Jun 26, 2017 | Advocacy
Amnesty International (AI) and the ICJ welcome the commitments made by the Royal Thai Government to prevent torture and other ill-treatment and urge authorities to ensure no further delay in implementing these undertakings.
The statement came on on the 30th anniversary of the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (UNCAT) – marked on June 26 as the International Day in Support of Victims of Torture.
October 2017 will mark ten years since Thailand pledged to respect and protect the right of all persons to be free from torture and other ill-treatment by ratifying the Convention against Torture. AI and the ICJ however remain concerned that torture is still prevalent throughout the country.
Thailand has made significant and welcome commitments at the United Nations Committee against Torture, Universal Periodic Review of the Human Rights Council and UN Human Rights Committee to uphold its obligations under the Convention against Torture.
These include commitments to penalize torture, as defined in the Convention, under its criminal law and to create an independent body to visit all places of detention under the purview of the Ministry of Justice.
However, to date, these remain paper promises, which have not yet translated into action.
AI and the ICJ call on Thailand to move forward with these commitments, including by criminalizing torture and other acts of ill-treatment, establishing practical, legal and procedural safeguards against such practices, and ensuring that victims and others can report torture and other ill-treatment without fear.
The prohibition of torture and other ill-treatment in international law is absolute. Torture is impermissible in all circumstances, including during public emergencies or in the context of threats to public security.
AI and the ICJ regret repeated delays to the finalisation and passage of Thailand’s Draft Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act.
If the remaining discrepancies with the Convention against Torture are addressed, the passage of this Act would criminalise torture and enforced disappearances and establish other safeguards against these acts.
Both organizations urge the Royal Thai Government to actualise its commitment to eradicating torture by addressing remaining shortcomings in the Act and prioritising its passage into law in a form that fully complies with Thailand’s obligations under the Convention against Torture and the Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance.
Additional consultations with the public and other parties should be carried out in a transparent and inclusive manner and without delay.
Similarly, AI and the ICJ urge Thailand to move ahead with its commitment to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture, which obligates authorities to establish a National Preventive Mechanism – an independent expert body authorised to visit places of detention, including by carrying out unannounced visits – as well as to allow such visits by an international expert body.
Such independent scrutiny is critical to prevent torture and other ill-treatment, including through implementing their detailed recommendations based on visits.
Authorities should also act immediately on the commitment made at Thailand’s Universal Periodic Review before the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2016 to inspect places of detention in line with the revised UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, also known as the Nelson Mandela Rules.
Thailand-Torture satement AI-ICJ-Advocacy-ENG-2017 (full statement in English, PDF)
Thailand-Torture satement AI-ICJ-Advocacy-THA-2017 (full statement in Thai, PDF)
Jun 23, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ has joined other NGOs in highlighting some of the achievements and failures of the June 2017 session of the UN Human Rights Council in a statement at the end of the session.
The statement, delivered on behalf of the group of NGOs by the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), read as follows:
At the close of this session, we welcome the commitment by many States from all regions to enhance the Council’s success and effectiveness, and the performance of Human Rights Council (HRC) members through a series of concrete actions. The steps outlined by the Netherlands, such as more competitive HRC elections and the application of objective human rights based criteria to determine whether and how to act on situations of concern, would go a long way in making the Council more accessible, effective, and protective.
The leadership shown by States in the development of joint statements on killings in the Philippines‘ so-called ‘war on drugs’ and threats against human rights defenders, and on the increasingly dire situation in the Maldives are examples of this. We regret the lack of such leadership on other States including China and Egypt.
Although we’d hoped for a more robust response on the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) from the Council, the international team of experts brings hope of uncovering the truth about the horrific violence in the Kasai. The UN, this Council, and the DRC itself must now ensure unhindered access for and support to the team, for it to independently produce a robust and credible report, which will constitute a step towards accountability.
We congratulate Cote d’Ivoire for its six years of cooperation with the UN and the mandate of the Independent Expert. We urge the Council to continue to pay attention to the human rights situation, particularly in the context of recent mutinies, and to assist the country in the implementation of the Independent Expert’s recommendations, including by striving for A-status for its National Human Rights Institution (NHRI).
We also echo the joint call by several States urging you to create a publicly accessible register of alleged acts of intimidation and reprisals and to provide short oral updates on cases at the start of every Item 5 general debate giving States concerned the opportunity to respond.
We also welcome the joint statement of the core group on civil society space together with some NGOs, and its reaffirmation that the “substantive participation of civil society makes this Council’s debates and work, including the UPR, richer and more meaningful”.
Mr President,
We are pleased that both resolutions on discrimination and violence against women were adopted by consensus, and that adverse amendments designed to remove language on comprehensive sexuality education and women human rights defenders were defeated. We regret that the Russian Federation and others systematically seek to remove reference to human rights defenders in all resolutions at each session. Denial of the existence of defenders is absurd, given the long history of formal recognition of the concept by the Commission on Human Rights, Council and General Assembly.
We regret that the resolution on the “protection of the family” fails to fully recognise that older persons are individual rights holders entitled to self-determination and autonomy, and ignores a significant UN process, the General Assembly Open-Ended Working Group on Ageing. The resolution also fails to acknowledge that diverse forms of the family exist. The entire initiative is implicated in an effort to subvert the aims of our human rights system and the universality of rights.
In closing, Mr President, we are dismayed at the lack of progress in terms of ensuring the most effective participation of civil society, in accordance with established rules and practice of the Council. Although symbolic, the massive reduction of reserved NGO desk space in this room is illustrative of this.
We are concerned about the lack of formal engagement by you and your Bureau with civil society, the absence of visible steps to curb and respond to intimidation or reprisals, and the abusive interruptions of NGO statements, including in some instances by the chair. And we look forward to engaging with your office to reverse this trend.
Thank you.
Among the NGOs joining the statement were the following:
- Amnesty International
- CIVICUS
- Human Rights Watch
- International Commission of Jurists
- International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA)
- International Longevity Center Global Alliance
- International Platform Against Impunity
- International Service for Human Rights
The joint statement may be downloaded in PDF here: UN-HRC35-EndSessionStatement-2017
* For additional information on ICJ priorities and activities at the session, see the following:
Refugees and migrants: the role of judges and lawyers
Business responsibility to protect human rights
Corporate impunity; legal protection of refugees and migrants
Discrimination against women in access to justice
Threats to independence of judges and lawyers; backsliding on violence against women
Ensuring women’s access to justice for gender based violence
Turkey: judicial independence and freedom of expression
Civil society space in the Human Rights Council
Call for strong action on Egypt at the Human Rights Council
Continuing lack of accountability for rendition and secret detention
“Protection of the Family”: concerns regarding the resolution
UN Human Rights Council adopts resolutions on independence of judges and lawyers
Jun 19, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ has joined other NGOs in expressing concerns about the latest resolution on “protection of the family” currently under consideration by the Human Rights Council.
The statement, which was delivered by the International Humanist and Ethical Union during the Council’s general debate on Follow-up and implementation of the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (item 8), read as follows:
In the Vienna, States reaffirmed their commitment to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In that vein, we would like to express our strong concerns about the draft resolution on the protection of the family [A/HRC/35/L.21 on “Protection of the Family: Role of the family in supporting the protection and promotion of human rights of older persons.”]
Together with NGOs working on the rights of older persons, we highlight that this resolution reinforces ageist stereotypes, fails to adequately recognize older persons as individual rights holders and falls far short of States’ obligations to respect, protect and fulfil their rights. We reject its limited focus on ‘protection and assistance’ and failure to reflect research that the family is the primary site of violence against older persons. We also note that the resolution ignores the work of the Open-ended Working Group on Ageing and ignores the conclusions of the Independent Expert on the enjoyment of all human rights by older persons.
This resolution is one of a series of Protection of the Family resolutions that aim to subvert the universality of international human rights; stifle diversity and autonomy; and to shift rights protections away from family members, including older persons, into the institution of ‘the family’. We are concerned that the resolution attempts to instrumentalize older persons and their rights towards these ends.
We are also concerned by the resolution’s failure to recognize that various forms of family exist everywhere, and its stating that “the family plays a crucial role in the preservation of cultural identity, traditions, morals, heritage and the values system of society,” without recognising that families can perpetuate discriminatory and harmful values and traditions, particularly against older women. Culture and tradition are not static or homogeneous; we all have equal human rights to participate in and create culture. When powerful institutions attempt to claim ownership over, or enforce ‘authentic’ interpretations of culture, tradition, or values, individuals – particularly those who are marginalized or vulnerable – are denied their fundamental rights.
For these reasons, we do not believe this draft resolution is in line with human rights principles and standards and therefore call on the Core Group to withdraw it or for members of the Human Rights Council to amend or vote against it.
*Joining and supporting organisations:
Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights
ARC International
Association for Women’s Rights in Development
Civil Authorize Negotiate Organization – Myanmar (C.A.N-Myanmar)
Coalition of African Lesbians
CREA
Federatie van Nederlandse Verenigingen tot Integratie van Homoseksualiteit – COC Nederland
HelpAge International
International Commission of Jurists
International Humanist and Ethical Union (IHEU)
International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA)
International Longevity Centre Global Alliance (ILC GA)
OUtRight Action International
Sexual Rights Initiative
Jun 16, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The International Commission of Jurists today drew to the attention of the Human Rights Council the failure of responsible States to ensure accountability for renditions and secret detention in several countries across the world.
The issue was highlighted by an oral statement in the General Debate on human rights situations that require the Council’s attention.
The ICJ statement continued as follows:
The US-administered rendition and secret detention programme of the last decade led to the commission of egregious violations of human rights and crimes under international law on a global scale with the complicity of several States, including in Europe.
Similar practices have been adopted in the Russian Federation where abductions of “terrorism” or “extremism” suspects and transfer to Central Asian States continue, in disregard of the principle of non-refoulement.
None of the States involved in the US-led renditions programme, or in abduction and transfer practices occurring in the Russian Federation, have ensured full accountability of those responsible and full redress for victims.
The ICJ calls on this Council to issue a strong call to all UN Member States to provide full accountability and redress for victims for the human rights violations that occurred during these operations.
Jun 13, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today spoke on behalf of a number of NGOs, drawing the attention of the Human Rights Council to the fact that the Council is permitting civil society space to shrink within its own chamber.
The statement was as follows:
Mr President,
We thank States for their commitment to address the shrinking space for civil society.
We draw the Council’s attention to the fact that since 2013, the number of desks reserved for NGOs in room XX for Human Rights Council sessions has been reduced from 24 to 2, leaving only the two speaking seats we are now sitting in.
This has been drawn to the attention of successive Presidents of the Council but the space has continued to shrink.
We invite all delegations to reflect on the impression this gives to civil society, not to mention States and other international actors, about the Council’s commitment to addressing shrinking civil society space.
I thank you Mr President.
The statement was delivered by the ICJ on behalf of the following NGOs:
- Article 19
- Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (Forum-Asia)
- Bahá’í International Community
- CIVICUS – World Alliance for Citizen Participation
- DefendDefenders (the East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project)
- FIAN International
- Franciscans International
- International Bar Association
- International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
- International Federation for Human Rights Leagues (FIDH)
- International Lesbian and Gay Association (ILGA)
- the International Movement against All forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR)
- International Platform Against Impunity
- International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
- Minority Rights Group International
- Peace Brigades International (PBI)
- Universal Rights Group (URG)
- Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF).
The statement can be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC35-OralStatement-GDItem3-CivilSocietySpace-2017
Jun 13, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
During a panel discussion at the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ delivered an oral statement on the role of men and boys in eliminating violence against women by ensuring women’s access to justice for gender based violence.
The statement was delivered during the first panel of the Council’s annual full-day discussion on the human rights of women. The panel focused on accelerating efforts to eliminate violence against women by engaging men and boys in preventing and responding to violence against women.
The ICJ’s statement was as follows:
Violence against women is a widespread human rights abuse rooted in patriarchal societies and gender stereotypes that are harmful to everyone. As the panel have recognised, the international community cannot address the issue as though it is only a problem for women and we welcome the positive focus on the role of men and boys as beneficiaries and agents of change.
The ICJ remains concerned about women’s access to justice for gender based violence. Strong domestic laws, grounded in an international human rights framework, that are upheld by a robust and independent judiciary, are essential components of tackling the problem.
However, the ICJ has worked with lawyers, judges and civil society to assess the obstacles that continue to face women seeking justice for gender based violence and we know that laws alone are not enough. It must also be acknowledged that many laws are based on patriarchal norms and stereotypes that are intrinsically discriminatory against women seeking justice through the legal system.
Behavioural change is required in not only preventing violence against women but also in ensuring that justice is available to those that have been subject to this violence. Men have a pivotal role to play in working with women to ensure that a gender based perspective is applied to the way laws are accessed and implemented.
We applaud the panellists’ focus on engaging with men and boys to prevent harmful behaviours of violence against women from taking root.
However, we would like to ask what role panellists suggest men and boys have in:
a) ensuring that perpetrators are held accountable for their actions, and
b) in supporting the justice system in rehabilitating offenders to prevent further acts of violence, without compromising justice and services available to women?
In response to the ICJ’s statement the Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women commented that structural problems impact on the effectiveness of laws.
Mr Abhijit Das noted that prosecution was only one means of addressing gender inequality and that engagement with men and boys needed to go beyond this to include the widest number of stakeholders possible, including those men and boys that do not perpetrate violence against women.
Mr Anthony Keedi noted that rehabilitation was a key component of addressing violence against women and must be at the heart of change to prevent cycles of violence from continuing.
The participants in the panel and discussion were:
- Chair: H.E. Mr Joaquin Alexander Maza Martelli, President of the Human Rights Council.
- Opening statement: Ms Kate Gilmore, UN Deputy High Commissioner of Human Rights provided an opening statement
- Keynote speaker: H.E. Ms Karen Ellemann, Minister for Equal Opportunities and Nordic Cooperation, Denmark
- Moderator: Ms. Lana Wells, Brenda Stafford Chair in the Prevention of Domestic Violence, University of Calgary, Canada
- Panellist: Ms Dubravka Simonovic, Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences
- Panellist: Mr Anthony Keedi, Masculinities Technical Adviser, ABAAD Resource Centre for Gender Equality, Lebanon
- Panellist: Mr Francis Oko Armah, Youth Activist, curious Minds, Ghana
- Panelist: Mr Abhijit Das, Co-Chair of MenEngage Alliance and Founder of Men’s Action for Stopping Violence against Women, India
