Mar 11, 2019 | Advocacy
The “Independent Commission of Enquiry” (ICOE) on Rakhine State, announced by the Government of Myanmar in May 2018 and established in July, has not demonstrated any reasonable prospect of meeting international standards of independence, impartiality or effectively contributing to justice or accountability for human rights violations constituting crimes under international law.
The ICOE is not transparent about how its information gathering will, if at all, shed light on the truth, or contribute to accountability and redress, while protecting individuals it comes into contact with. It is also yet to fulfill conditions called for by the UN Human Rights Council in its September 2018 resolution 39/2.
Any move to shift reference in the Council resolution currently under discussion, to include more positive recognition of the ICOE, would be wholly unjustified.
Furthermore, the government continues its unwillingness to address credible allegations of crimes under international law, including in its report to the CEDAW Committee in February in which rape allegations were dismissed as “wild claims.”
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), in response to a “Call for Submissions” on 12 December 2018, inviting “individuals, groups, witnesses and alleged victims to submit their complaints or accounts, with supporting data and evidence,” wrote to the ICOE Chairperson with four questions, summarised as:
- Are any measures in place to protect complainants and witnesses against threats of violence, legal action or other forms of reprisals for providing information to the ICOE? What specific measures have been taken to ensure the confidentiality of any materials submitted, and to protect the identities and wellbeing of witnesses?
- Given statements by commissioners that accountability is not part of their mandate, as the ICOE is seeking submissions of data and evidence from victims and witnesses, please clarify the ICOE’s position on how these submissions will be utilized – including for possible criminal investigations.
- Can you provide information on any measures taken to deal with real or perceived conflicts of interests that may affect the public’s trust in the ICOE’s impartiality and independence, including victims and witnesses and others who may submit materials in response to your call?
- The recommendations of past Commissions of Inquiry have not been fully implemented. Given the sensitive nature of the ICOE’s mandate, what considerations have been taken into account to increase the likelihood that recommendations will be more effectively implemented than in the past?
The ICOE did not respond to these questions, despite having formally acknowledged receipt of the letter. The deadline for public submissions to the ICOE has now passed. Its silence in this instance illustrates a broader failure to demonstrate independence or transparency and underlines protection concerns.
The ICJ is unaware of efforts by the ICOE to genuinely seek cooperation with the UN Independent International Fact Finding Mission or the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, as has been called for by the Council.
Based on extensive experience and research in Myanmar and globally, and recalling a 5-page legal assessment of the ICOE published in September 2018, the ICJ remains of the view that the ICOE, like previous government-backed inquires, cannot effectively contribute to or deliver justice or accountability.
Myanmar-Inquiry Rakhine-Advocacy-2019-BUR (Burmese version, in PDF)
Mar 8, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
Speaking at the UN, the ICJ today urged all States from all regions to participate actively in the process towards a treaty on business and human rights.
The statement, delivered during a general debate on thematic issues at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, read as follows:
“Mr President,
The report on the Fourth session of the Intergovernmental Working Group to establish a legally binding instrument in the field of business and human rights opens opportunities for States and the international community to build a multilateral legal framework in this field.
We continue to urge all States from all regions – especially those that have been reluctant to engage- to actively participate in this process.
The ICJ considers that this draft should be based on transparent consultation and participation and respect standards of clarity and precision.
Recent dramatic events in Brazil and South Sudan show the central place that a system of legal responsibility for businesses, including for complicit participation in abuses, should have in an international treaty.
The dam collapse in the Brazilian locality of Brumadhino and the evidence pointing to oil industry complicity with serious human rights violations in South Sudan show the global scale of the problem and the involvement of companies from all corners of the world.
A treaty should also provide to all states a set of common standards effective collective action to guarantee access to justice in a transnational setting.
The creation of an international legally binding framework for States to maximize action and cooperation regarding human rights abuses in the context of business operations remains a compelling necessity of our times.
I thank you.”
The statement may be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC40-OralStatement-GDitem3-2019
Mar 8, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today addressed the UN Human Rights Council on the need for a time-bound implementation plan, developed with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, for Sri Lanka to implement its commitments and obligations on transitional justice.
The statement, delivered during an interactive dialogue with the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights on her annual report, read as follows:
“Madame High Commissioner,
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) appreciates the efforts undertaken by the OHCHR in advancing transitional justice in Sri Lanka, mentioned in paragraph 69 of your report.
Any progress made by Sri Lanka, especially in relation to the implementation of transitional justice mechanisms under Resolution 30/1, albeit slow and wholly insufficient, has been primarily due to the continued engagement of the Council, OHCHR and international community. Therefore, keeping Sri Lanka on the agenda of the Council is paramount to ensure progress on all remaining commitments set out in Resolution 30/1.
As the Council is poised to provide Sri Lanka with an extension of two years to fulfill its commitments under Resolution 30/1, ICJ considers the expeditious development of a time-bound implementation plan with a deadline for delivery as essential. It is also pertinent that the implementation process is not a mere procedural exercise, but holistic and contextually appropriate.
At present, it appears that women are largely excluded from meaningfully participating in transitional justice processes, despite having been at the forefront in demanding truth and justice. Even mechanisms that have been put in place so far lack a comprehensive gender strategy. It is imperative that problems faced by women during and in the aftermath of the conflict are effectively identified and addressed in order to ensure that they are not left behind as the country seeks to move forward. The OHCHR with its expertise and experience in the field is well-placed to provide the necessary advice and technical assistance, especially in relation to matters that often get ignored or marginalized.
Madam High Commissioner, how would you see OHCHR fulfilling its role in relation to the development of the time-bound implementation plan and the due accomplishment of all remaining commitments made under Resolution 30/1?”
The statement can be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC40-OralStatement-IDwHCitem2-2019
The oral statement follows a joint open letter from NGOs, calling for such a plan, here.
The ICJ earlier submitted a written statement on Sri Lanka, available here.
Mar 7, 2019 | Новости, Пресс-релизы
Сегодня Международная комиссия юристов (МКЮ) выразила обеспокоенность в связи с решением Министерства юстиции Казахстана возбудить производство о лишении лицензии Сергея Сизинцева, бывшего исполнительного директора Республиканской коллегии адвокатов, избранного недавно главой Научно-консультативного совета при Республиканской коллегии адвокатов.
Официальным основанием для лишения Сизинцева лицензии является его пребывание в должности директора Республиканской коллегии адвокатов в 2016-2017 гг., которую он совмещал с адвокатской деятельностью.
На своей странице в facebook Сизинцев утверждает, что инициатива по лишению его адвокатского статуса не связана с официально заявленными в иске основаниями, и что, в действительности, законодательство Казахстана однозначно допускает возможность совмещения адвокатской практики и пребывание в должности директора. Этот иск инициирован, по его мнению, в связи с его критической позицией в отношении закона «Об адвокатской деятельности и юридической помощи», а также выступлениями на различных международных и национальных площадках по вопросам, связанным с независимостью юридической профессии.
МКЮ напоминает, что свобода выражения мнения и свобода собраний являются обязательными условиями для надлежащего и независимого функционирования юридической профессии и должны обеспечиваться как на уровне закона, так и на практике. В соответствии с принципом 23 Основных принципов ООН, касающихся роли юристов, юристы
«[…] имеют право принимать участие в общественных дискуссиях по вопросам, касающимся права, отправления правосудия и поощрения и защиты прав человека, и быть членами местных, национальных или международных организаций или создавать их и принимать участие в их заседаниях, не подвергаясь ограничению своей профессиональной деятельности вследствие своих законных действий или членства в законной организации. Осуществляя эти права, юристы в своих действиях всегда руководствуются правом и признанными нормами и профессиональной этикой юриста».
В качестве исполнительного директора Республиканской коллегии адвокатов и члена рабочей группы парламента по подготовке Закона «Об адвокатской деятельности и юридической помощи» Сергея Сизинцева выражал обеспокоенность членов юридической профессии, в том числе в связи с принятием нового закона, который они считают ограничительным.
Более того, в силу именно занимаемой должности он должен был выражать позицию Республиканской коллегии адвокатов, в частности, чтобы привлечь внимание к законодательным инициативам, которые могли поставить под угрозу независимость юридической профессии в Казахстане.
МКЮ обеспокоена тем, что возбуждение указанного производства выглядит как посягательство на независимость адвокатов в Казахстане, и может оказывать сковывающий эффект на представителей юридической профессии.
В этой связи МКЮ призывает Министерство юстиции незамедлительно отозвать этот иск.
МКЮ будет внимательно следить за делом Сергея Сизинцева и производством в районном суде г. Петропавловска.
В декабре 2017 года МКЮ организовала миссию в Казахстан, по итогам которой выразила обеспокоенность в связи с планируемой реформой:
В ноябре 2018 г. МКЮ выразила обеспокоенность в связи с производством о лишении лицензии председателей Актюбинской и Павлодарской коллегий адвокатов, а также отставкой Ануара Тугела, председателя Республиканской коллегии адвокатов Казахстана, предположительно – вследствие давления со стороны Министерства юстиции.
Mar 7, 2019 | Events, News
The ICJ is proud to join in presenting the documentary film The Long Haul, to be screened during the UN Human Rights Council session in Geneva.
Inspired by the life of the late Nigel Rodley—one of the principal architects of the modern human rights framework— the documentary The Long Haul addresses the current backlash on human rights and how best to respond.
Sir Nigel’s remarkable life story is an inspiration to stand up against wrongdoing and to continue fighting for equality and justice. At the same time, his family history is a reminder of the WWII tragedies that gave birth to the modern human rights regime and what could happen if we fail to honour these basic rights.
Nigel Rodley dedicated his career to the protection of those most at risk, including as Amnesty International’s first legal adviser and later as UN Special Rapporteur on Torture as then as a member and eventually Chair of the Human Rights Committee. He had a longstanding association with the ICJ as Commissioner and in other roles, and was President of the ICJ at the time he passed away.
The film will be screened at a side event to the UN Human Rights Council session, at 13h00 on Thursday 7 March, in Room XIV (UN Cinema) of the Palais des Nations in Geneva. Access is available only to those who already hold grounds passes for the UN in Geneva, or accreditation for the Council session.
The event is organised by the Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom in Geneva, with participation of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), Amnesty International, the World Organisation against Torture (OMCT), Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT), and International Service for Human Rights (ISHR).
For more information contact un(a)icj.org
A flyer for the event can be downloaded in PDF format here: Events-NigelRodleyFilm-2019-En
