Jul 20, 2017 | News
An interview of ICJ Secretary General Sam Zarifi with Reuters journalist Stephanie Nebehay.
GENEVA (Reuters) – Donald Trump is one of a new breed of leaders around the world who seek to use their democratic mandate to undermine the rule of law, the head of a legal and human rights watchdog said on Wednesday.
Branding the U.S. president an “authoritarian populist”, Saman Zia-Zarifi, secretary-general of the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), compared him to the leaders of Turkey, the Philippines, Hungary and Venezuela.
Zarifi cited as an example Trump’s travel ban on nationals from six Muslim-majority countries, a policy that he called “highly problematic” under the U.S. constitution and international law.
“What is different now is that a certain kind of populism is being used to actually counter the notion of the rule of law,” Zarifi said in an interview at the headquarters of the ICJ, which is composed of 60 eminent judges and lawyers from all regions who seek to protect human rights and the rule of law.
“The new populism has a certain shamelessness about it that is new. It’s not that people are denying that they are violating rights, what they are saying is they can violate rights because somehow they are empowered by the people,” he said.
Zarifi, who took over at the ICJ in April, said the new breed of populists included Turkey’s President Tayyip Erdogan, Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro, the Philippines’ Rodrigo Duterte, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Jaroslaw Kaczynski, head of Poland’s ruling party.
“I would say that in the U.S., Trump is an authoritarian populist. He has authoritarian tendencies but he still is facing checks and balances,” Zarifi said. “So he is not a full-blown authoritarian figure.”
The U.S. Supreme Court revised parts of Trump’s executive order banning travellers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, a policy Trump says is aimed at tackling terrorism.
“Looking at it again from the point of view of U.S. law – I’m an American lawyer – it seems highly problematic,” said the Iranian-born Zarifi, who moved to the United States as a teenager and holds a law degree from Cornell University.
Supreme Court rulings would be, he said, “a test for the health of the system of checks and balances in the U.S.”
Turkish Judiciary “Politically Compromised”
A crackdown by Erdogan’s government has led to the arrest of 50,000 people and the suspension of 150,000 in the year since a failed military coup in Turkey where the judiciary is “now politically compromised”, Zarifi said.
The Turkish government has said the action is justified by the gravity of the threat to the state from the coup attempt.
On Monday, the state prosecutor asked a court to remand the local Amnesty International director and nine other activists in custody pending trial for membership of a terrorist organisation.
Erdogan was quoted by Turkish media this month as saying they were detained on the basis of intelligence and that the judiciary would make its own decision.
But Zarifi said the judiciary should have thrown the case out.
“The handling of the case highlights the very serious concerns – and alarm in fact at this point – that we have raised about the independence of the judiciary and the legal system in Turkey over the last few years.”
Photo Credit: Reuters / Pierre Albouy
Jun 30, 2017 | Advocacy
A Joint NGO Statement was issued on the occasion of the Twenty-ninth meeting of UN treaty body chairs 27-30 June 2017, New York
This statement includes some reflections and recommendations, by the undersigned organisations (see list on p.6-7), in relation to the programme of work for the 2017 annual meeting.
Some of the comments and recommendations stem from a two-day consultation involving representatives of NGOs, States, treaty body members, OHCHR and academics, which took place in Geneva on 23-24 May 20171.
The consultation focused on developing a strategy for the Treaty Body strengthening process.
A report will shortly be made public.
The comments and recommendations below are structured around the substantive treaty body chairs meeting agenda items.
Universal-MeetingTreatyBodies-Advocacy-2017-ENG (full text in PDF)
Jun 28, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ has joined other leading human rights NGOs in setting out a range of specific measures to increase the effectiveness of UN Special Procedures – independent experts appointed by the Human Rights Council to address particular themes or countries.
The written submission was made in the context of the Annual Meeting of the Special Procedures, in Geneva.
Coordinated by the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), the document assesses current practices against a range of recommendations made in an earlier joint civil society submission in 2016.
The 2017 submission welcomes progress on a number of the recommendations, but also highlights issues where little or no progress has been made. It also offers several new recommendations.
Among the positive developments are the enhanced role of the Coordination Committee, action taken to combat reprisals, the creation of a database where details of individual communications (i.e. complaints) can be accessed, and engagement of Special Procedures with international and regional forums.
The full 2017 submission, entitled “The Special Procedures: Developments in Institutional Strengthening and Working Methods”, can be downloaded in PDF format here: UN-Submission-AnnualMeetingSpecialProcedures-2017
Jun 23, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ has joined other NGOs in highlighting some of the achievements and failures of the June 2017 session of the UN Human Rights Council in a statement at the end of the session.
The statement, delivered on behalf of the group of NGOs by the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), read as follows:
At the close of this session, we welcome the commitment by many States from all regions to enhance the Council’s success and effectiveness, and the performance of Human Rights Council (HRC) members through a series of concrete actions. The steps outlined by the Netherlands, such as more competitive HRC elections and the application of objective human rights based criteria to determine whether and how to act on situations of concern, would go a long way in making the Council more accessible, effective, and protective.
The leadership shown by States in the development of joint statements on killings in the Philippines‘ so-called ‘war on drugs’ and threats against human rights defenders, and on the increasingly dire situation in the Maldives are examples of this. We regret the lack of such leadership on other States including China and Egypt.
Although we’d hoped for a more robust response on the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) from the Council, the international team of experts brings hope of uncovering the truth about the horrific violence in the Kasai. The UN, this Council, and the DRC itself must now ensure unhindered access for and support to the team, for it to independently produce a robust and credible report, which will constitute a step towards accountability.
We congratulate Cote d’Ivoire for its six years of cooperation with the UN and the mandate of the Independent Expert. We urge the Council to continue to pay attention to the human rights situation, particularly in the context of recent mutinies, and to assist the country in the implementation of the Independent Expert’s recommendations, including by striving for A-status for its National Human Rights Institution (NHRI).
We also echo the joint call by several States urging you to create a publicly accessible register of alleged acts of intimidation and reprisals and to provide short oral updates on cases at the start of every Item 5 general debate giving States concerned the opportunity to respond.
We also welcome the joint statement of the core group on civil society space together with some NGOs, and its reaffirmation that the “substantive participation of civil society makes this Council’s debates and work, including the UPR, richer and more meaningful”.
Mr President,
We are pleased that both resolutions on discrimination and violence against women were adopted by consensus, and that adverse amendments designed to remove language on comprehensive sexuality education and women human rights defenders were defeated. We regret that the Russian Federation and others systematically seek to remove reference to human rights defenders in all resolutions at each session. Denial of the existence of defenders is absurd, given the long history of formal recognition of the concept by the Commission on Human Rights, Council and General Assembly.
We regret that the resolution on the “protection of the family” fails to fully recognise that older persons are individual rights holders entitled to self-determination and autonomy, and ignores a significant UN process, the General Assembly Open-Ended Working Group on Ageing. The resolution also fails to acknowledge that diverse forms of the family exist. The entire initiative is implicated in an effort to subvert the aims of our human rights system and the universality of rights.
In closing, Mr President, we are dismayed at the lack of progress in terms of ensuring the most effective participation of civil society, in accordance with established rules and practice of the Council. Although symbolic, the massive reduction of reserved NGO desk space in this room is illustrative of this.
We are concerned about the lack of formal engagement by you and your Bureau with civil society, the absence of visible steps to curb and respond to intimidation or reprisals, and the abusive interruptions of NGO statements, including in some instances by the chair. And we look forward to engaging with your office to reverse this trend.
Thank you.
Among the NGOs joining the statement were the following:
- Amnesty International
- CIVICUS
- Human Rights Watch
- International Commission of Jurists
- International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association (ILGA)
- International Longevity Center Global Alliance
- International Platform Against Impunity
- International Service for Human Rights
The joint statement may be downloaded in PDF here: UN-HRC35-EndSessionStatement-2017
* For additional information on ICJ priorities and activities at the session, see the following:
Refugees and migrants: the role of judges and lawyers
Business responsibility to protect human rights
Corporate impunity; legal protection of refugees and migrants
Discrimination against women in access to justice
Threats to independence of judges and lawyers; backsliding on violence against women
Ensuring women’s access to justice for gender based violence
Turkey: judicial independence and freedom of expression
Civil society space in the Human Rights Council
Call for strong action on Egypt at the Human Rights Council
Continuing lack of accountability for rendition and secret detention
“Protection of the Family”: concerns regarding the resolution
UN Human Rights Council adopts resolutions on independence of judges and lawyers
Jun 22, 2017 | News
The ICJ welcomes the adoption today, by consensus, of two UN Human Rights Council resolutions on the independence of judges & lawyers.
The Human Rights Council adopted the biannual resolution on independence of judges and lawyers, including a number of new elements on the theme of independence of lawyers and the legal profession. In particular, the resolution highlights the ongoing threats against and interference with the independence of lawyers and the ability of lawyers to fulfil their professional functions, including in relation to human rights.
The resolution reaffirms and builds on the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
The Human Rights Council also unanimously renewed the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers for a further period of three years.
The unofficial text of the two resolutions are available in PDF format below:
Official versions will eventually appear on the UN website, at this location.
