FOCUS ASIA-PACIFICAPRIL 2010 VOLUME 59

Focus
Asia-PacificNewsletter of the Asia-Pacific Human Rights Information Center (HURIGHTS OSAKA)

March 2011 Vol. 63

Contents
Right to Information in West Asia
This is a summary of the highlights of areport on the state of access to
information in Arab countries in West
Asia.
- Amman Center for Human Rights
Studies
Page 2
Arab Minority in IsraelThis is a short report on the continuing
efforts to deprive the Arab citizens in
Israel of their rights as Arab andindigenous minority in a supposedly
democratic state.
- The Association for Civil Rights in Israel
Page 6
Abuse of Bahraini Children
This is a short report on the cases ofphysical abuse of children in Bahrain in
the context of political suppression, andsocial and economic exclusion.
- Bahrain Center for Human Rights
Page 9Asian Laws and Jurisprudence and theInternational Human Rights Standards
This is a report on the HURIGHTSOSAKA law and jurisprudence project.
- HURIGHTS OSAKA
Page 11
Human Rights Events in the Asia-PacificThis is information on important humanrights events in the region.
Page 14

Editorial

Human Rights and West Asia
The Arab world is experiencing a major political turmoil thatwould hopefully lead to greater emphasis on the right of thepeople to decide on the form and components of theirpolitical system, and on the process of determining who theirleaders should be and how long should they stay in power.
Peaceful political, social and economic changes benefit fromproper circulation of information, as well as debate, on laws,
government policies, programs and services. Assertion of suchchanges through “people power” usually occurs in thecontext of a long history of government abuse of power thatcaused human rights violations.
Accountability of the government and their leaders for theroot causes of the present political turmoil is a major issue inthis regard.
But beyond the call for change in political leadership is theneed to call for a wide-ranging review of laws andgovernment systems from the perspective of human rights
protection, promotion and realization. What legal andinstitutional measures would address political repression,social exclusion and economic marginalization? Finding
rights-based measures and putting them into practiceconstitute a much more difficult challenge to undertake. West
Asian societies, or any society for that matter, ought to be selfcritical in responding to these calls.

1

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFICMARCH 2011 VOLUME 63

Right to Information in West Asia∗
Amman Center for Human Rights Studies

n calling for an internationalＩ
conference on freedom of
information, the United Nations
General Assembly declared
during its first session on 14
December 1946 that "Freedomof information is a fundamental
human right and is thetouchstone of all freedoms towhich the United Nations isconsecrated." [Resolution 59(1)].1 Freedom of information
subsequently became aconstitutional right in many
countries of the world, and has
been translated into laws thatguarantee the right of thejournalists and citizens toaccess information.

There is a noticeable increase in
the number of the countries
with legislations that guarantee
access to information. A 2009
survey shows ninety countries
around the world have theselaws, generally known as the"Freedom of Information Act" or[FOIA].2
Recent Developments
In West Asia, Jordan was thefirst country to enact a freedomof information law on 17 June2007 (Law of Access toInformation No. 47/2007).
However, the implementation of
the law has not beensatisfactory. Despite the lapse of
more than three years, the law
has not yet been properly
disseminated. Government
departments have not beenadequately informed of therequirements of the law. Civil
society organizations have tohelp explain the law, promote
its use, and facilitate the flow of
information to journalists andcitizens.
The Yemeni legislature started todeliberate on a draft law on
freedom of information in 2008.
The Yemeni draft law has
provisions compatible to someextent with the international
criteria and best practices.
Article 2 of the proposed law
lists the offices that should
provide access to information.
The list includes a range of state
institutions (covering legislative,
executive and judicial bodies),
other government offices, andn o n - g ove r n m e n t a lorganizations receiving publicfunds in whole or in part. The
head of the proposed
government office that would
implement the law (National
Center of Information) has thepower to include more
institutions in the list if
n e c e s s a r y. F r e e d o m o f
information watchdog Article
19 commented on thisprovision:3
Although this seems toencompass a broad range ofbodies within the scope of thedraft Law, the draft Law
should focus on the function
performed by the body, rather
than its formal designation. To
this end, it should include all
branches and levels ofgovernment, including local
government, elected bodies,bodies which operate under a2statutory mandate,nationalised industries andpublic corporations, nondepartmental bodies orquangos4 and judicial bodies,
as well as private bodies
carrying out public functions.
In other words, if the function
performed is a public one, thebody should be included
within the scope of the draft
Law to ensure uniform
coverage over all bodies that
perform public functions.

Article 3 states that the purposeof the draft law is to “ensureand facilitate the citizen’s rightto have access to information,”while Article 4 states that“[access to information is oneof] the citizen’s fundamental
rights and citizens andforeigners are entitled toexercise such a right within thelimits of the law.”
Though many believe that thedraft law still needs work inorder to make it fully subscribe
to international standards, it isimportant to emphasize thatthose supporting the draft law in
Yemen are heading towards theright direction. The enactmentof this law would make Yemen
the second Arab country inWest Asia to have such law.
Among the Gulf countries, theexisting press and publications
laws in the six countries (United
Arab Emirates, The Kingdom of
Bahrain, The Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia, The Sultanate of Oman,
Qatar, and Kuwait, all memberstates of the Gulf Cooperation

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFIC
Council or GCC) have no clear
or direct reference to the rightto information.
The Kingdom of Bahrain is
expected to be the first state
among the six member-states of
the GCC to enact a freedom of
information law. The Foreign
Affairs, Defense and Security
Committee at the Shura Council(legislature) of the kingdom has
already discussed the draft
freedom of information law.
However, with the current
political turmoil in the country,
the enactment of the law may
not happen within 2011.

