FACT SHEET – AHMED ZAOUI

Ahmed Zaoui is a democratically-elected member of parliament of Algeria. In 1991, as the FIS (Islamic Salvation Front) candidate for Cheraga, he was elected to parliament during the first multi-partly parliamentary elections ever held in Algeria. He was unable to take up his new position however, as in January 1992 the Algerian military regime launched a coup de tat, re-installed the former government and declared the FIS an ‘illegal’ party.

Since then, Mr Zaoui has been trying to find a safe and free country to live in, to enable his wife and children to live in safety and to continue his tireless efforts to restore peace and democracy in Algeria.

Mr Zaoui is an intellectual and a peaceful political activist, striving for the right of his people to self-determination and basic freedom. A moderate who favours dialogue and condemns violence, he was instrumental in organising and drafting – together with the Catholic Sant’ Egidio Community in Italy – a format for the Rome Colloqium. The Colloqium sought to bring together all of the Algerian political parties and concerned countries and led to the drafting of the 1995 Rome Platform, which until today remains the only political document for a peaceful resolution to the conflict in Algeria.

CHRONOLOGY OF FACTS

Algeria

· Mr Ahmed Zaoui is a religious scholar and until 1992 he was an Associate Professor of Theology and Comparative Religious Studies at the University of Algiers.

· In 1989 Mr Zaoui joined the FIS (Islamic Salvation Front), a peaceful, non-violent Islamic political movement that became the unanimous voice of the majority of the Algerian people against the excesses and corruption of one-party rule, which had prevailed in Algeria for some decades. During the first round of the 1991 elections in Algeria, the only free parliamentary elections to ever be held there, Mr Zaoui stood as the FIS candidate for Cheraga. He won his seat and on a national level the FIS captured the majority of seats in a landslide victory.

· Within weeks however, the election results were rejected by the military regime which swiftly moved to ban the FIS and arrest and imprison its founding leaders, Dr Abbassi Madani and Mr Ali Belhadj. In the months that followed, thousands of FIS members and supporters were murdered or disappeared. The crackdown on the FIS led to a bloody civil war that continues today and that has claimed the lives of over 200,000 victims, mainly civilians.

· After the coup, Mr Zaoui fled Algeria with many thousands of intellectuals, doctors, university Professors and religious Imams. He reached Europe.

Belgium and France

· In late 1993, Mr Zaoui reached Belgium where he sought refugee status and was initially permitted to remain.

· While in Belgium in 1994, Mr Zaoui was the first FIS leader to be approached by the Christian St Egidio Community in Rome to help organise and participate in the “Rome Colloqium”, Algerian multi-party negotiations held in Rome, Italy in 1994 and 1995. He was instrumental in organising and drafting a format for an international Colloqium in Rome that resulted in the Rome “Platform for a Political and Peaceful Solution to the Algerian Crisis”, signed in Rome on 13 January 1995 by the main Algerian political parties (both secular and Islamic). Both the Algerian and French Governments refused to attend the Colloqium.

· While in Europe Mr Zaoui also wrote many articles and issued numerous communiques, favouring a peaceful political solution to the Algerian crisis and condemning the violence that was unfolding there.

· In Europe in the mid-nineties, the FIS leadership in exile became fragmented and divided. These internal divisions were widely reported in the press, alongside reports about armed Algerian extremist groups operating within Europe. In the “media toxification” that followed, Mr Zaoui was wrongly labelled as being a member of the GIA (Islamic Armed Group), a violent extremist organisation. Mr Zaoui categorically rejects such an accusation. Indeed, the views and workings of the GIA are entirely anathema to the principles of the FIS, and the GIA have actually issued a death sentence against Mr Zaoui and other FIS leaders.

