UN Human Rights Council: key outcomes of the 38th ordinary session

UN Human Rights Council: key outcomes of the 38th ordinary session

The ICJ today joined other NGOs in highlighting key outcomes of the 38th ordinary session of the UN Human Rights Council.

The statement, delivered by International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) at the end of the session, read as follows (text in italics was not read aloud due to the limited time available):

“Our organisations welcome the adoption of the resolutions on civil society space, peaceful protest, on violence against women and girls and on discrimination against women and girls and the Council’s rejection of attempts to impede progress on protecting civic space, peaceful protest and the rights to sexual and reproductive health.

On civil society space, the resolution recognizes the essential contribution that civil society makes to international and regional organisations and provides guidance to States and organisations on improving their engagement with civil society. On peaceful protest, it sets out in greater detail how international law and standards protect rights related to protests.

On violence against women and on discrimination against women, we consider that ensuring sexual and reproductive health and rights are vital in efforts to combat violence and discrimination against women, online and offline, as well as to ensure targeted and specific remedies to victims. We appreciate that the work of women human rights defenders towards this is recognised.

We consider the adoption of the resolution on the contribution of the Council to the prevention of human rights violations as an important opportunity to advance substantive consideration on strengthening the Council’s ability to deliver on its prevention mandate.

Following challenging negotiations, we welcome the adoption by consensus of the resolution on human rights and the Internet, reaffirming that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, and calling on States to tackle digital divides between and within countries, emphasising the importance of tools for anonymity and encryption for the enjoyment of human rights online, in particular for journalists, and condemning once more all measures that prevent or disrupt access to information online.

We welcome continued Council attention to Eritrea‘s abysmal human rights record. This year’s resolution, while streamlined, extends expert monitoring of, and reporting on, the country and outlines a way forward for both engagement and human rights reform. We urge Eritrea to engage in long-overdue meaningful cooperation.

We welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Belarus under item 4 with an increased vote – as it is still the only independent international mechanism to effectively monitor human rights violations in Belarus – while remaining concerned over a narrative to shift the mandate to item 10 in the absence of any systemic change in Belarus.

We welcome the consensus resolution on the DRC, putting in place continued monitoring and follow up on the expert’s recommendations on the Kasais. However, given violations and abuses throughout several regions in the country, occurring against the backdrop of an ongoing political crisis, delayed elections, and the brutal quashing of dissent, we urge the Council to promptly move towards putting in place a country-wide mechanism that can respond to events on the ground as they emerge.

We welcome the strong resolution on Syria, which condemns violations and abuses by all parties, and appropriately addresses concerns raised by the COI about the use of chemical weapons, sexual and gender-based violence, and the need to address situations of detainees and disappearances. The Council cannot stay silent in the face of continued atrocities as the conflict continues unabated into its seventh year.

We welcome the joint statements delivered this session on Cambodia, the Philippines, and Venezuela. We urge Council members and observers to work towards increased collective action to urgently address the dire human rights situations in these countries.

On the Philippines, we emphasise that the Council should establish an independent international investigation into extrajudicial killings in the ‘war on drugs’ and mandate the OHCHR to report on the human rights situation and on moves toward authoritarianism.

The joint statement on Cambodia represents a glimmer of hope after the Council’s failure to take meaningful action against clear sabotage of democratic space ahead of elections. Close scrutiny of the human rights situation before, during and after the elections is paramount and the Council must take immediate action on current and future human rights violations in this regard.

We welcome the joint statement delivered by Luxembourg calling on the HRC President to provide  oral updates on cases of alleged intimidation or reprisal, including actions taken, at the start of the Item 5 general debate of each Council session and also provide States concerned with the opportunity to respond.

Finally, the new Council member to replace the United States of America should demonstrate a principled commitment to human rights, to multilateralism and to addressing country situations of concern by applying objective criteria.

 

Signatories:

  1. Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
  2. The Association for Progressive Communications
  3. The Center for Reproductive Rights (CRR)
  4. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
  5. DefendDefenders (the East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project)
  6. Human Rights House Foundation (HRHF)
  7. International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
  8. The International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA)
  9. International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
Extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Latin America: ICJ Commissioners urge continued and expanded engagement by the ICJ

Extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Latin America: ICJ Commissioners urge continued and expanded engagement by the ICJ

On 24-25 June, ICJ Commissioners from the Latin America region came together in Bogotá, Colombia, to consider and enhance ICJ strategies to combat past and resurging trends in extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances in the region.

The meeting was the first of its kind to bring together ICJ Commissioners on a regional basis: Carlos Ayala (Venezuela); Miguel Carbonell (Mexico); Gustavo Gallón (Colombia); Roberto Garretón (Chile); Juan Mendez (Argentina); Victor Rodriguez Rescia (Costa Rica); Alejandro Salinas Rivera (Chile); Mónica Pinto (Argentina); Belisário dos Santos Júnior (Brazil); and Wilder Tayler (Uruguay).

The meeting was followed by a preparatory mission (involving two Commissioners and the ICJ’s legal representative in Colombia) on the transitional justice mechanisms envisaged under the Havana Agreement, with a particular emphasis on the jurisdiction and operation of the ‘Special Jurisdiction for Peace’. A full high-level mission will follow in September, at which time the ICJ intends to identify minimum benchmarks for the effective operation and sustainable impact of those mechanisms.

In all regions of the world, recourse to enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings continues; victims and their families (the overwhelming majority of whom are women, children and indigenous peoples from rural areas dominated by poverty and social and political exclusion, as well as trade unionists and human rights defenders) struggle to obtain prompt and effective remedies and reparation; and perpetrators enjoy impunity through inadequate or improper laws, ineffective institutional frameworks, selective recourse to accountability mechanisms and/or political interference in the functioning of those mechanisms.

The meeting confirmed that these challenges are particularly evident in Latin America, where there has been a resurgence in recourse to enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings in countries throughout the region and where violations of the past have in very many cases been inadequately addressed. By way of example:

  • In Brazil, official statistics from 2016 attest to the occurrence of 62,000 violent deaths and potentially up to 22,000 enforced disappearances each year.
  • 45 years after the coup d’état in Chile, about 800 people have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment, but those figures belie the extensive occurrence and levels of responsibility for gross violations of human rights that occurred.
  • In Colombia, more than 70,000 cases of enforced disappearance were documented by the Attorney General for the period 1970-2015 and there is general consensus that the number of missing persons likely exceeds 100,000. The wide and persistent extent of extrajudicial killings has been noted by UN and Inter-American experts and bodies as well as the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.
  • In Guatemala, only 34 convictions for conduct involving conflict-era violations have been secured, despite the fact that the internal armed conflict of 1960-1996 involved massive and systematic human rights violations. Impunity has undermined redress and accountability and severely weakened the prevention of violations, with the National Civil Police having recorded more than 25,000 people ‘disappeared’ in 2003-2014, more than half of which were women.
  • Peru’s internal armed conflict of 1980-2000 resulted in more than 69,000 people killed and ‘disappeared’, but less than 100 convictions have been secured under the judicial subsystem established in 2004 that specializes in accountability for gross human rights violations.
  • In Venezuela, civil society reports at least 12,000 real or perceived political opponents having been arbitrarily detained between January 2014 and April 2018; and almost 6,000 alleged extrajudicial killings between 2012 and 2016.

In all the countries from which the Commissioners originate, several common factors were identified:

  • The intrinsic risks to continuation of and lack of redress and accountability for gross human rights violations posed by executive action that undermines the rule of law;
  • Also inherent to the rule of law, the critical need for independent and impartial judicial mechanisms and individual judges and lawyers to allow for transitional justice, in particular for victims and their families to access effective remedies and reparation and for the holding to account of perpetrators;
  • A high level of correspondence between impunity for gross human rights violations and the corruption of public officials;
  • The increased, and in some cases extensive, recourse to arbitrary and detention, which in many cases precede and allow for the occurrence of extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances;
  • A similar inter-relationship between enforced disappearances and the occurrence of torture and other forms of ill-treatment;
  • The detrimental impact to ensuring accountability for violations of the past when omitting non-State and paramilitary actors from transitional justice processes; and
  • The increase in highly conservative (political and popular) sentiments and movements within the region and the corresponding need to tailor responses depending on the democratic versus autocratic nature of government and its institutions.

Noting that the ICJ has long sought to combat extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances, including through the development of UN and regional instruments and standards and through its action in Latin America and the globe, the ICJ’s Commissioners urged the ICJ to continue and expand its engagement. Noting also the increasing call by local civil society actors for support and intervention by the ICJ, the meeting considered the organization’s role in seeking redress and accountability for, and prevention of, gross violations of human rights.

Commissioners reinforced, and commented on the effective parameters of, the ICJ’s strategic and victim-centred approach to address and prevent gross human rights violations, including extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances. Having regard to the ICJ’s mandate and worldwide network of judges and lawyers, Commissioners emphasized the unique role that the organization has by grounding its work on the transformative role of the law, justice institutions and justice actors.

The particular means by which this role can be achieved by the ICJ were discussed against the background of recent and planned activities in the region and beyond. Commissioners overwhelmingly supported these plans and the Secretariat is now poised to continue implementation of its strategies in its current programmes of work and in the development of future projects.

Guatemala: ICJ Latin American Commissioners condemn attacks against judicial independence

Guatemala: ICJ Latin American Commissioners condemn attacks against judicial independence

“Judges from the High Risk Tribunals in Guatemala, including Ericka Aifán, Yassmín Barrios, Miguel Ángel Gálvez and Pablo Xitumul, are facing unjustified disciplinary hearings,” nine Latin American Commissioners from the ICJ, meeting in Bogotá on 24 June, stated today.

The Commissioners understand that these judges are facing unjustified disciplinary hearings instigated by groups or persons who are displeased with judicial rulings in high-impact cases involving transitional justice or corruption.

They expressed serious concern about the precarious state of the independence of the judiciary in Guatemala. Judges are subjected to on-going attacks that seek to impact their work as honourable and impartial justice operators.

According to international standards, judges should exercise their functions free of any extraneous influence and with total impartiality; without any limitations, inducements, pressures, threats or interference, direct or indirect, from any quarter or any reason.

The Commissioners also expressed their complete support for Commissioner Iván Velásquez, head of the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG), who because of the exercise of his functions, has also suffered from a series of hostile acts and smear campaigns.

The ICJ Commissioners extend their full support to the CICIG in its struggle against impunity and corruption.

The Commissioners request that the international community continues to support the CICIG with sufficient human and financial resources.

At the same time, the Commissioners call upon the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, the Sub-Committee of Human Rights of the European Parliament and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, to visit Guatemala and to verify “in situ” the precarious state of judicial independence in the country.

The nine ICJ commissioners who issued the statement

Carlos Ayala, Vice-President of the International Commission of Jurists (Venezuela)

Mónica Pinto, Commissioner (Argentina)

Miguel Carbonnel, Commissioner (Mexico)

Victor Rodriguez Rescia Commissioner (Costa Rica)

Wilder Tayler, Commissioner (Uruguay)

Belisário dos Santos, Commissioner Brazil

Juan Mendez, Commissioner (Argentina)

Roberto Garretón, Commissioner (Chile)

Guatemala: attacks against judges and human rights defenders must cease

Guatemala: attacks against judges and human rights defenders must cease

Conclusions of the Conference on Judicial Independence, Guatemala City, 18-19 June 2018

The ICJ is deeply concerned about the increase in the abuse of disciplinary measures against independent and impartial judges and about crimes committed against human rights defenders. These attacks are putting the rule of law at risk in Guatemala.

The ICJ therefore urges the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Subcommittee on Human Rights of the European Parliament and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers to carry out visits to the country so as to verify the situation.

Judges facing malicious disciplinary proceedings

From 18-19 June 2018, the ICJ hosted a conference on the independence of judges with participants from different Central American judges’ associations.

The conference was able to verify that impartial and honourable judges face on-going disciplinary actions that seek to have then recused from trials or have them removed from office on account of their judicial decisions.

Judges are facing the malicious use of the judicial disciplinary system by groups or persons who disapprove of judicial rulings in high-impact cases.

The meeting was an opportunity for different justice sector institutions and judges, victims of attacks, to analyse fundamental concepts and international standards on the judiciary.

The conference concluded, the judicial career system must guarantee that a higher judicial authority can only sanction judges for legally established reasons as set down by international standards.

There was a full agenda of discussions with the participation of the Association of Guatemala Judges for Integrity (AGJI), the President of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, the Supervisor General of Courts, judges from the Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court, the Commissioner of the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG) and the plenary of the Council of the Judicial Career.

The conference examined attacks against judges and their impact, case by case, in the light of international standards. The conference concluded that judges including Ericka Aifán, Yassmín Barrios, Miguel Ángel Gálvez, Carlos Ruano and Pablo Xitumul are facing disciplinary measures because they have acted independently and impartially.

The spurious complaints presented against them before the judicial disciplinary system or other State institutions should be excluded “in limine”.

Read the full Article in English (PDF): Guatemala-Conference-of-Judges-News-Web-stories-June-2018-ENG

US withdrawal from UN Human Rights Council symptom of deeper crisis

US withdrawal from UN Human Rights Council symptom of deeper crisis

The Trump administration’s broader rejection of multilateralism and rule of law, its actual practices, and paralysis of other States, are the real issues, says the ICJ.

On the evening of 19 June, the United States of America announced it was formally abandoning its membership of the UN Human Rights Council.

“The withdrawal of the United States from the United Nations Human Rights Council is symptomatic of its broader rejection of multilateralism and rule of law, and how it acts in practice, both at home and abroad,” said ICJ Secretary General Sam Zarifi in reaction.

The inhuman caging of thousands of migrant and refugee children, and turning a blind eye to the grave human rights violations in North Korea, are but two recent and glaring examples, along with a recent highly critical report by the UN Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Philip Alston, following his visit to the US last year.

Even more concerning, the US retreat comes at the same time as openly racist and nationalist authoritarianism rises across Europe. Even where they are not immediately succeeding in coming to power, such movements are slowly paralyzing Europe at exactly the time its moderating or progressive influence on world affairs in general, and human rights in particular, is most needed.

The US in fact is cooperating in New York with the very same countries it publicly condemns, to cut the funding and mandate for the day-to-day human rights work of the UN – whether through the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Secretary General’s Rights up Front Initiative, or UN country offices. And many many other countries are complicit in that exercise by their silence.

With moves by other powerful States to seize and dilute the UN’s human rights machinery, it has never been more important for other States sincerely committed to defending human rights and the rule of law to step into the empty seats the US is leaving behind.

Guatemala: the ICJ condemns proposal to introduce amnesty measures in cases of gross human rights violations

Guatemala: the ICJ condemns proposal to introduce amnesty measures in cases of gross human rights violations

The ICJ strongly condemns the draft bill of the Congressional Commission on Legislation and Constitutional Affairs to propose reforms to the Law of National Reconciliation (Congressional Decree 145-96) and grant amnesty in cases of gross human rights violations.

“The amnesty included in this draft bill is unconstitutional and flagrantly violates Guatemala’s international obligations. It seeks to place more obstacles in the way of victims of serious human rights violations in their search for justice and truth,” said Ramón Cadena, Director of the Central American Office of the ICJ.

“Justice must be delivered in these important cases because it is the basis for political stability, the rule of law and democracy. Guatemalan authorities should demonstrate that they have an unquestionable commitment to the struggle against impunity.  Unfortunately, this draft bill demonstrates the exact opposite,” he added.

This decision flagrantly contravenes Guatemala’s international obligations to prosecute and punish those responsible for gross violations of human rights and guarantee the rights to justice, truth and reparation for victims of these crimes.

International bodies, including the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in numerous judgments, have condemned Guatemala for gross human rights violations; and on repeated occasions have stated that it is prohibited to grant amnesties in cases of gross violations of human rights and international crimes, such as crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes.

This draft bill could open the doors to allow impunity to continue, at a time when the judicial system is fighting against impunity in historic cases of gross human rights violations and international crimes and in so doing provide guarantees for the victims’ rights to justice.

The ICJ considers that the administration of justice in cases of gross violations of human rights and international crimes by independent judges in cases of “transitional justice” should be supported, not only by the Legislature but also by the Executive Branch, as well as, self-evidently, by the Judicial Branch itself.

The Supreme Court of Justice has the obligation to support independent judges that through their rulings are proving to be impartial, objective and independent and should take the necessary measures to protect judges from any interference or attack that affects the smooth exercise of their duties.

The ICJ recalls that it is a State’s inalienable obligation under international law to investigate gross violations of human rights and international crimes and to prosecute and punish those responsible.

Translate »