Sep 1, 2020 | News
The ICJ today expressed its concern regarding the 31 August 2020 and 14 August 2020 decisions of the Indian Supreme Court to convict prominent human rights lawyer Prashant Bhushan for criminal contempt of court, on the basis of two twitter posts in which the lawyer criticized the performance of the Indian judiciary.
While the Court only imposed a symbolic fine of one rupee, rather than imprisonment, the ICJ considers that the conviction appears to be inconsistent with international standards on freedom of expression and the role of lawyers.
The ICJ stressed that the ruling risks having a chilling effect on the exercise of protected freedom of expression in India and urged a review of the laws and standards on criminal contempt as applied by the Indian courts.
The two tweets published by Prashant Bhushan referred to the Chief Justice of India riding an expensive motorbike belonging to a BJP leader “when he keeps the SC in Lockdown mode denying citizens their fundamental right to access justice” and asserted that the Supreme Court and the last four Chief Justices of India had contributed to how, in his view, “democracy has been destroyed in India even without a formal Emergency”
The Court in its 31 August judgment held that the tweets were a serious attempt to “denigrate the reputation of the institution of administration of justice” which, it said, is “capable of shaking the very edifice of the judicial administration and also shaking the faith of common man in the administration of justice.”
The Court considered that its ruling was consistent with freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 of the Indian Constitution, saying that it will have to balance its exercise of power to punish for contempt for itself (Article 129) with freedom of speech and expression.
The ICJ is concerned, however, that the conviction appears inconsistent with international law on freedom of expression as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 19, ICCPR) to which India is a party.
While some restrictions of freedom of expression are permitted by international standards, a particularly wide scope must be preserved for debate and discussion about such matters as the role of the judiciary, access to justice, and democracy, by members of the public, including through public commentary on the courts.
Any restrictions must be strictly necessary and proportionate to meet a legitimate purpose, such as protecting public order or the rights and reputations of others.
“There is a general concern that the protection of freedom of expression is rapidly eroding in India,” said Ian Seiderman, ICJ Legal and Policy Director.
“We have seen this recently around the COVID 19 crisis in relation to the imprisonment of human rights defenders, on draconian charges of sedition, rioting and unlawful assembly for protesting against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act.”
“While the Indian Supreme Court has over the years generally been an institution that has served to advance human rights in India and globally, we fear it now may be perceived as silencing criticism and freedom of expression by invoking outdated criminal contempt laws,” Seiderman added.
The ICJ joins the 1800 Indian lawyers in calling for the Supreme Court “to review the standards of criminal contempt”, emphasizing that the law is overbroad and should be aligned with international law and standards on the limited scope for restrictions on freedom of expression and criminal contempt.
“Prashant Bhushan is a lawyer and lawyers being part of the legal system have a ring-side view and understanding of the state of the court. Convicting a leading lawyer for contempt for expressing his views in this manner may have a chilling effect on lawyers, in particular considering his involvement in many public interest litigation cases,” said Mandira Sharma, ICJ South Asia Senior Legal Adviser.
Contact
Ian Seiderman – ICJ Legal and Policy Director; e: ian.seiderman(a)icj.org , t: +41 22 979 38 00
Matt Pollard – ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, Director, ICJ Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers; e: matt.pollard(a)icj.org, t: +41 79 246 54 75
Download
India-Criminal-Contempt-of-Court-Press-Release-2020-ENG (PDF, with additional background information)
Aug 30, 2020 | News, Publications, Reports, Thematic reports
The ICJ marked the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances today by releasing a baseline study (in Spanish) which identifies key obstacles to accountability for serious human right violations in Colombia.
“The report finds that although Colombia has a comprehensive legal framework aimed at providing accountability for serious human rights violations, victims still face many challenges in obtaining access to justice,” said Kingsley Abbott, Coordinator of the ICJ’s Global Accountability Initiative.
“A robust domestic legal framework is important, but without effective Government implementation at every level full accountability for these violations will remain out of reach,” added Abbott.
Among other challenges, some victims still encounter difficulties in participating in criminal proceedings or obtaining information about investigations and prosecutions of those alleged to be responsible for violations.
The study recommends steps Colombia should take to improve the implementation of the domestic legal framework, including:
- raising the awareness of civil servants, including judicial employees, of victims’ rights and the appropriate legal mechanisms employed to search for “disappeared” persons;
- improving coordination between the State’s institutions, including the Search Unit for Persons Presumed Disappeared in the context and by Reason of the Armed conflict, the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, and the Office of the Attorney General; and
- ensuring that the investigation and prosecution of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings take place within the civilian rather than the military justice system.
The study also stresses the importance of Colombia recognizing the competence of the UN Committee on Enforced Disappearances (CED) to receive and consider individual communications. Considering the high levels of impunity, the recognition has been requested by Colombian civil society organizations and victims to improve the protection and guarantee of rights of victims of enforced disappearances.
The baseline study has been produced as part of the ICJ’s regional project addressing justice for extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Colombia, Guatemala and Peru, sponsored by the European Union.
The baseline study is available in Spanish.
Background
The ICJ has long been monitoring laws, policies and practices concerning the investigation and prosecution of serious human rights violations and abuses in Colombia, including enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings, as part of its efforts to promote accountability, justice and the rule of law around the world.
Enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings are among the most prevalent human rights violations committed in Colombia, particularly in the context of the ongoing internal armed conflict. In Latin America, Colombia has one of the highest figures of people who have been subject to enforced disappearance or unlawfully killed.
The project is implemented under the ICJ’s Global Accountability Initiative which has also produced baseline studies for Eswatini, Nepal, Myanmar, Venezuela, Cambodia, Tajikistan and Tunisia.
Contacts
Kingsley Abbott, Coordinator of the Global Accountability Initiative, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Carolina Villadiego, Legal and Policy Adviser, Latin America, and Regional Coordinator of the Project, e: carolina.villadiego(a)icj.org
Rocío Quintero M, Legal Adviser, Latin America, e: rocio.quintero(a)icj.org
Download
Colombia-GRA-Baseline-Study-Publications-Reports-Thematic-reports-2020-SPA (full report, in Spanish, PDF)
Aug 30, 2020 | Advocacy, News
While commemorating the International Day of the Disappeared 2020, the ICJ and 47 other national and international organizations and groups of victims, in Nepal, call on the responsible authorities to undertake immediate steps towards reinvigoration of the transitional justice (TJ) process, adopting a transparent and consultative process.
On this occasion, the victims’ groups and human rights organizations in Nepal commend the patience and resilience shown by the family members of those subjected to enforced disappearance during the 10-year-long internal armed conflict from 1996-2006. They have worked tirelessly advanced the TJ process (Truth, Justice, Reparation and Institutional Reform) in Nepal for more than a decade through their peaceful struggle, despite many difficult hurdles.
In 2015 the Supreme Court found several sections of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) Act, including the one empowering the commissions to offer amnesty and facilitate mediation/reconciliation between victims and perpetrators, including those involved in gross human rights violations, to be unconstitutional and non compliant with Nepal’s international obligations. More recently, on 26 April 2020 the Court rejected the petitions of the Government to review and revise the 2015 decision.
To date, the Government has not initiated any effort to amend the law as per these decisions. Rather, it has been misusing these Commissions in a manner that has prevented victims from accessing remedies through the regular criminal justice system and has made no efforts to strengthen these Commissions to delivery their mandates effectively. Two years back, Nepal recognized enforced disappearance as a distinct crime for the first time when enacting a new Penal Code. While this step is commendable, these legal provisions have not ensured justice for victims, the police typically refuse to investigate cases from the conflict period,arguing that they come under the jurisdiction of the TJ mechanisms.
Despite civil society’s repeated calls to appoint the Commissioners after amending the TRC Act following wider consultations with victims and civil society, the Government recently appointed Commissioners under the same Act that the SC had deemed flawed five years ago. Moreover, the Government has not addressed the repeated calls and concerns regarding the political interference and lack of transparency in the appointment of the Commissioners and the overall TJ process.
Human rights organizations and many victims groups have lost confidence in and stopped supporting to these Commissions.
The undersigned organizations call upon the Government of Nepal:
- To ensure the Commissions provide for, rather than delay and deny, truth and justice to
victims;
- Start fresh consultations to amend its law in compliance international human rights law
and Supreme Court directives, including by removing of amnesty for the perpetrators
provisions;
- Appoint a new set of commissioners under the revised Act that respects victims basic right
to truth and justice;
- Immediately ensure the social, cultural, economic, psychological and legal support
suffered by the victims and families of enforced disappearance as part of victims’ rights
to reparation;
- Revise the Penal Code to bring it in line with international standards. As a minimum, this
should include:
- amending the definition of enforced disappearances to bring it in line with Nepal’s international obligations and the Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance
- revising the penalty for enforced disappearance in the Penal Code to make it proportionate to the gravity of the crime
- removal of the statute of limitations for enforced disappearance cases
- Ratify International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances Punishment.
Download
Full joint-statement with detailed information in English and Nepali. (PDF)
Contact
Ian Seiderman: ICJ Legal and Policy Director, e: ian.seiderman(a)icj.org
Mandira Sharma: ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, e: mandira.sharma(a)icj.org
Aug 28, 2020 | Agendas, Events
Today, the ICJ and LPRC began a series of online seminars on international human rights mechanisms for the protection of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers for 44 Kazakh defense lawyers and human rights defenders of NGOs.
The seminars took plance via online communication on 28 and 29 of August and 12 of September. The event was of particular importance given the impact of COVID-19 on migration processes in Kazakhstan and Central Asia region.
The seminar lectures were delivered by prominent international experts in the field of migration from the International Commission of Jurists, representatives of the UNHCR Complaints Division, the European Council for Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and the Greek National Human Rights Commission.
The participants discussed international principles and fundamental documents on expulsion, detention and protection, briefly overviewed the economic, social and cultural rights of migrants, and considered the hierarchy of legal acts in Kazakhstan, the relationship between international law and national legislation. The training program consisted of theoretical and practical components to strengthen the gained knowledge and develop practical skills for the protection of migrants at the international level. A training module was prepared for the participants with an overview of access to international human rights mechanisms.
This seminar complements previously conducted trainings for 105 defense lawyers and human rights defenders of non-profit organizations on strategic judicial protection of migrants and ensuring the exchange of best practices and strategies between Kazakhstani and European lawyers.
The seminar was organized by the Legal Policy Research Center (LPRC) in cooperation with the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the International Commission of Jurists – European Institutions (ICJ-EI), with financial support from the European Union under the project “Strengthening Legal Protection of Migrants’ Rights in Kazakhstan”. The project aims to improve the access of migrants to national and international instruments for the protection of human rights in Kazakhstan, as well as to stimulate professional training and cooperation between specialized lawyers from Kazakhstan and their European counterparts.
Aug 27, 2020 | Advocacy, News
The ICJ, in collaboration with the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC), convened a virtual Asset Recovery Training Workshop from 18-26 August. The training was part of the ICJ efforts to advance the rule of law in Zimbabwe.
The training was held with investigators from ZACC. It was led by Dr Prosper Maguchu, a legal expert on human rights and financial crimes.
The objective of the training was to enhance the capacity of ZACC investigators to conduct financial investigations and apply asset tracing techniques in relation to corruption and money laundering cases.
Over the past 50 years, it is estimated that Africa has lost in excess of one trillion US dollars in illicit financial flows (IFFs) with claims that this is roughly equivalent to all of the official development assistance received by the continent during the same timeframe.
Zimbabwe is not immune to this challenge of IFFs.
ZACC chairperson Justice Loice Matanda-Moyo remarked that financial crimes and illicit financial flows had become a serious threat the Zimbabwe economy and beyond our borders. She pointed to the prevalence of tax evasion, smuggling, corruption, fraud, drug trafficking and money laundering and noted that ill-gotten proceeds involving money were moving across borders. In such instances it is a daunting task for investigators and asset recovery officers to follow the money trails and recover proceeds of crime. She noted that the virtual asset recovery workshop was an opportune moment time to enhance the capacity of investigators and asset recovery officers.
“This training was very timely and critical. It enhanced the capacity of ZACC in its pursuit to recover assets accumulated though corruption. The investigators were equipped with the requisite skills and techniques involved in asset recovery that include collecting evidence, issuing restraint and freezing orders and making mutual legal assistance requests. Recovering stolen assets is an important process in the fight against corruption as it deters corruption by turning it into a high-risk, low-reward activity. Additionally, asset recovery is a means to obtain resources for the development of the country, which resources can also be channelled towards strengthening the fight against corruption in Zimbabwe, thus contributing to the greater respect for the rule of law,” said ICJ Senior Legal Adviser Blessing Gorejena.
The training workshop provided a comprehensive overview on what asset recovery means, exploring approaches and tools in asset recovery and enhance the technical capacity of the investigators to trace, seize and confiscate and repatriate illicitly acquired assets.
Participants in this workshop included 18 investigative officers and two Commissioners. Overall there were 11 female and 9 male participants in attendance.
This workshop was supported by the European Union Delegation in Zimbabwe.
Contact:
Shaazia Ebrahim (ICJ media officer), c: +277 167 067 19 e: shaazia.ebrahim(a)icj.org
Vimbai Mutandwa (ICJ legal advisor), c: +263 77 351 7733 e: vimbai.mutandwa(a)icj.org
