press

NOVEMBER 2000

Bahrain: Dictatorship to be consolidated in the name of reforms

A new phase in Bahrain has already begun. This is a phase that is characterized by attempts to impose de facto unconstitutional practices. The Amir has announced the formation of a committee to process changes to the constitution and to provide a window-dressing to the dictatorial practices of the regime. As part of this policy, the regime has increased its clamp down on freedom of expression and is enforcing a ban on all voices that may raise objections to the changes being imposed on the nation. After dismissing leading columnists from Akhbar Al-Khalij and Al-Ayyam newspapers, the interior ministry has launched a campaign of terror to prevent citizens from organizing any seminar for debating the proposed unconstitutional changes. One seminar was banned last week in the capital, Manama. Moreover, the Secretary of Samahij Club, Abbas Abo Safwan, was arrested during a dawn raid on his house on 27 November. The Secretary was organizing a seminar on the changes proposed by the Amir. He invited the lawyer Abdulla Hashim and one of the people who were appointed in the committee for changing the constitution, Dr. Abdul Aziz Obol. Mr. Abo Safwan was ill-treated, intimidated and ordered to cancel the seminar. These practices are proofs that the Bahraini regime is planning to impose dictatorship that will be camouflaged as “reforms”. Opposition forces inside and outside Bahrain have repeatedly stated their views towards any steps for reforms. That such reforms must abide by the country’s constitution, that they must not curtail public freedoms and that the end result must be the empowerment rather than the disempowerment of the people. The opposition views the attacks on freedom of expression, the continuing detention of pro-democracy leaders, such as Abdul Wahab Hussein and Hassan Mushaimaa, the continued house-arrest of Sheikh Al-Jamri, the existence of the State Security Law and Court, and banning political exiles from returning home (without conditions) are all indications of the lack of seriousness of the regime to start a reform process. The government violated and continues to violate the constitution’s articles that specify the basic rights of citizens. Article 1 clearly specifies that Bahrain must be ruled through a democratic system, not through decrees, as has been going on since 1975. Article 17, C, states, “No citizen shall be deported from Bahrain, nor shall he be denied re-entry”. Article 22 guarantees freedom of conscience, the inviolability of places of worship and the freedom to perform religious rites and to hold religious processions and meetings. Yet the government has been imposing a clamp down on all religious gatherings. Article 42 states that “No law may be promulgated unless it has been passed by the National Assembly and ratified by the Amir”. Yet the National Assembly is banned all together since 1975. In summary, the regime prefers to deal with the people of Bahrain through the security forces and the intelligence department that are run by the likes of Donald Bryan and other mercenaries. The people of Bahrain demand that their relationship with the government must be through an elected and constitutional parliament. Bahrain Freedom Movement 30 November 2000 Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089

Bahrain: Plans for disenfranchising the nation opposed

Bahraini opposition groups and personalities met in London on 26 November to discuss the plans announced by the Amir of Bahrain on 23 November for setting up a 46-strong committee to agree on the clauses of a proposed “charter” for changing Bahrain’s constitution. A decree issued by the Amir intentionally ignored any reference to Bahrain’s constitution and instead referred to ambiguous “values and practice common to the State of Bahrain and the Bahraini people.” The decree declared that the appointed committee will then pass the prepared charter to a “popular congress” to be handpicked by the regime for rubber-stamping the charter. The appointed body comprises eight members of the Al-Khalifa family, 13 members of the powerless Shura Council and 11 government’s officials. Only 16% of the appointed people can be described as independent or semi-independent people, with the rest 84% being government’s stooges. The appointed body will not refer to the constitutional due process. The government’s stooges will swamp the presence of a handful of independent and semi-independent individuals in the appointed committee. The government has been violating Bahrain’s constitution since 1975, and the exercise announced by the Amir is heading towards superimposing dictatorship on the country by illegally bypassing the constitution. The people are also being denied their freedom to debate the politics of these major changes with freedom of press curtailed and interior ministry personnel continuing their atrocities against pro-democracy activists. The appointed committee shamelessly comprises the head of the State Security Court who had arbitrarily sentenced hundreds of citizens in the past years. The changes proposed by the Amir include creating an appointed upper chamber whose votes will be necessary in case the lower chamber (which could be elected) wants to debate the budget or to conduct legislative or monitoring duties. In other words, the government will have an army of appointed individuals blocking a lower chamber that will also be stripped from its constitutional powers. Members of the opposition, meeting in London on 26 November, noted that the proposals of the Amir are below the basic demands of the Bahraini people. Moreover, the engine of repression and all the mechanisms of dictatorship are being consolidated. While the country’s constitution specifies that sovereignty lies with the people, the proposals of the Amir will be processed in a closed loop without reference to the people. The entire process is heading towards the disenfranchisement of the nation in the name of reform. The opposition called for the reactivation of the constitution, the freeing of political prisoners and detainees and the unconditional return of all political exiles. If the regime decides to continue ignoring the basic rights of citizens, then it can be assured that the political crisis in Bahrain will not be resolved. Bahrain Freedom Movement 27 November 2000 Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089

BAHRAIN: Human rights developments and Amnesty International’s continuing concerns

MDE 11/003/2000 21/11/2000 BAHRAIN Human rights developments and Amnesty International’s continuing concerns 1. abIntroduction Compared with the mid-1990s civil unrest period, the human rights situation in Bahrain in the last two years has witnessed significant improvements. There are fewer cases of arbitrary arrest or reports of torture and ill-treatment, for example. However, the mechanisms that facilitated the deterioration of the human rights situation during the unrest are still in place. These include the use of incommunicado detention which often facilitates torture or ill-treatment of prisoners, administrative detention and trials before the State Security Court whose procedures fall far short of international standards for fair trial. The unrest started in December 1994 when thousands of people demonstrated and called for the restoration of the National Assembly which was dissolved in 1975 by order of the late Amir, Shaikh ‘Issa bin Salman Al Khalifa and respect for the Constitution, sections of which have also been suspended since 1975. During the unrest gross human rights violations took place which included the arbitrary detention of thousands of people, including children and women, without charge or trial, systematic use of torture against detainees which led to at least 10 deaths in custody, the killing of civilians during demonstrations in circumstances suggesting that they may have been extrajudicially executed, grossly unfair trials before the State Security Court and the forcible exile of a number of alleged dissidents. There were many acts of violence during the unrest and Amnesty International recognized Bahrain’s rights and responsibilities to maintain law and order, and urged that such measures should be consistent with human rights safeguards and not at their expense. Amnesty International documented its human rights concerns during this period in the reports entitled Bahrain: A human rights crisis (AI Index: MDE 11/16/96) and Bahrain: Women and children subject to increasing abuse (MDE 11/18/96), published in September 1995 and July 1996, respectively. However, the organization has long-standing human rights concerns in Bahrain which include administrative detention, unfair trials, forcible exile and torture and ill-treatment which continue to date, albeit on a lesser scale. Most of the victims of human rights violations are Shi’a Muslims who form the majority in Bahrain. The Amir of Bahrain, Shaikh Hamad bin ‘Issa Al Khalifa, acceded to power in March 1999 following the death of his father. Since then the Government of Bahrain has introduced a number of positive changes in the promotion and protection of human rights, including the release of hundreds of political prisoners. The Amir has publicly stated his commitment to the respect of human rights. These and other positive human rights development are highlighted in Section 1 of this report, and Amnesty International has publicly welcomed them. However, the organization remains concerned that human rights violations continue to take place and that some of the legislation, in force in the country since 1974, which in the past was a major contributing factor to the perpetration of gross human rights violations, has not been amended and continues to be used. In addition, the Bahraini Government continues to use the policy of forcible exile as a punitive measure against Bahraini dissidents and their families. These concerns are discussed in subsequent sections of this report. At the end of June 1999 Amnesty International delegates visited Bahrain to hold introductory talks with Bahraini Government officials. This was the first visit to the country by Amnesty International in 12 years. Detailed discussions took place with the Ministers of the Interior, Justice and Islamic Affairs, Foreign Affairs, and Labour and Social Affairs, as well as with senior judges and other officials. The talks focussed on Amnesty International’s human rights concerns and human rights promotion in the country. Amnesty International publicly welcomed the opening of a constructive dialogue with the authorities, but it also expressed its regret at the time that its delegates were not permitted to meet privately with other sectors of society concerned with the promotion and protection of human rights, including lawyers, journalists, medical doctors, women’s groups and others. Another meeting with Bahraini officials took place at the Bahraini Embassy in the United Kingdom in July 2000 and discussions focussed on human rights developments in the country as well as Amnesty International’s concerns. The organization sent a memorandum of its concerns to the Bahraini Government in November 1999 and sought the government’s comments on the memorandum. Amnesty International also requested another visit to take place before the end of 2000. The organization received assurances that its delegates would be free to meet whoever they wish to meet on their next visit. At the time of writing this report no comments on the memorandum had been received. However, Amnesty International has included in this report the government’s responses to a number of concerns raised in meetings in Bahrain and the United Kingdom. Amnesty International is publishing this report, which is based on the memorandum, in the hope that it may contribute to the human rights debate now underway in the country. The organization believes that if the recommendations of this report are implemented they could help to bring Bahrain’s law and practice into closer harmony with recognized international human rights standards. 2. abPositive human rights developments The Bahraini Government has taken a number of positive legislative and practical steps in the human rights field, including the release of hundreds of political prisoners, the setting up of a human rights unit within the Majlis al-Shura (Consultative Council), allowing a greater margin of freedom of expression as well as giving women the right to vote and stand as candidates in the up-coming local elections for the first time. Since his accession to power in March 1999 the Amir, Shaikh Hamad bin ‘Issa Al Khalifa, has ordered the release of more than 800 political prisoners and detainees, including prisoners of conscience.(1) The first amnesty was issued on 6 June 1999 when the Amir ordered the release of 320 people held without charge or trial in connection with anti-government protests and 41 political prisoners serving prison terms. On 17 November 1999 he ordered the release of another 200 political prisoners and detainees. On the occasion of Bahrain’s national day, 16 December, 195 political detainees and prisoners were released following a pardon from the Amir. Another 37 prisoners and detainees were released during the second half of March 2000 following an amnesty by the Amir to mark the religious Islamic holiday of ‘Id al-Adhha (feast of the sacrifice). To mark the Islamic new year on 5 April 2000 the Amir also ordered the release of 43 detainees held for involvement in anti-government protests. Most of those released were held without charge or trial, some for up to five years. Others had already served their sentences and were held beyond the expiry of their sentences. These releases, however, were conditional: prisoners and detainees had first to sign statements undertaking not to be involved in any anti-government activities. Following their release they were reportedly pressurized to give interviews to Bahraini newspapers in which they deplored their past actions and promised good behaviour in the future. In October 1999 the Amir issued a decree authorizing the setting up of a Human Rights Committee within the Majlis al-Shura. Article 2 of the decree states that the Committee will be made up of six members, five of them to be elected by the Majlis at the beginning of each session of the Majlis (October) and the President of the Council appoints one of his two deputies as the sixth member and also as the Head of the Committee. According to the decree, the Human Rights Committee’s tasks include studying all human rights legislation and regulations in force in Bahrain, p
roposing amendments in order to protect human rights, the promotion of human rights awareness and establishing and strengthening cooperation with international human rights organizations. Many Bahrainis reportedly filed complaints with the Human Rights Committee regarding such diverse issues such as dismissal from work, detention without charge or trial of a relative and ill-treatment by the police. These complaints were referred to the relevant ministries. However, the complaints have reportedly not been acted upon. To Amnesty International’s knowledge the Committee has not made any proposals regarding legislative amendments. This Committee has been criticized in the Bahraini press for its apparent lack of activities. The Amir has publicly pledged his commitment to the respect of human rights. He stated that human rights ”will continue to be one of the main concerns of the state in Bahrain”.(2) In an interview with Cable News Network (CNN) at the beginning of August 2000 he said that he was ready to allow free access to human rights groups, including Amnesty International. At the end of 1999 in his speech to mark Bahrain’s national day on 16 December the Amir announced that local elections would be held and that women would be able to vote and stand as candidates. As of October 2000 the date for the elections had not been set. In the same speech the Amir stated that all Bahraini citizens ”are equal before the law and have equal rights and duties within the framework of our national unity and our united Bahraini family, that does not accept differentiating between one citizen and another except on the basis of good citizenship”. In May 2000 the Bahraini Government announced plans for an elected Majlis al-Shura in 2004 in which women will be allowed to vote and stand as candidates, but without specifying whether the Majlis will have legislative powers. The all-male Council, set up in 1992 following a decree from the late Amir, reviews laws drafted by the cabinet before they are sent to the Amir for final approval. In 1996, the size of the Council was increased to 40 from 30 members reportedly to widen popular representation. The Council has no legislative powers and has a four-year term which starts in October.(3) At the end of September 2000 the Amir issued Decree No. 29 appointing members of the new Council. Nineteen new members, including four women for the first time, were named and the remaining 21 were re-appointed from the outgoing Council. At the opening of the Majlis al-Shura’s ninth term on 3 October 2000 the Amir announced that there will be a new constitutional and administrative set up in Bahrain before the end of this year and that this set up will be put forward to the Bahraini people, but without giving further details. There are no political parties in Bahrain and Bahraini opposition groups in exile(4), as well as a few journalists within the country expressed concern that this may mean amending the constitution without recourse to the ”legitimate due process prescribed by the constitution”.(5) Since December 1999 when the Amir urged Bahraini journalists and writers to ”express freely citizens’ aspirations” and called on government officials to ”accept constructive criticism for it serves the interests of the country” some Bahraini newspapers have carried columns dealing with issues that were taboo in the past, such as democracy, free elections, upholding the rule of law and respect for human rights. Seminars on these subjects have been organized and have been publicised in the media. In August 2000 a Journalists’ Association was created to, among other things, defend journalists’ rights, ensure ”the necessary freedom to carry their professional duties”, and to contribute to the spreading of the media awareness in the country.(6) This association is under the control of the Ministry of Cabinet Affairs and Information and, like other associations in Bahrain, therefore is not an independent trade union body. At the beginning of 2000 a Supreme Judicial Council was set up(7) for the first time and started its function in September 2000. This body is headed by the President of the Court of Cassation. Article 102(d) of the Constitution relating to the establishment of the Supreme Judicial Council is one of the articles suspended since 1975.(8) In an interview published in the Bahraini newspaper Akhbar al-Khalij (Gulf News) the Minister of Justice stated that the Supreme Judicial Council’s mandate includes the supervision of the good functioning of the courts, the promotion and transfer of judges and other issues relating to the welfare of judges. While Amnesty International welcomes this new development in the judicial system it is concerned that the Supreme Judicial Council is not empowered to appoint judges, but only to ”look into nominations made by the Minister of Justice relating to the appointments in the judicial positions”. The Council does not have its own independent budget. Its work falls under the Ministry of Justice’s budget, which raise serious questions about the extent of its independence. The Council also has no authority on the Public Prosecution which remains under the control of the Ministry of the Interior. Bahrain ratified the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention against Torture) in March 1998, initially with a reservation to Article 20.(9) However, this reservation was withdrawn as was announced by Bahraini’s delegation at the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities [now called Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights] in Geneva in August 1999. The delegation also stated that ”possible accession to the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women [CEDAW] is under consideration”. Bahrain acceded to the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD) in March 1990, and ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in 1992. Amnesty International urges the Bahraini Government to ratify other vitally important international human rights treaties, particularly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In June 1999 Amnesty International delegates visiting Bahrain saw very little evidence that the Government of Bahrain had conducted any public-awareness raising campaigns regarding its ratification of international human rights treaties. The organization is urging the authorities to devise sensitization programmes in relation to the rights protected by these instruments, the safeguards which are present in domestic law and ways in which individuals could access courts and other government institutions to obtain redress for violation of these rights. In addition, specific human rights training for law enforcement personnel is essential. The Bahraini authorities have also announced that they have invited the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention to visit the country between 25 February and 3 March 2001. The visit was scheduled to have taken place in 1999 but was twice postponed by the government. The government has also continued to cooperate with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) allowing the latter to visit persons arrested and detained on a regular basis, in accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the two parties in October 1996. Amnesty International has welcomed these positive steps undertaken by the Bahraini Government in the human rights field in recent years. However, the organization remains very concerned by the on-going serious violations, including the use of administrative detention, unfair trials before the State Security Court, allegations of torture and ill-treatment, forcible exile and constraints on human rights defenders. Amnesty International has been raising these concerns with the Bahraini authorities for many years and the time for action is now long overdue. 3. abAdministrative detention The Decree Law on State Security Measures, in force since October 1974, empowers the Minister of the Interior to
detain individuals without charge or trial for up to three years.(10) Detainees held under this provision are only permitted to submit a tadhallum (petition) to the High Court of Appeal three months after the issuing of their arrest warrant, and thereafter, six months after every decision rejecting the petition, thus denying the defendants the right to a prompt review of their detention before a court of law. Bahraini officials told Amnesty International that it has been necessary, since 1994, to use these provisions since there were insufficient court resources for the trials which would have followed upon the detainees having been indicted. The organization was also told that the reason why detainees are kept for up to three years without charge or trial was that the authorities ”did not want to give them criminal records”. These explanations fail to justify the grave violations of human rights which administrative detentions, especially for such long periods, entail. The absence of due process constitutes a serious violation of human rights which inflicts imprisonment without giving the detainee any opportunity to prove his or her innocence. The wording of Article 1 of the decree allows arrest and detention of an individual in extremely wide and nebulous circumstances (see footnote 9). The law provides neither additional clarification of what may constitute ”serious evidence” nor further definition of the acts described in Article 1. Officials at the Ministry of the Interior stated that these provisions were used only in cases when an individual was suspected of having used violence and that arrests did not in reality take place in circumstances as broad as were provided for. However, the cases highlighted below clearly indicate that the provisions contained in Article 1 of the Decree have been used to detain prisoners of conscience. Administrative detainees are not made fully aware of their right to lodge a complaint or informed about how the complaint would be processed. At times lawyers have lodged complaints on behalf of detainees but these complaints were simply ignored, which discouraged some lawyers from submitting any complaints. Only on two occasions were lawyers reportedly successful in having their complaints examined by the High Court of Appeal. This was when they challenged the detention of two prominent figures, al-Shaikh ‘Abd al-Amir Mansur al-Jamri and ‘Abd al-Wahab Hussain (see below). The current practice clearly violates international human rights standards. For example, Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights stipulates that ”No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention…. Anyone arrested or detained on a criminal charge shall be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorized by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release.” Article 14 of this Covenant includes the following provisions: 3. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, everyone shall be entitled to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: (a) To be informed promptly and in detail in a language which he understands of the nature and cause of the charge against him… (c) To be tried without undue delay; 4. Anyone who is deprived of his liberty by arrest or detention shall be entitled to take proceedings before a court, in order that court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his detention and order his release if the detention is not lawful. While Bahrain is not yet a state party to this Covenant, the guarantees in these Articles embody general principles of law which are universally recognised. This was acknowledged by the Bahraini Government itself when, writing to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, it claimed that ”all detentions are compatible with the provisions of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, although Bahrain is not a party to the latter.”(11) Principle 11(1) of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment (Body of Principles) states that ”A person shall not be kept in detention without being given an effective opportunity to be heard promptly by a judicial or other authority. A detained person shall have the right to defend himself or to be assisted by counsel as prescribed by law.” The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has, on several occasions, pointed out this incompatibility of the 1974 law with international standards. Thus in 1998 the Working Group expressed the following opinion: In respect of the application of the State Security Law of 1974, the Working Group refers to its previous Opinion No. 1995/35, especially paragraphs 5, 9 and 12 to 17 thereof, in which the Group concluded that the application of the Law may result in serious violations of the right to a fair trial guaranteed by articles 9 and 10 of the Universal Declaration. Its application is also contrary to principles 10 to 13, 15 to 19 and 33 of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment.(12) The Working Group urged the Bahraini Government ”to take the necessary steps to remedy the situation and to bring it into conformity with the principles and standards set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”(13). Amnesty International shares the view of the Working Group and would urge the Bahraini Government to revoke the decree and in future to arrest and detain suspects in accordance with international human rights standards. In June 1999 Amnesty International was informed by government officials that between 400 and 500 people were still held without charge or trial. Since then scores have been released or tried and sentenced, but new arrests have taken place frequently. In November 1999 Amnesty International requested details regarding administrative detainees, including their names, places of detention, date of arrest, and the exact date of their release if there were plans to release them. The organization also requested details regarding the exact charges against detainees who were awaiting trial and sought assurances that their trials would meet internationally agreed standards for fair trials. As of October 2000 no response had been received. However, among the people currently detained are five prisoners of conscience held since January 1996 without charge or trial. They are: al-Shaikh Hassan Sultan, al-Shaikh Hussain al-Deihi, Hassan Msheima’, Sayyed Ibrahim ‘Adnan al-‘Alawi, ‘Abd al-Wahab Hussain. The five, all prominent Shi’a Muslim leaders, were arrested on 21 and 22 January 1996. Their arrest followed mass protests against the closure by security forces of a number of mosques where prominent Shi’a Muslim leaders, including them, had been peacefully calling on the government to restore the parliament. Other prominent leaders arrested at that time included al-Shaikh ‘Abd al-Amir Mansur al-Jamri, al-Shaikh ‘Ali Ashur and al-Shaikh ‘Ali bin Ahmad al-Jeddhafsi. Al-Shaikh al-Jamri was pardoned and released in July 1999 almost immediately after he had been sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment (see Section 4). Al-Shaikh ‘Ali bin Ahmad al-Jeddhafsi was released on 26 July 1999, after three and a half years of detention without charge or trial, whereas al-Shaikh ‘Ali ‘Ashur was released at the beginning of September 2000 after more than four and a half years of detention without trial. All three were required to sign statements apologizing for their past political activities and committing themselves not to be involved in any political or social activities in the future. ‘Abd al-Wahab Hussain and the other four prisoners of conscience mentioned above have reportedly been put under pressure to sign similar statements but have so far refused to do so. In the last few months they have been placed in solitary confinement. Hassan Msheima’ and ‘Abd al-Wahab Hussain are said to be held in al-Qal’a Prison whereas the other three are held in Jaw Prison. ‘Abd al-Wahab Hussain appeared before the State Security Court o
