May, 04 2016, 11:15am EDT
Pakistan: Crackdown on Farmers' Protest
Excessive Force, Anti-Terror Law Used Against Peaceful Demonstrators
NEW YORK
In April, Pakistani authorities used draconian laws and excessive force to prevent tenant farmers in Punjab province from protesting for land rights, Human Rights Watch said today. Farmers in Okara district had planned to convene on April 17, 2016, the International Day of Peasants' and Farmers' Struggles.
The authorities should drop all charges brought against those exercising their rights to freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly, and appropriately punish security force members responsible for abuses against protesters.
"Blocking a peaceful meeting, arresting organizers, and then using excessive force against demonstrators shows a complete disregard for basic rights in a democratic society," said Brad Adams, Asia director. "The government's use of vague and overbroad counter-terrorism laws against protesting farmers brings new tensions to this volatile situation."
On the morning of April 16, police arrested Mehr Abdul Sattar at his home. Sattar is the secretary general of Anjuman-i-Mazareen Punjab, the farmers' group which was organizing the meeting the next day. The district administration imposed section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code, a colonial era law to restrict gatherings.
Hundreds of villagers gathered soon after to protest against the arrest of Sattar and four other tenant farmer leaders. The police and army personnel deployed in armored personnel carriers. After several protesters threw stones, the security forces carried out baton charges and fired tear gas canisters to disperse the protesters. Dozens were arrested under various anti-terrorism and public order provisions and many remain detained at undisclosed locations. Numerous witnesses told Human Rights Watch that security forces beat and arrested protesters, arresting some at their homes in the middle of the night.
The district coordinating officer of Okara told media that the local administration decided to forbid the Peasant's day meet because of security concerns after a recent terrorist attack in Lahore, saying there were "strict directions from the top authorities to keep an eye on the law and order situation and such assemblies that can cause security concern." He said that the farmer organizers refused to comply.
The Okara district police have registered more than 4000 cases under the penal code and the anti-terrorism law, which provides the authorities broad powers to arrest and to prosecute vaguely defined offenses such as section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. The government's National Action Plan against terrorism, created in 2015, expands the role of the military in counter-terrorism operations and permits the use of military courts for terrorism-related prosecutions.
In some cases, including that of Mehr Abdul Sattar, the police are refusing to provide information on the whereabouts of those arrested, which amounts to an enforced disappearance in violation of international law. Individuals forcibly disappeared are at a grave risk of being tortured or otherwise ill-treated.
Aisha Bibi, 55, villager, said that her son has disappeared since the crackdown by government forces. "When I asked the police about my son, the officers abused me and said that my son is being taught a lesson for being part of the farmers' struggle."
Since April 16, at least 24 farmers have been brought before the anti-terrorism courts and returned to judicial custody. Excessive use of tear gas might have resulted in the death of a 26-year-old farmer, according to his family members. Villagers told Human Rights Watch that security forces have since cordoned off villages in the area of dispute, preventing people, food and public services from entering or leaving.
Pakistan should ensure that security forces follow the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. They provide that all security forces use nonviolent means as far as possible before resorting to the use of force. Whenever the lawful use of force is unavoidable, officials should use restraint and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offense. Lethal force may only be used when strictly unavoidable to protect life.
"The government should promptly release those wrongfully held, provide information on those 'disappeared,' and hold accountable soldiers and police who use excessive force," Adams said. "Efforts to reach an agreement over the longstanding land dispute in Okara will be improved by showing greater respect for human rights."
Background and eyewitness accounts (names changed):
The dispute between tenant farmers in Okara and the military started 16 years ago. Traditionally, farmers were sharecroppers, handing over part of their produce as rent to the military, which acts as landlord through military-run farms. In 2000, the military unilaterally tried to change the rules, demanding that the farmers sign new rental contracts requiring them to pay rent in cash. The farmers refused, fearing that cash rents would, when times were lean, place them at risk of being evicted from land that their families have lived on for generations.
Human Rights Watch has previously documented a campaign of arbitrary detentions, torture, killings, and summary dismissals from employment by Pakistani security forces against the farmers.
The dispute peaked between May 5, 2003 and June 12, 2003, when the 150,000 people who live in the 18 villages that comprise Okara Military Farms were placed under curfew, with severe restrictions on movement within and into the district. Water, electricity and telephones were disconnected until the farmers agreed to sign the new contracts guaranteeing fixed income to the military owners of agricultural land.
During the election campaign of 2013, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif held a rally in Okara district and promised farmers their right to the lands farmed over generations. However, Sharif's promise remains unfulfilled and local authorities' oppression of the Okara farmers continues unabated, which has led to further protests. In July 2014, security forces killed two tenant farmers during a siege and assault in village 15/4 L.
The following accounts are from Human Rights Watch's visit to Okara district, Punjab from April 21 to 23, 2016.
Arbitrary arrests, detention, enforced disappearances
Human Rights Watch interviewed 14 people who said that their friends or family members were arrested by the authorities on April 16 or on ensuing days. Many remain in custody. Some have not been accounted for and may have been forcibly disappeared. The interviews were conducted in villages 4/4-L and 15/4-L. The local farmers' movement started in village 4/4-L in 2000, and it is considered by both the government and the farmers as the movement's headquarters.
Sakina Bibi, a 70 -year-old farmer from village 15/4L, said that her sons were arrested and detained, and she is concerned for their safety:
At about 2 to 2:30 a.m. on April 18, the police broke down the door of my house. There was a lot of noise. They were shouting. There were many of them. First they dragged my elder son Abbas, who is a school teacher from his bed and started beating him with rifle butts. Abbas suffers from hepatitis. Then they grabbed my younger son Javaid, and started hitting him on the head with batons. When I tried to restrain them, one police officer hit me on the head. They kicked and slapped my two daughters-in-law. They also arrested two village chowkidars [caretakers] and an 80-year-old neighbor who came to our house hearing our screams.
I don't know, where they have taken my sons and why they were arrested. I am more than 70-years-old and cannot pursue the disappearance of my sons. Nobody from the village can go to the police station to check because whoever goes to the police station is arrested.
Why is the National Action Plan being used against farmers? It is clearly because they want to throw us in jails and take our lands.
Muhammad Irfan, a resident of village 15/4L, said that his 60-year-old mother was in custody:
My mother Kaneez Bibi went to get medicine from the city for her diabetes on the morning of April 16. She was in an auto-rickshaw [motorbike taxi] and fell out after she was caught in the firing of teargas shells. She was arrested for attempted murder and under various sections of the Anti-Terrorism Act. We do not know where she is. I can't even go to the police station to check since I fear that I will be arrested as well. My mother can hardly walk. It is absurd to accuse her of attempting to commit murder.
Aisha Bibi, 55, a resident of village 4/4L, said that her son has disappeared since the crackdown by government forces:
My son Nadeem was arrested on April 17 when he was on his way to Okara city. My son is an auto-rickshaw driver and he was not in the protest of April 16. We have no land and are not even farmers. My husband is dead and my son is the only person in the house that earns a living. The police say that they have sent him to the Okara jail. However, the jail people refuse to talk to me and say that they will give out no information. When I asked the police about my son, the officers abused me and said that my son is being taught a lesson for being part of the farmers' struggle.
Mehr Abdul Sattar is the secretary general of Anjuman-i-Mazareen Punjab, the group that had organized the April 17 meeting. His arrest, a day earlier, led to the protests. His brother Mehr Abdul Jabbar told Human Rights Watch:
On April 16, I heard footsteps and loud noises coming from the front gate of our house. I ran towards the gate. Around 40 to 50 police officers had broken into our house. I couldn't recognize any of them, apart from the local Station House Officer. They started dragging and beating my brother. When I tried to restrain them, they started hitting us with rifle butts. They dragged us both out to the front gate. There were at least 12 police vehicles outside in the street. Then they took him away.
The police refused to tell me why Sattar was arrested. The district government officials claim that they have arrested him under the Maintenance of Public Order law. Earlier, on April 13, the district government had asked him to cancel the planned convention celebrating the International Day of Peasants. The district government also imposed section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code to stop the convention. Sattar refused to comply and said it is the constitutional right of the farmers to hold a peaceful, public meeting.
To this day we do not know where the police have taken Sattar. The police and district government refuse to meet us or tell us where he is. I am sure that they are torturing him. I was arrested in 2003 and was kept in "torture cells" for weeks.
Anyone who tries to question the detention of Sattar and the other farmers is implicated in false cases and arrested. Our fault is that we are sons of a poor farmer who have become aware of our rights to our land.
Izhar is a lawyer and a resident of village 4/4L. He said:
They are detaining people without registering arrests. I am a lawyer who has been working for the rights of other villagers. However, now even I can't go out of the village. For the past one year, I have stopped practicing law because I am afraid of being arrested. There are check posts outside the village and they arrest anyone going in and out. Sometimes they ask for National Identification Card and if the address on the N.I.C. is of our village, the police detain the individuals without any legal cause. The government has used the National Action Plan, which is meant to counter terrorists, to use military force on us. Anti-terrorism cases have been registered against women and children.
Excessive use of force
On April 16, army soldiers and the police responded to several protesters hurling stones and carrying wooden sticks by firing teargas canisters, carrying out baton charges and using steel rods, and shooting in the air. According to accounts, several protesters were badly beaten.
A resident of village 4/4L said that her 26-year-old son died during the protest:
In the morning, on April 16, he left the house to go to the protest against cancellation of the Peasants' day event. In the evening, he was brought home by fellow villagers. He was very ill, and told me that the excessive exposure to the teargas shells was suffocating him. We called the emergency ambulance service. However, the ambulance was stopped on the way to the hospital by the police at the checkpoint outside the village. My son died in the ambulance. Had the security forces allowed the ambulance to pass through quickly, my son might have been saved.
Muhammad Aslam, 50, a farmer from the village of 4/4L, described the security forces' use of force at the protest on April 16:
We had gathered that morning to protest the arrest of our leader, Mehr Abdul Sattar. There was a heavy presence of police and army troops. At about 10 a.m., the police attacked to disperse us without any warning. They started beating us, men, women, and children, mercilessly. I have marks on my body, which you can see. They used rods and batons to beat us. I cannot even go for a medical examination since I am afraid that I will be arrested on my way to the hospital. The entire village is hostage now. Nobody goes out.
The police have registered cases against us under the anti-terrorism law. The only terror acts that were committed are by the police and army. We were unarmed and peaceful.
How is it a crime to commemorate the International Day of Peasants? Is it a crime to be a farmer? The government treats us farmers as criminals and traitors. For the past one year, even if four or five farmers are seen together, they are arrested. They detain us for a few days without registering our arrest. They torture us and give us dirty water to drink while in custody. They want to break our resistance.
Rasheedan Bibi, a farmer from the village 4/4L, said:
I am over 50-years-old, a woman suffering from multiple illnesses. On April 16, I went to the protest against the cancellation of the peasant convention and arrest of our leaders. We had not blocked any road. We were unarmed and simply chanting slogans demanding release of our leaders and for granting us rights to our lands. The police and the army troops charged at us without any warning. They beat us with batons, kicked us, and dragged women on the road. My finger was fractured as a result of the beating and my knees are injured. My only crime is that I am a poor, farmer woman.
Muhammad Shabbir said he and his mother were beaten by the army and police officers for being part of the protest:
I work as a laborer in the fruit market in Okara city. I don't own even an inch of land, so I'm not a farmer. However, I went to the protest on April 16 in solidarity with the rest of the villagers. The army and the police attacked for us no reason. We posed no threat to them. When they were beating my mother with batons, I pleaded with them to stop, as she is old. For this, a police constable hit me on the head repeatedly, even as I bled. I needed stitches on my head. My mother has a broken hand and bruises all over her body.
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
South Korean Court Hears First Asian Youth Climate Case
"Carbon emission reduction keeps getting pushed back as if it is homework that can be done later," said one plaintiff's mother. "But that burden will be what our children have to bear eventually."
Apr 23, 2024
One of South Korea's two highest courts on Tuesday began hearing Asia's first-ever youth-led climate lawsuit, which accuses the country's government of failing to protect citizens from the effects of the worsening, human-caused planetary emergency.
Nineteen members of the advocacy group Youth4ClimateAction filed a constitutional complaint in March 2020 accusing the South Korean government of violating their rights to life, the "pursuit of happiness," a "healthy and pleasant environment," and to "resist against human extinction."
The lawsuit also notes "the inequality between the adult generation who can enjoy the relatively pleasant environment and the youth generation who must face a potential disaster from climate change," as well as the government's obligation to prevent and protect citizens from environmental disasters.
"South Korea's current climate plans are not sufficient to keep the temperature increase within 1.5°C, thus violating the state's obligation to protect fundamental rights," the plaintiffs said in a statement.
South Korea's Constitutional Court began hearing a case that accuses the government of having failed to protect 200 people, including dozens of young environmental activists and children, by not tackling climate change https://t.co/XRIGE23KGM pic.twitter.com/snvqBaGGe9
— Reuters (@Reuters) April 23, 2024
Signatories to the 2015 Paris agreement committed to "holding the increase in global average temperature to well below 2°C above preindustrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C."
According to the United Nations Environment Program's (UNEP) most recent Emissions Gap Report, the world must slash greenhouse gas emissions by 28% before 2030 to limit warming to 2°C above preindustrial levels and 42% to halt warming at 1.5°C. UNEP said that based on current policies and practices, the world is on track for 2.9°C of warming by the end of the century.
A summary of the lawsuit notes that South Korea is the fifth-largest greenhouse gas (GHG) emitter among Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development nations, and that the government is constitutionally obligated to protect Koreans from the climate emergency.
Instead, the plaintiffs argue, the Korean Parliament "gave the government total discretion to set the GHG reduction target without providing any specific guidelines." Furthermore, they contend that the government's downgraded reduction targets fall "far short of what is necessary to satisfy the temperature rise threshold acknowledged by the global community."
Lee Donghyun, the mother of one of the plaintiffs, toldReuters: "Carbon emission reduction keeps getting pushed back as if it is homework that can be done later. But that burden will be what our children have to bear eventually."
The South Korean case comes on the heels of a landmark ruling by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), which found that Switzerland's government violated senior citizens' human rights by refusing to heed scientists' warnings to swiftly phase out fossil fuel production.
The ECHR ruled on the same day that climate cases brought by a former French mayor and a group of Portuguese youth were inadmissible.
Courts in Australia, Brazil, and Peru also have human rights-based climate cases on their dockets.
In the United States, a state judge in Montana ruled last year in favor of 16 young residents who argued that fossil fuel extraction violated their constitutional right to "a clean and healthful environment."
Meanwhile, the Biden administration is trying to derail a historic youth-led climate lawsuit against the U.S. government.
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Rights Chief Demands International Probe of Mass Graves Near Gaza Hospitals
"Hospitals are entitled to very special protection under international humanitarian law," said Volker Türk, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights.
Apr 23, 2024
The United Nations' human rights chief on Tuesday called for an international investigation into mass graves discovered at two Gaza hospitals that Israeli forces recently assailed and destroyed, further imperiling the enclave's barely functioning healthcare system.
Volker Türk, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights, said in a statement that he was "horrified" by the discovery of mass graves at the Nasser and al-Shifa medical complexes, which the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) reduced to ruins.
More than 300 bodies were reportedly discovered in the mass grave near the Nasser facility in Khan Younis, Gaza, and eyewitnesses said Israeli soldiers executed civilians during their two-week-long raid of al-Shifa last month.
Türk demanded an "independent, effective, and transparent" probe into the killings and mass graves, adding that "given the prevailing climate of impunity, this should include international investigators."
"Hospitals are entitled to very special protection under international humanitarian law," he added. "And the intentional killing of civilians, detainees, and others who are hors de combat is a war crime."
"Every 10 minutes a child is killed or wounded. They are protected under the laws of war, and yet they are ones who are disproportionately paying the ultimate price."
The IDF's destructive attacks on Nasser and al-Shifa were part of a broader Israeli assault on Gaza's healthcare system. An analysis released Monday by Save the Children found that the rate of monthly Israeli attacks on healthcare in Gaza since October has exceeded that of any other conflict around the world since 2018.
The group estimated that Israel has launched an average of 73 attacks per month on healthcare in Gaza—and at least 435 attacks total since October.
"After six months of unimaginable horror, the healthcare system in Gaza has been brought to its knees," said Xavier Joubert, Save the Children's country director in the occupied Palestinian territory. "Healthcare workers are risking their lives daily to give Palestinian children a chance at survival. The constant attacks on healthcare are simply unjustifiable and must stop. Palestinian children must have unimpeded access to services, including healthcare and education."
Türk also used his statement Tuesday to condemn Israeli forces' killing of women and children in airstrikes on the southern Gaza city of Rafah in recent days. The human rights official noted that Gaza doctors rescued a baby from the womb of her mother as the latter succumbed to head injuries from an Israeli strike.
"The latest images of a premature child taken from the womb of her dying mother, of the adjacent two houses where 15 children and five women were killed—this is beyond warfare," said Türk. "Every 10 minutes a child is killed or wounded. They are protected under the laws of war, and yet they are ones who are disproportionately paying the ultimate price in this war."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Shameful': UK Conservatives Push Through Plan to Deport Asylum-Seekers to Rwanda
"The U.K. government could literally pay every refugee a £30,000 annual salary for life, and it would be cheaper," said one critic. "We're burning money just to enjoy the cruelty."
Apr 23, 2024
Legal and human rights experts on Tuesday said the British Conservative Party's decision to push through a bill allowing the government to deport asylum-seekers to Rwanda—effectively overriding last year's Supreme Court ruling—represented a "desperate low" from lawmakers eager to exploit migrants ahead of elections expected later this year.
"A lot of this is performative cruelty," Daniel Merriman, a lawyer whose clients have included some asylum-seekers whom the Tories tried to deport after it first introduced its plan in 2022, toldNPR. "The elephant in the room is the upcoming election."
After a prolonged debate, the unelected House of Lords cleared the way to pass the Safety of Rwanda bill early Tuesday morning, after dropping several proposed amendments including one that would have required independent verification that the central African country is a safe place to send migrants.
The House of Commons then passed the bill, and King Charles III is expected to formally approve the legislation in the coming days.
The bill requires courts and immigration officials to "conclusively treat the Republic of Rwanda as a safe country" to send asylum-seekers, even though the Supreme Court ruled in November that people deported to the country would face a significant risk of refoulement, or being sent back to the countries where they originally fled persecution or violence.
The Conservative government signed a treaty with Rwanda last December to strengthen protections for asylum-seekers, including a provision that partially bans Rwanda from sending people back to their home countries.
But the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) called on the U.K. to abandon the plan and instead "take practical measures to address irregular flows of refugees and migrants, based on international cooperation and respect for international human rights law."
"The new legislation marks a further step away from the U.K.'s long tradition of providing refuge to those in need, in breach of the Refugee Convention," said Filippo Grandi, the U.N. high commissioner for refugees. "Protecting refugees requires all countries—not just those neighboring crisis zones—to uphold their obligations. This arrangement seeks to shift responsibility for refugee protection, undermining international cooperation and setting a worrying global precedent."
"The U.K. has a proud history of effective, independent judicial scrutiny," Grandi added. "It can still take the right steps and put in place measures to help address the factors that drive people to leave home, and share responsibility for those in need of protection, with European and other international partners."
Dorothy Guerrero, head of policy and advocacy at Global Justice Now, noted that "disastrous foreign and economic policies of successive governments have contributed to the need for people to seek refuge."
"These same people's lives are continually used as a political football, after years of being scapegoats for bad government decisions," said Guerrero. "Statements from politicians are now even more blatantly devoid of any pretense of care for human rights. We will not stop pushing for a change of course, with safe routes to seek asylum in the U.K. so that people no longer have to risk their lives in the Channel."
"The passing of the Rwanda Bill is a shameful day for the U.K.," she added.
Hours after the legislation was passed, French officials announced that at least five people, including a seven-year-old child, had been killed while attempting to cross the English Channel, bound for the U.K. in an overloaded inflatable boat.
At The New Statesman, associate political editor Rachel Cunliffe wrote Tuesday that the tragedy reveals "the flaws of the Rwanda plan," which proponents say could deter migrants from seeking refuge in Britain.
Proponents of the Rwanda plan will inevitably point to today's disaster as further evidence that strong measures are needed to address the issue of Channel crossings. They will accuse Labour and opposition parties of ignoring the human cost of letting this crisis continue and argue that lives are at stake if the government does not act.
[...]
The reality is that a substantial number of people who pay people traffickers large sums of money to crowd them on to a tiny boat do so because they feel they have no other option. Fleeing war and persecution, they are desperate. And so they are prepared to take desperate measures. Measures that sometimes lead to tragedy, but which are deemed necessary given the hopelessness of their situation.
It is hard to see how the threat to send a tiny fraction of those who arrive (Rwanda has said it will only take 150-200 migrants) changes this calculation.
The Labour Party, which is leading Conservatives in polls ahead of the expected elections, has vowed to scrap the legislation if it wins control of the government later this year, and critics have expressed doubt that Prime Minister Rishi Sunak will actually secure deportation flights before Britons vote.
One flight was grounded in June 2022 after the European Court of Human Rights intervened, and on Monday the OHCHR warned aviation authorities that they would risk violating international law if they allow "unlawful removals" of asylum-seekers to Rwanda.
Critics have also pointed to a finding by the National Audit Office that the deportations would cost £1.8 million ($2.2 million) per person.
"The U.K. government could literally pay every refugee a £30,000 annual salary for life, and it would be cheaper than sending them to Rwanda," said David Andress, a history professor at the University of Portsmouth. "We're burning money just to enjoy the cruelty."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular