Sep 18, 2020 | News
Today, the ICJ called upon the responsible authorities to ensure that prompt, transparent, thorough, impartial and effective investigations are carried out of allegations of extrajudicial killings and other serious human rights violations by the Colombian police during recent street protests.
The ICJ stressed that any official responsible should be prosecuted and brought to justice and victims of any violations be provided an effective remedy and reparation.
From 9 September to 10 September 2020, mass protests against serious human rights violations by Colombian police took place in Bogota, following the death of Javier Ordóñez. Ordoñez died in police custody after he had been subjected to severe ill-treatment, including by prolonged taser shock.
The protests were met with acts of unlawful, unnecessary and disproportionate use of force by police. The protests left 13 people dead, and more than 200 injured.
The incidents have been condemned by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), which pointed to allegations of unlawful detention and ill-treatment of persons arrested following the demonstrations. The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has also expressed concern at the allegations the use of excessive force during the protests.
According to witness accounts, police opened fire against people who were protesting peacefully. Some of the victims killed were said to be people who had not taken part in the protests and died due to stray bullets. Some videos of police conduct have been circulated on social media.
Similarly, Bogota Mayor, Claudia López Hernández, has affirmed that she had handed over videos of police shooting indiscriminately against people during the protests to the Office of the Attorney General and other authorities. In addition, she shared part of the videos on her Twitter account.
The ICJ recalls that under international standards governing the use of force by law enforcement officials, lethal force may never be used unless strictly necessary to protect life.
The ICJ stresses that investigations must be impartial and the need for investigators to be independent of the police. Equally important, the investigations must take place within the civilian rather than the military justice system.
The ICJ is also concerned at the threats received by human rights lawyers who have been working working to document possible human rights violations during the protests.
Background
The protests were triggered by the death of Javier Ordoñez, who died at a police facility (Comando de Acción Inmediata, CAI), on the early morning of 9 September.
A video shows that before being transferred to the facility, Ordoñez was repeatedly shocked by policemen with a stun gun while on the ground and did not represent any threat to life or safety the police or other persons. Initial results of the investigation, including the autopsy report, indicate that Ordoñez was hit in the head, neck, shoulders, and chest inside the police facility.
On 11 September 2020, the Police and the Ministry of Defence offered an “apology” for any violation of the law that may have been committed by the police, without acknowledging any specific wrongdoing.
Subsequently, on 16 September, the Minister of Defence recognized that Javier Ordóñez was murdered by the police. Although he stated that the Police respect peaceful protests, he also said the protests of September 9 and 10 were a massive and systematic attack against the police.
Along the same lines, on 13 September 2020, the office of the Mayor of Bogotá held a ceremony of “forgiveness and reconciliation”. The ceremony had the participation of some of the victims, who demanded justice.
On 17 September 2020, the Office of the Attorney General filed arrest warrants against two policemen involved in the murder of Ordóñez. The warrants have been granted by a judge. Both policemen had been arrested.
In accordance with Colombia’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, investigations “must always be independent, impartial, prompt, thorough, effective, credible and transparent”.
The UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials require that any the use of force is exceptional, necessary, and proportional and that lethal force may only be used when strictly necessary to protect life.
Colombia has been recently facing a significant increase in serious human right violations and abuses, including unlawful killings. For example, since the Peace Agreement was signed in November 2016, there has been an upward trend in the killings, death threats, and harassments against human rights defenders.
As of December 2019, the UN Verification Mission in Colombia verified 303 killings of human rights defenders and social leaders since the signature of the Peace Agreement. So far, during 2020, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Colombia has documented 47 killings of human rights defenders and is reviewing other potential 44 cases.
Contact:
Carolina Villadiego, Legal and Policy Adviser, Latin America. Email: carolina.villadiego(a)icj.org
Rocío Quintero M, Legal Adviser, Latin America. Email: rocio.quintero(a)icj.org
Sep 14, 2020 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
The ICJ and ECRE intervened today before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of the extradition of a Kyrgyz national of Uzbek ethnicity back to his country of origin where he would be at risk of torture or other forms of ill-treatment .
In their submissions, the ICJ and the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) analysed thenon-refoulement obligations of the Russian Federation under international human rights law in relation to the consideration of evidence to assess the substantial grounds to believe that a concerned person will face real risk of a serious human rights violation; and the use of diplomatic assurances purportedly to protect against torture and other serious human rights violations in light of international law.
The two NGOs also provided the Court with an update on the legal framework governing extraditions from the Russian Federation to Central Asian States, in particular Kyrgyzstan, as well as Russia’s extradition practice. They concluded that the analysis of the law and practice revealed a number of critical human rights deficits.
They submitted that the lack of respect for the procedural aspect of the principle of non-refoulement, the consequent ineffectiveness of domestic remedies in this regard, in the Russian Federation, and the abysmal record of Kyrgyzstan in upholding its obligation to respect and protect the prohibition of torture or other ill-treatment mean that extraditions from the Russian Federation to Kyrgyzstan entail a high risk of violations of both substantive and procedural aspects of the principle of non-refoulement.
These submissions are an update of the third party intervention submitted by the ICJ before the Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights on 22 September 2016. The Chamber had ruled that no risk of breach of the principle of non-refoulement existed in the case but the judgment is now subject to the review of the Grand Chamber.
ECtHR-TK and others v Russia-GC-ICJECRE-Final (download the third party intervention)
Sep 8, 2020 | Advocacy, News
The ICJ, in collaboration with the Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission (ZACC), today launched a whistleblowing application (tip off) mechanism in Harare.
It is common that people reporting corruption, tipping off and submitting key evidence prefer to stay anonymous, as they may have an often, well-founded, fear of reprisal by the parties involved. In such instances it is imperative for the ZACC to adopt a protective solution that guarantees user anonymity. This tip off mechanism will enable ZACC to receive information and evidence securely while the user of the mechanism remains anonymous. In turn ZACC will be able to use the information received to investigate and prosecute cases of corruption. Additionally, the application will also have a case management dashboard which will aid evaluation of ZACC’s efficiency in handling corruption cases.
Corruption undermines the rule of law by impeding access to justice through diversions of public resources for private gain. As such, the ICJ, through the support by the EU, is working towards increased transparency and integrity in the justice delivery system in order to increase access to justice for all. The whistleblowing application is not undertaken in isolation, as it builds on other initiatives to combat corruption under this programme, which include the Anti-Corruption Campaign, establishment of an anti-corruption court, capacity building, and various research initiatives.
“Corruption remains a key challenge confronting Zimbabwe. If unabated, corruption undermines democracy and the rule of law leading to violations of human rights. Its destructive effect on development disproportionately affects the poor. The participation of the public, in augmenting government efforts in combating corruption is therefore critical. It is our hope that through this awareness programme, ordinary members of the public will be able to recognize corrupt behaviour and feel empowered to take a stand against it. Further, we hope that the mechanism will sustain the momentum against corruption and increase the demand for improved accountability and transparency in various sectors in Zimbabwe thereby contributing to reduction of corruption,” said Blessing Gorejena, ICJ’s Zimbabwe Project Team leader.
Once officially launched, the whistle-blowing mechanism will be available to the public. It will be promoted and encouraged by publicizing stories of successful prosecutions and other actions as a result of information provided by whistle-blowers, as well as reporting on the effective protection of such persons from any form of reprisal or other harm.
The project is facilitated through the support of the European Union.
Contact:
Blessing Gorejena, Senior Legal Adviser and Team Leader of ICJ Zimbabwe Project, t:0772151989, e: blessing.gorejena(a)icj.org
Sep 8, 2020 | Advocacy, News
On 29 August and 5 September, the ICJ collaborated with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) to hold a webinar series for legal aid providers in the Philippines on eliminating gender discriminatory attitudes and behaviors towards women.
Members of IBP’s legal aid committees from the Eastern and Western Mindanao Regions participated in these webinars, focused on gender stereotypes and discriminatory practices that exist in the legal profession and in the work of legal aid providers who directly engage with women when they seek justice.
Dato Ambiga Sreenevasan, ICJ’s Commissioner from Malaysia, addressed the promotion and protection of women’s human rights in the context of the legal profession: “While conditions for women have improved, there is still work to be done to achieve equality between men and women in the legal profession. At the entry level, things appear to be going well, but we must look also at women’s opportunities throughout their legal career and question why it is the case that some areas are still male-dominated.”
Mikiko Otani, ICJ’s Commissioner from Japan and a member of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, spoke about how gender stereotypes and gender discrimination hinder women from accessing justice. “The Bar should be at the forefront of advocating for improvement in legal structures that would help eliminate gender discrimination,” she said.
The Philippines had previously featured as one of the top ten performers in addressing gender disparities, as measured by the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index. However, it has recently fallen to rank 16th out of 153 countries. Emerlynne Gil, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, acknowledged various measures adopted by the Philippines to implement the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), such as the adoption of the Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Act and the Magna Carta for Women. She noted, however, that the Philippines still must do a great deal more.
“The existing culture of impunity and lack of effective remedies for women to access the justice system are just some of the difficult challenges the country faces that prevent it from achieving this goal,” Emerlynne Gil said.
The webinar series also featured a discussion on specific challenges faced by women when accessing justice during the COVID 19 pandemic and in the context of the “drug war” in the Philippines. The lawyers discussed their role and also that of the Bar as an institution to immediately identify and eliminate these gender stereotypes to ensure their clients’ right to access to justice.
Judge Amy Alabado Avellano, a Regional Trial Court judge in the Philippines led this discussion. Attorney Burt Estrada, IBP Executive Vice President, and Attorney Marienne Ibadlit, former IBP Governor for Western Visayas, also held a dialogue with the lawyers on how the IBP as a professional association for lawyers in the Philippines could contribute towards enhancing access to justice for women in the country.
Contact
For questions and clarifications, please contact Ms. Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +662 619 8477 (ext. 206); e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org.
Sep 7, 2020 | News
Turkish authorities should immediately release human rights defender Osman Kavala, in compliance with the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers’ decision of 3 September 2020, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), Human Rights Watch and the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project said today.
The decision followed a Committee of Ministers hearing to assess the execution of the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Osman Kavala. The Committee, acting in its supervisory capacity for Court Judgments, ordered the Turkish authorities, “to ensure the applicant’s immediate release,” pointing to, “a strong presumption that his current detention is a continuation of the violations found by the Court.”
“After the finding by the European Court of Human Rights that Kavala’s detention is unlawful, the Committee of Ministers has affirmed that Turkey is continuing to violate his rights by keeping him in detention” said Roisin Pillay, director of the Europe and Central Asia Programme at the International Commission of Jurists. “European Court rulings are binding, and Osman Kavala should be released immediately.”
Despite the unlawful detention and an acquittal by the Turkish criminal court presiding over his trial, Osman Kavala has been kept behind bars under a newly issued charge of “espionage” since March 2020. His lawyers are currently challenging the lawfulness of the detention before Turkey’s Constitutional Court. However, the Committee of Ministers indicated in its decision that Turkey should not wait for a ruling of the Constitutional Court but should release Kavala immediately.
In June, the ICJ, Human Rights Watch and the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project made a detailed submission to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which oversees enforcement of European Court of Human Rights judgments. The submission argued that the sequence of events and repeated local court decisions to ensure Kavala’s detention subsequent to the European Court’s ruling in December 2019 demonstrated that Turkey was prolonging the violations found by the European Court.
The European Court judgment in Kavala v. Turkey (Application no. 28749/18) found violations of the following provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights: Article 5(1) (right to liberty and security), Article 5(4) (right to a speedy decision on the lawfulness of detention), and the rarely used Article 18 (limitation on use of restrictions on rights) taken together with Article 5(1). The Court required Turkey to release Kavala and said that any continuation of his detention would prolong the violations and breach the obligation to abide by the judgment in accordance with Article 46(1) of the Convention.
The judgment on Osman Kavala’s case is particularly significant because it is the first final ruling of the European Court of Human Rights against Turkey in which the Court determined that, in interfering with an individual’s rights, Turkey acted in bad faith and out of political motivations, violating Article 18 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court said that by detaining Kavala since November 2017 and prosecuting him, the Turkish authorities had “pursued an ulterior purpose, namely to silence him as human rights defender.”
Kavala has been held in detention since November 2017, initially on bogus allegations that he used the 2013 Istanbul Gezi Park protests as a pretext for an attempt to overthrow the government, and that he was involved in the July 15, 2016 attempted military coup. On February 18, 2020, Kavala and his eight co-defendants were acquitted on charges of “attempting to overthrow the government by force and violence” in the Gezi Park trial.
But Kavala was not released, and a court ordered his detention again immediately on one of the grounds for his initial detention on 1 November 2017, namely the charge of “attempting to overthrow the Constitution by force and violence” because of the ongoing July 15, 2016 coup attempt-related investigation against him. Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan had publicly criticized his acquittal just before he was detained again. Weeks later a court ordered his detention a second time on another charge (“espionage”) but under the same investigation file on the coup attempt and relying on the same evidence.
“The decision by the Council of Europe Committee of Ministers confirms our submission that political considerations are behind the court orders prolonging Osman Kavala’s detention , and that there has been a concerted official effort to prevent Kavala’s release,” said Emma Sinclair-Webb, Turkey director at Human Rights Watch.
“Instead of complying with the European Court’s judgment, Turkey has continued to violate Kavala’s human rights.”
The targeted harassment in Turkey of rights defenders is part of a wider practice of arbitrary detentions and abusive prosecutions of journalists, elected politicians, lawyers, and other perceived government critics. This practice has been well-documented in many reports by the Council of Europe, the European Union, and human rights organizations.
“The campaign of persecution against Osman Kavala and the failure to release him and drop all charges have perpetuated a chilling environment for all human rights defenders in Turkey,” said Ayşe Bingöl Demir, co-director of the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project.
“Ending this blatantly unlawful detention, which has been ongoing for over 1000 days, will not only play a role in preventing further violations to Osman Kavala’s rights, it will also give a strong signal to the human rights defenders community that the oversight mechanisms in place to ensure Turkey’s compliance with its international human rights obligations can still be effective.”
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director of ICJ’s Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +32-2-734-84-46 ; e: roisin.pillay(a)icj.orgMassimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ’s Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +41-79-749-99-49 ; e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org ; Twitter: @maxfrigo
Türkiye: Osman Kavala Serbest Bırakılmalı
Yetkililer, Avrupa Konseyi’nin İnsan Hakları Savunucusunu Serbest Bırakma Kararına Uymalıdır
(Cenevre, 7 Eylül 2020) Uluslararası Hukukçular Komisyonu (ICJ), İnsan Hakları İzleme Örgütü ve Türkiye İnsan Hakları Davalarına Destek Projesi, yaptıkları açıklamada Türkiye makamlarının insan hakları savunucusu Osman Kavala’yı Avrupa Konseyi Bakanlar Komitesinin 3 Eylül 2020 tarihli kararına uygun olarak derhal serbest bırakması gerektiğini ifade etti.
Bu karar, Osman Kavala davasında Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nin kararının uygulanmasını değerlendiren Bakanlar Komitesi oturumunu müteakiben alındı. Mahkeme kararlarının uygulanmasını denetleme yetkisi olan Komite, Türk makamlarına “başvuranın derhal serbest bırakılmasını sağlama” talimatı vererek “mevcut tutukluluğunun mahkeme tarafından tespit edilen ihlallerin devamı olduğuna dair güçlü bir karine bulunduğuna” işaret etti.
Uluslararası Hukukçular Komisyonu Avrupa ve Orta Asya Programı Direktörü Roisin Pillay,” Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi’nin, Kavala’nın tutukluluğunun hukuka aykırı olduğunu tespit etmesinden sonra, Bakanlar Komitesi, Türkiye’nin Kavala’nın tutukluluğunu sürdürerek onun haklarını ihlal etmeye devam ettiğini doğruladı” dedi. Pillay, “Avrupa Mahkemesi kararları bağlayıcıdır ve Osman Kavala derhal serbest bırakılmalıdır” dedi.
Hukuka aykırı tutukluluğuna ve davasının görüldüğü Ceza Mahkemesinin verdiği beraat kararına rağmen, Osman Kavala yeni ileri sürülen bir “casusluk” suçlaması nedeniyle Mart 2020’den bu yana parmaklıklar ardında tutulmaya devam ediliyor. Kavala’nın avukatları, Türkiye’nin Anayasa Mahkemesi önünde tutukluluğun hukuksuz olduğuna ilişkin itirazlarda bulunuyorlar. Ancak Bakanlar Komitesi, kararında Türkiye’nin Anayasa Mahkemesinin vereceği bir kararı beklemeksizin Kavala’yı derhal serbest bırakması gerektiğini işaret ediyor.
Haziran ayında, ICJ, İnsan Hakları İzleme Örgütü ve Türkiye İnsan Hakları Davalarına Destek Projesi, Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi kararlarının uygulanmasını denetleyen Avrupa Konseyi Bakanlar Komitesi’ne ayrıntılı bir bildirim sundu. Bildirim, Avrupa Mahkemesi’nin Aralık 2019’daki kararının ardından Kavala’nın alıkonmasını sağlamak için gelişen olaylar serisinin ve tekrarlanan yerel mahkeme kararlarının, Türkiye’nin Avrupa Mahkemesi tarafından tespit edilen ihlalleri devam ettirdiğini gösterdiğini savundu.
Avrupa Mahkemesi, Kavala/Türkiye kararında (Başvuru no. 28749/18), madde 5/1 (özgürlük ve güvenlik hakkı), madde 5/4 (alıkonmanın yasaya uygunluğuna ilişkin ivedi karar alma hakkı) ve nadiren kullanılan madde 18 (haklara getirilecek kısıtlamaların sınırlanması) ile birlikte madde 5/1’in ihlal edildiğine karar vermiştir. Mahkeme, Türkiye’nin Kavala’yı tahliye etmesini zorunlu kılmış, tutukluluğunun devam etmesinin ihlalleri devam ettireceğini ve Sözleşmenin 46(1) maddesi uyarınca AİHM kararlarına uyma yükümlülüğünü ihlal edeceğini belirtmiştir.
Osman Kavala kararı, Türkiye’nin kötü niyetle ve siyasi amaçlarla bir bireyin haklarına müdahale ettiğini ve Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi’nin 18. maddesini ihlal ettiğini tespit eden Türkiye aleyhindeki ilk nihai karar olduğundan özel bir önem taşımakta. AİHM, Osman Kavala’yı Kasım 2017’den bu yana alıkoyup yargılayan Türk makamlarının “başvuranın bir insan hakları savunucusu olarak susturulmasını sağlamak için örtülü bir amaç taşıdığını” tespit etmişti.
Kavala, Kasım 2017’den bu yana, 2013 İstanbul Gezi Parkı protestolarını, hükümeti devirme girişimi için kullandığı ve 15 Temmuz 2016 askeri darbe girişimine müdahil olduğu yönündeki asılsız iddialarla tutuklu. 18 Şubat 2020’de Kavala ve diğer sekiz sanık, Gezi Parkı davasında “cebir ve şiddet kullanarak hükümeti ortadan kaldırmaya teşebbüs” suçlamasından beraat etmiştir.
Ancak Kavala cezaevinden tahliye edilmemiş ve bir hakim kararıyla 2016 darbesiyle ilgili devam eden bir soruşturmayla ilişkili olarak “anayasal düzeni cebir ve şiddet kullanarak ortadan kaldırmaya teşebbüs” suçlamasıyla tekrar tutuklanmıştır. Tekrar tutuklanmasından kısa bir süre önce Cumhurbaşkanı Recep Tayyip Erdoğan halka açık şekilde Kavala’nın beraatini eleştirmiştir. Kavala haftalar sonra, yine bu delillere ve soruşturma dosyasına dayanan bir başka suçlama ile (casusluk) bir kez daha tutuklanmıştır.
İnsan Hakları İzleme Örgütü Türkiye Direktörü Emma Sinclair-Webb,” Avrupa Konseyi Bakanlar Komitesi’nin kararı bildirimimizi doğrulamakta, Osman Kavala’nın tutukluluk halini uzatan mahkeme kararlarının arkasında siyasi değerlendirmelerin olduğunu ve Kavala’nın serbest bırakılmasını önlemek için ortak bir resmi çabanın bulunduğunu ortaya koymaktadır” dedi.
Sinclair-Webb, “Avrupa Mahkemesi’nin kararına uymak yerine, Türkiye, Kavala’nın insan haklarını ihlal etmeye devam etmiştir” dedi.
Türkiye’de insan hakları savunucularına yönelik baskı, daha genel olarak gazetecilere, seçilmiş siyasetçilere, hukukçulara, hükümeti eleştirdiği düşünülenlere yönelik keyfi alıkoymalar ve yargısal tacizin bir parçasıdır. Bu uygulama Avrupa Konseyi, Avrupa Birliği ve insan hakları örgütlerine ait birçok raporla belgelendirilmiştir.
Türkiye İnsan Hakları Davalarına Destek Projesi Eş Direktörü Ayşe Bingöl Demir “Kavala’ya karşı yürütülen yıldırma kampanyası, onun tahliye edilmemesi ve hakkındaki suçlamaların düşürülmemesi, Türkiye’deki tüm insan hakları savunucuları için baskı ortamının sürmesine sebep olmuştur” dedi.
“1000 gün boyunca devam eden açıkça hukuka aykırı olan tutukluluğun sona ermesi, yalnız Osman Kavala’nın haklarının daha fazla ihlal edilmesini önlemek konusunda değil, aynı zamanda insan hakları savunucuları topluluğuna Türkiye’nin uluslararası insan hakları yükümlülüklerine uyumunu denetleyen mevcut gözetim mekanizmalarının hala etkili olabileceği yönünde güçlü bir sinyal verecektir.”
İnsan Hakları İzleme Örgütü’nün Türkiye ile ilgili diğer raporları için tıklayınız:
https://www.hrw.org/europe/central-asia/turkey
Daha fazla bilgi için :
İstanbul’da, Emma Sinclair-Webb (İngilizce, Türkçe): +90-538-972-4486 (Whatsapp); ya da sinclae@hrw.org. Twitter: @esinclairwebb
Cenevre’de, Massimo Frigo (İngilizce, Fransızca, İspanyolca ve İtalyanca): +41-79-749-99-49; ya da massimo.frigo@icj.org. Twitter: @maxfrigo
Brüksel’de, Róisín Pillay (İngilizce, Fransızca): +32-2-734-84-46 (cep telefonu); ya da roisin.pillay@icj.org
New York’ta, Aisling Reidy (İngilizce) +1-917-378-3178 (cep telefonu); ya da reidya@hrw.org
