Israeli organization leads the UAE campaign to whitewash its human rights record
The European Microscope for Middle East Issues revealed that the UAE has assigned an Israeli organization headquartered in Ramat Gan, Israel, to lead and coordinate efforts to whitewash its European human rights image.
The European Microscope said that it had obtained secret documents showing that the organization called (IMPAC), the “International Movement for Peace and Coexistence,” has another headquarters in London, and another organization plays a significant role in it, called the “International Legal Forum” and is headed by the extremist Israeli, Arson Ostrovsky.
According to the follow-up of the European Microscope, the IMPAC organization, which currently leads the UAE lobby in international circles, launched a petition under the name of a coalition of 53 organizations. However, it became clear, upon examination, that some of them bear fictitious names, while others are semi-governmental organizations funded by Abu Dhabi and Bahrain and organizations that support Israeli settlement.
The coalition had launched its activities by launching a campaign of incitement against a Palestinian organization that defends the rights of Palestinian detainees in Israeli prisons called Samedoun, which Israel later included on the terrorist lists.
Among the participants in the coalition, the French imam of Tunisian origin, Hassan al-Shalghoumi, is known for his frequent visits to Israel and his support for normalization with it, as well as his support for the French extreme right and incitement against Muslim communities in Europe at the behest of Abu Dhabi.
The petition was launched to polish Abu Dhabi’s human rights record on the eve of the annual review of the UAE file at the International Human Rights Council, scheduled for the eighth of this month.
The petition praised that the UAE “has made great progress in promoting and protecting human rights in recent years and that these developments have significant implications for the wider Middle East region.”
News distribution companies distributed the news of the petition’s launch to the media for a fee.
The Emirates Lobby held a paid conference at the Press Club in Geneva last March, in parallel with the 52nd session of the Human Rights Council, under the pretext of discussing current and future challenges to human rights in the UAE.
Manal Mesalmi, a Tunisian with Belgian citizenship, represented the IMPAC organization in the Geneva Club and worked alongside the support of the Israeli lobby within an Emirati lobby in Brussels to coordinate meetings with the European Parliament in exchange for sums of money from Abu Dhabi.
The conference was promoted with the participation of eight experts in human rights. Still, it turned out that among them were two undergraduate students at the University of Geneva who attended for sums of money.
At the time, the UAE official media promoted a group of mercenaries as experts that Abu Dhabi uses for propaganda purposes to whitewash its human rights and humanitarian record by paying them financial bribes to buy positions.
The official Emirates News Agency (WAM) published a story titled: “Experts: The UAE is a pioneer and partner in decision-making in the global human rights file.”
The agency defined these international experts in the field of human rights as belonging to non-governmental human rights organizations, which are known by the acronym (NGO).
However, when examining the names referred to by the UAE agency, we will easily discover that some of the names mentioned do not work in human rights but rather with organizations funded by the UAE government, which makes these organizations (GONGO) and not (NGO).
The term (GONGO) refers to non-governmental organizations established or funded by governments to implement a specific social or political agenda or promote their political interests through nominally independent organizations.
Among these names, whom the UAE agency referred to as human rights experts, is Eric Gozlan, co-director of the International Council for Diplomacy and Dialogue. As we can quickly notice, Gozlan does not initially work in a human rights organization but rather in a political organization.
When reading Gozlan’s biography, we will discover that he studied economics and is a diplomat who has nothing to do with human rights to be a human rights expert.
The paradoxes do not stop here, of course. Gozlan’s biography, published by the International Council for Diplomacy and Dialogue, says that he works as a government advisor in the Middle East.
When searching a little deeper, we discover that Gozlan works as an advisor to the UAE government, and in particular, he works with the Emirati embassy in Brussels, which means that he is an employee of the Emirati government and not an independent expert as the Emirati media claims.
The second controversial figure is Manal Masalami, who is presented by (WAM) as the President of the European League for the Defense of Minorities, and the strange thing is that this association does not have a website on the “Internet” and has no impact on social networking sites, which raises doubts. This organization is fake.
Perhaps what confirms these suspicions is that the Emirati media referred to her by various names, such as the name of the President of the European Assembly, and that she was presenting herself a few months ago as an advisor in the European Parliament.
However, according to the follow-up of the European Microscope on Middle East issues, Manal Mesalmi is a Tunisian who holds Belgian citizenship and works within an Emirati lobby in Brussels to coordinate meetings with the European Parliament in exchange for sums of money from Abu Dhabi.
The UAE agency also refers to an unknown person named Kosei Atsu, describing her as an international expert in the field of human rights. Still, when searching for her on “Google” in various languages, you do not find any information about this personality. Her name appears only in the news of the Emirates News Agency, which does not define what Atsu does.
