Libya: Fact-Finding Mission a positive step towards accountability, which must be dispatched urgently

Libya: Fact-Finding Mission a positive step towards accountability, which must be dispatched urgently

The ICJ welcomes the establishment of a Fact-Finding Mission (FFM) for Libya by the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) at its 43rd session yesterday.

The resolution, titled “Technical assistance and capacity-building to improve human rights in Libya,” mandates the FFM to investigate and preserve evidence of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law committed by all parties in Libya since the beginning of 2016, with a view to ensuring that perpetrators be held to account.

“This is a long overdue step in the pursuit of accountability in Libya,” said Said Benarbia, the ICJ’s MENA Programme Director.

“While parties to the conflict have escalated hostilities in recent years and Libyans have been increasingly subject to egregious violations of their rights, States have continued to prioritize politics over justice. The establishment of the FFM is a sign that international actors finally recognize accountability is necessary to end the scourge of violence in the country.”

The FFM is required to submit its written report to the HRC at the 46th session in February-March 2021, giving the FFM only nine months to carry out its work despite the ongoing imposition of COVID-19 measures that will impact its operations.

Given the FFM’s short operational period, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights will have to move rapidly to appoint FFM experts and staff, allocate adequate resources and dispatch the mission. Staff appointed to the FFM should include experts in the investigation of sexual and gender-based violence crimes and the collection of evidence to a criminal standard.

“It’s imperative that the High Commissioner move quickly to dispatch this mission if it is to have any prospect of examining the full range of violations and abuses being committed across Libya,” said Kate Vigneswaran, the ICJ’s MENA Programme Senior Legal Adviser.

“The OHCHR should ensure the FFM has the full complement of skills and expertise to most effectively investigate crimes being committed in Libya, particularly the widespread sexual violence being perpetrated on women, girls, men and boys.”

The Government of National Accord, the Libyan Arab Armed Forces and all other parties to the conflict should fully cooperate with the FFM, including by granting access to the territories and population over which they have control, where possible in the context of COVID-19.

Other States, in particular those supporting Libyan actors in the ongoing conflict, should also provide full cooperation.

“The cooperation of both national and international actors is necessary for the FFM to engage with victims and preserve evidence, key components of its mandate,” Kate Vigneswaran added.

“While other international investigative mechanisms have shown it’s possible to carry out effective investigations without access to the affected territory, if Libyan actors are truly committed to the populations they assert they serve, they should be facilitating access to all forms of justice, whether national or international.”

The FFM will complement the work of the International Criminal Court in Libya, which has outstanding arrest warrants against Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi, Al-Tuhamy Mohamed Khaled and Mahmoud Mustafa Busayf Al-Werfalli.

The evidence preserved by the FFM may be used by the ICC, as well as States exercising universal jurisdiction, in their investigations and prosecutions.

Contact

Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 22 979 3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Kate Vigneswaran, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, t: +31 62 489 4664, e: kate.vigneswaran(a)icj.org, twitter: @KateVigneswaran

Background

Violations and abuses of international law, including unlawful killings and attacks on civilian objects, have continued unabated in the last few months. Most recently, on 11 June 2020, the UN Support Mission to Libya reported the discovery of at least eight mass graves, mainly in Tarhuna, in which the bodies of women and children were found. Reports further indicate that the Libyan Arab Armed Forces (LAAF), and their foreign allies, have laid anti-personnel landmines and other booby-traps in buildings as they withdrew from Tripoli, leading to causalities including among civilians returning to their homes after long periods of displacement. Reports of incidents involving “retributive crimes”, including the parading of corpses and looting of perceived opponents’ houses and public property, by GNA-affiliated armed groups have also surfaced.

The ICJ has repeatedly called on States to support the establishment of an international investigative mechanism for Libya, including in the interactive dialogue on the oral update by the High Commissioner for Human Rights on the Situation in Libya.

The draft of the resolution adopted yesterday was numbered A/HRC/43/L.40. The official adopted version will be published by the UN in the coming weeks.

 

Libya: continuing atrocities must compel States to establish an International Investigative mechanism at the UN Human Rights Council

Libya: continuing atrocities must compel States to establish an International Investigative mechanism at the UN Human Rights Council

Member States convening today for the resumption of the 43rd session of the UN Human Rights Council should support the establishment of an international investigative mechanism to document and preserve evidence of violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law (IHL) committed in Libya, said the ICJ and Lawyers for Justice in Libya.

The escalation in armed conflict in recent months and ongoing impunity for an increasing number of violations and abuses being committed in Libya lend particular urgency to the establishment of a mechanism for a period of at least one year to investigate all gross human rights violations and abuses and serious violations of IHL, with a view to preserving evidence and holding perpetrators accountable.

“Horrific reports documenting the discovery of mass graves are the latest addition to a long line of well-established atrocities perpetrated across Libya,” said Kate Vigneswaran, Senior Legal Adviser at the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme. “Impunity for these crimes has proven only to prompt further violence and prolong the conflict.”

On 11 June 2020, the United National Support Mission to Libya reported the discovery of at least eight mass graves, located predominantly in Tarhuna,  a town located southeast of Tripoli.

Though exhumations have only just commenced, initial reports by the Government of National Accord (GNA) indicate that they could contain hundreds of bodies, including of women and children.

Reports further indicate that the Libyan Arab Armed Forces (LAAF), and their foreign allies, have laid anti-personnel landmines and other booby-traps in buildings as they withdrew from Tripoli, leading to causalities including among civilians returning to their homes after long periods of displacement.

Reports of incidents involving “retributive crimes”, including the parading of corpses and looting of perceived opponents’ houses and public property, by GNA-affiliated armed groups have also surfaced.

“The systematic and ubiquitous nature of these violations reinforces the need for States to urgently push for mechanisms designed to address accountability and fight prevailing impunity. The establishment of an international investigative mechanism would not only pave the way towards obtaining justice for the victims and preserving evidence necessary for doing so, but also send a strong and unequivocal message that those who commit crimes will be held accountable,” said Marwa Mohamed, Head of Advocacy and Outreach at Lawyers for Justice in Libya.

An international investigative mechanism would bolster accountability efforts in the country, which have, thus far, been impeded by cycles of violence, weak and ineffective law enforcement agencies, the arbitrary exercise of policing and detention powers by armed groups and an inadequate legal framework for holding perpetrators of crimes under international law accountable.

States will vote on the resolution on Libya (UN Doc A/HRC/43/L.40) following the interactive dialogue on the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ Report on Libya on 18 June 2020.

The 43rd session of the Human Rights Council commenced in February 2020, but was suspended due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Contact

Kate Vigneswaran, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +31624894664 ; e: kate.vigneswaran(a)icj.org;

Background

A variety of armed groups have been engaged in recurrent waves of armed conflict since the 2011 uprising. These include the forces of the GNA, established in 2016, which is the internationally recognized State governing authority and is supported by armed groups acting either under their control or in alignment or alliance with it, and the LAAF, which is headed by Khalifa Haftar, who was endorsed by the House of Representatives after launching his military campaign in 2014, and is composed of a mixture of military units and armed groups.

The GNA generally has control over territory in the west, and the LAAF exercises a significant degree of control over territories in the east and parts of the south. In April 2019, the LAAF marched on Tripoli gaining further territorial control in parts of the west, but such gains have been reduced over recent weeks following the escalation in hostilities with the GNA and the LAAF’s consequent retreat.

Reports by UNSMIL and other international bodies and non-government organizations document the gross human rights violations and abuses and serious violations of IHL being committed by all parties to the conflicts in Libya. These include unlawful killings resulting from direct, indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks against persons not engaged in hostilities; attacks on civilian objects including medical facilities and equipment; torture and ill-treatment, including acts of sexual violence and the crime of rape; arbitrary arrests and detention; forced displacement; enforced disappearances; and extrajudicial killings. These violations and abuses have led to mass internal displacement, including of over 200,000 people since April 2019 from Tripoli and its outskirts.

Libya-Atrocities need investigation-News-2020-ARA (story in Arabic, PDF)

Zimbabwe:  the Human Rights Commission must be reconstituted to allow it carry out its work

Zimbabwe:  the Human Rights Commission must be reconstituted to allow it carry out its work

The ICJ today urged the country’s authorities to take immediate measures to fully reconstitute the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission (ZHRC) after its operations were effectively suspended following the expiry of the terms of office of four of its Commissioners on 7 May 2020.

One Commissioner had already resigned in 2018 meaning that the ZHRC no longer has the constitutionally required quorum for it to make certain decisions that are fundamental to the protection of human rights in Zimbabwe.

“The inability by the ZHRC to fully execute its constitutional mandate has serious implications on the ability of individuals -in particular victims of human rights violations -to access justice,” said Arnold Tsunga, Director of the ICJ Africa Programme.

“The role of ZHRC, as Zimbabwe’s national human rights institution is critical in providing an avenue for redress to victims of human rights violations and the general public,” he added.

Zimbabwe has been witnessing an escalation of human rights violations requiring investigation by a fully functioning and effective Commission.

This spate of human rights violations has had a disproportionate impact on the poor and economically vulnerable in the context of the Covid-19 lockdown measures.

There have been an increase in targeting of human rights defenders, civil society leaders and political opposition, which have included acts of enforced disappearance and torture and other ill-treatment.

The ICJ underlined that while redress for such violations required strong and independent judiciary as a guarantor of human rights, the role of fully functional ZHRC was critical to complement that of the judiciary.

The ICJ  called upon the authorities in Zimbabwe, and in particular the Parliamentary Committee on Standing Rules and Orders, to act expeditiously to ensure that the vacant positions are filled without any further delay to enable the ZHRC effectively perform and discharge its constitutional mandate.

The ICJ said that failure by the responsible authorities to act expeditiously to fill the vacant positions violated the core values and principles the Constitution of  Zimbabwe, in particular  section 324 of the Constitution which provides that “all constitutional obligations must be performed diligently and without delay”.

In addition, the President to fill in any vacant position within three months of death or resignation of a Commissioner. The position of Commissioner Khombe became vacant on the 30 October 2018, and has not been filled to date.

Additional Information

The ZHRC is established as an independent institution under Chapter 12 of the Zimbabwe constitution with the general objective to “support and entrench human rights and democracy; to promote constitutionalism; to promote transparency and accountability in public institutions; to secure the observance of democratic values and principles by the State and all institutions and agencies of government, and government-controlled entities;  and to ensure that injustices are remedied.”

On 26 May  the Chairperson of the ZHRC, Dr. E.H Mugwadi, wrote a letter notifying “partners and stakeholders” of the retirement of four Commissioners, namely Dr Ellen Sithole (former Deputy Chairperson), Dr Joseph Kurebwa, Kwanele M. Jirira and Japhet Ndabeni-Ncube with effect from 7 May.  The Chairperson noted that the retirement had left the Commission lacking the quorum to fulfil its constitutional obligations, particularly with respect to make policy resolutions and the adoption of monitoring and investigation reports. The Commission had also been unable to adopt Commission reports its activities.

International standards for effective and credible National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) are contained in the United Nations Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (Paris Principles), which provide that NHRIs must be adequately resourced with sufficient institutional capacity to perform and discharge their responsibilities.

Contact:

Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Africa Director, t: +263 777 283 249; e-mail: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org

Blessing Gorejena, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, t: +263 772 151 989, e-mail: Blessing.Gorejena(a)icj.org

 

Turkey: free rights defender following European Court ruling

Turkey: free rights defender following European Court ruling

The Council of Europe Committee of Ministers should issue a decision at its 4 June 2020 meeting directing Turkey to release the human rights defender Osman Kavala  and drop all charges against him, the ICJ, Human Rights Watch and the Turkish Human Rights Litigation Support Project said today.

The three groups have submitted a detailed submission to the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which oversees enforcement of European Court of Human Rights judgments. The groups outlined how Turkey continues to violate Kavala’s rights by flouting a landmark judgment, that became final on May 11 requiring his immediate release.

The European Court ruled that  Kavala’s detention is unlawful, and their binding judgment requires Turkey to release him immediately,” said Emma Sinclair-Webb, Turkey director at Human Rights Watch. “The Committee of Ministers, at its June 4 meeting, should press Turkey to comply  and issue a clear message that no Council of Europe member state should be silencing human rights defenders.”

The judgment is particularly significant because it is the first final ruling 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.”

The European Court judgment in Kavala v. Turkey (Application no. 28749/18) found violations of 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). It 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 European Convention on Human Rights..

A court ordered Kavala’s detention on November 1, 2017 on bogus allegations that he used the 2013 Istanbul Gezi Park protests as a pretext for an attempted coup, 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 detained him again immediately on the charge of “attempting to overthrow the constitution by force and violence” because of an ongoing 2016 coup-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 relying on the same evidence and investigation file.

“The sequence of court orders prolonging his detention and the lack of objective deliberation as to the lawfulness of any deprivation of liberty indicates that decisions have been guided by political considerations and there has been a concerted official effort to prevent Kavala’s release,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of ICJ’s Europe and Central Asia Programme . “Since 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 trend of arbitrary detentions and abusive prosecutions of journalists, elected politicians, lawyers, and other perceived government critics. This trend 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 Turkish Human Rights Litigation Support Project.

The three organizations made  detailed recommendations to the Committee of Ministers, urging it to:

  • Call on the government of Turkey to ensure the immediate release of Osman Kavala as required by the European Court’s judgment, stressing that the judgment clearly applies to his ongoing detention and persecution;
  • Place the Kavala v. Turkey judgment under “enhanced procedures” and treat it as a leading case under Article 18 of the European Convention;
  • Recognize that Kavala’s  continuing detention  violates Article 46 of the convention, concerning the binding nature of final judgments of the European Court, and that a failure to release Kavala may trigger an Article 46(4) procedure (infringement proceedings);
  • Emphasize to the Government of Turkey that  Kavala’s release is of added urgency in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, which increases the risk to his health in detention;
  • Ask the Government of Turkey to drop all charges under which Kavala has been investigated and detained to silence him, in conformity with the court’s findings that his rights have been violated and that his exercise of rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association was  wrongfully used as evidence to incriminate him.

The  groups also identified the general measures that Turkey needs to take to carry out  the  judgment  to end politically motivated detention and prosecution of human rights defenders and other perceived government critics. These measures focus on Turkey’s structural rule of law problems. They include  executive control over Turkey’s judiciary and prosecutorial authorities, and the evidence of a clear pattern of direct political interference in court decisions through frequent public speeches by Turkey’s president and proxies. A pattern of criminalizing the exercise of convention-protected rights defines many of the cases against human rights defenders and other perceived government critics.

Turkey’s international partners, including the European Union, should make it clear that the full implementation of the court’s judgment in Osman Kavala’s case will be key in measuring the credibility of any government pledges for reform, the three groups said.  Any justice reform and any human rights action plan would remain hollow until the  reasons that unjustly led Kavala to prison  are  addressed and fixed.

Kavala_v_Turkey-Execution-JointSubmissionR9_2-ICJHRWTLP-LegalSubmission-2020-eng (downaload the submission)

Kavala_v_Turkey-Execution-JointSubmissionR9_2-ICJHRWTLP-LegalSubmission-2020-tur (download the submission in Turkish)


Türkiye: AİHM Kararı Sonrası Hak Savunucusu Serbest Bırakılsın

Avrupa Konseyi Bakanları Osman Kavala’nın tahliyesinde ısrar etmelidir

(Strazburg, 3 Haziran 2020) – İnsan Hakları İzleme Örgütü, Uluslararası Hukukçular Komisyonu ve Türkiye İnsan Hakları Davalarına Destek Projesi, Avrupa Konseyi Bakanlar Komitesinin 4 Haziran 2020 tarihli toplantısında Türkiye’yi insan hakları savunucusu Osman Kavala’nın serbest bırakılmasına ve ona yönelik tüm suçlamaların düşürülmesine yöneltecek bir karar alması gerektiğini belirttiler.

Bu üç grup, Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi kararlarının uygulanmasını denetleyen Avrupa Konseyi Bakanlar Komitesi’ne detaylı bir bildirim sundu. Gruplar, Türkiye’nin 11 Mayıs’ta kesinleşen ve Kavala’nın derhal tahliye edilmesini gerektiren bu önemli kararı göz ardı ederek, Kavala’nın haklarını ihlal etmeye devam ettiğini belirtti.

