General Assembly - OHCHR

Loading...

UNITED NATIONS

A General Assembly

Distr. GENERAL A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 1 June 2010 ENGLISH/FRENCH/SPANISH ONLY

HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL Fourteenth session Agenda item 3

PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF ALL HUMAN RIGHTS, CIVIL, POLITICAL, ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING THE RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue Addendum Summary of cases transmitted to Governments and replies received*

*

Owing to its length, the present report is circulated as received.

GE.10-13841

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 2 CONTENTS Paragraphs

Page

Introduction ........................................................................................

1-7

6

Afghanistan ........................................................................................

8 – 14

7

Algeria ...............................................................................................

15 - 29

8

Angola ................................................................................................

30 - 37

11

Argentina ...........................................................................................

38 - 83

12

Azerbaijan ..........................................................................................

84 - 97

17

Bahrain ...............................................................................................

98 - 118

19

Belarus ...............................................................................................

119 - 165

23

Bolivia ................................................................................................

166 - 183

30

Brazil ..................................................................................................

184 - 190

32

Bulgaria ..............................................................................................

191 - 219

33

Burundi ..............................................................................................

220 - 224

37

Cambodia ...........................................................................................

225 - 253

38

Cameroon ...........................................................................................

254 - 268

44

Chad ...................................................................................................

269 - 274

47

Chile ...................................................................................................

275 - 304

48

China ..................................................................................................

305 - 437

51

Colombia ............................................................................................

438 - 566

72

Congo (Republic of the) ....................................................................

567 - 572

91

Cuba ...................................................................................................

573 - 631

91

Democratic People’s Republic of Korea ...........................................

632 - 639

99

Democratic Republic of the Congo ...................................................

640 - 678

100

Djibouti ..............................................................................................

679 - 684

107

Ecuador ..............................................................................................

685 - 728

108

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 3 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs

Page

Egypt ..................................................................................................

729 - 746

114

El Salvador ........................................................................................

747 - 786

116

Equatorial Guinea ..............................................................................

787 - 792

123

Eritrea ................................................................................................

793 - 804

124

Ethiopia ..............................................................................................

805 - 853

125

Fiji .....................................................................................................

854 - 875

134

Gabon ................................................................................................

876 - 890

138

Gambia ..............................................................................................

891 - 911

140

Guatemala ..........................................................................................

912 - 997

143

Guinea ................................................................................................

998 – 1010

156

Guinea-Bissau .................................................................................... 1011 – 1017

157

Honduras ............................................................................................ 1018 - 1054

158

India ................................................................................................... 1055 - 1084

165

Iran (Islamic Republic of) .................................................................. 1085 - 1244

171

Iraq ..................................................................................................... 1245 - 1263

200

Israel .................................................................................................. 1264 - 1297

204

Italy .................................................................................................... 1298 - 1317

209

Kazakhstan ........................................................................................ 1318 - 1340

212

Kenya ................................................................................................. 1341 - 1362

215

Kyrgyz Republic ................................................................................ 1363 - 1393

218

Libyan Arab Jamahiriya .................................................................... 1394 - 1399

224

Lithuania ............................................................................................ 1400 - 1414

225

Madagascar ........................................................................................ 1415 - 1423

228

Malawi ............................................................................................... 1424 - 1428

229

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 4 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs

Page

Malaysia ............................................................................................. 1429 - 1479

230

Mauritania .......................................................................................... 1480 - 1486

238

Mexico ............................................................................................... 1487 - 1677

239

Morocco ............................................................................................. 1678 - 1687

268

Myanmar ............................................................................................ 1688 - 1715

270

Namibia .............................................................................................. 1716 - 1720

274

Nepal .................................................................................................. 1721 - 1741

274

Nicaragua ........................................................................................... 1742 - 1755

278

Niger .................................................................................................. 1756 - 1764

279

Oman .................................................................................................. 1765 - 1770

281

Pakistan .............................................................................................. 1771 - 1799

282

Peru .................................................................................................... 1800 - 1814

286

Philippines .......................................................................................... 1815 - 1885

289

Republic of Korea .............................................................................. 1886 - 1934

300

Republic of Moldova ......................................................................... 1935 - 1968

308

Russian Federation ............................................................................. 1969-2070

313

Saudi Arabia ...................................................................................... 2071 - 2092

327

Serbia ................................................................................................. 2093 - 2135

330

Sierra Leone ....................................................................................... 2136 - 2145

337

Somalia .............................................................................................. 2146 - 2159

338

Sri Lanka ............................................................................................ 2160 - 2239

340

Sudan ................................................................................................. 2240 - 2284

353

Swaziland ........................................................................................... 2285 - 2289

360

Syrian Arab Republic ........................................................................ 2290 - 2332

360

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 5 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs

Page

Tajikistan ........................................................................................... 2333 - 2339

366

Thailand ............................................................................................. 2340 - 2410

367

Tunisia ............................................................................................... 2411 - 2470

378

Turkey ................................................................................................ 2471 - 2482

391

Uganda ............................................................................................... 2483 - 2512

393

Ukraine .............................................................................................. 2513 - 2538

398

United Arab Emirates ........................................................................ 2539 - 2543

402

United Republic of Tanzania ............................................................. 2544 - 2550

402

Uzbekistan .......................................................................................... 2551 - 2602

403

Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) .................................................. 2603 - 2636

410

Viet Nam ........................................................................................... 2637 - 2697

416

Yemen ................................................................................................ 2698 - 2728

425

Zimbabwe .......................................................................................... 2729 - 2741

430

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 6 Introduction 1. At its seventh session, the Human Rights Council, in its resolution 7/36, tasked the Special Rapporteur (a) to gather all relevant information, wherever it may occur, relating to violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, discrimination against, threats or use of violence, harassment, persecution or intimidation directed at persons seeking to exercise or to promote the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, including, as a matter of high priority, against journalists or other professionals in the field of information; (b) to seek, receive and respond to credible and reliable information from Governments, non-governmental organizations and any other parties who have knowledge of these cases; and (c) to make recommendations and provide suggestions on ways and means to better promote and protect the right to freedom of opinion and expression in all its manifestations. 2. In accordance with the above-mentioned provisions, the present report contains, on a country-by-country basis, summaries of general and individual allegations, as well as urgent appeals transmitted to Governments between 1 January 2009 and 19 March 2010, as well as replies received from Governments between 16 May 2009 and 14 May 2010. Although received before 14 May 2010, some replies are not included in the present report because translation is awaited. Most of the responses by States refer to cases raised by the Special Rapporteur during the period between January 2009 and March 2010; however, some of the responses are to cases addressed by him in earlier reporting periods, mainly due to delays in translation. While the summaries of these responses are included in this report, the summaries of the cases to which they refer will be found in the Special Rapporteur’s reports from preceding years (see A/HRC/11/4/Add.1, A/HRC/7/14/Add.1, and A/HRC/4/27/Add.1, covering three previous years). Replies to communications received after 15 May 2010 will be included in the next communications report of the Special Rapporteur, as well as replies not yet translated by that date. 3. During the period under review, the Special Rapporteur transmitted 304 communications to the Governments of 84 States: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Belarus, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo (Republic of the), Cuba, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Ecuatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, India, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Israel, Italy, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyz Republic, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Mauritania, Mexico, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Niger, Oman, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Republic of Moldova, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Tajikistan, Thailand, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Viet Nam, Yemen, and Zimbabwe. 4. 284 out of 304 communications were signed jointly with other Special Procedures mandate-holders. The geographical division of the communications was as follows: 32 per cent in Asia and the Pacific; 22 per cent in Latin America and the Caribbean; 19 per cent in Africa; 14 per cent in Europe, North America and Central Asia; and 12 per cent in the Middle East and North Africa.

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 7 5. Owing to restrictions on the length of documents, the Special Rapporteur has reduced details of communications sent and received. The full text of all communications is available within the files of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. 6. In reporting on the communications, the Special Rapporteur has used initials for those victims who, in the Special Rapporteur’s opinion, could be in a potentially sensitive situation, in order to respect their privacy and to prevent the possibility of further victimization. With a view to preserve the presumption of innocence, the Special Rapporteur omitted to include the names of alleged perpetrators, and of other individuals involved in the cases included in this report. Conversely, Governments’ communications may contain names of persons and/or disclose specific situations linked to the violation. 7. The Special Rapporteur wishes to reiterate that violations and concerns regarding the right to freedom of opinion and expression are, to different extents, a common phenomenon in the whole world. Consequently, the exclusion or the inclusion of a particular country or territory should not be interpreted as the indication of any specific choice done by the Special Rapporteur regarding the analysis of trends and patterns of the implementation of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. Afghanistan Urgent appeal 8. The Special Rapporteur sent an urgent appeal to the Government concerning proposed restrictions on media coverage during the Presidential elections on 21 August 2009. 9. According to information received, on 17 August 2009, the offices of the Foreign Ministry and the Interior Ministry issued separate statements in relation to media coverage during the presidential elections. In a copy of its statement issued in English, the Foreign Ministry noted that “all domestic and international media agencies are requested to refrain from broadcasting any incidence of violence during the election process from 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on 20 August 2009”. The statements were made “in view of the need to ensure the wide participation of the Afghan people... and prevent any election-related terrorist violence.” Reports claimed that a version of the same statement issued in the Dari-language warned the media that reporting on violence during the elections was “strongly prohibited”. A spokesman for President Hamid Karzai reportedly noted that the decision to impose media restrictions on the media during the elections was taken to protect the national interest of Afghanistan in order to encourage people and raise their morale to come out and vote. 10. Concern was expressed that the decision by the Government to restrict media coverage during the Presidential elections may prevent independent reporting in the country. Further concern was expressed that such restrictions may deprive voters of their right to seek and receive information about the election process and the threats that they may face on polling day. Response from the Government 11. In a letter dated 8 September 2009, the Government replied to the communication above. In its response, the Government stated that the main aim of ban on reporting during the Election

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 8 Day was to provide necessary psychological conditions to ensure participation of the people in elections. It further stated that there was sufficient evidence that the Al-Qaeda tried to carry out attacks by taking advantage of the presence of hundreds of international media personnel. From its perspective, the ban on reporting, which started at 06:00 a.m. in the morning and lasted until 17:00 p.m., proved effective in protecting the lives of the civilian population. 12. The Government also stated that the National Security Council of Afghanistan deemed the ban necessary to ensure the safety of citizens and to protect the national interest of the country. The ban was aimed at preventing reporting on terrorist activities and displaying victims’ dead bodies. 13. In order to ensure people’s access to information about the election process and security threats, as well as to local and international media, the Government stipulated that it held six press conferences on the day of the elections through spokespersons of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of National Defense, Ministry of Interior and Directorate of National Security, as well as Ministers of Interior and National Defense and Head of Directorate of National Security of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan. Observations 14.

The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government for its reply. Algeria

Lettre d’allégations 15. Le 8 janvier 2009, le Rapporteur spécial, conjointement avec le Président du Groupe de travail sur les Disparitions Forcées ou Involontaires et la Rapporteuse spéciale sur la situation des défenseurs des droits de l’homme, a envoyé une lettre d’allégations sur la situation de M. Moussa Bourefis, étudiant en médecine et interne stagiaire au service de gynécologie obstétrique du Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Constantine. Selon les informations reçues : 16. M. Moussa Bourefis aurait fait récemment l’objet d’actes d’intimidation suite à sa rencontre avec le Groupe de travail sur les Disparitions Forcées ou Involontaires en novembre 2008 à Genève. M. Moussa Bourefis risquerait d’être recalé de son stage au CHU de Constantine. Selon des informations obtenues, les pressions exercées sur les administrations de la Faculté et du CHU de Constantine le viseraient directement et auraient pour objectif de lui faire cesser ses activités militantes et associatives en faveur des familles de disparus. Lettre d’allégations 17. Le 31 juillet 2009, le Rapporteur spécial, conjointement avec la Rapporteuse spéciale sur la situation des défenseurs des droits de l’homme, a envoyé une lettre d’allégations sur la situation de M. Hamrani M’Hamed, citoyen libyen, et M. Zerrari Khalid, citoyen marocain, tous deux membres du Congrès Mondial Amazigh (CMA), une organisation non-gouvernementale qui œuvre à la défense et la promotion des droits civils, politiques, économiques, sociaux et culturels du peuple amazigh. MM. Hamrani M’Hamed et Zerrari Khalid se sont rendus en Algérie pour

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 9 assister à la réunion du Conseil fédéral (c.à.d. le Conseil d’administration) du CMA qui doit se tenir le 1er août. Selon les informations reçues : 18. Le 29 juillet 2009, M. Hamrani M’Hamed aurait été arrêté par la police de Tizi-Ouzu et interrogé pendant six heures sur les raisons de sa présence en Algérie et ses activités en Libye. Il aurait été relâché en début de soirée. 19. Le 30 juillet en début de matinée, M. Hamrani M’Hamed aurait à nouveau été arrêté par la police, ainsi que M. Zerrari Khalid. Ils auraient été libérés après six heures d’interrogatoire qui portait notamment sur le lieu où se tiendra la réunion du Conseil fédéral du CMA. Les policiers auraient fortement conseillé à MM. Hamrani M’Hamed et Zerrari Khalid de quitter le territoire algérien, sur lequel ils sont entrés légalement. 20. Des craintes sont exprimées quant au fait que les arrestations de MM. Hamrani M’Hamed et Zerrari Khalid soient liées à leurs activités de défense des droits de l’homme du peuple amazigh. Réponse du Gouvernement 21. Le 8 septembre 2009, le Gouvernement algérien a répondu à la lettre d’allégations du 31 juillet 2009. Le Gouvernement informe que les personnes mentionnées n’ont pas informé qu’elles étaient invitées par une organisation non gouvernementale. Cette dernière, étant une organisation de droit français, ne dispose d’aucun statut légal en Algérie. Par conséquent et selon la législation algérienne, elle ne pouvait pas mener des activités sur le territoire compte tenu du fait qu’elle ne disposait pas d’une accréditation auprès des autorités compétentes. 22. Les personnes objet de la communication ont donc fait l’objet d’un examen de situation conforme à la législation en vigueur dans la mesure où elles avaient contrevenu à la législation sur le séjour des étrangers et qu’elles sont associées à une activité non autorisée par les autorités compétentes. Appel urgent 23. Le 4 août 2009, le Rapporteur spécial, conjointement avec le Groupe de Travail sur la détention arbitraire et la Rapporteuse spéciale sur la situation des défenseurs des droits de l’homme, a envoyé un appel urgent sur la situation de Mme Zoubida Fdail, MM. Lounes Belkacem, Hocine Azelf, Rabah Issadi, Mohamed Meziani, Youcef Lekadir, M’Hamed Hamrani , Mustapha El-Ouaaliti et Khalid Zerrari, tous membres du Congrès Mondial Amazigh (CMA), une organisation non-gouvernementale qui œuvre à la défense et la promotion des droits civils, politiques, économiques, sociaux et culturels du peuple amazigh. Ils se sont rendus en Algérie pour assister à la réunion du Conseil fédéral (c.à.d. le Conseil d’administration) du CMA qui doit s’est tenue le 1er août. La situation de MM. Khalid Zerrari et M’Hamed Hamrani a fait l’objet d’une lettre d’allégations le 31 juillet 2009 par le Rapporteur spécial sur la promotion et la protection du droit à la liberté d’opinion et d’expression et de la Rapporteuse spéciale sur la situation des défenseurs des droits de l’homme. Le Gouvernement algérien a envoyé une réponse en date du 8 septembre 2009. Selon les informations reçues :

