Counter-terrorism legislation in Egypt, Tunisia and Pakistan

Counter-terrorism legislation in Egypt, Tunisia and Pakistan

The ICJ today delivered an oral statement on counter-terrorism legislation in these countries, in an interactive dialogue at the UN Human Rights Council with the  the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism.

The text of the statement follows:

 

COUNTER-TERRORISM LEGISLATION IN EGYPT, TUNISIA AND PAKISTAN

10 March 2016

Mr President,

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the attention given by Special Rapporteur Ben Emmerson, to defective counter-terrorism legislation that facilitates violations of human rights, as reflected for example by communications on Egypt, Tunisia and Pakistan in the Communications Report of Special Procedures (A/HRC/31/79).

Numerous counter terrorism laws promulgated or applied in these and other countries include overly broad or imprecise definitions of terrorism-related offences. These extend the laws’ reach beyond acts of a truly terrorist character. Such laws can be and are abused or misapplied to criminalize the legitimate and peaceful exercise of fundamental rights and freedoms.

Further, these laws provide sweeping immunities that contribute to pervasive impunity for unlawful killings by security forces.

These laws also facilitate violations of the right to liberty and fair trial rights and insufficiently safeguard against abuses in detention. In Tunisia a person can be held in police custody without being brought before a judge for up to 15 days. In Pakistan, suspects can be held in preventive detention without charge, and without being brought before a judge, for up to 90 days.

Egypt and Pakistan continue to use military courts to conduct unfair trials of civilians in terrorism cases, contrary to international standards. At least eight civilians sentenced to death in secretive trials by military courts in Pakistan have been hanged since January 2015. “Expedited” procedures in terrorism circuit courts in the Egyptian civilian system also give rise to fair trial concerns.

The ICJ invites the Special Rapporteur to comment on measures or mechanisms that states, inter-governmental organisations, and civil society can take to help ensure that states such as Tunisia, Egypt and Pakistan repeal or amend counter-terrorism legislation to bring it into line with their international human rights obligations and commitments.

Egypt: sustained attacks against judges must stop

Egypt: sustained attacks against judges must stop

The ICJ today called on the Egyptian authorities to put an immediate end to their campaign to muzzle judges through unfair and arbitrary “unfitness” proceedings.

The Disciplinary Board, in hearings that tried dozens of judges at the same time, declared a total of 41 judges “unfit” for judicial office in 2015, forcing them into retirement.

The Supreme Disciplinary Board is currently reviewing these two cases.

The ICJ is concerned that many of the judges that have been subjected to these proceedings are leading advocates for judicial independence in Egypt and that the proceedings before both the Disciplinary Board and the Supreme Disciplinary Board were not fair.

Further, the cases stem from the judges’ exercise of freedom of association, belief, assembly and expression, and it appears that the Disciplinary Boards did not act in accordance with relevant international standards in this regard.

”Ending judges’ tenure following mass proceedings that are both arbitrary and unfair is inconsistent with Egypt’s obligations under international law,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme.

“With these assaults on individual judges, the Egyptian authorities are ensuring that their ongoing, sustained crackdown on fundamental rights and freedoms is extended to the very institution that is supposed to protect such rights and freedoms- the judiciary,” he added.

In the “July 2013 Statement Case”, 56 judges were subjected to disciplinary proceedings, following the Military seizure of power in July 2013, for endorsing a statement that called for the 2012 Constitution to be restored, for a dialogue between all stakeholders to be established within the framework of constitutional legitimacy, and for the right to peaceful demonstration to be respected.

The ICJ considers the statement to have been made consistent with the judges’ right to freedom of expression and association, exercised in a manner that preserved the dignity of their office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.

However, on 14 March 2015, the Disciplinary Board found that 31 of the 56 judges were not fit to hold judicial office and in effect removed them from office by forcing them into retirement.

The Board found there was not sufficient evidence that the other 25 judges had in fact endorsed the statement.

The ICJ is concerned that the procedures and hearings before the Disciplinary Board and the Supreme Disciplinary Board have not satisfied international standards of fairness.

In many instances, judges were not adequately notified of the dates of the hearings or of the courtrooms where such hearings took place.

In Egypt, judges facing disciplinary hearings are entitled to have another judge represent them; however, many of the judges were not permitted by Board officials to bring their representative to the hearings, without any reason being given for barring the representative, or because no representative could be secured as a result of fear of reprisals.

Further, many judges were not provided with adequate time and facilities to prepare their defense.

In another case, the “Judges for Egypt Case”, each judge had limited time to make his case before the Board during the hearings, though they were granted the right to submit at the final hearing written pleadings of no more than two pages .

At the final hearing in the case, while the judges waited all day in the Board’s premises, the hearing was held in the absence of all but one of them.

Furthermore, the Board refused to collect the written pleadings without giving any reasons.

On 22 February 2016, after protesting against the adjournment of his hearing, Judge Amir Awad was arrested and placed under detention for four days by the office of the prosecutor.

He is charged with insulting a public employee and forcibly entering his office.

“Both cases have been tainted by failures to ensure the fairness of the proceedings. The Egyptian authorities must nullify all decisions to remove judges resulting from these proceedings and put an immediate end to all forms of intimidation against and persecution of judges,” Benarbia added.

Contact:

Nader Diab, Associate Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +216 51727023; e: nader.diab(a)icj.org

Egypt-Attacks against judges-News-Web Stories-2016-ENG (full story in PDF, English)

Egypt-Attacks against judges- Press Release -2016- ARA (full story in PDF, Arabic)

Egypt’s New House of Representatives: reform or annul presidential decrees to conform to international human rights standards

Egypt’s New House of Representatives: reform or annul presidential decrees to conform to international human rights standards

The ICJ today called on Egypt’s newly elected House of Representatives to amend or annul the web of repressive presidential decrees promulgated since the ouster of President Morsi.

“Egypt’s House of Representatives must dismantle the catalogue of repressive presidential decrees that have been used by the authorities to stifle dissent, curtail fundamental rights and freedoms and shield state officials from accountability in cases of human rights violations,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Programme.

Article 156 of the Egyptian Constitution provides that decrees issued by the President while the House of Representatives is not in session must be discussed and approved by the new House of Representatives within 15 days of it convening.

Failure to do so results in the laws being automatically nullified with retroactive effect.

The ICJ and others have detailed how many of these presidential decrees, including the Demonstration Law (No.107 of 2013), the Counter-Terrorism Law (No.94 of 2015), the Terrorist Entity Law (No.8 of 2015), the Law on Military Courts (No.136 of 2014) and laws amending the Criminal Code (No.128 of 2014) and the Prison Law (No.106 of 2015), violate Egypt’s obligations under international law.

Key concerns relate to the right to life, the right to liberty and the right not to be subjected to arbitrary detention, fair trial rights, and the rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly.

These fundamental rights are protected by for instance the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which Egypt ratified in 1982 and which today counts 168 states as parties.

Over the last two years, thousands of individuals have been prosecuted and convicted pursuant to such decrees, including the Demonstration Law, through proceedings that fell short of international fair trial standards.

Further, many of these decrees, in particular the Counter-Terrorism Law and the Demonstration Law, institutionalise the immunity of state officials from legal proceedings against any use of force committed in the course of their duties, including the use of lethal force when it is not strictly necessary to protect lives.

The decrees also fail to provide for any reparations mechanism for victims.

“Egypt’s parliament should, as a matter of urgency, ensure that those who have suffered human rights violations on the basis of these laws obtain effective remedy and reparations, remove all obstacles to justice and accountability, and address the impunity of state officials underpinned by these decrees”, Benarbia added.

Contact:

Alice Goodenough, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +44 7815 570 834; e: alice.goodenough(a)icj.org

Nader Diab, Associate Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 229 793 804; e: nader.diab(a)icj.org

Egypt-New House of Representatives-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text in Arabic, PDF)

Egypt: ICJ condemns the promulgation of a new, repressive Counter-Terrorism Law

Egypt: ICJ condemns the promulgation of a new, repressive Counter-Terrorism Law

The ICJ today condemned the promulgation of the Counter-Terrorism Law by the Egyptian President, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, as a new, repressive move that would erode the rule of law and brush aside fundamental legal and human rights guarantees.

Calls to revise the draft Counter-Terrorism Law by the ICJ and other international and national human rights organizations and stakeholders, including Egypt’s quasi-governmental National Human Rights Council, were disregarded.

“The promulgation of the Counter-Terrorism Law by President el-Sisi expands the list of repressive laws and decrees that aim to stifle dissent and the exercise of fundamental freedoms,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme.

“Egypt’s authorities must ensure the law is not used as a tool of repression and, to this end, comprehensively revise it so that it fully complies with international human rights law and standards,” he added.

In a position paper published on 9 July, the ICJ detailed how the law is inconsistent with, and in numerous ways violates, Egypt’s obligations under international law, including those relating to the right to life, the right to liberty and not to be subjected to arbitrary detention, the right to privacy, and fair trial rights.

Further, the law gives state officials broad immunity from criminal responsibility for the use of force in the course of their duties, including the use of lethal force when it is not strictly necessary to protect lives, grants sweeping surveillance and detention powers to prosecutors, entrenches terrorism circuits within the court system (which have in the past frequently involved fair trial violations), and grants the President far-reaching, discretionary powers to “take the necessary measures” to maintain public security, where there is a “danger of terrorist crimes.”

Contact:

Alice Goodenough, Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +44 7815 570 834; e: alice.goodenough(a)icj.org

Nader Diab, Associate Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 229 793 804; e: nader.diab(a)icj.org

Egypt-Counter-Terrorism Law Promulgated-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text in pdf, ARABIC)

Translate »