‘The rule of law in the UAE has been abused and the law is nothing but a tool of the system itself. These are nothing but show trials to demonstrate the power that the state has and how it can easily use the rule of law to legitimise that power.’ – Matthew Hedges
On Monday 08 July the Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales (BHRC) hosted an expert panel discussion as a side event to the 56th Session of the UN Human Rights Council, on ‘The Rule of Law in Jeopardy in the UAE’, to highlight growing concerns from the UN and other international bodies about the threat to the rule of law in the UAE. The event, which was held at the Geneva Press Club and on Zoom, was moderated by Anisa Kassamali (Barrister) who welcomed as speakers:
Louise Price, a barrister practicing in the UK and an Executive Committee member of the BHRC. Louise has a particular interest in the international application of the right to a fair trial and has undertaken trial observations.
Ahmed Al Nuaimi, currently based in the UK and a member of the UAE 87 with firsthand experience of the UAE authorities’ distressing measures to stifle dissent.
Matthew Hedges, British academic who was arrested in 2018 and detained for almost 7 months after being falsely accused used of spying for the government.
Falah Sayed, Human Rights Officer at MENA Human Rights in Geneva.
The threat to the rule of law in the UAE is an issue on which UN special reporters have expressed serious and ongoing concerns, especially concerning the ‘UAE 87’, a group including Emirati activists, scholars, doctors, lawyers and others who have called for democratic reform in the UAE and have been tried for various terror charges by the authorities. In January 2024 UN Special Rapporteurs described the charges as a ‘deeply regressive step’, calling on the UAE to ensure that national counterterrorism legislation does not unnecessarily or disproportionately restrict civil society and civil space and is consistent with international human rights law. The authorities have not responded meaningfully to these concerns and have dismissed the allegations as premature with proceedings still ongoing; however judgment has now been passed and, as feared, resulted in over 40 activists being jailed for life for terror offences.
The purpose of the panel event was to discuss these concerning issues and to highlight how these actions are in breach of international standards. BHRC calls on the International Community including the UN’s Human Rights Committee to respond to these concerns and to continue monitoring the situation, and joins Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and countless other civil society organisations around the world in calling for the immediate release of detained dissidents and human rights defenders in the United Arab Emirates.
‘The UAE is a place where there is no civic space and no civil society. Anyone who speaks out about the UAE or who criticises the UAE is forced into exile. That is a reality in the UAE. There has been a massive crackdown on freedom of expression and on public dissent in the UAE, using the legal framework itself which gives the space and authority for those who repress fundamental freedoms.’ – Falah Sayed
A significant number of UN experts including the relevant Special Rapporteurs have raised concerns about the ‘charges against civil society’ and the ongoing trials in the UAE of jailed human rights defenders, lawyers, academics and others. In May 2023, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention declared the detention of some of these individuals to be arbitrary, stating that the UAE was ‘arbitrarily detaining 12 human rights activists who have already completed prison terms handed down’. The current trial has been ongoing since December 23 and on 10 July, over 40 activists were handed life sentences. There are four key concerns with how the relevant international legal standards are being applied by the UAE in the context of this trial:
-
- The first concern is whether the trials are an act of discrimination and in contravention of the right to free expression and association.
-
- The second concern relates to the right to an independent and competent tribunal. There have been questions raised as to whether judges have been directing witnesses. There was a report specifically of witnesses being asked to prepare scripts and it is unknown whether those scripts were authored for them or whether they originated with the witnesses. There ought to be a guarantee of the separation of powers in the constitution as a fundamental tenet of the UN’s Basic Principles on Judicial Independence as set out in principle one.
-
- The third concern is double jeopardy and retroactive application of the law. This issue arises from the fact that some of these trials appear to be retrials or indeed second charges being brought on matters that have not only already been tried but have resulted in a previous conviction. The Arab Charter on Human Rights in Article 19 states that no one may be tried twice for the same offence. It is clear again that the lack of clarity and indeed duplication of charges is of concern when judged against those standards.
- The fourth and final concern emerges from reports of the conduct of the hearings and the lack of any public scrutiny of those hearings. The right to a public hearing is long enshrined in many constitutions around the world far preceding the modern international human rights treaties, and it could be described as an ancient right in Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (that everyone is entitled to a public hearing). The Arab Charter in Article 13 also guarantees the right to a public hearing, and yet it is clear from reading the reports of the UN Special Rapporteurs that there are a significant number of issues coming out of these trials that suggest that the rule of law is in jeopardy in the United Arab Emirates.
‘In Article 27 in the United Arab Emirates Constitution, it says that there is no penalty for what was done before the law came into force. These people have been in jail since 2012 and this law came into force in 2014, so how can you go back and charge them? A person cannot be legally prosecuted twice for the same incident. In UAE law it is not possible, and you cannot prosecute anyone for the same issue twice anywhere in the world. It is not only illegal but also destroys the most important principle around the world. No one is safe now. No one who goes there is safe as they can be charged for anything and they can be charged for something that they have been charged with before.’ – Ahmed Al Nuaimi
There are other serious issues that BHRC intends to spotlight about the conditions of detention and reports of torture taking place within secret prisons. The UAE government has shown scant respect for the rule of law and its own constitution, which in Article 26 states: ‘Personal freedom shall be guaranteed to all citizens. No person may be arrested, searched, detained or imprisoned except in accordance with the provisions of the law. No man shall be subjected to torture or other indignity’. Despite this constitutional prohibition of torture, its inclusion aligned with international standards that absolutely prohibit the use of torture under any circumstance, violence against prisoners in the UAE has increased significantly, with reports of ‘secret’ prisons and detainees with whereabouts unknown and no contact permitted with relatives or lawyers. There are reports of long periods of solitary confinement and loud noise exposure while individuals are in detention. The UN Nelson Mandela Rules on the treatment of prisoners suggest that solitary confinement should be limited to exceptional circumstances and used as a last resort for a short a time as possible, subject to independent review, and the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture in 2011 proposed that solitary confinement should be prohibited absolutely after 15 days.
‘When it comes to my experience and conditions in the prison, I simply said whatever my captives wanted me to say and agreed to whatever they wanted me to agree to. If I had not, it was made abundantly clear to me that I would be taken to a villa, one of the facilities where they hold people in an interrogation phase. These look from the outside like normal houses but they have the windows boarded up. There is a chair and you are tied to it with bright lights to stop you from sleeping as well as loud music and physical abuse from the State security personnel. I heard this firsthand from someone I met in prison who had been tied to a chair with a bag over his head for a year. Others have died in custody. I was threatened with rendition to overseas military bases that the UAE operate, namely in Eritrea or in Yemen. I was threatened with physical abuse against myself and my family. Meanwhile, I could hear it occurring in the same facility I was in, and it was made abundantly clear that this would happen to me. They forced me to take cocktails of medication which both elevated my mental state but at the same time depressed my mental state so that I was more subdued. This was all occurring in a police building operated by State security which is situated within the Ministry of Interior, which has a sovereign ability to overrule anything else. This abuse and everything that is happening is still under the authority of the Ministry of Interior, uniformed officers and senior leadership such as the Inspector General of the UAE’s Minister of Interior, Ahmed Nasser Al Raisi who is now also the President of Interpol.’ – Matthew Hedges
The State security apparatus is the main entity in the UAE that deals with terrorism and state security issues. In 2003 the State security apparatus founding law was replaced with a new law that expanded its powers and responsibility, and allowed it to operate without any judicial or governmental oversight on how it operates. This apparatus has been responsible for widespread and systematic human rights violations in the UAE including enforced disappearances, torture, arbitrary detention. Ahmed Mansoor, who is an award-winning human rights defender, was arrested in 2017 from his home and disappeared by members of the State security apparatus, and subjected to torture by State security. Nasser bin Graith, an academic at the Sorbonne University in Abu Dhabi, was sentenced to 10 years for ‘posting false information in order to harm the reputation and stature of the State and one of its institutions’ (he had earlier posted a tweet stating that he had not received a fair trial in the earlier UAE 5 case) and for criticising Egypt (a regional ally of the UAE). Ahmed Al Nuaimi noted the silence of Sorbonne University which had not responded nor supported Bin Graith, prompting Human Rights Watch to call for the university to break its silence and condemn the prosecution of one of its academics. The Emirates Detainees Advocacy Center (EDAC) has stated that there are over 60 prisoners of conscience who are arbitrarily detained by the state security apparatus and nearly all of them are being detained beyond the completion of their sentence and many are denied any contact with their families and lawyers. Furthermore, the State security apparatus operates on the basis of a law that has actually never been made public which is a clear violation of the principle of legality. There has been a draft made public (leaked by the EDAC) where it was found that the State security apparatus is given very broad powers to gather and analyse information on ‘any political activity and monitor social phenomena’. It is incredibly concerning to see these words enshrined in law. The President of the State security apparatus also has the power to place suspects in custody for up to three months and take any decision that is binding on all other security apparatuses. The State security apparatus is also allowed to establish security offices in any federal ministry, government office, Embassy or consulate. Such broad and unconstrained powers are contributing factors to violation of international human rights law and allow the authorities to act without any judicial oversight and with perceived impunity, all of which contributes to the culture of fear and a chilling effect on freedom of expression, conscience and thought.
The right to a fair trial and the prohibition against torture are inherent parts of upholding the rule of law. Individually and taken together, these are serious concerns that suggest that the international standards expected with respect to fair trials are not being met in the United Arab Emirates.
‘I have observed the growing influence of the State security regime within the UAE. It is a society within a society that controls and influences people’s behaviours and actions and it has now become so strong that not only does it limit the ability for Emiratis or foreign nationals to attend certain educational courses, to travel, to work, to meet, or to have any degree of a free life, they have now been able to successfully limit the cognitive abilities of people within their own minds. I saw this with my interrogators, but you can see the impact of this on people’s thought processes where you can see the gears in their head turning but they are now so afraid that they have to make themselves say something different to act in a different way against their own innate wishes. This really is a sign of the extent of repression in the UAE and the danger that this now presents’. – Matthew Hedges
Q&A
We have heard a lot about the domestic framework and how it affects individuals who are based in the UAE both British citizens and citizens of other nations, as well as UAE citizens. How can the international community safely assist those who are affected by these issues?
In relation to the trials that have been ongoing in the UAE and especially the UAE 84 trial, it is important for all of us in civil society and the international community to push for the monitoring of trials to allow people to see whether these trials are actually being conducted to uphold the standards of a fair trial. If these trials are being held in secret, which is nearly always the case, there is a higher risk that these trials will not meet fair trial standards and that victims will be subjected to torture. It is vital that we support the individuals who are currently detained by monitoring their trials and continually asking about their whereabouts and their condition. The international community must continue to monitor and keep the issue alive through discussions such as the BHRC panel, but also through other forums with NGOs and multilateral agencies working more closely together to spotlight abuses of the rule of law in the UAE and other GCC states.|
The discussion raised the UAE’s international legal obligations and violations to the right to a fair trial and other fundamental issues which are systemic and continuing with apparent impunity. What can the International Community including other states, international organisations and civil society do to hold the UAE to its legal international obligations? What are the available legal tools under international law and what other ways can the situation be raised to create awareness and compel change?
From a legal perspective this question is very difficult to answer. From the political or civil society perspective there is certainly much that can be done in respect of trial monitoring. In terms of holding the UAE to legal account at this stage there are some considerable challenges in that it is actually very hard to hold a state legally accountable. When we speak about accountability we should also think about universal jurisdiction which empowers us to hold Emirati high officials responsible when they have committed crimes. These officials come regularly to Europe and there is a strong possibility for universal jurisdiction which is still hard but certainly an avenue that should be explored seriously.
If the UAE 84 are convicted on the 10 July what recourse will the defendants have to challenge that ruling? What might then happen to the defendants and what concerns do you have?
There is no independence of the judiciary in the UAE. Although there is a right to appeal, judges are appointed in the Supreme Court by the President of the UAE, with the approval of the Federal Supreme Council. The lack of judicial independence makes everything far more difficult for the defendants, and any right of appeal is merely artificial. BHRC reiterates the importance of the role of the international community and of raising awareness of the legal limitations but also legal innovations such as universal jurisdiction. Ultimately, events like this one hosted by BHRC, are vital to ensuring that these issues remain in the public consciousness and stay on the radar of international organisations.
‘The authorities are destroying the principle of rule of law which is very dangerous for the community of the UAE and for the world.’ – Ahmed Al Nuaimi
FULL RECORDING AVAILABLE BELOW
