CLDH Calls for Accountability Over EU Assistance in Lebanon (1)
As per the statement by the High Representative of the European Union External Action on the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture the EEAS describes the use of torture as a method to quash political dissent and to restrict civic space as unacceptable. Furthermore, the statement emphasizes the fact that the EU contributes to the eradication of torture through various tools and is working to improve independent oversight, transparency, and accountability to mitigate the risk of torture and other ill-treatment.
In this context, we want to highlight from our end as a human rights organization the need for accountability over EU’s financial support for Lebanese security institutions so that the EU does not end up funding agencies that are accused of acts of torture and/or inhumane practices. On this matter, the European Parliament resolution on the situation in Lebanon (2023/2742(RSP)) emphasized the need to investigate misuse of EU funds for waste management facilities; underlined that the EU should oversee the projects and deliver funding in instalments following independent verifications for each phase of the relevant projects in order to compensate for Lebanon’s high risk of corruption; stressed the importance of credible experts carrying out due diligence on contractors with clear objectives, lines of accountability and minimized conflicts of interests; called for stronger anti-fraud measures, including via whistle-blower platforms. Such accountability over funds granted for Lebanese Intelligence agencies is pivotal particularly that instances of use of torture and ill-treatment have been regularly documented in Lebanese detention centers by several human rights organization such as CLDH and Amnesty International.
Therefore, CLDH alerts on the lack of transparency over EU funds for Lebanon. All requests for access to documents on the EU IBM in Lebanon project remained unanswered; the high fees requested by the European States to access documents (2) make their actions in Lebanon under documented and keep them out of public scrutiny. This undermines the accountability of European actors in their external policies. It should eventually be stressed that European actors have a legal responsibility for the consequences of their external policies, even if they do not implement the internationally wrongful and non-human rights compliant policies. Indeed, the UN’s International Law Commission stressed with Article 16 on the Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts that “a State which aids or assists another State in the commission of an internationally wrongful act by the latter is internationally responsible for doing so” and should, under Article 30, “cease that act'' and “offer appropriate assurances and guarantees of non-repetition” (3). Therefore, with regards to the human rights violations conducted by Lebanese authorities, and the fact that they would be unable to implement these policies without European support, the EU and the European States should be considered “internationally responsible” for the human rights violations described above. Under international law, they are responsible to the same extent as the Lebanese authorities conducting the violations.
-
(1) The Lebanese Center for Human Rights CLDH is writing this statement in reply to the statement issued by the High Representative of the EEAS condemning practices of torture.
(2) For example, the fees required in Switzerland are detailed here: Annex 1 of the Ordinance on Freedom of Information in the Administration (2006, 24 May). https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/2006/356/fr#annex_1
(3) International Law Commission. (2001). Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts. https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/english/draft_articles/9_6_2001.pdf
