Home / Publications

Publications

See more

Statement: US House Hearing on Liberia War Crimes Court

Africa
International Criminal Law
United States
War Crimes
Download full statement House Foreign Affairs Committee Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission Hearing on Liberia: Next Steps Towards Accountability for War & Economic Crimes June 13, 2024 – 10:30 a.m.  2360 Rayburn House Office Building STATEMENT Submitted by The Advocates for Human RightsCenter for Justice and AccountabilityCivil Society Human Rights Advocacy Platform of Liberia (CSO Platform)CIVITAS MAXIMACoalition for the Establishment of a War and Economic Crimes Court in LiberiaGlobal Justice and Research ProjectGlobal Justice CenterHuman Rights WatchSecretariat for the Establishment of War Crimes Court in Liberia Delivered by Liz EvensonInternational Justice DirectorHuman Rights Watch Many thanks for the opportunity to brief the commission. I am Liz Evenson, and I direct the International Justice Program at Human Rights Watch. Human Rights Watch investigates and reports on abuses in some 100 countries around the world. We direct our advocacy towards governments, armed groups and businesses, pushing them to change or enforce their laws, policies and practices. And we work globally to champion meaningful and fair justice for victims and survivors of atrocity crimes, before national and international courts. My statement today is presented on behalf of Human Rights Watch, together with The Advocates for Human Rights; Center for Justice and Accountability; Civil Society Human Rights Advocacy Platform of Liberia (CSO Platform); CIVITAS MAXIMA; Coalition for the Establishment of a War and Economic Crimes Court in Liberia; Global Justice and Research Project; Global Justice Center; and the Secretariat for the Establishment of War Crimes Court in Liberia. This group represents American, Liberian, and international organizations all working together to bring justice to Liberian citizens. Together our groups have been advocating for the establishment of a Liberian-led war crimes court in Liberia to address the legacy of impunity for the widespread and systematic violations of international human rights and humanitarian law[1] that characterized the country’s two brutal armed conflicts, which took place between 1989 and 2003. Liberian men, women, and children were gunned down in their homes, marketplaces, and places of worship. In a few cases hundreds of civilians[2] were massacred in a matter of hours. Girls and women were subjected to horrific sexual violence[3] including gang-rape, sexual slavery, and torture. Children were abducted from their homes and schools and pressed into service, often after witnessing the murder of their parents. The violence blighted the lives of tens of thousands of civilians and displaced almost half the population. While there have been a number of important criminal and civil cases outside of Liberia—and these cases have contributed to momentum within the country for justice[4]—to date not a single person has faced criminal investigation or prosecution in Liberia for serious crimes committed during the civil wars.In its 2009 final report, the Liberian Truth and Reconciliation Commission recommended the creation of an extraordinary criminal court[5] which would be a hybrid court composed of Liberian and international judges, prosecutors and other staff with a mandate to try those allegedly responsible for committing serious crimes. A legislative conference to talk about accountability was organized in Monrovia in 2019 with the legislature of Liberia, a Liberian coalition of NGOs, and international partners.[6] There is now renewed momentum after nearly two decades for the establishment of a court. Most recently, in March and April of 2024, the Liberian Senate and House of Representatives passed a resolution supporting the creation of a war and economic crimes court. On May 2, 2024, President Joseph Boakai signed an executive order[7] establishing an Office of the War and Economic Crimes Court for Liberia. The US government has played a critical role in advancing progress. US Ambassador-at-Large for Global Criminal Justice Beth Van Schaack has repeatedly voiced the US government’s partnership with Liberia in its journey to justice. Her commitments on behalf of the US government to support this process have been widely welcomed within Liberia. Members of Congress have also expressed their support for this court and justice for the Liberian people.[8] These developments are promising, and yet there is much work ahead that will need the support of the United States and others in the international community. Making Liberian-led justice a reality in Liberia requires sustained attention from justice champions in and outside of Liberia. What is needed now is for President Boakai’s administration to translate its stated commitment to a war crimes court into concrete steps for the court’s creation. We have made the following recommendations to the government of Liberia: Establish the Office proposed by President Boakai to be responsible for developing and implementing a concrete plan to establish a war and economic crimes court to hold perpetrators of grave crimes committed during Liberia’s armed conflicts to account, consistent with international standards and practice and ensure this plan is consistent with a victim-centered approach, including consultation with affected communities on the design of the court; Establish an independent committee comprised of government officials, a member of the Independent National Commission of Human Rights, international legal experts, and Liberian and international civil society actors from various sectors that is mandated to advise the government on the court’s creation. The committee should help establish a roadmap on the way forward for ensuring justice for war crimes and for strengthening the rule of law; Request assistance from the United Nations, African Union, Economic Community of West African States, and other international and regional partners as needed; Ensure a war crimes court for Liberia includes key elements in order to achieve trials that would be fair, meaningful, and credible:Composition of judicial benches that will have sufficient independence and expertise by including a majority of international judges on each trial and appeals bench;No bars on prosecution of individuals on the basis of their cooperation with the Truth and Reconciliation Commission;Inclusion of crimes and modes of liability in line with international standards;Fair trial protections;Witness protection and support;Involvement of victims of abuses in proceedings; and Outreach and communications that inform the victims and public. Work with the legislature to ensure the war crimes court established to hold perpetrators of grave crimes committed during Liberia’s armed conflicts to account is consistent with international standards and practice; Request from international partners adequate support and funding, for programs designed to improve Liberia’s judiciary and criminal justice system, to ensure an effective war crimes court and victims’ access to justice and the right of the accused to a fair trial; Continue to support efforts by third countries to bring universal jurisdiction cases for civil war-era crimes, including by continuing to fully cooperate with foreign authorities who request authorization to come to Liberia to investigate international crimes; Develop and implement a comprehensive reparations scheme for all victims of gross human rights violations and war crimes; Ensure protection for human rights defenders inside Liberia against attacks and intimidation, and bring to justice those who intimidate or attack human rights defenders. The process and the work of the court itself must be Liberian-led. This means primarily that Liberians who were impacted by the civil wars and have long advocated for accountability have a leading voice in determining the court’s trajectory. Liberian experts should also fill key positions in the judiciary, prosecution, defense, and registry. Liberian ownership of the court is crucial to build and maintain local support for accountability processes. Ensuring the court benefits from Liberian experts will also ensure that investing in the court strengthens the domestic justice system, leading to long-term benefits across Liberian institutions. The first step towards ensuring that the court is Liberian-led is making sure that Liberians and regional experts play critical roles in the creation of the court. Liberian civil society has been advocating for accountability in Liberia at great personal risk. Powerful actors opposed to accountability for wartime atrocities and former warlords hold positions of power in Liberia, and international actors have also at times worked to undermine their efforts. As a result, members of civil society have received threats to their security and their work over the years. These threats continue to this day. It is imperative that international partners, including the United States government, continue to support Liberian civil society organizations and the crucial work they are doing to see accountability in Liberia for civil war-era atrocities. High-level messages from Liberia’s international and regional partners in support of a court are also needed to maintain positive momentum. Liberia should request international and regional support to help it to determine the best legal and structural modalities for the court’s creation in a manner that will enable fair, credible functioning and partners should pledge international support and expertise based on accumulated experience. We recommend that the US Congress: Make clear its support to a Liberian-led process to achieve justice in the country through the creation of a credible war crimes court, and support to Liberian civil society organizations engaged in this effort; Provide the requested support to the Liberian government and civil society organizations working on behalf of justice, including assistance in developing the necessary legislation and systems for the protection of victims and witnesses, support in the legal representation of victims, and processes to engage meaningfully with the public and victims and survivors to create awareness of the objectives of a war crimes court and to allow Liberian voices to inform the design of the court; Offer financial support for the court, as the US has done in several other contexts, including, for example, the annual contributions to the Special Criminal Court in the Central African Republic. [1] Human Rights Watch, Q&A: Justice for Civil Wars-Era Crimes in Liberia (April 1, 2019), https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/04/01/qa-justice-civil-wars-era-crimes-liberia. [2] Jane W, John X, John Y, John Z v. Moses Thomas, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Case number 2:18-cv-00569-PBT, https://cja.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Jane-W-v.-Moses-Thomas-18-cv-00569.pdf. [3] Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Liberia, Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Liberia, https://www.trcofliberia.org/resources/reports/final/trc-final-report-volume-1-full.pdf. [4] Civitas Maxima press release, US Court finds Liberian Rebel Commander “Jungle Jabbah” Guilty of Crimes Linked to Atrocities in Liberia’s First Civil War (October 18, 2017), https://civitas-maxima.org/us-court-finds-liberian-rebel-commander-jungle-jabbah-guilty-of-crimes-linked-to-atrocities-in-liberias-first-civil-war/; Civitas Maxima press release, Liberian Plaintiffs Make Swiss and Liberian Legal History (June 18, 2021), https://civitas-maxima.org/liberian-plaintiffs-make-swiss-and-liberian-legal-history/; Center for Justice and Accountability press release, U.S. Court Finds Former Liberian Military Commander Liable for War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity (September 16, 2021), https://cja.org/u-s-court-finds-former-liberian-military-commander-liable-for-war-crimes-and-crimes-against-humanity/. [5] Human Rights Watch news release, Justice for Liberia, (December 10, 2009), https://www.hrw.org/news/2009/12/10/justice-liberia. [6] University of Nottingham, SEWACCOL, Legislature of Liberia, Civitas Maxima and the GJRP press release, Legislative Conference Brings Liberia Closer to the Establishment of a War Crimes Court (July 20, 2019), https://civitas-maxima.org/legislative-conference-brings-liberia-closer-to-the-establishment-of-a-war-crimes-court/. [7] Dounard Bondo and Ruth Maclean, The New York Times, Liberia Moves to Create War Crimes Court, Decades After Civil Wars Ended (May 3, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/03/world/africa/liberia-court-war-crimes.html. [8] United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations press release, Risch Applauds Establishment of War and Economic Crimes Court in Liberia (April 10, 2024), https://www.foreign.senate.gov/press/rep/release/risch-applauds-establishment-of-war-and-economic-crimes-court-in-liberia.
Read more

Joint NGO Letter to President Biden on the International Criminal Court

International Criminal Court
International Criminal Law
Middle East
United States
Dear President Biden: We write as organizations with a steadfast commitment to justice for grave international crimes and therefore to the success of the International Criminal Court (ICC). We urge your administration to oppose the threats and calls for punitive actions against the Court that several U.S. lawmakers have recently made. Acting on these calls would do grave harm to the interests of all victims globally and to the U.S. government’s ability to champion human rights and the cause of justice, which are stated priorities of your administration. Accountability is important for its own sake and protects against the commission of future atrocity crimes. Acting where it has jurisdiction and within its mandate as a court of last resort, the ICC works together with national authorities to ensure perpetrators of such crimes are held to account and that victims and affected communities find some measure of justice. While the United States is not an ICC member country, Republican and Democratic administrations have supported the Court in specific cases, and the U.S. has assisted arrest operations to bring justice to victims in central Africa. Your own administration has recognized the Court’s essential role to address serious crimes in Ukraine and Darfur. We are alarmed by threats that U.S. lawmakers have aimed at the Court in recent weeks including the letter sent on April 24 by Senators, threatening to sanction the ICC prosecutor’s “employees and associates,” if steps were taken to pursue arrest warrants against Israeli officials. On May 20, the ICC prosecutor requested warrants for leaders of Hamas and Israeli officials stemming from his ongoing Palestine investigation; ICC judges will assess the request to determine whether to issue warrants.
Read more

Idaho v. United States — Amicus Brief

Abortion
Human Rights Treaties
Reproductive Rights
United States
US Abortion Laws
Summary of Argument Idaho’s near-total abortion ban restricts access to necessary emergency reproductive healthcare, exacerbating preventable maternal mortality and morbidity and otherwise negatively impacting people capable of pregnancy in Idaho. The law’s narrow exception for life-saving care will not prevent or mitigate these harms in practice, and will leave patients in Idaho without access to emergency reproductive healthcare. The United States has ratified several human rights treaties—including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD), and the Convention Against Torture (CAT)—which require it to guarantee access to safe and legal abortion services, in particular in emergencies or acute medical crises governed by the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). In accordance with the United States’ obligations under these treaties, the federal government—and therefore each state—is required to respect, protect and fulfil individuals’ international human rights to life; health; privacy; non-discrimination; and to be free from torture, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. These rights are directly jeopardized by Idaho’s draconian abortion law.
Read more

In Geneva, United States Dodges Key Questions on its Abortion Rights Record

Abortion
Helms Amendment
Human Rights Treaties
Reproductive Rights
United States
US Abortion Laws
On October 17-18 in Geneva, the United States government faced questions from civil society and the Human Rights Committee on the country’s compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In addition to questions on immigrants’ rights, racial discrimination, and more, US officials were pressed repeatedly on the state of abortion access in the wake of the US Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization.
Read more

