Aug 29, 2016 | News
Tens of thousands of enforced disappearances in South Asia can only be addressed if all the region’s governments immediately criminalize this serious human rights violation, said today lawyers and activists from Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
The call came at a Conference on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances, organized by the ICJ and Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) on the eve of the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances.
South Asia has among the highest number of alleged victims of enforced disappearances in the world: tens of thousands of cases have been documented in Sri Lanka, Nepal, Pakistan and India, and since 2009, there has also been a surge in enforced disappearances in Bangladesh.
“Sri Lanka’s ratification of the Convention on Enforced Disappearance and its pledge to criminalize the practice is a welcome step,” said I. A. Rehman, Secretary General for the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.
“Other States in the region should now follow suit and show that they are serious about their commitment to human rights by making enforced disappearance a specific crime in their domestic law,” he added.
Under international law, an enforced disappearance is the arrest, abduction or detention by State agents, or by people acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the detention or by concealing the fate or whereabouts of the “disappeared” person which places the person outside the protection of the law.
The UN General Assembly has repeatedly described enforced disappearance as “an offence to human dignity”.
At present, enforced disappearance is not a distinct crime in any South Asian country, which is one of the major hurdles to bringing perpetrators to justice.
In the absence of a legal framework on enforced disappearance, unacknowledged detentions by law enforcement agencies are considered “missing persons” cases.
On the rare occasions where criminal complaints are registered against alleged perpetrators, complainants are forced to categorize the crime as “abduction” or “kidnapping”.
These categories do not recognize the complexity and the particularly serious nature of enforced disappearance, and often do not provide for penalties commensurate to the gravity of the crime.
They also fail to recognize as victims relatives of the “disappeared” person and others suffering harm as a result of the enforced disappearance, as required under international law.
“Despite thousands of cases of enforced disappearance across South Asia, the governments have failed to follow their legal obligation to treat these crimes as the serious human rights violation they are,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia Director.
“South Asian governments have done very little to support the victims and survivors of enforced disappearance, or to ensure the rights of their family members to truth, justice and reparation,” he added.
Other barriers to bringing perpetrators to account are also similar in South Asian countries: military and intelligence agencies have extensive and unaccountable powers, including for arrest and detention; members of law enforcement and security forces enjoy broad legal immunities, shielding them from prosecution; and military courts have jurisdiction over crimes committed by members of the military, even where these crimes are human rights violations.
Victims’ groups, lawyers, and activists who work on enforced disappearance also face security risks including attacks, harassment, surveillance, and intimidation.
A comprehensive set of reforms, both in law and policy, is required to end the entrenched impunity for enforced disappearances in the region – criminalizing the practice would be a significant first step, said ICJ and the HRCP.
Contact
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Read also
ICJ Practitioners’ Guides No. 9 Enforced Disappearance and Extrajudicial Execution: Investigation and Sanction and No. 10 Enforced Disappearance and Extrajudicial Execution: the Right of Family Members, which provide legal practitioners, activists and policy-makers with detailed and practical references on international standards on enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings.
South Asia-International disappearances day statement-News-2016-ENG (full text in PDF)
Aug 16, 2016 | News
The ICJ said today that the attack on Ramón Cadena, its director in Central America, is deplorable evidence that human rights lawyers in Guatemala cannot carry out their activities without fear of reprisal.
Around a dozen armed men ransacked Ramón Cadena’s house in Guatemala City on Monday morning while he was attending a workshop elsewhere in the country.
The ICJ regional director for Central America is the latest victim of a recent wave of harassment and intimidation against human rights defenders and legal and environmental activists in Guatemala and neighboring Honduras.
“The ICJ strongly condemns the attack against Ramón Cadena, which is most likely linked to his activities as a human rights lawyer,” said Wilder Tayler, ICJ Secretary General.
Ramón Cadena, a highly prominent human rights lawyer in the region, was a key witness in the trial of former President Efrain Rios Montt for his role in the alleged genocide and other atrocities committed during the civil war of the 1970s and 80s.
Ramón Cadena has also been providing legal advice and support (on behalf of the ICJ) to the communities fighting against mining projects in Guatemala.
“We urge the Guatemalan authorities to provide the much needed protection to Ramón Cadena and promptly and thoroughly investigate the attack to find the culprits. They must also combat the increasing threats and growing insecurity faced by human rights defenders in the country, which is a clear assault on human rights,” Tayler added.
Contact
Wilder Tayler, ICJ Secretary General, t +41 76 562 38 10 ; e: wilder.tayler(a)icj.org
Several organizations have also condemned the attack on Ramón Cadena and issued a statement in Spanish which can be read here.
Aug 12, 2016 | News
The ICJ and the Judicial Service Commission of Zimbabwe (JSC) today held a one-day workshop in Harare to review the Magistrate Court Civil Rules.
Mr Chikwana, Deputy Secretary of the Judicial Service Commission of Zimbabwe, provided the opening remarks to the meeting.
He stated that the purpose of the review was to reconcile the procedural requirements in the courts with the provisions of the new constitution of Zimbabwe (2013).
Mr Chikwana mentioned that one of the objectives of the revisions was to create uniformity in the Rules of the different courts and in so doing make court processes simpler and more accessible to the general public.
Arnold Tsunga, ICJ’s Director for Africa, said that the whole idea behind the in-country activities carried out by the ICJ was to strengthen justice administration in Zimbabwe.
The workshop commenced with a presentation on an Overview of the current rules and feedback on input from Stakeholders by Justice Uchena.
Thereafter the delegates were assigned to groups to discuss the 34 Orders within the Rules of the Magistrate’s Court. After the 45-minute discussions, the groups presented their feedback.
The meeting was attended by judicial officers from the Constitutional Court, High Court and Magistrate Court; members of the legal profession, academia and civil society organizations.
Other notable attendees at the workshop include the Deputy Attorney General Nelson Dias and Mr Edward Mapara from the Law Society. There were 23 female and 24 male delegates at the workshop.
Aug 11, 2016 | News
The ICJ today urged President Duterte to respect the judiciary’s institutional independence and allow it to conduct its work, particularly in disciplining its own judges, without external influence or undue interference.
This week, President Duterte publicly released a list of public officers, including judges, who are allegedly involved in the illegal drugs trade. In response, on 9 August 2016, Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno wrote to President Duterte noting that it is the responsibility of the judicial branch to discipline judges.
In her letter, the Chief Justice also stated that the disciplining of judges should be done without compromising the independence of the judiciary.
In response, President Duterte warned Chief Justice Sereno not to set off a “constitutional crisis”, saying that he may “order” the executive department not to “honor” the judiciary.
According to the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary and the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, the body responsible for the discipline of judges should be independent of the executive and composed mainly (if not solely) of judges and members of the legal profession.
The ICJ therefore calls for the Supreme Court of the Philippines to be free to establish and employ its established mechanisms to discipline its own judges, in full respect for procedural guarantees.
On a related issue, the ICJ is now in the Philippines to speak to lawmakers regarding a proposal to re-introduce the death penalty and its concerns regarding the recent spate of extrajudicial killings in the country.
The organization has previously written to President Duterte regarding its concerns on the proposal to re-introduce the death penalty and the rising number of deaths of people who are alleged to be involved in the illegal drug trade.
“The proposed reintroduction of the death penalty, the spate of extrajudicial killings, and the fervor currently exhibited by President Duterte in going after allegedly corrupt members of the judiciary are directly linked to his zeal to address a perceived widespread drug menace in the country,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
The ICJ strongly urges President Duterte to focus his efforts in strengthening key institutions such as the judiciary so that they can be strong allies in his efforts to address crime in the country.
Contact:
Emerlynne Gil, ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser, t +66 840923575 ; e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
Picture: Sam Zarifi and Emerlynne Gil with Congressman Edcel Lagman (in the center), the main proponent of the law that abolished the death penalty in the Philippines in the past. He is now leading the charge in the House of Representative to try to defeat the proposal to reimpose the death penalty.
Aug 10, 2016 | News
A law in Belize that disproportionately affects gay men was today ruled unconstitutional by the country’s Supreme Court after a three-year wait for the judgment.
