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.”
Mar 20, 2018 | News
The authorities in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) should reveal the whereabouts of prominent human rights defender and citizen-journalist Ahmed Mansoor and release him immediately and unconditionally, two dozen human rights organizations, including the ICJ, said today.
Ahmed Mansoor is being held for his peaceful human rights work.
20 March 2018 marks one year since security forces arbitrarily arrested Mansoor, winner of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders in 2015, at his home in Ajman.
The UAE authorities have continued to detain him in an unknown location, despite condemnation from UN human rights experts and independent human rights organizations.
“The authorities have subjected Ahmed Mansoor to enforced disappearance since his wife last saw him in September 2017. They must reveal his whereabouts to his family and grant him immediate access to them and to a lawyer of his choosing,” said Khalid Ibrahim, Executive Director of the Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR).
Following his arrest, the authorities announced that he is facing speech-related charges that include using social media websites to “publish false information that harms national unity.”
On 28 March 2017, a group of UN human rights experts called on the UAE government to release Mansoor immediately, describing his arrest as “a direct attack on the legitimate work of human rights defenders in the UAE.”
They said that they feared his arrest “may constitute an act of reprisal for his engagement with UN human rights mechanisms, for the views he expressed on social media, including Twitter, as well as for being an active member of human rights organizations.”
“Mansoor’s arbitrary detention is a violation of his right to freedom of expression and opinion. The UAE authorities must drop all charges against him and release him immediately,” said Carles Torner, Executive Director of PEN International.
Since his arrest, Mansoor has not been allowed to make telephone calls to his family and has been allowed only two short visits with his wife, on 3 April and 17 September 2017, both under strict supervision.
He was brought from an unknown place of detention to the State Security Prosecutor’s office in Abu Dhabi for both visits.
The authorities have refused to inform his family about his place of detention and have ignored their requests for further visits.
In February 2018, a group of international human rights organizations commissioned two lawyers from Ireland to travel to Abu Dhabi to seek access to Mansoor.
The UAE authorities gave the lawyers conflicting information about Mansoor’s whereabouts.
The Interior Ministry, the official body responsible for prisons and prisoners, denied any knowledge of his whereabouts and referred the lawyers to the police.
The police also said they had no information about his whereabouts. The lawyers also visited Al-Wathba Prison in Abu Dhabi following statements made by the authorities after Mansoor’s arrest, which suggested that he was being held there.
However, the prison authorities told the lawyers that there was nobody matching Mansoor’s description in prison.
“Pending his release, Mansoor must be granted immediate and regular access to his family, as well as to a lawyer of his choosing,” said Sima Watling, UAE Researcher at Amnesty International’s Middle East Regional Office.
UAE-one-year-Ahmed-Mansoor-remain-unknown-2018-ENG (Full text in PDF)
Mar 20, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today spoke at the Human Rights Council about the creation of a UN database of business enterprises involved in Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Terrority (OPT).
The statement, delivered in general debate under item 7 of the Council agenda, read as follows:
“Regarding the Report on a Database of business enterprises involved in listed activities in the settlements on the Occupied Palestinian Territory (A/HRC/37/39), the ICJ recognizes that considerable progress has been made, but considers that the normative and methodological frameworks of the database would benefit from incorporating an analysis of corporate complicity under international law, in addition to the existing references to the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
The ICJ stresses that a transparent process and strong due process safeguards in relation to companies alleged to be involved are essential and notes the efforts of the OHCHR in this regard.
All States, including the home States of the companies involved, have a responsibility to prevent companies from operating in breach of international law. Businesses themselves should see the database as an opportunity to more proactively incorporate respect for human rights within their policies and operations.
The database should contribute to global efforts to hold all business enterprises accountable for their role in violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Indeed, the ICJ urges all States, including those that have supported the creation of this database, to support and give due attention to addressing the human rights impacts of businesses in their own territories as well as global operations of businesses for which they are the home State.”
Video of the statement is available here:
Mar 12, 2018 | News
As they begin the appointment process, the Tunisian authorities must ensure that selection of members of the Constitutional Court are made in compliance with international standards on the independence of the judiciary, the ICJ said today.
This must happen through an open and transparent process and based on prescribed, objective criteria of merit, integrity, and equality before the law, the ICJ adds.
The 2014 Constitution and the Organic Law no. 50 of 2015 on the establishment of the Constitutional Court provide that three bodies are responsible for appointing the 12 members of the Constitutional Court.
These are the Assembly of People’s Representatives (ARP), the High Judicial Council, and the President of the Republic, which each body appointing four out of the 12 members successively.
The Constitution and the Organic Law also provide that members must have 20 years of professional experience and nine of them should have advanced legal expertise.
Over the past three weeks, the ARP has been reviewing the candidates for the Constitutional Court and the election of first four members is due to take place in a general plenary on Tuesday, 13 March 2018.
“Ensuring that the selection and appointment of all members of the Constitutional Court is made on the basis of their legal qualifications, competence and personal integrity is absolutely necessary to the strengthening of rule of law and the protection of human rights in Tunisia” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme.
“In electing the four members, the ARP should ensure that these criteria are fully met, and that the process safeguards against appointments for improper motives, including political considerations and arrangements between political groups,” he added.
The Tunisian authorities should also ensure that the composition of the Constitutional Court reflects the diversity of the community it serves, including by ensuring the equal representation of women in the Court, as well as a significant representation of minority groups.
In a previous memorandum, the ICJ has also urged the authorities to ensure that the selection process guarantees the independence of the institution and of the individual judges in compliance with international standards.
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, tel: +41798783546, email: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Background
Article 11 and 12 of Law no. 50 of 2015 provides that the election of candidates by the Parliament and the High Judicial Council shall take place through a secret ballot with the vote of a majority of two-thirds of their members. Article 13 provides that the President of the Republic appoints the last four members of the Constitutional Court.
The 2014 Constitution requires the establishment of the Constitutional Court within a year after the legislative elections. Four years later, and despite the entry into force of Law no. 50 in 2015, the Constitutional Court has not yet been established.
Tunisia-PR-Constitutional-Court-2018-ARA (Full Text in Arabic, PDF)
Mar 8, 2018 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
Today on International Women’s Day the world looks to celebrate the achievements of women and advances made towards the realization of women’s human rights but the day is also an opportunity to address the issues that continue to disadvantage women.
In the 70th anniversary year of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights many women around the world have seen States failing to live up to their obligations to ensure that they are able to exercise their human rights.
Where women’s human rights are violated many women face discrimination, denial of equal protection of the law and other impediments in accessing the justice that they deserve.
“The ICJ has a strong commitment to addressing the obstacles women face in accessing justice,” said ICJ Acting Vice-President, Justice Radmila Dragicevic-Dicic.
“The judiciary has an important role in protecting the rights of women, but in many States there is a lack of proper awareness and understanding of issues such as gender based-violence. Many judges would benefit from judicial education on specific gender-based issues to ensure that women victims are made visible and their rights protected by domestic laws and relevant international standards,” she added.
For several years the ICJ has worked on women’s access to justice issues in different countries in all regions with a variety of stakeholders, including human rights defenders, lawyers, judges, governmental authorities and international rights experts and mechanisms.
For example, in Tunisia, the ICJ issued a memorandum calling on authorities to remove the obstacles women face in accessing justice.
The ICJ has held regional dialogues in Africa and Asia with judges and lawyers.
In Asia, one outcome of this was The Bangkok General Guidance for Judges in Applying a Gender Perspective, designed to assist judges in employing a gender perspective in deciding cases before them, which has since been adopted for use by judiciaries in Indonesia and the Philippines.
In Africa, the need for gendered perspectives in judicial decision-making was also raised in a regional report evaluating sexual and gender based violence (SGBV) and fair trial rights.
The ICJ has undertaken substantial work on women’s access to justice in the context of SGBV, including a report calling for an eradication of harmful gender stereotypes and assumptions and a Practitioners’ Guide on Women’s Access to Justice for Gender-Based Violence.
Both have been used as training tools in Asia, Africa and MENA, most recently at a workshop on SGBV in Swaziland.
Last year the ICJ released a memorandum on effective investigation and prosecution of SGBV in Morocco.
The ICJ has also undertaken trial observations during hearings in the landmark Sepur Zarco case, the first case that resulted in a conviction for sexual crimes that had occurred during Guatemala’s internal conflict in the early 1980s.
The ICJ regularly engages with the UN Human Rights Council and the UN Committee on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women to highlight issues around women’s access to justice and call on the international community to be vigilant in upholding women’s rights protections.
“The ICJ is lucky to count among its number some very impressive women human rights defenders, who bring a great deal of expertise to the work of the organization,” said Dragicevic-Dicic.
“The five most recent additions to the ICJ have further strengthened the organization’s ability to speak authoritatively on women’s rights, and I look forward to working with my new colleagues to enhance women’s access to justice,” she added.
The new additions to the ICJ include Dame Silvia Cartwright, Former Governor of New Zealand; Professor Sarah Cleveland, Constitutional and Human Rights Professor at Columbia Law School in the USA; Justice Martine Comte who has over 30 years judicial experience in France; Mikiko Otani, member of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child from Japan; and Justice Lillian Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza from the Supreme Court of Uganda.
In an interview with the ICJ, Commissioner Justice Elizabeth Evatt, a distinguished Australian lawyer, jurist and trailblazer for women in the legal profession in her country, spoke about the importance of women being able to access justice.
One of the architects of Australia’s Family Law Act of 1975, Justic Evatt told the ICJ how the Act made divorce more accessible and abolished the Common Law relics that gave men greater rights over women, however new problems have emerged since then.
Justice Evatt explained that “(the Act) was an extremely important reform for women. It made it far easier for men and women to access divorce and have their matters dealt with because the court had conciliation and counselling services and also legal aid was more readily available. But I am afraid that since those days, thing have changed. The Family Court is now beset with delays and obstacles and it is impossible for people to get legal aid. People have to take their case on their own or face huge legal costs, so having begun well, it hasn’t continued well. More resources are needed.”
Justice Evatt also considers that there is a need for the government and the judiciary to take more action to address domestic violence.
However, she noted, “there has been a change over the years with a growing awareness of both the police and the local courts, which are the main ones dealing with violence. They have become far more aware of the need to take action to protect women and prevent violence but the cure for domestic violence does not lie just with the courts but also with the whole of society.”
Watch the interview:
