ICJ and ILGA-Europe joint submissions in Milica Đorđević and others v. Serbia

ICJ and ILGA-Europe joint submissions in Milica Đorđević and others v. Serbia

On 17 November 2014, the ICJ and ILGA-Europe filed their joint written submissions with the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Milica Đorđević and others v. Serbia (Application Nos. 5591/10, 17802/12, 23138/13 and 25474/14).  

The case concerns the authorities’ decision in 2009 to relocate the applicants’ “Pride Parade” to promote the equality and visibility of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people away from central Belgrade, Serbia, and the authorities’ repeated banning of Pride Parades in central Belgrade in 2011, 2012 and 2013.

The ICJ and the European Region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA-Europe)’s submissions to the Court focus on:

  • the essential role of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly in a democratic society, and the scope of discretion afforded to States in determining measures required to prevent disorder at an assembly where counter-demonstrators threaten violence against groups most at risk; and
  • the nature and scope of the State’s obligation in relation to the right to freedom of peaceful assembly under the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, focusing in particular on States’ duty to adopt legislative and administrative measures in order to fulfil their legal obligations.

 SERBIA-ECHR amicus Dordevic-Advocacy-Legal Submission-2014-ENG (full text in PDF)

Bolivia: politicians’ “trial” of judges an affront to the independence of the judiciary

Bolivia: politicians’ “trial” of judges an affront to the independence of the judiciary

The ICJ condemns the imminent “trial” of Constitutional Court judges by Bolivia’s Senate, in proceedings that could see the judges sent to prison over politicians’ disagreement with a legal ruling.

The proceedings “violate the independence of the judiciary and the right to fair trial,” the Geneva-based organization wrote today in an open letter to all Senators and Deputies of the legislative assembly.

The charges in the trial, scheduled to begin on 21 October, are based entirely on a precautionary ruling by the judges that parts of a new law regulating notaries should not be implemented until the Court has an opportunity to hear a constitutional challenge to the law.

“The spectacle of dozens of politicians pretending to act as an independent and impartial criminal court, threatening to throw constitutional court judges in jail over a difference of opinion as to interpretation of the law, is incompatible with respect for human rights, the separation of powers, and the rule of law,” said Matt Pollard, Head of the Centre for Independence of Judges and Lawyers at the ICJ.

Constitutional Court Judges Soraida Rosario Chanez Chire and Ligia Mónica Velásquez Castaños are to be tried on 21 October, while proceedings against Judge Gualberto Cusi Mamani have reportedly been temporarily suspended for reasons of health. The judges were suspended from duty on 28 July.

An analysis brief published by the ICJ and sent to the legislative members concludes that the proceedings violate Bolivia’s international legal obligations under the American Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The brief also cites judgments of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights that found violations of the American Convention as a result of defective parliamentary proceedings for removal of judges in other countries. The proceedings in Bolivia are poised to be even more egregious than the proceedings at issue in the earlier judgments, given the possibility for the Bolivian Senate (photo) to impose a criminal conviction and imprisonment.

“The ICJ urges the Senators and Deputies immediately to cancel the proceedings, to end the judges’ suspension from duty, to refrain from any other form of interference with judicial independence, and to reform judicial discipline and removal procedures to bring them into line with international standards,” said Pollard.

(update as of 21 October: the proceedings were postponed to 4 November after one of the judges collapsed on arrival at the Legislative Assembly and was taken to hospital).

Contacts:

English: Matt Pollard, Head of the Centre for Independence of Judges and Lawyers at the ICJ, t: +41 79 246 54 75; e: matt.pollard(a)icj.org

Spanish: Carlos Ayala, ICJ Commissioner, t: +58 212 952 8448; e: carlos.ayala(a)icj.org

BOLIVIA-Unfair trial of judges-News-Press release-2014-SPA (full text in PDF)

BOLIVIA-unfair trial of judges-Advocacy-Open letter-2014-ENG (full text in PDF)

BOLIVIA-unfair trial of judges-Advocacy-Open letter-2014-SPA (full text in PDF)

BOLIVIA-unfair trial of judges-Advocay-Analysis brief-2014-ENG (full text in PDF)

BOLIVIA-unfair trial of judges-Advocacy-Analysis brief-2014-SPA (full text in PDF)

ICJ, AIRE Centre and ECRE joint intervention in F.G. v Sweden

ICJ, AIRE Centre and ECRE joint intervention in F.G. v Sweden

Today, the AIRE Centre (Advice on Individual Rights in Europe), the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and the ICJ presented joint written observations to the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of F.G. v. Sweden (Application No. 43611/11).

The case arises from the Swedish authorities’ dismissal of an asylum application. The submissions focus on:

  • the obligation for Parties to the ECHR to ensure that the risk upon removal is addressed in such a way as to guarantee that the Convention’s protection is practical and effective;
  • whether requiring coerced, self-enforced suppression of a fundamental aspect of one’s identity, which enforced concealment of one’s religion entails, is compatible with Convention obligations;
  • the relevance and significance of the EU asylum acquis and Court of Justice of the EU’s jurisprudence on these matters; and
  • the relevance and significance of the 1951 Geneva Refugee Convention.

SWEDEN-ECHR amicus FG vs Sweden-Advocacy-Legal Submission-2014-ENG (full text in PDF)

Thailand: enforced disappearances

Thailand: enforced disappearances

ICJ affiliate the Colombian Commission of Jurists today delivered an oral statement at the UN Human Rights Council, concerning enforced disappearances in Thailand.

The statement noted that of the 81 cases transmitted by the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances to the Royal Thai Government between 1980 and 2014, the Government has clarified only two (A/HRC/27/49, 5 August 2014).

The statement highlighted the case of Somchai Neelapaijit, a lawyer and human rights defender, who was subjected to enforced disappearance more than 10 years ago but whose case remains unresolved. I also described the recent disappearance of Pholachi “Billy” Rakchongcharoen, a Karen minority human rights activist, who has not been seen since April 2014, when he was last seen in the custody of certain public officials with whom he and his community were engaged in an ongoing legal dispute.

The statement emphasised that Thailand must effectively investigate all cases and provide victims, including family members, withfull remedies and reparation. Enforced disappearance should be a distinct crime in domestic law, with penalties reflecting its extreme seriousness. Thailand should also accept the 30 June 2011 visit request of the Working Group and ratify the Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which it signed on 9 January 2012.

Thailand exercised its right of reply to respond to the oral statement.

The statement can be downloaded in PDF format here: Thailand-EnforcedDisappearance-Advocacy-non legal submission-2014-ENG

The statement and reply can be viewed in the UN video archive, here.

A written version of the reply by Thailand (unofficial, the official reply is as delivered in the video above) can be downloaded in PDF format here: Thailand_R of Reply_GD_18

UN Panel on “Protection of the Family”: joint oral statement

UN Panel on “Protection of the Family”: joint oral statement

The ICJ supports a joint oral statement, delivered by ARC International, in relation to the Panel on “Protection of the Family”, at the UN Human Rights Council today.

The oral statement emphasised the importance of recognising the diversity of forms of families around the world.

It also noted that familes can be sites for transmissions of values, and that this can on the one hand include the promotion of human rights values, or on the other hand values incompatible with respect for human rights.

Finally, the statement highlighted that a human rights-based approach to family policies must recognise that individuals within families have human rights that require protection. Indeed, while families have the potential to help protect the human rights of their members from violations, families also have the potential to conceal abuses of human rights within the family.

The full statement in PDF format may be downloaded here: Universal-ProtectionofFamily-Advocacy-nonlegalsubmission-2014.EN

Translate »