 |
June 1993, Page 62 Human Rights
By Andrea W. Lorenz
Egyptian Human Rights Organization Documents AbusesOn March 20, 1993, the non-governmental Egyptian Organization for Human Rights (EOHR) released a 15-page report on violations of human rights by both Islamic fundamentalist groups and government security officials in an area of northwestern Cairo called Imbaba. Established in 1985, EOHR is considered by many international human rights groups to be the most effective of the Egyptian human rights organizations. The report, based on hundreds of carefully documented interviews with victims and witnesses, accuses both militant Islamic groups and the Egyptian government of violating specific articles of the Egyptian constitution which protect human rights. Imbaba is a warren of crumbling apartment houses and narrow, dusty streets, many lined with open sewers. It was one of the areas hardest hit by the October 1992 earthquake. Many Cairenes credit local Islamic groups with providing clothing, medicine, and shelter to the victims more quickly and efficiently than the government. In recent months Imbaba has become fertile ground for the message of violent change preached by the more militant religious groups. Imbaba's residents have been caught in a dangerous face-off between the Islamic groups and government security forces. The March EOHR report points the finger at security police for initiating a campaign of torture and intimidation, but the authors are careful to point out that during the summer and fall of 1992 the Islamic groups planted the seeds of sectarian violence, thus inviting government retaliation. "During that period," the reports says, "Imbaba has seen a variety of attempts to forcefully impose certain patterns of social behavior on Muslim citizens. " EOHR maintains that the government could have stanched the violence earlier, but instead allowed the Islamists to preach unchecked until the situation grew out of control. When the government's security forces finally decided to take action, they descended on Imbaba with swift and painful vengeance, sweeping up hundreds of citizens in what EOHR describes as a campaign of "collective punishment." At first, Imbaba residents welcomed the crackdown. But by the end of the first two months, after reports of torture of women and children even appeared in the mainstream press, a popular rhyming slogan had started to circulate around Cairo: "The hell of the Muslim groups is better than the police's heaven. " In its zeal, according to the human rights group, the government punished innocent and guilty alike. Children were beaten to extract information about their relatives. The report cites the case of a nine-year-old boy who was detained and asked the whereabouts of his older brother. When he said he did not know, he was severely beaten. The police then caught the older brother and forced the nine-year-old to watch his brother being tortured. The boy told the EOHR: "I saw my brother bleeding from the mouth and he couldn't stand on his feet. An officer was beating him with a piece of wood. " Even the semiofficial newspaper Al Gumhuria reported on Dec. 19, 1992, that 27 children between the ages of 8 and 12 were released by the police following varying periods of detention. Women also were abused. The report says, "Some of the women held were subject to severe torture by the police officers of Imbaba police station for the whole duration of their detention which included beatings with a rod and the handling of genitals and forcing them out of their clothes. This has sometimes occurred in the presence of the accused to force them to confess. . . "
Freedom House Grades Countries On Individual and Social FreedomsFreedom House, a 52-year-old nonprofit human rights organization based in New York, published its fourth annual comparative survey of freedom in the January-February issue of Freedom Review. The survey rates 186 countries according to their relative levels of political and social freedom. Its findings are based on reports by other human rights organizations, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, as well as on information provided by indigenous opposition groups and individuals. The survey rates all countries or territories on a seven-category scale for political rights and for civil liberties. At the top of the scale, countries rated "one" come closest to the ideals indicated by the checklist questions, beginning with free and fair elections. The countries in category seven allow virtually no political rights and are characterized by extremely oppressive regimes. The checklist for civil liberties includes such questions as: Are there free and independent media, literature and other cultural expressions? Is there open public discussion and free private discussion? Survey author Joseph Ryan explains in his introduction that Freedom House "does not have a culture-bound view of democracy and rejects the idea that only Europeans and people of European descent qualify as democratic, i.e. free countries can have competitive political systems based on competing family groups and person alities rather than political parties." An interesting aspect of the survey is that it provides a separate category for countries with disputed territory, such as Israel (occupied territories), the United Kingdom (Northern Ireland) and Iraq (Kurdistan). These countries are given two ratings, one for the "mother country" and the other for the territory it controls and/or administers. In the case of Israel, for example, Israel proper receives a rating of 2 2 (free), but the occupied territories receive a rating of 6 6 (not free). One might infer from this that Freedom House means to absolve such countries of their responsibility for human rights abuses they commit within the disputed territory. Why not rate countries based on their total human rights record, not on a partial one? In the case of Iraq, the disputed territory receives a better rating than the country as a whole. Iraq receives the lowest rating, 77 (not free), while Kurdistan is rated 45 (partly free). Since the Gulf war, Iraqi Kurdistan has held free elections under the protection of coalition forces, and now has a relatively independent government. Defending his organization's approach, Ryan asserts that in the view of Freedom House, giving two separate ratings is not meant to imply that the "mother country" is not responsible for conditions within the territory it administers. Rather, separating the two is meant to come across as a criticism. "We think it packs more of a punch," he said. Below are the Freedom House ratings of Middle Eastern and Islamic countries and some of their immediate neighbors. The first number indicates political rights (PR) and the second civil liberties (CL). To provide a benchmark, we have included the United Kingdom (with its disputed territory of Northern Ireland) as well.
Kudos for KuwaitisAccording to the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, the human rights situation in Kuwait has improved since the reestablishment of the Kuwaiti parliament following the October 1992 elections. One of the parliament's first achievements was to organize a Human Rights Committee of seven parliamentarians chaired by the Hon. Mubarak Al-Adwani. The committee receives complaints from the general public, carries out independent inquiries, and may subpoena government officials to appear before it. It has been tasked with preparing recommendations on several pressing issues, including the issue of stateless Arabs (Bidoon) living in Kuwait, the need to improve appalling conditions in Kuwaiti prisons, and the problem of the abuse of domestic servants. Recently, for example, the committee staged a public visit to Talha Deportation Prison, where non-Kuwaitis awaiting deportation are incarcerated, thus drawing public attention to unbearable conditions and charges of indefinite detention without charge or trial. In addition, the Lawyers Committee reports, "The new parliament has embarked on an ambitious legislative program that would address many of the underlying structural problems that contribute to human rights abuse in Kuwait." Another pressing problem is the need for an independent judiciary. A draft law has been formulated to help create such an entity. The law would transfer control over the appointment and dismissal of judges from the Minister of Justice (who is currently appointed by the emir) to an independent judicial body, the High Judicial Council. The High Judicial Council nominates the members of the Constitutional Court. According to the Lawyers' Committee, "An independent Constitutional Court would be a powerful safeguard for the primacy of constitutional principles and the rule of law. " It would protect individuals and groups against arbitrary extra-constitutional actions by the ruling family. "Kuwait is on the verge of taking an important step toward institutionalizing protections essential for the preservation of the rule of law," writes the Lawyers Committee. Andrea W Lorenz is the features editor of the Washington Report. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||