Human rights in Israel
Human rights in Israel refers to the human rights record of the State of Israel as evaluated by intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations and human rights activists in the context of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, the wider Arab–Israeli conflict and Israel internal politics. Israel is a multiparty parliamentary democracy, it was described in its Declaration of Independence as a "Jewish state" – the legal definition "Jewish and democratic state" was adopted in 1985. In addition to its Jewish majority, Israel is home to religious and ethnic minorities, some of whom report discrimination. In the Palestinian territories, successive Israeli governments have been subject to international criticism from other countries as well as international human rights groups. One of the Basic Laws of Israel, intended to form the basis of a future constitution, Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, is a major tool for safeguarding human rights and civil liberties in the State of Israel.
According to the 2015 US Department of State's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, Israel faces significant human rights problems regarding institutional discrimination of Arab citizens of Israel, Ethiopian Israelis and women, the treatment of refugees and irregular migrants. Other human rights problems include institutional discrimination against non-Orthodox Jews and intermarried families, labor rights abuses against foreign workers. Despite criticism of its human rights record, Israel is seen as being more politically free and democratic than neighboring countries in the Middle East; the Council of the League of Nations adopted a resolution on 4 September 1931 regarding the general conditions required before the mandate regime could be brought to an end. The new government was to provide an oral or written declaration acknowledging acceptance of an obligation to constitutionally guarantee the equal rights of ethnic and religious minorities; that resolution followed a longstanding precedent of international law in cases where the Great Powers had assisted in the restoration of sovereignty over a territory.
The UN resolution on "The Future Government of Palestine" contained both a plan of partition and a Minority Protection Plan. It placed minority, women's, religious rights under the protection of the United Nations and the International Court of Justice; the plan provided specific guarantees of fundamental human rights. The new states were to supply a declaration, which according to precedent was tantamount to a treaty; the resolution stated that "the stipulations contained in the declarations are recognized as fundamental laws of State, no law, regulation or official action shall conflict or interfere with these stipulations, nor shall any law, regulation or official action prevail over them." The resolution required that the constitution of each state embody the rights contained in the Declaration. During the hearings on Israel's application for membership in the United Nations, Abba Eban said that the rights stipulated in UN resolution 181 had been constitutionally embodied as the fundamental law of the state of Israel as required by the resolution.
The instruments that he cited during the hearings were the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel, various cables and letters of confirmation addressed to the Secretary General. Eban's explanations and Israel's undertakings were noted in the text of General Assembly Resolution 273 Admission of Israel to membership in the United Nations, 11 May 1949; the Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel proclaimed, on 14 May 1948, that "the right of the Jewish people to national rebirth in its own country" was recognized in the Balfour Declaration of 2 November 1917, re-affirmed in the Mandate of the League of Nations which, in particular, gave international sanction to the historic connection between the Jewish people and "Eretz-Israel and to the right of the Jewish people to rebuild its National Home." It declared that the state "will be open for Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles. In 1950, Israel was admitted to the United Nations in accordance with General Assembly resolution 273 of 11 May 1949.
The Israeli Supreme Court has ruled that the Declaration of Independence is not a constitution and cannot be used to invalidate laws and regulations that contradict it. Israeli Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, states that fundamental human rights in Israel shall be upheld in the spirit of the principles set forth in the Declaration, but it exempted legislation, in force. Israeli legal scholars say that the wording of the law was adopted to avoid the difficulty of giving priority to equality, not expressly entrenched; the result is that the principle of equality can be reversed by ordinary legislation, furthermore will not override statutory or judge-made laws. The United Nations and its subsidiary organs say that Israel has a binding legal obligation that flows from resolution 181 and that the United Nations has a permanent responsibility in the matter. Israel is committed to the International Covenant on Civil
Human rights in Syria
The situation for human rights in Syria is considered egregiously poor among international observers. A state of emergency was in effect from 1963 until April 2011, giving security forces sweeping powers of arrest and detention. From 1973 to 2012, Syria was a single-party state; the authorities have been accused of harassing and imprisoning human rights activists and other critics of the government. According to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, freedom of expression and assembly are controlled, women and ethnic minorities face discrimination. According to Human Rights Watch, President Bashar al-Assad failed to improve Syria’s human rights record in the first 10 years of his rule, Syria's human rights situation remained among the worst in the world. According to Amnesty International, the government may be guilty of crimes against humanity based on "witness accounts of deaths in custody and extrajudicial executions, torture and arbitrary detention and forced disappearances during the crackdown against the 2011 uprising and during the Syrian Civil War.
The regime has conducted chemical attacks against its own civilians. From the early 1920s until 1946, Syria and Lebanon were under the control of a French Mandate ratified by the League of Nations on 29 September 1923. Human rights concerns during this period included the colonialist treatment of the Druze within their autonomous state in the southern portion of the mandate, as prisoners and peasants there were used for forced labor. During the Great Revolt, French military forces sieged much of Damascus and the countryside, killing at least 7,000 rebels and displacing over 100,000 civilians. Authorities would publicly display mutilated corpses in central squares within Damascus and villages throughout Syria as a means of intimidating opponents of the government. In 1926, the Damascus military court executed 355 Syrians without any legal representation. Hundreds of Syrians were sentenced to death in absentia, prison terms of various lengths, life imprisonment with hard labour. Additionally, it was during this period that Syrian Women's Rights groups began to assert themselves, led by individuals like Naziq al-Abid.
Jews in Syria have been discriminated against since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. In 1948, Jews were banned from selling their property. In 1953, all Jewish bank accounts were frozen and Jewish property confiscated. In 1954, Jews were temporarily permitted to emigrate, but they had to leave all their property to the government. In March 1964, Jews were banned from traveling more than 5 kilometres from their hometowns. Jews were not allowed to work for the government or banks, could not acquire drivers' licenses, were banned from purchasing property. Although Jews were prohibited from leaving the country, they were sometimes allowed to travel abroad for commercial or medical reasons. Any Jew granted clearance to leave the country had to leave behind a bond of $300–$1,000 and family members to be used as hostages to ensure they returned. An airport road was paved over the Jewish cemetery in Damascus, Jewish schools were closed and handed over to Muslims; the Jewish Quarter of Damascus was under constant surveillance by the secret police, who were present at synagogue services, bar mitzvahs, other Jewish gatherings.
The secret police monitored contact between Syrian Jews and foreigners and kept a file on every member of the Jewish community. Jews had their phones tapped and their mail read by the secret police. After Israel's victory in the 1967 Six-Day War, restrictions were further tightened, 57 Jews in Qamishli may have been killed in a pogrom; the communities of Damascus and Qamishli were under house arrest for eight months following the war. Many Jewish workers were laid off following the Six-Day War. In 1982, President Hafez al-Assad responded to an insurrection led by the Muslim Brotherhood in the city of Hama by sending a paramilitary force that indiscriminately killed between 10,000 and 55,000 civilians including children and the elderly during what became known as the Hama massacre. Amnesty International reports that women have been subject to discrimination and gender-based violence. For several years, the "watchdog organization" Freedom House has rated political rights in Syria as "7" — the "least free" rating on its scale of 1 to 7 — and given Syria a rating of "Not Free."According to the 2008 report on human rights by the U.
S. State Department, the Syrian government's "respect for human rights worsened". Members of the security forces arrested and detained individuals without providing just cause held prisoners in "lengthy pretrial and incommunicado detention", "tortured and physically abused prisoners and detainees"; the government imposed significant restrictions on freedom of speech, press and association, amid an atmosphere of government corruption. According to Arab Press Network, "despite a repressive political climate", there were "signs of positive change," during the 2007 elections. According to a 2008 report by Reporters without Borders, "Journalists have to censor themselves for fear of being thrown into Adra Prison."In 2009 Syria was included in Freedom House's "Worst of the Worst" section and given a rating of 7 for Political Rights: and 6 for Civil Liberties. According to Human Rights Watch, as of 2009 Syria’s poor human rights situation had "deteriorated further". Authorities arrested political and human rights activists, censored websites, detained bloggers, imposed travel bans.
Syria’s multiple security agencies continue to detain people without arrest warrants. No political parties were licensed and emergency rule, imposed in 1963, remained in effect. In April 2017
Human rights in Egypt
Most sources agree that Egypt is a gross violator of human rights. Authorities have banned protests and freedom of expression, imprisoned its opponents after unfair trials, outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood, expanded its anti-terrorism powers. Torture, forced disappearances, deaths in custody are not rare occurrences; the government continues to persecute journalists. Women and members of religious minorities are subject to discrimination. People are arrested for “debauchery” and sexual orientation. Due to an insurgency in Northern Sinai, the army has enacted curfews and evicted communities from their homes along the border with Gaza in order to restrict the flow of arms. A new constitution was adopted in January 2014; the document, in principle, improved protections for women’s rights, freedom of expression, other civil liberties. However, these rights have not been enforced in practice. There is a critical lack of accountability, with most human rights violations being committed with impunity. In a December 2016 report, a panel of UN experts concluded that: “The continuous persecution of women human rights defenders such as Azza Soliman and Mozn Hassan... establishes and reinforces a pattern of systematic repression of the Egyptian women’s rights movement, aiming to silence and intimidate those working tirelessly for justice, human rights and equality” On July 24, 2018, a hearing was held before the Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, U.
S. House of Representatives, on security, human rights, reform in Egypt. Freedom House, the "independent watchdog organization that supports the expansion of freedom around the world," rated Egypt "not free" in 2011, it gave Egypt a "Political Rights Score" of 6 and "Civil Liberties Score" of 5 on a scale of 1-7, with 1 representing the highest level of freedom and 7 representing the lowest level of freedom. In 2000 the related Center for Religious Freedom placed Egypt as free at 5. Reporters Without Borders placed the Côte d'Ivoire in press freedom. See List of indices of freedom for more information on these ratings and how they are determined; the Press Law, Publications Law, the penal code regulate and govern the press. According to these, criticism of the president can be punished by fines or imprisonment. Freedom House deems Egypt to have an unfree press, although mentions they have a diversity of sources. Reporters Without Borders 2006 report indicates continued harassment and, in three cases, imprisonment, of journalists.
They place Egypt 143rd out of 167 nations on press freedoms. The two sources agree that promised reforms on the subject have been disappointingly slow or uneven in implementation. Freedomhouse had a more positive assessment indicating that an increased freedom to discuss controversial issues has occurred. According to Al Jazeera.net, "in the past few years, independent Egyptian newspapers have emerged that have proved willing to hold the rich and powerful elite to account, right up to the presidency. The old state-owned newspapers are beginning to lose their readership." In July 2006, the Egyptian parliament passed a new press law. The new law no longer allows journalists to be imprisoned for comments against the government, but continues to allow fines to be levied against such journalists; the independent press and the Muslim Brotherhood protested this law as repressive. Although the Egyptian Government bans foreign newspapers, in September 2006, Egypt banned editions of Le Figaro and Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, because of their publication of articles deemed insulting to Islam.
According to Al Jazeera, the German newspaper contained an article authored by the German historian Egon Flaig, "looking at how the Prophet Muhammad, the founder of Islam, was a successful military leader during his lifetime". Al Jazeera quotes the Egyptian minister of information as saying that he, "would not allow any publication that insults the Islamic religion or calls for hatred or contempt of any religion to be distributed inside Egypt."Following the Arab Spring there was hope for greater freedom of speech in Egypt. However, as of February 2012, television journalist Tim Sebastian reported a "re-emergence of fear" in Egypt. Once again, I was told, Egyptians are starting to look over their shoulder to see who might be listening, to be careful what they say on the phone, to begin considering all over again who they can and cannot trust. “The intelligence services are active,” says a well-known commentator. The United States State Department voiced concern in August 2012 about freedom of the press in Egypt, following a move by the authorities to put two critics of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi on trial.
The State Department criticized Egypt for actions against Al-Dustour, a small independent newspaper, the Al-Faraeen channel, both of which have criticized Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood. In July 2016, Egyptian security forces stormed the home of Liliana Daoud, a Lebanese-British journalist, whisked her to the airport. Without advance warning, Ms. Daoud found herself on a plane to Lebanon. Before her deportation, Ms. Daoud was fired from her job at local private channel just a few weeks after a pro-Sisi businessman bought it. In August 2018, the Egyptian government put television host Mohamed al-Ghiety on trial for interviewing an anonymous gay man, he was jailed and sente
Human rights in the United Kingdom
Human rights in the United Kingdom are set out in common law, with its strongest roots being in the English Bill of Rights 1689 and Scottish Claim of Right Act 1689, as well as legislation of European institutions: the EU and the European Court of Human Rights. At the same time, it has been alleged that the UK has had a history of both de jure and de facto discrimination, and, in recent history, occasional violations of basic human rights in times of national security crises, or regarding the rights of migrants, the unemployed, the disabled. In recent years, British human rights legislation has been criticised by some for what they perceive as excessive attention to the human rights of offenders at the expense of those of victims. David Cameron in his second ministry announced plans to replace the Human Rights Act with a "British Bill of Rights". Magna Carta, issued in 1215, explicitly protected certain rights of the King's subjects and restricted the power of the King of England, it implicitly supported what became the writ of habeas corpus, safeguarding individual freedom against unlawful imprisonment with right to appeal.
After the first representative English parliament in 1265, the emergence of petitioning in the 13th century is some of the earliest evidence of parliament being used as a forum to address the general grievances of ordinary people. The idea of debating rights to political representation took form during the Putney Debates of 1647. Beginning in the late 17th century, philosophers began to think of rights not as privileges to be granted by the government or the law, but as a fundamental part of what it means to be a person. John Locke, one of the most influential of Enlightenment thinkers, argued that property - which to him included life and possessions - was an unalienable human right, that is, one which cannot be taken away, he articulated that every person is created equal and free but, in return for the advantages of living in an organised society, a person may need to give up some of this freedom. The Bill of Rights 1689, enacted in the Kingdom of England, reinforced the Petition of Right and the Habaes Corpus Act by codifying certain rights and liberties.
It established the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment and limited the power of the monarch. A separate but similar document, the Claim of Right Act 1689, was enacted in the Kingdom of Scotland; the rule of law started to become a principle in the way. In the place of the concept of popular sovereignty found in other democracies, the United Kingdom evolved a concept of parliamentary sovereignty under which the liberties of the individual are implications drawn from two principles. First, the "residual liberty" to act as one wishes so long as the activity is not restricted by the law. Second, public authorities and The Crown can do only that, authorised by law, in particular may not interfere with individuals' liberties without statutory authority. In this perspective, the vision of individual rights is perceived more in terms of an "undifferentiated mass of liberty" rather than a bundle of separate positive liberties and freedoms which define the relationship between citizen and state.
As Parliament is sovereign, liberties are alterable under the supervision of citizens' elected representatives who ensure that any encroachment is controlled and authorised for democratic purposes. During the 20th century, a belief arose that some extra protection of human rights above and beyond parliamentary scrutiny was necessary. Doubts grew about the capacity of parliamentary controls because of scepticism about Parliament's will to control the growing executive and the control by political parties of their MPs which allowed weak governments to avoid effective challenges; this scepticism went hand in hand with criticisms of the United Kingdom's political system and whether it is sufficiently representative of the range of opinion in the country. The doubts intensified with the experiences with terrorism in the 1970s and accession to the European Community in 1973 where Britain was exposed to other legal systems which did not share the same concept of parliamentary sovereignty and which gave stronger protection to human rights.
In particular, European entry led to the notion that the Parliament of the United Kingdom could be subject to the decisions of a higher legal order in the form of the European Court of Justice. This was highlighted in the Factortame litigation where the House of Lords was required to'disapply' provisions of an Act of Parliament which were contrary to European Community law ruling them invalid. In addition influenced by international human rights law, comparative constitutional law and European law, English courts became more sympathetic towards the concept of popular sovereignty and fundamental rights and liberties; the UK played an important role in the drafting of the Convention, with figures such as Arthur Goodhart, John Foster and the UK-based Hersch Lauterpacht providing the impetus for the creation of the Council of Europe in 1949 as a means of guarding against the rise of new dictatorships and to provide the citizens of Soviet-occupied countries with a beacon of hope. The initiative in producing a binding human rights agreement had been taken by the International Council of the European Movement, an organisation whose cause had been championed by Winston Churchill and Harold Macmillan, whose international juridical section (counting Lauterpacht and Maxwel
Brunei the Nation of Brunei, the Abode of Peace, is a country located on the north coast of the island of Borneo in Southeast Asia. Apart from its coastline with the South China Sea, the country is surrounded by the Malaysian state of Sarawak, it is separated into two parts by the Sarawak district of Limbang. Brunei is the only sovereign state on the island of Borneo. Brunei's population was 423,196 in 2016. At the peak of the Bruneian Empire, Sultan Bolkiah is alleged to have had control over most regions of Borneo, including modern-day Sarawak and Sabah, as well as the Sulu Archipelago off the northeast tip of Borneo and the islands off the northwest tip of Borneo; the maritime state was visited by Spain's Magellan Expedition in 1521 and fought against Spain in the 1578 Castilian War. During the 19th century, the Bruneian Empire began to decline; the Sultanate ceded Sarawak to James Brooke and installed him as the White Rajah, it ceded Sabah to the British North Borneo Chartered Company. In 1888, Brunei became a British protectorate and was assigned a British resident as colonial manager in 1906.
After the Japanese occupation during World War II, in 1959 a new constitution was written. In 1962, a small armed rebellion against the monarchy was ended with the help of the British. Brunei gained its independence from the United Kingdom on 1 January 1984. Economic growth during the 1990s and 2000s, with the GDP increasing 56% from 1999 to 2008, transformed Brunei into an industrialised country, it has developed wealth from extensive petroleum and natural gas fields. Brunei has the second-highest Human Development Index among the Southeast Asian nations, after Singapore, is classified as a "developed country". According to the International Monetary Fund, Brunei is ranked fifth in the world by gross domestic product per capita at purchasing power parity; the IMF estimated in 2011 that Brunei was one of two countries with a public debt at 0% of the national GDP. Forbes ranks Brunei as the fifth-richest nation out of 182, based on its petroleum and natural gas fields. According to local historiography, Brunei was founded by Awang Alak Betatar to be Sultan Muhammad Shah, reigning around AD 1400.
He moved from Garang in the Temburong District to the Brunei River estuary. According to legend, upon landing he exclaimed, Baru nah, he was the first Muslim ruler of Brunei. Before the rise of the Bruneian Empire under the Muslim Bolkiah Dynasty, Brunei is believed to have been under Buddhist rulers, it was renamed "Barunai" in the 14th century influenced by the Sanskrit word "varuṇ", meaning "seafarers". The word "Borneo" is of the same origin. In the country's full name, Negara Brunei Darussalam, darussalam means "abode of peace", while negara means "country" in Malay; the earliest recorded documentation by the West about Brunei is by an Italian known as Ludovico di Varthema, who said the "Bruneian people have fairer skin tone than the peoples he met in Maluku Islands". On his documentation back to 1550; the people are men of goodwill. Their colour is whiter than that of the other sort... in this island justice is well administered... The settlement known as Vijayapura was a colony to the Buddhist Srivijaya empire and was thought to be located in Borneo's Northwest which flourished in the 7th Century.
In the aftermath of the Indian Chola invasion of Srivijaya, Datu Puti lead some dissident datus from Sumatra and Borneo in a rebellion against Rajah Makatunao, a Chola appointed local Rajah. The dissidents and their retinue tried to revive Srivijaya in a new country called Madja-as in the Visayas islands in the Philippines. One of the earliest Chinese records of an independent kingdom in Borneo is the 977 AD letter to Chinese emperor from the ruler of Po-ni, which some scholars believe to refer to Borneo. In 1225, a Chinese official, Chau Ju-Kua, reported that Po-ni had 100 warships to protect its trade, that there was a lot of wealth in the kingdom. In the 14th century, the Javanese manuscript Nagarakretagama, written by Prapanca in 1365, mentioned Barune as the constituent state of Hindu Majapahit, which had to make an annual tribute of 40 katis of camphor. In 1369, Sulu, formerly part of Majapahit, had rebelled and attacked Po-ni, looting it of treasure and gold. A fleet from Majapahit succeeded in driving away the Sulus, but Po-ni was left weaker after the attack.
A Chinese report from 1371 described Po-ni as poor and controlled by Majapahit. During the 15th century, Po-ni had seceded from Majapahit and converted to Islam, thus transforming into the independent Sultanate of Brunei. Brunei became a Hashemite state when she allowed the Arab Emir of Mecca, Sharif Ali, to become her third sultan. Scholars claim that the power of the Sultanate of Brunei was at its peak between the 15th and 17th centuries, with its power extending from northern Borneo to the southern Philippines and in the northern Philippines which Brunei incorporated via territorial acquisition accomplished through royal marriages. However, Islamic Brunei's power was not uncontested in Borneo since it had a Hindu rival called Kutai in the sou
Human rights in Russia
As a successor to the Soviet Union, the Russian Federation remains bound by such human rights instruments as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and International Covenant on Economic and Cultural Rights. In the late 1990s, Russia ratified the European Convention of Human Rights and from 1998 onwards the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg became a last court of appeal for Russian citizens from their national system of justice. According to Chapter 1, Article 15 of the Constitution adopted in Russia in December 1993, these embodiments of international law take precedence over national legislation. However, from Vladimir Putin's second term as President onward there were increasing reports of human rights violations. Since the 2011 State Duma elections and Putin's resumption of the presidency in spring 2012, there has been a legislative onslaught on many international and constitutional rights, e.g. Article 20 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, embodied in Articles 30 and 31 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.
A law was passed in December 2015 that gives the Constitutional Court of Russia the right to decide whether Russia can enforce, or ignore, resolutions from intergovernmental bodies such as the European Court of Human Rights. As a member of the Council of Europe and a signatory of the European Convention on Human Rights, Russia has international obligations related to the issue of human rights. In the introduction to the 2004 report on the situation in Russia, the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe noted the "sweeping changes since the collapse of the Soviet Union undeniable". During his time as Ombudsman of the Russian Federation from 2004–2014, Vladimir Lukin invariably characterized the human rights situation in Russia as unsatisfactory while acknowledging that building a law-governed state and civil society in such a complex country as Russia would be a hard and long process. A former politician and diplomat, Lukin was replaced first by Ella Pamfilova and in April 2016 by Tatyana Moskalkova, a lawyer and professor with the rank of Major-General in the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
During Putin's first term as President, Freedom House rated Russia as "partially free" with poor scores of 5 on both political rights and civil liberties. In the period from 2005 to 2008, Freedom House rated Russia as "not free" with scores of 6 for political rights and 5 for civil liberties according to its Freedom in the World reports. In 2006, The Economist published a democracy rating, which placed Russia at 102nd among 167 countries and defined it as a "hybrid regime with a trend towards curtailment of media and other civil liberties". According to the Human Rights Watch 2016 report, the human rights situation in the Russian Federation continues to deteriorate. By 2016, four years into Putin's third term as President, the Russian Federation had sunk further on the Freedom House rating: he Kremlin continued a crackdown on civil society, ramping up pressure on domestic nongovernmental organizations and branding the U. S.-based National Endowment for Democracy and two groups backed by billionaire philanthropist George Soros as'undesirable organizations'.
The regime intensified its tight grip on the media, saturating the information landscape with nationalist propaganda while suppressing the most popular alternative voices. International monitors and domestic observers have listed numerous deeply-rooted problems in the country and, with their advocacy, citizens have directed a flood of complaints to the European Court of Human Rights since 1998. By 1 June 2007, 22.5% of its pending cases were complaints against the Russian Federation by its citizens. This proportion had risen since 2002 as in 2006 there were 151 admissible applications against Russia while in 2005 it was 110, in 2004 it was 64, in 2003 it was 15 and in 2002 it was 12. According to international human rights organizations and independent domestic media outlets, the following were among the common violations of human rights in Russia: deaths in custody, the widespread and systematic torture of persons in custody by police, security forces and prison guards. According to Amnesty International there was discrimination and murders of members of ethnic minorities.
In the years since 1992 at least 50 journalists have been killed, some in armed conflict situations, but others were the target of contract killings. Chechnya was a problem apart and during the Second Chechen War, from September 1999 to 2005, there were numerous instances of summary execution and forced disappearance of civilians there. According to the ombudsman of the Chechen Republic, Nurdi Nukhazhiyev, the most complex and painful problem as of March 2007 was to trace over 2,700 abducted and forcefully held citizens; the Federal Law of 10 January 2006 changed the rules affecting registration and operation of nongovernmental organizations in Russia. The Russian-Chechen Friendship Society, among others, was closed. A detailed report by Olga Gnezdilova demonstrated that small, genuinely volunteer organisations were disproportionately hit by the demands of the new procedures: for the time being, larger NGOs with substantial funding were not affected. Following Putin's r
Human rights in Bahrain
Bahrain's record on human rights has been described by Human Rights Watch as "dismal", having "deteriorated in the latter half of 2010". The government of Bahrain has marginalized the native Shia Muslim population. Torture and forced disappearances are common in Bahrain; the crackdown on protesters during the 2011 Arab Spring has brought further human rights complaints, including the destruction of dozens of long-standing Shia mosques. The Bahrain Independent Commission of Inquiry was established on 29 June 2011 by King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa to assess the incidents that occurred in the Kingdom during the period of unrest in February and March 2011 and the consequences of these events; the report was released on 23 November of that year and confirmed that there were some incidents of physical and psychological abuse on detainees. It has been criticized for not disclosing the names of individual perpetrators of abuses and extending accountability only to those who carried out human rights violations.
There is a growing problem of stateless people, known as Bedoon, who are descendants of Iranians who have lived in Bahrain for many decades. Most of Bahrain's stateless are Muslims, some of Bahrain's stateless are Christians. In Bahrain, stateless people are denied the right to hold legal residency, are not allowed the right to travel abroad, buy houses, to hold government jobs, they are not allowed to own land, start a business and borrow loans. The Bahraini government issued regulations preventing them from sending their children to public schools and to receive free medical care; the stateless can get deported at any time. Since the beginning of the 1980s, the Bahraini government has deported hundreds of Bedoon to Iran. Despite repeated government claims of improvement over the course of several years, Human Rights Watch claims that "torture is a regular part of the legal process in Bahrain."According to a 2011 report by Human Rights Watch, between 2007 and 2009, the government practiced torture and ill-treatment in interrogating security suspects.
Although government spokesmen have issued denials, there is no evidence of criminal investigations and the government has not imposed disciplinary measures on the alleged perpetrators. In 2011, Human Rights Watch claimed to have found evidence that protections for migrant workers have improved. In November 2018, a Bahraini footballer Hakeem al-Araibi, sentenced in absentia by Bahrain to 10 years in prison for vandalising a police station, was arrested upon arrival in Thailand with his wife for their honeymoon; the footballer, given refugee status by Australia in 2014, urged the Thailand authorities not to deport him to Bahrain as he was tortured in Bahrain for his political views. He was kept in detention in Thailand while the Australian government and many international organisations and individuals lobbied for his release, until it was announced on 11 February 2019 by the Thai Office of the Attorney-General that the extradition case against al-Araibi had been dropped by the criminal court at Bahrain's request.
No reason was given by the foreign ministry, but the decision was made under Section 21 of the Prosecution Act, which allows for cases to be dropped if not in the public interest, he would be released and allowed to return to Australia as soon as possible. Majority of the citizen population of Bahrain are Shia Muslims; the ruling Sunni Al Khalifa family, who were supported by the US, arrived in Bahrain from Qatar at the end of the eighteenth century. Shiites alleged that the Al Khalifa failed to gain legitimacy in Bahrain and established a system of "political apartheid based on racial and tribal discrimination." Vali Nasr, a leading expert on Middle East and Islamic world said "For Shi'ites, Sunni rule has been like living under apartheid". According to The Christian Science Monitor, Bahrain is practicing "a form of sectarian apartheid by not allowing Shiites to hold key government posts or serve in the police or military. In fact, the security forces are staffed by Sunnis from Syria and Pakistan who get fast-tracked to Bahraini citizenship, much to the displeasure of the indigenous Shiite population."According to the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights, while the Shiites exceeds 70% of the population, "they occupy less than 18% of total top jobs in government establishments.
In several government ministries and corporations no Shiite is appointed in leading jobs."Jobs in the police and armed forced are reserved for Sunni. Sunni Saudis are admitted to Bahrain as citizens to fill these jobs. Shiites and "some Sunnis of Persian origins", are banned from residing in the city of Riffa, where only the Sunni Muslims are permitted to live. There are concerns of the Bahraini government's systematic efforts to diminish the Shia majority by promotion of immigration of Sunni Muslims and granting them citizenship. According to Dr. Saeeid Shahabi, a London-based journalist, "there is the problem of political naturalization; the ruling family – similar to the Apartheid regime in South Africa, where you had a minority ruling a majority – wants to change the demographic situation of the country."On 28 April 2007, the lower house of Bahraini Parliament passed a law banning unmarried migrant workers from living in residential areas. To justify the law MP Nasser Fadhala, a close ally of the government said "bachelors use these houses to make alcohol, run prostitute rings or to rape children and housemaids".
Sadiq Rahma, technical committee head, a member of Al Wefaq said: "The rules we are drawing up are designed to protect the rights of both the families and the Asian bachelors these labourers have habits which are difficult for families living nearby to tolerate they come out of their ho