Viewing entries in
UN

IFOR speaks at the UN on the fundamental rights of the people of Western Sahara

Comment

IFOR speaks at the UN on the fundamental rights of the people of Western Sahara

During the 49th session of the UN Human Rights Council, the International Fellowship of Reconciliation took the floor in the plenary of the Council to address the issue of the violations of fundamental rights in Western Sahara.

In particular, IFOR referred to the right to self-determination of the people of Western Sahara and to the military occupation by the Kingdom of Morocco and consequent lasting violation of human rights in the region.


Mr. President,
With reference to the report on the Conclusions and Recommendations of the Special Procedures (A/HRC/49/26), IFOR would like to highlight the importance of the seven themes that have been recurring in the reports presented by the Special Procedures during the year 2021.
Among these, we pay particular attention to the Prevention of human rights violations, security and peace building, as well as to new technologies in the context of the illegal military occupation of the Non-Self-Governing Territory of Western Sahara by the Kingdom of Morocco.
There can be no peace in Western Sahara without respect for the fundamental rights of peoples, starting with the right to self-determination, enshrined in General Assembly resolution 1514 on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples and reaffirmed by the International Court of Justice in its 1975 Advisory Opinion.
IFOR calls on the Council to implement without delay operational paragraph 5 of General Assembly resolution 76/152 and to pay particular attention to the violation of the right to self-determination resulting from the aggression and military occupation of Western Sahara by the Kingdom of Morocco.

Comment

IFOR submission for the UN OHCHR quadrennial report on conscientious objection to military service

Comment

IFOR submission for the UN OHCHR quadrennial report on conscientious objection to military service

The International Fellowship of Reconciliation submitted a report on conscientious objection to military service to the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, answering to the call for inputs for the preparation of the OHCHR quadrennial analytical report on this topic which will be presented at the 50th session of the UN Human Rights Council in June 2022. The OHCHR report aims to provide information on new developments, best practices and remaining challenges regarding conscientious objection to military service since 2017

INTRODUCTION

The International Fellowship of Reconciliation welcomes the opportunity to submit input for the quadrennial report of the OHCHR on the right to conscientious objection to military service and expresses its appreciation for this important work.

This contribution is based on IFOR's research and report compilation work on the right to conscientious objection to military service, and largely on the work undertaken for UN State Reviews within the Universal Periodic Review process of the Human Rights Council and within the Human Rights Committee.

Following an overview of main aspects concerning the right to conscientious objection, since the last quadrennial Report, this submission provides a compendium of some country-based analyses on the right to conscientious objection and related issues with presentation of local developments, good practices and remaining challenges.

The right to conscientious objection to military service is directly linked to the right to life and the main purpose of the United Nations “to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace“.

Additionally, IFOR would like to emphasize the importance of the collective effort within the UN system and particularly at the Human Rights Council regarding the right to conscientious objection to military service. During the 36th session of the Council, following the presentation of the last OHCHR thematic report, Resolution A/HRC/36/L.20 on conscientious objection was adopted without a vote.

It is also important to encourage attention to this right during regular state review procedures, then to invite member states to accept recommendations on this issue and to provide assistance in efforts to fully implement this human right.

 


OVERVIEW

The right to conscientious objection to military service is a human right inherent to the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and "it entitles any individual to an exemption from compulsory military service if this cannot be reconciled with that individual’s religion or belief".

In this overview a number of main issues related to the right to conscientious objection are listed -accompanied with some cases-, highlighting developments, good practices and remaining challenges. These issues will then be detailed in the section dedicated to the country-based analyses.

Read the complete report submitted by IFOR here


OHCHR quadrennial report on conscientious objection to military service

In its resolution 20/2 adopted on 16 July 2012, the Human Rights Council requested the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights “to prepare, in consultation with all States, relevant United Nations agencies, programmes and funds, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations and national human rights institutions, a quadrennial analytical report on conscientious objection to military service, in particular on new developments, best practices and remaining challenges.”

