Mar 16, 2015 | Advocacy, Legal submissions
The ICJ has made further submissions to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention on its elaboration of Draft Principles and Guidelines on habeas corpus.
In February 2015, the Working Group released for public input a revised set of ‘Draft Principles and Guidelines on remedies and procedures on the right of anyone deprived of his or her liberty by arrest or detention to bring proceedings before a court without delay, in order that the court may decide without delay on the lawfulness of his or her detention and order his or her release if the detention is not lawful’.
The ICJ’s submission welcomes the elaboration by the Working Group of the revised Draft Principles and Guidelines as a means of assisting States to enhance, in law and in practice, respect for the right to habeas corpus and especially welcomes certain aspects of the document. It suggests means of further improving the revised Draft Principles and Guidelines, concerning:
- The temporary nature of any derogating measures impacting upon the application of some procedural elements of the right to habeas corpus;
- The competence of courts to make orders for immediate release;
- The implementation of court orders for release;
- The public nature of judicial decisions following adjudication of habeas corpus petitions;
- Guarantees applicable to specialized tribunals;
- The right to legal aid and legal assistance;
- Confirming that the procedure must be available at all times and to all detained persons, including prisoners or war, as a remedy to protect non-derogable rights such as the prohibition against torture and ill-treatment; and
- The inadmissibility of evidence obtained by torture.
The Working Group will present its final draft to the Human Rights Council’s 30th regular session in September 2015.
Attachments
ICJ-WGAD-RevisedDraftPrinciplesAndGuidelines-3rdLegalSubmission-2015-EN (The ICJ’s latest submission in PDF)
WGAD-Habeas-RevisedDraftPrinciplesAndGuidelines-2015-EN (PDF)
Additional links for reference
The ICJ’s first written submissions to the Working Group in November 2013
The ICJ’s second written submissions to the Working Group in April 2014
Panel presentations at the September 2014 Global Consultation by ICJ staff Matt Pollard and Alex Conte
Mar 12, 2015 | News
Pakistan’s decision to fully reinstate the death penalty puts at imminent risk of execution more than 500 people on death row who have exhausted all avenues of appeal, with another 8000 facing death penalties, said the ICJ today.
“The total abandonment of the moratorium on the death penalty is a disaster for human rights in Pakistan,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia director. “We fear a major acceleration in the flow of executions we have seen over the past few months—none of which do anything to protect the rights of the Pakistani people.”
25 people have been executed since 16 December 2014, when Pakistan lifted a moratorium on executions in cases of capital punishment related to terrorism. The decision to partially lift a six-year unofficial moratorium on executions was in response to an attack on a school in Peshawar, killing 150 people, almost all of them children. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack.
In January, Pakistan also amended the Constitution and the Army Act, 1952, empowering military courts to try civilians for terrorism related offences.
“The Pakistani people face a very real threat from terrorist attacks, but there is no indication that the death penalty will decrease this threat,” said Zarifi. “Instead, the government is targeting hundreds of people on death row whose convictions had nothing to do with terrorism-related offenses.”
In Pakistan, capital punishment is prescribed for 27 different offences, including blasphemy, sexual intercourse outside of marriage, kidnapping or abduction, rape, assault on the modesty of women and the stripping of women’s clothes, smuggling of drugs, arms trading and sabotage of the railway system. Many of these crimes do not meet the threshold of ‘most serious crimes’ stipulated by Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
Pakistan ratified the ICCPR in 2010. Article 6 of the ICCPR, guaranteeing the right to life, requires that states restrict capital punishment to only the ‘most serious crimes’. The UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has clarified that in the context of the death penalty, the definition of the ‘most serious crimes’ is limited to those cases in which there was an intention to kill, which resulted in the loss of life.
In December 2014, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution, that emphasizes that that the use of the death penalty undermines human dignity and that calls on countries that maintain the death penalty to establish a moratorium on its use with a view to its abolition. An overwhelming majority of 117 UN Member States voted in favor of the call for a worldwide moratorium on executions, as a step towards abolition of the death penalty.
Pakistan should reinstate a moratorium on the death penalty, with a view to definitively abolishing the practice in law,” said Zarifi.
ICJ opposes capital punishment in all cases without exception. The death penalty constitutes a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
Contact
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Advisor for Pakistan (London), t: +447889565691; email: reema.omer(a)icj.org
Mar 12, 2015 | News
Thailand must live up to its repeated promises to bring justice to the case of Somchai Neelapaijit, who was forcibly disappeared eleven years ago today, said the ICJ.
In multiple statements since Somchai Neelapaijit was abducted on a street in central Bangkok, the Royal Thai Government has pledged to resolve the case.
Before the United Nations Human Rights Council in May 2008, the Royal Thai Government pledged “to do its utmost and leave no stone unturned in order to bring to justice the case of Mr Somchai.”
In April 2014, Thailand gave assurances to the UN Committee that monitors the implementation of the Convention Against Torture in Geneva that the Department of Special Investigations (DSI) was continuing to investigate Somchai Neelapaijit’s case without any interference.
“Despite the passage of eleven years, Thai authorities have not carried out a comprehensive investigation or exhausted the possible sources of evidence,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific. “What is required is the DSI’s real and determined effort to identify the perpetrators and bring them to justice.”
Thailand signed, but has not yet ratified, the Convention Against Enforced Disappearance in January 2012.
Pending the ratification, Thailand must desist from any acts that would defeat the objective and purpose of the Convention, which among other things places an obligation on State Parties to make enforced disappearance a criminal offence, to thoroughly and impartially investigate cases, bring those responsible to justice and treat family members of a ‘disappeared’ person as victims in their own right.
Promisingly, the Ministry of Justice is in the process of drafting a Torture and Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Suppression Bill, which, in its current form, defines and criminalizes enforced disappearance and torture in Thailand.
“This new law must ensure there is no statute of limitations on enforced disappearance, which is not only a serious human rights violation but also a crime under international law,” added Zarifi. “Somchai’s fate and whereabouts remain unresolved, and his family continue to demand truth and justice from the authorities.”
To mark the 10-year anniversary of Somchai Neelapaijit’s “disappearance”, the ICJ released a report Ten Years Without Truth: Somchai Neelapaijit and Enforced Disappearances in Thailand, in which it documented the tortuous legal history of the case.
The report highlighted several key problems, such as poor use of forensic evidence, failure to follow and develop leads, unduly restrictive interpretation of national and international law, and above all, a lack of political will to resolve a case that remains emblematic of the culture of impunity in Thailand.
Contact
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002, e-mail: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Mar 9, 2015 | Advocacy
The ICJ supported a statement commenting on the respective reports by the Independent Expert on the Environment and Human Rights and the Independent Expert on Foreign Debt and its impact on Human Rights.
In the context of the Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Experts in the 28th Session of the Human Rights Council, Franciscans International and the Center of Concern, with the support of the ICJ, noted that the reports address, from different perspectives, a wide range of connections between the private sector and governments that many times result in human rights abuses.
The report by the Independent Expert on human rights and the environment, presented an encouraging set of good practices to mitigate environmental damage and its human rights impact.
The report by the Independent Expert on Foreign Debt and its impact on human rights highlighted the links between private lending and the abuses committed by authoritarian regimes.
This report will be followed by another report on applicable legal standards and analysis of whether additional international standards are needed.
Universal-Statement on BHR at HRC28-Advocacy-2015-ENG (full text in PDF)
Mar 6, 2015 | E-bulletin on counter-terrorism & human rights, News
Read the 90th issue of ICJ’s monthly newsletter on proposed and actual changes in counter-terrorism laws, policies and practices and their impact on human rights at the national, regional and international levels. The E-Bulletin on Counter-Terrorism and Human...
