Russian Federation: constitutional amendments undermining human rights protection should be withdrawn

Russian Federation: constitutional amendments undermining human rights protection should be withdrawn

Following the decision to postpone a referendum on amendments to the Russian Constitution, the ICJ calls on the authorities of the Russian Federation to refrain from adoption of the amendments or revise those amendments which are likely to have a detrimental effect on the rule of law and human rights protection.

“Amongst the wide range of amendments proposed, are some that would restrict the implementation of international human rights law, and in particular the decisions of international human rights courts, in the Russian Federation,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the Europe and Central Asia Programme of the ICJ.

“Other amendments would damage the independence of the Russian judiciary through changes to judicial appointments and dismissal procedures.”

The ICJ draws attention to these issues in a briefing paper on certain amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, published today.

“We urge the Russian authorities to use the opportunity presented by the postponement of the referendum, to reconsider amendments that would damage the ability of the justice system to provide an effective remedy to people whose human rights have been violated,” added Pillay.

Background

On 15 January 2020 the President of the Russian Federation announced a decision to introduce more than forty amendments to the Constitution adopted in 1993. They are to be adopted through an extraordinary procedure which includes public vote, organised specifically for these amendments.

The amendments touch upon a range of issues not necessarily connected with each other. They among other things erode the role of international law and tribunals as well as weaken the independence of the national judiciary.

On 25 March, Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin announced that a planned referendum on the constitutional amendments would be postponed due to COVID-19.

This ICJ briefing paper analyses how these amendments may run contrary to international commitments of the Russian Federation and further impede the judicial independence. The briefing paper addresses three particular changes proposed to the 1993 Constitution:

  • The role of international law and of decisions of international courts or other mechanisms (Article 125 of the Constitution)
  • Appointment of judges (Article 83 of the Constitution)
  • Procedures of appointment and removal for judges (Articles 83, 102 and 128 of the Constitution).

Full Briefing Paper (in PDF): Russia-constitution changes-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2020-ENG

Thailand: ICJ holds the commemoration for victims of enforced disappearance

Thailand: ICJ holds the commemoration for victims of enforced disappearance

On 11 March 2020, the ICJ co-hosted a panel discussion and an exhibition entitled “Committed to Memory: The Disappeared and Those They Left Behind.”

The event was held to mark the 16th anniversary of the enforced disappearance of a prominent lawyer and human rights defender Somchai Neelapaijit and other individuals who were subject to apparent enforced disappearance and whose fates remain unknown.

The event was held at Bangkok Art and Cultural Centre (BACC). More than 100 participants attended the event.

Opening remarks were delivered by Jenni Lundmark, Programme Officer, Delegation of the European Union to Thailand, and Associate Professor Dr. Gothom Arya, Adviser of the Institute of Human Rights and Peace Studies at Mahidol University.

Jenni Lundmark highlighted the European Union’s commitment to address torture and enforced disappearance and urged the Thai Parliament to pass pending anti-torture and enforced disappearance legislation without undue delay. Associate Professor Dr. Gothom called on the public to preserve the memory of the Thai persons who were victims enforced disappeared as well as many others whose disappearance were not recorded. He also encouraged the establishment of a network of victims of enforced disappearances to strengthen their advocates’ ability.

The event also featured photos and personal belongings of victims or potential victims of enforced disappearance, including: Somchai Neelapaijit, Thanong Po-Arn, Porlajee “Billy” Rakchongcharoen, Kamol Laosophaphan, Jahwa Jalo, Surachai Danwattananusorn, Siam Theerawut and Den Khamlae. For some of these cases, there has been a failure of authorities to conduct a prompt, effective, impartial and independent investigation into their cases. During the event, family members of the victims described stories from photos and personal belongings of the “disappeared” that were exhibited.

The panel discussion focused on progress of the investigations into enforced disappearances and evaluated the progress in developing legislation in Thailand to address this critical issue. The speakers included Angkhana Neelapaijit, wife of Somchai Neelapaijit; Thipwimon Sirinupong, lawyer who is representing Porlajee “Billy” Rakchongcharoen’s family; and Sanhawan Srisod, ICJ’s legal adviser.

During the discussion, speakers expressed concern at the recurrent delays in the amendment and enactment of the law against torture and enforced disappearance which will be critical for ensuring accountability and justice for victims of enforced disappearance. They also regretted that the latest Draft Act, after several rounds of revisions and public hearings, still had not addressed many of the principal shortcomings which the ICJ and other stakeholders and experts have indicated need necessarily be amended in order to bring the law into line with Thailand’s international human rights obligations.

The key concerns include the incomplete definitions of the crimes of enforced disappearance, the absence of provisions concerning the continuous nature of the crime of enforced disappearance and statute of limitations for torture and enforced disappearance crimes, and the inadequacy of provisions concerning safeguards against enforced disappearances.

