Dec 15, 2020 | News
On 15 December 2020, the eighth anniversary of the enforced disappearance of Lao civil society leader Sombath Somphone, the ICJ joined 53 organizations and 19 individuals in reiterating its calls on the Government to reveal his fate and whereabouts and to investigate his and all other cases of alleged enforced disappearance in the country.
The statement condemned the Government’s ongoing failure to adequately investigate all allegations of enforced disappearance in Laos, which has been compounded by years of near complete lack of commitment to address this serious crime or provide an effective remedy or reparation to its victims and their families.
In June 2020, during the third Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Laos, the Government refused to accept all five recommendations that called for an adequate investigation into Sombath’s enforced disappearance. The Government failed to support another eight recommendations that called for investigations into all cases of alleged enforced disappearances in Laos. Despite the government accepting that “the search for missing Lao citizens, including Sombath Somphone, is the duty of the Lao government”, it has failed to evidence any political will to effectively execute or fulfill this duty.
Sombath Somphone was last seen at a police checkpoint on a busy street in Vientiane on the evening of 15 December 2012. Footage from a CCTV camera showed that Sombath’s vehicle was stopped at the police checkpoint and that, within minutes, unknown individuals forced him into another vehicle and drove him away in the presence of police officers. CCTV footage also showed an unknown individual driving Sombath’s vehicle away from the city center. The presence of police officers at Sombath’s abduction and their failure to intervene strongly indicates State agents’ participation in Sombath’s enforced disappearance.
Lao authorities have repeatedly claimed they have been investigating Sombath’s enforced disappearance, but have failed to disclose any new findings to the public since 8 June 2013. They have not met with Sombath’s wife, Shui Meng Ng, since December 2017. No substantive information about the investigation has been shared by the authorities with Ng or Sombath’s family, indicating that, for all intents and purposes, the police investigation has been de facto suspended.
The statement reiterated a call for the establishment of a new independent and impartial investigative body tasked with determining Sombath’s fate and whereabouts, with the authority to seek and receive international technical assistance to conduct a professional and effective investigation in accordance with international standards. This is a call which multiple signatory organizations have been making since his enforced disappearance in 2012.
The statement further urged the Lao government to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED), which Laos signed in September 2008; incorporate its provisions into the country’s legal framework, implement it in practice, and recognize the competence of the Committee on Enforced Disappearances to receive and consider communications from or on behalf of the victims.
The full statement is available here.
Contact
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Dec 15, 2020 | Agendas, Events
Join ICJ and IHOP in this online conference in which Turkish and international experts will discuss the current challenges in Turkey to promptly and fully implement the judgments of the Court and how to improve the execution of judgments in the Turkish national system.
Turkey is the Council of Europe member state with the third highest number of European Court of Human Rights judgments awaiting execution, after the Russian Federation and Ukraine. As a Party to the European Convention on Human Rights and founding member of the Council of Europe, Turkey has committed to implement all rulings of the Strasbourg Court, yet the results of this commitment are far from clear.
Implementation of the European Court judgments is a key indicator in Europe of a country’s commitment to human rights and the rule of law, and failure to implement judgments fundamentally undermines access to justice for victims of human rights violations by watering down the impact of their litigation before the Court.
Failure to implement judgments through general implementation measures reforming laws, policies and practices, also leads to persistent, repeated violations of the States’ obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights. This problem has existed for many years in Turkey, leaving long-standing systemic human rights problems unsolved. Recently civil society has denounced the Turkish authorities’ attempts to circumvent the general application of certain new key rulings of the European Court.
In this conference, Turkish and international experts will discuss the current challenges in Turkey to promptly and fully implement the judgments of the Court and how to improve the execution of judgments in the Turkish national system:
– Justice Egbert Myjer, Former Judge at the European Court of Human Rights and Commissioner of the ICJ,
– Prof. Philip Leach, Professor of Human Rights Law at Middlesex University
– George Stafford, Director at European Implementation Network
– Emma Sinclair-Webb, Turkey Director, Human Rights Watch
– Kerem Altıparmak, ICJ Legal Consultant
– Ayşe Bingöl Demir, Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project Co-Director, Lawyer
– Prof. Başak Çalı, Professor of International Law, Co-Director of the Centre for Fundamental Rights at the Hertie School
The event will be introduced and moderated by Feray Salman, General Coordinator of the Human Rights Joint Platform (IHOP), Roisin Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme, and Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.<
TO REGISTER WRITE TO: ihop@ihop.org.tr
IHOPICJ-ZoomConference-ExecutionECtHRTurkey-Agenda-2020-ENG (download the agenda in English)
IHOPICJ-ZoomConference-ExecutionECtHRTurkey-Agenda-2020-TUR (download the agenda in Turkish)
The event is part of the REACT project: implemented jointly by ICJ and IHOP, this project seeks to support the role of civil society actors in turkey in ensuring effective access to justice for the protection of human rights. This project is funded by the European Union. The views expressed in the event do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the EU.
Dec 10, 2020 | News
ICJ’s 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence underscores the need for justice systems to be more responsive.
The campaign commenced on 25 November, International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women, and ended today on Human Rights Day. The campaign presented “an impact story” poster series, Facebook live interviews and opinion pieces on gender-based violence in Africa, Asia, Latin America, Middle East and North Africa.
The campaign underscored that harmful traditional norms and gender stereotypes provide the backdrop for the systematic and widespread abuse of women and girls’ human rights across the globe; it also emphasized the need to maintain essential services for survivors of gender-based violence (GBV) during COVID-19 lockdowns, including ensuring a continuum of adequate criminal justice response.
“Violence against women and girls around the world has increased in this global pandemic. Governments have a duty to ensure that their response to Covid-19 includes preventing such violence. For instance, all hotline services for reporting domestic violence must remain open during lockdowns and be considered part of essential services. The police must likewise be ready to act speedily if required. They must be made aware that women and girls are especially vulnerable at this time,” said ICJ Commissioner Ambiga Sreenevasan from Malaysia.
Throughout the campaign, the ICJ also underscored the ongoing need to support civil society organizations’ and women human rights defenders’ response to GBV, as well as the need to strengthen the judiciary’s capability to respond to GBV by enhancing its reliance on international human rights law and standards.
“The authorities have turned a blind eye to gender-based violence for far too long and it is time to prioritize combatting the phenomenon effectively, including through legislative reform and awareness raising,” said ICJ Commissioner Marwan Tashani from Libya.
Poster Series
Imrana Jalal (ICJ Commissioner, Fiji)
Mikiko Otani (ICJ Commissioner, Japan)
Ambiga Sreenevasan (ICJ Commissioner, Malaysia)
Marwan Tashani (ICJ Commissioner, Libya)
Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh (ICJ Africa Regional Programme Director)
Saïd Benarbia (ICJ MENA Programme Director)
Carolina Villadiego Burbano (ICJ Legal and Policy Adviser, Latin America)
Sexual Violence & Criminal Law in Zimbabwe
Amy Alabado Avellano (Family Court Judge, Philippines)
Savithri Wijesekera (Executive Director of Women In Need, Sri Lanka)
Nahla Haidar (ICJ Commissioner, Lebanon)
Saman Zia-Zarifi (ICJ Secretary General)
Tshabalala v S (South African Constitutional Court judgment on the doctrine of common purpose applied to rape)
Infographic
The Case for Reform: Criminal Law and Sexual Violence in Zimbabwe
Facebook Live Interviews
The Case for Reform: Criminal Law and Sexual Violence in Zimbabwe with Elizabeth Mangenje (ICJ Legal Adviser, Africa Regional Programme)
The State of GBV in the Middle East and North Africa Region with Nahla Haidar El Addal (ICJ Commissioner, Lebanon)
Women’s Access to Justice – What does justice mean for women in the context of COVID-19? (Joint initiative of ICJ, UN Women, and OHCHR)
Women’s Access to Justice – What does justice mean for women prisoners? (Joint initiative of ICJ, UN Women, and OHCHR)
Op-eds
Mujeres, justicia y pandemia, by Carolina Villadiego Burbano
Yet another treaty aims to protect African women. But how will it be enforced? by Nokukhanya Farisè and Tanveer Rashid Jeewa
Dec 8, 2020 | News
The ICJ with partners has intervened in European Court for Human Rights case concerning collective expulsions, including of children from Croatia.
The ICJ and partners (European Council for Refugees and Exiles, Dutch Council for Refugees, AIRE Center and the Hungarian Helsinki Committee) intervened today in the case S.B. v Croatia (Application No. 18810/19) at the European Court for Human rights.
The case concerns collective expulsion of migrants, including children, from Croatia to Bosnia and Herzegovina, and excessive use of force.
In the intervention, the organisations have highlighted international legal standards regarding the principle of non-refoulement and prohibition of collective expulsions. They also point to the need to take into account specific vulnerabilities of asylum seekers and children in order to guarantee enhanced safeguards afforded to them under international and EU law.
The organisations also note that in operations aimed at imposing restrictions on freedom of movement or deprivation of liberty to carry out an expulsion, the use of force should only be employed exceptionally and subject to strict necessity and proportionality requirements. The lack of resistance to law enforcement officials, per se renders force unlawful.
Please find the third party intervention here.
Dec 7, 2020 | News
The ICJ called today on the Council of the EU, the European Parliament and the European Commission to give a central role to the judiciary and ensure effective judicial remedies to prevent and redress human rights violations, in the draft Regulation on “Terrorist Content Online”.
The call comes as the final phase of the negotiations between the EU institutions on the draft Regulation begin this Thursday 10 December..
The ICJ is concerned that without procedures that incorporate core rule of law principles in the Regulation, there is a risk of improper and overreaching suppression of content that will undermine freedom of expression and other rights online.
Among the ICJ ‘s concerns with the proposal as it currently stands, is that it does not provide for mandatory judicial authorization and judicial review of orders by national authorities to remove content online deemed to be “terrorist”.
According to draft Article 4 of the proposal, national “competent authorities” would have the power to issue a decision requiring a hosting service provider to remove “terrorist” content or disable access to it within one hour from receipt of the removal order.
The ICJ considers that the power to issue removal orders to censor content online within an hour, without prior judicial authorisation, risks leading to excessive, arbitrary or discriminatory interference with the freedoms of expression, religion, assembly and association online as well as with rights to privacy and data protection of persons residing or present in EU Member States.
Under international and EU human rights law applicable to EU Member States, any restriction on these rights must be prescribed by law so that their application is clear and foreseeable, must be necessary and proportionate in the circumstances of the individual case, must be non-discriminatory and must allow access to an effective remedy. Furthermore, any person must have access to a court of law to access justice against breach of their rights.
The proposal, if approved without modifications, would allow – as yet undetermined – national authorities to order the removal of content online from host service providers, even if these are residing outside of their State or of the EU, without any authorisation from a court of law.
Furthermore, the definition of “terrorist” content relies heavily on a recent EU Directive on Combatting terrorism (2017/541) that allows for excessively wide criminalisation of forms of expression, such as the offence of “glorification of terrorism”.
The proposal is also likely to trigger a jurisdictional quagmire among EU Member States that will in the medium term be counter-productive to the objective of countering terrorism.
The power of a non-judicial authority of a Member State to issue orders binding upon public and private entities of another Member State, without prior judicial approval on the constitutionality and lawfulness of the order and of the rights in each jurisdiction, will seriously undermine mutual trust among jurisdictions, a core principle for the functioning of the EU Area of Freedom, Security and Justice. This is particularly important in light of the serious threats to the Rule of Law occurring in certain EU Member States that are already impairing the functioning of other EU criminal cooperation instruments, such as the European Arrest Warrant.
The ICJ therefore calls on all the actors heading the negotiations on the EU Regulation on “Terrorist Content Online” to adjust the current draft in order to provide for a central role of judicial authorities of EU Member States in the scheme of the Regulation by requiring designated “competent authorities” under Article 4 of the Regulation to be judicial authorities; to provide for judicial review, and to include adequate safeguards in the Regulation to ensure the protection of the human rights of any person subject to their jurisdiction.
Background
In 2018 the European Commission published a proposal of the EU Regulation on “Terrorist Content” Online. The aim of the Regulation is to establish uniform rules to prevent the misuse of hosting services for the dissemination of terrorist content online.
The Regulation has been since discussed by the Council of the EU and the European Parliament, who are currently in the final stages of negotiation in the EU legislative procedure in closed sessions among representatives of the European Parliament, the Council of the EU and the European Commission (the so-called trialogue procedure).
Contact:
Karolina Babicka, Legal Adviser, Europe and Central Asia Programme, e: karolina.babicka(a)icj.org
Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser, Europe and Central Asia Programme, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org, t: +41 79 749 99 49
Dec 2, 2020 | News
The ICJ today called upon the Sri Lankan authorities to conduct a prompt, thorough and impartial investigation into the events involving the use of lethal force by prison guards at Mahara prison on 29 and 30 November, which left at least nine inmates killed and over hundred others injured.
The action by the guards was taken in response to unrest resulting from protests by inmates over unsafe and overcrowded conditions in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
The ICJ also called for urgent measure to address the unsafe conditions in Sri Lankan prisons to protect the right to health and life, including where necessary by releasing detainees.
“The tragic events of Mahara prison are a consequence of the failure of the Sri Lankan authorities to effectively address the situation of prison conditions, which has turned into a full blown human rights and public health crisis in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic”, said Ian Seiderman, ICJ Legal and Policy Director
The unrest was the culmination of a series of protests staged by the prisoners demanding an increase in coronavirus testing and new isolation facilities for infected prisoners. According to Senaka Perera, President of the Committee for Protecting the Rights of the Prisoners, around 200 inmates of the Mahara prison have been infected with COVID-19.
While the Minister of Rehabilitation and Prison Reforms and the Inspector General of Police have instructed the Criminal Investigation Department to probe the unrest caused at the Mahara Prison, the Minister of Justice has formed a separate five-member committee, chaired by former High Court Judge Kusala Saorini Weerawardena, to conduct its own investigation.
The ICJ recalls that under international law, the use of lethal force by State authorities is only permissible where strictly necessary to protect life. This standard should govern any investigation, and those responsible for unlawful conduct resulting in death or injuries to prisoners must be held to account.
“In addition to ensuring accountability and redress for any violations at the Mahara Prison, the authorities must act swiftly to meet the legitimate grievances of detainees throughout the country”, added Ian Seiderman.
“An effective response is not optional, but is necessary to fulfill the State’s legal obligation to provide for equal access to healthcare and health services to prisoners, who are among the most vulnerable to the ravages of COVID-19 in highly unsafe, enclosed and overcrowded environments.” Seiderman added.
The incident follows a wave of similar protests in several other prisons in the country. On 18 November, five inmates who were under quarantine at the Old Bogambara Prison attempted to break out and an inmate was shot dead when the prisoner officers opened fire at the fleeing inmates.
The ICJ called for the release of detainees who are particularly at risk of losing their life or suffering severe health effects from COVID-19. This would also apply to other convicts who could be released without compromising public safety, such as those sentenced for minor, non-violent offences.
Background
Speaking in Parliament on Monday, Minister of Rehabilitation and Prison Reforms Dr. Sudharshini Fernandopulle stated that the Government has taken steps to reduce overcrowding by directing COVID-19 positive prisoners out of the prisons to the Welikanda Hospital and moving all women inmates to the Kandakadu Rehabilitation Centre. She also stated that a mechanism has been put in place to obtain bail for those arrested for minor drug offences. Moreover, a presidential pardon has been granted to over 600 convicts of minor offences who were in remand due to their inability to pay the required fine.
Several UN bodies, including the WHO and OHCHR, came together in recommending that States consider limiting the deprivation of liberty including pretrial detention, to a measure of last resort and enhance efforts to resort to non-custodial measures.
Contact
Osama Motiwala, Communications Officer – osama.motiwala(a)icj.org
