Guatemala: ending impunity, rights of indigenous peoples, and migrants (UN statement)

Guatemala: ending impunity, rights of indigenous peoples, and migrants (UN statement)

The ICJ today joined other NGOs in addressing the UN Human Rights Council session in Geneva, on the situation for human rights in Guatemala.

The statement, delivered by Franciscans International on behalf also of ICJ and other NGOs, read as follows (translation of Spanish original):

“We welcome the High Commissioner’s Report concerning the activities of her Office in Guatemala. We share the concerns and recommendations in the report, especially those related to the indigenous peoples, migrants and legislative initiatives that would impact in the full enjoyment of human rights.

As it was highlighted in the report, we are also concerned by the current discussions on the initiative to reform the National Reconciliation Law. This reform would give amnesty to those who committed serious crimes during the armed conflict, including those who have already been convicted. This puts at risk not only the fulfillment of the state’s obligations to end impunity, but also the security and access to justice of hundreds of victims and witnesses. Guatemala should dismiss immediately the initiative and refrain from promoting any other initiative that would promote impunity.

Additionally, the political and social tensions are intensifying towards the upcoming elections, and the inclusion of various groups, especially indigenous peoples, is at risk. Currently there is a low participation and representation of indigenous peoples in the political scene of the country. Out of 178 seats in the Congress, only 18 are occupied by Mayans (from which only two are women). The State must guarantee free participation, without intimidation or threats, of indigenous peoples running for different positions.

Lastly, the regional human rights situation of migrants is aggravating and the response by Guatemala, as evidenced in the last months, shows the lack of an effective policy to deal not only with migrants in transit, but also to create conditions to prevent forced migration of Guatemalans.

We thank the work that the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights has done, and we stress the importance of its activities in the country.”

The full statement may be downloaded in English and the original Spanish, in PDF format, here: HRC40-OralStatement-GDitem2-Guatemala-2019-EN-ESP

Transitional Justice Mechanisms in Sri Lanka (UN statement)

Transitional Justice Mechanisms in Sri Lanka (UN statement)

The ICJ today called at the UN for prompt establishment of a judicial accountability mechanism with international involvement, for Sri Lanka.The statement, delivered during an interactive dialogue on the OHCHR report on Sri Lanka at the Human Rights Council in Geneva, read as follows:

“The ICJ welcomes the comprehensive report of the OHCHR on promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka (A/HRC/40/23). We share OHCHR’s observation that there is a lack of progress and absence of a comprehensive strategy for implementation of all commitments made under Resolution 30/1.

ICJ is particularly concerned about the lack of progress in the area of criminal accountability (as noted in Paragraph 27 of the report). We believe that there is an urgent need to establish a judicial mechanism with the involvement of foreign judges. We echo the sentiments of the OHCHR regarding the inability of the Sri Lankan courts, on their own, to address the impunity of security forces for crimes under international law.

Failure of the criminal justice system to effectively address emblematic cases (as reflected in Paragraph 38 of the report) clearly indicates the level of capacity and willingness on the part of the State even today to prosecute and punish perpetrators of serious crimes when they are linked to the security forces or other positions of power.

ICJ also notes that women are grossly under-represented in the judiciary in Sri Lanka, which prevents women human rights defenders and female victims from having confidence in the ordinary criminal justice system, impeding their full engagement and participation in pursuing accountability for crimes committed against them during the conflict and other transitional justice processes.

A judicial mechanism with the involvement of foreign judges is particularly urgent for women in conflict-affected areas who still live in a highly militarized environment and are compelled to live among their perpetrators – those who have been accused of war crimes including rape and other forms of sexual violence.

We therefore reject calls for a purely domestic mechanism. Indeed, the ICJ considers that the continuing failure of the Government to ensure justice means that referral to the International Criminal Court or the creation of another international mechanism to facilitate criminal accountability would be fully warranted. The draft resolution before this session of the Council, reaffirming all elements of resolution 30/1, thus already represents a deep compromise and anything less than the existing text would be wholly unacceptable.

 

ICJ calls for prompt publication of UN Database of businesses in the Occupied Palestinian Territory

ICJ calls for prompt publication of UN Database of businesses in the Occupied Palestinian Territory

The ICJ today called for prompt release of a database of businesses involved in certain activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, that has been prepared by the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).The statement, delivered in a general debate, read as follows:

Regarding the Database of business enterprises involved in listed activities in the settlements on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the ICJ recognizes the important work that has been done, but is deeply concerned at OHCHR’s failure to publicly release it.

All States, including the home States of the companies involved, have a responsibility to prevent companies from operating in breach of international law. Businesses themselves should see the database as an opportunity to more proactively incorporate respect for human rights within their policies and operations.

The prompt publication of the database should contribute to global efforts to hold all business enterprises accountable for their role in violations of human rights and humanitarian law and to give them an incentive to cease in such behaviour. The ICJ urges all States, including those that have supported the creation of this database, to redouble efforts to prevent business complicity in serious human rights abuses and to hold businesses legally accountable when abuses occur in their own territories as well as in the global operations of businesses for which they are the home State.”

