Radio Nizkor

Documentos de audio sobre Estado de Excepción y Derechos Humanos
Audio documents on State of Exception and Human Rights


Tras los dramáticos sucesos del 11 de septiembre, muchas de las más representativas democracias han adoptado una serie de medidas que, bajo el manto de la "seguridad", están socavando las bases del estado de derecho tal cual lo conocemos. "De manera inusitadamente rápida, ha surgido todo un abanico de poderes de emergencia basados en el concepto de 'excepciones' y que tienen por finalidad poner a disposición de los dirigentes políticos y otros funcionarios públicos un marco legislativo que les permita actuar por fuera de las instituciones constitucionales y representativas ordinarias. Tal vez sea Carl Schmitt...el teórico más preeminente de la 'excepción': la 'excepción' es el poder que tiene el soberano para tomar decisiones en función de sus deseos políticos, en lugar de verse supeditado al derecho normativo...' En este contexto, la emergencia de ciertos aspectos del 'estado de excepción' debiera ser motivo de preocupación para los defensores de los derechos políticos fundamentales". [ESL/SPA]
Kanishka Jayasuriya, Ciencias Políticas, City University of Hong Kong

The dramatic events of September 11, 2001 have ramifications for the nature of global governance as well as the institutions of liberal democracy. The most representative democracies have adopted a series of measures that, under the guise of "security" undermine the basis of the rule of law as we know it. "In surprisingly short order, a broad set of emergency powers based on the concept of 'exceptions' has emerged to offer political leaders and other public officials a legislative framework for acting outside normal constitutional and representative institutions. Carl Schmitt, ..., is perhaps the most pre-eminent theorist of the exception: 'exception' is the capacity of the sovereign to make decisions in terms of its political will rather than be constrained by normative 'law'. In this context, the emergence of certain aspects of a 'state of exception' should be a cause for concern for those interested in the protection of fundamental political rights." [ENG]
Kanishka Jayasuriya, Political Science, City University of Hong Kong

Read full document in English


April 2014

Fichero AudioEU - The Court of Justice of the EU declares the Data Retention Directive to be invalid. Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the American University Washington College of Law, 23Apr14.

On April 8th, 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that the mass storage of telecommunications data violates the fundamental rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data.

The EU Data Retention Directive compelled telephone and Internet companies to retain traffic and location data as well as related data necessary to identify the subscriber or user for the purpose of the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crime, such as, in particular, organised crime and terrorism.

The European Court of Justice had to issue a preliminary ruling concerning the validity of Directive 2006/24/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006. The request addressed to the European Court has its origin in a case triggered in Ireland by Digital Rights Ireland. The Court joined this case with another request made by the Austrian Constitutional Court concerning the compatibility with the Federal Constitutional Law of the law transposing Directive 2006/24 into Austrian national law.

The Court has found that data retention entails a wide ranging and particularly serious interference with the fundamental right to privacy... "The Court observes first of all that the data to be retained makes it possible, in particular :

  • to know the identity of the person with whom a subscriber or registered user has communicated and by what means,
  • to identify the time of the communication as well as the place from which that communication took place and
  • to know the frequency of the communications of the subscriber or registered user with certain persons during a given period."

"Those data, taken as a whole, may provide very precise information on the private lives of the persons whose data are retained, such as the habits of everyday life, permanent or temporary places of residence, daily or other movements, activities carried out, social relationships and the social environments frequented."

"The Court takes the view that, by requiring the retention of those data and by allowing the competent national authorities to access those data, the directive interferes in a particularly serious manner with the fundamental rights to respect for private life and to the protection of personal data."

Though the Directive has now been struck down, the issue will remain live in all the countries who have passed domestic law to implement the data retention mass surveillance regime.

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
retention1 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:10:19 ENG



Fichero AudioUE - La Cour de justice de l'Union européenne déclare la directive sur la conservation des données invalide. Radio Nizkor, 21avr14.

Le 8 avril 2014, la Cour de justice de l'Union européenne a établi que la conservation à grande échelle de données générées par les communications électroniques constitue une violation des droits fondamentaux au respect de la vie privée et à la protection des données à caractère personnel.

La directive sur la conservation des données prévoit que les compagnies téléphoniques et les fournisseurs d'accès à Internet doivent conserver les données relatives au trafic, les données de localisation ainsi que les données connexes nécessaires pour identifier l'abonné ou l'utilisateur, tout cela à des fins de prévention, de recherche, de détection et de poursuite des infractions graves, comme notamment les infractions liées à la criminalité organisée et au terrorisme.

La Cour européenne de justice a émis une décision préjudicielle portant sur la validité de la directive 2006/24/CE du Parlement européen et du Conseil, du 15 mars 2006. La demande présentée à la Cour européenne trouve son origine dans une affaire déclenchée par Digital Rights Ireland. La Cour a joint cette affaire à une autre question préjudicielle introduite par la Cour constitutionnelle autrichienne concernant la compatibilité de la loi transposant la directive 2006/24 dans le droit interne autrichien avec la loi constitutionnelle fédérale.

La Cour a décidé que la conservation des données constitue une ingérence d'une vaste ampleur et d'une gravité particulière dans les droits fondamentaux au respect de la vie privée. "La Cour constate tout d'abord que les données à conserver permettent notamment de savoir:

  • avec quelle personne et par quel moyen un abonné ou un utilisateur inscrit a communiqué
  • de déterminer le temps de la communication ainsi que l'endroit à partir duquel celle-ci a eu lieu et
  • de connaître la fréquence des communications de l'abonné ou de l'utilisateur inscrit avec certaines personnes pendant une période donnée."

"Ces données, prises dans leur ensemble, sont susceptibles de fournir des indications très précises sur la vie privée des personnes dont les données sont conservées, comme les habitudes de la vie quotidienne, les lieux de séjour permanents ou temporaires, les déplacements journaliers ou autres, les activités exercées, les relations sociales et les milieux sociaux fréquentés."

"La Cour estime qu'en imposant la conservation de ces données et en en permettant l'accès aux autorités nationales compétentes, la directive s'immisce de manière particulièrement grave dans les droits fondamentaux au respect de la vie privée et à la protection des données à caractère personnel."

Bien que la directive ait été annulée, le problème ne disparaîtra pas dans les pays ayant adopté des lois pour mettre en oeuvre ce régime de conservation massive de données.

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
retention Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:09:14 FRA



Fichero AudioUSA - State of Exception and the CIA's extra-judicial rendition and interrogation program. Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the American University Washington College of Law, 03Apr14

The United States is implicated in a case currently pending before the European Court of Human Rights concerning two Guantánamo detainees who claim to have been tortured in Poland after an extraordinary rendition by the Central Intelligence Agency (the "CIA")

The applicants are Abd Al Rahim Hussayn Muhammad Al Nashiri, a Saudi Arabian national of Yemeni descent who was born in 1965; and Zayn Al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn, also known as Abu Zubaydah, a stateless Palestinian, who was born in 1971 in Saudi Arabia. Both men are currently detained in the Internment Facility at the U.S. Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba...

"Both applicants allege that they were victims of 'extraordinary renditions' by the CIA, that is, of apprehension and extrajudicial transfer to a secret detention site in Poland with the knowledge of the Polish authorities for the purpose of interrogation, during which they were tortured. Both men state that in December 2002 they were taken to Poland on board the same 'rendition plane'."

Both detainees' submissions are based in the so-called "Marty Reports", prepared by Swiss Senator Dick Marty, in 2006, 2007 and 2011, as rapporteur for the investigation conducted by the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe into allegations of secret detention facilities being run by the CIA in several Member States; they are also based on a report prepared by the CIA inspector general in 2004 on 'counterterrorism detention and interrogation activities' between September 2001 and October 2003. Their submissions also refer to a 2007 report by the International Committee for the Red Cross on the treatment of 'high value detainees' in CIA custody...

"The Marty Reports detail an intricate network of CIA detention and transfer in certain Council of Europe States. Among other things, the reports identify the secret detention centre in Poland as being located in the Stare Kiejkuty intelligence training base near the town of Szczytno in Northern Poland."

Mr Al Nashiri’s and Mr Husayn's complaints before the European Court of Human Rights relate to three principal issues: their torture, ill-treatment and incommunicado detention in Poland while in US custody; their transfer from Poland; and, Poland’s failure to conduct an effective investigation into the events."

"More recently, evidence has emerged that the CIA paid $15 million in cash to the intelligence service of Poland in order to make use of a secret detention site there to interrogate al-Qaeda suspects..."

Also, the Senate Intelligence Committee has produced a 6,300-page study, not available to the public yet, on the CIA Detention and Interrogation Program. Its Chairman, Dianne Feinstein, spoke on the Senate floor on 11 March 2014 in order to clarify the information that was published by the press concerning the CIA's intrusion and search of the Senate Select Committee's computers as well as the committee's acquisition of a certain internal CIA document known as the Panetta Review.

The debate surrounding the CIA's interrogation program is being revisited...

File name Real Media format Mp3 formatDuration Language
cia Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:20:11 ENG


July 2013

Fichero AudioUSA - New report summarizes the available information on how the NSA operates. Radio Nizkor, 12Jul13

A new report from the Congressional Research Service entitled "NSA Surveillance Leaks: Background and Issues for Congress", summarizes for Congress what is publicly known about the two National Security Agency surveillance programs that were disclosed by Edward Snowden and reported in June 2013 by The Guardian and The Washington Post.

According to this report: "Since these programs were publicly disclosed over the course of two days in June, there has been confusion about what information is being collected and what authorities the National Security Agency (NSA) is acting under. This report clarifies the differences between the two programs and identifies potential issues that may help Members of Congress assess legislative proposals pertaining to NSA surveillance authorities."

"These programs arise from provisions of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). However, they rely on separate authorities, collect different types of information, and raise different policy questions. For both programs, there is a tension between the speed and convenience with which the government can access data of possible intelligence value and the mechanisms intended to safeguard civil liberties. The first program collects and stores in bulk domestic phone records that some argue could be gathered to equal effect through more focused records requests. The second program targets the electronic communications of non-U.S. citizens but may incidentally collect information about Americans..."

Steven Aftergood, in charge of the Project on Government Secrecy of the Federation of American Scientists, states that "this report does not present any new factual material concerning the surveillance programs. But it identifies some outstanding questions about them — the word 'unclear' is used several times — and it formulates topics for congressional consideration".

Radio Nizkor has excerpted from this report the sections pertaining to: a) What Information Is Being Collected?, b) What Are the Legal Bases for the Collection? and, c) What Oversight Mechanisms Are in Place?, as these sections contain information on how the NSA operates these programs.

File name Real Media format Mp3 formatDuration Language
nsa Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:26:00 ENG



Fichero AudioUSA - Building America's Secret Surveillance State. (By James Bamford). Radio Nizkor, 02Jul13

"'God we trust,' goes an old National Security Agency joke. 'All others we monitor'. [...]

While the Obama administration and Senate intelligence committee members defend the spying as crucial in its fight against terrorism, this is only the latest chapter in nearly a century of pressure on telecommunications companies to secretly cooperate with NSA and its predecessors. But as stunning technology advances allow more and more personal information to pass across those links, the dangers of the United States turning into a secret surveillance state increase exponentially.

The NSA was so flooded with billions of dollars from post-Sept. 11, 2001 budget increases that it went on a building spree and also expanded its eavesdropping capabilities enormously. Secret rooms were built in giant telecom facilities, such as AT&T's 10-story "switch" in San Francisco. There, mirror copies of incoming data and telephone cables are routed into rooms filled with special hardware and software to filter out email and phone calls for transmission to NSA for analysis. [...]

Today the NSA is the world's largest spy organization, encompassing tens of thousands of employees and occupying a city-size headquarters complex on Fort Meade in Maryland. But in 1920, its earliest predecessor, known as the Black Chamber, fit into a slim townhouse on Manhattan's East 37th Street.

World War One had recently ended, along with official censorship, and the Radio Communication Act of 1912 was again in effect. This legislation guaranteed the secrecy of electronic communications... To the Black Chamber, however, the bill represented a large obstacle to be overcome--illegally, if necessary.

So the Black Chamber chief, Herbert O. Yardley, and his boss in Washington, General Marlborough Churchill, head of the Military Intelligence Division, paid a visit to 195 Broadway in downtown Manhattan, headquarters of Western Union. This was the nation's largest telegram company - the email of that day... The two government officials took the elevator to the 24th floor for a secret meeting with Western Union's president, Newcomb Carlton. Their object was to convince him to grant them secret access to the private communications zapping through his company's wires.

It was easier achieved than Yardley had ever imagined... Yardley later described, "President Carlton seemed anxious to do everything he could for us.'"

Time and again over the decades, this pattern has been repeated. The NSA, or a predecessor, secretly entered into agreements with the country's major telecommunications companies and illegally gained access to Americans' private communications. [...]

Thus, for roughly 100 years, whenever the government knocked on the telecommunications industry's door and asked them to break the law and turn over millions upon millions of private communications, the telecoms complied.... But unlike with Yardley and the Black Chamber, the dangers today of secret cooperation between the telecom and Internet industry and the NSA are incomparable... We now live in an era when access to someone's email account and web searches can paint a more detailed picture of their life then most personal diaries. Secret agreements between intelligence agencies and communications companies should not be allowed in a democracy. There is too much at risk...

File name Real Media format Mp3 formatDuration Language
prism Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:11:22 ENG


May 2013

Fichero AudioUSA - La CIDH y varios órganos de Naciones Unidas reiteran la necesidad de terminar con la detención indefinida de personas en la Base Naval de Guantánamo. (Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos). Radio Nizkor, 06may13

"La Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH), el Grupo de Trabajo de ONU sobre la Detención Arbitraria, el Relator Especial de ONU para la promoción y protección de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales en la lucha contra el terrorismo, Ben Emmerson, el Relator Especial de ONU sobre la tortura y otros tratos o penas crueles, inhumanos o degradantes, Juan Méndez, y el Relator Especial de la ONU sobre el derecho de toda persona al disfrute del más alto nivel posible de salud física y mental, Anand Grover, formulan un llamamiento urgente al Gobierno de los Estados Unidos de América a respetar y garantizar la vida, salud e integridad personal de los detenidos en la Base Naval de Guantánamo, particularmente en el contexto de la actual huelga de hambre...

La CIDH, el Grupo de Trabajo y los Relatores Especiales de ONU observan con suma preocupación, ..., que la indefensión jurídica de los detenidos en Guantánamo y la consecuente angustia generada por la incertidumbre acerca de su futuro, les ha conducido a la medida extrema de la huelga de hambre para demandar un cambio real de su situación. La CIDH, el Grupo de Trabajo y los Relatores Especiales de ONU subrayan que cuando la detención indefinida de personas, la absoluta mayoría de ellas sin cargos en su contra, aun en circunstancias extraordinarias, se prolonga más allá de un mínimo de tiempo razonable, la misma constituye una flagrante violación al derecho internacional de los derechos humanos, y constituye, en sí misma, una forma de trato cruel, inhumano y degradante...

Asimismo, la CIDH, y los órganos mencionados de las Naciones Unidas, recuerdan que, de acuerdo con la Declaración de Malta de la Asociación Médica Mundial, en los casos de personas en huelga de hambre deben respetarse, entre otros, los principios de ética en la actuación del personal médico y de respeto por la autonomía de las personas, según los cuales es injustificable la alimentación forzada de seres humanos que, de manera voluntaria e informada, rechacen tal procedimiento...

En atención a estas consideraciones, la CIDH, el Grupo de Trabajo y los Relatores Especiales de ONU, instan a los Estados Unidos de América a:

  • (a) adoptar todas las medidas legislativas, administrativas, judiciales y de cualquier otra naturaleza, necesarias para disponer el juzgamiento en pleno respeto del derecho al debido proceso de las personas detenidas en la Base Naval de Guantánamo o en su caso disponer su liberación inmediata o su traslado a un tercer país de conformidad con el derecho internacional;
  • (b) agilizar el proceso de liberación y traslado de aquellos detenidos que han sido certificados por el propio Gobierno para ser liberados;
  • (c) conducir una investigación seria, independiente e imparcial de los actos de alimentación forzada de internos en huelga de hambre y de la alegada violencia empleada en estos procedimientos;
  • (d) permitir que la CIDH y los procedimientos especiales del Consejo de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas, ..., realicen visitas de monitoreo al centro de detención de Guantánamo en condiciones tales que se les permita recorrer libremente las instalaciones y entrevistarse libre y privadamente con los prisioneros; y
  • (e) adoptar pasos concretos y decididos dirigidos a clausurar definitivamente el centro de detención de la Base Naval de Guantánamo;...
File name Real Media format Mp3 formatDuration Language
gtmo2 Haz click aquí REAL PLAYER Haz click aquí MP3 00:09:38 ESL/SPA


April 2012

Fichero AudioUE - L'ACTA et les plans répressifs de la Commission européenne au-delà de l'ACTA. (La Quadrature du Net). Radio Nizkor, 20avr12.

L'accord commercial anti-contrefaçon, plus connu sous le nom d'ACTA pour Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, est un accord négocié secrètement de 2007 à 2010 par 39 pays, dont les 27 de l'Union européenne, les États-Unis, le Japon et autres.

Négocié plutôt que débattu démocratiquement, ACTA contourne les parlements et est une véritable feuille de route pour des projets comme SOPA et PIPA, imposerait de nouvelles sanctions pénales et des mesures poussant les acteurs de l'Internet à « coopérer » avec les industries du divertissement pour surveiller et censurer les communications en ligne, en contournant l'autorité judiciaire.

Cet accord est donc une menace majeure pour la liberté d'expression en ligne et est porteur d'insécurité juridique pour les acteurs de l'Internet.

Le Parlement européen a désormais une occasion ultime de rejeter l'ACTA... Après avoir annoncé qu'il recommanderait le rejet de l'ACTA, le rapporteur britanique David Martin (S&D) tient ses engagements : son projet de rapport appelle le Parlement à refuser de « donner son consentement » à ACTA et souligne que « les bénéfices attendus de cet accord international sont largement inférieurs aux menaces qu'il fait peser sur les libertés civiles ».

Tout en soulignant les principaux dangers de l'ACTA, David Martin réconforte cependant les lobbies du copyright, des brevets et du droits des marques...

La conclusion du projet de rapport de M. Martin appelle la Commission européenne de « faire de nouvelles propositions pour protéger la propriété intellectuelle ».

Cela est aussi une source d'inquiétude au regard des projets de la Commission, qui s'apprête à réviser la Directive anti-partage IPRED (Acronyme pour: Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement Directive) pour accentuer la répression des infractions en ligne au droit d'auteur...

Le vote sur ACTA en plénière au Parlement européen devrait avoir lieu au mois de juillet voire en septembre...

En attendant, « le Parlement doit absolument résister aux pressions exercées par la Commission et protéger ses prérogatives »...

Plus dérangeant encore, sans même attendre la décision du Parlement européen d'accepter ou non ACTA, le Commissaire Michel Barnier, en charge du Marché intérieur, fait déjà pression en faveur de nouvelles mesures répressives en matière de droit d'auteur, similaires à celles prévues par les lois SOPA et PIPA aux États-Unis.