How the Dobbs Ruling Put the United States in Violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Abortion
Human Rights Council
Human Rights Treaties
Reproductive Rights
United States
US Abortion Laws
The June 2022 Supreme Court decision Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization eliminated federal constitutional protection for access to abortion in the United States. Following Dobbs, more than a dozen states fully banned abortion, and many others passed or proposed increased restrictions. On October 17-18, 2023, the Human Rights Committee will review US compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), including the impact of Dobbs on its human rights obligations.
Read more

Report to Human Rights Committee on US Abortion Bans as Violations of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Abortion
Human Rights Treaties
Reproductive Rights
United States
Introduction Since the United States (US) was last reviewed by the Human Rights Committee (HRC) nearly a decade ago in 2014, there have been significant developments in the area of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) for women, girls, and people who can become pregnant living in the US, including the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in June 2022. This decision overturned the constitutional right to abortion in the US after 50 years of precedent following the US Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade in 1973. Human rights experts warned before the Dobbs decision that overturning Roe would violate the rights of women, girls, and all people who can become pregnant in the US, as well as healthcare providers’ rights. Following the decision, the experts noted that whereas the restrictive new legal environment would not reduce the need for abortions, it would be guaranteed to increase the number of women and girls seeking clandestine and unsafe abortions, particularly for people of color and those living in poverty, and would fuel abortion stigma, leading to abuse of people in need of post-abortion care. They added: The decision to continue a pregnancy or terminate it must fundamentally and primarily be a woman’s decision as it will shape her whole future personal life and family life. The right of a woman to make autonomous decisions about her own body and reproductive functions is at the very core of her fundamental right to equality, non-discrimination, health, and privacy. As our submission details below, the restrictive environment around abortion in the US now also violates the rights to life and to be free of torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment (CIDT), as well as rights to free expression and movement, as guaranteed under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
Read more

Save Mifepristone: People’s Brief

Abortion
Reproductive Rights
United States
US Abortion Laws
On Friday, April 7, 2023, Texas-based U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk delivered his decision in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine et al v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration et al, ruling that mifepristone should be pulled from the market. On Wednesday, April 12, 2023, a three-judge panel for the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals partly overruled Kacsmaryk’s decision, stating that the FDA’s approval of mifepristone remains valid while also ruling to reinstate medically unnecessary restrictions to accessing the medication.  This decision could result in a devastating, nationwide ban on mifepristone — even in states where abortion is legally protected — and compromise access to medication abortion across the country. USOW and our partners across the country are mobilizing behind a united message to our judiciary: reverse this harmful decision, respect science, and uphold the law. Read the full brief
Read more

Support for the UNFPA Funding Act

United Nations
United States
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Last week, Representative Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA) reintroduced her Support UNFPA Funding Act, which ensures the United States contributes to the United Nations (UN) Population Fund. This fund is an agency within the UN that promotes gender equality, empowers women and girls, and provides life-saving resources to women globally. By working with partners in over 150 countries, the UNFPA provides access to sexual and reproductive health services to women around the world. Houlahan has been a staunch advocate in supporting this fund since joining Congress in 2019. She introduced this bill in the 116th and 117th Congress as it not only supports women and girls globally, but also promotes international stability. Read the full list of endorsing organizations
Read more

Organizational Letter Endorsing the Freedom to Learn Campaign

United States
As organizations, groups and initiatives committed to the pursuit of human and civil rights, advocating for marginalized communities and defending racial and gender justice in the United States, we are proud to endorse the Freedom to Learn campaign and announce our participation in the Freedom To Learn National Day of Action on May 3, 2023. We join the growing, global network of more than 5,000 academics, authors and advocates who oppose the censoring of critical content in public and higher education. The Freedom To Learn Movement has grown in response to the College Board’s February 2023 decision to water down its new Advanced Placement African American Studies course curriculum. We stand united in the call to restore the teaching of critical frameworks like intersectionality and contemporary movements for Black lives to the AP course. But more than that, we recognize that this one decision is not isolated. It is part of a long history of Black erasure and an alarming, current political moment in which right-wing politicians are seeking to undermine democracy by limiting public access to history and ideas. Read the Full Letter
Read more