12 avril 2006

Amnesty International:

PUBLIC                                                                                                          AI Index: MDE 30/011/2006              

                                                                                                                                           12 April 2006

UA 85/06              Fear for safety

TUNISIA                                                                   Lasad Jouhri (m), human rights defender

Human rights defender Lasad Jouhri has been harassed and intimidated by the security forces since he became one of the founder members of a new organisation set up to bring torturers to justice. He has been seriously assaulted before, and tortured in custody, and Amnesty International believes he is in danger.

He was one of around eight human rights defenders and lawyers who became the first members of Torture Victims against Impunity in late March. Since then he has received two written orders to report to a police station, but refused to respond because the orders did not say exactly where or when he should report. On 10 April at 8pm, around 10 police officers came to his apartment to ask why he had refused to report to a police station and asked him to go with them. He refused to go and managed to close the door to his apartment. The police knocked violently at the door for a few minutes and then left. Lasad Jouhri phoned several lawyers and human rights defenders, who came to his apartment and spent most of the night with him to witness any violations by the security forces. A marked police car is now parked in front of his apartment building.

At 5pm on 10 April, Lasad Jouhri’s 19-year-old son had been summoned to a police station in connection with his application for a passport. The police told him that his application had been rejected, asked him why his father had refused to present himself at a police station, and insulted him.

On 28 March, Lasad Jouhri found that the steering mechanism of his car had been tampered with to make the driver lose control of the vehicle. He reported this to the police. The people who did this are believed to have been members of the security forces or people following their orders.

Lasad Jouhri was jailed as a prisoner of conscience and released in 1998 after spending more than six years in prison for membership of the banned Islamist organization Ennahda. He was tortured on several occasions between 1991 and 1994. As a result his right leg is now partially paralysed, and he has to walk with a crutch.

In August 2002, after repeated harassment and intimidation by the security forces, he was assaulted by plainclothes policemen (see UA 271/02, MDE 30/016/2002, 29 August 2002). This came after he became a founder member of a new organisation, the Association Internationale de Soutien aux Prisonniers Politiques (International Association for the Support of Political Prisoners).

RECOMMENDED ACTION: Please send appeals to arrive as quickly as possible, in Arabic, French or English or your own language:

– expressing concern that Lasad Jouhri and his family have been harassed and intimidated by the security forces, and that his car has been tampered with in a manner that could have been fatal;

– asking the authorities to conduct a full investigation, and bring those responsible to justice;

– calling on the authorities to put an immediate end to the harassment of lawyers and human rights defenders.

APPEALS TO:

Président M. Zine El Abidine Ben Ali

Président de la République

Palais Présidentiel

Tunis

Tunisie

Fax:                                     +216 71 744 721

+216 71 731 009

Salutation:     Your excellency/Excellence

M. Rafik Belhaj Kacem

Ministère de l=Intérieur et du Développement Local

Avenue Habib Bourguiba

1000 Tunis

Tunisie

Fax:                                     +216 71 340 888

+216 71 340 880

E-mail:              mint@ministeres.tn

Salutation:     Your excellency/Excellence

COPIES TO:

M. Zakaria Ben Mustapha (Président)

Official human rights body reporting to the president

Comité supérieur des droits de l’homme et des libertés fondamentales

85 ave de la Liberté

1002 Tunis‑Belvédère

Tunisie           

Fax:                                     +216 71 796 593

+216 71 784 038

Salutation:     Dear Sir

and to diplomatic representatives of Tunisia accredited to your country.

PLEASE SEND APPEALS IMMEDIATELY. Check with the International Secretariat, or your section office, if sending appeals after 24 May 2006.

To: IFEX Autolist (other news of interest)

From: Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (HRinfo), info@hrinfo.net

Most of us remember the ‘Iraqi oil coupons’ scandal during early 2004, which included a number of journalists and prominent figures in Egypt and another fifty countries. The scandal claimed that the Iraqi Parliament had offered millions of petrol barrels in reward for those personalities that supported the former Iraqi regime.

Regardless of whether these claims were true or not, it is confirmed that the Tunisian government, known to be the largest tyrant these days, has acquired this experience and developed it, creating what we know today as the “Tunisian Embassies’ Coupons”. Through these coupons, promotion articles are published, presenting paid advertisement as news stories written in an ambiguous style, indicating to the reader that what is published is a reliable press release. However, in reality these articles are nothing less than false images of miserable circumstances in Tunisia.

While the most famous Arab prisoner of opinion, Mohamed Abbou, and hundreds of others are imprisoned in Tunisia, these articles are published with headlines such as, “Freedom of _Expression and advancement of Human Rights Principles …” or “The State of Law … Freedom of _Expression”!

