October, 16 2009, 02:01pm EDT
Honduras: Stop Blocking Human Rights Inquiries
International Community Should Back Prosecutors' Efforts, Oppose Amnesties for Abuses
WASHINGTON
The international community should strongly back the efforts of prosecutors in the human rights unit of the Honduras Attorney General's office to investigate army and police abuses in Honduras and to overturn a decree by the de facto government that severely restricts freedoms of speech and assembly, Human Rights Watch said today.
The organization also called on the international community to oppose any amnesty for human rights violations as part of the transition back to democratic rule. Deposed President Manuel Zelaya and the de facto government of Honduras are now engaged in negotiations about such a transition, and have announced that an agreement may be imminent.
Since the military ousted President Zelaya on June 28, 2009, the small human rights unit of the Office of the Attorney General has begun investigations into numerous cases of killings, alleged excessive use of force by security officials, and illegal and arbitrary detentions. The unit has also filed motions objecting to a decree limiting freedoms of the press and assembly, which the de facto government has used to bar two media outlets from broadcasting. But the unit has met with resistance from their superiors in the Attorney General's Office as well as acts of obstruction, including direct threats, from members of the armed forces.
"If anyone questions the damage that the de facto government has done to Honduras' democratic institutions it's clearly illustrated by these cases," said Jose Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch. "And by obstructing the investigations, the public security forces are thumbing their noses at the rule of law."
Human Rights Watch representatives visited Honduras this month and documented the serious obstacles human rights unit prosecutors have been facing in carrying out their investigations. In several cases the security forces have taken actions that have obstructed investigations.
On September 30, two members of the human rights unit went to an army battalion headquarters as part of their investigation into the forced closing of two media outlets on September 28. The army refused to let them enter or to do an inventory of the equipment army personnel had confiscated from the outlets. The prosecutors have raised the issue with their superiors in the Attorney General's Office, and are preparing a motion against the officers who barred their entry, but they have yet to obtain access to the battalion headquarters. On numerous occasions, security forces have denied the head of the human rights unit, Sandra Ponce, access to media outlets that they have occupied.
Army members involved in investigations have refused to comply with legally mandated time limits to respond to inquiries, telling prosecutors that they are too busy. Prosecutors from the human rights unit say police and military personnel verbally abuse them, including making direct threats such as, "I'm going to shoot you ('te voy a pegar un tiro')," during protest marches or while they are investigating alleged abuses following the marches.
In early July, during an investigation into the military shutdown of Radio Progreso, a radio station in Tegucigalpa that was occupied by the army on June 28, one army officer told a member of the human rights unit, "I wish I were in the Cold War, the days of Pinochet, the days when you could just disappear (someone). ('Ojala que estuviera en la guerra fria, los dias de Pinochet, los dias cuando podrias desaparecer (a alguien)".) The prosecutor interpreted this as a direct threat.
In some cases, prosecutors also have faced difficulties in conducting investigations due to decisions by their superiors in the Office of the Attorney General.
For example, prosecutors investigating the death of Isis Obed Murillo, a 19-year old shot during demonstrations outside Tegucigalpa's airport on July 5, say their superiors have asked for a new round of ballistics tests, after the first tests demonstrated that the shots that killed Obed Murillo came from an area on the runway where army troops were stationed. Prosecutors had also found over 150 shell casings matching the type of ammunition that the army used that day. The unit's findings contradicted not only the army's claims but also those of the government's human rights ombudsman, Ramon Custodio, who said the army only used rubber bullets during the demonstration. In a July 8 news release, Human Rights Watch pointed out that even rubber bullets can have lethal force and should not have been used, but that in any case the visual evidence suggested that some of the soldiers were using live ammunition.
In the last month, Attorney General Luis Alfredo Rubi has requested that the human rights unit submit petitions for his review before it files them in court. This new procedure has resulted in the delay of at least one important case - a petition against the army for taking over the installations of the Canal 36 television station on June 28 - for over two weeks, as Rubi's office examines its merits.
Several other investigations continue at varying speeds, including investigations into security forces' alleged gang rape of a woman in San Pedro Sula during a protest march, as well as two deaths during demonstrations, a shooting death at a military roadblock, and the alleged extrajudicial execution of a pro-Zelaya demonstrator near the Nicaraguan border.
But the speed with which these cases are resolved will depend on political will at the top. Unfortunately, the political crisis in Honduras has polarized the country, and Attorney General Rubi has taken sides. Following the removal of Zelaya from office, Rubi made clear that his office would arrest the deposed president if he stepped on Honduran soil.
The political positioning of the attorney general has resulted in conflicting actions by different sections of the office. While some units are prosecuting Zelaya supporters for "sedition" and "illicit demonstrations," the human rights unit filed a petition with the Supreme Court that challenges the constitutionality of the decree that makes the gatherings illegal.
Regardless of the outcome of this week's negotiation between Zelaya and the de facto government, Human Rights Watch said, the international community should express strong support for the human rights unit's efforts to investigate alleged abuses by security forces. They should also press the de facto government to instruct security forces to provide full and timely cooperation to human rights unit prosecutors as they investigate.
"Without strong international support, these investigations will probably face so many obstacles that they will go nowhere," said Vivanco. "In addition to applying sanctions, the United States and others should seek ways to support the people and institutions in Honduras that, in the face of tremendous pressure, are trying to protect human rights and defend the rule of law."
Human Rights Watch added that the international community should take a strong stance in favor of accountability for human rights violations committed after the coup, as international standards require that all victims of human rights violations have a right to a remedy.
"One issue that should be off the table during the negotiations between President Zelaya and the de facto government is the question of justice for human rights abuses," said Vivanco.
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
Privacy Defenders Decry 'Spy Draft' in Section 702 Renewal Advanced by Senate
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," explained one critic.
Apr 18, 2024
Civil liberties defenders on Thursday decried the U.S. Senate's advancement of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act, which critics say lawmakers are trying to ram through without protection against warrantless surveillance and with a provision that would effectively make every American a spy whether they like it or not.
Senators voted 67-32 in favor of a cloture motion to begin voting on RISAA, a bill to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which expires on Friday. FISA—a highly controversial law that has been abused hundreds of thousands of times—allows warrantless surveillance of non-U.S. citizens but also often sweeps up Americans' communication data in the process.
In a 273-147 vote last week, House lawmakers passed RISAA, including an amendment critics say dramatically expands the government's unchecked surveillance authority by compelling a wide range of individuals and organizations—including businesses and the media—to cooperate in government spying operations.
This so-called "Make Everyone a Spy" clause would allow the attorney general or director of national intelligence to force electronic communication service providers to "immediately provide... all information, facilities, or assistance" the government deems necessary.
"This bill would basically allow the government to institute a spy draft," Seth Stern, director of advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, warned Thursday. "It will lead to significant distrust between journalists and sources, not to mention everyone else."
"It's not about who RISAA allows the government to spy on, it's about who RISAA allows the government to force to spy," he added. "Regardless of whether the end target of the surveillance is a foreigner, it's indisputable that the people the government can enlist to conduct the surveillance are Americans. And what's more, these civilians ordered to spy would be gagged and sworn to secrecy under the law."
In addition to the "Make Everyone a Spy" provision, civil libertarians have sounded the alarm over the House lawmakers' rejection of an amendment that would have added a warrant requirement to the legislation.
Critics accuse Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and colleagues including Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Mark Warner (D-Va.) of trying to rush a vote on RISAA while disingenuously claiming Section 702's powers will expire with the law on Friday. That's a misleading claim, as a national security court earlier this month approved the government's request to continue a disputed surveillance program even if Section 702 lapses.
"There is simply no defense of Majority Leader Schumer and Sen. Warner's duplicity," Sean Vitka, policy director at the progressive advocacy group Demand Progress, said in a statement. "House Intelligence Committee leaders poisoned this bill with one of the most repugnant surveillance expansions in history, and apparently the administration was too busy attacking commonsense privacy protections to notice. They know it, we know it, and now the American people know it."
"There can be no mistake: Sens. Schumer and Warner just helped hand the next president an unspeakably dangerous weapon that will be used against their own constituents," Vitka added. "And there is only one vote left to stop it."
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)—who
said earlier this week that the bill would dragoon the American people into becoming "an agent for Big Brother"—on Thursday argued that "this issue demands a debate about meaningful reforms, not a rushed vote to rubber-stamp more warrantless government surveillance powers."
In an attempt to tackle the warrantless surveillance issue, Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) on Thursday proposed a RISAA amendment that would require the government to obtain a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court before accessing Americans' private communications.
However, the amendment contains exceptions to the warrant requirement in the event of unspecified emergencies and cyberattacks.
"If the government wants to spy on the private communications of Americans, they should be required to get approval from a judge—just as our Founders intended," Durbin said in a statement. "Congress has a responsibility to the American people to get this right."
The Biden administration and U.S. intelligence agencies vehemently oppose the Durbin-Cramer amendment. The White House called the measure "a reckless policy choice contrary to the key lessons of 9/11 and not grounded in any constitutional requirement or statute."
"The amendment outright bars the government from gaining access to lawfully collected information using terms associated with U.S. persons," the administration added. "Exceptions to that prohibition are narrow and unworkable. They are insufficient to protect our national security."
On Wednesday, the House also passed the Fourth Amendment Is Not for Sale Act, which would prohibit the government from buying Americans' information from data brokers if it would otherwise need a warrant to obtain the data, which includes location and internet records. The Senate will now take up FANFSA.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'The Opposite of Leadership': US Vetoes Palestine's UN Membership
Palestine's permanent observer at the United Nations said the resolution's failure "will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination."
Apr 18, 2024
U.S. President Joe Biden's administration on Thursday used the country's veto power at the United Nations Security Council to block Palestine's bid to become a full member of the U.N.
While 12 nations voted in favor of Palestinian membership and two abstained, the United States is one of five countries—along with China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom—who have veto authority at the Security Council.
Since Israel launched what the International Court of Justice has said is a "plausibly" genocidal assault of the Gaza Strip in response to a Hamas-led October attack, the Biden administration has blocked three cease-fire resolutions at the Security Council. Under mounting global pressure, the U.S. finally abstained last month, allowing a cease-fire measure to pass.
In the lead-up to Thursday's vote, the Biden administration was pressuring other countries to oppose the Palestinian Authority's renewed membership effort so it could possibly avoid a veto, according to leaked cables obtained by The Intercept.
"Take a moment to ponder how isolated Biden has made the U.S.," said Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, after the veto. "Biden lobbied Japan, South Korea, and Ecuador HARD to oppose the Palestine resolution so that the U.S. wouldn't have to veto. They refused. So Biden cast his fourth veto in seven months (!!) This is the opposite of leadership."
In addition to the nations Parsi highlighted, Algeria, China, France, Guyana, Malta, Mozambique, Russia, Sierra Leone, and Slovenia voted for giving Palestine full U.N. membership while Switzerland and the United Kingdom abstained.
After the vote, U.N. Newsreported on remarks from Riyad Mansour, a U.N. permanent observer for the state of Palestine:
"We came to the Security Council today as an important historic moment, regionally and internationally, so that we could salvage what can be saved. We place you before a historic responsibility to establish the foundations of a just and comprehensive peace in our region."
Council members were given the opportunity "to revive the hope that has been lost among our people" and to translate their commitment towards a two-state solution into firm action "that cannot be maneuvered or retracted," and the majority of council members "have risen to the level of this historic moment, and they have stood on the side of justice and freedom and hope, in line with the ethical and humanitarian and legal principles that must govern our world and in line with simple logic."
"The fact that this resolution did not pass will not break our will, and it will not defeat our determination," Mansour added. "We will not stop in our effort. The state of Palestine is inevitable. It is real. Perhaps they see it as far away, but we see it as near, and we are the faithful."
Parsi said that "a Western-friendly senior Global South diplomat" told him of Biden's veto: "Whatever agonizing claim the U.S. had to lead a self-appointed free world has died a very loud public death on the Security Council horseshoe tonight. YOU CAN'T LEAD IF YOU CAN'T LISTEN."
Biden, a Democrat seeking reelection in November, has faced fierce criticism in the United States and around the world for U.S. complicity in Israel's war on Gaza—which Hamas, not the Palestinian Authority, has controlled for nearly two decades. In under seven months, Israeli forces have killed 33,970 Palestinians, injured another 76,770, displaced most of the besieged enclave's 2.3 million population, devastated civilian infrastructure, and severely limited the flow of lifesaving humanitarian assistance.
Israel—which already got $3.8 billion in annual U.S. military aid before October 7—continues to receive weapons support from the Biden administration, even as a growing chorus of critics, including some Democrats in Congress, argues that the arms transfers violate U.S. and international law.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Shameful': Columbia Greenlights Police Crackdown on Anti-War Encampment
Even after dozens of students were arrested, hundreds "rushed to take the place of their classmates" and continued the protest.
Apr 18, 2024
The arrests of dozens of Columbia University and Barnard College students on Thursday "galvanized" other supporters of Palestinian rights on the campuses, as hundreds of students occupied the school's western lawn after New York City police filled at least two buses with protesters who had been detained for setting up an encampment.
"Disclose, divest, we will not stop, we will not rest," chanted hundreds of students as they marched around the area where organizers had set up a tent encampment early Wednesday morning.
Columbia President Minouche Shafik informed the campus community on Thursday that she had authorized the police to clear the encampment.
As it has been in the past, the school has become a center of anti-war protests—and crackdowns by school officials and the police—since Israel began its bombardment of Gaza in October.
Pro-Palestinian students and alumni have demanded that Columbia divest from companies that profit from Israel's apartheid policies in the occupied Palestinian territories and cancel its dual degree program with Tel Aviv University.
In response to pro-Palestinian demonstrations, Columbia in November suspended the campus chapters of Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine—an action that pushed the New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestine Legal to file a lawsuit on behalf of the students last month.
On Thursday, police and Columbia employees took down about 50 tents that had been up for more than a day and disposed of them in trash cans and alleyways—but The New York Times reported later that "demonstrators repitched a couple of tents, and ... recovered the main signage from the encampment as well," while hundreds of students were "still gathered and chanting on the south side of the grass."
The arrests came a day after Shafik testified before the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce about antisemitism on campus.
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), whose daughter, Isra Hirsi, was among the Barnard students who were suspended on Thursday for participating in the encampment protest, questioned Shafik about whether antisemitic protests have actually taken place at Columbia, prompting the president to say there have not.
"There has been a rise in targeting and harassment against anti-war protesters, because it's been pro-war and anti-war protesters is what it seems, like, correct?" asked Omar.
"Correct," replied Shafik.
On Thursday, Omar posted on social media two images of protesters at Columbia: one from the encampment this week, and one from 1968, when students protested the U.S. war in Vietnam.
New York City Council member Tiffany Cabán was among those who condemned the university's crackdown on the protests on Thursday.
"Suspending and arresting Columbia/Barnard student activists and disbanding student organizations—including Jewish students and organizations—doesn't combat antisemitism or increase safety," said Cabán. "All it does is punish and intimidate those who believe in human rights for Palestinians. Shameful."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular