India: authorities must stop harassment of Lawyers Collective and repeal Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act

India: authorities must stop harassment of Lawyers Collective and repeal Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act

 The ICJ today condemned the raids on 11 July by India’s Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on the homes and offices of Anand Grover and Indira Jaising, two lawyers prominent for frequently challenging the Indian government’s failures to respect and promote the rights of all people in India.

Grover and Jaising are both Supreme Court lawyers and co-founders of the Lawyers Collective, a non-governmental organization.

These raids were reportedly conducted pursuant to CBI’s registration of criminal charges into alleged violations of Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA), a much criticized law frequently used to target human rights defenders and critics of the Indian government.

“This raid seems designed to harass and intimidate two tireless advocates of Constitutional and international rights in India,” said Sam Zarifi, Secretary-General of the ICJ.

“The Indian government must immediately cease harassment of the Lawyers Collective and its founders Anand Grover and Indira Jaising,” he added.

The CBI raids appears to be based on a 2016 Ministry of Home Affairs report, now under appeal in the Bombay High Court, and without any material change in circumstances since its release.

The raid has also been conducted notwithstanding a National Human Rights Commission statement seeking a status report from the CBI by 21 July 2019 to ensure that the investigation is “non-discriminatory and to avoid arbitrariness”.

The attack is emblematic of a broader pattern of official threats to and harassment of Indian civil society in general, and the Lawyers Collective in particular.

Lawyers Collective’s FCRA license was cancelled in November 2016, a decision that is under appeal in the Bombay High Court. The action relied upon overly broad and vague legal provisions of the FCRA that violate India’s legal obligation to respect and protect the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.

“The repeated use of the FCRA to target civil society including Lawyers Collective has had a devastating chilling effect on public comment about the government,” said Zarifi.

“The law should be repealed, or substantially amended to include safeguards against arbitrary use of its provisions, and to protect freedom of expression and association,” he added.

The ICJ supports the 2016 call by three United Nations Special Rapporteurs to the Indian Government to repeal FCRA, which decried the FCRA’s use to “silence organisations involved in advocating civil, political, economic, social, environmental or cultural priorities, which may differ from those backed by the Government”.

India and Pakistan: in light of UN report on Kashmir, authorities must act to ensure accountability for human rights violations

India and Pakistan: in light of UN report on Kashmir, authorities must act to ensure accountability for human rights violations

The ICJ welcomes the report issued today by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) documenting human rights violations and abuses in Indian administered Kashmir and Pakistan administered Kashmir.

The ICJ called upon both India and Pakistan to take immediate measures to implement the Report’s main recommendations, and to hold security forces as well as non-state actors accountable for human rights violations and abuses.

The Report follows a June 2018 report that documented similar violations, as well as the widespread impunity for human rights violations by Indian security forces and armed groups allegedly supported by Pakistan. The Indian Government has rejected both reports as a violation of its “sovereignty and territorial integrity”. The Pakistan government has welcomed the report and called for the establishment of a United Nations Commission of Inquiry.

“It is unfortunate that India has again refused to acknowledge the facts set out in the OHCHR report, or to pledge action on its recommendations,” said Frederick Rawski, Asia Pacific Director for the ICJ.

“This is an opportunity for India, a member of the Human Rights Council, to lead by example. It can start by repealing the Armed Forces Special Powers Act and launching an investigation into rights abuses in line with international standards and the guidelines set out by the Indian Supreme Court,” he added.

The Report documents human rights violations by Indian security forces including extrajudicial killings, arbitrary detentions, unlawful custodial deaths, enforced disappearances, and ill-treatment and torture, including rape and sexual violence, in Indian-administered Kashmir.

According to the Report, based on data from civil society organization Jammu and Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society (JKCCS), 71 extrajudicial killings were allegedly committed by security forces in 2018 (for a total of 1081 between 2008 and 2018). Between 2016 and 2018, 1253 people have been blinded by pellet guns.

The Report highlights how the extraordinary powers granted to security forces by the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act, 1990 has been wielded arbitrarily and led to near total impunity from prosecution. In addition, it documents human rights abuses committed by non-state armed groups in Indian-administered Kashmir including kidnappings, killings and rape.

The Report also documents rights violations in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, including restrictions on freedom of expression and opinion, assembly and association, and the abuse of vague and overbroad anti-terrorism laws in contravention of international human rights law.

The Report documents cases of arbitrary arrest by local authorities and intelligence agencies, including charging 19 activists with treason for organizing a rally in November 2018, and the arbitrary detention of 30 members of the Jammu Kashmir National Students Federation in March 2019 by Pakistani law enforcement. The Report notes the particular vulnerability of journalists to threats, harassment and arbitrary arrest.

“While we commend Pakistan for welcoming the Report, the fact remains that the Government has done little to prevent the continuation of human rights violations by its security forces, or to implement the recommendations of the previous report,” Rawski said.

