Turkey: training for lawyers and CSOs on rights of migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers

Turkey: training for lawyers and CSOs on rights of migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers

Today begins in Istanbul (Turkey) a two-day training for lawyers and CSO practitioners representing and working with migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers.

This event is organized by ICJ, in cooperation with its partners Refugee Rights Turkey, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), Mülteci-Der (MD) and ICJ-EI, as part of the EU co-financed project Fostering Access to Rights for Migrants, Refugees and Asylum-Seekers in Turkey.

30 lawyers and civil society practitioners – representing nine different bar associations and relevant organisations from the Istanbul area and other nearby key migration and asylum locations – are taking part in the training on 11 and 12 November.

The training aims to update lawyers and CSOs on the international and national law on the rights of refugees, migrants and asylum-seekers in order to be effective in their work at both the national and international levels. It aims at an effective implementation of the Turkish legal framework on asylum and migration.

The main thematic areas to be discussed will be the principle of non-refoulement, international protection, detention and access to economic, social and cultural rights.

The training will use as a basis the draft training materials prepared by the ICJ and its partners (to be published an the end of 2019) and, among other sources, the ICJ Practitioners Guide no. 6: Migration and International Human Rights Law.

The project “Fostering Access to Rights for Migrants, Refugees and Asylum-Seekers in Turkey” is funded by the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) of the European Union.

Turkey-Training-Agenda-MigrationAsylumIHRL-Istanbul-2017-eng (download the agenda)

Greece: ICJ and others intervene in case challenging returns under EU-Turkey deal

Greece: ICJ and others intervene in case challenging returns under EU-Turkey deal

The ICJ and other human rights organisations intervened before the European Court of Human Rights in a case challenging the returns of migrants and refugees from Greece under the EU-Turkey deal.

The ICJ, the AIRE Centre, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles and the Dutch Council for Refugees have submitted a third party intervention before the European Court of Human Rights in the case of J.B. v. Greece. The case concerns the decision of Greek authorities to return a Syrian refugee to Turkey under the legal assumption that Turkey is a safe third country for refugees, that has been introduced following the EU-Turkey deal reached in reaction to the “refugee crisis”.

The interveners challenge the implementation of the rule of safe third country in these situations with regard to Greece’s obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Specifically, the intervention focuses on:

  • The principle of non-refoulement under the ECHR;
  • The safe third country concept in international refugee law and EU law;
  • The respect of the right to an effective remedy in cases of returns to Turkey under the safe third country rule.

Greece-JB_v_Greece-ECtHR-amicus-ICJ&others-final-eng-2017 (download the intervention)

European Union directive on counterterrorism is seriously flawed

European Union directive on counterterrorism is seriously flawed

European Union Member States must ensure that a new effort to standardise counterterrorism laws does not undermine fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, a group of international human rights organisations said today.

Amnesty International, the European Network Against Racism (ENAR), European Digital Rights (EDRi), the Fundamental Rights European Experts (FREE) Group, Human Rights Watch (HRW), the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the Open Society Foundations (OSF) are warning that the overly broad language of the new EU Directive on Combating Terrorism could lead to criminalising public protests and other peaceful acts, to the suppression of the exercise of freedom of expression protected under international law, including expression of dissenting political views and to other unjustified limitations on human rights. The directive’s punitive measures also pose the risk of being disproportionately applied and implemented in a manner that discriminates against specific ethnic and religious communities.

The groups call on EU Member States to ensure that implementation of the directive in national law includes additional safeguards to guarantee compliance with regional and international human rights obligations. These safeguards are especially important to ensure that any new laws passed, which will remain in place for years to come, cannot be used abusively by any government, including any that may be tempted to sacrifice human rights and due process in the name of pursuing security.

‘States must effectively address the threat of terrorism. But the EU has rushed to agree a vaguely worded counterterrorism law that endangers fundamental rights and freedoms,’ said Róisín Pillay, Europe Programme Director at the ICJ. ‘Time and again we’ve seen governments adopt abusive counterterrorism laws without assessing their effectiveness, and then implement them in ways that divide and alienate communities. We worry this directive will reinforce this trend and leaves too much leeway for governments to misuse the directive to violate rights.”

