February, 24 2009, 07:00am EDT
Syria: Dissolve the State Security Court
EU and US Should Engage Damascus to Abolish Repressive Court
NEW YORK
Syrian authorities should abolish the Supreme State Security Court (SSSC), a special court that exists outside the ordinary criminal justice system to prosecute those perceived as challenging the government, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today.
In the 73-page report, "Far from Justice: Syria's Supreme State Security Court," Human Rights Watch documents how the SSSC has relied on sham trials to prosecute at least 153 defendants since January 2007 on the basis of vague charges that criminalize freedom of expression. Those prosecuted include 10 bloggers, 16 Kurdish activists, and eight citizens accused of "insulting the Syrian president" in private conversations.
The report is based on interviews with former defendants before the SSSC, their lawyers, and human rights activists in Syria, as well as an extensive review of trial notes taken by Western diplomats, who are the only outside observers to have had access to the court. Human Rights Watch has extensively compiled information on the trials of and charges against 237 detainees, representing all cases known to have been decided by the SSSC between January 2007 and June 2008, and analyzed the charges brought in these cases, the categories of detainees prosecuted, the administration of justice at their trials, and their terms of sentencing.
"The State Security Court is one of Syria's main pillars of repression," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "It's a kangaroo court providing judicial cover for the persecution of activists, and even ordinary citizens, by Syria's security agencies. Defendants have no chance of defending themselves, much less proving their innocence against the bogus charges brought against them."
By decree, the SSSC is exempt from the rules of criminal procedure that apply in Syria's criminal courts. Defense lawyers play a largely ceremonial role in a charade of due process. They usually see their clients for the first time on the day of the trial and the court denies them the opportunity to engage in oral defense or call on witnesses. Most trials consist of four short sessions, often less than 30 minutes each. Defendants have no right to appeal their verdict to a higher tribunal.
Human Rights Watch found that security forces detain defendants scheduled to appear before the SSSC for long periods of time - usually for months - before informing them of the charges against them. Defendants frequently allege that Syrian security services tortured them to extract their confessions, but the court does not investigate the allegations or reject the confessions. The SSSC sentenced the vast majority of defendants who appeared before it during the 18-month period from January 2007 to June 2008 on the basis of its vaguely defined, overbroad "security laws," most typically the charge of "spreading false or exaggerated information that weakens national sentiment."
"In the name of protecting 'national sentiment,' the SSSC jailed more than 100 people last year," Whitson said. "It is not these defendants who weaken national sentiment, but the practices used by the Syrian state to silence them."
Since 1992, when it resumed its activities after a hiatus in the 1980s, the SSSC has tried thousands of people. The largest category of defendants before the SSSC in the last three years includes those labeled as "Islamists"; their chief "crime" appears to be that many possess CDs or books by fundamentalist clerics. The SSSC has also tried Kurdish activists, bloggers, writers, and private citizens, like Muhamad al-Husseini, 67, whom the SSSC sentenced to three years in jail in 2007 because the security services reportedly overheard him "insulting the Syrian president" and criticizing corruption in Syria while sitting at a popular cafe in Damascus. In one case, the government prosecuted a Syrian citizen after informants said he had insulted President Bashar al-Asad while watching television at his uncle's home.
"It appears that ordinary Syrians who aren't engaged in any political activity cannot have a private conversation, exchanging opinions about their government, in a restaurant or even in their own homes," said Whitson. "Instead of addressing the country's genuine problems of poverty, corruption, and a stunted political environment, the Syrian authorities expend national resources spying on their own people."
The European Union and the United States have been eager to engage with Syria recently. Human Rights Watch urged these governments to communicate their strong disapproval of the SSSC and to condition any further progress in their relations with Syria - notably the entry into force of the Association Agreement between Syria and the European Union - on abolition of the SSSC and concrete improvements in Syria's human rights situation.
Human Rights Watch also called on the Syrian authorities to:
- Abolish the court and create an independent judicial commission to review the existing cases before the SSSC;
- Order the release of defendants facing prosecution solely for exercising their freedom of expression or association; and
- Transfer to regular criminal court those cases where there is probative evidence that the defendant committed recognizable criminal offenses.
The report also urged Syria to decriminalize free expression and peaceful association by revising the vague and overbroad statutes in the penal code that the authorities use to prosecute individuals for speaking their minds or holding a meeting.
The SSSC suspended its operations starting in July 2008 following a riot that broke out at Sednaya prison, which the authorities quelled violently. The government detains the vast majority of detainees on trial before the SSSC at Sednaya prison. The SSSC did not issue any explanation for the suspension of hearings, but it is likely linked to the total blackout on information concerning detainees in Sednaya prison that Syrian authorities imposed following the riot.
Human Rights Watch urged the Syrian authorities to make permanent this temporary suspension and to release information on the fate of the detainees in Sednaya.
Accounts from "Far From Justice":
A defendant described the torture that he endured at the Political Security branch during investigation in 2003. The judge at the SSSC used his confession to convict him at trial:
- "The investigation began. It involved beatings and more beatings. [...] The investigation lasted for 12 days: two sessions of beatings per day. They beat me on the bottom of my feet, on my head. After 20 days in detention, they took me to an office and told me to sign my confession. I said, 'I want to read it.' I was beaten again, forced to thumb print the confession and sign. I never managed to read it."
A Kurdish university student, whom the SSSC sentenced to two-and-a-half years in prison for writing an article criticizing the treatment of Kurds, described his trial:
- "The whole thing lasted three sessions. My first session was for 30 minutes. This was the first time I saw my lawyer. The judge read the article I wrote during the session and asked me a few questions. This was the only time I spoke during the trial. He told me that I did not understand anything, and my facts on the repression of Kurds were all wrong. The second session was supposed to be my defense session. My lawyer had prepared a statement arguing that I should be amnestied like other Kurds detained after the Qamishli events. I refused that defense because I wanted to defend my article and asked for the session to be postponed. However, I never had a chance to present that defense, as I was sentenced during the third session. The judge said that my article 'had incited the Kurds to fight.' I had written it after the end of the fighting."
A Western diplomat who has attended numerous SSSC trials described the court sessions:
- "What strikes you is that it does not look or feel like a real court. It is in a room of a house with the judge sitting behind a desk. The judge usually makes a short summary of the case, asks a few questions to the defendant and then the session is over. The defense lawyers never speak, and I have never seen any physical evidence presented. The whole session does not last more than 30 minutes per group [of defendants]."
A Western diplomat who has frequently attended the SSSC proceedings provided his impressions of the president of the SSSC, judge Fayez al-Nuri:
- "I have never seen al-Nuri really look at a file. He basically tells the defendant, 'this is the charge, what do you have to say?' As the defendant speaks, he may suddenly say, 'enough!' The prosecutor never asks questions. He might add a comment or share a joke with al-Nuri."
A defense lawyer who regularly appears before the SSSC described the court's reliance on confessions obtained under torture:
- "The truth is that the vast majority of accused have been tortured. It is rare that a defendant has not been tortured. Unfortunately, the court continues to rely on the investigations conducted by the security services and has never - to my knowledge - opened any investigation into the torture cases."
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
LATEST NEWS
Biden Condemned for Ahistorical and 'Politically Suicidal' Attack on Campus Protests
"Biden's claim that 'dissent must never lead to disorder' defies American history, from the Boston Tea Party to the tactics that civil rights activists, Vietnam War protesters, and anti-apartheid activists used to confront injustice."
May 02, 2024
President Joe Biden faced immediate backlash Thursday for characterizing pro-Palestinian demonstrations that have erupted on university campuses across the country as lawless and violent, a narrative likely to further alienate the thousands of students who have joined peaceful protests against Israel's U.S.-backed war on Gaza in recent weeks.
In brief, unscheduled remarks delivered from the White House, Biden acknowledged that "peaceful protest is in the best tradition of how Americans respond to consequential issues."
But he then proceeded to cast recent campus demonstrations as abhorrent, using instances of property damage to broadly paint student protesters as out of control—giving a pass to police forces and pro-Israel mobs that have brutally attacked peaceful encampments.
Biden, who has armed Israel's military to the hilt, also conflated trespassing and disruptions of day-to-day campus activities—including classes and graduations—with violence, saying, "None of this is a peaceful protest."
"Dissent must never lead to disorder," the president said, ignoring the long history of disruptive civil rights and anti-war protests in the U.S. "There's the right to protest, but not the right to cause chaos."
Watch Biden's remarks in full:
Edward Ahmed Mitchell, a civil rights attorney and national deputy director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said Thursday that "President Biden's claim that 'dissent must never lead to disorder' defies American history, from the Boston Tea Party to the tactics that civil rights activists, Vietnam War protesters, and anti-apartheid activists used to confront injustice."
"And if President Biden is truly concerned about the conflict on college campuses, he should specifically condemn law enforcement and pro-Israel mobs for attacking students, and stop enabling the genocide in Gaza that has triggered the protests," Mitchell added.
Matt Duss, executive vice president of the Center for International Policy and a former foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), wrote following the president's remarks that "the best speech of Biden's campaign was in June 2020, amid the nationwide protests against the murder of George Floyd."
"He could've given a very similar speech today, if only he thought the same rights and principles applied to Palestinians," Duss added. "In June 2020, Biden criticized violence but also refused to paint the protests with that broad brush. He acknowledged the root causes, the pain driving them. He could've made some effort to do the same today, instead he chose to amplify a right-wing caricature."
Countering suggestions that criticism of Biden could harm his reelection chances against former President Donald Trump, Duss pointed to an old social media post in which he explained: "One of my concerns here is that Biden is undermining his re-election. In addition to being morally and strategically awful, I think his Gaza policy is alienating and demobilizing constituencies he will need."
At the end of his speech, a reporter asked Biden whether the mass demonstrations on college campuses have led him to reconsider his approach to Israel's assault on Gaza, which to date has been unconditionally supportive even in the face of horrific Israeli war crimes.
"No," Biden said in response to the reporter's question.
"Apparently Biden is not swayed by the mass killing of children, international law, or an election as a growing number of Americans are appalled by his policies," Assal Rad, an author and Middle East analyst, wrote in reply to the president.
Biden to young people: go fuck yourselves, I’m sticking with Israel and its genocide.
Absolutely surreal, sad, politically suicidal, grotesque. https://t.co/96RIQE2ZO5
— Daniel Denvir (@DanielDenvir) May 2, 2024
Justice Democrats called Biden's speech "shameful," writing that "as campuses have unleashed police on students—he blames protesters as the problem and ignores the violence they've faced."
"If dissent was crucial to our democracy," the progressive group added, "you would spend more time listening to their demands than lying about their tactics."
Biden's address came hours after Los Angeles police launched a violent attack on pro-Palestinian demonstrators at UCLA, where a pro-Israel mob brutally assaulted student protesters just a day earlier.
In a statement earlier this week, College Democrats of America endorsed the Gaza solidarity protests that have swept the nation and warned Democratic leaders that each day they "fail to stand united for a permanent cease-fire, two-state solution, and recognition of a Palestinian state, more and more youth find themselves disillusioned with the party."
"We condemn those politicians, like MAGA Republicans and many other lawmakers, for smearing all protesters as hateful when, according to reports, the overwhelming majority of protests are peaceful," said the College Democrats.
In a floor speech on Wednesday, Sanders called out his colleagues who "are spending their time attacking the protesters rather than the Netanyahu government, which has caused and has created this horrific situation."
Sanders noted that the late Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) "was arrested 45 times for sit-ins and protests, 45 times for protesting segregation and racism."
