Read the report (pdf)

PHR submitted a shadow report to the Human Rights Committee (HRC) for its review of the United States’ compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The report finds that the United States has failed to uphold its obligations under the ICCPR by its continued use of indefinite detention. The report also offers recommendations to the United States in in order to address these significant human rights concerns and encourages the HRC to include these recommendations in their U.S. review.

This week an Ohio judge awarded $15 million to Abukar Hassan Ahmed, a Somali constitutional law professor and human rights advocate, following a civil trial in which a Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) volunteer doctor delivered testimony crucial to the case. The compensation follows a November 2012 decision that found defendant Colonel Abdi Aden Magan, former chief of investigations for Somalia’s National Security Service (NSS), responsible for torture, cruel treatment, and arbitrary detention. Ahmed was detained and interrogated by the NSS for several months in the 1980s, during which he suffered brutal beatings, sexual humiliation, and water torture.

Crucial to the awarding of damages was the testimony of PHR volunteer Dr. Coleen Kivlahan, a family physician with over twelve years of experience working with victims of human rights abuses. Dr. Kivlahan examined Ahmed to document scars left by his torturers and assess his ongoing physical and psychological suffering. “Mr. Ahmed had objective signs consistent with torture which made testifying on his behalf quite straightforward,” said Kivlahan. She found that Ahmed continues to experience pain and bladder dysfunction as a result of his injuries, in addition to chronic signs of post-traumatic stress disorder. Her testimony featured prominently in the judge’s decision.

Humbled to be part of the case, Dr. Kivlahan said “Mr. Ahmed is a brilliant, articulate gentleman who told his story with unwavering courage. Despite the physical and psychological consequences of his extreme torture and humiliation, he relentlessly pursued justice for himself and other survivors.”

The judge admitted that it is “no easy task to quantify damages for human rights abuses” and acknowledged that monetary compensation would never adequately redress the indignities Ahmed suffered. Still, the remedy sends an important message to human rights violators that they cannot live in the United States with impunity. It also marks the first time a member of the NSS has been held accountable for acts committed under the brutal military dictatorship that ruled Somalia for decades.

The lawsuit was filed in 2010 by the Center for Justice and Accountability under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA). The ATCA is a powerful tool through which noncitizen victims of human rights abuses can seek civil remedies in U.S. courts. A part of American law since 1789, the ATCA grants federal courts jurisdiction to hear cases alleging violations of the “law of nations” or of a treaty signed by the United States. The ATCA can hold accountable both state actors and transnational corporations.

PHR will continue to support attorneys litigating cases under the ATCA and applauds all those involved in Ahmed’s case for their innovative strategies in bringing justice to victims and holding perpetrators accountable.

Amidst the unacceptable assault on civilian protesters in Egypt, reports indicate that those responsible for the brutality, that has so far left more than 500 dead, are also preventing access to medical care that the thousands of injured will need to survive.

Actors including the Egyptian military and police have attacked medical professionals and facilities as part of the country’s recent anti-government protests and resulting crackdown on dissent, preventing health care providers and treatment centers from serving their function. As a result, the death toll rises. Commentators compare Egyptian streets to “hospital corridors,” with photographs of demonstrators wearing surgical masks in an effort to protect themselves against tear gas. Yet, at the same time that rights groups decry Egypt’s authorization of live ammunition against pro-Morsi protesters, they also condemn the Muslim Brotherhood’s violence and incitement to violence against Christian citizens and their political opponents.

"We had to leave the hospital. We had to leave casualties. We had to leave bodies. It was horrible. It was barbaric. I saw with my own eyes one person shot in front of me on the steps of the hospital," The Guardian reported an eyewitness as saying. During assaults on protesters, paths to hospital buildings were either blocked or vulnerable to sniper fire from above, and human rights groups reported that as a result, ambulances could not reach hospitals.

Medical care must not be politicized. Globally recognized principles of medical neutrality – rooted in ethics of medical practice that date back at least 2,300 years and include Islamic tradition – protect the right of medical providers, facilities, and transport to operate without interference and the right of the injured to access nondiscriminatory and humane treatment.

Violations of medical neutrality are just one aspect of the gruesome crackdown on civilians in Egypt this week. Attacks against unarmed protesters demand a strong international response, as does recognizing – as a coalition of regional NGOs has recently said in a joint statement – that non-peaceful assembly does not justify collective punishment. The United States should immediately suspend its military assistance to Egypt and make continued U.S. aid conditional on the protection of civilians and respect for the human rights of all.

