Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, International Commision of Jurists samt Redress Trust retter alle en skarp kritik af justitsminister Lene Espersens (K) brug af diplomatiske garantier, når Danmark udviser mennesker til torturstater. I henvendelsen fra organisationerne til Lene Espersen gør organisationerne opmærksom på, at Danmark dermed lægger afstand til sin tidligere rolle som foregangsland på menneskerettighedsområdet:
Organisationerne gør endvidere Lene Espersen opmærksom på, at tortur og mishandling er et område, hvorpå lovgivningen er absolut; man kan ikke indskrænke lovens gyldighed, hvilket Lene Espersen bidrager med, når hun støtter sig til diplomatiske forsikringer (min fremhævelse):
Fra at være foregangsland for menneskerettigheder, skifter Danmark rolle, skriver organisationerne til Lene Espersen:
Det er her værd at bemærke, at Danmark dermed også bliver en del af det dårlige selskab, hvilket organisationerne dog indtil videre har undladt at skrive direkte.
“
”
Denmark has long been a strong defender and promoter of the absolute prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment, including the absolute prohibition of transfers of individuals to states where they will face a risk of torture and other ill-treatment [...] We were therefore surprised and highly concerned by certain remarks [that] appeared to signal a new willingness to contemplate reliance on assurances against such treatment from states where human rights violations are well-established to be systematic, endemic, persistent or widespread or where a particular group is routinely targeted for such abuse.
“
”
As you are no doubt aware, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in its recent unanimous judgment in Saadi v. Italy (28 February 2008), unreservedly reaffirmed that the right not to be exposed to a real risk of torture or other ill-treatment by being transferred to another state is absolute and cannot be balanced against the alleged threat posed by an individual to public safety .
“
”
Moreover, in legitimizing and institutionalizing the use of diplomatic assurances, Denmark and EU member states would send an unfortunate signal to other states, some with poor human rights records, that the use of diplomatic assurances is an acceptable way to proceed. Indeed, there is emerging evidence that such states are beginning to resort to diplomatic assurances to justify returns to countries with long records of torture and ill-treatment.
Leave a comment