THE LEGALITY OF STATE OF EMERGENCY STATUS IMPOSED BY FRANCE FOLLOWING TERRORIST ATTACK
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Abstract
A series of terrorist attacks occurred in Paris, France, on 13th November 2015. In response to those terrorist attacks, French President declared a state of emergency no less than 24 hours after the attacks. Under state of emergency, French government is allowed to take any measures derogating human rights, for instance, conducting a search without a warrant and restricting an individual's freedom. Later on 14th July 2016, another attack occurred in Nice. French government then extended the state of emergency, and the extension itself was undertaken up to five times, meaning that the state of emergency was imposed up to six terms. As for the extension of the state of emergency, the authority of French government to exercise the derogation of human rights was also extended. State of emergency is permissible under international law provided that it is carried out consistent with the principles of human rights. This article aims to analyze the standards and limitations that bind States to implement state of emergency, particularly derogation measures. In this regard, France has failed to comply with the principles prescribed by international law taking into account that several derogation measures taken by France were inconsistent with the limitations set out under state of emergency.
Keywords: derogation of human rights, state of emergency, terrorism
Abstrak
Pada tanggal 13 November 2015, telah terjadi rangkaian serangan teroris di kota Paris, Prancis. Akibat dari serangan teroris tersebut, maka Presiden Prancis mendeklarasikan bahwa Prancis dalam keadaan darurat. Dalam keadaan darurat tersebut pemerintah Prancis dapat melakukan tindakan-tindakan yang mengesampingkan HAM seperti melakukan penggeledahan tanpa surat perintah dan pembatasan terhadap kebebasan individu. Belum selesai masa keadaan darurat atas serangan teroris di kota Paris, munculah serangan teroris lainnya di kota Nice, Prancis pada tanggal 14 Juli 2016. Sebagai reaksi atas kejadian teror tersebut, Presiden Prancis kembali memperpanjang masa keadaan darurat. Oleh sebab itu, perpanjangan keadaan darurat dilakukan sebanyak lima kali yang berarti keadaan darurat diberlakukan dalam enam tahap. Dengan perpanjangan keadaan darurat maka pemerintah juga memperluas kewenangannya untuk melakukan tindakan yang mengesampingkan HAM warga Prancis. Keadaan darurat dapat diberlakukan berdasarkan hukum internasional dengan memperhatikan prinsip-prinsip HAM. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis standar dan batasan-batasan yang mengikat negara untuk memberlakukan keadaan darurat, terutama dalam mengambil langkah-langkah pengesampingan HAM. Dalam hal ini, Prancis telah gagal untuk mematuhi prinsip-prinsip hukum internasional mengingat beberapa langkah pengesampingan HAM tersebut tidak sejalan dengan batasan-batasan yang diatur dalam keadaan darurat.
Kata kunci: keadaan darurat, pengesampingan HAM, terorisme
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Bianchi, Andrea (ed.), Enforcing International Law Norms Against Terrorism, Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2004.
De Schutter, Olivier, International Human Rights Law: Cases, Materials, Commentary 2nd Edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
Doswald-Beck, Louise, Human Rights in Times of Conflict and Terrorism, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Duffy, Helen, The War on Terror and the Framework of International Law, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005.
Macken, Claire, Counter-Terrorism and the Detention of Suspected Terrorists: Preventive Detention and International Human Rights Law, New York: Routledge, 2011.
Nowak, Manfred, UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: CCPR Commentary2ndRevised Edition, Vienna: N.P. Engel Publisher, 2005.
Pati, Roza, Due Process and International Terrorism: An International Legal Analysis, Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 2009.
R. Farrell, Brian, Habeas Corpus in International Law, New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Ranstrop, M. and Wilkinson, P. (eds.), Terrorism and Human Rights, New York: Routledge, 2008.
Robertson, A.H. and Merrills, J.G., Human Rights in Europe: A Study of the European Convention on Human Rights 3rd edition, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993.
Other Documents
Amnesty International Report, “The Disproportionate Impact of France’s State of Emergency”, EUR 21/3364/2016, https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/EUR2133642016ENGLISH.pdf.
Amnesty International, “Counter Terror Report: Dangerously Disproportionate The Ever-Expanding National Security State in Europe”, Eur 01/5342/2017, https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur01/5342/2017/en/
Amnesty International, “France: Disproportionate Emergency Measures Leave Hundreds Traumatized”, 2016, https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2016/02/france-disproportionate-emergency-measures-leave-hundreds-traumatized/
Amnesty International, “France: Renewal of State of Emergency Risks
Normalizing Exceptional Measures”, 2016,
Défenseur des droits, https://www.defenseurdesdroits.fr/fr/letat-durgence.
French Government, https://www.gouvernement.fr/en/reinforcing-the-state-of-emergency-act.
French Government, https://www.gouvernement.fr/en/state-of-emergency-in-metropolitan-france-what-are-the-consequences
Human Rights First, “French State of Emergency Should not be Extended Again”, 2016, http://www.humanrightsfirst.org/blog/french-state-emergency-should-not-be-extended-again.
Human Rights Watch, “Dispatches: Will Frace’s State of Emergency Ever End?”, 2016, https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/04/20/dispatches-will-frances-state-emergency-ever-end.
Human Rights Watch, “France: Abuses Under State of Emergency, 2016, https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/02/03/france-abuses-under-state-emergency.