· In March 1994, following terrorist bombings in France and during a visit to Belgium by the Algerian Foreign Minister, Mr Zaoui was suddenly arrested and charged under antiquated Belgian laws with being the “head of a criminal association”. While the media claimed that the “association” was allegedly the GIA, a report from the Belgian BSR (Special Investigative Brigade) found that there was no conclusive evidence linking Mr Zaoui to this group. He was acquitted by the lower court in Brussels but the acquittal was later overturned by the Belgium Court of Appeal. Interestingly, he was given a four-year suspended sentence for being the “head” of the alleged association, while a co-defendant convicted of being a “member” of the group was sentenced to four years imprisonment. Later, in 1996, Mr Zaoui was vindicated in a decision of the Belgian Aliens Consultative Committee, which affirmed his membership of the FIS and acknowledged that there was nothing to suggest he belonged to the GIA.

· Later, in September 2001, Mr Zaoui was also to be convicted in absentia by a French Court on similar charges and was given a light suspended sentence. France’s anti-terrorism laws, pre-trial detention provisions and judicial procedures have been lambasted by the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) in a fifty page report released in 1999 entitled, “France: Paving the Way for Arbitrary Justice”.

· There is a good deal of evidence to suggest that neither France nor Belgium seriously believe that Mr Zaoui was guilty of the crimes for which he has been convicted. There is also a large body of evidence to suggest that the convictions against Mr Zaoui were politically-motivated due to the exceptionally-close political, diplomatic and economic relationship between the Algerian, French and Belgian Governments. Significantly, no international police warrant in respect of Mr Zaoui has ever emanated from France or Belgium. A number of international arrest warrants against Mr Zaoui have however emanated from Algeria, where he has received in absentia a number of death sentences and several sentences of life-imprisonment.

· In November 2002, a French television channel released a documentary uncovering the Algerian Government’s infiltration and manipulation of the GIA, the very terrorist group blamed for massacres in Algeria and attacks in Europe, and the very group which Mr Zaoui was alleged to have joined. The regime’s motive for seizing control of the GIA was to generate confusion amongst the Algerian population and the European community as to the motives of Algeria’s banned Islamic parties, thereby maligning the FIS and galvanising international opinion into support for the regime. In a shocking revelation, the documentary also exposed the French Intelligence Service’s dealings with Algerian intelligence officials and its actual complicity in alleged GIA attacks on France.

Switzerland – Burkina Faso

· In 1997, Mr Zaoui and his family moved to Switzerland where they claimed asylum. The manner in which the Swiss authorities dealt with them is further proof that the accusations levelled against Mr Zaoui are baseless and politically-motivated. Rather than allow its legal system to process him, the Swiss Government secretly kidnapped Mr Zaoui and his family from their home in the middle of the night, put them on a helicopter to the airport and then flew them to Burkina Faso, one of the most underdeveloped nations in Africa. Media reports indicated that the Burkina Faso authorities had agreed to accept the Zaoui family in exchange for development aid.

· While in Burkina Faso, Mr Zaoui was secretly contacted by telephone on three separate occasions by the Algerian President Bouteflika.

· In Burkina Faso Mr Zaoui was banned from being reported in the visual media and was unable to make political announcements or declarations. Unable to tolerate such restrictions, and growing increasingly fearful for his physical safety there, he left Burkina Faso and travelled to Malaysia, where he spent some time before travelling on to New Zealand.

118 Constable Street

Newtown
Wellington

Thursday, 7 August 2003

Dear Prime Minister,

I am a resident of Newtown Wellington, and I work as a researcher and educator for the Anglican Social Justice Commission. Before this I completed a Masters degree at Victoria University of Wellington. I have a strong interest in politics, international and local, and have a broad awareness of the political developments in Algeria over the last two decades. I am writing out of concern for the current situation involving Ahmed Zaoui, and the security risk certificate that has been issued against him here in New Zealand.

I am particularly concerned with your recent comments that the decision reached by Refugee Status Appeal Authority were limited as they lacked access to confidential SIS information, and moreover that this decision might be superseded on this basis. If there is indeed information of the nature that it “cannot and should not be made public”, then the authenticity of this information must be carefully weighed against the extensive and verifiable public information available on Mr Zaoui, his allegiances, and his activities over the last decade.

I have read the many of the reports and affidavits that were submitted in support of Mr Zaoui’s appeal to the Refugee Status Appeal Authority, and, on the basis of these, am not at all surprised at the Authority’s decision. Mr Zaoui’s case was extremely strong, and many prominent experts on Algeria hi-lighted and outlined aspects of Algeria’s complex political situation. As I am sure you are aware, such reports indicate that it is likely that Mr Zaoui’s has been tagged a terrorist by the Algerian regime (and consequently countries with close economic and political links to Algeria) as part of a wider move to quell even the most moderate political dissent. I urge you to remain fully aware of the Algerian Government’s manipulation of the war of terrorism for its own ends, and must not simply accept information originating from here (even if now untraceable to these origins) as authentic.

The authenticity of such confidential SIS evidence must also be weighed against Mr Zaoui’s many public activities promoting non-violent political solutions for Algeria. His work alongside the Sant’ Egidio community in setting up the dialogue processes in Rome in 1996, and thereby bringing together Algeria’s major political opposition groups, not only sits in contrast the activities of terrorists, but actually works directly against them. Terrorism lives and thrives in situations of instability, and gains its recruits and adherents from those with real or imagined grievances (of course acknowledging this in no way condones the terrorist resort to violence). Terrorism is far less likely to thrive in an environment where there are forums for addressing and resolving grievance. Such colloquiums as that inaugurated and supported by Mr Zaoui actively reduces international terrorism by providing a viable alternative for the expression of political opposition. The work of Mr Zaoui in promoting peace and discussion are of such a level and extent that they can not be merely disregarded as a front or cover, beneath which terrorists activities and agendas operate. Such activities in and of themselves are a strong refutation of any accusation of terrorist activities or connections. For this reason any supposedly terrorist activities of associations are extremely unlikely.

When Mr Zaoui first arrived in New Zealand I understand that he immediately stated who he was and petitioned for amnesty. These are not the actions of a terrorist, but rather seem the actions of someone confident enough of his own innocence that he is willing to throw himself at the mercy of the New Zealand’s democratic and legal systems. The normal procedure has granted Mr Zaoui refugee status, and thus found him innocent of any terrorist activities or associations. While legal mechanisms are in place, and have been invoked, for superseding this decision, I urge you to think carefully before pursuing them.

Central to the moral foundation that legitimises the legal system, both in New Zealand and international law, is the belief that one is innocent until proven guilty. If Mr Zaoui is extradited without trial (or actually in spite of winning his trial), then I urge you to allow him some opportunity to respond to the evidence that is being brought against him. I urge you to make the nature of the evidence being brought against Mr Zaoui, if not the detail, available to himself and to his legal counsel. Even if there are indeed legitimate reasons why this evidence must be kept from the public, there must be a process of some kind that allows it to verified and responded too. It must be available to at least some mechanisms independent of the SIS and international intelligence networks. I mean this as no slur against the SIS, and I would presume that they have thorough authentication processes in place, but such must also be weighed the quality and authenticity of the processes and submissions of the Refugee Status Appeal Board. The information that has been used to establish Mr Zaoui’s eligibility for refugee status can be publicly tested and is verifiable by any individual or organisation. The confidential SIS information on which Mr Zaoui’s fate now resides cannot. As democracies are by their very nature founded and maintained on the openness of bureaucratic processes and decisions (and insofar as they seek to allow citizens access to such they become totalitarian) I urge you to think carefully before removing the fate of Mr Zaoui from any form of democratic process whatsoever.

Finally, and as Mohamed-Larbi Zitout indicates in his report to the Refugee Status Appeal Authority, if Mr Zaoui is extradited and returned to Algeria (or to another country that will not guarantee his protection) then we, as a country, will be responsible for fate. As you are well aware many political opponents of the Algerian regime been tortured and killed (or at best only “disappeared”). If Mr Zaoui were to be extradited from New Zealand on the basis of confidential information obtained via international intelligence agencies, then it is likely that this too would be his fate.

I urge caution. The move of extraditing Mr Zaoui without giving due consideration to the overwhelming evidence in favour of his innocence would irrevocably compromise New Zealand’s reputation as a just and reasoning democracy.

Regards,
Mike Mawson.