SAMPLE LETTER

[date]

Subject: Fair trial for Samia Smets, accused of allegedly damaging a Quran

[Dear Mr. President] / [Dear Sir] / [Dear Minister],

[I am] / [We are] deeply concerned to learn that Ms. Samia Smets has been sentenced in a criminal court to 10 years imprisonment without having access to legal defence. The crime she has allegedly committed is of damaging a copy of the Quran.

In September 2007, the court of Biskra sentenced 26-year-old Samia Smets to 10 years imprisonment for allegedly having violated the Quran, under the Article 160, Section 4 of the Algerian Criminal Code which states that “any damage or desecration of the Holy Book is punishable by 5 to 10 years in prison." However, according to her lawyer, Samia Smets was initially judged without being defended by a lawyer and without adequate proof of the facts. It is unprecedented to give the maximum penalty for someone who has not appeared to be a repeat offender.

Algeria has signed and ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which obliges the courts of Algeria to guarantee procedural fairness in law, including the right to legal counsel. In addition, Article 36 of the Algerian Constitution states that “Freedom of creed and belief is inviolable” and Article 41 maintains that all citizens are entitled to the freedom of expression. We find the ruling in this case to be in violation of these national and international obligations and urge your government to intervene in the appeals process of this case.

The Criminal Court of Biskra held a retrial for Ms. Samia Smets, for which she was represented by a lawyer, and the verdict will be delivered on Tuesday 28 October. Due to the immediacy of this case we urge the authorities to:

1. Investigate the original trial of 2007 which led to the sentencing of Samia Smets;

2. Ensure a fair and transparent retrial is conducted under an independent and impartial judge, with access to a qualified defence lawyer; and

3. Ensure that the verdict against Ms. Smets is not inconsistent with the Algerian state’s commitment to the freedoms of belief, opinion and expression.

In light of the recent case in Biskra where the very same judge had sentenced six men to four years in prison for eating in public during the Ramadan fast on 29 September 2008 which was subsequently overturned, we are especially concerned about the emerging pattern of religiously-based verdicts being handed down in criminal cases.

We greatly appreciate your urgent attention to this critical matter.

Yours Sincerely,

[Your name / organization]

Six people, arrested mid-September, were sentenced to 4 years in prison and a 1000 Euro fine by the Tribunal of Biskra (in southern Algeria) on September 29, 2008. They were accused of having had food before the end of the Ramzan fast. http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/2008/10/07/01003-20081007ARTFIG00743-algerie-ans-ferme-pour-ne-pas-avoir-respecte-le-ramadan-.php

While the Algerian Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, freedom of conscience, and freedom of opinion, judges used article 142 bis 2 of the Penal Code to justify the sentence; this article sets punishment for 'offending the Prophet and denigrating the dogma of Islam by writing, drawing, oral statement and any other means'.

Clearly the fundamentalists' offensive is bearing fruits: the government negotiates with them, the laws of the Republic are gradually replaced by a narrowly defined version of the 'law of God', and if judges still take measures to subvert the legal code to justify their decision, one can fear that the time has come when this precaution will not even be necessary any more.

In order to avoid further "Talibanisation" of Algeria and to prevent further subversions of justice, the network "Secularism is a Women's Issue" calls upon everyone to take action (letter-writing, sending delegations to the Algerian Embassies in your home country, organizing demonstrations, sending out press articles, providing legal aid to those sentenced in Biskra, etc...) vis-a-vis the Algerian authorities to demand the immediate release of the condemned people, on the ground that this judgement contradicts the rights granted by the Algerian Constitution. One can also demand the revision of the trial.

Source: SIAWI - Secularism Is A Women's Issue http://www.siawi.org/article561.html

SAMPLE LETTER TO BE ADDRESSED TO EMBASSIES:

Dear Ambassador:

On 29 September 2008, the Court of Biskra sentenced six people for eating during Ramadan to four years' imprisonment. This ruling violates the Constitution of the Republic of Algeria, which guarantees freedom of religion, conscience and opinion.

We therefore urge the immediate release of those convicted and the subsequent revision of their trial.

Sincerely,

_______________________________.

SAMPLE LETTER

Dear Mr President,

We are writing to draw your attention to the case of Mr Mohamed Sifaoui, a human rights defender and a women's human rights defender at risk in France.

Since January 2003 he benefitted from police protection in France where he was granted political asylum in 2000. This protection was removed in January 2008, without further explanation.

For many years Mr Sifaoui has been inundated with hate mail; Muslim fundamentalists continue to propagate insulting rumours about him, that may encourage someone to actually take action against him. Since the removal of protection, Mr Sifaoui is still facing death threats by mail and telephone. Morevover, he is now regularly threatened by Muslim fundamentalists in the street, and was physically assaulted in broad daylight in the 11th district of Paris on June 13, 2008.

