May 6, 2017 | News
The programme, launched today in Niamey, Niger, aims to enhance the capacity of civil society organizations to use AU mechanisms for human rights protection and promotion.
The three-year Africa-wide project on Consolidating Civil Society’s Role in the Transition from African Human Rights Standards to Practice is run by the ICJ, together with the African Centre for Democracy and Human Rights Studies (ACDHRS), the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC) and the ICJ-Kenya Section.
The programme increases awareness of people in Africa about the AU human rights mechanisms for human rights implementation and compliance. It is directed at both national and community levels.
A further objective of the project is to strengthen national and regional responses to displaced persons and other groups at risk, including women and children.
The project will also provide an opportunity to human rights defenders, CSOs and journalists, who ordinarily have no means to access and attend the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, to do so in order to increase their involvement in the AU human rights system and will provide advocacy and litigation support to them.
Arnold Tsunga, Director of the ICJ Africa Regional Programme, noted that the African Union (AU) has developed an impressive body human rights law and standards.
He observed, however, that “one of the missing links is that of implementation and that unless human rights are effectively implemented, they may just remain standards on paper.”
The launch took place in the plenary of the NGO Forum preceding the 60th Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR).
Participants in the Forum strongly welcomed the opportunities that the project will create and many indicated that they would take advantage of the opportunity to broaden participation in the African human rights mechanisms.
The programme is supported by the European Union, which was represented at the launch by Mr. Basile Sallustio, Attaché to the Délégation in Niger.
Apr 27, 2017 | News
An appeals court’s confirmation of the conviction for crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture of Hissène Habré, the former president of Chad, is a vindication of the decades-long campaign waged by his survivors, the ICJ and two human rights groups supporting the victims said today.
Habré’s May 2016 conviction was upheld by the appeals chamber of the Extraordinary African Chambers in the Senegalese court system on April 27, 2017.
The appeals court also confirmed the life sentence handed down by the trial court and ordered Habré to pay over 82 billion CFA francs (approximately 123 million euros) to his victims.
“This is a crowning victory for Hissène Habré’s victims, who for 26 years never gave up fighting to bring him to justice” said the ICJ Commissioner Reed Brody, who has worked with the survivors since 1999.
“His life sentence is a wake-up call to tyrants everywhere that if they engage in atrocities they will never be out of the reach of their victims,” he added.
The appeals court also upheld the decision to order compensation to Habré’s victims and said that a trust fund created by the African Union (AU) should be tasked with searching for and recovering Habré’s assets.
A summary of the decision was read out in court by chief judge Ougadeye Wafi, a judge of the Supreme court of Mail, who shared the bench with two senior Senegalese judges.
Habré, who ruled Chad from 1982 to 1990, was not in court for the judgment. He did not recognize the chambers’ authority and sat silently throughout the trial.
His court-appointed lawyers filed the appeal on his behalf.
Hissène Habré fled to Senegal in 1990 after being deposed by the current Chadian president, Idriss Déby Itno. Although Habré was first arrested and indicted in Senegal in 2000, it took a long campaign by his victims before the Extraordinary African Chambers were inaugurated by Senegal and the AU in February 2013 to prosecute crimes under international law committed in Chad during Habré’s rule.
“I have been fighting for this day since I walked out of prison more than 26 years ago,” said Souleymane Guengueng, who nearly died of mistreatment and disease in Habré’s prisons, and later founded the Association of Victims of Crimes of the Regime of Hissène Habré (AVCRHH). “Today I finally feel free.”
Habré’s trial was the first in the world in which the courts of one country prosecuted the former ruler of another for alleged human rights atrocities.
“At long last, after so many years of fighting, so many years of setbacks, we have achieved what we set out to do,” said Jacqueline Moudeina of Chad, the victims’ chief lawyer and president of the Chadian Association for the Promotion of Human Rights (ATPDH).
The appeals court said that while it accepted the credibility of the witness Khadidja Hassan Zidane who stated that Habré personally raped her on four occasions, it could not convict Habré of personal having committed rape because the charge was not included in the individual indictment.
In the ruling upheld today, the trial court awarded each survivor of rape and sexual slavery 20 million CFA francs (approximately 30,489 Euros, US$32,702), each survivor of torture and arbitrary detention and each mistreated former prisoner of war 15 million CFA francs (22,867 Euros, US$24,526), and family members of victims 10 million CFA francs (15,244 Euros, US$16,350).
It said that 7,396 victims were eligible for reparations and that 3,489 others who had not produced sufficient proof could apply to the trust fund.
The court has already frozen some assets belonging to Habré including a house in an upscale Dakar neighborhood believed to be worth about 680,000 Euros as well as some small bank accounts. Habré is thought to have much more extensive assets.
“Money will never bring back my friends,” said Clément Abaïfouta, who as a prisoner was forced to bury other detainees in mass graves, and is now president of the AVRCHH. “But money is important to heal the wounds, to take victims out of poverty, and to show that we have rights that must be recognized.”
“With this verdict, we can now try to locate and seize Habré’s assets and make sure the victims are compensated,” said lawyer Moudeina.
Contact
Reed Brody, ICJ Commissioner, t: +221-76-618-79-10 (in Dakar) or +1-917-388-6745 ; e: reedbrody(a)gmail.com
The full text of the press release can be downloaded in English and in French below:
Chad-HisseneHabre Conviction Upheld-News-Press Releases-2017-ENG (English, PDF)
Tchad-Hissene Habre peine confirmee-News-Press Releases-2017-FRE (Français, PDF)
Apr 10, 2017 | News
Zambia should reaffirm its membership in the International Criminal Court to best advance justice for victims of atrocities, a group of African organizations and international nongovernmental organizations – including the ICJ – with a presence in Africa said today.
Zambia’s government began public consultations on the country’s ICC membership the week of March 27, 2017.
This was in response to the African Union summit’s adoption in January of an “ICC withdrawal strategy.”
An unprecedented 16 countries, including Zambia, entered reservations to this decision.
Zambia has been a role model on the continent in matters of peace, democracy, and human rights. Leaving the ICC would erode the country’s leadership and threaten respect for the rights of victims of the most brutal crimes across Africa, the group of organizations said.
As a member of the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC), Zambia has a proud history in the establishment of the ICC, they added.
SADC was active in the diplomatic conference in Rome in 1998 where the ICC’s treaty was finalized after six weeks of negotiations.
SADC members developed 10 principles for an effective, independent, and impartial court at a meeting in Pretoria in 1997.
The ICC is a groundbreaking achievement in the fight against impunity, the organizations said.
It is the first and only global criminal court that can prosecute individuals responsible for atrocities.
It is a court of last resort in that it has the authority to try genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity committed since 2002, but only when national courts are unable or unwilling to investigate and prosecute.
Since the court’s treaty opened for signature in 1998, 124 countries have become members.
Zambia signed the ICC’s Rome treaty on July 17, 1998, the day it opened for signature, and ratified the treaty on November 13, 2000.
The ICC faces many challenges in meeting the expectations of victims of mass atrocities and member countries, the organizations said.
Its inability to reach crimes committed in some powerful countries and their allies is a cause for deep concern, even as claims that the ICC is targeting Africa are not supported by the facts.
The court’s reach is limited to crimes committed on the territories of countries that have joined the court or offered the court authority on its territory, absent a referral by the United Nations Security Council.
The majority of ICC investigations in Africa have arisen in response to requests or grants of authority by governments in the countries where the crimes were committed – as in Central African Republic, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Mali, and Uganda – or through referrals by the UN Security Council – as in Darfur, Sudan and Libya.
The ICC has faced backlash from some African leaders since it issued arrest warrants for Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir for alleged genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity in Darfur in 2009 and 2010.
In 2016, evidence of the backlash reached new heights when South Africa, Burundi, and Gambia announced they would withdraw from the court, the first countries to take such action.
Gambia has rescinded its withdrawal and South Africa is also re-examining withdrawal, making Burundi the only country to have maintained its withdrawal.
Under the ICC Statute, withdrawal goes into effect one year after the state party submits a notification to the UN Secretary-General.
In the wake of the announced withdrawals, many African countries – including Botswana, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Ghana, Lesotho, Mali, Malawi, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, and Tunisia – have affirmed their commitment to remain in the ICC and to work for any reform as ICC members.
The organizations encourage Zambia to reaffirm its support for the court, particularly in the absence of any functioning regional criminal court that can hold perpetrators to account.
The groups expressing support for Zambia’s continued ICC membership are:
Africa Legal Aid
Africa Centre for International Law and Accountability–Ghana
Centre for Accountability and Rule of Law–Sierra Leone
Centre for Democratic Development–Ghana
Centre for Human Rights and Rehabilitation (Malawi)
Civil Resource Development and Documentation Centre (Nigeria)
Coalition for the International Criminal Court
Fédération Internationale des Droits de l’Homme
Human Rights Watch
Institute for Security Studies
International Commission of Jurists
JEYAX Development and Training (South Africa)
Kenya Section of the International Commission of Jurists
Kenya Human Rights Commission
Nigerian Coalition for the ICC
Parliamentarians for Global Action
Southern African Centre for the Constructive Resolution of Disputes (Zambia)
Southern Africa Litigation Centre (South Africa)
Apr 6, 2017 | News
South Africa is to appear before a scheduled hearing at the International Criminal Court on 7 April 2017 (ICC) in The Hague for a hearing on its failure to arrest Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmad al Bashir when he visited South Africa in June 2015.
