Victims still waiting for justice in Tunisia’s incomplete transition

Victims still waiting for justice in Tunisia’s incomplete transition

As today marks the fifth anniversary of the toppling of Ben Ali’s regime, the ICJ calls on Tunisian authorities to adopt key legal and policy reforms to combat impunity and to deliver justice to victims of past human rights violations.

Under Ben Ali’s regime, thousands of human rights violations, including torture and other ill-treatment, unlawful killings, enforced disappearances, and arbitrary arrests and detentions, were committed by law enforcement and other security officers.

Numerous similar violations were also committed during the December 2010 to January 2011 uprising and some of them continue today.

“The political and institutional reforms introduced in Tunisia over the past 5 years should not be the sole yardstick to measure the success of the transition,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme.

“Victims of human rights violations, in particular under Ben Ali’s rule, and during the uprising still await justice,” he added.

Despite several cases being brought before Tunisian courts, in particular military courts, these proceedings have yet to establish the truth about violations, ensure that all those who are responsible are held to account, and fulfill the rights of victims to effective remedies and reparation.

“Until their rights to effective remedies and reparation are realized, including by holding the perpetrators to account, the transition will remain incomplete,” Benarbia said.

Indeed, despite numerous legal and policy reforms, including the adoption of the “Transitional Justice Law”, and the establishment of the Truth and Dignity Commission (Instance Vérité et Dignité), the ICJ is concerned that justice for victims remains mostly elusive.

Obstacles that impede victims’ access to justice and effective remedies include current weaknesses in the Tunisian criminal procedures, such as the broad discretion of the public prosecutor to dismiss cases without providing specific reasons (and the lack of ability of victims effectively to challenge such decisions), the lack of effective measures for the protection of victims and witness, inadequate laws on the definition of crimes and superior responsibility, and the use of military courts to address human rights violations.

“Key reforms both in law and practice are needed for Tunisia to properly address past abuses in Tunisia, end pervasive impunity and provide victims with justice,” Benarbia said.

Contact:

Theo Boutruche, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, tel: +96 170 888 961, e-mail: theo.boutruche(a)icj.org

Tunisia-Anniversary-News Press Release-2016-ARA (Arabic version, in PDF)

Egypt’s New House of Representatives: reform or annul presidential decrees to conform to international human rights standards

Egypt’s New House of Representatives: reform or annul presidential decrees to conform to international human rights standards

The ICJ today called on Egypt’s newly elected House of Representatives to amend or annul the web of repressive presidential decrees promulgated since the ouster of President Morsi.

“Egypt’s House of Representatives must dismantle the catalogue of repressive presidential decrees that have been used by the authorities to stifle dissent, curtail fundamental rights and freedoms and shield state officials from accountability in cases of human rights violations,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Programme.

Article 156 of the Egyptian Constitution provides that decrees issued by the President while the House of Representatives is not in session must be discussed and approved by the new House of Representatives within 15 days of it convening.

Failure to do so results in the laws being automatically nullified with retroactive effect.

The ICJ and others have detailed how many of these presidential decrees, including the Demonstration Law (No.107 of 2013), the Counter-Terrorism Law (No.94 of 2015), the Terrorist Entity Law (No.8 of 2015), the Law on Military Courts (No.136 of 2014) and laws amending the Criminal Code (No.128 of 2014) and the Prison Law (No.106 of 2015), violate Egypt’s obligations under international law.

Key concerns relate to the right to life, the right to liberty and the right not to be subjected to arbitrary detention, fair trial rights, and the rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly.

These fundamental rights are protected by for instance the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Egypt ratified in 1982 and which today counts 168 states as parties.

Over the last two years, thousands of individuals have been prosecuted and convicted pursuant to such decrees, including the Demonstration Law, through proceedings that fell short of international fair trial standards.

Further, many of these decrees, in particular the Counter-Terrorism Law and the Demonstration Law, institutionalise the immunity of state officials from legal proceedings against any use of force committed in the course of their duties, including the use of lethal force when it is not strictly necessary to protect lives.

The decrees also fail to provide for any reparations mechanism for victims.

“Egypt’s parliament should, as a matter of urgency, ensure that those who have suffered human rights violations on the basis of these laws obtain effective remedy and reparations, remove all obstacles to justice and accountability, and address the impunity of state officials underpinned by these decrees”, Benarbia added.

Contact:

Alice Goodenough, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +44 7815 570 834; e: alice.goodenough(a)icj.org

Nader Diab, Associate Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 229 793 804; e: nader.diab(a)icj.org

Egypt-New House of Representatives-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text in Arabic, PDF)

Morocco: end disciplinary proceedings against judges

Morocco: end disciplinary proceedings against judges

The ICJ today called on the Moroccan authorities to put an immediate end to the disciplinary proceedings initiated against judges Amal Homani and Mohamed Al-Haini.

The two were referred to the High Judicial Council by the Minister of Justice on unfounded allegations of “violating the duty of discretion” and “expressing opinions of a political nature”.

The charges stem from social media comments and media articles written by the judges in which they criticized the government’s Draft Law No. 100.13 on the Conseil Supérieur du Pouvoir Judiciaire and the Draft Law No 106.13 on the Statute for Judges, including provisions that appear designed to maintain executive branch control of the judiciary and the career of judges.