On June 14, Mr Sifaoui reported the case to the local police and filed a case based upon the violence, insults and death threats. Moreover, on June 16, his lawyer formally wrote to the Minister of Interior to request protection for his client. To this date, he has not been given any protection. Meanwhile he continues to receive hate mail and is threatened as soon as he gets out of the house. Fearing for his life, Mr Sifaoui cannot step out of his house. His family, including children, is at risk too. It is very clear to us that Mr Sifaoui's life is in danger, due to the removal of his police protection. We fail to understand why protection was not given back to him after the physical assault of June 13.

At a time when other human rights defenders from Muslim countries and communities suffer from total abandonment by the countries that hosted them and granted them asylum (such as Aayan Hirsi Ali in Holland, or Tasleema Nasreen in India), one may wonder why the 'moderate Muslims' that European governments loudly pretend to desperately look for in order to dialogue with them, are so badly treated by these democracies. Is it that human rights defenders are in demand only when they are seen as politically useful by powers that be, and when they are not so useful, they are thrown as disposable? This is not our conception of defending human rights defenders.

We placed our hopes into the fact that France recently honoured Ms Taslima Nasreen with the Simone de Beauvoir award that gave recognition and visibility to her work as a defender of women's rights. We are astounded that the risks to his life which Mr Sifaoui is facing in France are not taken more seriously and that he was deprived of a protection once granted to him and which he still badly needs.

We have known Mr Sifaoui, his life and his career, for many years. He has been a journalist since 1988. His whole career demonstrates his honesty, his bold courage, and his involvement in the defence of civil liberties, secularism, human rights and women's rights. He worked in Tunisie and in Algeria. In Algeria he was a journalist at radio "Alger Chaine 3", and for the daily papers “Soir d'Algérie”, “Horizons”, “Le quotidien d'Oran”, “l'Authentique”, and a chief editor for the weekly “Le chroniquer”. He was also the correspondent in Algiers for the French weekly "Jeune Afrique".

In 1996, he barely escaped the bomb blast that killed so many independent journalists at the Maison de la Presse where most independent newspapers were housed. It is a well-known fact that armed fundamentalists in Algeria targetted journalists and especially those of “Le Soir d'Algérie” where Mr Sifaoui was working. After this traumatic event, Mr Sifaoui devoted his life as a journalist, opposing fundamentalists.

In 1999, he courageously opposed President Bouteflika's policy of 'national reconciliation' which granted impunity to fundamentalists with blood on their hands. Moreover this 'reconciliation' and its later developments forbade any truth finding, any enquiry into responsibilities for killings and massacres of the population: contrary to all known examples of 'truth and reconciliation commissions', this reconciliation is based on silencing the victims and veiling the facts. Harrassed by police and judiciary, receiving daily death threats, Mr Sifaoui came into exile in France where he was granted political asylum.

By January 2000, he resumed his activities as a journalist and a writer, especially at radio BFM and the weekly Marianne. He was also the correspondent in Paris of "La voix du Luxembourg". He immediately started investigating on Islamist groups in France. Subsequently, he received several death threats that led the Minister of Interior to give him around-the-clock police protection in January 2003. While death threats have continued non-stop over the years, this protection was removed in January 2008.

Mr Sifaoui is a well known writer: he published several books in French, among which: My brothers the assassins, France sick with Islamism, On the tracks of Ben Laden, Combatting Islamic terrorism, etc. A well-known reporter, he has done several segments for television and radio (on French, German and Canadian channels). He also gives conferences and is regularly invited as a speaker by NGOs.

Mr Sifaoui works very closely with secular and feminist groups. In Algeria as well as in France, Mr Sifaoui was outspoken on women's oppression in Muslim countries. Himself a Muslim believer, he spoke numerous times against the veiling of women, which he describes as a political flag for fundamentalists, as an instrument and symbol of submission of women.

He works with the well-known French women's rights organisation 'Ni Putes Ni Soumises' and with the secular French organisation 'Prochoix', and was elected on the board of SOS Racism since October 2007. He publicly took position against Tariq and Hani Ramadan who refused to condemn stoning to death for adulterous women. He is a signatory of Durban I and II petitions. He publicly condemned attacks on civilians in Israel, September 11 terrorist acts, Paris bombings in 1995, as well as bombings in London, Madrid, etc. In numerous public fora, he supported minority religious groups, gay groups, secularism, human rights and democracy. He supported freedom of speech, freedom of thought and freedom of the press, when he testified in court for the French weekly Charlie Hebdo and the Danish daily Jyllands Posten, at the time of the cartoons' controversy.

Mr Sifaoui, a well-known human rights defender and defender of the human rights of women, deserves continued protection from France.

We demand of the French Government that full protection be granted to him as it was in the past. Failing to do that at the earliest would place on France the responsibility of any further attack on Mr Sifaoui.

Sincerely yours,

[Your name / organization]

SAMPLE LETTER

Dear ______________,

We are writing to express our deep concern over the persistent tolerance of polygyny (the marriage of a man to more than one woman, often referred to as polygamy) in Canada. Through media reports and information received from our colleagues in Canada, we have been following the development of the polygamous community of Bountiful, British Columbia, run by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS). Throughout the latter half of the 20th century, this community has continued to practice polygyny which we maintain is not only against Canadian law, but is a violation of the rights of women, girls and boys. We understand that criminal investigations have been launched in the province of British Columbia, yet the claim of the ‘right to religious freedom’ is halting this process. We strongly believe that human rights are indivisible and the right to religious freedom must not be allowed to impinge upon the rights of the women and children of the communities who face early and forced marriages, domestic and sexual violence, and the limitations of their autonomy and independence. Religion is a personal choice and we are deeply concerned to see the Canadian government acquiescing to religious groups under the pretext of multicultural accommodation.

We applauded the decision of the government of Ontario in 2005 to disallow religious arbitration in that province, on the grounds that parallel legal systems are undemocratic and unfair. Due to gender imbalances that cut across religious and cultural communities, it was evident to us, given our network’s experience of parallel legal systems, that women often do not have the same capacity to access the formal legal structure and make autonomous decisions regarding their marriages, divorces, and children. We see similar challenges facing the women and children of Bountiful, B.C. and are not convinced that they are freely entering into these polygynous marriages without coercion or indoctrination. These are Canadian citizens and we find it abhorrent that they are being denied the same rights and freedoms as others.

These cases of polygyny are clearly not confined to any single religion or culture, as evidenced by the recent case of Mrs. Safa Rigby in Toronto, Ontario. Mrs. Rigby found that her husband of 14 years had recently married two other women while she was away with her children. We urge the government of Ontario to follow British Columbia's lead and begin to launch a criminal investigation into polygamist marriages in that province. Section 293 of the Canadian Criminal Code clearly states that: “Everyone who practices or enters into or in any manner agrees or consents to practice or enter into any form of polygamy, or any kind of conjugal union with more than one person at the time, celebrates, assists or is a party to rite, ceremony, contract or consent that purports to sanction a relationship mentioned in subparagraph or is guilty of an indictable offense ...” We urge the federal and provincial governments throughout Canada to immediately address this issue and take speedy and concrete measures to eliminate polygamy in Canada at the level of law and policing and not to cower to calls for ‘religious freedoms’ when these freedoms clearly violate the safety, security and fundamental human rights of citizens.

Yours sincerely,

[Your name / organization]

Please notify us of any action taken, at wluml@wluml.org

SAMPLE LETTER:

[Salutation],

We write to express our deep concern over the detention of six leading members of the Bahá’í faith. According to information we have received, on the morning of May 14th, 2008, Mrs. Fariba Kamalabadi, Mr. Jamaloddin Khanjani, Mr. Afif Naeimi, Mr. Saeid Rezaie, Mr. Behrouz Tavakkoli, and Mr. Vahid Tizfahm were arrested from their homes in Tehran by agents of the Ministry of Intelligence and taken to Evin prison. The government intelligence agents entered their homes and spent up to five hours searching each home, before taking them away. The six leaders are members of the informal national-level coordinating group of Bahá’ís in Iran known as the Friends. This organization was established, with the knowledge of the government, to help cope with the diverse needs of Iran’s Bahá’í community. A seventh leader of the same group, Mrs. Mahvash Sabet, has been arrested in Mashhad on March 5th 2008 and is reportedly still detained.

The detainees are currently being held incommunicado without access to legal counsel and have only been allowed to contact their family members for the first time on June 19th. According to the Iranian government, the six leaders were ostensibly arrested “for security reasons and not for their faith”. Over the past 30 years, however, the repeated deployment of such national security claims without adequate documentation lack substantial basis. Given that Bahá’í detainees have always been promised release if they agree to recant their faith, we are concerned that the threat against national security is a pretext for continued persecution of the Bahá’í community in Iran. Therefore, these recent arrests appear to us to be another manifestation of the ongoing persecution and discrimination practices against the Bahá’ís and other religious minorities in Iran.

The continued practice of discriminating against religious minorities places Iran in violation of its international legal obligations. In addition to being among the 48 member states of the United Nations in 1948 that unanimously adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Iran has also signed and ratified two covenants on human rights: the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The rights of members of religious minorities are held by Article 18 of both the UDHR and the ICCPR, namely the right of everyone to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. Article 2(2) of the ICESCR binds states parties "to guarantee" while Article2 of the ICCPR binds the states parties "to respect and to ensure" the rights “enunciated" and "recognized" in the Covenants. Furthermore, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights has passed more than 20 resolutions expressing concern about human rights violations in Iran, and each has made specific mention of the situation of the Bahá’í community there.

We therefore urge the Iranian authorities to immediately release the detained Bahá’í leaders and to uphold the rights of Iranian religious minorities in full accordance with international law and obligations. Until the release of the detainees, we call upon the Iranian authorities to ensure their safety and security as well as their access to legal counsel.

Thank you for your attention and we look forward to your response to this serious matter.

Yours Sincerely,

[Your name]

1. Conform to the constitution and all international and human rights instruments to which Nigeria is a signatory.

2. Resist the move by Senator Ufot Eme Ekaette, Senate Committee Chairperson on Women and Youth, in compelling legislators to legislate on morality and imposition of a national law on dress code for the Nigeria citizens.

3. Reconsider their position and reject the enactment of such a complicated moral issues into law for the benefit of females and Nigeria as a whole.

4. Realize that Nigeria is a secular state and not founded on any religious affiliation as imposition of dress code connotes a strong affiliation to religious tenets and principles as a result compelling Nigerians to be bound by tenets favouring religious sects.

5. Legislate with the sense of urgency on thriving national development and human rights issues in relation to alleviating the plight of the masses and vulnerable in the society.

6. Ensure in all circumstances respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in accordance with the national constitution, international human rights standards and international instruments ratified by Nigeria

SAMPLE LETTER

His Excellency, Senator Abubakar T. Ayuba
National Assembly Complex
Three Arms Zone
P.M.B 141 Abuja
Nigeria

[Date]

Subject: Nigerian Bill on ‘Indecent Dressing’

Dear Senator,

[I am] / [We are] concerned after having received news from women’s rights organisations in Nigeria of the ‘Bill for an Act to Prohibit and Punish Public Nudity, Sexual Intimidation and Other Related Offences’ (hereafter ‘Bill’) in Nigeria. We are particularly concerned with the way this Bill, which was initiated by Senator Ufot Eme Ekaette, has the potential to deny constitutional rights and is discriminatory against women. In addition to legislating on morality (which is distinct from law), this Bill provides an expansive definition of public nudity well beyond its ordinary meaning, thereby overlooking the diverse cultural and belief systems in Nigeria. The Bill is contrary to constitutionally and internationally guaranteed rights which prohibit discrimination on basis of gender. It also gives wide powers to police officers to invade individuals’ personal lives. We are troubled by the fact that this Bill has already successfully passed the first and second hearings of the floor of the Senate.

Not only does this Bill have the potential to police women’s bodies in Nigeria, its implementation will also mean that the police are free to intrude on women’s bodies on the pretext of upholding the provisions of this Bill – for instance checking with tape measures that articles of clothing are of the appropriate length as deemed by the Bill. While the provisions of the Bill demand that men be clothed from waist to knee, the requirement for women’s clothing is much stricter, almost to the point of absurdity and fetishizes female anatomy. We, along with women’s rights organisations in Nigeria, are also concerned that in the face of substantial development and human rights challenges facing Nigeria, the government prefers to spend precious time and resources on more trivial issues such as this Bill. Furthermore, it is a shocking misrepresentation to ignore corruption, abuse of power, lack of accountability and embezzlement as fundamentally indecent and immoral (the cumulative effects of which are a massive loss of a sense of decency, lives, quality of life and potentials in Nigeria), in order to focus on restricting women’s clothing including specifying to the inch how long sleeves must be.

[I am] / [We are] are particularly concerned with the way this unconstitutional and gender-discriminatory Bill seeks to regulate women’s bodies under the pretext of safeguarding ‘decency’ and ‘morality’ and preserving discriminatory traditions. We also take this opportunity to point out that as the incumbent President of the United Nations Human Rights Council, Nigeria has to set a standard in its obligatory role in the promotion of human rights commencing with the human rights situation of its citizens.

In light of the nature of this Bill and the way it will deny Nigerians, especially women, their basic rights, we urge you to:

1. Ensure that the constitution and all international and human rights instruments to which Nigeria is a signatory are conformed with.

2. Resist the move by Senator Ufot Eme Ekaette, Senate Committee Chairperson on Women and Youth, in compelling legislators to legislate on morality and imposition of a national law on dress code for Nigerian citizens.

3. Reject the enactment of such complicated moral issues into law for the benefit of females and Nigeria as a whole.

4. Acknowledge that Nigeria is a secular state and not founded on any religious affiliation. The imposition of a dress code connotes a strong affiliation to religious tenets and principles, consequentially compelling Nigerians to be bound by the same.

5. Legislate with a sensitivity and priority regarding the challenges facing Nigerian national development and human rights issues in relation to alleviating the plight of the masses and vulnerable in the society.

6. Ensure that respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in accordance with the national constitution, international human rights standards and international instruments which have been ratified by Nigeria are upheld in all circumstances.

Yours Sincerely,

_______________.