Site icon Iran Human Rights Documentation Center

Promotion and Protection of Human Rights: Human Rights Defenders

          
          UNITED
          NATIONS
          Economic and Social
          Council Distr.
          GENERAL
          E/CN.4/2005/l 01/Add. 1
          16 March 2005
          Original: ENGLISH / FRENCH!
          SPANISH
          COMK'IISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS
          Sixty-first session
          Agenda item 17 (b) of the provisional agenda
          PROMOTION AND PROTECTION OF HUMAN RIGHTS:
          HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS
          Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General, Hina Jilani
          Addendum
          Summary of cases transmitted to Governments and replies received*
          *The present document is being circulated in the languages of submission only as it greatly
          exceeds the page limitations currently imposed by the relevant General Assembly resolutions.
          GE.05- 12965
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 2
          Contents
          Paragraphs Pages
          Introduction 1 — 4 4
          Algeria 5 — 20 5
          Argentina 21 —26 10
          Armenia 27—29 12
          Azerbaijan 30—37 13
          Bahrain 38—49 15
          Bangladesh 50—64 19
          Belarus 65—77 23
          Bolivia 78—79 30
          Bosnia and Herzegovina 80 — 81 30
          Brazil 82—91 30
          Burundi 92— 93 34
          Cambodia 94—95 35
          Cameroon 96—97 35
          Central African Republic 98 — 99 36
          Chad 100— 102 36
          Chile 103 — 108 37
          China 109—138 39
          Colombia 139—216 49
          CostaRica 217—219 73
          Côte d'Ivoire 220 — 223 74
          Cuba 224—226 75
          Democratic Republic of the Congo 227—235 76
          Ecuador 236—246 79
          Egypt 247—252 84
          Ethiopia 253—258 86
          France 259—267 88
          Guatemala 268 —287 92
          Haiti 288—291 100
          Honduras 292—300 101
          India 301—308 104
          Indonesia 309—319 107
          Iran (Islamic Republic of) 320—335 111
          Iraq 336—337 116
          Israel 338—340 117
          Jamaica 341—343 118
          Kazakhstan 344—345 119
          Kyrgyzstan 346—348 120
          Lebanon 349—351 121
          Libyan Arab Jamahiriya 352—353 122
          Malaysia 354—364 122
          Maldives 365 —367 127
          Mauritania 368—370 128
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 3
          Contents (continued)
          Paragraphs Pages
          Mexico 371—394 129
          Morocco 395—401 137
          Myanmar 402—403 139
          Nepal 404—414 140
          Nigeria 415—416 144
          Pakistan 417—423 144
          Peru 424—433 146
          Philippines 434—437 151
          Republic of Korea 438—440 153
          Russian Federation 441 —466 154
          Rwanda 467—468 164
          Saudi Arabia 469—475 165
          Serbia and Montenegro 476— 480 167
          SriLanka 481—483 169
          Sudan 484—505 170
          Syrian Arab Republic 506— 517 177
          Thailand 518—529 181
          The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia 530— 532 185
          Tunisia 533—554 186
          Turkey 555—578 194
          Turkmenistan 579—581 202
          United States of America 582— 584 203
          Uzbekistan 585 — 599 205
          Venezuela 600—601 210
          VietNam 602—613 210
          Zambia 614—617 214
          Zimbabwe 618—628 215
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 4
          Introduction
          1. The present document is submitted by the Special Representative of the Secretary
          General on the situation of human rights defenders, Ms. Hina Jilani, to the Commission on
          Human Rights pursuant to Commission resolution 2003/64. The document provides summaries
          of the communications on specific cases addressed by the Special Representative to
          Governments, as well as summaries of the replies by Governments that she has received and her
          observations thereon.
          2. In the past, such information had been included in an annex. Following up on a practice
          adopted in her report to the Commission at its fifty-ninth session, the information on specific
          cases raised by the Special Representative over the year is now published in an addendum to her
          main report to the Commission at its sixty-first session (E/CN.4/2005/101).
          3. The cases raised by the Special Representative in this addendum relate to cases reported
          to her between 9 December 2003 and 9 December 2004. The addendum contains summaries of
          responses received from Governments and, where necessary, translated up to and including 31
          January 2005. Most of the responses by Governments refer to cases raised by the Special
          Representative during the period December 2003 to December 2004; however, some of the
          responses are to cases addressed by her in earlier reporting periods. While the summaries of
          these responses are included in this report, the summaries of the cases to which they refer will be
          found in the Special Representative's reports from preceding years (see E/CN.4/2003/104/Add.1
          and E/CN.4/2004/94/Add.3, covering the previous two years).
          4. For ease of reference, and as indicated in the table of contents, cases have been grouped
          by country, with countries listed alphabetically according to their names in English.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 5
          Algeria
          Communications envoyées
          5. Le 19 avril 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special sur
          la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, a adresse une
          communication au gouvernement concernant la situation de Mohammed Smain et Fethi Azzi,
          deux temoins dans une information judiciaire ouverte en France contre deux membres des
          milices de Relizane pour torture et actes de barbaric. Selon les informations reçues, la misc en
          examen des deux accuses ferait suite a une plainte pour torture, actes de barbaric et crimes contre
          l'humanite deposee en octobre 2003 devant le Procureur de la Republique du Tribunal de grande
          instance de Nimes par la Federation internationale des ligues des droits de l'homme (FIDH) et la
          Ligue française des droits de l'homme et du citoyen (LDH). Les deux accuses, aprés avoir etc
          mis en examen le 30 mars 2004, auraient etc liberes et places sous contrOle judiciaire suite a la
          decision dujuge des libertes et de la detention (JLD). Selon les informations reçues, Mohammed
          SmaIn et Fethi Azzi subiraient des pressions et harcélements de la part des autorites depuis leur
          retour de France au debut d'avril 2004 oü ils auraient temoigne devant lejuge d'instruction. En
          particulier, le S avril 2004, alors qu'il reprenait son travail a la sous-prefecture, Fethi Azzi se
          serait vu signifier son renvoi. M. Azzi aurait depuis etc reintegre aprés avoir etc degrade et mute
          dans un autre service de la sous-prefecture. Ii aurait d'autre part reçu des menaces a Jdiouia oü il
          reside, pour avoir temoigne dans l'affaire des deux presumes miliciens. Selon les informations
          reçues, Mohammed SmaIn, representant de la section de Relizane de la Ligue algerienne de
          defense des droits de l'homme (LADDH), aurait etc arrete par le groupement de gendarmerie de
          Relizane le samedi 10 avril 2004 alors qu'il se trouvait en compagnie dejournalistes enquêtant
          sur les disparitions forcees et detenu pendant 20 heures. Dimanche matin, le colonel
          commandant du groupement de gendarmerie lui aurait signifie qu'il serait poursuivi pour outrage
          a corps constitue et aurait refuse de lui rendre ses papiers de voiture. SmaIn aurait alors demande
          une audience au Procureur general, cc qui lui aurait etc refuse.
          6. Le 27 mai 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special sur
          la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, a envoyc une
          communication concernant le directeur du quotidien << Le Matin >>, Mohamed Benchicou, pour
          lequel un appel urgent avait etc envoyc par le Rapporteur special sur la protection et la
          promotion du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression le 4 avril 2002. Selon les informations
          reçues, Mohamed Benchicou aurait du comparaitre le 31 mai 2004 devant le tribunal d'El
          Harrach, dans le cadre d'une affaire qui l'oppose au Ministére des finances. Selon les
          informations reçues, lejournal << Le Matin >> aurait etc suspendu le 18 aoüt 2003, en méme temps
          que quatre autres quotidiens independants. Le 23 aoüt 2003, revenant d'un voyage, Mohamed
          Benchicou aurait etc interpelle a l'aeroport d'Alger par des policiers qui lui auraient indique
          vouloir fouiller son porte-documents et ses bagages. Les policiers auraient photocopie ses
          papiers personnels avant de les lui rendre. En depit du fait que, par lettre du 25 aoüt 2003, le
          directeur general des douanes algeriennes ait averti le gouvernement algerien de la nullite de la
          procedure frappant M. Benchicou et de l'absence d'infraction, lejour suivant, M. Benchicou
          aurait etc entendu pour transfert illegal de capitaux, et le 27 aoüt 2003, le Procureur de la
          Republique aurait exige qu'il soit place sous mandat de depot. Lejuge d'instruction n'aurait
          toutefois retenu que le contrOle judiciaire et aurait confisque le passeport de Mohamed
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 6
          Benchicou qui serait soumis depuis lors a une interdiction de quitter le territoire et astreint a se
          presenter au juge d'instruction toutes les semaines. Scion ies informations reçues, ie 31 mai
          2004, ie magistrat devrait juger i'affaire et statuer sur ia ievee du controiejudiciaire qui frappe
          Mohamed Benchicou depuis 8 mois. Des craintes ont etc exprimees que ies procedures a
          i'encontre de M. Benchicou et du journai <> ne constituent une forme de represaillies
          de ia part du Ministére de i'interieur pour avoir fait paraitre enjuiiiiet 2003 un articie dans iequei
          un citoyen aigerien aurait denonce ies tortures qu'ii aurait subies mettant en cause ie Ministre de
          i'interieur iui-même. Ces craintes sont d'autant pius vives que ie ministre mis en cause aurait
          pubhquement menace <> et son directeur.
          7. Le 28 mai 2004, ia Representante speciaie, conjointement avec ie Rapporteur speciai sur
          ia promotion et ia protection du droit a ia iiberte d'opinion et d'expression, avec ie Groupe de
          travaii sur ia detention arbitraire, ia Rapporteuse speciaie sur ies executions extrajudiciaires,
          sommaires ou arbitraires, a envoyc une communication concernant ia situation de M. llafnoui El
          Ghoul, responsabie de ia Ligue aigerienne de defense des droits de i'homme (LADDH) a Djeifa
          et correspondant de presse. Scion ies informations reçues, ie 24 mai 2004, M. E l Ghoui aurait etc
          arête par des pohciers en civii se depiaçant en voiture banahsee. Ii aurait etc conduit depuis son
          domiciie jusqu'â une ceiiuie oü ii serait depuis iors enferme. Cette detention interviendrait dans
          ie cadre de i'instruction de piusieurs piaintes pour diffamation deposees contre iui, notamment
          par ie prefet et ie directeur de ia sante pubhque de Djeifa, a ia suite d'un entretien qu'ii aurait
          donne au quotidien nationai << Le Soir >>, date du 17 mai 2004, oü ii aurait denonce ia situation
          des droits de i'homme en generai, et ceiie des journaiistes en particuher dans ia region de Djeifa.
          Scion ies informations reçues ie 25 mai 2004, M. Ghoui aurait etc presente devant ie juge du
          tribunai de Djeifa et condamne a six mois de prison ferme au sujet d'une quatriême piainte. Ses
          avocats n'auraient pas eu connaissance de cette audience ni de i'objet de ia piainte en question.
          Le 26 mai, sa famiiiie aurait etc empechee de iui rendre visite. M. E l Ghoui aurait entame une
          gréve de ia faim. Des craintes ont etc exprimees que son arrestation ne represente une forme de
          represaillies contre ses activites de defense des droit de i'homme. Ces craintes sont d'autant pius
          vives que iors d'une convocation au commissariat de Djeifa, ie 15 mai 2004, M. El Ghoui aurait
          reçu des menaces de mort exphcites, visant egaiement sa famiiie s'ii continuait a << s'entêter >>.
          8. Le 7juin 2004, ia Representante speciaie, conjointement avec ie Rapporteur speciai sur ia
          promotion et ia protection du droit a ia iiberte d'opinion et d'expression, ie Groupe de travaii sur
          ia detention arbitraire, ie Rapporteur speciai sur ia torture et ia Rapporteuse speciaie chargee de
          ia question de ia vioience contre ies femmes, a envoyc une communication concernant ia
          situation des personnes qui auraient été arrêtées pour avoir manifesté dans Ia region des
          Aurés et pour iesqueis ies Rapporteurs speciaux sur ia promotion et ia protection du droit a ia
          hberte d'opinion et d'expression, ia torture, ies executions extrajudiciaires, sommaires ou
          arbitraires ainsi que ie vice-president du Groupe de travaii sur ia detention arbitraire avaient
          envoyc un appei urgent ie 24 mai 2004. Scion ies informations reçues, ies 24 et 31 mai 2004,
          vingt-neufpersonnes arretees auraient comparu devant ie tribunai d'Arris et auraient etc
          condamnees pour attroupements, incitation a attroupement, diffusion de tracts et atteinte aux
          biens d'autrui, avec ies peines suivantes : Meziani Fouzi (8 mois), Beziane Abdelouahab
          (6 mois), Abassi Rachid (6 mois), Daoudi Essaid (6 mois), Aichi ilessane (8 mois), Yeza
          Abdes lam (8 mois), Titaouine Salim (8 mois), Lounissi Abdelkrim (6 mois), Yakoub
          Abderrezak, (8 mois), Zerdoumi Abde lmadjid (6 mois), Chatri Khaled (3 mois), Saidi
          Rachid (6 mois), Berbachi Ali (3 mois), Kerbai Samir (3 mois), Kerbai Mohamed Tayeb
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O1/Add. 1
          Page 7
          (3 mois), Meziani Karim (3 mois), Gharik Ahcene (3 mois), Bezala Essaid (3 mois), Yeza
          Salim (8 mois), Megharmi djamel (1 an), Boussetta Abdenacer (8 mois), Djouara Djamel
          (8 mois), Yeza Mohamed (3 mois), Khellafi Toufik (3 mois), Agali Abderrezak (3 mois),
          Titaouine A u (6 mois), Bezala A u (6 mois), Lounissi Tahar (3 mois), Zerdoumi Amar
          (6 mois). Les jeunes gens arrêtes, pendant les manifestations ou a leur domicile, auraient etc
          conduits dans des vehicules militaires a l'ancienne prison coloniale, lieu de cantonnement de la
          gendarmerie de Tkout oü ils auraient etc deshabilles et alignes avant d'être tortures et soumis a
          des agressions sexuelles, insultes et coups de matraque. Certains auraient eu des membres brises
          et le visage balafre suite aux coups que leur auraient portes les gendarmes. Des menaces de viol
          sur les sieurs et méres des detenus auraient egalement etc proferees. En raison de la couverture
          mediatique des evenements, et notamment des temoignages dans la presse relatant les tortures
          subies, une enquête aurait etc conduite le 26 mai par des fonctionnaires du Ministére de la justice
          dependant de la cour de Batna. Ceux-ci auraient conclu a l'absence de torture en depit du fait que
          neuf des jeunes gens arrêtes auraient reitere les declarations faites a la presse. En outre, des
          craintes ont etc exprimees que ces enquêtes n'aient pas etc conduites de maniêre independante et
          impartiale. Dans une lettre ouverte adressee au chef de l'Etat algerien, le procureur adjoint de la
          cour de Batna (dont depend Tkout) aurait denonce les <> qu'il aurait subis dans l'exercice de ses fonctions et que subiraient tous les
          magistrats >. L'auteur de la lettre mettrait directement en cause un officier superieur
          de l'armee. Ii nous a egalement etc rapporte que plusieurs dizaines de membres du mouvement
          citoyen de Tkout, qui auraient fui pour se refugier dans les montagnes environnantes, seraient
          toujours contraints de vivre dans la clandestinite en raison de la surveillance dont leurs domiciles
          feraient l'objet. Unimportant dispositif policier serait toujours en place dans le village de Tkout
          et les parents et membres des familles de ceux ayant fui feraient quotidiennement l'objet de
          menaces et d'intimidations, y compris des menaces de viol sur les femmes. Des craintes ont etc
          exprimees que cette repression, y compris les condamnations des jeunes gens ayant participe aux
          manifestations, ne vise a reprimer les mouvements citoyens luttant pour le respect de leurs droits,
          notamment aprés que le mouvement citoyen de Tkout aurait presente en mars dernier une plate-
          forme de revendications sociocconomiques, culturelles et linguistiques aux autorites locales et
          regionales.
          9. Le l4juin 2004, la Representante speciale a envoyc un appel urgent concernant la
          situation de Salah-Eddine Sidhoum, chirurgien et militant des droits de l'homme en Algerie,
          qui avait fait l'objet d'un appel urgent du Rapporteur special sur la promotion et la protection du
          droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, du Rapporteur special sur la torture et de la
          Representante speciale sur les defenseurs des droits de l'homme le 2 octobre 2003 qui se verrait
          refuser l'etablissement d'un passeport lui permettant de circuler librement. Selon de nouvelles
          informations, le 26 janvier 2004, Salah-Eddine Sidhoum aurait depose un dossier de
          renouvellement de son passeport a la daIra (sous-prefecture) de Sidi M'Hamed (Alger). A chaque
          fois qu'il se serait presente au guichet de cette administration, il lui aurait etc repondu que la
          fiche de police n'etait pas encore revenue du commissariat de Cavaignac, siege de la police
          judiciaire. Fin mai, plus de quatre mois aprCs le depot de sa demande, le prepose au guichet de la
          daIra lui aurait repondu que la police judiciaire avait emis un avis defavorable pour la delivrance
          d'un passeport sans lui indiquer ni verbalement ni par ecrit le motif de cc reflis, alors que la loi
          stipulerait que l'administration doit signifier par ecrit le motif du reflis, et cc dans un delai de un
          mois aprCs le dePOt du dossier. En outre, lors de la restitution de son dossier par le prepose de la
          daIra, M. Sidhoum aurait constate que deux photos d'identite manquaient. D c serieuses craintes
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 8
          ont etc exprimees que cc refus d'octroyer un passeport a Salah-Eddine Sidhoum a
          l'empêcher de poursuivre son travail de defenseur des droits de l'homme en l'empêchant de
          quitter le territoire algerien afin de reduire ses mouvements et ses contacts sur le plan
          international.
          10. Le 9 aoüt 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special sur
          la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, le Groupe de travail
          sur la detention arbitraire, a envoyc une communication de suivi concernant M. llafnaoui
          Ghoul, detenu t la prison de Djelfa depuis le 24 mai 2004. Selon les nouvelles informations
          reçues, le 2 aoüt 2004, le tribunal de premiere instance de Djelfa aurait condamne M. Hafnaoui
          Ghoul a deux mois de prison ferme, pour << sortie illegale d'un document de prison >>. Cette
          condamnation serait en relation avec la publication dans le quotidien <>
          d'une lettre que M. Ghoul aurait envoyce a sa fille le 24juin, et dans laquelle il s'exprimait sur
          sa situation juridique et sa detention. Des craintes ont etc exprimees que cette nouvelle
          condamnation ne vise a nouveau a sanctionner la liberte d'expression de Hafnaoui Ghoul. Ces
          craintes sont d'autant plus vives que, depuis plusieurs mois, une quinzaine de plaintes ont etc
          deposees contre M. Ghoul pour << diffamation et atteinte a un corps constitue >>. Trois procCs sont
          en cours, dont plusieurs audiences ont deja etc reportees.
          11. Le 23 septembre 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur
          special sur la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression et la
          Rapporteuse speciale sur la question de la violence contre les femmes, a envoyc une
          communication concernant un rassemblement pacifique des familles de disparus de Constantine
          ayant eu lieu le 20 septembre 2004 devant le siege provisoire du Comite ad hoc sur les disparus a
          Constantine qui aurait etc disperse par la violence par les forces de l'ordre, lesquelles auraient
          egalement procede a des arrestations. D'aprCs les informations reçues, M. ilmamlia, qui tentait
          de venir en aide aux personnes malmenees par la police, aurait etc arrete et conduit au poste de
          police avant d'être libere quelques heures plus tard. Mme Farida Oughlissi, mere de disparu,
          aurait etc frappee. Son corps serait marque par de nombreuses ecchymoses. Mme Louisa Saker,
          Secretaire generale de l'Association des familles de disparus de Constantine, aurait, quant a elle,
          etc interpellee et emmenee par des elements de la Brigade mobile de la police judiciaire (BMPJ)
          et detenue a la caserne de la police judiciaire de la zone Palma a Constantine. Ni les membres de
          sa famille, ni son avocat n'auraient etc autorises a lui rendre visitejusqu'a sa liberation dans la
          soiree. Durant sa detention, Louisa Saker n'aurait pas etc informee des motifs de son arrestation
          et aurait fait l'objet d'actes d'intimidation. Au moyen d'un couteau et d'une bombe
          lacrymogCne, celle-ci aurait etc menacee par des agents des services des Renseignements
          generaux d'être inculpee pour troubles a l'ordre public avant d'être relachee dans la soiree sans
          qu'aucune charge n'ait etc retenue contre elle. Suite a sa liberation, un medecin aurait pu
          constater les traces sur son corps des violences subies lors du dispersement du rassemblement. Ii
          a egalement etc rapporte que Mme Louisa Saker avait deja fait l'objet d'actes d'intimidation le
          5 novembre 2003 de la part de deux inspecteurs des services des Renseignements generaux.
          L'arrestation et la detention de Mme Saker et M. Hmamlia ainsi que les methodes utilisees pour
          disperser une manifestation pacifique sont d'autant plus preoccupantes que la police aurait deja
          arête des membres des familles de disparus et fait usage de violence a leur encontre lors de
          rassemblements a Constantine le 8 novembre 2001, a Alger le 5 novembre 2002, eta Oran le 9
          juillet 2003. S'agissant de Mme Saker, des craintes ont etc exprimees que celle-ci n'ait etc visee
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 9
          en particulier, en raison de ses nombreuses prises de position critiques quant a la gestion du
          dossier des disparus par les autorites algeriennes.
          Communications reçues
          12. Par lettre en date du 18 juin 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu ala communication en
          date du 19 avril concernant Mohamed Smail et Fethi Azzi. Concernant Mohamed Smail, le
          Gouvernement a indique qu'il avait etc interpelle le 10 avril 2004 sur les instructions du
          procureur de Relizane par la gendarmerie nationale alors qu'il se trouvait en voiture avec un
          journaliste etranger en possession d'une camera et effectuant un reportage sans autorisation. Les
          deux personnes auraient etc conduites ala brigade avant d'être relachees. Les documents de son
          vehicule lui auraient etc retires puis rendus. Concernant Fethi Azzi, le Gouvernement a indique
          qu'il n'auraitjamais etc arrête et qu'il n'aurait pas saisi les services de police en cc qui concerne
          les menaces alleguces. Le Gouvernement ne peut de cc fait faire de commentaire.
          13. Par lettre en date du 16 juillet 2004, le Gouvernement algerien a repondu a l'appel urgent
          envoyc le 27 mai 2004 concernant la situation de Mohamed Benchicou, objet d'accusation de
          transfert illegal de capitaux. Le Gouvernement a informe la Representante speciale que le l4juin
          2004, l'interesse aurait etc condamne a deux ans de prison ainsi qu'a une amende de
          23 400 000 DA, une somme qui correspond a deux fois la valeur du delit commis. Le
          Gouvernement a affirme avoir agi selon son droit interne et precise que personne, en dehors du
          juge, ne pouvait contester la mesure.
          14. Par lettre en date du 16 juillet 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu a l'appel urgent envoyc
          par la Representante speciale le 28 mai 2004, l'informant que le 9juin 2004 llafnaoui Ghoul a
          etc condamne a 2 mois d'emprisonnement pour les delits de diffamation, outrage et injures. Le
          Gouvernement a affirme que, conformement a la loi, l'interesse aurait reçu la visite de son pére
          et de son frére, mais pas de son oncle. Le Gouvernement a egalement precise que l'interesse
          prendrait reguliêrement ses repas et se trouverait en bonne sante. Par lettre supplementaire du 24
          novembre 2004, le Gouvernement a confirme que le jour-même la decision de la cour de Djelfa
          aurait ordonne la liberation de M. Hafnaoui El Ghoul en application de l'article 128 du Code de
          procedure penale.
          15. Par lettre en date du 16 juillet 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu a l'appel urgent envoyc
          par la Representante speciale le 7juin 2004 concernant les vingt-huit personnes condamnees
          pour attroupements et atteintes aux biens d'autrui. Le Gouvernement a souligne que le jugement
          du tribunal le 31 mai 2004 aurait etc plus ou moms soutenu par la cour de Batna le 20 juin 2004,
          laquelle aurait confirme la peine prononcee contre vingt-trois d'entre eux et aurait declare la
          relaxe des cinq autres. En cc qui concerne les accusations de mauvais traitements pendant la
          garde a vue (il faut noter que ces accusations n'auraient etc deposees qu'a la deuxiême
          audience), le Gouvernement a informe que les certificats medicaux au terme de la garde a vue
          n'auraient pas fait mention de mauvais traitements. Neanmoins, le Ministre de lajustice a
          ordonne une enquête, qui aurait conclu a la faussete des allegations.
          16. Par lettre en date du 9juillet 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu aux appels urgents
          envoycs par la Representante speciale le 14 juin 2004 et le 2 octobre 2003 l'informant que le
          passeport de Salah Eddine Sidhoum aurait etc renouvele et remis a l'interesse le 4 juillet 2004
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 10
          aprés accomplissement des formalites légales d'usage relatives a la délivrance d'un document de
          voyage.
          Observations
          17. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies. She welcomes the
          issuance of a passport to Dr. Sidhoum and the release of Mr. Ghoul. In the light of the case of
          Mr. Ghoul, however, the Special Representative recalls that the law of defamation requires
          legislators to strike a delicate balance between the protection of freedom of speech — particularly
          where this freedom is exercised in the defence of human rights — and the interests of the persons
          who are the subject of derogatory speech, in this case government officials. The Special
          Representative invites the Government to consider whether the possibility to resort to a measure
          as harsh as pre-trial detention for persons charged with defamation, as in the case of Mr. Ghoul,
          correctly strikes that balance.
          18. The Special Representative regrets that the Government has not, as of to date, clarified
          the circumstances of the alleged harassment by the authorities of Mr. SmaIn and Mr. Azzi
          (including arrest, detention, and demotion in civil service), which is reported to be in reprisal for
          their testimony in a torture case, nor indicated what action it intends to take to remedy these
          serious violations should they prove to be true.
          19. Regarding the case of Mr. Benchicou, the Special Representative has carefhlly
          considered the Government's explanation regarding the judicial proceedings that resulted in his
          conviction. She remains concerned, however, by the closure of LeMatin on the same day as four
          other newspapers and a few weeks after the publication of an article implying a minister in
          torture allegations, which was followed by the arrest of Mr. Benchicou five days later.
          20. Similarly, in the case of the human rights defenders from Tkout, the Special
          Representative regrets that the Government's reply has not been able to entirely dispel her
          concerns. The Special Representative invites the Government to review, in the light of the rights
          to freedom of expression and to freedom of peacefhl assembly and association, the provision of
          the criminal code making “attroupement” punishable. The Special Representative also invites the
          Government to consider whether enquiries into allegations of torture against security forces
          could not be entrusted to a body offering substantial guarantees of independence from the
          executive power, instead of the Ministry of Justice. This could contribute to enhancing the
          enjoyment by the citizens of Algeria of article 12 of the Declaration on Human Rights
          Defenders. The Special Representative observes that the allegations reported to her with regard
          to the case of Ms. Saker and other members of the Association des familles de disparus de
          Constantine confirm the urgency of such measure.
          Argentina
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          21. El 12 de agosto de 2004, la Representante Especial enviô un llamamiento urgente con
          respecto a la muerte de MartIn Cisneros, piquetero y dirigente de la organizaciôn Federacion de
          Tierra y Vivienda. Segün las informaciones recibidas, el 25 de junio, Martin Cisneros habria
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 11
          recibido varios disparos de arma de fuego a! salir de su trabajo en la Unidad de Produccion
          Social del Comedor “Los Pibes”en el barrio de La Boca en Buenos Aires. D c acuerdo con las
          informaciones, MartIn Cisneros habria sido matado a dos cuadras de distancia de la ComisarIa de
          Policia por un hombre conocido como informante y quien se alega también recibe protecciôn
          policial. Se indica que el 28 de Junio el supuesto informante, Junto con un menor de edad,
          habrian sido detenidos por la policia en relacion con la muerte de Sr. Cisneros.
          22. El 30 de agosto de 2004, la Representante Especial enviô una carta de alegacion, Junto
          con el Relator Especial sobre la promociôn y protecciôn de la libertad de expresiôn y opinion, y
          el Relator Especial sobre la tortura, en relaciOn con Juan Eduardo Riquel, secretario de la
          AsociaciOn de Trabajadores del Estado (ATE), de la localidad de Castelli, provincia de Chaco.
          Habria sido detenido el 4 de Julio de 2004 por personal de la comisaria de Castelli. Se alega que
          ese mismo dia un grupo de policias ingresO en el Club Sarmiento de Castelli, donde se celebraba
          una fiesta popular, y empezO a golpear miembros de la comunidad Toba. Juan Eduardo Riquel
          habria solicitado a los policias que detuvieran la agresiOn. Poco después, el mismo grupo de
          policias habria vuelto a! Club Sarmiento, y habrIan increpado directamente a Juan Eduardo
          Riquel por haber intercedido en defensa de las personas que habian sido golpeadas. El secretario
          de la ATE habria sido esposado, golpeado y llevado a la comisarIa, donde habria sido objeto de
          actos de violencia y malos tratos. En las dependencias policiales, el detenido habria manifestado
          espasmos respiratorios y dificultades para respirar, supuestamente debidos a! trato recibido en la
          comisaria. Habria sido conducido a! Sanatorio Norte de la localidad. Tras examinar a! detenido y
          escuchar su relato, los medicos se habrian negado a entregarlo de nuevo a la policia. Cuando se
          recuperO, Juan Eduardo Riquel habrIa presentado una denuncia ala Fiscalia de Investigaciones.
          Se alega que seguidamente se habrIa iniciado un proceso en contra del denunciante por “atentado
          y resistencia a la autoridad”. Se alega igualmente que Juan Eduardo Riquel habria recibido
          amenazas por parte de algunos policias por haber denunciado el caso.
          23. El 17 de septiembre de 2004, la Representante Especial enviO una carta de alegaciOn,
          Junto con el Relator Especial sobre la promociOn y protecciOn de la libertad de expresiOn y
          opiniOn sobre los periodistas Fabian Rubino, de Radio Mitre, llernán Espafla, de Diarlo
          Popular, y Juan Arias, del Crónica. Segün la informaciOn recibida, el 25 de enero de 2002,
          estos periodistas habrian sido agredidos por agentes de la policia mientras habrian informado
          sobre la represiOn policial durante una manifestaciOn de protesta en la Plaza de Mayo, en la
          ciudad de Buenos Aires. Se informa que Hernán Espafla habria recibido nueve balas de goma en
          el brazo y se alega que a! caer a! suelo un policia le habria dado patadas mientras le habria dicho
          “tpor qué no sacas fotos ahora?”.
          Comunicaciones recibidas
          24. Por carta fechada el 15 de octubre de 2004, el Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 30 de agosto de 2004 con respecto a los actos de
          hostigamiento y maltratos sufridos por Juan Eduardo Riquel. El Gobierno informO que una
          investigaciOn habria sido iniciada, a travCs de la cual se estableceria silas presuntas violaciones
          hubieran ocurrido. Hasta ahora, habr la tomado una declaraciOn testimonial del damnificado y se
          habria comprometido a disponer la custodia del mismo. El Gobierno declarO seguir atento a!
          resultado de las investigaciones e informar oportunamente a la Representante Especial.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 12
          Seguimiento de comunicaciones transmitidas previamente
          25. Por carta de fecha del 19 de marzo de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 6 de noviembre de 2003 sobre la situaciôn de la Dra.
          Maria Dolores Gómez y del Dr. Fernando Maroto. El Gobierno confirmo la necesidad de
          proteger la vida y la integridad fisica de ambas personas y de responder a la denuncia presentada.
          En particular, con respecto a Maria Dolores Gômez, la Secretaria de Derechos Humanos habria
          mantenido contacto permanente y habria realizado visitas con ella, asi se podria ocuparse de
          todas las gestiones necesarias y pertinentes de la citada ciudadana. Asimismo, ci Gobierno
          acentüa las medidas cautelares que habria otorgado a favor de los peticionarios desde junio de
          2001, antes de recibir las solicitudes de la Comisiôn Interamericana de Derechos Humanos
          (CIDH) y de las Naciones Unidas. El 7 de diciembre de 2003, ademas de recibir la custodia de
          la Gendarmeria en su domicilio particular, Dr. Maria Dolores Gômez habria recibido la custodia
          de la Policia Federal Argentina desde su domicilio hasta la sede de la Defensoria. El Gobierno
          confirmo que una denuncia de la amenaza, con referencia a la Dra. Maria Dolores Gômez y al
          Dr. Fernando Maroto, habria sido presentada ante la Fiscal del Departamento Judicial de San
          Isidro. La investigacionjuridica continuará segün su curso normal.
          Observations
          26. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response. She commends the
          Government's willingness to implement protective measures for human rights defenders at risk.
          She looks forward to receiving further informations regarding the findings of the ongoing
          investigations, in particular those relating to allegations of excessive use of force by members of
          the police.
          Armenia
          Communications sent
          27. On 26 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a letter of
          allegation regarding the situation of Mikael Danielyan, Chairman of the Armenian Helsinki
          Association, an organization which monitors and reports on human rights in Armenia. According
          to the information received, an article appeared in two national newspapers on 30 March 2004,
          accusing Mikael Danielyan of anti-State activities. The articles reportedly referred to the fact that
          he had carried out an interview with an Azerbaijani newspaper expressing critical views of the
          Government that was published on 26 March. According to the information received, on the
          same day, Mikael Danielyan was attacked by four assailants near his home in Yerevan. The
          assailants allegedly knocked him to the ground and beat him for approximately 10 minutes after
          which they allegedly fled. It was further reported that he was taken to hospital in a critical
          condition but that a thorough forensic examination was not conducted. Concern has been
          expressed that Mikael Danielyan may have been targeted for his human rights activities,
          including submitting and disseminating information on human rights abuses in Armenia for
          inclusion in international human rights reports.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 13
          Communications received
          28. By letter dated 8 August 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by the
          Special Representative on 26 April 2004 concerning an alleged assault on Mikael Danielyan by
          four unidentified persons. In its response, the Government informed the Special Representative
          that the following day, 31 March 2004, the police in Arabkir opened a criminal file on the
          aforementioned event and proceeded to undertake the necessary investigative steps. In that
          context, the victim was invited to undergo forensic and medical examination, but he refused and
          arrangements were made to conduct this procedure at the victim's home. The medical
          examination carried out on the victim reportedly showed that he had sustained several minor
          concussions and abrasions. As part of the investigation, the victim was also asked to supply the
          clothes he was wearing at the time of the alleged crime. The Government stated that he refused
          to do so, and later commented that he had already washed the clothes. The Government indicated
          that although all necessary and possible means of investigation have been explored, to date, they
          have failed to yield any positive results. The investigation is continuing.
          Observations
          29. The Special Representative would like to thank the Government for responding to her
          communication. She looks forward to receiving further information on the findings of the
          ongoing investigations.
          Azerbaijan
          Communications sent
          30. On 22 December 2003, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          action about information received regarding Ilgar Ibragimoglu Allahverdiev, leader and
          coordinator of the Center for the Protection of Conscience and Religious Freedoms (DEVAMM)
          and secretary-general of the International Religious Liberty Association (IRLA Azerbaijan), who
          was reportedly arrested on 3 December 2003 and detained for a three-month period on the orders
          of the Nasimi district court of Baku. According to information received, the court hearing was
          extremely short and his lawyers were not heard. It is reported that Mr. Ibragimoglu Allahverdiev
          was accused of disturbing public order and resisting representatives of the authorities in the
          aftermath of the presidential elections on 16 October 2003 (see communication dated 22 October
          2003 sent by the Special Rapporteur the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of
          opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on torture and the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the
          Working Group on Arbitrary Detention). It is alleged that this action might be directly linked to
          the participation of DEVAMM in the work of “Bizim Azerbaijan”, a democratic coalition of
          around 30 political parties and NGOs supporting the candidacy of Isa Qmbar, the chairman of
          the opposition party Musavat. It is also reported that there have been acts of harassment against
          the members of the committee created for protection of Mr. Ibragimoglu Allahverdiev's rights,
          composed notably of members of DEVAMM and IRLA, which was created after his arrest.
          According to reports, in the evening of 4 December, approximately at the same time in different
          parts of Baku, the home of DEVAMM's press-secretary, Mr. Seymur Rashidov, as well as the
          home of DEVAMM's driver, Mr. Shahin Gasanov, were visited by the staff of the local police
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 14
          departments, who without showing any official written document, reportedly asked them to come
          to the police department. As Mr. Rashidov was not at home at that time, the policemen allegedly
          called him on his mobile phone and told him to be the next morning at 9 a.m. at the 27th police
          department of Yasamal district. Mr. Rashidov was summoned to the prosecutor's office on 11
          December, where he was interrogated and released.
          31. On 30 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal in connection with the situation of the Muslim religious community of the Juma
          Mosque, which is reportedly threatened with eviction. According to the information received, on
          16 January 2004, the Juma Mosque community was allegedly informed by a letter from the
          Administration of the Historical Architectural Reserve Icherisheher of Baku that, based on
          information received from the General Prosecutor's Office, they would be required to hand over
          the Mosque to the “appropriate authorities” within 15 days. The letter reportedly mentioned the
          arrest of their imam Ilgar Ibragimoglu Allahverdiev for his alleged participation in post-election
          demonstrations as the ground for this decision. According to the information received, two
          additional letters were attached to this letter. The first, reportedly from the Prosecutor's office
          and addressed to the executive branch of the Baku City Administration, allegedly contained
          details of Ilgar Ibragimoglu's supposed guilt. The second, reportedly from the Executive Branch
          of Baku City, stated its intention to re-transform the Juma Mosque premises into a carpet
          museum as it used to be during Soviet times. Concern has been expressed that the fhture eviction
          of the religious community may be a form of reprisal against the work of Ilgar Ibragimoglu in
          defending human rights.
          32. On 1 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up
          urgent appeal regarding Ilgar Ibragimoglu Allahverdiev. According to new information
          received, following the court proceedings, which took place from 22 to 31 March 2004, the
          prosecution reportedly requested a prison sentence of four years and six months against Ilgar
          Ibragimoglu. The final verdict was reportedly due on 2 April 2004. Concern has been expressed
          that the court proceedings and heavy sentence requested against Ilgar Ibragimoglu may represent
          a form of reprisal against his human rights activities, in particular in the field of freedom of
          religion.
          33. On 28 September 2004, the Special Representative sent a follow-up letter of allegation
          concerning Ilgar Ibrahimoglu Allahverdiev. According to the information received, on 12
          September 2004, Ilgar Ibrahimoglu Allahverdiev was reportedly forbidden to leave the country
          by authorities at the Baku airport, as he was leaving to participate in a conference on tolerance
          and non-discrimination organized in Brussels on 13 and 14 September 2004 by the Organization
          for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Belgian Foreign Ministry. Concern has
          been expressed that the reported denial of permission of Ilgar Ibrahimoglu Allahverdiev to leave
          the country may be an attempt to prevent him from pursuing his human rights activities.
          Communications received
          34. By letters dated 1 April, 27 May and 9 August 2004, the Government replied to the
          communications sent by the Special Representative on 30 January and 1 April 2004 concerning
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 15
          the disputed occupation of a building by members of the Juma Mosque religious community.
          Referring to the recent verdicts, the Government informed the Special Representative that on 1
          March 2004, after a fair and proper hearing, the court ruled against the Juma Mosque religious
          community. This decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal and entered into force on 22 April
          2004. The Government stressed that during the course of the trial, the defendants had failed to
          present adequate documentation to support the claim that they had been legally granted use of
          the disputed building. The Government also emphasized that this particular religious community
          had repeatedly demonstrated reluctance to register with the State Committee on Religious
          Organizations and had persistently refused to comply with two paragraphs of the Religion Act; to
          obtain the prerequisite recommendation from the Caucasian Muslim Board and to provide a legal
          address. According to the regulation, seemingly only registered bodies could be permitted the
          use of the building in question. In connection with the criminal case against Ilgar Ibragimoglu
          Allakhverdiev in which he has been charged with mass disturbance and resistance or violence
          towards a police officer, the Government confirmed that the defendant had been handed down a
          five-year suspended sentence and had been placed on probation for a further five years by the
          Serious Crimes Court. The decision of the Court of Appeal is currently pending.
          35. By letter dated 24 December 2004, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent
          on 28 September 2004 concerning Ilgar Ibrahimoglu Allahverdiev. Unfortunately, the English
          translation was not available in time to be examined and included in this report, and will thus be
          reported next year.
          Observations
          36. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies to her communications.
          She regrets that for the reasons mentioned above, she is not in a position to make observations on
          the case of Mr. Allahverdiev.
          37. Regarding the related case of the Juma Mosque religious community, the Special
          Representative acknowledges that the Government's position in this case was upheld in court
          proceedings. She remains concerned, however, that the legislation regulating non-governmental
          organizations in Azerbaijan, including religious associations, might be open to misuse by
          authorities acting in reprisal against human rights defenders.
          Bahrain
          Communications sent
          38. On 7 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent action
          regarding AbduiraufAl-Shayeb, the official spokesperson of the National Committee for
          Martyrs and Victims of Torture, an organization that works on the rehabilitation of torture
          victims and at bringing the perpetrators to justice. It is reported that on 30 March 2004,
          Abdulrauf Al-Shayeb was arrested and held until 3 April, when he was released reportedly on the
          orders of the Office of the Crown Prince. Abdulrauf Al-Shayeb was allegedly charged with
          “immoral indecency” in connection with allegations of having extra-marital relations with a
          domestic worker, who was allegedly forced to accuse him of having had relations with her. It is
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 16
          reported that this person is being kept in detention. However, it is believed that Abdulrauf Al-
          Shayeb was targeted for his human rights work. It is reported that he was in Geneva from 15 to
          28 March 2004 to attend events related to the sixtieth session of the Commission for Human
          Rights. Concern has been expressed that his arrest might have been timed in order to prevent him
          from organizing a demonstration on behalf of survivors of torture, which he had called to
          coincide with the inaugural Bahrain Grand Prix on 4 April. Moreover, it is alleged that during his
          detention, a former high-level military officer (whose name is known to the Special
          Rapporteurs), who had allegedly been accused by the National Committee for Martyrs and
          Victims of Torture of being involved in the torture of detainees, threatened to “cut his tongue,
          which is too long”. Abdulrauf Al-Shayeb is reportedly expected to present himself to the Public
          Prosecutor on 7 April.
          39. On 1 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on torture, transmitted an urgent appeal regarding the Bahrain Centre for iluman
          Rights (BCIIR) and its executive director, Abdul-iladi AI-Khawaja. It is reported that on 26
          September 2004, two days after his participation in a symposium called “Poverty and Economic
          Rights in Bahrain” organized by BCHR in the Al-Orooba Club, Abdul-Hadi Al-Khawaja was
          arrested at approximately 10.30 p.m. at the Nabee Saleh police station to where he had been
          summoned. According to the information received he was later brought to the Howdh Aljaf
          Detention Centre where the Public Prosecutor remanded him in custody for a period of 45 days.
          It is reported that he started a hunger strike, which he later stopped; however, reports indicate
          that he is still continuing with his speech strike. Abdul-Hadi Al-Khawaja was allegedly charged
          under articles 165 and 168 of the Bahraini penal code with “encouraging hatred of the State” and
          “distributing falsehoods and rumours”, for which he could face up to five years imprisonment.
          Abdul-Hadi Al-Khawaja is allegedly being held in incommunicado detention and has been
          denied visits from his family and lawyer. Further reports indicate that the Al-Orooba Club was
          officially closed down by the Government for having hosted this event. On 28 September 2004,
          the BCHR was reportedly closed by the authority of the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs.
          Furthermore, according to the information received, the newspapers were informed of the closure
          of BCHR before itsdirectors and members. It is also reported that on 29 September 2004, the
          Minister of Labour and Social Affairs issued a press release, in which he declared that he had
          issued an order to dissolve the BCHR the night before, the order coming into force that same
          day. It is alleged that the official motive was that the BCHR violated Law No. 21 on Societies of
          1989. Concern has been expressed that Abdul-Hadi Al-Khawaja may have been detained as a
          direct result of his human rights work with BCHR, and in particular, his criticism of government
          policy in regard to poverty in Bahrain during the symposium. Further concern has been
          expressed about all members of the BCHR, due to reports about the creation by the Ministry of
          Labour of a multi-institutional committee aimed at “taking legal and punitive actions against the
          BCHR”. It is feared that such a committee may lead to the closure of the organization. In view of
          his alleged incommunicado detention, concern is expressed that he may be at risk of torture or
          other forms of ill-treatment.
          40. On 6 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal in connection with information received regarding Nabeel Rajab, the president of BCHR,
          and other members of that organization. According to the information received, on 30 September
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 17
          2004, the Minister of Labour and Social Affairs was quoted in the newspaperAl-Wasat as stating
          that punitive actions would be taken against the members of BCHR, in particular Nabeel Rajab,
          if they kept trying to breach the Ministry's order to close the organization, and commented that
          Nabeel Rajab was “sending messages abroad to create a chaotic atmosphere”, with reference to
          correspondence BCHR had with media and non-governmental organizations abroad on behalf of
          the re-establishment of the organization and the release of its executive director, Abdul-Hadi Al-
          Khawaja. Concern has been expressed that Nabeel Rajab and other members of the BCHR may
          have been threatened with punitive actions as a direct result of their human rights work, in
          particular their attempts to re-establish BCHR and secure the release of its executive director,
          Abdul-Hadi Al-Khawaja.
          41. On 1 November 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal regarding Mr.
          AbduiraufAl-Shayeb and Mr. Mahmood Ramadan, respectively spokesperson and board
          member of the National Committee for Martyrs and Victims of Torture in Bahrain. On 28
          October 2004, around 8 p.m., the two men, together with other protesters, were taking part in a
          ‘car parade' on a highway, organized by the Committee to publicly call for the liberation of Mr.
          Abdul-Hadi Al-Khawaja. According to the information received, although the protest was
          proceeding peacefully, Mr. Abdulrauf Al-Shayeb and ten other protesters were surrounded by 30
          anti-riot police for about three hours before being arrested. 200 riot police were allegedly present
          at the site, though not directly involved in blocking Mr. Abdulrauf Al-Shayeb and the ten other
          protesters. Attempts by other persons to negotiate their release with the police failed. Allegedly,
          around 800 persons gathered at the location and started to chant slogans demanding the release
          of Mr. Abdul-Hadi Al-Khawaja, waving his picture and Bahraini flags. According to the
          information received, at around 11:30 p.m. the police started firing teargas against the crowd and
          arrested the 11 encircled protesters and another estimated 30 of the protesters in the crowd.
          Several individuals were wounded. Concern is expressed that the arrest and detention of Mr.
          AbdulraufAl-Shayeb and Mr. Mahmood Ramadan may be an attempt to prevent their further
          activity as human rights defenders in Bahrain, in particular their efforts to obtain the release from
          custody of Mr. Abdul-Hadi Al-Khawaja, and on behalf of the persons assisted by the National
          Committee for Martyrs and Victims of Torture.
          Communications received
          42. By letter dated 16 April 2004, the Government responded to the urgent appeal sent by the
          Special Representative on 7 April 2004. The Government confirmed that, on 30 March 2004, the
          police arrested Abduirauf Al-Shayeb who was charged with trespassing under article 361 of the
          Criminal Code, based on his visits to a maid in the absence of the house owner. The Government
          indicated that the Department of Public Prosecution decided to remand Mr. Al-Shayeb in custody
          for a period of seven days under article 147 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It fhrther stated
          that, on 3 April 2004, he was released on bail, and not by order of the Crown Prince. The maid
          was released pursuant to article 149 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Government stated
          that Mr. Al-Shayeb had not been subject to inhuman treatment in custody, and that the
          investigators found no evidence to support the claim that a senior police officer threatened to cut
          out his tongue. As for the claim that Mr. Al-Shayeb was deliberately arrested to prevent him
          from organizing a demonstration in support of torture survivors, the Government stated that the
          case and investigation files show that none of the procedures undertaken prior to his arrest were
          directed against him personally or against any identifiable person in particular. Mr. Al-Shayeb
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 18
          was not arrested in order to prevent him from taking part in any meeting or peacefhl
          demonstration.
          43. By letter dated 6 October 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by the
          Special Representative on 1 October 2004 in connection with the recent arrest of Abdul-iladi
          AI-Khawaja. The Government refuted several of the allegations contained in the initial
          correspondence, notably: the accusation of arbitrary arrest, incommunicado detention, and
          improper, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. According to the Government,
          during his time in custody, the accused had been afforded all his rights of visit, representation
          and welfare. The accused was arrested for suspected violations of articles 165 and 168 of
          Bahrain's Penal Code. No charges were filed against him. Regarding the closure of the Bahrain
          Centre for Human Rights, the Government stated that the BCHR had long been operating in
          violation of Law No. 21 of 1989 on Societies, and despite several warnings, had continued its
          illegal activities. Under similar circumstances, the Al-Oruba Club had its activities suspended for
          45 days. The Government reiterated its commitment to human rights protection and advancement
          and welcomed the development of an open, active and vibrant civil society.
          44. By letter dated 13 October 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by
          the Special Representative on 6 October 2004 regarding Nabeel Rajab. The Government denied
          the accusations that the Minister of Labour and Social Affairs had threatened to take “punitive
          action” against the members of the BCHR during an interview. According to the Government,
          the Minister's decision to dissolve the BCHR was taken in accordance with the Societies Law,
          and only in response to the repeated failure of the organization to take appropriate disciplinary
          action against their members operating in violation of said law. As such, the decision should be
          respected unless subsequently reversed by the courts, and any violation of the aforementioned
          decision would incur further punitive action. The Government assured that the legal redress
          initiated by the BCHR would be afforded a fair and proper audience.
          45. By letter dated 1 December 2004, and in response to a further communications
          transmitted on 1 November 2004, the Kingdom of Bahrain sent additional information to the
          Special Representative concerning the arrest and detention ofAbduiraufAl-Shayeb and
          Mahmood Ramadan. According to the Government, the two detainees were arrested and
          detained for actions completely unrelated with the expression of their views or opinions.
          However, the Government declared that Mahmood Ramadan was promptly released due to lack
          of evidence, although the case against Abdulrauf Al-Shayeb remained under investigation. On 21
          November 2004, the King issued a directive ordering the release of all persons arrested and
          charged with illegal assembly and resisting police, including the aforementioned.
          46. By letter dated 1 December 2004, the Government sent further information to the Special
          Representative concerning the case against Abdul iladi AI-Khawaja and the Al-Oruba Club. In
          the communication, the Government stated that the Criminal Court had sentenced in absentia,
          Abdul Hadi Al-Khawaja, to one year in prison. The same day, a decree issued by the King of
          Bahrain pardoned the aforesaid from serving the sentence, in light of the time spent in custody
          prior to the court ruling. With regard to the Al-Oruba Club, the suspension of its activities was
          reversed by the Supreme Council for Youth and Sports.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O1/Add. 1
          Page 19
          Observations
          47. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its prompt and detailed replies to
          the communications sent. She welcomes the Government's reiteration of its commitment to
          human rights and to the development of an open, active and vibrant civil society. The Special
          Representative notes the pivotal role played by genuine freedom of speech, including for persons
          criticizing the authorities in relation to human rights issues, in the achievement of the goals the
          Government has set itself
          48. The Special Representative welcomes the release of Mr. Al-Shayeb, Mr. Al-Khawaja and
          Mr. Ramadan. While she acknowledges the Government's assurance that Mr. Al-Shayeb and Mr.
          Ramadan were arrested on grounds unrelated to their human rights work, she remains concerned
          at what appears to be a pattern of arrests of human rights defenders. In relation to the case of Mr.
          Al-Khawaja, the Special Representative notes that the use of criminal charges such as
          “encouraging hatred of the State” and “distributing falsehoods and rumours” frequently implies
          the risk of suppressing legitimate free speech, and is particularly wonying when such charges are
          raised against a person for having denounced alleged human rights violations.
          49. With regard to the two non-governmental organizations mentioned in her
          communications to the Government, the Special Representative particularly welcomes the
          decision of the Supreme Council for Youth and Sports to reverse the decision to close the Al-
          Oruba Club. The Special Representative notes the importance for an open society of legislation
          protecting freedom of association. She invites the Government to review the Law on Societies
          and other relevant regulations to ensure that Bahrain's legislation adequately protects the right of
          persons to freely organize to defend human rights.
          Bangladesh
          Communications sent
          50. On 19 January 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning
          allegations of legal action being brought against Khademul Islam Bidduth, leader of the
          Equality Trade Union Migrants Branch (ETU-MB) and Jamal Ali, an active member of the
          migrant movement. According information received, Khademul Islam Bidduth and Jamal Ali
          were arrested by police in the Republic of Korea on 26 October 2003 while taking part in a
          demonstration against an alleged crackdown on migrant workers by the Government, which
          reportedly began on 24 October. Both human rights defenders were subsequently deported from
          the Republic of Korea to Bangladesh, where they were reportedly held in detention until 4
          January 2004 when they were released on bail and targeted with legal action, apparently for their
          association with trade unions and civil society groups in the Republic of Korea.
          51. On 3 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a letter of
          allegation concerning the situation of the iluman Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities
          (IIRCBM), a human rights and humanitarian services organization which has publicly
          denounced human rights violations against minorities in Bangladesh and has filed a writ petition
          before the Bangladesh Supreme Court concerning the protection of religious and ethnic
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 20
          minorities. According to the information received, on 17 April 2004 a group of men, reportedly
          members of the ruling Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNF) under the leadership of a local
          member of Parliament whose name is known to the Special Representative, forcibly entered the
          offices of HRCBM in Dhaka. It is reported that they ransacked and looted the offices taking
          furniture, computers, videos and cameras as well as HRCBM documents. They also reportedly
          assaulted the office assistant, Kazi Shohag Hossain, who was allegedly later taken to hospital for
          treatment. According to the information received, the perpetrators of the attack threatened
          members of HRCBM staff, including its vice-president Advocate Dulal Choudhury, of serious
          consequences if the incident was reported. Also, the Lalbag police station allegedly initially
          refused to register the complaint. A case was reportedly registered on 22 April 2004. Concern
          has been expressed that the alleged attack on the offices of HRCBM may be an attempt at
          hindering their human rights work on behalf of minorities in Bangladesh, in particular on recent
          reporting of human rights abuses against minorities in the country, including State
          discrimination.
          52. On 5 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, sent an urgent appeal concerning
          the alleged attack on Mrs. Sumi Khan, ajournalist and Chittagong correspondent of the
          magazine Weekly 2000, who was reportedly stabbed and critically wounded in the Nandan
          Kanon area in Chittagong on 27 April 2004. According to information received, the attack took
          place at about 10.30 p.m., as Sumi Khan was on her way to a courier delivery service to send a
          report to her editor. Three men in an auto-rickshaw allegedly attempted to drag her into their
          vehicle, but she resisted. They then reportedly stabbed her several times. As people in the
          vicinity came to her aid, they reportedly grabbed her handbag and drove away. The assailants
          allegedly threatened that she would be killed if she did not stop writing. It was reported that three
          policemen stood by while the attack was taking place. She has reportedly filed a complaint with
          the police but so far no one has been arrested. Sumi Khan has reportedly written a number of
          investigative articles about human rights violations suffered by the Hindus and the alleged
          involvement of local politicians and religious groups in attacks on members of this community,
          kidnapping and land grabbing by some landlords. In recent weeks, she had allegedly received
          several anonymous threatening telephone calls, warning her not to “defame” people in her
          reports. It is believed that Sumi Khan is being targeted for her work as a journalist, in particular
          for her articles raising human rights concerns. Sumi Khan allegedly continues to receive
          threatening phone calls as she recuperates at her home.
          53. On 12 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, sent an urgent appeal concerning Aurobindo Pal,
          a freelance photojournalist and deputy chairman of the Nandail city's press club, who has
          reportedly been charged with “murder” after refusing to hand over photographs to police.
          According to information received, on 10 May 2004, Mr. Pal was arrested by police in
          Mymensingh district, northern Bangladesh, after refusing to hand over the negatives of pictures
          he took during a riot at a polling station in the city of Nandail where local elections were being
          held on 9 May 2004. It is reported that on the orders of a police officer whose name is known to
          the Special Rapporteur and the Special Representative, and who was allegedly involved in
          human rights abuses in the past, police reportedly fired into the crowd, killing two demonstrators
          and injuring at least 17 others. Mr. Pal took photographs of the incident, and on the same night,
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 21
          police allegedly turned up at his home to seize his negatives. It is reported that despite threats of
          reprisals from the police, Mr. Pal refused, after which the police reportedly searched his home
          and one officer said he had been ordered to arrest him if he failed to comply. It is reported that
          Mr. Pal, who was allegedly charged with “murder” under article 302 of the Criminal Code in
          order to prevent him from being released on bail and exert further pressure on him, is scheduled
          to appear before a Nandail court on 12 May 2004.
          54. On 28 July 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning Mr. Salam Azad, a writer who has written numerous publications raising
          concerns with regard to the human rights of religious minorities in Bangladesh. According to our
          information, Salam Azad has recently published a novel, “Bhanga Math”, on the theme of
          discrimination and human rights violations against religious minorities in Bangladesh. On 18
          July 2004, the Government banned the distribution and sale of this book, alleging that it would
          incite violence between Moslems and Hindus. Salam Azad at the time was outside Bangladesh,
          attending a United Nations human rights meeting. In the days following the alleged ban, Salam
          Azad was reportedly warned that he might be at risk of arrest by authorities upon his return to
          Bangladesh or of murder by political extremists. Salam Azad's wife has reportedly received
          threatening phone calls.
          55. On 26 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the killing of Dr. Kamal ilossain, a journalist working for the daily Alker
          Kago, secretary-general of the Manikchhari Press Club and a human rights advocate and founder
          of Ain-O-Shalishi Kendra (Center for Law and Justice, a human rights organization in
          Bangladesh). According to the information received, on 22 August 2004, Dr. Kamal Hossain was
          allegedly abducted and murdered by unknown individuals. According to his wife, the journalist
          hid when the attackers broke in, but surrendered to them after they threatened to kill his two-
          year-old son. Police found the journalist's body a few hours later, two kilometers from his home.
          He had allegedly been investigating cases linked to organized crime and a few days before his
          murder, he had helped police to identify some gang members. Reportedly, he had also received
          death threats. Concern has been expressed that Dr. Kamal Hossain may have been targeted in
          relation to his human rights activities, in particular his work on cases linked to organized crime
          and identification of some gang members. Concern is heightened by the fact that recently, the
          editors and journalists at the largest Bangla daily, Prothom Alo, have also reportedly been
          threatened with attacks by an Islamist group for publishing investigative reports about the
          activities of a number of madrasas (religious schools) in rural areas. Additionally, family
          members of the human rights defender Dr. llumayun Azad, who died suddenly on 12 August
          2004 whilst on a visit in Germany, have been threatened with death if they went to the airport to
          receive his body on 27 August.
          56. On 1 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Rafique al-Islam, responsible for the
          activities of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (ICBL) and the representative of Non
          Violence International in Bangladesh. According to the information received, on 21 August 2004
          at approximately 2.30 p.m., Rafique al-Islam was allegedly arrested at his home in Cox's Bazar
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 22
          by military officers of the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) and later taken to Cox's Bazar prison.
          It is reported that during the arrest, RAB members also seized documents and equipment from
          his office. A hearing of the charges against him was reportedly scheduled for the 26 August but
          was subsequently postponed to 29 August; neither his family nor his lawyer were informed of
          the charges brought against him. On 29 August 2004, Rafique al-Islam was reportedly remanded
          into the custody of the RAB for interrogation and was to be transferred to an unknown location.
          Concern has been expressed about the physical and psychological integrity of Rafique al-Islam
          given that other individuals recently detained by RAB military officers have reportedly been
          subjected to torture and other forms of ill treatment while in custody. It is also feared that the
          arrest of Rafique al-Islam may be a result of his work as a human rights defender, in particular
          through his campaign to ban landmines.
          Communications received
          57. By letter dated 7 May 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 5 May
          2004 concerning Mrs. Sumi Khan. The Government informed that the communication had been
          forwarded to the authorities concerned, for immediate attention and necessary action.
          58. By letter dated 10 May 2004, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent on 3
          May 2004 concerning the situation of the iluman Rights Congress for Bangladesh Minorities
          (IIRCBM). The Government informed that the communication had been forwarded to the
          authorities concerned for immediate attention and necessary action.
          59. On 3 August 2004, the Government sent a response to the urgent action sent on 28 July
          2004 concerning Mr. Salam Azad. The Government expressed its surprise at these allegations,
          explaining that Mr. Azad who was present at the Permanent Mission of Bangladesh in Geneva on
          19 July 2004 never mentioned neither at that time, nor later during the session of the Working
          Group on Indigenous Peoples, that he feared arrest by the authorities or that his family felt
          threatened. Concerning the reported ban on his book, the Government states that Mr. Azad
          should have sought appropriate legal action if he felt that the Government acted beyond the law.
          60. By letter dated 17 August 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 19
          January 2004. The Government informed that Khademul Islam Bidduth and Jamal Ali, who
          were both active members of a trade union for migrant workers in the Republic of Korea, had
          protested against a decision by the Government of the Republic of Korea to deport all illegal
          immigrants who had stayed more then 5 years. They were deported by the Government of the
          Republic of Korea on 1 January 2004. The reply indicated that, upon their arrival in Bangladesh,
          they were taken into custody on cognizable offences under section U/S 54 of the CrPC.
          According to the Government of Bangladesh, they were subsequently granted bail by the court,
          as the Government of the Republic of Korea lodged no formal or official complaint against them.
          61. By letter dated 31 August 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 26
          August 2004 concerning Dr. Kamal ilossain. The Government informed that the
          communication had been forwarded to the concerned authorities in Bangladesh for immediate
          attention and necessary action.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 23
          62. By letter dated 20 October 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 12
          May 2004. The Government informed that Mr. Aurobindo Pal had been arrested by the police
          in connection with a case lodged with Nandail Police Station, case no. 6 of 9 May 2004, under
          section 147/148/332/353/307/302 of the Penal Code. The reply indicated that allegations of inter
          alia arbitrary arrest and threats of reprisals were found to be unsubstantiated, as the investigating
          officer went with a warrant to arrest Mr. Pal. The case was at the time under investigation under
          the direct supervision of senior officials. The Government stated, as far as the demonstration on
          9 May 2004 was concerned, that activists and supporters of two candidates who where contesting
          for the local municipal elections had assembled unlawfully and entered into altercations, leading
          to an explosive and unruly situation. It informed that there was an exchange of fire between both
          groups. The Government indicated that one activist received bullet injuries and died after he had
          been taken to the hospital. Another activist, who had not been injured, died later following
          cardiac arrest. The Government concluded that in view of these explanations, the allegations that
          two persons died under police fire were unfounded. It informed that the police had fired two
          rounds of blank shots to disperse the rioting people and to bring the situation under control.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          63. By letter dated 21 May 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent jointly
          with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion
          and expression and the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention on
          4 December 2003 concerning Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury. The Government informed that
          Mr. Choudhury was arrested on sedition charges under case no. 8 of 9 December 2003 under
          section 11(3) of the Passport Act 1973 filed with Dhaka Airport Police Station. A separate case
          (no. 20) had also been filed against him with the same Police Station on 24 January 2004 under
          section 108(a)/120(b) 124(a)/505(a) of the Penal Code. Both cases were under investigation at
          the time. The Government fhrther stated that Mr. Choudhury had made a written statement
          denying that he had been tortured by the police while in custody, and informing that neither he
          nor members of his family had filed any complaints of torture or ill-treatment against the
          authorities.
          Observations
          64. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies. She welcomes the
          release on bail of Khademul Islam Bidduth and Jamal Ali. She remains gravely concerned about
          the reported attacks and threats of individuals and organizations working to protect human rights,
          including minority rights. She is equally concerned that several journalists have been victims of
          such attacks and threats, and that one of them was reportedly killed. The Special Representative
          urges the Government to take all necessary measures to ensure that the perpetrators are brought
          to justice.
          Belarus
          Communications sent
          65. On 9 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a letter of
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 24
          allegation concerning the situation of Natalya Kaliada, a journalist and human rights defender
          who has reportedly been fined US$ 200 for publishing articles on a web site operated by Charter
          97, an organization which works to promote democracy and human rights in Belarus. According
          to the information received, the fine followed an investigation into the legality of the news
          produced by the organization, carried out by the Deputy Attorney-General, which reportedly
          concluded that the activities of Charter 97, including its reporting of human rights violations,
          were illegal. Concern has been expressed that the fine imposed on Natalya Kaliada may be a
          reprisal for her reporting on human rights related issues and a means to deter her from further
          canying out her human rights work.
          66. On 26 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal regarding the situation of the Belarusian ilelsinki Committee (BIIC), the Belarus
          branch of the International Helsinki Federation, whose case was the subject of an urgent appeal
          by the Special Representative on 1 October 2003. According to the information received, on 19
          August 2003, the BHC reportedly received an official warning from the Ministry of Justice for
          omitting the quotation marks from the organization's name on its official letterheads and
          organizational symbol. In this context and according to the information received, on 17 March
          2004, following an investigation by the Department of Finance, criminal charges were brought
          against representatives of the BHC under Presidential Decree No. 8 art. 12 on “Receipt and Use
          of Foreign Financial Assistance” and namely for “omission to register foreign financial
          assistance”. The Department of Finance has reportedly stated that the Committee owes the State
          385 million Belarus roubles in unpaid taxes and fines for alleged unlawful use of project funds
          received under the European Union TACIS Programme. It is reported that according to the
          general rules of the Memorandum on Financing between Belarus and the European Union, it was
          agreed on 10 May 1994 that the TACIS programme would be exempt from taxation. According
          to the information received, the representatives of the BHC face criminal charges under article
          243 of the Criminal Code that could result in their arrest as well as the closure of the
          Committee's bank account and the confiscation of its property. At the time of the appeal, the
          Economic Court of the City of Minsk was scheduled to consider the lawsuit on 1 June 2004.
          Concern is expressed that the primary motivation behind these proceedings may be to prevent
          BHC from carrying out its human rights activities. This concern is heightened in the light of
          information received regarding the alleged closure of 51 NGOs, many of them human rights
          organizations, in the course of 2003, a number of which have also been the subject of urgent
          appeals by the Special Representative.
          67. On 18 June 2004, the Special Representative sent the following letter of general concerns
          in connection with information received on the closure of 51 NGOs and of written warnings to
          a further 810 NGOs, a significant number of which working in the defence of human rights: “I
          am gratefhl for the replies transmitted to five communications I sent to your Government in 2003
          regarding the closure of eight human rights NGOs. However, in the light of continued allegations
          of NGOs facing legal proceedings and closure, I remain gravely concerned at the situation of
          human rights defenders in Belarus. I am especially concerned at information I have received
          regarding the adoption since 1999 of a number of legislative measures regarding the registration,
          functioning and funding of NGOs, including human rights organizations, which appear to be
          contrary to article S (b) of the Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups
          and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 25
          Fundamental Freedoms, which provides for the rights of individuals to form, join and participate
          in non-governmental organizations for the purpose of promoting and protecting human rights. In
          particular, I am concerned with the restrictive registration procedures stipulated in Presidential
          Decree No. 2 of 26 January 1999, which modifies the prior system in which registration was
          reportedly a simple formality. According to my information, the Decree provides that all NGOs
          are now required to officially register or re-register with the Belarusian authorities. It also sets up
          a “State Commission on the registration of associations” with widespread powers to review
          registration requests. Presidential Decree No 11 of September 2003 reportedly extends the scope
          of this legislation to apply to unions of associations. Provisions within the Law on Association
          which regulates the closure of NGOs offer further ground for concern. In particular, I am
          alarmed by the provision that allows for an organization to be closed down on receipt of two
          written warnings in a given year from the Ministry of Justice. My information indicates that the
          system of official warning has been used in connection with the amended registration system to
          effectively end the work of human rights defenders in Belarus. In the course of 2003, the vast
          majority of human rights NGOs in Belarus have been closed down. I have personally received
          allegations of over 11 human rights organizations facing legal proceedings and closure for minor
          administrative irregularities such as having a different street address or using a different
          organizational symbol then that registered or undertaking activities deemed outside the scope of
          their charter. I consider that such minor irregularities do not provide sufficient grounds for the
          closure of an organization. Indeed, registration procedures and grounds for closure cannot be so
          restrictive that they result in the inability of defenders to carry out their activities. I am further
          alarmed by the June 2003 amendment of the Law on Association (no.213-3) which allows for the
          closure of an organization in the event of a violation of the legislation on demonstration and may
          result in the undue restriction of the right of defenders to peaceful assembly. I am equally
          concerned at information I have received regarding restrictions on the rights of NGOs to provide
          legal assistance and representation to citizens in civil trials. Presidential Decree No. 13 of 15
          April 2003 reportedly amends article 72 of the civil code which allowed associations to represent
          a defendant in court if its bylaw so provided. The Decree restricts this right by stipulating that
          “NGOs may only represent defendants at civil trials in general courts if authorized by law to
          represent members of such associations and other persons before the courts and defend their
          rights and interests.” Such provisions appear to be contrary to article 9 (a) and (b) of the
          Declaration on Human Rights Defenders that provide for the right to provide legal
          representation. Further, I understand that article 62 of the Constitution of Belarus does not place
          limitations on the right of citizens to choose their representatives in courts. Lastly, I am
          concerned by reported restrictions on the rights of NGOs to receive and utilize resources.
          Presidential Decree No.24 of 28 November 2003 reportedly provides measures to control foreign
          aid including preventing NGOs from using this aid to organize “meetings, demonstrations or
          picket lines”, as well as to “draft and circulate propaganda documents or to engage in other types
          of political activities”. The ability of human rights defenders to cany out their activities rests on
          their ability to receive fhnds and utilize them without undue restriction. The restriction imposed
          by Decree 24 represents a real threat to the existence of NGOs and is contrary to article 13 of the
          Declaration which provides for the right to received resources for the express purpose of
          promoting and protecting human rights. While I recognize the need to regulate the functioning of
          NGOs, I am gravely concerned that the above mentioned legislation is being used to obstruct the
          legitimate activities of organizations working in the defense of human rights in Belarus and
          silence human rights defenders. I call on the Belarus Government to ensure that the its legislation
          is in conformity with recognized international norms and standards in particular the Declaration
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 26
          on Human Rights Defenders and urge the government to ensure that the rights enshrined in the
          declaration on human rights defenders are respected in particular their right to freedom of
          association. I am available to provide any support in this regard and would be glad to open a
          meaningfhl dialogue with the government on the implementation of the Declaration. I would also
          like to take this opportunity to reiterate my request for an invitation to conduct an official visit
          sent to you on 1 July 2002 which has not received a response to this date.”
          68. On 28 September 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal in connection
          with new information received regarding the Belarusian ilelsinki Committee (BIIC), in
          particular its Chairperson, Tatiana Protsko, and its head accountant, Tatiana Rutkevich. The
          BHC has been the subject of urgent appeals by the Special Representative on 26 May 2004 and 1
          October 2003. According to new information received, the BHC was cleared of all charges of tax
          evasion by the Minsk Economic Court in June 2004, and the decision was upheld by the
          Appellate Court at the end of July 2004. The court's decision confirmed the legality of the
          activities of the organization and that the BHC complied with all procedures as required by the
          authorities. It is reported however that the criminal investigation against its chairperson, Tatiana
          Protsko, and its head accountant, Tatiana Rutkevich, continues and that they could face a
          sentence of up to seven years' imprisonment if convicted. According to the information received,
          as part of the criminal investigation, an additional audit of the BHC will take place, which will
          be coordinated by the Ministry for Taxes and Collections, involving the Ministry of Economy,
          Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Justice. Concern has been expressed that the primary
          motivation behind this investigation may be to prevent BHC from carrying out its human rights
          activities. This concern is heightened in the light of information received regarding the alleged
          closure of a number of human rights NGOs in the course of 2003 and 2004, a number of which
          have also been the subject of urgent appeals by the Special Representative.
          69. On 30 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a letter of
          allegation regarding information received on Professor Yuri Bandazhevsky, former rector of
          the Gomel Medical Institute, whose works raised awareness about the health effects of the
          radioactive fall-out of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor disaster of 1986 for the inhabitants of the
          Gomel's region, who openly criticized the State authorities and, in his capacity as a member of a
          special research committee, reported about the research being conducted into the Chernobyl
          disaster of 1986 by the Institute of Radiation Medicine (part of the Belarusian Ministry of
          Health), criticizing the manner in which the research had been carried out and the fact that
          money had been spent on research without producing any important scientific findings.
          According to the information received, on 13 July 1999, Yuri Bandazhevsky was arrested by a
          group of police officers in Gomel but was not formally charged until 5 August 1999. He was not
          reportedly given access to a lawyer and he had limited opportunities to meet his wife, Galina
          Bandazhevskaya. When, three weeks after his arrest, the lawyer had the permission to visit his
          client, Professor Bandazhevsky was transferred to a prison 160 km away in Mogilov without the
          lawyer's knowledge and was allegedly put in an isolation cell and then transferred again to a
          maximum security prison in Minsk. On 18 June 2001, after a four-month long trial in the
          Military Board of the Supreme Court, Professor Bandazhevsky was convicted of accepting US$
          26, 000 in bribes from students seeking admission to the Gomel Medical Institute and sentenced
          to eight years' imprisonment and confiscation of his property and was banned from exercising
          any managerial and political functions for five years after his release. It is alleged that the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 27
          prosecution did not produce any material evidence supporting this claim and that Professor
          Bandazhevsky's co-defendant, Vladimir Ravkov, vice-rector of Gomel Medical Institute, was
          forced by the police to testify of Professor Bandazhevsky's involvement in taking bribes. It is
          reported that for 14 to 16 hours a day, he was denied food and sleep, threatened that his wife and
          daughter would be harmed, and given psychotropic substances. He allegedly retracted his
          statement shortly afterwards. It is reported that Professor Bandazhevsky is currently confined to
          the “free settlement” of Peskavtsy (Grodno region), a form of internal exile. Concern has been
          expressed that Professor Bandazhevsky's detention may have been decided in order to prevent
          him from continuing his scientific works and from denouncing the effects of radioactive disaster
          of Chernobyl on the inhabitants of Gomel region.
          Communications received
          70. By letter dated 16 June 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by the
          Special Representative on 9 February 2004 in reference to the legal action taken against Natalya
          Kalyada. In its response, the Government referred to the illegal status of the organization
          Human Rights Centre Charter ‘97, which is not a registered organization that according the the
          Government has never attempted to register. The Government thus underlined that in its view the
          organization and its members exist and operate in violation of the law and are thereby subject to
          prosecution. The Government confirmed that on 2 February 2004, Natalya Kalyada was fined 20
          standard units, or US$ 160 at a fixed rate of exchange.
          71. By letter dated 5 July 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by the
          Special Representative on 26 May 2004 regarding the situation of the Belarusian ilelsinki
          Committee (BIIC). According to reports from the Government, on 23 June 2004, the Minsk
          City Economic Court overturned the financial sanctions previously incurred by the BHC for the
          non-payment of taxes on funds received under the TACIS programme. Consequently, all charges
          against the BHC relating to this issue have been dropped and the court expenses transferred to
          the Tax Inspection Office.
          72. By letter dated 17 December 2004, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent
          on 30 September 2004 concerning Professor Yuri Bandazhevsky. Unfortunately, the English
          translation was not available in time to be examined and included in this report, and will thus be
          reported next year.
          73. By letter dated 12 January 2005, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 28
          September 2004 concerning the Belarusian ilelsinki Committee (BIIC), in particular its chair,
          Tatiana Protsko, and its head accountant, Tatiana Rutkevich. Unfortunately, the English
          translation was not available in time to be examined and included in this report, and will thus be
          reported next year.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          74. By letter dated 11 February 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent
          jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of
          opinion and expression on 30 September 2003 concerning Viasna, and to the letter of allegation
          sent by the Special Representative on 2 October 2003 concerning the Legal Assistance to the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 28
          Population, Ratusha, Civic Initiatives, the Kontur Centre of Youth Initiatives and Varuta.
          The Government informed that under national law, the activities of voluntary associations are
          monitored by the registering body to ensure their conformity with legislation and status. When a
          violation occurs, the registering body must issue a written warning. If a violation is repeated
          within a 12-month period, the voluntary association is subject to dissolution by court decision.
          The Government stressed that compulsory dissolution may only be ordered by a court, in
          compliance with international practice. According to the Government, the organizations
          mentioned in the communications sent by the Special Representative committed repeated and
          gross violations of national legislation and received official warnings. Yet the violations
          continued to take place, which compelled the courts to take measures. The Government informed
          that on 28 October 2003, the Supreme Court approved the petition of the Ministry of Justice to
          dissolve Viasna. The decision was based on its violation of electoral laws in its monitoring of the
          last presidential election. It further stated that on 13 October 2003, the Supreme Court upheld the
          decision of the Minsk City Court to close the organization Legal Assistance to the Population.
          The court based its decision on repeated violations of legislation in the course of a year,
          including free legal assistance to the general public provided by the organization. According to
          the Government, the organization had received a written warning. In its reply, the Government
          indicated that Ratusha had committed repeated violations in the course of a year, concerning
          which a written warning had been issued. Hence, the justice department of the Grodno oblast
          executive committee filed for the dissolution of the organization. The Government confirmed
          that Civic Initiatives had been closed down, and informed that the decision was based on its
          repeated violations that had been the subject of an official warning. The organization had used
          office equipment received as non-reimbursable foreign aid for the preparation of propaganda
          materials and the conduct of other kinds of propaganda activities. Moreover, according to the
          Government, the organization had, inter alia, created structures not provided for in its founding
          statutes. Concerning the Kontur Centre of Youth Initiatives, the Government confirmed its
          closure. The decision was based on several violations of national law, including the Presidential
          Decree on the procedure for using non-reimbursable foreign aid and tax legislation. It stated that
          the organization did not comply with the Voluntary Associations Act concerning the registration
          of changes in its statute and the submission to the registering body of documents for verification.
          According to the reply, the organization received two written warnings relating to these
          violations, and the violations continued to take place after these warnings were issued. The
          Government confirmed that Varuta was closed down on 9 July 2003, and informed that on 8
          September 2003, the civil division of the Supreme Court upheld this decision. The Government
          confirmed the information contained in the communication sent on the basis for this decision.
          75. By letter dated 16 June 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 1
          October 2003 communications concerning Belarusian ilelsinki Committee (BHC), and to the
          urgent appeal sent on 1 October 2003 concerning Women ‘s Response. The Government
          informed that, on 17 August 2003, the Ministry of Justice issued a written warning to the
          Belarusian Helsinki Committee. The warning stated that inspections conducted in September
          2001 and August 2002 had established that the association had used on its letterhead, its seal and
          stamp, a name inconsistent with its statutes. The Government stated that, at a court hearing, the
          association's representatives did not dispute the details of this inspection. The court could not
          agree with the arguments of the association's representatives that showing the association's name
          in English on its letterhead and seal is not against national legislation. Furthermore, according to
          the Government, the association's short name on its stamp, ROO BKK, is inconsistent with its
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 29
          statues. The organization's representatives had argued that the violations noted were
          insignificant, but the court found that the legislation governing legal disputes did not contain
          such a concept. Based on the evidence, the court established that the written warning issued to
          the association by the registering body should be declared lawful and the appeal by the
          association without merit. The Government further indicated that, since its registration in 2000,
          Women's Response had committed several legal violations, including gross ones, within one
          year, for which the Ministry of Justice has issued four written warnings. Inter alia, the
          organization's address was different from that officially registered, and the number of its
          members was below that required for it to be registered. The Government stated that the
          organization used a seal that did not contain the legal entity's full name, which is required. It
          stated that the arguments advanced by the organization's representatives that the association's
          executive body was not located at its legal addresses for valid reasons are groundless. Under the
          law, the executive body must be situated at the exact address indicated in its statutes and, if there
          is a change of address, the organization is required to amend the statutes within one month.
          Hence the court ruled that the applications by the Ministry of Justice for the organization to be
          closed down were well-founded and should be granted.
          Observations
          76. The Special Representative would like to thank the Government for its responses, and
          welcomes the annulment of the financial sanctions previously imposed on the BHC for the non-
          payment of taxes on funds received under the TACIS programme. Nevertheless, the Special
          Representative remains concerned about the reported ongoing criminal investigation of the
          chairperson and head accountant of BHC.
          77. The Special Representative takes note of the Government's explanation of the
          administrative and judicial proceedings carried out in the cases of Ms. Kalyada and the non-
          governmental organizations Viasna, Legal Assistance to the Population, Ratusha, Civic
          Initiatives, the Kontur Centre of Youth Initiatives and Varuta. She acknowledges that, as outlined
          in the Government's replies, the authorities appear to have strictly applied the legislation
          governing such associations in closing down these NGOs. The Special Representative regrets to
          note, however, that the Government's replies in relation to these cases do not dispel the grave
          concerns she raised in her letter of general concerns dated 18 June 2004, but rather confirm them.
          She observes that where the laws governing associations are incompatible with the Declaration
          on Human Rights Defenders, their faithful application can only result in violations of the rights
          enshrined in the Declaration. The Special Representative therefore urgently invites the
          Government to review the Law on Associations and the Presidential Decree No. 2 of 26 January
          1999 in the light of the concerns expressed in her letter of 18 June 2004. She reiterates her offer
          to the Government to provide any support it may find useful in crafting legislation that strikes the
          right balance between, on one side, the need for the State to provide a framework regulating the
          formation and operation of NGOs, and freedom of association on the other side. She also restates
          her belief that, in order to engage in a meaningfhl dialogue in this matter, an official visit to
          Belarus may be very helpful. Finally, considering that changing the law might take some time,
          the Special Representative invites the Government to explore, as a matter of urgency, ways in
          which the NGOs that were closed in application of the current legislation could lawfully resume
          their activity while the revision of the legislation is being studied.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 30
          Bolivia
          Seguimiento de comunicaciones transmitidas previamente
          78. Por carta de fecha del l°de marzo de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 23 de octubre de 2003 con respecto al robo en Ia
          oficina de Ia Asamblea Permanente de Derechos ilumanos en Ia ciudad de La Paz. El
          Gobierno informO que ci 19 de octubre de 2003, una investigaciOn habrIa sido iniciada por la
          Policla Técnica Judicial de la ciudad de La Paz pero hasta la fecha no existen suficientes
          elementos probatorios debido al hecho de que los afectados no habrIan presentado ninguna
          declaraciOn a la division de policla.
          Observaciones
          79. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response.
          Bosnia-llerzegovina
          Communications sent
          80. On 18 October 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning the
          ilelsinki Committee for iluman Rights in Bosnia-llerzegovina, a branch of the International
          Helsinki Federation. According to the information received, on 26 September 2004, the
          organization's office in Sarajevo was forcibly entered and computers containing records and files
          concerning human rights cases and cases pending investigation were removed, and paper files
          were destructed. Allegedly, a camera was removed but no other valuable equipment was taken,
          including a new computer that did not contain any sensitive files. Concern has been expressed
          that the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Bosnia-Herzegovina may have been targeted
          due to their human rights activities.
          Observations
          81. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Brazil
          Communications sent
          82. On 9 February 2004, the Special Representative transmitted a letter of allegation, together
          with the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, about the alleged
          killings of Erastótenes de Almeida Gonçalves, Nelson José da Silva and João Batista Soares
          Lages, three lawyers from the Brazilian Ministry of Labour. On 28 January 2004, unknown
          individuals in a Fiat Strada allegedly shot in the head and killed ErastOtenes de Almeida
          Gonçalves, Nelson José da Silva and JoAo Batista Soares Lages as they were driving to the
          property of a landowner in the State of Minas Gerais while they were conducting a routine
          inspection. It is reported that the driver, Aliton Pereira de Oliveira, was found severely wounded
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 31
          and died later the same day at a hospital in Brasilia. Concern has been expressed that the three
          lawyers may have been killed in connection with their work defending workers' rights in Brazil.
          Concerns are heightened by the fact that they had been threatened as a consequence of their work
          advocating against and investigating conditions of slavery.
          83. On 18 March 2004, the Special Representative transmitted a letter of allegation, together
          with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of
          indigenous people, regarding the alleged killing of Valdez Marinho Lima, a Xerente Indian and
          an employee of the National Indigenous Foundation (FUNAI) who had been involved with
          investigating illegal mining activities on Yanomami territory. According to the information
          received, on 23 February 2004, Valdez Marinho Lima was reportedly shot in the chest by a
          group of unidentified men, thought to be illegal miners, in the Paapiu region of Yanomami
          territory. He and six other FUNAI agents were reportedly carrying out a mission to the region to
          investigate complaints about illegal miners made by Yanomami leaders at the Regional
          Assembly of Indigenous populations of Roraima earlier that month.
          84. On 28 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, transmitted an
          urgent appeal regarding the situation of Fernanda Giannasi, an official inspector of the
          Brazilian Ministry of Labour and campaigner on behalf of workers affected by asbestos.
          According to the information received, Fernanda Giannasi, who is the founding member of the
          Association of Asbestos—Exposed Workers in Brazil and the Latin America Coordinator of the
          Citizens Virtual Network against Asbestos, has been actively involved in exposing the dangers of
          asbestos to workers and in campaigning to obtain justice for injured workers for the past 20
          years. She has reportedly received international honours for her work, including the International
          Prize of Occupational and Environmental Health from the American Public Health Association.
          According to the information received, in the course of her work Fernanda Giannasi has been
          exposed to intimidation and harassment. On 2 December 2003, she was reportedly supposed to
          travel from São Paulo to carry out a visit to a factory in Recife in the state Pernambuco.
