Alkarama strongly condemns the unjust sentences issued by a court in the United Arab Emirates against 53 political detainees. Most of these individuals were the subject of Opinions from the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which had called for their immediate release.
On July 10, 2024, the State Security Chamber of the Federal Appeal Court in Abu Dhabi sentenced 53 people, including prisoners of conscience, political activists, lawyers, and teachers, as well as six companies accused of establishing and leading the "Justice and Dignity Committee" and supporting the "Call for Reform," two organizations deemed terrorist by the authorities due to their alleged links to the banned Muslim Brotherhood movement. The individuals were found guilty of supporting these organizations through articles and tweets while being aware of their anti-state objectives. Additionally, five other defendants received ten-year prison sentences and fines of ten million dirhams for "money laundering crimes" related to the creation, establishment, and funding of these terrorist organizations.
The court also imposed fines of twenty million dirhams each on six companies and their executives, ordering their dissolution, the closure of their offices, and the confiscation of their assets, including material and immaterial rights, funds, real estate, and facades. All materials, tools, and assets seized, used for crimes such as organized money laundering and financing a terrorist organization, were also confiscated. Furthermore, the court concluded the criminal case involving 24 individuals accused of "cooperation and financing of the terrorist organization Dawa al-Islah," acquitting one person of the charges. The authorities did not specify the fate of the remaining six individuals and indicated that the sentences could be appealed before the Federal Court.
Double Trial
In early January 2024, UAE authorities resumed the trial of several political detainees who had already served their sentences. The UAE Attorney General referred 84 of these detainees to the Federal Court of Abu Dhabi, accusing them of being primarily members of the Muslim Brotherhood, banned in the country, and of creating a secret organization aimed at committing acts of violence and terrorism on national soil.
The Attorney General stated in a press release published by state media that "the defendants had concealed this (alleged) crime and its evidence before their arrest and trial in Case No. 17 of 2013 – State Security."
Rachid Mesli, Director of Alkarama, described this trial as "a major farce and a contempt for the concept of justice," emphasizing that it represented a "flagrant violation of the principle against double jeopardy after a final verdict has been rendered, not to mention that they have already served their sentences in a trial lacking justice."
He further stated, "With this measure, the UAE authorities continue to violate the victims' rights and engage in slow executions against them. They seek to evade their obligations under international law, particularly the requirement to cooperate in good faith with UN human rights procedures, notably the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which has issued several Opinions declaring their detention arbitrary, demanding the release of the victims and reparations."
He also added that the authorities in Abu Dhabi have not only disregarded the Working Group's recommendations following complaints filed by Alkarama and other human rights organizations but have also maintained an absurd situation where the rule of law appears to be ignored and stripped of its substance, with state coercion prevailing as the dominant behavior.
Working Group's Opinion
The new trial of political detainees comes more than a year after the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention called for the fourth time for the release of these peaceful dissidents. These individuals were arbitrarily detained by the UAE for exercising their right to freedom of expression and calling for political reforms.
The Working Group’s Opinion concerns twelve of the 94 citizens who were repeatedly arrested in 2012 in the context of regional upheavals associated with the Arab Spring revolutions and who were sentenced to ten years in prison on charges of terrorism and cybercrime.
UAE authorities launched a series of arrests targeting dozens of individuals, including academics, judges, lawyers, and human rights defenders, who had signed a petition addressed to the President of the UAE and the Federal Supreme Council of the country, calling for democratic reforms. However, they were arrested by state security, placed in prolonged secret detention, subjected to severe torture, and subsequently tried and convicted in what became the largest mass trial in UAE history, known as the "UAE 94."
Content of the Opinion
During its 96th session, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention issued Opinion No. 19/2023 concerning several peaceful activists and lawyers, on whom Alkarama had worked actively over recent years by submitting complaints to the Working Group. Despite repeated calls from the Group, UAE authorities continued to ignore requests for the release of these individuals.
The experts’ decision involves Omran Ali Hassan Al Radwan Al Harthy, Abdullah Abdulqader Ahmed Ali Al Hajri, Ahmed Yusuf Abdullah Al Zaabi, Mohammed Abdul Razzaq Mohamed Al Siddiq, Hussain Munif Al Jabri, Hassan Munif Al Jabri, Sultan Bin Kayed Mohamed Al Qasimi, Khalifa Hilal Khalifa Hilal Al Nuaimi, Ibrahim Ismail Ibrahim Al Yasi, Mohammed Abdullah Al Roken, Abdul Salam Mohamed Darwish Al Marzouqi, and Fouad Mohamed Abdul Allah Hassan Al Hammadi.
While deeming their continued deprivation of liberty as arbitrary, the Working Group called on the UAE government to take the necessary measures to promptly rectify the situation of these twelve individuals and align it with relevant international standards, including those outlined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
The Working Group found that, given all the circumstances of the case, appropriate redress would be to release the twelve individuals immediately and grant them enforceable rights to compensation and other forms of redress in accordance with international law.
Investigation and Accountability
The Working Group urged the government to ensure that a thorough and independent investigation is conducted into the circumstances of the arbitrary deprivation of liberty of these twelve individuals and to take appropriate measures against those responsible for violating their rights, while referring the case to the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders for appropriate action.
