UPN, Alm.del - 2011-12 - Bilag 6: Henvendelse af 13/9-11 fra Amnesty International vedr. rapport om Libyen

Amnesty International PublicationsFirst published in September 2011 byAmnesty International PublicationsInternational SecretariatPeter Benenson House1 Easton StreetLondon WC1X 0DWUnited Kingdomwww.amnesty.org� Amnesty International Publications 2011Index: MDE 19/025/2011Original Language: EnglishPrinted by Amnesty International, International Secretariat, United KingdomAll rights reserved. This publication is copyright, but may be reproduced by anymethod without fee for advocacy, campaigning and teaching purposes, but notfor resale. The copyright holders request that all such use be registered withthem for impact assessment purposes. For copying in any other circumstances,or for reuse in other publications, or for translation or adaptation, prior writtenpermission must be obtained from the publishers, and a fee may be payable.To request permission, or for any other inquiries, please contact[email protected]

CONTENTSAbbreviations and glossary .............................................................................................5Introduction .................................................................................................................71. From the “El-Fateh Revolution” to the “17 February Revolution” .................................132. International law and the situation in Libya ...............................................................233. Unlawful killings: From protests to armed conflict ......................................................344. Enforced disappearances, detentions and torture........................................................575. Abuses by opposition forces .....................................................................................706. Foreign nationals: Abused and abandoned .................................................................797. Conclusion and recommendations.............................................................................91Endnotes ...................................................................................................................96

ABBREVIATIONS AND GLOSSARYAl-Gaddafi forcesMilitary and security forces loyal to Colonel Mu’ammar al-GaddafiGeneral People’s Committee for Foreign Liaison and International Co-operationLibya’sequivalent to a Ministry of Foreign AffairsGeneral People’s Committee for JusticeLibya’s equivalent to a Ministry of JusticeGeneral People’s Committee for Public SecurityLibya’s equivalent to a Ministry of theInteriorEUEuropean UnionKata’ibPopular name for Colonel al-Gaddafi’s armed brigadesKateebaPopular name for the Kateeba al-Fodhil Bou ‘Omar military barracks inBenghaziICCInternational Criminal CourtICCPRInternational Covenant on Civil and Political RightsIOMInternational Organization for MigrationISAInternal Security Agency, an intelligence agency associated with some of the worsthuman rights violations under Colonel al-Gaddafi’s ruleNATONorth Atlantic Treaty OrganizationNTCNational Transitional Council, the Benghazi-based leadership of the oppositionRevolutionary CommitteesBodies created by Colonel al-Gaddafi to “protect” the 1969“El-Fateh Revolution”Revolutionary GuardsSecurity militia under Colonel al-Gaddafi’s ruleRPGRocket-propelled grenadeThuuwarPopular name for opposition fighters, literally meaning “revolutionaries”

INTRODUCTIONInspired and emboldened by anti-government protests sweeping across the Middle East andNorth Africa region, Libyans called for 17 February 2011 – the fifth anniversary of a brutalcrackdown on a public protest in Benghazi – to be their “Day of Rage” against ColonelMu’ammar al-Gaddafi’s four-decade long repressive rule. Until opposition forces finallystormed the capital, Tripoli, in late August, Colonel al-Gaddafi had controlled Libya for overfour decades.Desperate to maintain their grip on power in the wake of the uprisings in neighbouringTunisia and Egypt which led to the toppling of long-standing presidents, the Libyanauthorities arrested a dozen activists and writers in the lead-up to the “Day of Rage.”However, the arrest of prominent activists in Benghazi and al-Bayda had the opposite of theintended effect – it triggered a public outcry of anger and prompted demonstrations ineastern Libya ahead of the scheduled date.Security forces greeted the peaceful protests in the eastern cities of Benghazi, Libya’s secondcity, and al-Bayda with excessive and at times lethal force, leading to the deaths of scores ofprotesters and bystanders. When some protesters responded with violence, security officialsand soldiers flown in from other parts of the country failed to take any measures to minimizethe harm they caused, including to bystanders. They fired live ammunition into crowdswithout warning, contravening not only international standards on the use of force andfirearms, but also Libya’s own legislation on the policing of public gatherings.The crackdown in eastern Libya did not discourage people in other regions from joining theuprising. Protests flared up across the country from Nalut and Zintan in the Nafusa (western)Mountain region, and al-Zawiya and Zuwara in the west; to Tripoli; to Kufra in the south-east.Such protests were met with tear gas, batons and live ammunition. In the face of governmentbrutality, the protesters’ determination to topple Colonel al-Gaddafi grew. Anti-governmentprotests quickly escalated into armed clashes with Colonel al-Gaddafi’s security forces (al-Gaddafi forces).In some areas, opponents of Colonel al-Gaddafi’s rule quickly overpowered the security forcesand seized abandoned weapons. They burned many public buildings associated with staterepression, including premises of the Revolutionary Committees, a body entrusted with“protecting” the principles of the “El-Fateh Revolution” that brought Colonel al-Gaddafi topower in 1969; and the Internal Security Agency (ISA), an intelligence body implicated ingross human rights violations in past decades. By late February, most of eastern Libya, partsof the Nafusa Mountain and Misratah (Libya’s third city, located between Benghazi andTripoli) had fallen to the opposition. The unrest rapidly evolved into an armed conflict, andthe civilian population increasingly suffered as the battle for Libya raged on.In the unrest and ongoing armed conflict, al-Gaddafi forces committed serious violations ofinternational humanitarian law (IHL), including war crimes, and gross human rights violations,which point to the commission of crimes against humanity. They deliberately killed andinjured scores of unarmed protesters; subjected perceived opponents and critics to enforced

disappearance and torture and other ill-treatment; and arbitrarily detained scores ofcivilians. They launched indiscriminateattacks and attacks targeting civilians intheir efforts to regain control of Misratahand territory in the east. They launchedartillery, mortar and rocket attacks againstresidential areas. They used inherentlyindiscriminate weapons such as anti-personnel mines and cluster bombs,including in residential areas. They killedand injured civilians not involved in thefighting. They extra-judicially executedpeople who had been captured andrestrained. They concealed tanks and heavymilitary equipment in residential buildings,in a deliberate attempt to shield them frompossible air strikes by the North AtlanticTreaty Organization (NATO) forces.1

The siege by al-Gaddafi forces of opposition-held territory, notably Misratah but also areassuch as Zintan in the Nafusa Mountain, aggravated humanitarian crises there as residentswere living without or with only limited access to water, electricity, fuel, medicine andessential foodstuffs. As al-Gaddafi forces shelled opposition-held areas, civilians had nowheresafe to hide.Those who could flee from Ajdabiya, 160km west of Benghazi, and the Nafusa Mountain didso. Others, such as residents of Misratah, particularly from late March to early May, weretrapped as the city was besieged from all sides but the sea and relentlessly shelled. EvenMisratah’s port came under fire by al-Gaddafi forces in a clear attempt to cut the city’s onlyremaining escape route and lifeline for humanitarian supplies.Al-Gaddafi forces also engaged in an extensive campaign of enforced disappearances ofperceived opponents across the country, including journalists, writers, on-line activists andprotesters. Thousands of Libyans were abducted from their homes, mosques and streets, orcaptured near the front line, frequently with the use of violence. Among the disappeared werechildren as young as 12. The fate and whereabouts of many of those abducted remainedunknown until detainees escaped, or were freed, by opposition forces in Tripoli, and theirfamilies’ anguish continued for months. Earlier this year, some of the disappeared appearedin broadcasts “confessing” to carrying out activities against Libya’s best interests orbelonging to al-Qa’ida.Testimonies of some of those released from detention in Tripoli and Sirte, which throughoutthe conflict were strongholds of Colonel al-Gaddafi, confirm fears that the disappeared andother individuals abducted and detained by al-Gaddafi forces have been tortured or evenextra-judicially executed. The most frequently-reported methods of torture and other ill-

treatment include beatings with belts, whips, metal wires and rubber hoses on all parts of thebody; suspension in contorted positions for prolonged periods; and the denial of medicaltreatment, including for injuries sustained as a result of torture or shooting.Such violations took place against the backdrop of the al-Gaddafi authorities’ severerestrictions of independent reporting in territories under their control; and violent attacks andassaults on Libyan and international media workers. Dozens of journalists have been detainedduring the unrest and at least seven have been killed near the front line. The government ofColonel al-Gaddafi also severely disrupted telephone communications and Internet access, ina vain attempt to halt the spread of information about the uprising and the governmentcrackdown.Members and supporters of the opposition, loosely structured under the leadership of theNational Transitional Council (NTC), based throughout the conflict in Benghazi, have alsocommitted human rights abuses, in some cases amounting to war crimes, albeit on a smallerscale. In the immediate aftermath of taking control in eastern Libya, angry groups ofsupporters of the “17 February Revolution” shot, hanged and otherwise killed throughlynching dozens of captured soldiers and suspected foreign “mercenaries” – and did so withtotal impunity. Such attacks subsequently decreased, although Sub-Saharan Africannationals continued to be attacked on what have proved to be largely unfounded suspicionsthat they were foreign “mercenaries” hired by Colonel al-Gaddafi.Opposition supporters targeted suspected al-Gaddafi loyalists and former members of some ofthe most repressive security forces. Between April and early July, for example, more than adozen such individuals were unlawfully killed in Benghazi and Derna (including at least threemembers of the ISA in Benghazi). They also tortured and ill-treated captured soldiers,suspected “mercenaries” and other alleged al-Gaddafi loyalists.Foreign nationals, particularly from Sub-Saharan Africa, have been particularly vulnerable toabuses by both al-Gaddafi and opposition forces, including arbitrary detention and torture,and found themselves caught in the crossfire. In a climate of racism and xenophobia stirredup by both sides, they have also been increasingly targeted for violent attacks, robbery andother abuses by ordinary Libyans across the country. As a result, many have fled across thenearest border or have been evacuated. While neighbouring countries, most notably Tunisiaand Egypt, have received hundreds of thousands of third-country nationals fleeing Libya,member states of the European Union (EU) continued to enforce their border control policiesand failed to guarantee safety for those escaping conflict. Since March, more than 1,500fleeing men, women and children have perished at sea trying to cross the Mediterranean toEurope.2As the violence in Libya escalated, the international community responded by setting-up aUnited Nation (UN) Human Rights Council Commission of Inquiry, referring the situation inLibya to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and authorizing “all necessary measures” –including the use of force, but short of a ground invasion – to “protect civilians”. Colonel al-Gaddafi’s government accused the international coalition (and then NATO after it took controlof military operations in late March) of killing over 800 civilians, although there is littleevidence available to corroborate such claims. NATO did admit to committing a number offatal mistakes, including one on 19 June in Tripoli that led to civilian deaths. Like all parties

to the conflict, NATO is bound by IHL and must take all necessary precautions to sparecivilians and civilian objects.On 27 June, ICC judges approved arrest warrants for Colonel al-Gaddafi and two of his closeassociates, his son Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi and his intelligence chief Abdallah al-Senussi foralleged crimes against humanity, including murder and persecution. This is an important stepin the fight against impunity in Libya and throughout North Africa and the Middle East.It is crucial that impartial and thorough investigations are carried out into all allegations ofserious human rights violations and violations of IHL. Wherever there is sufficient admissibleevidence, suspected perpetrators should be prosecuted in proceedings that fully respectinternational fair trial standards and with no imposition of the death penalty.Steps to prosecute those responsible are essential, not only to secure justice for victims andtheir families, but also to halt the repetition of such crimes in Libya and beyond. All victimsmust obtain redress, including reparation proportional to the gravity of the violation and harmsuffered.In order to build a new Libya on the basis of respect of human rights and the rule of law, allsuspected perpetrators must be brought to justice, regardless of their rank or affiliation –both supporters and opponents of Colonel al-Gaddafi. Those who have been found to beresponsible for abuses must not be allowed to hold positions from which they can againviolate human rights. Furthermore, comprehensive legal and institutional reforms must beintroduced to ensure respect for all human rights in law and in practice. Such reforms mustenshrine safeguards against human rights violations, such as arbitrary detention, torture andPhotos of the disappeared outside Benghazi North Court � Amnesty International

ABOUT THIS REPORTThe bulk of the findings in this report cover developments up to late July 2011, when theconflict was still tightly contested between al-Gaddafi and opposition forces. They are largelybased on an Amnesty International fact-finding visit to Libya between 26 February and 28May 2011, including to the cities of al-Bayda, Ajdabiya, Brega, Benghazi, Misratah and RasLanouf. During the visit, the organization’s delegates interviewed victims and victims’families, eyewitnesses, medical professionals, lawyers, media workers, prosecutors,opposition fighters and others. They visited hospitals, morgues and areas affected by thefighting, including the front lines. They met several officials of the NTC and local councils,including NTC Chairman Mostafa Abdeljalil. They also visited several detention centresadministered by opposition authorities in al-Bayda, Benghazi and Misratah, where theyinterviewed detainees in private and detention officials.The report also draws on information collected by Amnesty International’s fact-finding visitsbetween 6 and 20 April and 12 and 20 June to Tunisia near the Ras Jdir and Dhehiba bordercrossings into Libya. There, the organization’s delegates met individuals who had fled Libya,including third-country nationals and Libyans from the Nafusa Mountain area. In addition,the delegates interviewed people receiving medical treatment in Tunisia for injuries sustainedas a result of fighting in Misratah, the Nafusa Mountain region, al-Zawiya and elsewhere. Thereport also draws from testimonies of third-country nationals who fled eastern Libya to Egypt,collected during a fact-finding visit to Saloum in July 2011.From 25 March, Amnesty International repeatedly requested to visit areas then under thecontrol of Colonel al-Gaddafi’s forces, including Tripoli and al-Zawiya. The organization hadhoped to assess the human rights situation there and to investigate alleged violations of IHLby all parties to the conflict, including NATO forces. The last such request was sent to theGeneral People’s Committee for Foreign Liaison and International Co-operation on 28 July.Amnesty International’s requests went unanswered. Amnesty International was thereforeunable to monitor and document in detail human rights violations and other crimescommitted in areas controlled by al-Gaddafi forces, including Tripoli and much of westernLibya.This report documents serious and widespread human rights violations committed by al-Gaddafi forces, including extrajudicial executions and excessive use of force against anti-government protesters; torture and other ill-treatment; and the enforced disappearances ofperceived opponents. It presents prima facie evidence of war crimes, including deliberateattacks against civilians and indiscriminate attacks. The report also documents abusescommitted by opposition forces and their supporters, including unlawful killings, torture and

other violent attacks against captured soldiers, Sub-Saharan Africans suspected of beingmercenaries, and former members of the security forces.The report does not include information on allegations of sexual violence against womenduring the Libyan conflict. To gather information on such violations, Amnesty Internationaldelegates interviewed Libyan and foreign women in opposition-controlled territories, as wellas women who fled to Tunisia and Egypt; medical professionals, including gynaecologists andpsychologists; women’s groups activists and others; and reviewed some documentaryevidence, including video footage of women being subjected to sexual abuse. Theorganization was not able to collect first-hand testimonies and other evidence to verify theclaims, and is continuing its investigations.Amnesty International delegates returned to Libya in late August, days before oppositionforces stormed Tripoli. In al-Zawiyah, now under opposition control, they collectedtestimonies of people who had been injured in the battle for Tripoli and former detaineesfreed from military camps and other detention centres controlled by al-Gaddafi forces. Theyalso visited detention centres where those believed to be members of the al-Gaddafi forcesand suspected foreign mercenaries were being held.Cases highlighted in this report provide emblematic examples of wider patterns of abusescommitted since mid-February in Libya. Names of some individuals whose cases are includedhave been withheld to protect them and their families from reprisals, or on their request.

Inspired by the toppling of long-standing presidents in neighbouring Tunisia and Egypt,Libyans used social-networking websites to call for anti-government protests on 17 February2011. The significance of the date goes back to 17 February 2006, when security forceskilled at least 12 people and injured scores more in a protest in Benghazi, a protest that wasnot calling for political change, but simply expressing anger over cartoons of the ProphetMuhammad printed in Europe.A year later, in 2007, about a dozen activists announced plans for a peaceful demonstrationin Tripoli to commemorate the tragic event. The authorities arrested them and the protest didnot take place. After months in incommunicado detention, the activists were eventuallysentenced to prison terms ranging from six to 25 years for “attempting to overthrow thepolitical system”, “spreading false rumours about the Libyan regime” and “communicatingwith enemy powers”.3The crackdown on the 17 February 2006 protest, the silencing of any criticism of the actionsof the security forces, and the failure to bring those responsible for the deaths of protesters tojustice, typified the al-Gaddafi government’s record of repression of dissent, bans on anygatherings unless sanctioned by the government, and impunity for serious human rightsviolations.

In power since 1969, Colonel Mu’ammar al-Gaddafi portrayed himself as the country’sguide rather than ruler.4Yet he relied onsevere reprisals against any perceivedopponents, through political killing –including of Libyans in exile – imprisonment,torture and other ill-treatment, harassmentand intimidation, not only of his perceivedcritics but also of their families. Suchviolations were among the reasons for the2011 revolt and calls for political reform.Despite Libya’s relative economic securitycompared to other restive North Africancountries, unemployment and other socio-economic grievances also propelled the “17February Revolution” and helped to rallyLibyans en masse. Protesters and otheropposition supporters say that corruption,unemployment and inequality were amongthe key triggers of the uprising. Many toldAmnesty International delegates that “thecountry is rich, but its people are poor”because under Colonel al-Gaddafi thecountry’s wealth had been distributed to thebenefit of his supporters. Many also pointedto the poor state of the country’sinfrastructure, education and health services,standing in stark contrast to its oil wealth.Serious human rights violations were ahallmark of Colonel al-Gaddafi’s rule. Certaingroups were particularly targeted, includingindividuals seen as critics of the authoritiesor the principles of the “El-Fateh Revolution”;those deemed to be a security threat; andforeign nationals in an irregular situation,particularly from Sub-Saharan Africa. Theviolations were facilitated by the absence ofadequate legal safeguards, particularly incases deemed to be political. In such cases,the much-feared ISA, whose remit, mandateand structure were opaque and unclear,acted above the law and was implicated inthe worst violations. The ISA controlled twomajor prisons, Abu Salim and Ain Zara,5in

addition to a number of unrecognized places of detention outside the remit of any judicialauthority. Those detained by the ISA were frequently held incommunicado for long periods inconditions sometimes amounting to enforced disappearance, exposing them to the risk oftorture or other ill-treatment.Colonel al-Gaddafi’s rule was also characterized by repressive legislation outlawing politicalparties and independent organizations, and heavy-handed reprisals against anyone who daredto criticize the authorities or to organize anti-government protests. The space for civil societyand independent media was virtually non-existent, although in recent years the authoritieshad shown more tolerance to some dissenting voices, as long as they did not cross certain“red lines”, such as direct criticism of Colonel al-Gaddafi or the ideological foundation of hispolitical system. Neither political parties nor independent human rights organizations wereallowed. The Gaddafi International Charity and Development Foundation (GaddafiDevelopment Foundation, GDF), headed by the leader’s son Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi, was theonly organization permitted to address human rights issues, but clearly lacked independence.While Libyan law guaranteed peaceful freedom of assembly, in practice public meetings anddemonstrations were generally tolerated only when the participants were supporting thegovernment. However, public protests had been held in Benghazi since 2008 by families ofvictims of the Abu Salim Prison killings, where up to 1,200 detainees were extra-judiciallyexecuted in 1996 by security forces following a riot by detainees protesting against appallingprison conditions.6In June 2008, the Benghazi North Court of First Instance ruled that the authorities mustreveal the whereabouts and fate of 33 individuals believed to have died in Abu Salim orelsewhere in custody. Encouraged by the ruling, families then gathered almost every Saturdayoutside the People’s Leadership7premises in Benghazi holding pictures of their loved ones

and posters calling for the end of their suffering. Several were harassed as a result.8The relatives’ persistence no doubt helped to break the wall of silence and contributed to the“17 February Revolution”. Indeed, the arrest on 15 February of Fathi Terbil and Faraj al-Sharani, both prominent members of the Organizing Committee of Families of Victims of AbuSalim in Benghazi, was a catalyst for anti-government protests in Benghazi in the run-up tothe scheduled “Day of Rage” on 17 February.The authorities dispersed the protesters using non-lethal weapons, injuring scores of people,but nonetheless swiftly released the two men. Neither strategy worked as protests swelled inBenghazi on 17 February and then spread to other cities, including Zintan in the NafusaMountain; the remote Kufra in the south-east; al-Zawiya and Zuwara in the west; and al-Bayda, Derna and Tobruk in the east.Within days, protesters across eastern Libya overpowered the security apparatus, burneddown public buildings associated with the government, and seized weapons abandoned byfleeing security officials. In Benghazi alone, at least 109 people died as a result of gunshotwounds sustained during anti-government protests and clashes with security forces,according to local medical sources, including peaceful protesters and others not posing athreat to the security forces.The use of excessive force and firearms by al-Gaddafi forces in eastern Libya inflamed angerand triggered protests elsewhere in the country, including Tripoli, Misratah and the NafusaMountain. For instance, Misratah residents told Amnesty International that they initially tookto the streets on 19 February in solidarity with the victims in Benghazi and that they onlystarted calling for the “fall of the regime” during the funeral of Misratah’s first victim, KhaledAbu Shahma, shot by security forces on 19 February.The protest movement in Tripoli lagged behind that in other cities. It culminated in theconvergence of several marches on 20 February in the central Green Square – the symbolicseat of power adorned by huge posters of Colonel al-Gaddafi. According to witnesses, securityforces waited for the protesters to reach the square before opening fire, reportedly causingmany deaths and injuries. Smaller protests erupted elsewhere in Tripoli, including in SouqEl-Jum’a, Fashloum and Tajoura, in the following days, and were also reportedly met by liveammunition.In his first public speech after the unrest started, Colonel al-Gaddafi appeared on statetelevision on 22 February and described the protesters as “rats” manipulated by foreignerswishing to harm Libya’s interests. He threatened to use all means necessary to “purge Libyainch by inch, room by room, household by household, alley by alley, and individual byindividual until the country is purified”.9Two days earlier, his son Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi, who despite not having an official role waswidely seen as influential and dubbed by some as a “reformer”, had also made a televisedspeech. He blamed Libyans living in exile for instigating anti-government protests andadmitted that the authorities had sought to prevent the demonstrations by carrying out arrests.

He lamented the evolution of “small protests” into“a separatist movement… and a threat to thecountry’s unity”.10Maintaining that the reports ofthe casualty toll were exaggerated, Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi admitted that protesters had been killed.He partly blamed soldiers poorly trained in crowdcontrol, but also said that protesters wereintoxicated when they violently attacked publicbuildings. He alleged that armed Islamist groupsand individuals were driving the uprising. Hepresented two options to Libyans: either standbehind the current political system, which wouldlift restrictions on freedoms and introduce otherreforms; or be prepared for a protracted war inwhich “we will fight to the last man, woman andbullet”.11Government opponents vehemently denied theinvolvement of foreigners or the influence ofIslamist armed groups, maintaining that themovement was a popular uprising. On 2 March,opposition forces announced the establishment ofthe NTC headed by Mostafa Abdeljalil, formerSecretary of the General People’s Committee forJustice (equivalent to the Justice Minister), whohad defected on 21 February in protest over theuse of lethal force against protesters by securityforces. The NTC declared itself to be the “solelegitimate representative of the Libyan people” andpresented its vision of a “democratic Libya” builton the foundations of good governance and therespect of the rule of law and human rights.12TheNTC also vowed to abide by Libya’s obligationsunder international human rights law.By late February, violence escalated as anti-government protesters took up arms and clashedwith al-Gaddafi forces. At alarming speed, theunrest evolved into a fully-fledged armed conflict,and confrontations intensified as al-Gaddafi forcesattempted to regain control of cities that had fallento the opposition forces, while the latter tried togain new ground.In response to the escalating violence andpersistent reports of widespread human rightsviolations, on 26 February the UN Security Councilpassed Resolution 1970 referring the situation in

Libya to the Prosecutor of the ICC, imposed sanctions and an arms embargo, and ordered thefreezing of assets of the country’s leaders.Colonel al-Gaddafi’s government became increasingly isolated diplomatically. In addition todefections by members of his inner circle, it was abandoned by former regional andinternational allies. Governments that had not long ago ignored the Libyan government’sappalling human rights record to seek its collaboration in the control of migration andcounter-terrorism and to exploit lucrative business opportunities in the country, suddenlyturned on it, damning its human rights record and in some cases recognizing the NTC as thesole government authority in Libya.13On 17 March, as fighting intensified in eastern Libya as well as in Misratah, the UN SecurityCouncil adopted Resolution 1973 authorizing the establishment of a no-fly zone over Libyaand the implementation of all necessary measures, short of foreign occupation, to protectcivilians. On 19 March, the international alliance14launched its first military attacks againstal-Gaddafi forces, which had by then reached the opposition stronghold of Benghazi. Thismeant that there was now an international armed conflict (between the Tripoli governmentand the UN-mandated international alliance) alongside the non-international armed conflictthat had begun in late February.NATO assumed control of international military operations in Libya on 27 March.15By theend of August, it had carried out over 7,500 strike sorties. Colonel al-Gaddafi’s governmentalleged that NATO strikes killed over 800 civilians, but such allegations are impossible toindependently verify (see About This Report).NATO did, however, admit that a “weapons systems failure” on 19 June might have causedthe loss of “innocent civilian” life and expressed its regret over the incident, confirming itsintention to take all necessary precautions to avoid civilian casualties.16In letters sent on 11April and 2 August, Amnesty International urged NATO to take the utmost care to avoidcivilian casualties, including in their choice of means and methods of attack. Theorganization called for full and impartial inquiries into any incidents that led to civiliancasualties, the publication of their results, and adequate reparation for victims.At the time of writing, NATO strikes and fighting between al-Gaddafi forces and oppositionfighters were ongoing. The battle for Tripoli, which opposition forces entered on the night of20/21 August, was continuing, with large parts of the city reportedly falling under oppositioncontrol. However, the armed conflict did not directly affect the whole country. Fighting wasfocused in particular areas, including between Ajdabiya and Ben Jawad in the east; and theNafusa Mountain area, al-Zawiya (now in opposition control), Misratah and Zliten in the west.Some areas experienced few battles until cities fell under the control of the opposition, aswas the case in Kufra in the south-east, or were quickly retaken by al-Gaddafi forces, as wasthe case in Zuwara in the west. Other areas witnessed protracted battles as opposition forcesresisted attacks launched by al-Gaddafi forces in early March. In particular, Misratah’spopulation lived under siege and under fire for nearly two months, until the front lines movedfurther to the east and west, away from densely-populated residential areas.

The fighting led to the internal displacement of tens of thousands of civilians, many fleeingAjdabiya and surrounding areas. There was also a large exodus of Libyans and foreignnationals to neighbouring states. At the time of writing, over 672,000 foreign nationals hadfled Libya and not returned, including over 337,000 who fled home to neighbouringcountries and over 304,000 third-country nationals.17Also at the time of writing, anestimated 4,500 Libyans had crossed into, and remained in, Egypt and a further 187,000were in Tunisia, many of the latter having fled fighting in the Nafusa Mountain.Colonel al-Gaddafi’s government also clamped down on the media and communicationchannels. On 18 February, it blocked access to Facebook and Twitter, and soon afterdisrupted Internet access across Libya, leaving the vast majority of people without satellitetechnology, in both government- and opposition-controlled territory, with no Internetservices.18In the third week of February, the authorities severely disrupted telephonecommunications. People in opposition-controlled territory could not place international callsor calls to other parts of Libya. People in Tripoli and other territories at the time controlled byal-Gaddafi forces could receive international calls or calls from satellite phones, but few didso with ease as they suspected that the authorities could monitor their discussions. Thearrest of Syrian journalist Rana al-Aqbani on 28 March on accusations of “communicatingwith enemy bodies during wartime”, based on bugged phones conversations she had withpeople in eastern Libya and abroad, served as a cautionary tale.19The al-Gaddafi authorities’campaign of harassment of, and attacks against, journalists and restrictions on their freedomof movement in the government stronghold of Tripoli, coupled with the isolation of residentsof areas under the control of Colonel al-Gaddafi’s forces, meant that little was known aboutviolations committed in such areas.

On 23 February, the Libyan authority for External Communications, a body belonging to the al-Gaddafiauthorities responsible for dealing with foreign media, warned that the authorities were not responsible for thesafety of journalists working “without supervision” or entering illegally. At the same time, the al-Gaddafigovernment spokesman, Moussa Ibrahim, justified restrictions on journalists’ freedom of movement in Tripoliand other parts of western Libya as necessary for their own protection against “armed gangs”. Many foreignjournalists were detained incommunicado. Several were beaten or otherwise ill-treated.Lyndsey Addario,aphotographer withThe New York Times,was captured near Ajdabiya with three colleagues on 15 March by al-Gaddafi soldiers. She said that several of her captors groped her and at least one threatened to kill her.22ThreeBBC crew members reported being beaten, insulted and subjected to mock executions after they were capturedon 7 March near al-Zawiya.23Others journalists continued to be detained by al-Gaddafi forces. US freelance journalistMatthew VanDykewas taken by al-Gaddafi forces after heading to Brega from Benghazi in mid-March. Some four months later,Matthew VanDyke’s family finally received information that he was detained in Tripoli, at the time in the handsof the al-Gaddafi authorities. He was finally freed when Tripoli fell to opposition fighters.24While many foreignmedia workers have been released, the fate and whereabouts of at least six Libyan journalists and otherLibyans assisting media crews remain unclear and there are great concerns for their safety.25At least three Libyan and four foreign journalists or media workers have been killed near areas of fighting,some in unclear circumstances. They include Al Jazeera cameramenAli Hassan Al Jaber,who was killed bygunfire in an ambush near Benghazi on 13 March, in what appeared to be a deliberate and targeted attack,26andMohamed Nabus,who from the beginning of the protests became “the face of citizen journalism”,setting-up the first independent TV station on-line, bypassing the Internet shutdown by the Libyan authoritiesand sending raw information about the repression of the protests to the outside world.27He was shot dead on19 March in Benghazi, reportedly by al-Gaddafi forces, in an area where armed clashes had taken placebetween al-Gaddafi forces and opposition fighters.South African photojournalistAnton Hammerlwas killed on 5 April by al-Gaddafi forces at the front line nearBrega. News of his fate only emerged when the Libyan authorities released on 18 May three other foreignjournalists captured during the same incident. Two photographers, UK nationalTim Hetheringtonand USnationalChris Hondros,were both killed, by what appeared to be a projectile fired by al-Gaddafi’s forces on18 April while covering heavy fighting between opposition fighters and al-Gaddafi’s forces in the centre ofMisratah. Two of their colleagues were injured in the same incident.

INTERNATIONAL MECHANISMSThe deteriorating human rights situation in Libya prompted the UN Human Rights Council tounanimously adopt on 25 February a resolution condemning the “recent gross and systematichuman rights violations committed in Libya, including indiscriminate armed attacks againstcivilians”, and establishing a commission of inquiry to investigate all alleged violations ofinternational human rights law in Libya.28Within days, the UN General Assembly suspendedLibya’s membership of the UN Human Rights Council.This followed the UN Security Council’s referral of the situation in Libya to the ICC on 26February.29On 27 June the Pre-Trial Chamber of the ICC issued arrest warrants for Colonelal-Gaddafi, his son Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi and his head of military intelligence Abdallah al-Senussi for “crimes against humanity (murder and persecution) allegedly committed acrossLibya from 15 February 2011 until at least 28 February 2011, through the State apparatusand Security Forces”.30On 9 June, the UN Human Rights Council discussed the Commission of Inquiry’s report. TheCommission found evidence that the crackdown on protests in the first days of the unrestamounted to “a serious breach of a range of rights under international human rights law,including the right to life, the right to security of person, the right to freedom of assemblyand the right to freedom of expression”. The Commission also found that the authoritiescarried out widespread arbitrary arrests and engaged in a campaign of enforceddisappearances.After the situation in Libya developed into an armed conflict, the Commission interpreted itsmandate more broadly to additionally consider breaches of IHL by all parties to the conflict.The Commission found that:“[T]here have been many serious violations of IHL committed by Government forcesamounting to “war crimes”. Under the listing of “war crimes” in the Rome Statute applicableto non international armed conflict, the commission has identified violations involvingviolence to life and person, outrages upon personal dignity in particular humiliating anddegrading treatment, intentionally directing attacks against protected persons and targetsincluding civilian structures, medical units and transport using the distinctive emblems ofthe Geneva Conventions.”The Commission also noted that while it had registered fewer cases that would amount tocrimes under international law by opposition forces, it nonetheless had concerns about thetorture and other ill-treatment of captured soldiers and foreign nationals suspected of beingmercenaries.The Commission requested the extension of its mandate by a year given the large scope ofthe work, the ongoing violations in Libya, and the need to further delve into certainallegations it had not yet been able to confirm, such as the use of sexual violence and rapeon a large scale.31Various regional mechanisms also raised their concerns regarding the conduct of the Libyanauthorities. For instance, the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights unanimouslyordered provisional measures against Libya on 25 March. The Court described the situation in

2. INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THESITUATION IN LIBYASeveral bodies of international law apply to the situation in Libya.International human rights law, including on civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights, appliesboth in peacetime and during armed conflict and is legally binding on states, their armed forces and otheragents. It establishes the right of victims of serious human rights violations to remedy, including justice, truthand reparations.IHL, also known as the law of armed conflict, is a special body of international rules that apply alongsidehuman rights law to provide additional protection in situations of armed conflict. IHL includes rules protectingcivilians and other individuals who are not taking part in combat (“horsde combat”),as well as rulesregulating the means and methods of warfare. It also includes rules imposing obligations on states or otherentities militarily occupying a territory. IHL binds all parties to an armed conflict, including non-state armedgroups.International criminal law establishes individual criminal responsibility for certain violations and abusesof international human rights and IHL, such as war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, as well astorture, extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearance.

2.1. OBLIGATIONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND LIBYAN LAWLibya is a state party to some of the major international human rights treaties, including theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); the Convention against Tortureand Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT); the Conventionon the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW); the InternationalConvention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD); and the AfricanCharter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Libya is legally bound by its obligations under theseinternational treaties, as well as by relevant customary international law.International human rights law applies in time of armed conflict as well as peacetime; some(but not all) rights may be modified in their application, or “derogated from” or limited insituations of armed conflict, but only to the extent strictly required by the exigencies of theparticular situation and without discrimination.34At the start of the unrest in Libya, there wasno armed conflict, and the lawfulness of conduct of Libyan security forces under Colonel al-Gaddafi was to be assessed against human rights standards alone.The NTC, which has been recognized by over 40 states as the government authority in Libyaand is, at time of writing, increasingly the de-facto authority in Libya, has declared that it willrespect “IHL and human rights declarations”. The NTC also declared: “We recognise withoutreservation our obligation to...guarantee and respect the freedom of expression through media,peaceful protests, demonstrations and sit-in and other means of communication”. The NTChas proclaimed that the state to which it aspire will respect “human rights, rules andprinciples of citizenship and the rights of minorities and those most vulnerable”.35

There is no doubt that the NTC is legally bound by applicable rules of IHL, including those onthe treatment of prisoners, as a party to the non-international armed conflict in Libya (seesection on IHL below).Of particular relevance to this report are Libya’s international human rights law obligationsrelating to the right to life, the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degradingtreatment (“other ill-treatment”), the prohibition of enforced disappearance, the prohibitionof arbitrary detention and the right to freedom of assembly.36Certain violations, such astorture and enforced disappearance, amount to crimes under international law that statesmust criminalize in domestic legislation.37States must ensure that those responsible forthese and other human rights violations of a criminal nature, including extrajudicialexecutions, are brought to justice.38

2.1.1. ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES AND OTHER VIOLATIONS OF THE RIGHT TO LIBERTYArticle 2 of the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from EnforcedDisappearance defines an enforced disappearance as “the arrest, detention, abduction or anyother form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of personsacting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal toacknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of thedisappeared person, which place such a person outside the protection of the law”. Libya isnot party to the Convention, which came into force in December 2010; however, any act ofenforced disappearance as defined in the Convention will violate a range of rights under theICCPR and constitute a crime under international law.As a state party to the ICCPR, Libya is under an obligation to prevent arbitrary arrest anddetention and to allow anyone deprived of liberty an effective opportunity to challenge thelawfulness of their detention before a court (Article 9). It must ensure that those arrested arepromptly informed of any charges against them, and that those charged are brought beforethe judicial authorities within a reasonable time. Enforced disappearances also violate theright to humane treatment of detainees and the prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment(articles 7 and 10 of the ICCPR); and can violate the right to life (Article 6 of the ICCPR) andthe right to recognition as a person before the law (Article 16 of the ICCPR).Libyan legislation includes some safeguards against enforced disappearance and arbitrarydetention. For instance, Law No. 20 of 1991 on the Promotion of Freedom includes anumber of principles intended to guarantee the protection of human rights in theadministration of justice, such as Article 14 which stipulates that: “No one can be deprivedof his freedom, searched or questioned unless he has been charged with committing an actthat is punishable by law, pursuant to an order issued by a competent court, and inaccordance with the conditions and time limits specified by law”. According to the samearticle: “Accused persons must be held in custody at a known location, which shall bedisclosed to their relatives, for the shortest period of time required to conduct theinvestigation and secure evidence”.

2.1.2. TORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISHMENTLibya is a party to the ICCPR and the UNCAT. The authorities under Colonel al-Gaddafi failedto meet key obligations under these treaties regarding prevention, investigation,criminalization and reparations, when it comes to torture and other forms of ill-treatment.The Libyan authorities under Colonel al-Gaddafi failed to amend domestic legislation todefine torture in line with international law and to explicitly introduce an absolute prohibitionof torture (particularly, to ensure defences such as superior orders or “necessity” or otherexceptional circumstances are not available).The authorities under Colonel al-Gaddafi also failed to uphold their obligations to investigateallegations of torture and other ill-treatment; to bring those responsible for torture to justicein proceedings meeting international standards of fair trial; and provide all victims of tortureor other ill-treatment with redress including reparation.The Libyan authorities are also required to take concrete measures to prevent the occurrenceof torture and other ill-treatment, including by granting independent bodies the right tomonitor, including by means of visits, the situation of detainees in all prisons and otherplaces of detention. Some safeguards have been incorporated into Libyan laws. In addition toArticle 14 of Law No. 20 of 1991, mentioned above, these include the need for securityofficers to hold a warrant from the competent authority when arresting or detaining a suspect(Article 30 of the Penal Code); the requirement to detain suspects only in “prisons designedfor that purpose” (Article 31); and the right of detainees to challenge the legality of theirdetention (Article 33).However, the limited safeguards that exist in national law have been routinely flouted by theal-Gaddafi authorities and security forces, particularly in cases deemed to be political – aswitnessed in the crackdown against real or perceived government opponents and critics. Ifanything, the al-Gaddafi authorities increased their use of practices that facilitate torture andother ill-treatment, including secret detention, enforced disappearances, and prolongedincommunicado detention. Libya under Colonel al-Gaddafi strongly resisted internationalscrutiny and, despite repeated requests, did not extend an invitation to the UN SpecialRapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

2.1.3. DEMONSTRATIONS AND EXCESSIVE USE OF FORCEStates have a duty to uphold the right to freedom of assembly. According to Article 21 of theICCPR, any restrictions on the right to freedom of assembly must be in accordance with thelaw and strictly necessary to preserve national security or public safety, public order, publichealth or morals, or protect the rights and freedoms of others. Any such restrictions must beproportionate to a legitimate purpose and without discrimination, including on grounds ofpolitical opinion. Even when a restriction on the right to protest is justifiable underinternational law, the policing of demonstrations (whether or not they have been prohibited)must be carried out in accordance with international standards. These prohibit the use offorce by law enforcement officials unless strictly necessary and to the extent required for the

performance of their duty, and require that firearms are only used when strictly unavoidablein order to protect life.Article 1 of the Libyan Law on Public Assemblies and Demonstrations of 1956 stipulates:“Individuals have the right to meet peacefully. Policemen are not to attend their meetingsand they do not need to notify the police about such gatherings”.The law also provides for the right to hold public meetings in accordance with the regulationsset by the law. However, in practice, public assembly was never permitted during Colonel al-Gaddafi’s rule, unless the protestors were demonstrating in support of the government’spositions. Libyan legislation also severely constrains the right to freedom of expression, andprescribes harsh punishments for activities merely amounting to the exercise of that rightincluding life imprisonment and the death penalty.40While the Libyan authorities, like all governments, are responsible for ensuring public safetyand maintaining public order, including through the use of force when necessary and justified,it is clear that the al-Gaddafi security forces went far beyond what is permissible underinternational law and standards; and even under Libyan legislation. Force may only be usedby security forces in very limited and particular conditions, in response to activities thatgenuinely threaten lives and public safety. Even then, such force must be governed by theprinciples of necessity and proportionality as set out in international law and standards. Inresponding to anti-government demonstrations which started across Libya around 16February, al-Gaddafi security forces used excessive force, in contravention of relevantinternational standards as described below.

2.1.4. INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ON THE USE OF FORCE BY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALSThe Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and theCode of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials are UN standards aimed at ensuring thatpolice and security forces carry out their duties in a manner that respects human rights.41The two documents specify obligations with respect to the right to life, the prohibition oftorture and other ill-treatment.42The process of the standards’ development and adoptioninvolved a very large number of states and at least the substance of Article 3 of the Code ofConduct and Principle 9 of the Basic Principles reflects binding international law.43Libyan security forces under Colonel al-Gaddafi did not meet these standards in the eventscovered by this report. Indeed, they failed even to comply with the more limited safeguardsprovided for under Libyan domestic standards (i.e. the Decision of the Minister of Interior inrelation to the necessary procedures for security forces to undertake before using firearms,published in the Official Gazette on 15 September 1965), which themselves were notconsistent with the UN Basic Principles. Under those domestic standards, security forceswere supposed first to issue an audible verbal warning for protesters to disperse, using aloudspeaker if necessary. According to those domestic standards, the head of the securityoperation could order the use of tear gas or water cannon, and allow for the use of batons andrifle butts to disperse the crowd, only if protesters failed to disperse after two such warnings.The domestic standards authorized security forces to use firearms only if such measures

At time of writing there is in Libya a non-international armed conflict between al-Gaddafiforces and opposition fighters. There is also currently an international armed conflict betweenthe NATO-led coalition forces and the al-Gaddafi forces. The overwhelming majority ofviolations documented by Amnesty International have occurred as part of the non-international armed conflict.While international human rights law applies at all times, IHL applies only in situations ofarmed conflict. It contains the rules and principles that seek to protect anyone who is notactively participating in hostilities: notably civilians and anyone, including those who werepreviously participating in hostilities, who are wounded or surrender or are otherwise captured.It sets out standards of humane conduct and limits the means and methods of conductingmilitary operations. Its central purpose is to limit, to the extent feasible, human suffering intimes of armed conflict.

2.2.1. CONDUCT OF HOSTILITIES RULESA fundamental rule of IHL is that parties to any armed conflict must at all times “distinguishbetween civilians and combatants”, especially in that “attacks may only be directed againstcombatants” and “must not be directed against civilians.”45A similar rule requires parties todistinguish between “civilian objects” and “military objectives”. These rules are part of thefundamental principle of “distinction”.For the purposes of distinction, anyone who is not a member of the armed forces of a party tothe conflict is a civilian, and the civilian population comprises all persons who are notcombatants.46Civilians are protected against attack unless and for such time as they take adirect part in hostilities.47(In this report, the term “civilians” is used to refer to civilians whoare not taking a direct part in hostilities.)Civilian objects are all objects (i.e. buildings, structures, places and other physical propertyor environments) which are not “military objectives”, and military objectives are “limited tothose objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contributionto military action and whose partial or total destruction, capture or neutralisation, in thecircumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage”.48Civilian objects areprotected against attack, unless and for such time as they become military objectivesbecause all of the criteria for a military objective just described become temporarilyfulfilled.49In cases of doubt whether an object which is normally dedicated to civilianpurposes, such as a place of worship, a house or other dwelling, or a school, is being used formilitary purposes, it is to be presumed not to be so used.50Intentionally directing attacks against civilians not taking direct part in hostilities, or againstcivilian objects (in the case of non-international conflicts, medical, religious or culturalobjects in particular), is a war crime.51The principle of distinction also includes a specific rule that “acts or threats of violence theprimary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited”.52The corollary of the rule of distinction is that “indiscriminate attacks are prohibited”.53Indiscriminate attacks are those which are of a nature to strike military objectives andcivilians or civilian objects without distinction, either because the attack is not directed at aspecific military objective, or because it employs a method or means of combat that cannotbe directed at a specific military objective or has effects that cannot be limited as requiredby IHL.54“Area bombardments”, meaning attacks by bombardment of any kind which treatsas a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives

located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similarconcentration of civilians or civilian objects, are particularlyprohibited.55The use of inherently indiscriminate weapons such asanti-personnel land mines and cluster munitions violates theprohibition on indiscriminate attacks; the misuse of weapons thatmay have legitimate military purposes in appropriate circumstances,such as artillery, mortars and rockets, to attack objectives in civilianareas also is likely to violate the prohibition on indiscriminate attacks.IHL also prohibits disproportionate attacks which are those “whichmay be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury tocivilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, whichwould be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct militaryadvantage anticipated”.56Intentionally launching an indiscriminateattack resulting in death or injury to civilians, or a disproportionateattack (i.e. knowing that the attack will cause excessive incidentalcivilian loss, injury or damage) constitutes a war crime.57The protection of the civilian population and civilian objects is furtherunderpinned by the requirement that all parties to a conflict takeprecautions in attack and in defence. In the conduct of militaryoperations, then, “constant care must be taken to spare the civilianpopulation, civilians and civilian objects”; “all feasible precautions”must be taken to avoid and minimize incidental loss of civilian life,injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects.58Everything feasible must be done to verify that targets are militaryobjectives, to assess the proportionality of attacks, and to halt attacksif it becomes apparent they are wrongly-directed ordisproportionate.59Parties must give effective advance warning ofattacks which may affect the civilian population, unlesscircumstances do not permit.60Forces must also take all feasible precautions in defence to protectcivilians and civilian objects under their control against the effects ofattacks by the adversary.61In particular, each party must to theextent feasible avoid locating military objectives within or neardensely-populated areas, and remove civilian persons and objectsunder its control from the vicinity of military objectives.62

application of the protections of IHL is prohibited; torture, cruel or inhuman treatment andoutrages on personal dignity (particularly humiliating and degrading treatment) are prohibited,as are enforced disappearance, murder, the taking of hostages, the use of human shields,and arbitrary detention; no one may be convicted or sentenced except pursuant to a fair trialaffording all essential judicial guarantees; and collective punishments are prohibited.63Depending on the particular rule in question, many or all acts that violate these rules will alsoconstitute war crimes.64As noted above, IHL also prohibits the use of “human shields”. This means intentionallybringing civilians or other persons who arehors de combatinto proximity with a militaryobjective, or locating a military objective in proximity to civilians or other personshors decombat,with the specific intent of trying to prevent the targeting of the military objective.65Use of human shields does not automatically immunize an otherwise valid military objectivefrom attack, but the people being used as human shields must be taken into account indetermining whether any attack is proportionate, and in the obligation to take precautions tominimize their death or injury.

2.3.3. OTHER CRIMES UNDER INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS LAWWhether or not committed in the context of an armed conflict, certain acts such as torture,extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances constitute crimes under internationallaw. For instance, the UNCAT requires that states investigate and prosecute (if they do notextradite for prosecution), anyone who commits, or who attempts, is complicit in, orotherwise participates in any act that falls within the treaty’s definition of torture.Extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances are also recognized in internationalinstruments as being crimes in respect of which states have international obligations to bringthose responsible to justice.68The Human Rights Committee has said that, under the ICCPR,where investigations “reveal violations of certain Covenant rights, States Parties must ensurethat those responsible are brought to justice”, explaining:“As with failure to investigate, failure to bring to justice perpetrators of such violations couldin and of itself give rise to a separate breach of the Covenant. These obligations arise notablyin respect of those violations recognized as criminal under either domestic or internationallaw, such as torture and similar cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment (article 7), summaryand arbitrary killing (article 6) and enforced disappearance (articles 7 and 9 and, frequently,6).”The Committee has also said that states should “assist each other to bring to justice personssuspected of having committed acts in violation of the Covenant that are punishable underdomestic or international law”.69

2.4.1. JUSTICEThere are several possible means for bringing to justice those responsible for crimes underinternational law, in proceedings which meet international standards of fairness and do notresult in the death penalty.1.The Libyan authorities have an obligation to investigate all crimes under internationallaw and, whenever there is sufficient admissible evidence, prosecute the person suspected ofthose crimes.2.Other states: Other states should exercise their obligations to conduct prompt, thorough,independent and impartial criminal investigations of anyone within the State’s territory orjurisdiction who is accused or otherwise suspected of crimes under international law. If thereis sufficient admissible evidence, states should prosecute the suspect, or extradite him or herto another state willing and able to do so in fair proceedings which do not result in theimposition of the death penalty, or surrender him or her to an international criminal courtwhich has jurisdiction.3.The International Criminal Court: Libya has not ratified the Rome Statute. However, theUN Security Council, in accordance with Article 13(b) of the Rome Statute, has referred thesituation in Libya to the ICC Prosecutor.

