Feb 23, 2018 | News
The ICJ today called on the governments of Syria and Russia to cease all attacks on the civilian population in Eastern Ghouta.
Intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population and civilian objects, including hospitals, constitutes a war crime.
All those responsible for such crimes must be held accountable.
“The UN Security Council is blatantly failing to discharge its primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. It’s so paralyzed by division that it cannot even enforce its own resolutions on protecting the civilian population in Syria and ensuring unimpeded humanitarian access,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme.
“After 7 years of shielding the Syrian regime from accountability for its egregious crimes, including the use of chemical weapons, Russia is joining forces with this regime’s cynical enterprise to murder and starve its own people,” he added.
The air and artillery bombing campaign conducted by the Syrian government, with the backing of Russia, have caused hundreds of victims since Sunday.
The destruction of hospitals and the lack of basic supplies and medicines are making the living conditions of the civilian population extremely dire.
Under international humanitarian law, the Syrian government and its ally Russia have obligations to protect the civilian population and to grant rapid and unimpeded passage to humanitarian relief for the residents of Eastern Ghouta.
The UN Security Council imposed a disarmament plan concerning the Syrian chemical arsenal, yet credible reports of government use of chemical weapons against civilians continued to emerge as late as January and February 2018, in particular in Eastern Ghouta and Saraqeb.
In its last report in October 2017, the OPCW-UN Joint Investigative Mechanism established the responsibility of the Syrian government for the use of chemical weapons.
In the same month, Russia vetoed a resolution to renew the Mechanism’s mandate.
“States must act individually and collectively to stop the escalation of horrors we are witnessing in Eastern Ghouta. They must also ensure, including through any means available in their national legal systems, as well as at the regional and international level, that all those responsible for the war crimes, crimes against humanity and other international crimes committed in Syria, irrespective of their nationality, rank or status, are brought to justice,” Benarbia added.
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, tel: +41 798783546, e-mail: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Syria – Ghouta Bombing – News – Webstory – 2018 – ARB (Arabic translation in PDF)
Jan 15, 2018 | News
The ICJ is concerned at allegations that the recent arrest and detention of Oyub Titiev, the head of the Chechen branch of the Russian human rights organisation Memorial, were carried out as retaliation for his human rights activity.
The ICJ is particularly concerned at the more recent reports that family members of Oyub Titiev have had to leave Chechnya for security reasons following threats.
The ICJ calls on the Russian federal and local authorities to conduct a prompt, thorough and independent investigation into allegations that criminal charges against Oyub Titiev have been fabricated by police.
Oyub Titiev should be immediately released pending the outcome of this investigation, and measures should be taken to protect his security and that of his family.
On 9 January 2018, at 10.30, according to an official statement of the Ministry of Interior of Chechnya, Oyub Titiev’s car was stopped near Kurchaloy town to check his documents.
During a search of his car, a plastic bag with approximately 180 grams of a substance identified as marijuana was allegedly found.
Titiyev was charged with possession of a large quantity of narcotics under article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, he has stated that the narcotics were planted and has filed a complaint with the Prosecutor’s Office to initiate an investigation into these allegations.
Oyub Titiev, the head of Memorial in Chechnya, is one of very few human rights defenders who continue their work in Chechnya despite significant obstacles and threats.
He took over this position following the murder of the former head of Memorial in Chechnya, Natalya Estemirova in 2009.
In accordance with Article 2(a) of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders (Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms), human rights defenders have a right to conduct human rights work individually and in association with others.
Under the same Declaration, States have a duty to take all necessary measures to ensure the protection of everyone against any violence, threats, retaliation, adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action as a consequence of his or her legitimate activities as a human rights defender.
Threats of violence and the falsification of evidence by public officials constitute crimes under the Russian Criminal Code. Reliance in criminal proceedings on evidence falsely planted by the police or other State actors would violate international human rights law including fair trial guarantees under the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights.
Attacks on human rights defenders working in an extremely difficult human rights environment such as that of Chechnya, or attacks on their family members, have a chilling effect on work to defend human rights there. If further such attacks are to be prevented, individuals responsible for them must be brought to justice through a fair procedure, the ICJ stressed.
Oct 27, 2017 | News
Today, the ICJ expressed concern at the allegations of harassment of lawyer Shamil Magomedov following an acquittal of his client Sulntankhan Ibragimov, who had been accused of murder.
The allegations should be investigated and authorities must make clear to law enforcement officials that such intimidation and harassment is prohibited, the ICJ said.
Yesterday, the lawyer alleged that on 19 October, while he was in Moscow, a law enforcement officer visited his home in Dagestan and questioned his family members about his whereabouts and “why he complained so much to law enforcement bodies”.
The lawyer believes this is related to the acquittal of his client, Sulntankhan Ibragimov, in whose case a decision had been delivered three days before.
When the matter was raised in court, Prosecutor Magomed Aliyev claimed the law enforcement officer’s visit was routine.
