Malaysia: Minister’s order to take action against the transgender community must be revoked

Malaysia: Minister’s order to take action against the transgender community must be revoked

The ICJ today condemned the order issued by Zulkifli Mohamad Al-Bakri, Malaysia’s Minister in charge of religious affairs, to the Federal Territories Islamic Religious Department (Jawi) to take action against the transgender community.

The ICJ called on the Minister to rescind the order immediately and take steps to ensure non-discrimination and equal protection of all persons in Malaysia, including LGBTI persons.

On 10 July 2020, Zulkifli Mohamad Al-Bakri announced in a social media post that he had given the Jawi authorities “full licence to carry out its enforcement actions” against transgender persons in Malaysia. He elaborated that his order would beyond arresting transgender persons but would also extend to providing them “religious education” so that they would “return to the right path”.

“This unacceptable transphobic and homophobic attack from a government official highlights the societal prejudices and the lack of legal protections against discrimination faced by transgender persons in Malaysia,” said Ambiga Sreenavasan, a prominent Malaysian lawyer and Commissioner of the ICJ.

“Instead of ensuring that the human rights and dignity of all persons are respected and protected, the Minister, through his statement, is going in the complete opposite direction by advocating state action against persons belonging to sexual orientation and gender identity minorities,” added Ambiga Sreenavasan. “The Minister is legitimizing harassment, discrimination and violence against transgender people, and increasing violations of their human rights.”

Across the country in 13 states and the federal territories, a “male” who “poses” as a woman or wears the clothing of a “woman” may be subjected to criminal liability under state-level religious enactments. Consensual same-sex sexual relations are criminalized as “unnatural offences” in both secular civil law and religious state-level laws. These “offences” carry heavy penalties in the form of fines, imprisonment and corporal punishment in the form of caning, which constitutes impermissible cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment under international law and standards.

The ICJ stressed that these laws served to institutionalize systemic discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity and expression, while also creating barriers for LGBT people when seeking justice. They provide state authorities with expansive power to police gender identities, expressions and sexual orientations of people.

The ICJ notes that experiences of severe stigma, marginalization, and violence committed by families, communities, and State actors lead to immense health risks and mental health disparities of transgender individuals.

The ICJ is also deeply concerned about the Minister’s plan to require members of the transgender community to undergo religious conversion therapy. Numerous studies have shown how religious conversion therapy and related practices are causing real harm not only to transgender people, but also to lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals.

The ICJ calls on the Government of Malaysia to abide by its obligations under international law and follow through with its commitment to human rights, by ensuring that transgender people and all persons are legally protected  against discrimination, and that they are able to live free from prejudice, harassment, and violations of their human rights.

Contact

Emerlynne Gil, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org

Background

In 2019, the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (SUHAKAM) released a report on Transgender Persons in Kuala Lumpur and Selangor. Many of the transgender people interviewed for this report said that they constantly face arbitrary arrests, discrimination in obtaining employment, and even discrimination in obtaining housing because of their gender identity. A large majority of those interviewed experienced violence because of their gender identity.

Myanmar: ICJ highlights systemic impunity for criminal human rights violations in UPR submission

Myanmar: ICJ highlights systemic impunity for criminal human rights violations in UPR submission

Today, the ICJ submitted a report to the UN Human Rights Council Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) ahead of the review of Myanmar’s human rights record in January-February 2021.

The ICJ stressed the lack of accountability and redress for victims – and the resulting continued culture of impunity – for widespread gross human rights violations constituting crimes under international law in Myanmar, particularly those involving members of Myanmar’s Defence Services.

Certain provisions under the 2008 Myanmar Constitution as well as national laws such as the 1959 Defence Services Act and 1995 Myanmar Police Force Maintenance of Discipline Law shield security forces from public criminal prosecutions in civilian courts. Closed court martial proceedings also deny victims and their families the right to truth about human rights violations.

The Myanmar National Human Rights Commission (MNHRC), Myanmar’s national human rights institution with the mandate to investigate allegations of human rights violations, has not initiated any substantive or credible investigation into allegations of widespread and systematic human rights violations perpetrated in recent years by soldiers against persons from ethnic minorities, despite being recorded in detail in the reports of the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar and the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar.

Rather than strengthen the role of civilian courts and the MNHRC, Myanmar has set up ad hoc commissions of inquiry to investigate such incidents. However, these inquiries have a recommendatory mandate and an unclear relationship with the judiciary. The full report of the findings of these commissions are generally not publicly disclosed. Against this backdrop, Myanmar has ceased cooperation with the UN Special Rapporteur for Myanmar and rejected other UN and international accountability mandates.

In light of this, the ICJ recommended the following actions, among others:

  • For the MNHRC to investigate all allegations of gross human rights violations, especially including crimes under international law;
  • For the Parliament to repeal or amend the 1959 Defence Services Act to bring it in line with international human rights law and standards and ensure that gross human rights violations and serious international humanitarian law violations perpetrated by soldiers can only be prosecuted in civilian courts;
  • For the Union Government to publish the full report of the findings of ad hoc commissions of inquiry, such as that of the Independent Commission of Enquiry;
  • For the Union Government to issue an open invitation to and cooperate with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights as well as the UN Independent Investigative Mechanism on Myanmar; and
  • For the Union Government to cooperate with the International Criminal Court.

The ICJ also called for Myanmar to become a party to key human rights treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, that the State committed – yet failed – to accede to in its previous UPR cycle.

Download

Myanmar-UPR-Submission-2020-ENG (PDF)

Contact

Jenny Domino, ICJ Associate Legal Adviser, e: jenny.domino@icj.org

Kingsley Abbott, Coordinator of the ICJ’s Global Accountability Initiative, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

Myanmar: ICJ sets out legal deficiencies in Ministry of Transport and Communications Order to block access to specific websites

Myanmar: ICJ sets out legal deficiencies in Ministry of Transport and Communications Order to block access to specific websites

The ICJ published a legal memorandum concluding that the Ministry of Transport and Communications (MOTC) Order to block access to specific websites is not compliant with international human rights law.

The legal memorandum also sets out various remedial options under Myanmar law to question the lawfulness of the Order.

The ICJ focused its human rights analysis on the rights to freedom of expression and access to information and the right to health, which includes access to health information. These rights are well established under general and customary international law. The right to health is guaranteed under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Myanmar is a party.

The MOTC, presumably invoking Section 77 of the Telecommunications Law, ordered telecommunication service providers in March 2020 to take down 2,147 websites found by it to have disseminated “fake news,” adult content, and child sexual abuse content. It is not clear if any of the information under sanction relates to COVID-19, although the pandemic was mentioned elsewhere in one mobile service provider’s press release. Immediately after the release of the MOTC Order, it was discovered that the ban included ethnic news media websites, such as Rakhine-based Development Media Group and Narinjara News, thereby prompting speculation as to the true reasons behind the ban.

The ICJ emphasized the following in the legal memorandum:

  • Blocking access to specific websites engages a wide range of human rights concerns, including but not limited to the person’s right to freedom of expression and right of access to information protected under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and customary international law. While lack of transparency about the State rationale and evidence was an obstacle to a full analysis, the permissible conditions that would justify sweeping limitations on this right do not appear to have been met.
  • In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the MOTC Order also undermines the right to health of all persons in Myanmar. The right to health guaranteed under the ICESCR is reserved to all persons without discrimination and includes access to health information. The MOTC Order effectively hinders access to health information by blocking legitimate sources of information.
  • To challenge the MOTC Order, the following domestic legal remedies are available: (i) filing a complaint with the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission; (ii) filing an application for a constitutional writ before the Union Supreme Court and/or (iii) filing a declaration suit under the Specific Relief Act.

Download

Myanmar-Memo-on-MOTC-Order-Legal-Memorandum-2020-ENG (PDF)

Contact

Jenny Domino, ICJ Associate Legal Adviser, e: jenny.domino(a)icj.org

Hnin Win Aung, ICJ Legal Adviser, e: hninwin.aung(a)icj.org

Related work

Publication: Myanmar’s ongoing Internet shutdown and hostilities threaten right to health during COVID-19

Statement: Government must lift online restrictions in conflict-affected areas to ensure access to information during COVID-19 pandemic

Report: Curtailing the Right to Freedom of Expression and Information in Myanmar

Publication: Four Immediate Reforms to Strengthen the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission

Publication: Strategic Litigation Handbook for Myanmar

Philippines: accountability for violations still needed, while new counter-terror law poses new threats

Philippines: accountability for violations still needed, while new counter-terror law poses new threats

Speaking at the UN Human Rights Council today, the ICJ urged action on longstanding and pervasive impunity for human rights violations in the Philippines and highlighted new threats posed by a pending new counter-terrorism law.

The oral statement, delivered in an interactive debate on the human rights situation in the Philippines based on a report prepared by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, read as follows:

“Madame President,

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) concurs with the High Commissioner’s finding that overemphasis by the Government of the Philippines on national security and public order has led to serious human rights violations (A/HRC/44/22, para 12). Such violations will only increase if the draft Anti-Terrorism Act is approved and implemented.

The draft law would, for example, allows detention without judicial warrant for up to twenty-four days. Such prolonged pretrial detention without judicial review This is inconsistent with the prohibition of arbitrary detention under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and the right under the ICCPR of anyone arrested or detained on criminal grounds to be brought promptly before a judge.  The Human Rights Committee has stressed that such judicial control of initial detention periods is not only essential to guarantee the right to liberty but also to prevent torture, other ill-treatment, and enforced disappearance.

In line with both the High Commissioner’s report and the 25 June 2020 statement by a large number of Special Procedures, the ICJ urges the Government of the Philippines to accept the findings and recommendations and rapidly implement corrective measures, in cooperation with the OHCHR, civil society, and the Commission on Human Rights, and to abandon or fundamentally revise the draft Anti-Terror Law. In the absence of clear, effective and measurable progress on accountability at the national level, this Council must stand ready to establish an independent international investigation (para 88(iii)).

Thank you.”

Translate »