No Security Without Rights
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
No security without rights Human rights violations in the Euro-Mediterranean region as consequence of the anti-terrorist legislations Authors Albert Caramés Boada (ed.) and Júlia Fernàndez Molina Editing and translation: Anna Mattioli Aramburu Graphic design: Gerard Casadevall Bach Framework: The report “Without rights there is not security. Human rights violations in the Euro-Mediterranean region as a consequence of anti-terrorist legislations” was possible with the support of: Acknowledgments: Institut de Drets Humans de Catalunya (IDHC), specially to David Bondía, Anna Palacios and Víctor Sakamoto Legal Diposit: This work is under Creative Commons license – Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 Spain. This report can be copied distributed, published, translated and modified with no commercial purposes and its authorship acknowledged through the following text: CARAMES, A. (ed.); FERNANDEZ, J. (2017); ‘’Without rights there is not security. Human rights violations in the Euro-Mediterranean region as a consequence of anti-terrorist legislations’’. NOVACT NO SECURITY WITHOUT RIGHTS Human rights violations in the Euro-Mediterranean region as consequence of the anti-terrorist legislations INDEX COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 5 ALGERIA 16 EGYPT 21 FRANCE 29 GREECE 34 IRAQ 38 ISRAEL/PALESTINE 43 ITALY 51 JORDAN 54 LEBANON 58 LIBYA 63 MOROCCO 68 SYRIA 74 SPAIN 80 TUNISIA 86 TURKEY 93 NO SECURITY WITHOUT RIGHTS Human rights violations in the Euro-Mediterranean region as // INTRODUCTION consequence of the anti-terrorist legislations COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION The struggle against terrorism contributes to an alarming and constant retreat of the civil and political rights of people. In the context of a multipolar world scenario, which is strongly conditioned by an unprecedented evolution of national, regional and international responses to new terrorist threats, the principles of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights seem to have been relegated to an opaque area between the “necessary and legitimate” fight against terrorism and the gross violations that it perpetrates. After the 9/11 attacks in the United States, a growing wave of national and international promises of security was rolled on in a hegemonic way, as a response to the perception of a serious threat to world peace and safety. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the terrifying expressions and dimensions of the new terrorist threat at a global level, have led to the adoption of significant and unavoidable changes in the legal, political, economic and defensive agendas of states and international organizations, creating growing incompatibilities between many of these terrorist measures and the respect, protection and promotion of human rights. The increase of defence and security capacities, like the protection of integrity and sovereignty of the states facing external threats, has conditioned and altered international relations in various action fields. The changes in the political and legal approach of the fight against terrorism after 9/11 led to the acceptance that respect for international legality could be dispensable when facing this new threat. Thus, certain behaviours in detriment of respect for human rights became “legitimate” While under the auspices of the United Nations it has been right to repeatedly point out the need to assure and guarantee that the fight against terror should be effectively articulated with the international protection of human rights; the delegation of legal authority to sovereign States to impose such measures has hindered full compliance of internationally agreed conventions, protocols and resolutions. The competence to criminalize terrorism-related offences and to develop the mechanisms required in the legal tools developed both in international and regional levels, rests essentially on the sovereignty of nation- states. It is through their domestic legal system and political practice that national governments acquire the legal capacity to prevent, combat and criminalize terrorism in accordance with their obligations under international human rights law. As a fundamental part of the fight against terror in the last decade, the adoption of new national legislative frameworks on security (ambiguous in defining terrorist crimes but severe in defining punishments) has been characterized by a legal commitment to increase the state’s powers in matters of security, control, 5 NO SECURITY WITHOUT RIGHTS Human rights violations in the Euro-Mediterranean region as // INTRODUCTION consequence of the anti-terrorist legislations surveillance, repression and punishment policies that have systematically violated the fundamental rights and freedoms of individuals and societies. Human Rights Watch organization warns that since 2013, at least 47 countries have approved new measures against terrorism, becoming the wave of strictest measures approved since the aforementioned attacks in 2001. The report “Without Rights there is no security: Human Rights violations in the Euro-Mediterranean region as a consequence of antiterrorist legislations’’ compiles various efforts to denounce the perpetrated human rights’ violations through the implementation of the new anti-terrorism normative tools that have been approved by the Euro-Mediterranean regions in the past years. The ambiguity in the definitions of terrorism which are included in the national legislations leads to an indiscriminate persecution of individuals and groups, as well as to the arbitrary criminalization of activities that are perceived as threats to the state’s security. Procedural safeguards in criminal matters, fair treatment to accused people, and fundamental rights and freedoms are being relativized in this framework of fight against terror; while the authorities’ powers, impunity, injustice and severeness of the penalties charged to the accused increase without restriction, need or glimmer of proportionality. 6 NO SECURITY WITHOUT RIGHTS Human rights violations in the Euro-Mediterranean region as // INTRODUCTION consequence of the anti-terrorist legislations EVOLUTION OF INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATION IN THE FIGHT AGAINTS TERRORISM Despite de 9/11 attacks opened the doors to a wide process of legal reforms and renovations in order to fight terrorism, the United Nations had already started to draw some guidelines oriented to instigate the member States to adopt certain measures to prevent, repress and condemn this phenomenon through cooperation initiatives. Since 1963, the international community has been developing a legal infrastructure with conventions and protocols relative to the fight against terrorism which specify the obligations that every State Member undertakes to fulfil when developing their own domestic legal systems. Other key aspects of the global legal framework to combat terrorism have been typified through the resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council. The international regulations on the matter include certain aspects linked to the terrorist phenomenon, such as those provisions aimed at criminalizing terrorist acts, protecting the victims’ rights and adopting measures to promote and ensure effective sanctions and international cooperation. The 1373 resolution, approved by the United Nations Security Council after the 9/11 attacks, set up the creation of a Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC), which would be oriented towards strengthening the capacities of the member States to combat terrorism within their borders, and also at a global level. In March, 2004, through resolution 1535, the Security Council established the Executive Directorate of the CTC. In 2006 they reached an unprecedented agreement on the creation of a strategical framework to combat terrorism with the establishment of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. This strategy’s objective was to intensify the global fight against this threat by founding conditions to prevent it and combat it, while developing the capacity of the member States to strengthen the role of United Nations on the matter. The universal respect for human rights and the rule of law was understood as a fundamental pillar in that struggle. A decade later, the General Assembly adopted the UN Action Plan for the Prevention of Violent Extremism, based on the new configurations that terrorist groups like Daesh, Al-Qaida and Boko Haram had been provoking in the imaginary of the international community around the debate on the methods to face the threat of violent extremism. The Action Plan approved in 2016 is a call for concerted action by the international community that formulates more than 70 recommendations to the member States and the United Nations system to reorient the priorities of the fight against terror. In this sense, the Plan proposes the adoption of a wider approach, that transcends the exclusive implementation of permanent, essential and security-based anti-terrorism measures to address the drivers of violent extremism through targeted systematic preventive measures that approach the structural causes (social, politic, economic or cultural) and lead to the emergence and radicalization of these groups. In order to carry out such preventive measures, the Plan considers it necessary to take into account a series of areas of action, based on the application of justice and the reconstruction of the social pact between governors and governed by strengthening a good governance, human rights and rule of law, dialogue and conflict prevention and empowerment of communities, among others.