July, 02 2009, 03:24pm EDT
DR Congo: Massive Increase in Attacks on Civilians
Government and UN Peacekeepers Fail to Address Human Rights Catastrophe
GOMA, Democratic Republic of Congo
United Nations-backed Congolese armed forces conducting intensified
military operations in eastern and northern Democratic Republic of
Congo have failed to protect civilians from brutal rebel retaliatory
attacks and instead are themselves attacking and raping Congolese
civilians, Human Rights Watch said today. The attacks on civilians from
all sides have resulted in a significant increase in human rights
violations over the past six months.
"The Congolese government's military operations have been a disaster
for civilians, who are now being attacked from all sides," said Kenneth
Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, on a visit to eastern
Congo. "Congo and the UN need to take urgent measures to protect people
and keep this human rights catastrophe from getting even worse."
Since January 2009, nine Human Rights Watch fact-finding missions to
frontline areas found a dramatic increase in attacks on civilians and
other human rights abuses in Lubero, Rutshuru, Masisi, and Walikale
territories in North Kivu, Kalehe and Shabunda territories in South
Kivu, and Haute Uele district in northern Congo.
The Congolese army initiated military operations against the Ugandan
Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) rebels in December 2008 in northern Congo,
followed a month later by the launching of operations in eastern Congo
against the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), the
Rwandan Hutu militia. Since then, the rebel forces and Congolese army
troops combined have killed more than 1,500 civilians, raped thousands
of women and girls, abducted hundreds of adults and children, and
burned to the ground thousands of homes, sometimes entire villages.
According to the UN, more than a million people have been forced to
flee for their lives from these conflict areas, adding to the tens of
thousands of others displaced from earlier waves of violence. Many of
those newly displaced have limited or no access to humanitarian
assistance.
Retaliatory Attacks by FDLR and LRA Rebel Groups
FDLR and LRA combatants are responsible for the great majority of
killings of civilians documented by Human Rights Watch. Both armed
groups are deliberately terrorizing and punishing civilians and
attacking their property as a military tactic in retaliation for
Congolese government military operations. Those who committed or
ordered such attacks are responsible for war crimes.
On May 10, for example, FDLR combatants brutally massacred at least
86 civilians, including 25 children, 23 women, and seven elderly men at
Busurungi, in the Waloaloanda area of Walikale territory, North Kivu.
Twenty-four others were seriously wounded. Some of the victims were
tied up and executed; others were shot or their throats were slit by
knives or machetes as they tried to flee. A number of people were
burned to death when FDLR combatants deliberately locked them in their
homes and torched the village.
One witness who lived near the village outskirts took four of his
children by the hand and ran, calling on his wife to take the other
children. "I was the first out the door holding the children behind me
and calling on my wife to follow," he told Human Rights Watch. "But she
was too late. The FDLR pushed her back in the house with my daughter
and brother and then set it on fire. We heard their screams as we ran
away."
The FDLR carried out similar attacks in Mianga, Walikale territory,
on April 12, killing 45 civilians including decapitating the local
chief, and in Chiriba, Kalehe territory, around May 25, killing 10
civilians. Human Rights Watch found that in total at least 403
civilians were killed by the FDLR since January 2009.
The LRA, whose leaders are wanted by the International Criminal
Court for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Uganda,
are currently in northern Congo and continued their brutal attacks
against civilians, bringing the death toll to more than 1,000 civilians
since December. Abductions of children and adults have increased,
indicating that the LRA may be seeking to replenish its ranks. In two
attacks in early June in Dakwa, local sources reported that the LRA
abducted some 135 adults and children.
The Congolese army's operations against these two cross-border
groups were initially supported by Ugandan forces in northern Congo and
Rwandan forces in eastern Congo, and since March by UN peacekeepers in
Congo (MONUC). These forces have provided only limited protection for
civilians from the deliberate and brutal rebel attacks.
"Rebel atrocities against civilians in eastern and northern Congo
seem boundless," said Roth. "The Congolese army should recognize by now
that offensive military operations need to include effective measures
to protect vulnerable civilians from these predictable retaliatory
attacks."
Abuses by the Congolese Army
Congolese army soldiers have also committed war crimes against
civilians. Soldiers have deliberately attacked civilians whom they
accused of collaborating with the FDLR, raped women and girls, looted,
unlawfully forced civilians to act as porters, and torched homes in
villages that they claim harbored FDLR supporters.
In an attack on an FDLR position in Shalio, near Busurungi, in late
April, Congolese army soldiers killed an unknown number of FDLR family
members and Rwandan refugees. This possibly led to the brutal May 10
reprisal attack by the FDLR on Busurungi.
