Mar 12, 2019 | News
Following its mission to Ukraine on 4-8 March, the ICJ has called on the Ukrainian authorities to take urgent steps to ensure the physical safety of lawyers and to bring to justice those responsible for a series of violent attacks against them.
During its visit, the ICJ delegation heard consistent testimony of attacks on lawyers by private persons, ranging from acts of intimidation to use of firearms against them.
Several lawyers have been attacked physically and verbally by individuals or organized groups, including in court. At least six lawyers have recently been killed in relation to the exercise of their professional duties.
These attacks take place in an environment where legislative reforms directed at governance of the legal profession, which would have grave consequences for freedom of association and the functioning of the bar association and civil society, have been proposed by the Presidential Administration without consultation with lawyers.
Without urgent and significant efforts to prevent attacks and combat impunity, the independence of the legal profession, and the ability of lawyers to protect human rights, will be increasingly jeopardized, the ICJ concluded at the end of its mission to the country.
It is of concern that violent attacks against lawyers, many of which have been credibly attributed to extreme right-wing groups, often result in impunity of the perpetrators, despite evidence and despite specific provisions in the criminal law which protect lawyers against attacks.
The ICJ heard that the law enforcement bodies often fail to investigate these cases in a prompt and impartial manner even where the identity of perpetrators is known.
The ICJ stresses that these attacks on lawyers, which are often related to the defence of clients in politically sensitive criminal cases, undermine the ability of lawyers to exercise their duties and protect the human rights of their clients, free from intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference.
Furthermore, the ICJ recalls that under international human rights law, the State must take steps to protect the security of persons who the authorities know or ought to know are under threat, and they must ensure an independent, prompt, and thorough investigation of any attacks on the life or physical integrity of individuals.
In this regard, the ICJ stresses that a well-functioning, independent legal profession is essential to any justice system that upholds the rule of law. International standards recognize the importance of lawyers in protecting human rights and the contribution they make to maintaining the rule of law and the fair administration of justice.
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers emphasize the importance of the independence of bar associations in ensuring the fair and effective administration of justice. Such associations must be institutionally independent, both in law and in practice, from all external actors, including the government, other executive agencies, parliaments and outside private interests.
In light of these standards, the ICJ is concerned about the process of adoption of draft law No 9055 “On the Bar Association and Lawyers’ Activity”, which was drafted without the necessary level of consultation and participation of a main stakeholder, the National Bar Association of Ukraine, which strongly opposes it.
It is unacceptable that in this context the draft law had been submitted to the Parliament through an urgent procedure, the need for which appears to be dubious, the ICJ says.
If adopted without the necessary consultation and endorsement by the Bar Association, this law may pose a threat to the independence of the legal profession in Ukraine and the capacity of civil society, including human rights defenders, to carry out their critical work, the Geneva-based organization adds.
The ICJ is particularly concerned that according to the draft law, lawyers would not be able to be employed by NGOs while being members of the Bar Association.
While international practice may differ, in the context of Ukraine specifically, this may undermine the ability of human rights NGOs to provide qualified legal representation or assistance to those whose human rights have been violated.
The ICJ further noted consistent allegations of corruption and lack of integrity of lawyers including in the context of legal aid system.
It also appears that the examination process for qualification as a lawyer, especially in some regions, is not free from corruption. Until now, the Bar Association has not been able to effectively resolve this problem which must be addressed as a matter of urgency.
The mission to Ukraine included members of the ICJ Secretariat as well as representatives of the Amsterdam and Geneva Bar Associations. It met with leading human rights NGOs, IGOs, the members of the Ukrainian National Bar Association as well as representatives of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.
The ICJ wishes to thank all those whom its representatives met in Kyiv. A final report based on the key findings of the mission will be published later this year.
Mar 12, 2019 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
Today, the ICJ and the Tashkent State University of Law (TSUL) in partnership with the UN Human Rights Office in Central Asia are organizing this event. The topic of the Third Expert Discussion is rights of persons with disabilities.
The Expert Discussions are part of “Access to Justice in Economic, Social and Cultural Rights Project (ACCESS)” supported by the European Union.
The Expert Discussions are aimed at increasing awareness about the implementation of international law and standards on ESC rights by national courts, to facilitate access to justice in relation to ESC rights and effective use of international human rights law for ESC rights at the national level.
Each Expert Discussion is supported by presentations of international and national experts.
The first experts’ meeting was held in September 2018 on international standards in labour rights, and the second meeting – held in December 2018 – on the principle of non-discrimination in courts and court decisions.
The two events brought together lawyers, defense lawyers, individual experts, academia representatives and law students via interactive discussions, research papers, peer review articles and policy papers. Selected papers will be published in collection of scientific articles by the end of 2019.