Ranking of Countries
The extent of freedom of accessand circulation of informationthat exist in a country can bemeasured according to anumber of indicators such as
the existence/non-existence of:laws on right to Freedom ofInformation; laws that refer topeople’s right to information;adequate flow of informationfrom top to bottom ingovernment departments andpublicly-funded institutions;a n d fi n a l l y, p r o v i s i o n o f
information to all who makerequests (and not dependent on
knowing someone in the officeconcerned or on the status of
the person requesting for
information). Using these
indicators, Arab States in West
Asia have been ranked
accordingly in 2010, as Table 1
shows.
Jordan is ranked first among theArab countries in West Asia interms of freedom of access andcirculation of information forthe primary reason perhaps ofthe existence of a law
guaranteeing the right to

MARCH 2011 VOLUME 63
Table 1. Freedom of access andcirculation of information in ArabStates in West Asia

Rank

State

1

Jordan

2

Yemen

3

Bahrain4

Palestine

5

Iraq

6

Lebanon

7

Kuwait

8

Qatar

9

United Arab Emirates

10

Saudi Arabia

11

Syria

information. There is also
another reason for this top
ranking: existence of various
domestic and foreign humanrights and civil society groups
that try to hold the government
and themselves accountable tosuch a law, that pressure thegovernment to facilitate
adequate circulation of
information, and that alsopressure the government toallow media access to suchinformation.
Yemen and Bahrain, both in theprocess of enacting theirrespective freedom of
information laws, follow Jordan.
Palestine, Iraq and Lebanon
come next, while at the bottomof the list are Saudi Arabia and
Syria.
Saudi Arabia’s low rank infreedom of information is

3

explained by what many in theinternational community
consider as the existence of astrict and ultra-conservative
police state that has full control
over media broadcasts and on
what government activities
could be shown in public.
Journalists and human rights
organizations face difficulties infinding answers to questions
such as: Who are suffering fromi n j u s t i c e ? W hy a r e t h e ydetained, and where are theynow?
Syria, like Saudi Arabia,
punishes those who broadcast
or actively search for
information that sheds negative
light on the government. This isa consequence of thedeclaration of state of
emergency, even though there is
no legitimate emergency within
Syria, that has remained
effective for almost fifty years. It
gives the military and the police
the power to arrest anyone atanytime and as many times as
they like without any judicial
intervention. Many opposition
members and human rights
activists have been arrested andintimidated over the years dueto the state of emergency. The
Amman Center for Human
Rights Studies (ACHRS) agrees
with Amnesty International that
it is “unacceptable that
authorities [n Syria] continue to
use the national state of
emergency to suppress
dissenting voices”.5 One of themost notable prisoners until
recently was a 79-year oldhuman rights lawyer (Haythem
a l - M a l e h ) , wh o wa s o n l yreleased due to his “old age.”
Amnesty International reported
that Haythem al-Maleh was“serving a three-year sentence
after being convicted by a

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFIC
military court in July 2010 of“conveying within Syria false
news that could debilitate themorale of the nation” and“weakening national
sentiment.”” 6 Military court
convictions, such as that ofHaythem al-Maleh, prevent
human rights defenders fromexercising their right to accessand relay to the public any
information on human rights
issues. This completely violates
the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights and its guaranteeof the freedom of access to
information as stated in Article
19: “Everyone has the right tofreedom of opinion andexpression; this right includes
freedom to hold opinions
without interference and tos e e k , r e c e ive a n d i m p a r t
information and ideas throughany media and regardless offrontiers.” Additionally, thissituation creates a society
where corruption and injusticerun unimpeded.

IssuesFreedom of information has toconfront a number of political,
social and other constraints
existing in the Arab society.
Access to and circulation of
information that expose Arabpolitical leaders, and also
prominent families, may lead to
public unrest or violencecaused either by the leaders (orprominent families) as
retaliation or by the generalpublic as an expression of
dissatisfaction with the misuseof power by the leaders. In
either case, the parties involved
would suffer devastating results,
including crippled economy (asin the recent case of Egypt).
National leaders would
normally not want to take the

MARCH 2011 VOLUME 63
risk of losing power due tofreedom of information.
In the Arab society, whereindividual and family
reputations are given highimportance, exposure of corrupt
practices within thegovernment, business and otherp u r s u i t s i s e q u iva l e n t t oshaming the individual involved
as well as his/her family. Thus
people would not attempt topublicly disclose the corrupt
activities of colleagues, in order
not to shame them and theirrespective families and be held
responsible for it. Such public
disclosure can turn into a
conflict between families, thefamily of the individual whose
bad practice is exposed
retaliating against the family of
the person who makes the
public disclosure. To avoid thissituation, many issues aresettled “under the table” or“behind closed doors” so thatno one gets shamed or hurt.
There is also a notion in the
Arab society that information
should be available only tothose who have influence,
wealth, or power. Ordinary
people, on the other hand, aresupposedly incapable ofaccurately analyzing suchinformation. With such view ofthe people, the statement “Egypt
is not ready for democracy”
from Egyptian Vice President
Omar Suleiman is not surprisingat all.
Economics is also a factor
against freedom of informationin the Arab world. Political andbusiness leaders stand to lose
fi n a n c i a l l y b y m a k i n g
information available. Withpublic protests coming at theheels of exposure of bad

4practices, foreign investments
are threatened. As in the case of
Egypt, public disclosure ofviolations of human rights
means cut in financial support
from the United States.
Restrictions on the freedom of
the press foster an environment
for corruption and injustice at
all levels of society.

Summary and Recommendations
Information is the cornerstone
for the exercise of the freedomof opinion, freedom of
expression, and the freedom of
the press. These three freedoms
cannot be exercised without theright to information, whichtranslates into governmentsallowing journalists to accessinformation on governmental
programs and projects,
refraining from imposing
restrictions on the flow of
information to the citizens; not
imposing measures that makeaccess to information difficult.
ACHRS believes that the right toinformation is the criterion formeasuring all the other rights
and liberties. This right isparallel to democratic choice.
The freedom of the press
necessarily requires ability byindividuals to search for facts
and to publish information
without obstruction of any kind.
ACHRS affirms that the cultureof secrecy that prevails in the
Arab countries and the laws thatreinforce and strengthen thisculture (such as emergency
laws, laws on state secrets, laws
regulating civil service)contradict the principle oftransparency. This situationconsequently bars thedisclosure of mistakes,
promotes corruption, andFOCUS ASIA-PACIFICMARCH 2011 VOLUME 63

precludes good governance(which includes accountability).

transparency should be
held

ACHRS strongly recommends
the reinforcement of the right toinformation in the Arabcountries of West Asia together
with the elimination of
obstacles to exercising thisr i g h t. In this re ga rd, thefollowing are recommended:

7. Seminars and workshops
for journalists and media
workers on the right toinformation and its
relationship with thefreedom of the press (alongwith the promotion of
professionalism among
members of the press)
should also be held

