Lesotho: authorities must ensure the independence of the judiciary and reopen the Court of Appeal

Lesotho: authorities must ensure the independence of the judiciary and reopen the Court of Appeal

The Africa Judges and Jurists Forum (AJJF) and the ICJ today called on the authorities in Lesotho to guarantee the independence of the judiciary and to immediately take all legal and administrative measures necessary to make the Court of Appeal function independently and impartially.

The call came as the AJJF and ICJ concluded a 5-day Fact Finding Mission to Lesotho (7-12 May 2018).

The mission emphasized the importance of the Lesotho authorities ensuring that the constitutional and legal framework on the selection, appointment and tenure of judges and the actual practices conform to the international obligations of Lesotho pursuant the international human rights treaties to which it is party, as well as other applicable international standards.

“During our mission we were troubled to discovered that the Court of Appeal has not sat in the past two of its scheduled sessions and with the current impasse we are concerned that it may not convene anytime soon,” said Retired Chief Justice Othman Chande of Tanzania who led the AJJF/ICJ mission.

“We also found that the Prime Minister had initiated a process that may result in the impeachment of the Chief Justice under controversial circumstances,” he added.

The AJJF and the ICJ have been concerned for a number of years about threats to judicial independence in Lesotho.

The ICJ carried out a fact finding mission in 2013 exposing and evaluating some of these concerns. The report of the mission contained specific recommendations.

The AJJF and the ICJ are concerned that most of the recommendations that were made to address structural issues to do with guaranteeing the independence of the judiciary at law and in practice have not been implemented or otherwise addressed.

The appointment of the Chief Justice and the President of Court of Appeal is made by the King on the singular advice of the Prime Minister.

Any impeachment of the Chief Justice and the President of the Court of Appeal is also initiated by the Prime Minister.

These arrangements do not comport with international standards and give rise to the perception that the appointment of judicial officials and any impeachment action against them will be politically motivated.

This has also lead to friction or strong perception of friction between the Executive and the Judiciary in a deeply polarized society.

The appointment process of the President of the Court of Appeal has been subject to prolonged political dispute and litigation that has resulted in a leadership vacuum at the appex court that has made it dysfunctional.

The result is that all litigants who expect justice from the Court of Appeal have years of waiting before they can get their matters resolved.

While the case challenging the appointment of an acting President of the Court of Appeal is presently set down for hearing at the High Court in the coming weeks, it is not clear that this adjucation will conclude the legal process and pave way for the appointment of the acting President of the Court of Appeal.

The appointment of ordinary judges of the High Court is done by the King on the advice of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), which is chaired by the Chief Justice chairing a panel of only four people comprising the Chief Justice herself, Chairperson of the Public Service Commission, the Attorney General and one Judge.

All these officials are effectively appointed by the Prime Minister or closely work with the Chief Justice, resulting in an appointment process of judges of the High Court that lacks transparency and is perceived as open to cronyism.

“It is important that the legal profession and the judiciary speak strongly in defence of independence of the judiciary, but currently the legal profession is deeply divided, distrustful and polarized,” said Retired Chief Justice Sakala (Zambia).

“It is therefore important that a practice of regular bar-bench dialogue be initiated to reduce toxic relations that are being exploited to undermine judicial independence,” he added.

The broader reforms that were recommended by the SADC Commission of Inquiry to strengthen governance in Lesotho have not been wholly implemented.

The country needs broad reforms including in the judicial sector, but these reforms have been threatened or at least slowed down significantly by the instability in the successive coalition governments that make it impossible for the reforms to be carried out when the country is in a constant electoral mode.

The AJJF/ICJ mission hopes that the ongoing efforts to impeach the Chief Justice will fully respect her right to a fair hearing as stipulated in international obligations binding on Lesotho and that such efforts will strengthen rather than weaken the rule of law in an already fragile environment.

A report of the mission will be published and made publicly available.

Lesotho-End of Mission statement-News-2018-ENG (full story, in PDF)

37th UN Human Rights Council: joint NGO end of session statement

37th UN Human Rights Council: joint NGO end of session statement

The ICJ today joined other NGOs in an end-of-session statement, reflecting on the 37th ordinary session of the UN Human Rights Council.

The statement was delivered by the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) on behalf of:

  • The East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project (DefendDefenders)
  • The Global Initiative for Economic, Social & Cultural Rights
  • CIVICUS
  • International Commission of Jurists
  • International Federation for Human Rights Leagues
  • Conectas Direitos Humanos
  • Human Rights House Foundation
  • Amnesty International
  • International Lesbian and Gay Association
  • Human Rights Watch
  • Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA).

The statement read as follows (text in italics was not read aloud for lack of time):

“Our organisations welcome the adoption of the resolution on the promotion and protection of human rights and the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, particularly in reaffirming that all approaches to development must comply with the State’s international human rights obligations.

We agree that “cooperation and dialogue” are important for the promotion and protection of human rights, and that States should fully cooperate with the Council and its mechanisms, and ensure that all stakeholders are able to cooperate and engage with them without fear of reprisals.

However, we must now be vigilant to ensure that the resolution on Mutually Beneficial Cooperation, lacking in balance, does not undermine other important parts of the Council’s mandate: to address human rights violations and respond promptly to human rights emergencies in specific countries.

The Council has failed to take meaningful action to address the alarming situation on the ground in Cambodia. We welcome and echo the joint statement on Cambodia by over 40 states calling for further action if the situation does not improve in the lead up to the elections and for a briefing by the High Commissioner before the next Council session. We are concerned by Cambodia’s attempt to shut down criticism under item 10 debate on the worsening human rights situation in the country, as they are doing domestically.

We are disappointed by the weak outcome on Libya. Given the gravity of the human rights situation on the ground and the lack of accountability for crimes under international law, the Council cannot justify the lack of a dedicated monitoring and reporting mechanism.

We welcome the co-sponsorship of the Myanmar resolution by groups of States from all regions, making a joint commitment to address the continuing human rights violations and crimes against humanity in the country and support for the Special Rapporteur and Fact-Finding Mission to fulfil its mandate to establish truth and ensure accountability for perpetrators.

We also welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan allowing it to continue its vital investigations and identification of perpetrators. These developments acknowledge the importance of accountability for serious human rights violations and crimes under international law, which cannot be understated.

We welcome the adoption of the resolution on drugs and human rights as the OHCHR report will provide human rights indicators related to the drug issue that would help in future policies.

We welcome the resolution on Eastern Ghouta adopted after an urgent debate, demonstrating how this Council can respond in an agile manner to crises.

Having long supported the resolution on “protection of human rights while countering terrorism”, we appreciate the efforts that led to the end of the separate and deeply flawed initiative on “effects of terrorism on the enjoyment of human rights“. Future versions of the resolution must address the relevant issues exclusively and comprehensively from the perspective of the effective protection of human rights.

We welcome the Dutch-led joint statement on strengthening the Council, emphasising the importance of substantive civil society participation in any initiative or process and that the Council must be accessible, effective and protective for human rights defenders and rights holders on the ground.

Finally, we call on the Bureau co-facilitators on improving the efficiency and strengthening the Council to closely engage with all Members and Observers of the Council, human rights defenders and civil society organisations not based in Geneva.”

Zimbabwe: High Court judges Orientation Workshop

Zimbabwe: High Court judges Orientation Workshop

The ICJ and the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) of Zimbabwe, are convening a three-day Orientation Workshop for newly appointed judges. 

It is held until 24 March at Troutbeck Inn, Nyanga.

The workshop is the fourth such meeting that the ICJ and the JSC have convened with the support of the European Union.

The training provides a useful bridge for the new appointees as they transition from the bar to the bench.

The topics covered during the training include judgement writing, court procedure and decorum, substantive law, judicial independence and issues of integrity on the bench.

The Hon. Judge President Chiweshe in his opening remarks stated that the objectives of the workshop are to familiarize incoming judges with their new work environment and to acquaint them with the specific divisions of that court.

This is to prepare them for the full assumptions of work in the judiciary. Justice Chiweshe noted that each division, criminal, civil and family law, will expose the judges to its own activities, guided by the judge from that division.

After the training the hope is that the judges will be deployed to their respective regions and stations fully acquitted with the tasks before them and can dispense justice diligently, impartially, fairly, without fear, favour or promise.

In attendance at the first day of the workshop were 17 judges (four female and thirteen male).

Swaziland: ICJ calls for urgent enactment of Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Bill

Swaziland: ICJ calls for urgent enactment of Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Bill

The ICJ today submitted a briefing note to the Senate of Swaziland calling for its urgent adoption of the Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Bill 2015.

The ICJ’s briefing note concludes that enactment of the Bill is a matter required of the Kingdom of of Swaziland pursuant to its regional and universal human rights law obligations to criminalize and sanction the perpetrators of sexual and gender-based violence. Compliance with those obligations is reinforced by the ‘Vision 2022’ of His Majesty King Mswati III, the aims and targets of the Deputy Prime Minister’s Office and Swaziland’s consensus in the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The ICJ’s briefing note also concludes that, ten years after initial drafting of the Bill, its enactment during the current session of the Parliament of Swaziland is an essential step in complying with recommendations of the UN Human Rights Committee and CEDAW Committee and as a means of discharging the commitments made by His Majesty’s Government during the 2016 Universal Periodic Review.

Swaziland-SOADVBill-Advocacy-ParliamentaryBriefingNote-2018-ENG (Parliamentary Briefing Note, in PDF)

International Women’s Day: ICJ and its Commissioners advancing gender justice

International Women’s Day: ICJ and its Commissioners advancing gender justice

Today on International Women’s Day the world looks to celebrate the achievements of women and advances made towards the realization of women’s human rights but the day is also an opportunity to address the issues that continue to disadvantage women.

In the 70th anniversary year of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights many women around the world have seen States failing to live up to their obligations to ensure that they are able to exercise their human rights.

Where women’s human rights are violated many women face discrimination, denial of equal protection of the law and other impediments in accessing the justice that they deserve.

“The ICJ has a strong commitment to addressing the obstacles women face in accessing justice,” said ICJ Acting Vice-President, Justice Radmila Dragicevic-Dicic.

“The judiciary has an important role in protecting the rights of women, but in many States there is a lack of proper awareness and understanding of issues such as gender based-violence.  Many judges would benefit from judicial education on specific gender-based issues to ensure that women victims are made visible and their rights protected by domestic laws and relevant international standards,” she added.

For several years the ICJ has worked on women’s access to justice issues in different countries in all regions with a variety of stakeholders, including human rights defenders, lawyers, judges, governmental authorities and international rights experts and mechanisms.

For example, in Tunisia, the ICJ issued a memorandum calling on authorities to remove the obstacles women face in accessing justice.

The ICJ has held regional dialogues in Africa and Asia with judges and lawyers.

In Asia, one outcome of this was The Bangkok General Guidance for Judges in Applying a Gender Perspective, designed to assist judges in employing a gender perspective in deciding cases before them, which has since been adopted for use by judiciaries in Indonesia and the Philippines.

In Africa, the need for gendered perspectives in judicial decision-making was also raised in a regional report evaluating sexual and gender based violence (SGBV) and fair trial rights.

The ICJ has undertaken substantial work on women’s access to justice in the context of SGBV, including a report calling for an eradication of harmful gender stereotypes and assumptions and a Practitioners’ Guide on Women’s Access to Justice for Gender-Based Violence.

Both have been used as training tools in Asia, Africa and MENA, most recently at a workshop on SGBV in Swaziland.

Last year the ICJ released a memorandum on effective investigation and prosecution of SGBV in Morocco.

The ICJ has also undertaken trial observations during hearings in the landmark Sepur Zarco case, the first case that resulted in a conviction for sexual crimes that had occurred during Guatemala’s internal conflict in the early 1980s.

The ICJ regularly engages with the UN Human Rights Council and the UN Committee on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women to highlight issues around women’s access to justice and call on the international community to be vigilant in upholding women’s rights protections.

“The ICJ is lucky to count among its number some very impressive women human rights defenders, who bring a great deal of expertise to the work of the organization,” said Dragicevic-Dicic.

“The five most recent additions to the ICJ have further strengthened the organization’s ability to speak authoritatively on women’s rights, and I look forward to working with my new colleagues to enhance women’s access to justice,” she added.

The new additions to the ICJ include Dame Silvia Cartwright, Former Governor of New Zealand; Professor Sarah Cleveland, Constitutional and Human Rights Professor at Columbia Law School in the USA; Justice Martine Comte who has over 30 years judicial experience in France; Mikiko Otani, member of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child from Japan; and Justice Lillian Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza from the Supreme Court of Uganda.

In an interview with the ICJ, Commissioner Justice Elizabeth Evatt, a distinguished Australian lawyer, jurist and trailblazer for women in the legal profession in her country, spoke about the importance of women being able to access justice.

One of the architects of Australia’s Family Law Act of 1975, Justic Evatt told the ICJ how the Act made divorce more accessible and abolished the Common Law relics that gave men greater rights over women, however new problems have emerged since then.

Justice Evatt explained that “(the Act) was an extremely important reform for women. It made it far easier for men and women to access divorce and have their matters dealt with because the court had conciliation and counselling services and also legal aid was more readily available. But I am afraid that since those days, thing have changed. The Family Court is now beset with delays and obstacles and it is impossible for people to get legal aid. People have to take their case on their own or face huge legal costs, so having begun well, it hasn’t continued well. More resources are needed.”

Justice Evatt also considers that there is a need for the government and the judiciary to take more action to address domestic violence.

However, she noted, “there has been a change over the years with a growing awareness of both the police and the local courts, which are the main ones dealing with violence. They have become far more aware of the need to take action to protect women and prevent violence but the cure for domestic violence does not lie just with the courts but also with the whole of society.”

 

Watch the interview:

Translate »