Human Rights For All
Home page > Statements and Petitions > Amnesty International and Cageprisoners - Statement by Gita (...)

Amnesty International and Cageprisoners - Statement by Gita Sahgal

Sunday 7 February 2010

Send this article by mail Send

Amnesty International Statement

http://livewire.amnesty.org/2010/02/07/human-rights-are-for-all/

o o o

Statement by Gita Sahgal

7 February 2010

This morning the Sunday Times published an article about Amnesty International’s association with groups that support the Taliban and promote Islamic Right ideas. In that article, I was quoted as raising concerns about Amnesty’s very high profile associations with Guantanamo-detainee Moazzam Begg. I felt that Amnesty International was risking its reputation by associating itself with Begg, who heads an organization, Cageprisoners, that actively promotes Islamic Right ideas and individuals.

Within a few hours of the article being published, Amnesty had suspended me from my job.

A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when a great organisation must ask: if it lies to itself, can it demand the truth of others? For in defending the torture standard, one of the strongest and most embedded in international human rights law, Amnesty International has sanitized the history and politics of the ex-Guantanamo detainee, Moazzam Begg and completely failed to recognize the nature of his organisation Cageprisoners.

The tragedy here is that the necessary defence of the torture standard has been inexcusably allied to the political legitimization of individuals and organisations belonging to the Islamic Right.

I have always opposed the illegal detention and torture of Muslim men at Guantanamo Bay and during the so-called War on Terror. I have been horrified and appalled by the treatment of people like Moazzam Begg and I have personally told him so. I have vocally opposed attempts by governments to justify ‘torture lite’.

The issue is not about Moazzam Begg’s freedom of opinion, nor about his right to propound his views: he already exercises these rights fully as he should. The issue is a fundamental one about the importance of the human rights movement maintaining an objective distance from groups and ideas that are committed to systematic discrimination and fundamentally undermine the universality of human rights. I have raised this issue because of my firm belief in human rights for all.

I sent two memos to my management asking a series of questions about what considerations were given to the nature of the relationship with Moazzam Begg and his organisation, Cageprisoners. I have received no answer to my questions. There has been a history of warnings within Amnesty that it is inadvisable to partner with Begg. Amnesty has created the impression that Begg is not only a victim of human rights violations but a defender of human rights. Many of my highly respected colleagues, each well-regarded in their area of expertise has said so. Each has been set aside.

As a result of my speaking to the Sunday Times, Amnesty International has announced that it has launched an internal inquiry. This is the moment to press for public answers, and to demonstrate that there is already a public demand including from Amnesty International members, to restore the integrity of the organisation and remind it of its fundamental principles.

I have been a human rights campaigner for over three decades, defending the rights of women and ethnic minorities, defending religious freedom and the rights of victims of torture, and campaigning against illegal detention and state repression. I have raised the issue of the association of Amnesty International with groups such as Begg’s consistently within the organisation. I have now been suspended for trying to do my job and staying faithful to Amnesty’s mission to protect and defend human rights universally and impartially.

19 Forum messages

  • Amnesty International and Cageprisoners 8 February 14:12, by Rohini

    Gita Sehgal is absolutely right. It is correct to defend the human rights of human rights violators, but quite another matter to ’defend’ their ’right’ to violate the rights of others. Amnesty cannot do this and remain loyal to its goals.

    Reply to this message

    • Amnesty International and Cageprisoners 17 February 19:20, by Rajalaksmi, New Delhi

      As a long time supporter of human rights and of Amnesty’s role in exposing some of the worst violations, I find this controversy is doing little to help the cause.I am rather confused by Ms Sahgal’s statement and your response to it. There are too many allegations/statements that have not been validated. You say that it is " correct to defend the human rights of human rights violators, but quite another matter to ’defend’ their ’right’ to violate the rights of others." Has Begg violated the rights of others? If so can we be told how? Can Ms Sahgal explain how Amnesty has defended the torture standard? WIthout a rational explanation for such accusations, I can only conclude that Ms Sahgal, despite her claim to being secular is as prone to biases as unthinking religious zealots.

