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
Dec 20, 2019 | News
On 20 December 2019, the ICJ submitted recommendations to the Ministry of Justice on the Draft Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearances Act (“Draft Act”), scheduled for public consultation between 4 and 31 December 2019.
The ICJ also expressed concern at the recurrent delays in the amendment and enactment of this important legislation which will be critical for ensuring accountability and justice for future victims of torture and enforced disappearance.
In October, the Ministry of Justice withdrew the draft Act from the Cabinet “for further revision”, an act which has served to further delaye the passage of essential legislation criminalizing torture and enforced disappearances.
The ICJ also regretted that the latest Draft Act, after several rounds of revisions and public hearings, still has not addressed many of the principal shortcomings which the ICJ and other stakeholders and experts have indicated need necessarily be amended in order to bring the law into line with Thailand’s international human rights obligations, particularly under the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“UNCAT”) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (“ICCPR”).
As it stands, it is also inconsistent with the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (“ICPPED”), which Thailand has signed and committed itself to ratify.
The key concerns include:
- Incomplete definitions of the crimes of torture and enforced disappearance, as well as other key terms discordant with international law;
- The absence of provisions concerning cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment (CIDT/P);
- The inadequacy of provisions on the inadmissibility of statements and other information obtained by torture, CIDT/P and enforced disappearances as evidence in legal proceedings;
- The inadequacy of provisions relating to modes of liability for crimes described in the Draft Act;
- The inadequacy of provisions concerning safeguards against torture, CIDT/P and enforced disappearances; and
- The absence of provisions concerning the continuous nature of the crime of enforced disappearance and statute of limitations for torture and enforced disappearance crimes.
Download the recommendations in English and Thai. (PDF)
Further reading
Thailand: ICJ, Amnesty advise changes to proposed legislation on torture and enforced disappearances
Thailand: ICJ submits recommendations on draft law on torture and enforced disappearance amendments
Dec 19, 2019 | News
The ICJ said that today’s verdict by the Quezon City Regional Trial Court on the “Ampatuan Massacre” is a first step in achieving justice for the victims and their families.
The court found guilty several of the principal accused, including Zaldy Ampatuan, who is a former governor of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao. The Ampatuan Massacre involved the killing of 58 people, including 32 journalists. It became known as the single deadliest attack against journalists globally.
“The Ampatuan massacre was a human rights tragedy that demonstrated how ingrained impunity has become in Philippine society,” said Emerlynne Gil, ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser.
She added, “It clearly illustrated how respect for human rights has become a mockery in the Philippines, that it can be casually thwarted by a group of individuals who thought they can get away with the killing of 58 people, including journalists, in broad daylight.”
There are 197 accused named in this case, many of them members of the politically-powerful Ampatuan family. The principal accused, including Zaldy Ampatuan and several of his family members, were sentenced to imprisonment of reclusion perpetua (30 to 40 years) without parole. They were also ordered by the court to compensate the victims of the massacre.
The ICJ urged the Philippine government to use this case to now effectively address the culture of impunity in the country.
“The Philippine government should look to this case and use it more generally as a force for a comprehensive drive against impunity, which has been pervasive in unlawful killings, whether by State or private actors,” said Emerlynne Gil.
Background
On 23 November 2009, Bai Genalyn Mangudadatu, wife of Esmael Mangudadatu, was accompanied by members of her family, lawyers, political supporters, and journalists to file the certificate of candidacy of her husband, Esmael Mangudadatu, for the upcoming elections. They were killed by men who later on were revealed to have been ordered by Andal Ampatuan Sr., Andal Ampatuan Jr., and several other members of the Ampatuan family. The Ampatuan family is the political rival of the Mangudadatus.
The convoy of vehicles accompanying the Mangudadatus was ambushed. Passers-by were also killed by the armed men. Their bodies and vehicles were buried in shallow graves nearby.
There were 58 people killed that day, including 32 journalists who were accompanying the Mangudadatus. This became known as the single deadliest attack against journalists globally.
There were 192 persons named as accused in this case, including members of the Ampatuan family and law enforcement officers who conspired with them.
The trial went on for ten years. On 19 November 2019, Branch 221 of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City rendered its decision finding guilty beyond reasonable doubt 28 people, including Zaldy Ampatuan, his brother Datu Andal Ampatuan Jr, and several other Ampatuan family members. They were sentenced to reclusion perpetua (30 to 40 years) without parole.
Contact
Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Advisor, International Commission of Jurists, t: +66 8409 235 75, e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
Dec 18, 2019 | Advocacy, News
On 17 December 2019, the ICJ co-hosted a discussion on extrajudicial killings in Thailand and the lack of progress in investigations of these killings, with an emphasis on the killings of ethnic, racial, or linguistic minorities or indigenous persons, including indigenous persons in Northern Thailand and ethnic Malays in Southern Thailand.
The discussion was held at the Faculty of Law of Chiang Mai University. The event bought together participants from the North and Deep South of Thailand who considered developing joint advocacy strategy to address the troubling practices.
The event commenced with panel discussions on extrajudicial killings in Thailand and obstacles in access to justice faced by minority communities. Panelists included family members of victims, civil society organizations, lawyers and academics. Affected persons shared their experience as victims of attempted extrajudicial killings or relatives of victims of extrajudicial killings. Other panelists shared information on the dire trend of killings in their regions; concerns regarding extra-judicial killings of unarmed suspects; barriers to access to justice, including financial barriers due to poverty, lack of legal information, lack of trust in the authorities, and language barriers for indigenous speakers. Several panelists expressed concerns that family members of the victims could not participate in the investigation process. Others spoke on the objection of authorities to carry out autopsies of suspected extrajudicial killings in the Deep South.
ICJ’s Legal Adviser Sanhawan Srisod highlighted that investigators and law enforcement officials need to take into account international law and standards. These include the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which was launched in Thailand on 25 May 2017; and the 1990 UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. Different standards of operation between the police and the military to make arrests, which make military officers prone to violate the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. She also spoke on the different types of firearms that security personnel use and how they affect the proportionality of force; and the lack of guidelines on the use of firearms in arrest operations that is in compliance with international laws and standards.
A theater performance by Lanyim Theatre took place after the discussion.
The first panel was moderated by Pranom Somwong, Thailand’s Representative for Protection International. The panel included affected persons of an alleged extra-judicial killing from Thailand’s Deep South; Maitree Chamroensuksakul, from Rak Lahu Group and relative of a victim of an alleged extra-judicial killing in Northern Thailand; Prof. Somchai Preechasinlapakun, Head of Law Research and Development Center, Chiang Mai University; and Yureesa Samah, Officer of Duay Jai Foundation.
The second panel was moderated by Nadthasiri Bergman, Director of Human Rights Lawyers’ Association. The panel included Preeda Nakpiew, Lawyer of Cross-Cultural Foundation; Anukul Awaeputeh, Lawyer and Head of the Pattani branch, Muslim Attorney Center Foundation; Sumitchai Hattasarn, Lawyer and Director of Centre for the Protection and Revival of Local Community Rights; and Sanhawan Srisod, Legal Adviser of the ICJ.
The event was conducted in collaboration with Amnesty International Thailand; Cross Cultural Foundation; Human Rights Lawyers’ Association; Inter Mountain Peoples’ Education and Culture in Thailand Association (IMPECT); Legal Research and Development Center, Chiang Mai University; Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Regional Office for South-East Asia; and Protection International.
Further reading
Thailand: ICJ co-hosts discussion on addressing extrajudicial killings
ICJ holds seminar at Chiang Mai University Thailand on the right to life and the duty to investigate