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 10 24. Le 3 août 2009 en fin de matinée, Mme Zoubida Fdail, MM. Lounes Belkacem, Hocine Azelf, Rabah Issadi, Mohamed Meziani, Youcef Lekadir, M’Hamed Hamrani, M. Mustapha ElOuaaliti et Khalid Zerrari auraient été arrêtés par la police de Tizi-Ouzu suite à la tenue d’une conférence de presse et interrogés pendant plusieurs heures. MM Lounes Belkacem, Hocine Azelf, Rabah Issadi, Mohamed Meziani et Youcef Lekadir auraient été libérés dans la soirée. Mme Zoubida Fdail, MM Khalid Zerrari, Mustapha E-Ouaaliti et Hamrani M’Hamed seraient toujours maintenus en détention. 25. Des craintes sont exprimées quant au fait que les arrestations de MM Lounes Belkacem, Hocine Azelf, Rabah Issadi, Mohamed Meziani, Youcef Lekadir, Khalid Zerrari, M’Hamed Hamrani, Mustapha El-Ouaaliti et Mme Zoubida Fdail soient liées à leurs activités de défense des droits de l’homme du peuple amazigh. Réponse du Gouvernement 26. Le 8 septembre 2009, le Gouvernement algérien a répondu à l’appel urgent du 4 août 2009. Le Gouvernement informe que les personnes mentionnées ont organisé une manifestation sans autorisation préalable en violation de la législation algérienne. Le Congrès Mondial Amazigh, organisation non gouvernementale de droit français pour le compte de laquelle ces personnes agissaient, ne dispose d’aucun statut légal en Algérie. Par conséquent et selon la législation algérienne, elle ne pouvait pas mener des activités sur le territoire compte tenu du fait qu’elle ne disposait pas d’une accréditation auprès des autorités compétentes. 27. Les personnes mentionnées ont fait l’objet d’un examen de situation conforme à la législation en vigueur dans la mesure où elles ont contrevenu à la législation sur les réunions publiques et qu’elles se sont associées à des étrangers pour mener une activité non autorisée par les autorités compétentes. Observations 28. Le Rapporteur spécial remercie le Gouvernement de ses réponses mais regrette, au moment de la finalisation du présent rapport, l’absence de réponse aux communications en date du 8 janvier 2009, 7 novembre 2008, et 6 mars 2007. Il considère les réponses à ses communications comme partie intégrante de la coopération des gouvernements avec son mandat. Il exhorte le Gouvernement à répondre au plus vite aux craintes exprimées dans celles-ci, notamment en fournissant des informations précises sur les enquêtes menées afin de traduire en justice les auteurs des faits et les mesures de protection prises. 29. Par ailleurs, concernant la communication en date du 8 janvier 2009, le Rapporteur spécial rappelle que la Résolution 12/2 du Conseil des droits de l’homme a « demand[é] instamment aux gouvernements d’empêcher et de s’abstenir de commettre tout acte d’intimidation ou de représailles contre ceux qui: a) Cherchent à coopérer ou ont coopéré avec l’Organisation des Nations Unies, ses représentants et ses mécanismes dans le domaine des droits de l’homme, ou leur ont apporté des témoignages ou des renseignements; b) Recourent ou ont recouru aux procédures mises en place sous les auspices de l’Organisation des Nations Unies pour assurer la protection des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales, et tous ceux qui leur ont fourni une assistance juridique ou autre à cette fin; c) Soumettent ou ont soumis des communications en vertu de procédures établies conformément à des instruments relatifs aux droits de l’homme, et

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 11 tous ceux qui leur ont fourni une assistance juridique ou autre à cette fin; d) Sont des proches de victimes de violations des droits de l’homme ou de ceux qui ont fourni une assistance juridique ou autre aux victimes ». Angola Urgent appeal 30. On 27 January 2010, the Special Rapporteur, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, sent an urgent appeal to the Government concerning Mr. Belchior Lanso Tati, Mr. Francisco Luemba, Mr. Raul Tati, Mr. Pedro Fuca, Chevron employee, and Mr. Zefarino Pauti, a former police officer. Mr. Lanso Tati is an economist and university professor. Mr. Luemba is a lawyer and writer. He has defended several persons accused of crimes against the security of the state and has published a book in 2008 on the recent history of the Cabinda Province, which was critical of the government. Mr. Raul Tati is a catholic priest and the former Chair of the Catholic Church’s Justice and Peace Commission in the Cabinda Province, which documented and denounced alleged human rights abuses by the military in the interior of the Cabinda Province. The three men were also members of the “Civic Association of Cabinda”, “Mpalabanda”. This organization was working on the human rights situation in the Cabinda Province until its judicial ban in 2006 following allegations that it was carrying out political activities and inciting violence. A joint urgent appeal was sent on 16 August 2006 regarding the ban of “Mpalabanda” by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the then Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders. At the time of submitting the communication, no reply had been received from the Government to the communication. 31. According to the information received, Mr. Lanso Tati, Mr. Raul Tati, and Mr. Luemba were reportedly arrested by agents of the criminal investigation police on 13 or 14, 16 and 17 January 2010 respectively. They have not been formally charged, but it is reported that they are accused of crimes against the security of the state. They were initially detained in Cadeia civil prison, and have been transferred to Yabi prison, where they have access to legal counsel. 32. Further details about the exact dates and circumstances of the arrest and the places of detention of Mr. Pedro Fuca and Mr. Zefarino Pauti are not known. It is alleged that further individuals, among them Mr. Raul Danda, MEP for UNITA, Mr. Marcos Mavungo, human rights activist, Mr. Jorge Casimiro Congo, priest, Mr. Martinho Nombo, lawyer, and Mr. Agostinho Chicaia, engineer, also appear on arrest lists of Angolan authorities. 33. Mr. José Manuel Gimbi, correspondent of Voice of America in Cabinda, has allegedly been warned by a senior police official that his life was at risk. He was told that the authorities considered him to be a “dangerous person who has damaged Angola’s image”. It is alleged that this threat follows Mr. Gimbi’s recent reports on arbitrary arrests of human rights defenders in Cabinda.

