Ana səhifə

A/hrc/28/68/Add. 1 Advance Version


Yüklə 0.84 Mb.
səhifə3/15
tarix24.06.2016
ölçüsü0.84 Mb.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   15

China

(a) JUA 24/12/2013 Case No. CHN 14/2013 State Reply: 21/02/2014 Allegations concerning the situation of Ms. Liu Xia, Chinese national and wife of Nobel Peace Prize winner, Mr. Liu Xiaobo.

  1. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of China for its reply, dated 21.02.2014, to the present communication.

  2. The Rapporteur finds that the Government, in its reply, does not sufficiently address the concerns, legal obligations, and questions raised in the initial communication, which prompts him to infer that the Government fails to fully and expeditiously cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, as well as to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).

  3. In the absence of convincing information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, reiterated above, and thus, that the Government of China, by failing to protect the physical and psychological integrity of Ms. Liu Xia, including by denying her access to adequate medical attention, has violated her right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as codified, inter alia in the articles 1 and 16 of the CAT

(b) JUA 04/03/2014 Case No. CHN 2/2014 State Reply: None to date Allegations concerning the deteriorating health of Ms. Cao Shunli while in detention.

  1. The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of China has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).

  2. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, reiterated above, and thus, that the Government of China, by failing to protect the physical and psychological integrity of Ms. Cao Shunli, including by denying her access to adequate medical attention, has violated her right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as codified, inter alia in the articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.

(c) JUA 01/04/2014 Case No. CHN 3/2014 State Reply: 30/05/2014 Allegations of incommunicado detention of human rights lawyer Mr. Gao Zhisheng.

  1. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of China for its reply, dated 30.05.2014, to the present communication.

  2. The Rapporteur takes note of the information provided by the Governement in its reply; however he finds that the Government does not sufficiently address the concerns, legal obligations, and questions raised in the initial communication, which prompts him to infer that the Government fails to fully and expeditiously cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, as well as to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).

  3. In the absence of convincing information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, reiterated above, and thus, that the Government of China, by failing to protect the physical and psychological integrity of Mr. Gao Zhisheng, including by subjecting him to incommunicado detention, has violated his right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as codified, inter alia in the articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.

(d) JUA 08/04/2014 Case No. CHN 5/2014 State Reply: 19/06/2014 Allegations of ongoing arbitrary detention and prolonged solitary confinement of Mr. Wang Bingzhang and his deteriorating health while in detention.

  1. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of China for its reply, dated 19.06.2014, to the present communication.

  2. The Rapporteur takes note of the information provided by the Governement in its reply; however he finds that the Government does not sufficiently address the concerns, legal obligations, and questions raised in the initial communication, which prompts him to infer that the Government fails to fully and expeditiously cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, as well as to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).

  3. In the absence of convincing information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, reiterated above, and thus, that the Government of China, by failing to protect the physical and psychological integrity of Mr. Wang Bingzhang, including by subjecting him to prolonged solitary confinement, has violated his right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as codified, inter alia in the articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.

(e) JUA 05/05/2014 Case No. CHN 6/2014 State Reply: None to date Allegations of arrest and ill-treatment in detention of Ms. Ge Zhihui

  1. The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of China has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).

  2. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, reiterated above, and thus, that the Government of China, by failing to protect the physical and psychological integrity of Ms. Ge Zhihui, has violated her right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as codified, inter alia in the articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.

(f) JUA 16/07/2014 Case No. CHN 7/2014 State Reply: 20/08/2014 Allegations of arrest, detention, and harassment of human rights defenders surrounding the 25th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Protests.

  1. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of China (People’s Republic of) for its reply, dated 20 August 2014, to the present communication.

  2. He regrets that, as of the drafting of this report, no official translation is available to the Government’s reply of 20 August 2014.

  3. The Rapporteur will make his views on the case known later on, after being able to read an English version of the reply.

(g) JUA 23/10/2014 Case No. CHN 9/2014 State Reply: None to date Allegations of arbitrary detention and enforced disappearance of Ms. Liu Xizhen in connection to her legitimate human rights activities, and the exercise of her rights to freedom of opinion and expression and peaceful association.

  1. The Special Rapporteur regrets that the Government of China (People’s Republic of) has not replied to the present communication, thereby failing to cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13, and to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).

  2. In the absence of information to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, reiterated above and thus, that the Government of China (People’s Republic of), by arbitrarily detaining Ms. Liu Xizhen and repressing her rights to freedom of opinion, expression, and peaceful association, has violated her right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided by articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.

(h) JUA 30/10/2014 Case No. CHN 10/2014 State Reply: 08/12/2014 Allegations concerning the sentencing of Ms. Liu Ping to six and a half years’ imprisonment, as well as ill-treatment and denial of medical treatment in detention.

  1. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of the People’s Republic of China for its reply, dated 8 December 2014, to the present communication.

  2. The Rapporteur takes note of the information provided by the Government that Ms. Liu Ping’s conviction was upheld on appeal.

  3. The Rapporteur finds that the Government in its reply does not sufficiently address the concerns raised in the initial communication, and therefore fails to fully and expeditiously cooperate with the mandate issued by the Human Rights Council in its resolution 25/13. Likewise, it fails to comply with its obligation, under international customary law, to investigate, prosecute and punish all acts of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as codified, inter alia, in the Convention against Torture (CAT).

  4. In the absence of sufficient evidence to the contrary, the Rapporteur concludes that there is substance in the allegations presented in the initial communication, reiterated above, and thus that the Government of the People’s Republic of China, by failing to investigate allegations of torture, has violated Ms. Liu Ping’s right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided by articles 1 and 16 of the CAT.

Colombia

JUA 23/01/2014 Case No. COL 1/2014 State Replies: 14/04/2014 and 22/04/2014 Alegaciones relativas al peligro inminente de asesinato del Sr. Flaminio Onogama Gutiérrez, líder del pueblo indígena Embera Chamí, y del asesinato de los Sres. Berlain Saigama Javari y Jhon Braulio Saigama, también líderes del pueblo indígena Embera Chamí, por supuestos miembros de los “grupos armados ilegales post desmovilización” que harían presencia en la comunidad de La Esperanza, ubicada en el municipio de El Dovio, en el departamento del Valle del Cauca, en Colombia.



  1. El Relator Especial agradece al Gobierno de Colombia por sus respuestas, de fechas 14 y 22 de abril del 2014, acusando recibo de la presente comunicación.

  2. El Relator Especial aprecia el esfuerzo del Gobierno en responder detalladamente a las inquietudes, obligaciones y preguntas presentadas en la comunicación inicial sobre las alegaciones relativas al peligro inminente de asesinato del Sr. Flaminio Onogama Gutiérrez y del asesinato de los Sres. Berlain Saigama Javari y Jhon Braulio Saigama, líderes del pueblo indígena Embera Chamí.

  3. El Relator Especial toma nota de la información ofrecida por el Gobierno sobre la veracidad de las alegaciones presentadas; sobre la existencia de quejas presentadas por las víctimas o en nombre de ellas; sobre las medidas adoptadas para garantizar el derecho a la vida del Sr. Flaminio Onogama Gutiérrez y su integridad física; sobre las investigaciones que se encuentran en curso a raíz de la muerte de los Sres. Sres. Berlain Saigama Javari y Jhon Braulio Saigama y sobre las medidas tomadas por el gobierno para resguardar los derechos humanos del pueblo Embera. No obstante, el Relator Especial desea hacer referencia a los artículos 3 y 6 de la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos y el Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos, que garantizan a todo individuo el derecho a la vida y a la seguridad de su persona y disponen que este derecho sea protegido por la ley y que nadie sea arbitrariamente privado de su vida. Es obligación del Estado establecer la infraestructura institucional necesaria para prevenir posibles violaciones a estos derechos. Asimismo, el Relator Especial desea hacer referencia al Gobierno a los artículos 7 y 12 de la Convención contra la Tortura en relación al deber del Gobierno de investigar los asesinatos, así como al párrafo 7(b) de la Resolución 16/23 del Consejo de Derechos Humanos. Por tanto solicita al Gobierno de Colombia que lo mantenga al tanto de la evolución de las investigaciones judiciales. En cuanto a las medidas llevadas a cabo por el Gobierno de Colombia ante las amenazas sufridas por el Sr. Flaminio Onogama Gutiérrez, el Relator Especial considera suficientes las medidas de seguridad tomadas por el Gobierno, que incluyen un hombre de protección, un apoyo de transporte y un medio de comunicación.

  4. Sin embargo, el Relator Especial insiste en conocer el resultado de las investigaciones sobre los asesinatos de los Sres. Berlain Saigama Javari y Jhon Braulio Saigama, para poder determinar si el Gobierno de Colombia ha actuado con la debida diligencia para responder a hechos graves que prima facie constituyen violación a los derechos de esas personas a no ser torturados o sometidos a tratos crueles, inhumanos o degradantes como afirma el derecho internacional consuetudinario codificado en los artículos 1 y 16 del CAT.

Congo (Republic of the)

JAL 21/07/2014 Case No. COG 2/2014 State Reply: 05/09/2014, 15/10/2014 and 15/10/2014 Allégations concernant la situation de ressortissants de la République Démocratique du Congo expulsés par les forces de l’ordre congolaises (République du Congo) depuis le mois d’avril de l’année 2014.



  1. Le Rapporteur spécial remercie le gouvernement de la République du Congo pour ses réponses, datées du 5 septembre 2014 et du 15 octobre 2014, à la présente communication.

  2. Le Rapporteur accueille avec intérêt l’information fournie par le gouvernement, notamment sur les enquêtes préliminaires effectuées au sujet de ces allégations. De plus, le Rapporteur prend note de l’information fournie par le gouvernement selon laquelle l’opération « Mbata ya bakolo » a entrainé des incidents de violence. A cause de cette violence, des étrangers ont été blessés. Le Rapporteur note également que cette opération a inclus l’expulsion sommaire de beaucoup d’étrangers sans que ceux-ci n'aient eu la possibilité de contester cette expulsion ou donner un justificatif de leur présence dans le pays. Le Rapporteur note l’importance de combattre la violence urbaine qui peut être attribuée aux étrangers habitant illégalement dans le pays. Toutefois, le Rapporteur voudrait souligner que bien que le gouvernement doive poursuivre ces personnes pour leurs crimes, l’expulsion sommaire d’étrangers présente le risque de violer les droits des étrangers sous la CCT.

  3. Le Rapporteur estime que le gouvernement, dans sa réponse, ne répond pas suffisamment aux préoccupations, obligations légales, et questions soulevées dans la communication initiale, ce qui le pousse à déduire que le gouvernement ne coopère pas pleinement avec le mandat émis par le Conseil des droits de l’homme dans sa résolution 25/13, et ne se conforme pas à son obligation, en vertu du droit international coutumier, d'enquêter, poursuivre, et punir tout acte de torture et autres peines ou traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants, comme codifié, entre autre, dans la Convention contre la torture autres peines ou traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants (CCT).

  4. En particulier, le Rapporteur est préoccupé par le fait que dans sa réponse, le gouvernement n’explique pas suffisamment pourquoi il n’a pas ouvert d'enquête sur les allégations d’utilisation disproportionnée de la force, ni poursuivi ni puni ceux qui ont potentiellement violé l'interdiction absolue de la torture et des traitements cruels, inhumains et dégradants. En plus, en ne permettant pas aux personnes concernées de contester leur expulsion sommaire, le gouvernement a potentiellement violé les droits de ces étrangers à un recours concernant la torture ou les traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants dont ils ont souffert.

  5. En l’absence d’information suffisante et convaincante prouvant le contraire, le Rapporteur conclut qu’il y a de la substance quant aux allégations présentées dans la communication initiale, réitérées ci-dessus, et donc, que le gouvernement de la République du Congo, en expulsant violemment des ressortissants de la République Démocratique du Congo, a violé leur droit de ne pas être soumis à la torture et autres peines ou traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants, comme prévu dans les articles 1 et 16 de la CCT.

Cuba

(a) JUA 04/12/2013 Case No. CUB 6/2013 State Reply: 11/02/2014 Alegaciones de abuso físico y psicológico del Sr. Yoeni Jesús Guerra García, quien se encuentra en detención.

  1. El Relator Especial agradece al Gobierno de Cuba por su respuesta, de fecha 11 de febrero del 2014, acusando recibo de la presente comunicación.

  2. El Relator Especial da cuenta del esfuerzo del Gobierno en responder a las inquietudes presentadas en la comunicación inicial sobre las alegaciones de abuso físico y psicológico del Sr. Yoeni Jesús Guerra García durante su detención.

  3. El Relator Especial toma nota de la información ofrecida por el Gobierno sobre la supuesta falsedad de las alegaciones presentadas por la víctima; sobre las quejas presentadas por la madre de la víctima; sobre las investigaciones a raíz de las denuncias de malos tratos físicos, y los exámenes médicos que determinaron que el estado de salud del Sr. Yoeni Jesús Guerra García era favorable.

  4. En vista de las contradicciones entre la información presentada por el Estado y las alegaciones de las víctimas, el Relator Especial solicita mayor información al Gobierno de Cuba y a los denunciantes a efectos de dar seguimiento al caso.

(b) JUA 21/07/2014 Case No. CUB 2/2014 State Reply: None to date Alegaciones en relación con presuntos ataques, amenazas, actos de hostigamiento y detención de defensores y defensoras de derechos humanos en Cuba.

  1. El Relator Especial lamenta que, hasta la fecha, el Gobierno de Cuba no haya respondido a la presente comunicación, y por ello, considera que no ha cumplido con su deber de cooperar con el mandato establecido por el Consejo de Derechos Humanos en la resolución 25/13. Asimismo, el Relator Especial considera que el Gobierno no ha cumplido con la obligación emanada de la norma consuetudinaria internacional de investigar, juzgar y sancionar todos los actos de tortura y los tratos crueles, inhumanos o degradantes, como establece, inter alia, la Convención contra la Tortura (CAT).

  2. Ante la falta de información que indique lo contrario, el Relator concluye que el Gobierno de Cuba, al no tomar medidas para proteger la integridad física y psicológica de los Sres. Roberto de Jesús Guerra Pérez, Jorge Luis García Pérez “Antúnez”, Ciro Alexis Casanova Pérez y la Sra. Yris Pérez Aguilera –defensores de derechos humanos-, es responsable por sus sufrimientos físicos y mentales y ha violado sus derechos a no ser torturados o sometidos a tratos crueles, inhumanos o degradantes como afirman los artículos 1 y 16 del CAT.

Cyprus

(a) JAL 24/04/2014 Case No. CYP 2/2014 State Reply: 01/07/2014 Allegations concerning the potential refoulement of Mr. A and his family



  1. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Cyprus for its reply, dated 01.07.2014, to the present communication.

  2. The Rapporteur welcomes the account of the Government in response to the concerns, legal obligations and questions raised in the initial communication. He takes note of the information provided by the Government that the application for asylum of Mr. A and his family was properly reviewed and rejected by the Government of Cyprus as well as the offices of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; and that Mr. A had access to the appeals procedure after the Government rejected his refugee application. Moreover, the Rapporteur acknowledges the account of the Government regarding the rights and benefits enjoyed by Mr. A and his family while in Cyprus awaiting a decision on his refugee application.

  3. Consequently, the Rapporteur concludes that the Government of Cyprus has properly analysed the refugee application of Mr. A and his family and ensured his and his family’s enjoyment of rights while awaiting the decision, and has not violated the right of Mr. A to have a fair opportunity to state a claim for refugee or asylee status. Nevertheless, the Rapporteur wishes to assert that the non-refoulement provision in the Convention against Torture (CAT), which is also a customary international law norm, is both more protective and narrower than the non-refoulement norm of the 1951 Convention on the Status of Refugees. The CAT protects only against the risk of torture and ill-treatment, not more general “persecution.” But its prohibition is more absolute as it protects from refoulement even persons who do not qualify as refugees or asylees. Article 3 of the CAT still obliges States not to extradite, deport or otherwise return a person to any country or territory where that person could be at risk of torture. Should Mr. A or his family be deported to such a country, Cyprus would violate their right to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, as provided by articles 1, 3 and 16 of the CAT.

(b) JAL 05/06/2014 Case No. CYP 3/2014 State Reply: 05/08/2014 Allegations of acts of intimidation and reprisals for cooperation with the UN, its mechanisms and representatives in the field of human rights in the form of the temporary arrest and ill-treatment of Mr. Doros Polykarpou.

  1. The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Cyprus for its reply, dated 05.08.2014, to the present communication.

  2. The Rapporteur acknowledges the comprehensive account of the Government in response to the concerns raised in the initial communication about the allegations of acts of intimidation and reprisals against Mr. Doros Polykarpou for having cooperated with UN Committee Against Torture (UNCAT), which resulted in his temporary arrest and ill-treatment.

  3. The Rapporteur takes note of the information provided by the Government about the number of warrants issued against Mr. Polykarpou and their transmission to him both in writing and orally; about the subsequent procedure of payment of two of the three fines; about who has the authority to issue the warrants and who can execute them; about the fact that he was warned orally that if he failed to pay the fine the warrant would be executed during his visit to Mennogeia Detention Center; about the fact that he was allowed to call his wife who is also a lawyer and about the fact that water was offered while in prison. Notwithstanding, the Rapporteur wants to remind the government that Rule 8 b) of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners affirms that untried prisoners shall be kept separate from convicted persons. In the case at hand, Mr. Polykarpou affirms being placed in the same wing as the convicted persons while in Central Prison in Nicosia and the Government's reply does not address this serious allegation.

  4. Considering the present scenario, the Rapporteur asks for information regarding any investigation that has been conducted related to the allegations of having been handcuffed throughout his imprisonment and having been denied access to a legal representative. Taking into account the delicate situation of human rights defenders and the seriousness of the allegation of reprisal for accessing the UN system of human rights protection, the Special Rapporteur asks the government to present the letters informing Mr. Polykarpou of the pending warrants or any records that can account for that information being transmitted to him.
1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   15


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©atelim.com 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət