Rights groups and the Indonesian Supreme Court convene regional judicial dialogue on judging with a gender perspective
Judges and representatives of judicial training institutions from 9 countries across Southeast Asia gathered in Jakarta, Indonesia, to discuss how judicial decision-making can be further strengthened from a gender perspective.
A two-day event (5-6 October 2015), this judicial dialogue, entitled Regional Judicial Dialogue on Judging with a Gender Perspective, was organized by the ICJ, in collaboration with the Supreme Court of Indonesia and UN Women.
Participants discussed key topics such as initiatives of various courts in Southeast Asia that promote and protect women’s human rights, what are gender stereotypes and how gender stereotyping could be avoided in judicial decisions.
Speakers from the Supreme Court of Mexico were invited to speak about the initiative taken by the judiciary in the country to establish a protocol on judging with a gender perspective.
Senior judges from courts in Southeast Asian countries attended the event: Justice Dr. Takdir Rahmadi of the Supreme Court of Indonesia, Justice Suntariya Muanpawong, Chief Judge of the Research Division of the Supreme Court of Thailand; Justice Teresita De Castro of the Supreme Court of the Philippines, Justice Maria Natercia Gusmao Pereira of the Court of Appeal of Timor Leste; and Ms. Natalia Calero Sanches and Ms. Macarena Saez of the Mexican Supreme Court.
This dialogue is aimed at strengthening the participants’ ability to make decisions based on the rights to equality and freedom from discrimination.
UN Women also launched an online interactive platform that seeks to enhance dialogue among judges, prosecutors, court personnel, judicial training institutions, women’s machineries, scholars and other experts in the region.
The platform called, “Equality for All: community of change makers”, will enable users to access tools such as e-discussion forums, blogs and quick fact sheets that offer tailored learning solutions.
Zimbabwe: prosecutors training of trainers on regulation, code of ethics and prosecutorial guidelines
With support from the European Union (EU) and ICJ, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) held the first of two training of trainers in Bulawayo from 2-4 October 2015.
The training focused on regulations, code of ethics and prosecutorial guidelines and was attended by 50 senior prosecutors, senior law officers and office directors in attendance.
The participants are expected to then roll out the training at their various stations to cover the entire 500 women and men strong team of prosecutors.
Prior to adoption of the 2013 Constitution, prosecutors were supervised by the Attorney General under the Ministry of Justice.
Issues in respect of conduct, discipline, appointment, performance appraisal and other related conditions of service were dealt with through the line ministry and civil service commission.
The passage of the Constitution and the enactment of the NPA Act introduced the office of the Prosecutor General equally tasked with regulating the conduct of its staff through the NPA Board or any other delegated authority within the NPA.
The regulations and code of ethics were gazetted on 7 August 2015.
The code of ethics provides for the independence, integrity, propriety, impartiality, political engagement, competence and diligence of prosecutors in Zimbabwe.
The Prosecutor General also developed prosecutorial guidelines as mandated by the Constitution and the NPA Act on the institution of and conducting of criminal proceedings.
The objectives of the training were to equip senior officials with skills to conduct trainings for middle and lower officers to ensure greater compliance with the requirements of the new constitution of Zimbabwe; to familiarize senior officials on the regulations and code of conduct to ensure greater compliance with the requirements of the new constitution of Zimbabwe and to familiarize and train senior officials on the application of prosecutorial guidelines consistent with the requirements of the new constitution of Zimbabwe.
Following the completion of the trainings, the ICJ and NPA will conduct routine and random visits to different stations for purposes of observing the implementation, roll out of trainings and spot checks.
Remote support will also be provided in terms of statutes, such as the NPA Act, the regulations and code of ethics.
Further work is being explored to produce an updated prosecutor’s handbook that covers issues of prosecutorial conduct, ethics and guidelines.
Contact
Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Regional Director for Africa, t: +27 73 131 8411, e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org
Ukraine: lawyer Andriy Vishnevsky wrongfully disbarred for exercising freedom of expression
The ICJ is concerned at the recent disbarment of lawyer Andriy Vishnevsky, Director of the Coordination Centre of Legal Aid of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.
The ICJ considers that his disbarment, which resulted from his public comments critical of the Ukrainian bar association, interferes with his capacity to freely discharge his professional functions as a lawyer.
Furthermore, it constitutes a violation of his right to freedom of expression, and risks unduly constraining lawyers in legitimate participation in public debate.
The ICJ calls on the Ukrainian bar association to reinstate Andriy Vishnevsky to the bar so that he can resume his status as an accredited lawyer.
Andriy Vishnevky was disbarred on 10 September, following a hearing before the Qualification-Disciplinary Commission of Kiev Region Advokatura. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated based on two separate complaints: one submitted by the Ukrainian national bar association on 24 June 2015; and the other by Ukrainian Parliament Member Rybalka S.V. on 22 June 2015.
The complainants alleged that Andriy Vishnevsky “humiliated the bar, every lawyer, destroyed respect of the society to the bar in the State, in contradiction with the European standards”.
They cited his comments made at a conference on 15 June 2015 at the premises of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, where he presented his report “The bar and free legal aid: approaches to the reform”.
He made a number of comments critical of the legal profession.
These included his assessment that the bar association was “in a dire state”; a reference to “low ethical standards and professional level of the bar”, including that lawyers are “the main corruption element”; and a claim that “the phenomenon of police lawyers is not counteracted by the national bar association and not commented upon in any way”.
The decision quoted him as saying that “if the bar is not reformed as soon as possible in accordance with the principles and standards of the Council of Europe, it can become a hindrance to the implementation of the judicial reform”.
The Disciplinary Chamber came to the decision that the statements of Andriy Vishnevsky were contrary to the law and the Code of Lawyers’ Ethics and that he should therefore be disbarred for the statements made during the conference.
The ICJ considers the Chamber’s decision to contravene fundamental and universal principles on the independence of the legal profession.
If applied generally, this interpretation of the Code of Ethics would effectively prevent lawyers from critically debating the governance of the legal profession.
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provide that while lawyers should “maintain the honour and dignity of their profession as essential agents of justice” they, like other persons, “shall 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 right to freedom of expression is protected in international human rights law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, treaties to which Ukraine is a party.
Under the European Convention on Human Rights, where matters of public interest are discussed there is a particularly narrow scope for restriction of freedom of expression.
Disciplinary action against a lawyer, solely on the grounds of comments critical of the bar association, made at a conference convened to debate aspects of the justice system, amounts to an illegitimate interference with freedom of expression.
The ICJ is concerned that such punitive measures are likely to have a chilling effect on freedom of expression of lawyers in Ukraine and in particular on their ability to engage in debate on reform of the justice system.
It is important, for any justice system, that such debate take place with the active participation of the legal profession, as lawyers are amongst those best placed to identify and criticize the deficiencies of the justice system and make informed proposals for reform.
The ICJ calls on the Ukrainian bar association to reinstate Andriy Vishnevsky as a lawyer.
Furthermore, the ICJ recommends that the interpretation of the Code of Ethics should be reviewed and guidance should be issued to ensure that the Code of Ethics is not applied to stifle public debate among lawyers on ways to reform the justice system in Ukraine.
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, Europe Programme, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser, Europe Programme, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
The full statement with background information can be downloaded here:
Ukraine-Lawyer Vishnevsky statement-News-web story-2015-ENG (in PDF)
Ukraine-Lawyer Vishnevsky statement-News-web story-2015-UKR (Ukrainian version, in PDF)
Sri Lanka: ICJ welcomes UN resolution on accountability, urges action
The ICJ today welcomed the adoption by the UN Human Rights Council of a further resolution on promoting reconciliation, accountability and human rights in Sri Lanka.
The resolution, co-sponsored for the first time by the Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL), is a historic step towards post-war justice, accountability and reconciliation.
The ICJ at the same time called on the GOSL to take genuine and prompt steps to deliver on the commitments and obligations reflected in the resolution, which was adopted by the UN Human Rights Council by consensus.
“Today’s resolution is a significant step towards achieving justice, accountability and reconciliation for the victims of Sri Lanka’s long and bloody civil war,” said Nikhil Narayan, ICJ’s senior legal adviser for South Asia.
“The shift in posture of the Sri Lankan Government in co-sponsoring the resolution marks a further welcome break from the Rajapakse regime. The Government must now demonstrate its political will by immediately launching concrete steps towards a genuine process of truth-seeking, justice and reconciliation,” he added.
The consensus resolution reflects certain key recommendations contained in the Report of the office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) summarizing findings of the OHCHR Investigation on Sri Lanka (OISL), the ICJ notes.
The investigation and report was mandated by an earlier UN resolution on Sri Lanka, adopted in March 2014 over the strong objections of the Rajapakse government.
The report documents in vivid detail alleged serious violations and abuses of human rights and humanitarian law amounting to war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by both sides during the armed conflict in Sri Lanka, including extrajudicial killings, torture, enforced disappearances, forced recruitment, including of children, and sexual violence.
One of the most important recommendations of the High Commissioner for Human Rights called for an accountability process through a special judicial mechanism and prosecutor’s office that involves the full participation of international judges, prosecutors, lawyers and investigators.
Responding in part to this call, the resolution affirms the importance of participation of foreign judges, defence lawyers, prosecutors and investigators in an independent and impartial judicial mechanism to hold individuals accountable for human rights and humanitarian law violations, including those documented in the report.
The resolution also mandates further monitoring and reporting back to the Council on implementation of the accountability and other measures.
“The international community, through the UN Human Rights Council, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and Special Procedures, and other UN member states, must as the High Commissioner himself recommended, remain engaged through continued and sustained monitoring, assistance, support and fully integrated involvement of the international community to ensure full implementation of the resolution,” said Narayan.
Background:
The ICJ has worked with judiciaries, governments, civil society and victims around the world for decades to address impunity and victims’ right to remedy for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, including in situations of transition.
In Sri Lanka, the ICJ has been documenting and reporting on a gradual erosion of judicial independence, impartiality and integrity under successive governments, and the resulting culture of impunity, for over thirty years.
The ICJ considers the International Criminal Court (ICC) to be the preferred mechanism for individual accountability where national authorities and courts lack the capacity or the willingness to genuinely investigate and prosecute all war crimes and crimes against humanity. In the absence of an ICC process, the ICJ’s extensive experience in Sri Lanka and elsewhere demonstrates that any credible and effective accountability process in Sri Lanka must involve, at a minimum, a majority of international judges, prosecutors and investigators.
The ICJ therefore advocated for and welcomed the resolution’s recognition of the need for international participation.
Since January 2015, when a new president was elected, the GOSL has undertaken a number of important steps to reverse the slide towards authoritarianism and the erosion of the rule of law and the culture of impunity experienced under the Rajapakse government, and restore democratic governance and build confidence towards reconciliation among Sri Lanka’s ethnic minorities, including by restoring the Constitutional Council through the passage of the 19th amendment to the Sri Lankan Constitution, and returning some tracts of military-occupied lands in the North and East.
However, after decades of war and distrust, and a history of promises undelivered, much work remains to be done to deliver justice to victims and their families, and to rebuild trust and confidence among Sri Lanka’s fractured ethnic minorities. Continued and sustained monitoring and engagement by the international community in ensuring the progress of the implementation of this resolution will be essential.
Equally importantly, today’s consensus resolution also reaffirmed the OHCHR’s recommendations on: the mandate and resources of the accountability mechanisms; legislating retroactive recognition of international crimes under national law; justice and security sector reform; repealing the Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA); strengthening the Witness and Victim Protection Act; accession to the International Convention on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances (CED), the Additional Protocols to the Geneva Convention, and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court; and continued monitoring of and technical support for implementation through the OHCHR and by the Council.
