Three months earlier, she had been verbally insulted by some members of
parliament, who also distributed a booklet containing insults against her.90
• An NGO consisting of relatives of the victims of the terrorist attack in Beslan was
the target of numerous acts of intimidation and defamation campaigns. The NGO
advocated for an independent investigation into the attack. An administrative case
was brought against one of the leaders of the NGO, along with two other
members, for allegedly obstructing the court session that took place earlier in
relation to those three individuals. The case was later dismissed. Another
administrative case had been opened earlier against the head of the NGO
following her participation in a rally. In addition, flyers were distributed in the
town where the NGO operates, accusing the head of the NGO of “ serving foreign
powers” . The prosecutor’ s office lodged a suit against the NGO for extremist
activities, a charge linked to a statement made by the NGO two years earlier,
when it called on the president of the country to launch an independent
investigation into the assault that ended the terrorist attack and resulted in the
deaths of many of the hostages. The prosecutor claimed that the NGO had made
false accusations against the president. The authorities had also claimed earlier
that the NGO in fact had a different head, and they therefore tried to re-register
the organization under different leadership. There was a court ruling in this
respect that was eventually overturned by the Supreme Court.91
• A gathering took place in front of a government building to protest the
deterioration of the security situation in the city of Sarajevo and to call on the
prime minister and mayor to resign. Violence broke out, and a member of a
human rights movement was arrested and released a few hours later. Two days
later, the authorities released a statement accusing two human rights groups of
using the protest to destabilize the situation in the city.92
Abuse of charges
• A local office of an international human rights NGO was accused by local
authorities of “ illegal fundraising” , its bank accounts were frozen, and an
administrative fine was imposed on the organization’ s chairperson for the same
offence. The NGO faced legal proceedings on the basis of its street fundraising
(outdoor fundraising campaign) activities and for requesting donations on its
website. Both decisions were appealed by the NGO, but the cases remained
unresolved.93
• A human rights NGO was given a warning following an ad hoc inspection by the
authorities. The NGO challenged this in court, but lost the case. The reason for
the unplanned check was revealed during the hearing: namely, that the NGO had
90
Human Rights Council, op. cit., note 34, para. 1751.
Case of the Voice of Beslan (Russian Federation), Urgent Appeal, Observatory FIDH/OMCT, 22
April 2008. The government of the Russian Federation provided additional information about the
administrative case in relation to the three members of the NGO and an attempt to institute a criminal
case against them for disrespecting the trial proceedings instituted against them earlier. and for violence
against a representative of the authorities. The investigation by the relevant prosecutor’ s office revealed
that there was no reason to institute a criminal case, and the case was subsequently closed. The
government of the Russian Federation also noted that a lawsuit against the NGO for extremist activities
was suspended, and that the statement published by the NGO was had been sent for an expert
assessment in order to establish whether it contained “ linguistic features of extremism” .
92
Case of Dosta and Grozd (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Information provided by the OSCE Mission to
Bosnia and Herzegovina, based on information received from NGOs, the published statement of the
Canton Sarajevo, (entity of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina) and a statement from the activist
who was arrested and later released.
93
Case of Amnesty International (Turkey), “ Legal proceedings against Amnesty International Turkey
should stop” , Amnesty International, 22 June 2007; Amnesty International, op. cit., note 56, p. 303.
91
22
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents