Entries (34)

• Argentina

  Between 1976 and 1983, the military dictatorship in Argentina kidnapped, tortured and killed thousands of people. In the early 2000s, many direct perpetrators and high-ranking officials were brought before courts. However, many dictatorship crimes remain unresolved today, especially with respect to cases of corporate involvement in crimes of the military dictatorship. ECCHR has since its establishment been supporting cases examining corporate liability and high-ranking military officials in Argentina. 

  The proceedings against managers of Mercedes Benz Argentina, sugar company Ledesma and mining company Minera Aguilar SA show that dictatorship crimes always also have an economic dimension. In those cases, company employees supported Argentine security forces in abducting trade unionists and other staff members. These actions likely amounted to aiding and abetting the crimes of the dictatorship in order to further their own business interests.

  ECCHR submitted legal briefs in ongoing proceedings against Mercedes Benz, Ledesma and Minera Aguilar arguing that the Argentine government and judiciary are obliged to hold economic actors liable for their role in human rights abuses committed during the military dictatorship.

  Alongside these cases, Wolfgang Kaleck, founder and general secretary of ECCHR, has for many years been involved in litigation in the case of German citizen Elisabeth Käsemann. Käsemann, who had been politically active in the opposition to the Argentine military dictatorship, was kidnapped and tortured in 1977. The exact circumstances of her death have never been properly examined. 

• Arms exports

  Arms exports to repressive regimes; the sale of arms components to conflict parties; the illegal trade of rifles – European arms and ammunition producers time and again overstep (international) law. Lax guidelines and insufficient export controls fuel the deadly business with European weapons. Transnational corporations and corrupt elites are the biggest winners of this system. Civilians in conflict regions, authoritarian states and elsewhere suffer the use of these arms – arms trade violates their safety instead of protecting it.
  
  In 2014, the national security forces in the federal state of Guerrero in Mexico disappeared 43 students from a local university – a crucial role played an arms export by Heckler & Koch.
  
  Despite extensive evidence of war crimes and other international crimes being committed in Yemen, several companies as RWM Italia (a subsidiary of German arms manufacturer Rheinmetall AG) continue to provide members of the Saudi-led coalition with weapons, ammunition and equipment.
  
  Research conducted by human rights organizations indicates that the use of small arms, including those produced by European companies, can also lead to gender-specific injustice and the increase in violence against women – and not just in conflict regions.
  
  One of the contradictions at the heart of the issue is that while corporations like Rheinmetall and Heckler & Koch profit from ongoing conflicts, the countries where these companies are based are in some cases providing humanitarian aid to the very population targeted by these arms.

  ECCHR takes legal actions to challenge inadequate arms export controls and to hold political decision makers as well as European corporations to account.

• Bahrain

  Since its independence in 1971, the Kingdom of Bahrain faced waves of protests, repeatedly met by the ruling elite around the royal Al-Khalifa family with repression and fundamental human rights violations against human rights defenders, political opposition leaders, independent media and religious leaders. Although systematic torture in political cases was brought to a halt in the late 1990s, it seems to have resumed since 2007.
   
  Following demonstrations in other Arab countries, thousands of peaceful demonstrators took to the streets of Bahrain in spring 2011 to call for reforms. The regime responded by brutally repressing protests with the help of foreign troops. Hundreds of human rights activists, opposition leaders, journalists, students and other critics of the regime were imprisoned. Many of those imprisoned were and continue to be abused and, in some cases, tortured. Others are still are still facing systematic surveillance, persecution, arrests and torture.
   
  The King of Bahrain has established the Independent Commission of Inquiry (BICI) to investigate the excessive violence used against demonstrators during the uprisings in 2011. The BICI published a strong report pointing out to the existence of systematic policies of arbitrary detention, torture and harassment as well as to the responsibility of those at the highest governmental echelons. The BICI was not mandated to analyze individual criminal responsibility but it issued a series of recommendations, following which a Special Investigation Unit was created to investigate torture allegations. However this only has led to a handful of prosecutions against low-ranking officers.
   
  Despite several witness testimonies stating that both senior state officials and members of the royal family are or were involved in this practice, no inquiry has been conducted against those high profile public figures accused of being responsible for torture neither in Bahrain nor in European countries which would be in a position to do so.

• Colombia

  For decades, Colombia has suffered under an armed conflict that particularly affects the civilian population. In the course of this conflict (and after), human rights defenders, trade unionists and activists have been labeled as guerrilla fighters, making them into ostensibly legitimate military targets for the Colombian army and paramilitary groups.
   
  In light of the ongoing violence suffered by human rights defenders, trade unionists and activists, and the crucial importance of their work for a free and democratic society, there is an urgent need to take legal action and deter future attacks. The same applies to the widespread sexual violence against women, which is committed by all parties to the conflict and is part of the military strategy. There is a real need to challenge the impunity often enjoyed by those responsible, especially by higher ranking officials. Impunity is also rife when it comes to the impact of transnational corporations' business practices in Colombia. The role of companies in human rights violations is rarely investigated, let alone examined before a court.

  In light of the above, the situation in Colombia – which is representative of many recurring global human rights violations – is a focus area of ECCHR's work. The goal is to hold accountable those responsible for international crimes, including the most powerful actors.  Since to date there have been no effective investigations against high-level state officials in Colombia, ECCHR and its Colombian partner organizations are also calling on the International Criminal Court (ICC) to take action.

• Colonial looted art

  Whether still on display in glass cases, gathering dust in archival depositories or undergoing inspection by scientists, countless cultural artifacts were once looted and shipped off to Germany during the colonial era. The German colonizers brought back statues, masks and bodily adornments to their home country for exhibition and research purposes. And these objects still reside there today, far away from the countries they came from, in spite of the fact that the colonies no longer exist and that formerly colonized peoples have demanded the return of their art – a part of their cultural and spiritual l identity and heritage.

  Germany not only has the moral, but also the legal obligation to return these stolen objects and cultural treasures. Because such artifacts often have a great spiritual significance for the affected communities beyond their artistic value, the restitution of these objects has a human and fundamental rights dimension that far exceeds the simple claim of property rights. We are currently supporting our partners in their efforts against the German state to assert their individual and collective rights to their own cultural identity.

  ECCHR has worked for many years to address colonial injustice and Germany’s responsibility for its colonial crimes. Together with our efforts to repatriate Human Remains/Ancestors, scholarly and legal work on the issue of plundered art constitutes an important part of our project on decolonial legal critique and reparations – a decolonial legal praxis.

  Our efforts are not only directed at helping specific affected individuals or communities restore stolen artifacts in a manner that preserves their dignity and sanctity. Comprehensive reparations – the only adequate response to colonial injustice – can only exist when coupled with a practice of restitution that goes beyond mere lip service or arbitrary decisions on individual cases. With our work on looted colonial art and artefacts, we aim above all to demonstrate how the law is still saturated with colonial patterns of thought. These structures must be broken.

• Corporate responsibility

  In Pakistan, workers died in a fire at a textile factory because fire safety measures had been neglected. In Peru, people living near a copper mine became ill after pollution leaked into the groundwater. In Bahrain, critics of the regime were arrested and tortured after police used commercial surveillance software to tap their phones and computers. In these three examples, responsibility for human rights violations can be traced back to foreign companies in Germany, Switzerland and the UK, respectively.

  Both in economic and legal terms, transnational corporations are the winners of the globalized economy. They are often caught up in a broad range of human rights violations, but the people running the firms are only rarely called before the courts, and even more rarely convicted for their wrongdoing.

  However, taking legal action against transnational corporations for violations in their global supply chain is slowly becoming a more viable option. Social movements and NGOs from the Global South are increasingly using legal tools to address human rights violations involving foreign companies by taking action in the countries where these firms are headquartered.
  
  ECCHR aims to use legal mechanisms to help break down unjust economic, social, political and legal power relations around the world. In its Business and Human Rights program, ECCHR assists the political and social struggles of those affected by corporate human rights violations by supporting strategic legal interventions in Europe.

• Crimes against humanity

  Crimes against humanity – defined as a systematic attack on a civilian population – tend to be planned or at least condoned by state authorities: heads of government, senior officials or military leaders. In some cases, companies also play a direct or indirect role in their perpetration.

  The term “crimes against humanity” was first defined during the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials. Under this definition the Nazis' mass extermination of the Jewish population in Europe and other groups was a genocide but it also constituted a crime against humanity as a whole.

  When crimes against humanity – which can include ethnic cleansing, enslavement or deportation of a population – are perpetrated today, those responsible for them can be prosecuted before the International Criminal Court or in certain national jurisdictions under the principle of universal jurisdiction. All too often, however, those responsible enjoy absolute impunity.

  ECCHR works to end impunity for crimes against humanity. Together with affected persons, civil society organizations and an international network of partner organizations and lawyers, ECCHR undertakes legal interventions to bring those responsible to justice. 

• Double standards

  Decision makers in Western democracies often apply double standards when it comes to human rights. While the Global North will condemn and in some cases prosecute war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the Global South, there is little appetite to examine the role played by Western politicians, military leaders and corporations in crimes against international law. Serious human rights violations committed by Western actors – such as torture, forced disappearances or civilian deaths by drone – are rarely prosecuted. It seems as though different standards apply to human rights abuses, depending on who commits them.

  ECCHR undertakes strategic legal interventions to challenge these double standards, to end the impunity of the powerful and to change power structures. ECCHR chooses cases that make political, economic and legal shortcomings visible, in order to force decision-makers in the Global North to question – and ideally, to dismantle – their double standards. 

• Drones

  The almost global capacity to conduct airstrikes anytime, anywhere: that is one of the most distinctive features of armed drones – and therefore a new dimension of warfare. Since many years the US employs drone strikes in the thousands. Again and again, innocent people are killed in the attacks – in many different countries.
   
  US drone warfare often violates international law, such as strict rules on the use of force and self-defense (ius ad bellum), principles and customs of war (ius in bello), basic human rights (namely the right to life and physical integrity), by attacking individuals without sufficiently determining their status. This results in blatant violations of human rights and international law.

  Litigation aims at restricting legal interpretations of the applicable laws and seeks to enforce fundamental (human) rights. Nevertheless, the US receives support from a number of European governments, including Germany and Italy, through sharing intelligence and allowing the US to operate military bases on European soil.

• Enforced disappearances

  The enforced disappearance of persons violates a number of fundamental human rights and often serves to cover-up further rights violations. In Latin America thousands of oppositionists disappeared during the 1970's and 80's. Many victims subsequently faced torture and murder; in other cases the fate of the disappeared remains unknown. Similar reports of disappearances are currently emerging from places such as Sri Lanka and the Northern Caucasus.

  In cases of enforced disappearance, the perpetrators include not only those who kidnap and detain the victim, but also those who withhold information from relatives relating to the victim's whereabouts. In an effort to address the multiplicity of fundamental human rights violations involved, the United Nations drew up the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance in 2006, which was ratified by Germany on 24 September 2009.

• France

  Here you can find all ongoing and past ECCHR cases in France.

• India

  The injustices caused by the global economy take many forms. Very often it is marginalized people, for instance in India, whose rights are sidelined so that Western corporations can profit. CEOs and politicians in the countries where these companies are based seek to evade responsibility by pointing to the companies' suppliers, subsidiaries or internal social responsibility guidelines. But corporate social responsibility policies and even international corporate guidelines do little to improve the situation of most workers or farmers in countries like India where many remain in the most precarious to devastating working conditions.

  School children given inadequate information about clinical trials undertaken by Western drug companies; famers who aren’t properly warned about the health risks attached to using pesticides – increasingly, people affected by corporate wrongs are organizing and resisting. ECCHR supports them and their organizations in what are often political struggles for social and economic rights. By making legal interventions with international bodies (e.g. the UN Food and Agriculture Organization) or before domestic courts (e.g. the Supreme Court of India), ECCHR works with those affected to put an end to Western corporate wrongs in India.

• Italy

  Here you can find all ongoing and past ECCHR cases in Italy.

• Namibia

  From the 19th century, Namibia’s indigenous communities were robbed of their land and their cattle and subsequently driven into exile, initially by missionaries and merchants under the  direct responsibility of the colonial power of the German Kaiserreich. Between 1904 and 1908, the German Schutztruppe (“protection force”) forcefully suppressed the Ovaherero and Nama peoples’ uprisings and killed the majority of the population – estimates put the number of those killed at over 70,000. The genocide of the Ovaherero and Nama was the first genocide of the 20th century. The German government still refuses to pay reparations to the descendants of those affected.

  Since 2018, ECCHR has been providing legal advice to representatives of the Namibian civil society, especially from the Ovaherero and Nama groups, and is working with them to help further communicate their demands – which include the repatriation of human remains to Namibia and the return of artworks stolen during the colonial era – in Germany. Our work aims to help decolonialize the law and address colonial injustices in Germany and Namibia. We seek to facilitate dialogue between the different actors in this field – for example through international symposia in Germany and Namibia.