Une feuille de route récemment publiée sur la révision de la directive IPRED sur le renforcement des droits de propriété intellectuelle, confirme que la Commission souhaite se concentrer sur les infractions en ligne, utilisant ACTA pour mettre en place des mécanismes de censure privée dans le droit européen...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
acta Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:07:53 FRA


March 2012

Fichero AudioEU/Bel - SABAM vs Netlog: Another important ruling for the Open Internet and for fundamental rights after Scarlet vs. SABAM. (European Digital Rights). Radio Nizkor, 19Mar12.

"A few months after the Scarlet/SABAM case, the Court of Justice of the European Union has released a new decision on the legality of filtering systems on the Internet, this time with regard to filtering of content stored on web services.

Last February 16th, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled that a social network “cannot be obliged to install a general filtering system, covering all its users, in order to prevent the unlawful use of musical and audio-visual work”.

SABAM brought the social network Netlog to court to impose an injunction requiring the installation of filtering systems aimed at the prevention of infringements committed by its Belgian members (around 2 million consumers) on its website.

A social network is a set of online communication tools that allow the creation and exchange of user-generated content. Netlog is an online platform, where members can create their own webpage with a blog, pictures, playlists, videos… and as such considered as a social network, and a hosting provider...

The SABAM v. Netlog judgment represents a new win for fundamental freedoms.

Particularly now, in a political climate where the foundations of the current Internet are at stake, the European judges have re-emphasised the importance of not overburdening communication tools with restrictive technologies. This is crucial to protect the fundamental rights value of the Internet as well as its economic significance.

For the second time in a just a few months, thanks to actions taken by SABAM have led the Court of Justice of the EU to underline the importance of an open and free Internet and the respect for fundamental freedoms, such as the freedom of communication privacy and the freedom to conduct business.

But what is the difference between the Scarlet case and the Netlog decision?. The wording of the questions was the same in both cases except that the Netlog decision specifically addresses the situation of hosting providers, while the Scarlet case involved Internet access providers...

In the Scarlet case, the issue was about an access provider, a "mere conduit" (a service consisting of "transmission" in a communication network) in the language of the E-Commerce Directive.

SABAM wanted the ISP Scarlet to install a generalised filtering system for all incoming and outgoing electronic communications passing through its services and to block potentially unlawful communications.

In First Instance, while refusing the liability of the ISP, the Brussels Court concluded that the SABAM's claim was legitimate and that a filtering system had to be deployed. Scarlet appealed and the case was referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union. In its decision, the Court of Justice ruled that a filtering and blocking system for all its customers for an unlimited period, in abstracto and as preventive measure, violates fundamental rights, more particularly the right to privacy, freedom of communication and freedom of information. In addition, it breaches the freedom of ISPs to conduct business..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
netlog Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:08:54 ENG


January 2012

Fichero AudioEU/USA - US intervenes in the revision of the EU data protection Directive while EU Commission postpones the publication of the proposal for its review. (Privacy and Information Security Law blog, European Digital Rights). Radio Nizkor, 30Jan12.

"According to a spokesperson at the European Commission, the publication of the proposal for the review of the EU Data Protection Directive has been postponed until late February or March 2012.

The draft proposal was scheduled to be officially released in late January after it was leaked in December 2011.

According to various sources, the proposal received negative responses from several Directorates-General over the course of the 'inter-service consultation,' some of whom have voiced their concern that the proposed new framework would be stricter than the current legal framework and thus may have a negative impact on businesses.

For example, parts of the proposal, such as the right to be forgotten, are viewed by some as potentially too burdensome for companies.

The delay in the release date for the proposal will push back the formal adoption of the draft proposal by the European Commission.

Viviane Reding, Justice Commissioner and Commission Vice-President, is said to be working on a communication in which she will outline several key goals and objectives for the draft proposal. The draft proposal has not yet entered into the legislative process and may undergo substantial changes before it reaches that stage."

European Digital Rights informs that "right at the end of the inter-service consultation process in the European Commission (the almost final step before a legislative proposal is launched), the United States Department of Commerce launched a significant lobbying campaign against the leaked draft proposal for a Data Protection Regulation. The campaign included high-level phone calls from senior figures in the US Department of Commerce to top level staff in the European Commission covering topics such as US business, multilateral and bilateral treaty organizations, PNR, national security, law enforcement, trade and innovation."

"In general, the US complained about the draft proposal arguing that it will break with international standards and might even end up being counterproductive for data protection..."

European Digital Rights has analized the most prominent exaggerations and misunderstandings in the US paper, namely those pertaining to interoperability, data breach requirements, right to be forgotten, definition of "child", adequacy, regulatory enforcement and international cooperation.

It concludes that "Most of the objections are rather specious, obviously weak or plain wrong and interest-driven, aiming to water down the standards in the leaked draft Regulation. This early-stage intervention obviously aims at reducing interference with access by the US to any data about European citizens in the course of their investigations, showing very little effort to understand the European concept of privacy."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
retention2 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:09:01 ENG



Fichero AudioUSA/EU - The proposed EU-US Passenger Name Record (PNR) agreement breaches data protection, due process and other fundamental rights. Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the American University Washington College of Law, 30Jan12.

On 17 November 2011, U.S. and EU officials initialled a proposed agreement to authorize airlines to forward passenger name record data to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

Although the agreement cannot take effect without the approval of the European Parliament and the Council, the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) could read the proposed agreement only in a sealed room where they could not take notes or make copies.

The complete text on which the European Parliament will vote has finally been made public, revealing a failure to address the concerns raised by the Parliament and continued shortfalls in data protection, due process, and protection of fundamental rights.

In its resolution of 5 May 2010, the Parliament said that the Passenger Name Record (PNR) agreement should take the form of a treaty, recognize the fundamental right to freedom of movement, prohibit the use of PNR data for data mining or profiling, and take into consideration "PNR data which may be available from sources not covered by international agreements, such as computer reservation systems located outside the EU."

The proposed agreement does not meet these criteria, and does not mention any of these issues...

In view of the upcoming vote on the EU-USA PNR Agreement, the Austrian Organization for the Use of the Internet and NoPNR.org, with the endorsement, among others, of The Identity Project, Friends of Privacy USA, Center for Financial Privacy and Human Rights, Statewatch and Privacy International, sent an Open Letter to the European Parliament asking its Members to consider the following issues for their decision on the EU-US PNR Agreement:

  • The proposed agreement will not result in improved legal security for citizens
  • There is no access control or access logging
  • The proposed agreement does not meet the conditions set by the European Parliament
  • There is no appropriate information to travelers

This program has been prepared with information provided by the Electronic Privacy Information Center, European Digital Rights, The Identity Project and StateWatch.

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
pnrdata7 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:09:39 ENG



Fichero AudioUSA - The National Defense Authorization Act for 2012: A Great Threat to Americans' Civil Liberties and Rights. (The New York Times, Michel Chossudovsky for the Centre for Research on Globalisation, ACLU, The Center for Constitutional Rights, and E. D. Kain for Forbes). Radio Nizkor, 24Jan12.

"With minimal media debate, at a time when Americans were celebrating the New Year, the 'National Defense Authorization Act' (H.R. 1540) was signed into law by President Barack Obama. The actual signing took place in Hawaii on the 31st of December.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) authorises the arbitrary and indefinite military detention of American citizens.

According to Obama's "signing statement", the threat of Al Qaeda to the Security of the Homeland constitutes a justification for repealing fundamental rights and freedoms. The relevant provisions pertaining to civil rights were carefully esconded in a short section of a document of more than 500 pages.

President Obama says he disagrees with the NDAA but he signs it into law: '[I have] serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists' , the President wrote. He acknowledges that certain provisions of the Act (contained in Subtitle D--Counterterrorism) are unacceptable.

The fact of the matter is that both the Executive and the US Congress are complicit in the drafting of Subtitle D. In this regard, Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) revealed that it was the White House which had asked the Senate Armed Services Committee 'to remove language from the bill that would have prohibited U.S. citizens' military detention without due process'.

President Obama justifies the signing of the NDAA for 2012 as a means to combating terrorism, as part of a 'counter-terrorism' agenda. But in substance, any American opposed to the policies of the US government can --under the provisions of the this Act-- be labelled a 'suspected terrorist' and arrested under military detention... The signing statement does not in any way invalidate or modify the actual signing by President Obama of the NDAA into law. It does not have any bearing on the implementation/enforcement of the Law...'

The 'most important traditions and values' in derogation of The Bill of Rights and the US Constitution have indeed been repealed, effective on New Year's Day, January 1st 2012..."

On the other hand, Forbes contributor E. D. Kain explains that "The proof that this bill does not expressly exempt U.S. citizens or those captured on U.S. soil is that amendments offered by Sen. Feinstein providing expressly for those exemptions were rejected. The 'compromise' was to preserve the status quo by including the provision that the bill is not intended to alter it with regard to American citizens, but that's because proponents of broad detention powers are confident that the status quo already permits such detention."

"In part the National Defense Authorization Act helps to preserve the status quo established a decade ago with the original provisions in the PATRIOT Act giving the government broad new powers in the so-called War on Terror.

In part the bill expands those powers, codifying the use of indefinite detention of foreign nationals and possibly US citizens arrested abroad and at home. In part the bill expands the use of the US military on domestic soil, at once complicating anti-terrorism strategies at home and raising serious questions about the role of the military in law enforcement.

All these things should make Americans - and not just Americans - very nervous about the preservation of their civil liberties. That precarious balance between security and liberty is looking ever more tilted toward the former and away from the latter. The History of Anti-Terrorism is Bad News for Civil Liberties..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
ndaa Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:24:58 ENG



Fichero AudioUSA - US crackdown on global domain names and IP addresses continues. (European Digital Rights, Intellectual Property Watch, Access). Radio Nizkor, 05Jan12.

"US authorities have resumed their 'Operation in Our Sites' in order to attempt to fight counterfeit and piracy-related websites..

The introduction of draft bills, such as the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) aims at providing a legal basis for domain names and IP address seizures.

SOPA's broad definitions could indeed mean that no online resource in the global Internet would be outside US jurisdiction.

In response to these legislative proposals and repeated unilateral measures against European websites, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on 17 November 2011 in preparation of the EU/US summit stressing 'the need to protect the integrity of the global internet and freedom of communication by refraining from unilateral measures to revoke IP addresses or domain names.' The joint EU/US summit declaration published on 28 November 2011 indeed says: "We share a commitment to a single, global Internet, and will resist unilateral efforts to weaken the security, reliability, or independence of its operations".

However, despite the big show of opposition to the US bills and the Parliament's actions, Internet filtering and blocking schemes like SOPA and PIPA are still on the agenda on the other side of the Atlantic claiming worldwide jurisdiction for domain names and IP addresses.

According to recent reports, attempts to terminate the Internet's end-to-end architecture also seem to get even closer to the core of the Internet. This sort of access restriction is an experiment with key functions of the Internet, increasing the risk of fragmentation of the global Internet and as one co-chair of the DNS Working group of the European Regional Internet Registry stated, this gives restrictive tools 'to the bad guys'..."

On November 15th, 2011, a collection of international civil society and human rights organizations sent a letter to the House Judiciary Committee Chairman Representative, Lamar Smith (R-Texas), and Ranking Member Rep. John Conyers, Jr. (D-Michigan).

The groups called into question several provisions of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) that would have 'serious implications for international civil and human rights' and the integrity of the global internet. "By imposing technical changes to the open internet while eroding due process, SOPA introduces a deeply concerning degree of legal uncertainty into the internet economy, particularly for businesses and users internationally.

Business cannot be conducted online when international users and businesses do not have faith that their access to payments, domain names, and advertising will be available, raising challenges to economic development and innovation. This is as unacceptable to the international community as it would be if a foreign country were to impose similar measures on the United States.

The provisions in SOPA on DNS filtering in particular will have severe consequences worldwide...

By instituting this practice in the United States, SOPA sends an unequivocal message to other nations that it is acceptable to censor speech on the global Internet. Additionally, Internet engineers have argued in response to the Protect IP Act, DNS filtering would break the internet into separate regional networks.

Worse still, the circumvention technology that can be used to access information under repressive Internet regimes would be outlawed under SOPA, the very same technology whose development is funded by the State Department..."

This program also addresses the problems being faced by the the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) as regards the introduction of new top-level domains (TLDs). Larry Strickling, head of the US National Telecommunication and Information Administration (NTIA), said his agency is “seriously considering” using the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) – the entity administering the domain name system root zone currently managed by ICANN under a contract with the US government – to push for accountability and transparency of ICANN. To some, this might be considered a threat. For ICANN, this could mean losing core functions, such as DNS root zone management, including the TLDs and ccTLDs (country-code top-level domains, like .uk), internet protocol address allocation management on the global level, or protocol assignment...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
sopa Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:19:48 ENG


December 2011

Fichero AudioUSA/EU - "Outside the United States, Extraordinary Rendition on Trial". (Alka Pradhan for the American Society of International Law). Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the American University Washington College of Law, 16Dec11.

"Three pending cases before the European Court of Human Rights highlight allegedly illegal acts committed by European countries in connection with the U.S. extraordinary rendition program.

The first, filed by Khalid El-Masri in September 2009, claims unlawful abduction and mistreatment by the Macedonian Ministry of the Interior.

The second was filed by Abd Al-Rahim al Nashiri for alleged mistreatment during his detention at a secret prison (“black site”) in Poland...

The third, most recent case was filed against Lithuania by Zayn al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (“Abu Zubaydah”) for alleged secret detention and torture by CIA agents committed at a Lithuanian black site...

El-Masri’s petition alleges that Macedonia violated Article 3 (prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment) of the European Convention on Human Rights by failing to intervene during his torture and inhuman treatment by CIA agents in Macedonia; by allowing him to be transported to Afghanistan with the knowledge that he would be tortured and inhumanly treated at the destination; and by failing to investigate his arrest, detention, and transfer to the CIA by Macedonian authorities.

Additionally, El-Masri claims that his detention by Macedonian authorities for twenty-three days, along with his transfer to CIA agents, violated his right to liberty and security of person (Article 5), and that the failure by the Macedonian criminal courts to hear his case violated his right to remedy guaranteed by Article 13 of the Convention.

Regarding Al Nashiri, his petition alleges violations of Articles 2 (right to life), 3 (prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment), 5 (liberty and security of person), 8 (right to private and family life), 10 (freedom of expression), and 13 (right to remedy) of the Convention, and Protocol 6 to the Convention (abolition of the death penalty)...

If the Court accepts El-Masri’s and/or al Nashiri’s applications, both the applicants and the member states will be invited to present their claims before the Court. Should the Court find that a member state has violated the Convention, it may issue a declaratory judgment, order payment of damages and legal costs, or implement other measures of reparation.

Chamber judgments may be appealed to the “Grand Chamber,” whose judgments are final. Because the United States is not a party to the European Court of Human Rights, it is not named in the applications. However, if the United States decides to participate in the proceedings, the Court has the discretion to allow a third party to intervene in the form of written comments..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
rendition Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:11:45 ENG


November 2011

Fichero AudioUN - Despite the reforms introduced by the UN Security Council, due process guarantees remain unsatisfactory when listing individuals or entities as terrorists. Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the American University Washington College of Law, 30Nov11.

On 17 June 2011, the UN Security Council voted unanimously to pass two resolutions which would reform the Al-Qaida and Taliban sanctions regime.

Security Council resolutions 1988 and 1989 create two separate sanctions regimes, one for Al-Qaida and another for the Taliban. Up until this point, there has only been one sanctions regime to deal with both groups, established under Security Council Resolution 1267 in 1999...

This change lays the groundwork for de-listing members of the Taliban to participate in the so-called reconciliation efforts in Afghanistan.

The UN special Rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism at that time, Martin Scheinin, said the changes to the sanctions regime do not resolve fundamental deficiencies throughout the listing and de-listing process and exacerbates other human rights concerns.

In his statement the Rapporteur says that "The terrorist blacklist has been subject to consistent and growing criticism, including by certain judicial bodies and the Human Rights Committee, for its human rights shortcomings. Issues of fair trial and due process, right to privacy, freedom of movement and right to property have been raised and litigated".

Despite the reforms, the Special Rapporteur has maintained the position that the procedures for terrorist listing and delisting by the 1267 Committee of the Security Council do not meet international human rights standards concerning due process or fair trial.

Therefore he takes the view that as long as proper due process is not guaranteed at the United Nations level when listing individuals or entities as terrorists, national (or European Union) courts will need to exercise judicial review over the national (or European) measures implementing the sanctions...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
blacklisting2 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:09:44 ENG



Fichero AudioUSA - The War Powers Resolution should be revised. (Chris Economou, International Affairs Review, 17Oct11). Radio Nizkor, 29Nov11.

"Before U.S. President Barack Obama committed American forces to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) mission in Libya last spring, he neglected to provide an adequate reason for America's involvement or seek approval from Congress. [...]

Obama's failure to consult with Congress creates a dangerous precedent that denies Congress a say in deciding when and how U.S. military forces should be used and instead places these decisions into the hands of just one person - the president. [...]

The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to declare wars and fund the military. However, the Constitution simultaneously empowers the president to carry out wars as commander-in-chief. Both branches of government have long debated this dichotomy of war powers.

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 meant to end this debate by requiring closer collaboration between the branches when the United States enters into a conflict. [...]

Passed over a presidential veto, the War Powers Resolution means to serve as a check on the president's ability to commit U.S. forces to lengthy military engagements without approval from Congress.

Since the start of U.S. involvement in NATO's Libya mission, President Obama has neglected the War Powers Resolution by denying that the conflict is actually a war. [...]

Considering that America provided the bulk of NATO's military capabilities and funding in Libya, this was as much America's war as it was NATO's.

Therefore, Obama should have consulted with and sought approval from Congress and adhered to the 60-day deadline, as the Resolution requires.

To prevent future presidents from ignoring Congress' role in military conflicts, the War Powers Resolution should be revised to make it more specific and binding..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
warpowers Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:05:00 ENG



Fichero AudioGbr - Met Police using blanket and indiscriminate surveillance system / Review of RIPA needed. (The Guardian, UK). Radio Nizkor, 29Nov11.

"Civil liberties group raises concerns over Metropolitan police purchase of technology to track public handsets over a targeted area.

Britain's largest police force is operating covert surveillance technology that can masquerade as a mobile phone network, transmitting a signal that allows authorities to shut off phones remotely, intercept communications and gather data about thousands of users in a targeted area.

The surveillance system has been procured by the Metropolitan police from Leeds-based company Datong plc, which counts the US Secret Service, the Ministry of Defence and regimes in the Middle East among its customers.

Strictly classified under government protocol as "Listed X", it can emit a signal over an area of up to an estimated 10 sq km, forcing hundreds of mobile phones per minute to release their unique identity codes, which can be used to track a person's movements in real time.

The disclosure has caused concern among lawyers and privacy groups that large numbers of innocent people could be unwittingly implicated in covert intelligence gathering...

Nick Pickles, director of privacy and civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch, warned the technology could give police the ability to conduct "blanket and indiscriminate" monitoring... He added that "Such invasive surveillance must be tightly regulated, authorised at the highest level and only used in the most serious of investigations. It should be absolutely clear that only data directly relating to targets of investigations is monitored or stored." [...]

Regarding the investigatory powers act, lawyers have condemned what appears to be deception of the courts by undercover police and have called for fundamental reforms of the legislation governing covert operations.

"The revelation that a constable who infiltrated protest groups gave false evidence in court under oath triggered demands for a review of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa)...

Gordon Nardell QC, who is leading the Bar Council's working party on the operation of Ripa, said that “At the moment the law allows the police to target legally privileged communications between lawyer and client”. "The Bar Council thinks that is fundamentally wrong and creates a risk of miscarriages of justice. People accused of crime must be able to speak freely with their lawyer in the knowledge that what they say is kept from the ears of the investigating authorities.”

"We hope to persuade the House of Lords to make amendments to the protection of freedoms bill to ban the police from covertly gaining access to privileged lawyer-client communications..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
met Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:15:40 ENG



Fichero AudioEU - The Data Retention Directive should be repealed given that it does not meet privacy requirements. (Electronic Privacy Information Center, European Digital Rights, Office of the European Data Protection Supervisor). Radio Nizkor, 29Nov11.

"European Union Data Protection Supervisor Peter Hustinx raised the possibility of repealing Europe's Data Retention Directive, which requires telecommunication companies and Internet service providers to retain user data for law enforcement purposes.

The Directive applies to traffic and location data and the "related data necessary to identify" a user. Each EU member state must retain this data for a period of six months to two years from the date of the user's communication.

The Directive also requires each EU member state to enact procedures that grant law enforcement access to the data. According to Hustinx, the Directive does not provide clear guidance about why this data must be retained or who will have access to it.

Similarly, Hustinx believes that the Directive does not sufficiently justify the necessity of the data retention, lacks foreseeability, and is overly intrusive. He also notes that statistics on access requests indicate that a retention period of up to two years 'goes far beyond' what is necessary. In light of these concerns, Hustinx has asked the European Commission to consider all other options, 'including the possibility of repealing the Directive.' [...]

On 26 September 2011, European Digital Rights and 37 other NGOs from 14 countries sent a letter to Commissioners Malmström, Kroes and Reding on the review of the Data Retention Directive.

In their communique informing of the sending of the letter, European Digital Rights states “The central mistake which we would like not to see repeated is the fallacy that all uses of retained data can be used to argue that the Directive is valuable. In reality, recently generated data is more likely to be used in investigations and such data would have been available anyway even if the Directive had never existed.”

The letter also draws attention to some of the core problems with the Directive, such as the lack of a harmonised definition of "serious crime" (and the far reaching consequences of this) and the lack of a harmonised approach to access and security.

EDRi recalls that "Article 52 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union states that limitations of fundamental rights must not restrict or reduce the right in such a way or to such extent that the very essence of the right is impaired. The European Court of Human Rights has ruled similarly on numerous occasions."

Ironically, the Directive was proposed as a measure to harmonise the approach to this policy in the European Union - even though few countries had such a policy to begin with. It managed to disharmonise the single market, by forcing the policy onto 27 countries, with vastly varying retention periods, rules for cost reimbursement, etc.

The next step in the process for the Commission will be the preparation of an "Impact Assessment", listing a number of different policy options and coming to the conclusion (as has already been politically decided) that the Directive is useful but offering some small concessions, such as a small reduction in the maximum retention period, which will be sold as major improvements in the deeply flawed legislation...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
retention1 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:10:18 ENG



Fichero AudioUN/EU - Time to Rethink Terrorist Blacklisting. (Statewatch, Jan11). Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the American University Washington College of Law, 29Nov11.

"The terrorist proscription regimes enacted by the United Nations (UN) and the European Union (EU) after the attacks of 9/11 have been seriously undermined by growing doubts about their legality, effectiveness and disproportionate impact on the rights of affected parties. [...]

Ostensibly, these 'smart sanctions' (which target groups and individuals rather than whole populations) are designed to disrupt the activities of terrorist groups by criminalising their members, cutting off their access to funds and undermining their support.

In practice, however, far too many people have been included in national and international terrorism lists. At the same time, they have been systematically denied the possibility of mounting a meaningful defence to the allegations against them. Moreover, many listings are clearly politically or ideologically motivated, undermining genuine counter-terrorism efforts and paralysing conflict resolution efforts.

The UN blacklisting regime stems from UN Security Council Resolution 1267, which created the first list of alleged terrorists "associated with Osama bin Laden, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda". [...]

The EU's terrorist lists stem from the measures it took to transpose Resolution 1373 into EU law and currently stands at 57 individuals and 47 organisations. In addition to the UN and EU lists, many states have adopted domestic blacklists, massively expanding the net of criminalisation.

Whereas the EU has adopted a particularly broad definition of ‘terrorism’, the UN has failed to reach such an understanding, despite decades of deliberation. UN Security Council Resolution 1373 thus effectively outsources the definition of terrorism to nation states, encouraging the criminalisation of groups on the basis of geopolitical, foreign policy or diplomatic interests.

The criminalisation of self-determination movements that has resulted has transformed the migrant and Diaspora communities that support them into ‘suspect communities’ and obstructed peace processes aimed at resolving such conflicts.

There is now an irrefutable body of expert legal opinion that views international proscription regimes as incompatible with the most basic standards of due process. The adverse and unacceptable impact of the sanctions on fundamental human rights is also abundantly clear and systemic violations have been recognised repeatedly in judicial proceedings, particularly within Europe.

Listing decisions are usually based on secret intelligence material that neither blacklisted individuals nor the Courts responsible for reviewing the implementation of the lists will ever see. Needless to say, affected parties cannot contest the allegations against them (and exercise their right to judicial review) if they are prevented from knowing what the allegations actually are..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
blacklisting1 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:15:40 ENG



Fichero AudioEU - European Data Protection Supervisor says a serious policy debate on net neutrality must effectively address the protection of privacy and personal data. Radio Nizkor, 03Nov11.

This program shows the current state of the debate on what is known as "net neutrality" and the discussion points at a EU level based on the corresponding Opinion of the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS).

Net neutrality refers to the issue of whether Internet service providers (ISPs) should be allowed to monitor network traffic to filter or restrict Internet access, for example to block specific services or applications (for example peer to peer) or give preference access to others.

On October 7th, 2011 the EDPS, Peter Hustinx, released an opinion on the European Commission Communication on the open internet and net neutrality in Europe, a communication that had been adopted by the Commission on April 19th, 2011. (The Supervisor is an independent supervisory authority devoted to protecting personal data and privacy and promoting good practice in the EU institutions and bodies).

According to "La Quadrature du Net", an European advocacy group that promotes the rights and freedoms of citizens on the Internet, the EDPS's opinion on Net neutrality is a ground-breaking opinion. "He stresses that restrictions to Internet access inevitably harm privacy".

As the European Parliament enters in the final stage of the negotiations on its resolution on Net neutrality, this opinion underlines that the EU Commission's "wait and see" approach is bound to fail and is unjustifiable. Members of the EU Parliament - who will soon hold a crucial vote on the matter - must preserve citizens' privacy by requiring strong regulatory measures to ban discrimination of online communications.

In fact, the "Industry Committee" of the European Parliament unanimously adopted a resolution last October 20th demanding that the European Commission promptly assess the need for further legislative action...

La Quadrature du Net considers that the resolution passed by the Industry Committee is overall a positive text. However, the resolution falls short of asking for immediate legislative action to protect Net neutrality and for sanctions against Internet Service Providers who restrict access to the Internet. It also includes a loophole, which risks being interpreted as accepting such restrictions on mobile Internet on the pretext of alleged network congestion.

Jérémie Zimmermann, spokesperson for La Quadrature du Net, said that “While rather weak, the adopted resolution is a political commitment from the European Parliament in favour of Net neutrality, and aims to prevent telecom operators from restricting Internet access. Pressure is increasing on Commissioner Neelie Kroes and the EU telecoms regulators to come up with further legislation. Mrs Kroes must break away from her 'wait and see' approach and take action to effectively protect competition, innovation as well as citizens' freedom of expression and privacy online".

The draft guidelines on "Net Neutrality and Transparency" proposed by the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) in October 2011, have actually nothing to do with Net neutrality according to privacy groups, and instead readily accept that telecom operators can restrict access to the Internet as long as users are informed. They only prove that mere transparency and competition will not prevent operators from violating Net neutrality.

The text adopted in the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy vote will now move to be adopted in plenary without the possibility of further amendments, in a vote scheduled for late-November 2011...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
netneutrality Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:40:26 ENG



Fichero AudioEU - Mandatory data retention: update and developments. (StateWatch). Radio Nizkor, 03Nov11.

"Directive 2006/24/EC on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks more frequently goes by the name of the Data Retention Directive.

The Directive requires service provider to keep communications data concerning: phone-calls, faxes, mobile phone calls (including location) and internet usage (it should be noted that the monitoring of internet usage also reveals the content).

This highly controversial legislation was passed in 2006, its path cleared by the terrorist attacks in London and Madrid. Both these occasions provided the Council with the opportunity to introduce EU-wide data retention measures

Perhaps the most well-known comment on the Data Retention Directive is that of the European Data Protection Supervisor, who referred to it as “the most privacy invasive instrument ever adopted by the EU in terms of scale and the number of people it affects.” This statement reinforced the arguments made by numerous civil society organisations, individuals and politicians.

It is because of the highly invasive nature of the surveillance and monitoring permitted by mandatory data retention that the directive was annulled or suspended by court decisions in several Member States...

However, the idea that data retention and greater surveillance of telecommunications will help in the “fight against terrorism” is persistent, and seems to be resonating across Europe. The situation in Norway and the failure of police and security services to prevent the attacks has given rise to a number of arguments for enhanced surveillance of the internet.

At the EU level, there remains a significant lobby opposing any comprehensive re-thinking of how data retention should work, or whether it is necessary at all.

A number of Member States are strongly in favour of retaining the Directive as it stands – a recent leaked paper drafted by France, Ireland and the UK states that data retention "has played a key role in maintaining public security throughout Europe."

The paper attempts to justify current data retention legislation on numerous grounds, not least through recounting tales of specific cases where retained data has been successfully utilised.

Yet it may have been entirely possible to solve these cases without mandatory, blanket retention of all telecommunications information by targeting suspects. Alternative options include a process known as “quick-freeze”, whereby law enforcement bodies are able to ensure the retention of specific telecommunications data after an investigation has begun.

The differences between Member States were reflected at a recent meeting of the Working Party on Data Protection and Information Exchange...

It remains to be seen whether the original Directive will be amended or repealed in order to better respect the rights to privacy and data protection provided by Articles 7 and 8 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, and the right to privacy outlined in Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
retention Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:08:43 ENG


August 2011

Fichero AudioUSA - The Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago Rules Rumsfeld Can Be Held Liable for Torture of U.S. Citizens in War Zones. (Government Accountabilty Project; Inter Press Service; Vance v. Rumsfeld, Nos. 10-1687, 10-2442; Equipo Nizkor). Radio Nizkor, 16Aug11.

On August 8th, 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago in the case Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel v. Donald Rumsfeld and The United States of America, ruled that two American citizens can continue with their lawsuit holding former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld personally responsible for their alleged torture.

Both plaintiffs worked as contractors in Iraq and were wrongfully detained and subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques" by American military officers.

"The Court agreed with several rulings of a lower court regarding the case. Specifically, the Seventh Circuit found that Vance and Ertel 'alleged in sufficient detail facts supporting Secretary Rumsfeld's personal responsibility for the alleged torture,' 'that Secretary Rumsfeld is not entitled to qualified immunity on the pleadings,' and that 'a Bivens remedy is available for the alleged torture of civilian U.S. citizens by U.S. military personnel in a war zone.' (Bivens remedies allow for citizens to sue for damages for constitutional violations committed by federal agents.)"

On Apr. 16, 2006, two U.S. contractors in Iraq's Red Zone were handcuffed, blindfolded and transported to Camp Cropper, a U.S. military facility located a few miles from Baghdad International Airport, where they were detained as security internees.

Held without a trial or court hearing and tortured, the plaintiffs are suing for damages rendered against them in Camp Cropper, where Rumsfeld and several other unnamed officials allegedly "developed, authorized and used harsh interrogation techniques on them", thus violating their basic civil, constitutional and human rights...

Out of many suits brought against Rumsfeld over the torture of detainees in Iraq, Vance is one of only two that has been allowed to proceed... On August 2, 2011, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, in Washington DC, upheld the validity of a constitutional rights claim by Doe against Rumsfeld for his role in the torturing and illegal imprisonment of Doe, a U.S. citizen who was working as a translator in Iraq.

The Vance-Ertel case exposes the myriad links between private contractors, U.S. forces, U.S. government officials and intelligence agencies that often converge in the dark cells of detention centres such as Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay and Camp Cropper...

Upon analysing whether plaintiffs' allegations of torture entail a violation of their constitutional right to substantive due process, the court said that "The Supreme Court 'has long held that certain interrogation techniques, either in isolation or as applied to the unique characteristics of a particular suspect, are so offensive to a civilized system of justice that they must be condemned under the Due Process Clause.'"

The court rejected the claim that government officials should be above the law, stating in its final decision, "We see no persuasive justification in ... case law or otherwise for Rumsfeld's most sweeping argument, which would deprive civilian U.S. citizens of a civil judicial remedy for torture or even cold-blooded murder by federal officials and soldiers, at any level, in a war zone."

"Given the totality of the plaintiffs' allegations, that they were interrogated with physical violence and threats, were kept in extremely cold cells without adequate clothing, were continuously deprived of sleep..., a reasonable official in Secretary Rumsfeld's position in 2006 would have known that this amounted to unconstitutional treatment of a civilian U.S. citizen detainee."

The court also stated that "The wrongdoing alleged here violates the most basic terms of the constitutional compact between our government and the citizens of this country..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
rumsfeld Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:15:18 ENG


June 2011

Fichero AudioEU/USA - European Commission's Legal Service says EU-USA PNR Agreement is not Compatible with Fundamental Rights. (StateWatch). Radio Nizkor, 28Jun11.

On May 18th, 2011, the European Commission's Legal Service sent a Note to the Director-General of Home Affairs stating that it does not consider the planned agreement with the USA to exchange PNR (Passenger Name Record) data on individuals is "compatible with fundamental rights".

The Commission, which has been in charge of negotiating the agreement with the USA, has circulated the final agreement prior to formally submitting it to the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament for their agreement. This draft was distributed among Delegations on May 20th, 2011.

Said agreement has not been amended to meet the concerns of the Legal Service. Formally, the European Parliament cannot amend the agreement but it has to agree it - in effect, the parliament can veto the planned Agreement.

The European Commission's Legal Service Note says that the Legal Service has reviewed the draft agreement in respect of fundamental rights and: "considers that there are grave doubts as to its compatibility with the fundamental right to data protection." It concludes in fact that the Legal Service "does not consider the agreement in its present form as compatible with fundamental rights." [...]

On this matter, Tony Bunyan, Statewatch Director, comments:

"Secret Minutes of EU-US meetings since 2001 show that they have always been a one-way channel with the US setting the agenda by making demands on the EU. When the EU does make rare requests like on data protection, because US law only offers protection and redress to US citizens, they are bluntly told that the the US is not going to change its data protection system - as they were at the EU-US Justine and Home Affairs Ministerial Meeting in Washington on 8-9 December 2010.

This Agreement does not meet EU data protection standards of proportionality or purpose limitation, nor does it provide judicial redress to data subjects or any guarantee of independent oversight.

The European Parliament should refuse to consent to this Agreement as it is empowered to do under the Lisbon Treaty."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
pnrdata7 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:07:26 ENG


November 2010

Fichero AudioEU - European Commission announces strategy to strengthen EU data protection rules. (EPIC, Europa, European Data Protection Supervisor Press Service). Radio Nizkor, 26Nov10.

What happens to your personal data when you board a plane, open a bank account, or share photos online? How is this data used and by whom? How do you permanently delete profile information on social networking websites? Can you transfer your contacts and photos to another service?

Controlling your information, having access to your data, being able to modify or delete it – these are essential rights that have to be guaranteed in today's world.

The European Commission announced on November 4th, 2010, a strategy to "protect individuals' data in all policy areas, including law enforcement, while reducing red tape for business and guaranteeing the free circulation of data within the EU.

The key goals include, as the Electronic Privacy Information Center informs, "strengthening the rights of individuals, enhancing the free flow of information, extending privacy safeguards to police and criminal justice records systems, ensuring high levels of protection for data transferred outside of the European Union, and more effective enforcement of privacy rules. The new policy will build on the 1995 EU Data Directive which is the foundation for much of privacy law across Europe".

The current regulatory framework is basically provided by the Directive 95/46 of the European Parliament and the Council, of October 24th 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data". This general Data Protection Directive has been complemented by other legal instruments, such as the e-Privacy Directive for the communications sector..

In 2009, the Commission launched a review of the current legal framework on data protection, starting with a high-level conference in May 2009, followed by a public consultation running until the end of 2009. Targeted stakeholders consultations were organised throughout 2010.

This policy review will be used by the European Commission with the results of a public consultation to revise the EU’s 1995 Data Protection Directive. Public submissions and comments can be made on the European Commission’s public consultation website until January 15, 2011.

Building on this, the Commission will present proposals for a new general data protection legal framework in 2011, which will then need to be negotiated and adopted by the European Parliament and the Council...

Peter Hustinx, the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), spoke to the press about this subject on November 15th. He emphasised the importance of the reform of legal framework for data protection and insisted on the need for a strong and effective data protection in a society where personal information is used in quantities that cannot be measured, very often without individuals being aware of it...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
epic2 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:15:56 ENG



Fichero AudioUsa - District Court affirms its dismissal of civil lawsuit brought by family members of wrongfully detained men who died at Guantánamo. (CCR). Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the American University Washington College of Law, 17Nov10


On September 29th, 2010, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia affirmed its decision to dismiss Al-Zahrani v. Rumsfeld, a civil lawsuit brought by the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) and co-counsel concerning the deaths of three Guantánamo prisoners in June 2006.

The Court denied plaintiffs' motions for reconsideration despite newly-available evidence from soldiers stationed at the base at the time of the deaths that strongly suggest the men were killed at a black site at Guantánamo and a government cover-up of the true cause and circumstances of the deaths. The government reported the deaths as suicides.

The case, filed on behalf of the families of two of the deceased, Yasser Al-Zahrani of Saudi Arabia and Salah Ali Abdullah Ahmed Al-Salami of Yemen, charged the government and 24 federal officials with responsibility for the men's abuse, wrongful detention and ultimate deaths...

The case was initiated in the District Court for the District of Columbia on June 10, 2008, and the defendants subsequently moved to dismiss. On February 16, 2010, the district court granted the defendants’ motions and dismissed the case, holding that national security considerations prevented the court from hearing the families' claims...

