May 9, 2018 | News
The ICJ said today that Gina Haspel, nominated by Donald Trump to be Director of the CIA, should be subject to a full criminal investigation for her alleged involvement torture and other serious crimes, rather than elevated to serve as the country’s highest intelligence office.
The ICJ statement came as the United States Senate Intelligence was poised to beginning hearings on her confirmation to the position.
“If Gina Haspel becomes CIA Director, the United States will be sending a signal to the world that it has dropped the pretence of caring about even the most serious human rights violations,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Secretary General.
“It will show that torturing and disappearing people by US officials will not only be met with impunity, but will be no bar to career advancement.”
Following the terror attacks against the United States of 11 September 2001 until 2007, the CIA held at least 119 terror suspects or persons it suspected to have intelligence value in places of secret detention outside of US territory.
The black sites were situated in several countries, including Afghanistan, Lithuania, Poland Romania, and Thailand.
The detainees, who had no contact with the outside world, were placed beyond the protection of the law and subjected to torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.
The torture included near drowning (“waterboarding”), prolonged sleep deprivation, placement in painful stress positions for extended periods, forced rectal feedings, and slamming against walls.
Gina Hapel oversaw at least one “black site” detention centre in Thailand in 2002, while detainee Abd al-Rahim al Nashiri was being tortured there.
She is credibly alleged to have played a significant role in destroying video evidence of interrogations that were carried out under torture.
“The European Court of Human Rights has already condemned Poland for violating the rights of Abd al-Rahim al Nashiri, after he was transferred to secret CIA detention facility in Poland, yet nobody directly responsible CIA has ever been held accountable for these serious crimes,” said Sam Zarifi.
Contact
Ian Seiderman, ICJ Legal and Policy Director, t +41 22 979 3837 ; e: ian.seiderman(a)icj.org
May 7, 2018 | News
The ICJ today denounced the decision of the Presidium of the Azerbaijan Bar Association, of 23 April 2018, to suspend the licences of two Azerbaijan human rights lawyers Asabali Mustafayev (photo, on the left) and Nemat Karimli (photo, on the right).
The ICJ called on the Presidium to reverse their decision and allow the lawyers to resume their practice.
It stressed that disciplinary proceedings pending against the lawyers should be immediately terminated.
The ICJ said that the decision of the Presidium was contrary to international standards on the role of lawyers including the right to freedom of expression as guaranteed under international law.
The ICJ understands that the proceedings against the two lawyers, initiated following a submission of the Deputy Prosecutor General, were related to the critical statements made by the lawyers in the media, regarding high profile criminal cases.
Nemat Karimli, had stated in media interviews that his client Afgan Mukhtarli, an opposition activist convicted on charges of smuggling, had been illegally and forcibly transferred from Georgia to Azerbaijan and that his life could be at risk if he was returned to Azerbaijan.
The lawyer also complained of excessive searches and being prevented from communicating in private while visiting his client in detention.
The disciplinary proceedings against Asabali Mustafayev relate to allegations he made on social media that the prosecution of politician Gozal Bayramli, on a charge of smuggling, was politically motivated.
Both lawyers were charged with spreading false statements and slanderous information about investigative authorities.
The submission of the Prosecutor to the Bar Association, on 25 October 2017, alleged that lawyers Nemat Karimli and Asabali Mustafayev in their interviews to the media had “politicized” the criminal cases of Bayramli and Mukhtarli, tried to mislead the public and slandered investigative authorities. According to the information provided by the lawyers, no evidence had been attached to this submission.
Instead, the Disciplinary Commission collected evidence to submit to the Presidium of the Bar Association, which subsequently suspended the licence of the lawyers.
Furthermore, the lawyers state that, contrary to what is required by the Law on Lawyers and Advocates Activities, they have not received a copy of the opinion of the Disciplinary Commission submitted to the Presidium of the Bar Association.
The ICJ is concerned that the suspension of the lawyers’ licences, for comments which drew attention to possible violations of human rights, may violate the lawyers’ right to freedom of expression.
These comments appear to be within the bounds of lawyers professional responsibility to protect their clients in every appropriate way (UN Basic Principles, principle 13(b)).
The right to freedom of expression is protected under international treaties to which Azerbaijan is a party, including by Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers specify that lawyers “…have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights …”.
The European Court of Human Rights has emphasized that lawyers are entitled to comment in public on the administration of justice, provided that their criticism does not overstep certain bounds, based on principles of dignity, honor, integrity, and respect for the fair administration of justice.
The ICJ emphasizes that protection of lawyers’ freedom of expression, in particular as regards issues of the rule of law and the administration of justice, is not only important to the individuals in question, it also serves as an important safeguard for the protection of human rights.
Where lawyers are subject to disciplinary sanctions for such statements, the role of lawyers in upholding the rule of law in the administration of justice is undermined.
The ICJ therefore calls on the Azerbaijan Bar Association to lift the disciplinary sanctions that would unjustifiably interfere with lawyers’ freedom of expression.
The ICJ also calls on the Azerbaijan Bar Association to ensure that the lawyers subject to disciplinary proceedings obtain a copy of the opinion to be able to prepare their arguments and defence.
Background
Asabali Mustafayev represented Gozal Bayramli who was found guilty and sentenced to three years in prison for smuggling €12,000 ($13,400) in cash. Mustafayev had expressed his opinion about the arrest of Gozal Bayramli in his social media profile, alleging that it was politically motivated. He stated that when he shared this opinion he was not yet engaged as Gozal Bayramli’s lawyer.
Nemat Karimli represented Afgan Mukhtarli, an opposition activist based in Tbilisi, who was convicted of smuggling € 10,000, illegally crossing the border and resisting police arrest and was sentenced to six years in prison. Karimli in an interview stated that Mukhtarli was taken to Azerbaijan illegally and called on the Georgian authorities not to hand him to Azerbaijan authorities since it might endanger Mukhtarli’s life.
May 3, 2018 | Feature articles, News
On 3 and 4 May 2018, the ICJ supported by UNAIDS and OHCHR convened an expert meeting on global principles addressing criminalization’s detrimental impact in the areas of sexuality, reproduction, drug use and HIV.
The expert meeting of leading jurists from around the globe aimed at laying the foundations for a set of principles to address the misuse and abuse of the criminal law and its detrimental impact on health, equality and human rights.
The expert group focused on the criminalization of conduct relating to four principal areas: sexuality, reproduction, personal drug use, and the overly broad criminalization of HIV exposure, transmission and non-disclosure.
In these areas, international human rights authorities, as well as domestic courts, have regularly found criminal law provisions to be contrary to international law and standards, and to have a deleterious effect on public health.
“We need to understand why the blunt instrument of the criminal law is used against and affects real people, and why the criminal law ought not to apply in our four areas of concern. Where the criminal law is misused, that is a betrayal of the rule of law. The rule of law must be our guiding compass,” said Justice Cameron, Constitutional Court of South Africa.
“The principles we hope to develop must facilitate the availability of tools which can impact key populations where they are in conflict with the law. They are often at risk of blackmail, stigma and discrimination. It falls on courts to make the difficult decisions. Judges can then consider legality, legitimate purpose and questions of necessity and proportionality in light of a broader understanding of the human rights principles at stake and the relevant scientific evidence,” said Judge Mbaru, Industrial Court of Kenya.
“The law is required to guarantee rights but at same time it can impose arbitrary restrictions. Often those restrictions in the form of the criminal law purport to be necessary in order to ‘protect’ people. That purported purpose ought to be closely scrutinised,” said Justice Ortiz, Constitutional Court of Columbia.
Sam Zarifi, Secretary General of the ICJ, stated: “The misuse of the criminal law affects the most marginalized groups of people and, in particular, the dispossessed and disenfranchised.”
“The centrality of the rule of law at a time when it is under threat globally, and our crucial obligation to stand against laws that are arbitrary, unequal and discriminatory,” he added.
Tim Martineau, Acting Deputy Executive Director of UNAIDS said: “The application of human rights principles to criminal law is key in order to address the detrimental impact of such laws in the areas of sexuality, reproduction, drug use and HIV.”
“While there was significant progress in HIV prevention, treatment and care, there was a big discrepancy in HIV prevention in relation to key populations who are more vulnerable to HIV infection in many respects because of a lack of legal protection, and the unjust criminalization of their behaviour,” he added.
Kate Gilmore, Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights, stated that the criminal law can readily become a tool of repression or oppression. She said: “Wrongful deployment of criminal law betrays universal human rights standards. By eroding rather than protecting physical and mental integrity specifically in the contexts of sexuality, reproduction and gender identity, misuse of criminal law seeks a wrongful “regulation” of the body of women in particular, with devastating consequences for women’s and girls’ autonomy, health and well being.”
She emphasized that “the criminal law plays an essential role in the recognition, protection and enforcement of rights including by tackling impunity for violations for those rights.”
ICJ, UNAIDS and OHCHR consider that the envisaged principles will help legislators, judges and advocates in the development and review of criminal laws that have adverse consequences on health, equality and human rights particularly where they relate to key populations.
May 3, 2018 | News
The UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) today published a Declaration on Judicial Integrity, adopted by Chief Justices and other judges and stakeholders at the launch of a new Global Judicial Integrity Network in Vienna.
ICJ actively participated in the launch event, which took place 9-10 April at the UN offices in Vienna, Austria. It was one of the largest-ever gatherings of Chief Justices and other senior judges, together with other experts and stakeholders.
In addition to organising a panel discussion on judicial selection and appointment procedures in Southern and East Africa, the ICJ made the following statement to the plenary session of the launch event:
Throughout the decades since its inception in 1952, the primary and most effective means by which the International Commission of Jurists has worked to promote the rule of law around the world is precisely by bringing judges from different countries together to share experience and expertise with one another, and together to seek solutions to the common challenges they face. The Judicial Integrity Network should make a huge contribution by creating a platform for this kind of judge-to-judge engagement to take place on a global scale and a continuous basis. The sessions today and yesterday have truly illustrated the very great potential of the Network. The ICJ strongly supports the efforts of UNODC, Chief Justices, and other stakeholders to bring the Network into being, and we look forward to participating in it, promoting it, and using it in our own work with judiciaries around the world, in the years ahead.
The plenary session also accepted, by consensus, the ICJ’s proposal to include key language from the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, in the Declaration.
The Declaration, Terms of Reference, and Participants List is available on the UNODC website here or can be downloaded from the following links:
Declaration on Judicial Integrity (UNODC event 2018)
UNODC GJIN Terms of Reference 2018
ICJ Practitioners Guide no 13, on Judicial Accountability, can be downloaded here: Universal-PG 13 Judicial Accountability-Publications-Reports-Practitioners Guide-2016-ENG
Apr 29, 2018 | News
Between 28 and 29 April 2018, the ICJ co-hosted a Seminar for judges and prosecutors from Tunisia and Libya on the international law and standards that apply to the investigation and prosecution of gross human rights violations.
The participants included more than 30 judges and prosecutors from different regions in Tunisia and Libya.
The Seminar was co-hosted with the Associations des Magistrats Tunisiens (AMT) and the Libyan Network for Legal Aid.
The event commenced with opening remarks by ICJ Commissioner, Justice Kalthoum Kennou of Tunisia.
Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser at the ICJ, delivered a comprehensive overview of the international human rights law and standards that apply to the duty to investigate gross human rights violations.
He noted in particular that investigations of potentially unlawful deaths play a key role in accountability by upholding the right to life, which is guaranteed by Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
He then introduced the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which sets out a common standard of performance in investigating potentially unlawful deaths or suspected enforced disappearance and a shared set of principles and guidelines for States, as well as for institutions and individuals who play a role in the investigation.
The revised Minnesota Protocol formed part of the core materials referred to at the Seminar, together with the ICJ Practitioners Guide No 9 – Enforced Disappearance and Extrajudicial Execution: Investigation and Sanction (2015).
The Seminar also covered the collection of evidence, the duty to prosecute, and fair trial rights.
Other speakers at the event included Vito Todeschini, Associate Legal Adviser at the ICJ; Aonghus Kelly, Senior Legal Adviser, EU Border Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM); and Martin Hackett, Senior Trial Counsel at the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in the Hague.
Contact
Said Benarbia: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Kingsley Abbott: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Apr 25, 2018 | Events, News, Video clips
Today, the ICJ-European Institutions held the final event of its EU and OSI funded FAIR project (Fostering Access to justice for Immigrant children’s Rights) in the European Parliament in Brussels. Two videos have also been produced.
This is the closing event of a two-year long project, which aimed at strengthening access to justice for migrant children in the EU.
Migrant children in the EU face violations of their human rights every day.
Lack of access to their families, to information, guardians and legal assistance, lack of access to housing or education, unlawful detention – are few examples of what the children suffer.
The event in the European Parliament was hosted by four political groups and three Members of the EP took part in the panel discussions, on challenges migrant children face in their access to justice and on ways forward and what the EU could do to further advance the rights of some of the most vulnerable people at EU territory.
The panel discussions also included specific cases that national lawyers are dealing with in Italy, Greece, Germany and Ireland on behalf of migrant children.
Julien Makalu, a young engineering student shared his own experience when he arrived to Greece as unaccompanied minor some years ago.
During the FAIR project, the ICJ-European Institutions:
The FAIR project co-funded by the Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme of the European Union and OSIFE.
Download the flyer and agenda of the event here:
Universal – A2J Migrant Children Flyer – 2018 – ENG (Flyer)
Universal – A2J Migrant Children Agenda – 2018 – ENG (Agenda)
Watch the videos of the FAIR Project and the FAIR Project’s retreat
From 4 to 8 October 2017, 19 lawyers from Bulgaria, Germany, Greece, Italy, Ireland, Malta and Spain met together and with experts to strategize about their cases of access to justice for migrant children and on accessing international human rights mechanisms. The workshop took place on the French border near Geneva, allowing UN treaty bodies experts and members to participate.
