Belarus: stop politically motivated prosecution and disbarment of lawyers

Belarus: stop politically motivated prosecution and disbarment of lawyers

Today, the ICJ called on the Belarus Ministry of Justice and other relevant authorities to end the recent practice of using legal proceedings against lawyers in retaliation for discharging their professional duties and to reinstate those already disbarred.

In recent months, in the context of widespread violations of the human rights of those protesting against the outcome of the disputed 2020 presidential election, there has been an unprecedented increase of cases of disbarment of lawyers especially those who comment on violations of the human rights of their clients. Among the most recently disbarred lawyers are Konstantin Mikhel, Maxim Konon, Mikhail Kirilyuk and Yulia Ivanchuk.

“This recent wave of criminal and disciplinary proceedings against lawyers is highly worrying and it constitutes an attack on the independence of the legal profession. These proceedings, be they of criminal, administrative or disciplinary nature, should be discontinued or reconsidered as being contrary to the international human rights law concerning the independence of the legal profession,” said Temur Shakirov, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.

There is a clear pattern of the misuse of disciplinary proceedings against lawyers who represent political opponents of the government or those who openly criticize the government on issues of public significance.

Disciplinary proceedings in Belarus are not independent of the executive, since they are conducted by the Qualification Commission which operates under the Ministry of Justice.

Notably, disciplinary proceedings are pending against lawyer Dmitry Layevski, allegedly following his public comments on a pending Draft Law on advocates’ activities.

Dmitry Layevski is a lawyer representing Victor Babaryko, an opposition leader in Belarus currently in detention, and Maxim Znak, former legal representative of Maria Kolesnikova, another detained opposition leader.

Earlier, a number of lawyers, including Aleksandr Pylchenko, former legal representative of Viktor Babaryko and Maria Kolesnikova, and Lyudmila Kazak, former legal representative of Maria Kolesnikova, faced disciplinary sanctions, and Lyudmila Kazak incurred an administrative fine, as a result of discharging their professional functions.

Several lawyers involved in human rights cases have been called by the Qualification Commission to undergo an examination to re-certify their qualification to practice law and have failed the exam. This procedure appears to target lawyers working to defend human rights, as a means of harassment or reprisal.

For example, following comments in mass media, Sergey Zikraskiy, a lawyer who often represented Belarusian journalists, was called to pass extraordinary re-examination which he failed. The certification is carried out by the Qualification Commission.

Criminal cases are still pending against lawyers Ilya Saley and Maxim Znak, who appear to have suffered consequences as a result of their representation of opposition leaders Maria Kolesnikova and Victor Babaryko.

 “These disbarments have a significant chilling effect on work of the legal profession and undermine the ability of lawyers to defend human rights of their clients in accordance with international standards on the role of lawyers,” Shakirov said.

Background

International law and standards 

According to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, the State authorities must guarantee that lawyers are able carry out their professional functions without hindrance, intimidation, harassment or fear of retaliation (Principle 16). The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers affirm that lawyers “shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics.” (Principle 16.c)  They further stipulate that lawyers must not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions (Principle 18).

International standards also require the institutional independence of the legal profession.  The executive body of the professional associations of lawyers must be elected by its members and must exercise its functions without external interference (Principle 24, The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers).

Greece and Italy: judges highlight the need for procedural guarantees for migrants and asylum seekers

Greece and Italy: judges highlight the need for procedural guarantees for migrants and asylum seekers

Migrants and asylum seekers must be provided adequate procedural guarantees in asylum procedures and in immigration detention, a group of experts and judges asserted during a seminar for Greek and Italian judges held by the ICJ, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna (SSSA), and Greek Council for Refugees (GCR) on 29-31 March.

Asylum applicants should have access to adequate information about the procedure and their entitlements in a language they understand, access to a reliable communication system with the authorities, the availability of interpreters, access to legal aid, and reasoned decisions, experts said during the seminar, held in the framework of the FAIR plus project. Speakers further emphasized that immigration detention must be subject to automatic review by an independent body with a power to release detainees, especially when removal is no more an option.

More than 30 judges from Italy and Greece came together for this event to discuss procedural guarantees for migrants and asylum seekers, related to the safe third country concept, the access to legal assistance and interpretation, safeguards related to immigration detention, and procedural guarantees in the asylum procedure, especially in the accelerated procedures.

A summary of the discussions

On the first day, the judges exchanged overviews of national systems and presented some specific questions regarding the Italian and the Greek systems. Following the discussion on the safe third country concept and its implementation in Greece, an Italian judge presented recent developments in the Italian case-law, and the role of the judge, country of origin information, accelerated procedures, the length of procedures and the question of credibility assessment.

