Appendix D: Reported or Suspected Extraditions or Forcible Returns of Individuals between Member States of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization
Introduction
Under the Shanghai Convention on Combating Terrorism, Separatism and Extremism, Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) member states are obligated to treat acts of “terrorism,” “extremism,” and “separatism” within their territories as extraditable offences and grounds for denial of asylum claims.1 These practices may conflict directly with principles of international human rights law, including obligations to which SCO member states have individually committed to upholding.2 Moreover, the SCO has not made public any meaningful statistics on extraditions or forcible returns pursuant to the SCO framework, nor has it released a complete list of individuals or organizations designated as “terrorist,” “extremist,” or “separatist.” This lack of transparency and accountability prevents monitoring of the SCO’s and its members states’ compliance with international human rights standards and obligations.
Two charts are included in this appendix, presenting a snapshot of the patterns of cooperation among SCO member states on individual returns. The first chart is a matrix of reported or suspected extraditions or forcible returns between SCO member states, which sets forth a summary of data compiled by Human Rights in China (HRIC) concerning extraditions or forcible returns reported to have taken place between 1998 and 2011. The second chart is an HRIC summary of those individual cases represented in the matrix on which additional information is publicly available. This case chart provides further context and background on certain individuals targeted for extradition or forcible return on grounds implicating the SCO framework.
The information presented herein is neither comprehensive nor exhaustive. The SCO itself has not released official figures on extraditions or forcible returns, and relevant disclosures by individual SCO member state governments have been infrequent and inconsistent. In preparing the matrix and case chart, HRIC has drawn on publicly available English, Chinese, and Russian sources, including official government sources, UN sources, news outlets, and reports from local and international NGOs, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Initiative Group of Independent Human Rights Defenders in Uzbekistan. In addition, because many of the highlighted individuals use aliases, it is possible that some entries are redundant. Finally, a number of cases involving individuals who have simply disappeared from SCO member states are excluded because it is unknown whether they were transferred to other SCO member states.
The matrix and case chart reveal a number of disturbing patterns, including:
- A widespread, uneven practice: SCO member states have extradited or forcibly returned hundreds of individuals across their borders. Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan appear to have sent large numbers to China. Notably, Uzbekistan appears to have received the largest number of extradited or forcibly returned individuals, while China and Tajikistan have extradited or forcibly returned the fewest to other states.
- Unclear or questionable jurisdictional authority: Reports regarding extraditions and forcible returns frequently specify the involvement of security forces or government entities from states other than that from which the individual is being relocated, raising troubling questions concerning jurisdiction over individuals at risk of human rights abuses.
- Serious concerns regarding compliance with international obligations to protect against torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment: Extraditions and forcible returns between SCO member states raise serious questions concerning compliance with obligations preventing individuals from being expelled, returned, or extradited to a state where there are substantial grounds for believing that the individual would be in danger of being subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.
Despite the limited data available, it is clear that the orchestrated extraditions or forcible returns of individuals facilitated by member state obligations under the SCO framework present threats to individual liberties and physical security, in contravention of international human rights standards and obligations of the SCO and its member states.
<- Appendix C.2: Ministry of Public Security Official Statements | Main | Appendix D.1: Reported or Suspected Extraditions or Forcible Returns Matrix->
Endnotes
1. Shanghai Convention on Combating Terrorism, Separatism and Extremism, June 15, 2001, Art. 2, available at http://www.ecrats.com/en/normative_documents/2005. ^
2. See Appendix B for more information concerning the human rights obligations of SCO member states, as well as concluding observations and recommendations by international human rights treaty bodies concerning those states. ^
