Resolution adopted by the Human Rights Council
The rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association
The Human Rights Council,
Guided by the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination and other applicable human rights instruments,
Reaffirming the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter and the human rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
Recalling that the States Members of the United Nations have pledged to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,
Recalling also Commission on Human Rights resolution 2005/37 of 19 April 2005 and other relevant resolutions, Reaffirming that everyone has the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association and that no one may be compelled to belong to an association,
Recognizing the importance of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association to the full enjoyment of civil and political rights, and economic, social and cultural rights,
Recognizing also that the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are essential components of democracy, providing individuals with invaluable opportunities to, inter alia, express their political opinions, engage in literary and artistic pursuits and other cultural, economic and social activities, engage in religious observances or other beliefs, form and join trade unions and cooperatives, and elect leaders to represent their interests and hold them accountable,
Recognizing further that exercising the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association free of restrictions, subject only to the limitations permitted by international law, in particular international human rights law, is indispensable to the full enjoyment of these rights, particularly where individuals may espouse minority or dissenting religious or political beliefs,
Recognizing the critical mandate, role, expertise and specialized supervisory mechanisms and procedures of the International Labour Organization with respect to employers’ and workers’ rights to freedom of association,
Recalling Council resolution 5/1, entitled “Institution-building of the United Nations Human Rights Council”, and resolution 5/2, entitled “Code of Conduct for Special Procedures Mandate-holders of the Human Rights Council”, of 18 June 2007, and stressing that the mandate holder shall discharge his/her duties in accordance with these resolutions and the annexes thereto,
1. Calls upon States to respect and fully protect the rights of all individuals to assemble peacefully and associate freely, including in the context of elections, and including persons espousing minority or dissenting views or beliefs, human rights defenders, trade unionists and others, including migrants, seeking to exercise or to promote these rights, and to take all necessary measures to ensure that any restrictions on the free exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are in accordance with their obligations under international human rights law;
2. Calls upon the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to assist States to promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, including through the technical assistance programmes of the Office, at the request of States, and to cooperate with relevant bodies of the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations to assist States to promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association;
3. Encourages civil society, including non-governmental organizations and other relevant stakeholders, to promote the enjoyment of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, recognizing that civil society facilitates the achievement of the aims and principles of the United Nations;
4. Recalls that, in accordance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association can be subject to certain restrictions, which are prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others;
5. Decides to appoint, for a period of three years, a special rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association whose tasks will include:
(a) To gather all relevant information, including national practices and experiences, relating to the promotion and protection of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, to study trends, developments and challenges in relation to the exercise of these rights, and to make recommendations on ways and means to ensure the promotion and protection of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association in all their manifestations;
(b) To incorporate in his or her first report an elaboration of the framework, including seeking the views of States, through which the mandate holder will consider best practices, including national practices and experiences, that promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, taking into account in a comprehensive manner the relevant elements of work available within the Council;
(c) To seek, receive and respond to information from Governments, nongovernmentalorganizations, relevant stakeholders and any other parties who have knowledge of these matters, with a view to promoting and protecting the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association;
(d) To integrate a gender perspective throughout the work of the mandate;
(e) To contribute to the provision of technical assistance or advisory services by the Office of the High Commissioner to better promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association;
(f) To report on violations, wherever they may occur, of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, as well as discrimination, threats or use of violence, harassment, persecution, intimidation or reprisals directed at persons exercising these rights, and to draw the attention of the Council and the High Commissioner to situations of particularly serious concern;
(g) To undertake his or her activities such that the present mandate will not
include those matters of specific competence of the International Labour Organization and its specialized supervisory mechanisms and procedures with respect to employers’ and workers’ rights to freedom of association, with a view to avoiding any duplication;
(h) To work in coordination with other mechanisms of the Council, other competent United Nations bodies and human rights treaty bodies, and to take all necessary measures to avoid unnecessary duplication with those mechanisms;
6. Calls upon States to cooperate fully with and assist the special rapporteur in the performance of his or her tasks, to provide all necessary information requested by him or her, to respond promptly to his or her urgent appeals and other communications and to consider favourably his or her requests for visits;
7. Invites the High Commissioner, relevant special procedures of the Council and human rights treaty bodies to pay attention, within the framework of their mandates, to the situation of persons whose right to freedom of peaceful assembly or of association has been violated;
8. Requests the special rapporteur to submit an annual report to the Council covering activities relating to his or her mandate;
9. Requests the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner to provide all the human and financial resources necessary for the effective fulfilment of the mandate by the special rapporteur;
10. Decides to continue its consideration of the issue of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association in accordance with its programme of work.
The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network's working group on Freedom of association blog.
Le blog du groupe de travail sur la liberté d'association du Réseau Euro-Méditerranéen des Droits de l'Homme.
Le blog du groupe de travail sur la liberté d'association du Réseau Euro-Méditerranéen des Droits de l'Homme.
27/10/2010
07/10/2010
UN Human Rights Council establishes mandate on Freedom of Association // Le Conseil des droits de l'Homme crée un mandat sur la Liberté d'association
Englsh/francais
In a resolution (A/HRC/15/L.23) regarding the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, adopted without a vote as amended, the Council calls upon States to respect and fully protect the rights of all individuals to assemble peacefully and associate freely, including in the context of elections and including persons belonging to minorities and those espousing minority or dissenting views or beliefs, human rights defenders, trade unionists and others seeking to exercise or to promote these rights, and to take all necessary measures to ensure that any restrictions on the free exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are in accordance with their obligations under international human rights law; calls upon the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to assist States to promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, including through the technical assistance programs of her Office, at the request of States, as well as to cooperate with relevant bodies of the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations to assist States to promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; decides to appoint, for a period of three years, a Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; requests the Special Rapporteur to submit each year to the Council and to the United Nations General Assembly a report covering activities relating to his/her mandate; requests the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner to provide all the necessary human and financial resources for the effective fulfilment of the mandate by the Special Rapporteur; and decides to continue its consideration of the issue of freedom of peaceful assembly and of association in accordance with its program of work.
Le Conseil décide, par une résolution (A/HRC/15/L.23), de nommer pour trois ans un rapporteur spécial sur le droit de réunion et d'association pacifiques, qui aura pour attributions de rassembler les renseignements pertinents, notamment quant aux pratiques et aux acquis des États, sur la promotion et la protection du droit de réunion et d'association pacifiques, d'étudier les tendances, les faits nouveaux et les difficultés que présente l'exercice de ce droit et faire des recommandations sur les moyens de le promouvoir et de le protéger sous toutes ses formes. Le rapporteur spécial aura également pour attributions de faire figurer dans son premier rapport un schéma d'examen des pratiques conseillées, y compris les pratiques et les acquis des États, susceptibles de promouvoir et protéger le droit de réunion et d'association pacifiques; et de signaler les violations du droit de réunion et d'association pacifiques en quelque lieu qu'elles se produisent ainsi que les faits de discrimination, de menace, de recours à la violence, de harcèlement, de persécution, d'intimidation ou de représailles qui visent les personnes exerçant ce droit, et d'attirer l'attention du Conseil et du Haut-Commissaire sur les cas particulièrement préoccupants.
Le texte est disponible à http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/RES/15/21
In a resolution (A/HRC/15/L.23) regarding the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, adopted without a vote as amended, the Council calls upon States to respect and fully protect the rights of all individuals to assemble peacefully and associate freely, including in the context of elections and including persons belonging to minorities and those espousing minority or dissenting views or beliefs, human rights defenders, trade unionists and others seeking to exercise or to promote these rights, and to take all necessary measures to ensure that any restrictions on the free exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are in accordance with their obligations under international human rights law; calls upon the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to assist States to promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, including through the technical assistance programs of her Office, at the request of States, as well as to cooperate with relevant bodies of the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations to assist States to promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; decides to appoint, for a period of three years, a Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association; requests the Special Rapporteur to submit each year to the Council and to the United Nations General Assembly a report covering activities relating to his/her mandate; requests the Secretary-General and the High Commissioner to provide all the necessary human and financial resources for the effective fulfilment of the mandate by the Special Rapporteur; and decides to continue its consideration of the issue of freedom of peaceful assembly and of association in accordance with its program of work.
Le Conseil décide, par une résolution (A/HRC/15/L.23), de nommer pour trois ans un rapporteur spécial sur le droit de réunion et d'association pacifiques, qui aura pour attributions de rassembler les renseignements pertinents, notamment quant aux pratiques et aux acquis des États, sur la promotion et la protection du droit de réunion et d'association pacifiques, d'étudier les tendances, les faits nouveaux et les difficultés que présente l'exercice de ce droit et faire des recommandations sur les moyens de le promouvoir et de le protéger sous toutes ses formes. Le rapporteur spécial aura également pour attributions de faire figurer dans son premier rapport un schéma d'examen des pratiques conseillées, y compris les pratiques et les acquis des États, susceptibles de promouvoir et protéger le droit de réunion et d'association pacifiques; et de signaler les violations du droit de réunion et d'association pacifiques en quelque lieu qu'elles se produisent ainsi que les faits de discrimination, de menace, de recours à la violence, de harcèlement, de persécution, d'intimidation ou de représailles qui visent les personnes exerçant ce droit, et d'attirer l'attention du Conseil et du Haut-Commissaire sur les cas particulièrement préoccupants.
Le texte est disponible à http://ap.ohchr.org/documents/dpage_e.aspx?si=A/HRC/RES/15/21
30/06/2010
Tunisie: Adoption d'un amendement visant à renforcer la criminalisation de la défense des droits de l'Homme (17.06.2010)
Paris-Genève-Copenhague-Londres-New York, le 17 juin 2010. L'Observatoire pour la protection des défenseurs des droits de l'Homme, un programme conjoint de la Fédération internationale des ligues des droits de l'Homme (FIDH) et de l'Organisation mondiale contre la torture (OMCT), le Réseau Euro-méditerranéen des droits de l'Homme (REMDH), Reporters sans frontières (RSF), Amnesty International et Human Rights Watch condamnent l'adoption par le Parlement, le 15 juin 2010, d'un projet de loi visant à criminaliser directement les activités de sensibilisation menées par les défenseurs des droits de l'Homme tunisiens.
Cette loi vise à compléter les dispositions de l'article 61 bis du Code pénal en y ajoutant l'incrimination “des personnes qui établissent, de manière directe ou indirecte, des contacts avec des agents d'un Etat étranger, d'une institution ou d'une organisation étrangère dans le but de les inciter à porter atteinte aux intérêts vitaux de la Tunisie et à sa sécurité économique”. Les personnes incriminées pourront être condamnées à des peines allant de cinq à vingt ans de prison ferme (article 62 du Code pénal relatif à la sécurité intérieure). L'adoption de cet amendement pourrait permettre de poursuivre et d'emprisonner des défenseurs des droits de l'homme soutenus par des organisations étrangères et multilatérales.
Dans sa réponse aux interventions des députés, M. Lazhar Bououni, ministre de la Justice et des droits de l'Homme, a en effet précisé que “l'atteinte aux intérêts vitaux” incluait le fait “d'inciter des parties étrangères à ne pas accorder des crédits à la Tunisie, à ne pas investir dans le pays, à boycotter le tourisme ou à saboter les efforts de la Tunisie visant à obtenir le statut de partenaire avancé avec l'Union européenne” . Le vote d'une telle disposition intervient un mois après la tenue, le 11 mai 2010, du Conseil d'association entre l'Union européenne (UE) et la Tunisie, et alors même que la Tunisie a engagé des négociations en vue d'obtenir le statut de partenaire avancé.
“Cette décision liberticide constitue une atteinte flagrante à la liberté d'expression, et s'avère indiscutablement destinée à criminaliser les activités de sensibilisation à la situation des droits de l'Homme en Tunisie auprès des organisations étrangères”, a déploré Souhayr Belhassen, Présidente de la FIDH. “Il s'agit d'un nouveau coup porté à la société civile tunisienne, dans le but d'éviter que les voix dissidentes trouvent écho sur la scène internationale”, a ajouté Eric Sottas, Secrétaire général de l'OMCT. “Avec cette disposition, le Gouvernement tunisien complète son arsenal répressif à l'encontre des personnalités qui osent remettre en question, à l'étranger, la politique menée par le régime. C'est la porte ouverte à tous les abus. Tant que le pouvoir tunisien cherchera à faire taire toutes voix dissidentes, tant qu'il aura recours de manière systématique au harcèlement, à l'intimidation et à la censure, tant que le Code pénal lui servira à punir toute opinion contraire, l'UE ne saurait accorder à la Tunisie un statut avancé”, a déclaré Jean-François Julliard, secrétaire général de RSF.
“Les défenseurs de droits humains sont la cible directe de la nouvelle loi. Avant même son adoption, des articles publiés dans les journaux Al-Hadath, Koll Ennass, As Sarih, As Sabah, La Presse et Ach-Chourouk traitaient de “traîtres”, “agents” et “mercenaires” “qu’il convient de juger” certains défenseurs tunisiens pour avoir été en contact avec l’UE. Mais la loi vise aussi à bâillonner toute expression critique des Tunisiens en relation avec l’extérieur du pays” a par ailleurs rappelé Kamel Jendoubi, Président du REMDH. Ces attaques se sont amplifiées au cours des dernières semaines, mettant ouvertement l'accent sur leur soi-disant responsabilité dans l'“échec des négociations concernant le statut avancé avec l'UE” . De surcroît, le 15 juin 2010, à l'aéroport de Tunis, lorsqu'il revenait de Paris, M. Khémaïs Chammari a été soumis pendant plus de 65 minutes à un contrôle douanier abusif et vexatoire, qui a conduit notamment à la confiscation d'un de ces livres.
“Après avoir essayé d’étouffer toutes les voix indépendantes en Tunisie, les autorités cherchent par cette mesure à étendre leur emprise à l’étranger pour contrôler les défenseurs et empêcher que les violations commises quotidiennement en Tunisie soient dénoncées”, a déclaré Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui d'Amnesty International.
L'Observatoire, le REMDH, RSF, Amnesty International et Human Rights Watch redoutent que l'adoption de cette loi ne permette la recrudescence des actes de harcèlement à l'encontre des défenseurs des droits de l'Homme en Tunisie et qu'elle n'autorise, en particulier, l'ouverture de poursuites judiciaires arbitraires à l'encontre des personnes citées, ainsi que de tous ceux qui interpellent la communauté internationale en lui enjoignant de prendre les mesures nécessaires en faveur de l'amélioration de la situation des droits de l'Homme en Tunisie.
Nos organisations appellent de ce fait les autorités tunisiennes à abroger sans délai cette loi, dans la mesure où de telles dispositions sont manifestement contraires à l’esprit et à la lettre du Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques, ratifié par la Tunisie le 23 mars 1976, et à se conformer aux dispositions de la Déclaration sur les défenseurs des droits de l’Homme adoptée par l’Assemblée générale des Nations unies le 9 décembre 1998 et aux instruments régionaux et internationaux relatifs aux droits de l’Homme ratifiés par la Tunisie.
En outre, nos organisations appellent les institutions de l’UE à évaluer tout rehaussement des relations avec la Tunisie à l'aune d'un progrès notable et mesurable en matière de respect des standards internationaux des droits de l’Homme, et à immédiatement mettre en œuvre les Lignes directrices de l’UE sur les défenseurs des droits de l’Homme.
Cette loi vise à compléter les dispositions de l'article 61 bis du Code pénal en y ajoutant l'incrimination “des personnes qui établissent, de manière directe ou indirecte, des contacts avec des agents d'un Etat étranger, d'une institution ou d'une organisation étrangère dans le but de les inciter à porter atteinte aux intérêts vitaux de la Tunisie et à sa sécurité économique”. Les personnes incriminées pourront être condamnées à des peines allant de cinq à vingt ans de prison ferme (article 62 du Code pénal relatif à la sécurité intérieure). L'adoption de cet amendement pourrait permettre de poursuivre et d'emprisonner des défenseurs des droits de l'homme soutenus par des organisations étrangères et multilatérales.
Dans sa réponse aux interventions des députés, M. Lazhar Bououni, ministre de la Justice et des droits de l'Homme, a en effet précisé que “l'atteinte aux intérêts vitaux” incluait le fait “d'inciter des parties étrangères à ne pas accorder des crédits à la Tunisie, à ne pas investir dans le pays, à boycotter le tourisme ou à saboter les efforts de la Tunisie visant à obtenir le statut de partenaire avancé avec l'Union européenne” . Le vote d'une telle disposition intervient un mois après la tenue, le 11 mai 2010, du Conseil d'association entre l'Union européenne (UE) et la Tunisie, et alors même que la Tunisie a engagé des négociations en vue d'obtenir le statut de partenaire avancé.
“Cette décision liberticide constitue une atteinte flagrante à la liberté d'expression, et s'avère indiscutablement destinée à criminaliser les activités de sensibilisation à la situation des droits de l'Homme en Tunisie auprès des organisations étrangères”, a déploré Souhayr Belhassen, Présidente de la FIDH. “Il s'agit d'un nouveau coup porté à la société civile tunisienne, dans le but d'éviter que les voix dissidentes trouvent écho sur la scène internationale”, a ajouté Eric Sottas, Secrétaire général de l'OMCT. “Avec cette disposition, le Gouvernement tunisien complète son arsenal répressif à l'encontre des personnalités qui osent remettre en question, à l'étranger, la politique menée par le régime. C'est la porte ouverte à tous les abus. Tant que le pouvoir tunisien cherchera à faire taire toutes voix dissidentes, tant qu'il aura recours de manière systématique au harcèlement, à l'intimidation et à la censure, tant que le Code pénal lui servira à punir toute opinion contraire, l'UE ne saurait accorder à la Tunisie un statut avancé”, a déclaré Jean-François Julliard, secrétaire général de RSF.
“Les défenseurs de droits humains sont la cible directe de la nouvelle loi. Avant même son adoption, des articles publiés dans les journaux Al-Hadath, Koll Ennass, As Sarih, As Sabah, La Presse et Ach-Chourouk traitaient de “traîtres”, “agents” et “mercenaires” “qu’il convient de juger” certains défenseurs tunisiens pour avoir été en contact avec l’UE. Mais la loi vise aussi à bâillonner toute expression critique des Tunisiens en relation avec l’extérieur du pays” a par ailleurs rappelé Kamel Jendoubi, Président du REMDH. Ces attaques se sont amplifiées au cours des dernières semaines, mettant ouvertement l'accent sur leur soi-disant responsabilité dans l'“échec des négociations concernant le statut avancé avec l'UE” . De surcroît, le 15 juin 2010, à l'aéroport de Tunis, lorsqu'il revenait de Paris, M. Khémaïs Chammari a été soumis pendant plus de 65 minutes à un contrôle douanier abusif et vexatoire, qui a conduit notamment à la confiscation d'un de ces livres.
“Après avoir essayé d’étouffer toutes les voix indépendantes en Tunisie, les autorités cherchent par cette mesure à étendre leur emprise à l’étranger pour contrôler les défenseurs et empêcher que les violations commises quotidiennement en Tunisie soient dénoncées”, a déclaré Hassiba Hadj Sahraoui d'Amnesty International.
L'Observatoire, le REMDH, RSF, Amnesty International et Human Rights Watch redoutent que l'adoption de cette loi ne permette la recrudescence des actes de harcèlement à l'encontre des défenseurs des droits de l'Homme en Tunisie et qu'elle n'autorise, en particulier, l'ouverture de poursuites judiciaires arbitraires à l'encontre des personnes citées, ainsi que de tous ceux qui interpellent la communauté internationale en lui enjoignant de prendre les mesures nécessaires en faveur de l'amélioration de la situation des droits de l'Homme en Tunisie.
Nos organisations appellent de ce fait les autorités tunisiennes à abroger sans délai cette loi, dans la mesure où de telles dispositions sont manifestement contraires à l’esprit et à la lettre du Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques, ratifié par la Tunisie le 23 mars 1976, et à se conformer aux dispositions de la Déclaration sur les défenseurs des droits de l’Homme adoptée par l’Assemblée générale des Nations unies le 9 décembre 1998 et aux instruments régionaux et internationaux relatifs aux droits de l’Homme ratifiés par la Tunisie.
En outre, nos organisations appellent les institutions de l’UE à évaluer tout rehaussement des relations avec la Tunisie à l'aune d'un progrès notable et mesurable en matière de respect des standards internationaux des droits de l’Homme, et à immédiatement mettre en œuvre les Lignes directrices de l’UE sur les défenseurs des droits de l’Homme.
04/05/2010
Israel: Proposed bill seeks to outlaw human rights NGO based in Israel working on accountability issues in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (3.5.10)
The undersigned organisations express their serious concern at the new threats faced by human rights organisations in Israel involved in the struggle to uphold international law and the rule of law.
On April 28, 2010, a group of 19 members of Parliament, introduced a bill entitled “Associations (Amutot) Law (Amendment – Exceptions to the Registration and Activity of an Association), 2010”. This bill aims to prohibit the registration of, or to close down any existing non-governmental organisation (NGO), if “there are reasonable grounds to conclude that the association is providing information to foreign entities or is involved in legal proceedings abroad against senior Israeli government officials or IDF officers, for war crimes.” If adopted, the bill will legitimise the suppression of information regarding the commission of war cimes. As such, this bill has serious implications with respect to international law and the rule of law, and accountability for international crimes. As proposed, the bill also conflicts with numerous principles of treaty and customary international law, as codified in, inter alia, the Fourth Geneva Convention, international human rights treaties and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. The bill places arbitrary and unnecessary restrictions on the rights to freedom of association, information and expression and infringes upon victims’ fundamental right to an effective remedy.
On April 16, 2010, the nationalist, right-wing Israeli movement of “Im Tirtzu - The Second Zionist Revolution” released a report accusing at least twelve Israeli human rights organisations of support for or involvement in the indictment of Israeli officials for serious violations of international law in courts overseas, acting in accordance with the principle of universal jurisdiction. After releasing the report, Im Tirzu launched a billboard campaign, timed to coincide with Memorial Day on April 19 (Yom Hazikaron, ‘Israeli Fallen Soldiers and Victims of Terrorism Day’), and Israeli Independence Day, on April 20. This campaign, which involved defamatory slogans, aimed at de-legitimising the activities of human rights organisations supported by the New Israel Fund, including Adalah, PCATI, HaMoked, B’Tselem, ACRI, Bimkom, Gisha, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, Yesh Din, and Rabbis for Human Rights. Im Tirtzu previously launched a campaign against human rights organisations in February 2010, which focused on their provision of information to the United Nations (UN) Independent Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict led by former Justice Richard Goldstone.
Our organisations strongly denounce this new move which further undermines the safety of human rights defenders working to uphold the rule of law and combat impunity. Our organisations recall: that the fight against impunity constitutes an integral part of legitimate human rights activity, as recognised by international human rights instruments; that the activities conducted by the above-mentioned Israeli organisations are transparent; that they operate within the framework of the rule of law; that their mission is to represent victims of human rights violations; that their action is apolitical and that the only reason for which some of them resort to extra-national jurisdictions is that the Israeli jurisdictions has proven unwilling to pursue justice on these cases. Universal jurisdiction is a natural extension of the Nuremberg principles and Israel, of all countries, should not take actions which go against the spirit of Nuremberg.
We urge the Israeli authorities to take measures to ensure the protection of human rights defenders and organisations as provided in the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 9, 1998, which provides that “the State shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection by the competent authorities of everyone, individually or in association with others, against any violence, threats, retaliation, de facto or de jure adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action as a consequence of his or her legitimate exercise of the rights referred to in the present Declaration” and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the State of Israel.
We further urge the Members of the Knesset to refrain passing a new law that would hamper the activities of civil society organisations in contradiction with democratic values and violate international human rights standards binding upon the State of Israel, in particular the rights to freedom of association, information and expression and victims’ legitimate rights to an effective remedy.
The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN)
The Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, a joint programme of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT)
The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR)
Redress
An unofficial translation in English of the Law is available at: http://www.adalah.org/newsletter/eng/apr10/bill.pdf
On April 16, 2010, the nationalist, right-wing Israeli movement of “Im Tirtzu - The Second Zionist Revolution” released a report accusing at least twelve Israeli human rights organisations of support for or involvement in the indictment of Israeli officials for serious violations of international law in courts overseas, acting in accordance with the principle of universal jurisdiction. After releasing the report, Im Tirzu launched a billboard campaign, timed to coincide with Memorial Day on April 19 (Yom Hazikaron, ‘Israeli Fallen Soldiers and Victims of Terrorism Day’), and Israeli Independence Day, on April 20. This campaign, which involved defamatory slogans, aimed at de-legitimising the activities of human rights organisations supported by the New Israel Fund, including Adalah, PCATI, HaMoked, B’Tselem, ACRI, Bimkom, Gisha, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel, Yesh Din, and Rabbis for Human Rights. Im Tirtzu previously launched a campaign against human rights organisations in February 2010, which focused on their provision of information to the United Nations (UN) Independent Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict led by former Justice Richard Goldstone.
Our organisations strongly denounce this new move which further undermines the safety of human rights defenders working to uphold the rule of law and combat impunity. Our organisations recall: that the fight against impunity constitutes an integral part of legitimate human rights activity, as recognised by international human rights instruments; that the activities conducted by the above-mentioned Israeli organisations are transparent; that they operate within the framework of the rule of law; that their mission is to represent victims of human rights violations; that their action is apolitical and that the only reason for which some of them resort to extra-national jurisdictions is that the Israeli jurisdictions has proven unwilling to pursue justice on these cases. Universal jurisdiction is a natural extension of the Nuremberg principles and Israel, of all countries, should not take actions which go against the spirit of Nuremberg.
We urge the Israeli authorities to take measures to ensure the protection of human rights defenders and organisations as provided in the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 9, 1998, which provides that “the State shall take all necessary measures to ensure the protection by the competent authorities of everyone, individually or in association with others, against any violence, threats, retaliation, de facto or de jure adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action as a consequence of his or her legitimate exercise of the rights referred to in the present Declaration” and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by the State of Israel.
We further urge the Members of the Knesset to refrain passing a new law that would hamper the activities of civil society organisations in contradiction with democratic values and violate international human rights standards binding upon the State of Israel, in particular the rights to freedom of association, information and expression and victims’ legitimate rights to an effective remedy.
The Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN)
The Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, a joint programme of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT)
The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR)
Redress
An unofficial translation in English of the Law is available at: http://www.adalah.org/newsletter/eng/apr10/bill.pdf
Egypt: The EU Should Call on the Egyptian Government to Respect Freedom of Association (21.4.2010)
In anticipation of the European Union – Egypt Association Council Meeting scheduled for April 27, the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN) expresses its serious concerns about provisions of the draft bill on NGOs published by the Egyptian newspaper Al Dustour on March 7, 2010.
The EMHRN recalls that the current Egyptian law on NGO does not comply with international law standard regarding freedom of association[1]the EMHRN considers the published amendments threaten to unduly restrict freedom of association in Egypt in violation of the country’s international treaty obligations. Moreover, it regrets that the Egyptian authorities did not consult civil society organizations, particularly the NGO Campaign for Freedom of Association, during the elaboration process of this bill, although the government agreed, during the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of last February 19, to the following recommendation “NGOs should be consulted widely and have a substantive role in drafting the new NGO law”. and as such welcomes the government’s initiative to amend it. However,
The EMHRN expresses its deep concerns that the bill would seriously tighten the government’s control over civil society organizations as a number of article of the published law do not meet international standards regarding freedom of association.
The published amendments indeed unnecessarily restrict an association’s freedom by prohibiting association to work in more than two fields, given that an association still cannot pursue activities that “threaten the national unity, violate public order or ethics” (Article 9) as was the case under Law 84. Both terms are overly broad and invite governmental abuse. The published amendments finally continue to require that the Ministry of Social Solidarity grant a license before a new organization can function, whereas international best practice recommends a notification-only process of registration.
Published provisions also curb CSOs’ independence from government[2]. The bill continues to impose administrative authority's approval before obtaining funds from abroad (Article 13), while severe criminal penalties such as up to one year imprisonment for even minor infractions of these onerous obligations can be drastic and constitute a further inappropriate extension of government powers. The amendments finally grants additional power to the General Federation of Civil Associations, thus not only curtailing associations’ activities but also restricting the ability of groups to operate independently.
Ahead of the parliamentary and presidential elections, Egypt is witnessing growing human rights violations as illustrated by the recent arrest of peaceful demonstrators on April 6[3]. In addition, The Egyptian government intends to pass laws that would restrict civil and political rights, such as the draft NGOs law as well as the anti terrorism law, given that the uninterrupted state of emergency for 29 years is likely to be extended in May, and the law regulating media broadcasting.
According to the jointly agreed Action Plan within the European neighborhood Policy (ENP), EU and Egypt jointly agreed to “Implement measures that promote the right of assembly and association in accordance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”.
As a result, the EMHRN urges the EU to call on the Egyptian government:
* To respect and implement its commitments related to freedom of association, especially the jointly agreed priorities of the ENP EU-Egypt Action Plan and the recommendations of the UPR;
* Not to adopt the published text in its current form;
* To comply with the Universal Periodic Review recommendations, which stated that the government of Egypt should “continue efforts to reform in the short term Law 84/2002 in order to establish a procedure for setting up NGOs, which is nimble, fast and not subject to administrative discretion”;
* To produce a revised version of the Law 84 taking into consideration the comments of the Egyptian NGOs Campaign for the Freedom to Association.
In this context, the EMHRN calls on the EU to condition any enhancing of EU-Egypt relations to concrete improvements and commitments regarding to Human rights.
[1] See EMHRN Freedom of Association Annual Review 2009 at http://en.euromedrights.org/index.php/publications/emhrn_publications/68/4075.html
[2] For instance, the administrative authority will have the right to enter to the associations premises (Article 16), to withdraw an association's decision (Article 19), to receive copies of the papers to be presented to the General Assembly no less than fifteen days before the meeting (Article 23)
[3] See The EMHRN denounces the repression of Democracy Activists in Egypt http://en.euromedrights.org/index.php/news/emhrn_releases/67/4248.html
The EMHRN recalls that the current Egyptian law on NGO does not comply with international law standard regarding freedom of association[1]the EMHRN considers the published amendments threaten to unduly restrict freedom of association in Egypt in violation of the country’s international treaty obligations. Moreover, it regrets that the Egyptian authorities did not consult civil society organizations, particularly the NGO Campaign for Freedom of Association, during the elaboration process of this bill, although the government agreed, during the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of last February 19, to the following recommendation “NGOs should be consulted widely and have a substantive role in drafting the new NGO law”. and as such welcomes the government’s initiative to amend it. However,
The EMHRN expresses its deep concerns that the bill would seriously tighten the government’s control over civil society organizations as a number of article of the published law do not meet international standards regarding freedom of association.
The published amendments indeed unnecessarily restrict an association’s freedom by prohibiting association to work in more than two fields, given that an association still cannot pursue activities that “threaten the national unity, violate public order or ethics” (Article 9) as was the case under Law 84. Both terms are overly broad and invite governmental abuse. The published amendments finally continue to require that the Ministry of Social Solidarity grant a license before a new organization can function, whereas international best practice recommends a notification-only process of registration.
Published provisions also curb CSOs’ independence from government[2]. The bill continues to impose administrative authority's approval before obtaining funds from abroad (Article 13), while severe criminal penalties such as up to one year imprisonment for even minor infractions of these onerous obligations can be drastic and constitute a further inappropriate extension of government powers. The amendments finally grants additional power to the General Federation of Civil Associations, thus not only curtailing associations’ activities but also restricting the ability of groups to operate independently.
Ahead of the parliamentary and presidential elections, Egypt is witnessing growing human rights violations as illustrated by the recent arrest of peaceful demonstrators on April 6[3]. In addition, The Egyptian government intends to pass laws that would restrict civil and political rights, such as the draft NGOs law as well as the anti terrorism law, given that the uninterrupted state of emergency for 29 years is likely to be extended in May, and the law regulating media broadcasting.
According to the jointly agreed Action Plan within the European neighborhood Policy (ENP), EU and Egypt jointly agreed to “Implement measures that promote the right of assembly and association in accordance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights”.
As a result, the EMHRN urges the EU to call on the Egyptian government:
* To respect and implement its commitments related to freedom of association, especially the jointly agreed priorities of the ENP EU-Egypt Action Plan and the recommendations of the UPR;
* Not to adopt the published text in its current form;
* To comply with the Universal Periodic Review recommendations, which stated that the government of Egypt should “continue efforts to reform in the short term Law 84/2002 in order to establish a procedure for setting up NGOs, which is nimble, fast and not subject to administrative discretion”;
* To produce a revised version of the Law 84 taking into consideration the comments of the Egyptian NGOs Campaign for the Freedom to Association.
In this context, the EMHRN calls on the EU to condition any enhancing of EU-Egypt relations to concrete improvements and commitments regarding to Human rights.
[1] See EMHRN Freedom of Association Annual Review 2009 at http://en.euromedrights.org/index.php/publications/emhrn_publications/68/4075.html
[2] For instance, the administrative authority will have the right to enter to the associations premises (Article 16), to withdraw an association's decision (Article 19), to receive copies of the papers to be presented to the General Assembly no less than fifteen days before the meeting (Article 23)
[3] See The EMHRN denounces the repression of Democracy Activists in Egypt http://en.euromedrights.org/index.php/news/emhrn_releases/67/4248.html
Egypt: Newspaper Al Dostour published amendments to the NGO Law 84 (10.03.2010)
Newspaper Al Dostour published amendments to the Egyptian NGO Law 84 - See the web links below
Le journal Al Dostour publie des amendements à la loi egyptienne sur les ONG - voir liens ci-dessous
http://dostor.org/politics/egypt/10/march/7/8677
http://www.almasry-alyoum.com/article2.aspx?ArticleID=250130&IssueID=1732
Israel: Restricting the space of Human Rights Defenders and Organisations working in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (10.3.2010)
RE: RESTRICTING THE SPACE OF ISRAELI HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS AND ORGANISATIONS WORKING IN ISRAEL AND THE OPT
Dear Minister Moratinos,
Dear High Representative Ashton,
Aprodev, CIDSE, Front Line, the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN), the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT) and the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, a joint program of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), are concerned about the recent attempts of the Israeli government to restrict the space and freedom of Israeli civil society organisations to operate in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). These attempts are aimed at de-legitimising and severely restricting the work of civil society organisations. They represent a clear threat to democratic standards in Israel and the unimpeded work of human rights defenders. As such, we believe that the EU and its Member States must address this situation with urgency.
Proposed legislation to curtail foreign funding to Israeli NGOs
On 14 February 2010, a government-backed bill passed preliminary reading at the Israeli Knesset. Under the pretext of increasing transparency of foreign funding of NGOs, the bill restricts the freedoms of Israeli civil society organisations. It stipulates that any organisation “seeking to influence public opinion in Israel”, should be deemed a “political organisation” rather than one serving a charitable purpose. Such organisations will be required to register with the Political Party Registrar, and lose tax-exempt status. Furthermore, the bill requires any spokesperson of such an organisation to declare in all public appearances that they represent an organisation that receives funding from a “foreign political entity”. Non-compliance with the bill will result in fines or imprisonment.
This new bill seeks solely to intimidate and publicly de-legitimise these organisations and increase state monitoring of NGO activities. Indeed, there is no need for such a legislation as each NGO in Israel is already required to list its donors and other financial information on its website and to report annually to the government, specifying donations from foreign governments and their purpose. Furthermore, this bill will limit the NGOs’ capacity to receive foreign funding.
The Constitutional Committee of the Knesset plans to hold a vote on the bill on 17 March 2010. Given the political composition inside the Knesset, it is highly probable that the bill will be adopted.
Other forms of harassment against human rights organisations
This bill follows a broader de-legitimisation campaign orchestrated by extreme right-wing organisations. It comes in addition to other forms of harassment of and restrictions on the work of civil society organisations. This includes the arrest of those participating in peaceful demonstrations against the war on Gaza, the separation wall in the West Bank, and the practice of house demolition and the eviction of Palestinians in East Jerusalem. Of particular concern is also the government-backed Infiltration Prevention Bill, which is currently discussed in the Knesset. The new provisions would allow prison sentences of up to 7 years for staff and volunteers of Israeli aid organisations who have provided assistance to asylum seekers or migrants who have irregularly entered the country.
These recent efforts to interfere with the work of Israeli and international human rights defenders and organisations follow a pattern of continued acts of harassment by the Israeli government against Palestinian human rights defenders, encompassing arbitrary arrests and detentions and restrictions to their freedom of movement, including international travel bans.
In accordance with the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders, which recognise the importance “to ensure the safety and protect the rights of human rights defenders”, and Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association agreement which provides that “Relations between the Parties, as well as all the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement”, we call on the EU and its Member States to urge Israel to:
- Stop impeding and criminalising the work of civil society organisations in Israel and to respect their freedoms of association and expression.
- Withdraw the “foreign funding” bill and refrain from introducing any law under which independent organisations would be redefined as “political” and/or jeopardising their foreign funding.
We, the undersigned organisations urge the EU to raise the above mentioned issues with Israel at the highest political level, including during the visit of High Representative and Vice-Commissioner Ashton to Israel in mid-March and at the EU-Israel Association Council due to take place on 23 March 2010. We may recall that when other Mediterranean countries have adopted measures aiming at restricting the funding and work of civil society organisations, the EU has raised its concerns and condemned these measures. We also invite the High Representative Ashton to meet with civil society organisations during her visit to Israel.
An unofficial English translation is available at: http://www.adalah.org/newsletter/eng/feb10/docs/Unofficial%20English%20translation%20of%20NGO%20legislation.pdf
Dear Minister Moratinos,
Dear High Representative Ashton,
Aprodev, CIDSE, Front Line, the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN), the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT) and the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, a joint program of the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), are concerned about the recent attempts of the Israeli government to restrict the space and freedom of Israeli civil society organisations to operate in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT). These attempts are aimed at de-legitimising and severely restricting the work of civil society organisations. They represent a clear threat to democratic standards in Israel and the unimpeded work of human rights defenders. As such, we believe that the EU and its Member States must address this situation with urgency.
Proposed legislation to curtail foreign funding to Israeli NGOs
On 14 February 2010, a government-backed bill passed preliminary reading at the Israeli Knesset. Under the pretext of increasing transparency of foreign funding of NGOs, the bill restricts the freedoms of Israeli civil society organisations. It stipulates that any organisation “seeking to influence public opinion in Israel”, should be deemed a “political organisation” rather than one serving a charitable purpose. Such organisations will be required to register with the Political Party Registrar, and lose tax-exempt status. Furthermore, the bill requires any spokesperson of such an organisation to declare in all public appearances that they represent an organisation that receives funding from a “foreign political entity”. Non-compliance with the bill will result in fines or imprisonment.
This new bill seeks solely to intimidate and publicly de-legitimise these organisations and increase state monitoring of NGO activities. Indeed, there is no need for such a legislation as each NGO in Israel is already required to list its donors and other financial information on its website and to report annually to the government, specifying donations from foreign governments and their purpose. Furthermore, this bill will limit the NGOs’ capacity to receive foreign funding.
The Constitutional Committee of the Knesset plans to hold a vote on the bill on 17 March 2010. Given the political composition inside the Knesset, it is highly probable that the bill will be adopted.
Other forms of harassment against human rights organisations
This bill follows a broader de-legitimisation campaign orchestrated by extreme right-wing organisations. It comes in addition to other forms of harassment of and restrictions on the work of civil society organisations. This includes the arrest of those participating in peaceful demonstrations against the war on Gaza, the separation wall in the West Bank, and the practice of house demolition and the eviction of Palestinians in East Jerusalem. Of particular concern is also the government-backed Infiltration Prevention Bill, which is currently discussed in the Knesset. The new provisions would allow prison sentences of up to 7 years for staff and volunteers of Israeli aid organisations who have provided assistance to asylum seekers or migrants who have irregularly entered the country.
These recent efforts to interfere with the work of Israeli and international human rights defenders and organisations follow a pattern of continued acts of harassment by the Israeli government against Palestinian human rights defenders, encompassing arbitrary arrests and detentions and restrictions to their freedom of movement, including international travel bans.
In accordance with the EU Guidelines on Human Rights Defenders, which recognise the importance “to ensure the safety and protect the rights of human rights defenders”, and Article 2 of the EU-Israel Association agreement which provides that “Relations between the Parties, as well as all the provisions of the Agreement itself, shall be based on respect for human rights and democratic principles, which guides their internal and international policy and constitutes an essential element of this Agreement”, we call on the EU and its Member States to urge Israel to:
- Stop impeding and criminalising the work of civil society organisations in Israel and to respect their freedoms of association and expression.
- Withdraw the “foreign funding” bill and refrain from introducing any law under which independent organisations would be redefined as “political” and/or jeopardising their foreign funding.
We, the undersigned organisations urge the EU to raise the above mentioned issues with Israel at the highest political level, including during the visit of High Representative and Vice-Commissioner Ashton to Israel in mid-March and at the EU-Israel Association Council due to take place on 23 March 2010. We may recall that when other Mediterranean countries have adopted measures aiming at restricting the funding and work of civil society organisations, the EU has raised its concerns and condemned these measures. We also invite the High Representative Ashton to meet with civil society organisations during her visit to Israel.
An unofficial English translation is available at: http://www.adalah.org/newsletter/eng/feb10/docs/Unofficial%20English%20translation%20of%20NGO%20legislation.pdf
Morocco: Association des blogueurs marocains: Association denied from being legal (9.3.2010)
Thus came the oral response received by the Association of Moroccan bloggers from the Public Affairs Direction in Rabat state without any explanation of the rationale and reasons behind that administrative decision which is obviously contrary to clear laws and public freedoms and stting up of associations. This would lead to the killing of the the Association and the denial of all its legal documents that would enable it to engage in its activity or appeal, even against this arbitrary decision.
This "reservation" Strangely enough, comes to signal the culmination of years of waiting since the putting of the founding file of the Association of Moroccan bloggers which was the result of procrastination and delay of the Ministry of the Interior in Rabat. It failed firstly to enable the Association of its temporary founding receite standing against the requirements of the law which states that founding receite must be given immediately after the desposition of the founding file. And that temporary founding receite gains provisional status after the period of two months if the Administration has not provided any legal challenge to the legal status of the Association. But the Ministry of the Interior only denies that right without any sound justifications to repudiate all of its legal obligations, preferring the "abortion of associations" which it doesn't approve of. To be mentioned also is that the employee in Wilayat of Rabat who is responsible for the freezing of files of the association in office No. 505 has assaulted President of the Association and physically abused him while attending to his office inquiring about the fate of the file of the Association.
Because of this authoritarian act that is contrary to all principles of freedom of public organisation and slogans such as "the rule of law" we do announce to the public opinion nationally and internationally the follows:
• Renew our call to the Ministry of Interior in order to enable us of our founding receite or a written refusal.
• Our commitment to the right of exercising any civil and mediatic action that is guaranteed by all the national and international laws.
• Our perseverence to continue our struggle to establish freedom of expression and creativity through the press using all legitimate ways and means to achieve our inalienable rights without concessions.
• Our invitation to all national and international corporations to show more heed to the issue of restricting the associative work and civil society.
•Our solidarity with all bloggers, journalists and Internet activists exposed to harassment renewing our call for the immediate release of their prisoners among them: the blogger Boubken Alyadib, manager of Internet Abdullah Boukfou.
Global Trends in NGO Law “Survey of Arab NGO Laws” (05.03.2010)
Introduction: Civil Society and Development in the Arab World
When President Barak Obama delivered his now-famous address to the Muslim world in June of 2009, many in the Arab world welcomed the message of hope and “a new beginning.” President Obama’s call for freedom and political and civil rights echoed the statements of Arab reformers and human rights advocates, who have long called for a broad international and regional commitment to Arab political reform. In the words of the influential Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies’ Annual Report on Human Rights in the Arab Region, “human rights claims should be given priority over more narrow demands for political participation and the reform of electoral systems… demands linked to freedom of expression should be given special priority, particularly the right to independent organization, whether political parties, trade unions and professional syndicates, or NGOs.”[1]
Indeed, in recent years the significance of civil society, protection of basic freedoms for civil society, and their relationship to economic development have been acknowledged at the highest levels of Arab governments. One year prior to President Obama’s address, King Abdullah II of Jordan gave a speech explaining that “basic freedoms for citizens and civil society organizations… are major requirements for realizing comprehensive development, [and] this cannot be realized except in an environment governed by the values of freedom, pluralism, tolerance, respect for others’ opinions, the rule of law and equal opportunities.”[2] Similarly, Lebanon’s President Michel Sulayman has spoken of civil society as “a force that provides suggestions and support for the efforts of the state,”[3] and Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa commented in 2009 that steps were being taken to “provide a chance to the private sector and civil society to participate in the economic and social development process.”[4]
While these statements recognize the importance of civil society, and thus offer the promise of change, few Arab governments have taken the steps necessary to provide for a more enabling environment for NGOs by revising the laws governing their activities. The NGO laws of most Middle East / North Africa (MENA) countries remain extremely restrictive. With very few exceptions – most prominently, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, and with the passage of new legislation in 2010, Iraq – most Arab governments have adopted NGO laws that are constrain the formation and operation of NGOs and afford significant discretion to government officials in their oversight of them, thereby preventing NGOs from playing a role as full partners for social and economic development. Nonetheless, there have been new initiatives to revise the NGO laws in a number of countries, in some cases offering the prospect of improvement.
In light of the continuing international interest in the MENA region, and the multiple existing and anticipated initiatives to revise or replace NGO laws, ICNL focuses this issue of Global Trends on the NGO laws of the Arab world. We begin with a brief history of the development of NGO laws in the region. Section II considers the current status of NGO laws in the MENA countries. Section III reviews the most recent initiatives to revise the region’s NGO laws.
I. The Long Shadow of Egypt’s NGO Law
As Arab nations gained their independence in the 1950s and 1960s, many moved to follow the example of Egypt – the first Arab nation to gain its independence – and its charismatic leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser. Nasser, who ruled Egypt from 1954 until his death in 1970, was one of the most important figures in modern Arab history, and his socialist pan-Arab ideology was enormously influential across the MENA region.[5] Under Nasser’s rule, Egypt adopted the MENA region’s first post-independence NGO law, the Law on Private Associations and Foundations (Law 32 of 1964). A product of its time, Law 32 of 1964 reflected the subordination of independent civil society to what was seen as the higher Arab socialist interest, and “neither open political opposition nor an independent sector existed in Egypt during this time.”[6] NGOs could not be formed without the approval of government officials, whose discretion in registration was unlimited, and the government had the authority to dissolve or combine NGOs or even completely replace their Boards of Directors at any time.[7] Many of these provisions appear nearly verbatim in subsequently written Arab NGO laws, such as Jordan’s Law on Societies and Social Bodies (Law 33 of 1966) and Bahrain’s Law of Associations, Social and Cultural Clubs, Special Committees Working in the Field of Youth and Sports, and Private Foundations (Decree 21 of 1989), adopted twenty-five years later.
Arab NGO Law Reforms in the Last Decade
As in the post-independence period, as several Arab countries have moved to amend their NGO laws since the turn of the millennium, Egypt has again led the way. Beginning in 1997, the Egyptian government announced its intention to amend Law 32 of 1964 to “empower volunteer agencies as major partners in the development process.”[8] Dozens of prominent Egyptian civil society leaders were invited to take part in the drafting of the legislation. However, the bill ultimately approved by the parliament in 1999 diverged so strongly from their expectations and recommendations that they issued a public condemnation of the law three days before its passage and disavowed its contents.[9] Ultimately, the new Egyptian NGO law – Law 153 of 1999 – was declared unconstitutional by the Egyptian Court of Cassation because of procedural irregularities, but an almost identical version was enacted as Law 84 of 2002 and remains in effect to this day.[10]
Law 84 of 2002 (and its 1999 precursor) did away with several negative provisions of Law 32 of 1964. Among other changes, the requirement that NGOs seek government approval before purchasing real estate and the government’s right to unilaterally appoint members of any association’s Board of Directors were both removed.[11] However, registration of all groups remained mandatory, and NGOs continued to be subjected to burdensome and discretionary processes, inappropriate government supervision, unnecessarily severe criminal punishments, and improper restrictions on fundraising and activities. In other words, the government attempted to liberalize the NGO framework enough to allow NGOs to engage in government-sanctioned economic and social development programs – but not enough to provide for a truly independent civil society. This same pattern of development would come to characterize subsequent law reform efforts in Palestine and Oman (2000), Yemen (2001), Qatar (2004), Mauritania (2006), and Jordan (2008). All of these countries made positive changes to their NGO framework laws but did not adopt laws that were fully enabling of civil society or consistent with international law and best practices.
The following sections survey the current status of NGO laws across the region.
II. Survey of Arab NGO Laws
As briefly discussed above, most Arab NGO laws share several characteristics. In general, registration of all NGOs is mandatory, and there can be significant barriers to successful registration, including a high minimum number of members or discretionary registration processes. Once registered, NGOs will face substantial and often inappropriate government interference with their internal management and operations. They are also likely to face blanket restrictions on certain types of activities and their ability to raise funds. Registered NGOs will also encounter the possibility of dissolution for minor violations of the law or, in the absence of violations, simply at the personal discretion of a government official. Finally, NGO members must contend with potentially severe criminal punishments, including long jail sentences, for relatively minor violations of the law.
A. Registration
1. Mandatory Registration
The vast majority of nations in the MENA region require associations to register with the government prior to beginning any activities. In fact, most impose criminal penalties on individuals who work for or manage unregistered associations or foundations. Many of the laws do not clearly indicate the types of groups that are required to register, which can subject to penalties individual members who may not realize that they are in violation of the NGO laws. By prohibiting any associational activities – even informal activities, such as a group of neighbors meeting weekly to discuss political events – without prior registration, these laws clearly infringe upon the right to free association protected by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other conventions.
In one recent high-profile example, Mohammed al-Maskati, founder of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights, was jailed in September 2009 for operating the society without a license from the Bahraini government. As of this writing, his case continues; if found guilty, Mr. al-Maskati faces up to six months’ imprisonment.[12]
Registration is mandatory in Jordan,[13] Kuwait,[14] Libya,[15] Sudan,[16] the United Arab Emirates,[17] and several other MENA countries.
2. Large Number of Founders
In many countries of the MENA region, should a group attempt to register, it will confront a process that is burdensome and subject to broad ministerial discretion. For example, many MENA countries require a large number of founders before an association may be formed. Egypt[18] and Bahrain[19] each require 10 members, the United Arab Emirates[20] and Qatar[21] require 20, and Yemen[22] requires 21 at the time of application and 41 at the time of the first meeting. Sudan requires 30 members in order for an association to be successful in its application for registration.[23] Requiring such a large group acts as a substantial barrier for groups with less popular causes. By contrast, Tunisia requires only 2 founders[24] and Palestine requires 3,[25] numbers that facilitate formation and registration of associations.
3. Broad Government Discretion
Registration provisions in many MENA countries include vague language and sweeping grants of power to the relevant ministries, allowing government employees broad discretion when reviewing registration applications from would-be associations.
* According to Jordan’s Law on Societies (Law 51 of 2008 as amended in 2009), applications for registration of new societies are sent to an independent Board of Registration chaired by the Ministry of Social Development.[26] The Board is permitted to reject an application for any reason, though it must issue a written justification for its decision.[27]
* NGOs operating in Bahrain are subject to the Decree 21 of 1989 (as amended in 2002). Under this law, different government agencies handle the registration of NGOs depending on the NGO’s planned activities.[28] The law allows the government to reject an application, among other reasons, simply because it considers the association to be unnecessary or redundant.[29] NGOs then have the option to appeal the rejection, but given the lack of criteria for the government’s authority to reject applications, it is unclear on what basis a court could strike down a rejection.
* Applications for registration in Tunisia are submitted to the Minister of Interior. The Minister is free to make his or her decisions regarding the application without providing justification.[30]
In some cases, a country’s NGO laws may provide criteria on which the government is to base its decision to register or dissolve an NGO, but these criteria are so broad that they do little to constrain the government’s exercise of discretion.
* The Algerian Associations Act (Law 31-90 of 1990) deems an association to be void if it “was founded for a purpose contrary to the established institutional system or to public order, public decency or the law and regulations in force.”[31]
* In Egypt, associations are prohibited from having objectives that “[threaten] national unity or [breach] public order, [or] morals…”[32]
* The Moroccan Decree Regulating the Right of Association (Decree 1-58-376 of 1958 as amended by Decree 2-04-969 of 2005) prohibits associations from engaging in activities that “breach the laws or public morals; offend Islam, national unity, or the royal system; or incite discrimination.”[33]
* The Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor in Oman has the right to prevent an association from registering if it finds that the services to be provided by the association are not needed, or if there are other associations that are already meeting the need that would be filled by the new NGO.[34] The Ministry may also reject an application for “any other reasons according to the decision of the Ministry.”[35]
B. Government Supervision
In many MENA countries, organizations that have been successful in their applications for registration may be subject to significant government supervision. Governments may maintain control by attending associations’ meetings, deterring the discussion of opinions and issues inconsistent with a government position. The government may also retain authority over the selection of board members. By partly controlling an organization’s board, which acts as the decision-making authority for the organization, the government is able to ensure that it will have some say in all major decisions affecting the organization. In addition, many countries in the MENA region require associations to obtain government approval prior to entering into any foreign affiliation.
1. Meeting Attendance
* Under Article 26 of Law 84 of 2002, associations in Egypt are required to inform the Ministry of Social Solidarity and the General Federation of Associations and Foundations[36] of any upcoming general assembly meeting. The notification of the date of the meeting must include the agenda for the meeting. The General Federation is permitted to send a representative to the meeting, and following the meeting, the minutes must be sent to the Minister of Social Solidarity.
* In the United Arab Emirates, the Minister of Social Affairs, in addition to exercising broad powers of supervision generally, may send a representative to all general assembly meetings of an association.[37]
* NGOs in Jordan must inform the Controller of the Registry of Societies and the “Relevant Minister” assigned at the time of their registration of any general assembly meeting at least 15 days prior to the meeting.[38] Both the Controller and the Minister may elect to send a representative to the general assembly meeting. If an association fails to provide notice of the meeting, it is deemed illegal.
2. Board of Directors Interference
* The Ministry of Social Development and Labor in Syria is authorized to appoint members to the Board of Directors of any association.[39] It can also set the minimum and maximum number of individuals that may belong to an association’s Board.[40] Finally, the Ministry has the power to exclude a director from the Board in the interest of “national considerations.”[41]
* Under Article 34 of the Law 84 of 2002, the Egyptian government requires that associations submit a list of the names of all candidates for positions on their boards of directors to the Ministry of Social Solidarity at least 60 days prior to the election. The administrative authority may then require an individual to be removed from the list of nominees for “not fulfilling the nomination requirements” – though such “requirements” are not specified anywhere in the law itself.[42] If an individual’s nomination is not withdrawn after an administrative authority request, the government may initiate a judicial proceeding that will prevent any election from taking place until a “competent court” issues a decision on the legality of the nominee – a process that can take months if not years to complete.[43]
3. Prohibition on Affiliations
* Article 21 of the Algerian Law 31-90 of 1990 dictates that foreign associations may only be formed after receiving prior approval from the Minister of Interior. The right to form foreign associations is limited to Algerian associations whose objectives are the same as the foreign association.[44]
* In Morocco, an organization must obtain government permission in the form of a decree before it may enter into any foreign affiliation. [45]
* Similarly, an association operating in Oman must obtain approval from the Minister of Social Affairs and Labor in order to join any foreign affiliation or club.[46]
C. Restrictions on Activities
Laws prohibiting NGOs from participating in political activities are regularly implemented in the MENA region. Often, these laws do not define the term “political activities,” thereby potentially granting administrative agencies the ability to prohibit a wide range of activities, potentially barring NGOs from participating in public policy debates. Many countries also include provisions specifically banning other types of activities.
1. Political Activities
* Law 31-90 of 1990 prohibits Algerian NGOs from participating in any political activities.[47] It also prohibits associations from having any contacts with a political body or accepting funds from any entity with a political nature.[48] Foreign associations are not immune from such bans; in September 2008, for example, the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, present in Algeria since 2002, was forced “to announce the suspension of its activities in Algeria” after being accused of creating “opposition spaces” with its ‘Ramadan Nights’ program of events.[49] The organization has not held any events since.[50]
* Similarly, NGOs are prohibited from engaging in political activities in Syria.[51]
* Kuwaiti NGO laws ban NGOs from “interfering with politics and religious conflicts.”[52]
* Associations in Qatar are prohibited from becoming “involved in political issues.”[53]
2. Additional Restrictions
* In Oman, an association may not “interfere in religious issues” or “hold public festivals or public lectures without obtaining a prior permission from the Ministry.”[54]
* In addition to prohibitions on political activities, NGOs in Bahrain are banned from entering into any speculative activities.[55] They are also unable to obtain real estate without first receiving permission from the competent authority.[56]
* In addition to being prohibited from “interfer[ing] in politics or in matters that impair the State, its security, or its ruling regime,”[57] NGOs in the United Arab Emirates cannot participate in “conferences, forums, assemblies or meetings outside the State” without receiving permission from the Ministry of Social Affairs.[58] Similarly, an association must receive approval from the Ministry prior to holding “conferences, forums, meetings, or events attended by foreigners.”[59]
D. Restrictions on Fundraising
Many nations in the MENA region require associations to obtain prior approval, often but not always in the form of a license, before any fundraising activities can be implemented. Although the requirement to obtain a license may not be problematic on its own, the time constraints associated with obtaining a license may cause difficulties. For example, requiring multiple applications for fundraising licenses each year may create burdensome and expensive administrative processes for smaller NGOs. Also, if an association is only permitted to raise funds once a year its activities may be crippled due to insufficient funds.
* In Bahrain, to obtain a license to raise funds, an NGO must disclose how the money will be collected, how it will be spent, and the name of the bank and the account where the money will be deposited.[60] Once the license is obtained, it is only good for two months. [61]
* In Kuwait, associations are only permitted to collect funds once each year after first receiving a license from the government.[62]
* In Egypt, NGOs may not accept funds from a foreign source or send funds abroad without permission from the Ministry of Social Solidarity.[63] Government permission is also required for an NGO to receive foreign funding in Algeria,[64] Jordan,[65] Syria,[66] and Sudan,[67] among others.
E. Involuntary Dissolution
Governments may also exercise a significant degree of control over associations through the threat of liquidation or dissolution. Often, the legal provisions pertaining to liquidation or dissolution contain broad language, which again grants the administrative authority a great degree of discretion when making decisions.
* The Ministry of Social Development in Syria is able to liquidate an NGO based solely upon its opinion that the NGO is not necessary.[68]
* In Mauritania, the Ministry of Interior may dissolve an association if it “conducts propaganda offending the state” or if the association “violate(s) the state’s credibility,” among other reasons.[69]
* In Oman, an association may be dissolved if the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor determines that it has violated public “norms.”[70]
F. Criminal Punishments
As previously mentioned, many countries impose criminal penalties on individuals who work with or for an association that is not registered with the government. When these penalties are coupled with laws that do not clearly define what groups are required to register, individuals may unknowingly act in ways that subject them to criminal penalty. In addition, the imposition of severe criminal penalties for minor violations of the law may act as a deterrent to the associational activities of individuals and organizations.
* Any individual who manages or works for an unregistered Algerian association may be punished with a prison sentence of three months to two years and a fine of 50,000-100,000 Algerian Dinars.[71]
* Individuals who manage an unlicensed association in Mauritania may be imprisoned for a period of 1-3 years and fined MRO 3,000-450,000. Individuals working for an unregistered association may be sentenced to one year in prison and be required to pay a fine of MRO 270,000.[72]
* In Egypt, a punishment of up to one year in prison and a fine of LE 2,000-10,000 may be imposed onindividuals who form an NGO without proper registration. In addition, any individual who conducts activities on behalf of an association before registration is complete may be punished with 3 months in prison and a fine of LE 1,000. [73]
* A penalty of imprisonment up to five years and a fine of between TD 10-100 may be imposed on any individual who works for an unregistered association in Tunisia.[74] If an individual manages an unregistered association he or she may be penalized with imprisonment of five months to three years and a fine of TD 10-50.[75]
III. Conclusion: New and Ongoing NGO Law Initiatives
As the preceding pages demonstrate, NGOs operating in much of the Arab world face significant and continuing regulatory and legal barriers to their work. However, though the pace of change is slow, and there are some setbacks, some countries have experienced an incremental liberalization of the environment for civil society. Perhaps most importantly, with positive amendments to the NGO laws of Morocco in 2002 and 2005, Lebanon in 2006, and Iraq in 2010, the Arab region has domestic models for enabling framework legislation on civil society law.
The recent passage of Iraq’s Law on Non-Governmental Organizations is one of the few clear success stories on NGO law reform in the Arab world in recent years. [76] Along with Morocco, Lebanon, and Palestine, it is one of the only NGO laws in the region that does not mandate registration of all NGOs. The process of registering a new NGO, while not perfect, is clear and free of inappropriate discretion for government officials. Applications for registration may only be rejected for failure to comply with the NGO law itself, and any rejected NGO may appeal directly to an independent Court of Appeals.[77] There are no restrictions on foreign affiliations or domestic or international fundraising, [78] and NGOs are not hampered by unnecessarily burdensome reporting requirements.[79] It will now be significant for NGOs to seek implementation of the Law that is consistent with its enabling intent.
Other new and ongoing NGO law initiatives are now underway in at least seven MENA countries, though these initiatives will likely yield mixed results.[80]
* Algeria. The Minister of Interior and Local Collectivities, Yazid Zerhouni, announced in June 2008 that he would seek amendments to the Algerian Law on Associations. However, as of this writing, there is “no public debate on the issue… and no official information on potential amendments,” and as such most civil society leaders fear that any proposed amendments will further restrict the sector.[81]
* Bahrain. Beginning in 2007, the Ministry of Social Development announced that it would amend the 1989 NGO law and engaged in several rounds of public consultations with Bahraini and international organizations as it prepared a draft law. The law reform process stalled in mid-2008, but on September 7, 2009, the Bahraini newspaper Al-Wasat reported that a draft had been approved by the Council of Ministers and sent to the parliament for its consideration. As of this writing no Council of Ministers-approved draft has yet been formally made public.[82]
* Egypt. Since mid-2008, the Egyptian Minister of Social Solidarity and various government officials have confirmed that the Egyptian government will amend Law 84 of 2002. While a draft bill is expected to be introduced in parliament this year, the government has so far refused to make the text of the law available for public review or comment. Among other rumored changes, the General Federation of Associations and Foundations is expected to be assigned a supervisory role, in addition to that of the Ministry of Social Solidarity, in approving or denying registration and foreign funding applications, potentially adding yet another layer of government supervision. Egyptian civil society leaders, fearing that the new law will further restrict the sector, have been and are continuing to mount an advocacy campaign against adoption of any new amendments.[83]
* Kuwait. According to a report of the newspaper Al Qabas, a new draft civil society law is being considered by the parliamentary committee on health, social, and labor issues. No draft has been made available to the public, and at this time it is unclear what the effect of the proposed bill may be.[84]
* Libya. A panel chaired by the son of the Libyan President, Seif al-Islam Qaddafi, was expected to “propose a law permitting the creation of non-governmental organizations” in January 2010. However, recent statements by President Qaddafi stating that civil society “is a bourgeois culture and an imitation of the West” have cast doubt on whether or not the draft law will be announced. The situation remains unclear as of this writing.[85]
* Saudi Arabia. A draft Law on Associations and Foundations that would establish, for the first time, a legal framework for NGOs in Saudi Arabia was approved by the Shura Council in December 2007 and currently awaits the approval and adoption of the King. While many provisions of this law are consistent with international best practices, the draft law gives wide discretionary authority to government officials in the regulation of NGOs. The current status of the law is unclear.
* Yemen. The Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs has made public draft amendments to the Law on Associations and Foundations that would represent a significant degradation in the status of NGOs in that country. Among other things, the proposed law would require NGOs to seek prior approval before receiving funds from abroad, conducting public fundraising at home, or publishing any public media statements. It would also raise the minimum number of founders required for registration of new NGOs and require re-registration of NGOs every two years. International and domestic NGOs are mounting a robust campaign to defeat or improve the proposed amendments, and this campaign is ongoing as of this writing.
The outcome of these initiatives remains unclear. However, as strengthening and increasingly assertive calls for reform by Arab and international human rights defenders and their allies make clear, there is a need for a more progressive legal and regulatory environment for NGOs in the Arab world. The words of Arab leaders have been in some cases encouraging, but if the changes they promise are to become a reality, concrete steps towards more enabling laws for NGOs will be required.
More info at:
When President Barak Obama delivered his now-famous address to the Muslim world in June of 2009, many in the Arab world welcomed the message of hope and “a new beginning.” President Obama’s call for freedom and political and civil rights echoed the statements of Arab reformers and human rights advocates, who have long called for a broad international and regional commitment to Arab political reform. In the words of the influential Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies’ Annual Report on Human Rights in the Arab Region, “human rights claims should be given priority over more narrow demands for political participation and the reform of electoral systems… demands linked to freedom of expression should be given special priority, particularly the right to independent organization, whether political parties, trade unions and professional syndicates, or NGOs.”[1]
Indeed, in recent years the significance of civil society, protection of basic freedoms for civil society, and their relationship to economic development have been acknowledged at the highest levels of Arab governments. One year prior to President Obama’s address, King Abdullah II of Jordan gave a speech explaining that “basic freedoms for citizens and civil society organizations… are major requirements for realizing comprehensive development, [and] this cannot be realized except in an environment governed by the values of freedom, pluralism, tolerance, respect for others’ opinions, the rule of law and equal opportunities.”[2] Similarly, Lebanon’s President Michel Sulayman has spoken of civil society as “a force that provides suggestions and support for the efforts of the state,”[3] and Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa commented in 2009 that steps were being taken to “provide a chance to the private sector and civil society to participate in the economic and social development process.”[4]
While these statements recognize the importance of civil society, and thus offer the promise of change, few Arab governments have taken the steps necessary to provide for a more enabling environment for NGOs by revising the laws governing their activities. The NGO laws of most Middle East / North Africa (MENA) countries remain extremely restrictive. With very few exceptions – most prominently, Lebanon, Morocco, Palestine, and with the passage of new legislation in 2010, Iraq – most Arab governments have adopted NGO laws that are constrain the formation and operation of NGOs and afford significant discretion to government officials in their oversight of them, thereby preventing NGOs from playing a role as full partners for social and economic development. Nonetheless, there have been new initiatives to revise the NGO laws in a number of countries, in some cases offering the prospect of improvement.
In light of the continuing international interest in the MENA region, and the multiple existing and anticipated initiatives to revise or replace NGO laws, ICNL focuses this issue of Global Trends on the NGO laws of the Arab world. We begin with a brief history of the development of NGO laws in the region. Section II considers the current status of NGO laws in the MENA countries. Section III reviews the most recent initiatives to revise the region’s NGO laws.
I. The Long Shadow of Egypt’s NGO Law
As Arab nations gained their independence in the 1950s and 1960s, many moved to follow the example of Egypt – the first Arab nation to gain its independence – and its charismatic leader, Gamal Abdel Nasser. Nasser, who ruled Egypt from 1954 until his death in 1970, was one of the most important figures in modern Arab history, and his socialist pan-Arab ideology was enormously influential across the MENA region.[5] Under Nasser’s rule, Egypt adopted the MENA region’s first post-independence NGO law, the Law on Private Associations and Foundations (Law 32 of 1964). A product of its time, Law 32 of 1964 reflected the subordination of independent civil society to what was seen as the higher Arab socialist interest, and “neither open political opposition nor an independent sector existed in Egypt during this time.”[6] NGOs could not be formed without the approval of government officials, whose discretion in registration was unlimited, and the government had the authority to dissolve or combine NGOs or even completely replace their Boards of Directors at any time.[7] Many of these provisions appear nearly verbatim in subsequently written Arab NGO laws, such as Jordan’s Law on Societies and Social Bodies (Law 33 of 1966) and Bahrain’s Law of Associations, Social and Cultural Clubs, Special Committees Working in the Field of Youth and Sports, and Private Foundations (Decree 21 of 1989), adopted twenty-five years later.
Arab NGO Law Reforms in the Last Decade
As in the post-independence period, as several Arab countries have moved to amend their NGO laws since the turn of the millennium, Egypt has again led the way. Beginning in 1997, the Egyptian government announced its intention to amend Law 32 of 1964 to “empower volunteer agencies as major partners in the development process.”[8] Dozens of prominent Egyptian civil society leaders were invited to take part in the drafting of the legislation. However, the bill ultimately approved by the parliament in 1999 diverged so strongly from their expectations and recommendations that they issued a public condemnation of the law three days before its passage and disavowed its contents.[9] Ultimately, the new Egyptian NGO law – Law 153 of 1999 – was declared unconstitutional by the Egyptian Court of Cassation because of procedural irregularities, but an almost identical version was enacted as Law 84 of 2002 and remains in effect to this day.[10]
Law 84 of 2002 (and its 1999 precursor) did away with several negative provisions of Law 32 of 1964. Among other changes, the requirement that NGOs seek government approval before purchasing real estate and the government’s right to unilaterally appoint members of any association’s Board of Directors were both removed.[11] However, registration of all groups remained mandatory, and NGOs continued to be subjected to burdensome and discretionary processes, inappropriate government supervision, unnecessarily severe criminal punishments, and improper restrictions on fundraising and activities. In other words, the government attempted to liberalize the NGO framework enough to allow NGOs to engage in government-sanctioned economic and social development programs – but not enough to provide for a truly independent civil society. This same pattern of development would come to characterize subsequent law reform efforts in Palestine and Oman (2000), Yemen (2001), Qatar (2004), Mauritania (2006), and Jordan (2008). All of these countries made positive changes to their NGO framework laws but did not adopt laws that were fully enabling of civil society or consistent with international law and best practices.
The following sections survey the current status of NGO laws across the region.
II. Survey of Arab NGO Laws
As briefly discussed above, most Arab NGO laws share several characteristics. In general, registration of all NGOs is mandatory, and there can be significant barriers to successful registration, including a high minimum number of members or discretionary registration processes. Once registered, NGOs will face substantial and often inappropriate government interference with their internal management and operations. They are also likely to face blanket restrictions on certain types of activities and their ability to raise funds. Registered NGOs will also encounter the possibility of dissolution for minor violations of the law or, in the absence of violations, simply at the personal discretion of a government official. Finally, NGO members must contend with potentially severe criminal punishments, including long jail sentences, for relatively minor violations of the law.
A. Registration
1. Mandatory Registration
The vast majority of nations in the MENA region require associations to register with the government prior to beginning any activities. In fact, most impose criminal penalties on individuals who work for or manage unregistered associations or foundations. Many of the laws do not clearly indicate the types of groups that are required to register, which can subject to penalties individual members who may not realize that they are in violation of the NGO laws. By prohibiting any associational activities – even informal activities, such as a group of neighbors meeting weekly to discuss political events – without prior registration, these laws clearly infringe upon the right to free association protected by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and other conventions.
In one recent high-profile example, Mohammed al-Maskati, founder of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights, was jailed in September 2009 for operating the society without a license from the Bahraini government. As of this writing, his case continues; if found guilty, Mr. al-Maskati faces up to six months’ imprisonment.[12]
Registration is mandatory in Jordan,[13] Kuwait,[14] Libya,[15] Sudan,[16] the United Arab Emirates,[17] and several other MENA countries.
2. Large Number of Founders
In many countries of the MENA region, should a group attempt to register, it will confront a process that is burdensome and subject to broad ministerial discretion. For example, many MENA countries require a large number of founders before an association may be formed. Egypt[18] and Bahrain[19] each require 10 members, the United Arab Emirates[20] and Qatar[21] require 20, and Yemen[22] requires 21 at the time of application and 41 at the time of the first meeting. Sudan requires 30 members in order for an association to be successful in its application for registration.[23] Requiring such a large group acts as a substantial barrier for groups with less popular causes. By contrast, Tunisia requires only 2 founders[24] and Palestine requires 3,[25] numbers that facilitate formation and registration of associations.
3. Broad Government Discretion
Registration provisions in many MENA countries include vague language and sweeping grants of power to the relevant ministries, allowing government employees broad discretion when reviewing registration applications from would-be associations.
* According to Jordan’s Law on Societies (Law 51 of 2008 as amended in 2009), applications for registration of new societies are sent to an independent Board of Registration chaired by the Ministry of Social Development.[26] The Board is permitted to reject an application for any reason, though it must issue a written justification for its decision.[27]
* NGOs operating in Bahrain are subject to the Decree 21 of 1989 (as amended in 2002). Under this law, different government agencies handle the registration of NGOs depending on the NGO’s planned activities.[28] The law allows the government to reject an application, among other reasons, simply because it considers the association to be unnecessary or redundant.[29] NGOs then have the option to appeal the rejection, but given the lack of criteria for the government’s authority to reject applications, it is unclear on what basis a court could strike down a rejection.
* Applications for registration in Tunisia are submitted to the Minister of Interior. The Minister is free to make his or her decisions regarding the application without providing justification.[30]
In some cases, a country’s NGO laws may provide criteria on which the government is to base its decision to register or dissolve an NGO, but these criteria are so broad that they do little to constrain the government’s exercise of discretion.
* The Algerian Associations Act (Law 31-90 of 1990) deems an association to be void if it “was founded for a purpose contrary to the established institutional system or to public order, public decency or the law and regulations in force.”[31]
* In Egypt, associations are prohibited from having objectives that “[threaten] national unity or [breach] public order, [or] morals…”[32]
* The Moroccan Decree Regulating the Right of Association (Decree 1-58-376 of 1958 as amended by Decree 2-04-969 of 2005) prohibits associations from engaging in activities that “breach the laws or public morals; offend Islam, national unity, or the royal system; or incite discrimination.”[33]
* The Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor in Oman has the right to prevent an association from registering if it finds that the services to be provided by the association are not needed, or if there are other associations that are already meeting the need that would be filled by the new NGO.[34] The Ministry may also reject an application for “any other reasons according to the decision of the Ministry.”[35]
B. Government Supervision
In many MENA countries, organizations that have been successful in their applications for registration may be subject to significant government supervision. Governments may maintain control by attending associations’ meetings, deterring the discussion of opinions and issues inconsistent with a government position. The government may also retain authority over the selection of board members. By partly controlling an organization’s board, which acts as the decision-making authority for the organization, the government is able to ensure that it will have some say in all major decisions affecting the organization. In addition, many countries in the MENA region require associations to obtain government approval prior to entering into any foreign affiliation.
1. Meeting Attendance
* Under Article 26 of Law 84 of 2002, associations in Egypt are required to inform the Ministry of Social Solidarity and the General Federation of Associations and Foundations[36] of any upcoming general assembly meeting. The notification of the date of the meeting must include the agenda for the meeting. The General Federation is permitted to send a representative to the meeting, and following the meeting, the minutes must be sent to the Minister of Social Solidarity.
* In the United Arab Emirates, the Minister of Social Affairs, in addition to exercising broad powers of supervision generally, may send a representative to all general assembly meetings of an association.[37]
* NGOs in Jordan must inform the Controller of the Registry of Societies and the “Relevant Minister” assigned at the time of their registration of any general assembly meeting at least 15 days prior to the meeting.[38] Both the Controller and the Minister may elect to send a representative to the general assembly meeting. If an association fails to provide notice of the meeting, it is deemed illegal.
2. Board of Directors Interference
* The Ministry of Social Development and Labor in Syria is authorized to appoint members to the Board of Directors of any association.[39] It can also set the minimum and maximum number of individuals that may belong to an association’s Board.[40] Finally, the Ministry has the power to exclude a director from the Board in the interest of “national considerations.”[41]
* Under Article 34 of the Law 84 of 2002, the Egyptian government requires that associations submit a list of the names of all candidates for positions on their boards of directors to the Ministry of Social Solidarity at least 60 days prior to the election. The administrative authority may then require an individual to be removed from the list of nominees for “not fulfilling the nomination requirements” – though such “requirements” are not specified anywhere in the law itself.[42] If an individual’s nomination is not withdrawn after an administrative authority request, the government may initiate a judicial proceeding that will prevent any election from taking place until a “competent court” issues a decision on the legality of the nominee – a process that can take months if not years to complete.[43]
3. Prohibition on Affiliations
* Article 21 of the Algerian Law 31-90 of 1990 dictates that foreign associations may only be formed after receiving prior approval from the Minister of Interior. The right to form foreign associations is limited to Algerian associations whose objectives are the same as the foreign association.[44]
* In Morocco, an organization must obtain government permission in the form of a decree before it may enter into any foreign affiliation. [45]
* Similarly, an association operating in Oman must obtain approval from the Minister of Social Affairs and Labor in order to join any foreign affiliation or club.[46]
C. Restrictions on Activities
Laws prohibiting NGOs from participating in political activities are regularly implemented in the MENA region. Often, these laws do not define the term “political activities,” thereby potentially granting administrative agencies the ability to prohibit a wide range of activities, potentially barring NGOs from participating in public policy debates. Many countries also include provisions specifically banning other types of activities.
1. Political Activities
* Law 31-90 of 1990 prohibits Algerian NGOs from participating in any political activities.[47] It also prohibits associations from having any contacts with a political body or accepting funds from any entity with a political nature.[48] Foreign associations are not immune from such bans; in September 2008, for example, the Friedrich Ebert Foundation, present in Algeria since 2002, was forced “to announce the suspension of its activities in Algeria” after being accused of creating “opposition spaces” with its ‘Ramadan Nights’ program of events.[49] The organization has not held any events since.[50]
* Similarly, NGOs are prohibited from engaging in political activities in Syria.[51]
* Kuwaiti NGO laws ban NGOs from “interfering with politics and religious conflicts.”[52]
* Associations in Qatar are prohibited from becoming “involved in political issues.”[53]
2. Additional Restrictions
* In Oman, an association may not “interfere in religious issues” or “hold public festivals or public lectures without obtaining a prior permission from the Ministry.”[54]
* In addition to prohibitions on political activities, NGOs in Bahrain are banned from entering into any speculative activities.[55] They are also unable to obtain real estate without first receiving permission from the competent authority.[56]
* In addition to being prohibited from “interfer[ing] in politics or in matters that impair the State, its security, or its ruling regime,”[57] NGOs in the United Arab Emirates cannot participate in “conferences, forums, assemblies or meetings outside the State” without receiving permission from the Ministry of Social Affairs.[58] Similarly, an association must receive approval from the Ministry prior to holding “conferences, forums, meetings, or events attended by foreigners.”[59]
D. Restrictions on Fundraising
Many nations in the MENA region require associations to obtain prior approval, often but not always in the form of a license, before any fundraising activities can be implemented. Although the requirement to obtain a license may not be problematic on its own, the time constraints associated with obtaining a license may cause difficulties. For example, requiring multiple applications for fundraising licenses each year may create burdensome and expensive administrative processes for smaller NGOs. Also, if an association is only permitted to raise funds once a year its activities may be crippled due to insufficient funds.
* In Bahrain, to obtain a license to raise funds, an NGO must disclose how the money will be collected, how it will be spent, and the name of the bank and the account where the money will be deposited.[60] Once the license is obtained, it is only good for two months. [61]
* In Kuwait, associations are only permitted to collect funds once each year after first receiving a license from the government.[62]
* In Egypt, NGOs may not accept funds from a foreign source or send funds abroad without permission from the Ministry of Social Solidarity.[63] Government permission is also required for an NGO to receive foreign funding in Algeria,[64] Jordan,[65] Syria,[66] and Sudan,[67] among others.
E. Involuntary Dissolution
Governments may also exercise a significant degree of control over associations through the threat of liquidation or dissolution. Often, the legal provisions pertaining to liquidation or dissolution contain broad language, which again grants the administrative authority a great degree of discretion when making decisions.
* The Ministry of Social Development in Syria is able to liquidate an NGO based solely upon its opinion that the NGO is not necessary.[68]
* In Mauritania, the Ministry of Interior may dissolve an association if it “conducts propaganda offending the state” or if the association “violate(s) the state’s credibility,” among other reasons.[69]
* In Oman, an association may be dissolved if the Ministry of Social Affairs and Labor determines that it has violated public “norms.”[70]
F. Criminal Punishments
As previously mentioned, many countries impose criminal penalties on individuals who work with or for an association that is not registered with the government. When these penalties are coupled with laws that do not clearly define what groups are required to register, individuals may unknowingly act in ways that subject them to criminal penalty. In addition, the imposition of severe criminal penalties for minor violations of the law may act as a deterrent to the associational activities of individuals and organizations.
* Any individual who manages or works for an unregistered Algerian association may be punished with a prison sentence of three months to two years and a fine of 50,000-100,000 Algerian Dinars.[71]
* Individuals who manage an unlicensed association in Mauritania may be imprisoned for a period of 1-3 years and fined MRO 3,000-450,000. Individuals working for an unregistered association may be sentenced to one year in prison and be required to pay a fine of MRO 270,000.[72]
* In Egypt, a punishment of up to one year in prison and a fine of LE 2,000-10,000 may be imposed onindividuals who form an NGO without proper registration. In addition, any individual who conducts activities on behalf of an association before registration is complete may be punished with 3 months in prison and a fine of LE 1,000. [73]
* A penalty of imprisonment up to five years and a fine of between TD 10-100 may be imposed on any individual who works for an unregistered association in Tunisia.[74] If an individual manages an unregistered association he or she may be penalized with imprisonment of five months to three years and a fine of TD 10-50.[75]
III. Conclusion: New and Ongoing NGO Law Initiatives
As the preceding pages demonstrate, NGOs operating in much of the Arab world face significant and continuing regulatory and legal barriers to their work. However, though the pace of change is slow, and there are some setbacks, some countries have experienced an incremental liberalization of the environment for civil society. Perhaps most importantly, with positive amendments to the NGO laws of Morocco in 2002 and 2005, Lebanon in 2006, and Iraq in 2010, the Arab region has domestic models for enabling framework legislation on civil society law.
The recent passage of Iraq’s Law on Non-Governmental Organizations is one of the few clear success stories on NGO law reform in the Arab world in recent years. [76] Along with Morocco, Lebanon, and Palestine, it is one of the only NGO laws in the region that does not mandate registration of all NGOs. The process of registering a new NGO, while not perfect, is clear and free of inappropriate discretion for government officials. Applications for registration may only be rejected for failure to comply with the NGO law itself, and any rejected NGO may appeal directly to an independent Court of Appeals.[77] There are no restrictions on foreign affiliations or domestic or international fundraising, [78] and NGOs are not hampered by unnecessarily burdensome reporting requirements.[79] It will now be significant for NGOs to seek implementation of the Law that is consistent with its enabling intent.
Other new and ongoing NGO law initiatives are now underway in at least seven MENA countries, though these initiatives will likely yield mixed results.[80]
* Algeria. The Minister of Interior and Local Collectivities, Yazid Zerhouni, announced in June 2008 that he would seek amendments to the Algerian Law on Associations. However, as of this writing, there is “no public debate on the issue… and no official information on potential amendments,” and as such most civil society leaders fear that any proposed amendments will further restrict the sector.[81]
* Bahrain. Beginning in 2007, the Ministry of Social Development announced that it would amend the 1989 NGO law and engaged in several rounds of public consultations with Bahraini and international organizations as it prepared a draft law. The law reform process stalled in mid-2008, but on September 7, 2009, the Bahraini newspaper Al-Wasat reported that a draft had been approved by the Council of Ministers and sent to the parliament for its consideration. As of this writing no Council of Ministers-approved draft has yet been formally made public.[82]
* Egypt. Since mid-2008, the Egyptian Minister of Social Solidarity and various government officials have confirmed that the Egyptian government will amend Law 84 of 2002. While a draft bill is expected to be introduced in parliament this year, the government has so far refused to make the text of the law available for public review or comment. Among other rumored changes, the General Federation of Associations and Foundations is expected to be assigned a supervisory role, in addition to that of the Ministry of Social Solidarity, in approving or denying registration and foreign funding applications, potentially adding yet another layer of government supervision. Egyptian civil society leaders, fearing that the new law will further restrict the sector, have been and are continuing to mount an advocacy campaign against adoption of any new amendments.[83]
* Kuwait. According to a report of the newspaper Al Qabas, a new draft civil society law is being considered by the parliamentary committee on health, social, and labor issues. No draft has been made available to the public, and at this time it is unclear what the effect of the proposed bill may be.[84]
* Libya. A panel chaired by the son of the Libyan President, Seif al-Islam Qaddafi, was expected to “propose a law permitting the creation of non-governmental organizations” in January 2010. However, recent statements by President Qaddafi stating that civil society “is a bourgeois culture and an imitation of the West” have cast doubt on whether or not the draft law will be announced. The situation remains unclear as of this writing.[85]
* Saudi Arabia. A draft Law on Associations and Foundations that would establish, for the first time, a legal framework for NGOs in Saudi Arabia was approved by the Shura Council in December 2007 and currently awaits the approval and adoption of the King. While many provisions of this law are consistent with international best practices, the draft law gives wide discretionary authority to government officials in the regulation of NGOs. The current status of the law is unclear.
* Yemen. The Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs has made public draft amendments to the Law on Associations and Foundations that would represent a significant degradation in the status of NGOs in that country. Among other things, the proposed law would require NGOs to seek prior approval before receiving funds from abroad, conducting public fundraising at home, or publishing any public media statements. It would also raise the minimum number of founders required for registration of new NGOs and require re-registration of NGOs every two years. International and domestic NGOs are mounting a robust campaign to defeat or improve the proposed amendments, and this campaign is ongoing as of this writing.
The outcome of these initiatives remains unclear. However, as strengthening and increasingly assertive calls for reform by Arab and international human rights defenders and their allies make clear, there is a need for a more progressive legal and regulatory environment for NGOs in the Arab world. The words of Arab leaders have been in some cases encouraging, but if the changes they promise are to become a reality, concrete steps towards more enabling laws for NGOs will be required.
More info at:
18/01/2010
3rd EMHRN Free Association Report in the Euro-Mediterranean Region // 3ème Rapport du REMDH sur la liberté d’association dans la région EuroMéd
English
The third report of the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN) presents an overview of the situation of human rights NGOs in countries north and south of the Mediterranean in 2009.
Since the publication of the EMHRN’s last report on freedom of association, in December 2008, there has been very little, if any, improvement in the countries of the Euro-Mediterranean region. On the contrary, individuals’ ability to exercise their right to associate has continued to deteriorate in some respects.
In the countries of the eastern and southern Mediterranean, national legislations continue to restrict human rights activists’ ability to get involved with human rights and minority rights associations or groups suspected of having links to opposition movements. Activists are subject to stringent controls by the authorities, including by the judiciary. The situation is especially dire in Libya, where national legislation prohibits the formation of any group considered to be promoting ideas that undermine the Revolution.
Repressive policies against activists sometimes take a violent form. In Tunisia, for example, harassment and physical assaults against human rights defenders intensified in the months preceding the presidential elections of October 2009. In Syria, the arrest on July 28, 2009 of Mohanad Al-Hassani, the president of the Syrian Organization for Human Rights (Sawasiah), who had monitored prison conditions in the country, was an additional reminder of the urgent need to implement the recommendations made by the EMHRN during the past three years.
While the situation may be less extreme, restrictive laws and practices also are prevalent in other countries of the region. Recent declarations in Egypt and Algeria that national legislations governing associations would be amended, as well as accusations by key figures that human rights organizations were “a threat to national security”, were ominous signs that the extensive powers of the countries’ security apparatuses might be strengthened even further. Similarly, in Israel, the recent debate aiming at restricting the right of NGOs to receive foreign funds constituted a new source of concern, as it highlighted a determination to silence NGOs that denounce human rights violations. Meanwhile the proposed amendments to the 2008 Jordanian Law on Societies would require founding members to seek official authorization prior to incorporating an organization and would impose restrictions on the activities organizations are allowed to engage in. In that, the proposed amendments are indicative of the region’s enduring illiberal legislative approaches, which contravene international standards on freedom of association.
The actual practice of the authorities also often violates international standards in relation to freedom of association, even where legislation is not as restrictive. Thus, in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, political and security concerns resulting from the political division between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip drastically limit the right to form or join an association, despite the presence of a modern legal framework regulating the establishment and functioning of associations.
The situation is much more favorable in Lebanon and, to a lesser extent, in Turkey, where (Kurdish) minority associations nonetheless face serious obstacles when it comes to freedom of association, and in Morocco, where a number of associations still continue to encounter obstacles in registering due to the administrative authorities’ failure to implement the law. In these three countries, it is important that the authorities institutionalize the positive measures they have taken.
Within the countries of the European Union, the situation with respect to freedom of association continues to be generally positive due to the judicial monitoring of the European Court of Human Rights and the recommendations of the Council of Europe Expert Council on NGO Law. However, some campaigns to disrupt the actions of activists defending the rights of foreigners or minorities prove that there is still no room for complacency.
In this 100-page follow-up report, the EMHRN reviews both violations of the right to freedom of association and progress achieved in the 11 countries south and east of the Mediterranean and in the countries of the European Union. The report also contains a thematic chapter on the problems faced by ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious minority associations and a note on the increasingly important role played by “fake” NGOs (commonly called “government-organized NGOs” or “GONGOs”), both at the national and international level (for instance, at the UN).
The report is available on the EMHRN website at: http://en.euromedrights.org/index.php/news/emhrn_releases/67/4076.html
Francais
Le troisième rapport du Réseau Euro-méditerranéen des Droits de l’Homme (REMDH) présente l’évolution de la situation des ONG de défense des droits de l’Homme du Nord et du Sud de la Méditerranée en 2009.
Depuis le dernier Rapport de décembre 2008, force est de constater qu’il n’y a eu que très peu, sinon aucun changement positif concernant la liberté d’association dans les pays de la région euro-méditerranéenne. Sur certains points, il y a même eu une dégradation de la capacité d’exercer ce droit…
Pris dans l’étau d’une législation nationale stricte, Libye en tête, où la législation nationale interdit la création de tout groupe fondé sur des idées contraires à celles de la Révolution, les activistes de l’Est et du Sud de la Méditerranée souhaitant s’impliquer au sein d’associations de défense des droits de l’Homme, de défense des minorités ou encore de groupes soupçonnées d’être affiliées à des mouvements d’opposition sont de plus soumis à un contrôle scrupuleux des autorités administratives, et dans certains cas, d’autorités judiciaires au pas.
Cette politique répressive contre les militants associatifs prend parfois des formes violentes. En Tunisie, les actes de harcèlement et les agressions physiques des défenseurs des droits de l’Homme se sont intensifiés à l’approche des élections présidentielles d’octobre. En Syrie, l’arrestation, le 28 juillet 2009, de Mohanad Al-Hassani, Président de l’Organisation syrienne des Droits de l’Homme (Sawasiah), connu pour son implication dans le suivi des conditions de détention dans le pays, est également venu confirmer la nécessité de mettre en œuvre les recommandations, notamment, développées par le REMDH depuis trois ans.
Sans aller jusqu’à cet extrême, les autres pays de la région connaissent également des législations ou des pratiques strictes. Les annonces d’amendements législatifs aux lois sur les ONG entendues cette année en Egypte ou en Algérie, et les commentaires inquiétants de certaines personnalités accusant les organisations de droits de l’Homme « de menacer la sécurité nationale » qui s’en sont suivis, laissent présager un renforcement des pouvoirs des services de sécurité. De même, en Israël, de récentes déclarations visant à restreindre le droit des ONG à recevoir des financements de l’étranger constituent une nouvelle source de préoccupation, tant ils semblent motiver par la volonté de faire taire celles qui dénoncent les violations des droits de l’Homme. A l’instar des modifications législatives introduites à la loi jordanienne sur les sociétés, adoptée en 2008, qui imposent aux associations jordaniennes d’obtenir une autorisation pour leur fondation, ainsi que pour chacune de leurs activités, les évolutions législatives actuelles ne vont pas dans le sens d’une approche libérale en conformité avec les standards internationaux à cet égard.
Lorsque ce n’est pas la législation, c’est la pratique des autorités qui est en violation avec les standards internationaux relatifs à la liberté d’association. Dans les territoires palestiniens, en dépit de l’existence d’un cadre juridique moderne pour réglementer l’enregistrement et le fonctionnement des associations, les considérations politiques et sécuritaires, imputable à la division politique entre la Cisjordanie et la bande de Gaza, prennent désormais le pas sur le système des libertés publiques, compromettant gravement le droit de former une association ou d’y adhérer.
La situation des ONG est nettement plus favorable au Liban ou, à moindre mesure, en Turquie où les associations de défense des minorités, kurdes notamment, rencontrent de sérieux obstacles lorsqu’ils souhaitent s’organiser, ou au Maroc où les difficultés d’enregistrement d’un certain nombre d’associations, du fait de la non-mise en œuvre des dispositions légales par les autorités administratives, ont encore perduré cette année, attestant la nécessité, dans ces trois pays, que les autorités prennent toutes les mesures nécessaires afin d’institutionnaliser les mesures positives prises.
La situation en matière de liberté d’association au sein des Etats membres de l’Union européenne continue d’être globalement positive du fait tant du contrôle judiciaire de la Cour européenne des droits de l’Homme que des recommandations du Conseil d’experts du Conseil de l’Europe sur le droit en matière d’ONG. Cependant, certaines campagnes de déstabilisation opérée contre les défenseurs des droits des étrangers ou des minorités n’offrent la place à aucune forme de complaisance.
Dans ce Rapport de suivi de plus de 100 pages, le REMDH dresse le bilan des violations et des avancées au droit d’association dans les 11 pays du Sud et de l’Est de la Méditerranée et dans les pays membres de l’Union européenne. Il consacre également un chapitre thématique sur les difficultés rencontrées par les associations de défense des minorités ethnique, culturelle, linguistique et religieuse. Il contient enfin une note sur le rôle croissant des « fausses » ONG (communément dénommé « GONGO » ou organisations gouvernementales) tant au niveau national que dans les structures internationales (ONU notamment)
Le Rapport est disponible sur le site Internet du Réseau euro-méditerranéen des droits de l'Homme à l'adresse: http://fr.euromedrights.org/index.php/news/emhrn_releases/61/3694.html
Arabic
The third report of the Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Network (EMHRN) presents an overview of the situation of human rights NGOs in countries north and south of the Mediterranean in 2009.
Since the publication of the EMHRN’s last report on freedom of association, in December 2008, there has been very little, if any, improvement in the countries of the Euro-Mediterranean region. On the contrary, individuals’ ability to exercise their right to associate has continued to deteriorate in some respects.
In the countries of the eastern and southern Mediterranean, national legislations continue to restrict human rights activists’ ability to get involved with human rights and minority rights associations or groups suspected of having links to opposition movements. Activists are subject to stringent controls by the authorities, including by the judiciary. The situation is especially dire in Libya, where national legislation prohibits the formation of any group considered to be promoting ideas that undermine the Revolution.
Repressive policies against activists sometimes take a violent form. In Tunisia, for example, harassment and physical assaults against human rights defenders intensified in the months preceding the presidential elections of October 2009. In Syria, the arrest on July 28, 2009 of Mohanad Al-Hassani, the president of the Syrian Organization for Human Rights (Sawasiah), who had monitored prison conditions in the country, was an additional reminder of the urgent need to implement the recommendations made by the EMHRN during the past three years.
While the situation may be less extreme, restrictive laws and practices also are prevalent in other countries of the region. Recent declarations in Egypt and Algeria that national legislations governing associations would be amended, as well as accusations by key figures that human rights organizations were “a threat to national security”, were ominous signs that the extensive powers of the countries’ security apparatuses might be strengthened even further. Similarly, in Israel, the recent debate aiming at restricting the right of NGOs to receive foreign funds constituted a new source of concern, as it highlighted a determination to silence NGOs that denounce human rights violations. Meanwhile the proposed amendments to the 2008 Jordanian Law on Societies would require founding members to seek official authorization prior to incorporating an organization and would impose restrictions on the activities organizations are allowed to engage in. In that, the proposed amendments are indicative of the region’s enduring illiberal legislative approaches, which contravene international standards on freedom of association.
The actual practice of the authorities also often violates international standards in relation to freedom of association, even where legislation is not as restrictive. Thus, in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, political and security concerns resulting from the political division between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip drastically limit the right to form or join an association, despite the presence of a modern legal framework regulating the establishment and functioning of associations.
The situation is much more favorable in Lebanon and, to a lesser extent, in Turkey, where (Kurdish) minority associations nonetheless face serious obstacles when it comes to freedom of association, and in Morocco, where a number of associations still continue to encounter obstacles in registering due to the administrative authorities’ failure to implement the law. In these three countries, it is important that the authorities institutionalize the positive measures they have taken.
Within the countries of the European Union, the situation with respect to freedom of association continues to be generally positive due to the judicial monitoring of the European Court of Human Rights and the recommendations of the Council of Europe Expert Council on NGO Law. However, some campaigns to disrupt the actions of activists defending the rights of foreigners or minorities prove that there is still no room for complacency.
In this 100-page follow-up report, the EMHRN reviews both violations of the right to freedom of association and progress achieved in the 11 countries south and east of the Mediterranean and in the countries of the European Union. The report also contains a thematic chapter on the problems faced by ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious minority associations and a note on the increasingly important role played by “fake” NGOs (commonly called “government-organized NGOs” or “GONGOs”), both at the national and international level (for instance, at the UN).
The report is available on the EMHRN website at: http://en.euromedrights.org/index.php/news/emhrn_releases/67/4076.html
Francais
Le troisième rapport du Réseau Euro-méditerranéen des Droits de l’Homme (REMDH) présente l’évolution de la situation des ONG de défense des droits de l’Homme du Nord et du Sud de la Méditerranée en 2009.
Depuis le dernier Rapport de décembre 2008, force est de constater qu’il n’y a eu que très peu, sinon aucun changement positif concernant la liberté d’association dans les pays de la région euro-méditerranéenne. Sur certains points, il y a même eu une dégradation de la capacité d’exercer ce droit…
Pris dans l’étau d’une législation nationale stricte, Libye en tête, où la législation nationale interdit la création de tout groupe fondé sur des idées contraires à celles de la Révolution, les activistes de l’Est et du Sud de la Méditerranée souhaitant s’impliquer au sein d’associations de défense des droits de l’Homme, de défense des minorités ou encore de groupes soupçonnées d’être affiliées à des mouvements d’opposition sont de plus soumis à un contrôle scrupuleux des autorités administratives, et dans certains cas, d’autorités judiciaires au pas.
Cette politique répressive contre les militants associatifs prend parfois des formes violentes. En Tunisie, les actes de harcèlement et les agressions physiques des défenseurs des droits de l’Homme se sont intensifiés à l’approche des élections présidentielles d’octobre. En Syrie, l’arrestation, le 28 juillet 2009, de Mohanad Al-Hassani, Président de l’Organisation syrienne des Droits de l’Homme (Sawasiah), connu pour son implication dans le suivi des conditions de détention dans le pays, est également venu confirmer la nécessité de mettre en œuvre les recommandations, notamment, développées par le REMDH depuis trois ans.
Sans aller jusqu’à cet extrême, les autres pays de la région connaissent également des législations ou des pratiques strictes. Les annonces d’amendements législatifs aux lois sur les ONG entendues cette année en Egypte ou en Algérie, et les commentaires inquiétants de certaines personnalités accusant les organisations de droits de l’Homme « de menacer la sécurité nationale » qui s’en sont suivis, laissent présager un renforcement des pouvoirs des services de sécurité. De même, en Israël, de récentes déclarations visant à restreindre le droit des ONG à recevoir des financements de l’étranger constituent une nouvelle source de préoccupation, tant ils semblent motiver par la volonté de faire taire celles qui dénoncent les violations des droits de l’Homme. A l’instar des modifications législatives introduites à la loi jordanienne sur les sociétés, adoptée en 2008, qui imposent aux associations jordaniennes d’obtenir une autorisation pour leur fondation, ainsi que pour chacune de leurs activités, les évolutions législatives actuelles ne vont pas dans le sens d’une approche libérale en conformité avec les standards internationaux à cet égard.
Lorsque ce n’est pas la législation, c’est la pratique des autorités qui est en violation avec les standards internationaux relatifs à la liberté d’association. Dans les territoires palestiniens, en dépit de l’existence d’un cadre juridique moderne pour réglementer l’enregistrement et le fonctionnement des associations, les considérations politiques et sécuritaires, imputable à la division politique entre la Cisjordanie et la bande de Gaza, prennent désormais le pas sur le système des libertés publiques, compromettant gravement le droit de former une association ou d’y adhérer.
La situation des ONG est nettement plus favorable au Liban ou, à moindre mesure, en Turquie où les associations de défense des minorités, kurdes notamment, rencontrent de sérieux obstacles lorsqu’ils souhaitent s’organiser, ou au Maroc où les difficultés d’enregistrement d’un certain nombre d’associations, du fait de la non-mise en œuvre des dispositions légales par les autorités administratives, ont encore perduré cette année, attestant la nécessité, dans ces trois pays, que les autorités prennent toutes les mesures nécessaires afin d’institutionnaliser les mesures positives prises.
La situation en matière de liberté d’association au sein des Etats membres de l’Union européenne continue d’être globalement positive du fait tant du contrôle judiciaire de la Cour européenne des droits de l’Homme que des recommandations du Conseil d’experts du Conseil de l’Europe sur le droit en matière d’ONG. Cependant, certaines campagnes de déstabilisation opérée contre les défenseurs des droits des étrangers ou des minorités n’offrent la place à aucune forme de complaisance.
Dans ce Rapport de suivi de plus de 100 pages, le REMDH dresse le bilan des violations et des avancées au droit d’association dans les 11 pays du Sud et de l’Est de la Méditerranée et dans les pays membres de l’Union européenne. Il consacre également un chapitre thématique sur les difficultés rencontrées par les associations de défense des minorités ethnique, culturelle, linguistique et religieuse. Il contient enfin une note sur le rôle croissant des « fausses » ONG (communément dénommé « GONGO » ou organisations gouvernementales) tant au niveau national que dans les structures internationales (ONU notamment)
Le Rapport est disponible sur le site Internet du Réseau euro-méditerranéen des droits de l'Homme à l'adresse: http://fr.euromedrights.org/index.php/news/emhrn_releases/61/3694.html
Arabic
حرية التجمع والتنظيم تحت التهديد
التقرير الثالث للشبكة الأورو-متوسطية لحقوق الإنسان يقدم استعراضاً عاماً لوضع المنظمات غير الحكومية المعنية بحقوق الإنسان في بلدان شمال المتوسط وجنوبه خلال عام 2009.
منذ أن أصدرت الشبكة الأورو-متوسطية لحقوق الإنسان في كانون الأول/ ديسمبر 2008 تقريرها السابق حول التجمع والتنظيم, لم يحدث سوى تحسن ضئيل جداً، وفي بعض الحالات لا تحسن إطلاقاً، في بلدان المنطقة الأورو-متوسطية. وفي بعض الحالات حدث عكس ذلك إذ تواصل تدهور قدرة الأفراد على ممارسة الحق بحرية التجمع والتنظيم.
واصلت التشريعات الوطنية في بلدان شرق وجنوب المتوسط تقييد قدرة نشطاء حقوق الإنسان على الانخرط في الجمعيات المعنية بحقوق الإنسان وحقوق الأقليات أو في المجموعات التي يشتبه بارتباطها بحركات المعارضة. ويخضع النشطاء لسيطرة شديدة من السلطات، بما في ذلك من السلطة القضائية. الوضع شديد الوطأة في ليبيا بصفة خاصة، حيث تحظر التشريعات الوطنية تشكيل المجموعات التي تعتبرها السلطات بأنها تروج لأفكار من شأنها إضعاف الثورة.
وأحياناً تأخذ السياسات القمعية ضد النشطاء شكلاً عنيفاً. ففي تونس على سبيل المثال، اشتدت المضايقات والاعتداءات البدنية ضد المدافعين عن حقوق الإنسان خلال الأشهر التي سبقت الانتخابات الرئاسية التي جرت في تشرين الأول/ أكتوبر 2009. وفي سوريا، اعتقلت السلطات في 28 تموز/ يوليو 2009 السيد مهند الحسني، رئيس المنظمة السورية لحقوق الإنسان (سواسية)، الذي كان يراقب أوضاع السجون في البلاد، مما يمثل تذكيراً إضافياً بالحاجة الملحة لتنفيذ التوصيات التي وضعتها الشبكة الأورو-متوسطية لحقوق الإنسان خلال السنوات الثلاثة الماضية.
وفي حين قد يكون الوضع في البلدان الأخرى في المنطقة أقل تطرفاً، إلا أن القوانين والممارسات التقييدية سائدة فيها أيضاً. فقد أعلنت مصر والجزائر مؤخراً عن عزمهما تعديل التشريعات الوطنية التي تحكم الجمعيات، كما أطلقت شخصيات بارزة اتهامات بأن منظمات حقوق الإنسان تشكل "تهديداً على الأمن الوطني"، مما ينذر بأن السلطات الواسعة التي تتمتع بها الأجهزة الأمنية قد تزداد أكثر مما هي عليه الآن. وبمثل ذلك، بدأ يدور مؤخراً في إسرائيل جدال يهدف إلى تقييد حق المنظمات غير الحكومية بتلقي التمويل الأجنبي، مما يمثل مصدراً جديداً للقلق إذ أنه يدل على عزم السلطات على إسكات المنظمات غير الحكومية التي تستنكر انتهاكات حقوق الإنسان. في حين أن التعديلات المدخلة على قانون الجمعيات الأردني الصادر عام 2008 سيتطلب من الأعضاء المؤسسين للجمعيات الحصول على تصريح رسمي قبل تشكيل منظماتهم، كما ستفرض قيوداً على النشاطات التي يسمح للمنظمات بمزاولتها. وعلى ذلك فإن هذه التعديلات المقترحة تمثل مؤشراً على تواصل النهج المتشدد للتشريعات في المنطقة، والذي يتعارض مع المعايير الدولية لحرية التجمع والتنظيم.
الممارسات الفعلية للسلطات عادة أيضاً ما تنتهك المعايير الدولية لحرية التجمع والتنظيم، حتى عندما لا تكون التشريعات متشددة. وهكذا نجد أن الشواغل السياسية والأمنية في المناطق الفلسطينية المحتلة، والناشئة عن الانقسام السياسي بين الضفة الغربية وقطاع غزة، تؤدي إلى تقييد شديد للحق بتشكيل الجمعيات أو الانضمام إليها، وذلك على الرغم من وجود إطار قانوني عصري ينظم تأسيس الجمعيات وعملها.
الوضع أفضل بكثير في لبنان، و إلى حد أقل في تركيا حيث تواجه الجمعيات المعنية بالأقليات (وخصوصاً الأقلية الكردية) عقبات خطيرة عندما يأتي الأمر إلى حرية تكوين الجمعيات. وفي المغرب، ما زال عدد من الجمعيات يواجه عقبات في التسجيل بسبب تقصير السلطات الإدارية عن تطبيق القانون. وفي هذه البلدان الثلاث، من المهم أن تعمل السلطات على مأسسة الإجراءات الإيجابية التي اتخذتها.
أما ضمن بلدان الاتحاد الأوروبي، فقد ظل الوضع فيما يتعلق بحرية التجمع والتنظيم إيجابياً عموماً جراء الرقابة القضائية من قبل المحكمة الأوروبية لحقوق الإنسان والتوصيات الصادرة عن مجلس الاستشاريين التابع للمجلس الأوروبي بشأن قانون المنظمات غير الحكومية. بيد أن بعض الحملات الهادفة إلى تعطيل جهود النشطاء المدافعين عن حقوق الأجانب والأقليات تثبت أنه لا مجال حتى الآن للشعور بالرضا الكامل.
في تقرير المتابعة هذا الذي يقع في 100 صفحة، تستعرض الشبكة الأورو-متوسطية لحقوق الإنسان الانتهاكات التي حدثت ضد الحق بحرية التجمع والتنظيم، إضافة إلى استعراض التقدم الذي حدث في 11 بلداً من بلدان شرق المتوسط وجنوبه وبلدان الاتحاد الأوروبي. يحتوي التقرير أيضاً على فصول معنية بموضوعات محددة بشأن المشاكل التي تواجهها جمعيات الأقليات الإثنية والثقافية واللغوية والدينية، كما يتناول الدور المهم والمتنامي الذي تلعبه المنظمات غير الحكومية "المزيفة" (والتي عادة ما يطلق عليها عادة اسم "المنظمات غير الحكومية التابعة للحكومات")، وذلك على الصعيدين الوطني والدولي (في الأمم المتحدة، مثلاً).
التقرير متاح على الرابط التالي http://ar.euromedrights.org/index.php/publications/emhrn_publications/emhrn_publications_2009/3669.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
