UNITED NATIONS E Economic and Social Distr. GENERAL Council E/CN.4/2003/8/Add.1 24 January 2003 Original: ENGLISH COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Fifty-ninth session Item 11 (b) of the provisional agenda CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS, INCLUDING THE QUESTION OF TORTURE AND DETENTION Opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention The present document contains the opinions adopted by the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention at its thirty-second, thirty-third and thirty-fourth sessions, held in November/December 2001, June 2002 and September 2002, respectively. A table listing all the opinions adopted by the Working Group and statistical data concerning these opinions are included in the report of the Working Group to the Commission on Human Rights at its fifty-ninth session (E/CN.4/2003/8). GE.03-10553 (E) 040303 E/CN.4/2003/8/Add.1 page 2 CONTENTS Page Opinion No. 19/2001 (Nepal) ........................................................................................ 3 Opinion No. 20/2001 (China) ........................................................................................ 4 Opinion No. 21/2001 (Sri Lanka) .................................................................................. 8 Opinion No. 22/2001 (Ethiopia) .................................................................................... 14 Opinion No. 23/2001 (Israel) ........................................................................................ 15 Opinion No. 24/2001 (Sri Lanka) .................................................................................. 17 Opinion No. 25/2001 (Pakistan) .................................................................................... 22 Opinion No. 26/2001 (France) ....................................................................................... 26 Opinion No. 27/2001 (Morocco) ................................................................................... 27 Opinion No. 28/2001 (Algeria) ..................................................................................... 32 Opinion No. 29/2001 (Ethiopia) .................................................................................... 38 Opinion No. 30/2001 (Islamic Republic of Iran) .......................................................... 41 Opinion No. 31/2001 (Palestinian Authority) ............................................................... 44 Opinion No. 1/2002 (China) .......................................................................................... 47 Opinion No. 2/2002 (Myanmar) .................................................................................... 50 Opinion No. 3/2002 (Eritrea) ......................................................................................... 54 Opinion No. 4/2002 (Togo) ........................................................................................... 59 Opinion No. 5/2002 (China) .......................................................................................... 61 Opinion No. 6/2002 (Yugoslavia) ................................................................................. 66 Opinion No. 7/2002 (Egypt) .......................................................................................... 68 Opinion No. 8/2002 (Saudi Arabia) .............................................................................. 74 Opinion No. 9/2002 (Philippines) ................................................................................. 77 Opinion No. 10/2002 (Mauritania) ................................................................................ 81 Opinion No. 11/2002 (Syrian Arab Republic) .............................................................. 86 Opinion No. 12/2002 (Syrian Arab Republic) .............................................................. 91 Opinion No. 13/2002 (Lebanon) ................................................................................... 95 Opinion No. 14/2002 (Djibouti) .................................................................................... 97 E/CN.4/2003/8/Add.1 page 3 OPINION No. 19/2001 (NEPAL) Communication addressed to the Government on 7 June 2001 Concerning: Yubaraj Ghimire, Binod Raj Gyawali and Kailash Sirohiya The State is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1. The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention was established by resolution 1991/42 of the Commission on Human Rights. The mandate of the Working Group was clarified and extended by resolution 1997/50, and reconfirmed by resolution 2000/36. Acting in accordance with its methods of work, the Working Group forwarded to the Government the above-mentioned communication. 2. The Working Group conveys its appreciation to the Government for having provided the requisite information. 3. In a note dated 27 November 2001, the Government informed the Working Group that the above-mentioned individuals, who had been detained since 6 June 2001, were released on 17 August 2001. 4. The Working Group transmitted the reply of the Government to the source, which confirmed that all the charges had been formally withdrawn by the Government. The Working Group is in a position to render an opinion on the case. 5. Having examined all the available information before it and without prejudging the arbitrary nature of the detention, the Working Group decides to file the case of the above-mentioned individuals, in accordance with paragraph 17 (a) of its revised methods of work. Adopted on 28 November 2001 E/CN.4/2003/8/Add.1 page 4 OPINION No. 20/2001 (CHINA) Communication addressed to the Government on 14 June 2001 Concerning: Wang Wanxing The State has signed but not ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1. The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention was established by resolution 1991/42 of the Commission on Human Rights. The mandate of the Working Group was clarified and extended by resolution 1997/50, and reconfirmed by resolution 2000/36. Acting in accordance with its methods of work, the Working Group forwarded to the Government the above-mentioned communication. 2. The Working Group conveys its appreciation to the Government for having provided information concerning the case. 3. The Working Group regards deprivation of liberty as arbitrary in the following cases: (i) When it manifestly cannot be justified on any legal basis (such as continued detention after the sentence has been served or despite an applicable amnesty act) (category I); (ii) When the deprivation of liberty is the result of a judgement or sentence for the exercise of the rights and freedoms proclaimed in articles 7, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20 and 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and also, in respect of States parties, in articles 12, 18, 19, 21, 22, 25, 26 and 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (category II); (iii) When the complete or partial non-observance of the international standards relating to a fair trial set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the relevant international instruments accepted by the States concerned is of such gravity as to confer on the deprivation of liberty, of whatever kind, an arbitrary character (category III). 4. The Working Group welcomes the cooperation of the Government. However, it regrets that its reply was not informative enough and did not facilitate its task of investigating the case on specific points which were addressed in the letter of the Working Group’s Chairperson. The Working Group transmitted the reply of the Government to the source, which provided the Working Group with its comments thereon. The Working Group believes that it is in a position to render an opinion on the facts and circumstances of the case, in the context of the allegations made and the response of the Government thereto. 5. According to the information submitted to the Working Group by the source, Wang Wanxing, who is said to be a veteran pro-democracy and human rights activist, has been and is still being detained in Ankang Psychiatric Hospital, Beijing. It is reported that Mr. Wang E/CN.4/2003/8/Add.1 page 5 was first detained on 3 June 1992, after attempting to unfurl a banner in Tienanmen Square in Beijing to commemorate the 1989 repression of the pro-democracy movement. He was taken against his will to Ankang Psychiatric Hospital, an institution allegedly run by the Public Security Bureau (PSB) and reserved for criminals deemed insane or a threat to society. He has spent the last nine years in this institution without trial or an independent medical examination, save for a three-month period from 19 August 1999 to 23 November 1999. After his detention, authorities pressured his wife, Ms. Wang Junying, to admit her husband’s involvement in politics, assuring her that her husband would be held for no more than a month. 6. In early 1997, the authorities issued a document stating Mr. Wang had been determined to be “suffering from paranoid delusions” that caused “his attempt to disturb the social order”. On 19 August 1999, he was released for a three-month probationary period, on the condition that he follow a strict set of rules imposed by the Haidian District of the Beijing PSB and the hospital authorities. These rules prevented him from contacting the press and people involved in the pro-democracy movement, and as well as from listening to international radio broadcasts. 7. On 18 November 1999, Mr. Wang telephoned Dr. Lü Qiuling, chief of staff and secretary of the Communist Party at the hospital, and informed her of his intention to convene a press conference