The source and the government were also called upon to provide the Working Group with information on the measures taken to implement the recommendations issued, including those related to the release of the victims, the date of their release, compensation, the initiation of an investigation into the violation of their rights, and, if applicable, the outcome of the investigation.
Experts also sought information on legislative reforms adopted to align UAE laws and practices with international standards. The Working Group granted a six-month deadline from the date of transmission of the opinion to receive this information. Such a measure would enable the Working Group to inform the Human Rights Council of the progress made in implementing its recommendations and any inaction.
Experts examined the shortcomings of the national legislation on which the UAE authorities relied, particularly the anti-terrorism law, criticizing the ambiguous definition of terrorist crimes.
The former Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers highlighted that this law contains vague and overly broad definitions of criminal offenses, which contravene international human rights standards and the principle of legality. In 2020, several mandate holders under special procedures expressed concerns that the wording of the criminal provisions in this legislation was sometimes so imprecise and ambiguous that it could undermine the principle of legal certainty.
This uncertainty led the Committee against Torture to recommend that the criteria for detention in advisory centers be clearly defined by law.
Councelling Centers
The experts also addressed the issue of detention in counselling centres pursuant to the decisions of the specialized court competent for offences against State security and at the request of the State Security Prosecutor. The Working Group noted that the Anti-Terrorism Act does not explicitly provide for the competent court to specify the duration of detention in counselling centres for persons considered to be a terrorist threat, nor does it decide on the renewal of a detention order. Instead, in accordance with section 40(3) of the Anti-Terrorism Act and section 11 of the Counselling Centres Act, the latter must prepare a quarterly report for the attention of the prosecution for each of the detainees in the centre. The Public Prosecutor's Office then submits this report to the court, together with its opinion on whether or not it considers that the person in question is likely to commit a terrorist offence. The law stipulates that the court is then responsible for ordering the release of the person, if it considers that his or her "condition" permits.
Alkarama's Action
Alkarama argues that the new trial constitutes a form of psychological torture for the victims, who have waited many years to regain their freedom and resume their lives. However, the authorities have chosen to keep these individuals in detention, demonstrating the UAE's disregard for the recommendations of the Committee against Torture.
These recommendations were issued during the initial review of the UAE, to which Alkarama contributed through a shadow report. Alkarama also participated in an NGO briefing held at the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva in preparation for the review that took place during the 74th session on July 13 and 14, 2022.
In its final recommendations to the UAE in August 2022, the Committee against Torture emphasized, among other things, the need to ensure that counter-terrorism and state security laws fully comply with international human rights standards, including providing all fundamental legal safeguards outlined in paragraph 13 of General Comment No. 2 (2007), particularly the prosecution and punishment of law enforcement officials who commit acts of torture.
The Committee also recommended that detention decisions in advisory centers be based on clear and specific criteria defined by law, that arrest orders be subject to time limits, that legislation explicitly specify the maximum periods of detention in these centers, and that detainees have the right to challenge the legality of their detention.
It further recommended that the State party redouble its efforts to align detention conditions with the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules) and to investigate and prosecute all cases of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. In its concluding observations, the Committee highlighted that the State party should enhance its cooperation with UN human rights mechanisms, including allowing visits from the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and other UN human rights mechanisms and experts.
It is noteworthy that UAE authorities still hold over 60 prisoners of conscience, most of whom served their sentences in July 2022 but remain behind bars under the pretext of "advisory detention" following a series of violations, torture, and ill-treatment. Among the victims who served their sentences is the prominent lawyer and human rights activist Mohamed al Roken, who spent ten years in prison following an unjust sentence issued after an unfair trial.
In its ongoing concerns, Alkarama has worked on the cases of lawyer Mohamed Al-Roken and other prisoners of conscience, activists, and political opponents suffering from repression in the UAE, including dozens of peaceful dissidents known as the "UAE 94." In this context, Alkarama has submitted individual complaints to UN special procedures.
The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has concluded on multiple occasions that their detention was arbitrary and has demanded their release. Alkarama has also raised their case before the Human Rights Council during the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the UAE's human rights record and has issued numerous press releases regarding the issue as part of its media activity.
Previous Opinions
In light of complaints from Alkarama and other organizations, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention issued Opinion No. 60/2013 on September 9, 2013, concerning several of these political detainees in the UAE.
It was noted that the charges against them were related to their rights to freedom of opinion and expression, and that the restrictions imposed could not be considered proportionate or justified. It was observed that these individuals were held in solitary confinement without any legal justification, and that the charges against them were vague and inaccurate. The UN Working Group deemed the violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression and the right to a fair trial in this case as serious.
Previously, the Working Group had issued Opinions No. 64/2011 and 8/2009, in which it found violations of freedom of opinion and expression and freedom of peaceful assembly and association, as guaranteed by Articles 7 and 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as violations of the prohibition of arbitrary detention under Article 9 of the Declaration.
The Group, concerned by this typical practice of the UAE as reflected in these Opinions, emphasized the need for the government to comply with international law.