Apr 4, 2019 | News
Today, the ICJ urged Singapore’s Parliament not to pass the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Bill 2019 (‘Online Falsehoods Bill’), which was tabled on Monday, 1 April.
The ICJ said that the bill, if passed into law, would result in far-reaching limitations on freedom of expression, opinion and information in Singapore, and could be wielded to curtail important discussion of matters of public interest, including content critical of the government.
“This bill, if passed, would make the government the sole arbiter of what information is permissible online and what is not, creating a real risk that the law will be misused to clamp down on opinions or information critical of the government,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ Director for Asia and the Pacific.
The bill authorizes ministers to direct individuals, owners or operators of online platforms, digital advertising and internet intermediaries to remove, make corrections to, disable or block access to a “false statement of fact”, if such action is deemed to be “in the public interest”. Such ministerial directions can be made even if a false statement “has been amended or has ceased to be communicated in Singapore”.
The bill does not provide any real definition of “false statement of fact” and does not clarify what constitutes “public interest”. The bill also fails to provide for exceptions or defences such as honest mistake, parody, artistic merit, or public interest. Executive discretion is also not subject to judicial review or oversight under its provisions.
Criminal penalties for non-compliance with the law are severe, and include hefty fines and up to ten years’ imprisonment for violations.
These may be imposed on individuals and/or owners or operators of online platforms, as well as intermediaries who facilitate the communication of such statements, including social networking services, search engine services, internet-based messaging services and video-sharing services.
The bill is also clear that communications through SMS (Short Message Service) and MMS (Multimedia Messaging Service) fall under its remit.
“The spread of misinformation online is a complex problem that cannot be effectively addressed by simply granting broad discretion to government officials to censor online expression,” said Rawski.
“A multi-pronged approach that protects the rights to free expression, opinion and information is required, beginning with better media literacy education and free access to information, including to opinions critical of the government,” he added.
Contact
Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org
Singapore-fake news bill-News-web story-2019-ENG (full story with additional information, in PDF)
Apr 2, 2019 | News
The ICJ raised serious human rights concerns following the announcement by the Government of Brunei of the third phase of implementation of the 2013 Syariah Penal Code with its entering into force on 3 April 2019.
This week, the Syariah Penal Code will come into full effect, which means the imposition of horrific punishments – including the severing of limbs, whipping, and stoning to death – on those found to have committed acts such as rape, adultery, sodomy, and to have engaged in extramarital sexual relations.
“There are no circumstances under which punishments such as stoning, amputation or public flogging are acceptable under international law,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
“They are blatant violations of the prohibition on all forms of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,” he added.
Stoning, amputation and public flogging are contrary to the commitment that Brunei made when it became a party to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), including its obligations to take all necessary measures to eliminate all forms of discrimination against women.
Those punishments also violate the Convention on the Rights to the Child (CRC) to which Brunei is a party.
The ICJ also notes that consensual sexual activities, such as sodomy, adultery and other extramarital and premarital sexual relations, as much as consensual same-sex sexual conduct, do not constitute recognizably criminal offences under international human rights law and standards and should therefore not be criminalized at all.
The UN Special Rapporteur on Torture has stated that “any form of corporal punishment is contrary to the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”, and cannot be considered a “lawful sanction” under international law.
When Brunei’s Syariah Penal Code was adopted in October 2013, the ICJ condemned it for violating international human rights law and standards.
The Syariah Penal Code will also effectively reintroduce the death penalty, which has generally been viewed as having been de facto abolished, as it has not been imposed since 1957.
“The re-introduction of the use of the death penalty in the Syariah Penal Code is out of step with the global trend towards the abolition of capital punishment and the establishment of a moratorium on executions,” said Rawski.
In addition, the ICJ is concerned about the disproportionate and discriminatory impact of the Code on women and girls and on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender individuals in the country.
Although the 2013 Syariah Penal Code states that the penalty of stoning to death applies regardless of whether the offender is male or female, women face a greater risk of being convicted and sentenced to death because they are more likely to be found guilty of adultery or of otherwise having engaged in extramarital sexual relations.
“In addition to imposing penalties that are in clear violation of international law, the underlying ‘offenses’ are themselves discriminatory,” said Rawski.
“The Code is particularly regressive coming at a time when other Commonwealth countries are taking steps to de-criminalize same-sex consensual relations, and end discrimination and violence against women,” he added.
The ICJ strongly urges the Government of Brunei to withdraw the 2013 Syariah Penal Code, and take steps to ensure that its laws comply with international law and standards, consistent with Brunei’s obligations under international human rights instruments, including the CEDAW and the CRC.
Contact:
Emerlynne Gil, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +66 840923575, e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
Additional information:
On 17 December 2018, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution calling for a global moratorium on the death penalty, with the support of a 120 countries.
According to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights more than 160 UN member countries have either abolished the death penalty or introduced a moratorium on its use in law or practice.
The ICJ considers the imposition of the death penalty to be a violation of the right to life and the prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Apr 1, 2019 | News
On 31 March, Mikiko Otani, ICJ’s Commissioner and a member of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, spoke to Filipino lawyers at the bi-annual National Lawyers’ Conference of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), which took place at the Iloilo Convention Center, Iloilo City.
Mikiko Otani, who had been Chair of the Committee on International Human Rights of the Japan Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA) remains active in the JFBA, talked about the importance of advancing gender equality in the legal profession and the important initiatives of the JFBA on eliminating gender discrimination.
She noted that “female lawyers experience many forms of discrimination in the workplaces, practices, court rooms and bar associations.”
In countries all over the world, many formal barriers women used to face in entering the legal profession, including admission to law schools, the bar, have been eliminated.
However, women continue to face barriers, some of which are specific to the legal profession, but others common to women who work more generally.
Mikiko Otani noted that when she started practice as a lawyer in 1990, women applicants for jobs at law firms would often be asked during the interview whether they planned on getting married or having children.
Law firms preferred to hire male lawyers as they were thought to be unencumbered with looking after household matters, such as housekeeping and child care.
She recalled, “My colleagues questioned my decision to get married and have children almost immediately after becoming a lawyer while also continuing my practice as this was an unusual for women lawyers in Japan to do at that time. They felt that my decision to start a family at that point would be a hindrance to my career.”
She also talked about the bias observed in case assignment, where only male lawyers would be assigned to cases that required extensive traveling, while female lawyers would be often assigned to family cases, which are considered to be easy, unpopular or low-profile cases.
There was also frequent bias against female lawyers in promotion or offering partnership in law firms, contributing to a major gender gap in income between male and female lawyers.
In 2008, the JFBA formulated a Basic Plan which included the study of inequalities between male and female lawyers in Japan, finding ways to ensure a work-life balance for women, creating complaint handling bodies, and hosting trainings and educational activities in order to promote gender equality.
Mikiko Otani’s remarks resonated among many female lawyers in the Philippines, who shared in the discussion that followed that they face the same challenges.
“As lawyers, it is our responsibility to assist everyone, including women, in accessing justice,” said Marienne Ibadlit, a member of the Board of Governors of the IBP.
“We cannot be faithful to this responsibility if within our profession, we perpetuate gendered relationships and social inequalities that discriminate against women. A bar association that is committed to gender equality is a prerequisite to a justice system that does not discriminate against women and ensures the full enjoyment of women of their human rights.”
Contact:
Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t: +662 619 8477 (ext. 206) ; e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
Mar 31, 2019 | News
From 29 to 31 March 2019, the ICJ co-hosted a workshop in Ayutthaya province for authorities from Thailand on Human Rights, Investigation Techniques and Forensic Examination of Evidence. The event focused on how such investigations should be conducted in accordance with international human rights law and standards.
The workshop was co-hosted with Thailand’s Ministry of Justice and the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
The participants included 35 criminal investigators, public prosecutors, representatives of the Ministry of Justice’s Department of Special Investigation (DSI), the Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS), the Ministry of Defense, the National Anti-Corruption Commission and the Office of the Narcotics Control Board.
Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser for Global Redress and Accountability at the ICJ and a member of the Working Group in revising the Minnesota Protocol, presented a summary of the international human rights legal framework applicable to the investigation of unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance.
He also introduced an outline of the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which was launched in Thailand on 25 May 2017.
The Protocol formed the core of the materials used at the workshop. He also addressed the use of telecommunication evidence as evidence at trial.
Other speakers included:
- Amornrat Lekwichai, Senior Professional Level Forensic Scientist from the CIFS, who addressed the use of telecommunication and digital evidence in criminal cases towards establishing the identity of suspects;
- Pornthip Rojanasunan, Adviser with the CIFS and a member of the Advisory Panel in revising the Minnesota Protocol, who spoke on forensic pathology and the need for independent autopsies in an independent and impartial investigative process;
- Badar Farrukh, Human Rights Officer from OHCHR, who addressed witness interviews and witness protection;
- Angkhana Neelapaijit, National Human Rights Commissioner and spouse of lawyer Somchai Neelapaijit, a victim of enforced disappearance; and
- Somchai Homlaor, a leading Thai human rights lawyer and member of several independent fact-finding commissions, who raised concerns about challenges for accountability for human rights abuses in Thailand’s criminal justice.
This workshop is part of the ICJ’s ongoing efforts to ensure the domestic implementation of international law and standards on the investigation of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearances.
The ICJ has held several Workshops on the same topic including:
Regional Workshops
National Workshops
Contact
Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser for Global Redress and Accountability, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Office, t: +66 94 470 1345, e: kingsley.abbott@icj.org
Mar 15, 2019 | News
The ICJ called on the Government of Malaysia to take immediate steps to protect the right of all persons in the country to freedom of expression and assembly, after seven organizers of the International Women’ Day (IWD) March were summoned for questioning by police authorities on 14 March 2019.
“It is very concerning that the Malaysian authorities continue to rely on repressive legislation to control and undermine freedom of expression and freedom of assembly in the country,” said Emerlynne Gil, ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser.
The Women’s March took place in Kuala Lumpur, on 9 March 2019. The demands of the participating groups included an ‘end of all violence based on gender and sexual orientation’, the ban of all child marriages, and the setting of RM1,800 as a minimum wage.
A statement by the Dang Wangi District Police Deputy Chief identified the organizers as individuals who had spoken at an ‘LGBT’ rally.
There were reportedly taken in for questioning on 18 March for potential violations of Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act and Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act. They remain at risk of being charged for these offences.
The ICJ considers the Sedition Act 1948 and the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 to be incompatible with international standards. The ICJ has previously called on the Government of Malaysia to abolish both laws, which have historically been used to silence voices of those challenging governmental policy.
The laws place restrictions on the exercise of freedom of expression that are overbroad, unnecessary and disproportionate, and inconsistent with rule of law and human rights principles. The Pakatan Harapan Government committed itself to abolishing the Sedition Act 1948 and the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012, but has not done so to date.
“The vague definition of ‘seditious tendencies’ in the Sedition Act has been used as a tool for silencing government critics and human rights defenders by previous administrations. It is disappointing that the Malaysian authorities have ended the moratorium on the use of the Sedition Act 1948, and continue to use it, instead of moving towards its abolition,” said Gil.
According to international standards, any limits on the right to peaceful assembly should not require prior authorization by the authorities. Notification requirements must not be unduly bureaucratic and be used only for the purpose of allowing the authorities to facilitate the exercise of the right to peaceful assembly, and to protect public safety.
In a 14 March statement, the organizers claimed to have been in regular communication with the police and to have been in compliance with the relevant notice provisions of the Peaceful Assembly Act.
The ICJ calls on the Malaysian authorities to end any investigations targeting the organizers of the Women’s March pursuant to the Peaceful Assembly and Sedition Act. It also calls on the Government to abolish the Peaceful Assembly Act and the Sedition Act.
Contact
Emerlynne Gil, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +66 840923575, e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
Malaysia-Womens March-News-web stories-2019-ENG (full story with additional information, in PDF)
Mar 12, 2019 | News
Today, the ICJ co-hosted an art exhibition and public forum titled 15th Year of Somchai’s Disappearance and the Voices of the Disappeared at the Embassy of the Netherlands in Bangkok.
The event was held to commemorate 15 years since the enforced disappearance of Somchai Neelapaijit, a prominent human rights lawyer, whose case has never been adequately by the Thai authorities.
Somchai was abducted after being stopped on a road in Bangkok on 12 March 2004 and taken from his car by a group of police officers. He has not been seen since. Fifteen years after his disappearance, Somchai’s fate and whereabouts remain unknown and no one has been held accountable for the crime against him.
More than 100 participants attended the event, including family victims of alleged disappearance cases, students, lawyers, members of civil society, diplomats, and members of the Thai authorities and media.
Opening remarks were delivered by Angkhana Neelapaijit, wife of Somchai Neelapaijit, and Kenza Tarqaât, First Secretary of the Embassy of the Netherlands in Bangkok.
The opening session included remarks by the victims who spoke about their challenges and about the progress and development regarding investigations into the alleged disappearance cases of their relatives. The session included the following speakers:
Sanhawan Srisod, the ICJ’s National Legal Adviser, spoke during the second session on recent amendments to the Draft Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act.
She highlighted concerns that the recent amendments would, if adopted, fail to bring the law into full compliance with Thailand’s international human rights obligations.
Sanhawan further expressed concern that the fate of the Draft Act was uncertain as Thailand’s National Legislative Assembly (NLA) that is considering the bill, while it may also continue their work in case of the necessity, will stop considering laws on 15 March, prior to the scheduled elections of 24 March 2019.
She stressed that it is crucial the Thai Government continues to consider and amend the bill, and pass it without delay in line with Thailand’s international human rights obligations.
The panel was moderated by Chanatip Tatiyakaroonwong from Cross-Cultural Foundation and also included the following panelists:
- Nongporn Roongpetchwong, Human Rights Expert, Rights and Liberties Protection Department, Ministry of Justice
- Badar Farrukh, Thailand Team Leader, United Nations’ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Regional Office for South East Asia
Closing remarks was delivered by Pratubjit Neelapaijit, daughter of Somchai Neelapaijit.
The forum was co-organized with the Neelapaijit family, Amnesty International – Thailand, Cross Cultural Foundation (CrCF), the Embassy of the Netherlands in Bangkok, Human Rights Lawyers’ Association and the United Nations’ Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Regional Office for South East Asia.
Read Also:
Thailand-Summary ICJ analysis Draft Act-Advocacy-2019-ENG (Summary of the ICJ analysis of the Draft Act, in PDF)
Ten Years Without Truth: Somchai Neelapaijit and Enforced Disappearances in Thailand
Missed Opportunities: Recommendations for Investigating the Disappearance of Sombath Somphone
Thailand: ICJ submits recommendations on draft law on torture and enforced disappearance amendments
Thailand: ICJ, Amnesty advise changes to proposed legislation on torture and enforced disappearances
