Jul 9, 2013 | News
The ICJ today called for the immediate release of Le Quoc Quan, after the People’s Court of Hanoi announced on 8 July 2013 the postponement of his trial, without setting any new dates for the case. The reason given for the hastily informed adjournment was that the judge had suddenly taken ill.
The ICJ considers that Le Quoc Quan’s continued detention is in violation of Vietnam’s penal law and the State’s international legal obligations.
Le Quoc Quan, a lawyer and human rights defender, was arrested on 27 December 2012 and charged for tax evasion under article 161 of Vietnam’s 1999 Penal Code.
The postponement of the trial appears to signal that Le Quoc Quan will continue to remain in jail. Since his arrest last year, he has already been detained for more than six months.
“The continued detention of Le Quoc Quan is akin to him being punished even before the trial has commenced. This is a clear violation of his right to being presumed innocent,” said Andrew Khoo from the Malaysian Bar Council, an expert appointed by the ICJ, who had traveled to Hanoi to observe Le Quoc Quan’s trial.
On 29 December, two days after Le Quoc Quan’s arrest, his wife filed an application for bail to the police and procurator. She had also applied for release on his own recognizance. There are no specific detailed procedures spelled out in law governing bail procedures. Under article 92 of the Criminal Procedure Code, only family members are permitted to act as guarantors. To date, neither the police nor the procurator have replied to her applications.
Under article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Vietnam is a party, it should not be the general rule that persons are detained while awaiting trial, and release pending trial may only be subject to conditions to ensure appearance at the trial.
“There is no reason to believe that if released Le Quoc Quan would not appear for trial, and in any event his family has made representations to act as guarantors”, said Emerlynne Gil, the ICJ’s International Legal Adviser on Southeast Asia, who was also in Hanoi to observe the trial. “The People’s Court of Hanoi must order Le Quoc Quan’s release either on bail or his own recognizance.”
The ICJ notes that the postponement also violates Le Quoc Quan’s right to a speedy trial. Under international law, including ICCPR article 14, an accused has the right to be tried without undue delay and within a reasonable period of time. This prevents any unnecessary continuing deprivation of liberty and ensures that the interest of justice is properly served.
“We would expect that the People’s Court of Hanoi will notify promptly the public of the next date of Le Quac Quan’s trial and ensure that his right to a fair and public trial is upheld,” said Emerlynne Gil.
The ICJ looks forward to returning to Vietnam to continue monitoring this case and ensuring that the rights of Le Quoc Quan, including his right to liberty and to a fair trial, are fully respected and protected.
CONTACT:
Ms. Emerlynne Gil, International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, tel. no. +662 6198477; email: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
Jul 9, 2013 | News
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) today called on the Government of Malta to refrain from forcibly transferring a number of Somali nationals to Libya, where they are alleged to be at real risk of human rights violations and further transfer to Somalia.
According to media reports, the persons at risk of transfer are part of a group of some 102 persons, including 41 women and two babies, who arrived in Malta this morning.
The ICJ expresses its grave concern at the possibility that Somali nationals, who are alleged to be considered at risk of being subject to ill-treatment or persecution if sent back to Somalia, would first be sent back to Libya. According to the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, in Libya, migrants face a “constant risk of exploitation, arrest and indefinite detention”.
The ICJ stresses that the European Court of Human Rights has ruled, in the judgment Hirsi Jamaa and others v. Italy, that sending back potential asylum seekers, including of Somali origin, to Libya, without individual assessment of their situation and access to asylum procedures, violates the European Convention on Human Rights, in particular the principle of non-refoulement, the prohibition of collective expulsion and the right to an effective remedy for violations of human rights.
The ICJ therefore calls on the Maltese Government to refrain from expelling or otherwise transferring to Libya any of the Somali citizens who arrived on Maltese shores today. The migrants must be fully informed of their right to apply for international or humanitarian protection under EU and Maltese law; and each of their cases must be examined on its individual merits.
Statement-ExpulsionSomalis-2013-Malta (download the statement)
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Legal Adviser of the Europe Programme, tel: 41 22 979 38 05, e-mail: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Róisín Pillay, ICJ Director of the Europe Programme, e-mail : roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Jul 8, 2013 | E-bulletin on counter-terrorism & human rights, News
Read the 74th issue of ICJ’s monthly newsletter on proposed and actual changes in counter-terrorism laws, policies and practices and their impact on human rights at the national, regional and international levels. The E-Bulletin on Counter-Terrorism and Human...
Jul 5, 2013 | News
The Government of Pakistan should renew the official moratorium on the death penalty, with a view to definitively abolishing the practice in law, says the ICJ.
The Government signaled its intention to resume executions on Thursday, 4 July 2013 when it failed to renew a 2008 Presidential order imposing a moratorium on executions. It is estimated that approximately 8000 people are currently on death row in Pakistan.
“Resuming executions would be a major step backwards for Pakistan in protecting human rights,” says Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor for South Asia. “The prospect of lifting the moratorium is all the more alarming given the extraordinarily high number of people on death row.”
The announcement apparently comes as part of the newly elected Government’s strategy to tackle high levels of crime and insecurity in Pakistan.
The ICJ condemns the death penalty as a violation of the right to life and a form of cruel and inhuman punishment. Moreover, it is widely accepted that the practice cannot serve as a deterrent to crime or be administrated without error or discrimination.
More than 150 of the 192 United Nations members States have either abolished the death penalty or imposed a moratorium on its practice.
In December 2012, the United Nations General Assembly adopted its fourth resolution calling on all States retaining the death to place a moratorium on the practice with a view towards abolition.
Of the 186 member States present, 111 member States voting in favour and only 41 member States against, an increase from the previous three resolutions.