      Reply to this message

      • Amnesty International and Cageprisoners 19 February 03:49, by muluberhan

        Gita says she defends human rights on the other hand she is opposing humban right organizations like Amnesty for associationg with cageprisoners. I don’t see any substance to her irritation other than cageprisoners being defenders of human right abuses for Muslim men and women. Her problem is not organizations that stand for human rights rather her frustration seems to me to have a credible organizations like cageprisoners that are working hard to expose humanright abuses for muslim men and women. The issue of oppresion of women in some muslims countries that she raised today Feb 18/2010 during her interview with the Canadian Broadocastiong corporation, I don’t see any substance other than generalizations and fearing Jihad and self defence during occupation.

        Reply to this message

        • Amnesty International and Cageprisoners 21 February 19:53, by Salil Tripathi

          Mulubehran,

          If you look at the work of Southall Black Sisters and Women Against Fundamentalism, you will get some information of the work being done to oppose patriarchal orders imposing on women’s rights. Another publication which outlines Ms Sahgal’s concerns on women’s rights vis-a-vis religious fundamentalism can be found in this book she edited, Refusing Holy Orders: http://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/.... As Salman Rushdie’s statement today points out, she has been one of the earliest defenders of the idea of free speech and dissent, particularly during the early days after Ayatollah Khomeini’s fatwa. I have been a panelist with her in London, where she has strongly condemned the violence against Muslims in the Indian state of Gujarat in 2002.

          I hope this assorted set of facts have been helpful.

          Thanks;

          Salil Tripathi

          Reply to this message

        • Amnesty International and Cageprisoners 21 February 19:56, by splig

          You are only seeing what you want to see my friend. But if you are honest with yourself - not easy for some - you know that the treatment of women in many muslim countries is a disgrace.

          Reply to this message

  • Amnesty International and Cageprisoners 11 February 15:22, by Lost Causes

    Just wanted to add a comment of support to Gita Sahgal’s actions.

    It cant have been easy given the overall aims and objectives of Amnesty and the opportunity as Head of Gender Unit to bring women’s human rights higher up the agenda to risk the possibility of losing that work.

    I cant say I totally understand the ins and outs of what has happened but I do absolutely support your right to have your concerns about the association of Amnesty with Cageprisoners properly answered.

    Hopefully if anything good comes out it will be a more scrupulous approach by Amnesty in choosing to campaign by association and a return to core activities.

    I just wanted to add this here as I’ve made a couple of comments over on the Guardian CiF site which might appear to be questioning you.

    What I was questioning was the way everybody has jumped on the bandwagon as an opportunity to state their existing views, but not answered the points you raised in your statement.

    Reply to this message

  • Amnesty International and Cageprisoners 12 February 12:05, by Cristina Cona

    Dear Gita,

    a few days ago I posted a message on livewire.amnesty where I said I would like to start a postcard-writing campaign for you, along the lines of similar campaigns carried out by Amnesty in support of prisoners of conscience over the years. Since Amnesty, formerly an organization supporting victims of repression, is now clearly joining the ranks of those who victimize others for voicing uncomfortable opinions, I think such a campaign would be more than appropriate. So, please consider this a virtual postcard. Keep up your spirits, and remember a lot of people out there are supporting you. Cristina

    Reply to this message

  • Amnesty International and Cageprisoners 12 February 14:54, by laura

    I’m from Italy and I would like to know if there is a petition in support of Gita. if so, I can traslate and send it to italian associations and left wing parties asking to sign it. laura

    Reply to this message

  • Amnesty International and Cageprisoners - Statement by Gita Sahgal 14 February 16:35, by Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui

    I know Gita for a long time and have worked with her on a number of campaigns. I have always felt uncomfortable with orgasisations,like Cageprisoners,whose human rights commitment is selective. I am one of those who, with Moazzam’s father, worked tirelessly for his freedom from Guantanamo Bay and was delighted when he was freed and said so when I met him for the first time after his return. I am distressed to know that Gita has been suspended by Amnesty, whom I have always supported. Best Wishes for Gita. Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui

    Reply to this message

  • I read Begg’s autobiography and felt it left many unanswered questions about his exact political position. I have often wondered where he stands today on issues such as women’s equality, gay rights etc. I would like to know more about his organisation and its position on these questions. Since I trust Gita’s politics, I presume that its position is incompatible with the human rights declarations which I support and which I believe should be universal. Thus I support Gita’s critique of Amnesty, an organisation which I have until now admired and supported. It is uncomfortable campaigning for the human rights of people who don’t themselves endorse a universal human rights position, and I’ll continue to live with that discomfort, but, like Gita, I see no reason why we should have any type of alliance with such reactionaries. In fact, we should do all we can to oppose them - without descending to abuse of their human rights - and this includes asking organisations like Amnesty to maintain clear distance from their inhumane and illiberal organisations.

    Reply to this message

  • Amnesty International has a great reputation for the support of political prisoners. And while I disagree with the "torture" and lack of trial of the guantanamo bad detaineers, I also disagree with Begg’s stances on women, religion and his actions in fighting for them.

    Amnesty international has a responsibility to fight for political prisoners, but also to hold them to the same level of enlightenment and human rights they support and condone.

    And sacking or standing down Gita for her expressing her concerns is terrible.

    Providing Begg with Amnesty International support to get him a trial and out of guatanamo is fine.... But do not put your name to warped, sexist, fascist and plain nasty organisation.

    I’m very disappointed and trust the Amnesty International will show some courage and moral fortitude and re instate Gita and cut off their ties to Begg.

    Reply to this message

  • Amnesty International has made a grave and cowardly error here. The right to freedom of conscience is NOT the right to impose one’s beliefs on others. I urge those who donate to AI to withhold payments until Amnesty returns to its core principles.

    Reply to this message

    • Amnesty International and Cageprisoners - Statement by Gita Sahgal 17 February 18:23, by David Williams Toronto Canada

      I want to add my voice to those who have highlighted AI’s terrible error. I would also like to thank Christopher Hitchens for writing so eloquently about Gita Saghal on Slate.com

      LINK: http://www.slate.com/id/2244802/

      Reply to this message

    • This is one more example of the West acting - not out of any convictions - but out of FEAR of offending the Islamists. There is an obvious double standard where Islamists’ feelings must be treated with the softest of kid gloves while everyone else is treated bluntly. E.g., the mass hysteria over the publishing of a cartoon of Mohammed. When Islamist web sites publish the most odious lies about Jews, Americans, British, etc. etc. etc., this is 100% tolerated in the name of free expression.

      Perhaps IA is afraid of an expression of "conscience" in the form of one more suicide bomber. If that is the reason - admit it. If that is not the reason, all that remains is one more case of hypocrisy.

      Reply to this message

  • I’m hoping you can pass this message of support to Gita Sahgal. I do not have an in depth familiarity with these matters but listened to Ms Sahgal and Amnesty on CBC here in Canada this morning and she made great sense to me.

    I make a point of signing and supporting Amnesty at my local church and have passed info about this on to volunteers there. May you and Amnesty (hopefully together) enjoy every success honouring you very best objectives particularly by continuing the work Amnesty started with.

    Reply to this message

  • As a muslim apostate and atheist, I find it unconscionable that Amnesty International is now allied with clerical fascists and against democracy.

    Iranian democrats are being slaughtered by people like the Cageprisoners. And AI who is supposed to defend the rights of Iranians is now defending the rights of the oppressors.

    How did AI transform from a left wing organization to a right-wing anti-democracy organization?

    No more checks to AI.

