Oct 14, 2019 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
The conviction today of Catalan separatist leaders of broadly defined offences of sedition unduly restricts rights of freedom of expression, assembly and association, the ICJ said today.
“These convictions represent a serious interference with the exercise of freedom of expression, association and assembly of the leaders. The resort to the law of sedition to restrict the exercise of these rights is unnecessary, disproportionate and ultimately unjustifiable” said Massimo Frigo, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Senior Legal Adviser.
The ICJ also stressed that the overly broad definition of the crime of sedition applied in this case creates a high risk of arbitrariness.
“We are concerned that the Supreme Court does not comply with Spain’s obligations under international human rights law in the consideration of the charges against these defendants and this seriously undermines these convictions,” he added.
Nine of the twelve leaders on trial – including high-ranking Catalan government officials –were convicted of sedition in connection with their part in the administration on 1 October 2017 of a referendum on Catalonian independence. The referendum was conducted despite having been declared illegal by the Constitutional Court.
The voting process during the referendum was forcibly suppressed in many locations by the police, with credible reports of the use of unnecessary and disproportionate force in breach of Spain’s international law obligations.
“Interference with peaceful political expression and protest is not acceptable, save in limited circumstances where it is strictly necessary and proportionate for compelling purposes such as national security .” Frigo said.
Contact
Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe Programme, t: +41 22 979 38 05 ; e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Background
The 12 people convicted in connection with the October 2017 referendum include Oriol Junqueras (13 years of imprisonment for sedition and abuse of power), former Catalan vice-president; Carme Forcadell, former Catalan parliament speaker (11 years and six months of imprisonment for sedition); eight former ministers in the Catalan government – Jordi Turull (12 years of imprisonment for sedition and abuse of power), Raül Romeva (12 years of imprisonment for sedition and abuse of power), Joaquim Forn (10 years and six months of imprisonment for sedition), Santiago Vila (10 months for disobedience), Meritxel Borràs (10 months for disobedience), Dolors Bassa (12 years of imprisonment for sedition and abuse of power), Josep Rull (10 years and six months of imprisonment for sedition), Carles Mundó (10 months for disobedience); Jordi Sànchez (9 years of imprisonment for sedition) the former leader of the Catalan National Assembly (ANC); and Jordi Cuixart (9 years of imprisonment for sedition), former head of the independence organisation Òmnium Cultural.
Spain has obligations to protect freedom of expression, including political expression, under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); and freedom of peaceful assembly and association under Article 11 ECHR and Article 21 and 22 ICCPR.
The Human Rights Committee in its General Comment on freedom of expression has affirmed that: “extreme care must be taken by States parties to ensure that treason laws and similar provisions relating to national security, whether described as official secrets or sedition laws or otherwise, are crafted and applied in a manner that conforms to the strict requirements of paragraph 3” of article 19 ICCPR, which requires that restrictions on freedom of expression be provided for by law and must be necessary for a legitimate purpose, such as national security or public order .) Rights to participate in public life are protected under Article 25 ICCPR.
Oct 14, 2019 | Comunicados de prensa, Multimedia, Noticias
La condena impuesta hoy a los líderes independentistas catalanes por una amplia definición del delito de sedición restringe excesivamente e ilegalmente los derechos de libertad de expresión, asamblea y asociación, dijo hoy la CIJ.
“Estas condenas representan una grave interferencia con el ejercicio de la libertad de expresión, asociación y asamblea de los líderes catalanes. El recurso a la ley de sedición para restringir el ejercicio de estos derechos es innecesaria, desproporcionada e injustificable” dijo Massimo Frigo, asesor legal senior para la CIJ en Europa y Asia Central.
La CIJ también puntualizó que la excesivamente amplia definición del delito de sedición aplicada en este caso crea un alto riesgo de arbitrariedad.
“Nos preocupa que el Tribunal Supremo no haya tenido totalmente en cuenta las obligaciones de España bajo el derecho internacional de los derechos humanos en su consideración de los cargos contra estos acusados lo cual mina seriamente sus condenas” añadió.