The groups also noted that the legislative process for adopting this directive lacked transparency and opportunity for critical debate. There was no impact assessment of the proposal, negotiations moved forward without parliamentary-wide review of the text, and the proposal was rushed through behind closed doors and without any meaningful consultation of civil society.

Despite the inclusion of a general human rights safeguarding clause and repeated caution from our organisations the final text fails to fully protect human rights within the EU:

• The directive repeats the EU’s already overly broad definition of ‘terrorism,’ which permits states to criminalise, as terrorism, public protests or other peaceful acts that they deem ’seriously destabilise the fundamental political, constitutional, economic or social structures of a country or an international organisation.’

• Significantly, the directive requires states to criminalise a series of preparatory acts that may have a minimal or no direct link to a violent act of terrorism, and may never result in one being committed. For example the offences of participating in a terrorist group, travelling or receiving training for terrorist purposed are not adequately defined. Unless these broadly outlined offences are subject to careful drafting and strong safeguards in national law, they are likely to lead to violations of rights, including the right to liberty and freedoms of expression, association, and movement.

• The directive criminalises the public distribution of messages, including messages that ‘glorify’ terrorist acts, if the distribution is intentional and causes a danger that a terrorist offence may be committed. However, such a low threshold likely to lead to abuse if not limited as the UN recommends ‘to incitement that is directly causally responsible for increasing the actual likelihood of an attack’. The directive should have incorporated this language to avoid unjustified interference with freedom of expression.

We welcome the directive’s protection of activities of recognised humanitarian organisations. However we remain concerned that the protection does not expressly extend to all individuals providing medical or other life-saving activities that international humanitarian law (IHL) protects during times of armed conflict.

States should take the directive as an opportunity to reassess their counterterrorism laws, policies and practices and engage with civil society and other stakeholders. We welcome the European Commission’s commitment to formally include civil society organisations in their activities to support transposition of the directive.

Contact:

Roisin Pillay, ICJ Europe Director, at roisin.pillay(a)icj.org or +32 2 734 84 46

eu-press-release-flawed-counterterrorism-directive-2016-eng (download the statement)

Training on migration and human rights in the Western Balkans

Training on migration and human rights in the Western Balkans

The ICJ, OSCE and Group 484 are holding a training on migration and international human rights law starting on From 10 to 13 October in Zlatibor (Serbia).

The training has been organised by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Serbian NGO “Group 484” and will be given by the International Commission of Jurists.

It will focus on international protection of migrants and asylum seekers, access to territory and asylum and the principle of non-refoulement, in light of the current migrants and refugee crisis and drawing from the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, of the UN human rights systems and from EU law.

The training will be centred on the ICJ Practitioners Guide no. 6: Migration and International Human Rights Law.

serbia-jointtrainingmigrationhr-events-2016-eng (download the agenda)

ICJ and ECRE fifth submission on the implementation of M.S.S. judgment

ICJ and ECRE fifth submission on the implementation of M.S.S. judgment

The ICJ and ECRE presented today a joint submission on the situation of the asylum and reception systems in Greece to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.

The submission was presented in view of a meeting of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on the implementation by Greece of the European Court of Human Rights’ judgment in the case of M.S.S. v Belgium and Greece that will take place next June.

The submission refers to the previous detailed joint submissions of ICJ and ECRE and provides recent information on the state of the asylum procedure, reception conditions and detention practices, which are likely to be of importance to the supervision of the execution of the M.S.S. v. Belgium and Greece ruling. It focuses on:

  • ongoing obstacles to accessing the asylum procedure, namely concerning registration before the Asylum Service, the operation of appeals bodies, as well as the likely application of the “safe third country” concept regarding Turkey;
  • the state of Greece’s reception system, with a view to properly assessing its capacity to accommodate asylum seekers and migrants on its territory; and
  • updated information on the lawfulness and conditions of immigration detention, including new risks of detention stemming from nationality-profiling and the establishment of “hotspots” at points of arrival.

Greece-ICJECRE-MSS-CommitteeMinisters-5thsubmission-legal submission-2016-ENG (download the joint submission)

Translate »