n 14 March 2000 after he had challenged his detention. He was released in the evening of 17 March 2000, only to be rearrested one hour later at his home in al-Nuwaidrat. The health of Sayyid Ibrahim ‘Adnan al-‘Alawi is said to be poor since he suffers from diabetes. He is aged 40 and married with children. He had been living in forced exile in Syria, Pakistan and Iran from 1982 until 1994, when he was allowed to enter Bahrain. In 1995, during the unrest, he was arrested for three months without charge or trial and then released. Amnesty International has repeatedly called for the unconditional release of all prisoners of conscience held in Bahrain, including the five people mentioned above. 4. abViolations of the right to fair trial Political trials in Bahrain continue to be held before the Supreme Civil Court of Appeal, in its capacity as a State Security Court, whose procedures fall far short of internationally recognized standards for fair trial. This court is designated by Article 185 of the Penal Code to handle trials in relation to charges defined in Articles 112 to 184 of the Penal Code and relating to the internal and external security of the state. Decree No. 7 of 1976 was therefore issued setting up this special court and laying out exceptional provisions regulating its proceedings. Hearings before this court are invariably held in camera or with attendance restricted to only the closest relatives of the defendant, in breach of Article 10 of the UDHR which provides that everyone is entitled to a public trial. According to Article 5(5) of the 1976 Decree, defendants before this court may be convicted on the basis of ”confessions” given to police or a police testimony that such ”confessions” were given. Such ”confessions” were in the past routinely obtained through the use of torture or other ill-treatment and the court failed to investigate claims of torture. This violates Bahrain’s Constitution, Article 19(d) of which stipulates: ”No person shall be subjected to physical or mental torture, enticement or degrading treatment, and the law shall provide the penalty for these acts. Any statement or confession shall be null and void if it is proved to have been made under duress or enticement or degrading treatment or threat thereof.” The failure of this court to carry out prompt and impartial investigations of allegations of torture and other forms of ill-treatment is inconsistent with Bahrain’s obligations under international human rights treaties, particularly the Convention against Torture. This court is also not required to summon witnesses to give evidence or for cross-examination. Such evidence may be submitted in writing. There is no right of appeal against conviction and sentence. In June 1999 the Bahraini authorities told Amnesty International that the proceedings of the court provided a speedy disposal of criminal charges and that if an appeal mechanism were to be created, there may well be a reduction of the current estimated 40% acquittal rate. However, if 40% of defendants are indeed acquitted by this court, this raises serious questions regarding the legal evidential basis on which so many cases are proceeding to trial. Detainees awaiting trial are usually held incommunicado and have no access to lawyers. Although defendants may have appointed lawyers of their own choosing, the first contact can only take place on the first day of their trial, just moments before the opening of the session. These procedures violate internationally recognized standards for fair trial. Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights includes the provision that ”everyone shall be entitled to a fair… hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law…” as well as the rights, ”…3(b) To have adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his defence and to communicate with counsel of his own choosing… (e) To examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him… (g) Not to be compelled to testify against himself or to confess guilt.” Article 14(5) of the Covenant provides that ”Everyone convicted of a crime shall have the right to his conviction and sentence being reviewed by a higher tribunal according to law.” Similarly, these procedures violate other international standards, including Articles 10 and 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Principles 15 and 18 of the UN Body of Principles.(14) They also violate Article 20 (c) of Bahrain’s Constitution, which states that: ”An accused person shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty in a legal trial in which the necessary guarantees for the exercise of his right of defence in all the stages of investigation and trial are ensured in accordance with the law.” In a letter sent to Amnesty International in September 1998 the Bahraini Government stated that ”…Concerns that those appearing before the so-called ”State Security Court” (in reality the High Court of Appeal sitting to hear state security offences as prescribed by law) may not receive a fair trial are absolutely unfounded, and based on a fundamental misconception of the law. The Court’s enabling legislation (Legislative Decree No.7 of 1976) specifically states that the Court is bound as an overriding priority by the provisions of Bahrain’s Code of Criminal Procedure, 1966. In summary, the Code of Criminal Procedures applies to all Criminal trials in Bahrain and fully provides for all internationally established legal, evidential and procedural principles regarding fair trials. The High Court of Appeal therefore must, and in practice does, apply all the normal rules of criminal evidence and procedure in priority to any others. In short, the Court conducts itself in accordance with internationally recognized principles and procedural safeguards for a full and fair trial. Allegations of denial of proper legal advice and representation are also purely propagandist and, of course, untrue.” This statement however fails to address the absence of vital safeguards for fair trial in proceedings before the State Security Court, such as the right to have a fair and public hearing before a competent court, the defendants’ right to have adequate time and facilities to communicate with lawyers of their own choosing and prepare their defence, their right not be compelled to testify against themselves or to confess guilt, and importantly, their right to have their conviction and sentence being reviewed by a higher tribunal. Amnesty International regards the provision of an appeal mechanism in relation to all determinations of criminal responsibility as an absolute safeguard that cannot be relinquished. Scores of people have in the last 12 months been given prison sentences after unfair trials before this court. For example, on 3 May 2000 the State Security Court pronounced judgement in the case of 10 people charged with illegal activities and plotting to destabilize the country. Three people, ‘Ali Mahdi Ahmad Youssef, Sa’eed al-Shaikh, and Hesham ‘Ali Hassan Ahmad were sentenced to seven, five and two years’ imprisonment, respectively and fines. A fourth, ‘Aqil al-Jaziri, was sentenced in absentia to seven years’ imprisonment and a fine. Six people, including a Lebanese national, were acquitted. The nine people present were arrested at the beginning of November 1998 and were reportedly tortured while held incommunicado to extract confessions from them. No investigation into their torture allegations is known to have been carried out. They were detained without trial and without access to lawyers until 17 January 2000 when they appeared briefly before the State Security Court for the first time. One more court session took place on 29 January before the verdict was announced on 3 May. Three women, Hanan Salman Ahmad Haidar, aged 21, Salwa Hassan Ahmad Haidar, aged 35, and Leeda Ahmad ‘Issa al-‘Oreibi, aged 27, appeared before the State Security Court in Jaw on 14 May 2000 and were sentenced to a one-year prison term each for ”dis
tributing leaflets and undertaking activities harmful to security”. The three women were among a number of people arrested in November 1998. Hanan Haidar and Salwa Haidar were arrested on 4 November 1998 in al-Daih village near Manama and were reportedly tortured in ‘Issa Town police station. No investigation into their torture allegation is reported to have been conducted. Leeda Ahmad ‘Issa al-‘Oreibi was arrested in Sanabis on 15 November 1998. She was held in al-Khamis police station. The three were all released on bail a few weeks later. After the sentencing the women were held in a detention centre in ‘Issa town. They were released on 25 September 2000 reportedly following an amnesty. Al-Shaikh ‘Abd al-Amir Mansur al-Jamri was tried in 1999 and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment before he was released following a pardon from the Amir. He had been held without charge or trial for over three years. On 21 February 1999 he appeared before the State Security Court in Jaw on charges including incitement to acts of violence, sabotage and spying for a foreign country, which he denied in the court. He was given access to a government-appointed lawyer only one hour before the trial session began, and his family were able to appoint, during that session, four other lawyers to take charge of his defence. His wife and children were allowed to attend the trial session, which was otherwise held in camera. In detention, al-Shaikh ‘Abd al-Amir al-Jamri was said to have been pressurized by members of the security service in March and April 1998 to sign a statement that he admitted responsibility for the civil unrest in the country. However, on several occasions when he was brought before an investigating judge he refused to sign any statement and stated that he had signed the previous one under duress. Al-Shaikh al-Jamri appeared again before the court on 4 July and on 7 July 1999 he was sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment and a fine equivalent to $US 15 million. After the court had given its verdict al-Shaikh al-Jamri was reportedly taken to the Security and Intelligence Service (SIS) building and met with a senior security official who reportedly showed him a written statement and then told him that he had two choices: either to accept the conditions laid out in the statement and he would be released immediately or refuse these conditions with the outcome that he would spend 10 years in prison. The conditions included refraining from making any political demands, refraining from undertaking any social, political or religious activities, and officially asking for a pardon from the Amir. Al-Shaikh al-Jamri was apparently told that if he signed the statement he would be released immediately. He accepted the conditions, signed the statement and was released the following day after the Amir issued the pardon. Since his release al-Shaikh al-Jamri has been living under house arrest. Commenting on this case, the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers observed: ”While expressing his appreciation for Mr. Al-Jamri’s release, the Special Rapporteur is nevertheless concerned at the lack of independence of the tribunal which tried and convicted him.”(15) 5. abForcible exile as a form of punishment The Bahraini Government’s use of forcible exile as a punitive measure against suspected non-violent opposition activists or critics of the government remains a long-standing concern for Amnesty International. While in the late 1970s the victims were mostly trade unionists and others active in left-wing organizations, since the early 1980s, the victims had mostly been Shi’a Muslims suspected of having links with Iran. Until the beginning of the 1990s former political detainees and sometimes even entire families had been rounded up, stripped of their Bahraini passports or identity documents and forced to board boats bound for Iran, although they had no knowledge of that country or any family or relatives there. In recent years, forcible exile has been imposed exclusively upon Bahraini nationals attempting to return to their country after many years spent abroad in voluntary exile or for educational purposes. Those who have attempted to return include the wives and families of a number of former political prisoners who had originally fled the country to escape harassment. Returning Bahraini nationals are usually detained at Bahrain International Airport, sometimes for up to 10 days, and interrogated about alleged political opposition activities. They are issued with new Bahraini passports valid for one year, which indicates that there is no dispute regarding their citizenship, yet which are not valid for Bahrain, and then they are returned to their former country of residence, or elsewhere, on the first available flight. No reasons for the expulsions or details of the legal basis for such measures are given. They are denied any opportunity to appeal against the decision to expel them or to challenge its legality through the courts. Amnesty International has expressed its concern in relation to the policy of forcible exile on many occasions in the past and has documented many such cases.(16) This policy contravenes international human rights standards, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 13(2) of which states that ”Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.”, and Article 12(4) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It also violates Article 17(c) of the Bahraini Constitution which states that ”No citizen shall be deported from Bahrain, nor shall he be denied re-entry”. Officials in the Ministry of the Interior told Amnesty International in June 1999 that some of those deported were not Bahrain nationals and others had either obtained a passport of another state (which led to their automatically forfeiting their Bahraini passport) or had irregularities (not specified) in their documentation or did not have valid passports. They also stated that the reason why those arriving at the airport were given new Bahraini passports valid for a limited period of time and not valid for entry into Bahrain was that the Government of Bahrain wanted to help them to travel, as no other country would otherwise allow them entry. Almost all those forcibly exiled still have relatives and family members living in Bahrain. A number of Bahrainis had been allowed to go back to the country since the early 1990s following amnesties. For example, two amnesties were declared in April and June 1992 by the late Amir, Shaikh ‘Issa bin Salman Al Khalifa, allowing the return of a total of 121 nationals living abroad, although the identities of those concerned were not made public. The organization welcomed the two amnesties issued by the Amir, Shaikh Hamad bin ‘Issa Al Khalifa on 6 June and 3 November 1999 allowing 32 people in exile to return to the country. Those who benefited, however, were required to write to the Amir requesting a pardon and promising good behaviour in the future. Once in Bahrain many were required to give interviews to newspapers thanking the government for allowing them into the country and promising good behaviour in future. There are an estimated 700 Bahrainis, including women and children, who are still currently prevented from returning to their country. Amnesty International also knows of a number of Bahraini nationals who wrote to the authorities after Shaikh Hamad bin ‘Issa Al Khalifa acceded to power, seeking permission to return to their country but are still awaiting a response. The following cases are a sample of dozens of Bahraini nationals who have been prevented from returning to their country in the course of the last two years: ‘Abd al Jalil al-Nu’aimi, aged 53, left Bahrain in 1975, two months after the dissolution of the parliament. He first attempted to return to Bahrain in 1993. He was held at the airport, issued with a new passport valid for one year and was forcibly returned to Syria. He has been living in the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) for the last five years. On 16 June 2000 he flew to Bahrain. He was held at the airport and wa
s interrogated. He was told by the airport security authorities that he would not be allowed to enter the country since he had not sent a letter to the Amir asking for a pardon. He stated that he did not commit any crime and requested a meeting with the head of the Human Rights Committee of the Majlis al-Shura. This request was denied and his passport was renewed for one year and he was sent back to Dubai the following day. Khadija Ahmad Gharib al-Qassab, aged 41, married with four children, has been prevented from entering Bahrain because of her husband’s alleged activities for an unauthorized Bahraini Islamist group. She left Bahrain in 1985 to marry in Syria. She has been living with her husband in Denmark since 1989. On 9 April 2000 she and her children attempted to return to Bahrain for the first time since 1985. At the airport they were held for four days during which she was interrogated and then sent back to Denmark. She was asked questions about her husband who had been living in exile since the early 1980s. The airport security authorities wanted to know her husband’s activities, the reason he was not travelling with her and whether or not he had refugee status in Denmark. When she arrived at the airport her mother, brothers and sisters, all living in Bahrain, waited for hours but were not allowed to see her and her children. Hashim Kadhim Sa’eed left Bahrain in 1981 and went to live in India. In 1992 following the two amnesties announced by the late Amir he, his wife and their four children attempted to go back to Bahrain. They were held at the airport for three days during which they were interrogated and his expired passport, containing the names of his wife and children, was confiscated. Hashim Kadhim Sa’eed protested to the airport authorities about his detention and the refusal to let him and his family into the country. He stated that if he was suspected of any wrongdoing then he should be brought before a court of law. His protests were disregarded and they were given one new Bahraini passport for the whole family, valid for one year, and sent to Dubai. Hashim Sa’eed attempted to go back to Bahrain in 1998 with his family but were again turned away. In August 1999 he tried again on his own. On arrival at Bahrain International Airport he was held at the airport from 14 until 17 August, issued with a new one-year passport for the whole family and sent back to Dubai. In some countries, especially in the Gulf, Bahraini exiles have difficulties in obtaining jobs with passports that have already expired or are valid for one year only. They have difficulties in enrolling their children into state schools since parents have to show passports valid for five years. Their grown up children also have difficulties in joining universities because they cannot produce valid passports. Those who have not attempted to return to Bahrain in recent years and whose passports have expired are able to send their passports through Bahraini embassies for renewal in Bahrain. However they have to wait for months before they receive back their passports. Mahmoud Mohammad Ja’far Shaikh Mohsen al-‘Arab, aged 41 married with children, was forced to leave Bahrain in August 1980. He had been arrested five times, the last of which was in July 1980, and was reportedly subjected to torture. He left Bahrain for India with a newly issued Bahraini passport valid for five years. He stayed in India for 14 years, during which he married a Bahraini national and had four children born there. His passport had already expired and he did not try to renew it at the Bahraini Embassy in India because he feared it could be confiscated. He attempted to enter Bahrain in October 1993 with his family. When they arrived at Bahrain International Airport on 12 October they were held for 30 hours and were interrogated. His wife’s and his passports were confiscated and they were given two new passports and then deported to the U.A.E.. Both new passports were valid for one year and the wife’s new passport contained the names and photographs of the children. They have been living in the U.A.E. since October 1993. In 1996 Mahmoud al-‘Arab attempted with his family to enter Bahrain but were prevented and were sent back to Dubai. Every year they renew their passports at the Bahraini Embassy in Abu Dhabi. They wait for four months before they obtain their one-year passports. Mahmoud al-‘Arab’s and his wife’s families and relatives are all in Bahrain. His wife’s father died in Bahrain three years ago but she was not permitted to enter the country to attend his funeral. Amnesty International is urging the Government of Bahrain to issue a public declaration that all Bahraini nationals are entitled to return to Bahrain as the policy of forcible exile violates international human rights standards as well as provisions contained in the Bahraini Constitution. 6. abTorture, ill-treatment and impunity Bahraini legislation clearly prohibits the use of torture. Article 19(d) of the Constitution states that ”No person shall be subjected to physical or mental torture, enticement or degrading treatment, and the law shall provide the penalty for these acts. Any statement or confession shall be null and void if it is proved to have been made under duress or enticement or degrading treatment or threat thereof.”. Article 208 of the Penal Code states that ”Imprisonment [no terms given] shall be the penalty imposed on every public official who uses torture, force or threat, either personally or through a third party, against an accused person, witness or expert to force him to confess to having committed a crime or to give statements or information in respect thereof. The penalty shall be life imprisonment should the use of torture or force lead to death.” These provisions notwithstanding, the use of torture against detainees to extract confessions has been widespread, particularly during the civil unrest from 1994 until 1997. A number of detainees died in custody in circumstances suggesting that their death was caused by torture or that torture was a contributory factor. Methods of torture include severe beating with electric cables on the back and on the soles of the feet, suspension by the limbs, victims being blindfolded and forced to stand for hours with their hands tied behind their back and solitary confinement. Amnesty International has over the years raised with the Government of Bahrain its concerns about allegations of torture and ill-treatment of individuals in detention, and has published numerous reports and released urgent appeals detailing cases of torture, especially during the civil unrest. Incidents of torture have decreased since Bahrain ratified the Convention against Torture in March 1998. Nevertheless allegations of torture and ill-treatment have occasionally been reported since then. On 19 July 1998 Nuh Khalil ‘Abdallah Al Nuh, aged 22, was arrested apparently in good health at his shop in al-Nu’aim, a district of Manama. Two days later his body was handed over to his family for burial bearing physical marks, suggesting that he had been tortured. The Bahraini Government was reported to have promised an investigation into the death. On 24 August 1998 Amnesty International wrote to the Government expressing grave concern at the death of Nuh Khalil ‘Abdallah Al Nuh and urging that a prompt, independent and impartial investigation be set up and that details of the methodology or process, as well as the findings of such an investigation be made public. No investigation is known to have been carried out. ‘Abd al-Amir Ja’far al-‘Aradi, a 38-year-old engineer married with four children, was arrested on 31 August 1998 because of his alleged Islamist activities. He was initially held in the headquarters of the security services, then transferred to the building of the security services in al-Muharraq, an island northeast of Manama, and then to a prison in the Dry Dock. Following arrest ‘Abd al-Amir Ja’far al-‘Aradi was reportedly tortured for several days during interrogation. He was beaten and suspended from his tied hands while blindfolded, and left hanging from a wall for hours. Moh
ammad Sa’eed al-Maqabi, a 32-year-old bus driver, arrived in Bahrain from a trip to Syria on 20 August 2000. He was stopped at a checkpoint on the causeway between Saudi Arabia and Bahrain and was searched. He was released but the security forces confiscated some of the books he was carrying. The following day he was re-arrested at his home in the village of Barbar, east of Manama, on suspicion that he had maintained links with a Bahraini opposition activist living abroad and who had been in the past been tried and acquitted. Mohammad Sa’eed al-Maqabi was reportedly tortured: he was suspended for hours during which he was beaten with a cable on the soles of the feet (falaqa). As a result he lost consciousness and was taken to hospital. He was released on 28 August. Amnesty International is particularly concerned at the large number of juveniles who have been arrested on suspicion they had written anti-government graffiti, detained for hours or days and reportedly subjected to various forms of torture or ill-treatment, including beating, being forced to stand continuously for long periods of time, sleep deprivation and sexual harassment, and then released. For example, on 27 July 2000 a number of juveniles, including al-Sayyid Mahmoud al-Sayyid ‘Alawi al-Sayyid Ibrahim and al-Sayyid Jawwad al-Sayyid Hassan, both aged 16, were arrested in Abu Saiba’. They were held without charge for several days during which they were reportedly ill-treated before they were released. During the second week of August 2000, seven boys aged between 12 and 17, including Mahmoud Hassan, Taleb ‘Ali al-Asfar and Hamza ‘Ali al-Asfar, aged 15, 13 and 12, respectively, were arrested in the village of al-Daih and reportedly transferred to al-Khamis police station for interrogation, where they were at risk of torture or ill-treatment since they were held incommunicado. Families of detained juveniles are reportedly not notified until a few days after arrests have taken place. Torture and ill-treatment of juveniles violate Article 37 (a) of the Convention of the Rights of the Child which states that ”No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment…”, and Article 37 (b) which stresses that ”No child shall be deprived of his or her liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily” and that ”the arrest, detention or imprisonment of a child shall be in conformity with the law and shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time”. The UN Special Rapporteur on torture has sent numerous communications to the Bahraini Government raising cases of allegations of torture, including of juveniles. His report to the 55th Commission on Human Rights in 1999 stated that ”the Special Rapporteur is sufficiently concerned about persistent allegations of torture to have requested from the Government an invitation to visit the country”.(17) In his reply to this request the Permanent Representative of Bahrain in Geneva stated that ”an invitation should await the planned visit of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and that a joint visit, as tentatively suggested by the Special Rapporteur, risked complicating decision-making regarding cooperation with the Commission’s mechanisms”.(18) Allegations of torture and deaths in custody in suspicious circumstances have rarely been investigated by the Bahraini authorities. This contravenes the requirements of the Convention against Torture, Article 12 of which calls for a ”prompt and impartial investigation, wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture has been committed in any territory under its jurisdiction”. Amnesty International was told by officials from the Ministry of the Interior in June 1999 that the Public Prosecutor’s Office will have the responsibility for the conduct of investigations into allegations of torture and deaths in custody. (The Public Prosecutor’s Office remains under the umbrella of the Ministry of Interior). Amnesty International was also told that a general procedure for the processing of complaints against the police is set out in the Public Security Ordinance of 1982. Amnesty International received a copy of extracts from the Ordinance, including a full chapter (Chapter IV – Disciplinary Actions and Trials), from the Government of Bahrain in August 1999. The chapter deals with the various disciplinary measures that members of the Public Security Forces would face if they infringe the rules contained in the Ordinance, or decisions issued by the Minister of the Interior, or directives issued by the Director-General of the Public Security, or crimes prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure. This chapter also discusses how investigations into these infringements are conducted and by whom, but there is no reference to any procedure enabling victims of torture or other human rights violations to lodge complaints against members of the Public Security alleged to have committed those violations or how to seek redress. Nor is there a reference to the provisions of Article 208 of the Penal Code. In addition, the impartiality and independence of the investigations are not guaranteed given that the Director-General of the Public Security orders the formation of the ”Investigating Committee” which consists of two or more officers. An investigation under the Ordinance therefore fails to meet the requirements of Convention against Torture, including that which obliges the Government of Bahrain to prosecute those alleged to have committed torture. Amnesty International has welcomed the initiative of the Ministry of the Interior in publishing a manual for prisoners (A Prisoner’s Guide to Rights and Obligations 1997) but is concerned that shackles could be used as a form of punishment.(19) The use of shackles for punishment is considered to constitute cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and is prohibited under international law. Article 31 of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners states that ”Corporal punishment, punishment by placing in a dark cell, and all cruel, inhuman or degrading punishments shall be completely prohibited as punishments for disciplinary offences”, and Article 33 stipulates that ”Instruments of restraints, such as handcuffs, chains, irons and straitjackets, shall never be applied as a punishment…”. The Guide however does not provide advice to prisoners on how to lodge a complaint regarding their treatment or other issues nor does it have any entry relating to access to legal counsel whilst in detention. Officials from the Ministry of the Interior also admitted that law enforcement officials against whom findings of torture had been made had not been prosecuted, despite the provisions of Article 208 of the Penal Code, Article 75 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the obligations under the Convention against Torture. Amnesty International was told that one officer had been “disciplined” following a finding that he had perpetrated torture. Amnesty International stresses that provisions criminalizing torture will remain a “dead letter” until sufficient commitment is demonstrated to there being proper prosecutions. Prosecuting those responsible for acts of torture would send a clear signal to the people of Bahrain and to the international community of the government’s serious commitment to eradicate torture. Amnesty International urges the Bahraini Government to take steps to assist and compensate all victims of torture as stipulated by the Convention against Torture, Article 14 of which clearly states that: ”1. Each State Party shall ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. In the event of the death of the victim as a result of an act of torture, his dependants shall be entitled to compensation.” 7. abThe Death Penalty Three Bahraini nationals are currently under sentence of death. ‘Ali Ahmad ‘Abdallah al-‘Usfur, Youssef Hussain ‘Abd al-Baqi and Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim al-Kattab were sentenced to de
ath after unfair trials before the State Security Court in July 1996. They had been convicted of carrying out a fire-bomb attack on a restaurant in Sitra which resulted in the death of seven Bangladeshi nationals. Amnesty International has on several occasions written to the Bahraini authorities urging that the three death sentences be commuted to prison terms. No response had been received from the authorities. Death sentences have to be referred to the Amir for ratification before being carried out. The death penalty has rarely been applied in Bahrain. Only one execution has been carried out since 1977.(20) However, Bahrain’s penal code provides this punishment for a number of offences. Amnesty International urges the Government of Bahrain to declare a moratorium on executions as called for by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights in April 1999.(21) 8. abRestrictions on non-governmental organizations (NGOs) During their visit to Bahrain in June 1999 Amnesty International delegates met with the Minister and officials at the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, which also organized a formal meeting with representatives of many charitable and professional societies. It was with great regret that the delegates learned that their request to meet representatives of some of these associations, including the Lawyers’ Society and organizations concerned with the rights of women and children, was turned down by the authorities. In the meeting with the Minister of Labour and Social Affairs and other senior officials at the Ministry the delegates were provided with the Legislative Decree No. 21 of 1989 with Respect to Promulgating the Law of Social and Cultural Societies and Clubs, Associations Carrying on Youth and Sports Activities and Private Organizations and were able to ask questions about the procedure for consideration of a request for registration of a society. Notably absent is any association working for human rights. Indeed, the delegates were informed by an official from the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs that any application for registration on the part of a human rights association at that time would be “discouraged”. The 1989 Decree implicitly excludes human rights associations from its rubric and imposes many restrictions on other associations’ activities. For example, Article 33 of the Decree requires organizers of general meetings to provide the agenda and 15 days prior notification, and permits the Government to ”designate the person it deems fit for attending the said meeting,” and Article 38 requires that minutes and resolutions be provided to the government within 15 days of the meeting”. Article 13 effectively bans independent trade unions by stipulating that all labour-related activities be undertaken by the official General Committee of Bahraini Workers and Joint Labour-Management Committees. Amnesty International delegates were told that this Legislative Decree was being reviewed. The organization has urged that such amendments be introduced to make it consistent with relevant international human rights standards. Amnesty International considers the free functioning of a broad human rights NGO community as a pre-requisite for any civil society in which human rights protection and promotion are respected. In pursuing their activities, human rights defenders should enjoy basic human rights, such as the right to freedom of expression, opinion and assembly, as well as the right to a fair trial, freedom from arbitrary arrest, ill-treatment and torture and the right to life. All these rights are enshrined in several UN treaties and declarations, including the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture. In addition, Amnesty International would draw the Government of Bahrain’s attention to the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms adopted by the UN General Assembly on 10 December 1998. Article 5 of the Declaration states that ”For the purpose of promoting and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, everyone has the right, individually and in association with others, at the national and international levels: a) To meet or assemble peacefully; b) To form, join and participate in non-governmental organizations, associations or groups; c) To communicate with non-governmental or intergovernmental organizations. The rights to freedom of expression and association are vital for the advancement of other rights. Amnesty International urges the Government of Bahrain to consider ways in which human rights NGOs could be allowed not only to function without hindrance or restrictions, but be actively encouraged to engage in human rights promotion and protection. Amnesty International learned that on 8 August 2000 a group of people, including lawyers, submitted to the Minister of Labour and Social Affairs a registration request for a new independent human rights association, and at the time of writing this report they had not yet received a response. 9. abConclusion and recommendations A steady improvement in the overall human rights situation has evolved in Bahrain as a result of the end of the civil unrest and decisions taken by the government in the promotion and protection of human rights. While acknowledging these positive developments, Amnesty International is, however, concerned that human rights violations, in the form of arbitrary detention, reports of torture and ill-treatment, unfair trials and forcible exile continue to take place. The organization urges the Bahraini Government to: 1. abRatify the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (and its Optional Protocols), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women and its Optional Protocol, and to implement them in law and practice. 2. abRelease all prisoners of conscience immediately and unconditionally. 3. abEnd the use of administrative detention which results in arbitrary detention in contradiction with Bahrain’s international obligations and ensure that detainees in all cases are brought promptly before a judge. In addition, it should ensure that all people under any form of detention have the right to take proceedings before a court in order that the court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of the detention and order release if the detention is unlawful. 4. abGive urgent consideration to the insertion into the Code of Criminal Procedure of a provision requiring a detainee to have access without delay to legal counsel of his/her own choice and to require arresting officers to notify detainees of that right and to register that notification. 5. abSet up an independent body to undertake prompt, thorough and impartial investigations into all allegations of torture and ill-treatment, including cases of death in custody, and ensure that the methods and findings of such investigations are made public. 6. abBring to justice anyone responsible for committing acts of torture and other serious human rights violations. All investigations and trials should be held before ordinary criminal courts in accordance with international standards for fair trial. 7. abIssue a public declaration that torture will not be tolerated under any circumstances. 8. abAssist and compensate all victims of torture. 9. abEnd the practice of forcible exile and issue a public declaration that all Bahraini nationals living abroad are entitled to return to Bahrain. 10. abEstablish an appeal procedure from decisions of the High Court of Appeal. 11. abEstablish national bodies which will review without delay the consistency of domestic laws and procedures with international law obligations. 12. abGive serious consideration to transferring the function of the Public Prosecutor’s Office from the Ministry of Interior to the Ministry of Justice. 13. abAmend the Legislative Decree No. 21 of 1989 with Respect to Promulgating the Law of Social and Cultural
Societies and Clubs, Associations Carrying on Youth and Sports Activities and Private Organizations, to ensure that non-governmental organizations, including human rights groups, can function without restrictions. 14. abEnsure that judges are provided with relevant training in international human rights standards. 15. abEnsure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference. 16. abIntroduce human rights education programs at all levels of education and initiate a comprehensive human rights awareness program making use of all media, to ensure that all people living in Bahrain are aware of their rights as guaranteed by the UDHR and international treaties ratified by Bahrain. 17. ab**** (1) The term “prisoners of conscience” refers to the imprisonment, detention or other physical restrictions imposed on any person by reason of his or her political, religious, or other conscientiously held beliefs, or by reason of his or her ethnic origin, sex, colour, language, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or other status, provided that he or she has not used or advocated violence. (2) Gulf Daily News, 16/12/1999. (3) The Amir is the legislator in Bahrain. Article 35(a) of the Constitution states that “The Amir shall have the right to initiate laws, and he alone shall ratify and promulgate the laws”. (4) The biggest opposition group, Bahrain Freedom Movement, is based in London. Other opposition groups in exile include the Islamic Front for the Liberation of Bahrain, the National Front for the Liberation of Bahrain and Bahrain Popular Front. (5) Article 104(a) of Bahrain’s Constitution stipulates that “Notwithstanding the provision of Article (35) of this Constitution, for an amendment to be made to any provision of this Constitution, it is stipulated that it shall be passed by a majority vote of two-thirds of the members constituting the [National] Assembly and ratified by the Amir”. (6) Akhbar al-Khalij, 30 August 2000. (7) Decree Law No. 19/2000. (8) This Article states that “A Supreme Council of the Judiciary shall be formed by a law which shall supervise the functions of the Courts and the offices relating thereto. The law shall specify the jurisdiction of the said Council over the functional affairs of both the judiciary and the public prosecution.” (9) According to this Article if the Committee against Torture receives reliable information suggesting that torture is practised systematically in the territory of a State Party, it invites that state to cooperate with it in the examination of the information. The Committee may also designate one or more of its members to make a confidential inquiry and to report to the Committee. (10) This Article states that “If there is serious evidence that a person has perpetrated acts, made statements, carried out activities, or has been involved in contacts inside or outside the country, the nature of which is deemed to be prejudicial to the internal or external security of the state or to its basic statutes or its social or economic system, or which are deemed to be a seditious nature affecting or likely to affect existing relations between the people and the government, or between the various state institutions, or between groups of people, or between employees of institutions and companies, or the aim of which was to assist in the perpetration of acts of sabotage or the dissemination of subversive propaganda or atheistic principles. The Minister of Interior may order the arrest of that person, committing him to one of Bahrain’s prisons, searching him, his residence and the place of his work, and may take any measure which he deems necessary for gathering evidence and completing investigations. The period of detention may not exceed three years. Searches may only be made and the measures provided for in the first paragraph may only be taken upon judicial writ. Anyone arrested under the provisions of the first paragraph may submit a complaint against the arrest order, after the expiry of three months from the date of its execution, to the Supreme Court of Appeal. The complaint is renewable at the end of every six months from the date of the decree rejecting the complaint”. (Amnesty International’s translation) (11) E/CN.4/1999/63/Add.1, Opinion No. 6/1998 (Bahrain), at para. 6. (12) E/CN.4/1999/63/Add.1, Opinion No. 6/1998 (Bahrain), para. 8. (13) Ibid., para. 12(a). (14) Amnesty International has issued a number of reports detailing the unfairness of trial procedures followed in political and security cases in the country, including Bahrain: Violations of Human Rights (AI Index: MDE 11/01/91), published in May 1991, and Bahrain: A Human Rights Crisis (AI Index: MDE 11/16/95), issued in September 1995. (15) E/CN.4/2000/61, 21 February 2000, para. 49. (16) See for example the report issued in December 1993 and entitled “Bahrain – Banned from Bahrain: forcible exile of Bahraini Nationals”, AI Index: MDE 11/04/93. (17) E/CN.4/1999/61 Report of the SR on torture, 12.01.99, para. 78 (18) Ibid, para. 7 (19) “Cuffing the hands and legs in fetters for a period of up to one month”, page 36. In this section of the Guide prisoners could also be “handcuffed and leg-cuffed in iron fetters” in certain situations, including if they are on death row or if they have attempted or are planning to escape. (20) ‘Issa Ahmad Qambar, a Bahraini national, was executed by firing squad in March 1996. He was sentenced to death in July 1995 after having been found guilty of premeditated murder of a police official.

