I have been invited to discuss the work of the Sub-committee on Human Rights and, specifically, to examine two issues, namely, the death penalty, which has been a long-standing concern of Amnesty International worldwide, and the broader issue of prisoners' rights, with which the organisation has been directly associated for many years.
It may be a useful exercise to place both issues in a broader context. Key current issues for Amnesty International are impunity with regard to the commission of human rights abuses, the lack of effective mechanisms for accountability and the increasing clampdown on human rights in the context of the war on terror. The issues of individual prisoners' rights and the death penalty fit into this broader context.
While Amnesty International acknowledges that we must confront the threat posed by terrorist groups, we must also resist the backlash against human rights created by the pursuit of a global security doctrine which has deeply divided the world. At the same time, we must address the failure of Governments and the international community to deliver on social and economic justice.
More than 1 billion people live in extreme poverty. The principle of the justiciability of economic, social and cultural rights is a central issue of the moment, both in Ireland and internationally, with particular emphasis being placed on the development of an optional protocol to the International Convention on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, the mechanism for individual complaint. In the struggle for economic social and cultural rights the achievement of real gender equality must be one of the main goals. Amnesty International is currently running a worldwide campaign to stop violence against women. One of the challenges we face is a belief that the battle for women's rights has already been won. We argue that millions of women live in poverty, are abused and suffer violence throughout the world and there is no real, effective challenge or remedy.
We need to focus not just on abuses of civil and political rights but also on abuses of economic, social and cultural rights such as poverty, the rights of children to education and the right to a decent standard of living consistent with human dignity. It is no longer possible to define abuses of human rights purely in terms of torture or the death penalty or even prisoners' rights, although these issues continue to be important to us.
Increasingly, the war on terror is used in countries such as China, Iraq, Colombia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the United States as a rationale for rolling back on commitments to standards such as the Geneva Conventions, the convention against torture and the entire principle of human rights protection.
Every year, 500,000 people are killed by conventional weapons which are, in effect, the real weapons of mass destruction. Economic globalisation is a reality. The challenge is to ensure that it is ethical and grounded in the human rights framework. Amnesty International's European Union office is engaged in discussions at EU level on globalisation and migration. Immigration restrictions across Europe have led to an explosion in trafficking of persons for the purposes of either sexual or labour exploitation and Ireland has been identified by the International Organisation for Migration as both a destination and transit country for the trafficking of both women and children. In discussing trafficking, we must be clear that we are not talking about moving people around to avoid immigration controls. I refer specifically to forced trafficking of people for the purposes of labour or sexual exploitation.
As a member of the United Nations human security network, Ireland is in a strong position to maintain and develop the idea that the goals of freedom from fear and want are mutually reinforcing. That is the context in which Amnesty International feels that the rights of the individual, the rights of prisoners, and the issue of the death penalty are situated.
Amnesty International recently produced statistics which show that almost 3,700 executions took place in 2004. However, 97% of those executions were carried out by four countries, namely, the United States, China, Vietnam and Cambodia. If we take China and the United States as two of the largest users of the death penalty, it is worth noting that while the guesstimated figure for China is 3,200, Amnesty International and other observers believe the real figure is probably much closer to 10,000. Very often in China, the death penalty is used after unfair trials where people do not have the right of appeal and where sometimes they are not even clearly informed of the crime with which they have been charged. The death penalty can be used for crimes as minor as fiddling income tax returns or forging VAT receipts.
In the United States last year, the 115th person was released from death row after the evidence was discredited. So, while last year 57 executions took place in the USA, it is important to note that 23 of those occurred in the state of Texas. Sometimes those convictions were based on forensic evidence which even the Texan legal authorities accept is discredited. In one case, investigators in the Houston police department discovered 280 boxes of evidence that had been incorrectly labelled. Even though there was a decision to impose death sentences based on this discredited evidence, the death penalty continues to be implemented.
In terms of where we focus our energy, China and the United States are two countries where Ireland has significant influence. The Taoiseach recently led the largest trade delegation in the history of the State to China. During the visit, he noted that the Chinese were dealing with human rights in their own way but he also referenced the fact that China was making progress on human rights. We urge the Government to use its increasing influence and positive relationship with the Chinese Government to emphasise the urgent call of the international community for human rights reform, in particular, concerning the death penalty.
Ireland has played a positive role in the campaign for global abolition of the death penalty. We congratulate the Government on the result of the referendum which finally removed all reference to the death penalty from the Constitution.
While I have emphasised the negative side in the United States, it is also worth noting two major steps forward. Ten years ago, I was part of a discussion in Ireland which recognised that there was almost nothing we could do about the death penalty because it was so entrenched in American public opinion and had such political support that it was irreversible. However, in the past year we have seen two major landmark decisions to remove the death penalty from the statute book for use on juveniles and people suffering from mental illness. Those were two black marks that had discredited the international reputation of the United States for many years.
While the global trend is towards abolition, now is not the time for complacency. We feel that Ireland, with its commitment to human rights in terms of its foreign policy and the work it has done to date — and particularly given its positive relations with the Chinese and United States governments — is in an ideal position to play the role of honest broker concerning the death penalty.
The issue of prisoners' rights brings us back to the war against terror and the clampdown on individuals' rights internationally. Amnesty International has identified a number of concerns that we would like to draw to the attention of the sub-committee. Under the umbrella of the war on terror, vague and broad definitions of terrorism have arisen, particularly relating to the EU framework decision and Ireland's implementation of it in the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act.
We are concerned about laws which permit incommunicado detention, laws permitting authorities to detain people without charge or trial, and using secret evidence and anonymous witnesses, as we have seen with detainees held at Belmarsh in the United Kingdom.
In China, we have seen where the war on terror has been used to clamp down on the Uighurs — a Moslem community in the south of China. Any moves to secure greater autonomy or to have their culture represented more clearly are treated as anti-state actions and terrorist offences.
In the UK, I have already mentioned the conditions endured by detainees in Belmarsh. In the United States we are familiar with the situation of prisoners in Guantanamo.
Ireland, however, is not clear of any concerns relating to the ill-treatment of prisoners. I would reference the findings of ill-treatment by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture in 2002, the lack of a statutory inspection and complaints system, and the long overdue prisons Bill.
I have already mentioned the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo but I would like to draw the sub-committee's attention to the sub-contracting of torture by the United States. Some cases have been highlighted of prisoners who are picked up in a third country and then taken by privately hired aeroplane to a country such as Syria for torture. Ireland has been put in the frame in that context. There is anecdotal evidence that a particular plane has been documented passing through Shannon. Amnesty International feels that this warrants further investigation. If the accusations are substantiated that this plane is passing through Shannon and taking prisoners for torture in a third country, Amnesty International feels this would put Ireland in breach of its obligations under the UN convention against torture. We feel this sub-committee might look further into that matter by trying to document the facts of the case.
As regards the broad treatment of prisoners, we feel there are a number of key non-negotiable principles, one of which is that of non-discrimination — that all prisoners should be treated equally before the law. In any case, prisoners should be free from torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Extradition procedures that fail to provide guarantees must respect international fair trial procedures and must not lead to the extradition of suspects to countries where they would be subjected to unfair trials or the death penalty.
In the case of Irish prisoners overseas, it is the Irish State's duty to represent their interests, defend their rights if they cannot do so themselves, and make the necessary representations on their behalf should their rights to a fair trial or in respect of their treatment while imprisoned be infringed. These rights are enshrined in the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. There have been numerous instances in the United States involving death penalty cases where the right of access to consular representation has been denied to non-national prisoners and has compromised their right to a fair trial.
Another concern we wish to draw to the attention of the sub-committee is the EU arrest warrant procedure, which has been implemented in Ireland by the European Arrest Warrant Act. At EU level, it has been mired in national difficulties because of the lack of trust in standards of criminal justice in other member states. In addition, the lack of common standards in the application of basic procedural safeguards in criminal proceedings is likely to lead to severe difficulties in the application of this process.
While Amnesty International does not object to the warrant in principle and recognises the need to combat transnational crimes, such as trafficking, Amnesty International emphasises the need to establish and maintain consistently high standards across the EU.
As regards solutions, Amnesty International has put a number of recommendations on the table. The rights-based approach is a new concept in human rights terms where, instead of preaching from the outside, Amnesty International would like key players in society — such as Government Departments, policy makers and members of the business community — to use the human rights framework as a way of creating policy and practice, and making decisions that will really deliver on human rights protection.
A key step in controlling the international arms trade is the international arms trade treaty. We also urge the Government to speedily ratify the domestic legislation for the establishment of the International Criminal Court. While Ireland has signed up to it, and nominated a judge, the Government has not brought forward the necessary domestic legislation, which is a priority.
