Oct 15, 2019 | News
Today, ICJ called on Turkey to comply with its obligations under the UN Charter, international humanitarian law and international human rights law, immediately end its military operations in Syria, and protect and ensure the protection of the Syrian civilian population.
The ICJ also reiterated its call on all parties to the Syrian conflict to respect and comply with international humanitarian law and international human rights law.
On October 9, Turkey initiated operation “Peace Spring” in Rojava, the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)-held territory in north-east Syria, with the stated aim of securing Turkey’s border, “fighting terrorism” and facilitating the return of refugees to Syria. Turkey claimed to be acting pursuant to its right to self-defence under article 51 of the UN Charter, as well as UN Security Council resolutions on the fight against terrorism.
The ICJ recalled that none of these UN Security Council resolutions authorizes the use of armed force in violation of international law, and that the UN Charter prohibits the use of armed force by States, save when authorized by the UN Security Council or in self-defence.
Use of force in self-defence is lawful only when necessary to repel an armed attack and when proportionate to such attack. Military operations failing to abide by such requirements are in breach of the UN Charter.
“Turkey’s military operations violate the UN Charter and exemplify how the banalization of the illegal use of armed force continues to erode and dismantle the very fabric of the international legal order,” said Said Benarbia, the ICJ MENA Programme Director.
He added, “Instead of standing by while international law is being violated, the UN Security Council must take swift, appropriate measures to address the situation and to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
While UN Security Council member States have failed to find an agreement on even a statement on Turkey’s military operations in Syria, Turkish military operations continue to have a devastating impact on the general population, including multiple civilian casualties, attacks against civilian objects, including medical facilities and water supplies and infrastructure, and the displacement of more than 150,000 people, mainly civilians.
Turkish forces and the Turkish-backed armed groups have allegedly been responsible for violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Members of one of these groups, the Ahrar Al-Sharqiya, have been accused of the extrajudicial execution of at least nine civilians, among whom is Kurdish politician and women’s rights activist Harvin Khalaf; torture and other ill-treatment; kidnapping; and looting and seizure of private property.
Turkey’s Defence Ministry said 595 “terrorists” were “neutralized” since the start of “Peace Spring.”
Under international humanitarian law, parties to an armed conflict must respect and protect the civilian population, and refrain from any direct, indiscriminate or disproportionate attack against civilians and civilian objects. International human rights law also continues to apply during the conflict.
“Turkish authorities must investigate and prosecute unlawful killings committed in the context of operation “Peace Spring,” including extrajudicial executions amounting to war crimes,” Benarbia said.
He added, “If no action is taken by these authorities, States must act, collectively and individually, to hold to account all those responsible for such crimes.”
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Syria-Turkey operations-News-Press releases-2019-ARA (Arabic version, in PDF)
Syria-Turkey operations-News-Press releases-2019-TUR (Turkish version, in PDF)
Oct 4, 2019 | News
The ICJ today called on the Egyptian authorities to immediately release all lawyers arrested for discharging their professional functions, and ensure they and other lawyers in the country are allowed to perform their work without threats or intimidation.
The Egyptian authorities have arrested more than 2400 people over the past two weeks following anti-government protests.
Many of the detainees’ lawyers have themselves been arrested, including Mahienour Al-Massry, Sahar Ali, Mohamed Salah Ajaj, Mohamed Al-Baqer (photo), Mohamed Helmy Hamdoun, Ahmed Sarhan, and Ahmed Abd El-Azim.
On 29 September, while representing prominent human rights defender Alaa Abdelafttah during questioning before the State Security Prosecution, lawyer Mohamed Al-Baqer was arrested and charged with, among other charges, “spreading false information aiming at disturbing the public and peaceful order” and “joining a terrorist organization.”
The ICJ has previously documented how lawyer Mahienour Al-Massry was arrested under similar circumstances, and called for her immediate release.
Mahienour was also charged with “spreading false information” and “joining a terrorist organization.”
“By arresting lawyers and prosecuting them on trumped-charges, the Egyptian military is dismantling the very last line of defense against its ruthless crackdown on human rights and fundamental freedoms, and silencing the very same voices that can still witness, challenge and report on its industrial-scale human rights abuses,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
Under international standards reflecting core rule of law principles, lawyers must be able to discharge their professional functions without hindrance, harassment or improper interference.
They shall not suffer, or be threatened with prosecutions for any action taken in accordance with their professional duties.
The ICJ emphasized that these standards are there not only for the interests of the lawyers and those they represent or might in the future represent, but also to ensure that the rule of law remains operative for the society as a whole.
The Egyptian authorities must conform to these standards, refrain from its attacks against the legal profession, and immediately release all lawyers and other individuals arbitrarily detained.
Contact:
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Egypt-Attacks on Lawyers-News-web stories-2019-ARA (story in Arabic, PDF)
Oct 3, 2019 | News
Today, ICJ and the Defender Center for Human Rights (DCHR) filed a submission to the Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review in advance of its review of Libya’s human rights record in May 2020.
Information provided in the submission was based on the ICJ report titled Accountability for Serious Crimes under International Law in Libya: an Assessment of the Criminal Justice System, published in July 2019.
In the submission, the ICJ and DCHR drew the attention of the Working Group on the UPR to the following concerns with respect to Libya:
- Impunity for crimes under international law committed by State and non-State actors;
- The insufficient penalization of crimes under international law;
- The lack or inadequacy of investigations and prosecutions of crimes under international law;
- The systemic failure to guarantee the right to liberty and fair trial rights at pre-trial and trial stages.
The ICJ and DCHR called on the Working Group and the Human Rights Council to urge the Libyan authorities to take the following actions:
With regard to insufficient penalization of crimes under international law:
- Enact laws criminalizing war crimes, crimes against humanity and arbitrary deprivations of life (in particular arbitrary and summary executions) in line with international law;
- Amend Law No. 10 of 2013 to bring the definition of torture in line with the Convention Against Torture and the definition of enforced disappearance in line with the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, and criminalize other acts of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment consistent with international law;
- Amend article 425 of the Penal Code to include a definition of the crime of slavery consistent with international law;
- Amend articles 407 and 408 of the Penal Code to criminalize rape in line with international law and standards; enact laws criminalizing all forms of sexual and gender-based violence; and repeal article 424 of the Penal Code which extinguishes a conviction for rape or indecent assault and grants a stay of execution of the penalty imposed against the perpetrator if they marry the victim; and
- Amend (or repeal) Law No. 35 of 2012, Law No. 38 of 2012 and Law No. 6 of 2015 to exclude all crimes under international law from the scope of amnesties.
With regard to the obligation to independently and impartially investigate crimes:
- Amend article 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) to remove the requirement that an investigation can only be commenced upon the receipt of a criminal complaint, extend the three-month deadline for victims to file a complaint and remove the deadline entirely for crimes under international law and for other serious crimes under domestic law;
- Amend article 7 of the CCP to grant victims’ family members the right to file a complaint with a view to ensuring the commencement of an investigation;
- Repeal article 224 of the Penal Code to remove the power of the Minister of Justice to control and direct investigations and prosecutions by the Prosecutor’s Office; and
- Repeal Decree 388 of 2011 granting the “Supreme Security Committee” investigative powers and article 2 of Law No. 38 of 2012 permitting the use of information and evidence collected by “revolutionaries” during investigations and at trial.
With regard to the systemic failure to guarantee the right to liberty and fair trial rights at pre-trial and trial stages, amend the CCP in order to:
- Exclude the possibility of detaining an accused on the sole ground that she or he does not have a fixed place of residence;
- Set a maximum duration of pre-trial detention, and specify that any such detention should be employed as last resort only when necessary, proportionate and reasonable according to the circumstances of the case;
- Ensure that detainees are brought before an independent and impartial judicial authority promptly following arrest, and no later than 48 hours in any event;
- Include a provision recognizing the right to habeas corpus, and the right to compensation and other reparations for unlawful detention;
- Provide for the right to legal counsel from the moment of arrest in all circumstances, and repeal the provision requiring a lawyer to seek authorization from the investigating judge to speak during the interrogation of the accused;
- Require the disclosure of all evidence to the accused and allow them to make copies of the case file before a case is referred to court for prosecution; and
- Grant individuals the right to appeal any conviction and sentence on alleged errors of law and fact and to reconsideration of a conviction upon discovery of a new fact.
Download
Libya-UNHCR submission final-advocay-non legal submission-2019-ENG (submission in PDF)
Oct 2, 2019 | News
This support comes as the ICJ documents failure of criminal justice system on human rights accountability with its report Accountability for Serious Crimes under International Law in Libya: An Assessment of the Criminal Justice System.
At today’s launch of the publication, the UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL), the Delegation of the European Union to Libya (EUDEL) and the European Union Border Assistance Mission (EUBAM) supported calls for the establishment of a UN Commission of Inquiry for Libya.
The ICJ’s report examines the criminal justice framework in Libya and finds that investigations and prosecutions of crimes under international law have been limited to a handful of cases, and that future cases are unlikely meet international standards necessary to ensure fair and effective justice, in particular the rights to liberty and a fair trial and the prohibition on torture and ill-treatment.
