Pakistan: Taliban, Army Must Minimize Harm to Civilians

Humanitarian Situation in the Conflict Area Deteriorating

May 18, 2009

(New York) - The Taliban's use of landmines and human shields and the Pakistani army's aerial and artillery attacks are placing civilians at unnecessary risk in the continued fighting in Pakistan's Swat valley, Human Rights Watch said today.

Residents in the town of Mingora, the epicenter of the fighting, told Human Rights Watch that Taliban militants have laid landmines in the town and prevented many civilians from fleeing, using them as "human shields" to deter attack. Pakistani forces appeared to have taken insufficient precautionary measures in aerial and artillery attacks that have caused a high loss of civilian life. Human Rights Watch expressed concern that food and medical supplies were not reaching the population in the embattled area.

"The Taliban's use of landmines and human shields is a sorry addition to their long list of abuses in the Swat Valley," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "They urgently need to let civilians leave areas of fighting."

Mian Iftikhar Hussain, information minister in the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) provincial government, told the media on May 17, 2009, that almost 2 million internally displaced persons had been registered by authorities. The government feared the number would rise by another 500,000 in the coming days as fighting continued. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees, António Guterres, described the situation as, "a massive, massive displacement in the world today." Hundreds of thousands of civilians remain trapped in the Swat valley and adjoining troubled areas, and are unable to leave because of fighting.

Mingora residents told Human Rights Watch that fewer than 10,000 civilians remain in Mingora. Taliban forces have prevented many from leaving, while others are too infirm or poor, or are unwilling to leave. Several thousand Taliban remain in the town. The Taliban also continued to use battery-operated FM radios and patrols to communicate with residents and impose their authority.

Swat residents still in the valley and people fleeing into the towns of Swabi and Mardan told Human Rights Watch that the Taliban had laid landmines in eight places in Sohrab Khan Chowk, a square in the center of Mingora. Sharifabad, a village near the Haji Baba area about three kilometers from Mingora, has been mined in four places. Residents have seen the landmines being planted, and the Taliban told civilians that they would be blown up if they walked on them. The use of antipersonnel landmines - which are inherently indiscriminate in their targets - and holding civilians as human shields are serious violations of the laws of war, Human Rights Watch said.

Human Rights Watch said that the Pakistani army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, had given appropriate instructions to the army on May 13 to, "ensure minimum collateral damage even at the expense of taking risks, by resorting to precision strikes." However, Human Rights Watch has received several accounts of high civilian casualties in Pakistani military attacks. On May 8, 35 people, including 14 children and four women, were killed when Pakistani army mortar shells and missiles struck the Shahdra and Wathke neighborhoods of Mingora. Reportedly, none of those killed were Taliban fighters.

On May 11, the military's aerial bombardment of Matta, a Taliban-controlled district in central Swat, resulted in the deaths of at least three women and eight children, witnesses told Human Rights Watch. Residents in the area said that on May 14, Pakistani armed forces attacked Taliban-controlled Takhtaband near the Mingora bypass road. Though residents said that civilians died in the attack, they had not been able to recover the bodies or ascertain the number of dead due to an ongoing curfew and the precarious security situation. The laws of war require warring parties to take all feasible precautions to minimize civilian harm and prohibit attacks that do not distinguish between military targets and civilians.

"If Pakistan wants to win not just the battle for Swat but also a sustainable peace, its armed forces need to minimize civilian casualties and suffering," said Adams. "The people of Swat will expect the Pakistani government and armed forces to protect their safety both during the fighting and afterward."

Human Rights Watch said that because the area where the fighting continues is a closed military zone with journalists and human rights monitors barred from entering, it is currently not possible to verify this information independently. Local journalists have left the area, and the army is not permitting Pakistani reporters or foreign correspondents to enter. The area is under indefinite curfew, lifted only to allow civilians to flee.