    Reply to this message

  • In response to “Who Speaks for Human Rights?”, an article by D.D. Guttenplan & Maria Margaronis published in The Nation on March 18, 2010 (http://www.thenation.com/doc/201004...) with regards to the recent Amnesty International controversy opposing the ONG and their employee, Gita Sahgal, head of Amnesty’s gender unit, over the organization’s high profile public association with Moazzam Begg (Cage Prisoners), two things can be said:

    First of all, Amnesty International seems to continue having difficulties in positioning itself in relation to the global problematic of political manipulation and terror in the name of religion. Secondly, Amnesty International’s endemic hesitation to deal with criticism is questionable for an organization of its stature and reputation. Amnesty International’s attitude on both scores is comparable to that of other international Human Rights Organizations, such as the Federation of Human Rights (FIDH), in France.

    In somewhat different ways related to cultural expression, and for reasons related to different historical situations and political choices, a fraction of the “Left Wing” or Liberal Cultures in several Western countries, such as France, the UK, the USA, have chosen, on occasion, and at times repeatedly, to whitewash crime executed in the name of religion. That all humans have the right to Human Rights is undisputable and human rights organizations have a mammoth task to bring any form of discrimination to the public’s attention. But that such organizations should align themselves or be associated in public with individuals, events and affiliated organizations that underwrite violence of any kind in the name of religion is unacceptable on all accounts, and also merits to be brought to public attention and especially to the attention of those that provide their funding.

    In the case of Gita Sahgal, Amnesty International should immediately reinstate her in her position and suspend any association with Moazzam Begg, until such time as extensive dialogue and research over the matter has taken place, and then be made public to Amnesty International’s funders and the public at large.

    A similar point in case, illustrates Amnesty International’s general approach and culture in matters regarding crime in the name of religion. In February 2004, Didier Contant, grand reporter, fell from a building in Paris whilst he was doing his third investigation into the kidnapping and the assassination of the Monks of Tibhirine in Algeria in 1996. He had just returned from a month long investigation in Medea and Blida. Upon his return to Paris, a fellow journalist, Jean-Baptiste Rivoire from Canal+ launched a slander campaign against him, accusing him, among others with the editor in chief of Figaro Magazine who was supposed to publish his article, of working for the French and Algerian secret services. Needless to say, based on Rivoire’s information, which they did not deem necessary to check, the Figaro Magazine and several other publications refused Didier Contant’s article.

    In Rivoire’s slander campaign he repeatedly referred to an email from Amnesty International in London confirming his information. When contacted AI London first admitted to having had email exchanges with Rivoire regarding Contant, but then it was denied and turned into verbal conversations of which nobody could remember the content. It soon turned out that the main concern of Rivoire’s slander campaign was to prevent Contant from publishing information about the dubious activities in Algeria of a renegade officer from the Algerian Army, Abdelkader Tigha, in whose interests Amnesty International (and FIDH) acted after he was imprisoned in Taiwan when he was arrested for stealing from tourists. Tigha, in several versions of several statements blamed the Algerian Army for the death of the Monks of Tibhirine. He was an important witness for Canal+ reportages on the question. Contant returned with several hours of recordings of Blida and Medea residents describing his dubious identity. But for a few exceptions, the French press blacked out on the fate of Didier Contant. When contacted, journalists would say, “we need fresh news”, but even when the High Court of Paris condemned Rivoire for voluntary violence against Didier Contant in November 2009, not a single word appeared in the French press. As it turned out, as the storm died, neither Amnesty International nor FIDH continued to be associated with Abdelkader Tigha. For complete information about the death of grand reporter, Didier Contant, please visit: http://8e-mort-tibhirine.blogspot.com/

    Will Amnesty International follow a similar strategy in the case of their association with Moazzam Begg? Time will tell. But it would indeed be a sad loss for the organization to lose someone like Gita Sahgal, who from all accounts, seems to be dedicated human rights defender.

    Rina Sherman Paris, 20 March 2010

    Rina Sherman is a writer, ethnographer and filmmaker. http://www.rinasherman.com/

    Reply to this message

Reply to this article

| Site Map | Follow-up of the site's activity RSS 2.0