In mid-February unarmed demonstrators calling for greater freedom were gunned down in thestreets by al-Gaddafi forces, in what turned out to be a futile attempt to suppress the protestmovement.77Within days, most of eastern Libya and the western city of Misratah fell to theprotesters. By late February, the situation had escalated into an armed conflict, with clashesbetween al-Gaddafi forces and opposition fighters – mostly civilians who knew little ornothing about the use of weapons, and some former members of the security and armedforces who had defected and joined them – west of Ajdabiya and around Misratah.In their efforts to regain control of opposition-held areas, al-Gaddafi forces unleashed a brutalmilitary campaign, often targeting residents in opposition-held areas who were not involved inthe fighting. They fired indiscriminate rockets, mortars and artillery shells as well as clusterbombs into residential neighbourhoods, killing and injuring scores of residents. On severaloccasions they fired live ammunition or heavy weapons, including tank shells and rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), at residents who were fleeing – in what appeared at times to be apolicy of “shoot anything that moves”.Such attacks were particularly widespread in Misratah, but in some cases also took placeelsewhere, such as in and around Ajdabiya, when al-Gaddafi forces regained control of thearea. Tens of thousands of residents, most of the population, fled in fear of reprisals forhaving supported (or for being perceived as having supported) the revolt.78In Misratah, home to some 300,000 people, residents were trapped from late February as al-Gaddafi forces laid siege to the city from all sides but the sea, and continued to launchattacks against the port – the only exit and entry point for humanitarian aid and the onlyevacuation point for wounded and sick patients. Indiscriminate rocket attacks stopped in May,resumed in mid-June and continued sporadically.79On the night of 20/21 August opposition forces swept into Tripoli, initially meeting onlylimited resistance from forces charged with guarding the capital. While the initial success ofthe advance was checked by a fight-back by al-Gaddafi forces, by 24 August oppositionforces were increasingly consolidating their positions in the city. The storming on 23 Augustof Bab al-Aziziyah, Colonel al-Gaddafi’s residence and command centre, was seen as markinga turning point in the battle. At time of writing, more and more districts of Tripoli were saidto be falling under opposition control.

Inal-Bayda,a protester and a bystander were killed on 16 February, a day prior to theplanned “Day of Rage”, during a demonstration against the arrest of activists (see Chapter 1).The protester wasSa’ad Hamed Salah al-Yamani,a 20-year-old student. His father toldAmnesty International:“He asked for me for permission to go to the peaceful demonstration. He went out at about6.30pm and at about 7.45pm his best friend got a call to go to the hospital and when hewent there he found Sa’ad dead.”Sa’ad’s friend Hazem Ahmed Mohammed al-Faidi, who was with Sa’ad when he was killedand who was himself shot, told Amnesty International:“We went for a peaceful demonstration. We walked past the Commercial Bank, where thesecurity forces threw tear gas, and went on to the ISA building to call for the release of thepeople arrested the previous day. We were outside the main door, at the back of ‘UrubaStreet, by the market. They shot in the air from the guard room on the ground floor and thenshot live bullets. I was shot in the right flank and in the right arm. Sa’ad was standing two orthree metres from me and was shot immediately after me; he was shot in the face andcollapsed. He died immediately.”Medical records show the bullet went through the left side of Sa’ad’s mouth to the back ofhis neck and severed his spinal cord. Hazem sustained a punctured lung and internal injuriesand was lucky to survive.The other victim,Khaled al-Naji ‘Abderrazeq Khanfar,a 22-year-old student, was shot nearhis father’s jewellery shop between 8pm and 8.30pm. His father told Amnesty International:“We had closed the shop and gone home and I told him not to go out but he wanted to go tocheck as our shop is right next to the ISA building where there was the demonstration. Hewent out at about 7.30pm to 8pm and less than an hour later we received a call that he hadbeen killed. He was shot in the chest.”

A witness told Amnesty International that as Khaled went to cross the street behind thefamily shop he was shot by security forces who were firing down the street. Several shopowners in the street gave Amnesty International the same account of events, pointing tobullet holes in walls, shutters and doors.The scheduled demonstrations on 17 February were bolstered by protests across al-Baydafollowing the funerals of these two students. Scores, possibly hundreds, of soldiers had beenflown in from western and southern regions of Libya ahead of the planned demonstrationsand during the unrest.81Members of the security and armed forces chased and shot atprotesters – those who threw stones, as well as those who did nothing or who were runningaway. Seventeen protesters were killed in al-Bayda that day and scores were wounded.82Among the victims wasSafwan Ramadhan ‘Atiya ‘Ali,a 15-year-old high-school student. Hisfather told Amnesty International:“At about 4.15pm… we heard shooting in the neighbourhood, behind ‘Uruba Street and weheard the imam of the Green Mosque speaking to the soldiers with a loudspeaker… Therewere bullets, plastic bullets and live bullets, and youths were closing the streets with[makeshift barricades]. Safwan was at home and he called his little brother who was on thebalcony to go inside. A bit later he went downstairs and stood with a neighbour on the corneropposite the house. It was quiet. My other children wanted to go downstairs and I went withthem and took them to the supermarket by car and while there my cousin called me to go tothe hospital... People were holding up and parading the bodies of people who had been shotdead and I did not realize that one of them was Safwan. He was shot in the head as he stoodby the door of the mosque.”An eyewitness said:“We were at the Green Mosque and when we tried to leave after prayer the area wassurrounded by security forces, soldiers in green and blue uniforms. They had weapons forplastic bullets and for real bullets.83We stayed in the mosque for about an hour unable toleave and then some tried to leave, going forward and coming back because of the securityforces ahead. Safwan was by the door of the mosque when he was shot dead at about5.30pm-6pm.”According to the testimonies collected by Amnesty International in al-Bayda, thedemonstrations on 16 and 17 February were mostly non-violent. Some protesters threwstones and during the evening of 16 February some burned cars in a square opposite the ISAbuilding after the security forces opened fire on demonstrators from the top floor and the roofof the building. Sheikh Salah Salem Kamash, the imam, who was detained in the ISAbuilding from 16 to 17 February, told Amnesty International that he was held in an officefrom where he could see events outside the building on the CCTV monitors. He said that hesaw ISA members and soldiers shooting at protesters, some of whom were throwing stones atthe building. However, by all accounts, the stone-throwing was limited and for the most partfrom a distance that did not pose a serious danger to the lives of the security forces. In most

of the streets where demonstrations were held, AmnestyInternational saw bullet holes on walls and shop fronts but little orno visible damage from stone-throwing.In the afternoon of 16 February, policemen left the local policestation without confrontations with the demonstrators. By contrast,the ISA building was abandoned in the late afternoon of 17February while soldiers in the street continued to clash with andshoot at demonstrators until late evening. Some officers andmembers of the local police joined the demonstrators. Witnessestold Amnesty International that in the evening they saw policedefectors shooting at al-Gaddafi forces.From then on, the protests quickly escalated into violent� Amnesty Internationalconfrontations. Later during the night of 17/18 February, theprotests moved to the Hussein al-Jaweifi military base in Shahat, some 15km east of al-Bayda, where the soldiers who had shot at the demonstrators were reportedly based.Soldiers inside the base fired at protesters outside, some of whom were reportedly armed andseemingly included police deserters. A bullet fired from the base struck a building across themain road, killing 12-year-oldRoqaya Fawzi Mabroukas she was looking out of her bedroomwindow at about 3am.84Protests and armed clashes outside the base continued the following day after the child’sfuneral and resulted in some 30 protesters being killed and scores injured. The following day,19 February, the protesters took over the Shahat military base after some 17 protesters werereportedly killed there. The large quantity of spent cartridges (mostly from kalashnikov orsimilar rifles) found by Amnesty International at the base and the damage to some of thebuildings indicates that intense armed clashes took place.The protests and clashes then moved to al-Abraq Airport, some 25km east of al-Bayda, wherehundreds of soldiers who had been flown in from other parts of the country were reportedlystationed. It is not clear whether the soldiers who shot at protesters in al-Bayda or those whoclashed with protesters at the Shahat military base had retreated to al-Abraq Airport orwhether they had left the area. On 21 February, the airport was taken over by protesters, aftersome 15 of them were reportedly killed. The soldiers who were still at the airport werecaptured. Several were killed but most were subsequently released.85Soldiers reportedly shotunarmed protesters at both the Shahat military base and al-Abraq Airport. AmnestyInternational has not been able to establish exactly what happened during these incidentsand who was killed or injured as a result of excessive force.InBenghazi,events followed a similar pattern. When pre-emptive arrests failed to stopdemonstrations happening, the security and armed forces opened fire, killing and injuringunarmed protesters. The police mostly refrained from opening fire and some of them joinedthe protesters. Members of other security forces either fled or deserted to join the protesters,some of them turning their weapons against the soldiers.Roqaya Fawzi Mabrouk

Demonstrations began on 15 February, following the arrest of Fathi Terbil and Faraj al-Sharani, both members of the committee set up by relatives of victims of the 1996 AbuSalim Prison massacre (see Chapter 1). Protesters, mainly relatives of the prisoners killed,gathered in the evening outside the compound of the Directorate of the General Security(DGS, commonly referred to as the Directorate). They then headed to the city centre wherethey clashed with supporters of Colonel al-Gaddafi, many of them apparently members ofRevolutionary Committees carrying clubs and batons.86Fathi Terbil was released early on 16February but protests continued that day and ended in clashes, with protesters reportedlyassaulted by members of the police, riot police (Central Security), the People’s Leadershipand Revolutionary Committees. According to al-Jala’a Hospital records and testimonies ofvictims and witnesses, in the two days 59 protesters were treated for injuries not caused byfirearms.87The planned “Day of Rage” on 17 February took place against this tense background.Security and armed forces fired at unarmed protesters, some of whom threw stones. The dayended with at least 13 protesters killed and scores injured.88During the following three days,the death toll rose to 109.89The first three protesters killed in Benghazi were 25-year-oldMo’ayed Boujlawi,24-year-oldNaji JerdanoandTaher Bin Sreiti.They were shot in the evening of 17 February by al-NasrMosque near the Jalyana bridge.H.B.90told Amnesty International that he bumped into his friend, Mo’ayed Boujlawi, nearBasiouni Café in Dubai Road and they walked together and chanted:“silmiye”, “silmiye”(“peaceful”, “peaceful”). As they reached the Jneina bridge, adjacent to the main Jalyanabridge, they saw riot police and Directorate vehicles blocking the road. H.B. said:“To avoid more clashes with the police, we chanted: ‘The people and the riot police are bloodbrothers’ and continued marching, hoping to pass through the cars blocking the roadpeacefully without a problem… When we were near the Dawa Islamiya building, the securityforces opened fire on us… As I waited for the shooting to stop, I saw men wearing yellowhelmets armed with knives and batons running towards us, and we all fled. We ran backwardstowards the Jalyana and Jneina bridges. I returned to Dubai Road and lost Mo’ayed duringthe shootings. I later knew that he and the others crossed the bridge and turned right towardsa local mosque called al-Nasr, where he was killed.”The fleeing protesters arrived at al-Nasr Mosque during sunset prayers. Some had finishedpraying and were leaving while others – mainly protesters – who had just arrived werepreparing to pray. At that point snipers on the Jalyana bridge, between 100m and 200m fromthe mosque, shot and killed the three men.M.M.,91an imam at the mosque who witnessed the killings saidTaher Bin Sreiti,a man inhis forties, had not taken part in the protests and was simply entering or leaving the prayerhall when he was shot. R.S.,92who saw howNaji Jerdanowas killed, told AmnestyInternational:

“The mosque was crowded because protesters had just arrived and wanted to pray. So manypeople were standing in the mosque premises and couldn’t reach the water taps to performthe ablutions. So a man called on us to performtayammum(dry ablution). My attention wasbrought to a young man – whom I later knew as Naji Jerdano – when he asked how thetayammumwas performed. So I was looking at him, and he was standing just inside themosque gate using one foot to pull off his shoe in the other foot, when he suddenly fell andwas bleeding heavily. Just as he was still on the ground, a group of men wearing yellowhelmets came running towards us and one hit Naji with a baton on his back.”According to the death certificate, Naji Jerdano was shot in his right thigh, causing fatalbleeding, and hit on his back with a hard instrument. His mother, Fathiya ‘Ali Saltani, toldAmnesty International that Naji was protesting because of the lack of job opportunities:“He used to be upset that people with influential connections had a better life… I want thosewho killed my son and all the other young men to be punished… My son went out to protestpeacefully with other young men… Why did they open fire on him? Why did they kill him? Hedid nothing wrong.”Mo’ayed Boujlawi’s death certificate states that he was shot in his lower abdomen and thathe was dead on arrival at the hospital. He had married six months earlier and his wife waspregnant. H.B. said that when he met Mo’ayed on Dubai Road and marched with him to theJalyana bridge, Mo’ayed like the others was not carrying stones. Amnesty Internationalinspected the fence and fa§ade of the mosque and found no bullet holes, suggesting that thethree men were deliberately targeted.Among the protesters killed on 17 February wasMohammed Allam al-’Obeidi,who worked atthe College of Pharmacy and was a keen handball player. He was shot in front of his brother,who told Amnesty International:“We were demonstrating peacefully. We came from Rweissat Street into Jamal AbdennasserStreet, walking north-west against the traffic on the way to the Court [near the port]. At about9pm or 9.30pm, just before we reached Tibesti Hotel on our left… we saw a group of securityforces and members of the Revolutionary Guards coming in the opposite direction andblocking the road ahead. They were shooting and people tried to run into the side street toavoid the bullets. I saw several demonstrators fall the ground; I don’t know if they were killedor injured. At that moment Mohammed was hit and fell to the ground. He was shot in the leftside of the abdomen. No ambulance could reach the area and I looked for a car from the sidestreets and found one and took Mohammed to the al-Jala’a Hospital. They tried to save himbut he died just after midnight.”Another demonstrator, 38-year-old Mahdi Ben Zarra’a, who was wounded in the same place alittle later, described to Amnesty International the killing ofFawzi Mohammed Hsein al-Sabri:“As I was at the demonstration outside the court we heard shooting coming from Jamal Streetand we went to see what was happening. I was with Fawzi Mohammed Hsein al-Sabri andOthman al-Rouba’a. On Jamal Street, before the Tibesti Hotel, we found men wearing yellowplastic hats with sticks and men in dark coats with guns blocking the road. We walked arounda block to avoid them and got back to Jamal Street, further on to the east. There we saw a bigTop: Mohammed Allam al-’Obeidi; Above: Fawzi MohammedHsein al-Sabri � AmnestyInternational

group approaching composed of armed men in army fatigues and plain clothes and some withyellow plastic hats carrying clubs and sticks. They shot in our direction without warning. I gota bullet in my right foot, which smashed my foot completely. At the same time Fawzi wasshot in the head. He fell into a pool of blood. He died shortly after.”Tibesti Hotel employees told Amnesty International that on the evening of 17 Februarymembers of the Revolutionary Guards and Revolutionary Committees, as well as securityforces, shot at protesters behind the hotel, killing and injuring several of them. They said thatthe security forces were accompanied by men wearing yellow construction hats who had beenchasing and beating protesters with clubs and sticks since earlier in the day. Videos of theseevents, recorded by protesters and residents on mobile telephones and reviewed by AmnestyInternational, back up these accounts.The following day, 18 February, the funerals of those killed turned into anotherdemonstration. The security and armed forces again opened fire, killing and injuring peopleas they walked to and from the cemetery. Most were shot near the Directorate compound andnear the Kateeba al-Fodhil Bou ‘Omar military barracks (commonly referred to as the Kateeba)in the centre of Benghazi.Among those killed outside the Directorate compound wasAyman Miftah Kuider,a 26-year-old law student. His friend Ahmad93told Amnesty International:“We first went to the courthouse, where prayers were held for the victims of the previous day.Then at about 2pm-2.30pm we passed by the Kateeba and it was already bloody. Forces wereshooting demonstrators. On the way from the cemetery, at about 5pm, we reached the DGScompound. We were chanting ‘silmiye’, ‘silmiye’ [‘peaceful’] to indicate that we werepeaceful. Some men in police uniforms left the compound and joined the demonstrators.Some protesters were throwing stones but they were far away and the stones mostly did notreach the compound. Members of the DGS and [riot police] were shooting from the DGScourtyard and others from the top of some of the compound buildings. There were also menin army uniforms in the courtyard. Some protesters spoke to friends and family members ofthe DGS inside the compound who wanted to come out, and then they asked demonstrators

to stand back to allow them to come out and the demonstrators backed off to the oppositeside of the road. Only 10 or so came out. Then tear gas was thrown at us from inside thecompound, followed by live bullets.“I saw two young men getting shot and falling to the ground and then Ayman was shot and hefell. I ran to him. At first I did not see any blood but when I put my hand under his backthere was a pool of blood. He was shot in the upper chest, just below the neck, and the bulletwent through his back. Another demonstrator was shot as he was running over to help Ayman.He was shot in his right flank. I went with Ayman and the injured helper to al-Jala’a Hospitalin a private car.”Ayman’s family told Amnesty International that shortly before he was killed Ayman hadspoken to his father on the phone and that he was calm. His mother said:“He was studying to be a lawyer, like his father and others relatives, and the previous day hehad gone to the demonstration at the court with the lawyers. He went to the demonstrationbecause he supported freedom and justice.”The main flashpoints where most of the protesters were killed and injured between 18 and20 February were around the Kateeba: al-Birka area of Jamal Abdel Nasser Street, to the eastof the Kateeba, al-Hijazi Street (commonly called Sidi Abdel Jaleel Street), which forms aperpendicular angle with Jamal Abdel Nasser Street, and the empty space opposite the mainentrance of the Kateeba. Most of the protesters and bystanders were killed and injured somedistance from the Kateeba – 100m to 500m – indicating that they were not trying to stormthe Kateeba.94According to testimonies collected, soldiers shot at protesters from inside the compound –both from ground level and from the top of buildings – and repeatedly chased and shot atprotesters through nearby streets and into buildings, killing and injuring protesters andbystanders. They also targeted people trying to rescue the wounded. Bullet holes in the walls,doors and windows of buildings in the streets around the Kateeba examined by AmnestyInternational delegates, including a military expert, were consistent with the patterndescribed above.In a square further down the road from the Kateeba, a pharmacist showed AmnestyInternational delegates several boxes of medicines that had been perforated by bullets, whichhad penetrated the shop’s door and metal shutter. Across the road, staff at a dental clinicsaid that soldiers were chasing and shooting at protesters near the clinic and that on oneoccasion entered the clinic and shot at the walls and ceiling and at the lock of a door to gainaccess to the roof terrace.Sa’idi al-Gaddafi, one of Colonel al-Gaddafi’s sons, was reportedly present at the Kateebabefore it fell to protesters, during the crackdown on demonstrators. In an interview with theBBC from Tripoli, he accused “fundamentalists” of attacking the Kateeba. He said:“My father sent me [to Benghazi] at the beginning of the crisis to go and talk with peoplethere and to see what their demands are. And then they started attacking the Kateeba andthe police stations and then they took the weapons, so then I had to leave, you know,

because it was very unsafe… When those guys came with weapons and wanted to attack theKateeba, of course they were gonna get in and kill the soldiers. So they [the soldiers] had todefend.”95The presence of Sa’idi al-Gaddafi at the Kateeba raises questions as to whether he playedany role in giving or communicating orders to soldiers there to use lethal force againstunarmed protesters.On 20 February and possibly also the previous day, protesters and/or defectors from thepolice and security force who had joined them fired on the Kateeba96and threw blastinggelatine (a type of explosive)97and incendiary bottles (Molotov cocktails) at the Kateeba. Inthe early afternoon of 20 February, Mahdi Ziu, a 48-year-old middle manager of an oilcompany who lived near the Kateeba, drove his car loaded with gas canisters into the maingate of the Kateeba. The vehicle exploded, killing him and soldiers guarding the gate. Theexplosion blasted a hole in the wall and prompted other soldiers to retreat further into thecompound. After several hours of armed confrontations, the protesters overran the Kateeba,which had by then been abandoned.98Hossam Mohamed al-’Amami,aged 20, was killed at around sunset on 18 February near theKateeba. Earlier that day, he and his friend, Zakaria Ali al-Nayhoom, had taken part in thefuneral of the people killed the previous day. According to his mother Fayza, Hossam hadinjured his leg when he fell near the Directorate compound as he fled when security forcesopened fire at mourners. Hossam had no pockets so asked Zakaria to keep his two mobilephones. After the funeral, Hossam met Zakaria in Jamal Abdel Nasser Street in al-Birka areato collect the phones. Zakaria described what happened to Amnesty International:“I gave him his phones and we were chatting when they [the soldiers] opened fire. Everyoneran somewhere to take cover, some behind buildings… Hossam and I ran and hid behind anadvertisement banner. I held the cellphone and stretched my arm from behind the banner tofilm what was going on. Shortly after that, I felt a strong wound in my leg and could feel myblood running and fell. Hossam fell above me. I recited theShahada[prayer] but Hossam didnot say anything… He was hit with a bullet just under his neck, and died instantly.”At the location of the shooting, Amnesty International delegates saw several bullet holes inthe advertisement banner behind which Hossam and Zakaria had taken shelter.Mohamed Ode Oweida,a 49-year-old Palestinian who had lived most of his life in Libya andworked as a guard in a company in Sirte, was killed on 19 February by a shot to the head bysoldiers as he was urging them to stop shooting. Three witnesses told Amnesty Internationalthat Mohamed Ode Oweida was killed shortly after he arrived at Ibn Sirine Street, a smallstreet parallel to the main Sidi Abdel Jaleel Street. Protesters, who had been gathering sinceafter noon prayers in Sidi Abdel Jaleel Street and were throwing stones at soldiers, soughtshelter in Ibn Sirine Street as soldiers advanced. When Mohamed arrived, soldiers beganshooting at protesters hiding behind nearby buildings. A witness told Amnesty International:

“Mohamed arrived at the scene and immediately headed to the front of the Ibn Sirine Streetand made gestures with his arms signalling to the soldiers to calm down. He stood behind thesmall bushes on the corner street. The soldiers started firing at the bushes. He shouted: ‘Whyare you shooting? No one has arms here, why shoot?’ He opened his arms to show them thathe had no arms, then turned around and started walking back down the street to where theprotesters were hiding. I hardly turned my eyes away and looked back and he was lying on theground with his head split open.”On the wall behind the bushes where Mohamed stood moments before he was shot, AmnestyInternational delegates saw bullet holes. Footage taken by protesters shows the fatal woundto Mohamed’s forehead.Ramadan Salem al-Mokahel,a 27-year-old auditor, was shot dead on 19 February while hestood talking with his friends outside a bookstore in the al-Birka area in Jamal Abdel NasserStreet, some 100m to 200m from the Kateeba. He was not taking part in any protest,according to three of his friends. One of the friends had been with Ramadan in a café fromsunset prayers to evening prayers. In the evening, Ramadan went to al-Qabas Bookstore andwas standing talking to friends when he was shot. One of the friends, A.K.,99told AmnestyInternational:“Ramadan and I chatted a little and I was a bit emotional over the situation and killings andwas tearful. So he withdrew, walked a few steps and stood facing another guy who wasleaning over a column on the sidewalk just outside al-Qabas Bookstore. As he spoke on thephone, he suddenly fell over on his face and we realized that he was shot. We carried himand took him to the hospital, but he was shot in his head and didn’t make it.”InMisratah,100demonstrations started on 19 February, initially in solidarity with protesters inBenghazi. After security forces used force and firearms, protesters started calling for thedownfall of the al-Gaddafi regime. Almost immediately, the first protester was killed.KhaledAbu Shahma,a 42-year-old firefighter and father of seven, was shot in the abdomen at about3pm and died shortly after.More protesters and bystanders were killed and injured in thefollowing days and weeks.‘Ali Hussein al-Dweik,for example, a 43-year-old journalist (director of the new Free Libya radio station inMisratah) and father of two young children, was among those killedat a demonstration in the city centre in the afternoon of 21 March.His brother Mahmoud, who was with him on the demonstration,told Amnesty International:“At about 1.30pm-1.45pm we started to walk from the Intissarschool, in ‘Abdallah al-Gharib Street. Thekata’ib[al-Gaddafi forces]had come into the centre of town and hoisted the green flag [of al-Gaddafi’s regime] at the People’s Congress in Tripoli Street. Thedemonstration was heading in that direction to remove the green‘Ali Hussein al-Dweik � Amnestyflag and put back the flag of the ‘17 February Revolution’. At aboutInternational2.15pm the soldiers started to shoot with kalashnikovs andmachine-guns. We went north-east away towards the Nadi al-Hiyat

football ground. Thekata’ibwere firing tank rounds. People were running in all directions; Iwent towards the traffic lights where we had started and my brother went towards the Legueritraffic lights and was hit in the head by shrapnel from a tank shell. He died before he couldreach the hospital.”Other protesters shot dead that day includedMiftah Ramadhan al-Jabu,a 27-year-oldstationery shop owner, 30-year-oldKhaled Ibrahim al-Sriti,and 22 year-old university studentAbdel Hakim Ahmed Abou Zakiya,shot from behind in the head. Consistent testimonies fromresidents – both those who participated in the demonstrations as well as those who witnessedfrom a distance from their homes or while passing by – point to a pattern of unwarranted andexcessive use of lethal force against demonstrators and reckless use of force that endangeredbystanders.

Among the inherently indiscriminate weapons used by al-Gaddafi forces in Misratah againstresidential areas were Grad rockets and cluster munitions.101From the second half of March,al-Gaddafi forces also launched sustained and often indiscriminate lethal attacks againstresidential neighbourhoods in Misratah and Ajdabiya using tanks and heavy military vehiclesand equipment.Just after midday on 13 May a barrage of Grad rockets smashed into several homes in theRuissat neighbourhood, south-east of the Misratah city centre, killing and maiming severalresidents.RudainaandMohamed,two of Safia ‘Abdallah Shahit’s three young children, werekilled.She told Amnesty International:“I had bathed the children – Malak, aged five, Mohamed, aged three, and baby Rudaina,aged one. I left them in the bedroom and went to prepare lunch for them. Minutes later, Iheard an explosion and ran back to the children’s bedroom when a second rocket smashedinto the house. I fell to the ground; there was shattered glass everywhere and more explosions.After hearing the fifth explosion further away, I gathered the courage to enter the children’sbedroom and found them buried under the rubble. I was lifting the rubble, when I sawRudaina lying under her bed: the back of her head was just gone, pieces of her fleshscattered around. She was a baby, she wasn’t even walking yet. What has she done to deservethis?”

Safia’s daughter Malak survived, but her right leg was so severely wounded that it had to beamputated. Safia told Amnesty International that the family had fled their home in Ruissat inMarch to seek shelter in a safer neighbourhood and had only returned home a few days beforethe tragedy as they felt the area was secure following the withdrawal of al-Gaddafi forces fromcentral Misratah in late April.Nearby,Hassan Mohamed al-Rouj,a 36-year-old father of three, was killed by shrapnel froma rocket as he was on his way to the local mosque for Friday prayers. Another rocket smashedinto the courtyard of the Sassi family home at 12.45pm.Lotfiya Shikshaka-Sassi,a 55-year-old mother of six, sustained a large, deep wound to the abdomen and multiple wounds to thelegs, and her 30-year-old son Mohamed was injured in the legs and arms.Grad rockets are unguided and thus inherently indiscriminate projectiles that can sowdestruction at a distance of up to 40km. Their use against residential areas is in flagrantviolation of the prohibition of indiscriminate attacks, a cornerstone of IHL.From their positions around Misratah (to the east, west and south), al-Gaddafi forceslaunched countless Grad rocket attacks into the city’s residential areas, on some days firingseveral salvos of 40 rockets at a time. Dozens of residents were killed and scores injured insuch attacks while they were in or near their homes. Some of the victims had previously fledtheir homes in areas under attack and were sheltering with relatives and friends in what theybelieved were safer parts of the city.Ahmed Ahmed al-Majdoub,a 64-year-old father of 10, was killed on 25 April at hisdaughter’s house in the Qasr Ahmad neighbourhood of Misratah, to the west of the port. Hisson Mohammed told Amnesty International:

“My brother Fathallah had shrapnel injuries all over his body and waslater evacuated by a humanitarian boat to a hospital in Benghazi.”Several migrants were killed as they waited at Misratah port to beevacuated by the International Organization for Migration (IOM)102when Grad rockets struck the temporary refugee camps where theywere sheltering near the port. Among the victims were two Nigerianbabies, Destiny, 18 months old, his eight-month-old sister Success,their aunt Miriam, aged 38 and a mother of four, and their uncleAmarachi, aged 32 and a father of three.The children’s mother, 29-year-old Viva Emeka, who was expecting herthird child, lost her right leg and right hand and sustained multipleother injuries. From her hospital bed she told Amnesty International:“I was just at the port waiting for the ship to take us to safety, andholding my children, when an explosion rocked the port. I lostconsciousness, and woke up to realize I lost everything.”The children’s father, Emeka Ezelaobi, told Amnesty International:“Rockets exploded by our home so we fled and went to a Red Crescenttent camp near the port and were waiting for the IOM ship to evacuateus from Misratah. We were going to return to Nigeria, away from thiswar. It was 4 May and we had been waiting for the IOM ship for dayswhen the rocket exploded near us.“I have lost my children and my brother and sister and their childrenare now orphans. My wife is maimed for life and traumatized. Shedoes not want to live anymore and I don’t know how to help her. Ourfamily has been destroyed and I can’t cope.”

The IOM ship which Emeka and his family werewaiting for had reached Misratah on 30 April andwas due to leave the following day with hundredsof stranded migrants and critically-woundedpatients. However, it could not dock until 4 Maybecause of relentless rocket attacks on the portand surrounding areas. One of these rockets killedEmeka’s children and siblings. Five other migrantworkers from Egypt waiting to be evacuated nearthe port had been killed three weeks earlier, on14 April, as they queued for bread outside abakery near the port.After a brief respite of about three weeks, al-Gaddafi forces resumed firing Grad rockets intoMisratah in the second week of June.103In thelast two weeks of June, at least four residents,including a child, were killed and several otherswere injured in a series of rocket strikes in theeastern part of the city.The renewed attacks were even more vicious asthe rockets used were packed with small metalballs intended to maximize injury and damage.Grad rockets packed with ball bearings were alsofired into Benghazi’s south-westernneighbourhood of Hay Dollar in the morning of 19March, when al-Gaddafi forces had tried to re-enter Benghazi hours before the first NATO airstrikes.104Among those killed by cluster sub-munitions was12-year-oldHsein Mohammed Zoubi,who was hitin the afternoon of 11 April while he was playingin the garden of the place where he and his familywere sheltering. His father told AmnestyInternational:“Hsein was playing with other children when theexplosions happened and he was killed. One ofthe other children was injured and a youngAlgerian man who was also staying here, WardiIbn al-Saad, was injured and died on the way tohospital.“We are staying here because on 8 April thehouse opposite our home was shelled so we cameto this shelter. There were foreign journalistsTop: Hsein Mohammed Zoubi and family; Middle: Deadly ball bearings used in Grad rocketlaunched into Benghazi; Above: Housing used to shelter a tank in al-Gheiran neighbourhood inMisratah � Amnesty International

staying here and I thought we would be safe.”Al-Gaddafi forces launched frequent mortar attacks, including with 120mm mortarscontaining cluster sub-munitions, into the city centre near the “front line” prior to theirwithdrawal from the area in the third week of April.On 15 April, an Amnesty International delegate found several cluster sub-munitions in thearea, as well as parts of MAT-120 cargo mortar projectiles (designed and manufactured bythe Spanish company Instalaza S.A.) which contained cluster sub-munitions. The MAT-120is prohibited by the Convention on Cluster Munitions.105On 21 April, the day after al-Gaddafi forces left al-Gheiran neighbourhood, the delegatefound scores of the red ribbons that are attached to the cluster sub-munitions’ detonators.When al-Gaddafi forces later retreated from other areas of the city, Amnesty Internationalfound more remnants of cluster sub-munitions in these areas.Cluster munitions, which are banned by more than 100 countries, present an enormousdanger. Dropped from the air or fired from the ground, they are designed to break open inmid-air, releasing the sub-munitions over a wide area in a way that cannot discriminatebetween civilians and soldiers. Many of the sub-munitions fail to explode on impact andeffectively become anti-personnel mines.106Because they are inherently indiscriminate weapons, cluster munitions should not be used inany circumstances. Their use in residential areas is a flagrant violation of the prohibition onindiscriminate attack.By the second week of March, al-Gaddafi forces set about re-establishing control over citiesthey had earlier evacuated. They moved tanks and heavy military vehicles and equipment intoresidential areas of Misratah and Ajdabiya, and placed snipers in tall buildings in areas theycontrolled.Residents of Ajdabiya and surrounding areas were usually able to flee and reach safer areas,though this resulted in significant hardship for tens of thousands of displaced residents whobecame stranded in the desert in dire conditions for weeks.107Misratah’s residents, on the other hand, could not leave. Many resorted to erecting barricades,using sand-filled containers, discarded fridges, washing machines and furniture, to prevental-Gaddafi forces from advancing deeper into the city. From their positions in the city centreand from other positions around the city, al-Gaddafi forces launched relentless and oftenindiscriminate lethal attacks against the city’s residential neighbourhoods, killing andinjuring scores of residents in their homes or as they were going about their daily lives.As the situation escalated, al-Gaddafi forces and local residents-turned-opposition-fightersbattled each other in residential neighbourhoods. The city centre became the front line.108Tens of thousands of residents fled from areas taken over by al-Gaddafi forces or wherearmed confrontations were happening. They took shelter with relatives and friends, or in

schools in areas further away from the confrontations. Many residents told AmnestyInternational that they were forced to move again and again as the areas where they soughtshelter came under attack from al-Gaddafi forces. Those who did not manage to flee weretrapped in their home, under fire and facing shortages of food, water and medicines.Al-Gaddafi forces also concealed tanks next to civilian objects, in a deliberate, thoughultimately vain, attempt to shield them from possible air strikes. The practice of shielding isin violation of IHL and constitutes a war crime. Amnesty International observed thepositioning of tanks in several residential areas of Misratah, including al-Gheiran, Zawiyat al-Mahjoub, and on and around Tripoli Street. Some of the tanks were positioned in-between oreven inside houses; others were concealed inside food markets or other small commercialenterprises including a bakery on Sahili Road in Zawiyat al-Mahjoub.Even if such conduct did not amount to the use of human shields, it represents a failure totake feasible precautions to protect civilians from the effects of attack – which requires thatparties to a conflict endeavour at all times to avoid locating military objectives in civilianareas.

Seven-year-oldAmna ‘Adel al-Astaandher 18-month-old sisterRu’awere fatallywounded on 31 March after their familyfled their home in Kerzaz, aneighbourhood south of the city centre,and was trying to find safety in anotherpart of Misratah.The girls’ father, ‘Adel al-Asta, a buildingcompany director, told AmnestyInternational:“Thekata’ibhad come into Kerzaz, whereAbove (left): Amna ‘Adel al-Asta; Above (right): Ru’a ‘Adel al-Asta �Amnesty Internationalwe live, and the situation was becomingincreasingly unsafe. Soldiers were goinginto people’s houses. A neighbour told us that five members of a family of another neighbourhad been taken from their home. We decided to leave. I and my two brothers and our familiesgot into two cars; nine people in my car and six in my brother’s car.“As we were going around the roundabout to get on the Igzir bridge we saw two Toyota pick-ups with anti-aircraft machine-guns at the back coming from the Air Force College, the mainbase of thekata’ibin the area. We were about 300 metres from them and there were no othercars on the road; it was mid-morning, full daylight. They fired at us from their pick-ups.

“My brother’s car was in front and was not hit. A large calibre bulletcame through the driver’s door and went to the back. Amna and Ru’awere sitting behind me. The bullet went through Amna’s head andthrough Ru’a’s arm and into her chest. Amna was killed instantly andRu’a died after a few days. I don’t want revenge. I just hope that thosewho killed my little girls will one day face justice.”Two other families were shot at in similar circumstances as they werefleeing Kerzaz in their vehicles on 17 March. In both cases, familymembers were killed and injured.Tahar Abu Shibah,a 46-year-oldfather of nine, and his oldest daughterMona,aged 21, were killedwhen their car came under fire. One of his relatives, who was inanother car, told Amnesty International:“We left in three cars, at about 10pm, I was driving the first car, andTahar was behind. He was driving and Mona was sitting beside himand at the back were Tahar’s wife, his son, his nephew and two otherchildren from the family. At a certain point we saw a tank in front of us,quite close.“They started to shoot from the tank and I turned back and managedto get away, but Tahar and Mona were hit several times. Tahar waskilled on the spot; we got Mona to hospital but she died when we gotthere.”Top: Wreckage of car of Tahar Abu Shibah; Above (left): Miftah al-Tarhouni; Above (right): Mohammad al-Tarhouni � AmnestyInternational

In a separate incident a few hours earlier in the same area, anotherfamily came under fire as they were fleeing Kerzaz in three cars.Mohammed Mosbah Souib,a 61-year-old father of 14, was killed byshrapnel to the head and several members of the family were injured when all three carscame under tank fire. Mohammed’s wife, ‘Aisha, was hit in the back and their seven-month-old grandchild was hit in the face and badly injured. The baby’s mother, Hanan, was injuredin her arm. In another car, Mohammed’s son, ‘Imad, and his four-year-old niece ‘Aisha bothsuffered head injuries. The surviving members of the family told Amnesty International thatthey too had come under fire as they were trying to turn around, having become aware thattanks were positioned ahead.

Several people were killed in Ajdabiya, a city of over 100,000 residents that was largelydeserted when Amnesty International went there in early April.109Among them were 67-year-oldMiftah al-Tarhouni,and his 36-year-old sonMohammad,who were killed on 20 Marchnear Ajdabiya’s eastern gate when their car was hit by a projectile – seemingly a rocket or anartillery shell. His son Adam told Amnesty International:“They were blown to pieces. We did not find their bodies, only shreds of flesh. They had setout to look for me in Zwaytinah, where I work. I got stuck there after al-Gaddafi’s forcesinvaded the area the week before. In the meantime my family had fled Ajdabiya on 18 March,after the town was shelled the previous day. They went to take shelter in the desert to the

south of the city, with many other families. The telephone network in thearea had been cut off and we could not call each other. My father wasworried about me and on Sunday [20 March] he decided to go toZwaytinah to see me. As they passed near Ajdabiya’s east gate they werekilled by a missile.”Adam broke down in tears as he showed an Amnesty Internationaldelegate the fragments of his father’s and brother’s ID cards that he hadfound by the wreckage of their car on 26 March, after al-Gaddafi forceshad retreated from Ajdabiya and the surrounding area.In the cases mentioned above, and many others, the testimonies ofsurvivors and witnesses and the details they and others providedconcerning the positions of the two sides, al-Gaddafi forces andopposition fighters, at the time of the attacks strongly indicate that theprojectiles were fired by al-Gaddafi forces. In other cases, includingthose described below, it has not always been possible to establishwhether the people killed or injured were deliberately targeted, or werethe victims of indiscriminate or reckless fire, or were caught in thecrossfire. In some cases, it has not even been possible to establishwhether the shots were fired by al-Gaddafi forces or opposition fighters.Ruqaya ‘Abdelghani al-Sheikhi,a 34-year-old teacher, was killed in lateMarch near Ajdabiya as she and her family were fleeing the town, whichwas then surrounded by al-Gaddafi forces. Ruqaya’s mother, Khadija,told Amnesty International:

“It was between 3pm and 4pm and we were near the petrol station on the road which leadsto the eastern gate on the way out of town. My other children and grandchildren were in othercars in front and behind us. My son was driving and I was sitting in the front and Ruqaya andmy other daughter, ‘Aisha, were sitting at the back. There was shooting and Ruqaya was hittwice, in the back and in the arm. We drove on, looking for a hospital but the hospitals inZwaytinah, Sultan and Maqrun were closed. We eventually got Ruqaya to hospital in Gmeynes[about 100km from Ajdabiya on the way to Benghazi]; they operated on her and took out thebullet from her back but she died shortly after.”Another relative, Salma, who was in the car behind with her children, told AmnestyInternational:“There was a lot of shooting; we got caught in the crossfire. A bullet came through the leftrear window of our car and hit my daughter Ala’, who is nine years old. I was sitting in theback with the children. I was next to Ala’ and I was holding the baby. The bullet went straightpast me and scraped Ala’s forehead, by her left eye. Luckily it was a superficial injury. Ourcar was also hit in the wheel and we had to stop. We took cover from the shooting in abuilding by the side of the road and then went back into town and stayed there for two daysbefore we managed to leave town and went to take shelter in the desert.”

Amnesty International examined the cars in which the al-Sheikhi family was travelling. Thebullet holes in the vehicles are consistent with their accounts. Judging by the size of theimpacts, it appears that the cars were hit by 7.62 calibre bullets fired from kalashnikov orsimilar rifles, which both sides to the conflict use.In Misratah,‘Abderrabbo Fezzani,a 20-month-old baby boy, and his grandmother wereinjured when they were caught in the crossfire between al-Gaddafi forces and oppositionfighters in the second week of April. The child’s aunt, who was in the car with them and otherrelatives, told Amnesty International that they were on the Saheli Road in the westernoutskirts of the city when they were caught. Al-Gaddafi forces had several positions along thisroad from which they controlled access to parts of the city, launched attacks into areascontrolled by opposition fighters, and engaged in gun battles with opposition fighters.

EXTRAJUDICIAL EXECUTIONSOn 10 April, Amnesty International delegates saw the bodies of two opposition fighters whohad been shot in the back of the head with their hands bound behind their backs with metalwire. The bodies were recovered from the eastern front line, in the area between Ajdabiya andBrega. They were taken to the morgue of al-Huwari Hospital in Benghazi, where they wereidentified by their families. Staff at the morgue told Amnesty International that the body of athird fighter, whose hands were similarly tied behind his back, had also been brought to themorgue from the front line that morning and had been collected by the family. The forensicpathologist who carried out the postmortem examination and morgue staff told AmnestyInternational that the men’s feet had also been bound together.The following day, in the morgue of Ajdabiya Hospital, the organization’s delegates saw thebody of an unidentified man. The hands were tied behind his back with plastic handcuffs andwere tied by rope to a wire that was used to tie the ankles together. Hospital staff toldAmnesty International that this body, and another brought in with it but already removed forburial by the family, had been found at the eastern gate of Ajdabiya, which had been underthe control of al-Gaddafi forces a short time before. It is not yet clear whether they too wereopposition fighters or local people who had been taken prisoner and then killed.Amnesty International has separately received credible reports of four similar cases, wherebodies of captured fighters were found with the hands tied behind the back and multiplegunshot wounds to the upper part of the body.The bodies of three opposition fighters, 34-year-oldWalid al-Sabr al’-Obeidi,his 32-year-oldbrotherHassanand their 39-year-old cousinWalid Sa’ad Badr al-’Obeidi,were found in thewestern outskirts of Benghazi on 21 March. Their family told Amnesty International that allthree had their hands tied behind their back and two of the bodies had visible injuries –Hassan appeared to have been beaten on the right eye and neck, and Walid Sa’ad had abroken thumb. They also said that Walid al-Sabr had been shot in the forehead from closerange.

The three men had gone missing on 19 March when al-Gaddafiforces had attempted to recapture Benghazi and there had beenclashes with opposition fighters in the city’s western outskirts.Earlier that morning the three had been involved in the capture ofmembers of al-Gaddafi forces. Walid al-Sabr’s brother toldAmnesty International that he had called Walid al-Sabr later thatmorning and that when he answered he sounded out of breath, asif he was running, and cut the conversation short. His brothercalled again shortly afterwards and a man with an accent from thewest of Libya answered and said: “If you want your brother, come”,and ended the call. The brother rang again and the same mananswered and said: “Your brother is dead”. The following day thecar used by the three men was found riddled with bullets in thesouth-west outskirts of Benghazi.On 6 May, the bodies of‘Ashour al-Tifland his sonYousefwerefound in Misratah’s Kerzaz neighbourhood, which had beencontrolled by al-Gaddafi forces until two days earlier. Doctors whoreceived the bodies at Misratah’s main hospitals told AmnestyInternational that the hands were tied behind the back and thebodies were in an advanced state of decomposition. One of thevictims’ relatives told Amnesty International that ‘Ashour andYousef had gone missing from their farm in Kerzaz on 1 May.All available information about the above and other similar casesindicate that the victims were killed after they were captured,strongly suggesting that they were extra-judicially executed.Amnesty International has also seen footage taken on mobiletelephones confiscated by opposition fighters from captured al-Gaddafi soldiers or found on the bodies of al-Gaddafi soldierskilled at the front. Some of these videos show opposition fighterscaptured by al-Gaddafi soldiers being shot dead and captivesfilmed alive and later found dead.IHL absolutely prohibits the killing, torture and ill-treatment ofindividuals, including fighters, who have surrendered, beencaptured, injured or otherwise renderedhors de combat.Thedeliberate killing of captives is a war crime.The deliberate killing of individuals by al-Gaddafi forces is notlimited to captured opposition fighters. Father-of-four, 41-year-oldOthman Youssef Ba’iou,whose wife Asma was expecting anotherchild, was shot at close range in the neck by an al-Gaddafi soldierin his home in the area of Zawiyat al-Mahjoub on 1 April. Thatafternoon, four al-Gaddafi soldiers, armed with kalashnikovs,forced their way into the family home, where some thirty womenand children were staying together in search of safety. Asma andTop: Destruction in Bira; Above: Children of Othman Youssef Ba’iou hold hispicture � Amnesty International

USE OF ANTI-PERSONNEL AND OTHER MINESAl-Gaddafi forces planted anti-personnel, anti-vehicle and other mines in and around civilianresidential areas in different opposition-held areas across the country, further endangeringcivilians who are already having to cope with the danger of large quantities of unexplodedmunitions (UXOs) in areas where military attacks and armed clashes have taken place sinceMarch.Some two-dozen, highly-explosive, Brazilian-made T-AB-1 anti-personnel mines werediscovered in the residential neighbourhood of Tamina, south-east of Misratah’s city centre inearly May, when two were accidentally set off by a passing car.110The car was immobilizedbut fortunately no one was hurt.A week earlier, al-Gaddafi forces launched anti-vehicle mines into Misratah’s port and itssurroundings, in yet another attempt to render the port inaccessible. The mines, Type 84Model A anti-vehicle mines, are delivered by Chinese-made 122mm rockets which burst openin flight, each scattering eight mines over a large area.111Such rockets are unguided andindiscriminate and scatter their payloads of mines over a large area.The same type of anti-personnel mines as those used in Misratah were discovered at the endof March on the outskirts of Ajdabiya, in an area frequented by civilians.112On this occasiontoo the mines were discovered by chance, when an electricity company truck drove over anddetonated two of the mines two days after al-Gaddafi’s forces had retreated from the area.In June and July a large number of the same anti-personnel mines, as well as anti-vehiclemines, were discovered in the Nafusa Mountain area, west of the capital.113The presence of anti-personnel and other land mines has made it more difficult for residentsdisplaced by the conflict to return to their homes long after the end of armed confrontations.Moreover, the anti-personnel mines used are made of plastic, with hardly any metal contentand thus not detected by metal detectors, making the search exceedingly difficult anddangerous. Libya is not a party to the Anti-Personnel Mine Ban Treaty. But the use of suchinherently indiscriminate weapons violates the customary IHL prohibition of indiscriminateattack. Anti-personnel mines should not be used anywhere or under any circumstances. Thatthey were planted in and around residential neighbourhood indicates an intent to harmcivilians, and at the very least is a flagrant violation of the prohibition of indiscriminateattacks.

NATO’S OPERATION UNIFIED PROTECTORAs a party to an international armed conflict, NATO is bound by the rules of IHL. Colonel al-Gaddafi’s government accused NATO of targeting civilian objects and causing up to 800civilian casualties. Amnesty International is not able to independently verify such claimsgiven its lack of access to territories which were controlled by al-Gaddafi forces. Nevertheless,the organization received reports of civilian casualties, and wrote to NATO Secretary General,Anders Fogh Rasmussen, on 11 April and 2 August to request clarification and call on NATOto take all necessary precautions to avoid civilian casualties. In a response to AmnestyInternational, NATO Deputy Secretary General, Claudio Bisogniero, confirmed NATO’scompliance to IHL and commitment to protect civilians.On 19 June several civilians were reportedly killed, including two children and a woman,when a projectile struck their homes in Tripoli. In a 21 June press briefing by WingCommander Mike Bracken, Spokesperson for Operation Unified Protector, the Commanderstated that:“…during the course of the air strike, on the missile site, a potential weapon system failureoccurred and this caused the weapon not to hit the intended target, and reportedly resultedin a number of civilian casualties. We can still not confirm that the site where our weaponlanded was, in fact, the site that was shown on the media, but the site is very likely to be thatfailed weapon and is likely to have been caused by that weapons malfunction.”114Deaths of civilians caused by accidents such as weapons malfunctions do not necessarilyamount to violations of IHL. But NATO does have an obligation to take all necessaryprecautions to protect civilians, including taking measures to minimize risks to civilians frommalfunctioning weapons systems.On 20 June NATO strikes in Surman (west of Tripoli) against what appeared to be civilianhomes in a compound reportedly belonging to one of Colonel al-Gaddafi’s associates(Khweildy al-Hamedi), reportedly killed several civilians, including two children and theirmother. At a 21 June press briefing, Wing Commander Mike Bracken stated that:“In the early hours of Monday morning [20 June] NATO carried out a precision strike usingprecision-guided weapons on a highly-significant command-and-control node in the Surmanarea near Zawiya. The facility was directly involved in coordinating systematic attacks on theLibyan people and was identified through rigorous analysis based on persistent intelligence,surveillance and reconnaissance and this was carried out over a prolonged period of time.NATO is aware of allegations that this strike caused casualties. That is something we cannotindependently verify, but I say again, this was a legitimate military target, a high-value,command-and-control node used to coordinate attacks against civilians. We observed the siteover a prolonged period of time before conducting the precision strike which minimized anypotential risk of causing unnecessary casualties.”115In a BBC interview, published on 26 June, Lieutenant General Charles Bouchard,Commander of the NATO military operations in Libya, is quoted as saying that the targetstruck was a command-and-control centre being used by a senior al-Gaddafi aide and that thebomb carefully avoided a mosque and hospital nearby.116However, according to international

reporters present at the scene when the children’s bodies were being recovered from therubble, at least some of the targeted buildings in the compound appeared to be residential.On 30 July, NATO aircraft attacked three ground-based Libyan state television satellitetransmission dishes in Tripoli. There were no confirmed reports of civilian casualties. NATOexplained that the attack was carried out because:“TV was being used as an integral component of the regime apparatus designed tosystematically oppress and threaten civilians and to incite attacks against them. Qadhafi’sincreasing practice of inflammatory broadcasts illustrates his regime’s policy to instill hatredamongst Libyans, to mobilize its supporters against civilians and to trigger bloodshed.”117Amnesty International is concerned as generally television satellite transmission dishes andother media infrastructure are civilian objects. Amnesty International did not have theopportunity to monitor and analyse the full content of Libyan state television broadcasts whenit was under the control of Colonel al-Gaddafi, but the question of whether Colonel al-Gaddafiis using television broadcasts to instil hatred and mobilize its supporters is not thedetermining criteria for whether television transmitters are military objectives. The definitionof military objective in Article 52(2) of Protocol I, which reflects customary IHL, specifiesthat “military objectives are limited to those objects which by their nature, location, purposeor use make aneffective contribution to military actionand whose total or partial destruction,capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers adefinite militaryadvantage”.Propaganda is not “an effective contribution to military action” and it is difficultto consider that the destruction of the transmitters offers “an anticipated definite militaryadvantage”.118Amnesty International has written to NATO expressing concern about these attacks andrequesting details of the mechanisms and processes which have been put in place to ensurethat all the necessary precautions are taken to avoid civilian casualties, asking in particularabout what precautions NATO takes to avoid needless civilian deaths and injuries whencivilians are in the vicinity of military objectives.

The enforced disappearance of thousands of people, mostly men, from across Libya has beena grim feature of the unrest and conflict. Activists and government critics starteddisappearing in the lead-up to the “Day of Rage” on 17 February in a clear attempt to nip theprotest movement in the bud.As the unrest evolved into an armed conflict in late February, enforced disappearancesbecame more widespread or systematic, seemingly aimed at weakening the opposition orpunishing individuals, families or even whole areas or cities for their perceived support of theopposition, and their declared allegiance to the NTC.119NTC spokespeople say that 12,000 people disappeared in Tripoli alone,120but they have notprovided evidence to substantiate this figure and numbers of those disappeared or detainedare difficult to verify as during the conflict vast areas of Libya have remained under the

control of al-Gaddafi forces and have thereby been largely off-limits to independentmonitoring.Colonel al-Gaddafi’s government did not disclose details about those held and refused togrant access to independent organizations to detention facilities under the oversight of theGeneral People’s Committee for Public Security (equivalent to an Interior Ministry). However,they allowed the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to visit facilities under thecontrol of the General People’s Committee for Justice (equivalent to a Ministry of Justice). ToAmnesty International’s best knowledge, no visits by independent monitors took place to theAin Zara and Abu Salim prisons and the Salaheddin Detention Facility in Tripoli, as well asthe military police barracks in Sirte – where many of the disappeared were believed to beheld.Those who have been subjected to enforced disappearance in Libya fall under severalcategories. They include individuals taken on account of their real or perceived support of theopposition or participation in anti-government demonstrations; individuals who went missingas al-Gaddafi forces retreated from cities such as Benghazi and Kufra; and those who wentmissing in or around fighting in eastern Libya. Some victims were taken by al-Gaddafi forcesfrom their homes, roads or other public places in regions controlled by the opposition duringincursions by al-Gaddafi forces, notably in Misratah and cities in the Nafusa Mountain area.Cities retaken by al-Gaddafi forces, including al-Zawiya and Zuwara, were believed to havefaced a campaign of reprisals, including enforced disappearances, for daring to opposeColonel al-Gaddafi’s rule or for having taken up arms against the al-Gaddafi forces. Otherindividuals from these areas appeared to have been taken when they ventured out ofopposition strongholds in what seemed to be a campaign of collective punishment or adesperate attempt to eliminate real or perceived threats to Colonel al-Gaddafi’s rule. Inseveral instances documented by Amnesty International, al-Gaddafi forces abducted all males,including boys, found during house raids in cities that had declared their support of the “17February Revolution”.Furthermore, Amnesty International was deeply concerned for the safety of political detaineesheld in Tripoli prior to the unrest, as contact with their families and the outside world wasabruptly interrupted once protests began. The vast majority of them originated from easternLibya, seen as the opposition’s base.Some of the disappeared have been released and by early July the ICRC had visited some460 detainees in Tripoli, at that time still under the control of al-Gaddafi forces.121However,the fate and whereabouts of the disappeared remained unknown until opposition forces sweptinto Tripoli in late August. As Colonel al-Gaddafi’s grip on Tripoli loosened, detainees werereleased or escaped from the Abu Salim, Ain Zara and Jdeida prisons, as well as detentionfacilities in Tagoura, Khilit Fergan and Qasr al-Ghashir. Others have been extra-judiciallyexecuted by retreating al-Gaddafi forces.122The testimonies of former detainees confirm fears that some of the disappeared are at highrisk of torture or other ill-treatment or even extrajudicial execution, particularly upon capture

and/or during the initial period of detention. Some of those captured or detained by al-Gaddafi forces subsequently appeared on state television “confessing” to joining “armedgroups”, belonging to al-Qa’ida, being drug addicts, or having been “deceived” by theopposition. This only confirms fears about torture and other ill-treatment, particularly asseveral bore visible marks of beatings, according to relatives.Across Libya, including in opposition-controlled areas, families are living in anguish over thefate of their vanished relatives. They also fear reprisals. As a result, many are unwilling fortheir names to be disclosed publicly, believing that this will expose their relatives to evengreater risks. In some areas, local activists have started compiling lists and other informationabout missing people, and sharing them with the Libyan Red Crescent or contacting the ICRC,hoping to get some information. Hundreds of detainees were released from Tripoli in May,stirring families’ hopes, but the vast majority remained detained until late August.Amnesty International’s concerns about the safety of those being held by al-Gaddafi forcesare heightened by the consistent pattern of gross and widespread human rights violations,including torture and extrajudicial executions, that characterized the four-decade rule ofColonel al-Gaddafi. The practice of abducting individuals deemed as opponents or critics ofthe political system, followed by a denial of their arrest and the concealment of their fate andwhereabouts, was a recurring feature of Colonel al-Gaddafi’s rule, with numerous families stilltrying to uncover the truth about their relatives’ disappearance in past decades.123A growing body of international treaties, customary law and jurisprudence recognizesenforced disappearances as a continuous crime for as long as the fate of the victims is notclarified, and justice and reparation are not afforded.124International jurisprudence alsoacknowledges that enforced disappearances not only constitute inhumane treatment for thedisappeared, but also for their relatives who suffer constant distress not knowing whethertheir loved ones are alive or dead, where they are held, and how they are being treated.125To the extent that the practice of enforced disappearances in Libya had been carried out aspart of a widespread or systematic attack by the al-Gaddafi forces on the civilian population,it constitutes crimes against humanity, as provided in Article 7 of the Rome Statute of theICC.

GOVERNMENT CRITICS AND PROTESTERSSecurity forces in plain clothes, most known or believed to be members of the feared ISA,arrested government critics, pro-democracy activists, writers and others in the run-up to 17February 2011 in cities across Libya, including Tripoli, Benghazi, al-Bayda and Misratah.Some were released, but the fate and whereabouts of many remain unknown. They includesome detainees who were allowed access to their families or lawyers until demonstrationsbegan. Other protesters were abducted during and in the aftermath of demonstrations,particularly in areas that remained under Colonel al-Gaddafi’s grip, such as Tripoli.Jamal al-Haji,a former prisoner of conscience who continued to campaign for human rightsdespite several arrests in recent years,126was arrested in a car park in Tripoli on 1 February2011. Around 10 plain clothes security forces said the reason for the arrest was that a manhad accused Jamal al-Haji of hitting his car. The security officials then forced Jamal al-Hajiinto an unmarked vehicle and drove him away. The arrest of Jamal al-Haji over an alleged

traffic violation, which he denied and eyewitnesses refuted, isbelieved to be politically motivated due to his pro-democracyadvocacy and writing on Libyan websites based abroad. As protestsescalated, contact with him was lost and the authorities underColonel al-Gaddafi did not disclose his whereabouts and legalstatus.Arrests were also carried out in Benghazi in the lead-up to protests.Some of those arrested have been released, includingMohammadMisbah Soheim.A 30-year-old writer and pro-democracy advocate,Mohammad was arrested at his home on 16 February by ISAofficials in plain clothes. He had advocated reforms on websitesand on his Facebook page, and had travelled to Tunisia followingthe protests that ousted President Ben Ali. One of his last articles,addressed to Colonel al-Gaddafi, ominously warned that unlessLibyans obtained more freedoms, there would be bloodshed. WhenMohammad Misbah Soheim’s distressed relatives approached theISA headquarters on 16 February, officials initially denied anyknowledge of his arrest. They then confirmed his detention andpromised his release “after this crisis is over”. Throughout theduration of his detention, his relatives received no officialinformation about his fate and whereabouts, but heard that he andanother writer arrested in Benghazi at around the same time werebeing held in an undisclosed detention centre in Tripoli. Fivemonths later, on 21 July, his relatives received a call from himfrom Tripoli informing them of his release.

The fate and whereabouts of others remain unclear.Safai EddineHilal al-Sharif,a 41-year-old father of five who worked as a technician in an oil company inRas Lanouf, has disappeared since his arrest from home on 24 January 2011. Since then,his family have been unable to obtain any information about him or even anacknowledgement of his detention. His family told Amnesty International:“At about 8pm [on 24 January 2011] six men in plain clothes, probably members of the ISA,asked the children who were outside if their father was at home and to call him. He went outand the men took him away with them; he was in his pyjamas. After about half an hour theybrought Safai Eddine back and came into the house and searched the house. Safai askedthem what they were looking for, and one said: ‘We have an order to search all yourproperties’. Safai asked who gave that order, and the man answered: ‘We cannot say’. Theytook two computers, a camera, a camcorder (video) and a mobile phone.“They allowed him to get dressed and took him away. It was 9.30pm. Since then we havehad no news about him. An acquaintance who had contacts in the ISA said that Safai Eddinewas taken straight to Tripoli, but we have not been able to know anything about where he isheld, if he is in good health, what do they want from him; nothing. We don’t understand whythey have taken him.

“He was just an ordinary guy who spent his time between his family and his work. He was notinvolved in politics. He liked to browse the Internet and Facebook, but nothing more thanthat. We just want to know where he is, why he was taken.”Safai’s relatives heard from former detainees that he might be held in the Abu Salim Prisonin Tripoli, but received no official information.Other protesters and supporters of the opposition went missing as al-Gaddafi forces retreatedfrom cities that fell to the opposition, including Benghazi and Kufra. Amnesty Internationaldocumented cases of at least nine males, including four boys aged under 18, missing since20 February when they were last seen near or going into the Kateeba military compound inBenghazi as it was being taken over by protesters. The families of the nine missing men andboys believe that their relatives may have been taken by the retreating soldiers.Similarly, several individuals from Kufra told Amnesty International that as al-Gaddafi forceswithdrew from the city on 3 May, at least four men who supported the opposition disappearedwithout trace and were believed to have been taken by the retreating forces and have notbeen heard of since.

Libyan cameramanMohamed Al-Shouihdi,26, has disappeared since being captured by al-Gaddafi forces on 6 April as he drove with colleagues from the Middle East BroadcastingCorporation (MBC) from Ajdabiya towards the front line in Brega. His two colleagues, Algerianjournalist Hassan Zeitouni, and Egyptian cameraman Majdi Hilali were released on 9 Apriland 12 June, respectively. Upon release, former detainees told Mohamed Al-Shouihdi’srelatives of having seen him last some 25 days after his arrest. When Amnesty Internationallast spoke to his relatives in early August, they had no further news of his fate andwhereabouts.A family from the area of Ben Jawad described to Amnesty International how al-Gaddafisoldiers had stormed their house on 8 March in search of opposition fighters. They saw agroup of mostly young men lying on the ground outside the fence of their house. Seven oreight of them were alive but injured, and at least three were dead. They were wearing insigniathat identified them as opponents of Colonel al-Gaddafi, but it was unclear whether they hadbeen armed when captured or had been providing medical or logistical support to oppositionfighters. The prisoners were then pushed into military vehicles by the soldiers who threatenedthem, saying: “You will be punished you dogs… You will suffer for what you’ve done”.Other families told Amnesty International that they saw footage on state television of theirmissing relatives, believed to have been captured in or near areas of fighting in eastern Libya.The relatives were “confessing” to working with al-Qa’ida, being drug addicts, or having been“deceived” by the opposition which their families strongly denied. The families voiced fearsthat their detained relatives had been tortured or coerced to make them confess to havinglinks with al-Qa’ida.

DURING ATTACKS BY AL-GADDAFI FORCESHundreds of individuals, possibly more, including children, have been abducted by al-Gaddafi forces from their homes in front of their families, at mosques or on the street,particularly in areas that have declared allegiance to the opposition and as a result havecome under siege and under fire by al-Gaddafi forces.Amnesty International documented scores of cases of enforced disappearances in Misratah,particularly when al-Gaddafi forces launched an offensive attempting to retake control of thecity after being driven out in late February. They carried out reprisals against the populationseemingly to collectively punish Misratah residents for supporting the opposition or to weakentheir resolve to resist the incursion.Residents of neighbourhoods where al-Gaddafi forces positioned themselves during theirreturn to the city, particularly on the outskirts including in Kerzaz, al-Gheiran, Tamina, andZawiyat al-Mahjoub, as well as areas near Tripoli Street in central Misratah, were amongthose who suffered the brunt of the disappearances. Several families told AmnestyInternational that al-Gaddafi forces raided their homes, carried out searches and then took allthe men without any indication of why or to where they were being taken.

As al-Gaddafi forces entered the rural areas of Tamina, Kerzaz and al-Gheiran, in the south ofMisratah, in mid-March, the vast majority of families fled. Some residents, mainly men whostayed behind to protect their property, were taken from their homes by al-Gaddafi forces.The soldiers stole most valuables from the homes and destroyed the remainder. WhenAmnesty International visited the area in May, it noticed that some homes were completelyrazed while neighbouring ones were left untouched. Local residents explained that theuntouched homes belonged to perceived supporters of Colonel al-Gaddafi, while those lootedand ransacked belonged to perceived opposition supporters.Amnesty International met a man from the Qadoura family, whose 10 male relatives vanishedafter being taken by al-Gaddafi forces from a farm in Tamina in early April. The youngest wasjust 12. As well as abducting the 10 men and boys, eyewitnesses said that al-Gaddafisoldiers armed with kalashnikov rifles and RPGs drove off with two family cars.Around the same time, al-Gaddafi forces took three boys aged between 15 and 16 fromanother farm in Tamina. The al-Gaddafi forces were looking for their uncle, who they said wasa member of thethuuwar.They told the boys’ terrified relatives that if the wanted mansurrendered, the boys would be released. To spare the youngsters, the man handed himself insome hours later but neither he nor the boys have been released by the al-Gaddafi forces.Zawiyat al-Mahjoub, in the western outskirts of Misratah, suffered its share of disappearances.Local activists compiled information about 80 such cases, but believe that there might bemore as some families are too afraid to report them.Hussein al-Toumi, whose son and nine other relatives were taken, told Amnesty Internationalwhat happened when al-Gaddafi soldiers entered the home of Mostafa Hadi al-Toumi near theSahili Road, where al-Gaddafi forces were positioned, at around 5.30pm on 18 March:“We were sitting in the living room having just finished [the] ‘Asr prayer. We suddenly turnedaround and armed soldiers were in our courtyard. There were about five of them, armed withmachine-guns, revolvers and kalashnikovs. More were standing outside.“They searched the house, and took all our boys: Mostafa’s seven sons, his nephews’ twosons, and another relative. I tried to stop them taking the young ones, but they didn’t listen. Ipleaded with them that my son Hamza and Abdelwahab were not even 18.”Several families told Amnesty International that they saw their disappeared relatives on statetelevision claiming to have been manipulated by “armed gangs” affiliated to al-Qa’ida andseeking to destroy Libya. BrothersMansourandAli Abdel Salam Bousniya,who betweenthem had 17 children, were taken from the Masjid al-Rahman Mosque in Zawiyat al-Mahjoub,along with two other men, as they prepared for Friday prayer on 25 March. Mansour’s grievingwife told Amnesty International that she saw her husband on state television “admitting” tohurting Libya’s interests through involvement with “armed gangs”:“The footage provided little comfort. I found out that he had not been killed by that point,but his face looked swollen and bruised, and now I have no idea how or where he is. He is inhis sixties, not a young man. What has he done to deserve this?”

Similarly, in the Nafusa Mountain area, scores of people disappeared when they ventured outof opposition strongholds, particularly around checkpoints established by al-Gaddafi forces,from late February onwards. As the siege of the Nafusa Mountain intensified, and itsresidents were running out of necessities, they would drive to areas under the control of al-Gaddafi forces, such as Tiji. Many would vanish, some also later appearing on state television.Amnesty International met relatives of such victims; the relatives had fled to Tunisia, fearingthat al-Gaddafi forces would return to cities that declared their support for the NTC and carryout reprisals.A man told Amnesty International that his brother, a 37-year-old father from Nalut, togetherwith a relative and a friend, disappeared after he drove south from Nalut to Tiji to get spareparts for his car in early March. When he did not return, his family started calling himrepeatedly. He eventually answered, hastily saying: “I am going to Tripoli, take care of thekids”. Since then his phone has been switched off. His family heard from unofficial channelsthat he is being held in Ain Zara Prison in Tripoli. His distraught brother showed AmnestyInternational a video of the missing man proudly waving the opposition flag during peacefulprotests in Nalut, just days before his disappearance.

TORTURE OR OTHER ILL-TREATMENTBecause most of those arrested by al-Gaddafi forces were held completely outside theprotection of the law and denied contact with their families and lawyers, they wereparticularly vulnerable to abuse. The fact that they were detained incommunicado meant thatvery little was known about detention conditions during the conflict.Families lived through months of anguish for the safety and well-being of their relatives. Theirconcerns were heightened by the long-established and well-documented patterns of tortureand other ill-treatment meted out against perceived opponents or critics of Colonel al-Gaddafi,particularly in Abu Salim and Ain Zara prisons. Methods of torture most frequently used haveincluded electric shocks, beatings,falaqa(beatings on the soles of the feet), sleepdeprivation, prolonged contortion of the body in stress positions, and solitary confinement forlong periods.Some of those arrested and detained in Sirte and Tripoli in relation to the recent unrest saidthey were tortured and ill-treated, particularly upon arrest and in the initial period ofdetention. Several, including those not carrying any weapons, were shot after they werecaptured and posed no threat to security forces. Some were denied medical treatment forgunshot wounds.Jamal Mohamed Baba,aged 23, told Amnesty International that he and his 33-year-oldbrother Mikhael were taken away by al-Gaddafi soldiers at 9.30am on 18 March from a farmin the Kerzaz neighbourhood of Misratah when they were feeding their neighbour’s goats. Thesoldiers did not explain why and did not give them the chance to inform their families.Jamal described what happened next:“We were handcuffed, blindfolded, and hit with the back ofrifles, before being roughly shoved into a car. The soldierswere insulting us, calling us traitors, and terrorists. Theymade impolite remarks about my full beard, calling me amember of al-Qa’ida. I couldn’t take it anymore, so I triedto defend myself.“I was then taken out of the car, thrown on the pavement,and shot in the left foot. The bullet exited through the soleof my foot, and it was bleeding profusely. The soldiers thenforced me into the boot of the car, which was full of metal,and shut it. I couldn’t move and could barely breathe.”The brothers were taken to the Tawargha region just east ofMisratah, where Mikhael was similarly shot in the right foot.The captors then drove Jamal and Mikhael to the localhospital, where their wounds were bandaged but notcleaned. On arrival in Sirte, they were given medicaltreatment at the hospital, before being taken to a branch ofthe ISA for questioning. They were eventually transferred to

the Military Police barracks in Sirte, where they remained until their release six days later.The brothers told Amnesty International that they met several men from Misratah in detention,most of them arrested from their homes, many in the neighbourhood of Tamina.Khaled Bakirwas released on the same day as the Baba brothers. Originally from Misratah,he was arrested on 18 March by al-Gaddafi soldiers in Brega, where he worked for a petrolcompany. Khaled recounted sharing his cell at the military barracks in Sirte with detaineesfrom Benghazi, Brega, Ras Lanouf, Ben Jawad, Misratah and Ajdabiya. He said that he wasnot tortured, but could hear other detainees screaming in pain. He also saw several woundeddetainees from Misratah who told him that they were shot after being captured, despite notcarrying weapons or putting up any resistance.Another man detained by the ISA and in the Military Police barracks in Sirte told AmnestyInternational:“I was handcuffed and blindfolded all the time, though sometimes I managed to seesomething because my blindfold moved a bit. I was beaten and tortured in both places andoften I fainted and they threw water on me to wake me up...“They beat me with their rifle butts and other objects; they fired in the air and then burnedmy skin with the hot gun barrel; they suspended me by hanging my handcuffed wrists (tiedbehind my back) on the wall or on to a door; it was very painful.”Detainees said they were blindfolded duringinterrogation in Sirte. Upon release, they said theywere compelled to sign “attestation” forms promisingnot to do anything “damaging to the reputation of theGreat Jamahiriya” and acknowledging that they would“assume full responsibility” for the consequences ifthey should violate this pledge. Such pledges, however,do not seem to have guaranteed protection fromharassment by al-Gaddafi forces; AmnestyInternational is aware of at least one person who wasrearrested in Misratah after signing such a pledge.Former detainees also reported being abused in Tripoli.Munder Deghayes,a 40-year-old engineer and fatherof two who fled to Tunisia, was detained for over twomonths in Tripoli. He told Amnesty International thathe was arrested on Mizran Street in Tripoli on 4 Marchin a security operation to prevent people in the Mizranmosque from holding a planned protest after theFriday prayer. He said that during arrest, four or fivemen hit him all over his body, including with rifles,and caused his head to bleed profusely. Throughouthis detention, his head wound was not treated or even

cleaned by medical professionals.Munder Deghayes said that when he was first taken to the Salaheddin detention complex,127he was promised a swift release as soon as the necessary procedures and paperwork werecompleted. The interrogator’s attitude changed when he found messages and emails onMunder’s phone promoting the “17 February Revolution”. Those detaining him, who did notidentify themselves or the official bodies to which they belonged, then realized which familyhe belonged to. His father, Amer Taher Deghayes, co-founder of the banned Ba’athmovement in Libya, is believed to have been extra-judicially executed in 1980; his brotherOmar Deghayes was detained by the US authorities as a “terrorist suspect” in GuantánamoBay for five years before being cleared and released. These discoveries led to lengthyinterrogations about Munder’s knowledge of and involvement in al-Qa’ida and other “armedgangs”. After spending several days in Salaheddin, part of the time in solitary confinementand at other times in large cells with up to 130 people, Munder was transferred to Ain ZaraPrison, where he remained until his release on 10 May.Munder said that at night he could hear the screams of other detainees reverberating throughthe prison. He also said that several of his cellmates had open fractures or gunshot woundsthat were not treated for about a month, until detainees went on a hunger strike demandingthat the wounded receive medical treatment. Munder shared his cell with detainees fromTripoli, al-Zawiya, Zuwara, Garyan and Misratah, as well as with people from Bangladesh,Sudan and Syria. Most did not understand the reason for their arrest. Many were taken fromtheir homes or the street merely on suspicion of supporting the opposition. Munder said:“During interrogations, officials would ask us:‘Whyare you here? Do you have weapons? Areyou trying to ruin the country?’ It is unbelievable that those who arrest us, question us aboutthe reasons for our detention. Some of those held with me were elderly men, up to 80 yearsold. What could have they done to threaten the regime? There were also several people fromBenghazi, who were living in Tripoli before the unrest. It seems like they were just takenbecause of their origin, not because of anything they did... One person was transferred to usfrom Abu Salim, and was so traumatized that he couldn’t communicate for several days. Heeventually said that our… treatment in Ain Zara was a ‘five star hotel’ compared to what hehad seen in Abu Salim.”On 10 May, Munder was released with a group of some 130 individuals in the presence ofjournalists, both foreign and Libyan. This followed declarations by “tribal leaders” that thedetainees were manipulated by “armed gangs” into harming Libya’s interests, but had nowrepented and agreed to “correct their wrongdoings.”128

The exact number of political prisoners is difficult to establish as the al-Gaddafi authoritiesconsistently refused over the years to give Amnesty International and other such organizationsany detailed information on the number of people detained, the circumstances of their arrestand detention, and their legal status. According to estimates given by former prisoners,between 100 and 200 people were still detained in late February, taking into account therelease of 110 prisoners on 16 February 2011 and 25 others four days later.Many of those who were detained in Abu Salim Prison were victims of arbitrary detention, asthey were kept in detention after the expiry of their sentence or despite having been clearedof all charges. Others were detained after grossly unfair proceedings in front of exceptionalcourts, not meeting the minimum standards of fair trial, including the right to defence.Statements extracted under torture or duress were widely used as evidence to convictthem.129The suffering of many of these political detainees dates backs to the 1990s and even the late1980s. The majority were arrested without warrants, held incommunicado for years andtortured or otherwise ill-treated, particularly in the initial years of their detention. In somecases, the conditions of detention themselves amounted to torture or other ill-treatment.Throughout their long years of incarceration, they were allowed only intermittent access totheir families and denied proper medical treatment. They were deprived of any recreationalactivities or access to outdoor space for months or sometimes years.A distressed mother in Benghazi fearing for her son’s safety in Abu Salim Prison toldAmnesty International in May 2011:“How much more suffering can we endure? My boy was taken away from me in 2007 interrifying circumstances by men in civilian dress, armed to the teeth, without any explanationof where and why they were taking him. He was tortured, convicted in mock trial proceedings,and denied the right to appeal against this injustice. He’s now been detained for over fouryears, and I can count the number of times I visited him in Abu Salim on my one hand.Today, I don’t even know how he is. I am afraid, he [Colonel al-Gaddafi] is going to take outhis anger about the opposition to his rule on my boy, and those held with him, especiallythose from eastern Libya. He always called them ‘stray dogs’ and ‘terrorists’; and now theyare completely at his mercy, cut off from the external world.”Through tears, she spoke about her other son, who was killed during the 1996 Abu SalimPrison killings (see Chapter 1).130She said:“[The authorities] refused to tell us that my son was killed in 1996; so until the early 2000s,I would hover around the door of the prison begging in vain to see him. The first time I triedto visit my other son in Abu Salim in 2008, the guards turned me back at first, saying thatvisits were not allowed. I started crying and shouted at them: ‘If you killed him too, have thecourage to tell me and put an end to my agony. I am not leaving the prison until I get ananswer.’ I was eventually allowed to see him for a few minutes. Now I can’t even find out ifhe is alive or dead, and the memory of what happened to his brother continues to haunt meevery day. What if they kill the other one too?”

5. ABUSES BY OPPOSITION FORCESOpposition fighters and supporters haveabducted, arbitrarily detained, tortured andkilled former members of the securityforces, suspected al-Gaddafi loyalists,captured soldiers and foreign nationalswrongly suspected of being mercenariesfighting on behalf of al-Gaddafi forces. Noindependent or credible investigations areknown to have been carried out by the NTC,nor effective measures taken to hold toaccount those responsible for these abuses.The lightning flight of al-Gaddafi forcesand the collapse of state institutions in thefirst days of the protests left a security andinstitutional vacuum that has been mostlyfilled by the local residents who took uparms against al-Gaddafi forces.132The taskof policing the opposition-held areas hasbeen left to armed opposition fighters whohave taken the law into their own hands,who lack the necessary training andexperience, and who have been operatingwithout supervision or an accountabilityframework.

In May 2011, Amnesty International submitted a memorandum to and met with NTC officials,including Chairman Mostafa Abdeljalil, raising concerns about abductions, unlawful killings,torture and arbitrary detention at the hands of opposition fighters and supporters of the “17February Revolution”. The NTC is facing a difficult task of reining in opposition fighters andvigilante groups responsible for serious human rights abuses, including possible war crimes;but has shown unwillingness to hold them accountable.133Opposition officials with whomAmnesty International raised these concerns condemned such abuses, though they have oftendownplayed their extent and gravity, some dismissing them as “understandable” reactions toheinous crimes by al-Gaddafi forces. The officials assured Amnesty International that effortswere being made to stop and prevent such practices, but that this was difficult given theongoing conflict, attacks by al-Gaddafi forces and the lack of resources and capacity. So far,NTC officials have not provided details of any measures taken to address such concerns andhave avoided discussing or condemning crimes and abuses by opposition fighters andsupporters in the media or other public forums. On the other hand, the NTC publishedstatements on its official website (at the time inaccessible to the majority of Libyans due to

In the first days of the uprising, groups of protesters killed a number of captured soldiers andsuspected mercenaries in al-Bayda, Derna and Benghazi. Some were beaten to death, at leastthree were hanged, and others were shot dead after they had been captured or hadsurrendered. Those killed were presented as “African mercenaries” but their identities are notknown. Most were believed to be Libyan soldiers with dark skin and some may have beenSub-Saharan African nationals wrongly presumed to be “mercenaries” (see Chapter 6).Most of these killings were reported between al-Bayda and Derna, where a large number ofsoldiers were captured by or surrendered to protesters who took over military bases andairports. In Benghazi, soldiers had already left the military base before it was taken over byprotesters.Opposition fighters killed several soldiers in two separate incidents on the outskirts of Dernaon 22 February, according to Derna residents interviewed by Amnesty International. Onesoldier was seized by angry protesters and hanged from the pedestrian bridge in Derna. Up to15 others were killed during the night or early the next morning near the village of Martubah,south-east of Derna. An amateur video showing a group of dead men, some in militaryuniform, all of them barefoot and with their hands tied behind their back, was posted onLibyan opposition websites. It described the victims as Libyan soldiers executed by theircolleagues for refusing to shoot protesters.137However, the victims appear to be the samegroup of captured soldiers shown in another amateur video being interrogated by protestersand opposition fighters.138Moreover, by the time the killing occurred, on 22 February or earlythe next day, Libyan forces had fled the area.In al-Bayda, a resident told Amnesty International that on 18 February, as soldiers inside theHussein al-Juweifi military barracks in Shahat, east of al-Bayda, were beginning to losecontrol after protracted battles with protesters, he attempted to mediate to avoid morebloodshed:“I asked to speak to a senior officer at the compound whom I knew from before… I gave himmy word and said: if your soldiers surrender, they will be safe. As the group of soldiers were

coming out to surrender, the protesters were very angry and shot dead two soldiers… theywere Libyans, not foreign mercenaries… I feel guilty because was it not for me, they may nothave come out.”Also in al-Bayda, a dark-skinned man in riot police uniform – but referred to as an “Africanmercenary” – was first lynched by protesters and later taken out of the hospital and hanged.It is not clear if he was killed by hanging or if he was already dead when he was hanged.Several residents of al-Bayda, including hospital staff, told Amnesty International that theyhad witnessed different sequences of the victim’s ordeal.Amnesty International received consistent reports from several residents about the lynching,including by hanging, of men described as “mercenaries” in two separate incidents in al-Bayda and outside Benghazi North Court – the building where the protests began in Benghaziand which has become a symbol of the 17 February movement. Amateur videos show crowdscheering and filming the gruesome scenes on their mobile phones.

REVENGE KILLINGS AND ATTACKSFormer operatives, notably officers of ISAand members of the RevolutionaryCommittees and Revolutionary Guard,139have been targeted. Some have beenkilled. Others have been assaulted ordetained, or had their property attacked,looted or burned down. Many have leftopposition-held areas, some immediatelyafter the opposition took over, others afterreceiving threats or being attacked.A former ISA member,Ibrahim Khalifa al-Surmani,a father of six, was found deadon 10 May in the south-western outskirtsof Benghazi. He had been shot in thehead. His hands and feet were bound anda scarf was tightly tied around his neck.He was missing a piece of flesh from hisright calf and marks on his trousersindicated that he had been kneeling. Ablood-stained note bearing his name wasfound by the body; it read: “…a dogamong Gaddafi’s dogs has beeneliminated”.

behind his back with two plastic handcuffs, and a scarf was tightlytied around his neck. Marks on his trousers indicated that he hadbeen kneeling.In another case investigated by Amnesty International, a group ofarmed men – some of them masked – abducted a 55-year-oldfather of eight,Hussein Gaith Bou Shiha,also a former ISAmember, from his home in the evening of 8 May. The followingmorning his body was found, also in the south-western outskirts ofBenghazi. He too was handcuffed and had been shot in the headand had also been injured on the head and hand with a bluntobject. Those who abducted him did not identify themselves nordid they tell his family why or where they were taking him. However,Hussein Gaith Bou Shihathey were driving a pick-up truck with an anti-aircraft machine-gun� Amnesty Internationalmounted at the back, a type of vehicle which in eastern Libya isonly used by opposition fighters.By mid-July, Amnesty International received reports of several other similar cases, two inDerna and several others in Benghazi.Unlike the lynching and killings in the first days of the uprising, these more recent unlawfulkillings form a disturbing pattern and are perpetrated by organized groups who operate freely,openly and with impunity.Victims’ families are generally unwilling to publicize their cases for fear of reprisals and toavoid the stigma of being labelled as al-Gaddafi loyalists or “anti-revolutionary”. Some go asfar as disguising the identity of the perpetrators. The assumption is that anyone targeted bythethuuwarmust be al-Gaddafi loyalists and “anti-revolutionary”. Relatives of a formermember of the security forces who was abducted from his home by armed opposition fightersand found dead the following day – his hands and feet were bound and he had been shot inthe head – told Amnesty International that they had registered the deceased as a “martyr ofthe revolution” and a victim of al-Gaddafi forces.With no functioning police or judicial system, those who feel at risk have few options but toflee. A woman who was leaving Libya told Amnesty International:“My husband was threatened because he was a member of the [Revolutionary Committees].He didn’t tell me at first, he just said we should go to stay with our relatives in Benghazi for afew days. He didn’t say why and I didn’t understand and I didn’t want to go. We havechildren and our relatives have a small apartment and we would be crowded there. The dayafter a friend of my husband came and said our shop was burned down; he filmed it on hismobile phone and he showed it to us. He said we should leave immediately because theywanted to kill my husband. We left without taking anything, just our papers and a change ofclothes. We came to Benghazi to our relatives. After a while our home was attacked; myhusband went and found everything looted and smashed up. So we lost everything and myhusband is still at risk of getting killed.”140

DETENTIONOpposition forces have detained hundreds of individuals, including civilians, in areas theycontrol since the end of February. Many of those held are former ISA members, suspectedmembers of the Revolutionary Committees or Revolutionary Guard, and people accused of“subverting the revolution”, commonly referred to as the “fifth column”. Foreign nationals,the overwhelming majority from Sub-Saharan African countries, suspected of being“mercenaries” were also held but have since been released (see Chapter 6). In addition,scores of soldiers from al-Gaddafi forces captured at the front continue to be detained inBenghazi and Misratah.141Amnesty International welcomes the access granted to the ICRC tofacilities where such individuals are held.Amnesty International was granted access on several occasions to detainees held in twodetention centres in Benghazi, where it was able to interview detainees in private. One is inthe 17 February military camp142under the control of the 17 February (Martyrs’) Brigade, avolunteer militia set up at the end of February by opposition fighters, some with a military orpolice background. This mainly holds former ISA members, suspected members of theRevolutionary Committees or Revolutionary Guard, and people accused of “subverting therevolution”. The other detention centre is under the control of the Military Police and locatedin the former juvenile detention centre (Rahaba). This mainly holds captured soldiers andLibyan civilians and foreign nationals suspected of helping al-Gaddafi forces.143In Misratah, Amnesty International visited two locations where detainees were being held andwhere the organization’s delegates were also able to interview detainees in private: Sa’adounSecondary School,144where captured al-Gaddafi soldiers and five suspected foreignmercenaries were detained at the end of May; and the Zarouq Cultural Centre, in whichmainly civilians suspected of “subverting the revolution” (including former ISA members andother al-Gaddafi loyalists) were detained.In August, Amnesty International visited two locations where some 300 detainees were heldin al-Zawiya, according to officials. They included both civilians and former fighters loyal toColonel al-Gaddafi.All the detainees and former detainees interviewed by Amnesty International in Benghazi andMisratah said they were never shown an arrest warrant or any other document when they wereseized. In most cases, the manner of detention is better described as abduction rather thanarrest. They were seized by groups of heavily-armed men, some of them masked, who did notidentify themselves. They were then taken away in unmarked vehicles, usually pick-up truckswith anti-aircraft machine-guns mounted at the back.Groups of vigilantes and opposition fighters have been carrying out regular night-time raidslooking for people suspected of collaborating with or assisting al-Gaddafi forces. The onesfound and not killed have usually been handed over to authorities at the north Benghazicourthouse or at military camps such as the 17 February camp. Foreign nationals suspectedof being mercenaries who have been handed over to the NTC authorities have usually endedup at the Military Police detention centre, as have soldiers captured at the front.

Opposition officials145in Benghazi told Amnesty International that many of these groups actindependently and on their own initiative – not on the orders of military and other officials –and that they usually hand suspects over to the relevant NTC authorities, but not always. Oneofficial said that it was “not unusual to learn of people having been held in private houses orapartments”. Officials said that they did not know how many such vigilante groups wereoperating in Benghazi or in other areas under opposition control, but according to reportsthere were dozens or scores.None of the detainees, whether Libyan or foreign civilians, or Libyan soldiers, have hadaccess to a lawyer, been formally charged, or been given the opportunity to challenge theirdetention before a judicial authority.At the 17 February detention centre, members of an “investigation committee” – all of themvolunteers and some with a police or legal background – told Amnesty International that whenthe investigation reveals that a detainee is not involved in activities that pose a danger, he isreleased, usually after signing a pledge not to engage in acts “subverting the revolution” andconditional on relatives guaranteeing that the detainee keeps his promise. According to thisinvestigation committee, as of 26 April, 71 of 112 detained people had been released, mostwithin a few days. Detainees at the 17 February detention centre also told AmnestyInternational that many detainees were released within a few days or weeks.At the Military Police detention centre, the chief Military Prosecutor, Colonel Yusef al-Sfeir,told Amnesty International146that foreigners were interrogated and investigated and thatthose who have someone who can vouch for them are released.147At the end of May, fiveforeign nationals remained held at this facility, one of them pending release.148In Misratah by the end of May, only four foreign nationals remained detained at the Sa’adounSecondary School for Economic Sciences on suspicion of being “mercenaries”, out of thetotal of 162 detainees, mostly captured soldiers.Officials at the Zarouq Cultural Centre in Misratah told Amnesty International in May thatlarge numbers of detainees were released, particularly those with “dark skin”, afterinvestigations showed that there was no evidence in their involvement in the conflict, andafter the employers of Sub-Saharan African migrants confirmed their identities. The facilityheld 111 detainees at the times of Amnesty International’s visit and officials in Zarouq saidthat a 12-member committee is responsible for detaining individuals considered to be part ofthe “fifth column”, and conducting investigations, pending the return of a regular judicialprocess. Three members of the Committee need to approve the releases of suspects.Opposition officials and authorities at the detention centres in Benghazi told AmnestyInternational that civilians were often held for their own protection, to prevent them beingkilled by vigilantes. Some detainees told Amnesty International that they handed themselvesin to the detention authorities seeking protection because they felt threatened. Otherscomplained that they should not have to be imprisoned to avoid being killed.

TORTURE AND OTHER ILL-TREATMENTSeveral detainees, including Libyan and foreign civilians, as well as captured soldiers, toldAmnesty International that they were tortured, in most cases immediately upon capture bythose who seized them and in some cases during the first days of detention. Allegations ofbeatings and ill-treatment upon capture were frequent, and allegations of torture in detentionwere particularly common in the Zarouq detention centre in Misratah, as well as in a buildingseparate from the detention facility in the 17 February military camp.The most frequently-reported methods of torture and other ill-treatment include beatings allover the body with various objects including belts, metal bars, sticks, the backs of rifles andrubber hoses (at times administered directly on exposed flesh); electric shocks; and threats –including with rape. Victims are subjected to beatings and other abuses seemingly to extractconfessions and to punish them for their alleged “crimes”. In some cases, detainees areforced to sign or thumb-print statements under torture or duress without being allowed toread them. In fact, several detainees told Amnesty International that they were interrogatedwhile blindfolded.There were severe delays in providing medical treatment for injured detainees, including forwounds sustained as a result of torture, or upon capture. In some cases where detainees weretransferred to hospitals for treatment, they were not afforded protection from revenge attacks.For instance, a soldier with the al-Gaddafi forces was attacked by a group of unidentifiedindividuals in plain clothes and military dress in the middle of the night while receivingtreatment at the Hikma Hospital. His assailants, who came in through the window, beat himwith rubber hoses and metal wires all over his body, and broke his jaw and at least one tooth.Calling him “a traitor who came to annihilate residents of Misratah”, they threatened to killhim should he attract any attention. After enduring beatings for about 30 minutes, doctorsnoticed the noise and intervened; but the assailants managed to escape. AmnestyInternational was also shown video footage of a group of supporters of the opposition tauntingand humiliating captured soldiers receiving treatment at the al-Jala’a Hospital in Benghazi,including forcing them to repeat “I am a Gaddafi dog” and chewing paper.A detainee at the Sa’adoun Secondary School detention centre in Misratah told AmnestyInternational:“I am well-treated here but there is a man who comes regularly from outside the detentioncentre and tortures us. Several times he has beaten me with a metal bar and/or a belt andhas given me electric discharges with an electric baton [Taser]. It is very painful. He wantsme to confess that I have killed, raped and stolen; at least one of these crimes. When I saythat I didn’t do any of these things he tortures me more harshly. Sometimes he just hits uswithout asking any questions. He comes every few days and doesn’t always torture the samepeople. But we never know when he’ll come next and I worry all the time. He wears glasses,is about 40 years old and people call him ‘Abdellatif. There are some others also who comewith him but not every time.”The detainee had bruising and raw skin consistent with his account. Several other detaineessaid that they had been tortured by the same man and some of them also bore marks and

scars consistent with their accounts. Some of them said that they had been subjected toworse treatment in their first days in a detention centre in Misratah, believed to be Zarouq.One said:“For the first 15 days in the Zarouq centre they beat me every day, they beat me a lot on thesoles of my feet with a stick and a whip and gave me electric shocks on various parts of thebody. My feet felt as if on fire and I could not walk for days even after it stopped. Theywanted information. The people who tortured us were not the same as the ones who capturedus. Now they mostly leave me alone here.”Several detainees told Amnesty International that three detainees died as a result of torturewhile detained at a school:Salem Ali Ahmad al-Fitouri,from al-Ja’afara died under torture inthe Zarouq centre. It was reported that his left ear had been cut off.Mohammed NasserMshay,from Tripoli, died shortly after he was brought to the Sa’adoun Secondary Schooldetention centre from another detention facility as a result of the severe beating and torturehe was subjected to there, andAkram Bougila,described by those detained with him as adark-skinned Libyan, was reportedly taken to the hospital after severe beatings, but died thefollowing day. Several detainees also said a fourth man, whose name they did not know, diedfrom the severe beating.At the Military Police detention centre, many of the detained soldiers said they had beenbeaten when captured. Some said that they had been shot after they were captured.In the 17 February detention centre in Benghazi, several detainees reported being kept in aseparate building where they were beaten with rifle butts, and in one case given electricshocks with a Taser. Some said they were threatened with death. One said he had beenbeaten and threatened with rape. Most said that they were kept in the building for the firstday, and some for a few days. One said he was held there for 14 days. Another told AmnestyInternational:“They tied a cloth around my eyes and one around my mouth and handcuffed each of myhands to one side of the chair and cuffed my ankles together and beat me severely with abaton on the thighs and on the hands and on the back. Later they wanted me to sign a paperwhich I could not read and when I refused they put a gun to my head and said they would killme and so I signed. They then put me in an isolation cell for three days and then brought meto this building. Here the treatment is good.”While treatment of detainees improved after their initial periods of detention and detainees inMisratah and Benghazi have been visited by the ICRC; impunity for such behaviour remainsentrenched. Several detainees told Amnesty International that they had reported the tortureto the authorities in the detention centres where they were now held, but none was aware ofany investigation into their allegations.At the end of May, the NTC member in charge of legal affairs, Dr Salwa Dghili, was quoted inthe media as saying that the authorities were distributing guidelines to opposition fightersabout the treatment of detainees and warning that anyone who broke the rules would bepunished.149During a meeting with Amnesty International in May, she confirmed to Amnesty

International that guidelines have been distributed, and improvements to prison conditionshave been introduced, arguing that torture or other ill-treatment occurred in isolated cases.NTC officials showed willingness to take steps to improve prison conditions and avoidrepetition of the abuses; but seemed more reluctant to conduct investigations and bring thoseresponsible to justice. In a meeting with Amnesty International in May, NTC ChairmanMostafa Abdeljalil indicated that a major duty of the-then newly-appointed head for internalaffairs and local government, Ahmed Hussein al-Darrat, would be to bring the variousvigilante groups conducting arrests under his umbrella; and centralize policing in opposition-controlled territory. He also indicated the NTC’s intention of ensuring that the Prosecutionand courts operate normally. It remains unclear whether any practical steps have been takento realize these pledges; and adequate investigations have yet to be been conducted intoabuses committed by supporters of the opposition.

Before the uprising began, Libya was“home” to between 1.5 million and 2.5million foreign nationals.152Most originatedfrom Sub-Saharan African countries,including Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Eritrea,Ghana, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Somalia andSudan. Many came from neighbouring NorthAfrican countries and some from as far awayas south-east Asia. While some came insearch of better life opportunities either inLibya or in Europe, which they tried to reachvia Libya, others had fled conflict orpersecution.Some viewed Libya as a transit country;others had settled there. In fact, Libyarelied heavily on migrant labour, includingin the crucial sectors of construction,education, health and other services.The situation of foreign nationals in Libya,particularly those in an irregular situation,was dire prior to the unfolding conflict.Colonel al-Gaddafi’s government refused torecognize the right to seek and enjoy asylum,and made no effort to distinguish betweenindividuals entitled to internationalprotection, and economic migrants.Refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants inLibya lived under constant threat of beingTop: Migrant workers camping by the roadside outside Misratah’s port waiting to be evacuated, Libya, 15arrested and detained in appallingApril � Amnesty International; Above: A seething mass of humanity in no-man’s-land, desperate to reachconditions for “migration-related offences”.Tunisia, 2 March � UNHCR/A. DuclosBeatings, torture and other ill-treatment ofrefugees and migrants were rampant in

detention centres and perpetrated with total impunity. Sub-Saharan Africans in particularwere also vulnerable to exploitation and racist and xenophobic attacks by ordinary Libyans,fully aware that such abuses were tolerated by the authorities. Those responsible for suchcrimes were never held to account – facilitating the repetition of such abuses as evidenced inthe ongoing conflict.As the unrest in Libya evolved into armed conflict in late February 2011, foreign nationalswere vulnerable to indiscriminate attacks like other civilians. They were also targeted by bothsides.Widespread, but largely unfounded, reports that al-Gaddafi forces were relying on Sub-Saharan African mercenaries to fight the opposition put them at heightened risk in areas thatfell under the control of the NTC. Sub-Saharan Africans in territories under Colonel al-Gaddafi’s control fared little better. Racist and xenophobic attacks, already frequent beforethe unrest,153increased as a result of the breakdown of law and order and an escalation ofxenophobic rhetoric by both sides of the conflict. In a speech on state television on 20February, Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi blamed the uprising on foreign elements, and accused theopposition of using “Arab brothers and Africans” to create havoc in the country.154Thisexposed foreign nationals to further risks of attack.

ABUSES BY AL-GADDAFI FORCESThe majority of foreign nationals interviewed by Amnesty International who had crossed theborder from Libya into Tunisia and Egypt said they had fled for several reasons, including toescape the fighting and the increasing attacks and harassment they were facing, and becausethey could not survive financially as the country had come to a virtual standstill. Most hadbeen allowed to flee westwards unimpeded by the authorities, although several said they hadtheir money and phones taken by Libyan officials.Faraj Mohamed Omar,an Eritrean national who had been in Libya since 2007, told AmnestyInternational that he decided to leave Tripoli after about eight men in plain clothes, two ofthem armed with kalashnikov rifles, broke down the door of his home in the middle of thenight of 26 February. They searched the house for weapons, without finding any, then urgedFaraj and other Eritreans living there to join the demonstrations in support of Colonel al-Gaddafi. Shortly after, Faraj and his friends left Libya, encountering few problems on theirway to the Ras Jdir border crossing controlled by Tunisia.Other foreign nationals attempting to flee encountered greater difficulties. Three Côte d’Ivoirenationals, for example, told Amnesty International that they had been stopped and arrested inTripoli immediately after setting out on their journey to Tunisia. Government soldiers tookthem to the Tweisha Detention Centre, which was used in the past to detain foreign nationalsfor “migration-related offences”. There, they were beaten and verbally abused for betweenthree days and a week. They were eventually released but given no explanation for their arrestand detention, let alone the abuse to which they were subjected. They eventually reachedTunisia.

Amnesty International met three Egyptianmen in their twenties,Ali Mohamed Said,Hussein ‘Awad Abdel Fatahand‘Ali ‘Abdel‘Azim Muftah,who were working in Misratahprior to the unrest, two of them as bakers.In early March, they decided to escape thefighting and boarded a bus with some 40other Egyptians heading east. At acheckpoint leading to Tawargha, an areacontrolled by al-Gaddafi forces, they wereordered to turn back, but not before theirmobile phones were confiscated. As thefighting intensified, the three men weretrapped in their home near the Sahili Road,where al-Gaddafi forces were positionedduring their counter-offensive on Misratah.On 16 March, a group of al-Gaddafi soldiersentered their home and stole their savingstotalling 3,300 dinars (US$2,700). One ofthem told Amnesty International whathappened next:

“When they caught us, they immediately started shouting at us and beating us. They said:‘You Egyptians, Gaddafi is a blessing for you. Why are you here, baking bread for the armedgangs? We will teach you a lesson.’ We were then blindfolded and taken to a place we didn’tknow. There, we were punched, kicked and insulted. For two days, they didn’t give usanything to eat or drink. In our cell, there were other foreigners including a Tunisian andsome [Sub-Saharan] Africans. I have no idea why any of us were arrested, we were just hereto work, to make a living.“We were released after some six days; but still couldn’t find safety. We stayed in about 10different places since the siege and shelling started. The rockets were flying on top of ourheads, no matter where we went.”Other foreign nationals fell victim to al-Gaddafi forces during thesiege of Misratah.Ali Youssef,a 26-year-old man from Niger, toldAmnesty International that in the late afternoon on 25 March, hewas at home in the area of Jazira, west of central Misratah, alongwith his cousin Nasser Ider, when they heard explosions nearby.Shortly after, al-Gaddafi forces entered the area and startedsearching neighbouring homes. The two men left their buildingwith their hands up to show that they had no weapons or intent toresist. Ali Youssef said that al-Gaddafi forces nevertheless tied theirhands and feet and forced them to kneel on the ground. They thenshot at them without warning or explanation. Nasser was shot inthe back of the head and died immediately. Ali Youssef was luckieras the bullet only injured his face. He was, however, left for dead.Ali Youssef � AmnestyHe told Amnesty International that for 11 days he remained lyingInternational

on the ground unable to move or to get help as residents of the area fled the fighting. He waseventually seen by an Egyptian migrant worker, himself trapped in Jazira, who took him to aresidence used by foreign nationals. Another man from Niger described Ali Youssef’s stateafter his rescue:“When I saw Youssef, I was surprised that he was still alive. He looked like a skeleton. Hecouldn’t walk or talk. We couldn’t even take him to the hospital at the time, as it was toodangerous to get out. Only on 22 April, 17 days later, thethuuwartook him to Hikma[Hospital].”Such incidents follow a long-standing pattern of human rights violations by the Libyanauthorities under Colonel al-Gaddafi against foreign nationals, particularly those in anirregular situation. At time of writing, Libya is not a state party to the 1951 UN Conventionrelating to the Status of Refugees or its 1967 Protocol. It had no functioning asylum system,and the task of conducting refugee status determination (RSD) and screening individuals fellto the UNHCR in Tripoli, until the al-Gaddafi authorities suspended its activities in early2010. Since then, individuals wishing to claim asylum have had no opportunity to do so; andwere left trapped in Libya and vulnerable to further abuse.Libyan law makes the irregular entry to, stay in or exit from the territory a criminal offence,and allows for indefinite detention and expulsion from Libya without appeal and withoutconducting individual assessments. Foreign nationals have been systematically tortured andill-treated in detention with impunity by al-Gaddafi security forces.Since the eruption of the conflict, attempted travel to Europe from territories controlled byColonel al-Gaddafi increased, possibly as a result of a reduction in patrolling of the coast.Frustrations with the lack of durable solutions for refugees, including those who initially fledfrom Libya to Tunisia, pushed some refugees and asylum-seekers to cross back into Libya ina desperate attempt to board unseaworthy vessels to Europe. Reports also suggest thatColonel al-Gaddafi’s government encouraged foreign nationals to embark on dangerous boatjourneys across the Mediterranean to show the vital role played by his government inpreventing the “influx” of migrants to southern Europe.155

ABUSES IN OPPOSITION-HELD TERRITORIESWhen al-Bayda, Benghazi, Derna, Misratah and other cities first fell under the control of theopposition in the third week of February, house raids, killings, lynching and other violentattacks were perpetrated by supporters of the “17 February Revolution” against individualsbelieved to be foreign mercenaries on account of their skin colour. Some victims were dark-skinned Libyan soldiers; others may well have been Sub-Saharan Africans.Allegations that Colonel al-Gaddafi’s government was using foreign mercenaries, particularlyfrom Sub-Saharan Africa, to crush the uprising had inflamed anger among many Libyansliving in areas taken over by the opposition. The anger was further inflamed by Colonel al-Gaddafi’s public threats to bring in foreign fighters,156and by repeated references byopposition leaders and fighters to the alleged use of “African mercenaries” by the

The allegations about the use of mercenaries proved to be largely unfounded. Many capturedal-Gaddafi fighters, including those interviewed by Amnesty International in Benghazi andMisratah, were in fact Libyan nationals, including individuals from places such as Sabha inthe south-west of Libya and from the Tawargha region east of Misratah. Due to their blackskin and Sub-Saharan African features, they were mistaken for foreign mercenaries. Thisassumption may have partly been the legacy of Colonel al-Gaddafi’s long insistence that allLibyans were homogenous – Arab and Muslim – and that there were no minorities.160However,NTC officials did little to correct the false assumption and instead fed the flames of hatredand resentment.The exact number of victims of lynching, including those who were beaten to death,shootings and public hangings is difficult to establish given the reluctance of witnesses,forensic doctors, prosecutors, medical staff and others to provide details of the attacks.Based on testimonies of doctors, local residents, members of the security forces, protestersand some witnesses, at least tens of al-Gaddafi soldiers and suspected mercenaries werekilled in such attacks in the immediate aftermath of opposition victories in eastern Libya,including in al-Bayda, Derna and Benghazi.

As protesters, some of them defectors from security forces in possession of firearms,overpowered al-Gaddafi forces, over 20 people were reportedly killed upon capture in al-Bayda, Shahat and al-Abraq. In late February, an official in al-Bayda’s al-Thawra Hospitaltold Amnesty International that at least 24 bodies of soldiers and suspected “mercenaries”were brought into the hospital in the last two weeks of February. The total number ofcasualties in this area may well have been higher as not all victims were taken to the hospital.Mohamed Lamloom, a member of the Department of Public Prosecutions in al-Bayda, toldAmnesty International that by 22 February he had registered 16 bodies of al-Gaddafi soldiersand alleged mercenaries. Some of the dark-skinned soldiers who were killed were identifiedas Libyans from western regions, including Sibrata and Msellata, and the southern region ofSabha. Others might have been Sub-Saharan African migrants mistaken for mercenaries onaccount of their skin colour. Officials were not able to provide any precise information on thecauses of their deaths; and no full autopsy reports have been carried out. To date, noinvestigations have been conducted into the circumstances surrounding their deaths.A wounded protester from al-Bayda described to Amnesty International how he and otherprotesters captured two “mercenaries” who were allegedly shooting at people on 17 February.He said they beat the “mercenaries” until they lost consciousness, and took them to hospital.He continued:“[Al-Gaddafi] Soldiers and mercenaries were brought in from outside al-Bayda and did notknow the city, so when they opened fire at us and we ran towards them, they would run awayand enter alleys unaware that they were dead ends. We caught two this way and a crowd ofpeople hit them hard, some stabbed them with knives… one was a Tunisian and the other,[Sub-Saharan] African. I spoke to the Tunisian, but the African did not know Arabic. I and afew others brought them to the hospital... By that time they were in a bad state, they wereunconscious… I later heard that one of them, the [Sub-Saharan] African, I think, was takenaway from the hospital by angry people… I don’t know what happened to him after that.”There are fears that the man was lynched. Amnesty International viewed two videos of theman, who had Sub-Saharan African features. The first shows him lying in a hospital bed in auniform generally worn by members of the General Support Forces (riot police); the othershows the same man hanging by a rope while a crowd cheer and celebrate “justice”. It isunclear from the video footage, recorded on a mobile phone, whether the victim was actuallystrangled, but other sources told Amnesty International that the man had been dragged out ofhis hospital bed by an angry crowd and killed.161Sub-Saharan Africans who fled to Egypt from opposition-controlled territories in eastern Libyatold Amnesty International that they felt increasingly insecure, especially after havingwitnessed killings and other violent attacks against individuals with black skin. SudanesenationalOmar Amir,49-year-old father of five, told Amnesty International that he left Libya,where he had lived since 1997, after his house was raided by supporters of the opposition,who stole some of his belongings and beat him in front of his family. Furthermore, hewitnessed several black men being killed on suspicion of being mercenaries. He recountedhis experience:

“A week after protests started, I got a panicked phone call at 2am from my [female] cousin inMarj, that some armed men raided her house, which she shared with other Sudanese womenand children. To protect them, the following morning at dawn, I went to Marj … On my wayback to Benghazi on the same day after ‘Asr [the afternoon prayer, around 3.30pm], thethuuwarstopped our bus at a roadblock near ‘Aguria [just as one comes down the mountainfrom Marj]... They were armed… We were travelling in a procession of three small buses [12passengers each]... I saw three black people being brought down from the vehicle in front ofus. The three were beaten by severalthuuwar;two hit the black men with axes on their headand all over their body. Two of them fell on the ground and were no longer moving; I thinkthey died. I saw the third raise his hand, and it was chopped off [with the axe]. Our bus droveoff before I could see what happened to him later, but I am sure he was killed too… Thethuuwarcame to our bus, asking our nationalities. They said: ‘Any Chadians? Anyone fromNiger?’ We said that we were all Sudanese, and had IDs to show them. Only one Sudaneseyouth didn’t have any identification and was taken down. The Libyan driver managed toconvince thethuuwarthat he knew the boy, who has lived in Libya for a long time, andvouched that he was not a mercenary. I don’t know what happened to people in the third bus,as we drove away.”Footage of crowds gathered around dead “mercenaries” or captured al-Gaddafi soldiers –many of them dark-skinned, some in uniforms, others in civilian clothes or wrapped inblankets – is widely available on various websites. In such cases, crowds frequently expresstheir satisfaction that “justice has been served” and that “the blood of martyrs had not beenwasted”.162Often, the opposition flag is waved. For instance, a video uploaded on 20February on social-networking websites under the title “Killing of African Mercenaries” showstwo dead men with Sub-Saharan African features tied to the front of a pick-up truck,photographed and paraded around to triumphant shouts of “God is Great” and celebratorygunfire. Neither man is wearing police or military uniform, raising the possibility that theywere not members of al-Gaddafi’s forces killed in clashes with protesters; but dark-skinnedindividuals mistaken for “African mercenaries”.163While such violent attacks became less frequent following the immediate aftermath of theopposition’s victory in eastern Libya, Amnesty International has continued to documentattacks against Sub-Saharan Africans suspected of being mercenaries.The bodies of two unidentified men with Sub-Saharan African features were found in thewestern outskirts of Benghazi on 23 and 24 April. The throat of one had been cut and theankles were bound with a rope. The other had been shot in the head and had multiplecontusions, indicating that he had been beaten. As al-Gaddafi forces had not been present atthe time, Amnesty International suspects that the two were killed by individuals supportingthe “17 February Revolution” on suspicion that they were mercenaries.In another instance, a man from Chad, who lived and worked in a metal workshop inBenghazi’s industrial area, has been attacked and stabbed several times by four young menin plain and military clothes since the opposition took control of eastern Libya. Thegovernment of Chad had raised concerns, including with the Office of the High Commissionerfor Human Rights (OHCHR), that Chadians and in particular those in opposition-controlledareas, were accused of being mercenaries fighting for Colonel al-Gaddafi. According to theChadian authorities, some Chadians were victims of arbitrary arrest, enforced disappearance

and extrajudicial execution. The Chadian government said that several were shot after theirhands were tied and they were forced to kneel or lie down on the ground.164Amnesty International has also documented several attacks on Sub-Saharan Africans inMisratah. For instance, two migrant workers from Niger were shot at relatively close range byindividuals in pick-up trucks in separate incidents. One was shot on 26 April, after al-Gaddafiforces withdrew; the other was shot about 10 days earlier in an area under the control ofopposition fighters. Both survived, were evacuated from Misratah and were receiving medicaltreatment in Benghazi. While Amnesty International delegates visited them at the hospital inMay 2011, teenage Libyans boys entered their room calling them “mercenaries” andaccusing them of “killing Libyans”.According to testimonies collected by Amnesty International from individuals who had fledLibya to Tunisia, opposition supporters also attacked foreign nationals and people with darkskin in areas still controlled by al-Gaddafi forces. This has increased the belief of foreignnationals that there is nowhere safe for them in Libya.Liban Sheikh Ibrahim,a 32-year-old Somali, said he and his extended family of 14 people,including two children, decided to flee Libya on 6 March. On the road to Tunisia, he said, thevehicle in which they were travelling was stopped by a group of armed men near al-Zawiya.The men, who were carrying the flag of the opposition, ordered all the Somali men out of thevehicle and forced them to kneel on the ground. One was said to have shouted “shoot them,they are mercenaries”. Liban said their lives were saved by their Libyan driver, who told thearmed men that his passengers were “good Somali Muslims”, not mercenaries.Abdelrahman Abdallah Morsal,another Somali who fled to Tunisia, told AmnestyInternational in April that he had witnessed a Nigerian man being beaten in the street byordinary Libyans around 22 February in Tripoli’s Jansour neighbourhood, the site of anti-government protests and their brutal crackdown in February. They apparently suspected theNigerian man of supporting Colonel al-Gaddafi and threatened to set him ablaze.Abdelrahman said he then fled from the scene fearing that he too, as a black foreigner, wouldbe attacked.The vulnerability of Sub-Saharan Africans to violent attacks in opposition-controlled territoryhas been exacerbated by the wide availability of weapons and the security vacuum created bythe withdrawal of the police – still largely absent months after the NTC was formed. Thefailure of the de-facto authorities to address the issue – both by denouncing the myth of“African mercenaries” and by holding to account perpetrators of attacks – increases the riskthat such attacks will continue unpunished.In opposition-controlled areas, Sub-Saharan Africans and dark-skinned Libyan soldiers havebeen captured and detained, and some have been tortured. In eastern Libya, scores of Sub-Saharan African migrants were detained after 17 February and repeatedly paraded in front ofthe world’s media as “foreign mercenaries” before any investigations had been conducted toestablish their identities.165The overwhelming majority of them were later released andallowed to leave the country when no evidence was found against them. Similarly, in Misratah,

the administration at the Zarouq Cultural Centre, where those “subverting the 17 FebruaryRevolution” have been held, told Amnesty International that in the days after the oppositiontook control of the city, scores of individuals with dark skin were held when the city first fellunder the control of the opposition, on suspicion of being foreign mercenaries. Detentionadministrators admitted that the vast majority were eventually released when the suspicionsproved unfounded. They explained that the detainees were freed once their employerconfirmed that they had previously lived or worked in Libya, and “posed no threat to therevolution”.At the time of Amnesty International’s May 2011 visits to detention centres in Benghazi andMisratah, where captured soldiers were held, there were about 10 foreign nationals detainedon suspicion of being foreign mercenaries, including nationals of Chad and Algeria, out of atotal of about 230 captives. Twenty Egyptians were held in Misratah, apparently accused ofentering Libyan waters without authorization and/or of stealing fishing boats. The remainderof those held were Libyans, including dark-skinned soldiers from southern and western Libya.As was the case with other captives, foreign nationals were beaten or otherwise abused uponcapture and during their first days of detention. However, it seems that the most brutaltreatment was reserved for those with dark skin – whether Libyan or foreign.A man detained in Misratah told Amnesty International in May that his captors beat him withbelts, metal bars and wires all over his body, including his head, and burned his skin with alighter. He believed that he was singled out due to his black skin as his assailants keptshouting insults at him, including “slave”, “animal” and “mercenary”.A group of captured soldiers held in Sa’adoun Secondary School in Misratah expressed thesame sentiment. They said that all of them were tortured upon capture and in their first daysof detention, including with electric shocks and beatings, particularly on their backs, withmetal wires, belts and rubber hoses. They also said that the worst treatment was reserved forthose with dark skin. While their conditions subsequently improved, some continued to reportbeing terrorized by unidentified individuals in plain clothes, who did not belong to the regularprison administration or the guards. Interviewees said that these individuals entered cells,particularly at night, calling detainees “mercenaries” and threatening them with reprisals andsevere punishments for their alleged crimes against the Libyan people.166

INTERNATIONAL FAILURE TO PROTECT THOSE FLEEING THE CONFLICTSince the unrest started in February, over 644,000 foreign nationals have crossed Libya’swestern, eastern and southern borders in search of safety, and about 8,500 have beenevacuated from Misratah, which was besieged for two months by al-Gaddafi forces.167TheIOM reported that it had evacuated over 1,500 foreign nationals from Tripoli by boat inAugust as the fighting in the city and attacks against Sub-Saharan Africans intensified. Theorganization had also evacuated over 10,000 foreign nationals by road to Tunisia from Tripoli,before intensified fighting in August closed the land route. A further 27,000 people havereached Italy and Malta by boat.Thus far, EU member states, despite paying lip-service over the years to the human rights ofrefugees, asylum-seekers and migrants, have not adequately responded to the unfoldinghuman tragedy by assisting those fleeing conflict and persecution in Libya to reach safety.

This is despite EU backing for UN Security Council Resolution 1970 and the NATOcampaign in Libya, which have the stated objective of taking all possible measures to protectcivilians. By mid-May 2011, Europe had received only two per cent of the refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants fleeing Libya, as most had been admitted to neighbouring countries ortravelled further afield to their home countries.168Despite this, European countries haveexpressed concerns about the “massive influx” of refugees and migrants caused by theinstability in North Africa, and have continued to pursue a “border control” policy at theexpense of guaranteeing the right to seek asylum and migrants’ rights.This follows a period of collaboration between Colonel al-Gaddafi’s government and the EUand its member states to “control migration”, which in effect supported abusive practicesagainst refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants. Italy was at the forefront of countries seekingthe assistance of the Libyan authorities to stem the flow of migrants reaching Europeanshores. In October 2010, the European Commission, turning a blind eye to Libya’s direhuman rights record, signed an agreement with Libya over the “management of migrationflows” and border control.Since the unrest began, many people have embarked on dangerous or even fatal journeysfrom Libya across the Mediterranean to European shores. EU member states, as well as NATO,failed to take all necessary measures to enable these civilians to reach safety, despite thedeclaredraison d’êtreof NATO’s intervention in Libya being the protection of civilians. SinceMarch 2011, at least 1,500 people are believed to have perished at sea.169Following severalfatal incidents at sea, the UN refugee agency UNHCR has warned that all boats leaving Libyaought to be considered in distress and rescued.170For example, an unsafe boat left Libya on25 March and quickly ran into trouble. It drifted for two weeks and only nine of the 72people initially aboard survived, even though the boat issued distress calls and survivors saidthey had seen a military helicopter, what appeared to be an aircraft carrier and othervessels.171In June 2011, Amnesty International interviewed one of the nine survivors in theShousha camp in Tunisia. Ethiopian nationalElias Mohammad Kadi,23, recounted how afterhaving paid US$800 to embark the unseaworthy vessel along with nationals from Nigeria,Ghana, Ethiopia, and Eritrea, the boat drifted for 16 days. He confirmed that throughout thejourney, the boat encountered a large military ship, two helicopters and several other ships.He said that the passengers held up two babies and an empty canister upon spotting themilitary helicopter to indicate their need for help. They kept waiting for a rescue that nevercame. Lieutenant Massimo Maccheroni confirmed to Amnesty International that the ItalianCoastguard was alerted about a boat in distress and passed the alert on to the Malteseauthorities on the assumption that the vessel in distress was entering the Maltese Search andRescue Area. Father Musi Zerai, who runs Agenzia Habeshia, an organization based in Romeadvocating for refugee and migrants’ rights, told Amnesty International that he had alsoalerted the NATO headquarters in Naples upon receiving distressed calls from the passengers.While NATO denied responsibility, it remains unclear whether a full, impartial andindependent inquiry was launched to determine if more could and should have been done toavoid this terrible loss of life.172In early June, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Thomas Hammarberg,denounced Europe’s response to such tragedies, noting its added responsibility to guarantee

safety for those fleeing Libya given NATO’s military involvement in Libya. He urged Europeangovernments and institutions to accelerate their efforts and proactively seek to ensuresuccessful search-and-rescue operations. He also called on them to put human rightsconsiderations at the centre of their policy decisions.173Prior to the unrest, 8,000 refugees and 3,000 asylum-seekers were registered in Libya withUNHCR. The actual total number of those in need of international protection is believed to behigher as UNHCR was denied access to large parts of the country. In early 2010, it wasforced by the Libyan authorities to suspend its visits to detention centres across Libya andrefugee-status determination interviews, further hampering its already limited ability toscreen individuals potentially in need of international protection.174Hundreds of thousands of civilians have fled the conflict in Libya. While many have beenrepatriated, at least 3,300 and about 1,000 refugees and asylum-seekers continue to bestranded in camps in Tunisia and the Saloum camp in Egypt, respectively. They cannotreturn to their countries of origin for fear of persecution or other abuses; and are growingincreasingly frustrated with the slow pace of registration, refugee-status determination andresettlement. The international community has also been slow to respond to calls to prioritizethe resettlement of refugees who have fled Libya, or to raise the quota above the promised900 cases by 11 resettlement countries. The US government has yet to announce thenumber of refugees it is willing to accept.In a worrying development, NTC Chairman Mostafa Abdeljalil promised to “close the bordersin front of these Africans”.175This raises fears that regardless of the outcome of the conflictin Libya, refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants will continue to suffer discrimination andabuse in Libya, and be perceived as unwelcome guests.In another worrying development, theItalian authorities signed amemorandum of understanding with theNTC on 17 June 2011, in which the twoparties confirm their commitment to ajoint management of “the migrationphenomenon” through theimplementation of existing co-operationagreements on “illegal migration”. Inrecent years, Amnesty International andothers have documented how theimplementation of these very sameagreements resulted in grave humanrights violations, including the forcibleremoval through “push-back” operationsconducted at sea, of foreign nationals toLibya, where they faced arrest, tortureand detention in appalling conditions.176Against this background, theorganization is concerned that Italy andStranded migrant workers wait in the no-man’s-land between Libya and the Egyptian border post at Saloum, 4March � UNHCR/F. Noy

the NTC have now committed themselves to reciprocal assistance and co-operation in the“fight against illegal migration”, including through the “repatriation of illegal migrants”.177The signing of the above-mentioned memorandum while the armed conflict in Libya stillraged on, coupled with the ostensive absence of adequate safeguards to ensure respect ofhuman rights and refugee law, raises profound concerns that refugee and migrants’ rights riskonce again being sacrificed by Europe’s policy towards Libya. Concerns were heightenedwhen Mahmud Jibril, head of the Executive Board of the NTC, said during his visit to Naplesfor the signing ceremony that previous bilateral agreements on “illegal migration control” willbe upheld. Their negative impact on migrants’ rights and the right to claim asylum has beenwell-documented and denounced by Amnesty International, among others.178It is time that EU member states reflected on the human rights impact of their asylum andmigration policies in relation to their southern neighbours. They must stop ignoring humanrights violations against foreign nationals and put human rights protection and respect of theright to seek asylum at the centre of their migration and asylum policies.

7. CONCLUSION ANDRECOMMENDATIONSAmnesty International has long campaigned for all those responsible for abuses in Libya inthe last four decades, as well in the conflict, to be held to account not only to provide victimswith an effective remedy, but also to ensure the non-repetition of such violations.During the conflict, the organization found evidence that forces loyal to Colonel al-Gaddaficommitted violations of IHL, in some cases amounting to war crimes. They launchedindiscriminate attacks and direct attacks on civilians. Al-Gaddafi’s security forces alsocommitted gross violations of human rights, including the deliberate killing of scores ofunarmed demonstrators, a widespread campaign of enforced disappearances and arbitrarydetention, and torture and other ill-treatment of detainees. To the extent that these violationshave been committed as part of a systematic or widespread attack against the civilianpopulation, in pursuit of official policy, they constitute crimes against humanity.Members and supporters of the opposition also committed human rights abuses andviolations of IHL, albeit on a smaller scale, including violent attacks against perceivedsupporters of al-Gaddafi and suspected “mercenaries”.In order to rebuild Libya on the foundation of the respect of human rights and the rule of law,it is crucial to ensure that all such crimes are investigated, and that perpetrators are broughtto justice, regardless of their rank and affiliation. Allowing them to escape justice will send amessage that serious human rights violations will continue to be tolerated.The UN Security Council’s referral of the situation in Libya to the ICC and the arrest warrantsfor Colonel al-Gaddafi, Abdallah al-Senussi and Saif al-Islam al-Gaddafi send an importantmessage that perpetrators of crimes under international law will be brought to justice. It isessential that the international community follows through this commitment to secure justiceand reparations for all victims of violations in Libya.Looking to the future, the leadership in Libya will need to ensure a comprehensive overhaulof laws and practices that facilitated the systematic perpetration over decades of humanrights abuses in a climate of total impunity, and that triggered the anti-governmentmovement in the first place. Only then will the hopes of Libyans for a better future – one ofequality before the law, social justice, and the respect of human rights – be realized.To address human rights abuses and violations of IHL in the conflict, Amnesty Internationalmakes the recommendations below to both the Libyan leadership and the internationalcommunity, to alleviate the suffering of victims, including foreign nationals who fled thefighting. Amnesty International recommendations to the NTC are made in recognition of theNTC’s role as the de-facto government, and in acknowledgement of its willingness to addresshuman rights violations and break with the past impunity for such crimes. The organization isalso issuing a roadmap for reform in the form of an agenda for human rights change.

PREVENT TORTURE AND OTHER ILL-TREATMENTEnsure that all detainees are treated humanely and held only in detention centresauthorized by law, and that all detentions are promptly reviewed by a judge, in line withinternationally-recognized standards. Detainees must either be charged with a recognizablecriminal offence and promptly brought to trial in line with international standards for fair trialand without recourse to the death penalty, or released. In particular, ensure that nostatements extracted under torture are used as a basis for convictions;Ensure that the families of civilian detainees are informed promptly of the place ofdetention of their relatives and that detainees are allowed prompt access to their families andlawyers;Facilitate communication for captured soldiers with their families and ensure they aregranted access to the ICRC;Require that all detainees are examined by an independent doctor as soon as possibleafter they are arrested and regularly thereafter throughout their detention;Ensure that those making a complaint of torture or other ill-treatment and any witnessesto such abuse are adequately protected against possible reprisals, intimidation or harassment,and take firm action if such abuses take place;

ENSURE RESPECT FOR IHL IN THE CONDUCT OF HOSTILITIESEnsure that NTC fighters comply fully with the duty to take precautionary measures whencarrying out attacks, as well as in defence, and do not carry out indiscriminate attacks; inparticular, forbid the use of Grad or other indiscriminate rockets in areas where civilians maybe located within range;Ensure that there is a clear structure, hierarchy and chain of command in place for thefighters under the control of the NTC; andProvide adequate training on applying the rules of IHL, including necessary measures toprotect the civilian population from the dangers arising from military operations, includingnot locating military objectives in densely-populated areas. The NTC should seek outsideexpertise if necessary. Training should also be provided on handling weapons withoutendangering the civilian population, and ensuring that only those thoroughly trained areallowed to handle such weapons. Celebratory shooting should be forbidden.

IMPLEMENT A PROCESS OF DISARMAMENT AND DISMANTLE BODIES RESPONSIBLE FOR HUMAN RIGHTSVIOLATIONSImplement a process of disarmament, including of small arms; collect surplus weaponsand munitions within the population, using a combination of collective or individualincentives designed to regulate, license and reduce as much as possible all civilian armspossession; also safely destroy surplus weapons and ammunition which is clearly in excess ofnational needs;Stop the proliferation of weapons. Take immediate steps to safely store all nationalstockpiles of the armed forces, police and any other security agency; mark all weapons andrelated articles to facilitate effective tracing and accountability and ensure an effectivesystem of end-use certificates and licenses to control all imports and exports of arms andsecurity equipment;Dismantle the Internal Security Agency and other security agencies that have perpetratedsystematic human rights abuses; andAdopt best practices identified by the UN Office of Disarmament Affairs to controlweapons and munitions, and ratify the international conventions to prohibit the transfer anduse of inhumane weapons including anti-personnel mines and cluster munitions.

TO EU MEMBER STATES AND OTHER STATES WHO PARTICIPATED IN NATO’SOPERATION UNIFIED PROTECTOREnsure that prompt, independent, impartial and thorough investigations are conductedinto any allegations which may arise of serious violations of international law by participantsin Operation Unified Protector. Wherever there is sufficient admissible evidence, ensure thatsuspects are prosecuted in full compliance with international fair trial standards, and ensurethat victims receive full reparation;Investigate circumstances surrounding the deaths of 63 individuals abroad a boatdrifting at sea for over two weeks after leaving the coast of Libya on 25 March. The inquiryshould particularly consider whether NATO and EU member states failed to respond todistress calls and to rescue its passengers;Put in place effective mechanisms to prevent deaths at sea of refugees, asylum-seekersand migrants fleeing Libya, including increasing air surveillance and search-and-rescueoperations so vessels are located and people rescued. All vessels carrying people who haveleft Libya and neighbouring countries should be prima facie considered at risk; andComply with search-and-rescue obligations; and ensure that search-and-rescueoperations comply with international human right law and refugee law and standards,

TO THE ITALIAN GOVERNMENTDesist from conducting any “push-back” operations towards Libya;Set aside the memorandum of understanding on “migration control” signed with the NTCon 17 June 2011; and for the time being, refrain from engaging in negotiations with theLibyan authorities on joint management of “the migration phenomenon”, whether premisedon existing co-operation agreements between the two countries or not; andCommit to ensuring that any existing and future co-operation on “migration control” withLibyan authorities will be contingent upon both parties’ commitment and ability to fullyrespect, promote and comply with the human rights of asylum-seekers, refugees and migrants,and be consistent with international human rights and refugee law and standards.

ENDNOTESSee Chapter 3 for additional information on the international coalition and then NATO’s militaryinvolvement.Cumulative numbers based on media reports and estimates by the Office of the United Nations HighCommissioner for Refugees (UN Refugee Agency, UNHCR). For example see UNHCR, “Angelina Jolieand UNHCR chief Guterres visit boat people on Italian island”, 20 June 2011:http://www.unhcr.org.uk/news-and-views/news-list/news-detail/article/angelina-jolie-and-unhcr-chief-guterres-visit-boat-people-on-italian-island.htmlThey were all released within two years of their arrest. For more information, see Amnesty International,“Libya: Heavy sentences against prisoners of conscience” (Index: MDE 19/006/2008), 11 June 2008:http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE19/006/2008/enColonel al-Gaddafi officially relinquished the formal position of Secretary of the General People’sCommittee in March 1979 to devote himself to “revolutionary work”. After that, he was officially referredto as the “Leader of the Revolution”, and was not considered a head of state in the conventional sense,but rather as an influential advisor to the people.54321

For further details of the Abu Salim Prison killings, see Amnesty International, “Libyaof tomorrow”:What hope for human rights?(Index: MDE 19/007/2010), 23 June 2010:http://amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE19/007/2010/en; and Amnesty International,The long struggle fortruth: Enforced disappearances in Libya(Index: MDE 19/008/2010) 29 June 2010:http://amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE19/008/2010/enAccording to the information available to Amnesty International, the People’s Leadership comprised ofmembers of various tribes, members of the law enforcement bodies and others. People’s Leadershipsexisted in all major cities of Libya, and a national People’s Leadership was based in Tripoli. Their exactmandate, composition, reporting structure and role remains opaque. In recent years, they were involvedin informing families of victims of the Abu Salim Prison killings of their relatives’ deaths and negotiatingfinancial compensation.For example, five relatives of victims of the Abu Salim Prison killings were arrested and detainedincommunicado in March 2009 in connection with the protests and held for several days before beingreleased without charge or trial. For further details, see Amnesty International, “Libyaof tomorrow”:What hope for human rights?;and Amnesty International,The long struggle for truth: Enforceddisappearances in Libya.Colonel al-Gaddafi’s speech on 22 February can be viewed on YouTube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rbqV0ksBLUM&feature=related987

are not sufficient to restrain or apprehend the suspected offender. In every instance in which a firearm isdischarged, a report should be made promptly to the competent authorities.”According to Principle 5 of the Basic Principles:“Whenever the lawful use of force and firearms is unavoidable, law enforcement officials shall: (a)Exercise restraint in such use and act in proportion to the seriousness of the offence and the legitimateobjective to be achieved; (b) Minimize damage and injury, and respect and preserve human life; (c)Ensure that assistance and medical aid are rendered to any injured or affected persons at the earliestpossible moment; (d) Ensure that relatives or close friends of the injured or affected person are notifiedat the earliest possible moment.”Principle 9 of the Basic Principles, which reflects customary international law, requires:“Law enforcement officials shall not use firearms against persons except in self-defence or defence ofothers against the imminent threat of death or serious injury, to prevent the perpetration of a particularlyserious crime involving grave threat to life, to arrest a person presenting such a danger and resisting theirauthority, or to prevent his or her escape, and only when less extreme means are insufficient to achievethese objectives. In any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictlyunavoidable in order to protect life.”And Principle 10 explains:“In the circumstances provided for under principle 9, law enforcement officials shall identify themselvesas such and give a clear warning of their intent to use firearms, with sufficient time for the warning to beobserved, unless to do so would unduly place the law enforcement officials at risk or would create a riskof death or serious harm to other persons, or would be clearly inappropriate or pointless in thecircumstances of the incident.”See Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (8th UN Congresson the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders, 1990); Code of Conduct for Law EnforcementOfficials, General Assembly Res 34/169 (1979), Annex.42

SeeReport of the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions(UN Doc.:A/HRC/17/28), 23 May 2011 on “Protecting the right to life in the context of policing assemblies”;Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment(UN Doc.: A/HRC/13/39/Add.5), 5 February 2010, para189-194 on “Excessive use of forceby law enforcement bodies”.See for exampleReport of the UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions(UN Doc.: A/61/311), 5 September 2006, para35; see also Nigel Rodley,The Treatment of Prisonersunder International Law,(3rd ed, 2009), pp257-8.Red Cross study,Customary International Humanitarian Law: Volume 1: Rules,J-M Henckaerts and LDoswald-Beck, eds, 2005 (“ICRC Customary IHL Study”)ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 1; see also Protocol I, Article 48 and Protocol II, Article 12(2).ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 5; see also Protocol I, Article 50.ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 6; see also Protocol I, Article 51(3); Protocol II, Article 13(3).ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rules 8 and 9; Protocol I, Article 52.

ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 156, pp591,593,595-598. See also Rome Statute of the ICC,articles 8(2)(b)(i) and (ii) and 8(2)(e)(i)(ii)(iv) and (xii) (see also discussion in ICRC Customary IHL Study,p27).ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 2; see also Protocol I, Article 51(2) and Protocol II articles 12(2).ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 11; Protocol I, Article 51(4).ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 12; Protocol I, Article 51(4)(a).ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 13; Protocol I, Article 51(5)(a).ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 14; Protocol I, Articles 51(5)(b) and 57.ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 156.ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 15. See also Protocol II, Article 13(1).ICRC Customary IHL Study, rules 16-19.ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 20.ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 22.ICRC Customary IHL Study, rules 23 and 24.

See UNCAT, Article 2(3); Human Rights Committee,General Comment 31 (2004),para18; rules 154and 155 ICRC Customary IHL Study; also Rome Statute of the ICC, Article 33.The right to an effective remedy for victims of human rights violations is provided for in Article 2(3) ofthe ICCPR. It is also recognized in: Article 14 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel,Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; Article 3 of the 1907 Hague Convention concerningthe Laws and Customs of War on Land; Article 91 of Geneva Protocol I; Article 75 of the Rome Statute ofthe International Criminal Court; Article 7 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights; ICRCCustomary IHL Study, Rule 150; and “Basic principles and guidelines on the right to a remedy andreparation for victims of gross violations of international human rights law and serious violations ofinternational humanitarian law” (Basic principles on the right to a remedy and reparation), GeneralAssembly Resolution 60/147 (UN Doc.: A/RES/60/147), 16 December 2005.See UN General Assembly, “Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparationfor Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of InternationalHumanitarian Law” (Resolution A/RES/60/147), 21 March 2006; ICCPR, Article 2(3); Human RightsCommittee,General Comment 31(2004), paras15-16; UNCAT, Article 14; Committee against Torture,Dzemajl v Yugoslavia(161/2000), 21 November 2002, para9.6; ICRC Customary IHL Study, Rule 150.757473

Anti-government protests also took place in other parts of western Libya and were likewise met withexcessive force, which seemingly succeeded in suppressing the protest movement there. However,Amnesty International was not granted access to areas under the control of Colonel al-Gaddafi’s forcesand has therefore not been able to investigate the extent of the human rights violations there. For thisreason, those events are not covered in this report.See Amnesty International LiveWire, “Libya: living in fear and caught in crossfire”, 1 April 2011:http://livewire.amnesty.org/2011/04/01/libya-living-in-fear-and-caught-in-the-crossfire/#more-3312; andAmnesty International LiveWire, “Ajdabiya: civilians tell of their dead amid the rubble”, 30 March 2011:http://livewire.amnesty.org/2011/03/30/libya-ajdabiya-civilians-tell-of-their-dead-amid-the-rubble/#more-3282See Amnesty International, “Renewed rocket attacks target civilians in Misratah”, 24 June 2011:http://www.amnesty.org/en/for-media/press-releases/libya-renewed-rocket-attacks-target-civilians-misratah-2011-06-24807978

The Kateeba compound covers an area of about 1km2. It was surrounded by a wall and containedseveral buildings, used by the military as offices and for accommodation, and underground bunkers andcells. Since 20 February 2011, when it was taken over by protesters, the buildings in the compoundhave been burned down and looted and the surrounding wall demolished.BBC, Panorama, “Fighting Gaddafi”, first broadcast on BBC 1 on 21 March 2011:http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0101pyh. In the programme a soldier told the BBC that Sa’idi al-Gaddafi addressed the soldiers at the Kateeba and told them to give protesters “…one more day, and ifnothing changes, fire on them”. Sa’idi al-Gaddafi denied addressing the soldiers, saying it was not hisjob and that he was at the Kateeba because his family owned a house there.

The Spanish company that used to manufacture the MAT-120 cargo bombs said that the sub-munitions have a zero per cent failure rate. According to its website: “…if the submunition does notdetonate upon impact, it self-destroys after a few seconds, and, even if this self-destruction device fails,it self-deactivates infallibly within 10 minutes, therefore preventing the hazard of causing an accidentafter its use”. See Instalaza S.A., “About MAT-120”: http://www.instalaza.es/eng/des2.htmlThese assertions were disputed by a munitions expert consulted by Amnesty International, who confirmedthat if for various reasons the system of priming (system or fuses that trigger the exposition of theclusters) is not functioning, the explosives and detonators contained in these munitions explode whenpicked up. Thereby, these unexploded munitions (UXOs) continue to pose a danger to civilians,particularly as these cluster bombs hit residential areas.107

NATO, “NATO strikes Libyan state TV satellite facility”, 30 June 2011:http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_76776.htmFor an analysis of the status of attacks on media in IHL see Amnesty International,Collateral Damageor Unlawful Killings? Violations of the Laws of War by NATO during Operation Allied Force(Index: EUR70/18/00), 5 June 2000, pp41-48: http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/EUR70/018/2000For more information about disappearances, see Amnesty International,Libya: detainees, disappearedand missing(Index: MDE 19/011/2011), 29 March 2011:http://amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE19/011/2011/en; and Amnesty International,Libya:Disappearances in the besieged Nafusa Mountain as thousands seek safety in Tunisia(Index: MDE19/020/2011), 27 May 2011: http://amnesty.org/en/library/info/MDE19/020/2011/enMonsters and Critics News, “Opposition: at least 12,000 people ‘taken away’ in Tripoli”, 29 May2011: http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/uk/news/article_1629478.php/Opposition-At-least-12-000-taken-away-in-TripoliICRC, “Increasing health-care needs”, 5 July 2011:http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/update/2011/libya-update-2011-07-05.htm122121120119118

The Salaheddin complex was used by the Department of Criminal Investigations before the unrest. Itseems that since anti-government protests began, the complex became a detention facility for thosearrested in connection with the unrest. It is unclear who oversaw the complex throughout the unrest, asformer detainees reported seeing officials in different uniforms – military and police – as well as in plainclothes.Footage of the release ceremony in Kashaf (scouts) Theatre by CCTV can be found at:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAtHCwgYDFASuch individuals are all victims of arbitrary detention as defined by the UN Working Group onArbitrary Detention, which has identified three categories of arbitrary detention: when it is clearlyimpossible to invoke any legal basis justifying the deprivation of liberty, and the detention is not withinthe framework of national law (as when a person is kept in detention after the completion of his/hersentence or despite an amnesty law applicable to him/her) (Category 1); when the deprivation of libertyresults from the exercise of the rights or freedoms guaranteed by articles 7, 13, 14, 18, 19, 20 and 21of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and, insofar as states parties are concerned, by articles 12,18, 19, 21, 22, 25, 26 and 27 of the ICCPR (Category 2); and when the detention results from total orpartial non-observance of the international norms relating to the right to a fair trial, spelled out in theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights and in the relevant international instruments accepted by thestates (Category 3).130129128

Associated Press, “Libyan rebels distribute rules on POW treatment”, 30 May 2011:http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=132460On 29 March General Hamdi Hassi, an opposition forces commander near Ben Jawad was quotedsaying: “Now because of NATO strikes on [the government’s] heavy weapons, we’re almost fighting withthe same weapons, only we have Grad rockets now and they don’t”. SeeDaily Mail,“Rebels rain missileson retreating Gaddafi troops”, 29 March 2011: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1370412/Libya-war-Rebels-attack-Gaddafi-troops-close-Sirte.html#ixzz1SbRm1IXs;The New York Times,“Inferior ArmsHobble Rebels in Libya War”, 20 April 2011:http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/21/world/africa/21rebels.html; and Onur Coban, Libya-Frontline:http://www.onur-coban.com/category/libyas-frontline/See photos on Free Libya: http://freelibya-.tumblr.com/ [second photo]; andInternational BusinessTimes:http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/164413/20110616/libya-conflict-the-fight-for-misrata-photo.htmEstimates of the IOM. See Reuters, “Thousands of migrants still stranded in Libya-IOM”, 15 July2011: http://af.reuters.com/article/chadNews/idAFLDE76E0H820110715. The Libyan authorities placedthe number closer to 3 million. See General People’s Committee for International Relations and ForeignLiaison, “Statement in relation to irregular migration and the situation of Eritrean migrants in care anddeportation centres”, 7 July 2010.153152151150

See for instance, NTC, “Statement of the National Transitional Council on the Assistance of theChadian Government to Qadafi’s Regime”, 8 April 2011: http://www.libyanmission-un.org/ntc%20ENG/ntc1.pdf. See also, NTC officials and opposition fighters quoted in the mediaregarding the use of “African mercenaries” by Colonel al-Gaddafi:Asharq Al-Awsat,“Thuuwar preparingto go into Sirte and Tripoli”, 14 June 2011:http://www.aawsat.com/details.asp?section=4&issueno=11886&article=626486;Guardian,“HasGaddafi unleashed a mercenary force in Libya?”, 22 February 2011:http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/22/gaddafi-mercenary-force-libya;Time Specials,“Mu’ammaral-Gaddafi’s delusions of African grandeur”:http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2045328_2045333_2053164,00.html;and Monsters and Critics News, “Rebels blame Chad troops for loss of key Libyan cities”, 31 March2011: http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/africa/news/article_1629946.php/Rebels-blame-Chad-troops-for-loss-of-key-Libyan-cities158

Amnesty International interviewed one of the nine survivors, Ethiopian national Elias Mohammad Kadi,on 16 June at the Shousha camp in Tunisia. See Agenzia Habeshia, “Silence and indifference causedthe death of 63 people”, 19 April 2011: http://habeshia.blogspot.com/2011/04/mi-chiedo-perche-stanno-in-silenzio-le.html;Guardian,“Aircraft carrier let us die, say migrants”, 9 May 2011:http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/may/08/nato-ship-libyan-migrants; and Human Rights Watch,“NATO: investigate fatal boat episode”, 10 May 2011: http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2011/05/10/nato-investigate-fatal-boat-episodeReuters, “NATO, France deny failing to save Libyan migrants”, 9 May 2011:http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/09/us-libya-nato-migrants-idUSTRE74836P20110509173172