Turkey: dismissal of judges and prosecutors fundamentally unfair

Turkey: dismissal of judges and prosecutors fundamentally unfair

The ICJ condemned the dismissal of eight judges and three prosecutors by Turkey’s Council of Judges and Prosecutors (CJP) on 14 October 2020, for alleged membership of or connections with the Gülenist movement as a violation their right to a fair trial.

The ICJ calls on the CJP to revoke its order. In case any further is to be taken, the cases should be re-examined under the ordinary dismissal procedures.  The ICJ also urges the Turkish Government and Parliament to modify the constitutional rules on the CJP to ensure its full independence.

“This decision not  only affects the rights of the judges and prosecutors at stake, but also the Turkish population as whole, which damages the functioning of a fair and independent justice system bound by the rule of law,” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser with the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.

The decision by the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (CJP) is particularly problematic because it was not accompanied by any reasoning on the individual situation of each judge and prosecutor.

International law provides that judges may be dismissed only through a fair hearing before an independent authority. The lack of individual reasoning in dismissal decisions strikes at the heart of the right to a fair hearing.

As the ICJ demonstrated in the 2018 report Justice Suspended, within the current constitutional framework, the Council of Judges and Prosecutors (CJP) is itself  not provided with the guarantees necessary to ensure its institutional independence.

Despite the state of emergency having been lifted since July 2018, extraordinary powers given to the Council of Judges and Prosecutors to dismiss judges and prosecutors during the State of Emergency still apply, having been extended for three  years by Law no. 7145.

“It is unacceptable in a State governed by the rule of law that judges and prosecutors – whatever charges may be against them – be dismissed without a fair procedure, in disregard of international law,” added Massimo Frigo.

Background

On 14 October the Council of Judges and Prosecutors made use of special powers to dismiss judges and prosecutors without complying with the ordinary procedure, invoking extraordinary powers enacted by Law No 7145 of 31.07.2018. The decision was issued in the Official Gazette on 30 October 2020. This legislation inserted into ordinary law several powers that had previously applied under the state of emergency legislation. More than 30 judges have so far been dismissed under this procedure since the end of the state of emergency.

One of the amendments made by Law No 7145 of 31.07.2018 was to the Decree Law No 375 dated 1989. A Temporary Article (Article 35) was added to the Decree. On the basis of this article, the General Assembly of the Constitutional Court, the Presidency Councils of Court of Appeal, the Council of State, the General Assembly of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors, a Commission set up by the Ministry of National Security, and the Presidency of the Court of Audit, were each authorized to take dismissal decisions for public officials/judges and prosecutors under their mandate for three years from the date of the endorsement of the law No 7145

The decision to dismiss the nine judges and two prosecutors was made on 14 October 2020 and published in the Official Gazette on 20 October 2020. After recalling Law no 7145 that enables the dismissal of judges and prosecutors by the Board, the decision states that all defendants have asked to submit their written defences. The decision also indicates that this is not a criminal conviction. The decision is based on complaints received and refers to investigations on their social environment, criminal investigations and prosecutors conducted by judicial authorities in general on the Gülenist organisation/FETÖ, minutes of hearings, contents of the communication app Bylock, statements by witnesses and suspects. However, the decision does not include any reasoning relating to the individual situation of each judge or prosecutor.

International law and standards provide that disciplinary proceedings should be conducted by an independent authority or a court with all the guarantees of a fair trial and provide the judge with the right to challenge the decision and sanction. Disciplinary sanctions should be proportionate.

The UN Basic Principles on the independence of the judiciary set out international standards for discipline, suspension and removal of judges, including in order to ensure impartiality and independence of courts and tribunals as required by international law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention on Human Rights. The Basic Principles state that a “charge or complaint made against a judge in his/her judicial and professional capacity shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under an appropriate procedure. The judge shall have the right to a fair hearing. The examination of the matter at its initial stage shall be kept confidential, unless otherwise requested by the judge.”

The Consultative Council of European Judges (CCJE) adds that “a Head of State, Minister of Justice or any other representative of political authorities cannot take part in the disciplinary body.”

Contact

Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for the Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +41 22 979 3805, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org

 

Belarus: revoke disbarment of lawyer Aleksandr Pylchenko

Belarus: revoke disbarment of lawyer Aleksandr Pylchenko

The ICJ calls on the Belarus authorities to revoke the disbarment of lawyer Aleksandr Pylchenko and to end harassment or other interference with the work of lawyers in the country.

His disbarment appears to be arbitrary and in violation of rights to freedom of expression as well as international standards on the role of lawyers.

The decision of 15 October 2020 of the Ministry of Justice to disbar the lawyer is clearly related to his work in defence of human rights and his representation of clients, including, opposition leaders or protesters.

This disbarment is part of a pattern of increasing obstruction of lawyers who represent those associated with recent protests in Belarus, including through arrests and detention of lawyers, and prevention of their access to clients.

Aleksandr Pylchenko represented Viktor Babariko and Maria Kolesnikova, two leaders of the opposition in Belarus.

Disbarment proceedings against Mr Pylchenko started as a result of his public criticism of the response of the law enforcement authorities to claims of ill-treatment of protesters.

On 14 August 2020, in a media interview Mr Pylchenko called on the Prosecutor General’s Office to take action, in particular to launch criminal investigations into the ill-treatment of protesters by the police and to remove the Minister of Interior and other officials from their posts because of their involvement in human rights violations.

According to the Ministry of Justice, Mr Pylchenko called for “illegal actions, including blocking and disarming military units” and his statements “mislead the public about the powers of state bodies and do not comply with procedural norms”.

Belarus has obligations under international law to protect the right to freedom of expression (Article 19 ICCPR).  Lawyers have a particular role in publicly raising concerns about violations of the human rights of their clients, or problems in the justice system that lead to violations of human rights.

The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers affirm that lawyers, like others, are entitled to freedom of expression and in particular, have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights.

Furthermore, the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provide that governments must ensure that lawyers ‘are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference”. (Principle 23). Lawyers should 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). They should never be identified with their clients’ causes.

Background:

Following the presidential elections of 9 August 2020 in Belarus, widespread protests across Belarus took place.

On 18 June and 7 September 2020, Victor Babaryka and Maria Kolesnikova, opposition leaders in Belarus, were detained.

There are reports that defence lawyers were denied access to those arrested including in high-profile cases, such as the case of the former presidential candidate Victor Babaryka whose lawyer was not allowed to see his client in the detention centre for significant period of time.

On 9 September 2020, lawyers Ilya Salei and Maxim Znak, were detained allegedly on politically motivated charges.

On 25 September 2020, the Minsk city Oktyabrsky District Court sentenced Luidmila Kazak, lawyer of Maria Kolesnikova, to a fine (220 Euro) for “disobeyance to a lawful order” of a police officer (Article 23.4 of the Code of Administrative Offences). The lawyer stated that the arrest and administrative fine are connected to her legal representation of the opposition leader Maria Kolesnikova.

The ICJ has previously called on Belarus to comply with its international human rights obligations, including by releasing those arbitrarily detained and ceasing abusive prosecutions as well as harassment of lawyers.

European Union: rule of law report must be followed by action

European Union: rule of law report must be followed by action

The ICJ today welcomed the first annual rule of law report of the European Commission, which analyses the compliance of all EU Member States with rule of law standards, including on judicial independence, freedom of the media and civil society.

The report is a welcome recognition that rule of law guarantees cannot be taken for granted in any European country, and that all EU institutions must be particularly vigilant in their defence.

But the ICJ warns that the report is only valuable if it leads to strengthened EU enforcement action to address the serious rule of law crises in Poland and in Hungary.

“This report is further testimony to the actions of governments of Poland and Hungary, to deliberately and systematically dismantle protections for judicial independence and other essential rule of law protections,” said Róisín Pillay, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme Director.

“We need the EU to use its powers of enforcement promptly and to the full, to defend these fundamental guarantees, including through prompt progression of Article 7 and enforcement proceedings. It is welcome that the European Commission calls on Member States to accelerate the resolution of problems raised under the Article 7 proceedings against Poland and Hungary. This report should lead to renewed efforts of all the institutions to urgently progress these proceedings,” she added.

Additional information

The full text of the European Commission report is available here: https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2020-rule-law-report-communication-and-country-chapters_en

The International Commission of Jurists has repeatedly expressed serious concern at the deteriorating rule of law situation in both Poland and Hungary, see for example:

https://www.icj.org/poland-judges-and-lawyers-from-around-the-world-condemn-rapidly-escalating-rule-of-law-crisis/

And here: https://www.icj.org/european-union-icj-joins-call-for-urgent-eu-response-to-hungarys-covid-19-emergency-law/

Contact:

Róisín Pillay, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme Director, t: +32 476 97 42 63; e: roisin.pillay@icj.org

Karolina Babicka, Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +32 475 46 20 67; e: karolina.babicka@icj.org

Turkey : drop criminal charges against Chair and Board Members of Istanbul Bar

Turkey : drop criminal charges against Chair and Board Members of Istanbul Bar

The ICJ called today on the Public Prosecutor Office of Istanbul to drop criminal charges and investigations against the President and Board Members of the Istanbul Bar Association for having publicly displayed a photograph of lawyer Ebru Timtik, who died following a hunger strike while in detention.

“These charges have been brought as a direct result of the lawyers’ exercise of their freedom of expression,” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser with the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme. “ They should be dropped immediately.”

On 21 September, the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office of Istanbul notified to the 11 members of the board of the Istanbul Bar Association, including its President Mehmet Durakoğlu, that they were under criminal investigation.

The charges are not yet known but it is confirmed that the investigation concerns their hanging of a large picture of lawyer Ebru Timtik out of the window of the Istanbul Bar Association’s headquarters.

Lawyer Ebru Timtik died last 27 August on the 238th day of her hunger strike, while in detention on remand. She was a lawyer in the Progressive Lawyers Association and was under trialto answer to the unfounded accusation of being a member of a terrorist organisation. She undertook the hunger strike to protest against these accusations, which are often used in Turkey to silence political opposition and human rights defenders.

Following the bar association’s display of Ebru Timtik’s photograph, Minister of Interior Süleyman Soylu targeted the İstanbul Bar, saying, “I strongly condemn the ones who hung the photograph of a terrorist organization member on the İstanbul Bar Association.” Minister of Justice Abdulhamit Gül also said, “It is unacceptable that the bar association has become a backyard for illegal and marginal structures.” President Erdoğan also stated in the opening speech of the new legal year that “In the next period, we will do what is necessary to cut the bloody road extending from being attorneys to terrorists.”

“It is particularly worrying that these investigations were triggered after statements by the Minister of the Interior and the President,  besmirching the legitimate work of lawyers and bar associations as linked to ‘terrorism,” added Massimo Frigo.

International standards

The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers state:

18. Lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions.

23. Lawyers like other citizens are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly. In particular, they shall have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights and to join or form local, national or international organizations and attend their meetings, without suffering professional restrictions by reason of their lawful action or their membership in a lawful organization. In exercising these rights, lawyers shall always conduct themselves in accordance with the law and the recognized standards and ethics of the legal profession.

24. Lawyers shall be entitled to form and join self-governing professional associations to represent their interests, promote their continuing education and training and protect their professional integrity. The executive body of the professional associations shall be elected by its members and shall exercise its functions without external interference.

Contact

Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org, t: +41797499949; twitter: @maxfrigo

Ukraine: online roundtable on security of lawyers and state of legal profession in Ukraine

Ukraine: online roundtable on security of lawyers and state of legal profession in Ukraine

The ICJ in cooperation with the Ukraine National Bar Association will hold an online roundtable discussion “Security of lawyers and state of legal profession in Ukraine”.

The event of 18 September 2020 will assemble leading legal experts and practitioners from Ukraine and other countries who will discuss the state of the legal profession in Ukraine in light of the international standards on the role and independence of lawyers, and national legislation and practice. The discussion will center around the challenges to security of lawyers, especially where they protect human rights, as well as the institutional independence and self-governance of legal profession in Ukraine.

The round table follows an ICJ mission report, Between the Rock and the Anvil: Lawyers under Attack in Ukraine, that documents and analyses the state of the independence of the legal profession in Ukraine and risks that lawyers face in their work in defence of their clients.

The event is open for participation upon online registration. Please contact Leyla Madatli at Leyla.Madatli@icj.org.

The working languages of the event is Ukrainian, Russian and English. The roundtable will continue from 10.00 to 14.00 Ukraine time (CET 9.00-13.00).

Agenda in English.

Translate »