Nov 25, 2015 | News
The ICJ, the UNDP and the Office of the Supreme Court of the Union (OSCU) held a High Level Dialogue on “Drafting and Implementing a Code of Judicial Ethics” in Nay Pyi Taw on 24-25 November 2015.
This followed on a commitment by the OSCU to create a new code and to work together with the ICJ and UNDP to ensure it is informed by and implemented in accordance with international best practice.
The Judicial Ethics Review Committee, Regional High Court Judges and other senior court administrators participated in the Dialogue.
The participants and their international counterparts from the ICJ and UNDP discussed the content of the Draft Code of Ethics, international standards on Judicial Codes of Ethics and accountability mechanisms.
In opening the Dialogue, the Honourable Supreme Court Justice of the Union, U Mya Thien explained that the new code reflecting international standards would enhance public trust and promote accountability in the Judiciary.
In his opening remarks, Sam Zarifi, the ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the pacific noted the historic occasion in which the world was watching transition in Myanmar.
During the Dialogue, former ICJ Commissioner and UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Dato Param Cumaraswamy, and Justice Murray Kellum of Australia shared their wealth of experience developing codes of ethics and accountability mechanims at the national and international levels.
Both explained that public perception of the Judiciary is key in a transition to the rule of law and human rights.
All participants agreed the Myanmar’s judiciary is not yet independent and that its current judicial code of ethics requires updating.
It was acknowledged that new code of ethics would develop the independence of the judiciary in Myanmar.
Sam Zarifi explained that, “in order for the Supreme Court to assert judicial independence it must demonstrate that it can hold itself accountable to a code of ethics.”
Both the UNDP and the ICJ congratulated the OSCU for following its Strategic Plan for 2015-2018 and engaging in a dialogue designed to further this process.
Both expressed willingness to continue working with Myanmar’s judiciary on the issues of judicial independence, the rule of law and human rights.
Oct 26, 2015 | News
Myanmar’s human rights record for the past four and a half years will be under scrutiny at the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council (HRC), as the country goes up for its Universal Periodic Review (UPR) review on 6 November 2015.
Myanmar will be assessed on developments based on information provided by the government, UN human rights experts, institutions and treaty bodies; and stakeholders including Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs).
The eleventh round of Pre-Sessions to discuss the human rights situations in Myanmar was held on 8 October 2015 and was organized by UPR-Info.
The event brought together various permanent missions and various Myanmar civil society organizations (CSOs) that presented their respective UPR recommendations.
This event also provided NGOs, including the ICJ, with an opportunity to contribute to the UPR process by informing several delegations at once about specific, actionable recommendations to the government to effectively address human rights violations and provide redress.
In its UPR stakeholder submission, the ICJ drew the attention of the HRC Working Group on the UPR, and that of the HRC itself, to the ICJ’s concerns about the independence of the judiciary and legal profession, the lack of legislation adequately protecting human rights and the environment, discriminatory laws targeting women and minorities, and the writ of habeas corpus in Myanmar.
The Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights referred to these issues in its summary to the HRC Working group on the UPR.
UPR discussions in Geneva led by NGOs reiterated that despite reforms, significant human rights challenges remain in Myanmar. These include, but are not limited to, the following:
- During its first UPR in 2011, Myanmar had supported recommendations to consider signing and ratifying core human rights treaties, but has made no significant progress;
- A recent parliament veto reserves the 25% of the seats in the legislative bodies for the military, thus continuing military impunity and preserving their hold over any constitutional or legislative amendment;
- The Myanmar National Human Rights Commission suffers from low credibility due to its lack of autonomy from the government and failure to investigate egregious human rights violations;
- The package of “race and religion protection” laws comes at a time of increasing ethnic and religious tension, and discriminates on grounds of gender and religion. Discrimination against religious minorities has led to mass displacement, deaths and rights violations;
- Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender rights are routinely violated;
- The Environmental Conservation Law allowed government departments and private business abroad exemptions from environmental protection obligations;
- Judicial independence is compromised as judges in some instances still render decisions based on orders coming from military and the government.
Contact:
Vani Sathisan, ICJ International Legal Adviser, Myanmar, t: +95-09250800301; e: vani.sathisan(a)icj.org
The ICJ’s UPR stakeholder submission for Myanmar can be found here
The OHCHR summary to the UN Working Group for the UPR can be found here
Oct 6, 2015 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
Selected by a jury of 10 Global Human Rights organizations, including the ICJ, Ahmed Mansoor could not come to Geneva to collect the 2015 Award, as he has been banned from travelling. Robert Sann Aung (Myanmar) and Asmaou Diallo (Guinea) receive Martin Ennals Prizes.
Emirati blogger and prominent human rights defender Ahmed Mansoor is one of the very few independent voices to whom international NGOs can turn for a credible independent assessment of human rights developments in the United Arab Emirates.
He regularly raises concerns on arbitrary detention, torture, international standards for fair trials, non-independence of the judiciary, and domestic laws that violate international law.
Since 2006, he has focussed on initiatives concerning freedom of expression, civil and political rights.
He successfully campaigned in 2006-2007 to support two people jailed for critical social comments, who were released and the charges dropped.
Shortly after, the Prime Minister of UAE issued an order not to jail journalists in relation to their work.
He 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.
The Martin Ennals Jury has publically urged the government of the UAE to lift this travel ban and allow him to travel.
“Ahmed Mansoor continues to pay the price for speaking out on human rights issues in his country, we urge his government to lift the travel ban,” said Martin Ennals Foundation Chair Micheline Calmy-Rey.
