Mar 20, 2019 | News
Today, the ICJ launched a legal aid clinic project in collaboration with Great Zimbabwe University, Herbert Chitepo Law School to help facilitate the establishment of a legal aid clinic at the University’s Mucheke campus.
The clinic is located at the Mucheke Campus of University in a high-density suburb in Masvingo, thereby making the services offered by the legal aid clinic more accessible for persons from disadvantaged or marginalized groups in the community.
The project, supported by the European Union, aims to improve access to justice for communities by offering free legal assistance at the University legal aid clinic, while also providing an opportunity for students to develop critical skills that will enhance their work as legal practitioners. The activity is part of a wider initiative to develop and improve University legal aid clinics in Zimbabwe.
Arnold Tsunga, the ICJ Africa Regional Director, remarked that the launch of the legal aid clinics is a building block towards greater access to justice for the people of Zimbabwe and a positive step towards attainment of SDG 16 which speaks to the importance of peace, justice and strong institutions.
Francisca Midzi, a representative of the European Union delegation to Zimbabwe, stated in her remarks that “as the law students encounter real legal problems faced by the people, [the initiative] will teach them to have a social and professional responsibility to pursue justice in society. Herbert Chitepo Law School is injecting and inculcating a spirit of service in their students and they will carry it wherever they go to practice law and gradually this will transform Zimbabwe’s legal system to be more concerned about a court user who has limited knowledge and means to fully access justice.”
Professor R.J. Zvobgo, the Vice Chancellor of Great Zimbabwe University, commended this milestone achievement and stated that it provides an opportunity for the students to give back to the community by improving the ability of persons from affected groups to access justice.
“The free legal aid assists in eradicating the notion that a university is an ivory tower, divorced from the realities of the community in which it is located,” he said.
Contact:
Brian Penduka, e: brian.penduka(a)icj.org, t: +263772274307
Elizabeth Mangenje, e: elizabeth.mangenje(a)icj.org, t: +263774742420
Mar 19, 2019 | News
The ICJ in partnership with the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) convened a two day training workshop to build the capacity of Chief prosecutors and Senior management to effectively investigate corruption cases.
The training workshop took place at the Wild Geese Lodge, Harare on 18 – 19 March 2019.
The new government under President Mnangagwa, saw a shift in government priorities evidence of this is the launch of the Transitional Stabilisation Programme in October 2018. The Transitional Programme seeks to propel the country towards stabilisation and economic development as well eradicate corruption.
Through this programme, the government has established institutions to deal with corruption, this has seen the establishment of Special Anti-Corruption Courts, which has resulted in an increase in high level arrests on corruption charges. Additionally a new Anti-Corruption Prosecution Unit was established within the Office of the President and Cabinet to improve efficiency in the fight against all forms of graft and to strengthen the effectiveness of national mechanisms for the prevention of corruption.
This anti-corruption training workshop therefore becomes relevant in the government’s fight against corruption. The main objective of the workshop is to enhance the capability of prosecutors to handle corruption cases effectively.
Presentations focused on understanding corrupt practices; defining white collar crime and financial crimes in Zimbabwe; domestic, regional and international framework on corruption; seizure, freezing and confiscation of the proceeds of corruption; and the practical steps to combatting corruption. It is hoped that at the end of the two day meeting, prosecutors will effectively implement legal frameworks and policies in the prosecution of corruption cases.
Prosecutor General Hon K. Hodzi in his opening speech remarked that the NPA is proud of their partnership with the ICJ in their fight against corruption. He was grateful for the continued support from the ICJ. The Prosecutor General noted that corruption is a lived experienced by everyone in this country because it has direct impact on the socio-economic welfare of the people of Zimbabwe. He noted that this was an important workshop which would serve as a toolkit that would help renew the NPA’s approach to in the prosecution of corruption in this country.
The Prosecutor General hoped that the workshop would enable the prosecutors to share knowledge and experience as well meaningful discourse bordering around challenges in the prosecution of corruption cases. This approach would enable the NPA to contribute to effectively eliminating corruption in the improvement of justice in Zimbabwe. He urged prosecutors to show that corruption does not pay and can be defeated.
Present at the training workshop was the Prosecutor General of NPA, senior prosecutors and senior management, representatives from the Judicial Service Commission, Solomon Mhlanga from Office of the President and Cabinet, Mr. Shana from the Judicial College of Zimbabwe, Mr. Zowa from the Law Development Commission representatives from Transparency International Zimbabwe, and representatives from the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe. There were a total of 45 (forty-five) delegates; 29 (twenty-nine) male and 16 (sixteen) female delegates.