Imagine how would Tunisian citizens – who are overwhelmed with terror as a result of the practices of the Tunisian security bureaus, which does not refrain from framing cases against journalists, torturing them, and distorting their reputation – feel when they find in popular and respectable Egyptian newspapers contributions to falsely embellish the Tunisian government.

This reached an extent that some Tunisian citizens, now, believe that the publishing of such promotion articles indicates a new crime committed against Tunisian journalists or human rights activists, viewing promotion articles as a tool to cover up a crime being committed.

Such articles violate both Egyptian and international professional codes of ethics, as they confuse paid advertisement with editorial material. In addition, they reduce the credibility of newspapers that publish them. These articles also encourage many journalists to seek the satisfaction of the Tunisian embassy by giving a blind eye to what is really happening in Tunisia, in an attempt to win these highly paid for misleading advertisements.

The matter becomes more complicated when Egyptian newspapers defend the Tunisian government which violates the right to freedom of _expression and punish journalists because of their work, while at the same time they are fighting the Egyptian government to stop imprisoning journalists for their writings. As a result, the issue has become ambiguous, raising an important question: Is it righteous to defend freedom of press in a country while at the same time join together with another government in another country that violates freedom of press?

Gamal Eid

Lawyer and Executive Director of the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (HRinfo)

—————————–

[1] An article published in the independent weekly Al-Dostur newspaper entitled: “Tunisian Press Coupons: When a campaign to embellish the Tunisian government starts in the Egyptian Press, Tunisians expect a catastrophe!”

Sexual assaults and fabrication of cases against journalists and activists “Tunisia, Egypt, and Bahrain“

Introduction : Freedom of __expression and political dispute

No country in the world is void of political opposition, human rights activists, and journalists resisting corruption. Despite the intensity of the disagreement between these institutions and state authorities, this is a healthy disagreement indicating a process of political, social, or economic reform. Freedom of __expression and civil society mobility contribute to the exposure of corruption, provide alternative solutions, and present a better vision to curing crises.

Of the most important indicators defining the level of advancement and democracy of any state is how it deals with its political opposition, the methods it administers in this dispute, and the space available for freedom of opinion and __expression.

Accepting intense criticisms of political opposition is not a grant given by this ruler or that government. Rather, it is a natural right for people in any state given to journalists and human rights activists who use this right for the interest of the people. Here, all states and all people are equal, whether the country is developing or developed, whether the state is a democracy or an autocracy, and whether it is a secular government or a religious one.

In Egypt, as an example of a developing country, the court has passed famous sentences confirming these rights. In one case, the court ruled that it is agreed that in all constitutional countries, contesting political opposition is generally acceptable more than contesting a specific employee … The person who nominates himself to represent the country is knowingly exposed to having all his or her work a target for contestation and criticism. Public discussions, regardless of how intense their criticisms to actions and opinions of political parties, are in the interest of the nation and that through these discussions can develop a correct opinion pertaining the party it trusts and supports.1

In the United States, as an example of a developed country, the Supreme Court said that for a public official to prove that he or she is right in a defamation case, the official has to prove with clear and convincing evidence that the false statement defaming his or her reputation was published with the newspaper’s knowledge that it was false or to prove that the newspaper has neglected in a careless manner the confirmation of whether this statement was false or not.2

These examples are to clarify that political criticism, regardless of its intensity, should not be punished and should not result in the desire for revenge.

Arab rulers : Describing Gods, describing oppressors

Most Arab rulers, with a few exceptions, have come to power through illegitimate methods, such as, military coups, or nominal elections by which inheritance of power is pursued. It is also rare to find amongst those rulers those who carry the title of “former president, former king or former prince … etc”. The rule has become, as a result, that whoever comes to power, regardless of the method, seeks to maintain it for the rest of his life. Many seek to hand down the rule to a family member.

Most of these rulers, despite the fact that they have been ruling for more than twenty years, use an iron fist against those who dare to criticise their policies and practices. They give a green light to security authorities to eliminate political opposition, human rights activists, and journalists who only have their pens and words to oppose these policies. A series of gross violations with no rules or limits are thus committed, starting with implicating opposition, activists, and journalists in cases, detaining them and imprisoning them, and physically attacking them, passing through coercive disappearance and ending with the most degrading violations, such as framing criminal cases against those opposition forces, attempting to defame their reputations and spreading fear amongst citizens to prevent them from participating in public affairs. This is what this brief paper discusses.

Police authorities : Fabricating cases, dirty operations

Police authorities in most Arab countries have wide experience in torture and fabricating political cases and physical assaults as a result of training and the large budgets that these authorities receive.

However, because these methods are occasionally insufficient in deterring some political and human rights activists, and journalists, some authorities have started to prepare policemen for what is known as “dirty operations”. These operations, despite being few, have wide and long term effects in spreading fear amongst ordinary citizens and amongst some activists who fear that their turn will come. Such operations include fabricating criminal cases, committing sexual assaults, and scandals aiming at defaming reputations and breaking the spirits of the victims, in addition to spreading fear amongst others, sending a clear message to whoever thinks to criticise or oppose symbols of the regime and its authorities.

Dirty operations : When, why, and how ?

The use of dirty operations is not arbitrary. Rather, governments resort to them when they fail in using the accustomed methods in the Arab World, such as detention, fabrication of political cases, physical assault, and torture to limit the activities performed by victims, whether journalists, human rights activists, or political opposition whom governmental authorities view as a threat revealing their practices.

Accordingly, dirty operations are used against those activists for a specific aim or to achieve several goals depending on the case :

Case I : The resort to physical assault or sexual harassment against a specific activist aims at terrorising him or her and breaking his or her spirit. This is usually done whilst the activist is being arrested or after the activist has been kidnapped.

This kind of operation is used either as a punitive method or to force the activist to stop a specific activity, such as stopping the activist from continuing his or her writings on a governmental symbol or official, or to stop the activist from participating in political activities opposing the government.

Case II : This entails the fabrication of criminal cases or fabrication of immoral scandals against the activist without actually physically assaulting him or her. The scandal or case is then widely published, either through rumours or by using the media. In addition to the goals mentioned in Case I, other goals include spreading fear amongst the surrounding people that this procedure might be used against them if they perform the same or similar practices as the victim.

Case III : This entails the integration of all of the aforementioned-physical assault, fabrication of criminal cases, or an attempt to scandalise the activist using the media and/or by disseminating rumours.

The press and playing with fire

It is difficult to achieve the goals of “dirty operations”, especially in the second and third cases mentioned above, without the cooperation or participation of some journalists. Rarely, this cooperation takes place without the journalist being aware of the circumstances of the case.

Danger lies in the fact that these cases in which journalists and newspapers cooperate, affect not only the victim but also the freedom of press.

At the same time as some journalists accept to be used as tools by governmental authorities in launching campaigns targeting the reputation of activists, who might also be journalists, such campaigns also destroy the credibility of the press itself. This gives justification for the enemies of free press to attack it. In addition, many of those journalists who take a role in these “dirty operations” often themselves become victims of these operations when disagreement occurs between them and the governments and security authorities that use them. A careful look into a country such as Egypt and its current campaigns shows that some of the campaigns against journalists are because they at one time accepted to play such a role in the past. As a result these journalists find it difficult to find support from the press and activists.

Following is detailed accounts of some of these cases :

Tunisia

Tunisia is the most Arab country that is a member state in international human rights covenants. This is what some know about it. It is also the most stable country in North Africa, and this, too, some already know. This is exactly what the Tunisian government propagates. However, what many might know is not necessarily the truth. Ratifying and signing international human rights covenants or the stability of a country leads to an important question. How does that influence the situation of activists and the status of freedom of __expression ? How did stability occur ? Was it through providing security or through the oppression and control of security forces ?

A recently published report by the World Organisation Against Torture and the International Federation of Human Rights stated in the Middle East and North Africa section on Tunisia that all violations were committed against civil society and human rights activists, starting with violence, arbitrary arrests, and terrorising them, in addition to violating the right to activity. This means that Tunisia is the only country that commits all these violations that could be distributed amongst several countries !

“In 2005, defenders were victims of assassinations, abductions and death threats (Iraq), acts of violence (Bahrain, Morocco, Tunisia), arbitrary arrests and judicial proceedings (Algeria, Bahrain, Libya, Occupied Palestinian Territories, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia), acts of harassment and intimidation (Syria, Tunisia), as well as infringements to their freedom of movement (Occupied Palestinian Territories)” .3

As for the right of association, the report stated : “Freedom of association was once again blatantly flouted in Tunisia, where many independent associations were still not legally recognised by the authorities, such as the National Council for Liberties in Tunisia (CNLT), the International Association for the Support of Political Prisoners (AISPP), the Tunisian Association Against Torture (ALTT), the Centre for the Independence of Judiciary and Lawyers (CIJA), the Assembly for Alternative International Development (RAID-ATTAC) and the Observatory for the Freedoms of the Press, Publishing, and Creation (OLPEC)” .4

Of course, for these harassments to become tangible violations they have to strike at specific persons, whether they be journalists or political or human rights activists. Following are a few examples of such cases.

Sihem Bensedrine

No Arab human rights activist has been exposed to what Sihem Bensedrine was exposed to from assaults and fabricated cases, embodying the unity of state authorities in confronting an individual in order to defame her name and create obstacles to her efforts to shed light on the deteriorating situation created by security authorities that don’t know honourable disputes or the basics of the democratic process.

After security authorities failed in destroying Sihem Bensedrine’s will during the 1970s and 1980s, the use of “dirty operations” against her started with the participation of yellow press affiliated to the Tunisian government, such as Al-Shorouq, Al-Hadath, and Al-Sareeh. A rabid campaign started, aiming at defaming her name and reputation, beginning with accusing her of prostitution and the call for stoning her to forging pornographic pictures of her. The aim was to destroy her history and reputation. Fortunately, this did not work.

According to Lutfi Hajji, never had such obscene words been used or the situation reached such vileness towards a citizen. 5

The situation reached the extent of eliminating all means by which Sihem Bensedrine could earn a living. She was deprived from receiving her membership card from the Tunisian Press Association after Ben Ali assumed full control of it. The publishing house Al-Sabbar, which Bensedrine established, was shut down. It reached an extent that whoever wanted to get close to the dictatorship had to attack Bensedrine and participate in the “’dirty operations” launched against her.

It seems as if it’s a natural solution to get rid of Sihem Bensedrine. She was prevented from receiving medical care while in the Manouba women’s prison when she fell ill in July 2001, especially that she did not fully recover from the brutal police assaults on her in 2000.

Despite these “dirty operations” targeting her, Bensedrine won the 2004 International Press Freedom Award in Canada for her struggle for a free press in Tunisia, even though Tunisian authorities have shut down all five newspapers in which she worked.

Radya Nasrawy

Whenever one searches her name on any of the Internet’s search engines, many headlines come out in the results. Many of the headlines include statements such as : “Radya Nasrawy was beaten …”, “Following the arrest of Radya Nasrawy …”, “Radya Nasrawy was targeted …”, etc. All these headlines reflect what the human rights activist suffered from as a result of her defence of the rights of Tunisian citizens, which the security authorities have been trying to deprive them of.

Radya Nasrawy’s face is scarred as a result of a brutal attack committed by Tunisian authorities, which also targeted her young daughter, while she was organising a demonstration in solidarity of the prisoner of opinion Mohammed Abbou in March 2005.

As a form of division of labour, we find attacks against Radya Nasrawy, the lawyer and head of the Tunisian Association Against torture (ALTT), take place on two levels. On the one hand, the Tunisian police clearly practiced physical assault on her, the last of which was the attack that broke her nose because of her solidarity with the prisoner of opinion Mohammed Abbou, in addition to burning her office door and stealing her files, not to mention stealing her car. On the other hand, under the supervision of the police, some journalists have started to dig up her past and have forged abhorrent stories about her. One of these journalists claimed that Radya Nasrawy was extramaritally impregnated by Hemma Al-Hammami during her visits as a lawyer to him while he was in prison. In response, Monsef Al-Marzuki said about this journalist, that he doubts that the journalist has ever been imprisoned because of a principle or a case like that of Hemma. The journalist did not even refrain from presenting Tunisian prisons as if they were parks in which reckless lawyers can get impregnated by their lovers. 6

In this manner, press does not refrain from defaming activists and attempting to destroy their reputations, even though they are in prison, raising questions on the extent to which these “dirty operations” have reached.

Mohammed Abbou

On February 28, 2005, the lawyer Mohammed Abbou, leading member of the Congress for the Republic Party, published an article on the Internet. The article criticised the invitation of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to visit Tunisia during the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) organised by the United Nations in November of the same year in Tunisia. As a result, security authorities kidnapped Mohammed Abbou the following day and tried him. He was accused of a framed crime dating back to June 2002, claiming that Abbou had harmed his colleague Dalila Marad during a dispute between them in June 2002. In addition, he was accused of a crime related to the article he published on August 26, 2004 on Tunisianews Web site, entitled The Iraqi Abu Ghraib and the Tunisian Abu Ghraibs. In the article, Abbou compared between the status of Iraqi prisons and political prisoners in Tunisia. The article condemned torture practices on Tunisian prisoners and the silence of the judiciary.

Following an unfair trial that cannot be described at all as a fair trial, in which only 30 of the more than 850 lawyers who had voluntarily come forward to defend their colleague were recognized by the court, the court sentenced Mohammed Abbou to three and a half years imprisonment. The yellow press disseminated the news using the following headlines :

1. Al-Sabbah newspaper published on April 30, 2005, on the front page, “For violently attacking his colleague and defamation, the court sentences Mohammed About to three and a half years imprisonment”.

2. Al-Shorouq newspaper on April 29, 2005, published an article entitled “Mohammed Abbou is tried for physically assaulting his colleague, causing her serious injuries, and for inciting the people to violate the country’s laws”.

3. Al-Sareeh newspaper crossed all lines as it considered Mohammed Abbou’s trial to be unfit because the context of the trial was not related to the lawyer profession but rather to a citizen who attacked another citizen, in addition to another accusation that is totally contradictory with the fact that he is lawyer who should contribute to the implementation of the country’s laws.

These are all articles that present Mohammed Abbou as merely a deviant and violent person inciting the violation of the laws of the country and accused in a criminal case.

These articles ignored the basics of good journalism as they did not present to public opinion the circumstances of the accusations directed against Abbou. These articles also revealed the intentions of the judiciary, which insisted on connecting the two cases and dealing with them in the same session and judicial district, even though this is against the simplest guarantees of the right to defend oneself .7

Even though more than a year has passed since the imprisonment of Mohammed About and despite a wide campaign, the Tunisian police are currently continuing their “dirty operation” against Abbou. The police have threatened Abbou and his wife that they will frame the same immoral scandals against his wife if the solidarity for him and the demands for his release do not stop .8

Naziha Rajiba (Om Zied)

On February 28, 2004, the Tunisia appeals court sentenced Om Zied and Mohammed the Fifth Al-Hany to a six-month suspended sentence because she had 170 Euros in violation of the law.

This is what Tunisian newspapers affiliated to the government published. However, the newspapers intentionally ignored the fact that Om Zied had refused to stand before the appeals court because she was convinced that it was not independent and defence before the court that is controlled by the executive authority is useless. In addition, she stated that this case was framed in a scandalous manner. She was carrying 170 Euros sent to Mohammed the Fifth by his brother via Om Zied to help him pay the rent of his flat after the security authorities had closed all doors for the man to find a living, simply because he is the brother of Abdel Wahab Al-Hani, an activist. Also, these newspapers did not publish the comic procedures by which the trial was conducted ; comic to the extent that the judge told one of the lawyers not to worry as there won’t be any imprisonment. This only comes to prove that the sentence was pre-arranged.

Even more, the case-if you consider it to be one-does not carry a prison sentence in the first place. The case, according to law, simply entails confiscation ; not to mention the fact that the amount of money was small and trivial.

Om Zied, a teacher who had been teaching for 35 years, left her job with a reasoned resignation because of her fear of the police authorities that control teachers, particularly as Tunisian police are accustomed to attack teachers.

After that she worked as a journalist with several newspapers in addition to her Web site Tunisia’s Word http://www.kaklimatunisie.com , one of the Web sites expressing independent press and which has been blocked in Tunisia. Because Om Zied is one of those who cannot accept the horrific practices of the Tunisian government and has her free pen to confront the government with, and because her husband is the activist lawyer Mohammed Al-Mokhtar Jelali, she is a target for dirty operations performed by the Tunisian security authorities and their allies. The last of these operations was on March 7, 2006, when her husband received an anonymous letter threatening him with a sexual scandal and demanding 100,000 Dinars in return for silence.

A day before the letter arrived, Jelali received a telephone call in his office, also from an unknown person, using the same threats. The caller emphasised that he is not from the police and promised that Jelali would cry like a woman .9

In an article written by Om Zied, she presented evidence that the anonymous person is affiliated to the security authorities. She also insisted that such dirty operations do not affect her as they incriminate the perpetrators and not the victims .10

Abdallah Al-Zawary

In early 1991, journalist for Al-Fajr newspaper Abdullah Al-Zawary was arrested in a campaign that targeted many Tunisian citizens. On charges of belonging to the banned Al-Nahda Islamic movement, he was imprisoned for 11 years. Following his initial release in June 2002, however, Tunisian security forces did allow him to enjoy the freedom he had been deprived of for so long.

Zawary was re-arrested in August 2002 and sentenced to another eight months in jail for not respecting monitoring procedures. After his release he contested a decision by the minister of interior to send him into internal exile in Al-Gerba district of Gergeis City, which lies 500 km away from his residence. The goal was to deprive him from living with his family, and to make his and his family’s life difficult.

Zawary was released for a short period, during which a new case was being framed. He was accused of attacking the owner of an internet café by insulting her in public. As a result he was sentenced to four months in prison.

Zawary remains exiled, deprived from work and from living with his family. He is restricted from contacting the foreign world, even through the internet.

……………………………………..

Conclusions

A report written by Hina Jilani, special rapporteur for the United Nations Commission of Human Rights (according to General Assembly resolution 55/98 dated 4 December 2000 and the Commission for Human Rights resolution 61/2000 dated 26 April 2000, which was ratified by the Economic and Social Council 220/2000 on 16 June 2000), cited several different kinds of violations that human rights activists and journalists face across the world. The following is a selection of these points :

  Exposure and criticism of policies and practices that violate human rights have resulted in legal proceedings against human rights defenders as a retaliatory measure. Many have suffered long drawn-out trials, sometimes under procedures that, reportedly, fall far short of the standards of a fair trial. – The reporting of human rights violations has frequently led to charges of spreading false information, defamation of authorities or disturbance of public order. The peaceful __expression of views on human rights issues has been termed as “incitement”, civic education programs have led to charges of sedition and criticism of discriminatory practices has been prosecuted as an offence against religion.