18. ab(21) In its Resolution 1999/61, adopted on 28 April the Commission called on all states which maintain the death penalty to “establish a moratorium on executions, with a view to completely abolishing the death penalty”.18. ab

21 November: Important Report by Amnesty International on Bahrain

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL PRESS RELEASE AI Index MDE 11/007/2000 – News Service Nr. 219 Bahrain: Amnesty International’s Concerns about human rights situation While the human rights situation in Bahrain has improved in the last two years with the release of hundreds of political prisoners, the setting up of a human rights body within the Consultative Council and the ratification of the UN Convention against Torture, the mechanisms that have facilitated gross human rights violations in the past are still in place, Amnesty International said in a report released today. Human rights violations continue to take place, albeit on a lesser scale than during the period of civil unrest in the mid-1990s. Anti-government protesters or suspected political opponents are routinely arrested and detainees are at risk of being held for up to three years without charge or trial , the maximum allowed under the Decree Law on State Security Measures, in force since October 1974. Several hundred people remain held without charge or trial. Among them are five prominent political and religious leaders, all prisoners of conscience, who have been in detention since January 1996. The five have recently been put in solitary confinement because they refused to sign statements apologizing for their past political activities and committing themselves not to be involved in any political or social activities in the future. Political trials are still held before the State Security Court whose procedures fall far short of internationally recognized standards for fair trial, with defendants having no right to appeal against sentences and verdicts. Hearings before this court are invariably held in camera and defendants may be convicted on the basis of coerced confessions given to the police or a police testimony that such confessions were given. Despite the ratification of the UN Convention against Torture in 1998 dozens of allegations of torture and ill-treatment have been reported but have rarely been investigated by the government. The Government continues to use forcible exile as a punitive measure against suspected non-violent opposition activists or critics. Hundreds of Bahrainis, including women and children, are prevented from entering the country and are being forced to remain in exile. Many restrictions are imposed on non-governmental associations and no national independent human rights organization is permitted. In October 2000, the authorities rejected a request by a group of people, including lawyers, to set up an independent human rights organization. The authorities must allow human rights NGOs not only to function without hindrance or restrictions but be actively encouraged to engage in human rights promotion and protection, Amnesty International said. Amnesty International has welcomed the positive steps taken to date but is urging the Bahraini Government to bring the countrys laws and practice into closer harmony with international human rights treaties without further delay. \ENDS **************************************** For more information please call Amnesty International’s press office in London, UK, on +44 20 7413 5566 Amnesty International, 1 Easton St., London WC1X 0DW web :

http://www.amnesty.org

Bahrain: Freedom of expression banned; UN team to go ahead with an historic inspection visit

The case of Bahrain was discussed during a session organised in Florida, USA, on 17 November, by Human Rights Watch and the Committee for Academic Freedom in the Middle East and North Africa. Speakers from the USA, Morocco, Tunisia, Syria, Egypt and Bahrain explained the state of academic environments in the various countries. Dr. Munira Fakhroo, the Bahraini scholar and leading pro-democracy thinker, delivered an important intervention on Bahrain and highlighted the type of environment imposed on academia since 1995.

The seminar came at a time when a senior university lecturer, Dr. Jasim Ali, was thrown in jail for ten days in November because the authorities did not like his articles. The authorities were forced to release Dr. Ali following high level international interventions. The French news agency, AFP, reconfirmed on 14 November that a “Bahraini lawyer said Tuesday that Ali, who was arrested November 1, was freed “during the visit to Bahrain of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan following pressure from human rights organisations” on Bahraini authorities. “

The authorities intervened on 15 November and banned a seminar that was to take place at Matam Al-Qassab in Manama. The people in charge of the community centre had advertised for a seminar on “pluralism and co-existence” that would have been addressed by Seyyed Kamil Al-Hashimi, Sheikh Abdul Shahid Al-Satrawi and Sheikh Abdul Mohsin Mulla Atteya. The interior ministry summoned one of the organisers, Mr. Hussain Al-Alawi and ordered him to stop the function. This is yet another proof of the lack of freedom of expression in Bahrain.

The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention will be visiting Bahrain in the period between 25 February and 3 March 2001. The objective of the historic visit is to inspect Bahraini prisons and investigate cases of arbitrary detention. The visit had been re-scheduled several times as the government wanted the UN team to give up. Mr. Abdul Wahab Hussain, Mr. Hassan Mushaima’a and many pro-democracy leaders ere languishing in detention since January 1996 without charges or trial. More than 400 citizens have been sentenced by the unconstitutional State Security Court following unfair trails that fall short of all international conventions. All these are considered to be arbitrarily detained. The opposition hopes that the Amir will take a courageous step to start a new page with the people of Bahrain by releasing all political detainees and prisoners.

The fate of Hussain Mahdi Ahmed Obaid, 17, from Sanad, is still unknown since his arrest on 28 October. A security unit comprising seven armed men stormed the house of Mr. Obaid’s parent during a dawn raid. The house was ransacked and even sacks of sugar and rice were emptied on the floor, the tiles were removed and belongings were smashed. The raiders re-attacked the house for a second time on 28 October and committed further savage acts. Mr. Obaid had been detained four times in the past years.

Bahrain Freedom Movement

19 November 2000

Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089

Bahrain: Opposition calls for proper debate and mandate for reforms

The Gulf Cooperation Council summit is expected to be held on 30 and 31 December. Last time, in 1994, the summit was held in Bahrain at the start of the pro-democracy demonstrations that were sparked-off in December of that year. Six years on, Bahrain has undergone several changes that have not yet addressed the core issues of concern to the people of Bahrain. The people have staged their protests demanding their basic rights in their homeland. Up until now, the government has not positively responded to the moderate demands of the opposition. However, the Amir has met with members of the ruling family, members of the powerless Shura Council, staff of Bahrain University and other groups. He said that he intends to announce his proposals for changing the constitution on 16 December. The changes will include the introduction of bicameral parliamentary system and several other significant changes aimed at limiting the scope of authority of any body that may be elected. The opposition has called for freedom of expression to allow all people to debate the proposed changes and insisted that any changes must be approved by the people, either through a referendum or through the elected National Assembly. These are the legitimate means that can be accepted constitutionally and/or internationally. During the World Conference for Democracy held in Sمo Paulo, Brazil, in the period 12-15 November, the case of Bahrain was discussed by pro-democracy activists during the sessions on assisting democrats in closed society and local governance. It was pointed out that in Bahrain people are denied their basic rights, that the government has banned the formation of an independent NGO for human rights, and that changes to the constitution are being proposed and may be processed undemocratically. The case of Bahrain provided an example of a pro-Western, yet politically-closed society under a repressive regime that does not recognize the basic rights of citizens. Inside Bahrain, 250 employees of Gulf Air submitted a petition to the Chief Executive, Sheikh Ahmed bin Yousif Al-Nahyan, demanding an immediate improvement to their conditions. These include raising their flat salaries by 30%, and increasing their allowances in par with other similar companies. The employees have been suffering for several years without a proper attention to their conditions. Bahrain Freedom Movement 16 November 2000 Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089

Bahrain: Dr. Jasim Ali freed, Popular mandate is necessary for any constitutional change

Following international pressure and contacts that reached the highest level, and during the visit of Kofi Anan, the Secretary General of the UN, Dr. Jasim Ali was freed from jail after ten days in detention. Dr. Ali, who is a senior lecturer at Bahrain University, was detained on 1 November, after a raid by the intelligence department on his home in Hamad Town. His papers and floppy discs were confiscated. Dr. Ali, a well-known writer, was detained because the government did not like his articles. Mr. Anan visited Bahrain for two days last week, and during his trip the government wanted to impress him by several means. One of the things the government did was to donate premises and called them the UN House combining the various offices of the UN that operate in Bahrain. The government of Bahrain has been trying to impress the UN in an attempt to influence the outcome of the forthcoming visit by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention next February. The visit is the first of its kind and will be investigating cases of arbitrary detention in Bahrain. There are hundreds of people who are detained arbitrarily and many of whom had not been charged. The government has been condemned by UN teams for its abuse of basic citizens’ rights through the implementation of the unconstitutional State Security Law. The Amir met last week with members of the ruling family and with the appointed Shura Council. He told them that he intends to announce a process for changing the constitution next December. The process will include several key issues such as the creation of a bicameral parliamentary system, an appointed upper house and an elected lower house. That both houses will be given legislative powers and the appointed council’s approval will be needed (during combined session) in case the lower house wanted to discuss financial affairs of the state, or other critical matters. The Amir said that he will appoint a committee made up of some of appointed members of the Shura Council and other outside people to discuss the proposed changes. Later on he will issue decrees to change the constitution. The opposition reaffirmed its position that any changes that have no popular mandate will not be acceptable. Bahrain Freedom Movement 13 November 2000 Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089

AI Urgent Action on Arrest of Dr. Jasim Ali

PUBLIC AI Index: MDE 11/05/00 UA 346/00 Incommunicado detention / Fear of torture 9 November 2000 BAHRAIN Jasim Hussain ‘Ali, aged 41 A university lecturer, who has provided written analysis to a business information service about the political and human rights situation in Bahrain,has not been heard of since he was detained by the security forces on 1 November. He is believed to be held incommunicado and there are fears that he may be tortured or ill-treated. Jasim Hussain ‘Ali, a senior lecturer in business administration/ economics at Bahrain University and a father of two, was arrested by the Security and Intelligence Service (SIS) at his home in Hamad Town, south of the capital Manama. He is reportedly held at the SIS headquarters in al-Qal‘a, but when his family asked for permission to visit him, they were apparently refused. The exact reasons for his arrest are not known, but may be related to the fact that since 1997 he has provided written analysis about the human rights, political and economic situation in Bahrain to the Economist Intelligence Unit, a business information provider which is part of the Economist Group. In September, Jasim Hussain ‘Ali was apparently interrogated by the authorities at Bahrain airport when returning from abroad, and had a computer disk confiscated. Since then, the SIS has reportedly searched his house several times, confiscating more computer disks and questioning him about his links with the Economist Intelligence Unit. On 6 November Amnesty International wrote to the Bahraini authorities seeking clarification of the reasons for the arrest and detention of Jasim Hussain ‘Ali. No response has been received so far. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Political prisoners are often held incommunicado, and risk being tortured or ill-treated during the initial period following their arrest in an attempt to extract confessions. They may be detained for months or years without charge or trial under the provisions of the 1974 Decree Law on Security Measures, which allows for a maximum administrative detention of three years. A number of detainees have died in custody since December 1994, when widespread anti-government protests erupted. No investigations are known to have been carried out into reports of torture or deaths in custody, although the names of certain SIS employees have featured regularly in the testimonies of former political detainees. However, reports of systematic torture have decreased in recent years, and positive steps have been taken by the authorities in the field of human rights. In March 1998 Bahrain ratified the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), and in October 1999 a Human Rights Committee was set up to monitor human rights. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Please send telegrams/telexes/faxes/express/airmail letters in English, Arabic or your own language: – seeking assurances that Jasim Hussain ‘Ali will not be tortured or ill-treated, and calling for him to be given access to family, lawyers of his own choosing and medical care if necessary; – asking the authorities to clarify why Jasim Hussain ‘Ali was arrested and to confirm where he is held; – calling for his immediate and unconditional release if he is being held solely for the peaceful expression of his beliefs. APPEALS TO: His Highness Shaikh Hamad bin ‘Issa Al Khalifa Office of His Highness the Amir P. O. Box 555 The Amiri Court, Rifa’a Palace, Bahrain Faxes: +973 668884 Salutation: Your Highness His Excellency Shaikh Khalifa Bin Salman Al Khalifa Prime Minister Office of the Prime Minister P.O. Box 1000, Manama, Bahrain Telegrams: Prime Minister, al-Manama, Bahrain Telexes: 9336 PROM BN or 7889 PMPO BN Faxes: + 973 533033 Salutation: Your Excellency His Excellency Shaikh Muhammad Bin Khalifa Al Khalifa Minister of Interior Ministry of Interior P.O. Box 13, Manama, Bahrain Telegrams: Minister of Interior, al-Manama, Bahrain Telexes: 9572 PSMKT BN or 8333 ALAMAN BN Faxes: + 973 276765 or 290526 Salutation: Your Excellency COPIES TO: diplomatic representatives of BAHRAIN accredited to your country. PLEASE SEND APPEALS IMMEDIATELY. Check with the International Secretariat, or your section office, if sending appeals after 21 December 2000.

Bahrain: Major crackdowns on citizens and journalists

A new crackdown against peaceful citizens is underway in Bahrain. The atrocious security forces have been conducting house searches and arbitrary arrests in Sehla, Daih and Sanabis for the past few days. On 8 November, the attacked the house of Ali Al-Mullah, 31, in Sanabis. Since he was not there, they went on to search many houses in the neighbourhood. Earlier, the security forces had arrested Badar Al-Sabagh, 24, .Ali Al-Asafrah, 26, Amin Ibrahim Isa, 28, and Abdul Nabi Al-Hashash, 27. The latter was being treated at Salmanya Hospital as part of a regular therapy for his leg that had been operated on. The security forces attacked him in the hospital and took him to a detention centre. His family insisted to see him and when they were allowed to look at him on 8 November, he was in a very serious condition. In addition to his medical condition, he had been subjected to sever torturing by Khalid Al-Wazzan at Al-Khamis Police Station. From Ras Romman, the security forces arrested Abdul Amir Dhahi Abdulla, 27 and Abdul Hussein Makki Salman, 27. These were amongst others who had been arrested following the pro-Palestinian demonstrations in Ras Romman. Amongst those arrested was Bushra Makki Salman, the sister of Abdul Hussein Makki Salman. She had been released together with her brother after ill treatment and torture. Last week, Mohammed Ali Yaquob, 23, and Bashir Al-Shajjar, were detained during one of the crackdown operations. They remained inside the jails. Hassan Abdulla Saad was arrested upon his return to the country across the causeway with Saudi Arabia. He was tortured and then released. Salman Yousif Al-Sayegh, 16, from Abu Saibaa, was arrested for three days, tortured and then released. One of the recently released people explained a new method of torture invented by the intelligence department. The detainee is put inside a large sack (similar to the large sack used for packaging rice) and this sack is then suspended from the ceiling. The sack is then swung and smashed on the surrounding walls while the detainee is inside it. The interior minister issued an instruction to Dr. Fuad Shehab, who was appointed to head a powerless committee for human rights as part of the unconstitutional Shura Council, ordering him to pass copies of all letters and information he receives from the public regarding the political prisoners and detainees as well as any complaint of torture or ill-treatment. The committee was also threatened that it is not allowed to communicate with the outside world without clear permission from the interior ministry. The Editor-in-Chief of Al-Ayyam newspaper (who is also the information advisor to the Amir) dismissed six leading columnists Ahmed Al-Boostah, Khalid Al-Bassam, Radhi Al-Mosawi, Saeed Mohammed, Mohammed Fadhil and Mohammed Al-Mansoor. This follows a similar action by Akbar Al-Khalij where one of the columnists, Omran Salman, was also dismissed. This is the start of a sweeping operation aimed at replacing all those journalists who do not obey the information ministry. It is expected that more will be dismissed and a new obedient staff will be used for a misinformation campaign being planned by the government. Dr. Jasim Ali, a prominent member of Bahrain University staff and a writer, was detained on 1 November. He has not been allowed any access to the outside world and there is an increasing concern that he is being tortured and ill-treated. The family of Dr. Ali had not been informed about his fate. International human rights organisations have called on the Bahraini authorities to release him immediately as his arrest represents a gross violation of freedom of expression that has been guaranteed by the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the country’s constitution. Bahrain Freedom Movement 9 November 2000 Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089

Bahrain: Major crackdowns on citizens and journalists

A new crackdown against peaceful citizens is underway in Bahrain. The atrocious security forces have been conducting house searches and arbitrary arrests in Sehla, Daih and Sanabis for the past few days. On 8 November, the attacked the house of Ali Al-Mullah, 31, in Sanabis. Since he was not there, they went on to search many houses in the neighbourhood. Earlier, the security forces had arrested Badar Al-Sabagh, 24, .Ali Al-Asafrah, 26, Amin Ibrahim Isa, 28, and Abdul Nabi Al-Hashash, 27. The latter was being treated at Salmanya Hospital as part of a regular therapy for his leg that had been operated on. The security forces attacked him in the hospital and took him to a detention centre. His family insisted to see him and when they were allowed to look at him on 8 November, he was in a very serious condition. In addition to his medical condition, he had been subjected to sever torturing by Khalid Al-Wazzan at Al-Khamis Police Station. From Ras Romman, the security forces arrested Abdul Amir Dhahi Abdulla, 27 and Abdul Hussein Makki Salman, 27. These were amongst others who had been arrested following the pro-Palestinian demonstrations in Ras Romman. Amongst those arrested was Bushra Makki Salman, the sister of Abdul Hussein Makki Salman. She had been released together with her brother after ill treatment and torture. Last week, Mohammed Ali Yaquob, 23, and Bashir Al-Shajjar, were detained during one of the crackdown operations. They remained inside the jails. Hassan Abdulla Saad was arrested upon his return to the country across the causeway with Saudi Arabia. He was tortured and then released. Salman Yousif Al-Sayegh, 16, from Abu Saibaa, was arrested for three days, tortured and then released. One of the recently released people explained a new method of torture invented by the intelligence department. The detainee is put inside a large sack (similar to the large sack used for packaging rice) and this sack is then suspended from the ceiling. The sack is then swung and smashed on the surrounding walls while the detainee is inside it. The interior minister issued an instruction to Dr. Fuad Shehab, who was appointed to head a powerless committee for human rights as part of the unconstitutional Shura Council, ordering him to pass copies of all letters and information he receives from the public regarding the political prisoners and detainees as well as any complaint of torture or ill-treatment. The committee was also threatened that it is not allowed to communicate with the outside world without clear permission from the interior ministry. The Editor-in-Chief of Al-Ayyam newspaper (who is also the information advisor to the Amir) dismissed six leading columnists Ahmed Al-Boostah, Khalid Al-Bassam, Radhi Al-Mosawi, Saeed Mohammed, Mohammed Fadhil and Mohammed Al-Mansoor. This follows a similar action by Akbar Al-Khalij where one of the columnists, Omran Salman, was also dismissed. This is the start of a sweeping operation aimed at replacing all those journalists who do not obey the information ministry. It is expected that more will be dismissed and a new obedient staff will be used for a misinformation campaign being planned by the government. Dr. Jasim Ali, a prominent member of Bahrain University staff and a writer, was detained on 1 November. He has not been allowed any access to the outside world and there is an increasing concern that he is being tortured and ill-treated. The family of Dr. Ali had not been informed about his fate. International human rights organisations have called on the Bahraini authorities to release him immediately as his arrest represents a gross violation of freedom of expression that has been guaranteed by the Universal Declaration on Human Rights and the country’s constitution. Bahrain Freedom Movement 9 November 2000 Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089

Bahrain: Urgent actions on the arrest of Dr. Jasim Ali

Human rights organizations reacted to the arrest of Bahrain’s university lecturer Dr. Jasim Ali demanding his immediate release. On 7 November, International Pen (The Writers in Prison Committee of International Pen) issued an urgent action stating that it “is seriously concerned about the arrest of senior lecturer and writer Dr. Jasim Hussain Ali, who is thought to be detained in connection with his writings. There are fears that Dr. Ali may be at risk of ill treatment while in detention. The Writers in Prison Committee of International Pen is calling for the immediate and unconditional release of Dr. Ali. International Pen further urges the Bahraini authorities to take all necessary measure to protect the fundamental human rights of Dr. Jasim Ali while he is detained. “According to our information, Dr. Jasim Ali, a Senior Lecturer in Business Administration at Bahraini University, was arrested at his home in Hamad Town on 1st November 2000. Prior to his arrest, the intelligence service had reportedly interrogated him about his articles and confiscated his writings. Dr. Ali’s family were contacted by the Bahraini intelligence department after his arrest and asked to provide cloths for him, which indicates that he is likely to be detained for some time. Dr. Jasim Ali is feared to be held incommunicado, without access to his family or lawyer.” The Geneva-based International Organization Against Torture (OMCT) issued an urgent action on 7 November condemning the arrest of Dr. Jasim Ali. OMCT said “Dr. Jasim Hussain Ali, aged 41, was arrested on 1 November 2000 at his home in Hamad Town. The intelligence department ransacked his offices and confiscated his written articles and floppy discs…. Dr. Jasim Ali who holds a PhD in Business Administration from the USA, is a senior lecturer at Bahrain University (Business Administration). He specializes and writes on socio-economic affairs in the Gulf countries. Before his arrest, the intelligence department had allegedly interrogated him about his articles and confiscated his writings. All information received suggests that the he is being held solely for the expression of his beliefs.” OMCT called on the Bahraini authorities to “take all necessary measures to guarantee the physical and psychological integrity of Dr. Jasim Hussain Ali and order his immediate release in the absence of valid legal charges or, if such charges exist, bring them before an impartial and competent tribunal and guarantee their procedural rights at all times”. Moreover, the Cairo-based Arab Program for Human Rights Activists (APHRA) issued an urgent action on 7 November condemning the attitude adopted by the Bahraini authorities towards human rights organizations. APHRA noted that the Bahraini government “dismissed an application presented by 18 public figures to form a non-government committee for human rights.” APHRA denounced the “unjustifiable decision of dismissing the application to form the first non-government committee for human rights in Bahrain.” In this context, APHRA reasserted the “inherent right to form associations as guaranteed by the international conventions of human rights and in accordance with article 27 of Bahrain’s Constitution.” Scores of citizens were arrested in the past few days in an operation led by the torturer Khalid Al-Wazzan. The following were arrested in Sehla: Ali Abbas Jumma, 27, Salah Mahdi Hassan, 25, Abdul Adhim Ali Saeed Al-Mullla, 29, Haider Mahdi, 23, together with his brother Mostafa. Several others were arrested in Sanabis amongst them two persons named Abdul Amir and Bader, 25. From Daih, the torturer Al-Wazzan arrested Salah Al-Sheikh, 27. A Bahraini exile, Dr. Majid Al-Alawi, was allowed to return to Bahrain after 18 years outside the country. A spokesperson for the BFM commented that the case of Dr. Al-Alawi might serve to highlight the situation of hundreds of Bahrainis who had been forced to live outside their homeland because of their beliefs and political views. Since the Amir came to power in March 1999, more than 50 citizens were forcibly exiled. Bahrain is the only country in the world, which employs forcible exile as a means of punishment of its opponents. There is an international pressure on the government to abandon this inhumane policy. In the past, the government has allowed some individuals to return on the condition that they abandon their political beliefs and opposition activities. Bahrain Freedom Movement 8 November 2000 Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089

INTERNATIONAL PEN: Urgent Action on the Arrest of Dr. Jasim Ali

November 7, 2000 International Pen (The writers in Prison Committee of International Pen) is seriously concerned about the arrest of senior lecturer and writer Dr. Jasim Hussain Ali, who is thought to be detained in connection with his writings. There are fears that Dr. Ali may be at risk of ill treatment while in detention. The Writers in Prison Committee of International Pen is calling for the immediate and unconditional release of Dr. Ali. International Pen further urges the Bahraini authorities to take all necessary measures to protect the fundamental human rights of Dr. Jasim Ali while he is detained. According to our information, Dr. Jasim Ali, a senior lecturer in Business Administration at Bahraini University, was arrested at his home in Hamad town on 1st November 2000. Prior to his arrest, intelligence service had reportedly interrogated him about his articles and confiscated his writings. Dr. Ali’s family was contacted by the Bahraini intelligence department after his arrest and asked to provide cloths for him, which indicates that he is likely to be detained for some time. Dr. Jasim Ali is feared to be held incommunicado, without access to his family or lawyer.

OMCT on the Arrest of a University Lecturer in Bahrain

Case BHR 061100 The International Secretariat of OMCT requests your URGENT intervention in the following situation in Bahrain. Brief description of the situation The International Secretariat of OMCT has received information from the Bahrain Human Rights Organization (BHRO), a member of the OMCT network, that Dr. Jasim Hussain Ali, aged 41, was arrested on 1 November 2000 at his home in Hamad Town. The intelligence department ransacked his offices and confiscated his written articles and floppy discs. Later on, the intelligence department telephoned his family and asked them to provide clothes for him. This is a sign that he will remain in detention. Dr. Jasim Ali who holds a PhD in Business Administration from the USA, is a senior lecturer at Bahrain University (Business Administration). He specializes and writes on socio-economic affairs in the Gulf countries. Before his arrest, the intelligence department had allegedly interrogated him about his articles and confiscated his writings. All information received suggests that the he is being held solely for the expression of his beliefs. In contradiction with international norms and provisions of the 1973 Bahrain Constitution, laws decreed by the Emir and his government highly restrict freedom of expression. The authorities consider any violations of these laws as security related, and deal with it under the 1974 State Security Law which allows for the detention of a person without charge or trial for up to three years and sets a special court system “the State Security Court”, a procedure of which falls far below International standards for fair trial. BHRO notes that the State Security Law does not make any distinction, in its provisions, between persons who are prosecuted for having engaged in activities undertaken in the exercise of their fundamental rights, and persons who are prosecuted for having committed acts, which constitute undue abuse of the exercise of the aforementioned rights. According to BHRO, most persons arrested for political reasons (so-called security cases) were held incommunicado, a condition of detention conducive to torture. The Security and Intelligence Service (SIS) were alleged to have frequently conducted the interrogation of such detainees under torture. There are many documented cases of detainees who died under torture in the past few years. The practice of torture was undertaken with impunity, with no known cases of officials having been prosecuted for acts of torture or other ill-treatment. OMCT reiterates BHRO’s grave concern for the physical and psychological integrity of Dr. Jasim Ali. Action requested Please write to the authorities in Bahrain urging them to: i. take all necessary measures to guarantee the physical and psychological integrity of Dr. Jasim Hussain Ali and order his immediate release in the absence of valid legal charges or, if such charges exist, bring them before an impartial and competent tribunal and guarantee their procedural rights at all times; ii. intervene with the appropriate authorities in order to secure that Dr. Jasim Hussain Ali be allowed to meet with a lawyer and his family, as well as have access to medical care; iii.put an immediate end to the use of arbitrary detention of people by the police and abrogate 1974 State Security Law and all national laws which are not in compliance with international human rights standards; iv. guarantee the respect of human rights and the fundamental freedoms throughout the country in accordance with national laws and international human rights standards. Addresses His Highness Hamad Bin Issa Al Khalifa, Office of His Highness the Amir, P.O. Box 555, The Amiri Court, Rifa’a Palace, Bahrain. Fax : + 973 668884. Telex : 8666 Qasar BN; 8500 Qasar BN His Excellency Al-Shaikh Khalifa Bin Salman Al Khalifa, Prime Minister, P.O. Box 1000, al-Manama, Bahrain. Telex : 9336 PROM BN or 7889 PMPO BN. FAX: + 973 533033. His Excellency Al-Shaikh Mohammed Bin Khalifa Al Khalifa, Minister of Interior, P.O. Box 13, al-Manama, Bahrain. Fax : + 973 276765 or 290526 or 754303. Telex : 9572 PSMKT BN OR 8333 ALAMAN BN Geneva, November 6, 2000 Kindly inform us of any action undertaken quoting the code of this appeal in your reply. Organisation Mondiale Contre la Torture (OMCT) World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) Organizaciَn Mundial Contra la Tortura (OMCT) 8 rue du Vieux-Billard Case postale 21 CH-1211 Geneve 8 Suisse/Switzerland Tel. : 0041 22 809 49 39 Fax : 0041 22 809 49 29 E-mail : omct@omct.org http://www.omct.org