          However, at the last minute, the Secretary of the Labour Inspection reportedly rescinded
          permission for her journey. On 16 December 2003, she was reportedly informed that a former
          Labour Minister had instigated a criminal claim against her under article 139 of the Penal Code,
          allowing for criminal prosecution of critics of government officials, claiming that she had
          offended his honour. The claims reportedly referred to public statements made by Fernanda
          Giannasi criticizing the creation of a trade union by an asbestos multinational with the support of
          the former Labour Minister, allegedly to replace an independent union which had organized a
          strike at one of the factories of the multinational, and despite the fact that not all legal conditions
          were met. The criminal proceedings against Fernanda Giannasi reportedly began on 17 February
          2004 but have allegedly been postponed until September 2004. In parallel, on 1 February 2004,
          she reportedly received a threatening letter at her home from a group called the “movement in
          defence of national patrimony”. The letter allegedly accused her of causing the decline of the
          Brazilian asbestos industry. On 20 February 2004, she received an official notification from the
          Minister of Labour and Employment that she was no longer authorized to cany out inspecting
          activities and would be required to carry out all her work from the São Paolo offices.
          85. On 15 June 2004, the Special Representative transmitted an urgent action regarding the
          situation of Ant onio Carlos Ferreira Gabriel, also known as “Rumba”, a community leader
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 32
          who had been particularly active in denouncing cases of police violence in the shantytown of
          Jacarezinho in Rio de Janeiro. According to the information received, since the launch of a
          public campaign to denounce incidents of police kidnapping of local residents in 1999, Mr.
          Ferreira Gabriel has reportedly been the victim of constant acts of intimidation and harassment,
          including anonymous threatening phone calls and a raid on his house during which he was
          allegedly threatened at gun point by members of the police force. It is reported that in July 2001
          his wife lodged a complaint at Police Station N°25 regarding the raid. However, following
          numerous anonymous threatening phone calls from the police, she was allegedly forced to
          withdraw it. According to the information received, on 4 April 2002, “Rumba” was reportedly
          requested to present himself to the police, who arrested him on charges of drug trafficking and
          placed him in detention for four months. He was reportedly acquitted by the 34th Criminal Court
          on 4 February 2003. Shortly after the visit of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary
          or arbitrary executions to Brazil in September 2003, which included a visit to the Jacarezinho
          favela during which “Rumba” was reportedly actively involved in informing the community of
          her visit, the decision of the 34th Criminal Court was appealed by the Public Prosecutor. On 11
          December 2003, he was reportedly sentenced to eight years in prison without parole. The court
          judge reportedly made this decision without having reviewed the evidence that had led to his
          acquittal in the first trial. A habeas corpus appeal has reportedly been made to the Brazilian
          Supreme Court. Concern has been expressed that “Rumba” is being targeted for his human rights
          work on behalf of the residents of Jacarezinho community. In particular, concern has been
          expressed that the legal proceedings for drug trafficking charges and the decision to appeal his
          case may be in reprisal for his work to involve the community in reporting police violence to the
          Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and may be aimed at
          preventing him from carrying out his human rights work.
          86. On 13 September 2004, the Special Representative transmitted a letter of allegation
          concerning the County Community Council of Rio de Janeiro, a public organization
          composed of more than thirty organizations from civil society working for the promotion of
          penitentiary issues in the state of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. According to the information received,
          on 22 June 2004, during a visit to Milton Dias Moreira prison, Marcelo Freixo, the president of
          the Community Council of Rio de Janeiro, presented an authorization to photograph conditions
          within the prison, granted on 22 June. However, it is alleged that upon entering the prison, the
          authorities told the Council members that a further authorization from the secretary of the prison
          administration was required. They were later informed that this permission had been granted.
          The Community Council members then proceeded to take photographs of unsanitary conditions
          within the prison, such as an exposed sewage drain and fires allegedly used to burn prisoners'
          belongings. In the course of their visit, they were notified by the authorities that no authorization
          had been given and they were forced to destroy all their photographs before leaving the prison.
          These photographs were allegedly destroyed by an administrator and the Community Council
          members were forced to end their visit.
          87. On 25 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, transmitted an
          urgent appeal concerning the situation of Maria Joelma da Costa, president of the Rural
          Worker's Union, in Rondon do Pará, Pará State. According to the information received, Maria
          Joelma da Costa had been allegedly receiving anonymous threatening telephone calls to her
          home and office during the past months. She was allegedly threatened that she would be killed
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 33
          unless she stopped her work defending rural workers. It is reported that Maria Joelma da Costa
          has been receiving repeated death threats since she took over the presidency of the union in mid-
          2002. On 6 February 2004, another colleague, Ribamar Francisco dos Santos, was reportedly
          shot and killed in front of his house. No one has been charged with his killing, which is believed
          to have been a direct result of his union activities. Maria Joelma da Costa's husband José Dutra
          da Costa, known as “Dezinho”, a former Union president, had been killed by a hired gun-man on
          21 November 2000 in front of their house after having received death threats since 1993. It is
          alleged that although he had repeatedly reported these threats to the authorities, no measures had
          been taken to ensure his protection. Concern for her safety is heightened due to the reported
          withdrawal of her limited police protection on 2 October 2004.
          88. On 25 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, transmitted an
          urgent appeal concerning the situation of Eudo Lustosa Brasil, member of Acre Human Rights
          Centre (Centro de Defesa dos Direitos Humanos do Acre), in the city of Rio Branco. According
          to the information received, on 19 October 2004, Eudo Lustosa Brasil was reportedly the victim
          of an attempt on his life when he was fired at by three men on motorcycles as he was on his way
          home. It is reported that he escaped unharmed; however, on 21 October 2004 he allegedly
          received an anonymous threatening phone call telling him that “that was just a warning, next
          time you will finish up in the ground”. Concern was expressed that Eudo Lustosa Brasil may
          have been targeted as a result of his human rights work, in particular, his recent investigation and
          publication of the alleged torture of inmates by military police in a high security prison in Acre.
          89. On 2 November 2004, the Special Representative sent a letter of allegation concerning
          the situation of Carlos Roberto Salgueiro Dias and his wife Elisângela Batista Vieira
          Salgueiro Dias, environmentalists and co-founders of the NGO Friends of Environmental Justice
          (Amigos dajustica Ambiental — AJA), which works to protect the right to health of the Magé
          community in the State of Rio de Janeiro. According to the information received, on 12 March at
          approximately 4p.m., Carlos Roberto Salgueiro Dias was alone on the Rio-Teresopolis highway
          outside the Essencis Co-Processamento Corporation, an industrial waste processing plant, in
          order to determine the source of a strong odour which could be detected in his community. It is
          reported that the manager of Essencis, Mr. Albari G. Pedroso, stopped his car beside Carlos Dias
          and allegedly told him that three people were watching every move, that they knew who his wife
          was, her daily routine, where she worked and who her friends were. Mr. Pedroso allegedly
          continued to threaten him by saying that if the company was closed down as a result of his
          investigations, the 140 employees would make Carlos Dias pay for it. On 17 March 2004, Carlos
          Dias filed a complaint at Police Station No.66 in Piabeta in relation to these alleged threats.
          According to further information received, on 31 May 2004, Elisangela Salgueiro Dias was
          driving home from work in Rio de Janeiro at approximately 7.30 p.m. when a taxi carrying at
          least two passengers approached her car. Several shots were fired at her. One of the shots entered
          the front door of the driver's side and the other hit the top of the windshield on the passenger's
          side. Elisangela Salgueiro Dias, however, did not suffer any serious injuries as a result, apart
          from a bleeding hand. She was helped by two municipal guards and was taken to Police Station
          No.9 in the Flamingo district of Rio de Janeiro where her case was registered as an attempted
          homicide. As a result of these incidents, it is reported that in early June of the current year, the
          State Representative of Rio de Janeiro, Carlos Minc, sent a letter to the Human Rights State
          Secretary requesting police protection for both Carlos Dias and his wife. To this date, however,
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 34
          no police protection has been granted. Carlos Roberto Salgueiro Dias and his wife decided to
          leave their home in MagC and the organization they co-founded, Amigos dajustica Ambiental, as
          they feared for their safety. Reports indicate that they have now moved to another state. Grave
          concern has been expressed for the life and safety of Carlos Roberto Salgueiro Dias and his wife
          Elisangela Batista Vieira Salgueiro Dias. It is feared that both are being targeted as a direct result
          of their human rights work, in particular their work to investigate the effect on their community
          of possible contamination caused by industrial facilities close to Magé.
          Communications received
          90. By letter dated 1 September 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent on
          28 April 2004. Firstly, the Government informed the Special Representative that the criminal
          charges against Fernanda Giannasi, although levied against her by a former Minister of State,
          nevertheless constituted a private, and not a public, action. Secondly, in response to concerns
          about the cessation of Fernanda Giannasi's inspecting activities and her relocation to the São
          Paulo offices, the Government stated that these decisions were taken solely for her personal
          safety after she became the victim of threatening letters. The Government declared that Fernanda
          Giannasi had since requested official protection and had resumed her external inspecting
          activities on 15 April 2004. It also indicated that shortly thereafter, on 20 April 2004, an Inter-
          ministerial Commission to elaborate a national policy on asbestos was established. Similarly, a
          working group on asbestos, composed of labour inspectors and experts of FUNDACENTRO (a
          Foundation for Labour Safety), was created by the Ministry of Labour and charged with the task
          of examining the impact of asbestos on workers. The Government highlighted that Fernanda
          Giannasi was invited to join the aforementioned working group, but to date has not accepted the
          invitation.
          Observations
          91. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response, but regrets the
          absence of replies to several other communications sent. She remains concerned by reports of
          killings, attacks and threats of defenders, particularly those working for labour rights. She refers
          to her main report to the Commission (E/CN.4/2005/101) for a detailed analysis of the trends in
          the situation of human rights defenders in Brazil. Finally, the Special Representative would like
          to thank the Government for their favourable response to her request for an invitation in 2005,
          and looks forward to her visit.
          Burundi
          Communications envoyées
          92. Le 29 septembre 2004, la Représentante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur
          special sur la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, la
          Presidente-Rapporteur du Groupe de travail sur la detention arbitraire et le Rapporteur special
          sur la torture, a envoyé un appel urgent concernant l'arrestation de Pierre Claver et Célestin
          Nsavyimana. Selon les informations reçues, MM. Pierre Claver et Célestin Nsavyimana,
          respectivement président et trésorier de la Confédération des syndicats du Burundi (COSYBU)
          auraient été arrétés le 24 septembre 2004 au siege de leur organisation a Bujumbura. Deux
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 35
          ordinateurs auraient etc saisis au cours de leur arrestation. A l'heure actuelle, les deux
          syndicalistes seraient detenus dans les beaux de la police presidentielle et n'auraient toujours
          pas eu accés a leur avocat. Ii a en outre etc rapporte que ces arrestations seraient liees a un
          memorandum critique sur l'adoption le 17 septembre 2004 d'une nouvelle constitution par le
          Parlement burundais que Pierre Claver et Celestin Nsavyimana avaient soumis a signature aux
          membres de la COSYBU. Dans cc document, les deux syndicalistes s'inquietaient du role et de
          la place des institutions garantissant les libertes syndicales, les libertes individuelles et la stabilite
          politique. Des craintes ont etc exprimees que ces arrestations ne visent a empécher leurs activites
          pour la defense des droits de l'homme. Au vu de leur detention au secret, des craintes ont
          egalement etc exprimees que ces personnes puissent faire l'objet de torture ou de mauvais
          traitements.
          Observations
          93. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Cambodia
          Communications sent
          94. On 27 January 2004, the Special Representative sent a letter of allegation concerning the
          assassination of Chea Vichea, a human rights defender and president of the Free Trade Union of
          Workers of the Kingdom of Cambodia. According to the information received, at 9.20 a.m. on 22
          January, Chea Vichea was shot threes times by two unidentified assailants near Lanka Pagoda in
          Phnom Penh. He died instantly and the gunmen reportedly escaped. In the light of recent
          reported death threats against Chea Vichea, fear has been expressed that he may have been
          targeted for his human rights work and in particular, his active role in lobbying for improved
          labour conditions in the garment industry.
          Observations
          95. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Cameroon
          Communications envoyées
          96. Le 4juin 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec be Rapporteur special sur la
          promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression et be Rapporteur special
          sur ba torture, a envoye un appeb urgent concernant ba situation de Madeleine Afité, presidente
          de b'Action chretienne pour b'abobition de ba torture (ACAT) a Douaba, concernant une
          communication qui avait deja etc envoyee be 4 decembre 2003 par be Rapporteur special sur ba
          promotion et ba protection du droit a ba biberte d'opinion et d'expression et ba Representante
          speciabe du Secretaire general sur ba situation des defenseurs des droits de b'homme, et M. Essale
          Bisseck, president d'ACAT-Cameroun. Selon bes informations reçues, be 3 juin 2004, Madeleine
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 36
          Afité aurait reçu la visite de Me Essale Bisseck, président de l'ACAT-Cameroun a son bureau.
          Ce dernier lui aurait remis une convocation lui signifiant qu'ils étaient tous deux convoqués au
          commissariat special de la yule de Douala. La convocation n° 02/04, datée du 3 juin 2004 et
          signée de la main du commissaire de police Ebanda Phirma, lui demanderait de se rendre au
          commissariat des sa reception. Aucun motif ne serait mentionné. Des craintes ont été exprimées
          que cette convocation ne soit en relation avec leurs activités de defense des droits de l'homme.
          Observations
          97. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Central African Republic
          Communications envoyées
          98. Le 8 juin 2004, la Représentante speciale, conjointement avec la Présidente-Rapporteur
          du Groupe de travail sur la detention arbitraire, a envoyé un appel urgent concernant la situation
          du vice-président de la Ligue centrafricaine des droits de l'homme (LCDH), Me Goungaye
          Wanfiyo. Selon les informations reçues, Me Goungaye Wanfiyo aurait organisé une conference
          de presse le 25 mai 2004 pour dénoncer publiquement les dysfonctionnements de lajustice
          centrafricaine, notamment les prolongements illégaux des detentions provisoires, en particulier
          dans le cas de deux de ses clients, MM. Oumarou et Boykota Zouketia, détenus a la Maison
          centrale de Ngaragba a Bangui. M. Oumarou aurait été arrété et mis sous mandat de depot
          courant octobre 2003 pour atteinte ala süreté de l'Etat. Par ordonnance du 16 avril 2004, le juge
          d'instruction aurait prononcé un non-lieu. La personne serait toujours maintenue en detention en
          violation du Code de procedure pénale. M. Boykota Zouketia aurait été arrété par les forces de
          l'ordre le 7 avril 2004 et place sous mandat de depot le 27 avril, accuse de détournementde
          fonds publics. Contestant le delai illegal de garde a vue, M Goungaye Wanfiyo aurait saisi le
          Procureur de la République d'une demande de misc en liberté provisoire qui ne lui aurait pas été
          accordée. Le 13 mai 2004, le juge d'instruction aurait ordonné la misc en liberté provisoire
          assortie d'un controlejudiciaire. AprCs sa liberation, Boykota Zouketia aurait été de nouveau
          arrété le 15 mai 2004 présumément pour les mémes faits. Ii serait depuis détenu illégalement ala
          prison de Ngaragba. Le 17 mai, le juge d'instruction se serait dessaisi de l'affaire, apparemment
          en réponse aux pressions exercées sur lui par le parquet général. A la suite de la conference de
          presse de Me Goungaye Wanfiyo, le Procureur général prCs la cour d'appel de Bangui aurait
          répondu a ces dénonciations par voie de presse, menaçant Me Goungaye Wanfiyo de saisir le
          Conseil de l'Ordre <>.
          Observations
          99. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Chad
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 37
          Communications envoyées
          100. Le 1 er mars 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special sur
          la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression et le Rapporteur
          special sur la torture, a envoyc une lettre d'allegation concernant Tchanguiz Vathankha, Iranien
          d'origine installe au Tchad depuis de nombreuses annees, directeur de la radio privee Brakoss a
          Moissala qui diffuse des emissions relatives aux droits de l'homme. Selon les informations
          reçues, le 9 fevrier 2004, Tchanguiz Vathankha aurait etc arrête suite a la diffusion sur les ondes
          radio d'une interview de Saleh Kebzabo, chef du parti de l'Union nationale pour le
          developpement et le renouveau (UMDR), traitant de la situation socio-economique au Tchad.
          Selon les informations reçues, Tchanguiz Vathankha aurait etc torture par la police locale au
          cours de sa detention. Les coups qu'il aurait reçus ala tête, auxjambes et au thorax auraient
          provoque une hemorragie a l' il et des dommages a la retine. Le medecin de l'hopital de
          Moissala qui l'aurait examine aurait decrete que son etat de sante serait critique. Ii aurait etc
          detenu pendant 48 heures a la prison de la prefecture de Moissala, oü tout soin medical lui aurait
          etc refuse, puis remis en liberte le 11 fevrier 2004. Radio Brakoss aurait etc fermee sur ordre du
          prefet du Bahr Sara, puis reouverte le 16 fevrier avec une programmation limitee.
          101. Le 27juillet 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special
          sur la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, a envoyc un appel
          urgent concernant Evariste Ngaralbaye et Allahissem Ibn Miangar, journalistes a la radio FM-
          Liberte, crece par des ONG independantes de defense des droits de l'homme. Selon les
          informations communiquces, plusieurs tracts signes par des <>, dont le plus
          recent date du 9 juillet 2004, auraient etc envoycs au siege de la radio et distribues dans les rues
          avoisinantes. Ces tracts menaceraient explicitement de mort les deuxjournalistes et leur
          reprocheraient d'appeler leurs auditeurs a la revolte. Ii est allegue que ces menaces feraient suite
          a une interview du musicien ivoirien Tiken Djah Fakoly realisee le 30 mai 2004 par les deux
          journalistes et dans laquelle il avait formule de fortes critiques a l'encontre de certains
          gouvernements africains. Bien que ces faits aient etc denonces ala police, il semblerait
          qu'aucune enquête n'ait etc ouverte.
          Observations
          102. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communications. The Special Representative
          regrets that the Government of Chad has not replied to her request for an invitation dated 8 July
          2002 and reiterated on 2 December 2004. She encourages the Government to favourably review
          her request.
          Chile
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          103. El 8 de enero de 2004, la Representante Especial enviô un llamamiento urgente con
          respecto al señor Rodrigo Lopez Barrera, presidente de TravesChile, agrupaciôn que trabaja
          en la defensa de los derechos de las personas transgenero en Aconcagua. Segün la informacion
          recibida, el 16 de diciembre de 2003 habrIa recibido una amenaza de muerte telefonica anônima.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 38
          El 18 de diciembre, segün la informacion recibida, mientras caminaba por la calle en San Felipe,
          al este de Santiago, un desconocido habrIa realizado varios disparos contra el, y el 20 de
          diciembre, habrIa sido seguido por un automovil. Se teme que el ataque en contra de el esté
          relacionado con la documentacion y la denuncia por su parte de casos de abusos policiales contra
          personas transgéneras. Es el segundo asalto sufrido por miembros de esta agrupaciôn.
          104. El 23 de agosto de 2004, la Representante Especial envIo un llamamiento urgentejunto
          con el Relator Especial sobre la situaciôn de los derechos humanos y las libertades
          fundamentales de los indIgenas en relacion con Juana Calfunao Paillalef, lIder de una
          comunidad indIgena mapuche del municipio de Cunco de la IX Region. Juana Calfunao Paillalef
          es miembro fhndador de la organizaciOn no gubernamental ComisiOn Etica Contra la Tortura y
          trabaja en la promociOn y protecciOn de los derechos de su comunidad. Segün las informaciones
          recibidas, el 26 de junio de 2004 se habrIa desencadenado un incendio en su casa que habrIa
          quedado completamente arrasada. Tras el incendio, se habrIa descubierto el cadaver calcinado de
          su t b Basilio Cofloenao, lIder de la comunidad vecina de Juan Pichunlafi Se alega que Basilio
          Cofloenao habrIa sido asesinado en otro lugar y que su cadaver habrIa sido trasladado después al
          lugar del incendio. Basilio Cofloenao y uno de sus sobrinos habrIan recibido amenazas de
          terratenientes que habrIan pedido a la familia que abandonara su propiedad. Se informa que los
          afectados habrIan denunciado estos hechos a la policla nacional de la ciudad de Los Laureles y
          ante el Fiscal Regional, que sin embargo no habrIan realizado ninguna investigaciOn. Se informa
          también que durante el mes dejulio de 2004 Juana Calfhnao Paillalefy su familia habrIan sido
          objeto de una campafla de intimidaciOn que habrIa resultado en el asalto a piedras de su casa y
          disparos al aire delante de su hogar. Ademas de estos recientes actos de hostigamientos, se alega
          que en el mes de mayo de 2000, Juana Calfunao Paillalef, estando en los primeros meses de
          gestaciOn, habrIa sido detenida por la policla local durante tres dIas durante cual periodo habrIa
          sufrido agresiones a manos de los carabineros que habrIan provocado un aborto. La comunidad
          habrIa presentado una demanda contra los latifhndistas en el Primer Juzgado Civil de la ciudad
          de Temuco bajo el rol N° 94055-99.
          105. El 22 de octubre de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre
          la promociOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, el Relator Especial sobre la
          situaciOn de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales de los indIgenas, el Relator
          Especial sobre la tortura y el Relator Especial sobre ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o
          arbitrarias, enviO otro llamamiento urgente en relaciOn con Juana Calfunao Paillalef. Segün las
          nuevas informaciones recibidas, el 26 de septiembre de 2004, un funcionario de la CooperaciOn
          Nacional de Desarrollo IndIgena (CONADI) habrIa amenazado a Juana Calfunao Paillalefy a su
          hija de 17 aflos diciéndoles “ quieres que te queme viva ahora?”y “voy a buscar el arma para
          matarlos”. Se alega también que más tarde, ese mismo dIa, alguien habrIa disparado varias veces
          contra la vivienda provisional en la que Juana Calfunao y su familia se habban refugiado después
          del presunto incendio provocado que habrIa resultado en la destrucciOn de su casa y la muerte de
          su t b. Se teme que estas amenazas en contra de Juana Calfunao Paillalef y su familia puedan
          estar relacionadas con su trabajo en defensa de los derechos de su comunidad ind bgena. Ademas,
          se expresa temores por la seguridad y la vida de Juana Calfunao Paillalefy sus familiares.
          Comunicaciones recibidas
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 39
          106. Por carta de fecha de 2 de abril de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 8 de enero de 2004 con respecto al caso de Rodrigo
          Lopez Barrera. Las autoridades habrian determinado que no podrian estabiecer la veracidad
          entera de ninguna de las denuncias afectadas; no solo por faita de pruebas, si no tambien existe
          una disparidad de opiniOn en lo referido a las circunstancias. Asimismo, un contacto permanente
          habria sido realizado entre ci comisario de la Unidad de los Andes y ci citado ciudadano via
          telefono y reuniones. Una vigilancia especial en ci lugar de su domiciiio habria sido también
          puesta a su disposiciOn por ci Comisario de la Unidad. El Gobierno informO que diseflO ci
          Proyecto “AtenciOn de Salud a Colectivos Vuinerabies a la DiscriminaciOn Social” a través dci
          que se realizaron taileres de sensibiiizaciOn para optimizar la atenciOn médica dirigida a usuarios
          transgéneros. Ademas, ci Gobierno asegurO que seguirá atento ala situaciOn de las minorias.
          107. Por carta fechada ci 27 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a las comunicaciones
          transmitidas por la Representante Especial referente a la seguridad de Juana Calfunao Paillalef.
          Respecto a las alegaciones de asaito por carabineros presentadas por la citada ciudadana en ci
          aflo 2000, ci Gobierno constatO que Juana Caifhnao Paiiiaiefhabia sido detenida por agredir
          fisicamente a un carabinero civil y no al contrario. Segün ci Gobierno, Juana Caifunao Pailialef
          no fue agredida por carabineros. DeciarO también que no existian pruebas comprobatorias para
          demostrar que sufriO un aborto espontáneo como consecuencia de este presunto ataque. Sin
          embargo, ci Gobierno informO que en la actualidad, la Fiscalia Militar está investigando esta
          denuncia. Con respecto a la detenciOn de la denunciante en ci aflo 2002 como consecuencia de
          una ocupaciOn de la GobernaciOn de Cautin, ci Gobierno informO que este hecho está siendo
          investigado en la Fiscalia Militar. En junio de 2004, tras ci incendio de la vivienda de Juana
          Caifunao Pailialef en ci cual se habria encontrado ci cuerpo de Basiiio Cofloenao, lonko de la
          comunidad indigena Juan Pichuniaf, la denunciante habia manifestado que ci incendio the
          producto de la persecuciOn de los latifundistas con los cuales ella habria mantenido disputas
          judiciales de cercamientos. El Gobierno confirmO que una causa, junto con dos quereilas, habria
          sido formada, pero hasta la fecha no habria sido ningün pronunciamiento oficial por parte de la
          fiscalia. Igualmente, ci Gobierno informO que Juana Caifunao Pailialef esta alejada dci Consejo
          de Todas las Tierras y que no estaria siendo apoyada en ninguna de sus demandas por esta
          organizaciOn indigena. Segün ci Gobierno, su vincuiaciOn más fuerte, es con la comunidad
          UniOn Temuiemu de la comuna de Traiguén, pero aün dentro de la cual habria generado division
          y probiemas organizacionaics, sobre todo en la distribuciOn de recursos entregados por los
          programas dci Gobierno. Finaimente, respecto al tema indigena en general, ci Gobierno reiterO
          sus compromisos y avances, entre elios una nueva politica de Estado a favor de los pueblos
          indigenas.
          Observaciones
          108. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response in connection with
          Rodrigo LOpez Barrera, but regrets that she has yet to receive responses to her other
          communications. She acknowledges the steps taken by the Government in investigating reported
          violations but remains concerned by the inconclusive outcome of the investigations. She is
          particularly concerned about the safety of human rights defenders working on indigenous issues.
          China
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 40
          Communications sent
          109. On 16 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, sent a follow-up urgent appeal
          concerning the situation of Jiang Meili, the wife of Zheng Enchong, a human rights defender
          who was imprisoned in October 2003, and the situation of Shen Ting, a campaigner on behalf of
          Shanghai residents displaced by urban developments, who has also been advocating the release
          of Zheng Enchong. According to the information received, on 28 February 2004, Jiang Meili,
          who had travelled to Beijing to petition the National People's Congress on behalf of her husband,
          was reportedly detained by five women and two men who allegedly entered her hotel room,
          bound and gagged her and took her to a hotel in Hubei's Canzhou City. The following day she
          was reportedly taken to another hotel on Hutai road. According to the information received,
          Jiang Meili was not informed of the reason for her detention and the men and women, reportedly
          officials of the Shanghai Representative Office in Beijing, the Shanghai Letters and Petitions
          Office and the Shanghai Municipal Public Security Bureau (PSB), did not present an arrest
          warrant. She was allegedly released on 1 March. It is reported that since then, she has been under
          police surveillance and on 4 March was prevented from leaving her home to visit her husband.
          When she protested, she was allegedly taken to the Guoquing Lu Public Security Bureau and was
          released later that day. It is also reported that the authorities have confiscated her two mobile
          phones and have also reportedly disconnected her home phone line. According to additional
          information received, the mother of Shen Ting, Mo Zhujie, was reportedly abducted on 5 March
          2004 while visiting a displaced resident. According to the information received, 11 individuals,
          some wearing police uniforms and one who was allegedly identified as a member of the Shimen
          Erlu Public Security Bureau, reportedly entered the premises and forced Mo Zhujie into a police
          vehicle. They allegedly put a plastic bag over her head and threatened to kill her. She was
          reportedly released later that night. Concern has been expressed that Jiang Meili, Shen Ting and
          Mo Zhujie may have been targeted for their human rights work, and in particular for
          campaigning against the reportedly arbitrary imprisonment of Zheng Enchong. Fears have been
          expressed for the life and physical integrity of the above-mentioned individuals
          110. On 5 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture sent an urgent appeal concerning Ding Zilin, Zhang Xianling and iluang
          Jinping. It is alleged that on 28 March 2004, the three women, who belong to a group called the
          “Tiananmen Mothers”, were detained in an attempt to prevent them from commemorating the
          15th anniversary of the June 1989 pro-democracy protests in Tiananmen Square. It is reported
          that members of this group have campaigned on behalf of their children and other relatives killed
          there almost 15 years ago. The teenage sons of Ding Zilin and Zhang Xinliang, and Huang
          Jinpin's husband, had reportedly been killed at Tiananmen Square. No information on the
          whereabouts or on possible charges against the women is available.
          111. On 23 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up
          urgent appeal concerning the situation of Wang Jinbo, a political prisoner. According to the
          information received, Wang Jinbo was sentenced to four years imprisonment in December 2001
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 41
          on charges of “inciting the subversion of State power”. It is reported that in 2003, he was
          subjected to repeated beatings by other inmates, and that prison authorities had failed to take
          action against the perpetrators. An investigation into the beatings has allegedly not been carried
          out. He was also reportedly held in solitary confinement for several months in 2003. According
          to new information received, Wang Jinbo is now permitted visits by his family, although he is
          reportedly still not permitted to make telephone calls home. He has reportedly continued to
          conduct several hunger strikes to protest against his sentencing and his treatment in prison. It is
          reported that as a result, his health is deteriorating and it is not known whether he is being
          allowed access to medical treatment. His family have reportedly applied for his release on
          medical parole. Concern is expressed about the physical integrity of Wang Jinbo. Concern is
          further expressed that Wang Jinbo has been imprisoned for his work in defence of human rights
          and in particular for having called, through articles posted on the Internet, for a re-evaluation of
          the events surrounding the June 1989 pro-democracy protests in Tianamen Square.
          112. On 2 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up
          urgent appeal concerning reports that several human rights defenders and pro-democracy
          activists have been recently placed under de facto house arrest, presumably to prevent them from
          publicly marking the 15th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square repression on 4 June 2004. It is
          reported that among those allegedly placed under house arrest are Liu Xiaobo, one of the
          country's leading human rights figures who strongly criticized the “subversion” charges typically
          brought against most of the country's cyber-dissidents, ilu Jia, an activist who denounced the
          inaction of officials in the face of the spread of AIDS in China, and Ding Zilin, leader of the
          “Mothers of Tiananmen”, a group of mothers whose children were killed during the 1989
          repression. According to the information received, the police have been surrounding the homes
          of well-known activists for several days, preventing them de facto from meeting with journalists
          or with each other. It is also alleged that their telephone lines are disconnected as soon as they
          have conversations that are deemed to be politically “sensitive”, and that their Internet access has
          been interrupted.
          113. On 14 July 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent appeal concerning
          Zhang Youren, the leader of a farmers' group in Tangshan, Hebei province, who organized
          peaceful protests against the flooding of farmland to make way for a reservoir. According to
          reports, Zhang Youren was arrested at his home on 6 July 2004 at around 10.00 a.m. by public
          security police officers. The police reportedly searched his home and beat and arrested his wife,
          Wang Yushu. It is alleged that Zhang Youren's detention could be linked to the visit to Tangshan
          by Premier Wen Jiabao, scheduled for 8 to 10 July, during which the relocated farmers had been
          planning to petition him to intervene in their case. The arrest of Zhang Youren is believed to be
          an attempt to forestall any such action.
          114. On 16 July 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on the right
          of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health and
          the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Mr. Wang
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 42
          Guofeng, and his wife, Ms. Li Suzhi, both HIV-positive. According to the allegations received,
          they were arrested in Shangqiu city, Henan province, on 12 July 2004, when they were about to
          travel to Beijing to petition the National Health Department. They wanted to protest about the
          inadequate health care and other services for those infected with HP//AIDS in their city. In
          particular, they were concerned that they had not received the medical treatment that had been
          promised by the central authorities. They were also concerned that the local authorities had
          recently closed down the school of their children, which had been set up by a local HIV/AIDS
          activist for children whose parents were HP/-positive or had died of AIDS. The school was
          reportedly closed after its founder told the authorities that he was going to Thailand to participate
          in the 15th International Conference on HIV/AIDS. Wang Guofeng and Li Suzhi are currently
          detained in Shangqiu city. In the light of reports according to which people with HP//AIDS
          detained in Henan province in the past had been beaten while in police custody, concern is
          expressed that Wang Guofeng and Li Suzhi may be at risk of torture or other forms of ill-
          treatment. Concern is also expressed about their physical and mental integrity if they do not
          receive adequate medical treatment during their detention.
          115. On 12 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Wang Bingzhang, aged 57. According
          to the allegations received, Wang Bingzhang, a human rights and pro-democracy activist, was
          sentenced to life imprisonment in January 2003 and has been kept in solitary confinement in
          Shaoguan prison ever since. Up until June 2004, he has repeatedly been denied visits by family
          members. A senior prison official allegedly indicated that he was denied the visits as a
          punishment for bad behaviour. Wang Bingzhang reportedly suffered a stroke in January 2004 as
          a result of a hunger strike he had undertaken to protest his conditions. He has extreme difficulty
          in walking and appeared disoriented and confused when a family member visited him in June. In
          addition, he suffers from gastritis, phlebitis and varicose veins. On 9 May 2003, the Working
          Group on Arbitrary Detention had declared that the detention of Wang Bingzhang was arbitrary.
          In view of the alleged prolonged detention in solitary confinement and reports of his poor
          medical condition, concern is expressed about the physical and mental integrity of Wang
          Bingzhang if he does not receive prompt and adequate medical attention.
          116. On 19 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Yan Zhengxue, a human
          rights defender,who has initiated an international petition campaign against the Re-Education
          Through Labour (RTL) system. According to the allegations received, , Yan Zhengxue was
          arrested by the Zhejiang Province State Security Department police in Taizhou City, Zhejiang
          province, on 14 September 2004 at 2.35 p.m. and taken away to an unknown location. Concerns
          have been expressed that the reported arrest and detention of Yan Zhengxue may be an attempt
          to prevent him from carrying out human rights activities, in particular in connection with the
          meeting of the Central Party Committee of the 16th Party Congress. In view of his alleged
          incommunicado detention, concern is expressed that he may be at risk of torture or other forms
          of ill-treatment.
          117. On 26 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Mr. Zhang Bo, Ms.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 43
          Wang Jie, and Mr. Cai Shaojie, three Falun Gong practitioners, and Mr. Li Weiji. According to
          the allegations received, Zhang Bo is detained at an unknown location, Wang Jie and Cai Shaojie
          are detained in the Dabei prison, and Li Weiji is detained in the Panjin prison. It is reported that
          the police broke both Li Weiji's arms and caused him a lumbar inter-vertebral disc protrusion.
          On 5 March 2003, these persons were sentenced to imprisonment by the Yinzhou District Court
          in Tiding, Liaoning province, for collecting evidence of the persecution of Falun Gong
          practitioners in that province (i.e. persecution by the local authorities, including local
          governments and local police stations, related to the use of detention, torture and forced labour).
          Li Weiji was also convicted of assisting Falun Gong practitioners in going abroad. Zhang Bo and
          Wang Jie were sentenced to seven, Cai Shaojie to four and Li Weiji to eight years'
          imprisonment. In view of the allegations, concern is expressed that Zhang Bo, Wang Jie and Li
          Weiji are at risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment. Moreover, concern is expressed that
          the imprisonment of the four individuals is an attempt to prevent their activities to protect the
          human rights of Falun Gong practitioners in Lianoing province.
          118. On 1 December 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Special Rapporteur on the independence ofjudges and lawyers, sent a follow-up urgent appeal
          concerning Mr. Zheng Enchong, a Shanghai lawyer involved in the defence of economic and
          social rights of displaced persons, who is currently detained at Shanghai's Tilanqiao prison.
          According to the information received, since being sentenced on 28 October 2003, Zheng
          Enchong is in prison and denied access to his lawyer, which reportedly resulted in his not being
          able to file an appeal application against his sentence before the Shanghai Supreme People's
          Court. His wife reportedly filed an application on his behalf, but the Court has not acknowledged
          it. Furthermore, the director of the Shanghai's Judicial Bureau and Prisons Bureau, Mr. Miao
          Xiaobao, reportedly visited Zheng Enchong in detention on several occasions, telling him that if
          he admitted wrongdoing, his three-year sentence would be reduced by one year. However, Zheng
          Enchong refused to do so. Moreover, according to the information received, in spite of his
          relatively light sentence, Mr. Zheng is kept in a high security prison where he is obliged to share
          his 3.5 m2 cell with two other prisoners. In addition, Mr. Zheng's repeated requests to be
          allowed to telephone his family have consistently been denied. Concern is expressed that the
          denial of Mr. Zheng Enchong's right to see a lawyer and the right to appeal his sentence may be
          intended to prevent him from resuming his work as a lawyer who defends persons displaced
          from their homes by real estate projects. Such concerns are reinforced by the alleged attempts to
          induce Zheng Enchong to repudiate his work in defence of human rights, both by offering a
          reduction of his sentence and by aggravating the conditions of his detention.
          Communications received
          119. By letter dated 26 May 2004, the Government replied to the urgent action sent on 16
          March 2004 concerning Jiang Meili, Zheng Enchong, Shen Ting and Mo Zhujie. The
          Government informed that it had conducted diligent inquiries into the matters raised and made
          the following reply, reproduced in its entirety as requested by the Government.
          120. “Basic facts 1. Jiang Meili, female, age 50, from Shanghai, was displeased that the law-
          enforcement authorities had punished her husband, Zheng Enchong, for breaking the Chinese
          criminal law and falsified news reports time and time again, starting rumours and vilifying the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 44
          Chinese authorities. In response, the Shanghai municipal petitions department engaged with her
          in some educative mediation, on the basis of the relevant laws. In so doing, the public security
          organs did not apply any kind of coercion to her, nor did they confiscate any of her private
          belongings. The account given in the communication does not tally with the facts.
          121. “2. Mo Zhujie, female, age 65, a retired engineer from a Shanghai heavy industrial
          machinery plant. Her daughter, Shen Ting, aged 38, lives in Hong Kong. Recently, Mo and Shen
          have repeatedly spread rumours, influencing the foreign media and putting pressure on the
          Government in order to maximise their interests in a dispute over the demolition of their home.
          From March 2004 onwards, to create an impression, Mo has deliberately gone into hiding and
          the report has been put about abroad by her daughter, Shen Ting, that she has gone missing. On
          investigation, it transpires that the claims Mo was bundled by 11 individuals into a police vehicle
          and so forth do not tally with the facts.
          122. “A clar fication The Chinese Government guarantees citizens' freedom of speech in
          accordance with the law. The Constitution states that “citizens of the People's Republic of China
          enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of
          demonstration”. There are petition offices at the National People's Congress and at every level of
          government specially to deal with citizens' criticisms and appeals to the Government and give
          the general public an unobstructed channel for making their views known. At the same time,
          Chinese law stipulates that in exercising their freedom of speech, citizens must not harm the
          legitimate rights and interests of the State, society or other people. Even the Universal
          Declaration of Human Rights clearly stipulates that in exercising their rights and freedoms,
          people are subject to the restrictions laid down by law. The rumours spread and the disturbance
          caused by Jiang, Mo and Shen have nothing to do with freedom of speech and opinion. The
          Chinese Ministry of Justice took no coercive action against the three women, and their personal
          rights and other legitimate rights and interests were effectively guaranteed.”
          123. By letter dated 10 June 2004, the Government replied to the urgent action sent on 5 April
          2004 concerning Ding Zilin, Zhang Xianling and iluang Jinping. The Government informed
          that it had carefully investigated the matters referred to in this letter and made the following
          reply, reproduced in its entirety as requested by the Government.
          124. “Basic facts Ding Zilin, Zhang Xianling and Huang Jinping colluded with foreign
          organizations and jointly plotted to use such fraudulent means as the use of false labelling of
          goods and the forging of shippers' names to bring illegal goods into China; they also engaged in
          activities that were harmfhl to State security, in violation of the Customs Law of the People's
          Republic of China and the applicable provisions of the Security Law of the People's Republic of
          China and the rules for its implementation. The relevant authorities, acting in accordance with
          the law, placed Ding and the others under investigation and determined that they were engaging
          in illegal activities. They have since made a statement of repentance and have been released from
          investigation; they have now returned home.
          125. “Explanatory remarks (1) The Chinese Government guarantees citizens' right to freedom
          of expression and association, in accordance with the law. The Chinese Constitution clearly
          stipulates that “citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press,
          of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration”. The Standing Committee of the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 45
          National People's Congress and all levels of government have established offices to receive
          communications from the public and especially to address any criticisms of or complaints about
          the Government that citizens might raise, thus allowing the masses to make their views known
          without impediment. In order to guarantee citizens' right to freedom of association and
          strengthen the administration of associations, the Chinese Government has promulgated three
          sets of laws and regulations dealing specifically with the administration and registration of public
          associations. There are more than 200, 000 such associations registered with the civil authorities
          in all localities. Public associations are an important channel through which Chinese citizens can
          participate in the running of State and social affairs, and play a positive and irreplaceable role in
          all aspects of the country's economic and social life. Nowhere in the world do duties exist
          without rights, and nowhere do rights exist without duties. In exercising his or her rights and
          freedoms, every individual must respect the law and fulfil his or her duties. China's legislation
          guarantees citizens' right to freedom of expression and association, but at the same time
          stipulates that in exercising such rights and freedoms citizens may not harm the legitimate
          interests of the State, society, the community or other people. In addition, while citizens are
          entrusted with the right to freedom of expression and association and those rights are protected,
          there are standards set for actions by citizens that involve speech and association, and restrictions
          are placed on actions that harm the legitimate interests of the State, society, the community and
          others; such actions must also be fully consistent with the provisions of the relevant international
          human rights instruments. The investigation of the actions of Ding and the others conducted by
          the relevant departments was based solely on those individuals's actions and has absolutely
          nothing to do with freedom of expression or assembly and does not constitute any kind of
          arbitrary detention. (2) China was one of the first States to become a party to the Convention
          against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. It has
          consistently sought to prohibit torture and seriously performs the tasks required of it under the
          Convention, banning torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. The
          Chinese Constitution contains clear provisions protecting the right of citizens to personal
          security. In addition, the relevant provisions of various laws including the Criminal Law, the
          Criminal Procedure Law, the Police Law and the Prison Law of the People's Republic of China
          all clearly stipulate that it is strictly forbidden to beat or harass persons in detention or to subject
          them to corporal punishment or ill-treatment. Under the Provisions on Procedures for the
          Handling of Administrative Cases by the Public Security Organs, evidence obtained illegally by
          the public security authorities in their law enforcement work is considered to be inadmissible; the
          Provisions also and clearly stipulate that, in their law enforcement work, the public security
          authorities must show respect for the human rights of accused persons. In taking compulsory
          measures in respect of Ding and the two others the relevant authorities acted strictly in
          accordance with the law and conscientiously protected their legitimate rights and interests; the
          three were not tortured or subjected to any other inhumane treatment. The allegations in the letter
          do not tally with the facts.”
          126. By letter dated 5 July 2004, the Government replied to the urgent action sent on 23 April
          2004 concerning Wang Jinbo. The Government informed that it had carefhlly investigated the
          matters referred to in this letter and made the following reply, reproduced in its entirety as
          requested by the Government.
          127. “Basic facts Wang Jinbo is a male from Shandong Province born in October 1972. On 4
          December 2001 he was sentenced by the Linzhe Intermediate People's Court in Shandong to
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 46
          four years' imprisonment (from 24 May 2001 to 23 May 2005) for the crime of inciting
          subversion of the political authority of the State. He is currently serving his sentence in the
          Shandong No. 1 prison. The letter alleges that in 2003 Wang was subjected to repeated beating
          by other inmates and was held in solitary confinement for several months. An investigation has
          revealed that Wang was not involved with any fights with other prisoners during that time. On 19
          November 2003 Wang was ordered by the prison administration, in accordance with the law, to
          spend 14 days in solitary confinement for having deliberately smashed glass and disrupted the
          normal prison routine. Wang subsequently acknowledged his error and undertook self-criticism
          in writing, so that the prison authorities released him from solitary confinement one day early.
          After Wang was incarcerated the prison immediately allowed him to see members of his family
          once a week. During “atypical” periods the prison authorities still arranged for him to speak to
          members of his family by telephone. The allegation in the letter that he was not permitted to
          make telephone calls home is inconsistent with the facts. The letter further alleges that Wang
          went on several hunger strikes and that his health is deteriorating. In fact, while Wang has
          frequently said that he was going on a hunger strike, he has never actually done so, and his body
          weight has increased from 64 kilograms at the time he entered prison to 74 kilos at present.
          Currently his health is excellent; he has never shown any illness at his annual medical check-up
          and his family has never applied for him to be released on medical parole.
          128. “Explanatory remarks (1) The Chinese Constitution and legislation clearly stipulate that
          citizens enjoy freedom of expression. Article 35 of the Constitution stipulates that “citizens of
          the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of
          association, of procession and of demonstration”. The Chinese Government, acting in accordance
          with the law, protects these rights and freedoms. In exercising these rights and enjoying these
          freedoms, however, citizens must assume their corresponding duties under the law. While the
          Universal Declaration of Human Rights recognizes that citizens enjoy all sorts of rights, it
          clearly stipulates that in the exercise of their rights and freedoms all persons shall be subject to
          such limitations as are determined by the law. In the present case, Wang was convicted because
          his actions harmed the political authority of the State, for where there are laws they must be
          observed. The case has nothing to do with the freedom of expression and opinion. (2) China was
          one of the first States to become a party to the Convention against Torture, and the banning of
          torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment has been one of China's a
          consistent positions. Legislation such as the Criminal Law and the Police Law contain extremely
          strict provisions relating to the ban on torture, and they seek to prevent and punish any State
          employees, particularly those in the justice system, who practise torture. While Wang serves his
          sentence his legitimate rights and interests are being thoroughly guaranteed.”
          129. By letter dated 11 November 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on
          14 July 2004 concerning Zhang Youren. Unfortunately, the English translation was not
          available in time to be examined and included in this report, and the communication will thus be
          reported next year.
          130. By letter dated 11 November 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on
          12 August 2004 concerning Wang Bingzhang. Unfortunately, the English translation was not
          available in time to be examined and included in this report, and the reply will thus be reported
          next year.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 47
          131. By letter dated 31 December 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on
          26 October 2004 concerning Mr. Zhang Bo, Ms. Wang Jie, Mr. Cai Shaojie, and Mr. Li Weiji.
          Unfortunately, the English translation was not available in time to be examined and included in
          this report, and the reply will thus be reported next year.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          132. By letter dated 22 December 2003, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent
          jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture on 5 August 2003 concerning
          iluang Qi and Zeng Li, and to the letter of allegation sent jointly with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture on 8 December 2003 concerning iluang Qi and Zeng Li.
          The Government informed that it had carefully investigated the matters referred to in these letters
          and made the following reply, reproduced in its entirety as requested by the Government.
          133. “Basic facts Huang Qi is a male born in April 1963. On 5 June 2000 he was detained in
          accordance with the law and subsequently arrested on suspicion of inciting subversion of the
          political authority of the State. On 13 February 2001 the Chengdu intermediate people's court,
          acting in accordance with the law, heard Huang's case in camera. During the trial it became
          impossible to proceed owing to Huang's state of health, and the trial was postponed. After the
          defendant's health was restored, hearing of the case by the Chengdu intermediate people's court
          was resumed. On 9 May 2003 the Chengdu intermediate people's court, acting in accordance
          with the law, issued its verdict, sentencing Huang to five years' imprisonment and one year's
          deprivation of political rights for inciting subversion of the political authority of the State. Huang
          contested this verdict and filed an appeal. On 7 August 2003 the Sichuan higher people's court
          issued a second decision upholding the original sentence. Huang is currently sewing his sentence
          in the Chuanzhong prison in Sichuan province.
          134. “Explanatory remarks (a) Under the Constitution of the People's Republic of China
          citizens enjoy extensive freedoms, including freedom of expression, of the press, of assembly
          and of association. However, when exercising these freedoms and rights, they may not harm the
          interests or security of the State nor may they resort to rumour mongering or defamation to incite
          subversion of the State's political authority. Huang was arrested solely because he was suspected
          of publishing articles at his centre in which he used rumour and defamation to incite subversion
          of the political authority of the State, in violation of the law. Surely any country would punish
          acts that undermined its political authority. (b) China was one of the first countries to become a
          party to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
          Treatment or Punishment. China's consistent position has been one of opposition to those
          scourges. China has established a consummate body of internal human rights legislation aimed at
          protecting and promoting the rights of persons in detention or serving sentences, including the
          right to visitation and other humanitarian treatment. Laws and regulations such as the Criminal
          Law, the Criminal Procedure Law, the Prisons Law, the Prison Regulations and the Police Law
          of the People's Republic of China afford thorough protection for the rights of offenders and
          persons in detention; they clearly prohibit the beating, verbal harassment, corporal punishment or
          ill-treatment of such persons, and the justice system does not tolerate any violation of those
          rights. While he was in custody in Chengdu, Huang stabbed himself with a pen to avoid being
          investigated. He was promptly given treatment by the police in order to save his life. In dealing
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 48
          with Huang's ease the Chinese public security authorities followed judicial procedures
          scrupulously; Huang's legal rights were fully respected, and the issue of his alleged torture
          simply does not arise. (c) During the time Huang was in prison, his family members came on
          numerous occasions to bring him money and gifts, but they never requested permission to see
          him. No family member was denied an opportunity to visit. At the time of his trial, the two
          lawyers assigned to Huang, Gao Xiaoping and Fan Jun, saw him in prison on a total of four
          occasions 3 January 2000, 11 September 2000, 9 February 2001 and 19 May 2003.
          During the trial Huang and his counsel took part in the proceedings and fully exercised his right
          to a defence. The allegation that Huang's attorneys saw him only once after his arrest
          in June 2000 is simply hearsay. (d) Because this case touched on State secrets, the hearings were
          held in camera, in accordance with the law. In both trials, however, the verdict was read out in an
          open courtroom, in accordance with the law, and during the three days leading up to the verdict
          the court issued public announcements abroad indicating the time and place of the judgement
          hearing. Therefore the allegation that neither Huang's judgement nor his sentencing were open
          does not tally with the facts.”
          135. By letter dated 2 March 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent jointly
          with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion
          and expression on 3 December 2003 concerning Zheng Enchong. The Government informed
          that it had carefully investigated the matters referred to in these letters and made the following
          reply, reproduced in its entirety as requested by the Government.
          136. “Basic facts Zheng Enchong, male, is a native of Shanghai. He is a former employee of
          the Minjian law firm in Shanghai (who did not pass his annual qualifying review); on 6 June
          2003 he was placed in criminal detention on suspicion of illegally transferring State secrets
          abroad, and on 18 June he was arrested. On 15 August 2003 the Second Branch of the Shanghai
          People's Procuratorate initiated proceedings against Zheng in the Second Intermediate People's
          Court of Shanghai Municipality, on charges of illegally transferring State secrets abroad. On 26
          August the court heard the case in camera, in accordance with article 152, paragraph 1, of the
          Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China, because the case involved State
          secrets. The court's investigation revealed that in May 2003 Zheng had handed over to a foreign
          organization materials that were the property of the State. In the latter part of May, Zheng had
          sent official documents relating to the handling of an emergency by the Shanghai public security
          authorities by fax and e-mail to entities outside China. The Second Intermediate People's Court
          of Shanghai Municipality found that Zheng's actions violated article 111 of the Criminal Law of
          the People's Republic of China and constituted the crime of illegally transferring State secrets
          out of the country; on 28 October 2003 he was sentenced to three years' imprisonment.
          Following his sentencing, Zheng filed an appeal with the Supreme People's Court of Shanghai
          Municipality. Upon hearing the case the Supreme People's Court found that the decision of the
          court of first instance and the facts of the case were clear, the evidence was conclusive and
          sufficient, the judgement had been accurate and the severity of the penalty was appropriate; on
          18 December 2003 the court rejected the appeal and upheld the original verdict. During the
          proceedings in the courts of both first and second instance Zheng's counsel fully exercised his
          right to a defence and other procedural rights.
          137. “Explanatory remarks China's Constitution and legislation clearly stipulate that citizens
          enjoy the right to freedom of opinion and expression. Article 35 of the Constitution of the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O1/Add. 1
          Page 49
          People's Republic of China stated that “citizens of the People's Republic of China enjoy freedom
          of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration”. In
          exercising these rights and enjoying these freedoms, however, citizens must assume their
          corresponding duties under the law. While the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
          recognizes that citizens enjoy all sorts of rights, it clearly stipulates that in the exercise of their
          rights and freedoms all persons shall be subject to such limitations as are determined by the law.
          The present case is a criminal case involving the illegal transfer of State secrets abroad. Any
          restraining measures taken by China's judicial authorities in respect of Zheng were taken solely
          on the basis of his crime and were consistent with the relevant provisions of China's domestic
          legislation and international human rights conventions; the case has nothing to do with the
          freedom of opinion and expression.”
          Observations
          138. The Special Representative thanks the Government for responding to most of her
          communications, which attests to its willingness to cooperate with her mandate. She welcomes
          the release of Ding Zilin, Zhang Xianling and iluang Jinping. She remains deeply concerned
          by reports of arbitrary arrests and detention, including incommunicado, and torture and ill-
          treatment of defenders. The Special Representative refers to her main report to the Commission
          on Human Rights (E/CN.4/2005/1O1) for a detailed analysis of the trends in the situation of
          human rights defenders in China.
          Colombia
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          139. El 30 diciembre 2003, la Representante Especial enviô un llamamiento urgente con
          respecto a la organizaciôn humanitaria Peace Brigade International (PBI), particularmente dos de
          sus miembros, David Raboso y Dorotea Timmer, que habrIan sido victimas de hechos de
          intimidacion. Segün las informaciones recibidas, el 9 de diciembre de 2003, hacia las dos de la
          tarde, en un sitio ubicado entre Mangolo y Tierra Amarilla, David Raboso, de nacionalidad
          espaflola, y Dorotea Timmer, de nacionalidad de los Palses Bajos, voluntarios de PBI, se
          encontraban a bordo de un vehIculo visiblemente identificado con los sImbolos de la
          organizaciôn, acompaflando a uno de los miembros de la Comunidad de Paz de Apartado, cuando
          habrIan sido asaltados por cuatro individuos vestidos de civil y fuertemente armados. Durante el
          asalto, dos de los hombres habrIan apuntado con sus armas los miembros de PBI y les habrIan
          ordenado salir del vehIculo, obligandolos a entregarles sus telefonos portables y las llaves del
          vehIculo. Los atacantes habrIan procedido a obligar al miembro de la Comunidad de Paz a que
          descendiera del vehIculo para poder hablar con él. Los miembros de PBI habrIan explicado a los
          hombres armados que ellos estaban en permanente relacion con las autoridades de la region, los
          atacantes habrIan respondido que no les importaba, procediendo a insultarlos. Por fin, los
          hombres armados se habrIan llevado el teléfono portable de PBI, y varios millones de pesos,
          dinero propiedad de la Comunidad de Paz y destinado a la realizaciOn de sus proyectos
          comunitarios, asI como las copias de los documentos de identificaciOn de algunos miembros de
          la comunidad y sus libretas bancarias. Se informa que, algunos minutos después del asalto, se
          habrIan encontrado con soldados del BatallOn Bejarano Mufloz ante quienes habrIan denunciado
          el asalto.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 50
          140. El 31 de diciembre de 2003, la Representante Especial enviO una carta de alegaciOn sobre
          la situaciOn de Severo Bastos, fiscal suplente de lajunta directiva de Sintradin, Sindicato de
          Trabajadores del Instituto Colombiano de la Reforma Agraria (IINCORA), seccional de Arauca.
          Segün las informaciones recibidas, Severo Bastos, antiguo trabajador del INCORAy actual fiscal
          suplente de la Junta Directiva de Sintradin, habria sido asesinado por sicarios fliertemente
          armados, el 14 de diciembre de 2003, en la ciudad de Villa del Rosario, Norte de Santander,
          lugar en donde residia desde hace algün tiempo. Este supuesto asesinato se surnaria a los
          crimenes ocurridos durante el ültimo aflo y rnedio contra Rodrigo Gamboa, Jairo Vera Arias y
          Mario Sierra Anaya (16 de noviembre de 2003), todos directivos seccionales del mismo
          sindicato.
          141. El 5 de febrero de 2004, La Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          prornociOn y protecciOn de la libertad de expresiOn y opiniOn, enviO un llarnarniento urgente en
          acuerdo con la inforrnaciOn recibida el 31 de diciembre de 2003 que Inés Pefla habria sido
          arnenazada por un desconocido que le habria sugerido abandonar el prograrna de television que
          conduce llarnado “Cultura de Vida” en el cual habria denunciado la llegada de pararnilitares en la
          regiOn y la violaciOn de los derechos hurnanos desde la perspectiva de los jOvenes inmersos en el
          conflicto. Adernas, segün la inforrnaciOn recibida, el 27 de enero de 2004, una delegaciOn
          hurnanitaria formada por nueve personas, entre ellas la Presidente de la OFP, Yolanda Becerra,
          tres miembros del Consejo Noruego para Refhgiados, cuatro de la Conserjeria de Proyectos y
          uno de las Brigadas Internacionales de Paz, se habria desplazado por el rio Magdalena hacia el
          rnunicipio de San Pablo para visitar proyectos de vivienda de la OFP. Al pasar un control militar,
          varios hombres armados les habrian seflalado que se detuvieran, pero la delegaciOn no habria
          hecho caso y los hombres habrian disparado contra la barca. La delegaciOn habria escapado
          indemne pero habria sido obligada a regresar a la ciudad.
          142. El 10 de febrero de 2004, la Representante Especial enviO un llarnarniento urgente,junto
          con la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones extrajudiciales, surnarias o arbitrarias sobre la
          situaciOn de los dirigentes cornunitarios Wilson David iliguita y Gildardo Tuberquia y otros
          miembros de la Cornunidad de Paz de San José de ApartadO. Segün las informaciones recibidas,
          el 31 de enero, mientras varios miembros de la Cornunidad de Paz esperaban el autobüs en
          ApartadO, un desconocido que habria dicho estar alli por parte de los pararnilitares que actuaban
          en la regiOn de Uraba, les habria informado que los pararnilitares tenian planeado matar a Wilson
          David iliguita, Edelmira Durango y Arturo David y adernas, de atacar y robar a toda la
          cornunidad. Segün los inforrnes, testigos habrian indicado que el responsable de las arnenazas
          habria sido visto participando en ataques anteriores perpetrados contra la Cornunidad de Paz de
          San José de ApartadO por pararnilitares supuestarnente respaldados por el ejército. La cornunidad
          habria denunciado esos ataques ante las autoridades pero a la fecha, no se dispone de
          inforrnaciOn sobre las medidas que se han tornado para llevar a los responsables ante lajusticia.
          143. El 12 de febrero de 2004, la Representante Especial enviO un llarnarniento urgente, junto
          con el Relator Especial sobre la prornociOn y la protecciOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y
          de expresiOn y la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones extrajudiciales, surnarias o arbitrarias, en
          relaciOn con las arnenazas de rnuerte en contra de varios sindicalistas rniernbros de la asociaciOn
          de educadores de Arauca (ASEDAR), al parecer por pararnilitares supuestarnente respaldados
          por el ejército. El 7 de enero, Francisco Rojas habria recibido en su teléfono rnOvil una llarnada
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 51
          de un hombre que le dijo “a usted le han matado a su papa, su hermano, qué más espera, le
          damos ocho horas para salk de la ciudad 0 51 no huelen a cadaver... “. D c acuerdo con las
          informaciones recibidas, a primeras horas de la mañana del 28 de enero de 2004, aiguien
          introdujo una carta amenazandoie de muerte bajo la puerta de la casa de Jaime Carrillo,
          presidente dcl sindicato de maestros ASEDAR en ci municipio de Arauca, El secretario general
          dcl sindicato, Celedonio Jaimes Peflaloza, y a su expresidente, Francisco Rojas, tambien
          habrian recibido cartas amenazandoies de muerte. Sc informa que ese mismo dia, a las 11 de la
          mañana, se recibio en la oficina central de ASEDAR una ilamada teiefonica que repetia la
          amenaza de muerte contra Jaime Carrillo y Ceiedonio Jaimes. El autor de la ilamada se habria
          identificado como miembro de la organizaciôn paramilitar Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia
          (AUC). Jnformes seflaian que Jaime Carrillo habria recibido otra carta con una amenaza similar
          en la cual las AUC amenazarian con matar a las mismas personas citadas en la carta dci 28 de
          enero, ademas de a un maestro, Marcos Garcia.
          144. El 25 de febrero de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con ci Relator Especial sobre
          la promociôn dci derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn y la Relatora Especial sobre
          ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias en relaciOn a las amenazas de muerte, enviO un
          ilamamiento urgente en relaciOn con la seguridad Jesus Alfonso Naranjo y Mario Mora,
          representantes dci departamento de derechos humanos de la AsociaciOn Nacional de
          Trabajadores de Hospitaics, clinicas, Consuitorios y Entidades a procurar la Salud de la
          Comunidad (ANTHOC), un sindicato de trabajadores de la salud. Segün la informaciOn recibida,
          Jesus Aifonso Naranjo y Mario Mora habrian sido objeto de amenazas y ataques en ci pasado. En
          diciembre de 2003, tres hombres armados habrian atacado la esposa de Jesus Aifonso, Clara
          Sofia Caballero, cuando salia de su casa en Honda, departamento de Tolima. Mientras la habrian
          apuntado con un arma, la habrian dicho que su esposo estaba defendiendo a sindicalistas
          guerrilileros y que eso ic costaria la vida. El 21 de enero de 2004, una carta habria sido entregada
          a las oficinas centraics de ANTHOC en Bogota, la cual habria contenido una amenaza de muerte.
          La carta, que habria ilevado ci logotipo dci grupo paramilitar supuestamente respaidado por ci
          ejército los Autodefensas dci Magdaiena Medio, habria acusado a Jesus Aifonso Naranjo y
          Mario Mora de ser guerrilileros infiltrados en ci movimiento sindical. Habria informado a los dos
          hombres que los paramilitares los habrian deciarado objetivo military habria manifestado que
          los matarian donde quiera que se encuentren. Sc teme que estas amenazas de muerte estén
          relacionadas con su actividad de derechos humanos, y en particular su trabajo de denunciar las
          repetidas amenazas, despiazamientos forzados y asesinatos de funcionarios de salud por parte de
          los grupos paramilitares.
          145. El 27 de febrero de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con la Presidente-Relatora dci
          Grupo de Trabajo sobre la DetenciOn Arbitraria y ci Relator Especial sobre la promociOn dci
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un ilamamiento urgente en relaciOn con la
          situaciOn de miembros de Ia Asociación Campesina de Arauca (ACA) y en particular de Luz
          Perly Córdoba, Juan de Jesus Gutiérrez, Victor Enrique Amarillo y Moisés Elias Eregua.
          Segün la informaciOn recibida, ci 18 de febrero de 2004, miembros dci Departamento
          Administrativo de Seguridad (DAS) habrian detenido a la presidente de la ACA, Luz Perly
          COrdoba, cuando salia de sus ciases en la Universidad ININCA de Colombia. Luz Perly COrdoba
          estaria detenida en las instalaciones dci DAS de Paioquemao en Bogota. Su vivienda habria sido
          registrada en un operativo policial durante ci cual ci disco duro de la computadora, fotos,
          disquetes y papeics habrian sido sustraidos. Dc acuerdo con la informaciOn recibida, ci mismo
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 52
          dia, miembros de la Direcciôn de Policia Judicial e Investigaciôn (DIJIIN), del Cuerpo Técnico de
          Investigaciones de la Fiscalia (CTI), del DAS y de la policia general en el rnunicipio de Arauca
          se habrian presentado en las oficinas de la ACA, en el rnunicipio de Arauquita, supuestarnente
          con la rnisiôn de buscar docurnentos subversivos de acuerdo con una orden de un fiscal adscrito a
          la Fiscalia General de la Naciôn. Al encontrar las oficinas cerradas, los miembros de la operaciôn
          se habrian dirigido a la casa de la dirigente de la ACA, Nubia Vega. Habrian allanado la vivienda
          y tornado fotos. Tarnbien habrian detenido a dos de los escoltas de la ACA, Victor Enrique
          Amarillo y Moisés Elias Eregua. Miernbros del CTI se habrian llevado al esposo y al hijo de tres
          aflos de edad de la secretaria de la ACA para que ésta les abriera las oficinas. La secretaria habria
          llegado poco después para perrnitir la entrada a los responsables del operativo policial, los cuales
          se habrian llevado el disco duro de la cornputadora, docurnentos que contenian lecturas sobre
          derechos hurnanos, los estatutos de la ACA, los recibos del teléfono, tres disquetes y dos
          fotografias. El 19 de febrero, el tesorero de la ACA, Juan de Jesus Gutiérrez, habria sido
          detenido en Saravena y llevado a las instalaciones de la Brigada 18 del Ejército en Arauca donde
          habria sido rnantenido incornunicado. Le habria sido negada la visita de un abogado asi corno el
          acceso a alirnentacion y su ropa. Se terne que la supuesta detencion de los rniernbros de la ACA
          esté relacionada con sus actividades en favor de los derechos hurnanos. Igualmente se informo
          que los rniernbros de la ACA habrian sido victirnas de constantes arnenazas y hostigarniento.
          Tras recibir arnenazas contra su vida, Luz Perly Cordoba se habria ido de Arauca para vivir en
          Bogota. La Corte Interarnericana de Derechos Hurnanos (CIDH) habria solicitado la adopcion de
          rnedidas cautelares para su protecciôn. Victor Enrique Amarillo y Moisés Elias Eregua forrnaban
          parte de la escolta nornbrada por el Ministerio del Interior para proteger a los rniernbros de la
          ACA, en cumplimiento de las rnedidas cautelares recornendadas por la CIDH.
          146. El 9 de rnarzo de 2004, la Representante Especial enviô una carta de alegacion sobre la
          situaciôn de la Corporación Casa de Ia Mujer, una organizaciôn no gubernamental que trabaja
          para la promociôn, protecciôn y exigibilidad de los derechos hurnanos de las mujeres. Segün la
          informacion recibida, el 19 de diciernbre de 2003 hacia las 19.15 horas, cuatro hornbres arrnados
          habrian ingresado a una de las sedes de la Corporaciôn Casa de la Mujer en la ciudad de Bogota.
          Bajo arnenazas, habrian obligado, a los trabajadores presentes, Emilce Marroquin, Myriam
          Perez y Richard Alarcón, a tenderse en el suelo bajo la vigilancia armada de uno de ellos,
          rnientras los otros tres atacantes se habrian allanado a las oficinas. Segün la informacion, habrian
          cortado las cornunicaciones y se habrian llevado los discos duros de las cornputadoras, los cuales
          contenian informacion relacionada con los proyectos institucionales de la Casa de la Mujer,
          informacion sobre los espacios sociales en los que participa, la base de datos de las
          organizaciones nacionales e internacionales con las cuales está relacionada la instituciôn y las
          mujeres lideres con las que trabaja, las agencias financiadoras y adernas informacion contable y
          financiera. Se inforrna que a pesar de que en las oficinas se encontraban otros equipos de
          cômputo y de comunicaciôn, estos no habrian sido sustraidos. Segün la informacion, después del
          incidente los trabajadores habrian llamado a la policia desde un teléfono püblico, y se habrian
          presentado inrnediatarnente en el lugar dos agentes de la policia. Sin ernbargo, segün la
          informacion, la policia no habria abierto ningün acto oficial de la denuncia presentada y tarnpoco
          habrian atendido a las descripciones o datos que habrian contribuido a identificar o a capturar a
          los implicados.
          147. El 10 de rnarzo 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociôn y protecciôn del derecho a la libertad de opinion y expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 53
          urgente sobre la situaciôn de Berenice Celeyta, presidenta de la Asociaciôn para la investigaciôn
          y acciôn social NOMADESC y asesoria del departamento de derechos humanos del Sindicato de
          las Empresas Municipales de Cali (SINTRAEMCALI). Segün la informacion recibida, el 6 de
          febrero de 2004, un explosivo habria sido colocado en la puerta de entrada de la sede de
          SINTRAEMCALI, donde se encUentran también las oficinas de NOMADESC. Segün la
          informacion, el mismo dia, Berenice Celeyta habrla recibido una llamada en 5U teléfono celular,
          teléfono que le fue asignado por el Programa de protecciôn del Ministerio del Interior donde se
          habria escuchado una rafaga de arma de fuego. Ambos hechos habrian ocurrido unas horas
          despUés de la visita de una delegacion britanica organizada por la organizaciôn no
          gubernamental inglesa Justice for Colombia y compuesta de diputados, sindicalistas y miembros
          de organizaciones no gubernamentales, que habrlan venido para recibir denuncias sobre las
          violaciones de derechos humanos cometidos contra los sindicales y defensores de derechos
          humanos. Ademas segün la informacion, el 19 de febrero, Berenice Celeyta habrla encontrado en
          su contestador automático un mensaje que habria dicho “hija de puta, uno de estos dias la vamos
          a matar”.
          148. El 15 de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociôn del derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, Relatora Especial sobre
          ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias enviO un llamamiento urgente sobre el
          supuesto asesinato de José Luis Torres, un activista del sindicato de trabajadores de Salud
          ANTHOC y a la situaciOn de Jesus Alfonso Naranjo y Mario Mora, miembros de ANTHOC
          cuyo caso fue objeto de un llamamiento urgente enviado conjuntamente el 25 de febrero de 2004
          por la Representante Especial del Secretario General sobre los defensores de los derechos
          humanos, el Relator Especial sobre el derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y la
          Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias. Segün la informaciOn
          recibida, el 4 de marzo de 2004, José Luis Torres habria sido asesinado por impactos de bala por
          hombres no identificados en la entrada principal del Hospital General de Barranquilla donde
          trabajaba. Se informa que los miembros de la ANTHOC estarian siendo victimas de constantes
          amenazas y hostigamiento por grupos paramilitares supuestamente respaldados por el ejército.
          En este contexto, la Represenante Especial recuerda su comunicaciOn del 25 de febrero de 2004
          en la que ya se mencionaba la situaciOn de Jesus Alfonso Naranjo y Mario Mora, y las amenazas
          que habrian recibido el 21 de enero de 2004.
          149. El 15 de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          independencia de magistrados y abogados y el Relator Especial sobre el derecho a la libertad de
          opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn de Rodolfo RIos
          Lozano, abogado de derechos humanos que representa a Luz Perly COrdoba, presidenta de la
          ACA, cuyo caso fue objeto de un llamamiento urgente enviado conjuntamente el 27 de febrero
          de 2004 por la Representante Especial, la Presidenta-Relatora del Grupo de Trabajo sobre la
          DetenciOn Arbitraria, y el Relator Especial sobre el derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de
          expresiOn. Segün la informaciOn recibida, el 24 de febrero de 2004, después de la indagatoria de
          Luz Perly COrdoba, Rodolfo Rio Lozano habria recibido dos llamadas telefOnicas anOnimas. En
          la primera llamada el autor le habria acusado de ser un “perro terrorista de las FARC, abogado
          defensor de narcoterroristas” y en la otra, dos horas más tarde, le habria dicho que deberla
          escoger entre abandonar el pals, dejar los casos en los que estaba trabajando, o morir. Se informa
          ademas que Rodolfo Rios Lozano habria sido sometido a vigilancia y habr la sido seguido por
          unos hombres no identificados.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 54
          150. El 15 de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn y la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones
          extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, enviO un llamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn de
          Marina Navarro y Daniel Botella, dirigentes de la AsociaciOn de Campesina de Arauca en el
          municipio de Tame, quienes habrIan recibido amenazas de muerte. Segün la informaciOn
          recibida, el 21 de febrero, miembros de la Brigada MOvil nüm. S del ejército habrIan entrado en
          la zona de BotalOn, al parecer con Ordenes de detener a Marina Navarro y Daniel Botella. Se
          informa que los soldados habrIan dicho que no pensaban capturar a los dos dirigentes, sino que
          los iban a “dar de baja”.
          151. El 18 de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          tortura y el Relator Especial sobre el derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y expresiOn, enviO una carta
          de alegaciOn sobre los siguientes casos. Emanuel Rivero, defensor de derechos humanos e
          integrante de la FundaciOn Comité Regional de Derechos Humanos “Joel Sierra”, habrIa sido
          golpeado cuando tropas del BatallOn Revéiz Pizarro habrIan allanado su casa en el barrio Vicente
          Primera Etapa, departamento de Arauca, el 1 de octubre de 2002. Emanuel Rivero se habrIa
          identificado como integrante del Comité de Derechos Humanos “Joel Sierra” en Saravena y
          habrIa explicado a los soldados que la documentaciOn que tenla eran materiales proporcionados
          por el Colectivo de Abogados José Alvear Restrepo y Humanidad Vigente, dos organizaciones
          no gubernamentales colombianas, ya que estaba capacitandose en derechos humanos. Los
          soldados le habrIan respondido que se trataba de polItica del Ejército de LiberaciOn Nacional
          (ELN) y le habrIan golpeado en la cara, mientras habrIan seguido allanando la casa. Los soldados
          habrIan encontrado unos videos de movilizaciones campesinas que habrIan calificado de estar
          relacionados con la guerrilla y le habrIan golpeado de nuevo. Los soldados también habrIan
          encontrado un estuche de cirugla que empleaba para hacer las prácticas del bachillerato agrario y
          le habrIan dicho que lo utilizaba para auxiliar a la guerrilla. Posteriormente se lo habrIan llevado
          en una camioneta donde un soldado habrIa continuado pegándole hasta el punto que otro militar
          le recriminO. Una vez en la base del BatallOn Revéiz Pizarro lo habrIan tirado al suelo bocabajo y
          con las manos atadas. HabrIa pasado la noche atado a una ventanajunto a un sofa. Al dIa
          siguiente habrIa sido interrogado, sin atender la reclamaciOn de que hubiera presencia de la
          PersonerIa o de un abogado. HabrIa sido puesto en libertad unas horas más tarde pero no le
          habrIan devuelto los documentos decomisados. Eduardo Pefla Chacón, de 19 aflos de edad,
          Ronald Pefla Chacón, de 15 aflos de edad, Pedro Jaime Mosquera y Martino Mosquera,
          miembros de la ACA, asI como Reinel ilermosa, familiar de un socio de la ACA, que habrIan
          sido detenidos el 16 de mayo de 2003 por agentes de la fuerza püblica en los municipios de
          Saravena y de Arauquita, departamento de Arauca. ACA contarla con medidas cautelares de
          protecciOn dictadas por la ComisiOn Jnteramericana de Derechos Humanos, pero serla objeto de
          constantes intimidaciones, seflalamientos y agresiones por parte de agentes estatales y por los
          paramilitares de las AUC. Los hermanos Pefla ChacOn y Reinel Hermosa habrIan sido
          conducidos al puesto de policla de Arauquita, donde a Ronald y Eduardo Pefla ChacOn habrIan
          puesto bolsas plásticas en la cabeza, los habrIan sumergido en agua, golpeado y acusado de ser
          guerrilleros. HabrIan sido puestos en libertad diez horas más tarde sin recibir ningün tipo de
          explicaciones. Reinel Hermosa también habrIa sido golpeado y posteriormente trasladado ala
          cárcel de Arauca.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 55
          152. El 18 de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          tortura, envio una carta de alegacion en relacion con Juan Carlos Celis Gonzalez, defensor de
          derechos humanos y miembro de la Corporaciôn Movimiento por la Vida, quien habrIa sido
          detenido por miembros de la Policla Nacional clii de diciembre de 2002 en Bogota. Los hechos
          habrIan tenido lugar en el marco de una serie de operativos adelantados por miembros de la
          fuerza püblica, quienes con fhndamento en informacion entregada por la red de informantes o
          cooperantes, habrIan llevado a cabo cerca de 50 allanamientos en toda la ciudad. En este
          contexto, el apartamento de Juan Carlos Celis Gonzalez habrIa sido allanado por
          aproximadamente 15 personas, algunas de ellas miembros de la Policla Nacional uniformados y
          fuertemente armados y otras vestidas de civil, quienes habrIan entrado en la casa sin orden
          judicial y sin acompaflamiento de la Fiscalla, ni de la Procuradurla. En el apartamento, Juan
          Carlos Celis Gonzalez habrIa sido insultado, puesto bocabajo en el suelo, esposado y golpeado.
          Su cabeza habrIa sido tapada con una chaqueta. Al no contestar a las preguntas que le haclan,
          habrIa sido sometido a choques electricos en todo el cuerpo, mientras los agentes habrIan
          manipulado una grabadora y le habrIan ordenado que confesara que era responsable de unos
          atentados. Ese mismo dIa, habrIa sido trasladado a las instalaciones del Servicio de
          Investigaciones Judiciales e Inteligencia de la Policla (SIJIN), sin permitirle informar a sus
          familiares que habla sido detenido. Su detencion habrIa sido oficializada mediante la firma de un
          acta donde no habrIan constado los motivos de su captura. HabrIa sido obligado a firmar un acta
          de buen trato durante el procedimiento de registro de su lugar de habitacion. Durante la
          diligencia de indagatoria, Juan Carlos Celis Gonzalez habrIa puesto en conocimiento de las
          autoridades las torturas de las que habrIa sido vIctima por parte de los miembros de la Policla
          Nacional, pero no se habrIan practicado los exámenes de medicina legal, ni se habrIa iniciado
          investigaciôn alguna tendiente a esclarecer los hechos. Por otra parte, se habrIa adelantado una
          investigaciôn penal en contra de Juan Carlos Celis, por los cargos de terrorismo, rebelion y
          fabricacion, trafico y porte ilegal de armas en la modalidad de almacenamiento.
          153. El 5 de abril de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento urgente en relaciOn con la
          situaciOn del lIder indIgena Kankuamo Gilberto Arlanht Ariza, y de los dos estudiantes
          German Acosta y Diego Sierra, quienes habrIan participado en el XXXV Congreso Mundial de
          la FederaciOn Internacional de Derechos Humanos (FIDH) en Quito entre el 1 y 6 de marzo de
          2004. Segün la informaciOn recibida el 2 de marzo, Gilberto Arlanht Ariza habrIa denunciado
          ante el Congreso el supuesto genocidio que habrIa sufrido el pueblo Kankuomo desde el aflo
          2001. Segün se informa ese mismo dIa un grupo armado habrIa llegado al domicilio de Gilberto
          Arlanht Ariza en Bogota. HabrIan disparado contra la puerta y habrIan proferido amenazas
          contra las personas que se encontraban allI. Segün la misma informaciOn, el 3 de marzo, se
          realizO una asamblea general en la Universidad de Tolima. Se informa que durante la asamblea
          general habrIan sido circulados panfletos acusando a German Acosta y a Diego Sierra de
          pertenecer a la guerrilla y también habrIan acusado a miembros del Comité Estudiantil de
          Bienestar Universitario de apoyar acciones de protesta de tipo violento.
          154. El 7 de abril de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones
          extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, enviO un llamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn de
          miembros del Sindicato Nacional de Trabajadores de Ia Industria de Alimentos
          (SINALTRAINAL). Segün la informaciOn recibida, el 15 de marzo de 2004, miembros de
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 56
          SINALTRAITNAL en Bucaramanga, Cücuta, Barrancabermeja, Cartagena, Vailedupar, Cali,
          MedeilIn y Bogota habrIan iniciado una huelga de hambre con ci objetivo de reiterar sus
          denuncias en ci ambito internacional sobre los asesinatos, las desapariciones forzadas, los actos
          de hostigamiento y las amenazas de muerte y otras graves violaciones de derechos que estarlan
          padeciendo los miembros de este sindicato. Sc informa ademas que en febrero de 2004,
          SINALTRAITNAL habrIa interpuesto una acciOn de tutela en contra de la empresa BURNS
          PHILP COLOMBIA S.A. pore! despido de los trabajadores del 29 de enero de 2004. El 19 de
          marzo, se habrIa hecho pübiica la sentencia dcl juez 3° Civil Municipal de Paimira Vaile en la
          que se exigla a dicha empresa que reintegrase a los dos trabajadores. En este contexto, y segün la
          informaciOn recibida, ci 19 de marzo de 2004, un comunicado firmado por las AUC habrIa sido
          circulado en ci departamento de Vaile de Cauca. El comunicado contendrIa la siguiente amenaza
          contra los integrantes de SINALTRAINAL: “El bioque conjunto calima pacIfica y demas
          colaboradores urbanos de la ciudad de Paimira, deciaran la guerra a estos sujetos ya identificados
          como directivos de esta organizaciOn, para que la abandonen en un piazo no mayor de tres meses
          de lo contrario serán deciarados objetivos militares por nuestra organizaciOn y acabaremos con
          todos.” Sc informa ademas que ci 20 de marzo, una carta parecida habrIa ilegado a la sede de
          SINALTRAINAL en Paimira Vaile seflalando que los directivos de esta asociaciOn eran
          colaboradores en la insurgencia en ci Vaile de Cauca.
          155. El 23 de abril de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con ci Relator Especial sobre ci
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un ilamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn
          de Ademir Luna, periodista y miembro de la CorporaciOn Regional para la defensa de los
          Derechos Humano (CREDHOS), una organizaciOn de derechos humanos en Barrancabermeja,
          Departamento de Santander, que habia pübiicamente denunciado la presencia de los
          paramilitares en la regiOn. Segün la informaciOn recibida, ci 3 de febrero de 2004, hacia las
          nueve de la noche, Ademir Luna habria observado que varios hombres estaban vigilando su casa.
          Segün la informaciOn recibida, ci 29 de marzo de 2004, en un caso de confusion de identidad,
          Fabian Correa, ci conductor de un taxi que es de propiedad dci padre de Ademir Luna, Eduardo
          Luna, habria sido atacado por dos hombres. Los individuos habrian subido a! taxi y obligado a
          Fabian Correa a conducir hacia una caile sin salida, sitio en la cual lo habrian encaflonado con
          armas de fuego diciéndoie “Usted es Ademir Luna, cierto? Lo vamos a matar.” Segün los
          informes, habrian colocado a Fabian Correa contra ci timOn dci automOvii y ic habrian rociado
          gasolina en ci cuerpo y en ci automOvii, amenazando con quemarlo, mientras ic habrian dicho
          “que Si que era Ademir Luna. Ese carro era de Ademir.” Posteriormente, los individuos armados
          habrian intentado encender a! automOvii pero a! no funcionar ci encendedor, se habrian
          marchado diciéndoie “Sabe qué, gordo hijo de puta, usted esta rezado. Digaic a esa gonorrea que
          se cuide, que lo vamos a matar.” Fabian Correa se habria dirigido inmediatamente a la policia
          para denunciar lo ocurrido.
          156. El 26 de abril 2004, la Relatora Especial, junto cone! Relator Especial sobre ci derecho a
          la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones extrajudiciales,
          sumarias o arbitrarias, enviO un ilamamiento urgente sobre ci supuesto asesinato de Gabriel
          Remolina, de su esposa Fanny Robles y su hijo Robinson Remolina. Gabriel Remolina es ci
          cuflado de EfraIn Guerrero, presidente de la seccional dci SINALTRAITNAL. Sc seflala que los
          miembros de dicho sindicato ya fheron objeto de un ilamamiento urgente, enviado
          conjuntamente ci 7 de abril de 2004 por ci Relator Especial sobre ci derecho a la libertad de
          opiniOn y de expresiOn, la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones extrajudiciales y la Representante
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 57
          Especial. Segün la informacion recibida, el 15 de marzo de 2004, miembros de
          SINALTRAITNAL en varias regiones del pals habrian iniciado una huelga de hambre con el
          objetivo de reiterar sus denuncias en el ámbito internacional sobre las graves violaciones que
          estarlan padeciendo los miembros de este sindicato. El señor Efrain Guerrero habria participado
          en la huelga de hambre. El 19 de marzo de 2004, un comunicado firmado por las AUC habria
          sido circulado en el departamento de Valle de Cauca, en el que se habria amenazado a los
          directivos de SINALTRAINAL que abandonen su trabajo o que serán declarado objetivo militar.
          En este contexto, y segün la nueva informacion recibida, el 20 de abril de 2004, un grupo de
          hombres armados habria ingresado en la casa de Gabriel Remolina en la ciudad de Bucaramanga,
          Departamento de Santander. Los hombres habrian disparado contra la familia. Habrian matado a
          Gabriel Remolina y Fanny Robles y herido a sus tres hijos, los cuales habrian sido llevados al
          hospital. Uno de ellos, Robinson Remolina, habria fallecido poco despues. Se informa ademas
          que el 14 de abril, otro miembro de SINALTRAITNAL, Onofre Esquivel, habria sido amenazado
          por dos individuos en su vivienda en Bugalagrande, Departamento del Valle. Segün los informes,
          Onofre Esquivel habria sido amenazado de muerte previamente por los paramilitares,
          supuestamente respaldados por el ejercicio, en octubre de 2003.
          157. El 10 de mayo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn y la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones
          extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, enviO una carta de alegaciOn sobre el supuesto asesinato
          de Maria Lucero llenao, presidente de la Junta AcciOn Comunal en la Vereda Puerto Esperanza
          del municipio El Castillo, en el Departamento del Meta, y de su hijo, Yamid Daniel, de 16 aflos
          de edad. Segün las informaciones recibidas, el 6 de febrero de 2004, a las 22.30 horas, civiles
          armados al parecer pertenecientes a grupos paramilitares, habrian llegado a la casa de MarIa
          Lucero Henao en la Vereda Puerto Esperanza. Al principio, ella se habria negado a abrir, pero
          cuando los hombres habr lan amenazado de tumbar la puerta, se habria sentido obligada a abrirla.
          Los hombres la habrian llevado a la fuerza a pesar de los ruegos de su madre, sus hijas y su hijo,
          quienes salieron detras para tratar de impedir el hecho. Segün la informaciOn, durante el trayecto
          a las afueras del caserlo, los hombres armados habr lan intentado amarrar a Maria Lucero Henao
          con cuerdas de nylon mientras le habrian gritado “desde hace tiempo le teniamos ganas pero no
          se habia presentado la oportunidad” y a la familia le habrian acusado de ser guerrilleros. A cinco
          minutos de la casa habrian obligado a la madre y a las hijas a volver y habrian quedado con
          Maria Lucero Henao y Yamid Daniel Henao. Poco despues, la familia habria escuchado disparos
          de armas de fhego pero, por miedo no habrian salido de la casa hasta la madrugada, cuando
          habrian encontrado los dos cuerpos sin vida. D c acuerdo con la informaciOn, el cuerpo de Yamid
          Daniel Henao se encontraba desfigurado, con impactos en la boca y con una oreja amputada.
          Segün la informaciOn, Maria Lucero Henao y su familia habr la sido una de las diez ünicas
          familias que habia permanecido en el caserlo Puerto Esperanza despues de la incursiOn
          paramilitar del 2 de agosto del 2001. En su calidad de presidenta de la Junta AcciOn Comunal
          para defender los derechos de los habitantes del caserlo y ante la supuesta ausencia de la
          actuaciOn rapida y oportuna de las autoridades, Maria Lucero Henao, habria tenido que realizar
          el levantamiento de los cadaveres de siete vecinos de su vereda. Se informa ademas que en varias
          ocasiones habria denunciado la grave situaciOn de los pobladores de Puerto Esperanza ante la
          Oficina del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos y varias
          delegaciones diplomáticas con asiento en Colombia, entre ellas las embajadas de Austria,
          Canada, Gran Bretafla, Italia, Alemania y Francia. Tambien, habr la representado su comunidad
          ante la ComisiOn Interinstitucional que visitO la zona en 2003, y habria relatado los hechos de
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 58
          agresiôn que sufria la comunidad debido a la permanente presencia en la zona de los
          paramilitares supuestamente respaidados por ci ejército. Se informa que habria sido objeto de
          amenazas y de un intento de asesinato en los üitimos tres aflos.
          158. El 13 de mayo de 2004, La Representante Especial, junto con ci Relator Especial sobre la
          independencia de magistrados y abogados, enviô una carta de aiegacion sobre ci supuesto
          asesinato dcl abogado Carlos Bernal, miembro dcl Comité Permanente para la Defensa de los
          Derechos Humanos y dcl Frente Social y Politico, que habria sido asesinado ci 10 de abril de
          2004 en la ciudad de Cücuta por una persona no identificada, que le disparo varias veces en la
          cabeza cuando se encontraba en un estabiecimiento de yenta de comida. Otra persona no
          identificada habria disparado a la cabeza de su guardaespaidas Camilo Jiménez, quien faiiecio
          horas más tarde. Sc informa que al momento de su muerte, Carios Bernal habria estado
          beneficiario dci Programa de Protecciôn dci Ministerio dci Interior y de Justicia. Este ataque
          pone en evidencia una vez más la precaria situaciôn que viven los abogados defensores de
          derechos humanos en Colombia, quienes enfrentan amenazas, ataques fisicos y, en casos como ci
          presente, la muerte.
          159. El 28 de mayo de 2004, la Representante Especial enviô un ilamamiento urgente sobre la
          situaciôn de Carlos Alberto ilurtado Aramburo, ci sobrino de Jorge Isaac Aramburo
          Garcia, lider dci Movimiento Negro en Colombia y dci Consejo Comunitario dci Rio
          Yurumangui. Segün la informacion recibida, eli 0 de octubre de 2003, la Comisiôn
          Interamericana de Derechos Humanos habria otorgado medidas cautelares a favor de Jorge Isaac
          Aramburo Garcia para protegerie tanto a éi, como a su familia, ya que desde ci aflo 2000 11
          miembros de su familia habrian sido asesinados por miembros de los grupos paramilitares
          supuestamente respaidados por ci ejército. En este contexto y segün la informacion recibida, ci
          11 de mayo de 2004 a las 17.00 horas, Carios Aiberto Hurtado Aramburo habria sido secuestrado
          de su residencia en ci Barrio la Jndependencia por dos individuos desconocidos que se
          movilizaban en un taxi. Segün los informes, desde esa fecha no se habria tenido noticias de su
          paradero.
          160. El 21 de junio de 2004, la Representante Especial, conjuntamente con la Presidente-
          Relatora dci Grupo de Trabajo sobre la Detenciôn Arbitraria, enviô un ilamamiento urgente en
          reiacion con Mauricio Avilez Alvarez, representante dci Comité Operativo de la Coordinacion
          de Derechos Humanos Colombia-Europa-Estados Unidos (CCEEU), una organizaciôn que
          produce informes a nivel internacional sobre la situaciôn de derechos humanos en Colombia.
          Segün las informaciones recibidas, Mauricio Aviiez Alvarez habria sido detenido ci 10 de junio
          de 2004 en Barranquilila por miembros dci Grupo de Acciôn Unificada por la Libertad Personal
          (GAULA) dci ejército. El Sr. Aviiez Alvarez habria sido trasiadado en un vehiculo sin piacas
          hasta los calabozos de la Segunda Brigada de Barranquilila. Habria sido acusado de rebeiion,
          extorsiôn y homicidio agravado por la coiocacion de un artefacto expiosivo ci 16 de diciembre
          de 2003 en ci centro comercial SAO de Barranquilia, atentado en ci cual faiiecio una persona. Sc
          informa, sin embargo, que ese dia ci Sr. Aviiez Alvarez habria participado en un taller de la
          Coordinacion en Barranquilia y que por lo tanto, no pudo haber participado en la comisiôn dci
          atentado descrito. El Sr. Aviiez Alvarez se encuentra actualmente detenido en la carcei “El
          Bosque” de Barranquilila. Sc informa, por üitimo, que habria sido detenido y acusado con ci
          objeto de amedrentarlo para que cese en sus actividades de defensa de los derechos humanos y
          de denuncia de las politicas gubernamentaics en materia de seguridad.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 59
          161. El 5 de Julio de 2004, la Representante Especial, Junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn
          de Luz Perly Córdoba y Juan de Jesus Gutierres Ardila, presidenta y tesorero de la ACA,
          cuyo caso ya fue obJeto de un llamamiento urgente enviado el 27 de febrero de 2004 por la
          Presidente-Relatora del Grupo de TrabaJo sobre la DetenciOn Arbitraria conJuntamente con el
          Relator Especial sobre el derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y la Representante
          Especial. Segün la informaciOn recibida, Luz Perly COrdoba y Juan de Jesus Gutierres Ardila
          habrIan sido detenidos durante la noche del 18 de febrero de 2004 en Bogota. Segün la nueva
          informaciOn recibida, el 18 de Junio de 2004 Luz Perly COrdoba y Juan de Jesus Gutierres Ardila
          habrIan cumplido 120 dIas de privaciOn de la libertad sin que la fiscalla hubiera hecho la
          calificaciOn del mérito de la instrucciOn como lo establece la ley.
          162. El 7 de Julio de 2004, la Representante Especial, Junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y el Relator Especial sobre la independencia de
          magistrados y abogados, enviO una carta de alegaciOn con respecto a Pedro Julio Mahecha
          Avila, abogado y miembro de la CorporaciOn Colectivo de Abogados “José Alvear Restrepo”,
          quien habrIa sufrido actos de hostigamiento por parte del DAS el 14 de mayo de 2004. El
          abogado habrIa sido hostigado y seguido en la ciudad de Cartagena por personas que se habrIan
          identificado como funcionarios del DAS. La misma tarde, el abogado habrIa denunciado el
          supuesto hostigamiento ante la policla. Sin embargo, el hostigamiento habrIa continuado y el
          abogado habrIa abandonado la ciudad de Cartagena y anulado un viaJe a la ciudad de
          Barranquilla, donde se habrIa comprometido a dirigir un programa auspiciado por la UniOn
          Europea. Los informes indican que fhncionarios del DAS habrIan dispuesto un operativo en la
          ciudad de Cartagena con el fin de demostrar que Pedro Julio Mahecha Avila era guerrillero de las
          FARC. Este supuesto hostigamiento podrIa ser relacionado con su trabaJo como abogado y
          defensor de derechos humanos.
          163. El 28 de Julio de 2004, la Representante Especial enviO una carta de alegaciOn sobre el
          supuesto asesinato de Carmen Elisa Nova llernández, fiscal del Sindicato de TrabaJadores de
          ClInicas y Hospitales de Santander (SINTRACLINICAS). Segün las informaciones recibidas, el
          15 deJulio de 2004, a las 20.15 horas, Carmen Elisa Nova habrIa sido asesinado al ingresar a su
          domicilio, después de cumplir laJornada laboral en la ciudad de Bucaramanga, Santander. D c
          acuerdo con las informaciones, dos sicarios que se habrIan trasladado en una moto con la placa
          cubierta por un trapo le habrIan disparado en tres ocasiones causandole la muerte. La Sra. Nova
          Hernandez habrIa trabaJ ado como enfermera desde hacIa 28 aflos en la ClInica Bucaramanga,
          donde se habrIa afiliado a la organizaciOn sindical para la protecciOn de los derechos de los
          trabaJadores. HabrIa sido elegida como fiscal del sindicato el pasado 24 de Julio. Se informa
          también que los miembros de SINTRACLINICAS habrIan interpuesto demandas ante la Fiscalla,
          La Defensoria del Pueblo y otros organismos püblicos, refiriéndose a actos de hostigamiento que
          habrIan sufrido desde marzo del 2002, cuando hubo un intento de secuestrar a la presidenta del
          sindicato. Se teme que este supuesto asesinato esté relacionado con el trabaJo de Carmen Elisa
          Nova Hernandez en favor de los derechos humanos, y en particular su trabaJo de sindicalista en
          defensa de los derechos de los trabaJadores.
          164. El 6 de agosto de 2004 la Representante Especial, Junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          situaciOn de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales de los indIgenas, enviO un
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 60
          ilamamiento urgente en reiacion con la situaciôn de inseguridad, peligro e indefension en la que
          se encuentran aigunos lideres indigenas de la Organización Zonal IndIgena del Putumayo
          (OZIP). Segün la informacion recibida, los dias 2 y 3 de Junio 2004, aigunos miembros de dicha
          organizaciôn habrian recibido amenazas de muerte por parte de hombres armados no
          identificados. A Hermes Meliton Narváez, que ocupa ci cargo de presidente, José Antonio Jajoy
          Pai, tesorero, Luis Alejandro Lopez Agreda y Rosaura Guzman, respectivamente secretario
          general y vocal de la OZIP, habria sido ordenado bajo amenazas de muerte de abandonar su
          ejercicio de iiderazgo y de acabar las actividades de la organizaciOn. A pesar de que las
          instituciones pübiicas informadas de los hechos, entre otras, la Defensorla del Pueblo, ci
          Ministerio del Interior, la Policia Nacional y ci Servicio de Inteligencia (SIJTN), habran
          habilitado mecanismos temporales de protecciOn de los ilderes de la OZIP, ci 24 de Junio 2004,
          Luis Alejandro LOpez Agreda habria recibido una nueva ilamada telefOnica en la que se ic
          trasmitia ci mismo mensaje intimidatorio. Segün se informa, ci presunto autor de la amenaza se
          habria presentado como miembro de las AUC, con sede en ci municipio de Puerto Caicedo,
          Putumayo. Actualmente, José Antonio Jajoy se encuentra en la Oficina dci Alto Comisionado
          para los Derechos Humanos terminando una pasantia bajo ci programa que esta instituciOn
          desarroila con la Universidad de Deusto en Espafla. Su vuelta a Colombia está prevista para
          finales dci verano. José Antonio Jajoy ha continuado recibiendo amenazas en las que se ic
          invitaria a no voiver al pals bajo peligro de muerte.
          165. El 9 de agosto de 2004, la Representante Especial, Junto con ci Relator Especial sobre la
          situaciOn de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentaics de los indigenas, enviO un
          ilamamiento urgente en relaciOn con la situaciOn de inseguridad, peligro e indefensiOn en la que
          se encuentran los indigenas de Colombia y en particular ci pueblo indIgena Kankuamo de Ia
          Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta. Segün la informaciOn recibida, ci 4 de agosto de 2004, ci
          dirigente indigena Fredy Arias Arias, coordinador dci programa de derechos humanos de la
          OrganizaciOn Indigena Kankuama (01K), the asesinado cuando se dirigia en bicicieta desde la
          sede de la organizaciOn hacia su residencia en la ciudad de Vailedupar. Segün se informa, los
          autores de dicho crimen, dos personas que se movilizaban en una moto, habr lan sido presuntos
          miembros de los paramihtares.
          166. El 31 de agosto, la Representante Especial, Junto con ci Relator Especial sobre ci derecho
          a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un ilamamiento urgente en relaciOn con la situaciOn
          de inseguridad y peligro en la que se encuentra Lilia Solano, profesora de la universidad y
          directora de la organizaciOn no gubernamental de derechos humanos Proyecto Justicia y Vida.
          Segün la informaciOn recibida, ci 28 de Julio de 2004, Lilia Solana habria ilevado a cabo una
          protesta dentro de la camera de debate dci Congreso Nacional en Bogota contra los posibies
          planes de conceder inmunidad procesal a los grupos paramilitares presuntamente respaidados por
          ci Gobierno. Sc informa que este mismo dia ci Gobierno habria invitado a tres dirigentes
          paramilitares quienes habr lan estado presentes durante la protesta. Desde entonces, se alega que
          Lilia Solano habria recibido amenazas de muerte tanto en ci teléfono de su casa como en su
          teléfono mOvil. Ademas, se informa que las oficinas de Proyecto Justicia y Vida habrian estado
          sometidas a una vigilancia constante por desconocidos. Sc teme que estas supuestas amenazas de
          muerte en contra de Lilia Solano puedan estar relacionadas con su trabaJo de defensora de los
          derechos humanos, y en particular su oposiciOn a la impunidad de los combatientes paramilitares
          en Colombia.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/l0l/Add. 1
          Page 61
          167. El 20 de septiembre de 2004, la Representante Especial enviô una carta de alegacion
          sobre actos de intimidacion en contra de la doctora Soraya Gutiérrez, miembro de la
          Corporaciôn Colectivo de Abogados José Alvear Restrepo. Segün la informacion recibida, el 13
          de febrero de 2003, mientras la Sra. Soraya Gutiérrez regresaba a casa en un vehIculo blindado
          asignado al Colectivo de Abogados por el programa gubernamental de protecciôn a defensores
          de derechos humanos, habrIa sido interceptado por otro vehIculo que le habrIa obligado a
          detenerse. Se informa que varios hombres bajaron del vehIculo llevando ametralladoras. La Sra.
          Soraya Gutiérrez habrIa logrado arrancar su vehIculo y eludir la posible acciôn de los agresores.
          Se alega también que en los dIas antes de dicho suceso habrIa recibido llamadas telefonicas
          anônimas en las que no se contestaban o se escuchaban risas macabras. Se teme que estos actos
          de hostigamiento e intimidacion en contra de la Sra. Soraya Gutiérrez puedan estar directamente
          relacionados con su trabajo de defensora de derechos humanos y constituir un claro intento de
          impedir el desarrollo de sus actividades.
          168. El 23 de septiembre de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial
          sobre el derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn y el Relator Especial sobre ejecuciones
          extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, enviO un llamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn de la
          periodista e investigadora de derechos humanos, Claudia Julieta Duque, quien estarla
          recibiendo amenazas de muerte desde agosto de 1999, cuando iniciO una investigaciOn
          periodIstica sobre las posibles irregularidades en el proceso penal del homicidio del humorista y
          periodista, Jaime GarzOn, en la que se seflalaba al DAS como responsable de un montajejurIdico
          para acusar Juan Pablo Ortiz Agudelo y Ediberto Sierra Ayala por el homicidio del Sr. GarzOn.
          Se informa que la Sra. Duque dio a conocer estos hechos ante la DirecciOn de Derechos
          Humanos de la Policla Nacional, quien realizO un estudio de riesgo que arrojO como resultado
          que habla un peligro inminente de que las amenazas se hagan efectivas. D c acuerdo con las
          informaciones recibidas, la periodista también denunciO las amenazas ante la Fiscalla. La
          FundaciOn para la Libertad de Prensa solicitO, por medio de un derecho de peticiOn, informaciOn
          sobre el estado de las investigaciones en el caso de la Sra. Duque. En oficio N° 6601, la Fiscalla
          respondiO “que ci despacho no encontrO informaciOn al respecto”, pese a que la FundaciOn para
          la Libertad de Prensa habla incluido el nümero del proceso y la Fiscalla en el que se deberla
          encontrar la investigaciOn. Informes indican que la Sra. Duque ha recibido protecciOn de la
          policla. Sin embargo, la Fiscalla no ha avanzado en las investigaciones y, por el contrario, le
          informO a la FundaciOn para la Libertad de Prensa que las denuncias que la Sra. Duque interpuso
          en sus despachos no existlan.
          169. El 19 de octubre de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre
          ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, enviO una carta de alegaciOn con respecto al
          caso de Teresa Yarse, lIder de la asociaciOn de Mujeres de las Independencias (AMI),
          organizaciOn que trabaja en favor de los derechos de la mujer y contra la pobreza en MedellIn,
          Departamento de Antioquia. HabrIa fallecido el 6 de octubre de 2004 al recibir tres tiros cuando
          se encontraba en una cancha deportiva cerca de su casa. Se teme que la muerte de Teresa Yarse
          pueda estar directamente relacionado con su trabajo de defensora de derechos humanos en dicha
          comunidad, y en particular con su intento de reprimir confrontaciones armadas entre guerrilla y
          paramilitares. Se alega que la muerte puede ser atribuida a los paramilitares que controlan el
          barrio Comuna 13.
          Comunicaciones recibidas
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 62
          170. Por carta de fecha de 30 de marzo de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 5 de febrero de 2004 acerca de la situaciôn de Inés
          Pefla y miembros de Ia Comisión Internacional de las Brigadas de Paz y del Consejo
          Noruego de Refugiados. La Procuraduria General de la Naciôn informo que una vez conocida la
          denuncia, se habia dirigido al Comandante del Puesto Fiuvial No. 31 de la Armada Nacional
          soiicitandoie aumentar los controles y retenes en ci rio Magdaiena a fin de evitar la incursion de
          grupos armados ilegales, y asi proteger la vida e integridad de las personas que diariamente
          trafican por ci rio. Respecto a la situaciOn de Inés Pefla, ci Gobierno informO que ci proceso se
          encuentra en la Fiscalia Quinta a fin de determinar la real existencia dci hecho punibie y sus
          presuntos responsabies. Respecto ala situaciOn de la Comitiva, se informO que hasta ci momento
          no existian pruebas fehacientes sobre los hechos denunciados. Sin embargo las diligencias de
          Yolanda Becerra fueron asignadas a la Fiscalia Sexta. Sc hizo entrega también a las
          coordinadoras de la OrganizaciOn Femenina Popular de las normas de autoprotecciOn que deben
          tenerse en cuenta para disminuir ci grado de vuinerabilidad. La Fiscalia Quinta Seccional
          informO que las diligencias contra desconocidos, siendo ofendida Inés Pefla, fueron enviadas ci
          21 de febrero 2004 a la oficina de asignaciones de la Unidad Especializada de Fiscalias de la
          ciudad de Bucaramanga, por entera razOn de competencia funcional.
          171. Por carta fechada ci 28 de mayo de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 25 de febrero y ci 12 de marzo de 2004. El Gobierno
          informO que la Fiscalia General, ci Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad y la Policia
          Nacional habrian sido informados de las amenazas recibidas por los citados ciudadanos. Con
          respecto a Jesus Alfonso Naranjo, ic habria ortorgado un esquema de seguridad, en ci que
          cuenta con dos escoitas, un apoyo de transporte terrestre por 192 horas mensuales y un medio de
          comunicaciOn celular. Asimismo, y conforme con las recomendaciones dci Comité de
          RegiamentaciOn y EvaluaciOn de Riesgo, las autoridades entregará tiquetes internacionaics para
          éi y su grupo familiar toda vez que acorde con la informaciOn suministrada. Con respecto a
          Mario Nel Mora, ci esquema de seguridad con ci que anteriormente contaba fue suspendido sin
          embargo, ic habria asignado a otro esquema por la protecciOn de los dirigentes nacionaics
          mediante ci cual contaria con medio de comunicaciOn Avantel. En la actualidad, espera una
          reevaluaciOn de su nivel de riesgo por la Policia Nacional, que podria otorgarie mecanismos
          adicionaics. El 30 de marzo de 2004, ci Ministerio dci Interior y de Justicia precisa que ci difunto
          no habria solicitado ninguna medida de protecciOn de los organismos estataics.
          172. Por carta fechada eli 0 dejuiio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 12 de febrero de 2004 relativa a las presuntas
          amenazas en contra de varios sindicalistas miembros de la Asociación de Educadores de
          Arauca (ASEDAR), Jaime Carrillo, Celedonio Jaimes Peflaloza y su presidente Francisco
          Rojas. El Gobierno informO que la Fiscalia Tercera delegada ante los jueces dci circuito de
          Arauca estaba investigando dichas amenazas, adelantando varias diligencias investigativas, entre
          elias, deciaraciones de los testigos. Ademas, la Oficina de ProtecciOn realizO una evaluaciOn
          técnica dci nivel de riegos y amenazas de las personas antes mencionadas. La oficina ics dio a
          conocer las recomendaciones que deben tener en cuenta para su seguridad personal. También se
          acordO en reuniones con la policia nacional que realizaria patruilajes por las residencias y lugares
          de trabajo de estos señores.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 63
          173. Por carta fechada el i 0 dejuiio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 15 de marzo de 2004 sobre la seguridad dci
          representante legal de Luz Perly Cordoba, Rodolfo Rios Lozano. El Gobierno confirmo ci 10 de
          abril de 2004 que ci abogado hara parte dci Programa Especial de Protecciôn Integral para
          dirigentes y miembros sobrevivientes de la Union PatriOtica y dci Partido Comunista
          Colombiano, por ci cual beneficiara de un vehIculo corriente, dos escoitas, un celular, un radio
          Avantel y tiquetes nacionaics para cuando lo solicitarlan. Asimismo, ci 18 de marzo de 2004, ci
          Comité de RegiamentaciOn y EvaluaciOn de Riesgos habrIa autorizado ci cambio de su vehIculo
          corriente por un vehIculo blindado. Con respecto a las amenazas dirigidas al abogado ci 27 de
          abril de 2004, la Fiscaila ha iniciado un procedimiento investigativo de los hechos denunciados.
          El Gobierno seguirá atento al resuitado de la investigaciOn e informará oportunamente a la
          Representante Especial.
          174. Por carta fechada eli 0 dejuiio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 30 de diciembre de 2003 con referencia a la
          seguridad de David Raboso y Dorothea Timmer. El Gobierno informO que una investigaciOn
          de los hechos denunciados habrIa sido iniciada. Segün ci Gobierno, los citados ciudadanos en
          ningün momento habrIan sido amenazados o agredidos, sino ci vIctima de tal hostigamiento fue
          ci señor David Wilson, representante de la comunidad de San José con quién se despiazaban. Los
          miembros de la PBI habrIan recibido recomendaciones de abstenerse de transportar dinero, o al
          mInimo, de designar una escoita policla. Segün los fhncionarios dci DAS, los hechos
          denunciados por los miembros de la PBI no habrIan sido confirmados por los residentes de la
          zona. Hasta la fecha, no existe resuitado conciuyente ni para identificar a las personas que
          agredieron a David Wilson ni para determinar las circunstancias de los hechos denunciados. La
          investigaciOn se encuentra en etapa previa pero en cuanto recabe más informaciOn ci Gobierno
          informará a la Representante Especial.
          175. Por carta fechada eli 0 dejuiio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 11 de febrero de 2004 referente a las amenazas en
          contra de Wilson David iliguita, dirigente comunitario, y otros miembros de la Comunidad de
          Paz de San José de ApartadO. El Gobierno confirmO que mandO a las autoridades civiles,
          militares y de policla a tomar las medidas necesarias para garantizar la integridad fIsica de dichas
          personas. Segün la Defensorla dci Pueblo, ci 9 de febrero de 2004 habrIa recibido una denuncia
          suscrita por la CorporaciOn JurIdica “Libertad”. La Ministerla de Defensa Nacional informO que
          recabara informaciOn con ci propOsito de investigar la veracidad de las amenazas y tomar las
          medidas necesarias para neutralizar acciones delictivas de las organizaciones armadas al margen
          de la icy.
          176. Por carta fechada ci 26 dejuiio de 2004, ci Gobierno enviO informaciOn adicional sobre
          la situaciOn de Jesus Alfonso Naranjo y Mario Nel Mora. El Gobierno informO que hasta la
          fecha la investigaciOn con referencia a las amenazas sufridas por ci denunciante, Jesus Aifonso
          Naranjo, se encuentra en etapa preliminar y en práctica de pruebas. Con respecto al denunciante
          Mario Mora, ci Gobierno aciarO que no habrIa sido victima de las amenazadas mencionadas, y
          por consecuencia, no habrIa sido incluido en la investigaciOn.
          177. Por carta fechada ci 26 dejuiio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 23 de abril de 2004 referente a Ademir Luna. Con
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 64
          respecto a los actos de hostigamiento en contra de citado ciudadano durante los meses de febrero
          y marzo de 2004, ci Gobierno informo que la policla habrIa recibido ninguna denuncia, y por
          consecuencia no habrIa sido posibie iniciar una investigaciôn. Asimismo, segün ci Gobierno, no
          existirla una amenaza directa que pondrIa en riesgo la vida dcl afectado o que impedirla ci
          desarroilo de sus labores como periodista. No obstante, ci Gobierno deciaro que habrIa reforzado
          todas las medidas de seguridad dispuestas.
          178. Por carta fechada ci 26 dejuiio de 2004, y siguiente una otra comunicaciôn ci 2 dejunio
          de 2004 por la Representante Especial, ci Gobierno enviô informacion adicional sobre Ademir
          Luna. Segün ci Gobierno, una investigaciôn dci incidente dci 29 de marzo de 2004 habrIa sido
          iniciada por la Fiscaila con ci objeto de estabiecer los autores. Por ci momento, ci DAS ic habrIa
          aconsejado aplicar las normas de autoprotecciôn y de comunicar personas sospechosas que se
          acercasen a ei como persona fIsica o a su casa. En todo momento, contarla con ci apoyo de
          patruilajes esporadicos que adeiantaran los funcionarios dci Puesto Operativo de
          Barrancabermeja. El Gobierno seguirá atento al resuitado de la investigaciôn e informara
          oportunamente a la Representante Especial.
          179. Por carta fechada ci 26 de Julio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 26 de abril de 2004 referente a la muerte de Gabriel
          Remolina, su esposa Fanny Robles y su hijo Robinson Remolina. El Gobierno informo que ci
          13 de mayo de 2004, la Fiscaila Quinta de la Ciudad de Bucaramanga habrIa iniciado una
          investigaciôn de los hechos denunciados. El 26 de mayo de 2004, ci Ministerio dci Interior
          habrIa solicitado a la Fiscaila General de la Naciôn un estudio de la posibilidad de incluir a los
          hijos de los difuntos en ci Programa de Victimas de la Violencia de la Red de Solidaridad Social.
          El Gobierno notô que Efrain Guerrero, miembro de familia de los difuntos y presidente de una
          seccional dci SITNALTRAINAL, será beneficiario de un programa de protecciôn, por ci cual se ic
          habrIa asignado un vehIculo y dos escoitas. El Gobierno seflaio que en cuanto tenga informacion
          adicional, informarla oportunamente a la Representante Especial.
          180. Por carta fechada ci 27 dejuiio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 5 de abril de 2004 sobre la situaciôn de Gilberto
          Arlanht Ariza y los dos estudiantes German Acosta y Diego Sierra. El Ministerio de Interior
          informo que ci ilder indIgena Gilberto Arianht Ariza es beneficiario de las siguientes medidas de
          protecciôn, medios de comunicaciôn y cuatro apoyos de reubicacion temporal y dos pendientes.
          Ademas, la Vicepresidencia de la Repübiica remitiô un informe de las gestiones adelantadas por
          ci Gobierno con ci fin de garantizar la protecciôn de la comunidad indIgena Kankuamo. Entre las
          medidas tomadas por ci Gobierno figuran visitas al resguardo indIgena Kankuamo, ci
          estabiecimiento de un grupo de trabajo, la presencia permanente de un funcionario dci Gobierno
          en la zona, quien trabajara en coordinacion con ci Defensor Comunitario, un Consejo de
          Seguridad, y la entrega de 4 telefonos satelitaics. Al Cabildo Gobernador se ic aprobo un apoyo
          de transporte terrestre por 92 horas mensuales, un medio de comunicaciôn Avantel, un teléfono
          celular y tiquetes aéreos nacionaics. Con elfin de garantizar la vida e integridad de los miembros
          de la comunidad despiazados en la ciudad de Bogota, las siguientes medidas han sido adoptadas;
          apoyo de reubicacion temporal, apoyo de trasteo, apoyo colectivo de transporte, y medios de
          comunicaciôn Avantel. Adicionaimente, ci Ministerio dci Interior y Justicia dispuso de tiquetes
          aéreos para trasiadar a los ilderes espirituales desde Vailedupar a Bogota. Con respecto a la
          situaciôn de los dos estudiantes German Acosta y Diego Sierra, ci comando dci departamento
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O1/Add. 1
          Page 65
          ordeno a! Grupo de Policla Judicial adelantar las correspondientes labores investigativas
          tendiente ajudicializar a las personas que están amedrentando a otros estudiantes. Ademas,
          recomendo a los estudiantes afectados instaurar las correspondientes denuncias penales ante la
          Fiscalla con el fin de consolidar bases jurIdicas para la identificacion y captura de los presuntos
          responsables. Adicionalmente, el Gobierno de Colombia seguirá atento a! resultado de las
          investigaciones que se adelanten, respecto de lo cual informara oportunamente a la
          Representante Especial.
          181. Por carta fechada el 27 dejulio de 2004, el Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 27 de febrero de 2004 relativa a la situaciôn de Luz
          Perly Cordoba. El Gobierno informo que en enero de 2004 se iniciô una investigaciôn formal en
          relacion con las actividades de Luz Perly Cordoba por los presuntos delitos de rebelion y
          concierto para delinquir que llevo a la liberacion del orden de captura en contra de la acusada el
          16 de febrero de 2004. En la actualidad, está detenida en la cárcel de mujeres del Buen Pastor de
          Bogota. Por el momento, el proceso penal se encuentra en etapa de instrucciôn y en el perlodo de
          recaudo de pruebas. El Gobierno insistiô que en todo momento habrIa respectado las garantlas
          procesales de la acusada con la plena observancia de sus derechos y de la ley colombiana.
          182. Por carta fechada el 27 dejulio de 2004, el Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 10 de marzo de 2004 referente ala situaciôn de
          Berenice Celeyta. El Gobierno, por medio del Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad,
          informo que el 2 de abril de 2004, la afectada habla sido declinado la oportunidad de asistir a una
          entrevista, por tratar temas relacionados con su seguridad, con el area de Protecciôn del DAS
          Valle del Cauca. El Gobierno constatô que seguirla atento a la aceptaciôn y disponibilidad de la
          interesada. Respecto a! hecho ocurrido en la sede de SINTRAEMCALI el 6 de febrero de 2004,
          el Gobierno confirmo que habrIa capturado un ciudadano, dentro del proceso adelantado por la
          Fiscalla Especializada, por el cual habrIa determinado la detencion preventiva por los presuntos
          delitos de terrorismo y posesiôn ilegal de armas. El Gobierno informo tambien que habrIa
          reforzado la seguridad en las instalaciones y plantas de EMCALI. La Fiscalla informo que pese a
          que se habla ordenado insistir en la comparecencia la interesada, para escucharla en ampliacion
          de denuncia y como quiera que transcurrieron más de ciento ochenta dIas desde la iniciaciôn de
          la etapa preliminar, sin haberse logrado la identificacion e individualizacion de los presuntos
          responsables de la conducta punible, mediante resolucion de octubre 30 de 2002, se habrIa
          ordenado la suspension de las diligencias. Respecto a los nuevos hechos sucedidos los dIas 6 y
          19 de febrero de 2004, el Gobierno insistiO que serla necesario remitir la denuncia ala DirecciOn
          seccional de Fiscallas de Santiago de Cali, a fin de que sea asignado a! fiscal que corresponda. El
          Gobierno de Colombia seguirá atento a! resultado de las investigaciones que se adelanten,
          respecto de lo cual informara oportunamente a la Representante Especial.
          183. Por carta fechada el 28 dejulio de 2004, el Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 19 de marzo de 2004 sobre Juan Carlos Celis
          Gonzalez. El Gobierno confirmO que el citado ciudadano habrIa sido capturado el 10 de
          diciembre de 2002, detenido sin beneficio de excarcelaciOn el 20 de diciembre de 2004 y que en
          la actualidad se encuentra sujeto a una investigaciOn penal. Segün el Gobierno, se habrIan
          encontrado elementos probatorios con respecto a actividades terroristas en el domicilio del
          acusado. Siguiente las acusaciones, el Gobierno precisO que Juan Carlos Celis Gonzalez nunca
          habrIa sido vIctima de malos tratos. No obstante, habrIa iniciado una investigaciOn de los
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 66
          presuntos atropellos que se encuentra en etapa preliminar y en práctica de pruebas. El Gobierno
          comprometiô que en cuanto tenga más informacion, se lo harla del conocimiento de la
          Representante Especial.
          184. Por carta fechada el 20 de agosto de 2004, el Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 9 de agosto de 2004 acerca de la muerte de Fredy
          Arias Arias. El Gobierno informo que el 3 de agosto de 2004, el dIa de la muerte, habrIa
          convocado un Consejo de Seguridad Departamental, en el cual habrIa decidido de investigar la
          muerte por medio de un equipo interinstitucional con el objeto de fortalecer las condiciones de
          seguridad de la organizaciôn indIgena de Kankuama. Ademas, a dicha reunion un ofrecimiento
          de recompensa por US$15,000,000 fue determinado a quien pudiera brindar más informaciOn
          sobre los hechos ocurridos. Asimismo, el Gobierno habrIa incrementado los patrullajes sobre el
          sector de la casa indIgena y de la residencia del Gobernador, Jaime Arias Arias, y le habrIa
          asignado dos escoltas. Ademas, el 4 de agosto de 2004, habrIa organizado una reuniOn con los
          lIderes Kankuamo, las autoridades departamentales y organismos de seguridad, con el propOsito
          de ofrecerles medidas de seguridad y autoprotecciOn. El Gobierno seguirá atento al resultado de
          la investigaciOn e informará oportunamente a la Representante Especial.
          185. Por carta fechada el 21 de septiembre de 2004, el Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 17 de mayo de 2004 en referencia ala muerte de
          Carlos Bernal. El Gobierno precisO que el difunto habrIa recibido medidas cautelares por parte
          del Programa Especial de ProtecciOn para dirigentes, miembros y sobrevivientes de la UniOn
          PatriOtica y del Partido Comunista Colombiano, entre ellos un esquema individual, medios de
          comunicaciOn y tiquetes aéreos nacionales. Por el momento, el progreso incluye desmantelar un
          centro de acopio de material de guerra empleado por las AUC para llevar a cabo los homicidios.
          El Gobierno seguirá atento al resultado de las investigaciones de los hechos denunciados e
          informara oportunamente a la Representante Especial.
          186. Por carta fechada el 7 de octubre de 2004, el Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 21 dejunio de 2004 relativa a Mauricio Avilez
          Alvarez. El 9 dejunio de 2004, la Fiscalla habrIa ordenado la vinculaciOn al proceso del citado
          ciudadano por existir serias imputaciones en su contra como presunto responsable de los hechos
          ocurridos el 16 de diciembre de 2003 en la ciudad de Barranquilla. Asimismo, el 10 dejunio de
          2004 se habrIa proferido un orden de captura y le habrIa impuesto medida de aseguramiento en
          orden de detenciOn preventiva por provisionales conductas punibles de concierto para delinquir,
          homicidio y tentativa de homicidio con fines terroristas, en concurso con rebeliOn. La fiscal de
          conocimiento expresO que la investigaciOn está de curso probatorio y en cumplimiento de los
          principios fundamentales.
          187. Por carta fechada el 8 de diciembre de 2004, el Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 21 de junio de 2004 referente al caso de Mauricio
          Avilez Alvarez. El Gobierno declarO que el Procurador RegiOn del Atlantico estarla vigilante de
          la situaciOn en general, y junto con el Procurador Judicial Penal, del proceso en particular. La
          Fiscalla informO que mediante resoluciOn del 20 de octubre de 2003, se habrIa dispuesto a
          revocar la resoluciOn mediante la cual se habrIa impulsado la medida de aseguramiento de
          Mauricio Avilez Alvarez, y como consecuencia, ordenarla su libertad inmediata.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 67
          188. Por carta fechada ci 24 de enero de 2005 ci Gobierno contestô nuevamente ala
          comunicaciôn transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 21 dejunio de 2004 acerca de la
          situaciôn de Mauricio Avilez Alvarez. El Gobierno informo que ci Ministerio dci Interior y de
          Justicia habia solicitado al DAS la reaiizacion de un estudio técnico de nivel de riesgo y grado de
          amenaza para determinar ci grado de vuinerabilidad en que se encuentra Mauricio Aviiez
          Alvarez. Asi mismo, se soiicito a la Policia Nacional adoptar las medidas de seguridad
          pertinentes para saivaguardar la vida e integridad dci mismo. Adicionaimente, ci Gobierno de
          Colombia seguirá atento al resuitado de las investigaciones que se adelanten, respecto de lo cual
          informara oportunamente a la Representante Especial.
          189. Porcartasde
          fechas 7 de octubre y 7 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 6 de agosto de 2004 con informacion relativa a los
          lideres indigenas de Ia Organización Zonal IndIgena del Putumayo (OZIP). Segün la Policia
          Nacional, habria practicado, en forma individual, un estudio técnico de nivel de riesgo y grado de
          amenazas al presidente y al secretario general, Hermes Meliton Narváez y Luis Alejandro Lopez
          Agreda. Tras este anaiisis, ics habria dado a conocer las medidas basicas de seguridad personal y
          familiar, impuisandoies a observar estas medidas en todo momento. El 9 de Junio de 2004, ci
          Defensor dci Pueblo habria solicitado al departamento de policia dci Putumayo medidas de
          protecciOn por miembros de dicha organizaciOn. En la actualidad, la sede de la OZIP y las
          residencias de los directivos disponen de un servicio de vigilancia mediante patruilajes y revistas
          constantes. El Gobierno seguirá atento al caso. Respecto a la situaciOn dci tesorero, Antonio
          Jajoy Pay, ci Gobierno informO que desde ci 15 de abril de 2004 permanecerá en Madrid para
          seis meses.
          190. Por cartas de fechas 12 de octubre y 7 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO ala
          comunicaciOn transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 28 de Julio de 2004 con informaciOn
          en torno a la muerte de Carmen Elisa Nova llernández. El Gobierno precisO que la difunta
          nunca habria solicitado ni beneficiado de medidas de protecciOn. Segün ci Gobierno,
          SINTRACLITNICAS, Bucaramanga, habria solicitado protecciOn para Teresa Báez Rodriguez,
          presidente y Edith Elena Rey, anterior fiscal. La Sra. Báez Rodriguez habria beneficiado de un
          esquema de protecciOn colectivo en la ciudad de Bucaramanga y tiquetes nacionaics. En la
          actualidad, ci Gobierno confirmO que la Fiscalia habria sido informado de la muerte de Carmen
          Elisa Nova Hernández para poder adelantar las investigaciones pertinentes. Ademas, se habria
          solicitado al DAS de realizar de manera urgente un estudio técnico dci nivel de riesgo a los
          demas directivos de SINTRACLINICAS, Bucaramanga, con ci fin de presentar ci caso a
          consideraciOn dci Comité de RegiamentaciOn y EvaluaciOn de Riesgos. Asimismo, como medida
          preventiva, habria solicitado la colaboraciOn de la policia nacional en la coordinaciOn de rondas
          para los mencionados dirigentes. El Gobierno seflalO que en cuanto tenga más informaciOn se lo
          haria dci conocimiento de la Representante Especial.
          191. Por cartas de 19 de octubre y 7 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO ala
          comunicaciOn transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 28 de mayo de 2004 sobre la
          situaciOn de Carlos Alberto ilurtado Aramburu. Segün ci Gobierno, la Fiscalia General habria
          abierto una investigaciOn de los hechos denunciados, la cual se encontraria en etapa previa y en
          práctica de pruebas, y los resuitados de la cual serán reemitidos a la mayor brevedad posibie.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 68
          192. Por carta fechada ci 8 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a otra comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 5 dejuiio de 2004 en reiaciOn con la situaciOn de
          Luz Perly Córdoba. El Gobierno transmitiO un informe de la Vicepresidencia de la Repübiica
          en ci cual comunicO que la Fiscaila General, despues de escuchar a la Sra. COrdoba en diligencia
          de indagatoria, decretO en contra de ella imponiendo una medida de aseguramiento sin beneficio
          de excarceiaciOn por ci delito de rebeiiOn. InformO que la investigada contO con todas las
          oportunidades legales y constitucionales y que se le habrIa designado un defensor de oficio tras
          la renuncia voluntaria de sus abogados defensores. El Gobierno dio a conocer que ci 13 de
          agosto de 2004 se caiificO ci merito de la investigaciOn y se profiriO resoiuciOn de acusaciOn
          contra la sindicada por los delitos de concierto para delinquir con fines de narcotrafico y
          rebeiiOn. La decision quedO ejecutariada y la causa fue remitida al Juzgado de Penal dci Circuito
          Especializado de Arauca para iniciar la etapa dejuicio. Se habrIa fijado ci S de enero de 2005
          como fecha para la audiencia preparatoria.
          193. Por carta fechada ci 8 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno enviO informaciOn adicional
          relativa a la muerte de Carmen Elisa Nova llernández. El 27 de septiembre de 2004, la Fiscaila
          reiterO que la Unidad Nacional de Derechos Humanos y Derecho Internacional Humanitario a
          Bucaramanga habrIa abierto una investigaciOn sobre ci supuesto asesinato de la difunta. Por ci
          momento, la investigaciOn se encuentra en etapa previa y en práctica de pruebas. La Procuradurla
          conducira tambien una investigaciOn con respecto a las amenazas y peligros de los miembros dci
          sindicato SIINTRACLINICAS.
          194. Por carta fechada ci 8 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 20 de septiembre de 2004 con referencia a la
          situaciOn de la Dra. Soraya Gutiérrez. Segün ci Gobierno, y conforme con la informaciOn
          enviada por ci DAS ci 18 de noviembre de 2004, la reevaiuaciOn dci servicio de seguridad de la
          citada ciudadana no se habrIa ilevado a cabo porque no se habrIa contado con ci consentimiento
          de la interesada.
          195. Por carta fechada ci 8 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 9 de marzo de 2004 relativo a las presuntas
          amenazas a Emilce Marroquin, Myriam Perez y Richard Alarcon. El Gobierno reaiizO la
          necesidad de investigar ics hechos denunciados. Tras una reuniOn de seis organizaciones no
          gubernamentaics, inciuyendo la CorporaciOn Casa de la Mujer, con funcionarios dci Programa
          Presidencial de Derechos Humanos, los siguientes compromisos se habrIan estado realizados.
          HabrIa decidido de formar eniaces entra ciertos comandos de policla y las sedes de las
          organizaciones de riesgo de amenazas por mejorar ci contacto.
          196. Por carta fechada ci 8 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 31 de agosto de 2004 acerca de la situaciOn de Lilia
          Solano. El Gobierno informO que una investigaciOn habrIa sido iniciada de oficio por la Fiscaila
          ci 28 de septiembre de 2004, la cual se encuentra en etapa previa. Tras un estudio técnico de
          nivel de riesgo y grado de amenaza, las autoridades habrIan apuntado MEDJO, en consecuencia
          dci cual, la interesada habrIa recibido un Avantel. En la actualidad, realizarla un estudio técnico
          de seguridad a su residencia.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 69
          197. Por carta fechada ci 8 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 23 de septiembre de 2004 respecto a la seguridad de
          Claudia Julieta Duque. El Gobierno informo que habrIa presentado su caso ante ci Comité de
          Regiamentacion y Evaiuacion de Riesgos y ci Programa de Protecciôn a Periodistas y
          Comunicadores Sociales ci 15 de octubre de 2004. La reunion habrIa recomendado que la citada
          ciudadana y su hija reciban dos tiquetes aéreos internacionaics, un vehIculo blindado y un escoita
          conductor. La solicitud por la asistencia econOmica habrIa sido negada. El Programa de
          ProtecciOn a Periodistas y Comunicadores Sociales por su parte desde diciembre de 2003 ic
          habrIa asignado un Avantel, un esquema de seguridad, lo anterior que no habrIa sido aceptada
          por la amenazada, y en ci Interin, un apoyo de transporte por 90 horas mensuales y un blindaje
          arquitectOnico dci departamento. El Programa continuará solicitando a la Fiscaila y al
          Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad informaciOn sobre los avances en las denuncias
          presentadas.
          198. Por carta fechada ci 24 de enero de 2005, ci Gobierno contestO nuevamente a la
          comunicaciOn transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 23 de septiembre de 2004 acerca de la
          situaciOn de Claudia Julieta Duque. El Ministerio dci Interior y de Justicia informO que
          mediante Acta No. 9 de emergencia dci CRER, ci pasado 24 de noviembre se habla
          recomendado la aprobaciOn de manera excepcionai, un apoyo de reubicaciOn temporal por valor
          de dos miliones de pesos m/cte. ($2000000), para ci pago de un mes de arriendo de la
          periodista, debido a las üitimas amenazas recibidas en contra de su vida y la de su hija. AsI
          mismo, la Procuradurla Delegada para la PrevenciOn en materia de Derechos Humanos y
          Asuntos Etnicos informO que revisado ci sistema sobre investigaciones disciplinarias se encontrO
          que ci caso está radicado con ci No. 9-113208/04 por presunta responsabilidad por amenazas,
          seguimientos y retenciOn en contra de la Sra. Claudia Julieta Duque y se encuentra en estudio
          preliminar de la queja. Adicionaimente, ci Gobierno de Colombia seguirá atento al resuitado de
          las investigaciones que se adelanten, respecto de lo cual informará oportunamente a la
          Representante Especial.
          199. Por carta fechada ci 8 de diciembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 21 de junio de 2004 referente al caso de Mauricio
          Avilez Alvarez. El Gobierno deciarO que ci Procurador de la RegiOn dci Atiantico estarla
          vigilante de la situaciOn en general, yjunto con ci Procurador Judicial Penal, dci proceso en
          particular. La Fiscaila informO que mediante resoluciOn dci 20 de octubre de 2003, se habrIa
          dispuesto a revocar la resoluciOn mediante la cual se habrIa impuisado la medida de
          aseguramiento de Mauricio Aviiez Alvarez, y como consecuencia, ordenarla su libertad
          inmediata.
          200. Por carta fechada ci 24 de enero de 2005 ci Gobierno contestO nuevamente a la
          comunicaciOn transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 21 dejunio de 2004 acerca de la
          situaciOn de Mauricio Avilez Alvarez. El gobierno informO que ci Ministerio dci Interior y de
          Justicia habla solicitado al DAS la realizaciOn de un estudio técnico de nivel de riesgo y grado de
          amenaza para determinar ci grado de vuinerabilidad en que se encuentra Mauricio Aviiez
          Alvarez. AsI mismo, se solicitO a la policla nacional adoptar las medidas de seguridad pertinentes
          para saivaguardar la vida e integridad dci mismo. Adicionaimente, ci Gobierno de Colombia
          seguirá atento al resuitado de las investigaciones que se adelanten, respecto de lo cual informara
          oportunamente a la Representante Especial.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 70
          Seguimiento de comunicaciones transmitidas previamente
          201. Por carta fechada el 28 de mayo de 2004, el Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida el 11 de agosto de 2003 y el 20 de noviembre de 2003 por la Representante Especial
          con respecto a la situaciôn de Wilson David Higuita y los miembros de la Coniunidad de Paz
          de San José de Apartadó. La Defensorla del pueblo informô que asesorô la instauraciôn de una
          acciôn de tutela contra el comandante de la XVII Brigada del ejército nacional e intervino como
          coayuvante entorno a! caso de Wilson David Higuita. El 17 de octubre de 2003, la Fiscalla
          informó que en la Fiscalla Novena especializada de MedellIn, Antoquia, se adelanta la
          investigaciôn, donde figuran como ofendidos el Sr.Higuita y otros miembros de la comunidad de
          Paz, por hechos ocurridos en febrero de 2003.
          202. Por carta fechada el 29 de mayo de 2004 el Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 3 de diciembre de 2003. El Gobierno informô que
          reconociô la peticiôn recibida del Colectivo de Abogados José Alvear Restrepo con respecto a
          las amenazas dirigidas a su compafiera de trabajo Adriana Cuellar e informó que las
          autoridades encargadas de la seguridad püblica habrIan efectuado una investigación. Segün el
          Gobierno, un estudio técnico de seguridad, incluyendo el nivel y grado de amenaza, por el DAS
          habrIa sido un requisito para acceder al Programa de Protección a Periodistas. El Colectivo
          habria contestado que un estudio no se requeria por parte de la policia nacional, y no habria dado
          consentimiento al DAS. Sin embargo, el Gobierno seguirá los investigaciones y remitirá los
          resultados a la Representante Especial.
          Observaciones
          203. In 2004, following an agreement with the Government of Colombia, the Special
          Representative conducted a tw-day follow-up visit to her country visit to Colombia in 2001
          (E/CN.4/2002/106/Add.2) to assess the of the situation of human rights defenders in the country.
          She thanks the Government for its cooperation in arranging this follow-up visit and making itself
          available for meetings. While in Bogota, the Special Representative had the opportunity to meet
          with the Vice-President, representatives of the military, the Prosecutor's Office and the Foreign
          Ministry. She also thanks the Attorney General's Office and representatives of the Constitutional
          Court for having met with her. She also met with a wide spectrum of civil society
          representatives, including many organizations that she had met with in 2001.
          204. Since the Special Representative's visit to Colombia in 2001, a number of significant
          developments have taken place. For general developments, see also the report of the High
          Commissioner on the situation in Colombia (E/CN.4/2005/10). On 21 February 2002, peace talks
          between the Government of Colombia and FARC broke down, combat between the security
          forces and illegal armed groups intensified, and there was a subsequent increase in violence
          throughout the country. On 7 August 2002, a new Government came to power under President
          Alvaro Uribe.
          205. On 11 August 2002, a state of emergency was declared under Decree No. 1837, allowing
          restrictions including on freedom of expression, movement and assembly. On 29 April 2003, the
          Constitutional Court ruled against a renewal of the state of emergency, declaring it incompatible
        
          
          E/CN. 4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 71
          with the Constitution of 1991. Subsequently, the Government sought to amend the Constitution
          under a bill known as the “Anti-Terrorist Statute” adopted in December 2003, which inter alia
          restored judicial powers to armed forces. The Special Representative expresses her concern that
          this legislation, which contradicts recommendations made by United Nations human rights
          bodies, and adversely affects the ability of human rights defenders to carry out their work. On 30
          August 2004, the Colombian Constitutional Court, with a majority 5 to 4 decision, rejected
          Legislative Act 02 of 2003 (Anti-Terrorist Statute) because of procedural errors.
          206. The Government also adopted the Democratic Security Policy, aimed at combating
          terrorism, regaining control of the national territory and strengthening democratic institutions.
          While some aspects of this policy have been welcomed, concern has been voiced that many other
          aspects adversely impact human rights and the rule of law, including the recruitment of a
          network of paid informer, in an attempt to involve civilians in maintaining security, which has
          led to a climate of distrust among the population. It is reported that in some regions, people have
          grown reluctant to denounce human rights abuses for fear of reprisals. Consequently, human
          rights organizations have faced increasing difficulty to monitor and report on the human rights
          situation. This policy has also resulted in blurring the distinction between civilians and
          combatants, thus further exposing civilians, in particular human right defenders, to unacceptable
          levels of risk.
          207. Since her mission to Colombia, the Special Representative has continued to receive
          information on grave human rights violations committed against human rights defenders. In
          2002, she sent 17 communications to the Government of Colombia regarding 34 cases of alleged
          violations against human rights defenders, including 14 killings. In 2003, 12 communications
          were sent and in 2004, 31 communications were sent regarding 11 killings of human rights
          defenders, death threats and detentions. The majority of these attacks were reportedly perpetrated
          by paramilitaries. While official figures indicate a decrease in indicators of violence, including
          homicide by 22 per cent, massacres by 33 per cent, kidnappings by 26 per cent and forced
          displacement by 52 per cent, politically motivated or selective killings, arbitrary detentions and
          torture while in detention and enforced disappearances are on the rise. In view of this
          information, the Special Representative is gravely concerned that the situation of human rights
          defenders in Colombia remains critical and has recently degraded in some areas.
          208. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its detailed responses and
          welcomes its cooperation with her mandate. She welcomes the willingness of the authorities to
          investigate reported violations. Nevertheless, in the majority of instances, cases are still pending
          and only few investigations have resulted in the indictment of the perpetrators or in their
          sentencing. As a result, acts against human rights defenders continue to be committed with
          impunity and actions taken by the Government have not had the expected impact.
          209. Government policies have resulted in new challenges for human rights defenders. It is
          reported that the policies of mass arrests and large-scale raids under the state of emergency and
          Anti-Terrorist Statute have led to the arrest of NGO members as well raids on NGO offices.
          These practices have adversely affected human rights defenders' ability to carry out their work.
          Many reported having to limit their activities and felt they had to restrain their freedom of
          expression in the interest of their safety.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 72
          210. During her follow-up visit, the Special Representative sought to assess the
          implementation of her recommendations. She notes that while some positive steps have been
          taken, the environment for the security of defenders has deteriorated, which has seriously
          hampered their ability to carry out their human rights activities. Despite positive developments,
          recommendations appear not to have been consistently integrated in Government policies. As a
          result, they have not had the awaited impact on the situation of human rights defenders.
          Concerns were expressed that the Government attributed insufficient priority to human rights and
          international humanitarian law and that projects for constitutional reforms and new laws
          introduced by the Government in the course of 2003 may be incompatible with international
          norms. In particular, proposals to reduce the power of the Constitutional Court and the
          Prosecutor General's Office raised concerns amongst defenders.
          211. According to reports, the level of impunity for human rights violations continues to be
          very high. Recently, a unit to fight against impunity was established as part of the human rights
          and international humanitarian law Presidential Programme within the Office of the Vice-
          President. The Government has committed itself to follow up on investigations into serious
          human rights violations through the work of a special committee and the design and
          implementation of a public policy to fight impunity. However, defenders indicated that to date,
          the committee has not produced significant results or made any effective progress in its
          investigations. There continues to be a decrease in investigations and prosecutions of human
          rights violations by the military and a dismissal of cases of collusion with paramilitaries brought
          against high-ranking military officials. The issuing of Decree No. 128 fails to meet international
          standards and risks perpetuating a climate particularly detrimental to human rights defenders.
          212. On 15 July 2003, the a agreement was signed between the Government and the United
          Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC) which stipulated their complete demobilization by
          2005, a ceasefire and a halt to kidnappings. In May 2004, paramilitaries involved in peace talks
          with the Government agreed to remain in a designated “safe zone” within which they would be
          immune from arrest or extradition. Despite these negotiations and the group's self-declared
          ceasefire, paramilitary groups have continued to perpetrate grave human rights violations
          including massacres, selective homicides and disappearances. As a result, despite positive
          actions taken by the Government, human rights defenders have continued to face serious threats
          from these groups. Nearly half of the communications sent in 2004 concerned reports of
          violations committed by paramilitaries. While the President in his speeches has indicated that
          there is a need to return to the rule of law, decisive action to dismantle ties between the
          paramilitaries and public servants has not yet been undertaken. Further efforts are still required
          from the Government to significantly address this issue in order make the situation of human
          rights defenders safer.
          213. The Special Representative welcomes the fact that a dialogue between the Government
          and human rights organizations continues to take place. In this respect, a decentralization project
          for human rights and international humanitarian law has been established in 16 departments
          under the direction of the Ministry of the Interior and the Presidential Human Rights programme.
          However, despite several positive initiatives by the Government, relations between the
          Government and NGOs continues to be characterized by mutual distrust.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 73
          214. Meetings to adopt measures for the protection of trade unionists were also organized by
          the Vice-President and the Minister for Social Protection with the participation of union leaders
          and regional leaders.Despite these initiatives, the situation of trade unionists continues to be of
          grave concern. In the first 8 months of 2004, the Special Representative received information on
          the killing of four family members of a prominent trade unionist, one member of health workers
          union and a trade unionist of SINTRACLINICAS.
          215. Despite the ratification in July 2003 of the Presidential Directive 07 which instructs
          public servants to respect human rights defenders and the work of their organizations, public
          attacks against the credibility of defenders have continued. Governmental authorities have
          publicly questioned the legitimacy of human rights organizations, including international NGOs,
          accusing them of being at the service of terrorism. The Special Representative expresses her
          gravest concern at the increase in public statements stigmatizing human rights defenders as
          “enemies”. Given the deterioration in the security situation of defenders, such statements
          increase the risk of attacks by paramilitaries and arrests and raids by national security forces.
          216. The Special Representative welcomes the expansion of the protection programme within
          the Ministry of the Interior which benefited from an increase in budget in 2003 and covered
          8,840 individuals including NGO members, union leaders and Journalists. Despite these positive
          developments, the programme has not had the awaited impact on the safety of human rights
          defenders. Difficulties in administering the risk assessment process and lack a consistent policy
          on the part of the State have reportedly delayed its implementation. Defenders have expressed a
          lack of confidence in the programme and refused to take advantage of it. Many fear that the
          programme could be used to gather further intelligence on them, as those designated for their
          protection are part of the groups reported to perpetrate the abuses. Cases sent by the Special
          Representative in 2004 illustrate the programme's limitations, as at least two beneficiaries were
          killed, another arrested and yet another received death threat on the cell phone provided to him
          by the programme. There is a consensus that the situation of human rights defenders can only
          improve with a change in attitude for authorities. As long as senior Government officials
          continue to stigmatize defenders as adversaries, no protection programme, regardless of how
          well funded, can successfully ensure their safety.
          Costa Rica
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          217. El 3 de agosto de 2004, la Representante Especial enviô una carta de alegacion. El 3 de
          Julio 2004, a las 6.25 de la tarde, el personal de Casa Alianza en la ciudad de San José, Costa
          Rica, habria recibido una amenaza de bomba dejada supuestamente por un desconocido en el
          contestador telefonico de la organizaciôn. Durante el mismo dia, el equipo del Programa de
          Apoyo Legal de Casa Alianza se habr la trasladado a la Comunidad de Orotina donde habrian
          entrevistado a algunos de las presuntas victimas de un profugo sacerdote, quien segün las
          informaciones recibidas habria sido acusado en 1998 en la Fiscalia AdJunta de San Carlos de
          abusos deshonestos cometidos contra personas menores de edad en la region. Sin embargo, el
          sacerdote habria huido del pals dos dias después de ser acusado. Segün se informa, poco tiempo
          después de salir de la ciudad de Orotina se habria deJado la amenaza telefOnica en la que se
          referia a una bomba y la exigencia de parar de buscar al sacerdote. Se teme que esta supuesta
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 74
          amenaza de bomba efectuada contra ci personal de Casa Aiianza pueda estar relacionada con su
          trabajo como defensores de los derechos humanos y en particular su trabajo como defensores de
          los derechos humanos de las personas menores de edad.
          Comunicaciones recibidas
          218. Por carta fechada ci 10 de septiembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 3 de agosto de 2004 sobre las amenazas recibidas
          por la organizaciôn Casa Alianza. El Gobierno confirmo que una denuncia habrIa sido
          presentada, y por consecuencia una investigaciôn iniciada, mediante la cual habrIa estabiecido
          que la ilamada provenla de un teléfono pübiico. Las autoridades habrIan entrevistado a varias
          personas que trabajan cerca de dicha cabina teiefonica con ci fin de recabar más
          informacion,pero informo que ya no se habrIa ilegado a ningün resuitado concreto para
          identificar al autor dci hecho.
          Observaciones
          219. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its comprehensive response. She
          acknowledges the steps taken by the Government to identify the perpetrators and the
          investigation carried out.
          Côte d'Ivoire
          Communications envoyées
          220. Le 2juin 2004, la Représentante spéciale, conjointement avec ic Rapporteur special sur la
          promotion et la protection du droit a la hberté d'opinion et d'expression et ic Rapporteur special
          sur ics executions extrajudiciaires, sommaires ou arbitraires, a envoyé un appel urgent
          concernant des rapports scion lesquels Amourlaye Touré et Mamadou Fofana, tous deux
          membres du Mouvement ivoirien pour ics droits de i'homme (MIDH), seraient soumis a des
          actes d'intimidation et a des menaces de mort. Scion ics informations reçues, Amourlayc Touré,
          président par interim du MIDH, aurait récemment reçu des menaces de mort alors qu'ii se
          trouvait a Genéve, oü ii participait a des reunions organisécs dans ic cadre de la session annuelie
          de la Commission des droits de i'homme des Nations Unies. Mamadou Fofana serait quanta iui
          entré dans la ciandestinite aprés avoir été la cibie d'actes d'intimidation ics 25 et 26 avrii,
          iorsqu'un groupe de civils se serait présenté a son domicile en i'accusant de <>. Scion ics informations reçues, ces menaces et intimidations pourraient
          être iiees a la publication par ic MIDH, ic 28 avrii 2004, d'un rapport sur des violations des
          droits humains commises a Abidjan a la suite d'un defile organisC ic 25 mars, au cours duquel ics
          forces de sCcuritC auraient recouru a une force excessive pour disperser ics manifestants
          pacifiques et non armés.
          221. Le 19 novembre 2004, la Représentante speciale a envoyé une iettre d'aiiegation
          concernant Madame Olga Nana Mianda Mwanza, citoyenne congolaise residant en Côte
          d'Ivoire et membre du secretariat de la Commission d'enquête internationaic des Nations Unies
          sur ics violations des droits de i'homme en Côte d'Ivoire du 15 juilliet au 15 septembre 2004.
          Scion ics informations reçues, en raison de son service auprés de la Commission, die aurait été
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 75
          attaquCe, molestee et menacCe avec sa famille par des Jeunes patriotes au cours des CvCnements
          du 6 au 11 novembre 2004 a Abidjan. Sa residence aurait etC saccagCe et cue aurait perdu tous
          ses biens. File aurait trouvC refuge avec sa mere, son frCre et ses deux enfants tout d'abord
          auprCs de l'ONTJCI et de l'armee française, avant d'être CvacuCe vers Accra (Ghana), le 15
          novembre 2004.
          Communications reçues
          222. Par lettre en date du 29 decembre 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu a l'appel urgent en
          date du 2juin 2004. Ii a indique que les faits s'inscrivent dans le contexte des CvCnements de
          novembre 2004 au cours desquels de nombreuses violations des droits de l'homme ont etC
          commises. Le Gouvernement a indique que des enquêtes ont etC ouvertes pour faire la lumi Cre
          sur ces faits. Dans sa rCponse, le Gouvernement a mis en cause la responsabilite de la France
          quanta l'inaboutissement de ces enquêtes. Quant aux faits, le Gouvernement a notC qu'il Ctait
          hasardeux d'imputer ceux-ci aux <>, qu'il a dit être des <> ala
          tentative d'occupation d'Abidjan par les militaires français de l'op eration Licorne. Le
          Gouvernement a souhgn e qu'il considerait les patriotes comme des defenseurs des droits de
          l'homme luttant pour defendre leur droit a l'autodetermination inscrit dans la Charte des Nations
          Unies. Le Gouvernement a souligne que la Côte d'Ivoire subissait depuis 2002 une agression
          armee, condamnee par la communaute internationale et africaine. Dans sa reponse, le
          Gouvernement a mis en cause egalement la responsabilite de la France dans les evenements
          survenus en novembre 2004. Notamment, ii a explique qu'aprCs la destruction des avions de la
          base de Yamoussoukro, et croyant a un coup d'Etat, des milliers de citoyens ivoiriens etaient
          sortis pour protester et defendre la legalite constitutionnelle par des moyens pacifiques scion les
          articles 29 et 5 de la Charte africaine. Le Gouvernement a egalement mis en cause la
          responsabilite des forces françaises dans une serie de violations des droits de l'homme.
          Observations
          223. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response in the case of Olga
          Nana Mianda Mwanza. While she acknowledges the Government's information with regard to
          the context in which the violation alleged in the communication took place, she notes that the
          response does not provide any information with regard to the specifics of the case raised in her
          communication. She regrets the absence of response to her other communication. She remains
          concerned about the safety of human rights defenders in Côte d'Ivoire.
          Cuba
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          224. El 22 de septiembre de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con ci Relator Especial
          sobre ci derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, enviO una carta de alegaciOn con
          respecto al periodista Carlos Brizuela Yera, de la agencia de prensa independiente Colegio de
          Periodistas Jndependientes de CamagUey, que habrIa sido condenado ci 26 de abril de 2004 por
          ci tribunal provincial popular de Ciego de Avila a tres aflos de carcel por “desacato”, “desorden
          püblico”, “resistencia ala autoridad” y “desobediencia”. El Sr. Brizuela Yera habrIa sidojuzgado
          junto con otras nueve personas por manifestar, ci 4 de marzo de 2002, delante dcl hospital en que
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 76
          se encontraba ingresado Jesus Alvarez Castillo, al que la policia habria golpeado. Entre las otras
          personas figuraria Lester Tellez Castro, director de la agencia independiente Agencia de Prensa
          Vileza, en el momento de los hechos y condenado a tres aflos y medio de prisiôn. Los otros ocho
          acusados serian miembros de la organizaciôn local de defensa de los derechos humanos
          Fundacion Cubana de Derechos Humanos (FCDH) y habrian sido condenados a penas que van
          de tres aflos de residencia vigilada a siete aflos de prisiôn incondicional. Estas personas son
          Lázaro Iglesias Estrada, Enrique Garcia Morejôn. Antonio Marcelino Garcia Morejôn, Delio
          Laureano Requejo Rodriguez, Virgilio Mantilla Mango, Odalmis Hernández Márquez, Ana
          Peláez Garcia y Juan Carlos Gonzalez Leyva, abogado invidente y presidente de la FCDH.
          Seguimiento de comunicaciones transmitidas previamente
          225. Por carta fechada el 25 de octubre de 2004, el Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 28 de noviembre de 2003 con respecto a la situaciôn
          de Oscar Espinosa Chepe. El Gobierno negô los hechos resumidos en la carta y seflalo que el
          citado ciudadano habria contado sin excepciôn con toda la atenciôn y tratamientos medicos
          necesarios y con el derecho a varias visitas familiares.
          Observaciones
          226. The Special Representative would like to thank the Government for its response and
          looks forward to receiving responses to her other communications. The Special Representative
          welcomes the reported release of a number of long-term detainees, including Oscar Espinosa
          Chepe, Raul Rivero, Marcelo Manuel Lopez Banobre, Osvaldo Alfonso, Edel Jose Garcia Diaz
          and Margarito Broche Espinosa. Nevertheless, she remains concerned by the ongoing detention
          and heavy sentencing of numerous human rights defenders in Cuba.
          Democratic Republic of Congo
          Communications envoyées
          227. Le 21 avril 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special sur
          la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, la Presidente-
          Rapporteur du Groupe de travail sur la detention arbitraire, le Rapporteur special sur la torture et
          la Rapporteuse speciale sur les executions extrajudiciaires, sommaires ou arbitraires, a envoye un
          appel urgent concernant la situation de Dieudonné Been Masudi Kingombe, directeur du
          Centre des droits de l'homme et du droit humanitaire (CDH), une association de defense des
          droits de l'homme basee a Lubumbashi, Grégoire Mulamba Tschisabamka, secretaire general
          de la CDH et Me Freddy Kitoko, vice-president de l'ASADHO/Katanga (Association africaine
          de defense des droits de l'homme/Katanga). Selon les informations reçues, M. Dieudonne Been
          Masudi Kingombe aurait etc arrête le samedi 10 avril 2004 a 18 heures, a Lubumbashi, par des
          officiers de l'Agence nationale de renseignements (ANR). Ii aurait etc transfere a la direction
          provinciale de l'ANR oü il aurait etc frappe violemment au corps et a la tête, et un agent de
          l'ANR aurait tente de lui arracher l'oreille par morsure. M. Been Masudi aurait etc libere deux
          heures plus tard dans un etat de sante precaire. Le motif de son arrestation ne lui aurait pas etc
          communique. Gregoire Mulamba Tschisabamka et Me Freddy Kitoko auraient quant a eux etc
          arretes le 15 avril 2004 par des agents de l'ANR, semble-t-il sur ordre du directeur provincial de
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 77
          l'ANR, dont le nom est connu des Rapporteurs spéciaux et de la Représentante spéciale. Aucune
          information n'a été reçue sur le lieu de detention de ces personnes ni sur les éventuelles
          accusations portées contre elles. Ii semblerait de plus que l'ANR détiendrait une liste sur laquelle
          figureraient 10 noms de personnes a arréter, dont certains sont connus des Rapporteurs spéciaux
          et de la Représentante spéciale, tous membres d'associations de defense des droits de l'homme.
          Ces arrestations seraient intervenues aprés la parution, le 6 avril 2004, d'un communiqué de
          presse du CDH dCnonçant la situation d'insCcuritC des ressortissants de la province de l'Equateur
          vivant au Katanga. Selon les informations reçues, le 8 avril 2004, l'Observatoire national des
          droits de l'homme aurait contactC par téléphone les membres du CDH et les aurait informés du
          <> du gouverneur du Katanga, a la suite de la publication de cc communiqué.
          Depuis le 10 avril 2004, le secrétaire général du CDH, M. Grégoire Mulamba Tshisakamba,
          aurait reçu plusieurs fois parjour des appels anonymes le menaçant de mort. Des craintes ont été
          exprimées que cette arrestation ne soit en relation avec le travail de defense des droits de
          l'homme des personnes susmentionnées.
          228. Le 27 avril 2004, la Représentante spéciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special sur
          la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberté d'opinion et d'expression et la Rapporteuse
          spéciale sur la situation des droits de l'homme en République démocratique du Congo, a envoyé
          un appel urgent concernant Faustin Bella Mako, correspondant pour la province du Katanga de
          l'organisation non gouvernementale Journalistes en danger (JED), organisation de formation et
          de defense des droits des journalistes, et directeur de l'hebdomadaire << Congo News >>, paraissant
          a Lubumbashi, chef-lieu de la province du Katanga, qui aurait été interpellé le 20 avril 2004 vers
          11 heures a l'aéroport international de Lubumbashi-Luano par des agents de l'Agence nationale
          de renseignements (ANR). Ii semblerait que M. Mako ait été arrété au moment oü il s'apprêtait a
          embarquer a bord d'un vol régulier de la Compagnie africaine d'aviation (CAA) en partance
          pour Kinshasa. Ii serait garde en detention dans les cachots de l'Agence nationale des
          renseignements (ANR) dans la commune de Lubumbashi. Bella Mako était, semble-t-il, attendu
          le 21 avril a Kinshasa oü s'était ouverte une session de formation de tous les correspondants de
          JIED a travers la République démocratique du Congo, consacrée aux techniques d'investigation
          sur les allegations d'atteintes a la liberté de la presse et a la redaction des alertes.
          229. Le 3 mai 2004, la Représentante spéciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special sur la
          promotion et la protection du droit a la liberté d'opinion et d'expression, a envoyé une lettre
          d'allégation concernant la nuit du 27 au 28 avril 2004 : alors que M. Paul Nsapu rentrait chez lui
          en voiture vers 23 h 45, aprés avoir assisté au séminaire organisé par l'Organisation
          internationale de la francophonie (OIF) intitulé << Gestion de la transition au regard du role des
          institutions d'appui a la democratic >>, il aurait été suivi par deux voitures aux vitres teintées et
          aux plaques d'immatriculation maquillées. Les conducteurs de ces deux véhicules auraient tenté
          de provoquer un accident sur le boulevard du 30-Juin au niveau du batiment de la Régie des
          eaux, a Kinshasa, puis l'auraient poursuivi jusqu'a une station-service fréquentée au rond-point
          de la Victoire, oü M. Nsapu se serait réfugié. Ses poursuivants l'auraient surveillé pendant une
          demi-heure avant de partir. Des craintes ont été exprimées que cette agression ne représente une
          forme de représailles pour ces activités en faveur des droits de l'homme. Selon les informations
          reçues, cette agression survient au lendemain d'une interview que M. Paul Nsapu avait donnée a
          la chaine de télévision Antenne A, reprise par Télé-Kin-Malebo (TKM), concernant la situation
          politique en RDC et la suite a donner a la saisine de la Cour pénale internationale (CPI) sur les
          violations des droits de l'homme dans l'est de la RDC.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 78
          230. Le 11 juin 2004, la Représentante spéciale, conjointement avec la Présidente-Rapporteur
          du Groupe de travail sur la detention arbitraire, a envoyé un appel urgent relativement a
          l'arrestation de Robert Ilunga Numbi, président de l'ONG Les Amis de Nelson Mandela pour
          la defense des droits de l'homme (ANMDH), Rodolphe Mafuta, président de l'ONG Bana
          Kalamu, Kally Kalala et Lems Kalema, respectivement président et membre de l'ONG Bana
          Matonge. D'aprês les informations reçues, Robert Ilunga Numbi, Rodolphe Mafuta, Kally Kalala
          et Lems Kalema, auraient été arrétés le 7 juin 2004 alors qu'ils s'étaient présentés
          volontairement auprés de l'inspecteur de police judiciaire Khonde suite a une convocation datée
          du lenjuin 2004. Ils seraient détenus, sans avoir été informés de leurs droits, dans un petit cachot
          insalubre situé dans la cave de l'immeuble abritant la direction générale de la police judiciaire
          des parquets situé au 30 de l'avenue Kalemie, commune de la Gombe a Kinshasa. Les visites de
          leur famille ainsi que celles d'un médecin leur auraient été interdites et ils auraient été privés de
          l'assistance d'un avocat. Des craintes ont été exprimées que cette arrestation vise a réprimer les
          activités menées par ces organisations en faveur des droits de l'homme et, notamment, suite au
          litige relatif a un chantier de construction sur un terrain destine aux jeux des enfants spoliés dans
          le quartier de Matonge II a Kinshasa.
          231. Le 16 juillet 2004, la Représentante spéciale a envoyé un appel urgent concernant
          M. Floribert Chebeya Bahizire le président de l'ONG la Voix des Sans-Voix pour les droits de
          l'homme (VSV). Selon les informations reçues, le 6 juillet 2004, alors qu'il se rendait a un
          rendez-vous avec un journaliste du journal << Le Potentiel >> au siege du quotidien a Kinshasa,
          quatre hommes armés auraient interpellé Floribert Chebeya Bahizire aux abords dujournal et
          l'auraient fouillé sous prétexte de rechercher un tract hostile au Gouvernement. Ils lui auraient
          confisqué sa sacoche et extorqué de l'argent. Ils auraient ensuite semblé attendre des
          instructions. M. Floribert Chebeya Bahizire aurait profité d'un moment d'inattention de ses
          présumés ravisseurs pour leur échapper et se réfugier dans les locaux dujournal. Les hommes
          seraient restés aux abords dujournaljusqu'a cc que les journalistes leur demandent de partir.
          Floribert Chebeya Bahizire ne serait ressorti que plus tard. Des craintes ont été exprimées que cet
          incident ne soit lie aux activités de defense des droits de l'homme de M. Floribert Chebeya
          Bahizire en particulier dans le cadre des activités de son organisation VSV. Ces craintes sont
          d'autant plus vives qu'il aurait déjà fait l'objet de menaces verbales de la part de hauts
          représentants de la Cour d'ordre militaire, aujourd'hui dissoute, qui l'auraient contraint a se
          réfugier dans la clandestinité fin 2002. Le 6 janvier 2003, la VSV, craignant pour la sécurité et la
          vie de son président, aurait décidé de suspendre ses activités pendant un mois. Floribert Chebeya
          Bahizire ne serait rentré en RDC qu'en avril 2003.
          Communications reçues
          232. Par lettre en date du 3 juillet 2004, le Gouvernement a répondu a la communication
          envoyée par la Représentante spéciale le 3 mai 2004 relative a Paul Nsapu, l'informant qu'il
          serait dans l'impossibilité de verifier les dires énoncés dans l'appel urgent ou d'identifier les
          responsables, aucune plainte n'ayant été déposée par la victime et par consequent aucune enquête
          n'ayant été ouverte.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 79
          233. Par lettre en date du 28 juillet 2004, le Gouvernement a informe la Représentante spéciale
          que l'appel urgent, envoyé le 16 juillet 2004, relatif a la situation de M. Floribert Chebeya
          Bahizire, aurait été transmis aux autorités compétentes dans la capitale.
          Observations
          234. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies to two of the
          communications sent. She regrets, however, that as of the date of the present report, the
          Government has not provided any clarification with regard to the reported attacks against human
          rights defenders. In this respect she notes that also with regard to the communications sent in the
          course of the year 2003 the Government has not, as to date, provided the clarifications it
          undertook to submit.
          235. The Special Representative expresses her deep concern at the persistant situation of
          widespread intimidation of human rights defenders and obstruction of their work emerging from
          the communications, and at the apparent climate of impunity in which these attacks take place.
          She recalls that the protection of the rights enshrined in the Declaration on human rights
          defenders is vital to the promotion of human rights, as well as to the re-establishment of peace
          and security, and renews her invitation to the Government to take resolute steps in this direction.
          She thanks the Government for responding favourably to her request for an invitation to visit the
          country and hopes that dates can be agreed on soon in order for her visit to take place shortly.
          Ecuador
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          236. El 3 de febrero de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn y el Relator Especial sobre la situaciOn de los
          derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales de los indIgenas, enviO un llamamiento urgente
          sobre la situaciOn del Sr. Leonidas Iza, presidente de la ConfederaciOn de Nacionalidades
          IndIgenas del Ecuador (CONAIE). D c acuerdo con las informaciones recibidas, el 10 de febrero
          de 2004, hacia las 22 horas, el Sr. Iza y los familiares que le acompaflaban, habrIan sido
          atacados por hombres desconocidos que, después de amenazar al Sr. Iza diciéndole “te vamos a
          matar”, habrIan comenzado a disparar al grupo a quemarropa, hiriendo a un hijo, a un sobrino y a
          un hermano del Sr. Iza, los cuales se encuentran hospitalizados. Segün la fuente, el hijo del Sr.
          Iza habrIa recibido disparos de arma de fhego en el abdomen por lo que habrIa tenido que ser
          operado de urgencia y se encuentra en estado de salud muy grave. Se teme que el ataque contra
          el Sr. Iza estarla en conexiOn con sus acciones en defensa del pueblo, en particular de las
          poblaciones indIgenas, y a sus manifestaciones püblicas contra el Tratado de Libre Comercio
          (TLC), el Area de Libre Comercio de las Americas y las polIticas del Presidente de la Repüblica.
          Segün los informes, el Sr. Iza habrIa criticado püblicamente al Presidente, luego de que el
          mandatario rompiera una alianza con los indIgenas gracias a los que habla accedido al poder en
          las elecciones del aflo 2000. Ademas, habla anunciado que la CONAIE, dentro del ambito de su
          trabajo, preparaba la realizaciOn de protestas contra la polItica del Gobierno.
          237. El 27 de febrero de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre
          la situaciOn de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales de los indIgenas, enviO un
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 80
          liamamiento urgente en relacion con las amenazas recibidas por los miembros de la Fundación
          Pachamama, una organizaciôn de derechos humanos que apoya a la comunidad indigena de
          Sarayaku en la provincia de Pastaza en su oposiciôn a la concesion otorgada a una empresa
          extranjera de extracciôn de petroleo en su territorio. Este caso ya fue objeto de la especial
          atenciôn del Relator Especial sobre la situaciôn de los derechos humanos y las libertades
          fundamentales de los indigenas en su informe de 2004sobre sus comunicaciones con los Estados
          (E/CN.4/2004/80/Add. 1). Segün la informacion recibida, en noviembre de 2002 la comunidad de
          Sarayaku habrla declarado un “estado de alerta” para lograr una movilizacion contra la incursion
          de la Compaflia General de Combustibles (CGC) en su territorio. Desde entonces, la comunidad
          habria sido objeto de una campafla de intimidaciOn y difamaciOn, y en febrero de 2003 dos
          dirigentes indigenas de la comunidad, Franco Viteri y José Gaulinga, habrian sido amenazados
          de muerte. El 5 de mayo de 2003, la ComisiOn Jnteramericana de Derechos Humanos dictO
          medidas cautelares a favor de los lideres indigenas mencionados anteriormente, y de varios
          miembros de la comunidad de Sarayaku. El 17 de diciembre del mismo aflo estas medidas fueron
          ampliadas durante un periodo de seis meses, después de que varios miembros de los comunidad
          de Sarayaku fueran victimas de repetidas amenazas de muerte y de agresiones fisicas los dias 4 y
          5 de diciembre de 2003, cuando se habrian movilizado ala ciudad de Puyo. Asimismo, segün la
          informaciOn recibida, el 18 de enero de 2004, el Ministro de Energia y Minas habria declarado
          “la OEA no manda aqul”. En este contexto y segün se informa, el 12 de febrero, el personal de la
          FundaciOn Pachamama habria recibido tres llamadas telefOnicas anOnimas amenazadoras por
          parte de un individuo desconocido. En la primera llamada, recibida por la maflana, el individuo
          habria dicho “el petrOleo es el desarrollo del pals, si ustedes se oponen, aténganse a las
          consecuencias”. Poco después, el mismo individuo habria vuelto a llamar y habria insultado al
          personal de la FundaciOn Pachamama. Al cabo de varios minutos, el individuo habria llamado
          una tercera vez y les habr la amenazado de muerte. Se teme que estas presuntas amenazas de
          muerte estén relacionadas con el trabajo llevado a cabo por la FundaciOn Pachamama a favor de
          la comunidad indigena Sarayaku en su oposiciOn a la extracciOn de petrOleo en su territorio.
          238. El S de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y el Relator Especial sobre la situaciOn de los
          derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales de los indigenas, enviO un llamamiento urgente
          en relaciOn con la situaciOn de las organizaciones dedicadas a la protecciOn de los derechos
          humanos, las tradiciones culturales y el territorio de la comunidad Sarayaku, ubicada en la selva
          amazOnica ecuatoriana, en la provincia de Pastaza. En este caso se llama la atenciOn urgente del
          Gobierno sobre la informaciOn adicional recibida en relaciOn con las agresiones sufridas por el
          Sr. Marion Santi, presidente de la AsociaciOn Sarayaku, una organizaciOn dedicada a la defensa
          de la cultura, las tradiciones y los derechos humanos de la comunidad indigena Kichwa de
          Sarayaku. Se seflala que la situaciOn de dicha comunidad ya fue objeto de un llamamiento
          urgente enviado conjuntamente el 27 de febrero de 2004 por el Relator Especial sobre la
          situaciOn de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales de los indigenas y la
          Representante Especial. Segün la informaciOn recibida, el Sr. Marlon Santi the agredido y
          golpeado en Quito la noche del 29 de febrero de 2004. Después, los agresores se habrian llevado
          los documentos de identificaciOn personal y de viaje del Sr. Santi, asi como su dinero.
          Posteriormente, el agredido informO del suceso y del robo a las autoridades ecuatorianas. Se
          teme que esta acciOn esté debida a la intenciOn del Sr. Santi de viajar a Costa Rica el dia 3 de
          marzo, para asistir a una reuniOn en apoyo de la causa presentada por la comunidad indigena de
          Sarayaku ante la ComisiOn Jnteramericana de Derechos Humanos contra el Estado de Ecuador y
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 81
          la empresa petrolera argentina CompaflIa General de Combustibles (CGC). En este contexto y
          segün las informaciones recibidas, la comunidad de Sarayaku habrIa sido objeto de una campafla
          de intimidacion, aparentemente a consecuencia de su oposiciôn a la concesiôn otorgada a las
          empresas petroleras para que empiecen los trabajos de perforaciôn en su territorio. Segün se
          informa, las organizaciones locales de derechos humanos que apoyan la reclamacion de la
          comunidad de Sarayaku también habrIan recibido amenazas de muerte, como es el caso de la
          Fundacion Pachamama. La comunidad de Sarayaku afirma que la extracciôn de petroleo en su
          territorio daflarla su entorno y su forma de vida. En este sentido, la propia comunidad ha
          propuesto un desarrollo alternativo y sostenible en su territorio para que su cultura no sufra las
          consecuencias de tales actuaciones. En mayo de 2003, la Comisiôn Interamericana de Derechos
          humanos ordeno a Ecuador que protegiera a la comunidad de Sarayaku después de que algunos
          de sus dirigentes recibieron amenazas de muerte en febrero de ese mismo aflo. En diciembre, la
          Comisiôn amplio las medidas cautelares después de que miembros de la comunidad de Sarayaku
          fueron vIctimas de repetidas amenazas de muerte y de agresiones fIsicas y verbales durante una
          manifestacion celebrada ese mismo mes.
          239. El 16 de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn y el Relator Especial sobre la situaciOn de los
          derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales de los indIgenas, enviO un llamamiento urgente
          sobre la situaciOn de Pablo Xavier OrtIz, asesor de la organizaciOn indIgena Jnstituto
          Amazango, una organizaciOn que apoya a la comunidad indIgena de Sarayaku, en la provincia de
          Pastaza. Dicha comunidad ya fue objeto de dos llamamientos urgentes enviados conjuntamente
          el 27 de febrero de 2004 y el 5 marzo de 2004 por la Representante Especial, el Relator Especial
          sobre la situaciOn de los derechos humanos y libertades fundamentales de los indIgenas, y el
          Relator Especial sobre el derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn. También se llama a la
          atenciOn urgente del Gobierno la informaciOn adicional recibida en relaciOn con las amenazas
          que habrIa recibido Pablo Xavier OrtIz, segün la cual, el 18 de febrero de 2004 habrIa recibido
          una llamada telefOnica anOnima en la que el individuo le habrIa gritado “hijo de puta, vos que
          andais con los indios del Puyo”. El 12 de febrero, Pablo Xavier OrtIz habrIa recibido otra
          llamada anOnima en un hotel de la localidad de Puyo donde estarla trabajando, en la cual el autor
          le habrIa dicho “vas a ver, hijo de puta, qué te hacemos.” Se informa ademas que el 10 de marzo
          un hombre habrIa llamado a la casa de Pablo Xavier OrtIz y, al enterarse de que no estaba, habrIa
          pedido otros nümeros de teléfono donde se le pudiera localizar diciendo que tenla una reuniOn
          con el Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores. Se teme que estas presuntas amenazas de muerte estén
          relacionadas con el trabajo llevado a cabo por Pablo Xavier OrtIz y el Instituto Amazango a
          favor de la comunidad indIgena Sarayaku en su oposiciOn a la extracciOn de petrOleo en su
          terntorio.
          240. El 17 de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho ala libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones
          extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias y el Relator Especial sobre la tortura, enviO un
          llamamiento urgente en relaciOn con Patricio Ordóflez Maico, de 27 aflos de edad, miembro de
          la FundaciOn Amigos por la Vida, una organizaciOn no gubernamental que trabaja para los
          derechos de las personas lesbianas, gays, bisexuales y transexuales. Patricio OrdOflez Maico
          habrIa sido detenido dos veces en mayo yjunio de 2001 por agentes de la policla nacional en
          Quito. Durante su primera detenciOn habrIa sido sometido a abusos sexuales por un agente que le
          habrIa amenazado de muerte en caso de que denunciara los hechos. Sin embargo, enjunio de
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 82
          2001, habrIa presentado una denuncia ante la Policla Nacional. En su carta de fecha 2 de
          septiembre de 2002, ci Relator Especial sobre la cuestiôn de la tortura notifico al Gobierno que
          habla recibido informacion sobre estas alegaciones (E/CN.4/2003/68/Add.1, parr. 430). Desde
          que interpuso su primera denuncia, Patricio Ordoflez Maico habrIa recibido varias amenazas de
          muerte. El 25 de febrero de 2002, uno de los agentes denunciados se habrIa presentado en un
          restaurante donde se encontraba con unos amigos y lo habrIa amenazado de muerte si no retiraba
          la denuncia. Tras este incidente, Patricio Ordoflez Maico habrIa presentado otra denuncia y se
          habrIa instalado en otra ciudad por temor a su seguridad. El pasado 12 de marzo de 2004, un
          intruso se habrIa introducido en las instalaciones de la Fundacion Amigos por la Vida, habrIa
          atacado a Patricio Ordoflez Maico y lo habrIa amenazado de muerte. Patricio Ordoflez Maico
          habrIa conseguido escapar pero habrIa resuitado herido en ci pecho y la espaida. El intruso no
          habrIa robado nada en las instalaciones, y todo indicarla que su ünica intenciôn era de atacar a
          Patricio Ordoflez Maico. Más tarde, éste habrIa presentado una denuncia ante la Policla Judicial
          de Guayaquii. El incidente dci 12 de marzo de 2004 habrIa ocurrido una semana despues de que
          Patricio Ordoflez Maico expuso su caso durante una reunion organizada en Quito por la
          FederaciOn Internacional de Derechos Humanos. Segün la informaciOn recibida, Patricio
          OrdOflez Maico todavIa no habrIa sido notificado de los resuitados de las investigaciones abiertas
          a raIz de sus repetidas denuncias ni habrIa sido informado sobre las medidas tomadas para ilevar
          los agentes denunciados ante lajusticia.
          241. El 19 de abril de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con ci Relator Especial sobre la
          situaciOn de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentaics de los indIgenas, enviO un
          ilamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn de los miembros de la organizaciOn Fundación
          Pachamama, una organizaciOn dedicada a la protecciOn de los derechos humanos, las
          tradiciones cuituraics y ci territorio de la comunidad Sarayaku, ubicada en la seiva amazOnica
          ecuatoriana en la provincia de Pastaza. En este contexto se seflala que la comunidad de Sarayaku,
          tanto como las organizaciones que la apoyan como es ci caso de la FundaciOn Pachamama,
          habrIan sido objetos de una campafla de intimidaciOn aparentemente a consecuencia de su
          oposiciOn a la concesiOn otorgada a las empresas petroicras para los trabajos de perforaciOn en su
          territorio. Se seflala igualmente que la situaciOn de la FundaciOn Pachamama ya fue objeto de un
          ilamamiento urgente enviado ci 27 de febrero de 2004 por ci Relator Especial sobre la situaciOn
          de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentaics de los indIgenas y la Representante
          Especial. La situaciOn de otras organizaciones e individuos que tambien apoyan a la comunidad
          indIgena de Sarayaku, como es ci caso de la AsociaciOn Sarayaku, tambien fue objeto de dos
          ilamamientos urgentes enviados ci 5 y ci 27 de marzo por ci Relator Especial sobre la situaciOn
          de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentaics de los indIgenas, ci Relator Especial
          sobre ci derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y la Representante Especial. Segün la
          informaciOn adicional recibida, ci 6 de abril de 2004, ci personal de la FundaciOn Pachamama
          habrIa recibido una ilamada telefOnica en la cual ci autor habrIa advertido de la colocaciOn de
          una bomba en la oficina de la organizaciOn. El autor de la ilamada habrIa dicho “ya ics
          advertimos y no nos hicieron caso; ahora ics dejamos un regalito en ci edificio”. Sc informa que
          ci personal habrIa evacuado ci edificio y ilamado a la policla quien habrIa registrado ci edificio.
          Unas horas despues y segün se informa, aiguien habrIa dejado una caja delante de la puerta de la
          FundaciOn, la cual habrIa sido inspeccionada por la policla quien habrIa comprobado que estaba
          vacla. Sc informa que la FundaciOn habrIa denunciado tanto este incidente como las amenazas de
          muerte que habrIan recibido en febrero a la Fiscaila General pero que, hasta la fecha, no se
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 83
          habrIa tenido noticia de que la Fiscalla General haya abierto una investigaciOn en relaciOn con
          los hechos.
          242. El 26 de abril de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones
          extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, enviO un llamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn de los
          miembros de la Fundación Amigos por Ia Vida, y en particular de unos de los miembros de la
          organizaciOn, Patricio Ordoflez Maico. Segün la informaciOn recibida, Patricio OrdOflez Maico
          habrIa sido detenido en mayo yjunio de 2001 por agentes de la Policla Nacional en Quito.
          Durante su primera detenciOn habrIa sido sometido a abusos sexuales por un agente que le habrIa
          amenazado de muerte en caso de que denunciara los hechos. Sin embargo, enjunio de 2001
          habrIa presentado una denuncia ante la Policla Nacional. Desde que interpuso su primera
          denuncia, Patricio OrdOflez Maico habrIa recibido varias amenazas de muerte y el 12 de marzo
          de 2004 habrIa sufrido un atento contra su vida. Su caso ya fue objeto de una llamamiento
          urgente enviado conjuntamente el 17 de marzo de 2004 por la Representante Especial, el Relator
          Especial sobre la tortura, el Relator Especial sobre el derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de
          expresiOn y la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, y de un
          llamamiento por el Relator Especial sobre la tortura el 2 de septiembre de 2002. Segün la
          informaciOn adicional recibida, clii de abril de 2004 el personal de la FundaciOn Amigos por la
          Vida habrIa recibido una llamada telefOnica anOnima cuya autor habrIa dicho “se va a colocar
          una bomba en la FundaciOn para que vuelen con todo, ya que son unos maricones hijos de puta.”
          El mismo dIa, segün se informa, un individuo en civil que se habrIa identificado como miembro
          de la policla nacional de Ecuador habrIa acudido a la FundaciOn Amigos por la Vida. HabrIa
          dicho que venla para llevar a Patricio OrdOflez Maico a la comisarla para que hiciera una
          declaraciOn. Cuando el personal de la FundaciOn le pidiO que mostrara su identificaciOn, el
          individuo se habrIa marchado y segün se informa, habrIa sido visto entrando en un automOvil
          dorado con cristales tintados y sin placa de matrIcula.
          243. El 27 de abril de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento urgente en relaciOn con
          José Serrano Salgado, miembro de la organizaciOn no gubernamental Centro de Derechos
          EconOmicos y Sociales (CDES), quien habrIa sido amenazado de muerte el 25 de abril de 2004.
          Segün la informaciOn recibida, José Serrano Salgado viajaba en su coche en la VIa Norte-Sur, en
          Quito, provincia de Pinchincha, cuando tres individuos no identificados que viajaban en un
          automOvil sin placa de matrIcula le habrian obligado a pararse. Los informes indican que uno de
          los individuos llevaba un revOlver. Cuando José Serrano Salgado saliO del automOvil, el
          individuo armado le habria amenazado de muerte e insultado varias veces. Segün la informaciOn
          recibida, los tres individuos le habrIan pedido que les entregara su mOvil y al ver que lo habia
          dejado en su casa, habrian seguido amenazandole de muerte. Antes de marcharse, los tres
          agresores se habr lan llevado las llaves del automOvil de José Serrano Salgado. Se teme que estas
          presuntas amenazas contra José Serrano Salgado estén relacionadas con sus actividades en la
          comunidad indigena de Sarayaku y su oposiciOn a la concesiOn otorgada a las empresas
          petroleras. Se informa que el José Serrano Salgado habria denunciado la agresiOn ante la policia
          el 25 de abril de 2004.
          244. El 7 de mayo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento urgente en relaciOn con
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 84
          José Soils Sohs, periodista del diario El Universo en Guayaquii. Segün la informacion recibida,
          ci 26 de abril de 2004, José Soils Soils habria recibido dos iiamadas teiefonicas de un individuo
          no identificado quien habrla dicho “j,Ei Licenciado Soils? Digaic ai Licenciado Soils que no se
          meta con nosotros que ya vamos a sahr”. Dos semanas antes, cuando José Soils Soils se
          encontraba cerca de su casa, cuatro desconocidos que viajaban en un vehicuio bianco sin piacas
          de matricuia ie habrian gritado “Cuidate”. José Soils Soils habrla presentado una denuncia ante
          ia Fiscaha Generai por ios hechos ocurridos. Las amenazas contra José Soils Soils estarlan
          reiacionadas con sus informes sobre ias presuntas ejecuciones extrajudiciaies de personas
          detenidas después de un robo en una farmacia en Guayaquii y sobre ia presunta desaparicion de
          Johnny Ehas Gômez Baida, César Augusto Mata Vaienzueia y Edwin Danici Vivar Paima. Estas
          tres personas habrian sido detenidas por ia pohcia ci 19 de noviembre de 2003 en reiacion con ci
          robo. Habrian teiefoneado a sus famihares poco después de ser detenidas y ics habrian dicho que
          estaban bajo custodia en ci cuartei de ia Pohcia Judiciai de Guayaquii. Segün ia Fiscaha Generai
          de Guayaquii, estas tres personas habrlan sido hberadas. Segün ia pohcia, no habrian sido
          trasiadadas a un centro de detencion y Jhonny Ehas Gômez Baida no habria sido arrestado.
          245. Ei 26 de octubre de 2004, ia Representante Especiai, junto con ci Reiator Especiai sobre
          ci derecho a ia hbertad de opinion y de expresiOn y ci Reiator Especiai sobre ia situaciOn de ios
          derechos humanos y ias hbertades fundamentaics de ios indigenas, enviO un iiamamiento urgente
          en reiaciOn con Leonidas Iza, Presidente de ia ConfederaciOn de Nacionahdades Indigenas en
          Ecuador (CONAJE). Segün ia informaciOn recibida, ci 13 de octubre de 2004 a ias 9.45 de ia
          maflana, Leonidas Iza habria recibido una amenaza de muerte anOnima en su teiéfono ceiuiar. Sc
          aiega que ci reahzador de ia iiamada habrla amenazado de muerte a Leonidas Iza y a toda su
          famiha. Sc informa también que ci 14 de octubre de 2004, en horas de ia madrugada, se habria
          producido un robo en ias oficinas de ia sede de CONAJE en Quito en ci cuai varios ordenadores
          conteniendo informaciOn importante para ci movimiento indigena habrlan sido robados. Dc
          acuerdo con ias informaciones recibidas, ci resguardo pohciai de ia sede no estaba presente ese
          dia. Sc teme que ias amenazas de muerte en contra de Leonidas Iza y su famiha puedan estar
          reiacionadas con su trabajo como defensor de ios derechos de ias pobiaciones indigenas y a sus
          manifestaciones pübhcas contra ias pohticas dci gobierno. Ademas se teme que ci aiianamiento
          de ia sede de CONAJE pueda constituir un ciaro intento de impedir ias actividades de ia
          organizaciOn.
          Observaciones
          246. The Speciai Representative regrets that at the time of the finahzation of this report, the
          Government had not rephed to her communications. She reiterates her serious concerns at the
          safety of human rights defenders canying out their iegitimate work in Ecuador. She refers to her
          main report (E/CN.4/2005/101) for a detaiied anaiysis of the trends in the situation of human
          rights defenders in Ecuador.
          Egypt
          Communications sent
          247. On 19 January 2004, the Speciai Representative sent an urgent appeai regarding the
          aiieged deiay in approving a grant awarded to The Egyptian Organization for iluman Rights
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 85
          (EOIIR). According to the information received, on 1 September 2003, the EOHR was awarded
          a grant of US$40, 000 from the National Endowment for Democracy in the United States of
          America to fund a one-year project of human rights monitoring in the country and produce an
          annual report. The project was reportedly due to begin on 1 October 2003, however the
          organization has allegedly not received approval for this grant despite having applied to the
          Ministry of Social Affairs in Masr Elkadima on 18 September 2003, as required under article 17
          of NGO Law 84/2002. This law has already been the subject of an urgent action by the Special
          Representative on 18 June 2003. Concern has been expressed that the alleged delay in approving
          this grant may be aimed at preventing the EOHR from carrying out its work in defence of human
          rights.
          248. On 16 July 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning the El Nadim Centre for the Psychological
          Rehabilitation of Victims of Violence. It was founded in 1993 by a collective of doctors and
          psychiatrists and operates as a clinic registered with the Doctor's Syndicate. It provides treatment
          and rehabilitative services to victims of torture by police and security forces, as well as victims
          of domestic violence. It also assists victims by bringing their cases to the attention of relevant
          authorities and by pursuing criminal charges against the perpetrators. According to the
          allegations received, on 11 July 2004, agents of the Ministry of Health entered the Cairo offices
          of El Nadim Centre and confiscated documents, including patients' files and publications
          produced by the Centre, and took photographs of the premises. It is alleged that they had an
          aggressive and threatening behaviour. Later, the agents of the Ministry of Health filed a
          complaint with the Ministry of Health accusing the El Nadim Centre of using its premises as a
          clinic for prohibited purposes. This complaint could give the Ministry grounds to order the
          closure of the Centre.
          Communications received
          249. By letter dated 3 March 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by the
          Special Representative on 19 January 2004 in connection with the alleged delay in approving a
          grant awarded to The Egyptian Organization for iluman Rights (EOIIR). The Government
          confirmed that the case had been examined by the Ministry of Social Affairs at the beginning of
          2004, and informed the Special Representative that all the necessary administrative measures to
          approve the EOHR's grant had been taken.
          250. By letter dated 20 September 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by
          the Special Representative on 16 July 2004 concerning allegations regarding the El Nadim
          Centre for the Psychological Rehabilitation of Victims of Violence. According to information
          received from the Prosecutor's Office, the accused denied the allegations made against them and
          stated that the inspection on 11 July 2004 was carried out pursuant to article 11 of the Regulation
          of Medical Institutions Act No. 51 of 1981. They also declared that during the inspection, several
          violations were discovered, in particular the existence of unacceptable hygiene standards,
          unregistered doctors working at the centre, the lack of a functioning technical director and the
          unauthorized publication of books, thereby infringing upon article 10 of the aforementioned act.
          The Government confirmed that the Ministry of Health had been officially informed of these
          breaches in the law. It stated that the centre had been given a month to take remedial action and
          had been notified that failure to comply with the required standards would lead to the withdrawal
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 86
          of its licence (article 13, para. 5). Tn its response, the Government reported that the centre was re-
          inspected on 24 August 2004, and closed down. On 31 August 2004, it was re-inspected once
          more and found to have remedied most of the violations. The investigation is ongoing.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          251. By letter dated 25 May 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent jointly
          with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion
          and expression and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture on 12 August 2003
          concerning Ashraflbrahim, with reference to its previous reply dated 30 September 2003. The
          Government informed that, on 6 March 2004, Mr. Ibrahim had been acquitted by the ruling of
          the court.
          Observations
          252. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response to both
          communications sent. In particular, she welcomes the steps taken for the approval of the grant.
          Similarly, in light of the conclusions of the 31 August 2004 re-investigation, she invites the
          Government to find a suitable solution to the recent closure of the El Nadim Centre. Finally, the
          Special Representative would like to thank the Government for the interest it has shown in
          considering her request for an invitation to conduct an official visit and hopes her request will
          receive a favourable answer shortly.
          Ethiopia
          Communications sent
          253. On 13 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning alleged actions by the Government to interfere with the functioning of the
          Ethiopian Free Journalists Association (EFJA), a private association defending the rights of
          journalists working in the country, for whom a letter of allegation was sent on behalf of the
          Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and
          expression on 28 November 2003. According to more recent information received, on 4 January
          2004, the Ministry of Justice convened a meeting of the members of the Association, which, due
          to the boycott of the members, was re-scheduled for 18 January. That day, and reportedly despite
          the sparse attendance, the Ministry announced the election of a new executive committee of the
          EFJA. Fears have been expressed that this action may be politically motivated, as the
          Association had, over the months preceding this meeting, been critical about a proposed new
          press law, which seemed to contain provisions that would in effect reinforce control over the
          press and journalists, and in particular introduce criminal sanctions for the failure of the press to
          “investigate the correctness of the news that it publishes” (article 19), require publications and
          distributors to be registered and licensed (arts. 7 and 9), give the Government power to withhold
          or withdraw registration and licences subject only to post-denial or post-revocation of judicial
          review, and allow the Minister for Information to prohibit the local press from reprinting news
          published outside the country if it i deemed that the report “endangers peace and security”,
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 87
          “spreads false accusations and defamation against public bodies and officials” and “harms and
          weakens” patriotism.
          254. On 26 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the situation of Yohannes Solomon, a member and employee of the Ethiopia
          Human Rights Council (EHRCO) and a member of the Central Council of the Ethiopian
          Teachers Association. According to the information received, on 6 and 8 March 2004, two plain
          clothes policemen reportedly came to the home of Yohannes Solomon in Addis Ababa and stated
          that they had come to arrest him. Yohannes Solomon was reportedly not there at the time, having
          left the country on the 6 March to attend events related to the United Nations Commission on
          Human Rights in Geneva. His sister reportedly asked him why they wanted to arrest him. They
          allegedly stated that they wanted to interrogate him and further stated that he should stop
          working for EHRCO. According to the information received, Yohannes Solomon had reportedly
          previously been the victim of harassment by members of the security forces on 25 May and 10
          September 2001. Concern has been expressed that Yohannes Solomon is being targeted for his
          human rights activities and in particular his advocacy work on behalf of EHRCO and for the
          Central Council of the Ethiopian Teachers Association on education and the rights of teachers.
          255. On 3 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, sent an urgent appeal regarding the
          situation of Diribi Demissie, Gemechu Feyera and Sentayehu Workneh, president, vice-
          president and treasurer of the Macha Tulema Association (MTA), an officially registered Oromo
          community welfare organization, and 13 other members of the Oromo. According to the
          information received, the MTA has been raising funds to provide food and shelter for 300 Oromo
          students who were suspended or expelled from Addis Ababa University following their arrest on
          21 January 2004 during a demonstration to demand the release of eight other students. These
          students had allegedly been arrested after protesting against the Government's decision to
          transfer the Oromia regional capital from Addis Ababa to Adama. According to the information
          received on 18 May 2004, Diribi Demissie, Gemechu Feyera and 13 other members of the
          Oromo were reportedly arrested in Addis Ababa. Sentayehu Workneh was reportedly arrested on
          20 May and was allegedly beaten during his arrest. They were reportedly initially held
          incommunicado at the Central Investigation Department Maikelawi. Six of the students have
          allegedly been provisionally released while the three MTA officials and the seven other Oromo
          have reportedly been accused of involvement in a bombing incident at Addis Ababa University
          on 29 April 2004 and of having links to the Oromo Liberation Front (OLF). It is reported that
          they are due to appear in court on 3 June 2004. Concern has been expressed that Diribi Demissie,
          Gemechu Feyera and Sentayehu Workneh may have been targeted for their human rights work
          and in particular their work on behalf of the Oromo.
          Communications received
          256. By letter dated 7 May 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 13
          February 2004. The Government informed that for three consecutive years, the Ethiopian Free
          Journalists Association (EFJA) had failed to present reports on its activities and performance
          and audits adopted by its general assembly. The Ministry of Justice had given several notices to
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 88
          the EFJA in this regard. When the EFJA did not respond to these notices, the Ministry was
          forced to take legal measures and decided to suspend the organization until it fhlfilled its
          obligations. The Government stated that however, taking into account the importance of the
          resumption of its function, the Ministry decided to discuss the problems with members of the
          EFJA. To this end, the general assembly of the organization was called for a meeting within one
          month of the suspension of the EFJA. The first meeting was adjourned, as most of the members
          of the general assembly were not present. According to the Government, the second meeting
          decided, after dealing extensively with the issues, to change the EFJA leadership, whose term of
          office was long overdue (four years). A new Executive Committee has hence been established
          from among the members of the general assembly who were present at the meeting. The
          Government informed that this procedure was in accordance with the statutes of the EFJA. It
          stated that this election was entirely undertaken by EFJA members present at the meeting and
          that it is not related to the press law as alleged.
          257. By letter dated 29 July 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by the
          Special Representative on 3 June 2004 concerning the situation of Diribi Demissie, Gemechu
          Feyera and Sentayehu Workneh, president, vice-president and treasurer of the Macha Tulema
          Association (MTA), and 13 other members of the Oromo. According to the Government, Macha
          Tulem is an affiliate of the Oromo Liberation Front, and its work with the welfare association for
          Oromo people a simple guise for its violent and illegal activities. The Government declared that
          the police had uncovered factual evidence on their alleged involvement. The Government
          therefore emphasized that the legal proceedings against the officials of the Macha Tulema
          Association and the 13 other individuals were in complete conformity with the law. The
          aforementioned persons were arrested in connection with the terrorist attack on Addis Ababa
          University on 29 April 2004. They are currently standing trial and have been remanded in
          custody until the Court presents its findings.
          Observations
          258. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its two responses. With respect to
          the case of the EFJA, she must note that the Government's explanation has not dispelled her
          concern with respect to government interferences into the association's operations. The Special
          Representative acknowledges that EFJA may have failed to present its financial statements and
          audit reports. She notes, however, that the Government does not contend that EFJA failed to
          keep its financial records properly or was engaged in fraud. There was thus no compelling public
          interest requiring the Government to sanction the organization. As a general principle, the
          Special Representative is of the opinion that, while correct and transparent book keeping by
          NGOs is very important, this is not primarily to protect government interest. NGOs engaged in
          the defence of human rights should keep transparent financial records and subject themselves to
          audits in order to attract vital contributions from funders. The sanction for failing to do so should
          be - and is - that potential fhnders refuse to support the NGO. Governments, on the other hand,
          should only intervene if there are allegations that shortcomings in the keeping of financial
          records amount to fraud, misappropriation or other criminal activities.
          France
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 89
          Communications envoyées
          259. Le 26 mai 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special sur
          la vente d'enfants, la prostitution d'enfants et la pornographic impliquant des enfants a envoyc
          une lettre d'allegation concernant la situation du Dr Catherine Bonnet, psychiatre et defenseur
          des droits des enfants. Selon les informations reçues, depuis 1996 le Dr Bonnet aurait fait l'objet
          de multiples procedures disciplinaires de la part du Conseil de l'Ordre des medecins et de mises
          en examen repetees pour denonciations calomnieuses, suite a des signalements et diagnostics
          d'abus sexuels sur mineurs. Selon les informations reçues, le Dr Bonnet, aurait examine six
          enfants de familles differentes et aurait redige des certificats medicaux attestant des abus sexuels
          commis par l'un des parents. Le 5 decembre 1998, les parents concernes par ces signalements
          auraient porte plainte contre le Dr Bonnet auprés du conseil regional de l'Ordre des medecins
          d'Ile-de-France pour avoir redige des certificats de complaisance et pour denonciations
          calomnieuses lors de ses diagnostics, pourtant confirmes par d'autres experts medicaux. Le
          conseil regional de l'Ordre des medecins d'Ile-de-France aurait condamne le Dr Bonnet a trois
          fois trois ans d'interdiction de pratiquer la medecine pour avoir redige de faux certificats et pour
          manquement ala deontologie. En aoüt 1999, l'instance nationale du Conseil de l'ordre saisie en
          appel aurait revise et annule la condamnation pour signalement au nom de l'article 226-14,
          requalifie les motivations des autres condamnations et reduit la sanction a une periode de 15
          jours d'interdiction d'exercer sa profession assortie de deux avertissements disciplinaires
          presumement en depit de diagnostics confirmant son expertise. Enjuillet 2001, le Conseil d'Etat
          aurait confirme cette decision. D'autres plaintes auraient continue a être deposees auprés des
          instances disciplinaires, a la suite desquelles le conseil regional de l'Ordre des medecins aurait a
          nouveau condamne le Dr Bonnet. Ces decisions auraient a nouveau etc revisees ou annulees par
          le Conseil national de l'Ordre des medecins. Parallélement aux procedures disciplinaires, le Dr
          Bonnet aurait fait l'objet de plusieurs plaintes au penal dont l'une serait toujours en cours. En
          particulier, elle aurait etc misc en examen une premiere fois enjuin 2002 pour denonciation
          calomnieuse; un non-lieu aurait etc prononce le 19 octobre 2002. Le 9 octobre 2002, le
          Dr Bonnet aurait etc misc en examen une seconde fois pour un autre signalement par le tribunal
          de grande instance de Paris pour denonciation calomnieuse supposement sur la base de ses
          condamnations en premi Cre instance disciplinaire. L'instruction se serait terminee le 6 mars
          2003, annonçant la transmission du dossier au parquet dans un delai de 20 jours. Aucune
          decision n'aurait etc rendue depuis lors. En consequence des multiples poursuites disciplinaires
          etjudiciaires a son encontre et d'articles publics par les medias, le Dr Bonnet aurait perdu sa
          clientele privee, puis son travail salarie et s'avCrerait être au chomage. D'autres praticiens
          medicaux auraient egalement etc soumis a des sanctions disciplinaires lors de circonstances
          semblables, mais n'auraient pas voulu en divulguer les details auprCs des mecanismes onusiens
          des droits de l'homme par crainte de subir les mémes traitements que le Dr Bonnet. Par ailleurs,
          selon les information reçues, le 18 decembre 2003, suite notamment a un mouvement de
          protestation de la part de nombreux medecins quant aux dispositions de la loi reglementant les
          signalements et diagnostics d'abus sexuels, le Parlement aurait vote un amendement interdisant
          les poursuites disciplinaires. Des craintes ont etc exprimees que les multiples poursuites
          disciplinaires etjudiciaires contre le Dr Bonnet ne visent a faire obstacle a ses activites en la
          faveur de la defense des droits des enfants.
          260. Le 30 juillet 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special
          sur la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, a envoyc un appel
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 90
          urgent concernant Mme Keita Matindie, membre du parti d'opposition le Rassembiement des
          Repubhcains (RDR), tresoriere de la section Jeunesse et membre active de la section Femmes du
          parti et defenseur des droits de i'homme dont la demande d'asiie aurait etc rejetee. Mme Keita
          Matindie faisant i'objet d'une procedure d'expuision du territoire français devrait être renvoyce
          en Côte d'Ivoire de façon imminente. Scion ies informations reçues, son pére, Seydou Keyta
          aurait etc tue par des CRS iors des vioiences de 2000 et aurait fait partie des victimes du charnier
          de Yopugon. Par aiiiieurs, cue aurait participe a ia marche de protestation organisee par ies partis
          d'opposition ie 25 mars 2004 et aurait etc temoin de serieuses vioiations des droits de i'homme
          dont des executions sommaires perpetrees par ies forces de securites du pays. Eiie aurait a cette
          occasion etc battue par ies CRS avec d'autres miiitants du RDR. Au cours de ces manifestations,
          son epoux Paui Kiburugupu et sa mere auraient etc arretes et seraient depuis portes disparus. En
          avrii 2004, Mme Keyta Matindie aurait temoigne sur ies vioiations commises par ies forces de
          i'ordre, et dont cue aurait etc temoin iors des evenements des 25 et 26 mars 2004 a Abidjan,
          auprCs de ia Commission d'enquête internationaie etabiie par ie Haut-Commissariat aux droits de
          i'homme. Suite a son temoignage, cue aurait fait i'objet de nouveaux harcCiements et,
          notamment, cue aurait reçu des menaces de mort de ia part de membres du GPP (Groupement
          patriotique pour ia paix), proche de ia presidence, iui disant qu'eiie etait etrangere, membre du
          RDR et qu'ayant assiste aux vioiences cue meritait d'être battue et tuce. Durant piusieurs mois,
          cue aurait etc obhgee de fuir son domiciie en raison du harcCiement dont cue aurait fait i'objet.
          Scion ies informations reçues, ie 20 juilliet 2004, cue serait arrivee a i'aeroport de Roissy —
          Charies-de-Gauiie en France en possession d'un visa Schengen vaiide et aurait soiiicite son
          admission au titre de i'asiie a ia frontiere. Sa demande aurait etc refusee par ie chef du bureau
          d'asiie pohtique a ia frontiere en raison du caractCre << manifestement infonde >> de sa demande.
          Eiie n'aurait pas etc autorisee a rentrer sur ie territoire pour que sa demande soit examinee sur ie
          fond. Le motif de ia decision reposerait sur ie fait que << ies deciarations de i'interessee seraient
          imprecises et iacunaires >> et qu'eiie n'apporterait pas d'eiements probants sur ies fait mentionnes
          ci-dessus. Neanmoins, scion ies informations reçues, Mme Matindie aurait de serieuses
          difficuites a s'exprimer en français et n'aurait pas etc assistee d'un interprCte iors de son premier
          entretien. Mme Keita se trouverait actueiiement en zone d'attente a Roissy et son expuision
          serait prevue pour demain. Dc sericuses craintes ont etc exprimees que son retour en Côte
          d'Ivoire ne mette sa vie et son integrite physique en danger.
          Communications reçues
          261. Le 16 aoüt 2004, ic Gouvernement a repondu a ia communication envoyce ic 30 juiiiiet
          2004 par ia Representante speciaie sur ia situation de Mme Keita Matindie, qui, au moment de
          i'appei urgent, se trouvait en attente de reconduite en Côte d'Ivoire. Scion ic Gouvernement, ics
          autorites auraient conduit une enquête et i'interessee aurait etc entendue a piusicurs reprises.
          Cette enquête aurait conduit au rejet de sa demande d'asiie. En effet, ii serait apparu que ic
          passeport presente par cette personne etait un passeport voic et que ia personne qui se presentait
          comme Mme Keita Matindie n'etait pas ia personne qui avait temoigne devant ia Commission
          d'enquête internationaic etabiie par ic Haut-Commissariat aux droits de i'homme.
          262. Le 10 novembre 2004, ic Gouvernement a repondu a ia communication envoyce ic
          26 mai 2004 par ia Representante speciaie sur ia situation du Dr Catherine Bonnet. Le
          Gouvernement a indique que, dans i'exercice de son metier, ic Dr Bonnet a produit des
          certificats medicaux attestant de sevices a enfants, mais ces certificats auraient depasse, dans
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 91
          certains cas, le simple constat des sévices et auraient notamment été remis non aux autorités
          compétentes mais aux conjoints des personnes que le Dr Bonnet soupconnait d'abus sexuels. Des
          plaintes auraient été déposées contre elle. Le Conseil de l'Ordre des médecins, qui serait une
          juridiction, aurait du examiner celles-ci au regard des régles de déontologie qui s'imposent aux
          médecins.
          263. Le Gouvernement a indiqué que le régime disciplinaire des médecins doit permettre de
          concilier liberté d'exercice et respect des régles de déontologie. A cette fin, l'article 76 du Code
          de déontologie médicale stipule que le médecin ne doit faire état, dans les certificats médicaux
          qu'il délivre a ses clients, que des constatations médicales qu'il est en mesure de faire. Par
          ailleurs, aux termes de l'article 44 du Code de déontologie lorsqu'un médecin discerne qu'un
          mineur de quinze ans est victime de sévices ou de privations il doit alerter les autorités
          judiciaires, médicales et administratives. Le Gouvernement reléve enfin que le législateur
          français, conscient de la difficulté des professionnels de la petite enfance, a promulgué le
          2 janvier 2004 une loi relative a l'accueil et a la protection de la petite enfance. Cette loi modifie
          l'article 226-14 du Code penal en prévoyant que le signalement aux autorités compétentes ne
          peut faire l'objet de sanctions disciplinaires.
          264. Le Gouvernement a observe que les conseils régionaux exercent, au scm de l'Ordre des
          médecins, la competence disciplinaire de premiere instance. La section disciplinaire du Conseil
          national de l'Ordre des médecins est compétente pour connaitre des appels. Ses decisions
          peuvent enfin faire l'objet d'un recours devant le Conseil d'Etat, qui est la plus haute juridiction
          administrative.
          265. Dans le cas du Dr Bonnet, le conseil regional de l'Ordre des médecins de la region Ile-de-
          France, statuant sur des plaintes transmises par le conseil départemental de la Ville-de-Paris, a
          inflige plusieurs sanctions au Dr Bonnet. En appel, la section disciplinaire du Conseil national a
          réformé trois d'entre elles et annulé les trois autres. Dans trois cas oü le Dr Bonnet avait fait des
          signalements au Procureur de la République, le Conseil national a annulé les sanctions, déclarant
          qu'elle n'avait pas manqué a son devoir de prudence et circonspection. Dans trois autres cas oü
          le Dr Bonnet avait remis des certificats, attestant des abus sexuels commis par un des parents, a
          l'autre parent, dont elle n'ignorait pas qu'il/elle se trouvait en conflit avec le premier, le Conseil
          national a confirmé qu'elle avait manqué a ses devoirs de prudence. Malgré tout, le Conseil
          national a réformé a deux reprises les lourdes peines d'interdiction d'exercer la médecine en ne
          prononcant qu'un simple blame. Dans le troisiCme cas, il a ramené la durée de l'interdiction
          d'exercer la médecine de 3 ans a 15 jours.
          Observations
          266. The Special Representative thanks the Government for prompt and detailed replies to the
          communications sent. In the case of Ms. Keita, she commends the Government for having
          conducted a prompt investigation into the case and having suspended the expulsion of the
          individual in question in order to examine her case. She considers that the Government's
          explanations with regard to the case of Ms. Matindie solve the concerns raised in the
          communication.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 92
          267. With regard to the ease of Dr. Bonnet, the Special Representative welcomes the
          legislation recently enacted by the French Parliament to enhance the protection of physicians
          who denounce suspected cases of child abuse to the competent prosecutorial and judicial
          authorities against legal action by parents of the child and other persons affected. The Special
          Representative remains, however, preoccupied that this legislation and the way it is implemented
          may not go far enough in effectively shielding physicians against abusive complaints. In
          particular, the Special Representative remains concerned about the fairness of proceedings before
          the disciplinary bodies of the Ordre des Medecins. She believes that physicians play a vital role
          in the protection of children against the most serious violations of their rights, and that they have
          to be in turn effectively protected in this role as human rights defenders.
          Guatemala
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          268. El 20 de enero de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociôn y protecciôn del derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, el Relator Especial
          sobre la independencia de magistrados y abogados y el Relator Especial sobre la yenta de niflos,
          la prostituciOn infantil y la utilizaciOn de niflos en la pornografla, enviO un llamamiento urgente
          con relaciOn al caso pendiente de Bruce ilarris, director ejecutivo de los programas para
          America Latina de Casa Alianza y un defensor de los derechos de los menores de edad, que será
          analizado por un tribunal guatemalteco el 22 de enero prOximo. Segün la informaciOn recibida,
          Bruce Harris the acusado de difamaciOn por Susana de Umafla, siguiendo una conferencia de
          prensa celebrada en septiembre de 1997 en la cual la Oficina del Procurador General y Casa
          Alianza expusieron el trafico ilegal de niflos en Guatemala. Durante la conferencia, Bruce Harris
          habrIa declarado que Susana de Umafla habrIa utilizado “influencia indebida” con las autoridades
          gubermentales para facilitar las adopciones internacionales. En febrero de 1999, la Corte
          Constitucional habrIa dictado que, por no ser miembro de los medios de comunicaciOn, Bruce
          Harris no tenla derecho a la libertad de expresiOn— la defensa en contra de la difamaciOn. D c esta
          manera, Bruce Harris enfrenta la posibilidad de una condena criminal y cinco aflos de
          encarcelamiento.
          269. El 5 de febrero de 2004, la Representante Especial enviO un llamamiento urgente sobre la
          situaciOn de Orlando JoaquIn Blanco Lapola, director del Centro Internacional de
          Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos (CIIDH). Segün las informaciones recibidas, el 16 y el 30
          de enero 2004, y el 2 de febrero, Orlando JoaquIn Blanco Lapola habrIa recibido amenazas
          telefOnicas anOnimas insultandole y amenazandole de muerte. Se presume que las amenazas
          guardarlan relaciOn con sus actividades en favor de los derechos humanos, particularmente su
          participaciOn en la elaboraciOn del acuerdo para el establecimiento de la ComisiOn para la
          InvestigaciOn de Cuerpos Ilegales y Aparatos Clandestinos de Seguridad (CICIACS).
          270. El 5 de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociOn y la protecciOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un
          llamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn de Elolda MejIa Samoya, presidente y representante
          legal de la AsociaciOn Amigos del Lago Izabal, una organizaciOn que se opone a la reactivaciOn
          de las actividades mineras en el departamento de Izabal. Segün la informaciOn recibida, el 18 de
          febrero, Elolda MejIa Samayoa habrIa sido advertida de que si no dejaba de oponerse a las
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 93
          actividades minerlas, se arriesgaba a que la mataran. HabrIan dicho ademas a su casero que
          quemarlan la casa en la que vive Elolda MejIa Samayoa si ésta continuaba con sus actividades.
          El 21 de febrero, segün la informacion, la Asociaciôn Amigos del Lago Izabal habrIan
          convocado una reunion en la localidad de Puerto Barrios para informar a los habitantes de la
          zona sobre las repercusiones ecolOgicas de las actividades mineras, durante la cual un grupo de
          individuos desconocidos se la habrIan interrumpido y habrIan amenazado a Elolda MejIa
          Samayoa, diciendo “que cayera su cabeza”. Se informa ademas que estas amenazas vienen
          precedidas por el presunto asesinato de Enrique Alcantara, trabajador del Consejo Nacional de
          Areas Protegidas (CONAP) y activista medioambiental quien habrIa luchado contra el trafico
          ilegal de fauna silvestre. Segün la informaciOn, el 10 de febrero de 2004, alas 15.00 horas,
          Enrique Alcantara habrIa sido asesinado de impactos de bala por desconocidos en la ciudad de
          Puerto Barrios. Se teme que estas presuntas amenazas de muerte contra Elolda MejIa Samayoa y
          el presunto asesinato de Enrique Alcantara estén relacionados con sus actividades de defensa del
          medio ambiente a favor de los habitantes del departamento de Izabal.
          271. El 19 de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociOn y la protecciOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y el Relator
          Especial sobre la tortura, enviO un llamamiento urgente en relaciOn con Victoriano Zacarlas
          Mindez, secretario ejecutivo de la Central General de Trabajadores de Guatemala (CGTG) y
          secretario general del Sindicato de Pilotos Automovilistas y Similares de Guatemala, tal como
          Wilson Carreto y Miguel Angel Ochoa, directivos de la UniOn de Pilotos de Transporte Pesado
          por Carretera, quienes habrIan sido detenidos el 25 de febrero de 2004, supuestamente de manera
          violenta, por las fuerzas estatales de seguridad en la ciudad de Guatemala. Segün las
          informaciones recibidas, estas tres personas habrIan manifestado contra la medida que habrIa
          implementado la municipalidad de Guatemala, la cual restringirla la circulaciOn de vehIculos
          pesados en la capital, obligando los conductores a trasladar su trabajo a horarios nocturnos y
          peligrosos. Durante esta manifestaciOn, se habrIan observado incidentes de orden püblico.
          Debido al derrame de gasolina de dos cisternas que se colocaron en un cruce de avenidas en el
          centro de Guatemala, a las personas detenidas durante la manifestaciOn, se les habrIa tipificado
          entre otros cargos, el de “terrorismo”. Sin embargo, segün testimonios, este acto habrIa sido
          realizado por personas infiltradas dentro de la manifestaciOn para provocar el caos. Deacuerdo
          con las informaciones recibidas, Victorio Zacarlas Mindez, Wilson Carreto y Miguel Angel
          Ochoa se encontrarlan actualmente detenidos en incomunicaciOn en una carcel judicial
          preventiva, en condiciones de hacinamiento y de insalubridad debido a la deficiencia de las
          instalaciones. Ala luz de estas alegaciones, se han expresado temores por la integridad fIsica de
          las personas arriba mencionadas.
          272. El 5 de abril de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociOn y la protecciOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un
          llamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn de Thelma Peláez, Fiscal de la SecciOn de Derechos
          Humanos del Ministerio Püblico cuyo caso ya fue objeto de un llamamiento urgente enviado por
          la Representante Especial el 21 dejunio de 2003. D c acuerdo con la nueva informaciOn recibida,
          clii de marzo de 2004, el vehIculo en el cual viajaba Thelma Pelaez habrIa sido perseguido por
          una motocicleta blanca de marca Honda con una placa de matrIcula perteneciente al Ministerio
          de Defensa Nacional. Los custodios de Thelma Pelaez habrIan interceptado a los tripulantes de la
          motocicleta, quienes se habrIan identificados como miembros del Ejercito de Guatemala. Al
          inquirir acerca del motivo de la persecuciOn, habrIan dicho a los custodios que la fiscal “deberla
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 94
          dejar las cosas en paz.” Se informa ademas que ci mismo 11 de marzo, una pick-up con vidrios
          polarizados y sin piacas de matrIcula habrIa perseguido por más de una hora a! vehIculo de
          Thelma Peiaez. Sc teme que estés presuntos actos de hostigamiento en contra de Thelma Peiaez
          estén relacionados con su trabajo de investigar, entre otros casos, ci asesinato ci 11 de Junio de
          2003de1 auxiliar de la Procuradurla de los Derechos Humanos (PDH) de Chimaitenango, José
          Israel Lopez LOpez y los hechos de 24 y 25 de Julio de 2003 durante una manifestaciOn Pro RIos
          Montt, organizada por la Frente Republica Guatemaiteca, en la cual fueron detenidos varios
          indIgenas.
          273. El 22 de abril de 2004, la Representante Especial, Junto con ci Relator Especial sobre ci
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y ci Relator Especial sobre la yenta de niflos, la
          prostituciOn infantil y la utilizaciOn de niflos en la pornografla, enviO un ilamamiento urgente en
          relaciOn con la situaciOn dci personal de la organizaciOn no gubernamental “ ,Donde están los
          niflos y las niflas?”, y en particular, de Maria Isabel Escobar Donis, Ana Morales, Maria
          Teresa Soto, Manuel Cedillo y Diego Sunuc. Segün la informaciOn recibida, esta organizaciOn
          estarla investigando las circunstancias en que se adoptO a niflos, tras separarios de sus padres,
          durante la guerra civil de Guatemala. Se informa que altos mandos dci ejército estarlan
          implicados en las adopciones. Se informa que los miembros de la organizaciOn hubieron sido
          victimas de constantes amenazas y hostigamiento. En marzo de 2003, dos empicadas de la
          organizaciOn habrIan sido agredidas a! regresar de una investigaciOn y las boisas que contenlan
          grabaciones magnetofOnicas y otra informaciOn sobre ci caso habrIan sido robados. En visto dci
          constante hostigamiento, la organizaciOn habrIa sido obligado mudarse las oficinas en cuatro
          ocasiones a lo largo de 2003. En este contexto y segün la informaciOn recibida, a mediados de
          marzo de 2004, Maria Isabel Escobar Donis habrIa sido interceptada por tres hombres armados
          cerca de las oficinas de la organizaciOn. A punta de pistola, los hombres ic habrIan exigido
          entregar sus Haves y habrIan ilevado ci automOvil de la organizaciOn. Ademas, segün la
          informaciOn recibida, durante las vacaciones de Pascua, dci 8 a! 12 de abril, las oficinas de la
          organizaciOn habrIan sido asaitadas y ademas de ordenadores y otros aparatos, habrIan sido
          robados archivos que contenlan informaciOn sobre la participaciOn de militares en violaciones de
          derechos humanos durante la guerra civil. Sc teme que estos actos de agresiOn serlan una forma
          de intimidar a los miembros de de la organizaciOn, para que abandonase su trabajo de investigar
          y resolver las adopciones supuestamente ilegaics de niflos durante la guerra civil.
          274. El 14 de Junio de 2004, la Representante Especial enviO una carta de alegaciOn sobre ci
          supuesto asesinato de ilugo Oswaldo Gutiérrez Vanegas, presidente dci Comité Protierra de La
          Pita, en ci municipio de Santa Ana, departamento de Petén, ci cual lucha por la protecciOn de las
          tierras ejidaics y los derechos de las comunidades de esas tierras. Dc acuerdo con las
          informaciones, ci Comité Protierra estarla intentando inscribir estas tierras en ci registro civil dci
          municipio de Santa Ana, pero hasta la fecha las autoridades no habrIan dado marcha a este
          proceso y ci aicaide municipal de Santa Ana habrIa negado reconocer ci Comité Protierra. Segün
          la informaciOn recibida, ci 5 deJunio de 2004, Hugo Oswaido Gutiérrez Vanegas habrIa sido
          asesinado a goipes de machete, en ci camino de entrada a la aidea La Pita, a! regresar a su hogar
          tras haber participado en un encuentro de formaciOn. Sc informa ademas que en ci mes de abril,
          Hugo Gutiérrez Vanegas habrIa sufrido un atentado contra su vida en ci mismo lugar y segün los
          informes, ci Ministerio Pübiico no habrIa tomado medidas adecuadas para investigar ci incidente.
          Sc teme que ci supuesto asesinato de Hugo Oswaido Gutiérrez Vanegas esté relacionado con su
          actividad de defensa de los derechos de los habitantes de la comunidad de La Pita.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 95
          275. El 15 de Julio de 2004, la Representante Especial, Junto con la Relatora Especial sobre la
          violencia contra la muJer y el Relator Especial sobre la yenta de niflos, la prostituciôn infantil y
          la utilizacion de niflos en la pornografia, enviô un llamamiento urgente en relacion con los hijos
          de Margarita Perez Aguilar y José Elias Juárez, ambos miembros activos del Sindicato de
          Finca Maria Lourdes. El Sindicato de Finca Maria Lourdes vela por los derechos de los
          trabaJadores que habrian sido hostigados por la direccion de la plantacion tras presentar una
          denuncia en 1992 por la despedida ilegal de 47 miembros. D c acuerdo con las informaciones
          recibidas, la hiJa de 15 altos de edad y su hermano de 13 altos de edad, estaban lavando ropa
          cerca de su casa por la tarde del 6 de Julio de 2004 cuando dos hombres con el rostro cubierto por
          pasamontaflas los habrian atacado y arrastrado a punta de pistola a un cafetal cercano, donde los
          habrian atado con su ropa. A continuaciôn, uno de los hombres habria violado a la nifla mientras
          el otro montaba guardia. Los trabaJadores de la plantacion que buscaban a los niflos
          desaparecidos los habrian encontrado aproximadamente una hora despuCs. Los dos niflos habrian
          sido golpeados. El 7 de Julio de 2004, los padres de los niflos habrian presentado una denuncia
          ante el Ministerio Püblico y la Procuraduria de los Derechos Humanos. En su testimonio, la nifla
          habria identificado al hombre que estuvo montando guardia como el director de la Finca Maria
          Lourdes, por su ropa y su comportamiento. El 8 de Julio de 2004, el medico forense local habria
          confirmado que la nifla habria sido violada. Aün no se habria dictado ninguna orden de detencion
          en relacion con este ataque. Se teme que esta violacion pudiera formar parte de las tácticas de
          intimidacion emprendidas por la direccion de la plantacion contra los activistas sindicales que
          habrian emprendido acciones legales contra la plantacion. En marzo de 2004, el director de la
          plantacion habria ofrecido una recompensa a cualquiera de los guardias privados de seguridad de
          la plantacion que violara a una muJer relacionada con el sindicato. El 8 de Julio de 2004, los
          abogados que representan a la Finca Maria Lourdes habrian advertido a otros miembros del
          sindicato de que serian detenidos si implicaban al director de la plantacion en la denuncia de
          violacion.
          276. El 19 de Julio de 2004, la Representante Especial enviô una carta de alegacion en relacion
          con la situaciôn de Erminio Gonzáles secretario general del Sindicato de TrabaJadores de la
          Municipalidad de Esquipulas y secretario general adJunto de la Federacion Nacional de
          Servidores Püblicos. Segün la informacion recibida, el 17 de septiembre 2002, Erminio Gonzáles
          habria sido despedido de su trabaJo como peon de limpieza municipal en la municipalidad de
          Esquipulas de una forma supuestamente ilegal, Junto con otros 41 trabaJadores. Se informa que
          Erminio Gonzáles, Junto con sus compafleros, habria reclamado ante el alcalde el pago del bono
          incentivo que supuestamente nunca habrian recibido. Por tal motivo, habrian presentado una
          demanda al Juzgado de TrabaJo y PrevisiOn de Chiquimula en contra del alcalde por
          incumplimiento de pago del citado bono. Supuestamente, a partir de esa demanda, el alcalde
          habria iniciado una serie de hostigamientos y represalias en contra de los trabaJadores. Segün la
          informaciOn recibida, el 30 de Junio de 2004, Erminio Gonzáles habria recibido una amenaza de
          muerte telefOnica en la que un desconocido habria hecho referencia al despedido ilegal “Te
          recordás de los hechos en Morales, si allá te escapaste, pero, esta noche no escaparás, porque te
          tenemos vigilantes. Te doy 15 dias para que salis de aqui, sino lo haces te quito la vida, vieJo
          serote”. Se teme que esta presunta amenaza de muerte en contra de Erminio Gonzáles pueda
          estar relacionada con el conflicto en torno a su despedida y en particular por su trabaJo de
          sindicalista en el cual vela por los derechos laborales de los trabaJadores municipales.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 96
          277. El 2 de agosto de 2004, la Representante Especial enviô un llamamiento urgente sobre la
          informacion recibida en relacion con la seguridad de Edda Gaviola, directora del Centro para
          Acciôn Legal en Derechos Humanos (CALDH), y de los testigos de la masacre de Plan de
          Sanchez. CALDH actüa como asesorJurIdico de los supervivientes de la masacre de Plan de
          Sanchez del 18 deJulio de 1982, que resulto en la muerte de 268 personas a manos de las fuerzas
          armadas guatemaltecas. El 29 de abril de 2004, el CALDH habrIa presentado el caso de Plan de
          Sanchez ante la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos con la consecuencia de que la Corte
          habrIa condenado al Gobierno guatemalteco por la matanza. Segün la informacion recibida, el 14
          y 15 de Julio, la casa de Edda Gaviola habrIa sido asaltada. Los asaltantes habrIan deJado
          mensaJes intimidatorios y registrado sus documentos personales. El 16 de Julio, una de las
          oficinas de CALDH habrIa sido asaltada y segün la informacion, los asaltantes habrIan robado un
          ordenador portatil y un telefono movil y habrIan registrado documentos que contenlan
          informacion importante sobre el trabaJo del Centro. Tras el asalto a la casa de Edda Gaviola, las
          autoridades habrIan incrementado la protecciôn a una presencia policial permanente de 24 horas
          al dIa. Sin embargo, las oficinas fheron asaltadas. El 17 de Julio de 2004, un testigo de la masacre
          habrIa oldo una motocicleta que se habrIa aproximado a su comunidad y a su casa. D c
          madrugada, se encontrô una caJa que contenla una amenaza de muerte que decla “Pronto seras
          muerto, por ser testigo de la masacre de Plan de Sanchez y por ser responsable del condena del
          estado de Guatemala. Esta es tu querido premio pronto seras asesinado. Feliz Aniversario del 18
          de Julio”. Se teme que estos actos de hostigamiento en contra de Edda Gaviola y la supuesta
          amenaza de muerte en contra de un testigo de la masacre de Plan de Sanchez puedan constituir
          un claro intento de intimidar a los supervivientes y al personal del CALDH para que deJen de
          perseguir a los responsables de las matanzas perpetradas durante los aflos de conflicto en
          Guatemala, incluido el caso de Plan de Sanchez. Se teme también que otros empleados del
          CALDH pueden correr peligro.
          278. El 9 de agosto de 2004, la Representante Especial, Junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociôn y la protecciôn del derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, enviO una carta
          adicional en relaciOn con la seguridad de los miembros del Centro para Acción Legal en
          Derechos ilumanos (CALD11), y de los testigos de la masacre de Plan de Sanchez. D c acuerdo
          con las informaciones recibidas, durante el mes de Julio de 2004, el CALDH y los testigos del
          Plan Sanchez habrIan sido suJetos de una campafla de intimidaciOn y hostigamiento que habrIa
          resultado en el allanamiento de la casa de la directora del CALDH y de las oficinas de la sede. El
          17 deJulio, se habrIa amenazado de muerte a uno de los testigos de la masacre de Plan de
          Sanchez. Se informa también que el dIa 30 de Julio, se habrIan recibido en la sede de CALDH
          llamadas anOnimas que habrIan avisado de la colocaciOn de una bomba en el edificio. Sin
          embargo, estas amenazas no se habrIan cumplido hasta la fecha. Segün la nueva informaciOn
          recibida, el 1 de agosto, una nota escrita a mano habrIa sido deJada en la sede del CALDH de
          Rabinal, BaJa Verapaz, en la cual habrIa amenazado de muerte al mismo testigo de la masacre de
          Plan de Sanchez y al personal del CALDH, en particular al vocero, Miguel Angel Albizures. Se
          teme que estos nuevos actos de hostigamiento en contra del personal del CALDH y esta segunda
          amenaza de muerte en contra del mismo testigo del Plan de Sanchez puedan constituir un
          verdadero intento de intimidar a los supervivientes de la masacre y al personal del CALDH para
          que deJen de exprimirse sobre el masacre y perseguir a los responsables de las matanzas
          perpetradas durante los aflos de conflicto en Guatemala. En particular se teme que la vida del
          testigo y de los empleados del CALDH estén en peligro.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 97
          279. El 6 de septiembre de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial
          sobre la promociOn y la protecciOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y el
          Relator Especial sobre la tortura, enviO una carta de alegaciOn en relaciOn con Gerardo
          Montenegro, Luis Romero, Mynor Tuc, Edwar Morales, Mario Morales, Julio Rodas,
          Francisco Revolorio y Dervin Revolorio, periodistas de varios medios de comunicaciOn en
          Guatemala. Segün la informaciOn recibida, el 31 de agosto de 2004, estos periodistas habrIan
          sido agredidos por agentes de la Policla Nacional Civil (PNC) durante un enfrentamiento armado
          entre campesinos y las fuerzas del orden. Los hechos habrIan tenido lugar durante el desalojo
          forzado de más de mil campesinos de la Finca Nueva Linda, Puerto Champerico, departamento
          de Retalhuleu, al que los campesinos se habrIan opuesto. Se alega que los policlas habrIan
          golpeado a los periodistas, tirandolos al suelo y pateandolos, y habrIan confiscado sus equipos de
          trabajo, incluso cámaras fotograficas y de television. Los agentes de la PNC habrIan agredido los
          periodistas cuando éstos habrIan intentado cubrir el supuesto excesivo uso de fherza con la que la
          policla habrIa actuado en contra de los campesinos. En particular, los periodistas habrIan
          intentado filmar como unos policlas golpeaban a un campesino gravemente herido. Segün se
          informa, varios policlas y campesinos habrIan fallecido durante el desalojo, y otros habrIan
          resultado heridos. Se teme que estos actos de violencia en contra de los periodistas puedan estar
          directamente relacionados con su trabajo de difundir las imágenes de las supuestas violaciones
          de derechos humanos cometidas por los agentes de la PNC en contra de los campesinos.
          280. El 21 de septiembre de 2004, la Representante Especial enviO una carta de alegaciOn en
          relaciOn con la informaciOn sobre la seguridad de Mario Minera, coordinador del Programa de
          Fortalecimiento Municipal y Desarrollo Democrático del Centro para AcciOn Legal en Derechos
          Humanos (CALDH) en la ciudad de Guatemala. Segün la informaciOn recibida, clii de
          septiembre de 2004, hacia las seis y media de la mañana, Mario Minero se habrIa dirigido a la
          ciudad de Solola donde habrIa fijado una reuniOn con Andrea Barrios, miembro del programa de
          derechos de las mujeres del CALDH. Mientras se habrIa dirigido hacia Solola en un vehIculo del
          CALDH, dos hombres presuntamente armados le habrIan encaflonado y amenazado de muerte si
          no obedecla a sus ordenes. Se informa que le habrIan obligado a subirse a un vehIculo y le
          habrIan secuestrado por un periodo de aproximadamente media hora para luego abandonarlo en
          una calle de la zona once. Antes de dejarlo en libertad, los asaltantes habrIan registrado sus
          pertenencias personales y llevado los documentos de CALDH, diciendole que le serlan devueltos
          posteriormente. Se informa tambien que cuando Andrea Barrios habrIa llegado al sitio convenido
          para la reuniOn, el estacionamiento del Restaurante Parador en la calle Roosevelt, ya se lo
          habrIan llevado a Mario Minero y ella habrIa notado la presencia de un vehIculo extraflo y otro
          sin placas que se habrIa quedado allI hasta que ella se habla ido del lugar. Se teme que estos
          actos de hostigamiento y acoso en contra de Mario Minero puedan estar directamente
          relacionados con sus actividades como defensor de derechos humanos y miembro del CALDH.
          Se teme tambien que otros empleados del CALDH pueden corer serio peligro dado que la
          instituciOn ha sido objeto de dos previas comunicaciones con respecto a actos de intimidaciOn e
          hostigamiento durante el pasado mes de agosto. Las previas comunicaciones fueron enviadas al
          Gobierno el 2 de agosto y el 9 de agosto 2004 conjuntamente con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn
          281. El 7 de octubre de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con la Relatora Especial sobre
          los derechos humanos de los migrantes, enviO un llamamiento urgente sobre el allanamiento y
          robo en las oficinas del Centro de Atención al Migrante (CAM), organizaciOn dedicada a
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 98
          ofrecer ayuda humanitaria a la poblacion migrante en Guatemala. Segün las informaciones
          recibidas, el 20 de septiembre de 2004, el equipo de oficina del CAM (ordenadores personales,
          teléfonos, fax y cámaras fotograficas) habrIan sido sustraldo y sus archivos destruidos. La fuente
          afirma que el allanamiento de las oficinas del CAM no serla un hecho aislado, sino que formarla
          parte de una ola de ataques que estarlan sufriendo las organizaciones de derecho humanos en
          Guatemala.
          282. El 19 de octubre de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre
          el derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento urgente en relaciOn con
          la seguridad del personal de Ia Procuradurla de Derechos ilumanos (PDII) de Coatepeque,
          Quetzaltenango, y en particular, el auxiliar Luis Alberto LOpez BatzIn. Segün la informaciOn
          recibida, el 30 dejulio de 2004, la sede de la PDH habrIa sido avisada sobre la existencia de una
          bomba que les obligO a suspender una conferencia de prensa en la que se convocaba a la marcha
          nacional contra la violencia. D c acuerdo con la nueva informaciOn recibida, el 4 de agosto de
          2004, Luis Alberto LOpez BatzIn habrIa sido amenazado de muerte por hombres armados que
          habrIan entrado en la oficina de la PDH. Se informa también que durante los dIas posteriores a
          dicho suceso, habrIa recibido llamadas telefOnicas en la oficina amenazando a todos los
          funcionarios de la PDH y en particular a la familia de Luis Alberto LOpez BatzIn. Se alega que la
          situaciOn se habrIa agravado de tal manera que el personal de la PDH decidiO encerrar la oficina
          para prevenirse de posibles riesgos mayores. Se teme que estos actos de hostigamiento y las
          amenazas de muerte en contra de Luis Alberto LOpez BatzIn y el personal de la PDH puedan
          estar relacionados con ciertos casos actualmente a cargo de la Procuradurla, mismos en los que
          podrIan estar involucrados grupos armados ilegales de la zona.
          283. El 28 de octubre de 2004, la Representante Especial enviO un llamamiento urgente en
          relaciOn con la seguridad de Mario René Lopez Sagastume, representante del Procurador de los
          derechos humanos de Guatemala en la Auxiliatura de Escuintla. Segün las informaciones
          recibidas, el 14 de septiembre de 2004 a las 20.00 horas aproximadamente, el auxiliar
          departamental Mario René LOpez Sagastume habrIa recibido una amenaza anOnima por teléfono
          en la Auxiliatura, en la que le habrIan dicho ‘ya te controlamos'. El 17 y el 19 de septiembre de
          2004, habrIa recibido otras llamadas anOnimas en las que una persona con voz masculina se rela
          y le habrIa amenazado de nuevo. Se informa que durante el mes de octubre de 2004, Sr. LOpez
          Sagastume habrIa recibido varias llamadas anOnimas amenazandole de muerte. D c acuerdo con
          los informes recibidos, el 5 de octubre, hacia las nueve de la tarde, el realizador de la llamada le
          habrIa dicho “ya te tenemos en la lista y te vas a morir, hijo de la gran puta no te metas a
          mierdas”. El 8 de octubre, hacia la misma hora habrIa recibido otra llamada en que le habrIan
          dicho “te vas a morir”, y el dIa siguiente hacia medianoche, le habrIan dicho en una nueva
          llamada que “te vas a morir, deja de meterte a lo que note importa ya conocemos lo que haces
          hijo de puta”. Se informa también que Erwin Barrientos, investigador de la Auxiliatura de
          Esquintla, mientras mantenla una conversaciOn telefOnica con un funcionario de la MisiOn de las
          Naciones Unidas de Guatemala, ambos habrIan entendido sonidos extraflos y los aparatos se
          habrIan quedado mudos indicando tal vez la posibilidad de una intervenciOn telefOnica por
          desconocidos. Se teme que estas amenazas en contra de Mario René LOpez Sagastume y la
          presunta intervenciOn telefOnica de los aparatos de la Auxiliatura en el departamento de
          Escuintla puedan constituir un claro intento de impedir su trabajo de defensor de derechos
          humanos. Se teme también que estos actos de intimidaciOn puedan estar relacionados con ciertos
          casos llevados por la Auxiliatura en contra de agentes y oficiales de la Policla Nacional y otros
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 99
          casos en los que pueden estar involucrados narcotraficantes. Estos hechos han hecho que la
          Instituciôn del Procurador solicite seguridad permanente en la sede de la Auxiliatura, la que esta
          siendo proporcionada por un agente de la Policla Nacional Civil con puesto fijo.
          Comunicaciones recibidas
          284. Por carta fechada el 28 dejunio de 2004, el Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 20 de enero de 2004 con respecto al caso de Bruce
          ilarris, el director de Caza Alianza. El Gobierno informo que el 30 de enero de 2004, el citado
          ciudadano habrIa sido absuelto de las acusaciones en su contra por el Tribunal Duodecimo de
          Sentencia Penal. La denunciante seguirá con las acusaciones de difamacion, calumnia e injuria
          en la Sala Décima de la Corte de Apelaciones.
          285. Por carta fechada el 13 de octubre de 2004, el Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial le 5 de abril de 2004 referente a la situaciôn de
          Thelma Inés Peláez Pinelo de Lam. Segün la Policla Nacional Civil, habrIa brindado medidas
          de seguridad a la afectada, y en la actualidad, lo habrIa asignado seis agentes uniformados de la
          PNC a la casa de su progenitora. En cuanto a la Fiscalla, una investigaciôn habrIa sido iniciada,
          tras de la cual habrIa solicitado al Servicio de Investigaciones CriminalIsticas de la Policla
          Nacional Civil y al Director de Investigaciones CriminalIsticas del Ministerio Püblico la
          designacion de las personas para realizar la investigaciôn respectiva. Asimismo, habrIa solicitado
          al Ministerio de la Defensa informacion sobre los presuntos sindicados, y al Superintendencia de
          Administracion Tributaria-SAT informacion sobre el vehIculo presuntamente utilizado en la
          persecuciôn contra la agraviada. El Gobierno informo igualmente que no estarla necesario que la
          citada ciudadana sea entrevistada por el Servicio de Investigaciones CriminalIsticas de la Policla
          Nacional Civil y que la identificacion del vehIculo notado en la denuncia serla suficiente. El 3 de
          agosto del 2004, la afectada habrIa tenido una entrevista con la Comisiôn Presidencial por medio
          de la cual habrIa manifestado que se le siguen brindando las medidas de seguridad. El Gobierno
          declaro seguir atento al resultado de las investigaciones e informar oportunamente a la
          Representante Especial.
          286. Por carta de fecha del 27 de enero de 2005, el Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 14 dejunio de 2004 relativa a ilugo Oswaldo
          Vanegas Gutiérrez. Segün el Gobierno y la oficial que lleva el caso, the más probable que la
          muerte habrIa sido un crimen pasional, y no por su liderazgo del Comité Protierra de La Pita. El
          Gobierno informo que el caso se encuentra en fase preparatoria de investigaciôn, y por lo
          momento, habrIan realizado los allanamientos respectivos y las declaraciones de los testigos.
          Una entrevista con la hija del difunto confirmo que él habrIa sido victima de varios actos de
          hostigamiento y amenazas de muerte en meses precedente a su asesinato. En la actualidad, la
          orden de aprehension en contra del sospechoso se encuentra pendiente de verificar, por que no
          hay nadie que identifique al sindicado.
          Observaciones
          287. The Special Representative would like to thank the Government for its responses, but
          regrets the absence of replies to several other communications sent. She considers that the
          Government's explanations with regard to the case of Mr. Harris solve the concerns raised in the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 100
          communication. She also welcomes the steps taken to protect the physical safety of Thelma Ines
          Pelaez Pinelo de Lam. In connection with the death of Hugo Oswaldo Vanegas Gutierrez, the
          Special Representative intends to monitor closely the ongoing investigation and requests that the
          Government inform her of its progress. The Special Representative remains deeply concerned at
          the security of human rights defenders carrying out their legitimate work in Guatemala. She
          refers to her main of report (E/CN.4/2005/101) for a detailed analysis of the trends in the
          situation of human rights defenders in Guatemala and for her observations.
          ilaiti
          Communications envoyées
          288. Le 13 fevrier 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec la Presidente-
          Rapporteur du groupe de travail sur la detention arbitraire, a envoye une lettre d'allegation
          concernant l'arrestation presumee de Kettly Julien, coordinatrice de l'Institut mobile
          d'education democratique (IMED), partenaire de HaIti solidarite internationale (HSI) travaillant
          a la prise en charge de victimes de violence de tous bords et a la documentation de leur cas.
          Selon les informations reçues, Kettly Julien aurait etc arrétee le 6 fevrier 2004 vers midi alors
          qu'elle etait en reunion avec quatre autres personnes. Le mandat d'arrêt pour << complot contre la
          sürete de l'Etat>> n'aurait etc redige qu'â posteriori sous la pression de membres de la Brigade
          d'intervention rapide. Kettly Julien serait actuellement detenue a la police <> de Port-
          au-Prince. Des craintes ont etc exprimees que l'arrestation de Kettly Julien n'ait pour but de faire
          obstruction a ses activites en faveur des droits de l'homme, en particulier l'assistance aux
          victimes de violence, la distribution de medicaments et la documentation de cas de violations
          presumees.
          289. Le 4 aoüt 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special sur
          la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, a envoye un appel
          urgent concernant M. Jean-Claude Bajeux et Mme Sylvie Bajeux, responsables du Centre
          iecumenique des droits de l'homme (CEDH), une organisation de defense des droits de l'homme
          basee a Port-au-Prince, en HaIti. Un appel urgent a etc envoye le 22 juillet 2002 par la
          Representante speciale du Secretaire general sur la situation des defenseurs des droits de
          l'homme, le Rapporteur special sur la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et
          d'expression et la Rapporteuse speciale sur les executions sommaires, arbitraires et
          extrajudiciaires. Selon les informations reçues, vers 3 heures, dans la nuit du 1 er au 2 aoüt, des
          hommes armes auraient tire a deux reprises sur le domicile de M. et Mme Bajeux. Prevenue a
          3 h 20, la police scientifique ne serait venue constater les faits que vers 10 heures du matin.
          L'attaque visant les responsables du CEDH intervient aprés le cinquiême Forum pour la reforme
          de lajustice penale dont M. Jean-Claude Bajeux est le porte-parole et alors qu'une delegation de
          la FIDH, qui aurait particuliêrement beneficie de l'aide du CEDH dans l'organisation de sa
          mission, est actuellement presente en HaIti. Des craintes ont etc exprimees que cette attaque ne
          soit en relation avec les activites de defense des droits de l'homme et en particulier leur
          participation active au Forum pour la reforme de lajustice penale. Ces craintes sont d'autant plus
          vives que M. et Mme Bajeux auraient deja fait l'objet d'attaques et de menaces en raison de leur
          action en faveur des droits de l'homme en HaIti. En particulier, en octobre 2003, ils auraient etc
          attaques par des hommes armes au moment oü ils rentraient chez eux et, en juillet 2002, leur
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 101
          residence aurait ete prise d'assaut par des hommes qui, sous la menace d'armes de poing,
          auraient sequestre Mme Sylvie Bajeux et quatre de leurs employes presents.
          290. Le 22 octobre 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special
          sur la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, le Rapporteur
          special sur l'independance des juges et des avocats et le Rapporteur special sur les executions
          extrajudiciaires, sommaires ou arbitraires, a envoye un appel urgent concernant la situation de
          Rénan ilédouville, avocat et secretaire general du Comite des avocats pour le respect des
          libertes individuelles (CARLI), et de Mario Joseph, avocat travaillant pour le Bureau des avocats
          internationaux. Renan Hedouville et Mario Joseph travailleraient a la defense de personnes dont
          les droits fondamentaux auraient etc violes par l'armee haltienne entre 1991 et 1994, et
          notamment en faveur des familles des victimes du massacre de Raboteau en avril 1994. En aoüt
          2004, le CARLI aurait notamment proteste contre l'acquittement d'officiels de l'armee qui
          auraient etc impliques dans le meurtre en septembre 1993 d'Antoine Izmery. Mario Joseph
          representerait par ailleurs des partisans notoires du parti de l'ex-president Aristide, le parti
          Famille Lavalas, qui auraient recemment etc emprisonnes sans charge. D'aprês les informations
          reçues, tous deux seraient actuellement menaces de mort s'ils ne cessent leurs activites de
          defense des droits de l'homme et s'ils persistent a accuser d'anciens officiers de l'armee.
          D'autres membres du CARLI, parmi lesquels Marie Nadia Charles, directrice executive,
          Morisseau Jean Rony, avocat, et Carline Seide, qui avait reçu l'aide de l'organisation, seraient
          contraints de vivre dans la clandestinite en raison du harcélement dont ils feraient l'objet.
          Observations
          291. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communications.
          ilonduras
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          292. El 19 de abril de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociôn y la protecciôn del derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, el Relator
          Especial sobre la tortura y la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o
          arbitrarias, enviO un llamamiento urgente en relaciOn con Sara Sauceda Flores, cuyo hijo,
          Darwin Roberto Sauceda Flores, habrIa sido detenido y sometido a malos tratos en varias
          ocasiones, amenazado de muerte y ejecutado sumariamente el 17 de febrero de 2002 en el barrio
          de Colonia La Trinidad, en ComayagUela en la ciudad de Tegucigalpa. El caso de Darwin
          Roberto Sauceda Flores fue el objeto de una comunicaciOn el 8 de abril de 2004 por el Relator
          Especial sobre la tortura. D c acuerdo con la nueva informaciOn recibida, Sara Sauceda Flores
          habrIa denunciado a dos agentes a los que acusa de ser responsables del homicidio de su hijo.
          Ademas habrIa criticado abiertamente a las autoridades por no llevar a cabo una investigaciOn
          adecuada sobre el caso de su hijo. Dicho caso habrIa sido asignado al Juzgado de Letras Segundo
          de lo Criminal para que se iniciaran procedimientos judiciales. Desde que habrIa interpuesto su
          denuncia, Sara Sauceda Flores habrIa sido repetidamente intimidada. El 12 de abril de 2004,
          habrIa recibido una amenaza de muerte anOnima en su lugar de trabajo, en la ciudad de
          Tegucigalpa. Segün indican los informes, el 17 de marzo de 2004, cuando Sara Sauceda Flores
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 102
          se dirigia a su trabajo, ci taxi en ci que viajaba habria sido goipeado por un automovii en ci que
          viajaban dos personas. Sara Sauceda Fiores habria reconocido a! pasajero como ci hombre que
          anteriormente la habria acosado desde otro automovii. Ademas, segün la informacion recibida,
          en enero de 2004, Sara Sauceda Fiores habrla encontrado tres casquililos de bala en su taquilila de
          su lugar de trabajo. Habria denunciado todas las amenazas y los actos de intimidacion a!
          Ministerio de Seguridad Pübiica de Honduras.
          293. El 8 de junio de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con ci Relator Especial sobre ci
          derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn y ci Relator Especial sobre la situaciOn de los
          derechos humanos y las libertades fhndamentaies de los indigenas, enviO un ilamamiento urgente
          en relaciOn con José Idalecio Murillo, lider de la Coordinadora Regional de Resistencia Popular
          (CRRP), una organizaciOn de defensa de los derechos humanos y dci medio ambiente basada en
          ci departamento de Intibuca, y varios activistas dci Consejo Civico de Organizaciones Jndigenas
          Populares (COPINIH). Dc acuerdo con las informaciones recibidas, ci 27 de mayo de 2004,
          cuatro desconocidos habrian disparado contra la casa de José Idaiecio Murillo. Los informes
          indican que ci ilder de la CRRP habria denunciado este caso ante la Fiscaila y la DirecciOn
          General de InvestigaciOn Criminal (DGIC). Otros miembros dci CRRP también habrian sido
          amenazados de muerte durante las üitimas semanas. Sc teme que estas amenazas estén
          vinculadas con la campafla realizada por ci CRRP contra la expiotaciOn maderera en la zonal
          central dci pals y contra la presunta corrupciOn dci gobierno local. Sc informa ademas que varios
          activistas dci COPINH, una de las organizaciones más importantes dci CRRP, habrian sido
          agredidos por sus esfherzos por proteger ci entorno natural de la zona de expiotaciOn por parte de
          las empresas madereras. El 19 de mayo de 2004, unos activistas dci COPIINH habrian bioqucado
          camiones y confiscado la madera que transportaban hasta ci departamento de La Paz. El 20 de
          mayo de 2004, un hombre habria entrado en las oficinas dci COPIINH y habria amenazado a las
          personas presentes. Habria preguntado “tcon qué derecho me robaron mi madera?” Al salir,
          habria gritado “a los tres los voy a matar”. El 29 de mayo de 2004, una bala de 9mm habria sido
          encontrada en la puerta de entrada dci COPINIH. Estos hechos habrian sido denunciados ante la
          DGIC, ci Comisionado Nacional de Derechos Humanos (CONADEH) y la Fiscaila, pero se teme
          que la Fiscaila, segün los informes, habria rechazado la denuncia. Las amenazas contra activistas
          dci COPINIH ya fueron objeto de un ilamamiento urgente enviado por la Relatora Especial sobre
          ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, ci Relator Especial sobre la tortura, la
          Representante Especial, ci Relator Especial sobre la independencia de magistrados y abogados y
          ci Relator Especial sobre la situaciOn de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentaics de
          los indigenas ci 8 de octubre de 2003.
          294. El 11 de junio de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con ci Relator Especial sobre
          ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, enviO un ilamamiento urgente sobre la
          situaciOn de Andrés Pavón, presidente dci Comité para la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos en
          Honduras (CODEH), organizaciOn independiente de derechos humanos. Segün la informaciOn
          recibida, Andrés PavOn habria acusado a! Gobierno de violaciOn de derechos humanos,
          negligencia y negaciOn de justicia a raiz de la muerte de más de 100 personas, ocurrida durante
          un incendio en la prisiOn de San Pedro Sula ci 17 de mayo de 2004. Segün los informes, durante
          ci incendio, se habria mantenido a los jOvenes encerrados adentro y no se ics habria permitido
          escapar. En este contexto y segün la informaciOn recibida, desde finales de mayo 2004 Andrés
          PavOn habr la recibido cuatro ilamadas telefOnicas amenazadoras, dos en su teléfono mOvil y dos
          en ci teléfono de su oficina en las cuales ci autor ic habr la dicho que iba a “acabar con los
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 103
          defensores de mareros.” También se informa que durante la ültima semana de mayo, se habria
          visto un automOvil con los cristales tintados delante de la casa en la que Andrés PavOn pasa los
          fines de semana, a unos 45 minutos de Tegucigalpa. Se informa ademas que Andrés PavOn
          habria sido atacado verbalmente en la television y la radio. Durante un programa de radio
          nacional, tanto un miembro del personal de la radio como ciudadanos comunes habrian dicho
          que Andrés PavOn deberia recibir un tiro por “defender a delincuentes” y en un programa de la
          television nacional habrian sugerido que se matara al hijo de Andrés PavOn o a otro familiar
          cercano para ver si segula con su trabajo. Frente a esta situaciOn, el 29 de mayo Andrés PavOn
          habria pedido medidas cautelares a la ComisiOn Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Se teme
          que estas amenazas contra Andrés PavOn estén relacionados con su actividad de derechos
          humanos, y en particular la de pedir una investigaciOn por la muerte de más de 100 reclusos
          durante el incendio en la prisiOn de San Pedro Sula.
          295. El 12 de agosto de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO una carta de alegaciOn sobre varios
          activistas del Consejo CIvico de Organizaciones IndIgenas Populares (COPIN11), basado en
          el departamento de Intibuca. Durante el mes de mayo de 2004, habrian sido agredidos por sus
          esfuerzos por proteger el entorno natural de la zona de explotaciOn por parte de las empresas
          madereras. Ademas se informe que el 27 de mayo de 2004, cuatro desconocidos habrian
          disparado en contra de la casa de José Idalecio Murillo, lider de la CRRP. Habria denunciado
          este caso ante la Fiscalia y la DGIC. Otros miembros del CRRP también habrian sido
          amenazados de muerte. Se teme que estas amenazas estén vinculadas con la campafla realizada
          por el CRRP contra la explotaciOn maderera en la zonal central del pals y contra la presunta
          corrupciOn del gobierno local.
          296. El 4 de noviembre de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial
          sobre la tortura, enviO un llamamiento urgente en relaciOn con el Centro de Prevención,
          Tratamiento y Rehabilitación de las Victimas de Ia Tortura y sus Familiares (CPTRT),
          organizaciOn no gubernamental de Honduras. Segün las alegaciones recibidas el 26 y el 27 de
          octubre de 2004, las oficinas del CPTRT fueron destruidas. Los archivos y papeles fueron
          revueltos, amenazas de muerte contra el personal inscritas en las paredes, y varios libros en
          forma de cruz fueron colocados en el piso de la oficina del director. Después de un incidente
          similar en mayo de 2003, la organizaciOn tuvo que cambiarse a sus locales actuales. Segün los
          informes, el ataque está relacionado con el apoyo de las organizaciones a una campafla reciente
          sobre la independencia del sistema judicial del Ministerio de Seguridad.
          Comunicaciones recibidas
          297. Por carta fechada el 28 de junio de 2004, el Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 19 de abril de 2004 con informaciOn referente a la
          muerte de Darwin Roberto Sauceda Flores. El Gobierno informO que la unidad especial sobre
          la muerte de menores habria iniciado una investigaciOn, a través de la cual se confirmO que los
          presuntos responsables forman parte de los integrantes de la pandilla “MS” que habrian operado
          en la Colonia Bella Vista de Comayaguela. No obstante, el caso no se habria presentado ante la
          Fiscalia del Ministerio Publico por falta de testigos.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 i/Add. 1
          Page 104
          298. Por carta fechada ci 30 de junio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ciii de junio de 2004 con respecto a la seguridad de
          Andrés Pavón y su familia. El Gobierno, conforme con las recomendaciones de la Comisiôn
          Interamericana de los Derechos Humanos, habrIa otorgado varias medidas cautelares para la
          seguridad de Andres Pavôn y su familia, entre elias, un patruilaje de protecciôn, un teléfono
          celular mediante ci cual podrIa comunicar con ci personal de la Policla Nacional. El Gobierno
          informo que la Ministerla de Seguridad está conciuyendo unas investigaciones, los resuitados de
          que serán remitidas a la mayor brevedad posibie.
          299. Por carta fechada ci 18 de octubre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 12 de agosto de 2004 referente a las varias
          denuncias de miembros dci Consejo CIvico de Organizaciones IndIgenas Populares (COPINIH).
          El Gobierno confirmo que los afectados habrIan presentado unas denuncias ante ci Ministerio
          Pübiico e informo que ci procedimiento investigativo se encuentra en etapa preliminar y
          continuará con ci objetivo de determinar la verdad sobre las denuncias presentadas. Con respecto
          a la denuncia interpuesta por ci Sr. Murillo MejIa, esta fue totaimente investigada y remitida al
          Ministerio Pübiico. Sin embargo ci ofendido habrIa desautorizado a la Fiscaila General para que
          ejercitara la acciôn penal pübiica por tratarse de un delito de orden pübiico a instancia, y como
          consecuencia se ordeno ci archivo administrativo dci caso.
          Observaciones
          300. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its responses. She welcomes the
          positive steps taken by the Government. In the case of Darwin Roberto Sauceda Fiores, she
          welcomes the initiating of an investigation but remains concerned by the fact that the absence of
          witnesses resulted in no charges being pressed. She commends the Government for complying
          with the request for precautionary measures by the Interamerican Commission on Human Rights
          in the case of Andrés Pavôn and looks forward to being informed about the findings of the
          investigation. Despite these positive developments, the Special Representative remains
          concerned by the level of impunity enjoyed by the perpetrators of these crimes.
          India
          Communications sent
          301. On 3 February 2004, the Special Representative sent a letter of allegation about the
          alleged killing of Santa and Mahesh Kant, two land rights activists in India. According to the
          information received, on 24January 2004 at 7 p.m., Santa and Mahesh Kant were allegedly killed
          as they were travelling by bike from Shabdo village to the Fatehpur Block Resource Centre. It is
          reported that they were stopped by a group of heavily armed men, suspected to be members of a
          local gang, and shot at point blank range. Santa reportedly died immediately and Mahesh died
          later from the gunshot wound. According to the information received, Santa and Mahesh Kant
          had been working with the local community of Shabdo village to achieve sustainable and
          equitable use of land resources. Their work reportedly involved reclaiming common land that
          had been taken by powerful gangs. Concerns have been expressed that these killings may be in
          reprisal for their work in the defence of land rights. Concerns are heightened by reports that the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 105
          local mafia had allegedly already threatened both activists, who had reportedly refused to give up
          their work.
          302. On 18 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          violence against women and the Special Rapporteur on the sale of children, child prostitution and
          child pornography, transmitted an urgent appeal regarding the situation of Kailash Satyarthi, an
          activist for the abolition of child labour and chairperson of Global March Against Child Labour
          and Global Campaign for Education. According to the information received, on 15 June 2004,
          Kailash Satyarthi, accompanied by four parents who claimed that their daughters were being
          held in bondage in the Great Roman Circus in Colonel Tehsil, Gonda district in Uttar Pradesh,
          met the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, the Police Superintendent and media representatives in order
          to conduct a rescue operation at the circus. According to information received, the circus uses
          these children as well as many other minor girls for labour and keeps them in bondage. It is
          reported that in the presence of the Magistrate and the Police Superintendent, the owner of the
          circus threatened Kailash Satyarthi at gunpoint, and with other members of the circus, attacked
          him and the parents with iron rods and knives. They reportedly managed to escape, despite
          attempts by the circus owner and the members of the local administration to block the exit.
          Kailash Satyarthi was reportedly taken to hospital in Lucknow, where he was treated for head
          injuries and is reported to be in a stable condition. It is reported that despite confirmation from
          the administration of Uttar Pradesh that they would undertake action to release the children from
          the circus and despite the presence of members of this administration during the rescue
          operation, no action has been taken. Concern is expressed that Kailash Satyarthi has been
          targeted for his work to defend children's rights and promote the abolition of child labour.
          303. On 15 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people and the Special
          Rapporteur on torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Umakanta Meitei, an indigenous and
          human rights defender from Manipur. According to the allegations received, on 9 September
          2004 at approximately 2.30 p.m., he was arrested without charge by a Manipur police commando
          of the Central Reserve Police Force, Indian Reserve Battalion, as he was leaving his residence.
          After being threatened with a gun and blindfolded, he was beaten and taken to jail. He suffered
          injuries to his head, legs and chest. Umakanta Meitei was reportedly released the same day at
          approximately 7.30 p.m. In view of the allegations of detention and ill-treatment, concern is
          expressed that he was targeted for his work as a human rights defender and may be at risk of
          torture or other forms of ill-treatment.
          304. On 17 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a letter of
          allegation regarding members of the Jangipara branch of the Association for Protection of
          Democratic Rights (APDR), a human rights organization in West Bengal working for the
          promotion of democratic rights. According to the information received, on 21 August 2004,
          human rights defenders from the APDR who had assembled for a peaceful street meeting in
          Hooghly to protest alleged State repression, were reportedly attacked at approximately 4.40 p.m.
          by 50 or 60 local members of the Communist Party of India (CPIM). It is alleged that they the
          human rights defenders were punched, beaten with poles, kicked and verbally abused. Sources
          indicate that although a number of people participating in the meeting allegedly rushed to a
          police station to seek help, none of the police officers posted nearby came to stop the violence or
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 106
          to arrest the perpetrators. It is reported that Sri Amitadyuti Kumar, vice-president of APDR, and
          Gautam Munshi, treasurer of the Hooghly District Committee, were among the alleged victims
          who were later treated in Walsh Hospital, Srirampur. Concern has been expressed that the
          alleged attack on members of the APDR was made to prevent their protest against human rights
          violations reportedly carried out by the State.
          Communications received
          305. By letter dated 23 September 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by
          the Special Representative on 15 September 2004 regarding an allegation concerning Umakanta
          Meitei. The Government of India wished to express its disagreement with the term “indigenous”
          human rights defender, which it believes suggests that the Government recognizes a separate
          category of its citizens as “indigenous” people. Similarly, the Government requested an
          elaboration of the criteria on which an individual is termed as a “human rights defender”. The
          Government promised to make every effort to investigate the allegations on receipt of the
          necessary clarifications.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          306. By letter dated 24 February 2004, the Government replied to an urgent appeal sent jointly
          with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions on 15 September
          2003 concerning Teesta Setalvad, Rais Khan Azeezkhan Pathan and Suhel Tirmizi. The
          Government informed that the State Government of Gujarat has provided round-the-clock police
          protection for Mr. Pathan with effect from 16 September 2003. When Mr. Pathan visits other
          parts of the State, concerned authorities will arrange for his protection, provided that he gives
          details of his programme in advance. According to the Government, round-the-clock police
          protection has been provided for Mr. Tirmizi. On 16 September 2003, Mrs. Setalvad was
          requested, to inform the authorities about her programme during the visit to Ahmedabad well in
          advance, so that they may arrange for suitable police protection.
          307. By letter dated 7 July 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 29 July
          2003. The Government informed that, on 7 July 2003, Mr. Ningthoujam Mangoljao, managed to
          escape from the police. On 8 July 2003, he was found dead. A team of doctors conducted a post-
          mortem, which indicated injuries that Mr. Mangaljao sustained while escaping. According to the
          Government, the post-mortem did not suggest any torture by the police. The Government stated
          that, on 12 July 2003, Dr. Lamabam Pardesi, gave a press statement concerning the alleged
          killing of Mr. Mangaljo. Hence he was summoned to appear at the Lamphel Police Station on 13
          July 2003 to establish whether he could give any factual evidence not known to the investigating
          officer. According to the Government, Dr. Pardesi could not provide any material evidence to
          substantiate the allegations of custodial killing. For similar reasons as mentioned above, the
          Lamphel Police Station also summoned Dr. Debabrata Roy Laifungbam on 14 July 2003. The
          Government stated that he was summoned under U/s 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code, not
          U/s 166 as referred to in the communication sent by the Special Representative. Dr. Laifhngbam
          had at the time not responded to the summons. According to the Government, the summons were
          not related to the press statement by Dr. Laifhngbam as referred to in the communication sent.
          The Government stated that the summons issued by the police U/s 160 of the Criminal Procedure
          Code for Dr. Pardesi and Dr. Laifhngbam to appear before the 0/C Lamphel Police Station for
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 107
          examination as witnesses in the ease was a natural step and could not be construed as a violation
          of their human rights.
          Observations
          308. The Special Representative thanks the Government for the responses received and hopes
          remaining ones will be forthcoming. In the case of Umakanta Meitei, a follow-up to the
          response was being drafted at the time of the report. She hopes dialogue can be pursued in
          respect to these issues. She wishes to reiterate her concerns, in particular, the allegations of ill-
          treatment and possible torture of human rights defenders by various members of the police force.
          She also notes with regret the level of impunity enjoyed by the suspected perpetrators of these
          cnmes.
          Indonesia
          Communications sent
          309. On 27 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning ilusni Abdullah, age 26, and
          Mahyyeddin, age 23, members of the People's Crisis Centre (PCC), an organization which
          provides humanitarian assistance to internally displaced persons in Nanggrose Acre Darussalam
          province, who are reportedly being detained by police in Nanggrose Acre Darussalam.
          According to the information received, on 15 December 2003, Husni Abdullah was arrested by
          members of the North Aceh District Military Command (Kodim 0103) at the PCC Office in
          Meunasah Mesjid Cunda Village. At the time of his arrest, Husin Abdullah was reportedly
          beaten and interrogated by soldiers and his office searched. He was allegedly initially held in
          Kodim 0103 and transferred around 3 January 2004 to North Aceh District Police Station
          (Kapolres), where he has reportedly been denied access to his family or lawyers. He has
          reportedly lost some teeth as a result of being beaten with rifle butts while in detention.
          According to the information received, Mahyeddin was also arrested by officers from Kodim
          0103 in Sawang Kupala Cunda village on 15 December 2003. He was reportedly also held at
          Kodim 0103 before being transferred to Lhokeseumawe prison, where he is believed to have no
          access to his family and only limited contact with his lawyers. It is alleged that he has been
          beaten while in custody. Both men have allegedly been accused by the police of being members
          of the Free Aceh Movement. However, fear has been expressed that Husni Abdullah and
          Mahyyeddin may have been targeted for their human rights work. Concern has been expressed
          that they may be at risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment in view of their reportedly
          denied or restricted access to their lawyers and relatives and in view of allegations according to
          which they have been beaten while in custody.
          310. On 25 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Masrizal, Iwan Irama
          Putra, a human rights defender age 27, ilarlina, a student and human rights defender aged 2,
          Nova Rahayu, a student and human rights defender age 23, Nursida, a student and human rights
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 108
          defender age 22, and Syafruddin, a human rights defender. According to information received,
          on 19 February 2004, Police Mobile Brigade (Brimob) officers arrested Masrizal at his home in
          the Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam provincial capital, Banda Aceh, reportedly on suspicion of being
          a member of the armed opposition Free Aceh Movement (GAM). He is believed to be held in
          Banda Aceh Regional Police Station. On 22 February, at around 12.30 p.m., Iwan Irama Putra
          was reportedly arrested by Brimob at a friend's home in Banda Aceh, and has not been seen
          since. He is a member of the Network of Linge Students (IMPEL), based in Central Aceh
          District, whose work has included providing assistance to internally displaced people. He was an
          acquaintance of Masrizal, and the two arrests are believed to be linked. Early on 23 February,
          police allegedly made a series of raids on the homes of members of the Acehnese Democratic
          Women's Organization (ORPAD), which carries out activities for women's education and
          empowerment in Banda Aceh. They reportedly detained Harlina, a member of IMPEL and
          ORPAD, at around 4 a.m. at her home. She was reportedly beaten before being taken away in a
          Kijang minivan. She was reportedly last seen approximately two hours later, when police took
          her with them to the house of another activist, who was not at home at the time. On the same
          date, Nursida and Nova Rahayu, both members of ORPAD, were reportedly arrested at Nursida's
          home at around 6 a.m. They were reportedly taken away in two trucks. It is reported that the
          police and the military have denied having any information on the three women's whereabouts.
          At around 5 a.m. the same day, police reportedly arrived at the student dormitory looking for
          Syafruddin, an activist with the educational and human rights organization Student Solidarity for
          the People (SMUR). They did not find him, but reportedly questioned and beat other residents of
          the dormitory. Syafruddin returned to the dormitory a few hours later and was reportedly beaten
          before being taken away by the police.
          311. On 2 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on the
          situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Bestari Raden, a 55-
          year-old environmental and pro-democracy activist. On 23 March, he was allegedly arrested by
          soldiers from the Aceh Tenggara District Military Command (Kodim 0108) in Lawe Pakam
          Village, Babul Makmur Subdistrict, Aceh Tenggara District, Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam
          Province. It is alleged he is now held in Kodim 0108 and is undergoing intensive interrogation.
          Bestari Raden is reportedly the coordinator of the Environmental Caucus (Kaukus Lingkungan),
          whose activities include advocacy and environmental and human rights education. He is
          reportedly a member of the Indigenous People's Alliance of the Archipelago (Aliansi
          Masyarakat Adat Nusantara/AMAN), which campaigns for the rights of indigenous peoples. It is
          reported that Bestari Raden was previously accused of being a leader of GAM. In view of past
          allegations of torture and ill-treatment in military custody, concern is expressed that Bestari
          Raden may be at risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment.
          312. On 4 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the order of expulsion delivered to Sidney Jones and Francesca Lawe-
          Davies, respectively Southeast-Asia director and analyst at the Jakarta office of the International
          Crisis Group (ICG), on 1 June 2004. According to information received, Sidney Jones and
          Francesca Lawe-Davies were ordered to leave Indonesia “immediately” because they were in
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 109
          violation of immigration laws. The order allegedly follows public statements by the head of the
          National Intelligence Agency, General Hendropriyono, that ICG reports were “not all true”, and
          “damage the country's image”. It is reported that since establishing its Jakarta office in 2000,
          ICG has published 37 reports and briefing papers on conflict-related issues, including Aceh,
          Papua, the Jemaah Islamiyah terrorist movement, communal violence and the transition from
          military to civilian rule. ICG has allegedly regularly criticized the Indonesian authorities about
          their response to the ongoing activity of the militant group Jemaah Islamiyah, as well as the
          Government's responsibility for human rights violations during armed conflicts in the provinces
          of Aceh and Papua. It is feared that the decision to expel Sidney Jones and Francesca Lawe-
          Davies is directly related, inter alia, to their reports on alleged human rights violations. The
          decision also raises concerns about the alleged country's measures against critical observers
          ahead of the presidential election on 5 July. In this respect, it is reported that the Government has
          announced that it has placed 20 international and local NGOs on a “watch list” as threats to the
          country's secunty.
          313. On 5 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a follow-up letter of allegation concerning Mr.
          Muhammad Nazar, leader of the Aceh Information Referendum Centre (Sentral Informasi
          Referendum untuk Aceh, SIRA). According to new information received, he was beaten in the
          face and kicked in the chest on 19 February 2004 while being questioned by police intelligence
          at the Aceh Regional Police Station (Markas Kepolisian Daerah, Mapolda). He was subsequently
          denied access to his lawyers and relatives. Dewi Meuthia, his wife, was reportedly questioned
          for six hours at the same police station on 27 February 2004 about her campaign to release
          Muhammad Nazar and her association with Amnesty International.
          314. On 16 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the question of torture, sent a letter of allegation concerning Mr. Muzakir Abdullah, a 21-year-
          old volunteer for Kontras Aceh, the Commission for Involuntary Disappearances and Victims of
          Violence in Aceh. He was arrested at his house in Batee Leusong, Seumirah village, Nisam
          District of North Aceh, on 16 June 2004 by a group of military personnel. His dead body was
          reportedly found the next day. It is alleged that his neck was scratched and that he presented
          wounds all over his body, reported to be the result of torture.
          315. On 16 August 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning
          Pemraka (Pemuda Mahasiswa Rakyat ke Acheh; Acheh ilumanitarian Volunteer
          Association) in Laksana, Banda Aceh. Pemraka is a human rights NGO which assists IDPs and
          the victims of the conflict in Aceh. According to the information received, on 7 August 2004,
          Banda Aceh police allegedly raided the Pemraka office located at 2 Kongkol Street, Laksana,
          arresting two Pemraka aid workers, Asnawi and Fahrizal, along with 11 other individuals from
          Banda Aceh who were in the office at the time. All were reportedly arrested on the grounds of
          alleged involvement with GAM and harbouring GAM members. It is reported that the majority
          of the individuals arrested were victims of war who were receiving medical attention at the
          general hospital in Aceh. Reports indicate that seven of the civilians were later released due to
          lack of evidence, however the remaining six individuals from Banda Aceh and the two Pemraka
          aid workers are still being held for questioning about their alleged involvement with GAM. It
          was also reported that on 6 August, following an armed contact between Indonesian troops and
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 110
          GAM in Samalanga subdistrict, Fachrurazi, an Pemraka activist and student of Iskandar Thani
          College, was arrested by the Brimob of Lyand while he was going to the mountains to rescue a
          wounded refugee and take him to the nearest local health facility. He has been missing since
          then. Concerns have been expressed that the alleged disappearance of Fachrurazi as well as the
          arrests of the Pemraka aid workers, Asnawi and Fahrizal, along with the other eleven civilians
          have been carried out in an attempt to hinder the human rights activities carried out by the
          organization.
          316. On 3 December 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the independence of judges and lawyers, sent an urgent appeal concerning Mr. Munir, a
          human rights lawyer, Mrs. Suciwati, his wife, and relatives of Mr. Munir living in Malang, East
          Java. As a lawyer, Mr. Munir represented numerous alleged human rights victims, and he also
          co-founded the Commission for Disappeared Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras), a
          group that has allegedly exposed the abduction by the military of several human rights activists
          in Jakarta. According to the information received, on 7 September 2004, Mr. Munir died during a
          flight from Singapore, two hours before arriving at Amsterdam. Mr. Munir was allegedly on his
          way to the Netherlands to take part in a course on international human rights law at the
          University of Utrecht. Reportedly, the Netherlands Forensic Institute performed an autopsy, and
          on 11 November 2004 the Government of the Netherlands transmitted a copy of the forensic
          report to Indonesia's Foreign Ministry. The report allegedly indicates that Mr. Munir died from
          excessive levels of arsenic in his body, in particular in his stomach. Furthermore, the report
          allegedly states that the concentration and location of the arsenic indicates that it had been
          slipped into the food or drink he had consumed. The information received indicates that, as of 20
          November 2004, Mr. Munir's family had not received a copy of the report from the Government
          of Indonesia. The Indonesian police have allegedly started an investigation into Mr. Munir's
          death. The information received further indicates that Mrs. Suciwati received a death threat after
          she demanded, together with relatives of Mr. Munir, an impartial and thorough investigation into
          his death. On 20 November 2004, Mrs. Suciwati reportedly received a brown box through the
          post at her home in Bekasi, West Java. It is alleged that the box was filled with a decapitated and
          dismembered chicken, along with a note stating: “Be careful!! !!! Do not connect the TNT
          [ Indonesian military] to the death of Munir. Do you want to end up like this?” Reportedly, she
          immediately contacted the police, who arrived at her house four hours later. It is also reported
          that on 9 September 2004, a letter was received by relatives of Mr. Munir in Malang, East Java.
          The letter allegedly “congratulated” them with his death, stating that Mr. Munir was a traitor and
          expressing wishes that the spirits of the country's heroes pardoned him. Concern is expressed
          that the death of Mr. Munir may be a result of his activities to defend human rights, in particular
          his work as a lawyer and in connection with his activities for the Commission for Disappeared
          Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras). Furthermore, concern is expressed that the alleged
          death threat received by Mrs. Suciwati and the intimidation of relatives of Mr. Munir may be
          attempts to prevent an impartial and thorough investigation into his death.
          Communications received
          317. By letter dated 17 June 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 2 April
          2004. The Government confirmed the arrest of Bestari Raden, and stated among other reasons,
          it was related to his role in masterminding a rally which degenerated into violence, culminating
          in the torching of a timber factory. It fhrther informed that Mr. Raden was suspected of
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 111
          involvement in a number of serious crimes since 1999, including murder, instigation of violence
          aimed at separatism, subversive activities against the State, threats against public security, arson,
          kidnapping, and damage to public property. A thorough inquiry into Mr. Raden's activities was
          being conducted responsibly. The Government stated that all the necessary measures were being
          taken to ensure the full protection of his rights, and that he had been given due process of law
          throughout the duration of his detention. According to the reply, allegations of torture and ill-
          treatment were therefore unfounded. Mr. Raden was at the time in the custody of the South Aceh
          police headquarters, where he was transferred after one month in the custody of the local Aceh
          Tenggara district police station following his arrest. The Government stressed that Mr. Raden
          would on no account be detained for any of the normal activities associated with overt and
          peaceful support for environmental or democratic causes.
          318. By letter dated 25 June 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 4 June
          2004. The Government informed that no such thing as an expulsion order was ever issued against
          Sidney Jones. Mrs. Jones' resident's visa expired on 10 June 2004, and the question of whether
          the Government would extend or not extend the visa was a routine procedure. The Government
          stated that it was a gross exaggeration to equate the Government decision with an attempt to
          bridle freedom of speech or restrict civil liberties. It also stated that allegations that the
          Government reacted negatively to the reports by so-called “critical observers” on the
          forthcoming president election were grossly exaggerated, and that they intended to make too
          much out of an administrative decision.
          Observations
          319. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies to her communications.
          She expresses her hope that replies to her remaining communications will be forthcoming. She
          reaffirms her grave concerns about the reported attacks, threats and detention of human rights
          defenders in context of the conflict in Aceh. The Special Representative encourages the
          Government to review favourably her follow-up request sent on 7 December 2004 for an
          invitation to conduct an official visit to the country.
          Iran (Islamic Republic of)
          Communications sent
          320. On 8 December 2003, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, sent an urgent appeal
          concerning Shirin Ebadi, chairwoman of a children rights' organization, the Center of Human
          Rights Defenders, and the 2003 Nobel Peace Prize Winner. According to reports, on 3 December
          2003, Shirin Ebadi received death threats from militia men allegedly linked to the Hezbollah
          while entering the room of the University of Tehran Azzahra where she had been invited to make
          a speech on women rights and the right of custody for the mothers. The men reportedly blocked
          the entrance door, shouting slogans such as “death to Shirin Ebadi”, and, according to the
          information received, she had to hide in the cellar of the university. Fears have been expressed
          that her life and physical integrity may be at risk.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 112
          321. On29 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Mr. Arzhang Davoodi,
          an Iranian citizen age 47, engineer and poet, who was reportedly arrested in July or August 2003
          in Tehran by members of the security forces after he gave an interview to the BBC about the
          political corruption in Iran. The authorities have reportedly denied his arrest and detention. It was
          further reported that since December 2003, Mr. Davoodi would be secretly maintained in solitary
          confinement in the Evin prison of Tehran where he has allegedly been victim of ill-treatment and
          torture. As a result, he has reportedly lost his vision in the left eye and is in very poor health
          condition. Concern has been expressed that Arzhang Davoodi may have been targeted for his
          activity in the defence of human rights. Further fears for his life have been expressed.
          322. On 10 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up urgent appeal
          concerning Arzhang Davoodi. Mr. Davoodi, who was reportedly arrested after he spoke in a
          television documentary about political prisoners and the death of the Canadian-Iranian
          photojournalist Zahra Kazemi, has reportedly been severely beaten in detention and required
          several hospitalizations. It is reported that following his arrest, he was taken to Evin prison,
          where he was reportedly held in solitary confinement for approximately three and a half months,
          during which his relatives had no news about him. According to more recent information
          received, the lawyer of Arzhang Davoodi was not able to gain access to him for almost a month
          after his appointment in January 2004 and has never been present when Arzhang Davoodi was
          interrogated. It is reported that under the Iranian Code of Criminal Procedure, a lawyer's
          appointment is not official until the client has signed a document to this effect, and lawyers are
          not permitted to be with their clients at interrogations before they are formally charged. Up to
          now, it is not known if charges have been brought against Mr. Davoodi, although he is believed
          to be accused of being a spy, and working with an unspecified “dark organization” (sazm an-c
          siyah).
          323. On 24 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of
          physical and mental health and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a follow-
          up urgent appeal concerning Arzhang Davoodi. According to more recent information received,
          Mr. Davoodi remains in prison, although it is reported that a US$ 59,380 bail was paid, as
          requested by the judicial authorities, to secure his release. It is alleged that the authorities have
          reportedly refhsed to release him on the grounds that his file is “not complete”. It is also reported
          that Arzhang Davoodi was tortured and kept in solitary confinement for 100 days while he was
          held in Section 325, a detention facility run by the Revolutionary Guard in Evin prison. During
          the winter, for several days he was reportedly kept in a room with the air conditioning turned on
          all night, making the room even colder. The alleged torture has reportedly left him with a broken
          shoulder blade, bleeding in his left eye, deafness, a broken jaw and teeth, for which a doctor
          reportedly assessed that he required treatment of his eyes, ears and teeth, and physiotherapy for
          his shoulder. The authorities have allegedly provided him with no treatment to date. Further
          information indicates that on 17 March, Arzhang Davoodi was transferred from Salon 1 of Evin
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 113
          prison, where he had been detained since his transfer from Section 325 in early March, to Salon
          8 of Evin prison, which is reportedly used for people detained for financial offences, and has no
          medical facilities. It is reported that prison officials refuse to grant him leave to obtain the
          required medical treatment. Finally, it is reported that since his arrest in July or August 2003,
          Arzhang Davoodi has been allowed to make phone calls to his lawyer, and to meet with him on
          one occasion. However, it is reported that his lawyer has not been able to have a copy of his file,
          and it has not been established whether Mr. Davoodi has been formally charged with an offence.
          324. On 24 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a letter of
          allegation concerning the case of A u Al Chaldawi, a human rights defender who has been
          working on behalf of the Iranian Arab minority in Khuzestan and in particular on education
          projects to improve literacy rates among Ahwazi Arab children. According to the information
          received, Ali Al-Chaldawi was arrested in February 2003 by Iranian security authorities in
          Ahwaz. He was reportedly held in detention until August 2003 when he was allegedly charged
          with the “establishment of a library and distributing free text books in Arabic to Ahwazi Arab
          school children” and sentenced to two and a half years' imprisonment. It is reported that he
          appealed his sentencing and on 3 April 2004, the Khuzestan branch of the Iranian Revolutionary
          Court of Appeals upheld its decision. Concern has been expressed that the alleged sentencing of
          Ali Al Chaldawi may be aimed at preventing him from carrying out his work in defence of the
          rights of the Iranian Ahwazi Arabic minority.
          325. On 9 July 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of
          physical and mental health and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a follow-
          up urgent appeal concerning Akbar Mohammadi, a student who was arrested in early July 1999
          during a demonstration. He was sentenced to death in September 1999 but later his sentence was
          commuted to 15 years' imprisonment. He is currently being held at Evin prison. According to the
          new allegations received, Akbar Mohammadi was subjected to several mock executions during
          his first year in prison. During that year, he was also subjected to severe ill-treatment. He was
          handcuffed, suspended by his arms, and whipped on the soles of his feet with electric cables. His
          beatings allegedly resulted in the loss of 40 per cent of his hearing on his left ear. On one
          occasion, he was kicked down a flight of stairs and broke his pelvis. He was allegedly denied
          medical treatment and has been unable to walk comfortably since. In November 2003, Akbar
          Mohammadi was hospitalized for stomach and kidney problems, including internal bleeding, and
          possibly a lung infection. It is alleged that although a hospital doctor recommended a hospital
          stay of one month, he was transferred back to Evin prison after six days. His health is said to
          have deteriorated since then, as the operation he underwent at that time was reportedly
          unsuccessful. A medical report prepared by medical officials in Evin prison allegedly states that
          Akbar requires further medical intervention outside the confines of the hospital and a period of
          rehabilitation in a suitable environment. Concern has been expressed about his physical and
          mental integrity if he does not receive prompt and adequate medical treatment. The urgent appeal
          sent on 9 July 2004 also concerned Akbar Mohammadi's brother, Manuchehr Mohammadi, a
          member of the Anjoman-e Daneshjuyan va Daneshamuktegan-e M dli (National Association of
          Students and Graduates). According to the new allegations received, when his mother visited
          him in Evin prison on 5 September 2003, shortly after he had returned there, his face was badly
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 114
          bruised, he could hardly walk and told her that he had been tortured. His sentence was extended
          by two years at the end of November 2003. According to recent reports, Manuchehr Mohammadi
          is currently suffering from gingivitis and chronic severe bleeding from the gums, which is said to
          cause him pain when he speaks or eats. Doctors in Evin prison are said to have recommended
          that he be treated outside the prison. Concern has also been expressed about his physical and
          mental integrity if he does not receive prompt and adequate medical treatment. Finally, the
          urgent appeal sent on 9 July 2004 related to information received according to which their
          relatives have also been subjected to intimidation and harassment for their efforts to seek
          guarantees for the rights of the two detainees. On 8 July 2003, their father, Mr. Muhammad
          Muhammadi, and their sister, Simm, were arrested and taken to Evin prison. Simm was
          reportedly beaten in front of her father and dragged away. She was held in solitary confinement
          for 14 days. She was interrogated for several hours every night and asked about the activities of
          her sister Nasrin, who lives in Europe, and her brother Manuchehr. She was allegedly threatened
          with further beatings and death. While in custody, she spent five days in prison hospital because
          of breathing problems. She was released on bail on 22 July 2003. When Simm was in custody,
          her father was reportedly told that she and he would be severely beaten if he kept asking about
          her whereabouts. He allegedly suffered a heart attack while kept in solitary confinement. He was
          then released on bail. It is fhrther reported that more recently, on 28 June 2004, the family of
          Akbar and Manuchehr Mohammadi were threatened again with unspecified reprisals if they
          publicly discussed their plight.
          326. On 23 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning Mr. Arzhang
          Davoodi. He was arrested in October 2003 after he assisted in the making of a TV documentary
          in which he criticized the Iranian authorities. According to recent allegations, Mr. Arzhang
          Davoodi has been in solitary confinement for the two last weeks, during which it is reported that
          he has not been allowed phone calls or visits from his family and has only been able to meet his
          lawyer on one occasion, on 15 August. The visit lasted five minutes. On one occasion, he and 22
          other detainees were reportedly kept in a room of 24 m2, without air-conditioning or water. He is
          also believed to have been repeatedly subjected to beatings, including more than 500 blows on
          his left ear. Although a prison doctor made a formal request to the prison authorities that his left
          ear be operated on as soon as possible, the judge responsible for his case refused, allegedly on
          grounds that in hospital the detainee would spread the story that he was being treated for injuries
          caused by torture in detention. As reflected in previous joint urgent appeals, Mr. Arzhang
          Davoodi was due to be released in March 2004 after his family paid bail. However, he was
          reportedly told by the judge that the court will not hear his case and that he will not be released
          until he signs the confession he has been asked to sign. According to the information received, he
          has not been formally charged yet.
          327. On 15 November 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Omid Memariyan, a 30-
          year-old Internet journalist and civil-society activist working on the training and capacity-
          building of country's developing NGO sector. On 10 October 2004, he was arrested at his office
          in Tehran. His house was searched by officials of the judiciary and his personal notes and
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 115
          computer were confiscated. He is being detained without charge at an undisclosed location,
          although he is believed to be held in solitary confinement, under the jurisdiction of Branch 9 of
          the Revolutionary Court, in the vicinity of Tehran airport. His family has seen him just once, in a
          meeting of four minutes duration, which took place at Branch 9 of the Revolutionary Court.
          Omid Memariyan appeared extremely distressed. He has reportedly refused to exercise his right
          to appoint a lawyer. In view of his alleged detention in an unknown location, concern is
          expressed that he may be at risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment.
          328. On 16 November 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the
          independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture and the
          Special Rapporteur on violence against women, sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning Ms.
          Mahboobeh Abbasgholizadeh, an activist for women's rights, editor of Farzaneh, ajournal for
          women's studies, and director of the NGO training centre. According to the information
          received, Mahboobeh Abbasgholizadeh was arrested at her home on 1 November 2004 by order
          of the Prosecutor General. Since her arrest, she has reportedly been detained and held
          incommunicado and denied access to a lawyer or family members. To date, no formal charges
          have reportedly been brought against her but she is being interrogated about her presentations at
          international meetings, including her address to the Asia Pacific Women's Watch Beijing+10
          NGO Forum in July 2004, and her contacts with international women's rights activists. In the
          light of the reported subject matter of her interrogations and considering the lack of formal
          charges, concern is expressed that the arrest of Mahboobeh Abbasgholizadeh may be aimed at
          preventing her from continuing to speak out and publish on women's rights in the Islamic
          Republic of Iran.
          Communications received
          329. By letter dated 10 June 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 29
          January 2004, informing that Mr. Arzhang Davoodi had been under medical examination by the
          prison doctors as required. He had been examined by an ophtalmologist for dizziness and
          headaches while reading, and according to ophtmalmologic and optometric advice, he had been
          provided with glasses. The Government further stated that, as a result of an examination by an
          otorhinolaryngologist, his left ear has been diagnosed as being slightly impaired, which could be
          a sign of previous damage. According to the reply, the medical records indicated that no urgent
          treatment for that ear was required and that it would gradually improve.
          330. By letter dated 12 August 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 9
          July 2004. The Government confirmed that Akbar and Manoochehr Mohammadi are serving
          their prison term, and stated that they enjoy required medical care and that they go on leave on
          regular intervals. In its reply, the Government informed that there is no record of any detention
          of Mr. Mahmood and Ms. Nasrin Mohammadi, father and sister of the above persons.
          331. By letter dated 6 October 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 23
          August 2004. The Government informed that Mr. Arzhang Davoodi has been charged with
          activities against the internal security of the State and sentenced to imprisonment. He had been
          temporarily transferred to Rajaee-shahr prison. According to the reply, he had never been in
          solitary confinement, and he had recently met with his family.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 116
          332. By letter dated 20 December 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on
          15 November 2004. The Government informed that Omid Memariyan was detained for
          participating in the establishment of an association against the internal security of the State,
          activities against the State and dissemination of false accusations. It stated that he had been
          released on bail.
          333. By letter dated 20 December 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on
          16 November 2004. The Government informed that Ms. Mahboobeh Abbasgholizadeh was
          detained for her activities against the State and inspiring immoral acts in tsociety. It stated that
          she had been released on bail.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          334. By letter dated 18 May 2004, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent
          jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of
          opinion and expression and the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers
          on 5 December 2003, concerning Mr. Nasser Zarafchan. The Government informed that Mr.
          Zarafchan was sentenced to five years' imprisonment for illegal possession of weapons and
          disclosure of classified information regarding the trial of the alleged murder of intellectuals. Mr.
          Zarafchan is serving his term in Evin prison and he meets with his family and attorney on a
          regular basis. The Government stated that on the occasion of the visit of the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression to the country,
          it was impossible to schedule a meeting with Mr. Zarafchan due to the short notice.
          Observations
          335. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies. She welcomes the
          release on bail of Omid Memariyan and Mahboobeh Abbasgholizadeh. She refers to her main
          report to the Commission (E/CN.4/2005/101) for a detailed analysis of the trends in the situation
          of human rights defenders in the Islamic Republic Iran and for her observations.
          Iraq
          Communications sent
          336. On 1 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the situation of Yanar Mohammed, ajournalist campaigning for women's
          rights in Iraq, head of the Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq, which publishes the Al
          Nisa magazine and runs the www.equalityiniraq.com web site. Recently, Ms. Mohammed has
          been involved in campaigning against the introduction of the Shariah law in civil matters and
          advocated the maintaining of a secular law. According to the information received, she has
          reportedly been receiving threats from Jaysh Al-Sahaba (Army of Sahaba), a militia group based
          in Baghdad. She reportedly received a first death threat on 31 January 2004. It is reported that
          the most recent e-mail she received threatened to kill her within a few days and that she was
          warned that if she published the next edition of her Equality newsletter, she would be killed.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 117
          Other members of the Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq were reportedly also threatened
          in this message.
          Observations
          337. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Israel
          Communications sent
          338. On 21 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, issued a press release and sent a
          letter of allegation in connection with information received, on 19 May 2004, about a civil
          demonstration organized by the residents of Rafah town and refugee camp. It is reported that
          thousands of persons marched to protest against a reported operation by Israeli forces, which had
          been going on since 17 May 2004, to demolish houses in the Tel Sultan area of Rafah and
          allegedly resulted in the death at least 30 civilians. According to the information received, as the
          demonstrators were heading towards the Tel Sultan area, the Israeli forces allegedly opened fired
          at them with heavy artillery, including machine guns and tanks, at the same time as an Israeli Air
          Force helicopter gunship reportedly fired a missile into the crowd. The assault allegedly resulted
          in the killing of 10 persons, among which children, and wounding another 50. Six of those killed
          have been identified as Walid Naji Abu Qamar, age 10, Mubarak Salim Al Hashash, age 11,
          Mahmoud Tareq Mansour, age 13, Mohammed Talal Abu Sha'ar, age 20, Alla Musalam Sheikh-
          Eid, age 20, and Fuad Khamis Al-Saqqa, age 31.
          339. On 9 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Chairman-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, sent an urgent appeal
          regarding Abd al-Latif Gheith, a human rights defender and board chairman of Addameer
          Prisoner's Support and Human Rights Association, a Palestinian NGO based in Ramallah aiming
          to bring to an end the torture of political prisoners. According to the information received, on 29
          July 2004 Abd al-Latif Gheith was detained after security guards had reportedly stopped him at a
          military checkpoint and questioned him about the activities and staff of the NGO. It is further
          reported that on 4 July 2004, the Israeli deputy military commander allegedly issued an order for
          the six-month detention of Abd al-Latif Gheith. This order was reportedly issued on the grounds
          of “endangering security”and in the absence of any official charge being brought against him.
          Concern is expressed that he may be being detained in an attempt to hinder his work with
          political prisoners, his human rights activities with Addameer as well as his active participation
          in campaigning against Israel's construction of the Wall in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
          Observations
          340. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 118
          Jamaica
          Communications sent
          341. On 10 March 2004, the Special Representative, jointly with the Special Rapporteur on
          extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, transmitted an urgent action regarding a witness
          known as “Zepheniah”, as well as members of the community of Burnt Savannah about whom
          concerns have been expressed after they witnessed the alleged extrajudicial execution of three
          men by members of the Jamaican Constabulary Force on 2 March 2004. Two conflicting
          versions of the facts have been brought forward. According to the police, at 9.45 a.m. on 2
          March, officers saw a car with several men in it, allegedly “acting suspiciously”. They reportedly
          ordered the car to stop. The police claimed that a shootout followed in which they fired in self-
          defence, resulting in the death of Evon “Phil” Baker, age 21, Craig Vascianna, age 22, and Omar
          “Ted” Graham, age 23. Although the police claimed to have recovered one handgun and one
          sawed-off shotgun on the scene, no police officers were reportedly injured in the incident.
          However, members of the community of Burnt Savannah vigorously dispute this version.
          According to a witness known as “Zepheniah”, the three men were all shot at point-blank range
          by the police. Moreover, “Ted”, who was a taxi-driver, reportedly asked the police to spare his
          life, but a policeman known as Clarke reportedly told him that they had to kill him as well since
          he was a witness and another police officer then allegedly shot him twice. Another witness
          reported that the police officers then placed the guns subsequently found on the three men at the
          scene of the crime. According to the information received, witnesses of the killings, who later
          went to the Frome police station, were all threatened by the police and were afraid to give further
          statements. For instance, when “Zepheniah” went to the police station with a crowd of people
          from his community who had demonstrated about the killings, a policeman with badge number
          20998 allegedly told him that he would shoot him. Another policeman allegedly cranked up his
          gun on a close relative of one of the deceased as if he wanted to shoot him. A superintendent was
          reportedly present but allegedly did nothing about the policeman's action. It is reported that
          when people were demonstrating in the road, policemen allegedly chased them off the street and
          fired about twelve shots at them, and that the one known as Clarke mentioned that he had eight
          men on his list in Burnt Savannah. It is further believed that when the alleged killings occurred
          on 2 March 2004, Clarke actually wanted to eliminate a key witness in a murder case that has
          been brought against him in December 2003. In view of the alleged killings and of the several
          threats received, fears have been expressed for the safety and for the lives of the witnesses to the
          events.
          342. On 6 December 2004, the Special Representative, jointly with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, transmitted a
          letter of allegation regarding individuals and associations defending the rights of gays and
          lesbians in Jamaica, in particular the members of the human rights organization JFLAG
          (Jamaican Forum of Lesbians, All-sexuals and Gays). Attention has been drawn to a letter to
          the editor by the Jamaican Police Federation's Public Relations Officer, published in the Jamaica
          Observer of 25 November 2004. In his letter, which follows the publication on 16 November
          2004 of a report by Human Rights Watch entitled “Hated to death: Homophobia, Violence and
          Jamaica ‘s HI V/A IDS epidemic “, the Police Federation's Public Relations Officer “condemn [ s]
          the role of these so-called ‘human rights' groups to spread lies and deliberately malign and
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 119
          slander the police force and the government”. He calls on “the Minister of Justice to examine
          these allegations and slap on sedition charges where necessary to both foreign and local agents of
          provocation”. In stating that “the Government and the police cannot be held responsible for....
          the cultural responses of the population towards gay”, the letter also appears to condone violence
          against gays and lesbians. This impression is insufficiently dispelled by the assurance that “as
          law enforcement officers we try our utmost ‘to serve, to reassure and to protect”. The letter to
          the editor raises particular concerns against the background of reported attacks and threats
          against persons defending the rights of homosexual men and women in Jamaica. According to
          the information received, on 9 June 2004, Brian Williamson, a well-known gay rights activist,
          was murdered at his home. Within an hour after his body was discovered, reportedly a crowd
          gathered outside the crime scene. A smiling man called out, “Battyman [ homosexual] he get
          killed!” Many others reportedly celebrated Williamson's murder laughing and calling out, “let's
          get them one at a time, ““that's what you get for sin, ““let's kill all of them.” Furthermore, it is
          reported that JFLAG regularly receives intimidating mail, c-mails and telephone calls. By way of
          example, according to the information received, on 16 November 2004 an anonymous male
          called JFLAG and said “homosexuals should be dead”. These incidents have been reported in
          writing to the Matilda's Corner police station in Kingston on 26 November 2004. In view of the
          above, concern is expressed that individuals and associations defending the rights of gays and
          lesbians, in particular the members of JFLAG, may be at risk of both attempts by public
          authorities to suppress their exercise of free speech and of violent attacks by homophobic
          individuals who may have gained the impression that the Government will not vigorously pursue
          such violence.
          Observations
          343. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communications.
          Kazakhstan
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          344. By letter dated 22 December 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 5
          December 2003. The Government confirmed that on 28 January 2003, the Karasai district court
          sentenced Sergey Duvanov to three and half years in prison. It informed that staff from foreign
          embassies and representatives of international organizations were allowed to attend the judicial
          hearing as observers. In the hearing of the appeals, the Almaty oblast court refused their
          attendance because the victim's mother opposed their presence, since the presence of outsiders
          seriously violated her rights by broadcasting details of the offence relating to the personal life of
          the victim, who was a minor. The Government stated that in August 2003, Mr. Duvanov's
          lawyers lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court under the supervisory procedure. The Supreme
          Court found no grounds for reviewing the case after hearing the appeal. Concerning the
          allegations of lack of fair trial, the Government commented that the evidence of guilt consists of
          a consistent and precise testimony by the victim. It was objectively backed up, inter alia, by a
          medical forensic examination of the victim that found bodily injuries characteristic of rape.
          Moreover, according to the Government, a biological forensic examination indicated that it could
          not rule out that sperm found in her sexual organs and on her underwear and dressing-gown was
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 120
          Mr. Duvanov's. It indicated in this respect that a DNA test found that the sperm discovered did
          belong to Mr. Duvanov. The Government stated that there were no procedural violations, and
          that the search of Mr. Duvanov's dacha was conducted in accordance with the rules set out in the
          legislation governing criminal procedure. The preliminary investigation was carried out fully and
          objectively, and, as the court ruled, the investigating body committed no procedural violations.
          Numerous witnesses were questioned, several experts' reports were committed, and numerous
          applications by the parties were granted during the preliminary investigation and the court
          proceedings. With respect to the mass media, the Government stated that it follows a policy
          based on legislative guarantees of the freedom of speech and the freedom to receive and
          distribute information and efforts to enhance the legal framework for the activities of the mass
          media. It fhrther informed that other principles include placement of official state-funded
          material in the mass media in a fair manner and a constructive relationship between the state and
          voluntary groups and associations, international organizations and media research institutes.
          Observations
          345. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response.
          Kyrgyzstan
          Communciations sent
          346. On 26 July 2004, the Special Rapporteur sent a letter of allegation regarding Ainura
          Aitbaeva, daughter of human rights defender Ramazan Dyryldaev, president of the Kyrgyz
          Committee for Human Rights, who was the subject of a joint communication by the Special
          Representative and the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary and arbitrary executions on
          8 May 2003. According to information received, on 3 July 2004, Ainura Aitbaeva was allegedly
          attacked and beaten by unidentified individuals in front of her home in the presence of her two
          children. She is still in hospital, where she is suffering from concussion. Concern is heightened
          by the fact that other similar attacks against family members of human rights defenders have
          been reported. It is reported that this is not the first incident of an attack against family members
          of human rights defenders. It is alleged that in April 2004, four unidentified men attacked
          Chingiz Sydykov, the 21-year-old son of Zamira Sydykova, chief editor of the independent
          newspaper Respublika. It is reported that prior to the alleged attack against her son, Zamira
          Sydykova had published articles criticizing the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Kyrgyzstan.
          Concern has been expressed that the alleged attack against Aitbaeva Ainura may be directly
          related to the activities of her father and his work as a human rights defender.
          Communications received
          347. By letter dated 15 September 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by
          the Special Representative on 26 July 2004 with information relating to the case of Ainura
          Aitbaeva and Chingiz Sadykov. Following the submission of a formal complaint by Ainura
          Aitbaeva, the Government stated that she was requested to undergo a forensic and medical
          examination. However, she apparently declined, and as a result no official confirmation of her
          assault exists. Consequently, the Ministry of Internal Affairs has decided to discontinue all
          investigations and to halt all criminal proceedings due to lack of evidence. Presently, the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 121
          Sverdlovsk District attorney general's office in Bishkek is reviewing these decisions and will
          determine whether they should be upheld. In connection with the assault on Chingiz Sadykov,
          the Government confirmed that the Oktyabr District of internal affairs had begun criminal
          proceedings the following day, 26 April 2004. On 22 May 2004, Arzamat Sagyndykovich
          Akhmatov was charged with hooliganism and remanded in custody at a centre in Bishkek. The
          case is awaiting a hearing before the Oktyabr district court in Bishkek.
          Observations
          348. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response. She welcomes the
          steps taken by the authorities but notes with concern their decision to discontinue investigation
          into the allegation. She invites the Government to keep her informed of the developments in this
          case.
          Lebanon
          Communciations sent
          349. On 23 September 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning
          Samira Trad, member of Frontier center, an organization that works on refugee rights in
          Lebanon, who has already been the subject of a letter of allegation sent by the Special
          Representative on 16 September 2003. According to new information received, following her
          detention in September 2003, the General Security directorate sought charges against Ms. Trad
          for operating an “illegal organization” and “harming the image of the State”. The Prosecutor
          General rejected those charges, including those related to the legal status of the organization.
          Instead, he reportedly charged Samira Trad under article 386 of the Penal Code for libel against
          the Lebanese authorities in Baabda court. It is reported that to date, the prosecutors have not
          specified who was libeled or how, and that no date has been set for a trial.
          Communications received
          350. By letter dated 12 November 2004, the Government responded to a communication sent
          by the Special Representative on 23 September 2004 concerning the legal action taken against
          Samira Trad. The Government confirmed that the file regarding the prosecution of Samira Trad
          had been deposited with the Baabda criminal court on 11 September 2003. According to the
          Office of the Prosecutor General, the appeal hearing has been set for 28 January 2005.
          Observations
          351. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response. She remains
          concerned about the persisting harassment of Samira Trad and her organization. She notes with
          concern the legal action taken against Samira Trad in connection with her activities in favour of
          refugees. The Special Representative recalls that the law of libel requires legislators to strike a
          delicate balance between the protection of freedom of speech — particularly where this freedom is
          exercised in the defence of human rights — and the interests of the persons who are the subject of
          derogatory speech. In particular, she invites the Government to consider whether the use of such
          laws in against legitimate activities of human rights defenders such a publishing reports,
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 122
          correctly strikes this balance. She invites the Government to keep her informed of the
          developments in this case.
          Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
          Communications sent
          352. On 21 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal regarding the situation of Fathi El-Jahmi, a human rights defender and recently released
          political prisoner, who has reportedly disappeared. According to the information received, Mr. El
          Jahmi was sentenced to five years' imprisonment in October 2002, following an address to the
          People's Congress in Tripoli during which he reportedly called for democratic and political
          reform. He was allegedly not permitted to attend the trial and was reportedly released from
          prison on 12 March 2004. According to the information received, following his release, Mr. El-
          Jahmi was reportedly subject to 24-hour surveillance and his home phone and electricity supply
          were reportedly disconnected. He was also reportedly threatened by members of the
          Revolutionary Committee Party, who reportedly stated that they would kidnap his wife and
          daughters if he continued to express his views on the human rights situation in the country. On
          19 March, it is reported that members of the Revolutionary Committee Party allegedly ransacked
          the computer business owned by Mr. El-Jahmi's son. On 4 April 2004, an unidentified security
          group allegedly raided the home of Mr. El-Jahmi and took him away to an undisclosed location.
          In view of his alleged disappearance, concern is expressed that since he is a diabetic and suffers
          from a cardio-vascular disease that requires daily medication, Mr. El-Jahmi may be at risk of
          torture or ill-treatment. Concern is also been expressed that he has been targeted for his work in
          defence of human rights, and in particular for calling for political reform.
          Observations
          353. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Malaysia
          Communications sent
          354. On 8 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning members of Suara Rakya Malayisa (SUARAM), a human rights NGO, and
          other participants in a peacefhl demonstration against the misuse of police power. According to
          the information received, on 28 February 2004 one hundred people, including members of
          SUARAM and of political parties, gathered outside the Bukit Aman Police Station to protest
          against the abuse of police powers and in particular, the death of suspects while in police
          custody, police shootings, violations of remand procedure and the dispersion of peaceful
          assemblies. According to the information received, the demonstrators were reportedly going to
          hand a memorandum to the inspector general of the police when the police allegedly intervened,
          confiscating the memorandum and ordering the demonstrators to disperse. It is reported that they
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O1/Add. 1
          Page 123
          attempted to arrest Fahmi Reza, a member of SUARAM, and when the crowd protested and
          demanded his release, members of the police allegedly beat him. The police also reportedly
          sprayed chemical-laced water against the crowd. Following this, 17 demonstrators, including
          Eric Paulsen, Elizabeth Wong and Fahim Reza of SUARAM, Sivarasa Rasiah, vice-president
          of the Malaysian People's Party and Tian Chua, vice-president of the National Justice Party,
          were arrested. In the course of their arrest, Tian Chua and Elizabeth Wong allegedly sustained
          bruises due to ill-treatment by the police. All those arrested have reportedly been released on bail
          and have been requested to report back to the police on 15 March 2004. Concern has been
          expressed that the members of SUARAM and other demonstrators may have been arrested for
          their human rights activities, in particular their condemnation of the abuse of police powers.
          355. On S May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, sent an urgent appeal concerning the
          arrest of P. Uthayakumar, a human rights lawyer and of several other people, in particular S.
          Jayathas, Ganesan, Dhayalan, Raju, Batumalai, Kanthan, Devarass, Letchumanan,
          Nambirajan and Antonyamma, during a demonstration. According to the information received,
          on 30 April 2004, a group of 20 people gathered outside the Brickfields police station in Kuala
          Lumpur to protest against police brutality, and in particular the alleged death in custody of
          Francis Udayapan held in connection with a theft, and to demand to see his body. Riot police
          were reportedly waiting outside the police station and while the mother of Francis Udayapan
          went inside to lodge a report regarding the alleged death of her son, police with batons reportedly
          broke up the demonstration and arrested 11 of the protestors including P. Uthayakumar, S.
          Jayathas, Ganesan, Dhayalan, Raju, Batumalai, Kanthan, Devarass, Letchumanan, Nambirajan
          and Antonyamma. They were allegedly released on bail shortly afterwards and are required to
          report to the police on 15 May when charges may be brought against them. Concern has been
          expressed that P. Uthayakumar and other demonstrators may have been targeted for their human
          rights activities, in particular their condemnation of the alleged death of suspects in police
          custody.
          356. On 13 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and the Special Rapporteur on
          extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning the
          situation of P. Uthayakumar. According to the information received, P. Uthayakumar has
          worked on behalf of victims of alleged police brutality and is currently representing the family of
          Francis Udayapan. It is reported that he has received numerous threatening phone calls related to
          his work and on 8 May 2004, his brother Wanytha Moorthy reportedly received a call on his
          mobile phone from an anonymous caller who reportedly stated that his brother should “not fool
          around with the police” and further stated that if he did not heed this warning, he would be
          killed. In this context and according to the information received, on 11 May 2004 Mr.
          Uthayakumar was driving along Jalan Medang in Bangsar when a motorcycle reportedly began
          to trail his car. A short time later, he was reportedly blocked by three or four cars. The driver of
          one of the cars reportedly alighted from his vehicle and approached the car of Mr. Uthayakumar
          with a sledgehammer, allegedly smashing the windscreen and the driver's side window. It is
          reported that the driver of the motorcycle then pointed a gun at him following which Mr.
          Uthayakumar allegedly jumped out of the door of his car on the passenger's side and managed to
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 124
          escape his assailants. He reportedly suffered injuries to his face, hands, legs and back during the
          incident. Immediately after the alleged attack, he reportedly filed a complaint at Brickfields
          police station. Reportedly, he has filed a number of reports to the police about threatening calls
          that he has received in the past but to date, no action by the police has been taken. Concern has
          been expressed that Mr. Uthayakumar is being targeted for his human rights activities and in
          particular his work to defend victims of police brutality.
          357. On 7 July 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and the Special Rapporteur on
          contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, sent a
          follow-up urgent appeal concerning the safety of Mr. Uthayakumar who has received new
          threats on two occasions. On 20 May 2004, he was assaulted at gunpoint by persons believed to
          be members of the Royal Malaysian Police Force. He sought temporary asylum in the United
          Kingdom and returned to Malaysia on 13 June 2004, with the assurances of the Government of
          Malaysia that his safety would be guaranteed. Information indicates that since his return, his
          Uthayakumar's office has been repeatedly visited by the Royal Malaysian Police Force, for
          which he has lodged a complaint with the police. The officer in charge of the police district of
          Brickfields has since lodged a police report against Mr. Uthayakumar for alleged criminal
          defamation of the police. On 29 June 2004, Mr. Uthayakumar found an envelope in his letter box
          containing a bullet in a plastic casing and a note written on tracing paper using letters from
          newspaper cuttings and reading “Lu Puki mak, suka Timbulkan sentimen perkauman, Lu mati
          sikit-sikit nanti gampang” (you son of a gun, like to raise racial issues, you will die slowly
          eventually, fool).
          358. On 26 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, sent a follow-up urgent appeal
          concerning the continued harassment of Mr. Uthayakumar. According to the information
          received, in a letter dated 21 June 2004, the director-general of income tax informed him that he
          was not allowed to leave the country since he allegedly owed income tax. On 16 July, he paid
          this amount and subsequently sent three letters asking for a certificate of release that would
          enable him to travel abroad again, which he has not yet received. It is further reported that on 9
          September 2004, Mr. Uthayakumar was arrested at his law firm in Kuala Lumpur and brought to
          Brickfields police station and the Kuala Lumpur Magistrates Court Police Headquarters at Jalan
          Hang Tuah. Reportedly, he was required to provide a statement in relation to the proceedings
          opened against him on charges of defaming the police. According to the information received,
          these charges result from statements he made after he was attacked on 10 May 2004, in which he
          voiced his suspicion that high-ranking police officers were involved in the attack. He was
          released four hours after the arrest. Concern remains that the alleged harassment of Mr.
          Uthayakumar is a response to his efforts to publicize alleged human rights abuses by the Royal
          Malaysian Police Force, and to his work as a lawyer representing a number of clients from the
          Indian minority in Malaysia.
          Communications received
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 125
          359. By letter dated 14 June 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 5 May
          2004 concerning Mr. Uthayakumar, S. Jayathas, Ganesan, Dhayalan, Raju, Batumalai,
          Kanthan, Devarass, Letchumanan, Nambirajan and Antonyamma. The Government
          informed that, on 29 April 2004, the Royal Malaysian Police received a fax concerning plans of
          the demonstration referred to in the communication sent by the Special Representative. It stated
          that between 30 and 40 people took part in the demonstration. When the demonstrators reached
          the gates of the Brickfields police station, police officers warned the group to disperse since a
          demonstration without a legal permit is considered an illegal assembly. The police informed that
          only those who intended to lodge a police report would be allowed into the police station, and
          only the mother of Francis Udayapan and a lawyer did so. According to the Government, after
          several warnings by the police, 12 people who refused to disperse were arrested. The arrests
          were based on section 27 of the Police Act 1967 for the offence of convening an illegal
          assembly. The Government indicated that on 30 April 2004, those who were arrested were
          released on police bail. The police would continue their investigations. According to the reply,
          the concern expressed that some members of the demonstrators were specifically targeted for
          arrest is groundless.
          360. By letter dated 23 June 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 8
          March 2004 concerning Eric Paulsen, Elizabeth Wong, Fahim Reza, Sivarasa Rasiah, Tian
          Chua and Suara Rakya Malayisa (SUARAM). The Government informed that police officers
          had received information that a group of demonstrators intended to gather in front of police
          headquarters in Bukit Aman for the primary purpose of submitting a memorandum to the
          authorities. The police agreed to allow three representatives of the demonstrators to enter the
          police headquarters to formally hand over the memorandum to the Officer-in-Charge. According
          to the reply, the demonstrators insisted that 10 of them should be allowed to enter. The police
          stood by their earlier decision since three representatives would likely create less upheaval
          within the building and still serve the primary purpose of the demonstration. The Government
          indicated that at the same time, police officers requested the demonstrators outside the olice
          headquarters to disperse, since such a gathering would require a police permit obtained in
          advance under section 27 of the Police Act 1967. It stated that after the demonstrators repeatedly
          ignored these requests, 17 demonstrators were arrested on the charge of convening an illegal
          assembly. They were released the same day on police bail. The Government indicated that at no
          time was force used to either detain or keep them in custody.
          361. By letter dated 7 October 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeals sent on 13
          May 2004 and 7 July 2004. The Government confirmed that Mr. Uthayakumar lodged a
          complaint concerning the assault referred to in the communication sent on 13 May 2004. It stated
          that in this report, lodged on 10 May 2004, Mr. Uthayakumar accused the police of being behind
          the incident. The Government mentioned that an investigation had been launched under sections
          324, 427 and 506 of the Penal Code, and that no arrests had been made so far. According to the
          Government, the investigation has been hampered due to Mr. Uthayakumar's refhsal to give
          police statements under section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code. On 17 June 2004, he was
          subpoenaed under this section in an effort to record his statement for further investigation into
          the case. Despite acknowledging receipt of the subpoena, Mr. Uthayakumar did not turn up at the
          police station. The Government informed that on 27 August 2004, the Kuala Lumpur Magistrates
          Court issued a warrant to ensure Mr. Uthayakumar's compliance under section 111 (2) of the
          Criminal Procedure Ordinance. On 9 September 2004, he was picked up by the police for his
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 126
          statement to be recorded and was released the same day. According to the reply, there exists no
          evidence to prove that the incidents involving Mr. Uthayakumar had any connection with the
          police, or were the direct result of Mr. Uthayakumar's work to discredit the police force.
          362. By letter dated 22 December 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on
          26 October 2004. The Government reiterated its response dated 7 October 2004, by which it
          explained the reason behind the arrest of Mr. Uthayakumar on 9 September 2004. The
          Government stated that it failed to see how the execution of a warrant issued by the country's
          independent judiciary for Mr. Uthayakumar's failure to respond to a subpoena can possibly be
          construed as a violation of his basic human rights. With regard to the restriction on Mr.
          Uthayakumar's travels abroad, the Government informed that the restriction remains as long as
          the amount he owes to the Inland Revenue Board is not settled in full, pursuant to subsection 104
          (1) of the Malaysian Immigration Department's Suspected List. According to the reply, in order
          for Mr. Uthayakumar to be allowed to travel overseas again, he would need to submit a Release
          Letter to the Immigration Department from the Inland Revenue Board, which will state, inter
          alia, that he has paid his arrears in full.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          363. By letter dated 4 March 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent jointly
          with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion
          and expression and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women on 6 November 2003.
          The Government confirmed that on 16 October 2003, the Kuala Lumpur magistrates court
          convicted Irene Fernandez of maliciously publishing false news, and that here one-yearjail
          sentence had been stayed pending appeal. It informed that, in 1996, when Ms. Fernandez was
          first charged, the court ordered her to surrender her passport, a routine procedure in cases where
          there is flight risk. Her passport has since expired, and her application for a new passport has
          been denied on the grounds that the case is still under due process of law since Ms. Fernandez
          has filed an appeal to the High Court.
          Observations
          364. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its numerous replies. She remains
          gravely concerned with the reported persistant harassment of Mr. Uthayakumar, including
          death threats and assaults. The Special Representative takes note of the Government's
          explanation of the administrative and judicial proceedings against him. With respect to the
          persistant restrictions on Mr. Uthayakumar's movement, she acknowledges that as outlined in the
          Government's replies, the authorities appear to have strictly applied the legislation governing the
          non-payment of taxes. The Special Representative regrets to note, however, that the
          Government's reply in relation to this issue does not dispel the concerns she raised in
          communication. She observes that freedom of movement represents an internationally
          recognized basic freedom and invites the Government to consider whether national laws
          providing for its curtailment for non-payment of taxes may not be incompatible with the
          international norms in this respect. She thus encourages the Government to consider other means
          than restricting Mr. Uthayakumar's basic right to freedom of movement to address his reported
          failure to pay his taxes in full. She encourages the Government to reply favourably to her request
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 127
          sent on 8 July 2002 and reiterated on 2 December 2004 for an invitation to conduct an official
          visit to the country in 2005.
          Maldives
          Communications sent
          365. On 6 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Chairman-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the
          independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on torture and the Special
          Rapporteur on violence against women, sent an urgent appeal regarding Mr. Ismail Asif and Ms.
          Jennifer Latheef, respectively employee of a television company and video film producer, both
          of whom have been working to draw attention to human rights concerns. According to the
          information received, Ismail Asif, who is also an activist for the political opposition, was
          arrested at his home at around 10 p.m. on 17 September 2004. He is reportedly being held
          without charges and was not allowed access to a lawyer. It is reported that he is being questioned
          about organizing a peacefhl political meeting in July 2004, which was disguised as birthday
          party. It was also alleged that he was arrested because of his involvement in a civil society
          network that monitors the conditions of detention of those arrested following the August
          demonstrations to ensure their human rights are protected. From mid-August 2004 until his
          arrest, Ismail Asif had been interviewing those who had been released from detention to
          document human rights violations against detainees and has been helping families of the
          detainees to draft letters to the authorities requesting the right to visit. According to information
          received, Jennifer Latheef, who has particularly focused her work on the prevalence of sexual
          abuse in the country, was reportedly arrested in front of the National Security Services on 13
          August 2004, when a demonstration was broken up with baton charges and tear gas. She is
          reportedly being detained at the Dhoonidhoo interrogation centre and was denied access to
          family members until 17 September 2004. It was also reported that, during her detention, the
          police kicked her in the back numerous times whilst she was blindfolded. She was reportedly
          detained a first time on 22 September 2003 for her part in a protest regarding the killing of Evan
          Naseem on the 19 September 2003 and the killing of three other prisoners and fatal injury of
          others on 20 September 2003 in Maafushi Jail.
          Communications received
          366. By letter dated 27 October 2004, the Government responded to a communication sent by
          the Special Representative on 6 October 2004 regarding Jennifer Latheef and Ismail Asif. The
          Government informed the Special Representative that the aforementioned had both been
          arrested, on 13 and 17 August 2004 respectively, in connection with the investigation into the
          mob violence of 12-13 August 2004. According to the Government, the investigation of Jennifer
          Latheef had been completed and as a result, she has been under house arrest since 26 October
          2004. The Government indicated that in accordance with the law, charges would be filed against
          her shortly. The Government assured tha, in conformity with the rights of all citizens, the
          accused would receive a fair and impartial trial. Regarding the situation of Ismail Asif, the
          Government stated that the investigation remained open. The Government assured that on
          completion Ismail Asif would be promptly released or charged. The Government declared that
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 128
          all detainees in the Dhoonidhoo centre were given adequate access to family visits, legal counsel
          and medical assistance. Concerning the accusations of torture and ill-treatment, the Government
          stated that the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives had been ordered to undertake an
          investigation. Once the final conclusions have been made, the Government promised to take the
          appropriate legal action against any possible guilty parties. The Government emphasized its
          commitment to human rights and highlighted the agreement signed with the International
          Committee of the Red Cross on 5 October 2004, and the visit by a two-member delegation from
          Amnesty International on 10 October 2004.
          Observations
          367. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its reply. She welcomes the
          Government's clarifications on both cases and the investigations carried out into the allegation.
          She observes however that the Government's response has not dispelled her concerns about
          allegations of arbitrary detention and arrest of the human rights defenders in question. In
          particular, she calls on the Government to either bring charges or immediately release both
          individuals.
          Mauritania
          Communications envoyées
          368. Le 2 decembre 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special
          sur la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, le Rapporteur
          special sur les executions extrajudiciaires, sommaires ou arbitraires et la Rapporteuse speciale
          chargee de la question de la violence contre les femmes, a envoyc un appel urgent concernant
          neuf femmes membres du Collectif des familles de detenus, Mmes El Moumne Mint Mohamed
          Elemine, Raky Fall, Khadijetou Mint Maghlah, Teslem Mint Oumar, Mariem Mint Neyni,
          Fatimetou Mint Khaya, Mariem Fall Mint Chenouve, Meye Mint ilamady et Fatma Mint
          ilamady. Selon les informations reçues, sept d'entre elles auraient etc arrétees le 21 novembre
          2004 par la gendarmerie, lors de l'ouverture de la premiere audience du <>, presumes auteurs de la tentative des coups d'Etat des 8 et 9 juin 2003, dont elles
          seraient les proches. Elles auraient etc conduites a la brigade d'Ouad Naga oü elles auraient etc
          parquees sous le soleil et a méme le sol pendant toute la journee du 21 novembre. Mmes Meye
          Mint Hamady et Fatma Mint Hamady auraient quant a elles etc arretees le 22 novembre 2004,
          alors qu'elles protestaient contre des gendarmes qui semblaient vouloir maltraiter une femme
          agee a la sortie de la salle d'audience. Le méme jour, Mme Mariem Mint Neyni, enceinte, aurait
          etc liberee mais aurait, de nouveau, etc arretee le 29 novembre au soir. Sans avoir etc informees
          des motifs de leur arrestation, elles auraient etc interrogees a plusieurs reprises sur les raisons
          pour lesquelles deux membres du Collectif participaient a la 36 e session de la Commission
          africaine des droits de l'homme et des peuples (CADHP). Le 30 novembre 2004, aprCs avoir
          finalement etc accusees de <> et de <>, elles auraient etc
          transferees a la prison des femmes de Nouakchott. Toutes les autorisations de visite demandees
          par leurs proches auraient etc refusees. Mme Raky Fall, enceinte, souffrirait depuis le debut de sa
          detention de douleurs dans la poitrine. En raison de leur detention au secret, des craintes ont etc
          exprimees sur l'integrite physique et psychologique de ces femmes, et notamment Mme Raky
          Fall qui se trouve dans un etat de sante fragile.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 129
          Communications reçues
          369. Par lettre datée du 6 janvier 2005, le Gouvernement a répondu a l'appel en date du
          2 décembre 2004. Le Gouvernement a indiqué que les individus en question avaient été arrétés
          pour avoir commis des actes délictucux, notamment outrage a magistrat et menace de mort scion
          les articies 204 et 281 du Code pénai. Le Gouvernement a affirmé que ces femmes avaient été
          informécs des raisons de icur arrestation et traitécs avec humanité et a rejeté ics aiiégations
          d'atteinte a icur intégrité physique, de méme que ceiies reiatives a icur absence d'accês a icurs
          famiiies et avocats. Le Gouvernement a par aiiieurs affirmé que ics normes internationaics des
          droits de i'homme ne pouvaient être invoquées pour icur defense au vu des actes déiictueux
          qu'eiies auraient commis. Enfin, ic Gouvernement a indiqué que ces femmes auraient bénéficié
          d'une hberté provisoire et qu'eiies devraient se presenter iors de icur procés.
          Observations
          370. The Speciai Representative thanks the Government for its response to her
          communication. She weicomes the reported provisionai reicase of the individuai concerned and
          iooks forward to remaining informed about this case.
          Mexico
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          371. Ei 13 de enero de 2004, ia Representante Especiai enviô un iiamamiento urgente con
          respecto a ia situaciôn de Arturo Soils y otros miembros de Ia organización de derechos
          humanos Centro de Estudios Fronterizos y de Promoción de los Derechos ilumanos
          (CEFPRODIIAC) y tambien de los familiares de José Antonio Cervantes Espeleta (victima
          de asesinato) quienes habrian sufrido una serie de amenazas y actos de intimidacion. Segün ia
          informacion recibida, José Antonio Antonio Cervantes Espeieta habrla desaparecido ci 13 de
          diciembre de 2003 en ia ciudad de Reynosa. Las fhentes de ia investigaciôn habrian asegurado a
          ia famiiia que ci Sr. Cervantes Espeieta “habria decidido desaparecer” y que se encontraba vivo y
          sano. No obstante, su cadaver habria sido haiiado ci 26 de diciembre. Segün ios informes,
          CEFPRODHAC habr la denunciado pübiicamente ia aparente incoherencia e inadecuada
          investigaciôn iniciai por io cuai, ci director de ia pohcia judiciai dci Estado ios acusô de
          difamacion. No obstante ante ia aparente negativa de investigar exhaustivamente ci caso, ci 4 de
          enero ci presidente de CEFPRODHAC, Arturo Soils, habria sohcitado en varios periodicos
          regionaics a ias autoridades que investigaran ia supuesta impiicacion de ia poiicia en ci secuestro
          y asesinato de éste y de ios otros casos de secuestro ocurridos en ci norte dci Estado de
          Tamauiipas. Ai dia siguiente, un desconocido habr la teiefoneado a ias oficinas de
          CEFPRODHAC y habria dicho “ya cáiiense ci hocico”. Segün ios poiicias que investigan ci caso
          en Nueva Leon, donde vivia ia victima, eiios tambiCn habrian recibido amenazas. Ei 4 de enero
          ia fiscaila de Tamauiipas habria anunciado ia detenciOn de cuatro personas - entre eiios
          miembros en actividad y exmiembros de ia poiicia judiciai dci Estado y de ia poiicia preventiva -
          en reiaciOn con ci caso. Asimismo, segün informes, ci principai sospechoso, un agente en
          actividad de ia poiicia judiciai dci Estado, habria huido.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 130
          372. El 23 de enero de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociôn del derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento urgente con
          respecto a la situaciOn de MartIn Barrios llernández. Segün la informaciOn recibida, el dIa 30
          de diciembre de 2003 a las 9.30, MartIn Barrios Hernandez estuvo a punto de entrar en su casa
          cuando un individuo se le habria acercado y le habrIa dicho “Fernando, ya deja de estar
          chingando”. D c acuerdo con la informaciOn, el individuo habria golpeado a Martin Barrios
          Hernández en la cabeza y en la espalda con un a ladrillo y al tratar de defenderse, el individuo le
          habria dado pufletazos en la cara y los brazos y le habrIa dado una patada en el estOmago. Luego
          el individuo habria huido en un taxi que lo habria aguardado al otro lado de la calle. Herido a la
          cabez, Martin Barrios Hernández habrIa sido trasladado a un centro de la Cruz Roja para recibir
          primeros auxilios y el mismo dia, habria denunciado el incidente ante el Ministerio Püblico de
          Tehuacan. Esta agresiOn habria precedido una serie de amenazas recibido por Martin Barrios
          Hernández. Se teme que las amenazas y la agresiOn estén relacionadas con su trabajo como co-
          ordenador de la ComisiOn de Derechos Humanos y Laborales del Valle de Tehuacan que ha
          apoyado a trabajadores despedidos de fabricas de pantalines vaqueris y otras pequeflas maquilas
          en Tehuacan. En enero de 2003 la ComisiOn de Derechos Humanos y Laborales del Valle de
          Tehuacan produjo conjuntamente con la organizaciOn Red de Solidaridad de la Maquila, con
          sede en Canada, un informe sobre la situaciOn de los trabajadores (principalmente mujeres
          indigenas) empleados en las diversas fábricas de tejido en el valle de Tehuacan y los problemas
          que enfrentan, que incluyen salarios bajos, largas jornadas de trabajo, restricciones a la
          formaciOn de sindicatos, mano de obra infantil y peligros para la salud a causa de los productos
          quimicos utilizados en las lavanderias, asi como problemas medioambientales causados por las
          m aquilas.
          373. El 24 de febrero de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre
          la promociOn y la protecciOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un
          llamamiento urgente con respecto a la situaciOn del General José Francisco Gallardo, cx
          general del ejército mexicano y defensor de los derechos humanos. Segün la informaciOn, en
          octubre de 1993 el General José Francisco Gallardo publicO en la revista Forum un articulo
          titulado “Las necesidades de un ombudsman militar en Mexico” en el cual proponia la creaciOn
          del cargo de defensor del pueblo para las fuerzas armadas para examinar las acusaciones de
          violaciones de derechos humanos cometidas por el personal militar. Tambien considerO
          inconstitucionales los poderes especiales del ejército, proponiendo ponerles fin. El 9 de
          noviembre de 1993 habria sido detenido por delitos de malversaciOn, fraude y daflos a la
          propiedad militar, de los cuales ya habia sido exonerado aflos atrás. En marzo de 1998, le habrian
          condenado a 28 aflos y 8 meses de cárcel y le habrIan quitado los grados militares. En diciembre
          de 1998, el Grupo de Trabajo de las Naciones Unidas sobre la DetenciOn Arbitraria emitiO una
          opiniOn sobre el caso del General Gallardo en la cual afirmO que el motivo de la privaciOn de
          libertad del General era el del ejercicio legitimo de su libertad de expresiOn y opiniOn. Fue
          liberado el 7 de febrero de 2002, dos semanas antes de la reexaminaciOn de su caso por la Corte
          Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Segün la nueva informaciOn recibida, el 17 de enero de
          2004, un periOdico nacional habria citado al General José Francisco Gallardo que habria
          criticado el nombramiento de un general del ejército para la unidad antiterrorista de la
          Procuradurla General de la Repüblica. El 19 de enero 2004, habria recibido una llamada
          telefOnica en la cual un presunto miembro del ejército le habr la dicho “cuidate porque te van a
          cargar”. Desde la llamada, el General Francisco Gallardo habria visto vehiculos desconocidos
          cerca de su casa vigilando sus movimientos. Habria denunciado ambos incidentes ante la
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 131
          Procuradurla General de Justicia del Distrito Federal. Se teme que esta amenaza esté relacionada
          con su actividad de denunciar las violaciones de derechos humanos cometidas por las fuerzas
          armadas mexicanas.
          374. El 24 de febrero de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre
          el derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento urgente con respecto a
          la situaciOn de Arturo Soils, Presidente del Centro de Estudios Fronterizos y de PromociOn de
          los Derechos Humanos. La Representante Especial en su carta del 13 de enero de 2003, ya habia
          expresado su preocupaciOn por las amenazas que éste habria recibido al principio de este aflo.
          Segün la nueva informaciOn recibida, el 4 de febrero de 2004, Arturo Solis habria recibido otra
          llamada anOnima cuyo autor le habria amenazado gravemente. Segün las informaciones
          recibidas, el individuo habria pronunciado las palabras “deja de estar chingando o le va a llevar
          la chingada”. Se temen que estas presuntas amenazas de muerte estén relacionadas con el trabajo
          de Arturo Solis a favor de los derechos humanos, en particular el de denunciar la presunta
          implicaciOn de la policia mexicana en asesinatos y secuestros ocurridos en el norte del Estado de
          Tamaulipas, y con las varias declaraciones püblicas realizado con respeto a la presunta
          responsabilidad de la policia mexicana en el asesinato del empresario José Antonio Cervantes
          Ezpeleta, ocurrido en diciembre de 2003.
          375. El 24 de marzo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre el
          derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn
          del Comité de Derechos ilumanos, una organizaciOn que brinda ayuda humanitaria y refugio a
          migrantes en el Estado de Tabasco, y en particular su representante Fray Bias Aivarado. Segün
          la informaciOn recibida, en octubre de 2003 un desconocido habria acercado al esposo de un
          integrante del Comité de Derechos Humanos en Pueblo Nuevo y, refiriéndose a Fray Blas
          Alvarado, le habria dicho “al curita lo tenemos fichado y pronto va a caer”. Segün la
          informaciOn, el 6 de febrero de 2004, la secretaria del Comité de Derechos Humanos en
          Tenosique habria encontrado en la oficina un papel que habria dicho, “Cuidense, los estamos
          vigilando.” El papel habria venido amarrado en la cola de una iguana, la cual se habria
          encontrado escondida dentro de una bolsa de plastico. Se teme que esta amenaza esté relacionada
          con la actividad de derechos humanos del Comité de Derechos Humanos y en particular la de
          denunciar püblicamente el trato de los migrantes y las posibles redes de corrupciOn que
          favorecen a los traficantes de indocumentados.
          376. El 2 de junio de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, el Relator Especial sobre la
          situaciOn de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales de los indigenas y la Relatora
          Especial sobre ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, enviO un llamamiento urgente
          en relaciOn con Lucia Genaro Linares, Erika Gonzáiez Genaro, Eiisabeth Gonzáiez Genaro
          y Adriana Rubio Jorge. Segün las informaciones recibidas, estas personas habrian sido
          amenazadas después de presentar una denuncia oficial contra las autoridades municipales de
          Zapotitlan Tablas, Estado de Guerrero. Los informes indican que la denuncia habria sido
          presentada tras la supuesta muerte bajo custodia, en enero de 2004, de un miembro de la familia
          Genaro, SOcrates Tolentino Gonzalez Genaro. Segün la informaciOn recibida, SOcrates Tolentino
          Gonzalez Genaro, de 18 aflos, habria sido detenido el 14 de enero de 2004 en Zapotitlán Tablas
          por agentes de la policia municipal que lo habrian llevado a la cárcel municipal. Al dia siguiente,
          las autoridades municipales habrian dicho a su madre, Lucia Genaro Linares, que éste se habia
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 132
          suicidado en la prisiôn. Tras la muerte de su hijo, Lucia Genaro Linares habria firmado, por
          instrucciôn del sindico municipal, unos documentos oficiales, despues de que el sindico
          municipal le habria dicho que las autoridades pagarian los gastos del fhneral. Los informes
          indican que el 17 de enero de 2004, la hija de Lucia Genaro, Erika Gonzalez Genaro, habria
          descubierto que su madre habia renunciado involuntariamente al derecho de la familia a que se
          realizara una autopsia, y habia declarado que su hijo intentaba suicidarse. Ante el intento de
          encubrimiento, la familia, con la ayuda de una organizaciôn local de derechos humanos, habria
          conseguido que se exhumara el cadaver de Socrates. El 10 de marzo de 2004, un examen forense
          habria concluido que eljoven habia sido brutalmente golpeado y se habia muerto a consecuencia
          de las lesiones sufridas, que incluian dos fracturas de cráneo, una fractura en una costilla
          derecha, fractura de la tibia izquierda y fractura del esternOn. Lucia Genaro habria presentado
          posteriormente una denuncia ante el ministerio püblico de Tlapa, Estado de Guerrero, contra
          varias autoridades municipales, entre las que se encontrarian el presidente municipal, el sindico
          municipal y tres agentes de la policia municipal de Zapotitlan Tablas. Segün indican los
          informes, desde que se habria presentado la denuncia, Lucia Genaro y otros familiares habrian
          sido intimidados en varias ocasiones. En una de ellas, el sindico municipal habria amenazado a
          Lucia diciendo: “te vamos a matar si note callas”. El 22 de abril de 2004, varios agentes de la
          policia preventiva municipal que viajaban en un vehiculo habrian apuntado con sus armas a las
          hermanas de SOcrates, Erika y Elizabeth Gonzalez Genaro, asi como a su tia, Cesarea Linares, en
          Zapotitlan Tablas. El 3 de mayo de 2004, tres policias municipales habrian gritado “señora
          pendeja” a Lucia Genaro en la calle y le habrian dicho que no hiciera nada sobre la muerte de su
          hijo. Erika Gonzalez Genaro habria dejado de ir a la escuela por temor por su propia seguridad.
          La novia de SOcrates, Adriana Rubio Jorge, tambien habria sido acosada cuando, el 7 de mayo de
          2004, a las tres de la madrugada, dos agentes municipales habrian pasado por delante de su casa
          y habrian arrojado piedras al tejado del edificio.
          377. El 9 de junio de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          promociOn y la protecciOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un
          llamamiento urgente sobre la situaciOn de Isidro Baldenegro y ilermenegildo Rivas,
          defensores de derechos humanos y ecologistas que trabajan a favor de los derechos de la
          comunidad de indigenas raramuri y en particular para poner fin a la explotaciOn maderera no
          regulada de tierra forestales. Segün la informaciOn recibida, el 29 de marzo de 2003, agentes de
          la Policia Judicial del Estado habrian detenido a Isidro Baldenegro y Hermenegildo Rivas sin
          orden judicial en la comunidad de Coloradas de Virgen en el Estado de Chihuahua. Se habrian
          acusado a ambos de posesiOn ilegal de armas e Isidro Baldenegro habria sido acusado de
          posesiOn de marihuana. El 7 de abril de 2003, eljuez del Juzgado Penal del Distrito Judicial de
          Hidalgo habria ordenado la detenciOn preventiva de ambos. Segün los informes, numerosos
          testigos habrian declarado que las pruebas contra ambos habrian sido falsificadas supuestamente
          por orden del cacique local y en junio de 2003, la ComisiOn Estatal de Derechos Humanos de
          Chihuahua habria dicho al Procurador General de Justicia del Estado de Chihuahua que
          investigara a los agentes implicados. En este contexto y segün la informaciOn recibida, en abril
          de 2004 la unidad de asuntos internos de la Procuraduria General del Estado de Chihuahua
          habria concluido que siete agentes de la policia judicial habrian sido responsables de falsificar las
          pruebas contra Isidro Baldenegro y Hermenegildo Rivas y habria iniciado procedimientos
          penales contra ellos en los tribunales estatales. Segün la informaciOn recibida, a pesar de que se
          habria demostrado que los cargos contra los dos hombres habrian sido falsificados, el fiscal
          federal no los habria retirado y habria seguido pidiendo que ambos sean condenados. Segün los
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 133
          informes, ci veredicto judicial de su caso seria inminente. Se teme que la supuesta detencion
          arbitraria y las pruebas faisas contra Isidro Baidenegro y Hermenegildo Rivas representen una
          manera de impedir sus actividades de defender los derechos de su comunidad.
          378. El 12 de agosto de 2004, la Representante Especial junto con ci Relator Especial sobre ci
          derecho ala libertad de opinion y de expresiOn, enviO una carta de alegaciOn. El 13 de mayo de
          2004, ci periodista y corresponsal de Cimacnoticias en Chiapas, Manuel de Ia Cruz, habrIa sido
          secuestrado y goipeado por unos 20 policIas municipales en Tuxtia Gutiérrez. Manuel de la Cruz
          habrIa presentado una queja ante la ComisiOn Estatal de Derechos Humanos (CEDH) ci 13 de
          mayo de 2004. La CEDH ic habrIa ofrecido medidas precautorias para ei y su compaflera Laura
          Matus. Se teme que estos hechos estén relacionados con las denuncias pübiicas de Manuel de la
          Cruz respecto a violaciones de derechos humanos que habrIan ocurrido durante ci conflicto
          indIgena de Los Altos.
          379. El 19 de agosto de 2004, la Representante Especial enviO un ilamamiento urgente sobre
          la situaciOnde Pedro RaW Lopez llernández, Ombudsman chiapaneco y presidente de la
          ComisiOn de Derechos Humanos dci Estado de Chiapas, cuyo caso ya fue objeto de dos previas
          comunicaciones de la Representante y la Relatora Especial sobre ejecuciones extrajudiciales,
          sumarias o arbitrarias, enviadas al Gobierno ci 17 de enero de 2002 y ci 17 de octubre de 2002.
          Segün la nueva informaciOn recibida, ci 16 de agosto de 2004, ci Congreso dci Estado de
          Chiapas habrIa ratificado un dictamen de la ComisiOn de Justicia dci 13 de agosto, de separar
          temporaimente a Pedro Raüi LOpez dci cargo de presidente de la ComisiOn Estatal de Derechos
          Humanos, por una acusaciOn de haber obstaculizado la labor dci Organo Fiscalizador para la
          revisiOn de los ingresos de la comisiOn a su cargo. Unas horas después de ratificar ci dictamen,
          se informa que ci yerno de Pedro Raüi LOpez, Moisés Cervantes Perez, habrIa sido detenido en la
          ComisiOn Estatal de Derechos Humanos por elementos de la Agencia Estatal de InvestigaciOn
          que ic habrIan conducido a la Procuradurla General de Justicia dci Estado. Hasta ci momento no
          se conoce la situaciOn de Moisés Cervantes Perez. Durante ci mismo dIa, la hija de Pedro Raüi
          LOpez, Martina Martha LOpez Santiago, habrIa sido detenida por individuos no identificados que
          habrIan revisado su boisa y despues la habrIan dejado ir. Sc teme que estos actos de
          hostigamiento y la remociOn temporal dci Pedro Raüi LOpez puedan constituir un ataque contra
          la ComisiOn de Derechos Humanos dci Estado de Chiapas con ci fin de impedir ci trabajo
          realizado por dicho organismo.
          380. El 21 de septiembre de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con ci Relator Especial
          sobre ci derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y ci Relator Especial sobre la tortura,
          enviO una carta de alegaciOn. Los relatores especiales han recibido informaciOn segün la cual un
          grupo de aproximadamente cinco personas no identificadas habrIan disparado 15 veces contra
          lloracio Zacarlas Barrientos Peralta, un campesino de la comunidad de La Florida, municipio
          de Atoyac de Alvarez, Estado de Guerrero, que habrIa failecido ci 28 de noviembre dci 2003 por
          la tarde. Los hechos habrIan ocurrido cuando Horacio Zacarlas Barrientos Peraita se encontraba
          trabajando en su parcela y a menos de 24 horas que ci Juzgado Cuarto Penal dci Distrito de
          Acapulco librara la primera orden de aprehensiOn en contra de uno de los represores de la
          ilamada “guerra sucia”, un cx -comandante de la policla judicial. Dc acuerdo con la informaciOn
          recibida, Horacio Zacarlas Barrientos Peraita habrIa sido vIctima y a testigo presencial de la
          detenciOn, tortura, ejecuciOn y desapariciOn de campesinos en los aflos 1970, en acciones
          supuestamente realizadas por ci ejército y la policla mexicanos, en ci municipio de Atoyac de
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 134
          Alvarez, y era justamente uno de los principales testigos de la Fiscalia Especial para
          Movimientos Sociales y Politicos del Pasado (FEMOSPP), dentro de las investigaciones que se
          llevan a cabo contra militares y policias involucrados en las mencionadas violaciones de los
          derechos humanos. Una organizaciOn de defensa de los derechos humanos habria informado en
          reiteradas ocasiones que no era conveniente que Horacio Zacarias Barrientos Peralta fuera
          entrevistado en su casa y que era necesario llevarlo a declarar a Acapulco o a Ciudad de Mexico,
          porque opinaban que su vida corria peligro.
          381. El 17 de noviembre de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial
          sobre el derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y el Relator Especial sobre la situaciOn
          de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales de los indigenas, enviO un llamamiento
          urgente en relaciOn con la situaciOn de inseguridad, peligro e indefensiOn judicial que viven las
          comunidades indigenas de Oaxaca. En particular, refieren a la situaciOn de los miembros del
          Consejo Indigena Popular de Oaxaca “Ricardo Flores Magón” como consecuencia de los
          recientes actos de hostigamiento y posibles intentos de asesinato que se habrian llevado a cabo
          por parte de distintas corporaciones policiacas de Oaxaca. D c acuerdo con las informaciones
          recibidas, el 29 de septiembre Ra M Javier Gatica Bautista, dirigente indigena de la mencionada
          organizaciOn y defensor de los derechos humanos de los indigenas, y la persona que lo
          acompaflaba, Pedro Bautista Rojas, habrian padecido un intento de homicidio mientras
          regresaban a la Ciudad de Mexico. Se alega que en dicha ocasiOn, tres sujetos que presuntamente
          trabajan con José Murat Casab, Gobernador del Estado de Oaxaca, habrian atentado contra la
          vida de Raül Javier Gatica Bautista pero debido a la intervenciOn de la policia auxiliar las armas
          fueron retiradas y el atentado fue impedido. Segün se informa, dichos hechos se suman a
          recientes actos de intimidaciOn sufridos por los miembros del Consejo Jndigena Popular de
          Oaxaca “Ricardo Flores MagOn”. En varias ocasiones, Raül Javier Gatica Bautista se entrevistO
          con el Relator Especial sobre la situaciOn de los derechos humanos y libertades fundamentales de
          los indigenas y le manifesto su preocupaciOn por las constantes amenazas y acosos sufridos por
          el y las poblaciones indigenas de Oaxaca. A pesar de dos reuniones llevadas a cabo los dias 8 y
          13 de octubre 2004 con las instituciones püblicas en las cuales se discutieron posibilidades de
          habilitar mecanismos temporales de protecciOn para garantizar la integridad fisica y la vida de
          los miembros del Consejo Indigena Popular de Oaxaca “Ricardo Flores MagOn”, se denuncia la
          escasa voluntad politica de los representantes tanto federales como estatales de cumplir con los
          requisitos minimos de seguridad. Se teme que estos actos de hostigamiento en contra del Consejo
          Indigena Popular de Oaxaca “Ricardo Flores MagOn” y el atentado contra la vida de RaM Javier
          Gatica Bautista y Pedro Bautista Rojas puedan estar relacionados con sus actividades como
          defensores de los derechos humanos, en particular en la defensa de los derechos de los pueblos
          indigenas.
          Comunicaciones recibidas
          382. Por carta fechada el 11 de marzo de 2004, el Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 24 de febrero de 2004 con informaciOn en torno al
          caso de José Francisco Gallardo Rodriguez. El Gobierno confirmO que el 21 de enero de 2004
          el afectado habria presentado una denuncia ante la Fiscalia desconcentrada en Tlalphan. En la
          actualidad las amenazas serán investigadas por parte de la fiscalia local, y en cuanto se termine la
          investigaciOn el Gobierno remitirá el resultado con la mayor brevedad posible. Por el momento,
          el Gobierno informO que el citado ciudadano beneficiara de medidas provisionales otorgadas por
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 135
          la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, entre elias, un servicio de acompaflamiento y
          protecciôn.
          383. Por carta fechada ci 27 de abril de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 23 de enero de 2004 con respecto a la situaciôn de
          Martin Barrios llernández. El Gobierno informo que ci 30 de diciembre de 2003 la victima
          habria presentado una denuncia ante la Procuraduria General de Justicia dcl Estado de Puebia
          para denunciar al probable responsabie. Por consecuencia, la Policia habria iniciado una
          investigaciôn para averiguar ci nombre y domiciiio de los probabies responsabies, asi como de
          los testigos presenciales. Como consecuencia, se iogro la comparencia del probable responsabie
          del delito de lesiones y amenazas. El denunciante presentô queja ante la Comisiôn de Derechos
          Humanos dci Estado Puebia con motivo de los mismos hechos. Un representante de dicha
          Comisiôn acudio a la ciudad de Tehuacan Puebia, para solicitar a la Procuraduria General de
          Justicia de Puebia y a la Direcciôn de Seguridad Pübiica Municipal de Tehuacan Puebia que
          tomen las medidas necesarias para garantizar la seguridad e integridad fisica dci denunciante,
          peticiôn que the aceptada por esa autoridad. El Gobierno informo que la autoridad ministerial
          local y la Comisiôn de Derechos Humanos dci Estado Puebia están investigando los hechos
          denunciados. Adicionaimente, ci Gobierno de Colombia seguirá atento al resuitado de las
          investigaciones que se adelanten, respecto de lo cual informara oportunamente a la
          Representante Especial.
          384. Por carta fechada ci 10 dejunio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 13 de enero y ci 2 de febrero de 2004 con
          informacion relacionada a la situaciôn de Arturo Soils Gómez, ci Presidente dci Centro de
          Estudios Fronterizos y de Promociôn de los Derechos Humanos (CEFPRODHAC), una
          organizaciôn que está investigando la muerte de José Antonio Cervantes. Respecto a la seguridad
          dci citado ciudadano, la Policia Ministerial dci Estado de Tamaulipas habria recibido de oficio la
          denuncia que se ic habr la permitido de abrir una investigaciôn. La autoridad ministerial lo habria
          juzgado necesario de otorgar varias medidas cautelares para asegurar la integridad fisica de
          Arturo Soils Gômez, entre elias, la vigilancia policial y contacto inmediata entre ci victima y la
          Comisiôn de Derechos Humanos dci Estado en todo momento. Respecto a la investigaciôn dci
          secuestro y homicidio, ci S de enero de 2004 los supuestos responsabies habr lan sido puestos a la
          disposicion dci Juez Segundo de Primera Instancia Penal dci Quinto Distrito Judicial dci Estado.
          Asimismo, habria solicitado ordenes de aprehension en contra de cuatro otras personas, los
          trámites para la extradicion de una de elias, que habria estado interceptado en los Estados Unidos
          de America, habr lan sido iniciados.
          385. Por carta fechada ci 15 dejunio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 24 de marzo de 2004 con respecto a la situaciôn de
          Fray Bias Aivarado. El Gobierno confirmo que la victima habria presentado una denuncia ante
          la Procuraduria General de Justicia de Tabasco ci 10 de abril de 2004. No obstante, la Comisiôn
          Estatal de Derechos Humanos de Tabasco habria deciarado que, por su parte, no habria recibido
          ninguna queja en reiacion con ci asunto. Sin embargo, aun intentarla estabiecer contacto con ci
          presunto quereilante para informarie de su derecho a la protecciôn ante la icy. El Gobierno
          deciaro en cuanto tenga más informacion informaria oportunamente a la Representante Especial.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 136
          386. Por carta fechada ci 21 de Junio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 9 de Junio de 2004 con respecto al caso de Isidro
          Baldenegro y ilermenegildo Rivas. El Gobierno informO que la ComisiOn Estatal de Derechos
          Humanos de Chihuahua habrIa abierto una investigaciOn al fin de la cual habrIa recomendado
          que la SubprocuradurIa de Justicia Zona Sur investigara la forma y los términos en que los
          citados ciudadanos se habrIan encontrado detenidos.
          387. Por carta fechada ci 4 de agosto de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 9 de Junio de 2004 con la punterla de proporcionar
          informaciOn adicional sobre Isidro Baldenegro y ilermenegildo Rivas. En Junio de 2004, una
          opiniOn técnica JurIdica habla ratificado conciusiones no acusatorias a favor de los detenidos. A
          raIz de eso, ci Juez habla sobreseldo la causa penal y ci 23 de Junio de 2004, ics habla puesto en
          libertad.
          388. Por carta fechada ci 10 de Julio de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 2 de Junio de 2004 sobre Lucia Genaro Linares,
          Adriana Rubio Jorge, Erika Gonzalez Genaro y Elisabeth Gonzalez Genaro. El Gobierno
          informO que ci procedimiento investigativo que habrIa sido iniciado por la Procuradurla General
          de Justicia dci Estado de Guerrero ci 15 de enero de 2004 continuarIa a fin de determinar los
          hechos verdaderos entorno a la muerte de SOcrates Tolentino Gonzalez Genaro. Una vez que se
          arroje todos los elementos necesarios, se ejercitarla la acciOn penal correspondiente.
          389. Por carta fechada ci 24 de septiembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 19 de agosto de 2004 con respecto a la situaciOn de
          Pedro RaW Lopez llernández. El Gobierno dci Estado de Chiapas informO que ci citado
          ciudadano habrIa beneficiado de medidas cautelares desde ci 16 de enero de 2002. Respecto a las
          presuntas detenciones dci yerno e hija de Pedro Raüi LOpez Hernández, ci Gobierno deciarO que
          no habla encontrado ninguna prueba para comprobar la detenciOn de ambos.
          390. Por carta fechada ci 29 de octubre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO a la comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 12 de agosto de 2004 relativa a la situaciOn de
          Manuel de Ia Cruz. El Gobierno informO que existen evidencias en la averiguaciOn previa
          iniciada por ci Minsterio Pübiico que permiten presumir que los agentes municipaics
          denunciados incurrieron en hechos delictivos; situaciOn que en su oportunidad vaiorará ci Organo
          Jurisdiccional. AgregO que es cierto que ci Señor Manuel de la Cruz the objeto de abuso y
          negligencia por parte de servidores pübiicos municipaics. Además, se informO que ci 2 de agosto
          de 2004. se dictO auto de formal prisiOn en contra de cuatro policlas municipaics como probabies
          responsabies de los delitos de robo con violencia, privaciOn ilegal de la libertad, abuso de
          autoridad y lesiones. Los cuatro policlas se encuentran en detenciOn preventiva y están siendo
          procesados baJo una causa penal dci Juzgado Segundo de primera Instancia dci Ramo Penal dci
          Distrito Judicial de Tuxtia que se encuentra en etapa de instrucciOn. Asimismo, la ComisiOn
          Estatal de Derechos Humanos ileva a cabo una investigaciOn que se encuentra pendiente de
          conclusion definitiva.
          391. Por carta fechada ci 29 de noviembre de 2004, ci Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 21 de septiembre de 2004 referente ala muerte de
          Zacarias Barrientos Peralta. El Gobierno informO que ci 6 de enero de 2004 se habrIa
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 137
          proferido una orden de captura contra cinco personas, y les habria puesto a disposicion del Juez
          de Primera Jnstancia en Materia Penal del Distrito Judicial de Galeana. Asimismo, un proceso
          habria sido iniciado en contra de los presuntos responsables, el resultado de la cual, remitiria a la
          mayor brevedad posible.
          Seguimiento de comunicaciones transmitidas previamente
          392. Por carta fechada el 28 de enero de 2004, el Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 13 de noviembre de 2003 relativa a la situaciôn de
          Marisela Ortiz. El gobierno transmitiô un informe de la subprocuraduria de investigaciôn en el
          que constatô que habria entrevistado a Marisela Ortiz y solicitado la ayuda técnica de un
          especialista de identificacion (retrato hablado) con el fin de identificar a los responsables de las
          amenazas sufridas por ella. Se adjunto a la comunicaciôn recibida el retrato realizado por el
          especialista del presunto responsable. Ademas, el gobierno informo que oficiales de la
          Procuraduria General se habrian trasladado al domicilio de Marisela Ortiz con el prôposito de
          entrevistarla, sin embargo, les habria informado que la señora no se encontraba ya que se habria
          ido a los Estados Unidos por temor a represalias.
          393. Por carta fechada el 5 de enero de 2004, el Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 13 de septiembre de 2002 relativa a la situaciôn de
          Francisco Cortés Pastenes. El gobierno informo que el 30 de agosto de 2002, la CIDH
          transmitiô una nota mediante la cual decreto medidas cautelares de carácter urgente a favor de la
          Enedina Cervantes Salgado, esposa de Faustino Jiménez, asi como a favor de Francisco Cortés
          Pastenes. Se comunicô también que el Gobierno de Mexico implemento las siguientes medidas a
          favor del Francisco Cortés Pastenes: una escolta integrada por elementos de la Procuraduria
          General de la Repüblica, y un nümero telefonico de seguridad para comunicarse con la Unidad
          de Promociôn y Defensa de los Derechos Humanos de SEGOB. Las investigaciones se
          encuentran a cargo de la Unidad contra la Delincuencia Organizada (UEDO).
          Observaciones
          394. The Special Representative would like to thank the Government for its responses, and
          once again comment on their ongoing diligence in promptly replying to multiple
          communications. The Special Representative welcomes the arrest of four police officers
          currently held in detention awaiting trial for the kidnapping and ill-reatment of Manuel de la
          Cruz. She regrets that in the communication received concerning Lucia Genaro Linares, Adriana
          Rubio Jorge, Erika Gonzalez Genaro and Elisabeth Gonzalez Genaro, the Government referred
          solely to the ongoing investigation of Socrates Tolentino Gonzalez Genaro and thus omitted to
          inform the Special Respresentative of any investigation into the threats against the
          aforementioned human rights defenders. She refers to her main report to the Commission on
          Human Rights (E/CN.4/200 5/101) for a detailed analysis of the trends in the situation of human
          rights defenders in Mexico, and for her observations to these trends.
          Morocco
          Communications envoyées
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 138
          395. Le l2janvier 2004, la Representante speciale a envoyc un appel urgent concernant la
          situation de Mohammed Rachid Chrii, vice-secretaire general de la section de l'Association
          marocaine des droits de l'homme (AMDH) a Safi. Selon les informations reçues, Mohammed
          Rachid Chrii aurait etc interpelle le 22 avril 2003 a la suite d'une altercation qu'il aurait cue dans
          la rue avec un policier alors que cc dernier brutalisait un homme en etat d'arrestation dans un
          quartier de la ville de Safi. Selon les informations reçues, peu aprés cette altercation, il aurait etc
          suivi et enleve par cc méme policier et certains de ses collégues et emmene dans un centre de
          detention non officiel oü il aurait etc soumis a de mauvais traitements, notamment a des coups et
          a l'introduction d'objets dans l'anus. Ii aurait ensuite etc conduit au commissariat de police oü il
          aurait de nouveau subi des sevices. Alors que des certificats medicaux attesteraient des sevices et
          traumatismes subis par M. Chrii, aucune enquête n'aurait etc ouverte ace jour sur ces faits.
          D'autre part, selon les informations reçues, le 9 mai 2003, Mohammed Rachid Chrii aurait etc
          condamne par le tribunal de premiere instance de Safi pour outrage a fonctionnaires publics dans
          l'exercice de leurs fonctions a 18 mois de prison ferme et 4000 dirhams d'amende. Ce verdict
          aurait etc confirme en appel par la cour d'appel de Safi le 10 juin 2003. Une procedure d'appel
          serait en cours mais aucune date d'audience n'aurait etc fixee.
          396. Le 18 fevHer 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special
          sur la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression et le Rapporteur
          special sur la torture, a envoyc une lettre d'allegation concernant des allegations de brutalite
          contre Abde lhamid Amine ainsi que plusieurs militants lors d'un sit-in pacifique devant le
          Parlement a Rabat, organise le 28 janvier 2004 a l'appel de la Coalition pour le droit aux soins et
          l'accCs aux medicaments et de celle d'artistes pour la diversite culturelle. M. Amine aurait etc
          violemment frappe par la police et serait reste inanime pendant plusieurs minutes suite aux coups
          reçus.
          397. Le 28 octobre 2004, la Representante speciale a envoyc un appel urgent concernant la
          situation de M. A u Salem Tamek. Ali Salem Tamek, un militant pour l'independance du Sahara
          occidental, est egalement militant de la branche sahraoui du Forum pour la verite et la Justice,
          une association qui fait campagne pour les droits de victimes de torture, de disparitions forcees et
          d'autres violations des droits de l'homme et de leurs familles. Le 10 septembre 2002, M. Tamek
          a etc condamne a deux ans d'emprisonnement et a une amende pour << misc en danger de la
          securite interieure de l'Etat>>. Le 30 janvier 2003, alors qu'il etait en detention au complexe
          penitencier de Sale, un de ses codetenus l'aurait attaque avec une barre de metal. Ce méme
          codetenu l'aurait deja auparavant attaque avec un couteau. En raison de la deterioration de sa
          sante, M. Tamek aurait etc transfere le 29juin 2003 a l'hopital de la prison de Alt Melloul.
          M. Tamek aurait etc libere debut janvier 2004 par un decret d'amnistie royale. Selon les
          informations reçues, Ali Salem Tamek souffrirait de plusieurs maladies (asthme, crises
          cardiaques, rhumatisme, intestins, estomac et peau) et aurait besoin de se deplacer a l'etranger
          pour y être hospitalise. Ii aurait depose vainement trois dossiers de demande de passeport : le
          premier, le 6 avril 1999, sous le numero 149; le deuxiCme, le 9 fevrier 2001, sous le numero 55;
          et, le dernier, le 21 octobre 2004. A cet egard, nous sommes preoccupes par le fait que les delais
          pour delivrer un passeport a M. Tamek pourraient être motives par une volonte de le punir pour
          ses activites passees au scm du Forum pour la verite et la Justice, et dans le but d'exercer des
          pressions a son egard afin qu'il ne reprenne pas ses activites au scm de cette association, malgre
          son etat de sante critique.
          Communications reçues
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 139
          398. Par lettres en date du l4janvier, du l6juin etdu 6 aoüt 2004, le Gouvernementa
          repondu ala communication envoyée par la Représentante speciale, le l2janvier 2004,
          concernant la situation de M. Mohammed Rachid Chrii qui aurait fait l'objet d'une affaire de
          commerce illegal de drogues. Concernant les accusations de mauvais traitement, le
          Gouvernement observe que l'examen medical présenté le 24 avril 2004 et l'examen independant
          auraient indique que bien que l'interesse ait présenté des bleus et des blessures mineures, cela ne
          pouvait constituer des marques de torture. Concernant les charges pesant sur Mohammed Rachid
          Chrii, cc dernier aurait ete condamne pour commerce illegal de drogues, transfert clandestin de
          tabac, port d'arme et outrage a fonctionnaires dans l'exercice de leurs fonctions. Ii aurait ete
          condamne a une peine de dix-huit mois d'emprisonnement et a une amende de 4 000 dirhams. La
          cour d'appel aurait néanmoins revise la sentence pour commerce illegal de drogues. Le 7 janvier
          2004, l'interesse aurait beneficie de la grace royale pour des raisons humanitaires.
          Observations
          399. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies relating to the
          communication sent in the case of Mr. Chrii. She regrets that the Government has not, at the
          moment of the finalization of the present report, submitted replies to the other communications.
          400. With regard to the case of Mr. Chrii, the Special Representative welcomes the Royal
          pardon granted to him. She also welcomes that Mr. Chrii was subjected to a medical visit to
          clarify his allegations of torture at the hands of the police. The Special Representative regrets,
          however, that the perpetrators of the ill-treatment of Mr. Chrii, which appears to be confirmed by
          the results of the medical examination, have not been subjected to disciplinary or criminal
          proceedings. Such proceedings are required, whether Mr. Chrii was, as he alleges, severely
          tortured, or only subjected to lesser ill-treatment (still resulting in visible wounds) at the hands of
          the police, as the Government concedes. Similarly, the Special Representative is concerned at the
          lack of information with regard to any disciplinary or criminal action taken against the police
          who beat Mr. Amine.
          401. Concerning the case of Mr. Tamek, the Special Representative welcomes the fact that Mr.
          Tamek was in the meantime issued a passport.
          Myanmar
          Communciations sent
          402. On 18 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Chairman-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning U Aye Kyu, also known as “Monywa”
          Aung Shin, a former newspaper editor, U Aung Myint, also known as “Phyapon” Ni Loan Oo, a
          newspaper journalist, U Tun Myint, a teacher, U Naing Naing, also known as Saw Naing Naing,
          an elected member of Parliament, and U Soc Han, a former high court advocate, all of whom
          have been involved in the work of the National League for Democracy . According to the
          allegations received, U Aye Kyu, U Tun Myint, U Naing Naing and U Soc Han, who are
          currently detained in the Insein Prison, all suffer from serious health problems. U Aye Kyu
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 140
          specifically suffers from asthma and respiratory problems. U Aung Myint is currently held in the
          Kalay Prison, approximately 600 miles away from Yangon, where prisoners allegedly rely on the
          provision of food and medicine from relatives. In September 2000, the five persons mentioned
          above participated in the writing of a statement that was broadcast over the radio protesting
          against the de facto house arrest of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, leader of the National League for
          Democracy, as well as other members of that organization. On 14 December 2000, they were
          sentenced to 21 years' imprisonment by the Insein Jail Additional Military Tribunal for the
          violation of press and security laws, during a trial for which they did not have legal
          representation. In view of their reported poor health, concern is expressed for their mental and
          physical integrity if they do not receive prompt and adequate medical attention.
          Observations
          403. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Nepal
          Communications sent
          404. On 18 December 2003, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal regarding Mr. Ram Krishna
          Adhikari, a reporter for the weekly “Saghu”, who has reportedly been missing since 10
          December 2003. He was last seen attending a human rights event organized by the Human
          Rights Organization of Nepal (HURON), at the Hotel Orchid in Kathmandu. According to
          reports, the journalist may have been detained by security forces and held at a secret location.
          405. On 19 January 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning Mr
          Dinesh Raj Prasain, Coordinator of the Collective Campaign for Peace (COAP), who was
          allegedly beaten by members of the Royal Nepali Army who also reportedly searched his
          residence in Banasthali. According to the information received, on 13 January six men in
          civilian clothes and who reportedly identified themselves as security personnel, arrived at his
          house demanding to search it for documents and materials. Dinesh Raj Prasain reportedly refused
          to open the door, following which one of the men allegedly produced a revolver and threatened
          to kill him. It is reported that the men then proceeded to break down the door and at least four of
          them, one of whom was reportedly referred to as “Major”, allegedly started beating Mr Prasain
          and kicking him in the face, head, stomach and thighs while the other men carried out a search of
          his house. It is fhrther reported that 15 members of the Nepali Army surrounded the building
          during the above incident. Additional reports indicate that Dinesh Raj Prasain has recently
          received death threats. Concern has been expressed that the alleged attack and threats against
          Dinesh Raj Prasain are a result of his human rights work.
          406. On 4 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Bhimsen Kumar
          Gautam, a 40-year-old teacher and auditor from Dhuseni Shivalaya Village Development
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 141
          Committee (VDC) in Kavrepalanchowk district, currently residing in Shreenagar Tole,
          Minbhawan, in Kathmandu municipality. He is reported to be a member of the Nepal National
          Teachers' Association, which is close to the Communist Party of Nepal - United Marxist
          Leninist (CPN-UML), and of the Nepal section of Amnesty International. He was reportedly
          questioned and arrested on 3 March 2004 by a group of men who entered the building where he
          rents a room and identified themselves as security forces personnel. His papers and citizenship
          documents were reportedly checked and he was allegedly told to get some clothes on and prepare
          to leave. It is also alleged that the security forces made a brief attempt to search the room before
          taking him away. It is reportedly not known why he was arrested. His whereabouts are reportedly
          unknown since then. Efforts by relatives to locate him, including informing the National Human
          Rights Commission, have so far been reportedly unsuccessful. In view of his alleged detention at
          an undisclosed location, fears have been expressed that he may be at risk of torture or other
          forms of ill-treatment.
          407. On 20 April 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal regarding the
          situation of Shiva Kumar Pradhan, a human rights defender and secretary-general of yhe
          People's Forum for Human Rights and Development Bhutan (PFHRD). According to the
          information received, Shiva Kumar Pradhan was allegedly arrested on 19 September 2001 and
          charged with the murder of R. K. Budathoki, President of the Bhutan People's Party who was
          reportedly killed on 9 September 2001 in Damak, Jhapa. Due to his refugee status, Shiva Kumar
          Pradhan was reportedly denied bail and has allegedly been detained in the District Prison of
          Changdragari since 16 October 2001. It is reported that the publicly known facts surrounding the
          murder do not corroborate the charges brought against Shiva Kumar Pradhan. It is fhrther
          reported that the final hearing of his case in the District Court of Changdragari has been
          postponed 18 times and that the reasons for the repeated postponements are allegedly unknown.
          The final hearing is reportedly scheduled for 2 May 2004. Concern has been expressed that the
          arrest and imprisonment of Shiva Kumar Pradhan and the reported delay in legal proceedings
          may be an attempt at hindering his human rights activities.
          408. On 7 July 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women,
          sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning the case of Mama Sunuwar, a 15-year-old girl whose
          whereabouts are unknown since her alleged arrest on 17 February 2004. In this context, the
          special rapporteurs have also received information concerning Ms. Bimala B.K., a 20-year-old
          resident of Kharelthok Village Development Committee (VDC) 4 of Kavre, who reportedly
          witnessed the arrest of Mama Sunuwar. According to the new information received, Bimala B.K
          was arrested by the police of Bhagvati Station on 11 February 2004 at around 10a.m., when she
          was returning home from Bhagvati Temple. She was arrested on suspicion of being a Maoist. It
          is reported that at Bhagvati Police Station, she was severely beaten on various occasions and hit
          with plastic pipes, her head was submerged into water, her knees and feet were slot with a sharp
          blade and salt and chilli powder were sprinkled over the injuries. She was reportedly gang-raped
          by soldiers during 15 consecutive nights. She is also reported to have been forced to take
          sedatives. According to the information received, on 18 February 2004 she was taken to
          Bhagvatisthan and forced to show to the police Mama Sunuwar's house. Mama Sunuwar was
          arrested and they were both taken together to Shantigate Army Barracks and to Panchkal Centre,
          where they were kept in separate rooms and beaten. Bimala B.K later reported that she had heard
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 142
          Mama Sunuwar screaming with pain. On 19 February 2004, Bimala BK. was taken to Dhulikhel
          Police Station and has not seen Mama Sunuwar since then. Whenever she asked police about her
          location and condition, she was given varying responses. On one occasion she was told that she
          had been killed. On 24 March 2004, Bimala B.K. was transferred from Dhulikhel Police Station
          to a Women's prison. As far as the special rapporteurs have been informed, no detention warrant
          has been issued by any judicial authority. It is reported that a foreign diplomatic embassy was
          informed by the army that Mama Sunuwar was killed when she tried to escape from custody, that
          an autopsy was conducted and the body handed over to her family. However, her relatives
          sustain that they have never seen her body nor received any information about her fate. Finally,
          the special rapporteurs have received information according to which relatives of Mama
          Sunuwar are subjected to harassment and intimidation since her arrest.
          409. On 12 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of
          physical and mental health and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent
          appeal regarding several male transvestites and the Blue Diamond Society of Nepal, a NGO
          working with sexual minorities on sexual health including HP//AIDS and campaigning for the
          rights of sexual minorities. According to the allegations received, on 9 August 2004, 39 male
          transvestites, usually called metis, all members of the Blue Diamond Society, were arrested on
          the street and in public places including bars and restaurants. They are now held in Hanuman
          Dhoka police station and were not given food or water during the first 15 hours in custody. They
          have not yet been charged with any offence. Concerns have been expressed that their physical
          integrity may be at risk. On 25 July, the Police allegedly raped four male transvestites, Jaya
          Bahadur Lama, Ramesh Lama, Binod and Madan. They were reportedly stopped by the
          police at about 3.30 a.m. in a street near Jamal, forced into a police van, beaten and their money
          was taken away. While driving around the city, the van stopped and one officer allegedly took
          Jaya Bahadur Lama into the street, beat him, forced him to perform oral sex and raped him. The
          men were then reportedly taken to Gausala police station where Ramesh Lama was taken into the
          backyard of the police station, beaten and forced to perform oral sex. Although Jaya Bahadur and
          Ramesh Lama managed to escape from the police, Binod and Madan were kept inside the van
          and were reportedly beaten and raped by 12 policemen for around three hours. The Blue
          Diamond Society made a complaint to police authorities about this attack and there is concern
          that the recent arrests may be in retaliation for this complaint. A private writ was recently filed in
          the Supreme Court of Nepal against the Blue Diamond Society, which calls for closing down the
          Blue Diamond Society on the grounds that the organization “promotes homosexuality”. Concerns
          have been expressed that defending this court action would seriously hinder the effective
          functioning of the Blue Diamond Society, given the organization's limited human and financial
          resources, and that closing down the Blue Diamond Society would be detrimental to HIV
          prevention efforts in Nepal. Concerns also have been expressed that other organizations working
          in the area of HIV prevention among gay men could be open to similar charges.
          410. On 15 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal regarding ilira Lal Khadka, chairman of the Rukum district branch of Human Rights
          and Peace Society (HURPES)l. According to the information received on 29 August 2004, at
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 143
          approximately 8 p.m., Hira Lal Khadka was arrested at his home/office in Jumlikhalanga,
          Rukum district, and taken to Rukum District Police Office. It is reported that prior to his arrest,
          an estimated 40 to 50 police officers surrounded the building and searched his home. It is fhrther
          reported that a detention order has been issued against Hira Lal Khadka under the Terrorist and
          Disruptive Activities (Punishment and Control) Act (TADA) authorizing his detention for 90
          days without trial. In the days subsequent to his arrest he was allegedly given a letter in which he
          was accused of publishing pamphlets written by relatives of members of the Communist Party of
          Nepal (CPN) (Maoist) who have “disappeared”. Sources indicate that these pamphlets appealed
          to the authorities to make known the whereabouts of the “disappeared”. After three days in
          detention, representatives of civil society were allowed to visit him and according to reports
          received it is feared that he may have been subjected to ill-treatment. On 6 September, Hira Lal
          Khadka was reportedly transferred to Nepalgunj Prison, Banke district,, were he remains in
          detention. Concern has been expressed that Hira Lal Khadka may have been arrested and
          detained as a direct result of his human rights activities as chairman of HURPES and in
          particular his public condemnation of human rights violations, including disappearances,
          allegedly committed by the security forces. Further concern has been expressed for the safety of
          Hira Lal Khadka after the alleged killing of a a member of HURPES,.Dekendra Raj Thapa, on 11
          August2004.
          411. On 15 September 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal regarding
          Dekendra Raj Thapa, a journalist with Radio Nepal, human rights defender and member of the
          Dailekh district branch of Human Rights and Peace Society (HURPES). According to the
          information received, on 27 June 2004, Dekendra Raj Thapa was reportedly abducted and
          detained by a group of CPN-Maoists who had summoned him to discuss a drinking water project
          that he had been managing. On 11 August 2004, it is alleged that Dekendra Raj Thapa was killed
          by his Maoist captors who cited 10 charges against him, including acting as master of
          ceremonies at an event attended by the King of Nepal, corruption in a local drinking water
          project and being on the payroll of the army to spy against Maoists. Following the killing it is
          alleged that the Maoists have issued fhrther death threats against nine other journalists. Concern
          has been expressed that Hira Lal Khadka may have been killed as a direct result of his human
          rights activities as a member of HURPES and in particular his public condemnation of human
          rights violations committed by Maoists. Further concern has been expressed for the safety of all
          journalists in Nepal in the light of these recent threats.
          412. On 11 October 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning Durga
          Thapa, a newspaper reporter and representative of the Informal Sector Service Centre (INSEC),
          a Nepali human rights organization. According to the information received, on 29 July 2004,
          Durga Thapa accompanied a team of human rights defenders andjournalists who visited Rahakul
          Ranibas Village Development Committee (VDC), Surkhet district, in order to search for
          information concerning people abducted by the Maoists and lobby for their release. Allegedly,
          three days later, Durga Thapa was abducted by the Maoists when the team was leaving the
          village, and the Maoists accused him of “activities against the people's regime” and detained him
          in a labour camp. It is reported that Durga was released on 16 August. Allegedly, Durga Thapa
          has later received death threats from Maoists and has also been threatened that he may again be
          abducted by the Maoists. Concern has been expressed that the reported harassment of Durga
          Thapa may be a direct result of his human rights activities as a member of the Informal Sector
          Service Centre.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 144
          413. On 14 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture
          and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, sent a follow-up urgent appeal
          concerning Bimala B. K. According to new information received, she is currently held in
          Kathmandu Prison, having been in custody for almost six months without charge, and subjected
          to torture. In view of the earlier allegations of torture, concern is expressed that she may continue
          to be at risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment. Moreover, concern is heightened by recent
          reports confirming that Mama Sunuwar, whose arrest and beating was witnessed by Bimala B.
          K., died in custody.
          Observations
          414. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted any replies to her communications. She refers to her main report
          to the Commission on Human Rights for a detailed analysis of the trends in the situation of
          human rights defenders in Nepal, and for her observations to these trends. She encourages the
          Government to review favourably her request sent on 14 October 2003 and reiterated on 2
          December 2004 for an invitation to conduct an official visit to the country in 2005.
          Nigeria
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          415. By letter dated 2 April 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 14
          November 2003 concerning Churchill Ibeneche. The Government informed that the allegations
          cannot be investigated, as the Nigerian authorities have no record of existence of the C3RJ. It
          stated that the Special Representative might wish to provide additional information on the C3RJ
          and its Executive Director to enable investigation to be carried out.
          Observations
          416. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response to her
          communication. She also wishes to thank the Government for granting her request for an
          invitation to conduct an official visit and looks forward to conducting her visit to the country in
          May this year.
          Pakistan
          Communications sent
          417. On 31 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal regarding the situation of Dr. A.ll.Nayyar, a peace activist, anti-globalization
          campaigner and former professor of Quaid - i - Azam University. According to the information
          received, during April and May 2003, Dr. Nayyar and a group of students staged a protest
          outside Kentucky Fried Chicken and Pizza Hut restaurants in Islamabad in protest against the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 145
          Iraq war and as part of a general campaign to boycott goods from the United States. According to
          the information received, the police were initially cooperative with the demonstrators until they
          reportedly came under pressure from the franchise management to stop the demonstration. It is
          reported that on 9 April 2003, a minor confrontation took place in which the police pushed the
          demonstrators back and stopped them from using a megaphone and from shouting slogans. No
          further confrontation was reported and the demonstration allegedly continued peacefully for
          another month. However, according to the information received, on 9 April 2003, a criminal case
          was registered against Dr. Nayyar for his involvement in the demonstration. No further action
          was reportedly taken until 24 March 2004 when two policemen allegedly came to his office and
          reportedly informed him that a First Information Report (FIR) had been filed against him and
          advised him to obtain bail before his arrest. The F.I.R reportedly states that Dr. A.H. Nayyar and
          his colleagues had staged an unlawful demonstration. Concern has been expressed that the
          registration of a criminal case against Dr. Nayyar may be an attempt at hindering his human
          rights work.
          418. On 7 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          violence against women and the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary
          executions, sent an urgent appeal regarding the situation of Uzma Noorani, secretary-general of
          Panah Shelter Home for Women and a council member of the Human Rights Commission of
          Pakistan. According to the information received, in 2002 Uzma Noorani provided shelter in the
          Panah Shelter Home for Women to a woman who had allegedly been tortured by her husband, a
          major in the army. It is reported that during this time, the husband of the woman, whose name is
          known to the Special Representative, harassed and threatened to kill the staff of Panah for having
          granted asylum to his wife. The woman reportedly returned to her husband two months later.
          However, her husband reportedly obtained the contact details of Uzma Noorani and has
          subjected her and her family to constant harassment and intimidation with threatening and
          abusive telephone calls. She reportedly filed a complaint on 26 April 2003 with the commander
          of the army and the Citizen Police Liaison Committee (CPLC). The commander reportedly
          informed her that she would no longer be harassed. She allegedly did not receive a reply from the
          CPLC. The harassment reportedly stopped following her complaint but has reportedly begun
          again. A further complaint was filed on 25 February 2004 with the police, including the Senior
          Superintendent of Police in Islamabad Mr Shaid Nadeem Balouch. However, no action has
          reportedly been taken by the authorities to protect Uzma Noorani and her family. Concern has
          been expressed that Uzma Noorani is being targeted for her work on women's rights.
          419. On 9 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          violence against women, sent an urgent appeal in connection with information received that
          Samina Khokhar, sister of Irfan Khokhar, has received a death threat from unknown men who
          are believed to be connected to the perpetrators of her brother's murder. It is reported that Irfan
          Khokhar was the information coordinator of Peace Worldwide, a Christian organization based in
          Islamabad who was murdered by three men on the night of 7 February 2004. According to the
          information received, on 25 May 2004, two unknown men followed Samina Khokhar in
          Islamabad and called her at her workplace, saying that she would be killed because her family
          had not withdrawn the complaint against the three perpetrators involved in her brother's murder,
          including Hafiz Atta ur Rehman. She is now said to be in hiding, and her other brother, Jmran
          Khokhar, also has reportedly had to leave his home due to continuous threats. Since Irfan
          Khokhar's death, the victim's family has reportedly been threatened by Hafiz Atta ur Rehman,
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 146
          who is believed to be the primary suspect responsible for the killing. In addition, staff members
          of Peace Worldwide have also allegedly received threats from the perpetrators. Although the
          police have arrested one suspect, Hafiz Atta ur Rehman and the other suspect are still at large,
          and the police have reportedly not taken any serious action to protect witnesses and the victim's
          family. In this context the special rapporteurs requested that protection be provided to the
          victim's family and witnesses and that justice is rendered in this case.
          Communications received
          420. By letter dated 16 June 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by the
          Special Representative on 31 March 2004 in connection with the situation of Dr A.ll.Nayyar.
          According to the Government, on 9 April 2004, the police filed a FIR against the Dr A.H.Nayyar
          and several other protestors for violations against section 144 (holding a protest demonstration
          without obtaining prior permission). The Government stated that the accused filed for a writ in
          the Lahore High Court Rawalpindi Bench challenging the aforementioned FIR. The same Court
          ruled in favour of the accused and the FIR was quashed on the grounds that it had been lodged
          without any lawful authority.
          421. By letter dated 14 July 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by the
          Special Representative on 9 June 2004 with reference to a death threat received by Samina
          Khokhar. The Government confirmed that the police in Islamabad were willing to provide the
          victim with protection. However, it noted that the whereabouts of the aforementioned are
          unknown. The police recommended that Samina Khokhar inform them of her place of work and
          residence.
          422. By letter dated 15 October 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by
          the Special Representative on 7 April 2004 regarding the situation of Uzma Noorani. The
          Government informed the Special Representative that a FIR had been filed against Uzma
          Noorani on 1 October 2003, leading to her subsequent arrest and appearance before a judge.
          However, the necessary preventative action has been prepared and sent to the Court.
          Observations
          423. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies to the communications
          sent. She welcomes the termination of the criminal proceedings against Dr. Nayyar. The Special
          Representative remains concerned, however, about the case of Ms. Noorani. It appears from the
          Government's reply that instead of being shielded by the authorities against the threats and other
          harassment she is enduring as a result of her work in the defence of women subjected to
          domestic violence, Ms. Noorani is now herself the subject of criminal proceedings.
          Peru
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          424. El 10 de mayo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre la
          tortura, el Relator Especial sobre el derecho a la libertad de opinion y de expresiOn y el Relator
          Especial sobre la yenta de niflos, la prostituciOn infantil y la utilizaciOn de niflos en la
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O1/Add. 1
          Page 147
          pornografla, envio una carta de alegacion. Los relatores especiales y la Representante Especial
          han recibido informacion segün la cual cerca de 150 niflos y adolescentes que viven o trabajan
          en la calle en Lima, asI como algunos adultos que los acompaflaban, habrIan sido vIctimas de
          un uso excesivo de la fuerza por parte de la policla el 20 de noviembre de 2003, durante la
          represiôn de una manifestacion convocada por asociaciones comprometidas con niflos que viven
          o trabajan en la calle: el Movimiento Nacional de Niflos y Adolescentes Trabajadores
          organizados del Peru (MNINATSOP), el Movimiento de Niflos y Adolescentes Trabajadores
          Hijos de Obreros Cristianos (MANTHOC), el Instituto de Formaciôn para Educadores de
          Jôvenes Adolescentes y Niflos Trabajadores de America Latina y el Caribe (IFEJANT) y
          Generaciôn. La manifestacion se habrIa organizado para conmemorar el aniversario de la
          Convenciôn de los Derechos del Niflo y para pedir pacIficamente una mejor protecciôn de los
          derechos del niflo. D c acuerdo con la informacion recibida, la manifestacion se desarrollaba
          pacIficamente hasta que la policla intervino para disolverla a la fherza en la Plaza Mayor. Los
          agentes de policla habrIan utilizado gases lacrimogenos y golpeado con porras a los
          manifestantes, a quienes tambien habrIan dado patadas. Bebes que se encontraban en los brazos
          de sus madres tambien habrIan sido golpeados. Algunas personas se habrIan desmayado y otras
          habrIan sufrido contusiones. A modo dejustificacion de su actuaciôn, la policla habrIa alegado
          que la manifestacion era ilegal por no respetar el decreto de la AlcaldIa mediante el cual se
          prohibirla toda manifestacion püblica en el centro de Lima. Se alega que para no infringir este
          decreto, las organizaciones de niflos trabajadores habrIan adelantado una protesta no violenta con
          pequeflos grupos que ingresaban a la plaza por turnos, exigiendo el respeto a los niflos y el
          reconocimiento y plena ciudadanla de la niflez como un sujeto de derecho, como actores
          protagonistas de la sociedad. Se alega igualmente que 13 manifestantes habrIan sido detenidas
          por las fuerzas policiales pertenecientes a la Unidad de Servicios de Control de Disturbios de la
          Policla. Entre ellas, Enrique Jaramillo, coordinador de Generaciôn, habrIa sido golpeado e
          insultado cuando se encontraba bajo custodia policial. Tres menores, unajoven de 14 aflos de
          edad y dos varones de 10 y 12 aflos, todos niflos de la calle, habrIan sido trasladados a un centro
          de detencion preventiva y liberados el 22 de noviembre de 2003.
          425. El 18 de mayo de 2004, la Representante Especial, junto con el Relator Especial sobre
          ejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, enviô un llamamiento urgente sobre la
          situaciôn de Catalina Castillo Leon, un testigo del supuesto secuestro y asesinato de seis
          miembros de su familia en 1992. Segün la informacion recibida, el 24 de junio de 1992, diez
          hombres vestidos en uniformes parecidos a los del ejército y al parecer miembros del Grupo
          Colina, un grupo que presuntamente hacla parte orgánica de la estructura del Servicio de
          Inteligencia de Peru habrIan secuestrado a Rafael Ventocilla Rojas, alcalde del Distrito de
          Cochamarca, sus hijos Alejandro, Simon y Paulino, su nieto Ruben y su hermano Marino.
          Catalina Castillo Leon habrIa denunciado la detenciOn de sus familiares ante la policla. Segün los
          informes, los cuerpos de los seis integrantes de su familia habrIan sido hallados el dIa siguiente
          sepultado en una fosa comün cerca de la carretera Huara-Sayán. Segün los informes, la
          investigaciOn se encuentra actualmente en la fiscalla especializada. Catalina Castillo LeOn habrIa
          pedido a la Comisarla de Huaura de constatar los hechos pero el comisario responsable quien, al
          parecer es familiar de un miembro del Grupo Colina, habrIa mostrado reservas antes este pedido.
          En este contexto y segün la informaciOn recibida, el 6 de mayo de 2004, un grupo de diez
          individuos, uno de ellos vistiendo traje de policla, habrIa irrumpido violentamente en el
          domicilio de Catalina Castillo LeOn en Provincia de Guacho. Los hombres la habrIan amenazado
          con darle muerte tal como ocurriO a los seis miembros de su familia. Se teme que esta reciente
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 148
          amenaza contra Catalina Castillo Leon esté relacionada con su actividad de solicitar una
          investigaciOn independiente e imparcial tras el asesinato de seis miembros de su familia.
          426. El 19 de Julio de 2004, la Representante Especial enviO una carta de alegaciOn sobre la
          situaciOn de seguridad de Mario lluamán Rivera, Presidente de la ConfederaciOn General de
          Trabajadores del Peru, organizador de la huelga general del pasadol4 deJulio de 2004 en Lima.
          Segün las informaciones recibidas, el 6 de Julio de 2004 la esposa de Mario Huamán Rivera
          habrIa recibido, de manos de un repartidor, un ramo de fibres y un paquete envuelto. Segün los
          informes, diez minutos después habrIa recibido una llamada telefOnica anOnima en la que le
          habrIa preguntado sobre el regalo y le habrIa recomendado que no lo abriera porque contenla una
          bomba. La esposa habrIa llamado a la policla que se habrIa llevado el paquete y que luego
          confirmaron que contenla una granada. Segün se informa, la policla habrIa abierto una
          investigaciOn sobre esta amenaza de muerte. Se teme que esta amenaza de muerte pueda estar
          relacionada con el trabajo de Mario Huamán como Presidente de la ConfederaciOn General de
          Trabajadores del Peru yen particular su trabajo de organizador de la huelga del 14 deJulio para
          pedir meJ ores condiciones de vida y para oponerse ala polItica econOmica del Gobierno.
          427. El 7 de septiembre de 2004, la Representante Especial, Junto con el Relator Especial
          sobre las eJecuciones extraJudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias, el Relator Especial sobre la tortura,
          el Relator Especial sobre la independencia de magistrados y abogados y el Relator Especial sobre
          la promociOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn, enviO un llamamiento urgente
          en relaciOn con Luis Alberto RamIrez ilinostroza, quien fue vIctima de tortura durante la
          dictadura militar y quien es ahora uno de los testigos principales ante la ComisiOn de la Verdad y
          ReconciliaciOn del Peru yen el proceso Judicial contra un general retirado acusado de la
          desapariciOn forzada de nueve personas en 1991. D c acuerdo con la informaciOn recibida, Luis
          Alberto RamIrez Hinostroza habrIa recibido amenazas de muerte y ataques contra su persona en
          varias ocasiones durante los ültimos meses. El 13 de marzo de 2004, cuatro individuos habrIan
          disparado contra él llamandole “bocOn” mientras le persegulan. El 6 de mayo, habrIa recibido
          una carta con amenazas Junto con dos fotograflas de su hiJa y su esposa. En Julio del mismo aflo,
          habrIa recibido otras amenazas de muerte en su casa. En otra ocasiOn, cuando visitO el lugar
          donde habrIa sido torturada aflos atrás, unos soldados lo habrIan fotografiado y habrIan
          amenazado con detenerle. A finales de agosto de 2004, Luis Alberto RamIrez Hinostroza habrIa
          notado que alguien le estaba siguiendo. Seguidamente habrIa solicitado ayuda ante la
          procuradurla de Huancayo. Sin embargo le habrIan informado que el funcionario solicitado no se
          encontraba y habrIa tenido que irse sin protecciOn policial. Dos dIas más tarde, el 30 de agosto,
          un hombre y una muJer le habrIan disparado desde un vehIculo negro cerca de su casa, en El
          Tambo, Huancayo. Luis Alberto RamIrez Hinostroza habrIa resultado herido en el estOmago y
          habrIa sido conducido al Hospital El Carmen, donde habrIa sido operado. Se alega que la
          ComisiOn Jnteramericana de Derechos Humanos pidiO al Gobierno peruano, el 2 de agosto de
          2004, que tomara las medidas necesarias para garantizar su seguridad. Antes del ültimo ataque,
          habrIa recibido una carta oficial en la que se le indicaba que se le otorgaban garantlas personales,
          pero no se le habrIa proporcionado asistencia fIsica. Actualmente, dos agentes de policla estarlan
          encargados de su seguridad en el hospital. Sin embargo las autoridades todavIa no le habrIan
          garantizado la asistencia de guardaespaldas para más adelante. A la luz de estas alegaciones, se
          han expresado temores por la seguridad de Luis Alberto RamIrez Hinostroza y la de su familia.
          428. El 22 de noviembre de 2004, la Representante Especial, Junto con el Relator Especial
          sobre la promociOn y la protecciOn del derecho a la libertad de opiniOn y de expresiOn y el
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 149
          Relator Especial sobre la independencia de magistrados y abogados, envio un llamamiento
          urgente sobre la situaciôn de Gloria Cano, abogada y defensora de los derechos humanos de la
          organizaciôn no gubernamental Asociaciôn Pro Derechos Humanos (APRODEH), quien habria
          recibido recientemente amenazas de muerte. D c acuerdo con las informaciones recibidas, el 20
          de octubre de 2004, Gloria Cano se encontraba en las oficinas de APRODEH en Lima cuando
          recibio el mensaje de texto siguiente en su telefono movil: “Hola perra, nos estamos en la cared,
          cuidate hasta de tu sombra, te vas a reunir con el terruco en el infierno yelmo”. Gloria Cano
          habria sido ya previamente victima de un acto de intimidacion en enero de 2003, cuando habria
          sido rodeada, insultada y golpeada por un grupo de individuos no identificados delante de las
          oficinas de APRODEH. Gloria Cano denuncio la amenaza de muerte ante la Fiscalia de la
          Naciôn, el 25 de octubre. La CIDH ha pedido al Estado peruano que les informe cuales medidas
          está tomando para investigar esta denuncia. Segün se informa, Gloria Cano recibio la amenaza al
          dia siguiente de la publicacion de un comunicado de prensa de APRODEH que mostraba su
          preocupaciôn por la excarcelacion de Vladimiro Montesinos (cx -asesor presidencial sobre
          inteligencia), Nicolás Hermoza Rios (cx -comandante enjefe de las fuerzas armadas) y Roberto
          Huamán Azcurra (cx -director del Servicio de Jnteligencia Militar), que habian permanecido
          detenidos los ültimos 18 meses por su presunta implicacion en el homicidio de tres miembros del
          grupo armado de oposiciôn Movimiento Revolucionario Tüpac Amaru durante una operaciôn
          militar de 1997. Los acusados habrian sido excarcelados porque, a causa de las demoras en el
          juicio, habian excedido el plazo máximo de detencion preventiva permitido por la ley. Gloria
          Cano es el abogado de las familias de las victimas desde 2001 y se supone que las amenazas
          recibidas estén relacionadas con su trabajo de abogado y defensor de los derechos humanos en
          relacion con este caso.
          429. Por carta fechada el 7 de Julio de 2004, el Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 10 de mayo de 2004 con respecto al supuesto uso
          excesivo de la fuerza por parte de la policia en contra de 150 niflos y adolescentes que viven o
          trabajan en Ia calle en Lima, asi como algunos adultos que los acompaflaban durante una
          manifestacion convocada por asociaciones comprometidas con niflos que viven o trabajan en la
          calle. El Gobierno informo que los intervenidos y aproximadamente otras 80 personas, en
          proceso de identificacion, se reunieron en la Plaza Mayor donde se concentraron para realizar
          una manifestacion con ocasiôn de celebrarse un aniversario de la Convenciôn sobre los Derechos
          del Niflo, propiciando actos violentos, en su intento de ingresar al centro de Lima, zona declarada
          “restringida” por un mandato municipal. Por tal razôn, los efectivos policiales les habrian
          conminado para que dejaran su actitud de fuerza. No obstante, éstos atacaron a los custodios del
          orden, quienes se habrian vistos obligados a lanzar gases lacrimogenos; en estas circunstancias,
          habria intervenido un mayor contingente policial siendo también atacados y herido el mayor
          Fernando Vergara Garcia. Como consecuencia habria capturado “in flaganti” a 13 personas. El
          Atestado Policial habria llegado a las siguientes conclusiones: a) Que las personas identificadas y
          otras 80 aproximadamente en proceso de identificacion son presuntos autores del Delito contra la
          Tranquilidad Püblica (Contra la Paz Püblica —Alteracion del Orden Püblico-Disturbios y
          Asociaciôn Ilicita para Delinquir), Delito Contra la Administracion Püblica Cometido por
          Particulares-(Violencia y Resistencia a la Autoridad); b) No se habria encontrado indicios de
          daflos materiales en la propiedad püblica ni privada en la Plaza Mayor y calles aledaflas; c) Se
          deja a la Autoridad Judicial competente, se pronuncie sobre las situaciôn legal de la dos
          ciudadanas norteamericanas, y si se habria infringido la Ley de Extranjeria; d) Se pone a
          disposicion de la Autoridad Judicial competente a X, quien a ser detenido dijo llamarse y se
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 150
          pronuncie sobre su situaciôn legal al haber utilizado otro nombre; e) No de habrIa recibido las
          respuestas de la informaciones solicitadas a las diversas entidades, asI como los RML que
          acrediten las lesiones de los intervenidos y efectivos de la Policla, cuyos resultados una vez
          recabados se remitirán a la Autoridad Judicial Competente; Hasta el momento no habrIa sido
          posible identificar a las otras 80 personas que habrIan participado en los ilIcitos penal detallados
          arriba. En consecuencia se habrIa formalizado denuncia penal contra los manifestantes que
          irrumpieron en la Plaza Mayor por los delitos de Delito contra la Tranquilidad Püblica — Delitos
          contra la Paz Püblica, Disturbios en agravio de la Sociedad, de acuerdo con el artIculo 315 del
          Codigo Penal. El estado actual del proceso corresponderla a la etapa inicial de la investigaciôn.
          Asimismo las denuncias contra las dos ciudadanas norteamericanas habrIan sido archivadas de
          manera definitiva.
          430. Por carta fechada el 23 de septiembre de 2004, el Gobierno contestô a la comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 7 de septiembre de 2004 con respecto a las
          amenazas de muerte y ataques contra Luis Alberto RamIrez ilinostroza. El Gobierno
          transmitiô un informe del Consejo Nacional de Derechos Humanos. Este informe indica que el
          31 de agosto 2004, el Ministro de Justicia, el Dr. Carlos Gamarra Ugaz, remitiô un oficio al
          despacho del Viceministro del Interior reiterando las medidas cautelares necesarias para
          garantizar la integridad personal de Luis Alberto RamIrez Hinostroza. El Viceministro del
          Interior fue informado eli 0 de septiembre 2004 que el General PNP Adolfo Alfaro Züfliga,
          Director de la VIl-DIRTEPOL en Huancayo, habrIa recibido a través de un memorandum del
          General PNP Percy Soria Medina, director general de la Policla Nacional de Peru el orden que se
          procedera “de inmediato a instalar servicio de seguridad personal al agraviado, con dos efectivos
          policiales, durante las 24 horas del dIa hasta nueva orden”. También, el personal especializado de
          la JEFICAJ está en carga de realizar las investigaciones correspondientes con el propôsito de
          identificar, ubicar y capturar a los autores en coordinacion con el representante del Ministerio
          Publico. Ademas, el Consejo Nacional de Derechos Humanos informo que el prefector Regional
          de Junin, mediante un oficio de fecha de 4 de agosto 2004, seflalo que el 22 de marzo 2004, el
          Dr. Eduardo Torres Gonzales, Juez Penal se dirigio a la prefectura de Junin para brindar las
          garantlas personales a Luis Alberto RamIrez Hinostroza. En base a la peticiôn del ôrgano
          jurisdiccional, el 15 de abril 2004, se emitiô una resolucion prefectoral en Junin otorgando
          garantlas personales a favor de Luis RamIrez Hinostroza y su familia, en contra de Luis Perez,
          contra quién tiene un proceso judicial por derechos humanos (tortura). Ademas, Dilma Clemente,
          Juez del Cuarto Juzgado Penal, se ha dirigido al prefecto de la provincia de Huancayo para
          solicitar las garantlas personales al agraviado. La Secretaria Ejecutiva del Consejo Nacional de
          Derechos Humanos del Ministerio de Justicia ha remitido oficios el 4 de agosto 2004 a varias
          agencias del Estado solicitando informacion. La Secretaria Ejecutiva del Consejo de Derechos
          Humanos deja constancia que no ha recibido informacion relacionada a medidas concretas
          adoptadas con la finalidad de protecciôn al Señor Ramirez Hinostroza hasta el 30 de agosto.
          431. Por carta fechada el 14 de octubre de 2004, el Gobierno contestô ala comunicaciôn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial el 18 de mayo de 2004 con respecto a las amenazas de
          muerte y ataques en contra de Catalina Castillo Leon. El Gobierno transmitiô una nota de
          informacion proporcionada por el Consejo Nacional de Derechos Humanos. En un oficio de
          fecha S dejulio 2004, Dr. Felix E. Salazar Huapallo, Fiscal Superior Decano, Distrito Judicial de
          Huaura, indico al Fiscal Superior Titular, Representante del Ministerio Püblico ante el Consejo
          Nacional de Derechos Humanos, que habla recibido informacion del Coronel PNIP José Campos
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 151
          sobre la intervenciôn policial realizada ci 6 de mayo 2004 en ci domiciiio de Catalina Castillo
          Leon. Los motivos y circunstancias de la intervenciOn policial fueron en ci marco del Operativo
          “Delincuencia 2004”, cuyo objetivo era ubicar y capturar a los autores del asesinato del
          empresario Jorge Wetterman Rivas. Un hijo de la Sra. Castillo LeOn, Wilbert Ventocilia Castililo,
          fue acusado dcl delito “Contra ci Patrimonio” — robo agravado y subsiguiente homicidio dcl
          ingeniero Wetterman Rivas y fue buscado por la policla. Wilbert Ventocilia Castillo huyO en un
          vehIculo. Ademas, ci Fiscal Superior Decano, Distrito Judicial de Huaura, no tiene conocimiento
          de aiguna denuncia o queja presentada directamente por la Sra. Castillo LeOn, asimismo tampoco
          otra denuncia en la Primera y Segunda Fiscaila Provincial Penal dci Distrito.
          432. Por carta fechada ci 23 de diciembre 2004, ci Gobierno contestO ala comunicaciOn
          transmitida por la Representante Especial ci 22 de noviembre de 2004 sobre la situaciOn de
          Gloria Cano Legua, abogada y defensora de los derechos humanos de la organizaciOn no
          gubernamental AsociaciOn Pro Derechos Humanos (APRODEH). El Gobierno informO que la
          Fiscaila Penal ingresO la denuncia presentada por Gloria Cano, por delito contra la libertad, en
          contra de los responsabies, y que dicha denuncia the remitida a la DivisiOn de la Policia dci
          Ministerio Pübhco con elfin de ilevar a cabo las investigaciones prehminares. Asimismo, ci
          Gobierno informO que ci 5 de noviembre de 2004, la Policla Nacional dispuso la adopciOn de
          una serie de medidas en relaciOn con la solicitud de medidas de seguridad solicitadas por Gloria
          Cano. En particular, se dispuso otorgar servicio de seguridad y vigilancia dci local de
          APRODEH a cargo de la Comisarla PNP de Jesus MarIa y brindar medidas de protecciOn
          personal a la Doctora Gloria Cano, asi como efectuar las investigaciones dci caso con relaciOn a
          su denuncia.
          Observaciones
          433. The Special Representative would like to thank the Government for its detailed
          responses. She welcomes the steps taken to improve the situation of human rights defenders, in
          particular, the police protection programmes offered to a number of victims of death threats and
          serious physical attacks. Nevertheless, she remains concerned by the gravity of the threats levied
          against human rights defenders in Peru. Furthermore, the Special Representative would like to
          voice her concern for the present safety of Mr. Hinostroza since the termination of the protection
          measures granted to him by the Government on 30 August 2004. Finally, the Special
          Representative would be grateful if the Government would take the opportunity to inform her of
          any measures taken to prevent the harassment of human rights defenders in Peru.
          Philippines
          Communications sent
          434. On 21 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Chairman-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, sent a communication
          concerning the situation of Jose Suplaag, the spokesperson of the Union of Farmers in Danao
          City (PAMADA). The allegation is that he was arrested and tortured by members of 78th
          Infantry Batailion in Brgy Damalog, Sogod, Cebu. According to the information received, on 2
          December 2003, a group of armed soldiers reportedly arrived at the farm of Jose Supiaag in Pili,
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 152
          claiming that subversive documents had been found in his possession, proceeded to arrest him by
          force. He was then allegedly taken to the headquarters of the 78th Infantry Batallion where he
          was accused of being a member of the New People's Army, which Jose Suplaag reportedly
          denied. He was then allegedly tortured for two days by his captors, who wrapped his head with a
          plastic bag full of crushed pepper until he was at the point of fainting, then punched him in the
          back with their elbows and threatened him with summary execution if he did not admit his
          membership of the NFA. Jose Suplaag, reportedly illiterate, was made to sign a document
          without being informed of its contents. It is further alleged that, on 4 December, Jose Suplaag
          was taken to Danao City Jail and charged with illegal possession of firearms in a case filed by his
          captors at the Regional Trial Court, Branch 25. Fear has been expressed that the alleged arrest
          and torture of Jose Suplaag may represent a form of reprisal for his work with PAMADA in the
          defence, in particular denouncing the alleged human rights violations committed by the 78th
          Infantry Battalion.
          435. On 1 March 2004, the Special Representative sent an allegation letter regarding the
          killings of Juvy Magsino, a human rights lawyer, the Chairperson of Mindoro for Justice and
          Peace and Vice Mayor of Naujam in Mindoro Oriental and of Leim Fortu, a volunteer at
          Mindoro for Justice and Peace and the Acting Secretary General of Karapatan-Mindoro Oriental.
          According to the information received, on 13 February 2004 Juvy Magasino and Leim Fortu
          were on their way by car to the house of a friend in Pingagsbangan Naujan. After passing
          through Curba, they were reportedly followed by two men on a motorcycle with no licence plate
          who are believed to be members of the 204th Infantry Brigade. It is reported that in Barangay
          Amuguis, 100 metres from the headquarters of the 204th Infantry Brigade (IBPA), the men fired
          at the human rights defenders' vehicle with a 9mm gun and a rifle. Juvey Magasino reportedly
          received three gunshot wounds to her head and chest and Leim Fortu received gunshot wounds
          to her chest, right ear, knee and shoulder. Both women reportedly died from their wounds.
          According to the information received, Juvy Magasino, who was running for Mayor of Nauj an in
          Mindoro Oriental, had reported to the Karapatan Southern Tagalog Office that she had received
          two death threats informing her that she would not live beyond 15 February 2004. Concern has
          been expressed that the killings may be connected to the human rights activities of the two
          women and in particular to the criticism voiced by Juvy Magasino about the increased military
          deployment in the island province. The allegation also suggested that she had spoken out on the
          involvement of a former 204th IBPA commanding officer in the alleged killings of the
          Karapatan-Southern Tagalog Secretary General, Eden Marcellana, and Chairman of Kasama-TK,
          Eddie Gumanoy, in April 2003.
          436. On 24 September 2004, the Special Representative sent an allegation letter in connection
          with the death of Rashid Manahan, a human rights defender, executive director of the
          Community Resource and Development Center (CRDC), a non-governmental organization based
          in Boliao District, Supermarket Area, and Mindanao coordinator of the Mamamayan Tutol sa
          Bitay Movement for Restorative Justice. According to the information received, on 24 August
          2004, Mr. Rashid Manahan, was killed in broad daylight in front of Ponce Suites, Bajada, in
          Davao City. It is alleged that he was with Prof Nymia Simbulan, Executive Director of
          Philrights and Ms. Martha Alvarez, a representative of the European Union. The three were on
          their way to attend a forum against the death penalty in Mindanao. Mr. Manahan was reportedly
          killed by the Davao Death Squad that is linked to more than 100 unsolved killings. Concern has
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 153
          been expressed that the murder of Mr. Rashid Manahan is the result of his dedication to the
          defence of human rights.
          Observations
          437. The Special Representative regrets that, at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication. She expresses serious concerns at
          the reported killings of human rights defenders in the country.
          Republic of Korea
          Communications sent
          438. On 19 January 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal regarding the
          alleged arrest and deportation of two Bangladeshi human rights defenders by the South Korean
          authorities. According to the information received, Khademul Islam Bidduth, leader of the
          Equality Trade Union Migrants Branch (ETU-MB) and Jamal Ali, an active member of the
          migrant movement, were arrested by police in the Republic of Korea on 26 October 2003 while
          taking part in a demonstration against an alleged crackdown on migrant workers by the
          Government, which began on 24 October. The allegation is that, following their deportation to
          Bangladesh, they were held in detention until 4 January 2004, apparently for their association
          with trade unions and civil society groups. Reports have also been received regarding alleged
          violence in the treatment of other ETU-MB members by police and immigration authorities
          during the above mentioned demonstrations.
          Communications received
          439. By letter dated 4 June 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by the
          Special Representative on 19 January 2004 in connection with the alleged arrest and deportation
          of two Bangladeshi human rights defenders by the South Korean authorities. In its response, the
          Government questioned the status of the accused as human rights defenders. According to the
          Government, Khademul Islam Bidduth and Rasul ilossen were illegal migrants in violation of
          several articles of the Immigration Control Act; in particular, articles 17 (residing illegally) and 7
          (travelling under a false passport), respectively. As a result, they were deported to Bangladesh on
          31 December 2003. In its response, the Government expressed its confidence that any action
          taken against the deported persons is in conformity with the sovereign law of the Republic of
          Korea. It also emphasized that the petitions filed by the accused on two occasions were
          dismissed by the National Human Rights Commission, an independent body. In response to the
          allegations of police violence and ill-treatment towards “Equality Trade Union — Migrants'
          Branch” demonstrators, the Government denied all acusations. Indeed, the Government
          informed the Special Representative that both Khademul Islam Bidduth and Rasul Hossen had
          assaulted police officers who attempted to curtail the spread of the demonstration into
          unauthorized areas of the city.
          Observations
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 154
          440. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response to her
          communication.
          Russian Federation
          Communications sent
          441. On 26 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent a letter of allegation concerning Asian Davietukaev, a human rights
          defender who had been working as a volunteer with the Society of Russian-Chechen Friendship
          (SRCF) since 2000, in particular gathering information on the situation of human rights in
          Chechnya for the SRCF Information Centre. According to the information received, on 10
          January 2004 at 22:15, approximately 50 armed men in three military and two civilian vehicles,
          arrived at the home of Aslan Davletukaev in Avtury, where they reportedly beat him and forced
          him at gunpoint into one of their cars. It is reported that on 16 January, the body of Aslan
          Davletukaev, apparently showing signs of torture and mutilation, was found by reconnaissance
          units of the Russian army near a highway at the entrance to Gudermes. His death was reportedly
          the result of a bullet wound to the back of the head.
          442. On 28 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, sent an urgent appeal concerning the situation of
          Mr. Imran Ezhiev, human rights defender and Chairperson of the Chechen and Ingush Branch
          of the Society of Russian-Chechnen Friendship (SRCF). According to the information received,
          Imran Ezhiev was returning home to Ingushetia on 26 January when he was reportedly followed
          by a grey model Zhiguli car without licence plates, thought to belong to the security service of
          the Chechen president. It is reported that Imran Ezhiev was investigating the reported abduction
          and killing of Aslan Sheripovich Davletukaev, a volunteer with SRCF. Fear has been expressed
          that Imran Ezhiev may be targeted for his human rights work, in particular his efforts to bring
          about accountability for the reported killing of his former colleague. Concerns are heightened by
          the fact that three members of SRCF have reportedly been killed to date, allegedly including
          Imran Ezhiev's brother. The concerns of the special rapporteurs are further heightened by the fact
          that Imran Ezhiev was reportedly subject to previous harassment by the authorities in 2001 and
          to an alleged abduction attempt from his home in Yandariye Camp on November 2002.
          443. On 12 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, sent an urgent appeal concerning the
          situation of Aikhazur Bataev, a volunteer with the Society for the Russian-Chechnen
          Friendship, and his wife Larisa Vakhaevna Batateva, who have both reportedly been active in
          the defence of the rights of migrants and refugees. According to the information received, on 29
          January 2004, Larisa Vakhaevna Batateva, reportedly met the Chairperson of the Committee of
          Human Rights of the Russian Federation during her visit to the Sathsita refugee camp and
          reportedly informed her about violations committed against forced migrants. Following this,
          Larisa Vakhaevna Batateva was allegedly threatened by the head of administration of her native
          village of Zakan-Yurt, who declared that her family “would have problems” if she and her
          husband did not stop their “propaganda activities”. On 10 February 2004, according to the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 155
          alegations received, Alkhazur Bataev, who is registered as a forced migrant and holds a Russian
          passport, was detained by the chief police officer and other representatives of Sunzha police in
          Sathsita refugee camp and is being held at Sunzha police office, although the police have not
          confirmed his whereabouts. Alkhazur Bataev has reportedly also been involved in reporting
          human rights violations committed by officials of the Migration Service of Ingushetia at the
          Sathsita refugee camp. The special rapporteurs expressed concern that his detention may
          represent a reprisal for their activities in reporting human rights violations committed against
          forced migrants.
          444. On 24 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning reports that on 23 February 2004, a peaceful meeting in central Moscow to
          oppose the ongoing armed conflict in Chechnya and to commemorate the sixtieth anniversary of
          the mass deportation of the Chechen people from Chechnya to Kazakhstan, was broken up by the
          police. It is reported that as the demonstrators commenced a minute of silence to commemorate
          the victims of the Chechnya conflict, the police moved in and detained the demonstration
          organizers, Lev Ponomarev, Executive Director of the Movement for Human Rights, and
          Nikolai Khramov of the Transnational Radical Party, as well as approximately 11 other persons
          believed to be members of that party. These people are allegedly currently still being detained in
          two separate police stations in Moscow. It is further reported that the Moscow city authorities
          had denied the demonstrators permission to hold the meeting, stating that the day was an official
          holiday (23 February is reportedly Defence of the Fatherland day, to celebrate Russian armed
          forces and their contribution to defending the country), but according to information received,
          there were no other activities or gatherings taking place in the area at that time.
          445. On 23 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the situation of Lybkan Bazayeva, a human rights defender and member of
          the Memorial Human Rights Centre in Chechnya. According to our information, Lybkan
          Bazayeva has been working for the Memorial Human Rights Centre since January 2000. She has
          been actively involved in advocating against human rights violations in Chechnya and in the
          refugee camps in the territory of Ingushetia. It is reported that in May 2000 Lybkan Bazayeva
          filed a complaint against Russia concerning events in Chechnya to the European Court of Human
          Rights in Strasbourg, which was reportedly declared admissible by the Court on 16 January
          2003. Her application reportedly concerns allegations of indiscriminate bombing by Russian
          military planes of civilians (including Lybkan Bazayeva and her family) leaving Grozny on 29
          October 1999. According to the allegations received, on 19 October 2003, a group of 20-25
          armed men wearing camouflaged uniforms broke into the house of Lybkan Bazayeva in Grozny.
          These men failed to present any documentation regarding their identity or permission to search
          the house. It is also reported that they intimidated the neighbours, beat members of the family
          who were reportedly living as tenants in Lybkan Bazayeva's apartment and only left after they
          were convinced that she was not currently living there. At that time, she was reportedly living
          elsewhere with acquaintances. Reportedly, the “Memorial” Centre has made repeated inquiries to
          the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Chechnya with regard to the attack of 19 October 2003. A
          reply by the Deputy Minister of Internal Affairs of Chechnya to the Memorial Centre on January
          2004 reportedly stated that Lybkan Bazayeva was an active supporter of Dudayev and
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 156
          Maskhadov. According to reports received, following concern for her safety she has been forced
          to leave the region temporarily. The special rapporteurs express concern that this attack may be
          connected with Lybkan Bazayeva's human rights activities, in particular with regard to the
          complaint filed against Russia at the European Court in Strasbourg.
          446. On 4 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning the situation of Stanislav Markelov, a
          human rights lawyer who has worked on behalf of victims of alleged human rights violations in
          Chechnya. Markelov is currently representing the family of Zelimkhan Murdalov, a Chechnyan
          student who reportedly disappeared in January 2001 following his arrest by Russian Special
          Police Detachment (OMON) forces in Grozny, in the court case opened against Sergei Lapin, a
          member of OMON, in connection with this disappearance. According to the information
          received, on 16 April 2004 Stanislav Markelov was travelling home on the Moscow metro when
          he was reportedly attacked by five men, dressed in civilian clothing who reportedly surrounded
          him and shouted: “You got what you're asking for. No more speeches from you in court”. They
          allegedly hit him on the head with a heavy object causing him to lose consciousness. He
          reportedly regained consciousness a few hours later and discovered that his lawyer's licence
          card, his passport and his entry card for the state Duma as well as various documents related to
          his cases — including those related to the trial of Sergi Lapin - - had been stolen. According to the
          information received, Stanislav Markelov was taken to City Hospital No. 68 where he was
          diagnosed as suffering from concussion. On 19 April he reportedly presented a medical
          certificate of his injuries to the Subway Security Section of Moscow Department of Internal
          Affairs No. 8 but the police officer on duty reportedly claimed that the certificate was fake and
          stated that he could only file a lost property complaint. On 21 April he also reportedly filed a
          complaint about the attack with the Moscow City Department of Internal Affairs. It is reported
          that a criminal investigation has not yet been opened. Stanislav Markelov also represented the
          family of a victim who disappeared and was allegedly tortured to death by a member of the
          Russian special police force, OMON, in Grozny. Markelov also represents a journalist who has
          allegedly received death threats for publishing an article in relation to the same torture case. A
          criminal investigation into the attacks against Stanislav Markelov has reportedly not been opened
          yet. The special rapporteurs express concern that Stanislav Markelov has been targeted for his
          human rights activities and, in particular, his work to defend victims of human rights violations
          in Chechnya.
          447. On 9 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a letter of
          allegation concerning recent declarations made by high government officials aiming at
          discrediting the work of non-governmental organizations defending human rights.
          According to the information received, during a press conference held on 7 May 2004 on the
          situation of Russian prisons, the Head of the General Direction of Sentence Enforcement of the
          Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation (GUIN) reportedly accused human rights
          organizations of being financed by criminal networks and of disseminating false information in
          the media. He allegedly declared that there were 163 human rights organizations financed by
          oligarchs and stated some names, while also acknowledging that there are more than 360 other
          cooperative human rights organizations with whom it is possible to create a civil society. It is
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 157
          believed that this declaration came as the response to the recent activities and protests of a
          number of human rights NGO against the reportedly deplorable conditions of detainees in
          Russia. It is reported that human rights organizations have allegedly played a significant role in
          bringing to justice those responsible for torture and ill-treatment of inmates and that last year, as
          a result of their activities, three prison employees accused of beating inmates were brought to
          justice. It is fhrther reported that several fact-finding commissions sent by the Ministry of Justice
          as a result of recent protests and hunger-strikes allegedly concluded that “criminal leaders led
          this protests and hunger strikes in order to establish their influence zones”. According to
          information received, during his state of the nation address of 26 May 2004, the President of the
          Russian Federation allegedly denounced human rights groups critical of his record in front of the
          Federation Council and accused some of serving the interests of dubious organizations. It is
          believed that these statements partly come in response to the denunciation in the past year by
          human rights non-governmental organizations of the curtailing of media freedom, especially in
          relation to limiting the access to State-run television in the March 2004 presidential elections, as
          well as of reported human rights violations by State authorities in Chechnya. Fear has been
          expressed that within the current prevailing context, such accusations and reported portraying of
          NGO members as criminals and representatives of foreign enemies of Russia by senior State
          officials may result in increasing the vulnerability of human rights defenders within the
          Federation. Fear has also been expressed that such statements may contribute directly or
          indirectly to endangering the activities and lives of human rights defenders by legitimating their
          targeting. The Special Representative calls on the Government of Russia to ensure that all
          necessary measures were taken to ensure the full protection of the rights guaranteed by the
          Declaration on Human Rights Defenders.
          448. On 21 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the Kazan iluman Rights Center (KHRC), based in Kazan, Tatarstan.
          According to the information received, on 5 May 2004, members of the Security Direction of the
          Ministry of Internal Affairs required that a draft of KHRC's forthcoming book, Tortures in
          Tatarstan, Proportion, Facts, be submitted to the Ministry for review. This book was allegedly
          being published in conjunction with the publishing house Kheter. On 6 May, during a press
          conference, KHRC announced the release of a new compilation of published articles concerning
          human rights violations by the Tatarstan Police entitled “The Law and its victims: Tortures in
          Tatarstan”. The previously planned repeat of the press conference was allegedly cancelled by the
          direction of “Variant T” TV channel, which challenged the objectivity of the correspondent and
          the editor. On 7 May, members of the Office of the Fight Against Economic Crimes of the
          Ministry of Internal Affairs (OFEC) accused KHRC of illegal publication of the second book and
          claimed that KHRC had used the Kheter publishing house logo, despite in-house publication by
          KHRC. On 14 May, the OFEC reportedly initiated an audit of KHRC accounts. It is furthermore
          reported that a grenade was found near the door of Mr. Vladimir Chikov, father of Pavel Chikov,
          the project director and former chair of KHRC. Mr. V. Chikov had allegedly previously been
          contacted by OFEC for an interview concerning the KHRC audit. On 27 May, following a joint
          press conference held on 27 May by the KHRC and two other human rights organizations
          concerning the alleged acts of harassment against them, it is reported that, later that day, the
          KHRC headquarters were forcibly entered and ransacked. Two masked men wearing gloves
          reportedly broke into the premises, destroyed equipments and then disappeared. An official
          investigation was reportedly opened. It is alleged that the acts mentioned above could be linked
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 158
          to KHRC's publications on human rights and were intended to intimidate their members. The
          special rapporteurs express concern that the physical integrity of members of KHRC may be at
          risk.
          449. On 20 July 2004, the Special Representative sent a follow-up letter of allegation
          concerning the Society of Russian-Chechen Friendship (SRCF) in Karabulak, Ingushetia,
          Russian Federation. According to new information received, on 12 July, at approximately 6.30
          p.m., over 20 armed members of the military police allegedly raided the office of the Society of
          Russian-Chechen Friendship in the town of Karabulak, Ingushetia. Three members of staff and
          another person were reportedly present during the raid, Imran Abdulsalamovich Ezhiev, Zaur
          Maripov, Khamzat Kuchiev and his wife, Raisa Kuchiev. The officers allegedly seized computer
          equipment and papers addressed to the Society of Russian-Chechen Friendship, the Moscow
          Helsinki Group and the chairperson of the Presidential Commission of Human Rights. It is
          reported that during the search, the officers found ajar with black powder beside the computers,
          which they alleged to be explosive material. According to the information received, Khamzat
          Kuchiev, correspondent of the SRCF's Information Centre, sprinkled some of the powder on the
          floor to show that it was from a printer cartridge and not explosive. As a result, he was allegedly
          arrested and detained under article 222 of the criminal code, which relates to terrorist activities.
          Reports indicate that he was released on the night of the 12 July and no charges were brought
          against him. It is further alleged that the officers ordered Raisa Kuchiev to bring neighbours into
          the office to bear witness to the officers' findings. The witnesses were then reportedly forced to
          sign blank sheets of paper. According to reports, Imran Ezhiev, Chairperson of the Chechen and
          Ingush branch of SRCF and Councillor to the Russian Deputy of the State Duma advised them
          not to follow the officer's instructions. Consequently, an officer reportedly pushed him out of the
          office shouting, “You should never have complained about us”. Reports indicate that those
          present were verbally abused during the incident. According to the information received, the
          military police did not produce a search warrant nor did they present identity cards during the
          alleged raid. The special rapporteurs express concern that the alleged raid of the Society of
          Russian-Chechen Friendship and the detention of Khamzat Kuchiev may have been carried out
          in an attempt to hinder the human rights activities carried out by the organization.
          450. On 27 July 2004, the Special Representative sent a letter of allegation concerning the
          alleged assassination of Nikolay Girenko, head of the Minority Rights Commission at St.
          Petersburg's Scientific Union and chairman of the Ethnical Minority Rights, a leading anti-racist
          organization in St Petersburg. He had reportedly been given consultative status with the local
          authorities on minority rights and acted as an expert in legal cases against fascists and fascist
          organizations. According to the information received, on 20 June 2004 Nikolay Girenko was
          assassinated at gun point at his apartment in St Petersburg by two unknown assailants. The
          special rapporteurs express concern that the alleged assassination of Nikolay Girenko may be
          linked to his human rights activities and in particular his work to defend the rights of ethnic
          minorities.
          451. On 28 July 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related
          intolerance, sent an urgent appeal concerning Dmitri Kraiukhin, director of United Europe, a
          non-governmental organization which works to combat racism in Orel, western Russia.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 159
          According to the information received, in June 2003 Dmitri Kraiukhin reportedly informed the
          Prosecutor's Office in the Zavodskii district of Ore! about a!!eged acts of vanda!ism and
          distribution of anti-Semitic activities carried out by a neo-Nazi organization ca!!ed Russian
          Nationa! Unity (RNU). It is reported that, as a resu!t of this comp!aint, a crimina! case was
          opened which !ed to two members of RNU being charged with offences under article 282 of the
          Russian Crimina! Code on “incitement of nationa!, racia! or re!igious enmity”. The court case
          was reportedly due to commence in September 2004 with Dmitri Kraiukhin as the chief witness.
          In February 2004, on conclusion of the criminal investigation, the Zavodskii district prosecutor
          allegedly gave RNU all the case material, including the contact information for all the case
          experts and witnesses. It is alleged that RNTJ activists then began to distribute leaflets in Ore!
          and other cities across central Russia accusing Dmitri Kraiukhin of “heresy” and publicizing his
          home telephone number and address. Consequently, it is reported that Dmitri Kraiukhin has been
          the subject of numerous threats, and he requested that the Zavodskii authorities provide him with
          witness protection. This request was allegedly denied. In early July 2004, Dmitri Kraiukhin
          reportedly received a death threat through the post which included a photocopy of an article from
          the Russian daily newspaper Izvestiya concerning the murder of human rights defender Nikolai
          Girenko. Reports indicate that a section of the article regarding Nikolai Girenko's planned
          participation in a trial against RNU activists was highlighted. Reportedly, the same threat was
          sent to a local police official and editors of three newspapers in the region which have been
          critical of extreme nationalist organizations. The special rapporteurs express concern for the
          safety of Dmitri Kraiukhin, as these death threats and acts of intimidation may be directly linked
          to his anti-racism activities as a human rights defender and more specifically to his participation
          in the trial of a neo-Nazi organization.
          452. On 7 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Fatima Gazieva, human rights
          defender and co-founder of the human rights organization Echo of War, and her husband Ilyas
          Itaev in Kalinovskaya, Naor, Chechnya. According to the information received, on 3 September
          2004 Fatima Gazieva and Ilyas Itaev were allegedly arrested at their home in Kalinovskaya by
          Russian-speaking armed men and taken to an unknown location in military trucks. It is reported
          that no explanation was given for the arrest. Further reports indicate that, in April 2004, federal
          officers allegedly visited the village of Assinovskaya, where Fatima Gazieva lived previously, to
          ask about her activities and whereabouts. The special rapporteurs express grave concern for the
          safety of Fatima Gazieva and her husband Ilyas Itaev, as this arrest and incommunicado
          detention may have been carried out as a direct result of her work as a human rights defender.
          453. On 14 September 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning the
          situation of the Chechen Committee for National Rescue, a non-governmental organization
          working for the protection of human rights, based in Nazran, Republic of Jngushetia, Russian
          Federation. According to the information received, on 2 August 2004 the Prosecutor's Office of
          the Republic of Ingushetia allegedly filed a complaint against the Chechen Committee for
          National Rescue in which it claimed that the Committee produced and distributed extremist
          information. It is reported that particular reference was made to press releases distributed by the
          Committee between April and June 2004 which allegedly held Russian authorities responsible
          for human rights violations carried out in Chechnya, and which incited people to rebel against
          the Russian authorities. Reports indicate that Nazran District Court scheduled a hearing of the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 160
          motion on the grounds that such activities allegedly promulgate national discord and were
          extremist per se. However, it is reported that the Committee was not notified of the hearing and
          hence the case has been postponed. It is feared that, if the Committee is charged under article 9
          of Federal Law No. 1 14-FZ on “counteractions to extremist activities”, which may result in the
          closure of the Chechen Committee for National Rescue. The special rapporteurs express their
          concern that the primary motivation behind these proceedings may be to prevent the Chechen
          Committee for National Rescue from carrying out its human rights activities.
          454. On 18 October 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning
          Ludmilla Ausheva, Fatima Malsagova, Tamara Yandieva, Maddan Albogachieva, Khava
          Dolgieva, Motya Mogushkova, Maremm Yusupova, Birlant Shishkhanova, Radimkhat
          Yandieva, Madina Khutieva, Fatima Mukhieva, Anna Uzhakhoeva, Maryam Timurzieva, and
          Zinaida Batalova, all of whom reside in Ingushetia and work for the International Medical Corps
          (IMC). According to the information received, in the aftermath of the 6 February 2004 bomb
          attack on the Moscow metro, a leaflet was published by the Ministry of Interior and the Federal
          Security Service (FSB), where names and photos of the 14 persons mentioned above were
          displayed, claiming that they were wanted by the police and were planning a terrorist attack
          similar to that of 6 February. Allegedly, the leaflet was displayed in the Moscow Police
          Department and Moscow police stations and in several public places in Moscow, such as metro
          stations and at the Sheremetyevo-1 and 2 airports. It is reported that all necessary measures were
          later taken by the authorities to get the pictures out of the public domain, and that an internal
          investigation into the issue is being conducted by the Moscow City Prosecutor's Office.
          According to the information received, on 9 September 2004, the leaflet reappeared slightly
          modified, with names and photos of the 14 persons mentioned above, claiming they were wanted
          by the FSB and the Ministry of Internal Affairs on suspicion of their involvement in terrorist
          activities on the territory of the Russian Federation. Allegedly, the leaflet was published on the
          site www.rambler.ru and in the North-Ossetian newspaper Slovo Nahis. The special rapporteurs
          have expressed concerns that the reported exposure of Ludmilla Ausheva, Fatima Malsagova,
          Tamara Yandieva, Maddan Albogachieva, Khava Dolgieva, Motya Mogushkova, Maremm
          Yusupova, Birlant Shishkhanova, Radimkhat Yandieva, Madina Khutieva, Fatima Mukhieva,
          Anna Uzhakhoeva, Maryam Timurzieva, Zinaida Batalova, all of whom work for IMC, as
          suspected terrorists may be an attempt to prevent their human rights activities.
          455. On 6 December 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Ruslan Susaev,
          the head of the organization Civilian's Protest, who also assists the Information Centre of the
          Russian-Chechen Friendship Society in Chechnya, his wife, Susanna Susaeva, and his children.
          On 4 November 2004, Ruslan Susaev and Susanna Susaeva were stopped at a police roadblock
          near Achkoi Martan. The police ordered them out of the car, threw Mr. Susaev to the ground and
          searched him. They were taken to the police station in Achkoi Martan, and later to the
          Sunzhenskii Regional Department of Internal Affairs (ROVD). The police tried to make Mr.
          Susaev confess to a crime, and told him that his family would suffer unless he signed a
          confession. He refused to sign, and on the morning of 5 November 2004 they were released. Mr.
          Susaev has reportedly been the subject of recent harassment and threats by the security forces in
          connection with his work. He collected information about a house raid on 27 August 2004 in the
          town of Sernovodsk, allegedly carried out by the so-called “Kadyrovtsy”, members of the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 161
          Chechen Ministry of Interior security forces. During this raid several people were beaten, one
          person was killed, and another person was taken away. Mr. Susaev took part in a demonstration
          calling for the release of this person. On 28 August 2004, several masked men wearing uniforms
          of the security forces raided Mr. Susaev's home. They asked for Mr. Susaev, searched the house,
          fired in the air, hit Mr. Susaev's mother in the face, and forced two of the children to lie on the
          floor. On 29 August 2004, several men again came looking for him at his home, took two of his
          sons to a police station in Grozny, and released them a few hours later. That evening, a car
          without licence plates stopped in front of the house, and three men in camouflage uniforms
          entered and threatened to torture Mr. Susaev unless he stopped his human rights work. Mr.
          Susaev and his family have since been moving from place to place in Chechnya and Jngushetia.
          The special rapporteurs expressed their concern that the allegations of ill-treatment, intimidation
          and harassment of Mr. Ruslan Susaev and his family may be a result of his activities as a human
          rights defender, and aimed at preventing him from further pursuing his human rights work. We
          express concern that he and his family may be at risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment.
          Communications received
          456. By letter dated 13 April 2004, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent on
          26 January 2004. The Government confirmed that Asian Davietukaev was taken away on 10
          January 2004 and reported that, on 18 January 2004, the Shalin district's procurator's office
          initiated criminal case No. 36011 on the basis of evidence of abduction of a person under article
          126.2 of the Criminal Code. The Government confirmed the finding of his body, and stated that,
          on 20 January 2004, the Gudermes district procurator's office initiated criminal case no. 35002
          on the basis of evidence of homicide under article 105.1 of the Criminal Code. The examination
          of these cases was continuing at the time, and the procurator's office of the Chechen Republic
          was monitoring the course of the preliminary investigation procedure.
          457. By letter dated 13 April 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 28
          January 2004. The Government reported that, on 15 March 2003, the Shah District Procurator's
          Office in the Chechen Republic initiated proceedings concerning the previous abduction of Mr.
          Imran Ezhiev. In the course of this investigation, it was found that, on 26 January 2004, Mr.
          Ezhiev left his home in Yandar for the town of Karabulak by car. The Government stated that, on
          his way, Mr. Ezhiev noticed that two vehicles without state registration plates were following his
          car. When he stopped at a public phone, the cars continued driving in the direction of Nazran.
          According to the Government, Mr. Ezhiev did not report this incident to the law-enforcement
          agencies. The Government informed that his statement provided detailed information on the
          killing of members of the Society of Russian-Chechnen Friendship (SRCF). These points have
          yet not been completely checked, and the results will be made known in due course.
