Dec 17, 2016 | News
The ICJ jointly convened a two-and-a-half day training workshop with the Raoul Wallenberg Institute.
The meeting congregated lecturers from the four law schools from around the country to look into options for the development of clinical legal education programmes.
One of the objectives of the meeting was to acquaint and equip law schools with the various models and approaches to clinical legal education.
To that end the workshop covered issues including: an overview of clinical legal education programmes and models for law clinics; developing clinical legal education curricula; clinical/interactive teaching methods; and practical placement of students with local, regional and international organizations.
This initiative was a first step in a Clinical Legal Education Programme which is a response by the ICJ to concerns from judicial officers on the quality of legal graduates.
The clinical legal education programme is part of a broader ICJ intervention, which is looking to better equip and motivate lawyers to effectively contribute to the maintenance of the rule of law and preservation of human rights.
The process was jointly facilitated by Professor David Mcquoid-Mason (President, Commonwealth Legal Education Association) and Alex Conte of the ICJ and the University of Sussex.
The 17 participant academics (ten males and seven females) who attended the meeting where drawn from the four law schools in Zimbabwe: the Faculty of Law from the University of Zimbabwe; the Herbert Chitepo Law School at the Great Zimbabwe University; the Zimbabwe Ezekiel Guti University; and the Midlands State University.
Additional participants where drawn from the Institute for Peace, Leadership and Governance, at Africa University.
The workshop was held with the support of the European Union Delegation to Zimbabwe (EU).
Dec 15, 2016 | News
The Pakistani Government must not extend legal provisions that empower military courts to try civilians for terrorism-related offences, the ICJ said today.
The 21st Amendment and corresponding amendments to the Army Act, 1952, are scheduled to lapse on 6 January 2017, when their respective two-year sunset clauses expire.
“These military trials of civilians has been a disaster for human rights in Pakistan,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia Director.
“The conduct of these tribunals over the last two years has demonstrated that military trials are secret, opaque, violate even basic fair trials rights —and don’t do anything to protect people from acts of terrorism,” he added.
In a question-and-answer briefing paper released today, the ICJ provides answers to key questions regarding the conduct of military courts and the issues that have arisen in their operation.
The military has acknowledged the convictions of at least 144 people by military courts for their “involvement” in terrorism-related offences, 140 of whom have been sentenced to death.
Twelve out of the 140 people sentenced to death by military courts have been hanged.
The military has announced that least four people have been given life imprisonment sentences, but the actual number could be much higher.
Some 135 out of 144 people (94 per cent) convicted by military courts had allegedly “confessed” to the charges, raising serious questions about the possibility of torture or other coercive measures being used to secure these convictions.
The ICJ has documented how proceedings before Pakistani military courts fall short of national and international standards requiring fair trials before independent and impartial courts:
- Judges are part of the executive branch of the State and continue to be subjected to military command;
- The right to appeal to civilian courts is not available;
- The right to a public hearing is not guaranteed;
- A duly reasoned, written judgment, including the essential findings, evidence and legal reasoning, is denied;
- The procedures of military courts, the selection of cases to be referred to them, the location and timing of trial, and details about the alleged offences are kept secret; and
- The death penalty is implemented after unfair trials.
In addition to these concerns, the ICJ has also received reports that suspects tried by military courts have been subjected to torture and ill-treatment in detention and their family members have been harassed and intimidated by military authorities.
Allegations of torture and ill-treatment are not effectively investigated and information alleged to have been obtained by means of torture or other ill-treatment is not excluded as evidence in trial, the ICJ says.
In at least two cases, the petitioners have also alleged that the convicts were children under the age of 18 at the time they were arrested by law enforcement agencies.
Military courts were empowered to try civilians pursuant to the National Action Plan against terrorism, in contravention of international standards.
The National Action Plan envisioned military courts to be a short-term “solution” to try “terrorists”, to be operational only for a two-year period during which the Government would bring about necessary “reforms in criminal courts system to strengthen the anti-terrorism institutions”.
With less than one month left before military courts cease to be in effect, there is little sign of the promised reforms to strengthen the ordinary criminal justice system to effectively handle terrorism-related cases, the ICJ adds.
“Pakistan has not used the period of using military courts to reform and strengthen the criminal justice system,” said Zarifi.
“On the contrary, military courts have only further undermined the legitimacy of the ordinary courts and weakened the rule of law in Pakistan.”
The ICJ urges the Pakistan Government to not extend the 21st Amendment and ensure that all counter-terrorism laws and procedures are in accordance with Pakistan’s human rights obligations.
Contact
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Pakistan (Lahore), t: +923214968434; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org
pakistan-military-courts-qa-advocacy-2016-eng (full Q& A on Military Courts, in PDF)
pakistan-list-of-convicted-advocacy-2016-eng (full list of convicted people, in PDF)
Dec 15, 2016 | Advocacy
On the fourth anniversary of the enforced disappearance of prominent Lao civil society leader Sombath Somphone, the ICJ and other organizations condemn the government’s ongoing failure to conduct an effective investigation with a view to determining his fate.
The full statement can be downloaded here:
Laos-sombath4years-advocacy-2016-eng (in PDF)
Dec 15, 2016 | News
The ICJ and the Judicial College of Zimbabwe (JCZ) have assisted senior prosecutors in their role in strengthening the rule of law and protection of human rights in the country.
The Zimbabwe National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) held a pilot training of trainers for senior prosecutors on fair trial standards and human rights from 15-16 December 2016.
The NPA received substantive legal and technical support for this training from the Judicial College of Zimbabwe (JCZ) and the ICJ.
In consultation with the ICJ, the JCZ designed the training curriculum.
The JCZ has a statutory mandate to provide continuous professional development to various justice sector actors including the prosecution.
The content of the curriculum includes prosecutorial conduct in upholding the rule of law, constitutional and legislative protection of the rights of accused persons, general powers of the prosecutor general and his/her nominees, and the relationship with the other justice actors, such as the police.
In addition, the training focused on aspects relating to warrants for further detention, bail, right to remain silent, admissibility of statements obtained through illegal or abusive means, discharge at close of state case, sentencing and the prosecutors code of ethics.
The framing of the various topics is informed by universal, regional and domestic law and standards on the role, duties and mandate of the NPA, and individual prosecutors.
Fifty (50) senior prosecutors from different provinces and districts were selected to attend this inaugural intensive human rights training, facilitated by Mr. Shana, the JCZ principal, and Mr. Andrew Chigovera, former Attorney-General, former Commissioner, African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights.
Contact
Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Regional Director for Africa, t: +27 73 131 8411, e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org
Dec 14, 2016 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today joined other NGOs in calling on the UN Human Rights Council to take bold and decisive action to address the grave situation in South Sudan.
The statement, made during a Special Session of the Human Rights Council, convened on an urgent basis to discuss the situation in South Sudan, underscores the negative consequences of continuing impunity and lack of accountability, and calls among other things for the Human Rights Council resolution to be adopted that would:
· Support a strengthened mandate and capacity of the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan to investigate serious violations of human rights and humanitarian law and identify alleged perpetrators, with a special focus on sexual and gender based crimes.
· Request that the report of the UN Commission is transmitted to the UN Security Council for consideration and further action.
· Urge that all states encourage further concrete action to prevent a further escalation of violence and conflict, and to deter and address these on-going violations of international human rights and humanitarian law at the UN Security Council, including sanctions and the imposition of a comprehensive arms embargo.
· Urge the African Union to take immediate steps to establish the hybrid court for South Sudan provided for in the 2015 peace agreement.
The Human Rights Council ultimately adopted, without a vote (i.e. by consensus), a resolution that includes many of these elements (final text not yet available).
The full statement can be downloaded in PDF format here: un-jointstatementsouthsudan-advocacy-2016
It was delivered by Human Rights Watch on behalf of:
- Amnesty International
- Association for Human Rights in Ethiopia
- Defend Defenders
- Human Rights Watch
- Humanity United
- International Commission of Jurists
- International Refugee Rights Initiative
- International Service for Human Rights
- National Coalition of Human Rights Defenders Uganda
- Pan-African Human Rights Defenders Network
- South Sudan Human Rights Defenders Network
