Mar 30, 2017 | News
The ICJ today called on the Tunisian President, Beji Caid Essebsi, to refrain from signing into law amendments to the law that regulates the country’s High Judicial Council (HJC). The amendments were adopted on Tuesday 28 March 2017 by the People’s Representatives Assembly.
The ICJ also urged the Head of the Cabinet, Youssef Chahed, to act, as a matter of highest priority, on the nominations by the Instance Provisoire de la Justice Judiciaire (IPJJ) with a view to filling the positions of the First President of the Cassation Court and its General Prosecutor.
The ICJ expressed concern that the amendments revising the country’s 2016 HJC law would weaken the effective functioning of the judiciary and the administration of justice in several respects
- The amendments would strip the IPJJ President of the authority to convene the HJC’s first meeting and instead provide the President of the Parliament with such power. This would constitute an inappropriate interference of the legislative branch into the management of the judiciary in clear violation of the principle of separation of powers and judicial independence.
- The amendments would explicitly exclude any possibility of challenge or judicial review of such action of the President of the Parliament. The ICJ considers that the judiciary must be able to review such decisions to ensure that they are not exercised arbitrarily or outside the law.
- The amendments would also reduce the quorum required for the validity of HJC meetings from one-half to one-third of its members. This could lead to situations where non-judicial members of the HJC have the power to take decisions over the judiciary, in contravention of international standards.
“Instead of using legislative tactics and procedures to weaken the independence and the effective functioning of the HJC, the Tunisian Head of Cabinet should act on the IPJJ’s nominations to fill the positions of the President and the Prosecutor General of the Cassation Court as a matter of urgency, and ensure that until the HJC is properly established, the IPJJ continues to fully exercise its competencies in overseeing and managing the judiciary,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle-East and North Africa (MENA) Programme.
Indeed, irrespective of the amendments, the ICJ recalls that article 148(8) of the Constitution clearly states that the IPJJ is to carry out its mandate until the seats on the HJC have been filled. This is further affirmed under article 74 of the 2016 HJC Law and article 19 of the 2013 IPJJ Law. Both of these laws make the end of the exercise of the IPJJ’s functions dependent on two conditions, namely that the HJC be fully composed and established.
The ICJ considers that the delay in acting on the IPJJ nominations of senior judges risks undermining the effective functioning of the judiciary, as well as adversely affecting the functioning of other institutions that are essential to upholding the rule of law and protecting human rights in Tunisia. The adopted amendments are no answer to this problem.
“The ongoing crisis is political and not judicial,” Benarbia said.
“Solving it does not require the introduction of legislative amendments that erode the rule of law and judicial independence, but rather the compliance with existing laws and the Constitution,” he added.
Contact
Theo Boutruche, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle-East and North Africa Programme, t: +33 6 42837354, e: theo.boutruche(a)icj.org
Background
The amendments were introduced and adopted amid a continuing crisis and functional paralysis of the judiciary that also impact on the effective functioning of other State institutions, including the body in charge of reviewing the conformity of laws with the Constitution.
In particular, two key positions have been left vacant as neither the First President of the Cassation Court, nor its General Prosecutor, have been appointed, and both of these positions also serve as ex officio members of the HJC.
In October 2016, elections were organized to choose the members of the HJC. A swearing-in ceremony before the President of the Republic followed in 14 December 2016, in which not all the HJC Members participated.
In November 2016, the IPJJ proposed candidates including to fill these two positions. Under the Tunisian Law, the Head of the Cabinet must confirm these nominations.
Alternatively, this official may request new nominations from the IPJJ until agreement is reached, as provided for in article 12 and 14 of the IPJJ Law No.13 of 2013. So far, the Head of the Cabinet has failed to act on the IPJJ’s nominations and uncertainty prevails as to whether the HJC has been properly established.
Under the Tunisian Constitution and laws, the President of the Cassation Court is also the President of the Instance Provisoire de Contrôle de la Constitutionnalité des Projets de Loi, the body in charge of assessing the conformity of laws with the Constitution during the transition period.
When established, the HJC will be charged with appointing four members of the Constitutional Court.
Tunisia-Statement new HJC Law-News-Web stories-2017-ARA (full story in Arabic, PDF)
Mar 21, 2017 | News
The ICJ today called on the Untied Arab Emirates (UAE)’ authorities to immediately release Ahmed Mansoor, the 2015 Laureate of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders, and to ensure that he is not subjected to any form of ill-treatment as long as he remains detained.
On 20 March 2017, security officials raided the apartment where Ahmed Mansoor and his family resides and confiscated electronic devices. They took Ahmed Mansoor away at around 3:15AM local time. His present whereabouts remain unknown.