The agency also referred to Ayman Nasri, the head of the Arab-European Forum for Dialogue and Human Rights, which holds consultative status at the United Nations. Despite this, this organization does not have a website on the Internet or social networking pages.
Its President, Nasri, is an unknown figure who has appeared in the Egyptian media since 2019. Most of his statements are not related to human rights but rather a criticism of the opponents of the Emirates. He has no achievements in the field of human rights.
As for the other figures mentioned in the report, they are not independent in the first place. They are the two Bahrainis: Abdul Jabbar Al-Tayeb, President of the Bahraini Jurists Association, and Issa Al-Arabi, President of the Arab Union for Human Rights. International” and “Human Rights Watch” to obtain funding.
According to the Emirates News Agency, these “independent experts”, who work for the Abu Dhabi government directly or with funding from it, submitted a shadow report on human rights in the Emirates in preparation for reviewing the official account of the state, which Abu Dhabi will officially submit to the United Nations Human Rights Council next May.
Perhaps the greatest irony is that the shadow report launched by these “independent organizations” has praised the UAE more than the official report of the UAE, which confirms that the independence of these organizations is not guaranteed. The shadow report is a parallel report submitted by non-governmental organizations to monitor defects, not to praise the government.
It is noteworthy that until this moment, there is no published copy of the shadow report, which these organizations promised to make available to the public in 3 languages after the symposium. Still, according to the speakers, the content of the report includes excessive praise for the UAE, which makes it a copy utterly similar to the government report.
On the other hand, it is evident from similar reports of the Universal Periodic Review at the International Human Rights Council that human rights organizations have agreed that the UAE has not implemented the recommendations and violated human rights.
Recently, the Universal Periodic Review website published 16 parallel reports submitted by civil society organizations on the human rights situation in the UAE, co-authored by more than 30 organizations.
With the exception of only one report, submitted by organizations affiliated with the Abu Dhabi authorities, all other parallel words criticized the human rights situation in the UAE and indicated the authorities’ failure to fulfil their obligations during the previous review cycle, according to the UAE Detainees Advocacy Center.
Numerous reports indicated that the UAE had implemented only one of the 49 recommendations regarding freedom of expression and civil space. However, it accepted these recommendations during the comprehensive review cycle that took place in 2018.
In its report, the MENA Group for Human Rights indicated that although the UAE constitution prohibits torture, its legislation refrained from defining torture by the Convention Against Torture. Instead, it recommended ensuring its definition fully complies with the Convention against Torture.
MENA said that it has observed that the State Security Apparatus is responsible for a widespread pattern of human rights violations, including arbitrary arrest and detention, enforced disappearance, and torture, particularly against government critics, political opposition figures and human rights defenders, noting that many individuals were detained longer than the three months imposed by the 2003 State Security Law before being brought to court and charged.
The No Peace Without Justice organization highlighted in its report that the Federal Penal Code of 2021 restricted freedom of expression and speech, freedom of association, and peaceful assembly.
In the same context, the fourth joint report, submitted by the UAE Detainee Advocacy Center, CIVICUS, the Gulf Center for Human Rights (GCHR), and the World Organization Against Torture (OMCT), stated that the 2014 Anti-Terrorism Law and the 2021 Anti-Terrorism Law Rumors and cybercrime have similar limitations and the report recommended that they be amended in line with international standards.
The fourth joint report recommended that the UAE align its definition of terrorism with international standards and stop using it to arrest, detain and prosecute human rights defenders and activists for the peaceful exercise of their rights.
It also called on the UAE authorities to provide a safe and secure environment for members of civil society, human rights defenders, and journalists to carry out their work, to conduct impartial, thorough and effective investigations into all cases of killings, enforced disappearances, assaults, harassment and intimidation against them and to bring the perpetrators of these crimes to justice.
In addition, Amnesty International noted that Article 40 of the UAE’s counter-terrorism legislation allows for the indefinite detention of those who pose a terrorist threat or those who have been convicted of terrorist offences.
No Peace Without Justice stated in its report that these centres were used by the UAE authorities to suppress dissent and arbitrarily detain individuals for indefinite periods.
It warned that the UAE authorities are still holding 24 prisoners from the (UAE 94) group after the expiry of their sentences under the “advising” and combating terrorism laws.
The fifth joint report indicated that arbitrary deprivation of nationality is a measure used by the government to combat terrorism within the framework of the Nationality Law, noting that since the collective trial known as the “UAE 94”, no less than 60 people have been arbitrarily stripped of their nationality.
It is noteworthy that similar reports, or what is known as “stakeholder” reports, are reports prepared by non-governmental bodies in response to the official information submitted by each member state of the Council, periodically, at a rate of about once every four years, to the United Nations Human Rights Council.