Human Rights Watch, “France: Despicable Attack in Nice”, 2016, https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/07/15/france-despicable-attack-nice.
Human Rights Watch, “France: Multiple Attacks Kill over 100”, 2015, https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/11/14/france-multiple-attacks-kill-over-100.
Human Rights Watch, “France: Prolonged Emergency State Threatens Rights”, 2016, https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/07/22/france-prolonged-emergency-state-threatens-rights.
Keith, Linda Camp dan C. Poe, Steven, “Are Constitutional State of Emergency Clause Effective? An Empirical Exploration”, Human Rights Quarterly Vol. 26 (2004) 1071–1097, 2004.
Legal Documents
A and Others v. United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, Application no. 3455/05. 19 February 2009.
Aksoy v. Turkey, European Court of Human Rights, Application no. 21987/93, 18 December 1996.
Amann v. Switzerland [2000] European Court of Human Rights, Application no. 27798/95.
Brannigan and McBride v. the United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 26 May 1993, Series A, No. 258-B.
Buscarini and Others v. San Marino, ECtHR, 1999, Application No. 24645/94.
Celepli v. Sweden, Communication No. 456/1991, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/51/D/456/1991 (1994).
Communication No. 721/1996, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/74/D/721/1996 (2002).
Communication No. R. 8/34, J. Landinelli Silva and Others v. Uruguay (Views adopted on 8 April 1981), UN doc. GAOR, A/36/40.
European Court of Human Rights, Guide to Article 9 Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion, http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Guide_Art_9_ENG.pdf.
General Assembly of the United Nations Resolution No. 60/288, The United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, A/RES/60/288, 20 September 2006.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Advisory Opinion OC-8-87, January 30, 1987, Habeas Corpus in Emergency Situations (arts. 27(2), 25(1) and 7(6) American Convention on Human Rights), Series A, No. 8.
Ireland v. the United Kingdom, European Court of Human Rights, judgment of 18 January 1978, Series A, No. 25.
Kokkinakis v. Greece, ECtHR, 1993, Application No. 14307/88.
Lawless v. Republic of Ireland (No.3), ECtHR, 1961.
Malone v. The United Kingdom [1984] European Court of Human Rights, Application no. 8691/79.
Manoussakis and Others v. Greece, ECtHR, 1996, Application No. 18748/9.
Metropolitan Church of Bessarabia and Others v. Moldova, ECtHR, 2001, Application No. 45701/99.
Mr. Ali Saleh Kahlah Al-Marri v. United States of America, Opinion of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention No. 43/2006, U.N.DOC. A/HRC/7/4/Add.1 (2007).
Mr. Mohammed Abdul Rahman Al-Shimrani v. United States of America, Opinion of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention No. 2/2009, U.N.Doc. A/HRC/13/30/Add.1 (2010).
Mr. Sanad Ali Yislam Al-Kazimi v. United States of America, Opinion of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention No. 3/2009, U.N.DOC. A/HRC/13/30/Add.1 (2010).
Nachova and Others v. Bulgaria, ECtHR, 2005, Application Nos. 43577/98 and 43579/98.
Notification from France to the Secretary of the UN, 21 December 2016, https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/2016/CN.984.2016-Eng.pdf.
Notification from France to the Secretary of the UN, 22 July 2016, https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/2016/CN.565.2016-Eng.pdf.
Notification from France to the Secretary of the UN, 23 November 2015, https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/2015/CN.703.2015-Eng.pdf
Notification from France to the Secretary of the UN, 25 February 206, https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/2016/CN.538.2016-Eng.pdf.
Notification from Guatemala to the Secretary General of the UN, 20 November 1998, https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/1998/CN.866.1998-Eng.pdf.
Notification from Thailand to the Secretary General of the UN, 28 January 2014,
https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/2014/CN.49.2014-Eng.pdf.
Notification from Turkey to the Secretary General of the UN, 21 July 2016, https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/2016/CN.580.2016-Eng.pdf.
Notification from Ukraine to the Secretary General of the UN, 16 July 2015, https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CN/2015/CN.416.2015-Eng.pdf.
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, “UN Rights Experts Urge France to Protect Fundamental Freedoms while Countering Terrorism,” 19 January 2016, https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?LangID=E&NewsID=16966.
Paris Minimum Standard of Human Rights Norms in a State of Emergency 1984.
Report of the Human Rights Committee, UN doc. GAOR, A/56/40 (vol.I).
Salah Karker v. France, Communication No. 833/1998, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/70/D/833/1998 (2000).
Segerstedt-Wiberg and Others v. Sweden [2006] European Court of Human Rights, Application no. 62332/00.
Sher and Others v. United Kingdom, ECtHR, (application no. 5201/11).
Siracusa Principles, on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1984/4.
The Greek Case, European Commission on Human Rights, Yearbook of the ECHR, Vol. 12, No.1, 1969
Timishev v. Russia, ECtHR, 2005, Applications Nos. 55762/00 and 55974/00.
United Nations Commission on Human Rights, Habeas Corpus, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/RES/1992/35 (1992).
United Nations Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 29, States of Emergency (Article 4), CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.11 31 August 2001, adopted at the 1950th meeting, 24 July 2001.
United Nations Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 32: The Right to Equality Before Courts and Tribunals and to a Fair Trial (Art. 14 of the Covenant), 27 July 2007, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/GC/32 (2007).
United Nations Human Rights Council, Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in its 58th Session, 2014, U.N.Doc.A/HRC/27/47.