Mar 1, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today delivered a joint oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council, addressing the abuse of counter-terrorism measures to repress human rights defenders and other civil society actors, and highlighting deep concerns about possible moves to allow Egypt a significant role over the UN’s independent expert on human rights and counter-terrorism.
The statement was delivered in an interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism. The ICJ made the statement jointly on behalf of Amnesty International, Article 19, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, CIVICUS, Human Rights Watch, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), and Privacy International.
The organisations had earlier sent a joint letter to all States’ delegations to the Council in Geneva, highlighting Egypts appalling record of abuse of counter-terrorism measures, and urging States to strongly oppose any attempts to weaken the mandate of the Special Rapporteur, whether by diluting or distorting it by importing the flawed Egyptian-led approach into the Mexican-led resolution for its renewal, or any moves by longstanding leader Mexico to share co-leadership of the mandate renewal resolution with Egypt or other States with such an appalling record in relation to the very issues the mandate is to address.
The joint oral statement to the Council read as follows (check against delivery):
“Madame Special Rapporteur,
Our organizations welcome your report on the impacts of counter-terrorism and counter-extremism measures against civil society and human rights defenders (A/HRC/40/52).
We strongly concur with your findings regarding the deliberate and targeted abuse of overly broad and vague definitions of terrorism and violent extremism to criminalize and otherwise suppress human rights defenders and other civil society actors. We also appreciate your highlighting the need to prevent indirect impacts on civil society.
Among those States with a particularly appalling record of deliberate and targeted abuse, Egypt, which is mentioned in your report (paras 53 and 56), is a prominent example. As Human Rights Watch recently stated: “Using counterterrorism as a guise to crush all forms of dissent could be Egypt’s hallmark of 2018… There’s simply not much room left to peacefully challenge the government without being detained and unfairly prosecuted as a ‘terrorist’.”[1] Other examples from the reports before the Council include Turkey (para 53), Saudi Arabia (A/HRC/40/52/Add.2 paras 21-29), and China particularly as regards Uyghurs and Kazakhs (paras 55 and 57).
We share your concern about the elements lost from the previous Human Rights Council and General Assembly resolutions on “protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism” in their March 2018 merger with the deeply flawed Egyptian-led initiative on “effects of terrorism” (para 29). We reiterate our call from March 2018 for future versions of the resolution to address the relevant issues exclusively and comprehensively from the perspective of the effective protection of human rights.[2] We strongly oppose any attempts to dilute your mandate, including by importing the flawed Egyptian-led approach into the resolution for its renewal, or any sharing of co-leadership of the mandate renewal resolution with States that have such an appalling record in relation to the very issues the mandate is to address.
Madame Rapporteur, beyond the particular cases mentioned in your report (para 53), what are your views on the broader situation within Egypt in terms of abuse of counter-terrorism measures and what can States, the United Nations, civil society, and other stakeholders do to stop such abuses in the name of counter-terrorism in Egypt and other egregious situations?
Thank you.
[1] https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/01/17/egypt-new-moves-crush-dissent (17 January 2019). See also among others: Human Rights Watch World Report 2019, https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2019/country-chapters/egypt; EuroMed Rights, Egypt – Finding Scapegoats: Crackdown on Human Rights Defenders and Freedoms in the Name of Counter-terrorism and Security (Feb 2018) https://euromedrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/EuroMed-Rights-Report-on-Counter-terrorism-and-Human-Rights.pdf; Joint NGO Statement, Egypt: Civil society faces existential threat (23 June 2016) https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Egypt-Advocacy-JointNGOStatement-2016.pdf.
[2] Joint NGO end-of-session statement (23 March 2018) https://www.icj.org/hrc37-endofsession/.”
The statement can be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC40-JointOralStatement-SRCTHR-2019-EN
For more information email un(a)icj.org.
Nov 14, 2018 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
The ICJ intervened today before the European Court of Human Rights in the cases of a judge and a scholar that were arrested in the wake of the state of emergency in Turkey.
Mr Hakan Baş is a judge who was dismissed and arrested under emergency legislation following the attempted coup of 15 July 2016.
Mr Seyit Ali Ablak is a teacher and was arrested in 2017 also during the state of emergency declared following the attempted coup.
They claim, among others, the violation of their right to a judicial review of detention under articles 5.3 and 5.4 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
In this intervention, the ICJ addressed the following issues:
- the international legal and normative framework on the independence of the judiciary and the role of judges, in particular in implementation of obligations under articles 5.3 and 5.4 ECHR;
- the current situation of the independence, governance and administration of the judiciary in Turkey, with particular regard to the Council of Judges and Prosecutors and the role of the peace judges, and their conformity with State obligations under articles 5.3 and 5.4 ECHR. The situation will be assessed with reference to the findings of an ICJ mission undertaken in May 2018 and contained in the mission report Justice Suspended.
Turkey-icj-Bas-Advocacy-legal submission-2018-ENG (download the intervention in Baş v. Turkey)
Turkey-icj-Ablak-Advocacy-legal submission-2018-ENG (download the intervention in Ablak v. Turkey)
Nov 2, 2018 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
The ICJ intervened today before the European Court of Human Rights in the case of a detained Member of the Turkish Parliament from the HDP party, Ms Burcu Çelik, arrested in 2017 under “terrorism charges”.
In this submission, the ICJ provides the Court with observations concerning the capacity of the Turkish legal system to provide effective remedies for violations under the ECHR with regard to detention, in particular detention of Members of Parliament, in light of its Convention obligations, in particular obligations under Article 5.4.
The ICJ presents its analysis of these aspects of the Turkish legal system based, in part, on information ascertained during a mission to Turkey undertaken in May 2018 and in its report Justice Suspended.
Specifically, the ICJ addresses the question as to whether the remedies of individual application before the Constitutional Court (CC) and under article 141.1 (a) and (d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) may be considered as effective in light of the State’s obligations under articles 5.4 and 35.1 ECHR.
Turkey-icj-Celik-Advocacy-legal submission-2018-ENG (download the intervention)
Oct 1, 2018 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
The ICJ made submissions today to the European Court of Human Rights in support of the right of association of Azerbaijan’s lawyers representing applicants before the Court and highlighting the situation of harassment of the legal profession in the country.
The ICJ intervened today in the cases of Democracy and Human Rights Resource Centre v. Azerbaijan and Mustafayev and Democracy and Human Rights Resource Centre v. Azerbaijan.
In these cases, lawyer Asabali Mustafayev and its NGO challenged the compliance of the freezing of their assets and criminal proceedings for financial offences as arbitrary interferences with their work as human rights defenders and in representation of clients before the European Court of Human Rights itself.
The ICJ has intervened to highlight the case-law regarding the right to individual application before the Court under article 34 ECHR and its application to the work of lawyers and legal NGOs.
It further examined the systemic practice in Azerbaijan of harassment of lawyers and of NGOs established by lawyers for the purpose of providing legal advice or representation, including representation of applicants before the European Court of Human Rights.
Finally, the ICJ analyzed the implications of such practices with regard to the State’s obligations under article 18 ECHR read together with article 11 ECHR.
Azerbaijan-icj-DHRRC&other-Advocacy-legal submission-2018-ENG (download the submission)
“Defenseless Defenders: Systemic Problems in the Legal Profession of Azerbaijan” – ICJ report in Azeri, Russian and English.
Question to the parties: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/eng?i=001-184179
Sep 21, 2018 | Advocacy, News, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ wrote today to the Council of Europe’s Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatović, to request action against the decision by Turkish authorities to ban entrance to Galatasaray square in Istanbul (Turkey) to a collective of mothers of disappeared persons called “Saturday Mothers”.
On 25 August 2018 , the Sub-Governorship of Beyoğlu District of İstanbul announced the prohibition of gatherings for assembly of any type of demonstrations in Galatasaray Square in Istanbul, the square where the Saturday Mothers have gathered every Saturday since 1995 to 1998 and since 2009 until 2018.
On the 700th week of their peaceful protests, the Saturday Mothers and their supporters congregated in Galatasaray Square at midday to once again raise awareness of the need for those responsible to be held accountable for the extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances following their time in State custody in the 1990s. The police used tear gas to stop the protest and arrested 47 people. All were released by Saturday evening.
Senior officers of the Turkish authorities have even issued statements accusing the Saturday Mothers of being abused by or in collusion with terrorist organisations.
The ICJ wrote to the European Commissioner for Human Rights, that it “considers this situation to be at odds with Turkey’s obligations under international human rights law, in particular of the right to peaceful assembly under article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights and article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”
The ICJ further added that “given the consistent record and presence of the Saturday Mothers in Galatasaray Square throughout the years, it is hard to see how the restriction on their right to peaceful assembly could in any way be necessary and proportionate to a legitimate purpose. It is clear that no prior warning for the gathering was needed for security reasons in light of its regular occurrence at least since its resumption in 2009, i.e. nine years ago. Furthermore, the demonstration took place on a pedestrian area where cars are not allowed.”
ICJ-Letter-SaturdayMothers-CoEComm-Turkey-2018-ENG (download the letter)
Sep 20, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today put the spotlight the lack of independence of the legal profession in Azerbaijan speaking at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The statement, made during the consideration of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Azerbaijan, read as follows:
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the acceptance by Azerbaijan of the recommendations by France (140.70), by Greece (141.12), Austria (141.13), Estonia (141.68), Slovenia (141.71), and Mexico (141.77), to respect the rights of lawyers.
The ICJ regrets, however, that Azerbaijan only noted and did not explicitly support the recommendations by Sweden (141.33), USA (141.39), Czechia (141.67) and Germany (141.76) and rejected the recommendation by the United Kingdom (141.60) to “End all interference in the work of lawyers through disbarment or other disciplinary measures on improper grounds such as expressing critical views.”
These recommendations call for the amendment of the Law on Advocates and Advocates’ Activities to ensure the effective independence of the Bar Association of Azerbaijan. They also call for the setting up of independent and transparent mechanisms for lawyers’ admission to practice, and disciplinary proceedings against lawyers, in conformity with the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
The ICJ notes that Azerbaijan’s support of most recommendations is predicated on the assumption that the situation of the independence of the legal profession in Azerbaijan is in line with international law.
This, however, is not the situation in the country.
The ICJ expresses concern at the persistent lack of independence of the Bar Association of Azerbaijan; indeed, it has actually played a role in undermining the work of lawyers defending human rights. The situation is exacerbated by recent hasty reforms that prohibit lawyers from appearing in any court hearing unless they are members of this non-independent Bar association, furthermore without a sufficient and meaningful transition period. This seriously curtails access to justice for human rights violations in the country.
