Apr 17, 2018 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions, News
The ICJ and other NGOs jointly intervened before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in a case against Spain on the denial of entry of asylum seekers in the enclave of Melilla.
The ICJ, the European Council on Refugees and Exiles, the AIRE Centre, Amnesty International and the Dutch Refugee Council argued that the European Convention on Human Rights prohibits refusal of entry, and/or return of a person to face serious violations of human rights, including of the right to life, the prohibition of torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, or flagrant denial of justice and of the right to liberty.
They submitted that these refusals of entry are also contrary to the rights set out in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (CFR) and the prohibition on non-refoulement found in the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees (Refugee Convention).
The joint interventions presents the argument that, for these prohibitions to be practical and effective and not theoretical and illusory, Contracting Parties must have in place effective systems for identifying people within their jurisdiction who are entitled to benefit from the prohibition on refusing entry.
Spain-ICJ&others-AmicusBrief-ND&NT-ECtHR-GC-legalsubmission-2018 (download the thirty party intervention)
Apr 16, 2018 | Advocacy, News, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ and ECRE have presented today to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants a submission on access to justice for migrants in Europe.
The submission is an input for the forthcoming report of the UN Special Rapporteur on access to justice for migrants to the UN General Assembly.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) have provided a brief overview of aspects of access to justice for migrants, with a particular focus on asylum seekers and migrant children, in European countries.
The issues dealt with include:
- obstructions to access to justice in relation to access to the territory;
- the undue use of national security exceptions to weaken access to justice in immigration procedures;
- concerns with access to justice in expulsion and detention procedures;
- specific obstacles to access to justice for asylum seekers, including when appealing the rejection of their claims by first instance asylum authorities before a judicial or administrative appeal body;
- specific obstacles to access to justice for undocumented minors.
ICJECRE-NonLegalSubmission-SRMigrants-Access2JusticeEurope4Migrants-2018-ENG (download the submission)
Apr 9, 2018 | News
Prior to this workshop, on 6 April the ICJ met with the Mon State High Court, including its Chief Justice.
Legal advisers from the ICJ had a constructive discussion with the justices about judicial reform in Myanmar, including the role of lawyers and civil society, as well as jurists, in advancing accountability and access to justice.
The two-day workshop aimed to identify challenges and opportunities for human rights advocacy using law, and to encourage the building of relationships and networks between lawyers and civil society.
The workshop considered strategic litigation concepts and case studies in the region. It also discussed the landscape of rule of law and justice in Myanmar, particularly the experiences regarding access to justice of some sixty participants from Mon State.
Mar 14, 2018 | News
The new CTI tool on non-refoulement covers:
- constitutional and legislative provisions;
- national procedures;
- procedural rights to be guaranteed to those facing deportation or expulsion;
- training; and
- visa and stay arrangements for when return is prohibited.
There is also a section on non- refoulement in the extradition context.
The purpose of this and other CTI Implementation Tools is to inspire other States to take action through exchanges of good practices.
The tool also provides timely and practical information and advice for States in light of the recently released UN Committee against Torture’s General comment on the implementation of Article 3 of the Convention in the context of Article 22.
Some of the laws mentioned in this tool detail the powers that can be exercised by State authorities to remove a person and the constraints on those powers, as well as the relevant administrative and judicial procedures to be followed. National legislation has also detailed the rights of persons within those procedures (photo).
The tool was developed for the CTI by the ICJ with the support of the University of Bristol’s Human Rights Implementation Centre.
CTI’s series of UNCAT Implementation Tools are available here.
Mar 5, 2018 | News
The ICJ has welcomed last Thursday’s judgment of the Pretoria High Court which declares the South Africa’s involvement in shutting down the South African Development Community Tribunal “unlawful, irrational, arbitrary and therefore unconstitutional”.
ICJ’s Africa Director, Arnold Tsunga described the judgment as a “triumph for the rule of law in Southern Africa and an opportunity for governments in the SADC region to commit to immediate restoration of the Tribunal”.
The SADC Tribunal has been inactive since 2012, when SADC Member States suspended its operations and removed individual access to the Tribunal, including in cases involving human rights violations.
The action was widely seen as a backlash for several judgments against Zimbabwe in relation to land programmes implemented during the administration of former President Robert Mugabe.
In a unanimous judgment delivered by High Court Judge President D Mlambo, the Court held that “any act which detracted from the SADC Tribunal’s exercise of its human rights jurisdiction at the instance of individuals, was inconsistent with the SADC Treaty itself and violated the rule of law”.
Describing former President Zuma’s decision to sign the replacement 2014 Protocol of the SADC Tribunal as one such act, the Court held that the rule of law in South Africa’s constitutional dispensation required prior Parliamentary approval for the Executive to lawfully participate in a decision to curb the powers of the Tribunal or withdraw South Africa from its obligations under the SADC Treaty and the Protocol establishing the Tribunal.
“A restoration of the SADC Tribunal to its original character will facilitate individual access to a much needed accountability mechanism and greatly enhance regional confidence in human rights and the rule of law”, said Arnold Tsunga.
In line with articles 14 and 15 of its 2000 Protocol, the SADC Tribunal had exercised supervisory jurisdiction over the human rights commitments of SADC Member State under the SADC Treaty.
The ICJ called on the governments of Southern Africa’s other 14 SADC Member States to take immediate and concrete steps to restore the SADC Tribunal and recommit to rebuilding, staffing and funding it to ensure its effectiveness.
Contact
Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Africa Director; t: +27716405926, or +254 746 608 859 ; e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org
Solomon Ebobrah, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ Africa Regional Programme, t: +234 8034927549; e: solomon.ebobrah(a)icj.org
