Gambia: Declaration allowing access to African Court a major advance for access to justice

Gambia: Declaration allowing access to African Court a major advance for access to justice

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the formal declaration of the Gambia to allow individuals and certain non-governmental organizations with observer status access to complain of human rights violations against the Gambian State at the African Court on Human and Peoples Rights.  

Gambia became the ninth African State to make the declaration to allow individual access the African Court on Human and Peoples Rights. The ICJ called on other States to follow suit rapidly.

“The Gambian government should be applauded, but more African States need to step up to reinforce their international human rights obligations by allowing victims of violations direct access to the Court and to empower the African Human Rights Court to do the work for which it was set up.” said Arnold Tsunga, Director of the ICJ African Regional Progamme. “It is only through extensive depositing of article 34(6) by the majority of African states that the court can be truly an African Court”.

In addition to granting access to individuals, the Declaration made under article 34(6) of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights triggers the courts jurisdictional competency under article 5(3) to allow for a limited number of NGOS access.

“The promise of human rights protection under the African human rights system can only be realized when political leaders match rhetoric with such action as allowing individuals to seek an effective remedy by direct access to regional human rights mechanisms like the African Court,” added Arnold Tsunga.

The ICJ emphasized that despite the significant human and material resources invested in the Court since its establishment in 2006, the African Court has been unavailable to great majority of Africans, since very few States had so far entered the declaration recognizing its competency.

Other States that have previously made declarations include Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d´Ivoire, Ghana, Malawi, Mali, Tanzania and Tunisia.

Although, complaints of human rights violation can only be brought directly before the Court against the nine States that have made the declaration, victims of human rights violation of almost all African States can already bring claims against other states through the non-judicial communication procedure available at the African Commission on Human and Peoples´ Rights.

The ICJ stressed while access to the Commission’s procedures is important, it was not an adequate substitute for the kind of binding legal remedy that can be only ordered by a Court. The ICJ noted poor rate of compliance with decisions of the African Commission.

Contacts:

Arnold Tsunga, Director of the Africa Regional Programme, International Commission of Jurists C: +263 77 728 3248, E: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org

Solomon Ebobrah, Senior Legal Advisor, Africa Regional Programme, International Commission of Jurists.C: +234 803492 7549, E: solomon.ebobrah(a)icj.org 

Egypt: verdict in case of police who tortured and killed detainee reinforces limited justice for crimes by state officials

Egypt: verdict in case of police who tortured and killed detainee reinforces limited justice for crimes by state officials

The South Cairo Criminal Court’s conviction and sentencing on 11 November 2018 of Assistant Detective Mohamed Sayed Abdel Halim and Police Officer Mohamed Ahmed Salem to three years and six months’ imprisonment respectively for conduct involving the torture and killing of 22-year-old Mohamed Abdel-Hakim Mahmoud does not amount to justice for the crimes against him, the ICJ said today.

The ICJ called on prosecutors to consider options for appeal or new charges that could hold the perpetrators properly to account for serious crimes, with sanctions appropriate to the gravity of their conduct and in line with international law.

The two officers apparently unlawfully arrested Mohamed Abdel-Hakim Mahmoud, otherwise known as “Afroto,” on 5 January 2018 and subjected him to severe beatings and other torture, as a result of which he died.

The Court convicted Abdel Halim of “beating that led to death,” a crime that carries a sentence of three to seven years’ imprisonment under Article 236 of the Egyptian Penal Code, and Salem of “light beating.”

“The low sentences imposed by the Court are completely disproportionate to the conduct of the perpetrators, who beat Afroto, threw him into a cell and then beat him again when he complained he was unable to breath. The perpetrators should have been held accountable for their true criminal conduct, which included torture and murder in police custody,” said Kate Vigneswaran, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ MENA Programme.

“The Egyptian authorities’ consistent efforts to immunize public officials from real accountability denies the victims and their families their right to redress and reinforces the Egyptian people’s increasing lack of trust in the Egyptian government and judicial system,” she added.

The definition of torture under Article 126 of the Egyptian Penal Code only establishes liability for torture for the purpose of obtaining a “confession” against a suspect, falling far short of the standard required by the Egyptian Constitution and the Convention Against Torture (CAT), which contemplate torture being undertaken for any number of purposes. The Penal Code also imposes penalties—hard labour and the death penalty—inconsistent with human rights, including for torture and murder.