Rape cases have also dramatically increased in areas of Congolese
army deployment. In nearly all the health centers, hospitals, and rape
counseling centers visited by Human Rights Watch, rape cases had
doubled or tripled since the start of military operations in the Kivus
in January. While all sides continue to use rape and other sexual
violence as a weapon of war, the majority of the rape cases
investigated by Human Rights Watch were attributed to soldiers from the
Congolese army.
The Congolese army's practice of forcing civilians to provide
dangerous labor has put civilians further at risk. Hundreds of
civilians have been regularly forced at gunpoint to carry heavy
ammunition and other supplies for Congolese forces. On June 21, Human
Rights Watch researchers witnessed dozens of civilians being forced to
carry supplies for the army from Bunyakiri in Kalehe territory while
soldiers deployed to frontline positions in South Kivu.
Salary arrears, limited food rations, and an unclear chain of
command following the integration of more than 12,000 former Congolese
rebel combatants into the army's ranks in early 2009 have contributed
to the rise in abuses against civilians. In Kalehe territory in South
Kivu, soldiers who had not been paid for five months are regularly
pillaging, looting, and extorting the civilian population. On June 15,
government soldiers, angry because they had not been paid, tried to
kill their commander and then attacked a UN base in Pinga, North Kivu.
On June 17, more than 30 armed soldiers who had not been paid deserted
in Ngora, Walikale territory.
Senior army officials conceded the problem of salary arrears and
told Human Rights Watch that soldiers involved in military operations
were now being paid, although Human Rights Watch could not
independently verify the claim.
The integration into the top ranks of the Congolese army of
individuals implicated in serious human rights abuses further
exacerbates an already dangerous human rights environment. The most
glaring example is Bosco Ntaganda, now a general in the Congolese army
involved in military operations in eastern Congo, who is wanted on
war-crimes charges by the International Criminal Court.
"The government's failure to feed and pay its soldiers regularly is
a virtual invitation for them to prey on the civilian population," said
Roth. "Then to allow these troops to be led by commanders like Bosco
Ntaganda with a known track record of horrific abuse creates a climate
in which atrocities flourish."
Limited Protection of Civilians by UN Peacekeepers
UN peacekeepers in Congo, MONUC, have provided logistical, planning,
and other support to the Congolese army's operations, known as "Kimia
II." But the peacekeepers have not exerted adequate pressure on the
Congolese army to stop brutal abuses.
The peacekeepers began an initiative in early 2009, known as joint
protection teams, to act as an early-warning system in areas where
civilians might be at risk of attack. While these teams have gathered
important information and sometimes contributed to reducing abuses,
their recommendations to UN peacekeepers and Congolese forces have
rarely been followed.
Following the Busurungi massacre in May, a UN assessment team
visited the area and recommended urgently setting up a base nearby to
protect local people. To date, no base has been established, and there
have been no regular UN patrols from existing bases. UN officials told
Human Rights Watch that a base is due to be established in the coming
days. Congolese soldiers who fled the area following the attack have
also not provided adequate protection for civilians.
"Civilians at risk of rebel attack in the Waloaloanda area have been
left too long without adequate protection even though MONUC has
identified the area as a priority protection zone," said Roth. "The
MONUC command should not delay any further, and should urgently deploy
peacekeepers to the area."
Congolese forces and UN peacekeepers have also yet to establish
promised humanitarian corridors that would allow a safe exit from
conflict zones for thousands of Rwandan refugees and FDLR combatants
who wish to disarm voluntarily. Congolese and UN officials have said
that such individuals will be allowed safe passage.
"UN peacekeepers should not support Congolese armed forces that are
committing war crimes and failing to protect civilians and refugees,"
said Roth. "By continuing to back such military operations, the
peacekeepers risk becoming complicit in abuses."
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
Mistrial Declared in Abu Ghraib Torture Suit Against US Contractor
"This will not be the final word; what happened in Abu Ghraib is engraved into our memories and will never be forgotten in history," one plaintiff vowed.
May 02, 2024
The federal judge presiding over a case filed by three Iraqis who were tortured by U.S. military contractors in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison two decades ago declared a mistrial Thursday after jurors were unable to reach a unanimous verdict.
After eight days of deliberation—a longer period than the trial itself—the eight civil jurors in Alexandria deadlocked over whether employees of CACI conspired with soldiers to torture detainees. The Virginia-based professional services and information technology firm was hired in 2003 during the George W. Bush administration to provide translators and interrogators in Iraq during the U.S.-led invasion and occupation, conspired with soldiers to torture detainees.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema—who said Wednesday that "it's a very difficult case"—declared a mistrial.
Plaintiff Salah Al-Ejaili toldThe Guardian that "it is enough that we tried and didn't remain silent."
"We might not have received justice yet in our just case today, but what is more important is that we made it to trial and spoke up so the world could hear from us directly," he added. "This will not be the final word; what happened in Abu Ghraib is engraved into our memories and will never be forgotten in history."
Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights—which filed the case—said that "we are, of course, disappointed by the jury's failure to reach a unanimous verdict in favor of our plaintiffs despite the wealth of evidence."
"But we remain awed by the courage of our clients, who have fought for justice for their torment for 16 years," Azmy added. "We look forward to the opportunity to present our case again."
Al Shimari v. CACI, which was first filed in 2008 under the Alien Tort Statute—a law allowing non-U.S. citizens to sue for human rights abuses committed abroad—plaintiffs Suhail Al Shimari, Asa'ad Zuba'e, and Al-Ejaili accused CACI of conspiring with the U.S. military to perpetrate war crimes including torture at Abu Ghraib. The men suffered broken bones, electric shocks, sexual abuse, extreme temperatures, and death threats at the hands of their U.S. interrogators.
The case marked the first time a U.S. jury heard a case brought by Abu Ghraib survivors. Along with the Guantánamo Bay detention camp in Cuba, the prison became synonymous worldwide with U.S. torture during the War on Terror. Dozens of Abu Ghraib detainees died while in U.S. custody, some of them as a result of being tortured to death. Abu Ghraib prisoners suffered torture and abuse ranging from rape and being attacked with dogs to being forced to eat pork and renounce Islam.
A 2004 probe by Maj. Gen. Anthony Taguba found that the majority of Abu Ghraib prisoners—the Red Cross said 70-90%—were innocent. Women and girls were also imprisoned at Abu Ghraib as bargaining chips to lure militants wanted for resisting the U.S.-led invasion and occupation of their homeland. Some reported rape and sexual abuse by their captors, which reportedly led to the "honor killing" murders of multiple women.
CACI denies any wrongdoing and still gets millions of dollars worth of U.S. government contracts each year. In February, Fortunenamed CACI one of the "World's Most Admired Companies" for the seventh consecutive year.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Hobbs Signs Repeal, Arizonans Push Abortion Rights Ballot Measure
"We cannot afford to celebrate or lose momentum. The threat to our reproductive freedom is as immediate today as it ever was," said the campaign behind the ballot initiative.
May 02, 2024
While Democratic Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs on Thursday signed legislation repealing an 1864 abortion ban, reproductive rights advocates in the state reiterated that fuller freedom over family planning requires passing a November ballot measure.
In response to an
Arizona Republic opinion piece noting that there is no emergency clause in House Bill 2677, the law repealing the ban, "which means it won't go off the books until 90 days after the Legislature adjourns," Arizona for Abortion Access stressed that "Arizonans will still be living under a law that denies us the right to make decisions about our own health."
"We cannot afford to celebrate or lose momentum. The threat to our reproductive freedom is as immediate today as it ever was," the campaign behind the ballot initiative said, adding that only passing the Arizona Abortion Access Act "changes that for good."
The Arizona Abortion Access Act is a proposed state constitutional amendment that would prohibit many limits on abortions before fetal viability and safeguard access to care after viability to protect the life or physical or mental health of the patient. Arizonans were fighting for it even before the state Supreme Court reinstated the 160-year-old ban.
Even Hobbs recognized that the battle for reproductive freedom is far from over, saying Thursday that "today, we should not rest, but we should recommit to protecting women's bodily autonomy, their ability to make their own healthcare decisions, and the ability to control their lives."
"Let me be clear: I will do everything in my power to protect our reproductive freedoms, because I trust women to make the decisions that are best for them, and know politicians do not belong in the doctor's office," the Democrat pledged.
Her signature came just a day after the Arizona Senate approved H.B. 2677, following its state House passage last month. In both cases, a couple of Republican lawmakers voted with Democrats to advance the legislation—defying not only party members in the state but a national GOP that is hellbent on ending access to abortion care.
Democratic Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes said Wednesday that the Senate vote "to repeal the draconian 1864 abortion ban is a win for freedom in our state" and she was looking forward to Hobbs signing the bill.
"However, without an emergency clause that would allow the repeal to take effect immediately, the people of Arizona may still be subjected to the near-total abortion ban for a period of time this year," Mayes acknowledged. "Rest assured, my office is exploring every option available to prevent this outrageous 160-year-old law from ever taking effect."
Law Dork's Chris Geidner pointed out that "on Tuesday—though technically unrelated—Mayes' office asked the Arizona Supreme Court to stay the issuance of the mandate in the case holding the near-total ban enforceable."
According to Geidner:
If granted, that would push the issuance of the mandate to July 25—90 days beyond the date when the Arizona Supreme Court denied Mayes' request for reconsideration—which would then block enforcement to at least 45 days beyond that, to September 8.
At that point, the repeal law passed on Wednesday likely will have gone into effect—meaning that the 15-week ban would remain the applicable law throughout this entire time—and the expected vote on the proposed constitutional amendment will be less than two months away.
