Police – The Observatory For Defenders https://observatoryfordefenders.org Wed, 11 Mar 2026 13:43:57 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/cropped-OB-eye-orange-32x32.png Police – The Observatory For Defenders https://observatoryfordefenders.org 32 32 Mauritanie : arrestations, détentions et poursuites judiciaires arbitraires contre huit défenseur·es des droits humains anti-esclavagistes https://observatoryfordefenders.org/alert/mauritanie-arrestations-detentions-et-poursuites-judiciaires-arbitraires-contre-huit-defenseur%c2%b7es-des-droits-humains-anti-esclavagistes/ Wed, 11 Mar 2026 09:01:08 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=24504 Paris, Genève, Nouakchott, le 6 mars 2026. Au cours du mois de février, à la suite de la révélation d’un cas présumé d’esclavage impliquant une jeune enfant de 11 ans à Nouakchott et d’un rassemblement devant le commissariat de Police de Dar Naïm 2 de Nouakchott, six membres de l’IRA, dont une journaliste, ainsi que deux lanceuses d’alerte ont été arrêté·es et poursuivi·es par les autorités mauritaniennes. Iels sont accusé·es de « diffusion de fausses informations » et « association de malfaiteurs ». Le 4 février 2026, des membres de l’IRA ont rendu publiques des allégations relatives à l’asservissement de Nouha Mohamed, une jeune fille de la communauté haratine âgée de 11 ans, qui aurait été maintenue en situation de servitude domestique par un couple dans la capitale, Nouakchott. Faisant suite à cette dénonciation, les autorités ont ouvert une enquête et les personnes soupçonnées ont été brièvement placées en garde à vue avant d’être relâchées. Le 6 février 2026, durant l’interrogatoire des personnes soupçonnées dans l’affaire d’esclavage présumé, des militant·es de l’IRA se sont rassemblé·es devant le commissariat de Police de Dar Naïm 2 à Nouakchott afin d’exiger que les investigations soient menées de manière diligente et que la victime présumée et sa famille soient protégées. Les forces de police auraient alors dispersé violemment les militant·es présent·es devant le commissariat, blessant plusieurs d’entre elles et eux. Dans ce contexte, la journaliste et membre de la commission de communication de l’IRA, Warda Souleymane, a publié sur les réseaux sociaux, le 6 février, une déclaration dénonçant les violences subies par les manifestant·es ainsi que les conditions de détention de certain·es militant·es. Suite à une plainte de la Haute Autorité de la Presse et de l’Audiovisuel (HAPA) le 10 février 2026, elle a été convoquée puis arrêtée par la police à Nouakchott et placée en détention à la prison des femmes de Nouakchott, où elle demeure détenue pour diffusion présumée de fausses informations. Le 13 février 2026, Lemrabet Mahmoud, chef de la section de l’IRA à Nouadhibou, a, à son tour, été arrêté par les autorités et placé en détention dans la prison de Nouadhibou, après avoir dénoncé sur les réseaux sociaux l’arrestation de Warda Souleymane. Inculpé pour « incitation à la haine et à la discrimination » et pour « utilisation de moyens électroniques pour diffuser des discours haineux », M. Mahmoud a comparu le 5 mars devant le tribunal de Nouadhibou, qui l’a condamné à un an de prison avec sursis. Le 16 février 2026, les lanceuses d’alerte Lalla Vatma et Rachida Saleck ainsi que les membres de l’IRA Abdallahi Abou Diop, chargé de la protection des droits humains, Elhaj Elid, coordinateur national des sections, Bounass Hmeida, coordonnateur national adjoint, et Med Vadel Aleyatt, chef de section dans la commune de Koumbi Saleh, ont été arrêté·es après avoir été convoqué·es par la police de Dar Naïm. Après leur garde à vue au commissariat de Dar Naim 2, iels ont comparu devant un juge d’instruction du tribunal de Nouakchott Nord (cabinet n°2) le 23 février, qui les a inculpé·es pour « diffusion de fausses informations » et d’« association de malfaiteurs » et placé·es sous mandat de dépôt. Les hommes ont été transférés à la prison centrale de Nouakchott, communément appelée « prison des Salafistes », tandis que les deux lanceuses d’alerte ont été incarcérées à la prison des femmes de Nouakchott. Ces 6 détenu•es ont comparu le 4 mars devant le juge d’instruction pour l’interrogatoire sur le fond, lors duquel iels ont soulevé son incompétence. Les avocat·es de la défense contestent la base juridique de ces poursuites, estimant qu’elles visent à criminaliser les personnes ayant dénoncé un cas d’esclavage. L’Observatoire relève que la procédure aurait été marquée par plusieurs irrégularités, notamment des transferts de compétence entre juridictions, les requalifications successives susmentionnées et des restrictions dans l’accès à l’assistance juridique et aux soins médicaux pour certain·es détenu·es, alors même que plusieurs auraient été blessé·es lors de leur arrestation et subi des sévices corporels et psychologiques en détention. Or, la Mauritanie a ratifié la Convention contre la torture (CAT) en 2004 et son Protocole facultatif (OPCAT) en 2012, et a mis en place en 2015 un Mécanisme National de Prévention de la Torture (MNP), en vertu desquels elle s’est engagée à prévenir et punir ces pratiques. Ces événements s’inscrivent dans un contexte plus large de pressions récurrentes contre les défenseur·es des droits humains engagé·es dans la lutte contre l’esclavage en Mauritanie et en particulier contre les membres de l’IRA. Bien que l’esclavage ait été aboli en 1981 et qualifié de crime contre l’humanité par la loi de 2015, des organisations internationales et de la société civile continuent de documenter des pratiques esclavagistes affectant principalement la communauté haratine. A cet égard, les victimes, militant·es anti-esclavagistes et lanceur·ses d’alerte qui dénoncent ces faits sont régulièrement exposé·es à des représailles et à des poursuites judiciaires. Entre 2010 et 2018, le président de l’IRA et député Biram Dah Abeid a été arrêté à plusieurs reprises, notamment en août 2018, sur la base d’accusations liées à l’incitation à la violence et au discours de haine. De même, illustration d’un harcèlement judiciaire acharné, Warda Souleymane avait été arrêtée par les autorités mauritaniennes le 31 octobre 2025, à son retour de Banjul (Gambie), pour avoir dénoncé publiquement la discrimination raciale à l’encontre des populations noires mauritaniennes lors de la 85ᵉ session de la Commission africaine des droits de l’Homme et des peuples (CADHP), avant d’être libérée sous contrôle judiciaire le 6 novembre 2025. Le 28 novembre 2025, neuf personnes, dont Dieynaba Ndiom, défenseure des droits des femmes, responsable des subventions pour l’Initiative Pananetugri pour le Bien-Être de la Femme (IPBF), avaient été arbitrairement arrêté·es avant d’être libéré·es sous caution et contrôle judiciaire le 5 décembre 2025. Ces arrestations répétées suscitent de vives préoccupations quant à l’utilisation du système judiciaire pour restreindre l’action légitime de défense des droits humains en Mauritanie. L’Observatoire note que l’arrestation et la poursuite de défenseur·es pour avoir dénoncé des faits présumés d’esclavage et participé à un rassemblement pacifique constituent des restrictions aux droits reconnus par le Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques (PIDCP) et à la Charte africaine des droits de l’homme et des peuples, ratifiés par la Mauritanie. L’invocation d’infractions telles que la « diffusion de fausses informations » ou l’« association de malfaiteurs » afin de sanctionner la dénonciation de violations graves des droits humains soulève de sérieuses inquiétudes quant à la possibilité des défenseur·es de poursuivre leurs activités sans représailles, et contrevient à ce titre aux dispositions contenues dans la Déclaration des Nations unies sur les défenseur·es des droits humains. L’Observatoire condamne ainsi fermement l’arrestation, la détention et le harcèlement judiciaire visant les membres de l’IRA, dont la journaliste Warda Souleymane, ainsi que les deux lanceuses d’alerte, qui semblent directement liés à leurs activités légitimes et pacifiques de défense des droits humains. L’Observatoire appelle les autorités mauritaniennes à procéder à leur libération immédiate, à abandonner les charges à leur encontre et à garantir que l’ensemble des défenseur·es des droits humains puisse exercer leurs activités sans entrave ni représailles.]]> Paris, Genève, Nouakchott, le 6 mars 2026. Au cours du mois de février, à la suite de la révélation d’un cas présumé d’esclavage impliquant une jeune enfant de 11 ans à Nouakchott et d’un rassemblement devant le commissariat de Police de Dar Naïm 2 de Nouakchott, six membres de l’IRA, dont une journaliste, ainsi que deux lanceuses d’alerte ont été arrêté·es et poursuivi·es par les autorités mauritaniennes. Iels sont accusé·es de « diffusion de fausses informations » et « association de malfaiteurs ». Le 4 février 2026, des membres de l’IRA ont rendu publiques des allégations relatives à l’asservissement de Nouha Mohamed, une jeune fille de la communauté haratine âgée de 11 ans, qui aurait été maintenue en situation de servitude domestique par un couple dans la capitale, Nouakchott. Faisant suite à cette dénonciation, les autorités ont ouvert une enquête et les personnes soupçonnées ont été brièvement placées en garde à vue avant d’être relâchées. Le 6 février 2026, durant l’interrogatoire des personnes soupçonnées dans l’affaire d’esclavage présumé, des militant·es de l’IRA se sont rassemblé·es devant le commissariat de Police de Dar Naïm 2 à Nouakchott afin d’exiger que les investigations soient menées de manière diligente et que la victime présumée et sa famille soient protégées. Les forces de police auraient alors dispersé violemment les militant·es présent·es devant le commissariat, blessant plusieurs d’entre elles et eux. Dans ce contexte, la journaliste et membre de la commission de communication de l’IRA, Warda Souleymane, a publié sur les réseaux sociaux, le 6 février, une déclaration dénonçant les violences subies par les manifestant·es ainsi que les conditions de détention de certain·es militant·es. Suite à une plainte de la Haute Autorité de la Presse et de l’Audiovisuel (HAPA) le 10 février 2026, elle a été convoquée puis arrêtée par la police à Nouakchott et placée en détention à la prison des femmes de Nouakchott, où elle demeure détenue pour diffusion présumée de fausses informations. Le 13 février 2026, Lemrabet Mahmoud, chef de la section de l’IRA à Nouadhibou, a, à son tour, été arrêté par les autorités et placé en détention dans la prison de Nouadhibou, après avoir dénoncé sur les réseaux sociaux l’arrestation de Warda Souleymane. Inculpé pour « incitation à la haine et à la discrimination » et pour « utilisation de moyens électroniques pour diffuser des discours haineux », M. Mahmoud a comparu le 5 mars devant le tribunal de Nouadhibou, qui l’a condamné à un an de prison avec sursis. Le 16 février 2026, les lanceuses d’alerte Lalla Vatma et Rachida Saleck ainsi que les membres de l’IRA Abdallahi Abou Diop, chargé de la protection des droits humains, Elhaj Elid, coordinateur national des sections, Bounass Hmeida, coordonnateur national adjoint, et Med Vadel Aleyatt, chef de section dans la commune de Koumbi Saleh, ont été arrêté·es après avoir été convoqué·es par la police de Dar Naïm. Après leur garde à vue au commissariat de Dar Naim 2, iels ont comparu devant un juge d’instruction du tribunal de Nouakchott Nord (cabinet n°2) le 23 février, qui les a inculpé·es pour « diffusion de fausses informations » et d’« association de malfaiteurs » et placé·es sous mandat de dépôt. Les hommes ont été transférés à la prison centrale de Nouakchott, communément appelée « prison des Salafistes », tandis que les deux lanceuses d’alerte ont été incarcérées à la prison des femmes de Nouakchott. Ces 6 détenu•es ont comparu le 4 mars devant le juge d’instruction pour l’interrogatoire sur le fond, lors duquel iels ont soulevé son incompétence. Les avocat·es de la défense contestent la base juridique de ces poursuites, estimant qu’elles visent à criminaliser les personnes ayant dénoncé un cas d’esclavage. L’Observatoire relève que la procédure aurait été marquée par plusieurs irrégularités, notamment des transferts de compétence entre juridictions, les requalifications successives susmentionnées et des restrictions dans l’accès à l’assistance juridique et aux soins médicaux pour certain·es détenu·es, alors même que plusieurs auraient été blessé·es lors de leur arrestation et subi des sévices corporels et psychologiques en détention. Or, la Mauritanie a ratifié la Convention contre la torture (CAT) en 2004 et son Protocole facultatif (OPCAT) en 2012, et a mis en place en 2015 un Mécanisme National de Prévention de la Torture (MNP), en vertu desquels elle s’est engagée à prévenir et punir ces pratiques. Ces événements s’inscrivent dans un contexte plus large de pressions récurrentes contre les défenseur·es des droits humains engagé·es dans la lutte contre l’esclavage en Mauritanie et en particulier contre les membres de l’IRA. Bien que l’esclavage ait été aboli en 1981 et qualifié de crime contre l’humanité par la loi de 2015, des organisations internationales et de la société civile continuent de documenter des pratiques esclavagistes affectant principalement la communauté haratine. A cet égard, les victimes, militant·es anti-esclavagistes et lanceur·ses d’alerte qui dénoncent ces faits sont régulièrement exposé·es à des représailles et à des poursuites judiciaires. Entre 2010 et 2018, le président de l’IRA et député Biram Dah Abeid a été arrêté à plusieurs reprises, notamment en août 2018, sur la base d’accusations liées à l’incitation à la violence et au discours de haine. De même, illustration d’un harcèlement judiciaire acharné, Warda Souleymane avait été arrêtée par les autorités mauritaniennes le 31 octobre 2025, à son retour de Banjul (Gambie), pour avoir dénoncé publiquement la discrimination raciale à l’encontre des populations noires mauritaniennes lors de la 85ᵉ session de la Commission africaine des droits de l’Homme et des peuples (CADHP), avant d’être libérée sous contrôle judiciaire le 6 novembre 2025. Le 28 novembre 2025, neuf personnes, dont Dieynaba Ndiom, défenseure des droits des femmes, responsable des subventions pour l’Initiative Pananetugri pour le Bien-Être de la Femme (IPBF), avaient été arbitrairement arrêté·es avant d’être libéré·es sous caution et contrôle judiciaire le 5 décembre 2025. Ces arrestations répétées suscitent de vives préoccupations quant à l’utilisation du système judiciaire pour restreindre l’action légitime de défense des droits humains en Mauritanie. L’Observatoire note que l’arrestation et la poursuite de défenseur·es pour avoir dénoncé des faits présumés d’esclavage et participé à un rassemblement pacifique constituent des restrictions aux droits reconnus par le Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques (PIDCP) et à la Charte africaine des droits de l’homme et des peuples, ratifiés par la Mauritanie. L’invocation d’infractions telles que la « diffusion de fausses informations » ou l’« association de malfaiteurs » afin de sanctionner la dénonciation de violations graves des droits humains soulève de sérieuses inquiétudes quant à la possibilité des défenseur·es de poursuivre leurs activités sans représailles, et contrevient à ce titre aux dispositions contenues dans la Déclaration des Nations unies sur les défenseur·es des droits humains. L’Observatoire condamne ainsi fermement l’arrestation, la détention et le harcèlement judiciaire visant les membres de l’IRA, dont la journaliste Warda Souleymane, ainsi que les deux lanceuses d’alerte, qui semblent directement liés à leurs activités légitimes et pacifiques de défense des droits humains. L’Observatoire appelle les autorités mauritaniennes à procéder à leur libération immédiate, à abandonner les charges à leur encontre et à garantir que l’ensemble des défenseur·es des droits humains puisse exercer leurs activités sans entrave ni représailles.]]> Azerbaijan: Unlawfully Detained Women Journalists Face Sexual Violence amidst On-going Crackdown on Civil Society https://observatoryfordefenders.org/alert/azerbaijan-unlawfully-detained-women-journalists-face-sexual-violence-amidst-on-going-crackdown-on-civil-society/ Thu, 05 Feb 2026 10:59:08 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=24393 5 February 2026- The Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (OMCT-FIDH) and the undersigned organisations, express their serious concern regarding the recent letter of Azerbaijani journalist Aysel Umudova sent to media outlets from Baku Pre-trial Investigation Facility, in which she has reported being subjected to sexual harassment and ill-treatment by police officers during her arrest on 6 December 2024. Umudova’s letter published in December 2025 echoes the earlier case of a journalist and human rights defender, Ulviyya (Ali) Guliyeva, who faced arbitrary detention, torture, and explicit rape threats by a police officer while in police custody on 6 May 2025. Umudova’s letter describes her arbitrary detention in connection with the so-called “Meydan TV case”, three-hour long transfer to Baku, denial of timely access to legal and medical assistance, and degrading conditions of detention. During transportation, while experiencing a panic attack and in a state of acute vulnerability, she reported having been subjected to an “unwanted physical contact”, constituting sexual harassment according to Article 40 of the Council of Europe Istanbul Convention, by a police officer sitting next to her in a police car, an incident she clearly resisted, and which has had lasting psychological consequences. Upon arrival at the Baku City Police Department, she was further subjected to intimidation and coercion, including threats related to unlocking her phone, before being taken to the investigator. Umudova has stated that it took her approximately one year to stabilise and bring herself to publicly disclose the psychological impact of these events, which continue to affect her well-being. These allegations are similar to the case of a journalist and human rights defender, Ulviyya (Ali) Guliyeva, who has faced sustained harassment in connection with the same so-called “Meydan TV case”. Since early 2025, she has been repeatedly summoned for questioning, subjected to an unlawful travel ban, and ultimately detained on 6 May 2025. While in police custody, she reported being subjected to beatings and explicit rape threats by a police officer aimed at forcing her to disclose passwords to her electronic devices. Her apartment was searched in the absence of a lawyer, and evidence allegedly discovered during that search was later used against her in criminal proceedings. Following that treatment, she submitted contemporaneous handwritten complaints to her lawyer and the authorities. Thereafter, she described ongoing symptoms such as severe headaches, vomiting, dizziness, and fainting, which also aggravated her pre-existing mental health condition. Despite the seriousness of these allegations and the clear risk of long-term harm, the authorities have refused to order an independent forensic examination or provide adequate medical care. These events unfolded in relation to the “Meydan TV case”, under which on 6 December 2024 six journalists, including Aysel Umudova, and the head of Baku Journalism School were arrested and then remanded in custody on 8 December 2024 by the Baku City Khatai District Court. Under the same case, three other journalists were arrested on 5 February, 21 February, and 1 March 2025, and Ulviyya (Ali) Guliyeva was arrested on 6 May 2025. As the next hearing in the so-called “Meydan TV case” is scheduled for 6 February 2026 before the Baku Grave Crimes Court, these credible and consistent allegations raise serious concerns. In the continued absence of any effective, independent investigation, they call into question whether Azerbaijan’s judicial and investigative authorities will fulfil their duties to take prompt, meaningful, and independent accountability measures in response to such grave violations of fundamental rights and human dignity. Aysel Umudova and Ulviyya (Ali) Guliyeva, along with their journalist colleagues arrested and still remaining in custody in connection with the so-called “Meydan TV case”, have been charged under multiple provisions of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan, including illegal entrepreneurship and smuggling carried out by an organised group. These charges, which are widely regarded by independent observers as fabricated and politically motivated, have been systematically used against dozens of other journalists and civil society members in Azerbaijan over the past two years. The beatings, rape threats and sexual harassment against Guliyeva and Umudova constitute sexual and gender-based violence and the treatment they experienced violates the prohibition of torture and of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The authorities’ failure to investigate allegations of sexual harassment, sexual violence, and ill-treatment, together with their disregard of multiple requests for timely medical care and their failure to ensure independent investigations, constitutes a clear breach of their duty to prevent, investigate, and punish ill-treatment and sexual violence against women, contrary to Azerbaijan’s Constitution and other domestic law, as well as the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), all ratified by Azerbaijan. The cases of Aysel Umudova and Ulviyya (Ali) Guliyeva indicate a deeply troubling pattern within the broader context of politically motivated prosecutions in Azerbaijan, in which punitive pre-trial detention and sexual violence appear to be used as instruments to intimidate, silence, and punish human rights defenders and independent women journalists in Azerbaijan. We call on the authorities of Azerbaijan to:
  • Immediately and unconditionally release Ulviyya Guliyeva and Aysel Umudova and drop all politically motivated charges against them and other political prisoners;
  • Conduct independent, impartial, prompt, and effective investigations into allegations of torture, ill-treatment, sexual harassment, and other violations, in line with international standards, and ensure accountability for all those responsible;
  • Guarantee access to adequate, independent medical care, including specialist examinations, for both journalists;
  • End the judicial harassment of journalists, human rights defenders, and other critical voices in Azerbaijan with abusive criminal prosecutions.
We also urge Azerbaijan’s international partners, including the Council of Europe, the European Union, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and relevant United Nations bodies and Special Procedures, to:
  • Publicly condemn the arbitrary detention and sexual harassment of Ulviyya Guliyeva and Aysel Umudova and other political prisoners cases;
  • Raise their cases at the highest political levels;
  • Closely monitor court proceedings and detention conditions; and
  • Ensure that concrete and measurable progress in ending the crackdown on independent media and ensuring accountability for torture, ill-treatment and gender-based violence are central in all steps toward developing closer cooperation with Azerbaijan.
]]> 5 February 2026- The Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (OMCT-FIDH) and the undersigned organisations, express their serious concern regarding the recent letter of Azerbaijani journalist Aysel Umudova sent to media outlets from Baku Pre-trial Investigation Facility, in which she has reported being subjected to sexual harassment and ill-treatment by police officers during her arrest on 6 December 2024. Umudova’s letter published in December 2025 echoes the earlier case of a journalist and human rights defender, Ulviyya (Ali) Guliyeva, who faced arbitrary detention, torture, and explicit rape threats by a police officer while in police custody on 6 May 2025. Umudova’s letter describes her arbitrary detention in connection with the so-called “Meydan TV case”, three-hour long transfer to Baku, denial of timely access to legal and medical assistance, and degrading conditions of detention. During transportation, while experiencing a panic attack and in a state of acute vulnerability, she reported having been subjected to an “unwanted physical contact”, constituting sexual harassment according to Article 40 of the Council of Europe Istanbul Convention, by a police officer sitting next to her in a police car, an incident she clearly resisted, and which has had lasting psychological consequences. Upon arrival at the Baku City Police Department, she was further subjected to intimidation and coercion, including threats related to unlocking her phone, before being taken to the investigator. Umudova has stated that it took her approximately one year to stabilise and bring herself to publicly disclose the psychological impact of these events, which continue to affect her well-being. These allegations are similar to the case of a journalist and human rights defender, Ulviyya (Ali) Guliyeva, who has faced sustained harassment in connection with the same so-called “Meydan TV case”. Since early 2025, she has been repeatedly summoned for questioning, subjected to an unlawful travel ban, and ultimately detained on 6 May 2025. While in police custody, she reported being subjected to beatings and explicit rape threats by a police officer aimed at forcing her to disclose passwords to her electronic devices. Her apartment was searched in the absence of a lawyer, and evidence allegedly discovered during that search was later used against her in criminal proceedings. Following that treatment, she submitted contemporaneous handwritten complaints to her lawyer and the authorities. Thereafter, she described ongoing symptoms such as severe headaches, vomiting, dizziness, and fainting, which also aggravated her pre-existing mental health condition. Despite the seriousness of these allegations and the clear risk of long-term harm, the authorities have refused to order an independent forensic examination or provide adequate medical care. These events unfolded in relation to the “Meydan TV case”, under which on 6 December 2024 six journalists, including Aysel Umudova, and the head of Baku Journalism School were arrested and then remanded in custody on 8 December 2024 by the Baku City Khatai District Court. Under the same case, three other journalists were arrested on 5 February, 21 February, and 1 March 2025, and Ulviyya (Ali) Guliyeva was arrested on 6 May 2025. As the next hearing in the so-called “Meydan TV case” is scheduled for 6 February 2026 before the Baku Grave Crimes Court, these credible and consistent allegations raise serious concerns. In the continued absence of any effective, independent investigation, they call into question whether Azerbaijan’s judicial and investigative authorities will fulfil their duties to take prompt, meaningful, and independent accountability measures in response to such grave violations of fundamental rights and human dignity. Aysel Umudova and Ulviyya (Ali) Guliyeva, along with their journalist colleagues arrested and still remaining in custody in connection with the so-called “Meydan TV case”, have been charged under multiple provisions of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan, including illegal entrepreneurship and smuggling carried out by an organised group. These charges, which are widely regarded by independent observers as fabricated and politically motivated, have been systematically used against dozens of other journalists and civil society members in Azerbaijan over the past two years. The beatings, rape threats and sexual harassment against Guliyeva and Umudova constitute sexual and gender-based violence and the treatment they experienced violates the prohibition of torture and of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The authorities’ failure to investigate allegations of sexual harassment, sexual violence, and ill-treatment, together with their disregard of multiple requests for timely medical care and their failure to ensure independent investigations, constitutes a clear breach of their duty to prevent, investigate, and punish ill-treatment and sexual violence against women, contrary to Azerbaijan’s Constitution and other domestic law, as well as the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), the Convention Against Torture (CAT) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), all ratified by Azerbaijan. The cases of Aysel Umudova and Ulviyya (Ali) Guliyeva indicate a deeply troubling pattern within the broader context of politically motivated prosecutions in Azerbaijan, in which punitive pre-trial detention and sexual violence appear to be used as instruments to intimidate, silence, and punish human rights defenders and independent women journalists in Azerbaijan. We call on the authorities of Azerbaijan to:
  • Immediately and unconditionally release Ulviyya Guliyeva and Aysel Umudova and drop all politically motivated charges against them and other political prisoners;
  • Conduct independent, impartial, prompt, and effective investigations into allegations of torture, ill-treatment, sexual harassment, and other violations, in line with international standards, and ensure accountability for all those responsible;
  • Guarantee access to adequate, independent medical care, including specialist examinations, for both journalists;
  • End the judicial harassment of journalists, human rights defenders, and other critical voices in Azerbaijan with abusive criminal prosecutions.
We also urge Azerbaijan’s international partners, including the Council of Europe, the European Union, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe and relevant United Nations bodies and Special Procedures, to:
  • Publicly condemn the arbitrary detention and sexual harassment of Ulviyya Guliyeva and Aysel Umudova and other political prisoners cases;
  • Raise their cases at the highest political levels;
  • Closely monitor court proceedings and detention conditions; and
  • Ensure that concrete and measurable progress in ending the crackdown on independent media and ensuring accountability for torture, ill-treatment and gender-based violence are central in all steps toward developing closer cooperation with Azerbaijan.
]]> El Salvador: Más de cien organizaciones de sociedad civil denuncian la detención arbitraria de la defensora Ruth López y demandan la garantía de sus derechos humanos https://observatoryfordefenders.org/alert/el-salvador-mas-de-cien-organizaciones-de-sociedad-civil-denuncian-la-detencion-arbitraria-de-la-defensora-ruth-lopez-y-demandan-la-garantia-de-sus-derechos-humanos/ Wed, 21 May 2025 17:00:05 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=23482 Más de 100 organizaciones de derechos humanos de Americas y Europa, entre ellas la Organización Mundial Contra la Tortura (OMCT) y la Federación Internacional por los Derechos Humanos (FIDH), en el marco del Observatorio para la Protección de los Defensores de Derechos Humanos, denuncian la detención arbitraria de la defensora de derechos humanos Ruth López y exigen el respeto y la garantía de sus derechos humanos. Más de cien organizaciones de la sociedad civil de las Américas y Europa expresamos nuestra profunda preocupación e indignación ante el arresto de Ruth López, abogada salvadoreña y jefa de la Unidad Anticorrupción de Cristosal. La noche del domingo 18 de mayo, agentes de la Policía Nacional Civil de El Salvador se presentaron a su domicilio y, desde entonces, se desconoce su paradero. Hasta el momento, Ruth López permanece privada de libertad sin acceso a representación legal ni comunicación con su familia. Esta práctica, que impide a las personas conocer su situación jurídica y ejercer su derecho a la defensa, constituye una grave violación al debido proceso y configura una desaparición forzada. Ruth López es una defensora de derechos humanos, que ha estado involucrada en múltiples casos clave contra la corrupción y la injusticia en El Salvador, incluyendo investigaciones a la actual administración del presidente Nayib Bukele. La Fiscalía ha señalado que su arresto está relacionado con hechos de corrupción durante la administración de Sánchez Cerén. Como organizaciones de la sociedad civil, conocemos de cerca, y valoramos el trabajo de Cristosal. Expresamos nuestra profunda preocupación y denunciamos este hecho como parte de un patrón preocupante de criminalización contra voces críticas e independientes. En el contexto de las violaciones masivas a los derechos humanos de las personas privadas de libertad: Demandamos al Estado salvadoreño:
  • Informar sobre el lugar donde Ruth López se encuentra privada de libertad.
