Friday, December 25, 2009

Rohingya in Bangladesh and their Issues by Nurul Islam

Rohingya in Bangladesh and their Issues
by Nurul Islam
(Wednesday, September 30, 2009)

"The bilateral relationship between Bangladesh and Burma is obsessed with its economic prospects, the government successfully down played the problem as a repatriation matter only that overshadowed the Rohingya issue."

Who are the Rohingya?

The Rohingya are genetically related to Bengalis, Indians, Arabs and Moors, reflected in their darker skin and south Asian appearance of recognized national groups in Burma.

The Rohingya are one of the two major indigenous people of Rakhine state (Historically known as Arakan; other ethnic community is Rakhine Buddhists), the western province of Burma. The North Rakhine state is situated in the south and south East Asian junction.

Introduction

The Rohingya people of Burma an ethnic group existing in a state of national Limbo, are one of the most severely affected communities living under the military regime in a country where human rights abuse and suffering is the norm.

The systematic human rights abuses towards the Rohingya are committed with intent to destroy this particular minority community. Since 1948 about 1.5 million Rohingya people have either been expelled or have had to flee the country to escape persecution. Most of them are found in Bangladesh, Pakistan, KSA, UAE and Malaysia. They are vulnerable without any status in those countries. Neither civil society Organizations nor UN bodies and other international Organizations properly addressed this issue since last two decades.

The treatmenet of Rohingya in Burma

The state peace and development council (SPDC, Burma`s government) rejects the existence of a separate ethnic group called “Rohingya”. They are not considered to be a national ethnic group as provided by sec.3 of the 1982 Law, and members of the Rohingya population are therefore ineligible for full citizenship. (A1, 2004)

The vast majority of Rohingyas are effectively denied Burmese citizenship; subjected to severe restriction on freedom of movement; forced Labour; forced eviction; and extortion and arbitrary taxation.

The military regime has declared the Rohingyas as non-nationals in utter disregard of their history, glorious past and establishment in the country.

Planned increase in Buddhist settlement has caused serious demographic changes in northern Rakhine(Arakan).It has systematically got rid of the Rohingya population . In 1983 the military regime had declared certain townships in Rakhine-such as Gwa,Paung Nagunt and Taung-gut as “Muslim free zone”.

Rohingyas are banned from traveling from one place to another, even within same locality, without pass.

The authorities imposed very high rate of taxation on the food grains and every item they produce.

The Rohingyas have to provide slave Labor to build military establishments, bridges, embankments and pagodas.

Since the promulgation of of Burma citizenship Law in 1982, Rohingya students have been denied the right to education.

The Rohingyas are banned from getting married and founding a family. No marriage permission has been granted since March 2005.

Burma is not state party to most international human rights treaties. Amnesty international has consistently urged the SPDC to accede to these treaties. However, the fact that the SPDC has not done so does not release it fromits obligation to respect fundamental human rights which, being provided for under customary international Law, are binding on all states.

The Rohingya in Bangladesh

The Rohingya have been leaving their home country for 30 some years now. They have gone to many different countries, but the biggest choice for them is Bangladesh. There, the Rohingya experience even more difficulty, as the Rohingya are severely poor and have little rights given to them as refugees.

The Bangladeshi government has never formally given them refugee status, and have forced many of them out of the country.

Around 230,000 of the refugees have been repatriated to Burma, but approximately 20,000 remain in the UNHCR administered camps. At least 100,000 Rohingy are believed to be in Bangladesh out side the camps and with no official status as refugees (MSF-Holland).

History of Muslim rule in Arakan and“ Ruhai”in Cox`s Bazar

A lot of people in Cox`s Bazar particularly in Moheshkhali are claiming themselves as “Ruhai” (people of Rohang) and they are very much proud of this name. They feel great with the name of “Ruhai” because they are aware that their fore-fathers were the descendents of Rohingya from Rohang ( Arakan ). There is an authentic history behind their claim. The actual fact is that Muslim rule began in Arakan since 1430. Earlier in 1406 the king of Arakan Narameikhla fled to Muslim Bengal with a large number of his followers when Arakan was invaded by Burman king. He stayed in Bengal for 24 years under the patronage of Bengal ruler Sultan Giasuddin Azam Shah.

There he and his followers embraced “Islam” and took Muslim names. In 1430 Bengal ruler Sultan Jalaluddin Mohammad Shah sent a large Muslim forces to Arakan, drove away the invading Burmans and reinstated Narameikhla , now with the name of Solaiman Shah( Arakanese Chronically corrupted it as Meng Saw Mun)on the throne of Arakan and he and his descendents ruled Arakan for over 200 years(1430-1638). Mrauku was founded as Arakan Capital by him in 1433. Now a days, some ultra-Nationalists,racists so called Rakhine historians are being tried to De-Legitimize Rohingya history by presenting fabricated facts that Meng Saw Mun and his decedents took Muslim names just to please Bengal rulers and denying Muslim in Arakan with their racial name of “Rohingya”. In fact, their presentation is intentional and biased. Their intention is to erase the name, “Rohingya” and its entity despite “Rohingya” is historically and internationally introduced. Rather the previous Burma Democratic Government recognized Rohingya. Some authentic evidences in this regards are mentioned below;

Prime minister U Nu declared “Rohingya” as an indigenous ethnic group of Burma like the Shan, Kachin, Karen,Chin,Mon and Rakhine in a radio speech broadcasted at 8..00 p.m on 24th September,1954.

Encyclopedia Burmaica, Vol 4, No, 9 published by the ministry of Information and Publication clearly mentioned that the “Rohingya” are citizens of Burma and an indigenous ethnic group.

For nearly one century (1582-1666) the district of Chittagong was under Arakanese rule. Arakan was an independent state until the Burman invaders occupied Arakan in 1784. The Muslim Rohingya and Buddhist Maghs (Rakhine) were living there until 1784 by exercising peaceful co-existence and communal harmony. Ever since the occupation of Arakan by Burman invaders in 1784CE the Rohingya Arakanese have been made targets of extermination and genocide with the ulterior motive of turning Arakan into a Buddhits dominated province of Burma caused thousands of Rohingya Muslims fled Arakan for the fear of persecution of the anarchic Burman ruler. They arrived in east Bengal and chose Cox`s Bazar Low land area particularly Mohesh Khali and its adjacent areas to rehabilitate.

