The United Nations Counter-Terrorism Complex Bureaucracy, Political Influence and Civil Liberties
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The United Nations Counter-Terrorism Complex Bureaucracy, Political Influence and Civil Liberties September 2017 / N°700a FIDH - The United Nations Counter-Terrorism Complex 1 Secretariat Building at United Nations Headquarters, February 23, 2017. © UN Photo/Rick Bajornas 2 FIDH - The United Nations Counter-Terrorism Complex TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 5 II. HUMAN RIGHTS AND UN COUNTER-TERRORISM 76 ABBREVIATIONS 11 1. HUMAN RIGHTS ENTITIES AND THE UN COUNTER- TERRORISM COMPLEX 79 INTRODUCTION 13 Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) 79 METHODOLOGY 19 OHCHR, CTC, and CTED 81 OHCHR and 1267 Monitoring Team 81 I. UNITED NATIONS COUNTER-TERRORISM OHCHR and UNODC 82 ARCHITECTURE BODIES 24 OHCHR and CTITF Working Groups 82 1. UN SECURITY COUNCIL 25 Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism 1267/1989/2253 ISIL (Da’esh) and Al-Qaida Sanctions Committee 25 83 Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team 27 2. ADDITIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS OVERSIGHT IN UN The 1566 Working Group 29 COUNTER-TERRORISM ARCHITECTURE 85 The 1540 Committee 29 Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) and Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate (CTED) 85 The Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) 30 The Office of the Ombudsperson to the ISIL (Da’esh) and Al- Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate (CTED) 32 Qaida Sanctions Committee and Due Process 89 2. UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY 34 The Focal Point for De-Listing 92 UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy 34 United Nations Counter-Terrorism Center 93 Ad Hoc Committee and Working Group on Terrorism 35 Victims of Terrorism Support Portal 93 3. UN SECRETARIAT 36 3. HUMAN RIGHTS PROVISIONS IN UN RESOLUTIONS AND United Nations Office of Counter-Terrorism (OCT) 36 POLICIES 94 Security Council Counter-Terrorism Resolutions 94 Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF) 41 General Assembly Resolutions 94 UN Counter-Terrorism Centre (UNCCT) 44 Definitions of Terrorism, Incitement, and Violent Extremism 95 Integrated Assistance on Countering Terrorist (I-ACT) 46 Preventing Violent Extremism and Human Rights 99 4. UN AGENCIES, OFFICIES, AND PROGRAMS 47 United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC): Terrorism 4. COUNTER-TERRORISM, VICTIMS, AND CIVIL SOCIETY Prevention Branch (TPB) 47 101 Victims of Terrorism 101 Department of Peacekeeping Operations (DPKO): Office of Rule of Law and Security Institutions (OROLSI) 48 Cooperation with Civil Society 102 Key CTITF Entities 49 5. DUPLICATION, COORDINATION, AND EVALUATION 51 III. MAIN PRIORITIES ON THE UN COUNTER- TERRORISM AGENDA AND THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS 6. UN COUNTER-TERRORISM LEADERSHIP 56 IMPACT Russian Federation 58 104 People’s Republic of China 61 1. COMBATING THE FINANCING OF TERRORISM 105 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia 64 Russia 108 Egypt 68 China 111 United States 69 Egypt 114 7. NEW GUIDING UN COUNTER-TERRORISM POLICIES 71 2. PREVENTING VIOLENT EXTREMISM 119 Secretary General’s Plan of Action to Prevent Violent Russia 121 Extremism (PVE) 71 Tunisia 124 International Framework to Counter-Terrorist Narratives & Ideologies 72 United States 126 Fifth Review of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy (2016) Mali 131 72 FIDH - The United Nations Counter-Terrorism Complex 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3. UN REGIONAL COOPERATION: THE (BAD) EXAMPLE OF THE SHANGHAI COOPERATION ORGANIZATION (SCO) 135 China 138 Russia 143 4. RULE OF LAW, CAPACITY BUILDING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE 146 Mali 147 France 152 5. TERRORIST NARRATIVES AND INTERNET AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGIES (ICT) 159 China 162 Egypt 165 United States 168 IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 170 1. CONCLUSION 171 2. RECOMMENDATIONS 173 UN Wide 173 To the OCT 175 To the UNSC 176 2. ANNEX 1: SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS 179 Resolution 1373 (2001) 179 Resolution 1456 (2003) 179 Resolution 1566 (2004) 180 Resolution 1624 (2005) 180 Resolution 2178 (2014) 181 3. ANNEX 2: CTITF ENTITIES 182 4. ANNEX 3: ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS 184 4 FIDH - The United Nations Counter-Terrorism Complex EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The United Nations’ ability to counter terrorism is a test for its future relevance as the threats posed by the rise of non-state terrorist groups have challenged the UN’s raison d’être to maintain international peace and security. The fight against terrorism has become a key priority of the international community and has garnered unprecedented levels of cooperation amongst member states, demonstrated by the hydra-headed complex of UN bodies and entities tasked with counter-terrorism