An Interview with Ms. Sheila B. Keetharuth, Commissioner – Commission of Inquiry on Eritrea –
2015-09-29 17:35:48 Written by Russom Mesfun Published in English Articles Read 3345 times-
font size
decrease font size
increase font size
Question. Although Eritreans, at least those in the Diaspora, are familiar with your picture and your being one of the trio of the UNCOI, can you provide us with an introduction as to your background and how you ended up with the COI team?
Answer. I am a lawyer from Mauritius and have been working on human rights issues on the African continent for almost three decades. I have served as the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Eritrea since November 2012. On 27 June 2014, when the UN Human Rights Council adopted Resolution A/HRC/RES/26/24 setting up the Commission of Inquiry on Eritrea, it specifically indicated that the Special Rapporteur would be one of the three members. This explains my presence on the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in Eritrea (COIE) as one of the Commissioners.
Q. What is the COI and how does it come into existence?
A. Following the presentation of my reports (A/HRC/23/53 in June 2013 and A/HRC/26/45 in June 2014) in my capacity as Special Rapporteur, and taking into account the non-cooperation of the Eritrean Government with the mandate and other human rights mechanisms, in June 2014, the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) decided to establish, for a period of one year, a commission of inquiry on human rights in Eritrea (COIE). The HRC mandated the COIE to investigate violations of international human rights law, as outlined in the reports of the Special Rapporteur on human rights in Eritrea. There were also calls for the setting up of the Commission of Inquiry on Eritrea made by civil society and other Eritreans, including those in the diaspora. Following the presentation of the Commissino’s report containing its findings in June 2015, the HRC decided to extend the mandate of the COIE for one year to investigate systematic, widespread and gross violations of human rights in Eritrea with a view to ensuring full accountability, including where these violations may amount to crimes against humanity.
Q. Are members appointed or they have to express an interest and even have to apply to be member of such a commission?
A. The President of the Human Rights Council approaches suitably qualified candidates to see whether they may be interested and then appoints members from among those who express an interest in being part of the Commission.
Q. Since your work entails having to investigate a government’s policy and behavior, does the government in question have a say in approving the members?
A. Appointment of the Commisioners remains the responsibility of the UN Human Rights Council and does not entail the approval of the Government concerned.
Q. What in short were you able to firmly establish from your investigation of the Eritrean regime?
A. The Commission found that systematic, widespread and gross human rights violations have been and are being committed with impunity in Eritrea under the authority of the Government. Some of these violations may constitute crimes against humanity. Our investigation identified specific patterns of systematic human rights violations, based on several factors. They included:
• The high frequency of occurrence of violations documented and corroborated;
• The number of victims and the replication of the violation over a certain period of time;
• The type of rights violated; and
• The systemic nature of these violations, meaning that they cannot be the result of random or isolated acts by the authorities.
The COIE was able to confirm serious human rights violations in Eritrea, including cases of extrajudicial killing, enforced disappearance and incommunicado detention, arbitrary arrest and detention, torture, inhumane prison conditions, violations of human rights in the context of the indefinite national service, which in effect amounts to forced labour, sexual violence in the national service, lack of freedom of expression and opinion, assembly, association, religious belief and movement.
Q. Was there any information that you came across thar surprised you most? What was it, why?
A. It was the extent to which the vast security network reaches into every level of society in-country but also in other countries. This is one of the reasons why the Commission said that Eritrea is a country ruled by fear and not by law. While I had an indication of this state of affairs, the Commission was able to gauge how wide-reaching it was.
Q. Have you heard of, read or even worked on a situation like that of Eritrea? Are there regimes out there like the PFDJ?
A. The COIE’s mandate is to focus on human rights violations in Eritrea and it is best to avoid making comparisons with other countries. However, human rights violations in Eritrea are systematic, widespread and indeed happening on a large scale and we seldom see human rights violations of the scope and scale we see in Eritrea today.
Q. The regime’s constant criticism of the report is that you have never been into the country. How much did you try to convince the regime to allow you in?
A. Although the Commission repeatedly sought the cooperation of the Government in carrying out its work, it received no response. The Chair wrote to President Isaias Afewerki seeking his invitation and collaboration right at the start and followed up on several occasions, including with requests for information. The Commission even sent an advance copy of the report to the Eritrean authorities. There was no response.
Q. Do you think not being able to talk to the people inside undermined your report?
A. The Commission conducted interviews with some 550 witnesses in eight countries and received 160 written submissions. As was indicated by the Chair, Mike Smith, the Commission recorded the voices of real Eritrean people as articulated in these 550 testimonies and 160 submissions received. The Commission also reflected the silenced voice of the majority of Eritreans who have never been able to elect their own representatives in national, free, fair and democratic elections, as well as the voices of imprisoned and ill-treated critics, journalists, religious leaders and others who have disappeared into a vast network of jails, the muzzled voice of those subjected to forced labour and inhumane conditions for years on end. Finally, the Commission highlighted the voice of those who every day risk their lives to flee a government that has failed them and all of the others.
Q. There was also this incident of a cut and paste situation involving a North Korean document that somehow ended up being inserted in that of Eritrea. What exactly happened and why? Do tragic errors like that undermine or compromise the credibility of the UN and specifically the COI?
A. This “incident” as you call it did not involve the COIE and it is not something I have personal knowledge about. It is therefore difficult for me to talk about this specific happening. However, not related to the COIE work, it has no incidence on the credibility of the COIE.
Q. You are also accused of being anti-PFDJ because you had previously worked for humanitarian organizations. Can you be an objective investigator with a background of opposing unpopular governments?
A. I have dedicated my time and energy for years to monitor, document, investigate, advocate against human rights violations and even to litigate abuses wherever they happen, mainly in Africa. I have grounded my work in the human rights treaties and documents accepted universally as well as regionally, on the African continent. I have no interest in opposing any specific political organisation or government. I oppose human rights violations as my unwavering pursuit for human dignity for all.
Q. In fact, what was it like having to work on the Eritrean case?
A. It has been challenging; a situation which I can describe as taking two steps forward and one backward. However, the work which the Commission was able to achieve with the support of its Secretariat is there for the international community to appraise.
Q. If you had to do it again, would you still be part of the COIE?
A. I make it a point to deliver on my responsibilities. This is exactly what I did and would continue doing.
Q. There were reports that Commision members were threatened during the Geneva Demonstration by the regime’s supporters. What exactly took place and what can you tell us about the results or status of that investigation?
A. The President of the Human Rights Council made a statement to that effect on 23 June 2015 before the Commission presented its report. As the investigations are ongoing, I would not like to comment further on the matter.
Q. What was it like to be threatened by the supporters of a regime that you documented as ruling by fear? Would you say the regime unwittingly helped make your case or could one say that people found the report so unfounded that they resorted to threats?
A. It is unfortunate that this happened. There are other ways of engaging on substantive issues and the Commission has always kept the channels of communication open to address the core of its mandate, that is, human rights violations committed by the Eritrean authorities against its citizens.
Q. You seem to be the most accessible and visible in the media, we do not hear from your colleagues as much. Have you been delegated to be the team spokesperson?
A. Not at all. My fellow Commissioners are also very active and available. The only difference is that I have been highlighting the situation of human rights in Eritrea since November 2012 in my capacity as Special Rapporteur.
Q. What’s next for the COIE, where do you go from here?
A. The COIE is currently transitioning to its next phase and developing its programme of work. This is work in progress.
Q. What is it that you would have achieved by the end of the tenure of the Commision?
A. By the end of the tenure of the COIE we are aiming at bringing clarity regarding responsibility for human rights violations committed in Eritrea. Our goal is to pave the way for accountability, in a country where a pervasive culture of impunity is firmly entrenched.
Q. What is meant by Crimes against Humanity?
A. The definition of crimes against humanity is threefold:
– Crimes against humanity include: murder (killing or causing death, including the deprivation of access to food and medicine); extermination (mass killing or causing death to a part of the population); enslavement; imprisonment or other deprivation of physical liberty; torture; rape; sexual slavery; sexual violence; enforced disappearances of persons; persecution (intentional and severe deprivation of one or more fundamental rights contrary to international law by reason of the identity of the group); and other inhumane acts committed during peace time or war time.
– Crimes against humanity should take place in the specific context of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population: the act should not be isolated or sporadic incident but it should be a course of conduct involving the multiple commissions of acts/ crimes against any civilian population.
– In addition, there should be two subjective or mental elements: the criminal intent to commit the inhuman act/conduct and the knowledge that it is part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population. Gross negligence or inadvertent recklessness is not sufficient for the commission of crimes against humanity.
Q. Will you be able to enter into the country this time around? Even if allowed, how would you be able to guarantee your safety?
A. As the Commission has previously indicated, the preferred way to conduct its investigations would be in situ, that is in the country and we hope to be invited. It is the responsibility of the host government to provide security to those it has invited.
Q. Just as importantly, how would you guarantee the safety of those you interview?
A. The prime responsibility for the safety of those whom the COIE interview remains with the government authorities. Witnesses and victims’ protection is a central concern for the Commission. We have adopted procedures and methods of work aimed at protecting such persons, as well as the information they have chosen to share with us, during all stages of our work and beyond the release of our report.
However, our ability to physically protect concerned persons is limited and we count on the governments of the countries we have visited to respect their primary responsibility to protect their residents, including the victims and witnesses we have interviewed. We have systematically sought guarantees from the concerned States that individuals wishing to meet us shall have unhindered access to us, and that none of them shall, as a result of meeting us, suffer any harassment, threat, act of intimidation, ill-treatment or reprisal, or face any criminal prosecution or other judicial proceedings.
Q. What if the regime availed only people that would refute your original report?
A. As part of its working methods, the COIE ensures that it has total freedom to interview any witness who can shed light on human rights violations in Eritrea, as per its mandate.
Q. Are you planning to interview as part of the investigation the current ruler of Eritrea, Mr. Isaias Afewerki or senior officials? Have there been attempts to contact him directly?
A. As indicated above, the COIE wrote directly to the President at the start of the first mandate and followed up. We will certainly seek an invitation to Eritrea again.
Q. African leaders seem united in their opposition as discriminatory the International Crimes Court (ICC). What is the point of the COIE and how does it help the victims of the regime you’re investigating?
A. On renewing its mandate in June 2015, the Human Rights Council decided “to extend, for a period of one year, the mandate of the commission of inquiry to investigate systematic, widespread and gross violations of human rights in Eritrea with a view to ensuring full accountability, including where these violations may amount to crimes against humanity”. The mandate is clear. What the HRC decides to do with the findings is not in the hands of the COIE. The work of the COIE will also serve as a record of the human rights violations victims have been subjected to at the hands of the authorities. However, the COIE aims at providing the basis to break the cycle of impunity for human rights violations in Eritrea. To do this the COIE has based and will continue using as legal framework all obligations assumed by Eritrea under international human rights treaties and other relevant treaties as well as those applicable under customary international law.
