حتى اليوم لم أر أي بحث نقاش طرح جدي لموضوع التعذيب ، لا سياسيا، لا أخلاقيا، لا سسيولوجيا، لا أمنيا، لا تاريخيا
الجميع، ساسة، مجتمع مدني، إعلام، رجال قانون، الجميع بلا استثناء يتجاهل الموضوع! يخاف من الموضوع، يتهرب من الفتح الجدي و العميق للموضوع
هل مشكلة النقاب أهم و لا تترك مساحة للباقي؟ هل نخبتنا غير قادرة على الخوض في مثل هذه المواضيع؟ هل لتصريح النهضة أنها لن تقوم بالمحاسبة و على الضحايا أن يقومو بذلك بأنفسهم دخل في هذا التجاهل؟ هل وجود السبسي على رأس الحكومة اليوم و هو صاحب التاريخ الدموي في تعذيب البرسبكتيفيست و الشرايطية هو السبب؟ هل سيعيش إبني في بلد يعذب فيه المواطن؟
يبدو أن الموضوع لا يهم أحدا! لكنه يهمني و يهم إبني...
Sebssi et la torture : http://mel7it3.blogspot.com/2011/03/une-petite-fouille-dans-les-egouts-de.html
Je parlerais juste de ce qui s'est passé a partir du 14 Janvier.. l'avant est une tâche qui dépasse les moyens d'un simple blogueur..
FIDH : Rapport Tunisie 2011 publié le 20 juillet 2011
EXTRAITS DU RAPPORT :
« La torture continue, la répression résulte de décisions prises en haut lieu, une répression organisée, décidée au plus haut niveau et avec pour objectif d’instiguer la peur et d’intimider la population tunisienne pour la dissuader de manifester » Page 8
« Les graves violations des droits de l’Homme commises par les forces de sécurité en réponse aux manifestations organisées à Tunis les 5 et 6 mai 2011 demandant la démission du gouvernement provisoire » page 11
« l’ensemble des témoignages recueillis par les chargés de mission, aussi bien à Tunis qu’à Siliana et Kasserine, mettent en lumière la concordance des récits et le systématisme des pratiques des forces de sécurité pour réprimer les manifestations. Les récits sont souvent similaires en ce qu’ils décrivent des pratiques d’une extrême violence, la présence de policiers cagoulés, des arrestations manifestement arbitraires et souvent suivies de libérations au bout de quelques heures, des passages à tabac des manifestants » Page 22
le rapport complet :
Ce que je trouve bizarre est qu'un decret loi, la fameux decret 106, signé le 22/10/2011 stipule :
الفصل 5 (فقرة رابعة) :
تسقط الدعوى العمومية الناتجة عن جناية التعذيب بمرور خمسة عشر عاما.
وتجري آجال سقوط الدعوى العمومية بالنسبة لجرائم التعذيب التي ترتكب على طفل بداية من بلوغه سن الرشد.
le decret loi ici : http://www.iort.gov.tn/WD120AWP/WD120Awp.exe/CTX_22240-84-sLfCXaXkEO/RechercheTexte/SYNC_219381593
Un fait d'autant plus étrange que ce décret loi, viens juste aprés le dépôt d'une plainte pour torture contre, justement, le premier ministre actuel : Béji Caid Sebssi!
Et la cour pénale internationale dans tout ça ??
Je vous laisse écouter (toute aide en traduction, sous-titrage est la bienvenu, et je m'excuse pour mon anglais médiocre)
Je sais, c'est un billet en arabe, français, anglais, qui pose des questions, n'apporte aucune réponse ou presque.. mais c'est ma participation comme simple blogeur, avec les moyens de bord, en espérant.. que ce sujet, prend sa place dans nos médias.. sur internet.
J'ai pensé, comme je ne maîtrise bien pas l'arabe, retranscrire l'interview en anglais, peut-être ça aiderait au sous-titrage, ou quelqu'un d'autre à la traduction.
ردحذفNB:Il y a peut-être des phrases qui ne correspondent pas tout à fait aux paroles.
Part 1:
ردحذف-----
Y: -Here we are! Welcome!
B:-Thank you!
Y:-Can you present yourself please?
B:-Yes! My name is Brenda G. Hollis, and i am the prosecutor of the special court for Sierra Leon.
Y:-Ok. I have a single question: what is a “reasonable doubt”? Because in the case of Tunisia, people from the old regime stayed in charge after the revolution, and you have a lot of I-witness, a lot of witness, saying that a lot of evidence has been destructed, destroyed, have been lost. So, when you are.., when you want to get your right, you'll never find evidence. So, for the accused one, it is a reasonable doubt. There is no evidence, all has been destructed. The notion of “a reasonable doubt”, in this case, how it comes?
Part 2:
ردحذف------
B:-Well, you can't change the standard for criminal law, there will always be reasonable doubt, there are several lacks within it. And reasonable doubt, that standard basically says “when all of the evidence is presented to the judges, there can be only one reasonable explanation for that evidence, and that is 'the accused is guilty' ”. If there are other reasonable explanations, inconsistent with guilt, then there is a reasonable doubt and the person must be acquitted. But, in terms of your situation in Tunisia, perhaps what you're talking about is what kinds of evidence can be used to prove a case. And very often, you can reach out to other kinds of evidence. First of all, you all have witnesses, you have been the victims of crimes, and they can talk about that, and very often they knew who committed the crimes and what that person's position was. Then you can go up the chain of command to see who was in charge in that time. You could look to prior laws, prior regulations that show what the authority of those people in that position was. And so that's a way of linking them to the crime. You can also look for press releases talking about these crimes to give notice to these people that these crimes have been committed, you can look to international reports, of NGOs (Non-Governmental Organization), of IGOs (Inter-Governmental Organization), UN (United Nations) reports to show that there was notice given that these crimes were been committed and that maybe they even spoke with the leaders about these crimes and yet nothing happened. So there are many forms of evidence that you can use and it's gonna be more difficult to destroy that evidence and the first step should be to secure all of that documentary evidence everywhere to be sure that nobody can destroy them, more of it, and also to begin to find witnesses. And we have witnesses not only who are victims and survivors, but even those who were among the perpetrators, who actually came forward in to testify. So that's a possibility as well, many ways that you can actually prove these cases.
Part 3:
ردحذف------
Y:-OK. In your intervention, you said that torture is not something that in the jurisdiction of the international court.
B:-As an independent crime. So, torture as a crime against humanity, torture as a war crime, act of torture as a basis for genocide, but to prove torture itself without being a war crime, crime against humanity or genocide, The ICC (International Criminal Court) does not have jurisdiction of that.
Y:-So, the easy version: if I am tortured by the police in Tunisia, just tortured to have information or as an intimidation, not in a war for genocide, is not into the jurisdiction of the International court.
B:-The ICC, yes. But, that means that Tunisia should be sure to make it a crime, in Tunisia.
Y:-But, I don't know if you know, there is a new law, just a new one, saying that an amnesty for people who tortured other people before 1995. So if I am one of those people, I cannot pursuit the torturer in Tunisia, and I cannot also do it for the international court.
B:-Not as an independent crime, and then I think what is left for the people of Tunisia is to put pressure on the government to change that crime as there is a feeling that they should be all prosecuted for extending farther back in the past then that should be changed. But, in terms of your present law, it would be included in the national law and it's not an independent crime in the international courts.
Y:-OK. Tank you very much.
B:-Thank you.
"I-witness" -> eyewitness
ردحذف