Syria and Russia: end attacks on Eastern Ghouta now

Syria and Russia: end attacks on Eastern Ghouta now

The ICJ today called on the governments of Syria and Russia to cease all attacks on the civilian population in Eastern Ghouta.

Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population and civilian objects, including hospitals, constitutes a war crime.

All those responsible for such crimes must be held accountable.

“The UN Security Council is blatantly failing to discharge its primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. It’s so paralyzed by division that it cannot even enforce its own resolutions on protecting the civilian population in Syria and ensuring unimpeded humanitarian access,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme.

“After 7 years of shielding the Syrian regime from accountability for its egregious crimes, including the use of chemical weapons, Russia is joining forces with this regime’s cynical enterprise to murder and starve its own people,” he added.

The air and artillery bombing campaign conducted by the Syrian government, with the backing of Russia, have caused hundreds of victims since Sunday.

The destruction of hospitals and the lack of basic supplies and medicines are making the living conditions of the civilian population extremely dire.

Under international humanitarian law, the Syrian government and its ally Russia have obligations to protect the civilian population and to grant rapid and unimpeded passage to humanitarian relief for the residents of Eastern Ghouta.

The UN Security Council imposed a disarmament plan concerning the Syrian chemical arsenal, yet credible reports of government use of chemical weapons against civilians continued to emerge as late as January and February 2018, in particular in Eastern Ghouta and Saraqeb.

In its last report in October 2017, the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism established the responsibility of the Syrian government for the use of chemical weapons.

In the same month, Russia vetoed a resolution to renew the Mechanism’s mandate.

“States must act individually and collectively to stop the escalation of horrors we are witnessing in Eastern Ghouta. They must also ensure, including through any means available in their national legal systems, as well as at the regional and international level, that all those responsible for the war crimes, crimes against humanity and other international crimes committed in Syria, irrespective of their nationality, rank or status, are brought to justice,” Benarbia added.

Contact

Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, tel: +41 798783546, e-mail: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Syria – Ghouta Bombing – News – Webstory – 2018 – ARB (Arabic translation in PDF)

Maldives: authorities must end assault on the legal profession

Maldives: authorities must end assault on the legal profession

As the assault on the rule of law and human rights under the state of emergency in the Maldives continues, the ICJ expressed concerned about government reprisals taken against lawyers for performing their legitimate professional functions.

The ICJ urged the Maldivian authorities to stop obstructing the work of lawyers and respect the independence of the legal profession.

The ICJ called on the government to immediately lift the state of emergency, revoke the “suspension” of human rights protections, release judges of the Supreme Court and persons detained for political reasons, and ensure the independence of the judiciary.

On 22 February, the Department of Judicial Administration, the administrative arm of the Maldivian judiciary, suspended lawyer Hussain Shameem for an indefinite period of time, citing an ongoing investigation against him.

“No lawyer should be subject to persecution for carrying out their professional duties. Lawyers like Hussain Shameem are indispensable in ensuring human rights protection and upholding the rule of law in the Maldives, especially during a state of emergency,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia-Pacific Director.

The decision to suspend Shameem came only days after the Maldivian police launched an investigation against him for “obstruction of justice” and “obstruction of the administration of law and other government function”.

Hussain Shameem is representing members of the political opposition who are in detention, including former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom and parliamentarian Faris Maumoon.

Before his suspension, Hussain Shameem had made public statements asserting that the declaration emergency declared by the Government on 5 February 2018 was unconstitutional.

He had also highlighted the poor conditions of detention of his clients.

The ICJ has learned that the police confiscated the mobile phones of another two lawyers, Mahfooz Saeed and Moosa Siraj.

Like Shameem, they were representing individuals arrested and detained during the state of emergency, including Justice Ali Hameed, who was part of the Supreme Court bench that recently issued a judgment directing the release of members of the opposition.

The police have also informed lawyers taking up cases during the state of emergency that they can only meet their clients for 30 minutes, which is an arbitrary and unlawful restriction on the fair trial rights of accused persons.

Under international standards, including 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.

International standards also provide that lawyers shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics.

“The government’s actions against these lawyers, who are just doing their job of protecting their clients’ rights, has a chilling effect on other lawyers in the country as it sends a message that any exercise of their professional responsibilities perceived as contrary to wishes of the governments will not be tolerated,” added Rawski.

Contact:

Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 64 478 1121, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Pakistan (London), t: +447889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org

Additional information: the state of emergency

On 5 February, the Government of the Maldives had declared a 15-day state of emergency under Article 253 of the Constitution, suspending a range of human rights protections. The declaration of emergency followed a Supreme Court judgment on 1 February that ordered the release of at least nine members of opposition parties, who were in detention on a number of charges.

On 20 February, the Parliament extended the state of emergency for another thirty days, citing the ongoing constitutional crisis. The extension appears to have been taken in violation of Maldivian law and the Constitution as the number of parliamentarians required for such an extension was not present during the vote.

The constitutionally and internationally protected rights that have been suspended in part or in full during the state of emergency include, among others, the right to liberty; the right to freedom of assembly; and the right to privacy. Basic safeguards surrounding arrest, detention, search and seizures – including the criminal procedure code – have also been suspended.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which the Maldives is a State Party, allows for States only to derogate from full protection of only a limited number of human rights during declared “public emergency which threatens the life of the nation.” No rights can be entirely suspended. Measures of derogation may only be taken to the extent strictly necessary to meet a specific threat to the life of the nation.

Morocco: remove obstacles to access to the Constitutional Court – new ICJ memo

Morocco: remove obstacles to access to the Constitutional Court – new ICJ memo

In a memo published today, the ICJ called on the Moroccan authorities to refrain from signing into Law Draft Organic Law No. 86.15 on access to the Constitutional Court with a view to amending it and ensuring its full compliance with international standards.  

On 8 August 2017, the House of Representatives approved the Draft Law.

The Second Chamber of the Parliament, the House of Counselors, approved the Draft Law on 16 January 2018.

Before its promulgation, the Draft Law is due to be reviewed by the Constitutional Court to assess its compliance with the Constitution.

“The Draft Law is a missed opportunity to facilitate individuals’ access to the Constitutional Court and to remedy Morocco’s history of inadequate procedures of constitutional review,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.

“By providing for a two-layered admissibility system that includes vague and subjective criteria, and by omitting to extend free and competent legal assistance to those unable to pay when challenging the constitutionality of laws, the Draft Law puts undue burden on the litigants and curtails their access to the Court,” he added.

Under the Draft Law, a request to challenge the constitutionality of a law can only be introduced in the context of a litigation.

Lower courts are to refer the request to the Cassation Court after reviewing it and confirming that the formal and legal requirements set out in the Draft Law are met.

The Cassation Court shall then assess the challenge and refer it to the Constitutional Court if deemed “serious.”

The ICJ is concerned that this proposed procedure increases the likelihood that some laws and provisions may never be subjected to constitutional review, and that litigants may be blocked in their efforts to ensure the review of the constitutionality of the laws.

Moroccan authorities should provide for lower courts to immediately refer constitutionality challenges to the Constitutional Court, as well for other avenues of access, including for individuals and NGOs to be enabled to join proceedings as interested parties or to submit information as amicus curiae or through expert opinions, the ICJ says.

Under international law, anyone who alleges they have been the victim of a human rights violation has the right to access to an effective remedy, including a judicial remedy.

In Morocco, ensuring that alleged victims have access to constitutional review is of key importance to fulfilling this right within the national legal system.

Morocco-Access Const Ct-News-web story-2018-ARA (full story in Arabic, PDF)

Morocco-Access Const Ct-Advocacy-Position paper-2018-ENG (Memo in English, PDF)

Morocco-Access Const Ct-Advocacy-Position paper-2018-ARA (Memo in Arabic, PDF)

Guatemala: the ICJ strongly condemns the attack against the Deputy Prosecutor for Human Rights

Guatemala: the ICJ strongly condemns the attack against the Deputy Prosecutor for Human Rights

The ICJ strongly condemns the attack against the Deputy Prosecutor for Human Rights, Sonia Elizabeth Montes Valenzuela, carried out on 15 February by unknown gunmen in the central Zone 1 of Guatemala City.

Sonia Montes was on her way to work at the Public Prosecutors Office when two gunmen on motorbikes drove past and fired six bullets into the car.

Fortunately both Sonia Montes and her driver, Néstor Valdes Antonio, were unharmed.