Following the dismissal, the families filed a motion for reconsideration on the basis of the evidence from the soldiers, as reported by Scott Horton in Harper's Magazine in January 2010, arguing that the new facts compelled the court to reopen the case and they requested for permission to amend their complaint to incorporate the Newly-Discovered Evidence...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
gtmo1 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:05:01 ENG


August 2010

Fichero AudioEU - Tackling terrorism through asset-freezing and terrorist designation, by Gilles de Kerchove, EU Counter-terrorism coordinator. (Conference: "Terrorism Lists, Executive Powers and Human Rights", Université Libre de Bruxelles, 20Oct09). Radio Nizkor, 16Aug10


On 20th October 2009 the Free University of Brussels hosted a conference on "Terrorism lists, executive powers and human rights".

The conference was organised by the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights and the Université Libre de Bruxelles with the support of the Transnational Institute and of Statewatch amongst other organisations.

This audio document contains the speech delivered by Gilles de Kerchove, EU Counter-terrorism coordinator, under the title "Tackling terrorism through asset-freezing and terrorist designation”. In his speech, Mr. de Kerchove:

1) Makes some prelimimary remarks regarding the "terrorist designation" system, stating that these proceedings are of an administrative nature. "It is not a criminal sanction, it is a purely administrative procedure". "The decision which leads to the listing of a person or an organization is a political and administrative one". At the same time, the speaker recognizes that "it has a very serious negative impact on the person’s freedom and property".

There are two systems in Europe based on two major UN Security Council resolutions:

a) UN listing resolution (UNSC Res. 1267, adopted in 1999). EU member states decided to implement this decision collectively by tasking the Commission to transpose it to the legal order of the Community and therefore ensure its direct application within the EU.

b) Based on SC Res. 1373 which asks all the members of the UN to have an autonomous mechanism to list individuals and organizations linked to terrorism; here again the EU decided to have a common mechanism. Following the TEC, the EU can only freeze assets of “external terrorists”, and not terrorists operating whithin the EU.

Some EU states do not have a legal base for administrative freezing, they use a judicial freezing, or confiscation, which is not exactly adequate according to the speaker.

2) Regarding the legal challenges in court, the speaker refers to the two main cases which prompted a significant change: a) The PMOI (People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran) decision of the Court of First Instance of the European Communities (CFI) regarding the EU autonomous designation procedure, where the Court declared that the proceedings did not respect the due process of law, and b) The Kadi decision of the European Court of Justice related to the UN designation (Court said that Council had not respected the due process rights of applicants, specially the right of defense and reversed the CFI's prior decision). As a result of these decisions, the Commission drafted an amendment to the EU Council 2002 Regulation in order to, in a way, take the improvement already decided after the PMOI case, and import them when implementing the UN SC decision.

3) Talking about the "way forward", the speaker said that "Some improvements have been done, but not enough. We need to improve further the fairness of the listing procedure. The main proposal brought forward is to create an independent review of the decision of the 1267 committee: either an specially constituted tribunal, or a sort of ombudsman, an impartial review panel to advise." "The procedure itself has to be improved, as well as the quality of the information on the base of which a person or an organization is put on the list. Accurate identification is necessary. A smaller but more accurate consolidated list needs to be produced, at least.

"The more the list will be reliable the more the European Court of Justice will abstain from reviewing the substance of the case". Mr. De Kerchove sees a problem on the wish of the Court of Justice to get access to the whole file, given that it is a classified file. "If we go that way, at some stage it would be necessary to set up within the Court of Justice a sort of special chamber to allow the court to have access to confidential matters."

According to the speaker, the challenges ahead can be summarized as: trying to convince the US to improve the UN listing regime and, 2nd step, the Lisbon Treaty.

Radio Nizkor's editorial note: This speech by Mr. De Kerchove clearly shows the arguments offered by the defenders of what we call the "global state of exception", as that term is used by Carl Schmitt. The argument uses "terrorism" as a basis to both expand executive powers and to quash civil liberties and human rights. It also consolidates a system outside the law which allows the circumvention of due process and the protection of civil rights to the extent that the classification of individuals and groups as “terrorists” becomes dependent solely on an administrative decision, not only lacking legitimacy from an international law perspective but also infringing the principle of the legality of state acts.

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
dekerchove Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:32:57 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioEU - The Slow Road to Justice: The case of Jose Maria Sison, by Jan Fermon, Progress Lawyers, attorney for Jose Maria Sison in Sison vs. EU. (Conference: "Terrorism Lists, Executive Powers and Human Rights", Université Libre de Bruxelles, 20Oct09). Radio Nizkor, 16Aug10


This audio document contains the speech delivered by Jan Fermon, attorney for Jose Maria Sison in Sison vs. EU, at the Conference "Terrorism Lists, Executive Powers and Human Rights", held on the 20th of October 2009 at the Free University of Brussels

Jose M. Sison is a Filipino national who has been listed on the EU list.

In his speech, Jan Fermon:

    - Describes some of the aspects of the proceedings and their developments.
    - Comments on the improvements referred to by Mr. De Kerchove (PMOI case) and their impact on Sison's case.
    - Comments on the devastating influence of the listing on the ongoing peace process in the Philippines.

ABOUT THE PROCEEDINGS: Jose M. Sison was listed first by the US on the 12th of August 2002. One day after he was put on a Dutch national list, for he is residing in Holland since 1988. In September 2002, after announcement that Sison will take this matter to a Dutch court, he was taken off the Dutch list and put on the EU list, so finally the case had to be brought before the European Court of Justice, where the decision process is much slower. The first decision took 5 years, the second one 2 more years. The ruling was in favor of Sison.

As for the reasons why Jose M. Sisan was on the list, the Dutch government provided no answer. The Council of the EU responded, first, that the information grounding his inclusion on the list was secret; when access to the file was then requested, the answer was that there was no file. Later on, it was admitted that there was a file, but the file was submitted to the Committee by a member state who took the documents back... and the information as to which state submitted the documents is also secret. According to the speaker:

1) In terms of due process of law this means that the EU, at least at this initial states, is acting as the Spanish inquisition, where the whole proceedings were conducted on a secret file and the arguments held against the “defendant” where kept away from him. It is the defendant who has to show that he/she is not a terrorist.

2) Consequences: The sanctions imposed upon the person are extremely harsh. Sison was not allowed to work in Holland, where he had a modest social allowance which was taken away from him. He could not have access to any insurance. Not being able to pay for rent of his apartment, he received a letter saying that he had to leave the apartment. It is all about a a sanction that was abolished by the French revolution, and that is call “civil death”, by which the individual is excluded as a person from all economic and social life.

The speaker asks himself whether all this has anything to do with the struggle against terrorism?. The answer is no. The amount of funds deposited in the bank account that was frozen was ridiculous. No suspicious transactions had ever been found by the Dutch authorities, as stated by the attorneys representing the state before the European Court of Justice. It is an instrument of political pressure rather than a rational and legitimate way of combating the financing of terrorism. In fact, Sison case shows that the question whether Sison had been involved on financing terrorism has not even been taken into consideration in any way.

WHO IS JOSE MARIA SISON: Jose Maria Sison was the founder of the Communist Party of the Philippines. He was arrested under the Marcos regime and held for 10 years in solitary confinement. Since 1969 an armed conflict exists in the Philippines and since the beginning of the '90 the government and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) decided to engage in a peace process, which led to the signing of important agreements, the first of which was a road map to the process itself and a "Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law", which included a Joint Monitoring Committee in charge of monitoring its implementation. Under this agreement both parties committed themselves to bring to justice human rights violators and war crimes perpetrators.

At the end of the 90's it became evident that the government of the Philippines could not deliver on land reform and democratic reforms, thus in violation of the initial agreement. At that time, before 9/11, the government put pressure on the NDFP to accept its proposals in the peace negotiations and threatened with criminalizing the movement and the negotiators as terrorists. Actually that was what happened.

RESULTS IN THE FIELD: These negotiations, based on respect for international law and mutual recognition, were broken as a result of the criminalization of political opponents and the rebellion. The government of the Philippines engaged since into a completely different approach. As a result: 800 people have been killed in the meanwhile. The EU legitimized through this listing this evolution in the Philippines and helped the government to depart from the negotiating process and to engage into brutal and savage repression against progressive movements, hence supporting a repressive government.

SISON has been delisted by the European court twice: in July 2007 on procedural grounds (lack of state of reasons and contradiction of evidence); then, 10 days before the court decided to annul the Council decisions by which Sison was put on the list between 2002 and 2006, the EU put him on the list again, hence leading to a second Sison case.

In this second series of listing the Council's state of reasons did not have to do with terrorism and was in contradiction with the own legal requirements the Council set up itself.

Fermon is rather skeptical about the purported advances concerning notification and the statement of reasons, given that when defense counsel got the proposed statement of reasons, counsel wrote a letter to the Council and all 27 member states warning of the blatant error...Two months later the EU was bringing forward the same statement of reasons.

In the last Sison case (Sep. 2009), the Court stated that a decision taken from an asylum case does not meet the requirements in order to put somebody on the list.

Jan Fermon sees an extremely worrying development in the announcement made by Gilles de Kerchove, the EU Counter-terrorism coordinator: The common position would be changed in such a way that in the future there will be no requirement for a decision by a competent judicial authority for investigation. Instead, the fact of the secret services having launched an investigation would be considered to be enough to put somebody on the list. According to De Kerchove speech, the legal requirement by which at least a judge or judicial authority should have looked into the case at the national level before the EU can list a person, would be eliminated.

For further contextual information on the Sison Case and the peace negotiation process in the Philippines you can listen to "Human Rights and Peace Negotiations: The Filipino Peace Negotiation Model", an interview to Rey Claro Casambre, Executive Director of the Philippine Peace Center, conducted by Prof. Richard Wilson, Professor of Law and Director of the International Human Rights Law Clinic, American University of Washington.

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
fermon Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:32:06 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioEU - Challenging arbitrary regimes: The case of the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI), by Prof. Eric David, President of the International Law Centre, ULB. (Conference: "Terrorism Lists, Executive Powers and Human Rights", Université Libre de Bruxelles, 20Oct09). Radio Nizkor, 16Aug10


This audio document contains the speech delivered by Prof. Eric David, President of the International Law Centre at the Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), at the Conference "Terrorism Lists, Executive Powers and Human Rights", held on the 20th of October 2009 at the ULB.

In his speech, prof. Eric David explains the history of the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI) and carries out a brief examination of the case law of the Court of First Instance of the European Court of Justice.

The PMOI case resulted in the first decision which changed the pernicious previous judgments issued in the Kadi and Al Barakaat case (2005, Court of First Instance of the European Communities) and the Ayadi case (2006).

The PMOI is a movement which participated at the end of the 70's and the beginning of the 80's in the overthrow of the Shah's regime. Differences between the MPOI and the Islamists arose soon after. The MPOI members were forced to leave Iran and sought refuge in Iraq. The PMOI conducted actions against the Iranian army between 1986 and 2000. In 2003 the US invaded Iraq and the PMOI declared themselves neutral, giving their weapons to the US. From that time de PMOI decided not to use violence against the regime in Iran.

Case before the Court of First Instance.

By a 2 May 2002 decision, the Council of the European Union included the PMOI in the Community list of persons and entities whose funds must be frozen in order to combat terrorism. Since then, the Council adopted several decisions giving effect to the list in question. The PMOI continued to be included in that list.

In its first judgment of 12 December 2006, the Court annulled one of the decisions on the grounds that it did not contain a sufficient statement of reasons, that it had been adopted in the course of a procedure during which the applicant's rights of defense had not been observed and that the Court itself was not in a position to review the lawfulness of that decision. Nevertheless, the PMOI remained on the list until December 2008.

In a second judgment of 23 October 2008 (the PMOI judgment), the Court annulled a later decision on the grounds that the Council had failed to give sufficient reasons as to why it had not taken into account the judgment of a British judicial authority, the Proscribed Organisations Appeals Commission ("POAC"), ordering the removal of the PMOI from the British list of terrorist organizations. In this judgment the Court recalled that it was imperative when adopting Community fund-freezing measures that the Council ensure the existence of a decision of a competent national judicial authority, as well as verifying any consequences of this decision at the national level. In its judgment, the POAC described as ‘perverse’ and ‘unreasonable’ the Home Secretary’s conclusion that the applicant was still an organization concerned in terrorism.

The European court decision to annul the decision of the Council to include in the list the PMOI faced opposition from France, where judicial proceedings against “X” (persons presumed to be members of the PMOI) had been initiated. Hence, on 15 July 2008 the Council adopted a new decision which maintained the PMOI’s name on the updated Community funds-freezing list.

The Court found again, on December 4, 2008, that the contested decision was adopted in breach of the PMOI's rights of defence. The Council has failed to explain the specific reasons as to why the acts ascribed to the persons alleged to be members of the PMOI should be attributed to the PMOI.

The refusal by the Council and the French authorities to communicate, even to the Court alone, the information contained in this document has the consequence that the Court is unable to review the lawfulness of the contested decision, which infringes the PMOI’s fundamental right to an effective judicial review.

Rights at stake in this situation:

The listing of an organization entails very serious material consequences: freezing of assets, obstacle to liberty of movement of its members, the right to property, freedom of movement, which are not respected. There is no judicial intervention in this.

Prof. Eric David responds to Gilles de Kerchove, saying that the administrative and political nature of the measure does not mean that you are beyond the obligation to go before a judge: there is a real violation of basic rights and it is quite clear that such a decision must be reached after a serious investigation of the evidence brought forward by a prosecutor.

The speaker acknowledges some change in the practice of the EU concerning insufficient statement of reasons when they decide to list a person or a movement. The statement of reasons in the case of the PMOI was just a 10 line assertion saying that the PMOI had carried out a number of violent acts against Irani persons, but this does not prove that these acts are terrorists acts. While discussing these matters one have to analyze whether the situation is a situation of armed conflict or rather of terrorist violence.

Beyond what is presented as an administrative sanction there is a real criminal sanction. Just what happened in this case. This listing entails important violations of human rights and civil liberties.

The UN human rights committed considers the right to a judge (art. 14 of the ICCPR: “everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal”) as a peremptory rule, as a ius cogens rule. However, the EU Council do not respect what is a peremptory rule, which is completely regrettable.

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
edavid Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:21:44 ESL/SPA


June 2010

Fichero AudioOnu - Informe elaborado por expertos de la ONU confirma la utilización de métodos ilegales sistemáticos en un régimen de excepción internacional. Radio Nizkor, 12jun10


Un detallado documento debatido en la ONU, que no fue rechazado de plano por ninguno de los países involucrados, confirmó el empleo de cárceles clandestinas en la lucha contra el terrorismo liderada por Estados Unidos, que hasta ahora era un secreto a voces.

El informe, encomendado por la Organización de las Naciones Unidas y elaborado por cuatro expertos independientes del foro mundial, expone en detalle los aspectos de esas actividades ilegales y también de los vuelos organizados para desplazar a los supuestos terroristas, con escalas en numerosos estados cómplices.

Se trata de un documento importante porque recoge en una sola pieza una información que se conocía desde hace tiempo, pero de manera fragmentada, y concentra su atención en demostrar el alcance de la detención secreta como un problema mundial y también como un asunto real de este momento.

Los autores del documento fueron el finlandés Martín Scheinin, Relator especial sobre la promoción y protección de los derechos humanos en la lucha contra el terrorismo, el austríaco Manfred Nowak, Relator especial sobre la cuestión de la tortura, la paquistaní Shaheen Ali, vicepresidenta del Grupo de Trabajo sobre Detención Arbitraria y el sudafricano Jeremy Sarkin, presidente del Grupo de Trabajo sobre Desapariciones Forzadas.

El informe de los expertos de la ONU asegura que son muchos los estados que recurren a la detención secreta de personas, aduciendo intereses de seguridad nacional que a menudo se ven como amenazas o emergencias sin precedentes o se presentan como tales...

El empleo de la detención secreta equivale en la práctica a sustraer a los detenidos del marco legal y dejar sin sentido las garantías que establecen diversos instrumentos internacionales, en particular el recurso de hábeas corpus, reflexiona el informe.

Los expertos recomiendan la prohibición expresa de la detención secreta, junto con cualquier otra forma de prisión no oficial.

Hay que llevar registros de detención inclusive en tiempos de conflicto armado como exigen los Convenios de Ginebra, que establecen el tratamiento debido a los combatientes y a la población civil en caso de guerras.

Scheinin se mostró satisfecho por la reacción del Consejo de Derechos Humanos, órgano ante el que el informe fue presentado, y comentó que según su opinión ha salido mejor de lo esperado y puntualizó que el informe ha sido controvertido, pero ahora parece que existe el reconocimiento de que el tema es lo suficientemente serio para no trivializarlo con obstáculos procesales.

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
gtmonu Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:12:18 ESL/SPA


March 2009

Fichero AudioUsa - El Centro por los Derechos Constitucionales hace público un informe que desmiente las informaciones del Almte. Walsh sobre Guantánamo. (Agencia International Press Service). Radio Nizkor, 02mar09


La situación de los prisioneros en la base naval estadounidense en Guantánamo, Cuba, se "deteriora" con rapidez, mientras las autoridades procesan "unos pocos cambios cosméticos", advirtió el Centro por los Derechos Constitucionales (CCR).

Estas noticias contradicen los últimos informes de autoridades militares de Estados Unidos, según los cuales los prisioneros recibían un trato "humano".

El CCR difundió el 23feb09 un informe sobre las condiciones de reclusión en los bloques denominados cinco, seis y Echo, tras la conferencia de prensa brindada por el vicejefe de operaciones navales, almirante Patrick M. Walsh. En el reporte que elevó a la Casa Blanca, Walsh concluyó que Guantánamo cumple con las normas establecidas en las Convenciones de Ginebra.

El informe del CCR, "Conditions of Confinement at Guantanamo: Still in Violation of the Law" ("Condiciones de confinamiento en Guantánamo: Todavía en violación de la ley") rechaza las conclusiones de Walsh.

Los redactores del estudio cubrieron el periodo enero-febrero de 2009 y tomaron en cuenta nuevos testimonios de abogados y detenidos. Según el mismo, "[L]os detenidos en Guantánamo han continuado sufriendo confinamiento solitario, abusos psicológicos, alimentación forzada abusiva de huelguistas de hambre, abusos religiosos, y abusos físicos y amenazas de violencia de parte de guardias y de equipos de la Fuerza de Reacción Inmediata"...

El director ejecutivo del CCR, Vincent Warren, llamó al presidente de Estados Unidos, Barack Obama, a "remediar y poner fin rápidamente al Guantánamo creado por su predecesor, sin blanquearlo".

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
ccr Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:08:44 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioUsa/Afg - Los prisioneros en la cárcel de Bagram continúan en un régimen de estado de excepción y sin reconocimiento jurídico. (Agencia International Press Service). Radio Nizkor,02mar09


Muchos defensores de los derechos humanos aplaudieron al presidente de Estados Unidos, Barack Obama, por ordenar el próximo cierre de la cárcel en la base naval de Guantánamo, Cuba. Muchos otros preguntaron entonces qué pasaría con la de Bagram, en Afganistán.

Abogados del Departamento de Justicia (fiscalía general) de Obama respondieron esa interrogante recientemente en tribunales federales: el Poder Ejecutivo asumirá la misma posición que durante la presidencia de George W. Bush. En otras palabras, los más de 600 detenidos en la base aérea estadounidense en Bagram no tienen derecho a que tribunales del país norteamericano analicen la legalidad de su reclusión. El Departamento de Justicia entiende que ninguna de las sentencias sobre Guantánamo puede aplicarse en beneficio de los recluidos en Bagram, pues los tribunales estadounidenses no tienen jurisdicción sobre ellos y su cautiverio responde a una operación militar en curso.

Algunos dicen ser víctimas de "entregas extraordinarias" ("extraordinary renditions") de la Agencia Central de Inteligencia (CIA), mecanismo por el cual se trasladó en el periodo de Bush a personas que no pueden ser legalmente arrestadas en Estados Unidos a países dispuestos a usar tratamientos inhumanos contra ellos. Muchos más dicen haber sido torturados y abusados en esa cárcel, ubicada en las afueras de Kabul.

En el caso Boumediene versus Bush, entablado por un ciudadano de Bosnia-Herzegovina preso en Guantánamo, "la Corte Suprema sostuvo que los detenidos" allí "tienen derecho al hábeas corpus para apelar su detención", pero no limitó ese derecho a Guantánamo. El juez Anthony Kennedy, miembro conservador de la Corte Suprema, dijo que "no sería benevolente con funcionarios que encarcelen a personas en otros países para evitar la jurisdicción de los tribunales estadounidenses", indicó Marjorie Cohn, presidenta del Sindicato Nacional de Abogados.

Observadores dicen no estar sorprendidos de que Obama siga el modelo de Bush... A comienzos de febrero, la fiscalía mantuvo ante un tribunal federal en San Francisco la invocación del gobierno anterior del "secreto de Estado", para impedir que la justicia considerara la demanda de un etíope residente en Gran Bretaña y víctima de una "entrega extraordinaria". Se trata de Binyam Mohamed, quien hasta hace muy poco estuvo prisionero en Guantánamo. La Corte Suprema británica dejó en reserva siete párrafos de una sentencia en un caso presentado por defensores de Mohamed y que daban crédito a las torturas que el demandante asegura haber sufrido. El tribunal explicó que el Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos había amenazado, en una carta enviada al Departamento de Relaciones Exteriores británico, con reconsiderar la cooperación bilateral en inteligencia...

La ONU ha criticado en un informe reciente la condición de reclusión de los prisioneros en Bagram. Por otro lado, aunque a la Cruz Roja se le permitió visitar a detenidos, sus conclusiones son mantenidas en secreto. Además, las fuerzas armadas estadounidenses rechazaron pedidos de la ONU para realizar visitas similares...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
bagram Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:09:03 ESL/SPA


May 2008

Fichero AudioUE - Un informe admite que algunos Gobiernos de la UE apoyaron programas de tortura de la CIA. (Agencia International Press Service). Radio Nizkor, 21may08


La connivencia entre Gobiernos de la Unión Europea (UE) y el de Estados Unidos en un programa secreto de torturas y secuestros socava las pretensiones de la UE de defender los derechos humanos, según un informe interno.

En 2001, la UE instruyó a los diplomáticos que la representan sobre los criterios para oponerse a los malos tratos sufridos por detenidos en otros países. Esas pautas tenían origen en el compromiso declarado de "desarrollar una acción sistemática y sostenida contra la tortura".

Una nueva evaluación de la UE sobre la aplicación de esos parámetros admite que algunos gobiernos practicaron un doble discurso, al implicarse en el programa denominado de "entregas extraordinarias" operado por la Agencia Central de Inteligencia (CIA) de Estados Unidos. Este mecanismo es empleado para capturar a sospechosos de terrorismo y transferirlos, sin pasar por los tribunales, a terceros estados que cometen torturas, según activistas.

En el informe interno se especifica que se debería garantizar el "pleno respeto" a los derechos humanos al formular políticas de lucha contra el terrorismo, sin permitir la expulsión de extranjeros a sus países de origen si hay probabilidades de que sean torturados, perseguidos o asesinados allí.

Un informe elaborado en 2007 por una comisión investigadora del Parlamento Europeo concluyó que al menos 1.245 vuelos de la CIA atravesaron espacio aéreo del bloque o aterrizaron en sus aeropuertos entre fines de 2001 y fines de 2005.

El resultado de la connivencia entre la UE y la CIA es "una brecha de credibilidad" a la hora de recomendar "en otros países" medidas contra la tortura, en palabras del eurodiputado socialista británico Claude Moraes...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
uetort Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:06:08 ESL/SPA


April 2008

Fichero AudioIrq - La Unión Europea no tiene normas claras en cuanto a la actuación de mercenarios en Iraq. (Agencia International Press Service ). Radio Nizkor, 07Apr08.


La Unión Europea carece de "pautas claras" cuando recurre a empresas privadas de seguridad para proteger a sus funcionarios en Iraq.

Un informe presentado en el Parlamento Europeo señaló que la subcontratación de compañías para actividades militares resultó muy polémica desde que Estados Unidos invadió ese país hace cinco años.

Las autoridades iraquíes responsabilizaron a la empresa de seguridad estadounidense Blackwater de un tiroteo que terminó con 11 muertos en septiembre de 2007.

Las acusaciones de que mercenarios de Blackwater dispararon indiscriminadamente se vieron seguidas de una serie de quejas acerca de que esas empresas, que también ofrecen guardaespaldas a diplomáticos europeos, han demostrado prestar poco respeto a los derechos humanos.

Los gobiernos de la UE deben ser transparentes en lo relativo a esas firmas, sostiene el informe debatido el 09 de marzo de 2008 en el Parlamento Europeo.

El documento advierte que, a menos que se establezcan reglas claras para las actividades de esas empresas, "será extremadamente difícil que el Parlamento Europeo acceda a ampliar la presencia física de la UE en Iraq"...

Nombre del Fichero Formato Real PlayerFormato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
blackwater Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:07:07 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioIrq - Testimonios de veteranos dicen que la tortura en Iraq y en la base naval en Guantánamo es parte de las operaciones militares. (Agencia International Press Service). Radio Nizkor, 07Apr08.


Episodios de tortura y maltrato contra prisioneros en Iraq y en la base naval en Guantánamo, Cuba, salieron a la luz, detallados por soldados estadounidenses, en una reunión organizada por veteranos opuestos a la guerra.

De estos testimonios, la organización Veteranos de Iraq Contra la Guerra concluyó que los actos brutales de las fuerzas de Estados Unidos hoy ampliamente conocidos por el público no han sido hechos aislados perpetrados por "unas pocas manzanas podridas", como aseguran políticos y militares.

Por el contrario, advirtieron, esas acciones se han constatado a diario, y respondido a instrucciones y órdenes precisas dictadas por los comandantes.

"Uno puede convertirse en guardia de un campo de concentración sin tomar muchas decisiones propias", dijo en ese sentido Christopher Arent, de 24 años, ante el auditorio convocado por Veteranos de Iraq contra la Guerra el fin de semana... Arent dijo haber perdido el entusiasmo cuando lo trasladaron a Guantánamo en 2003... "Llegaba a la oficina a las 4.30 de la madrugada y a veces ya había algún prisionero en la sala de interrogatorios. Allí la temperatura era de unos seis grados bajo cero y el volumen de la música era atronador. Los prisioneros estaban encadenados al piso de pies y manos", dijo...

El ex sargento Domingo Rosas, destacado entre abril de 2003 y abril de 2004 en la localidad iraquí de Al-Qayim, cerca de la frontera con Siria, aseguró haber recibido la orden de no dejar dormir a los prisioneros durante su turno de guardia...

Andrew Duffy, quien también fue miembro de la Guardia Nacional y prestó servicio como médico en la prisión de Abu Ghraib, cerca de Bagdad, relató que se negaba a los detenidos todo tipo de asistencia, aun en casos críticos...

Veteranos de Iraq contra la Guerra difundieron una declaración en la que destacaron que "estos testimonios no se refieren a conductas individuales, sino a la naturaleza de la ocupación" en Iraq... "Le pedimos al Departamento de Defensa que deje de decir que se puede lograr lo imposible. Nos enfrentamos con un problema político que no tiene solución militar. Esta guerra no puede ganarse: es una ocupación que sólo puede ser terminada", concluyeron.

Nombre del FicheroFormato Real PlayerFormato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
tortura1 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:07:42 ESL/SPA


March 2008

Fichero AudioUsa - La militarización progresiva de la política exterior elimina el control civil de las operaciones exteriores. (Agencia International Press Service ). Radio Nizkor, 31Mar08.


La política exterior de Estados Unidos es cada vez más dominada por el Pentágono en vez del Departamento de Estado (cancillería), y el Congreso legislativo no hace nada para detenerlo, alertaron organizaciones de derechos humanos.

El Departamento de Defensa no sólo logra más dominio con la creación de sus nuevos programas de ayuda militar, en el marco de su "guerra contra el terrorismo", sino también a través del creciente poder de los "comandantes combatientes", altos mandos que supervisan las operaciones militares en todo el mundo, según el informe titulado "Preparen, apunten, política exterior", divulgado el jueves por una coalición de organizaciones no gubernamentales.

De hecho, un documento de estrategia preparado el año pasado por el Comando Sur, que supervisa todas las operaciones en el Caribe y América Latina al sur de México, proponía que esa oficina militar coordinara además a todas las agencias estadounidenses relevantes, incluyendo las civiles, "para cubrir toda la gama de desafíos regionales"...

Este informe es el último de una serie que han alertado sobre la creciente militarización de la política exterior estadounidense, sobre todo bajo el gobierno de Bush.

En mayo de 2007, por ejemplo, el organismo independiente de control Centro por la Integridad Pública, divulgó en su sitio web información sobre el flujo de miles de millones de dólares del Pentágono a gobiernos represivos como los de Djibouti, Etiopía, Pakistán y Uzbekistán, fondos que el Departamento de Estado muy probablemente no habría aprobado siguiendo las disposiciones sobre derechos humanos incluidas en las leyes estadounidenses sobre ayuda exterior.

El proyecto de investigación del Centro por la Integridad Pública, titulado "Daño colateral", concluyó que el Congreso ejerció poca o ninguna vigilancia sobre el desembolso de esa ayuda.

Informes de la Oficina de Responsabilidad Gubernamental del Congreso, e incluso del Comité de Relaciones Exteriores del Senado, han reflejado también la preocupación de que la influencia y las operaciones en el exterior del Departamento de Estado y de otras agencias civiles están siendo eclipsadas por los mayores recursos del Pentágono y sus comandantes combatientes...

Nombre del FicheroFormato Real PlayerFormato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
dosmil Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:08:09 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioIrq - El quinto aniversario de la invasión de Iraq muestra un país arrasado y sin futuro alguno a corto plazo. (Agencia International Press Service ). Radio Nizkor, 26Mar08.


Al cumplirse cinco años de la invasión de Estados Unidos a Iraq, la tétrica realidad y la opinión pública iraquí desmienten al gobierno del país ocupante, según el cual la situación allí ha mejorado.

El vicepresidente estadounidense Dick Cheney declaró el lunes, en visita sorpresiva a Iraq, que la invasión lanzada el 20 de marzo de 2003 había sido un "esfuerzo exitoso".

Pero las cifras dejan en evidencia que uno de cada tres iraquíes abandonó su hogar, depende de la asistencia de emergencia para sobrevivir o murió a causa de la invasión y la ocupación. Eso es lo que Cheney considera un "esfuerzo exitoso".

La organización humanitaria Just Foreign Policy calculó que más de un millón de iraquíes murieron tras la invasión y ocupación de su país...

Más de cuatro millones de iraquíes debieron abandonar sus hogares, y alrededor de la mitad de ellos se vieron obligados a dirigirse a otros países, según el Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (Acnur).

Uno de cada cuatro residentes de Bagdad, con seis millones de habitantes, debió dejar su vivienda, indicó la Media Luna Roja iraquí...

El desempleo, que ya se ubicaba en 32 por ciento de la población económicamente activa, osciló durante la ocupación entre 40 y 70 por ciento, según el gobierno iraquí...

Bagdad se convirtió en la ciudad más peligrosa del mundo, en gran parte a causa de la política estadounidense de enfrentar a facciones políticas y a grupos étnicos y religiosos entre sí...

Las estrategias de limpieza étnica y religiosa, respaldadas por las fuerzas ocupantes, eliminaron virtualmente todas las áreas mixtas de la capital...

Nombre del Fichero Formato Real PlayerFormato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
quinto Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:06:57 ESL/SPA


January 2008

Fichero AudioEU - La Asamblea Parlamentaria del Consejo de Europa dice que las "listas negras" del Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU y de la UE violan el derecho al debido proceso. Radio Nizkor, 27ene08


La Asamblea Parlamentaria del Consejo de Europa (PACE) considera que los procedimientos utilizados por el Consejo de Seguridad de las Naciones Unidas y la Unión Europea para elaborar las listas negras de individuos y grupos supuestamente vinculados al terrorismo, violan derechos básicos y son "completamente arbitrarios". En consecuencia, sus miembros insisten en que estos procedimientos deben ser revisados "para preservar la credibilidad de la lucha internacional contra el terrorismo".

El 23ene08 la PACE sometió a votación una recomendación sobre la cuestión de las listas negras del Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU y de la Unión Europea. Esta recomendación fue aprobada con 110 votos a favor, 2 en contra y 3 abstenciones. Votaron en contra los parlamentarios Cezar Florin PREDA (Rumanía) del grupo del Partido Europeo de los Pueblos y Dragan ŠOC (Montenegro), miembro de la Asamblea por el mismo partido. Se abstuvieron Ryszard BENDER (Polonia), del Grupo Demócrata Europeo, Tomáš JIRSA (República Checa), también del Grupo Demócrata Europeo y Ladislav SKOPAL (República Checa), parlamentario del Grupo Socialista Europeo.

La publicación el 16nov07 del proyecto de resolución y recomendación, así como del memorándum explicativo sobre las listas negras, ha ayudado a reavivar la discusión sobre esta cuestión en los círculos políticos y académicos.

Ese memorándum explicativo o informe fue publicado por la Comisión de Asuntos Jurídicos y Derechos Humanos de la Asamblea Parlamentaria del Consejo de Europa, siendo relator del mismo el parlamentario suizo Dick Marty, perteneciente a la Alianza de los Liberales y Demócratas por Europa. Entre las conclusiones del informe, Dick Marty manifiesta que "Es lamentable y preocupante que organismos internacionales tan importantes y prestigiosos, fundados sobre la protección de los derechos humanos, el estado de derecho y la democracia, hayan decidido retroceder en estos valores, mientras el mundo permanece casi indiferente. Da que pensar cómo los estados abandonan tan fácilmente los principios recogidos en el Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos... Los gobiernos lavan su conciencia invocando, sencillamente, la prioridad que deben acordar a las decisiones del Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU. Esto... no dispensa a los estados de abstenerse de aplicar "procedimientos" arbitrarios que son contrarios a todos los principios fundamentales de la cultura jurídica de los países civilizados. Ciertamente la lucha contra el terrorismo es una necesidad que nadie puede cuestionar. Pero consideramos inaceptable renunciar, en nombre de esta lucha, a los principios fundamentales de una sociedad democrática. Esto es intolerable desde el punto de vista jurídico, éticamente inaceptable y difícilmente defendible como una cuestión de eficacia."

"... [L]a práctica actual de las listas negras es escandalosa y mancha el honor de las instituciones que hacen uso de ella en estos términos. La elaboración de listas negras sin respetar los derechos más elementales cuestiona la credibilidad de la lucha contra el terrorismo y como consecuencia reduce su eficacia. Es posible desarrollar una prevención eficaz y una persecución rigurosa del crimen de carácter terrorista al tiempo que se respetan los principios fundamentales del Convenio Europeo de Derechos Humanos; respetar estos principios es incluso indispensable para que todos los ciudadanos apoyen y se identifiquen con esta lucha. La injusticia es un aliado importante de los terroristas: por tanto, combatámosla también. Esta es precisamente la finalidad de los textos presentados a consideración de la Asamblea por la Comisión de asuntos jurídicos."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
listas Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:26:17 ESL/SPA


July 2007

Fichero AudioEU - European Parliament passes resolution on the new EU-USA PNR agreement calling it "substantially flawed". Radio Nizkor, 19Jul07


Members of the European Parliament fear that the new Passenger Name Record agreement between the European Union and the United States, reached on June 28th, 2007, fails to protect citizens' data.

The European Parliament passed a resolution on July 12, 2007 on this agreement expressing that that the new deal still fails to offer an adequate level of data protection and it has been concluded without any involvement of parliaments from both sides, lacking democratic oversight.

While recognising the difficult conditions under which the negotiations took place, MEPs regret that the EU-US agreement for the transfer of Passenger Name Records is "substantively flawed", in particular by "open and vague definitions and multiple possibilities for exception".

Even though the European Parliament welcomed the provision that existing data protection law for US citizens (US Privacy Act) will be extended administratively to EU citizens' data processed in America, MEPs felt there is still much more to be improved... It "criticises the failure of the new PNR agreement to offer an adequate level of protection of PNR data, and regrets the lack of clear and proportionate provisions as regards the sharing of information and retention and supervision by data protection authorities; is concerned about the numerous provisions that are to be implemented at the discretion of the US Homeland Security Department"...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
pnrdata6 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:13:39 ENG



Fichero AudioEU - European Commission to propose EU Passenger Name Record travel surveillance system . (StateWatch). Radio Nizkor, 19Jul07


After the European Union concluded on June 28, 2007 a controversial new agreement with the USA giving its agencies access to PNR (passenger name record) personal data on everyone flying to and from that country, the European Commissioner for justice and home affairs, Mr Frattini, said that he would present a Framework Decision for a EU PNR system in October.

Mr Frattini is reported as saying that, in the wake of the attempted attacks in London and Glasgow: "I suggest that all member states should equip themselves with a PNR system and share information with others when relevant".

Mr Frattini's proposal is all the more confusing as there appears to have been no reference to the implementation of the April 2004 EU Directive on the obligation of carriers to communicate passenger data which had to be implemented in all member states by 5 September 2006...

The data to be sent comprises, according to said Directive, personal data on each passenger: type of travel document (eg: passport/visa), nationality, full name and date of birth, that is, the data held on the "machine readable zone" (MRZ) of passports (just four items of data). This is known as Advance Passenger Information or "API".

It appears that Spain is the first EU country to start collecting API (Advance Passenger Information) from incoming travellers as from 13 June 2007 - the UK requires Advance Passenger Information from targeted countries.

Article 3.1 of the 2004 Directive refers to transferring data "by the end of check-in". However, airlines are likely to collect Advance Passenger Information data when the ticket is booked days or weeks before the flight. This data could be passed to the national agencies well prior to check-in and be followed by a final passenger manifest after check-in.

So the question has to be asked: If the collection of Advance Passenger Information at the flight booking stage becomes the norm why is Passenger Name Record needed?...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
pnrdata5 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:13:10 ENG


June 2007

Fichero AudioEU/US - EU negotiators agree that PNR data will be held for 7 years, doubling the current 3.5 years, and also that data can be access for a further 8 years. (StateWatch). Radio Nizkor, 29Jun07


An "Extraordinary meeting" of the Permanent Representatives Committee (COREPER) was held in Luxembourg on 12 June 2007 during the Justice and Home Affairs Council. The sole subject on the agenda was the EU-USA passenger name record (PNR) agreement.

The current "Undertakings" state that PNR data will be held for: "3.5 years from the date the data is accessed (or received) from the air carrier's reservation system. After 3.5 years, PNR data that has not been manually accessed during that period of time, will be destroyed. PNR data that has been manually accessed during the initial 3.5 year period will be transferred by the Customs and Border Protection Department to a deleted record file." Under the proposed new agreement: "PNR data would be kept for 7 years as "active" data and 8 years as "dormant" data." Under the existing agreement data which has not been accessed for 3.5 years is destroyed.

Under the proposed agreement all data will be held for 15 years...

The USA has used the successful challenge against the legal basis of the 2004 EU-US agreement (plus "Undertakings") on the transfer of passenger name records in the European Court of Justice by the European Parliament to put forward significant changes - to which the EU has agreed.

"What is particularly outrageous is that if the law changes in the USA the way the agreement is implemented changes too without any renegotiation - which is very worrying given the nature of new laws which remove the rights of suspects including habeaus corpus", commented Tony Bunyan, Statewatch editor...

On June 27th, 2007, two weeks after the EU Permanent Representatives Committee meeting on the agreement, the European Data Protection Supervisor, Peter Hustinx, addressed a letter to the German Council Presidency, expressing grave concern" at the proposals to:

  • extend the time personal data is held from 3.5 years to 15 years:
  • data can be passed to a "broad range of US agencies" with "no limitation" on its further processing;
  • the absence of a "robust legal mechanism" for EU citizens to "challenge misuse" of their data;
  • and the fact that the US "wants to avoid a binding agreement"
File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
pnrdata4 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:11:19 ENG


April 2007

Fichero AudioBM - Piden la dimisión del Presidente del Banco Mundial, Paul Wolfowitz, por corrupción y nepotismo. (International Press Service). Radio Nizkor, 15abr07.


Numerosas organizaciones no gubernamentales, ex altos funcionarios del Banco Mundial y el sindicato de la institución piden la renuncia de Wolfowitz por favorecer, de manera impropia y en violación de los protocolos internos, a su novia, Shaha Riza, con un aumento de salario y una transferencia al Departamento de Estado estadounidense. La polémica por este asunto se incrementó además por nuevas revelaciones sobre pasadas irregularidades de la funcionaria.

"Según el no gubernamental Government Accountability Project (GAP, Proyecto para la Responsabilidad del Gobierno), con sede en Washington, que investigó el caso desde el comienzo, fuentes internas del Banco confirmaron que Riza nunca había solicitado ni recibido permiso del organismo para trabajar en el SAIC, el mayor contratista de defensa del gobierno de Estados Unidos cuando Wolfowitz se desempeñaba como subsecretario de Defensa... La Junta del organismo multilateral no estaba al tanto de los generosos aumentos de salario que recibió Riza pese a que se encontraba en una "misión externa" en el Departamento de Estado de Estados Unidos."

Por su parte, el sindicato del Banco Mundial ha pedido la renuncia de Wolfowitz, pues "su conducta puso en tela de juicio la integridad y eficacia del Grupo del Banco Mundial y destruyó la confianza de sus empleados en su liderazgo". El sindicato advierte que no hubo representación de la asesoría legal del Banco durante las negociaciones del nuevo contrato de Shaha Riza, su pareja, aunque sí estaba presente su propio abogado personal. Señala también que el ex consejero general del Banco, Roberto Danino, rechazó los términos de la transferencia de la funcionaria al Departamento de Estado, lo que llevó a Wolfowitz a excluirlo de las negociaciones del contrato...

A todo ello se añade el hecho de que el actual presidente del Banco Mundial fue uno de los principales ideólogos de la invasión a Iraq, y que de los cinco nombramientos de altos funcionarios internacionales realizados por Wolfowitz en sus dos años en la presidencia del Banco, tres correspondieron a miembros de gobiernos que apoyaron la guerra de Estados Unidos contra Iraq: se trata del nuevo vicepresidente para Asuntos Externos del Banco y ex viceprimer ministro de Jordania, Marwan Muasher; la ex Ministra española de Asuntos Exteriores, Ana Palacio, nombrada Primera Vicepresidenta y Consejera Jurídica General del Grupo del Banco Mundial en junio de 2006; y Juan José Daboub, ex ministro de Finanzas de El Salvador y que se desempeña ahora como uno de los dos directores gerente del Banco.

Estos hechos llevan también a pensar que "Paul Wolfowitz usó su cargo para recompensar a gobiernos y personas que ayudaron a Estados Unidos en la guerra de Iraq", tal y como declaró el director del Programa Estratégico de la organización no gubernamental New America Foundation, Steven Clemens...

El formato Real Media de este fichero, permite visualizar documentos de análisis contextual sincronizadamente con el audio. Esto es posible con el programa Real One Player. Más Información.

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
wolfo Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:19:05 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioUsa - La Corte Suprema decidió no resolver sobre la cuestión del centro de detención ilegal de Guantánamo. (International Press service). Radio Nizkor, 08Abr07

"La indolencia de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de Estados Unidos ante el clamor de los más de 300 detenidos en la base naval de este país en Guantánamo, Cuba, es objeto de duros cuestionamientos por parte de activistas y expertos en derechos humanos.

La Corte decidió el 2 de abril no atender los casos de los musulmanes tomados prisioneros en la "guerra" de Estados Unidos "contra el terrorismo" y recluidos en Guantánamo, hasta que no se agoten las vías legales en tribunales de apelaciones de menor rango.

Como consecuencia, el principal tribunal estadounidense se negó a revisar la legalidad de la detención hasta que se cumplan, en todos los casos, los procedimientos previstos en la Ley de Tratamiento a Detenidos (DTA), aprobada en 2005.

Esa norma permite apelaciones de las decisiones tomadas por paneles militares ante tribunales civiles, pero muy limitadas...

Los tres jueces que redactaron el fallo, Anthony M. Kennedy y John Paul Stevens, anotaron que deseaban ver el proceso establecido por la DTA en acción antes de determinar si se trata de un sustituto adecuado para el hábeas corpus...

Abogados del Centro para los Derechos Constitucionales consideraron que el proceso en estos tribunales es "una farsa"..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
suprema Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:06:21 ESL/SPA


September 2006

Fichero AudioUsa - The legal situation of the Guantanamo detainees, the Supreme Court decision on Hamdan v. Rumsfeld and its implications for the future. (By Richard Wilson). Radio Nizkor, 28Sep06.


Richard Wilson, Professor of Law and Director of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the American University of Washington, provides us with a new and in depth update on the Detainees at Guantanamo Bay, their legal situation and in particular the legal situation of Wilson's client Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen detained by U.S. forces in July 2002 when he was 15 years old.

Richard Wilson has collaborated with Equipo Nizkor for several years. He is also a member of Equipo Nizkor‘s Board of Directors.

Wilson has addressed for Radio Nizkor the situation of the Guantanamo Detainees and the US Administration policies on Guantanamo on two previous occasions:

On October 2004, Radio Nizkor interviewed Wilson on the the developments regarding the situation of the Guantanamo detainees and, at that time, the current status of legal issues in Guantanamo, where he addressed topics as important as:

  • The relationship of the Guantanamo Bay situation and the torture scandal at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq
  • The publication of internal Memoranda bu high ranking officials within the Bush Administration regarding the approval of the use of torture, and
  • The very important decision of the US Supreme Court in June of 2004, namely Rasul vs. Bush.

Previously, Radio Nizkor had posted online Richard Wilson's speech "The situation of Detainees at Guantanamo Bay and the Inter-American Human Rights Commission Response", which he delivered at the Seminar on a "States of Exception and Strategies for Peace and for the Defense of Civil Rights", organized by Equipo Nizkor and held in Brussels between the 27th. and the 29th. of March 2003.

In this speech Wilson analyzed the "legal black hole" surrounding the status of the Guantanamo detainees, as well as the question of precautionary measures that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights had asked the US government to adopt.

In this new and in depth interview Richard Wilson provides the audience with:

    1) An Update on the Detainees at Guantanamo Bay, their legal situation and in particular the legal situation of Wilson’s client Omar Khadr. [Starting at 00:02:48]
    2) A detailed review of the decision by the US Supreme Court in the case of Hamdan vs. Rumsfeld decided on June 29th, 2006, and [Starting at 00:31:15]
    3) A detailed comment on the possible legal implications for the future of the Hamdan decision and some of the current pending actions in the US Courts that have been left unresolved by this decision. [Starting at 01:10:39]

Upon addressing those matters, Wilson provides the audience with an outstanding systematization of the current legal situation of the Guantanamo Detainees and the issues at stake in order to properly exercise their defense.

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
update Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 01:34:15 ENG


July 2006

Fichero AudioUE - La plainte de M. Al-Masri recevable selon Martin Hoffman, procureur de Munich chargé d'instruire le dossier. Radio Nizkor, 14jui06


"Au cours de nos recherches, nous n'avons découvert aucune pièce infirmant les déclarations de M. Al-Masri" qui accuse la CIA de l'avoir enlevé, a indiqué le 10 juillet devant les députés Martin Hoffman, procureur de Munich chargé d'instruire le dossier. Témoignant devant la commission temporaire sur les activités présumées illégales de la CIA en Europe, il a cependant indiqué ne disposer d'aucune preuve de la participation des autorités ou des services secrets allemands dans cet enlèvement.

Citoyen allemand d'origine libanaise, Khaled Al-Masri affirme que des agents de la CIA l'ont enlevé en décembre 2003 et détenu pendant cinq mois dans une prison secrète en Afghanistan.

Il avait raconté son histoire devant la commission parlementaire au mois de mars, affirmant qu'il avait été arrêté lors d'un voyage dans l'ancienne République yougoslave de Macédoine, séquestré durant 23 jours dans un hôtel de Skopje, interrogé, puis transporté "les yeux bandés et un capuchon sur la tête" dans une prison secrète en Afghanistan où il aurait été torturé à plusieurs reprises. Il a été finalement relâché sans qu'aucune charge ne soit retenue contre lui..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
masri Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:08:19 FRA



Fichero AudioEU - La CIA "clairement responsable" des activités illégales en Europe avec la complicité de certains Etats membres. Radio Nizkor, 11jui06


Selon le Parlement européen, "dans un certain nombre de cas, la CIA ou d'autres services américains se sont rendus clairement responsables de l'arrestation, de l'expulsion, de l'enlèvement et de la détention illégaux de terroristes allégués" en Europe.

Le texte souligne également la complicité de certains Etats membres. La commission temporaire a reçu le feu vert du Parlement afin de poursuivre son travail pour six mois de plus.

Les députés ont adopté, le 6 juillet, un rapport intérimaire de la commission temporaire sur l'utilisation alléguée de pays européens par la CIA pour le transport et la détention illégale de prisonniers.

Le rapport de Giovanni Claudio FAVA (député italien qui fait partie du Group Socialiste européen) a été adopté par 389 voix pour, 137 contre et 55 abstentions.

Les députés rappellent que ces actions "ne correspondent pas à des concepts de droit international connus et sont contraires aux principes fondamentaux de la législation internationale en vigueur en matière de droits de l'homme".

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
pecia1 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:22:37 FRA



Fichero AudioUE - La commission d'enquête temporaire sur les activités illégales de la CIA rend ses premières conclusions aux députès, ainsi qu'au Conseil et à la Commission. Radio Nizkor, 14jui06 (Cet enregistrement correspond aux évenéments du 05jui06)


Le rapporteur de la commission d'enquête temporaire sur les activités illégales présumées de la CIA en Europe s'est exprimé devant les députés, mercredi 5 juillet, ainsi que le Conseil et la Commission. Selon lui, les restitutions extraordinaires sont un "fait", réalisé avec la complicité de certains Etats membres. Les députés ont toutefois exprimé des opinions parfois plus nuancées.

Le rapporteur du Parlement, Giovanni Claudio FAVA a rappelé à l'Assemblée qu'il était question de contribuer à faire la lumière sur les abus commis au nom de la lutte contre le terrorisme. Ou dans le cas présent, rechercher "la vérité sur une négation des droits", en l'occurrence "les droits refusés à ceux qui sont accusés d'être nos ennemis mais qui, en tant qu'êtres humains, en tant que suspects, ont ces droits - à un procès équitable, à une défense, à un jury et à un traitement digne-". Selon le rapporteur, "sans cela, il n'y a pas de loi, il n'y a que la force arbitraire, exercée par certains pays et acceptée par les autres"...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
pecia2 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:12:15 FRA



Fichero AudioUsa - Cuestionan medidas de excepción usadas por el Ejecutivo para obstruir investigaciones judiciales. (International Press service). Radio Nizkor, 11jul06


La costumbre del gobierno de George W. Bush de procurar sistemáticamente ampliar su poder en nombre de la "guerra contra el terror" quedó al desnudo una vez más, tras un histórico fallo de la Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos.

Ese alto tribunal falló el 29 de junio contra el procesamiento de los denominados "combatientes enemigos" en tribunales especiales ("comisiones") militares.

Bush alegaba que tenía, en su carácter de presidente, "derechos inherentes" previstos por la Constitución de su país para hacer "lo que sea necesario" en su tarea de proteger a los estadounidenses en tiempos de guerra.

En ese sentido, ha apelado sistemáticamente a la facultad de adjuntar a las leyes aprobadas por el Congreso legislativo, en el momento de su sanción, las denominadas "declaraciones firmadas" ("signing statements"), en las que indica cómo interpreta el Poder Ejecutivo la nueva norma y cómo será aplicada...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
bush Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:09:21 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioIta/Usa - El número dos de los servicios secretos italianos (SISMI) fue detenido por complicidad en un secuestro realizado por la CIA. Radio Nizkor, 11jul06


"El 'número dos' del servicio secreto de Italia SISMI fue detenido el 05 de julio por su presunta participación en el secuestro de un supuesto terrorista islámico realizado por la CIA...

De acuerdo con los reportes, Marco Mancini fue detenido a primera hora de la mañana en su casa cerca de Ravenna, en el norte de Italia , acusado de ser cómplice del secuestro en Milán del imán egipcio Hassan Mustafa Osama Naser, también conocido como Abu Omar, en febrero de 2003..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
sismi Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:05:21 ESL/SPA


June 2006

Fichero AudioEU - Le PE et l’Assemblée parlementaire du Conseil de l'Europe dénoncent la collusion délibérée de plusieurs Etats européennes avec la CIA. Radio Nizkor, 26jun06


La "Commission temporaire du Parlement sur l’utilisation présumée des pays européens par la CIA pour le transport et la détention illégale de prisonniers" a indiqué dans son rapport intérimaire adopté le 12 juin 2006, que la CIA était "directement responsable" des "restitutions extraordinaires", de "la saisie illégale, l'enlèvement et la détention de terroristes présumés sur le territoire des Etats membres", qui constituent des violations du droit international.

Les députés critiquent aussi les Etats membres pour leur passivité face aux agissements de la CIA, voire leur complicité avec celle-ci.

Le rapport --rédigé par le député italien Claudio FAVA-- a été adopté par 25 voix pour, moyennant 14 contre et 7 abstentions. Il indique que la CIA a utilisé des avions pilotés par des compagnies aériennes de premier rang pour le transfert illégal de terroristes présumés vers des pays utilisant couramment la torture pour l'interrogation des prisonniers...

D'autre part, la Commission des questions juridiques et des droits de l’homme de l’Assemblée parlementaire du Conseil de l’Europe a déclaré le 7 juin 2006 que les Etats-Unis ont progressivement tissé une « toile d’araignée » de disparitions, de détentions secrètes et de transferts illégaux d’un Etat à l’autre – grâce à la collaboration ou la tolérance d’Etats membres du Conseil de l’Europe.

Dans un projet de résolution adopté lors d’une réunion à Paris et inspiré d'un rapport de Dick Marty, la commission affirme que des centaines de personnes, même simplement soupçonnées de sympathie pour des organisations considérées terroristes, se sont ainsi retrouvées piégées...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
pecia Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:08:04 FRA



Fichero AudioEU - La Cour de justice annule la décision du Conseil d'autoriser les compagnies aériennes à transmettre aux autorités américaines des données à caractère personnel. Radio Nizkor, 26jun06


Pour la justice européenne, le transfert de données des voyageurs à l'administration américaine est illégal.

La Cour de Justice européenne, dans un arrêt redu le 30 Mai 2006, a jugé illégales les autorisations de transfert des données des passagers aériens aux autorités américaines données par la Commission et le Conseil.

Un accord entre les Etats-Unis et l'UE dans ce domaine a été signé au nom de la lutte contre le terrorisme mais, visiblement, contre la loi. L'arrêt de la Cour donne partiellement raison aux critiques émises par le Parlement européen mais ne résout pas tous les problèmes...

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
cour Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:12:59 FRA



Fichero AudioEu/Usa - Pour la seconde fois, le Parlement européen appelle à fermer le centre de détention de Guantanamo Bay. Radio Nizkor, 26jun06


Pour la seconde fois, le Parlement européen appelle à fermer le centre de détention de Guantanamo Bay, désigné par l’Administration américaine comme une zone de non-droit.

En février déjà, les eurodéputés avaient voté une résolution réclamant la fermeture du centre de détention.

La résolution adoptée le 13 juin 2006 par le Parlement européen sur la situation des prisonniers à Guantanamo, "appelle à nouveau l'administration américaine à fermer le centre de détention de Guantanamo Bay et demande instamment que chaque prisonnier soit traité conformément au droit humanitaire international et, s'il est inculpé, jugé sans retard, dans le cadre d'une procédure équitable et publique, par un tribunal compétent, indépendant et impartial ou un tribunal international".

Elle appelle aussi les autorités américaines "à mettre en ouvre la convention des Nations unies contre la torture et autres peines ou traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants et à mettre fin immédiatement à toutes les "techniques d'interrogatoire spéciales".

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
gtmofra Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:10:02 FRA



Fichero AudioUsa - Prohíben la entrada de abogados y varios periodistas al centro de detención ilegal de Guantánamo. (Prensa Latina, Washington). Radio Nizkor, 25jun06


"El mando militar de Estados Unidos suspendió las ya limitadas visitas de abogados y periodistas a la base naval de Guantánamo, prohibición ordenada tras la muerte de tres prisioneros en ese enclave...

Según letrados del Centro para los Derechos Constitucionales (CCR), una organización no gubernamental con sede en Nueva York, la restricción contra los representantes legales afloró casi al unísono de una negativa a reporteros interesados en visitar el enclave...

Barbara Olshansky, abogada del CCR, dijo que sus colegas sospechaban que las visitas serían suspendidas súbitamente, pero que aún así establecerían una querella ante un tribunal federal en Washington para procurar el acceso a sus clientes..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
visitas Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:04:13 ESL/SPA


May 2006

Fichero AudioUsa - CIA expands operational file secrecy and Department of Defense seeks a broad new exemption from FOIA. (Project on Government Secrecy of the Federation of American Scientists). Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the Schell Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School, 07May06


"The Central Intelligence Agency conducted a review of its "operational files" last year, as it is required to do every ten years under the CIA Information Act of 1984, to see if any such files could have their "operational" designation rescinded, making them subject to Freedom of Information Act requests... But instead of removing any files from operational status, as contemplated by the 1984 Act, the CIA added nearly two dozen new categories of files that will now be exempt from search and review under the FOIA, according to a newly disclosed report to Congress."

