No Government Executes Children, Do They?

Iran’s missile testing and supposed nuclear ambitions have been big news lately. You could even hear special audio of the sound of the Iranian missile actually blasting off on radio news programmes this week! It sounded … well, like a missile blasting off.

However, there’s another story the Iranian authorities are less keen to get out.

That’s the one about how they hang child offenders (those less than 18 at the time of the alleged offence) in defiance of international law.

Iran’s got nearly 140 child offenders on death row (and that’s just the number we know about). Since 1990 they’ve executed at least 30 child offenders, including seven last year and two so far this year.

Now four more are at imminent risk.

Behnoud Shojaee, Mohammad Feda’i, Salah Taseb and Sa’eed Jazee are facing execution in the next few days [link: http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=17819]


Please spread the word about this scandal.Take action to try to stop these executions by sending an email direct to the Iranian Head of Judiciary [link: http://www.amnesty.org.uk/actions_details.asp?ActionID=465]

We’ve been told that “every voice makes a difference” in these cases and that Iran is beginning to listen to internal and external pressure on this issue.
And please check back again to get an update on Behnoud and Mohammad’s fate and this disgraceful situation.

42 Days Without Charge, Are You Mad?

On Wednesday, MPs will make a crucial decision that could undermine the basic human rights of everyone in the UK.

“42 Days – who likes it and who doesn’t” is the talk of the media right now. They’re referring, of course, to the government’s plans to give police the power to lock people up for 42 days – six weeks – without even charging them with anything. Last week John Major waded in; then the Guardian has found that senior police figures have reservations; the Times says the public like it but that Brown’s going to lose Wednesday’s Commons vote (on the Counter-Terrorism Bill, which contains the 42-day proposal); while the Mirror (and a reluctant Home Secretary) notes that even the UK’s intelligence community isn’t calling for it.

Time for Amnesty to pitch in then – and we really don’t like it.

Amnesty’s UK Director Kate Allen has written to every potential rebel backbench MP, urging them to oppose any extension to pre-charge detention. Human rights in the UK are under serious threat and it’s time for MPs to defend them. Here’s what she had to say:

This week, you will have a chance to debate and vote on the Counter Terrorism Bill. The vote will be a watershed moment for human rights in the UK.

The Bill would increase pre-charge detention for terrorism suspects to 42 days. If this proposal goes ahead, people could be held for six weeks without knowing anything about the reason for their detention. This flies in the face of justice.

Prolonged detention without charge or trial undermines fair trial rights protected by international human rights law. Everybody who is arrested is entitled to be charged promptly and tried within a reasonable time, or to be released.

I am not reassured by the Government’s recent ‘concessions’.

- The Home Secretary will now have to be satisfied that there is a “grave and exceptional terrorist threat” before authorising an extension. This definition is sweepingly broad.
- Parliament will debate and vote on the extension earlier than previously. However, this debate would be meaningless because of the risk of prejudicing future trials.
- Finally, the Bill makes no provision for proper judicial safeguards.

I understand the complexity of counter-terrorism operations and the threat that we face from international terrorism. The horrific terrorist attacks of recent years, including in our own capital, were barbaric acts and gross human rights violations. All states have an obligation to act to protect people from terrorism. The perpetrators of terrorist attacks must be brought to justice.

However, unless governments respond to the threat of international terrorism with measures that are fully grounded in respect for human rights, they risk undermining the values they seek to protect and defend.

You have an opportunity this week to defend the values that underpin civil liberties in this country. I urge you to stand in support of principles that lie at the heart of our society, principles such as justice and liberty. The alternative is to succumb to the climate of fear that terrorists seek to breed among us.

I urge you to oppose any further extension of pre-charge detention.

Amnesty International members have been campaigning against extending pre-charge detention limits since the idea was first proposed. Over 7,000 people have signed our ‘Not a Day Longer’ petition at the Number Ten website http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/notadaylonger

It’s crunch time right now. Please spread the word on your blogs and sites or, even better, contact your MP and ask them to stand up for our civil liberties by opposing 42 days. You can find our press release here [link: http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news] and a handy list of ‘ten good reasons why extending pre-charge detention is a bad idea’ here [link:http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=17539].

Backbench MPs have received an impassioned plea from Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen ahead of today's debate on plans to extend pre-charge detention limits to 42 days in terrorism cases.

Describing the vote as 'A watershed moment for human rights in the UK,' Kate Allen urges MPs to oppose any further extension of pre-charge detention. By doing so, MPs 'have an opportunity this week to defend the values that underpin civil liberties in this country.' The letter has been sent to potential rebel MPs whose votes will be pivotal to whether the Counter-terrorism Bill becomes law. It concludes:

'I urge you to stand in support of principles that lie at the heart of our society, principles such as justice and liberty.

'The alternative is to succumb to the climate of fear that terrorists seek to breed among us.

'I urge you to oppose any further extension of pre-charge detention.'

Kate Allen states that the proposal to extend pre-charge detention 'flies in the face of principles of justice' and argues that she is 'not reassured by the Government's recent 'concessions'.' Amnesty believes that the Bill still lacks proper judicial safeguards and that parliamentary scrutiny will be meaningless because of the risk of prejudicing future trials. There is also serious concern that the definition of the 'grave and exceptional threat', that would trigger the Home Secretary's decision to seek extended pre-charge detention, is too broad.

Amnesty accepts that the government has a duty to protect the public but argues strongly that this should only be done in a way that respects their rights. Allen's letter argues:

'All states have an obligation to act to protect people from terrorism. The perpetrators of terrorist attacks must be brought to justice. But unless governments respond to the threat of international terrorism with measures that are fully grounded in respect for human rights, they risk undermining the values they seek to protect and defend.'

Amnesty International members have been campaigning against extending pre-charge detention limits since the idea was first proposed. Over 7,000 people have signed its 'Not a Day Longer' petition at the Number Ten website http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/notadaylonger

What Shall we do Next? I Know, Lets Have a Complete Ban on Cluster Bombs

Monday 19 May, about 100 world leaders will head to Dublin to kick-start a conference that could bring the world one step closer to the end of the use of cluster bombs in warfare.

From 19 – 30 May, representatives from about 100 countries – including the UK – will meet to finalise the text of an international cluster munitions treaty.

This treaty, which will hopefully be signed in November of this year, will see the banning of cluster bombs. This would be a really significant step and a really positive one at that. It could be as significant as the Ottawa Treaty that saw the ban of landmines in 2007.

Cluster bombs are dangerous and volatile explosives. They scatter hundreds of small-but-lethal bomblets over a wide area, many of which don’t explode on impact remaining deadly to the civilian population.

As a result they can have devastating consequences, particularly for children who pick up unexploded bomblets thinking that they are toys and then are severely injured or even killed as a result.

Earlier this week, Amnesty, Oxfam and Landmine Action released a poll revealing that more than six out of ten people across Britain believe the UK Government would no longer be a force for good if they didn’t support a cluster bombs ban, and that nearly eight out of ten people agree that we should push for a ban on the use of these weapons.

Read Landmine Action’s Simon Conway’s article in The World Today to find out more about these weapons and what they’re calling for.

As it stands at the moment, the UK Government is calling for a ban but is holding out for some exemptions to allow them to retain some cluster munitions in their arsenal.

Amnesty don't want the UK government to undermine moves towards a total ban on the use of cluster bombs.

So together with Landmine Action, Handicap International and several others we're pushing for the UK Government to sign up to a total ban – no exemptions.

Handicap International drew up a petition that had 25,000 signatures and handed this in to the Foreign Secretary not so long ago.

Amnesty have a delegation in Dublin pushing for this to happen and will let us know how they get on. In the meantime, please let as many people as possible know about this as possible.

src="/image_library/26/29/24580.gif"
alt="Protect the Human - Amnesty International" width="99" height="125" />

Detention without charge? Are you mad!?

Have you herd about this idea of holding people without charge for up to two months? What do you think of it? Surely it's a good idea if helps to get criminals, terrorists or other dangerous people off our streets, or is it?

The last I herd is Great Britain is a free country. We are all free to do as we please as long as we keep our behaviour within the law. One of the fundamental aspects of freedom is the principal of Innocent until proven guilty. If you accuse me of breaking the law it is up to you to prove it. It is my prerogative to protest my innocence, but before I can be considered guilty a judge and jury must be convinced of my guilt. Then and only then can I be sentenced to a term in jail, (or in other countries possibly execution). We hear with increasing regularity of people being released early for prison after new evidence prooves they are not guilty. Such as parents jailed for murdering their children, just for it to come out later to have been cot death. They are only the few examples of miscarriages of justice that get reported by the media, they show that the policy of innocent until proven guilty is the only way to go, because it is to easy to get it wrong in the first place. If people can be held for decades, or even executed for crimes they are not guilty of, then is it not possible, or perhaps even likely, that many more Innocent people will end up in prison for two months at a time while the real criminal is walking free maybe even plotting future crimes if this legislation is allowed to go through.

So i ask my question again, surely it's a good idea if helps to get dangerous people off our streets, or is it? If you answer is still yes then i have to ask; If it was you, your partner, son, or daughter who was made to spend the equivalent of a sentence for assault, in prison, without charge, would that be an acceptable sacrifice to make to help the police with their enquiries?


Find out more about this at http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=17539

Ten GOOD reasons why extending pre-charge detention is a BAD idea:

1. UNDERMINES one of our most basic rights, enshrined in UK law as far back as Magna Carta and now at the heart of the European Convention on Human Rights, to which UK is a signatory: the right for anyone who is detained by the state to be told promptly why they are being held and what they are charged with.

2. COMMUNITY relations will suffer if the Muslim community appears to be particularly targeted for prolonged pre-charge detention. This could have an impact on intelligence gathering and policing, and could undermine positive efforts to engage with Muslims in the UK.

3. IMPACT on any individuals detained for such a long time – in terms of their job, family, house, friendships and relationships within their community – would be devastating.

4. QUESTIONED widely by experts – Lord Goldsmith (former Attorney General), Stella Rimington (former MI5 Chief), Sir Ken MacDonald (Director of Public Prosecutions and head of the Crown Prosecution Service) and parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights.

5. UNDERMINES presumption of innocence –Two months in prison is roughly equivalent to the length of time someone might serve in prison for assault. Lengthy pre-charge detention would impose what is in effect a ‘sentence’ of two months on somebody who may never be charged with any crime.

6. UK ALREADY has by far the longest pre-charge detention period for offences related to terrorism of any common law state.

7. INTERNATIONAL STANDING – it is much harder for the UK to criticise the human rights records of other countries that lock people up without charge when we are doing so at home. This measure would give other countries a ‘green light’ to curtail civil liberties.

8. HISTORY – from Northern Ireland and Amnesty’s experience all over the world - shows that locking people up without charge doesn’t work.

9. STATEMENTS obtained from suspects could be deemed inadmissible at trial if detention conditions are considered to be unduly harsh.

10. SAFEGUARDS discussed are insufficient – the kind of judicial oversight proposed is in no way the same as charging someone and giving them the chance to defend themselves in a fair trial.

British Residents in Guantanamo Bay

There are six British residents among the 400+ Guantanamo Bay detainees. They are still being held illegally, without charge, without trial, without legal council and under threat of torture. It is surly unacceptable that people can still be treated like that in this day and age. If the prisoners were to be charged, tried and convicted, then they could be held for as long as the law says is appropriate. Few of the inmates of Guantanamo Bay have been formally charged or have any hope of a fair trial.
Among the British residents are several who have had resident status in the UK for over a decade, some as long as 20 years. Between them they have 9 children who don’t know if their father will ever come home. At least one was a charity volunteer working in Afghanistan, and now lives in a dog kennel for his trouble. One of the men is cleared for release, but if our government wont accept him back he will be deported to Jordan where he will be at greater risk of torture.
There have been three UK residents released already. Testimony from them describes life as a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay. You must read it before you can even begin to understand what their lives are like, but not having been in their shoes we will never fully understand. I hope it is nothing anybody reading this will ever have to experience. For more information follow the link below.