Search Tips
sorted by
6 shown of 6 entities
Best practices that promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association 2012, para. 34
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur expresses his utmost concern in relation to peaceful assemblies that were either not allowed or violently dispersed in a number of countries, such as in Bahrain, Belarus, China, Egypt, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Malawi, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and the Syrian Arab Republic.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Best practices that promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association 2012, para. 46
- Paragraph text
- Several good initiatives were brought to the attention of the Special Rapporteur, which should be replicated. In Burkina Faso, a seminar on "public demonstration and human rights: what strategy for a better collaboration between the different actors" was conducted by the Ministry of Justice and the Promotion of Human Rights for the benefit of security forces and NGOs. In Slovenia, training initiatives for law enforcements officials on the use of non-lethal instruments of constraint (such as batons, tear gas and water canons) when maintaining public order were delivered. In the United Kingdom, the police of several counties appointed an independent human rights lawyer to advise them on the legality and human rights implications of large-scale public order operations in relation to controversial protests.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Best practices that promote and protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association 2012, para. 78
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur considers as best practice legislation which provides for criminal and disciplinary sanctions against those who interfere with or violently disperse public assemblies through excessive use of force (e.g. Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Colombia, Cote d'Ivoire, Cuba, Estonia, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Serbia and Spain). More specifically, in Colombia, according to the law, the excessive or arbitrary use of force against peaceful demonstrators constitutes a grave breach, under the disciplinary regime for the national police. Similarly, in Portugal, a decree-law foresees sanctions against authorities who hinder the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, and article 382 of Criminal Code sets the applicable sanctions in relation to the abuse of power.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Governance & Rule of Law
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2012
Paragraph
Fundamentalism and its impact on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association 2016, para. 64
- Paragraph text
- Religious fundamentalism by non-State actors - and the State's active or tacit encouragement of this - frequently results in violations of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association. Some prominent Buddhist monks in Myanmar, a Buddhist-majority country, have stirred vicious anger and violence against the Rohingya people, a Muslim minority group that is not recognized by the Government as a distinct ethnic group. The Government has reportedly done little in response, leading to repeated outbreaks of violence targeting Rohingya. Moreover, following riots between Rohingya and Buddhists in Rakhine State, the Government imposed Emergency Act 144 in June 2012, which prevented groups of five or more people from gathering in public areas. The ban was reportedly only enforced against Rohingya. The Special Rapporteur welcomes reports that the state of emergency was lifted in March 2016, but stresses that such blanket bans, especially when enforced against a specific group only, violate the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2016
Paragraph
The exercise of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association in the context of elections 2013, para. 24
- Paragraph text
- In this regard, the Special Rapporteur recalls that the right to freedom of peaceful assembly does not require the issuance of a permit to hold an assembly. If necessary, a mere prior notification, intended for large assemblies or for assemblies at which some degree of disruption is anticipated, may be required. Spontaneous peaceful assemblies, which usually occur in reaction to a specific event - such as the announcement of results - and which by definition cannot be subject to prior notification, should be more tolerated in the context of elections. In addition, the Special Rapporteur considers laws establishing authorization procedures to be even more problematic in the context of elections, as authorization may be arbitrarily denied, especially when demonstrators intend to criticize Government policies. In the Sudan, a peaceful demonstration organized by an independent gubernatorial candidate for the April 2010 elections was curbed by police forces invoking the failure of the organizers to seek permission. Several protestors were arrested and/or injured by security forces.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2013
Paragraph
The rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association in the context of natural resource exploitation projects 2015, para. 41
- Paragraph text
- The Special Rapporteur reiterates that the guarantees provided by international human rights standards relate only to assemblies that are peaceful (see A/HRC/20/27, para. 25). When violent incidents occur within otherwise peaceful assemblies, authorities have a duty to distinguish between peaceful and non-peaceful demonstrators, take measures to de-escalate tensions and hold the violent individuals - not the organizers - to account for their actions. The potential for violence is not an excuse to interfere with or disperse otherwise peaceful assemblies. This principle is all the more important because violence in the course of peaceful protests may be instigated to justify the dispersal of a protest.
- Body
- Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association
- Document type
- Special Procedures' report
- Topic(s)
- Civil & Political Rights
- Humanitarian
- Year
- 2015
Paragraph
6 shown of 6 entities