This page summarizes cases raised with Bahrain by the Special Rapporteur between May 1, 2011, (when the Special Rapporteur took up his functions) and February 28, 2017 (the date of the last public release of communications). Communications are released to the public once per year. This page also contains observations on these communications and on responses received from Bahrain.
Communications and observations are divided into sections based upon which observation report they originally appeared.
Each communication is referenced as urgent appeal (UA), allegation letter (AL), joint urgent appeal (JUA) and joint allegation letter (JAL) – the hyperlinks lead to these documents. This is followed by the date the communication was issued, as well as the case number and the State reply (also hyperlinked if available).
Summaries and communications are published only in the language of submission (in the case of Bahrain, English).
Observations
The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Bahrain for replying to all communications sent. He nevertheless remains gravely concerned about the significant number and the grave nature of the allegations received during the reporting period.
The Special Rapporteur is gravely concerned about the physical and psychological integrity of people exercising their rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association as well as of those who monitor such fundamental freedoms in Bahrain, including prominent human rights defenders. He urges the authorities to refrain from using force, including the use of indiscriminate tear gas, during peaceful demonstrations. He also urges the authorities to ensure that no one is criminalised for the peaceful exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association and to release immediately and unconditionally all persons convicted for exercising their legitimate rights.
The Special Rapporteur refers again to Human Rights Council resolution 15/21, and in particular operative paragraph 1 that “[c]alls upon States to respect and fully protect the rights of all individuals to assemble peacefully and associate freely, including in the context of elections, and including persons espousing minority or dissenting views or beliefs, human rights defenders, trade unionists and others, including migrants, seeking to exercise or to promote these rights, and to take all necessary measures to ensure that any restrictions on the free exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are in accordance with their obligations under international human rights law”.
He recommends the Government to ensure that the recommendations put forward by the Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry are implemented and accountability for those responsible and full redress to victims are provided. He requests the Government to keep him informed about any new steps taken in this regard.
The Special Rapporteur reminds the Government of Bahrain of his country visit request sent in September 2011, to which a response is yet to be received. In this connection, OP6 of resolution 15/21 states that the “Human Rights Council… [c]alls upon States to cooperate fully with and assist the Special Rapporteur in the performance of his or her tasks, to provide all necessary information requested by him or her, … and to consider favourably his or her requests for visits”.
Observations
The Special Rapporteur would like to thank the Government of Bahrain for replying to all the communications he sent during the reporting period, but he is deeply concerned about the significant number of, and the grave nature of the allegations received during the period under review.
The Special Rapporteur remains gravely concerned about the physical and psychological integrity of individuals exercising their rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association, as well as of those monitoring the exercise of these rights. He urges the authorities to ensure that the legislation related to the right of peaceful assembly and its implementation meet international norms and standards related to freedom of peaceful assembly (see notably A/HRC/20/27). In this regard, he underscores that, according to Article 21 of the International Covenant on civil and political rights, “No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others” (emphasis added). International law therefore does not “give the State any right to take measures and place restrictions… in order to guarantee national security”, as mentioned in one of the responses transmitted (unofficial translation), but rather imposes an obligation on States to facilitate the exercise of peaceful assembly. In this respect, he also reminds that assembly organizers and participants should not be held responsible and liable for the violent behaviour of others.
The Special Rapporteur is further dismayed about the killing of two children during demonstrations. Even when demonstrations turn violent, the Special Rapporteur emphasises that the right to life and to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are a non-derogable right in international human rights law, including in the context of assemblies. In this regard, he refers to Article 5 of the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials Adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (1990), which provides that “whenever the lawful use of force and firearms is unavoidable, law enforcement officials shall minimize damage and injury, and respect and preserve human life.” The Special Rapporteur calls upon the authorities to carry out a thorough and independent investigation into any allegations of excessive use of force during demonstrations that took place during the period under review. He also underlines that “States Party shall ensure in its legal system that the victim of an act of torture obtains redress and has an enforceable right to fair and adequate compensation, including the means for as full rehabilitation as possible. In the event of the death of the victim as a result of an act of torture, his dependents shall be entitled to compensation.” (Article 14 of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, to which the Syrian Arab Republic is a State party). The Special Rapporteur notes that a code of conduct for police officers has recently been drafted and he reiterates that he stands ready to provide any technical assistance the Government may require in this regard.
The Special Rapporteur is also seriously concerned about acts of harassment and intimidation against human rights defenders who are members of associations. More specifically, he is concerned about allegations of reprisals against individuals who have taken part in the Universal Periodical Review of Bahrain at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. He urges again the authorities to ensure that no one is criminalised for the peaceful exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association. In this regard, he also refers to the press release he issued, together with other mandate holders, on 23 August 2012, where he urges the authorities to immediately and unconditionally release all persons convicted for exercising their legitimate rights and freedoms.
The Special Rapporteur refers to Human Rights Council resolution 21/16, and in particular operative paragraph 1 which “reminds States of their obligation to respect and fully protect the rights of all individuals to assemble peacefully and associate freely, online as well as offline, including in the context of elections, and including persons espousing minority or dissenting views or beliefs, human rights defenders, trade unionists and others, including migrants, seeking to exercise or to promote these rights”.
The Special Rapporteur reminds the Government of Bahrain of his country visit request sent in September 2011, to which a response is yet to be received. He believes such a country visit may provide with a significant opportunity to discuss the technical assistance the Government may require.
Observations
The Special Rapporteur would like to thank the Government of Bahrain for replying to all his communications during the reporting period. However, he expresses his concern at the volume of allegations received and severity of the issues raised therein. Although the Government refutes these allegations, the Special Rapporteur remains concerned about the situation of individuals and members of civil society organizations, including human rights organizations, who remain at risk of arbitrary detention and ill treatment as a result of their legitimate and peaceful activities.
The Special Rapporteur takes note with appreciation that the civil society was engaged in producing amendments to the Decree No. 21 of 1989 promulgating the Law on Associations, Social and Cultural Clubs, Private Youth and Sports Organizations and Private Foundations. However, he expresses concern that the mentioned law unduly restricts the right to freely associate as it includes: a prior approval procedure to set up an association, extensive discretion to the authorities to monitor and influence the internal affairs of an association, and prior ministerial approval with regards to funding. As stated in his thematic report to the Human Rights Council, the Special Rapporteur “underlines that the right to freedom of association equally protects associations that are not registered … This is particularly important when the procedure to establish an association is burdensome and subject to administrative discretion … ” (A/HRC/20/27, paragraph 56).
Furthermore, he is of the opinion “that a “notification procedure”, rather than a “prior authorization procedure” that requests the approval of the authorities to establish an association as a legal entity, complies better with international human rights law …” (A/HRC/20/27, paragraph 58). Moreover, the Special Rapporteur reminds the Government that “members of associations should be free to determine their statutes, structure and activities and make decisions without State interference” (A/HRC/20/27, paragraph 64). Concerning access to funding, the Special Rapporteur reminds the Government that it is necessary for the existence and sustainable operations of associations. Furthermore, he emphasize that, according to Article 21 of the International Covenant on civil and political rights, “No restrictions may be placed on the exercise of this right other than those which are prescribed by law and which are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, public order (ordre public), the protection of public health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. This article shall not prevent the imposition of lawful restrictions on members of the armed forces and of the police in their exercise of this right.”
The Special Rapporteur appreciates the response provided by the Government on recommendations adopted on 28 July 2013 to amend the Law no. 58 (Protecting Society from Terrorists Act) of 2006. Although the Special Rapporteur is aware that States have an interest in protecting “national security or public safety”, which are legitimate grounds for restricting freedom of association, he reminds the Government of Bahrain that there is also need for States to comply with international human rights law while countering terrorism and that, under the International Covenant on civil and political rights, any limitation must not only pursue a legitimate interest but also be “necessary in a democratic society”. In addition, concerning the recommendation of the National Assembly to “[g]ive the security agencies the necessary and appropriate powers to protect society from terrorist acts and prevent their spread”, the Special Rapporteur did not find such specific reference in Security Council Resolution 1373 (2001) as indicated by the State. The Special Rapporteur further reminds that national security should not be used to justify measures aimed at suppressing opposition or repressive practices against its population.
The Special Rapporteur urges the Government of Bahrain to take immediate steps to facilitate the exercise of peaceful assembly and free association. He reiterates the content of the operative paragraph 2 of the Human Rights Council Resolution 24/5 that “[r]eminds States of their obligation to respect and fully protect the rights of all individuals to assemble peacefully and associate freely, online as well as offline, including in the context of elections, and including persons espousing minority or dissenting views or beliefs, human rights defenders, trade unionists and others, including migrants, seeking to exercise or to promote these rights, and to take all necessary measures to ensure that any restrictions on the free exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association are in accordance with their obligations under international human rights law.”
The Special Rapporteur reminds the Government of Bahrain of his country visit requests sent in September 2011 and October 2013. He regrets to not have received a response to date. In this connection, OP6 of resolution 15/21 states that the “Human Rights Council… [c]alls upon States to cooperate fully with and assist the Special Rapporteur in the performance of his or her tasks… and to consider favourably his or her requests for visits”.
Observations
Responses to communications
The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Bahrain for its numerous replies this reporting period and requests replies to the two communications for which no responses have been received. He recalls that he considers responses to his communications to be an important part of the cooperation of Governments with his mandate, in accordance with Human Rights Council resolutions 24/5 (2013), 21/16 (2012) and 15/21 (2010).
Environment in which these rights are exercised
Regarding the case of Mr. Sheikh Ahmed Ali Al-Salman, Secretary General of Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society, the main opposition movement in Bahrain, and a religious key figure in the country, who interrogated at least four times since the events of February 2011 in Bahrain, the Special Rapporteur notes the response of the Government. However, he expresses continued concern that the charges against this individual may be a result of his dissenting views and his exercise of the freedoms of association and of opinion and expression, and request further information in relation to the judicial investigations.
He recalls that the term “association” denotes “any groups of individuals or any legal entities brought together in order to collectively act, express, promote, pursue or defend a field of common interests” and that the term refers to, among others, “civil society organizations, clubs, cooperatives, NGOs, religious associations, political parties, trade unions, foundations or even online associations” (A/HRC/20/27, paragraph 51 and 52). He urges the Government to recognize that the rights to both freedom of peaceful assembly and association play a significant role in the development and survival of meaningful democratic systems since they allow for an environment where minority or dissenting views or beliefs are respected and enable dialogue, pluralism,tolerance and broadmindedness. The Special Rapporteur reiterates his grave concern about the sentencing of Ms. Maryam Al-Khawaja, Ms. Zainab Al-Khawaja, and Ms. Ghada Jamsheer (BHR 15/2014). Ms. Maryam Al-Khawaja is a human rights defender and the co-director of the Gulf Centre for Human Rights, whose arrest was the subject of another communication in this reporting period (BHR 12/2014). Ms. Maryam Al-Khawaja and her sister, a human rights defender and social media activist in Bahrain, are the daughters of the co-founder of the Bahrain centre for Human Rights defender, Mr. Abdulhadi Al-Khawaja, who has been detained since 2011. He also voices his dismay at the continued arbitrary detention of Ms. Jamsheer, the head of the Women’s Petition Committee.
Moreover, the Special Rapporteur wishes to echo the observations of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, which is concerned that under the current Law of Associations 21/1989, women’s associations are prohibited from engaging in political activities and their freedom of association is “hindered by lengthy registration procedures and excessive supervision, in addition to the need to channel international funding requests to the Ministry of the Interior” (CEDAW/C/BHR/CO/3, paragraph 31).
In relation to the case of alleged arbitrary arrest, detention, and torture of nine Bahraini nationals, including two minors (BHR 11/2014), the Special Rapporteur takes notes of the reply of the Government, however, he articulates his continued preoccupation that several of the cases mention violations of the right of peaceful assembly. He further stresses that it is the obligation of States to respect and fully protect the rights of all individuals to assemble peacefully and associate freely (A/HRC/RES/24/5, operational paragraph 2).
The Special Rapporteur restates his concerns about alleged destruction of the “Pearl Roundabout” monument and related imagery, and continued prohibition of public access prohibition to the site. He voices alarm at the policy of removing from both public space and public memory the symbol of the pro-democratic movement of Bahrain and remains troubled about continued restrictions imposed on the rights of everyone to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, as reported by civil society groups in the past few years. He stresses that laws governing freedom of assembly should avoid blanket time and location prohibitions, and provide for the prospect of other less intrusive restrictions, in compliance with international human rights standards and laws.
Human rights defenders and the right to association
In relation to the allegations of harassment and intimidation of members of the Bahrain Youth Society for Human Rights (BYSHR), he recalls his concerns about retaliation against the human rights defenders because of their organizations’ work (BHR 10/2014). He emphasizes that while the State do not have to agree with the opinions and criticism expressed by persons espousing minority or dissenting views or beliefs, it has a positive obligation to ensure the existence of an enabling environment for civil society, including the enjoyment of the right of association, so that it may exist, operate and express itself freely and without fear (A/HRC/20/27, paragraph 63). He urges the authorities to implement all necessary measures to protect people exercising their right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly against threats, violence, intimidation or reprisals.
He considers threats against human rights defenders, including members of associations, a grave source of concern not only to the individuals affected, but more generally for the message it sends to other civil society actors who wish to engage in defence of human rights.
Reported reprisals
In connection with the case of alleged reprisal against Ms. Maryam Al-Khawaja (BHR 15/2014), the Special Rapporteur expressed dismay at the case of reprisal due to her cooperation with the United Nations and its human rights mechanisms.
The case of Mr. Nabeel Rajab, President of the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights and member of other human rights organizations, who has advocated for peaceful demonstrations to defend human rights in Bahrain, is also of serious concern to the Special Rapporteur (BHR 13/2014). He fears that this arrest and detention may be an act of reprisal for his several week trip to Europe, where he had advocated for the recognition of human rights in Bahrain and met with international and regional human rights mechanisms, including the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
In relation to these cases, the Special Rapporteur calls on the Government of Bahrain to take preventive steps against similar acts in the future and to ensure full investigations and accountability once they have occurred, in accordance with Human rights Council resolutions 12/2, 24/24 and 27/38.
Country visit
The Special Rapporteur reminds the Government of Bahrain of his willingness to undertake a country visit to Bahrain, as indicated by his last letters of 2 September 2011 and 30 October 2013. He trusts that such a visit would allow him to examine first-hand issues relating to his mandate, identify good practices and formulate pertinent recommendations to relevant stakeholders. He looks forward to receiving a positive reply at the earliest possible opportunity.
Observations
Responses to communications
The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Bahrain for its reply to the communication sent during this reporting period.
Regarding the case of Mr. Sheikh Ali al Salman, the Secretary General of the main opposition party in Bahrain, the Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society, and a well-known religious figure in the country (BHR 9/2015), the Special Rapporteur reiterates his serious concerns from his last Observations Report (A/HRC/29/25/Add.3, para. 504). The history of the targeting of Sheikh Ali al Salman and most recently, his sentencing to two years’ imprisonment for his dissenting views and the exercise of his rights to freedom of association and freedom of opinion and expression, remain of serious concern.
The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Bahrain for the information provided about the conviction of Sheikh Al Salman and his appeal, which was delayed. However, the Special Rapporteur urges the Government of Bahrain to implement the Opinion of the Working Group of Arbitrary Detention, which concludes that Sheikh Al Salman is arbitrarily deprived of his liberty and calls for his release (A/HRC/WGAD/2015/23, para. 42). The Special Rapporteur would also appreciate additional information about the appeal of Sheikh Al Salman’s sentence, which was delayed in late 2015.
In relation to the case of human rights defender, Mr. Nabeel Rajab, the Special Rapporteur acknowledged his release on bail for health reasons and called on the Government to drop the charges against him (PR 16/07/2015). Mr. Rajab was detained and charged for exercising his right to freedom of expression on the social media platform, Twitter and was previously subjected to reprisals.
The Special Rapporteur takes this opportunity to remind the Government that the term “association” denotes “any groups of individuals or any legal entities brought together in order to collectively act, express, promote, pursue or defend a field of common interests” and that the term refers to, among others, “civil society organizations, clubs, cooperatives, NGOs, religious associations, political parties, trade unions, foundations or even online associations” (A/HRC/20/27, paras. 51 and 52). He urges the Government of Bahrain to promote and protect the right to freedom of association to everyone in Bahrain, including those exercising their right to express opinions of political dissent.
Country visit
The Special Rapporteur reminds the Government of Bahrain of his pending requests to visit Bahrain, as indicated by his last letters of 2 September 2011 and 30 October 2013. He trusts that such a visit would allow him to examine first-hand issues relating to his mandate, identify good practices and formulate pertinent recommendations to relevant stakeholders. He looks forward to receiving a positive reply at the earliest possible opportunity. He reiterates that Human Rights Council resolution 15/21, which established his mandate, and 24/5, which renewed it for an additional period of three years, both call on States to consider favourably his requests for visits.
Observations
Responses to communications
The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of Bahrain for its replies to his communications sent during this reporting period.
Environment in which these rights are exercised
The special Rapporteur reiterates his concern regarding the suspension (BHR 2/2016) and subsequent dissolution (BHR 5/2016) of Al-Wefaq National Islamic Society and considers that the reasons given by the authorities to justify these measures, in particular 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 and 10, are not in compliance with articles 19 and 22 of the ICCPR. He stresses that activities aimed at “encouraging mass demonstrations” and criticizing the regime are not legitimate grounds to dissolve an association. He reminds the Government that the action to suspend or dissolve an association is one of the most severe restrictions on freedom of association. Therefore, any such decision to suspend or dissolve an association should comply with international human rights law and standards. Namely it should be guided by the principles of proportionality and necessity (A/HRC/20/27, paragraph 75).
Regarding the Government’s reply to communication BHR 3/2016, the Special Rapporteur notes that Nabeel Rajab remains in custody, for charges related to “compromising the dignity and prestige of the State” after having declined to provide further information on 14 June. After having received a complaint lodged on 30 June 2016, where Mr. Rajab complained about his conditions of detention, the Office of the Public Prosecutor inspected his place of detention and found his complaint to be unfounded. Moreover, according to the authorities, Mr. Rajab benefited from adequate health care. Similarly, the Rapporteur thanks the Government for the information provided but he remains concerned about the conviction of Mr. Ali Salman (BHR 2/2016) for charges that seem to be directly linked to the exercise of his rights to freedom of expression and association (in particular related to his criticism of the regime).
Regarding communication BHR 5/2016, he takes note of the strategy adopted by the Government to “put an end to deviant ideology which gives rise to extremism and bigotry” by sentencing Shia clerics whose sermons are considered extremist. Nevertheless, he remains concerned about information that Shia clerics continue to be targeted for expressing their religious views. He also takes note of the Government’s answer regarding the withdrawal of Sheikh Isa Qassim’s nationality, alleging that Sheikh Qassim has established organizations “subservient to an external religio-political authority” and has played a leading role in the creation of an “extremist sectarian environment in which he attempted to divide society on the basis of confessional affiliation and compliance with his orders”, that he “violated the concept of the rule of law, particularly by influencing elections through the delivery of legal opinions on whether voters should participate in, or boycott, elections”, that he “he even mobilized many groups to lobby against the promulgation of the second (Jaafari) part of the Family Law Code”. However, the Special Rapporteur is concerned that certain of these reasons justifying Sheikh Qassim’s conviction seem to be linked to his legitimate exercise of his right to freedom of expression, freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association. He also regrets not having received information regarding Mr. Abduljalil Al-Singace.
Similarly, he remains alarmed at the allegations of travel bans imposed on numerous human rights defenders (BHR 4/2016 and BHR 7/2016). He notes the authorization of the Prosecutor’s Office to impose a travel ban on individuals based on the provisions of article 159 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, if such action is considered to be in the interest of an investigation.
The Special Rapporteur expresses his concern at the targeting of human rights defenders and political activists for peacefully carrying out their human rights activities as well as for legitimately exercising their rights to freedom of expression and freedom of association. The right to freedom of association obliges States to take positive measures to establish and maintain an enabling environment. It is crucial that individuals exercising this right are able to operate freely without fear that they may be subjected to any threats, acts of intimidation or violence, including summary or arbitrary executions, enforced or involuntary disappearances, arbitrary arrest or detention, torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, a media smear campaign, travel ban or arbitrary dismissal, notably for unionists (A/HRC/20/27, paragraph 63).
The Special Rapporteur takes note of the Government’s answer received on 19 April 2017 regarding the alleged arbitrary arrest and detention of six individuals, including one individual with an intellectual disability and two minors and of the fact that, according to police and medical reports, the individuals were not subjected to violence (BHR 2/2017). However, the Rapporteur reminds Bahrain that arresting protesters for taking part in peaceful assembly is in violation of article 21 of the ICCPR. The Special Rapporteur expresses his concern at what appears to be a growing criminalization of civil society activists for their role in peaceful protests and a tendency to repress, including through excessive use of force, the attempts of civil society to collectively voice its grievances. He recalls that assemblies are also an instrument through which other social, economic, political, civil and cultural rights can be expressed, meaning they play a critical role in protecting and promoting a broad range of human rights. They can be instrumental in amplifying the voices of people who are marginalized or who present an alternative narrative to established political and economic interests. Assemblies present ways to engage not only with the State, but also with others who wield power in society, including corporations, religious, educational and cultural institutions, and with public opinion in general (A/HRC/31/66, par. 6).
Country visit
The Special Rapporteur reminds the Government of Bahrain of his willingness to undertake a country visit to Bahrain, as indicated by his last letters of 2 September 2011 and 30 October 2013. He trusts that such a visit would allow him to examine first-hand issues relating to his mandate, identify good practices and formulate pertinent recommendations to relevant stakeholders. He looks forward to receiving a positive reply at the earliest possible opportunity.
For the full reports, containing communications, replies and observations for all countries, see the following links:
Report A/HRC/20/27/Add.3: May 1, 2011 to March 15, 2012
Report A/HRC/23/39/Add.2: March 16, 2012 to February 28, 2013
Report A/HRC/26/29/Add.1: March 1, 2013 to February 28, 2014
Report A/HRC/29/25/Add.3: March 1, 2014 to February 28, 2015
Report A/HRC/32/36/Add.3: March 1, 2015 to February 28, 2016
Report A/HRC/35/28/Add.4: March 1, 2016 to February 28, 2017
