Dec 14, 2018 | News
The Egyptian authorities should immediately and unconditionally release human rights lawyer Mohamed Ramadan and drop the charges against him or otherwise charge him with a recognizable crime consistent with international law, said the ICJ today.
Mohamed Ramadan was arrested, by plainclothes security officers on 10 December 2018, after attending proceedings concerning the renewal of a detention order against one of his clients. The client, Ayman Mahmoud, himself had been evidently detained for political reasons, and charged with joining and promoting an “illegal group” and “spreading false news on Facebook and Twitter to harm State interests.”
Following his arrest, Mohamed Ramadan was detained overnight in the National Security Agency Office. Ramadan’s family and lawyers did not know of his whereabouts until he was brought before the Alexandria Prosecutor on 11 December 2018.
According to information available to the ICJ, the Prosecutor charged Ramadan with joining a terrorist group, promoting its ideology including through social media and possession of publications supporting the group’s purpose (Case No. 16576/2018 Montaza), and ordered that he be detained for 15 days.
The charges appear to be to intended to prevent Ramadan’s exercise of freedom of expression and work as a lawyer. One of the lawyers who attended Ramadan’s interrogation on 11 December 2018 informed the ICJ that Ramadan had been informed by the Prosecutor to stop representing political detainees.
“The Egyptian authorities have engaged in a pattern of arresting, detaining and charging lawyers, human rights defenders and others perceived as opponents on unsubstantiated or illegitimate charges and in violation of their rights, typically under the pretext of fighting its ‘war on terrorism’,” said Saïd Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director. “The authorities should stop using laws that are purportedly designed to counter terrorism to silence persons exercising their human rights and lawyers carrying out their proper professional functions.”
According to lawyers who attended Mohamed Ramadan’s interrogation on 11 December, the Prosecutor alleged Ramadan possessed flyers opposing Egyptian President Sisi and multiple yellow vests. A credible news source reported that, prior to his arrest, Ramadan had posted a photograph on Facebook in which he wore a yellow vest to mock the government’s restriction on the sale of them.
According to media reports, earlier this month Egyptian authorities restricted the sale of yellow vests until the end of January 2019, in fear that opponents might be influenced by the French gilet jaunes protests to hold similar protests during the anniversary of the 2011 uprising against Hosni Mubarak next month.
Mohamed Ramadan is one of a number of lawyers who have been targeted in connection with carrying out their professional functions or for being perceived as opposing the Egyptian authorities.
“Imprisoning human rights lawyers, charging them for posting comments online, and deterring them from defending clients hampers the independent role they should play as a lawyer and as a last line of defence against the authorities’ abuses,” said Said Benarbia. “Egypt must protect these lawyers and safeguard their security, not muzzle their voices through abusive criminal proceedings.”
Background
In April 2017, the Alexandria Criminal Court convicted Ramadan in absentia of inciting terrorism, and sentenced him to ten years’ imprisonment followed by five years’ house arrest and a five year ban on using the internet, for posting comments attributed to him on fake Facebook profiles which were critical of the Egyptian President. His retrial is suspended until the Supreme Constitutional Court decides on the constitutionality of the Counter-Terrorism Law.
Any person arrested has the right to inform, or have the authorities notify, someone that they have been arrested and where they are being held. Detainees must be given access to a lawyer, a doctor and their family, from the time they are taken into custody, including police custody.” Restrictions on communicating with a laywer during detention also undermines the rights to liberty and to a fair trial, including under articles 9 and 14 of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Egypt is a party.
Articles 19, 22 and 25 of the ICCPR protect the rights to freedom of expression, to freedom of association and to participate in public affairs. The United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders commits States to generally protecting such rights exercised by HRDs and requires states to protect HRDs from violence, threats, retaliation, de facto or de jure adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action for the lawful exercise of such rights.
Paragraphs 16 and 18 of the UN Basic Principles on the role of Lawyers require states to ensure lawyers are able to perform of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference, are not prosecuted or threatened with prosecution for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics, and can exercise freedom of expression.