The previous quadrennial analytical report was published on May 1st 2017 and presented to the 35th session of the UN Human Rights Council. You can read here the OHCHR report A/HRC/35/4 and contributions previously submitted

On May 25th 2019 the OHCHR published a new report on approaches and challenges for obtaining the status of conscientious objector to military service which was then presented to the 41st session of the UN Human Rights Council.

You can read here the report A/HRC/41/23

Comment

IFOR speaks at the UN about the Peace Community of San José de Apartadó on its 25th anniversary

Comment

IFOR speaks at the UN about the Peace Community of San José de Apartadó on its 25th anniversary

The International Fellowship of Reconciliation participated in the UN Human Rights Council General Debate on item 3: Promotion and protection of all human rights, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights.

IFOR took the floor to address the members of the plenary concerning the Peace Community of San José de Apartadó and the several human rights violations the community members are facing.


Human Rights Council, 49th Session 

16th March 2022 

Item 3: Promotion and protection of all human rights,  

civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights 

Oral statement delivered by the International Fellowship of Reconciliation. 

Mr. President, 

Despite some progress, implementation of the Peace Agreement in Colombia is slower than expected.1 This has made the human rights situation increasingly dramatic. 

IFOR is especially concerned about the safety of the members of the Peace Community of San José de  Apartadó. 

The establishment of the Peace Community, 25 years ago this month, is based on principles of  International Humanitarian Law that protect civilians from being involved in armed conflicts.  

The recent murder of Huber Velásquez, a social leader of San José de Apartadó reveals the freedom of  operation of paramilitary groups in the region [that manifests itself in extortions, forced meetings,  sanctions, threats and recruitments].  

The Peace Community also reported violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression. In 2018, the Peace Community publicly denounced several human rights violations committed against its  members by paramilitaries and the tacit and passive attitude of the army concerning these violations. The 17th Brigade of the Colombian Army denounced the Peace Community for slander and defamation and  the Constitutional Court eventually urged the Peace Community to refrain from denouncing such issues.  This decision raises strong concerns regarding the respect of international obligations, increases the  vulnerability of human rights defenders and promotes a climate favorable to the persistence of human  rights violations and their impunity.  

IFOR calls upon the Member States and the office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights to monitor  the violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and to support an urgent action by the Colombian government to ensure the safety of the Peace Community and the dismantlement of  paramilitary successor groups, [as agreed in point 3 of the Final Peace Agreement]. 

Thank you. 


Click here to watch the delivery of the statement in the plenary.

Click here to download the complete statement.

IFOR has submitted a written thematic statement to the 49th session of the UN Human Rights Council. This document, titled "Colombia: New Threats Against The Peace Community Of San Jose De Apartado On Its 25th Anniversary", has been received by the Secretary-General and has been circulated in accordance with Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31. It is registered officially on the UN website as A/HRC/49/NGO/239 and is available here.


25th anniversary of the Peace Community

The Peace Community represents a longstanding effort of nonviolent resistance in a highly violent context in Colombia.

The Community was created in 1997 and March 23rd marks its 25th anniversary.

IFOR, together with FOR Peace Presence and FOR Austria is organizing a webinar series on the occasion of this anniversary. Learn more about the series here. And about the webinar on the Peace Community here.

Read more about the anniversary on site celebration, here.

Comment

IFOR takes the floor at the UN Human Rights Council on war resisters and nuclear threat

Comment

IFOR takes the floor at the UN Human Rights Council on war resisters and nuclear threat

IFOR is participating in the 49th session of the UN Human Rights Council which started on February 28th and will conclude on April 1st.

On March 8th the High Commissioner addressed the plenary on current human rights situations and IFOR took the floor during the General Debate, after the members states, and delivered an oral statement with direct references to the current situation in Ukraine and highlighting other concerning situation such as the illegal practice of "batidas" to illegally recruit young people in Colombia.


Human Rights Council, 49th Session 

Geneva, 8th March 2022 

Item 2: General Debate with the High Commissioner on Human Rights 

Madame High Commissioner,  

International Fellowship of Reconciliation - IFOR is extremely concerned about the deterioration of  human rights as a result of warfare including in Ukraine.  

We express our solidarity to all those who are suffering because of war. 

We plead to promote peace without increasing ongoing violence.  

The answer cannot be reduced to the alternative of suffering or waging war. 

The way forward is through international law, cooperation, disarmament and the establishment of civilian  peace corps, for instance.  

We support the right to refuse to kill and non-violent resistance to war, in Ukraine, in Russia and in all  countries, including the «No Means No» campaign in Belarus to support war resisters.  Violations of the right to conscientious objection to military service continue, including in Colombia,  where irregular recruitment practices -“batidas”- persist, [ignoring rulings from the Constitutional Court1,  recruitment regulations and compliance with the peace agreement].2 

We are concerned about violations of the right to Freedom of Expression and Assembly also for those  protesting against war. Over 13,000 protesters3have been detained in 147 Russian cities since February  24th.4 

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion is a non-derogable right and, as is freedom of expression, it  continues to apply in situations of armed conflict. 

We would also like to draw the attention of this Council to the nuclear threat. 

Nuclear deterrence does not maintain peace and security, it only brings terror and threat to humanity. The Right to Life is “the supreme right from which no derogation is permitted”5; [the UN Human Rights  Committee6stated that the threat or use of nuclear weapons is incompatible with the Right to Life and  may amount to a crime under international law].  

IFOR urgently calls on all Member States to ratify and implement the UN nuclear ban treaty [Treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons]7. 


1 Sentence C-879/11 - Measures to compel those who have not complied with the obligation to register in order to define their military situation - They  cannot consist of arbitrary detentions that violate personal liberty or judicial confidentiality. 

2 Annual Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights and reports of the Office of the High Commissioner and the Secretary-General,  37th session, 26 February-23 March 2018. National, regional and international human rights law stipulates that military forces are not responsible for citizen  security, the fight against organised crime, coexistence and development. In exceptional situations, the National Police may require military assistance,  which must be provided in accordance with the principle of police primacy and with strict civilian control. The tasks of coexistence and development are the  exclusive responsibility of the civilian authorities". 

3 As of March 6th. 

4 According to OVD-Info data. https://ovd.news/news/2022/03/02/russian-protests-against-war-ukraine-chronicle-events  5 Parag. 2 of General Comment n. 36 of the Human Rights Committee. 

6 General Comment No. 36 (2018) on art. 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) on the right to life. 7 entered into force last January 22nd 2021.



Comment

IFOR addresses the UN Human Rights Council on the right to refuse to kill

Comment

IFOR addresses the UN Human Rights Council on the right to refuse to kill

On March 10th, on the occasion of the 49th session of the UN Human Rights Council, IFOR participated in the Interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the freedom of religion or belief, Mr. Ahmed Shaheed, and addressed the issue of the right to conscientious objection to military service in the plenary.

The statement has been co-sponsored by War Resisters' International and referred as well to the concerning situation of armed conflicts.


Human Rights Council, 49th Session 

Geneva, 10th March 2022 

Item 2: Interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the freedom of religion or belief Joint oral statement delivered by the International Fellowship of Reconciliation. 

Mr. President, 

We thank the Special Rapporteur for His report1 and share the same concern for the violation of the right to  conscientious objection to military service of objectors from religious or belief minorities. We are aware of two Jehovah’s Witnesses currently imprisoned as conscientious objectors in South Korea.2 There  are twenty others imprisoned in Eritrea3 where there is a system of indefinite National Service. Last year we had the case of Ukrainian protestant conscientious objectors in the Rivne region whose right has  been violated.4 

Violations of the right to conscientious objection to military service continue in many countries. In Colombia, young people are recruited by the official army through arbitrary detentions [batidas], although the  Constitutional Court has forbidden it in 2011.5 

Conscientious objectors continue to be imprisoned in various countries, such as Turkmenistan6, Singapore7,  Eritrea8, Tajikistan9, Israel10. 

In Turkey, Eritrea and Singapore the right is not recognized. Turkish objectors are facing a situation of “civil  death”.11 

As highlighted by the SR in His report, we are deeply alarmed by the violation of this right in situations of armed  conflicts. 

Ukraine compels all males of age 18-60 to take arms and fight in the current war; on the other side we witness  the arresting of thousands of anti-war Russian citizens, and we hear that not only contract soldiers, but also  ordinary conscripts are employed in the war.12 

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion is a non-derogable right, like freedom of expression, and it continues  to apply regardless of a situation of armed conflict. 

We urge all member States to release all imprisoned conscientious objectors and respect international standards  [for the exercise of the right to conscientious objection]. 



1 A/HRC/49/44https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/RegularSessions/Session49/Documents/A_HRC_49_44_AdvanceUneditedVersion.docx

2 https://www.jw.org/en/news/legal/by-region/south-korea/jehovahs-witnesses-in-prison/ 

3 As of March 2022. https://www.jw.org/en/news/legal/by-region/eritrea/jehovahs-witnesses-in-prison/ 

4 Parag. 79 of the thirty-first report by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) on the human rights situation in  Ukraine (1 August 2020 to 31 January 2021), based on the work of the United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mission in Ukraine (HRMMU). https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/UA/31stReportUkraine-en.pdf 

5 Sentence C-879/11 - Measures to compel those who have not complied with the obligation to register in order to define their military situation - They  cannot consist of arbitrary detentions that violate personal liberty or judicial confidentiality. 

6 https://www.ecoi.net/en/document/2025552.html

7 https://www.jw.org/en/news/legal/by-region/singapore/jehovahs-witnesses-in-prison/

8 https://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/HRC/Pages/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=26439&LangID=E

9 https://www.forum18.org/archive.php?article_id=2629

10 https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-conscientious-objector-released-from-military-prison/ 

https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=INT%2fCCPR%2fCSS%2fISR%2f47719&Lang=en 11 The situation of conscientious objectors is defined as “civil death” by European Court of Human Rights. (Ulke v. Turkey, application no. 39437/98). 12 https://takiedela.ru/news/2022/02/24/komitet-soldatskikh-materey/ 

https://mobile.twitter.com/KevinRothrock/status/1501567647741358082 

https://www.interfax.ru/world/827191


Comment

 IFOR joins statement at the UN on Western Sahara

Comment

IFOR joins statement at the UN on Western Sahara

On the occasion of the opening debate of the 49th session of the UN Human Rights Council, which took place in Geneva on March 8th, the International Fellowship of Reconciliation joined a statement delivered by the American Association of Jurists, on behalf of the NGOs Geneva Support Group for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights in Western Sahara.


Item 2 – Annual report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights General debate 

I thank you, 

I have the honour to speak on behalf of a group of more than 300 organisations (www.genevaforwesternsahara.org); including the Sahrawi National Commission of Human  Rights. 

We express our deepest concern about the continuing systematic and serious violations of human  rights and International Humanitarian Law norms committed by the Kingdom of Morocco in the  occupied Non-Self-Governing Territory of Western Sahara. 

The illegal plundering of the Saharawi natural resources continues with the support in particular  of the member countries of the European Union, in violation of the decisions of the Court of  Justice of the European Union. 

Sahrawi human rights defenders, journalists and political prisoners are subjected to harassment,  threats, arbitrary arrests, ill-treatment, torture, sexual violence. Peaceful manifestations in the  Occupied Western Sahara are violently repressed. The use of drones has caused the death of civilians of different nationalities. 

The inexplicable silence observed by the Office of the High Commissioner regrettably supports  the persistent impunity enjoyed by the Kingdom of Morocco for the crimes committed in the  Occupied Western Sahara. 

I thank you for your attention. 

****** 

Point 2 – Rapport annuel du Haut-Commissaire des Nations Unies aux droits de l’homme Débat général 

Je vous remercie, 

J'ai l'honneur de parler au nom d'un groupe de plus de 300 organisations  (www.genevaforwesternsahara.org) ; y compris la Commission Nationale Sahraouie des Droits  de l'Homme. 

Nous exprimons notre plus vive préoccupation quant aux violations systématiques et graves des  droits de l'homme et des normes du Droit International Humanitaire commises par le Royaume  du Maroc dans le Territoire Non Autonome occupé du Sahara Occidental. 

Le pillage illégal des ressources naturelles du peuple Sahraoui continue avec le soutien en  particulier des pays membres de l’Union européenne, en violation des décisions de la Cour de  Justice de l’Union européenne. 

Les défenseurs des droits de l'homme, les journalistes et les prisonniers politiques sahraouis sont  soumis au harcèlement, aux menaces, aux arrestations arbitraires, aux mauvais traitements, à la  torture, aux violences sexuelles. Les manifestations pacifiques au Sahara occidental occupé sont  violemment réprimées. L’utilisation de drones a causé la mort de civils de différentes  nationalités. 

L’inexplicable silence observé par le Haut-Commissariat vient malheureusement conforter  l'impunité persistante dont jouit le Royaume du Maroc pour les crimes commis au Sahara  Occidental occupé.

Je vous remercie pour votre attention.  

****** 

Tema 2 – Informe anual del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos  Humanos 

Debate general 

Muchas gracias, 

Tengo el honor de hablar en nombre de un grupo de más de 300 organizaciones  (www.genevaforwesternsahara.org); incluida la Comisión Nacional Saharaui de Derechos  Humanos. 

Expresamos nuestra más profunda preocupación por las sistemáticas y graves violaciones de los  derechos humanos y de las normas del Derecho Internacional Humanitario cometidas por el  Reino de Marruecos en el Territorio No Autónomo ocupado del Sahara Occidental. 

El saqueo ilegal de los recursos naturales del pueblo saharaui continúa con el apoyo en particular  de los países miembros de la Unión Europea, en violación de las decisiones del Tribunal de  Justicia de la Unión Europea. 

Los defensores de los derechos humanos, los periodistas y los presos políticos saharauis son  objeto de acoso, amenazas, detenciones arbitrarias, malos tratos, tortura, violencia sexual. Las  manifestaciones pacíficas en el Sáhara Occidental ocupado son reprimidas con violencia. El uso  de drones ha causado la muerte de civiles de diferentes nacionalidades. 

El inexplicable silencio observado por la Oficina del Alto Comisionado lamentablemente  respalda la persistente impunidad de la que goza el Reino de Marruecos por los crímenes  cometidos en el Sáhara Occidental Ocupado. 

Les agradezco su atención. 

*****



Western Sahara case

1963                 Western Sahara was integrated to the list of Non Self-Governing Territories (NSGT) by the Special Committee on decolonization (C24), the proposal was endorsed by the UN General Assembly (resolution 1956).

1966                 Adoption of resolution 2229 by the UN General Assembly, which invited the Administering Power (Spain) to determine at the earliest possible date the procedures for the holding of a referendum with a view to enabling the indigenous population of the Territory to exercise freely its right to self-determination; Spain failed in its mandate as Administering Power and never organized the referendum.

6 Nov. 1975       the International Court of Justice (ICJ) released its Advisory opinion requested by the UN General Assembly on the legal status of Western Sahara: the Court asserted that the materials and information presented to it do not establish any tie of territorial sovereignty between the territory of Western Sahara and the Kingdom of Morocco. Thus the Court has not found legal ties of such a nature as might affect the application of resolution 1514 (XV) in the decolonization of Western Sahara and, in particular, of the principle of self-determination through the free and genuine expression of the will of the peoples of the Territory.

                        Hassan II launched the military invasion of Western Sahara, followed by thousands of civilians (Green March).

                        Adoption of resolution 380 by the UN Security Council, which called upon Morocco immediately to withdrawn from the Territory of Western Sahara all the participants in the march.

NOTE: From then on, Western Sahara became (and still is today) the only NSGT which is under foreign illegal military occupation.

26 Febr. 1976     Spain informed the UN Secretary General that as of that date it had terminated its presence in Western Sahara and relinquished its responsibility over the Territory.

NOTE: From then on, Western Sahara became (and still is today) the only NSGT which has not an internationally recognised Administering Power: de jure, Spain should still be considered as the Administering Power, de facto, the UN has the primary responsibility over the Territory.

1979                 Mauritania signed a peace agreement with the Polisario Front and withdrew from the Territory.

                        Adoption of resolution 34/37 by the UN General Assembly, which deeply deplored the aggravation of the situation resulting from the continued occupation of Western Sahara by Morocco and the extension of that occupation to the territory evacuated by Mauritania. The General Assembly also recognized the Polisario Front as the representative of the people of Western Sahara.

1980                 Adoption of resolution 35/19 by the UN General Assembly, which declared that it was deeply concerned at the aggravation of the situation deriving from the continued occupation of Western Sahara by Morocco and reiterated the appeal to Morocco to terminate the occupation of Western Sahara.

. . . continue reading about Western Sahara case, and recent developments, in English, Spanish and French on the website of the Geneva Support Group

Comment

IFOR joins "Appeal for Peace in Ukraine" at the UN

Comment

IFOR joins "Appeal for Peace in Ukraine" at the UN

On February 28th the 49th session of the UN Human Rights Council started its working session and on March 3rd and 4th an Urgent debate on the situation of human rights in Ukraine, stemming from the Russian aggression.

You can watch here the plenary meeting of the mentioned urgent debate with the interventions of member states and NGOs.

On March 8th, during the General Debate with the High Commissioner for Human Rights, Madam Bachelet, IFOR joined 20 other NGOs in an "Appeal for Peace in Ukraine", delivered by the Associazione Papa Giovanni XXIII.


49th Regular Session of the Human Rights Council, 28 February – 1 April 2022 Item 2: General Debate with the High Commissioner on Human Rights  Joint Oral statement delivered by: Associazione Comunità Papa Giovanni XXIII (APG23) Co-signing NGOs1:  

Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII (APG23); Association Points-Cœur; AVSI  Foundation; Baptist World Alliance (BWA); Center for Global Nonkilling; Confédération  Internationale Société de Saint Vincent de Paul; Conscience and Peace Tax International  (CPTI); Dominicans for Justice and Peace (Order of Preachers); Dominican Leadership  Conference; Edmund Rice International; Foundation for the Social Promotion of Culture;  ICMICA-MIIC Pax Romana; International Catholic Child Bureau (BICE); International  fellowship of Reconciliation – IFOR; International Organization for the Right to Education  and freedom of Education (OIDEL); International Volunteerism Organization for Women  Education and Development (VIDES International); Istituto Internazionale Maria Ausiliatrice  (IIMA); MIAMSI; Mouvement contre le Racism et pour l’Amitiéentre les Peuples (MRAP);  New Humanity. 

“Appeal for Peace in Ukraine” 

Madam High Commissioner,  

I speak on behalf of 20 NGOs to express our extreme dismay at the military action that is currently  unfolding in Ukraine. We would like to echo your appeal2 of February 24 that urges an immediate halt to  hostilities that puts countless civilian lives at risk.  

We bring into this room the voice of the defenceless victims of conflicts, whose human rights are being  violated. 

We would like to recall the 2016 Declaration on the Right to Peace3 that affirms “Everyone has the right  to enjoy peace such that all human rights are promoted and protected and development is fully realized.” 

We believe that a process of disarmament is needed in order to guarantee peace. All countries involved in  the security architecture of Europe must commit to the reduction of strategic and non-strategic nuclear  weapons stored in the continent. Moreover, the Treaty on Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons should be  signed and implemented by all States.  

We appeal to the UN, the international community, all parties to strive for an end to the fighting in Ukraine  by enforcing international law and finding a solution to the conflict based on the principle of peaceful  settlement of disputes. 

“War is a “scourge”… It is an adventure without return that compromises humanity's present and threatens  its future… War is always a defeat for humanity”4 

No one has the right to make a war, yet we all have the duty to build peace. 

Thank You! 


1 NGOs not accredited to ECOSOC supporting this statement: 1. Japan Committee for the Right to Peace 2 https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=28153&LangID=E 

3 A/RES/71/189 

4 Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, paragraph 497


Comment

Joint press release on the UN Human Rights Committee's finding in the case of a Greek conscientious objector

Comment

Joint press release on the UN Human Rights Committee's finding in the case of a Greek conscientious objector

IFOR, together with WRI-War Resisters' International, EBCO-European Bureau for Conscientious Objection and Connection e.V., releases today, January 18th, a joint press statement on the historical decision of the UN Human Rights Committee in the case of Lazaros Petromelidis.


"UN Human Rights Committee finds multiple violations in a landmark case of Greek conscientious objector to military service”


On December 6th, the UN Human Rights Committee announced their decision on the case of conscientious objector Lazaros Petromelidis from Greece. The Committee found violations of the articles 9(1), 12(2), 14(7), and 18(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and asked Greece to take necessary measures addressing these violations.
As the organisations signing this statement, we welcome this decision of the Human Rights Committee.
The decision of the UN Human Rights Committee1 in a longstanding case of a Greek conscientious objector advances relevant jurisprudence and could be significant for conscientious objectors in other
countries too.

Lazaros Petromelidis had refused on ideological grounds to enlist for military service in 1992, when there was no provision for alternative civilian service in Greece. [...]

Overall, from 1992 until 2014, Lazaros Petromelidis has been convicted 5 times for insubordination, found himself in custody at least 4 times, and paid 2 financial penalties instead of imprisonment.
While it is not the first time that the Committee has examined a case involving a punitive and discriminatory alternative service,2 this is the first case where the conscientious objector has not
reported for such service at all. Furthermore, contrary to older cases, this time it was examined under, and was found to be a violation of, article 18(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), about freedom of thought, conscience and religion [...]

Worth noting also that the Committee found for the first time a violation of article 12(2) in a case of a conscientious objector who was prohibited from leaving his country, not only because of “the excessive duration of the impugned interference but also the fact that it has been imposed on the author for having legitimately exercised his right to freedom of conscience”. [...]

The Committee also consolidated its jurisprudence as of the violation of art. 9(1) about arbitrary detention as punishment for legitimate exercise of freedom of religion and conscience.

This also means that Petromelidis should have not been detained in the first place. [...]

According to the Committee’s decision, Greece is obliged to make full reparation to Petromelidis, and therefore, inter alia, to expunge the author’s criminal record, to reimburse all sums paid as fines (i.e., financial penalties instead of imprisonment) and to provide adequate compensation. [...]

The undersigned organisations expect from Greece to immediately implement the UN Human Rights Committee’s decision, both as for Petromelidis’ full reparation as well as for bringing the relevant
legislation in line with international human rights law and standards. [...] "
Read the complete press release here.


You can have a look at the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) here.

To learn more about the current situation of conscientious objection to military service in Greece you are welcome to have a look at the latest report submitted by IFOR to the UN Human Rights Committee. Click here to read it.

Comment

IFOR joins NGOs statement to the NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY State Parties

Comment

IFOR joins NGOs statement to the NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY State Parties

Originally scheduled for April 2020, the 10th Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) had been postponed several times, due to the ongoing pandemic. Most recently, the NPT Conference had been scheduled to convene in New York from 4-28 January 2022, but, over the past several days, NPT States Parties had been discussing whether and how to proceed and decided to postpone again until August 1st 2022 (tentatively).

IFOR regularly engages on these Review Conferences and on the occasion of the 10th Conference joined a STATEMENT FROM CIVIL SOCIETY TO THE STATES PARTIES OF THE NUCLEAR, signed by over 90 organizations of the civil society and sent to the State Parties on January 10th.

"It is encouraging to see countries reiterate their support for the #NPT. However, the Treaty is only as strong as its implementation. [...] Implementing past action plans must be the floor and not the ceiling for taking forward the NPT’s provisions. [...] Many countries have demonstrated their commitment to nuclear disarmament by joining the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (#TPNW), which has now entered into force. The TPNW is a major contribution to the common goal of eliminating the threat of nuclear war and eliminating nuclear weapons. [...]

The 91 undersigned organisations call on NPT states parties and the international community to advance new and bolder leadership. We urge all NPT states parties to move beyond bitter politicisation and to work together to build majority support for a plan of action to advance the NPT’s Article VI goals, create much needed momentum for further progress on disarmament, and save humanity from the scourge of nuclear war."

You can read the complete text here!


Comment

IFOR reports to the UN the non-recognition of the right to conscientious objection to military service in Turkmenistan

Comment

IFOR reports to the UN the non-recognition of the right to conscientious objection to military service in Turkmenistan

The International Fellowship of Reconciliation has just submitted to the UN Human Rights Committee a report on Turkmenistan regarding the right to conscientious objection to military service.

In particular, IFOR highlights the non-recognition of this right in the country and the consequent discrimination of conscientious objectors, as outlined by the individual cases mentioned in the text.

Along with the non-recognition of the CO right, other relevant issues are the imprisonment of conscientious objectors, the violation on the ne bis in idem principle and the torture and ill-treatment of prisoners.

The Report has been prepared for the adoption of the List of Issues which will be undertaken by the Committee at its 134th session which will take place in March.

Here you can have a look at the complete Report prepared by IFOR and published on the UN Committee webpage.


Learn more about the States review procedure at the Human Rights Committee

The Human Rights Committee is the body of independent experts that monitors implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by its State parties. It meets at the Palais Wilson and its Members serve in their personal capacity, not as representatives of their Governments.

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights has been Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966; it entered into force on 23 March 1976.

Here you can find an easy-to read version of the Covenant

The right to conscientious objection to military service inheres in the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, Art 18 of the Covenant. It entitles any individual to an exemption from compulsory military service if such service cannot be reconciled with his/her religion or beliefs. 

All States parties are obliged to submit regular reports to the Committee on how the rights are being implemented.

Civil society organizations are invited to submit "alternative reports" and contribute to the review procedure.

The Committee examines each report and addresses its concerns and recommendations to the State party in the form of "concluding observations”.

The process of examining a report runs across two Committee sessions.

At the first session, reporting procedure are streamlined and a  “List of Issues” arising from the relevant report and other information supplied to the Committee is adopted.

The List of Issues addresses the most crucial matters regarding the enjoyment of Covenant rights in the relevant State and often seeks additional information with respect to key questions. The List of Issues is sent to the State party well in advance - at least one session ahead - of the session at which the report will be examined in the presence of representatives of the State party. 

Subsequently, the Committee is also often briefed, typically in an informal meeting, on views of members of civil society wishing to bring Committee members up to date on certain issues.

The Committee then proceeds to examine each report in a public constructive dialogue with a delegation of the relevant State party.

The examination begins by an opening presentation of the report by the State party’s delegation, often including a response to the List of Issues. Thereafter, Committee members put questions to the representatives, seeking to clarify or deepen understanding of issues arising concerning the implementation and enjoyment of Covenant rights in the State party.

After the conclusion of this dialogue, the Committee drafts detailed written concluding observations on the report in question. The concluding observations have the dual function of helping States to prepare future reports and helping the Committee to focus on the most 19 critical issues in future dialogues over future reports. All concluding observations are publicly available via the Treaty Bodies database of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf).

The Committee’s follow-up procedure complements and focuses the efforts of States parties and civil society subsequent to the adoption of concluding observations.

Comment