Jul 30, 2018 | News
On 25 July 2018, the ICJ facilitated an integrated meeting of governmental stakeholders in the justice chain involved in different aspects of combatting sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) in the Kingdom of Eswatini (Swaziland), the first meeting of its kind.
The meeting was convened by ICJ Commissioner and Principal Judge of the High Court of Eswatini, Justice Q. M. Mabuza. It followed a meeting held in February 2018 on combating SGBV in Eswatini and an ICJ report on key challenges to achieving justice for gross human rights violations in Eswatini, the latter of which recommended that justice sector stakeholders involved in the investigation, prosecution and sanctioning of, and provision of redress to victims for, acts of SGBV should convene six-monthly meetings so as to develop a common and integrated approach to the effective combating of SGBV.
The integrated meeting involved senior officials from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the Office of the Attorney General, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the police, correctional services, and the judiciary.
The meeting discussed the fight against SGBV in the context of the Guidelines on Combating Sexual Violence and its Consequences in Africa, and other international standards. It considered the national legal and policy framework on SGBV; practices and challenges in the investigation and prosecution of SGBV; the sanctioning of SGBV offences; and the rehabilitation of sexual and domestic violence offenders by correctional services. Perspectives of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the police and the judiciary were emphasized during discussions.
Stakeholders discussed issues with a view to identifying gaps and challenges in national law, policy and practice when measured against regional and global standards and best practices, as well as with a view to considering potential solutions to those gaps and challenges. The meeting agreed on next steps, including on concrete action that aligns with and/or augments the National Strategy to End Violence. Stakeholders agreed that they should all be involved in the early stages of cases involving SGBV.
Stakeholders also agreed that the recently enacted Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Act will only be effectively implemented if justice sector stakeholders are well coordinated. Stakeholders agreed that integrated meetings should be held regularly, at intervals of no less than six months including, if possible, before the end of 2018.
Jul 27, 2018 | News
On 25 July, the ICJ visited the displaced persons of the Laguna Larga community, who were forcibly evicted from their homes over a year ago.
These displaced persons are now living in makeshift tents in infra-human conditions in the El Desengaño community, municipality of Candelaria, State of Campeche on the frontier between Guatemala and Mexico.
Their health and well-being are at serious risk.
On 8 September 2017, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) granted precautionary measures in favour of the evicted and displaced community of Laguna Larga (Resolution 36/2017 Precautionary Measures No 412-17), calling on the Guatemalan authorities to adopt the “necessary measures to protect the rights to life and to personal integrity of the beneficiaries, through measures designed to improve, among other aspects, their sanitary and health conditions, in particular of children, women and the elderly”.
To date, the Guatemalan authorities have taken no action to implement the precautionary measures.
The ICJ was able to observe that the only measure adopted by the Guatemalan State has been to provide the displaced community with two teachers to give classes to the children.
However, the ICJ could also observe that the educational installations are precarious, too hot and very dark, which makes it difficult to give classes.
No sanitary nor health services have been provided by the Guatemalan authorities. On 24 July, a child died only 30 hours after her birth, seemingly a consequence of lack of medical attention.
Neither have other precautionary measures concerning food, access to water and housing been implemented.
The ICJ is deeply concerned that the Guatemalan State has not fulfilled the requirements of the IACHR and that after a year, the rights to life and personal integrity of the displaced community of Laguna Larga is at risk of irreparable harm.
In the face of the inaction of the Guatemalan authorities, members of the Laguna Larga community with the support of Mexican and Guatemalan organizations have managed to implement various projects to provide drinking water, electricity, food and health services.
However, despite these important efforts, this humanitarian support remains insufficient given the serious crisis.
While the efforts of the Laguna Larga community and Mexican and Guatemala non-governmental organizations have been an example of civil society organization, it in no way exonerates, substitutes or reduces the responsibility of the Guatemalan State to guarantee the rights to life and personal integrity of the displaced population and to implement the precautionary measures ordered by the IACHR.
Ramon Cadena, Director of ICJ’s Central American Office, said:
“Given this situation, the ICJ urges the Guatemalan authorities immediately to fulfil the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights’ precautionary measures 412-17 and to resume the dialogue that was started before the eviction. According to international standards, the State should provide reparations for all the harm and prejudice caused.”
Jul 26, 2018 | News, Op-eds
An opinion piece by Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser in Bangkok, Thailand.
Over recent decades, international observers have tended to view the human rights and political situation in Cambodia as a series of predictable cycles that does not warrant too much alarm.
The conventional wisdom has been that Prime Minister Hun Sen and his government routinely tightens their grip on the political opposition and civil society in advance of elections before relaxing it again after victory has been secured.
But that analysis is no longer valid.
The reason is simple: During the course of ensuring it will win the national election scheduled for this Sunday (29 July), Hun Sen’s ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) has, since the last election, systematically altered the country’s constitutional and legal framework – and these changes will remain in place after the election has passed.
Through the passage of a slew of new laws and legal amendments inconsistent with Cambodia’s obligations under international law, and the frequent implementation of the law to violate human rights, the legal system has been weaponized to overwhelm and defeat the real and perceived opponents of the CPP, including the political opposition, the media, civil society, human rights defenders and ordinary citizens.
This misuse of the law is a significant development in the history of modern Cambodia and represents a determined move away from the vision enshrined in the historic 1991 Paris Peace Agreements that ended years of conflict and sought to establish a peaceful and democratic Cambodia founded on respect for human rights and the rule of law.
