|
|
|
| February 8, 2002 | Friday | Ziqa’ad 24, 1422 |
Afghan govt fails to satisfy German MPs on prisoners
ISLAMABAD, Feb 7: A four-member delegation of human rights committee of German parliament on Wednesday said Taliban and Al Qaida prisoners in Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay should be treated according to the Geneva Convention.
Members of the delegation, which had held talks with ministers of interim Afghan administration in Kabul, expressed their dissatisfaction over replies they received to questions about the plight of prisoners in Afghanistan.
The ministers of Afghan interim administration failed to give satisfactory reply of the questions asked about the condition of Al Qaida and Taliban prisoners, Carsten Hunbner of Socialist Party said at a press conference at German Embassy.
The Afghan government, he said, had informed them that most of the prisoners had been released and only criminals had been kept in the prisons.
“Certainly they should be treated under Geneva Convention,” said the head of delegation, Christa Nickles, while the other members nodded.
The delegation had not been allowed to visit any prison camp in Afghanistan.
When their views were sought on the human rights violations in Kashmir, the delegation members observed that all the international human rights organization, including Amnesty International, should be allowed to visit Indian held Kashmir for appraising the situation.
On a question about a recent decree of the military government to include army officials in the anti-terrorist courts, Angelika Graf replied that they shared the concern being expressed by lawyers’ bodies and human rights groups in Pakistan.
She said that military and civilian cases should be dealt separately.
The delegation members said they had raised the issue of blasphemy laws and specific cases filed under those laws during their meeting with Law Minister Shahida Jameel. The minister, they said, showed her aversion to the laws and hinted that they would be modified.
They expressed the hope that punishment under the laws would be drastically reduced and appraisal of evidence and statement of witness would be changed.
On a question whether the case of Dr Younas Sheikh had also come under discussion, they replied in affirmative.
|
|
|
|
