Four immediate reforms to strengthen the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission

Four immediate reforms to strengthen the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission

The Government of Myanmar should adopt constitutional and legislative guarantees to enable the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission (MNHRC) to better protect and promote human rights for all persons in the country, according to a new ICJ briefing note.

Entitled Four Immediately Implementable Reforms to Enhance Myanmar’s National Human Rights Commission, the note analyzes the ability of the MNHRC to address various human rights violations, some of which have been found by experts to constitute the most serious crimes under international law. The briefing is available in Burmese and English.

“The NLD-led government should promptly reform the MNHRC Law, allowing for the selection of better qualified and representative Commissioners, and granting them the independence and resources necessary for their work. This reform is a low-hanging fruit for the NLD, and overdue” said Sean Bain, ICJ Legal Adviser.

“At the same time, Commissioners should robustly pursue their mandate, including by advocating for the rights of society’s most vulnerable people,” he added.

The MNHRC itself has recognized the need for law reform, in its self-assessment of 2018, and in its reform proposals to the Government. Any law reform process should be opened up to genuine public consultation, enabling inputs from experts and the general public.

“The MNHRC generally fails to act on reported human rights violations, from crimes by soldiers in border areas through to regular attacks on the press, rendering it ineffective in providing redress to victims,” said Sean Bain, ICJ Legal Adviser. “The MNHRC’s routine inaction in critical cases demonstrates its lack of the necessary independence to stand against state actors, particularly the military,” he added.

One illustrative case is the Commission’s reluctance to further pursue justice for the death in military custody of journalist Ko Par Gyi, whose killers were secretly tried and acquitted in a military court, despite the MNHRC’s finding that a public criminal prosecution was warranted. Commissioners have also been notably silent on gross human rights violations against Rohingyas, perpetrated by Tatmadaw soldiers in the context of “clearance operations”.

The note highlights that the Commission refrains from investigating alleged human rights violations by referencing Section 37 of the 2014 MNHRC Law. This provision is narrowly construed to effectively preclude the MNHRC from conducting inquiries on matters that are already the subject of a legal proceeding.

The composition of the Commission also does not reflect Myanmar’s ethnic, religious, regional and gender diversity, which further erodes its ability to address the conflict-related violations and abuses particularly prevalent in border areas such as Rakhine, Kachin and Shan states.

While amending problematic provisions in the 2014 MNHRC Law is warranted, a constitutional guarantee would also significantly improve the Commission’s institutional independence.

“A constitutional provision, in contrast to ordinary legislation, is subject to a stricter amendment process that would less likely render the MNHRC politically vulnerable,” said Jenny Domino, ICJ Associate Legal Adviser.

“Myanmar can look to the experience of the national human rights institutions of East Timor and the Philippines, which were established by constitutional provision at a time that both countries were transitioning to a democratic and rule of law based order”,” she added.

Four immediately implementable reforms for the Government of Myanmar are recommended:

  1. To the Union President and the Selection Board: appoint Commissioners through a transparent and fully consultative process that enables its composition to effectively protect human rights and appropriately reflect the full diversity of the population of Myanmar, including ethnic, religious, regional, gender and sexual identities;
  2. To the Commissioners: adopt a broad and active interpretation of their mandate, including by taking steps to address the most serious violations, including crimes under international law, and certain human rights cases that have gone before courts;
  3. To the Myanmar parliament: amend the 2014 MNHRC Law to include provisions that strengthen the MNHRC’s capacity and independence, and improve the appointment process for commissioners
  4. To the Constitutional Amendment Committee: propose provisions guaranteeing the structural and financial independence of the MNHRC in amending the 2008 Constitution.

To download the press release in Burmese, click here.

Download

Myanmar-MNHRC-Advocacy-Briefing-Note-2019-ENG (in English, PDF)

Myanmar-MNHRC-Advocacy-Briefing-Note-2019-BUR (in Burmese, PDF)

Contact

Jen Domino, ICJ Associate Legal Adviser, e: jenny.domino(a)icj.org, t: 09968134317

Daw Hnin Win Aung, ICJ Legal Adviser, e: hninwin.aung(a)icj.org, t: 09428122794

Related material:

Achieving Justice for Gross Human Rights Violations in Myanmar: Baseline Study

Myanmar: Five years without justice for journalist Ko Par Gyi

Practitioners’ Guide N°12 now available in Arabic

Practitioners’ Guide N°12 now available in Arabic

Today, the ICJ published an Arabic translation of Practitioners’ Guide N°12 on Women’s Access to Justice for Gender-based Violence.

The Guide is designed to support legal practitioners and human rights defenders involved or interested in pursuing cases of gender-based violence.

It provides information about regional and international law and standards relevant to gender-based violence, advice on implementing these standards as part of domestic law reform and examples of existing good practice in seeking protection for women.

The Guide (Arabic version here) also addresses the practical issues that are faced by women who have been subject to gender-based violence and the steps that are necessary to secure their access to justice in practice. It considers women’s experiences of the criminal justice system and reflects on how the justice system deals with women’s safety and need for access to services beyond legal assistance.

Download

Universal-Womens accesss to justice-Publications-Practitioners’ Guide Series-2019-ARA (full guide, in PDF)

Algeria: reverse mass, arbitrary transfer of judges

Algeria: reverse mass, arbitrary transfer of judges

The ICJ today called on the Algerian authorities to reverse the decision of the Minister of Justice to transfer 2’998 judges, and instead ensure their right to security of tenure and protect the individual and institutional independence of the judiciary in the country.

The ICJ further called on the authorities to refrain from any unlawful or disproportionate use of force against the judges who are currently on strike in a protest against the Minister’s decision.

The call comes after security forces stormed the Oran’s Court of Appeal on 3 November 2019, using force against the judges to end the strike, and amidst the growing, legitimate demands for the establishment of the rule of law and the end the executive’s control over the judiciary.

“The Algerian authorities must end their interference in judicial affairs and ensure that all decisions pertaining to the management of the career of judges, including transfers, are taken by an independent High Judicial Council on the basis of objective criteria and transparent procedures,” said Said Benarbia, Director of ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme.

Under Organic Law n° 04-12 on the High Judicial Council (HJC), the President and Vice-President of the HJC are respectively the Algerian President and the Minister of Justice. For this and other reasons the ICJ considers that the HJC as currently constituted is not independent of the executive, and consequently that the judiciary as a whole is both institutionally and in practice subordinated to the executive in contravention of international standards on judicial independence and impartiality.

“Instead of attacking judges who are seeking to defend the rule of law, the most urgent priority for Algerian authorities should be the reform of the HJC to ensure its full independence,” Benarbia added.

In 2018, the Human Rights Committee expressed, in its Concluding Observations on the fourth periodic report of Algeria, its concerns over the insufficient guarantees for judicial independence and the need to strengthen the independence and the powers of the HJC.

Contact:

Said Benarbia, Director of ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Program, t: +41 22 979 38 17 ; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Algeria-Judges strike-News-2019-ARA (Arabic version, in PDF)

Egypt: lawyer and human rights defender Gamal Eid must be protected from attack

Egypt: lawyer and human rights defender Gamal Eid must be protected from attack

The ICJ today condemned the physical assault and acts of threats and intimidation taken against its Commissioner Gamal Eid, a prominent Egyptian lawyer and human rights defender.

The ICJ called on the Egyptian authorities to investigate the attacks and bring those responsible to justice. They should also take effective measures to ensure that Gamal Eid and other lawyers and human rights lawyers are protected.

Amidst the ongoing crackdown on human rights defenders and the arrest of more 4,000 individuals since recent anti-corruption protests began, Gamal Eid has been subjected to a sustained campaign of intimidation and harassment.

Two armed men in civilian clothes physically assaulted him on October 10, stole his cellphone and tried to seize his laptop. The assault resulted in injuries to his arm and leg and several cracks in his ribs.

Prior to this assault, Eid’s car was stolen on 30 September and he has repeatedly received anonymous phone calls and messages ordering him to “stop and behave.”

The ICJ believes these attacks to be related to Eid’s work as a lawyer and to his human rights activities, and are part of a pattern by the Egyptian military and government to silence people suspected of opposing them, including those documenting and reporting on the ongoing crackdown on human rights and fundamental freedoms.

“Instead of resorting to cynical, thuggish tactics to silence Gamal Eid, Egypt’s military and government must act to ensure his safety and physical integrity,” said Said Benarbia, Director of ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Program.

“ They must also ensure that lawyers and human rights defenders are able to carry out their work free of fear, harassment or intimidation,” he added.

In the context of the recent protests against President El-Sisi, the Egyptian security forces have arbitrarily detained at least 16 lawyers in relation to the exercise of their professional functions, including Mahienour El-Massry and Mohamed El-Baqer.

Amr Imam, a lawyer and colleague of Gamal Eid at Arabic Network for Human Rights Information was also arrested on 16 October 2019.

The threats to, attacks against, and arbitrary detention of Egyptian lawyers and human rights defenders are in contravention with Egypt’s obligations under international law, and run counter to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, which respectively provide that lawyers and human rights defenders must be able to carry out their professional functions and work without hindrance, harassment, intimidation, or improper interference.

Contact:

Said Benarbia, Director of ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Program, t: +41 22 979 38 17 ; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Egypt-Gamal Eid-News-press releases.2019-ARA (Arabic version, in PDF)

ICJ welcomes EU Court of Justice ruling finding Poland violated independence of the judiciary, protection against gender-based discrimination

ICJ welcomes EU Court of Justice ruling finding Poland violated independence of the judiciary, protection against gender-based discrimination

The ICJ welcomed today’s ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union finding that Poland violated the independence of the judiciary by lowering in 2017 the pension age of Polish judges and giving the power to maintain them in office to the Minister of Justice.

The Court also found that the new law creating widely disparate retirement ages between women and men who are ordinary court judges or prosecutors – 60 and 65 respectively – constituted unlawful discrimination

“The Court of Justice has upheld the cardinal principle of the rule of law that the terms of judges cannot be determined controlled on an ad hoc basis by political powers,” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.

“This judgment confirms that these retirement laws were a direct blow to the principle of separation of powers, the bedrock of the rule of law,” he added.

The Court of Justice held as contrary to the principle of independence of the judiciary under article 19 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU as series of laws lowering the age of retirement for ordinary judges, prosecutors and Supreme Court judges from 70 to 65 years for men and 65 to 60 for women. These laws allowed the Minister of Justice to decide which judges are to be reinstated.

“Poland should scrap these laws entirely and reinstate fully the situation of the judiciary prior to their enactment,” Frigo said.

“These laws were but a part of the systemic attack to the independence of the judiciary that the Polish government should stop,” he added.

The ICJ also called on Poland to bring the retirement ages of men and women back into parity.

The case was brought by the European Commission in an infringement proceeding against Poland for violation of the obligation to provide access to justice for EU law violations under article 19 TFEU.

Contact:

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

More information on Massimo Frigo’s blog

 

Israel: deportation of Omar Shakir must be halted and the work of human rights defenders protected

Israel: deportation of Omar Shakir must be halted and the work of human rights defenders protected

Today, the ICJ called on the Israeli Government to reverse its decision to deport Omar Shakir, the Human Rights Watch (HRW) Israel and Palestine Director, and ensure that he, HRW, and other human rights defenders are able to carry out their human rights work without intimidation.

The ICJ fears that the decision will have a chilling effect on human rights defenders in the country, who the Israeli authorities are bound to protect and not intimidate or persecute.

The deportation decision is based on a 2017 amendment to the “Entry into Israel Law”, which allows authorities to deny foreigners a permit for entry to and residence in Israel “if he or she, or the organization or the body for which he or she operates, has knowingly published a public call to engage in a boycott against the State of Israel or has made a commitment to participate in such a boycott.”

An appeal against the deportation decision was rejected by the Jerusalem District Court in April 2019, and by Israel’s Supreme Court today.

Israel’s Supreme Court seems to have accepted the Government’s claim that Shakir’s work at HRW, which entailed calling on businesses to cease operating in Israeli settlements in the West Bank, as required by international law, constitutes a call for the boycott of Israel.

The ICJ noted that the move to deport Omar Shakir constitutes an unjustifiable infringement on his right to freedom of expression, guaranteed by article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. As a State party to the Covenant, Israel has an obligation to respect and protect this right.

The Human Rights Committee already expressed its concern with regard to Israel’s anti-boycott legislation and called on the Israeli authorities to “ensure that individuals fully enjoy their rights to freedom of expression and association and that any restrictions on the exercise of such rights comply with the strict requirements of article 19.”

The deportation would also contravene the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, which affirms the duty of States to promote and facilitate the work of human rights defenders, while scrupulously protecting their fundamental freedoms.

 

Translate »