Home

In addition, the Special Rapporteur has retained his previous conclusions, particularly those indicating that “torture is widespread in Jordan” owing to “lack of awareness” and “impunity”. (...) A/HRC/4/G/17 page 4 With regard to the Special Rapporteur’s claim about lack of awareness among officials of torture: The Special Rapporteur describes a lack of awareness of torture as a reason for the widespread practice of torture in Jordan. (...) Counter-terrorism and its characterization as one of the reasons for the widespread practice of torture in Jordan: The Special Rapporteur provides us with no clear evidence as to how he arrived at this conclusion.

The Special Rapporteur noted, “Even where there are natural disasters afflicting the general population, the root causes are often man-made, and it is the regime in power which shares responsibility for this.”2 The Human Rights Council has expressed deep concern “at the continuing reports of systematic, widespread and grave violations of…economic, social and cultural rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.”3 3.

DOCUMENT 5/3666 France and United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland: draft resolution (Original text: English and French) (5 October 1956) The Security Council, Recognizing that the action of the Government of Egypt in unilaterally bringing to an end the system of international operation of the Suez Canal, which was confirmed and completed by the Suez Maritime Canal Convention signed at Constantinople on 29 October 1888, has prejudiced the rights and guarantees en- joyed by users of the Canal under that system,' thereby creating a situation which endangers the free and open passage of shipping through the Canal, without distinction of flag, as laid down by that Con- vention Considering that this action was designed to, and did, subject to the Egyptian national interest, and to excl1.l.sive Egyptian control, the operation of an inter- national public service which was set up for the be- nefit of all nations Considering that the action of the Egyptian Govern- ment is contrary to the principles of respect for international obligations and the interdependence of nations Considering that the situation created by this action, which has gravely impaired the confidence necessary for the operation of an international service, is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security Considering that, for these reasons, the rights and interests of users of the Suez Canal cannot be left in the hands of a purely national organization Noting that a conference to discuss this situation was called in London on 16 August 1956, and that eighteen of the twenty-two States attending that con- ference, who between them are responsible for over 90 per cent of the traffic using the Canal, put forward proposals to the Egyptian Government Noting with regret the refusal of the Egyptian Govern- ment to negotiate on the basis of these proposals Noting that a second conference held in London from 19 to 21 September 1956 provided for the estab- lishment of an association designed to assist its members in the exercise of their rights as users of the Suez Canal in consonance with the 1888 Conven- tion and with due regard for the rights of Egypt Noting that, in the view of the Governments which participated in this conference, the proposals of the eighteen Powers continue to offer a fair basis for a peaceful solution of the Suez Canal problem, taking into account the rights and interests of the user nations as well as those of Egypt Noting that on 1 October 1956 the Suez Canal Users Association was inaugurated 5 DOCUMENT S/3666/Rev.l* France et Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d'l rlande du Nord: proJet de resolution (Texte original en anglais et en jranr;ais) (5 octobre 1956) Le Conseil de securite, Reconnaissant que l'action unilaterale duGouverne- ment egyptien qui a eu pour effet de mettre fin au systeme de gestion internationale du canal de Suez, systeme confirme et complete par la Convention des- tinee it garantir le libre usage du canal maritime de Suez, signee a Constantinople le 29 octobre 1888, a porte atteinte aux droits et garanties dont jouissaient les usagers du canal, cr~antde ce fait une situation qui compromet le libre passage des navires 1t travel'S le canal, sans distinction de pavilIon, ainsi qu'il estprevu dans cette convention, Considerant que cette action aete entreprise en vue - et a eu pour effet - de soumettre a1'inter~t national egyptien et au seul contr61e de l'Egypte lagestion d'un service public international qui avait ete organise pour le benefice de toutes les puissances, Considerant que l'action du Gouvernement egyptien est contraire au principe du respect des obligations internationales et de l'interdependance des nations, Considerant que la situation creee par cette action, qui a gravement compromis la confiance indispensable a la gestion d'un service public international, est susceptible de mettre en danger le maintien de la paix et de la securite internationales, Considerant pour ces raisons que les droits et inter~ts des usagers du canal de Suez ne sauraient ~tre laisses entre les mains d'un organisme purement national, Notant qu'une conference a ate reunie a. (...) "The Egyptian ambassador was given a negative response and a statement of the reasons. He was also told that in view of the widespread public interest in the matter, the United states planned to give out a statement of its position.

The killing of women, the execution of selected individuals by elements within the police and military, gang and crime-related killings, social cleansing, and other acts of violence have created a widespread sense of insecurity among the population. (...) Thus, regardless of the extent to which State agents may be involved, the evidence shows that the State has responsibility under international human rights law for the widespread killings of gang members; gay, lesbian, transgender, and transsexual persons; human rights defenders; women; and prison inmates (see chapter III). 13. (...) MINUGUA’s study began with a general observation that the areas in which lynching is most widespread are areas that suffer disproportionate poverty, are predominantly indigenous, have a weak State presence, and experienced the most human rights violations during the armed confrontation.

These attacks are committed for purely personal reasons by individuals. The aggrieved, and those seeking justice, include the families of the victims. (...) Acid attacks have been identified as one of the worst forms of violence by the government and the society. In response to widespread concern against acts of acid crimes, the Government has taken numerous measures to address this problem, including the adoption last month of the comprehensive "Acid Crimes Control Act 2002".

Since there is no evidentiary support for the claim of "systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations", then it follows that there equally no support for the final conclusion of "crimes against humanity" being committed by the Government of Eritrea. (...) In brief, there is no space for sexual slavery and widespread, systemic, violence against women. Travesty of international law and sovereign rights 16. (...) The advanced unedited version, in particular, states unequivocally "that systematic, widespread and gross human rights violation have been and are being committed by the Government of Eritrea" and "that the violations in the areas of extrajudicial executions, torture (including sexual torture), national service and forced labour may constitute crimes against humanity."

Finally, he would like to thank the many internally displaced persons who, in a climate of widespread fear, were ready to share their experiences with him. (...) Regarding IDPs, Nepal has a long history of displacement due to natural disasters. In addition, a widespread pattern of conflict-induced displacement has emerged today, next to and obscured by the traditional economic migration. (...) Such acts are in violation of the norms of international law reflected in Guiding Principles 10 (para. 2 (a)) and 11 (para. 2 (c)). 45. The widespread climate of fear among the IDPs was palpable.

In the previous report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions to the Commission on Human Rights at its sixty-first session, the Special Rapporteur noted that there is a widespread lack of compliance with the obligation to administer the death penalty in a transparent manner: “secrecy prevents any informed public debate about capital punishment within the relevant society … Countries that have maintained the death penalty are not prohibited by international law from making that choice, but they have a clear obligation to disclose the details of their application of the penalty. (...) Today, it would be impossible to survey current practices in a comprehensive manner; for that reason, the Special Rapporteur chose to focus on representative incidents and practices. (...) CONCLUSION 48. The widespread pattern of non-compliance with transparency obligations that the present report has documented is disappointing.

Transfers are made for three reasons - to benefit the court, to benefit the judge and to benefit the judge’s family. (...) During the Special Rapporteur’s mission, a number of reports were issued by various Indonesian organizations alleging widespread and systemic corruption within the administration of justice system. 30. (...) The indictments allege widespread or systematic acts of murder and persecution directed against a civilian population, and that the defendants failed to prevent their subordinates from carrying out such crimes.

To date, there are important reasons to be optimistic about CICIG’s work. It has signed cooperation agreements with the Office of the Public Prosecutor and the Ministry of the Interior. (...) Corruption and ineffectiveness are widespread. The dysfunctional relationship between the PNC and the Office of the Prosecutor continues to stymie effective coordination and prosecutions. 35. (...) While there is insufficient information to reliably determine how many killings are committed by State agents versus private individuals, both appear to be widespread. Any strategy to confront these killings must have two prongs: • Relentlessly root out the practice of social cleansing by government bodies; This recommendation has not been implemented