related issues. FIDH’s new report looks into the counter-terrorism complex at the United Nations in order to better understand the massive structure that has developed over the last two decades, the corpus of measures and programs it has been generating and their impact on both the enjoyment of human rights and the effectiveness of counter-terrorism at the national and regional levels UNITED NATION’S RESPONSIBILITY TO COUNTER TERRORISM The UN as a norm setter and convener has the responsibility for ensuring that human rights are centralized in all counter-terrorism activities, from gap analysis and technical assistance, to capacity building. In that respect, it has made human rights a central principle of its Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy under Pillar IV. However, despite this commitment, the UN is at a critical juncture. The UN is faced with the major risk that the authoritarian states that occupy or have a strong influence in key positions in this structure may have the non-human rights compliant counter-terrorist policies, already applied in their own territories, endorsed by the international community and replicated widely. In the current counter-terrorism architecture, efforts are conducted in competing silos of subsidiary organs of the Security Council (UNSC) and the General Assembly (UNGA) that often overlap in their programs and activities. This silo mentality is mainly driven by the fundamental division over which each body is ultimately responsible for countering terrorism. The General Assembly claims to be the competent organ to deal with terrorism because of its universal membership, whereas the Security Council is responsible for maintaining peace and security, which obviously includes countering terrorism. Fundamentally, the UNSC and the UNGA bodies have different mandates when it comes to counter-terrorism. In theory, Security Council bodies such as the Counter-terrorism Committee (CTC) and its Executive Directorate (CTED) are responsible for assessing needs and providing analysis for technical assistance to member- FIDH - The United Nations Counter-Terrorism Complex 5 states, whereas General Assembly bodies such as the Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF) entities are responsible for coordinating and capacity building. In practice though, this bifurcated system actually results in a competition for resources, influence, and project ownership amongst the two branches. UN COUNTER-TERRORISM “REFORM” Member States, frustrated by the current state of counter-terrorism work at the UN and confused by its tentacular structure and multiplicity of bodies, requested the Secretary General in the latest review of the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy (GCTS), to develop a proposal on how best to implement that strategy across all four pillars, including Pillar IV focused on ensuring the protection of human rights. The SG’s report proposed the creation of a new Office of Counter- Terrorism (OCT) to be headed by an Under Secretary General, that would take the CTITF and the UN Counter-Terrorism Centre (UNCCT) out of the Department of Political Affairs (DPA) and put them under the OCT, which was officially established in June 2017. Effective counter terrorism operations at the UN would be best delivered by mainstreaming counter-terrorism responsibilities into fewer bodies that have the independence to conduct evaluations of states and provide recommendations or with an overarching coordinating body to eliminate silos. The creation of the OCT could have fulfilled that objective. However, it remains unclear how the new Office, whose Head was selected by the Russian Federation, will effectively overcome the many challenges pertaining to coordination and resources, the increase of civil society involvement, and the centralization of the protection of human rights in all counter- terrorism efforts. Given that CTITF and UNCCT will remain intact, with their staff, mandate and own resources, and that the terms of reference of the Office provide no details regarding its interaction with Security Council bodies such as CTED, the OCT may be seen as a mere cosmetic addition that will not adequately overcome the structural deficiencies. Over the last decade, member states and UN entities have developed a variety of programs and taken action through binding and non binding resolutions to counter and prevent terrorist acts focusing on thematic issues such as facilitating international judicial cooperation, monitoring NGOs for foreign terrorist financing, denying safe havens for terrorist actors, developing effective criminal justice systems, and creating PVE National Action Plans, among others. Nevertheless, no entity in the UN counter-terrorism structure has developed effective tools for monitoring and evaluating the impact of their activities. To date, the UN has not conducted any evaluation of the human rights compliance of its activities and programs. Similarly, UN bodies do not 6 FIDH - The United Nations Counter-Terrorism Complex have the human and financial resources