Victims of alleged reprisals for cooperation with the UN
Cases- Case status
- Unknown
- Location of case in SG report
- 2021-033-001
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- 2021
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
Latitude: 26.820553
Longitude: 30.802498
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- Egypt
- From Region
- UN body that raised the case prior to the SG report
- UN Special Procedures: Thematic
- UN (Dep.) High Commissioner on Human Rights
- Dates of prior UN action
- July 2020, 20 November 2020, 22 January 2021,
- Type of record
- Unnamed individual/group/organization
- Gender
- Gender unclear
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- No
- Was the victim a minor?
- No
- Individual's/organization's activity
victims of alleged reprisals for cooperation with the UN; cooperation with the Working Group of Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances, the Forum on Minority Issues and the UPR
- Type of rights defended
- Civil/political rights
- Was the victim a civil servant or member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- No
- Reported trigger of reprisal
cooperation with the Working Group of Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances, the Forum on Minority Issues and the UPR
- Engagement with UN body
- UN Human Rights Council: Minorities forum
- UN Human Rights Council: UPR
- UN Special Procedures: thematic
- Type of attempted engagement
- Submission of information to UN
- Location of mentioned reprisals
- Egypt
- Reprisal information
Multiple UN actors during the reporting period drew attention to the targeting and prolonged detention of victims of alleged reprisals for cooperation with the UN, including through the justification of counter-terrorism and national security legislation. In July 2020, special procedures mandate holders addressed the situations of several detained individuals, including three mentioned in this report being held on terrorism-related charges following their cooperation with the Working Group of Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances, the Forum on Minority Issues and the UPR (see Annex II). Mandate holders noted disproportionate restrictions in communication with family members, pre-trial detentions renewed in absentia, and grave risk of contracting COVID-19 (EGY 10/2020). On 22 January 2021, the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders stated that “The use of prolonged pre-trial detention and misuse of anti-terrorism and national security laws to criminalise the work of civil society actors must end” (see also EGY 2/2021).23 34. On 20 November 2020, the Spokesperson for the High Commissioner for Human Rights highlighted a “broader pattern of intimidating organizations defending human rights and of the use of counter-terrorism and national security legislation to silence dissent,” noting the use of “sweeping counter-terrorism laws and vague charges such as ‘joining a terrorist organization’ and ‘spreading false information’ to harass and criminalize the work of human rights defenders.”24 During the 46th session of the Human Rights Council, a group of 26 Member States called for the release of two individuals included in the present report who were detained in relation to their cooperation with the UN (see Annex II), among others, and “recall[ed] the need to counter terrorism in full respect of international human rights.”25 In another statement, a group of 31 Member States stated they were “deeply concerned about the application of terrorism legislation” and “urge[d] Egypt to end the use of terrorism charges to hold human rights defenders and civil society activists in extended pre-trial detention and the practice of adding detainees to new cases with similar charges after the legal limit for pre-trial detention has expired.”26
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Charge/Investigation/Prosecution: Charge/Investigation/Prosecution - General
- Charge/Investigation/Prosecution: Conviction
- Charge/Investigation/Prosecution: Trial
- Detention/Imprisonment: Detention/Imprisonment - General
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- Yes
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- Yes
- Was the case raised by a State at the UN?
- Yes
- Which State raised the case at the UN and when?
Slovenia on behalf of a group of 26 countries. No specific victims named.
- 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?
- Yes
- How many times has the case been followed up in subsequent SG reports?
- 0