  Through its work on Namibia, ECCHR aims to highlight and question colonial continuities in the law. In proceedings before a US court, for instance, in which Ovaherero and Nama communities are suing Germany for the genocide, the German state has rejected the application of present-day international law. Instead, it prefers to rely on the law in force during colonial times – law that denied colonized peoples not only a status as subjects of international law, but also minimum protections under international humanitarian law. ECCHR seeks to highlight other viable legal arguments beyond the current dominant interpretations of the law in this area.

• Pakistan

  Here you can find all ongoing and past ECCHR cases in Pakistan.

• Pesticides

  In Europe and North America, it goes without saying that a pesticide may only be sold if the producer explicitly warns the consumer and public of the product’s risks. Consumers are even required to have official safety certification before purchasing certain pesticides. This is not the case, however, when international agrochemical corporations sell their products in the Global South. India is one example of a country where international companies sell pesticides that are strictly regulated or even banned in the companies’ home states.
  
  In some cases pesticide companies ignore both local rules and internationally-recognized standards. It seems that when it comes to the right to health, life and the preservation of natural resources, the law does not apply equally to all. This is clear from several cases examined by ECCHR in India and the Philippines since 2013.
  
  Wrongdoing by agrochemical companies has to date rarely come before the courts. The liability of pesticide producers for health and environmental harm has been recognized in only very few cases, largely because of the legal obstacles. ECCHR tries to overcome these difficulties by using alternative legal tools such as lodging complaints with the Panel of Experts on Pesticides Management at the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).

• Pushbacks

  Kilometers of barbed wire exclusion fences, thousands of high-tech patrols at sea, in the air and on land, pushback agreements with neighboring countries: the European Union goes to great lengths to exclude people fleeing from war, persecution and hardship in their home countries. To justify their actions leaders in Brussels and the EU member states claim the pushbacks are politically necessary and permitted under law.

  Every other week another boat carrying migrants and refugees capsizes or sinks off the coast of Italy or Malta. Witnesses frequently report instances of abuse at the borders between Turkey and Greece. There is a steady climb in the number of people who lose their lives while trying to cross the Moroccan-Spanish border. All of these events serve as evidence of the terrible failure of the EU’s asylum and refugee policies.

  Illegal pushbacks or forced returns at EU borders represent a flagrant violation of fundamental human rights and refugee laws. In the Spanish enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla on the northern coast of Africa, refugees and migrants are repeatedly subjected to brutal violence from border guards. Anyone attempting to enter these Spanish cities – and thereby reach EU territory – is immediately deported to Morocco without any examination of their right to asylum.

  Since 2014, ECCHR has been examining the scope for legal intervention against the practice of pushbacks in the EU and has been helping affected persons with individual legal proceedings.

• Rescue at sea

  Since 2014, search-and-rescue (SAR) NGOs have been constantly present in the Mediterranean. They seek to fill the rescue gap left by the lack of state-organized SAR operations by providing vital humanitarian assistance to those who have to make the life-threatening journey across the sea. However, several EU countries have started to implement stricter migration policies which encompass the criminalization of NGOs carrying out SAR activities. The systematic criminalization of what is essentially human rights work has severely restricted and decreased SAR missions conducted by NGOs.

  In its effort to counteract human rights violations ensuing from policies of criminalization, ECCHR submitted two complaints to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders addressing the ongoing criminalization of crew members of the NGO rescue ships Iuventa and Sea-Watch 3. Both complaints seek to address not only the systematic criminalization of the activists, but also the smear campaigns against SAR NGOs and the seizure of rescue ships. By proving that such cases are not isolated incidents but part of an established policy, ECCHR aims to counter this worrying trend of criminalizing those who rescue lives at sea.

• Resource exploitation

  Mining, timber felling, wind farms and hydro-electric dams – resource exploitation can result in contaminated water, heavy metals in the blood of local residents, forced displacement, land grabbing and the violent suppression of peaceful protests. Economic activities in the Global South far too often disregard the plight of people and the environment.

  Heads of the large multinational companies that are responsible for such harm say their liability is limited. State and private investors who finance these projects argue that they have limited influence over what happens on the ground. And also political decision makers often evade their responsibility to defend the rights of affected people against corporate interests.

  ECCHR seeks to challenge this. Looking at resource exploitation, we see that the responsibility for endangering human rights and the environment lies with those who profit most from these industries in the global economy. We work with those affected by such human rights violations to enforce their rights.

• Sexual and gender-based violence

  Rape, sexual assault, forced pregnancy and sexual slavery: these are all sexual violence. In repressive regimes and armed conflict, the military, secret services and police often use these and similar methods as part of their strategy to oppress the civilian population. Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) is used as a tool against women and girls, as well as men and boys – based on their socially-assigned roles or deviation from such norms (as in the case of LGBTIQ persons). Sexual and gender-based violence attacks the dignity and sexual integrity of those affected. Social norms often prevent those affected from talking about their experiences, and crimes are rarely reported to authorities, prosecuted or dealt with socially. The physical, psychological, economic and social consequences affect the survivors but also their families and communities.

  International criminal law allows sexual and gender-based crimes to be prosecuted as acts of genocide, crime against humanity and war crime. In practice, however, investigations, trials and rulings fail to reflect the prevalence and magnitude of these crimes. This is due to gender discrimination being both a root cause of SGBV, as well as the reason impunity for crimes persists. Sexual and gender-based crimes’ depiction and legal classification as an individual, rather than widespread and systematic, crime fails to reflect its frequent nature and the political aim behind their commission.

  ECCHR has worked to counter the silencing and trivialization of, and impunity for sexual and gender-based crimes since 2010.

• Shrinking spaces and authoritarianism

  Whenever states and corporations stifle critical voices and crackdown on political dissent – whether in the streets, on social media, or in the courtroom – they shrink civic space necessary for a democratic society based on human rights to thrive.

  Overly broad “counter-terrorism” frameworks, digital surveillance targeting journalists and activists, or the increasing criminalization of solidarity with refugees are only some examples of how civil society is targeted increasingly all over the world. Such authoritarian policies and practices occur in democracies and dictatorships alike.

  In the last decade, worldwide intersectional emergencies such as the climate crisis, rising far-right populism and the pandemic have posed collective challenges that impact everyone, even if unequally, no matter where in the world we live. However, civil society is constantly resisting to (re)claim its space. 

  ECCHR’s work is only possible through in collaboration and solidarity with civil society actors around the globe. Many of our partners – be it in Mexico, The Gambia or Italy – face varying degrees and types of pressure, restrictions and even physical attacks, intended to repress their activities, expression and ability to organize. The Shrinking spaces and authoritarianism project hopes to support them in efforts to cope, resist, and innovate new ways to strengthen progressive civic power. Through legal and discursive interventions, ECCHR will draw attention not only to how civil society space is under attack in different contexts, but also to how it is being defended and by whom.

• Social audits and certifications

  Inspections, certifications, safety audits: what sounds helpful is often a sham. So-called safety and working condition audits are of little use to workers in global production and supply chains or residents of (agro)industrial areas. Instead of state inspections, for which there is rarely sufficient money or political will, private companies monitor labor, health and environmental standards.
  
  This social auditing and certification system helps European buyers claim they are “doing something,” although in reality, it intensifies problems in the supply chain. By appearing to be a functioning, independent inspection of the supply chain, the system prevents the actors responsible – factory owners, manufacturers, distributors, and especially governments – from developing effective mechanisms to improve working conditions. The same applies, for example, to certifications of the sustainability of plantations, and the safety of medical products or hazardous structures such as dams.
  
  However, repeatedly there are serious problems with inspections by private companies. Certifiers are sometimes commissioned and paid by the companies they inspect – undoubtedly a conflict of interest. Moreover, audits (also known as “conformity assessments”) often only provide snapshots of operations, especially when visits are announced, as is typical. In some cases, only issues with easily measurable indicators are examined, such as mandatory overtime and firefighting equipment. By making these visible and ignoring others, certifiers suggest that other problems, such as pressure on trade unions, discrimination or sexual harassment, do not exist. Inspection methods are also often problematic, for example, only using data from the inspected company’s management, interviewing workers in front of their superiors, or neglecting trade unions’ views.
  
  ECCHR’s cases highlight a structural problem: in addition to their clients, certifiers bear responsibility for the environment and human rights, but it is difficult to hold them accountable. Particularly in high-risk industries such as mining and textiles, those responsible for safety, the environment and human rights must not be obscured by long and disperse decision-making chains. One possible solution is to create legal standards on quality control for social and sustainability audits, similar to those already in place for other types of certification.

• Spain

  Here you can find all ongoing and past ECCHR cases in Spain.

• Sri Lanka

  Ever since the final stages of the Sri Lankan civil war in 2009, issues of the criminal accountability for war crimes, crimes against humanity and the ongoing sexualized violence against women have been part of ECCHR's legal case work. According to a United Nations report, more than 70,000 civilians lost their lives during the Sri Lankan army's final offensive against the rebel Tamil Tigers (LTTE) lasting from the end of 2008 until May 2009. Women and girls were repeatedly subjected to sexualized violence in the course and aftermath of the war.

  To date no one has been held accountable for the civilian deaths and the suspected crimes against international law in Sri Lanka. On taking office in January 2015, President Sirisena announced plans to address the grave war crimes, stating that with the help of the international community he wished to establish an independent national judicial mechanism. Just three months later, in April 2015, he reneged on his promise. He made it clear that the mechanism would not have any power to prosecute but instead be of truth-seeking nature only. For this, he said, Sri Lanka would not need any international help.

  A number of high-ranking members of the Sri Lankan army suspected of involvement in war crimes took up diplomatic posts in European and other countries after the conflict came to an end. As a result they could only face prosecution if their diplomatic immunity was revoked. ECCHR calls for greater care to be taken in future with the accreditation of Sri Lankan diplomats. When visas are being issued to diplomatic embassy staff serious efforts must be made to investigate claims that the individual may be linked to war crimes. If necessary, these efforts must include independent preliminary investigations by the relevant prosecution authorities.

• Surveillance technology

  Many states now resort to the systematic surveillance of their citizens. In authoritarian states surveillance is all too often used as a means of oppression. With a couple of clicks, authorities in states like Syria, Bahrain, Turkey and Ethiopia can control a person’s computer or smartphone. The intercepted data is used to systematically spy on networks of political and human rights activists, journalists and political opponents. In many cases this surveillance is a precursor to further human rights violations: detention, torture, forced confessions and wrongful convictions.

  The spy software and technical support for this surveillance is often provided by corporations based in European states – including the UK and Germany. This is made possible by lax export controls and regulations. The companies fail to take any responsibility for human rights violations committed through the use of their products.

  ECCHR takes legal action, e.g. criminal complaints and OECD complaints, against software companies that contribute or could be contributing to serious human rights violations such as the unlawful arrest, detention and the torture of regime critics and activists.

• Syria

  Since 2012, ECCHR has worked to address crimes in Syria with a network of Syrian partners, consisting in particular of victims and survivors, activists and lawyers. Together with international allies, all have fought tirelessly over the past 13 years for justice and the reckoning with crimes committed by the Syrian regime and other actors.

  The first trial worldwide on state torture in Syria was held in Germany between April 2020 and January 2022 at the Higher Regional Court in Koblenz. The main defendant was Anwar R, a former official of President Bashar al-Assad’s Syrian General Intelligence Directorate. In January 2022, the court convicted Anwar R, sentencing him to a lifelong prison term for crimes against humanity. The court had already sentenced his colleague, Eyad A, in February 2021 to four years and six months in prison for aiding and abetting torture in at least 30 cases.

  In June 2018, it also became known to the public that the German Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) had issued an arrest warrant against Jamil Hassan, head of the Syrian Air Force Intelligence Service until July 2019. The al-Khatib trial in Koblenz and this warrant, which can be enforced internationally, are milestones in the struggle for justice and accountability in the name of all those affected by Assad’s torture system. A series of criminal complaints, filed by ECCHR together with more than 100 Syrians – torture survivors, relatives, activists and lawyers – in Germany, Austria, Sweden and Norway since 2016, contributed to these outcomes.

  In January 2024, we filed an additional criminal complaint against Turkish-backed militias, including the Syrian National Army (SNA), which have been committing war crimes and crimes against humanity against the predominantly Kurdish civilian population since the “Olive Branch” military operation in the northern Syrian region of Afrin in 2018.

  For the duration of Assad's rule, major hurdles stood in the way of addressing these international crimes. First, Syria is not a state party to the International Criminal Court, and secondly, Russian and Chinese vetoes in the UN Security Council blocked a referral of the situation to the ICC. This meant that the only remaining route to justice was via national courts. In some third countries, for example in Germany, the principle of universal jurisdiction makes it possible to take legal action against such criminal acts and hold low-ranking and high-ranking perpetrators accountable. 