Planned Parenthood Arizona took similar action after the Senate vote on Wednesday. The group's CEO, Angela Florez, explained that "we have said all along that we will use every possible avenue to safeguard essential care for our patients and all Arizonans, and that's exactly what we're doing with today's motion."
"While anti-abortion extremists in the state Legislature will continue to do everything in their power to undermine Arizonans' freedom and criminalize essential healthcare, Planned Parenthood Arizona is taking action to prevent a harmful total ban on abortion from taking effect in our state," Florez continued. "The court's April 9 ruling was both tragic and wrong, but it rested on trying to discern legislative intent. The Legislature has now spoken and clearly does not want the 1864 ban to be enforced."
"We hope the court stays true to its word and respects this long-overdue legislative action, by quickly granting our motion to end the uncertainty over the future of abortion in Arizona," added Florez, whose group supports the ballot measure.
Keep ReadingShow Less
DOE Investigating Columbia University for Anti-Palestinian Harassment
"Students have the right to speak out against the genocide of Palestinians, without fear of unequal treatment, racist attacks, or being denied access to an education by their university," one lawyer said.
May 02, 2024
Palestine Legal announced Thursday that the U.S. Department of Education has launched a federal investigation into "extreme anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab, and Islamophobic harassment" at Columbia University a week after the advocacy group filed a complaint on behalf of four students and a campus organization.
"While the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) looks into all complaints it receives, it only opens a formal investigation when it determines the facts warrant a deeper look," Palestine Legal pointed out on social media. "The complaint explains how Columbia has allowed and contributed to a pervasive anti-Palestinian environment on campus—including students receiving death threats, being harassed for wearing keffiyehs or hijab, doxxed, harassed by [administration], suspended, locked out of campus, and more."
"Instead of protecting Palestinian and associated students when their voices are most needed to oppose an ongoing genocide, Columbia has taken actions to reinforce this hostile climate in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964," added the group.
"The law is clear, if universities do not cease their racist crackdowns against Palestinians and their supporters—they will be at risk of losing federal funding."
Palestine Legal senior staff attorney Radhika Sainath stressed that "the law is clear, if universities do not cease their racist crackdowns against Palestinians and their supporters—they will be at risk of losing federal funding."
"Students have the right to speak out against the genocide of Palestinians, without fear of unequal treatment, racist attacks, or being denied access to an education by their university," the lawyer added.
Since the filing, which highlighted that Columbia University President Minouche Shafik invited "the New York Police Department (NYPD) onto campus for the first time in decades to arrest over 100 students who had been peacefully protesting Israel's genocide of Palestinians," the Ivy League leader has called officers back to the school for more arrests.
On Tuesday night, the NYPD "violently arrested and brutalized dozens of student protestors, some with guns drawn, using sledgehammers, batons, and flash-bang explosives," noted Palestine Legal, which represents Maryam Alwan, Deen Haleem, Daria Mateescu, and Layla Saliba as well as Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP).
Columbia is one of many American campuses where administrators have called the police, who have behaved aggressively toward students and faculty nonviolently demonstrating to demand that their schools and the U.S. government stop supporting the Israeli assault of Gaza, which has killed at least 34,596 Palestinians in under seven months.
The Interceptrevealed last week that OCR opened an investigation into the University of Massachusetts Amherst after Palestine Legal filed a complaint "on behalf of 18 UMass students who have been the target of extreme anti-Palestinian and anti-Arab harassment and discrimination by fellow UMass students, including receiving racial slurs, death threats and in one instance, actually being assaulted."
Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)—who has supported peaceful student protests and whose daughter Isra Hirsi was suspended from Columbia's Barnard College for protesting last month—highlighted the reporting on social media and some of the verbal attacks that students have endured.
OCR has opened a probe into Emory University following a complaint filed by Palestine Legal and the Council on American Islamic Relations, Georgia (CAIR-GA), according toThe Guardian. The newspaper noted Thursday that complaints have also been filed about Rutgers University in New Jersey and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Emory spokesperson Laura Diamond said in a statement that the university "does not tolerate behavior or actions that threaten, harm or target individuals because of their identities or backgrounds."
CAIR-GA executive director Azka Mahmood said that she hopes the investigation into Emory helps "make sure that the systems put in place against bias are used for everyone across the board—so we can produce a comfortable, equitable place for Palestinian, Muslim, and Arab students in the future."
The probes and complaints are notably being conducted and reviewed by an administration that has condemned campus protests while arming Israeli forces engaged in what the International Court of Justice has called a plausibly genocidal campaign in Gaza.
After U.S. President Joe Biden delivered brief remarks on the demonstrations Thursday morning, Edward Ahmed Mitchell, a civil rights attorney and national deputy director at CAIR, said his "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," Mitchell added, "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."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular