Mar 7, 2014 | News
The ICJ expressed concern at today’s arrest of Fakhriddin Zokirov, a prominent defence lawyer who had represented the former Minister of Industry, Zaid Sayidov.
The former Minister was recently convicted for a number of crimes including polygamy, receiving a bribe, rape, fraud, illegal confinement and sentenced to 26 years of imprisonment.
The ICJ is concerned at reports that the arrest of the lawyer may be related to his active and robust defence of the former Minister in court.
Lawyer Zokirov was arrested by the State Finance Control and Anti-Corruption Agency on charges of fraud in banking transactions, which allegedly took place several years ago.
Two other lawyers who defended the former Minister, Shukhrat Kudratov and Iskhok Tabarov, announced at a press conference that they had recently faced various threats and intimidation in connection with the case.
The lawyers reported that the pressure on them had significantly increased in relation to a lawsuit which they brought against the head of the State Finance Control and Anti-Corruption Agency, Fattokh Sayidov.
They alleged that the head of the Agency threatened that if they did not drop the case, they would “share the dock” with their client, the former Minister.
“Abusive prosecutions of lawyers and threats against them in connection with their work are contrary to international standards on the independence of lawyers and undermine the integrity of the justice system”, Róisín Pillay, Director of the Europe Programme, said today. “In the exercise of their profession, lawyers must remain free from intimidation, harassment, fear and arbitrary prosecution and arrest. The ICJ calls on the authorities of Tajikistan to ensure that lawyers’ integrity is protected, and that the criminal justice system is not misused to intimidate them.”
Under the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, lawyers must not be identified with their clients’ causes, and must be protected against attacks and intimidation, including prosecutions or administrative or other sanctions for action taken in accordance with their recognized professional duties.
Contacts:
Róisin Pillay, Director, Europe Programme, t + 32 273 48 46, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser, Europe Programme, t + 41 22 979 38 32, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
Tajikistan-arrest of lawyer-news-web story-2014-rus (full text in pdf)
Feb 21, 2014 | Advocacy, News, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ and other human rights organizations issued a public statement calling on Spanish lawmakers not to pass draft legislation that, if approved, would seriously limit Spanish courts’ ability to investigate and prosecute serious crimes under international law.
The draft legislation, tabled in Parliament by the Popular Party (PP), provides that, for cases involving allegations of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes not occurring on Spanish territory to be investigated and prosecuted in Spain, the suspect must either be a Spanish national or a foreigner habitually resident in Spain or a foreigner who is in Spain, whose extradition has been denied by Spanish authorities.
For case of torture and enforced disappearance, the proposed legislation requires that the suspect be a Spanish national or, alternatively, that the victim be a Spanish national at the time when the crime was committed and that the suspect be present in Spain when jurisdiction is assumed.
Where these conditions are not met, the proposal would allow Spanish courts to hear cases for those crimes for which prosecution is required by international treaties where the suspect is a foreigner on Spanish soil, so long as Spain has received and denied an extradition request.
The ICJ and other organizations stressed in their statement that if enacted, this legislation would close the doors of Spanish courts to certain victims of gross human rights violations who are unlikely otherwise to be able to obtain justice, particularly within their own jurisdictions.
Spain-Universaljurisdiction-NGOsJointStatement-2014-eng (download the joint statement in English)
Spain-Universaljurisdiction-NGOsJointStatement-2014-SPA (download the joint statement in Spanish)
Feb 17, 2014 | News
The ICJ today expressed concern at a ruling of the Italian Constitutional Court which denies full accountability of Italian officials in the case of the 2003 unlawful rendition, enforced disappearance and torture of Osama Mustafa Hassan Nasr, also known as Abu Omar.
In a ruling making no mention of the international human rights law obligations of Italy, the Court agreed with the contention of the Italian Government that it may protect from disclosure and use in court what it considers to be “secrets of state” even if to do so would prevent the revelation of the truth about serious crimes and human rights violations and the holding of those responsible to account.
The Court ruled that, under the Italian Constitution and the law on secrets of state, it is the sole prerogative of the President of the Council of Ministers, exercising “a wide discretionary power”, to establish the width of application of the secret of state doctrine.
The Court affirmed that such decisions cannot be questioned by ordinary courts.
A number of Italian and United States intelligence agents, including the former Director of the Italian Military Secret Service, Nicolò Pollari, had been found guilty of criminal offences in connection with the rendition.
The Constitutional Court’s ruling is likely to effectively annul the convictions of the top Italian secret agents involved in the rendition.
“This ruling constitutes a serious blow to the fight against impunity for some of the most serious crimes under international law”, said Massimo Frigo, Legal Adviser for the Europe Programme. “It disregards fundamental pillars of international human rights law, including the right to truth and the duty to investigate, prosecute and ensure accountability for gross violations of human rights”.
“The doctrine of “secret of state” must never be used as a means to cover up responsibility for crimes under international law or gross violations of human rights,” Frigo added. “The United States, which is primarily responsible, deplorably has abdicated its responsibility to meaningfully investigate and hold officials to account for gross human rights violations in its rendition and secret detention programme. Italy, by contrast, had been the only country in which the courts had imposed convictions for the US-led renditions. After this judgment, there is a real risk that the Italian complicity in this crime will never be fully ascertained and accounted for.”
The ICJ is concerned at reports that time limits for the conclusion of criminal proceedings in this case could expire in two months, despite the fact that, under international standards, limitation periods should not be imposed in respect of serious of crimes such as torture and enforced disappearance.
The expiry may foreclose any further investigation or criminal trial on Italian involvement in this rendition, which should occur irrespective the obstacles caused by the secret of state doctrine.
The ICJ is particularly concerned that successive Italian governments since 2007 have either proposed or refused to withdraw government applications before the Constitutional Court affirming that the executive prerogative on secret of state takes precedence over the fight against impunity.
The ICJ considers that the law and practice regarding the “secret of state” must be reformed to be into compliance with Italy’s duty to investigate crimes under international law and gross human rights violations.
While States may protected a limited amount of information when strictly necessary for legitimate national security purposes, they may not do so with respect to information concerning gross violations of human rights.
Background
Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr, also known as Abu Omar, was been kidnapped in 2003 in the streets of Milan by CIA operatives and subject to rendition to Egypt where he had been subject to enforced disappearance, arbitrary detention and torture.
The case of Abu Omar was one of at least 136 known cases in the rendition and secret detention carried out since 2001 by the United States, with the participation of some 54 other States, which typically involved multiple human rights violations, including torture and ill-treatment, enforced disappearance, and arbitrary detention.
The Constitutional Court judgment effectively reversed the ruling of the Court of Cassation that ordered the reopening of the trial against the former Director of the Italian Military Secret Service, Nicolò Pollari, his deputy, Marci Mancini, and other Italian military secret services operatives for their alleged complicity in the operation.
The Court of Cassation had held that the doctrine of “secret of state”, which barred their conviction, would not apply to them, because the Italian secret services have no authority to conduct such illegal operations and they had therefore effectively acted in private capacity.
Following that judgment, the Court of Appeal convicted, among others, for complicity in the kidnapping Nicolò Pollari to ten years of imprisonment and Marco Mancini to nine years.
The Court of Cassation upheld in absentia the convictions and sentences of 23 US agents involved for the offence of kidnapping.
On 5 April 2013, the President of the Italian Republic, Giorgio Napolitano, granted a pardon for US Colonel Joseph L. Romano III, who had been convicted by Italian courts of the offence of complicity with the US in kidnapping for his role in the rendition of the Milan cleric Abu Omar in 2003.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe Programme, massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Dec 6, 2013 | News
On 6 December, the ICJ concluded a trial observation mission to Kazakhstan on the case of the disbarment of lawyer Polina Zhukova.
Lawyers Lyubov Agushevich and Polina Zhukova were disbarred following disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Ministry of Justice regarding their defence of a client in court proceedings.
The alleged misconduct, which lead to the disbarment of the lawyers, included inter alia a statement of innocence of their client, submitting motions to the court, submitting requests for recusals, one lawyer “putting a question which she knew the answer to”, reading a page out of the case file, and filing a motion for an examination of the witnesses who attended the hearing.
These actions were interpreted by the presiding judge in the criminal case in which the lawyers represented the defendant as violations of professional ethics, and were later used as grounds for the termination of their licenses to practice law.
ICJ observers, Justice Ketil Lund, an ICJ Commissioner and a former Justice of the Supreme Court of Norway, and Zulfikor Zamonov, a lawyer from Tajikistan, observed the Supreme Court appeal hearing in the case on 5 December.
The Supreme Court upheld the motion of lawyer Zhukova to resume proceedings in her case and reconsider the issue of the lawfulness of her disbarment.
“The ICJ welcomes the decision to review the case against the lawyer and will continue following the case,” said Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe Programme.
Read also:
Disbarment proceedings against lawyers in Kazakhstan
Disciplinary action against lawyers in CIS countries: analysis of international law and standards
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, ICJ Europe Programme, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, LegalAdviser, ICJ Europe Programme, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
Dec 3, 2013 | News
Today, the ICJ observed a hearing in a case concerning Zinaida Mukhortova, a lawyer detained until recently in a psychiatric facility, allegedly for carrying out her professional duties, but released on 1 November.
At the hearing on 2 December, the Karaganda Regional Court confirmed the lawfulness of her detention, upholding the earlier decision of the Balkhash City Court of 20 August 2013, to grant the motion of the Prosecutor’s Office to detain the lawyer.
“The likelihood of her repeated detention for the lawful exercise of her profession has risen following this decision,” Almaza Osmanova, an ICJ observer present at the hearing, commented.
The deputy Head of the Medical Facility in which Zinaida Mukhortova (photo) was detained, Doctor R.R. Iskahakov was present at the hearing and insisted on the lawfulness of her detention.
The ICJ previously reported Doctor Iskahakov’s refusal to release lawyer Mukhortova until all the court proceedings had been completed.
The ICJ trial observation mission consisted of two observers: Almaza Osmanova, a practicing lawyer from Kyrgyzstan and Kayum Yusufov, a practicing lawyer from Tajikistan.
The ICJ has previously made statements following lawyer Mukhortova’s detention and subsequent release from the psychiatric facility:
Kazakhstan: ICJ welcomes release of a lawyer from psychiatric detention
Kazakhstan: psychiatric detention of lawyer must be ended
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, ICJ Europe Programme, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, LegalAdviser, ICJ Europe Programme, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
Nov 18, 2013 | News
Following its mission to Tajikistan on 10-13 November, the ICJ called on the Tajikistan authorities to reconsider provisions of a draft law which could undermine the independence of the legal profession.
The draft Law on Lawyers’ Activities and Advokatura would allow the Ministry of Justice a significant role in regulating entry to the profession.
In particular, the Qualification Commission for lawyers, which would be responsible for access to the profession, would operate under the Ministry of Justice (picture).
It would be chaired by a deputy Minister, and would also include five lawyers, one representative of Parliament, one legal academic, and one other representative of the Ministry of Justice.
It is particularly worrying that all lawyers would be required to go through a new qualification process, carried out by this Commission, within one year of the new law coming into force.
“The draft law would bring welcome reforms, unifying a divided profession under a single, independent, Union of Lawyers. However, the value of these reforms would be undermined, since every lawyer would have to go through a new qualification process, the nature of which is not yet clear, administered by a body under the Ministry of Justice,” said Judge Egbert Myjer, Commissioner of the ICJ.
“The procedure would risk cleansing the profession of independent lawyers and leading to de facto domination of the profession by the Ministry of Justice, contrary to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers,” he added.
Under international standards on the role of lawyers, independent self-governing professional associations of lawyers should be established, and should have sufficient powers to regulate the profession, including control of the qualification of lawyers.
The ICJ emphasized that at present there is a lack of consistency in the varied qualification procedures in the different sections of the legal profession in Tajikistan, which impedes high professional standards.
This should be addressed through a unified, independent and rigorous qualification process administered by the profession itself, in line with international standards, and as recommended by the UN Human Rights Committee, the International Bar Association and the ICJ.
The ICJ heard consensus from lawyers’ associations in Tajikistan that the proposed role of the Ministry of Justice would impair the effective and independent work of lawyers.
The lawyers’ associations added that these concerns were not taken into account in the drafting process.
In response to criticism by the UN Human Rights Committee earlier this year, the Minister of Justice stated that the Qualification Commission would only be placed under the Ministry for Justice for a transitional period.
This is not reflected in the current draft law. However, the authorities reassured the ICJ that the role of the Ministry of Justice in qualification was not intended to be permanent.
The ICJ mission to Tajikistan took place from 10 to 13 November. It was led by Justice Egbert Myjer, an ICJ Commissioner and former judge of the European Court of Human Rights, and also included ICJ staff members Róisín Pillay, Director of the Europe Programme of the ICJ, and Temur Shakirov, Legal Advisor of the Europe Programme.
The mission included a roundtable discussion with lawyers’ associations of Tajikistan, as well as meetings with representatives of the judiciary, the Ombudsman, and the National Legislative Centre and NGOs.
On 14 November, ICJ staff members met with the first deputy Minister of Justice.
The ICJ mission followed its report on the Independence of the Legal Profession in Central Asia, which analysed the law and practice of each of the five Central Asian states, including Tajikistan, in light of international law and standards, and made recommendations on the principles that should guide reform of the legal profession.
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, ICJ Europe Programme, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe Programme, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
Tajikistan-ICJ Mission-news-web story-2013 (full text in pdf)
Tajikistan-ICJ Mission-news-webs story-2013-rus (full text in pdf)