Human Rights Watch expressed grave concern about the humanitarian situation in Mingora. The town remained without electricity and fuel, food supplies were dangerously scarce and all hospitals and medical facilities remained shut. Pakistani authorities should consider all possible mechanisms, including airdrops, to ensure that food, fuel, and medical supplies reach those unable or unwilling to leave the conflict area.

Bangladesh: Executions, Torture by Security Forces Go Unpunished

New Government Must Address Impunity to Make Good on Human Rights Promises

May 18, 2009

(New York) - The Bangladeshi government should take urgent action to make good on its campaign promise to end impunity for human rights abuses and to establish the rule of law, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Successive governments have promised but failed to ensure that law enforcement officials and soldiers responsible for abuses are brought to justice.

The 76-page report, "Ignoring Executions and Torture: Impunity for Bangladesh's Security Forces," details the involvement of soldiers, paramilitary officers, and police in so-called "crossfire killings" and other custodial killings, torture, "disappearances," and arbitrary arrests. It examines a number of cases that have received national and international attention, in which those responsible have not been prosecuted. Facing constant threats, harassment, and even physical abuse, victims and family members have often been forced to abandon their efforts to seek justice, and the suspected perpetrators have continued serving in the security forces.

"If you are a soldier, a member of the Rapid Action Battalion or the intelligence services, or a police officer, you can get away with murder in Bangladesh," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "But those who kill or torture should be behind bars with other violent criminals."

Over the past five years, the military, the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) - an elite crime-fighting force - and the police have been responsible for well over 1,000 killings. Human Rights Watch and others have long contended that many of these deaths, often described as "crossfire killings," were actually extrajudicial executions of people in custody. Bodies of the victims often had wounds that suggested that they had been tortured. While there have been far fewer extrajudicial killings since the new government took power in January 2009, new cases have begun to emerge in recent weeks and no one has been held accountable for past abuses.

The report highlights the case of Choles Ritchil, a leader of the indigenous Mandi tribe, who was arrested and tortured to death by a group of soldiers in March 2007. It also describes how Khabirul Islam Dulal, a local politician in Bhola district, was tortured by navy officers in front of his family and neighbors a few weeks earlier. Although witnesses have identified suspects in both cases, no one has been prosecuted and imprisoned.

"The very forces tasked with upholding the law and providing security to the public have become well known for breaking the law in the gravest manner without ever facing any consequences," Adams said. "Forces such as RAB and the military intelligence agency DGFI have become symbols of abuse and impunity."

The report concludes that Bangladeshi governments since independence in 1971 have been unwilling to prosecute and punish state officers responsible for grave human rights violations. The problem is one of both law and practice. Alleged human rights violations should be investigated by an independent and neutral body, and archaic laws that shield security officials from prosecution should be amended. The report urges the government to set up a witness protection program and to prosecute or take disciplinary action against anyone who tries to stop or hinder a criminal investigation.

The situation is partially the result of an outdated legal framework under which law enforcement officers and members of the armed forces are shielded from prosecution. In violation of international legal standards, article 46 of Bangladesh's Constitution empowers parliament to pass laws that provide immunity from prosecution to any state officer for any act done to maintain or restore order, and to lift any penalty, sentence, or punishment imposed.

Soldiers and RAB officers are also protected from the civilian criminal justice system under rules that ensure that they can only be prosecuted in internal courts by their peers through processes that lack independence or impartiality. While the civilian courts have jurisdiction over cases involving police officers suspected of involvement in criminal activities, such officers are protected by Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which requires explicit government approval to prosecute an officer purporting to act in an official capacity. Several other laws state that no legal action can be taken against a person who in good faith acts to implement any of its provisions.

Foreign governments are well aware of the poor human rights record of these agencies, but nevertheless cooperate with and provide training to them.

For all of these reasons, senior law enforcement and military officers have never been under strong systemic pressure to ensure that soldiers, paramilitaries, or police officers operate within the law or human rights norms. They take for granted that they have complete discretion in carrying out their mandate, even if it includes the use of unlawful violence. They send the message to victims that anyone who attempts to hold them accountable will have to pay a high price and that, in any case, the efforts will be fruitless.

