Oct 14, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ has presented information to the UN Committee against Torture in preparation for the Committee’s examination of the fifth periodic report of Uzbekistan under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
In its submission, the ICJ addresses Uzbekistan’s legislation on extradition, its potential discrepancies with international law.
The ICJ welcomes the recent ratification of the Commonwealth of Independent States (hereafter, “CIS”) Convention on Legal Assistance and Legal Relations in Civil, Family and Criminal Matters 2002, known as the Chisinau Convention, as a positive step towards the compliance of the country’s extradition system with international standards
In it report, the ICJ formulates the following recommendations to Uzbekistan:
- Fully implement human rights and procedural safeguards and guarantees in extradition proceedings or in connection with other types of transfers, and interpret and apply such safeguards in accordance with Uzbekistan’s international human rights law obligations. In particular, Uzbekistan should take all necessary measures to fully implement the human rights guarantees featured in the Chisinau Convention into its domestic legislation.
- Implement the necessary reforms to give judicial authorities the central decision-making role in extradition proceedings, and ensure their full independence both at an institutional and personal level, in law and in practice. Extradition decisions should be taken by prosecutors only if they enjoy the same level of independence as judges, in law and in practice.
- Ensure that individuals extradited to face trial in Uzbekistan courts are awarded the full protection of the Convention.
- Take effective measures to prevent torture and other forms of ill-treatment, including by ensuring compliance with the non-refoulement principle in extradition proceedings.
- Carry out effective, independent and impartial investigations with a view to identifying persons directly and indirectly responsible for rendition operations and abduction practices, as they violate human rights and involve crimes under international law. Those responsible should be prosecuted, tried and, if convicted, sentenced to punishments commensurate with the gravity of their crimes, and to appropriate administrative sanctions to ensure non-repetition.
Uzbekistan-CAT-Advocacy-non legal submission-2019-ENG (download the submission in English)
Sep 16, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today put the spotlight the increase and “normalisation” of enforce disappearances and abductions worldwide, with examples about Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, speaking at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The statement, made during the general debate, reads as follows:
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) shares concerns highlighted by the Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances in its report (UN doc. A/HRC/42/40) at the “increasing use of extraterritorial abductions” and at the “normalization of these practices” globally. ICJ previously documented such practices in our 2017 report, Transnational Injustices.
The killing of Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi Arabia is an example of particular concern, as is the reported abduction, by Turkish authorities, of persons they claim to be linked to “terrorist organisations.” Several of these people, who later reappeared in Turkish prisons, are currently facing serious challenges in mounting a proper legal defence. Complaints of the families have not been properly investigated.
In Egypt, the National Security Agency (NSA) has been abducting and forcibly disappearing hundreds as a technique to suppress dissent. This year, the ICJ and Adalah reported on the disappearance of 138 detainees for between 10 to 219 days, many of whom were subjected to torture.
The ICJ urges the Council to address these worrying developments and calls on all countries:
- to stop all practices of enforced disappearance, abduction or informal international transfer;
- to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, and
- to provide to the victims of enforced disappearance and their families full access to their rights, including an effective remedy.
Aug 30, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ has presented information to the UN Human Rights Committee in preparation for the Committee’s examination of the eighth periodic report of Ukraine under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).
In this submission, the ICJ draws the Committee’s attention to the situation with the security and independence of the legal profession and Ukraine’s compliance with and implementation of its obligations under Articles 2, 6 and 14 of the ICCPR, as well as the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
The ICJ stresses that attacks on lawyers are likely to lead not only to violations the rights of the individual lawyers concerned, but also to violations of the rights of the clients they represent, including the right to a fair trial (Article 14 ICCPR), the right to liberty (Article 9 ICCPR), the right to freedom from torture or other ill-treatment (Article 7 ICCPR), and the right to an effective remedy (Article 2.3 ICCPR) as attacks on lawyers may, in turn, hinder the provision of effective legal representation.
Ukraine-List of Issues-Advocacy-non legal submission-2019-ENG (full submission, in PDF)
Aug 19, 2019 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
The International Commission of Jurists, the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project and Human Rights Watch have jointly intervened before the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Taner Kiliç, former Chair of the Board of Amnesty International Turkey.
Taner Kiliç is a Turkish human rights defenders. He had been Chair of the Board of Amnesty International Turkey since 2014.
He was arrested on 6 June 2017 on reportedly unsubstantiated charges of “membership of a terrorist organisation” and was released on bail on 15 August 2018 after having spent 14 months in detention.
His case before the European Court of Human Rights challenges the lawfulness of his pre-trial and on remand detention, the violations of his right to judicial review of his detention, and of his freedom of expression and association, considering his arrest linked to his work as leader of a NGO.
As the interveners have written to the Court, this case epitomises some of the most fundamental human rights challenges in Turkey today.
These involve widely documented restrictions on freedom of expression, association, and assembly of human rights defenders (HRDs) and rapidly closing civil society space.
The interveners have submitted observations on:
- the factual context in respect of the situation facing HRDs in Turkey;
- international standards governing obligations towards HRDs of relevance to the Court’s interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights, including the limits prescribed by Article 18;
- key principles necessary for a rule of law approach to the application of the criminal law, against the legal and practical pattern of excessive resort to criminal law against HRDs in Turkey today.
Turkey-ECtHR-icj&others-Kilic-Advocacy-legal submission-2019-ENG (download the third party intervention)
Photo credit: Amnesty International
Jul 17, 2019 | Advocacy, News, Non-legal submissions
Today, the ICJ filed a submission to the Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review in advance of its review of Turkey’s human rights record in January 2020.
In its submission, the ICJ considered:
- the situation with the independence of the judiciary in Turkey, during and after the state of emergency of 2016-2018;
- the lack of effective remedies for the mass dismissals in the public sector occurred in that period;
- the shortcomings in fair trial rights in the criminal justice system:
- the obstacles to the action of civil society;
- the lack of accountability for torture and enforced disappeareances; and
- provided information on the status of international human rights treaties ratified by Turkey.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Full submission in English (PDF) : Turkey-UPR-Advocacy-non-legal submissions-2019-ENG
Jul 12, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ joined other NGOs in an end-of-session statement, highlighting the achievements and shortfalls of the 41st Ordinary Session of the UN Human Rights Council, 24 June – 12 July 2019.
The statement, delivered by International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), reads as follows:
By renewing the mandate of the Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI), the Council has sent a clear message that violence and discrimination against people of diverse sexual orientations and gender identities cannot be tolerated. It reaffirmed that specific, sustained and systematic attention is needed to address these human rights violations and ensure that LGBT people can live a life of dignity. We welcome the Core Group’s commitment to engage in dialogue with all States, resulting in 50 original co-sponsors across all regions. However, we regret that some States have again attempted to prevent the Council from addressing discrimination and violence on the basis of SOGI.
The Council session also sent a clear message that Council membership comes with scrutiny by addressing the situations of Eritrea, the Philippines, China, Saudi Arabia and the Democratic Republic of Congo. This shows the potential the Council has to leverage its membership to become more effective and responsive to rights holders and victims.
The Council did the right thing by extending its monitoring of the situation in Eritrea. The onus is on the Eritrean Government to cooperate with Council mechanisms, including the Special Rapporteur, in line with its membership obligations.
We welcome the first Council resolution on the Philippines as an important first step towards justice and accountability. We urge the Council to closely follow this situation and be ready to follow up with additional action, if the situation does not improve or deteriorates further. We deeply regret that such a resolution was necessary, due to the continuation of serious violations and repeated refusal of the Philippines – despite its membership of the Council– to cooperate with existing mechanisms.
We deplore that Council members, such as the Philippines and Eritrea, sought to use their seats in this Council to seek to shield themselves from scrutiny, and those States[1] who stand with the authorities and perpetrators who continue to commit grave violations with impunity, rather than with the victims.
We welcome the written statement by 22 States on China expressing collective concern over widespread surveillance, restrictions to freedoms of religion and movement, and large-scale arbitrary detention of Uyghurs and other minorities in Xinjiang. We consider it as a first step towards sustained Council attention and in the absence of progress look to those governments that have signed this letter to follow up at the September session with a resolution calling for China to allow access to the region to independent human rights experts and to end country-wide the arbitrary detention of individuals based on their religious beliefs or political opinions.
We welcome the progress made in resolutions on the rights of women and girls: violence against women and girls in the world of work, on discrimination against women and girls and on the consequences of child, early and forced marriage. We particularly welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Working Group on Discrimination Against Women and Girls under its new name and mandate to focus on the intersections of gender and age and their impact on girls. The Council showed that it was willing to stand up to the global backlash against the rights of women and girls by ensuring that these resolutions reflect the current international legal framework and to resist cultural relativism, despite several amendments put forward to try and weaken the strong content of these resolutions.
However, in the text on the contribution of development to the enjoyment of all human rights, long standing consensus language from the Vienna Declaration for Programme of Action (VDPA) recognising that, at the same time, “the lack of development may not be invoked to justify the abridgement of internationally recognized human rights” has again been deliberately excluded disturbing the careful balance established and maintained for several decades on this issue.
We welcome the continuous engagement of the Council in addressing the threat posed by climate change to human rights, through its annual resolution and the panel discussion on women’s rights and climate change at this session. We call on the Council to continue to strengthen its work on this issue, given its increasing urgency for the protection of all human rights.
The Council has missed an opportunity on Sudan where it could have supported regional efforts and ensured that human rights are not sidelined in the process. We now look to African leadership to ensure that human rights are upheld in the transition. The Council should stand ready to act, including through setting up a full-fledged inquiry into all instances of violence against peaceful protesters and civilians across the country.
During the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial and summary executions, States heard loud and clear that the time to hold Saudi Arabia accountable is now for the extrajudicial killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. We recall that women human rights defenders continue to be arbitrarily detained despite the calls by 36 States at the March session. We urge States to adopt a resolution at the September session to establish a monitoring mechanism over the human rights situation in the country.
We welcome the landmark report of the High Commissioner on the situation for human rights in Venezuela; in response to the grave findings in the report and the absence of any fundamental improvement of the situation in the meantime, we urge the Council to adopt a Commission of Inquiry or similar mechanism in September, to reinforce the ongoing efforts of the High Commissioner and other actors to address the situation.
We welcome the renewal of the mandate on the freedom of peaceful assembly and association. This mandate is at the core of our work as civil society and we trust that the mandate will continue to protect and promote these fundamental freedoms towards a more open civic space.
We welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Belarus. We acknowledge some positive signs of re-engagement in dialogue by Belarus, and an attempted negotiation process with the EU on a potential Item 10 resolution. However, in the absence of systemic human rights reforms in Belarus, the mandate and resolution process remains an essential tool for Belarusian civil society. In addition, there are fears of a spike in violations around upcoming elections and we are pleased that the resolution highlights the need for Belarus to provide safeguards against such an increase.
We welcome the renewal of the quarterly reporting process on the human rights situation in Ukraine. However, we also urge States to think creatively about how best to use this regular mechanism on Ukraine to make better progress on the human rights situation.
The continued delay in the release of the UN database of businesses engaged with Israeli settlements established pursuant to Council resolution 31/36 in March 2016 is of deep concern. We join others including Tunisia speaking on behalf of 65 states and Peru speaking on behalf of 26 States in calling on the High Commissioner to urgently and fully fulfil this mandate as a matter of urgency and on all States to cooperate with all Council mandates, including this one, and without political interference.
Numerous States and stakeholders highlighted the importance of the OHCHR report on Kashmir; while its release only a few days ago meant it did not receive substantive consideration at the present session, we look forward to discussing it in depth at the September session.
Finally, we welcome the principled leadership shown by Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, in pursuing accountability for individual victims of acts of intimidation and reprisals under General Debate Item 5, contrasting with other States which tend to make only general statements of concern, and call on States to raise all individual cases at the interactive dialogue on reprisals and intimidation in the September session.
(text in italics was not read out due to the limited time)
Signatories:
- International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
- Amnesty International
- ARTICLE 19
- Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
- Association for Progressive Communications (APC)
- Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies
- Center for Reproductive Rights
- CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
- DefendDefenders (the East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project)
- Franciscans International
- Global Initiative for Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
- Human Rights House Foundation
- Human Rights Watch
- International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
- International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
- International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA)
[1] States who voted against the resolution on Eritrea: Bahrain, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Egypt, Eritrea, Iraq, India, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, the Philippines and Pakistan.
States who voted against the resolution on the Philippines: Angola, Bahrain, Cameroon, China, Cuba, Egypt, Eritrea, Hungary, Iraq, India, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, and the Philippines.