The support by international actors echoes the ICJ’s call for the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry or similar mechanism to monitor, document and report on human rights violations in order to identify perpetrators, and gather and preserve evidence for future prosecutions, either national or international.
UNSMIL, the EU and a number of States expressed their support for the establishment of a Commission of Inquiry or similar mechanism at the 42nd session of the Human Rights Council.
The ICJ also advocated for such a mechanism in its statement to the Council on 25 September.
At the launch, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser Kate Vigneswaran said that “it’s time for States to stop working on the premise that the Libyan criminal justice system can effectively ensure accountability for crimes committed by State and non-State Actors and instead look at options for ensuring they don’t go unpunished.”
The ICJ’s report also calls on States and UN actors to ensure they adopt human rights-compliant terms in their engagement with Libya and to refrain from entering into or implementing agreements with Libyan authorities that could give rise to support for or complicity in violations of international law.
Kate Vigneswaran stated: “Human rights and accountability should underpin any agreements and engagement with Libyan actors entered into by States, rather than being sidelined in the interests of a political solution. Time has shown that the absence of human rights at the forefront of dialogue and engagement with stakeholders has failed to ensure the cessation of egregious human rights violations and abuses being perpetrated throughout the country.”
The launch, which was held in partnership with the Embassy of the Netherlands in Libya, was opened by the Netherlands’ Ambassador, H. E. Mr. Lars Tummers.
Kate Vigneswaran discussed the key findings and recommendations contained in the report. A panel comprised of ICJ Commissioner Marwan Tashani and representatives of EUDEL, EUBAM and UNSMIL responded to the report and provided insights into their work in Libya.
Sep 27, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
Today, at the close of the 42nd regular session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, the ICJ and other NGOs highlighted key acheivements and failures.
The joint civil society statement, delivered by International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) on behalf of the group, read as follows (not all text could be read aloud due to time limits):
“The Council reaffirmed that reprisals can never be justified. Council members rejected attempts to weaken the text including attempts to delete the references to the roles of the Assistant Secretary-General and the Human Rights Council Presidents. The resolution listed key trends such as the patterns of reprisals, increasing self-censorship, the use of national security arguments and counter-terrorism strategies by States as justification for blocking access to the UN, acknowledged the specific risks to individuals in vulnerable situations or belonging to marginalized groups, and called on the UN to implement gender-responsive policies to end reprisals. The Council called on States to combat impunity and to report back to it on how they are preventing reprisals, both online and offline. The Bahamas and the Maldives responded to this call during the interactive dialogue and we encourage more States to follow their good practice. We also encourage States to follow the good practice of Germany and Costa Rica in raising specific cases of reprisals. The Council also welcomed the role of the Assistant Secretary-General and invited the General Assembly to step up its efforts to address reprisals and ensure a coherent system-wide response.
We welcome the creation of a Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) on Venezuela as an important step towards accountability for the grave human rights violations documented by the High Commissioner. We urge Venezuela to cooperate with the FFM and to honor the commitments they have made during this session, including by allowing OHCHR unfettered access to all regions and detention centers and implementing their recommendations. Cooperation and constructive engagement and measures for international accountability and justice should be seen as complementary and mutually reinforcing.
We welcome the renewal and strengthening of the mandate of the Group of Eminent Experts on Yemen, sending a clear message to parties to the conflict – and to victims – that accountability is at the center of the mandate, and providing a crucial and much-needed deterrent to further violations and abuses. States should support the recommendations made by the GEE in their recent report, including prohibiting the authorization of transfers of, and refraining from providing, arms that could be used in the conflict to such parties; and clarifying the GEE’s role to collect and preserve evidence of abuses.
We welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Cambodia, but regret that calls to strengthen the mandate of the OHCHR to monitor and report on the situation have been ignored. We regret that the resolution fails to accurately depict the continuing crackdowns on civil society and the severity and scale of recent attacks on the political opposition.
We welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry on Burundi. Its work is vital as the country heads towards elections in 2020. The Burundian Government should desist from denial and insults, and should cooperate with the Commission and other UN bodies and mechanisms.
We welcome that the EU and OIC have jointly presented a resolution on Myanmar requesting the High Commissioner to report on the implementation of the recommendations of the Fact-Finding Mission at HRC 45. However, the international community needs to take stronger action to ensure accountability for and cessation of grave international crimes, in particular by referring Myanmar to the ICC and imposing a global arms embargo – and by acting on the FFM’s reports, including those on economic interests of the military and on sexual and gender-based violence in Myanmar and the gendered impact of its ethnic conflicts.
The joint EU/OIC resolution on Myanmar welcomes the FFM report on the military’s economic interests, which identifies companies contributing to abuses. The High Commissioner, however, has still not transmitted the database of companies facilitating Israel’s illegal settlements more than 2 and a half years after its mandated release. The High Commissioner pledged in March to fulfil the mandate “within the coming months”. The ongoing unexplained and unprecedented delays have become a matter of credibility, for both the High Commissioner and the HRC. Mr. President, we request that you confer with the High Commissioner and advise as soon as possible when this important Council mandate will be fulfilled.
‘Cautious optimism’ best defines our approach to Sudan. While this year’s resolution, which welcomes the peaceful popular uprising, renews the Independent Expert’s mandate, supports the opening of an OHCHR country office, and highlights the role and needs of civil society, is an improvement on 2018, significant challenges remain. Ensuring accountability for the perpetrators of grave human rights and humanitarian law violations should be a central priority for the new Government, and the Council should assist in this regard.
We regret the lack of Council action on Kashmir and urge the Council, as well as India and Pakistan, to act on all the recommendations in the report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
On terrorism and human rights, we are deeply disappointed that Mexico and other States have partially acquiesced in attempts by Egypt to dilute or distract the work of the Special Rapporteur on counter-terrorism away from its appropriate focus on human rights violations while countering terrorism and human rights of victims of terrorism. We regret that States have asked the Special Rapporteur to spend the limited time and resources of the mandate, to comment on the overbroad concept of the “effects” of terrorism, by which Egypt and some other States seem primarily to mean macroeconomic, industrial, and investment impacts, rather than the human rights of individual victims. The length to which States seem willing to put the existing Special Rapporteur’s mandate at risk, in the name of protecting it, while failing even to incorporate stronger consensus text on human rights issues included in the most recent merged parallel resolution at the General Assembly, suggests that the merger of the previous Mexican and Egyptian thematic resolutions no longer holds any real promise of positive results for human rights.
We welcome the adoption of the resolution on the question of the death penalty, which is an important reflection of the movement towards the international abolition of this cruel punishment. Significantly, this resolution reiterates and affirms the position of international law that the abolition of the death penalty is an irrevocable commitment and that an absolute prohibition exists to guard against its reintroduction. We also welcome the acknowledgement of the ‘most serious crimes’ threshold that acts to restrict the death penalty, in States that have yet to abolish it, only to crimes of extreme gravity; this resolution plainly identifies that criminal conduct that does not result directly and intentionally in death can never meet the threshold test and can never serve as a basis for the use of the death penalty. We are very pleased to acknowledge that the adoption of this resolution is complimentary to the General Assembly’s resolution calling for an international moratorium on the death penalty and, together, they serve to illustrate the advancing global commitment to abolition.
We welcome the Council’s renewed attention to the protection of the right to privacy in the digital age: fully integrating human rights into the design, development and deployment of Artificial Intelligence, machine learning technologies, automated decision-making, and biometric systems, is essential to safeguard not only the right to privacy, but also to freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association, and economic social and cultural rights.
On human rights in the administration of justice, we welcome the focus in this year’s resolution on concrete measures to prevent and respond to violence, death and serious injury in situations of deprivation of liberty, which illustrates the potential of thematic resolutions to set out specific practical, legal and policy steps that can be drawn on by governments, civil society, and other stakeholders to have real positive impact at the national level.
We commend Australia for its leadership on Saudi Arabia, as well as the other States who stood up for women’s rights activists and accountability. We urge more States to live up to their commitment to defend civil society and sign the statement in the coming 2 weeks.
We appreciate the attention paid by individual governments to the situation in China, including the dire situation facing Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims; the crackdown on human rights defenders, including those working to draw attention to violations of economic, social and cultural rights; and the suppression of fundamental freedoms in Tibet. However, we deplore that the Council and many of its members have once again failed to take decisive action to ensure monitoring and reporting on the human rights situation in the country, especially Xinjiang, and press for access for the High Commissioner.
For five years since the last joint statement in March 2014, the Council has failed to hold Egypt accountable for continuing systematic and widespread gross human rights violations. In the latest crackdown on peaceful protests, reports indicate that more than 2000 people have been arrested in the past week. When will the Council break its silence and convene a Special Session to address the grave and deteriorating human rights situation in Egypt?”
Signatories:
- International Service for Human Rights (ISHR)
- DefendDefenders (the East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project)
- Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI)
- CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
- Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies
- Asian Legal Resource Centre
- Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
- International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
- Amnesty International
- Association for Progressive Communications (APC)
- Human Rights Watch
- International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