The authorities have not informed his family members of the reasons for his arrest, the authority that ordered such arrest, or the location to which he was taken.
The ICJ calls upon the UAE authorities to disclose, as a matter of urgency, Ahmed Mansoor’s place of detention and provide full information about his fate and whereabouts.
International law requires that detainees be held in officially recognized places of detention and that no one is held secretly in detention, whether in officially recognized detention facilities or elsewhere.
The ICJ fears that the arrest and secret detention of Ahmed Mansoor is likely related to his human rights work, protected under international law.
His activities involve the exercise of his right to the freedom of expression, including his use of social media to criticize attacks on human rights defenders in the UAE.
“Arbitrarily detaining Ahmed Mansoor and subjecting him to secret detention exemplifies the lengths to which the UAE authorities are prepared to go in their relentless campaign to suppress peaceful human rights work and to reduce to silence all those perceived to be critical of the authorities,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme.
“The UAE authorities must comply with their obligations under international law and release immediately and unconditionally all those individuals detained or imprisoned solely for peacefully exercising their rights to freedom of expression and association,” he added.
Mansor’s arrest and secret detention comes amidst a continuing crackdown on individuals calling for peaceful political reform.
Many of them were subjected to serious human rights violations, including torture and other-ill-treatment, arbitrary detention and enforced disappearances.
The ICJ has previously documented such cases.
Contact:
Said Benarbia, ICJ Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: 41 22 979 38 17, e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Background
Ahmed Mansoor is a highly prominent human rights defender in the UAE and well known in the Arab region and around the world.
He has regularly monitored and raised awareness about cases of serious human rights violations in the UAE, including cases arbitrary detention, torture and other ill-treatment, enforced disappearances and violations of fair trial rights.
Since 2006, has faced repeated intimidation and harassment, including imprisonment in 2011 after being convicted of “insulting officials” and sentenced to three years’ in prison, although he was released after eight months.
Since being jailed in 2011, he has been denied a passport and banned from travelling.
Nov 25, 2016 | Advocacy
The ICJ today joined a group of 60 organizations condemning a new law that would further repress civil society organizations and human rights advocacy in the country, and calling on the Government to stop efforts to silence civil society.The NGO statement follows urgent warnings from the UN Special Rapporteurs on Freedom of Association, on Freedom of Expression, and on Human Rights Defenders that, if implemented, the law would “devastate” civil society in the country.
The full NGO statement can be downloaded in PDF format here: egypt-ngolaw-openletter-2016
Oct 11, 2016 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
Selected by a jury of 10 global human rights organizations, including the ICJ, Ilham Tohti has worked for two decades to foster dialogue and understanding between Uyghurs and Han Chinese. Detained in China, he could not travel to collect his prize in Geneva.
A renowned Uyghur intellectual in China, Ilham Tohti (photo) has rejected separatism and violence, and sought reconciliation based on a respect for Uyghur culture, which has been subject to religious, cultural and political repression in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.
In 1994 he began to write about problems and abuses in Xinjiang, which led to official surveillance.
From 1999 to 2003 he was barred from teaching.
Since then the authorities have also made it impossible for him to publish in normal venues.
As a response, he turned to the Internet to broaden public awareness of the economic, social and developmental issues confronting the Uyghurs.
In 2006 he established Uyghurbiz.net, a Chinese-language site, to foster dialogue and understanding between Uyghurs and Han Chinese.
Over the course of its existence, it has been shut down periodically, and people writing for it have been harassed.
In 2009, he was arrested for several weeks after posting information on Uyghurs who had been arrested, killed and “disappeared” during and after protests.
In the following years he was periodically subjected to house arrest, and in 2013, while bound to take up a post as a visiting scholar at Indiana University, USA, he was detained at the airport and prevented from leaving China.
On January 15, 2014, Ilham Tohti was arrested on charges of separatism and sentenced to life imprisonment, after a two-day trial.
Numerous statements were issued by Western governments and the European Union condemning his trial and sentence, and in early 2016 several hundred academics petitioned the Chinese leadership for his release.
Upon his nomination as a Finalist for the Martin Ennals Award earlier this year, his daughter stated: “My father Ilham Tohti has used only one weapon in his struggle for the basic rights of the Uyghurs of Xinjiang: Words; spoken, written, distributed, and posted. This is all he has ever had at his disposal, and all that he has ever needed. And this is what China found so threatening. A person like him doesn’t deserve to be in prison for even a day.”
Martin Ennals Foundation Chair Dick Oosting said: “The real shame of this situation is that by eliminating the moderate voice of Ilham Tohti the Chinese Government is in fact laying the groundwork for the very extremism it says it wants to prevent.”
The two other finalists received Martin Ennals Prizes.
Zone 9 Bloggers (Ethiopia) are nine young activists who called themselves ‘Zone 9’ as a symbol for Ethiopia as a whole (Kality prison in Ethiopia, has 8 zones and holds many journalists and political prisoners).
They document human rights abuses and shed light on the situation of political prisoners in Ethiopia.
Six of its members were arrested and charged with terrorism.
Although they have now been released, three are in exile while four of the six remaining in Ethiopia are still facing charges and banned from travel.
Razan Zaitouneh (Syria) has dedicated her life to defending political prisoners, documenting violations, and helping others free themselves from oppression.
She founded the Violations Documentation Center (VDC), which documents the death toll and ill-treatment in Syria’s prisons.
She had started to cover all sides in the conflict when she was kidnapped, alongside with her husband and two colleagues, on 9 December 2013. Her whereabouts remain unknown.
Background
The “Nobel Prize of Human Rights”, the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders (MEA) is a unique collaboration among ten of the world’s leading human rights organizations to give protection to human rights defenders worldwide.
Strongly supported by the City of Geneva, the award is given to Human Rights Defenders who have shown deep commitment and face great personal risk. Its aim is to provide protection through international recognition.
The Jury is composed of the following NGOs: ICJ, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Human Rights First, Int’l Federation for Human Rights, World Organisation Against Torture, Front Line Defenders, EWDE Germany, International Service for Human Rights, and HURIDOCS.
Contact:
Michael Khambatta, Director, Martin Ennals Foundation, t: +41 79 474 8208, e: khambatta(a)martinennalsaward.org
Olivier van Bogaert, Director, ICJ Media and Communications, and ICJ Representative on the MEA Jury, t: +41 22 979 38 08, e: olivier.vanbogaert(a)icj.org
china-mea-laureate-2016-news-press-releases-2016-chi (full text in Chinese, PDF)
Watch the Martin Ennals Award Ceremony 2016:
Watch the Ilham Tohti movie:
Sep 26, 2016 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today at the UN Human Rights Council, joined other organisations to condemn the increasing attacks aimed at deterring NGOs from exposing human rights violations.
The statement was delivered by the leading international NGO the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), on behalf of ICJ, Amnesty International, Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), Centros de Estudios Legales y Sociales (CELS), Conectas Direitos Humanos, East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Programme (EHAHRDP), and Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR), during a general debate on Follow up to the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (VDPA).
The organisations stated as follows:
“The failure of States to protect in these instanes is incompatible with the VDPA’s recognition of the ‘important role of non-governmental organisations in the promotion of all human rights’, that NGOs should be able to play this role ‘without interference’, and that they ‘enjoy the rights and freedoms recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights’.
One example of such interference is the ruling on 17 September by a Cairo Criminal Court to freeze the personal bank accounts of five Egyptian human rights defenders – Bahey el din Hassan, Hossam Bahgat, Gamal Eid, Mostafa El-Hassan, and Abdel Hafiz Tayel – as part of the ongoing investigations into case no.173, also known as the foreign funding case.
The court also froze the bank accounts of three human rights NGOs: the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, Hisham Mubarak Law Center, and Center for the Right to Education.
As a result, a judicial committee is now expected to manage the funds of these independent NGOs and defenders, as well as have full access to their records and databases of the NGOs, including files related to victims of human rights violations.
The VDPA makes clear that the ‘administration of justice, … especially, an independent judiciary and legal profession in full conformity with applicable standards contained in international human rights instruments, are essential to the full and non-discriminatory realization of human rights’.
To illustrate: In Egypt, the judiciary has been used as a tool in the ongoing crackdown on civil society, systematically failing to respect fair procedures. None of the individuals or organizations accused have thus far been permitted to view their entire case file, nor to present their defense before the investigative judges. Further, the court relied for its verdict on allegedly falsified investigations compiled by Egypt’s National Security Agency (NSA), and disregarded all material evidence presented by the defendants.
Such systematic attacks on civil society are not only illegal, but ill-advised and absolutely inimical to a State’s national interests, peace and prosperity.
We call on Egyptian authorities to immediately and unconditionally reverse the ruling and drop the investigation into case no. 173. We also stress that Egyptian human rights defenders need the support of this Council, particularly those States that have repeatedly expressed their commitment to protecting HRDs. We urge States to demonstrate their genuine leadership in this regard.”
