Mar 2, 2020 | News
The ICJ hosted a two-day workshop on 29 February and 1 March 2020 in Yangon, Myanmar entitled “Workshop on the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death.”
Some 25 lawyers attended the event, including criminal lawyers handling murder cases and human rights lawyers. The workshop was opened with remarks by Frederick Rawski, Director of the ICJ’s Asia & Pacific Programme. He emphasized the importance of conducting investigations consistent with international standards in holding perpetrators accountable for unlawful killings.
The Minnesota Protocol provides guidance on the State’s implementation of its duty under international law to investigate potentially unlawful killings, including when State actors may have been involved. It applies to deaths under custody, suspicious deaths and enforced disappearances. Myanmar has experienced widespread incidents of such deaths, including in recent years those constituting serious crimes under international law.
An overview of the international human rights law framework was provided by ICJ Associate Legal Adviser Jenny Domino, highlighting how the conduct of prompt, effective and impartial investigations into unlawful killings is a core component of the State’s obligation to uphold the right to life. Drawing from her previous work in the Philippines, she also discussed the applicability of Minnesota Protocol standards to the human rights investigations of the killings arising from the Philippine ‘war on drugs’. ICJ Legal Adviser Hnin Win Aung then introduced the Minnesota Protocol and its 2016 revision before discussing the role of lawyers in ensuring that the State conducts investigations in accordance with international standards.
Glenn Williams, an experienced international criminal investigator and Detective Inspector (Retired) of the New Zealand Police Force, discussed how to properly secure a crime scene and chain of custody in order to preserve the integrity of the evidence. Participants applied these skills in a group exercise based on a real-life case scenario. He also presented on the proper conduct of witness interviews and the investigative challenges of dealing with telecommunications evidence.
Dr Porntip Rojanasunan, a forensic pathologist in Thailand and Member of the Expert Advisory Panel during the Minnesota Protocol revision process, shared her forensic expertise through illustrative cases that she had worked on in Southeast Asia in the past two decades. Dr Porntip stressed the importance of forensic pathology in determining the true cause of death and of conducting an autopsy in potential cases of human rights violations.
The workshop is part of the ICJ’s ongoing promotion of international human rights law and standards globally. In Asia, this has included engagement with Myanmar authorities as well as authorities in neighboring countries on the Minnesota Protocol.
See also
Myanmar: ICJ co-hosts Minnesota Protocol workshop with government authorities
Myanmar: ICJ discusses the Minnesota Protocol with prosecutors
Statement: Five years without justice for journalist Ko Par Gyi
Related material
Minnesota Protocol (English)
Minnesota Protocol (unofficial Burmese translation)
Feb 27, 2020 | Advocacy, News
In January and February 2020, the ICJ supported community dialogue events on international and national law and standards relating to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief.
The events were organized by the Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA) for around 50 youths and human rights defenders from Chin State and Bago Region in Myanmar.
The program sought to improve the capacity of local youths and human rights defenders from Chin State and Bago Region to understand how freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) is protected by the international and national legal frameworks and apply this understanding to their activities.
The ICJ’s national legal researcher, Ja Seng Ing, introduced the concept of freedom of religion or belief (FoRB) u, and applicable international standards on FoRB for Myanmar including how FoRB interacts with other human rights such as freedom of expression. She presented an overview of the domestic legal framework on FoRB and highlighted the State’s obligation to implement such laws and policies to respect and protect the equality, non-discrimination and other rights of individuals and to particularly address violations of their rights to FoRB.
The participants raised the need to improve the quality of public discussion on FoRB and related human rights, and shared this experiences in advocating for the protection of FoRB – including the limitation and challenges that they have faced.
The activities are part of the ICJ’s ongoing effort to convene civil society actors and lawyers in Myanmar with a view to advancing FoRB in the country, and builds on the ICJ’s previous work on this theme.
Contact
Ja Seng Ing, ICJ Legal Researcher, e: jaseng.ing(a)icj.org
Related material
Primer on international human rights law and standards on the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion or belief, January 2019
New report examines right to freedom of religion or belief in Malaysia, March 2019
Feb 10, 2020 | Advocacy, News
The ICJ conducted a workshop for journalists on fair trial rights and due process on 9 February 2020 in Yangon to help them respond to situations of arrest and prosecution
Some 25 journalists across Myanmar participated in the event, including media representatives from ethnic communities in Shan and Kachin states. Members of nationwide journalism networks, the Myanmar Media Lawyers Network, and the Myanmar Press Council also participated.
The workshop apprised journalists of the guarantees and rights of persons arrested and prosecuted under international human rights law, and the limited protections available under Myanmar law in comparison. It provided a space for participants to collectively identify gaps in journalistic protection. It also intended to foster greater collaboration between journalists and lawyers in safeguarding a free press in Myanmar.
The workshop opened with remarks from Linda van der Horst, head of the political section of the Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in Myanmar, and Ross Clarke, Team Leader at the ICJ. Both stressed the role of the media in ensuring a robust democracy that adheres to the rule of law, especially in light of the upcoming 2020 national elections. Linda Van der Horst noted that the workshop could also help journalists more deeply understand legal concepts useful for their reporting.
ICJ Associate Legal Adviser Jenny Domino addressed the rights of arrested persons and fair trial guarantees in criminal proceedings under international law. She highlighted the unlawfulness of arresting a journalist as punishment for his work in ensuring that individuals receive information in a free and democratic society. In a comparative context, she discussed the various writs available under Philippine law to protect journalists from unlawful arrests, extralegal killings and enforced disappearances.
ICJ Legal Adviser Hnin Win Aung then discussed Myanmar criminal procedure and the pre-trial rights of criminal defendants. She introduced the writ of habeas corpus remedy under the 2014 Law on the Application for Writs for contesting arbitrary detention. She explained the limitations of this remedy and the practical challenges of litigating in the Myanmar courts.
The presentations were followed by a panel discussion on fair trial rights challenges in Myanmar. The panel was composed of U Myint Kyaw of the Myanmar Press Council, U Brang Mai of Myitkyina Journal, U Myo Aung of Dawei Watch and U Than Zaw Aung of Myanmar Media Lawyers’ Network. The speakers agreed that there is no equality before the law and pushed for greater advocacy on judicial independence and impartiality.
To conclude the workshop, the participants shared their thoughts on how lawyers and the ICJ could help local media moving forward. The participants suggested a human rights analysis of how fair trial rights are undermined in practice by various actors in Myanmar’s criminal justice system. They also expressed their interest to work more closely with lawyers towards better reporting of current events.
The workshop marks the ICJ’s effort to support journalists and empower persons from minority groups towards greater participation in Myanmar’s democratic transition.
Contact
Jenny Domino, ICJ Associate Legal Adviser, e: jenny.domino(a)icj.org
Hnin Win Aung, ICJ Legal Adviser, e: hninwin.aung(a)icj.org
Related material
Strategic Litigation Handbook for Myanmar
Briefing Paper, Citizenship Law and Human Rights in Myanmar
Event, ICJ hosts workshop with civil society on freedom of religion or belief
Jan 23, 2020 | News
The ICJ welcomes today’s Order of the International Court of Justice (Court) in the case of The Gambia v Myanmar indicating provisional measures to protect the rights of the persecuted Rohingya minority under the Genocide Convention and calls on Myanmar to implement the Order without delay.
“The Order is a significant step towards justice for the Rohingya as it imposes specific, legally-binding, obligations on Myanmar to take critical steps to protect their rights under the Genocide Convention,” said Sam Zarifi, Secretary General of the International Commission of Jurists, currently in Yangon, Myanmar. “It is now incumbent on the whole international community, including States, civil society and UN agencies, to urge and assist Myanmar to fulfil its obligations under the Order.”
In its Order, delivered orally, the Court found it had prima facie jurisdiction over the case and indicated a series of provisional measures, including that Myanmar must:
- take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of the definition of genocide set out in Article II of the Genocide Convention;
- ensure that its military as well as any irregular armed units which may be directed or supported by it, and any organizations or persons which may be subject to its control, direction or influence do not commit acts of genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, attempt to commit genocide, or complicity in genocide;
- take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of any evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II of the Genocide Convention; and
- submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to the Order within four months as from the date of the Order and thereafter every six months until a final decision on the case is rendered by the Court. Every report will be communicated to the Gambia which will then have the opportunity to submit to the Court its comments thereon.
Provisional measures are orders the Court has the power to make aimed at preserving the rights of the Parties to a case pending the final decision of the Court in order to avoid irreparable damage to the rights which are the subject of the dispute, in this case the rights of the Rohingya.
A hearing on the merits of the case will be heard at a later date.
The role of the Court is to settle disputes submitted to it by States in accordance with international law – its role does not extend to determining the criminal responsibility of individuals for perpetrating serious human rights violations.
“As Myanmar is unwilling and unable to conduct investigations and, where appropriate, prosecutions of serious human rights violations domestically which meet international law and standards, the various processes underway around the world directed towards criminal accountability- including the investigation of the International Criminal Court – remain necessary and urgent,” added Zarifi.
In 2018, the International Commission of Jurists issued a baseline study of the obstacles to accountability for serious human rights violations in Myanmar identifying “systematic impunity” within the country as a result of the “lack of accountability of perpetrators of human rights violations; lack of access to effective remedies and reparation for victims; and ongoing challenges with the independence and accountability of justice actors.”
International processes underway around the world directed at criminal accountability for serious human rights violations in the Myanmar situation include:
To download the full statement with background information, click here.
Contacts
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Secretary General, t: +41 79 726 4415; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Kingsley Abbott, Coordinator of the ICJ’s Global Accountability Initiative, t: +66 94 470 1345; e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Jan 18, 2020 | Advocacy, News
From 16 to 17 January 2020, the ICJ, in collaboration with the National Police Commission (KOMPOLNAS), UN Women, and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) organized a Seminar on Eliminating Gender Discriminatory Practices for the Police.
