28 Nov, 2007

BCHR: Authorities reinforce sweeping media ban, Internet censorship on controversial report

(BCHR/IFEX) - A statement by the Higher Criminal Court on 27 November 2007 affirmed the permanence of the decision to stop publishing news or press comments on the "Al-Bandar report", although the prosecution of Salah Al-Bandar, the issuer of the report, was passed.

The decision to extend the "publication ban order" was explained by the judge in the following statement: "The ruling on the accused was made in his absence, and thus was susceptible to reversal and appeal by default, meaning it had not yet become final, and this justifies maintaining a ban on any publication about the report".

The ban on any media coverage of the "Al-Bandar report", originally issued in 2006, resulted in the prosecution of many journalists (for example, Mohamed Al-Sawad and Ahmed Al-Aradi of the "Alwaq" newspaper) and some human rights activists (for example, Nabeel Rajab of BCHR). Furthermore, the Bahraini Ministry of Information used this ban to activate articles 40 and 71 of the Press Decree Code of 2002, issuing an official order to prevent Internet access (from inside Bahrain) to many Bahraini and non-Bahraini websites that make reference to the report. This ban continues and applies to electronic forums, sites of local political and civic organizations, including religious, secular and ethnic groups based outside Bahrain. It also banned access to websites of human rights organizations BCHR and HAQ (inside Bahrain) as well as the Network of Human Rights Information (HRinfo), outside Bahrain.

The "Al-Bandar report" contains documents exposing a "secret" organization led and funded by known official organizations - mainly the Royal Court - and contains executive plans aiming at introducing sectarian sedition, rigging elections and undermining dissident groups, disenfranchising Shia populations, creating and funding phony non-governmental organizations, clamping down on and containing civic organizations, as well as managing a politically-motivated change of demography scheme by facilitating the immigration of thousands of people of different nationalities from around the region. The report also exposes the mobilization of the media team and capabilities of a newspaper created, funded and supported by the secret organization, and dedicated to achieving the above objectives and to misleading people about the report and its content, as well as about many public issues, activists and rights organizations.

BCHR is concerned about the ban on media coverage of the "Al-Bandar report", which only raises suspicions over the contents of the document. This is a blatant breach of Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights acceded to by Bahrain. Furthermore, BCHR is concerned about the use of legislation to clamp down on freedom of expression and to limit space for action by human rights activists and their organizations.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Send appeals to Bahraini authorities: - calling for an end to the constraints on media access and freedom of expression, including the banning of various websites - denouncing the use of legislation, and the Press Decree Code in particular, to punish individuals and groups who attempt to express their views on public issues - condemning the alleged creation of a "secret organization" aimed at influencing media, activists and their organizations

APPEALS TO:

His Hightness Shaikh Hamad Bin Isa Al-khalifa, King of Bahrain His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman Al-Khalifa Cabinet Prime Minister Fax: +973 1721 1363

Please copy appeals to the source if possible.

For further information contact Nabeel Rajab, Vice-President, BCHR, Manama, Bahrain, tel: +973 3963 3399 / 3940 0720, fax: +973 1779 5170, e-mail: nabeel.rajab@bahrainrights.org, info@bahrainrights.org, Internet: http://www.bahrainrights.org

17 Nov, 2007

Bangladeshi workers and Bahrain,An analysis from two angles: Business and Human Rights

Enhancing social protection of Bangladeshi migrants Dhaka, Bangladesh Nabeel Rajab

Bahrain Centre for Human Rights

Section 1: The Situation

There are approximately 74,000 Bangladeshi workers in Bahrain, including up to 4,000 women. These workers represent 10 per cent of the total population of residents in Bahrain.

Within the region, Bangladeshi workers are mainly employed in unskilled work, such as construction work, menial and manual labor, and tend to work for the lowest wages out of migrant workers from Asia. They can be seen working in ‘3-D’ jobs ,dangerous, dirty or demeaning.

What are the problems faced ?

A large number of Bangladeshi workers in Bahrain are classified as ‘undocumented or illegal workers. This comes as a result of holding expired work permits, or being ‘runaway and workers who are employed in work other than that listed on their work permit.

The position of undocumented workers is a vulnerable one. They are vulnerable to maltreatment, abuse, and blackmail. They are also unable to access aid and protection from government authorities, health service providers, and the judicial system.

Mainly because they are desperate to secure employment abroad, many Bangladeshi workers carry false identification documents, including passports.

These are usually made in the country of origin by the recruitment agents. Workers in Bahrain found carrying false documents are normally deported.

Other Bangladeshi workers do not have work contracts, and some have created false contracts and destroy the one sign in the Embassy. Again, this can be seen as a result of desperation to gain and keep their jobs.

In legal disputes, court verdicts have been shown to pass tougher sentences for poor migrant workers, as compared with locals.

In addition, many Bangladeshis have been trafficked to the country (and the region) on false promises of good jobs with higher salaries. A large number have sold property or other valuables in their home country in order to pay for their travel to the region.

The issues faced by migrant workers are largely ignored by civil society both in sending and receiving countries. Because Bangladeshi workers generally cannot speak the language of the host country they work in, they cannot seek help from the police or other government authorities and institutions in the receiving country.

Because they are poor migrant workers whose their main concern is to keep their job and continue to send money to their family at home, their plight is largely ignored by officials.

Section Two: Violations

- Working conditions, including wages, living conditions, and health and safety regulations often fall far below International standards.

- Psychological, physical, verbal abuse, and inhumane living and work conditions have led migrant workers in the past to run away – or commit suicide.

- In some cases, undocumented or runaway female domestic workers end up working, or being forced into working as prostitutes. Often, in these cases, an agent from their home country coerces them into runaway from their sponsors and working as prostitutes.

- The majority of workers are not aware of their rights.

- Asian country Embassies in receiving countries are more concerned about the flow of remittances into their home economies, than the human rights of their citizens.

- Many Recruiting agents, both in home and receiving countries, are key violators of migrant workers’ human rights.

Section Three: Recommendations

1. Bangladeshi embassies based in the region have to take tougher measures in addressing the problem of their own citizens when dealing with host governments. They should keep in mind the host countries’ continuing need for a labour force due to the economic and construction boom.

2. The Bangladeshi government and other Asian ‘sending’ countries should join together for negotiations with receiving countries in the Gulf and wider Middle East region.

3. Bangladesh should develop a system to bring individuals, recruitment agencies and government employees in Bangladesh and who are responsible for human rights volitions to justice, and black list those acting in receiving countries.

4. Workers should be educated and encouraged to join labour unions and civil society groups in receiving countries.

5. Receiving countries should have shelters and safe houses for abused workers. These should be run by sending country embassies if the receiving country government has not established its own.

6. Workers should be guaranteed their right not to be deported with prior review of their cases by an independent judiciary in order to ensure that their right to fair and due process is respected.

7. The contribution of migrant workers to the economy of receiving and sending countries should be recognized

8. Countries should publish and implement national action plans and policies to protect the labour and human rights of all workers, including migrant workers, without discrimination.

9. Activists and social workers should facilitate the establishment of an inter-regional network between Arab and Asian organizations interested in the issues related to the situation of migrant workers. The network should work through regular meetings and exchange of information. This work should include:

- Campaigning for concluding bilateral agreements between origin and host countries on the regulation of migration.

- Formulating contracts which are ratified by ministry of labor in both sending and receiving countries .

10. A maximum number of working hours for domestic workers should be set and implemented.

11. Civil society groups in both sending and receiving countries should work together.

12. Concerned individual activists and organization should fight against the impunity of the middle agents, particularly regarding the exploitation rings run by recruiting agencies in Bangladesh.

13. We should work to raise awareness among migrant workers about legal protection through information campaigns by NGOs, National Human rights institutions, Embassies and trade unions.

15 Nov, 2007

BCHR: Arbitrary detention and unfair trials in Bahrain during 2006

Arbitrary detention and unfair trials in Bahrain during 2006

This Report is released by the Bahrain Center for Human Rights November 2007

Preface:

The year 2006 has witnessed an extreme decline in public freedoms in Bahrain, especially in regards to freedom of expression and opinion and the freedom of assembly.

The year 2006 has witnessed many violations, that were documented, against human rights defenders and political activists and juveniles, who were subjected to beatings, torture, and detention (some detained for extended periods without charges). While some were tried in criminal courts due to a peaceful manner of expression of opinion, or as a result of participating in protests and gatherings which were related to human rights issues.

All the foresaid arrests, detentions and charges were based upon the Bahraini Penal Code promulgated by Decree Law No. (15) in 1976 by the executive authority at a time when the Legislative Council was dissolved and the infamous emergency law (State Security) was applied. This law conflicts with the agreed constitutional principles and the conventions of the international covenants. Law No. 15 is based on strict new laws, such as the gatherings and press law, which violates human rights.

The Bahrain Center for Human Rights played a fundamental role in the defense of detainees through providing legal support. In 2006, the total number of detainees has reached seventy one (71). The BCHR has adopted all these cases. The Center’s role, as represented through the different stages of the proceedings, took the following form:

Indictment stage (Preliminary Investigation):

This stage is when the detention takes place, and the detainees are indicted with charges at the Police Stations, Criminal Investigation Department (CID), and the Public Prosecution Office. This is a very important and critical stage, because many detainees are subjected to torture and ill-treatment in order for the police to obtain information and make the detainees confess and acknowledge the charges made against them. These detentions are usually done in isolation, where the detainee is not allowed to contact his family or a lawyer. Furthermore, there is no neutral medical supervision.

In this stage, the Center's role includes allocating lawyers in order to determine the detainees’ places and to attempt to secure the detainees visitation rights. BCHR members have also attended interrogation sessions, at the public prosecution, with the defendants in order to provide moral support and to reduce the element of coercion against the accused by the Investigation Authority, also to secure that the legal action taken against the detainees is sound.

Trial Stage: This is the stage when the criminal proceedings are referred to the relevant Courts.

The role of the Bahrain Centre for Human Rights (BCHR) entails all of the following:

A- Formation of the Defense Committee: The BCHR assigns the most possible qualified lawyers to defend the accused detainees and coordinates amongst them in preparing the legal defenses.

B- Overseeing the preparation of the defense case: This consists of overseeing, coordination and contribution to the preparation of the legal defense memoranda in liaison with the BCHR sponsored lawyers, and the provision of legal evidence and conducting a study of the case to extract the evidence.

C- Providing of legal Support: This entails provision of legal advice to the accused and their families at all stages of the proceedings (the Charges Stage & trial) and informing them about the proceedings and responding to their inquiries through the lawyers and BCHR’s human rights activists.

D- Close monitoring and surveillance: It is the provision of a detailed database of the detainee statements and the precise information of the charges of the ongoing proceedings and documenting the cases of violations and torture, if possible, by contacting the detainee and his/her family, and to present the BCHR’s specialist observing members for court hearings, should they be allowed to attend.

3- Assisting the families in organizing their movement: In all the cases mentioned in this report the Bahrain Center for Human Rights brought together the relatives of detainees and helped them to organize themselves, and to develop strategies to reveal the truth and to set their children free. This escalating move has led to a royal pardon of a special release of all convicts and defendants, in the cases of opinion and freedoms in the year 2006.

Cases Overseen by the Bahrain Center for Human Rights in 2006 The total number of detainees, whoso cases were taken by the Bahrain Center for Human Rights in 2006, were 71 people spread over 10 lawsuits. We will hereby cite the cases with an overview presentation of facts and charges against the detainees and the stages of the criminal proceedings.

1. The Case of Detainees in the Airport Incident: A- Date of arrest: 28 / 12 / 2005.

B- Number of detainees: 22 people (five of them were activists in committees of human rights and national demands).

C- The charges against detainees: Article (178) of the Bahraini Penal Code: Anyone who participates in a gathering, composed of at least five people and in a public place, with the purpose of committing crimes and premeditated action facilitating or disturbing public security, even if it was to achieve a legitimate purpose, shall be liable to a term not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding BD200/-, or one of the foresaid charges.

- Article (155 / 1) anyone who deliberately damages buildings or public property or property allocated for the public interests will be punished with imprisonment.

- Article (179) if one or more of the gathered persons proceeded with the use of violence to achieve the gathering objective, all participants will be punished with imprisonment and/or a fine.

- Incident Profile: They were arrested following the arrest warrants they received for their participation in a peaceful gathering. at the airport of Bahrain. The protesters demanded the release of a detained cleric who was arrested for his political opinions, when returning from abroad. The detainees were carefully selected from a group of more than 200 people who participated in the protest. Most of these detainees are either members in committees of people’s demands or human rights activists.

D- Stages of the proceedings: Following the Prosecution’s decisions to keep them in custody for investigation for a period of 15 days, the cases were then referred to the criminal court and the detainees were sentenced after one month.

E- Court Judgment: the Lower Criminal Court sentenced four persons not guilty of the charges and sentenced the remaining to two years imprisonment. After the defendants appeal the punishment period was reduced to one year by the Court of Appeal.

F- Discrimination and release: The detainees requested to appeal to the Court of Cassation because the articles that the charges were based on are unconstitutional, and because of the incorrect way the law was being applied. However this trial was not held due to a royal pardon in the case, and the detainees were released a week prior to the expiration of the sentence.

G- -Names of Sponsored lawyers in the case:

1. Mohamed Jaffar Al-Mutawa 2. Ahmed Jaffar Al-Arayyedh 3. Fatima Al-Hawaj 4. Fadhel Al-Mudaifa 5. Shahzalan Khamees 6. Ali Salem Al-Arayyedh 7. Taimoor Kareemy 8. *Court of Cassation: Mohamed Ahmed

H- - Release: The detainees were released on the 22nd of September 2006 following the special pardon in the issues of freedoms and expression; this happened to be one week prior to the expiration of the sentence period, as the expiration of the sentence was the 28th of September, 2006.

On the 15th of February, 2006 those who were acquitted by the court were released. This was after they had spent 49 days in detention.

2- The case of detainees who participated in a peaceful march in Daih:

A. Date of Arrest: 14th June 2006

B. No. of Detainees: 14 people

C. The charges against detainees: Article (178) of the Bahraini Penal Code: Anyone who participates in a gathering, composed of at least five people and in a public place, with the purpose of committing crimes and premeditated action facilitating or disturbing public security, even if it was to achieve a legitimate purpose, shall be liable to a term not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding BD200/-, or one of the foresaid charges.

- Article (155 / 1) anyone who deliberately damages buildings or public property or property allocated for the public interests will be punished with imprisonment.

- Article (179) if one or more of the gathered persons proceeded with the use of violence to achieve the gathering objective, all participants will be punished with imprisonment and/or a fine.

D. Incident Profile: They were arrested during their participation in a peaceful march, demanding the release of detainees of opinion when the police dispersed the march without warning.

E. Stages of the proceedings: Following the Prosecution’s decisions to keep them in custody for investigation for a period of 15 days, the cases were then referred to the criminal court and the detainees were sentenced after one month. Seven peopled were excluded, due to insufficient evidence against them and they were released on the 29th of January, 2006.

F. Court Judgment: the Lower Criminal Court sentenced seven people to two years and after the appeal by the defendants the punishment period was reduced to one year before the Court of Appeal.

G. Names of Sponsored lawyers in the case:

1. Radhy Khalil 2. Ahmed Jaffar Al-Arayyedh 3. Fatima Al-Hawaj

H- Release: The detainees were released on the 22nd of September, 2006 following the special pardon in the issues of freedoms and expression; this was 25 days prior to the expiration of their sentence period, as they were supposed to be release on the 13th of October, 2006.

3- The case of detainees in the protest near Dana Mall:

A. Date of Arrest: 10th March 2006

B. No. of Detainees: 22 people (two people were Human Rights activists in Committees of People’s Demand and four people were under the age of 18).

C. The charges against detainees: Article (178) of the Bahraini Penal Code: Anyone who participates in a gathering, composed of at least five people and in a public place, with the purpose of committing crimes and premeditated action facilitating or disturbing public security, even if it was to achieve a legitimate purpose, shall be liable to a term not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding BD200/-, or one of the foresaid charges.

-Article (227) punishment with imprisonment, for a period not exceeding ten years, for a person who starts a fire, with the intention of endangering people's lives or property (fixed or movable property), even if owned by him.

D. Incident Profile: the defendants were arrested during their participation in a peaceful protest that was organized by the relatives of the detainees in the previous cases, demanding the release of their sons. Although security authorities were notified prior to the protest, the riot police attacked the protesters with teargas and rubber bullets, which led to the escape of participants to the nearest building i.e. Dana Shopping Complex. The riot police chased the demonstrators into the shopping mall and indiscriminately arrested people with the use of force.

E. Stages of the proceedings: Following the Prosecution’s decisions to keep them in custody for investigation for a period of 45 days, the case was referred to the High Criminal Court and was adjourned four times due to unavailability of prosecution witnesses to attend court at the request of the defense. During the trial amnesty was issued to release all of the detainees.

F. Court Judgment: No verdict was issued due to the pardon and their release.

G. Names of Sponsored lawyers in the case:

1. Abdulla Shamlawi 2. Ahmed Jassem 3. Fatima Al-Hawaj 4. Issa Ebrahim

H- Release: The detainees were released on the 24th of September 2006, following the pardon in the cases of freedom and expression and prior to pronouncing the sentences against the detainees. This release took place after six and a half months of imprisonment.

4. The Case of the Detainees of Daih’s Peaceful march on April 2, 2006: A. Date of arrest: 2 / 4 / 2006. B. Number of detainees: 5 people C. The charges against detainees: Article (178) of the Bahraini Penal Code: Anyone who participates in a gathering, composed of at least five people and in a public place, with the purpose of committing crimes and premeditated action facilitating or disturbing public security, even if it was to achieve a legitimate purpose, shall be liable to a term not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding BD200/-, or one of the foresaid charges.

- Article (155 / 1) anyone who deliberately damages buildings or public property or property allocated for the public interests will be punished with imprisonment. - Article (179) if one or more of the gathered persons proceeded with the use of violence to achieve the gathering objective, all participants will be punished with imprisonment and/or a fine.