"Protesting injustice and expressing our opinions is part of our American tradition," said the Vermont senator. "And when you talk about America being a free country, well, you know what, whether you like it or not, the right to protest is what American freedom is all about."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Fossil Fuel Companies Use Enclosures to Hide Planet-Heating Methane Flares
"If you enclose the flare, people don't see it, so they don't complain about it," said one expert. "But it also means it's not visible from space by most of the methods used to track flare volume."
May 02, 2024
Fossil fuel companies are using a technology known as enclosed flaring to conceal dangerous methane emitted during the production of fossil gas, a report published Thursday revealed.
The Guardian's Tom Brown and Christina Last reported that fossil fuel producers in countries including the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Norway "appear to have installed technology that could stop researchers from identifying methane, carbon dioxide emissions, and pollutants at industrial facilities involved in the disposal of unprofitable natural gas."
As the World Bank, European Union, and others have been using satellites to track flaring—the burning of unwanted fossil gas—in an effort to reduce the harmful practice, fossil fuel producers have been adopting enclosed combustion technology to eliminate unwanted methane.
While the industry promotes enclosed combustors as a clean, safe, and efficient solution for eliminating unwanted emissions and ensuring regulatory compliance, critics claim they're a way for gas producers to conceal flaring—which releases five times more methane than previously believed, as Common Dreamsreported in 2022.
"Enclosed combustors are basically a flare with an internal flare tip that you don't see."
"Enclosed combustors are basically a flare with an internal flare tip that you don't see," Tim Doty, a former regulator at the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, told The Guardian. "Enclosed flaring is still flaring. It's just different infrastructure that they're allowing."
"Enclosed flaring is, in truth, probably less efficient than a typical flare," Doty added. "It's better than venting, but going from a flare to an enclosed flare... is not an improvement in reducing emissions."
Eric Kort, an associate professor at the University of Michigan, told The Guardianthat "if you enclose the flare, people don't see it, so they don't complain about it."
"But it also means it's not visible from space by most of the methods used to track flare volumes," he added.
According to a March 2023 report published by the World Bank and Global Gas Flaring Reduction Partnership, an estimated 140 billion cubic meters of gas was flared globally in 2022, a 3% decrease from the previous year. The top 10 countries by flare volume that year were Russia, Iraq, Iran, Algeria, Venezuela, the United States, Mexico, Libya, Nigeria, and China.
Flaring releases carbon dioxide and toxic pollutants including carcinogenic chemicals. Despite these dangers, energy and environmental regulators allow the venting of fossil gas, which is up to 90% methane, into the atmosphere.
Methane—which has more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide during its first two decades in the atmosphere—is emitted during the production and transportation of oil, gas, and coal, as well as from municipal landfills and livestock.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) published a report last October warning that immediate cuts to methane gas pollution caused by fossil fuel production are critical for limiting planetary heating to 1.5°C, the more ambitious objective of the Paris agreement.
The need is urgent. According to the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the three most critical heat-trapping gases in Earth's atmosphere—carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide—once again reached record levels last year, with methane increasing by 10 parts per billion to 1,922.6 ppb.
Responding to The Guardian's reporting, U.K. Green parliamentary candidate Catherine Read said that "oil and gas companies are hiding their 'flaring' operations because laws are being brought in to reduce emissions of [greenhouse gases] from waste gas that can't be sold at a profit."
"They don't care about us, our children, or nature," she added, "only profit above all else."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'An Affront to the World': Shell Posts Billions in Profits as Planet Burns
"The grotesque wealth that this Earth-wrecking company continues to accumulate is something we cannot allow ourselves to accept as normal," one campaigner said.
May 02, 2024
Oil major Shell announced $7.7 billion in profits during the first quarter of 2024 on Thursday, as well as a $3.5 billion share buyback program.