“Pakistan must take action to hold perpetrators of rights violations accountable, and take action to end threats and violence targeted at human rights defenders and journalists,” he added.

The ICJ called on both Pakistan and India to grant unconditional access to the OHCHR and Special Procedures of the UN Human Rights Council, and to ensure that human rights defenders and journalists can carry out their work without threats or reprisals from security forces and non-State armed groups.

The ICJ also underscores the importance of the OHCHR recommendation that the United Nations set up an independent commission of inquiry into allegations of rights violations by all parties to the conflict.

The ICJ urged both the Indian and Pakistan governments to respect, protect and fulfill their international human rights obligations in Kashmir, to accept the Report’s findings and take immediate and effective action to implement its recommendations.

 

 

Italy: Minister Salvini’s statements are a threat to judiciary’s independence

Italy: Minister Salvini’s statements are a threat to judiciary’s independence

The ICJ called today on the Italian Government to reject the incendiary statements issued by Matteo Salvini, Vice-President of the Council of Ministers and Minister of Interior, calling for the “reform” of the judiciary after a court issued a judgement with which he did not agree.

On 2 and 3 July, Minister Salvini issued a series of press statements and tweets that accused a judge in Agrigento of having made a “political judgment” for having ordered the release of the captain of the rescue boat SeaWatch3, Carola Rackete.

She is alleged to have rammed a boat of the law enforcement officers of the Guardia di Finanza in an effort to rescue 53 migrants stranded at sea for more than two weeks.

Minister Salvini followed his complaints with a direct request “to reform the judiciary, select and promote those who administer it in Italy and change the criteria of appointment, because this is not the justice that is useful for a country that wants to grow.”

“The declarations by Minister Salvini are unbecoming of a representative of an Executive and constitute a direct threat to the independence of the Italian judiciary” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe Programme.

“Calling for a reform of the system of appointments and dismissal of judges in the wake of pernicious accusations of “politicization” are a clear threat to the independence of the judiciary and to any judge that would rule against the wishes of Mr Salvini,” he added.

“The Italian Government should publicly reject the threats by Matteo Salvini and ensure that any justice reform is fully in compliance with international and national constitutional standards on the independence of the judiciary”, said Frigo.

The ICJ emphasizes that international standards on the independence of the judiciary forbid such inappropriate interference with judicial process by the exective.

In that connection, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which includes Italy, has affirmed that “[i]f commenting on judges’ decisions, the executive and legislative powers should avoid criticism that would undermine the independence of or public confidence in the judiciary. They should also avoid actions which may call into question their willingness to abide by judges’ decisions, other than stating their intention to appeal.”

On Twitter, Mr Salvini has also issued declarations that undermine the right to presumption of innocence under articles 14.2 ICCPR and 6.2 ICCPR by calling Carola Rackete an “outlaw” and a “criminal” before and after the ruling of the judge on release.

The ICJ has informed the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers of the situation.

Background

On 2 July 2019, the judge for preliminary investigations (Giudice per le Indagini Preliminari – G.I.P.) of Agrigento, Sicily, Italy – i.e. the judge competent under Italian criminal procedure law to decide on the lawfulness of one’s pre-trial detention – ruled that the detention of Carola Rackete, captain of the boat SeaWatch3, was unlawful and ordered her immediate release.

The judge based her decision on the Italian Constitution that dictates the primacy of international law standards over national law. Following this principle, she found that the criminal offences of which Carola Rackete was charged could not stand.

She was accused of disregarding the orders of the Italian law enforcement officers (Guardia di Finanza) not to disembark at Lampedusa (Sicily) harbour and to have hit with her boat the boat of the Guardia di Finanza that was standing between the SeaWatch3 and the point of disembarkment. Carola Rackete held that she was acting upon her duty to rescue and disembark the people on her boat and that there was urgency to do so.

With regard to the criminal charge of “resistance or violence against a military vessel” (article 1100 of the Navigation Code), the judge found it inapplicable because the boat concerned could not be considered a “military vessel”. On the merits of the criminal offence of “resistance to a public officer under article 337 of the Criminal Code, the judge ruled that the clause of exclusion of criminal responsibility of “implementation of a duty” provided by law (article 51 Criminal Code) did apply and therefore that Carola Rackete could not hold any criminal responsibility. The duty to implement was identified as the duty of rescue at sea that international maritime law foresees for all captains of maritime vessels.

The judge ruled that such duty has primacy in Italian law and further found that the legal provision under which the Minister of Interior, Matteo Salvini, ordered the prohibition of disembarkment on Lampedusa (article 11-ter of d.lgs. 286/98, introduced by Law Decree 53/2019, the so-called “Salvini Decree-bis”) had to respect international law as envisaged by the provision itself.

Carola Rackete remains under investigation for facilitation of irregular migration under a separate criminal proceeding.

Kyrgyz Republic: ICJ legal opinion on Askarov retrial concludes his conviction should be quashed

Kyrgyz Republic: ICJ legal opinion on Askarov retrial concludes his conviction should be quashed

In a legal opinion issued today analyzing the retrial of the Kyrgyz human rights defender Azimjan Askarov, which followed the UN Human Rights Committee finding of multiple human rights violations in his first trial, the ICJ concludes that these violations have not been remedied by the retrial.

In particular, the ICJ finds that the retrial did not effectively examine allegations of the torture of Askarov in detention. It failed to conduct new investigations, hear new witnesses or question the elements on which the initial conviction was based. As a result, the retrial did not respect the presumption of innocence or comply with the requirements of a fair trial.

As a consequence, Azimjan Askarov’s conviction should be quashed and he should be released, the ICJ said.

“This analysis shows that despite years of court hearings, Azimjan Askarov has never been afforded a fair trial or an effective investigation into his allegations that he was tortured. We call on the Kyrgyz authorities to act on these findings and to quash his conviction and release him from detention. Without this, the decision of the UN Human Rights Committee will remain unimplemented ” said Róisín Pillay, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Director.

An investigation into allegations of torture and other violations of Askarov’s human rights should be launched, the ICJ concluded, and he should be accorded full reparations for violations of his human rights.

Background

Azimjan Askarov, a prominent human rights defender in the Kyrgyz Republic, was convicted on 15 September 2010 of complicity in the murder of a law enforcement officer, attempted complicity in hostage-taking, illegal possession of firearms, incitement of interethnic hatred, and organization of riots.

The ICJ has followed his case since the initial trial and Askarov’s eventual conviction – and identified multiple violations of his human rights in detention, trial and conviction in 2010.

In 2016, the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) adopted Views in which it found violations of Askarov’s rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The HRC decided that Kyrgyzstan was to make full reparation to Askarov; take appropriate steps to immediately release him; quash his conviction and, if necessary, conduct a new trial in due compliance with fair trial guarantees.

Following the HRC decision, the Supreme Court of the Kyrgyz Republic remanded the case of Azimjan Askarov for retrial to the Chuy Regional Court due to new circumstances. The retrial took place from 4 October 2016 to 24 January 2017. The retrial proceeded without quashing the defendant’s conviction but with “resumption” of the proceedings in the case.

The ICJ legal opinion is based on the findings from the observation of a number of hearings before the Chuy Regional Court and analysis of documents in the case. It assesses the proceedings in light of Kyrgyzstan’s domestic law as well as relevant international law and standards. The opinoin is signed on behalf of the ICJ by ICJ Commissioners Justice Azhar Cachalia, Judge of the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa; Justice Nicolas Bratza, former President of the European Court of Human Rights, Professor Juan Mendez, former UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

The full text of the legal opinion is available below.
In English: Kyrgyzstan-Askarov report II-Publications-Reports-Trial observation report-2019-ENG
In Russian: Kyrgyzstan-Askarov report II-Publications-Reports-Trial observation reports-2019-RUS

Guatemala: ICJ and partners conduct workshops the investigation and prosecution of unlawful death and enforced disappearances

Guatemala: ICJ and partners conduct workshops the investigation and prosecution of unlawful death and enforced disappearances

Between 26 and 29 June 2019, in Guatemala City, ICJ and its partner, Fundación de Antropología Forense de Guatemala (FAFG), with the support of the Asociación Guatemalteca de Jueces por la Integridad (AGJI) and the Bufete de Derechos Humanos (BDH), undertook trainings of more than 12 judges and 20 prosecutors on the international law and standards that apply to the investigation of unlawful death and enforced disappearances.

The workshops were conducted as part of the project under the ICJ’s Global Accountability Initiative entitled, Promoting justice for extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Colombia, Guatemala and Peru, supported by the EU European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR).

Opening remarks were given by Tomás Pallás Aparisi, Head of Cooperation at the EU Delegation to Guatemala, Delia Dávila, Magistrate from the Supreme Court of Guatemala and Haroldo Vasquez, President of the Asociación Guatemalteca de Jueces por la Integridad AJGI.

Ramón Cadena, Director of the ICJ’s Central America Office, addressed the international law and standards that apply to the investigation and prosecution of unlawful death and enforced disappearances and their relevance to Guatemala. Edgar Pérez, director of Bufete de Derechos Humanos (BDH) discussed the situation of enforced disappearances in Guatemala and the value and applicability of international law and standards. Marco García, a representative of FAFG, outlined the role of forensic science in the investigation of unlawful death and enforced disappearances.

Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser & Coordinator of the ICJ’s Global Accountability Initiative, provided an overview of the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which formed the core of the materials used at the workshops.

The ICJ took the opportunity of the workshops to visit the office of its partner, the Asociación de Familiares de Detenidos-Desaparecidos de Guatemala (FAMDEGUA) and meet with Justice Delia Marina Davila Salazar of the Supreme Court of Justice of Guatemala.

Contacts:

Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser & Coordinator of the ICJ’s Global Accountability Initiative, email: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

Carolina Villadiego Burbano, ICJ Legal and Policy Adviser, Latin America, and Regional Coordinator of the Project, email: carolina.villadiego(a)icj.org

Morocco: remove obstacles to women’s and girls’ access to justice for sexual and gender-based violence – New ICJ report

Morocco: remove obstacles to women’s and girls’ access to justice for sexual and gender-based violence – New ICJ report

In a report released today in Rabat, the ICJ called for the removal and eradication of legal obstacles and discriminatory judicial attitudes hindering women’s and girls’ ability to seek justice and redress for sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) in Morocco.

The ICJ’s report Obstacles to Women’s and Girls’ Access to Justice for Gender-based Violence in Morocco (available in English and Arabic) explores the various obstacles that women seeking justice in Morocco face, and addresses recommendations to the Moroccan government and judiciary with a view to improving access to justice and effective remedies for women and girls who are victims of SGBV.

“The Moroccan authorities should amend Law 103/13 and the Penal Code to ensure compliance with international human rights law and standards. Morocco’s Office of the Public Prosecutor and the country’s judicial authorities, including the High Judicial Council, should ensure that detailed guidelines on investigation and prosecution of SGBV crimes are developed and complied with, and that awareness-raising programmes be rolled out to counter judicial stereotyping and victim-blaming,” said Saïd Benarbia, Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at the ICJ.

Notwithstanding the recent adoption of Law 103/03 on combatting violence against women, SGBV has not been adequately addressed; it remains widespread in Morocco, with a profoundly detrimental human rights impact on victims and society at large. Law 103/3 fails to define rape in a manner consistent with relevant international law and standards, with the crime still addressed through the lens of morality and public decency, rather than as a violation of one’s bodily integrity and autonomy; Law 103/3 also fails to criminalize child and early marriage, lending support to this harmful practice.

In addition to discriminatory laws and procedures, women and girls seeking justice and redress as survivors of SGBV in Morocco have to face a judiciary that often harbours biased assumptions, and propounds negative gender stereotypes, including cultural norms rooted in patriarchy.

Against this background, the ICJ’s report analyses how exceedingly lenient sentences – for instance in cases of marital rape – and the heightened risk women and girls face of being charged with consensual extramarital sexual relations deter them from seeking justice and redress in case of physical and sexual abuse of which they may be victims, either at the hands of their husband or of individuals with whom they are not married.

To begin addressing women’s and girls’ predicament in these and other respects related to SGBV, the report calls on the Moroccan authorities to:

  • Adopt legislation that recognizes one’s right to sexual autonomy, and that recognizes equal relationships as requiring free and full consent of both parties;
  • Adequately define and fully criminalize through a gender-neutral definition acts of rape, including by criminalizing marital rape as a separate offence;
  • Repeal Article 490 of the Penal Code criminalizing extramarital sexual relations, and ensure that Article 19 of the Family Code on the minimum age of marriage is stringently observed;
  • Enact policies, legislative and procedural measures aiming at enhancing the effectiveness of judicial and other public sector services related to women’s access to justice, including enforcing spousal and child support, providing free legal assistance to victims of SGBV, granting protection orders, and adopting other urgent measures;
  • Develop and enforce guidelines on investigating and prosecuting SGBV crimes;
  • Develop a national protocol for SGBV-related medical, forensic examinations, and ensure forensic-testing services be available and affordable;
  • Provide training and awareness-raising programmes aimed at countering judicial stereotyping, victim-blaming and other harmful practices.

Contact:

Saïd Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41.22.979.3817, e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Additional information:

ICJ Commissioner Martine Comte led the delegation that met with different Moroccan authorities, justice and civil society actors this week in Rabat in order to present ICJ’s report and discuss its findings and recommendations. The ICJ delegation met with Mr Mohamed Aujjar, Minister of Justice; Mr Taoufik El Maimouni, President of the Commission on Justice, Legislation, and Human Rights at the Chamber of Deputies; Mr Larbi Tabit, Secretary General at the Minister of Solidarity, Women, Family and Social Development; Ms Amina Bouayach, President of the National Human Rights Council and representatives of the judiciary and of the civil society.

Download:

Morocco-Obstacles GBV-Publications-Reports-Thematic report-2019-ENG (full report in English, PDF)

Morocco-Obstacles GBV-Publications-Reports-Thematic report-2019-ARA (full report in Arabic, PDF)

Morocco-Women HR report-News-2019-ARA (News story in Arabic, PDF)

Translate »