أجهزة شرطة سودانية سيئة السمعة

أجهزة شرطة سودانية سيئة السمعة 

أيمن عادل أمين

Kvinnan piskas av polisman i Sudan

تواصل حكومة السودان إنصرافيتها المعهودة و تسهب في الرعب و الهلع الذي يطوقها من كل الجوانب ، تاركاً أثره علي سياسات الدولة في إدارة الشؤون العامة ، جاء في الأنباء وعلي إذاعة أمدرمان الرسمية ، أن وزارة الداخلية تبحث إنشاء وحدة شرطية جديدة لمراقبة شبكات التواصل الاجتماعي (فيسبوك – تويتر ) بإعتبار أنها باتت تهدد الأمن القومي السوداني .

لا شك في أن حرية التعبيرتحديداً في مفهوم الطغمة الحاكمة هو تهديد للأمن ، و الدعوة لإسقاط نظام الفقر و الجوع و نقد السياسات القمعية هي تهمة أيضاً ، وكشف ملفات الفساد التي أزكمت الأنوف و غطت علي كل شي باتت تهمة ، فكل شي غير طبيعي في زمن غير طبيعي هو بالطبع طبيعي ، وهذا داب الديكتاتوريات . إخراس الأصوات بكافة السبل ، التدخل في حياة الناس بكل الأشكال السافرة و المقززة ، و التحكم في سلوك البشر العام و الخاص .

ولكن أن تنشئ الدولة جهاز شرطي قائم بذاتة للتنسط وترصد تواصل المواطنين إجتماعياً عبر الوسائل الجديدة المتاحة و الإستفادة من التطور التكنلوجي لمواكبة العصر هو درجة متقدمة من التسلط و القهر ، بصورة مشابهة هنا لما ذهبت له الحكومة الإيرانية وباتت تترصد مواطنيها .

والمسألة هنا مشابهة لما قبلها ، فالشرطة السودانية سيئة السمعة التي تنفذ قانون النظام العام سئ الذكر قادرة أن تتعقب أي شي فلا أجد درك أقبح و أذل من أن تترصد حياة الناس و خصوصياتهم وتفترض النبؤة في نفسك و أنت أقبح و اسواء بشر ، فشرطة النظام العام و منسوبيها من هم نموذج لسوء الأخلاق و السمعة وعدم المهنية ، بما تمارس من إنتهاكات متواصلة يقشعر له البدن و تدعو للحسرة و الحياء وقد فاحت وعمت الأسافير و القنوات التلفزيونية العالمية .

أنشئوا أجهزتكم الشرطية العلنية و السرية ، فالشعب السوداني لا يهاب الترصد أو المتابعة و قد أعلنها داوية أن النظام يجب أن يمضي فلا أجد معني في تكوين جهاز شرطة جديد أو تحديث جهاز أصلاُ موجود ، الأجدر بشرطتكم أن تشرع في محاسبة منسوبيها المتورطين و الغارقين في دماء الأبرياء و كان حرياً بها أن تخلع القبعات وتلتحق بالجماهير حفاظاً علي ماتبقي من وطن بات لا يسع أحد ، ومن أجل عدل حقيقي ومحاسبة تطال كل المجرمين .

Sudan: Two activists at risk of flogging for ‘indecent behaviour’

Sudan: Two activists at risk of flogging for ‘indecent behaviour’

12-11-2013

The Sudanese authorities must drop ‘indecent behaviour’ charges against two activists who risk being sentenced to flogging in a trial that opens tomorrow, Amnesty International said today.

The organization is calling for the charges to be immediately and unconditionally dropped.

“Yet again the Sudanese authorities are exploiting their legal system to harass and intimidate activists,” said Sarah Jackson, Amnesty International’s Deputy Regional Director.

“The public order laws being used in this case do not specify what is meant by ‘indecent behaviour’ so the security forces are using their discretion to arrest and punish whoever they want to.”

On 21 October Najlaa Mohammed Ali , a lawyer and a human rights activist, and Amin Senada, an activist, were travelling by car to Port Sudan, when two armed men stopped the car, claiming to be from Sudan’s Public Order Police.

They accused Amin Senada of placing his hand on Najlaa Mohammed Ali’s shoulder and ordered the two to accompany them to the Public Order Department. The two were later charged with ‘indecent behaviour’ under Article 152 of Sudan’s Criminal Code, part of a broader set of laws known as the public order regime, which impose corporal punishment and fines for what is seen as immoral behaviour. Such charges can result in corporal punishment of up to 40 lashes.

“It appears that the charge is a response to Najlaa’s activism, including her participation in countrywide demonstrations that took place in September,” said Sarah Jackson.

Amnesty International is calling on the Sudanese authorities to abolish the penalty of flogging, which violates the absolute prohibition against torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

“Thousands of people, mainly women, are at risk of flogging in Sudan after being arrested for what is arbitrarily deemed ‘indecent behaviour’. This law is highly arbitrary and discriminatory, and needs to be repealed,” said Sarah Jackson.

Amnesty International is urging the Sudanese authorities to repeal or radically revise Article 152 of the Criminal Code as soon as possible to bring it in line with Sudan’s obligations under international human rights law.

Background information
Article 152 states: “(1) Whoever commits, in a public space, an act, or conducts himself in an indecent manner, or a manner contrary to public morality, or wears an indecent or immoral dress, which causes annoyance to public feelings, shall be punished, with whipping, not exceeding forty lashes, or with a fine, or with both (2) The act shall be contrary to public morals if it is regarded as such according to the standard of the person's religion or the custom of the country where the act takes place.”
In August this year, the case of Amira Osman Hamed, a Sudanese women’s rights activist charged under Article 152 for not wearing a headscarf, attracted international attention. Her trial has repeatedly been delayed.

To: Members of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights

To: Members of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights

Dear Commissioners,

RE: Urgent Fact-Finding Mission Needed to Investigate Killings and Detention by Security Forces in Sudan

The undersigned organisations are writing to you to express our deep concern at the lack of action or public comments made by the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) and the African Union (AU) concerning recent events in Sudan, including the deaths of at least 170 protestors and the detention of over 800 others, and restrictions on the media. The gravity of the situation requires a swift and concerted response from the ACHPR. As the premier human rights institution on the continent, the ACHPR should urgently condemn the excessive and disproportionate use of force against protestors and restrictions on basic civil and political rights in Sudan.

The ACHPR should alsosend a fact-finding mission to investigate these violations and call on the government of Sudan to immediately stop further abuses. Such an inquiry could be organised in close coordination with the African Union High Level Implementation Panel and relevant UN bodies.

We call on the ACHPR to act swiftly to protect human and peoples’ rights in Sudan, which is a state party to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights. The African Charter contains guarantees relating to the rights to liberty, freedom of expression, information, association, and assembly under Articles 6, 9, 10, and 11. The Sudanese government response to the protests has violated these obligations. It has shown no signs of responding to calls for an urgent, independent, and impartial investigation into incidents surrounding the recent protests.

The findings of any inquiry should include recommendations to the AU as to take up their responsibilities as set out in the AU Constitutive Act to promote peace, security, and stability in Sudan; promote democratic principles and institutions, popular participation, and good governance; and promote and protect human and peoples’ rights.

Government Response to Demonstrations

Demonstrations taking place throughout the country that began on 23 September have been met with excessive use of force by the Sudanese authorities. Many of the protests turned violent as protesters vandalized and set fire to gas stations and police stations, and threw stones at police and security forces. Government security forces, including the National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS) and the Central Reserve Police forces, have fired live ammunition at protestors, beaten them with rubber batons, and fired tear gas to disperse crowds.

The initial demonstrations were sparked by a government announcement on 22 September that subsidies on fuel and other commodities would be lifted. As the demonstrations spread to cities and towns the death toll and numbers of people in detention rose.

Whilst the exact death toll linked to these events is not known, Sudanese human rights groups have documented at least 170 deaths. The Sudanese Doctors’ Union has placed the figure at 210. According to witnesses the majority of deaths resulted from gun-shotsto the upper parts of the body and head and strongly suggests the disproportionate use of force against scores of protestors.

Since the demonstrations began the Sudanese authorities have shut down national and international media outlets, ordered journalists not to write about these incidents, and issued strict instructions to newspaper editors on what information can be published about the protests.

On 25 September the Medical Director of Omdurman Hospital was summoned by the NISS after he spoke publicly on BBC Arabic about the numbers of casualties admitted to his hospital. The Chairman of the Sudanese Doctors’ Union was also detained for a few hours on 5 October after he reported publicly that at least 210 people had been killed according to data from his Union.

At least 800 people have been detained by the police and the NISS since the demonstrations began on 23 September 2013, according to the African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies. Those in custody include scores of political activists and human rights defenders as well as journalists, lawyers, and youth activists, who have been arrested at their homes and places of work.

Authorities have used Sudan’s repressive National Security Act of 2010 to detain people who have spoken out or sought to document the abuses. Under the act detainees can be held for four and a half months without charge or trial, and are usually held incommunicado and without access to their families or lawyers for prolonged periods in violation of international law, giving rise to a risk of torture or ill-treatment in detention. There are serious concerns for the safety of the dozens still in national security detention, many of who are without access to their families and lawyers.

At least 50 people who participated in the protests have been arrested, charged with public order offences, and subject to summary trials that do not meet international law standards and fail to guarantee procedural rights. Some of those convicted have been sentenced to lashing. On 24 September 2013, for example, the Omdurman Central Criminal Court summarily tried and convicted eight protestors arrested from a demonstration the night before in the Al Abassia area of Omdurman for disturbance of public peace (article 67 of the 1991 Penal Code) and public nuisance (article 77), sentencing them each to twenty lashes and a fine of 200 Sudanese pounds. The group had no legal representation during the proceedings and the lashing penalty was carried out immediately.

The Leadership Role of the ACHPR

The human rights violations that have taken place in Sudan in connection with the demonstrations reflect a broader governance and human rights crisis in the country that requires concerted and swift action by the ACHPR and AU. We recall that the ACHPR in its 2012 Concluding Observations and Recommendations on the 4th and 5th Periodic Report submitted by Sudan recommended that Sudan “appoint an independent commission to investigate all extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, and torture by the police and make public its findings.”

The recent tragic events cannot be addressed in isolation from serious and widespread violations of human rights and humanitarian law taking place on a daily basis throughout Sudan, including armed attacks against civilians in Sudan’s armed conflict zones of Darfur, South Kordofan, and Blue Nile states. The ACHPR’s request for provisional measures in the case of South Kordofan in November 2011 remains unimplemented by the government of Sudan, in violation of Rule 98 of the ACHPR’s Rules of Procedure to “adopt Provisional Measures to prevent irreparable harm to the victim[s].”

Over the past twenty years the ACHPR has issued several resolutions demonstrating commitment to peace and security, justice and accountability, and respect for fundamental human rights in Sudan and Africa as a whole. It has shown leadership on Sudan’s human rights crises. For example, in 2004 the ACHPR undertook an investigative mission to Darfur, which drew the attention of the AU to the crisis and has demonstrated the potential positive impact of the ACHPR.

The ACHPR has a clear mandate to conduct fact-finding investigations. Under Article 45 of the African Charter, the ACHPR is empowered to conduct research into human rights practices and togive its views and recommendations to governments, as well as toco-operate with other African and international institutions concerned with the promotion and protection of human and peoples’ rights. Article 46 of the Charter gives the ACHPR the right to use “any appropriate method of investigation.”

In June 2013 the ACHPR carried out a fact-finding mission in the Republic of Mali, having been requested by the AU Executive Council to open an investigation into the human rights situation in the North of Mali and to provide concrete recommendations on measures to be taken.

Recalling the mandate of the commission, we urge you to take urgent action to establish and send a fact-finding mission to investigate the death and injury of protesters and mass detentions in towns across Sudan, in violation of international human rights law.

Yours sincerely,

African Centre for Democracy and Human Rights Studies

African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies

Amman Centre for Human Rights Studies

Arry Organisation for Human Rights and Development

Conscience International Sierra Leone

East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders’ Project

Human Rights Institute of South Africa

Human Rights Watch

International Refugee Rights Initiative

Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project

Sudan Consortium

UN experts call on Sudan to stop threatening women with flogging

UN experts call on Sudan to stop threatening women with flogging

06/11/2013

Two United Nations independent experts today warned Sudan against threatening women with flogging, stressing this practice amounts to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment that goes against international law.

“Premarital sex, adultery, failing to prove rape, dressing ‘indecently’ or ‘immorally’, being found in the company of a man, or committing acts that are deemed incompatible with chastity – these are some of the offences for which women have been chastised with flogging in various parts of the world,” said the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, Rashida Manjoo. “This needs to stop.”

On Monday, Amira Osman Hamed, a 35-year-old Sudanese civil engineer and women’s rights activist was charged with dressing indecently or immorally for refusing to cover her hair with a headscarf. If found guilty, she could be sentenced to corporal punishment of up to 40 lashes.

Following Monday’s hearing, Ms. Osman Hamed remains in legal limbo while the prosecution decides if additional hearings will take place or if the case will be dismissed.

“Given continued discrimination and inequalities faced by women, including inferior roles attributed to them by patriarchal and traditional attitudes, and power imbalances in their relations with men, maintaining flogging as a form of punishment, even when it applies to both women and men, means in practice that women disproportionally face this cruel punishment, in violation of their human rights to dignity, privacy and equality,” said Frances Raday, the chairperson of the Working Group on the issue of discrimination against women in law and in practice.

The experts called for the immediate release of Ms. Osman Hamed and for the Government of Sudan to review its legislation related to flogging.

Under international human rights law, corporal punishment can amount to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or even to torture, and States cannot invoke provisions of domestic law to justify violations of their human rights obligations under international law.

“Corporal punishment of women and girls is usually linked to the control and limitation of their freedom of movement, freedom of association, as well as their personal and sexual choices. Punishment usually has a collective dimension, and is public in character, as the visibility of the issue also serves a social objective, namely, influencing the conduct of other women,” the experts said.

“We call on States to abolish all forms of judicial and administrative corporal punishment, and to act with due diligence to prevent, respond to, protect against, and provide redress for all forms of gender-based violence.”

----------------------

قالت اثنتان من خبراء الأمم المتحدة المستقلين لحقوق الإنسان، اليوم الأربعاء، في أعقاب الأنباء الواردة عن حالات جلد لنساء في السودان، "إن جلد المرأة بما في ذلك فيما يتعلق "بالجرائم المتصلة بالشرف" يرقى إلى المعاملة القاسية واللاإنسانية والمهينة في القانون الدولي و يجب أن يتوقف".

وقد مثلت أميرة عثمان حامد، وهي مهندسة مدنية سودانية تبلغ من العمر 35 عاما وناشطة في مجال حقوق المرأة أمام المحكمة يوم الاثنين بتهمة إرتداء الملابس غير المحتشمة أو غير الأخلاقية لرفضها تغطية شعرها. وفي حالة ما إذا تمت إدانتها، فقد يحكم عليها ب 40 جلدة. وقالت مقررة الأمم المتحدة الخاصة المعنية بمسألة العنف ضد المرأة وأسبابه وعواقبه، رشيدة مانجو إن "ممارسة الجنس قبل الزواج، والزنا، والفشل في إثبات الاغتصاب، وارتداء الملابس "غير المحتشمة" أو "غير الأخلاقية"، ومصاحبة رجل، أو ارتكاب الأفعال التي تعتبر منافية للعفة، هي بعض "الجرائم" التي تبرر جلد المرأة في أجزاء مختلفة من العالم. يجب ان يتوقف ذلك. لا ينبغي إرغام النساء مثل أميرة على العيش في خوف من التعرض للجلد. ويتعين على الحكومات وقف جلد النساء والفتيات". ومن جانبها قالت فرانسيس راداي، رئيسة الفريق العامل المعني بمسألة التمييز ضد المرأة في القانون وفي الممارسة العملية، إن إدانة النساء تتم على نحو غير متناسب حول الجرائم التي يعاقب عليها بالجلد. وأضافت "ونظرا لاستمرار التمييز وعدم المساواة التي تواجهها المرأة، بما في ذلك الأدوار المتدنية التي تنسبها لها المواقف الأبوية والتقليدية، واختلال توازن القوى في علاقاتها مع الرجال، والحفاظ على الجلد كشكل من أشكال العقاب، حتى عندما ينطبق على كل من المرأة والرجل، يعني في الممارسة العملية، أن المرأة تواجه هذه العقوبة القاسية بشكل غير متناسب في انتهاك لحقوقها الإنسانية فيما يتعلق بالكرامة والخصوصية والمساواة". ودعت الخبيرتان إلى الإفراج الفوري عن السيدة عثمان حامد، كما حثتا الحكومة السودانية على مراجعة التشريعات المتعلقة بالجلد. يشار إلى أنه بموجب القانون الدولي لحقوق الإنسان، يمكن أن يرقى العقاب البدني إلى مستوى العقوبة القاسية أو اللاإنسانية أو المهينة أو حتى التعذيب، ولا يمكن أن تتذرع الدول بأحكام قانونها الداخلي لتبرير انتهاكات التزاماتها في مجال حقوق الإنسان بموجب القانون الدولي. وأوضحت الخبيرتان "يرتبط العقاب البدني للنساء والفتيات عادة بالسيطرة والحد من حريتهن في التنقل، فضلا عن الخيارات الشخصية والجنسية. وعادة ما تتخذ العقوبة بعدا جماعيا وعلنيا، حيث تسلط الضوء على هدف اجتماعي، وهو التأثير على سلوك النساء الأخريات". وأضافتا "نحن ندعو الدول إلى العمل على إلغاء جميع أشكال العقاب البدني القضائية والإدارية، والتصرف بالجدية الواجبة لمنع جميع أشكال العنف القائم على نوع الجنس وتوفير سبل الانتصاف".

From Toni Morrison To Sudanese Women

From Toni Morrison To Sudanese Women

To a Sudanese Woman:

Some months ago, I watched a video of punishment meted out to you—a lawfully mandated public whipping that I understand is not uncommon in your country. I have seen many instances of human brutality, but this one was particularly harrowing.

In the midst of my revulsion, certain thoughts surfaced.

I have been wondering how much courage it takes to lash a woman. (Even guillotine executioners had the decency to mask their faces to hide their shame as they cut off Heads.) Perhaps the man who whipped you took pride in his expertise: in never missing, always connecting his whip with your flesh. How satisfying it must have been to maul a helpless, weaponless female. How empowering, how masculine. Watching those onlooking men laughing at the spectacle of your humiliation distressed me as much as watching the executioner. I understand that historically the control of women—not only their movements, their speech, but especially their uteri, their ova, their fetuses—is one of the major foundations of sovereign nations. And although certain modern nations are slowly abandoning that ancient requirement, some, like yours, as well as Saudi Arabia and others, cling to male guardian laws as a singular characteristic of power. For them an ovum is a matter of state; sperm is not. The raped is responsible for her assault; the rapist is not.

How afraid such regimes must be, how puerile their claims of power.

I don’t know, or care to know, what “law” you broke. What I do know is that the infractions of which women like you are guilty pertain to their being untethered. And in regimes such as yours—whether chaotic or silently oppressive—the unleashed are lashed: for being alone in public, for mingling with unrelated males, for owning a cellphone, for driving a car, for wearing trousers. The helpless are punished for bearing the child of a rapist employer. And age does not matter. Children of 11 and women of 75 have all been jailed and bloodied for contesting, forgetting, or ignoring incomprehensible, even silly, rules.



Nevertheless, the abused-animal life so many women are required to live is being challenged. The lasting response I had watching that video is the most important. You did not crouch or kneel or assume a fetal position. You shouted. You fell. But you kept rising. After each cut of the lash into your flesh, you tried to stand; you raised your body up like a counter-whip. It so moved me to see your reactions; I interpreted them as glimmers of hope, of principled defiance.

Each cut tearing your back hurts women all over the world. Each scar you bear is ours as well. I have no advice for you and would not presume to offer any, but like thousands of women everywhere I will not give in to sorrow or retreat into despair. Women are speaking out, saying aloud what you are forbidden to say at all, doing in public what you are not ever permitted to do. They are gathering together, demanding that your efforts to rise up in the face of brutality are not in vain.

Sincerely,

Toni Morrison

Morrison, a Nobel Laureate and Pulitzer-prize winning author, is a board member of Advancing Human Rights.