Hague attacks Aung San Suu Kyi detention

William Hague has described the decision to extend the detention of the Burmese pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi as an attempt to “suppress democracy”.

Aung San Suu Kyi has been illegally detained by the Burmese authorities for 14 of the last 20 years.

And William, the Shadow Foreign Secretary, attacked the decision by a Burmese court to sentence her to an additional 18 months' house arrest:

“Today’s verdict is an entirely politically motivated move intended to suppress democracy and shut off this courageous woman and leader from her people and confirms that the election scheduled for next year would be no more than a sham.”

William said he supported the EU agreement to impose tough new sanctions on the regime in Burma, including a ban on all new investment and sanctions on financial transactions.

And he called on the EU to support a commission of inquiry to establish if the Burmese generals are guilty of committing crimes against humanity and if they should ultimately face trial by the ICC.

Aegis calls on Government to adopt Parliament’s recommendations and completely close the ‘impunity gap’ for genocide suspects in UK

In a report released today, the Parliamentary Joint Select Committee on Human Rights says inconsistencies in the way the UK applies international law have created an “impunity gap” for perpetrators of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. It commends the Government's recent decision to amend to legislation to partially address the problem, but calls for it to close remaining loopholes in the law and to re-establish a specialist war crimes unit to investigate people in the UK who are suspected of such offences.

Under the law as it stands, no-one in the UK can be prosecuted for war crimes in internal armed conflicts, genocide or crimes against humanity committed before 2001. Even if people here are suspected of committing such offences since 2001, they can only be prosecuted if legally resident here, not merely if they are present in the country (for eg., visiting on a student or business visa).

The Aegis Trust worked with MPs and Lord Carlile QC, Lord Falconer QC and Baroness D’Souza to prepare amendments to the Coroners and Criminal Justice Bill which would have closed these loopholes. Tabled in the House of Lords, they triggered the Government’s decision last month to extend jurisdiction of UK courts to prosecute international crimes as far back as 1991.

As the Committee points out, however, this only takes jurisdiction back to the date on which Crimes Against Humanity became recognised as crimes in international law. It argues for jurisdiction on genocide and war crimes in internal armed conflicts to be extended back to the dates on which they were recognised in international law (e.g. 1948 for genocide).

The Committee also supports Aegis’ call for replacement of the ‘residence’ test with a simple ‘presence’ test, so that anyone present on UK soil could be subject to jurisdiction on international crimes, not only those who are legally resident. This is the test used by other common law countries such as Canada, the US, New Zealand, South Africa.

“The Aegis Trust is delighted that the Joint Committee on Human Rights has adopted all of our recommendations for strengthening UK law in this area,” says Aegis’ Head of Campaigns Nick Donovan, whose evidence is quoted in the Committee’s report. “We too commend the Government for the bold progress made last month, and call on it to finish the job by closing remaining legal loopholes which benefit suspected war criminals in the UK.”

In June Aegis published a report that brought together, for the first time, details of people entering the UK who are suspected of international crimes. The report – 'Suspected war criminals and genocidaires in the UK: Proposals to strengthen UK law' – examines 18 cases, including those of suspected genocidaires from Rwanda, alleged torturers from Zimbabwe, Iraq, Liberia and the Congo, and alleged war criminals from Afghanistan, Sudan, Sierra Leone and Sri Lanka. They include such people as a Lieutenant Colonel from KHAD, the Soviet-era Afghan government’s secret police; an alleged Tamil Tiger assassination hit squad driver, and a member of Sierra Leone’s ‘Mosquito’ rebel group, notorious for murder, rape, looting, burning, sexual slavery and forced amputations.

The Joint Committee’s report comes at a time when the workload of the UK Border Agency’s war crimes team is increasing. Several weeks ago, the Government revealed that in the first six months of 2009, recommendations of immigration status refusal following investigation were up four-fold on the preceding four years. Since 2004, there have been 421 cases where immigration action was recommended and 30 cases where the matter was referred was made to the police. How many of these people are currently at large in the UK is unclear.

PRIME MINISTERS' GENOCIDE ANNOUNCEMENT: Peers and NGOs say: "Very good news - but it doesn't go far enough"

The Aegis Trust, JUSTICE and REDRESS welcome the government's decision to apply the jurisdiction of UK courts to prosecute genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes retrospectively back to January 1^st 1991. This follows amendments tabled to the Coroners and Justice Bill by Lord Carlile QC, Baroness D’Souza, and Lord Falconer QC. When it comes to ending impunity for mass atrocities, this bold move by the government is as significant as the War Crimes Act 1991 and the International Criminal Court Act 2001. "Until now, it has only been possible to prosecute these crimes in the UK if they were committed after 2001," explains Sally Ireland of JUSTICE. "In practice, this means that four Rwandans resident in the UK and suspected of genocide in 1994, who recently won their High Court appeal against extradition to Rwanda, can now face trial in the United Kingdom. This is a real step forward."

