Magdulein Abaida v Libya

CEDAW Committee, 12 April 2021. CEDAW/C/78/D/130/2018

A women’s human rights defender is subjected to torture and ill-treatment, through using gender-based violence and threats by state officials and by unknown persons using online technology.

Magdulein Abaida is a women’s human rights defender, who set up her own organization, Hakki, (“My Right”) and also took part in activism with other human rights organizations in Libya. She also worked as a translator for journalists.

In February 2012, Magdulein Abaida took part in a demonstration known as the

‘“Libyan women’s day of anger”, about the lack of quotas for women in the national elections and comments by the Chair of the National Transitional Council on men having multiple wives.” The commander of a powerful militia, the Martyrs of 17 February Brigade, claimed that the organizers had repudiated their own culture, including by not covering their hair. As a consequence, the author and others were afraid to leave their homes.’ (paragraph 2.2)

Subsequently Magdulein Abaida’s name was put out on social media and she and other activists received threats from members of the public. Over the next few months, she participated in interviews and discussion programs on Libyan national media. She began working with a Jewish Libyan journalist, R, on a project in June 2012. Soon afterwards, she was arrested and detained briefly and then released without her belongings. She made a complaint to the national human rights institution. Eventually it transpired that R and other individuals had also been detained, and information about them, including photographs, were put on the internet: this led to further anonymous threats, including death threats. Some three weeks after this, Magdulein Abaida was arrested while taking part in a women’s human rights workshop, by several armed men entering the workshop room, while 30 more men, armed with Kalashnikovs, waited outside. Members of the Martyrs of 17 February Brigade took her to a compound, where she was detained. She was accused of being an Israeli spy, insulted as “a bitch” and “a whore” and threatened with death. She was then beaten up for half an hour. A man, S., introduced himself as a Supreme Security Committee investigator – an official Libyan government service – asked her about R. and made the accusation that Hakki was a “prostitution organization”, supporting Jews and Israel. Again, she was released and subjected to more hate mail and death threats.(paragraph 2.7)

Magdulein Abaida fled Libya and was granted asylum abroad. Because she had left Libya, she was unable to progress domestic remedies but was assisted by the non-governmental organization REDRESS to make a complaint to the Libyan Prosecutor General. This did not receive a response, so the author concluded that domestic remedies have been “unreasonably prolonged, are unavailable and are unlikely to bring effective relief.” (paragraph 2.11)

She alleged that the state of Libya was guilty of torture, because the Supreme Security Committee officials were state agents and the Martyrs of 17 February Brigade, apparently an armed group, were in fact working alongside the official state agents.

Magdulein Abaida submitted (paragraph 3.2) that Libya had

“Violated her rights under article 1 of the Convention as it discriminated against her on the basis of her sex and as a defender of the human rights of women. She argues that the Supreme Security Committee subjected her to severe pain and suffering while she was in detention from 11 to 12 August 2012, including exposure to gendered and sexual verbal abuse, kicking, blows with a gun and a death threat, which violated her right not to be tortured and resulted in her being diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. Given her arrest during a women’s rights workshop and the questioning on Hakki immediately following her torture, the authorities were clearly attempting to punish her for and force her to cease her women’s rights work and to discourage her from breaking gender norms.”

She argued also that she had been subjected to arbitrary and unlawful detention on several occasions, and that the apparent motive had been to punish her for her exercise of her freedom of expression in her public advocacy for women’s rights.

She argued that: (paragraph 3.9) she was “the victim of a breach of her rights under article 5 (a) of the Convention. Referring to the Committee’s observations on “the persistence of entrenched, traditional stereotypes regarding the roles and responsibilities of women and men in the family and in society at large” in Libya, she argues that it was such stereotypes that contributed to her being targeted for torture, arrest and arbitrary detention, as well as the gender-specific abuse to which she was subjected in detention.”

An issue which makes this case particularly important is that Magdulein Abaida made a further claim that Libya had violated her rights under Article 7(c) of the CEDAW Convention, in failing to take action “to protect her from hateful and threatening emails, letters and messages concerning her involvement in women’s rights issues and stated that she had repudiated her culture and should be executed. They pressured her to give up her activism.”

In response, among its findings, the CEDAW Committee noted that Libya had

“Breached her rights under article 7 (c) of the Convention, in that its authorities made her cease her work for Hakki, by failing to protect her from threats and by attempting to punish her for her activism for women’s rights. The Committee also notes that the author was arrested during a women’s rights workshop and questioned on Hakki immediately after being tortured. In addition, it notes the Deputy Interior Minister’s criticism of Hakki for “chanting for women’s freedom”. The Committee further notes that States parties should encourage the work of human rights organizations and women’s non-governmental organizations. In this connection, the Committee recalls its general recommendation No. 30 (2013) on women in conflict prevention, conflict and post-conflict situations, in which it states that women’s “ability to participate as active members of civil society” is among the “prerequisites for creating a society with lasting democracy, peace and gender equality.” (paragraph 6.5)

The CEDAW Committee’s finding was that Libya had violated not just Article 1 and Article 5(a) of the Convention, Libya had also violated Article 7(c)

Article 7

States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the political and public life of the country and, in particular, shall ensure to women, on equal terms with men, the right:

[…]

(c) To participate in non-governmental organizations and associations concerned with the public and political life of the country.

The CEDAW Committee made specific recommendations regarding the Libyan authorities’ failure to protect her from hateful and threatening emails, letters and messages concerning her involvement in women’s rights issues and stated that she had repudiated her culture and should be executed. They pressured her to give up her activism.” (paragraph 3.10) This is very relevant as it reflects the realities of women human rights defenders, that they are living with threats from a variety of actors, known and unknown: as well as the usual recommendations on eradicating gender-based violence, the CEDAW Committee made a particular recommendation: (paragraph 8(b))

(v) Put in place concrete, specific and effective legislative and other measures, including a national action plan, to ensure a safe and favourable environment for women’s human rights defenders and female activists and address the current state of impunity, including with respect to non-State actors.

(vi) Recognize publicly the specific place and role of women’s human rights defenders and their legitimacy in the public debate.

[…]

(xii) Take concrete, specific and effective legislative and other measures to enable, protect and promote women’s participation, on equal terms with men, in women’s rights organizations, non-governmental organizations and associations concerned with the public and political life of the country, including peace negotiation and electoral processes with a view to a sustainable and peaceful national reconstruction, and take effective measures to ensure that women are not intimidated into ceasing their participation in public and political life.”