Sep 14, 2017 | Advocacy
In a joint statement released today, the ICJ joins several other organisations in calling on the Supreme Court of the Maldives to rescind the indefinite suspension of 56 lawyers.
The lawyers had signed a petition to the Supreme Court calling for the independence and reform of the judiciary.
The statement, made jointly with Maldivian Democracy Network, Front Line Defenders, Transparency International and FORUM-ASIA, can be downloaded here: Maldives-Advocacy-Lawyers-2017
Sep 13, 2017 | Advocacy
The ICJ joined 17 other organizations in calling for robust and human rights compliant international standards to regulate the use of “Unmanned Aerial Vehicles” , developed through fully inclusive and consultative processes.
Universal-DroneStandards-Advocacy-2017-ENG (full PDF)
Sep 13, 2017 | Advocacy, News
As proceedings resume in India v. Pakistan (Jadhav case) before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the ICJ has published a briefing paper to clarify the key issues and relevant laws raised in the case in a Question and Answer format.
The case concerns Pakistan’s failure to allow for consular access to an Indian national detained on charges of serious crimes.
India has alleged “egregious violations of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (VCCR)” by Pakistan in connection with the detention, trial and conviction of Indian national Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav.
Pakistani authorities arrested Jadhav on 3 March 2016.
India was informed of the arrest on 25 March 2016. On 10 April 2017, Pakistan’s military announced Jadhav had been convicted and sentenced to death by a military court for “espionage and sabotage activities against Pakistan.”
India’s requests for consular access, made at least sixteen times starting from 25 March 2016, were either denied by Pakistan or made conditional upon India’s assistance in the investigation against Jadhav.
India alleges that denial of consular access breaches Pakistan’s obligations under Article 36(1) of the VCCR, to which both States are parties.
In May 2017, the ICJ accepted India’s request for provisional measures and directed Pakistan to “take all measures at its disposal” to ensure Jadhav is not executed pending the final decision of the Court.
India is due to file its written memorial with supporting documents today, 13 September.
Pakistan will have three months to file a counter-memorial.
The ICJ will then decide on dates for oral hearing of arguments.
Following the hearings, the Court will deliberate and issue a judgment.
While the case at issue is limited to denial of consular access under the VCCR, it engages other critical fair trial concerns that arise in military trials in Pakistan.
The International Commission of Jurists has documented how Pakistani military courts are not independent and the proceedings before them fall far short of national and international fair trial standards.
Judges of military courts are part of the executive branch of the State and continue to be subjected to military command; the right to appeal to civilian courts is not available; the right to a public hearing is not guaranteed; and a duly reasoned, written judgment, including the essential findings, evidence and legal reasoning, is denied.
The case also underscores one of inherent problems of the death penalty: that fair trial violations that lead to the execution of a person are inherently irreparable.
The International Commission of Jurists considers the death penalty a violation of the right to life and cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment and notes that a large majority of States, in repeated UN resolutions, have called on retentionist states to declare a moratorium on the practice with a view to abolition.
Contact:
Frederick Rawski (Bangkok), ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, e: frederick.rawski@icj.org
Reema Omer (London), ICJ International Legal Adviser, South Asia t: +447889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org
Download the Q&A:
India-ICJ Q&A Jadhav case-Advocacy-2017-ENG (in PDF)
Sep 12, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today made an oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council, on the crisis for human rights and the rule of law in Venezuela.
The statement was made in general debate under item 2 on the oral update delivered by the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
The ICJ statement read as follows:
“The ICJ welcomes the efforts of the High Commissioner and his Office to document and draw attention to the situation in Venezuela, including through the report published on 30 August. As the High Commissioner highlighted, the situation only continues to worsen and the ICJ fully supports his call for the Council to establish an international investigation into human rights violations in Venezuela.
The deep human rights crisis and the breakdown of the rule of law in Venezuela is undoubtedly the most worrying situation in the American hemisphere.
Arbitrary detentions, extrajudicial and arbitrary executions, military trials of civilians and persecutions and harassments of opponents, dissidents and human rights defenders have become systematic and widespread practices.
The combined action of the Supreme Court of Justice, the Government and the National Constituent Assembly has destroyed the rule of law, suppressing the separation of powers, delivering a fatal blow to the Legislative, and seriously undermining independence and impartiality of the Judiciary.
The 1999 Constitution has de facto ceased to be in force and the road to arbitrary exercise of power has begun.
The ICJ considers that it is imperative that the Human Rights Council take action on this serious situation.”
The High Commissioner, in his oral update on 11 September, had stated as follows in relation to Venezuela:
“Last month my Office issued a report on Venezuela, highlighting excessive use of force by security officers, and multiple other human rights violations, in the context of anti-Government protests. There is a very real danger that tensions will further escalate, with the Government crushing democratic institutions and critical voices – including through criminal proceedings against opposition leaders, recourse to arbitrary detentions, excessive use of force, and ill-treatment of detainees, which in some cases amounts to torture. Venezuela is a Member State of this Council, and as such has a particular duty to “uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights”, in the words of Resolution 60/251. My investigation suggests the possibility that crimes against humanity may have been committed, which can only be confirmed by a subsequent criminal investigation. While I support the concept of a national Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the current mechanism is inadequate. I therefore urge that it be reconfigured with the support and involvement of the international community. I also urge this Council to establish an international investigation into the human rights violations in Venezuela.”
The ICJ also launched today a new report on Venezuela, and convened a side event to discuss the need for action by the Human Rights Council.
Sep 11, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today delivered an oral statement at the UN Human Rights Council, on the need for criminalisation and other effective measures against enforced disappearances in Asia.
The statement, which was delivered in an interactive dialogue with the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, read as follows:
“Mr President,
The ICJ echoes the Working Group’s recommendation that States should criminalize all acts of enforced disappearance, including enforced disappearances of migrants, which should be punished by appropriate penalties, taking into account their extreme seriousness.
As noted in the recent ICJ publication, “No more ‘missing persons’: the criminalization of enforced disappearance in South Asia”, despite the region having some of the highest numbers of reported cases of disappearances in the world, enforced disappearance is not presently a distinct crime in any South Asian country.
This is a major obstacle to ensuring justice in cases of enforced disappearance.
In Southeast Asia, the ICJ has highlighted the failure of authorities to effectively investigate cases of alleged enforced disappearance in the absence of national laws criminalizing enforced disappearance, for example with respect to emblematic cases of Sombath Somphone in Lao PDR and Somchai Neelapaijit and Porlajee “Billy” Rakchongcharoen in Thailand.
Where there is no clear national legal framework specifically criminalizing enforced disappearance, unacknowledged detentions by law enforcement agencies are often treated by national authorities as “missing persons” cases.
On rare occasions where criminal complaints are registered against alleged perpetrators, complainants are forced to categorize the crime as “abduction”, “kidnapping” or “unlawful confinement”.
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.
Finally, the ICJ welcomes the Working Group’s migration study; we note that the ICJ Principles on the Role of Judges & Lawyers in relation to Refugees and Migrants, published earlier this year, includes key safeguards that could help prevent disppearances in this context.
Thank you.”
The statement is available in PDF format in English, in Thai and Laotian.
Aug 15, 2017 | Advocacy
Tep Vanny, one of Cambodia’s most prominent land activists and human rights defenders, will have spent one year in prison on 15 August for defending her community and exercising her human rights.
The ICJ and other human rights organizations condemn her arbitrary imprisonment and call for her convictions to be overturned, for all ongoing politically motivated and unsubstantiated charges against her to be dropped, and for her immediate release from prison.
Tep Vanny has fought tirelessly to protect the rights of members of the Boeung Kak Lake community, following their forced eviction from their homes in Phnom Penh.
More recently, she played a leading role in the so-called ‘Black Monday” campaign, challenging the arbitrary pre-trial detention of five human rights defenders, Lim Mony, Ny Sokha, Yi Soksan, Nay Vanda, and Ny Chakrya (the “Freethe5KH” detainees).
On 22 August 2016, following her arrest at a protest calling for the release of the five, she was convicted of ‘insulting of a public official’, and sentenced to six days in prison.
However, instead of releasing her based on time served, the authorities reactivated dormant charges dating back to a 2013 protest and kept her in detention.
“It is clear that the authorities are using the courts to lock me up, silence my freedom of expression and break my spirit,” said Tep Vanny. “They want to stop me from advocating and seeking a solution for the remaining people from Boeung Kak Lake as well as other campaigns to demand justice in our society.”
On 19 September 2016, Tep Vanny was sentenced, along with three other Boeung Kak Lake community activists, to six months imprisonment for “insulting and obstructing public officials” in a reactivated case related to a 2011 peaceful protest calling for a resolution to the Boeung Kak Lake land dispute, despite the absence of credible inculpatory evidence.
This conviction has since been upheld by the Court of Appeal on 27 February 2017.
On 23 February 2017, following proceedings which fell short of fair trial standards, Tep Vanny was convicted of “intentional violence with aggravating circumstances”, sentenced to a further 30 months in prison and fined more than 14 million riel (about US $3,500 – or twice the annual minimum wage in Cambodia) for having peacefully participated in protests calling for the release of her fellow activist Yorm Bopha, back in 2013.
While the #FreeThe5KH human rights defenders were released on bail on 29 June 2017, after having spent 427 days in arbitrary detention, Tep Vanny remains in prison.
She is currently on trial in a third reactivated case, facing charges of “public insult” and “death threats” brought by another member of the Boeung Kak Lake community, despite the complaint having been dropped by the community member.
On 8 August 2017, the Court of Appeal upheld her February 2017 conviction.
Cambodia-Joint Statement Tep Vanny-Advocacy-2017-ENG (full statement in English, PDF)
Cambodia-Joint Statement Tep Vanny-Advocacy-2017-KHM (full statement in Khmer, PDF)
Cambodia-Infographic TV Case Overview-Advocacy-2017-KHM (Infographic in Khmer, PDF)