On the second day, the discussion related to the impact of Covid-19 pandemic on the rights of migrants and asylum seekers took place. The situation in Greece and in Italy was described by judges, in particular in relation to the access to the asylum procedure, the lawfulness of detention, the right to health and the question of access to a personal hearing when some of the hearings take place electronically.

An overview of the situation of immigration detention in Italy and Greece was presented by an Italian lawyer and an expert from UNHCR Greece. Speakers highlighted that in cases when people cannot be returned, they should not be kept in detention without a legal basis.

Accelerated procedures in law and in practice in both countries have been introduced by UNHCR Greece and Italy were addressed through a case-study and discussion, covering mainly the specific needs in accelerated procedures, automatic suspensive effect of appeals, and time limits in the accelerated procedures.

Finally on the last day, two lectures were delivered by Ledi Bianku, a former judge of the European Court for Human Rights, and an Associate Professor at the University of Strasbourg. First, looking into the guarantees in asylum and migration proceedings, Ledi Bianku stressed the need to always provide asylum applicants adequate information about the procedure and their entitlements in a language they understand, access to a reliable communication system with the authorities, the availability of interpreters, access to legal aid, and reasoned decisions in order to provide access to an effective remedy. In the second part of his intervention, Mr. Bianku discussed the detention of migrants, where he stressed the need for automatic review of detention, especially when removal is no more an option, by an independent body with a power to release.

The FAIR plus project is a judicial training and cooperation project supported by the European Union’s Justice programme, focusing on four countries Ireland, Greece, Italy and the Czech Republic. The aim of the project is to contribute to better judicial protection of the fundamental rights of migrants across the EU. Within the project the ICJ and partners are drafting of training materials and relevant legal briefings, implement training of the existing judicial trainers in the target countries, conduct four national trainings, two transnational seminars, and an international roundtable. The project is implemented in collaboration with national partners: Immigrant Council of Ireland (ICI), Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna (SSSA), Greek Council for Refugees (GCR) and Forum for Human Rights (Czech Republic).

Please find the agenda here.

Turkey : Immediately free lawyer and human rights defender Öztürk Türkdoğan

Turkey : Immediately free lawyer and human rights defender Öztürk Türkdoğan

The ICJ called today on the Turkish authorities to immediately release human rights defender and lawyer Öztürk Türkdoğan, who was arrested this morning after an unlawful search of his home.  The charges against him, if any, are unkown and he is currently being held without access to his lawyer.

Öztürk Türkdoğan is the chair of the Human Rights Association and a lawyer and member of the Ankara Bar Association.

“The arrest and search of Öztürk Türkdoğan’s continues a systematic pattern of misuse of the criminal law to harass and persecute human rights defenders and lawyers in Turkey in recent years,” said Roisin Pillay, ICJ’s Europe and Central Asia Programme Director. “Öztürk Türkdoğan must be released immediately. If he remains in detention then he must be ensured immediate and confidential access to a lawyer, and be informed of the nature of any charges against him and brought promptly before a court.”

The arrest occurred during a search of Öztürk Türkdoğan’s home without the presence of a lawyer, which is in direct contravention of Turkish criminal procedural law.

While no information has been made available on the charges against Öztürk Türkdoğan, he is currently being detained without access to a lawyer for 24 hours, which indicates that the charges are likely related to terrorism or to offences against the State. These offences, contrary to obligations under international human rights law, are vaguely and broadly defined and have been long used and abused by prosecutors in Turkey to suppress human rights defenders, lawyers and political opponents.

Under international human rights law, anyone arrested has a right to prompt and confidential access to a lawyer, and to information on the charges against them.  Arrests and searches of homes must not be arbitrary and must be carried out in compliance with international standards and national laws and procedures.

“Hundreds of lawyers, judges and prosecutors have been improperly arrested, harassed and detained in the past few years by Turkish authorities  ” said Roisin Pillay.  “Using the criminal justice system in this way is contrary to the most fundamental principles of the rule of law.”

Background

Systematic violations of human rights in investigation and prosecution of counter-terrorism offences in Turkey have also been documented by the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, theWorking Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe.

The ICJ has extensively documented these violations:

 

 

 

 

 

Czech Republic: ICJ and Forum for Human Rights celebrate landmark European Committee decision upholding procedural rights for children

Czech Republic: ICJ and Forum for Human Rights celebrate landmark European Committee decision upholding procedural rights for children

All children regardless of their age must have access to procedural rights when they are accused of criminal acts, the Council of Europe’s European Committee of Social Rights decided in a landmark case (No. 148/2017) brought by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) with support from the Prague-based Forum for Human Rights.

The ICJ and Forum lodged a complaint challenging the failure of the Czech Republic to provide for legal assistance to children under the age of 15 (the age of criminal responsibility in the Czech Republic) in the pre-trial stage of proceedings and failure to provide alternatives to formal judicial proceedings for them.

The European Committee of Social Rights, which is responsible for oversight of the European Social Charter of 1961, found the Czech Republic was violating the rights of children under 15, who face proceedings in the child justice system but are below the age of criminal responsibility. The Committee found that the failure to provide these due process safeguards violated the rights of the children to social protection under Article 17 of the 1961 Charter. Human rights protected under the European Social Charter are legally binding on States party to it.

“The Committee’s decision is ground-breaking in many ways, yet two implications are revolutionary. First, it clearly emphasises the inter-dependence between fair-trail rights and child’s well-being. In modern human rights law, there is no such a thing as a clear-cut division between civil and political rights and social rights. But most importantly, the decision undermines paternalistic attitudes towards young children who enter the juvenile justice system and makes clear that all children – regardless their age – must be ensured adequate procedural protection in the course of the whole proceedings, based on the restorative justice principles,” said Maroš Matiaško, senior legal consultant of Forum.

The decision of the European Committee on Social Rights should lead to fundamental changes in the Czech child justice system, Forum for Human Rights and the International Commission of Jurists said today.

“We brought this case to ensure that children below the age of criminal responsibility do not have lower standards of protection of their rights compared to the older children in the child justice system,” said Karolína Babická, ICJ Legal Adviser. “We expect the Czech Republic to swiftly implement the decision of the Committee and ensure that all children regardless their age have access to procedural rights and alternative procedures like settlements and conditional termination or withdrawal of prosecution.”

Background

The legal findings come following a collective complaint submitted to the European Committee on Social Rights by Prague-based Forum for Human Rights and the International Commission of Jurists in 2017.

The Committee’s decision is built on two legal grounds, (I) mandatory legal representation for all children in conflict with the law regardless of age already in the pre-trial stage and (II) their access to alternatives in line with restorative justice principles.

On the first ground, the Committee found that the State must ensure mandatory legal assistance to children below the age of criminal responsibility already in the pre-stage of the proceedings. The reasoning is built on four grounds:

–Children below the age of criminal responsibility are not always able to understand and follow pre-trial proceedings due to their relative immaturity. It cannot therefore be assumed that they are able to defend themselves in this context.

–Children below the age of criminal responsibility should be assisted by a lawyer in order to understand their rights and the procedure applied to them, so as to prepare their defence. The failure to ensure legal assistance for children below the age of criminal responsibility in the pre-trial stage of proceedings is likely to impact negatively on the course of the proceedings, thereby increasing the likelihood of their being subjected to measures such as deprivation of liberty.

–Legal assistance is necessary in order for children to avoid self-incrimination and fundamental to ensure that a child is not compelled to give testimony or to confess or acknowledge guilt.

–The assistance of a lawyer is also necessary in situations where parents/legal guardians have interests that may conflict with those of the child and where it is in the child’s best interest to exclude the parents/legal guardians from being involved in the proceedings. Therefore, the Committee concluded that mandated separate legal representation for children is crucial at the pre-trial stage of proceedings.

In relation to the second legal ground, the Committee emphasised that diversion (alternatives to proceedings, such as settlement or conditional termination or withdrawal of criminal proceedings) from judicial proceedings should be the preferred manner of dealing with children in the majority of cases and diversion options should be available from as early as possible after contact with the system, before a trial commences, and throughout the proceedings. The principle applies to an even greater degree to a situation in which children below that age can still be engaged in the child justice system.

It may be left to the discretion of States Parties to decide on the exact nature and content of diversion measures, and to take the necessary legislative and other measures for their implementation, though there are relevant standards that should be taken into account, especially those developer by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child.

Collective complaints alleging violations of obligations under the European Social Charter, may be brought against States which have ratified the 1995 Additional Protocol to the European Social Charter. On the basis of the European Committee on Social Rights’ decision on a collective complaint, the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers may recommend that the State take specific measures to implement the decision.

Read the full decision here.

See more information about the case here.

Watch our talk on the case and its importance:

Contact:

Karolína Babická, Legal adviser Europe and Central Asia Programme; karolina.babicka(a)icj.org

Translate »