The ICJ considers that in the circumstances, the visit to and questioning by a law enforcement officer of a lawyer’s family about his professional activities could only reasonably be understood as a form of intimidation or harassment.
International standards, such as the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, provide that governments must ensure that lawyers “are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference” and “shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics.”
The ICJ calls on the relevant prosecutorial and law enforcement authorities to make clear to all their officials that all intimidation and harassment of lawyers, including by visiting and questioning a lawyer’s family about the lawyer’s protected professional activities, is prohibited.
Background
Shamil Magomedov, a lawyer from Dagestan, defended Sultankhan Ibragimov in a case where he was charged with the muder of Alisultan Omarov, a Greco-Roman wrestling coach, in 2015 and the murder in 2016 of Nazim Gadjiev, the leader of the “Sadval” movement.
On 16 October, the jury trial found Sultankhan Ibragimov not guilty on all accounts.
Russia-Shamil Magomedov statement-News-web stories-2017-RUS (story in Russian, PDF)
Oct 3, 2017 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
On 2 October, the ICJ and Amnesty International submitted an intervention before the European Court of Human Rights in the case Ecodefence and others v the Russian Federation, Application no. 9988/13 and 48 other applications, which concern labeling NGOs as foreign agents.
In this submission, the applicants provided the Court with an analysis, based on international law sources, of:
a) the scope of application of rights to freedom of expression and association guaranteed under Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR or the Convention) to restrictions on the activity of non-governmental organisations (NGOs);
b) application of the principle of legality to such restrictions;
c) the legitimacy of the aim, necessity and proportionality of measures regulating NGOs, including restrictions on funding, burdensome reporting requirements, sanctions and the stigmatizing effect of labelling NGOs as “foreign agents”; and
d) the scope of permissible restrictions under Article 18 of the ECHR, particularly the question of interferences used for purposes other than those which fall under Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention.
The submission addresses the obligations of State parties to the ECHR with account taken of the other international law obligations, such as those under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as well as other relevant standards under international law.
Russia-ECtHR-AmicusBrief-Ecodefence-legalsubmissions-2017-ENG (download the third party intervention)
Jun 30, 2017 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
ICJ Commissioner Karinna Moskalenko talks about the vulnerabilities of human rights defenders in Russia, as part of the ICJ’s ongoing women profiles series.
Ms Moskalenko is a Russian lawyer who has been a Commissioner of the ICJ since 2003. In the early 1990s she founded, and was the former Director of, the International Protection Centre based in Moscow.
The Centre was founded after Russia had ratified the Human Rights Committee Mechanism with the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. This provided an opportunity to be able to use international mechanisms to appeal against injustices.
Once Russia had ratified the European Convention it was also possible to use the European Court of Human Rights as another means to challenge incidences where domestic remedies were failing to protect the rights of people in Russia.
The Centre pursued many cases successfully and the credibility of the organization grew, which also increased demands for help. Karinna said that women have a strong role to play in human rights defence work in Russia and form the majority of the human rights community where they are well respected.
However, this is not reflected elsewhere in Russian society where, although women are visible in senior roles within the judiciary and the executive, they do not often play an important role in leadership positions or decision-making.
“Women in Russia are sometimes much more vulnerable than other groups of the population,” said Karinna. She identified the particular problem of domestic violence as one where women are unable to obtain legal protections because police are not very interested in the problem. In addition many people within society think that women already have enough protections so there is little public opposition for reducing protections and no support for enhancing these.
Karinna felt compelled to work as a human rights defender to protect the most vulnerable people but commented that many lawyers are not interested in this field of law. Instead, they prefer to build careers within official bodies of the judiciary or the government. Human rights activities are no longer very popular, she said.
Members of non-governmental organizations are often accused of being ‘foreign agents’ or ‘enemies of the State’. As many people do not understand the nature of human rights defence work, Ms Moskalenko said it can be frustrating and hurtful to have to defend yourself against these accusations. However, Karinna thinks that those working in human rights are the most patriotic people she knows because they care about the rights of each and every member of society.
Fortunately, the International Protection Centre has won so many cases for ordinary people that they have a very good reputation in society, but they do not have enough funding for their activities. They cannot accept international funds and domestically no funding is available. Many lawyers take on unpaid cases, but not everyone can afford to do so. The defence of human rights is a very difficult career.
“I cannot say that there is no fear. There is, of course. Some of my friends were killed because of their human rights activity.”
Ms Moskalenko said that human rights defence work is very important but in Russia defenders are not protected financially, legally, morally or physically. They are frequently threatened, persecuted and even killed.
However, although working as a human rights defender is difficult, Karinna says that “when you somehow help people, you want to continue that, you think that you believe that you must do that, you cannot stop and people come to you, how can you refuse?”
Watch the interview:
The series of profiles introducing the work of ICJ Commissioners and Honorary Members on women’s rights was launched on 25 November 2016 to coincide with the International Day to Eliminate Violence against Women and the first day of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence Campaign.