The ICJ has previously expressed concern over the arbitrary arrests and enforced disappearance of human rights defenders, lawyers, and political activists and persons otherwise providing support to political detainees.
In June 2018, the ICJ also expressed its concerns about Egypt’s repeated renewals of the State of Emergency since April 2017, and the use of the state of emergency to suppress the activities of and persecute students, human rights defenders, political activists, union members and those suspected of opposing the government.
Egypt-MohRamadan-News-web stories-2018-ARA (full story in Arabic, PDF)
Jul 24, 2018 | Advocacy, Analysis briefs, News
In a briefing paper published today, the ICJ called on the parties to the conflict in Yemen to take immediate and effective measures to ensure the protection of the civilian population, including against human rights abuses and international humanitarian law violations.
Serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in Yemen include direct and indiscriminate attacks against civilians and the impediment of access to humanitarian relief of the civilian population.
Gross human rights violations and abuses include widespread instances of arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and ill-treatment, and enforced disappearances.
The ICJ has called for persons responsible for such violations to be held to account.
“All parties to the conflict in Yemen have acted in blatant disregard of the most basic rules of international humanitarian law and human rights law,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
“The top priority is to end these violations and in particular to protect the civilian population,” he added.
In its briefing paper, the ICJ analyses international law violations committed in the conduct of hostilities and against persons deprived of their liberty.
The Saudi Arabia-led coalition and the Houthis are allegedly responsible for direct, indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks against civilians and civilian objects, including local markets, food storage sites, water installations and medical facilities.
The United Arab Emirates, the internationally recognized government of Yemen and the Houthis have allegedly engaged in arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and ill-treatment, and enforced disappearances.
The ICJ briefing paper also examines the potential legal implications of the blockade imposed by the Saudi Arabia-led coalition on Yemen and the sieges laid by the Houthis against several towns and localities, which impede the civilian population to access humanitarian relief.
The ICJ briefing paper further assesses the potential responsibility of third States for transferring arms to the parties to the conflict.
Under numerous instruments, including the Arms Trade Treaty, States are prohibited from selling arms to the parties to an armed conflict whenever a risk exists that the end-user could commit international law violations.
Arms transfers may even engage the exporting States’ international responsibility for aiding or assisting in the commission of such violations.
“Victims must have access to effective legal remedies and be provided with adequate reparation,” Benarbia said.
“The international community must state loud and clear that impunity is not an option. The Security Council should refer the situation in Yemen to the International Criminal Court and third States should consider, where feasible, the exercise of universal jurisdiction to prosecute relevant crimes under international law,” he added.
Contact
Vito Todeschini, Associate Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +216-71-962-287; e: vito.todeschini(a)icj.org
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Yemen-War briefing-News-web story-2018-ENG (full story with background information, English, PDF)
Yemen-War impact on populations-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2018-ENG (Analysis Brief in English, PDF)
Yemen-War briefing-News-web story-2018-ARA (full story with background information, Arabic, PDF)
Yemen-War impact on populations-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2018-ARA (Analysis Brief in Arabic, PDF)
Jun 18, 2018 | Events, News
This side event at the Human Rights Council takes place on Wednesday, 20 June, 16:00-17:00, room XXIII of the Palais des Nations. It is organized by the ICJ.
Speakers:
May 25, 2018 | News
The ICJ today called on the Tunisian Parliament to reverse its decision of 26 March 2018 and allow the Truth and Dignity Commission (IVD) to carry out its mandate for at least another year.
The IVD should be in the position to finalize its investigations of past serious human rights violations in the country and, when appropriate, refer cases to the Specialized Criminal Chambers (SCC), the ICJ added.
Since its decision, the Parliament has not considered or adopted any measures to address the legal and practical consequences, including how incomplete investigations by the IVD will be handled, how other investigations will be transferred to the SCC and by whom, how evidence will be preserved and protected, how the documents and the material gathered by the IVD will properly be archived, and what would happen if the IVD were unable to complete the drafting of the final report.
The initial four-year term of the IVD ends on 31 May 2018.
“It’s absolutely irresponsible for the Tunisian Parliament to thwart the whole transitional justice process and curtail the work of the IVD without providing any path forward,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
“As one of the three branches of government, the Parliament must abide by Tunisia’s obligations under international law to establish the truth about past human rights violations, bring the perpetrators to account, and provide victims with effective remedies and reparation,” he added.
The March decision runs counter to all these obligations.
It denies the rights of victims, and broader society, to know the truth, including about the circumstances and reasons that led to decades of serious human rights violations in the country.
The IVD has not been able to finalize its investigations or produce its final report.
It also shields those responsible from criminal accountability. Only eight cases have so far been referred by the IVD to the SCC.
The fate of cases that have been investigated but are not referred before 31 May 2018 remains unclear. The IVD reportedly received some 62’712 complaints.
“The Parliament is abdicating its responsibility to respect and protect victims’ rights,” Benarbia said.
“Instead of playing cynical political games that can only foster impunity, the Parliament should reverse its decision and remove all the obstacles that might impede the IVD’s work in ensuring accountability for past abuses, ” he added.
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41798783546, e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Background
Under the 2013 law on transitional justice, the IVD initially had a four-year term, with the possibility of renewal for a single additional year, on the basis of a reasoned decision by the IVD.
The 2013 law provided that the IVD’s decision on renewal should be submitted to the Parliament.
The law is however silent as to whether the submission of the IVD decision was simply a matter of notification, or required approval of Parliament to be effective.
In any event, 68 members of the Parliament voted on 26 March against extending the term of the IVD for another year.
Under its bylaws, for decisions of Parliament to be valid they must be adopted by at least 72 of its members.
The apparent lack of quorum for the Parliament’s 26 March decision has only introduced more uncertainty and confusion, further complicating the position for the IVD and others, including most notably the victims themselves.
On 24 May 2018, the IVD and the Minister in charge of relations with constitutional bodies, civil society and human rights issued a joint statement reiterating Tunisia’s commitments to the transitional justice process as provided by the Constitution.
In the statement, the IVD was requested to transfer all cases concerning serious human rights violations to the SCC, to establish criteria on the basis of which reparation for victims will be provided, to establish compensation criteria for the Victims Fund, and to send the final report to the President of the Republic, the President of the Parliament and the President of the Government.
Tunisia-IVD Parliament-News-2018-ARA (full story in Arabic, PDF)
Apr 25, 2018 | News
The ICJ today called on the Egyptian authorities to quash the conviction of, and immediately release Hisham Geneina, a former judge and former head of the Central Auditing Authority in Egypt.
A Cairo military court convicted Geneina on Tuesday 24 April and sentenced him to five years in prison for “publishing false information harmful to the national security.”
The charges were related to a media interview in which Geneina criticized the interference of the Egyptian authorities in the election process and referred to the existence of documents that incriminate political and military leaders since 2011, including in cases of human rights violations.
The first hearing of the military trial took place on 18 April.
At the defense request, it was adjourned to 20 April so that the lawyers can have access the case file. The judgement was issued 4 days later.
“Genina’s detention, prosecution and conviction solely for peacefully and legitimately exercising his right to the freedom of expression is a testament to the length to which Egypt’s military and government would go to silence critical voices,” said Saïd Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
“After a grossly unfair trial before a military court that he should never have been prosecuted before in the first place, Egyptian authorities must stop the charade and immediately and unconditionally release Hisham Geneina,” he added.
Egypt – Geneina – News – Webstory – 2018 – ARA (Arabic translation in PDF)
Background
Hesham Genena was arrested on 13 February following a media interview in which he claimed, among other things, that the former Chief-of-staff Sami Annan was in possession of documents incriminating the country’s political and military leadership.
One day before his arrest, the military spokesperson said that Genena’s statement casts doubts on the State and its institutions in the time where the armed forces are combating terrorism in Sinai.
He added that the armed forces will use their rights as provided for in the Constitution and the law to protect national security, and that they will refer the matter to the relevant authorities to take legal action.
According to information provided by his lawyer, Geneina is currently in solitary confinement in the Cairo Appeal Prison and his health condition is deteriorating due to injuries related to a physical attack against him on 27 January, for which he needs surgical intervention.