On the other hand, "The Department of Defense is seeking a broad new exemption from the Freedom of Information Act for unclassified information relating to weapons of mass destruction. According to the proposed legislation, 'Examples of such information could include ... formulas and design descriptions of lethal and incapacitating materials; maps, designs, security/emergency response plans, and vulnerability assessments for facilities containing weapons of mass destruction materials.' The proposal is puzzling because most such information, including that which is not classified, is already exempt from the FOIA..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
secrecy Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:12:51 ENG



Fichero AudioUsa - U.S. to switch from a "data preservation" to a EU-like "data retention" system that could pose serious privacy risks. (Electronic Privacy Information Center - EPIC). Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the Schell Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School, 07May06


The Electronic Privacy Information Center, EPIC, informs that Members of Congress are calling for laws in the United States that would compel Internet service providers and telecom companies to store information about their customers for months or years and make those records available to the police upon request...

To date, law enforcement has not been able to show that retaining all users' data helps to solve criminal cases. Traffic data is seldom essential in criminal investigations and data retained for longer than 6 months is rarely useful.

Retaining all customer data could also raise serious security and privacy risks..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
epic1 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:18:26 ENG


April 2006

Fichero AudioUsa - Les vols secrets de la CIA comptent également avec la complicité du Maghreb. (Hebdomadaire "Jeune Afrique"). Radio Nizkor, 30abr06


"Fruit d'une longue traque, tant il a fallu multiplier les enquêtes, les sources et parfois les prises de vue clandestines, le dernier rapport d'Amnesty International sur les vols secrets de la CIA, rendu public le 5 avril, est curieusement passé inaperçu au Maghreb.

Et pourtant... « Below the radar » dévoile en une cinquantaine de pages l'une des facettes les moins connues de cet archipel du non-droit qu est la lutte américaine contre le terrorisme...

À bien décrypter les documents publiés par Amnesty, deux catégories de « pays-relais » peuvent être distinguées.

Les soutiens actifs tout d'abord, où l’« ennemi combattant » de l'Amérique peut être transféré pour y être interrogé de façon musclée... Le Pakistan, la Jordanie et la plupart des Républiques russophones d'Asie centrale figurent dans ce premier groupe. Tout comme, en Afrique, trois pays : l'Egypte (une centaine de transférés, dont 30 % ont disparu depuis) ; Djibouti, où les Américains ont installé début 2002 une base et huit cents hommes entièrement voués à l'antiterrorisme; et, dans une moindre mesure, le Maroc...

À ces soutiens... s'ajoute... le soutien passif... des pays qui autorisent les vols secrets à se poser sur leurs aéroports pour embarquer ou débarquer des suspects, le tout dans la plus grande discrétion...

Cette seconde liste est beaucoup plus longue : la plupart des pays européens (y compris la France et la Suisse) y figurent. Mais aussi, en Afrique, la Gambie, le Maroc à nouveau et - a priori plus étonnant - la Libye et l'Algérie. Les enquêteurs d'Amnesty ont ainsi traqué à travers le monde les mouvements de quatre avions affrétés par la CIA (un Boeing 737 et trois Gulfstream), dont deux appartiennent à Premier Executive, entre 2002 et fin 2005..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
ciafra Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:07:09 FRA



Fichero AudioUsa - Denuncian que al menos 600 funcionarios estarían implicados en delitos de tortura en Afganistán, Iraq y Guantánamo. (Inter Press Service News Agency). Radio Nizkor, 27abr06


Dos años después de conocidos los abusos a presos en la cárcel bagdadí de Abu Ghraib a manos de soldados de Estados Unidos, la justicia se muestra lenta en procesar a los acusados, según tres importantes organizaciones de derechos humanos.

Los redactores del informe constataron un patrón generalizado de maltrato en varios centros de detención, así como casos de tortura lisa y llana y al menos ocho homicidios.

El estudio registró 330 casos creíbles de abuso, que involucraron a 600 funcionarios estadounidenses y a 460 víctimas, en Afganistán, Iraq y el enclave naval del país norteamericano en Guantánamo, Cuba, desde fines de 2001...

El informe titulado "By The Numbers", consta de 27 páginas, y es el resultado de un proyecto conjunto denominado "Hallazgos del Proyecto sobre Abuso de Detenidos y Responsabilidad", que integran Human Rights First, Human Rights Watch y el Centro de Derechos Humanos y Justicia Global de la Universidad de Nueva York.

"Nuestra investigación demuestra que los abusos contra detenidos eran generalizados, y que pocos (responsables) fueron puestos verdaderamente a disposición de la justicia", agregó.

Apenas tres oficiales fueron condenados en tribunales marciales por su participación en abusos de detenidos, y ninguno por la doctrina de la responsabilidad de la cadena de mando.

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
abu Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:06:51 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioUsa - In a Freedom of Information Act Lawsuit, Former Top Official in the US Justice Department Concludes that Surveillance Program was Illegal. (Electronic Privacy Information Center). Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the Schell Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School, 23Apr06


"In December 2005, the New York Times reported that President Bush secretly issued an executive order in 2002 authorizing the National Security Agency (NSA) to conduct warrantless surveillance of international telephone and Internet communications on American soil. President Bush acknowledged the existence of the NSA surveillance program and vowed that its activities would continue.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center - EPIC- submitted Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to the NSA and four Department of Justice components just hours after the existence of the warrantless surveillance program was first reported. Noting the extraordinary public interest in the program — and its potential illegality — EPIC asked the agencies to expedite the processing of the requests...

Documents obtained by EPIC earlier in March 2006, through the FOIA litigation, reveal that a former top official in the Justice Department doubted that the domestic surveillace program was allowed under the Authorization for Use of Military Force Resolution..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
epic Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:10:07 ENG


March 2006

Fichero AudioUsa - La CIA cree que no más del 10% de los presos en Guantánamo eran terroristas. (Semanario Terraviva). Radio Nizkor, 14mar06


"El gobierno de Estados Unidos se empeña en presentar a los prisioneros en su base naval de Guantánamo, Cuba, como peligrosos terroristas, pero informes independientes y poco conocidos indican que la evidencia contra los detenidos es casi nula.

'Las personas que están allí, detenidas en el campo de batalla, son terroristas, fabricantes de bombas, reclutas e instructores de terrorismo, guardaespaldas (del líder saudita Osama bin Laden), potenciales suicidas, quizás vinculados con los atentados del 11 de septiembre' de 2001 en Nueva York y Washington, dijo el año pasado el secretario (ministro) de Defensa, Donald Rumsfeld. Los detenidos son "lo peor de lo peor", agregó el jefe del Pentágono.

Pero dos recientes informes independientes basados sobre documentos del propio Departamento (ministerio) de Defensa llegan a conclusiones diametralmente diferentes a las de Rumsfeld.

A pesar de las millones de palabras publicadas en la prensa sobre Guantánamo en los últimos años, la mayoría de los principales medios de comunicación de Estados Unidos han ignorado estos dos estudios..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
denbeaux Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:07:07 ESL/SPA


December 2005

Fichero AudioOnu - 33 expertos independientes de la ONU ratifican el carácter absoluto de la prohibición de la tortura. (Servicio de Prensa de la Oficina de las Naciones Unidas en Ginebra (Traducción del Equipo Nizkor)). Radio Nizkor, 11dic05


"Con ocasión del Día de los Derechos Humanos, expresamos alarma ante los intentos de muchos Estados de sortear diversas disposiciones del derecho internacional de los derechos humanos dando nombres nuevos a prácticas viejas. Si bien los instrumentos internacionales señalan que los derechos humanos están en la base de cualquier sociedad democrática, cada vez con mayor frecuencia son vistos como un obstáculo frente a los esfuerzos de los gobiernos por garantizar la seguridad...

Tenemos la determinación, en el marco de nuestros respectivos mandatos, de continuar con nuestro trabajo en cuanto defensores de todos los derechos humanos de todas las personas. Con la mirada en los valores consagrados en la Carta y otros instrumentos de las Naciones Unidas, rechazamos la artificial contraposición entre derechos humanos y seguridad nacional. De hecho, no puede haber seguridad sin respeto hacia los derechos humanos..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
tortura Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:07:11 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioOnu - Estados Unidos parece dispuesto a un enfrentamiento frontal con la Asamblea General de la ONU. (Inter Press Service News Agency). Radio Nizkor, 11dic05.

"Estados Unidos parece resuelto a una colisión frontal con la ONU respecto de la forma en que el foro mundial conduce sus asuntos.

El Secretario General de la ONU, Kofi Annan, debería estar ahora de gira por Asia, pero suspendió ese viaje cuando Estados Unidos amenazó con no aprobar el presupuesto del foro mundial si no se adoptaban reformas administrativas...

Aunque no lo exige la Carta de la ONU, aprobar el presupuesto bienal por consenso entre los miembros ha sido una práctica ininterrumpida desde los tiempos del presidente estadounidense Ronald Reagan (1981-1989), según funcionarios del foro mundial.

Bolton promueve agresivamente una campaña de renovación del aparato administrativo de la ONU desde que fue designado por el presidente George W. Bush en agosto, pero ha enfrentado una gran oposición de parte del Grupo de los 77 (G-77) y China, bloque de 132 países en desarrollo..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
bolton1 Haz click aquí REAL PLAYER Haz click aquí MP3 00:06:16 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioOnu - Organismos internacionales piden al Departamento de Estado de los Estados Unidos que frene al Embajador Bolton. (Inter Press Service News Agency). Radio Nizkor, 11dic05.

"El gobierno de Estados Unidos debe controlar al embajador en la ONU, John Bolton, y adoptar un enfoque más conciliador en el conflicto por el presupuesto del foro mundial, según una coalición de organizaciones de la sociedad civil.

Estas instituciones, entre las que figuran la filial estadounidense de Amnistía Internacional, la humanitaria Oxfam y Citizens for Global Solutions, enviaron una carta a la secretaria de Estado (canciller) de Estados Unidos, Condoleezza Rice, para pedirle que sofrene a Bolton.

El funcionario amenazó con retener fondos de su país para la ONU (Organización de las Naciones Unidas) e impedir que el foro implemente su presupuesto para 2006-2007, a menos que primero aplique las propuestas de reforma presentadas por el gobierno de George W. Bush..."

File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
bolton Haz click aquí REAL PLAYER Haz click aquí MP3 00:05:01 ESL/SPA



Fichero AudioCol - Entrevista a Alirio Uribe, vicepresidente de la FIDH, en el día internacional de los derechos humanos. Radio Nizkor, 10dic05


En el día internacional de los derechos humanos, 10 de diciembre, Radio Nizkor entrevista a un conocido defensor de los derechos humanos, Alirio Uribe, Vicepresidente de la Federación Internacional de Derechos Humanos (FIDH).

Hemos realizado con Alirio un repaso a las principales cuestiones que, a nivel internacional, afectan en este momento no sólo al disfrute de hecho de los derechos, sino también a los avances logrados en el Derecho Internacional de los Derechos Humanos y que, desde las políticas antiterroristas, se están intentando socavar.

En este Día Internacional de los Derechos Humanos Alirio aborda asuntos tales como:

  • la cuestión de la integralidad de los derechos, frente a las tesis de la condicionalidad y de las "generaciones" de derechos
  • cómo afectan las políticas económicas de corte neoliberal a las libertades civiles y el disfrute de los derechos económicos y sociales.
  • estado de excepción: derechos humanos y políticas antiterroristas
  • especial análisis de la ley de "justicia y paz" y de los resultados de la negociación con los paramilitares por parte del Gobierno de Álvaro Uribe
  • Situación de precariedad de las libertades civiles y los derechos humanos en Colombia.

    El formato Real Media de este fichero, permite visualizar documentos de análisis contextual sincronizadamente con el audio. Esto es posible con el programa Real One Player. Más Información.

  • File name Real Media format Mp3 formatDuration Language
    alirio Haz click aquí REAL PLAYER Haz click aquí MP3 00:57:53 ESL/SPA



    Fichero AudioUsa - U.S. secret detention facilities in Europe catch the attention of the Council of Europe. (The New York Times; Human Rights Watch; Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly). Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the Schell Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School, 03Dec05


    "When the Bush administration rewrote the rules for dealing with prisoners after 9/11, needlessly scrapping the Geneva Conventions and American law, it ignored the objections of lawyers for the armed services. Now, heedless of the lessons of Abu Ghraib, the civilians are once again running over the people in uniform. Tim Golden and Eric Schmitt reported yesterday in The Times that the administration is blocking the Pentagon from adopting the language of the Geneva Conventions to set rules for handling prisoners in the so-called war on terror...

    Dana Priest reports in The Washington Post that even the Central Intelligence Agency's clandestine operators are getting nervous about the network of secret prisons they have around the world - including, of all places, at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe."

    "Human Rights Watch has conducted independent research on the existence of secret detention locations that corroborates the Washington Post's allegations that there were detention facilities in Eastern Europe." Specifically, Human Rights Watch "have collected information that CIA airplanes traveling from Afghanistan in 2003 and 2004 made direct flights to remote airfields in Poland and Romania."

    In turn, On November 7th. 2005, the Legal Affairs Committee of the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) appointed its Chairperson Dick Marty (from Switzerland, member of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe) as rapporteur to examine the subject of alleged secret CIA detention centres...

    File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
    prisons Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:13:57 ESL/SPA


    October 2005

    Fichero AudioPri - El FBI ejecuta a un líder independentista de 72 años. (Asociación Americana de Juristas). Radio Nizkor, 02oct05.


    "La Asociación Americana de Juristas, organización no gubernamental con estatuto consultivo en el Consejo Económico y Social de las Naciones Unidas, se une al dolor e indignación del pueblo puertorriqueño por el vil asesinato perpetrado por el FBI, Buró Federal de Investigaciones, del patriota y líder independentista puertorriqueño, Filiberto Ojeda Ríos, quien tenía 72 años de edad y padecía de una condición cardiaca que le requería llevar un marcapasos.

    El ataque a la residencia y la muerte del dirigente independentista Filiberto Ojeda Ríos por agentes federales del gobierno de los Estados Unidos no fue producto de un mero operativo policiaco, sino de una acción militar con objetivos políticos.

    Los datos conocidos hasta esta fecha apuntan a que allí lo que ocurrió fue un fusilamiento, a raíz de dicho operativo militar..."

    File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
    ojeda Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:04:41 ESL/SPA


    August 2005

    Fichero AudioGbr - New army special forces regiment involved in the operation that led to the killing of an innocent Brazilian. (The Guardian, UK). Radio Nizkor, 10Aug05.


    According to an article published on August 4, 2005 by the British newspaper “The Guardian”, a new army special forces regiment was involved in the operation that led to the killing of an innocent man at Stockwell tube station in south London.

    The article says that the Special Reconnaissance Regiment, set up in April to help combat international terrorism, was deployed in the surveillance operation which led to the shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, a Brazilian electrician, on July 22, according to Whitehall sources...

    On August 3, Whitehall sources told the Guardian that soldiers of the Special Reconnaisance Regiment, modelled on an undercover unit that operated in Northern Ireland, was engaged in "low-level intelligence behind the scenes" when the Brazilian was shot. There was "no direct military involvement in the shooting", the sources said...

    The regiment absorbed 14th Intelligence Company, known as "14 Int", a plainclothes unit set up to gather intelligence covertly on suspect terrorists in Northern Ireland. Its recruits are trained by the SAS...

    File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
    guardian Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:04:27 ENG



    Fichero AudioUsa - Pentagon thinking up scenarios for martial law in US. (The Washington Post). Radio Nizkor, 10Aug05.


    According to a report published on August 8, 2005 by the Washington Post, "the U.S. military has devised its first-ever war plans for guarding against and responding to terrorist attacks in the United States, envisioning 15 potential crisis scenarios and anticipating several simultaneous strikes around the country, according to officers who drafted the plans".

    The report - elaborated by Bradley Graham, Washington Post Staff Writer - says that "the classified plans, developed at Northern Command headquarters, outline a variety of possible roles for quick-reaction forces estimated at as many as 3,000 ground troops per attack, a number that could easily grow depending on the extent of the damage and the abilities of civilian response teams.

    The possible scenarios range from "low end," relatively modest crowd-control missions to "high-end," full-scale disaster management after catastrophic attacks such as the release of a deadly biological agent or the explosion of a radiological device, several officers said"...

    File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
    martial Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:12:11 ENG


    July 2005

    Fichero AudioEU - Update on anti-terror policies and data retention in the European Union. (European Commission Newsroom; StateWatch.). Radio Nizkor, 24Jul05.


    A "Declaration on the European Union response to the London bombings", that defines the priorities to combat terrorism and indicates a strict timetable for implementing practical measures, was adopted on July 13th. 2005 in Brussels at the end of an extraordinary meeting of the European Interior ministers.

    According to this Declaration, the Council will:

    • agree the Framework Decisions on the Retention of Telecommunications Data (October 2005), on the European Evidence Warrant (December 2005), and on the exchange of information between law enforcement authorities (December 2005); adopt the Decision on the exchange of information concerning terrorist offences (September 2005);
    • combat terrorist financing by agreeing by December 2005 a Regulation on Wire Transfers; adopting the Third Money Laundering Directive and the Regulation on cash control by September 2005; agreeing a Code of Conduct to prevent the misuse of charities by terrorists (December 2005); reviewing the overall EU’s performance (December 2005) and urging Member States to ensure that comprehensive financial investigation is a part of all terrorist investigations and to develop robust asset freezing powers.

    Regarding the specific issue of data retention, a proposal for an EU Framework Decision on the mandatory retention of all traffic data was put forward by the UK, Ireland, France and Sweden on 28 April 2004. Tony Bunyan, Statewatch editor, comments that "...If this proposal was limited to tackling terrorism that would be one thing but it is not. It will put everyone in the EU under surveillance, be used to tackle crime in general and potentially could be used for social and political control."

    File name Real Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
    data Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:16:03 ENG


    May 2005

    Fichero AudioDeclaration on Upholding Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Combating Terrorism (The Berlin Declaration). (International Commission of Jurists). Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the Schell Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School, 06May05


    On 28 August 2004, 160 lawyers from around the world, meeting at the International Commission of Jurists biennial conference in Berlin, adopted a Declaration on Upholding Human Rights and the Rule of Law in Combating Terrorism.

    "Since September 2001 many states have adopted new counter-terrorism measures that are in breach of their international obligations. In some countries, the post-September 2001 climate of insecurity has been exploited to justify long-standing human rights violations carried out in the name of national security."

    The subject of terrorism came up in several resolutions and decisions adopted at the 61st. session of the Commission on Human Rights, which concluded on April 22, 2005. During this year's session a group of human rights organizations issued a joint press release calling on the Commission to act to address meaningfully one of the greatest human rights challenges presently faced by the international community: the need to protect human rights in combating terrorism.

    The Berlin Declaration highlights the grave challenge to the rule of law brought about by excessive counter-terrorism measures, reaffirms the most fundamental human rights violated by those measures, and delineates methods of action to address the challenge.

    File nameReal Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
    lawyers Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:11:08 ENG


    April 2005

    Fichero AudioUN - Statement of the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims before the 61st. session of the UN Commission on Human Rights. Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the Schell Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School, 05Apr05

    File nameReal Media format Mp3 format Duration Language
    torture Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:09:08 ENG


    December 2004

    Fichero AudioUsa - Attorneys representing several Guantanamo detainees challenge the Administration's effort to undermine Supreme Court's decision in Rasul v. Bush. (Center for Constitutional Rights). Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the Schell Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School, 20Dec04.


    On December 1st, 2004, the Center for Constitutional Rights asked two federal court judges to forcefully reject the Bush Administration's effort to dismiss 12 Habeas Corpus petitions brought on behalf of individuals detained at Guantanamo Bay.

    In an extraordinary move, the government has essentially sought to overturn the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in the landmark case Rasul v. Bush.

    On November 5th, 2004, a group of attorneys representing several Guantanamo detainees submitted a Memorandum in opposition to the government's motion to dismiss the instant habeas petitions.

    The Petitioners assert in their Memorandum the following:

    • that the President's exercise of his war powers is subject to judicial review
    • that the Supreme Court has already determined that the Guantanamo detainees have stated a claim
    • that pertinent case law, moreover, confirms that the detainees have due process rights under the Constitution that they may vindicate through habeas actions.
    • that the detainees also have rights under the Geneva Conventions and other international law that may be vindicated in a habeas action and,
    • that the detainees have common law rights that inhere in the habeas statute and do not depend upon the cognizability of rights otherwise provided by the Constitution, laws or treaties of the United States.

    File name Real Media formatMp3 format Duration Language
    habeas Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:30:53 ENG



    Fichero AudioUsa - US District Judge ruled in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld that the Geneva Conventions protect those incarcerated at Guantánamo. Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the Schell Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School, 07Dec04.


    In a decision dated November 8, 2004, US District Judge James Robertson ruled that it is unlawful to try prisoners detained at Guantánamo by the currently constituted Military Commissions.

    "In his ruling on Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Judge Robertson asserted that the Geneva Conventions - the conventions signed by the United States and countries all over the world to govern the conduct of nations during wartime - protect those incarcerated at Guantánamo."

    According to the Court, all those arrested in or around the conflict in Afghanistan must be treated as prisoners of war if there is any doubt as to their status.

    Under the Geneva Conventions, prisoners of war must be provided the same legal process as the soldiers in the armed forces of the capturing army. Mr. Hamdan, the petitioner in the case, is, therefore, entitled to have his case heard by a properly convened military court or courts martial as defined under United States law...

    File name Real Media formatMp3 format Duration Language
    hamdan Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:23:31 ENG


    November 2004

    Fichero AudioUsa - US District Judge rejected the government's increasing move toward secret and coercive investigatory tactics in the post-9/11 environment. Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the Orville H. Schell, Jr. Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School, 12Nov04.


    In the case of Doe and ACLU v. Ashcroft et al., US District Judge Victor Marrero ruled, on September 28th, 2004, that "the compulsory, secret, and unreviewable production of information required by the FBI's application of 18 U.S.C. § 2709 violates the Fourth Amendment, and that the non-disclosure provision of 18 U.S.C. § 2709 (c) violates the First Amendment."

    Plaintiffs in this case, "John Doe" - an internet access firm -, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the American Civil Liberties Foundation, "challenge the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 2709. That statute authorizes the Federal Bureau of Investigations to compel communications firms, such as internet service providers (ISPs) or telephone companies, to produce certain customer records whenever the FBI certifies that those records are "relevant to an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities".

    The FBI demands under § 2709 are issued in the form of national security letters (NSLs), which constitute a unique form of administrative subpoena cloaked in secrecy and pertaining to national security issues. The statute bars all national security letters recipients from ever disclosing that the FBI has issued an National Security Letter.

    The Court concluded that § 2709 violates the Forth Amendment because, at least as currently applied, it effectively bars or substantially deters any judicial challenge to the propriety of an National Security Letter request. And also, that the permanent ban on disclosure contained in § 2709 (c) operates as an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech of the First Amendment.

      "In general, as our sunshine laws and judicial doctrine attest, democracy abhors undue secrecy, in recognition that public knowledge secures freedom. Hence, an unlimited government warrant to conceal, effectively a form of secrecy per se, has no place in our open society.

      Such a claim is especially inimical to democratic values for reasons borne out by painful experience. Under the mantle of secrecy, the self-preservation that ordinarily impels our government to censorship and secrecy may potentially be turned on ourselves as a weapon of self-destruction.

      When withholding information from disclosure is no longer justified, when it ceases to foster the proper aims that initially may have supported confidentially, a categorical and uncritical extension of non-disclosure may become the cover for spurious ends that government may then deem too inconvenient, inexpedient, merely embarrassing, or even illicit to ever expose to the light of day.

      At that point, secrecy’s protective shield may serve not as much to secure a safe country as simply to save face."

    File name Real Media formatMp3 format Duration Language
    nsl Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:27:34 ENG


    October 2004

    Fichero AudioUsa - Update on the situation of the detainees in Guantanamo Bay and the current status of legal issues relating to this matter. (By Richard Wilson). Radio Nizkor, 02oct04.



    Richard Wilson is Professor of Law and Director of the International Human Rights Law Clinic at the American University of Washington and Equipo Nizkor collaborator.

    This audio report is an update of the speech previously delivered, in March 2003, at the Seminar on "States of Exception and Strategies for Peace and for the Defense of Civil Rights", under the title: "US policy after 9/11: The situation of Detainees at Guantánamo Bay and the Inter-American Human Rights Commission Response".

    Richard Wilson speaks about the developments in relationship to the individuals detained in Guantanamo Bay that have happened since that previous presentation, covering mainly the following topics:

    • Information about children detained at Guantanamo
    • Relationship of the Guantanamo Bay situation and the torture scandal at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq
    • Publication of internal Memoranda within the Bush Administration with regard to the approval of the use of torture by high ranking government lawyers
    • The very important decisions of the US Supreme Court in June of 2004
    • Current status of legal issues in Guantanamo
    • Legal strategy pursued by lawyers in the U.S. in addressing those current issues
    • Potential resources for further reading

    Nombre del Fichero Real Media formatmp3 format Duration Language
    gtmorw Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 01:24:38 ENG


    September 2004

    Fichero AudioEU - Privacy groups warn that proposed retention of personal data resulting from communications is necessarily an invasive act. (Privacy International and European Digital Rights). Radio Nizkor with the collaboration of the Orville H. Schell, Jr. Center for International Human Rights at Yale Law School, 18sep04.

    File name Real Media formatMp3 format Duration Language
    privacy2 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:06:20 ENG



    Agosto 2004

    Fichero AudioOnu - Entrevista con Leandro Despouy, Relator Especial de la ONU sobre independencia de jueces y abogados, acerca de los estados de excepción y los derechos humanos. Radio Nizkor, 12ago04

    Los Relatores y Representantes Especiales de las Naciones Unidas, los expertos independientes y los presidentes de los distintos grupos de trabajo de los Procedimientos Especiales de la Comisión de Derechos Humanos de la ONU, así como del programa de Servicios de Asesoramiento, reunidos en su sesión anual, entre los días 21 y 25 de junio de 2004 en Ginebra, acordaron por unanimidad que cuatro de ellos viajen a Iraq, Afganistán y la base naval estadounidense de Guantánamo, para entrevistarse con los detenidos acusados de terrorismo.

    En su pronunciamiento, los relatores y expertos enfatizaron su preocupación por "la grave incidencia de ciertas medidas adoptadas en nombre de la lucha contra el terrorismo en el disfrute de los derechos humanos y las libertades fundamentales".

    Theo Van Boven, Relator Especial sobre la Cuestión de la Tortura, Leandro Despouy, Relator Especial sobre la Independencia de Jueces y Abogados, Paul Hunt, Relator Especial sobre el Derecho de Toda Persona al Disfrute del Más Alto Nivel Posible de Salud Física y Mental, y Leila Zerrougui, presidenta del Grupo de Trabajo sobre la Detención Arbitraria, fueron los designados para visitar Iraq, Afganistán, y la base de Guantánamo.

    Hemos entrevistado a uno de los relatores que participará de esa misión, Leandro Despouy, en la actualidad Relator Especial de la ONU sobre independencia del poder judicial, quien también ha sido Relator Especial sobre los Estados de Excepción y los Derechos Humanos.

    Leandro Despouy habla con nosotros de los estados de excepción y los derechos humanos, de por qué los tribunales especiales y la legislación de excepción violan los derechos humanos, así como del sistema de protección internacional al que tienen derecho las personas detenidas en Guantánamo y en otros centros de detención de Iraq y Afganistán.

    File nameReal Media format Mp3 formatDuration Language
    despouy Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:42:14 ESL/SPA


    Julio 2004

    Fichero AudioUsa - Homeland Security Secretary has stated that the second generation of CAPPS (Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System) has been discontinued. (Electronic Privacy Information Center - EPIC). Radio Nizkor, 27Jul04.

    File name Real Media formatMp3 format Duration Language
    capps Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:10:10 ENG



    Fichero AudioEU - President of the European Parliament asked EU court to annul EU-US passenger data deal. (StateWatch / e-Government news from European Communities). Radio Nizkor, 23Jul04.

    File name Real Media formatmp3 format Duration Language
    pnrdata3 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:09:24 ENG



    Fichero AudioEU - The Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue issued a resolution opposing the EU-US agreement on transfer of air passenger data. (StateWatch). Radio Nizkor, 21Jul04.

    Nombre del Fichero Real Media formatmp3 format Duration Language
    pnrdata2 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:10:39 ENG



    Fichero AudioUsa - The attorneys representing nine Guantanamo detainees file five Habeas Corpus petitions on their behalf. (Center for Constitutional Rights). Radio Nizkor, 14Jul04.

    Nombre del Fichero Real Media formatmp3 format Duration Language
    hcorpus Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:03:36 ENG



    Fichero AudioUsa - Supreme Court rules that foreign terrorism suspects may use the US legal system to challenge their detention. (Center for Constitutional Rights). Radio Nizkor, 07Jul04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real PlayerFormato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    gtmosce Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:09:46 ENG



    Fichero AudioUsa - Informe sobre el fallo del Tribunal Supremo con relación al uso del "Habeas Corpus" por parte de los presos de Guantánamo. (Center for Constitutional Rights con Traducción del Equipo Nizkor). Radio Nizkor, 06Jul04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real PlayerFormato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    gtmousc Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:12:35 ESL/SPA


    Junio 2004

    Fichero AudioUsa - Center for Constitutional Rights files lawsuit against US corporations involved in torture in Iraq. (Center for Constitutional Rights). Radio Nizkor, 11Jun04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real PlayerFormato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    titantort Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:05:47 ENG



    Fichero AudioUsa - El Center for Constitutional Rights ha demandado a dos empresas de Estados Unidos implicadas en torturas en Iraq. (Center for Constitutional Rights). Radio Nizkor, 11jun04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real PlayerFormato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    titan Haz click aquí REAL PLAYER Haz click aquí MP3 00:06:20 ESL/SPA



    Fichero AudioUsa - American Librarians and the ACLU oppose the Patriot Act and the Bush administration’s claim that it should be made permanent. (American Library Association / American Civil Liberties Union). Radio Nizkor, 06Jun04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real Player Formato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    patriot1 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:09:51 ENG



    Mayo 2004

    Fichero AudioEU - EU/US agreement on passenger data denounced by human rights and civil liberties groups. (StateWatch). Radio Nizkor, 27May04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real Player Formato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    pnrdata Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:07:25 ENG



    Fichero AudioUsa/Irq - Condenan como desertor a un sargento objetor de conciencia que es hijo del músico nicaragüense Carlos Mejía Godoy. Radio Nizkor, 24may04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real Player Formato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    godoy Haz click aquí REAL PLAYER Haz click aquí MP3 00:05:38 ESL/SPA



    Fichero AudioUsa - Torture scandal is "predictable result" of US detention policies and the related information must be disclosed. (Federation of American Scientists / American Civil Liberties Union). Radio Nizkor, 13may04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real Player Formato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    excep2 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:10:50 ENG



    Fichero AudioEU - Draft data protection legislation contrary to European convention on human rights. (StateWatch). Radio Nizkor, 08may04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real Player Formato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    privacy1 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:08:30 ENG



    Fichero AudioIrq - The World Organisation Against Torture calls for effective investigation into acts of torture in Iraq. (OMCT). Radio Nizkor, 06may04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real Player Formato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    excep1 Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 00:03:38 ENG


    Abril 2004

    Fichero AudioGbr/Irq - British senior officer says US soldiers view Iraqis as "untermenschen".
    The Daily Telegraph. Radio Nizkor, 30abr04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real Player Formato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    unter Haz click aquí REAL PLAYER Haz click aquí MP3 00:04:17 ENG



    Fichero AudioGbr - Altos oficiales británicos dicen que los militares norteamericanos consideran a los iraquíes como "untermenschen".
    (The Daily Telegraph, traducción de Radio Nizkor). Radio Nizkor, 19abr04.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real Player Formato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    gbrus Haz click aquí REAL PLAYER Haz click aquí MP3 00:04:59 ESL/SPA



    Febrero 2004

    Fichero AudioUS policy after 9/11: The situation of Detainees at Guantanamo Bay and the Inter-American Human Rights Commission Response.
    By Richard Wilson, Professor of Law and Director of the International Human Rights Law Clinic, American University Washington, D.C. Radio Nizkor, 13Feb04


    This speech by Prof. Richard Wilson was delivered at the seminar on "States of Exception and Strategies for Peace and for the Defence of Civil Rights", organized by Equipo Nizkor and held in Brussels between the 27th. and the 29th. of March 2003.

    Richard Wilson analyses the "legal black hole" surrounding the status of the Guantanamo detainees, as well as the question of precautionary measures that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has asked the US government to adopt.

    The Commission decided during its 114th regular period of sessions to adopt precautionary measures on behalf of the Guantanamo detainees. The Commission asserted that:

      "....where persons find themselves within the authority and control of a state and where a circumstance of armed conflict may be involved, their fundamental rights may be determined in part by reference to international humanitarian law as well as international human rights law. Where it may be considered that the protections of international humanitarian law do not apply, however, such persons remain the beneficiaries at least of the non-derogable protections under international human rights law. In short, no person under the authority and control of a state, regardless of his or her circumstances, is devoid of legal protection for his or her fundamental and non-derogable human rights".

    What is this "Legal Black Hole" and what is the executive branch's theory as to why these individuals are caught there?

    "The US applies a perverse logic to conclude that all the individuals detained in Guantamo are 'unlawful combatants' ".

    This is what Richard Wilson clearly explains us.

    Tecnical Data:

    This speech was first recorded in Brussels (Belgium) on March 27, 2003; its digitization, production and online posting have been carried out by Radio Nizkor on February 22, 2004.

    This audio document has been posted in Real Audio and MP3 formats, their quality being equivalent to that of a CD-Rom.

    If your connection speed does not allow you to listen to this file, we can send it to you by post in a CD-Rom. In this case, the production and shipment costs will be at your charge.

    In order to do so, you may e-mail us at Editor Radio Nizkor.

    File name Real Media formatMp3 format Duration Language
    gtmo Click on icon REAL PLAYER Click on icon MP3 01:00:32 ENG


    Fichero AudioEl Estado de Excepción en la historia de Colombia.
    Ponencia presentada por Alirio Uribe, Presidente del Colectivo de Abogados "José Alvear Restrepo", en el seminario sobre Estados de Excepción y Estrategias para la Paz y la Defensa de los Derechos Civiles (Bruselas, 27-29 marzo 2003).

    Esta ponencia analiza el uso que de los estados de excepción se ha hecho por parte de los distintos Gobiernos colombianos a lo largo del último siglo, y, especialmente, durante los últimos 25 años.

    Alirio Uribe establece claramente la interrelación entre los estados de excepción y las violaciones sistemáticas a los derechos humanos que se vienen dando en Colombia, y nos muestra así el porqué de esas violaciones sin que haya una dictadura en Colombia. Los estados de excepción se han utilizado en Colombia para acallar, y hasta eliminar, toda forma de oposición política.

      Si bien en todo estado de derecho el poder legislativo reside en el Congreso, cuando el Congreso Colombiano se reúne en 1991 para la promulgación de la Constitución ese mismo año, hacía 105 años que éste no expedía ningún código, esto es, desde 1886 el Congreso no legislaba...Los códigos penal, civil, de familia, etc, todos ellos fueron meros decretos del ejecutivo, incluso el Código Laboral y Sustantivo de Trabajo vigente hoy, tiene su origen en un decreto de estado de sitio de 1946, que si bien devino legislación permanente, sigue teniendo la estructura de un decreto de estado de sitio. "Esto muestra cómo el congreso se deroga de facto a través del estado de excepción".

      Lo mismo ocurrió en el ámbito de la justicia. Hasta 1987 en colombia se podía juzgar a civiles en tribunales militares. Si bien en 1987 la Corte Suprema lo declara inconstitucional, nuevamente en estado de sitio se crea la justicia de orden público, después la justicia sin rostro...

      Es también mediante decretos de estado de sitio como se crea el paramilitarismo.

      Desde los años 50 no ha habido control, ni judicial ni por parte del Congreso, sobre los estados de excepción, que han sido casi permanentes e ininterrumpidos.

      La utilización de los estados de excepción convierte en inexistente la democracia en Colombia...

    Esta ponencia fue pronunciada el 27 de marzo en el seminario que el Equipo Nizkor organizó en Bruselas entre los días 27 y 29 de marzo de 2003 bajo el título: "Estados de excepción y estrategias para la paz y la defensa de los derechos civiles".

    Nota técnica:

    El proceso de almacenamiento, edición y post edición ha sido realizado con medios informáticos propios de Radio Nizkor.

    La puesta on line se hace con ficheros en formato MP3 y Realplayer, ambos en calidad equivalente a CD Rom.

    En el caso de ficheros de sonido que resulten muy grandes para su reproducción on line, puedes solicitar que se te envíen por vía postal ordinaria almacenados en un CD ROM en ambos formatos.

    En ese caso, el precio de distribución será el del costo de producción para organismos de derechos humanos, radios comunitarias y alternativas, más el coste del correo postal.

    Para ello debes ponerte en contacto vía correlectrónico con Editor Radio Nizkor, desde donde se te enviarán las instrucciones necesarias para ello.

    Nombre del Fichero Formato Real Player Formato mp3 Duración en minutos Idioma
    colexp1 Haz click aquí REAL PLAYER Haz click aquí MP3 00:38:44 ESL/SPA


    Más información en la página especializada del Equipo Nizkor sobre
    Estado de excepción.


    On-Line Donations

    Equipo Nizkor | Proyecto Desaparecidos | Derechos HR

    Radio Nizkor Indice - Busca Enlaces de Derechos Humanos Contactanos