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 12 34. The attack of 8 January 2010, by separatist rebels against the Togolese national football team in the framework of the 2010 Africa Cup of Nations is reportedly used to justify these arrests and the crackdown on government critics and human rights defenders working on the situation in Cabinda. Human rights defenders have also denounced that they are being subjected to travel restrictions and having their passports confiscated. 35. Mr. Chicaia was the subject of an allegation letter sent by the then Special Representative of the Secretary General on the situation of human rights defenders on 29 September 2006. The mandate-holders acknowledged receipt of the reply received from the Government on 10 October 2006. 36. Concern was expressed that the arrests that are reported to have been carried out already or are reportedly imminent, and the detention of the abovementioned persons and the threats against Mr. Gimbi might be directly related to their work in defense of human rights and in particular the non-violent exercise of their right to freedom of opinion and expression. Observations 37. The Special Rapporteur regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the Government had not transmitted a response to his communications of 27 January 2010, and to an earlier communications sent on 9 September 2008, 30 November 2006, 16 August 2006 and 5 April 2004. He urges the Government to respond to the concerns raised by him, and provide detailed information regarding investigations undertaken, subsequent prosecutions as well as protective measures taken. Argentina Llamamiento urgente 38. El 2 de abril de 2009, el Relator Especial, junto con la Relatora Especial sobre la situación de los defensores de los derechos humanos, enviaron un llamamiento urgente señalando a la atención urgente del Gobierno la información recibida en relación con las amenazas y serio hostigamiento de la Sra. María Soledad Laruffa, militante de la filial Merlo de la Liga Argentina por los Derechos del Hombre (LADH). 39. La LADH es una institución, creada en 1937, dedicada a la defensa, la promoción y la educación para los derechos humanos. 40. Según la información recibida, el 26 de marzo de 2009, la Sra. Laruffa habría sido interceptada por dos desconocidos a bordo de una moto, con los rostros ocultos por los cascos, que habría vuelto a amenazarla ahora de manera personal con el mensaje “que la corte con eso de los derechos humanos”, y evidenciando además la existencia de un “grupo en condiciones de actuar secuencialmente”. 41. Anteriormente, el 23 de marzo de 2009, la Sra. Laruffa habría recibido una llamada telefónica amenazante en su celular de parte de desconocidos, los cuales habrían proferidos insultos y reclamos.

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 13 42. Estos actos de hostigamiento habrían coincido con los preparativos del histórico juicio por el asesinato en 1976, de Floreal Avellaneda, militante de 15 años de edad de la Federación Juvenil Comunista. 43. Este juicio, cuyo inicio está previsto para el 27 de abril de 2009 y durante el cual juzgará el Gral. Santiago Omar Riveros y sus cómplices, será el primero en examinar el accionar del terrorismo de Estado en el ámbito de Institutos Militares, entre los cuales estaba el de Campo de Mayo. 44. El 24 de marzo de 2009, se habría realizado un acto de reclamo de justicia para Floreal Avellaneda durante una jornada de conmemoración en el predio de Quinta Seré, organizada por la dirección de derechos humanos de la Municipalidad de Morón, durante la cual la Sra. Laruffa habría obsequiada a la Sra. Iris Avellaneda, la madre de Floreal Avellaneda, una remera estampada con su rostro en nombre de los jóvenes de la LADH. 45. Se expresó temor que la amenaza en contra de la Sra. María Soledad Laruffa podría estar relacionada con su trabajo de investigación de los crimines del pasado y, más en general, en cuestiones de justicia y derecho a la verdad. Asimismo, se expresó preocupación por su integridad física y psicológica. Respuesta del Gobierno 46. Mediante cuatro cartas fechadas el 9 de abril de 2009, el 16 abril de 2009, el 8 de junio de 2009, el 13 de agosto de 2009 y el 6 de enero de 2010, el Gobierno respondió al llamamiento urgente. 47. En la carta con fecha el 9 de marzo de 2009, se informó que el llamamiento urgente fue puesto en conocimiento del Chancillería quien informó que estaba llevando a cabo consultas urgentes con las autoridades pertinentes de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. 48. En la carta fechada el 16 de abril de 2009, el Gobierno proporcionó información, brindada por la Secretaría de Derechos Humanos del Gobierno de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Según la carta, la Secretaría de Derechos Humanos tomó contacto con el Juzgado Federal en lo Criminal y Correccional No 3 de Morón a cargo del Juez Subrogante Dr. Juan Pablo Sala, quien informó que estaba tramitando la denuncia bajo la causa No 1.760. 49. Se informó que, en razón de la gravedad de los hechos, la Secretaría de Derechos Humanos recomendó al magistrado que arbitre los medios conducentes a fin de requerir la incorporación de la denunciante al Programa Nacional de Protección de Testigos del Ministerio de Justicia, Seguridad y Derechos Humanos de la Nación. 50. Asimismo, la Secretaría de Derechos Humanos solicitó por escrito al Sr. Juez Salas que informe las medidas adoptadas tendientes a determinar a los responsables de los hechos denunciados. 51. Según la carta fechada el 8 de junio de 2009, la Secretaría de Derechos Humanos solicitó informes a diversos organismos gubernamentales tendientes a la obtención y recopilación de información relativa a las gestiones realizadas sobre el caso.

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 14 52. Entre otros, se puso en contacto con la dirección de Derechos Humanos del Municipio de Morón quien informó que después de que ocurrieron los hechos, se puso en contacto con el abogado de la Sra. Laruffa para ponerse a su disposición. 53. La mencionada Secretaría informó que no tenía conocimiento de que la autoridad judicial hubiera efectuado el pedido de protección al Ministerio de Justicia, Seguridad y Derechos Humanos. 54. En la carta con fecha el 6 de enero de 2010, se informó en nombre del Sr. Juez Salas que el día 30 de julio de 2009, se resolvió archivar la causa de la Sra. Laruffa, debido a la situación planteado y el resultado de las diligencias instructoras recopiladas en la causa. Asimismo, el testimonio de la Sra. Laruffa no resulta suficiente porque no logró aportar datos relevantes que resultaran de interés para el desarrollo de una pesquisa o siquiera identificar de forma alguna a quienes la habrían intentado coaccionar. No fue vislumbrada que la producción de otras medidas probatorias permitan variar tal cuadro de situación. 55. Así también, las últimas situaciones que denunciara la Sra. Laruffa no encuadran en figura penal alguna y no existiría acción típica punible que pueda aplicarse a tales hechos. No pueda vincular dicha situación con los hechos materia de investigación en la presente pesquisa. La ausencia de otras evidencias directas o indirectas impidió de momento el avance de la presente investigación. Llamamiento urgente 56. El 31 de julio de 2009, el Relator Especial, junto con la Relatora Especial sobre la situación de los defensores de los derechos humanos, enviaron un llamamiento urgente señalando a la atención urgente del Gobierno la información recibida en relación con el secuestro del Sr. Emanuel San Martín, un educador del Hogar Juan XXIII, y la intimidación de otros educadores del Hogar Juan XXIII y miembros de la organización Pelota de Trapo. 57. Pelota de Trapo es una fundación que se dedica a la defensa de los derechos de niños y jóvenes. En 1987, Pelota de Trapo fundó el Movimiento Nacional Chicos del Pueblo, una red de más de 300 organizaciones. El Hogar Juan XXIII forma parte de dicha red. Durante 2008, el Movimiento Nacional Chicos del Pueblo lanzó una campaña denominada “El Hambre es un Crimen - Ni un Pibe Menos”. 58. El 5 de agosto de 2008, la Relatora Especial sobre la situación de los defensores de los derechos humanos envió un llamamiento urgente al gobierno argentino en relación con el allanamiento de la Escuela Gráfica Manchita de Pelota de Trapo, perpetrado por ocho hombres armados, y el secuestro de un joven del Hogar Juan XXIII. El 8 de octubre de 2008, dos titulares de mandatos enviaron un llamamiento urgente en relación con el secuestro del Sr. Emanuel San Martín. El 4 de diciembre, dos titulares de mandatos enviaron un llamamiento urgente al Gobierno en relación con los supuestos secuestros de la Sra. María Isabel Almeida y el Sr. Emanuel San Martín, educadores del Hogar Juan XXIII; el Sr. Reymundo Sacca, un voluntario del mismo hogar; la Sra. Viviana Dadario, una educadora de la Red El Encuentro en José C. Paz; y la supuesta intimidación de otros educadores del Hogar Juan XXIII y miembros de la organización Pelota del Trapo. El 14 de julio de 2009, la Relatora Especial sobre la situación de los defensores de los derechos humanos envió otro llamamiento urgente en relación con el

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 15 secuestro de la Sra. Verónica Vaquel, una educadora de la organización Pelota de Trapo, y la intimidación de otros educadores del Hogar Juan XXIII y miembros de la organización Pelota de Trapo. Se agradecieron las respuestas de su Gobierno a las otras comunicaciones, recibidas el 28 de octubre de 2008, el 16 de enero de 2009, el 5 de febrero de 2009 y el 9 de marzo de 2009. 59. Según las informaciones recibidas, el 24 de julio de 2009, aproximadamente a las 12 horas del mediodía, el Sr. San Martín habría sido secuestrado por cuatro personas no identificadas cuando salió del Hogar Juan XXIII para realizar unas compras. 60. Habría estado regresando de la farmacia, cerca del Hogar Juan XXII, cuando una camioneta tipo Kangoo obscura se habría acercado y las cuatro personas a bordo del vehículo le habrían apuntado con una escopeta. Asimismo, lo habrían llevado a un galpón y lo habrían golpeado. 61. A las 12:46 horas de la tarde habría llegado un mensaje de texto al celular de uno de los dirigentes de la fundación que decía “Tenemos uno de ustedes al que mas queríamos bingo... Ema es un pibe menos”. 62. Casi al mismo tiempo otro miembro de la fundación habría recibido un mensaje similar que decía: “Tenemos lo que más buscamos, tenemos a Ema su pibe, respeten…”. También llegó otro mensaje a las 14:15 horas que decía “Ojo con lo que dicen la vida de uno de sus pibes está en peligro y con sentencia de muerte”. Poco después, habría llegado otro mensaje advirtiendo a los miembros del Hogar Juan XXIII falsamente que el Sr. San Martín había muerto. 63. Sin embargo, aproximadamente a las 18:30 horas, el educador habría sido puesto en libertad en la Capital Federal cerca del Zoológico de Palermo. A pesar de la intervención del Ministerio de Justicia y Seguridad de la Nación, mientras el Sr. San Martín estaba secuestrado no habrían logrado identificar ni detener a los agresores. 64. Tras el inicio de la campaña “El Hambre es un Crimen - Ni un Pibe Menos” miembros de la fundación Pelota de Trapo y el Hogar Juan XXIII habrían sido objeto de una campaña de amenazas e intimidaciones, siendo varios de ellos incluso secuestrados. El Sr. San Martín habría sido víctima de secuestros en dos ocasiones durante dicha campaña en 2008. Recientemente, los miembros de Pelota de Trapo habrían pedido protección policial, pero esta les habría sido negada. Después de este nuevo atentado habrían designado custodia en el Hogar Juan XXIII, pero los integrantes de Pelota de Trapo siguen sin protección. 65. Se expresó temor que el secuestro del Sr. San Martín y las amenazas y los actos de intimidación contra los miembros de Pelota de Trapo y el Hogar Juan XXIII podrían estar relacionados con las actividades legítimas de estas organizaciones en defensa de los derechos humanos de niños y jóvenes bonaerenses. Respuesta del Gobierno 66. En cartas fechadas el 10 y 26 de agosto de 2009, el 5 de octubre de 2009 y el 1 de diciembre de 2009, el Gobierno respondió al llamamiento urgente. 67. Según la primera carta, se estaba realizando consultas urgentes a nivel de las autoridades nacionales y provinciales.

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 16 68. En la carta fechada el 26 de agosto de 2009, el Gobierno proporcionó información elaborada por el Subsecretario de la Procuración General de la Suprema Corte d Justicia de la Provincia de Buenos Aires y confirmó los datos presentados en las comunicaciones relacionadas a los casos de la Sra. Vaquel y el Sr. San Martín. 69. Asimismo, se informó que estaban tramitando la causa I.P.P. No. 12.147 por Privación Ilegal de la Libertad, en la cual resultó víctima el Sr. San Martín. También las causas 6749, 11306, 14853, 18471 y 18584 en las cuales resultan víctimas miembros del Movimiento nacional Los Chicos del Pueblo fue tramitado. 70. El informe proporcionó información sobre el caso del Sr. Emmanuel San Martín. En el informe, confirmaron los hechos presentados en la comunicación relativa al Sr. San Martín. 71. Se informó que tanto personal policial de la provincia de Buenos Aires como así también de Policía Federal Argentina a través de su Delegación Avellanda, se dedica a la custodia dinámica de los distintos domicilios donde tiene asiento la organización como así también de sus integrantes. 72. En la respuesta del Gobierno fechada el 5 de octubre, se proporcionó más información relativa al caso así como las respuestas a las preguntas hechas en el llamamiento urgente elaboradas por la Secretaría de Derechos Humanos de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Según la información recibida, el 24 de julio de 2009, el sacerdote Luis Alberto Espósito formuló denuncia penal por los hechos que resultara víctima el educador Sr. San Martín dando origen a la Investigación Penal Preparatoria No. 12.147. 73. Se informó que estas actuaciones se encontraban en plena etapa de investigación, tramitando diligencias de instrucción a fin de dar con los autores de los hechos denunciados. 74. Se subrayó que la investigación se encontraba en pleno trámite en la fecha que se recibió la carta pero que los autores de los hechos no habrían sido identificados. 75. Asimismo, se informó que recibieron declaraciones testimoniales e hicieron una reconstrucción de los hechos denunciados con la presencial personal de la Fiscalía Interviniente y de los peritos de fotografía y video de Fiscalía de Cámaras Departamental, como así también del padre Luis Espósito, Director del Hogar Juan XXIII. El funcionario judicial manifestó que en reiteradas oportunidades el personal de Fiscalía realizó inspección del lugar y recibió declaraciones testimoniales. También se informó que se encontraban realizando análisis de telefonía tanto de base como móvil para esclarecer los hechos. 76. La Secretaría habría expresado al Subsecretario de Derechos Humanos la aspiración de que instructores especializados pertenecientes al Procuración General de la Provincia de Buenos Aires colaboren en este proceso investigativo, con el fin de lograr un rápido esclarecimiento de los hechos denunciados. 77. En relación con las medidas de protección adoptadas, informaron que el encargado de la pesquisa habría informado que dispuso las consignas fijas de personal policial pertenecientes a la División de Custodia del Policía de la Provincia de Buenos Aires a efectos de custodias la

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 17 Fundación Pelota de Trapo como así también el Hogar Juan XXIII, para preservar a los jóvenes integrantes de las mismas. 78. Se informó que, con fecha 18 de diciembre de 2008, se convocó a la Policía Federal Argentina a través de su Delegación en la Ciudad de Avellaneda para la realización de tareas investigativas y custodias fijas y dinámicas para brindar seguridad a las víctimas. 79. En la carta fechada el 1 de diciembre de 2009 se informó que habían continuado las investigaciones descritos en las cartas previas. Por ejemplo, habían tomado declaraciones testimoniales y realizado la reconstrucción del evento descripto supra, encontrándose asimismo presente el padre Luis Espósito, Director del Hogar Juan XXIII. También el suscripto se había hecho presente en reiteradas oportunidades junto a personal de la Fiscalía en el Hogar Juan XXIII, donde realizó una inspección del lugar y recibió declaraciones testimoniales. 80. En relación con las medidas adoptadas para garantizar la seguridad de Emanuel San Martín y los demás miembros del Hogar Juan XXIII, le informó que se habían dispuesto consignas fijas de personal policial perteneciente a la División de Custodia de la policía de la Provincia de Buenos Aires a los efectos que custodien la fundación Pelota de Trapo y el Hogar Juan XXIII, a los efectos de preservar a los jóvenes integrantes de las mismas. 81. Posteriormente y más puntualmente desde el día 18 de diciembre de 2008, se había convocado a la Policía Federal Argentina a fin que realice tareas investigativas y se haga cargo de las custodias fijas para darles seguridad. La División de Custodia de la policía de la Provincia de Buenos Aires y la Delegación Avellaeda de Policía Federal Argentina se habían continuado garantizar la seguridad. 82. Se informó que se estaban continuando realizar análisis de telefonía tanto de base como móvil a fin de poder esclarecer los injustos en examen, contando con la colaboración de personal de la Procuración de la Provincia de Buenos Aires. Observaciones 83. El Relator Especial agradece la información proporcionada por el Gobierno de Argentina en relación con las dos comunicaciones enviadas. Azerbaijan Urgent appeal 84. On 15 July 2009, the Special Rapporteur, together with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, sent an urgent appeal to the Government concerning youth activists Mr. Adnan Hajizade and Mr. Emin “Milli” Abdullayev. Mr. Adnan Hajizade is a prominent video-blogger and coordinator of the OL Youth Organization. Mr. Emin “Milli” Abdullayev is the co-founder and coordinator of the Alumni Network (AN) Youth Organization and head of ANTV Online. Mr. Abdullayev has previously also worked with the OSCE Office in Baku, the Council of Europe and the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 18 85. According to information received, on 8 July 2009, Mr. Hajizade and Mr. Abdullayev were assaulted while having dinner at a Lebanese Restaurant in the centre of Baku, by two men in civilian clothing. The two individuals, who had been identified as Mr. Babek Huseynov and Mr. Vusal Mammadov, addressed them in an aggressive manner and attacked them physically. Following the incident, Mr. Hajizade and Mr. Abdullayev went to the Sabail police station to file a complaint, and to report the injuries they had sustained. They were interrogated for several hours by the police and subsequently arrested. They were transferred to the Khatai detention centre at police station No 37. Mr. Hajizade and Mr. Abdullayev were allowed to see their lawyers only in the afternoon of 9 July 2009, and were examined by a doctor afterwards. According to information available, both sustained minor injuries. The assailants were not arrested. 86. On 10 July 2009, Mr. Hajizade and Mr. Abdullayev were again interrogated at the Sabail police station for several hours. Later that day, a preliminary hearing was held in their case at the Sabail District Court. Mr. Hajizade and Mr. Abdullayev were charged with hooliganism under article 221 of the Criminal Code of Azerbaijan, and were remanded to two months pre-trial detention pending further investigation of the case. The hearing in their case was held in closed session. 87. Concern was expressed that the arrest, detention, and subsequent remand in detention of Mr. Hajizade and Mr. Abdullayev may be related to their activities in the defense of human rights, especially to their activism in youth organizations. Further concern was expressed that the assailants of Mr. Hajizade and Mr. Abdullayev were not arrested, and were present at their hearing only as witnesses. Urgent appeal 88. On 4 August 2009, the Special Rapporteur, together with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders and the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, sent an urgent appeal concerning Mr. Novruzali Mammadov, Head of the Talysh Cultural Centre and Talysh language expert. Mr. Mammadov was the subject of an earlier communication, sent to your Excellency’s Government on 26 August 2008. A response to that communication had been received on 13 March 2009. 89. According to new information received, in June 2009, Mr. Novruzali Mammadov was diagnosed with several serious medical conditions by a doctor in Prison Colony No. 15, including cataract, prostate cancer and thyroid problems. On 28 July 2009, Mr. Mammadov was transferred from Prison Colony to the central hospital for the penitentiary system, which is run by the Ministry of Justice. 90. Mr. Mammadov is allegedly not receiving adequate medical care in the hospital, where his health has further deteriorated. Reports claim that he has been denied pain relief by the hospital staff and has received no treatment for his conditions yet. 91. Concern was expressed that the health of Mr. Novruzali Mammadov may further deteriorate if he does not receive adequate medical care and urgent attention.

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 19 Response from the Government 92. At the time this report was finalized, the reply of the Government of 9 October 2009 to the communication sent on 4 August 2009 had not been translated. Letter of allegations 93. On 18 September 2009, the Special Rapporteur, together with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a letter of allegations to the Government regarding the death of Mr. Novruzali Mammadov. Mr. Mammadov was the Head of the Talysh Cultural Centre, editor of now-defunct Talysh minority language newspaper, Talyshi Sado (Voice of the Talysh) and a Talysh language expert. 94. Mr. Mammadov was the subject of an earlier communication sent to the Government on 26 August 2008. A response to the first communication had been received on 13 March 2009. A second communication was sent on 4 August 2009. 95. According to the information received, on 17 August 2009, Mr. Mammadov died in detention at the hospital of the Ministry of Justice’s Penitentiary Service in Baku where he had been transferred on 27 July 2009. Mr. Mammadov’s serious health condition reportedly required urgent surgery. However, prison authorities allegedly failed to provide him with adequate medical treatment, as reported by his family who was allowed to visit him on 30 July. Moreover, in the days prior to his death, and despite his alleged aggravated condition and pain, Mr. Mammadov was placed in a common ward, lacking sanitary facilities and bed clothing. 96. Grave concern was expressed that the lack of sufficient medical care and deplorable conditions of detention may have aggravated Mr. Mammadov’s health condition leading to his death. Observations 97. The Special Rapporteur regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the Government had not transmitted a response to his communications of 15 July 2009 and 18 September 2009. At the same time, the Special Rapporteur wishes to thank the Government for the response provided to communications sent on 4 August 2009 and on 26 August 2008. He considers response to his communications an important part of the cooperation of Governments with his mandate. He urges the Government to respond to the concerns raised by him, and provide detailed information regarding investigations undertaken, subsequent prosecutions as well as protective measures taken. Bahrain Urgent appeal 98. On 19 February 2009, the Special Rapporteur, together with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, sent an urgent appeal to the Government regarding the charges against, and the travel ban imposed on Mr. Abdulhadi Alkhawaja. Mr. Abdulhadi Alkhawaja is the former President of the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights (BCHR) and

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 20 currently protection coordinator at the non-governmental organization Front Line with responsibility for the Middle East and North Africa with the exception of Bahrain. Mr. Alkhawaja was the subject of 2 urgent appeals sent on 2 February 2007 and on 14 December 2005. The Government responded to both communications. According to the information received: 99. On 7 January 2009, Mr. Abdulhadi Alkhawaja delivered a speech during Ashora, an annual gathering commemorating the martyrdom of Imam Hussain, the third historic Imam of Shia. Mr. Alkhawaja had been invited due to his experience as a human rights defender in Bahrain. In his intervention Mr. Abdulhadi Alkhawaja referred to the human rights situation in Bahrain, and denounced instances of corruption and discrimination. He also called for resistance to human rights violations by peaceful means and civil disobedience. 100. On 21 January, the office of the Attorney General ordered prosecution against Mr. Alkhawaja under articles 29(2), 160, 165, and 168(1) of the Penal Code. He was charged with ‘propaganda to overthrow or change the political system by force’, ‘publicly instigating hatred and disrespect against the ruling regime’, and ‘willfully broadcasting false and malicious news, statements or rumors and spreading provocative propaganda related to the internal affairs of the country that could disturb public security and cause damage to the public interest’. These charges carry the maximum sentence of up to ten years imprisonment. 101. The first hearing in his case was held by the High Criminal Court on 8 February 2009, and subsequently adjourned to 11 March 2009. In the morning of 9 February 2009, Mr. Alkhawaja was prevented from leaving to go to Iraq, where he was scheduled to travel as the Middle East coordinator of Front Line. He was told by passport control officers that there is an official order from the General Prosecution Office to prevent him from leaving the country. 102. Concern was expressed that the charges against Mr. Abdulhadi Alkhawaja may be related to his legitimate activities defending human rights, particularly his defense of freedom of expression in Bahrain. Response from the Government 103. In a letter dated 1 April 2010, the Government replied to the communication sent on 19 February 2009, concerning Mr. Abdulhadi Alkhawaja. In its response, the Government informed that the information and allegations sent by the Special Rapporteurs are inaccurate, and stated that it “take[s] issue in particular with the reference to Mr. Al-khawaja’s “legitimate activities defending human rights, particularly his defence of freedom of expression in Bahrain”. The Government further provided the following information: 104. “In the view of my Government, Mr. Al-Khawaja cannot in any way be characterized as a legitimate human rights defender. He has, in my Government’s view, no genuine interest in human rights but is, in reality, engaged in a clearly political campaign to overthrow Bahrain’s legitimate constitutional government. In his capacity, he has been intimately involved in inciting violence to achieve this end, including participation in demonstrations that have seen violence against police personnel. He has quite rightly been marginalized by political and human rights organizations in Bahrain, and consequently seeks to enhance his own credibility by falsely associating himself with human rights principles and with international human rights groups. My

