Saudi Action against ‘Tweeter’ a potential abuse of Interpol

February 10 2012

Spokespeople of the Malaysian Police have today confirmed that Saudi newspaper journalist Hamza Kashgari “was detained at the airport upon arrival following a request made to us by Interpol after the Saudi authorities applied for it” (source: AFP). Kashgari is accused of insulting the Prophet Mohammed and clerics want him to be charged with the religious offence of apostasy, an offence punishable by death.

Fair Trials International’s Chief Executive, Jago Russell, said:

“Interpol should be playing no part in Saudi Arabia’s pursuit of Hamza Kashgari, however unwise his comments on Twitter. If an Interpol red notice is the reason for his arrest and detention it would be a serious abuse of this powerful international body that is supposed to respect basic human rights (including to peaceful free speech) and to be barred from any involvement in religious or political cases.”

Fair Trials International calls on Interpol to stand by its obligations to fundamental human rights and to comply with its obligation not to play any part in this case, which is clearly of a religious nature.

For more information please contact Fair Trials International on +44 (0)20 7822 2370 or +44 (0)7950 849 851
________________________________________
Notes to Editors

1. Fair Trials International is a human rights charity that provides assistance to people arrested in a country other than their own and campaigns for reform to fight the underlying causes of injustice in cross-border cases.

2. Hamzi Kashgari is a 23-year-old newspaper columnist, who fled his native Saudi Arabia when he posted a controversial tweet on the prophet’s birthday that sparked more than 30,000 responses and several death threats.

3. Interpol

Interpol is an association, based in Lyon, France, which facilitates cooperation between national police forces. It has a membership of 190 countries and is open to dictatorship and democracy alike. It is the second largest global entity after the United Nations. It has a budget of over €59 million. Interpol’s constitution prohibits involvement in “all matters having a political, religious, or racial character.” The constitution also requires Interpol to act “in the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights”.
Interpol is best known for issuing ‘red notices’. A red notice is an alert requested by a member state indicating that it seeks an individual’s provisional arrest. Once a notice is disseminated, other members can choose to act, or not act, on that notice. However, many countries automatically arrest and extradite anyone with a red notice against them. Even if one country decides not to arrest someone subject to a red notice, travel across international borders is usually impossible, due to the risk that an arrest will happen at an airport or other international border. Even if a state decides not to extradite a subject after arrest on a red notice, he or she could spend weeks or months in detention awaiting the outcome of such a decision. A red notice can have other consequences. Subjects’ bank accounts may be frozen or closed, or they may find it impossible to open a new account, or to obtain or keep employment. They often find that applications for travel visas, loans or other lines of credit are refused, because of the existence of the red notice. Red notices are growing in use: over 6,000 were issued in 2010.

4. Accountability

Despite the major human impact of red notices, there is no court or other independent forum in which a person can challenge a notice against them. Domestic courts have historically refused to adjudicate claims against Interpol, and many have granted it formal immunity from claims. No international or administrative court has been expressly given jurisdiction over its actions.

Individuals subject to a red notice can only challenge it via an internal Interpol Commission called the “Committee for the Control of Interpol’s Files”. The Commission’s decisions are also non-binding on the General Secretariat – there are simply recommendations that can be overturned by Interpol’s members in the General Assembly. There is no transparent process for dealing with grievances or disputes, no right to a public hearing, and no mode of appeal against decisions of Interpol. This leaves a person with no remedy against Interpol even where loss and damage have been suffered as a result of wrongful refusals to remove notices when these have been issued unlawfully or when Interpol has suffered as a result of wrongful refusals to remove notices when these have been issued unlawfully or when Interpol has refused to remove or correct false information contained in them.

For more information on FTI’s concerns about Interpol and other cases of injustice click here.