The
Human Rights Committee periodic report on Syria’s complianc with the International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Human
Rights Committee
(HR/CT/606 Seventy-first Session)
30 March 2001 /1917th Meeting (PM)
STATE OF EMERGENCY, RIGHT
TO FAIR TRIAL, POLYGAMY DISCUSSED AS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMITTEE CONCLUDES REVIEW OF SYRIA'S
REPORT
The
Human Rights Committee this afternoon concluded its consideration of the second periodic
report on Syria’s complianc with the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights. As it did so, Syria’s delegation responded to written and oral questions
posed by the Committee, both during the meeting and previously. Those responses
addressed the issue of the continued state of emergency in the country, measures in place
to ensure the right to a fair trial, the status of Kurds within Syria, the rights of the
child, the makeup of Parliamen the question of polygamy and the release of Lebanese
nationals held in Syria. On the last issue, Fayssal Mekdad (Syria) said he had
followed the process of release of the Lebanese arrested in Syria on television, and they
had spoken at length in front of the cameras. None of them, he noted, had complained
about mistreatment. They had not been subject to any harassment or anything that
contravened the provisions of the Covenant while in detention in Syria. The released
detainees now lived in Lebanon. Also providing answers to Committee members’
questions was Abboud Sarraj (Syria), Dean of the Faculty of Law, University of
Damascus. In a closing remark, he assured the Committee that its observations would
be taken into account. In a closing statement, Prafullachandra Natwarlal Bhagwati of
India, Committee Chairman, said he was very thankful to the Committee for the full and
frank discussion which had been held. He then enumerated a number of concerns the
Committee still had, including the continued state of emergency in the country and the
related restrictions that subsisted, issues related to the death penalty and the range of
offenses under which it could be applied, and alleged instances of torture. During
the meeting, while stressing that much more remained to be done, several members noted
positive recent developments in the human rights situation in Syria. The Committee is
scheduled to meet again on Tuesday, 3 April, at 10 a.m. to continue elaborating its draft
general comment on article 4 of the Covenant.
Background
The
Human Rights Committee met this afternoon to continue its consideration of the Second
Periodical Report of the Syrian Arab Republic on its compliance with the International
Covenant on Civic and Political Rights (document CCPR/C/SYR/2000/2). (For more
background information and summary of the report, see HR/CT/605 issued 30 March. For
background on the session see Press Release HR/CT/590 issued 19 March.)
Questions and Comments by Experts
An
expert said he had a question with regard to the discrepancy between Syria’s
presentation and information received from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other
sources. One of the interesting things in the report and presentation were the
aspects of arrest and detention that had been stressed. He had had the impression
that the procedures being described were the ones that would occur under normal
situations. The discrepancy was perhaps due to the state of emergency in
Syria. He asked what rights, normally applicable under the Constitution, might
not be applicable in the allegedly rare cases of derogations from the Covenant due to the
country’s state of emergency or in cases that found themselves before the highest
State security courts. Many of the more “blood-curdling” allegations
related to the latter, he said. The representative of Syria had indicated that many
allegations could be clarified if NGOs had sought the information from the State party, he
said. However, many of the allegations, the Committee had been told, had been
transmitted and there had not been a response. Certain NGOs, such as Amnesty
International and Human Rights Watch, had been invited into the country in the
1990s. According to subsequent information provided by one of those NGOs, persons
had been brought into the State security court in bad condition and the court had ignored
their allegations of torture. Turning to the death penalty, he said Amnesty
International had received information in 2000 that an individual had been executed in
Syria in 1992. It had been left up to Amnesty to inform the family. He sought
more information about the actual application of the death penalty. He also asked
for information on when members of the organized legal profession had refused to appear
before the State security court because they had doubts about its impartiality. He
then asked for comment on the fact that –- if he understood the situation correctly
-- places of pre- and post-trial detention were under the same authority.
Answers to Experts’ Questions
FAYSSAL MEKDAD (Syria) said
he was honoured to present the work of his Government in enhancing human rights. He
confirmed that his delegation would provide all necessary information. His
Government had made great efforts to prepare the report and had not wanted to avoid its
responsibilities. Technical complications had prevented it to providing the second
report on time. He hoped that recent efforts would contribute to a solid basis for
providing reports on time in the future. That basis needed human as well as
financial resources. He hoped that the Committee’s comments could be useful to
enhance human rights in Syria. The circumstances of Syria were difficult, he
said, addressing questions about the state of emergency. Between the forties and the
sixties, the Country was plagued by coups d’état. That cycle had stopped in
1970. In 1975 armed groups, such as the “Muslim Brothers” started killing
citizens. People committing such crimes could not talk about human rights, he
said. The city of Hama had been attacked by those gangs who had killed there for
seven days. The State had no choice but to put an end to the killing.
Allegations had been made that the State was responsible for the killings. Those
allegations were not acceptable. Could the killers be welcomed back to the country
after they had fled? He appealed to the Committee to believe him, as he told the
truth. Regarding questions about some individuals who had died in jail, he said one
of them had not died in jail, but in Paris, as was well known. Why the
falsification? One of the most important elements in the story of Lebanon was
that of a protracted civil war. In 1975 Syria had intervened by sending
troops. The inalienable position of Syria at the time was based on the view that no
party to a civil war should be defeated, he said. The civil war ended in 1990.
The peace and return to prosperity was thanks to Syria’s sacrifices including
thousands of martyrs. All Lebanese detainees had been handed over to Lebanese
authorities. He assured the Committee that not a single Lebanese detainee was in
Syria and was prepared to have a dialogue with the Lebanese Government if there were
questions. Turning to another question, he asked what was wrong
with saying, as the Constitution did, that art should be in the service of society.
This did not imply a restriction on the freedom of innovation in art. There were
thousands of books in Syria on all sorts of topics. The provision in the
Constitution had been designed only to encourage art and literature.
ABBOUD
SARRAJ (Syria), Dean of the Faculty of Law, University of Damascus, said his
delegation was present to engage in dialogue –- everything the Committee said would
be considered and duly taken into account. Today’s meeting would not be the
last -– many meetings would be held with the Committee in the future. Much of
significance had been said. He said the Committee members believed that it was not
necessary to continue the state of emergency in Syria. The matter related to the
State and was contingent on the circumstance affecting the country. He noted that
there was a law which governed the situation, and that in all countries of the world there
was such a law. Many countries that had not declared states of emergency had
human rights violations, he said. The emergency law contained very important
restrictions on officials for safeguarding human rights. While the emergency was in
effect, its provisions were seldom used. In recent years, there were very few known
cases where the law had been applied. When decisions on capital punishment were made
they were sent to a court of appeal, which commuted the penalty to imprisonment, meaning,
effectively, that there was no capital punishment. The Committee had been referring
to instances of capital punishment without trials and disappearances. Those
allegations had been made by certain organizations. The relevant authorities in
Syria had asserted that there had been no such incidents. He said Amnesty
International had been allowed to enter Syria and conduct its investigations in full
freedom. It was not necessary, he pointed out, that whoever disappeared was an enemy
of Syria. There were many neighbouring States and it was easy to enter them. Regarding
the status of women, he said that women in Syria had rights that were not observed in many
developed countries. Personal law was derived from Islamic law, which gave women a
full range of rights provided in the Holy Koran. No rights for women had been belittled or
derogated. Regarding polygamy, he said only a small percentage of men married more
than one women, as an old cultural heritage. The wife could submit a petition to the
court that life with her husband had become unbearable, and the judge, if convinced, would
provide for divorce. By law, women in Syria could work without seeking the approval
of their husbands. Regarding corporal punishment in schools, he said he
“lived” in education and had not heard about corporal punishment. Such
things could happen because of some crazy teacher, but the law did not allow it.
There were no laws preventing NGOs from coming to his country. Any association could
work in Syria. There was a trend in Syria to encourage institutionalization of NGOs.
He said international law and instruments took precedence over internal law.
Internal law was adjusted when needed in order to comply with international law. He said the issue of visas was subject to regulations and did not represent
any restriction on freedoms. The visas were required because some persons who had
responsibilities in Syria could not leave, such as those in military service. In
some cases, divorced persons could not leave the country unless they had paid their
alimony or child support. Employees of some companies could not leave the country
until they obtained approval. Women did not need an exit visa to leave the country.
Answers
to Written Questions
Mr.
SARRAJ then turned to a questions on article 14 of the Covenant on the right to a fair
trial. He said that the judicial power in Syria enjoyed full independence in its
decisions and verdicts. The late President had stressed the need not to interfere
with the judiciary, and there were many constitutional and legislative provisions in place
to protect that independence. The selection of judges took place without any
personal consideration, efficiency being the only criteria. The relevant article
prevented the appointment of disabled individuals in judicial jobs because adequate
physical capacities were needed. He agreed that there was nothing that prevented the
employment of disabled persons if the disability did not run counter to the nature of the
job. The highest State Security Court was a judicial court established in 1968 and
was headed by a civil judge, he said. Additionally, there was one civil and one
military judge. The Court’s meetings were public and the right to defence was
ensured. Counsel could be contacted at any time. It was known in Syria that
the president of the court and the two members were selected from among the best judges in
the country. Responding to a question, he said military trials in Syria were
used to try military persons for military offences. The military judge must apply
the normal penal law and procedures. The military judiciary power was not at all
different from the normal judiciary power. Political offences were offences
committed out of a political motive or that violated a political right, he said. The
sentences of life in prison and capital punishment were not allowed for political
crimes. Political prisoners were not forced to work in prison. Regarding
confiscation of money of officials accused of insubordination, he said that particular
amendment to the Penal Law had been issued because of the refusal of employees to work
when Syria was in dire need of their services. An amnesty was issued every two or three
years for those employees, and money had not been confiscated. Regarding freedom of
expression, he said in Syria conscience was the only restriction. The Association of
Journalists was responsible for the conditions of the journalists. No restrictions
were imposed on journalists, even during the state of emergency. There was no
difference with other countries in that regard. Radio and television belonged to the
State, but Syria was encouraging the private sector to establish stations in the
future. Radio and television had full freedom of expression. Regarding the case
of Mr Nizar Nayyuf, he said Mr. Nayyuf had been arrested in 1992, and condemned to 10
years imprisonment by the Court of State Security because he belonged to a clandestine
organization and was instigating and spreading chaos. The clandestine organization
had been behind many acts of violence. In 1999, Mr. Nayyuf had refused to enter a
request to be freed. There was nothing in Syria to restrict the
right to freedom of association, unless such association was contrary to the health of the
State or other citizens, he said. The Government had never prohibited any
demonstration carried out in accordance with official regulations. The State
encouraged the establishment of syndicates, clubs, parties and other organizations, he
said. The records of the Ministry of Social Affairs confirmed that there were more
than 600 societies permitted to work within the fields of their competence. There
were societies for women, youth, farmers, artists, doctors, engineers and many others. There
were six political parties in Syria. The Baath Socialist party worked with other
parties within the national front, he noted. The nature of the People’s
Parliament as a legislative authority necessitated that members of Parliament should read
and write well, but an advanced degree was not necessary.
The earmarking of 50 per cent of seats in the Parliament for workers and farmers expressed
the social and economic structure of society. In Syria there were no problems with
Kurdish citizens -– they were on an equal footing with other citizens. A number
of Kurds had occupied high posts in the State and had an effective role in social and
economic life. All information received on discrimination against Kurds was
erroneous, he stressed. Kurds who came to Syria were well taken care. He said the
rights of the child were respected by all State institutions. The Convention on the
Rights of the Child had been ratified in 1993 and its provisions were fully adhered
to. Kurdish children born in Syria were considered citizens, without any
discrimination, he noted. The same thing applied to Kurdish children who came from
other countries.
Syrian authorities sought to inform citizens about the Covenant and tried to
explain it. Syria newspapers gave the Covenant a special place on their pages.
Human rights were taught in elementary and secondary schools as well in faculties of Law,
Letters, Sociology and Education. The international human rights articles were also
taught to judges and others The subject was also taught in police academies in
Syria. In conclusion, he said it was difficult to talk about human rights without
taking into consideration the political, social and economical situation of a
country. The desire to safeguard human rights and the dignity of human beings
existed in Syria. He wanted to convey to the Committee that Syria’s President
desired to enhance human rights and to protect them on the basis of the Constitution,
Syrian law, covenants and international agreements.
Questions by
Experts
One expert said he
was still unclear about the state of emergency, as most rights dealt with by the Committee
were subject to derogation. He had information from the Syrian Government that the
state of emergency was “de facto suspended”. He wanted to know if the
state of emergency existed. He also asked for more factual information in the next
report. The Committee had reviewed information about cases which had been decided
under the state of emergency by the Court of State Security. Unfortunately, replies
given by the Government to organizations who sought information about two prisoners did
not address the specific complaints. It was unhelpful that the Government had not
responded in detail to allegations about the absence of lawyers and detainment beyond the
term of imprisonment. Perhaps the delegation could shed some light on the matter. There
seemed to be a fresh breath for the protection of human rights under the new President,
and the situation had improved, according to information he had received. That ought
to be encouraged. However, he hoped that things might move along a little
faster. People professing peaceful proposals should be given that liberty, even if
they criticized government. Giving a long term of imprisonment to somebody who
criticized a government was not consistent with the Covenant He also wished to see
some of the decrees passed under the emergency law, such as one relating to censorship,
removed. An expert said that perhaps in the follow-up session the
delegation could give information on texts before the Committee related to the equality of
women, repudiation and disobedience. She still had some questions on political
crimes. Her perplexity had been strengthened with a reference made to French
law. She wanted to know whether a political crime came under the jurisdiction of the
Highest State Security Court. She asked for more clarification on recourse to the
State Security Court.Another expert asked for more information on the role of civil
society in Syria. Many positive things had been seen since the assumption to power
of the new President. He wondered if the trend would continue. He also asked a
question regarding the rights of women in accordance with the Isamic Sharia. Did
women have the right to repudiate their husbands before a magistrate? In some
Islamic countries recently laws had been adjusted to allow women to do so. Was the same
situation in effect in Syria? Another expert said many questions had not
really been answered, such as the question about Lebanese detained in Syria. The
delegation had said there were no Lebanese in detention, but had not addressed allegations
of what had happened in the past. Regarding the independence of the judiciary, he
asked whether the fact that the President of the Republic should preside over the Supreme
Judicial Council did not suggest some problems about that independence. He would
like some enlightenment on that. He had noted that the term of membership of the
High Constitutional Court was four years and that that term could be renewed. He did
not think such a short term gave judges the necessary independence, especially if the term
was renewable. Were judges really as independent as the Constitution suggested, he
asked.
An
expert asked for further clarification on the issue of freedom of expression. The
delegation had explained that it was still in a state of war with Israel and that an
emergency situation prevailed. Was it really necessary to maintain a state of
emergency, which affected freedom of expression? The Syrian Arab Writers Union was
supposed to be independent, but according to information before the Committee it was led
by members of the Baath party, and consequently functioned as a sort of censorship
body. He asked for further clarification on that issue and on how free citizens were
in asking for information from official documents. He understood that about 8.5 per
cent of the population were of Kurdish ethnic origin. In 1962, a census had been
undertaken in one of Syria’s provinces, resulting in the classification of some Kurds
as unregistered foreigners, which limited their rights. Was that true? If it
was, what was the Government doing to give some protection to their human rights. Another
expert invited the delegation for comments on a case brought to his attention by a usually
reliable source, concerning a woman who had been arrested without a warrant in December
2000 because she had distributed a cartoon of the Syrian president by e-mail and had not
yet appeared before a judge. He also wanted to know if intelligence forces, when
they arrested people, operated under the same rules as the police in criminal cases. He
said no statistics or data had been given regarding the state of emergency. He
renewed his questions about differences between procedures of the Higher State Security
Court from procedures in other courts in pre-trial detention stage. He noted that
before their release, the existence of Lebanese prisoners had been denied. He wanted
more assurance about the existence of Lebanese detainees. Another expert asked for
more information about a particular case of somebody who had died shortly after being
freed from prison. He had obtained lists of Syrian, Jordanese and Lebanese
prisoners. Some of them had been released, according to the list, but others,
mentioned by name, were mentioned as still detained. Was it possible to get an
indication of the validity or falsehood of that information?
Notwithstanding the assurances of
the delegation regarding Kurdish children, he said there had been at least 150 cases
indicating that children had not been registered. He also asked for more
clarification regarding the status of women and military courts. The
“yardsticks” used in defining political crime were not clear to him. The report
had said that meetings had to be free from disturbances and not designed to pressure the
state. That raised the problem of freedom of association and expression. He
also asked if it was true that professionals were by nature members of a union
Responses
by Delegation
Mr. MEKDAD (Syria)
expressed his satisfaction at the constructive dialogue that had taken place. Syria
had tried its best to benefit from the suggestions previously elaborated by the Committee
in preparing the current report. There was still room for improvement, however, and
the current observations would be taken into consideration when the third report was
prepared. Many members had spoken of the new atmosphere or “change of
guard” in Syria, he said. He stressed that what was happening was a
continuation of the achievements made during the tenure of the previous leadership.
Initiatives were in place to improve the social and economic situation in the
country. There was a newly developed perspective regarding the media. That did
not, however, mean that information in Syria had been restricted in the past. He
encouraged the Committee to read the mass media in the social, economic and political
fields -- anyone who did so could see that restrictions on their freedom of expression
were not in place. The only restriction in place was one’s conscience.
Writers could write whatever they wanted in whatever manner they chose. However,
some aspects of tradition and society must be taken into account. He said that joining
societies such as the previously mentioned Arab Writers Union was voluntary. Was it
possible to believe that the Writers Union was dominated by a specific authority?
The writers did not like such regulations. The Union had decided to expel two
persons as had been notified by an expert -– was the Government expected to require
of the association that they be readmitted? Associations were fully free to judge
their members in whatever way was appropriate -– the final say belonged to
them. He then returned to the issue of the Lebanese. He said he had followed
the process of release of the Lebanese arrested in Syria on television, and they had
spoken at length in front of the cameras. None of them had complained about
mistreatment. They had not been subject to any harassment or anything that
contravened the provisions of the Covenant while in detention in Syria. The released
detainees now lived in Lebanon. The Lebanese authorities would undertake their
prosecution.
Regarding the case of the Arab
writer Haider Haider, he said his novel about a specific Arab state had raised many
discussions leading to threats and attacks on him. But those discussions took place
in another Arab country. In Syria, the intellectuals had defended his freedom of
expression. He was proud of the way the Syrian authorities had tackled the
issue. Regarding Jordanian and Lebanese detainees, he reiterated they did not exist
in Syria. They had been released. The Jordanians had been accused of espionage
and unacceptable activities on Syrian territory. The Constitution of the Baath
socialist party was not applied in Syria, he said, responding to another question, but the
Constitution of the Syrian Arab Republic was applied. Syndicates and unions were
fully independent. Democracyin those organizations was defined by the principles and
objectives of the organizations and the free way they elected their officials. Mr.
SARRAJ reiterated that the state of emergency did not mean summary execution, torture or
disappearances, despite what reports by organizations might have said. He stressed
that those cases did not exist in Syria. The problem was who spoke the truth, the
organizations or the Syrian authorities. He emphasized that there was a new vision
in Syria, a general desire to apply the provisions of the Human Rights Declaration and the
Covenant. Genuine differences between the Committee and Syria did not exist, and
there was agreement on principles. In Syria human rights were fully applied. He
said the theory on political crime in Syria was good and sound, derived from the French
system. If the High State Security Court tried political prisoners, that court would
be illegal. The legal status of women in Syria was a distinguished one, he
said. The Law on Personal Affairs had been praised by the Women’s League of
Syria and the question of polygamy did not create a problem. Repudiation was a
provision in which husband and wife could repudiate each other before the court. In
case repudiation was accepted, marriage would end. That provision had enabled women
to leave their husbands. The law of 1965 on opposing the objectives of the revolution
had never been applied, he said, nor the law on enemies of the revolution. He was
pleased to have met with the Committee and had taken note of all questions and
comments. Some unanswered questions would be answered later. He hoped that
during the next meeting things would be fully satisfactory.
Closing
Statement by Chairman
Prafullachandra
Natwarlal Bhagwati of India, Committee Chairman, said he was very thankful to the
Committee for the dialogue over the course of the day -- a full and frank discussion had
been held. He wished that the report had been sent earlier. There had been a
delay of 17 years. Nevertheless, detailed answers to the Committee’s questions
had been provided.Because he was limited in time, he would not reiterate all the
Committee’s outstanding concerns. The continued state of emergency in the
country and the related restrictions that subsisted were one of the concerns.
Concern had also been expressed on the death penalty and the range of offenses under which
it could be applied. He urged the State party to reconsider the matter and asked it
to provide relevant statistical information. Concern had also been expressed
regarding alleged instances of torture. He noted that the Committee’s concerns
would be more fully expressed in its concluding observations.
=============================================================================================================