1. E m e r g e n c y l a w s a n dmartial rule in the Arabstates where these laws arestill enforced should be
repealed/lifted
2. The right to information
being part of theConstitutions should be
respected
3. A special law on the rightto information should beenacted in those countries
where such law does not
yet exist
4. Arab countries in West Asia
should accede to theinternational human rights
instruments, particularly
the International Covenant
on Civil and Political
Rights
5. Laws regulating freedom of
the press, particularly thelaws on the protection of
the secrets and documentsof the state, should bemade compatible with
Article 19 of theInternational Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights
6. Seminars and workshops
for government officials tof a c i l i t a t e t h e fl o w o f
information fromgovernment institutions to
the media and enhance theculture of openness and8. The culture of openness
and transparency in society
and the personal culture of
exercising the right toinformation and todisseminate
this
information should bepromoted
9. Government control overthe media, whether
supported by law or not,should stop and the law as
the case maybe should be
repealed
10. The civil society in the
Arab countries of West Asia
should sponsor local andArab initiatives, such asalliances and networks thatexert pressure for the
consolidation of the rightto information and thedissemination of its culture.
For further information pleasecontact: Amman Center for
Human Rights Studies, Al
Abdali, Al Sharaf Building 4th
Floor, P.O. Box 212524, Amman
11121, Jordan; ph (962 6) 46
55 043; fax (962 6) 46 55 043;
e-mail: maysoon@achrs.org,
ir@achrs.org; www.achrs.org* This report was prepared by ateam of researchers of ACHRS
composed of Anwar al-Khatib,

5

Salem Qubailat, a. Muhammad
Yaqoub, Magdy Helmy, Naji
Alkhchnawi, and Aaron
Williams. Mr. Yahya Shqair
supervised the team.

Endnotes
1 Resolutions Adopted by theGeneral Assembly During Its
First Session (January 1946 –May 1947) http://www.un.org/
documents/ga/res/1/ares1.htm
2 Roger Vleugels, “Overview of all
90 FOIA countries & territories,”
Fringe Special, 7 September
2009, available at the Freedomof Information Advocates
Network (FOIAnet) website:w w w. f o i a dvo c a t e s . n e t / e n /resources.
3 Article 19, Memorandum on the
Draft Information Law of Yemen,
May 2009 (www.article19.org/
pdfs/analysis/yemenmemorandum-on-freedom-ofinformation-draft-law.pdf), page
4.
4 A quango is an acronym forquasi-autonomous nongovernmental organization. See
Nigel Morris, "One by one, thequangos are abolished. But at
what cost?," The Independent,
27
July
2010,
in
www.independent.co.uk/news/
uk/politics/one-by-one-thequangos-are-abolished-but-atwhat-cost-2036175.html.
5 Amnesty International, Syria
must release all prisoners ofconscience after human rights
lawyer freed, 8 March 2011,
http://www.amnesty.org/en/
news-and-updates/syria-mustrelease-all-prisoners-conscienceafter-human-rights-lawyerfreed-2011-03
6 Ibid.

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFICMARCH 2011 VOLUME 63

Arab Minority in Israel
The Association for Civil Rights in IsraelOne of the most importantprinciples in a democracy
is to protect the minority against
the tyranny of the majority. A
democratic state is by naturepluralistic and respectful ofdiversity among its citizens, andenables each group within its
population that so wishes tomaintain all the components of
its own identity, including its
heritage, culture, and national
identity. In a democracy, every
minority group has the right toexpress its own narrative
concerning the past and its own
vision of the future, even if thesediffer from or challenge thenarratives of the majority. A
democracy does not condition
citizens' rights on declarationsof agreement or "loyalty" tocertain ideas and opinions. All
the above are basic principles ofsubstantive democracy.
The attitude of the State of Israel
towards Arab citizens
contradicts these democratic
principles. Many Jewish citizens
and many of their elected
representatives believe that Arabcitizens of Israel are entitled toequality and to protection of
their rights only on condition
that they abandon their national
identity, culture, language, andhistorical heritage, and declaretheir "loyalty" to values they do
not share.
Arab Citizens
Today, Arab citizens of Israel
comprise close to 20% of thetotal population of the country,

numbering over 1,000,000.
They live predominantly invillages, towns, and mixed
Arab-Jewish cities in the Galilee
region in the north, the Triangle
area in central Israel, and the
Naqab (Negev) desert in thesouth. They belong to threereligious communities: Muslim(81%), Christian (10%), andDruze (9%). Under international
instruments to which Israel is astate party, they constitute anational, ethnic, linguistic, andreligious minority.
In Israel there are glaring
socioeconomic disparities
between Jewish and Arab
population groups, particularly
with regard to land, urban
planning, housing, social
services, employment
opportunities, and education.
Over half of the impoverishedfamilies in Israel are Arabfamilies,and Arab
municipalities are among thepoorest in the country.
Issues
The events of October 2000,
exactly one decade ago, were aparticularly sharp and painful
manifestation of the complex
relationship between the Stateof Israel and the Arab minoritythat lives in this country. During
these events, thirteen Arabs
were killed, including twelve
Israeli citizens and one residentof the Occupied Territories.
None of the policemen involvedin these events has beenprosecuted. This reality created6

a grave sense among Arabcitizens that they could be
injured with impunity, seriously
damaging the already fragile
trust between the Arab minority
and the state. These events are achilling illustration of thepossible outcomes of ongoingdiscrimination and injury to aminority group. October 2000
added a new layer of pain,
offense, and mistrust to therelations between the state andthe Arab minority, leaving an
open wound that has yet toheal. From the standpoint of the
Arab public, the lesson of
October 2000 was that the state
will not hesitate to employ
lethal violence against its Arabcitizens if they fail to act inaccordance with its policies.
The investigation of the eventsof October 2000 by the Ministryof Justice's Police Investigation
Department (PID) was marredby grave defects. Justice was notdone, and no-one was called toaccount for their actions. The
failure to prosecute those
responsible for the killing of the
Arab citizens exacerbates the
mistrust that dominates therelationship between the Arabminority and the state; impairs
the status of the Arab minority
and leads to a negligent attitude
to Arab lives; weakens the ruleof law in the State of Israel; delegitimizes protests; andconstitutes a blemish that willcontinue to mar Israeli
democracy.

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFICThe Or Commission, a statecommission of inquiry, wasestablished to investigate theevents of October 2000. The
commission's recommendations
offered the state a historic
opportunity to redefine its
attitude to the Arab minoritythat lives in Israel; toacknowledge the needs andrights of this minority; to repair
injured trust; and to correct thecourse of the relationship with
the Arab minority. Ten years
after these events, however, theState of Israel does not seem tohave internalized thecommission's conclusions,since its attitude towards the
Arab minority has only
worsened.
Over the past two years, inparticular, we have seen an
unprecedented deterioration in
the attitude of the state towards
the Arab citizens. This has been
manifested in discriminatory
proposed laws - some of which
recently passed as laws by the
Knesset (parliament);1 attacks on
freedom of expression andpolitical activity; racist
statements by public figures; ahostile approach by the policea n d t h e l aw e n f o rc e m e n tbodies; policy based mainly on
force; and ongoingdiscrimination against the Arabpublic in the allocation ofbudgets and resources.
Alongside these attacks, agrowing attempt is being madeto force Arab citizens to meetinherently antidemocratic testsof "loyalty."
Two particularly problematicpieces of legislation along theselines just passed in the mostrecent Knesset session -The
Nakba Law and the Acceptanceto Communities Law. Part of the

MARCH 2011 VOLUME 63
recent slew of anti-democratic
legislation that the Association
for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI)
has been relentlessly working toprevent, these two bills becamelaws on 22 March 2011.

alternative opinions. The actual
meaning of this fine is therevocation of public funding, up
to ten times the cost of the eventin which the “offense” wascommitted.

Together with the Abraham
Fund Initiatives and residents ofcommunal villages who oppose
the bill (Atid Misgav), ACRI filed
a petition in the Israeli High
Court of Justice, demanding todisqualify the “Acceptance toCommunities” law on the
grounds that it provides a“license to discriminate” against“unwanted” communities, who
are rejected by acceptancecommittees in communal
villages and in kibbutz
expansions. This law legalizes acommon discriminatory
practice, which has alreadybeen criticized by the High
Court of Justice.

The bill seeks to single out andmark Israel’s Arab citizens as
dangerous and disloyal to thestate if they seek to express theirown narrative and interpretationof historical events. The billcompletely ignores the state’s
duty to recognize ethnicnational minority groups, theirculture, and their narrative, aspart of their right to cultural
independence.

The Nakba Law, officially titled“Budget Principles Law(Amendment 39) – Reducing
Budgetary Support for Activities
Contrary to the Principles of theState,” will enable a committeeof bureaucrats from the Ministryo f F i n a n c e t o fi n emunicipalities, public
institutions, or publicly
supported organizations – ifthey believe that these bodies
oppose the interpretation of theterm “Jewish and democraticState,” express feelings ofmourning related to the Israeli
Independence Day or the
Nakba, or violate the symbols of
the State.
Therefore, for example, it will
be possible to fine cultural or
educational institutions andlocal municipalities if they holdan event that gives artistic
expression (or any other form of
expression) to critical or

7

Arab Israelis as Indigenous
Minority
It is important to note that theArabs in Israel constitute noto n l y a m i n o r i t y, b u t a n
indigenous people - that is, aminority that was present before
the establishment of the current
political entity. This status wasrecognized inter alia in theReport of the aforementioned
Or Commission. An indigenous
minority, as distinct from animmigrant minority, bears astronger affinity to the local land
and history, and views thecountry (though not necessarily
the state) as its historicalhomeland. International law has
enshrined the rights ofminorities in general, and ofindigenous minorities inparticular, notably the right toequality, the right to property,
and the right to maintaincultural identity, in a series of
conventions and declarations towhich the State of Israel iscommitted.
A democratic state does notdemand that a minority - andFOCUS ASIA-PACIFIC
certainly an indigenous
minority with the history andcircumstances that exist in Israel- forego its identity in order toreceive rights. An understandingon the part of the Jewish
majority, and on the part of theinstitutions of state, of theindigenous affinity between the
Arabs in Israel and this country
is critical in order to build
relations of trust between thestate and the Arab minority. It isalso critical to understand themanner in which the Arabminority perceives its identity,
as well as natural affinity - inhistorical, national, social, andfamilial terms - with thePalestinian residents of the
Territories and with the Arabinhabitants of neighboring
countries.
In addition to the conditioningof rights on "loyalty," demands
h av e a l s o b e e n m a d e t ocondition the rights of Arabcitizens to benefits provided by
the National Insurance Institute,on the basis of the slogan "norights without obligations."
Recent examples include thedecision to condition
acceptance to the Foreign
Ministry's cadet course on
military or national service, andthe granting of benefits toreleased soldiers in institutionsof higher education. Arabcitizens - like religious Jews andpeople with disabilities - areexempt from service in the
Israeli military by law; neither
are they obliged to perform
alternative civil service.
More importantly, however, ademocracy does not present its
citizens with conditions forenjoying basic rights, and does
not discriminate among
citizens. In 2006, the Haifa

MARCH 2011 VOLUME 63
District Court ruled in a petition
submitted by Adalah (a humanrights center) that the use of
military service as a criterion in
acceptance to student
dormitories discriminates
against Arab students andshould be abolished. It is
important to understand that thedemand for citizens to declareallegiance to the State of Israel
as a Jewish state (as if there wasa single monolithic perceptionof the Jewish nature of thestate); to the Zionist vision (as if
there was a single monolithic
definition of this vision); and to
the narrative of the Jewish
majority (as if there was a single
monolithic narrative acceptedby all the Jewish citizens) istantamount to a demand for
Arab citizens to erase their own
identity and deny their past. At
the same time, these same
demands are also (indirectly)
imposed on Jewish citizens,r e fl e c t i n g a n i m a g i n a r yconsensus within the majority
group regarding these issues.
Final Statement
It is not impossible to improve
the trust between the various
arms of the state and the Arabcitizens. This will be achieved if
the Jewish majority and its
representatives in positions of
power understand that
democracy entails an obligation
to enable the Arab minority tomaintain its identity, heritage,
and culture, and if theyabandon the desire to control
the life of the Arab populationand to impose on it alien values
that it does not share. In thisc o n t e x t , i t i s a l s o wo r t hmentioning the comments by
Deputy Prime Minister Dan
Meridor during a debate on one

8of the proposed laws mentioned
above:Why do we need to add theword 'Jewish' to every proposal
and to show the Arab citizens
that it does not belong to them?
And then people wonder why
they are adopting more
extreme positions. …[w]hy do[we] need to make things
harsher and more severe all the
time? The majority does notneed to remind the minority all
the time that it is a minority.

Rather than raising improperand impractical demands for
Arab citizens to identify with
the Jewish identity of Israel andwith the symbols of the Jewish
nation as common national
symbols, an effort should bemade to promote solidarity andidentity on a civil andegalitarian basis. The minority
should enjoy all the legal anddemocratic courses of actionand expression provided in any
reasonable democracy.
For further information, pleasecontact: The Association for
Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI),
National Headquarters, Nahalat
Binyamin 75, Tel Aviv 65154
ISRAEL; ph (972-3) 5608185;
fax (972-3) 56081659; e-mail:mail@acri.org.il; www.acri.org.il

Endnote1 For details of the proposed legislations see ACRI List of Top AntiDemocratic Legislative Initiatives
in www.acri.org.il/en/?p=1639

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFICMARCH 2011 VOLUME 63

Abuse of Bahraini Children
Bahrain Center for Human Rights

S

ince August 2010, Bahraini
authorities have beenarresting political activists,
human rights defenders, andmembers of the Shiite
communities. Bahraini children
have not been spared from thecrackdowns and have sufferedfrom widespread waves ofarbitrary arrests, kidnappings,
enforced disappearances, andphysical, psychological andsexual torture. Many believedthat the attacks on children
were perpetrated by members of
the national security forces, andalso by foreign mercenaries who
were hired as members of the
Bahraini Special Forces. The
Special Forces attack people,
including children, randomly.
Many people have also been
injured due to excessive use offorce, and the use of rubberbullets and tear gas. A group of
United Nations (UN)independent experts
condemned in a March 2011
official UN news release thecontinuing brutal suppression of
the protests.1
Children in Detention
During a crackdown that started
in August 2010 at least seventysix children were arrested,
constituting 21% of the moret h a n t h r e e h u n d r e d fi f t ydetainees in Bahrain at thattime. This rate far exceeded the
proportion of child detainees tothe total number of detainees or
prisoners in countries sufferingfrom disturbances such as in

Occupied Palestine (3.7% of
total prisoners)2 and Iraq (3% of
the total detainees). 3 This
reflects the severity of the latest
security crackdown andarbitrary arrests against the mostvulnerable group of people insociety. While some of thesechildren have been released in
February 2011, many are still in
detention charged with crimes
mostly related to participationin protests, demonstrations andburning of tires. More children
have been arrested recently(February 2011) as part ofongoing crackdown on
protesters. Among the youngestof the detained children was Ali
Ahmed Abbas (12 years old)
who disappeared for several
days before his family found outthat he was in police custody.
During the August 2010
crackdown, children as young
as ten years old were arrested.
Ten-year-old Jihad Aqeel AlSari
was arrested on 19 November
2010, the eve of the Universal
Children's Day, after refusing forfear of his life to heed a call to
go to a police station. His family
believed that his arrest wasmeant to put pressure on his
father, Mr. Aqeel AlSari, a Shiite
cleric who was detained foralleged link to what was known
as the "terrorism network," andwho spoke before the Court on
28 October 2010 on how he
was tortured in detention. Jihad
was then released but confined
to his place of residence.

9

Parents are usually not officiallyinformed of the reason for thearrest of their children, sincearrests are often denied forseveraldays
after
disappearance. They are alsodenied of the right to visit theirdetained children, and to checktheir children's safety.4
Pleas by parents for the releaseand continuation of educationof the detained children while
their cases were being tried incourts (with guarantees to bringthem to court hearings) were
rejected. In addition, requests
by lawyers to release thesechildren under required
guarantees because of their
young age, especially for those
who have already spent morethan two months in detention,
were also rejected.
Children are being held in
criminal detention centers alongwith adult detainees who arecharged with criminal offenses
such as drug trafficking. Thisviolates the recommendation of
the United Nations Working
Group on Arbitrary Detention
stated in the report on its 2001
visit to Bahrain. The relevant
recommendation states:5
The Working Group
recommends the [Bahraini]
Government to extend thejurisdiction of the Juvenile
Court to cover minors aged
between 15 and 18, andamend the existing law torequire that minors in thiscategory are assisted by

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFICMARCH 2011 VOLUME 63

counsel, to allow forrehabilitative measuresappropriate to their age andneeds, and to have them held
separately from adults inprisons.

Prolonged detention caused
serious psychological trauma onsome of the children. Some ofthem have stopped eating. Somechildren who suffered serious
injuries due to attacks by thepolice have been transferredfrom hospitals to the detention
centers before full recovery.
ChildrenasVictims
Suppression of ProtestsofChildren are victims of arbitraryattacks on villages and of thecollective punishment policy.
They are also being intimidated
in order to dissuade them fromparticipating in protest actions.
Some children are also victimsof attacks by riot police against
people who protest in theirvillages.
Recently, on 30 March 2011,
fifteen-year-old Sayed-Ahmad
Sa'eed Shams from Saar village
was shot in the face by security
forces and died on the way to
the American Mission Hospitalin the village. Reports show that
he was playing outside hishouse with friends when the riot
police came. He panicked andstarted to run but the police
fired on him. There was noprotest taking place in thevillage at that time.6
In a different case, in October
2010, two nine-year-olds, andone six-year-old, were injured
by rubber bullets fired at themby members of the riot police
during a protest in their village.
In another case, a thirteen-year-

old child suffered cuts fromshattered glass caused by rubberbullets fired by riot police andby the impact of bomb
explosion.
The Bahrain Center for Human
Rights received a number ofcomplaints regarding
kidnapping of children from thestreets by groups of armed
militia wearing civilian clothes
who roam Shiite villages where
protests have been held. Most
kidnapped children were
subjected to enforced
disappearance for periods
ranging from several hours toseveral days. They were taken to
secret centers in blindfold
where they were tortured,
severely beaten, stripped andp h o t o g ra p h e d n a k e d , a n dsexually harassed. They werelater released wearing only theirunderwear in places far fromtheir villages.
Most families of the affectedchildren have filed complaints
with the police and requested
investigation. But despite thenumber of complaints filed,there has been no concrete
action to hold the perpetrators
accountable.
The Bahrain Center for Human
Rights believes that thistargeting of children throughkidnapping and torture is aimed
at scaring parents and thevillage residents. This is also
aimed at forcing activists in
Shiite villages to stop theirdemonstrations and protests.
These protests have been goingon for several years now due tothe systematic marginalizationand isolation carried out by the
Bahraini authorities at all levels(political, social, and cultural)
including deprivation of10

educational and housing
services to Shiite villagers.
Concluding Statement
Bahraini law prohibits children
below twenty years of age fromparticipating in any political
exercise (such as elections) due
to their assumed inability tomake sound decision. And yet,children of at least fifteen yearsof age can be liable to full
criminal responsibility just like
adults. Criminal cases are filed
against children and tried incriminal, rather than juvenile,
courts. Some have beensentenced to life imprisonment.
This situation violates theinternational human rights
standards.
There is a clear disregard of therights, security and welfare ofc h i l d r e n w h o h av e b e e nphysically harmed, detained
and sentenced harshly by thecriminal courts in the context ofthe government campaign tostamp protest actions by thepeople.
In view of the serious situation
affecting Bahraini children, theBahrain Center for Human
Rights recommends that the
Bahraini government undertakethe following:
1. Immediate release of alldetainees under eighteen
years old. Criminal charges
against them should be
pursued in accordance withinternational human rights
standards on fair trial,considering their status aschildren
2. P r o m p t , i m p a r t i a l a n deffective investigation of all(Continued on page 15)