Bangladesh's new government, under the leadership of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina, has declared a "zero-tolerance" policy for extrajudicial executions and stated that state officials who engage in such acts will be punished. There are, however, no indications that the authorities have initiated any serious investigations into past abuses or into credible allegations that several suspects in the February 2009 rebellion and massacre at the headquarters of the Bangladesh Rifles, the country's border security forces, have been tortured and killed while in custody.

Given their long history of arbitrary arrests, torture, and extrajudicial killings, Human Rights Watch recommends that DGFI and RAB be disbanded or, at the very least, that an independent commission be set up to assess their performance, identify and recommend for dismissal officers believed to be responsible for serious human rights violations, and develop an action plan to transform them into agencies that operate within the law and with full respect for international human rights norms.

DGFI's operations should be strictly limited to lawful military intelligence activities and in no circumstances should it have powers to detain or to engage in surveillance of the political opposition and critics of the government.

"As a party to the UN human rights conventions, Bangladesh is obliged to ensure that all violations - past and future - are investigated, and that those responsible are brought to justice," Adams said. "If Bangladesh is to become a country in which fundamental human rights are respected and the law is applied equally to the poor and the powerful, the existing culture of impunity has to be torn down."

Thailand: Replace Flawed Rights Panel

Unqualified Candidates Were Selected by Secret and Illegal Process

May 13, 2009

(New York) - The newly appointed members of Thailand's National Human Rights Commission, whose selection process violated constitutional requirements and international standards, should resign to restore the commission's credibility, Human Rights Watch said today. Upcoming constitutional reforms should include a new selection process that will ensure independence, transparency, public scrutiny, and broad-based participation.

The seven new members approved by the Senate on May 1, 2009, in a closed session, include one who was a subject of a commission investigation and several with no experience in human rights. Several highly qualified candidates were rejected.

"Thailand is facing grave human rights challenges and needs a serious and committed commission to work on them," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "Instead, inexperienced and unqualified people were placed on this commission in a way that clearly broke the rules. The best thing these members can do for human rights is to step down."

On March 11, the secretary of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) invited applications for new commissioners after the terms of the previous commissioners had expired. The commission received 133 applications. The selection committee, consisting of five senior judges and the president of the parliament, met to consider the applications on April 8. On April 10, the committee sent seven nominees, including one who has been the subject of a commission investigation, to the Senate for consideration and approval. The Senate effectively rubber-stamped the committee's nominees.

The seven nominees were: Police General Vanchai Srinuwalnad, assistant commissioner general of the Royal Thai Police; Parinya Sirisarakarn, former member of the Constitution Drafting Assembly of Thailand (2007) and a prominent industrialist; Paibool Varahapaitoorn, secretary to the Office of the Constitutional Court; Visa Penjamano, inspector-general, Ministry of Social Development and Human Security; Taejing Siripanich, secretary, Don't Drive Drunk Foundation; Nirand Pithakwachara, former elected senator for Ubon Ratchathani; and Professor Amara Pongsapich, former dean, Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn University.

The new commissioners do not come from a diverse range of social backgrounds, nor do any of them represent human rights groups. More important, local human rights groups have protested that the new commissioners lack necessary first-hand experience in protecting and promoting human rights. Vanchai, Parinya, Paibool, and Visa, in particular, have no experience at all and have no public record of demonstrating basic understanding of human rights.

In 2007, Parinya was named in a commission investigation as responsible for causing environmental damage in Thailand's northeastern region, where he holds a license to extract salt. Parinya's lack of commitment to promoting universal human rights was evident in an oral presentation to the Thai Senate in which he dismissed "Western criticisms of Burma" as "foreign interference" in domestic affairs. In that light, if made a commissioner, he stated that he would not welcome international intervention on human rights issues in Thailand.

Human Rights Watch said that candidates who have solid records in defending human rights were rejected, including: the Muslim activist Angkhana Neelapaijit, from the Working Group on Justice for Peace, who has spent many years documenting and exposing abuses in the southern border provinces; Wallop Tangkananurak, a prominent child rights defender; and Pairoj Polpetch, who monitors compliance of Thai laws with international human rights standards.

"None of the new human rights commissioners has a reputation for working on human rights," said Adams. "The prominent human rights professionals who applied were ignored, calling into question whether the commission will be serious or has been set up to serve entrenched interests."

Human Rights Watch said that the government of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has committed itself to the protection of human rights and to differentiate itself from its recent predecessors, including the abusive government of Thaksin Shinawatra and the military junta. But neither the government nor the opposition party has made any effort to discuss the need to ensure the selection of independent and qualified human rights commissioners as part of planned constitutional reforms.

Under section 256 of the 2007 Constitution of Thailand, the NHRC commissioners should be persons "having apparent knowledge and experiences in the protection of rights and liberties of the people, having regard also to the participation of representatives from private organizations in the field of human rights."

The Principles Relating to the Status of National Institutions on human rights ("The Paris Principles"), which were adopted by United Nations General Assembly in 1993, state that: "The composition of the national institution and the appointment of its members, whether by means of an election or otherwise, shall be established in accordance with a procedure which affords all necessary guarantees to ensure the pluralist representation of the social forces (of civilian society) involved in the protection and promotion of human rights." The Paris Principles state that members of government departments, if included in a national human rights commission, "should participate in the deliberations only in an advisory capacity."

"The commissioners should resign to make it possible for a new selection," said Adams. "To prevent the same mistakes from being made again, the constitution should be amended to establish a selection process that ensures independence, transparency, public scrutiny, and broad-based participation in the selection of NHRC commissioners."

The selection of the previous commission was made under the terms of the 1997 Constitution and was based on the active involvement of representatives of civil society, the media, and other social sectors, unlike the exclusive panel of judges and one representative of the incumbent party that made the new selections under the military-junta-sponsored constitution of 2007.

This new selection committee chose the seven nominees based solely upon the written forms and supporting documents that they submitted. In contrast, the nominees to the previous commission were thoroughly examined by the Senate before approval. There was virtually no attempt in the process used this year to inform the public about what was going on, let alone to allow public scrutiny and debate on the appropriateness of the short-listed candidates. An online form to leave questions on the Senate website was not available until the afternoon before the cutoff date.

Competence, efficiency, and independence have been the main challenges facing the human rights body from its inception. Former Prime Minister Thaksin had encouraged government officials and the security forces to disregard investigations and recommendations of the commission concerning state-sanctioned abuses. These included the 2003 "war on drugs" and extrajudicial tactics used by various police and security units in the context of counterinsurgency in Thailand's southern border provinces. Annual budget allocations for the commission had also been restricted by the government.

Yet some commissioners and staff worked hard to monitor and investigate abuses across Thailand. Some of their interventions in the southern border provinces saved the lives of victims of arbitrary arrests and torture. Similarly, they had exposed and stopped a number of government and private projects that severely endangered public safety and the environment across the country.

Malaysia: New Prime Minister Should Repeal Internal Security Act

The release of 13 detainees is a welcome surprise from Prime Minister Najib, who had long supported the Internal Security Act. We hope that his promise to review the law is genuine and that he realizes that it is a blight on the Malaysian justice system and the country's reputation.

Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch

Malaysia's new prime minister, Najib Abdul Razak, should follow up on his surprise release of 13 detainees by promptly acting to rescind the internal security law, Human Rights Watch said today.

On April 3, 2009, his first day in office, Prime Minister Najib ordered the release of 13 detainees and promised that the government would review the Internal Security Act (ISA) under which they were held. The ISA permits indefinite detention without charge or trial. By April 5, all 13 had been freed, including eight terrorism suspects, three alleged forgers, and two leaders of the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf). Three foreigners among them have been deported, while the 10 Malaysians remain under police supervision.

"The release of 13 detainees is a welcome surprise from Prime Minister Najib, who had long supported the Internal Security Act," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "We hope that his promise to review the law is genuine and that he realizes that it is a blight on the Malaysian justice system and the country's reputation."

The detention of the Hindraf members exemplifies the government's long misuse of the ISA. The release of the two Hindraf leaders, V. Ganabatirau and R. Kengadharan, leaves three Hindraf members in ISA detention for more than 15 months for their part in organizing a massive demonstration on November 25, 2007, to protest educational and economic discrimination against Malaysian Indians.

Hindraf had held the rally even though the police had refused to issue a permit. All five have been accused of threatening national security by "upsetting harmony" among Malaysia's Malay, Chinese, and Indian communities. Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan publicly stated, without providing any supporting evidence, that the five "clearly have links with international terrorist organizations and they are involved in activities that amount to inciting racial hatred."

"The government imposed the ISA instead of charging the Hindraf activists with credible criminal offenses," said Adams. "If it can't promptly charge them and others still held and give them a fair trial, it should release them."

Also on his first day in office, Prime Minister Najib lifted the ban on two opposition party newspapers, Suara Keadilan, published by Parti Keadilan Rakyats (PKR), and Harakah, published by Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS). The ban had been imposed on March 23, 2009, and was widely seen as an attempt to limit opposition parties from getting their messages to voters before by-elections on April 7. Under the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, annual license renewal is mandatory for all newspapers. The Home Affairs Ministry can restrict or ban a publication outright on several vaguely defined grounds, but no legal remedy is available as the minister's discretion to grant, revoke, or suspend licenses is "absolute" and not subject to judicial review.

Human Rights Watch said that lifting the ban was an important step and called for a revision of the printing and publications law to ensure it was consistent with the right to freedom of expression.

The government also continues to use criminal defamation and other laws to undermine opposition politicians and critics of the government. Raja Petra Kamaruddin, founder and editor of Malaysia's most popular website, MalaysiaToday, was originally detained under ISA for demeaning Islam. He was freed on procedural grounds on October 7, 2008. The government is appealing the ruling. He also has been criminally charged with sedition under the Sedition Act 1948 and criminal defamation under the Penal Code on what Human Rights Watch considers to be a politically motivated charge of defaming a government leader.

Opposition parliamentarian and Democratic Action Party (DAP) chairperson Karpal Singh had been charged under the Sedition Act for remarks he made in relation to political changes in Perak, one of Malaysia's 13 states. And opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim is currently facing trial on politically motivated sodomy charges.

"If Prime Minister Najib wants to back up his claim as a reformer, he will repeal laws empowering the government to censor the media or to engage in dirty tricks used previously against political opponents," Adams said.

Also crucial for improving freedom of expression in Malaysia is repeal of the Police Act 1967, which mandates the need for a police permit for public assemblies of three or more people. In 2008 alone, the law was used to shut down peaceful vigils supporting the repeal of the ISA and to limit election rallies by opposition parties.

"Free expression and peaceful assembly are bedrocks of a rights-respecting society," said Adams. "Until Malaysia's government stops carving out legal rules to attack its political opponents, it cannot claim to be a modern democratic state."

Cambodia: 1997 Grenade Attack on Opposition Still Unpunished

The attack on Sam Rainsy and his supporters remains an open wound in Cambodia, but neither the government nor Cambodia's donors are doing anything to hold those responsible to account. The perpetual failure to address this crime has made March 30 'Impunity Day' in Cambodia. This anniversary, on the day the Khmer Rouge trials is beginning, shows how far Cambodia has to go toward holding human rights abusers accountable.

Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch.

Suspects in Attack Have Been Promoted Instead of Prosecuted

Twelve years after a grenade attack on an opposition party rally that killed at least 16 people and wounded more than 100, the Cambodian government has still taken no steps to bring the perpetrators to justice, Human Rights Watch said today. Human Rights Watch criticized the recent promotions of officials suspected of involvement in that attack.

On March 30, 1997, about 200 supporters of the opposition politician Sam Rainsy gathered in a park across the street from the National Assembly in Phnom Penh to denounce the judiciary's lack of independence and judicial corruption. In a well-planned attack, four grenades were thrown into the crowd, killing protesters and bystanders, including children, and blowing limbs off street vendors. An FBI investigation concluded that Cambodian government officials were responsible for the attack.

"The attack on Sam Rainsy and his supporters remains an open wound in Cambodia, but neither the government nor Cambodia's donors are doing anything to hold those responsible to account," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The perpetual failure to address this crime has made March 30 'Impunity Day' in Cambodia. This anniversary, on the day the Khmer Rouge trials is beginning, shows how far Cambodia has to go toward holding human rights abusers accountable."

On the day of the grenade attack, Prime Minister Hun Sen's personal bodyguard unit, Brigade 70, was, for the first time, deployed at a demonstration. The elite military unit, in full riot gear, not only failed to prevent the attack, but was seen by numerous witnesses opening up its lines to allow the grenade-throwers to escape and threatening to shoot people trying to pursuing the attackers.

Rather than punishing the people who ordered and carried out the grenade attack, the government has handed out high-level promotions to several known human rights abusers in Cambodia's armed forces and national police - including at least two linked to the 1997 attack.

The commander of Brigade 70 at the time, Huy Piseth, who ordered the deployment of Brigade 70 forces to the scene that day, is now undersecretary of state at the Ministry of Defense. Hing Bunheang, who was deputy commander of Brigade 70 at the time and who threatened to kill journalists investigating the case, was promoted to deputy military commander of the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces (RCAF) in January 2009.

"Handing out promotions to people implicated in massacring peaceful demonstrators is a slap in the face for the victims," said Adams. "This seems to be an intentional message from Hun Sen - that those who do his bidding will be promoted, no matter how egregious their acts."

Six other deputy military commanders face serious allegations of human rights abuses and were also promoted in January. These include Military Intelligence Chief Mol Roeup and Military Police Commander Sao Sokha. Like the commanders of Brigade 70, these men are close confidants of Hun Sen who have been implicated in abductions, torture, and extrajudicial killings.

The failure to pursue those responsible for the 1997 attack is part of a widespread pattern of well-connected perpetrators evading justice. Some examples include:

• On September 4, 2008, Mean Sokchea, a RCAF major working in Brigade 70, shot dead 21-year-old waitress Put Samphors at a restaurant in Kandal province. Mean Sokchea, in a drunken stupor, fired his gun and apparently mistakenly hit Put Samphors in the stomach. She was taken to a hospital but later died of her wounds. Mean Sokchea was detained by the police overnight but was then released, allegedly after intervention by Hing Bun Heang. Put Samphor's family received US$2,700 from Mean Sokchea, and the police told them that their daughter was shot while authorities were chasing robbers.

• On the night of January 16, 2003, a street youth named Prak Sitha was beaten to death at the Ministry of Interior (MOI) headquarters after he was arrested and detained by off-duty MOI officers on suspicion of theft. His body - bearing numerous injuries to the head, torso, arms, and legs - was dumped at a Phnom Penh pagoda the following morning by ministry officers, in violation of police regulations regarding deaths in custody. No criminal charges were filed in connection with this death. In December 2004, the case was cited by the UN secretary-general's special representative for human rights in Cambodia - who stated that Prak Sitha died at the ministry "following beatings by a known police officer" - as an example of a "consistent and continuing pattern of impunity" in Cambodia.

• On December 5, 1999, Tat Marina, age 16, was severely disfigured in an acid attack in Phnom Penh. The attack was allegedly committed by Khun Sophal, the wife of a senior government official, Svay Sitha, because she was angry her husband had a sexual relationship with Tat Marina. Neither Khun Sophal nor those suspected of being her accomplices in the attack were brought to justice. Intense media publicity compelled the Phnom Penh Municipal Court to issue an arrest warrant for Khun Sophal for attempted murder, but the police claimed that they could not locate her, although journalists reported that she was living at home as usual.

While the Cambodian police and courts regularly allow well-connected or financially able criminal suspects to escape prosecution, the justice system is also routinely used by the government to lock up its political opponents who have committed no crimes. For example, on March 20, 2009, Tuot Saron - former Sam Rainsy Party commune chief in Kompong Thom - was convicted on charges of kidnapping and illegal confinement, although no credible evidence was put forward by the prosecution. On February 19, the Appeal Court upheld the murder conviction of Thach Saveth, who is serving a 15-year prison sentence for the 2004 murder of a trade union official, Ros Sovannareth, despite the government's failure to produce any credible evidence against Thach Saveth.

Human Rights Watch said that the Cambodian judiciary's lack of independence will impact its ability to provide fair and impartial justice in the trials of former Khmer Rouge leaders, being carried out with a mix of Cambodian and international judges.

"The political control of Cambodia's courts is the main reason so many Cambodians and observers are concerned that the trials of Khmer Rouge leaders will lack credibility," said Adams. "In this way, Cambodia's tragic history and troubled present are deeply connected."

Sri Lanka: No Let-Up in Army Shelling of Civilians

We receive reports of civilians being killed and wounded daily in the 'no-fire zone, while the Sri Lankan government continues to deny the attacks. The Tamil Tigers' use of civilians as human shields adds to the bloodshed."

Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch

Tamil Tigers Unwilling to Release Their Hold on 150,000 People

The Sri Lankan army, despite government denials, is indiscriminately shelling the "no-fire zone" in northern Sri Lanka where thousands of civilians are trapped by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), Human Rights Watch said today, citing new information from the region. More than 2,700 civilians have reportedly been killed over the last two months, and the number of casualties rises daily.

"We receive reports of civilians being killed and wounded daily in the 'no-fire zone, while the Sri Lankan government continues to deny the attacks," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "The Tamil Tigers' use of civilians as human shields adds to the bloodshed."

A doctor at the makeshift hospital in Putumattalan, inside the government-declared "no-fire zone," told Human Rights Watch over the phone early today that dozens of dead and wounded civilians were being brought to the hospital daily. The interview was interrupted by shelling, audible over the phone; the doctor later explained that an artillery shell had struck approximately 250 meters from the hospital, killing two civilians and wounding seven others. Another shell struck about a kilometer from the hospital, also killing and wounding civilians.

When Human Rights Watch spoke to the doctor at about 5 p.m., he said the hospital had received 14 bodies and 98 wounded that day. He told Human Rights Watch that the shelling appeared to come from the direction of government positions three kilometers to the west.

The doctor described another artillery attack inside the no-fire zone on March 21, 2009:

"Between 10 and 11 a.m. on March 21, a shell hit a shelter about 200 meters from a church in Valayanmadam [three kilometers south of Putumattalan]. When I went to the site in the evening, two bodies were still lying at the site, while three bodies had already been buried. Nine people had been injured."

The Sri Lankan government continues its official denials of any attacks in the no-fire zone, including in discussions with top international officials. For example, in his phone conversation with the United Nations secretary-general, Ban Ki-moon, on March 17, President Mahinda Rajapaksa claimed that "no firing whatever was being carried out on the No Fire or Safe Zones declared by the security forces."

Collecting accurate information from the conflict zone is extremely difficult, as the government continues to block access for media and independent observers.

Civilian casualties in the 25-year-old armed conflict with the LTTE have skyrocketed since January. According to a UN document reprinted in the media, the UN country team in Sri Lanka has documented 2,683 civilian deaths and 7,241 injuries in the six weeks from January 20 to March 7. A copy of the patient list from the makeshift hospital in Putumattalan on file with Human Rights Watch contains the names of 978 people brought to the hospital from March 1 to March 10. According to the list, 79 adults and 40 children died, while 646 adults and 213 children were injured.

Human Rights Watch said that the LTTE continued to prevent 150,000 Tamil civilians from leaving the conflict zone and effectively used them as human shields. During the last two months LTTE only permitted about 4,000 injured civilians and their caretakers to be evacuated by ferryboat by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

In one incident reported to Human Rights Watch, a local employee of an international aid agency was wounded and several of his family members killed by a shell that hit a shelter in Putumattalan on March 21. According to information that the aid agency received from its staff on the ground, the employee sustained serious head wounds and his situation is considered critical unless he receives medical treatment. Despite several days of negotiation, however, the LTTE has refused to allow the ICRC to evacuate the man.

On March 17, another aid volunteer was wounded as a result of shelling in the no-fire zone. He did not get needed medical attention and died.

The situation of the civilians trapped in the conflict zone is aggravated by the acute shortage of food, sanitary facilities, and medication, as international humanitarian agencies cannot deliver sufficient supplies to the conflict area.

A volunteer at the hospital today told Human Rights Watch: "It is really difficult for people to find food, and you can see that over the last four weeks people have lost weight and they get sick because of lack of nutritious food, [lack of adequate] bathing and toilet facilities, as well as lack of medicines in the hospital. We are in a very, very desperate situation. People are suffering."

Top UN officials, including the secretary-general, the under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs, and the high commissioner for human rights, as well as a number of concerned states, have called on the Sri Lankan government and the LTTE to make protecting civilians a top priority and to take all necessary measures to halt the spiraling humanitarian disaster.

"The Sri Lankan government has responded to broad international concerns with indignation and denials instead of action to address the humanitarian crisis," said Adams.

Human Rights Watch called on the UN Security Council to put Sri Lanka on its agenda and to address urgently the deteriorating situation. It also called on Sri Lanka's key bilateral partners, such as Japan, the United States and India, to make the safety of the trapped civilians a top priority in any discussions of financial assistance.

Last week, Human Rights Watch sent a letter to members of the board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) about the government's request for a US$1.9 billion loan to address its financial crisis and, according to the Sri Lankan Central Bank's request, to "continue with the resettlement, rehabilitation and reconstruction work in the Northern Province." It has asked the IMF to finalize negotiations on the loan by March 31.

In its letter, Human Rights Watch emphasized that the government's current policies and practices are counterproductive to the stated goal of the IMF loan and urged that IMF board members discuss concrete action the government needs to take to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in the north.

Nepal: Victims Await Justice From New Government

The Maoist-led Nepali government should make accountability for human rights abuses before, during, and after the conflict in Nepal an urgent priority, Human Rights Watch and the Nepal-based Advocacy Forum said today in a letter to Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal.

The groups urged the prime minister to ensure that members of security forces and of the Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) responsible for large-scale "disappearances" are held accountable, including through criminal prosecutions.

The letter was released during the March session of the UN Human Rights Council where a delegation of victims is due to give testimony before the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances.

Nepal had the largest number of "disappearances" in recent years among countries reporting to the United Nations Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances. In December 2008, the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) made public findings of its investigations into 156 cases of enforced disappearances in Bardiya district, most of which occurred between December 2001 and January 2003.

"In spite of promises of a new Nepal, the government has not taken meaningful action on 'disappearances' and other gross human rights violations," said Brad Adams, Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "Those responsible for extrajudicial killings, torture, enforced disappearances and other serious abuses should be investigated and prosecuted. Now is the time for the prime minister to live up to his promises and hold perpetrators accountable."

In September 2008, Human Rights Watch and Advocacy Forum released a report, "Waiting for Justice: Unpunished Crimes from Nepal's Armed Conflict," which examined in detail the state's response to 48 First Information Reports (FIRs) filed in relation to 62 cases of alleged extrajudicial killings, torture, enforced disappearances, and rape by security forces between 2002 and 2006.

Both organizations expressed their disappointment at the government's failure to table the Disappearance Bill for debate in parliament, passing it by ordinance without public input or debate.

"We welcomed the disappearances bill, as it is a hopeful step on the road to accountability," said Mandira Sharma, director of Advocacy Forum. "But we are deeply disappointed that the government chose to avoid a national debate on such a central issue. The bill needs to meet international standards to have any chance of success."