Plenty of crime, no justice

20 October 2010 by Bette Dam

Almost a decade after US and UK troops invaded Afghanistan, human rights advocates blame both local and international players for the state of impunity still prevailing in the country.

Mohibullah went for a brief visit last month to his native village in the Southern Afghani province of Uruzgan. He would have liked to stay longer if it weren’t for his fear of Americans as well as prominent Afghans who work with Americans there.

In the first years of the war on terror in Afghanistan, Mohibullah worked for an aid organisation in Tarin Kowt. “We build schools, we build roads.” Late one night in 2003, members of the US Special Forces
pulled him out of his house and put him without any explanation in the notorious Bagram prison, a site known for torture and abuse against detainees.

Mohibullah said he was tipped as a Taliban supporter by Jan Muhammad, a US ally who was governor of Uruzgan at the time. Muhammad apparently saw him as a rival within their tribal grouping.

In Bagram, he was tortured in an attempt to get him to admit his Taliban ties. Prison officials deprived him of sleep, used electric shocks and let dogs loose on him, Mohibullah recalled. After three years he was released for lack of evidence. On his way out, the Americans ordered one last thing: shut up about what happened here.

Want to read more?

If you subscribe to a free membership, you can read this article and explore our full archive, dating back to 1997.

Subscribe now

Related articles

19 February 2007 by Laetitia Grotti

One year ago on January 6, 2006, the 17 members of Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER) were closing up shop after submitting their final report to King Mohammed VI. The Moroccan truth commission had received a flood of compliments from the international community praising the recommendations in its report, especially those advocating legislative and constitutional reforms. One year later, however, the results have been rather mixed.

11 September 2006 by our correspondent in Arusha

After having tried high-ranking officers, ministers, businessmen, priests, journalists, local officials and militiamen, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is in uncharted waters. On September 11, the most famous rwandese troubadour of his generation will stand trial for genocide. 

23 October 2006 by Christine Chaumeau

China is keeping a polite distance from international criminal justice. Beijing is hardly disinterested, but China does want to make sure that these new global mechanisms are not going to infringe upon its sovereignty by delving into particularly sensitive cases such as Tibet. 

United Nations Operation in Burundi disarms rebel forces in Mbanda in February 2005 (Photo: Flickr/UN Photo/Martine Perret)
03 June 2015 by Janet H. Anderson, The Hague (The Netherlands)

Over the last month, Burundi has hit the headlines as the president put himself forward to be elected for a controversial third term, resulting in street protests, thousands of refugees who fled instability and an attempted coup. Behind the issues of elections and constitutionalism are also those of justice following Burundi’s long-running civil war. The international community supported an intensive process of negotiation and the signing of the Arusha Accord in 2000. But in the decade and a half since, its provisions on justice have been debated though never fully implemented.

06 November 2006 by Pierre Hazan

France's attitude towards international criminal justice is marked by ambiguity. Paris subscribes to a vision of the world in which international humanitarian law is considered a way to curb violence against civilian populations, but at the same time it is wary of an unchecked judicial system that could end up prosecuting French soldiers engaged in areas where it has old and deep-rooted interests.