Event: children’s rights and business – the role of States

Event: children’s rights and business – the role of States

Organized by UNICEF and the ICJ, this side event takes place on Thursday 17 September 2015, from 12:00-14:00, Room XXVII, Palais des Nations, Geneva. 

More than ever before, business enterprises have an impact on children’s lives.

Children are consumers of businesses’ products and services, workers in their factories and fields, family members of their employees,  and residents of the communities  that host their operations.

Some of these interactions can benefit children. Companies have, for instance, created new technologies that enrich children’s education, enhance medical care, and connect families around the world.

Yet at the same time, businesses can also have detrimental impacts.

Companies can make and sell unhealthy and unsafe goods to children, pollute the environments  in which children live and play, and expose them to serious dangers including in the workplace.

As children are still growing and developing, they are especially vulnerable to negative business  impacts  and can be severely  and permanently  affected  by infringements  of their rights.

Child consumers can be more easily convinced to buy and use inappropriate or  unsuitable  products,  and  children  are  much  more  susceptible  than  adults  to  the harmful  physical  effects  of  toxic  chemicals,  manual  labour  and  poor  diets.

Young workers  can  never  fully  make  up  for  time  spent  out  of  education,   and  missed opportunities are rarely restored.

Many  of these  impacts  remain  unnoticed,  and businesses  rarely  involve  or seek  the input  of  children  on  decisions  that  will  profoundly  affect  them.

Children  may  not understand  that  their  rights  are  in  jeopardy,  and,  even  when  they  do,  often  face tremendous  challenges  in making  their voices  heard.

All too frequently,  child victims lack the confidence, resources and legal authority to demand accountability  from those who violate their rights.

For these reasons, it is imperative that governments take action to protect and promote children’s  rights  in  the  context  of  business  operations.

In  February  2013,  the  UN Committee   on  the  Rights  of  the  Child  adopted  General  Comment  16  on  State obligations  regarding  the impact of the business  sector on children’s  rights to assist States  to  ensure  that  businesses   respect  children’s   rights  as  envisioned   in  the Convention  on  the  Rights  of the  Child.

The  ICJ  and  UNICEF,  at the  request  of the Committee,  have  elaborated  a Guide  to offer  to States  practical  examples  and  best practices on how to protect and ensure the realization  of the rights of the child in the context of business operations.

 

Malaysia: Federal Court decision allowing trial of human rights defender inconsistent with rule of law and human rights protection

Malaysia: Federal Court decision allowing trial of human rights defender inconsistent with rule of law and human rights protection

The ICJ expressed disappointment over the decision made today by the Malaysian Federal Court to refer human rights defender Lena Hendry for trial, after dismissing the constitutional challenge on section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Act 2002.

The ICJ said this provision is being applied in a manner inconsistent with the right to freedom of expression, which includes the right to seek and impart information of all kinds.

“The decision by the Federal Court is incompatible with the commitment to the rule of law and respect for human rights which was expressed by Malaysia during its last Universal Periodic Review at the UN Human Rights Council in 2013,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.

“Lena Hendry is clearly a human rights defender and Malaysia has the special duty not only to respect her right to freedom of expression, but to protect her exercise of this right through the exposure of human rights violations in Sri Lanka,” he added.

The constitutional challenge was brought by the lawyers of Lena Hendry who was charged under section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Act 2002 for screening the film “No Fire Zone: the Killing Fields of Sri Lanka” on 3 July 2013.

Authorities allege that she violated section 6(1)(b) of the law for showing a film that had not been approved by the Board of Censors.

The lawyers of Lena Hendry are now preparing for the trial before the Magistrate’s Court.

The ICJ calls on the Government of Malaysia to drop all charges against Lena Hendry and to undertake steps to make its laws consistent with the country’s obligations and commitments under international law.

Background:

Section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Act 2002 states that “No person shall circulate, exhibit, distribute, display, manufacture, produce, sell, or hire any film or film publicity material, which has not been approved by the Board [of Censors].”

On 14 September 2015, the Federal Court of Malaysia dismissed the constitutional challenge on Section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Act 2002. The question posed to the Federal Court was: “Whether section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Act 2002 read together with section 6(2)(a) violates Article 10 read together with Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution and therefore should be struck down and void for unconstitutionality.”

The Federal Court answered the question in the negative and ordered that the case be sent back to the High Court. The High Court, in turn, will transfer the matter back to the Magistrate’s court for trial. The Magistrate’s Court is where the matter initially originated.

If convicted, under section 6(2)(a) Lena Hendry could be fined up to RM30,000 (approximately US$6,900) and/or sentenced to up to three years imprisonment.

The right to freedom of expression is guaranteed in the Federal Constitution of Malaysia under Section 10(1)(a), which states that “every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression.”

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders also affirm the duty of all states to respect and facilitate freedom of expression, particularly as regards information or opinions about human rights.

Contact:

Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser of ICJ for Southeast Asia, t: +66 840923575 ; e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org

 

Event at UN: Judges, lawyers, prosecutors and human rights – 30 years of UN action

Event at UN: Judges, lawyers, prosecutors and human rights – 30 years of UN action

Judges, lawyers, prosecutors and human rights: 30 years of UN action

Side event, Tuesday 15 September 2015, 1600 – 1800

Room XXII, Palais des Nations, Geneva

Followed by a drinks reception hosted by the IBA’s Human Rights Institute
in Bar Serpent, Palais des Nations

The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) are organising a side event at the Palais des Nations to mark the 30th Anniversary of the Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary and the 25th Anniversary of the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors. This side-event, taking place during the 30th session of the Human Rights Council, will look back on the progress that has been made in the protection of judges, lawyers and prosecutors over the past 30 years and the continuing challenges for implementation of the UN standards.

Side Event, 1600-1800

Opening remarks:

  • Her Excellency Zsuzsanna Horváth Ambassador of Hungary

Speakers:

  • Monica Pinto Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers
  • Anne Ramberg Secretary General, Swedish Bar Association
  • Irene Petras Executive Director, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights
  • Nazir Afzal Former Chief Crown Prosecutor, North West England

 

Drinks Reception, 1800

The IBA’s Human Rights Institute will host a drinks reception in Bar Serpent, Palais des Nations, with a number of high-level speakers to follow the side event to the 30th session of the Human Rights Council.

Speakers:

  • Her Excellency Patricia O’Brien Ambassador of Ireland
  • His Excellency Mothusi Bruce Rabasha Palai Ambassador of Botswana
  • Monica Pinto Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers

 

Side event co-sponsors include, in addition to the IBAHRI and ICJ:
Australian Permanent Mission to the UN, Permanent Mission of Hungary to the UN, Permanent Mission of Ireland to the UN, Permanent Mission of Mexico to the UN, Permanent Mission of Thailand to the UN, Permanent Mission of the Republic of Botswana to the UN, Council of Europe
Association pour la Prévention de la Torture, Avocats Sans Frontières, Colombian Commission of Jurists, Commonwealth Lawyers’ Association, Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association, International Legal Assistance Consortium, Judges for Judges, Lawyers for Lawyers

 

Attendance at this side event is open to individuals who have access to the UN grounds at Palais des Nations in Geneva.

Event: ending contemporary forms of slavery in supply chains

Event: ending contemporary forms of slavery in supply chains

This side event will be held on Wednesday 16 September 2015, 12h00 – 14h00, at the Palais des Nations, Conference Room XXI, in Geneva.

It will assess the most effective strategies and recommend concrete measures for States, businesses and other stakeholders to prevent and eradicate contemporary forms of slavery from supply chains and to provide assistance and redress to victims.

It will also identify key challenges and opportunities in addressing slavery and slavery-like practices in supply chains, including in terms of the legal standards, policy measures, institutional framework, and implementation.

