Serbia: killing of lawyer must be urgently investigated

Serbia: killing of lawyer must be urgently investigated

The killing of Serbian defense lawyer Dragoslav Ognjanović must be independently, promptly, and thoroughly investigated and the perpetrators brought to justice, the ICJ said today.

Dragoslav Ognjanović (photo), a prominent lawyer who had defended Slobodan Milosovic and had also represented defendants in cases of organized crime, was shot dead outside his home in Belgrade late on Saturday 28 July.

“Safety of lawyers is essential to the fair operation of the justice system and to protection of the rule of law. The Serbian authorities now need to take urgent steps to re-establish confidence that they can ensure the safety of lawyers who may be under threat, and to investigate and bring to justice the perpetrators of this crime,” said Justice Radmila Dragicevic-Dicic, of Serbia’s Supreme Court, Vice-President of the ICJ.

“Investigation and prosecution of this case will be a significant test for the Serbian authorities and the legal system,” she added.

The Serbian and Belgrade bar associations have called a week-long suspension of work by lawyers in order to express their concern at the risk of violence against lawyers.

Serbian authorities have blamed an ongoing turf war between organized crime groups competing to control the narcotics trade.

“The concerns of the Serbian legal profession should be taken seriously by the government and the prosecution service, and the bar associations should be consulted on means to ensure the safety of lawyers,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of ICJ’s Europe Programme.

Additional information

International human rights law, including the European Convention on Human Rights to which Serbia is a party, requires that states take steps to protect the life and physical integrity of persons who they know or ought to know are at real risk of violence.

In addition, the right to life, protected under Article 2 of the European Convention as well as under other international law standards, requires states to ensure an independent, prompt and effective investigation into killings, with a view to bringing to justice those responsible.

According to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, governments must ensure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference (principle 16). The UN Basic Principles specify that “[w]here the security of lawyers is threatened as a result of discharging their functions, they shall be adequately safeguarded by the authorities” (principle 17).

Eswatini (Swaziland): ICJ facilitates integrated meeting of justice sector stakeholders involved in combatting sexual and gender-based violence

Eswatini (Swaziland): ICJ facilitates integrated meeting of justice sector stakeholders involved in combatting sexual and gender-based violence

On 25 July 2018, the ICJ facilitated an integrated meeting of governmental stakeholders in the justice chain involved in different aspects of combatting sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) in the Kingdom of Eswatini (Swaziland), the first meeting of its kind.

The meeting was convened by ICJ Commissioner and Principal Judge of the High Court of Eswatini, Justice Q. M. Mabuza. It followed a meeting held in February 2018 on combating SGBV in Eswatini and an ICJ report on key challenges to achieving justice for gross human rights violations in Eswatini, the latter of which recommended that justice sector stakeholders involved in the investigation, prosecution and sanctioning of, and provision of redress to victims for, acts of SGBV should convene six-monthly meetings so as to develop a common and integrated approach to the effective combating of SGBV.

The integrated meeting involved senior officials from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the Office of the Attorney General, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the police, correctional services, and the judiciary.

The meeting discussed the fight against SGBV in the context of the Guidelines on Combating Sexual Violence and its Consequences in Africa, and other international standards. It considered the national legal and policy framework on SGBV; practices and challenges in the investigation and prosecution of SGBV; the sanctioning of SGBV offences; and the rehabilitation of sexual and domestic violence offenders by correctional services. Perspectives of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the police and the judiciary were emphasized during discussions.

Stakeholders discussed issues with a view to identifying gaps and challenges in national law, policy and practice when measured against regional and global standards and best practices, as well as with a view to considering potential solutions to those gaps and challenges. The meeting agreed on next steps, including on concrete action that aligns with and/or augments the National Strategy to End Violence. Stakeholders agreed that they should all be involved in the early stages of cases involving SGBV.

Stakeholders also agreed that the recently enacted Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Act will only be effectively implemented if justice sector stakeholders are well coordinated. Stakeholders agreed that integrated meetings should be held regularly, at intervals of no less than six months including, if possible, before the end of 2018.

ICJ Secretary General discusses rule of law and human rights with Myanmar Attorney General

ICJ Secretary General discusses rule of law and human rights with Myanmar Attorney General

On 26 July 2018, the ICJ Secretary General, Sam Zarifi, met Myanmar’s Union Attorney General, U Tun Tun Oo.

The ICJ Legal Adviser Sean Bain and senior staff from the Union Attorney General’s Office (UAGO) joined the meeting in Nay Pyi Taw.

Rule of law developments in Myanmar were discussed, including progress integrating international standards into the work of the UAGO, such as the new “Code of Ethics for Law Officers”.

The participation of UAGO staff in the ICJ’s recent workshops on the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Deaths was another topic discussed.

Noting the UAGO’s stated reform commitments, Sam Zarifi renewed the ICJ’s call on Myanmar’s prosecution authorities to drop the charges against Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo, two Reuters journalists, which do not appear to have a valid legal rationale.

Efforts to effectively prosecute the assassination of lawyer U Ko Ni were also discussed.

Sean Bain noted the UAGO’s efforts to draft an umbrella land law according to the government’s National Land Use Policy, and highlighted the importance of public participation and consultation in this process, to ensure compliance with Myanmar’s obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

The Attorney General thanked the ICJ for the organization’s ongoing honest advice and support for human rights.

The ICJ has worked with the UAGO since 2014 to provide assistance on prosecutorial independence and human rights in the context of Myanmar’s broader democratic reforms.

 

Misuse of law will do long-term damage to Cambodia

Misuse of law will do long-term damage to Cambodia

An opinion piece by Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser in Bangkok, Thailand.

Over recent decades, international observers have tended to view the human rights and political situation in Cambodia as a series of predictable cycles that does not warrant too much alarm.

The conventional wisdom has been that Prime Minister Hun Sen and his government routinely tightens their grip on the political opposition and civil society in advance of elections before relaxing it again after victory has been secured.

But that analysis is no longer valid.

The reason is simple: During the course of ensuring it will win the national election scheduled for this Sunday (29 July), Hun Sen’s ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) has, since the last election, systematically altered the country’s constitutional and legal framework – and these changes will remain in place after the election has passed.

Through the passage of a slew of new laws and legal amendments inconsistent with Cambodia’s obligations under international law, and the frequent implementation of the law to violate human rights, the legal system has been weaponized to overwhelm and defeat the real and perceived opponents of the CPP, including the political opposition, the media, civil society, human rights defenders and ordinary citizens.

This misuse of the law is a significant development in the history of modern Cambodia and represents a determined move away from the vision enshrined in the historic 1991 Paris Peace Agreements that ended years of conflict and sought to establish a peaceful and democratic Cambodia founded on respect for human rights and the rule of law.

And it risks cementing the human rights and rule of law crisis that now exists within Cambodia for years to come.

To facilitate the closure of civil society space, and contrary to international law and standards, in 2015 the Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations (LANGO) was passed, which requires the mandatory registration of all NGOs and Associations, provides the government with arbitrary powers to deny or revoke registration, and places a vaguely worded duty on NGOs and associations to “maintain their neutrality towards political parties”.

The biggest blow to the political opposition has been the amendment last year of the Law on Political Parties (1997), amended twice within four months, which empowers the Supreme Court to dissolve parties, and four election laws, which permits the redistribution of a dissolved party’s seats in the country’s senate, national assembly, and commune and district councils.

Last November, the Supreme Court, presided over by a high-ranking member of the CPP, used the amended Law on Political Parties to dissolve the main opposition party, the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), which had received just under 44% of the vote – or about 3 million votes – in communal elections held in June 2017.

After the CNRP’s dissolution, the amended election laws were then used to redistribute CNRP seats at every level of government, from the commune to the senate, to the CPP and minor parties.

To silence the media, the country’s media and taxation laws have been invoked – local radio stations have been ordered to stop broadcasting Radio Free Asia and Voice of America “in order to uphold the law on media” and the independent Cambodia Daily was forced to close after being presented with a disputed US $6.3 million tax bill which the Daily claimed was “politically motivated” and not accompanied by a proper audit or good faith negotiations.