“There is little attention for the massive crackdown on free expression and assembly in the UAE, and Ahmed Mansoor is one of the few independent voices who refuses to be silenced,” said Olivier van Bogaert, ICJ Director of Media and Communications, and ICJ Representative on the MEA Jury.
“Without him, we would probably not know that behind the UAE’s shopping malls, high-rise towers and tourism hub, there is a nasty underside, there are dark prisons where inmates are hidden for years without trial, and tortured,” he added.
Honored with a Martin Ennals Prize, Robert Sann Aung (Myanmar) has courageously fought against human rights abuses since 1974.
He has been repeatedly imprisoned in harsh conditions, physically attacked as well as regularly threatened. He was disbarred from 1993 – 2012.
Currently, he represents students detained for peacefully protests.
Asmaou Diallo (Guinea) founded l’Association des Parents et Amis des Victimes du 28 septembre 2009 (APIVA), after the Guinean military attacked peaceful demonstrators on that day.
APIVA assists those affected, and supports them to testify in court proceedings.
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, ICJ Director of Media and Communications, and ICJ Representative on the MEA Jury, t: +41 22 979 38 08, e: olivier.vanbogaert(a)icj.org
Watch the Martin Ennals Award Ceremony 2015:
Watch the Ahmed Mansoor film:
Sep 16, 2015 | News
Myanmar’s government must end the practice of appointing newly retired military officials as judicial officers to its courts and ensure that the judiciary carries out its functions as a separate branch and independent of the Executive, said the ICJ today.
At least 20 former military officers who have just recently resigned from the military were reportedly appointed as vice director generals to the country’s Supreme Court this month.
They will be performing administrative functions but according to section 310 of the Myanmar Constitution will be in line for senior judicial appointments at the state or regional level after 5 years or sooner if the President considers them to be ‘eminent jurists’.
“One of the fundamental aspects of an independent, impartial and accountable judiciary is the appointment of judges, through proper procedures, on the basis of their legal competencies,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia Director. “The process for appointing and promoting judges must be transparent and ensure judicial independence and impartiality.”
A group of leading members of the Myanmar bar launched a “yellow ribbon” campaign last Friday in Yangon to protest the practice of assigning military officers to serve as judicial officers.
“The process of selecting these officers and assessing their legal qualifications is totally opaque,” Zarifi added. “The lawyers wearing yellow ribbons are emphasizing the belief of people in Myanmar that strengthening the rule of law is essential to guaranteeing justice and the country’s political and economic development, so it’s important to improve the judiciary’s qualifications and increase public trust.”
The Supreme Court of Myanmar launched its Strategic Plan 2015-2016, citing “judicial independence and accountability” as one of its key strategy areas.
The UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary provide that that “Persons selected for judicial office shall be individuals of integrity and ability with appropriate training or qualifications in law.”
“The Myanmar judiciary is trying to shake off decades of interference from the Executive branch in order to assert its proper role as defender of the rights of people in Myanmar, and it can’t do so without a clear and transparent appointment and promotion process,” Zarifi said.
An exposition and analysis of international law and standards are available in English and Myanmar language in the ICJ’s authoritative Practitioners’ Guide on the Independence and Accountability of Judges, Lawyers and Prosecutors.
Contact:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific, t: +66 807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Vani Sathisan, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Myanmar, t: +95 9250800301; e: vani.sathisan(a)icj.org
Jul 8, 2015 | News
The ICJ held a successful workshop with the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) on ‘Investment Law Challenges: Defending Public Policy in Investor State Arbitration’.
The event took place in Nay Pyi Taw from 6 to 8 July 2015 and was attended by 60 participants from the OAG and other Ministries.
The workshop was designed to raise awareness about Myanmar’s human rights obligations in relation to investment and to build the OAG’s capacity to draft law that carves out regulatory space for public policy making.
The workshop also prepared the OAG for challenges to public policy through arbitration with a moot court exercise.
The topic is timely as Myanmar rushes to draft new investment law and sign Bilateral Investment Treaties that give investors standing to challenge public policy promoting and protecting human rights.
In opening the workshop, Director General U Kyaw San spoke of the rapid increase of investment in Myanmar and the corresponding changes in its regulatory system.
Dr. Na Chi Oo, a speaker for the OAG, outlined the challenges this poses to the drafting of new public policy.
Participants heard from ICJ Commissioner Prof Andrew Clapham who discussed globalization, investment arbitration and public policy.
He examined the use of human rights law in investment arbitrations.
Guest speaker Prof. Anthony Daimsis introduced bilateral investment treaties and highlighted provisions that can restrict state regulatory space.
Prof. Errol Mendes gave examples of international cases in which public policy has been challenged.
Ms. Harpreet Kaur Dhillon, from the Centre for International Law, National University of Singapore gave practical advice for drafting law that protects the regulatory role of the state.
Dr. Daniel Aguirre, ICJ Legal Adviser, added that “Myanmar needs to update its regulatory system to protect the environment and human rights. It must make sure it does not sign away its regulatory role through investment law and bilateral treaties.”
The event culminated with a moot arbitration exercise where OAG participants engaged in a mock consultation process and a simulated arbitration over a public health policy.
The ICJ was impressed by the interest and genuine commitment of the participants to promote the rule of law and public policy in Myanmar.
The ICJ staff enjoyed open and frank discussion with the Attorney General and is Director Generals on relevant legal developments and looks forward to further discourse.
The ICJ remains committed to provide support in this field in line with the promotion and protection of human rights.
