Sri Lanka: President’s remarks on “missing persons” are an affront to victims

Sri Lanka: President’s remarks on “missing persons” are an affront to victims

The ICJ expressed alarm about comments made by Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa which offensively mischaracterized the situation of “missing persons” in Sri Lanka, many of whom have been the victims of the crime of enforced disappearances.

According to a statement released by the President’s office after President Rajapaksa’s meeting with UN Resident Coordinator, Hanaa Singer, on 17 January 2020, the President had “explained that these missing persons are actually dead” and that “most of them had been taken by the LTTE or forcefully conscripted. The families of the missing attest to it. However, they do not know what has become of them and so claim them to be missing.”

“It is appalling to hear such callous declarations from the Office of the President, particularly given that no credible investigations have been conducted into the cases of those who have gone missing during the armed conflict,” said Frederick Rawski, Asia Pacific Director for the International Commission of Jurists.

The fate and whereabouts of some 20,000 people were reportedly unaccounted for in the immediate aftermath of the armed conflict in Sri Lanka. Many of these people are suspected to have been subjected to enforced disappearance, unlawful killings and/or other crimes under international law.

The Report of the UN Secretary-General’s Panel of Experts on Accountability in Sri Lanka (2011) and the reports of the State-led Commissions of Inquiry on Lesson Learnt and Reconciliation (2011), and Presidential Commission of Inquiry into Complaints of Abductions and Disappearances (2015) found that at least some of those who had surrendered to the Sri Lankan military at the end of the war in 2009 remain unaccounted for to date, and that many cases remain unresolved.

According to the same statement, Rajapaksa further informed the UN Resident Coordinator that, “after necessary investigations, steps would be taken to issue a death certificate to these missing persons. Afterwards their families would be given the support they need to continue with their lives.”

Under international law and standards, allegations of enforced disappearances and unlawful killings must be investigated, promptly, thoroughly, impartially. Those responsible must be brought to justice in fair trials, and the victims and their families are entitled to effective remedy and reparation.

“The President’s statement appears to disregard the purpose of the Office of Missing Persons. Any attempt to provide ‘closure’ to the relatives of the missing without following the necessary legal procedure to establish the truth is unacceptable,” said Rawski. “Their families have waited for ten years or longer to find out the fate of their loved ones.  The response of the State should be to help facilitate the existing process, not to disrupt or obstruct it,” he added.

The previous government adopted the Office of Missing Persons Act in August 2016 and established the Office of Missing Persons (OMP) in February 2018, in light of its commitments to the UN Human Rights Council under Resolution 30/1. According to Section 13 (1) (a) (ii) of the OMP Act, a certificate of death shall be issued only upon the conclusion of an investigation and the issuing of a report to the relative of such missing person to such effect. However, as an interim measure, the OMP is empowered to facilitate the provision of certificates of absence to family members of a missing person. A certificate of absence legally recognizes that a person is missing and allows the family to conduct transactions as though the person is dead.

The ICJ urges the Government of Sri Lanka to desist from any measures that would derail from the established legal procedure to search and trace the “disappeared” and other missing persons in Sri Lanka. ICJ instead calls upon the Government to support the Office of Missing Persons to speed up the investigation process in establishing the truth, accountability, and reparation.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 2 619 84 77; e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

Myanmar: Implement “provisional measures” order of the International Court of Justice without delay

Myanmar: Implement “provisional measures” order of the International Court of Justice without delay

The ICJ welcomes today’s Order of the International Court of Justice (Court) in the case of The Gambia v Myanmar indicating provisional measures to protect the rights of the persecuted Rohingya minority under the Genocide Convention and calls on Myanmar to implement the Order without delay.

“The Order is a significant step towards justice for the Rohingya as it imposes specific, legally-binding, obligations on Myanmar to take critical steps to protect their rights under the Genocide Convention,” said Sam Zarifi, Secretary General of the International Commission of Jurists, currently in Yangon, Myanmar. “It is now incumbent on the whole international community, including States, civil society and UN agencies, to urge and assist Myanmar to fulfil its obligations under the Order.”

In its Order, delivered orally, the Court found it had prima facie jurisdiction over the case and indicated a series of provisional measures, including that Myanmar must:

  • take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of the definition of genocide set out in Article II of the Genocide Convention;
  • ensure that its military as well as any irregular armed units which may be directed or supported by it, and any organizations or persons which may be subject to its control, direction or influence do not commit acts of genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, attempt to commit genocide, or complicity in genocide;
  • take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of any evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II of the Genocide Convention; and
  • submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to the Order within four months as from the date of the Order and thereafter every six months until a final decision on the case is rendered by the Court. Every report will be communicated to the Gambia which will then have the opportunity to submit to the Court its comments thereon.

Provisional measures are orders the Court has the power to make aimed at preserving the rights of the Parties to a case pending the final decision of the Court in order to avoid irreparable damage to the rights which are the subject of the dispute, in this case the rights of the Rohingya.

A hearing on the merits of the case will be heard at a later date.

The role of the Court is to settle disputes submitted to it by States in accordance with international law – its role does not extend to determining the criminal responsibility of individuals for perpetrating serious human rights violations.

“As Myanmar is unwilling and unable to conduct investigations and, where appropriate, prosecutions of serious human rights violations domestically which meet international law and standards, the various processes underway around the world directed towards criminal accountability- including the investigation of the International Criminal Court – remain necessary and urgent,” added Zarifi.

In 2018, the International Commission of Jurists issued a baseline study of the obstacles to accountability for serious human rights violations in Myanmar identifying “systematic impunity” within the country as a result of the “lack of accountability of perpetrators of human rights violations; lack of access to effective remedies and reparation for victims; and ongoing challenges with the independence and accountability of justice actors.”

International processes underway around the world directed at criminal accountability for serious human rights violations in the Myanmar situation include:

To download the full statement with background information, click here.

Contacts

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Secretary General, t: +41 79 726 4415; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Kingsley Abbott, Coordinator of the ICJ’s Global Accountability Initiative, t: +66 94 470 1345; e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

Indonesia: ICJ holds seminar on eliminating gender discriminatory practices for the police institution

Indonesia: ICJ holds seminar on eliminating gender discriminatory practices for the police institution

From 16 to 17 January 2020, the ICJ, in collaboration with the National Police Commission (KOMPOLNAS), UN Women, and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) organized a Seminar on Eliminating Gender Discriminatory Practices for the Police.

It was held in Bogor, Indonesia and gathered 30 law enforcement officers from Indonesian provinces that are reported to have the highest rate of incidents of violence against women.

Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia and the Pacific Regional Director, stressed to participants that, “Police officers are the first point of contact for women who try to access justice for violations committed against them. It is important therefore for these officers to be well-trained on gender sensitivity and women’s human rights.”

“Only 40 percent of women speak out on violence, and only 10 percent of these report to the police because they are often blamed for the violence they experience or humiliated by those who should protect them,” added Ms. Doreen Buettner, Programme Specialist on Access to Justice of UN Women.

Indonesia is a State Party to the Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), having ratified it on 13 September 1984. It has established a gender mainstreaming mechanism under Presidential Instruction No. 9 of 2000 on Gender Mainstreaming in National Development, which obliges all government representatives and agencies, including the police, to mainstream gender in their work in order to eliminate gender-based discrimination.

Ms. Poengky Indarti, Commissioner from the National Police Commission (KOMPOLNAS), stressed that “Gender-responsive police training should not a one-time thing, we need to institutionalize the training for it to be sustainable.”

At the seminar, the discussions were aimed at strengthening the understanding of the members of police officers on women’s human rights, and the importance of eliminating gender stereotyping in their work to enhance access to justice for women.

Ms. Siti Aminah, Commissioner of the National Commission of Violence Against Women in Indonesia (Komnas Perempuan) and Professor Meg Garvin, Executive Director of the National Crime Victim Law Institute (NCVLI) and Clinical Professor of Law at the Lewis & Clark Law School facilitated discussions on common gender stereotypes in Indonesia and strategies, protocols and good practice relating to all aspects of responses to incidents of violence against women.

Contact

Ruth Panjaitan, National Legal Advisor for Indonesia, International Commission of Jurists, e: ruthstephani.panjaitan(a)icj.org

Resources

To access pictures from the event, click here.

Cambodia: Spurious “treason” charges against opposition leader Kem Sokha must be dropped

Cambodia: Spurious “treason” charges against opposition leader Kem Sokha must be dropped

Today, following the commencement of the trial of political opposition leader Kem Sokha, the ICJ condemned his continuing legal harassment and called on the Government of Cambodia to drop the ill-founded and apparently politically-motivated charges of treason against him.

“The trial hearing today marks and extends more than two years of legal harassment of one of Cambodia’s most prominent leaders of the political opposition,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Pacific Director.

“The charges against Kem Sokha are wholly unsubstantiated – They should be dropped, and the trial discontinued in the accordance with his right to fair trial.”

In September 2017, Kem Sokha, leader of the now-defunct main opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP), was arrested without warrant by more than 100 police officers in a midnight raid on his home. His arrest, in violation of his parliamentary immunity, was reportedly made on the basis that he had allegedly committed a crime in flagrante delicto – the Prosecution Office of Phnom Penh Municipal Court argued that he had been caught “red-handed” in an act of treason despite the fact that the alleged act was a speech he had made four years earlier in Australia in 2013. In the speech, Sokha had alluded to receiving foreign assistance in advocating for democratic change in Cambodia.

Kem Sokha was thereafter charged with alleged “conspiracy with a foreign power” under article 443 of the Criminal Code, and detained in the remote Trapaing Thlong prison in Tboung Khmum Province near the Vietnamese border. His applications for bail were rejected multiple times before he was released from prison after one year in pre-trial detention. During this period, Sokha was also denied access to independent doctors and medical treatment, despite his suffering from serious medical conditions. In 2017, the courts in Phnom Penh ruled that his pre-trial detention was legal under Cambodian law and refused him bail, even though Sokha had been barred from attending the proceedings, which his lawyers also boycotted in protest.

Kem Sokha’s arrest occurred in the midst of an intense crackdown on political opposition, civil society and independent media in the lead-up to the 2018 general elections. Two months after his arrest, Cambodia’s Supreme Court dissolved the CNRP and banned 118 CNRP officials from political activities for five years. In July 2018, the ruling Cambodian People’s Party won the elections by a landslide.

Following the elections, the Cambodian government has continued to systematically repress and persecute perceived critics of the regime through abuse of legal and judicial processes. In 2019, Cambodian authorities brought apparently politically-motivated charges against more than 100 members of the political opposition, more than half of whom were detained.

“There is an ongoing human rights and rule of law crisis in Cambodia, which needs to be urgently addressed,” said Rawski.

“The dissolution of the CNRP and imprisonment of its leader were crucial indicators that the Cambodian government had crossed a red-line a long time ago.”

The ICJ has called on the Cambodian authorities to fulfill the State’s obligations to protect people’s rights guaranteed under international law, including the rights to free expression, political participation and freedom of association, as well as the right to a fair trial and freedom from arbitrary detention.

To download the full statement with additional background information, click here.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia and Pacific Regional Director, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

See also

ICJ, ‘Cambodia: Charges against Kem Sokha must be dropped and respect for fundamental freedoms restored’, 14 November 2019

ICJ, ‘Misuse of law will do long-term damage to Cambodia’, 26 July 2018

ICJ, ‘Cambodia: the ICJ condemns dissolution of main opposition party’, 16 November 2017

Translate »