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 21 Government strongly urges you to treat any information or allegations from Mr. Al-Khawaja or his supporters with extreme caution as to both its sources and content. 105. The facts of the events in question are as follows. On 6 January 2009, Abdul Hadi AlKhawaja delivered a speech on the occasion of Ashura, a religiously charged and emotive occasion for the Shia community. In his speech, Mr. Al-Khawaja used deliberately inflammatory language to call for the overthrow of the legitimate government of Bahrain, and attempted to draw parallels with the historical events of Ashura. Moreover, he sought to use the occasion to give religious or sectarian legitimacy to the potentially violent overthrow of the government. 106. Further, and in deliberately incendiary language, Mr. Al-Khawaja made a number of untrue and inflammatory allegations against the government and against members of the ruling family. His only purpose and intent in making such allegations was to incite hatred, and he would have been fully aware that his words were likely to (and indeed were intended to) stir his supporters into violence. 107. Moreover, while Mr. Al-Khawaja evidently attempted to choose his words carefully (doubtless for international consumption), to give the impression that he was advocating “peaceful resistance”, it is abundantly clear from the timing, tone and content of his remarks that his intention was to defame the government and individuals within it, and to incite and promote violence against the government, its employees and property. Indeed, he explicitly called for the overthrow of Bahrain’s legitimate constitutional government by extra-constitutional means. 108. Further, Mr. Al-Khawaja made a clear implicit link between the battle of karbala, the backdrop of Ashura, and the necessity of a “battle” to overthrow what he characterized as an “oppressive regime”, seeking to draw parallels between the Umayyad regime and the government of Bahrain. He also clearly called for extra-constitutional action in order to overthrow the legitimate constitutional government of Bahrain. Given Mr. Al-Khawaja’s previous involvement in violent attacks on police, and his record of inciting violence, there can be little doubt as to what was intended by his remarks. 109. For these reasons, Mr. Al-Khawaja was interviewed by the Public Prosecutor on suspicion of a number of offences, including inciting the overthrow of the government, inciting hatred, defaming senior officials, and insulting the King and government institutions. 110. Subsequently, he appeared in court on 11 March 2009, facing charges of attempting to forcibly change the government, publicly inciting hatred and contempt of the government, and deliberately spreading false and malicious information. His counsel requested an adjournment of the case so that he could submit a challenge to the constitutionality of the charges. The court accepted this request and the case was adjourned. I would also point out that the hearing was attended by representatives of both local and international human rights organizations. 111. Finally, I want to underline, once again, that the arrest, investigation, charging and trial of Mr. Al-Khawaja are in no way relevant to the protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, nor the activities of genuine human rights defenders. My Government remains committed to the promotion and protection of human rights, and to safeguarding and facilitating the activities of those who genuinely seek to advance this noble cause.”

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 22 Letter of allegations 112. On 5 March 2010, the Special Rapporteur, jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, sent a letter of allegations on concerning Mr. Nabeel Rajab, president of the Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR), Mr. Mohamed Al-Maskati, president of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights (BYSHR), and Mr. Abdul Ghani AlKhanjar, spokesperson for the National Committee for Martyrs and Victims of Torture (NCMVT). BCHR is a broad-based human rights organization which has continued to operate despite being ordered to close by the authorities in November 2004. BYSHR is a youth-led human rights organization, founded in 2005 but denied registration by the authorities. NCMVT has been involved in organizing protests and public events to commemorate victims of conflict and uprisings in Bahrain. Mr. Nabeel Rajab was the subject of communications sent by the then Special Representative of the Secretary-General on the situation of human rights defenders and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression on 25 July 2005 and 6 October 2004. 113. In recent months, Mr. Rajab, Mr. Al-Maskati and Mr. Al-Khanjar have worked with the international organization Human Rights Watch in the preparation of a report on the increasing use of torture by the Bahraini authorities. Entitled “Torture Redux”, the report contains testimonies of victims of torture and ill-treatment, including those of human rights defenders and political activists. Published on 8 February 2010, the report acknowledges human rights activists who assisted in its preparation, and identifies Mr. Rajab, Mr. Al-Maskati and Mr. Al-Khanjar by name. 114. According to the information received, in recent weeks, a media smear campaign has been carried out against Mr. Rajab, Mr. Al-Maskati and Mr. Al-Khanjar. Beginning on 9 February 2010, unsubstantiated statements have been published regarding the activities of the three human rights defenders in various national newspapers, including The Gulf News, Al Watan News and Bahrain Voice. Several such articles have been published to date and the campaign appears to be ongoing. The statements include unsubstantiated allegations that Mr. Rajab, Mr. Al-Maskati and Mr. Al-Khanjar have betrayed their country, have committed acts of violence and have used Molotov cocktails. 115. In addition, on 16 February 2010 a radio program was broadcast on Bahrain Radio Station in which Mr. Faisal Fulath, a member of the Shura Council, Mr. Adel Al Mghwdah, a member of Parliament, and Mr. Mohammed Al-Shooruqi, a broadcaster, publicly condemned Mr. Rajab, Mr. Al-Maskati and Mr. Al-Khanjar. The previously published allegations against the three human rights defenders were repeated, in addition to accusations that they had links to foreign Governments, that they incited Bahraini youth to committing acts of violence, and that they had defamed the State before international organisations. 116. It is believed that the media campaign against Mr. Rajab, Mr. Al-Maskati and Mr. AlKhanjar may be related to their work in the preparation of the report “Torture Redux”, which was published the day before the first articles against them appeared in the press. It is believed that the media campaign may directly encourage public discontent with human rights defenders and their activities, in addition to discrediting Mr. Rajab, Mr. Al-Maskati and Mr. Al-Khanjar and the organisations they represent.

