Sep 10, 2018 | Advocacy, News
The ICJ today called on all MEPs to vote in favour of the draft resolution and report by rapporteur Judith Sargentini MEP, before the European Parliament, which would activate Article 7 of the Treaty of the European Union in respect of Hungary.
A vote for the resolution would mean that, under Article 7.1, the Council would determine whether there is a clear risk of serious breach by Hungary of the founding values of the EU.
Ultimately, if the situation persists, this would allow the Council to take more robust measures, including suspension of voting rights, to address the situation.
The vote, scheduled for 12 September, is crucial for the rule of law in Hungary and throughout the European Union.
The Parliament will vote on whether to activate the process under Article 7, by calling on the Council to identify a risk of serious breach by Hungary of the EU’s founding values, including the rule of law and respect for human rights.
The ICJ considers that the measures put in place by the Hungarian government since 2011 have led to a severe deterioration of the rule of law and human rights, by weakening Constitutional rights protection, limiting judicial independence, suppressing independent media, civil society and academic institutions, and imposing arbitrary laws that violate the human rights of marginalized sections of society.
Cumulatively, these measures pose a grave, systemic threat to the protection of the human rights of all people in Hungary.
“The European Parliament should respond to the critical situation in Hungary by using the powers available to it under Article 7 TEU to defend human rights and the rule of law. Not to do so would be to abandon Hungary to an increasingly dangerous path, and would set a damaging precedent for all of Europe,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe Programme.
Read the full statement and key concerns here: Hungary-triggering Art 7-Advocacy-2018-ENG (in PDF)
May 11, 2017 | Advocacy
Today the ICJ presented its views on counter-terrorism, security and human rights in Europe, to the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (LIBE) of the European Parliament, as part of a hearing on the EU’s Comprehensive Assessment of EU Security Policy.
The exchange of views, Chaired by the Chair of the LIBE Committee, Claude Moraes, included contributions by Commissioner Julian King of the European Commission, as well as representatives of national parliaments, civil society organisations and MEPs.
The ICJ presentation by Róisín Pillay (photo), Director of the ICJ Europe Programme, emphasised the need to make human rights and the rule of law central to EU security policy, to the development of EU legislation and its implementation at national level.”
The full text of the presentation can be downloaded here: Europe-Presentation LIBE-Advocacy-2017-ENG (in PDF)
More on LIBE
Apr 27, 2017 | News
An expert meeting organized by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) in Warsaw focused on the human rights-compliant implementation of legislation and policies to counter the foreign terrorist fighter phenomenon. The ICJ partnered in the event.
The two-day meeting (25-26 April) brought together 21 participants (11 men and 10 women) – including experts from international and national organizations, civil society, academia and OSCE staff – to reflect on experiences and human rights challenges in responses aimed at countering the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters.
“Human rights compliance is essential both for the short and the long-term effectiveness of any measure to address the phenomenon,” said Omer Fisher, Head of the ODIHR Human Rights Department. “Jeopardizing human rights protection in the course of responding to the threat will not solve, but rather exacerbate the problem, because human rights violations provide fertile ground in which terrorism can thrive.”
Over the past few years, OSCE participating States have taken a wide range of administrative and criminal law measures to prevent the movement of terrorists or terrorist groups, to suppress the provision of support for them, and to counter the incitement and recruitment of foreign terrorist fighters.
“Broadly defined criminal offences and administrative measures based on vague definitions – including of terrorism and related offences – are open to abusive, arbitrary or discriminatory application,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the Europe Programme of the ICJ.
“Legislation criminalizing acts such as travel for the purpose of terrorism must, therefore, be narrowly defined, clear and accessible, and provide for appropriate legal and procedural safeguards,” she added.
The expert meeting will inform a policy guidance document, which ODIHR will prepare in the coming months to assist OSCE participating States in the human rights-compliant and gender sensitive implementation of legislation and policies to address the phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters.
Mar 21, 2016 | News
The ICJ today expresses serious concern that the deal concluded on Friday 18 March between the European Union and Turkey on the return of migrants and refugees to Turkey is likely to lead to serious violations of international and EU human rights and refugee law.
“This initiative carries high risks of infringing the right of asylum and the prohibition of non-refoulement, as well as the right to an effective remedy for potential violations of these rights”, said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe Programme.
All EU Member States, including Greece, have obligations to protect these rights under international human rights law, and Member States and EU institutions have similar obligations under the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
The agreement seeks to establish swift return from Greece to Turkey of any migrant or asylum seeker attempting to reach Greece who does not apply for international protection there or whose application is deemed unfounded or inadmissible.
In order to facilitate such returns, Turkey may be declared to be a “safe third country” which could allow for the dismissal of asylum requests in Greece based on this element alone, and the rapid return of applicants.
The EU and Turkey, in their joint statement, contend that these operations will not be carried out in violation of international and EU law, including the prohibition of collective expulsions and the principle of non-refoulement, which prohibits return to a country where the returned person faces a real risk of torture or other serious violation of human rights.
It is nevertheless unclear how the system proposed could lead to swift returns, while respecting international human rights and refugee law, the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights and the EU Asylum Procedure Directive, for a number of reasons.
First, the ICJ stresses that Turkey cannot be considered a “safe third country” for the return of migrants and refugees.
Authoritative reports and international jurisprudence on Turkey demonstrate that neither the general human rights situation in Turkey, nor its asylum procedure and reception system are in line with international law, including Turkey’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights’ prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment in article 3 ECHR.
Second, the ICJ affirms that the commitment of Turkey to adapt its asylum system to comply with international law and standards does not in itself allow for returns from EU countries in compliance with the principle of non-refoulement.
International and EU law binding on Greece and other EU Members States requires an assessment of the situation in the country of return at the moment the return is effected to determine whether there is a real risk of violations of human rights.
Therefore, at present, and irrespective of the commitments made on reform, any return to Turkey would be at high risk of infringing the principle of non-refoulement and the returning country’s legal obligations.
Crucially for the prospects of the new system, it is also clear that the Greek asylum system is not in a position to proceed to a swift consideration of asylum applications in compliance with human rights, including procedural guarantees.
“As is clear from ongoing Council of Europe discussions about implementation of European Court decisions against Greece, the Greek asylum procedure cannot yet provide for an effective remedy for cases of arbitrary refoulement. Without respect for such guarantees, many migrants will be left vulnerable,” said Massimo Frigo, Legal adviser at the ICJ.
The ICJ emphasises that, whatever co-operative arrangements are put in place, Greece and Turkey will have responsibility under international human rights and EU law as regards the rights of persons subject either to Greek or Turkish territorial jurisdiction or to Greek or Turkish authority and/or control.
Furthermore, through its direct involvement in and financing of these arrangements, the EU itself may be complicit in any breach of the right of asylum, the prohibition of collective expulsions, the prohibition of non-refoulement or the right to an effective remedy.
The ICJ is further concerned at the “one for one” resettlement mechanism that will be established to settle one Syrian refugee in a EU country for every Syrian returned to Turkey.
It is of serious concern that this mechanism contemplates the return of Syrians to Turkey. Syrians are prima facie entitled to international protection and would likely fall within one of the grounds of international protection of the EU Qualification Directive.
It would therefore be unlawful under EU law to return them to Turkey.
Full text and additional information on the content of the deal available here.
Contact
Róisín Pillay, Director, Europe Programme, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Massimo Frigo, Legal adviser, Europe Programme, massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Mar 11, 2016 | Advocacy
The ICJ, Amnesty, ECCJ and FIDH welcome the adoption of the Recommendation of the Committee of Ministers to member States on human rights and business (the Recommendation) on 3 March 2016.
This is the Council of Europe’s first inter-governmental instrument on business and human rights.
Adopted by the organization’s highest decision-making body, the agreement by all 47 Council of Europe member States is a significant achievement.
If adequately implemented, the Recommendation can contribute to an enhanced system of legal accountability of business enterprises involved in human rights abuses and access to effective remedy for those whose rights have been affected.
EU-coe_recommendation-Advocacy-2016-ENG (full text in PDF)
