On the first anniversary of their arrest, 65 organizations call for the immediate and unconditional release of the Iwacu journalists Agnès Ndirubusa, Christine Kamikazi, Egide Harerimana and Térence Mpozenzi who were convicted on charges against state security for simply doing their job. Their continued detention on baseless charges is a stark reminder that, despite a recent change in leadership, the Burundian government has little tolerance for independent journalism and free speech, the organizations said.

On 22 October 2019, the four journalists were arrested along with their driver Adolphe Masabarakiza as they went to report on clashes between the security forces and an armed group in Bubanza province. Although they had informed the provincial authorities of their plan to travel to the area, they were arrested on arrival and later accused of threatening internal state security. However, during the trial, the prosecution presented no evidence of the journalists having any contact with the armed group.

Although they were charged with complicity in threatening the internal security of the state, Ndirubusa, Kamikazi, Harerimana and Mpozenzi were ultimately convicted of attempting to commit the crime, a lesser criminal offense. Their lawyers say that they were not informed of the change to the charge prior to the verdict or allowed to defend themselves against it in court, violating fair trial standards. All four were sentenced to two and a half years in prison and fined one million Burundian francs (approximately 525 USD). Masabarakiza, who had been provisionally released in November 2019, was acquitted. Ndirubusa, Kamikazi, Harerimana and Mpozenzi appealed their conviction, but in its 4 June decision the Ntahangwa Court of Appeal upheld the verdict.

The message sent by the courts is an attempt to intimidate and threaten other journalists from doing their work and reporting on what is happening inside the country, the organizations said. The conviction and continued detention of the four journalists also runs counter to Burundi’s constitutional guarantees on freedom of expression, as well as regional and international obligations in accordance with Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It is particularly inconsistent with the African Commission’s 2019 Declaration of Principles on Freedom of Expression and Access to Information, which specifically provides that states shall take measures to prevent “arbitrary arrest and detention” of journalists.     

Iwacu is one of the few remaining independent media houses operational in Burundi. Hundreds of journalists and human rights defenders have fled the country since the start of the political crisis in 2015 and those still working in the country often face threats and harassment. Releasing Ndirubusa, Kamikazi, Harerimana and Mpozenzi would be an important first step towards reopening civic space and recognizing the contribution of reliable media reporting in ensuring access to information for all Burundians.

How can abolition in Ghana be encouraged?

 

Testimony of a person sentenced to death

Matthew Kwame Sabbah, 58, who has been sentenced to death at age 31 and served a total of 27 years at the Nsawam Medium Prison recounts his experience after his release through a presidential pardon in March 2020.

“Prison is not a place somebody should stay at all, it’s indeed a very bitter place to live especially when you’re sentenced on death row. There is a lot of torture we go through. We sleep like the way they pack sardines in tins. The quality of the food and health care we receive in prison is to be deplored. To get prison officers to take you to the hospital whenever you are sick is a problem. As a result, some people have even lost their lives, the food we eat, even if you give it to the dog, it will not eat it.”

That is why, ACAT Ghana calls on the government, police and prison services, and the court and justice system to uphold human rights law and conventions and abolish the death penalty.

 

PRESS RELEASE

Access to counsel - A matter of life or death

In commemoration of the 18th World Day Against the Death Penalty and the 30th anniversaries of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and the IBA Standards for the Independence of the Legal Profession, the members of the World Coalition Against the Death Penalty and the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute take the opportunity to:

Stress the importance of the right to effective legal representation in capital punishment cases, where the consequences that can arise from the lack thereof can be nothing less than the difference between life and death; Recall that the imposition of the death penalty following a trial in violation of due process and fair trial standards would render the sentence arbitrary and in violation of the right to life; Emphasize that the independence of the legal profession and access to justice are prerequisites to democracy and the rule of law; Recognize the challenges that limit the work of lawyers, such as a lack of adequate time and facilities to prepare a defense; a lack of necessary training for complex proceedings; being confronted with pressure and interference in their work; and deficient legal aid systems; Urge all States to protect lawyers from any form of attack, harassment, or pressure, and to fully recognize, uphold and protect their role in upholding human rights, free and democratic societies, and the rule of law; Advocate for universal abolition and call on States that have not yet abolished the death penalty to guarantee the right to effective legal representation at all stages of capital cases without distinction of any kind.

Signatories :

The Advocates for Human Rights Children Education Society Coalition Tunisienne Contre la Peine de Mort Colegio de Abogados y Abogadas de Puerto Rico Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide Center for Prisoner’s Rights ECPM (Together Against the Death Penalty) FIACAT (International Federation of ACATs) Legal Awareness Watch Paris Bar Reprieve UIA-IROL ( the Institute for the Rule of Law of the International Association of Lawyers)

To the attention of the UN Human Rights Treaty Bodies and the Human Rights Treaties Branch of the OHCHR.

We, the undersigned civil society organisations, write to you concerning the functioning of the UN Treaty Bodies during the COVID-19 pandemic. This pandemic has had a disproportionate impact on the work of the Treaty Bodies, with the postponement, cancellation and scaling-down of nearly all sessions scheduled for 2020. Since July 2020, most of the Treaty Bodies have met virtually and limited their activities, rescheduling all the reviews of states parties planned. The effects of the pandemic have been exacerbated by the financial crisis that the OHCHR and the UN are undergoing. This is an unprecedented situation which requires exceptional efforts from all stakeholders to overcome it. Appreciating the significant efforts of Treaty Body members to continue many activities, we remain concerned that the challenges and constraints analyzed very well by the Treaty Bodies’ Working Group on COVID-19 still apply.

The 28th August letter of the High Commissioner to Member States recommended that all sessions until the end of the year will take place online, while some will be cancelled. Although we understand that the current situation has created enormous challenges, we are seriously concerned by the increasing backlog and protection gap due to the fact that the Treaty Bodies are not reviewing States. We are also concerned that there is lack of clarity as to what work they will be able to carry out in the coming months.

We urge the Treaty Bodies and their Secretariats to schedule State reviews no later than 2021, and OHCHR to prioritise resources and tools for this. We recommend anticipating risks and possible scenarios with clear mitigation and contingency plans that are public and proactively communicated to civil society. Should the pandemic further prevent the scheduling of physical sessions of the Treaty Bodies in 2021, we consider that a pragmatic approach should be taken which allows online State reviews on a temporary and exceptional basis.

Learning from the experiences of the past months, the Treaty Bodies should define the conditions for online State reviews and be supported by the OHCHR and the other UN departments accordingly to allow such reviews to take place online or in a hybrid mode. Moreover the webcast is essential in the specific context of online public sessions and must be reliable.

Predictability, transparency, inclusivity, and accessibility are essential conditions to enable the full participation of civil society, and all stakeholders, in the work of the Treaty Bodies, in particular if online reviews are organised. Civil society organisations require advance notice of the up-coming work of the Treaty Bodies, to enable them to undertake human rights monitoring, prepare alternative reports, plan briefings and raise the funds to undertake this work. In addition, sufficient time allocation and technical requirements, including accessibility for persons with disabilities relying on screen readers and sign language, and availability of good quality audio for interpreters, should be ensured for online private briefings with members of civil society organisations.

Given the plethora of human rights restrictions and violations arising from the responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial for rights-holders that the Treaty Bodies, who are the only independent and expert monitors of the legally binding human rights treaties, are able to fulfill their mandates and independently assess states’ compliance. In fact, the relevance of the Treaty Bodies is at stake, if they are not able to continue to perform their fundamental mandate in the midst of a human rights crisis.

Sincerely yours,