Oct 3, 2017 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
On 2 October, the ICJ and Amnesty International submitted an intervention before the European Court of Human Rights in the case Ecodefence and others v the Russian Federation, Application no. 9988/13 and 48 other applications, which concern labeling NGOs as foreign agents.
In this submission, the applicants provided the Court with an analysis, based on international law sources, of:
a) the scope of application of rights to freedom of expression and association guaranteed under Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR or the Convention) to restrictions on the activity of non-governmental organisations (NGOs);
b) application of the principle of legality to such restrictions;
c) the legitimacy of the aim, necessity and proportionality of measures regulating NGOs, including restrictions on funding, burdensome reporting requirements, sanctions and the stigmatizing effect of labelling NGOs as “foreign agents”; and
d) the scope of permissible restrictions under Article 18 of the ECHR, particularly the question of interferences used for purposes other than those which fall under Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention.
The submission addresses the obligations of State parties to the ECHR with account taken of the other international law obligations, such as those under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as well as other relevant standards under international law.
Russia-ECtHR-AmicusBrief-Ecodefence-legalsubmissions-2017-ENG (download the third party intervention)
Oct 2, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ has joined other NGOs in welcoming action by the HRC on Yemen, Burundi, and DRC, as well as on reprisals and intimidation against civil society and human rights defenders, and the death penalty, while expressing disappointment about lack of adequate action on other matters.
The full statement is as follows:
Joint statement by International Service for Human Rights on behalf of Amnesty International, Asian Forum on Human Rights and Development (Forum Asia), Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS), CIVICUS, Human Rights House Foundation, International Commission of Jurists and the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA).
We welcome the adoption of the resolution intended to end acts of intimidation or reprisals. However, we regret that a small group of States – most of them regular perpetrators of acts of intimidation or reprisals – have tried to undermine the Council’s efforts to end reprisals. We thank the majority of the Council members for resisting these efforts.
We are concerned that there were attempts to dilute several resolutions at this Council with the insertion of so-called “sovereignty” clauses. While we welcome the fact that they were ultimately defeated, we are concerned that a significant number members seek to use the concept of Sovereignty to shield themselves and other States from international scrutiny.
We also welcome that the resolution on the death penalty urges States to not impose it as a sanction for specific forms of conduct such as apostasy, blasphemy, adultery and consensual same-sex relations.
We applaud the creation by consensus of an international investigative body on Yemen, and the broad State leadership on this issue. It sends a message that the people of Yemen have not been abandoned, and that accountability for international crimes is urgently required. We call on all parties to the conflict to fully cooperate with this mandate.
On Burundi, we welcome the extension of the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry (COI). This was the only credible response to the CoI’s concerns that crimes against humanity may have been committed, and the persistent non-cooperation of Burundi with both the COI and the OHCHR presence in the country. We urge Burundi to follow through on its promises to start cooperating with the UN system, in line with duties as HRC member, and – failing that – call on the General Assembly to take appropriate action.
On Myanmar, while we welcome the extension of the fact-finding mission’s mandate, we are disappointed that the Council did not do more to address the gravity of the situation on the ground, in particular acknowledging the disproportionate campaign of violence by Myanmar’s security forces in Rakhine State, which have forced around half a million Rohingya to flee to Bangladesh since 25 August. We urge States to use the ongoing UN General Assembly session to address what the High Commissioner for Human Rights described to the Council as a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing.”
On Cambodia, while the Council missed an opportunity for robust scrutiny of the worsening situation, the pre-election reporting in March should put authorities on notice.
On the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), we welcome the Council’s decision to boost scrutiny of the human rights crisis for another year, which shows how horrific the situation has become. The DRC must now cooperate with all Council mechanisms, and the Council needs to keep its eyes on the country until all actors stop committing violations and abuses, and justice for victims has been obtained.
Finally, we regret the increasing effort spent on procedural tricks and manoeuvers by States in an attempt avoid scrutiny – including by abusing the privilege of being a member to seek to avoid scrutiny of their own situation – instead of spending diplomatic time and capital on ending human rights violations, which is the Council’s core mandate. A renewed commitment to addressing situations based on objective criteria is now more urgent than ever.
Sep 28, 2017 | Advocacy, Uncategorized
The ICJ today called on the UN Human Rights Committee and a group of UN Special Procedure mandates to take urgent follow up action on Venezuela in light of the grave and ever deteriorating human rights situation in the country.
In a letter to the UN Human Rights Committee, the treaty body responsible for monitoring implementation by States parties to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the ICJ called for urgent action by the Committee, either through its established follow-up procedure and/or through requesting a special interim report. The Committee’s follow-up procedure was referenced in the Committee’s Concluding Observations on Venezuela’s fourth periodic report under the ICCPR. Special interim reports may be requested by the Committee under Article 40(1)(b) of the ICCPR.
The ICJ also called for urgent action to be taken by the following UN Special Procedure mandates: the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, the Special Rapporteur on freedom of assembly and of association, the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers and the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. This group of Special Procedure mandates had on 4 August 2017 issued a joint statement on the human rights situation in Venezuela.
The ICJ’s letters draw attention to several critical areas of concern:
- The rapidly deteriorating human rights situation;
- The lack of accountability of perpetrators of human rights violations;
- The lack of effective remedies and reparation for victims of human rights violations;
- The lack of independence of the judiciary;
- The institutional crisis arising from decisions of the Supreme Court of Justice;
- The unconstitutional election of the new National Constituent Assembly;
- The dismissal of the former Attorney General;
- The recent establishment of a ‘Truth Commission’;
- The intended revision of Venezuela’s Constitution; and
- Venezuela’s failure to notify its state of emergency under the ICCPR.
ICJ-Correspondence-VenezuelaFollowUp-HRCttee-2017-09-28 (download letter to the Human Rights Committee, in PDF)
ICJ-Correspondence-VenezuelaFollowUp-SPs-2017-09-28 (download letter to the Special Procedure mandates, in PDF)
ICJ reports:
Venezuela: the Supreme Court of Justice has become an arm of an authoritarian executive
Venezuela: rule of law and impunity crisis deepens
Venezuela: dismissal of Attorney General a further blow to the rule of law and accountability
Venezuela: Human rights and Rule of Law in deep crisis
Strengthening the Rule of Law in Venezuela
Sep 27, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today highlighted a sharp deterioration in the situation for human rights and the rule of law, in a statement to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The statement was delivered during the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, and read as follows:
“The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur (UN Doc A/HRC/36/61) and strongly supports the renewal of her mandate.
Monitoring and action by the international community has seldom been more important for Cambodia since the Paris Peace Accords were signed in 1991.
Civil society, independent media and the political opposition are under sustained attack in what appears to be a carefully orchestrated effort to silence dissenting voices in the lead up to national elections in July 2018. Vague legal provisions in for instance the Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations (LANGO) and the Law on Political Parties, are being weaponized to this end.
Human rights defenders and others, including the “ADHOC 4”, Ny Chakrya, Tep Vanny, Hun Vannak, Doem Kundy, and the President of the opposition party, Kem Sokha, face criminal charges with all the hallmarks of being politically motivated.
Prosecutors and judges lack independence and impartiality, and investigations routinely fall short of international standards, as in the case of the killing of political commentator Kem Ley.
Seeking to justify its actions, Cambodia frequently invokes the principle of the rule of law.
The ICJ, a global organisation of judges and lawyers, has worked for the rule of law for more than sixty years. The rule of law does not simply mean that laws exist and are enforced, but requires among other things: equal application of the law without discrimination, including due to political or other opinion, and ensuring that laws are only adopted and applied consistent with international human rights law.
What is happening in Cambodia today has nothing to do with the rule of law.
The ICJ would therefore ask the Special Rapporteur what further recommendations she has towards seeing the rule of law, as properly understood, truly reign in Cambodia.”
The Human Rights Council is expected to adopt a new resolution on Cambodia later this week. The ICJ and other non-governmental organisations have called for it to include additional monitoring and additional opportunities to discussion the situation at the Human Rights Council, before national elections scheduled for July 2018.
Sep 25, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today joined a group of 285 organisations from around the world calling on governments across the world to respect, protect and fulfill the right to access safe and legal abortion services and post-abortion care.
The statement, which was delivered by the NGO Action Canada for Population and Development, during a general debate at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, read as follows:
Through the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, States explicitly agreed to prioritize the human rights of women, including the eradication of gender-based discrimination and violence. However, many States have not yet made the important decision that women’s human rights deserve to be upheld and their lives are worth saving. The continued criminalization of abortion and restrictions on access to and provision of abortion and post-abortion care in many jurisdictions is stark evidence of this.
Around 22 million unsafe abortions are estimated to take place around the world annually, leading to 7 million health complications and 47,000 deaths. In addition, there are major social and financial costs to women and girls, families, communities, health systems and economies. The criminalization of abortion and failure to ensure access to quality abortion services is a violation of the rights to non-discrimination, to privacy, and to make decisions about one’s own body, and can constitute torture or ill-treatment, as repeatedly highlighted by UN bodies and experts. Prohibiting abortion pushes it underground and gives rise to unsafe abortions, violating the rights to life, health and bodily autonomy. Moreover, the poor and those already facing multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination are disproportionately affected, making the global community’s pledge to “leave no one behind” ring hollow.
These human rights violations must stop now. On September 28, the Global Day of Action for Access to Safe and Legal Abortion, we urge the Human Rights Council to address the human rights violations arising from criminalization of abortion and the denial of access to safe and legal abortion services through its resolutions, decisions, dialogues, debates, and the UPR. We demand in a collective voice that governments across the world respect, protect and fulfill the right to access safe and legal abortion services and post-abortion care.
The full statement, with the list of signatories, may be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC36-JointOralStatement-item8-GD-Abortion-2017
Sep 22, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
Addressing the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ today urged Thailand to end criminal proceedings against lawyer Sirikan “June” Charoensiri, that are based on her professional activities as a human rights defender and lawyer.
The statement came during general debate at the Human Rights Council on, among other things, the report compiling cases of individual complaints that have been raised by the Special Procedures (independent experts) appointed by the Council. The statement read as follows:
“Among the many cases covered by the Communications Report of Special Procedures (A/HRC/36/25) is that of Thailand lawyer and human rights defender, Sirikan “June” Charoensiri. She was charged with sedition and other offences for actions taken, in her professional role, to protect human rights. With other lawyers, she had observed and provided legal assistance to participants in a peaceful protest.
In April, four Special Rapporteurs sent a joint communication (AL THA 2/2017) to Thailand about her case, and the related issues of restrictions on fundamental freedoms put in place following the military coup of May 2014, and prosecution of civilians in military courts.
Thailand’s response to the communication (No.52101/483) attempts to justify the charges against her by, among other things, appearing to associate her with the persons to which she and her colleagues were providing legal aid.
Principle 18 of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers states that, “lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions.”
The International Commission of Jurists considers that the case against Ms Charoensiri is incompatible with these and other international human rights standards. The ICJ calls upon Thailand ensure the legal proceedings against Ms Charoensiri are ended, and that measures are taken to end and prevent similar cases against other human rights defenders in the country.”
Exercising its right of reply to the statement, the delegation of Thailand, while appearing to accept that Ms Charoensiri is a human rights defender and lawyer, asserted that she had not been charged in her capacity as a lawyer or human rights defender, but due to the possibility that she was a principal or co-perpetrator of an offence, which the delegation said was based on unspecified information from the Royal Thai Police. The delegation affirmed that the Thai government attaches high priority to the protection of human rights defenders, and referred to several initiatives the delegation said were currently being prepared in this regard.
More detail from ICJ about the case is available by clicking here.
Details of the Special Procedures’ action on the case is available in the database of communications, by clicking here.