The hearing, before the pre-trial Chamber of the ICC will consider whether South Africa was in breach of its obligations under the ICC Rome statute when it failed to effect the ICC arrest warrant on President Bashir.
The ICJ, represented by South African Justice Johann Kriegler, will be attendance observing the proceedings.
President Bashir has been indicted by the ICC on charges of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity in relation to atrocities committed from 2003 to 2008 in Darfur.
“The case is critical for ensuring the effectiveness of the ICC as an institution. The only means the ICC has of enforcing its orders is through the cooperation of States,” said Sam Zarifi the Secretary General of the ICJ.
“The failure to arrest President Bashir and the subsequent efforts to withdraw from the ICC Rome statute raise important questions about South Africa’s commitment to the fight against impunity in Africa and globally,” Zarifi added.
South Africa gave notice last October that it intended to leave the ICC, but this notice has been withdrawn, at least pending debate in Parliament.
The ICJ had filed a brief with the South African Parliament calling on South Africa to remain with the ICC Rome statute.
The brief was signed by retired South African Constitutional Court Justices Laurie Ackermann, Richard Goldstone, Johann Kriegler, Yvonne Mokgoro, Kate O’Regan and Zak Yacoob.
It was co-signed by Navi Pillay, former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, former judge of the ICC and former President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and Wilder Tayler, then Secretary General of the ICJ.
Justice Zak Yacoob remarked that “pursuit of justice and pursuit of peace are complementary and mutually reinforcing objectives that South Africa will best achieve by remaining party to the Rome Statute of the ICC. Its not an either or situation. Protecting heads of States from justice whatever they do compromises peace too much.”
Contact
Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Director for Africa, t +27716405926 ; e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org
Background
South Africa was among the first States to ratify the Rome Statute of the ICC. It signed the Rome Statute on the day it was adopted, 17 July 1998, and ratified it on 27 November, 2000.
Both during the negotiations preceding the Rome Conference that established the Court in 1998, and at the Conference itself, South Africa played a leading role.
However, the events of June 2015 surrounding the arrival of President Omar al Bashir of Sudan in South Africa appears to have engendered a shift in South Africa’s posture, leading many observers to call into question the country’s commitment to international justice.
The failure by South African authorities to arrest and surrender President al Bashir to the ICC, although he had been indicted by the ICC for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide, led to the Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC) taking the government to court to compel it to fulfill its obligations both under the Rome Statute and the Implementation of the International Criminal Court Act 27 of 2002 (Implementation Act).
On 19 October 2016, the Minister of International Relations and Co-operation gave notice of South Africa’s intention to withdraw from the Rome Statute.
The Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services put out a call for submissions to be made to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services on the Implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act Repeal Bill [B23-2016] to be made by 8th March 2017.
Mar 30, 2017 | News
The ICJ expressed its hope today that an arrangement reached between four judges of the High Court and Botswanan President Ian Khama along with Chief Justice Dibotelo would serve to restore the effective functioning of the High Court and its critical role in the administration of justice.
The settlement resulted in Justices Key Dingake, Modiri Letsididi, Ranier Busang and Mercy Garekwe withdrawing a petition and letter they had written complaining about what they considered to be a range of deficiencies in the justice system, as well as a failure of leadership in judicial administration.
The President and executive, for its part, discontinued pursing allegations of misconduct and bringing the name of the judiciary into disrepute against the judges and disestablished the impeachment tribunal that had been set up to try them.
The ICJ had previously expressed its concern about the process of the impeachment of the judges and the impact of the impeachment proceedings on judicial independence and impartiality in Botswana.
The ICJ was also concerned that impeachment proceedings would not accord with the principles of the right to fair trial.
“This settlement paves the way for the four judges to resume their normal duties,” said Arnold Tsunga Director of the ICJ.
“The Botswana executive and judicial officials charged with administration of the justice can now focus their attention on addressing the very real challenges facing the justice system in the country,” Tsunga added.
The ICJ reminds the Botswana authorities of their duty to guarantee the independence, impartiality and accountability of the judiciary under international law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, treaties to which Botswana is a party.
Contact
Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Regional Director for Africa, t: +27 716405926or +263 777 283 249; e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org
Background
The ICJ recalls that the four judges were suspended under section 97 of the Botswana Constitution on allegations of misconduct and bringing the name of the judiciary into disrepute.
The suspension was precipitated by a signed petition directed to the Chief Justice. In the petition the judges objected, among other things, to alleged poor conditions of service, as well as disparaging comments the Chief Justice was said have made about another judge’s ethnicity and defamatory statements related to corruption.
The petition also advocated for the Chief Justice’s impeachment and was copied to all judges of the High Court.
The Chief Justice and the President took issue with the contents and tone of the petition, alleging it to be disrespectful of the Chief Justice and causing disrepute of the judiciary in the eyes of members of the public.