The news comes as every month covered by the period was the hottest of its kind on record. The three-month period also saw the second-largest wildfire in Texas history, extreme heat in West Africa and the Sahel, and the beginning of the Great Barrier Reef's fifth mass bleaching event in eight years. Scientists have clearly linked global heating, and the weather disasters it exacerbates, to the climate crisis driven primarily by the burning of fossil fuels.
"As extreme weather accelerates and the cost-of-living crisis rumbles on, Shell's latest billion-pound profits are an affront to the world," Izzie McIntosh, climate campaign manager at Global Justice Now, said in a statement. "The grotesque wealth that this Earth-wrecking company continues to accumulate is something we cannot allow ourselves to accept as normal."
"This is the sad irony of the global energy system in which those causing chaos are the ones getting rich."
Shell's profits for the first three months of 2024 were around 20% lower than for the same time in 2023, CNBC reported. However, the company brought in $1.2 billion more than analysts had predicted. The world's largest oil firms, including Shell, saw record profits in 2022 following Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the energy crisis that followed.
"Shell has beaten expectations by a reasonable margin, despite the impact of lower gas prices during the first quarter," Stuart Lamont, an investment manager at RBC Brewin Dolphin, said in a statement shared by CNBC.
Global Witness pointed out that Shell's earnings to date amounted to over $58,000 a minute, more than the average U.K. nurse makes in a year.
"Shell continuing to rake in huge sums of money shows us that huge polluter profits were not a one-off but are the twisted reality of an energy system that benefits climate-wrecking companies to the cost of everyone else," Global Witness fossil fuel campaigner Alexander Kirk said in a statement.
Shell announced its profits one day after the U.S. Senate held a hearing on how large oil and gas companies, including Shell, have continued to deceive the public about the dangers of their products, moving from outright climate denial into making commitments they don't intend to keep or touting false solutions like carbon capture and storage that they then fail to develop. Shell, according to the testimony of Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), spent only 11% of its capital on low-carbon technologies between 2009 and 2023.
The hearing sparked calls for accountability from the fossil fuel industry—such as mechanisms to make climate polluters pay for the transition to renewable energy—and the news of Shell's profits generated more.
In the U.K., Labor Shadow Energy and Climate Minister Ed Miliband proposed increasing the tax on energy company profits. Shell paid the U.K. government around $1.4 billion in taxes in 2023, of which around $300 million went to the Energy Profits Levy, according toThe Guardian. Also last year, it paid its shareholders $23 billion, nine times more than it invested in its "Renewables and Energy Solutions" program.
"These results show yet again why it is so damning [that Prime Minister] Rishi Sunak refuses to bring in a proper windfall tax on the oil and gas giants," Miliband said. "These are companies that have made record profits at the expense of working people. Labor says tax these companies fairly so we can invest in clean homegrown energy that will end the cost of living crisis and make Britain energy independent."
Greenpeace U.K. called Shell's latest profits "shameless."
"Their reckless hunt for profits needs to end," the environmental advocacy group wrote on social media. "When will world leaders find their backbone and make polluters pay?"
When one commenter suggested governments held back out of desire to keep collecting Big Oil's taxes, Greenpeace fired back, "What taxes?" and noted that Shell avoided paying U.K. taxes for years.
"At the end of the day we want clean, cheap renewable energy not to face the worst impacts of climate change," Greenpeace continued. "Solutions exist, we just need the political and industrial will to get them in place."
Global Witness and Global Justice Now also took the opportunity to call for an energy transition.
"This is the sad irony of the global energy system in which those causing chaos are the ones getting rich," Kirk said. "This spiral won't stop until we make the urgent switch to a fairer renewable energy system that puts both people and planet first."
McIntosh concluded: "We urgently need to bring a fair and organised end to the fossil fuel era, and that means companies like Shell must stop trying to extract new oil and gas, and start paying what they owe for the loss and damage they've caused. Profit announcements like this for a corporate dinosaur like Shell need to become a thing of the past."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular