(Balochwarna News Monitoring Desk):
A delegation of the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or
Involuntary Disappearances (*) concluded its ten-day official visit to
Pakistan. The visit took place from 10 to 20 September 2012. The
delegation of the Working Group was composed of Mr. Olivier de
Frouville, Chair of the Working Group, and Mr. Osman El-Hajjé, member of
the Working Group. During the visit, the Working Group received
information on cases of enforced disappearances and studied the measures
adopted by the State to prevent and eradicate enforced disappearances,
including issues related to truth, justice and reparation for the
victims of enforced disappearances.
The Working Group wishes to
thank the Government of Pakistan for extending an invitation to visit
the country. It acknowledges the efforts undertaken before and during
the visit to facilitate it, in particular for the assistance in terms of
the security arrangements in cooperation with the United Nations. The
Working Group also wishes to thank the United Nations Pakistan Country
Team as well as the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for
Human Rights Secretariat, for their support.
During its ten-day
mission, the Working Group visited Islamabad, Lahore, Karachi, Quetta
and Peshawar. In Islamabad, the Working Group had the honour of meeting
with Her Excellency, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and His Excellency
the Minister of Interior. The Working Group also met with the Advisor to
Prime Minister on Human Rights, the Governor of Punjab, the Additional
Secretary in charge of the United Nations and Economic Coordination at
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Inspectors General of various
provincial police agencies. In Lahore, the Working Group met with the
Home Secretary, the Additional Home Secretary and the Secretary
Prosecution of Punjab. In Karachi, the Working Group met the Chief
Minister, the Chief Secretary, the Home Secretary, and the Advocate
General of Sindh. In Quetta, the Working Group held meetings with the
Chief Secretary and the Home Secretary of Baluchistan. In Peshawar, the
Working Group met with the Home Secretary of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
In
Islamabad, the Working Group also held meetings with the Chief Justice
and the judges of the High Court of Islamabad, the Chair of the
Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances and the
parliamentarians of the Standing Committee on Human Rights.
Regretfully,
some of the meetings that the Working Group had requested with a number
of important actors both at the federal and provincial levels did not
take place, notably with the Minister of Law, Justice and Parliamentary
Affairs, the Minister of Defence, the Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court, the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, the
Inspector-General of Frontier Corps in Baluchistan and Khyber
Pakhtunkhwa provinces and the Chief Justices of the High Courts of
Lahore, Karachi, Quetta and Peshawar.
The Working Group held a
number of meetings with representatives of all sectors of the civil
society including NGOs, activists and lawyers. The Working Group also
met a number of relatives of disappeared persons in all parts of the
country.
The Working Group received allegations according to
which some of the persons with whom we met had been threatened or
intimidated. We call on the State to guarantee the safety of those who
have met with us and protect them against any form of reprisals, threat
or intimidation.
In addition, the Working Group met with
representatives of the diplomatic community in Islamabad, as well as
with Heads of various United Nations Agencies.
The invitation
extended by the Government to us and other special procedures of the
Human Rights Council is a testimony of its will to cooperate and take
human rights issues seriously. The WGEID welcomes this opening and hopes
that other special procedures mandate holders will be invited in the
near future to visit Pakistan.
The Working Group also welcomes
the ratification by Pakistan of the International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights and of the Convention against Torture. It calls on the
Government to ratify the Convention for the protection of all persons
against enforced disappearances.
The Working Group undertakes its
visits in a spirit of dialogue and cooperation and aims at formulating
constructive recommendations.
Before stating our preliminary
conclusions and recommendations, please note that we did not make any
public statements before the press conference today. Any declaration
quoted from one of the members of this Working Group has thus
incorrectly been attributed to us.
I. Mandate of the WGEID
The
WGEID is tasked with two main mandates. The first mandate is to deal
with cases of enforced disappearances. We receive allegations of cases
of enforced disappearances and we transmit those cases to the States,
asking them to take all necessary measures to find the fate or the
whereabouts of the concerned person. This is done in a “humanitarian
spirit”, that is to say that once the person is found, the case is
considered clarified. We do not look for individual or State
responsibilities. But we always remind the State of its obligations to
investigate the case, punish the perpetrators and provide integral
reparations to the victims.
The other mandate entrusted to the
WGEID is related to the Declaration for the protection of all persons
against enforced disappearances, adopted by the UN General Assembly in
1992 (thereafter ‘the Declaration’). The WGEID promotes the
implementation of the standards of the Declaration and encourages States
to implement those standards at the national level. In this respect, we
receive general allegations concerning violations of the Declaration
that are transmitted to the State, with the request to explain their
position and describe the steps they have undertaken in relation to
those allegations.
There have been a lot of discussions during
the visit about the mandate of this Working Group, in particular on the
issue of whether this was a “fact-finding” mission. This expression can
have different meanings. If one means by that a body which is tasked
with collecting evidence, with the view to initiate criminal
proceedings, this is not the role of the WGEID, as the WGEID has always
interpreted its mandate, as far as individual cases are concerned, as
“humanitarian”. Within this mandate of dealing with cases of enforced
disappearances, the WGEID always receives information about alleged
individual cases of enforced disappearances, as it did during this
mission. Furthermore, the WGEID receives information with respect to its
second mandate, which is related to the implementation of the standards
of the Declaration by States.
II. General context
Pakistan
has been on the road to democracy since its independence. As in all
countries worldwide, this road has been difficult and met with many
obstacles. Pakistan has endured several periods of military dictatorship
throughout its history, which resulted at times in massive violations
of human rights. The perceptions of different groups in the society of
not being treated on an equal footing with others created frustrations
and demands which were often responded to through violent means and
further inequalities. Article 25 of the Constitution of Pakistan
provides that “All citizens are equal before law and are entitled to
equal protection of law” and this principle should lead all policies of
the State.
Since 2008, there has been a new phase of
parliamentarian democracy, bringing much hope to the people of this
country. Pakistan’s political and institutional life is characterized by
a multi-party system, a strong independent judiciary, a vibrant civil
society and a lively press, discussing all kinds of matters, including
the problem of enforced disappearances.
Meanwhile, Pakistan is
facing important security challenges. There is a widespread perception,
among the population, that their security is not sufficiently ensured.
The State has to deal with multiple threats, coming from terrorist
movements or violent groups. The conflicts taking place in neighbouring
countries or territories is an additional factor of insecurity. The
Working Group acknowledges these threats and the need for the State to
ensure the right to life of their citizens. However, it also underlines
that actions taken to deal with security threats, and in particular with
terrorism, must at all times respect nationally and internationally
recognized human rights. Human rights violations in the name of the
fight against terrorism does not achieve its aim but can only, on the
contrary, lead to further violations.
III. The phenomenon of enforced disappearances in Pakistan
Cases pending before the WGEID
A
number of cases of enforced disappearances filed with the WGEID have
allegedly occurred in 1985 and in the beginning of the 1990s, in the
north-west region, in relation to the conflicts taking place in
Afghanistan. A number of cases were also reported to the WGEID to have
taken place in the 1990s, in relation to the military operations carried
out in Karachi and its aftermaths (Sindh province). At the beginning of
the 2000s, the Working Group started receiving cases of persons
allegedly abducted in the context of the so-called “war on terror” and
sometimes said to have been transferred to other State’s territories or
detention centres. Those cases mostly concerned the provinces of Punjab
and KPK, between 2003 and 2006. Starting from 2005-2006, a number of
cases were received from Sindh and Baluchistan. In 2011, as noted in its
annual report, the Working Group transmitted five new cases to the
Government, including two cases through its urgent action procedure. The
2011 annual report of the WGEID also indicates the latest public
information on the reported 107 cases concerning Pakistan, pending
before the WGEID.
2. Allegations received during the mission
According
to various official and unofficial sources met during the visit, it is
in the post 9/11 period that the question of “missing persons” began to
raise real attention at the national level. There is acknowledgement
that enforced disappearances have occurred and still occur in the
country. Cases continue to be reported to the national authorities. But
there are controversies both on the figures and on the nature of the
practice of enforced disappearances.
The figures communicated to
us range from less than a hundred to thousands. In Baluchistan alone,
some sources allege that more than 14,000 persons are still missing,
while the provincial government only recognizes less than a hundred. To
date, the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances still has
more than 500 cases in its docket concerning the whole country. The
number of officially registered allegations, although may not be
reflective of the reality of the situation, is itself an indication of
the existence of the phenomenon.
As far as the nature of the
practice is concerned, the authorities at the federal and provincial
levels with whom we met often declared that most of the “missing
persons” were in fact not victims of enforced disappearances. According
to those authorities, some of those persons had been under criminal
charges and had chosen to go in hiding, while some others have fled to
another country to join illegal armed groups. Others, according to the
same authorities, have been the victims of abductions by non state
actors for various reasons. Cases of enforced disappearances by State
actors, in this context, would be the result of misconducts and ultra
vires behaviour by some agents of the State.
However,
nongovernmental sources allege that there is a pattern of enforced
disappearances in Pakistan, imputable to law enforcement agencies in
conjunction with intelligence agencies.
During our visit families
told us their stories and each story, while being different, revealed
the same pattern. The abduction, often taking place in front of
witnesses, is reported to be perpetrated by law enforcement agencies,
like the police or the frontier corps, jointly with members of
intelligence agencies in civilian clothing. When asked whether they had
filed a complaint for illegal arrest, families generally say they tried
to file a first information report (FIR) with the police, but were
turned down or discouraged to do so. Most of them finally filed their
cases with the provincial High Court or the Supreme Court of Pakistan,
so that the Court would issue an order to the police to initiate an
investigation. In a large number of cases, families reportedly received
threats or were intimidated to try to prevent them to file such cases.
Some families were promised that if they would not file a case, their
loved ones would be released, which did not happen.
Some other
families were threatened that if they did file a case, their loved ones
will be harmed, or another member of their family would also be
abducted. According to the families we have heard, witnesses who were
called to testify before the courts were threatened and in some cases
victimized. In a few cases, the lawyers defending the families were
reportedly themselves victims of enforced disappearances.
Some of
the abducted persons were released while others were never seen again
by their relatives. A number of those who have returned have testified
to being held in unofficial places of detention. Many of those who came
back were allegedly threatened not to speak about their period of
disappearance. Some however have chosen to take high risks to give
statements before courts or before the Commission of Inquiry. In
Baluchistan, since 2010, a number of persons whose whereabouts were
previously unknown were found dead, generally with signs of torture and
sometimes decomposed to the point that their relatives were unable to
identify them. Sometimes those bodies were found far from the place
where they had been abducted, for some in deserted areas. The practice
of “delivering” dead bodies has allegedly accelerated in the years 2011
and 2012. Most of the families we have met, telling their stories, felt
abandoned and hopeless.
They implored that if their loved ones
were being accused of any crime, he or she should be presented before a
judge and, if recognized guilty, be convicted.
It is the
responsibility and duty of the State to investigate thoroughly these
serious allegations. The State of Pakistan, acknowledging the existence
of the problem of enforced disappearances, has already taken positive
steps to try to address this issue. The WGEID welcomes the declared will
of the Government to tackle this issue and look at the current
shortcomings in order to find the truth about the disappeared and
finally eradicate the crime of enforced disappearances in Pakistan.
Nevertheless, serious challenges remain when it comes to the prevention
and the eradication of enforced disappearances in Pakistan. The WGEID
emphasizes that, under article 3 of the Declaration, the State must take
effective measures to prevent and terminate acts of enforced
disappearance in any territory under its jurisdiction.
The WGEID
also underscores that in order to prevent any act of enforced
disappearances, it is of outmost importance that, as enshrined in the
Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced
Disappearances, any person deprived of liberty shall be held in an
officially recognized place of detention and be brought promptly before a
judicial authority (art. 10(1)).
IV. Efforts made by the State of Pakistan to deal with the problem of enforced disappearances
The
Working Group welcomes the role played by the judiciary to shed light
on the phenomenon of enforced disappearances in Pakistan and to trace
missing persons. In 2007, the Supreme Court filed a number of petitions
presented by individuals or NGOs. It was followed by provincial high
courts which also began to take up cases under their jurisdiction to
protect human rights. In a number of cases, the Supreme Court also took
suo motu actions, showing its determinate will to tackle the problem.
After the independence of the judiciary was reinstated in 2009, the
courts continued to play a major role in the search for the disappeared
persons and a number of persons resurfaced after having been kept in
unlawful custody for several months, sometimes for years. The WGEID was
told that the courts were also instrumental in facilitating the filing
of FIR by families in relation to the abduction of their relatives, when
they had previously been turned down by the local police.
Two
special bodies were set up successively on the issue of enforced
disappearances. In April 2010, the Interior Ministry set up a committee
to investigate the fate of the disappeared persons. In March 2011, the
Supreme Court decided to institute a specific body to deal with cases of
enforced disappearances, initially for six months, but its mandate was
then extended for three years. The two-member Commission of Inquiry on
Enforced Disappearances is tasked with following up on the work done by
the Interior Ministry’s Committee and to deal with cases already
received by the Supreme Court, as well as with receiving new cases. The
Commission can hear the families and the witnesses, in general in the
presence of the representatives of most of the law enforcement and
intelligence agencies. The Commission has held hearings in different
parts of the country. It can order the setting up of a “Joint
Investigation Team” (JIT) at the provincial level, in charge of
investigating the matter. It can also summon any potential perpetrator.
The JIT must report to the Commission on the result of the
investigation.
In May 2012, the Statute of the National
Commission on Human Rights as a national human rights institution (NHRI)
has been adopted by the Parliament. The authorities have told the WGEID
that the Commission will, among other mandates, have the responsibility
to deal with the issue of enforced disappearances, including the
exercise of quasi-judicial powers.
There have been commitments
from several official authorities to “solve” the problem of the “missing
persons” in Pakistan. In particular, as far as Baluchistan is
concerned, the Baluchistan “package” adopted by the new government
included a provision according to which all persons being in custody
should be either released or brought before a court.
V. Challenges faced by the State of Pakistan in resolving the issue of enforced disappearances
The judicial inquiries
Efforts
made by the courts proved to be efficient in a number of cases, where
the persons could effectively be traced and found, and could finally
return to their family. However, in the greatest number of cases, the
investigations initiated under the orders of the courts remained
inconclusive.
Reportedly, the courts have avoided using
compelling methods to ensure the cooperation of law enforcement and
intelligence agencies whose agents were accused of having perpetrated an
enforced disappearance. Some families informed the WGEID that, although
they had brought witnesses before the court to substantiate their
claims, the court before which the case was filed satisfied itself with
the oral declaration by the representative of the said agency, denying
the custody of the person. Others told the WGEID that the court failed
to use its power to summon an agent suspected of having participated in
an enforced disappearance.
The main complaint was that the
courts’ proceedings failed to result in prosecutions of the named
perpetrators, even when evidence was, according to their lawyers,
sufficient to do so.
2. The Commission of inquiry
The
same criticism was also made of the Commission of Inquiry, which is
said to have limited authority on the various law enforcement or
intelligence agencies, allegedly involved in the enforced disappearances
reported to the Commission. As in the case of courts, the WGEID
received reports that the Commission satisfied itself with the denial of
the accused agency that it had the concerned person in custody.
The
Commission informed the WGEID that should its orders not be complied
with, it had the power to initiate criminal proceedings against the
potential perpetrators. But the WGEID has received no report of such
criminal proceedings.
Some families also reported to the WGEID
that the Commission, after having reviewed a case, gave oral assurances
to the family that their loved ones would soon return back home, which
in fact never happened. They were not aware of whether or not a formal
order had been delivered to the authority allegedly having the
disappeared person in its custody.
The families we met had
different feelings about the fact that the hearings took place in the
presence of representatives of different agencies, including those being
accused of having abducted their loved ones: some said they had no fear
to confront them, whereas others felt intimidated. The Commission has
told the Working Group that families were given the choice to be heard
alone with the two members of the Commission, if they preferred to do
so. The Working Group is of the opinion that this should be the rule,
rather than the exception.
If families are willing to confront
and tell their stories in front of the agencies, they should be given
the possibility to do so. But generally, the families should be heard by
the two members of the Commission in a confidential meeting.
There
is no doubt that the courts and the Commission are facing enormous
difficulties in their task related to cases of enforced disappearances.
The fact that they are being criticized by some families is reflective
of the frustration, anguish and fear endured by these families. It is
also a sign that those institutions ought to be further strengthened.
The WGEID is in particular aware of the limits imposed on a two-member
Commission, notably with respect to the limited capacities in terms of
staffing.
3. Impunity
As
the High Commissioner for Human Rights said when recently visiting the
country “Impunity is dangerously corrosive to the rule of law in
Pakistan.” Listening to authorities and to victims, we could feel that
impunity was a concern for the whole society. Some officials conveyed
their concerns that criminals, terrorists or militants from armed groups
enjoyed a great impunity because, even when investigations were
initiated against them, they managed to get out of them, by using
threats against the police, the judges or witnesses. There were hints
that this might explain why some law enforcement or intelligence agents
might resort to illegal practices such as enforced disappearances.
The
WGEID is aware of the difficulties encountered by law enforcement
officials to bring criminals to justice and acknowledge the security
challenges faced by Pakistan in different areas. However, it underscores
that these challenges cannot be accepted as a justification to commit
such a heinous crime as enforced disappearances. We draw attention, in
this respect, to Article 7 of the Declaration which provides that: “No
circumstances whatsoever, whether a threat of war, a state of war,
internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be
invoked to justify enforced disappearances.”
Furthermore,
according to the information received by the WGEID, the practice of
enforced disappearances was also a tool to target political or human
rights activists, who are legitimately exercising their freedoms of
expression, association, and assembly.
Victims complained that,
even when clearly identified by witnesses, the perpetrators were not
only never convicted, but even never submitted to any effective
investigation. The WGEID, despite its reiterated requests, has received
no information related to convictions of state agents in relation to
acts of enforced disappearances.
We were told by government
officials that families of disappeared persons were not so keen to file
complaints against named perpetrators and that in the absence of any
complaint, no prosecution could be initiated. However, the WGEID would
like to recall article 13(1) of the Declaration which provides that
whenever there are reasonable grounds to believe that an enforced
disappearance has been committed, the State shall promptly refer the
matter to a competent and independent State authority for investigation,
even if there has been no formal complaint. No measure shall be taken
to curtail or impede the investigation.
It was also reported to
the WGEID that some victims and witnesses received serious threats when
reporting their cases to the police, the courts or the Commission of
Inquiry. The WGEID was pleased to hear from official authorities of the
Sindh and Baluchistan, but also at the federal level, that laws and
regulations relating to the protection of victims and witnesses were in
the process of being adopted. As provided in article 13(3) of the
Declaration, “steps shall be taken to ensure that all involved in the
investigation, including the complainant, counsel, witnesses and those
conducting the investigation, are protected against ill-treatment,
intimidation or reprisal.” A strong and comprehensive program for the
protection of victims and witnesses should be set up, with a special
attention to women as relatives of disappeared persons.
The WGEID
notes that the Prime Minister promised to the High Commissioner, during
her visit, that there would be a “zero tolerance” policy for such
abuses, and hopes that this policy will be implemented with urgency.
Investigation
against, and punishment of perpetrators, should be in accordance with
the law, and with all the guarantees of a fair trial.
Perpetrators
should be punished with appropriate penalties, with the clear exclusion
of the death penalty. Enforced disappearances can also be punished on
the basis of other crimes, as defined in the Criminal Code of Pakistan,
such as the offence of “kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and
wrongfully to confine person”. However, it is recommended the creation
of a new and autonomous crime of enforced disappearances, following the
definition given in the 2006 Convention or the protection of all persons
against enforced disappearances, and with the legal consequences
flowing from this qualification (see the WGEID’s study on the best
practices on enforced disappearances in domestic criminal legislation,
doc. HRC/16/48/Add.3).
The WGEID also notes that, in Pakistan,
military personnel cannot be submitted to trial before civil courts.
This might constitute a factor of impunity for human rights violations
and should be changed. Article 16 §§ 1 and 2 of the Declaration states
that persons alleged to have committed an enforced disappearance shall
be suspended from any official duties during the investigation and shall
be tried only by the competent ordinary courts, and not by other
special tribunal, in particular military courts.
4. Supervision and training of law enforcement agencies and intelligence agencies
During
its visit, the WGEID repeatedly received allegations according to which
there was a lack of supervision and accountability of law enforcement
and intelligence agencies to the Government.
Accountability and
full oversight of law enforcement and intelligence agencies is all the
more essential in a situation where the State has to face multiple
threats, like terrorism or political violence. In these circumstances,
there is a risk that intelligence agencies would acquire new powers to
interrogate, arrest and detain individuals, to the detriment of the law
enforcement agencies. This shift can ultimately endanger the rule of
law, as the collection of intelligence and collection of evidence about
criminal acts becomes more and more blurred.
Furthermore, agents
in charge of intelligence may be tempted to abuse the usually legitimate
secrecy of intelligence operations and commit violations of human
rights under the cover of this secrecy.
For these reasons, it is
of major importance that the executive effectively supervise and direct
the actions of the intelligence agencies. The Parliament has also a role
to play in this regard, as it is to hold the executive branch and its
agents accountable to the general public.
Appropriate training
should also be given to members of law enforcement and intelligence
agencies in the field of human rights, with particular focus on enforced
disappearances. It should be made clear to all, in particular, that, as
stated in article 6(1) of the Declaration that: “No order or
instruction of any public authority, civilian, military or other, may be
invoked to justify an enforced disappearance. Any person receiving such
an order or instruction shall have the right and duty not to obey it.”
5. Assistance to the families and reparation
Victims
of enforced disappearances are not only those who have been
disappeared, but also their families. Relatives are enduring pain and
anguish, as a consequence of the continuous uncertainty about the fate
or the whereabouts of their loved ones. In the immense majority of
cases, the disappeared persons are men and it is the women who are left
alone. The gendered dimension of the phenomenon of enforced
disappearances should be duly taken into consideration.
Family
members are also prevented from exercising their rights and obligations
due to the legal uncertainty created by the absence of the disappeared
person. This uncertainty has many legal consequences, among others on
the status of marriage, guardianship of under age children, right to
social allowances of members of the families and management of property
of the disappeared person. When asked, officials told us that there were
no specific legal institutions designed to deal with these complex
issues. To address this issue, the State of Pakistan should enable the
issuance of a “declaration of absence by reason of enforced
disappearance.”
During some meetings with officials, we heard
that relatives of the disappeared are often taken care of by the
extended family and that, in any case, they can file a civil claim in
court in order to obtain compensation. But the issue of “compensation”
should be clearly distinguished from the aid that should be provided to
the families to cope with the dire consequences of the absence of the
main breadwinner.
The WGEID recommends the establishment of
mechanisms providing for social allowances or appropriate social and
medical measures for relatives of disappeared persons in relation to the
physical, mental and economic consequences of the absence of the
disappeared. In this respect, we welcome the information provided by the
Advisor to the Prime Minister on Human Rights that there is an existing
fund dedicated to women which could be used for this purpose.
In
no case should the acceptance of financial support for members of the
families be considered as a waiver of the right to integral reparation
for the damage caused by the crime of enforced disappearances, in
accordance with article 19 of the Declaration.
In addition to the
punishment of the perpetrators and the right to monetary compensation,
the right to obtain reparation for acts of enforced disappearance under
article 19 of the Declaration also includes the means for as complete
rehabilitation as possible. This obligation refers to medical and
psychological care and rehabilitation for any form of physical or mental
damage as well as to legal and social rehabilitation, guarantees of
non-repetition, restoration of personal liberty, family life,
citizenship, employment or property, return to one’s place of residence
and similar forms of restitution, satisfaction and reparation which may
remove the consequences of the enforced disappearance.
6. Recommendations
The
WGEID would like now to share a number of preliminary recommendations
to the State of Pakistan. It is to be noted that these recommendations –
as well as the conclusions we have just exposed – are not exhaustive
and will be complemented in the final report, which will be presented
before the Human Rights Council at one of its sessions in 2013:
-
As a preventive measure against enforced disappearance, any person
deprived of liberty shall be held in an officially recognized place of
detention and be brought promptly before a judicial authority.
- The
Commission of Inquiry should be reinforced. Its membership should be
extended, so as to allow parallel hearings. Its staff and resources
should be strengthened and the Commission should be given its own
premises.
- The courts and the Commission of Inquiry should use all
powers they have to ensure compliance with their orders, including the
request of sworn affidavits and writs of contempt of courts.
- As a
rule, the families should be heard in confidential meetings before the
Commission of Inquiry, without the presence of representatives of law
enforcement and intelligence agencies.
- A new and autonomous crime
of enforced disappearances should be included in the Criminal Code,
following the definition given in the 2006 Convention or the protection
of all persons against enforced disappearances, and with all the legal
consequences flowing from this qualification.
- Investigation against
and punishment of perpetrators should be in accordance with the law,
and with all the guarantees of a fair trial. Perpetrators should be
punished with appropriate penalties, with the clear exclusion of the
death penalty.
- Investigations should be initiated whenever there
are reasonable grounds to believe that an enforced disappearance has
been committed, even if there has been no formal complaint.
-
Measures should be taken to ensure that, in case of human rights
violations, suspected perpetrators, including army personnel, are
suspended from any official duties during the investigation and are
tried only by competent ordinary courts, and not by other special
tribunal, in particular military courts.
- Clear rules and dedicated
institutions should be created in order to ensure the oversight and the
accountability of law enforcement and intelligence agencies.
-
Appropriate training should be given to members of law enforcement and
intelligence agencies in the field of human rights, with particular
focus on enforced disappearances.
- A comprehensive program for the
protection of victims and witnesses should be set up, with a special
attention to women as relatives of disappeared persons.
- The State
has to guarantee the safety of those who have met with the WGEID during
this visit and to protect them against any form of reprisals, threats or
intimidation.
- A system of declaration of absence as a result of
enforced disappearance should be issued in order to address the legal
uncertainties created by the absence of the disappeared person.
-
Financial aid should be provided to the relatives of the disappeared
persons, in particular women and children, in order to help to cope with
the difficulties generated by the absence of the disappeared person.
-
A program of integral reparation should be set up for all victims of
enforced disappearances, including not only compensation but also full
rehabilitation, satisfaction, including restoration of dignity and
reputation, and guarantees of non-repetition.
- Ratify the Convention
for the protection of all persons against enforced disappearances, and
recognize the competence of the Committee to consider individual and
inter-state complaints under article 31 and 32.
- If requested by the
Government of Pakistan, the United Nations and other international
organizations should stand ready to provide technical assistance and
consultative services, so as to implement the Working Group’s
recommendations.
*
To conclude, a mother of a disappeared
person has asked us to convey a message to all persons in charge of
public affairs in Pakistan.
She asked: “If your child disappeared, what would you do?”
This
question summarizes the ordeal families are going through. As far as
the WGEID is concerned, our only – but unsatisfactory response – to such
a torturing pain is to recall that the relatives of the disappeared
persons have the right to the truth, the right to justice and the right
to reparation, and it is the duty of the State of Pakistan to take all
necessary measures to make those rights effective.
Thank you.
Courtesy: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pa ... spx?NewsID=12549&LangID=E |
| | |
