Jul 22, 2018 | Artículos, Noticias
La reciente elección del magistrado suplente de la Corte de Constitucionalidad, llevada a cabo por la Corte Suprema de Justicia (CSJ), pone en grave riesgo la justicia constitucional y su imparcialidad.
En efecto, días atrás, la Corte Suprema de Justicia eligió al magistrado suplente de la Corte de Constitucionalidad (CC), puesto que había quedado vacante luego de que la magistrada suplente anterior, fuese electa como Fiscal General por el Presidente de la República.
Los ocho magistrados de la CSJ que votaron a favor del profesional electo como magistrado suplente de la Corte de Constitucionalidad, no han observado las normas y estándares internacionales en materia de administración de justicia.
Los Principios Básicos relativos a la Independencia de la Judicatura estipulan que “Las personas seleccionadas para ocupar cargos judiciales serán personas íntegras e idóneas y tendrán la formación o las calificaciones jurídicas apropiadas.”
No obstante, la CIJ ha podido constatar que los magistrados de la CSJ nombraron a una persona:
a) que en el año 2010, fue destituido como Fiscal General por la propia Corte de Constitucionalidad cuando recién había asumido el cargo, por haber sido considerado una persona no idónea para ocupar tan importante cargo;
b) que abiertamente ha estado en contra de la presencia de la Comisión Internacional contra la Impunidad (CICIG) en el país, a pesar del buen trabajo que ha realizado dicha comisión en la lucha contra la impunidad y la corrupción;
c) que en el 2010, ya en su calidad de Fiscal General y luego de asumir el cargo, fue acusado de afectar casos relacionados con la lucha contra la corrupción e impunidad y de intervenir y afectar la prueba existente en dichos casos.
Por ello, en esta elección, la CIJ tiene hondas y legítimas preocupaciones sobre la verdadera voluntad de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de: a) tramitar un genuino y necesario proceso de depuración del Sistema de Justicia; y b) de apoyar las reformas constitucionales que vendrían a fortalecer el Sistema de Justicia.
Además, con esta elección, la CSJ ha contribuido a profundizar la crisis del Sistema de Justicia; su decisión viene a afectar la poca credibilidad que la población guatemalteca aún tiene en el Sistema de Justicia.
Debemos recordar que los actos del Congreso de la República del 11 de septiembre de 2017, llevaron a la Corte de Constitucionalidad a catalogarlos como actos susceptibles de causar “un daño irreparable a la justicia” en Guatemala.
Es opinión de la CIJ, que la elección del magistrado suplente de la Corte de Constitucionalidad, llevada a cabo por la Corte Suprema de Justicia, también debe ser considerada como una forma de causar un daño irreparable a la justicia.
Por ello, la CIJ tiene la esperanza de que la Corte de Constitucionalidad protegerá, una vez más, el Estado de Derecho en Guatemala.
Ramón Cadena, Director para Centro América de la CIJ expresó: “El acto de la Corte Suprema de Justicia de elegir a una persona que no es idónea para el cargo de magistrado suplente de la Corte de Constitucionalidad, resulta altamente preocupante para una recta administración de justicia y la vigencia efectiva del Estado de Derecho en Guatemala”.
Jul 19, 2018 | News
His Majesty King Mswati III of the Kingdom of Eswatini (formerly known as the Kingdom of Swaziland) yesterday gave his royal assent to the Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Act, a milestone in the fight against sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) in the country.
In its May 2018 report on key challenges to achieving justice for human rights violations in Swaziland, the ICJ identified the widespread occurrence of SGBV, with discriminatory practices based on customary laws and traditional beliefs undermining equality between men and women and the access by victims of such violence to effective remedies and reparation, as well as the holding to account of perpetrators of such violence.
Eswatini’sNational Strategy to End Violence in Swaziland 2017-2022, produced by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in collaboration with the UN Population Fund, itself pointed to an alarming rate of increasing violence in all its forms, noting that its most common form was gender-based violence, disproportionately affecting women and girls.
The new law follows a protracted legislative process, first initiated in 2009; then resumed in 2015. It has also been accompanied by increasing attention and concern by international human rights mechanisms, including the UN Human Rights Committee and the Committee on Elimination of Discrimination against Women.
Building on ICJ initiatives to bring together international, regional and local SGBV experts in 2015, and on sustainable development goals on access to justice and gender equality in 2017, the ICJ with local partners convened a workshop on combatting SGBV in Swaziland in February 2018. In consultations during and around this most recent workshop, interlocutors signaled fears that the Senate of Swaziland was equivocating on passage of the 2015 Bill. Responding to local partners’ requests, the ICJ made a submission to the Senate in March 2018, bringing to its attention to the global and regional obligations of the Kingdom to enact the legislation, as well as the Government’s own commitments to do so. The Senate soon after voted to adopt the legislation.
The new law for the first time criminalizes marital rape and other domestic violence offences; makes provision for Specialised Domestic Violence Courts; creates mechanisms and avenues for reporting of offences; and requires medical examination and treatment of victims. These are issues that had not been previously provided for.
Enactment of the law is significant, incorporating into domestic law a very large part of Eswatini’s international human rights obligations, including those arising from the Africa region, to criminalize and sanction the perpetrators of SGBV. It also discharges commitments made by His Majesty’s Government during the 2016 Universal Periodic Review.
Just as important will be the effective implementation of the new law to combat SGBV by bringing perpetrators to account and providing victims with access to justice.
With a view to enhancing the prospects of an effective and comprehensive approach to that end, the ICJ’s Commissioner, and Principal Judge of the High Court, Justice Qinsile Mabuza, will next week be coordinating a meeting of governmental justice sector stakeholders involved in combatting SGBV in the country. This first coordinated meeting of governmental actors will focus on issues of investigation, prosecution and sanctioning of sexual and gender-based violence crimes, including the role of social and medical services.
The ICJ is also commissioning a report on the access of victims of SGBV to effective remedies and reparation. Focused on case studies, the report will include attention to lack of justice through acquittals that have been prompted by inadequate laws or procedures and/or through lack of prompt or sufficient forensic or medical evidence. This report will feed into discussions at a second meeting of governmental justice sector stakeholders, intended for 2019.
Jul 18, 2018 | Communiqués de presse, Nouvelles, Publications, Rapports
La CIJ a salué aujourd’hui la levée de l’état d’urgence en vigueur en Turquie depuis presque deux ans, qui devrait être effective à partir de minuit. La CIJ a toutefois ajouté que les autorités devaient désormais instaurer une série de mesures visant à rétablir l’état de droit dans le pays.
La prise de position de la CIJ coïncide avec la publication de son rapport Justice Suspended – Access to Justice and State of Emergency in Turkey (disponible en anglais seulement) qui décrit comment les mesures prises en vertu de l’état d’urgence, notamment la révocation massive de magistrats et les arrestations et poursuites arbitraires d’avocats et de défenseurs des droits de l’Homme, ont érodé les institutions et les mécanismes judiciaires du pays.
Le rapport préconise, entre autres, l’abrogation de ces mesures, le rétablissement de l’indépendance du système judiciaire et la réforme des lois antiterroristes du pays.
“Avec la fin de l’état d’urgence, nous appelons au retrait immédiat des notifications de dérogations à la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme et au Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques,” a déclaré Massimo Frigo, conseiller juridique principal pour le programme Europe et Asie centrale de la CIJ.
“Nous sommes préoccupés par le fait que la plupart de ces mesures d’exception restent ancrées dans la loi turque, avec des des conséquences pernicieuses à long terme sur la jouissance des droits de l’Homme élémentaires et les bases de l’Etat de droit dans le pays,” a-t-il ajouté.
Jul 18, 2018 | News, Publications, Reports
The ICJ welcomed today the lapse of Turkey’s nearly two-year state of emergency, which is expected to be effective as of midnight, but said that the authorities needed now to take a range of measures to repair the rupture to the rule of law in the country.
The ICJ’s comments came as it released its report Justice Suspended – Access to Justice and State of Emergency in Turkey, outlining how measures undertaken pursuant to a state of emergency, including the mass dismissal of judges and arbitrary arrests and prosecutions of lawyers and human rights defenders had eroded the justice institutions and mechanisms in the country.
The report recommends a number of measures including the repeal of measures enacted under the state of emergency, the restoral of the independence of the judiciary and the reform of the country’s anti-terrorism legislation.
“With the end of the state of emergency we call for the immediate withdrawal of the notifications of derogations to the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,” said Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for the Europe and Central Asia Programme.
“We remain concerned that many of the emergency measures have been given permanent effect in Turkish law and will have pernicious and lasting consequences for the enjoyment of human rights and for the rule of law in Turkey,” he added.
These measures include the dismissals of hundred of thousands of people from their job, including judges and prosecutors.
Constitutional amendments, introduced during the state of emergency, permanently enshrine executive and legislative control of the governing institutions of the judiciary, contrary to international standards on judicial independence, the ICJ says.
Many of those charged with vaguely-defined offences under the state of emergency face trial before courts that are not independent and cannot guarantee the right to a fair trial, the Geneva-based organization adds.
Crucially, most of the people affected by emergency measures, including summary dismissals, have not yet had the opportunity to obtain a remedy before an effective and independent court or tribunal.
The ICJ report illustrates how the mechanisms which should address and remedy human rights violations in Turkey lack effectiveness and independence and that these deficiencies extend both to the courts and the state of emergency complaints commission.
It further finds that the ordinary functions of lawyers and activities civil society, key actors in ensuring access to justice, have been considerably curtailed.
“The Turkish Government says that they want their actions to respect the rule of law. Effective and independent remedies and reparations for human rights violations must be available to all if this principle is to have any reality in practice,” said Massimo Frigo.
Contact
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for the Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +41 22 979 3805, e: massimo.frigo@icj.org
Download
Full ICJ report in PDF in English: Turkey-Access to justice-Publications-Reports-2018-ENG
Full ICJ report in PDF in Turkish: Turkey-Access to justice-Publications-Reports-2018-TUR
Jul 16, 2018 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
Changes within the Commission enhance the organization’s capacity to respond to increased threats to rights protection via erosion of the rule of law, particularly in relation to the independence of the judiciary.
The ICJ is pleased to announce new leadership at the ICJ as Professor Robert K. Goldman (US) has been elected President of the organization and Justice Radmila Dragicevic-Dicic (Serbia) has been elected Vice-President, a role she will undertake jointly with Professor Carlos Ayala (Venezuela) who was also appointed Vice-President earlier in the year.
Professor Robert K. Goldman served as Acting President of the ICJ following the sad passing of former President Professor Sir Nigel Rodley in 2017.
The President and Vice-Presidents are supported by the Executive Committee, which has also been bolstered by new members Justice Sir Nicolas Bratza (UK), former President of the European Court of Human Rights; Dame Silvia Cartwright (New Zealand), former Governor-General of New Zealand; and Shawan Jabarin (Palestine), prominent human rights activist and Director General of Al-Haq, an independent Palestinian non-governmental human rights organization.
“I am honoured to have been elected President of the ICJ and to be able to work with such proficient and inspiring jurists amongst ICJ leadership and in the wider Commission itself, without whom the ICJ could not provide the expertise and leadership it does on such a wide range of human rights issues,” said Professor Robert K. Goldman, ICJ President.
“Those that have taken on a new role in ICJ leadership will help guide the organization in augmenting efforts to defend the rule of law amidst the current political backdrop of increasing antipathy and hostility towards rights protections,” he added.
In addition to these changes in the senior leadership of the ICJ, the organization is also pleased to welcome five new members:
Justice Chinara Aidarbekova (Kyrgyzstan), judge of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Kyrgyzstan; Gamal Eid (Egypt), prominent lawyer and human rights defender; Jamesina Essie L. King (Sierra Leone), Commissioner of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights; Michael Sfard (Israel), prominent human rights lawyer who has represented many Israeli and Palestinian individuals and organizations; and Ambiga Sreenevasan, former President of the Malaysian Bar Council.
“The ICJ is alarmed by the increasing volume of worldwide attacks on the institutions that uphold human rights both at an international level, where UN mechanisms are constantly condemned rather than supported and enhanced to maximize their efficacy; and also on the local level, for example when we see the independence of the judiciary, an essential element of maintaining rights protections, coming under attack in places like Guatemala, Poland and South Korea,” said Saman Zia-Zarifi, ICJ Secretary-General.
“The ICJ relies on its global advocates of human rights to advance and defend the rights of others through the culmination of their vast and varied expertise and I am pleased to welcome our newest Commissioners to help in this regard, ” said Zia-Zarifi.
A further nine Commissioners were elected to serve additional terms on the Commission:
Professor Roberto Garreton (Chile), Professor Robert K. Goldman, Hina Jilani (Pakistan), Professor Jose Antonio Martin Pallin (Spain), Justice Sanji Monageng (Botswana), Tamara Morschakova (Russia), Dr Jarna Petman (Finland), Belisario dos Santos Jr (Brazil) and Justice Philippe Texier (France).
Hina jilani (Pakistan) and Belisario dos Santos Jr (Brazil) were both also re-elected to the Exectuive Committee and Professor Marco Sassoli (Italy/Switzerland) and Justice Stefan Trechsel (Switzerland) were re-elected as Alternates to the Executive Committee.
On video: Bob Goldman talks about the ICJ and the Rule of Law