D. Incident Profile: The detainees were arrested from the main street following a peaceful march demanding the release of detainees in the cases of opinion and freedom. E. Stages of the proceedings: The defendants were detained by Public Prosecution for 45 days for investigation and then the case was referred to the Criminal Court and during the trial amnesty was issued to release all of the detainees in the cases of opinion and freedoms. F. Court Judgment: No verdict was issued due the pardon and their release. G. Names of Sponsored lawyers in the case:

1. Fatima Al-Hawaj 2. Issa Ebrahim 3. Radhy Khalil

H. Release: The detainees were released on the 26th of September, 2006 following the pardon in the issues of freedoms and expression; this was prior to their sentence and after five months and a half of imprisonment.

5. The Case of the Detainees of Bani Jamra’s Peaceful march: A. Date of arrest: 16 / 3 / 2006. B. Number of detainees: 2 people C. The charges against detainees: Article (178) of the Bahraini Penal Code: Anyone who participates in a gathering, composed of at least five people and in a public place, with the purpose of committing crimes and premeditated action facilitating or disturbing public security, even if it was to achieve a legitimate purpose, shall be liable to a term not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding BD200/-, or one of the foresaid charges.

- Article (155 / 1) anyone who deliberately damages buildings or public property or property allocated for the public interests will be punished with imprisonment.

- Article (179) if one or more of the gathered persons proceeded with the use of violence to achieve the gathering objective, all participants will be punished with imprisonment and/or a fine.

D. Incident Profile: The detainees were arrested after they received warrants from the police station on suspicion of their involvement in the demonstrations and acts of protest E. Stages of the proceedings: The defendants were detained by Public Prosecution for 30 days for investigation and then the case was referred to the Criminal Court F. Court Judgment: Found innocent of all charges G. Names of Sponsored lawyers in the case: 1. Issa Ebrahim 2. Ahmed Jaffar Al-Arayyedh

H. Release: They were released after being acquitted of the charges on the 5th of July 2006. This was after four months and five days of detaintion. 6. The Case of the Detainees of Daih’s Peaceful march April 4, 2006 : A. Date of arrest: 28 / 4 / 2006. B. Number of detainee: 1 Person C. The charges against detainees: Article (178) of the Bahraini Penal Code: Anyone who participates in a gathering, composed of at least five people and in a public place, with the purpose of committing crimes and premeditated action facilitating or disturbing public security, even if it was to achieve a legitimate purpose, shall be liable to a term not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding BD200/-, or one of the foresaid charges.

- Article (179) if one or more of the gathered persons proceeded with the use of violence to achieve the gathering objective, all participants will be punished with imprisonment and/or a fine.

D. Incident Profile: The detainee were arrested from his home on suspicion of participation in a peaceful demonstration. E. Stages of the proceedings: The detainee was held in custody for 2 months for investigation, he was then referred to the Lower Criminal Court. F. Court Judgment: He was found innocent from all charges. G. Names of Sponsored lawyers in the case: 1. Ahmed Jaffar Al-Arayyedh

7. The Case of a Detainee accused of providing a hide for a wanted: A. Date of arrest: 28 / 4 / 2006. B. Number of detainee: 1 Person C. The charges against detainees: Article (51/1) of the Bahraini Penal Code: Anyone who helps a sentenced person to escape will be punished. D. Incident Profile: The detainee was arrested by civic police while driving his car with his nephew by his side. His nephew wanted by the security authorities in the case of gathering at the airport (refer case no.1). E. Stages of the proceedings: He was arrested for two weeks for investigation by the Public Prosecutor. However, he was released prior to expiration of the custody due to his suffering of heart disease. He was then referred to the criminal court. F. Court Judgment: He was found innocent from all charges. G. Names of Sponsored lawyers in the case: 1. Hassan Al-Nahhash

8. The Case of a Detainee of Sanabis’s Peaceful march: A. Date of arrest: 4 / 12 / 2005. B. Number of detainee: 1 Person C. The charges against detainees: Article (178) of the Bahraini Penal Code: Anyone who participates in a gathering, composed of at least five people and in a public place, with the purpose of committing crimes and premeditated action facilitating or disturbing public security, even if it was to achieve a legitimate purpose, shall be liable to a term not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding BD200/-, or one of the foresaid charges.

- Article (179) if one or more of the gathered persons proceeded with the use of violence to achieve the gathering objective, all participants will be punished with imprisonment and/or a fine.

D. Incident Profile: The detainee was arrested as he was leaving a shopping mall. Protestors were demonstrating outside the mall. E. Stages of the proceedings: The detainee was detained for 90 days for investigation and he was then referred to the Lower Criminal Court. F. Court Judgment: The Lower Court sentenced him to a year imprisonment, and after the appeal, the Appeal Court affirmed the sentenced period. G. Names of Sponsored lawyers in the case: 1. Ahmed Jaffar Al-Arayyedh H. Release: The detainee was released on the 22nd of September, 2006 following the pardon in the cases of freedom and expression; this was prior to the expiration of his sentence by two days as the sentenced expiration date was the 24th of September 2006.

9. The Case of the Detainees accused of possessing a printed document: A. Date of arrest: 16 / 11 / 2006. B. Number of detainees: 2 people C. The charges against detainees: Article No. (161) of the Penal Code states; a penalty of imprisonment or a fine for the possession of a printed document that contains support for or the promoting of the overthrow or change of the political, social or economic regime. D. Incident Profile: The detainees were arrested while possessing some booklets written by a Bahraini Writer who presents his point of view on the parliamentary elections. E. Stages of the proceedings: The detainees were detained for 15 days before they were referred to Public Prosecution for trial. F. Court Judgment: One defendant was sentenced to one year imprisonment and the second to six months. The judgment was appealed but the next session was not decided due to special amnesty against the charges. G. Names of Sponsored lawyers in the case: 1. Mohamed Ahmed

H. Release: They were acquitted of the charges and then released on the 25th of February 2006. This was after the amnesty.

10. The Case of the Detainee of Sanabis’s Peaceful march: A. Date of arrest: 29 /12 / 2006. B. Number of detainee: 1 Person C. The charges against detainees: Article (178) of the Bahraini Penal Code: Anyone who participates in a gathering, composed of at least five people and in a public place, with the purpose of committing crimes and premeditated action facilitating or disturbing public security, even if it was to achieve a legitimate purpose, shall be liable to a term not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding BD200/-, or one of the foresaid charges.

- Article (179) if one or more of the gathered persons proceeded with the use of violence to achieve the gathering objective, all participants will be punished with imprisonment and/or a fine. D. Incident Profile: The detainee was arrested for participating in a peaceful demonstration demanding the release of political prisoners. E. Stages of the proceedings: The detainee was held in custody for 30 days by Public Prosecution. The case was referred to the Court who ordered his release on the basis of a guaranteed residence until sentence pronouncement. F. Court Judgment: The case is still under deliberation. G. Names of Sponsored lawyers in the case: 1. Issa Ebrahim Release: The detainee was released on the 22nd of February 2007 after the first hearing on the basis of a guaranteed residence. The case is still pending before the court.

9 Nov, 2007

BCHR JOINT ACTION: 52 organizations call on Bahrain government to stop clamping down on freedom of expression

JOINT ACTION - BAHRAIN

8 November 2007

Fifty tow national, regional and international organizations call on government of Bahrain to stop clamping down on freedom of expression SOURCE: Bahrain Center for Human Rights

We, the undersigned human rights organizations, express our deep concern about the recent serious deterioration of freedom of expression in Bahrain.

This includes violations of:

- the right to post information about public issues on Internet sites, - the right to print and distribute academic, documentary and artistic publications, - the right to watch films of public interest (documentary, drama, action, fiction, etc), - the right to express views, as journalists, writers, authors and bloggers, - the right for human rights defenders and activists to access media.

The Bahraini authorities have taken severe measures against activists to prevent them from reaching the public through media outlets, have blocked access to websites, have banned films, prohibited the printing of fictional and non-fictional books, and, above all, they have prosecuted writers and journalists for practicing their professions and expressing their beliefs.

Moreover, the Penal Decree Code of 1976 and the Press Decree Law of 2002 have both been used to nominally "legalize" the aforementioned violations.

We, the undersigned human rights organizations, call upon the Bahraini authorities to halt their attacks upon freedom of expression, to abolish abusive laws, and to respect their commitment to international charters and covenants, in particular Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

1. Alhorrya Centre for Political Rights and Democracy 2. Andalus Centre for Anti-Violence and Tolerance Studies 3. Arab Archives Institute, Jordan 4. The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (HR Info), Egypt 5. The Arab Organization for Civil Society and Human Rights 6. Article 19, United Kingdom 7. Bahrain Centre for Human Rights, Bahrain 8. Bahrain Journalists Association 9. Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS), Egypt 10. Cartoonists Rights Network, United States 11. Centre for Human Rights and Democratic Studies (CEHURDES), Nepal 12. Centro de Periodismo y Etica Publica (CEPET), Mexico 13. Centro para la Comunicación Social (CENCOS), Mexico 14. Civil Observatory for Human Rights 15. Defend International 16. Ecumenical Movement for Justice and Peace (EMJP) 17. The Egyptian Organization for Human Rights (EOHR), Egypt 18. The Egyptian Association Against Torture 19. The Egyptian Society for Democratic Development 20. The Egyptian Center for Human Rights 21. Foundation for Press Freedom (FLIP), Colombia 22. Free Media Movement (FMM), Sri Lanka 23. Freedom House, United States 24. Habi for Environmental Rights 25. Hisham Mubarak Centre 26. Ibn Khaldoun Centre for Development Studies 27. Independent Journalism Centre Moldova (IJC Moldova), Moldova 28. Index on Censorship, United Kingdom 29. Initiative for Freedom of Expression, Turkey 30. Institute for Reporter Freedom and Safety (IRFS), Azerbaijan 31. International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), Belgium 32. International Justice 33. Institute of Mass Information (IMI), Ukraine 34. Journalists Trade Union (JuHI), Azerbaijan 35. KARAPATAN, the Alliance for the Advancement of Peoples Rights 36. Land Centre for Human Rights 37. Maharat Foundation, Lebanon 38. Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA), Namibia 39. Network integration of Arab youth 40. Nadeem Centre for Psychiatric Rehabilitation for Victims of Violence 41. Pakistan Press Foundation (PPF), Pakistan 42. Reporters Without Borders (RSF), France 43. Women petition committee 44. World Press Freedom Committee (WPFC) 45. World Association of Community Radio Broadcasters (AMARC) 46. KARAPATAN, the Alliance for the Advancement of Peoples Rights. 47. Ecumenical Movement for Justice and Peace (EMJP) . 48. Network Integration of Arab Youth. 49. Defend International 50. World Association of Newspapers 51. Bahrain Youth Society of Human Rights 52. HAQ- Movement of Liberties and Democracy- Bahrain

For further information contact Nabeel Rajab, Vice-President, BCHR, Manama, Bahrain, Tel: +973 3963 3399 / 3940 0720, fax: +973 1779 5170, e-mail: nabeel.rajab@bahrainrights.org, info@bahrainrights.org, Internet: http://www.bahrainrights.org

30 Oct, 2007

CARAM / BCHR: State of health of Migrant 2007- Mandatory testing in Bahrain

State of health of Migrant 2007 Mandatory testing in Bahrain

Mandatory testing Research is made by CARAM network and its member organization The Bahrain Center for Human rights BSHR. It is a part of comprehensive regional report that covers countries of origins and destinations . It is an annual report that included Bahrain for the first time.

1- Migrant-Friendly Testing

A- Informed consent B- Pre-test and post-test counselling C- Confirmatory tests D- Confidentiality of test results E- Referral systems for treatment, care and support F- Financial and Geographical Accessibility G- Language H- Gender and Cultural Sensitivity I- Policy J- Health Education K- Accessibility

2- Bahrain country report

A- Pre-Departure testing B- Testing Procedures and Handling of Results C- Accessibility to treatment, care and support for migrants D- Impact of result E- Reintegration

3- Action to be taken

a- Actions for governments in origin and destination countries b- Actions for health testing facilities c- Action by the privet sector d- Actions for embassies e- Actions for NGOs and CBOs f- Actions for international partners

Migrant-Friendly Testing

Mandatory medical testing is now being used to restrict the movement of migrant workers in the name of public health. The very idea of required testing connotes and reinforces the judgment that migrant workers are carriers of disease and are vectors for the spread of infections like HIV. Under this paradigm, current mandatory medical testing practices are conducted without respect for the rights of migrant workers and are punitive by nature, since failing the tests leads to loss of the right to travel to or stay in a destination country and thus denies them the right to employment.

Although CARAM AND BCHR does not, in any way, support mandatory testing of migrant workers, the reality is that there is currently no political will to abolish testing requirements, which widely includes HIV. As such, CARAM AND BCHR proposes a more humane manner of conducting medical tests among migrant workers: a “migrant-friendly” medical testing that assures the protection of the rights of migrant workers and ensures that their health and well-being is safeguarded.

This framework for “migrant-friendly testing” is characterised as being based on the principles of non-discrimination; is responsive to the contexts of migrants; and is conducted in an enabling environment that provides migrants the ability to make choices that support their health and well-being. In addition and ideally, CARAM AND BCHR believes that, in line with UNAIDS guidelines, testing of migrants should be accompanied by full access to antiretroviral therapy for those who are found to be HIV positive.

The principle of non-discrimination stipulates that migrants are treated in the same way as the general public under prevailing laws and policies regarding HIV testing, and are treated as human beings with full exercise of their human rights no matter which country they are in. Under the context of medical testing, this principle can be manifested in the following conditions:

• Informed consent Full informed consent is obtained from the migrant worker being tested. This means that all information about the health test is communicated to migrants in a way that they understand, considering language and literacy before providing formal consent. Information includes: the process of testing, the risks and benefits of health testing, consequences and implications of the results, and the treatment services available. Other elements of informed consent include how the test results will be communicated and the opportunity for the migrant to ask questions.

• Pre-test and post-test counselling In the conduct of HIV testing, proper pre-test and post-test counselling is provided in a way that migrants understand, taking into consideration their language and literacy level. Pre-test counselling includes basic information regarding HIV transmission, prevention, and the specific vulnerability of migrant workers; the process of testing, and the meaning of HIV test results.

Post-test counselling is provided individually to all migrant workers, regardless of their HIV test result, or at least to all HIV positive results. Post-test counselling for migrant workers with HIV positive test results is aimed at encouraging positive, healthy lifestyles, and providing information on available support services and treatment options. For migrant workers with negative HIV test results, counselling is directed at promoting safer lifestyles to prevent HIV infection, and can be given in a group setting if necessary.

• Confirmatory tests Government Health Institutions, in the form of centralised reference laboratories, have a mechanism for ensuring verification of all test results that render migrant workers unfit to work. Confirmation of test results is free of charge.

• Confidentiality of test results Full details of test results are given directly and only to the migrant worker on an individual basis, especially for an “unfit” result. An option of having a translator during disclosure of results is available with the assurance that confidentiality is observed by all involved. In the current reality where third parties are also provided with such results, these parties are not provided details on the condition found, but only the determination of whether the individual is fit, temporarily unfit or unfit.

• Referral systems for treatment, care and support Health testing is only ethically acceptable in a context where treatment, care and support are available in all stages of migration. Proper referral systems need to be in place at all testing centres to provide migrants with access to treatment, care and support. This requires facilitating contact with service providers and follow-up efforts to ensure migrant workers’ welfare.

Making medical testing responsive to the contexts of migrant workers means that there is acknowledgement of the unique situations migrants face, and that assistance is provided to counteract their vulnerable social position, which is most pronounced when they travel outside their home countries for work. This means fulfilling the following:

• Financial and Geographical Accessibility The location of testing centres in both origin and destination countries is decentralised to allow easier access for migrant workers whose residence or place of work are in geographically remote areas. This minimises transportation and other related costs that migrant workers would otherwise incur if testing centres are all located in the capital.

Testing fees, like all information pertaining to the medical testing process, are presented in a transparent manner to avoid unscrupulous practices by medical testing personnel. This implies a sound monitoring system and an accessible mechanism for redress by relevant regulatory bodies.

In cases where a migrant worker is found “unfit” to work, especially in the destination countries, repatriation costs are provided by employers or sponsors. Upon return to their home countries, repatriated migrant workers receive support or assistance from the Government to ease their reintegration.

• Language Stakeholders involved in the mandatory medical tests are required to explain the process of medical testing to migrant workers in a way that they can understand, considering language and literacy levels. This language requirement is also observed in the provision of counselling services, delivery or disclosure of results and in referring migrant workers to service providers. Although this is particularly important in destination countries where migrant workers may not speak the language of the nationals, the situation in origin countries may also require sensitivity to the language used by migrant workers in relation to ethnicity and terminology. If specific language capacity is not available among the staff of a testing centre, services of skilled independent translators are utilised.

• Gender and Cultural Sensitivity Medical testing centres observe proper gender matching by employing the services of female doctors to conduct examinations for female migrant workers, and male doctors for male migrant workers. In situations where there is a lack of female doctors, other female health personnel – midwives, nurses or others – are present during the course of the examination of female migrant workers.

There is a need to review the requirement of a physical examination that requires migrant workers to fully undress. If this is deemed necessary for medical purposes, then it is conducted with full explanation of every step of the examination process.

Sensitive examination procedures, including those involving the prostate, breast, pelvic or rectal areas, are fully explained to the migrant workers prior to the onset of the whole medical testing process. Such examinations are conducted with respect to privacy and cultural sensitivity.

Medical testing facilities respond to the needs of male and female migrant workers by having separate and sanitary restrooms or toilets, and separate cubicles for physical examinations and the like.

The ultimate goal of creating an enabling environment for migrants to access migrant-friendly testing is to ensure that migrants are able to make informed decisions in all matters pertaining to their health and well-being. As such, there is a need to formulate principles and strategies across the range of issues relating to medical testing for migrants. The following points need to be taken into account.

• Policy Medical testing for migrant workers is conducted in a manner that respects and protects their right to health, particularly, the right to information, privacy, bodily integrity and access to health care services. This can be realised if appropriate and sound policies are in place and are properly implemented in both sending and receiving countries. Such policies need to reflect the provisions enshrined in international conventions that promote and protect migrants’ rights, such as the Migrant Workers Convention. Furthermore, strict and regular monitoring of the implementation of these policies needs to be set up by Governments, with participation from civil society and migrants’ communities.

• Health Education Health education is institutionalised and implemented to improve the health-seeking behaviour of people and to enhance their awareness of their rights as individuals, as migrants and as patients. This way, migrants will be able to proactively seek health-related information and services.

• Accessibility Government-accredited medical testing facilities are accessible to migrants, geographically and financially, and without monopoly. Migrant workers are able to choose the most convenient testing facility s/he can access, without prejudice to quality medical testing facilities and procedures.

Medical testing should not be used simply as a screening mechanism to decide who can work and who cannot. Medical testing is foremost a process to prevent the occurrence of illness; and it is a gateway to access healthcare services, specifically treatment and care. More than a screening process, medical testing should be aimed at benefiting the health and well-being of migrant workers because they have a right to be healthy and they have a right to work productively.

BAHRAIN Report

Bahrain is a major destination country for migrant workers. The country is currently experiencing a construction boom and is promoting its tourism industry, both of which are fuelling the trend of migration to Bahrain for work in the construction and service industries. Another significant form of employment for migrant workers is as domestic workers: this is specifically for females.

Bahrain’s total population of 707,160 includes 268, 951 expatriates (38%) who account for over 50% of the country’s workforce. A major proportion of the migrant worker population comes from India, but there are also significant numbers coming from Bangladesh, Philippines, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nepal, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, Thailand, Sri Lanka and a number of countries in Eastern Europe. Workers from these countries mainly provide the workforce for 3-D jobs (work that is regarded as dirty, dangerous and demanding), or work in the entertainment sector. Bahrain also receives a smaller number of expatriate workers from the United States, Australia, South Africa and Western Europe, who tend to be employed in well-paid jobs with private companies or in the education sector. This research, however, focuses on migrants employed in the construction sector, as semi-skilled or skilled manual labourers, or as domestic helpers. These are the most vulnerable sectors where migrants find work.

Bahrain, as one of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) member countries, follows the mandatory health testing of migrant workers in line with the rules and regulations of the Gulf Approved Medical Centres Association (GAMCA). Upon arrival, all construction workers and manual labourers are referred to the government’s centralised health facility for migrant workers, Al Razi Health Centre, which is a GAMCA centre. According to the centre’s own records, a total of 87,000 migrant workers were tested in 2006, meaning an average of 350 workers are tested per weekday.

Mandatory health testing for domestic workers is undertaken in a decentralised fashion; tests can be done at local health centres in the area where their employer lives. These health centres are accredited, licensed and operated by the Bahrain Ministry of Health. While the majority of foreign workers are documented, it is widely accepted that there are quite a few ‘floating’ migrants working in Bahrain. These are workers without the required documents, which includes being without a positive health test result. According to NGO workers and health professionals, these undocumented workers have evaded or escaped the testing process out of fear of the consequences of being declared unfit.

PRE-DEPARTURE TESTING

Bahrain does not require migrant workers to undergo pre-departure health testing in their country of origin unless they are from certain Sub-Saharan African countries. While some recruitment agencies and sending countries’ officials recommend and in some cases require it, in our research findings, there was little evidence of a standardised process of pre-departure testing for migrant workers. Some had undergone testing in their home countries and others had not. For example, most Filipinos interviewed stated they had been tested in the Philippines, all Bangladeshis interviewed stated they had not been tested in Bangladesh, and some Indians interviewed stated they had been tested before leaving India, while others had not.

For a number of respondents, pre-departure testing appeared to give a sense of security or legitimacy, but for other workers the fear of being prevented from temporarily migrating for employment made them avoid health testing in their home country or trying to manipulate the results. “They didn’t tell us anything, they gave us eye-test, x-ray and general check up. Because I had done the medical before [I left India] I had no worries.” (Male Indian garage worker)

“If you’re working in this kind of business then you have to be careful. Because we cannot go out of our country if we don’t have all this physical check up already. If you are a legitimate contract worker you have to pass all the tests before you go to Bahrain… But before you go to Bahrain, if you fail there you cannot come here. So you don’t have to worry about it… We are physically fit because we are legitimate – if you are not legitimate then that’s the worry.” (Female Filipina waitress)

“You know, they are supposed to undergo a medical in their own country. In many countries this either does not happen, or workers slip through other channels and avoid it, or are able to manipulate their results [by paying etc]. They probably travel with disease.” (Migrants’ support NGO worker)

To ensure monitoring of testing policies and procedures, GAMCA mandates that testing centres in sending countries undergo annual inspection by the GCC Executive Board Technical Committee for Gulf Countries, to ensure that they follow standards set by the GCC Health Ministries Executive Committee. Additional inspections are carried out if a complaint is filed about a particular centre, or if a high number of workers found unfit in a receiving country are being passed by a centre in a sending country.

“The Gulf Technical committee carries out annual inspections of health centres in sending countries. The centres are inspected to see if they meet standards set by the GCC Health Ministries executive committee. Additional checks are carried out if there are complaints regarding a particular centre, if a consistent number of unfit workers are given fit certificates from a particular centre. These centres will have penalties if they don’t meet the standards.” (GAMCA Official)

ON-SITE Testing Procedures and Handling of Results Following government laws, migrant workers are required to undergo mandatory medical testing only once per employment contract while in Bahrain. This is usually done on arrival. However, if they change employer or sponsor, the worker needs to do the test again . Barbers and those working in the food and beverage sector, in hotels or restaurants, need to test every year.

GAMCA testing guidelines prescribe a series of tests in sending countries, but in Bahrain itself, only a selective number of tests are conducted. All migrant workers in Bahrain are given chest x-rays and examined for pulmonary tuberculosis, but individual tests, including for HIV, vary according to the profession of the migrant worker. Female migrant workers are required to take a pregnancy test. As part of meeting GAMCA requirements, testing centres are obliged to have all equipment necessary to undertake the prescribed tests, meet international standards of quality control, and laboratories must have quality control certification by GAMCA.

GAMCA has established a monitoring process for the inspection of new centres and the evaluation of existing ones. Through this, new licenses can be recommended and old licenses can be renewed or revoked. Penalties including warnings, fines and/or temporary license suspension. An internal Ministry of Health committee monitors both the public and private health centres that provide mandatory health testing services to migrant workers. The private centres must be certified and endorsed by the Ministry of Health, via the Al Razi centre.

A Bahrain Ministry of Health official explained: “We test mainly with a clinical examination: blood pressure, vision, screening for any diseases. Some occupations are given blood test to check for HIV, hepatitis B and C and syphilis. All expatriates are given chest x-rays and checked for pulmonary tuberculosis. Process: go from X-ray station to blood pressure and vision station to physician. Sequence: X-ray, nurses’ station for blood pressure and vision, physician for general check up.”

However, almost none of the workers interviewed were aware of which health conditions or diseases were tested. Most could only state that they underwent a physical check, an X-ray and had a blood sample taken. When asked if they were told what they were tested for, the most common answer is a straight “No,” and most reported having no idea at all about the tests.

“No, we didn't talk about the tests.” (Male Bangladeshi construction worker) “They take the blood, the urine.” (Female Filipina domestic workers)

The research findings indicate that language diversity among health centre staff is low. GAMCA guidelines do not require staff to be able to speak migrants’ languages, although both health professionals and migrant workers mentioned this as an area for potential improvement in the mandatory health testing system. According to a doctor from a private testing centre frequently used by migrant workers, language barriers contribute to the lack of information provided to workers by medical personnel at testing centres.

“Because sometimes I feel there is a gap during the conversation, with the language problem, [this is] a very big problem. So maybe they cannot explain what happened and what to do next.”

With regards to gender and cultural sensitivity, all respondents indicated satisfaction with the process and treatment by staff. All stated that they were segregated according to gender while being tested, and that doctors were gender matched. All respondents indicated that they felt comfortable and satisfied with this arrangement.

Al Razi Centre, the main public health testing centre for migrant workers, appears to have the necessary medical and technical facilities, but it is not very well lit, there is little sign of ventilation, and conditions do not appear to be as hygienic as might be expected, especially in regard to the toilets. Accordingly, the migrant workers interviewed gave an overall rating of cleanliness at the centre as ‘medium.’

Through observation, it was noted that the clinic had a small number of posters displayed on general health issues, such as hygiene, smoking and diabetes. There were also a small number of posters and cartoons in English, Arabic and Hindi script, but none of the materials referred to the mandatory testing procedure. General comments from migrant workers indicated satisfaction with the standard of care and the conditions of the centre overall. Although there seems to be sufficient seating in the waiting room, the main complaint made by migrants was in regards to the crowded conditions.

Physical accessibility to testing centres was not mentioned as a problem by any of the respondents. Al Razi is on a main road in Bahrain’s capital city and close to a central bus station. All domestic workers interviewed said that they were taken to a health centre by their sponsor. According to a doctor working in a private health centre, the decentralisation of testing centres also has improved accessibility for workers.