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFC

MARCH 2011 VOLUME 63

Asian Laws and Jurisprudence and the International
Human Rights Standards∗
HURIGHTS OSAKAH

URIGHTS
OSAKA
implemented a research
project that analyzed Asian laws
and jurisprudence from ahuman rights perspective. The
research project involved eight
countries in Asia, namely,
China, India, Indonesia,
Republic of Korea, Japan,
Nepal, the Philippines, andThailand. The research project
attempted to determine theextent of incorporation ofinternational human rights
standards into the domestic
legal system (in terms of laws,
government policies andprograms, and administrative
procedures and mechanisms)
and jurisprudence (in terms ofcourt decisions and procedures)to address specific issues insociety; and show how far havethey been used by the humanrights practitioners.
Implementation Scheme
The research project involved
human rights centers1 in theeight Asian countries2 that havebeen undertaking research on
human rights issues including
the domestic application ofinternational human rights
standards. The research project
included a regional workshop
involving representatives ofregional human rights
organizations, and internationalorganizations and United
Nations (UN) agencies andoffices based in Bangkok. The

research partners presented theinitial version of their respective
reports during the August 2010
workshop, and discussed themwith the other participants who
were equally knowledgeable of
the research topics.
Research Reports
The reports of the research
partners have been compiled ino n e b o o k , e n t i t l e d L a w,
Jurisprudence and Human
Rights in Asia. The book also
includes four more reports,
covering an examination of thejurisprudence in Hong Kong
relating to the International
Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights, the impact of theConvention on the Eliminationof All Forms of Discrimination
Against Women (CEDAW) in
Japan, CEDAW and the laws ofIslamic countries andcommunities in Southeast Asia,
and lastly a summary paper.
The research reports cover theissues confronting thefollowing:a. Migrant workers – both
local (China) and foreign(South Korea) workers;
b. Women – protection fromdomestic violence( Th a i l a n d ) a n d e q u a ltreatment as workers(Japan), women’s rights andIslamic laws in Southeast
Asia;

11

c. Children – as child soldiers(Nepal);d. Indigenous peoples – rightto land and freedom of
religion (Indonesia);e. P r i s o n e r s / c r i m i n a ldefendants – right to fairtrial (Japan);f. Specific sections of society –mainly members of minority
communities who havealways been suspected of
criminal acts under the antiterror laws (India);g. General public – protecting
their rights under the Bill of
Rights law (Hong Kong);
exercising their right tohealth care (Philippines).
The reports reviewed the issues
confronting the different groupsof people, the relevant laws that
directly affect them, thedecisions of the highest courts
relating to their human rights,

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFC
and the factors that facilitate orhinder the protection,
promotion and realization of
their human rights.
A number of practical measures
have been discussed asconcrete examples that may
apply to other communities or
peoples. A number of questions
have also been raised thatshould be useful not only indrafting new laws or amending
existing ones, but also in
implementing them on the
ground.
The final paper sums up from a
regional perspective thedifferent components of thevaried national experiences,highlighting relevant laws, court
decisions and other information
relevant to the issues raised by
the reports.
The book presents a variety ofnational contexts affecting theprotection, promotion andrealization of human rights atthe national level. Each report
has stories to tell, and practicalexperiences to learn from.
Alongside inspiring stories oflaws and jurisprudence that
support human rights are
discussions of the problems that
inhibit proper application of theinternational human rights
standards in domestic legal
systems.
A number of court decisions inseveral Asian countries support
the domestic application ofinternational human rights
standards.
Jurisprudence and International
Human Rights Standards3
The Supreme Courts haveapplied the international human

MARCH 2011 VOLUME 63
rights standards in different
ways:

Rules for the Treatment of
Prisoners.5 It states thata. R e c o g n i t i o n o f t h eincorporation of provisionsof international humanrights instruments indomestic laws such as Bill of
Rights Ordinance (BORO) in
Hong Kong, and laws on
specific issues relating to
ch i l d r e n , w o m e n , a n dworkers.
b. Recognition of specificprovisions of international
human rights instruments as
jus cogens underinternational law. Three
years after the UN adopted
the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR), thePhilippine Supreme Court
recognized the UDHR as an
essential component of the“constitutional structure ofworld community” andcharacterized “freedom fromarbitrary and unnecessarily
prolonged detention as acustomary norm.” In Hong
Kong, Article 7 of ICCPR
was considered "aperemptory norm ofcustomary international law
from which no derogation islegally permissible.”4c. Treatment of International
human rights instruments as"guideline" in making
decisions.

Considering the Rules
contained in the PrisonsOrdinance and the Standard
Minimum Rules for theTreatment of Prisoners adopted
by the first United Nations
Congress,6 it is quite obviousthat the Prison Officers arebound not only to perform
such duties for the purpose ofpreserving discipline andenforcing diligence,cleanliness, order andconformity to the rules of theprison, but also to treat theprisoners with kindness andhumanity.

d. Treatment of the provisions of
the international humanrights instruments as"obligation of the state," andthus ruled that they should be
followed.
The Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
has applied the international
human rights standards byciting the Standard Minimum

12

In Nepal, the Supreme Court
declared that it is the legal andconstitutional obligation andduty of the Nepali government
to “protect the rights of thechild in line with the provisionsof the Bonded Labour(Prohibition) Act” and the CRC.
It further states that theprotection of child-bonded
laborers is also the international
commitment of Nepal pursuant
to Nepal Treaty Act, 1990 and
Article 26 of the Constitution of
the Kingdom of Nepal.7
The Philippine Supreme Courtin recognizing the right of alesbian-gay-bisexual-transsexualgroup to participate as apolitical party in an election
declared that its decision is
fully in accord with ourinternational obligations toprotect and promote humanr i g h t s . I n p a r t i c u l a r, w e
explicitly recognize theprinciple of non-discrimination
as it relates to the right toelectoral participation,
enunciated in the UDHR andthe ICCPR.8

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFIC
It also explained the necessityof applying the international
standards:[F]or individuals and groups
struggling with inadequate
structural and governmental
support, international humanrights norms are particularly
significant, and should be
effectively enforced indomestic legal systems so thatsuch norms may become
actual, rather than ideal,
standards of conduct.

The Korean report presents acase before the Constitutional
Court that clarified for the firsttime the entitlement of foreign
migrant workers in Korea toexercise labor and other rights
in recognition of the obligationof the Korean state underinternational human rights
treaties.

MARCH 2011 VOLUME 63
rights practitioners have tocontinuously push theboundaries of national
application of international
human rights standards bybuilding on these “spaces” andby overcoming through practicalmeasures resistance to it.
For further information, pleasecontact HURIGHTS OSAKA.
* This report draws from thetexts of Jefferson R. Plantilla andSalbiah Ahmad, editors, Law,
Jurisprudence and Human
Rights in Asia (Kuala Lumpur:
HURIGHTS OSAKA and SIRD,
2011).
Endnotes1

On the other hand, the courts
may even improve theinternational standards. As one
account states:
Justice Bokhary citedextensively international legal
materials when he said that“[i]n the field of human rights,
m u n i c i p a l l aw h a s o f t e nwalked in the footsteps ofinternational law – and may insome jurisdictions have caught
up with or even overtaken it.”9Concluding Comments
The research project reviewed
the “spaces” within nationallaws and jurisprudence in a
number of Asian countries thatwere appropriate (or effective)
application of international
human rights standards. Because
these “spaces” are still at thestage of growth, they should
continuously be widened andeffectively employed. Human2

For the profile of many of thesehuman rights centers see
Directory of Asia-Pacific Human
Rights Centers (Osaka:
HURIGHTS OSAKA, 2008). The
directory is also available at
http://hurights.pbworks.com/, orthrough
http://
www.hurights.or.jp/english/
directory-of-hr-centers.html.
Research partners:
1. China - Public Interest andDevelopment Law Institute,Wuhan University School of
Law
2. India - Human Rights Law
Network (HRLN)
3. Indonesia - Association forCommunity and Ecologically
Based Law Reform (HuMA)
4. Nepal - Center for Legal
Research and Resource
Development (CeLRRd)
5. Republic of Korea MINBYUN-Lawyers for a
Democratic Society
6. Japan - Human Rights Now
7. Philippines - Institute of
Human Rights, University of
the Philippines Law Center
8. Thailand - c/o Center for
Human Rights Studies andSocial Development, Faculty

13of Graduate Studies, Mahidol
University.
3 This is from pages 344-346 of
the book. References to theresearch reports in the bookhave been deleted.
4 Ubamaka Edward Wilson v.
Secretary for Security, [2009]
H.K.E.C. 908 (C.F.I.)
5 Lama Hewage Lal (Deceased),R a n i Fe r n a n d o ( Wi f e o f
Deceased Lal) And Others v.
O f fi c e r- I n - C h a r g e , M i n o r
Offences, Seeduwa Po lice
Station and Others, Supreme
Court, S. C. (FR) Application no.
700/2002, 17 September 2003
and 14 June 2004 in http://
www.lawnet.lk/docs/case_law/
slr/HTML/2005SLR1V40.htm.
6 The United Nations Congress on
the Prevention of Crime and theTreatment of Offenders adopted
the Standard Minimum Rules for
the Treatment of Prisoners(adopted in Geneva in 1955 andapproved by the Economic andSocial Council by its resolutions
663 C (XXIV) of 31st July 1957
and 2076 (LXII) of 13th May
1977).
7 Secretary Som Prasad Paneru,
among others v. His Majesty’s
Government, among others.
September 2006, Nepal Law
Reporter, 2006 A.D.
8 Ang Ladlad LGBT Party v.
Commission on Elections, G.R.
No. 190582, 8 April 2010 in
h t t p : / / s c . j u d i c i a r y. g o v. p h /jurisprudence/2010/
april2010/190582.htm#_ftnref41
9 Hong Kong: Sec'y for Justice v.
Ya u Yu k L u n g , [ 2 0 0 7 ] 3
H.K.L.R.D. 903, (C.F.A.). Albert
H . Y. C h e n , “ I n t e r n a t i o n a l
Human Rights Law andDomestic Constitutional Law:
Internationalisation ofConstitutional Law in Hong
Kong,” NTU Law Review 4-3/09,
254.
Availableatw w w. l aw. n t u . e d u . t w /ntulawreview/articles/4-3/09.pdf

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFC

MARCH 2011 VOLUME 63

Human Rights Events in the Asia-PacificT

he
Development
Alternatives with Women for
a New Era (DAWN), which
promotes the linkage of genderjustice/women's rights witheconomic justice/human rights,
convened a small Asian
workshop in order to explore
ways in which the Kuala
Lumpur Guidelines for a
Human Rights Approach to
Economic Policy in Agriculture(Kuala Lumpur Guidelines) 1
could become a tool foradvancing gender justice andwomen's rights among groups
that work on economic justiceissues in the agricultural sector.
The workshop analyzed cases int h e a g r i c u l t u r e s e c t o r byidentifying the human rights
and barriers at stake, and thestrategies to promoteaccountability and policy
alternatives/options to further
enhance existing policy. The
event, "Workshop on a Human
Rights Approach to Economic
Policy in Agriculture:
Engendering the Kuala Lumpur
Guidelines in Response to a
Fierce New World," was held at
the Miriam College in Quezon
City last 26-27 January 2011.
Miriam College, theInternational Working Group on
Trade-Finance Linkages, andAgribusiness Action Initiative
co-organized the workshop. For
further information, pleasecontact: Miriam College Women and Gender Institute(WAGI), Ground Floor, Caritas
Building, Miriam College,
Katipunan Road, Loyola
Heights, Quezon City, Metro
Manila, Philippines; ph (632)5805400 local 3590; ph/fax:(632) 4359229; e-mail:wagi@mc.edu.ph; www.wagimc.org.
The Asian Consortium on
Human Rights Based Access toJustice (HRBA-A2J) organized
the Pilot Training Workshop on
Human Rights Approach to
Realizing Equal Access toJustice (EA2J). The workshop
aimed to strengthen theinstitutional and individual
capacities of members of the
Asian Consortium to apply
human rights norms, standards
and principles to realize EA2J.
The workshop was designed toenable participants to:
1. A r r i v e a t a c o m m o nunderstanding of EA2J;
2. Justify the human rights
approach to realizing EA2J;
and3. Integrate the human rights
norms, principles andstandards in the design anddevelopment of EA2J
interventions.
The workshop was held in
Manila on 4-7 April 2011. For
further information pleasecontact: The Secretariat, Asian
Consortium on Human Rights
Based Access to Justice, c/o
ESCR-Asia, Inc., Rm.6,
Mezzanine Floor, Ateneo De
Manila University, Loyola
Heights, Quezon City, Metro
Manila, Philippines; ph/fax:(632) 9293482; e-mail:escasia2003@yahoo.com ,jtejada_philja@yahoo.com,
jgpallera98@yahoo.com,
davidlens@hotmail.com
The International Women's
Rights Action Watch Asia Pacific14( I W R AW A s i a Pa c i fi c ) i s
organizing a Pilot Testing
Workshop for Litigating Lawyers
on Women's Human Rights
Using CEDAW to be held from16 - 20 June 2011 in Kuala
Lumpur. The Workshop is being
held in keeping with IWRAWAsia Pacific's on-going efforts insupporting lawyers to litigate
cases relating to women's
human rights founded on the
Principle of Equality and Nondiscrimination at the domesticc o u r t s . Th e P i l o t Te s t i n g
Workshop for Litigating Lawyers
on Women's Human Rights
Using CEDAW aims to enable
participants:i) Enhance understanding of
women's lived realities, theneed for claiming humanrights, and the challenges inpractical realization of suchrights;ii) Strengthen capacity indrawing State accountability
towards the realization of
wo m e n ' s h u m a n r i g h t sthrough domestic litigation;andiii) Strengthen capacity inusing CEDAW to promotewomen's equality and nondiscrimination in all fields atthe domestic level.
The expected participants are
litigating lawyers with
substantial experience in
representing cases relating tohuman rights and/or women's
human rights. Participants will
share their experiences andinputs on litigation at national
levels that would help finalize aresource package being
developed by IWRAW-Asia

FOCUS ASIA-PACIFIC
Pacific for lawyers engaged inlitigation for women’s humanrights to use the CEDAW
framework and principles moree f f e c t i v e l y. F o r f u r t h e r
information, please contact:
International Women's Rights
Action Watch Asia Pacific(IWRAW-Asia Pacific), 80-B,
Jalan Bangsar 59200 Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia; ph (603)2282 2255; fax (603) 2283

Abuse of Bahraini Children(Continued from page 10)cases of abduction,
enforced disappearance
and torture, especiallythose involving children
and minors as victims, tobring the perpetrators ofsuch crimes to justice
3. Provide full care for thevictims of these violations,especially the children andminors, and give themadequate compensationand necessary support forrehabilitation
4. In case persons undereighteen years old have tobe detained such detention
must not contravene theinternational human rights
standards and must be inplaces established forjuvenile detention andunder the responsibility of
the Ministry of Social
Affairs, and not under the
Ministry of the Interior or
any other security-relatedbody
5. Immediate stop to repeatedattacks on Bahraini villages,
especially those affecting
children and minors

MARCH 2011 VOLUME 63
2552; e-mail: iwraw-ap@iwrawap.org/iwraw_ap@yahoo.com:
www.iwraw-ap.org
Endnote1 KualaLumpur Guidelines aredesigned as a tool to provide basic
information and a methodology foruse by anyone concerned withensuring the primacy and centralityof the human rights of those

6. Implement the Convention
on the Rights of the Child
and
the
2002
recommendations of theCommittee on the Rights of
the Child on the reform of
the criminal justice system7
7. Address political and social
problems through dialogue
based on an understandingof the root causes of these
problems, and inaccordance with laws andprocedures that comply
with international humanrights standards
8. Take all necessary measures
to ensure that children andminors at risk of detention
or trial are not deprived of
their right to education, andguaranteed the completionof their education to ensure
a decent future.
For further information, pleasecontact: Bahrain Center for
Human Rights (BCHR),
Manama, Bahrain; ph (973)39633399; (973) 39400720;
fax (973) 17795170; e-mail:info@bahrainrights.org;
www.bahrainrights.org

Endnotes
1 See "Broken promises in Bahrain- UN experts question15

affected by trade, investment andfinance rules as well as fiscal,monetary and other economic
policies related to agriculture. The
Guidelines were developed by anumber of organizations led by theInternational Gender and Trade
Network, International Network for
Economic, Social and Cultural
Rights-ESCR-Net and Center ofConcern. Visit www.escr-net.org
and www.red-desc.org for moredetails.

Government's human rights
commitments," News and Events,
www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/
Pa g e s / D i s p l a y N e w s . a s p x ?
NewsID=10881&LangID=E
2 See report on study of thedetainees and prisoners in Israeli
jails (Arabic language), inw w w. p a l i s s u e . c o m / v b /palestine14/issue20233.
3 See World Association of Arab
Translators and Linguists, Urgent
Appeal for releasing the prisoners
detained in Iraq prisons, 11
March
2010,
w w w. b r u s s e l l s t r i b u n a l . o r g /Prisoners110310.htm.
4 "Mothers of detainees plead with
officials to disclose place of theirsons' detention," Alwasat News,in Arabic language,www.alwasatnews.com/2939/
news/read/475969/1.html.
5 Report of the UN Working Groupon Arbitrary Detention: Visit to
Bahrain, E/CN.4/2002/77/Add.2,
5 March 2002, page 2.
6 "Death of a young man from
Saar, shot in the face yesterday
afternoon", Alwasat News, in
Arabiclanguage,
www.alwasatnews.com/3128/
news/read/535099/1.html.
7 Concluding Observations of theCommittee on the Rights of theChild: Bahrain, CRC/C/15/Add.
175 (2002), available atwww.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/
0/1888017232928146c1256b59
004e9cba?Opendocument.

HURIGHTS OSAKA Calendar

DE
AU
OSAKA

ST
PO

BUR
E

HURIGHTS OSAKA has published the report on its research project on analysis of Asian laws and court
decisions. The full report is now a book entitled Law, Jurisprudence and Human Rights in Asia. The
research project was supported by a grant from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner
for Human Rights.

JAPON

TAXE PERCUEPRINTED MATTERAIR MAIL

May be opened for inspection by the postal service.

HURIGHTS OSAKA, inspired by the Charter of the United Nations and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, formally opened in December 1994. lt has the following goals: 1) to promote human rights
in the Asia- Pacific region; 2) to convey Asia-Pacific perspectives on human rights to the international
community; 3) to ensure inclusion of human rights principles in Japanese international cooperative activities; and 4) to raise human rights awareness among the people in Japan in meeting its growing internationalization. In order to achieve these goals, HURIGHTS OSAKA has activities such as Information Handling, Research and Study, Education and Training, Publications, and Consultancy Services.
FOCUS Asia-Pacific is designed to highlight significant issues and activities relating to human rights in
the Asia-Pacific. Relevant information and articles can be sent to HURIGHTS OSAKA for inclusion in thenext editions of the newsletter.
FOCUS Asia-Pacific is edited by Osamu Shiraishi, Director of HURIGHTS OSAKA.
Sender:

HURIGHTS OSAKA(Asia-Pacific Human Rights Information Center)
3F, piaNPO, 2-8-24 Chikko Minato-ku Osaka 552-0021 Japan
Phone: (816)6577-3578
Fax: (816)6577-3583
E-mail: webmail@hurights.or.jp Web site: http://www.hurights.or.jp

HURIGHTS OSAKA