have failed to do so.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the UK Government what measures it is taking to work with EU countries to table a resolution at the UN Human Rights Council on Bahrain.
5. In multilateral fora, the UK has used its influence to encourage and build the capacity of other states to protect human rights. For example, the human rights criteria attached to states seeking EU membership and the UK’s commitment to EU expansion. AIUK is concerned, however, by the UK’s position on EU accession to the European Convention on Human Rights. Statements by UK Government ministers about their intention to “scrap”2 the Human Rights Act or reconsider the UK’s relation with the European Court of Human Rights are also worrying. These messages are not only heard in the UK; they reverberate across Europe and send a signal to other countries that adhering to the Court and Convention is optional or negotiable. Undermining the rule of law and these regional protections that the UK has a long history in developing is a serious setback for the millions across Europe who rely on the Court for justice. These moves by the UK also undermine the UK’s ability to work with and through those same structures, as well as the UK’s human rights credibility with other member states.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the UK Government provides an update about negotiations around EU accession to the Convention and explains what, if any, its objections are.
1.2 Business and human rights
6. There are also inconsistencies in the context of trade and investment. AIUK is concerned, for example, by the UK’s restrictive interpretation of the extraterritorial application of human rights protections under international law with respect to the impacts of UK-based companies operating overseas. We have documented a number of cases in which companies with headquarters in the UK have caused or contributed to human rights abuses in other countries, and where the UK has both regulatory and administrative means to take action to prevent and sanction such abuse, but has failed to do so.3 AIUK is deeply concerned that measures introduced in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offender Act also create a barrier for the overseas victims of UK based multi-national companies to seek redress for human rights abuses in UK Courts. AIUK expects that the UK’s forthcoming Action Plan on Business and Human Rights will be sufficiently coherent and robust to bring about significant improvements in the human rights impacts of UK companies and in the ability of their victims to access remedy.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the UK Government how progress in implementing the UN Guiding Principles on business and human rights will be monitored and how shortcomings will be dealt with.
1.3 Strengthening human rights internally:
7. In the promotion of human rights internationally, the UK should be seeking to set the national standard for others to follow. The FCO, therefore, should be an advocate for human rights across all government departments. Not only does this relate to concerns around human rights reporting that we have previously raised with the FAC4 but it would also strengthen human rights protections in both domestic and foreign policy and practice. AIUK continues to argue that human rights reporting in cross-departmental initiatives such as the UK’s National Action Plan on UNSCR 1325 (NAP) and the implementation of strategies such as the Building Stability Overseas Strategy5 should be strengthened by stating clear and defined objectives and indicators, upon which progress and implementation should be reported against.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the FCO how and if it advocates human rights with other departments.
2. The FCO’s efforts to strengthen the ability of states to counter terrorism whilst working to protect human rights in those states, as described by the Secretary of State in his speech on 14 February 2013 on Countering Terrorism Overseas.
2.1 Setting the standard:
8. The UK, like all states, has the primary responsibility to protect, promote and respect human rights of all people in its territory, including the obligation to protect them from violations (including acts of terrorism) as much as possible. Individuals suspected of involvement in terrorism-related activities should be investigated and, where there is sufficient evidence, prosecuted in ordinary criminal courts, in conformity with international fair trial standards. The UK must not seek to operate clandestinely. It should seek to operate in a manner that enables it to be held accountable for policy and practice, including by upholding the principles of a fair, transparent and open judicial process. The Foreign Secretary argues that the approach outlined in his speech is a “framework of accountability and human rights”. The approach offered, however, is a not a rights based approach to security, but a continuation of an approach that not only inconsistently promotes human rights in other countries, but also undermines human rights through the UK’s own domestic counter-terror measures. This undermines the UK’s reputation abroad and fails to set a standard appropriate for a credible international human rights advocate. For example, AIUK is concerned that measures in the Justice and Security Act are not only contrary to traditions of fair and open justice in the UK but could have a negative impact on the credibility of the UK’s judicial system and be replicated elsewhere, leading to negative consequences for victims of human rights violations elsewhere in the world. Similarly, AIUK considers that the Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (TPIMS) can amount to deprivation of liberty or constitute restrictions on the rights to privacy, expression, association and movement as well as allowing the UK Government to rely on secret material.
Amnesty International UK urges the UK Government to investigate and, where appropriate, try individuals suspected of terrorism-related activities, rather than establish and use procedures such as TPIMs that circumvent and undermine the ordinary criminal justice procedure.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the FCO what measures are taken to ensure that UK domestic legislation cannot be quoted by other governments to justify repressive measures.
9. The UK should also be setting the standard by supporting international treaties and mechanisms. AIUK is therefore disappointed that the UK has not fully committed to the ratification of the UN Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. Noting the UK Government’s commitment to make further progress towards ratification by the UK’s mid-term UPR report (2014),6 AIUK continues to advocate that a timetable be established and adequate resources allocated to ensure the Convention’s ratification as soon as possible.
Amnesty International UK urges the UK Government to make public the specific legislative changes that would be necessary to allow ratification of the Convention.
2.2 Measures to strengthen ability of states to counter terrorism:
10. AIUK has long documented cases where security provisions (often coupled with excessive force) have been abused and used against human rights defenders and critics under anti-terrorism and other “national security” legislation. Over-broad or vague provisions (including “states of emergency”) are at particular risk of abuse or being applied in an arbitrary and/or discriminatory manner. “National security” and “public order” definitions, for example, should be in line with the Johannesburg Principles.7 Narrow and clearly defined provisions, together with effective oversight and robust accountability mechanisms which involve civil society in both drafting and implementation are essential. UK efforts to build counter-terror capacity in other countries must be matched with strengthening accountability measures, not only rule of law measures (such as improvements to judicial systems) but also by ensuring enabling environments for human rights defenders or supporting the development of National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs).8
Amnesty International UK recommends that the UK Government articulates how it actively supports civil society organisations, human rights defenders as well as non-judicial institutions (eg NHRIs) specifically as part of its approach to strengthening the ability of states to counter terrorism.
11. The four measures highlighted in the Foreign Secretary’s speech9 speak more to the UK’s desire to deport individuals and seek assurances rather than the promotion or protection of human rights. AIUK has long considered the use of diplomatic assurances to deport individuals (alleged to pose a threat to the UK’s national security) to countries where there is real risk of torture and other ill-treatment to be an unreliable and unenforceable mechanism which circumvents the absolute prohibition on torture or other ill-treatment. In his speech, the Foreign Secretary claims a “need” to share information which will see the UK relying on assurances and—more concerning—that even when these assurances are not credible the UK will still seek to build a “justice and human rights partnership”.10 Whilst international partnerships can and should be used to promote human rights, AIUK is concerned that the UK’s previous “partnerships” with governments of countries such as Lebanon, Jordan, Libya, Ethiopia and Morocco11 aimed to circumvent these. In addition, under the recent examination of the UK’s fifth periodic report to the UN Committee against Torture, the UK stated that it was not enforcing the return of Sri Lankan failed asylum seekers but admitted that it uses assurances in individual cases and used arrangements such as “monitoring by a local human rights body, to ensure that the assurances could be independently verified”.12 The process of monitoring a single person returned under diplomatic assurances has few, if any, of the safeguards built into system-wide protocols for monitoring all detainees in all places of detention in a given country.13 Assurances regarding torture from governments of countries where torture and ill-treatment are systematic or widespread are inherently unreliable and do not sufficiently protect against torture and other ill-treatment. They simply are not worth the paper they are written on.
Amnesty International UK urges the UK Government to cease seeking, using and relying on unreliable diplomatic assurances against torture and other ill-treatment to forcibly return persons to places where they are at risk of such abuses.
2.3 Safeguards
12. In his speech, the Foreign Secretary highlighted five safeguards14 to support the measures previously mentioned. AIUK believes these are unacceptably weak and represent a continuation of a counter-terror approach that is inconsistent with international human rights standards. The UK’s claim that intelligence efforts will always be “in accordance with the law” is misleading given its habit of changing the law, often to circumvent international standards. AIUK has long criticised the UK Government for many of the practices it has adopted in the name of countering terrorism and protecting national security and does not consider that existing scrutiny measures are sufficiently robust. One of the safeguards mentioned in the speech regards ministerial oversight and approval. Yet serious problems remain regarding credible allegations made against the UK (including involvement of Ministers) of human rights abuses in counter terror operations under the “war on terror”. The UK Detainee Inquiry began work in July 2011 and fell short of international human rights standards for effective, independent and thorough investigations. It was concluded early in January 2012 and reported to the UK Government in June 2012 on its work to date. The UK Government has yet to publish the report. Whilst we understand that a new inquiry is on-hold pending on-going criminal investigations, there still remains a need for an adequate investigation into allegations of UK complicity in torture and other abuses. Any future inquiry must be fit for purpose and consistent with human rights standards. Consultation with victims, civil society organisations and others is key to ensuring that the terms of reference and protocol of such an inquiry meet international standards which require it to be prompt, independent, thorough and subject to public scrutiny with the participation of victims.
Amnesty International UK urges the UK Government to publish the interim report from the UK Detainee Inquiry without further delay.
Amnesty International UK urges the UK Government to establish a human rights compliant inquiry on alleged UK involvement in human rights violations, including torture and other ill-treatment of detainees held overseas, that ensures real accountability, and that conforms with and fully discharges the UK’s obligations under international human rights law.
2.4. The Somalia “model”
13. The speech highlights the UK’s approach to Somalia as a model, with reference to the key features of “helping a new legitimate government, African troops bringing peace and security, with the international community giving constant diplomatic, financial and humanitarian support.” AIUK is, however, concerned by reports regarding the UK’s intention to relax the UN arms embargo as civilians still face a high risk of being killed or injured. Adequate safeguards should be implemented first and proven effective before the UN lifts the embargo.15 AIUK was concerned by the lack of focus on human rights at the 2012 Somalia conference in London.16 Since then, there has been a welcome increase in efforts to include human rights concerns (particularly sexual violence) and civil society groups, with the Foreign Secretary meeting groups in Mogadishu17 and side events around the 2013 Somalia conference in London.18 The UK has made commitments to support civil society participation in Somalia under the New Deal for Engagement in Fragile States19 and, through the EU, as a “New Deal” partner for Somalia.20 The UK should seek to strengthen this approach and apply it consistently to the UK’s efforts elsewhere.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the UK Government to what extent it has sought to engage with civil society groups in Somalia, including women’s groups.
3. The 11 April declaration by G8 Foreign Ministers on the prevention of sexual violence in conflict, and the impact of the FCO’s Preventing Sexual Violence Initiative, launched in May 2012
14. AIUK welcomes the Preventing Sexual Violence in conflict Initiative (PSVI) and the leadership that the UK has provided in securing such a strong declaration from the G8 Foreign Ministers. The strengths that we see in the PSVI, however, highlight the need to show strong leadership on the UK’s wider efforts around women, peace and security (ie the UK’s obligations under UN Security Council Resolution 1325 et al.) as well as women’s rights more generally (one of the FCO’s human rights priorities). AIUK recognises that the UK’s National Action Plan on UNSCR 1325 (NAP) has benefitted from an increase in staff resourcing and the review has brought some improvements, but we continue to see gaps that need to be addressed. UK policies on women, peace and security should be replicated across other conflict strategies and afforded senior leadership (including in Embassies and High Commissions).
Amnesty International UK recommends that the UK Government should outline indicators in the NAP to measure success, budget, ensure effective consultations in country and joining up with the NAPs of other countries.
3.1 Women’s participation in peace and reconciliation:
15. The PSVI Declaration places welcome emphasis on the role of “women’s civil society organisations and networks, in particular women human rights defenders” and the commitment to “support conflict-affected countries to develop and implement country-level action plans with the involvement of local organisations.” Women and girls are uniquely and disproportionately affected by armed conflict and their participation in related processes is necessary to ensure a gender perspective in peace building. In addition to women having participation21 and victim22 rights, women are also proven effective agents of progress and change from Liberia to Northern Ireland, to Uganda and Sudan.23 AIUK is therefore concerned by the limited participation of women in peace and reconciliation processes in Afghanistan. For example, the High Peace Council set up to negotiate with the Taliban has 70 members, but only nine of them are women. Afghan women human rights defenders (WHRDs) are some of the most active agents of positive social change in their communities and are on the frontline in protecting human rights.24 AIUK is particularly concerned at the lack of protection mechanisms available to WHRDs who face daily threats and intimidation. Attacks against them are often gender-based, so they are targeted both because they are activists and because they are women. The UK is one of Afghanistan’s largest bilateral donors, has troops on the ground and supports the peace process. It therefore has an important role in ensuring that the human rights’ improvements felt by Afghan women and girls are not lost during transition or reconciliation processes.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the UK Government identifies specific and measurable improvements in the funding, political intervention and other forms of support given to WHRDs, particularly those working outside of Kabul.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the UK Government (with EU partners and the UN Special Rapporteurs on Human Rights Defenders and Violence Against Women) lobby for the Afghan Government to issue an open invitation to the United Nations Special Rapporteurs to make a country visit before the end of 2014.
Amnesty International UK urges the UK Government to more effectively and publicly advocate for Afghan women to be meaningfully represented in both planning stages and during peace and reconciliation talks in all forums, including in the trilateral talks hosted by the UK.
3.2 Women’s participation in security sector reforms:
16. The PSVI Declaration provides welcome recognition that the promotion and protections of women and children’s full human rights and fundamental freedoms are critical in the fight to end all forms of sexual violence in conflict and that “efforts to end sexual violence in conflict must also promote women’s active and equal political, social and economic participation including in all conflict prevention, conflict resolution, transitional justice and security sector reform processes”. For this commitment to be realised, security sector reform processes must be sufficiently gender sensitive. The Chicago summit emphasised the importance of the full participation of all Afghan women in the reconstruction, political, peace and reconciliation processes. However, AIUK has worked closely with Afghan women’s groups and is concerned that the attempts by donors and the Afghan Government to increase women’s recruitment into the police has, to date, been inconsistent and ad hoc. The development of an Afghan NAP and the development of a new UK NAP with an Afghanistan bilateral section provides an opportunity to link the Plans and ensure that measures to support women’s recruitment into the security sector are mutually reinforcing.
Amnesty International UK urges the UK Government to ensure that its £70 million contribution to supporting the Afghan National Army and police (2015–2017) specifically address women’s recruitment in the security sector.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the FCO whether the UK Government will lobby for the next phase of the UNDP/Law and Order Trust Fund for Afghanistan (LOTFA) to include a stronger focus on women’s recruitment into the police.
3.3 Gender-based violence:
17. Although focused on sexual violence in conflict, the PSVI Declaration further commits states “to assisting conflict-affected countries in ensuring that their future national security sector and justice reform programmes are gender and child-sensitive and that they are designed to address and reduce gender-based violence”. The FCO’s report recognises that 87% of women in Afghanistan will experience at least one form of violence in their lives.25 Through the Tokyo Mutual Accountability Framework (TMAF) the Afghanistan government and international partners (including the UK) committed to the implementation of both the Elimination of Violence Against Women law and the implementation of the National Action Plan for the Women of Afghanistan, yet progress on both counts has been, at best, inconsistent.26 The UK’s prioritisation of violence against women in DFID’s operational plan for Afghanistan is welcome, but this must be reflected across government and result in tangible, adequately resourced implementation.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC enquires about the implementation of TMAF, specifically how the UK government intends to meet the commitments to tackle gender-based violence and whether (and what) benchmarks have been set.
3.4 Gender mainstreaming:
18. AIUK continues to welcome cross-departmental working but recommends a more coordinated and coherent cross-government approach to addressing violence against women and girls by the FCO, DFID and MOD. The PSVI Declaration states that “government should review the doctrine and training provided to their national military and police to ensure that it includes training for appropriate personnel deployed to the relevant theatres”. AIUK believes that the UK’s work through the PSVI (and beyond) should be integrated more comprehensively in the UK’s engagement with conflict countries. The UK’s Team of Experts has the potential to be a positive contribution to existing international efforts to address sexual violence in conflict. However, to be consistent in the promotion of commitment under PSVI, the UK needs to ensure that all country work—particularly when working with opposition groups (such as in Syria or as previously in Libya) is gender sensitive.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC seeks clarification from the FCO regarding how gender perspectives are integrated across government departments, including Ministry of Defence doctrine, training and practice.
4. Threats to freedom of expression through the media, such as the jamming of broadcasts and the growing trend of imposing controls on access to the internet
19. AIUK welcomes the UK’s prioritisation of freedom of expression on the internet as well as the commitment that freedom of expression applies equally online as it does offline. Freedom of expression, however, is much wider27 than the interpretation provided in the FCO’s report.28 Whilst the media and journalists play a key role in the effective realisation of all aspects of freedom of expression,29 it is important that the role of civil society more broadly is included in work on freedom of expression.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the UK Government how it consistently engages with civil society organisations in its freedom of expression work.
20. Restrictions to freedom of expression are often systemic attempts to stifle voices of dissent and ensure reports of abuses are silenced. AIUK has long reported on situations where the curtailment of freedom of expression is part of a much larger crackdown on civil society and human rights. In Zimbabwe, for example, we have reported such a crackdown ahead of the 2013 elections. In February 2013, the police announced a ban on short wave radios which we see as an attempt by police to curb access to alternative sources of news. Shortly after the ban was announced, police searched the offices of Radio Dialogue in Bulawayo and seized 180 radios and charged Zenzele Ndebele, the station manager, under section 182 of the Customs and Exercise Act.30
Amnesty International UK recommends that the UK Government uses its influence to help secure an effective Southern African Development Community mission that can ensure space for civil society is safeguarded up to and during the election.
21. We have also witnessed a proliferation of “national security” and “public order” legislation aimed at restricting the space in which civil society operates. Such laws have been introduced in Russia,31 Ethiopia32 and proposed in Uganda.33 Both Syria34 and Sri Lanka35 use counter terror laws to persecute activists. All legislation, whether designed to combat terrorism or to guarantee safety and public order should be consistent with human rights standards. Such legislation should not be used or abused to prevent a safe and enabling environment for human rights defenders and civil society organisations.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the UK Government what it is doing to tackle the misuse of “national security” and “public order” legislation.
4.1 Bilateral approach:
22. As demonstrated by the UK’s response to the “Arab Spring”36 and Syria,37 various funding by the UK of civil society groups and the Prime Minister’s “golden thread”38 theory, the government recognises the importance of a vibrant civil society for accountability, human rights and security. The UK must therefore consistently press countries to respect international human rights standards even when there may be tensions with other priorities. AIUK was deeply disappointed that the Government failed to assert that the Commonwealth Heads of Government (CHOGM) should not be hosted by Sri Lanka unless there were significant improvements in human rights. We continue to witness a deterioration of human rights in Sri Lanka, including attacks on the judiciary and broader civil society.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the UK Government to develop a strategy to use the period between now and CHOGM to press the Sri Lankan Government to deliver significant improvements in human rights prior to the meeting in November.
4.2 Direct support for HRDs:
23. The UK must also provide consistent support for HRDs on the ground including by raising cases of concern. The FCO’s report maintains that the UK continues to work on human rights concerns through the UK-Russia dialogue and UK government representatives issue reactive statements, such as the passing of the “foreign agents’ law”39 or the Pussy Riot case.40 However, the impact of the dialogue is unclear and the issuing of statements is ad hoc and we were unable to find a statement from the UK to support the Association in Defence of Voters’ Rights Golos (Voice) became the first NGO to fall foul of the “foreign agents’ law” in April 2013.41 Golos played a prominent role in organising election monitoring and reporting allegations of electoral fraud in the 2011 parliament and 2012 presidential elections, and the FCO provided support for the work of Golos in 2011.42 The priority for the UK appears to be more in developing commercial relationships with Russia43 and, more recently, in security interests (particularly regarding Syria). Whilst these are legitimate avenues for the UK Government to pursue, it must not be at the cost of side lining human rights.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the UK Government about the impact of its work in Russia and how its concerns are raised whilst seeking to build commercial partnership and security efforts such as Syria.
Amnesty International UK recommends that the FAC asks the UK Government what plans they have to use the UK/Russia Cultural year of 2014 to promote human rights.
4.3 Syria
24. Even in conflicted-affected countries, the UK should ensure that freedom of expression is protected as part of mainstreaming human rights in its wider approach. Not only is this important in itself, but it also preserves the truth which is essential for reconciliation. In Syria, AIUK has documented that professional media workers and “citizen journalists” have been victims of unlawful killings, torture, enforced disappearances, abductions and intimidation by both pro-government and anti-government forces. Whilst some armed opposition groups have helped international journalists to gain access to some of the main conflict areas and often afforded them protection, other armed opposition groups have abducted or murdered journalists considered sympathetic to the government or hostile to the opposition (such as those working for state TV). Armed opposition groups have launched online campaigns against journalists they describe as media shabiha, posting public threats and rejoicing when attacks against those journalists have been carried out.44 Human rights must be mainstreamed throughout the UK’s efforts in Syria including transition efforts (such as work with opposition forces45) and helping to ease the humanitarian crisis by supporting neighbouring countries where 1.5 million Syrians have fled and providing assistance to the estimated 4 million internally displaced people.46
Amnesty International UK further recommends that the FAC asks the UK Government how human rights are incorporated into engagement with the Syrian opposition.
Amnesty International UK urges the UK Government to continue to help ease the humanitarian crisis in Syria by urgently helping to provide housing, food, water, sanitation and health care to refugees.
Amnesty International UK urges the UK Government to continue to press—through the UN Security Council—for the situation to be referred (including abuses by both authorities and armed opposition groups) to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.
24 May 201
1 Foreign Secretary’s speech at the Lord Mayor’s Easter Banquet, 16 April 2013: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-secretary-speech-at-the-lord-mayors-easter-banquet (accessed on 22 May 2013).
2 In addition to the Conservative’s 2010 General Election Manifesto (http://media.conservatives.s3.amazonaws.com/manifesto/cpmanifesto2010_lowres.pdf) see also: the Prime Minister in 2011 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8802230/Conservative-Party-Conference-2011-David-Cameron-backs-Theresa-May-over-chilling-Human-Rights-Act.html (accessed 15 May 2013) and more recent statements by both Justice and Home Secretaries in March 2013 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21726612; http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/mar/03/tory-ministers-human-rights-act).
3 See, for example, Amnesty International, Nigeria: The true 'tragedy': Delays and failures in tackling oil spills in the Niger Delta, (November 2011): http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AFR44/018/2011 ; Amnesty International, Don’t mine us Out of Existence: Bauxite Mine and Refinery Devastate lives in India (February 2010): http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/ASA20/001/2010/en/0a81a1bc-f50c-4426-9505-7fde6b3382ed/asa200012010en.pdf; Amnesty International, Petroleum, Pollution and Poverty in the Niger Delta (June 2009): www.amnesty.org.uk/uploads/documents/doc_19492.pdf; Amnesty International and Greenpeace, The Toxic Truth (September 2012): http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=20342.
4 Amnesty International UK: Submission to the Foreign Affairs Committee’s inquiry into the FCO’s human rights work in 2011 (May 2012): paragraph 5, page 4.
5 Ibid. Section 3 (pages 13 – 17).
6 Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 30 January 2013, c828W); Hansard source (Citation: HL Deb, 30 October 2012, c123W).
7 The Johannesburg Principles on National Security, Freedom of Expression and Access to Information (Principle 2). See also the Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation of Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Annexed to a note verbale dated 24 August 1984 from the Permanent Representative of the Netherlands. UN Doc E/CN.4/1984/4 (1984), Principles 29-31.
8 Consistent with the UN Principles Relating to the Status of National Institutions (Paris Principles).
9 I.e. Building the counter-terrorism capacity of overseas security services; working with local investigators to improve the ability to build cases based on evidence; supporting prosecutors and judges; “improve and where appropriate monitor conditions in detention facilities so that convicted terrorists can be held securely and their treatment meets with international standards”.
10 Foreign Secretary William Hague, Countering Terrorism Overseas (14 February 2013): https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/countering-terrorism-overseas (accessed 22 May 2013).
11 Amnesty International: United Kingdom: Briefing to the UN Committee Against Torture (50th Session, May 2013) EUR 45/002/2013 http://www.amnesty.org/pt-br/library/info/EUR45/002/2013/en (accessed 22 May 2013).
12 UN OHCHR, Committee Against Torture examines report of the United Kingdom (8 May 2013): http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=13312&LangID=E (accessed 22 May 2013).
13 United Kingdom: Briefing to the UN Committee Against Torture (50th Session, May 2013) EUR 45/002/2013 http://www.amnesty.org/pt-br/library/info/EUR45/002/2013/en (accessed 22 May 2013).
14 Foreign Secretary William Hague, Countering Terrorism Overseas (14 February 2013): https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/countering-terrorism-overseas (accessed 22 May 2013).
15 Amnesty International, Somalia: UN Arms Embargo must stay in place (5 March 2013): http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=20660 (accessed 22 May 2013).
16 Amnesty International, Somalia: Protection of civilians and human rights are critical for stable future (23 February 2012): http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/somalia-protection-civilians-and-human-rights-are-critical-stable-future-20 (accessed 22 May 2013).
17 UK Government announcement, Foreign Secretary William Hague has travelled to Somalia to open the new British Embassy in Mogadishu (25 April 2013): https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-secretary-opens-new-british-embassy-in-mogadishu (accessed 22 May 2013).
18 E.g. UK Government announcement, The UK government invited members of the diaspora community to help explain the challenges Somali women face – and their ideas to overcome them (30 April 2013) https://www.gov.uk/government/news/helping-somali-women-to-take-a-lead-role-in-rebuilding-their-country (accessed 22 May 2013).
19 International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding, A New Deal for engagement in fragile states http://www.pbsbdialogue.org/documentupload/49151944.pdf (accessed 22 May 2013).
20 http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/news/2013-04-19_international_dialogue_peacebuilding_and_statebuilding_en.htm (accessed 22 May 2013).
21 Such as UN Security Council Resolution 1325 (2000) on Women, Peace and Security and Resolution 2041 (2012) on Afghanistan.
22 Such as right to justice (e.g. those responsible for abuses are held to account); right to truth (e.g. about the abuse and identify perpetrators); right to remedy (e.g. prevent future abuses); right to redress, etc.
23 http://www.amnestyusa.org/our-work/issues/women-s-rights/women-peace-and-security (accessed on 22 May 2013).
24 Amnesty International with the Research Institute on Women, Peace and Security; the Organisation of Human Welfare; and the Afghan Women’s Network, Afghanistan: An action plan on women’s rights (May 2013).
25 Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Human Rights and Democracy Annual Report 2012 (May 2013), page 124.
26 Amnesty International with the Research Institute on Women, Peace and Security; the Organisation of Human Welfare; and the Afghan Women’s Network, Afghanistan: An action plan on women’s rights (May 2013).
27 Freedom of expression encompasses: the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds (e.g., political, religious or philosophical, artistic and cultural), by any means (e.g. writing, speech, music, graphic, internet, language, behaviour). It is highly relevant therefore for combating discrimination against those expressing their identity (LGBT or compulsory dress codes)
28 essentially limited it to press freedom, bloggers and users of social media
29 http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/news-item/ten-ways-to-repress-a-journalist
30 Amnesty International, Zimbabwe: Prominent human rights defender hunted down through the media (8 March 2013): http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/zimbabwe-prominent-human-rights-defender-hunted-down-through-media-2013-03- (accessed 22 May 2013).
31 Amnesty International, The clampdown against freedoms of expression, assembly and association in Russia (April 2013): http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/EUR46/011/2013/en (accessed 22 May 2013).
32 Amnesty International, Ethiopia must improve its human rights record to be a credible candidate for election to the Human Rights Council (28 August 2012): http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AFR25/012/2012/en (accessed 23 May 2013).
33 Amnesty International Annual Report (May 2013): http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/uganda/report-2013#section-153-5 (accessed 23 May 2013).
34 Amnesty International (joint public statement): Syria: Rights Activists Face Terrorism Charges (17 May 2013): http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE24/021/2013/en/19bb9afd-78c9-4739-9f00-dac5e7a7542e/mde240212013en.pdf (accessed 23 May 2013).
35 Amnesty International, Sri Lanka: Assault on dissent thrives in Sri Lanka’s climate of impunity (10 May 2013): http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/ASA37/011/2013/en (accessed 22 May 2013).
36 https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-arab-partnership https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-arab-spring-is-a-moment-of-huge-opportunity-to-build-peace-security-and-prosperity-for-the-region-and-by-extension-the-world
37 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-secretary-pledges-continued-support-for-syrian-people
38 https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/transcript-of-david-cameron-qa-at-new-york-university
39 UK Government Announcement: Foreign Office concerned about Russian NGO pressure (28 March 2013): https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-office-concerned-about-russian-ngo-pressure (accessed 23 May 2013); UK Government Announcement: Foreign Office expresses concern about new Russian NGO law (25 July 2012): https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-office-expresses-concern-about-new-russian-ngo-law (accessed 23 May 2013). Also see Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Human Rights and Democracy Annual Report 2012 (May 2013) p. 205.
40 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-office-minister-deeply-concerned-at-pussy-riot-verdict and report
41 http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/russia-voters-rights-ngo-first-victim-foreign-agents-law-2013-04-25
42 Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Human Rights and Democracy Annual Report 2011 (May 2012), page 30.
43 UK Government Announcement: Prime Minister David Cameron has spoken with President Putin of Russia (25 March 2013): www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-call-with-president-putin-of-russia (accessed 22 May 2013); UK Government Announcement: Prime Minister David Cameron has visited Russia at the invitation of Russian President Dmitry Medvedev (12 September 2011): https://www.gov.uk/government/news/pm-visits-russia-to-boost-trade (accessed 22 May 2013); UK Government Announcement: Russian trade mission aims for export boost (27 November 2012): https://www.gov.uk/government/news/russian-trade-mission-aims-for-export-boost (accessed 22 May 2013).
44 Amnesty International, Syria: Journalists deliberately targeted as country becomes most dangerous in world for reporters (3 May 2013): http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=20759 (accessed 23 May 2013).
45 UK Government Announcement: Foreign Secretary William Hague, Foreign Secretary welcomes declaration by Syrian national coalition (21 April 2013), https://www.gov.uk/government/news/foreign-secretary-welcomes-declaration-by-syrian-national-coalition--2 (accessed on 22 May 2013).
46 Amnesty International, People on the Move: ‘For many displaced Syrians, going back home is out of the question’ (22 May 2013): http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/people-move-many-displaced-syrians-going-back-home-out-question-2013-05-22 (accessed 23 May 2013).