May 25, 2018 | News
The ICJ today called on the Tunisian Parliament to reverse its decision of 26 March 2018 and allow the Truth and Dignity Commission (IVD) to carry out its mandate for at least another year.
The IVD should be in the position to finalize its investigations of past serious human rights violations in the country and, when appropriate, refer cases to the Specialized Criminal Chambers (SCC), the ICJ added.
Since its decision, the Parliament has not considered or adopted any measures to address the legal and practical consequences, including how incomplete investigations by the IVD will be handled, how other investigations will be transferred to the SCC and by whom, how evidence will be preserved and protected, how the documents and the material gathered by the IVD will properly be archived, and what would happen if the IVD were unable to complete the drafting of the final report.
The initial four-year term of the IVD ends on 31 May 2018.
“It’s absolutely irresponsible for the Tunisian Parliament to thwart the whole transitional justice process and curtail the work of the IVD without providing any path forward,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
“As one of the three branches of government, the Parliament must abide by Tunisia’s obligations under international law to establish the truth about past human rights violations, bring the perpetrators to account, and provide victims with effective remedies and reparation,” he added.
The March decision runs counter to all these obligations.
It denies the rights of victims, and broader society, to know the truth, including about the circumstances and reasons that led to decades of serious human rights violations in the country.
The IVD has not been able to finalize its investigations or produce its final report.
It also shields those responsible from criminal accountability. Only eight cases have so far been referred by the IVD to the SCC.
The fate of cases that have been investigated but are not referred before 31 May 2018 remains unclear. The IVD reportedly received some 62’712 complaints.
“The Parliament is abdicating its responsibility to respect and protect victims’ rights,” Benarbia said.
“Instead of playing cynical political games that can only foster impunity, the Parliament should reverse its decision and remove all the obstacles that might impede the IVD’s work in ensuring accountability for past abuses, ” he added.
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41798783546, e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Background
Under the 2013 law on transitional justice, the IVD initially had a four-year term, with the possibility of renewal for a single additional year, on the basis of a reasoned decision by the IVD.
The 2013 law provided that the IVD’s decision on renewal should be submitted to the Parliament.
The law is however silent as to whether the submission of the IVD decision was simply a matter of notification, or required approval of Parliament to be effective.
In any event, 68 members of the Parliament voted on 26 March against extending the term of the IVD for another year.
Under its bylaws, for decisions of Parliament to be valid they must be adopted by at least 72 of its members.
The apparent lack of quorum for the Parliament’s 26 March decision has only introduced more uncertainty and confusion, further complicating the position for the IVD and others, including most notably the victims themselves.
On 24 May 2018, the IVD and the Minister in charge of relations with constitutional bodies, civil society and human rights issued a joint statement reiterating Tunisia’s commitments to the transitional justice process as provided by the Constitution.
In the statement, the IVD was requested to transfer all cases concerning serious human rights violations to the SCC, to establish criteria on the basis of which reparation for victims will be provided, to establish compensation criteria for the Victims Fund, and to send the final report to the President of the Republic, the President of the Parliament and the President of the Government.
Tunisia-IVD Parliament-News-2018-ARA (full story in Arabic, PDF)
May 18, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
Speaking today at a special session of the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ joined calls for an independent international inquiry into the use lethal and other force by Israeli security forces in Eastern Gaza.
The statement read as follows:
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) deplores apparent violations of international law by Israeli security forces during the past six weeks in Eastern Gaza near the border with Israel, in relation to demonstrations by Palestinians.
The ICJ is concerned at the many killings and serious injuries associated with the excessive, unjustified or otherwise unlawful use of force, including the killing of a number of children.
The ICJ recalls that international human rights law permits use of lethal force only when strictly necessary to protect life. The ICJ understands that Israel has taken the position that only the international law of armed conflict, and not international human rights law, was applicable, and that all lethal force used against protestors was justified. The ICJ insists that human rights law – and specifically, standards on the use of force in law enforcement contexts – was indeed applicable, and that the use of lethal force was in the circumstances wholly unjustified.
Excessive force, including lethal force, has apparently been used against unarmed persons who do not pose a threat to life. Irrespective of legal regime, such use of force is manifestly inconsistent with the principles of necessity and proportionality.
The ICJ joins the call for this Council to establish an independent Commission of Inquiry or similar investigation, to ensure accountability for serious violations of international law.
Update: The session concluded with the adoption (29 yes, 2 no, 14 abstained) by the Council of a resolution establishing a Commission of Inquiry.
Apr 29, 2018 | News
Between 28 and 29 April 2018, the ICJ co-hosted a Seminar for judges and prosecutors from Tunisia and Libya on the international law and standards that apply to the investigation and prosecution of gross human rights violations.
The participants included more than 30 judges and prosecutors from different regions in Tunisia and Libya.
The Seminar was co-hosted with the Associations des Magistrats Tunisiens (AMT) and the Libyan Network for Legal Aid.
The event commenced with opening remarks by ICJ Commissioner, Justice Kalthoum Kennou of Tunisia.
Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser at the ICJ, delivered a comprehensive overview of the international human rights law and standards that apply to the duty to investigate gross human rights violations.
He noted in particular that investigations of potentially unlawful deaths play a key role in accountability by upholding the right to life, which is guaranteed by Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
He then introduced the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which sets out a common standard of performance in investigating potentially unlawful deaths or suspected enforced disappearance and a shared set of principles and guidelines for States, as well as for institutions and individuals who play a role in the investigation.
The revised Minnesota Protocol formed part of the core materials referred to at the Seminar, together with the ICJ Practitioners Guide No 9 – Enforced Disappearance and Extrajudicial Execution: Investigation and Sanction (2015).
The Seminar also covered the collection of evidence, the duty to prosecute, and fair trial rights.
Other speakers at the event included Vito Todeschini, Associate Legal Adviser at the ICJ; Aonghus Kelly, Senior Legal Adviser, EU Border Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM); and Martin Hackett, Senior Trial Counsel at the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in the Hague.
Contact
Said Benarbia: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Kingsley Abbott: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Apr 25, 2018 | News
The ICJ today called on the Egyptian authorities to quash the conviction of, and immediately release Hisham Geneina, a former judge and former head of the Central Auditing Authority in Egypt.
A Cairo military court convicted Geneina on Tuesday 24 April and sentenced him to five years in prison for “publishing false information harmful to the national security.”
The charges were related to a media interview in which Geneina criticized the interference of the Egyptian authorities in the election process and referred to the existence of documents that incriminate political and military leaders since 2011, including in cases of human rights violations.
The first hearing of the military trial took place on 18 April.
At the defense request, it was adjourned to 20 April so that the lawyers can have access the case file. The judgement was issued 4 days later.
“Genina’s detention, prosecution and conviction solely for peacefully and legitimately exercising his right to the freedom of expression is a testament to the length to which Egypt’s military and government would go to silence critical voices,” said Saïd Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
“After a grossly unfair trial before a military court that he should never have been prosecuted before in the first place, Egyptian authorities must stop the charade and immediately and unconditionally release Hisham Geneina,” he added.
Egypt – Geneina – News – Webstory – 2018 – ARA (Arabic translation in PDF)
Background
Hesham Genena was arrested on 13 February following a media interview in which he claimed, among other things, that the former Chief-of-staff Sami Annan was in possession of documents incriminating the country’s political and military leadership.
One day before his arrest, the military spokesperson said that Genena’s statement casts doubts on the State and its institutions in the time where the armed forces are combating terrorism in Sinai.
He added that the armed forces will use their rights as provided for in the Constitution and the law to protect national security, and that they will refer the matter to the relevant authorities to take legal action.
According to information provided by his lawyer, Geneina is currently in solitary confinement in the Cairo Appeal Prison and his health condition is deteriorating due to injuries related to a physical attack against him on 27 January, for which he needs surgical intervention.
Mar 23, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today joined other NGOs in an end-of-session statement, reflecting on the 37th ordinary session of the UN Human Rights Council.
The statement was delivered by the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) on behalf of:
- The East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project (DefendDefenders)
- The Global Initiative for Economic, Social & Cultural Rights
- CIVICUS
- International Commission of Jurists
- International Federation for Human Rights Leagues
- Conectas Direitos Humanos
- Human Rights House Foundation
- Amnesty International
- International Lesbian and Gay Association
- Human Rights Watch
- Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA).
The statement read as follows (text in italics was not read aloud for lack of time):
“Our organisations welcome the adoption of the resolution on the promotion and protection of human rights and the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, particularly in reaffirming that all approaches to development must comply with the State’s international human rights obligations.
We agree that “cooperation and dialogue” are important for the promotion and protection of human rights, and that States should fully cooperate with the Council and its mechanisms, and ensure that all stakeholders are able to cooperate and engage with them without fear of reprisals.
However, we must now be vigilant to ensure that the resolution on Mutually Beneficial Cooperation, lacking in balance, does not undermine other important parts of the Council’s mandate: to address human rights violations and respond promptly to human rights emergencies in specific countries.
The Council has failed to take meaningful action to address the alarming situation on the ground in Cambodia. We welcome and echo the joint statement on Cambodia by over 40 states calling for further action if the situation does not improve in the lead up to the elections and for a briefing by the High Commissioner before the next Council session. We are concerned by Cambodia’s attempt to shut down criticism under item 10 debate on the worsening human rights situation in the country, as they are doing domestically.
We are disappointed by the weak outcome on Libya. Given the gravity of the human rights situation on the ground and the lack of accountability for crimes under international law, the Council cannot justify the lack of a dedicated monitoring and reporting mechanism.
We welcome the co-sponsorship of the Myanmar resolution by groups of States from all regions, making a joint commitment to address the continuing human rights violations and crimes against humanity in the country and support for the Special Rapporteur and Fact-Finding Mission to fulfil its mandate to establish truth and ensure accountability for perpetrators.
We also welcome the renewal of the mandate of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan allowing it to continue its vital investigations and identification of perpetrators. These developments acknowledge the importance of accountability for serious human rights violations and crimes under international law, which cannot be understated.
We welcome the adoption of the resolution on drugs and human rights as the OHCHR report will provide human rights indicators related to the drug issue that would help in future policies.
We welcome the resolution on Eastern Ghouta adopted after an urgent debate, demonstrating how this Council can respond in an agile manner to crises.
Having long supported the resolution on “protection of human rights while countering terrorism”, we appreciate the efforts that led to the end of the separate and deeply flawed initiative on “effects of terrorism on the enjoyment of human rights“. Future versions of the resolution must address the relevant issues exclusively and comprehensively from the perspective of the effective protection of human rights.
We welcome the Dutch-led joint statement on strengthening the Council, emphasising the importance of substantive civil society participation in any initiative or process and that the Council must be accessible, effective and protective for human rights defenders and rights holders on the ground.
Finally, we call on the Bureau co-facilitators on improving the efficiency and strengthening the Council to closely engage with all Members and Observers of the Council, human rights defenders and civil society organisations not based in Geneva.”