The speakers will also discuss opportunities for contemporary forms of slavery eradication within the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development framework.

Universal-HRCEnding contemporary forms of slavery in supply chains-Event-Agenda-2015-ENG (full agenda, in PDF)

Thailand: end prosecution of Phuketwan journalists and repeal criminal defamation laws

Thailand: end prosecution of Phuketwan journalists and repeal criminal defamation laws

The Thai government must end proceedings against two journalists who were today acquitted of charges of defaming the Royal Thai Navy and immediately repeal the country’s criminal defamation laws, the ICJ said today.

The two journalists with the Phuketwan online news outlet, Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian, were charged with criminal defamation under the Thai Criminal Code and violation of Article 14(1) of the Computer Crimes Act.

“Today’s verdict affirms the right of journalists in Thailand to freely express their views, even if – especially if – they sometimes have to criticize public authorities when it is in the public interest to do so,” said Kingsley Abbott, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, who observed the proceedings.

“The verdict today is a relief not only for the two brave journalists who could have faced jail sentences for doing their job, but also for other journalists in Thailand who followed this case with anxiety about potentially significant new restrictions on their ability to work,” he added.

The prosecution now has 30 days to appeal the verdict.

“The charges against these two journalists generated severe international criticism for Thailand and harmed the country’s reputation more than any article in Phuketwan,” said Abbott. “The prosecution should take heed of this verdict and drop the case without further appeal.”

The Royal Thai Navy had complained that the journalists defamed it when, on 17 July 2013, the journalists reproduced a paragraph from a Pulitzer prize-winning Reuters article that alleged “Thai naval forces” were complicit in human trafficking.

In a decision read out today at the Phuket Provincial Court, with respect to the charges of criminal defamation, the Judge held that the journalists had reproduced information from a news source, Reuters, that they believed to be reliable.

Regarding the charges under the Computer Crimes Act, the Judge found that the information that was published was not “false computer data” and was not information that could “cause damage” to national security which are elements of Article 14(1).

The Judge also noted that the Computer Crimes Act was not intended to cover allegations of defamation.

“Thailand must repeal its criminal defamation laws in recognition that criminal penalties are a disproportionate means to address reputational damage,” Abbott added.

“Thailand should also reform the Computer Crimes Act to more precisely define that its purpose and scope is not intended to place limitations on freedom of expression.”

Background

Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Thailand is a State Party, guarantees the right to freedom of expression, which includes the right to impart information.

The UN Human Rights Committee, which monitors State compliance with the ICCPR, has expressed its concern at the misuse of defamation laws to criminalize freedom of expression and has said that such laws should never be used when expression is made without malice and in the public interest.

It has also clarified that imprisonment is never an appropriate penalty for defamation.

The ICJ, the Human Rights Committee, the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression and other international human rights bodies and an increasing number of governments believe that criminal defamation laws should be abolished. Such laws are incompatible with the right to freedom of expression.

Criminal penalties are a disproportionate means to protect against reputational harm and pose an impermissibly severe impediment to the exercise of free expression.

Thailand was criticized in May 2014 when the United Nations Committee against Torture expressed its concern “at the numerous and consistent allegations of serious acts of reprisals and threats against human rights defenders, journalists, community leaders and their relatives, including verbal and physical attacks, enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings, as well as by the lack of information provided on any investigations into such allegations.”

The Committee recommended that Thailand “should take all the necessary measures to: (a) put an immediate halt to harassment and attacks against human rights defenders, journalists and community leaders; and (b) systematically investigate all reported instances of intimidation, harassment and attacks with a view to prosecuting and punishing perpetrators, and guarantee effective remedies to victims and their families.”

Read also:

The Phuketwan trial: an insidious prosecution of free expression

Contact:

Kingsley Abbott, ICJ International Legal Adviser, (Bangkok), t:+66 944701345, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

Thailand-Phuketwan trial-News-Press releases-2015-THA  (full text in PDF, Thai version)

Translate »