ICJ holds its first regional workshop on the investigation of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance in Asia

ICJ holds its first regional workshop on the investigation of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance in Asia

Between 30 May and 1 June 2018, the ICJ co-hosted a workshop for authorities from Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar and Nepal on the investigation of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance in accordance with international human rights law and standards.

The workshop was co-hosted with Thailand’s Ministry of Justice and the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and took place as part of the ICJ’s Global Redress and Accountability Initiative, which has as one of its core objectives, “increasing the knowledge and capacity of lawyers, prosecutors and investigators to deal with challenges of impunity and access to redress.”

The participants included more than 30 criminal investigators, forensic doctors, forensic scientists, prosecutors, police trainers, senior judges and representatives of the Cambodian Ministry of Justice, the Myanmar Attorney General’s Office, the Thai Ministry of Justice and the Nepal Office of the Attorney General.

The event commenced with opening remarks by the Ambassador of Finland, Ms. Satu Suikkari-Kleven; the Ambassador of Germany, Mr. Peter Prügel; Adviser on the Promotion of the Rights and Freedom from Thailand’s Ministry of Justice, Mr. Pitaya Jinawat; and the Asia Director of the ICJ, Frederick Rawski.

Alex Conte, Senior Law and Policy Advisor, ICJ Global Redress and Accountability Initiative, gave an overview of the international human rights legal framework that applies to the investigation of unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance.

Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser at the ICJ, then provided an overview of the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which was launched in Thailand on 25 May 2017 and which formed the core of the materials used at the workshop.

Other speakers included Ms. Jennifer Prestholdt, Deputy Director, the Advocates for Human Rights, who presented on the Rights of Victims and Families and witness interviews; Mr. Glenn Williams, Detective Inspector, Field Crime Manager, New Zealand Police National Headquarters, who presented on the investigation process including crime scene management;

Ms. Shivani Verma and Ms. Pratubjit Neelapaijit, of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights who presented on Witness Protection; and Dr. Pornthip Rojanasunan, Adviser, Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS)/Member of the Advisory Panel who presented on forensic pathology.

This workshop followed two workshops the ICJ co-hosted between 5 to 8 December 2017 in Thailand on the investigation of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance for lawyers from Thailand and India, academics and the Thai authorities.

Contact

Alex Conte, ICJ Global Redress and Accountability Initiative, t: +41 79 957 2733; e: alex.conte(a)icj.org

Kingsley Abbott, Senior International Legal Adviser, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Office, t: +66 94 470 1345, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

Transitional justice, prevention, and the obstacle of impunity: the example of Nepal (UN Statement)

Transitional justice, prevention, and the obstacle of impunity: the example of Nepal (UN Statement)

The ICJ today delivered an oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council, on transitional justice, prevention and impunity, highlighting the continuing problem of impunity in Nepal.

The statement, which was made during a clustered interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence and the Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide, read as follows:

“The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) remains deeply concerned by continuing impunity for gross human rights violations in many parts of the world, which undermines the potential for transitional justice to contribute to prevention as outlined in the Joint Study (A/HRC/37/65).

For example, in Nepal, more than ten years after the civil war, political expediency has trumped calls for justice and accountability. There has been near absolute impunity for those responsible for serious crimes under international law.

Transitional justice mechanisms – the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and Commission on Investigation of Disappeared Persons (CoID) – have fallen short of international standards, both in their constitution and their operation, despite repeated orders by the Supreme Court of Nepal to enforce the standards.

The Commissions’ deeply flawed mandates, among other problems, allow them to recommend amnesties for gross human rights violations. In addition, their non-consultative, uncoordinated and opaque approach to their work has also created distrust with all major stakeholders, including conflict victims and members of civil society.

The Government continues to flout its obligation, both pursuant to the Supreme Court’s orders and under international law, to enact domestic legislation to criminalize serious crimes in accordance with international standards.

As highlighted by in the Joint study, turning a blind eye on past atrocities signals that some perpetrators are above the law, which further discredits State institutions and “breeds a (long-standing) culture of impunity in which atrocities may become ‘normalized’, rendering prevention significantly more difficult.” (para 43)

That, indeed, is the experience in Nepal: continuing impunity for gross human rights violations perpetrated during the conflict is one of the major obstacles to the creation of a stable and legitimate democratic government and lies at the heart of the rule of law crisis in the country. Ending impunity is essential to preventing further violations.”

Video of the statement is available here:

 

The delegation of Nepal exercised its right to reply later in the day. Its reply is here:

 

 

The ICJ oral statement complements a related written statement by the ICJ at the session.

Nepal: justice proving elusive – human rights NGOs 

Nepal: justice proving elusive – human rights NGOs 

The one-year extensions of Nepal’s two transitional justice mechanisms without necessary legal and institutional reforms ordered by the Supreme Court and the UN are insufficient to comply with international standards, the ICJ, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said today.

The three organizations warned that the mere extension of the terms of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission on the Investigation of Enforced Disappeared Persons (CIEDP) is likely to prolong the justice process without meaningfully improving the chances that victims will have their demands for justice, truth, and accountability met.

“The net worth of these two bodies has now been tested by the victims in Nepal who are deeply dismayed and disappointed at not having been served truth and justice—even after years of delay,” said Biraj Patnaik, Amnesty International’s South Asia Director.

On February 5, 2018, the Government of Nepal extended, for the second time, the mandates of the TRC and CIEDP by one year without taking any measures to ensure their credibility and human rights compliance, and to increase the capacity of the Commissions as demanded by victims, civil society groups, and the National Human Rights Commission of Nepal (NHRC).

On the same day, the NHRC called on the government to amend the Enforced Disappearances Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act, 2014, in line with international standards and the judgements of the Supreme Court of Nepal.

The TRC and CIEDP have fallen short of international standards, both in constitution and operation, despite repeated orders by the Supreme Court of Nepal.

Among other flaws, the current legal framework allows for the possibility of amnesties and effective impunity for gross human rights violations amounting to grave crimes under international law, and the broad authority to facilitate reconciliation, including without the informed consent of the victims and their families.

In addition, a non-consultative, uncoordinated and opaque approach to their work has also created distrust with all major stakeholders, including conflict victims and members of civil society.

Where the Commissions have made efforts to work effectively, they face problems due to a lack of sufficient human and financial resources.

“Families and victims of Nepal’s decade-long civil war have waited far too long for answers, and cynical government attempts such as extending the mandate without broader reform as directed by the highest court is a further slap in the face,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director at Human Rights Watch.

“The two commissions have gathered a lot of documentation, but the authorities seem more committed to protecting perpetrators than ensuring justice in the process.”

Despite flaws in the law, and questions of legitimacy and capacity, victims and their families have given the benefit of the doubt to these bodies, and submitted thousands of complaints.

As of February 2018, the TRC has received 60,298 complaints of human rights violations, and the CIEDP has received 3,093 complaints of enforced disappearance.

Though the Commissions have stated that they have initiated investigations into some of these cases, there are serious concerns about the quality of these investigations, and to date, not a single case has been recommended for prosecution.

“Now a member of the UN Human Rights Council, the international community has high expectations of the government of Nepal,” said Frederick Rawski, Asia Director of the International Commission of Jurists.

“It needs to commit to ensure that these institutions function independently and free from political interference, and in accordance with international standards that prohibit impunity for gross human rights violations. Merely extending their mandates without addressing the underlying problems is not adequate.”

Contacts

 Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 64 478 1121, e: frederick.rawski@icj.org

Meenakshi, Ganguly, South Asia Director, Human Rights Watch, e: gangulm@hrw.org

Omar Waraich, Deputy Director, Amnesty International South Asia, t: +94 72 737 5467; e: omar.waraich@amnesty.org

Background

The TRC and CIEDP were established on 10 February 2015 through the Enforced Disappearances Enquiry, Truth and Reconciliation Commission Act, 2014.

The two-year mandates of the TRC and CIEDP expired on February 9, 2017.

The government extended the mandates for one year.

On 20 January 2018, the President approved an Ordinance extending the mandate of the two Commissions.

On the basis of the Ordinance, the Council of Ministers, on 5 February 2018, extended the mandates of these bodies for an additional year.

 

Translate »