Myanmar: documentation practices may raise challenges for accountability – article now available in Burmese

Myanmar: documentation practices may raise challenges for accountability – article now available in Burmese

This important blog by ICJ Senior Legal Adviser Kingsley Abbott was first posted to Opinio Juris. It has been translated into Burmese language as a resource for individuals, institutions and organizations in the country.

Documenting criminal human rights violations in the Myanmar is critical, so we must be careful not to create problems for future efforts at establishing criminal responsibility.

In his article, Kingsley Abbott, discusses the important role of the documentation of serious human rights violations in Myanmar by civil society, UN bodies and journalists.

This effort has played a critical role in raising awareness of the situation inside and outside the country and in getting responses from the international community.

Read the article in English

Read the article in Burmese

Contact

Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for Global Redress & Accountability e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

Threats to the rule of law in Turkey, Poland, Hungary, Azerbaijan and South Sudan (UN statement)

Threats to the rule of law in Turkey, Poland, Hungary, Azerbaijan and South Sudan (UN statement)

The ICJ today highlighted threats to the rule of law in Turkey, Poland, Hungary and Azerbaijan, and the need to address corporate complicity in South Sudan, at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.The statement, delivered during general debate, read as follows:

“The situation remains grave for the rule of law and legal protection of human rights in Turkey and Poland.

In Turkey, constitutional reforms in 2017 that undermined the independence of the judiciary should be abolished. Civil society members are prosecuted under overbroad and vague terrorism offences.

In Poland, the Legislature is trying arbitrarily to remove one third of the Supreme Court, a measure that is on hold only temporarily. Unjustified disciplinary proceedings are also being pursued against Polish judges for having sought a ruling of the Court of Justice of the EU.

Elsewhere, in Hungary civil society is ostracized and subject to legislation that risks criminalizing their legitimate activities. In Azerbaijan, as one example of a broader pattern of interference with lawyers and other human rights defenders, lawyer Elchin Sadigov was reprimanded for advising in a confidential manner to his client in detention to complain about torture to which he allegedly had been subjected.

The ICJ is also concerned at the findings by the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan (A/HRC/40/69, A/HRC/40/CRP.1) that point to the oil industry as a “major driver” in the continuation of the armed conflict and resulting human rights violations. Potential corporate complicity with crimes under international law demand investigation and a strong monitoring mechanism for the use of oil revenues should be established.”

Myanmar’s government-commissioned inquiry still cannot deliver justice or accountability

Myanmar’s government-commissioned inquiry still cannot deliver justice or accountability

The “Independent Commission of Enquiry” (ICOE) on Rakhine State, announced by the Government of Myanmar in May 2018 and established in July, has not demonstrated any reasonable prospect of meeting international standards of independence, impartiality or effectively contributing to justice or accountability for human rights violations constituting crimes under international law.

The ICOE is not transparent about how its information gathering will, if at all, shed light on the truth, or contribute to accountability and redress, while protecting individuals it comes into contact with. It is also yet to fulfill conditions called for by the UN Human Rights Council in its September 2018 resolution 39/2.

Any move to shift reference in the Council resolution currently under discussion, to include more positive recognition of the ICOE, would be wholly unjustified.

Furthermore, the government continues its unwillingness to address credible allegations of crimes under international law, including in its report to the CEDAW Committee in February in which rape allegations were dismissed as “wild claims.”

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), in response to a “Call for Submissions” on 12 December 2018, inviting “individuals, groups, witnesses and alleged victims to submit their complaints or accounts, with supporting data and evidence,” wrote to the ICOE Chairperson with four questions, summarised as:

  1. Are any measures in place to protect complainants and witnesses against threats of violence, legal action or other forms of reprisals for providing information to the ICOE? What specific measures have been taken to ensure the confidentiality of any materials submitted, and to protect the identities and wellbeing of witnesses?
  2. Given statements by commissioners that accountability is not part of their mandate, as the ICOE is seeking submissions of data and evidence from victims and witnesses, please clarify the ICOE’s position on how these submissions will be utilized – including for possible criminal investigations.
  3. Can you provide information on any measures taken to deal with real or perceived conflicts of interests that may affect the public’s trust in the ICOE’s impartiality and independence, including victims and witnesses and others who may submit materials in response to your call?
  4. The recommendations of past Commissions of Inquiry have not been fully implemented. Given the sensitive nature of the ICOE’s mandate, what considerations have been taken into account to increase the likelihood that recommendations will be more effectively implemented than in the past?

The ICOE did not respond to these questions, despite having formally acknowledged receipt of the letter. The deadline for public submissions to the ICOE has now passed. Its silence in this instance illustrates a broader failure to demonstrate independence or transparency and underlines protection concerns.

The ICJ is unaware of efforts by the ICOE to genuinely seek cooperation with the UN Independent International Fact Finding Mission or the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, as has been called for by the Council.

Based on extensive experience and research in Myanmar and globally, and recalling a 5-page legal assessment of the ICOE published in September 2018, the ICJ remains of the view that the ICOE, like previous government-backed inquires, cannot effectively contribute to or deliver justice or accountability.

Myanmar-Inquiry Rakhine-Advocacy-2019-BUR (Burmese version, in PDF)

 

Translate »