Bahrain Center for Human Rights
20 November 2006
Bahrain Center for Human Rights
20 November 2006
Based on the policy of revealing those who contribute to human rights violations “name them and shame them” the Bahrain Center for Human Rights presents in this report what it considers as a “Blacklist”. The prime objective of this revelation is to enlighten the public in regard to members and blocks of the expired House of Representatives who have ratified laws that restrict freedoms and contradict human rights norms, disregarding international obligations and condemnations by national, regional and International human rights organizations. This report is based on voting results that are derived from meetings of the House of Representatives.
The House of Representatives, during the elapsed four years, has ratified coercive-packaged-deals of laws that were initiated by the Government and which restricts freedoms and punishes citizens for exercising their fundamental rights that are guaranteed by International Covenants. The ratified laws are: the Law on Political Societies that places political groups under the mercy of the government i.e. during foundation, funding, activity and closure; the Law on Gatherings and Demonstrations, which grants the security apparatus full control of activities and gatherings and allows legal pursuit and punishment against everyone who joins these gatherings; the Law to Combat Terrorism, that undertakes terrorism as a cloak to form a status of Emergency Act that imposes the death penalty and harsh punishments against actions that do not necessary imply the use of violence; the Law to Deprive Citizens of their Civil and Political Rights, this allow for selectively depriving opposition figures and human rights activists from their right to vote or to run for election by fabricating judicial charges in cases related to their opinions and peaceful activities.
The House of Representatives has also failed to amend the restrictive laws that were pronounced prior to its existence, such as the 2002 Law on the Press, that was used during the work of house of representatives against journalists, activists and internet websites; the 1989 Law on Societies which hindered the establishment and activities of many societies and was used to close the Bahrain Center of Human Rights; the 1974 Penal Code which consists of stringent clauses that provided the regime, during the last three decades of the last century, a way to establish the Security Act Law and court, and facilitate the practice of excessive human rights violations that resulted in the loss of tens of life’s and left thousands of victims of arbitrary imprisonments, tortures and forcible exile. The House of Representatives has also failed to refute Law 56 of 2002 that grants impunity to those responsible of committing the foresaid violations whom are still in their high and sensitive security and administrative positions.
House of Representatives has, instead of monitoring the Governmental Apparatuses and investigating into their human rights violation, surrendered to Governmental influence, it had supported the government in justifying the use excessive force against peaceful activities and against hundreds of activists, journalists and human rights defenders subjected to physical assault, defamation, and judicial arbitrary detention and unfair trials. The majority members of the House of Parliament had connived with the Government or kept silent. As far as what was allegedly called the “Terrorist Cell” and “Guantanamo” prisoners some members acted on a selective basis, though that was too late, too little, biased and more of a show-off strategy and complementary to the government.
The distinct role of the members conniving with the government was to fail the bills that would contribute to improving people’s living standards, the nullification of questioning the Ministers who were accused of corruption despite evidences provided by interrogatory committees as in the case of General Organization for Social Insurances (GOSI) and Retirement. The concerned MPs refused to pronounce a vote of no confidence against the foresaid Ministers. They also had a fundamental role in reducing House of Parliament’s authorities through amending internal policy standard and especially those related to the ban on public questioning of Ministers.
During the last four years, the Government was not compelled to use the appointed Council of Shura to fail bills or decisions of the elected council, because it depended on the unofficial coalition amongst members that control the Council to the benefit of the government that would paralyze their ability to put any proposed bill from members of Council.
Examining voting results related to the bills and cases mentioned in this report, it is concluded that that the said coalition consist of the Chief of the Council and members of both Al-Menber Al-Islamy (Muslim Brotherhood) and Al-Asala Al-Islamiya (Salafist) and a group of independents (refer to the list below). It is believed that the common ground of this unofficial coalition is the connected interests of its members and blocks with high governmental personnel. It is also relates to incentives, pressure and bargaining that the government used. Hence, the sectarian factor is not fundamental motive but a tool used to gain public support to cover the foresaid coalition members’ postures.
MPs against Human Rights!:
| No. | Name | Remarks |
| 1 |  |
Chief of Council of Representatives |
| 2 |  |
Independent & Confederate with the Chief of the Council |
| 3 |  |
Independent & Confederate with Chief of the Council |
| 4 |  |
Chairman of Al-Menbar Al-Islamy |
| 5 |  |
Al-Menbar Al-Islamy |
| 6 |  |
Al-Menbar Al-Islamy |
| 7 |  |
Al-Menbar Al-Islamy |
| 8 |  |
Chairman of Al-Asala Block |
| 9 |  |
Al-Asala Bloc (Deputy Second to the Chief of the Council) |
| 10 |  |
Al-Asala Bloc |
| 11 |  |
Al-Asala Bloc |
| 12 |  |
Al-Asala Bloc |
| 13 |  |
Chief of the “Independent Bloc” |
| 14 |  |
Independent Bloc |
| 15 |  |
Independent Bloc |
| 16 |  |
Independent Bloc |
| 17 |  |
Independent Bloc |
| 18 |  |
Independent Bloc |
| 19 |  |
Independent Bloc |
The matter is not confined to the above mentioned members, the passive or negative stand of other members of the council (being reversible, absent or not voting) resulted in support of government projects and policies despite their being against human rights. Those members motives vary between nepotism and sectarianism. However, we found through those voting results several members that had taken brave postures that comply with International Standards related to human rights, and amongst them are: Abdulhadi Ahmed Marhoon – Chief of Democratic Block and Deputy to Chief of Council, Yousif Zainelabedeen Zainal and Abdulnabi Slaman Ahmed Naser – Democratic Block, Abdulla Jaffer Al-Ali and Mohamed Abdlla Al-Shaikh Al-Abbas – Islamic Block, Fareed Ghazi Jassem Rafeea and Jassem Hasan Hassan Abdulaal – Economists Block.
As far as the upcoming Parliamentary Council, the Bahrain Center for Human Rights fears that political and sectarian polarization and the manipulation of elections constituencies to bring back the same groups and members, thus, resulting in the continuity of negative role of the “Parliament” towards freedoms and human rights. Even if those loyal to the government lost their majority in the upcoming election, the government will effectively use the defect in the mechanism and authorities of the hierarchy of Representative Council in order to subjugate or disable it.
On top of this all, the fundamental factor in imposing government power over the legislative authority remains, in its ability to use the appointed Shura Council, which shares the legislative authority with the elected members. Shura members proved during the last period their absolute obedience to the government as far as passing bills against freedoms and human rights or in supporting of governmental repressive actions. Despite being from different sects, Shura members’ common stands and harmony proves the political motives rather than the sectarian one. The Bahrain Center for Human Rights will observe the performance of both councils in the up-coming period and calls for reforms that provide a more positive role for the “parliament” in promoting freedoms and human rights in terms of monitoring and legislation.