Anyone cooperating with the CoI and relatives residing in Eritrea
Cases- Location of case in SG report
- 2015-019-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2015
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 15.179384
Longitude: 39.782334
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Eritrea
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- UN Human Rights Council: UN Independent Investigation
- Dates of prior UN action
- 4 June 2015
- Type of record
- Unnamed individual/group/organization
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
cooperating with the commission of inquiry on human rights in Eritrea..... Regardless of the country or location, almost all victims and witnesses in contact with the commission.... were afraid to testify, even on a confidential basis,
- Engagement with UN body
- UN Human Rights Council: UN Independent Investigation
- Dates of engagement
- Unclear
- Type of attempted engagement
- Meeting with UN officials during country visit / with locally present UN officials
- Submission of information to UN
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- Unclear
- Reprisal information
The risk of reprisals against anyone cooperating with the commission of inquiry on human rights in Eritrea, or their relatives still residing in the country, was one of the main challenges that the commission faced in carrying out its mandate. Regardless of the country or location, almost all victims and witnesses in contact with the commission assumed that they were still being monitored in secret and were afraid to testify, even on a confidential basis, out of fear for reprisals by the Eritrean authorities against themselves and their family members residing in Eritrea
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Family/friends/acquaintances targeted
- Surveillance
- Threats/Intimidations (incl. "fear of reprisal")
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- No
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- No
- Further case development
During the interactive dialogue on the report at the twenty-ninth session of the Human Rights Council, the Government did not address the allegations of reprisals.
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- No
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- No
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
- No
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 1
- In which SG report was this case followed up on? 0
- 2016
- Follow up information provided in SG report 0
41.My previousreport made mention of the risk of reprisals against anyone cooperating withthe commission of inquiry on human rights in Eritrea as one of the main challenges the commissionhad faced in the execution of its mandate(see A/HRC/30/29, para.19). In its report on its second term, the commission stated that the protection of victims and witnesses remained a central concern, adding that almost everyone thecommissionershadspokento had indicated that they feared reprisals by the Eritrean authorities, either against themselves or their family members still residing in the country(see A/HRC/32/47, para.8). The Commission had worked to protect the identities of victims, witnesses and other sources,but as itsability to physically protect witnesses was limited, it reminded States of their primary responsibility to protect those individuals residing within their borders who had cooperated with the Commission.9
- Followup Trends 0
- Stayed same
- Did the government respond? 0
- No
- Was this case followed up by a UN body? 0
- UN Human Rights Council: UN Independent Investigation