United Arab Emirates communications: May 1, 2011 to February 28, 2017

This page summarizes cases raised with the United Arab Emirates 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 the United Arab Emirates.

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 the United Arab Emirates, English).

First Report (May 1, 2011 to March 15, 2012)

None

Second Report (March 16, 2012 to February 28, 2013)

Joint urgent appeal, 15/05/2012. Case no. ARE 3/2012. State Reply: None to date. Alleged revocation of citizenship, arbitrary detention and enforced disappearance of human rights defenders.
Joint urgent appeal, 07/11/2012. Case no. ARE 7/2012. State Reply: [26/03/2013]. Alleged mass arrest and detention of human rights defenders, judges and lawyers.
Joint allegation letter, 04/12/2012. Case no. ARE 8/2012. State Reply: None to date. Allegations of amendments to the 2006 Law on Cybercrime which have the potential to significantly curtail freedom of opinion and expression on the internet, as well as the right to freedom of association and peaceful assembly.

Observations
The Special Rapporteur would like to thank the Government of the United Arab Emirates for its reply to the communication he sent on 7 November 2012, but he regrets that the two other communications he sent during the reporting period remain unanswered. He considers responses to his communications as an important part of the cooperation of Governments with his mandate, and urges the authorities to provide as soon as possible detailed responses to all the concerns raised in his communications.

The Special Rapporteur is concerned about the increasing restrictions to the exercise of freedom of association and of peaceful assembly in the country, which include withdrawal of nationality, arrests, detention and convictions against individuals who have solely exercised their fundamental rights and freedoms. The Special Rapporteur is increasingly concerned about the physical and psychological integrity of individuals exercising their rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association in the country, particularly of those protecting or promoting human rights.

He 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”.

Third Report (March 1, 2013 to February 28, 2014)

Joint urgent appeal, 16/04/2013. Case no. ARE 1/2013. State replies: 10/06/2013, 03/11/2013. Alleged violation to the right to a fair trial of 94 human rights defenders and other civil society activists, and sentencing of a human rights defender for publishing information on these trials.
Joint urgent appeal, 20/06/2013. Case no. ARE 3/2013. State reply: None to date. Alleged physical attack and acts of intimidation and reprisal against a human rights defender for having cooperated with the United Nations, its representatives and mechanisms in the field of human rights.
Joint urgent appeal, 06/08/2013. Case no. ARE 4/2013. State reply: 20/11/2013. Alleged sentencing of 69 out of the 94 individuals arrested, including human rights lawyers, judges, academics and student leaders, reported irregularities in their trial, and allegations of torture whilst in detention.
Joint urgent appeal, 07/11/2013. Case no. ARE 5/2013. State reply: None to date. Alleged implementation of the new law on Cyber Crime as well as alleged torture of detainees.

Observations
The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of the United Arab Emirates for its responses to two out of four of his communications. However, he regrets that the Government has not replied to all his communications at the time of the finalization of the present report. He considers the responses to his communications as an important part of the cooperation of Governments with his mandate and urges the authorities to provide detailed responses to all the concerns raised in his communications.

The Special Rapporteur expresses 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 of the Government’s renewed engagement with the international community in the field of human rights and he calls on the Government to keep him informed on the progress made into the investigations conducted in relation to the aforementioned cases, and that perpetrators will be brought to justice and that the victims will obtain adequate redress.

Furthermore, the Special 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.”