page 4
lasted, in some cases, more than 236 days. One of
the accused described to the Court the beatings
he received and stated that as a result of these
beatings, he urinated blood and his leg swelled to
the extent that he was unable to walk.
Neither the President of the Court nor the
prosecutor investigated or ordered investigation
into the allegations made by many of the detainees
during the hearings and in the complaint. Neither
the President of the Court nor the prosecutor
ordered any medical examination of the detainees
who alleged that they were subjected to acts
of torture or other ill-treatment. Furthermore,
“confessions” alleged to have been obtained as a
result of these acts were admitted as evidence by
the Court. Before allowing the admission of such
evidence, the President of the Court failed to require
the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt
that these “confessions” were obtained voluntarily
and not by coercive means. Sixty-nine of the
accused were convicted on 2 July 2013 by the State
Security Chamber and sentenced to serve terms of
imprisonment ranging between 5 and 15 years. (For
more information about the UAE 94 case, see ICJ
report, Mass convictions following an unfair trial: The
UAE 94 case.]
Preventing and eradicating acts of torture and other
ill-treatment in the MENA region requires holding
the perpetrators of these acts to account and
ensuring the rights of victims to effective remedies
and reparation. It also requires comprehensive
reform of the criminal justice systems, including laws
and policies on detention, evidence, and forensic
medicine. Ultimately, however, these reforms will
be illusive if, as illustrated by the UAE 94 case and
numerous other cases, judges and prosecutors
fail to carry out their functions independently,
impartially and in defence of the absolute right
of the persons deprived of their liberty not to be
tortured or ill-treated.
The Middle East and North Africa: A Torture-Free Zone