The Governing Council of the Inter-Parliamentary Union,

Having before it the case of Mr. Talib Al Mamari, a member of the Majlis A’shura of Oman, which has been examined by the Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians pursuant to the Procedure for the examination and treatment of complaints (Annex I of the revised rules and practices),

Taking into account the letters from the Chairman of the Majlis A’Shura, the last one dated 9 September 2014, the information provided at the hearing held on 14 October 2014 with the Omani delegation to the 131st IPU Assembly, and the information regularly provided by the complainants,

Considering the following facts regarding Mr. Al Mamari’s arrest, prosecution and sentencing:

• Mr. Al Mamari was arrested, with the prosecutorial authorities invoking flagrante delicto, which application is contested by the complainants, on 24 August 2013 in connection with his participation in a demonstration on 22 August 2013;

• He was convicted on 10 October 2013 and sentenced to a seven-year prison term and a fine of 1,000 riyals for impairing the honour of the State, disturbing public order and obstructing traffic; in this regard, the court verdict states that Mr. Al Mamari was convicted of inciting unrest by “inciting people of Liwa to demonstrate in front of Sohar Industrial Port” and deliberately spreading biased reports violating the dignity of the State because he “intentionally spread tendentious news that could impair the honour of the country”.  On the latter crime, court documents illustrate that more specifically, Mr. Al Mamari impaired the honour of the country by giving the Government a deadline to respond to the demonstrators’ demands, and threatening to demonstrate further – ready to die if need be – should no government response be forthcoming; Mr. Al Mamari and his lawyers rejected the conclusions of the first instance ruling, objecting to both its form and substance, and filed an appeal;

• Mr. Al Mamari was released on bail on 11 October 2013 pending the appeal, but re-arrested later that same day on charges that he was responsible for incitement during Friday prayers at the mosque;

• Mr. Al Mamari’s verdict was upheld in a Court of Appeals on 16 December 2013, which reduced his sentence to a four-year prison term and a 500-riyal fine after merging the sentences for the multiple crimes of which he was convicted;

• In February 2014, the Supreme Court overturned the decision against Mr. Al Mamari, due to a procedural error, ruling a retrial in the Court of Liwa – the location of the alleged crime – as opposed to the Court in Muscat;

• The retrial nevertheless took place once again in Muscat, according to the Omani delegation, at the hearing held on 14 October 2014, because of “security concerns” and given that the Supreme Court’s decision to transfer the case to Liwa had subsequently been effectively challenged in court;

• On 6 August 2014, the court in Muscat found Mr. Al Mamari guilty of the charges and sentenced him to a four-year prison term and 700-riyal fine. The judge ruled that Mr. Al Mamari could be released on bail for the amount of 10,000 riyals; Mr. Al Mamari appealed and is awaiting the verdict, which may be handed down at the next hearing scheduled for 25 October 2014;

• Following the payment of bail, Mr. Al Mamari remains in detention, however, due to the investigation pending against him in connection with the allegations of incitement during Friday prayers at the mosque,

• The demonstrations in which Mr. Al Mamari participated were peaceful and were held in protest against pollution in Liwa; the demands of the demonstrators were not political, as they merely requested the Government to protect the health of Liwa inhabitants affected by the pollution; according to the complainants, Mr. Al Mamari was arrested and sentenced for exercising his freedom of peaceful assembly; they underscore that many people reported that he attended the demonstration as a mediator and was carrying out his duty as a member of parliament, concerned by popular demands; the complainants also affirm that a video provided by the authorities that allegedly implicated Mr. Al Mamari as inciting violence during the protest was clearly modified and edited, and that the footage of children throwing rocks was in fact of a separate event that had occurred on a different occasion;

• On 23 August 2013, Mr. Al Mamari held meetings with other parliamentarians and security authorities about the protests and the security forces’ response. At the end of the meeting, Mr. Al Mamari returned to his brother’s house, where he was staying after being injured by the police intervention in the demonstration. Mr. Al Mamari was arrested by security forces after they raided his brother’s house in the early hours of 24 August 2013;

• In the course of the demonstrations, members of the security forces fired tear gas and used water cannons to disperse the crowd and Mr. Al Mamari was among those injured by the violent police intervention; the Chairman of the Majlis A’Shura noted in his letter of 6 March 2014, however, that the Majlis could not review the medical report on injuries of the citizens concerned, as none had lodged official complaints; however, according to the Chairman, members of the Majlis did not notice any injuries requiring medical treatment on the day following the event,

• Mr. Al Mamari’s colleagues in Parliament had advised him not to take to the streets and to use instead his powers in Parliament to plead his cause;

• The region of Liwa had benefited from large-scale investments which had been very beneficial to the people.  While there may have been some pollution, the Government ensured that acceptable limits were not exceeded and five ministers had gone to the area to set such limits; if there was any serious concern about pollution the Parliament would have been the first to know about it and to adopt a critical position,

• One of the complainants states that, in the period preceding the first appeal, Mr. Al Mamari had been held in solitary confinement in a national security detention centre, without his lawyer being able to access his client, and that Mr. Al Mamari was tried at first instance by an inimical judge closely associated with the prosecution;

• In his letter of 12 January 2014, the Chairman of the Majlis A’shura noted that Mr. Al Mamari was convicted in the first instance court in a public hearing, with his lawyer in attendance and with full access to evidence and that Mr. Al Mamari’s lawyer was also present during the appeal proceedings. The Chairman concluded by explaining that, in his view, all measures taken were legal and did not violate any provision. In his letter dated 6 March 2014, the Chairman remarked that Mr. Al Mamari was being treated properly by the prison authorities, detained with others, and allowed to receive visits. The Chairman attached a document from the Governor of the Central Prison where Mr. Al Mamari was detained detailing the list of Mr. Al Mamari’s visitors, including the dates of their visits and their relationship to Mr. Al Mamari; the Deputy Chairman of the Majlis A’shura, at the hearing held with the Committee on 17 March 2014, confirmed this information and added that Mr. Al Mamari was even in charge of leading Muslim prayers with other inmates, that other members of parliament had the right to visit him and had done so;

• The Deputy Chairman of the Majlis A’shura stated at the aforesaid hearing that Mr. Al Mamari’s trial had been carried out according to due process and that he had been allowed to present a strong defence; he also stated that the Majlis A’Shura had closely monitored proceedings, including through the presence of a trial observer,

Considering that, on 9 May 2014, one of the complainants expressed alarm over the arrest and detention of three individuals – at least one of which was a relative of Mr. Al Mamari – allegedly apprehended for publicly defending Mr. Al Mamari and calling for his release. These arrests were confirmed by the other complainant, with the nephew of Mr. Al Mamari having reportedly been detained for 67 days,

Considering that the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association conducted a mission to Oman between 8 and 13 September 2014 and that he was not permitted to meet with Mr. Al Mamari; considering that in the preliminary findings of his mission, released in a statement on 13 September 2014, the Special Rapporteur:

• Voiced concerns over the limiting of freedom of assembly and association rights and a “pervasive culture of silence and fear affecting anyone who wants to speak and work for reforms in Oman”;

• Stated that he had spoken with many people who reported having been arrested or detained without due process and subject to intimidation and torture for asserting their rights;

• Stated that, although the right to peaceful assembly was guaranteed in Omani Basic law, the caveat that this must be “within the limits of the law” was applied in a manner often leading to the annulment of the essence of such rights;

• Expressed concern regarding the response of the public authorities to protests, where he received reports of arbitrary arrest and excessive force and concern about reported reprisals against human rights activists and bloggers, and highlighted the arrests and imprisonment of individuals allegedly for expressing dissenting views online,

Taking note of the invitation which the Omani delegation to the 131st IPU Assembly extended to the Committee to visit Oman to enhance its understanding of the issues which have arisen in the case, including the specific cultural and historical context in which they have to be seen,

1. Thanks the Chairman of the Majlis A’Shura and the Omani delegation for their cooperation and the information they have provided; 

2. Is concerned about the serious allegation that Mr. Al Mamari was prosecuted and convicted on the basis of charges which may have infringed his legitimate right to freedom of assembly; wishes to receive a copy of the first-instance ruling in the retrial as well as a copy of the evidence, including videos and testimonies, that the court has relied on in support of his conviction; wishes also to receive a copy of the legal document regarding the decision to overturn the original order by the Supreme Court for the retrial to take place in Liwa;

3. Trusts that the appeal court will issue an exemplary ruling that takes due account of Mr. Al Mamari’s basic human rights; wishes to receive a copy of the ruling on appeal as soon as it becomes available;

4. Is concerned about the allegation that three individuals were the subject of reprisals for publicly raising concern about the case of Mr. Al Mamari; wishes to receive the official views on this matter;

5. Wishes also to receive official documentation on the legal and factual grounds in support of the accusation that Mr. Al Mamari’s speech at the mosque during Friday prayers amounted to incitement; wishes to be informed of the stage reached in the legal proceedings in this matter;

6. Notes the discrepancies between the information provided by the authorities and the complainants with regard to the allegations of use of disproportionate force by law enforcement officers during the demonstrations; wishes to receive specific information from the complainants about whether or not those who were reportedly injured submitted official complaints to the relevant authorities in this regard;

7. Welcomes the invitation extended by the Omani delegation for a Committee delegation to visit Oman; considers that such a visit would provide an excellent opportunity to exchange views, in a spirit of dialogue and openness, with the parliamentary, judicial and executive authorities, the complainants and relevant third parties, and to acquire a better understanding of the issues that have arisen in the case, including their legal, historical and cultural context; underscores that it is of primary importance that the delegation also meet with Mr. Al Mamari himself;

8. Requests the Secretary General to make the necessary arrangements for the visit to take place in the very near future and to convey this decision to the parliamentary authorities, the complainants and any third party likely to be in a position to assist with the preparation of the visit;

9. Requests the Committee to continue examining this case and to report back to it in due course.

---

Note: you can download a complete electronic version of the brochure "Results of the 131th Assembly and related meetings of the Inter-Parliamentary Union" in PDF format (file size 1026 Kb). This version requires Adobe Acrobat Reader, which you can download free of charge.

HOME PAGEIPU ASSEMBLYMAIN AREAS OF ACTIVITYIPU STRUCTURE AND DOCUMENTS