Nueve de los doce líderes politicos procesados – incluyendo altos cargos del gobierno catalán – han sido condenados por sedición en conexión con su contribución a la administración el 1 de octubre de 2017 de un referéndum sobre la independencia de Cataluña. El referéndum se llevó acabo pese haber sido declarado ilegal por el Tribunal Constitucional.
El proceso de voto durante el referéndum fue reprimido por la fuerza en muchas localidades por la policía, con informes creíbles de uso innecesario y desproporcionado de la fuerza en violación de las obligaciones de España en derecho internacional.
“La intereferencia con la expresión y protesta política pacífica es inacceptable, salvo en limitadas circunstancias en las que sea estrictamente necesario y proporcionado por razones convincentes como la seguridad nacional.” dijo Frigo.
Contacto
Massimo Frigo, asesor legal senior, Programa Europeo de la CIJ, t: +41 22 979 38 05 ; e:massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Antecedentes
Las doce personas que han sido condenadas en conexión con el referéndum de Octubre de 2017 incluyen a Oriol Junqueras, ex-vicepresidente de la Generalitat catalana; Carme Forcadell, ex-presidenta del Parlament catalán; ocho ex-consejeros del Gobierno catalán – Jordi Turull, Raül Romeva, Joaquim Forn, Santi Vila, Meritxel Borràs, Dolors Bassa, Josep Rull, Carles Mundó -; Jordi Sànchez, ex-líder de la Asamblea Nacional Catalana (ANC), y Jordi Cuixart, ex-líder de la organización independentista Òmnium Cultural.
España tiene obligación de proteger la libertad de expresión, incluyendo la expresión política, bajo el artículo 10 de la Convención Europea de Derechos Humanos (ECHR, por sus siglas en inglés) y el artículo 19 del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos (ICCPR, por sus siglas en inglés), y la libertad de asamblea y asociación pacíficas bajo el artículo 11 de ECHR y los artículos 21 y 22 de ICCPR.
El Comentario General sobre libertad de expresión del Comité de Derechos Humanos afirma que Los Estados partes deben procurar con el mayor cuidado que las leyes sobre traición y las disposiciones similares que se refieren a la seguridad nacional, tanto si se califican de leyes sobre secretos de Estado o sobre sedición, o de otra manera, estén redactadas y se apliquen de conformidad con las condiciones estrictas del párrafo 3 del artículo 19 del ICCPR, lo cual requiere que las restricciones en la libertad de expresión estén legisladas y que sean necesarias en base a propósito legítimo, como la seguridad nacional o el orden público. El derecho a participar en la vida pública está protegido bajo el artículo 25 de ICCPR.
Oct 14, 2019 | Events, News
This side event will take place on Wednesday, 16 October 2019 at 13h00-15h00 in room XXIV of Palais des Nations, Geneva.
The ICJ and FRIEDRICH EBERT STIFTUNG invite you to a discussion about the article 6 of the Revised draft of a legally binding instrument on TNCs and other business enterprises to assess its content and coverage. The discussion will have a focus on whether its various paragraphs adequately address issues such as parent company and lead buyer liability in relation to harm caused by their subsidiaries or suppliers to human rights and labor rights.
The panel will feature:
- Doug Cassel (by video), University of Notre Dame
- Makbule Sahan, International Trade Union Confederation
- Markus Krajewski, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg
- Olivier de schutter, University of Louvain
Moderator
- Ian Seiderman, ICJ Legal and Policy Director
Side event Legal liability (flyer of the event, in PDF)
Oct 11, 2019 | News
The ICJ in partnership with the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) convened the 2019 International Humanitarian Law (IHL) moot court competition.
The IHL moot court competition brought together 12 law students from Great Zimbabwe University, Midlands State University, University of Zimbabwe and Zimbabwe Ezekiel Guti University; to engage with IHL issues.
The Great Zimbabwe University students won the competition and will participate in the All Africa Moot Court Competitions to be held in Arusha, Tanzania representing Zimbabwe.
Moot Court competitions are a part of the philosophy of developing a conscientious lawyer and contributing to law graduates who have an affinity for defending human rights and the rule of law. IHL incorporates human rights principles in times of war. As a result, understanding IHL allows students to have an understanding of the application and limitations of human rights during times of war. The moot court competitions additionally equip the students with an invaluable opportunity to develop key advocacy skills.
“The moot competition gives law students the opportunity to have experiential learning and can be one among an array of interventions that could be done to supplement the university education of lawyers in Zimbabwe that has not been very strong on human rights and humanitarian law,” said Arnold Tsunga, Director of ICJ’s Africa Regional Programme.
The competition was held from 8 October to 11 October 2019. On 8 October the law students underwent an advocacy boot camp which was a full training day on advocacy skills. The four law faculties participated in a preliminary round on 9 October. The top two, Great Zimbabwe University and Midlands State University qualified for the final round. The winning team, Great Zimbabwe University will participate in the All Africa Moot Court Competitions which brings together IHL national champions from all over Africa.
The competition was supported by the European Union.
Contact
Arnold Tsunga, t: +26377728 3248; e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org
Rumbidzai Muyendesi, t: +263771666579; e: rumbidzai.muyendesi(a)icj.org
Oct 10, 2019 | Advocacy, News
On 9 October 2019, in commemoration of the World Day against the Death Penalty (10 October), the ICJ, Thai Journalists Association (TJA), Internews, and the Delegation of the European Union in Thailand held a workshop on “Legal, Moral and Human Rights Issues in Death Penalty” at the Thai Journalists’ Association.
The participants included 35 journalists from various news agencies in Thailand and journalism and human rights students.
The course aimed to help strengthen the capacity of journalists to write informatively and critically about death penalty issues in Thailand. Through this course, journalists learned about the abolition of death penalty in other regions of the world and reviewed cases which have transformed public opinion on capital punishment around the world.
Sanhawan Srisod, the ICJ’s Legal Adviser, held a session to discuss capital punishment in Thailand’s criminal justice system. She underscored that there is no perfect justice system and as the risk of miscarriage of justice is always present, the death penalty should not be retained. She further encouraged journalists to help strengthen calls for an effective criminal justice response to serious crimes, as an alternative to the death penalty. She further pointed out current domestic investigation and prosecution practices which risk breaching international law and standards. These, she noted, may hamper the legality and efficiency of investigations and prosecutions, and pose a risk of rendering an innocent person eligible for capital punishment.
Other speakers at the Workshop included:
- E. Mr Pirkka Tapiola, Ambassador of the European Union to Thailand
- E. Mr Emilio de Miguel Calabia, Ambassador of Spain to Thailand
- Judge Hanne Sophie Greve, Commissioner, the International Commission against the Death Penalty (ICDP)
- Representative from Thailand’s Ministry of Justice
- Toshi Kazama, Photographer and anti-death penalty advocate
- Orasom Suthisakorn, Author and prison writing course instructor
Background
The ICJ categorically opposes the death penalty in all situations and considers it a violation of the right to life and a form of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
Thailand has repeated commitments on the international stage to work towards abolition and has committed to becoming an abolitionist state in its master plan for human rights.
In June 2018, however, 26-year-old Teerasak Longji was executed by lethal injection for aggravated murder. It was Thailand’s first execution in nine years. The last previous execution occurred in 2009 when two men were executed for drug-related crimes.
The UN General Assembly, has repeatedly adopted Resolutions supported by very wide majorities, calling on all retentionist states to observe a moratorium on the death penalty with a view to full abolition.
Thailand is a State party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Thailand has not become party to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR, aiming at the abolition of the death penalty in law and practice.
In March 2017, the UN Human Rights Committee, the body mandated to interpret and monitor compliance with respect to the ICCPR, issued Concluding Observations after reviewing Thailand’s 2nd country report on the implementation of its obligations under the ICCPR. The Human Rights Committee recommended that Thailand “consider abolishing the death penalty and acceding to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR”, and if the death penalty is maintained, to “take all measures necessary… to ensure that it is limited to the most serious crimes, such as acts carried out with the intention of killing.”
There are reportedly 55 crimes punishable by death in Thailand, including crimes relating to corruption, bribery and drugs, which do not meet the threshold of the “most serious crimes” within the meaning of the ICCPR.