This post originally appeared in The Huffington Post.

The recent video by Yasiin Bey, actor and rapper formerly known as Mos Def, offers a powerful look into the harshness of force feeding — which some 45 Guantánamo detainees have been subjected to. In the video, Bey moans, gags, and finally pleads for the force feeding to end because he can't take it anymore. Even President Barack Obama recently acknowledged the brutality of force feeding detainees at Guantánamo by saying: "Is that the America we want to leave our children? Our sense of justice is stronger than that."

Force feeding violates longstanding medical ethics, is inhuman and degrading, and is against our fundamental values. The World Medical Association states that force feeding is "never medically acceptable," and the American Medical Association has said that it "violates core ethical values of the medical profession." A federal judge recently even called the procedure "painful, humiliating, and degrading." And a bipartisan taskforce found that force feeding is "a form of abuse and must end."

Force feeding is inconsistent with medical ethics, as it directly infringes on detainees' rights to make their own decisions about their health. Health professionals at Guantánamo have been subjecting detainees to the procedure against their wishes, using shackles and restraints for up to four hours a day while force feeding them. Medical professionals who administer force feeding at Guantánamo are violating their clinical and ethical responsibilities, and instead should use their independent medical judgment, respond to the detainees' needs and wishes, and stop using force.

Everyone's reaction to force feeding is not as strong as Bey's; others find it uncomfortable, at worst. As one of Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) medical experts recently pointed out, for some, force feeding is extremely painful, while others eventually get used to it. The procedure can be particularly painful in situations like Guantánamo, where detainees are likely to resist. But regardless of varying reactions to the procedure, health professionals and leading medical groups from around the world unequivocally call to immediately end the force feeding of detainees.

While force feeding is a major problem and the president's administration needs to stop the practice, we have to remember that it's only a part of the ongoing crisis at Guantánamo Bay. One piece of good news is that a Senate hearing took place just last month on the larger topic of closing Guantánamo where a PHR medical expert, Brigadier General (Ret.) Stephen Xenakis, testified and said, "Force-feeding completely undermines the physician-patient relationship by destroying the trust that is essential for all clinical treatment."

The detainees have engaged in a hunger strike as a way to express their longstanding and legitimate grievances resulting from their deplorable conditions, including solitary confinement, indefinite detention, and torture. PHR has documented the serious physical and psychological consequences of indefinite detention and the devastating effects of solitary confinement. The detainees' drastic measures represent an act of desperation, and the solution is not to violate medical standards and compromise our core values, but rather to address the appalling conditions they have been subjected to for over a decade.

No human being should ever have to endure such treatment. Everyone deserves to either be released or charged and tried in a court of law. No one should linger for years in detention without charge, losing all faith in our justice system.

As a nation, we must do better. We must respect everyone's human rights, including those of detainees in our custody and care. Holding people in detention indefinitely violates American values and our country's core principles of justice and fairness.

August 8, 2013 marks the 25th anniversary of the 8/8/88 uprising in Burma, when the Burmese military brutally suppressed pro-democracy protesters. Student leaders initiated the demonstrations in Rangoon to protest corruption, government mismanagement, and the lack of economic reforms. The demonstrations spread nationwide as monks, ethnic nationality leaders, and others joined.

Soldiers, following orders, shot directly into crowds of unarmed demonstrators. Over the course of the protests, the crackdown took thousands of lives. After delivering her first speech in August 1988, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi quickly became a known as a staunch advocate of democracy and openly spoke about Burmese military authoritarianism to the western world. The protests continued until September 1988, when the Burmese army took power and enforced repressive military rule.

Twenty-five years after the brutal crackdown on protesters, the government of Burma has made significant moves toward democracy. However, severe human rights violations persist, as Burma’s military, or Tatmadaw, continue attacks on ethnic minorities, including the Kachin – an ethnic group that has fought against the central government since a ceasefire dissolved two years ago. Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) has documented crimes against ethnic minorities committed by the military as well as by fellow civilians; PHR experts documented a massacre of Muslims in Meiktila, Mandalay Division, where police stood by as dozens of people were killed. The recent examples of anti-Muslim violence in Meiktila and elsewhere, as well as the rampant hate speech and racism against minorities, stand in the way of building democracy in Burma.

Remembering the violence of 8/8/88 offers not only a moment to pay respects to the victims of that day’s violence, but it is also a time to recognize that the protests represented a riot for freedom, democracy, and fairness. Above all, it was a call for unity. Daw Aung San Suu Kyi stated in her speech:

“While I am on the subject of unity may I speak for a while on the union of states of which Burma is composed. The different peoples of Burma should also remain united. The majority people of course remain the Burmese. They must strive with ever-increasing efforts to live in this accord and amity.”

The generation of 8/8/88 must remember Daw Aung San Suu Kyi’s words and remain tireless advocates for democracy for all. Leaders of 8/8/88 should understand that true democracy requires protecting the human rights of all people. The 8/8/88 generation should help build unity among the Burmese people and end the generations of silence that have allowed for continued violations against minority groups.

PHR has compiled this informational fact sheet to provide an overview of the deadly effects of nerve agents, as well as the procedure for the professional documentation of evidence of chemical warfare agents use and exposure. Evidence collection of the use of such weapons requires highly specialized procedures and equipment. Such evidence is necessary not only to determine who is responsible for its use, but also to ensure the proper medical treatment of victims and protection of first responders and others in the immediate environment.

التعرض للعوامل المشلة للأعصاب و جمع الأدلة الجنائية
>> (pdf) العربية

Often referred to as the “rape capital of the world,” the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has yet to break free of its human rights crisis. In March of this year, our team of eight graduate students from the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University traveled to the DRC to research access to justice for survivors of sexual violence. Our research was part of a Capstone Workshop advised by Professor Yasmine Ergas and in collaboration with Physicians for Human Rights (PHR).

Our report reveals that, despite efforts to strengthen the judicial system, serious barriers to justice for rape survivors remain. In 2006, the country adopted a new constitution and two new laws to fight impunity for sexual violence. Since then, international and domestic organizations have helped support and reinforce the work that local mobile courts are doing to improve access to justice throughout the DRC. These mobile courts aim to bring justice to communities by convening trials, issuing judgments, and awarding victims monetary compensation; however, survivors almost never receive the reparations awarded to them in court.

In fact, the barriers to receiving compensation begin immediately after someone is raped. If a survivor of sexual violence is able to overcome the associated shame and stigma, and seek formal redress, he or she is often encouraged to utilize traditional justice mechanisms. Here, community leaders order the perpetrator to pay money or in-kind donations (such as cows) to the survivor’s family, or force the survivor to marry the perpetrator. Police often encourage these arrangements, taking bribes, fees, or a cut of the award along the way.

These traditional arrangements do not constitute justice. They benefit the survivor’s family rather than the individual survivor. Forcing a survivor to marry her aggressor does not provide redress. Moreover, bypassing formal prosecution undermines the rule of law.

Even when survivors successfully bring their cases to court, pervasive poverty, excessive post-trial complexities, and the lack of political will on the part of the Congolese government mean reparations are rarely delivered. When awarded, reparations can be incredibly high, ranging from $300 into the millions. However, before receiving reparations in court, victims must pay a number of fees, including six percent of the total reparation amount. Survivors can claim indigence to waive these fees, but this entails prohibitively complex paperwork, a task that is especially onerous for low literacy populations. These factors can compel survivors to refrain from even applying for reparations.

Significantly, our research revealed that there is no funding for the post-trial phase, so lawyers and victims’ advocates lack incentive to aid survivors after verdicts are delivered and survivors are often ill-equipped to navigate the bureaucratic maze themselves. After risking reprisals and shame, survivors ultimately receive nothing, which causes additional trauma and discourages others from pursuing legal redress.

Considering these barriers, our research team developed nine recommendations for international and domestic stakeholders, which demonstrate that immediate, practical steps can be taken to help bring justice to the countless survivors who have suffered for decades.

Ultimately, it is crucial that reparations, when awarded, are actually delivered to survivors. Without this final, but imperative, step in the formal justice process, there will be no meaningful peace and security in the DRC.

Dr. Stephen N. Xenakis, PHR's anti-torture expert, testified at the Senate Judiciary Committee on Closing Guantanamo: The National Security, Fiscal, and Human Rights Implications, on July 24, 2013. He asked for an immediate end to the force feeding of Guantanamo detainees. He stated that force feeding is painful and degrading and violates medical guidelines by undermining the doctor-patient relationship and by engaging health professionals in the use of force against detainees. Read his full testimony here.