Dokument #1041262
ACCORD – Austrian Centre for Country of Origin and Asylum Research and Documentation (Autor)
In response to your above request we may provide you with the following information:
No information about an organisation called “Federation des Droits de l’Homme de Congo” (FEDHOCO) could be found among the sources consulted by ACCORD.
However, several reports mention an NGO platform called “Fédération congolaise des droits de l’homme“ (FECODHO). In an article dated 29 August 2002, IRIN reports on the launch of the organisation:
“A number of human rights organisations in the Republic of Congo (ROC) have formed a coalition with the objective of bringing about closer collaboration in their efforts to promote democracy, good governance, and human rights in the country, according to a communique from the ROC government. […] Fecodho is made up of the following NGOs and associations: l’Association panafricaine Thomas Sankara (APTS), of which Ewangui is the head; la Convention nationale des droits de l’homme (Conadho); la Ligue des droits de l’homme; l’Association pour la democratie et les droits de l’homme; le Club UNESCO [UN Scientific and Cultural Organisation] des droits de l’homme et la culture de paix (Cudhoc); l’Association Afrique avenir; l’Association congolaise pour la sante et le developpement; and la Communaute de developpement et d’actions sociales au Congo.
Critics, however, dismissed the federation as a vehicle to endear its leaders to President Denis Sassou-Nguesso and better position them for appointments in his new government. They added that apart from APTS, Conadho and Cudhoc, they had never heard of the member organisations.” (IRIN, 29 August 2002)
According to IRIN and “La Semaine Africaine”, Cephas Germain Ewangui, a former vice-president of the national electoral commission, is the president of FECODHO (IRIN, 29 August 2002; La Semaine Africaine, 3 October 2002).
The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organization Against Torture (OMCT) stated in their annual report for 2002, dated 26 February 2003, that FECODHO was a “governmental NGO” which had been formed with the purpose to discredit the work of the Congolese Observatory of Human Rights (Observatoire congolais des droits de l’homme - OCDH):
“In August 2002, an NGO platform, the Congolese Federation of Human Rights (Fédération congolaise des droits de l’Homme - FECODHO) was formed with the obvious purpose of discrediting the work and opinions of the OCDH in the eyes of national and international public opinion. FECODHO is a platform of eleven Congolese associations, all of which have close links to government circles. When it was formed, the progovernment newspaper Les Dépêches de Brazzaville of 23rd August stated that the creation of FECODHO would “at last enable us to effectively counter the misinformation spread internationally by the Congolese Observatory of Human Rights and the International Federation for Human Rights”. As at end 2002, FECODHO was still active and working to promote government policy. The creation of this “governmental NGO” is a reaction to the human rights defenders’ efforts to combat impunity, especially the legal proceedings the OCDH and FIDH have instituted in France concerning the “Brazzaville Beach” case (1999).” (FIDH/OMCT, 26 February 2003, p. 45).
These allegations were rejected by FECODHO (Afrique Express, 17 September 2002).
Agence France Presse (AFP) reported in February 2005 that in December (2004) FECODHO had issued a report after a six-month investigation, denouncing “the systematic practice of torture” in around 100 cases at police stations (AFP, 22 February 2005; see also Iran Daily 11 December 2004). According to Le Defi Africain, in December 2003 FECODHO also presented a report on the human rights situation in the republic of Congo, containing information about press freedom, torture, prison conditions, political freedom, and impunity (Le Defi Africain, 16 December 2003).
This Response was prepared after researching publicly accessible information currently available to the ACCORD within time constraints. This Response is not, and does not purport to be, conclusive as to the merit of any particular claim to refugee status or asylum.
References: