Lesotho: ICJ and Lnfod hold judicial workshop to promote access to justice for persons with disabilities

Lesotho: ICJ and Lnfod hold judicial workshop to promote access to justice for persons with disabilities

From 1 to 3 October, the ICJ and the Lesotho National Federation of Organizations of the Disabled (Lnfod), an umbrella body of organizations for persons with disabilities, held a judicial training in Lesotho on the rights and access just to persons with disabilities.

The workshop was attended by judges, magistrates, disability law and policy experts, Lnfod and ICJ legal advisers and ICJ Commissioner Justice Charles Mkandawire.

At the workshop, the ICJ Legal Adviser Associate Nokhukanya Farise discussed on the UN international legal framework on access to justice for persons with disabilities at both the universal and regional levels. In this regard, the ICJ highlighted provisions related to access to justice of the International Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), as well as the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Africa.

These instruments provide for a substantive right to access to justice for persons with disabilities under article 13.

In addition, they expand on the rights to non-discrimination and equality of persons with disabilities, as well as their right to equality and access to the physical environment, facilities, services and infrastructure required under article 9 of the CRPD.

Justice Charles Mkandawire of the High Court of Malawi and ICJ Commissioner, who attended the workshop and facilitated a session on the role of the judiciary, said: “The judiciary should be functional independently of the executive and legislature, and the relationship between all three should be characterised by mutual respect. The judiciary should also be impartial and independent to prevent the abuse of power.”

Lnfod has been actively working to secure access to justice for persons with disabilities in the criminal justice system of Lesotho. In the workshop, independent law and policy expert Dianah Msipa discussed the case of Koali Moshoeshoe and Others v DPP and Others, where Lnfod successfully challenged the constitutionality of Section 219 of the Criminal Procedure & Evidence Act No.9 of 1981 in the High Court (Constitutional Division).

That provides that persons with intellectual/psychosocial disabilities are not competent witnesses, denying them equal access to justice.

Lnfod explained the Court’s ruling that the legal barrier violated the right to equality before the law and was discriminatory on the basis of disability. It also disproportionately affected women and girls with intellectual and psychosocial disabilities as this rendered them vulnerable sexual abuse.

Lnfod indicated it hoped that the Koali Moshoeshoe case would act as a reformative judicial precedent which will be disseminated and implemented by the courts of law across the country.

“The shift towards the realization of the right to legal capacity for persons with intellectual/psychosocial presents a remarkable opportunity towards overall enjoyment of all the rights provided for in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities on an equal basis with others,” Lnfod said in a statement delivered before the workshop.

At the workshop, independent disability law and policy expert Dianah Msipa explored the issues of understanding disability, the rights of access to justice for persons with disabilities, barriers to effective participation in the criminal justice system, and the use of accommodations in access to justice.

“The training was well-received by all the delegates and I am encouraged by the word of the delegates who stated that they would start providing accommodations to persons with disabilities,” Dianah Msipa said.

Contact:

Khanyo Farise, e: Nokukhanya.Farise@icj.org

ICJ and Defender Center for Human Rights submission to the Universal Periodic Review of Libya

ICJ and Defender Center for Human Rights submission to the Universal Periodic Review of Libya

Today, ICJ and the Defender Center for Human Rights (DCHR) filed a submission to the Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review in advance of its review of Libya’s human rights record in May 2020.

Information provided in the submission was based on the ICJ report titled Accountability for Serious Crimes under International Law in Libya: an Assessment of the Criminal Justice System, published in July 2019.

In the submission, the ICJ and DCHR drew the attention of the Working Group on the UPR to the following concerns with respect to Libya:

  • Impunity for crimes under international law committed by State and non-State actors;
  • The insufficient penalization of crimes under international law;
  • The lack or inadequacy of investigations and prosecutions of crimes under international law;
  • The systemic failure to guarantee the right to liberty and fair trial rights at pre-trial and trial stages.

The ICJ and DCHR called on the Working Group and the Human Rights Council to urge the Libyan authorities to take the following actions:

With regard to insufficient penalization of crimes under international law:

  • Enact laws criminalizing war crimes, crimes against humanity and arbitrary deprivations of life (in particular arbitrary and summary executions) in line with international law;
  • Amend Law No. 10 of 2013 to bring the definition of torture in line with the Convention Against Torture and the definition of enforced disappearance in line with the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, and criminalize other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment consistent with international law;
  • Amend article 425 of the Penal Code to include a definition of the crime of slavery consistent with international law;
  • Amend articles 407 and 408 of the Penal Code to criminalize rape in line with international law and standards; enact laws criminalizing all forms of sexual and gender-based violence; and repeal article 424 of the Penal Code which extinguishes a conviction for rape or indecent assault and grants a stay of execution of the penalty imposed against the perpetrator if they marry the victim; and
  • Amend (or repeal) Law No. 35 of 2012, Law No. 38 of 2012 and Law No. 6 of 2015 to exclude all crimes under international law from the scope of amnesties.

With regard to the obligation to independently and impartially investigate crimes:

  • Amend article 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) to remove the requirement that an investigation can only be commenced upon the receipt of a criminal complaint, extend the three-month deadline for victims to file a complaint and remove the deadline entirely for crimes under international law and for other serious crimes under domestic law;
  • Amend article 7 of the CCP to grant victims’ family members the right to file a complaint with a view to ensuring the commencement of an investigation;
  • Repeal article 224 of the Penal Code to remove the power of the Minister of Justice to control and direct investigations and prosecutions by the Prosecutor’s Office; and
  • Repeal Decree 388 of 2011 granting the “Supreme Security Committee” investigative powers and article 2 of Law No. 38 of 2012 permitting the use of information and evidence collected by “revolutionaries” during investigations and at trial.

With regard to the systemic failure to guarantee the right to liberty and fair trial rights at pre-trial and trial stages, amend the CCP in order to:

  • Exclude the possibility of detaining an accused on the sole ground that she or he does not have a fixed place of residence;
  • Set a maximum duration of pre-trial detention, and specify that any such detention should be employed as last resort only when necessary, proportionate and reasonable according to the circumstances of the case;
  • Ensure that detainees are brought before an independent and impartial judicial authority promptly following arrest, and no later than 48 hours in any event;
  • Include a provision recognizing the right to habeas corpus, and the right to compensation and other reparations for unlawful detention;
  • Provide for the right to legal counsel from the moment of arrest in all circumstances, and repeal the provision requiring a lawyer to seek authorization from the investigating judge to speak during the interrogation of the accused;
  • Require the disclosure of all evidence to the accused and allow them to make copies of the case file before a case is referred to court for prosecution; and
  • Grant individuals the right to appeal any conviction and sentence on alleged errors of law and fact and to reconsideration of a conviction upon discovery of a new fact.

Download

Libya-UNHCR submission final-advocay-non legal submission-2019-ENG (submission in PDF)

Libya: support from international actors for the establishment of a UN Commission of Inquiry

Libya: support from international actors for the establishment of a UN Commission of Inquiry

This support comes as the ICJ documents failure of criminal justice system on human rights accountability with its report Accountability for Serious Crimes under International Law in Libya: An Assessment of the Criminal Justice System.

At today’s launch of the publication, the UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL), the Delegation of the European Union to Libya (EUDEL) and the European Union Border Assistance Mission (EUBAM) supported calls for the establishment of a UN Commission of Inquiry for Libya.

The ICJ’s report examines the criminal justice framework in Libya and finds that investigations and prosecutions of crimes under international law have been limited to a handful of cases, and that future cases are unlikely meet international standards necessary to ensure fair and effective justice, in particular the rights to liberty and a fair trial and the prohibition on torture and ill-treatment.

The support by international actors echoes the ICJ’s call for the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry or similar mechanism to monitor, document and report on human rights violations in order to identify perpetrators, and gather and preserve evidence for future prosecutions, either national or international.

UNSMIL, the EU and a number of States expressed their support for the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry or similar mechanism at the 42nd session of the Human Rights Council.

The ICJ also advocated for such a mechanism in its statement to the Council on 25 September.

At the launch, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser Kate Vigneswaran said that “it’s time for States to stop working on the premise that the Libyan criminal justice system can effectively ensure accountability for crimes committed by State and non-State Actors and instead look at options for ensuring they don’t go unpunished.”

The ICJ’s report also calls on States and UN actors to ensure they adopt human rights-compliant terms in their engagement with Libya and to refrain from entering into or implementing agreements with Libyan authorities that could give rise to support for or complicity in violations of international law.

Kate Vigneswaran stated: “Human rights and accountability should underpin any agreements and engagement with Libyan actors entered into by States, rather than being sidelined in the interests of a political solution. Time has shown that the absence of human rights at the forefront of dialogue and engagement with stakeholders has failed to ensure the cessation of egregious human rights violations and abuses being perpetrated throughout the country.”

The launch, which was held in partnership with the Embassy of the Netherlands in Libya, was opened by the Netherlands’ Ambassador, H. E. Mr. Lars Tummers.

Kate Vigneswaran discussed the key findings and recommendations contained in the report. A panel comprised of ICJ Commissioner Marwan Tashani and representatives of EUDEL, EUBAM and UNSMIL responded to the report and provided insights into their work in Libya.

Updated Practitioners’ Guide on “The right to a remedy and reparation for gross human rights violations” now available in Turkish

Updated Practitioners’ Guide on “The right to a remedy and reparation for gross human rights violations” now available in Turkish

Today, the ICJ published a Turkish translation of Practitioners’ Guide N°2 on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Gross Human Rights Violations.

The translation has been funded by the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR).

Under its Global Redress and Accountability Initiative, the ICJ had launched its 2018 update to Practitioners’ Guide No 2, outlining the international legal principles governing the right to a remedy and reparation for victims of gross human rights violations and abuses by compiling international jurisprudence on the issues of reparations. 

The Guide is aimed at practitioners who may find it useful to have international sources at hand for their legal, advocacy, social or other work.

Amongst revisions to the Guide, the 2018 update includes new sections on terminology and on non-discrimination;updated sections on the notions of ‘collective victims’, ‘collective rights’, the rights of ‘groups of individuals’; additional references to the work of the Committeeon the Elimination of Discrimination against Women and the Committee on the Rights of the Child; an updated section on remedies for unlawful detention, including references to the 2015 UN Basic Principles and Guidelines on Habeas Corpus; and updates on gender-based violence and on violations occurring in the context of business activities.  

The Guide first recalls the States’ general duty to respect, protect, ensure and promote human rights, particularly the general duty of the State and the general consequences flowing from gross human rights violations (Chapter 1).

It then defines who is entitled to reparation: victims are, of course, the first beneficiaries of reparations, but other persons also  have a right to reparation under certain circumstances (Chapter 2).

The Guide goes on to address the right to an effective remedy, the right to a prompt, thorough, independent and impartial investigation and the right to truth (Chapters 3-4).

It then addresses the consequences of gross human rights violations, i.e. the duty of the State to cease the violation if it is ongoing and to guarantee that no further violations will be committed (Chapter 6). It continues by describing the different aspects of the right to reparation, i.e. the right to restitution, compensation, rehabilitation and satisfaction (Chapter 7).

While the duty to prosecute and punish perpetrators of human rights violations is not necessarily part of the reparation as such, it is so closely linked to the victim’s right to redress and justice that it must be addressed in this Guide (Chapter 8).

Frequent factors of impunity, such as trials in military tribunals, amnesties or comparable measures and statutes of limitations for crimes under international law are also discussed (Chapter 9).

The guide in Turkish is available here.

This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the ICJ and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union.

 

 

Translate »