Event: renditions, extraditions and human rights

Event: renditions, extraditions and human rights

The ICJ invites you to an event to discuss challenges in prevention of, and accountability for, violations of human rights in renditions and other transfers of suspects, including through past European complicity in US-led renditions, and in ongoing transfers of suspects in the CIS region.

Join us for a discussion marking the EU launch of the International Commission of Jurists’ report, Transnational Injustices: National Security Transfers and International Law. The event is kindly hosted by Ana Gomez and Eva Joly, MEPs.

Panelists will discuss the ongoing practice of states unlawfully rendering people accused of terrorism, accountability for violations of human rights in past renditions, and how the EU institutions and EU Member States should address these.

When: Tuesday 30 January 16.00 – 18.00

Where: Room A5G305, European Parliament, Brussels

RSVP to: anamaria.gomes@europarl.europa.eu 

Speakers include:

  • Ana Gomes, Member of the European Parliament
  • Eva Joly, Member of the European Parliament
  • Róisín Pillay, International Commission of Jurists
  • Natacha Kazachkine, Open Society European Policy Institute

A flyer for this event is available in PDF format by clicking here.

UN Committee against Torture: ICJ and TLHR’s joint submission on Thailand

UN Committee against Torture: ICJ and TLHR’s joint submission on Thailand

Today, the ICJ and Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR) filed their joint submission to the UN Committee against Torture (Committee).

The Committee will consider it during the adoption of a list of issues prior to reporting (LOIPR) for the examination of the Second Periodic Report of Thailand under Article 19 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT).

During its 63rd session, from 23 April to 18 May 2018, the Committee will prepare and adopt a LOIPR on Thailand.

Once adopted, the LOIPR will be transmitted to the State party. Thailand’s formal response to the LOIPR will then constitute its Second Periodic Report under article 19 of the Convention.

Thailand ratified the CAT in 2007. Following its review of Thailand’s initial report under CAT, the Committee adopted its Concluding Observations at its 52nd Session in May 2014.

The ICJ and TLHR’s joint submission to the Committee highlights a number of ongoing concerns with respect to the country’s implementation of and compliance with the provisions of the CAT.

In addition, the joint submissions formulates certain questions and recommends that the Committee should include them in its LOIPR and address them to the Government of Thailand, including on the following pressing issues:

  • The fact that, since the coup d’ état of 22 May 2014, the constitutional and legal framework in force in Thailand has increased opportunities for legally-sanctioned impunity;
  • The failure to criminalize through the adoption of bespoke domestic legislation the crimes of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and enforced disappearance, consistent with the CAT and other relevant international law;
  • The failure to conduct investigations of credible allegations of enforced disappearances, as well as into credible reports of the widespread use of torture and other ill-treatment in a prompt, effective, independent and impartial manner in numerous cases; and
  • Threats and reprisals against persons working to bring to light cases of alleged torture, other ill-treatment and enforced disappearance.

Contact

Kingsley Abbott, Senior International Legal Adviser, ICJ Asia Pacific Programme, t: +66 94 470 1345, e: kingley.abbott@icj.org

Thailand-CAT Submission-Advocacy-non-legal submission-2017-ENG (Full submission in PDF)

THAILAND-CAT additional info-Advocacy-2018-ENG (additional information, updated in April 2018)

Egypt: adopt draft law on the appointment of women to the judiciary

Egypt: adopt draft law on the appointment of women to the judiciary

The ICJ today called on the Egyptian Parliament to adopt a Draft Law on the appointment of women to the judiciary and to eliminate longstanding discrimination against their appointment as judges.

The Draft Law was introduced by member of the Parliament (MP) Nadia Henry this month and is supported by another 60 MPs.

The Speaker of Parliament has referred it to the legislative committee for review.

“Ensuring women’s full and equal participation in Egypt’s judiciary is necessary for a fair legal system reflective of the community it serves,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.

“It’s also necessary to end decades of discriminatory practices that have meant only a handful of women judges have ever been appointed despite explicit guarantees of equality in the Constitution,” he added.

Article 11 of the Constitution requires the State to ensure the “achievement of equality between women and men in all civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights,” including the right of “holding public and senior management offices in the state and their appointment in judicial bodies and authorities without discrimination”.

Women were first appointed to judicial office in 2007. Between 2007 and 2017 there were less than 67 female judges across Egypt, for a population of more than 100 million.

This significant under-representation of women is entrenched in a widespread discriminatory view, including within the judiciary itself, that working as a judge in court was an inappropriate profession for women.

“The Draft Law is significant first step towards challenging these discriminatory views and harmful practices. The Authorities must not only adopt it, they must also adopt other urgent, practical and structural measures to fully guarantee the rights of women to have equal access to judicial office and ensure their equal representation in the judiciary,” Benarbia added.

Background

The first article of the draft law places an obligation on all judicial bodies to appoint women to judicial offices and ensure that the conditions of their appointment are consistent with those that are applicable to men.

In its second article, the draft law nullifies any law that infringes on the obligation set forth in Article 1. Article 3 of the draft law invalidates any procedures in relation to the appointment of judges if such procedures do not comply with the Article 1 of the draft law.

Article 10 of the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary provide that, “In the selection of judges, there shall be no discrimination against a person on the grounds of race, colour, sex, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or status…”.

The Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, key human rights treaties to which Egypt has been party since the early 1980s, also explicitly prohibit discrimination against women, including in relation to access to public office such as judicial appointments.

Contact

Saïd Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41.22.979.3817, e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Egypt-women judges-news-2018-ARA

 

 

 

Egypt: ICJ condemns recent executions following unfair military trials, calls for moratorium

Egypt: ICJ condemns recent executions following unfair military trials, calls for moratorium

The ICJ today condemned the executions of 22 civilians during the past month, following death penalty cases before military courts in which fair trial guarantees appear to have been flagrantly violated.

The Egyptian authorities should establish an immediate moratorium and halt all pending executions with a view towards the total and permanent abolition of the death penalty, the ICJ added.

“The executions of these civilians constitute blatant, egregious violations of the right to life by the Egyptian authorities,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.

“Carrying them out based on military trials, which furthermore failed to scrupulously observe international fair trial standards, amounts to the arbitrary deprivation of life,” he added.

Based on information provided by the defendants’ lawyers and families, Egyptian NGOs have reported a litany of fair trial violations that marred these proceedings.

These included the case of a defendant who was convicted following one trial session, in the absence of his counsel.

It also included instances involving enforced disappearances and allegations of torture and other ill-treatment, some of which were documented in the prosecution reports.

In one case the defendants’ lawyers filed a motion to “review the case” under article 448 of the Code Criminal Procedure which should normally suspend the carrying out of any sentence of execution.

The executions were nevertheless carried out on 9 January, before the Military Court’s review, which was due on 28 February 2018.

“The Egyptian authorities have brushed aside the most basic legal safeguards on the imposition and carrying out of the death penalty,” Benarbia said.

“Because they cannot ensure respect of fair trial rights, they must impose an immediate moratorium on executions.”

Under international standards, proceedings in death penalty cases must conform to the highest standards of judicial independence, competence and impartiality, and must strictly comply with all fair trial rights.

The ICJ has previously documented how the Egyptian judiciary fails to conform to these standards.

Contact

Saïd Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41.22.979.3817, e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Egypt-Executions-News-2018-ARA (Arabic translation in PDF)

Background

International standards recognize the particular concerns with judicial independence and impartiality that arise in relation to the trial of civilians by military courts.

Accordingly, the jurisdiction of military courts should be limited to military personnel in cases of strictly military offences, i.e. alleged breaches of military discipline.

The above-mentioned cases involved civilians and allegations of ordinary offenses, including theft, rape, and murder (including murder of military officers).

Particularly in these circumstances, there could be no justification for these cases to have been adjudicated before military courts and the ICJ considers that this factor in itself renders the executions in violation of the right to life.

The ICJ furthermore opposes the death penalty in all circumstances as a violation to the right to life and to the prohibition of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

The cases in question were: Case No. 411/2013 before the Ismailiya Criminal Military Court (15 executions in 26 December 2017), case No.  22/2015 before Tanta Criminal Military Court (4 executions in 2 January 2018) and case  No. 93/2011 before the Ismailiya Criminal Military Court (3 executions in 9 January 2018).

Translate »