İnsan Hakları İzleme Örgütü Türkiye Direktörü Emma Sinclair-Webb, “Avrupa Mahkemesi, Kavala’nın alıkonmasının hukuka aykırı olduğuna ve bağlayıcı kararının gereği olarak Türkiye’nin Kavala’yı derhal tahliye etmesi gerektiğine karar verdi” dedi. Emma Sinclair-Webb, “Bakanlar Komitesi, 4 Haziran toplantısında, hiçbir Avrupa Konseyi üyesi devletin insan hakları savunucularını susturmaması gerektiğine dair net bir mesaj vererek buna uyması için Türkiye’ye baskı yapmalıdır” dedi.

Bu karar, 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.

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. Karar, 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.

Bir hakimlik 2013 İstanbul Gezi Parkı protestolarını darbe girişimine bahane olarak kullandığı ve 15 Temmuz 2016 askeri darbe girişimine müdahil olduğu iddiasıyla, Kavala’nın 1 Kasım 2017’de tutuklanmasına karar vermiştir. 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 hâkim kararıyla 2016 darbesiyle ilgili devam eden bir soruşturmayla ilişkili olarak “anayasal düzeni cebir, 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, aynı delillere ve soruşturma dosyasına dayanan bir başka suçlama ile (casusluk) bir kez daha tutuklanmıştır.

Uluslararası Hukukçular Komisyonu Avrupa ve Orta Asya Programı Direktörü, Róisín Pillay, “Tutukluluğun devamına ilişkin yargı kararlarının silsilesi ve tutuklamanın yasallığı konusunda nesnel bir değerlendirmenin olmaması, kararların siyasi beklentiler tarafından yönlendirildiğini ve Kavala’nın tahliyesini önlemek için düzenlenmiş bir siyasi çaba olduğunu göstermektedir.” dedi. Pillay, “Avrupa Mahkemesi’nin kararından bu yana Türkiye, Kavala’nın insan haklarını ihlal etmeye devam etti” tespitinde bulundu.

Türkiye’de insan hakları savunucularına yönelik taciz daha genel olarak gazetecilere, seçilmiş siyasetçilere, hukukçulara, hükümeti eleştirdiği düşünülenlere yönelik keyfi alıkoymalar ve yargısal tacizin bir parçası. Bu eğilim Avrupa Konseyi, Avrupa Birliği ve insan hakları örgütlerine ait birçok raporla belgelendirilmiştir.

Türkiye İnsan Hakları Davalarına Destek Projesi Ortak Direktörü Ayşe Bingöl Demir “Kavala’ya karşı yürütülen yıldırma kampanyası, onun tahliye edilmemesi ve hakkındaki suçlamaların düşürülmemesi, Türkiye’deki tüm insan hakları savunucuları için oluşan baskı ortamının sürmesine sebep olmuştur” dedi.

Üç örgüt, detaylı tavsiyelerde bulunarak Bakanlar Komitesi’ni:

  • Avrupa Mahkemesinin kararı gereği Osman Kavala’nın derhal tahliyesinin sağlanması için Türkiye Hükümetine çağrıda bulunmaya, kararın açık şekilde devam eden tutukluluğa ve baskıları da kapsaması gerektiğini vurgulamaya,
  • Kavala/Türkiye kararını nitelikli denetim prosedürü altında izlenmek üzere sınıflandırmaya ve Sözleşmenin 18. maddesi altında öncü dava olarak kabul etmeye,
  • Kavala’nın devam eden tutukluluğunun kesinleşen AİHM kararlarının bağlayıcılığına ilişkin Sözleşmenin 46. maddesini ihlal ettiği tespit etmeye ve Kavala’nın tahliye edilmemesinin Madde 46/4 prosedürünü (ihlal işlemleri) başlatacağını tespit etmeye,
  • Türkiye Hükümetine, Kavala’nın serbest bırakılmasının Covid-19 salgını bağlamında ek bir aciliyete sahip olduğunu ve salgının alıkonma esnasında sağlığına yönelik mevcut tehlikeyi artırdığını vurgulamaya
  • Mahkemenin, Kavala’nın haklarının ihlal edildiğine, toplantı, örgütlenme ve ifade özgürlüğünü kullanmasının hatalı şekilde kendisini suçlamak için delil olarak kullanıldığına ilişkin tespitleri doğrultusunda, Türkiye Hükümeti’nden Kavala’nın susturulmak amacıyla soruşturulduğu ve alıkonduğu tüm dosyalarda tüm suçlamaların düşürülmesini talep etmeye davet etmiştir.

Örgütler ayrıca, Türkiye’nin insan hakları savunucularının ve diğer hükümeti eleştirdiği düşünülenlerin siyasi amaçlarla alıkonmalarına ve yargılanmalarına son verilmesine yönelik kararın uygulanması için alınması gereken genel tedbirleri belirlediler. Genel tedbirler, Türkiye’nin hukukun üstünlüğüne ilişkin yapısal sorunlarına odaklanmaktadır. Bu yapısal sorunlar arasında yürütmenin Türkiye’de yürütmenin yargısı ve savcılıkları üzerindeki kontrolü; Cumhurbaşkanı ve ona bağlı diğer yetkililer tarafından, sıklıkla yapılan halka açık konuşmalar aracılığıyla mahkeme kararlarına doğrudan siyasi müdahalede bulunmaya yönelik yaygın eğilime ilişkin açık deliller yer almaktadır. Sözleşme ile korunan hakların kullanılmasının suç haline getirilmesi, insan hakları savunucularına ve hükümeti eleştirdiği düşünülenlere karşı açılan birçok davanın ortak yönünü oluşturmaktadır.

 

Kavala_v_Turkey-Execution-JointSubmissionR9_2-ICJHRWTLP-LegalSubmission-2020-tur (download the submission in Turkish)

Kavala_v_Turkey-Execution-JointSubmissionR9_2-ICJHRWTLP-LegalSubmission-2020-eng (downaload the submission)

 

For more information, please contact:

Massimo Frigo (English) massimo.frigo(a)icj.org, +41229793800

 

Thailand: Six Years after Billy’s enforced disappearance, there has been no real progress towards accountability

Thailand: Six Years after Billy’s enforced disappearance, there has been no real progress towards accountability

On the sixth anniversary of the apparent enforced disappearance of Karen activist, Pholachi “Billy” Rakchongcharoen, the ICJ repeated its calls for Thailand to bring those responsible to justice and apply appropriate penalties that take into account the extreme seriousness of the crime.

On 23 December 2019, after the Thai Ministry of Justice’s Department of Special Investigation (DSI) in September had located bone fragments which they identified as likely belonging to Billy, eight charges, including premeditated murder and concealing the body, were brought against four officials of Kaeng Krachan National Park, with whom Billy was last seen. However, in January 2020, public prosecutors suddenly dropped seven murder-related charges against the four accused on the basis that there was insufficient evidence to take the cases to trial.

“It is disturbing that after six years the prosecutors could not move forward with the prosecution because the authorities failed to gather evidence to identify the perpetrator for Billy’s murder despite the discovery of bone fragments,” said Frederick Rawski, Asia Regional Director of the ICJ. “Thai authorities should, pursuant to its international legal obligations, continue to gather other direct and circumstantial evidence to prosecute and punish perpetrator with appropriate penalties.”

The four suspects are now facing only a minor charge for failing to exercise their official functions because they released Billy instead of handing him over to the police after they took him into custody in April 2014 for collecting wild honey in the park.

“Thailand needs to implement legislation criminalizing enforced disappearance without delay so that prosecutors have the appropriate tools to prosecute those responsible, and are not forced to bring charges for crimes of lesser gravity,” he added.

Download the statement with detailed background information in English and Thai.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia-Pacific Director, t: +66 64 478 1121; e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

Further reading

Thailand: discovery of “Billy’s” remains should reinvigorate efforts to identify perpetrator(s)

Thailand: continuing delay in the enactment of the draft law on torture and enforced disappearance undermines access to justice and accountability

Translate »