Jul 14, 2015 | News
The Royal Government of Cambodia must immediately end the legal harassment of human rights defender, Ny Chakrya, Head of the Human Rights and Legal Aid Section of the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (ADHOC), the ICJ said today.
On 13 July 2015, a Deputy Prosecutor at the Phnom Penh Municipal Court questioned Ny Chakrya for two hours in relation to statements he had made at two press conferences in May 2015.
The summons and questioning were, according to information provided to the ICJ, pursuant to a complaint by an Investigating Judge and another prosecutor.
The proceedings appear to be based on the fact that at the press conferences Ny Chakrya alleged that two clients of ADHOC had been arbitrarily arrested and detained in Siem Reap province and were facing an unfair trial.
“The legal harassment of Ny Chakrya for merely raising allegations of human rights violations is itself a clear violation of human rights,” said Kingsley Abbott, ICJ’s International Legal Adviser.
“Human rights defenders play a vital role in promoting and protecting human rights and the State has a duty to create the conditions for them to be able to carry out their work effectively and without fear of retaliation,” he added.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Cambodia is a State Party, guarantees the right to freedom of expression; the prohibition of arbitrary arrest or detention and the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law; and the right to seek effective remedies for alleged violations of human rights.
The UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, adopted by a consensus of States including Cambodia, affirms the right of everyone to peacefully oppose human rights violations.
It reaffirms the prohibition of retaliation, threats and other harassment against anyone who takes peaceful action against human rights violations, both within and beyond the exercise of their professional duties.
It also protects the right of persons to file formal complaints about alleged violations of rights.
The UN Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors provide that prosecutors have the duty to uphold human rights and that states must ensure they have the power and discretion to fulfill this and other duties. Prosecutors should not proceed with a case they know to be unfounded.
“The complaint against Ny Chakrya was clearly without foundation and he should never have been summoned for questioning in the first place,” Abbott said. “To continue to proceed with this case would be a violation of Ny Chakrya’s rights as a human rights defender.”
The ICJ reiterates its call for the end of the legal harassment of Ny Chakrya and that his case should be closed definitively by whatever means or to whatever extent is available to the Deputy Prosecutor and other state officials.
Background:
According to information provided to the ICJ, on 22 June 2015 the Phnom Penh Municipal Court issued a summons for Ny Chakrya to appear before it for questioning pursuant to a complaint filed by the Investigating Judge and the Deputy Prosecutor of the Siem Reap Provincial Court alleging public defamation (Art. 305 of the Cambodian Criminal Code), acts of slanderous denunciation (Art. 311 of the Cambodian Criminal Code), and the publication of comments to put pressure on the jurisdiction (Art. 522 of the Cambodian Criminal Code).
On 13 July 2015 at the Phnom Penh Municipal Court, the Deputy Prosecutor questioned Ny Chakrya about statements he made at two press conferences organized by ADHOC.
At a press conference on 12 May 2015 in Siem Reap, Ny Chakrya and a lawyer from ADHOC alleged that two clients of ADHOC had been arbitrary arrested and detained in the context of a high profile land dispute in Siem Reap province.
Ny Chakrya alleged that their arrest and detention was a violation of Cambodian law and international human rights law.
At a press conference on 20 May 2015 in Phnom Penh, Ny Chakrya sought to raise public awareness about a complaint that he had filed the same day to the President of the Disciplinary Council of the Supreme Council of Magistracy.
In the complaint, Ny Chakrya alleged that the Deputy Prosecutor and Investigating Judge of the Siem Reap Provincial Court lacked independence and that the two villagers would not receive a fair trial as a result.
On 17 June 2015, the Siem Reap Provincial Court found ADHOC’s clients guilty of inciting a group of villagers to trespass on, use and destroy the property of Community Takhmao Development Agricultural & Industrial, an agricultural development company.
They were sentenced respectively to six months’ and eight months’ imprisonment.
The criminal proceedings arose in the context of a dispute between Community Takhmao Development Agricultural & Industrial and villagers in Chup Romdeng Village in Siem Reap province regarding the alleged illegal clearing of land in Siem Reap province.
Contact:
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ International Legal Adviser, t: +668 4092 3575 ; e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Jul 13, 2015 | News
The ICJ today condemned the approval by the Cambodian Peoples’ Party (CPP) of a law which aims to pose obstacles to and restrictions on the activities of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in order to be officially registered in the country.
In June and July 2015, the ICJ and other international human rights groups sent joint letters to the Government of Cambodia, including to Prime Minister Hun Sen and the President of the National Assembly, urging for the withdrawal of the draft law.
“It is extremely disappointing that the Government has chosen to ignore widespread national and international criticism of the draft LANGO and calls for it to be withdrawn,” said Kingsley Abbott, International Legal Adviser for the ICJ.
“There is no doubt that the draft law’s restrictions on freedom of association and expression, in contravention of international law and standards, will severely impair civil society’s ability to carry out its vital work,” he added.
Today, the Cambodian National Assembly unanimously approved the draft Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations (draft LANGO) promoted by the Cambodian Peoples Party (CPP) after 55 members of the opposition party, Cambodia National Rescue Party, decided to boycott the vote.
All 68 members of the CPP, including Prime Minister Hun Sen, attended the plenary session of the National Assembly and voted in favor of the draft law.
The draft LANGO will still have to be adopted by the Senate, and thereafter, receive the assent of the Cambodian King before it becomes law.
The ICJ calls on the Senate to reject the draft LANGO.
“The fact that the legislation was passed without genuine consultation with civil society tends to suggest that the Government’s intention is to weaken the impact of NGOs, including human rights defenders,” Abbott said.
The draft law’s most problematic provisions include:
- excessive documentation required for the registration of both domestic and international associations and NGOs;
- arbitrary powers of the Ministry of Interior and Ministry of Foreign Affairs to deny or revoke registration on the grounds of “public security, stability and order, or generate a threat to national security, national unity or the culture, traditions and customs of Cambodian national society”;
- the requirement that associations “adhere to a stance of neutrality vis à vis political parties”, and provisions that allow for the suspension and dissolution of groups that violate this requirement;
- the requirement that NGOs report to several ministries and to submit an annual report summing up work activities and finances; and
- the inclusion of sweeping provisions for the suspension and dissolution of domestic and international associations and NGOs.
Background
The draft LANGO, if ultimately adopted and implemented, would bring Cambodia into non-compliance with international law and standards.
As a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Cambodia must guarantee the rights to freedom of expression and association and ensure that no restrictions are put in place except under the strict conditions set out in articles 19(3) and 22(2) of the ICCPR. These conditions clearly have not been met under the terms of the draft LANGO.
In addition, Article 2 of the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders provides that each “State has a prime responsibility and duty to protect, promote and implement all human rights and fundamental freedoms, inter alia, by adopting such steps as may be necessary to create all conditions necessary in the social, economic, political and other fields, as well as the legal guarantees required to ensure that all persons under its jurisdiction, individually and in association with others, are able to enjoy all those rights and freedoms in practice.
Article 8 states that everyone “has the right, individually and in association with others, to have effective access…to participation in the government of his or her country and in the conduct of public affairs…[including] the right, to submit to governmental bodies and agencies and organizations concerned with public affairs criticism and proposals for improving their functioning and to draw attention to any aspect of their work that may hinder or impede the promotion, protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms.”
Contact:
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ’s International Legal Adviser, t: +668 4092 3575 ; e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Jul 9, 2015 | News
In a letter sent today, the ICJ and seven other human rights organizations urge the Thai Government to drop criminal charges against two journalists from the online news outlet Phuketwan who are about to go on trial for writing about the trafficking of the Rohingya.
The letter was sent to the General Prayuth Chan-ocha, Prime Minister of Thailand.
The trial, which is set to start on 14 July, revolves around criminal charges brought by the Royal Thai Navy against Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian for reproducing one paragraph from a Pulitzer Prize-winning article written by Reuters news agency implicating the Navy in the smuggling of the Rohingya off the coast of Thailand.
“Thailand must drop these charges immediately and unconditionally,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
“Criminal prosecution of speech is a violation of international law, and the Thai Navy’s relentless pursuit of this case seems even more misguided as it comes at a time when journalists have played a vital role in uncovering mass graves on the Thailand-Malaysia border and thousands of migrants and refugees, including Rohingya, left stranded on boats in the Andaman Sea,” he added.
On 16 December 2013, the Royal Thai Navy lodged complaints of criminal defamation and offences against Thailand’s Computer Crimes Act (CCA) against the journalists.
On 17 April 2014, the journalists were charged with criminal defamation under articles 326 and 328 of the Thai Criminal Code, which carry a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment and a fine of up to 200,000 Baht (USD $6,000); and violation of article 14(1) of the CCA, which carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment and a fine of up to 100,000 Baht (USD $3,000).
“The absurdity of these prosecutions was emphasized when the Office of Thailand’s Prime Minister recently asked one of the two journalists, Chutima Sidasathian, who is working towards a Ph.D. on the Rohingya, to suggest a solution to the ‘boat people’ crisis,” Zarifi further said.
“It is not too late to follow that request with an unconditional withdrawal of all charges as an official recognition of the important work by Alan Morison and Chutima Sidasathian in raising these issues and as a concrete gesture of Thailand’s purported commitment to addressing them,” he added.
Contact:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Background:
Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Thailand is a State Party, guarantees the right to freedom of expression, which includes the right to impart information. The UN Human Rights Committee, which monitors State compliance with the ICCPR, has expressed its concern at the misuse of defamation laws to criminalize freedom of expression and has said that such laws should never be used when expression is made without malice and in the public interest.
The ICJ, an increasing number of governments, the Human Rights Committee and other international authorities, believe that criminal defamation laws should be abolished. Such laws are inherently incompatible with the ICCPR and other international laws and standards on freedom of expression. Criminal penalties are always a disproportionate means to protect against reputational harm and pose an impermissibly severe impediment to the exercise of free expression.
Thailand was criticized in May 2014 when the United Nations Committee Against Torture expressed its concern “at the numerous and consistent allegations of serious acts of reprisals and threats against human rights defenders, journalists, community leaders and their relatives, including verbal and physical attacks, enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings, as well as by the lack of information provided on any investigations into such allegations.”
The Committee recommended that Thailand “should take all the necessary measures to: (a) put an immediate halt to harassment and attacks against human rights defenders, journalists and community leaders; and (b) systematically investigate all reported instances of intimidation, harassment and attacks with a view to prosecuting and punishing perpetrators, and guarantee effective remedies to victims and their families.”
Thailand-Letter to PM Prayuth re Phuket Wan-Advocacy-open letters-2015-ENG (full text of the letter, in PDF)
Thailand-Phuketwan cases-News-Press release-2015-THA (full text of press release in PDF, Thai)
Thailand-Letter to PM Prayuth re Phuket Wan-Advocacy-open letters-2015-THA (full text of the letter, in PDF, Thai)
Jul 8, 2015 | News
The ICJ held a successful workshop with the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) on ‘Investment Law Challenges: Defending Public Policy in Investor State Arbitration’.
The event took place in Nay Pyi Taw from 6 to 8 July 2015 and was attended by 60 participants from the OAG and other Ministries.
The workshop was designed to raise awareness about Myanmar’s human rights obligations in relation to investment and to build the OAG’s capacity to draft law that carves out regulatory space for public policy making.
The workshop also prepared the OAG for challenges to public policy through arbitration with a moot court exercise.
The topic is timely as Myanmar rushes to draft new investment law and sign Bilateral Investment Treaties that give investors standing to challenge public policy promoting and protecting human rights.
In opening the workshop, Director General U Kyaw San spoke of the rapid increase of investment in Myanmar and the corresponding changes in its regulatory system.
Dr. Na Chi Oo, a speaker for the OAG, outlined the challenges this poses to the drafting of new public policy.
Participants heard from ICJ Commissioner Prof Andrew Clapham who discussed globalization, investment arbitration and public policy.
He examined the use of human rights law in investment arbitrations.
Guest speaker Prof. Anthony Daimsis introduced bilateral investment treaties and highlighted provisions that can restrict state regulatory space.
Prof. Errol Mendes gave examples of international cases in which public policy has been challenged.
Ms. Harpreet Kaur Dhillon, from the Centre for International Law, National University of Singapore gave practical advice for drafting law that protects the regulatory role of the state.
Dr. Daniel Aguirre, ICJ Legal Adviser, added that “Myanmar needs to update its regulatory system to protect the environment and human rights. It must make sure it does not sign away its regulatory role through investment law and bilateral treaties.”
The event culminated with a moot arbitration exercise where OAG participants engaged in a mock consultation process and a simulated arbitration over a public health policy.
The ICJ was impressed by the interest and genuine commitment of the participants to promote the rule of law and public policy in Myanmar.
The ICJ staff enjoyed open and frank discussion with the Attorney General and is Director Generals on relevant legal developments and looks forward to further discourse.
The ICJ remains committed to provide support in this field in line with the promotion and protection of human rights.
Jul 2, 2015 | News
The Royal Thai Government must immediately end its harassment and intimidation of human rights lawyer, Sirikan Charoensiri, the ICJ said today.
Sirikan Charoensiri (photo), a lawyer with Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR), has been providing legal aid to 14 students who were arrested on 26 June 2015 after carrying out peaceful protests calling for democracy and an end to military rule.
Since then, the Royal Thai Police have threatened Sirikan Charoensiri with legal action, publically announced they are considering charging her with a crime, and visited her home and questioned her family.
“The government must immediately end its harassment and intimidation of human rights lawyer Sirikan Charoensiri,” said Matt Pollard, Head of the ICJ’s Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers in Geneva. “The case against her clients clearly violates Thailand’s obligations under international law, and cannot be a valid basis for the police to take any action against her for defending their rights.”
On 30 June 2015, the ICJ met in Geneva with staff members of the United Nations Special Rapporteurs on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, and on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders, in order to bring Sirikan Charoensiri’s case to their attention.
“The ICJ has been repeatedly warning of Thailand’s steady slide away from open democracy and the rule of law,” added Pollard. “These actions of the police, targeting peacefully protesting students with prosecution in a military court, and then targeting the lawyer who comes to their defence, underscores the urgent need to restore respect for human rights in Thailand.”
Contact:
Matt Pollard, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ’s Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, t: +41 22 979 38 12, e: matt.pollard(a)icj.org
Background
The 14 students were arrested during the evening of 26 June 2015 and were brought to a police station in Bangkok and then to the Bangkok Military Court for a hearing on pre-trial detention, which proceeded until midnight.
The students have been charged with violating order 3/2015 of the National Council for Peace and Order (which prohibits the public assembly of more than five people for political purposes) and a ‘sedition’-type offence under section 116 of Thai Criminal Code, which carries a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment.
Upon hearing of the students’ arrest, Sirikan Charoensiri and three other lawyers drove in her car to the Bangkok Military Court in order to provide legal aid to the students.
Following the hearing and during the early morning of 27 June 2015, the police asked Sirikan Charoensiri for her permission to search her car for the student’s phones, without a warrant. She refused to consent to the warrantless search. As a result, the Police impounded her car, which contained the lawyers’ case files and personal computers, and five phones belonging to the students.
At 12:45pm, Sirikan Charoensiri went to the police station to file a complaint of malfeasance regarding the seizure of her car. The police refused to accept the complaint and in the meantime another police team searched her car with a warrant. Five phones belonging to the students were seized as evidence.
At 18:00pm, Sirikan Charoensiri again attempted to file a complaint at the police station for malfeasance. A senior investigator told her that the police had power to search her car and suggested that if she filed a complaint, it would not finish there and that the police would consider countering with some form of legal action against her. The police finally accepted the complaint at 11:00pm.
On 28 June 2015, a senior police officer told the media that they had found “important evidence” in Sirikan Charoensiri’s car and are considering whether to charge her with a crime.
On 29 June 2015, the police visited Sirikan Charoensiri’s family home and asked her parents to identify her in photos and questioned them about her background.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Thailand is a State Party, guarantees the right to peaceful assembly; the right to freedom of expression; the prohibition of arbitrary arrest or detention and the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law (including the right of prompt access to a lawyer and precluding jurisdiction of military courts over civilians in circumstances such as these); and the prohibition of arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy, family, home and correspondence (which includes arbitrary searches or seizures).
The UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders affirms the right of everyone peacefully to oppose human rights violations. It prohibits retaliation, threats and other harassment against anyone who takes peaceful action against human rights violations, both within and beyond the exercise of their professional duties. It protects the right of persons to file formal complaints about alleged violations of rights. The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provide that governments are to ensure that lawyers are able to perform their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference.
Sirikan Charoensiri formerly served as a National Legal Consultant with the ICJ.
Thailand-Sirikan case-News-press releases-2015-THA (full text in PDF, Thai version)
Jun 9, 2015 | News
The ICJ today organized a diplomatic dialogue, in advance of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR), with ambassadors and high-level diplomatic representatives, to share the state of human rights in Myanmar.