“This is a vile attack against the justice system in Guatemala and the whole human rights movement in the country. These types of attacks seek to destabilize democracy and the rule of law,” Ramón Cadena, the ICJ Director stated.

“We call on President Jimmy Morales to carry out a full and impartial investigation in order to identify the material and moral authors of these acts,” he added.

The ICJ also expresses its solidarity with the families of the victims of the attack and with the Attorney General, Thelma Aldana, and the Commissioner of the International Commission against Impunity (CICIG), Iván Velásquez.

The Public Prosecutors’ Office and the CICIG are working tirelessly to investigate crimes and to end impunity and corruption in Guatemala.

Thailand: immediately stop criminal defamation complaint against torture victim

Thailand: immediately stop criminal defamation complaint against torture victim

Thailand should immediately cease misusing criminal and civil defamation laws to legally harass victims, human rights defenders and journalists who raise allegations of torture or other ill-treatment, the ICJ said today.

Yesterday, the Director of the Internal Operations Security Command (ISOC) Region 4, Lt. Gen. Piyawat Nakwanich, reportedly authorized Lt. Col. Seathtasit Kaewkumuang to lodge defamation complaints against Isma-ae Tae, a founder of Patani Human Rights Organization (HAP).

ISOC is responsible for security operations in Thailand’s deep South.

“It is astonishing that after all of the Government’s repeated commitments to address allegations of torture and protect victims and human rights defenders, ISOC is now misusing the justice system to legally harass an alleged victim of torture,” said Kingsley Abbott, the ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia.

“Thailand should immediately stop these defamation complaints against Isma-ae Tae and ensure an investigation that meets international law and standards is conducted into all allegations of torture or other ill-treatment without delay,” he added.

The accusations relate to a TV program entitled “Policy by People” that aired on the Thai PBS channel on 5 February 2018 in which Isma-ae Tae described being tortured and ill-treated by Thai soldiers when he was a student in Yala, located in Thailand’s restive deep South.

Criminal defamation in Thailand carries a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment and a fine of up to 200,000 Baht (USD $6,300).

 The imposition of harsh penalties such as imprisonment or large fines under these laws has the effect of discouraging victims of torture or other ill-treatment from coming forward to seek the remedies and reparations to which they are entitled under international human rights law binding on Thailand, the ICJ said.

The complaints were made against the backdrop of a ruling by the Supreme Administrative Court on 19 October 2016, which ordered the Royal Thai Army and the Defence Ministry to pay 305,000 baht (USD $9,700) compensation to Isma-ae Tae, after it found he was “physically assaulted” during detention and had been illegally detained for nine days – exceeding the limit of seven days permitted under Martial Law Act B.E. 2457 (1914) (Martial Law).

“Even more astonishing is that a superior Thai court has already found that the military physically assaulted Isma-ae Tae and awarded him compensation, which only serves to highlight the injustice of these complaints”, added Abbott.

In 2008, Isma-ae Tae was arrested pursuant to Martial Law and allegedly tortured in order to purportedly extract a confession in relation to a national security case. To date, no perpetrators have been brought to justice.

Contact

Kingsley Abbott, Senior International Legal Adviser, ICJ Asia Pacific Programme, t: +66 94 470 1345, e: kingley.abbott@icj.org

Thailand-Isma-ae Tae defamation case-News-Press releases-2018-ENG (full story with additional information, in PDF)

Thailand-Isma-ae Tae defamation case-News-Press releases-2018-THA (Thai version of full sory, in PDF)

Read also

Thailand: ICJ welcomes decision to end proceedings against human rights defenders who raised allegations of torture

Thailand: ICJ welcomes dropping of complaints against human rights defenders but calls for investigation into torture

Thailand: stop use of defamation charges against human rights defenders seeking accountability for torture

Thailand: immediately withdraw criminal complaints against human rights defenders

Further reading on the Draft Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act

UN Committee against Torture: ICJ and TLHR’s joint submission on Thailand

Thailand: ICJ, Amnesty advise changes to proposed legislation on torture and enforced disappearances

Thailand: ICJ commemorates international day in support of victims of enforced disappearances

Thailand: pass legislation criminalizing enforced disappearance, torture without further delay

Translate »