Council of Europe: ICJ and AI submission on draft foreign fighters protocol

Council of Europe: ICJ and AI submission on draft foreign fighters protocol

The ICJ and Amnesty International have presented a submission on the draft of an Additional Protocol supplementing the Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism.

In their submission, the ICJ and AI outlined before the Committee on Foreign Terrorist Fighters and Related Issues (COD-CTE) of the Council of Europe the general principles of human rights law related to the issue of foreign fighters and the implementation of Security Council resolution 2178(2014) and made observations on the draft criminal offences contained in the draft protocol.

The submission outlines positions and concerns with relation to:

  • The lack of definition of central concepts like “terrorism”, “terrorist acts”, and “foreign fighters”
  • The risk of introducing criminal offences lacking the clarity, accessibility and foreseeability required by the principle of legality
  • The risk of conflation of of different legal regimes, notably of international humanitarian law and ordinary criminal law
  • The need to investigate and prosecute existing crimes under international law
  • The need to ensure that any criminalisation of acts or omissions must have a close connection to the commission of the principal criminal offence, with a real risk that such a principal criminal act would in fact take place
  • Specific comments on the draft offences of participation in an association or group for the purpose of terrorism; receiving training for terrorism; travelling abroad for the purpose of terrorism; funding travelling abroad for the purpose of terrorism; organizing or otherwise facilitating travelling abroad for the purpose of terrorism.

CouncilofEurope-Submission-ForeignFighters-Advocacy-Legal Submission-2015-ENG (download the observations)

Side event: legally binding instruments on business and human rights – European perspectives

Side event: legally binding instruments on business and human rights – European perspectives

This side event will take place on Thursday 19 March 2015, 12.00-14.00, at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, Room XXVII.

It aims at creating a space to discuss the EU agenda on Business & Human Rights, identifying current challenges and development, and exploring opportunities arising from the Treaty process.

Panelists:
Mons. Silvano Tomasi, Holy See, Permanent Observer
Mr. Jerome Bellion-Jourdan, Delegation of the European Union to the UN
Mrs. Elena Valenciano, European Parliament Sub-Committee on Human Rights, Chair
Mr. Richard Meeran, Leigh Day, Partner
Ms. Anne van Schaik, Friends of the Earth Europe, Economics and Justice Team
Moderation: Dr. Carlos Lopez, International Commission of Jurists, Senior Legal Adviser

Erope-Flyer side-event EU BHR perspectives-News-event-2015-ENG (ful text in PDF)

Malaysia: ICJ calls for immediate release of Nurul Izzah Anwar, detained in relation to Sedition Act

Malaysia: ICJ calls for immediate release of Nurul Izzah Anwar, detained in relation to Sedition Act

The ICJ today condemned the arrest and detention of Malaysian Member of Parliament and daughter of imprisoned opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, Nurul Izzah Anwar, under section 4(1) of the colonial-era 1948 Sedition Act.

The arrest, which took place around 3.30pm at Dang Wangi police station in Kuala Lumpur, appears to be linked to a speech she gave in Parliament on 10 March 2015 that reportedly criticized the judges in her father’s sodomy II case.

It was reported that Nurul Izzah (photo) was at the police station today to provide statements for her involvement in a demonstration on 14 February, as well as her parliamentary speech.

She managed to complete part of her statement, but was arrested before she could provide a statement on the alleged seditious speech.

Nurul Izzah has yet to be formally charged and it is unclear as to whether the detention is in relation to a specific section of her speech or to the entire speech.

“The Malaysian authorities must stop the continued use of the offence of sedition to arbitrarily detain and stifle freedom of expression,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.

On 10 February 2015, the Federal Court of Malaysia upheld the Court of Appeal’s decision to convict and sentence Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy under section 377B of the Penal Code.

Since then, a cartoonist has been charged under the Sedition Act, while several opposition politicians and lawmakers have been investigated for allegedly making seditious comments on the Federal Court’s decision.

The ICJ has previously denounced the use of the Sedition Act and repeatedly called for its abolition of the Act as its vague and overbroad provisions are incompatible with international human rights standards.

Nurul Izzah will reportedly remain in prison for the night and will have her remand hearing first thing in the morning on 17 March 2015.

The ICJ will continue to monitor her case.

The ICJ also calls on the Government of Malaysia to immediately release of Nurul Izzah and reiterates its call for the repeal of the Sedition Act.

Background

The 1948 Sedition Act, originally enacted by the British colonial government and amended several times over the years, criminalizes speech and publications considered to have “seditious tendencies”.

The term “seditious tendencies” is ambiguously defined to mean any kind of speech or publication that causes “hatred or contempt, or excite disaffection” against any ruler or the government or promotes “ill will and hostility between the different races or classes”.

The law also considers “seditious” any speech or publication that questions the special privileges of the Malay people, as provided in the Constitution.

Furthermore, sedition is a strict liability offence in Malaysia, which means that the intention of a person allegedly making seditious statements is irrelevant.

For instance, a person making a statement may not have the intent to cause “hatred or contempt” towards the government, but may nonetheless be held liable for sedition if authorities believe that the person in fact incited such feelings.

The ICJ considers that the Act, by its very terms, contemplates restrictions on the exercise of freedom of expression that are grossly overbroad and inconsistent with basic rule of law and human rights principles.

Contact:

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Regional Director of Asia and the Pacific, mobile: +668 07819002 or email: email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

 

Pakistan’s decision to lift death penalty moratorium a disaster for human rights

Pakistan’s decision to lift death penalty moratorium a disaster for human rights

Pakistan’s decision to fully reinstate the death penalty puts at imminent risk of execution more than 500 people on death row who have exhausted all avenues of appeal, with another 8000 facing death penalties, said the ICJ today.

“The total abandonment of the moratorium on the death penalty is a disaster for human rights in Pakistan,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia director. “We fear a major acceleration in the flow of executions we have seen over the past few months—none of which do anything to protect the rights of the Pakistani people.”

25 people have been executed since 16 December 2014, when Pakistan lifted a moratorium on executions in cases of capital punishment related to terrorism. The decision to partially lift a six-year unofficial moratorium on executions was in response to an attack on a school in Peshawar, killing 150 people, almost all of them children. Pakistan Tehreek-e-Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack.

In January, Pakistan also amended the Constitution and the Army Act, 1952, empowering military courts to try civilians for terrorism related offences.

“The Pakistani people face a very real threat from terrorist attacks, but there is no indication that the death penalty will decrease this threat,” said Zarifi. “Instead, the government is targeting hundreds of people on death row whose convictions had nothing to do with terrorism-related offenses.”

In Pakistan, capital punishment is prescribed for 27 different offences, including blasphemy, sexual intercourse outside of marriage, kidnapping or abduction, rape, assault on the modesty of women and the stripping of women’s clothes, smuggling of drugs, arms trading and sabotage of the railway system. Many of these crimes do not meet the threshold of ‘most serious crimes’ stipulated by Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Pakistan ratified the ICCPR in 2010. Article 6 of the ICCPR, guaranteeing the right to life, requires that states restrict capital punishment to only the ‘most serious crimes’. The UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions has clarified that in the context of the death penalty, the definition of the ‘most serious crimes’ is limited to those cases in which there was an intention to kill, which resulted in the loss of life.

In December 2014, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution, that emphasizes that that the use of the death penalty undermines human dignity and that calls on countries that maintain the death penalty to establish a moratorium on its use with a view to its abolition. An overwhelming majority of 117 UN Member States voted in favor of the call for a worldwide moratorium on executions, as a step towards abolition of the death penalty.

Pakistan should reinstate a moratorium on the death penalty, with a view to definitively abolishing the practice in law,” said Zarifi.

ICJ opposes capital punishment in all cases without exception. The death penalty constitutes a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

Contact

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

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

Thailand: live up to promises “to do its utmost” to bring justice in the case of the enforced disappearance of Somchai Neelapaijit

Thailand: live up to promises “to do its utmost” to bring justice in the case of the enforced disappearance of Somchai Neelapaijit

Thailand must live up to its repeated promises to bring justice to the case of Somchai Neelapaijit, who was forcibly disappeared eleven years ago today, said the ICJ.

In multiple statements since Somchai Neelapaijit was abducted on a street in central Bangkok, the Royal Thai Government has pledged to resolve the case.

Before the United Nations Human Rights Council in May 2008, the Royal Thai Government pledged “to do its utmost and leave no stone unturned in order to bring to justice the case of Mr Somchai.”

In April 2014, Thailand gave assurances to the UN Committee that monitors the implementation of the Convention Against Torture in Geneva that the Department of Special Investigations (DSI) was continuing to investigate Somchai Neelapaijit’s case without any interference.

“Despite the passage of eleven years, Thai authorities have not carried out a comprehensive investigation or exhausted the possible sources of evidence,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific. “What is required is the DSI’s real and determined effort to identify the perpetrators and bring them to justice.”

Thailand signed, but has not yet ratified, the Convention Against Enforced Disappearance in January 2012.

Pending the ratification, Thailand must desist from any acts that would defeat the objective and purpose of the Convention, which among other things places an obligation on State Parties to make enforced disappearance a criminal offence, to thoroughly and impartially investigate cases, bring those responsible to justice and treat family members of a ‘disappeared’ person as victims in their own right.

Promisingly, the Ministry of Justice is in the process of drafting a Torture and Enforced Disappearance Prevention and Suppression Bill, which, in its current form, defines and criminalizes enforced disappearance and torture in Thailand.

“This new law must ensure there is no statute of limitations on enforced disappearance, which is not only a serious human rights violation but also a crime under international law,” added Zarifi. “Somchai’s fate and whereabouts remain unresolved, and his family continue to demand truth and justice from the authorities.”

To mark the 10-year anniversary of Somchai Neelapaijit’s “disappearance”, the ICJ released a report Ten Years Without Truth: Somchai Neelapaijit and Enforced Disappearances in Thailand, in which it documented the tortuous legal history of the case.

The report highlighted several key problems, such as poor use of forensic evidence, failure to follow and develop leads, unduly restrictive interpretation of national and international law, and above all, a lack of political will to resolve a case that remains emblematic of the culture of impunity in Thailand.

Contact

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002,  e-mail: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Translate »