          458. By letter dated 29 April 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 12
          February 2004. The Government stated that Larisa Vakhaevna Bataeva and Aikhazur Bataev
          have never been members of the Society for Russian-Chechnen Friendship or any other human
          rights organization. The reply confirmed that Mrs. Bataeva had met the head of administration of
          Zakan-Yurt, and denied that she had received any threats in this context. Mrs. Bataeva claims to
          be unaware of which persons have been stating that she, as well as her husband, have received
          threats, and why they have made such statements. The Government reported that, on 14 February
          2004, Mr. Bataev was arrested, suspected of having committed a number of serious offences in
          Chechnya. He gave explanations related to the circumstances described in the investigation file,
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 162
          and he was released the same day. The Government stated that, on 23 February 2004, the
          Achkoy-Martanov district internal affairs office in Chechnya decided not to institute criminal
          proceedings against Mr. Bataev, due to lack of evidence that a crime had been committed.
          According to the reply, Mr. Bataev has stated that his detention was not linked to any persecution
          by the head of the administration of Zakan-Yurt.
          459. By letter dated 13 May 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 24
          February 2004. The Government reported that, on 18 February 2004, the deputy prefect of
          Moscow's Central Administrative District rejected a notification to hold the peaceful meeting
          referred to in the communication sent by the Special Representative. The decision was based on
          paragraph 4 of the Provisional Regulations on the procedure for notifying the Moscow city
          executive authorities of the holding of rallies, street processions, demonstrations and pickets on
          streets and squares and in other public places of the city, approved by Russian Presidential
          Decree No. 765 of 24 May 1993. According to the reply, the approximate 30 demonstrators were
          warned several times that their action had not been authorized by the executive authorities. The
          Government confirmed that Lev Ponomarev, Nikolai Khramov and 11 other demonstrators
          were arrested, and informed that the arrests were based on article 20.2, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the
          Russian Federation Code of Administrative Offences of 30 December 2001. Later, the
          Meshchansky and Basmanny district courts heard administrative charges against these people in
          judicial proceedings. The reply stated that they were subject to administrative penalties
          consisting of a fine in the amount of 15 times the minimum wage (1,500 roubles) for Mr.
          Khramov, a fine of 1,000 roubles for Mr. Ponomarev, and fines from 500 to 700 roubles to the
          remaining participants. According to the Government, these 13 persons were not detained
          beyond the statutory limit in the internal affairs division.
          460. By letter dated 15 July 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 23
          April 2004. The Government reported that the incident relating to Lybkan Bazayeva is being
          investigated. In a witness statement, Mrs. Bazayeva stated that, on 19 October 2003, armed men
          in camouflage uniforms burst into the house belonging to her mother-in-law in Grozny. She
          stated that they were looking for her and her two sons and that they had beaten tenants living in
          the house. According to the Government, her statement had been refuted by the testimony of
          eyewitnesses: These armed men did check the documents of some of the persons living in this
          house or in its neighbourhood, but, according to the witness, they did not conduct any search or
          used physical force. The Government stated that there were still need for further investigation.
          Hence, a procedural decision has not yet been taken.
          461. By letter dated 16 September 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on
          21 June 2004. The Government reported that the Office of the Fight Against Economic Crimes
          of the Ministry of Internal Affairs (OFEC) investigated the alleged illegal use of the name of the
          Kheter publishing house. In the course of the investigation, the Kazan iluman Rights Centre
          (KHRC) stated that the book entitled The Law and its Victims Tatarstan was issued with the
          assistance of the Yalkin limited liability company. KHRC also stated that the person who used
          the details of the Kheter publishing house in printing the book could not be identified. According
          to the Government, on 5 June 2004, OFEC decided not to initiate a criminal case due to lack of
          evidence pursuant to article 24.1.2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Procurator's Office
          of the Republic of Tatarstan has recognized this decision as justified. As far as the discovery of
          the hand grenade on 25 May 2004 is concerned, the Government reported that the Privolzhsky
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 163
          district internal affairs authority of the city of Kazan on 1 June 2004 initiated a criminal case on
          the basis of evidence of an offence under article 167.1 of the Criminal Code. This provision
          relates to unlawful acquisition, transfer, supply, storage, carriage or bearing of firearms, basic
          parts thereof, munitions, explosive substances or explosive devices. According to the
          Government, on 1 June 2004, the Vakhitovsky district internal affairs authority of Kazan
          initiated a criminal case relating to an attack on the office of KHRC and the intentional
          destruction of office equipment on the basis of evidence of an offence under article 167.1 of the
          Criminal Code. The Government indicated that the persons who committed these offences have
          not yet been identified, and that the Office of the Procurator-General of the Russian Federation
          monitors the investigation. At the time no definitive decision on these criminal cases had been
          taken.
          462. By letter dated 16 September 2004, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent
          on 27 July 2004. The Government reported that, relating to the killing of Nikolay Girenko on 19
          June 2004, the Saint Petersburg procurator's office initiated criminal proceedings on the basis of
          murder pursuant to article 105, paragraph 1, of the Criminal Code. The head of the Saint
          Petersburg Central Internal Affairs Department (C lAD) has ordered the creation of a task force
          composed of the most experienced members of the Criminal Investigation Department of the
          Saint Petersburg and Leningrad oblast C lAD. According to the Government, several possible
          versions of the incident have been proposed and are being studied. This includes the suggestion
          that the crime was linked to Mr. Girenko's activities as an expert in criminal cases involving
          extremism and racism, and also to his commercial activities. The Government stated that efforts
          to identify the individuals who committed the crime were continuing.
          463. On 20 September 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 28 July 2004
          concerning the case against two members of Russian National Unity (RNU). The Government
          claims that the case is still pending before the Zavodsky district court of the city of Orel, the
          question not yet having been examined. The next judicial sitting at the time of this
          communication was for the 31 August 2004. The Government further states that Dmitri
          Kraiukhin gave his personal details in court but did not request that the hearing be held behind
          closed doors. Moreover, all the witnesses' personal details are annexed to the bill of indictment
          in line with the law in force (arts. 217, 220 and 222). The Government has no information that it
          was in fact the District Procurator who had distributed such information to the public. The
          Government further claims that, despite the fact that leaflets containing information concerning
          Mr. Kraiukhin were distributed in the city of Orel, Bryansk and some other oblasts, there was
          nothing in such leaflets requesting Mr. Kraiukhin to refuse to testify or to give false testimony.
          Mr. Kraiukhin was nevertheless offered protection by special-reaction detachment officers as
          well as by having his phone conversations monitored. He refused such protection. The
          investigation section of the Sovetsky district internal affairs office is currently investigating
          threats received by Mr. Kraiukhin relating to his participation in the trial against RNU.
          464. By letter 13 October 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 7
          September 2004. The Government stated that Fatima Gazieva and Ilyas Itaev have not been
          subject to criminal prosecution nor been detained on suspicion of committing offences. It stated
          that no complaints or declarations have been received from them by the Procurator's Office of
          the Chechen Republic. The Government confirmed that Mrs. Gazieva has been involved in the
          organization Echoes of War, and reported that she ended her involvement in 1999. It was not
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 164
          known to Mrs. Gazieva that officers of the federal forces had visited the village of Assinovskaya
          in Sunzha district of the Chechen Republic to obtain information about her activities and
          whereabouts. According to the reply, on 3 September 2004, representatives of federal structures
          brought Mrs. Gazieva, Mr. Itaev and a number of other inhabitants of the Chechen Republic to
          the settlement of Khankala. The purpose was to elucidate any kinship relations with members of
          alleged illegal armed formations, including the Basaevs, Maskhadovs and Umarovs. The reply
          indicated that no unlawfhl actions were committed against these persons under questioning. On 4
          September 2004, Mrs. Gazaeva and Mr. Itaev were brought by a helicopter of the federal forces
          to the village of Shchelkovskaya, and they returned to the village of Kalinovskaya. According to
          the reply, Mrs. Gazaeva and Mr. Itaev have no complaints in this regard.
          465. By letter dated 18 November 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on
          14 September 2004 concerning the Chechen Committee for National Rescue. Unfortunately,
          the English translation was not available in time to be examined and included in this report, and
          will thus be reported next year.
          Observations
          466. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its numerous responses, which
          attest to its willingness to cooperate with her mandate. She welcomes the steps taken by the
          Government with regards to investigating allegations of abuses. She notes, however, that no
          investigation has so far resulted in the identification, charging and sentencing of perpetrators. As
          a result, impunity for violations against human right defenders remains high. She refers to her
          main report to the Commission on Human Rights for a detailed analysis of the trends in the
          situation of human rights defenders in the Russian Federation, and for her observations to these
          trends. In view of the numerous reports of violations, she encourages the Government to review
          favourably her request sent on 20 September 2004 for an invitation to conduct an official visit to
          the country.
          Rwanda
          Communications envoyées
          467. Le 15 juillet 2004, la ReprCsentante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special
          sur la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, a envoyé un appel
          urgent sur la Commission parlementaire etablie fin 2003, chargee de mener des enquêtes sur
          l'eventuelle propagation de l'ideologie genocidaire au Rwanda, et qui aurait rendu ses
          conclusions le 27 juin 2004. Les recommandations de la Commission auraient ete adoptees par le
          Parlement et le rapport devrait être transmis au Sénat prochainement. Selon les informations
          communiquées, il semblerait que l'interpretation faite par la Commission de la loi contre
          l'ideologie genocidaire serait de nature a limiter toute opposition, méme moderee, au
          Gouvernement et a restreindre la pleine jouissance du droit a la liberte d'expression et d'opinion
          au Rwanda, en particulier a l'egard des defenseurs des droits de l'homme. Ainsi, il a ete rapporté
          que, suite aux recommandations de la Commission, le Parlement aurait demande au
          Gouvernement de dissoudre la Ligue rwandaise pour la promotion et la defense des droits de
          l'homme (LIPRODHOR) ainsi que quatre autres organizations de la société civile au motif
          qu'elles propageraient des idees genocidaires. Par ailleurs, au cours de debats parlementaires, la
          Commission aurait egalement demande au Gouvernement de prendre des mesures a l'encontre de
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 165
          plusieurs ONG internationales prCsentes dans le pays, en particulier Care international, Trocaire,
          11.11.11 and Norwegian's People's Aid, comme ayant des ideologies genocidaires. Plusieurs
          Eglises, ainsi que des dirigeants religieux, auraient egalement etc mises a l'index. Des craintes
          ont ete exprimées pour la sécurité personnelle de plusieurs responsables de la LIPRODHOR du
          fait qu'une dizaine d'entre eux auraient ete nommément cites dans le rapport de la Commission.
          Suite a ces événements, les 2 et 4juillet, six defenseurs des droits de l'homme, membres actifs
          de la LIPRODHOR, dont Aloys Habimana, Ruben Niyibizi, Felicien Dufitumukiza, Ndagijimana
          Balthazar, Fabien Bakizanye et Jean Damascéne Ntaganzwa, auraient quitté le Rwanda.
          Observations
          468. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Saudi Arabia
          Communications sent
          469. On 11 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning Prince Sultan bin Turki, a member of the ruling family, who has reportedly
          been calling for peacefhl political, economic and judicial reforms in the country since January
          2003. He advocated in the world media for transparency, accountability, and an overhaul of the
          Saudi judicial system. According to information received, Sultan Bin Turki, who had been living
          abroad, was abducted on 12 June 2003 in Collonges-Bellerive, Switzerland, by five masked men
          who struck him unconscious and drugged him. He was reportedly transported against his will to
          Riyadh, where he remained in the hospital for two months due to the effects of the drug he was
          given, which reportedly resulted in his losing two-thirds of the use of his lungs. It is reported that
          he was then put under house arrest in his villa of the Al-Morooj neighborhood of Riyadh. By the
          end of January 2004, he reportedly gave interviews to the BBC English and Arabic services and
          to Al-Jazeera TV channel, during which he revealed his kidnapping and arrest. On 26 January
          2004, following his public statements, he was reportedly arrested and moved to the Al-Hair
          prison, where he is believed to still be detained. It is not clear whether charges have been brought
          against him.
          470. On 18 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Chairman-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, sent an urgent appeal
          concerning the reported arrest of the following 11 pro-democracy activists: Dr. Matrouk al-
          Falih, a professor of political science at King Sa'ud University, Riyadh, Dr. Abdullah al-
          ilamid, a former professor of contemporary literature at Imam Muhammad bin Sa'ud
          University, Riyadh, Muhammad Sa'id Tayyab, a retired journalist from Jeddah, Dr. Tawfiq al-
          Qussayyir, a professor of electronics at King Sa'ud University in Riyadh, Suleyman al-
          Rashudi, a retired lawyer in Riyadh, Najib Al Khunaizi, from Qateef, Khalid Al-ilameed,
          from Riyadh, Amir Abu Khamsin, from Al Hasa, Ali Al Dumaini, Adnan Al Shikes, and
          Abdulkarim Al Juhaiman, from Riyadh. According to information received, these persons
          were arrested on 15 March 2004 by the Mabahith (secret police), for criticizing the Government-
          appointed National Commission on Human Rights (NCHR), which was established by the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 166
          Government over a week ago, and for planning to set up their own “Saudi Independent Human
          Rights Committee”, in a petition delivered to the Government and signed by 53 intellectuals. It is
          reported that they have criticized NCHR for its lack of independence from the Government and
          are suspected of issuing “statements which do not serve the unity of the country and the cohesion
          of society”. They are reportedly held incommunicado at the General Intelligence (al-Mabahith al-
          ‘Amma) in ‘Ulaysha, in the capital, Riyadh. It is believed that three detainees were released on
          16 March, although their names are not known.
          471. On 23 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, sent a follow-up urgent appeal
          concerning the case of Dr Matrouk aI-Falih, Dr Abdullah al-ilamid, Muhammad Sa'id
          Tayyab, Dr Tawfiq aI-Qussayyir, Suleyman al-Rashudi, Najib Al Khunaizi, Khalid Al-
          ilameed, Amir Abu Khamsin, A u Al Dumaini, and Adnan Al Shikes. According to more
          recent information received, nine of the 12 people listed above were released between 17 and 29
          March 2004, after they were allegedly forced to sign a pledge to end their participation in any
          political or human rights activities and to stop calling for reforms in the Kingdom. Dr. Matrouk
          al-Falih, Dr. Abdullah al-Hamid and Ali Al Dumaini are believed to remain in incommunicado
          detention because of their refhsal to sign this pledge. It is reported that, to date, no charges have
          been filed against them and that they have been denied access to their lawyers since their arrests.
          472. On 31 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal regarding the situation of Mazen Saleh bin Mohammed al-ilussein al-Tammimi,
          human rights defender and founding member of Al-Karama human rights organization in Saudi
          Arabia. According to the information received, on 31 May 2004 Mazen Saleh bin Mohammed al-
          Hussein al-Tammimi was reportedly arrested at his family home in Damman, along with his wife
          and four children, all below the age of 6. His arrest was allegedly connected to his participation
          in a meeting on the issues of detainees in the Gulf, Guantánamo Bay and Irak which took place
          on 27 May in Qatar. Although his family were reportedly released the following day, sources
          indicate that Mazen Saleh bin Mohammed al-Hussein al-Tammimi is still being held in
          incommunicado detention in the offices of Saudi Arabia's General Intelligence service (al-
          Mabahith al-'Amma) in Damman. It is further alleged that Mazen Saleh bin Mohammed al-
          Hussein al-Tammimi was allegedly subjected to ill treatment at the time of his arrest. Concern
          has been expressed that Mazen Saleh bin Mohammed al-Hussein al-Tammimi may have been
          arrested and detained as a direct result of his human rights activities. It is reported that in 2004 he
          was appointed Al-Karama representative for the Khobar region for which he was responsible for
          reporting on all cases of human rights violations, particularly those relating to arbitrary
          detention. It is alleged that his work was under close scrutiny of the Saudi security forces. Fear
          has also been expressed for the physical and psychological integrity of Mazen Saleh bin
          Mohammed al-Hussein al-Tammimi as he is physically handicapped and may be at risk of
          torture and other forms of ill treatment while in custody.
          473. On 17 November 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and the Chairman-Rapporteur of the
          Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, sent an urgent appeal regarding Abdul Rahman Al-
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 167
          Lahem, a lawyer and member of the Arab Commission on Human Rights. Abdul Rahman Al-
          Lahem is part of the legal team defending three reform activists, Abdullah Al-Hamed, Au Al-
          Demaini and Matruk Al-Faleh, who were arrested in March 2004 and are currently on trial in
          Riyadh for petitioning and issuing statements demanding political reforms and an end to
          institutional repression of civil rights due to the war on terrorism. According to the allegations
          received, Mr. Al-Lahem was arrested by the Saudi intelligence forces on 6 November 2004
          following a letter he sent to Crown Prince Abdullah on behalf of the defendants, which accused
          the trial judges of denying the three men a fair trial through delaying tactics, judicial bias and the
          denial of the right to a public trial, including the right of international and national media to
          attend. Concern has been expressed that his arrest may be linked to his work as legal counsel to
          the imprisoned reform activists. Concern is heightened by the fact that on 17 March 2004, Mr.
          Al-Lahem had reportedly already been arrested and detained for 8 days in connection with his
          active defense and support of the three accused.
          Communications received
          474. By letter dated 12 August 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by
          the Special Representative on 26 April 2004 with reference to Dr. Matrouk aI-Falih, Dr.
          Abdullah al-ilamid, Muhammad Sa'id Tayyab, Dr. Tawfiq aI-Qussayyir, Suleyman at-
          Rashudi, Najib At Khunaizi, Khatid At-ilameed, Amir Abu Khamsin, Au At Dumaini, and
          Adnan At Shikes. According to the Government, the aforementioned were arrested after they
          held several meetings. Following an investigation, they were charged with engaging in acts
          which justified terrorism, encouraged violence and incited civil disturbance. The Government
          stated that, after they admitted their misguided involvement, apologized and requested that all
          criminal proceedings against them be dropped, Dr. Tawfiq al-Qussayyir was released on 27
          March and Muhammad Sa'id Tayyab and Suleyman al-Rashudi on 28-29 April. Dr. Matrouk al-
          Falih, Dr. Abdullah al-Hamid and Ali Al Dumaini were charged with organising the meetings
          and their cases have been referred to the courts for judgement. The Government informed the
          Special Representative that the accused have enjoyed their full rights at all times. The first
          hearing began on 9 August and the second is due to begin on 23 August 2004.
          Observations
          475. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response, but regrets the
          absence of replies to numerous other communications sent. She expresses her concern at the
          reports of arbitrary arrests of human rights defenders in Saudi Arabia.
          Serbia and Montenegro
          Communications sent
          476. On 22 December 2003, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal regarding
          alleged threats made against Goran Stoparic, a former member of the Serbian security forces'
          Special Anti-Terrorist Unit, to discourage him from providing testimony in court of human rights
          abuses reportedly committed by other members of the security forces. According to information
          received, Goran Stoparic was due to testify on 8 December 2003 at the trial of Sasa Cvjetan for
          the killing of 19 ethnic Albanian children, women and men by Serbian security forces in
          Podujevo during the 1999 Kosovo war. It is reported that, a few minutes before testimony was
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 168
          due to be given, Goran Stoparic initially cancelled his appearance, saying he was unwell, after
          being threatened by the commanding officer (whose reported name is available to me) of his
          former unit and told to conceal the truth, and that the commander's brother was allegedly among
          the perpetrators of the crime. Information further indicates that Goran Stoparic subsequently
          went on to give his testimony. Concern has been expressed that the alleged threat was aimed at
          deterring Stoparic from testifying on behalf of human rights and that he, and other potential
          witnesses in the allged human rights abuses, may as a result be in need of protection.
          477. On 31 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the situation of the office of the ilelsinki Committee for iluman Rights in
          Serbia. According to the information received, on 18 March 2004, following the publication by
          the Helsinki Committee of Military Secret, a book which reportedly documents the political
          activities of the military during the rule of President Milosevic, its author, Viadan Vlajkovic,
          was allegedly arrested and placed in custody. According to the allegation, he is under
          investigation for crimes related to the disclosure of military secrets. On 26 March 2004, a search
          warrant was issued against the Helsinki Committee offices in Belgrade, their offices raided by
          military police, and all 251 copies of Military Secrets were temporarily confiscated. On 29
          March 2004, the chair of the Helsinki Committee, Sonja Biserko, was reportedly summoned to
          give testimony to a military court. Concern has been expressed that the raid against the Helsinki
          Committee's offices and confiscation of the bookMilitary Secrets and arrest of his author may
          represent an attempt to obstruct the legitimate efforts of the Helsinki Committee to monitor and
          help understand how the armed forces of FRY functioned during the Milosevic era.
          478. On 12 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a letter of
          allegation concerning attacks against journalists, who are believed to have been targeted for their
          reporting on human rights abuses, in particular during the Milosevic era. In particular, reports
          were received indicating that on 28 March 2004, a bomb was found under a vehicle of the
          independent television programme B92 TV, while the journalists were in Mitrovica to report on
          the upsurge of violence in Kosovo. On 3 May, Masan Lekic, a B92 reporter, was reportedly
          attacked as he was conducting an investigation on Milorad “Legija” Lukovic, the main suspect in
          the assassination of former Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic. It is reported that his attackers first
          asked him which television company he was working for and, when he answered B92, the media
          in the country which has been the most active in denouncing human rights violations by the
          Milosevic regime, they allegedly threw his camera to the ground and seized the tape.
          479. On 30 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Mrs. Svetlana Djordjevic.
          According to information received, in July 2003 Svetlana Djordjevic published a book entitled
          Testimonies about Kosovo, in which she reportedly described human rights violations, such as
          evictions, mistreatment and killing of Albanian civilians perpetrated by the police in Kosovo in
          1998 and 1999, until the end of the NATO intervention. The book allegedly gives the fhll names
          of police officers, commanders and citizens who took part in human rights violations in the
          province. Immediately after the publication of this book, Svetlana Djordjevic began receiving
          anonymous phone calls at her home and threatening notes stuck on the door of her flat in Vranje.
          On 27 June 2004, she was the victim of a physical attack. An unidentified man burst into her
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 169
          apartment, grabbed her mouth and injected her in left upper arm with unidentified liquid. While
          she was still conscious, he ordered her to go out publicly on television and deny all she wrote. He
          then left, leaving a red rose in her hand, a sign which suggest that the threats may come from
          members of the now-disbanded Special Operation Unit, whose misdeeds are pointed out in the
          book. Svetlana Djordjevic was found an hour after by her husband and transferred to hospital.
          An investigation was launched, but no information has yet been revealed. Mrs. Djordjevic was
          then granted special protection by the police. However, the policemen who were supposed to
          ensure her protection are reported to be the ones that she denounced in her book. Moreover, she
          and the people with whom she lived have recently been subjected to repeated acts of harassment
          from the police. As a consequence, she is now reported to live in hiding. In view of the threats
          and assault of which she has been the victim, concerns are expressed for Mrs. Djordjevic's
          physical and psychological integrity.
          Observations
          480. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Sri Lanka
          Communications sent
          481. On 3 December 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal regarding Mr. Uswatta
          Liyanage Anthony Joseph Perera, who has been active in combating torture and child abuse,
          and to provide assistance to the victims in obtaining legal advice and medical attention.
          According to the allegations received, on 22 November 2004, Uswatta Liyanage Anthony
          Joseph Perera received a phone call telling him to put an end to his human rights work if he
          wanted to live. He has brought these threats to the attention of the National Human Rights
          Commission (NHRC) in a letter dated 25 November 2004. Concern is expressed that the threats
          against Mr. U.L.A. Joseph Perera may be aimed at preventing him from further assisting Mr.
          Lalith Rajapakse, an alleged torture victim, who was the subject of an urgent appeal by the
          Special Rapporteur on the question of torture (E/CN.4/2004/56/Add. 1, para. 1509). He has filed
          a fhndamental rights application and is a complainant in a torture case against police officers,
          which is pending before the Negombo High Court. Mr. Rajapakse as well has complained about
          threats to his life. These concerns are reinforced by the death of Mr. Gerald Perera, a torture
          victim, and the subject of an urgent appeal of the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture,
          dated 22 November 2004 (see also E/CN.4/2003/68/Add.1, para. 1571, and
          E/CN.4/2004/56/Add.1, para. 1557). He was a successful plaintiff in a fundamental human rights
          case relating to torture. He was due to testify on 2 December 2004 in the criminal case against
          the policemen who tortured him, but was shot on 21 November and died of the wounds on 24
          November.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 170
          482. By letter dated 23 March 2004, the Government of Sri Lanka replied to the urgent appeal
          sent jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture on 25 September 2003. The
          Government referred to the allegations concerning the arrest and torture of W.A. Phanapala
          Perera, and reported that the Supreme Court had ordered the perpetrators, three police officers,
          to pay compensation and costs to W.A. Dhanapala Perera. The Supreme Court ordered the
          Superintendent of Police (SRI) and the Inspector General of Police (IGP) to take appropriate
          action against these officers. The Government stated that the Senior Superintendent of Police,
          Kaluthara, had started an initial inquiry against the police officers against whom there were
          findings in the “Fundamental Rights” case. The charges had, on 22 July 2003, been brought up
          against the concerned police officers for torture. Relevant inquiries were in progress at the time.
          According to the Government, STU forwarded extracts of the investigation notes to the Attorney-
          General's Department on 11 January 2004 seeking advise as to whether there is a possibility to
          consider charges against the concerned police officers under the Convention against Torture Act.
          The matter was at the time under consideration by the Attorney-General.
          Observations
          483. The Special Representative would like to thank the Government for its response to last
          year's communication, and awaits the arrival of a reply to its most recent communication.
          Sudan
          Communications sent
          484. On 6 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the question of
          torture, sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning the situation of Dr. Mudawi Ibrahim Adam,
          Director of the Sudan Social Development Organization (SUDO), a voluntary organization
          created to promote sustainable development and human rights, which has organized a number of
          workshops on subjects connected with human rights and is also reportedly engaged in
          humanitarian activities; it has recently provided non-food items to internally displaced persons in
          Darfur. According to the information received, Dr. Mudawi Ibrahim Adam was reportedly
          arrested at his home in Khartoum on 28 December 2003 and is reportedly held in Kober Prison
          in Khartoum North, where he is believed to be interrogated by the National Security Forces. The
          reasons for his arrest are allegedly not known and he has reportedly not been charged with any
          offence. Concern has been expressed that he may have been arrested in connection with his
          activities in defence of human rights. In the light of a recent visit made by Dr. Mudawi Ibrahim
          Adam to Darfhr and previous reports received according to which people seeking or providing
          information on the region have been subjected to torture and other forms of ill-treatment by the
          National Security forces, fears have been expressed for his safety. In this connection, we would
          like to refer again to the case ofjournalist Yusuf al-Bashir Musa, who was reportedly arrested
          and severely beaten by the security forces in Darfur in May 2003, after he allegedly wrote an
          article about the destruction of Sudan air force planes and helicopters in El Fashir airport by the
          Sudan Liberation Army (SLA).
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 171
          485. On 8 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Waiel Taha, a 23-year-
          old student and member of the Sudan Organization against Torture (SOAT) student network,
          who was reportedly arrested by members of the National Security Agency (NSA) outside
          Khartoum University Student Union Building on Nile Street on 5 January 2004. It is reported
          that he was subsequently taken to an undisclosed location and that his whereabouts are unknown
          since then. A delegation from the Khartoum Student Union reportedly went to the NSA office
          and requested information on his whereabouts. However, the NSA allegedly denied that he had
          been arrested. According to the information received, another student, Yousif Fat'h Al
          Rahman, was reportedly arrested with Waiel Taha. He reportedly confirmed that they were both
          taken by force by nine individuals on a Toyota pick-up truck, 2002 model, and that they were
          subsequently separated. YousifFat'h Al Rahman was reportedly taken to the NSA building near
          Old Khartoum High School, where he was allegedly punched on the face, beaten on the sole of
          the feet and back, kicked, pressed hard on the stomach, forced to drink three litres of water with
          a bottle inserted to the throat, strangled and subjected to death threats by five security officers.
          He was reportedly hurled, blindfolded and handcuffed, into a road near Mahmood Sharief
          Station in Bun on 6 January 2004. Concern has been expressed that Waiel Taha's arrest may be
          linked to his participation, together with the Khartoum University Student Union in the
          organization of a series of briefing and public talks regarding disturbances which allegedly
          occurred on 3 and 4 January 2004 at Khartoum University between female students and guards.
          It is alleged that during the disturbances students were beaten by the guards with metal wires and
          water hoses. Some of the injured students allegedly pressed charges against the university
          guards. In view of the reported incommunicado detention of Waiel Taha at an undisclosed
          location and allegations concerning the torture and other forms of ill-treatment of Yousif Fat'h
          Al Rahman while in custody, fears have been expressed that Waiel Taha may also be at risk of
          torture and other forms of ill-treatment.
          486. On 5 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, sent an urgent appeal concerning Salih
          Mahmoud Osman, a human rights defender and member of the Sudan Organization Against
          Torture (SOAT) lawyers' network, who was reportedly arrested at his home in Wad-Madani,
          capital of the Central Region in Sudan, at 11 p.m. on Sunday 1 February 2004. Reports indicate
          that he is currently being held at the National Security Agency (NSA) offices in Wad Madani,
          where he is reportedly being interrogated. Although Mr. Salih has not been formally charged
          with any offence, it is believed that he might have been arrested in connection with his activities
          in defence of human rights, in particular the fact that he provides free legal aid and legal
          representation to victims of human rights abuses and to those who face capital punishment or
          severe punishments (amputation and cross-amputation) in Darfur region, and to the fact that he
          has written articles and researches on the current conflict in Darfhr. Information received also
          indicates that Mr. Salih was suffering from jaundice at the time of his arrest and has not
          recovered. It is mentioned that his wife has reportedly not been allowed to see him but she was
          allowed to bring him food as his ill health needs a special diet.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 172
          487. On 23 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up
          urgent appeal concerning Dr. Mudawi Ibrahim Adam, Director of the Sudan Social
          Development Organization (SUDO), an organization promoting sustainable development and
          human rights, through workshops on human rights-related issues and engagement in
          humanitarian work. According to more recent information received, on 8 February 2004, Mr.
          Adam was brought before the Attorney-General and charged with crimes against the State under
          articles 50, 51, 56, 63 and 64 of the Penal Code. It is reported that article 50 relates to
          undermining the constitutional system or the unity of the country and article 51 relates to waging
          war against the State, or supporting those who do so. Both are allegedly punishable by death and
          do not allow release on bail. Mr. Adam is reportedly now held in police custody and has been
          allowed to see his wife and lawyer only in the presence of police. He is apparently not allowed
          books or newspapers, but is allowed to watch TV. Dr. Mudawi, who was reportedly arrested at
          his home in Khartoum on 28 December 2003 after visiting the area of Darfur, was first held
          under article 31 of the National Security Forces Act in the National Security Centre and in the
          political section of Kober prison. He went on hunger strike demanding to be released or charged.
          He ended the hunger strike after two days, when he was brought before the Attorney-General.
          488. On 5 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on the
          independence of judges and lawyers and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent
          an urgent appeal concerning Baroud Sandal Ragab, Ismail Oman, Mohamed ilaroun,
          Mohamed ShariefAli and Abdalla Aldoma, all lawyers. It is alleged that they were arrested on
          19 March in Khartoum, and are being held incommunicado in a special section of Kober prison.
          Abdalla Aldoma, a prominent member of the opposition Umma party, presided over a delegation
          of that party to the National Committee for the Development and Restoration of Social
          Infrastructure in Darfur. It is alleged that his arrest is linked to the delegation's withdrawal from
          that Committee. The other four lawyers are members of the Popular Congress, another
          opposition party. Their arrest is allegedly related to their participation in a number of
          demonstrations with displaced persons from Darfur, denouncing the lack of shelter and food.
          489. On 12 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up urgent appeal
          concerning the situation of Osman Adam Abdel Mawla, a human rights defender and member
          of the Nyala branch of the Sudan Social Development Organization (SUDO), which promotes
          sustainable development and human rights through workshops on human rights-related issues
          and engagement in humanitarian work. According to the information received, on S May 2004,
          Osman Adam Abdel Mawla was arrested by security forces in Zalingy. He is reportedly being
          held at the security offices in Zalingy and has allegedly not had any charges brought against him.
          It should be noted in this respect that the Director of SUDO, Dr. Mudawi Ibrahim Adam, who
          was previously subject to urgent appeals in relation to his reported involvement in humanitarian
          work in Darfhr and his reporting on the human rights situation in the area. In this context,
          concern has been expressed that Osman Adam Abdel Mawla may have been targeted for his
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 173
          human rights work and in particular his work with SUDO, which has recently provided
          assistance to internally displaced people (IDPs) in the Darfur region.
          490. On 12 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Nureddin Mohammad Abdel Rahim,
          omda, or mayor, of Shoba, and Bahr al-Din Abdullah Rifah, omda of Jabalsi. On 9 May 2004 it
          is alleged that the two men were arrested in the street in Kabkabiya, North Darfur state, after a
          meeting called by the International Committee of the Red Cross. It is reported that they had
          provided information on human rights violations by Government-supported militia in the region,
          including information on burnt villages, killings and mass graves. It is alleged that the men are
          held incommunicado. In view of their alleged detention incommunicado, concern is expressed
          that Nureddin Mohammad Abdel Rahim and Bahr al-Din Abdullah Rifah may be at risk of
          torture or other forms of ill-treatment.
          491. On 3 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up
          urgent appeal concerning the situation of Osman Adam Abdel Mawla, a member of SUDO.
          According to the information received, Osman Abdel Mawla was reportedly arrested on 5 May
          2004 and held at the security offices in Zalingy during which time he was reportedly neither
          interrogated nor informed of the reason for his detention. He was reportedly released on 18 May.
          The Special Representative welcomes the release of Osman Abdel Mawla but remains concerned
          at information received that since his release, he has been denied the necessary permit to travel
          outside Nyala. Concern has been expressed that this alleged restriction on his freedom of
          movement may represent an attempt at preventing aim from canying out his human rights
          activities and in particular from reporting on the human rights situation on Darfur.
          492. On 18 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, sent an urgent appeal concerning the situation of
          Adel Abdullah Nasir Aldeain Saeed, a lawyer with the Sudan Organization Against Torture
          (SOAT) network in Nyala, which works at providing free legal aid services to persons sentenced
          to death, amputation, cross-amputation and any other inhumane and degrading punishments.
          According to the information received, on 16 June 2004, Ad d Abdullah Nasir Aldeain Saeed
          was reportedly arrested by the security forces at his office at 1 p.m. and taken to the security
          forces offices in Nyala. He has reportedly not been formerly charged and has been denied any
          visits by his family or lawyers. Concern is expressed that Mr. Ad d Abdullah Nasir Aldeain's
          arrest may be related to his human rights work in particular his monitoring activities and a
          petition he sent, together with other lawyers, to the director of the security forces in Nyala
          demanding that the detainees currently being held without legal representation at the security
          forces detention centre be charged and brought to court in a fair trial or be immediately released
          if there are no valid charges against them.
          493. On 21 July 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning the situation of Salih Mahmoud
          Osman, a Human Rights lawyer with SOAT. It is reported that, on 1 February 2004, Salih
          Mahmoud Osman was arrested by members of the National Security Agency (NSA) at his home
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 174
          in Wad-Madani. Reports indicate that he has been held in incommunicado detention since then
          and that no official charge has been brought against him. According to new reports received, on
          30 June 2004 Salih Mahmoud Osman began a hunger strike in protest against his detention.
          Serious concern is expressed for the health and physical integrity of Salih Mahmoud Osman,
          who was reportedly suffering from jaundice at the time of his arrest and who also suffers from
          diabetes and high blood pressure. Concern is also expressed that Salih Mahmoud Osman ‘s arrest
          may be related to his work as a human rights lawyer and, in particular, to his provision of free
          legal representation to detainees facing capital punishment and to victims of human rights abuses
          in the Darfur province.
          494. On 3 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Rapporteur on the
          independence of judges and lawyers, sent an urgent appeal concerning the situation of Aba Zer
          Ahmed Abu Al Bashir, a lawyer, member of the Berti Tribe and human rights defender in
          Nyala, Sudan. According to the information received, on 24th July 2004, Aba Zer Ahmed Abu
          Al Bashir was reportedly arrested by the security forces at his office in Nyala and taken to the
          security forces' offices in Nyala where he currently remains in detention. He has reportedly not
          been formerly charged and has been denied any visits by his family or lawyers. Concern is
          expressed that Zer Ahmed Abu Al Bashir ‘s arrest may be related to his human rights activities
          and in particular to a written request which he sent to the state Governor of Southern Darfur on
          16 July 2004, together with 10 other peace activists, requesting that the conflict in the area come
          to an end. Concern is heightened by reports that 10 peace activists and tribal leaders, parties to
          the request, were also arrested
          495. On 2 September 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning the
          situation of Dr. Isam Siddig, Chairman of the Sudanese Peace Forum. According to the
          information received, during March 2004, Dr. Isam Siddig was reportedly arrested by Sudanese
          Security forces at his home in the Khartoum suburb of El Gireif Gharb. He was allegedly
          brought to the National Security headquarters in North Khartoum where he was held until 10
          p.m. , then ordered to report on a daily basis for the next five days. Information indicates that he
          was detained from 9 a.m. until 10 p.m. every day and was reportedly questioned about his
          activities with the Sudanese Peace Forum. According to further reports, on 18 August 2004 Dr.
          Isam Siddig was arrested at his office in Khartoum by three agents of the Sudanese Security
          forces. He was allegedly ordered to report to the Security Forces headquarters every day, where
          he is still being held on a daily basis from 9 a.m. until 10p.m. Whilst in custody, he has not been
          questioned nor has he been told the reason for his arrest. Concern has been expressed that Dr.
          Isam Siddig may have been arrested and detained as a direct result of his human rights activities
          as Chairman of the Sudanese Peace Forum. Concern has been heightened as this is the second
          time that he has been reportedly arrested for no apparent reason.
          496. On 6 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a letter of allegation concerning the cases
          mentioned below. Faisal El Bagir, a freelance journalist and correspondent for Reporter Sans
          Frontiêres in Sudan and a member of SOAT, has allegedly been detained repeatedly in
          connection with his work as a journalist and human rights defender. In particular, he was
          detained on 8 June 2003 at Khartoum airport by the security forces as he was returning from
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 175
          Athens after attending a conference on the Designs for Democratic Media in Iraq. It is reported
          that his luggage was searched, his passport confiscated and he was interrogated on his
          journalistic activities. On 26 July 2003, he was detained again as he was returning from Dhaka
          where he had attended a meeting on children's rights and on 16 August, he was reportedly
          summoned by the political section of the security forces and interrogated about his activities and
          links with SOAT. It is reported that he was summoned again by the press section of the security
          forces on 11 October following a press release defending freedom of expression, one which was
          signed by over 250 journalists, and then he was detained again on 10 January 2004. Gasim
          Taha, a journalist working for the daily Al Sahafa, and Muhanad ilusain, working forAkhbar
          Al Youm, were detained by the security forces in Nyala on 15 November 2003, released on the
          same day and ordered to report weekly to the security office. Their arrest followed a visit on 13
          November 2003 to the villages of Singita and Oda in Southern Darfur after an attack of the two
          villages by Arab militia, during which the journalists filmed and photographed the village and
          the destruction of houses and farms. It is believed that their arrest was related to their reporting
          activities on the human rights situation in the Darfur region.
          497. On 6 September 2004, the Special Representative sent a letter of allegation concerning
          Murtada Al Gahli, ajournalist and SOAT staff member, who was summoned on 11 October
          2003 following the release of a press statement calling for the respect of freedom of expression
          that was signed by over 250 journalists. In December 2003, he was reportedly put under
          investigation in connection with several articles he had written in the newspaper AlAyam and the
          newspaper was reportedly order by the National Security Agency to cancel his column.
          498. On 6 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a letter of allegation concerning the arrest of
          some 45 students from the University of Bkhat al Rodah, Al Duwain, on 17 March 2003 after
          protesting against a decision by the dean to refuse the establishment of a student union. It is
          reported that the police used rocks, pebbles, electric baton and tear gas resulting in the injuring of
          many students including Jmjad Taha Hussain, Faiza Al taieb Omer, Limia Osman. The students
          were reportedly taken to the security office and detained for three hours all in the same room
          without opened windows or fan. Upon their release, they were reportedly order to evacuate their
          university rooms.
          499. On 17 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a follow-up letter of allegation concerning
          Waiel Taha, a student and member of the SOAT student network in Sudan. According to the
          new information received, he was released on bail on 7 January 2004. It is alleged that while in
          custody he was tied to a chair, blindfolded with a shirt and beaten on his genitals and other parts
          of his body with a water hose, and that he was threatened with rape. He was reportedly charged
          by the Chief Persecutor of the Crime Against the State with instigating students, illegal
          occupation of a room used by a guard and the destruction of a Student Support Fund's banner,
          under articles 144 (Intimidation) and 182 (Criminal mischief) of the Penal Code of 1991.
          Although he was released on bail, it is reported that he was ordered to report back to the Crime
          Against the State Office on 8 and 11 January 2004.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 176
          500. On 6 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Mr. Faisal Dawood
          Abd Alrahman, 26, a fourth-year economics student, Secretary-General of the Darfur Student
          Association at the University of Khartoum. According to the information received, on 23
          September 2004 at 11 a.m., eight officers from National Security Agency (NSA) arrested Mr.
          Faisal Dawood Abd Alrahman and Mr. Abd Alrahman Mohamed Abd Alrahman, 27, a
          second-year Arts Faculty student and Chairperson of the Darfur Student Association at the
          University of Khartoum, on the University of Khartoum premises. Mr. Faisal Dawood Abd
          Alrahman and Mr. Abd Alrahman Mohamed Abd Alrahman were taken to the NSA political
          section offices at Khartoum North. While detained there, they were allegedly beaten and
          punched all over their bodies for an hour. They were questioned about the activities of the Darfur
          Student Organization. Abd Alrahman Mohamed Abd Alrahman was released on 24 September
          2004 at 4 p.m. Faisal Dawood Abd Alrahman is still in detention and his whereabouts remain
          undisclosed. The detention of Faisal Dawood Abd Alrahman at an undisclosed location and the
          treatment he was allegedly subjected to upon his arrest give rise to fears about his being
          subjected to further ill-treatment.
          501. On 12 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Adib Abdel Rahman Yusuf, of the Sudan
          Social Development Organization (SUDO) in Zalingy, West Darfur State, who was arrested in
          Khartoum by National Security and Intelligence Agency officers on 10 September 2004. He is
          currently held incommunicado at the political section of the National Security and Intelligence
          Agency offices in Khartoum. In view of his incommunicado detention lasting already for a
          month, concern is expressed that Mr. Adib Abdel Rahman Yusuf may be at risk of torture or
          other forms of maltreatment.
          Communications received
          502. By letter dated 7 July 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 5 April
          2004 concerning Baroud Sandal Ragab, Ismail Oman, Mohamed ilaroun, Mohamed
          ShariefAli and Abdalla Aldoma.
          503. By letter dated 14 October 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 2
          September 2004. The Government reported that Dr. Isam Siddig had never been detained by the
          security forces, and that he had only been summoned for interrogation several times. According
          to the Government, during his presence at the security office he was treated humanely and all his
          legal rights under the constitution were observed.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          504. By letter dated 23 March 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 24
          April 2003 concerning the Sudanese Women's Civil Society Network for Peace (SWCSNP).
          The Government reported that this organization had not registered itself with the Ministry of
          Humanitarian Affairs and that this procedure was available to them in accordance with the law.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 177
          SWCSNP started its activities without prior permission, and hence the office was shut down as
          the law stipulated. The Government reported that, under the Commission of Humanitarian
          Assistance Act of 1995, no association, organization or group may undertake any activity until it
          has been registered with the authorities. In this connection, the Government stated that
          international human rights law established a right for the public authorities to deny an individual
          his freedom and security whenever such is necessary to protect national security, public safety or
          the national economy or to prevent a crime or the disruption of public order. Such restrictions
          must be in accordance with the law and can only be used in exceptional circumstances. The
          Government reported that the SWCSNP had not exhausted all internal legal possibilities still
          available for them, in conformity with the International Covenant on Civic and Political Rights.
          Observations
          505. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies. She acknowledges the
          explanation received in the case of Dr. Isam Siddig indicating that he is not detained by the
          security forces. She notes, however, that the Government's explanation had not fully dispelled
          her concerns. Although he is not formally detained, according to her information, Mr. Isam
          Siddig must report daily from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m. to the Security Forces office. She believes that
          such practice can be understood to amounting to a form of detention. In the case of Aba Zer
          Ahmed Abu Al Bashir, she notes that information she has received from non-governmental
          sources indicated that he had actually not been arrested, and that the link between such an
          alleged arrest and his submission of a written request to the Governor of South Darfur, was not
          clearly established. In light of this new information, she considers this case to be closed. She
          refers to her main report (E/CN.4/2005/101) for a detailed analysis of the trends in the situation
          of human rights defenders in Sudan, and for her observations to these trends.
          Syrian Arab Republic
          Communications sent
          506. On 16 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-
          up urgent appeal concerning Aktham Naisse, the President of the Committees for the Defense of
          Democratic Liberties and Human Rights in Syria (CDF). According to reports received, in the
          late afternoon of 11 February 2004, Aktham Naisse, was summoned to report to the “al-Mintaqa”
          offices of the military secret service in Damascus. He was then allegedly detained and
          interrogated by two high-ranking military officers until after midnight and reportedly released on
          12 February in the early afternoon. It is reported that during his detention, military officers
          verbally harassed Aktham Naisse, who was scheduled to travel abroad shortly, threatening him
          not to allow him to leave Syria, or not be allowed to return. They reportedly suggested that other
          accidents “might happen”. The military secret services allegedly accused Mr. Naisse and CDF of
          having illegal contacts and being “the workers of Europe, the USA and Israel”, reportedly on the
          basis of conversations tapped on Mr. Naisse's telephone by the Syrian authorities. Concern has
          been expressed that this detention may be linked to Aktham Naisse's work in the defence of
          human rights, in particular an online petition, “To end the state of emergency in Syria”
          ,reportedly launched by CDF at the end of January 2004. It is reported that the military secret
          service officers said that the number of signatories, amounting to more than 3,500, was a sign
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 178
          that CDF had illegal international contacts. Concerns are heightened by reports of prior
          surveillance and by the fact that CDF has not yet been recognized by the authorities.
          507. On 23 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the situation of ilaytham Al-Maleh, Director of the Human Rights
          Association in Syria who had reportedly been prevented from travelling abroad. According to the
          information received, on 11 February 2004, Mr. Haytham Al-Maleh was due to travel to United
          Arab Emirates on a family visit when he was stopped by Syrian security authorities at the
          International Airport of Damascus and not permitted to leave the country. It is believed that this
          prohibition to travel follows a speech that Mr. Al-Maleh made in front of the Human Rights
          Committee of the German Parliament on the International Day of Human Rights, concerning the
          human rights conditions under the law of emergency in Syria. It seems that Mr. Haytham Al-
          Maleh had not been allowed to leave Syria for several months until he received an official
          invitation from the German Parliament, and that at that point, the Syrian Ministry of the Republic
          Presidential Affairs asserted that Mr. Haytham was not banned from leaving the country.
          Concern has been expressed that this restriction on the movement of Mr. Haytham Al-Maleh
          may be linked to his work in defence of human rights.
          508. On 9 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up
          urgent appeal concerning the situation of Aktham Naisse, Daniel Sauod and Nadal Danvish
          and other members of the Committee for the Defence of Democratic Liberties and Human
          Rights, who were allegedly arrested following a peaceful demonstration to demand more
          political freedom and an end to the state of emergency. According to the information received,
          on 8 March 2004 the Committees for the Defence of Democratic Liberties and Human Rights in
          Syria organized a sit-in in front of the Syrian Parliament in Damascus to protest against the
          emergency laws and to call for the release of political prisoners as well as for democratic
          reforms. It is reported that, in the days preceding the demonstration, members of the Committee
          for the Defence of Democratic Liberties and Human Rights were summoned by State security for
          questioning and a number of members did not participate in the sit-in, reportedly due to
          intimidation. According to the reports received, 20 minutes after the demonstration began the
          security forces intervened - removing all the banners and arresting a number of demonstrators,
          including Aktham Naisse, head of the Committee for the Defence of Democratic Liberties and
          Human Rights, and two members of its council of trustees, Daniel Sauod and Nadal Darwish.
          Concern has been expressed that members of the Committee for the Defence of Democratic
          Liberties and Human Rights have been targeted for their human rights work and in particular for
          having exercised their right to freedom of expression in demanding political reform.
          509. On 31 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning ilassan Watfi, 39), a human rights
          defender and an active member of the Syrian-based Arab Organization for Human Rights
          (AOHR). According to the information received, Watfi was reportedly arrested by political
          security officers on 16 March 2004 at his home in the area of Masiaf on the outskirts of Hama, in
          central Syria. He is allegedly being held incommunicado at the Military Intelligence Centre in
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 179
          Damascus. Concern has been expressed that he may be at risk of torture and that his arrest may
          be a way to hinder his work in the defence of human rights in particular his work with the
          AOHR.
          510. On 16 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-Rapporteur
          of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning Aktham Naisse. On 13 April,
          after having being summoned, Aktham Naisse was allegedly arrested when he presented himself
          at the department of military security in the city of Latakia. It is alleged that he is held
          incommunicado, although the authorities there deny that he is in custody. Aktham Naisse is the
          head of the Committees for the Defence of Democratic Liberties and Human Rights (CDDLHR),
          which has been conducting a nationwide campaign for political reform and respect for human
          rights, and advocating for an end to the state of emergency in Syria. Aktham Naisse was
          allegedly arrested shortly after CDDLHR issued its annual report for 2003, which detailed
          serious human rights violations in the Syrian Arab Republic. Further reports indicate that he had
          recently said that the CDDLHR was preparing a petition to be presented to the President, calling
          for the lifting of the state of emergency and respect for human rights. Concerns is expressed that
          Aktham Naisse may have been arrested in connection to his work as a human rights defender,
          especially in light of the fact that, as a founding member of CDDLHR, he was allegedly detained
          from 1991 to 1998 because of his human rights work. In 1992, he was reportedly sentenced to
          nine years in prison after an unfair trial by the Supreme State Security Court. It is alleged that he
          was tortured and ill-treated in custody. In view of his alleged detention incommunicado, concern
          is expressed that he may be at risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment. Moreover, serious
          concern is expressed for the life and health of Aktham Naisse if he does not receive appropriate
          and prompt medical treatment.
          511. On 11 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning the situation of
          Akhtham Naisse. According to new information received, on 22 April Aktham Naisse was
          reportedly charged with “carrying out activities contrary to the socialist system of the state and
          ‘opposing the objectives of the revolution”. However, it is reported that no official statement
          regarding the charges has been issued. On 26 April, Aktham Naisse appeared before the Supreme
          State Security Court (SSSC) in Damascus where he was reportedly interrogated for two days
          regarding his human rights activities. It is reported that he had been subjected to mistreatment in
          prison and as a result has suffered a stroke which has left him partly paralysed and unable to
          speak clearly. He has reportedly been denied medical care. A lawyer was reportedly present at
          the hearing to assist with the questioning; however, on seeing the health condition of Aktham
          Naisse, he reportedly refused to do so. The lawyer was then allegedly threatened that “he would
          be in Mr. Naisses's place” if he did not cooperate. According to the information received, there
          has been no report on the outcome of the SSSC hearing and Aktham Naisse continues to be
          denied legal representation as well as visits from his family. Concern is expressed that Aktham
          Naisse has been targeted for his human rights work, particularly in light of CDF's online petition
          calling for democratic reform and the recent publication of its annual report on human rights in
          Syria.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 180
          512. 0116 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, sent a follow-up urgent appeal
          concerning Aktham Naisse. According to the information received: Aktham Naisse was tried on
          26 July 2004 at the Supreme State Security Council Court and the verdict is pending. He had
          been charged with “opposing the objectives of the revolution” and “disseminating information
          aimed at weakening the State”. A very limited number of international observers were allowed in
          the courtroom, where he was tried on the grounds of the publication of the CDF annual report
          denouncing human rights violations in Syria and a number of press statements made by CDF
          members denouncing human rights violations against Kurdish citizens. Mr. Naisse, who needs
          daily medical treatment and has been kept in solitary confinement since 13 April, has been
          allegedly denied consultations with a lawyer in private and is not allowed to communicate with
          his family. Of particular concern is that the Supreme State Security Court is outside the ordinary
          criminal justice system, accountable only to the Minister of Interior, is not bound by the rules of
          the Code of Criminal Procedures. Its verdicts are not subject to appeal. Reports suggest that
          Aktham Naisse's prosecution has been motivated by his human rights activities, particularly the
          publications and dissemination of information on respect for human rights in Syria, activities
          which are legally provided for by numerous international human rights instruments. We are thus
          concerned that his right to freedom of expression, to be a human rights defenders, rights in the
          context of minimum conditions of detention and fair trial rights may be at risk.
          513. On 27 October 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a letter of
          allegation concerning the Syrian Organization for iluman Rights, which published a report
          February 2004 on alleged use of torture in Syrian prisons and detention centres. The organization
          called in the report for the establishment of a committee of lawyers and judges to carry out
          regular inspections of prisons and detention centres. According to information received, on 11
          December 2001, the Syrian Organization for Human Rights applied for registration. In a letter
          dated 10 February 2002, the Ministry of Social Affairs rejected the application. Allegedly, in
          June 2002, the organization filed a suit in the Administrative Court against the rejection of their
          application, and the case is still pending in court. We are concerned that the reported refusal by
          the Ministry of Social Affairs to register the Syrian Organization for Human Rights and the delay
          in the court proceedings against this decision, which have been pending for more then two years,
          may be motivated by a wish to obstruct their human rights defence activities.
          Communications received
          514. By letter dated 20 September 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on
          11 June 2004. The Government confirmed the arrest of Aktham Naisse, and reported that he
          was arrested on 13 April 2004. It stated that he was sent for trial before the Supreme State
          Security Court (SSSC), in accordance with the relevant laws, for disseminating false and
          exaggerated reports likely to harm Syria's relations with neighbouring States, for circulating a
          petition calling for political reform, and for founding an unauthorized secret organization. The
          SSSC held two sessions, the first on 26 July 2004 and the second on 16 August 2004, attended
          by a number of Syrian and Arab lawyers and representatives for the European Union and the
          United States Embassy. The Government informed that, at the second session, Mr. Naisa was
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 181
          released on bail pending his trial, which was postponed until 24 October 2004. According to the
          reply, Mr. Naisse confessed to the charges against him and made an apology.
          515. By letter dated 20 September 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 6
          August 2004 concerning Aktham Naisse. The content of the letter is identical to the reply dated
          20 September 2004 to the 11 June 2004 communication (see above).
          516. By letter dated 12 January 2005, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent on
          27 October 2004 concerning the Syrian Organization for iluman Rights. Unfortunately, the
          English translation was not available in time to be examined and included in this report, and will
          thus be reported next year.
          Observations
          517. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies. She acknowledges the
          explanation given in the case of Mr. Naisse. She observes that these explanations did not entirely
          dispel her concern with regards to the arrest and legal action against Mr. Naisse. In particular, the
          Special Representative notes that the use of criminal charges such as “disseminating false
          reports” frequently implies the risk of suppressing legitimate free speech, and is particularly
          wonying when such charges are raised against a person for having denounced alleged human
          rights violations. She refers to her main report to the Commission of Human Rights
          (E/CN.4/2005/101) for a detailed analysis of the trends in the situation of human rights defenders
          in the Syrian Arab Republic, and for her observations to these trends.
          Thailand
          Communications sent
          518. On 17 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial,
          summary or arbitrary executions and the Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an
          urgent appeal concerning the situation of Somchai Neelahphaijit, Chairman of the Muslim
          Lawyers Association and a human rights defender who has reportedly been missing since 11
          March 2004. According to the information received, Somchai Neelahphaijit left his home in
          Bangkok on Thursday 11 March and has reportedly not been seen since. He was allegedly due to
          attend a meeting at 9 p.m. on Friday 12 March at the Chalina Hotel in Bang Kapi district and was
          also due to appear in court for a case in Narathiwat province on 15 March. He allegedly did not
          attend either of these events and his family has reportedly not had any contact from him. On 16
          March his wife reportedly filed a complaint with Bang Yikhan police. According to the
          information received, prior to his alleged disappearance, Somchai Neelahphaijit had reportedly
          received anonymous threatening phone calls, including one call from a a senior member of the
          authorities informing him that he was on the top of the military blacklist. Fear has been
          expressed for the safety of Somchai Neelahphaijit and in particular, concern has been expressed
          that he may have been targeted for his human rights work, including his involvement in
          petitioning 50,000 signatures nationwide to call for an end to martial law in southern Thailand as
          well as his work to defend Muslim suspects against terrorist and treason charges.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 182
          519. On 14 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning alleged death threats against members of the National Commission on Human
          Rights, including Wasant Panich and Jaran Dittha-apichai. According to information
          received, human rights commissioner Wasant Panich allegedly received a death threat by a letter
          posted to him on 8 May 2004 in a brown envelope marked by a Garuda, the official logo of
          Thailand. The content of the letter allegedly blamed him for creating religious divisions among
          people and reportedly cited a speech he gave while visiting Yala and Pattani with six other
          commissioners a week earlier. The letter also reportedly warned Wasant Panich to remain
          “quiet”, otherwise his life, and possibly the lives of his family members, would be in danger.
          These threats are reportedly in relation to comments made by Wasant Panich during his speech
          regarding the violence that reportedly took place on 28 April 2004 in southern Thailand and
          during which 108 suspected Islamic militants and five members of the security forces were
          reportedly killed and which was the subject of a letter of allegations by the Special Rapporteur
          on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions on S May 2004. It is reported that Mr.
          Wasant's comments stressed that religious diversity was acceptable in a democratic society. He
          also reportedly said, having documented many accounts from witnesses that police had killed
          suspected militants who were incapable of fighting back, that “ [ t]here were many options open to
          the soldiers allowing them to use more a lenient approach with the assailants”. Another human
          rights commissioner, Jaran Dittha-apichai, also reportedly received death threats after he
          allegedly told local media on 28 April 2004 that a fact-finding mission was needed in the South.
          Mr. Jaran allegedly received more than 500 hate c-mails attacking him on the website of a local
          newspaper after he made the remark. Jaran Dittha-apichai was also threatened in a telephone call
          on 1 May 2004 that he would end up like the disappeared human rights lawyer Somchai
          Neelahpaijit. It is believed that other human rights commissioners, including Chaiwat Satha-
          anant, may also have received death threats.
          520. On 27 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the situation of members of the Yaung Chi Oo Workers Association
          (YCOWA), a non-governmental organization that has been promoting the human rights and
          labour rights of Burmese workers in Mae Sot over the past several years. According to
          information received, members of the YCOWA have recently been the victim of a number of
          acts of intimidation and violence. In particular, it is reported that at around 11 p.m. on 11 May
          2004, two YCOWA members, Kyaw iltay and Zaw Win, were reportedly surrounded and
          stopped near the Mae Sot Hospital by six men on motorcycles allegedly carrying knives and
          sticks. The six men allegedly beat the two YCOWA members. Concerns have been expressed
          that YCOWA members may have been targeted in retaliation for their actions in favour of
          Burmese workers' rights and it is feared that they become the victim of further attacks. It is
          further reported that in December 2003, two leaders of YCOWA, Moe Swe and Ko Phyo, had
          reportedly gone into hiding after local business owners carrying their photos allegedly searched
          for them in Mae Sot factories and streets.
          521. On 25 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning the situation of
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 183
          Somchai Neelahphaijit, Chairman of the Muslim Lawyers Association and human rights
          defender, who has reportedly been missing since 11 March 2004. The Special Representative
          welcomes the establishment of an independent Committee and three subcommittees to
          investigate his alleged disappearance. According to the information received however, despite
          the arrest of five police suspected of involvement in the abduction as well as the fact that
          Somchai Neelahpaijit has reportedly been missing for over 100 days, little progress has been
          made by the Committee in locating his whereabouts. One member of the Committee has
          reportedly stated that they have not been receiving adequate cooperation from the police
          regarding the case. Given the lengthy period of time since the disappearance of Somchai
          Neelahpaijit, serious concern is expressed for his safety and for the apparent lack of progress in
          bringing to justice those persons responsible for his disappearance.
          522. On 28 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a letter of
          allegation concerning the alleged assassination of Charoen Wataksorn, human rights defender
          and prominent environmentalist in Prachuab Khiri Kan Province, who was the former leader of a
          successful campaign against the construction of a coal-fired power plant in the district of Bo Nok
          in 2002. According to the information received, on 21 June 2004 Charoen Wataksorn travelled to
          Bangkok to present a petition to the House Committee on Corruption investigation regarding the
          alleged issuing of land title deeds for public land in Prachuab Khiri Kan Province. It is reported
          that, on his return to Bo Nok that evening, he was shot seven times and killed by two gunmen
          who had reportedly been waiting for him at the bus station. Concern is expressed that Charoen
          Wataksorn had been targeted for his human rights activities and in particular his work on behalf
          of the rights of the residents of Bo Nok.
          523. On 7 July 2004 and 15 July 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special
          Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression,
          sent an urgent appeal concerning Supinya Klangnarong, Secretary-General of the non-
          governmental organization Campaign for Popular Media Reform, a voluntary organization which
          monitors and reports on the right to freedom of information and expression in Thailand, and
          three editors of the Thai Post, namely Thaweesin Sathitrattanacheewin, Roj Ngammaen and
          Kannikar Wiriyakul. According to the information received, on 15 July 2003 CPMR issued a
          report entitled “The Comprehensive Telecommunications System under Shin Corp's Empire: the
          undeniable conflict of interests”, which alleged that the economic growth of the country's largest
          telecommunications and media company Shin Corp had been facilitated by its political
          connections with the Royal Thai Government. The report also alleged that the growth of this
          private telecommunications company limited public access to telecommunication services as
          well as public participation in the media and communications system. An article based on a
          report by CPMR and containing quotes by Supinya Klangnarong was published in a national
          newspaper the following day. In November 2003, Shin Corp reportedly filed a libel case against
          Supinya Klangnarong and the three editors. On 23 June 2004, the Criminal Court decided that
          the case could proceed. It will reportedly begin on 6 September 2004. It is reported that they
          could face up to two years' imprisonment if found guilty and a 200,000 baht fine. Concern is
          expressed that Supinya Klangnarong has been targeted for her human rights activities and that
          the charge of libel may have been brought against her in an attempt to hinder her work to
          promote the right to freedom of expression and information in Thailand.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 184
          Communications received
          524. By letter dated 30 March 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 17
          March 2004. The Government reported that it shares the concern expressed in the
          communication sent over the disappearance and safety of Somchai Neelahphaijit. The Royal
          Thai Police reported, utilizing all available means to search for Mr. Neelahpaijit's whereabouts.
          The response indicated that Thaksin Shinawatra, the Prime Minister, had made it clear to all Thai
          agencies concerned that all necessary measures must be taken to resolve this case as soon as
          possible, and bring those responsible for the disappearance to justice without exception and
          delay. The Government stated that, on 18 March 2004, Thaksin Shinawatra established an
          independent Committee with three subcommittees to investigate his alleged disappearance, under
          the Chairmanship of the Director-General of the Department of Special Investigation, Ministry
          of Justice. The Government reported that further developments regarding Mr. Neelahpaijit would
          be provided upon availability.
          525. By letter dated 17 May 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 14
          May 2004. The Government reported that Wasant Panich or Jaran Dittha-Apichai, or any
          other human rights commissioners, including Chaiwat Satha-anant, can make a request for
          protection of their lives to the authorities concerned, should they feel that such special protection
          is needed. Appropriate action would then be promptly taken. It stated that the freedom of
          expression and opinion is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution. The Government
          expressed its commitment to the promotion of the role of human rights defenders as laid down in
          the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders.
          526. By letter dated 20 July 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 7 July
          2004. The Government stated that the decision to file a libel case against Supinya Klangnarong
          was taken by Shin Corp itself and added that allegations of any connection between Shin Corp
          and the Government was unfounded, since the Government has no control of any decision of the
          company and is not represented in its board. The reply stated that the national legislation
          guarantees that anyone who is offended shall be able to launch a lawsuit in the relevant court.
          The Government stated that it considered the case as a civil case, not a human rights violation.
          The Government reported that the final decision would be made by the relevant courts, on the
          basis of evidence presented by both parties, with which the Royal Thai Government cannot
          interfere. It further indicated that if Mrs. Klangnarong was not satisfied with the decision of the
          court, she could appeal the decision or resort to existing national human rights protection
          mechanisms. The Government stated that freedom of expression is guaranteed by national
          legislation as laid down by international human rights law. In its reply, the Government finally
          stated that it may serve the interests of all parties if the special procedures of the Commission on
          Human Rights in each case would consider whether there is a human rights violation and
          whether domestic remedies had been exhausted.
          527. By letter dated 20 July 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 15 July
          2004 concerning Supinya Klangnarong, Thaweesin Sathitrattanacheewin, Roj Ngammaen
          and Kannikar Wiriyakul. The reply is in its substance identical to the reply provided to the
          communication sent 7 July 2004 on Mrs. Klangnarong. The Government called upon the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 185
          Secretariat to ensure that a careful screening of communications be made in the future so as to
          avoid repetition of work.
          528. By letter dated 6 August 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 25
          June 2004 concerning Somchai Neelahphaijit. The Government previously replied in a letter
          dated 30 March 2004 to the communication sent by the Special Representative concerning Mr.
          Neelahpaijit on 17 March 2004. The Government reiterated that it attaches utmost importance to
          the disappearance of Mr. Neelahphaijit. It reported that, on 12 July 2004, the Criminal Court
          heard the case filed by the State Prosecutor over his disappearance, and that his wife has been
          allowed to act as a co-plaintiff The lawsuit was filed against five police officers who where
          charged with robbery and coercion through threats of death or bodily harm against Mr.
          Neelahpaijit. According the reply, these charges may change if more evidences can be gathered
          or the whereabouts of Mr. Neelahpaijit can be determined. The Government indicated that the
          Court had set the first hearing of witnesses on 9 August 2004 and would continue consideration
          under the continuous hearing system of more then 100 witnesses until 21 December 2005. It
          stated that, despite the relentless efforts by the Government agencies concerned and the
          independent Committee to locate the whereabouts of Mr. Neelahpaijit, his fate still remained
          unknown.
          Observations
          529. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its numerous replies. She
          welcomes the measures taken in the case of Somchai Neelahphaijit but remains gravely
          concerned about progress to locate his whereabouts and to bring to justice those people
          responsible for his disappearance. She reaffirms her serious concern at the reports of death
          threats and assaults of defenders.
          The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
          Communications sent
          530. On 4 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, sent an urgent appeal in
          connection with information received regarding Zoran Bozinovski, a journalist known for his
          efforts to write on corruption and human rights abuses, who allegedly received threats against his
          life and the lives of his two young daughters on 4 and 5 December 2003. According to
          information received, the threats are a response to reports by Mr. Bozinovski on corruption
          among officials in the Government and the judiciary, and are reported to originate from a
          Macedonian businessman allegedly linked to criminal gangs. Mr. Bozinovski reportedly filed a
          confidential complaint with the police on 4 December, including audio recordings of explicit
          death threats against himself and his daughters. Following his initial report to the police, the
          same person allegedly threatened him again on 5 December for having reported the earlier
          threats to the police. On 18 December the police allegedly informed Mr. Bozinovski that the
          person who had threatened him had been cautioned but no criminal charges had been pressed
          against him. Mr. Bozinovski is reportedly very concerned that he and his family remain at risk.
          Reports indicate that Mr. Bozinovski was attacked on 24 September 2002 by three men armed
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 186
          with iron bars, who broke into the offices of the Tumba radio station in Kumanovo, after which
          he was taken to the hospital with severe head and hand injuries. At the time of the attack, Mr.
          Bozinovski was reportedly investigating corruption involving the head of the Macedonian
          customs service. Reports indicate that the assailant sentenced for the 2002 attack was never
          imprisoned, although the judgment was final.
          531. On 4 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up
          urgent appeal concerning Zoran Bozinovski. According to new information received, Mr.
          Bozinovski reportedly published an article in the newspapers Kumanovo Boulevard and Start
          allegedly denouncing impunity for criminals. On 7 April, Mr. Bozinnovski reportedly received a
          phone call from one of the person quoted in his article, who threatened to kill him. It is reported
          that Mr. Bozinnovski immediately went to the police to report the incident and that upon his
          arrival he was reportedly arrested on the basis of a detention warrant for having failed to appear
          in a court hearing in a defamation suit against him on 6 April 2004 and reportedly in order to
          ensure his presence at the next hearing on 19 April 2004.According to reports, Mr. Bozinovski
          was detained at the investigative prison (“Shutka”) in Skopje, until 13 April when he was
          released. Concern has been expressed that, under the newly amended article 172 of the Criminal
          Code on defamation, Mr. Bozinovski, who faces a number of defamation suits for articles he has
          published, in particular on corruption of officials, might face a prison term of up to three years if
          found guilty.
          Observations
          532. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication. She expresses grave concern at
          the absence of enforcement of the sentence passed against Bozinovski's assailant and the
          resulting impunity. She calls on the Government to take all necessary measures so that sentences
          against perpetrators of human rights abuses are indeed enforced. She recalls that the law of
          defamation requires legislators to strike a delicate balance between the protection of freedom of
          speech — particularly where this freedom is exercised in the defence of human rights — and the
          interests of the persons who are the subject derogatory speech. The Special Representative
          invites the Government to consider whether the possibility to resort to a measure as harsh as pre-
          trial detention for persons accused of defamation, as in the case of Mr. Bozinnovski, correctly
          strikes that balance.
          Tunisia
          Communications envoyées
          533. Le 31 dCcembre 2003, la Représentante speciale a envoyé un appel urgent concernant
          Neziha Rejiba, journaliste, plus connue sous son nom de plume de Om Zied et membre du
          Conseil national pour les libertes en Tunisie (CNLT), une organisation qui travaille sur la
          defense des droits humains, l'égalité entre les sexes et la promotion des valeurs démocratiques, et
          au sujet de laquelle la Représentante spéciale du Secrétaire general pour la question des
          défenseurs des droits de l'homme, le Rapporteur special sur la promotion et la protection du droit
          ala liberté d'opinion et d'expression avaient envoyé un appel le 10 octobre 2003. Selon les
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 187
          informations reçues le 18 novembre, cue aurait etc accusee de <> pour avoir donne 170€ a unjeune
          Tunisien alors qu'eiie rentrait d'un sejour a i'etranger. Ii sembierait que cette accusation pourrait
          être abusive, dans la mesure oü, scion ia ioi tunisienne en matiêre de controie des changes,
          Mme Rejiba aurait cu une semaine a son retour de voyage pour changer ses devises. Scion ics
          informations reçues, ic 19 novembre, a i'issue du procés, cue aurait etc condamnee a huit mois
          de prison avec sursis et 1 200 dinars d'amende. Le procés en appei devait se tenir ic 31 decembre
          2003. Des craintes ont etc exprimees que cette condamnation ne soit hee au travaii de Neziha
          Rejiba en faveur des droits humains, en particuiier ses reportages sur des questions touchant a
          i'education et a ia corruption supposee du Gouvernement.
          534. Le l2janvier 2004, ia Representante speciaie a envoyc un appei urgent concernant ia
          situation de Sihem Ben Sedrine, membre du Conseii nationai des iibertes en Tunisie (CNLT),
          dont cue a etc ia porte-paroic de 2001 a 2003, ainsi qu'ecrivain, journahste et defenseuse des
          droits humains. Scion ics informations reçues, ic 5 janvier 2003 a 15 heures, Sihem Ben Sedrine
          aurait etc agressee en picine rue aiors qu'eiie sortait de son domiciie, rue Abou-Dhabi a Tunis,
          icquci est egaiement ic siege du CNILT, pour se rendre dans un << pubhnet>> (cybercafe). Eiie
          aurait etc misc a terre par un inconnu qui i'aurait frappee a coups de poing a piusicurs reprises,
          en presence de deux acoiytes. Sihem Ben Sedrine aurait fait constater ses biessures auprCs d'un
          medecin ic iendemain et demande a son avocat de porter piainte. Des craintes ont etc exprimees
          que cette agression ne soit hee a son travaii en faveur des droits de i'homme. Scion ics
          informations reçues, i'immeubie du CNLT serait i'objet d'une surveiiiiance accrue depuis debut
          janvier. Pius de cinq pohciers en civii surveillieraient tous ics jours i'entree de i'immeubie. Dc cc
          fait, des craintes ont etc exprimees que cette attaque n'ait etc perpetree par ics services de
          securite tunisiens.
          535. Le S mars 2004, ia Representante speciaie, conjointement avec ic Rapporteur speciai sur
          ia promotion et ia protection du droit a ia iiberte d'opinion et d'expression, a envoyc un appei
          urgent concernant Abdellatif Makki et Jalel Ayyed qui se verraient refuser icur reintegration a
          i'Universite de Tunis en raison des peines de prison qu'iis auraient effectuecs du fait, sembie t-ii,
          de icurs activites passees au scm de i'Union generaic tunisienne des etudiants (UGTE). Scion ics
          informations reçues, AbdeiiatifMakki, 41 ans, ancien Secretaire generai de i'UGTE et interne
          aux hopitaux de Tunis, aurait etc arête en 1991 et condamne a une peine de 10 ans de prison par
          ic tribunai mihtaire de Tunis en raison de ses activites syndicaics au scm de i'UGTE. Libere ic
          10 juiiiiet 2001 aprCs avoir purge i'integrahte de sa peine, AbdeiiatifMakki aurait demande, ic 26
          septembre 2001, sa reinscription en premi Cre annee d'internat. Scion ics informations reçues, sa
          demande aurait etc rejetee par ic secretariat generai de ia facuite de medecine de Tunis.
          AbdeiiatifMakki aurait aiors pris contact avec ics MinistCres de i'enseignement supericur et de
          ia sante pubhque, ainsi qu'avec ic Haut-Comite des droits de i'homme, sembie-t-ii sans aucun
          resuitat. Le 19 mars 2002, ia Direction des affaires juridiques et du contenticux du MinistCre de
          i'enseignement supericur aurait notifie a Abdeiiatif Makki sa decision de refuser son inscription
          au motif que son affaire toucherait a ia securite et a ia stabihte de i'institution universitaire
          concernee. S'agissant de Jaici Ayyed, 39 ans, ceiui-ci aurait etc arrete en 1991 et condamne a
          huit ans d'emprisonnement pour ses activites syndicaics au scm de i'UGTE. Au moment de son
          arrestation, Jaici Ayyed venait de terminer cinq annees de formation theorique et une annee de
          pratique en medecine. Depuis sa hberation, Jaici Ayyed se serait vu iui aussi refuser ic droit de
          poursuivre ses etudes. AbdeiiatifMakki et Jaici Ayyed auraient conteste ics decisions prises a
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 188
          leur encontre auprés du tribunal administratif de Tunis. Cependant, en raison des delais parfois
          longs de traitement de pareilles requêtes, tous deux pourraient voir leurs chances de reprendre
          leurs etudes definitivement compromises. Le 7 fevrier 2004, ils auraient entame une gréve de la
          faim qu'ils poursuivraient a cc jour.
          536. Le 11 mars 2004, la Representante speciale a envoyc un appel urgent concernant les cas
          suivants de membres de l'Union generale des etudiants de Tunisie (UGET).
          537. D'aprês les informations reçues, le 28 juin 2003, Zied Kacem, etudiant ala faculte des
          lettres de l'Universite de Sousse et membre du bureau federal de l'UGET de Sousse, aurait etc
          renvoyc par decision du conseil de discipline pour << propos diffamatoires et appel a la gréve >>. Ii
          semblerait qu'aprês avoir etc deboute dans ses demarches pour être reintegre dans les facultes
          des lettres de Tunis, de Sfax et de la Mannouba, M. Kacem ait entame une gréve de la faim le 26
          fevHer 2004. Le 28 fevrier 2004, les responsables locaux de l'UGET auraient adresse une
          petition au Ministre de l'enseignement superieur lors de sa visite a la faculte de droit de Sousse
          lui demandant la reintegration de Zied Kacem et revendiquant la liberte d'expression et le droit
          syndical pour les etudiants. La police aurait reçu l'ordre d'intervenir pour disperser les etudiants
          rassembles. Elle les aurait poursuivis dans les toilettes de la faculte et dans les amphitheatres.
          Plusieurs etudiants, y compris des militants de l'UGET, auraient etc blesses, notamment Ayech
          Amami, Hatem Mabrouki (qui aurait souffert d'une double fracture au bras gauche), Atef Ben
          Salem et Chaker Sayari. Ala suite de ces evenements, les etudiants Kamel Amorossia, Atef Ben
          Salem et Nizar Othmani se seraient vu interdire l'accês a l'Universite le 3 mars 2004. Ils auraient
          etc chasses des locaux sur ordre du Secretaire general de l'Universite aprés avoir demande les
          raisons de cette decision. Le même jour, Anis Ben Fraj, qui selon les informations reçues avait
          etc reinscrit a l'Universite de Sousse a la suite d'une gréve de la faim entamee pour protester
          contre sa revocation de la faculte des lettres de l'Universite de Sfax, qu'iljugeait illegale
          (reference est faite a cet egard a un appel urgent envoyc par le Rapporteur special sur la
          promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression et la Representante
          speciale du Secretaire general sur la situation des defenseurs des droits de l'homme le S mars
          2004), aurait etc empechee d'acceder a l'enceinte de l'universite par la police. Ii aurait etc
          agresse et sa carte d'etudiant aurait etc confisquce selon les forces de l'ordre suite a une decision
          du recteur de l'Universite du Centre annulant son inscription. Selon les informations reçues, les
          policiers auraient refuse de lui donner une copie de cette decision. Anis Ben Fraj ferait depuis
          l'objet d'une filature policiêre constante. Par ailleurs, d'autres militants de l'UGET, Wissam
          Essaldi et Samir Enefzi, de la faculte de droit de Tunis, et Badr Essalem, de la faculte de
          journalisme, risqueraient egalement d'être renvoycs de l'Universite pour leur engagement
          syndical, a la suite de leur prochaine comparution devant des conseils de discipline.
          538. Le 1 er avril 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur special sur
          la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, a envoyc un appel
          urgent concernant la persistance de la situation de AbdellatifMakki, 41 ans, et Jalel Ayyed, 39
          ans. Selon les nouvelles informations reçues, aprés avoir vu leur demande de poursuivre leur
          internat en medecine rejetee par la faculte de medecine, AbdellatifMakki et Jalel Ayyed auraient
          etc autorises a s'inscrire en DEA de biochimie au scm de la faculte des sciences. Toutefois, il a
          etc porte ala connaissance des Rapporteurs speciaux qu'ils se seraient vu refuser l'accês aux
          laboratoires d'accueil qui se trouveraient dans la faculte de medecine, cc qui les empêcherait de
          valider leur formation et d'obtenir leur diplome de troisiême cycle au scm de la faculte des
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 189
          sciences. Scion ics informations reçues, AbdeiiatifMakki et Jaici Ayyed poursuivraient une
          gréve de ia faim depuis S4jours pour réciamer ic droit a poursuivre icurs etudes. Les rapports
          indiquent que AbdeiiatifMakki aurait déjà perdu pius de 20 kiios et qu'ii aurait été transporté
          d'urgence a i'hopitai Rabta a Tunis ic 27 mars 2004. MaigrC son Ctat de sante inquiCtant, ii aurait
          refuse de suspendre sa gréve de ia faim. L'état de sante de Jaici Ayyed serait egaiement trés
          inquiCtant.
          539. Le 27 avrii 2004, ia Représentante speciaie, conjointement avec ic Rapporteur spCciai sur
          ia promotion et ia protection du droit a ia iiberté d'opinion et d'expression, a envoyé une iettre
          d'aiiegation concernant Me Patrick Baudouin, président d'honneur de ia Fédération
          internationaic des iigues des droits de i'homme (FIDH). Scion ics informations reçues, ic 13 avrii
          2004, Me Baudoin se serait vu interdire i'accés au territoire tunisien a i'aéroport Tunis-Carthage
          par ia poiice poiitique, sans qu'aucun motif ne iui ait été signifié. Me Baudoin se rendait en
          Tunisie pour participer a une conference de presse ic 14 avrii 2004, afin de presenter ic Rapport
          annuci 2003 de i'Observatoire pour ia protection des défenseurs des droits de i'homme organiséc
          en partenariat avec ia Ligue tunisienne des droits de i'homme. Ce rapport, intituié <> et préfacé par ic prix Nobei
          de ia paix 2003, dresse un état des vioiations commises a i'encontre des défenseurs des droits de
          i'homme dans pius de 80 pays, dont ia Tunisie. Des craintes ont été exprimécs que ic
          refouiement de Me Baudoin par ics autorités tunisiennes ne vise a faire obstacie a ses activités en
          faveur de ia defense des droits de i'homme ainsi qu'a ia pubiicisation du Rapport annuci de
          i'Observatoire pour ia protection des défenseurs des droits de i'homme. Scion ics informations
          reçues, cc serait ia troisiéme fois que Me Patrick Baudouin se verrait interdire i'accés au territoire
          tunisien dans ic cadre de ses fonctions au scm de ia FIDH.
          540. Le 7 mai 2004, ia Représentante spéciaie a envoyé un appei urgent concernant ia
          situation de ia Ligue tunisienne des droits de i'homme (LTDH), dont ics activités de defense des
          droits de i'homme seraient menacécs en raison du biocage par ics autorités tunisiennes des fonds
          aiioués par i'Union européenne, une situation ayant fait i'objet d'un appei urgent date du S
          novembre 2003. Scion ics informations reçues, ia LTDH se verrait toujours dans i'impossibiiité
          d'accéder a ia seconde tranche des fonds attribués par i'Union européenne pour ses activités et
          programmes en faveur de ia defense des droits de i'homme. Le Comité directeur de ia Ligue se
          verrait a cc jour dans i'incapacité de régier ic ioyer annuci du siege centrai du au pius tard ic
          31 mai 2004. Scion ics termes du contrat de iocation, a défaut de versement a cette échéance, ia
          LTDH se verrait dans i'obhgation de quitter ses iocaux et de ics restituer a icur propriétaire. Le
          gei des fonds menacerait égaiement i'existence de dix sections régionaics de ia LTDH a Sfax,
          Jendouba, Sousse, Mahdia, Gafsa, Gabes, Kairouan, Monastir, Kébiii et Bizerte. Des craintes
          ont été exprimécs que cc gei des fonds ne vise a priver ia LTDH des moyens financiers iui
          permettant de mener ces activités en faveur des droits de i'homme.
          541. Le 11 juin 2004, ia Représentante spéciaie, conjointement avec ic Rapporteur spéciai sur
          ia promotion et ia protection du droit a ia iiberté d'opinion et d'expression et ic Rapporteur
          spéciai sur ia torture, a envoyé une iettre d'aiiégation concernant, ic 8 juin 2004, trois membres
          de i'Association de iutte contre ia torture en Tunisie (ALTT), Radhia Nasraoui (présidente), A u
          Ben Salem (vice-président) et Ridha Barakati (trésorier), qui auraient été agressés verbaiement
          et auraient reçu des coups de ia part de poiiciers appartenant a ia Brigade de süreté de i'Etat aiors
          qu'iis essayaient d'entrer dans ics iocaux du siege du gouvernorat de Tunis pour y déposer,
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 190
          conformement a la loi tunisienne, les documents requis pour l'enregistrement de leur association.
          Les membres de 1'ALTT qui se verraient constamment refuser l'accés aux locaux du gouvernorat
          de Tunis auraient alors decide de faire un sit-in devant le siege du gouvernorat. Radhia Nasraoui
          aurait alors etC emmenee par plusieurs policiers jusqu'â une rue isolee oii cue aurait etc
          sequestree pendant environ une heure et demie. Au Ben Salem aurait, quant a lui, etc conduit
          dans une rame de metro, et Ridha Barakati aurait etc place dans un taxi, dont le chauffeur aurait
          reçu l'instruction de l'eloigner le plus possible du gouvernorat. L'ALTT, dont la creation aurait
          etc annoncee le 26 juin 2003, Journee internationale des Nations Unies pour le soutien aux
          victimes de la torture, a pour mandat de promouvoir les legislations locales de protection contre
          la torture, recenser et faire le suivi des cas de torture, et fournir une assistance aux victimes sur le
          plan medical ainsi que sur le plan judiciaire, en vue du depot de plaintes auprCs des instances
          nationales et internationales. Des lejour de sa creation, les membres fondateurs de l'ALTT se
          seraient rendus au siege du gouvernorat de Tunis afin de deposer les documents requis mais
          auraient etc refoules. D'aprCs les informations reçues, Ali Ben Salem, age de 74 ans, et dont la
          sante serait deja fragile, aurait etc trés affecte par les violences qu'il aurait subies et serait
          actuellement dans un grand etat de faiblesse. Quant a Radhia Nasraoui, celle-ci aurait des bleus
          sur ses bras et sur l'une de ses jambes; elle serait provisoirement dans l'impossibilite de
          reprendre normalement ses activites d'avocate.
          542. Le 13 juillet 2004, la Representante speciale a envoyc un appel urgent concernant la
          situation de plusieurs organisations de defense des droits de l'homme en particulier l'Association
          internationale pour le soutien des prisonniers politiques (AISSP), le Rassemblement pour une
          alternative internationale de developpement (Raid-Attac Tunisie) et l'Association de lutte contre
          la torture en Tunisie (ALTT). Selon les informations reçues, aprCs s'être vu interdire la tenue de
          son assemblee generale enjanvier dernier, le 22 juin 2004, l'AISSP aurait etc notifice d'un refus
          de reconnaissance legale de l'association par les autorites. Aucun motif n'aurait etc donne ace
          refus contrairement a l'article S de la loi 154 de 1959 relative aux associations qui prevoit que la
          decision de refus de constitution doit être motivee. D'autre part, le Raid-Attac Tunisie se serait
          vu interdire la tenue de son deuxieme congrCs, prevu pour les 26 et 27 juin 2004, par le MinistCre
          de l'interieur. Selon les informations reçues, cette interdiction surviendrait aprCs que les autorites
          tunisiennes auraient tente d'empêcher la tenue du premier congrés du Raid-Attac en juillet 2001.
          Le congrés avait finalement pu se tenir aprés l'arrivee d'invites etrangers, notamment de
          parlementaires europeens. Le Raid-Attac n'aurait pas non plus obtenu de reconnaissance legale.
          Enfin, selon les information reçues, les membres de l'Association de lutte contre la torture en
          Tunisie (ALTT) auraient etc empeches enjuin 2003 de deposer les documents relatifs ala
          creation de cette association et le Conseil national pour les libertes en Tunisie (CNLT) n'aurait
          toujours pas obtenu son enregistrement legal malgre plusieurs demandes.
          543. Le 21 juillet 2004, la Representante speciale a envoyc un appel urgent concernant
          l'Association de lutte contre la torture en Tunisie (ALTT), et en particulier son Secretaire general
          Chokri Latif. Selon les informations reçues le samedi 10 juillet 2004 et pour la seconde fois en
          une semaine, M. Chokri Latif, aurait etc convoque par les services de la police tunisienne et
          interroge sur sa responsabilite personnelle dans des publications considerees << illegales >> et sur
          son << appartenance a une association non reconnue >>. A la fin de cet interrogatoire, une misc en
          garde officielle lui aurait etc delivree, lui signifiant qu'il pourra être poursuivi pour ces faits
          consideres comme delictueux par les autorites tunisiennes.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 191
          544. Le 22 novembre 2004, la Representante speciale, conjointement avec le Rapporteur
          special sur la promotion et la protection du droit a la liberte d'opinion et d'expression, a envoye
          une lettre d'allegation concernant Radhia Nasraoui, avocate tunisienne, presidente de
          l'Association de lutte contre la torture en Tunisie et ex-membre de la Commission internationale
          d'enquête des Nations Unies sur la Côte d'Ivoire. Selon les informations reçues, le 17 novembre
          2004, des dizaines d'agents de police auraient encercle le quartier del Manar oü Mme Nasraoui
          habite et aurait de cc fait interdit l'accês des militants devant se rendre chez elle a l'occasion de
          la gréve de la faim organisee par le Comite de soutien a Jalel Zoghlami, Nejib Zoghlami et
          Loumamba Moshi. Elle aurait elle-méme etc bloquee a l'entree de la ville pendant une demi-
          heure par les agents qui auraient tente d'ouvrir les portes de son vehicule pour obliger un de ses
          amis a en descendre. Des craintes ont etc exprimees que ces actions ne visent a faire obstacle au
          travail de defenseur des droits de l'homme que conduit Me Nasraoui. Ces craintes sont d'autant
          plus vives que depuis son retour de Côte d'Ivoire, Radhia Nasraoui aurait etc victime de
          multiples actions a son encontre. Son domicile et son cabinet seraient surveilles, de méme que
          celui de sa mere. Son man aurait egalement etc suivi et des agents de la police politique auraient
          pose des questions a ses medecins concernant son etat de sante. Par ailleurs, le 25 octobre 2004,
          au lendemain des elections presidentielles, alors qu'elle accordait une interview a une radio
          etrangere, un individu non identifie lui aurait arrache son portable. Le chef du poste de police du
          boulevard Bab-Benet aurait refuse d'enregistrer la plainte.
          Communications reçues
          545. Par lettre en date du 30 janvier 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu aux appels urgents
          envoyes le 31 decembre 2003 et le 10 octobre 2003 concernant Mme Neziha Rejiba. Le
          Gouvernement a assure que l'affaire dont Mme Rejiba a fait l'objet aurait etc en pleine
          conformite avec le droit commun. Suivant les recommandations de l'administration douaniCre, le
          tribunal de premi Cre instance de Tunis a condamne Mme Rejiba a huit mois de prison avec sursis
          eta une amende egale au seuil minimal. L'interessee a interjete appel et la cour d'appel doit
          rendre son jugement le 25 fevrier 2005.
          546. Par lettre en date du 30 decembre 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu a la communication
          du 12 mars 2004 concernant des universitaires tunisiens. Le Gouvernement a indique que les
          etudiants en question auraient fait l'objet de decisions disciplinaires emanant de leurs institutions
          respectives suite aux infractions aux rCglements interieurs de ces institutions. Le Gouvernement
          a affirme que ces decisions n'auraient aucun rapport avec les activites syndicales garanties par la
          Constitution tunisienne. Concernant Zied Kacem, le Gouvernement a signale qu'il aurait
          continue a enfreindre le rCglement interieur de la faculte de Sousse en organisant des assemblees
          generales non autorisees et incitant les etudiants a entrer en grCve, en perturbant le cours normal
          des etudes. En consequence, le conseil disciplinaire aurait decide de son renvoi. Le
          Gouvernement a egalement souligne que des etudiants, dont Ayech Hammami, Hatem Mabrouki,
          Atef Ben Salem et Chaker Sayari, s'etaient reunis le 28 fevrier 2004, lors de la visite du Ministre
          de l'enseignement superieur, de la recherche scientifique et de la technologie. AprCs que l'accCs
          a la salle de reunion leur aurait etc interdit, des etudiants auraientjete des pierres contre les
          forces de l'ordre qui seraient intervenues pour disperser la foule. Concernant l'interdiction
          d'accCs ala faculte a l'encontre des etudiants Kamel Amroussia, Atef Ben Salem et Nizar
          Othmani, le Gouvernement a precise que la mesure faisait partie de dispositions preventives
          prises par la faculte pour garantir l'ordre. Quant aux allegations concernant Anis Ben Fraj, le
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 192
          Gouvernement a signale que l'interesse se serait vu retirer sa carte d'etudiant suite aux
          perturbations auxquelles ii aurait participe. Ii aurait etc renvoyc car ne s'interessant pas a
          etudes. Les allegations d'agressions a son egard seraient sans fondement. Concernant Wissem
          Said et Samir Nefzi, le Gouvernement a precise qu'ils auraient etc deferes devant le conseil de
          discipline de la faculte de droit de Tunis en mars 2004 pour avoir detruit des urnes durant les
          elections des conseils scientifiques en 2003 et avoir agresse le secretaire general de la faculte des
          sciences economiques et de gestion de Tunis. Le dossier de Wissem Said aurait etc classe et
          l'examen de celui de Samir Nefzi reporte. Concernant l'etudiant Badr Essalem Trabelsi, il aurait
          etc question qu'il soit defere devant le conseil de discipline de l'Institution de presse et des
          sciences de l'information de La Manouba, en mars 2004, pour avoir porte atteinte a la personne
          du Ministre, mais l'administration serait revenue sur sa decision.
          547. Par lettre en date du 6 janvier 2005, le Gouvernement a repondu aux appels urgents
          envoycs le 5 mars et le 1 avril 2004 concernant la situation de MM. AbdellatifMakki et Jalel
          Ayed. Le Gouvernement a indique que, le 29juin 2004, le Conseil scientifique de la faculte de
          medecine de Tunis se serait prononce en faveur de la reintegration des interesses. La decision
          serait assortie de deux mesures d'ordre pedagogique : la reprise de certains stages pendant une
          periode de trois mois chacun, au cours desquels ils seront encadres et evalues, et la reussite aux
          examens des epreuves du certificat de la session principale dejuin 2005 ou celle de rattrapage de
          juillet 2005. En cc qui concenie l'interruption initiale des etudes, le Gouvernement a precise que
          les interesses n'auraientjamais etc condamnes pour leurs activites syndicales, ou pour leurs
          opinions politiques, mais pour des infractions de droit commun, a savoir avoir perpetre un
          attentat dans le but de changer la forme du gouvernement. Par consequent, ils auraient etc
          emprisonnes, respectivement, pour une periode de 10 et 8 ans ainsi qu'â une peine
          complementaire de S ans de controle administratifi En premiere instance, la demande de
          reinscription et de reintegration a la faculte de medecine a leur sortie de prison aurait etc rejetee,
          le Conseil scientifique ayant estime que leur formation n'etait plus ajour du fait de leur
          interruption prolongee d'etudes et que des risques serieux pouvaient en resulter pour les patients.
          Neanmoins, suite aux deliberations, le Conseil aurait decide d'autoriser leur reintegration, a
          condition que leurs connaissances medicales et professionnelles soient mises a niveau. En
          conclusion, le Gouvernement a souligne que le MinistCre de l'enseignement superieur, de la
          recherche scientifique et de la technologie ne disposait que d'un simple pouvoir de tutelle sur les
          decisions prises par les institutions universitaires, y compris celles relatives aux inscriptions des
          etudiants afin que ces decisions soient exclusivement guidees par des considerations d'ordre
          scientifique ou pedagogique.
          Réponses reçues sur des cas soulevés par Ia Représentante spéciale dans les années
          précédentes
          548. Par lettre en date du 9 mars 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu a l'appel urgent envoyc
          par la Representante speciale le 23 juillet 2003 concernant M. Mohamed Noun l'informant que
          l'interesse aurait toujours etc reconnu par les autorites comme une personne propageant de
          fausses informations de nature a troubler l'ordre public. Par consequent, le Gouvernement a
          affirme que ces accusations resteraient sans fondement. Par ailleurs, le Gouvernement a precise
          que M. Noun fait partie de l'<< Association internationale de soutien aux prisonniers politiques>>
          une organisation sans aucune existence legale en Tunisie, et donc tous ses membres et ses
          fonctions pourraient être passibles de poursuites judiciaires.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 193
          549. Par lettre en date du 9 mars 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu a la lettre d'allegation
          envoyce par la Representante speciale le 17 septembre 2003 concernant Me Saida Akremi.
          D'aprês le Gouvernement, M. Akremi aurait systematiquement propage de fausses informations
          a l'egard des autorites. Par ailleurs, le Gouvernement a aussi souligne que M. Akremi fait partie
          de l'<< Association internationale de soutien aux prisonniers politiques >>, une organisation sans
          aucune existence legale en Tunisie, et donc tous ses membres et ses fonctions pourraient être
          passibles de poursuites judiciaires. Contrairement ala plainte deposee, M. Akremi n'aurait
          jamais fait l'objet des supposees agressions le 13 decembre 2003 et ii n'y auraitjamais eu de
          preuves apportees de sa part. Le Gouvernement a indique qu'un collégue aurait depose une
          plainte au nom de la victime deux semaines aprés et, suite a cette action, une commission
          rogatoire aurait etc ordonnee et suivrait son cours. En cc qui concerne le vol perpetre dans le
          cabinet en juin 2002, le Gouvernement a indique que les coupables auraient etc apprehendes.
          550. Par lettre en date du 9 mars 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu a l'appel urgent envoyc
          par la Representante speciale le 17 octobre 2003 concernant Abdallah Zouari, Mme Sihem Ben
          Sedrine, AbderraoufAyadi, Omar Mestiri et Marc Thorner. En cc qui concerne M. Zouari,
          un journaliste, le Gouvernement a rappele sa complicite dans une affaire ayant pour but la
          subversion du gouvernement actuel et pour laquelle il avait etc condamne a ii ans de prison et
          S ans de controle administratifi Le Gouvernement a precise que son retour en prison pour 9 mois
          aurait etc le fait de son refus de se conformer aux conditions de la peine complementaire de
          controle administratif aprés sa liberation initiale le 6 juin 2002. Par ailleurs, M. Zouari aurait
          aussi etc condamne le 24juillet 2003 a 4 mois de prison ferme pour diffamation. Le
          Gouvernement a affirme avoir agi selon sa legislation dans les deux affaires. En cc qui concerne
          Sihem Ben Sedrine, Abderraouf Ayadi, Omar Mestiri et Marc Thorner, le Gouvernement a
          affirme que les forces de l'ordre auraient agi de façon legitime le 6 fevrier face au refus des
          interesses de se disperser.
          551. Par lettre en date du 9 mars 2004, le Gouvernement a repondu a l'appel urgent envoyc le
          19 novembre 2003 concernant Mme Radhia Nasraoui. Le Gouvernement a indique que les
          allegations d'intimidation et de harcélement seraient sans fondement et qu'il n'y auraitjamais eu
          de preuves apportees par les personnes supposement agressees. Le Gouvernement a egalement
          affirme que l'action menee par les services de la douane a l'aeroport, a son retour de Turquie le 6
          septembre 2003, se serait deroulee dans des conditions conformes aux mesures administratives
          en vigueur. Le Gouvernement a aussi precise que suite a l'evenement l'interessee aurait etc
          invitee a reprendre ses affaires. Quant a sa gréve de faim, le Gouvernement a souligne que cc
          n'etait pas la premiere fois que Mme Nasraoui aurait tente d'attirer l'attention publique et celle
          des medias par ces types de moyens. Finalement, en cc qui concerne la plainte qui a etc deposee
          par Mme Nasraoui le 16 juillet 2003, suite a une supposee agression le 13 juillet 2003, le
          Gouvernement a indique que l'affaire suivrait normalement son cours.
          Observations
          552. The Special Representative would like to thank the Government for its responses, and
          regrets the absence of replies to her other communications. In the case of AbdellatifMakki and
          Jalel Ayed, the Special Representative, welcomes the decision to authorize both student to
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O 1/Add. 1
          Page 194
          pursue their medical studies. She considers that the Government's explanations in their regard
          solve the concerns raised in the communication.
          553. Tn the case of the Tunisian university students, the Special Representative acknowledges
          the explanation provided by the Government and welcomes the discontinuation of the
          disciplinary proceedings against Wissem Said and Badr Essalem Trabelsi. She observes,
          however, that the information provided by the Government was not able to entirely dispel her
          concern with regards to the environment prevailing to the conduct of student union activities. In
          particular, she remains concerned about the expulsion of Zied Kacem from the Faculte de lettres
          and Anis Ben Fraj and the decision to forbid access of Kamel Amroussia, Atef Ben Salem and
          Nizar Othmani to the university premises.
          554. She refers to her main report for a detailed analysis of the trends in the situation of human
          rights defenders in Tunisia, and for her observations to these trends. She encourages the
          Government to review favorably her request for an invitation to visit the country first sent on 21
          August 2002 and reiterated most recently on 2 December 2004.
          Turkey
          Communications sent
          555. On 19 December 2003, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on adequate housing, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to
          freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and
          lawyers and the Representative of the Secretary-General on internally displaced persons, sent an
          urgent appeal concerning the situation of Sezgin Tanrikulu, Chairman of the Diyarbakir Bar
          Association, and Sabahattin Korkmaz, Burhan Deyar and ilabibe Deyar, all lawyers of the
          Diyarbakir Bar Association. According to the information received, on 5 December 2003, the
          Diyarbakir Penal Court held its second hearing in the case reportedly lodged against the four
          above-mentioned lawyers by the Governorate. Sezgin Tanrikulu, Sabahattin Korkmaz, Burhan
          Deyar and Habibe Deya were reportedly indicted on 3 June 2003, under article 240 of the
          Turkish Penal Code and Article 59/1-2 of the Law on Legal Profession, for “misconduct in
          duty” and “abusing their legal responsibility” in connection with compensation cases of 96
          villagers from caglayan village of Kulp district (Diyarbakir), Ziyaret and Uluocak villages of
          Lice district, which were reportedly evacuated and burned in the years 1993 and 1994. The Court
          has reportedly adjourned the hearing to 24 December 2004 at 10 a.m. It is believed that the court
          case was launched against the lawyers to intimidate and prevent them from denouncing the
          forced evictions and house demolitions resulting in forced displacement, reportedly carried out
          between 1989-1999 as a form of punishment against the Kurdish population living in the
          Southern and South-Eastern part of Turkey.
          556. On 21 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the situation of Sefika Gflrbflz, President of GOC-DER a Turkish NGO
          established in 1997 which conducts research and reports on forced displacement issues.
          According to the information received, on 19 January 2004, the Istanbul State Security Court n°4
          reportedly sentenced Sefika GUrbUz to pay a fine of TL 2.180 on the basis of article 312/2 of the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 195
          Penal Code, which prohibits “incit [ ing] people to enmity and hatred because of class, racial,
          religious, confessional, or regional differences”, reportedly in connection to a press conference
          that GOC-DER held on April 2002 to present the publication of a report concerning forced
          displacement of Kurdish people in Turkey. It is reported that on 3 August 2002, article 3 12/2 was
          amended, allegedly in order to narrow its use by requiring “that incitement endanger public
          order”. It is reported that this amendment aimed in part at avoiding the use of this provision
          against human rights defenders. However, reports indicate that this requirement was on the
          contrary reportedly used to increase Mr. GUrbUz' sentence. Concern has been expressed that this
          court sentence may be contrary to the aims of the amendment adopted in 2002. Concern has
          further been expressed that the court decision may represent a form of reprisal for the human
          rights reporting activities of GOC-DER.
          557. On 17 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-
          up urgent appeal concerning the situation of Alp Ayan, Gflnseli Kaya and Adnan Akin, staff
          members of the Human Rights Foundation of Turkey. According to the information received, on
          30 September 1999, Alp Ayan, Gunseli Kaya and Adnan Akin were arrested in Izmir while on
          their way to attend the funeral of a prisoner allegedly killed in Ankara Central Prison on 26
          September 1999. On 3 October 1999, after a preliminary hearing before the Criminal Court of
          Izmir, they were reportedly charged with coercion, violence, threat, assault or resistance to a
          police decision forbidding a meeting and with helping the members of a terrorist organization
          and disseminating propaganda on its behalf Their trial has reportedly been continuing for four
          years, with repeated adjournments. According to new information, on 16 February 2004, Alp
          Ayan was sentenced to 18 months and one day in prison, GUnseli Kaya to 18 months in prison
          and Adnan Akin to three years in prison by the Aliaga first-instance Penal Court. It is reported
          that the defendants intended to appeal their convictions. It is further reported that the other 37
          defendants have been acquitted. Concern has been expressed that the reported sentencing to
          imprisonment of Alp Ayan, GUnseli Kaya and Adnan Akin may be an attempt at preventing them
          from carrying out their human rights activities.
          558. On 3 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the situation of llflseyin Cangir, Vedha Aydin and other members of the
          iluman Rights Association (I11D). According to the information received, in December 2003
          members of IHD distributed posters throughout Turkey with statements in both Turkish and
          Kurdish to commemorate Human Rights Day on 10 December 2003. The posters were reportedly
          confiscated on the order of the Public Prosecutors in Van, Hakkari, Adiyaman and Mardin.
          Posters in Kurdish were reportedly also confiscated from IHD headquarters in Ankara.
          According to the information received, HUseyin Cangir, head of the Mardin Branch of IHD, has
          allegedly been charged under article 256 536 of the Penal Code for “hanging posters on
          billboards belonging to the municipality without the permission of the governor” in connection
          with the hanging of posters carrying statements saying, “Peace will win, all equal, all different”,
          in Turkish and Kurdish. It is reported that Mardin Penal Court began to hear his case on 11
          February 2004 and that the hearing was adjourned until 17 March 2004. Similar proceedings
          against the heads of the Van Branch of IHD are pending before the Van Penal Court and a
          hearing of the case against Vedha Aydin of the Sirrt Branch of IHD is scheduled for 24 March
          2004. Concern has been expressed that these judicial proceedings may constitute means of
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 196
          harassment against human rights defenders. Concern has also been expressed that these
          proceedings may represent a form of resistance from the judiciary to the implementation of the
          fourth harmonization package (Law 4778), which was adopted on 2 January 2003 and reportedly
          amended article 4 of Law No. 2908 on associations, reportedly removing limitations upon the
          promotion or use of non-Turkish languages and cultures as well as article 6 of the same law
          allowing the use of “illegal languages” in the various activities of an association, including
          publications, conferences and posters.
          559. On 17 March 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture and the Special Rapporteur on violence against women,
          sent an urgent appeal concerning three Iranian nationals, Farideh Asadi (f), Nazila Mohamad
          ilasani Zamani (f) and Soheila Pordel (f), who have allegedly been seeking asylum in Ankara.
          They were due to be deported to Iran with their children in four days. All three women were said
          to be women's rights activists, and members of the International Federation of Iranian Refugees
          (IFIR)-Turkey, who, while in Turkey, have participated in public conferences and meetings in
          the defence of women's human rights in Iran, during which they have expressed criticisms of the
          Iranian regime, and called in radio interviews for strikes against the Government of the Islamic
          Republic of Iran. Concerns and fears have therefore been expressed that their right to life and
          security of the person could be at risk if they are returned.
          560. On 25 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, sent an urgent appeal concerning
          Berfin Peyam, aged 12, and members of her family who have reportedly been receiving threats
          since she lodged a complaint that she had been severely beaten by police officers in Diyarbakir,
          southeastern Turkey. Concerns have been expressed for their safety. According to the
          information received, Berfin Peyam was reportedly abducted from the street in Diyarbakir on 19
          February 2004 by people carrying walkie-talkies, who blindfolded her and took her away in a
          car. They asked her where her sister was, and when she did not reply they reportedly punched
          her repeatedly in her mouth and knees, so that her mouth began to bleed heavily. She was then
          reportedly taken to a place which is believed to be the Anti-Terror Branch of Police
          Headquarters in Diyarbakir where she was given treatment for her mouth but then beaten again
          and threatened. She was released later that day. It has been brought to our attention that when
          Berfin Peyam applied to the local branch of the Human Rights Association (Jnsan Haklari
          Dernegi, IHD) she was unable to speak and had to write her complaint. Medical reports confirm
          these injuries. After IHD lodged a complaint on her behalf about the incident with the State
          Prosecutor, Berfin Peyam and her family, who were staying outside Diyarbakir city, reportedly
          received five or six phone calls from people who falsely identified themselves as IHD members,
          asking them to come to Diyarbakir. On 19 May, Berfin Peyam and her mother visited the office
          of IHD to seek advice. IHD reportedly sent a fax notifying a major human rights NGO about its
          concerns for the safety of Berfin Peyam and her family. Shortly after, Berfin Peyam reportedly
          received an anonymous call, asking her why she contacted this NGO and telling her that it would
          be very bad for her now.
          561. On 6 August 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 197
          Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Abduihekim Gider, a lawyer, Abdullah
          Gflndogdu, Tahsin Atak, and Ihsan Gfllmek. According to the allegations received, on 30 July
          2004, police detained Abdullah GUndogdu, Tahsin Atak and Ihsan Gulmek in the Pervari district
          of Siirt Province, on suspicion of aiding and abetting an armed organization, the Kurdistan
          People's Congress (Kongra-Gel), formerly known as the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK). Their
          lawyer, Abdulhekim Gider, came to meet with them at the police station in Pervari on 1 August.
          While he was waiting, a police officer asked him, “How can you defend traitors? This lot are
          terrorists ... haven't you got a conscience?” When Abdulhekim Gider saw him, Abdullah
          GUndogdu appeared exhausted and scared and could not stand upright. He said that he had not
          been given any food since the day he was detained, and that he had been stripped naked and
          sprayed with cold pressurized water for two-and-a-half hours, especially at his kidney area. He
          said that he had also had his testicles squeezed and been beaten about the head. Tahsin Atak and
          Ihsan Gulmek only said that they had not been given food, but they both appeared tired and
          frightened. Tahsin Atak later complained that he had been severely beaten on his body and legs.
          When his lawyer met with him in prison, there was still blood on his legs and socks from this.
          That day, Abdulhekim Gider tried to lodge a complaint that Abdullah GUndogdu had been
          tortured, but the Pervari prosecutor was reluctant and allegedly tried to persuade him not to do
          so. When he returned to the prosecutor's office on 2 August, a police officer reportedly pointed
          his rifle at the lawyer and said to another officer, “I might accidentally pull the trigger”. When
          Abdulhekim Gider went back to the police station to meet with his clients the same day, he says
          he was prevented from entering by seven or eight police officers, including the local police chief,
          who surrounded him and apparently insulted and threatened him, because he had lodged a
          complaint of torture against them. After he appealed to a senior police officer who came to the
          station, Abdulhekim Gider was allowed to meet with his clients. As the lawyer left the police
          station, one of the police officers who had earlier threatened him told him, “Yourjob is not going
          to be easy any more”. When Abdulhekim Gider asked what this meant, the police officer told
          him, “Go away! I don't want to see you again. Bad things happen, and they are going to happen”.
          Police have pressured the detained men's relatives to change their lawyer, and police officers in
          Pervari are reported to have threatened Abdulhekim Gider since then. Groups of police have
          followed him in the street, and police vehicles have patrolled conspicuously outside buildings
          where he has been conducting meetings with the families of his clients. Abdullah GUndogdu,
          Tahsin Atak and Jhsan GUlmek were all remanded to Siirt prison at 11 p.m. on 3 August.
          562. On 6 October 2004, the Special Representative sent a letter of allegation concerning Mr.
          Ferhat Kaya, Chair of the pro-Kurdish Democratic People's Party (DEHAP) in the Central
          District of the city of Ardahan in northeastern Turkey, and a Kurdish human rights activist. He is
          trying to obtain rights for people affected by the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline in
          particular, by ensuring that locals living in Kurdish Turkey obtain the compensation to which
          they are entitled and that their rights are respected by the European Court of Human Rights.
          According to the information received, on 5 May 2004, Ferhat Kaya was detained after his
          attendance at meetings with those affected by the pipeline and with trade unionists in Ardahan.
          He was reportedly humiliated and beaten during his detention. It is alleged that an officer pointed
          a gun at his head, verbally abusing him and his family, and that he was also pushed to the ground
          and kicked repeatedly. Witnesses stated that he had blood on his clothes and deep cuts on his
          arms and elsewhere. According to medical reports, these are consistent with torture. He was
          allegedly called a “terrorist” by the court prosecutor, although he was not attending the court
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 198
          hearing. His detention finished on 21 May 2004 after the payment of Turkish Liras 2,000 bail.
          Concern has been expressed that Mr.Kaya's detention was caused in order to prevent him from
          defending local people affected by the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline.
          Communications received
          563. By letter dated 20 January 2004, the Government replied to the urgent action sent by the
          Special Representative on 19 December 2003 concerning the situation of Sezgin Tanrikulu,
          Sabahattin Korkmaz, Burhan Deyar and ilabibe Deyar. The Government informed the
          Special Representative that the aforementioned persons had been acquitted on 24 December
          2003 and also stated that the Government of Turkey attached great importance to the successful
          return of displaced citizens and in this respect had launched the “Back to Village and
          Rehabilitation Project” to enable the return and resettlement of displaced persons as well as the
          establishment of social and economic infrastructure and sustainable living standards for them.
          The Government stated that it would continue to take all feasible measures for the success of the
          voluntary return processes and stood ready to cooperate with the relevant international
          organizations.
          564. By letter dated 12 March 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 17
          February 2004, and to the urgent appeal sent on 22 October 2003, both concerning Alp Ayan
          and Gflnseli Kaya. The Government reported that, on 13 February 2004, the Aliaga first-
          instance Penal Court convicted Alp Ayan and GUnseli Kaya and sentenced them to minimum
          penalties set forth in article 32/1 of Law no. 2911 on meetings and demonstration marches. Alp
          Ayan was sentenced to 18 months and one day of imprisonment and a monetary fine of
          60,750,000 Turkish Liras (approximately US$ 50), while GUnseli Kaya was sentenced to 18
          months imprisonment and a pecuniary fine of 60 million Turkish Liras (approximately 50 USD).
          The verdict was not final at the time and could be appealed before the Court of Cassation. The
          Government stated that Alp Ayan was acquitted from 13 cases out of a total of 16.
          565. By letter dated 29 March 2004, the Government responded to the urgent appeal sent on
          17 March 2003. The Government reported that, according to preliminary information received
          from the relevant Turkish authorities, the requests for asylum for Farideh Asadi, Nazila
          Mohamad, ilasani Zamani and Soheila Pordel had been refused by the United Nations High
          Commissioner for Refugees office in Ankara. It stated that additional information would be
          provided once received.
          566. By letter dated 20 April 2004, the Government provided an additional reply to the urgent
          appeal sent on 17 March 2003. According to the Government, the communication sent by the
          Special Representative stated that there were four people concerned, whereas the number of
          people is three, since Nazila Mohamad Hasani Zamani appeared to be the name of one person.
          According to the Government, Farideh Asadi, Nazila Mohamad ilasani Zamani and Soheila
          Pordel had objected to the decision by the UNHCR Office in Ankara to refuse their requests for
          asylum, as referred to in the reply dated 29 March 2004. The Government stated that these
          persons asked the UNHCR Office in Ankara for a reassessment of their initial application, and
          that the Office accepted to reassess the application of Soheila Pordel, while refusing the requests
          of the two others. The Government further informed that these persons have applied for
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 199
          obtaining permission to stay in Turkey with an “ordinary alien” status. This application was at
          the time being considered by the Ministry of Interior.
          567. By letter dated 11 May 2004, the Government provided a further reply to the urgent
          appeal sent on 17 February 2004. The Government reported that, on 13 February 2004, the
          Aliaga Penal Court of First Instance convicted Adnan Akin to three years' imprisonment, in line
          with article 32/3 of the Penal Code. The conviction was based on his violent acts against a
          gendarmerie officer, during a demonstration held on 30 September 1999, at which Alp Ayan and
          Gunseli Kaya also participated. According to the Government, the court increased his
          imprisonment by one additional day in line with article 8 1/1-3 of the Turkish Penal Code, which
          regulates penalties for repeat offences.
          568. By letter dated 12 May 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 21
          January 2004. The Government confirmed that, on 19 January 2004, the Istanbul State Security
          Court No. 4 sentenced Sefika Gflrbflz, in line with article 3 12/2 of the Penal Code. She was
          found guilty of the alleged crime of “inciting hatred and enmity among people because of racial
          and regional differences in a way that is likely to endanger the public order”. The conviction
          related to her reading of a report titled “Report on the Involuntary Immigration Report, 1996-
          200 1” and its annexes, during a press conference held in Istanbul on 17 April 2002. The
          Government stated that she was sentenced to one year's imprisonment. This penalty should be
          converted to a fine of 2,180,700,000 Turkish Liras (approximately US$ 2,112), based on her
          good conduct exercised during the proceedings and in conformity with article 59/2 of the Penal
          Code. Also, the execution of the punishment would not be suspended. According to the
          Government, both Sefika GUrbUz and the Public Prosecutor appealed the decision.
          569. By letter dated 25 May 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 3
          March 2004. The Government reported that, on 10 December 2003, the Van Penal Court decided
          that the hanging of posters, prepared and printed by the iluman Rights Association (IHD), to
          public places was illegal. The decision was based on articles 310 and 311 of the Penal Code.
          Hence the Public Prosecutor's Office at the Van Security State Court ordered the collection of
          these posters, in line with Article “Add. 1” of the Press Law No. 5860. According to the
          response, on 9 December 2003, the Public Prosecutor's Office in Derik, a town of Mardin, filed a
          lawsuit against llflseyin Cangir with the Derik Penal Court, in line with the article 536/1 of the
          Penal Code. This related to hanging posters in two different places without the permission of the
          Kaymakan, the official in charge of governing a provincial district. The case was pending at the
          time. The Government stated that, on 23 December 2004, the Van Penal Court found that the
          statements on the posters did not constitute a crime, and adopted a decision of non-prosecution of
          the head of the Van Branch of IHD.
          570. By letter dated 2 July 2004, the Government provided an additional reply to the
          communication sent 3 March 2004. The Government reported that, on 21 April 2004, the Derik
          Penal Court, First Instance, convicted llflseyin Cangir of the charges referred to in the
          Government reply dated 25 May 2004 and in line with articles 536/2, 536/3, 536/5, 59 and 72 of
          the Penal Code. The court sentenced him to a fine of 361,008,000 Turkish Liras (approximately
          US$ 241), and later suspended the execution of the penalty.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 200
          571. By letter dated 14 July 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 25 May
          2004. The Government reported that Berfin Peyam's mother has lodged a complaint to the
          Public Prosecutor's Office in Diyarbakir concerning the alleged ill-treatment of Berfin Peyam.
          Upon the complaint, the Public Prosecutor's Office initiated an investigation, and several
          testimonies were heard. The Government argued that these testimonies establish that Berfin
          Peyam was with the family of a schoolmate the day under question. It also stated that a medical
          report submitted by her mother indicated that Berfin Peyam at the time appeared calm, yet
          concerned, with certain difficulty of expressing herself verbally, which would gradually
          diminish. According to the Government, Berfin Peyam was later re-examined, and the report of
          the Forensic Medicine Institute does not indicate any traces of ill-treatment or physical violence
          directed towards her. The Public Prosecutor's Office decided that the allegations of the
          complainant was unfounded, and reached a decision of non-prosecution. Moreover, the
          Government stated that the Prosecutor's Office decided that legal proceeding should be initiated
          against Berfin Peyam on grounds of “simulation of infringement”, as the complainant
          incriminated public officials upon the statements of Berfin Peyam. In line with article 164 and
          successive provision of the Penal Code, the decision could be appealed at the Siverek Heavy
          Penal Court in 15 days after the communication of this decision. According to the reply, the
          decision was communicated on 7 June 2004.
          572. On 14 October 2004, the Government sent a response to the urgent appeals sent on 6
          August 2004 concerning Abduihekim Gider, Abdullah Gflndogdu, Tahsin Atak, and Ihsan
          Gfllmek. The Government states that Mr. GUndogdu, Mr. Atak, and Mr. Gulmek were suspected
          of committing the crimes of aiding and abetting the PKK/KONGRA-GEL terrorist organization,
          recruiting new members for the said organization and arranging their travel to join its rural cadre,
          and were detained in this respect on 30 July 2004 at around 12 o'clock in Pervari, Siirt. During
          the search carried out at Mr. GUndogdu's house, the police found money in local and foreign
          currencies and clothing, which were understood to be transferred to the terrorist organization,
          along with other logistical supplies and an unlicensed hunting rifle. On the same day, under the
          authorization and instruction of the Public Prosecutor, they were put into the detention centre at
          the Pervari Police Station. They were informed or their legal rights and relevant documents were
          prepared accordingly. They underwent medical examinations that very day. On 3 August 2004,
          the suspects were taken to the Office of the Prosecutor, and on their way they underwent another
          medical examination at the Pevari State Hospital. Following their interrogation with the Public
          Prosecutor they were referred to the Criminal Court of Peace in Pervari where the court decided
          to arrest them on the grounds of aiding and abetting the terrorist organization. They were then
          committed to the prison in Siirt. Legal proceedings against the three suspects are under way. The
          Government further stated that Abdulhekim Gider, the lawyer of the detainees, filed a complaint
          with the Public Prosecutor's Office on 1 August 2004 on the grounds that his clients were
          subjected to ill-treatment. Since the medical examinations carried out before and after the
          detention periods concerned showed that there were no signs of ill-treatment, the investigation
          initiated in this regard was concluded with a decision of non-prosecution. Mr. GUndogdu
          appealed against this decision and the appeal is being considered by the Batman Heavy Penal
          Court. On 1 and 2 August 2004, Mr. Gider visited his clients, but he did nto appear during the
          interrogation of the suspects despite having been informed of the time and venue of the
          interrogation. Moreover, before his second visit, while entering the police station and canying to
          black plastic bags, upon refusing to present his ID, an argument broke out between him and the
          security officers during which he threatened the officers.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 201
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          573. By letter dated 25 February 2004, the Government provided an additional reply to the
          urgent appeal sent jointly with the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary
          Detention on 21 July 2003 concerning Sevim Yetkiner and Baki çelebi. The Government
          referred to its previous reply to this communication, by letter dated 21 August 2003, where it
          stated that a lawsuit had been filed against these persons at the Erzurum State Security Court on
          14 July 2003. This court adopted a decision of non-competence and referred the case to the
          Dogubeyazit Penal Court of First Instance. A lawsuit was filed against Sevim Yetkiner and Baki
          çelebi, along with 11 other accused persons, on ground of aiding and abetting the PKK-KADEK
          terrorist organization and pursuant to article 3 12/1 of the Penal Code. The Government reported
          that the next hearing of the case was to be held on 19 February 2004. It fhrther stated that, while
          in custody, Sevim Yetkiner and Baki çelebi were reminded of their right to demand legal
          counsel, but declined to demand a defence lawyer. According to the reply, they did not report
          any kind of ill-treatment during their custody, and this was also confirmed by a medical report.
          They were released on 6 August 2003.
          574. By letter dated 12 March 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 17
          February 2004, and to the urgent appeal sent on 22 October 2003, both concerning Alp Ayan
          and Gflnseli Kaya. This reply is summarized above.
          575. By letter dated 12 March 2004, the Government responded to the urgent appeal sent
          jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of
          opinion and expression on 29 October 2003 on the iluman Rights Foundation of Turkey
          (HRFT). The Government referred to its previous response dated 30 December 2003. It reported
          that the third and final hearing in case of Directorate General of Foundations (DGF) versus the
          HRFT was held on 9 Mach 2004. The legal representatives of DGF chose not to appear before
          the court, which implies that DFG will not follow through the case. The Government stated that
          the case in question therefore have been taken off the agenda of the concerned court.
          576. By letter dated 20 May 2004, the Government responded to the letter of allegation sent
          jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of
          opinion and expression on 10 November 2003. The Government confirmed the charges of Eren
          Eskin and Erdal Tas, relating to an article published in the 1k /b /n c / c Yeni Gundem newspaper.
          According to the Government, the Court acquitted these two persons on 16 April 2002. The
          verdict of the Court was not appealed and is therefore final.
          577. By letter dated 16 July 2004, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent by the
          Special Representative on 14 October 2002 concerning Alp Ayan and Ecevit Piroglu. The
          Government commented upon a statement in the communication, where the Special
          Representative referred to allegations that the persons concerned faced a sentence up to six years
          imprisonment for “having insulted the Turkish armed forces” and the Ministry of Justice, after
          they took part in a protest meeting on 10 February 2002. Upon inquiries conducted by the
          competent authorities, this allegation could not be verified. The Government asked for additional
          information on either the name of the city in which the alleged meeting took place, or on the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 202
          name of the relevant Public Prosecutor's Office which initiated the investigation, in order to
          clarify the matter and give accurate information on the case.
          Observations
          578. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its numerous replies. At the
          invitation of the Government of Turkey, she conducted an official visit to the country in October
          2004. She refers to the separate report, submitted to the Commission (E/CN.4/2005/101/Add.3),
          for a detailed overview of the situation of human rights defenders in Turkey.
          Turkmenistan
          Communications sent
          579. On 29 April 2004, the Special Representative sent a letter of allegation concerning the
          new Law on Public Associations and the corresponding criminial code amendements.
          According to the information received, on 21 October 2003, the Government of Turkmenistan
          adopted a new law on association which regulates the establishment and operation of
          associations and NGOs within the country, which reportedly came into effect on 20 November
          2003. According to the information received, under article 17 of the new law all public
          associations are now required to register with the Ministry of Justice (Adalat) or face criminal
          charges, including imprisonment up to one year and “corrective labour” for activities if
          unregistered. It has been further reported that the registration procedures set by the new law
          remain unclear and render the registration of organizations unduly difficult. Concern has been
          expressed with respect to the reportedly wide-ranging power granted by article 18 to the Ministry
          of Justice with regards to grounds on which registration can be denied. Additional concern has
          been expressed with regards to the requirement stipulated by article 17 that organizations re-
          register for any change in their charter and any factual changes in their registration details.
          Further concern has been expressed concerning article 33, which reportedly requires all existing
          associations to now re-register with the Ministry. It is fhrther alleged that the new law places
          undue restrictions on the work of foreign and international NGOs based in Turkmenistan, which
          are required to have a minimum of 500 members, as opposed to 50 members for national
          associations and just five for local ones. As well, an NGO has to have a branch abroad in order to
          be eligible for registration under the category of “international association”. Concerns have also
          been expressed with regards to restrictions imposed on authorized activities for public
          associations by article 21, which establishes a list of permitted activities. Additionally, according
          to the information received, article 22 establishes undue scrutiny by the Ministry of Justice into
          the activities of registered association by requiring that associations submit annual reports and
          copies of management decisions on their activities to this Ministry, and to provide it with prior
          notification of any events the association organizes and to allow for government officials to
          attend. Finally, concern has been expressed that articles 21 and 22, respectively, place undue
          restriction on cooperation with international NGOs and access to foreign funding. Particular
          concern has been expressed that, taken as a whole, the November 2003 Law on Public
          Associations imposes conditions on associations conducting human rights activities which may
          be in violation of the Declaration on the Right and Responsibilities of Individuals, Groups and
          Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and
          Fundamental Freedoms.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 203
          Communications received
          580. By letter dated 17 May 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by the
          Special Representative on 29 April 2004 regarding the Law on Public Associations, which
          came into force on 21 October 2003. In its response, the Government reiterated its commitment
          to provide the highest level of access to human rights for its citizens. The Government stated that
          the new law gives every citizen the choice to create or enter into public associations, while at the
          same time determining the administrative and legal conditions for the creation, management,
          reorganization and closure of public associations. The act also provides for the registration of all
          public associations and the re-registry after any amendemnts to their charter, this procedure
          applies to national and international groups equally. The Government also maintained that only
          public order and general well-being can guarantee the recognition and respect of all rights for all
          people. According to the Government, the provisions of the new law are by no means
          discriminatory towards international organizations. The Government confirmed its commitment
          to the United Nations and assured that its amendments were introduced in conformity with the
          Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to
          Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.
          Observations
          581. The Special Representative would like to thank the Government for its prompt response
          in connection with a communication sent by her regarding the new Law on Public Associations.
          The Special Representative takes note of the Government's explanation of provision included in
          its new Law on Public Associations. The Special Representative regrets to note, however, that
          the Government's replies in relation to these cases do not dispel the grave concerns she raised in
          her communication with regards to the restrictive environment created by such legislation and its
          potential incompatibility with the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders. The Special
          Representative therefore urgently invites the Government to review the Law on Public
          Associations in the light of the concerns expressed in her communication. She reiterates her offer
          to the Government to provide any support it may find useful in crafting legislation that strikes the
          right balance between, on one side, the need for the State to provide a framework regulating the
          formation and operation of NGOs, and freedom of association on the other side. She also restates
          her belief that, in order to engage in a meaningfhl dialogue in this matter, an official visit to
          Turkmenistan may be very helpful.
          United States of America
          Communications sent
          582. On 4 March 2004, the Special Representative, in conjunction with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, transmitted an
          urgent action regarding the reported refusal to allow observers from three human rights groups
          permission to attend and observe military commission trials of detainees at Guantanamo Bay,
          Cuba, and the alleged restriction on freedom of expression imposed on lawyers. According to the
          information received, Amnesty International, iluman Rights First and iluman Rights
          Watch, international non-governmental human rights organizations, reportedly wrote to the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 204
          United States Department of Defense in May 2003, requesting permission to observe the military
          commission trial proceedings, in follow-up to the United States administration's commitment
          that the commission would be open to the public. It is reported that in January and February
          2004, respectively, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch received a written response
          from the Department of Defense reportedly denying them access to the military commissions on
          the basis of “limited courtroom seating and other logistical issues”. The letter also reportedly
          stated that seating would only be provided to select members of the press and to the International
          Committee of the Red Cross. Human Rights First has reportedly not yet received a response to
          its request. According to the information received, on 20 February 2004, the three organizations
          sent ajoint letter to the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, protesting their exclusion from
          the proceedings. It is further reported that, under the military commission rules, civilian and
          military lawyers can reportedly only speak to the press once they have received permission from
          the military officials in charge of the proceedings and that the granting of permission may be
          limited to certain topics. Concern has been expressed that the reported denial of access for these
          independent human rights organizations to trial proceedings in Guantanamo Bay may represent
          an attempt to limit independent scrutiny of the military commission proceedings and that the
          denial would weaken the international human rights monitoring activities undertaken by these
          organizations. Additional concerns have been expressed that the restrictions reportedly imposed
          upon lawyers involved in the proceedings may infringe upon their independence and
          compromise the obligation to assure a fair trial
          Responses received on cases sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          583. By letter dated 21 October 2004, the Government replied to the communication sent by
          the Special Representative on 6 November 2003 regarding the situation of two anti-war
          protestors, Willow Rosenthal and Erik Shaw. In its response, the Government informed the
          Special Representative that all of the 25 arrested anti-war protestors had now been released, after
          the charges against one defendant were dropped on 10 March 2004, and against the remaining 24
          defendants on 22 April 2004. Apparently, the decision was taken after several peaceful protests
          by the same organizations were held in the ensuing months. Further, the Oakland, Califi, Police
          Department, although by no means as an admission of guilt for alleged crimes, has changed its
          crowd-control tactics. In particular, greater efforts have been made to coordinate with protest
          organizers before the event and new restrictions have been place on the use of non-lethal
          munitions. The Government confirms that a civil lawsuit has been filed before a federal court by
          nine International Longshore and Warehouse Union members and 31 other protesters. It is stated
          that the two parties were, at the time of writing, engaged in out-of-court settlement negotiations.
          In reference to specific allegation of the surveillance of Erik Shaw, the Government declined to
          comment, but highlighted that no domestic or international law prohibited the photographing of
          individuals in public. They also stated that no government action had been taken against Mr
          Shaw or his organization.
          Observations
          584. The Special Representative would like to thank the Government for its response to last
          year's communication. The Special Representative is encouraged by the decision to review the
          nature of police procedures and tactics in this context. She looks forward to remaining informed
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 205
          about decisions taken in this respect. She regrets that at the time of the finalization of her report
          no response had been received to her communication sent this year.
          Uzbekistan
          Communications sent
          585. On 23 December 2003, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning
          allegations that a conference on the death penalty organized in Tashkent by the non-
          governmental organization Mothers against the Death Penalty and Torture, has been
          prevented from taking place. According to information received, on 12 December 2003 the
          authorities indicated that the conference could not be held since it was organized by an
          unregistered organization. Mothers against the Death Penalty and Torture has reportedly been
          denied registration by the authorities. Representatives of the organization have allegedly been the
          subject of harassment in the past. They have allegedly received death threats after their
          participation in the annual meeting of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
          (EBRD) in May 2003. Members of the organization were reportedly told repeatedly by Secret
          Service officers that their organization was “blacklisted” and that the Secret Service was awaiting
          orders to close the organization. Concern has been expressed that Mothers against the Death
          Penalty and Torture has been targeted due to its work on behalf of human rights in the context of
          the death penalty and torture.
          586. On 16 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up
          urgent appeal concerning Ruslan Sharipov, a 25-year-old journalist and human rights defender.
          According to the information received, Ruslan Sharipov was allegedly excluded from a general
          amnesty announced in December 2003 by the President, reportedly on the ground that the crime
          he committed was “too serious”. According to our previous information, Ruslan Sharipov was
          arrested on 29 May 2003 and convicted on 13 August by the Tashkent City Court on charges of
          homosexual conduct, sex with a minor and involving minors in “antisocial behaviour” (articles
          120, 128 and 127 of the Criminal Code). He was reportedly first sentenced to five and a half
          years in prison, which was subsequently reduced to four years following his appeal in
          September. This was maintained despite reports indicating that forensic medial tests conducted
          after his arrest found no evidence of sexual relations with minors and despite reported evidence
          that his confessions were obtained under duress. Reports also indicate that Mr. Sharipov may
          have been framed in connection to his human rights activities, including his reporting on police
          corruption and human rights abuses in the country. Fears have been expressed that his exclusion
          from the presidential general amnesty may aim at further targeting him for his activities in the
          defence of human rights. It is reported that calls have been made for the presidential general
          amnesty to extend to his conviction.
          587. On 16 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the
          Special Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Fatima
          Mukhadirova, a 62-year-old woman, who was reportedly sentenced on 12 February 2004 in a
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 206
          closed court hearing to six years in prison with hard labour for possession of unsanctioned
          religious literature, membership in a prohibited religious organization, and “attempted
          encroachment on the constitutional order”. The authorities alleged that Fatima Mukhadirova is a
          member of Hizb ut-Tahrir (Party of Liberation), a non-violent Muslim group advocating the
          peaceful establishment of an Islamic State in Uzbekistan. It is believed that Mrs. Mukhadirova,
          whose youngest son is reportedly also in prison on charges of Hizb ut-Tahrir membership, may
          have been arrested for having spoken out during the mission of the Special Rapporteur on the
          question of torture in Uzbekistan against the ongoing arrests of independent Muslims and for
          having reported on the case of her eldest son, Muzafar Avazov, a religious prisoner who died in
          prison from torture in August 2002.
          588. On 25 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-
          up urgent appeal concerning Fatima Mukhadirova. According to the information received, on
          12 February 2004 Fatima Mukhadirova was sentenced in a closed court hearing for possession of
          unsanctioned religious literature, membership of prohibited religious organizations and
          unconstitutional activities. It has been alleged that the accusations were unproven and that her
          arrest may have been linked to her having raised the case of the death of her son with
          international bodies and in particular her meeting with the Special Rapporteur on the question of
          torture. On 24 February 2004, the Tashkent city court reportedly decided to release Fatima
          Mukhadirova, on the grounds of her gender and her old age, and sentenced her to pay a fine of
          280,000 sums, which is reportedly equal to two-thirds of the average annual income. The Special
          Representative and the Special Rapporteur welcome the reported release of Ms. Mukhadirova.
          They express their concern, however, at the heavy fine imposed on her. Fear has been expressed
          that the fine may represent an attempt to hinder her human rights activities and in particular her
          efforts to obtain an investigation into the death of her son in custody.
          589. On 26 February 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent an urgent appeal concerning Muidinjon Kurbanov,
          chairman of a regional branch of the Human Rights Society of Uzbekistan (1-IRSU) and of a
          coalition of human rights organizations, as well as chairman of the Jizzakh province branch of
          Birlik (Unity), an opposition and pro-democracy political movement. According to the
          information received, on 5 January 2004, Muidinjon Kurbanov was reportedly taken to the
          provincial Department of Internal Affairs by officers from the Jizzakh Province Department for
          Anti-Terrorism and Narcotics, interrogated for several hours about his human rights and political
          activities and asked to reappear for further interrogation on the following day. On 16 February
          2004, he was reportedly arrested on weapons and narcotics charges, after police conducted an
          illegal search of his property. According to the information received, the police reportedly found
          weapons and narcotics in a chicken coop close to his home. It is reported that his wife recounted
          that on 6 February 2004 an unknown man had entered the courtyard and ran away when she went
          to investigate. It is further alleged that, on the following morning, she found that the lock of the
          chicken coop had been opened, raising suspicions that evidence may have been planted.
          Muidinjon Kurbanov was reportedly held incommunicado for three days, during which time he
          was allegedly interrogated, threatened and forced to sign a confession dictated by the police. In
          particular, it is alleged that the police threatened that if he did not confess to the charges they
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 207
          would bring in his wife and take him to the basement where they would “show him” why he
          should confess. Muidinjon Kurbanov was reportedly denied access to his lawyer until 20
          February 2004, after the latter filed a complaint with the procuracy. Muidinjon Kurbanov is
          reportedly currently in custody at the Jizzakh City Department of Internal Affairs. Fears have
          been expressed that he is at risk of ill-treatment. Concern has also been expressed that his arrest
          may be linked to his human rights and political work. Concern is heightened by the fact that
          Muidinjon Kurbanov had already been arrested in 1998 on trumped-up narcotics charges. On that
          occasion, he was reportedly threatened with charges of religious extremism, and repeatedly
          beaten while in custody, which reportedly caused one of his kidneys to burst.
          590. On 14 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent a follow-up
          urgent appeal concerning Ruslan Sharipov, a journalist and human rights activist. Ruslan
          Sharipov was reportedly found guilty on 13 August 2003 under articles 120 (homosexuality) and
          128 (sexual relations with a minor) of the Criminal Code, despite the lack of forensic medical
          evidence, and sentenced on appeal to four years in prison. He was reportedly subjected to torture
          and threats while in detention. It is widely believed that his prosecution was linked to his work as
          an investigative journalist and a human rights defender, in particular reporting on corruption and
          human rights abuses. According to recent information received, Mr. Sharipov, who is reportedly
          eligible for early release on 11 June 2004, has reportedly been placed since 13 March 2004 under
          house arrest and is required to report to a low-security prison for work every day. It is reported
          that such a transfer is automatic once one-quarter of a sentence has been completed. In this
          context, it is alleged that he has been barred from resuming his human rights and journalism
          activities, under threat of losing the possibility of early release. In particular, it is reported that
          Mr. Sharipov will not be allowed to travel to Istanbul in late May 2004 to receive an award on
          the occasion of the World Newspaper Congress and World Editors' Forum.
          591. On 30 June 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning Mr. Bobomurod Abdullayev, director of OZOD OVOZ, a non-governmental
          organization that works on freedom of opinion and expression in Uzbekistan. On 12 June 2004,
          Bobomurod Abdullayev came to Baku as a participant in the eleventh General Meeting of the
          International Freedom of Expression Exchange (IFEX). On 13 June 2004, police reportedly
          visited his house in the Kizil-Shark Chilanzarsk region of Uzbekistan. His wife was allegedly
          questioned by the police about his travel and about the work of the IFEX conference. According
          to information received, on 14 June, a policeman returned to Abdullayev's home and reportedly
          told his wife that there was a warrant outstanding for his arrest. Since then, Abdullayev's wife
          and two young children have left their home out of fear for their security. Although no charges
          were apparently specified, it is believed that this police harassment and the threat of arrest may
          be connected with OZOD OVOZ's activities on behalf of freedom of expression in Uzbekistan.
          592. On 3 August 2004, the Special Representative sent a letter of allegation concerning the
          reported closure of the Open Society Institute (OSI) in Tashkent. According to information
          received, on 14 April 2004 the Open Society Institute in Tashkent was shut down by the
          Government of Uzbekistan owing to the reported refusal by the Ministry of Justice to renew its
          registration. It is further alleged that, before the closure, members of staff in the OSI office in
          Tashkent received death threats and were subjected to other forms of intimidation. According to
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 208
          reports, the Uzbek authorities allegedly stated that OSI materials supplied to universities in
          Uzbekistan “distort(ed) the essence and the content of socio-economic, public and political
          reforms conducted in Uzbekistan” and “discredit(ed) Uzbek government policies”. The decision
          was reportedly based on a December 2003 decree in which the Government of Uzbekistan
          requested international NGOs operating in the country to register with the Ministry of Justice and
          the Ministry of Foreign Affairs before 1 April 2004. It is reported that this decree may have been
          adopted to enforce the law on non-governmental and non-commercial organizations adopted in
          May 1999, which requires international NGOs to register with the Ministry of Justice of the
          Republic of Uzbekistan. Concern is expressed that the OSI section based in Tashkent may have
          been targeted in an attempt to prevent it from carrying our human rights activities. Further
          concern is expressed that this law may be implemented to create a nexus between NGOs and
          terrorism.
          Communications received
          593. By letter dated 6 January 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 23
          December 2003. The Government stated that Mothers against the Death Penalty and Torture
          had not filed an application for official registration of its statutes at the Ministry of Justice in
          accordance with the Non-State Non-Profit Organizations Act and the Voluntary Associations Act
          and was thus an unregistered non-governmental organization. As such, its activities may be
          considered as contrary to the national legislation in force. The Government indicated that the
          organization was prohibited to hold a conference on the death penalty in Tashkent on 5
          December 2003, owing to its lack of registration. In its reply, the Government provided
          information concerning the issue of death penalty in Uzbekistan. In particular, it pointed out that
          the death penalty has been deleted from several articles of the Criminal Code, and that the actual
          number of sentences involving the death penalty has decreased since 1999. The Government also
          mentioned that an individual sentenced to death may appeal against the judgement by several
          means, and that, in several instances, the death penalty has been commuted to deprivation of
          liberty.
          594. By letter dated 1 March 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 25
          February 2004. The Government indicated that, on 24 February 2004, in second instance, the
          court of appeal of the Tashkent City Court on criminal cases revised the sentence adopted by the
          Shayhantohur District Court on 12 February 2004 with regard to Mrs. Fatima Mukhadirova.
          The court replaced the previous ruling of six years imprisonment with a sentence relating to a
          fine under articles 57 and 60 of the Criminal Code. According the reply, Mrs. Mukhadirova was
          released from imprisonment.
          595. By letter dated 22 April 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 26
          February 2004. The Government reported that, on 16 February 2004, a search was conducted in
          the home and adjacent premises of Muidinjon Kurbanov, based on a decision approved by the
          procurator of Zarbdar district, Djizik oblast. On 19 February 2004, Mr. Kurbanov was charged
          based on discovering weapons, ammunition and narcotics during this search. According to the
          Government's reply, Mr. Kurbanov was held criminally liable for the commission of offences,
          unrelated to his human rights protection activities. The Government underlined that he was
          detained in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure, and that, on 27 February 2004, this
          measure was given up in exchange for his signing a pledge of good conduct. It stated that three
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 209
          lawyers represented him during the investigation, and that they participated when the basic
          investigative measures were carried out. According to the reply, the preliminary investigation
          into the case had ended, and, on 1 March 2004, the case was referred to the court for
          consideration of the merits.
          596. By letter dated 27 October 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 30
          June 2004. The Government stated that, on 14 June 2004, the authorities had checked whether
          residents of all apartments and houses in “Qizil Sharq” area of the Chilanzar District were
          complying with passport regulations, including the house where Bobomurod Abdullayev lives.
          The control was carried out by the Chilanzar District Department for internal affairs, the
          chairperson of the community of citizens and housing administrators, under the instruction of the
          Tashkent City Internal Affairs Department. The Government indicated that the authorities
          established that that Mr. Abdullayev had been away for a business trip and that his wife and
          parents had been at home. No illegal action was taken against his family members. The
          Government assured the Special Representative that no arrest warrant had been issued against
          Mr. Abdullayev in this connection. The Government underlined that neither Mr. Abdullayev, nor
          members of his family have complained to the authorities about the incident referred to in the
          communication sent by the Special Representative.
          597. By letter dated 28 October 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 3
          August 2004 concerning the Open Society Institute (051). Unfortunately, the English
          translation was not available in time to be examined and included in this report, and will thus be
          reported next year.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          598. By letter dated 18 February 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent
          jointly with the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the
          Special Rapporteur on the question of torture and the Chairperson-Rapporteur of the Working
          Group on Arbitrary Detention on 22 October 2003 concerning Fatima Mukhadirova. The
          Government referred to its previous response dated 28 November 2003 and provided additional
          information: It indicated that, on 12 February 2004, the Shayhantohur District Court found
          Fatima Mukhadirova guilty of offences under articles 159.3 (a) and (b), 244-1.3 (a) and 59 of the
          Criminal Code, for continuing her unlawful activities in a religious extremist organization with a
          view to undermining the constitutional foundation of Uzbek society. The court sentenced her to
          deprivation of liberty for six years, partly incorporating a suspended sentence decided by the
          same court on 5 November 2001. The Government reported that Fatima Mukhadirova lodged an
          appeal with the Tashkent City Court against this ruling, and that a consideration of this appeal
          was scheduled for 24 February 2004.
          Observations
          599. The Special Representative thanks the Government of Uzbekistan for responding to most
          of her communications, which attests to its willingness to cooperate with her mandate. She refers
          to her main report to the Commission on Human Rights (E/CN.4/2005/101) for a detailed
          analysis of the trends in the situation of human rights defenders in Uzbekistan, and for her
          observations to these trends. She encourages the Government to review favourably her request,
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 210
          first sent on 24 May 2001 and reiterated most recently on 2 December 2004, for an invitation to
          conduct an official visit to the country.
          Venezuela
          Comunicaciones enviadas
          600. El 25 de mayo de 2004, la Representante Especial enviô un llamamiento urgente en
          relacion con Liliana Ortega, presidenta del Comité de Familiares de Victimas del 27 de Febrero
          (COFAVIC). Junto con otras organizaciones nacionales e internacionales, el COFAVIC habria
          pedido püblicamente que se llevaran a cabo investigaciones independientes e imparciales sobre
          presuntas violaciones de derechos humanos que se habrlan cometido entre el 27 de febrero y 4 de
          marzo de 2004. Segün los informes, al menos 14 personas habrian muerto y más de 200 habrian
          resultado heridas durante enfrentamientos entre manifestantes de oposiciôn y las fuerzas de
          seguridad. Ademas, se informa que el 12 de mayo de 2004, un individuo no identificado habria
          colocando folletos en la entrada principal de la sede de la organizaciôn COFAVIC en Caracas.
          Los folletos habrian contenido amenazas de muerte y frases insultantes, asi como una caricatura
          de Liliana Ortega diciendo: “A ml me pagan para que defienda los derechos humanos de los
          malandros de la oposiciôn”. Se informa ademas que ese mismo dia, COFAVIC habr la recibido
          una serie de llamadas telefonicas de individuos no identificados que habr lan pedido informacion
          sobre Liliana Ortega y el COFAVIC. Se teme que las amenazas estén relacionadas con el trabajo
          dentro del area de derechos humanos de Liliana Ortega y COFAVIC y en particular con la
          documentacion y denuncia de los malos tratos por parte de miembros de la policia y de las
          fuerzas de seguridad durante las violencias politicas en Venezuela en febrero y marzo de 2004.
          El caso de Liliana Ortega ya the sujeto de un llamamiento urgente enviado conjuntamente por la
          Relatora Especial sobrejecuciones extrajudiciales, sumarias o arbitrarias y la Representante
          Especial el 25 de abril de 2002.
          Observaciones
          601. The Special Representative regrets that at the time of the finalization of this report, the
          Government had not transmitted a reply to her communication.
          Viet Nam
          Communications sent
          602. On 6 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning Dr. Nguyen
          Dan Que, who was reportedly arrested on 17 March 2003, four days after he allegedly issued a
          statement alleging the lack of respect for the right to freedom of information in Vietnam.
          According to new information received, Dr. Nguyen Dan Que was accused of espionage but the
          formal charges against him and the date of a possible trial are not known. He is reported to have
          been denied access to his legal representatives and relatives since his arrest. He is also reported
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 211
          to be suffering from a blood pressure condition, a bleeding peptic ulcer and kidney stones.
          Medication which he needs for his serious condition has reportedly been provided to the
          detention centre where he is held, but it is not known whether this has in fact been given to him.
          In view of his reported incommunicado detention, fears have been expressed that he may be at
          risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment. Concern has also been expressed for his physical
          integrity if he does not receive prompt and adequate medical treatment
          603. On 22 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the Special
          Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people and
          the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, sent a letter of
          allegation relating to the situation of the Degar tribe (Montagnards) in some areas of the
          Vietnamese central highlands. According to the information received, on 10 and 11 April on the
          occasion of Easter celebrations, between 10,000 and 30,000 Christian members of the Degar
          tribe reportedly gathered in the cities of Buon Ma Tuor, Kontum, Dalat, Phuoc Long and Plei Ku
          as well as in other areas, to protest alleged ongoing repression against hill tribes and violations of
          their human rights, including their right to freedom of religion, by the authorities. The
          demonstrations were allegedly violently suppressed by the Vietnamese authorities, reportedly
          causing an as-yet-undetermined number of casualties. Although it seems that exact figures of the
          casualties are difficult to assess, it is reported that the authorities are still barring access to the
          area by independent observers and have imposed a news blackout on hospital personnel, some
          reports mention that at least 10 Montagnards were killed, including one from a gunshot wound in
          the head and others from beatings, and hundreds were allegedly wounded. It is alleged that
          security forces, supported by men in civilian clothes armed with metal bars, shovels, clubs with
          nails attached to them, machetes and chains, confronted Montagnard protesters in the area
          around Buon Ma Tuor, the capital of the Dak Lak province, on the morning of 10 April, seeking
          to prevent them from accessing main cities where protests were to be organized. The protesters
          who were reportedly not armed are said to have attempted to defend themselves by throwing
          stones at the security forces. Further reports indicate that hundreds of Montagnards have fled
          their villages and have gone into hiding. The situation of Montagnard or Degar peoples has
          already been addressed by the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and
          fundamental freedoms of indigenous people in his communications with the Government in
          2002. It is reported that, over the last decades, indigenous Montagnards have been facing
          military operations during which arrests, beatings and extrajudicial executions at the hands of
          Vietnamese security forces were alleged to have occurred. The destruction of several churches
          has also been reported.
          604. On 21 July 2004, the Special Representative sent a follow-up urgent appeal concerning
          Dr. Nguyen Dan Que, human rights defender. According to information received on 13 March
          2003, Dr. Nguyen Dan Que reportedly issued a statement alleging that there was no freedom of
          expression in Vietnam. On 17 March 2003 he was allegedly arrested outside his home in Ho Chi
          Minh City and held incommunicado for significant periods during his detention. According to
          new information received, on 19 July 2004 Dr. Nguyen Dan Que was brought to trial in Ho Chi
          Minh City where he reportedly spent 16 months in detention. Reports indicate that he was
          charged with “abusing democratic rights to jeopardize the interests of the State”. It has also been
          alleged that Dr. Nguyen Dan Que has been denied access to legal consultation and that his family
          have not been given a formal charge sheet detailing the accusations against him. In view of these
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 212
          reports it is feared that he may be deprived of his right to legal representation during his trial.
          Concern has also been expressed for his physical integrity as he is reported to be suffering from
          high blood pressure, kidney stones and a bleeding ulcer. Further concern is expressed that Dr.
          Nguyen Dan Que may have been arrested and detained in an attempt to hinder his human rights
          activities.
          605. On 7 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Chairperson-
          Rapporteur of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, sent an urgent appeal concerning Rev.
          Nguyen long Quang, aged 45, Vice President and General Secretary of the Mennonite Church
          in Vietnam. He was reportedly arrested on 8 June 2004 on the outskirts of Ho Chi Minh City and
          taken to the jail at the District 2 Public Security Police Station. Reports indicate that police
          ransacked his home and office and informed his colleagues that they were charging him with
          “inciting others to oppose an officer carrying out his official duty”. Police also confiscated four
          computers and numerous books and papers, including his legal files on human rights cases. Rev.
          Nguyen Hong Quang has defended land-rights cases of impoverished farmers from the
          provinces, spoken out against the arrests of religious and political dissidents, and drawn attention
          to the situation of minority Christian churches in Vietnam. On 18 May 2004, he made public a
          report entitled “Violations of the law by public security officers of District 2 and Ho Chi Minh
          City in the forcible detention of the four Mennonite evangelists”.
          606. On 25 November 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on freedom of religion or belief, sent a follow-up letter of allegation concerning the Mennonite
          Church, and in particular Rev. Nguyen Hong Quang. According to new information received,,
          after a trial that took only four hours and was marred by some procedural shortcomings, Nguyen
          Hong Quang was convicted to three years of imprisonment on 12 November 2004 by the
          people's court of Ho Chi Minh City in connection with his religious convictions and related
          activities for “resisting persons doing official duty”. It is also reported that several of his
          collaborators, Pham Ngoc Thach, Le Thi Hong Lien, Nguyen Van Phuong, Nguyen Huu Nghia
          and Nguyen Thanh Nhan received sentences of between 9 and 36 months for the same offense.
          Communications received
          607. By letter dated 2 April 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 6
          January 2004 concerning Dr. Dan Que Nguyen. The Government underlined that freedom of
          expression and freedom of information are enshrined in domestic law, and that torture and any
          other form of inhumane treatment and punishments are strictly forbidden. It stated that these
          rights are guaranteed and strictly observed in practice. In its reply, the Government stated that
          the information and allegations contained in the communication sent by the Special
          Representative are unfounded. It indicated that Dr. Que was arrested for having committed acts
          in violation of article 80 of the Criminal Code of Vietnam, and he will be brought to trial when
          investigation procedures have been completed. The Government stated that the right of the
          defendant to a fair proceeding before the court shall be guaranteed in strict accordance with the
          law. Finally, the Government assured the Special Representative and special rapporteurs that Dr.
          Que was in good health.
          608. By letter dated 14 May 2004, the Government replied to a letter of allegation sent on 22
          April 2004. The Government stated that the allegations and information contained in the
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 213
          communication were unfounded. It reported that, on 10 and 11 April 2004, some extremist
          elements in Dak Lak and Gia Lai provinces induced, deceived and forced local people to carry
          out demonstrations. This conduct was instigated and instructed from outside, especially from the
          Montagnard Foundation. The reply indicated that the extremists committed acts aimed at causing
          public disorder, dividing people of the Central Highlands, damaging Vietnam's great national
          unity and undermining its territorial integrity. It reported that they had used dangerous weapons,
          destroyed public property, attacked some commune headquarters, and captured local officials.
          The Government stated that, in view of such violent acts, the law-enforcement forces and the
          people had to take defensive action. It mentioned that measures have been taken to stabilize the
          situation and that only the instigators, leaders and those who committed acts against public
          officers on duty were been held in custody by the local government. In its reply, the Government
          also reported that there was no repression of Protestants, and that Protestants in the Central
          Highland enjoy favourable conditions for religious practices.
          609. By letter dated 18 August 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 21
          July 2004. The Government reported that, on 29 July 2004, the People's Court of Ho Chi Minh
          City held an open criminal trial in first instance for Dr. Nguyen Dan Que. It stated that the court
          examined the case in strict accordance with the law and found the defendant guilty. Dr. Que was
          sentenced to two years and six months of imprisonment under article 258 of the Penal Code,
          based on his abusive use of democratic freedoms to infringe upon the interests of the State and
          his violation of the rights and interests of organizations and citizens.
          610. By letter dated 14 October 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 7
          September 2004 concerning Nguyen long Quang. The Government indicated that the
          information and allegations referred to in the communication sent by the Special Representative
          were unfounded. It referred to several acts in violation of the law carried out by Mr. Quang. In
          particular, the Government stated that, on 2 March 2004, Mr. Quang and other individuals
          chased up and violently assaulted two youngsters, tried to assassinate them, took away their
          motorbikes, caused public chaos and fought violently against the police. The Government
          indicated that, on 8 June 2004, the police arrested Mr. Quang on the charge of “fighting against
          on-duty public officers”, and that four other persons already had been charged in connection with
          the incident.
          611. By letter dated 6 December 2004, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent
          on 25 November 2004. The Government reiterated its reply dated 14 October 2004, and referred
          to several violations of the law carried out by Nguyen long Quang. It confirmed that, on 12
          November 2004, the People's Court of Ho Chi Minh City convicted Mr. Quang to three years
          imprisonment. The Government reported that he had been charged with “assaulting on-duty
          public officers” and that he was convicted in accordance with article 257 of the Penal Code.
          According to the reply, the trial was conducted in full and strict observance of due process.
          612. By letter dated 31 January 2005, the Government replied to the case of Nguyen long
          Quang. The Government informed the Special Representantative that, on 31 January 2005, the
          Office of the President announced the President's decision to grant special amnesty for 8.428
          inmates, including Mr. Quang. It stated that the decision was based on a humanitarian and lenient
          policy towards those who have showed sincere attitude of repentace and made remarkable
          progress while serving their imprisonment sentence.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 214
          Observations
          613. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its numerous replies. She
          welcomes the release of Nguyen long Quang. She expresses her serious concern about the
          alleged arrests of human rights defenders in connection with their public statements. She remains
          concerned about the reports of arrests, assaults and killings of demonstrators.
          Zambia
          Communciations sent
          614. On 23 February 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning Sara
          Longwe, a member of United Nations Coalition of Non-Governmental Organizations (CONGO)
          and a human rights defender on gender issues in Zambia, her husband Peter Clarke, a journalist,
          and their daughter. According to the information received, on 5 January 2004, the Minister of
          Home Affairs reportedly issued a deportation order requiring Peter Clarke, a British citizen, to
          leave the country within 24 hours. This deportation order is reportedly connected to an article he
          had written in his weekly satirical column in The Post newspaper. It was already the subject of
          an urgent appeal by the Special Rapporteur on the right to freedom of opinion and expression on
          3 February 2003. According to new information received, on 12 February 2004, Peter Clarke
          was allegedly arrested and detained for assaulting a police officer at the Chelston police office in
          Lusaka. He was reportedly released on bail the following day. On 16 February 2003, he
          appeared in court on charges of assault and disorderly conduct. His next hearing is reportedly
          due to take place in March 2004. According to additional information received, on 12 February
          2004, the eldest daughter of Sara Longwe and Peter Clarke was reportedly kidnapped while
          driving her mother's car. She was reportedly stopped by armed assailants who pointed a gun at
          her, questioning her as to her mother's whereabouts. They then reportedly hijacked the car,
          placed Sara Longwe's daughter on the car floor behind the driver's seat and drove away, asking
          for money and threatening to kill her. The hijackers allegedly drove for two hours before
          dumping her on a small dirt road in Chamba Valley. During the incident, the hijackers reportedly
          claimed to be acting under someone else's orders and stopped to pick up an additional person
          who was rheard saying : “You've got the child.” It is believed that the assailants had intended to
          attack either Sara Longwe or Peter Clarke. Fear has been expressed that the alleged harassment
          of Peter Clarke and of his daughter may be connected to the human rights activities of Sara
          Longwe and, in particular ,her campaign work against gender-oppressive policies in Zambia.
          Communications received
          615. By letter dated 25 February 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 23
          February 2004. The Government stated that Mr. Clarke and his family have never been tortured.
          It reported that Mr. Clarke was to be deported after he insulted the president as well as the people
          of Zambia. The Government indicated that he had appealed to the High Court, and the
          deportation order had not been implemented at the time, pending the outcome of the court's
          decision. As for the kidnapping of Mr. Clarke's daughter, the Government stated that Mr. Clarke
          went to report the incident to the police. While at the police station, he became unruly and
          assaulted a police officer. The case was pending at the time, and Mr. Clarke had been released on
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 215
          bail. The Government informed that Mr. Clarke's daughter had been found and that there was an
          investigation ongoing at the time.
          616. By letter dated 25 March 2004, the Government provided additional information with
          regards to the urgent appeal sent on 23 February 2004 concerning Sara Longwe, Peter Clarke,
          and their daughter. The Government referred to its preliminary reply dated 25 February 2004. It
          informed that the Government could not comment upon the merits of Mr. Clarke's deportation
          and assault cases, as these were being considered before courts. The Government stated that Mr.
          Clarke was receiving a fair trial under national laws. As to the alleged kidnapping of Mr.
          Clarke's daughter, the Government reported that the matter received the full attention of the
          police, and that investigations into the matter were being carried out. According to the
          Government, the concerns that the alleged harassment of Mr. Clarke and his daughter may be
          connected to Sara Longwe's human rights activities were unfounded and unjustified. The
          Government stated that it was committed to the advancement of human rights of women, and
          that the Government worked closely together with civil society for the promotion and protection
          of the human rights of women.
          Observations
          617. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its response to her
          communication. She welcomes steps taken by the Government in investigating the kidnapping
          of the Clarke's daughter and the release of Peter Clarke. The Special Representative will monitor
          the outcome of the various investigations and invites the Government to keep her informed of the
          developments.
          Zimbabwe
          Communications sent
          618. On 13 January 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the situation of Douglas Togarasei Mwonyora, a lawyer and human rights
          defender, and a spokesperson for the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), a network of
          NGOs which was subject to an urgent action by the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and
          protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Chairperson-Rapporteur of the
          Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and Special Representative of the Secretary-General on
          human rights defenders on 27 October 2003. According to the information received, the police
          allegedly arrested Douglas Togarasei Mwonyora in Harare on 15 December, claiming that
          Mwonyora had insulted President Mugabe in a radio interview, reportedly with statements
          calling Mugabe's withdrawal from the Commonwealth “foolish bravery”. Douglas Togarasei
          Mwonyora has reportedly been charged with contravening section 16 (2) of the Public Order and
          Security Act (POSA). It is reported that Mwonyora was remanded to custody until 14 January
          2004 and was granted bail in the amount of Z$ 30,000. Fear has been expressed that Douglas
          Togarasei Mwonyora may have been targeted in connection with his human rights activities.
          619. On 30 April 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on
          the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning the situation of Roderick Fayayo, Secretary General of the University of
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 216
          Zimbabwe Union, Philani Zamchiya, president of the Zimbabwe National Students Union
          (ZITNASU), and members of ZINASU Tafadzwa Mugabe, Simbarashe Machiridza, Obert
          Mbuzini and Pasttense Tarondwa. According to the information received, members of the
          Association of University Teachers (AUT) had been involved in a pay dispute with the Ministry
          of Education since late 2002 which resulted in ongoing strike action by lecturers and other
          members of staff at the University of Zimbabwe. It was reported that, as a result of the strike
          action, students had not been receiving their subsistence grants or loans. On 15 March 2004, in
          order to protest against the continued deadlock in negotiations between AUT and the Ministry of
          Education and the effect this has had on their studies, students of the University of Zimbabwe
          reportedly held a peaceful demonstration authorized by the university's administration. During
          the demonstration, university security guards reportedly surrounded the student leaders to
          prevent them from accessing the office of the vice-chancellor. Allegedly, when the students
          refused to comply, the security guards used tear gas to disperse the demonstration and arrested
          Roderick Fayayo, Philani Zamchiya, and Tafadzwa Mugabe, Simbarashe Machiridza, Obert
          Mbuzini and Pasttense Tarondwa. They were reportedly brought to Avondale police station
          where they were charged with public violence under common law and could face a possible
          prison sentence. It is reported that their trial will be held on 9 June 2004. Concern has been
          expressed that members of ZINASU have been targeted for their participation in a demonstration
          to protest against the ongoing strike and to defend the rights of the students of the University of
          Zimbabwe.
          620. On 12 May 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur on the
          promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the Special
          Rapporteur on the question of torture, sent a letter of allegation concerning the situation of
          Tinashe Lukas Chimedza, former Secretary General of ZINASU, a youth and social rights
          activist and the Zimbabwe nominee to the International Youth Parliament. According to the
          information received, Tinashe Chimedza had been invited to speak at an Education Rights Forum
          at the University of Zimbabwe scheduled for 22 April 2004. It is reported that, before the
          commencement of the event, heavily armed police surrounded the hall and allegedly arrested
          Tinashe Chimedza upon his arrival. The police allegedly took him to a room where they punched
          and beat him with sticks before taking him to Marlborough police station. It is reported that, on
          the insistence of his lawyers Otto Saki from Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) and
          Jacob Mafume from Human Rights Forum, Tinashe Chimedza, who was allegedly unconscious
          and bleeding heavily from the mouth, was taken from the police station to hospital, where he
          remained under police surveillance. According to the information received, Tinashe Chimedza
          was detained based on an arrest warrant issued against him in 2001 for having committed acts of
          violence during a student demonstration when he was Secretary General of ZINASU. He was
          reportedly granted bail on 29 April 2004. Concern is expressed that Tinashe Chimedza is being
          targeted for his work as a student's rights advocate.
          621. On 1 September 2004, the Special Representative sent an urgent appeal concerning a
          number of provision contains in the new draft Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO) Bill
          2004. The Special Representative had sent an allegation letter on 6 November 2003 expressing
          concern about previous NGO law, the Private Voluntary Organizations (PVO) Act of 1967.
          According to the information received, the draft NGO Bill to repeal the PVO Act was publicized
          in Zimbabwe in Gazette No. 68 on 20 August 2004. The draft bill requires that all NGOs and
          Church-based organizations in Zimbabwe register with a newly established “Non-Governmental
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/1O1/Add. 1
          Page 217
          Organizations Council”. Section 9 of the bill reportedly criminalizes any organization operating
          without being registered and imposes criminal sanctions of up to five months imprisonment to
          the board member of such an NGO. It is reported that NGOs already registered under the
          existing PVO Act will be granted a one-year grace period before being required to re-register,
          whereas NGOs not required to register under the PVO Act will be deemed illegal until the NGO
          Council accepts their registration. Concerns have also been expressed with regards to the
          independence and wide-ranging powers of the registration body. In particular, it is reported that
          the NGO Council will be composed of five NGO representatives and nine government
          representatives, all appointed by the Minister of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare.
          Additionally, section 4 of the draft bill reportedly grants the Council the authority to “determine
          every application for registration ... , conduct investigations into the administration and activities
          of NGOs ... , take disciplinary actions ... , [ and] formulate a code of conduct for NGOs”. Concern
          has been expressed that this may grant government authorities overly broad control over the
          creation and authorized activities of NGOs. Concerns have also been expressed with regards to
          the restrictive provisions prohibiting access to funding for local NGOs working on human rights
          and governance issues, in particular those included in section 17, which reportedly provides that,
          “No local NGO shall receive foreign fhnding or donation to carry out activities involving or
          including acts of governance”. Further concern is expressed with regards to the prohibition for
          international NGOs to carry out human rights work. In particular, it is reported that section 9 of
          the bill states that “No foreign NGO may be registered if its sole or principal objects involve or
          include any issues of governance”, with governance defined as including the “protection and
          promotion of human rights”. While recognizing that it is within the ambit of States' authorities
          to regulate the operation of NGOs, I am gravely concerned that the framework laid out in the
          draft NGO Bill may result in the prohibition of legitimate activities for the defence of human
          rights in Zimbabwe and lead to the criminalization and closure of many existing human rights
          organizations. I would like to draw the attention of the Government to the Declaration on Human
          Rights Defenders, adopted by consensus by the General Assembly on 9 December 1998,
          especially its article 5(b), which provides that “everyone has the right, individually or in
          association with others, to form, join and participate in non governmental organizations,
          associations or groups”, and article 6(c), which provides that “everyone has the right,
          individually or in association with others to study, discuss, form and hold opinions on the
          observance, both in law and in practice, of all human rights and fundamental freedoms and,
          though these and other appropriate means, to draw public attention to those matters”.
          622. On 29 September 2004, the Special Representative, together with the Special Rapporteur
          on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, sent an urgent
          appeal concerning 52 women, members of Women of Zimbabwe Arise (Woza), who were
          reportedly arrested during a protest march against new legislation which would allegedly ban
          foreign human rights groups and bar local advocacy groups from campaigning on “issues of
          governance” and allow restrictions to human rights organizations work. The women reportedly
          walked 250 miles from Bulawayo and were stopped just 19 miles from Harare, their destination.
          It is reported that the marchers, and four men who volunteered to protect them as they slept by
          the roadside en route, were taken to Norton police station. The police reportedly accused them of
          staging an illegal protest and that, although they had claimed initially that the march was
          organized to raise fhnd for their church, they were found canying placards with political
          messages.
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/10 1/Add. 1
          Page 218
          Communications received
          623. By letter dated 21 May 2004, the Government replied to the urgent appeal sent on 30
          April 2004. The Government informed the Special Representative that the student demonstration
          on 15 March 2004, in which more then 800 students participated, had not been sanctioned by the
          authorities as required by the Public Order and Security Act and the University of Zimbabwe
          Ordnance 30. It stated that university guards had dispersed the students and arrested 10 of them,
          including Roderick Fayayo, Simbarashe Machiridza, Obert Mbuzini and Pasttense
          Tarondwa. According to the Government's reply, the police were called to the scene, but did not
          intervene. The Government reported that, in the course of the demonstration, someone threw a
          tear canister at the students and that the police were not involved in the incident. It rejected the
          allegation that the police had charged the students.
          624. By letter dated 5 August 2004, the Government replied to the letter of allegation sent on
          12 May 2004. The Government reported to the Special Representative that, on 22 April 2004, the
          police were made aware that students at the University of Zimbabwe were preparing to hold an
          unsanctioned meeting and that Tinashe Lukas Chimedza was going to speak at the meeting.
          Four police officers were deployed to monitor the situation. The Government stated that one of
          the police officers asked Mr. Chimedza to identify himself, and that he responded by punching
          the police officer, who then staggered backwards. According to the Government's reply, as a
          result members of the public started to assault Mr. Chimedza and that two police officers had a
          difficult time trying to restrain the assault against Mr. Chimedza. According to the Government's
          account, they finally managed to take Mr. Chimedza, who had been injured, to the hospital. The
          Government underlined that he received medical attention under police guard. The Government
          indicated that at that point, he had been put under arrest for assaulting a police officer and for
          malicious injury to property and vandalism dating back to 2001. According to the reply, on 23
          April 2004, Mr. Chimedza was charged with the assault. He pleaded guilty and paid a fine. The
          Government reported that the cases, based on incidents dating back to 2001, are pending before
          the courts.
          625. By letter dated 2 September 2004, the Government responded to the urgent appeal sent
          by the Special Representative on 1 September 2004. The Government reaffirmed its
          responsibility to legislate in the national interest. It stated that the Non-Governmental
          Organizations (NGO) Bill 2004 is intended to ensure that social protection is guaranteed and
          that it does not remain in the hands of dubious players who are not accountable. The Government
          argued that foreign-fhnded organizations and foreign organizations have proven to be a threat to
          national security when it comes to dealings with governance issues. The Government asserted
          that it will never tolerate that foreign donors fund instability and chaos in Zimbabwe, non-
          governmental organizations or individuals. The Government explained that the NGO Bill 2004
          aimed at hindering foreign donors employing local puppets or others to champion foreign values
          or governance issues, most of which espouse the policies of Governments which are anti-
          Zimbabwe, under cover of “human rights” and “democracy”. The Government commented that,
          as far as unregistered organizations are concerned, these are already illegal under the Private
          Voluntary Organizations Act.
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
        
          
          E/CN.4/2005/101/Add. 1
          Page 219
          626. By letter dated 19 February 2004, the Government provided replies to several of the
          communications sent by the Special Representative in 2003. In their content, the replies are
          identical to some replies the Government provided last year and which were included in the
          addendum to the 2004 Commission report (E/CN.4/2004/94/Add.3).
          Responses received to communications sent by the Special Representative in previous years
          627. By letter dated 11 March 2004, the Government provided a response to the urgent appeal
          sent on 17 October 2003 concerning Beatrice Mtetwa. The Government also sent a reply dated
          12 November 2003 to this communication. Regarding the alleged altercation with a police
          officer, the Government informed the Special Representative that a police officer had been
          charged with assault, based on allegations that the police officer assaulted Mrs. Mtetwa with
          open hands and that the case is pending before courts. The Government further refered to various
          communications sent by the Special Representative, including allegations of complicity and
          impunity on the part of the police. In this connection, the Government pointed to several other
          cases where alleged violations of human rights by police officers are fully investigated and
          prosecuted.
          Observations
          628. The Special Representative thanks the Government for its replies. She remains gravely
          concerned at the reported arrests of human rights defenders. She reaffirms her grave concern
          that, while recognizing that it is within the ambit of States' authorities to regulate the operation of
          NGOs, the framework laid out in the Non-Governmental Organizations Bill 2004 may result in
          the prohibition of legitimate activities for the defence of human rights in Zimbabwe and lead to
          the criminalization and closure of many existing human rights organizations.
        

Download Attachments:

Exit mobile version