Jul 4, 2018 | News
The ICJ condemned today the forced retirement of 27 out of 72 judges of the Supreme Court of Poland in defiance of the most basic principles on the independence of the judiciary.
“The forced retirement of a third of the Supreme Court under the new law on the judiciary amounts to an arbitrary dismissal of judges” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme, “It is a flagrant breach of a basic tenet of the independence of the judiciary, the security of tenure of judges.”
The government claims the law and its implementing measure of forced retirements are aimed at improving the administration of justice. However, the ICJ considers them to be a deliberate attempt to destroy judicial independence and install executive control.
“We call on the Polish authorities to follow the EU’s recommendations, abolish this draconian legislation and immediately reinstate the Supreme Court justices. Not to do so strikes at the very core of judicial independence”, said Róisín Pillay.
“Universal principles of judicial independence guaranteeing security of tenure were developed long ago exactly to safeguard the kind of abuse of political authority driving this forced retirement measure, whereby judges would serve at the pleasure of the government of the day,” she added.
The ICJ considers that the implementation of the new law on the Supreme Court and the dismissal of the 27 Supreme Court Justices directly contravenes the security of tenure of judges and, hence, the principle of judicial independence, as expressed in the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, Council of Europe standards, the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence and the rule of law principle of the EU Treaties.
Poland-Attacks on judiciary-News-web stories-2018-ENG (full story – with additional background information – in PDF)
Jun 29, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today raised concerns for the independence of the judiciary in Serbia, in a statement to the United Nations.
The statement was delivered during the discussion of the outcome of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Serbia, at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
It read as follows:
“The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) congratulates Serbia on the completion of its Third Cycle Universal Periodic Review.
The ICJ welcomes the acceptance by Serbia of all recommendations to strengthen the rule of law and judicial independence, including by limiting political influence over judicial appointments (Norway, 6.1; Sweden, 6.2; France, 6.3; Australia, 6.20; Germany, 6.22; Morocco, 6.23; Estonia, 6.24; Republic of Korea, 6.25; Singapore, 6.26; Canada, 6.27).
The ICJ regrets, however, that constitutional amendments currently under discussion in Serbia run counter to these recommendations.
The amendments would empower the National Assembly to determine appointments and dismissals of judges of the Constitutional Court, as well as for half of the members of the High Judicial Council, five members of the High Prosecutorial Council, the Supreme Public Prosecutor and public prosecutors.
The independence and autonomy of the Constitutional Court, High Judicial Council and State Prosecutorial Council, would be better secured by reducing or eliminating the role of political bodies such as the National Assembly, particularly as regards dismissals.
The ICJ stresses that the judiciary and the prosecution service must exercise their functions free from direct or indirect external influences, threats or interferences, including from the legislative and executive powers.
While welcoming reforms for life tenure of judges and deputy prosecutors, the ICJ urges Serbia to implement the accepted recommendations by precluding involvement of the National Assembly in the appointment and dismissal of judges, court presidents, public prosecutors, and deputy public prosecutors.”
Jun 22, 2018 | Events, News
This side event at the Human Rights Council takes place on Tuesday, 26 June, 14:00-15:00, room XXVII of the Palais des Nations. It is organized by the ICJ and the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI).
In recent years, lawyers have increasingly been targeted across the world including Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Attempts to impede the work of lawyers through arbitrary disbarments and other disciplinary procedures, criminal or administrative proceedings, physical attacks or intimidation have become an unfortunate new normality in many lawyers’ work.
Lawyers are too often identified with their clients’ cause or specifically targeted in violation of their right to freedom of expression. This side event will discuss challenges faced by lawyers in defending human rights in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
Moderator: Róisín Pillay, ICJ Europe and CIS Programme Director
Speakers:
- Helene Santos, Senior Fellow–UN Liaison Officer in Geneva for the IBAHRI
- Fariz Namazov, Lawyer, Member of the Azerbaijan Bar Association
- Hanna Boryak, Lawyer, Chair of the Committee for the Protection of Advocates’ Rights and advocacy at the Ukrainian National Bar Association
- Iurii Grygorenko, Lawyer, member of the Committee for the Protection of Advocates’ Rights and Advocacy at the Ukrainian National Bar Association
- Temur Shakirov, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser Europe and CIS Programme
Jun 21, 2018 | Events, News
The ICJ will participate today in the side event “State of emergency and attacks on the legal profession in Turkey” organized by IBAHRI, the Law Society, and the Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales.
This side event at the Human Rights Council takes place on Thursday, 21 June, 15:00-16:00, room XXV of the Palais des Nations.
It is co-sponsored by Lawyers for Lawyers, Union Internationale des Avocats, Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada.
In this side event, panelists will share their analysis on the impact of the state of emergency on the rule of law and the ongoing obstacles faced by the legal profession in Turkey since the failed coup in 2016.
They will also discuss Turkey’s derogations from its international and regional human rights obligations, as well as the response of regional and international human rights mechanisms to this situation.
Panelists:
- Özlem Zingil, Turkish lawyer;
- Massimo Frigo, International Commission of Jurists;
- Tony Fisher, Chair of the Human Rights Committee of the Law Society of England and Wales;
- Stephen Cragg QC, Secretary of the Bar Human Rights Committee of England and Wales;
- Natacha Bracq, Programme Lawyer, International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute.
Geneva-SideEvent-StateofEmergencyLawyersTurkey-IBAHRI&others-June2018-ENG (download the flyer)
Jun 20, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ issued a statement today on the occasion of an interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, on an effective accountability mechanism for the European Border and Coast Guard Agency.The ICJ was not able to read the statement during the interactive dialogue due to the limited time provided for NGO statements. The statement was as follows:
“The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes that the report (A/HRC/38/41) of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants recognizes the importance of monitoring mechanisms, access to justice, and accountability in the context of returns (para 78).
The ICJ, which is a member of the Frontex Consultative Forum on Fundamental Rights, shares the conclusion of the Special Rapporteur that the current implementation of an individual complaints mechanism for Frontex is “rather ineffective, since it largely relies on the discretionary powers of internal oversight bodies” and deficient in its follow-up procedure (para 84).
Furthermore, the ICJ considers that giving the Executive Director of Frontex competence to decide the merits of complaints creates a reasonable perception of bias. This, together with the lack of any requirement to publish its decisions, mean the existing complaint mechanism cannot constitute an effective remedy for human rights violations.
The ICJ is particularly concerned at these shortcomings in light of, as the Special Rapporteur noted, the “externalization of States’ obligations through the actions of international or regional organizations during return procedure” (para. 82). Such externalisation prevents victims of human rights violations from accessing effective remedies.
Finally, the ICJ notes that actions such as the closure of harbours to ships rescuing migrants, including refugees, are in clear breach of the international law of the sea and effectively prevent any access to legal remedies. Such actions should be condemned by this Council.
The ICJ supports the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation that States and international and regional organisations must ensure accountability for human rights violations and invites him to explore further such organisations’ responsibility in this regard under human rights law.”