Contact:
Brian Penduka, e: brian.penduka(a)icj.org, t: +263772274307
Vimbai Mutandwa, e: vimbai.mutandwa(a)icj.org, t: +263773517733
Mar 19, 2019 | News
Today, the ICJ held a side event titled “Accountability for crimes under international law in Libya: Challenges and Prospects” during the 40th Session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The event was co-hosted by the Permanent Mission of the Kingdom of Netherlands and the Permanent Mission of the Federal Republic of Germany.
A panel of renowned experts discussed a number of issues relating to accountability for crimes under international law in Libya, including shortcomings in Libyan law and practice, political and security challenges impacting prospects for reform, the role of the International Criminal Court, and the consequences for tackling human trafficking and abuse of migrants.
The panel included Monique van Daalen, Ambassador of the Permanent Mission of the Netherlands; Salah el-Marghani, former Justice Minister of Libya; Marwa Mohammed, Lawyers for Justice in Libya; Mark Kersten, Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy, University of Toronto, and Wayamo Foundation; Kate Vigneswaran, Senior Legal Adviser for the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme; and Mary Fitzgerald, Libya researcher and expert.
During the side event, the ICJ presented and distributed a briefing paper highlighting the key issues that hamper accountability for crimes under international law in Libya, including the definition of crimes under domestic law, amnesties and imunities, rights during arrest and detention, and rights at trial.
The paper included detailed recommendations to the Libyan authorities as well as the international community with a view to tackling the main obstacles to the achievement of accountability in Libya.
The briefing paper anticipates the publication of the forthcoming ICJ report on Libya’s criminal justice system.
Download:
Lybia-Accoutability challenges-Advocacy-Analysis brief-2019-ENG (Briefing paper, in PDF)
Libya HRC side event flyer – March 2019 (Event flyer, in PDF)
Mar 12, 2019 | Events, News
The ICJ convened a two-day workshop from 9th to 10th March 2019 in Dhaka, Bangladesh to discuss applicable international legal mechanisms designed to achieve accountability for serious human rights violations in Asia.
Bangladesh-based non-government organizations the Centre for Peace and Justice and Naripokkho co-hosted the event with the ICJ, with a representative of AJAR (Asia Justice and Rights) also joining. Twenty Bangladeshi lawyers, activists and academics attended the event.
Legal advisers from the ICJ provided an overview of the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar (IIMM), currently being established following a UN Human Rights Council resolution in September 2018.
They also discussed the structure and procedures of the International Criminal Court (ICC), whose prosecutors are currently conducting a preliminary examination into the deportation of Rohingyas from Myanmar into Bangladesh. Unlike Myanmar, Bangladesh is a State Party to the Rome Statute of the ICC, and its pre-trial chamber has indicated the Court has jurisdiction over crimes listed in the Rome Stature were one element, or part of a crime, was committed inside the territory of Bangladesh.
AJAR’s co-founder provided an overview of transitional justice processes, drawing upon international and regional experiences of truth-seeking, prosecutions, reparations and reforms to guarantee non-repetition of human rights violations.
Two of the ICJ’s legal advisers also travelled to Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, where they met relevant stakeholders to discuss the situation of Rohingya refugees from Myanmar, and to share information about accountability mechanisms, including about expected timelines, outcomes and limitations.
The activity is part of the ICJ’s global work on promoting accountability and redress for gross human rights violations to facilitate justice and deter repetition.
Contact: Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior Legal Advisor for Global Redress and Accountability e: kingsley.abbott@icj.org
Mar 7, 2019 | Advocacy, News
The ICJ joined a list of 77 civil society organizations to call on relevant authorities in Myanmar to drop spurious charges against journalist Ko Swe Win, to decriminalize defamation, and to release human rights defenders currently imprisoned under repressive criminal defamation laws.
The statement reads:
On the second anniversary of the defamation charges brought upon Ko Swe Win, editor at online newspaper Myanmar Now, we, the undersigned 77 civil society organisations, call on the relevant authorities to drop the case against him. Spurious defamation charges under Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law were filed against him on 7 March 2017 by ultranationalists intent on suppressing free speech. The Government of Myanmar must take concrete steps in parliament to decriminalise defamation, repeal Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law and drop the charges and release all activists and human rights defenders currently in prison and being charged under this repressive legislation.
Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law of 2013 was amended in 2017, but notably, defamation is still criminalised and carries a punishment of up to two years of imprisonment or a fine of up to one million kyat or both. The law is still frequently used to stifle free speech in Myanmar and silence critics. To date, a reported 173 cases have been filed under Article 66(d) since its enactment.
The UN Human Rights Committee has called on all states to decriminalise defamation, indicating that imprisonment for defamation is a penalty that can never be appropriate or compatible with the right to freedom of expression. In addition, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression has stated that defamation should be treated as a matter of civil rather than criminal law, stressing that criminal prosecution for defamation inevitably becomes a mechanism of political censorship, which contradicts freedom of expression and of the press. In the case of Article 66(d), Myanmar law allows for agents of the offended party to file charges for defamation and initiate criminal proceedings on their behalf. In effect, this means that powerful organisations and individuals can operate via proxies to target those that they consider disturbing, a form of judicial harassment with severe implications for the individuals who are accused.
Ko Swe Win was charged with defamation under Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law for sharing a story by Myanmar Now on Facebook. The story quoted a senior monk who said that well-known ultranationalist monk U Wirathu’s actions could be cause for him to be expelled from the monkhood as they violated the tenets of Buddhism. U Wirathu, notorious for using Facebook to agitate against Muslims, had previously expressed support for and thanked U Kyi Lin – the recently convicted gunman who shot and killed prominent lawyer U Ko Ni in January 2017. U Ko Ni was an expert on constitutional law and was working to change the military-drafted 2008 Constitution. The plaintiff, a follower of U Wirathu, brought the charges in March 2017 and the court proceedings started in July 2017.
Since then, Ko Swe Win has had to travel regularly to the courthouse in Mandalay, where the charge was filed, from his home in Yangon and back – a distance of over 1,200 kilometres. The court hearings, now totaling 55, have been ongoing for almost two years, but the court has still only heard the plaintiff’s side, which has consistently been stalling the process. On some occasions, Ko Swe Win has travelled from Yangon only to find that the plaintiff or witnesses have failed to appear in court and that the proceedings have been postponed. The plaintiff himself was arrested in August 2017 and has since been detained, which has caused significant delays to the process.
U Wirathu has been summoned twice but failed to appear. On the first occasion, his lawyer informed the court that U Wirathu could not make the hearing because he was attending a donation ceremony. On the second occasion, U Wirathu’s lawyer requested that the hearing be held at his monastery compound. That request was denied by the township court, but U Wirathu appealed to the higher district court, which also denied the request. While the district court considered the request, no hearings could be held in the township court. Ko Swe Win however, was still required to make an appearance every two weeks before the township court judge just to be informed of the next date he was due to appear in court. This procedure, which required him to travel from Yangon to Mandalay, was typically over in a matter of minutes.
The many irregularities of this case highlight the lack of independence of the Myanmar judiciary. It appears that the authorities are determined to target those that are working to expose troubling truths and terrible crimes, rather than those who commit them. Those responsible for spreading dangerous speech and inciting violence face no consequences, while those who criticise such dangerous actions continue to be prosecuted. In a recent parallel case, also fraught with controversies, two Reuters reporters – Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo – were convicted to seven years in prison for exposing a mass killing of Rohingya men and boys carried out by the Myanmar military in northern Rakhine State.
In Myanmar, high-ranking military commanders, some of whom are accused by UN investigators for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and even genocide, remain at large, while journalists who expose the truth and report on human rights violations in the country are charged under repressive laws. This inverted idea of justice needs to come to an end if Myanmar is to continue its path towards democracy.
As long as Article 66(d) remains, people in Myanmar, especially those who criticise powerful individuals, officials and government policies online, will be at risk of being imprisoned for their peaceful exercise of the right to freedom of expression.
In light of the above, we call on the Government of Myanmar and its relevant authorities to:
- Drop the defamation charges under Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law against Ko Swe Win and other activists and human rights defenders and release those currently imprisoned under this repressive legislation;
- Repeal Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law, or at a very minimum, amend it to ensure that:
- defamation is no longer criminalised by deleting references to “defamation” as well as vague language such as “disturbing”;
- only a government prosecutor can file a criminal complaint under Article 66(d);
- where recognisably criminal acts such as “extortion” and “threats” occur in the law they are clearly and narrowly defined in line with international human rights law, to ensure it is not used to criminalise the peaceful expression of views.
Download
Myanmar-statement on defamation-Advocacy-2019-ENG (full statement in English, PDF)
Myanmar-statement on defamation-Advocacy-2019-BUR (full statement in Burmese, PDF)
