Poland: ICJ and Amnesty International intervene before European Court against arbitrary disciplinary proceedings of Judge Igor Tuleya

Poland: ICJ and Amnesty International intervene before European Court against arbitrary disciplinary proceedings of Judge Igor Tuleya

The ICJ and Amnesty International have submitted today to the European Court of Human Rights their intervention in the case of Judge Igor Tuleya who alleges that the seven disciplinary proceedings brought against him have affected his reputation as a judge and undermine the authority of the judiciary.

Judge Igor Tuleya contests that the disciplinary proceedings brought against him were in violation of his right to respect for private life and of his right to an effective remedy against violation of human rights.

The case takes place in the context of the “reform” of the judiciary in Poland, involving policy measures and legislative changes approved between late 2015 and 2020, which have seriously compromised the independence of the judiciary.

The intervention focuses on three main issues:

  • The scope of application of Article 8 and Article 13 in cases relating to disciplinary proceedings against judges, in light of international standards on disciplinary proceedings and measures and effective domestic remedies; of the Court’s Convention jurisprudence; and of general principles on the rule of law and the role and independence of the judiciary.
  • The situation of the independence of the judiciary in Poland as the context in which to assess the application of Articles 8 and 13.
  • The scope of Article 10 as applied to judges, including those engaged in the administration of the judiciary.

ECtHR-AmicusBrief-Tuleya_v_Poland-Advocacy-Legal-Submission-2020-ENG (download the third party intervention)

Indonesia: ICJ addresses open letter to COVID-19 Mitigation Task Force calling for special measures to protect women workers in its pandemic response

Indonesia: ICJ addresses open letter to COVID-19 Mitigation Task Force calling for special measures to protect women workers in its pandemic response

In an open letter, the ICJ today called on Indonesia’s COVID-19 Mitigation Task Force to provide detailed guidance to the Government of Indonesia, in taking actionable steps to implement gender responsive measures in the country.

Since the beginning of the outbreak of the pandemic, the mortality rate of Indonesia is reportedly among the highest in the world.

In addressing the pandemic, the Government has established regulations and repeatedly advised people to restrict social gatherings and stay at home. These measures have a particularly disparate impact on Indonesian women, exacerbating the pre-existing gender inequalities in Indonesia.

The ICJ has previously highlighted the challenges faced by women in its report  “Living Like People who die slowly.” Similar concerns has been expressed by the UN Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.

The ICJ called the task force to take proactive and special measures to protect women workers in its COVID-19 response, in line with the recommendations of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women’s Guidance Note on COVID-19.

Specifically, the ICJ has recommended that it promote government responses to:

  1. Ensure that women receive basic needs support
  2. Provide more working opportunities for women to work from home
  3. Provide online counseling or mental health support for women workers

The ICJ considers that the failure to recognize the gender dynamics affecting women workers, particularly public health emergencies, limits the effectiveness of the overall Government’s response efforts and impedes the full realization of women’s human rights in Indonesia.

Download

Poland: treatment of lawyer Roman Giertych undermines independence of legal profession

Poland: treatment of lawyer Roman Giertych undermines independence of legal profession

On 15 October 2020, Polish lawyer Roman Giertych was detained by the Central Anticorruption Bureau (CBA) on accusations of money laundering. His house and office were searched and prosecutors imposed preventive measures, including suspension of his right to practice law.

Lawyers for Lawyers, the ICJ and the Amsterdam Bar Association are concerned that the manner in which these measures were taken is inconsistent with international standards on the independence of the legal profession.

Roman Giertych has worked on a series of high-profile cases against the governing Law and Justice party. He has also represented various prominent opposition figures, including Donald Tusk, the former Polish prime minister and head of the Civic Platform opposition party, and former president of the European Council.

Mr. Giertych’s arrest happened one day before the scheduled detention hearing in another politically significant high-profile case, concerning Leszek Czarnecki, in which Roman Giertych was appointed as defence counsel.

According to the information available to Lawyers for Lawyers (L4L), the ICJ and the Amsterdam Bar Association, Mr. Giertych was arrested merely to serve him with charges. He was not given a chance to appear voluntarily.

On 22 October 2020, Mr Giertych’s defense lawyers filed four complaints with the court about the actions of the Poznań prosecutor’s office relating to his arrest and the search of his home and office.

Professional lawyers’ associations such as the National Council of Attorneys-at Law, the Association of Attorneys-At-Law “Defensor Iurius”, the Polish Bar Council and the Council of the Warsaw Bar Association of Advocates have expressed “great concern” about Mr. Giertych’s detention, the search of his house and office, and the preventive measures that were taken against Mr. Giertych.

Lawyers for Lawyers, the ICJ and the Amsterdam Bar Association are concerned about the circumstances of Mr. Giertych’s arrest, in particular the fact that the arrest seems to have only been made in order to present him with charges.

L4L, ICJ and the Amsterdam Bar Association are also concerned by the fact that the searches of his house and office were conducted without proper safeguards of attorney-client privilege and by the suspension of Mr. Giertych’s right to practice his legal profession by a public prosecutor. We will continue to monitor the case of Mr. Giertych closely.

Download

Poland-Roman Giertych-Advocacy-2020-ENG (full statement with additional information, in PDF)

Ukraine: proposed law against the Constitutional Court should be withdrawn

Ukraine: proposed law against the Constitutional Court should be withdrawn

Today, the ICJ calls on the Ukrainian authorities to abandon a draft law which would dismiss the judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, as a means of retaliation for a decision adopted by the Court and in order to circumvent the decision.

The authorities should also refrain from any other actions, including harassment of judges, which undermine the independence of the Constitutional Court.

“This draft law constitutes a direct attack on the ability of the judiciary to exercise its functions independently. It is incompatible with basic principles of the rule of law and the separation of powers, and with international standards on the independence of the judiciary,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.

“By the nature of their role, the judiciary, and especially constitutional courts may be required to decide on controversial matters. It is however essential that particularly in such cases, courts are able to operate without fear of retaliation or repression for the decisions they take,” she added.

The draft law on Restoring Public Confidence in the Constitutional Court, submitted by President Zelensky to the Ukrainian Parliament (Verkhovna Rada), aims to pronounce a decision of the Constitutional Court on anti-corruption legislation “void” and without legal consequences.

This runs contrary to the Ukrainian Constitution according to which “[d]ecisions and opinions adopted by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine shall be binding, final and may not be challenged” (Article 151-2).

The draft law would terminate the mandate of the judges of the Constitutional Court, in contravention of the Constitution of Ukraine as well as basic principles of independence of the judiciary, governing appointments, dismissal and security of tenure of judges.

The draft law provides that the powers of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in force at the time of the decision on the anti-corruption law would be terminated from the date of entry into force of the law.

According to the explanatory note to the Draft Law, one reason the adoption of the law would be  justified is because there had not been a “proper substantiation” of its judgment on the anti-corruption law. The note alleges that Court’s  decision was adopted in the private interests of judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, that its proper substantiation was not provided and that it contradicts the principle of the rule of law and denies the European and Euro-Atlantic choice of the Ukrainian people. The ICJ considers these allegations are inappropriate as they directly interfere with the judicial function of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, contrary to the national legislation and international law on the independence of the judiciary.

On 2 November 2020, Oleksandr Tupitsky, the President of the Constitutional Court was summoned for interrogation by the State Investigation Bureau in connection with allegations against him of committing crimes as part of an organized group. The ICJ fears that this may be a form of pressure in relation to the Constitution Court’s decision.

Following these incidents, the Constitutional Court has stopped working as four of the judges refuse to take part in its sessions. The Court therefore lacks the necessary quorum to operate.

The ICJ calls on Ukraine to withdraw the draft law, and to refrain from any further reprisals against judges for their decisions.

Download

Ukraine-draft law constitutional court-News-ENG-2020 (full statement with background information)

Translate »