Mansurkhon Kamalov, the Deputy Rector of TSUL, said: “We have already held two expert discussions on the right to work and the principle of non-discrimination in courts together with the ICJ with the support of the European Union. Each event touched upon international and national standards and legal regulation of specific ESC rights. Our meeting today is organized on the eve of celebrating the day when independent Uzbekistan became a full member of the UN; and it raises a very relevant topic not only for the country, but also for the international community as a whole. The TSUL is pleased to cooperate with the ICJ, which helps increase public awareness about international legal norms and standards in the field of ESC rights and practice of their implementation at the national and international level; access to justice with regard to ESC rights, as well as the effective use of international human rights law to protect these rights at the national level.”
Ryszard Komenda, Head of the UN Human Rights Office in Central Asia, said: “Today, about 10 per cents of the population are persons with disabilities. Persons with disabilities are the largest minority in the world. This figure is constantly increasing as a result of demographic growth, progress in healthcare systems, and the overall population aging patterns, according to WHO’s world data. In the framework of the Universal periodic review (UPR) of Uzbekistan, that was held for the third time in May 2018, a number of the UN Human Rights Council members called on Uzbekistan to ratify the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and welcomed measures that have been already in the process of implementation with the aim to ensure the rights of persons with disabilities in the country. According to the UPR outcome document, the Republic of Uzbekistan accepted relevant recommendations and declared its intention to ratify the Convention. Ratification of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities will be a significant step in further promoting and ensuring implementation of international human rights standards in the Republic of Uzbekistan.”
Dmitriy Nurumov, ICJ Legal Consultant, said: “Access to justice, which includes a fair trial and equality before the law, is of particular importance for people living with a disability, who often face inter-sectional and multiple barriers to access justice. The ICJ believes that inclusive societies in which all individuals have equal access to justice, require identifying and overcoming systemic and practical barriers that hamper equal access to justice, including in enjoyment of ESC rights. The ICJ hopes that today’s discussion will map out such existing barriers and the ways they can be overcome.”
Contact:
Dilfuza Kurolova, ICJ Legal consultant, t: +998 90 9050099 ; e: dilfuza.kurolova(a)icj.org
Watch the video here:
Mar 12, 2019 | News
Today, the ICJ co-hosted an art exhibition and public forum titled 15th Year of Somchai’s Disappearance and the Voices of the Disappeared at the Embassy of the Netherlands in Bangkok.
The event was held to commemorate 15 years since the enforced disappearance of Somchai Neelapaijit, a prominent human rights lawyer, whose case has never been adequately by the Thai authorities.
Somchai was abducted after being stopped on a road in Bangkok on 12 March 2004 and taken from his car by a group of police officers. He has not been seen since. Fifteen years after his disappearance, Somchai’s fate and whereabouts remain unknown and no one has been held accountable for the crime against him.
More than 100 participants attended the event, including family victims of alleged disappearance cases, students, lawyers, members of civil society, diplomats, and members of the Thai authorities and media.
Opening remarks were delivered by Angkhana Neelapaijit, wife of Somchai Neelapaijit, and Kenza Tarqaât, First Secretary of the Embassy of the Netherlands in Bangkok.
The opening session included remarks by the victims who spoke about their challenges and about the progress and development regarding investigations into the alleged disappearance cases of their relatives. The session included the following speakers:
Sanhawan Srisod, the ICJ’s National Legal Adviser, spoke during the second session on recent amendments to the Draft Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act.
She highlighted concerns that the recent amendments would, if adopted, fail to bring the law into full compliance with Thailand’s international human rights obligations.
Sanhawan further expressed concern that the fate of the Draft Act was uncertain as Thailand’s National Legislative Assembly (NLA) that is considering the bill, while it may also continue their work in case of the necessity, will stop considering laws on 15 March, prior to the scheduled elections of 24 March 2019.
She stressed that it is crucial the Thai Government continues to consider and amend the bill, and pass it without delay in line with Thailand’s international human rights obligations.
The panel was moderated by Chanatip Tatiyakaroonwong from Cross-Cultural Foundation and also included the following panelists:
- Nongporn Roongpetchwong, Human Rights Expert, Rights and Liberties Protection Department, Ministry of Justice
- Badar Farrukh, Thailand Team Leader, United Nations’ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Regional Office for South East Asia
Closing remarks was delivered by Pratubjit Neelapaijit, daughter of Somchai Neelapaijit.
The forum was co-organized with the Neelapaijit family, Amnesty International – Thailand, Cross Cultural Foundation (CrCF), the Embassy of the Netherlands in Bangkok, Human Rights Lawyers’ Association and the United Nations’ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Regional Office for South East Asia.
Read Also:
Thailand-Summary ICJ analysis Draft Act-Advocacy-2019-ENG (Summary of the ICJ analysis of the Draft Act, in PDF)
Ten Years Without Truth: Somchai Neelapaijit and Enforced Disappearances in Thailand
Missed Opportunities: Recommendations for Investigating the Disappearance of Sombath Somphone
Thailand: ICJ submits recommendations on draft law on torture and enforced disappearance amendments
Thailand: ICJ, Amnesty advise changes to proposed legislation on torture and enforced disappearances
Mar 12, 2019 | Events, News
The ICJ convened a two-day workshop from 9th to 10th March 2019 in Dhaka, Bangladesh to discuss applicable international legal mechanisms designed to achieve accountability for serious human rights violations in Asia.
Bangladesh-based non-government organizations the Centre for Peace and Justice and Naripokkho co-hosted the event with the ICJ, with a representative of AJAR (Asia Justice and Rights) also joining. Twenty Bangladeshi lawyers, activists and academics attended the event.
Legal advisers from the ICJ provided an overview of the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar (IIMM), currently being established following a UN Human Rights Council resolution in September 2018.
They also discussed the structure and procedures of the International Criminal Court (ICC), whose prosecutors are currently conducting a preliminary examination into the deportation of Rohingyas from Myanmar into Bangladesh. Unlike Myanmar, Bangladesh is a State Party to the Rome Statute of the ICC, and its pre-trial chamber has indicated the Court has jurisdiction over crimes listed in the Rome Stature were one element, or part of a crime, was committed inside the territory of Bangladesh.
AJAR’s co-founder provided an overview of transitional justice processes, drawing upon international and regional experiences of truth-seeking, prosecutions, reparations and reforms to guarantee non-repetition of human rights violations.
Two of the ICJ’s legal advisers also travelled to Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh, where they met relevant stakeholders to discuss the situation of Rohingya refugees from Myanmar, and to share information about accountability mechanisms, including about expected timelines, outcomes and limitations.
The activity is part of the ICJ’s global work on promoting accountability and redress for gross human rights violations to facilitate justice and deter repetition.
Contact: Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior Legal Advisor for Global Redress and Accountability e: kingsley.abbott@icj.org
Mar 7, 2019 | Events, News
The ICJ is proud to join in presenting the documentary film The Long Haul, to be screened during the UN Human Rights Council session in Geneva.
Inspired by the life of the late Nigel Rodley—one of the principal architects of the modern human rights framework— the documentary The Long Haul addresses the current backlash on human rights and how best to respond.
Sir Nigel’s remarkable life story is an inspiration to stand up against wrongdoing and to continue fighting for equality and justice. At the same time, his family history is a reminder of the WWII tragedies that gave birth to the modern human rights regime and what could happen if we fail to honour these basic rights.
Nigel Rodley dedicated his career to the protection of those most at risk, including as Amnesty International’s first legal adviser and later as UN Special Rapporteur on Torture as then as a member and eventually Chair of the Human Rights Committee. He had a longstanding association with the ICJ as Commissioner and in other roles, and was President of the ICJ at the time he passed away.
The film will be screened at a side event to the UN Human Rights Council session, at 13h00 on Thursday 7 March, in Room XIV (UN Cinema) of the Palais des Nations in Geneva. Access is available only to those who already hold grounds passes for the UN in Geneva, or accreditation for the Council session.
The event is organised by the Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom in Geneva, with participation of the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), Amnesty International, the World Organisation against Torture (OMCT), Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT), and International Service for Human Rights (ISHR).
For more information contact un(a)icj.org
A flyer for the event can be downloaded in PDF format here: Events-NigelRodleyFilm-2019-En
Mar 7, 2019 | Advocacy, News
The ICJ joined a list of 77 civil society organizations to call on relevant authorities in Myanmar to drop spurious charges against journalist Ko Swe Win, to decriminalize defamation, and to release human rights defenders currently imprisoned under repressive criminal defamation laws.
The statement reads:
On the second anniversary of the defamation charges brought upon Ko Swe Win, editor at online newspaper Myanmar Now, we, the undersigned 77 civil society organisations, call on the relevant authorities to drop the case against him. Spurious defamation charges under Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law were filed against him on 7 March 2017 by ultranationalists intent on suppressing free speech. The Government of Myanmar must take concrete steps in parliament to decriminalise defamation, repeal Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law and drop the charges and release all activists and human rights defenders currently in prison and being charged under this repressive legislation.
Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law of 2013 was amended in 2017, but notably, defamation is still criminalised and carries a punishment of up to two years of imprisonment or a fine of up to one million kyat or both. The law is still frequently used to stifle free speech in Myanmar and silence critics. To date, a reported 173 cases have been filed under Article 66(d) since its enactment.
The UN Human Rights Committee has called on all states to decriminalise defamation, indicating that imprisonment for defamation is a penalty that can never be appropriate or compatible with the right to freedom of expression. In addition, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression has stated that defamation should be treated as a matter of civil rather than criminal law, stressing that criminal prosecution for defamation inevitably becomes a mechanism of political censorship, which contradicts freedom of expression and of the press. In the case of Article 66(d), Myanmar law allows for agents of the offended party to file charges for defamation and initiate criminal proceedings on their behalf. In effect, this means that powerful organisations and individuals can operate via proxies to target those that they consider disturbing, a form of judicial harassment with severe implications for the individuals who are accused.
Ko Swe Win was charged with defamation under Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law for sharing a story by Myanmar Now on Facebook. The story quoted a senior monk who said that well-known ultranationalist monk U Wirathu’s actions could be cause for him to be expelled from the monkhood as they violated the tenets of Buddhism. U Wirathu, notorious for using Facebook to agitate against Muslims, had previously expressed support for and thanked U Kyi Lin – the recently convicted gunman who shot and killed prominent lawyer U Ko Ni in January 2017. U Ko Ni was an expert on constitutional law and was working to change the military-drafted 2008 Constitution. The plaintiff, a follower of U Wirathu, brought the charges in March 2017 and the court proceedings started in July 2017.
Since then, Ko Swe Win has had to travel regularly to the courthouse in Mandalay, where the charge was filed, from his home in Yangon and back – a distance of over 1,200 kilometres. The court hearings, now totaling 55, have been ongoing for almost two years, but the court has still only heard the plaintiff’s side, which has consistently been stalling the process. On some occasions, Ko Swe Win has travelled from Yangon only to find that the plaintiff or witnesses have failed to appear in court and that the proceedings have been postponed. The plaintiff himself was arrested in August 2017 and has since been detained, which has caused significant delays to the process.
U Wirathu has been summoned twice but failed to appear. On the first occasion, his lawyer informed the court that U Wirathu could not make the hearing because he was attending a donation ceremony. On the second occasion, U Wirathu’s lawyer requested that the hearing be held at his monastery compound. That request was denied by the township court, but U Wirathu appealed to the higher district court, which also denied the request. While the district court considered the request, no hearings could be held in the township court. Ko Swe Win however, was still required to make an appearance every two weeks before the township court judge just to be informed of the next date he was due to appear in court. This procedure, which required him to travel from Yangon to Mandalay, was typically over in a matter of minutes.
The many irregularities of this case highlight the lack of independence of the Myanmar judiciary. It appears that the authorities are determined to target those that are working to expose troubling truths and terrible crimes, rather than those who commit them. Those responsible for spreading dangerous speech and inciting violence face no consequences, while those who criticise such dangerous actions continue to be prosecuted. In a recent parallel case, also fraught with controversies, two Reuters reporters – Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo – were convicted to seven years in prison for exposing a mass killing of Rohingya men and boys carried out by the Myanmar military in northern Rakhine State.
In Myanmar, high-ranking military commanders, some of whom are accused by UN investigators for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and even genocide, remain at large, while journalists who expose the truth and report on human rights violations in the country are charged under repressive laws. This inverted idea of justice needs to come to an end if Myanmar is to continue its path towards democracy.
As long as Article 66(d) remains, people in Myanmar, especially those who criticise powerful individuals, officials and government policies online, will be at risk of being imprisoned for their peaceful exercise of the right to freedom of expression.
In light of the above, we call on the Government of Myanmar and its relevant authorities to:
- Drop the defamation charges under Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law against Ko Swe Win and other activists and human rights defenders and release those currently imprisoned under this repressive legislation;
- Repeal Article 66(d) of the Telecommunications Law, or at a very minimum, amend it to ensure that:
- defamation is no longer criminalised by deleting references to “defamation” as well as vague language such as “disturbing”;
- only a government prosecutor can file a criminal complaint under Article 66(d);
- where recognisably criminal acts such as “extortion” and “threats” occur in the law they are clearly and narrowly defined in line with international human rights law, to ensure it is not used to criminalise the peaceful expression of views.
Download
Myanmar-statement on defamation-Advocacy-2019-ENG (full statement in English, PDF)
Myanmar-statement on defamation-Advocacy-2019-BUR (full statement in Burmese, PDF)
![Smoke rises after an Israeli air strike on the village of Taybeh in southern Lebanon [Source: Al Jazeera]](https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Screenshot-2026-03-20-at-15.56.24-300x200.png)