The ICJ and Cordaid are convening a webinar series to foster dialogue among women human rights defenders and religious and customary justice actors.
This public online event takes place 20 & 21 October 2020 11:00-13:30 (CEST) / 16h00 – 18h30 GMT+7
Women’s empowerment in every aspect of their lives is reliant upon ensuring that systems of law and justice work for women. Over the years, many countries have seen an expansion of women’s legal entitlements and enhancement of their right to access justice; however, in many contexts, there is also a growing trend of invoking religion and custom to violate women’s human rights. It is in these contexts where laws and policies exist that expressly discriminate against women, posing a continuing serious challenge to women’s ability to access justice.
In response, Cordaid and the ICJ will convene a webinar series to foster dialogue among women human rights defenders (WHRDs) and religious and customary justice actors.
The focus of the exchange will be on ensuring the protection of women’s human rights and access to justice in contexts where religious and customary laws are prevalent, within a framework of rule of law and international human rights standards. Diverse WHRDs and religious and customary justice actors from Asia, Africa, and the Middle East and North Africa will come together in two consecutive sessions:
Webinar 1 (Oct 20): Intersections between women’s human rights and custom and religion
Webinar 2 (Oct 21): Best practices, interventions, and obligations under international human rights law to ensure access to justice in cultural and religious contexts
Both sessions will be held on Zoom with simultaneous translation in Bahasa, Dari, English and French.
During the first webinar, the discussion will be focused on responding to the questions below:
How do custom and religion shape the ability of women to access justice?
Do pathways to justice based in custom and religion promote women’s human rights?
Do you perceive a clash between women’s human rights and pathways to justice based on custom and religion? If so, how?
Are there religious and cultural practices, which have an impact of exacerbating inequalities between men and women, and negatively affect women’s ability to defend their human rights?
How have women created space within customary and religious law to advocate for women’s human rights?
During the second webinar, the discussion will be focused on responding to the questions below:
What are the best practices and interventions, which can be adopted by States, international organisations and civil society to support positive impacts of custom and religion on women’s access to justice?
What practical measures can be adopted by States, international organisations and civil society to eliminate practices, which exacerbate women’s inequality and are barriers to pathways to justice?
What are the obligations of these actors when customary and religious law discriminate against women and prevents them from being able to defend their rights?
How have women successfully created space for advocacy within customary and religious contexts?
Documents:
Cordaid Publication: Diverse Pathways to Justice for All: Supporting Everyday Justice Providers to Achieve SDG16.3
ICJ Publication: Indigenous and other Traditional or Customary Justice Systems – Selected International Sources
IDLO report: Navigating Complex Pathways to Justice: Women and Customary and Informal Justice System
ICJ Publication: Access to Justice Challenges Faced by Victims and Survivors of Sexual and Gender-Based violence in Eswatini
Human Rights Council: Report of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of Religion or Belief
Report of the 2017 Geneva Forum on traditional and customary justice systems
Report of the 2018 Geneva Forum on indigenous and other traditional or customary justice systems in Asia
Report of the 2020 Geneva Forum on indigenous and other traditional or customary justice systems in Africa
2019 Report of the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, on indigenous justice
Obstacles to Women’s and Girls’ Access to Justice for Gender-based Violence in Morocco (June 2019), in English and in Arabic
Gender-based Violence in Lebanon: Inadequate Framework, Ineffective Remedies (July 2019), in English and in Arabic
The Tunisian Parliament should amend or reject the revised Draft Organic Law No. 25-2015 on the protection of security forces scheduled for discussion in Parliament today, said the ICJ. The Law if adopted would reinforce impunity for violations committed by security forces and undermine the rule of law and human rights.
The revised Draft Law was approved by the Parliamentary Commission in July 2020, following unsuccessful attempts to adopt it in 2015 and 2017.
Article 7 of the Draft Law provides for the exoneration of security forces from criminal responsibility for using lethal force to repel attacks on a security building, when the force is necessary and proportional to the danger posed to the building. In 2017, the ICJ and other organizations urged Parliament to reject a prior draft which included the same provision.
“More than 10 years after the uprising, Tunisia’s security forces continue to enjoy impunity for decades of serious human rights violations,” said Said Benarbia, the ICJ’s MENA Programme Director.
“The Parliament should adopt all the effective measures at its disposal to end such impunity, not entrench it by allowing the use of lethal force when it’s not strictly necessary to protect lives.”
Article 7 of the Draft Law would preserve the operation of Law No. 69-04, which permits the use of firearms to defend property, “mitigate” a resistance, or stop a vehicle or other form of transport in the context of public meetings, processions, parades, public gatherings, and assemblies. It allows for the use of lethal force to disperse an unlawful gathering where other means of dispersal have failed.
Under international law, including the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force, the intentional use of lethal force must be reasonable, necessary and proportional, and is only permissible if strictly necessary to protect life from an imminent threat to life, not a threat to property.
In the context of non-violent assemblies, the use of force should be avoided and, where unavoidable, restricted to the minimum extent necessary against only those individuals posing an imminent threat of death or serious injury.
The Draft Law appears to preserve an exemption under article 42 of the Criminal Code and Article 46 of Law No. 82-70 on the Statute of Internal Security Forces of 6 August 1982. Article 42 of the Criminal Code provides that a person is not liable for crimes under the Criminal Code, including homicide, if their acts were carried out pursuant to other laws or orders from a competent authority. Article 46 of Law No. 82-70 limits this immunity in relation to orders given to officers of the Internal Security Forces by requiring the orders be given “by their superior in the framework of legality.” Under international law, superior orders cannot serve as a ground of defence to a crime of unlawful killing by a State agent, such as a member of a security force.
“The Tunisian Parliament should reject the Draft Law and conduct a complete review of all laws regulating the conduct of the security forces to ensure they meet standards necessary to protect the population from the excesses demonstrated in the past,” said Kate Vigneswaran, the ICJ’s MENA Programme Senior Legal Adviser.
“Members of the Parliament should send a clear, unequivocal message that the impunity of the security forces can no longer be tolerated.”
Contact:
Said Benarbia, Director, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Kate Vigneswaran, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +31-62-489-4664; e: kate.vigneswaran(a)icj.org
The ICJ today highlighted the need for accountability for crimes under international law in Libya, and concerns for the independence of lawyers in Ukraine, at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The oral statement, delivered in the general debate on technical cooperation and capacity building, read as follows:
“Madame President,
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the oral updates on Ukraine and Libya.
Technical assistance and capacity building objectives in Libya can only be achieved if the protection of human rights, entrenchment of the rule of law and pursuit of accountability are prioritized.
States should support the Fact-Finding Mission by extending its reporting mandate, increasing contributions to the UN budget necessary to establish the Mission’s secretariat, and fully cooperating with it.
States should also support the Berlin Process working groups, ensuring that the political and accountability pillars work in unison and making meaningful commitments to implement their recommendations.
Across all of Ukraine, lawyers continue to be associated with their clients and may face consequences for representing them by private individuals and also through abuse of legal proceedings. High-profile cases bear risks for independent lawyers who choose to diligently represent their clients.
The decline in security of lawyers in and outside of courts, and the problem of threats, harassment, and attacks against lawyers, should be addressed as a matter of priority, including through technical cooperation. Measures should be taken to build the capacity of law enforcement agencies and court security personnel to ensure that lawyers and others involved in court proceedings can work in an atmosphere free from intimidation, harassment, and improper interference.
The ICJ today joined other NGOs in expressing concern that the Human Rights Council is poised to fail to adequately respond to the human rights crisis in the Philippines, and urging stronger action.
The statement, which was delivered by the World Organization against Torture (OMCT) on behalf of the group of NGOs in a general debate on item 10, read as follows:
“On behalf of 15 organisations, including colleagues in the Philippines, we are deeply disappointed that the draft Item 10 resolution on the Philippines fails to reflect the gravity of the situation, including as documented in the OHCHR report.
Colleagues from the Philippines have tirelessly advocated for an international investigation, at great personal risk. The thousands of victims of killings and other violations and their families continue to be deprived of justice.
This is a collective failure by the States at this Council. We are shocked by the lack of support for a more robust response.
We acknowledge the rationale presented for constructive engagement with the Government of the Philippines. However, an approach based purely on technical cooperation and capacity-building has no realistic prospect of meaningful impact with a government that denies the true scale and severity of the human rights violations, has publicly endorsed the policy of killings, avoids independent investigations, and continues to crack down on civil society.
Despite the shortcomings of the resolution, it at least keeps the situation on the agenda for the next two years and allows for robust reporting by the OHCHR on the situation – including the implementation, or lack thereof, of OHCHR report recommendations. The Council must follow developments closely and be ready to launch an independent investigation if the killings and the crackdown on civil society do not immediately end and prosecution of perpetrators is not pursued.
I thank you.”
Alyansa Tigil Mina (ATM)
Amnesty International
Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
CIVICUS
Ecumenical Voice for Human Rights and Peace in the Philippines (EcuVoice)
Franciscans International
Harm Reduction International
Human Rights Watch
iDefend
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
KARAPATAN
Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocate (PAHRA)
Durante décadas, las víctimas de desapariciones forzadas y ejecuciones extrajudiciales en América Latina han demando justicia, verdad y reparación. A pesar de estos esfuerzos, la impunidad en estos delitos es alta. En algunos casos, las víctimas han esperado por más de cuatro décadas para que se haga justicia.
Como parte de su estrategia para promover la rendición de cuentas en casos de graves violaciones a los derechos humanos alrededor del mundo, la CIJ, junto con sus socios, está implementando un proyecto regional para promover justicia en casos de ejecuciones extrajudiciales y desapariciones forzadas en Colombia, Guatemala y Perú.
El proyecto cuenta con el apoyo de la Unión Europea. Uno de los resultados del proyecto ha sido apoyar la elaboración de tres casos emblemáticos por parte de los socios locales de la CIJ.
En Colombia, para ilustrar uno de los patrones de ejecuciones extrajudiciales, la Asociación de Red Defensores y Defensoras de Derechos Humanos (dhColombia) produjo un documento sobre tres casos de ejecuciones extrajudiciales cometidos de 2005 a 2008. El documento Una práctica sistemática ejecuciones extrajudiciales en el eje cafetero (2006-2008) presenta las dificultades que las víctimas y sus abogados han enfrentado para demostrar la responsabilidad de demando en estos casos.
En Perú, el Instituto de Defensa Legal (IDL) documentó la desaparición forzada de estudiantes universitarios y profesores entre 1989 y 1993, en el momento más argüido del conflicto interno peruano. En el documento Los desaparecidos de la Universidad Nacional del Centro IDL describe el difícil camino jurídico que las víctimas han enfrentado, para llevar a la justicia a los agentes del Estado que estarían involucrados en estos crímenes.
En Guatemala, para subrayar la manera en como se cometieron desapariciones forzadas contra las comunidades rurales en el marco del conflicto armado guatemalteco, la Asociación de Familiares de Detenidos-Desaparecidos de Guatemala (Famdegua) escribió acerca de la desaparición de más de 500 personas en la región de las Veparaces. En el informe Las desapariciones forzadas en la región de las Verapaces se presenta la historia de cinco de estos casos.
Estos tres informes contribuyen a comprender la prevalencia de estas violaciones en América Latina y las opciones disponibles para hacer frente a la impunidad.
El 30 de septiembre de 2020, la CIJ organizará un webinar regional para discutir la protección y garantía de los derechos de las víctimas de desapariciones forzadas y ejecuciones extrajudiciales en Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Guatemala y Perú. El webinar será transmitido en vivo en la página de Facebook de la CIJ, a las 14 horas (hora de Guatemala) / 15 horas (hora de Colombia y Perú) / 17 horas (hora de Chile y Argentina).
Contactos:
Kingsley Abbott, Coordinador de la iniciativa global de rendición de cuentas de la CIJ. Correo electrónico: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Carolina Villadiego, Asesora Legal, América Latina y coordinadora regional del proyecto. Correo Electrónico: carolina.villadiego(a)icj.org
🍪 We use cookies on our website to improve your experience. By clicking "Accept all", you consent to the use of all the cookies. If you'd like to control which cookies we use, please visit "Cookie settings". To find out more, read our privacy policy and cookie policy.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
