Information on Khashoggi case from Turkish President Erdogan highlights need for international investigation

Information on Khashoggi case from Turkish President Erdogan highlights need for international investigation

In light of new information released by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan about the apparent murder of prominent Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the Turkish government should seek cooperation from independent and impartial international investigators into the apparent extrajudicial killing of prominent Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi Arabian Consulate in Istanbul, the ICJ urged today.

Turkish President Recep Tayyib Erdogan today told the Turkish Parliament that investigations suggested that Saudi officials had planned to kill Khashoggi and he called for all those responsible for the killing to be punished regardless of rank.

“Given the highly political nature of this case and its emblematic impact for journalists and dissidents around the world, Turkey should work with the United Nations to establish a special independent mechanism to carry out the investigation with a view to identifying the perpetrators and prescribing recommendations for appropriate accountability measures,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ’s MENA Programme Director.

“Alternatively, the investigation should be conducted by competent Turkish authorities, given that Turkey already has jurisdiction and an obligation to carry out an investigation,” he added.

Investigations by Turkey to date suggest that the crime was planned, at least in part, in Saudi Arabia, and that perpetrators, evidence and witnesses are located in at least two countries.

Turkish Foreign Minister, Mevlut Cavusoglu, stated today that Turkey is ready to cooperate with an international investigation into Jamal Khashoggi’s death.

“Given the gravity of the crime and the fact that evidence and perpetrators are located outside Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other States should cooperate with an international investigation and waive any diplomatic protections and immunities that may apply to State officials and premises. They should also hand over all forensic, video, audio and other evidence, facilitate investigators’ access to State territory and witnesses, including State officials, and provide the necessary support to locate, retrieve and identify other evidence such as human remains and trace evidence and to carry out an autopsy on Khashoggi’s remains,” Benarbia said.

The ICJ dismissed statements by Saudi Arabia that it would carry out an independent, impartial investigation of the apparent murder.

On 20 October 2018, after initially denying any involvement in Jamal Khashoggi’s enforced disappearance, the Saudi Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement claiming Khashoggi died when a “fight broke out” in discussions with Saudi officials at the consulate.

“Saudi Arabia has provided no evidence to support its incredible claim two weeks on that Jamal Khashoggi died after a fight broke out. Their investigation into his death lacks transparency and independence. Given Saudi Arabia’s past record in countenancing complete impunity for officials involved in serious human rights violations, it is reasonable to expect that this investigation and will result in a cover-up in which those most responsible avoid accountability,” Benarbia added.

Saudi Arabia’s repeated denials that it had any knowledge of the fate of Khashoggi, followed by its claims that “rogue” State operatives were responsible for his death, indicate that any Turkish investigation will be unlikely to elicit any meaningful cooperation from Saudi authorities.

“The denials, obfuscation and scapegoating by Saudi Arabia reveals a contempt for human rights that’s indicative of its modus operandi,” Benarbia said.

“Saudi authorities have repeatedly failed to carry out independent and impartial investigations into allegations that State officials have engaged in widespread arbitrary arrested and detention, torture and other ill-treatment and enforced disappearances, including of journalists, human rights defenders and critics of the government. Since Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman was appointed in June 2017, repression of the exercise of human rights for political reasons has increased. Those convicted for exercising their lawful rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association face lengthy prison terms or the death penalty, after trials marred by fair trial rights violations,” he added.

Saudi Arabia-Khashoggi intl investigation-News-press releases-2018-ENG (full story with additional background, in PDF)

The future of investment-related dispute settlement: options and models (UN side event)

The future of investment-related dispute settlement: options and models (UN side event)

This side event will be held on October 25th, 2018, from 13:00 until 14:30 at Room XXVII, Palais des Nations, United Nations, in Geneva.

Organized jointly by the ICJ, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES), this session’s goal is to provide a platform for discussion about the benefits and shortcomings of the current model of dispute settlement on investment matters and the needs and directions of future reform.

The debate will assist all participants in the World Investment Forum in understanding the current issues regarding investment dispute settlement and the needs and options for reform with a view to foster a strategy where investment-related dispute settlement and rule of law principles contribute to the sustainable development objectives.

The objectives of the event:

  • Provide a platform for informed discussion among practitioners and interested stakeholders in the area of investment-related dispute settlement
  • Contribute to an improved understanding of the issues at stake and the options for future reform
  • Contribute to the efforts of the international community to achieve common ground in various issues related to investment-related dispute settlement

Issues for debate:

  • What should governments expect from the ongoing UNCITRAL process in reforming investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS)?
  • Should substantive and procedural issues relating to the current model of dispute settlement on investment matters be addressed in a comprehensive way?
  • What are the elements to be considered when discussing the possible creation of an investment court?
  • Would people impacted by investment projects have a role and standing in investment-related dispute settlement?

Speakers:

Vu Thi Chau Quynh, Deputy Director General, Department of Legislation, The Ministry of Planning and Investment, Viet Nam
Kekeletso Mashigo, Director, Legal – International Trade, Investment, Tax Trade Negotiations Unit, International Trade and Economic Development Division, Department of Trade and Industry, South Africa
Colin Brown, Deputy Head of Unit – Dispute Settlement and Legal Aspects of Trade Policy – DG TRADE – European Commission
Samira Sulejmanovic, Head, Unit for Bilateral Trade Relations, Ministry of Foreign Trade and Economic Relations, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Jane Kelsey, Professor, Faculty of Law, The University of Auckland, New Zealand

Moderator:

Sam Zarifi, Secretary-General of the ICJ.

Thailand: ICJ co-hosts lawyers’ meeting on admissibility of evidence in the national security context

Thailand: ICJ co-hosts lawyers’ meeting on admissibility of evidence in the national security context

On 21 October, the ICJ, together with Cross Cultural Foundation (CrCF), organized a lawyers’ meeting in Bangkok on the admissibility of evidence in the context of application of special security laws in Thailand.

Attendees included 30 human rights lawyers, paralegal officers, documentation officers, human rights defenders and journalists from Bangkok and other regions in Thailand.

The objectives of the meeting were:

  • To discuss about the challenges that lawyers currently face regarding the admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings, both in law and in practice, in the context of existing special security laws. These laws include the Martial Law, Emergency Decree, and the Internal Security Act that are applied in the southern border provinces, and certain repressive National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Orders that are applied nationwide;
  • To discuss how to address the adverse effects on human rights and the administration of justice as a consequence of the implementation of these laws and how lawyers, members of civil society, and other stakeholders, at national and international levels, may work together to address such challenges; and
  • To gather recommendations from participants and discuss future advocacy strategies to tackle identified challenges.

The ICJ’s Legal Memorandum on Hearsay Evidence and International Fair Trial Standards was used as one of the main reference materials during the meeting.

A main recommendation of the Workshop, echoed the ICJ’s assessment in the Legal Memorandum, namely that Thailand should review existing standards in all special security laws and relevant articles in the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the admissibility of evidence that are not compatible with international fair trial standards to ensure safeguards required to protect individuals from unfair trials.

 Read also

Thailand : legal memorandum – hearsay evidence and international fair trial standards

Philippines: ICJ and IBP hold workshop on eliminating gender stereotypes in justice delivery

Philippines: ICJ and IBP hold workshop on eliminating gender stereotypes in justice delivery

From 12 to 13 October 2018, the ICJ and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) held its second national workshop on eliminating gender discriminatory attitudes and behaviours towards women.

Participants at the workshop were members of IBP’s Board of Governors and Committee on Bar Discipline. The workshop was held in Cebu City, Philippines.

Emerlynne Gil, ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser opened the workshop by emphasizing that it is crucial for lawyers of all areas of expertise to engage in dialogues such as this in order to further enhance women’s access to justice.

Gil pointed out that gender stereotypes incorporated in laws and perpetuated in the administration of justice impair the capacity of women to exercise their right to access to justice.

She emphasized that lawyers, as frontline formal justice actors, play a key role in eliminating these stereotypes.

Marienne Ibadlit, IBP’s Governor for Western Visayas, spoke about the establishment of the Gender and Development (GAD) Committee as a standing committee of the IBP.

The establishment of the GAD Committee is expected to advance gender and women’s human rights within the IBP.

It is also expected to institutionalize within the IBP efforts to build the capacity of lawyers in the Philippines to assist women in accessing justice.

The participants recognized during the opening session that recourse to gender stereotypes in the practice of law and administration of justice is widespread in the Philippines and that gender stereotypes directly impact women’s access to justice.

A range of stereotypes were identified, including the idea of women being the ‘weaker sex’ and the perception that female lawyers are not suited for litigation of controversial political or criminal cases.

During the workshop, participants discussed how they could maximize their role as lawyers in facilitating women’s access to justice, specifically in the areas of domestic violence, sexual violence, family law, and employment law.

Some of the participants noted that they themselves had been influenced by gender stereotypes and committed to be more consciously gender sensitive in their work and personal life.

While acknowledging that much more must be done to bring about systematic change, it was agreed that incremental measures could be impactful.

Abdiel Dan Fajardo, National President of the IBP, expressed support for more action by lawyers in the Philippines on women’s human rights.

Both the ICJ and IBP reinforced their commitment to joint collaboration in furthering the advancements in women’s access to justice in the country.

Contact  

Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t: +662 619 8477 (ext. 206) ; e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org

Translate »