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 23 117. Concern was expressed that the media smear campaign against Mr. Rajab, Mr. Al-Maskati and Mr. Al-Khanjar might be related to their work in the defence of human rights, in particular their work against torture and against violations of human rights by the authorities, and their cooperation with international organizations, in particular Human Rights Watch, in the publicizing of such abuses. Observations 118. The Special Rapporteur regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the Government had not transmitted a reply to his communications of 5 March 2010, 28 July 2008, 18 January 2008, 25 October 2007, and 7 March 2007. He considers response to his communications an important part of the cooperation of Governments with his mandate. He urges the Government to respond to the concerns raised by him, and provide detailed information regarding investigations undertaken, subsequent prosecutions as well as protective measures taken. Belarus Letter of allegations 119. On 14 May 2009, the Special Rapporteur, together with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, sent a letter of allegations to the Government concerning the judgment of the Supreme Court to maintain a previous decision by the Ministry of Justice not to register the human rights organization Nasha Viasna (Our Spring). Viasna has been working on various human rights issues since 1999, advocating human rights issues through the media, organizing education programs and monitoring elections. In January 2009, Viasna launched a campaign for the abolition of the death penalty in Belarus. 120. According to the information received, Viasna had been registered with the Ministry of Justice since 1999, and was forced to close down in October 2003, as a result of a decision by the Supreme Court, following the demand of the Ministry of Justice. In April 2004, after having exhausted all domestic remedies to challenge the decision of the Supreme Court, the President of Viasna and the Vice-President of FIDH lodged a complaint with the UN Human Rights Committee. In its communication of 24 July 2007 (no. 1296/2004), the Committee concluded that Article 22 (1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights had been violated, and considered that the co-authors of the complaint were “entitled to an appropriate remedy, including the re-registration of Viasna”, and that “Belarus was under an obligation to take steps to prevent similar violations occurring in the future”. 121. On 15 April 2008, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe reiterated the position of the UN Human Rights Committee regarding the closure of Viasna and urged the Belarusian authorities to “repeal Article 193-1 of the Criminal Code, criminalising activities of non-registered organizations” (resolution 1606 of 15 April 2008). 122. Despite the opinion of the UN Human Rights Committee, all subsequent attempts by Viasna to register have failed. In January 2009, 67 members of Viasna submitted an application to the Ministry of Justice to register the NGO under the name “Nasha Viasna”, since Belarusian legislation prevents the use of the name of an organization that had been liquidated. On 26

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 24 February 2009, the organization was denied registration by the Ministry of Justice due to the violations concerning the holding its constituent congress. An appeal was lodged against this decision, but on 22 April 2009 the court refused to consider it due to defect of form. On 24 April 2009, the Supreme Court also rejected the complaint by the founders of Nasha Viasna against the decision of the Ministry of Justice. The Supreme Court found that the decision by the Ministry of Justice was legal due to certain procedural violations by Nasha Viasna, including inaccuracies in the founders’ list and the organization’s Charter. All other arguments by the Ministry of Justice had been found invalid. The Supreme Court also rejected the argument of the Ministry of Justice which claimed that Nasha Viasna’s constituent congress was not in full conformity with the relevant legislation. 123. On 25 April 2009, Nasha Viasna applied for registration for the third time. 124. Concern was expressed that the refusal to register Nasha Viasna may be connected to its work in the defence of human rights, in particular its campaign for the abolition of the death penalty in Belarus. Further concern was expressed that the repeated refusal to register the organization contravenes Article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Belarus is a party, and runs counter to the decision by the UN Human Rights Committee, and the resolution of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Response from the Government 125. In a letter dated 31 August 2009, the Government responded to the communication sent on 15 July 2009. In its response, the Government transmitted information provided by the Office of the Procurator-General of the Republic of Belarus and the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus. 126. The criminal proceedings against Mr. L. Svetik were heard by the Vitebsk Provincial Court in connection with the charge that he had committed an offence under article 130, paragraph 1, of the Criminal Code (Incitement to racial, ethnic or religious enmity or discord). 127. In accordance with a decision by the deputy prosecutor of Vitebsk province of 11 May 2009, one of the charges against Mr. Svetik — committing an offence under article 367, paragraph 2, of the Criminal Code (Defamation of the President of the Republic of Belarus) — was dropped. 128. On 16 July 2009, the criminal division of the Vitebsk Provincial Court sentenced Mr. Svetik under article 130, paragraph 1, of the Criminal Code to pay a fine of 31,500,000 Belarusian roubles (approximately US$ 11,130). 129. The court found Mr. Svetik guilty of engaging, from July 2006 to January 2008, in premeditated acts aimed at provoking ethnic enmity and discord among the Belarusian, Jewish and Russian ethnic groups, advocating the exclusivity and supremacy of the Russian ethnic group, and demeaning the national honour and dignity of the Belarusian and other ethnic groups. Coming to Vitebsk for this purpose, he posted pamphlets on behalf of an unregistered organization, Russian National Unity (Vitebsk branch), to the Vitebsk Provincial Executive Committee, newspapers, Belarusian theatres, and members of political parties and voluntary associations. The pamphlets contained pictures, statements and slogans aimed at provoking

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 25 ethnic and religious enmity and discord among the Belarusian, Jewish and Russian ethnic groups, advocating the exclusivity and supremacy of the Russian ethnic group and the Orthodox religion, and demeaning the national honour and dignity of the Belarusian, Jewish and other ethnic groups. 130. The guilt of the accused, Mr. Svetik, was established by the testimony of the injured parties, Mr. T. Gusachenko, Mr. V. Bazan, Mr. Y. Derzhavtsev and others, who stated that they had received and seen the pamphlets, the content of which demeaned the Belarusian, Jewish and other peoples. 131. In addition, the conclusions of expert handwriting analysis indicated that the addresses on the envelopes containing the pamphlets had been written by Mr. Svetik. Forensic analysis established that the pictures and printed text of the pamphlets were produced on a printer using the supplementary toner cartridge and paper that were seized from Mr. Svetik’s place of residence. Authorship analysis indicated that the texts of the letters containing the pamphlets sent to the injured parties and witnesses had all been written by the same person. 132. According to the expert academic analysis conducted by the linguistic commission, the Russian National Unity pamphlets under investigation may contain explicit incitement to interethnic enmity and discord aimed at demeaning the national honour and dignity of the Belarusian, Jewish and other ethnic groups. 133. The Vitebsk Province Procurator’s Office concurred with the court’s judgement. However, the sentence has not been carried out, since Mr. Svetik and his defence counsel, Mr. P. Sapelko, have appealed by way of cassation to the criminal division of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Belarus. The case is scheduled to be heard by the court of cassation on 15 September 2009. Neither Mr. Svetik nor any other persons acting on his behalf have lodged a complaint with the Office of the Procurator-General of the Republic of Belarus. Further information relating to the trial and the reliability of the facts set out in the petition will be provided after the hearing of the case by the court of cassation. Letter of allegations 134. On 14 August 2009, the Special Rapporteur sent a letter of allegations to the Government concerning Ms. Natallya Radzina, an editor of an opposition news website, Charter 97. 135. According to information received, on 15 July 2009, Ms. Natallya Radzina received an email threatening violence of a sexual nature if she was not careful about what she chose to post on the Charter 97 website. The threat was reportedly prompted by an article posted on the website criticizing the authorities for failing to curb the neo-fascist Russian National Unity party’s racist and xenophobic activities. 136. Moreover, on 8 June 2009, access to the Charter 97 website was reportedly blocked by a distributed denial of service attack (DDoS), in which a site is bombarded with a massive amount of connection requests that overload its server. 137. On 26 April 2009, police allegedly overran Charter 97 offices, preventing the editors from updating the website on a day that opposition demonstrations were taking place.

A/HRC/14/23/Add.1 page 26 138. Concern was expressed that threats against Ms. Natallya Radzina and impediments to the operation of Charter 97 may represent a direct attempt to stifle the right to freedom of expression in Belarus. Response from the Government 139. At the time this report was finalized, the reply of the Government of 2 July 2009 had not been translated. Urgent appeal 140. On 24 August 2009, the Special Rapporteur, together with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, sent an urgent appeal to the Government regarding the judgment of the Supreme Court to maintain a previous decision by the Ministry of Justice not to register the human rights organization ‘Nasha Viasna’ (Our Spring). Nasha Viasna, previously known as Viasna, has been working on various human rights issues since 1999, advocating for human rights through the media, organizing education programs, preparing alternative human rights reports on Belarus and monitoring elections. In January 2009, it launched a campaign for the abolition of the deat