“Instead of subjecting judges who are promoting the rule of law and judicial independence to unjustified and arbitrary disciplinary proceedings, the Moroccan authorities must comply with their obligations under international standards to guarantee, protect and preserve judicial independence,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme.

“The disciplinary proceedings against judges Amal Homani and Mohamed Al-Haini are clearly without foundation and must be immediately and unconditionally terminated,” he added.

International standards are clear: members of the judiciary are, like other citizens, entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly.

The exercise of these basic human rights in a manner that preserves the dignity of their office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary should not constitute a disciplinary offence, the ICJ says.

The social media comments and media articles by judges Amal Homani and Mohamed Al-Haini were clearly within the scope of their rights to freedom of expression, the Geneva-based organization adds.

Under the current legal framework, in particular Law No.1-74-467 of 1974 on the Statute for Judges, the Ministry of Justice has comprehensive and effective control over the entire judiciary, including the High Judicial Council, the career of judges and judicial administration.

Indeed, under the current framework, the Minister of Justice is the Vice-President of the High Judicial Council.

As such the impartiality and fairness of any disciplinary hearings initiated by the Minister of Justice based on statements perceived to criticize the executive branch, must be called into question, the ICJ says.

While provisions of the 2011 Constitution relating to the judiciary constitute an important step towards ending the executive’s control over the judiciary, Moroccan professional associations of judges and civil society organizations have expressed concern that the draft laws perpetuate such control as well as executive interference in judicial matters.

The ICJ has previously called on the Moroccan authorities to revise the two flawed draft laws to ensure their full compliance with international law and standards on judicial independence.

“The Moroccan authorities must end their attacks on judicial independence, including by revising flawed institutional and legal reforms and by ending politicized proceedings against judges,” Benarbia said.

Contact:

Theo Boutruche, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, tel: +961 70 888 961, e-mail: theo.boutruche(a)icj.org

Morocco-Judges Homani-El Haini-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full press release in PDF, Arabic)

United Arab Emirates: lift travel ban on 2015 finalist Ahmed Mansoor, urges Martin Ennals Award Jury

United Arab Emirates: lift travel ban on 2015 finalist Ahmed Mansoor, urges Martin Ennals Award Jury

Ten human rights groups, including the ICJ, represented in the Jury, today called on the United Arab Emirates authorities to lift the travel ban imposed on Ahmed Mansoor, one of the three human rights defenders nominated for the 2015 Award, and to issue him a passport.

Widely respected as one of the few voices within the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to provide a credible independent assessment of human rights developments in the country, Ahmed Mansoor regularly raises concerns regarding arbitrary detention, torture or degrading treatment, and failure to meet international standards of fair trial.

He also draws attention to other human rights abuses, including against migrant workers.

As a result, Ahmed Mansoor has faced repeated intimidation, harassment, and death threats from the UAE authorities or their supporters, including arrest and imprisonment in 2011 following an unfair trial.

He and four other activists who called for democratic rights in the UAE were jailed in 2011 on the charge of “insulting officials”.

Although pardoned and released later that year, Ahmed Mansoor has been banned from travel and had his passport confiscated.

As a result of his courageous work, Ahmed Mansoor was selected as one of the three finalists of the Martin Ennals Award who will be recognized at a ceremony hosted by the city of Geneva on October 6th.

The Award is usually handed out by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

As matters stand, however, Ahmed Mansoor will be prevented from attending the ceremony because the UAE authorities have arbitrarily imposed a travel ban on him and have refused to return his passport.

Both the travel ban and the confiscation of his passport violate Ahmed Mansoor’s right under international human rights law to freedom of movement, as these measures were taken to punish him for his peaceful human rights activism.

The Martin Ennals Award Jury today noted with concern : “Ahmed Mansoor’s absence at the ceremony would mark a very disappointing position for the UAE, which is a country that prides itself as one of the hubs of international business and tourism in the Middle East, as well a safe haven in the region. As a member of the UN Human Rights Council, which is running for a second term, we expect the UAE authorities to honour their obligations to uphold human rights and protect human rights defenders. The UAE government must match its rhetoric on the international stage with meaningful actions at home, starting with immediately lifting the travel ban on Ahmed Mansoor, to returning and renewing his passport, and allowing him to travel to Geneva for the ceremony.”

Ahmed Mansoor is a member of the Advisory Committee of Human Rights Watch’s Middle East and North Africa Division, as well as the Advisory Board of the Gulf Centre for Human Rights.

The following organizations are represented in the Martin Ennals Award Jury: International Commission of Jurists, Amnesty International, FIDH, Human Rights First, HURIDOCS, International Service for Human Rights, EWDE Germany, Front Line Defenders, Human Rights Watch, World Organisation Against Torture.

Contact:

Michael Khambatta, Director, Martin Ennals Foundation, t +41 79 474 8208 ; e: khambatta(a)martinennalsaward.org

UAE-MEA Jury Joint Statement Ahmed Mansoor-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text of press release in ARABIC, pdf)

Translate »