Pakistan: UN review highlights human rights failures

Pakistan: UN review highlights human rights failures

Pakistan’s third Universal Periodic Review (UPR) has drawn global attention to a number of serious human rights failures in the country, said the ICJ today.

On 16 November, the UPR Working Group of the Human Rights Council adopted a draft UPR outcome report for Pakistan. Pakistan received a total of 289 recommendations – a substantial increase from its previous UPR in 2012, when Pakistan received 167 recommendations. As many as 111 State delegations took the floor to make statements, and 14 States submitted their questions in advance.

“That well over a hundred delegations participated in the review indicates the global community’s interest in Pakistan’s human rights situation,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Director.

Key recommendations urge Pakistan to:

  • Reinstate a moratorium on executions with the view to abolishing the death penalty;
  • Repeal or amend “blasphemy laws” to bring them in line with international human rights law;
  • Ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and a number of other human rights treaties;
  • Ensure effective protection of the rights of religious minorities, human rights defenders, journalists and other vulnerable groups;
  • Strengthen the National Commission for Human Rights;
  • Ensure prompt, impartial and effective investigations of human rights violations and bring perpetrators to justice;
  • Set 18 as the minimum legal age for marriage; and
  • Ensure effective implementation of laws on violence against women.

“The States’ recommendations echo the concerns of dozens of civil society organizations and even the National Commission of Human Rights – who all agree that the Government must take urgent measures to address the downward spiral of rights in the country”, Rawski said.

Pakistan will now examine the recommendations and respond to the Human Rights Council at latest by the Council’s next session in March 2018.

Pakistan’s review comes at a time of serious concern about the rights situation in the country.

The Government lifted the informal moratorium on the death penalty and carried out nearly 500 executions in less than three years – among the highest execution rates in the world; Parliament enacted laws allowing military courts to try civilians for certain terrorism-related offences in secret trials; and the authorities started a new wave of crackdowns on NGOs, journalists and human rights defenders, including subjecting them to enforced disappearance.

Persecution of religious minority communities also continues despite the Government’s claims that religious minorities “enjoy equal rights as equal citizens of Pakistan”. Last month, three Ahmadi men were sentenced to death for blasphemy for allegedly scratching anti-Ahmadi pamphlets that had the “Mohr-e-Nabbuwat” (seal of the Prophet Muhammad) printed on them. And earlier this week, the Islamabad High Court directed the Government to respond to a petition demanding a separate database for Ahmadis in the civil service to ensure they are not “posted in offices involving sensitive matters”.

“As a member of the Human Rights Council, Pakistan is expected to uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights, something it has clearly failed to do,” added Rawski.

“Pakistan should make use of this process by accepting the recommendations made during the review and adopting a concrete, action-based national human rights plan to ensure their effective implementation.”

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 64 478 1121, e: frederick.rawski@icj.org

Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Pakistan (London), t: +447889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org

Pakistan-UPR-PressRelease-2017-eng (download the press release)

Additional information

UN Member States reviewed Pakistan’s human rights record for the third time on Monday, 13 November, through the UPR process.

The UPR is a unique mechanism of the UN Human Rights Council aimed at improving the human rights situation of each of the 193 UN Member States. Under this mechanism, the human rights record of all UN Member States is peer-reviewed every four to five years by the UPR Working Group, consisting of the 47 UN Member States of the Human Rights Council; however, any UN Member State can take part in the discussions and the dialogue during the UPR of the reviewed States. States then make recommendations to the country under review, which has the option of accepting or noting the recommendations.

 

 

Cambodia: the ICJ condemns dissolution of main opposition party

Cambodia: the ICJ condemns dissolution of main opposition party

Today’s decision of the Supreme Court to dissolve the main opposition political party, the Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), has significantly heightened the human rights and rule of law crisis within the country, the ICJ said.

The Supreme Court has also banned 118 of CNRP politicians from political activity for five years.

“By dissolving the main opposition party and banning 118 CNRP politicians from political activity for five years, the Supreme Court is irreparably interfering with the rights of potentially millions of Cambodians to freely choose their political representatives and vote for them in the upcoming elections,” said Kingsley Abbott, the ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia.

“The fact that the Law on Political Parties was amended to enable the Supreme Court to dissolve political parties shortly before it dissolved the CNRP strongly suggests the entire ‘legal process’ was nothing more than political theatre, inconsistent with human rights and the rule of law.”

A full bench of nine judges of the Supreme Court, including the President, unanimously decided to dissolve the CNRP pursuant to powers contained within Article 44 (new) of the Law on Political Parties (LPP), which was controversially amended twice this year, in February and July 2017.

The lawyers representing the CNRP were not present at Court after electing to boycott the proceedings in protest at their legitimacy.

Furthermore, the President of the Supreme Court, Justice Dith Munty, who read out the decision, is reportedly a member of the ruling Cambodian People’s Party (CPP) and sits on both its Standing and Permanent Committees, raising serious doubts about the independence and impartiality of the Court.

“It makes a mockery of fair justice to have someone in a leadership position within one political party sit in judgment on the conduct of that party’s main opposition. There can be no starker example of an inherent conflict of interest,” Abbott said.

“At an absolute minimum, the President should have recused himself from any role in relation to the case, as should have any other judge sitting on the bench if they hold a similar position within the CPP,” he added.

These concerns are consistent with the ICJ’s findings in a report it released last month, in which it found that the “single largest problem facing the Cambodian justice system is the lack of independent and impartial judges and prosecutors.”

“The problem is two-fold: an endemic system of political interference in high-profile cases and an equally entrenched system of corruption in all others.”

On 23 October 2017, the 26th anniversary of the 1991 Paris Peace Conference on Cambodia, the ICJ and 54 other organizations wrote an open letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the Conference’s co-chairs calling on them to reconvene the members of the Conference, along with other concerned stakeholders, for an emergency summit to discuss the human rights crisis within the country.

“The dissolution of the CNRP sends a strong signal to the international community and all Cambodians that a red-line has been crossed, which makes reconvening the Paris Peace Conference to address the human rights and rule of law crisis within the country all the more urgent,” said Kingsley Abbott.

Contact

Kingsley Abbott, Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, ICJ, t: +66 94 470 1345 ; e: kingsley.abbott@icj.org

Background

It has been reported that, on 4 and 5 October 2017, the Cambodia Youth Party and the Funcinpec Party, respectively, filed complaints with the Ministry of Interior (MOI) alleging that the CNRP had violated Articles 6 (new) and 7 (new) of the Law on Political Parties, and asked the MOI to file a complaint with the Supreme Court to dissolve the CNRP.

On 6 October 2017, the MOI filed a complaint with the Supreme Court pursuant to Article 38 (new) of the LPP to dissolve the CNRP.

Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Cambodia is a State Party, guarantees the rights of all persons, without any unreasonable restrictions, “to take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen representatives; and to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors.”

Article 14 of the ICCPR affirms the principle that tribunals judging rights and obligations in legal proceedings be independent and impartial.

Detailed international standards on requirements for a court to be independent have been set out in the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary (1985), and requirements for judicial impartiality have been set out in the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct and Commentary (2002/2007), which includes the standard that “All partisan political activity and association should cease upon the assumption of judicial office” (para 75 of the Commentary).

 

Pakistan: human rights record under UN scrutiny

Pakistan: human rights record under UN scrutiny

As Pakistan is set to undergo its third Universal Periodic Review (UPR) on 13 November, the ICJ has urged Pakistani authorities to meaningfully engage with the process to improve the human rights situation in the country.

“Pakistan’s past engagement with the UPR has been characterized by denial and defensive posturing,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Director.

“As a recently-elected member of the UN Human Rights Council, it is more important than ever for the Pakistan to show that it takes its human rights obligations seriously by engaging with the upcoming UPR in its true spirit,” he added.

During its second UPR in 2012, Pakistan received 167 recommendations, of which it rejected seven, noted 34, and accepted 126.

The seven recommendations rejected by Pakistan relate to some of the most serious human rights violations in the country, including recommendations to adopt an official moratorium on the death penalty with a view to abolishing capital punishment in law and practice, repeal blasphemy laws, and decriminalize adultery and non-marital consensual sex.

Even accepted recommendations have been largely ignored in the four years since the previous UPR, the ICJ notes.

Enforced disappearances are still not recognized as a distinct, autonomous crime; perpetrators of gross human rights violations continue to escape justice; there has been complete inaction to prevent abuse of so-called blasphemy laws; and freedom of expression is often restricted on vague grounds such as “national security” and “immorality”.

“Pakistan’s human rights situation has in many ways deteriorated since 2012,” Rawski added.

“Yet – as reflected by Pakistan’s national report for the upcoming UPR – the authorities apparently remain in a state of denial about the dire human rights implications of these new measures,” he said.

These measures include the lifting the informal moratorium on the death penalty and carrying out nearly 500 executions in less than three years – among the highest in the world; passing laws allowing military courts to try civilians for certain terrorism-related offences; and a new wave of crackdowns on NGOs, journalists and human rights defenders, including retaliating against NGOs for presenting “a very bleak picture” of the country’s human rights situation to the UN.

“UN member states on Monday should urge Pakistan to end the dangerous downward spiral on rights by ending repression, respecting fundamental freedoms, and holding perpetrators of violations responsible,” Rawski said.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 64 478 1121, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Pakistan (London), t: +447889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org

Additional information

The UPR is a unique mechanism of the UN Human Rights Council aimed at improving the human rights situation of each of the 193 UN Member States. Under this mechanism, the human rights record of all UN Member States is peer-reviewed every four to five years by the UPR Working Group, consisting of the 47 UN Member States of the Human Rights Council; however, any UN Member State can take part in the discussions and the dialogue during the UPR of the reviewed States. States then make recommendations to the country under review, which has the option of accepting or noting the recommendations.

 

Thailand: ICJ lectures on basic international human rights law and right to life at Chiang Mai University

Thailand: ICJ lectures on basic international human rights law and right to life at Chiang Mai University

Today, the ICJ addressed an academic seminar on the topic of “Post-mortem Examinations and Inquires”, organized by Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law, in collaboration with the Cross Cultural Foundation, a partner of the ICJ.

Participants in the seminar, which was held at Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law campus, included undergraduate students and lecturers from Chiang Mai University.

The ICJ’s speakers at the workshop were Sanhawan Srisod, ICJ National Legal Adviser, who delivered an introduction to International Human Rights Law, and Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, who addressed the right to life, and the international law and standards as they relate to investigations including the rights of victims and family members.

Other speakers at the Workshop were Preeda Nakphew a lawyer with the Cross Cultural Foundation, and Sarawut Pratoomraj, a Law Reform Officer with the Law Reform Commission of Thailand.

The seminar was part of an ongoing engagement between the ICJ and Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law.

Nepal: search for truth and justice continues – new ICJ report

Nepal: search for truth and justice continues – new ICJ report

The arrest of absconding murder convict Bal Krishna Dhungel, a senior Maoist leader, highlights the weaknesses, as well as the promises, for victims seeking accountability through Nepal’s judicial system, said the ICJ as it released a report on accountability mechanisms in the country.

The ICJ’s report Achieving Justice for Gross Human Rights Violations in Nepal concludes that impunity for gross human rights violations is one of the major obstacles to the creation of a stable and legitimate democratic government and lies at the heart of the rule of law crisis in Nepal.

It found that a lack of commitment by Nepal’s political leadership to address past and ongoing human rights violations continues to allow perpetrators to escape justice and undermines victims’ right to effective remedies and reparation.

“In the past, the promise to shield perpetrators for human rights violations has been used as a bargaining chip to garner political support and build political alliances,” said Frederick Rawski, Director of the ICJ’s Asia Pacific Regional Programme.

“It is imperative that accountability for human rights violations remains a priority for Nepal’s political leadership after Parliamentary elections, and that alliances between political parties are not once again used as an excuse to undermine Nepal’s human rights obligations,” added Rawski.

Attempts to thwart justice have also included the cynical manipulation of justice sector actors, from the police to the Attorney General’s office, in a way that threatens the independence and credibility of the institutions responsible for safeguarding human rights and the rule of law in Nepal, the report highlights.

This pattern of impunity persists despite demands for accountability by civil society and victims’ organizations, as well as the National Human Rights Commission and Nepal’s Supreme Court.

“In many ways, the Supreme Court of Nepal has emerged as a beacon of hope for victims of human rights violations,” said Rawski.

“The Court has given domestic effect to Nepal’s obligations under international law and has set high standards for accountability, remedy and reparations,” he added.

However, the Government’s disregard of key judgments has limited the impact of the Supreme Court’s jurisprudence, the report says.

Attacks on the independence of the judiciary, as demonstrated by the impeachment motion against former Chief Justice Sushila Karki, also indicate a worrying trend.

The ICJ’s report found that the mandate and operation of transitional justice mechanisms fall short of international standards despite the repeated reinforcement of such standards by the Supreme Court.

Though ostensibly formed to provide a measure of public accountability, the practice of forming ad hoc commissions of inquiry to investigate rights violations has promoted impunity by diverting investigations from the criminal justice process – where they belong – into parallel mechanisms that are established by means that make them vulnerable to political interference and manipulation.

The ICJ’s report also concludes that gross human rights violations in Nepal are not a thing of the past, but are ongoing.

Notably in the Terai region, the State has responded to the Madhesh movement with excessive use of force, extrajudicial killings, and torture and other ill-treatment.

Political expediency has trumped calls for justice and accountability and the Government continues to use State machinery to shield perpetrators rather than serve the interests of justice.

“In a seemingly perpetual cycle, the weak rule of law in the country contributes to impunity for human rights violations, and this culture of impunity further erodes the rule of law,” said Rawski.

“The search for truth and justice in Nepal will not be realized unless this cycle is ended,” he added.

Additional information

Dhungel had been absconding since the Supreme Court upheld his conviction for murder in 2010. The arrest comes after a contempt of court petition was filed before the Supreme Court against the Inspector General of Police for failing to implement multiple Supreme Court orders directing Dhungel’s arrest.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 64 478 1121, e: frederick.rawski@icj.org

Alex Conte, ICJ Global Redress and Accountability Initiative, t: +41.79.957.2733; e: alex.conte@icj.org

Download

Nepal-GRA Baseline Study-Publications-Reports-Thematic reports-2017-ENG  (full report in PDF)

Read also

ICJ Discussion Paper Nepal’s Transitional Justice Process: Challenges and Future Strategy (August 2017)

ICJ Report Authority without Accountability: The struggle for justice in Nepal (October 2013)

 

Translate »