Subscribe to News & Updates

Belarusian youth activists must be freed

Thu, 26 Nov 2009 11:38:24 +0000

In April and May 2008, seven youth activists were sentenced to up to two years of ‘restricted freedom’ in Belarus after they participated in a peaceful demonstration in the capital, Minsk.

Amnesty International believes that Artsyom Dubski, Tatyana Tishkevich, Alyaksei Bondar, Mikhail Kryvau, Maxim Dashuk and Ales Charnyshou have been targeted for the peaceful exercise of their rights to freedom of assembly and expression.

The seventh activist, Ales Straltsou, served just over 18 months of his two-year sentence of 'restricted freedom' before he was amnestied in November 2009.

Thousands of people, including civil society activists and businessmen, took to the streets in Minsk on 10 January 2008 to participate in a demonstration against the introduction of a presidential decree concerning restrictive tax and employment regulations for small businesses.

The demonstration was organized by entrepreneurs who had applied to the authorities for permission to hold the demonstration. They did not receive a reply to their request and decided to go ahead with the protest.

Fourteen individuals were subsequently convicted for “taking part in or organizing actions that gravely disturb public order” and sentenced to up to two years of ‘restricted freedom’.

While seven of them have since been pardoned under an amnesty and one has been released, the sentences of Artsyom Dubski, Tatyana Tishkevich, Alyaksei Bondar, Mikhail Kryvau, Maxim Dashuk and Ales Charnyshou remain in force.

The terms of ‘restricted freedom’ are so severe that they are considered by Amnesty International to amount to house arrest.

The terms of ‘restricted freedom’ include: allowing police officers to enter their place of residence at any time to check that they are abiding by the terms of their sentence; the seven individuals need permission to leave their town or district of residence; they are required to be at home when not at work, at least from 7pm to 6am unless work hours do not allow this; they are regularly required to report to their local police station.

Amnesty International is also concerned that, although the sentence of ‘restricted freedom’ is imposed by a judge, the details of the restrictions can be set by the police officer in charge of the case.

This results in a situation where the restrictions can be changed arbitrarily by police officers, making it very difficult for the convicted person to comply, and offering them no right of appeal against such decisions.

In June 2009, Maxim Dashuk's sentence was increased by 15 months of further ‘restricted freedom’ after a police officer was unable to find him at home on several occasions. Maxim Dashuk says that he was at work with his mother at the business she owns. He had been working longer hours after the death of his father in April.

In July 2009, Artsyom Dubski was sentenced to one year in prison after the police officer in charge of his case told the prosecutor he had violated the terms of his sentence. He is currently serving his sentence in Prison No.19 in Mogilov, eastern Belarus.

Tatyana Tishkevich left Belarus on 21 January 2008 after she was expelled from university because of her political activities. She was sentenced in her absence.

Alyaksei Bondar and Mikhal Kryvau also left the country after they were sentenced. All three face up to three years’ imprisonment if they return to Belarus as leaving the country means they have automatically violated the terms of their sentence.

Amnesty International believes that the convictions against all six activists violate their rights to freedom of assembly and expression.

It is calling on the Belarusian authorities to immediately and unconditionally release Artsyom Dubski, to lift the restrictions on Tatyana Tishkevich, Alyaksei Bondar, Mikhail Kryvau, Maxim Dashuk and Ales Charnyshou and to allow the three who have fled to return to Belarus without risk of further charges being brought against them.

READ MORE

Belarus activists tell of life in exile (News, 27 November 2009)

Read Mikhail Kryvau's blog

Read Tatyana Tishkevich's blog

Read Ales Charnyshou's blog

Read Alyaksei Bondar's blog

Image caption:
Maxim Dashuk © Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (left)
Artsyom Dubski ©Nasha Niva/nn.by (right)

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and Myanmar's political prisoners

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:15:23 +0000

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is on trial for allegedly violating the terms and conditions of her house arrest. The leader of the Myanmar opposition party, the National League for Democracy, was arrested shortly before her house detention order was to expire on 27 May 2009. A verdict in her trial is imminent. If convicted, she faces up to five years in prison.

She has been detained for over 13 of the past 20 years, mostly under house arrest. Her first period in detention began in July 1989 as the Myanmar government intensified its crackdown on nationwide pro-democracy protests that began a year earlier.

Twenty years on, she's still being denied her freedom. She is a prisoner of conscience, and she should be freed at once, without condition and not be returned to house arrest.

Amnesty International announced on 27 July that Daw Aung San Suu Kyi has been awarded its most prestigious honour – the “Ambassador of Conscience” Award for 2009.

Video placeholder

Daw Aung San Suu Kyi is the most prominent of over 2,100 political prisoners in Myanmar. Many are held in poor conditions, and are at risk of torture and other ill-treatment. Conditions in Myanmar’s prisons are harming the health of many political prisoners. Access to medical treatment is severely limited. Many prisoners are denied adequate food and are therefore malnourished.

Judicial proceedings show no regard for due process, and many trials have been held in special closed courts. Since October 2008, when the government began sentencing en masse those who had peacefully taken part in major anti-government protests in August and September 2007, more than 350 political activists have been jailed.

Some of these political activists have been given lengthy jail terms –- one being sentenced to 104 years in November 2008, while 23 others were sentenced to 65 years.

Ten individual cases highlighted below represent the unending political repression in Myanmar in the last two decades.

All ten individuals are prisoners of conscience, meaning that they have been imprisoned solely on account of their political, religious or other conscientiously held beliefs, ethnic origin, sex, colour, language, national or social origin, economic status, birth, sexual orientation or other status –- who have not used violence, or advocated violence or hatred.

U Saw Naing Naing and U Soe Han

Elderly prisoners of conscience, U Saw Naing Naing and U Soe Han, were sentenced to 21 years’ imprisonment each in 2000 for publishing a statement that urged the release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. They are being held in Insein Prison in Yangon, Myanmar’s largest city. On 12 June 2009, it was learned that U Saw Naing Naing and U Soe Han, together with three other political prisoners, had been moved to specials punishment cells, known as “dog cells.” A “dog cell” is a space to keep military/prison dogs.

1988 Generation Students Group – Htay Kywe, Mie Mie and Zaw Htet Ko Ko

Activists Htay Kywe, Mie Mie and Zaw Htet Ko Ko were arrested in the hunt for the people behind the major anti-government protests that began in August 2007. Htay Kywe and Mie Mie are now serving 65 years in prison while Zaw Htet Ko Ko has been jailed for 11 years. All three are members of a pro-democracy group, the 88 Generation Students.

Khaing Kaung San

Human rights activist Khaing Kaung San fled political persecution in Myanmar for Thailand in the 1990s, where he was granted asylum, but he was forcibly returned in 2000 and sentenced to ten years in prison. Khaing Kaung San, an ethnic Arakanese, was a well-known political dissident and human rights activist who had worked closely with groups providing support to other Arakanese people living in exile in Thailand.

U Win Htein

U Win Htein, a senior assistant to Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, is serving a 14-year prison sentence. He was imprisoned in 1996 for organizing the collection of information about agricultural productivity that the government deemed to be sensitive, and for helping three foreign journalists report on prison conditions for political prisoners in Myanmar. He is in poor health.

Myo Min Zaw and Ko Aye Aung

Student activists Myo Min Zaw and Ko Aye Aung were arrested on 14 September 1998 for distributing leaflets and organizing student demonstrations in Yangon. Both men were leading members of the banned All Burma Federation of Student Unions (ABFSU). Myo Min Zaw and Ko Aye Aung are serving sentences totalling 52 years and 45 years respectively. They were reported to have been tortured during interrogation.

Zarganar

Popular comedian Zarganar is serving a 35-year prison sentence for leading a movement that collected money and supplies for the survivors of Cyclone Nargis, which hit Myanmar on 2-3 May 2008.

He was arrested on 4 June 2008, after he criticised the government’s handling of the cyclone relief situation in interviews with foreign journalists. Zarganar, who had joined the 1988 uprising against military rule, had been previously arrested for his pro-democracy efforts.

Italy: Discriminatory draft law affecting migrants and Roma community

Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:54:46 +0000

Amnesty International is concerned about proposals included in a draft law -the so-called “security package”- approved on 14 May 2009 by the Chamber of Deputies, and now under consideration by the Senate. The organization considers that the law would violate human rights of migrants and asylum-seekers and might lead to discrimination against Roma and Sinti.

Amnesty International is particularly concerned about three provisions:

Criminalizing irregular migration: The draft law criminalizes irregular entry and stay in Italy. Making irregular migration a crime, in combination with existing criminal law, will have severe consequences for the human rights of migrants. Existing criminal provisions oblige all civil servants (including in health, education, social services) to report to the police all criminal acts, including, if it becomes a crime, being an irregular migrant. If they fail to do so, civil servants would face criminal prosecution.

Amnesty International is concerned that if the draft law passes, this will deter irregular migrants from accessing to school, medical (including emergency) care, protection by security forces against crime , for fear of being reported to the police. Parents who are irregular migrants may be prevented to report the birth fo their child; this would affect the newborn’s right to recognition before the law.

Denying rights to vulnerable people based on residence and registration status: According to the draft law, persons without a fixed abode would have to register for residency status at the Ministry of Interior and no longer in the municipality where they live.

As residency in the territory of a municipality is a precondition to obtain access to health care, social assistance, education and electoral registration, those who live in mobile homes or who are homeless (many of whom are migrants, Roma and Sinti) risk being denied the enjoyment of those rights and, if authorized to vote in Italy may be prevented from voting.

Establishing and empowering associations of citizens to patrol municipalities: The draft law, if adopted, will allow local authorities to ask for assistance by associations of citizens to cooperate with police forces in patrolling the streets.

Amnesty International is concerned about the lack of clarity of the provisions of the draft law, which may result in abuses, including discrimination and impunity. For example, it is unclear what powers these patrols would have; what training (If any) is required to participate in them; under whose authority they will operate and what measures will be adopted to ensure accountability for violations of human rights law.

The draft law encountered criticism for its consequences on human rights by NGOs, IGOs, churches and State institutions. Italy’s Superior Council of Judges - the self-governing body of the judiciary - in an advisory opinion, criticised the law in relation to infringement of the rights of migrants. Nevertheless, it appears that the government is determined to obtain approval of this law.

In light of the above, Amnesty international calls on the government to ensure that any legislation adopted within the “security package” is in full compliance with Italy’s obligation under international law. If it is not it should be amended or withdrawn