The average testing time does not appear to exceed an hour, although waiting times can be much longer, resulting in a worker losing the day’s earnings. Responses to questions on the financial arrangements at testing centres varied. Some workers lost their wages because of time spent being tested, some said they had paid for the test themselves, while others said their employer bore all the costs of the test, including transportation.

“The medical took maybe half an hour - sponsor paid.” (Male Pakistani garage worker) “For the X-ray, it was one day... and then it was two days for the other tests. The company cut one day salary because I went back again for two days.” (Male Bangladeshi construction worker)

GAMCA guidelines indicate that migrant workers should indicate their consent by signing an English/Arabic form on their medical report. However, this form cannot be understood or filled out by migrant workers who are illiterate. Moreover, many workers stated that no consent or signature was taken from them at the time of testing, and several interviewees indicated that it was their sponsor who had signed the consent form for their test. The findings confirmed that there is an inconsistency between the prescribed practices and the actual experience of migrants undergoing testing in these centres. Although, as one respondent indicated, logically no ‘consent’ is actually necessary since the tests are mandatory.

“A form must be filled out by the applicant and signed by the sponsor, presented to reception and fees paid.” (Ministry of Health official)

“No [consent is take], all tests are mandatory. They [staff] tell us we’ll take ‘x-rays, blood pressure, urine test, go to the doctor.” (Male Indian office workers)

“No… there was nothing like that [consent].” (Male Bangladeshi construction worker)

None of the workers, health professionals or government officials spoke of pre-test or post-test counselling. Each time migrant workers were asked about this, the response was negative. From our overall findings, no counselling or information specific to the workers’ situation as migrant workers undergoing mandatory testing is provided. Based on government officials’ and health professionals’ responses, counselling does not appear to be part of any testing practice or policy. As with the issue of informed consent, no workers seemed to expect any counselling services either, as confirmed by male Bangladeshi and Indian garage workers:

“No, nothing like this, they just gave us the test.”

Our findings also clearly indicate that there is very little concept that migrant workers own their personal medical information or have a right to privacy. This extends from the process of pre-employment mandatory testing to policies and practices regarding workers found to be living with HIV. For example, issues of confidentiality and privacy are breached at various stages of the mandatory testing process. This might be during the actual testing proceedings or resulting from the handling and disclosure of results. Test results and related data are jointly owned by the testing centre and the Economic Development Board (EDB), which is initiating a programme to computerise the pre-employment health testing process. All GAMCA centres also share medical information on workers tested at GAMCA centres through a shared database of information. This sharing of medical information is mandated by the state, as confirmed by a National Aids Committee official:

“By law, if any persons are found to have a communicable disease then the Public Health Department (Ministry of Health) must be informed.”

On a more personal level, it was observed that workers, particularly female domestic workers, were seen waiting with, or were taken for testing by, a local. This is assumed to be their sponsor or some other authority figure. While the practice of sending workers accompanied by an individual who is presumably more knowledgeable about the procedure can possibly assist with language and can be comforting and useful to the workers, it can also potentially compromise privacy in testing and handling test results. A number of workers interviewed reported that their results were given directly to them in an open fashion, or collected by their sponsors.

“They give [results] to the sponsor.” (Female Filipina domestic workers)

“They put the papers on a table (indicates with hands ‘spread out’). It was open, not in an envelope. The men had to find their picture and take their result.” (Male Indian garage worker)

Accessibility to treatment, care and support for migrants Confirmatory tests are only undertaken if workers test positive for HIV. Information on workers who test positive for HIV is passed from testing centres to a number of additional institutions. Bahrain’s policy requires that all HIV positive cases detected by health centres must be reported to the Ministry of Health Public Health Department. This is done by filling out a specially created form for reporting HIV positive cases. The Ministry of Health then informs the National Aids Committee, who arranges for a confirmatory test. If the worker tests positive for HIV a second time, the National Aids Committee then arranges the migrant worker’s deportation with the sponsor and the General Directorate of Nationality, Passports and Residence (Immigration).

Test results are available within 7 days of taking the test or, for a higher cost, within one day. There does not appear to be any consultation during the disclosure of results, and most migrant workers stated that they collected the results themselves. This was not the case for domestic workers: all domestic workers interviewed reported that their results were sent to or collected by their sponsor. This is also confirmed by the Doctor in a private testing centre:

“If the result is ok… they will come to the office and take the report. And if it is not ok, they will say ‘call your sponsor’ or ‘give this letter to your sponsor’.”

Supposedly, in the case of a treatable illness, workers will be referred to another health centre or hospital. However, among those migrants interviewed, only two people indicated that they were informed about referral for treatment.

There are three categories under which a migrant is declared as unfit. Workers who test positive for a communicable disease, such as HIV, hepatitis B, malaria, leprosy, tuberculosis or an STI are declared unfit. Those who are found to have chronic conditions such as chronic renal failure, chronic hepatic failure, congestive heart failure, uncontrolled hypertension, uncontrolled diabetes mellitus, cancer, psychiatric or neurological disorders and physical disabilities (including colour blindness, deafness) are considered unfit. And pregnancy among female migrant workers is also grounds for being declared unfit.

Migrants found to have active TB are provided with two weeks’ treatment before being deported. Other than that, there was no evidence of a referral system for workers that are declared unfit. While migrants found to be HIV positive are reportedly advised to seek treatment in their country of origin, there was no indication of referral for treatment either through GAMCA centres or otherwise, and very basic HIV counselling is reportedly provided prior to their deportation. Moreover, antiretroviral treatment (ART) for HIV-infected persons is only available to Bahrainis. A joint campaign by the Ministry of Health and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has been launched to raise awareness on HIV as a means of preventing its spread, but it is unclear whether migrant worker communities are targeted and how such activities will reach them.

Treatment for non-communicable and relatively minor illnesses discovered during the mandatory testing is available to migrant workers, although they may have to bear the costs themselves. It was found that very few of the migrants interviewed had medical insurance. Access to health centres poses a problem for workers living in labour camps due to their location. Also, site foremen or middle managers often deter workers from seeking medical help for work-related injuries to avoid incurring costs to the company. Moreover, there are no NGOs or organisations specifically providing health care, support or information to migrant workers. Although some sending countries’ embassies hold regular medical camps, some workers may be reluctant to turn to their embassies out of fear of dealing with the authorities and the consequences of being found unfit.

Impact of results A fit result allows a migrant worker to gain or retain employment in Bahrain, even though this status is dependent upon them maintaining their health. Workers who are declared unfit, on the other hand, face the serious consequence of deportation. Although this is the current policy, not everyone agrees with it, as indicated by this National Aids Committee official:

“Once detected, either through pre-employment [test], check up, or blood transfusion, we have to test again for confirmation. If test results are positive for HIV a second time, the person will be deported. It is my dream that if he is able to work, then he should be able to. He has a right to work if he is able to work.”

Unfortunately, one of the strategies to deal with an unfit status or potentially negative results is to become a runaway or illegal worker. These people notoriously end up in jobs with the worst conditions, including salary, working hours and physical conditions. Fear of deportation because of health problems also prevents workers who may have communicable illnesses from seeking treatment, which may be inadvertently leading to the spread of these diseases. The doctor in a private health centre said:

“I mean once he will come to know he is unfit the authority will ask him to call his sponsor, then he feels that there is something wrong…. They just give the papers [and are told] ‘ok go.’ So those who are living (here) for a long time they know, ok, maybe you are unfit, don’t go back to your sponsor - run away.”

When asked about the impact of negative test results, respondents described financial ruin, emotional distress, familial suffering and stigmatisation within their community as results of being declared unfit and deported.

“You think so much about your money, you spent the money and then nothing. You’re going back. It’s for nothing, you don’t have money.”

And again,

“Some people put the land for [sale] because they want money to go to Bahrain or whatever, and then they go back and they don’t have their land. No house, nothing. That is true.” (Female Filipina domestic workers)

“Uh, I have seen some people, those who wanted to commit suicide. What else [can I] say? How will he face his family, how will he return the money, what will he do now? And maybe all his family, he’s scared [of] his family. We don’t know what is going on there. But this man who came here by this amount of money and [is] unfit here, he is, I mean he is a dead person in his country, I can say this, I saw so many people like this.” (Doctor, private health centre)

REINTEGRATION Official parties in Bahrain appear to bear no responsibility for the impact of an unfit result on workers once they have been deported. There is no referral to health care or support providers in the workers’ home countries through the GAMCA network or otherwise, although there are reports of community groups involved in aiding workers through legal assistance to ensure proper compensation or by providing financial assistance on their return. The only concern of the Bahrain Government seems to be to secure its position, and any attempt by the unfit migrant to return through official channels will be thwarted by the GAMCA shared database. A GAMCA Official explained:

“A number of GAMCA centres are linked electronically to the main office in Riyadh (share a database). Bahrain’s Ministry of Health is moving towards an electronic system for processing migrant workers’ files as part of a labour market reform programme.”

Action to be taken

Actions for governments in origin and destination countries

• All origin and destination countries, especially destination countries, should ratify the UN Migrant Workers Convention.

• Governments of origin countries need to unite in order to affect changes in the policies and practices of labour recruitment that will benefit and protect migrant workers’ rights and health.

• Governments of origin countries should fulfil their inherent responsibility to protect their nationals, rather than consider these people as economic units, by negotiating for the rights of their migrant workers with destination countries.

• Destination countries need to discard HIV status as an exclusionary condition, and cease and desist in the practice of forcibly deporting HIV positive migrants to prevent the further stigmatisation and marginalisation of migrant workers living with HIV.

• Bilateral agreements and MoUs between origin and destination countries should specifically address the health rights of migrant workers, including migrant workers’ rights with regards to health testing, access to treatment and inclusion under insurance policies. It is urged that bilateral agreements and MoUs specifically define the elements of migrant-friendly health testing in the content of these agreements

• Institute specific laws and policies that are in accordance with the principles of migrant-friendly testing and that explicitly mandate the inclusion of informed consent, confidentiality of testing and test results, pre-test and post-test counselling and a proper referral system as components of health testing for migrants.

• Institute an independent monitoring system that establishes standards and regularly monitors both government and private facilities in their implementation of informed consent, pre-test and post-test counselling, gender and cultural sensitive health staff, confidentiality of test results and a functioning referral system for all migrant workers.

• Decentralise high-quality health testing centres or develop support packages in order to reduce the additional costs that migrant workers pay for transportation and accommodation when seeking health testing for employment abroad, and provide compensation for lost wages for time spent testing in destination countries.

Actions for health testing facilities:

• Strictly enforce confidentiality of test results by not giving out any details on the exact results of the health tests to third parties such as recruitment agencies, employers and others.

• Adhere strictly to the practice of informed consent where a person learns the key facts about the health test, including its risks and benefits, its consequences and implications before deciding whether or not to participate.

• Integrate pre-test and post-test counselling that includes information regarding HIV transmission, prevention of HIV and the meaning of the HIV test results, as well as prevention-counselling by jointly identifying a client’s unique circumstances, vulnerabilities and risks when migrant workers have to undergo a HIV test.

• Ensure that pre-test and post-test counselling for migrant workers is provided in a language the migrant worker can understand, and in a cultural and gender-sensitive manner.

• Conduct post-test counselling individually regardless of the test result, or as a standard minimum for HIV positive results, in a way that does not stigmatise the individual.

• Provide independent translation services when needed or requested by migrant workers.

• Be provided with the necessary information (for example, a list of addresses) for referral to treatment, care and support services.

• Ensure that health staff are continuously trained on gender and cultural sensitivity.

• Ensure that both male and female doctors are available and that migrant workers are presented with a choice of either a male or female doctor.

• Make available separate restrooms and separate cubicles for physical examinations.

• Abolish all unnecessary health testing and related practices that are not required standards, such as providing women with Depro-Vera injections or full-naked body-checks.

• Conduct confirmatory tests free of charge, with a new blood sample by an independent hospital.

Actions for the private sector:

• GAMCA’s well-established monitoring system on the technical quality aspects of health testing both in origin and destination countries should be broadened by an equally strict monitoring of the principles of informed consent, pre-test and post-test counselling, the confidentiality of test results, and a proper functioning referral system.

• Recruitment agencies need to provide a full list of the costs involved when a migrant worker applies for work abroad. These should be fully transparent and consistent. The costs for health testing need to be specified and standardised, along with stipulations of costs potentially forfeited or borne by the migrant in the case of an “unfit” result.

Actions for embassies:

• Assistance should be provided for migrant workers who get repatriated due to health conditions, including direct referral to health facilities and treatment in the country of origin.

• Embassy staff should be versed in the related migration policies of the destination country and should receive sensitivity training on issues of health, especially regarding STIs, HIV and AIDS. In this way, they will be able to assist their countrymen and women with proper health referral and can assist in dignified repatriation.

Actions for NGOs and CBOs:

• Work on sensitising third parties such as employers and recruitment agencies about migrant-friendly testing, and advocate appropriately for changes in current testing standards.

• Challenge stigma and discrimination (including in the media) against migrant workers and advocate for the protection, respect and fulfilment of their health rights with regards to health testing through policy and legal reform.

• Support associations or informal groups of migrant workers and assist them with integrating HIV awareness and related policies into their work.

• Establish culturally and linguistically appropriate HIV outreach programmes targeting both documented and documented migrant workers that can also assist with referral to related health services.

Actions for international partners:

 Implement the framework for migrant-friendly testing, which needs to be firmly rooted in bilateral, regional and multilateral mechanisms, in terms of both formal and informal cooperation.

 Ensure meaningful participation of migrant workers in international forums on health testing and HIV issues.

 Stimulate both quantitative and qualitative research on health testing and its effects on the well-being of migrant workers.

 Increase and maintain awareness on issues of migration and HIV, and promote the rights of migrants through formal campaigns, multilateral conferences that bring migrants and policy makers together, and by stimulating donors to support related activities.

29 Oct, 2007

BCHR ALERT: Journalist and editor fined in defamation case

30 October 2007

SOURCE: Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR), Manama

(BCHR/IFEX) - On 28 October 2007, the Supreme Criminal Court of Appeals convicted journalist Hesham Al-Zayani and the editor-in-chief of "Akhbar Al-Khaleej" newspaper of smear and defamation against the President of Arabian University, Dr. Rafia Ghabbash. They were fined a liability of BD 1000 (approx. US$2,650) in addition to court fees. The initial conviction was made on the basis of article no. 15 of the 1976 Penal Code and no. 47 of the 2002 Press Code.

On the same day, the High Criminal Court postponed the case against journalist and writer Jaffar Al-jamry of "Al-wasat" newspaper until December 2007. Mr Al-jamry was accused of smear and contempt by a female official of the Ministry of Health.

As per a statement by the president of the Bahrain Journalists Association (BJA) in a TV broadcast on 22 October, the number of cases brought against journalists has reached 25. Statistics from BJA show that in 2006, the total number of cases brought against journalists was 27, of which only 7 (26%) were adopted by the Public Prosecution (PP). In 2007, and as per the same source, the total number of cases against journalists is 32 of which 12 (38%) have been moved by the PP, which shows the dramatic deterioration of freedom of expression in general and journalism in particular. BJA, acting as mediator, was successful in amicably convincing many individuals, mostly government officials, to drop their cases. This role played by the BJA, however, has not reduced the number of cases brought against journalists.

The charges in the cases formed against journalists were based on both Press Decree Code no. 47 of 2002 and Penal Decree Code no. 15 of 1976, which have been condemned and criticized, locally and internationally.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Send appeals to the Bahraini Authorities: - urging them to stop the deterioration of freedom of expression and journalism by amending Press Decree Code no. 47 to ensure conformity with international human rights standards - asking that they abolish the Penal Code and cease using it to prosecute journalists and writers, or amend it to ensure conformity with international charters and covenants

APPEALS TO:

His Highness Sheikh Hamad Bin Isa Al-khalifa King of Bahrain Riffa, Bahrain Fax: +973 1721 1363

His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman Al-Khalifa Cabinet Prime Minister Manama, Bahrain Fax: +973 1721 1363

Please copy appeals to the source if possible.

For further information contact Nabeel Rajab, Vice-President, BCHR, Manama, Bahrain, tel: +973 3963 3399 / 3940 0720, fax: +973 1779 5170, e-mail: nabeel.rajab@bahrainrights.org, info@bahrainrights.org, Internet: http://www.bahrainrights.org

24 Oct, 2007

IFEX / BCHR Alert: Three writers for banned Internet site convicted of criminal defamation, fined

ALERT - BAHRAIN

23 October 2007

Three writers for banned Internet site convicted of criminal defamation, fined

SOURCE: Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR), Manama

(BCHR/IFEX) - On 21 October 2007, the Higher Criminal Court convicted three Bahraini writers of insult and defamation, fined them 200 Bahraini Dinars (approx. US$530) and charged them 51 BD (approx. US$135) in damages, in addition to court fees.

The writers were convicted of defaming the director of Dar Al-Manar Elderly Care Centre and her husband, in an article published in the electronic journal "Al-Saheefa" ( http://www.alsaheefa.net ). The three writers are Mr Saleh Al-Amm, a journalist, writer and the editor of the journal; Muath Al-Meshari, a columnist for "Al-wasat" newspaper; and Fareed Al-Shayeb, a writer for "Al-Saheefa".

"Al-Saheefa" is one of the electronic sites banned within Bahrain by the local authorities.

The case began earlier in 2007, when the public prosecution detained and interrogated Al-Amm, later releasing him on bail of 500 BD (approx. US$1330) after charging him with insult and defamation over content on the website. The Lower Criminal Court sentenced Al-Amm to three months' imprisonment or a fine of 300 BD (approx. US$795). In addition, Al-Meshari and Al-Shayeb were fined 200 BD for writing several articles on the website related to the management of Dar Al-Manar, in which they alleged administrative and financial corruption.

The three defendants appealed this first conviction in March. However, the Appeal Court ruled non-jurisdiction and transferred the case to the High Criminal Court, which declared its ruling on 21 October, charging the three writers with defamation, as outlined by Article 365 of the Bahraini Penal Code, Article 15, of 1976.

It is to be noted this Penal Code article and the Press Code number 47 of 2002 have been used, in recent months, to interrogate and prosecute more than 14 journalists as well as bloggers and website administrators.

The BCHR expresses its concern over the systematic attack on all forms of free expression in Bahrain, through the use of notorious laws, promulgated to curtail that freedom.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Send appeals to the Bahraini authorities: - asking that they stop harassing journalist and writers - requesting that they lift the bans on all electronic sites dealing with public, cultural and human rights affairs relevant to Bahrain - urging them to nullify those laws that infringe upon free expression, to ensure conformity with international human rights standards

APPEALS TO:

His Highness Sheikh Hamad Bin Isa Al-khalifa, King of Bahrain Riffa, Bahrain Fax: +973 1721 1363

His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman Al-Khalifa Cabinet Prime Minister Manama, Bahrain Fax: +973 1721 1363

Please copy appeals to the source if possible.

For further information contact Nabeel Rajab, Vice-President, BCHR, Manama, Bahrain, tel: +973 3963 3399 / 3940 0720, fax: +973 1779 5170, e-mail: nabeel.rajab@bahrainrights.org, info@bahrainrights.org, Internet: http://www.bahrainrights.org

The information contained in this alert is the sole responsibility of BCHR. In citing this material for broadcast or publication, please credit BCHR.

22 Oct, 2007

BCHR/IFEX Flash - Bahraini Authorities Ban an Academic Publication

Bahraini Authorities Ban an Academic Publication

Country/Topic: Bahrain Date: 20 October 2007 Source: Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR) Person(s): Nabeel Rajab Target(s):Authors, Historians, Artists, Academicians, Researchers Type(s) of violation(s): Ban, censorship, forbidden, Urgency: Flash

(BCHR/IFEX) - The following is a statement from BCHR, a member of IFEX:

In a statement published today info@bahrainrights.org, the Bahrain Journalists Association (BJA) disclosed the news about none endorsement of a book manuscripted by the academician Dr Nader Kathem titled: 'Memory Exploitations: In a Pluralistic Society , Saddled with History'. It is a collection of academic series published by the author in the local press, during the past period.

Dr Kathem's book falls in the context of the development of multiculturalism in Bahrain and discusses the historical and cultural constraints which prevented the establishment of cultural pluralism in Bahrain and the completion of coexistence and harmony between its communities .

After the legal period of three months of submitting a publication request, which was on 19 July 2007, Dr Kathem has not received a response or the authorization from the Publication Directorate of the Ministry of Information (MI) to allow for printing his series in the form of a book.

The vice president of the BJA. Mr Adel Marzouk stated that 'procrastination of the Ministry of Information represented by the Department of Printing and Publishing in issuing an authorization of printing Dr Kathem's book is a mislead compass to genuine monitoring and an indication to a retreat from political reform, respect of freedom of speech and creativity'

It is to be noted that Dr Kathem book will be the second publication to be held within one year, after the novel 'Omar bin Al-Khattab, A Martyr' by the well known writer Abdullah Khalifa, which was passed to the Ministry of Information over seven months ago. For an earlier novel by Mr Khalifa, 'Husain's Head', the official response by the MI is to forbid and ban its publication in Bahrain.

The Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR) expresses its concerns over the persistent censorship of all forms of freedom of expression in Bahrain. It also seeks the intervention of the new minister to play a active role in changing the policies by which the Bahraini MI is run, considering the world openness and the knowledge transfer across, overcoming all technological and physical borders.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Send appeals to the Bahraini Authorities asking for their respect to freedom of expression by academicians, researchers, novelists and journalists. This require:

- lifting ban on publications in general and in particular, academic researches, novels and artistic products.

- showing respect to academic researchers, artists, writers and novelists who take the burden to produce creative products to humanity.

-taking measure to amend Press and Publication Decree code no 47 of 2002 to ensure its compliance with the international declarations and covenants as well as vows of its leadership to respect freedom of expression .

TAKE ACTION TO:

- His Hightness Shaikh Hamad Bin Isa Al-Khalifa- King of Bahrain

Riffa -Bahrain

- His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman Al-Khalifa Cabinet Prime Minister Fax: +97 3 1 721 1363

Please copy appeals to the source if possible.

MORE INFORMATION:

For further information contact Nabeel Rajab, Vice-President, BCHR, Manama, Bahrain, tel: +973 3963 3399 / 3940 0720, fax: +973 1779 5170, e-mail: nabeel.rajab@bahrainrights.org , info@bahrainrights.org , Internet: http://www.bahrainrights.org

info@bahrainrights.org http://www.alayam.com/ArticleDetail.asp?CategoryId=2&ArticleId=285250

20 Oct, 2007

BCHR/ FEX : The Hollywood film "The Kingdom" has been banned in Bahrain

ALERT - BAHRAIN

19 October 2007

Film banned

SOURCE: Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR), Manama

(BCHR/IFEX) - The Hollywood film "The Kingdom", which explores the "war on terror" through a fictional story happening in Saudi Arabia, has been banned in Bahrain. This act was confirmed by the Publication and Press Directorate of the Ministry on Information without indicating the reasons behind the censorship order.

The film depicts an FBI investigation of two terrorist bombing attacks that took place in Saudi Arabia, in Riyadh in May 2003 and in Al-Khobar in June 1996, during which over 100 people of different nationalities were killed.

Previously, the Bahraini authorities had banned other films from being viewed in cinemas, including the religious film "The Passion of the Christ", which was banned last year on the grounds that it was against Islam because it depicted a prophet (Jesus).

The Bahrain Center for Human Rights expresses its concerns at how freedom of expression is being targeted and curtailed. This ban is part of a long series of prohibitions and censorship which did not spare artistic products, novels and documentaries.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Send appeals to the Bahraini authorities: - urging them to lift the ban on films of a documentary nature which exhibit no offence to public beliefs and/or traditions - asking that they cease making decisions on behalf of the public and viewers - urging them to take measures to amend Press and Publication Decree code no 47 of 2002 to ensure its compliance with international declarations and covenants

His Highness Shaikh Hamad Bin Isa Al-Khalifa King of Bahrain Riffa, Bahrain Fax: +97 3 1 721 1363

His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman Al-Khalifa Cabinet Prime Minister Fax: +97 3 1 721 1363

Please copy appeals to the source if possible.

For further information contact Nabeel Rajab, Vice-President, BCHR, Manama, Bahrain, tel: +973 3963 3399 / 3940 0720, fax: +973 1779 5170, e-mail: nabeel.rajab@bahrainrights.org, info@bahrainrights.org, Internet: http://www.bahrainrights.org

19 Oct, 2007

IFEX ALERT : Women's rights defender forbidden from appearing in media

IFEX - News from the international freedom of expression community _______________________________________________________________

ALERT - BAHRAIN

16 October 2007

Women's rights defender forbidden from appearing in media

SOURCE: Bahrain Center for Human Rights (BCHR), Manama

**For further information on previous attempts to silence Ghada Jamsheer, see IFEX alerts of 22 March 2007 and 2 June 2005**

(BCHR/IFEX) - BCHR has expressed its concern about the news revealed by Ms Ghada Jamsheer, a women's rights activist and president of the Bahrain Women's Petition, of the existence of a formal decision preventing her from appearing in any of the Bahraini media. Ms Jamsheer stated that the ban includes radio, television and all local newspapers.

Sources in Bahrain link this media ban to the Bahraini Royal Court and to Ghada Jamsheer's April 2007 letter to the King, Sheikh Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa, calling for the dissolution of the Supreme Council for Women, chaired by the King's wife, Sheikha Sabika Bint Ibrahim Al-Khalifa, due to its failure to promote women's rights and its political loyalty to the Government.

Ghada Jamsheer is a prominent defender of women's rights in the Gulf region and, in 2006, was named one of the heroes of freedom in the Arab region by the American magazine "Time" and one of the ten most influential women in the Arab countries by "Forbes" magazine.

In May 2006, BCHR issued a statement shedding light on the death threats, bugging and harassment faced by Ms Jamsheer in relation to a statement published in local newspapers.

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

Send appeals to the Bahraini authorities: - asking them to respect women's rights, including freedom of expression in particular - calling on them to cease hindering the access of women and other human rights defenders to the media and other means of public communication - urging them to stop harassing and intimidating human rights defenders in general and women in particular

APPEALS TO:

His Highness Shaikh Hamad Bin Isa Al-khalifa King of Bahrain Fax: +97 3 1 721 1363

His Highness Sheikh Khalifa bin Salman Al-Khalifa Prime Minister of Bahrain Fax: +97 3 1 721 1363

Please copy appeals to the source if possible.

For further information contact Nabeel Rajab, Vice-President, BCHR, Manama, Bahrain, tel: +973 3963 3399 / 3940 0720, fax: +973 1779 5170, e-mail: nabeel.rajab@bahrainrights.org, info@bahrainrights.org, Internet: http://www.bahrainrights.org

The information contained in this alert is the sole responsibility of BCHR. In citing this material for broadcast or publication, please credit BCHR.