  • Permitir a Ruth López tener contacto con su equipo de abogados.
  • Garantizar la integridad física y psíquica de Ruth López.
Nos preocupa la pérdida de independencia de la administración de justicia y la garantía de los derechos de las personas privadas de libertad en El Salvador. Hacemos un llamado a la comunidad internacional, a defensores y defensoras de derechos humanos, y a todas las personas comprometidas con la justicia a elevar nuestras voces por Ruth López, una mujer valiente que ha dedicado su vida a la defensa de los derechos humanos y la lucha contra la impunidad en su país.]]> Más de 100 organizaciones de derechos humanos de Americas y Europa, entre ellas la Organización Mundial Contra la Tortura (OMCT) y la Federación Internacional por los Derechos Humanos (FIDH), en el marco del Observatorio para la Protección de los Defensores de Derechos Humanos, denuncian la detención arbitraria de la defensora de derechos humanos Ruth López y exigen el respeto y la garantía de sus derechos humanos. Más de cien organizaciones de la sociedad civil de las Américas y Europa expresamos nuestra profunda preocupación e indignación ante el arresto de Ruth López, abogada salvadoreña y jefa de la Unidad Anticorrupción de Cristosal. La noche del domingo 18 de mayo, agentes de la Policía Nacional Civil de El Salvador se presentaron a su domicilio y, desde entonces, se desconoce su paradero. Hasta el momento, Ruth López permanece privada de libertad sin acceso a representación legal ni comunicación con su familia. Esta práctica, que impide a las personas conocer su situación jurídica y ejercer su derecho a la defensa, constituye una grave violación al debido proceso y configura una desaparición forzada. Ruth López es una defensora de derechos humanos, que ha estado involucrada en múltiples casos clave contra la corrupción y la injusticia en El Salvador, incluyendo investigaciones a la actual administración del presidente Nayib Bukele. La Fiscalía ha señalado que su arresto está relacionado con hechos de corrupción durante la administración de Sánchez Cerén. Como organizaciones de la sociedad civil, conocemos de cerca, y valoramos el trabajo de Cristosal. Expresamos nuestra profunda preocupación y denunciamos este hecho como parte de un patrón preocupante de criminalización contra voces críticas e independientes. En el contexto de las violaciones masivas a los derechos humanos de las personas privadas de libertad: Demandamos al Estado salvadoreño:
  • Informar sobre el lugar donde Ruth López se encuentra privada de libertad.
  • Permitir a Ruth López tener contacto con su equipo de abogados.
  • Garantizar la integridad física y psíquica de Ruth López.
Nos preocupa la pérdida de independencia de la administración de justicia y la garantía de los derechos de las personas privadas de libertad en El Salvador. Hacemos un llamado a la comunidad internacional, a defensores y defensoras de derechos humanos, y a todas las personas comprometidas con la justicia a elevar nuestras voces por Ruth López, una mujer valiente que ha dedicado su vida a la defensa de los derechos humanos y la lucha contra la impunidad en su país.]]> Uganda: Arbitrary suspension and detention of student leaders https://observatoryfordefenders.org/alert/uganda-arbitrary-suspension-and-detention-of-student-leaders/ Tue, 06 May 2025 09:58:40 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=23324 27 students at Kyambogo University in Kampala, Uganda, including Akiso Benjamin, the Guild President and a social justice and environmental activist and Kabuni Evelyne, Murozi Abel, Kiwumulo Paul, Winnie Nansenja, and Muguluma Wahab, student leaders defending student rights at the university. On 23 April, 2025, student leaders at Kyambogo University in Kampala convened a general assembly to address issues affecting students, including late registration surcharges, missing marks, delayed release of results, and the request for students who had paid at least 70% of their tuition to be allowed to sit for end-of-semester exams. During this assembly, police officers stormed the meeting and violently disrupted it by firing tear gas canisters and live bullets. Peaceful students were dispersed across the campus, and 20 of them were brutally arrested by armed police forces. As they were taken from Kyambogo University to Jinja Road Police Station in Kampala, some were subjected to torture by being forced under police trucks and kicked by officers. On 24 April, ten of the 20 arrested students were released from the police station, while the remaining ten, including their leader, Akiso Benjamin, continued to be held in custody. On 25 April, the ten students still detained were brought before a Grade One Magistrate at Nakawa – one of the five divisions of Kampala -, to be charged with three counts under the Penal Code : “incitement to violence” (article 51), “unlawful assembly” (articles 65-75), and “participating in a riot” (articles 65-75). They were subsequently remanded to Luzira Maximum Security Prison in Kampala, where several contracted illnesses. On 29 April, 2025, all ten students were granted cash bail set at UGX 100,000 each, despite their limited financial means as unemployed students. On the same day, these ten students, along with seven other students, were suspended from the university for 30 days for “disrupting university activities”. Among the 17 suspended students, six are Guild leaders. The suspension, effective 29 April, prohibits them from accessing university premises, thereby preventing them from sitting for their examinations scheduled for 7 May. This disciplinary measure was imposed without affording the students a fair hearing before the University Council’s Welfare and Student Affairs Committee. The Observatory strongly condemns the ongoing judicial and administrative harassment of students peacefully advocating for their rights, which appear to be aimed only at restricting their freedom of peaceful assembly guaranteed under article 29 (1) of the Constitution of Uganda. Persistent reports of peaceful assemblies continuing to be unduly prohibited and repressed, relying on disparate provisions, were outlined in 2023 in the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Committee’s concluding observations on the second periodic report of Uganda, demonstrating a worrying trend. The Observatory is also worried about the disproportionate use of force by police officers in response to peaceful assemblies. This concern echoes that of the UN Human Rights Committee which has raised alarm over reports of assemblies being frequently dispersed through disproportionate force. The United Nations Committee against Torture has already expressed in 2022 deep concerns that torture and ill-treatment were widespread and frequently practised in Uganda, and recommended the immediate suspension of suspected perpetrators from duty while investigations are carried out. The Observatory urges the Ugandan authorities to immediately put an end to any act of harassment, at the judicial and administrative level, and any act of intimidation against peaceful students. The Observatory requests the authorities to drop all charges against the 20 students and quash their suspension without delay to ensure they are able to sit for their final examinations on 7 May. The Observatory further calls on the Ugandan authorities to carry out immediate, thorough, and impartial investigations into the acts of torture and ill-treatment committed against the students who participated in the general assembly on 23 April, as well as those perpetrated against the 20 arrested students, and to bring the perpetrators to justice in accordance with international human rights standards.]]> 27 students at Kyambogo University in Kampala, Uganda, including Akiso Benjamin, the Guild President and a social justice and environmental activist and Kabuni Evelyne, Murozi Abel, Kiwumulo Paul, Winnie Nansenja, and Muguluma Wahab, student leaders defending student rights at the university. On 23 April, 2025, student leaders at Kyambogo University in Kampala convened a general assembly to address issues affecting students, including late registration surcharges, missing marks, delayed release of results, and the request for students who had paid at least 70% of their tuition to be allowed to sit for end-of-semester exams. During this assembly, police officers stormed the meeting and violently disrupted it by firing tear gas canisters and live bullets. Peaceful students were dispersed across the campus, and 20 of them were brutally arrested by armed police forces. As they were taken from Kyambogo University to Jinja Road Police Station in Kampala, some were subjected to torture by being forced under police trucks and kicked by officers. On 24 April, ten of the 20 arrested students were released from the police station, while the remaining ten, including their leader, Akiso Benjamin, continued to be held in custody. On 25 April, the ten students still detained were brought before a Grade One Magistrate at Nakawa – one of the five divisions of Kampala -, to be charged with three counts under the Penal Code : “incitement to violence” (article 51), “unlawful assembly” (articles 65-75), and “participating in a riot” (articles 65-75). They were subsequently remanded to Luzira Maximum Security Prison in Kampala, where several contracted illnesses. On 29 April, 2025, all ten students were granted cash bail set at UGX 100,000 each, despite their limited financial means as unemployed students. On the same day, these ten students, along with seven other students, were suspended from the university for 30 days for “disrupting university activities”. Among the 17 suspended students, six are Guild leaders. The suspension, effective 29 April, prohibits them from accessing university premises, thereby preventing them from sitting for their examinations scheduled for 7 May. This disciplinary measure was imposed without affording the students a fair hearing before the University Council’s Welfare and Student Affairs Committee. The Observatory strongly condemns the ongoing judicial and administrative harassment of students peacefully advocating for their rights, which appear to be aimed only at restricting their freedom of peaceful assembly guaranteed under article 29 (1) of the Constitution of Uganda. Persistent reports of peaceful assemblies continuing to be unduly prohibited and repressed, relying on disparate provisions, were outlined in 2023 in the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Committee’s concluding observations on the second periodic report of Uganda, demonstrating a worrying trend. The Observatory is also worried about the disproportionate use of force by police officers in response to peaceful assemblies. This concern echoes that of the UN Human Rights Committee which has raised alarm over reports of assemblies being frequently dispersed through disproportionate force. The United Nations Committee against Torture has already expressed in 2022 deep concerns that torture and ill-treatment were widespread and frequently practised in Uganda, and recommended the immediate suspension of suspected perpetrators from duty while investigations are carried out. The Observatory urges the Ugandan authorities to immediately put an end to any act of harassment, at the judicial and administrative level, and any act of intimidation against peaceful students. The Observatory requests the authorities to drop all charges against the 20 students and quash their suspension without delay to ensure they are able to sit for their final examinations on 7 May. The Observatory further calls on the Ugandan authorities to carry out immediate, thorough, and impartial investigations into the acts of torture and ill-treatment committed against the students who participated in the general assembly on 23 April, as well as those perpetrated against the 20 arrested students, and to bring the perpetrators to justice in accordance with international human rights standards.]]> Serbia: European civil society stands in solidarity with the people of Serbia https://observatoryfordefenders.org/alert/serbia-european-civil-society-stands-in-solidarity-with-the-people-of-serbia/ Tue, 11 Mar 2025 19:04:30 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=23030 We, representatives of European civil society from across the continent, express our deep concern over the rapid escalation of restrictions, attacks, and repression against civil society in Serbia and call on the Serbian authorities to stop them. The latest illegal police raid on five leading non-governmental organisations represents a stark and deeply troubling intensification of the systemic effort to silence critical voices and suppress fundamental freedoms. This targeted assault underscores the growing crackdown on organisations that directly empower citizens to participate in public life and hold authorities accountable.  We stand in unwavering solidarity with the people of Serbia who are courageously resisting state oppression and systemic misgovernance. The mass protests were sparked by the tragic collapse of the newly renovated train station in Novi Sad on 1 November 2024, which claimed 15 lives and left two others seriously injured. This disastrous incident laid bare the authorities’ systemic corruption and negligence, which is why the protests demand systemic change in addition to the government taking responsibility for the tragedy. The Serbian government has responded to these legitimate expressions of grief and outrage with increasing repression against civil society. The scale of state violence and intimidation is deeply alarming. Dozens of attacks on protesters have been documented, including vehicles being driven into crowds and the brutal assault of a female student by ruling party activists. These examples illustrate the lengths to which the government is willing to go to quash dissent and deny responsibility for the disaster. Those who express support for the movement — students, professors, activists, and independent voices — are accused of acting on behalf of foreign interests and face threats, surveillance, police interrogations, and losing their job. These attacks are not new. For over a decade, Serbia’s political leadership has steered the country away from democratic values and the commitments required for EU integration. Civic space in Serbia rated as “obstructed” by the CIVICUS Monitor, underscoring the longstanding challenges faced by those committed to this path. These trends are part of an authoritarian playbook that we have come to know and experience in our EU countries too. Yet, in the face of this repression, the resilience of Serbian society inspires us and gives us hope. The protests, which have spread to at least 245 cities and towns, have drawn tens of thousands — sometimes up to 100,000 people — onto the streets. The broad support enjoyed by the movement from trade unions, farmers, the bar association, private businesses, and self-organised citizens, shows how rooted it is in the Serbian society. It is the largest mobilisation in Serbia in decades, signalling the strength of civil society and the unyielding spirit of the Serbian people in their struggle for democracy and justice. All our struggles, in each of our countries, are interconnected and the strength of this movement is another brick in our collective power. The Serbian people’s fight for democracy, transparency, and human rights is also a fight for the fundamental values upon which the EU itself claims to be built. But the EU’s failure to act decisively has contributed to the deepening distrust among Serbian citizens towards the European path, weakening the enlargement process as a whole, and discrediting the EU’s external policy. Clearer messages and concrete actions are urgently needed to show citizens and civil society organisations that they are not alone in this fight, and that the EU truly upholds the values it claims to stand for. We stand in solidarity with the people of Serbia in their pursuit of a shared democratic future, and we call on European leaders to do the same.]]> We, representatives of European civil society from across the continent, express our deep concern over the rapid escalation of restrictions, attacks, and repression against civil society in Serbia and call on the Serbian authorities to stop them. The latest illegal police raid on five leading non-governmental organisations represents a stark and deeply troubling intensification of the systemic effort to silence critical voices and suppress fundamental freedoms. This targeted assault underscores the growing crackdown on organisations that directly empower citizens to participate in public life and hold authorities accountable.  We stand in unwavering solidarity with the people of Serbia who are courageously resisting state oppression and systemic misgovernance. The mass protests were sparked by the tragic collapse of the newly renovated train station in Novi Sad on 1 November 2024, which claimed 15 lives and left two others seriously injured. This disastrous incident laid bare the authorities’ systemic corruption and negligence, which is why the protests demand systemic change in addition to the government taking responsibility for the tragedy. The Serbian government has responded to these legitimate expressions of grief and outrage with increasing repression against civil society. The scale of state violence and intimidation is deeply alarming. Dozens of attacks on protesters have been documented, including vehicles being driven into crowds and the brutal assault of a female student by ruling party activists. These examples illustrate the lengths to which the government is willing to go to quash dissent and deny responsibility for the disaster. Those who express support for the movement — students, professors, activists, and independent voices — are accused of acting on behalf of foreign interests and face threats, surveillance, police interrogations, and losing their job. These attacks are not new. For over a decade, Serbia’s political leadership has steered the country away from democratic values and the commitments required for EU integration. Civic space in Serbia rated as “obstructed” by the CIVICUS Monitor, underscoring the longstanding challenges faced by those committed to this path. These trends are part of an authoritarian playbook that we have come to know and experience in our EU countries too. Yet, in the face of this repression, the resilience of Serbian society inspires us and gives us hope. The protests, which have spread to at least 245 cities and towns, have drawn tens of thousands — sometimes up to 100,000 people — onto the streets. The broad support enjoyed by the movement from trade unions, farmers, the bar association, private businesses, and self-organised citizens, shows how rooted it is in the Serbian society. It is the largest mobilisation in Serbia in decades, signalling the strength of civil society and the unyielding spirit of the Serbian people in their struggle for democracy and justice. All our struggles, in each of our countries, are interconnected and the strength of this movement is another brick in our collective power. The Serbian people’s fight for democracy, transparency, and human rights is also a fight for the fundamental values upon which the EU itself claims to be built. But the EU’s failure to act decisively has contributed to the deepening distrust among Serbian citizens towards the European path, weakening the enlargement process as a whole, and discrediting the EU’s external policy. Clearer messages and concrete actions are urgently needed to show citizens and civil society organisations that they are not alone in this fight, and that the EU truly upholds the values it claims to stand for. We stand in solidarity with the people of Serbia in their pursuit of a shared democratic future, and we call on European leaders to do the same.]]> Venezuela: Detención arbitraria de Kennedy Tejeda, Edward Ocariz y Yendri Omar Velásquez https://observatoryfordefenders.org/alert/venezuela-detencion-arbitraria-de-kennedy-tejeda-edward-ocariz-y-yendri-omar-velasquez/ Fri, 06 Sep 2024 07:58:43 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=22327 Kennedy Tejeda, Edward Ocariz, y la detención arbitraria y subsecuente liberación del Sr. Yendri Omar Velásquez. Kennedy Tejeda es un dedicado defensor de los derechos humanos, abogado y miembro del equipo legal de Foro Penal, una ONG constituida por abogados y abogadas que promueve y defiende los derechos humanos, prestando asistencia jurídica gratuita a ciudadanos reprimidos por el Estado por disentir y, en general, a víctimas de violaciones de derechos humanos. Edward Ocariz es un líder comunitario en Coche, Caracas, miembro del Comité en defensa de los derechos humanos de la parroquia Coche y vicepresidente de la organización Primero Justicia en la parroquia Coche, que colabora con el Programa Venezolano de Educación Acción en Derechos Humanos (Provea), organización miembro de la FIDH. Yendri Omar Velásquez es el director del Observatorio de Violencias LGBTIQ+. El 2 de agosto de 2024, Kennedy Tejeda fue detenido por la Guardia Nacional Bolivariana y presuntamente trasladado a la Dirección General de Contra-inteligencia Militar (DGCIM) en Valencia, estado Carabobo. El Sr. Tejeda fue arrestado cuando visitaba el Comando Rural de Montalbán, un centro de detención en el estado Carabobo, para averiguar sobre la situación de unos detenidos en protesta en dicho estado. En la mañana del 3 de agosto de 2024, la madre de Kennedy Tejeda informó al coordinador de Foro Penal en el estado de Carabobo que un funcionario en Montalbán le señalo que el Sr. Tejeda había resultado detenido y trasladado a la sede de la DGCIM, sin indicarle los motivos de su detención. El 4 de agosto de 2024, se confirmó al Foro Penal el decreto de la medida judicial privativa de libertad para Kennedy Tejeda y que estaba bajo la orden de los tribunales con competencia en Terrorismo de la ciudad de Caracas, sin comunicar los delitos imputados. Ulteriormente, el Sr. Tejeda fue trasladado en un comando militar de la Guardia Nacional Bolivariana. A la fecha de publicación de este llamado urgente, ni Foro Penal ni su familia han tenido contacto con Kennedy Tejeda y le ha sido denegado el acceso a sus abogados. Por otro lado, el 2 de agosto de 2024, Edward Ocariz fue detenido por funcionarios de seguridad del Estado enmascarados, en su hogar en Coche, Caracas, y llevado en la Zona 7 de la Policía Nacional Bolivariana, en Boleíta, Caracas. Al momento de su detención, los funcionarios policiales no mostraron orden de allanamiento ni de captura. Edward Ocariz ya había denunciado amenazas de simpatizantes oficialistas con anterioridad a su detención. A la fecha de publicación de este llamado urgente, se desconocen los motivos de su detención y se encuentra detenido en Tocuyito. Desde el 8 de agosto de 2024, se encuentra incomunicado, ya que su familia afirma no haber podido comunicar con él desde esta fecha. El 3 de agosto de 2024, Yendri Omar Velásquez fue detenido en el aeropuerto de Maiquetía, donde le informaron que su pasaporte había sido anulado mientras se disponía a viajar para representar a una coalición de organizaciones ante el Comité para la Eliminación de la Discriminación Racial (CERD) en Ginebra por invitación de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas. Fue liberado el mismo día, después de varias horas durante las cuales se desconocía su paradero. En el contexto de las recientes elecciones presidenciales de julio de 2024, la práctica de la anulación de pasaportes se ha identificado como una posible acción de intimidación contra las personas opositoras del régimen, y personas defensoras de derechos humanos que colaboran con el sistema internacional de protección de los derechos humanos. Además, los y las abogados/as y voluntarios/as de Foro Penal, quienes han prestado su asistencia pro bono a varios detenidos víctimas de la represión post-electoral en Venezuela, están sufriendo acoso e intimidación por parte de las fuerzas de seguridad, obstruyendo el derecho de las personas detenidas a recibir una representación legal adecuada. El Observatorio recuerda que estas detenciones arbitrarias y actos de intimidación forman parte de una política sistemática de persecución y represión contra voces disidentes y civiles, incluyendo a las personas defensoras de derechos humanos. Esta represión se ha intensificado tras las elecciones presidenciales del 28 de julio de 2024, en las que se proclamó de manera controvertida la victoria de Nicolás Maduro el 29 de julio 2024, la cual ha sido señalada por fuertes indicios de fraude, generando intensas protestas en el país debido a las irregularidades y la falta de transparencia del Consejo Nacional Electoral (CNE). En este contexto de represión generalizada contra la sociedad civil en el país, al menos 25 personas fueron asesinadas y más de 2400 personas fueron detenidas a la fecha de publicación de este llamado urgente, según información de Provea y del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos respectivamente. Asimismo, el 15 de agosto 2024, el Parlamento venezolano aprobó la “Ley de fiscalización, regularización, actuación y financiamiento de las organizaciones no gubernamentales y afines”, que obliga a las ONGs a inscribirse en un registro local y hacer una "relación de donaciones recibidas con plena identificación de los donantes, indicando si son nacionales o extranjeros" bajo la supervisión del Ministerio de Interior. El Observatorio recuerda que esta ley busca aislar aún más a la sociedad civil venezolana, obstaculizando la libertad de asociación y el accionar libre e independiente de las organizaciones de la sociedad civil, que se encuentran ahora obligadas a buscar autorización del gobierno para realizar sus actividades, además de tener que declarar cualquier financiamiento extranjero. El Observatorio manifiesta su más alta preocupación por las detenciones arbitrarias e incomunicadas de Kennedy Tejeda y de Edward Ocariz, que parecen ser represalia por su legítima labor en defensa de los derechos humanos. El Observatorio también rechaza la anulación del pasaporte de Yendri Omar Velásquez y la detención arbitraria a la que ha sido sometido, que hacen parte de un patrón por limitar la labor de las personas defensoras de derechos humanos. El Observatorio urge a las autoridades venezolanas a garantizar a Edward Ocariz y a Kennedy Tejeda acceso inmediato e incondicional a sus abogados y familiares, y a liberarlos de manera inmediata e incondicional. El Observatorio también insta a las autoridades de Venezuela a poner fin a todo tipo de hostigamiento, incluido a nivel judicial y administrativo, en su contra y en contra de Yendri Omar Velásquez, del conjunto de integrantes de Foro Penal, así como contra todas las personas defensoras de derechos humanos en el país. El Observatorio exhorta a las autoridades venezolanas a poner un alto a la represión generalizada contra la sociedad civil y también pide que garanticen en todas las circunstancias el derecho a la libertad de reunión pacífica, consagrado en los instrumentos internacionales de derechos humanos de los que Venezuela es parte, en particular el artículo 21 del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos (PIDCP).]]> Kennedy Tejeda, Edward Ocariz, y la detención arbitraria y subsecuente liberación del Sr. Yendri Omar Velásquez. Kennedy Tejeda es un dedicado defensor de los derechos humanos, abogado y miembro del equipo legal de Foro Penal, una ONG constituida por abogados y abogadas que promueve y defiende los derechos humanos, prestando asistencia jurídica gratuita a ciudadanos reprimidos por el Estado por disentir y, en general, a víctimas de violaciones de derechos humanos. Edward Ocariz es un líder comunitario en Coche, Caracas, miembro del Comité en defensa de los derechos humanos de la parroquia Coche y vicepresidente de la organización Primero Justicia en la parroquia Coche, que colabora con el Programa Venezolano de Educación Acción en Derechos Humanos (Provea), organización miembro de la FIDH. Yendri Omar Velásquez es el director del Observatorio de Violencias LGBTIQ+. El 2 de agosto de 2024, Kennedy Tejeda fue detenido por la Guardia Nacional Bolivariana y presuntamente trasladado a la Dirección General de Contra-inteligencia Militar (DGCIM) en Valencia, estado Carabobo. El Sr. Tejeda fue arrestado cuando visitaba el Comando Rural de Montalbán, un centro de detención en el estado Carabobo, para averiguar sobre la situación de unos detenidos en protesta en dicho estado. En la mañana del 3 de agosto de 2024, la madre de Kennedy Tejeda informó al coordinador de Foro Penal en el estado de Carabobo que un funcionario en Montalbán le señalo que el Sr. Tejeda había resultado detenido y trasladado a la sede de la DGCIM, sin indicarle los motivos de su detención. El 4 de agosto de 2024, se confirmó al Foro Penal el decreto de la medida judicial privativa de libertad para Kennedy Tejeda y que estaba bajo la orden de los tribunales con competencia en Terrorismo de la ciudad de Caracas, sin comunicar los delitos imputados. Ulteriormente, el Sr. Tejeda fue trasladado en un comando militar de la Guardia Nacional Bolivariana. A la fecha de publicación de este llamado urgente, ni Foro Penal ni su familia han tenido contacto con Kennedy Tejeda y le ha sido denegado el acceso a sus abogados. Por otro lado, el 2 de agosto de 2024, Edward Ocariz fue detenido por funcionarios de seguridad del Estado enmascarados, en su hogar en Coche, Caracas, y llevado en la Zona 7 de la Policía Nacional Bolivariana, en Boleíta, Caracas. Al momento de su detención, los funcionarios policiales no mostraron orden de allanamiento ni de captura. Edward Ocariz ya había denunciado amenazas de simpatizantes oficialistas con anterioridad a su detención. A la fecha de publicación de este llamado urgente, se desconocen los motivos de su detención y se encuentra detenido en Tocuyito. Desde el 8 de agosto de 2024, se encuentra incomunicado, ya que su familia afirma no haber podido comunicar con él desde esta fecha. El 3 de agosto de 2024, Yendri Omar Velásquez fue detenido en el aeropuerto de Maiquetía, donde le informaron que su pasaporte había sido anulado mientras se disponía a viajar para representar a una coalición de organizaciones ante el Comité para la Eliminación de la Discriminación Racial (CERD) en Ginebra por invitación de la Organización de las Naciones Unidas. Fue liberado el mismo día, después de varias horas durante las cuales se desconocía su paradero. En el contexto de las recientes elecciones presidenciales de julio de 2024, la práctica de la anulación de pasaportes se ha identificado como una posible acción de intimidación contra las personas opositoras del régimen, y personas defensoras de derechos humanos que colaboran con el sistema internacional de protección de los derechos humanos. Además, los y las abogados/as y voluntarios/as de Foro Penal, quienes han prestado su asistencia pro bono a varios detenidos víctimas de la represión post-electoral en Venezuela, están sufriendo acoso e intimidación por parte de las fuerzas de seguridad, obstruyendo el derecho de las personas detenidas a recibir una representación legal adecuada. El Observatorio recuerda que estas detenciones arbitrarias y actos de intimidación forman parte de una política sistemática de persecución y represión contra voces disidentes y civiles, incluyendo a las personas defensoras de derechos humanos. Esta represión se ha intensificado tras las elecciones presidenciales del 28 de julio de 2024, en las que se proclamó de manera controvertida la victoria de Nicolás Maduro el 29 de julio 2024, la cual ha sido señalada por fuertes indicios de fraude, generando intensas protestas en el país debido a las irregularidades y la falta de transparencia del Consejo Nacional Electoral (CNE). En este contexto de represión generalizada contra la sociedad civil en el país, al menos 25 personas fueron asesinadas y más de 2400 personas fueron detenidas a la fecha de publicación de este llamado urgente, según información de Provea y del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos respectivamente. Asimismo, el 15 de agosto 2024, el Parlamento venezolano aprobó la “Ley de fiscalización, regularización, actuación y financiamiento de las organizaciones no gubernamentales y afines”, que obliga a las ONGs a inscribirse en un registro local y hacer una "relación de donaciones recibidas con plena identificación de los donantes, indicando si son nacionales o extranjeros" bajo la supervisión del Ministerio de Interior. El Observatorio recuerda que esta ley busca aislar aún más a la sociedad civil venezolana, obstaculizando la libertad de asociación y el accionar libre e independiente de las organizaciones de la sociedad civil, que se encuentran ahora obligadas a buscar autorización del gobierno para realizar sus actividades, además de tener que declarar cualquier financiamiento extranjero. El Observatorio manifiesta su más alta preocupación por las detenciones arbitrarias e incomunicadas de Kennedy Tejeda y de Edward Ocariz, que parecen ser represalia por su legítima labor en defensa de los derechos humanos. El Observatorio también rechaza la anulación del pasaporte de Yendri Omar Velásquez y la detención arbitraria a la que ha sido sometido, que hacen parte de un patrón por limitar la labor de las personas defensoras de derechos humanos. El Observatorio urge a las autoridades venezolanas a garantizar a Edward Ocariz y a Kennedy Tejeda acceso inmediato e incondicional a sus abogados y familiares, y a liberarlos de manera inmediata e incondicional. El Observatorio también insta a las autoridades de Venezuela a poner fin a todo tipo de hostigamiento, incluido a nivel judicial y administrativo, en su contra y en contra de Yendri Omar Velásquez, del conjunto de integrantes de Foro Penal, así como contra todas las personas defensoras de derechos humanos en el país. El Observatorio exhorta a las autoridades venezolanas a poner un alto a la represión generalizada contra la sociedad civil y también pide que garanticen en todas las circunstancias el derecho a la libertad de reunión pacífica, consagrado en los instrumentos internacionales de derechos humanos de los que Venezuela es parte, en particular el artículo 21 del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos (PIDCP).]]> Uganda: Increasing harassment against Students for Global Democracy and its members https://observatoryfordefenders.org/alert/uganda-increasing-harassment-against-students-for-global-democracy-and-its-members/ Tue, 30 Jul 2024 17:06:38 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=22208 Mike Gesa Munabi, and SGD field officer, Mr Johnbosco Mutyaba. SGD is a student-led non-profit and non-partisan organisation founded in 2005 that inspires young people, principally students, to adopt and promote principles of leadership, good governance and sustainability with the goal of greater youth participation in democratic processes and sustainable development efforts in Uganda and the outside world. On July 23, 2024, Johnbosco Mutyaba, was arrested at the Central Police Station in Kampala as he sought the release of pro-democracy student activists, with whom SGD works as part of their Uganda university chapters. The students had been arrested following the #march2parliament protests that took place the same day against the rampant corruption in government institutions, especially the Ugandan Parliament. Mr Mutyaba was released on the same evening on police bond without any charge. Previously, on June 21, 2024, Mike Gesa Munabi was arrested by the police in Iganga, north-east of Kampala, and subsequently released on state bond on June 22, 2024. The trumped-up accusations laid against him are “inciting violence” and “offensive communication”, which appear to be related to Mike Gesa Munabi’s stances for democracy, human rights and good governance, and particularly to his support of 50 pro-democracy youth activists who had been arrested by the authorities on August 27, 2023 and September 2023. Upon his release from prison, Mr Gesa Munabi was instructed to report to the police on a monthly basis until his case is dismissed or sanctioned for a court hearing. On July 7, 2024, he reported to the police for the first time, and his police release bond was extended to August 9, 2024 when he will have to report back on the status of his case. His case has not been sanctioned for court hearing and therefore, at the time of publication of this Urgent Appeal, no date has yet been set for any court appearance. Messrs Mutyaba and Gesa Munabi’s arrests are only the latest instances of a widespread harassment against SGD and its members. The organisation was subjected to multiple break-ins into its offices on December 2, 2023 and December 19, 2023, during which several items of office equipment were vandalised and destroyed, as well as to acts of intimidation and surveillance of staff members by suspected government operatives. As a fervent defender of democracy and good governance, SGD has been particularly targeted and harassed, in a context of increasing tension ahead of the 2026 General elections. Mr Samuel Kayiwa, Project officer of the “Human Rights and Civic Space for Students” project of the NGO Global Democracy Uganda and supporter of SGD, has also been receiving threatening calls and has been followed by unknown people, which has caused fear and threats to his life. Students for Global Democracy intends to lodge a complaint with the Uganda Human Rights Commission against the government for the continued harassment of their staff and members. The Observatory recalls that this arrest is part of a persistent crackdown on human rights defenders, organisations and civil society in Uganda. The rights to freedom of expression and of association are particularly limited, and human rights defenders are subjected to moral and physical attacks, intimidation, threats and judicial harassment. The Observatory recalls that in May and June 2024, 11 human rights defenders suffered an alarming repression, including abduction, arbitrary arrests and detentions, and judicial, physical and moral harassment. The Observatory further recalls that in October 2021, several human rights organisations were subjected to acts of intimidation by the police of Uganda and several human rights defenders were arrested, including Joss Kaheero Mugisa, Robert Birimuye and six African Institute for Energy Governance (AFIEGO) members. Furthermore, on August 20, 2021, AFIEGO, together with 53 other civil society organisations, got unduly suspended by the NGO Bureau on the grounds that the organisations were allegedly found to be “non-compliant with the NGO Act, 2016”. The Observatory strongly condemns the arbitrary arrest and harassment of Students for Global Democracy Uganda staff members, which only appear to be aimed at punishing them for their legitimate human rights activities. The Observatory further condemns the moral, physical and judicial harassment of Students for Global Democracy and its members. The Observatory urges the Ugandan authorities to put an end to all acts of harassment, including at the judicial level, and any act of intimidation against Johnbosco Mutyaba, Mike Gesa Munabi, Samuel Kayiwa, and all Students for Global Democracy Uganda members, as well as against all human rights defenders in the country. The Observatory also calls on the Ugandan authorities to guarantee in all circumstances the right to freedom of association as enshrined in international human rights law, and in particular Article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 10 of the African Charter On Human And People's Rights, to which Uganda is a party.]]> Mike Gesa Munabi, and SGD field officer, Mr Johnbosco Mutyaba. SGD is a student-led non-profit and non-partisan organisation founded in 2005 that inspires young people, principally students, to adopt and promote principles of leadership, good governance and sustainability with the goal of greater youth participation in democratic processes and sustainable development efforts in Uganda and the outside world. On July 23, 2024, Johnbosco Mutyaba, was arrested at the Central Police Station in Kampala as he sought the release of pro-democracy student activists, with whom SGD works as part of their Uganda university chapters. The students had been arrested following the #march2parliament protests that took place the same day against the rampant corruption in government institutions, especially the Ugandan Parliament. Mr Mutyaba was released on the same evening on police bond without any charge. Previously, on June 21, 2024, Mike Gesa Munabi was arrested by the police in Iganga, north-east of Kampala, and subsequently released on state bond on June 22, 2024. The trumped-up accusations laid against him are “inciting violence” and “offensive communication”, which appear to be related to Mike Gesa Munabi’s stances for democracy, human rights and good governance, and particularly to his support of 50 pro-democracy youth activists who had been arrested by the authorities on August 27, 2023 and September 2023. Upon his release from prison, Mr Gesa Munabi was instructed to report to the police on a monthly basis until his case is dismissed or sanctioned for a court hearing. On July 7, 2024, he reported to the police for the first time, and his police release bond was extended to August 9, 2024 when he will have to report back on the status of his case. His case has not been sanctioned for court hearing and therefore, at the time of publication of this Urgent Appeal, no date has yet been set for any court appearance. Messrs Mutyaba and Gesa Munabi’s arrests are only the latest instances of a widespread harassment against SGD and its members. The organisation was subjected to multiple break-ins into its offices on December 2, 2023 and December 19, 2023, during which several items of office equipment were vandalised and destroyed, as well as to acts of intimidation and surveillance of staff members by suspected government operatives. As a fervent defender of democracy and good governance, SGD has been particularly targeted and harassed, in a context of increasing tension ahead of the 2026 General elections. Mr Samuel Kayiwa, Project officer of the “Human Rights and Civic Space for Students” project of the NGO Global Democracy Uganda and supporter of SGD, has also been receiving threatening calls and has been followed by unknown people, which has caused fear and threats to his life. Students for Global Democracy intends to lodge a complaint with the Uganda Human Rights Commission against the government for the continued harassment of their staff and members. The Observatory recalls that this arrest is part of a persistent crackdown on human rights defenders, organisations and civil society in Uganda. The rights to freedom of expression and of association are particularly limited, and human rights defenders are subjected to moral and physical attacks, intimidation, threats and judicial harassment. The Observatory recalls that in May and June 2024, 11 human rights defenders suffered an alarming repression, including abduction, arbitrary arrests and detentions, and judicial, physical and moral harassment. The Observatory further recalls that in October 2021, several human rights organisations were subjected to acts of intimidation by the police of Uganda and several human rights defenders were arrested, including Joss Kaheero Mugisa, Robert Birimuye and six African Institute for Energy Governance (AFIEGO) members. Furthermore, on August 20, 2021, AFIEGO, together with 53 other civil society organisations, got unduly suspended by the NGO Bureau on the grounds that the organisations were allegedly found to be “non-compliant with the NGO Act, 2016”. The Observatory strongly condemns the arbitrary arrest and harassment of Students for Global Democracy Uganda staff members, which only appear to be aimed at punishing them for their legitimate human rights activities. The Observatory further condemns the moral, physical and judicial harassment of Students for Global Democracy and its members. The Observatory urges the Ugandan authorities to put an end to all acts of harassment, including at the judicial level, and any act of intimidation against Johnbosco Mutyaba, Mike Gesa Munabi, Samuel Kayiwa, and all Students for Global Democracy Uganda members, as well as against all human rights defenders in the country. The Observatory also calls on the Ugandan authorities to guarantee in all circumstances the right to freedom of association as enshrined in international human rights law, and in particular Article 22 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Article 10 of the African Charter On Human And People's Rights, to which Uganda is a party.]]> Thailand: Joint call to end judicial abuse and arbitrary detention, and to investigate Netiporn ’Bung’ Sanesangkhom’s death https://observatoryfordefenders.org/alert/thailand-joint-call-to-end-judicial-abuse-and-arbitrary-detention-and-to-investigate-netiporn-bung-sanesangkhoms-death/ Fri, 14 Jun 2024 15:05:26 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=22112 International organisations, including FIDH and OMCT within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, call on the Thai government to end the abuse of the judicial process and the arbitrary detention of human rights defenders, activists, and protesters. Additionally, they urge a thorough and independent investigation into the death in custody one month ago of Netiporn 'Bung' Sanesangkhom. AI Index Number: ASA 39/8157/2024 Tawee Sodsong Minister of Justice 404 Chaeng Watthana Rd, Thung Song Hong Sub-district, Lak Si District, Bangkok 10210 June 14, 2024 Dear Minister of Justice, RE: REQUEST to BRING AN END TO the abuse of the judicial process and Arbitrary Detention of HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS, ACTIVISTS AND PROTESTERS, and TO investigate the death in custody of Netiporn ‘Bung’ Sanesangkhom We, the undersigned organisations, write this open letter to request you take urgent and immediate steps to end the ongoing abuse of the judicial process and apparent arbitrary detention of human rights defenders, activists and protesters in Thailand, solely because of their exercise of their right to peaceful protest. Our organisations remain concerned that, in contravention of Thailand’s obligations under international human rights law and standards, the Thai authorities are initiating criminal proceedings against individuals solely because they have exercised their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, leading to their being convicted and often sentenced to imprisonment as a result. The ongoing abuse of the judicial process extends to systematically denying human rights defenders, activists and protesters temporary release on bail. We also request a prompt, thorough, transparent, independent, impartial and effective investigation into the circumstances of the death in custody of activist Netiporn ‘Bung’ Sanesangkhom on May 14, 2024 (see below), while she was arbitrarily detained. We urge the government to provide redress as appropriate for the loss of her life. Bung carried out two lengthy hunger-strikes prior to her death to protest against the restrictive environment preventing pro-democracy activists and human rights defenders from exercising their rights, and against the abuse of the judicial process to target, silence and, detain activists, protesters and human rights defenders, including herself. [1] We call on the Thai government to take the opportunity provided by its candidature for membership of the United Nations Human Rights Council between 2025 and 2027 to demonstrate its commitment to upholding and protecting international human rights law. With respect to this, we further urge the government to take immediate steps to address the concerns outlined below and ensure Thailand’s compliance with its international human rights obligations to protect the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association, and other human rights, and create a safe and enabling environment for human rights defenders to exercise and defend their own rights as well as those of others. Abuse of the judicial process Since mass protests calling for political and social reforms started in 2020, the Thai authorities have targeted human rights defenders, activists and protesters solely for their participation in peaceful protests or for expressing their opinions, often with protracted criminal proceedings that lead to criminal and civil sanctions. According to statistics gathered by Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR), between July 2020 and May 2024, the authorities initiated criminal proceedings against at least 1,954 individuals in 1,296 cases, including 286 young persons under 18 years old, for participating in peaceful protests or expressing their opinions online and offline. [2] At least 424 persons, including children, face charges under the Criminal Code for offences related to “security”, carrying lengthy prison terms upon conviction. In this connection, Thai authorities have initiated proceedings against at least 272 persons for lèse-majesté (Article 112) and 152 persons for sedition (Article 116). [3] In addition, at least 202 people were charged under the Computer Crimes Act (CCA) in connection with their online expressions. [4] At the time of writing, trials were still ongoing in at least 729 cases, and at least 717 individuals are facing potential sentences linked to their exercise of their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. [5] Courts have handed down prison sentences, with some individuals notably being sentenced to up to 50 years for lèse-majesté offences. [6] UN human rights bodies and independent experts have raised concerns about the use of criminal provisions to criminalise the legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression, including with respect to their use in Thailand, due to their incompatibility with international human rights law. [7] The UN Human Rights Committee, for example, has held that “imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty” for defamation-related offences [8] and has expressed concern over criminal provisions, including sedition and lèse-majesté under the Criminal Code and the CCA. [9] The restrictive, overbroad, ambiguous or imprecise language of these criminal provisions fails to narrow down the scope of the punishable offences in question with a clear definition of the criminalised conduct, establishing its elements and the factors that distinguish it from conduct that is not criminally proscribed. As such, these criminal provisions fail to meet the requirements of international law with respect to the principle of legality; the limited and narrowly defined legitimate fundamental public interests allowed under international human rights law (namely, for the protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms of others, national security, public safety, public order, public health or public morals); necessity; proportionality; non-arbitrariness and non-discrimination. [10] As a result, these criminal provisions give officials wide discretion to unduly limit the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly in the name of public security, order and health, and allow for the imposition of lengthy prison terms. Regardless of whether criminal proceedings lead to prosecution, imprisonment or fines, their use may have the effect of further undermining the enjoyment of defendants’ rights. Individuals are required to commit time and other resources to defend themselves against unwarranted charges. Children and young people are particularly impacted by abuse of the judicial process which may result in stigma and compromise their ability to fully enjoy their right to education. [11] Arbitrary detention According to TLHR, as of June 6, 2024, at least 43 individuals involved in protests were in detention, 19 of whom had been sentenced to imprisonment and 24 of whom were still in pre-trial detention. [12] Of the 24 people, 17 were charged with t lèse-majesté offences. [13] The Thai authorities repeatedly held prominent protesters in detention and denied them temporary release on bail. [14] Under international human rights law and standards guaranteeing the right to liberty and the presumption of innocence, there is a presumption that people charged with a criminal offence will not be detained while awaiting trial. [15] The UN Human Rights Committee has held that a defendant may only be detained pending trial in exceptional circumstances where the authorities must demonstrate that their deprivation of liberty pending trial is both necessary and proportionate, for example, in cases where there is substantial reason to believe that if released, the individual would abscond or commit a serious offence or interfere with the investigation or obstruct the course of justice. [16] In addition, pre-trial detention should not be mandatory for all defendants charged with a particular crime, nor should it be ordered for a period based on the potential sentence for the crime charged rather than on a determination of necessity. [17] Further, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) has repeatedly and consistently found Thailand’s detention of individuals solely as a result of their peaceful exercise of their right to freedom of expression, including under lèse-majesté provisions and article 14 of the Computer Crimes Act, to be arbitrary. [18] The UNWGAD has expressed grave concern at a pattern of arbitrary detention resulting in serious harm to society by causing a chilling effect and leading individuals to “[refrain] from debates on matters of public interest in order to avoid prosecution.” It has called on the Thai authorities to release individuals arbitrarily detained in violation of Thailand’s human rights obligations, including the right to liberty, the right to a fair trial and the right to freedom of opinion and expression under Articles 3, 8, 9, 10 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 2, 9, 14 and 19 the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), by which Thailand is bound as a State party. [19] The United Nations Human Rights Committee [20] and UN Special Procedures, [21] as well as governments during the Universal Periodic Reviews [22] , have made further recommendations to the Thai government to stop arbitrarily detaining individuals and imposing excessive restrictions on the legitimate exercise of the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Death in custody Netiporn ’Bung’ Sanesangkhom, a 28-year-old woman activist, was among those who were denied bail and was held in arbitrary detention twice due to her peaceful activism. Netiporn faced seven criminal charges because of her involvement in the protest movement, including one charge of lèse-majesté which stemmed from peacefully conducting a public opinion poll on February 8, 2022 about road traffic controls imposed during royal motorcades. [23] She was initially granted temporary release pending her trial, but on May 3, 2022, the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court revoked bail and remanded her in custody in the lèse-majesté case mentioned above because Netiporn had continued to take part in peaceful assemblies and had violated a bail condition requiring her to refrain from “joining a protest that causes public disorder”. [24] She then went on her first hunger strike until she was temporarily released on August 4, 2022. [25] More recently, in a separate case, on January 26, 2024, Netiporn was sentenced to one month’s imprisonment for contempt of court. [26] In late February 2024, her detention was then extended, as the Bangkok Criminal Court t revoked bail and remanded her in custody for the same aforementioned lèse-majesté case against her, which was still pending. [27] Starting on January 27, 2024, she went on her second hunger strike, this time for more than 65 days, to protest her detention and the detention of other activists. [28] Eventually, she reportedly suffered a cardiac arrest on May 14, 2024 and passed away, while in the Central Women’s Correctional Institute Hospital. [29] Under international human rights law and standards, the Thai authorities must respect, protect, and fulfill the right to life of everyone under their jurisdiction, including people in detention. There is a presumption of State liability for arbitrary deprivation of life that arises in connection with custodial deaths. Such presumption may be rebutted only when the State is exonerated of any liability through a prompt, thorough, effective, independent, impartial and transparent investigation into the circumstances and causes of such a death, which is an essential requirement to uphold the right to life. [30] Thailand is further obligated under international human rights law to provide medical care for everyone deprived of their liberty. Thailand is a State Party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has stated that governments must respect the right to health by ensuring equal access to health services for all persons, including prisoners. [31] The 1990 UN Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners stipulate that prisoners should have access to the same health services as the general population in a country without discrimination. [32] Additionally, the revised 2015 UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules) restate that right and mandate prompt access to medical attention in urgent cases and the transfer of prisoners requiring specialised treatment or surgery to appropriate facilities, which can also be civil hospitals if needed. [33] Recommendations The abuse of the judicial process and the arbitrary detention of human rights defenders, activists and protesters constitute violations of Thailand’s obligations under international human rights law, as would any failure to effectively investigate the custodial death of Netiporn ‘Bung’ Sanesangkhom. The Thai government must act to uphold its commitments to protect human rights and ensure the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, liberty and security of person, due process guarantee, and the right to life, among other rights, are respected. The Thai authorities need to take immediate steps outlined below to address the concerns raised in this letter and to demonstrate their adherence to their international human rights obligations, with a view to fostering an environment where human rights are fully respected and protected. These actions are essential to comply with the ICCPR and other international standards. To end the abuse of the judicial process and the arbitrary detention of human rights defenders and activists, we call on the Thai authorities to: • Respect, protect and fulfil the rights of everyone, including of children and other young people, to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly; • Conduct a thorough review of the bail process to align it with international human rights law and standards, ensuring that detention in connection with the legitimate exercise of human rights is arbitrary and unlawful, and pre-trial detention be the exception rather than the rule; • Immediately and unconditionally release individuals from arbitrary detention, drop criminal investigations and prosecutions and quash convictions related solely to their exercise of their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly; • Repeal or amend laws used to stifle peaceful dissent, including by bringing the lèse-majesté (Article 112) and sedition (Article 116) provisions and the CCA in line with international human rights law and standards on freedom of expression, as recommended by the Human Rights Council’s Special Procedures and the UN Human Rights Committee; and • Establish regular, structured dialogue with civil society organisations to address concerns referred to in this letter and involve them in relevant policy-making processes. To address the concerns around the death in custody of Netiporn, take the following actions: • Conduct a prompt, effective, thorough, independent, impartial and transparent investigation into the circumstances and cause of Netiporn’s death, in line with international human rights law and standards, including in the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), to establish accountability and prevent future occurrences; • Provide appropriate forms of remedy, including compensation and other forms of reparations, as warranted in line with international law; and • Ensure the right to health for all detainees, as a minimum as mandated by the Nelson Mandela Rules, including by providing prompt access to medical attention and necessary specialised treatment or surgery as needed. The undersigned organisations remain committed to working with relevant government agencies to provide any additional information you may need in order to fulfill these recommendations.    

Footnotes

[1] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้, 14 May 2024, https://tlhr2014.com/archives/66964 [2] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, พฤษภาคม 2567: จำนวนผู้ถูกดำเนินคดีทางการเมืองยอดรวม 1,954 คน ใน 1,296 คดี, 5 June 2024, https://tlhr2014.com/archives/67575 [3] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, พฤษภาคม 2567: จำนวนผู้ถูกดำเนินคดีทางการเมืองยอดรวม 1,954 คน ใน 1,296 คดี (previously cited). [4] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, พฤษภาคม 2567: จำนวนผู้ถูกดำเนินคดีทางการเมืองยอดรวม 1,954 คน ใน 1,296 คดี (previously cited). [5] Information documented by Thai Lawyers for Human Rights [6] See Amnesty International, “Thailand: 87-year prison sentence handed in harshest lèse-majesté conviction,” 19 January 2021, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2021/01/thailand-87-prison-sentence-lese-majeste and Guardian, “Man jailed for record 50 years for criticising Thai monarchy” 18 January 2024, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/18/man-jailed-for-record-50-years-for-criticising-thai-monarchy#: :text=A%20Thai%20man%20has%20been,a%20 legal%20rights%20group%20said. [7] UN Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Thailand, 25 April 2017, UN Doc. CCPR/C/THA/CO/2, paras 35-38, https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/concluding-observations/ccprcthaco2-concluding-observations-second-periodic-report (‘2017 Concluding Observations’) [8] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 19; Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 34 on Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression, 12 September 2011, UN Doc. CCPR/C/GC/34, paras 30, 38 and 47, https://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/gc34.pdf. [9] UN Human Rights Committee, 2017 Concluding Observations (previously cited). [10] For further analysis of the laws against international human rights law and standards, see: ICJ, Dictating the Internet: Curtailing Free Expression, Opinion and Information Online in Thailand, April 2021, Part III, https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Thailand-Dictating-the-Internet-FoE-Publication-2021-ENG.pdf [11] Amnesty International Thailand, ‘แอมเนสตี้-ศูนย์ทนาย’ ดำเนินคดีของเด็กและเยาวชน 3 ปี สร้าง 7 ผลกระทบ แนะ 6 ข้อ ก. ยุติธรรม, 21 พฤศจิกายน 2566, https://www.amnesty.or.th/latest/news/1190 [12] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, รายชื่อผู้ต้องขังทางการเมือง 2567, 6 June 2024, https://tlhr2014.com/archives/63015 [13] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, รายชื่อผู้ต้องขังทางการเมือง 2567 (previously cited). [14] This pattern of arbitrary detention through the denial of bail has been ongoing since 2021. See, for example, Amnesty International, Urgent Action: Peaceful protestors may face 100+ years in prison, 24 March 2021, Index: ASA 39/3891/2021, https://www.amnesty.org/fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/ASA3938912021ENGLISH.pdf; and Amnesty International, Thailand: Immediately drop unjustified charges against protest leader, 24 September 2021, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2021/09/amnesty-thailand-protest-leader-arrest/; Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, The expanding universe of legal persecutions: Examining various developments following the #19Sept protest (Part 2), 29 June 2021, https://tlhr2014.com/en/archives/31397 [15] Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 35 on Article 9: Liberty and security of person, 16 December 2014, UN Doc. CCPR/C/GC/35, https://www.ohchr.org/en/calls-for-input/general-comment-no-35-article-9-liberty-and-security-person, para 38. [16] Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 35 on Article 9: Liberty and security of person (previously cited). [17] Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 35 on Article 9: Liberty and security of person (previously cited). [18] See the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD), Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its ninety-seventh session, 28 August–1 September 2023, 23 October 2023, UN Doc. A/HRC/WGAD/2023/49, para 61(a). The UNWGAD also referred to its opinions No. 35/2012, No. 41/2014, No. 43/2015, No. 44/2016 and No. 51/2017, which made the same assessment. [19] UNWGAD, Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its ninety-seventh session, 28 August–1 September 2023, para 71-72 (previously cited). [20] UN Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Thailand, 25 April 2017, UN Doc. CCPR/C/THA/CO/2, https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/g17/099/90/pdf/g1709990.pdf?token=co1x9EVLWuVMLTDQbb&fe=true, para 25-26. [21] See recent examples of such communications from UN Special Rapporteurs at UN Special Procedures, Joint allegation letter, 13 March 2024, UN Doc. AL THA 3/2024, https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=28802; and UN Special Procedures, Joint allegation letter, 5 May 2023, UN Doc. AL THA 2/2023, https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=28064 [22] Thailand received at least four recommendations on arbitrary arrest and detention of activists during the Universal Periodic Review in 2021. See United Nations Human Rights Council, Report of the Working Group on the Univesal Periodic Review: Thailand, 21 December 2021, UN Doc. A/HRC/49/17, recommendation 52.47 by Mexico (“Decriminalize freedom of expression and peaceful assembly and avoid the detention of minors for exercising these rights”), recommendation 52.52 by Austria (“Guarantee the rights to freedom of expression and assembly and stop targeting civilians engaging in peaceful protests under criminal charges entailing punishment with exorbitant prison terms”), recommendation 52.60 by Sweden (“Amend article 112 of the criminal code on royal defamation to bring it into line with Thailand’s international human rights obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and, as an intermediate step, remove mandatory minimum prison terms for violations of that provision”) and recommendation 52.83 by Ireland (“End arbitrary detentions, arrests and any acts of harassment against political actors and civil society, including human rights defenders”). [23] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited). [24] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, ศาลสั่งถอนประกัน “ใบปอ – เนติพร” ผู้ต้องหา ม.112 คดีทำโพลขบวนเสด็จ ชี้สร้างความวุ่นวายกับกลุ่มผู้ชุมนุมอื่น ผิดเงื่อนไขประกัน, 5 May 2022, https://tlhr2014.com/archives/43235 [25] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited). [26] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited). [27] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited). [28] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited) [29] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited) [30] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 6(1); the UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (1989), and its companion document, the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016). See also: Amnesty International, Thailand: Tragic death of detained activist must be ‘wake-up call’, 14 May 2024, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/05/thailand-tragic-death-of-detained-activist-must-be-wake-up-call/ [31] International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), Article 12. See also CESCR, General Comment No. 14: The Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health (Art. 12), 11 August 2000, UN Doc. E/C.12/2000/4, para. 34. [32] Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners, Rule No. 9. [33] United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, Rules No. 24 and 27.]]> International organisations, including FIDH and OMCT within the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, call on the Thai government to end the abuse of the judicial process and the arbitrary detention of human rights defenders, activists, and protesters. Additionally, they urge a thorough and independent investigation into the death in custody one month ago of Netiporn 'Bung' Sanesangkhom. AI Index Number: ASA 39/8157/2024 Tawee Sodsong Minister of Justice 404 Chaeng Watthana Rd, Thung Song Hong Sub-district, Lak Si District, Bangkok 10210 June 14, 2024 Dear Minister of Justice, RE: REQUEST to BRING AN END TO the abuse of the judicial process and Arbitrary Detention of HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS, ACTIVISTS AND PROTESTERS, and TO investigate the death in custody of Netiporn ‘Bung’ Sanesangkhom We, the undersigned organisations, write this open letter to request you take urgent and immediate steps to end the ongoing abuse of the judicial process and apparent arbitrary detention of human rights defenders, activists and protesters in Thailand, solely because of their exercise of their right to peaceful protest. Our organisations remain concerned that, in contravention of Thailand’s obligations under international human rights law and standards, the Thai authorities are initiating criminal proceedings against individuals solely because they have exercised their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, leading to their being convicted and often sentenced to imprisonment as a result. The ongoing abuse of the judicial process extends to systematically denying human rights defenders, activists and protesters temporary release on bail. We also request a prompt, thorough, transparent, independent, impartial and effective investigation into the circumstances of the death in custody of activist Netiporn ‘Bung’ Sanesangkhom on May 14, 2024 (see below), while she was arbitrarily detained. We urge the government to provide redress as appropriate for the loss of her life. Bung carried out two lengthy hunger-strikes prior to her death to protest against the restrictive environment preventing pro-democracy activists and human rights defenders from exercising their rights, and against the abuse of the judicial process to target, silence and, detain activists, protesters and human rights defenders, including herself. [1] We call on the Thai government to take the opportunity provided by its candidature for membership of the United Nations Human Rights Council between 2025 and 2027 to demonstrate its commitment to upholding and protecting international human rights law. With respect to this, we further urge the government to take immediate steps to address the concerns outlined below and ensure Thailand’s compliance with its international human rights obligations to protect the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly and association, and other human rights, and create a safe and enabling environment for human rights defenders to exercise and defend their own rights as well as those of others. Abuse of the judicial process Since mass protests calling for political and social reforms started in 2020, the Thai authorities have targeted human rights defenders, activists and protesters solely for their participation in peaceful protests or for expressing their opinions, often with protracted criminal proceedings that lead to criminal and civil sanctions. According to statistics gathered by Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR), between July 2020 and May 2024, the authorities initiated criminal proceedings against at least 1,954 individuals in 1,296 cases, including 286 young persons under 18 years old, for participating in peaceful protests or expressing their opinions online and offline. [2] At least 424 persons, including children, face charges under the Criminal Code for offences related to “security”, carrying lengthy prison terms upon conviction. In this connection, Thai authorities have initiated proceedings against at least 272 persons for lèse-majesté (Article 112) and 152 persons for sedition (Article 116). [3] In addition, at least 202 people were charged under the Computer Crimes Act (CCA) in connection with their online expressions. [4] At the time of writing, trials were still ongoing in at least 729 cases, and at least 717 individuals are facing potential sentences linked to their exercise of their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. [5] Courts have handed down prison sentences, with some individuals notably being sentenced to up to 50 years for lèse-majesté offences. [6] UN human rights bodies and independent experts have raised concerns about the use of criminal provisions to criminalise the legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression, including with respect to their use in Thailand, due to their incompatibility with international human rights law. [7] The UN Human Rights Committee, for example, has held that “imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty” for defamation-related offences [8] and has expressed concern over criminal provisions, including sedition and lèse-majesté under the Criminal Code and the CCA. [9] The restrictive, overbroad, ambiguous or imprecise language of these criminal provisions fails to narrow down the scope of the punishable offences in question with a clear definition of the criminalised conduct, establishing its elements and the factors that distinguish it from conduct that is not criminally proscribed. As such, these criminal provisions fail to meet the requirements of international law with respect to the principle of legality; the limited and narrowly defined legitimate fundamental public interests allowed under international human rights law (namely, for the protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms of others, national security, public safety, public order, public health or public morals); necessity; proportionality; non-arbitrariness and non-discrimination. [10] As a result, these criminal provisions give officials wide discretion to unduly limit the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly in the name of public security, order and health, and allow for the imposition of lengthy prison terms. Regardless of whether criminal proceedings lead to prosecution, imprisonment or fines, their use may have the effect of further undermining the enjoyment of defendants’ rights. Individuals are required to commit time and other resources to defend themselves against unwarranted charges. Children and young people are particularly impacted by abuse of the judicial process which may result in stigma and compromise their ability to fully enjoy their right to education. [11] Arbitrary detention According to TLHR, as of June 6, 2024, at least 43 individuals involved in protests were in detention, 19 of whom had been sentenced to imprisonment and 24 of whom were still in pre-trial detention. [12] Of the 24 people, 17 were charged with t lèse-majesté offences. [13] The Thai authorities repeatedly held prominent protesters in detention and denied them temporary release on bail. [14] Under international human rights law and standards guaranteeing the right to liberty and the presumption of innocence, there is a presumption that people charged with a criminal offence will not be detained while awaiting trial. [15] The UN Human Rights Committee has held that a defendant may only be detained pending trial in exceptional circumstances where the authorities must demonstrate that their deprivation of liberty pending trial is both necessary and proportionate, for example, in cases where there is substantial reason to believe that if released, the individual would abscond or commit a serious offence or interfere with the investigation or obstruct the course of justice. [16] In addition, pre-trial detention should not be mandatory for all defendants charged with a particular crime, nor should it be ordered for a period based on the potential sentence for the crime charged rather than on a determination of necessity. [17] Further, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD) has repeatedly and consistently found Thailand’s detention of individuals solely as a result of their peaceful exercise of their right to freedom of expression, including under lèse-majesté provisions and article 14 of the Computer Crimes Act, to be arbitrary. [18] The UNWGAD has expressed grave concern at a pattern of arbitrary detention resulting in serious harm to society by causing a chilling effect and leading individuals to “[refrain] from debates on matters of public interest in order to avoid prosecution.” It has called on the Thai authorities to release individuals arbitrarily detained in violation of Thailand’s human rights obligations, including the right to liberty, the right to a fair trial and the right to freedom of opinion and expression under Articles 3, 8, 9, 10 and 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 2, 9, 14 and 19 the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), by which Thailand is bound as a State party. [19] The United Nations Human Rights Committee [20] and UN Special Procedures, [21] as well as governments during the Universal Periodic Reviews [22] , have made further recommendations to the Thai government to stop arbitrarily detaining individuals and imposing excessive restrictions on the legitimate exercise of the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. Death in custody Netiporn ’Bung’ Sanesangkhom, a 28-year-old woman activist, was among those who were denied bail and was held in arbitrary detention twice due to her peaceful activism. Netiporn faced seven criminal charges because of her involvement in the protest movement, including one charge of lèse-majesté which stemmed from peacefully conducting a public opinion poll on February 8, 2022 about road traffic controls imposed during royal motorcades. [23] She was initially granted temporary release pending her trial, but on May 3, 2022, the Southern Bangkok Criminal Court revoked bail and remanded her in custody in the lèse-majesté case mentioned above because Netiporn had continued to take part in peaceful assemblies and had violated a bail condition requiring her to refrain from “joining a protest that causes public disorder”. [24] She then went on her first hunger strike until she was temporarily released on August 4, 2022. [25] More recently, in a separate case, on January 26, 2024, Netiporn was sentenced to one month’s imprisonment for contempt of court. [26] In late February 2024, her detention was then extended, as the Bangkok Criminal Court t revoked bail and remanded her in custody for the same aforementioned lèse-majesté case against her, which was still pending. [27] Starting on January 27, 2024, she went on her second hunger strike, this time for more than 65 days, to protest her detention and the detention of other activists. [28] Eventually, she reportedly suffered a cardiac arrest on May 14, 2024 and passed away, while in the Central Women’s Correctional Institute Hospital. [29] Under international human rights law and standards, the Thai authorities must respect, protect, and fulfill the right to life of everyone under their jurisdiction, including people in detention. There is a presumption of State liability for arbitrary deprivation of life that arises in connection with custodial deaths. Such presumption may be rebutted only when the State is exonerated of any liability through a prompt, thorough, effective, independent, impartial and transparent investigation into the circumstances and causes of such a death, which is an essential requirement to uphold the right to life. [30] Thailand is further obligated under international human rights law to provide medical care for everyone deprived of their liberty. Thailand is a State Party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has stated that governments must respect the right to health by ensuring equal access to health services for all persons, including prisoners. [31] The 1990 UN Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners stipulate that prisoners should have access to the same health services as the general population in a country without discrimination. [32] Additionally, the revised 2015 UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules) restate that right and mandate prompt access to medical attention in urgent cases and the transfer of prisoners requiring specialised treatment or surgery to appropriate facilities, which can also be civil hospitals if needed. [33] Recommendations The abuse of the judicial process and the arbitrary detention of human rights defenders, activists and protesters constitute violations of Thailand’s obligations under international human rights law, as would any failure to effectively investigate the custodial death of Netiporn ‘Bung’ Sanesangkhom. The Thai government must act to uphold its commitments to protect human rights and ensure the rights to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, liberty and security of person, due process guarantee, and the right to life, among other rights, are respected. The Thai authorities need to take immediate steps outlined below to address the concerns raised in this letter and to demonstrate their adherence to their international human rights obligations, with a view to fostering an environment where human rights are fully respected and protected. These actions are essential to comply with the ICCPR and other international standards. To end the abuse of the judicial process and the arbitrary detention of human rights defenders and activists, we call on the Thai authorities to: • Respect, protect and fulfil the rights of everyone, including of children and other young people, to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly; • Conduct a thorough review of the bail process to align it with international human rights law and standards, ensuring that detention in connection with the legitimate exercise of human rights is arbitrary and unlawful, and pre-trial detention be the exception rather than the rule; • Immediately and unconditionally release individuals from arbitrary detention, drop criminal investigations and prosecutions and quash convictions related solely to their exercise of their rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly; • Repeal or amend laws used to stifle peaceful dissent, including by bringing the lèse-majesté (Article 112) and sedition (Article 116) provisions and the CCA in line with international human rights law and standards on freedom of expression, as recommended by the Human Rights Council’s Special Procedures and the UN Human Rights Committee; and • Establish regular, structured dialogue with civil society organisations to address concerns referred to in this letter and involve them in relevant policy-making processes. To address the concerns around the death in custody of Netiporn, take the following actions: • Conduct a prompt, effective, thorough, independent, impartial and transparent investigation into the circumstances and cause of Netiporn’s death, in line with international human rights law and standards, including in the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), to establish accountability and prevent future occurrences; • Provide appropriate forms of remedy, including compensation and other forms of reparations, as warranted in line with international law; and • Ensure the right to health for all detainees, as a minimum as mandated by the Nelson Mandela Rules, including by providing prompt access to medical attention and necessary specialised treatment or surgery as needed. The undersigned organisations remain committed to working with relevant government agencies to provide any additional information you may need in order to fulfill these recommendations.    

Footnotes

[1] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้, 14 May 2024, https://tlhr2014.com/archives/66964 [2] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, พฤษภาคม 2567: จำนวนผู้ถูกดำเนินคดีทางการเมืองยอดรวม 1,954 คน ใน 1,296 คดี, 5 June 2024, https://tlhr2014.com/archives/67575 [3] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, พฤษภาคม 2567: จำนวนผู้ถูกดำเนินคดีทางการเมืองยอดรวม 1,954 คน ใน 1,296 คดี (previously cited). [4] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, พฤษภาคม 2567: จำนวนผู้ถูกดำเนินคดีทางการเมืองยอดรวม 1,954 คน ใน 1,296 คดี (previously cited). [5] Information documented by Thai Lawyers for Human Rights [6] See Amnesty International, “Thailand: 87-year prison sentence handed in harshest lèse-majesté conviction,” 19 January 2021, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2021/01/thailand-87-prison-sentence-lese-majeste and Guardian, “Man jailed for record 50 years for criticising Thai monarchy” 18 January 2024, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/18/man-jailed-for-record-50-years-for-criticising-thai-monarchy#: :text=A%20Thai%20man%20has%20been,a%20 legal%20rights%20group%20said. [7] UN Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Thailand, 25 April 2017, UN Doc. CCPR/C/THA/CO/2, paras 35-38, https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/concluding-observations/ccprcthaco2-concluding-observations-second-periodic-report (‘2017 Concluding Observations’) [8] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 19; Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 34 on Article 19: Freedoms of opinion and expression, 12 September 2011, UN Doc. CCPR/C/GC/34, paras 30, 38 and 47, https://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrc/docs/gc34.pdf. [9] UN Human Rights Committee, 2017 Concluding Observations (previously cited). [10] For further analysis of the laws against international human rights law and standards, see: ICJ, Dictating the Internet: Curtailing Free Expression, Opinion and Information Online in Thailand, April 2021, Part III, https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Thailand-Dictating-the-Internet-FoE-Publication-2021-ENG.pdf [11] Amnesty International Thailand, ‘แอมเนสตี้-ศูนย์ทนาย’ ดำเนินคดีของเด็กและเยาวชน 3 ปี สร้าง 7 ผลกระทบ แนะ 6 ข้อ ก. ยุติธรรม, 21 พฤศจิกายน 2566, https://www.amnesty.or.th/latest/news/1190 [12] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, รายชื่อผู้ต้องขังทางการเมือง 2567, 6 June 2024, https://tlhr2014.com/archives/63015 [13] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, รายชื่อผู้ต้องขังทางการเมือง 2567 (previously cited). [14] This pattern of arbitrary detention through the denial of bail has been ongoing since 2021. See, for example, Amnesty International, Urgent Action: Peaceful protestors may face 100+ years in prison, 24 March 2021, Index: ASA 39/3891/2021, https://www.amnesty.org/fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/ASA3938912021ENGLISH.pdf; and Amnesty International, Thailand: Immediately drop unjustified charges against protest leader, 24 September 2021, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2021/09/amnesty-thailand-protest-leader-arrest/; Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, The expanding universe of legal persecutions: Examining various developments following the #19Sept protest (Part 2), 29 June 2021, https://tlhr2014.com/en/archives/31397 [15] Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 35 on Article 9: Liberty and security of person, 16 December 2014, UN Doc. CCPR/C/GC/35, https://www.ohchr.org/en/calls-for-input/general-comment-no-35-article-9-liberty-and-security-person, para 38. [16] Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 35 on Article 9: Liberty and security of person (previously cited). [17] Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 35 on Article 9: Liberty and security of person (previously cited). [18] See the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (UNWGAD), Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its ninety-seventh session, 28 August–1 September 2023, 23 October 2023, UN Doc. A/HRC/WGAD/2023/49, para 61(a). The UNWGAD also referred to its opinions No. 35/2012, No. 41/2014, No. 43/2015, No. 44/2016 and No. 51/2017, which made the same assessment. [19] UNWGAD, Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its ninety-seventh session, 28 August–1 September 2023, para 71-72 (previously cited). [20] UN Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Thailand, 25 April 2017, UN Doc. CCPR/C/THA/CO/2, https://documents.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/g17/099/90/pdf/g1709990.pdf?token=co1x9EVLWuVMLTDQbb&fe=true, para 25-26. [21] See recent examples of such communications from UN Special Rapporteurs at UN Special Procedures, Joint allegation letter, 13 March 2024, UN Doc. AL THA 3/2024, https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=28802; and UN Special Procedures, Joint allegation letter, 5 May 2023, UN Doc. AL THA 2/2023, https://spcommreports.ohchr.org/TMResultsBase/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=28064 [22] Thailand received at least four recommendations on arbitrary arrest and detention of activists during the Universal Periodic Review in 2021. See United Nations Human Rights Council, Report of the Working Group on the Univesal Periodic Review: Thailand, 21 December 2021, UN Doc. A/HRC/49/17, recommendation 52.47 by Mexico (“Decriminalize freedom of expression and peaceful assembly and avoid the detention of minors for exercising these rights”), recommendation 52.52 by Austria (“Guarantee the rights to freedom of expression and assembly and stop targeting civilians engaging in peaceful protests under criminal charges entailing punishment with exorbitant prison terms”), recommendation 52.60 by Sweden (“Amend article 112 of the criminal code on royal defamation to bring it into line with Thailand’s international human rights obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and, as an intermediate step, remove mandatory minimum prison terms for violations of that provision”) and recommendation 52.83 by Ireland (“End arbitrary detentions, arrests and any acts of harassment against political actors and civil society, including human rights defenders”). [23] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited). [24] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, ศาลสั่งถอนประกัน “ใบปอ – เนติพร” ผู้ต้องหา ม.112 คดีทำโพลขบวนเสด็จ ชี้สร้างความวุ่นวายกับกลุ่มผู้ชุมนุมอื่น ผิดเงื่อนไขประกัน, 5 May 2022, https://tlhr2014.com/archives/43235 [25] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited). [26] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited). [27] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited). [28] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited) [29] Thai Lawyers for Human Rights, บุ้ง เนติพร เสียชีวิตระหว่างการควบคุมตัวของ จนท.ราชทัณฑ์ รอชันสูตรพลิกศพต่อในวันพรุ่งนี้ (previously cited) [30] International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 6(1); the UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (1989), and its companion document, the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016). See also: Amnesty International, Thailand: Tragic death of detained activist must be ‘wake-up call’, 14 May 2024, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/05/thailand-tragic-death-of-detained-activist-must-be-wake-up-call/ [31] International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR), Article 12. See also CESCR, General Comment No. 14: The Right to the Highest Attainable Standard of Health (Art. 12), 11 August 2000, UN Doc. E/C.12/2000/4, para. 34. [32] Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners, Rule No. 9. [33] United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, Rules No. 24 and 27.]]> Tunisie: Attaques et actes d’intimidation à l’encontre de l’association DAMJ et de sa coordinatrice Mira Ben Salah https://observatoryfordefenders.org/alert/tunisie-attaques-et-actes-dintimidation-a-lencontre-de-lassociation-damj-et-de-sa-coordinatrice-mira-ben-salah/ Fri, 05 Apr 2024 19:51:04 +0000 https://observatoryfordefenders.org/?post_type=alert&p=21947 Mira Ben Salah (de son nom de naissance Amine Ben Salah). DAMJ est une organisation œuvrant à la promotion de la justice, de l’égalité et de l’inclusion des communautés les plus vulnérables en Tunisie, et en particulier la communauté LGBTIQ+. L’organisation travaille activement à la protection des personnes marginalisées, discriminées et criminalisées du fait de leur identité de genre ou de leur orientation sexuelle. Le 27 février 2024, le bureau de l’association DAMJ situé à Sfax a fait l’objet d’une descente de police. Aux alentours de 11 heures, la coordinatrice du bureau Mira Ben Salah a entendu des coups de poings et coups de pieds agressifs sur la porte du bureau. Effrayée, elle n’a pas immédiatement répondu mais a fini par ouvrir la porte tandis que les individus tentaient de forcer l’entrée à l’aide d’un objet en acier. Lorsqu’elle a ouvert la porte, trois hommes en civil se sont présentés comme des policiers et ont demandé à voir la pièce d’identité de Mme Ben Salah et d’avoir accès au bureau. Mme Ben Salah a demandé que lui soit présenté un mandat de perquisition, sans quoi elle refuserait l’accès au bureau et ne présenterait sa carte d’identité que si elle recevait une convocation officielle. Face au refus de Mira Ben Salah, l’un des policiers s’est montré de plus en plus agressif, a tenté de la pousser, a menacé de la placer en garde à vue et a affirmé que les activités de l’association étaient illégales. Mme Ben Salah n’a pas cédé aux menaces et les policiers sont repartis. Des voisins ont informé les membres de DAMJ qu’avant de se présenter à leur bureau, les policiers avaient questionné les habitant·es de l’immeuble quant aux activités de l’association et à l’identité de ses bénéficiaires. Le même jour, suite à la visite des agents de police, le bureau de l’association a reçu six appels des services de police. Mme Ben Salah a été sommée de se présenter au poste de police le plus rapidement possible avec son contrat de travail ainsi que les documents attestant du statut juridique de l’association, sans quoi des agents de police reviendraient avec un mandat de perquisition. Mme Ben Salah s’est alors présentée au poste de police accompagnée d’une avocate et a affirmé vouloir porter plainte pour harcèlement contre le policier qui l’avait menacée. La plainte a finalement été déposée auprès du procureur de la République le 29 mars 2024. Depuis ces incidents du 27 février 2024, Mira Ben Salah affirme faire l’objet de harcèlement croissant de la part des forces de l’ordre, dont la présence autour du bureau de DAMJ s’est renforcée. Les agents de police contrôlent son identité quasi quotidiennement et accompagnent ces contrôles de moqueries et insultes liées à l’identité de genre de Mme Ben Salah. Les bénéficiaires de DAMJ se sentent également plus exposé·es et craignent pour leur sécurité lorsqu’ils et elles se rendent au bureau de l’association. Par ailleurs, les 19 et 22 février 2024, Mme Ben Salah avait déjà fait l’objet de harcèlement à travers plusieurs appels téléphoniques au cours desquels elle a reçu des menaces, y compris des menaces de mort. L’Observatoire précise que ces actes d’intimidation font suite à la dénonciation par DAMJ, dans un communiqué du 26 janvier 2024, de l’intensification des menaces à l’encontre de la communauté LGBTIQ+ et de ses défenseur·es de la part des autorités tunisiennes. Le communiqué évoquait notamment la déclaration portée par des parlementaires le 1er décembre 2023, lors d’une séance plénière de l’Assemblée des représentants du peuple (ARP) en présence de la ministre de la Famille, de la Femme, de l'Enfant et des Personnes âgées, selon lesquels il était essentiel de contrer le phénomène portant atteinte à la famille traditionnelle, en faisant référence à l'homosexualité. DAMJ a également documenté l’arrestation arbitraire et la criminalisation d’au moins 10 personnes en janvier 2024 du fait de leur appartenance à la communauté LGBTIQ+. L’Observatoire rappelle par ailleurs que ce n’est pas la première fois que l’association DAMJ et ses membres font l’objet de menaces du fait de leurs activités. En août 2023, Malek Khedhri, un créateur de contenu tunisien, a utilisé les plateformes Instagram et TikTok pour lancer une campagne de haine et de violence contre la communauté LGBTIQ+. Ses comptes Instagram et TikTok ont alors été suspendus grâce aux signalements massifs de la communauté, suite à quoi le créateur de contenu a créé des groupes Telegram rassemblant environ 1000 participants, au sein desquels ont été partagées des photos et des vidéos de membres de DAMJ, y compris de Mme Mira Ben Salah, ainsi que les adresses et les numéros des bureaux de l’association, appelant à la violence et aux attaques contre les membres de DAMJ et les bénéficiaires de l’association. Le 8 août 2023, DAMJ a déposé une plainte contre Malek Khedhri auprès du procureur de la République près le Tribunal de première instance de Tunis. Le créateur de contenu a été convoqué, interrogé, puis poursuivi devant le Tribunal de première instance de Tunis. Au moment de la publication de cet Appel Urgent, l’'affaire est toujours en cours et la prochaine audience est prévue pour le 29 avril 2024. En outre, en juillet 2023, le bureau de Sfax de DAMJ avait déjà fait l’objet de harcèlement téléphonique de la part des services de police menaçant l’association de perquisitionner leur bureau et de remettre en cause la légalité de leurs activités. Le 21 août 2023, DAMJ a déposé une plainte auprès de l'inspection générale du Ministère de l'intérieur, demandant une enquête administrative. Au moment de la publication de cet Appel Urgent, aucune suite n’a été donnée à cette demande. L’Observatoire rappelle également que DAMJ fait l’objet de menaces et d’actes de harcèlement depuis de nombreuses années. En mars 2021, plusieurs membres de l’association avaient fait l’objet d’actes de surveillance, d’agressions, d’arrestations et de détention arbitraires, de harcèlement judiciaire, de menaces de mort et d’intrusion à leur domicile. L’Observatoire exprime sa vive inquiétude face aux nouvelles attaques et actes d’intimidation à l’encontre de DAMJ et de ses membres, qui ne semblent viser qu’à les dissuader d’exercer leurs activités légitimes de défense des droits humains. L’Observatoire appelle les autorités tunisiennes, et en particulier le Ministère de l’intérieur, à mettre un terme à toute forme de harcèlement et d’intimidation à l’encontre des membres de DAMJ, et à mener une enquête indépendante, rigoureuse, impartiale et transparente afin d’en identifier les responsables et de les traduire devant un tribunal indépendant, compétent et impartial. L’Observatoire appelle également les autorités tunisiennes, et en particulier le Ministère de l’intérieur, à prendre toutes les mesures nécessaires afin d’assurer la sécurité de Mira Ben Salah et de tou·tes les membres de DAMJ, et à garantir les droits à la liberté d’association et d’expression dans le pays.]]> Mira Ben Salah (de son nom de naissance Amine Ben Salah). DAMJ est une organisation œuvrant à la promotion de la justice, de l’égalité et de l’inclusion des communautés les plus vulnérables en Tunisie, et en particulier la communauté LGBTIQ+. L’organisation travaille activement à la protection des personnes marginalisées, discriminées et criminalisées du fait de leur identité de genre ou de leur orientation sexuelle. Le 27 février 2024, le bureau de l’association DAMJ situé à Sfax a fait l’objet d’une descente de police. Aux alentours de 11 heures, la coordinatrice du bureau Mira Ben Salah a entendu des coups de poings et coups de pieds agressifs sur la porte du bureau. Effrayée, elle n’a pas immédiatement répondu mais a fini par ouvrir la porte tandis que les individus tentaient de forcer l’entrée à l’aide d’un objet en acier. Lorsqu’elle a ouvert la porte, trois hommes en civil se sont présentés comme des policiers et ont demandé à voir la pièce d’identité de Mme Ben Salah et d’avoir accès au bureau. Mme Ben Salah a demandé que lui soit présenté un mandat de perquisition, sans quoi elle refuserait l’accès au bureau et ne présenterait sa carte d’identité que si elle recevait une convocation officielle. Face au refus de Mira Ben Salah, l’un des policiers s’est montré de plus en plus agressif, a tenté de la pousser, a menacé de la placer en garde à vue et a affirmé que les activités de l’association étaient illégales. Mme Ben Salah n’a pas cédé aux menaces et les policiers sont repartis. Des voisins ont informé les membres de DAMJ qu’avant de se présenter à leur bureau, les policiers avaient questionné les habitant·es de l’immeuble quant aux activités de l’association et à l’identité de ses bénéficiaires. Le même jour, suite à la visite des agents de police, le bureau de l’association a reçu six appels des services de police. Mme Ben Salah a été sommée de se présenter au poste de police le plus rapidement possible avec son contrat de travail ainsi que les documents attestant du statut juridique de l’association, sans quoi des agents de police reviendraient avec un mandat de perquisition. Mme Ben Salah s’est alors présentée au poste de police accompagnée d’une avocate et a affirmé vouloir porter plainte pour harcèlement contre le policier qui l’avait menacée. La plainte a finalement été déposée auprès du procureur de la République le 29 mars 2024. Depuis ces incidents du 27 février 2024, Mira Ben Salah affirme faire l’objet de harcèlement croissant de la part des forces de l’ordre, dont la présence autour du bureau de DAMJ s’est renforcée. Les agents de police contrôlent son identité quasi quotidiennement et accompagnent ces contrôles de moqueries et insultes liées à l’identité de genre de Mme Ben Salah. Les bénéficiaires de DAMJ se sentent également plus exposé·es et craignent pour leur sécurité lorsqu’ils et elles se rendent au bureau de l’association. Par ailleurs, les 19 et 22 février 2024, Mme Ben Salah avait déjà fait l’objet de harcèlement à travers plusieurs appels téléphoniques au cours desquels elle a reçu des menaces, y compris des menaces de mort. L’Observatoire précise que ces actes d’intimidation font suite à la dénonciation par DAMJ, dans un communiqué du 26 janvier 2024, de l’intensification des menaces à l’encontre de la communauté LGBTIQ+ et de ses défenseur·es de la part des autorités tunisiennes. Le communiqué évoquait notamment la déclaration portée par des parlementaires le 1er décembre 2023, lors d’une séance plénière de l’Assemblée des représentants du peuple (ARP) en présence de la ministre de la Famille, de la Femme, de l'Enfant et des Personnes âgées, selon lesquels il était essentiel de contrer le phénomène portant atteinte à la famille traditionnelle, en faisant référence à l'homosexualité. DAMJ a également documenté l’arrestation arbitraire et la criminalisation d’au moins 10 personnes en janvier 2024 du fait de leur appartenance à la communauté LGBTIQ+. L’Observatoire rappelle par ailleurs que ce n’est pas la première fois que l’association DAMJ et ses membres font l’objet de menaces du fait de leurs activités. En août 2023, Malek Khedhri, un créateur de contenu tunisien, a utilisé les plateformes Instagram et TikTok pour lancer une campagne de haine et de violence contre la communauté LGBTIQ+. Ses comptes Instagram et TikTok ont alors été suspendus grâce aux signalements massifs de la communauté, suite à quoi le créateur de contenu a créé des groupes Telegram rassemblant environ 1000 participants, au sein desquels ont été partagées des photos et des vidéos de membres de DAMJ, y compris de Mme Mira Ben Salah, ainsi que les adresses et les numéros des bureaux de l’association, appelant à la violence et aux attaques contre les membres de DAMJ et les bénéficiaires de l’association. Le 8 août 2023, DAMJ a déposé une plainte contre Malek Khedhri auprès du procureur de la République près le Tribunal de première instance de Tunis. Le créateur de contenu a été convoqué, interrogé, puis poursuivi devant le Tribunal de première instance de Tunis. Au moment de la publication de cet Appel Urgent, l’'affaire est toujours en cours et la prochaine audience est prévue pour le 29 avril 2024. En outre, en juillet 2023, le bureau de Sfax de DAMJ avait déjà fait l’objet de harcèlement téléphonique de la part des services de police menaçant l’association de perquisitionner leur bureau et de remettre en cause la légalité de leurs activités. Le 21 août 2023, DAMJ a déposé une plainte auprès de l'inspection générale du Ministère de l'intérieur, demandant une enquête administrative. Au moment de la publication de cet Appel Urgent, aucune suite n’a été donnée à cette demande. L’Observatoire rappelle également que DAMJ fait l’objet de menaces et d’actes de harcèlement depuis de nombreuses années. En mars 2021, plusieurs membres de l’association avaient fait l’objet d’actes de surveillance, d’agressions, d’arrestations et de détention arbitraires, de harcèlement judiciaire, de menaces de mort et d’intrusion à leur domicile. L’Observatoire exprime sa vive inquiétude face aux nouvelles attaques et actes d’intimidation à l’encontre de DAMJ et de ses membres, qui ne semblent viser qu’à les dissuader d’exercer leurs activités légitimes de défense des droits humains. L’Observatoire appelle les autorités tunisiennes, et en particulier le Ministère de l’intérieur, à mettre un terme à toute forme de harcèlement et d’intimidation à l’encontre des membres de DAMJ, et à mener une enquête indépendante, rigoureuse, impartiale et transparente afin d’en identifier les responsables et de les traduire devant un tribunal indépendant, compétent et impartial. L’Observatoire appelle également les autorités tunisiennes, et en particulier le Ministère de l’intérieur, à prendre toutes les mesures nécessaires afin d’assurer la sécurité de Mira Ben Salah et de tou·tes les membres de DAMJ, et à garantir les droits à la liberté d’association et d’expression dans le pays.]]>