Viet Nam Human Rights
Operated by the US State Department, the anti-terrorism programme offers money for information on people outside the country, who the Government has designated as being associated with terrorism, although they have not been charged with any crimes.
It also offers financial incentives to foreigners who claim to have terrorist ties, if they cooperate with US authorities.
Targeting fugitives
“Many of the people targeted by the Rewards for Justice programme have had their due process rights denied”, Alena Douhan, Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures said, in a statement endorsed by UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention.
Offering money to foreign individuals, allegedly involved in or associated with US-deemed terrorist activity – including Iran, Cuba and other States – comes with the threat of sanctions should they not cooperate with Washington’s demands.
According to the UN experts, these sanctions violate a number of rights, including their right to work, freedom of movement, reputation and life.
Moreover, there is no possibility of accessing justice to protect these rights.
Ms. Douhan maintained that as those rights entail the presumption of innocence and fair trial, which the US is obliged under international law to respect, by offering money for information towards capture, “the programme encourages others to participate in the denial of these rights”.
“Such offers are reminiscent of wanted posters that target fugitives from justice – fugitives charged with crimes or who have warrants for their arrest”, she said.
Forced labour
The Special Rapporteur made the case that pushing “an individual [to] carry out tasks against their will under the threat of a penalty” amounts to forced labour, as defined by International Labour Organization (ILO) agreements.
Noting that the US has accepted that definition, she reminded that “forced labour is prohibited by treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the United States has ratified”.
Respect international law in fighting terrorism
Ms. Douhan respectfully urged the US Government to review its Rewards for Justice Programme “to ensure that its activities are aligned with international law”.
Fighting terrorism...shall only be done with due respect to human rights -- Special Rapporteur
“Fighting terrorism is obviously necessary, but it shall only be done with due respect to human rights, international humanitarian and refugee law, in line with the UN Global Strategy on Counter-Terrorism”, she spelled out.
The Special Rapporteur has raised this with the US Government, along with other issues concerning her mandate, but has thus far received no response, the experts’ statement said.
Special Rapporteurs and independent experts are appointed by the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council, to examine and report back on a specific human rights theme or a country situation. Their positions are honorary, and they are not paid for their work.
All comments [ 20 ]
Since September 11th there has been a profound change not only in America’s attitude toward international relations but also in its domestic approach to civil liberties and the rule of law.
Post world war II multilateralism has been mitigated by the veto power of the permanent members of the security counsel and the preponderant presence of the U.S. in the financial institutions of the U.N.
America’s aggressive unilateralism is combined with a multilateralism of convenience that goes along with the formation of ad-hoc « coalitions of the willing » that can « rotate » and will no longer automatically include all of the long established allies.
After 9/11 this exceptionalism in international affairs went along with a progressive and dramatic change in the domestic balance of power.
The unprecedented scale of the terrorist attacks and the blind hate and apocalyptic state of mind of their fanatic perpetrators, created panic in the US.
Fear of an enemy causes voters and legislators alike to relax their vigilance in defense of civil liberties
One should not take the stance of superiority in criticizing this inclination to justify the state of exception, because it is part of the logic of politics even in a democracy that abides by the rule of law.
Terrorists exploit the freedom and rights that citizens and foreigners enjoy in open and democratic societies; they need those freedoms like parasites to be able to deploy and execute their evil plans and thereby they provoke those open societies to close themselves and to restrict these freedoms and rights
The distinction between rules and rights that apply in peaceful times and the temporarily suspension of these rules and rights in emergency situations is an accepted distinction in the constitutional theory and practice of democratic societies.
What is dangerous is the lack of convincing justification for the undetermined prolongation of this state of emergency and the political instrumentalisation of abstract risk to extend executive power beyond what is necessary to combat actual and potential threats
Each state party, to the extent it has not already done so, shall institute a legal and regulatory regime to prevent, combat, and eradicate the financing of terrorism and for effective international cooperation with respect thereto
Each state party shall establish and maintain a financial intelligence unit to serve as a national center for the collection, analysis, and dissemination of pertinent money laundering and terrorist financing information.
The states parties, consistent with their respective domestic legal and administrative regimes, shall promote cooperation and the exchange of information in order to improve border and customs control measures to detect and prevent the international movement of terrorists and trafficking in arms or other materials intended to support terrorist activities.
Marking the twentieth anniversary of the landmark anti-terrorism resolution adopted in the wake of the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, the Security Council today renewed its determination to further strengthen the unified and coordinated international response against those heinous acts.
Any counter‑terrorism measures comply with all their obligations under international law, in particular international human rights law, international refugee law and international humanitarian law, noting that failure to do so contributes to increased radicalization to violence and fosters a sense of impunity.
Foreign terrorist fighters increase the intensity, duration and intractability of conflicts and may pose a serious threat to their States of origin, transit and destination.
Terrorists have sought to exploit disruptions arising from COVID-19, attempting to benefit from the setbacks to the development and human rights agendas, riding on the wavetops of polarization and hate speech amplified by the pandemic.
Terrorists are adapting quickly, keen to exploit cyberspace and new technologies, linkages with organized crime, as well as regulatory, human and technical gaps in national capacities
Key measures needed, including: international solidarity through practical collaboration and impactful capacity-building; law enforcement and criminal justice responses, as mandated by the Council, to detect, deter and bring terrorists to justice; a renewed commitment to address the underlying conditions and drivers of terrorism that enable it to sustain and spread; a strategic investment in building resilience to terrorism; and engaging more with youth, civil society, the private sector and the scientific community in the fight against the scourge. Public-private partnerships are vital in this regard.
We must continue to remember and honour all victims and survivors of terrorism; promote their rights and needs; and provide them with avenues for healing through justice and support
Your comments