  Mail and faxes are commonly intercepted, Internet facilities cut off and telephones tapped. Incidents of offices being broken into and theft of information have been reported. Computers and disks containing information on the work of NGOs are usually what are carried away.

  Smear campaigns against human rights defenders have become a tool increasingly used to discredit their work. Government-controlled media are used for slanderous accusations and attacks on the honour and reputation of non-Government human rights organizations and individual defenders. Many such campaigns carry comments of senior government officials, targeting human rights defenders who criticize or expose repressive State policies or action.

  Human rights activity is reviled in such terms as “damaging national interests”, “disturbing social peace” and, especially the propagation of women’s human rights, spreading “immorality” or “obscenity”. In the case of women’s human rights defenders, vilification of this nature by Government or non-State entities has resulted in physical attacks, threats and ostracism.

  Finally, a growing number of States tend to create governmental NGOs in order to discredit the work of independent NGOs at the national and international level. 17

These points serve to clarify governmental malpractices against activists in the Arab world. And in the case of the three countries selected as case studies for the purposes of this report, the parallels are clear. As mentioned in the report, Tunisia, Egypt and Bahrain have all established semi-governmental human rights councils, which work in apposition to independent organizations.

However, none of these councils have condemned any of the ’dirty operations’ perpetrated against activists and journalists. In Tunisia, the governmental human rights council in Tunisia took no steps to condemn the sentencing of journalist Mohammed Abbou, who was imprisoned for three and a half years for an article he wrote. The Egyptian National Council for Human Rights did not lobby for an investigation into the attacks perpetrated against women journalists during the referendum in 2005. Likewise, the Human Rights Committee in Bahrain did not remind the minister of interior of his pledge to find out who sexually attacked Moussa Abd Aly.

The following are a series of recommendations issued by the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information to the relevant authorities. We have excluded security services as they are the tool used to carry out the ’dirty operations’. In future, we hope the security apparatus proves itself worthy of the respect that would enable us to address its members as authorities who respect the law and the rules of dealing with political opposition.

Recommendations

To Arab Governments :

1. Announce a renewal of commitment and genuine abidance by international human rights agreements they have signed, and to stop issuing accusations against activists and journalists in political and criminal cases.

2. Administer their disputes with political opposition groups, activists and journalists in accordance to standards of respect and values, including holding accountable those involved in the ’dirty operations’. To the media :

1. Abide by local and international professional codes of ethics, and work to maintain credibility.

2. Preserve the message of journalism by not allowing state security authorities to use media outlets to destroy the reputations of activists. To the public prosecution :

1. Work seriously to restore its independence, the remnants of which it is on the verge of losing. Its lack of independence has affected its credibility, because some members of the public prosecution have accepted to perform in the interest of governments and to be hijacked by the authorities in their political disputes.

2. Support the demand of human rights activists to revive the investigative judicial system, which supports the independence of judiciary and guarantees fair trials. To independent civil society :

1. Avoid turning a blind eye to violations against human rights activists, journalists and political opposition, regardless of pressure or incentive. This is key in the struggle to maintain independence.

2. Stand firm and collectively against ’dirty operations’, and expose those involved in such practices. To government-sponsored human rights councils and committees :

1. Preserve the sanctity of human rights work by ceasing to adulate governments while turning a blind eye to violations as shocking as cases of framing activists and journalists.

2. Use reasoned resignations if government bodies refrain from honouring pledges and continue implementing ’dirty operations’.

Endnotes :

1- Ruling of the court of cassation on 6 November 1924 – Dr. Muhammad Abdullah, Publishing Crimes, pp. 289

2- Free Speech in an Open Society, Rodney A. Smolla.

3- Steadfast in Protest – Annual Report 2005 of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (FIDH/OMCT), obs_annual_report_2005_eng.pdf

4- ibid

5- Lutfi Hajji is the founder of the independent Tunisian Press Syndicate. Security forces banned the convention of its first conference on 7 September 2005.

6- Dr. Monsef Al-Marzuki, From Ruin to Institutionalisation hem.bredband.net (source originally in Arabic)

7- The Case of Mohammed About : In response to some of the questionable pens, Samir Ben Omar, The website of the Congress for the Republic : www.cprtunisie.net

8- An interview with a source close to Mohammed Abbou’s family

9- Inspirations from internal clips, an article written by Om Zied on 14 March 2006 www.kalimatunisie.com

10- Ibid

11- Published on NDP-affiliated Good News 4 Me website www.gn4me.com

12- Interview with Seleem Azzouz, Cairo, 23 March 2006

13- Interview with Mohammed A in 2002

14- Statement by the Bahraini Centre for Human Rights issued on 31 March 2004 www.bchr.net

15- Hood online www.hoodonline.org

16- Press statement by Moussa Abd Aly, Bahrain Online, 13 December 2005 www.bahrainonline.org

17- UN document A/56/341 published on 10 September 2001 N0153217.pdf

par ABDELAZIZ BARROUHI

Achat de 35 % de Tunisie Télécom, investissements massifs au Maroc… Le groupe émirati poursuit son irrésistible expansion.

Le 29 mars 2006 aura été un jour faste pour la Tunisie et le Maroc. Un peu plus de 3 milliards de dollars (3,052) en cash pour l’achat, par Dubai Technology, Electronic Commerce & Media Free Zone/Dubai Investment Group (Tecom/Dig), de 35 % de l’opérateur national Tunisie Télécom (voir J.A. n° 2360). Le même jour, 12 milliards de dollars sont engagés au Maroc par Dig et sa branche immobilière, Dubai International Properties (Dip), en présence du roi Mohammed VI, en vue de la réalisation d’un programme immobilier dans les cinq prochaines années, en partenariat avec deux sociétés marocaines : la Caisse de dépôt et de gestion (CDG) et SABR Management. Parmi les projets, celui des « Dubai Towers », à Casablanca. Coût estimé : 600 millions de dollars. Le complexe comprendra un hôtel, deux tours, dont une à usage de bureaux, des immeubles résidentiels, des commerces et des loisirs. Toujours à Casablanca, la Marina coûtera quelque 500 millions de dollars. À Rabat, le projet Amweej nécessitera un investissement de 2 milliards de dollars pour la construction sur les rives du Bouregreg d’un complexe touristique, résidentiel et d’affaires.

Tecom, Dig, ou Dip ne sont que des filiales. Derrière eux, deux noms : Dubai Holding et Cheikh Mohamed Ibn Rachid al-Maktoum, émir de Dubaï, vice-président et Premier ministre des Émirats arabes unis (EAU). C’est une entreprise de statut public, que l’on dit chargée aussi de faire fructifier la fortune de la famille régnante des Maktoum. Son président, Mohamed al-Gergawi, est ministre d’État pour les affaires du cabinet à Dubaï. Le holding est propriétaire et gestionnaire d’un portefeuille diversifié d’une vingtaine de filiales opérant dans divers secteurs d’activité comme les télécommunications et les technologies de l’information, les marchés financiers, l’énergie, l’immobilier, le tourisme et l’hôtellerie de luxe, la biotechnologie, les industries manufacturières, les services portuaires, la santé et l’éducation. Des métiers qui se retrouvent le plus souvent en tandem, comme c’est le cas en Tunisie. Tecom, créé en 2000, est à la fois un opérateur de télécommunications et de médias, à l’instar de Vivendi Universal. Les activités de Tecom relèvent de la nouvelle économie. À Dubaï, il gère une sorte de Silicon Valley qui rayonne sur l’ensemble du Golfe et comprenant Dubai Media City, Knowledge Village, et Dubai Internet City. Plus de 5 500 personnes y travaillent. Les sociétés qui opèrent dans les zones couvertes par Tecom bénéficient des avantages fiscaux accordés aux acteurs de la nouvelle économie. On y compte plus de 700 firmes opérant dans les nouvelles technologies de l’information et 200 dans les médias. Parmi les premiers, d’illustres noms comme Sun, Microsoft, Oracle, IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Compaq, Dell, Siemens, Canon, Sony-Ericsson, Cisco. De grands médias internationaux y ont aussi installé leurs bureaux régionaux comme Reuters, CNN, MBC, CNBC.

En matière de télécommunications, Tecom exerçait jusque-là ce que l’on appelle une « activité de niche » et employait 500 personnes à Dubaï. Il fournissait à ses 19 000 abonnés installés dans ces zones franches (pour la plupart de grandes firmes étrangères grandes consommatrices de télécoms) ou des quartiers résidentiels de haut standing l’accès à Internet, à la transmission de données, au téléphone fixe et à la télévision par câble. Tecom jouissait ainsi d’un monopole dans ces zones, tandis qu’Etisalat exerçait un monopole de fait dans le reste des EAU. Tecom comme Etisalat viennent de perdre ces monopoles dans le cadre d’une libéralisation du secteur et la création d’un nouvel opérateur : Emirates Integrated Telecommunications Company (EITC), qui va opérer sous la marque « Du » et dont les actionnaires majoritaires sont publics, qu’ils soient de Dubaï ou d’Abou Dhabi. Il s’agit d’une simple restructuration du secteur dans la mesure où le président de la nouvelle entité n’est autre que Ahmed Ben Biyat, l’un des principaux dirigeants de Dubai Holding et de Tecom. Ce dernier a donc cédé à EITC, en février, ses actifs de téléphonie fixe situés à Dubaï pour 330 millions de dollars. Ce qui l’intéresse désormais, ce n’est plus le marché local mais l’expansion à l’international. D’où l’acquisition de Tunisie Télécom, dont il pourra prendre le contrôle majoritaire dans un délai de quatre ans. D’où aussi sa participation de 120 millions d’euros, en octobre, dans le capital d’Interoute, propriétaire et opérateur du réseau voix et données le plus dense d’Europe et fournisseur de solutions pour les entreprises. D’où, enfin, le rachat par Tecom d’Axiom Telecom, le plus grand revendeur de téléphonie mobile au Moyen-Orient.

Avec Tecom, on retrouve Dig, bras financier de Dubai Holding, qui prend des participations directes dans les entreprises, opère à la Bourse et investit dans l’immobilier. Dig est à chaque fois présent aux côtés des filiales sectorielles (comme Tecom et Dip) dans leurs opérations.

Ce qui est investi en Tunisie et au Maroc ne représente qu’une petite part de l’offensive menée dans le monde par les investisseurs de Dubai Holding. Aux États-Unis, le même mois, Dubai Ports World (DPW), une autre filiale de Dubai Holding, a suscité une levée de boucliers au sein du Congrès après sa prise de contrôle de la gestion de six ports américains (dont celui de New York) à travers sa branche britannique, Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Company (P&O), rachetée pour 6,8 milliards de dollars, faisant de DPW, déjà implanté en Asie, en Australie, en Allemagne et au Venezuela, l’un des premiers gestionnaires de ports dans le monde. À Londres, l’an dernier, Dubai International Capital (Dic) s’est offert le fameux musée de cire Madame Tussauds pour 1,5 milliard de dollars. Puis a acquis 2 % du capital du constructeur automobile germano-américain DaimlerChrysler pour 1 milliard de dollars, devenant ainsi le troisième actionnaire.

« En dix ou quinze ans, nous avons placé Dubaï sur la carte mondiale », se félicite Mohamed al-Gergawi, commentant le retentissement soudain du déploiement à l’international du conglomérat. Il aurait même pu dire qu’ils l’ont sorti du néant, car, de tous les émirats, sultanats et royaume du Golfe, seul Dubaï ne dispose pas de réserves importantes de pétrole, qui ne représente que 6 % de son PIB. Juste récompense, mais peut-être aussi parce qu’il est épargné par la « malédiction de l’or noir », Dubaï est devenu une référence particulièrement respectée dans le monde arabe, où les hommes d’affaires ne jurent plus que par lui.

19 Filiales

– Dubai Media City

– Dubai Studio City

– Samacom

– International Media Production Zone

– Dubai Internet City

– Dubai Outsource Zone

– eHostinq

– Dubai Properties

– Dubai International Properties

– Dubai International Capital

– Dubai Investment Group

– Empower

– Dubai Energy

– Dubai Knowledge Village

– Dubai Healthcare City

– Dubai Industrial City

– Dubailand

– Jumeirah Group

– Dubiotech

Numéro un arabe en Tunisie

par ABDELAZIZ BARROUHI

Avec l’acquisition de Tunisie Télécom, Dubai Holding se hisse à la première place des investisseurs arabes dans le pays, devançant le Koweït et l’Arabie saoudite. Dubai Holding est déjà présent dans le capital de la compagnie aérienne privée Karthago Airlines (à hauteur de 10 %), de la Siame (près de 10 %) et de Somocer (Groupe Abdennadher, quelque 15 %).

Pour les hommes d’affaires tunisiens, c’est un signe qui augure d’investissements encore plus importants en provenance du Golfe. « Dubai Holding, ce sont des gens qui voient loin, déclare un grand chef d’entreprise. Ils ont une grosse assise financière et une expérience et expertise qui apporteront un plus à Tunisie Télécom. Mieux : c’est là une initiative qui devrait être suivie par d’autres investissements, surtout que la Tunisie présente la particularité d’être un pays plein de ressources humaines, surtout dans le domaine des technologies de l’information. »

Confirmation d’Ahmed Ben Biyat, président de Tecom, pour qui il s’agit en effet d’un « investissement stratégique » et donc d’« un premier pas » pour Tecom et la Tunisie. Et aussi de Saoud Baalawi, président de Dig, qui estime que l’opération Tunisie Télécom annonce « un engagement à long terme dans le marché tunisien ».