Background

Somchai was stopped at a Bangkok roadside on 12 March 2004 and pulled from his car by a group of men. He has not been seen since.

At the time, Somchai was defending clients from Thailand’s restive southern provinces who were accused of attacking a military base as part of the ongoing insurgency in the region. Somchai had alleged police tortured the Muslim suspects.

Since 19 July 2005, DSI has spent more than 14 years and eight months investigating the enforced disappearance of Somchai Neelapaijit. However, there is little information in the public domain regarding its progress.

From 1980 to May 2019, the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances has recorded and transmitted 90 cases of alleged enforced disappearance to Thailand. Currently, 79 cases remain outstanding.

Further reading

Ten Years Without Truth: Somchai Neelapaijit and Enforced Disappearances in Thailand

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

Canada: Supreme Court affirms that Eritreans can seek redress against Canadian Company for human rights abuses

Canada: Supreme Court affirms that Eritreans can seek redress against Canadian Company for human rights abuses

The ICJ today welcomed the judgement of the Canadian Supreme Court in the Case of Araya v, Nevsun, which allows a civil lawsuit by a group of Eritrean plaintiffs to proceed against Canadian company Nevsun Resources Ltd. for its alleged involvement in forced labour, slavery, torture and other serious human rights abuses against plaintiffs.

The ICJ together with Amnesty International-Canada intervened in the case as a third party, arguing that Canada’s common law should be read in a manner consistent with the right to an effective remedy for human rights violations under international law and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

“This judgment is a landmark achievement for workers and other victims of human rights violations as well for international rule of law and justice,” said Carlos Lopez, Senior Legal adviser at the ICJ.

“The Supreme Court of Canada has shown that misapplied legal doctrine should not stand in the way of people’s right to effective remedy and reparations,” he added.

In the case, the Supreme Court of Canada  rejected the company’s contention that the “act of state doctrine” would preclude the case from going forward.

The Court concluded that this doctrine is not in fact part of Canadian law.

The company also contended that the allegations of breach of customary international law  could only be applicable to States and not to the company itself.

The Court, however, held that customary international law, including customary human rights law, is part of Canadian law and could apply to Nevsun as a corporate entity.

In a significant victory for the plaintiffs and other similarly situated alleged victims, the Supreme Court has allowed the case to proceed, dismissing jurisdictional and procedural objections from Nevsun.

The proceedings before the Supreme Court originated in an appeal by the defendant company Nevsun Resources Ltd against the British Columbia Court of Appeal’s judgment of 2017 which upheld the rights of claimants to sue in Canada.

The claim filed in 2015 argued that Nevsun Resources was involved in various ways in the practice of forced labour, slavery, torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and crimes against humanity at the Bisha mine (picture) against hundreds of Eritreans who were conscripted into the Eritrean National Service Programme and forced to working in the mine operated jointly by Nevsun and Eritrean State companies.

The claimants were allegedly forced to work in the Bisha mine and fled the country to find refuge in Canada, where they sued Nevsun.

Guatemala: ICJ conducts workshops on the investigation and prosecution of unlawful death and enforced disappearances

Guatemala: ICJ conducts workshops on the investigation and prosecution of unlawful death and enforced disappearances

The ICJ convened two workshops in Guatemala City from 11 to 13 February for more than 30 lawyers and more than 30 representatives of victims’ organizations on the international law and standards that apply to the investigation of unlawful death and enforced disappearances.

The workshops were conducted as part of the project under the ICJ’s Global Accountability Initiative entitled, Promoting justice for extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Colombia, Guatemala and Peru, and supported by the EU European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR). The project promotes accountability of perpetrators and access to effective remedies and reparation for victims and their families in cases of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances.

The workshop for lawyers was inaugurated by the President of the Board of Lawyers of Guatemala, Ovidio Orellana. The workshop with representatives of victims organizations was inaugurated by the Chief of Cooperation of the European Union Alberto Cortezón.

Participants in the workshops emphasized that the Guatemalan public authorities must respect and effectively impolement the the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death,  and that there was a need to reinforce advocacy strategies for the respect of the Protocol by the Guatemalan Human Rights Institutions.

The Presidential Commission on Human Rights (COPREDEH) and the Ombudsman´s Office participated during the workshop with victims’ organizations.  They committed themselves to take the necessary actions to incorporate into their work the principles and content of the Minnesota Protocol, as a complementary tool to other conventions and binding law.

Contacts:

Ramón Cadena, Regional Director of ICJ’s Central America Office, email: ramon.cadena@icj.org

Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser & Coordinator of the ICJ’s Global Accountability Initiative, email: kingsley.abbott@icj.org

Carolina Villadiego Burbano, ICJ Legal and Policy Adviser, Latin America, and Regional Coordinator of the Project, email: carolina.villadiego@icj.org

Translate »