Section 53 of Belize’s Criminal Code, an old British colonial law, banned ‘carnal intercourse against the order of nature’ and thereby made consensual gay sex between adult men in private illegal in Belize. Today the legal provision has been ruled ‘unlawful’ to the extent that it can be applied to same-sex activity.
In handing down the judgment, Chief Justice Kenneth Benjamin agreed that Section 53 amounts to a violation of the constitutional rights to dignity, privacy, equality and non-discrimination on grounds of sex. He found that there was no justification in the form of ‘public morality’ and therefore the law must be modified. He awarded costs to the Claimaint, Caleb Orozco.
The case is the culmination of years of work by a Caribbean-led coalition of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans (LGBT) activists, academics and legal experts. The individual claimant is Caleb Orozco, a Belizean gay man and prominent LGBT human rights advocate.
Today Orozco said: “This is the first day of my life in which it is legal for me to be me. This is a history-making judgment for Belize, the country which I am proud to call home. Our judicial system has been proven to be robust and unprejudiced. This judgment should give other oppressed minorities the confidence to speak up and stand up for themselves in situations of human rights abuse in the way I have. Our courts really are there to protect us all. In striking down Section 53, Belize has also rejected a poisonous remnant of colonial rule. We have reaffirmed ourselves as a society built on dignity and respect for all our people. This is a proud day.”
Simone Hill, President of the United Belize Advocacy Movement (UNIBAM) said before the judgment: “This is about our human rights. As citizens of this country our rights should be respected without fear or favour. Win or lose, we will continue the fight to ensure the victory of the protection of our rights.”
The case was heard in May 2013 and presided over by Chief Justice Kenneth Benjamin. Today’s ruling – some three years and three months later – upholds Belize’s LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans) community’s human rights to privacy, equality, dignity and non-discrimination, all of which are protected under the country’s constitution.
A group of churches, namely the Roman Catholic Church of Belize, the Belize Church of England Corporate Body, and the Belize Evangelical Association of Churches were admitted as ‘Interested Parties’ in the case opposing Mr Orozco’s claim and seeking to maintain the criminalisation of gay men in Belize.
Meanwhile, the International Commission of Jurists, the Commonwealth Lawyers Association and the Human Dignity Trust were joint ‘Interested Parties’ in support of Mr Orozco.
Téa Braun, Legal Director of the Human Dignity Trust, said:
“This is a great victory for human rights and the rule of law.
Intimacy in private between two adults of their own free will should not be a matter for the law. The only outcome of such laws is to blight the lives of members of the LGBT community by fostering a climate of oppression and state-sponsored discrimination. The bravery and resilience of colleagues across the Caribbean who have worked tirelessly on this case is an inspiration. Caleb Orozco is a hero and a trailblazer. The Human Dignity Trust is immensely proud to have worked alongside him and his legal team.”
Alex Ward, President of the Commonwealth Lawyers Association, which passed a resolution on the ‘Decriminalisation of Sexual Orientation’ in 2009, said: “This is a sound and just ruling which we whole heartedly welcome. It is the CLA’s mandate to uphold the rule of law across the Commonwealth and today marks a considerable success in maintaining the integrity of the Belizean Constitution and protecting its citizens’ fundamental rights.”
Livio Zilli, Senior Legal Adviser at the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), said: “The ICJ hails the courage, commitment and tenacity of the entire LGBT movement in Belize, and Caleb Orozco’s in particular, and salutes this decision as a critical contribution to upholding people’s human rights whatever their sexual orientation or gender identity.”
While convictions under Section 53 in Belize were rare, the law carried a sentence of up ten years’ imprisonment effectively for consensual homosexual sex.
There are still 76 legal jurisdictions across the world that make same-sex intimacy between consenting adults a crime. Of these, 38 countries are, like Belize, members of the Commonwealth.
The Interested Parties that joined in support of the case were represented by Godfrey Smith SC and Debevoise & Plimpton led by Lord Goldsmith QC. Tim Otty QC, founder of the Human Dignity Trust, Tristan Jones, Jessica Gladstone, Nicola Leslie, Conway Blake, were key members of the victorious legal team.
