Nov 27, 2012 | News
The ICJ and ILGA-Europe welcome the historic decision by the UN Human Rights Committee in Irina Fedotova v. Russian Federation, which was released on 19 November.
“We are very pleased with the Committee’s Views in this case and in particular with the recognition that expressing opinions and information about same-sex sexual orientation cannot be limited in the name of public morality,” said Alli Jernow, ICJ Senior Legal Advisor.
In March 2009, Fedotova had displayed posters declaring “Homosexuality is normal” and “I am proud of my homosexuality” near a secondary school building in Ryazan.
The Ryazan Law on Administrative Offences prohibited “public actions aimed at propaganda of homosexuality among minors.” She was arrested, convicted, and ordered to pay a fine of 1,500 roubles.
Fedotova lost her appeal to the district court and the Constitutional Court ruled that the prohibition of information that was “capable of harming health, morals and spiritual development, as well as forming perverted conceptions about equal social value of traditional and non-traditional family relations” could not be considered a violation of the right to freedom of expression.
But the Human Rights Committee held that Russia had violated Fedotova’s rights to freedom of expression and to be free from discrimination.
These rights are guaranteed by articles 19 and 26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
“The decision is especially important because it effectively reverses the position taken by the Committee in the 1982 case of Hertzberg v. Finland, which upheld a ban similar to the one in the Fedotova case,” Jernow added.
The Human Rights Committee ordered the Russian Federation to reimburse the fine paid by Fedotova as well as her legal costs and to ensure that the relevant provisions of domestic law are made compatible with articles 19 and 26 of the Covenant.
Since the Ryazan law was adopted, a number of other regions in Russia have adopted legislation banning “homosexual propaganda.” Activists across the country, including in St. Petersburg, have been arrested and convicted under such laws.
In its decision, the Human Rights Committee emphasized that limitations for the purpose of public morals, which are derived “from many social, philosophical and religious traditions,” could not be based exclusively on a single tradition.
Furthermore, any such limitations “must be understood in light of universality of human rights and the principle of non-discrimination.” The Committee recalled that the “prohibition against discrimination under article 26 comprises also discrimination based on sexual orientation.”
The Committee stated that Russia “has not shown that a restriction on the right to freedom of expression in relation to ‘propaganda of homosexuality’ – as opposed to propaganda of heterosexuality or sexuality generally – among minors is based on reasonable and objective criteria.”
Fedotova’s actions were not aimed at involving minors in any particular sexual activity. Rather, “she was giving expression to her sexual identity and seeking understanding for it.”
“We hope this landmark decision will send a strong signal to Russia to reconsider such discriminatory steps and to abandon any legislative proposals criminalising ‘homosexual propaganda’,” said Evelyne Paradis, Executive Director of ILGA-Europe.
The ICJ had submitted a legal opinion, which the Committee excerpted in detail, arguing that the law was discriminatory and that limitations on rights could not discriminate. Earlier this year, the ICJ and ILGA-Europe published a briefing paper titled “Homosexual Propaganda Bans: Analysis and Recommendations.”
Contact:
Alli Jernow, ICJ Senior Legal Advisor, t + 41 22 979 3823
Juris Lavrikovs, ILGA-Europe, t + 32 2 609 54 16 and + 32 496 708 375
Nov 23, 2012 | News
The ICJ expressed its grave concerns regarding the new Constitutional Declaration issued by President Mohamed Morsi on 22 November.
The President’s unilateral imposition of a constitutional framework on the Egyptian people, under which Constitutional Declarations, decisions, laws and acts taken by the President are shielded from any judicial review, undermines basic rule of law principles.
“Rather than establishing the rule of law and meeting the democratic aspirations of the Egyptian people, President Morsi perpetuates the practices of the old regime by denying the rights of Egyptians to fully participate in the conduct of public affairs and to challenge executive decisions and actions”, said Said Benarbia, ICJ Senior Legal Advisor for the MENA Programme. “The Egyptian authorities must change course to ensure that the new Constitution is in line with international rule of law and human rights principles, and that the drafting and adoption process is transparent and inclusive.”
Under the Declaration, the President has arrogated to himself sweeping powers “to protect the goals of the revolution, including by tearing down the structure of the former regime, excluding its symbols in the state, society and the judiciary, and purging the Sate institutions”. All decisions taken by the President, since he took office and until a new Constitution is adopted and a People’s Assembly is elected, are characterized as “final and binding and cannot be appealed by any way or to any entity. Nor shall they be suspended or cancelled and all lawsuits related to them and brought before any judicial body against these decisions are annulled”.
The ICJ also expresses its concern about the impact of the new Constitutional Declaration and the decision of President Morsi to dismiss the Prosecutor General on the independence of the judiciary.
Under international standards, all disciplinary, suspension or removal proceedings against members of the judiciary must be determined in accordance with well-established procedures that guarantee the right to a fair and transparent hearing and to an independent review.
Only an independent body can ensure the fairness of these proceedings, the ICJ stresses.
In a report published last week, the ICJ described how the Egyptian authorities have failed to ensure the drafting of a new Constitution in compliance with international principles of inclusive participation and transparency. The report concludes that the draft Constitution conflicts with Egypt’s obligations under international human rights law.
Contact:
Saïd Benarbia, Middle East & North Africa Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ, t +41 22 979 3817; e-mail: said.benarbia(at)icj.org
Alice Goodenough, Middle East & North Africa Legal Adviser, ICJ, t +41 22 979 3811; e-mail: alice.goodenough(at)icj.org
Nov 22, 2012 | News
The ICJ, Metlhaetsile and Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) held a multi-stakeholder roundtable dialogue on women’s access to justice in Gaborone, Botswana from 20-21 November 2012.
The event, which is a key step in an ongoing ICJ initiative on women’s access to justice in Botswana, brought together a group of experts to discuss and review a draft ICJ/Metlhaetsile/FES report on the obstacles to justice women continue to face in Botswana.
Participants included attorneys, representatives of NGOs and government agencies, human rights defenders, and members of the judiciary.
The forthcoming report will capture and explore the accounts of barriers received from stakeholders accross Botswana through field research during 2011-2012.
It will include information on the relationship between the gaps in the realization of economic and social rights and the obstacles faced by women to access justice.
It will also identify a series of responsive recommendations elaborated by roundtable participants.
Nov 21, 2012 | News
The ICJ and other human rights groups celebrate historic first condemnation of killings based on gender identity.
An international coalition of organizations dedicated to human rights celebrated yesterday’s historic vote in the Third Committee of the United Nations General Assembly to pass resolution A/C.3/67/L.36 condemning extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions.
The vote reversed the events of 2010 when the same body voted to strip the resolution of reference to “sexual orientation.”
The UNGA also expanded upon its commitment to the universality of human rights by including “gender identity” for the first time in the resolution’s history.
The resolution, which is introduced biennially in the Third Committee, urges States to protect the right to life of all people, including by calling upon states to investigate killings based on discriminatory grounds.
It was introduced by the Government of Sweden and co-sponsored by 34 states from around the world.
For the past 12 years, this resolution has urged States “to investigate promptly and thoroughly all killings, including… all killings committed for any discriminatory reason, including sexual orientation.”
Apart from Human Rights Council resolution 17/19, it is the only UN resolution to make specific reference to sexual orientation.
This year, the term “gender identity” was added to the list of categories vulnerable to extrajudicial killings.
At Tuesday’s session, the United Arab Emirates, speaking on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, presented an amendment that would have stripped the resolution of reference to “sexual orientation and gender identity” and substituted “or for any other reason.”
The UAE proposal was rejected in a vote with 44 votes in favor, 86 against, and 31 abstentions and 32 absent.
Another failed effort, led by the Holy See, would have stripped all specific references to groups at high risk for execution; however it was never formally introduced.
The Third Committee also retained language expressing “deep concern” over the continuing instances of arbitrary killing resulting from the use of capital punishment in a manner that violates international law, which some States led by Singapore attempted to have deleted. The Singapore proposal was rejected in a vote with 50 votes in favor, 78 against, and 37 abstentions and 30 absent.
The full resolution passed with 108 votes in favor, 1 against, 65 abstentions, and 19 absent.
Many governments, including Brazil, the United States and South Africa, among others, spoke out to condemn the proposed amendment to remove reference to sexual orientation and gender identity.
The Government of Japan ended the silence that has often characterized the Asian Group’s participation on LGBT rights at the UNGA by stating: “we cannot tolerate any killings of persons because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Our delegation voted against the proposed amendment to this paragraph because we think it is meaningful to mention such killings from the perspective of protecting the rights of LGBT people.”
Some governments condemned the reference to sexual orientation and gender identity, including Sudan on behalf of the Arab Group, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates on behalf of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.
Trinidad and Tobago stated that specific reference to “gender identity” presented a “particular challenge” for the country.
Speaking frequently, the Government of Egypt stated that it was “gravely alarmed at the attempt to legitimate undetermined concepts like gender identity” by equating them with other forms of discrimination such as that based on race, color, sex, religion, and language. In reference to sexual orientation and gender identity, Egypt stated: “we are alarmed at the attempts to make new rights or new standards.”
The vote affirms the resolution’s dramatic conclusion in 2010. At that time, the Third Committee removed the reference to “sexual orientation” by a vote of 79 in favor, 70 opposed, with 17 abstaining and 26 not voting and was silent on “gender identity.”
However, in a remarkable turn of events, the resolution was later introduced before the full General Assembly, which voted to reinstate the language by passing it 93 to 55, with 27 abstentions and 17 absent or not voting.
The states’ decision on Tuesday to support the inclusion of “sexual orientation” and introduce “gender identity” into the resolution is one more in a series of positive developments the UN and in regional human rights systems where there is increasingly recognition of the need for protection from discrimination regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity.
The successful expansion of the resolution to include “gender identity” on Transgender Day of Remembrance, a day dedicated to those murdered as a result of their gender identity or expression, was particularly significant.
Contact:
Allison Jernow, t +41 22 979 38 23, e-mail: allison.jernow@icj.org
NOTE:
The vote
- For a full vote on the Singapore Amendment, click here. For a photograph of the vote, click here.
- For a full vote on the United Arab Emirates Amendment to remove sexual orientation and gender identity, click here. For a photograph of the vote, click here.
- For a full vote on the passage of the Extrajudicial, Summary and Arbitrary Executions Resolutions, click here. For a photograph of the vote, click here.
Nov 21, 2012 | News
The ICJ condemned today the execution of Ajmal Amir Kasab and called on India to immediately reinstate a moratorium on the death penalty.
“This is the second execution in South Asia in less than a week, marking a resurgence of capital punishment in the region,” said Sam Zarifi, Asia Director for the ICJ.
The ICJ condemned Pakistan’s execution of soldier Muhammad Hussain on Wednesday 15 November 2012.
Ajmal Kasab was executed by hanging in the early hours on Wednesday morning amid great secrecy.
The execution comes just a day after India voted against a United Nations General Assembly (GA) draft resolution, adopted by the GA’s Third Committee, calling for a moratorium on the use of the death penalty.
Over one hundred United Nations member States supported the draft resolution, an increase from previous United Nations General Assembly Resolutions passed in 2007, 2008 and 2010. The resolution will be taken up by the GA in December.
“India is one of a dwindling number of States voting against the resolution and still retaining the death penalty,” Zarifi added. “The death penalty violates the right to life and the inherent dignity of the person.”
More than 150 of 192 United Nations member States have either abolished the death penalty or do not practice it.
“There is no doubt that Kasab’s crimes were heinous, causing immeasurable suffering, but putting him to death is a significant step backwards for India, ending its eight-year hiatus on executions,” Zarifi said.
CONTACT:
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme, t: +66 857200723; email: sheila.varadan(at)icj.org
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 26198477; email: sam.zarifi(at)icj.org
Background:
Ajmal Kasab, a 25-year old Pakistani national, was sentenced to the death for his role in the Mumbai terrorist attack in 2008. The Supreme Court confirmed Ajmal Kasab’s death sentence on 29 August 2012, upholding the judgment of the Bombay High Court on 21 February 2011 and the sentence handed down by a lower court in May 2010.
On 18 September 2012, Kasab sent a four-line handwritten mercy plea to the President of India. The Maharashtra Home Ministry recommended rejecting the mercy plea on 24 September 2012 and Governor of Maharashtra, K Sankaranarayan, advised the same on 29 September 2012. The Union Government rejected the mercy plea on 23 October 2012. The President rejected the mercy plea in early November 2012.
Nov 20, 2012 | News
The ICJ today called on the Israeli authorities to immediately end their military attacks in the Gaza Strip.