“Pakistan is part of a dwindling minority of States who continue to retain the death penalty and carry out executions,” Varadan. “The ICJ urges the newly elected Government of Pakistan to demonstrate its commitment to upholding human rights and to desist from licensing the State deliberately to take the life any person in its custody.”
CONTACT:
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme (Bangkok), t: +66 857200723; email: sheila.varadan(a)icj.org
Jul 4, 2013 | News
The ICJ called on the Egyptian authorities, including the army, to uphold the rule of law and democratic principles and take immediate and effective measures to prevent the deterioration of the human rights situation.
The statement came as the head of the armed forces, General Abdel Fattah El Sisi, announced on 3 July 2013 the suspension of the Constitution and the removal of President Mohamed Morsi.
The General said that Constitutional Court Chief Justice Adly Monsour would head an interim government until new elections were held.
The ICJ is deeply concerned that the decisions that have been taken by the military are beyond the scope of its constitutional authority and violate basic rule of law principles.
If implemented, these decisions will also set a dangerous precedent, wrongly signaling that the conflicts and challenges in Egypt should be met by military force rather than through political engagement and legal processes, the ICJ said.
“All Egyptian authorities should ensure that any political disagreement or conflict is resolved in compliance with rule of law principles and through legally established channels. Under international law, political divergences cannot be invoked to justify the unlawful seizure of the executive power,” said Wilder Tayler, ICJ Secretary General.
The ICJ is also concerned about reports that President Morsi, his advisers and leaders from the Freedom and Justice Party have been arrested.
Journalists have also been arrested and several television stations linked to the Muslim Brotherhood were taken off air following the Military decisions.
“The army and government authorities should ensure the protection of the rights of those detained in the context of the ouster of President Morsi, including the right to liberty and to security of person. Journalists arrested while exercising their professional duties must be released immediately,” Tayler further said.
The transition process in Egypt, under both the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF) and President Mohamed Morsi has failed to comply with international rule of law and human rights standards, the ICJ said.
The ICJ is also concerned about of the deterioration of the human rights situation in Egypt over the last few days, including cases of unlawful killings and physical violence against protesters, including sexual assaults against women.
“The Egyptian authorities should ensure that these human rights violations are fully investigated with a view to holding the perpetrators to account. They must also guarantee the rights of all peaceful protesters to security and to the freedoms of assembly and expression,” Tayler added.
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(a)icj.org
Jul 2, 2013 | News
The ICJ calls on the UAE authorities to take urgent measures to ensure the extinguishment of the convictions of the 68 individuals convicted in the UAE 94 case, and to immediately and unconditionally release those detained.
The ICJ also calls for the withdrawal of any remaining charges against each of the 94 accused.
Sixty-eight individuals were convicted today by the State Security Chamber of the UAE Federal Supreme Court and sentenced to varying sentences.
These include 56 accused who were sentenced to 10 years imprisonment and 8 accused who were tried in absentia and sentenced to 15 years imprisonment.
The convicted individuals were found guilty of “establishing, founding and administering an organization, with the aim of challenging the basic principles upon which the government of the State is based, taking control of the government and establishing a secret structure for the organization”.
“The legal provisions on which these convictions are based fail to meet international law requirements of legal certainty and criminalize the enjoyment and exercise of the rights to freedom of expression and association”, stated Said Benarbia, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme.
The ICJ considers that the trial against the accused has failed to comport with international law and standards governing fair trials, including the rights of accused persons to be informed of the reasons for their arrest and the charges against them.
The rights of the accused to be presumed innocent was also undermined by provisions of UAE law that effectively impose a presumption of guilt and allow for the indefinite renewal of pre-trial detention orders.
Further, most of the detainees were held in secret pre-trial detention, including prolonged incommunicado detention and solitary confinement.
Their right of access to family members and to a lawyer during the first months of detention was denied, and most of the detainees were unable to challenge the lawfulness of their detention.
They also reported being subjected to torture and other ill-treatment, including severe beatings, pulling out detainees’ hair, sleep deprivation, exposure to extreme light during the day and night, death threats and other threats and verbal abuse.
None of these allegations of ill-treatment were investigated and prosecuted by the UAE authorities. Instead, “confessions” and other information obtained as a result of torture and other ill-treatment were heavily relied upon as evidence to “prove” the charges against the accused.
The rights of the accused to defence were also severely restricted, including by denying defence lawyers’ access to detainees in pre-trial detention, in particular during interrogation; delaying their access to cases files until a few days before the trial; subjecting them to various forms of intimidation and harassment, including criminal prosecution; and severely curtailing their right to cross-examine witnesses.
Two ICJ observers, together with other international observers and international media, were denied access to the first and second hearings of the trial in contravention of international standards on the right to a public hearing.
Further restrictions on this right included relatives being forced to sign statements agreeing not to disclose information about the trial hearings as a condition to being granted access.
Some of the relatives who reportedly disclosed information about the trial have been subjected to various forms of harassment by UAE authorities.
One individual was prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to a 10-month prison term for “tweeting with bad intent about the trial”.
The ICJ notes that under UAE law, decisions of the Supreme Court cannot be reviewed by any other court, which denies the right of the convicted individuals to an appeal.
“The UAE 94 trial has been marred with a catalogue of violations of fair trial guarantees that have undermined the fairness of the proceedings at every stage. Consequently, any remaining charges against the accused must be withdrawn and those detained must be immediately and unconditionally released”, Benarbia added. “Allegations of torture and ill-treatment must also be promptly, independently and impartially investigated and those responsible held accountable”, he added.
An analytical report on the charges and trial of the UAE 94 in light of international law and standards will be published this month.
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(a)icj.org