To curb the exercise of freedom of expression, the Constitution has received vaguely worded amendments placing an obligation on Cambodian citizens to “primarily uphold the national interest” while prohibiting them from “conducting any activities which either directly or indirectly affect the interests of the Kingdom of Cambodia and of Khmer Citizens”.

Meanwhile individual journalists, members of the political opposition including the CNRP’s leader, Kem Sokha, human rights defenders and an Australian documentary filmmaker have been charged with any number of a kaleidoscope of crimes ranging from intentional violence and criminal defamation to treason and espionage.

And Cambodia lacks an independent and impartial judiciary.

In 2014, three “judicial reform laws” were passed which institutionalized the prosecution and judiciary’s lack of independence from the executive.

At the same time, the government perversely uses the doctrine of the “rule of law” to justify its actions.

Just hours after the Supreme Court dissolved the CNRP, Hun Sen announced that the decision was made “in accordance with the rule of law.”

When members of the diplomatic community and senior UN officials meet government officials to express concern at the increasing misuse of the law they receive an absurdist legal lecture on the “importance of the rule of law”.

What is happening in Cambodia is the opposite of that.

The International Commission of Jurists, UN authorities and others have been defining the rule of law since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was pronounced in 1948.

All agree that that the rule of law entails passing and implementing laws consistent with a country’s international human rights obligations.

It is time for the international community to recognize that a frank and fresh analysis of the situation in Cambodia is urgently required which acknowledges the way the country’s underlying legal and constitutional framework has been deliberately altered, and the way in which this will impact the country adversely long past this month’s election.

This acknowledgment must be accompanied by a coherent and, where possible, joint, plan of action that clearly sets out, with a timeline, what is required to bring Cambodia back on track with the agreed terms of the Paris Peace Agreements – including necessary legal and justice sector reforms – and the political and economic consequences for not doing so.

As long as Hun Sen’s Government deploys increasingly sophisticated justifications for its repressive actions, a more refined, multilayered and vigorous response from the international community is required – grounded on a proper application of the rule of law and Cambodia’s international human rights obligations.

ICJ holds second regional workshop on the investigation of unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance in Asia

ICJ holds second regional workshop on the investigation of unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance in Asia

From 24 to 26 July 2018, the ICJ co-hosted a workshop for authorities from Thailand, Cambodia, and Myanmar.

The theme of the workshop was on conducting investigations of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance in accordance with international human rights law and standards.

The workshop was co-hosted with Thailand’s Ministry of Justice, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the New Zealand Embassy in Bangkok.

The participants included 25 criminal investigators, public prosecutors and representatives of the Cambodian Ministry of Justice and the Thai Ministry of Justice.

The event commenced with opening remarks by James Andersen, Deputy Head of Mission, Embassy of New Zealand in Bangkok; Aim-orn Siangyai, Deputy Director General of Thailand’s Rights and Liberties Protection Department, Ministry of Justice; Frederick Rawski, Asia Pacific Regional Director, ICJ; and Shivani Verma, Human Rights Officer, OHCHR Regional Office for South-East Asia.

Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser at the ICJ, gave a summary of the international human rights legal framework that applies to the investigation of unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance.

He then provided an outline of the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which was launched in Thailand on 25 May 2017 and which formed the core of the materials used at the workshop.

Other speakers included Glenn Williams, Detective Inspector, Field Crime Manager, New Zealand Police National Headquarters, who addressed the investigation process including crime scene management; Sean Buckley, International Investigator, who addressed witness interviews; Shivani Verma of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights who addressed Witness Protection; and Dr. Pornthip Rojanasunan, Adviser of Thailand’s Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS), who addressed the issue of forensic pathology.

This workshop followed three workshops the ICJ co-hosted between 5 to 8 December 2017 and 30 May to 1 June 2018 in Thailand on the investigation of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance for lawyers from Thailand and India, academics and State authorities from Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar and Nepal.

Contact

Kingsley Abbott, Senior International Legal Adviser, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Office, t: +66 94 470 1345, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

Translate »