Ten eminent jurists join the ICJ Commission
The ICJ is pleased to announce the election of ten eminent jurists to the ICJ Commission.
Throughout its sixty-year history, the ICJ’s credibility has stemmed from its unique group of eminent jurists and legal experts: the ICJ Commission. ICJ Commissioners provide expert support and strategic direction to the ICJ Secretariat’s regional and thematic programmes.
The following Commissioners have been elected for five-year terms:
Commissioners Elected for First Terms
Prof. Andrew Clapham (UK)
Justice Radmila Dicic (Serbia)
Mr. Shawan Jabarin (Palestine)
Justice Qinisile Mabuza (Swaziland)
Justice Tamara Morschakova (Russian Federation) – from 1st May 2013
Justice Egbert Myjer (Netherlands)
Prof. Victor Rodriguez Rescia (Costa Rica)
Prof. Marco Sassoli (Italy/Switzerland)
Justice Stefan Trechsel (Switzerland)
Prof. Rodrigo Uprimny Yepes (Colombia)
Commissioners Elected for Second Terms
Mr. Roberto Garreton (Chile)
Prof. Robert Goldman (USA)
Commissioners Elected for Third Terms
Justice Ian Binnie (Canada)
Justice Elizabeth Evatt (Australia)
Ms. Karinna Moskalenko (Russian Federation)
Prof. Sir Nigel Rodley (UK)
Mr. Raji Sourani (Palestine)
For further details, including biographies for each of the ICJ’s Commissioners and Honorary Members, please click here .
United Arab Emirates: ICJ concerned by trial of lawyers and human rights defenders
The ICJ expressed its concern over the criminal trial of 94 individuals, including judges, lawyers, academics, human rights defenders and civil society activists, in the State Security Chamber of the UAE Federal Supreme Court.
Following a wave of arbitrary arrests and detention, which began in March 2012, the case was referred to the Supreme Court on 27 January 2013.
“The ICJ is gravely concerned over the fairness of the upcoming proceedings, including the lack of any right of appeal, the lack of restrictions on the use of evidence obtained through torture or ill-treatment and severe restrictions imposed on the rights of the defence, in contravention of international human rights law, including the Arab Charter on Human Rights, to which the UAE is a party,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser of the Middle East and North Africa Programme. “Furthermore, allegations of torture and ill-treatment by detainees, including incommunicado detention, prolonged solitary confinement, sleep deprivation and verbal and physical abuse, must be promptly, impartially and thoroughly investigated.”
The ICJ further notes that there have been violations of international fair standards.
These include the failure of State authorities to formally charge defendants, severe restrictions on access to legal counsel, including during questioning and the failure to disclose case files to the defence until a few days before trial.
Until two weeks before the trial, there was a single lawyer acting for all detainees and other lawyers who tried to assist have faced harassment, including detention and deportation, the ICJ says.
The trial is part of a broader crackdown by the UAE authorities in response to a petition signed by 100 academics, legal professionals, and civil society activists, in March 2011, for political reforms and increased public participation in government.
“The ICJ condemns the use of criminal proceedings to suppress peaceful calls for increased democracy as an unlawful restriction on the right to freedom of expression,” Benarbia added. “Extending the clampdown on critics to include numerous members of the legal profession severely compromises the Rule of Law in the UAE.”
Contact:
Said Benarbia, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser of the Middle East and North Africa Programme, tel: 41 22 979 38 17, e-mail: said.benarbia(at)icj.org
Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal should pursue justice, not vengeance
The death sentence handed down by the International Crimes Tribunal today against Delwar Hossain Sayeedi (photo) violates international standards of due process and fair trial, and, if carried out, would violate his right to life, says the ICJ.
“The ICJ wholly condemns the atrocities committed in Bangladesh’s war of liberation in 1971, notably the widespread and systematic use of rape as a form of torture and the unlawful killings. It is paramount that those responsible should be held accountable,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director. “But even perpetrators of atrocities have rights. They should be brought to justice, not subjected to vengeance.”
Delwar Hossain Sayeedi, vice-president of the Jamaat-e-Islami party, was indicted on 3 October 2011 on 20 charges including genocide and crimes against humanity. He was arrested and brought before the War Crimes Tribunal for the first time on 2 November 2010. He was accused of working with the Al-Badr group during the independence struggle in the early 1970s.
The International Commission of Jurists opposes the death penalty as a violation of the right to life and a form of cruel and inhuman punishment. The United Nations General Assembly has called on all States to establish a moratorium on the death penalty with a view to universal abolition.
Today, crowds gathered outside the courthouse as the verdict was being read, demanding Delwar Hossain Sayeedi be sentenced to death for his role in the atrocities committed in the 1971 war of liberation. Earlier this month, widespread protests erupted across Bangladesh after the Tribunal imposed a life sentence on Abdul Qadar Mollah instead of the death penalty.
“The enormous demonstrations and the unfortunate violence that have accompanied each decision of the ICT demonstrate the passions still enflamed by the crimes of 1971. But it is in everyone’s interest to ensure that the rule of law and the path to justice are not subject to immediate political pressure,” Zarifi added. “The Government’s obligation to bring those responsible for the atrocities committed in 1971 to justice must not outweigh the presumption of innocence and the duty to ensure the security of all persons.”
The ICJ says that the International Crimes Tribunal does not adhere to international standards of a fair trial and due process.
According to the ICJ, there are serious procedure flaws at all stages: pre-trial release has been routinely and arbitrarily denied; witnesses have been abducted and intimidated; there have been credible allegations of collusion between the Government, prosecutors and judges.
On 14 February 2013, a draft amendment was tabled in Parliament, retroactively changing the International Criminal (Tribunals) Act 1973 to enable prosecutors to appeal a life sentence and seek the death penalty.
This amendment came after protests for a death sentence in the 5 February 2013 verdict against Abul Qadar Mollah.
As a State party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Bangladesh is obligated to guarantee due process and fair trial rights to all suspects, even those accused of war crimes.
Such obligations include the right to an public hearing before a competent, independent and impartial tribunal; the right to be tried in one’s presence; the right to counsel and the right to a full defence; and the right not to be punished again for an offence for which there has already been a final conviction in accordance with the law.
“Failing to abide by minimum standards of due process will cast doubt on the Tribunal’s findings and undermine victims’ hard-fought battle for justice,” Zarifi said. “The Bangladesh Tribunal is one of very few transitional justice mechanisms that have imposed the death penalty.”
This verdict is the third issued by the tribunal. Earlier this month, Abdul Qader Mollah, the assistant secretary-general of the Jamaat-e-Islami was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment for committing crimes against humanity during the 1971 liberation war.
On 21 January, Abul Kalam Azad, a former leading member of the Jamaat-e-Islami party, was tried and convicted in absentia and sentenced to death for crimes committed during Bangladesh’s war of liberation in 1971. He was convicted on six counts of a crime against humanity and one count of genocide.
The government established the Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal in 2010, after amending the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973. The International Crimes Tribunal has jurisdiction to try crimes against humanity, crimes against peace, genocide, violations of the Geneva conventions and any other crimes under international law.
The ICJ supports the right of victims to seek truth and justice for the atrocities committed in the 1971 Liberation War.
However, any such process must adhere to international human rights standards, including full guarantees for a fair trial.
CONTACT:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 26198477; email: sam.zarifi(at)icj.org
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme, t: +66 857200723; email: sheila.varadan(at)icj.org
ICJ and others welcome European Court judgment on same-sex second-parent adoption
The European Court of Human Rights today ruled that an Austrian ban on same-sex second-parent adoption is discriminatory.
The European Court of Human Rights delivered its judgment in the case of X and Others v. Austria and ruled that Austria’s Civil Code discriminates against a partner in a same-sex relationship by making it legally impossible to adopt the biological child of the other partner while permitting second parent adoptions for unmarried heterosexual couples.
The organisations that provided written submissions in this case (FIDH, ICJ, ILGA-Europe, BAAF, NELFA, and ECSOL) welcome this judgment and consider it a landmark judgment applying the European Court of Human Rights’ case law on equal treatment of unmarried couples to same-sex couples applying for second-parent adoption.
Children in same-sex families are highly vulnerable due to a lack of legal recognition and their inability to establish legal links to both of their parents.
Currently, second-parent adoption is possible in 11 European countries: Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and Great Britain. New legislation that would allow it is planned in France, Luxembourg and Switzerland. Moreover, as a result of the Court’s judgment, it would follow that the legislation of Austria, Andorra, parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Liechtenstein, Portugal and Romania should be amended to allow same-sex couples to apply for second-parent adoption, because these countries already permit unmarried heterosexual couples to do so.
Martin K.I. Christensen, Co-Chair of ILGA-Europe’s Executive Board:
“This is a very significant and important victory for rainbow families in Europe. We hope that this judgment will pave the way towards the removal of the remaining legal barriers for these families in Europe. The lack of recognition and the inability for partners in same-sex families to establish legal links to their children is not only discriminatory and creates a number of legal uncertainties, but also has a profound and detrimental impact on the everyday lives of these families and the wellbeing of the children in those families. The principle of the best interests of the child needs to be upheld without exception.”
Alli Jernow, Senior Legal Adviser, International Commission of Jurists, stated:
“With today’s decision, the Court clearly asserts that families are families, regardless of the sex of the parents, and that barriers to legal recognition and protection based on sexual orientation serve the interests of neither parents nor children.”
Souhayr Belhassen, President of FIDH, said:
“The Court recognised the right of a partner in same-sex couple to adopt another partner’s biological child when such adoptions are available for heterosexual couples. This is an important step forward towards the application of the principle of non-discrimination based on the sexual orientation and strengthening legal security and certainty for children. This ruling should guide not only domestic courts, but also the legislator in European states that have not yet amended their legislation in that direction”.
Juha Jämsä, the Vice-President of NELFA, said:
“This is an important day for European LGBT families. We feel very hopeful that this case will lead to our children’s rights gaining better recognition throughout Europe. No group of children should be discriminated against because of their parents’ sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression”
ICJ holds seminar on prerogative writs under the 2008 Constitution of Myanmar
The ICJ, in collaboration with the Office of the Attorney General of the Union of Myanmar, held a two-day academic seminar in Naypyitaw entitled “The Prerogative Writs under the 2008 Constitution of Myanmar”.
At the event, which took place on 14 – 15 February 2013, opening remarks were given by His Excellency Dr. Tun Shin, Attorney General of the Union of Myanmar and Mr. Saman-Zarifi, Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific of International Commission of Jurists, to a total of approximately 40 public prosecutors and judges.
The aim of the seminar was to discuss and contribute to the application of the recently re-introduced prerogative writs, namely, habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, under Myanmar’s 2008 Constitution which came into force in early 2011.
The seminar allowed ICJ to not only gain a deeper insight into the current writ practices in Myanmar but also permitted the Office of the Attorney General to draw best practices from other countries, such as Australia, Philippines and Malaysia.
The topics addressed during the seminar were the importance of prerogative writs in ensuring justice and upholding the rule of law; specific international standards on the independence of prosecutors and their role in the justice system; how writ cases are handled, challenges faced by the prosecutors and the burden of proof; and the powers of the judiciary to promulgate its own rules to ensure fundamental rights, as in the case of the Supreme Court in Philippines.
Panelists included Justice John Dowd AO QC, former Chairman of the International Commission of Jurists; Justice Adolfo Azcuna, Chancellor of the Philippine Judicial Academy and former Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines; and Mr. Andrew Khoo of the Malaysian Bar Council.
Recent News
Tanzania: African CSOs Call for the Non-Recognition of the Illegitimate Government and for Transitional Justice and Fresh Elections06 Nov 2025
Türkiye: Justice Reforms Central to Fair, Durable Peace Parliamentary Commission Should Make Bold Recommendations for Change06 Nov 2025
Greece: ICJ and ECRE call the European Committee of Social Rights to ensure Greece’s compliance with migrant and refugee children’s rights06 Nov 2025
ICJ submission highlights discrimination as key obstacle to women and girls with disabilities in enforcing their human rights04 Nov 2025