  The fall of the Assad regime after 54 years of dictatorship and 13 years of bloody civil war opens up new avenues to legally address the crimes of dictatorship that were previously foreclosed. Syrian civil society and the international community are now discussing what exactly a process of reckoning and reparation should look like.

• Textile industry

  The collapse of the Rana Plaza factory building in April 2013 in Dhaka, Bangladesh and the fire at Ali Enterprises in Karachi, Pakistan in September 2012 are two particularly drastic examples of the inhumane working conditions endured in southern Asia by those producing goods for the European market. Payment below the living wage, excessive overtime hours on six to seven days per week, workplace abuse and discrimination, repression of trade unions and frequent workplace accidents and fire disasters: this is the sad reality faced by millions of workers in South and East Asia. European companies aggravate the already poor conditions by demanding low prices and tough deadlines. This pressure is passed along to the workers by the factory owners.
   
  European companies do require their suppliers to comply with codes of practice and hire certification firms to monitor working conditions. What the Ali Enterprises case shows, however, is that this kind of auditing and certification is wholly unsuitable for effecting meaningful improvement in the lives of local workers. This situation makes it all the more important to establish what liability is borne by certification firms and by companies like German clothing discounter KiK.

• Torture

  The law is clear: torture is prohibited under any circumstances. Whoever commits, orders or approves acts of torture should be prosecuted. This is set out in the UN Convention against Torture which has been ratified by 146 states.
  
  Failure to punish and acknowledge torture adds to the trauma of survivors and their families; individual as well as collective traumas persist. The cycle of torture, impunity and further injustice cannot be broken without addressing these crimes, including through the law. This is why – where torture is used as part of a policy – it is important to hold not only low-ranking perpetrators of torture accountable but also their superiors as well as political and military decision makers – including those from politically and economically powerful states.  
  
  In the fight against torture, ECCHR works with survivors and partner organizations to pursue a variety of legal avenues. In some cases, it might be appropriate to bring a case to the International Criminal Court, as with the torture and mistreatment of detainees by British forces in Iraq. ECCHR also takes cases based on the principle of universal jurisdiction in third states like Germany, Switzerland, Austria and Sweden, filing complaints against those responsible for the US torture program in the so-called "war on terror," against the Bahraini Attorney General, and against senior officials within the Syrian intelligence services.

• Ukraine

  Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has prompted a debate on how to best address international crimes arising from the conflict and hold those responsible for them to account. Despite a wide range of efforts by the Ukrainian government, civil society and the international community to pursue accountability for such crimes, there remain significant questions as to how this should be achieved and how international criminal law can be strengthened.

  The overwhelming response by many Western countries to the call for the swift application of international criminal justice to address the human rights situation in Ukraine is clearly a welcome development. However, it is nonetheless essential that any application of international justice avoids the pitfalls of double standards, as double standards may only serve to weaken institutions of international law in the long run.

  ECCHR is currently involved in several cases, as well as open source investigative collaborations, concerning human rights abuses in the war. Due to the restrictive circumstances of war-time conflict, both the gathering and the dissemination of information related to cases and investigations must contend with unique obstacles. Thus, our casework will be continually updated as information becomes both available and conveyable in light of changing events. Read more in Avenues for Accountability 

• US torture

  Guantánamo, Abu Ghraib, Bagram, secret detention centers in Eastern Europe; waterboarding, sleep deprivation, electric shocks – these are all symbols of a barbaric system of torture. As part of the so-called war on terror, the CIA and US military engaged in a systematic program of abduction, illegal detention and torture that was authorized at the highest levels.
  
  In response to the 9/11 attacks in 2001, the CIA and the US military – with approval at the highest levels – kidnapped, unlawfully detained and tortured hundreds of people. To seek accountability for these crimes, ECCHR works together with former Guantánamo detainees, the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) in New York, and partner lawyers in Europe (Gonzalo Boye, William Bourdon, Walter van Steenbrugge and Christophe Marchand) to pursue select legal interventions against the architects of the US torture program. These legal efforts focus mainly on high-ranking politicians, officials, intelligence agents and military personnel.

• USA

  Dictatorships and illiberal states are not the only ones who disregard human rights. Time and again, Western democracies violate fundamental human rights. Mass surveillance of their own citizens, drone strikes that kill civilians, the torture of detainees – these are just some of the crimes that for example the United States has overseen in recent years.

  After the 9/11 attacks, the US brutally pursued those they considered their "enemies." From early 2002, the CIA and the US military – with approval at the highest levels – kidnapped, unlawfully detained and tortured hundreds of people. The US torture program violated international as well as human rights law (including the UN Convention against Torture) – under the pretext of the fight against terrorism.

  The US use of armed unmanned aerial vehicles, also known as drones, as part of counter-terrorism operations began under President George W. Bush and was greatly expanded under President Barack Obama. The US uses armed drones to kill suspected terrorists overseas, including outside areas of armed conflict. In many cases the drones kill innocent civilians. The practice of using lethal force against individuals outside of any armed conflict, or – in the case of attacks conducted during an armed conflict – without properly determining their status (whether they are military targets or civilians) results in egregious violations of human rights and international (humanitarian) law.

  For more than ten years, ECCHR has been taking legal action against systematic US torture and unlawful drone strikes. The focus of our work is on establishing the accountability of those bearing the greatest responsibility: the senior politicians, officials, intelligence agents and military personnel who established and implemented these policies. 

• Uzbekistan

  The Uzbekistan human rights record is so appalling that the country is considered one of today’s most repressive regimes in the world. Freedom of expression is severely limited. Authorities intensified their crackdown on civil society activists, opposition members, and journalists. Torture is endemic in the criminal justice system. And the government forces more than one million adults and children to harvest cotton every year.
  
  ECCHR has been engaged in various proceedings to demand that the political and economical interests of Western actors do not further undermine human rights in Uzbekistan, but instead, that Germany, the European Union, and the International Labour Organization firmly abide by transparent and human rights-based policies, and uphold accountability where needed.

• War crimes

  Attacks directed against civilians; torture of detainees; sexual slavery – when committed within the context of armed conflict, these and other grave crimes amount to war crimes as defined by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. While the system of international criminal justice makes it possible to prosecute war crimes, in many cases those responsible are not held to account.

  There is often a huge gap between the promise of international criminal law and the reality of how it is enforced. While there have been trials for war crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, to date no politician or military officer from a Western state has ever sat on the defendant's bench at the International Criminal Court or a UN Special Tribunal. The double standards of international criminal justice in many cases represents an obstacle to the enforcement of universal human rights.

  When addressing crimes committed in armed conflict, it is essential that the law applies equally to all. ECCHR takes legal action to address war crimes like the abuse of Iraqi detainees by British soldiers and torture in detention facilities run by the Syrian intelligence services. ECCHR uses a range of legal approaches – submissions to the International Criminal Court, criminal proceedings in national jurisdictions, actions under the principle of universal jurisdiction – to challenge impunity for war crimes. 

• Yemen

  In a report from April 2018, the UN describes the war in Yemen as the “world’s worst humanitarian crisis,” one that has left over ten million people dependent on humanitarian aid to survive. Since 2015, thousands of civilians have been killed in the armed conflict; many more have died from famine and disease.

  While human rights violations are committed by all conflict parties in Yemen, one of the main causes of civilian casualties are airstrikes by the Saudi-led military coalition, which launched its military intervention in Yemen in March 2015. Along with Saudi Arabia, the coalition also includes the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, Kuwait and Sudan. Numerous reports by the UN and NGOs in Yemen and abroad document repeated and deadly attacks on civilian targets like hospitals, markets, schools and residential buildings.

  Despite all of the reports, warnings and evidence that the airstrikes by the Saudi-led coalition breach international humanitarian law, European companies are among those selling arms to the coalition states – with authorization from their respective European government authorities.

  Furthermore, since 2002, the US has been using targeted drone attacks in the name of “counter-terrorism” to kill people in Yemen suspected of being involved in terrorism. These strikes are not as “surgical” as the US claims, and often result in the deaths of civilians. So far, nobody has been able to legally put an end to the US drone strikes or the killings of the Yemeni civilian population.

  This is why ECCHR and its partner organizations from Yemen and in Europe are using the law to ensure that companies (complaint against Italian arms producer RWM Italia, a subsidiary of German firm Rheinmetall AG), and state authorities (administrative complaint against the German government for the involvement of US air base Ramstein) are held accountable for their role in aiding and abetting to civilian deaths in Yemen.