Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - manjida

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Law / right to privacy by UN
« on: March 29, 2015, 02:29:33 PM »
United Nations establishes landmark role for expert to investigate and report on right to privacy:

The UN's top human rights body, the Human Rights Council, today has passed a landmark resolution endorsing the appointment of an independent expert on the right to privacy. For the first time in the UN's history, an individual will be appointed to monitor, investigate and report on privacy issues and alleged violations in States across the world.

The resolution, which appoints a Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy for an initial period of three years, was spearheaded by Germany and Brazil, two countries who have shown sustained commitment to improving the protections of privacy at the UN, especially in the past two years as issues of State surveillance have dominated headlines around the world. More than 60 States co-sponsored the resolution, including countries from Africa, Asia, Latin America, and Europe.

Despite the consensus reached, the passing of the resolution comes after months of intense negotiation. The power to establish a Special Rapporteur is among the most substantial available to the Human Rights Council, and the Council's decision to establish the role further confirms the importance of privacy as a human right.

The deployment of internet monitoring and censorship during the Arab Spring thrust the issue of state surveillance into the UN spotlight almost five years ago. Since then, the revelations of the surveillance practices of law enforcement and intelligence agencies have sparked international debates, prompting calls to reform national laws and policies. Beyond digital surveillance, the capacity of states and companies to collect, store, analyse and share personal data continues to increase, and has contributed to the momentum behind demands for a dedicated Special Rapporteur on privacy.

The Special Rapporteur will be the authoritative voice and intellectual leader at the global level on the right to privacy around the world. The resolution gives the individual a broad mandate to promote the respect and protection of the right to privacy in all circumstances, wherever or however it is exercised. Amongst other things, the mandate holder will monitor states' and companies' compliance with the right to privacy, investigating alleged violations, and making recommendations to ensure that this fundamental right is respected and protected.

The individual chosen to take up the role of Special Rapporteur is expected to be appointed in June 2015.

Privacy International, the world's leading organisation promoting the right to privacy, has campaigned for the establishment of a Special Rapporteur on privacy for more than two years. Today's successful adoption of a resolution establishing a Special Rapporteur comes as the organisation celebrates its 25th anniversary.

Tomaso Falchetta, Legal Officer for Privacy International, said:

    “The Council today has confirmed what we have said for some time: The right to privacy is an invaluable human right, essential to human autonomy and dignity, and deserves explicit attention to ensure that it is respected and protected around the world. Now, perhaps more than ever, we need a dedicated individual to hold those accountable who wish to violate privacy, whether it is through surveillance, indiscriminate data collection, or other techniques that infringe on this important right. As Privacy International celebrates 25 years of advocating for the right to privacy, we can confidently say that today's resolution is one of the most important events to protect privacy.”


Eminent Indian political psychologist and social theorist Ashis Nandy talks to Shamsuddoza Sajen of The Daily Star on various aspects of genocide in the context of South Asia, particularly Bangladesh.

The Daily Star (TDS): Why is it important to study genocide in the context of South Asia?

Ashis Nandy (AN): I believe that genocide is such an issue that it cannot simply be ignored after it has occurred. A society can be brought to the ground from the intense implosion resulting from genocide. The framework of a social conscience that forms the ethical entity of a society is thus moved. After a genocide, a sense of cruelty can be witnessed in a society which reaches the very roots of that people. And this comes out at different times.

Let me give you an example. A friend of mine told me the story of a married couple in Cambodia who were fighting with each other about a new lover in the husband's life. The husband used to sell fruits in the market. Several wars have taken place in Cambodia, so one could easily buy old grenades and bombs. The wife, in anger, bought a grenade from some place. When her husband was at the shop, selling his fruits, she threw the grenade at his stall. The husband obviously died but those around him also died. It was a market place and thus was crowded with people.

This mentality comes from the history of genocide in Cambodia. The framework of Cambodian life changed as a result of genocide. The same happened in the case of South Asia as well. That's why justice is important, and that's why punishment is also important. But that is not the end of everything. The children, grandchildren of these perpetrators are still alive. They will create their own mythology. We say that they are guilty; they say that they are not guilty; they claim to be patriots as well.

The process of genocide doesn't end with genocide, it continues. Once Dr A. Q. Khan was interviewed by Indian journalist Kuldip Nayar. Nayar asked A.Q. Khan, “Dr Khan, you created the bomb but your father and brothers live in Bhopal, which is in Madhya Pradesh in India. When you throw the bomb in Delhi or Mumbai, the radiation will spread to Bhopal as well.” A Q Khan said, “In 1947, I entered Pakistan after crossing the deserts of Rajasthan, starving and thirsty for a drop of water. I haven't forgotten that incident yet. That experience haunts me till date.  If the security of Pakistan is threatened, I will drop the bomb on India even if it means destroying my own family.”

This kind of mentality, this way of thinking is prevalent in our post-genocide society.  It's our misfortune that such genocides took place and several small genocides still occur every now and then. One can recall the Brahmaputra Mail train bombing of 1996 or the riots in Gujarat in 2002 as genocides on a smaller scale.

TDS: Do you see any change in the modus operandi of genocide in recent times?

AN: During the partition, most of the people who raped women accepted their crime and even married their victims later on. When they were being repatriated, these women did not want to leave their new families behind.
But, now we have become very individualistic. As urbanisation has increased, there has been a growing sense of anonymity. The internal checks have collapsed. Our sense of ethics has diminished. During the Gujarat riots, the rape victims were burnt to death.

TDS:  In the context of the subcontinent, there always seems to be a relation between religion and genocide. What do you think?
AN: There is a religious dogma, that's true, but it's not like there's always a religious purpose to them. Because in their hearts everyone knows that this has no relation with religion. Punjabi Muslims would generally say that Bengali Muslims are not actual Muslims because they are similar to Hindus. But the traditions of Punjabi Muslims were much more in line with Hinduism than those of Bengali Muslims.
How can one mobilise people, as every kind of people, be it Bengalis, Punjabis, villagers, Shiites, Sunnis or Hindus, makes a population. This is the case in the entire South Asia. Politicians think that people can be mobilised if they are religion centric. This was not the case earlier on. When religion is brought into politics, the issue of religious divides would appear as well.

TDS: War criminals are being tried in Bangladesh at the moment but there are attempts to show these trials in a negative light, especially in the western media.
AN: The American government is promoting negative propaganda against the trial because they fear that their skeletons might be dug out in this process. If fair justice of war crimes is to be done then Henry Kissinger should be forced to stand trial. Let them release every document and correspondence. Then we'll know whether they're speaking the truth or lies. We'll know, we'll decide.

TDS: Why are these trials important?
AN: So that these genocides don't take place in the future. Otherwise these will continue; there will not be any end to this. After the trials are over and justice delivered, everyone can say that justice has been served. The families of those condemned to the death sentence might be angry. But nothing can be done about it. In Bangladesh you are not doing any summary trial or trial through 'kangaroo' courts. There is a scope to appeal after the sentence is delivered. There should not be any doubt about the trial process in Bangladesh. People are seeing that; they are not idiots, they can see for themselves and decide. Capital punishment is executed even in America. Let the people who oppose capital punishment here express their objections in America.


Law / Irish court 'accidentally' makes drugs legal
« on: March 11, 2015, 01:18:07 PM »
 An Irish court has temporarily legalised certain class-A drugs after a law governing the possession of controlled substances was ruled unconstitutional.

Judges at Ireland's Court of Appeal deemed the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977 to be incompatible with Irish law following a legal challenge.

The legislation, which covers a range of illegal drugs, had been sporadically updated to bring new psychoactive substances under its provisions.

Article 15 of the Irish constitution states that the country's parliament, known as the Oireachtas, has the exclusive privilege of creating new laws.

An emergency session of parliament has been called to pass legislation to recriminalise the drugs, The Journal has reported. It is believed possession will remain legal until Thursday, when the new laws will come into effect.

The case was brought to appeal by a Lithuanian national arrested over possession of methylethcathinone in 2012. Following his conviction, the man's lawyers argued that it would be unfair to be in possession of a drug that was legal one day and illegal the next.

Drugs covered by section 2(2) of the law included crystal meth, ketamine, MDMA and magic mushrooms.

In recent years, Ireland has seen a growth in retailers which sell psychoactive substances and drug paraphenalia, known as 'headshops'. This has resulted in Ireland's police force struggling to keep up with the introduction of new drugs available to the public.

Dozens of previous convictions are now under question, according to the country's health minister, Leo Varadkar:

"I'm told it's dozens, but I can't say for certain because what they'll have to do now is go thought each individual case and see if the people in question were charged just under this section of the act, or if they were charged with other acts as well."

Politicians had been alerted to the potential ruling for the past week, keeping the situation under tight wraps from the media.

Law / Re: Why US unsigned the Rome Statute ?
« on: March 10, 2015, 02:00:56 PM »
ma'am.. I would rather sat that's their superior complexity!!

Law / Re: Cyber Crimes: are women the main target?
« on: March 10, 2015, 01:57:30 PM »
Excellent write up :) and a very true finding!!

Law / Safeguard
« on: March 09, 2015, 12:14:31 PM »
United Nations   Resolution 1996/15

Economic and Social Council
45th plenary meeting
23 July 1996
1996/15. Safeguards GUARANTEEING protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty
The Economic and Social Council,

Recalling General Assembly resolutions 2857 (XXVI) of 20 December 1971 and 32/61 of 8 December 1977 and Economic and Social Council resolutions 1745 (LIV) of 16 May 1973, 1930 (LVIII) of 6 May 1975, 1990/51 of 24 July 1990 and 1995/57 of 28 July 1995,

Recalling also article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1/

Recalling further the safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, annexed to its resolution 1984/50 of 25 May 1984, and its resolution 1989/64 of 24 May 1989 on the implementation of the safeguards,

Taking note of the report of the Secretary-General on capital punishment and implementation of the safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, 2/

Recalling the Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions, set forth in the annex to its resolution 1989/65 of 24 May 1989 and endorsed by the General Assembly in its resolution 44/162 of 15 December 1989, and taking note of the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions concerning the death penalty contained in his report to the Commission on Human Rights at its fifty-second session, 3/

Taking note of Security Council resolution 827 (1993) of 25 May 1993, in which the Security Council decided to establish the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 and to adopt the Statute of the International Tribunal annexed to the report of the Secretary- General pursuant to paragraph 2 of Security Council resolution 808 (1993), 4/ and taking note also of Security Council resolution 955 (1994) of 8 November 1994, in which the Security Council decided to establish the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994 and to adopt the Statute of the International Tribunal for Rwanda annexed to that resolution,

1. Notes that, during the period covered by the report of the Secretary-General on capital punishment and implementation of the safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, an increasing number of countries abolished the death penalty and others followed a policy reducing the number of capital offences, and declared that they had not sentenced any offender to that penalty, while still others retained it and a few reintroduced it;

2. Calls upon Member States in which the death penalty has not been abolished to effectively apply the safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, in which it is stated that capital punishment may be imposed for only the most serious crimes, it being understood that their scope should not go beyond intentional crimes with lethal or other extremely grave consequences;

3. Encourages Member States in which the death penalty has not been abolished to ensure that each defendant facing a possible death sentence is given all guarantees to ensure a fair trial, as contained in article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and bearing in mind the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, 5/ the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, 6/ the Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors, 7/ the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, 8/ and the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners; 9/

4. Also encourages Member States in which the death penalty has not been abolished to ensure that defendants who do not sufficiently understand the language used in court are fully informed, by way of interpretation or translation, of all the charges against them and the content of the relevant evidence deliberated in court;

5. Calls upon Member States in which the death penalty may be carried out to allow adequate time for the preparation of appeals to a court of higher jurisdiction and for the completion of appeal proceedings, as well as petitions for clemency, in order to effectively apply rules 5 and 8 of the safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty;

6. Also calls upon Member States in which the death penalty may be carried out to ensure that officials involved in decisions to carry out an execution are fully informed of the status of appeals and petitions for clemency of the prisoner in question;

7. Urges Member States in which the death penalty may be carried out to effectively apply the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, in order to keep to a minimum the suffering of prisoners under sentence of death and to avoid any exacerbation of such suffering.

1/ General Assembly resolution 2200 A (XXI), annex.
2/ E/CN.15/1996/19.
3/ E/CN.4/1996/4.
4/ S/25704.
5/ Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Milan, 26 August-6 September 1985: report prepared by the Secretariat (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.86.IV.1), chap. I, sect. D.2, annex.
6/ Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Havana, 27 August-7 September 1990: report prepared by the Secretariat (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.91.IV.1), chap. I, sect. B.3, annex.
7/ Ibid., sect. C.26.
8/ General Assembly resolution 43/173, annex.
9/ First United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, Geneva, 22 August-3 September 1955: report prepared by the Secretariat (United Nations publication, Sales No. 1956.IV.4), annex I, sect. A.

Like the sentence ''It’s all about the positive attitude towards life'' Thank you ma'am!! :)

Law / Re: Why US unsigned the Rome Statute ?
« on: March 08, 2015, 12:14:40 PM »
Thank you ma'am for such an useful article. By the way, with all grounds that have been mentioned in the paper I would like to add that it is not only the fear of American nationals and military leaders being held accountable for their actions but also USA will not ever give the chance to anyone to let them be identified as unable or unwilling state to prosecute their own nationals who committed international crimes since the ICC has the 'principle of complementarity' not the 'principle of primacy'.

It will be really a good news for the whole nation if we find our former CJ as a judge of ICC  :) ..... let's see what happens!!!!!

Law / Re: Why US unsigned the Rome Statute ?
« on: March 07, 2015, 09:19:07 AM »
me either Sir... not surprised... they are like that..after all USA....

Law / Re: France's burqa ban upheld by human rights court
« on: March 07, 2015, 09:16:18 AM »
 Thank you ma'am... :)

Law / ICC Appeals Chamber Issues Its First Judgment on Reparations
« on: March 07, 2015, 09:15:44 AM »
On March 3, 2015, the Appeals Chamber at the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued its first-ever judgment on reparations. Trial Chamber I had issued its decision establishing the principles and procedures to be applied to reparations in the case against Thomas Lubanga in August 2012. Both the defense and the victims had appealed the trial chamber decision.

In March 2012, Lubanga became to first person to be convicted by the ICC for the enlistment, conscription, and use of child soldiers under the age of fifteen years to participate actively in hostilities. The crimes occurred in 2002 and 2003 in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. Lubanga was sentenced to a total of 14 years of imprisonment, and both his conviction and sentence were upheld on appeal.

The ICC is the first international criminal tribunal that allows for victims to claim for reparations for the harm suffered as a result of the crimes. Such reparations can include restitution, indemnification, and rehabilitation. Victims can also receive certain types of reparations in proceedings before the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia.

In addition, a Trust Fund for Victims (Trust Fund) has been established by the ICC States Parties. The Trust Fund’s responsibilities include implementation of reparations awards and the provision of physical and psychosocial assistance and material support to victims of the crimes within the jurisdiction of the court but not necessarily in relation to a case or a conviction. The Trust Fund’s operates in accordance with its Regulations.

The March 3 appeals judgment studied whether the trial chamber decision could be considered an order for reparations. It found that although the trial chamber decision contained key elements of an order for reparations, it needed to be amended for it to be considered as such. The Appeals Chamber found that an order for reparations in accordance with Article 75 of the Rome Statute must contain at least five essential elements. These elements are discussed below.

First, the order must be directed against the convicted person. The trial chamber decision had originally directed the order to the Trust Fund. The Appeals Chamber held that even when the convicted person is indigent, the order must be directed against them.

Second, the order must establish and inform the convicted person of his/her liability with respect to the reparations awarded in the order. The Appeals Chamber clarified that even when the Trust Fund advances funds in light of the convicted person’s indigence, the convicted person remains liable and must reimburse the Trust Fund.

Third, the order must specify and provide reasons for, the type of reparations ordered. Reparations can be collective, individual, or both. In this regard, the Appeals Chamber recalled that the victims’ legal representative had contested the trial chamber decision in relation to the award of collective reparations. They argued, in particular, that the trial chamber should have considered the individual request for reparations filed by the victims. The Appeals Chamber held that it was unnecessary for the trial chamber to do so and that its decision to award collective reparations should be construed as a decision to reject award of individual reparations. However, the Appeals Chamber indicated that the Trust Fund should consult with individual victims who participated in the trial and other victims who filed requests for reparations in relation to the collective reparations awards.

Fourth, the order must define the harm caused to direct and indirect victims as a result of the crimes for which the person was convicted, as well as the modalities of reparations that the trial chamber considers appropriate based on the circumstances of the case. The trial chamber had favored a broader approach in relation to the victims that could be selected for reparations and the types of harm that could be considered. The Appeals Chamber held that only victims who suffered direct or indirect harm as a result of the crimes that the person has been convicted of can receive reparations. Indirect harm includes that suffered by family members, and by individual who intervened to help the victims or to prevent the crimes.

Finally, the order must identify the victims eligible to benefit from the awards for reparations or set out the criteria of eligibility based on the link between the harm suffered by the victims and the crimes for which the person was convicted. In this regard, the Appeals Chamber held that the trial chamber had erred in delegating responsibility on victims’ eligibility to the Trust Fund. The Appeals Chamber also clarified that based on its ruling that there must be a link between reparations and the crimes the person was convicted. Therefore, it was not possible for the court to award reparations for sexual and gender-based crimes suffered by the victims in the case at hand. This is because those crimes were not charged by the prosecution and, thus, were not part of the crimes Lubanga was convicted for. However, the Appeals Chamber noted, the Trust Fund can use its discretionary assistance mandate to provide assistance to victims of sexual and gender-based violence.

The Appeals Chamber amended the trial chamber decision on the basis of the five requirements. An amended order was attached to the judgment. The Appeals Chamber ordered the Trust Fund to present a draft implementation plan for collective reparations to a newly constituted trial chamber within six months from the issuance of the judgment.

Check :

Law / Why US unsigned the Rome Statute ?
« on: March 05, 2015, 11:10:20 AM »
The U.S. opposed the ICC from the beginning, surprising and disappointing many people. Human rights organizations and social justice groups around the world, and from within the US, were very critical of the U.S. stance given its dominance in world affairs.

The U.S. did eventually signed up to the ICC just before the December 2000 deadline to ensure that it would be a State Party that could participate in decision-making about how the Court works. However,

    By May 2002, the Bush Administration “unsigned” the Rome Satute.
    The U.S. threatened to use military force if U.S. nationals were held at the Hague
    The U.S. continues to pressure many countries to sign agreements not to surrender U.S. citizens to the ICC.

But why would a country, often vocal in the area of human rights, and often amongst the first to promote human rights as a global issue in the past refuse to sign up to an international law and institution designed to protect human rights?

For more details please go through the link below:

Law / Re: France's burqa ban upheld by human rights court
« on: March 05, 2015, 11:01:06 AM »
Thanks ma'am for your kind suggestion.... I should follow  :)

Pages: [1] 2 3 4