Press release of the Inter-Parliamentary Union
Beijing, 21 September 1996
N° 7

IPU COUNCIL ENDS BEIJING IPU MEETINGS

The Inter-Parliamentary Council, the governing body of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), concluded its 159th session in Beijing today. It took a series of decisions regarding the future work of the IPU and also adopted reports from the various committees which had met in Beijing during the 96th Inter-Parliamentary Conference. These concerned human rights of parliamentarians, international humanitarian law, the situations in the Middle East and Cyprus, women parliamentarians, and security and co-operation in the Mediterranean.

HUMAN RIGHTS OF MPs

The Chairman of the IPU's Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians, Mr Nicos Anastasiades (Cyprus), reported to the Council on the public cases of 109 MPs in 13 countries whose basic rights to freedom of speech and action have been violated because of arbitrary measures taken against them.

Mr Anastasiades, after having gone through all these cases before the Council meeting, appealed to all parliamentarians present to "extend your active support to those of your fellow parliamentarians whose human rights are under threat, or may have been violated. It is not only our duty to do so, but also it is in our interests. It is them today. It could be us tomorrow."

The Committee's work is normally carried out in private and cases are only made public in response to a lack of progress in solving them by governments and parliaments. (A summary of the public cases is contained in the annex of this communique.)

WOMEN PARLIAMENTARIANS

Mrs Wang Suxhian (China) reported to the Council on the results of the Meeting of Women Parliamentarians that had taken place on the eve of the 96th Inter-Parliamentary Conference. She said that the women parliamentarians had held a "thorough and absorbing debate" on the question of follow-up to the Beijing Platform for Action of the 1995 IVth World Conference on Women, and had demonstrated their real commitment one year after the Women's Conference to implement its results.

She also said the women parliamentarians had debated the issue of women as victims of poverty and extreme poverty and as key actors in its eradication. "The UN declared the decade 1996-2007 to be the decade for the eradication of poverty, but I fear that the work to be done may take us much more than just one decade," Mrs Wang said.

On the question of women's participation in politics -- women only occupy an average of 10% of parliamentary seats world-wide -- Mrs Wang said women parliamentarians can make a "decisive contribution to the well-being of our societies".

"We should progressively be associated in far greater numbers in the elaboration of national policies and legislation. We also feel that more women should be in responsible positions in our governments, our parliaments and our political parties. In fact, the IPU has already stated that it sees this as a matter of democracy."

Later in the debate, Mrs Najma Heptulla, Deputy Chairman of Rajya Sabha, said that the Indian Parliament would host from 14 to 18 February 1997, in New Delhi, a specialized IPU Conference on "Towards Partnership between Men and Women in Politics". She encouraged an equal participation of men and women in that Conference.

Mrs Wang said that the question of the sexual exploitation of children would be the main topic for the next meeting of women parliamentarians, in Seoul, South Korea, in April 1997.

MIDDLE EAST

The Council endorsed a report of the IPU Committee on Middle East questions which had met during the Beijing Conference, and which had for the first time brought together, face-to-face, representatives of Israel and of the Palestine National Council. Also present at the meeting were representatives of Egypt and Jordan. The Committee regretted however, that the Syrian delegation had declined the invitation to attend its meeting and express its views on progress in the peace process in the Middle East.

According to the Committee's report, the representative of Palestine expressed his disappointment that since the change of government in Israel, "in reality, there was no progress in the peace process". In fact, "the government of Israel was slow to honour the provisions of the agreement reached between the two sides" and he mentioned in particular "delays in freeing prisoners, redeploying the Israeli forces from Hebron and ensuring safe passage between Gaza and the West Bank".

"The Israeli representatives affirmed that Israel was committed to peace," according to the report. "Peace and security went together and therefore it was inevitable that attacks on the Israeli people by extremist Palestinian groups would affect the peace process. Because of the desire of the Israeli people to achieve peace and security, the government had to go step by step towards peace and take stock after each step."

The Committee expressed the hope that the two delegations would meet more often and discuss as partners ways to promote the peace process, and the Council felt the meeting was a "significant step in the IPU's efforts to promote dialogue between parties and promote peace in the Middle East". The Committee noted also that all the delegations had firmly denounced terrorism which they felt was aimed at derailing the peace process.

SECURITY AND CO-OPERATION IN THE MEDITERRANEAN

Representatives of the coastal states around the Mediterranean met in Beijing to look at future steps to promote security and co-operation in the Mediterranean. According to the report presented to the Council, the participants stressed the positive developments which had taken place in recent years, especially under the impetus of the IPU. They also stressed that pending the establishment of autonomous intergovernmental and inter-parliamentary mechanisms for security and co-operation in the Mediterranean (as suggested by the last CSCM in 1995), the IPU continues to provide the most appropriate parliamentary framework since all Mediterranean partners are represented in it on an equal footing.

The parties to the CSCM process -- the Conference on Security and Co-operation in the Mediterranean -- decided to open up the process to the parliaments of non-coastal States whose economic, political and strategic life is directly linked to the Mediterranean. The parliaments of Jordan and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia were therefore admitted to the process, bringing to 24 the number of main CSCM participants who regularly meet at IPU Conferences; the process also involves associate participants.

Preparations for the IIIrd CSCM, to be held in Tunis in 1999, were pursued as well as for the first preparatory meeting for this Conference in Monaco in July 1997. The topic for this meeting will be "Adjustment of national employment policies and strengthening of international co-operation in the field in the Mediterranean, with a view to development which generates jobs as a way of strengthening regional stability".

CYPRUS

The Council took note of the report of the IPU Committee to monitor the situation in Cyprus and adopted its recommendations. (The delegation of Turkey objected to some parts of the report.) The Committee had met during the Beijing Conference and had conducted hearings of the representatives of the two Cypriot communities and of two of the three Guarantor Powers (Turkey and United Kingdom); Greece was unable to be represented owing to pending legislative elections.

The report said the Committee had reviewed recent events in Cyprus, in particular those of 11 and 14 August 1996 in the UN buffer zone separating the two communities where clashes during a demonstration had led to the killing of two Greek-Cypriots, followed by the killing on 8 September of a Turkish-Cypriot soldier in the cease-fire line.

The Council urged the authorities of the two communities and the Government of Turkey to "conduct without delay the necessary in-depth investigations and promptly bring to justice all those suspected of being directly or indirectly responsible for the series of events in question".

The Council also appealed to the parties to "do everything in their power to find a mutually acceptable formula" so that a dialogue between military leaders could take place "as soon as possible", as had been proposed by the United States in July 1996.

The Council also reiterated its appeal to the parties to reach agreements on a series of confidence-building measures that the UN Secretary-General has proposed. In the report, the Committee said it is "convinced that measures to establish progressively the right of freedom of movement across the buffer zone, in particular for family reunion, and measures to re-establish telephone and postal communications -- apart from reflecting a common commitment to respect a fundamental principle of human rights -- would contribute decisively to reducing tension, facilitate the two Communities' knowledge of each other and hence mutual respect and, rather than hindering the process of political negotiation, would effectively sustain it. Keeping the buffer zone watertight is not acceptable, no matter what justifications are advanced."

It also appealed to the leaders of the two communities to resume their suspended proximity talks in the buffer zone on political issues "as quickly as possible".

The report noted the increase in the number of mediators in the Cyprus issue, saying this fact "constitutes an opportunity for the settlement of the Cyprus question, but only to the extent that the mediators ensure that their efforts dovetail with those of the UN Secretary-General; otherwise, this increase could on the contrary add to the difficulties".

Moreover, the report said, "negotiations preceding consideration of Cyprus' request for affiliation to the European Union provide a unique opportunity to settle the Cyprus problem, provided that they take full account of the interests of the two Communities and are consistent with the principles of the United Nations and its recommendations regarding Cyprus".

INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW

The Council took note of the report of the IPU's ad hoc Committee to promote respect for international humanitarian law (IHL), established one year ago to encourage parliaments to contribute to ensuring respect for the rules of IHL. It presented to the Council the first results of the world enquiry which it is conducting on parliamentary action to ensure national application of IHL and on the question of anti-personnel mines.

The world survey is on the production, stockpiling, transfer and use of anti-personnel mines, and on prohibition of certain types of anti-personnel mines, destruction of stockpiles and mine clearance. It also covers ratification of all IHL instruments, the question of parliamentary bodies existing to deal with IHL and anti-personnel mines, the establishing of an international penal tribunal, and action to educate military and civilian personnel on IHL rules, as well as to incorporate in penal codes, whether military or civil, IHL principles and rules.

The Council decided that the enquiry should be finalized over the next 12 months and called on all parliaments which have not yet done so to send in their replies to the IPU.

ELECTIONS TO IPU EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

The Council elected Mr Gustavo Carvajal Moreno (Mexico) and Mrs Toujan Faisal (Jordan) to replace, respectively, Mrs H. Castillo de Lopez (Venezuela) and Mrs F. Kéfi (Tunisia), whose terms had expired. Moreover, the Council elected Mr D. Novelli (Italy) to replace Mr R. Riz (Italy), who is no longer a member of parliament.

NEXT IPU CONFERENCE

The next Inter-Parliamentary Conference, the 97th, will be held in Seoul, South Korea, from 10 to 15 April 1997. The Council chose the following two subjects to be debated by parliamentarians at the Seoul Conference:

• "Co-operation for world and regional peace and stability as well as for respect for all forms of the sovereignty and independence of States"
• "Measures required to change consumption and production patterns with a view to sustainable development"

ANNEX: SUMMARY OF PUBLIC HUMAN RIGHTS CASES

Albania (1 MP): This is the case of Mr Fatos Nano, former Prime Minister of Albania, who is currently serving a prison term for falsification of official documents and embezzlement of State funds in favour of a third person in connection with emergency aid delivered by Italy to Albania in 1991. The Committee is concerned at the allegation that the authorities may consider claiming from Mr Nano the sum of 7.2 million Lek that he allegedly embezzled, although the case against the third person was dismissed. It noted that Mr Nano is now allowed to have regular contact with his lawyers but it remains concerned that his prosecution may have been based on political considerations, neglecting elementary standards of fair trial. The Committee also noted that Mr Nano has not yet availed himself of his right to request a review of his trial under Albania's new penal code and strongly urges him to make use of this right.

Burundi (31 MPs): The Committee is dealing with two cases in Burundi: the first concerns four members of Parliament who were assassinated in 1994 and 1995 -- their killers enjoying total impunity; the second case concerns 27 parliamentarians, some of whom have suffered assassination attempts, and all are currently in hiding or exile abroad following the coup d'etat which took place in Burundi on 25 July this year. The Committee condemned the suspension of the National Assembly of Burundi and demanded that the right of the parliamentarians concerned to exercise their mandates be immediately restored.

Cambodia (6 MPs): The first case concerns Mr. Sam Rainsy, a prominent critic of the Government. He was stripped of his parliamentary seat on being expelled from his party, although is no provision in Cambodian law to justify such an act. Moreover, Mr Rainsy has been prevented from exercising his right to have his case heard by an independent and impartial court, mainly because the Constitutional Court has not yet been established. The Committee noted with satisfaction that the law establishing the Court has meanwhile been adopted and expressed the hope that it would soon be operational. It remains concerned at the fact that the Khmer Nation Party, which Mr Rainsy set up, is refused official recognition, and the Committee wishes to ascertain the legal grounds for this.

The other Cambodian case concerns five members of the Buddhist Liberal Democratic Party who are under the threat of expulsion from parliament on similar grounds as those invoked in the case of Mr Rainsy. Moreover, at a party congress convened in October 1995 by Son San, the founder of the party, a grenade was thrown injuring many people. Although the Government pledged to conduct thorough investigations, no result seems to have been obtained so far.

Colombia (8 MPs): The first case concerns six members of the Colombian parliament who have all been assassinated and whose deaths have not been clarified, even though some date back as much as 10 years. While there has been some progress in one case, the Committee is concerned at what appears to be a lack of determination to conclude the investigations and apprehend the suspected killers. The Committee also expressed its concern at renewed death threats against members of the Colombian Congress, particularly regarding two other MPs whose cases are currently before the Committee.

Gambia (3 MPs): The first case concerns Mr Lamin War Juwara, a member of the dissolved parliament, who was arrested in October 1995 and has since disappeared. Repeated calls to the authorities for information and co-operation have so far met with no response at all. A second case also involves two members of the dissolved parliament, Mr Mamadou Cadi Cham and Mr Omar Jallow, who were also arrested in October 1995. They are allegedly detained without any charges having been brought against them. The Committee expressed its concern for the safety and well-being of the three MPs and requests the Gambian authorities to provide information on their situation and health, on the reasons for their detention and prospects for their release.

Guatemala (1 MP): This case concerns Mr Amílcar Mendez, who has received several death threats, most recently on 10 April this year. The following day masked men broke into his home and attacked Mr Mendez's daughter who was alone at the time. The Congress of Guatemala has adopted a resolution condemning the violence against Mr Mendez and his daughter and demanding an investigation and adequate protection for him and his family. The Committee urged that a judicial investigation be carried out and expressed its concern that it had not received any information that such investigations are underway. It also called for Mr Mendez and his family to receive adequate protection.

Honduras (1 MP): This case concerns a member of the Honduran Congress, Mr Miguel Salazar, who was assassinated in January 1988. Ever since then the Committee has been examining his case, and with growing concern because there has been very little information to indicate that any serious effort has been undertaken by the authorities to shed light on his assassination. Following recent intervention by the Honduran Congress, it now appears that efforts are being made to arrive at the truth, and that the criminal investigation department has launched a new investigation into the murder. The Committee also reiterated its concern that Mr Salazar's family receive adequate material compensation -- which still is not the case.

Indonesia (2 MPs): The first case concerns Mr Sukatno whose case has been before the Committee since 1991 and whose situation remains unchanged. At its previous session in Istanbul in April, the Council once again appealed to the President of the Republic of Indonesia to release Mr Sukatno, in view of his age, the long years he has spent in prison, and his declining health. As there has been no answer, the Committee reiterated its appeal to release Mr Sukatno because of such compelling humanitarian grounds. (The delegation of Indonesia expressed its objection to the resolution on this case.)

The second case concerns Sri Bintang Pamungkas, an outspoken critic of the Government, who lost his parliamentary mandate because his party "recalled" him. Moreover, in May 1996, Sri Bintang was sentenced to almost three years' imprisonment for allegedly calling President Suharto a dictator. A previous charge under "crimes against State security" had to be dropped for lack of evidence. The Committee expressed the fear that this may denote a deliberate attempt to have him prosecuted. It also expressed concern at the allegation of serious flaws in the trial, for example the use of tape-recordings which is forbidden under Indonesian law. (The Committee requested the IPU Secretary General, who will travel to Indonesia after the IPU meetings in Beijing, to take this opportunity to gather information on all relevant aspects of these cases, and requested the Indonesian authorities to kindly agree to such a mission.) (The delegation of Indonesia welcomed the idea that the IPU Secretary General would discuss the Indonesian cases during his upcoming visit.)

Myanmar (29 MPs): The first case concerns those MPs who were elected to parliament in 1990 and subsequently arrested. The Committee reaffirmed its indignation that over six years later, the authorities of Myanmar continue to disregard the outcome of the elections. It also said that the National Convention can in no way be considered a step towards democracy. Moreover, the Committee said it remains concerned at the re-arrest of MPs-elect in connection with the party congress convened last May by Aung San Suu Kyi. The Committee said it also remains extremely concerned at the prison conditions, reports of inhuman and degrading treatments, prolonged shackling and lack of proper medical care which may have led to the death in August of one MP-elect imprisoned since 1991. The Committee said it could only conclude from the refusal of the Myanmar authorities to authorize an on-site mission, that the conditions of detention of the MPs concerned are too bad.

The second case concerns two of the MPs-elect arrested in 1991 who were released the following year but were subsequently re-arrested in 1994 for having been in contact with foreigners and provided information and made comments which were critical of the government. They were sentenced to seven years' imprisonment for endangering state security. The Committee said it fails to see how the charges could possibly stand, and urged all members of the IPU to take urgent action in support of all the members of the elected Parliament of Myanmar who are still in detention.

Nigeria (7 MPs): This case concerns members of the Nigerian Parliament who were arrested after parliament was dissolved in the November 1993 coup. Six of the MPs were subsequently released on bail. The very serious charges which were originally brought against five of them have been withdrawn and the cases closed, although they have all been warned not to criticize the government in future. However, another MP had to go into exile for fear of his life and the case reportedly remains open against him, while the seventh parliamentarian, although released, has been forced to go into hiding. The Committee said it would pursue its examination of these cases.

Togo (3 MPs): This case concerns Mr Atidepe, Mr Amorin and Mr Edeh, three parliamentarians who were assassinated between 1992 and 1994. While for many years the Committee was assured by the authorities that investigations were being carried out, the Committee has only recently been informed that in fact the investigations into these murders have been closed because of an amnesty law for political and politically motivated crimes, adopted in late 1994. The Committee expressed its regret that, as a result, the truth will not be established in these three cases and justice will not be rendered. The Committee also demanded adequate compensation for the families of the victims, for which a legal and institutional framework must be established. The Committee welcomed the fact that the Togolese delegation present in Beijing indicated that all the political factions in its parliament will ensure that the necessary initiatives are taken to this end. The Committee also expressed its sincere hope that this could be achieved and that compensation would be paid before the next IPU Conference in Seoul, in April 1997.

Tunisia (1 MP): The case concerns Mr Khemaïs Chammari, an opposition member of the Tunisian Parliament. On 17 July 1996, he was sentenced to five years' imprisonment on account of having circulated an investigation record in a matter affecting the country's external security. On 29 August, the Cassation Court upheld the sentence. Mr Chammari is said to have sent to a third party by fax a secret record of the preliminary investigation file regarding the case of Mr Mouadda, who is President of Mr Chammari's party. The only piece of evidence transmitted to the Committee was a fax cover page carrying no indication of the documents annexed. The Committee said, therefore, that it was unable to regard it as proof of the transmission of a secret document. The Committee also expressed its concern at the conditions of imprisonment of Mr Chammari, although it noted with great satisfaction that they had improved following the intervention of the President of the Chamber of Deputies. It also said it was very grateful to the Tunisian delegation in Beijing for having made itself available -- through a member of the governing party and a member of Mr Chammari's party -- who both provided information to the Committee. It requested the Tunisian authorities to kindly receive an on-site mission to gather detailed information on all aspects of the case, both from the competent authorities and from Mr Chammari and his defence counsel. (The delegation of Tunisia expressed its opposition to the Committee's views on this case.)

Turkey (16 MPs): These cases concern the former Turkish parliamentarians of Kurdish origin which, the Committee said, are at a virtual standstill. The first case concerns 15 former parliamentarians, and the Committee had hoped that the four MPs currently serving their sentences might be released pending the procedure before the European Commission on Human Rights, to which their cases have been referred. The Turkish authorities have stated that this request cannot be satisfied -- which the Committee noted with deep regret. It recalled that other parliamentary organization have also called for the release of these four prisoners and still hopes that the Turkish authorities will release them, for example by way of an amnesty bill. It further expressed concern at the re-arrest of Mr Sakik and at his prosecution under the Anti-Terrorism Law, and said it fails to understand how the incriminated statement may be considered to be separatist propaganda.

As regards the case of Mr Ibrahim Aksoy, who has received several sentences under the Anti-Terrorism Law, the Committee expressed its fear that he may have been prosecuted merely on account of having exercised his right to freedom of speech, and that any proceedings under way against him may result in debarring him from any further political activity.