Enforced Disappearances Under Afghan Law
What is Enforced Disappearance?
Enforced disappearance refers to the arrest, detention, or abduction of a person by state agents or persons acting with state authorization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the person's fate or whereabouts, placing them outside the protection of the law.
It is considered a serious violation of human rights and international law, including:
The right to liberty and security.
The right not to be subjected to torture or cruel treatment.
The right to recognition before the law.
The right of families to know the fate of their relatives.
Afghan Legal Framework on Enforced Disappearances
Afghanistan does not have a specific law criminalizing enforced disappearance as a distinct offense. However:
The Afghan Penal Code (2017) criminalizes:
Arbitrary arrest and detention (Article 447).
Kidnapping and abduction (Article 442).
Torture and cruel treatment (Article 392).
Crimes against humanity (Article 423, which includes enforced disappearance if part of a widespread or systematic attack).
The Constitution of Afghanistan (2004) guarantees fundamental rights such as:
Right to life (Article 24).
Prohibition of torture (Article 7).
Right to legal recourse (Article 54).
Challenges in Addressing Enforced Disappearances in Afghanistan:
Weak rule of law and judicial capacity.
Political interference and lack of accountability.
Lack of effective investigation mechanisms.
Security situation complicates evidence gathering.
Families often have little access to justice or information.
Case Studies of Enforced Disappearances in Afghanistan
Case 1: The Disappearance of Abdul Raziq, Kandahar (2016)
Background: Abdul Raziq was a local community leader in Kandahar.
Incident: He was reportedly detained by local security forces in 2016 during a sweep for insurgents.
Disappearance: His family was never informed of his detention location or fate.
Aftermath: Despite multiple complaints to authorities and human rights groups, the government denied knowledge.
Legal Outcome: No official investigation was initiated; this case highlights the impunity surrounding enforced disappearances.
Significance: The case was widely cited by Afghan human rights activists as emblematic of state abuse.
Case 2: Kidnapping and Disappearance of Journalists in Kabul (2018)
Details: Several journalists covering sensitive topics (corruption, insurgency) were abducted by unknown actors believed to have connections with security agencies.
Example: Journalist Saeed Mirzai was detained for several weeks without charge; his family was kept in the dark.
Legal Process: Despite media outcry, the security agencies denied involvement, and no formal charges or trials occurred.
Significance: This illustrated how enforced disappearance was used to intimidate dissent and suppress freedom of expression.
Case 3: Case of Haji Gul Mohammad (2014, Helmand Province)
Incident: Haji Gul Mohammad, a political activist, was arrested by police forces during a protest.
Disappearance: Police refused to acknowledge his detention; family received no information.
Investigation: Human rights NGOs intervened, pushing the Ministry of Interior to investigate.
Outcome: Eventually, he was released after 45 days in detention; no officials were held accountable.
Legal Note: The case revealed the gap between formal laws and actual practice, with lack of transparency enabling enforced disappearances.
Case 4: Mass Disappearances in Taliban-Controlled Areas (2015-2017)
Context: Taliban and other insurgent groups have also been accused of enforced disappearances, targeting government supporters, former officials, and suspected informants.
Example: In Kunduz province, dozens of individuals “disappeared” after being detained by Taliban forces.
Legal Recourse: Families could not access courts or legal mechanisms, as these areas were outside government control.
Human Rights Impact: These cases fall under international law prohibitions of enforced disappearance but Afghan law’s enforcement is impossible in these zones.
Case 5: The Fate of Detained Persons in Bagram Airbase (2009-2013)
Background: Detainees held at Bagram by U.S. and Afghan forces reportedly faced enforced disappearance-like conditions:
Lack of acknowledgment of detention.
Incommunicado detention without access to legal counsel.
Legal Context: Although not Afghan state actors exclusively, Afghan law’s protective mechanisms failed to cover these detainees.
Aftermath: International pressure led to partial reforms, but many detainees remain unaccounted for or were transferred without transparency.
Significance: This case highlights the intersection of Afghan and international law, and the challenges in combating enforced disappearance.
Legal Remedies and Mechanisms in Afghanistan
Filing Complaints: Victims' families may submit complaints to police or the Attorney General's Office, but follow-up is often lacking.
Ombudsman Office: The Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) plays a key role in documenting disappearances and advocating for families.
International Pressure: UN bodies and NGOs push for Afghan government compliance with international human rights treaties.
Draft Law: There have been efforts to draft specific legislation criminalizing enforced disappearance, but no law has been enacted as of now.
Summary
Enforced disappearances in Afghanistan occur at the hands of state agents, security forces, and insurgent groups.
Afghan laws criminalize arbitrary detention and kidnapping, but lack explicit provisions and effective enforcement mechanisms for enforced disappearance.
Judicial and investigative institutions are weak, leading to widespread impunity.
Families face obstacles in accessing information and justice.
The situation is worsened by ongoing conflict, political instability, and limited rule of law.
RELATED Blog
0 comments