And it risks cementing the human rights and rule of law crisis that now exists within Cambodia for years to come.
To facilitate the closure of civil society space, and contrary to international law and standards, in 2015 the Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations (LANGO) was passed, which requires the mandatory registration of all NGOs and Associations, provides the government with arbitrary powers to deny or revoke registration, and places a vaguely worded duty on NGOs and associations to “maintain their neutrality towards political parties”.
The biggest blow to the political opposition has been the amendment last year of the Law on Political Parties (1997), amended twice within four months, which empowers the Supreme Court to dissolve parties, and four election laws, which permits the redistribution of a dissolved party’s seats in the country’s senate, national assembly, and commune and district councils.
Last November, the Supreme Court, presided over by a high-ranking member of the CPP, used the amended Law on Political Parties to dissolve the main opposition party, the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), which had received just under 44% of the vote – or about 3 million votes – in communal elections held in June 2017.
After the CNRP’s dissolution, the amended election laws were then used to redistribute CNRP seats at every level of government, from the commune to the senate, to the CPP and minor parties.
To silence the media, the country’s media and taxation laws have been invoked – local radio stations have been ordered to stop broadcasting Radio Free Asia and Voice of America “in order to uphold the law on media” and the independent Cambodia Daily was forced to close after being presented with a disputed US $6.3 million tax bill which the Daily claimed was “politically motivated” and not accompanied by a proper audit or good faith negotiations.
To curb the exercise of freedom of expression, the Constitution has received vaguely worded amendments placing an obligation on Cambodian citizens to “primarily uphold the national interest” while prohibiting them from “conducting any activities which either directly or indirectly affect the interests of the Kingdom of Cambodia and of Khmer Citizens”.
Meanwhile individual journalists, members of the political opposition including the CNRP’s leader, Kem Sokha, human rights defenders and an Australian documentary filmmaker have been charged with any number of a kaleidoscope of crimes ranging from intentional violence and criminal defamation to treason and espionage.
And Cambodia lacks an independent and impartial judiciary.
In 2014, three “judicial reform laws” were passed which institutionalized the prosecution and judiciary’s lack of independence from the executive.
At the same time, the government perversely uses the doctrine of the “rule of law” to justify its actions.
Just hours after the Supreme Court dissolved the CNRP, Hun Sen announced that the decision was made “in accordance with the rule of law.”
When members of the diplomatic community and senior UN officials meet government officials to express concern at the increasing misuse of the law they receive an absurdist legal lecture on the “importance of the rule of law”.
What is happening in Cambodia is the opposite of that.
The International Commission of Jurists, UN authorities and others have been defining the rule of law since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was pronounced in 1948.
All agree that that the rule of law entails passing and implementing laws consistent with a country’s international human rights obligations.
It is time for the international community to recognize that a frank and fresh analysis of the situation in Cambodia is urgently required which acknowledges the way the country’s underlying legal and constitutional framework has been deliberately altered, and the way in which this will impact the country adversely long past this month’s election.
This acknowledgment must be accompanied by a coherent and, where possible, joint, plan of action that clearly sets out, with a timeline, what is required to bring Cambodia back on track with the agreed terms of the Paris Peace Agreements – including necessary legal and justice sector reforms – and the political and economic consequences for not doing so.
As long as Hun Sen’s Government deploys increasingly sophisticated justifications for its repressive actions, a more refined, multilayered and vigorous response from the international community is required – grounded on a proper application of the rule of law and Cambodia’s international human rights obligations.
Jul 26, 2018 | News
From 24 to 26 July 2018, the ICJ co-hosted a workshop for authorities from Thailand, Cambodia, and Myanmar.
The theme of the workshop was on conducting investigations of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance in accordance with international human rights law and standards.
The workshop was co-hosted with Thailand’s Ministry of Justice, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the New Zealand Embassy in Bangkok.
The participants included 25 criminal investigators, public prosecutors and representatives of the Cambodian Ministry of Justice and the Thai Ministry of Justice.
The event commenced with opening remarks by James Andersen, Deputy Head of Mission, Embassy of New Zealand in Bangkok; Aim-orn Siangyai, Deputy Director General of Thailand’s Rights and Liberties Protection Department, Ministry of Justice; Frederick Rawski, Asia Pacific Regional Director, ICJ; and Shivani Verma, Human Rights Officer, OHCHR Regional Office for South-East Asia.
Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser at the ICJ, gave a summary of the international human rights legal framework that applies to the investigation of unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance.
He then provided an outline of the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which was launched in Thailand on 25 May 2017 and which formed the core of the materials used at the workshop.
Other speakers included Glenn Williams, Detective Inspector, Field Crime Manager, New Zealand Police National Headquarters, who addressed the investigation process including crime scene management; Sean Buckley, International Investigator, who addressed witness interviews; Shivani Verma of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights who addressed Witness Protection; and Dr. Pornthip Rojanasunan, Adviser of Thailand’s Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS), who addressed the issue of forensic pathology.
This workshop followed three workshops the ICJ co-hosted between 5 to 8 December 2017 and 30 May to 1 June 2018 in Thailand on the investigation of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance for lawyers from Thailand and India, academics and State authorities from Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar and Nepal.
Contact
Kingsley Abbott, Senior International Legal Adviser, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Office, t: +66 94 470 1345, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
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)
