Pakistan: Asia bibi’s blasphemy case, a final plea for justice

Pakistan: Asia bibi’s blasphemy case, a final plea for justice

In a briefing paper released today, the ICJ provides answers to key questions regarding the blasphemy case against Asia Noreen (Asia bibi), a 45-year old Christian woman convicted and sentenced to death for “defaming the Prophet Muhammad” in 2010.

Tomorrow, on Thursday 13 October 2016, the Supreme Court of Pakistan is scheduled to hear Asia bibi’s appeal challenging her conviction and death sentence for blasphemy.

The Lahore High Court had upheld her conviction and sentence in October 2014.

“Asia bibi has been on death row for six years under a bad law that has been improperly applied,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia Director.

“The Supreme Court has previously held that people accused of blasphemy in Pakistan ‘suffer beyond proportion or repair’– Asia bibi’s case is an illustration of that injustice and suffering,” he added.

If the Supreme Court upholds her conviction, Asia bibi will be at the risk of execution, with only limited options of filing for a review of the judgment and making a mercy petition to the President of Pakistan.

The Supreme Court has so far not upheld any convictions for blasphemy under section 295-C of the Penal Code (defamation of the Prophet Muhammad).

The briefing paper explains the allegations against Asia bibi and assesses the violations of Pakistani and international fair trial standards during her blasphemy trial and high court appeal.

“This is the first blasphemy appeal being heard by the Supreme Court since 2002,” Zarifi said.

“All eyes are on the Court to see if it will provide justice to Asia bibi, and whether it will try to clean up some of the manifest injustices of the blasphemy law and how it’s being applied today,” he addedd.

The ICJ opposes laws that criminalize the exercise of freedom of expression as protected by international law and standards, including in relation to religion, and opposes capital punishment in all circumstances.

The death penalty constitutes a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

Contact:

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Pakistan (London), t: +44 7889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org

 Additional Information:

In November last year, the ICJ published a report documenting in detail systematic and widespread violations of the right to a fair trial in proceedings related to blasphemy offences in Pakistan, particularly in trial courts. The report confirmed concerns raised by the Supreme Court of Pakistan that individuals accused of blasphemy ‘suffer beyond proportion or repair’ in the absence of adequate safeguards.

The ICJ also made a number of recommendations to the Pakistani executive, legislative and judicial branches to address violations caused by application of the blasphemy laws, whether due to the legislative provisions themselves or at the investigative, prosecutorial, procedural, administrative and judicial levels highlighted in the report, including to ensure that those accused of blasphemy have a fair chance at defending themselves.

pakistan-asia-bibi-qa-advocacy-2016-eng (full Q & A, in PDF)

Thailand: ICJ alarmed at increasing use of arbitrary powers under Article 44

Thailand: ICJ alarmed at increasing use of arbitrary powers under Article 44

Thailand should immediately end the use of Article 44 of the Interim Constitution which gives the Head of the military junta sweeping, unchecked powers contrary to the rule of law and human rights, said the ICJ today.

Despite widespread international condemnation of Article 44, its use has increased every year since the Interim Constitution was promulgated on 22 July 2014 following the coup d’état of 22 May 2014.

The Head of the National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO), Prayut Chan-o-cha, has issued at least 107 Orders under Article 44 (available in the public domain): at least one in 2014; 44 in 2015; and 62 in 2016 to date – with 37 Orders being issued since June 2016 alone.

“The Head of the NCPO’s increasing willingness to use extraordinary powers to make ad hoc, arbitrary changes to existing laws and regulations without judicial oversight should be alarming to everyone, including the business sector,” said Wilder Tayler, Secretary General of the ICJ.

“Article 44 places law making power in the hands of one man, while Articles 47 and 48 of the Interim Constitution block judicial review or access to remedies and reparation. This is entirely inconsistent with the three fundamental pillars of the rule of law, equality, accountability and predictability, and should be revoked immediately,” he added.

The Article 44 orders range from those restricting the civil rights of all people in Thailand to those aimed at seemingly minor and ordinary bureaucratic processes.

To date, Article 44 has been used to introduce a raft of revisions into existing Thai law without observing proper process or practice, including providing for the acquisition of land for the establishment of Special Economic Zones bypassing the usual environmental and social checks and balances provided for in domestic legislation; granting military officers sweeping powers of investigation, arrest and detention; and prohibiting the gathering of five or more persons for political purposes.

“It is long past time for Thailand to revoke Article 44 and all others laws, orders and announcements issued since the military coup that are inconsistent with the rule of law and human rights,” Tayler said.

“The justifications the military presented for such measures were never valid or credible, and certainly not so after more than two years of direct military rule.”

All Orders issued under Article 44 – and all other NCPO Orders and Announcements – will continue to remain in force under the draft Constitution that was accepted at a public referendum on 7 August 2016, and may only be repealed or amended by an Act.

Last week, Deputy Prime Minister Wissanu Krea-ngam announced that the NCPO was considering converting many of the hundreds of orders issued by the NCPO into legislation, including those issued under Article 44.

thailand-art-44-ncpo-news-press-releases-2016-eng (full text with background, in PDF)

thailand-head-of-ncpo-orders-advocacy-2016-eng (full list of all publicly available Head of NCPO Orders, in PDF)

thailand-art-44-ncpo-news-press-releases-2016-tha (full text in Thai, PDF)

 

Thailand: immediately drop sedition case and all proceedings against human rights lawyer Sirikan Charoensiri

Thailand: immediately drop sedition case and all proceedings against human rights lawyer Sirikan Charoensiri

The government should drop all proceedings against human rights lawyer, Sirikan Charoensiri, including the specious accusation of sedition, which apparently relate to her organization’s representation of 14 student activists peacefully protesting in June 2015, the ICJ and other groups said today.

On 27 September 2016, Sirikan Charoensiri (photo), a lawyer and documentation specialist at Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR), received a summons from the Thai Police following accusations that she violated Article 12 of the Head of National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Order 3/2015, prohibiting the gathering of five or more people for political purposes, and Article 116 of the Thai Criminal Code, a ‘sedition’-type offence.

According to the summons, the accusations are made by an army officer, Lieutenant Colonel Pongsarit Pawangkanan.

Sirikan Charoensiri received the summons, dated 20 September 2016, when she returned to Thailand after attending the 33rd Session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva where she conducted advocacy on the human rights situation in Thailand on behalf of FORUM-ASIA and the ICJ.

Sirikan Charoensiri did not receive an earlier summons, dated 14 September 2016, the police claimed had been sent to her apartment, as she was not home at the time.

Sirikan Charoensiri has already been charged with two offences under the Criminal Code of Thailand: “giving false information regarding a criminal offence” and “refusing to comply with the order of an official” in relation to TLHR’s provision of legal aid to 14 student activists – the new summons appears to relate to the same case.

The army’s accusation that Sirikan Charoensiri has violated the frequently abused sedition law with its extremely serious penalties and risk of a military trial is indefensible and must be withdrawn immediately,” said Wilder Tayler, Secretary General of the ICJ.

“The fact that the authorities have made these accusations more than one year after TLHR’s clients were charged with sedition in the same case suggest the accusations have been made in retaliation for her high-profile national and international human rights advocacy since the military coup,” he added.

The other groups who signed the statement are: Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (an FIDH–OMCT partnership), Protection International (PI), Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada (LRWC), Fortify Rights, and the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR).

thailand-sirikan-charoensiri-conviction-news-press-releases-2016-eng (full text in PDF)

thailand-sirikan-charoensiri-conviction-news-press-releases-2016-tha (Thai version, in PDF)

 

 

Malaysia: Tian Chua conviction another abuse under repressive Sedition Act

Malaysia: Tian Chua conviction another abuse under repressive Sedition Act

The conviction of Member of Parliament Tian Chua under the 1948 Sedition Act increases already severe restrictions on freedom of expression in Malaysia, said the ICJ today.

The Malaysian government should drop all charges filed under this law and remove or amend this colonial era law to ensure compliance with international human rights law and standards, the ICJ added.

The Sessions Court in Kuala Lumpur convicted Tian Chua (photo) today under Section 4(1)(b) of the 1948 Sedition Act for allegedly uttering “seditious words.”

The allegedly “seditious words” spoken by Tian Chua were calling on Malaysians to “stand up and fight against racism and corruption.”

Tian Chua spoke these words at a public forum on 13 May 2013 at the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Assembly Hall.

“Prime Minister Najib Razak promised in 2012 to abolish the 1948 Sedition Act, but until now, this promise has not been fulfilled,” said Emerlynne Gil, ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser.

“It now appears that the Malaysian government is holding on to this law to silence political opponents and human rights defenders who express critical views about what is happening in the country today,” she added.

Tian Chua received a penalty of three months’ imprisonment plus a fine of RM1,800 (approximately US$435).

Although he will still be entitled to keep his seat as Batu’s representative to the Malaysian Parliament, his conviction sends a clear and dangerous message that politically critical comments or dissenting opinions from anyone, including a Member of Parliament, will not be tolerated by the government, the ICJ says.

Several other people were also charged for sedition for their speeches at the same public forum where Tian Chua spoke: activists Adam Adli, Hishamuddin Md. Rais, Haris Fathillah Mohamed Ibrahim, and Safwan Anang.

All of them have already been convicted in the past few months under the same provision of the Sedition Act.

“By its very terms, the 1948 Sedition Act contemplates restrictions on the exercise of freedom of expression that are grossly overbroad and inconsistent with the basic rule of law and human rights principles,” said Gil.

The lawyers of Tian Chua, Latheefa Koya and N. Surendran, have confirmed that they will be seeking a stay order on the basis that they will be appealing the sentence and conviction.

The ICJ has repeatedly expressed its concerns regarding the restrictive effect the 1948 Sedition Act has on freedom of expression in the country.

The law criminalizes speech and publications considered to have “seditious tendencies”, a term that is very ambiguously and vaguely defined.

Last year, the ICJ expressed alarm over amendments made by the Malaysian Parliament strengthening the law and broadening its scope, making the “promotion” of hatred between religions an offence.

Contact:
Emerlynne Gil, ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t: +66840923575 ; e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org

Translate »