Oral statement in the interactive dialogue with the fact finding mission on Myanmar

Oral statement in the interactive dialogue with the fact finding mission on Myanmar

The ICJ welcomes the final report of the FFM (Independent International Fact Finding Mission).

Having monitored justice and human rights in Myanmar for over 50 years, the ICJ has an established presence in the country, and supports justice sector actors to implement reforms necessary to protect human rights through the rule of law.

With this experience, the ICJ concurs with conclusions of the FFM and the Special Rapporteur: particularly those highlighting the pervasive damage of unchecked military power and impunity on human rights, the rule of law, and development of an inclusive democratic society.

Myanmar’s Government has failed to fulfill international law obligations to investigate, prosecute and punish perpetrators of rights violations. In this context, the launch of an IIMM (Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar) is necessary, and welcome. Myanmar should cooperate with the Mechanism, whose files may enable future prosecutions of individual criminals.

But this Mechanism is not a court: all States, particularly Myanmar, must work toward holding criminal trials, in competent jurisdictions, inline with international standards – noting that prosecutions target criminals, not the country.

Other immediate opportunities for Myanmar to protect human rights include: amending the National Human Rights Commission Law to expand its mandate and independence; amending laws that facilitate impunity such as the 1959 Defence Services Act; enacting an anti-discrimination law; and reviewing the 1982 Citizenship Law. These legislative reforms are urgent and possible steps that are necessary to demonstrate if the Government is genuine about its international law obligations. Any constitutional reform must also expand rights protections.

As the FFM’s mandate is ending, the ICJ would like to ask the experts: how can States best monitor and implement your recommendations, particularly related to international criminal accountability?

See also:

ICJ, Achieving Justice for Gross Human Rights Violations in Myanmar, January 2018

Terms of Reference for the UN Independent International Mechanism for Myanmar (unofficial Burmese translation), 16 January 2019, available here.

Statement to the Human Rights Council by Mr. Nicholas Koumjian, Head of the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar (unofficial Burmese translation with accompanying English text), 9 September, available here.

China: UN Secretary-General should denounce human rights violations in Xinjiang

China: UN Secretary-General should denounce human rights violations in Xinjiang

Antonio Guterres should publicly condemn China’s widespread violations of the rights of its Muslim minority citizens, especially in Xinjiang Province, the ICJ demanded in a joint letter submitted along with Amnesty International, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), Human Rights Watch, and the World Uyghur Congress.

The joint letter urged the UN Secretary-General to call for an end to widespread arbitrary detention of Muslim and minority communities through the immediate closure of Xinjiang’s ‘political education’ camps. Reports by the United Nations and human rights organizations have estimated that more than one million Muslims have been interned in extra-legal ‘political education’ detention camps.

“In the past few years, China’s violations in Xinjiang, including arbitrary detention, ill-treatment, pervasive surveillance and political indoctrination of Turkic Muslims, have intensified, and continue to worsen,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Secretary General.

“Quiet diplomacy has not worked. Mr. Guterres must exercise the full extent and power of his mandate as leader of the United Nations to demand and ensure protection of the rights of everyone in China, including all individuals in Xinjiang.”

The joint letter urged the UN Secretary-General to publicly support the creation of a UN fact-finding mission to assess the scale and nature of crimes under international law and human rights violations in Xinjiang. It further called on the UN Secretary-General to refrain from unqualified praise of China’s ‘Belt and Road’ Initiative – an investment initiative in which Xinjiang is a centerpiece – and to meet with representatives from the Uyghur community to hear first-hand of their plight.

“China has exerted immense and often inappropriate political pressure on individuals, governments and organizations criticizing its human rights violations,” said Zarifi. “The United Nations must push back against China’s political pressure and provide principled and steadfast leadership to end China’s political and cultural repression, and ongoing human rights violations in Xinjiang.”

Public criticism of China’s actions in Xinjiang has been growing. In August 2018, a member of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination noted that China’s treatment of its Muslim minority citizens in Xinjiang had turned the region into a “‘no rights’ zone” with individuals being treated as “enemies of the State based on nothing more than their ethno-religious identity”. In March 2019, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Michelle Bachelet, highlighted the need for her office to gain full access to facilitate independent and impartial investigation into ‘wide patterns of enforced disappearances and arbitrary detentions’ in the region. On 10 July 2019, 25 countries issued a joint statement calling on China to refrain from subjecting Uyghurs and other Muslim and minority communities in Xinjiang to arbitrary detention, surveillance and restrictions on freedom of movement.

Malaysia: High Court ruling on Sisters in Islam threatens rights to freedom of expression and of religion or belief

Malaysia: High Court ruling on Sisters in Islam threatens rights to freedom of expression and of religion or belief

ICJ expressed concern over the decision given on 27 August 2019 by the Malaysian High Court that a fatwa issued against the women’s organization, Sisters in Islam, should be referred to the Syariah Court.

The High Court used as a basis Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution, which states that secular courts do not have jurisdiction over matters pertaining to Islam.

The ICJ called on the Malaysian authorities to ensure that custom, tradition, and religion should not be used as a justification to undermine human rights, including women’s human rights.

In 2014, the Selangor Fatwa Council issued a fatwa declaring the Sisters in Islam a “deviant organization.” For many years, Sisters in Islam has been promoting more egalitarian interpretations of Islamic laws with the aim of ending discrimination against women and achieving equality in the Muslim family.

“For women to fully exercise their religious freedom, they must be able to retain or adopt the religion of their choice, and they must be able to continue belonging to this religion without being discriminated against within the religion,” said Emerlynne Gil, ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser.

The ICJ stressed that under international law, States have an obligation to protect people who are prevented from exercising their religious freedom by private actors, such as their own religious communities.

“The Malaysian government, including the judiciary, has the obligation to protect groups like Sisters in Islam when they face persecution from within their religious communities for propounding alternative views about their religion,” said Emerlynne Gil.

Furthermore, the ICJ had previously underscored in a 2019 briefing paper on the challenges to Freedom of Religion or Belief in Malaysia, the tensions emerging from jurisdictional disputes between civil courts, which apply federal and state laws, and Syariah courts, which apply Islamic laws.

In 2018, the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, in reviewing the performance of Malaysia, voiced its own concern over “the existence of a parallel legal system of civil law and multiple versions of Syariah law, which have not been harmonized in accordance with the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).” The CEDAW Committee concluded that this “leads to a gap in the protection of women against discrimination, including on the basis of their religion.

Contact:

Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Advisor, ICJ, e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org

Myanmar: ICJ discusses international standards on investigations of unlawful killings with Prosecutors

Myanmar: ICJ discusses international standards on investigations of unlawful killings with Prosecutors

At a training event for senior prosecutors hosted by the Union Attorney General’s Office (UAGO) on 7 September 2019 in Yangon, Nay Pyi Taw, the ICJ made presentations on the international standards and legal obligation on unlawful killings.

Representing each of Myanmar’s 14 states and regions, some 30 law officers attended the activity, which was a capacity-building training hosted by the UAGO. This is part of the ICJ’s ongoing engagement with authorities in Myanmar as well as in neighboring countries on the Minnesota Protocol on the investigation of potentially unlawful death (the Minnesota Protocol).

The Minnesota Protocol provides guidance on the State’s implementation of its duty under international law to investigate potentially unlawful killings, including when State actors may have been involved. It applies to deaths under custody, suspicious deaths, and enforced disappearances. Myanmar has experienced widespread incidents of such deaths, including in recent years those constituting serious crimes under international law.

ICJ Associate Legal Adviser, Jenny Domino, introduced salient points of the Minnesota Protocol and shared relevant examples from experience promoting and protecting human rights in the Philippines. She highlighted the significance of the State’s duty to investigate potentially unlawful killings in upholding the right to life under international human rights law.

ICJ Legal Researcher, Ja Seng Ing, shared the case of Laotian activist Sombath Somphone, who was subjected to enforced disappearance on 15 December 2012 with the apparent consent or acquiescence of State agents. To date, Laotian authorities have failed to conduct effective investigations with a view to revealing the fate or whereabouts of Somphone. ICJ has repeatedly called for accountability on the issue.

Participants discussed these cases in relation to the comparative remedies and practical challenges related to the conduct of investigations in Myanmar, where police and prosecutors both have roles to play in the conduct of investigations.

First published in 1991 and subsequently revised in 2016 under the auspices of the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Minnesota Protocol includes guidelines on conducting investigations to ensure that they are prompt; effective and thorough; impartial and independent; and transparent.

Since December 2017, the ICJ has co-hosted several regional workshops in Asia focused on this topic, with lawyers, academics, and State authorities from Thailand, Cambodia, Nepal, India, and Myanmar attending the events.

See also:

https://www.icj.org/thailand-launch-of-the-revised-minnesota-protocol/

https://www.icj.org/myanmar-reverse-laws-and-practices-that-perpetuate-military-impunity-new-icj-report/

Translate »