Arab HR Activits on Bahrain

Urgent Action Bahrain Case No. Ap.4B.00 6th November2000 State authorities in Bahrain charged exiled human rights organizations of conspiring with the political opposition against the national interests of Bahrain. Meanwhile, human rights NGOs are not guaranteed legal existence in Bahrain and no organization may undertake the task of monitoring or documenting the violations committed by the authorities. Bahrains authorities also dismissed an application presented by 18 public figures to form a non-government committee for human rights. The Minister of Labor & Social Affairs justified the governments dismissal of the application on the pretext that time was not ripe for the formation of such a committee. He claimed that the existing committee, formed by the Shura Council, was adequately qualified for the task of defending human rights in Bahrain. Though it is a governmental committee, the minister insisted that there was no need for another committee to carry out the same task. The governments dismissal of the application was based on article 11 of Bahrains law on association. This article grants the administration the right to reject any association in case there is another association operating in the same field of activity. The Arab Program for Human Rights Activists denounces the unjustifiable decision of dismissing the application to form the first non-government committee for human rights in Bahrain. In this context, APHRA reasserts the inherent right to form associations as guaranteed by the international conventions of human rights and in accordance with article 27 of Bahrains Constitution. The Arab Program, therefore, urges the state authorities of Bahrain to legally recognize the formation of the new independent committee and not to restrict human rights activity to the governmental committee formed by the Shura Council. Moreover, the Arab Program stresses the urgent need to reconsider the extremely restrictive law on association in Bahrain, which limits public associations to a very marginal role compared with civil society organizations elsewhere in the world. Finally, the Arab Program for Human Rights Activists encourages all Arab organizations to support citizens of Bahrain in their struggle for the freedom to form associations, which undoubtedly will contribute to the development and promotion of public activity in Bahrain. ARAB PROGRAM FOR HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS 25 EBRAHEEM IBN EL MAHDI ST 7TH DISTRICT FLOOR 12 FLAT 26 NASR CITY – CAIRO EGYPT TEL. 00 202 404 11 85 fAX. 00 202 403 99 54 rphra@rite.com

www.aphra.org

Bahrain: Crackdown on journalists and pro-Palestinian demonstrators

The citizens continued to voice their support for the Palestinian cause amid tight and intense security presence. The security forces blocked the main entrances to the capital, Manama, to prevent people from joining the demonstrations that start after Friday prayers. Despite the security clampdown, the citizens marched in the streets denouncing the Israeli aggression against the people of Palestine. Slogans with large letters were pained on the walls of Sakhir Palace confirming the demand of the people: “restoration of the National Assembly”. Pro-Palestinian slogans were also pained on the walls in many parts of the country and the security forces were seen painting over the slogans. The recently appointed Editor-in-Chief of Akhbar Al-Khalij (Anwar Abdul Rahman) started his purge of journalists by dismissing Mr. Omran Salman. He wrote to Mr. Salman on 31 October informing him that he is no longer required as from 1 November. This arbitrary and inhumane method of dismissing journalists is aimed at intimidating any person who dares to speak out freely. On the other hand, Mr. Hafedh Al-Sheikh was prevented from publishing one of his columns in Akhbar Al-Khalij. The column appeared instead in the Qatari newspaper Al-Sharq on 2 November. Mr. Al-Sheikh said that freedom of expression is curtailed in Bahrain and people are not allowed to participate in the consultations that the Amir has always spoken about. He questioned why did the information minister issued a ban on reporting with regard to the ongoing court case between himself and the mercenary Abdul Adhim Al-Baboli who works in the information ministry. Mr. Al-Sheikh had criticized the blunder caused by Abdul Adhim Al-Baboli following the Gulf Air disaster. Since then, the information ministry brought a court case against him. Al-Quds newspaper published an article for Dr. Mansoor Al-Jamri on 4 November, in which he outlined the views of the opposition regarding the statements of the Amir. The Amir had said on 3 October that he intended to change the constitution. The opposition stated that it is not against reforms but such reforms must be processed through the elected National Assembly as specified by the country’s constitution. Bahrain Freedom Movement 5 November 2000 Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089

Bahrain: Citizens support the formation of a human rights NGO

The refusal of the Bahraini government to allow the formation of an independent non-governmental organisation (NGO) for monitoring human rights situation has been condemned by civic groups inside the country. One of the journalist, Radhi Al-Mosawi reflected in his articles the astonishment of the people upon hearing the decision of the government to ban the formation of such NGO. Eighteen distinguished personalities submitted an application in early August requesting the labour minister to allow the formation of the NGO. The 18 personalities are Ms. Hessa Al-Khameeri, Salman Seyed Ali Kamal-u-Din, Dr. Sabeeka Mohammed Al-Najjar, Nabeel Ahmed Rajab, Fathi Abdulla Salim, Abdulla Mohammed Saleh Al-Abbasi, Dr. Monthir Jaffer Isa Al-Khor, Ms. Fatima Hassan Al-Hawwaj, Abdul Shahid Hussain Omran, Mohammed Jaffer Hassan, Isa Ibrahim Mohammed, Ahmed Ibrahim Fakhro, Ali Ibrahim Bu-Hejji, Ali Abdulla Ali Fakhro, Khalid Saleh Khamis Al-Zayyani, Hassan Ahmed Ali Al-Mahmood, Ms. Seham Hamid Ali Salim Sangoor, and Mahmood Mohammed Jawad. These distinguished citizens represent all sections of Bahraini society and are trusted by the citizens. The government refuses to see the people of Bahrain united on political and human rights issues. The human rights NGO is critically needed in Bahrain as citizens continue to suffer arbitrary detention and intimidation. Scores of pro-democracy leaders, such as Mr. Abdul Wahab Hussain and Mr. Hassan Mushaimaa languish in jails without charges for many years. Mohammed Al-Motawwa, the information minister and spokesman for the prime minister, announced that the premier “listened to the wishes of the Shura Council and decided to withdraw the article of decree that would have charged the citizens studying at secondary schools”. The government was at pain to give some fictitious victory for the powerless Shura Council. The council rejected only one proposal submitted by the government since its creation in 1993. This was when it objected to the ban on satellite dishes. The government ignored the powerless council and went ahead with its ban. However, to give an impression that this council has teeth, the government proposed a ridiculous and unbelievable decree to charge Bahrainis for studying at secondary schools. The bill wan not believed from the beginning and all people knew the game from the start. The powerless Shura Council doesn’t not command respect from either the government or the public. Bahrain Freedom Movement 2 November 2000 Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089

November Commentary:

Support to Israel and dictatorships:

Why the US has lost in the Middle East

The sudden eruption of the Palestinian conflict caught many by surprise. But for those who have lived under occupation for the past half a century or those who live in the Palestinian Diaspora, it was only expected given the failure of the peace process to deliver. The public expression of anger and outrage at the massacre of the Palestinian youths by the Israeli soldiers has been particularly strong. The US President, Bill Clinton, who had hoped he would leave the White House after he had achieved a comprehensive and working settlement of this issue did not get his way. He has now resigned himself to accepting a humiliating exit with the most important dream far away from reality. For Ehud Barak, his name will be associated with the total collapse of the process started by his predecessors. His name will now be associated with Ariel Sharon, the architect of the Sabra and Chatila massacres in 1982. The international opinion has now shifted against the Israelis who sent their helicopter gunships and tanks to crush to death scores of Palestinian youths and demolish many homes. But for Yasser Arafat, the newly-launched uprising has been a saviour. He was seen by many as a weak leader who had often been bypassed by events and manoeuvres. Now his image has changed. At Sharm El Sheikh, the coast Egyptian town where the latest American venture to salvage the Israeli government failed, he did not totally sell out to the bigger powers at the table of negotiations.

To the Palestinians, the world community has failed them drastically and left them to the merciless Israelis. The natural reaction of this nation would have been a total and uncompromising rejection of the Israeli policies and an ultimatum to pull their troops from the territories occupied in 1967. This would have been in line with the UN resolutions 242 and 338. The United Nations has been at the forefront to force Saddam Hussain to abide by the UN resolutions against his government. Economic sanctions have been in force since 1990 while Iraqis died of hanger and illnesses. The Arab countries also took part in blockading Iraq. In contrast, the Israelis seem to get away with the most vicious murders, and contempt of the international community.

The United States is seen as the main power behind the UN policies towards both Iraq and Israel. While it chose to take uncompromising stands against Iraq, it has failed to take any step to stop the massacre of the Palestinians. Instead it has bullied members of the Security Council into ignoring the fate of the Palestinians and letting Israel off the hook. Jerusalem is part of the territories occupied by Israel in 1967 and, apart from the US, no other country has accepted Israeli sovereignty over the holy city. Members of the Security Council still consider the occupation illegal and demand that Israel pulls its forces out of Jerusalem and the whole of West Bank and the Golan Heights. The political, military and financial support by the Unites States has hardened the Israeli stands and prevented a real solution in the region. The world community has not, however, taken strong stands to ensure Israeli compliance with the said resolutions. The Palestinians are the only people in the world who have been forced to live in refugee camps for more than half a century.

The reaction of the Arab and Muslim masses against the Israeli atrocities has been overwhelming. From Morocco to Jakarta demonstrators have taken to the streets in support of their Palestinian brothers and sisters. Even the small countries of the Gulf which have never had a demonstration in recent years witnessed an explosion of public anger. In Muscat, Sharjah, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Doha, Manama and Kuwait, people have taken strong stands against Israel and demonstrated in support of the Palestinian people. Funds were made available to the uprising, while mobile hospitals were provided to treat the thousands of injured. In Bahrain, which has been the scene of public demonstrations in the past six years, people have reacted angrily to the Israeli occupational policies. Having experienced similar atrocities, albeit on smaller scale, the Bahrainis have effectively re-lived their own recent experience.

Bahrainis know what it means to have foreign troops firing at locals and killing them. They appreciate what it means to be displaced from their homeland and understand the psychological trauma of a people who stood empty-handed to face an oppressive occupational regime. This is why the Bahraini demonstrations were different from others that took place elsewhere. The participants in these demonstrations have first hand experiences in stone-throwing against foreign troops and were subjected to interrogation and torture by foreigners. They were also banished from their homeland and their lands confiscated by the rulers or re-located to foreign settlers.

The Americans have become worried about their position in the Middle East. This has become more serious especially after the attack on their cruiser, the Cole, allegedly by two suicidal bombers. They have now alerted their personnel in the Gulf to take extra precautions to avoid being trapped in unnecessary difficulty. It is unlikely that major attacks against the Americans will take place at least in Bahrain where the American installations are highly fortified and where the people are not known for their violent nature. The government will, however, try to cash on the crisis, especially as it finds itself accused of inhumane treatment of its own citizens. The opposition has called for civil protests against the Israelis and in support of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people. Students, preachers, intellectuals, poets and other professionals have joined forces to present a unified stand against aggression. The government, on the other hand, has attempted to hijack these activities but to no avail. It therefore started attacking pro-Palestinian demonstrations that took to the streets on 20, 22 and 27 October.

It is likely that the situation will remain tense for some time to come especially if the Israelis have not ceased their attacks on civilians. It is in the interest of the Americans to stop their unequivocal support to the Israelis and take a neutral stand in the conflict like the other powers. It must have realised by now that imposed peace is as bad as imposed war. What is wanted is a just peace which caters for the legitimate rights of the Palestinians in their homeland. Moreover, the five million Palestinian refugees must be allowed back to their homeland.

The United States is seen as the main supporter of dictatorships in the region, and has done little to improve human rights or democracy in the Middle East. These factors have collectively led the Arab and Muslim masses to look negatively at the US role in the Middle East. The hope is that the recent developments will lead the US to a more balanced approach. Its stands in the Palestinian crisis will be the main indicator.

Bahrain Freedom Movement

November 2000

Tel/Fax: (+44) 207 278 9089