Dec 4, 2023 | Events, News
The conclusion drawn at a workshop hosted by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and Thailand’s Ministry of Justice on 30 November and 1 December 2023, in Ayutthaya province, was that Thailand should step up efforts to provide real access to justice for victims of corporate human rights abuses involving Thai companies abroad. This is imperative to make sure that Thailand meets its international legal obligations and fulfills the commitment it made in adopting a National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights Phase 2 (NAP), aimed at regulating the conduct of Thai companies abroad.
The workshop advanced a crucial component of the set of action points outlined in the NAP, engaging nearly 30 members from the justice sector, relevant authorities across various departments, academics, lawyers, and civil society actors.
“This workshop holds particular importance as it contributes to the global initiative aimed at addressing the lack of human rights regulation and the accountability of transnational corporations, a significant gap in human rights protection,” remarked Santiago A. Canton, ICJ’s Secretary-General in an opening statement.
“The state’s obligation to prevent human rights abuses committed by the companies it may influence does not stop at the border. The adoption of the Maastricht Principles in 2011 revealed evidence of State obligations to protect economic, social, and cultural rights beyond its borders, including in the context of corporate conduct, and this obligation binds the judiciary of the State. These principles have subsequently been confirmed by several jurisprudences of the UN treaty bodies,” said Sandra Epal Ratjen, ICJ’s UN Senior International Legal Adviser.
During the workshop, participants discussed existing challenges, covering areas such as corporate veils, conflicts of law, jurisdictional issues, statutes of limitations, and remedies.
“When an abuse occurs, the legal separation of corporate entities often allows parent companies and their representatives to evade responsibility for human rights abuses committed by them, leaving victims with no means to enforce compensation awards,” said Sanhawan Srisod, ICJ’s Legal Adviser.
“Courts in the parent company’s home country may serve as an alternative forum for claims seeking remedy or reparation. However, affected foreign citizens generally encounter greater barriers than Thai citizens in accessing justice due to several reasons, including language barriers, lack of understanding of the Thai legal system, financial constraints, short statutes of limitation, and the unavailability of access to legal aid, local lawyers, and internal corporate documents,” added Srisod.
Proposals from the participants included amending laws to shift the burden of proof, especially when critical facts or documents necessary to resolve a claim reside exclusively within the knowledge of the corporate defendant. This involves considering the potential influence parent companies exert over their subsidiaries in relevant actions. Other recommendations involved extending the statute of limitations for cases involving victims of transnational corporate human rights abuses, acknowledging the existence of corporate veils under Thai law, strengthening the enforcement of foreign judgments against parent companies in Thailand.
Effective measures aimed at ensuring remedies could include requiring businesses to obtain insurance coverage or establishing preventive remedial funds for Thai businesses before embarking on overseas investment. The eligibility criteria of existing funds and grievance mechanisms could be widened within Thailand to explicitly allow affected persons outside the country access to such remedies and mechanisms. There were also suggestions to explicitly broaden the scope of duties of the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand (NHRCT) to investigate and reconcile abuses occurring abroad.
Further recommendations included establishing standards for remedies with a human-centered approach and exploring the implementation of social sanction measures.
Participants considered how best to implement measures through bodies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Board of Investment (BOI), whose representatives attended the Workshop. This encompassed proposals for sustainable disclosure of corporate information to both the SEC and BOI. Additionally, there were suggestions to strengthen the BOI’s role or assign a permanent mandate to the NAP Committee for overseeing Thai investments abroad. Participants also explored the idea of incorporating human rights challenges faced in foreign investment as mandatory disclosure points in the SEC’s One-Report, which listed companies are required to submit annually. Furthermore, there were discussions regarding the Stock Exchange of Thailand (SET) assuming a more influential role in regulating transnational corporations.
Background
Thailand’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights Phase 2 (2023-2027) outlines various activities within the Action Plan on Cross Border Investment and Multinational Enterprises.
Its Action Point 1.3 designates the Ministry of Justice, supported by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Office of the Attorney General, with the responsibility of conducting a study. This study aims to offer recommendations for amending laws or establishing measures aimed at ensuring access to the justice system and effective civil, criminal, and administrative remedies for communities, both locally and overseas, affected by the operations of Thai companies or state enterprises abroad.
This workshop was the second of its kind. The first meeting was conducted on 10 and 11 September 2022 by the ICJ and Thailand’s Ministry of Justice.
Speakers at the Workshop included:
- Darunee Paisanpanichkul, Deputy Dean, Faculty of Law, Chiang Mai University
- Ruangsak Suwaree, Director-General, Rights and Liberties Protection Department, Ministry of Justice
- Sandra Epal Ratjen, Senior International Legal Adviser and UN Representative, ICJ
- Sanhawan Srisod, Legal Adviser, ICJ
- Santiago A. Canton, Secretary-General, ICJ
- Sayamol Kaiyoorawong, National Human Rights Commissioner of Thailand
- Teerachai Sanjaroenkijthaworn, Co-ordinator, Extra-Territorial Obligation Watch Coalition
Contact
Sanhawan Srisod, ICJ Associate International Legal Adviser, e: sanhawan.srisod@icj.org
Further reading
Thailand: Barriers persist in access to justice for victims of human rights abuses involving Thai transnational corporations abroad – ICJ report
Nov 28, 2023 | Cases, News
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Berlin, November 28, 2023 – A German court in the city of Celle is expected to deliver a verdict on November 30, 2023, in the first trial in Germany for crimes committed in The Gambia, Gambian and international civil society groups said today in releasing a question and answer document about the trial.
The groups are: the African Network against Extrajudicial Killings and Enforced Disappearances (ANEKED), the European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights (ECCHR), the Gambian Center for Victims of Human Rights Violations, Human Rights Watch, the International Commission of Jurists, Reporters Without Borders (RSF), the Rose Lokissim Association, the Solo Sandeng Foundation, and TRIAL International.
This trial is possible because Germany recognizes universal jurisdiction over certain serious crimes under international law, allowing for the investigation and prosecution of these crimes no matter where they were committed and regardless of the nationality of the suspects or victims.
The trial concerns Bai L., an alleged member of the “Junglers,” a paramilitary unit also known as the “Patrol Team,” which was set up by then-president Yahya Jammeh in the mid-1990s. Jammeh’s 22-year rule was marked by systematic oppression and widespread human rights violations, including torture, extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, and sexual violence against actual and perceived opponents.
German prosecutors accuse Bai L. of being a Junglers driver involved in the attempted murder of Ousman Sillah, a lawyer; the murder of Deyda Hydara, a journalist; the attempted murder of Ida Jagne and Nian Sarang Jobe, who worked with the independent newspaper Hydara; and the murder of a former Gambian soldier, Dawda Nyassi
The verdict in the Bai L. case represents a major step in the search for justice for years of abuses committed under Jammeh’s rule in The Gambia, the groups said. The Bai L. trial reinforces the role that governments like Germany can play in advancing justice for atrocities committed abroad under the principle of universal jurisdiction.
Civil society groups will hold a news conference online on Thursday, November 30 after the verdict is issued – scheduled for 3:30 pm CET – at the following link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/81236784593?pwd=tvLgbtT3I8N9rF2Db2XTIRyH3Kn1gv.1
To read the question-and-answer document, please see the attached PDF:
Questions and Answers on first German trial for serious crimes
For more information, please contact:
For Reporters Without Borders, in Dakar, Sadibou Marong (English, French): +221-70-960-40-92 (mobile); or smarong@rsf.org. Twitter: @cheikhsadbu
For TRIAL International, in Geneva, Babaka Mputu (English, French, German): +41-775-07-04-56 (mobile); or media@trialinternational.org. Twitter: @Trial
For Human Rights Watch, in New York, Elise Keppler (English, French): +1-917-687-8576 (mobile); or kepplee@hrw.org. Twitter: @EliseKeppler
For Solo Sandeng Foundation, in Germany, Fatoumatta Sandeng (English, German, Mandinka, Wollof): +49-163-174-7519 (mobile); or solosandengfoundation@gmail.com. Twitter: @solosandengfound
For ANEKED, in New York, Nana-Jo Ndow (English, French, Spanish, Portuguese): +1-929-684-5734 (mobile); or nanajo.ndow@aneked.org. @theANEKED
For Reporters Without Borders, in Berlin, Nicola Bier (German, English, French, Spanish, Italian): +49-160-9957-6073 (mobile); or nicola.bier@reporter-ohne-grenzen.de. Twitter: @ReporterOG
Lawyer for Baba Hydara and Omar and Modou Nyassi, in Celle, Patrick Kroker (German, English, French): +49-170-813-6258 (mobile); or info@patrickkroker.net. Twitter: @pkroker2
For International Commission of Jurists, in New York, Reed Brody (English, Spanish, French, Portuguese): +1-917-388-6745 (mobile); or reedbrody@gmail.com. Twitter: @reedbrody
Nov 3, 2023 | News
Former Deputies and Mayors Face Prosecution and Prolonged Incarceration for Political Speech.
The Turkish government should abide by international law and implement the binding judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) by immediately releasing politicians Selahattin Demirtaş and Figen Yüksekdağ, who formerly co-chaired the opposition Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), four rights organizations said today.
The four nongovernmental organizations—Human Rights Watch, the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project, the International Commission of Jurists, and the International Federation for Human Rights—made their call on the seventh anniversary of the politicians’ wrongful imprisonment.
“The seventh anniversary of the unlawful incarceration of Selahattin Demirtaş and Figen Yüksekdağ is a stark reminder of the Erdoğan presidency’s willingness to use detention for political ends to silence democratically elected opposition politicians representing millions of Kurdish and leftist voters in Turkey,” said Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “In defying the binding ECtHR judgments ordering the politicians’ release, Turkey is flagrantly violating its legal obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights and international law more broadly.”
On November 4, 2016, months after being stripped of their parliamentary immunity, Demirtaş, Yüksekdağ and eight fellow members of parliament from the HDP were arbitrarily detained and placed in pretrial detention, with four others incarcerated over the following five months. At the time, the HDP held 10.7 percent of seats in Turkey’s parliament and was backed by over five million voters. While the 12 other deputies whose cases are covered in the ECtHR judgments are no longer in detention, Demirtaş and Yüksekdağ remain incarcerated.
All the former parliamentarians have been repeatedly prosecuted in individual proceedings based exclusively on their exercise of their right to freedom of expression, protected under international law. This included their political speeches and activities, which did not involve or advocate violence. When a mass trial was opened against them in 2021, many of those ongoing individual case files were merged. The vague and wide-reaching accusations against them in this trial include allegations of “undermining the unity and territorial integrity of the State” (separatism) and even “murder.” These accusations relate to their support for protests that mainly took place in cities in southeast Turkey between October 6 and 8, 2014. The politicians have been held responsible for all offences allegedly committed over the course of these protests, which were organized against the brutal siege of the Kurdish-majority northern Syrian town of Kobane by the extremist armed group Islamic State (also known as ISIS). During the protests, 37 people reportedly died.
The evidence against the politicians, on the basis of which Demirtaş and Yüksekdağ are currently detained, consists of two social media postings supporting protests over the Kobane siege sent from the HDP Twitter account, together with the politicians’ nonviolent political speeches, lawful activities, and witness statements against them added to the case file years later that raise serious questions of credibility.
The ECtHR determined in three judgments—two pertaining to Demirtaş in November 2018 and December 2020, and one to Yüksekdağ and 12 others in October 2022—that their detention on the basis of speeches and social media postings was a politically motivated move to silence them, “stifling pluralism and limiting freedom of political debate, the very core of the concept of a democratic society.” The court found that their rights to liberty, to freedom of expression, and to be elected had been violated. The facts forming the basis on which Demirtaş and Yüksekdağ are detained and were prosecuted for in the 2021 mass trial are substantially the same as those contained in the proceedings which the ECtHR found to be insufficient grounds for their detention.
“Despite the European Court ruling that the grounds to justify Yüksekdağ and Demirtaş’s detention were insufficient, the Ankara public prosecutor in April 2023 requested their conviction on numerous alleged offences concerning their political speech, which may result in their life imprisonment without parole,” said Temur Shakirov, interim director of the International Commission of Jurists’ Europe and Central Asia Programme. “This underscores the ultimate political motives behind the ongoing case targeting the two and reinforces doubts about the fair administration of justice in the country.”
After Demirtaş and Yüksekdağ’s detentions in November 2016, Turkey held a landmark referendum and several crucial election campaigns. The April 16, 2017 constitutional referendum introduced a system of governance concentrating power in the hands of the president. It was followed by the June 24, 2018 presidential election in which Demirtaş ran as a candidate from his prison cell against President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the March 31, 2019 local elections, and, most recently, the May 14-28, 2023 parliamentary and presidential elections.
“With two prominent figures of the opposition in detention, the country has been deprived of a significant measure of meaningful democratic debate and fair elections around these crucial campaigns,” said Reyhan Yalçındağ, vice president of the International Federation for Human Rights. “With the March 2024 local elections fast approaching, the Committee of Ministers and the other Council of Europe bodies need to use all available means to ensure the end of the continuing violations of Demirtaş’s and Yüksekdağ’s rights, including their rights to participation in public affairs, which is also a violation of the rights of millions of voters.”
The Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers, responsible for overseeing member states’ implementation of ECtHR judgements, has issued six decisions and two resolutions calling on Turkey to release Demirtaş from detention. At its December 5-7 session this year, the Committee of Ministers will for the third time examine Turkey’s failure to implement the judgment pertaining to Yüksekdağ and release her from detention.
The four nongovernmental organizations have made a joint submission to the Committee of Ministers asking it to issue a decision in December calling for the release of Yüksekdağ.
“Turkey has ignored the Committee’s numerous decisions and interim resolutions calling for Demirtaş’s immediate release. This refusal to comply with Turkey’s international obligations has been repeated in the case of Yüksekdağ,” said Ayşe Bingöl Demir, director of the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project. “The Committee must intensify its scrutiny against Turkey in relation to these cases without further delay, and this must include the triggering of infringement proceedings, in line with the route rightly followed in the case of the imprisoned rights defender Osman Kavala.”
Eighteen other elected former party officials and mayors from the HDP and an affiliated party, the Democratic Regions Party, are also currently detained. Among them is the prominent former elected mayor of Diyarbakır, Gültan Kışanak, detained since October 25, 2016, and Sebahat Tuncel, former co-chair of the Democratic Regions Party, detained on November 6, 2016. Kışanak’s pretrial detention has exceeded the legal limit of seven years under Turkish law, notwithstanding that seven years’ pretrial detention is a flagrant violation of international human rights law. The detentions of the politicians are blatantly arbitrary and politically motivated, and those imprisoned should be immediately released, the organizations said.
Press release in Turkish: Turkey Demirtas and Yuksekdag press release TURKISH
Oct 19, 2023 | News
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) condemns the strike on al-Ahli hospital in the Gaza Strip on 17 October 2023, which according to the Palestinian Health Ministry killed more than 500 Palestinian civilians, mainly women and children, and injured hundreds more.
“Civilians and hospitals must be protected at all times”, said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ’s MENA Programme. “Intentional attacks on hospitals may amount to war crimes under international humanitarian law and must cease immediately”, added Benarbia.
Palestinian sources have said that the massacre was caused by an Israeli air strike. The Israeli Defence Forces have denied any responsibility, claiming that it was caused by a failed rocket launch by Palestinian armed groups.
Under the Geneva Conventions and customary international humanitarian law, States have an obligation to investigate war crimes with a view to bringing alleged perpetrators to justice.
The ICJ calls on the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to allocate the necessary resources to respond to the escalating situation in Israel and Gaza with a view to investigating and establishing criminal responsibility for alleged war crimes and other violations of international humanitarian law committed by both parties.
According to the ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan, the ICC has jurisdiction over potential war crimes committed by Palestinian armed groups in Israel and Israelis in the Gaza Strip, even though Israel is not a State party. In 2015, Palestine acceded to the ICC Statute. In 2021, the Court ruled that its jurisdiction “in the Situation in Palestine extends to the territories occupied by Israel since 1967, namely Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.”
On 12 October the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) ordered the entire population of northern Gaza, that is, more than 1 million people, to evacuate to southern Gaza within 24 hours in advance of a likely military ground offensive.
On 14 October, the World Health Organization (WHO) strongly condemned Israel’s repeated orders for the evacuation of 22 hospitals in the Gaza strip, and called on Israeli authorities to protect health facilities, health workers, patients and civilians.
“The Israeli evacuation order was issued in the absence of safe passage or a safe destination. It may amount to a transfer of parts of the population of the occupied territory, a war crime under the ICC Statute and a serious violation of international humanitarian law”, said Benarbia.
Under international humanitarian law, hospitals and other medical facilities are considered to be protected civilian objects. Unless they are used for military purposes, they shall be protected at all times and may not be the object of attack.
Under international humanitarian law, all parties to an armed conflict have an obligation to distinguish between military and civilian targets and to take all feasible precautions to protect civilians from attacks and from the effects of military operations. Indiscriminate attacks on civilians and civilian objects, including those perpetrated using weapons that are indiscriminate by nature, amount to breaches of international humanitarian law. Intentionally directing attacks against civilians amounts to war crimes under the under the Statute of the ICC and customary international law.
Furthermore, the ICJ is deeply concerned by reports of the use of white phosphorus by Israel in other military operations in Gaza and Lebanon.
“Israel must refrain from using white phosphorus, and any other means and methods of warfare that are inherently indiscriminate or that cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering”, added Benarbia.
White phosphorus has the potential to cause civilian harm due to the severe burns it causes and its lingering long-term effects on survivors. While it is not per se a prohibited weapon under international humanitarian law, its use in densely populated areas, such as the Gaza Strip, is prohibited as it violates the international humanitarian law requirement that parties to the conflict take all feasible precautions to avoid civilian injury and loss of life.
The ICJ also condemns the continued detention by Palestinian armed groups of approximately 200 hostages.
“Hostage-taking is prohibited under international humanitarian law, and those detained must be released immediately”, said Benarbia.
The ICJ also reiterates calls by the United Nations Secretary General, WHO and others for the establishment of a humanitarian corridor to enable humanitarian aid to enter the Gaza Strip.
Contact:
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme, email: said.benarbia(at)icj(dot)org
Oct 13, 2023 | News
Geneva, 13 October 2023
In this statement, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) looks back at five weeks of consideration of a wide range of country situations and human rights thematic concerns, and at intense negotiations during the 54th session of the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC) that ended today in Geneva.
This session resulted in some positive actions for the protection and promotion of human rights and for accountability for grave human rights violations. However, States also failed to address the dire human rights situation in a number of countries. They also failed to support unanimously a number of important initiatives towards the greater enjoyment of human rights for all without discrimination.
Welcoming the renewal of a number of Special Procedures’ mandates
The ICJ welcomes the renewal of a number of Special Procedures’ mandates on both country situations and themes. In particular, the mandates on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan, Cambodia and Russia have been extended. With regard to thematic mandates, the ICJ particularly salutes the adoption of resolutions enabling the continuation of the work of the UN Special Rapporteur on Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence, as well as of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. With respect to this, the ICJ considers it very positive that the resolution on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances explicitly encourages States to participate in the upcoming world congress to promote the ratification of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance in 2024.
Continued intergovernmental negotiations on the issue of private security companies
The ICJ is actively engaged in supporting the elaboration of new standards to enhance human rights protection in respect of the activities of private military and security companies. In this context, the ICJ has followed the HRC’s thematic debates on both the use of mercenaries and the work of the intergovernmental working group tasked with the elaboration of a new regulatory framework on private military and security companies. In light of this, the organization welcomes the renewal of the mandate of the intergovernmental working group to negotiate such standards.
Celebrating the creation of a new investigative mechanism on the situation in the Sudan
The ICJ applauds the creation of a robust independent international fact-finding mission on the human rights and humanitarian crises resulting from the ongoing armed conflict in the Sudan. The ICJ had joined a group of 120 civil society organizations that sent a letter to States, on 1 September 2023, in advance of the HRC session, urging the creation of such an independent investigative mechanism.
Adoption of important thematic resolutions
The ICJ also considers that the adoption of a new resolution providing more capacity for the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to support States in the realization of economic, social and cultural rights (ESCR) is a positive step.
However, the ICJ urges States to ensure:
• respect for the independence of the OHCHR in carrying out additional work in this area;
• that ESCR be treated on an equal footing with other human rights; and
• that any new work builds upon the existing work carried out by the HRC and by the OHCHR for several decades in this area.
After intense negotiations, the HRC eventually adopted the resolution on preventable maternal mortality and morbidity and the one on the question of the death penalty. Fortunately, all amendments aimed at weakening human rights protections in both texts were defeated.
However, the ICJ deplores the persistence of ploys intentionally engineered during the negotiations of these two resolutions, which, if successful, would have been detrimental to the enjoyment of women and girls’ human rights, including to sexual and reproductive health and comprehensive sexuality education. In addition, purported concern over States’ sovereignty negatively impacted a number of debates and threatened to impair progress in the protection of universal human rights.
Regretting the inability of the HRC to address key situations
These controversies took place at a very polarized HRC session and reflect the broader geopolitical realities and ideological tensions worldwide.
In this regard, the ICJ regrets that the HRC failed to continue the mandate of the International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia. This commission was established to respond to the dramatic human rights situation after the conflict between the Federal Government and the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) broke out in 2020. Since then, widespread violations of human rights and serious violations of international humanitarian law have been committed in Tigray, Amhara and Afar in northern Ethiopia. As the situation is deteriorating even further, the failure of the HRC to renew the mandate of the Commission terminates the international independent investigation of atrocity crimes committed in the context of this conflict and is an abject dereliction of duty on the part of Member States of the HRC.
With regard to Afghanistan, while the extension of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights in the country, with additional resources to carry out his work, is an important measure towards monitoring the dire human rights and humanitarian situation, the ICJ deeply regrets that the HRC was not able to give a response commensurate with the gravity of the situation and failed to create a robust independent accountability mechanism to investigate, collect and preserve evidence of the widespread and systematic human rights violations and atrocities crimes committed in the country.
Last but not least, the ICJ regrets that the Council could not take action on the violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law committed by all parties in Israel and the OPT since the attacks in Israel by Palestinian armed groups started on 7 October 2023.
https://www.icj.org/israel-occupied-palestinian-territory-immediately-end-attacks-on-civilians/