Contact
Nikhil Narayan, ICJ’s senior legal adviser for South Asia; t: +41 79 730 09 27; e: nikhil.narayan(a)icj.org
Faith-based and other groups commit to strengthen freedom of religion or belief in Southeast Asia
At a two-day conference held in Bangkok, and first of its kind, committed to working to enhance the right to Freedom of Religion or Belief in Southeast Asia.
For the first time, approximately 70 human rights defenders, members of religious groups, rights groups, UN agencies and representatives from the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights, ASEAN Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Rights of Women and Children, National Human Rights Institutions and other government agencies from across the region gathered together to discuss key pressing concerns regarding the right to freedom of religion or belief in Southeast Asia with the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom on Religion or Belief, Heiner Bielefeldt.
The event was co-organized by the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), the ICJ, and Boat People SOS (BPSOS) from 30 September to 1 October 2015 in Bangkok, Thailand.
During the event, participants were able to deepen their understanding on the right to freedom of religion or belief under international law and standards, and how religious freedom and other human rights should be interpreted and applied in a complementary manner.
“Many people suffer complex violations of their human rights, for example in the intersection of religious minority status, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation or indigenous origin,” said Heiner Bielefeldt.
The two-day conference also successfully provided a multi-stakeholder platform for the participants to share challenges and best practices, as well as brainstorm ideas on addressing violations related to state control and regulation of religion, and extreme interpretations of religion.
“The politicization of religion undermines freedom of religion or belief, not only to the detriment of minorities, but also of followers of majority religions who do not wish to see their faith be turned into a tool of political power gambling,” added the Special Rapporteur.
Notable suggestions raised by the group on addressing identified obstacles to the free practice of religion or belief included the need for reforms, such as the repeal of blasphemy laws and mandatory registrations, and the importance of dialogue between groups of the same faith, as well as those of different religions.
“We need more cooperation across boundaries, including between faith-based and secular civil society organization,” stressed the expert.
Participants at the conference also recognized the opportunity presented before them in advancing freedom of religion or belief in the region and committed to working to enhance this right by reaffirming:
- Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which declares: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”
- Freedom of religion or belief is an inalienable, non-derogable human right, encompassing the right to hold or not to hold any faith or belief, to change belief, and to be free from coercion and to manifest religion or belief.
- For freedom of religion or belief to be fully enjoyed, other human rights must also be respected, particularly the principle of nondiscrimination and freedoms of expression, assembly, association, education, and movement.
The participants also committed to:
- Defend and promote freedom of religion or belief as a universal, inalienable and non-derogable human right, as set out in the Universal Declaration, in international law and declarations, and in the work of national, regional, and global institutions.
- Defend and promote freedom of religion or belief for all persons, as individuals and in community with others, through their work and respective institutions by sharing information and mobilizing effective responses.
- Work toward the nondiscriminatory realization of freedom of religion or belief in recognition of multiple and intersectional discriminations and vulnerabilities, including, among other grounds, on grounds of ethnicity, indigenous identity, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship, and disabilities.
- Enhance global and regional cooperation by working across geographical, national, racial, ethnic, political and religious boundaries.
- Advocate for accountability and remedies for individuals and communities suffering from violence, persecution, discrimination, harassment, marginalization or other abuses of human rights because of their religion or belief.
- Express and act in solidarity with individuals and communities suffering from violence, persecution, discrimination, harassment, marginalization or other abuses of human rights because of their religion or belief.
The Conference Declaration was based on the Charter for Freedom of Religion or Belief and the New York Resolution for Freedom of Religion or Belief of the International Panel of Parliaments for Freedom of Religion or Belief (IPPFORB).
South East Asia-Decla Freedom of religion-Advocacy-2016-ENG (full Declaration, in PDF)
Recent News
Qatar: States urged to ensure access to justice for women and girls with disabilities27 Nov 2025
End the judicial persecution of human rights lawyers Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and Hadi Ali Chattha26 Nov 2025
Tunisia: Conviction of Ebru Timtik Award Laureate Ahmed Souab marks escalating repression of lawyers21 Nov 2025
ICJ Honored for Championing Refugee and Migrant Justice Worldwide21 Nov 2025