Exactly, the Rohingya Muslims were passing subjugated life until British occupied Arakan in 1824 under the Burman Invading rulers.They were deprived from all basic human rights and the Burman rulers introduced “divide and rule” policy in Arakan. Soon after Independence the BTF massacred hundreds of Arakan Muslims caused about 50,000 Muslims fled to East Pakistan.So, after the Independence of Burma their generations(Ruhai) were reluctant to return to Arakan due to having awareness about the sufferings of their fore fathers while they were in Arakan and rather they already assimilated locally in east Bengal.But they feel about their fore-father’s ancestral Land, “Rohang”( The ancient name of Arakan ). To this pretext, the Language, Culture etc., between Chittagonians and Rohingyas have found mostly consistence. So far, no exact figure of Rohingyas living in Bangladesh has been traced. But the researchers estimated more than One Lac Rohingyas (excluding Rohingya refugees living in camps) are living in Cox`s Bazar and its adjacent areas because most of the Rohingyas were already assimilated locally. Some quarter claimed that more than three Lac Rohingyas are living scattered in Bangladesh.

History of Rohingya Refugee Influx to Bangladesh

* 1942 - 100,000 Rohingya Muslims were massacred during world war 11. A large number of their settlements were uprooted. (Siddique-2007)
* 1948 - Arakan became a province of independent Burma.Since then Rohingyas have been driving out of Burma and now living in exile as refugees. (Siddique-2007)
* 1974 - Muslims in Northern Rakhine (Arakan)state are given foreign instead of National registration cards.
* 1978 - Dragon King operation in Burma causes second refugee influx (200,000 persons)
* 1982 - The Burma citizenship Law of 1982, which violate several fundamental principles of customary international Law standards, has reduced them to a position of defacto statelessness.
* 1992 - Third refugee influx with 250,000 persons hasted in 21 camps in Bangladesh.
* 1993 - By November 50,000 refugees had been forcibly returned. (Wipperman T.E HaqueM-2007)
* 1994 - UNHCR Stops individual voluntary repatriation in August 1994, as thousands return to Burma each week. After this date reports of forced repatriation increase.
* 2007 - Some refugees were resettled in Canada as part of a pilot resettlement. (Wipperman T.E Haque M-2007)

The sufferings of Rohingya people in Bangladesh

The population density of Rohingya community is so high, and this has an impact on the general status of healthcare.

Mobility is restricted, with employment outside the camp forbidden.

Refugees International noted that most Rohingyas become day laborers ,under cutting the daily wage from 50 taka to around 80 taka.

The Rohingya children brought up in a different culture and poverty over last two decades, which created a generation with lack of cultural identity along with mentality and socially deprived generation.

It is alarming that as this issue was not properly addressed by the state and civil society, the Rohingya have also become a source of anti-social activities.

Concerning Issues

Although the Rohingya issue belongs to Burma, but it affects Bangladesh the most because of its closed border with Burma.

Bangladesh government has failed to raise the issue in international level.

The bilateral relationship between Bangladesh and Burma is obsessed with its economic prospects, the government successfully down played the problem as a repatriation matter only that overshadowed the Rohingya issue.

Suggestions

* Civil society and media should come forward proactively for raising awareness among the mass people and government to address the Rohingya issue properly and adequately.
* As a member of the UN Human Rights Council, especially Bangladesh government should prove its commitment to the refugee protection by taking immediate action to end their abuse and exploitation.
* To take measures for peaceful co-existence with Rakhine people and all other communities in Arakan as well as in Burma.
* To take measures internationally for repatriation from their refugee places and their rehabilitation in their original places.
* As part of civil society , Human rights Organizations should reach international level consensus through national level dialog with aiming to corporate Rohingya issue in to Burma`s current democratic movement.
* Resettlement programs can be initiated from western countries (Canada, which received over thousand refugees a year).
* As regional body ASEAN can push the Burmese present regime to resolve this issue.
* Other international bodies such as SAARC, OIC, and BISMTEC may play positive role regarding Rohingya issue in their own prospective.
* Government of Bangladesh should allow international Organizations to implement better facilities for both camp and non-cam refugees and support the establishment of better educational and skills training programs for Rohingya community.

References:

[1]. Research paper-2007: Nitigobashana Kendro, Dhaka

[2]. Souvenir: A.H.S.

[3]. “History of Arakan “ by Dr. A. Karim

[4]. Various magazines and historical documents of world renowned historians.


Source:http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/66790

by courtesy & © 2009 Nurul Islam

Thursday, December 3, 2009

False Accusations Harm Cause of Human Rights: The Case of Mary Mandol



http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/3132
Persecuted Christians
False Accusations Harm Cause of Human Rights: The Case of Mary Mandol
By Dr. Richard Benkin Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Editor’s Note: On April 29, Canada Free Press (CFP) picked up a story sent by Christian Newswire about a persecuted mother and her infant son in Bangladesh. From the outset, people trying to help could not find Mary Mondol, the woman who was the subject of the story. The Chicago-based Dr. Richard Benkin, who successfully fought for the release of Bangladeshi journalist, Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury, imprisoned after writing articles in the Weekly Blitz warning the outside world about the rise of Islamic radicals, urging Bangladesh to recognize Israel, and advocating for religious equality, contacted Choudhury to track down Mary Mondol, a Christian woman living in Dhaka. Following are the results of their investigation. Since 2006, Dr. Benkin has been investigating and exposing the emerging South Asian threat stemming from the cooperation of radical Communists and radical Islamists. He has termed this the “Red-Green Alliance” and continues to speak about the atrocities and strategic advantages it already has carried out, as well as the very real threat it poses to us all.

On April 29, I read an article in Canada Free Press about anti-Christian activity in Bangladesh. The story concerned Mary Mondol, a Christian woman who, according to Christian Freedom International (CFI), was approached by a Muslim man in 2001 and given the following choice: either marry him and convert to Islam or be killed. Having no choice, she acquiesced and spent the next several years in virtual captivity, faced regular beatings even while pregnant, and was finally kicked out with her infant son in January. She sought refuge with Christian “pastor,” William Gomes, and the two then began building a case against her husband; but the authorities refused to act. Now, Gomes reportedly said, “They are threatening me to stop working for her. Now I cannot give her shelter any longer…I may be killed any time, as they are very strong and are from the majority community. Being a Christian, I am a minority, and the government doesn’t give support for us. But we are praying to save her from the Muslim family.”

It was a terribly moving story and one that is not unknown by any means in the Muslim world. Unfortunately, however, it is also false, and as such has set back the fight for human rights in South Asia, of which I am part. Having met with religious minorities who had faced persecution from Bangladeshi Islamists, I was determined to act. Moreover, the reported inaction by Bangladeshi authorities in the Mondol case also rang true and mirrored my own experiences with Bangladeshi officials in the Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury case and others. So, in fact, I called my brother, friend, and confidant, Shoaib, the famous “Muslim Zionist.” He has experienced Islamist persecution and has a history of supporting persecuted Bangladeshis no matter what their faith. He is also an accomplished journalist with an extensive network of sources. He also secured the help of Kazi Azizul Huq, a fundamentalist Muslim—that’s right, a Muslim fundamentalist—and the International Affairs Secretary of Khalafat Andolin Bangladesh (KAB). I met Huq when I was in Dhaka in 2007. We spoke for hours and though we agreed on very few issues, as I said, “Well, we’re not lobbing bombs at each other” (not too much of a stretch, especially with the “mujahadeen” in the room). We have maintained an ongoing dialogue that continues to find commonality among believers of different faiths. Huq and KAB have demonstrated their sincerity by taking public positions that are unpopular in this nation of almost 150 million; most notably, that the government should drop all charges against Shoaib and also end its ban on travel to Israel.

For several days, however, Shoaib and Huq continued to tell me that they could find no evidence of the case or even Mondol’s existence. Concerned, I contacted James Jacobson, head of CFI, on May 4 who said they had “solid documentation on [Mondol’s] situation.” He asked his “coworker in Dhaka…to contact [me] about Mary,” but thought he might not “because of security issues.” He never did, and as Shoaib and Huq continued to come up empty, things turned nasty. On May 7, Huq sent an email to a number of people calling the entire story “dubious,” based on the absence of evidence. One of the recipients, Rosaline Costa had previously said she intended to raise the issue at a May 9 Congressional Briefing on Bangladesh and responded to Huq by questioning the veracity of his contacts. That same day, Shoaib’s Weekly Blitz received a phone call from William Gomes who asked to meet Shoaib at the newspaper office, which he did on May 8. He began by clarifying that he was no pastor and that the entire story was false. At that point, Shoaib provided a car to bring Mary Mondol herself to the newspaper.

She denied most of the allegations in the story, stating unequivocally that her marriage and conversion were voluntary. Her husband became abusive only recently, and she and William Gomes filed a complaint under Bangladesh’s Women and Children Repression Act. According to Mondol and Gomes, authorities promptly arrested the husband who is still in jail awaiting trial. She said that the story took on its current form only after she went to Costa for help. She was destitute, she said, but Costa did not help her despite being part of NGOs that are supposed to do such things.

Shoaib Choudhury stands by these allegations and has offered to provide a tape recording of his interview with Mondol and Gomes if needed. Moreover, once these matters were uncovered, things began to change. Costa admitted that she knew Gomes was not a pastor as alleged, but that one of her informants added that because he thought it would “give the story more credibility”. It is also significant that no one brought up the Mondol case at the May 9 Congressional briefing, of which I was part—and the alleged actions in the story were germane to the briefing’s purpose. Gomes also contacted me and confirmed the Weekly Blitz account, repeating an allegation he made on tape that Bangladeshi NGOs “are becoming fabulously rich by cashing in on the agonies of religious minorities in Bangladesh” by issuing false reports like the Mondol case. On the other hand, no one ever provided evidence of the initial story’s allegations. This, too, is not atypical. Most NGOs go to the same set of informants (mostly on the left) who tend to have the same political agenda and often give it higher priority than religious freedom.

The false allegations already have hurt the fight against minority persecution in Bangladesh whether they are the product of noble or venal intentions. That persecution does exist and is a very serious problem. Fighting it often means confronting out and out denials, even by people holding credible positions. Our most powerful ally in those confrontations is truth. False accusations enable both friends and foes alike to question the credibility of all allegations we bring. Bangladeshi officials on condition of anonymity already have made it clear to me and others that they “know these things do exist” but must “show up liars” and others who “want to hurt Bangladesh. They expect the Mondol case to come up again and again. It almost seems in response to the revelations in the Mondol case that a flood of minority persecution stories has been flooding cyberspace. What is truly unfortunate is that many—or even most—of them are true, but people are giving them less credibility than they did previously.

The fight against Islamist injustice is difficult enough. Far too often, we come up against western officials who would rather give Islamists and their fellow travelers the “benefit of the doubt” and accept their “assurances” that “everything possible is being done” to secure minority rights, as I was told recently by another government official.

*
Dr. Richard L. Benkin secured the release of Bangladeshi journalist Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury in 2005. The two continue working together to fight Islamist radicals and their allies in South Asia and elsewhere. For more information on how to help, please contact Dr. Benkin at drrbenkin@comcast.net. Their web site is InterfaithStrength.com. Dr. Benkin can be reached at: drrbenkin@comcast.net

Courtesy: Canada Free Press

Monday, September 28, 2009

Irreligious secular rulers are responsible for whatever deprivation, discrimination and oppression religious minorities have suffered in Bangladesh

The Weekly Blitz 11 July 2007
BD Journalist Criticizes Secular Rulers
Blitz Desk

Sanjeeb Chowdhury, Chairman, Bangladesh Human Rights Forum issued the following statement recently:

Majority population of Bangladesh irrespective of religious identity are poor, oppressed and discriminated by mainstream rulers and elite irrespective of their political party affiliation.

Due to lack of efficiency, sincerity, patriotism and vision of the rulers, condition of large majority of population in Bangladesh have not improved despite some increase in average per capita income. Naturally its evil effects and deprivation have been a little bit intensive on the religious minorities. It would be a distortion of the real picture if someone projects that members of the religious majority community of Bangladesh are generally well-off and oppressor while members of the religious minority communities are poorer and oppressed.

Since the independence of Bangladesh in 1971 the leaders and administrators including those who politically lead the country and the parliament and the civil and military bureaucracy have been generally secular elite, educated in western type colleges and universities. In fact since the partition of the Indian Sub-continent in 1947 till today national secularists have been ruling this territory. These secularists, who are generally irreligious, did not miss any opportunity to misuse religion for political or other gains. Irreligious secular rulers are responsible for whatever deprivation, discrimination and oppression religious minorities have suffered in Bangladesh from the beginning till today. Madrasha educated Religious Islamic clergies have never ruled or administered Bangladesh. They have not done any wrong to we the religious minorities in Bangladesh.

Those who try to blame Islam or its followers for the deprivation of the non-Muslim religious minorities in Bangladesh, often do it dishonestly to save the real criminals who are none but secular rulers. It is true that there are several Islamist parties in Bangladesh. But none of those parties is powerful enough to acquire and exercise state power in Bangladesh. The mainstream secular leadership, administration and media as a part of their strategy sometime project these Islamist parties as marginalized and insignificant, sometime projects as dangerously powerful. I do not know any incident where Islamic Clergies or their political parties organized any communal riot or oppression against the minority Hindus of Bangladesh. Rather Bangladesh Khelafat Andolon a prominent political party of the Islamic Clergies of Bangladesh have been working with the agenda to remove inter-community mistrust and bridge Believer Muslims with Believers of other communities for harmonious coordination and justice.

Chowdhury is also a member of the Standing Committee of Bangladesh Hindu League, Senior Vice President of Bangladesh Inter-religious Council for Peace and Justice (BICPAJ) and former Vice President of Dhaka Union of Journalists.
Posted on 11 Jul 2007 by Root

Thursday, June 4, 2009

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-1

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-1a

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-1b

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-2

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-3

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-4

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-5a

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-5

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-6

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-7

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-8

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-9

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-10

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-11

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-12

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-13

DHAKA SEMINAR 2006 Pic-14

Wednesday, May 27, 2009

10 Basic Human Rights Standards for Law Enforcement Officials

To: feedback@pmo.gov.bd
From: K A Huq
Subject: 10 Basic Human Rights Standards for Law Enforcement Officials
Cc: ig@police.gov.bd,rab1bd@yahoo


AI Index: POL 30/04/98


10 Basic Human Rights Standards
for Law Enforcement Officials


All governments are required to adopt the necessary measures to instruct law enforcement officials, during basic training and all subsequent training and refresher courses, in the provisions of national legislation in accordance with the UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials as well as other basic international human rights standards applicable to law enforcement officials.

These standards should be made available as widely as possible to the general public and fully respected under all circumstances. They should be reflected in national legislation and practice, and regular public reports issued on their implementation. Exceptional circumstances such as a state of emergency or any other public emergency do not justify any departure from these standards.

All governments should adopt an active and visible policy of integrating a gender perspective into the development and implementation of training and policies for law enforcement officials.


Introduction

These '10 Basic Human Rights Standards for Law Enforcement Officials' were prepared by Amnesty International in association with police officials and experts from different countries. They are based on United Nations law enforcement, criminal justice and human rights standards. They are intended as a quick reference, and not as a full explanation of or commentary on the applicability of international human rights standards relevant to law enforcement.

This document is intended to raise awareness amongst government officials, parliamentarians, journalists and non-governmental organizations of some fundamental standards which should be part of any police training and police practice.

It is hoped that police authorities will be able to use these 10 basic standards as a starting point to develop detailed guidance for the training and monitoring of the conduct of police agents. Certainly, it is the duty of all officers to ensure that their colleagues uphold the ethical standards of their profession - the standards outlined here are essential for exercising that responsibility.


Background

Everyone shares responsibility to uphold the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in its entirety. Nevertheless the UDHR contains a number of articles which are particularly relevant for law enforcement work:

1. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person (Article 3, UDHR)

2. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Article 5, UDHR)

3. All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law (Article 7, UDHR)

4. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest and detention (Article 9, UDHR).

5. Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which they have had all the guarantees necessary for their defence (Article 11(1), UDHR)

6. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression (Article 19, UDHR)

7. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, and no one may be compelled to belong to an association (Article 20, UDHR)

Other documents directly relevant to policing work are the following United Nations law enforcement, criminal justice and human rights instruments:

UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials

UN Guidelines for the effective implementation of the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials

UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-Legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions

UN Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances

UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment

UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials

UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (hereafter referred to as Standard Minimum Rules)

UN Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment (hereafter referred to as Body of Principles)

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child

UN Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty

UN Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women

UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power

UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)

The UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, the UN Standard Minimum Rules and the UN Body of Principles set out several important principles and prerequisites for the humane performance of law enforcement functions, including that:

Every law enforcement agency should be representative of, and responsive and accountable to, the community as a whole

The effective maintenance of ethical standards among law enforcement officials depends on the existence of a well-conceived, popularly accepted and humane system of laws

Every law enforcement official is a part of the criminal justice system, the aim of which is to prevent and control crime, and the conduct of every official has an impact on the entire system

Every law enforcement agency should discipline itself to uphold international human rights standards and the actions of law enforcement officials should be open to public scrutiny

Standards for humane conduct of law enforcement officials lack practical value unless their content and meaning become part of the creed of every law enforcement official, through education and training and through monitoring.

The term ''law enforcement officials'' includes all officers of the law, whether appointed or elected, who exercise police powers, especially the powers of arrest and detention. This should be given the widest possible interpretation, and includes military and other security personnel as well as immigration officials where they exercise such powers.


Copies of UN law enforcement, criminal justice and human rights standards can be obtained from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, CH-1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland ( http://www.un.org/cgi-bin/treaty 2.pl or E-mail to: treaty@un.org)


Basic Standard 1:

Everyone is entitled to equal protection of the law,

without discrimination on any grounds, and especially against violence or threat.

Be especially vigilant to protect potentially vulnerable groups such as children, the elderly, women, refugees, displaced persons and members of minority groups.

For the implementation of Basic Standard 1 it is of great importance that police officers at all times fulfil the duty imposed on them by law, by serving the community and protecting all persons against illegal acts, consistent with the high degree of responsibility required by their profession. They must promote and protect human dignity and maintain and uphold the human rights of all persons, among which are the following:

1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of the person

2. No one should be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile

3. All persons deprived of their liberty have the right not to suffer torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment

4. Everyone is entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law

5. Everyone has the right to a fair trial

6. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement

7. Everyone has the right to peaceful assembly

8. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression

No law enforcement official may inflict, instigate or tolerate any act of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, nor may they invoke superior orders or exceptional circumstances such as a state of war or threat of war, or political instability or other public emergency as a justification for such acts. Special attention should be given to the protection of human rights of members of potentially vulnerable groups, such as children, the elderly, women, refugees, displaced persons and members of minority groups.

Sources include: UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (Articles 1,2,5), Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (paragraph 2.2.4)


Basic Standard 2:

Treat all victims of crime with compassion and respect,

and in particular protect their safety and privacy

Victims are people who have suffered harm, including mental and physical injury, emotional suffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their fundamental rights through acts or omissions that are in violation of criminal law.

For the implementation of Basic Standard 2, police officers must:

1. Ensure that, if needed, measures are taken to ensure the protection and safety of victims from intimidation and retaliation

2. Inform victims without delay of the availability of health and social services and other relevant assistance

3. Provide without delay specialist care for women who have suffered violence

4. Develop investigative techniques that do not further degrade women who have been victims of violence.

5. Give particular attention to victims who have special needs because of the nature of the harm inflicted on them or because of factors such as race, colour, gender, sexual orientation, age, language, religion, nationality, political or other opinion, disability, ethnic or social origin, etc.

Sources include: UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power (Principles 4, 14, 15, 16 and 17), CEDAW - General Recommendation No 19 (11th Session, 1992)


Basic Standard 3:

Do not use force except when strictly necessary

and to the minimum extent required under the circumstances

The implementation of Basic Standard 3 involves, among other things, that Police officers, in carrying out their duty, should apply non-violent means as far as possible before resorting to the use of force. They may use force only if other means remain ineffective or without any promise of achieving the necessary result. Basic Standard 3 must be implemented in accordance with
Basic Standard 4 and 5.


Whenever the lawful use of force is unavoidable, police officers must:

1. Exercise restraint in such use and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offence and the legitimate objective to be achieved

2. Minimize damage and injury, and respect and preserve human life

3. Ensure that all possible assistance and medical aid are rendered to any injured or affected persons at the earliest possible moment

4. Ensure that relatives or close friends of the injured or affected person are notified at the earliest possible moment

5. Where injury or death is caused by the use of force by police officers, they shall report the incident promptly to their superiors, who should ensure that proper investigations of all such incidents are carried out.

Sources include: UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (Article 3), UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (Principles 4, 5, 6 and 9)

Basic Standard 4:

Avoid using force when policing unlawful but non-violent assemblies.

When dispersing violent assemblies, use force only to the minimum extent necessary.

Everyone is allowed to participate in peaceful assemblies, whether political or non-political, subject only to very limited restrictions imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society to protect such interests as public order and public health. The police must not interfere with lawful and peaceful assemblies, otherwise than for the protection of persons participating in such an assembly or others.

The implementation of Basic Standard 4 involves, among other things:

1. In the policing of assemblies that are unlawful but non-violent, police officers must avoid the use of force. If force is indispensable, for example to secure the safety of others, they must restrict such force to the minimum extent necessary and in compliance with the other provisions in Basic Standard 3

2. Firearms shall not be used in the policing of non-violent assemblies. The use of firearms is strictly limited to the objectives mentioned in Basic Standard 5

3. In the dispersal of violent assemblies police officers may use force only if other means remain ineffective or without any promise of achieving the intended result. When using force police officers must comply with the provisions in Basic Standard 3

4. In the dispersal of violent assemblies police officers may use firearms only when less dangerous means are not practicable and only to the minimum extent necessary to achieve one of the objectives mentioned in Basic Standard 5 and in accordance with the provisions in Basic Standard 3 and Basic Standard 5.

Sources include: UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (Principles 9, 12, 13, and 14)

Basic Standard 5:

Lethal force should not be used except when strictly unavoidable

in order to protect your life or the lives of others

The use of firearms is an extreme measure which must be strictly regulated, because of the risk of death or serious injury involved. The implementation of Basic Standard 5 requires, among other things, that police officers must not use firearms except for the following objectives and only when less extreme means are insufficient to achieve these objectives:

1. In self-defence or in defence of others against the imminent threat of death or serious injury

2. To prevent the perpetration of a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life

3. To arrest a person presenting such a danger and resisting the police officer's authority, or to prevent his or her escape

In any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life.


Police officers must identify themselves as such and give a clear warning of their intent to use firearms, with sufficient time for the warning to be observed, unless to do so would unduly place the officers at risk or would create a risk of death or serious harm to other persons, or would be clearly inappropriate or pointless in the circumstances of the incident.

Rules and regulations on the use of firearms by police officers must include guidelines that:

Specify the circumstances under which police officers are authorized to carry firearms and prescribe the types of firearms and ammunition permitted

Ensure that firearms are used only in appropriate circumstances and in a manner likely to decrease the risk of unnecessary harm

Prohibit the use of any firearms or ammunition that cause unnecessary injury or present an unnecessary risk

Regulate the control, storage and issuing of firearms and ammunition, including procedures for ensuring that police officers are accountable for firearms and ammunition issued to them

Provide for warnings to be given, if appropriate, when firearms are to be discharged

Provide for a system of reporting and investigation whenever police officers use firearms in the performance of their duty.

Sources include: UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (Basic Principles 9,10 and 11)


Basic Standard 6:

Arrest no person unless there are legal grounds to do so,

and the arrest is carried out in accordance with lawful arrest procedures

To make sure that an arrest is lawful and not arbitrary, it is important that the reasons for the arrest and the powers and identity of arresting officers are known. Therefore the implementation of Basic Standard 6 involves, among other things:

1. Arrest or detention shall only be carried out strictly in accordance with the provisions of the law and by competent officials or persons authorized for that purpose

2. Police or other authorities which arrest a person shall exercise only the powers granted to them under the law

3. Anyone arrested must be informed at the time of arrest of the reasons for the arrest

4. The time of the arrest, the reasons for the arrest, precise information identifying the place of custody, and the identity of the law enforcement officials concerned must be recorded; in addition, the records must be communicated to the detained person or to his or her lawyer

5. Officials carrying out an arrest should identify themselves to the person arrested and, on demand, to others witnessing the event

6. Police officers and other officials who make arrests should wear name tags or numbers so that they can be clearly identified. Other identifying markings such as the insignia of soldiers' battalions or detachments should also be visible

7. Police and military vehicles should be clearly identified as such. They should carry number plates at all times.

8. A person should not be kept in detention without being given an effective opportunity to be heard promptly by a judicial or other officer authorized by law to exercise judicial power, and be entitled to a trial within a reasonable time, or to release. It should not be the general rule that persons awaiting trial are detained in custody, but release may be subject to guarantees to appear for trial.

9. All detainees should only be kept in recognised places of detention. Such places of detention should be visited regularly by qualified and experienced persons appointed by, and responsible to, a competent authority distinct from the authority directly in charge of the administration of the place of detention.

10. The detention of refugees and asylum seekers should normally be avoided. No asylum-seeker should be detained unless it has been established that detention is necessary, is lawful and complies with one of the grounds recognized as legitimate by international standards. In all cases, detention should not last longer than is strictly necessary. All asylum-seekers should be given adequate opportunity to have their detention reviewed by a judicial or similar authority. Reference regarding the detention of refugees and asylum seekers should be made to the competent authorities, as well as to the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and other refugee assistance organizations.

Sources include: UN Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment (Principles 2, 8, 10, 11, 12, 20 and 29), UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Rule 55), UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees (Article 31), Conclusion 44 of the UNHCR Executive Committee


Basic Standard 7:

Ensure all detainees have access promptly after arrest to their family

and legal representative and to any necessary medical assistance

Experience worldwide has shown that it is often in the first hours or days of detention that detainees are at greatest risk of being ill-treated, tortured, made to "disappear", or killed. Unconvicted detainees must be presumed innocent and treated as such. The implementation of Basic Standard 7 requires, among other things, that:

1. Detainees should be promptly told of their rights, including the right to lodge complaints about their treatment.

2. A detainee who does not understand or speak the language used by the authorities responsible for his or her arrest is entitled to receive information and have the assistance, free of charge if necessary, of an interpreter in connection with the legal proceedings subsequent to his or her arrest.

3. A detainee who is a foreigner should be promptly informed of his or her right to communicate with the relevant consular post or diplomatic mission.

4. All detained refugees and asylum seekers should be allowed access to the local representative of the UNHCR and to refugee assistance organizations, regardless of why they are being detained. If a detainee identifies himself / herself as a refugee or an asylum seeker, or otherwise indicates their fear at being returned to their country, it is incumbent on the detaining officials to facilitate contact with these organizations.

5. Police officers or other competent authorities must ensure that all detainees are fully able in practice to avail themselves of the right to notify family members or others immediately of their whereabouts. All detainees should be informed of this right. If they do not have the financial or technical means to send word to their relatives, the officers must be ready to communicate the

6. Police officers or other competent authorities must ensure that accurate information on the arrest, place of detention, transfer and release of detainees is available promptly in a place where relatives and others concerned can obtain it. They must ensure that relatives are not obstructed from obtaining this information, and that they know or are able to find out where the information can be obtained. (See also the commentary to Basic Standard 8)

7. Relatives and others should be able to visit a detainee as soon as possible after he or she is taken into custody. Relatives and others should be able to correspond with the detainee and make further visits regularly to verify the detainee's continued well-being.

8. Every detainee must be informed promptly after arrest of his or her right to a legal counsel and be helped by the authorities to exercise this right. Moreover, every detainee must be able to communicate regularly and confidentially with their lawyer, including having meetings with their lawyer within sight but not within hearing of a guard or police officer, in order to help prepare the detainee's defence and to exercise his or her rights.

9. An independent doctor should promptly conduct a proper medical examination of the detainee after taken into custody in order to ascertain that the detainee is healthy and not suffering from torture or ill-treatment, including rape and sexual abuse. Thereafter, medical care and treatment shall be provided whenever necessary. Every detainee or his or her legal counsel has the right to request a second medical examination or opinion. Detainees, even with their consent, must never be subjected to medical or scientific experimentation which may be detrimental to their health.

10. Female detainees should be entitled to medical examination by a female doctor. They should be provided with all necessary pre-natal and post-natal care and treatment. Restraints should only be used on pregnant women as a last resort and should never put the safety of a woman or foetus at risk. Women should never be restrained during labour.

Sources include: UN Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment (Principles 8, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25 and 29), Conclusion 44 of the UNHCR Executive Committee


Basic Standard 8:

All detainees must be treated humanely.

Do not inflict, instigate or tolerate any act of torture or ill-treatment,

in any circumstances, and refuse to obey any order to do so

Detainees are inherently vulnerable because they are under the control of law enforcement officials who therefore have a duty to protect detainees from any violation of their rights by strictly observing procedures designed to respect the inherent dignity of the human person. Accurate record-keeping is an essential element of the proper administration of places of detention. The existence of official records which are open for consultation helps to protect detainees from ill-treatment including torture. The implementation of Basic Standard 8 requires, among other things, that:

1. No person under any form of detention may be subjected to torture, or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and law enforcement officers have a right and a duty to disobey orders to carry out such acts. No law enforcement official may inflict, instigate or tolerate any act of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, nor may they invoke superior orders or exceptional circumstances such as a state of war or threat of war, or political instability or other public emergency as a justification for such acts.

2. Law enforcement officials should be instructed that rape of women in their custody constitutes an act of torture that will not be tolerated. Similarly, they should be instructed that any other forms of sexual abuse may constitute torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and that offenders will be brought to justice.

3. The term ''cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment'' should be interpreted so as to extend the widest possible protection against abuses, whether physical or mental, including holding a detainee in conditions which deprive him or her, even temporarily, of the use of any of his or her natural senses, such as sight or hearing, of his or her awareness of place or passing of time. Compliance with the other basic standards for law enforcement are also essential safeguards against torture and ill-treatment.

4. A detainee may not be compelled to confess, to otherwise incriminate himself or herself or to testify against any other person. While being interrogated, no detainee may be subject to violent threats or methods which impair his or her capacity of decision or judgement. Female guards should be present during the interrogation of female detainees and should be solely responsible for carrying out any body searches of female detainees.

5. Children should be detained only as a last resort and for the shortest possible time. They should be given immediate access to relatives, legal counsel and medical assistance and relatives or guardians should be informed immediately of their whereabouts. Juvenile detainees should be kept separate from adults and detained in separate institutions. They should be protected from torture and ill-treatment, including rape and sexual abuse, whether by officials or other detainees.

6. Refugees and asylum seekers detained for non-criminal reasons should never be detained together with common law prisoners. Conditions and treatment should be humane, and appropriate to their status as refugees.

7. Detainees should be kept separate from imprisoned persons and, if requested, be kept reasonably near their usual place of residence. All detainees should if possible wear their own clothing if it is clean and suitable, sleep singly in separate rooms, be fed properly and be allowed to buy or receive books, newspapers, writing materials and other means of occupation as are compatible with the interests of justice.

8. Registers of detainees should be kept in all places of detention including police stations and military bases. The register should consist of a bound book with numbered pages which cannot be tampered with. Information to be entered in them should include:

· The name and identity of each person detained

· The reasons for his or her arrest or detention

· The names and identities of officials who arrested the detainee or transported him

· The date and time of the arrest and of the transportation to a place of detention

· The time, place and duration of each interrogation and the name of the person or persons conducting it

· The time of the detainee's first appearance before a judicial authority

· Precise information concerning the place of custody

· The date, time and circumstances of the detainee's release or transfer to another place of detention.

Other measures that can contribute to the proper treatment of detainees are:

(A) Police officers and other competent authorities should allow representatives of the local or national bar and medical associations, as well as local or national members of parliament, appropriate international bodies and officials, to visit any police station and facilities, including detention centres, without restriction for the purpose of inspection.

(B) These bodies and officials must be able to make unannounced visits

(C) These bodies and officials must have access to all parts of each place of detention and all detainees and be able to interview them freely and without witnesses

(D) These bodies and officials must be able to make return visits whenever they wish

(E)These bodies and officials must be able to make recommendations to the authorities concerning the treatment of detainees

(F) The treatment of detainees should conform as a minimum to the standards laid down in the UN Standard Minimum Rules and the Body of Principles.

Sources include: UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (Article 5); UN Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment (Principles 1,2,6, 12, 21 and 23); UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Article 2); UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Rules 55, 85, 86, 87, 88, 91, 92 and 93); UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 10); UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (Article 37), Conclusion 44 of the UNHCR Executive Committee


Basic Standard 9:

Do not carry out, order or cover up extrajudicial executions or

''disappearances'', and refuse to obey any order to do so


No one should be arbitrarily or indiscriminately deprived of life. An extrajudicial execution is an unlawful and deliberate killing carried out by, or on the order of, someone at some level of government, whether national, state or local, or with their acquiescence.

There are several important elements in the concept of an extrajudicial execution:

· It is deliberate, not accidental

· It violates national laws such as those which prohibit murder, and/or international standards forbidding the arbitrary deprivation of life.

Its unlawfulness distinguishes an extrajudicial execution from:

· A justifiable killing in self-defence

· A death resulting from the use of force by law enforcement officials which is nevertheless consistent with international standards

· A killing in an armed conflict situation which is not prohibited by international humanitarian law

In an armed conflict, even if not an international armed conflict, armed officers and soldiers of the government, as well as combatants of armed political groups, are prohibited from carrying out arbitrary and summary executions. These acts would constitute breaches of Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions --(which also prohibits mutilation, torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, hostage taking and other gross abuses).

The ''disappeared'' are people who have been taken into custody by agents of the state, yet whose whereabouts and fate are concealed. It is a grave violation of human rights to carry out disappearances.

No order or instruction of any public authority, civilian, military or other, may be invoked to justify an extrajudicial execution or a ''disappearance''. Any person receiving such an order or instruction has a duty to disobey it.

All police officers and all other law enforcement personnel should be aware of their right and duty to disobey orders the implementation of which might result in serious human rights violations. Since those violations are unlawful, police officers and others must not participate in them. The need to disobey an unlawful order should be seen as a duty, taking precedence over the normal duty to obey orders. The duty to disobey an unlawful order entails the right to disobey it.

The right and duty to disobey an order to participate in ''disappearances'' and extrajudicial killings are incorporated in the UN Declaration on Disappearances (Article 6) and in the UN Principles on Extra-Legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (Principle 3). The UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials protect the right to disobey by stating that no criminal or disciplinary sanction should be imposed on law enforcement officials who, in compliance with these Basic Principles and the UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, refuse to carry out an order to use force and firearms or who report such use by other officials.

To implement Basic Standard 9, it is important that the use of force and firearms by the police strictly complies with all the provisions in Basic Standard 3, Basic Standard 4 and Basic Standard 5.

Sources include: UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-Legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (Principle 1 and 3); Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions; UN Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances (Preamble and Article 6)

Basic Standard 10:

Report all breaches of these Basic Standards to your senior officer

and to the office of the public prosecutor.

Do everything within your power to ensure steps are taken to

investigate these breaches.

All violations of human rights by the police or other law enforcement personnel, including any breaches of these Basic Standards, should be investigated fully, promptly and independently, for instance by the office of the public prosecutor. The main objective of these investigations is to establish the facts and to bring to justice those responsible:

1. Has a violation of human rights or a breach of principles or of national law been perpetrated? If so, by whom?

2. If a public official has committed a crime or breach of regulations, was he or she acting under orders or with the acquiescence of other officials?
3. Has the office of the prosecutor opened a criminal investigation and, if there is sufficient admissible evidence, sought to prosecute?

Sources include: UN Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (Preamble and Articles 1, 2, 8); UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (Preamble)


_______________________________________

Fair Trials Manual Date Published: 01/12/1998

This manual is a guide to the international and regional standards which protect the right to a fair trial. It is intended for the use of trial observers and others assessing the fairness of an individual case. It also assist in evaluating whether a country's criminal justice system guarantees respect for international standards of fair trial. The manual covers pre-trials rights, rights at trial and during appeals, and special cases including death penalty trials, cases involving children, and fair trial rights during armed conflict.

You can access this online at
http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/fairtrial/fairtria.htm



12-Point Program for the Prevention of Torture by Agents of the State
(Amnesty International, 1983, 2000)


Torture is a fundamental violation of human rights, condemned by the international community as an offence to human dignity and prohibited in all circumstances under international law. Yet torture persists, daily and across the globe. Immediate steps are needed to confront torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment wherever they occur and to eradicate them totally.

Amnesty International calls on all governments to implement the following 12-Point Program for the Prevention of Torture by Agents of the State. It invites concerned individuals and organizations to ensure that they do so. Amnesty International believes that the implementation of these measures is a positive indication of a government's commitment to end torture and to work for its eradication worldwide.

1.Condemn torture
The highest authorities of every country should demonstrate their total opposition to torture. They should condemn torture unreservedly whenever it occurs. They should make clear to all members of the police, military and other security forces that torture will never be tolerated.

2. Ensure access to prisoners
Torture often takes place while prisoners are held incommunicado - unable to contact people outside who could help them or find out what is happening to them. The practice of incommunicado detention should be ended. Governments should ensure that all prisoners are brought before an independent judicial authority without delay after being taken into custody. Prisoners should have access to relatives, lawyers and doctors without delay and regularly thereafter.

3. No secret detention
In some countries torture takes place in secret locations, often after the victims are made to "disappear". Governments should ensure that prisoners are held only in officially recognized places of detention and that accurate information about their arrest and whereabouts is made available immediately to relatives, lawyers and the courts. Effective judicial remedies should be available at all times to enable relatives and lawyers to find out immediately where a prisoner is held and under what authority and to ensure the prisoner’s safety.

4. Provide safeguards during detention and interrogation
All prisoners should be immediately informed of their rights. These include the right to lodge complaints about their treatment and to have a judge rule without delay on the lawfulness of their detention. Judges should investigate any evidence of torture and order release if the detention is unlawful. A lawyer should be present during interrogations. Governments should ensure that conditions of detention conform to international standards for the treatment of prisoners and take into account the needs of members of particularly vulnerable groups. The authorities responsible for detention should be separate from those in charge of interrogation. There should be regular, independent, unannounced and unrestricted visits of inspection to all places of detention.

5. Prohibit torture in law
Governments should adopt laws for the prohibition and prevention of torture incorporating the main elements of the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention against Torture) and other relevant international standards. All judicial and administrative corporal punishments should be abolished. The prohibition of torture and the essential safeguards for its prevention must not be suspended under any circumstances, including states of war or other public emergency.

6. Investigate
All complaints and reports of torture should be promptly, impartially and effectively investigated by a body independent of the alleged perpetrators. The methods and findings of such investigations should be made public. Officials suspected of committing torture should be suspended from active duty during the investigation. Complainants, witnesses and others at risk should be protected from intimidation and reprisals.

7. Prosecute
Those responsible for torture must be brought to justice. This principle should apply wherever alleged torturers happen to be, whatever their nationality or position, regardless of where the crime was committed and the nationality of the victims, and no matter how much time has elapsed since the commission of the crime. Governments must exercise universal jurisdiction over alleged torturers or extradite them, and cooperate with each other in such criminal proceedings. Trials must be fair. An order from a superior officer must never be accepted as a justification for torture.

8. No use of statements extracted under torture
Governments should ensure that statements and other evidence obtained through torture may not be invoked in any proceedings, except against a person accused of torture.

9. Provide effective training
It should be made clear during the training of all officials involved in the custody, interrogation or medical care of prisoners that torture is a criminal act. Officials should be instructed that they have the right and duty to refuse to obey any order to torture.

10. Provide reparation
Victims of torture and their dependants should be entitled to obtain prompt reparation from the state including restitution, fair and adequate financial compensation and appropriate medical care and rehabilitation.

11. Ratify international treaties
All governments should ratify without reservations international treaties containing safeguards against torture, including the UN Convention against Torture with declarations providing for individual and inter-state complaints. Governments should comply with the recommendations of international bodies and experts on the prevention of torture.

12. Exercise international responsibility
Governments should use all available channels to intercede with the governments of countries where torture is reported. They should ensure that transfers of training and equipment for military, security or police use do not facilitate torture. Governments must not forcibly return a person to a country where he or she risks being tortured.

This 12-Point Program was adopted by Amnesty International in October 2000 as a program of measures to prevent the torture and ill-treatment of people who are in governmental custody or otherwise in the hands of agents of the state. Amnesty International holds governments to their international obligations to prevent and punish torture, whether committed by agents of the state or by other individuals. Amnesty International also opposes torture by armed political groups.


Amnesty International is a worldwide voluntary activist movement working towards the observance of all human rights as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international standards.

Amnesty International promotes respect for human rights, which it considers interdependent and indivisible, through campaigning and public awareness activities, as well as through human rights education and pushing for ratification and implementation of human rights treaties.

Amnesty International takes action against some of the gravest violations by governments of people's civil and political rights. The focus of its campaigning against human rights violations is to:

free all prisoners of conscience. These are people detained for their political, religious or other conscientiously held beliefs or because of their ethnic origin, sex, colour, language, national or social origin, economic status, birth or other status – who have not used or advocated violence;

ensure fair and prompt trials for all political prisoners;

abolish the death penalty, torture and other ill-treatment of prisoners;

end political killings and “disappearances.”

Amnesty International also calls on armed political groups to respect human rights and to halt abuses such as the detention of prisoners of conscience, hostage-taking, torture and deliberate and arbitrary killings.

Amnesty International is independent of any government, political persuasion or religious creed. It does not support or oppose any government or political system, nor does it support or oppose the views of the victims whose rights it seeks to protect. It is concerned solely with the impartial protection of human rights.

Amnesty International has formal relations with the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC); the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); the Council of Europe; the Organization of American States; the Organization of African Unity; and the Inter-Parliamentary Union.

If you require more information about Amnesty International's work or want to receive more copies of this document you can contact the Campaigning Program, 1 Easton Street, London WC1X 8DJ




-------------------------


K A Huq 16/05/2005 19:13

To: SHameed@amnesty.org
cc
Subject: HR Training Design & Materials

16 May 2005

To : Ms. Sadia Hameed

Fm : Kazi Azizul Huq

Re : HR Training Design & Materials

Dear Ms. Hameed,

I seek your assistance in Designing and Collecting Materials for:-

(1) Human Rights Training for Police Force…..

(2) Human Rights Training for Journalists……

I should be grateful if you could kindly supply me materials and/or refer
me to appropriates sources.

Best regards,

Kazi Azizul Huq
Consultant & Team Leader
Center for Development Studies
61/A, Siddeswari Road, 1st Floor,
[ east of Viqarunness School]
Dhaka, Bangladesh

Tel:(880-2)9355106, 9881436, 0189-407963
E-amil: cds@dhaka.net

-----

To: K A Huq
Subject: Re: HR Training Design & Materials
X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.0.2CF1 June 9, 2003
From: SHameed@amnesty.org
Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 14:31:53 +0100
X-BOL-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: shameed@amnesty.org
X-MailScanner-To: kahuq@dhaka.net


Dear Mr Huq,

Thank you for your email. In response to your request I have copied below texts of two tools used by Amnesty International in the promotion of human rights with police. We also have a publication called the fair trials manual which we use to promote international standards for fair trail with members of the judiciary and the police. This publication is available on-line or a copy can be mailed to you. The information is attached below. The documents copied below are also available on our website.

I will need some more time to collate information on for the training of journalists and will respond to you shortly with more guidance on what materials may be helpful.

All the Best,

Sadia Hameed
South Asia Team
Amnesty International
International Secretariat
1 Easton Street
London WC1X 0DW
United Kingdom
T: +44 (0) 207 413 5721
F: +44 (0) 207 956 1157
_____________________
http://www.asiapacific.amnesty.org

AI Index: POL 30/04/98

10 Basic Human Rights Standards

for Law Enforcement Officials


http://www.police.gov.bd/index5.php?category=15
This Universal Declaration of Human Rights

As a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member states themselves and among the peoples of Member states themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to with a person belongs, whether it be independent , trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 3
Everyone has the rights to life, liberty and security of person.

Article 4
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude, slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.

Article 5
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, in human or degrading treatment or punishment.

Article 6
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.

Article 7
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 8
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.

Article 9
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.

Article 10
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.

Article 11
(1) Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.

(2) No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

Article 12
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

Article 13
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each state.

(2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

Article 14
(1) Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.

(2) This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 15
(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.

(2) No one shall arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Article 16
(1) Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.

(2) Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.


(3) The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 17
(1) Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

Article 20
(1) Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.

(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 21
(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

(2) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.

(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.

Article 22
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Article 23
(1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favorable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

(2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.

(3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favorable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family and existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

(4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

Article 24
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.

Article 25
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

(2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

Article 26
(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.

(2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedom. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.

(3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

Article 27
(1) Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.

(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.

Article 28
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set froth in this Declaration can be fully realized.

Article 29
(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

Article 30
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.