Mar 12, 2014 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ prepared an oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council in response to a report on armed drones presented to the Council by the UN Special Rapporteur on human rights while countering terrorism, Ben Emmerson, on 11 March 2014.
The ICJ expressed appreciation at the focus of the report on the use of remotely piloted aircraft in counter-terrorism operations, and particularly with the Special Rapporteur’s assessment that the single greatest obstacle to an evaluation of the impact of drone strikes is lack of transparency. Lack of transparency creates an accountability vacuum and prevents effective access to justice.
In addition to sources of a legal obligation of transparency, the ICJ refers to the Tshwane Global Principles on National Security and the Right to Information.
The ICJ stressed that a number of attacks documented in the report occurred outside of the context of any armed conflict, and thus were fully subject to international human rights law with no role for the special and potentially more permissive rules of international human applicable in situations of armed conflict.
The ICJ agreed a number of points raised in the report of the Special Rapporteur were matters of controversy between states, but at the same time recalled that a lack of consensus did not necessarily mean that international law did not already provide definite answers to the issues.
The ICJ further suggested that principles and guidelines on the use of remotely piloted aircraft in counter-terrorism operations should be based on legal analysis, framed from the perspective of ensuring States’ compliance with international law; and justice and redress for victims of human rights violations and/or violations under international humanitarian law.
Due to the very limited time allocated to non-governmental organisations during the Interactive Dialogue on the Report, the ICJ was not able actually to read out its oral statement, but is making it public and has communicated its contents to the Special Rapporteur.
The oral statement can be downloaded in PDF here: ICJ-HRC25-SRCT-OralStatement-Drones.
The Report by the Special Rapporteur is available here.
For further information please contact: Mr Alex Conte (alex.conte(a)icj.org), ICJ International Law and Protection Programmes
Mar 12, 2014 | News
The ICJ condemned the High Court decision sentencing prominent Malaysian lawyer and chairman of the opposition Democratic Action Party Karpal Singh with a criminal sanction. He was found guilty of sedition on 21 February 2014.
The sanction amounts to RM 4,000 fine (approximately US$1,220).
The High Court’s decision was based on a statement made by Karpal Singh at a press conference on 6 February 2009 that Sultan Azlan Shah’s decision to remove the Perak’s state Chief Minister from office in 2009 could be challenged in a court of law.
“The Malaysian government is brazenly utilizing a draconian and outdated sedition law to restrict freedom of expression in the country by lawyers and public figures,” said Emerlynne Gil, ICJ’s International Legal Adviser on Southeast Asia.
The Malaysian government on 21 July 2012 announced that it planned to repeal the colonial-era 1948 Sedition Act, but has been slow to act on its announcement.
“Public discussion, including debates on the interpretation of laws, are an integral part of the nature of the legal process and a crucial step in the strengthening of a country’s democracy and rule of law,” said Gil. “A lawyer’s right to freely and independently engage and express their views on the law fulfills an important aspect of their professional role.”
In June 2010, the High Court initially ruled that the prosecution had failed to prove a prima facie case and acquitted Karpal Singh. The prosecution, however, later appealed, and the Court of Appeal reversed the High Court’s decision and ordered a retrial.
Pursuant to article 48(e) of the Federal Constitution, Karpal Singh now risks losing his Parliamentary seat unless the High Court’s decision is overturned during appeal.
Karpal Singh was the lead counsel for opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim during his Sodomy II appeal from 6 – 7 March 2014, which saw the Court of Appeal overturn his acquittal and sentenced him to five years in prison.
Karpal Singh is expected to appeal both the conviction and the sentence to the Court of Appeal.
Contact:
Emerlynne Gil, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t +66 2 619 8477; email: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
Craig Knowles, ICJ Media Consultant, t +66 81 9077653; email:craig.knowles(a)icj.org
Mar 10, 2014 | Agendas, Events
This side event to the 25th Human Rights Council session will take place on Wednesday, 12 March 2014, 16.00 – 18.00 pm, in Geneva, Palais des Nations, Room XXII.
The members of this panel are in a unique position to highlight on-going challenges to the rule of law in Myanmar and their impact on the enjoyment of human rights.
They will provide personal insight into the important international presence for human rights monitoring, practical challenges facing lawyers concerning the rule of law, and link these issues to sustainable economic development on the ground in Myanmar today.
This panel argues that it is crucial to maintain a robust engagement with the UN human rights mechanisms in order to support and facilitate the reform process in Myanmar and improve the country’s human rights situation.
Speakers:
Tomás Ojea Quintana, UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar
Kyaw Min San, Myanmar lawyer, Pyoe Pin and Justice For All
Daniel Aguirre, International Commission of Jurists, Myanmar
Chair/moderator:
Carlos Lopez, International Commission of Jurists
The presentations by panellists will be followed by an open interaction with the audience. Copies of the recent ICJ report Right to Counsel: The Independence of Lawyers in Myanmar will be available.
Myanmar – HRC25 Side event – March 2014
Mar 8, 2014 | News
The ICJ today condemned as a miscarriage of justice, Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim’s conviction on sodomy charges.
The ICJ said the overturning of his 2012 High Court acquittal — following an appeal by the Malaysian government — by a Court of Appeal panel contravenes international human rights standards and the rule law.
“The ICJ condemns the use of the colonial-era Article 377B of the Malaysian Penal Code, which prohibits consensual same-sex sexual conduct, in conflict with international standards regarding respect for the right to privacy,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
“This article is seldom used in Malaysia, but this is the second time it has been used to convict Anwar, and both times its use seemed clearly motivated to hobble his ability to challenge the government as a politician.”
The sodomy charges against Anwar, which date back to 2008, were dismissed by the High Court on 9 January 2012, but the Court of Appeal today overturned that acquittal and instead sentenced Anwar to five years’ imprisonment. The Court of Appeal ruling took less than two hours.
The ICJ has been observing the proceedings in what has been called Anwar’s ‘Sodomy 2’ trial. ICJ Commissioner Justice Elizabeth Evatt AC, from the Australian High Court and a former member of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, was at the Court of Appeal today on behalf of the ICJ.
“This decision certainly casts doubts on the independence and impartiality of the Malaysian judiciary and tarnishes the reputation of the country’s legal system,” said Zarifi.
The judgement means Anwar will not be able to run for election in a local state seat later this month.
After sentencing, Anwar’s lawyers were successful in arguing for a stay in execution and bail, pending appeal.
CONTACT
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002, e-mail: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Craig Knowles, ICJ Media & Communications, (Bangkok), t:+66 819077653, e-mail: craig.knowles(a)icj.org
Mar 7, 2014 | News
The ICJ expressed concern at the arrest and detention, on 28 February, of lawyer Taisiya Baskayeva, who represents a significant number of victims of human rights violations before the European Court of Human Rights.
Taisiya Baskayeava was arrested on charges of large-scale fraud under article 159.3 of the Russian Criminal Code, based on allegations by investigators that she misappropriated reparations awarded to victims she represented in the case of Salkazanov and others v. Russia before the European Court.
The arrest followed repeated attempts by the investigator to place her in detention in connection with the case.
A previous request to the Court by the investigator for her arrest, on 14 February, had been based partly on the allegation that she was in hiding in the United Arab Emirates and the fact that she had been “put on an international missing list.”
However the Court on that occasion denied the request, saying that it “received no reliable information that Baskayeva T.S. had left the territory of Russia” and that she had sent an urgent telegram from the Moscow region to prove her presence in the territory of Russia.
Taisiya Baskayeva was detained in Moscow region while undergoing a medical check and driven some 1200 km in a car to North Osetia.
At a hearing on 4 March 2014 the Soviet District Court of Vladikavkaz decided to grant the motion to detain the lawyer for two months pending trial. The Court ruled out other less restrictive measures.
The ICJ has received information indicating that the investigation presented no evidence that Taisiya Baskayeva had left Russia, except for an allegation made by the investigator in the motion for her arrest.
The ICJ is unaware of the reasons for declaring the lawyer missing, since her whereabouts were clearly known.
Moreover, the fact that she was detained while undergoing a medical check, of which the investigative authorities were duly informed by the Central City Hospital, contradicts her inclusion on a “international missing list”.
According to the official letter of the Deputy Head Physician at the disposal of the ICJ, the schedule of her visits was also made known to the investigative authorities.
The ICJ is concerned at that the detention may be arbitrary, and may have been ordered for the improper motive of subjecting Taisiya Baskayeva to persecution, harassment or intimidation in regard to her representation of her clients before the European Court of Human Rights.
If so, the Russian Federation would be in breach of obligations in respect of the right to liberty under article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The ICJ recalls that for lawyers to be able to fulfill their role and duties effectively, and independently, the State authorities must ensure that they are able to discharge their functions without any intimidation, harassment or improper interference.
According to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, lawyers must not be threatened with prosecution or any other form of sanctions for any action taken in accordance with professional duties or standards and ethics (Principle 16).
Under these principles when lawyers are threatened as a result of discharging their functions, the state authorities must take adequate steps to protect them (Principle 17).
The ICJ is concerned that the detention may constitute a form of a reprisal for an effective representation of the interests of a significant group of victims before the European Court of Human Rights.
Any such reprisal would be incompatible with Russia’s obligations under article 34 of the European Convention for Human Rights guaranteeing an effective exercise of the right to bring lodge applications claiming violations under the ECHR.
Approximately 200 other cases submitted by Ms. Baskayeva are currently pending before the European Court of Human Rights.
The ICJ will continue to monitor the criminal prosecution of lawyer Taisiya Baskayeva.
Contacts:
Róisin Pillay, Director, Europe Programme, t + 32 273 48 46, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser, Europe Programme, t + 41 22 979 38 32, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
Russia-Concerns over Baskayeva-news-web story-2014-rus (full text in pdf)
