May 31, 2017 | News
The ICJ today called on the Egyptian authorities to act immediately to repeal the law on civic associations.
The law was adopted by Egypt’s Parliament on 15 November 2016 and signed into law by President El-Sisi on 29 May 2017.
Until the law is repealed, the authorities should desist from enforcing it, the ICJ says.
The law effectively prohibits most Egyptian human rights non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from registering and working in Egypt, stipulating that civic associations’ work shall take place in the fields of development and social welfare consistent with “the State’s plans and its developmental needs and priorities.”
Egyptian and international NGOs are also forbidden to advocate against any law or its implementation, as well as to carry out “political activities” or any that “harm national security, public order, public morals or public health.”
They are prohibited from conducting public surveys, research or reports without permission and approval of the results of such work must be given by the authorities prior to publication (articles 14, 87).
The law also provides for an entity to be formed by presidential decree from representatives of three security bodies, which will decide on all matters related to NGO funding, the registration and issues relating to the work of international NGOs, and cooperation between Egyptian associations and any foreign body.
“The law on civic associations, if implemented in its present form, would be tantamount to an official death certificate of independent civil society in Egypt,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Director.
“By signing it into law, President El-Sisi is silencing the very organizations that could act as a check on the abusive and arbitrary exercise of his power,” he added.
The adoption of this repressive law is just the latest measure in a sustained, relentless campaign by Egypt’s military and executive authorities aimed at dismantling Egyptian civil society through highly politicized judicial proceedings and arbitrary travel bans against NGOs and human rights defenders.
For instance, the foreign funding case taken against NGOs (no. 173/2011) saw leading Egyptian human rights organizations, such as the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS), the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (ANHRI) and the Hicham Mubrak Law Center (HMLC), subject to arbitrary investigations.
The grounds included “receiving funds to harm national interests and destroy the basic foundations of the state (the army, police, and judiciary),” “establishing an entity operating as a civic association without official registration,” and “income tax evasion.”
Four of these organizations and six NGO directors/board members have been subjected to asset freezes.
In the last two months, many NGO staff and directors have been summoned for interrogation by investigative judges, including ICJ partners Mustapha El-Hassan, Director of HMLC, Gamel Eid, Founder and Director of ANHRI, and Mohamed Zaree, CIHRS’ Programme Director and short-listed candidate for the Martin Ennals Award 2017.
The ICJ has previously documented how the Egyptian authorities have used the justice system as a repressive tool in their efforts to silence many of those suspected of opposing them.
“Egyptian authorities must comply with their obligations under international law and put an immediate end to their campaign to silence human rights defenders and NGOs. A first step in that direction would be the immediate repeal of the law on civic associations,” Benarbia said.
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 22 979 38 17: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Egypt-NGO Law-News-Press release-ARA (Press release in Arabic, PDF)
May 30, 2017 | News
Representatives of large European business enterprises met today with State delegates and representatives of FIDH and the ICJ in Geneva to discuss their views on a prospective international treaty on business and human rights.
The meeting was organized by the FIDH and ICJ and took place under Chatham House rules.
The United Nations Human Rights Council started in 2014 an intergovernmental process towards an international treaty concerning business and the protection human rights.
The first draft elements of that treaty should be discussed in October 2017, after two years of preparatory consultations among the concerned stakeholders.
The meeting in Geneva took place in the context of growing involvement by key business leaders in international discussions, in dialogue with civil society and governments, around global human rights standards.
Business representatives present in the meeting expressed their views regarding the content of a future international treaty founded on their need to have level playing field regarding human rights responsibilities to operate in global markets.
They pointed out that the new treaty should apply to all businesses, go beyond the existing frameworks and create a framework for a fair human rights based competition among businesses towards higher standards.
State delegates and NGOs representatives also shared their perspectives noting that the current circumstances call for bolder collective action as a matter of urgency.
Most participants underlined the key role that State agencies should play in enforcing the rules at the local level and in protecting their people.
Finally, a call was made for businesses, civil society and governments to take their responsibility to promote global human rights binding rules for business operations, including in the global marketplace.
May 30, 2017 | News, Op-eds
An opinion piece by Sean Bain, ICJ legal consultant in Myanmar, and Vicky Bowman, Director of the Myanmar Centre for Responsible Business.
A strategic environmental assessment is needed to enable sustainable development and the fulfilment of human rights for the people of Kyaukphyu, the site of a planned SEZ and deep-sea port.
In its interim report released in March, the Advisory Commission on Rakhine State chaired by former United Nations secretary-general Kofi Annan, called for a comprehensive assessment of the special economic zone in Kyaukphyu Township.
The aim would be to “explore how the SEZ may affect local communities and map how other economic sectors in the state may benefit (or possibly suffer) from the SEZ”.
The State Counsellor’s Office endorsed the commission’s interim recommendations, including for this assessment.
The call for a comprehensive assessment in Kyaukphyu echoes a proposal from our organisations, the Myanmar Centre for Responsible Business and the International Commission of Jurists, for the government to undertake a strategic environmental assessment.
Its purpose would be to address concerns about human rights and to consider the cumulative environmental and social impacts of planned developments. Oxfam has put forward a similar recommendation to the government.
Our recommendation comes as media reports this month suggest that the government is giving renewed attention to the future of the SEZ and related projects in Kyaukphyu.
The SEZ, which has been planned to include industrial parks along with deep-sea ports and transport links to China, would transform the demographic and economic character of Rakhine State’s central coast and hinterlands.
It would have significant impacts for local communities and the state economy, both during and beyond the envisaged 20-year construction period.
Kyaukphyu – already the starting point for oil and gas pipelines to China – would host the largest development project ever undertaken in Rakhine State.
Financed mostly by Chinese investors, with shipping facilities linking Myanmar to international routes through the Bay of Bengal, the project also has national and regional economic significance.
However, to date there has been insufficient consideration of the impacts, either positive or negative, on the livelihoods and human rights of residents and the economy of Rakhine State.
Plans for the SEZ are ambitious yet detailed information is scarce and so far there has been no genuine public participation in planning processes.
While contracts and payments regarding investments are decided in Myanmar’s economic and political capitals, it is at the local level that negative impacts can be felt the most.
It is also at the local level where economic benefits may be enhanced.
To address negative impacts and enable benefits, a joined-up approach that brings together national and local government and local and foreign companies with the people of the area is needed.
At present, a lack of coordination across ministries, and between national and regional governments is limiting the scope to harness opportunities and manage impacts of investments.
Despite their significance, neither the SEZ and deep-sea ports nor the offshore gas projects serviced from Kyaukphyu are included in Rakhine State’s socioeconomic development plan.
We believe a strategic environmental assessment is needed to enable sustainable development and the fulfilment of human rights in the Kyaukphyu area.
Strategic environmental assessments, which are part of Myanmar law, are defined in the 2015 Environmental Impact Procedure as “a range of analytical and participatory approaches that aim to integrate environment into policies, plans and programs and evaluate the inter-linkages with economic and social considerations.
The principle is to integrate environment, alongside economic and social concerns, into a holistic sustainability assessment.”
Unlike an environmental impact assessment, which is a permitting requirement for individual projects, a strategic environmental assessment takes a holistic approach by integrating environmental and social concerns and human rights protection, to produce a big picture view of the impacts of interrelated projects.
At Kyaukphyu, the national and state governments – drawing on financial and technical assistance from development and human rights partners – could commission expert independent consultants to undertake the necessary studies and analysis to produce such an assessment.
The assessment would consider the cumulative human rights and environmental impacts of the SEZ, seaports, pipelines, offshore gas developments and transport and energy infrastructure, including impacts on traditional fishing and farming livelihoods in Kyaukphyu.
It could address how best to avoid or minimise the physical and economic displacement of residents, and how to reduce the potential for local tensions and conflict associated with expected socioeconomic transformations.
A legal framework – based on international law and standards – for protecting human rights during economic displacement and resettlement needs to be put in place. That’s not just for the SEZs, but for all projects.
While insufficient to address the lack of legal accountability in the SEZ Law and the limited access to justice in Myanmar, a strategic environmental assessment could improve transparency and give voice to the views of local communities, businesses, civil society organisations and other stakeholders.
This would help fill major gaps in planning and decision-making processes thus far.
Consultation is critical to the value and legitimacy of any assessment but too often it is tokenistic or minimised to cut costs and time.
Development partners should ensure that they are funding genuine and extensive public participation.
A lesson from Myanmar’s only other assessment of this kind, currently underway with support from the International Finance Corporation focused on the hydropower sector, has been the need to communicate and engage constantly about the purpose and process of the assessment.
Many civil society groups chose not to participate in consultations for the IFC-backed assessment due to scepticism and lack of confidence in the process.
To learn from this experience, international and local NGOs in Kyaukphyu could share information and support communities to make informed decisions about their engagement with a strategic environmental assessment.
Until there is a concrete and transparent plan to manage impacts from development projects in Kyaukphyu, particularly those with negative impacts on human rights, current preparations for the SEZ should be put on hold.
This includes land acquisition that is underway and risks violating the rights of local residents.
The government should also delay entering into investment agreements with the winning consortium of developers, which is led by China’s CITIC Group, until there has been broader multi-stakeholder debate about the SEZ, and how it may develop and interact with other investments in the area.
A strategic environmental assessment in Kyaukphyu could contribute towards correcting a development process that has so far not contributed meaningfully to the realisation of human rights or addressed the economic needs of the population in Kyaukphyu or Rakhine State.
We hope that the Myanmar government at national and state level as well as development partners will take this forward, building on the advisory commission’s recommendation and its endorsement by the state counsellor.
May 29, 2017 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
Honorary ICJ Member Leila Zerrougui speaks about the obstacles in accessing justice that women face, particularly in conflict settings, in the latest ICJ profile on women human rights defenders.
Professor Leila Zerrougui is an Algerian legal expert on human rights and administration of justice. She has served as a juvenile judge, judge of first instance, appeals court judge and was appointed to the Algerian Supreme Court.
She was the Deputy Special Representative of the Secretary-General and Deputy Head of the United Nations Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO) where, from 2008, she spearheaded the Mission’s efforts in strengthening the rule of law and protection of civilians. From 2012 to 2017 she served as Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict.
Prof. Zerrougui explained that she was part of a first generation of women who had access to education in her country and that the opportunity to study law helped her to understand rights, how to exercise these and how to protect them.
When she started as a juvenile judge, the family code was very unjust for women, and she was motivated to try and fix these injustices.
Although confronted by occasional misogyny, Prof. Zerrougui considered that in some ways her gender enabled her to enjoy more opportunities when she started her career as there were so few female judges and male peers felt less threatened by her.
Prof Zerrougui said that throughout her career she has been supported by many men, but emphasized that it is important that men understand that gender issues are about the relationships between men and women and that it is in everyone’s best interests to promote gender equality in all aspects of life.
Among the many obstacles facing women in accessing justice, she cited administrative blockages, lack of knowledge about legal procedures, lack of financial means and family pressures and interference. Women without access to education or other public spaces, particularly those whose families do not support them, are totally disempowered.
Prof. Zerrougui said that as a judge she observed many cases were thrown out because those filing cases didn’t understand the legal procedures that were involved. She therefore decided to spend two hours every week taking part in a TV programme to explain these procedures to citizens in a way that they could access and understand.
Prof. Zerrougui has worked in many conflict settings and is known for her innovative methods. She said: “In many conflict settings, you don’t have justice. So it is not about how can you access justice, the system is not there.” Prof. Zerrougui went on to explain that in these settings it is first necessary to take justice to where the victims are.
In the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Prof. Zerrougui established mobile criminal justice courts, with an investigator, prosecutor and a mobile court and a prison in every Province. It was the first stage to bring justice to remote areas, and to allow the victim to face the perpetrators, sometimes high ranking military.
In this context, she explained how rewarding it was to see a colonel taken to the village where he and his solders had raped women and to face justice there. His victims were able to participate in the process and see him face justice and receive his sentence. The decision was then made to detain the perpetrator in a different area, where he would not have the influence to arrange his release.
Prof. Zerrougui explained that children are often victims of conflicts they have not instigated but, despite sometimes constituting as much as 50 or 70 per cent of the overall population in conflict zones, are frequently forgotten and left without a voice.
In her role as UN Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, she was involved with the Colombia peace process and the first agreement signed there was about releasing children and reintegrating them into their family or society rather than seeking punishment. However, she explained it is also vital to ensure that perpetrators of abuses against children are punished.
Prof. Zerrougui encouraged more young women to think about working in human rights and said: “just choose the space when you have the opportunity to get it, don’t think about all the obstacles, it’s good to know them but not stop at that, and you will achieve results, the recognition will come.”
She added that this work is important, “because without human rights defenders, without people that dedicate their lives, their careers, to defend the most vulnerable, the voiceless, then the world becomes a jungle.”
Watch the interview:
The series of profiles introducing the work of ICJ Commissioners and Honorary Members on women’s rights was launched on 25 November 2016 to coincide with the International Day to Eliminate Violence against Women and the first day of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence Campaign.
May 27, 2017 | News
On 24 May 2017, States at the UN reached an agreement to prepare an “international regulatory framework” to protect human rights and ensure accountability for violations and abuses relating to the activities of private military and private security companies (PMSCs).
The agreement, reached at Working Group level, has still to be ratified by the full UN Human Rights Council.
It would be the first universal international instrument on human rights and private security companies negotiated and adopted at the UN.
This could pave the way to further developments towards increased monitoring and accountability of the private security industry.
The agreement constitutes a landmark achievement. The intergovernmental Working Group over the past six years have been mired in circular debates as to whether or not it is desirable to develop a legally binding instrument on PMSCs.
Last’s week agreement leaves aside for the moment the decision about the nature of the instrument and will instead allow for a constructive focus on the contents of the future instrument.
Activities of private and military security companies became the object of heightened international scrutiny particularly after events in the context of the armed conflict in Iraq over the past decade.
These include unlawful killings at Nisoor Square and torture and ill-treatment at Abu Graib prison.
A Working Group of experts on mercenary activity appointed by the UN Human Rights Council started to look at the issues in 2007, generating proposals for international instruments to fill perceived regulatory gaps.
Many States have now accepted that the absence of an international regulatory framework combined with limited or non-existent regulation at national level offers a “breeding ground” for human rights abuses committed by PMSCs.
The main clients of these companies are governments that contract them to carry out specific functions, including some that many believe should remain firmly in the hands of public officials.
One key issue that the future instrument should address is the circumstances under which PMSCs can be considered to act on behalf of the State when they are contracted to perform functions that are typically State functions.
International law already governs some aspects of PMSC activity. International human rights law provides for a general obligation of States to protect against the adverse consequences of PMSC activity.
There has also been other international regulatory activity outside of UN auspices in this area.
In 2008 a select group of mostly Western States led by the Government of Switzerland and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) elaborated the Montreux Document on pertinent obligations for States regarding PMSCs.
Other initiatives such as a Code of Conduct for the PMSCs themselves followed suit. But many States and civil society organizations regard these initiatives as insufficient and lacking the universality afforded by UN processes.
One notable weakness in current approaches is the dearth of standards and mechanisms squarely addressing accountability of private security industry and to ensure access to remedy for those victims of abuse.
Experience shows that States legal frameworks have limited effectiveness when abuses occur at the cross-border level, involving more than one company in more than one jurisdiction, especially in conflict or post-conflict environments.
The prospective international regulatory framework should surely build on existing initiatives, research and findings.
To that end, broad participation by all stakeholders should be ensured.
In this regard, participation of civil society and NGOs specialized in human rights has not been optimal so far.
States leading this new process should make all and every effort to fill that gap, ensuring that international and national civil society receive timely information and facilities for meaningful participation.
May 26, 2017 | News
The ICJ has launched the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016) in Thailand, together with the Thai Ministry of Justice, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the German Embassy in Bangkok.
The launch on Thursday coincided with a parallel launch of the revised Minnesota Protocol by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva.
The Minnesota Protocol is a companion document to the UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (1989), and sets a common standard of performance in investigating potentially unlawful death and a shared set of principles and guidelines for States, as well as for institutions and individuals who play a role in death investigations.
The launch was attended by representatives of the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Royal Thai Police, the Office of the Attorney General, the Ministry of Defence, and the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand.
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia and member of the Forensics and Legal Working Groups which assisted with the revision the Minnesota Protocol, opened the event for the ICJ by commending Thailand for hosting the first national launch of the revised Minnesota Protocol.
“Investigations 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, to which Thailand is a State Party,” said Abbott. “All over the world we witness impunity in cases of unlawful death because either investigations do not take place or are inadequate and non-compliant with international law and standards.”
“The Minnesota Protocol makes it clear that investigations must be prompt, effective and thorough, as well as independent, impartial and transparent, and we expect that the revised Minnesota Protocol will help Thailand and other States to meet that obligation,” added Abbott. “The ICJ wishes to take this opportunity to reaffirm our long-standing commitment to the Thai authorities to assist them in efforts to implement Thailand’s international human rights obligations.”
The other speakers at the launch were:
- Ms Pitikarn Sitthidech, Director General, Rights and Liberties Protection Department, Ministry of Justice
- Ms Katia Chirizzi, Deputy Head, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Regional Office for Southeast Asia
- Prof. Stuart Casey-Maslen, Project Manager of the revision of the Minnesota Protocol, University of Pretoria
- Dr Pornthip Rojanasunan, Adviser, Central Institute for Forensic Science (CIFC) and member of the Expert Advisory Panel of the revision of the Minnesota Protocol
- Ms Angkhana Neelapaijit, Commissioner, National Human Rights Commission of Thailand and Victim Representative
- Mr Kittinan Thatpramuk, Deputy Director General, Department of Investigation, Office of the Attorney General
- Pol.Lt.Col. Payao Thongsen, Commander, the Special Criminal Cases Office 1, Department of Special Investigation (DSI)
Contact
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t: +66 94 470 1345; e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Universal-Minnesota Protocol-Advocacy-2017-ENG (PDF, English)
Universal-Minnesota-Protocol-Advocacy-2017-THA (PDF, Thai)
Universal-Minnesota Protocol-Advocacy-2017-BUR (PDF, Burmese)
