Jan 9, 2018 | News
The ICJ today called on the Government of Pakistan to take immediate measures against the increasing practice of enforced disappearances in the country.
A significant number of recent victims were said to be human rights defenders and political activists.
The ICJ highlighted the particular case of Raza Mahmood Khan. Raza, a human rights defender and peace activist, has been “missing” since 2 December 2017 after he organized a public event in Lahore to discuss recent political developments, including religious extremism and the role of state institutions.
Raza is known for his work on human rights, building inter-faith harmony, and promoting peace and tolerance between Pakistan and India. His family and friends have appealed to the police and the courts to trace him, but more than a month since his alleged “disappearance”, his whereabouts are still unknown.
“Many of the victims of enforced disappearances in Pakistan have been activists like Raza, which indicates the shrinking space for activism and dissent in the country,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Director.
Given that circumstances in which Raza went “missing” are very similar to other cases of enforced disappearance reported recently, the ICJ called on Pakistani authorities to conduct a prompt, impartial, and thorough investigation to determine his fate and whereabouts and hold perpetrators criminally responsible.
“It is not enough for the authorities to deny knowledge of the fate or whereabouts of disappeared people. Are they properly questioning eyewitnesses to abductions? Are they looking for forensic evidence or electronic data from mobile phones? There are clear steps that authorities can and should take to investigate such crimes, and they must act immediately to establish the truth about these cases,” added Rawski.
Pakistan’s Supreme Court has, in multiple judgments, acknowledged the role of security and intelligence agencies in enforced disappearances and secret detentions, holding that the practice constitutes a violation of the “fundamental rights” recognized by the Constitution of Pakistan as well as international human rights law.
The State Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances has more than 1500 unresolved cases of enforced disappearances as of January 2018.
In 2017 alone, the Commission received 868 reports of alleged enforced disappearances – one of the highest since the Commission’s establishment in 2011. The UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances also has more than 700 pending cases from Pakistan.
“Despite hundreds, if not thousands, of cases of enforced disappearance reported from across Pakistan, not a single perpetrator of the crime has been brought to justice,” added Rawski. “Not only does this impunity deny truth and justice to victims of the crime, it is also eroding the rule of law and emboldening perpetrators of human rights violations.”
The UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID) has on a number of occasions expressed concern about lack of implementation of the recommendations it made following a country visit to Pakistan in 2012, citing among other things continuing impunity arising from failure to diligently investigate allegations.
The UN Human Rights Committee also, in its review of Pakistan’s implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), noted with concern “the high incidence of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings allegedly perpetrated by the police and military and security forces.”
Pakistan must ensure all persons held in secret or arbitrary detention are immediately released or charged with a recognizable criminal offence and brought promptly before a competent, independent and impartial tribunal for a trial that meets international standards.
The ICJ called on Pakistan to become a party to the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance; recognize enforced disappearance as a distinct, autonomous offence; and hold perpetrators of enforced disappearance, including military and intelligence personnel, to account, through fair trials before civilian courts.
Contacts
Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 64 478 1121, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org
Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Pakistan (London), t: +447889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org
Jan 8, 2018 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions, News
The ICJ and other organizations have intervened today before the European Court of Human Rights challenging expulsions of asylum seekers from Hungary to Serbia.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and the Dutch Council for Refugees have submitted today a third party intervention before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary.
The case challenges the systematic practice by the Hungarian authorities to send back to Serbia foreign nationals asking for asylum under the pretention that Serbia is a safe third country in which to ask for international protection.
The intervening organizations have argued before the Court that:
- a removal that exposes an applicant to the risk of refoulement and deprives them of protections under international and EU law, is prohibited regardless of whether the decision was taken on the basis of the safe third country concept or the country was included in a “safe third country” list.
- International law requires, inter alia, a rigorous scrutiny of the applicant’s arguable claim of potential prohibited treatment, access to an effective remedy following a negative decision, and access to the rights under the 1951 Refugee Convention.
- Application of the safe third country concept for EU Member States is contingent on the applicant being admitted to the territory and having effective access to a fair asylum procedure in the safe third country
- An assessment of whether restrictions on the freedom of movement of migrants, imposed in a border or international zone, amount to deprivation of liberty under Article 5 ECHR must be based on the impact of these measures on the individuals concerned.
Hungary-ECtHR-amicusbrief-cases-Ilias&Ahmed-ICJ&others-2018-ENG (download the third party intervention)
Background
Ilias Ilias and Ali Ahmed, both Bangladeshi nationals, fled their home country in arrived at the Hungarian-Serbian border on 15 September 2015 after having briefly crossed through Serbia during their trip.
Having asked immediately for asylum in Hungary, they were confined for days in a transit zone, a ” a confined area of some 110 square metres, part of the transit zone, surrounded by fence and guarded by officers”.
Their applications were rejected on the very same day of their application on the grounds that they could have asked for asylum in Serbia, considered by Hungary a safe third country, and appeals were rejected.
They were removed to Serbia on 8 October 2015.
Dec 20, 2017 | News
From 9-13 December, a delegation from the ICJ visited the company Carbones del Cerrejón LLC (El Cerrejón) to analyse the operation and effectiveness of its grievance mechanism.
The company, owned by Glencore plc, Anglo American and BHP Billiton, is located in the department of La Guajira, Colombia. The visit took place within the framework of the ICJ’s initiative on the effectiveness of grievance mechanisms established by companies to remedy negative impacts and human rights abuses.
The ICJ appreciated the collaboration of the Institute of Studies for Development and Peace (INDEPAZ) in the organization and facilitation of the visit.
It also acknowledges and thanks the company Carbones del Cerrejón for the welcome and all the facilities provided to the mission as well as the information shared with the delegation.
The ICJ also thanks the communities of Afro-descendants, peasants and indigenous Wayuu who welcomed and spoke with it.
This statement contains preliminary views and recommendations from the delegation regarding the company’s grievance system and the context in which it operates.
Subsequently, the ICJ will prepare a full report and will use this evaluation in the context of a general evaluation and recommendations on operational level grievance mechanisms.
The objective of the mission was to learn about and analyse the operation of the grievance mechanism established by the company and to evaluate in a preliminary way its effectiveness.
Cerrejón is one of the companies in the coal mining sector that started the process of establishing grievance and / or complaint mechanisms early.
Between 2009 and 2011 it was part of five pilot projects carried out by a team of the Special Representative of the UN Secretary General on business and human rights.
Contextualize the mechanism: Coal mining in La Guajira
La Guajira – province of Colombia on the border with Venezuela – besides its natural beauty and the friendliness of its people surprises visitors by the sharp contrast it presents between the great wealth generated by the extraction of coal and the poverty prevalent among its population.
The majority percentage of the population of La Guajira is made up of indigenous Wayuu populations and Afro-descendant communities, who generally live in poverty.
There is a lack of water and of employment opportunities or economic activities that are not linked to the operations of El Cerrejón, which accentuates the apparent dependence of the regional economy on the extractive activity of coal and raises doubts and questions about sustainability of the regional economy sitting on these bases in the short, medium and long term.
The information received by the delegation of the ICJ points to corruption as one of the main factors that influence and determine the lack of better health and education services, infrastructure and economic investment in the region by the State.
Corruption is more visible among the political class. Senior officials of the regional government were or are currently being prosecuted for corruption and murder.
La Guajira has had eight different governors in five years, which is a destabilizing and paralyzing factor in a highly centralized political system of government.
In this context, although considerable efforts are made by various actors, including El Cerrejón, distrust among the population is significant.
El Cerrejón, which operates in La Guajira, is one of the largest open-pit coal mining operations in the world and has an integrated operation that includes the extraction of coal, its transport by private railroad to Puerto Bolivar (150 kilometers away) and its cargo and transportation to consumer countries.
About 40 percent of the coal exported by Colombia goes to European markets. El Cerrejón is presented as an example of responsible mining both in the Colombian coal mining region and in the world and it has recently developed a series of social responsibility policies, including a due diligence process in the field of human rights.
The ICJ was informed that the experience and lessons learned from the grievance mechanism have influenced the design of these policies.
Colombia-Cerrejon-grievance-assessment-News-2018-ENG (Full text in PDF)
Watch the video (in Spanish):
Dec 20, 2017 | News
Legal Advisers from the International Commission of Jurists addressed a locally-initiated forum on human rights held in Yangon in December.
Participants who attended from across the country heard from more than twenty presenters and panelists, speaking on topics including: freedom of religion and belief; human rights in armed conflict; freedom of assembly and expression; and economic, social and cultural rights.
The ICJ’s International Legal Adviser Sean Bain joined a panel discussing ongoing human rights violations in areas of conflict and insecurity.
In November the ICJ published a report, “Questions and Answers on Human Rights Law in Rakhine State,” which lays out applicable national and international law in the human rights crisis there, and steps necessary to improve the situation.
Sean Bain emphasized that rights violations against Rohingya Muslims should also be examined with reference to the overall patterns of violations throughout the country, too often perpetrated by security forces with impunity against peoples of many ethnicities and religions, particularly in conflict areas.
On a panel discussion on religious freedom, Advocate Daw Zar Li Aye outlined relevant provisions in national and international law that protect freedom of religion and belief.
She noted, however, that in practice ambiguous and vague provisions of national laws have been applied in a discriminatory manner against members of minority groups.
Zar Li Aye also suggested that any legislative amendments incorporate clearly stated objectives to protect religious freedom, in line with the State’s international law obligations.
Many participants in the forum noted the emergence of a backlash against the language of human rights in recent months, linked to the crisis in northern Rakhine State.
Asked how human rights defenders in Myanmar may continue their work in this context, Sean Bain responded, “To be truly effective in protecting human rights for all we must stay true to our values and not accept violations against any people in any context.”
The ICJ’s involvement in this Forum is part of ongoing engagement with civil society groups in Myanmar.
Dec 18, 2017 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
Raquel Yrigoyen Fajardo, Karabo Ozah and Charles Dinda talk about traditional justice systems in video interviews recorded at the 2017 ICJ Geneva Forum.
Dr. Raquel Yrigoyen Fajardo, Lawyer and Professor at the Law Faculty of the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru, and founding member of the International Institute on Law and Society (IIDS), describes the survival and contemporary recognition of justice systems of indigenous peoples in the Americas, despite the history of colonial domination.
She argues that indigenous justice systems often already reflect many international human rights standards, and where there may be discrepancies change should be sought through respectful engagement and consultation rather than coercive imposition.
In contrast, Ms Karabo Ozah, Deputy Director of the Centre for Child Law at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, argues that it is crucially important to ensure that customary and traditional courts respect domestic legislation and international standards on human rights.
Otherwise she warns, based on her experience, customary courts too frequently fail to protect the rights of marginalized groups, children, LGBTI, and women.
Charles Dinda, Senior Legal Adviser with the Danish Institute for Human Rights in Zambia, points out that while traditional and customary justice institutions are the most easily accessible and in many respects most credible institutions for some populations, their decisions are too often inconsistent or unfair.
To avoid this, he insists on the importance of understanding and studying the way these systems operate and on the need to engage with them to learn about their practices and to build their capacities so that they have better knowledge of international human rights standards and indeed of the national laws in the countries where they operate.
Watch the interview with Dr. Raquel Yrigoyen Fajardo
Watch the interview with Karabo Ozah
Watch the interview with Charles Dinda
NOTE:
The views expressed by the participants do not necessarily reflect those of the ICJ.
For more information about the 2017 Geneva Forum on Customary and Traditional Justice Systems, click here or contact matt.pollard(a)icj.org .