But even after the reforms "there remain serious loopholes in our laws on atrocity crimes," warns Kevin Laue of REDRESS. "Unless the government gets tougher the UK will continue to be a safe haven for those suspected of the most heinous offences." The Aegis Trust, JUSTICE and REDRESS call on the government to replace the unclear residency requirement for prosecution of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity with a simple presence test. Suspects who have been 'present' in the UK since the 1990s but not 'resident' include Felicien Kabuga, the alleged financier of the Rwandan genocide and Chucky Taylor, former head of the anti-terrorist unit in Liberia, who was recently convicted in the United States for torture. Border Agency statistics indicate it is likely that there may be other suspects present in the United Kingdom who are being refused residency status but who, rightly, cannot be removed for human rights reasons. Under current law, and even with the Government's proposed changes announced today, these people would still be immune from prosecution in the United Kingdom.

A simple presence test for prosecution - as called for in the amendments tabled by Baroness D’Souza, Lord Carlile QC and Lord Falconer QC to the Coroners and Justice Bill - would bring us into line with other common law countries, including Canada, New Zealand and South Africa and the United States. It would also bring our laws on genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity into line with our laws on torture, hostage taking and grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. For these latter three crimes, UK courts do not apply a residency test for prosecution. There is no practical or sensible reason for a jurisdictional difference between these crimes, all of which belong to the same bracket of serious violations of international criminal law. "Why should we be able to prosecute visiting torturers but not génocidaires?" asks Nick Donovan, Head of Campaigns at the Aegis Trust.

Today’s announcement is important and demonstrates significant progress in breaking down barriers to prosecution. When it comes to genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, however, the Government's position should be unequivocal. It should respond to every credible allegation of the presence in the United Kingdom of any individual who may have committed these crimes. If these suspects cannot be deported or extradited, they must be prosecuted here. Otherwise the impunity gap remains and the UK government is effectively condoning the presence on UK soil of suspected mass murderers without any prospect of arrest or trial.

DARFURI SURVIVORS TO RALLY IN LONDON AS ICC DECIDES ON BASHIR ARREST WARRANT

Today the judges at the ICC will announce whether or not they are going to issue an arrest warrant for Omar Bashir, the President of Sudan, on charges of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide in Darfur.

If a warrant is issued, it will be the first time that such a step has been taken against a sitting head of state. As the ICC judges announce their decision in the Hague, Darfuri survivors will be gathered in capital cities across Europe to remember their murdered loved ones and destroyed communities – the victims of this crisis, whose slaughter demands justice.

London rally. In London, they will congregate for a commemoration outside the Sudanese Embassy from midday to 2.00pm, reading out the names of over a thousand victims and holding a minute’s silence at 1.00pm, the moment the ICC’s decision is announced.

“Khartoum will make a lot of noise that this is a politically motivated assault on the President, and through him, the Sudanese state and Sudanese people,” says Ishag Mekki, Humanitarian Officer for the Darfur Union – the umbrella group for Darfuri exiles living in the UK. “Amid that noise, just remember that on Bashir’s watch, millions of Sudanese men, women and children have been driven from their homes, killed or raped in Darfur. Not because they carry guns, but because of who they are. This is a matter of justice, not politics. And we, the survivors, know how desperately justice is needed.”

Darfur perpetrators implicate Bashir

Ahead of the ICC’s announcement, in a film released by the Aegis Trust (see earlier article) even the perpetrators themselves have begun to speak out against their masters in Khartoum; Janjaweed fighters describing how they call in Government airstrikes before attacking, and soldiers explaining how they were ordered by senior officers to rape girls as young as eleven or twelve.

“The rape and murder of the innocent is completely contrary to the tenets of Islam. It is contrary to basic principles of humanity. And it is a crime in International law. Would you accept it if your loved ones were the victims?”, asks Nejwa Gabir Ahmed, a survivor from Darfur living in the UK. She adds: “Unless the perpetrators are brought to justice, and unless justice is seen to be done, there will never be peace and reconciliation in Darfur. And we, the exiled, will never be able to return to our homeland with peace in our hearts.”

Call to UN Security Council: resist pressure from Khartoum over Article 16

It is widely expected that if the ICC issues an arrest warrant for Omar Bashir, politicians and diplomats in many quarters will increase the pressure for the UN Security Council to invoke Article 16 and suspend the process of international justice for Darfur.

“I ask the decision-makers at the UN Security Council; do not lightly trade away justice for the victims, or give it up in the face of blackmail from Khartoum,” says Darfuri survivor Khatir Mohammed, General Secretary of the Darfur Union. “A murder suspect is not let off the charges if he threatens to go out and kill more people. Nor should Omar Bashir, or any of those suspected of crimes against humanity in Darfur, be allowed to get off the hook by threatening peacekeepers, aid workers or our people in Sudan.”

A new report just released by Aegis, ‘The Enforcement of International Criminal Law’, addresses ways in which the international community could strengthen prospects for enforcement of any arrest warrant against Bashir.