Southeast Asian Judges adopt Guidance on applying a gender perspective in their work

Southeast Asian Judges adopt Guidance on applying a gender perspective in their work

The ICJ today published a General Guidance aimed at assisting judges and others in the justice sector to effectively incorporate a gender perspective in their work.

The General Guidance is especially significant as it reaffirms that customs and traditions should not be invoked to justify discrimination against women.

The Bangkok General Guidance for Judges in Applying a Gender Perspective was discussed and adopted by judges from Philippines, Thailand, Timor Leste, and Indonesia, at a gathering in Bangkok from 24 to 25 June 2016, hosted by the ICJ and UN Women.

During the workshop, judges from the four Southeast Asian countries deliberated extensively how best to assist judges in employing a gender perspective in deciding cases before them.

“The Bangkok General Guidance can make a powerful contribution towards achieving gender equality under the law in Southeast Asia,” said Sam Zarifi, Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific at the ICJ. “It is crucial that judges now work to implement this General Guidance in their home countries.”

The idea to initiate the development of th Bangkok General Guidance emerged from the ASEAN Regional Dialogue on Judging with a Gender Perspective, which was held in Jakarta, Indonesia in 2015.

The Supreme Court of the Philippines offered to take the lead on the project during that regional judicial dialogue.

“Women have a right to equal treatment and equal protection and non-discrimination under the law. It is our responsibility as judges to ensure that women receive equal treatment in law and in practice,” said Justice Teresita de Castro of the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

Judges attended several sessions over the course of the two-day workshop, participating in exercises focused on identifying and addressing gender stereotypes.

“Women in the region face many obstacles in accessing justice,” said Roberta Clarke, Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific at UN Women.

“But judges may be either unaware of these issues or unsure how to address these issues through the legal process,” she added.

The Bangkok General Guidance will make judges aware of means to consider evidence without resorting to gender stereotypes and decide cases based on the principle of equality recognized under international human rights standards, including the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW).

Recommendations for institutional policies that should be adopted by courts to help them become more gender sensitive and gender responsive are also set out in the General Guidance.

Contact:

Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t: +66840923575 ; e: emerlynne.gil@icj.org

Southeast Asia-Bangkok-Guidance-Advocacy-2016-ENG (full PDF, in English)

Southeast Asia-Bangkok-Guidance-Advocacy-2016-BUR (full PDF, in Burmese)

Southeast Asia-Bangkok-Guidance-Advocacy-2016-MON (full PDF, in Mon language)

Southeast Asia-Bangkok-Guidance-Advocacy-2016-SHAN (full PDF, in Shan language)

Thailand: English translation of draft Constitution

Thailand: English translation of draft Constitution

The ICJ, International IDEA (Australia) and the Office of the United Nations Resident Coordinator in Thailand have collaborated to produce an unofficial translation of the draft Constitution of Thailand which is scheduled to be the subject of a national referendum on 7 August 2016.

The original Thai text as formally published by the Royal Thai Government shall in all events remain the sole authority having legal force.

Thailand-Draft-Constitution-EnglishTr-Advocacy-2016-ENG (full text in PDF)

Contact

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific, t: +66807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Kingsley Abbott, Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +66 94 470 1345; e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

UN Human Rights Committee: joint submission by ICJ and TLHR on Thailand

UN Human Rights Committee: joint submission by ICJ and TLHR on Thailand

The ICJ and Thai Lawyers for Human Rights provided a joint submission to the UN Human Rights Committee for its consideration during the adoption of a list of issues for the examination of the Second Periodic Report of Thailand under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

During its 117th Session, from 30 June to 25 July 2016, the Committee will prepare and adopt a List of Issues on Thailand.

These issues will be put to the Government of Thailand for formal response ahead of the Committee’s full examination of Thailand’s Second Periodic Report during the Committee’s 119th Session, the exact dates of which have yet to be confirmed but which is expected to take place in March 2017.

The ICJ and Thai Lawyers for Human Rights’ joint submission raises matters and suggests concrete questions to be put to the Government of Thailand concerning the following issues:

– Thailand’s derogation under Article 4 of the Covenant;

– Torture and other ill-treatment, enforced disappearances and custodial deaths in disputed circumstances; and

– Thailand’s new institutional and legal framework since the coup d’état, which severely restricts the exercise of Covenant rights within the country and in particular the recent introduction of the National Council for Peace and Order’s (NCPO) Head Order 13/2016, which grants members of the military wide-ranging law enforcement powers to ‘prevent and suppress’ 27 ‘crimes’, together with blanket immunity from prosecution.

THAILAND-JOINT ICJ TLHR HRC LOI SUBMISSION-Advocacy-non legal submission-2016-ENG (full text in PDF)

Judges & Lawyers in Myanmar: ICJ-IBAHRI statement on UN Universal Periodic Review

Judges & Lawyers in Myanmar: ICJ-IBAHRI statement on UN Universal Periodic Review

The ICJ today joined with the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute to make an oral statement on judges & lawyers in Myanmar, during the consideration of its Universal Periodic Review outcome by the UN Human Rights Council.

The statement:

“The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) and the International Commission of Jurists welcome Myanmar’s decision to accept recommendations made at the Universal Periodic Review relating to the administration of justice and the independence of the legal profession and call on the Government of Myanmar to implement the recommendations which it has accepted ‘in principle’ to reform the Bar Council Act to allow for the Bar Council to become a truly independent and self-governing association.

In order to ‘guarantee in law and practice that lawyers and judges can perform their professional functions without improper interference and legally form and join self-governing associations’, we call for the right to join such associations to be enshrined in law, and that the right of the first Independent Lawyers’ Association of Myanmar (ILAM) to register as an association be respected;

In order to ‘define professional legal standards and disciplinary procedures in conformity with the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers’, we call upon the government of Myanmar to engage in a consultation process with the legal profession and other stakeholders in relation to the revision of the Bar Council Act. The government should also commit sufficient funds to allow for the funding of the system created by the new Legal Aid Law.

We are encouraged by and support efforts by the Office of the Supreme Court of the Union to draft and implement a Code of Judicial Ethics.

Finally, we urge the Government to improve legal education and continue legal professional development including with regard to international human rights law and the UN human rights mechanisms.

We are glad to provide support in the realisation of these recommendations and will look for collaboration with the Government to that end.”

UN Statement on Nepal

UN Statement on Nepal

The ICJ today delivered an oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council, on the Universal Periodic Review of Nepal.

“The ICJ is concerned that the Government of Nepal has yet to implement many of the recommendations it accepted during the first UPR cycle, including several that reflect its international legal obligations regarding the new Constitution, investigation and prosecution of serious crimes, and establishment of credible transitional justice mechanisms.

The police continue to refuse to investigate conflict-era cases even when explicitly ordered by courts to do so. The transitional justice commissions do not enjoy the support of the victims and human right organizations, a year into their two-year mandate. Victims’ rights to truth, justice and reparation are not being respected, protected and fulfilled.

More than 59 persons, including 10 police personnel, were killed during recent protests, but as yet we are not aware of any impartial and effective investigation of the killings.

Many serious crimes under international law, including torture and enforced disappearance, still are not recognised as crimes under the Nepali penal code.

The ICJ therefore calls upon the Government to reconsider its position, and to accept and implement the UPR recommendations arising from this cycle, relevant to:

  • Strengthening the constitutional protection of human rights;
  • Amending the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act, 2014, in line with international standards and Supreme Court orders;
  • Establishing a credible transitional justice process;
  • Preventing, investigating, and responding effectively to any use of excessive force by security forces;
  • Ensuring prompt, independent and impartial investigations and, prosecution in cases of unlawful killings, whether the perpetrators are security forces or protesters;
  • Amending the Penal Code to explicitly incorporate serious crimes under international law; and
  • Ratifying relevant treaties, and accepting requests for visits of the Working Group on Enforced Disappearances, and Special Rapporteur on the right to truth.”

A more detailed written statement may be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC31-Advocacy-WrittenStatement-Nepal-2016

Translate »