It was held in Bogor, Indonesia and gathered 30 law enforcement officers from Indonesian provinces that are reported to have the highest rate of incidents of violence against women.
Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia and the Pacific Regional Director, stressed to participants that, “Police officers are the first point of contact for women who try to access justice for violations committed against them. It is important therefore for these officers to be well-trained on gender sensitivity and women’s human rights.”
“Only 40 percent of women speak out on violence, and only 10 percent of these report to the police because they are often blamed for the violence they experience or humiliated by those who should protect them,” added Ms. Doreen Buettner, Programme Specialist on Access to Justice of UN Women.
Indonesia is a State Party to the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), having ratified it on 13 September 1984. It has established a gender mainstreaming mechanism under Presidential Instruction No. 9 of 2000 on Gender Mainstreaming in National Development, which obliges all government representatives and agencies, including the police, to mainstream gender in their work in order to eliminate gender-based discrimination.
Ms. Poengky Indarti, Commissioner from the National Police Commission (KOMPOLNAS), stressed that “Gender-responsive police training should not a one-time thing, we need to institutionalize the training for it to be sustainable.”
At the seminar, the discussions were aimed at strengthening the understanding of the members of police officers on women’s human rights, and the importance of eliminating gender stereotyping in their work to enhance access to justice for women.
Ms. Siti Aminah, Commissioner of the National Commission of Violence Against Women in Indonesia (Komnas Perempuan) and Professor Meg Garvin, Executive Director of the National Crime Victim Law Institute (NCVLI) and Clinical Professor of Law at the Lewis & Clark Law School facilitated discussions on common gender stereotypes in Indonesia and strategies, protocols and good practice relating to all aspects of responses to incidents of violence against women.
Contact
Ruth Panjaitan, National Legal Advisor for Indonesia, International Commission of Jurists, e: ruthstephani.panjaitan(a)icj.org
Resources
To access pictures from the event, click here.
Jan 15, 2020 | News
Today, following the commencement of the trial of political opposition leader Kem Sokha, the ICJ condemned his continuing legal harassment and called on the Government of Cambodia to drop the ill-founded and apparently politically-motivated charges of treason against him.
“The trial hearing today marks and extends more than two years of legal harassment of one of Cambodia’s most prominent leaders of the political opposition,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Pacific Director.
“The charges against Kem Sokha are wholly unsubstantiated – They should be dropped, and the trial discontinued in the accordance with his right to fair trial.”
In September 2017, Kem Sokha, leader of the now-defunct main opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), was arrested without warrant by more than 100 police officers in a midnight raid on his home. His arrest, in violation of his parliamentary immunity, was reportedly made on the basis that he had allegedly committed a crime in flagrante delicto – the Prosecution Office of Phnom Penh Municipal Court argued that he had been caught “red-handed” in an act of treason despite the fact that the alleged act was a speech he had made four years earlier in Australia in 2013. In the speech, Sokha had alluded to receiving foreign assistance in advocating for democratic change in Cambodia.
Kem Sokha was thereafter charged with alleged “conspiracy with a foreign power” under article 443 of the Criminal Code, and detained in the remote Trapaing Thlong prison in Tboung Khmum Province near the Vietnamese border. His applications for bail were rejected multiple times before he was released from prison after one year in pre-trial detention. During this period, Sokha was also denied access to independent doctors and medical treatment, despite his suffering from serious medical conditions. In 2017, the courts in Phnom Penh ruled that his pre-trial detention was legal under Cambodian law and refused him bail, even though Sokha had been barred from attending the proceedings, which his lawyers also boycotted in protest.
Kem Sokha’s arrest occurred in the midst of an intense crackdown on political opposition, civil society and independent media in the lead-up to the 2018 general elections. Two months after his arrest, Cambodia’s Supreme Court dissolved the CNRP and banned 118 CNRP officials from political activities for five years. In July 2018, the ruling Cambodian People’s Party won the elections by a landslide.
Following the elections, the Cambodian government has continued to systematically repress and persecute perceived critics of the regime through abuse of legal and judicial processes. In 2019, Cambodian authorities brought apparently politically-motivated charges against more than 100 members of the political opposition, more than half of whom were detained.
“There is an ongoing human rights and rule of law crisis in Cambodia, which needs to be urgently addressed,” said Rawski.
“The dissolution of the CNRP and imprisonment of its leader were crucial indicators that the Cambodian government had crossed a red-line a long time ago.”
The ICJ has called on the Cambodian authorities to fulfill the State’s obligations to protect people’s rights guaranteed under international law, including the rights to free expression, political participation and freedom of association, as well as the right to a fair trial and freedom from arbitrary detention.
To download the full statement with additional background information, click here.
Contact
Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia and Pacific Regional Director, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org
See also
ICJ, ‘Cambodia: Charges against Kem Sokha must be dropped and respect for fundamental freedoms restored’, 14 November 2019
ICJ, ‘Misuse of law will do long-term damage to Cambodia’, 26 July 2018
ICJ, ‘Cambodia: the ICJ condemns dissolution of main opposition party’, 16 November 2017