“Egypt should amend the Penal Code to prohibit all forms of torture and abolish the death penalty and hard labour,” said Kate Vigneswaran.

“The authorities are obligated under international law to ensure effective justice for crimes committed by public officials by charging them with crimes and imposing sentences reflecting their criminal conduct. Legislative reform is needed to both ensure accountability for victims and uphold the rights of perpetrators,” she added.

Contact:

Kate Vigneswaran, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, m: +31 624894664, e: kate.vigneswaran@icj.org

Egypt-Afroto Verdict-News-2018-ENG (full story with additional information, in PDF)

Philippines: Government must act to ensure justice in killing of lawyer Benjamin Ramos

Philippines: Government must act to ensure justice in killing of lawyer Benjamin Ramos

The ICJ and the Alternative Law Groups (ALG) today called on the Government of the Philippines to take immediate and effective action to addressing the apparently unlawful killing of Benjamin ‘Ben’ Ramos, a prominent lawyer and a founder of the National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL).

Benjamin Ramos was shot by two unidentified men in the public plaza of Barangay 5, Kabankalan City on 6 November 2018.

The ICJ and ALG call on the Government of the Philippines to conduct a thorough, prompt, impartial, and independent investigation into the killing of Benjamin Ramos.

Benjamin Ramos, in his work with the NUPL, had previously provided legal assistance to the families of the victims of the ‘Sagay 9 massacre’, which involved the killing of nine sugarcane farmers from the National Federation of Sugar Workers by unidentified armed men on 20 October 2018 in Negros Occidental, a province in the central part of the Philippines.

Given the sensitive nature of the work of Benjamin Ramos, which involved confronting powerful interests, it is important that any investigation consider the suspected links between that work and his killing.

“It is essential for the proper and effective functioning of the administration of justice that lawyers are kept safe as they fulfill their duties to protect the rights of their clients and promote the cause of justice,” said Emerlynne Gil, ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser.

As affirmed by the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, governments must ensure that lawyers are able to perform all their professional functions without “intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference.” In addition,“[w]here the security of lawyers is threatened as a result of discharging their functions, they shall be adequately safeguarded by the authorities”.

The organizations note that there have been at least thirty-four (34) lawyers killed since 2016, under the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte.

“The rising number of killings of lawyers is very concerning and alarming; it is an attack not only on individual lawyers but on the justice system as whole. The Philippine government must take immediate and proactive measures to ensure the safety of lawyers as they conduct their professional duties,” said Maria Generosa Mislang, National Coordinator of ALG.

Contact:

Emerlynne Gil, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +662 619 8477 (ext. 206) ; e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org

 

Switzerland: ICJ and ICJ-Switzerland’s position on the “self-determination initiative” referendum

Switzerland: ICJ and ICJ-Switzerland’s position on the “self-determination initiative” referendum

The ICJ and the Swiss Section of the ICJ called today on Swiss people to seriously consider the adverse implications, if adopted, of the popular initiative called the “Swiss law instead of foreign judges – initiative for self-determination” by its proponents. On 25 November 2018, Swiss citizens will be called to vote on this initiative.

The campaign against the initiative has identified it as an “anti-human rights” referendum.

“The initiative, if approved, would have the effect of making it very difficult for people in Switzerland to access Swiss courts to vindicate their human rights,” said Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser.

“Swiss people would lose important defences against abuses by the State or private entities,” he added.

Unlike the title suggests the scope of the initiative is directed against international law in general (except for very few existing peremptory norms) which includes international multilateral treaties or bilateral commercial and administrative agreements.

The initiative would therefore fly in the fact of a fundamental legal principle essential to the rule of law, namely that individual States cannot use their national arrangements as an excuse to avoid their international legal obligations.

“Switzerland, as home to numerous international law-making institutions, has a long and distinguished history of championing international law. Adoption of this initiative would be a blow to the country’s reputation and leadership in this area,” said Massimo Frigo.

“The role accorded to international law by the Swiss Constitution and the jurisprudence of the Swiss Supreme Court is essential to uphold reliability of Switzerland as party to international treaties, its role as central actor and generator in many fields of law including international trade, but also legal certainty in Switzerland”, said Professor Marco Sassoli, board member of the Swiss Section of the ICJ and ICJ Commissioner.

“Much of the economic and diplomatic success of Switzerland is based on its faithful adherence and promotion of international law. Essential Swiss values such as its neutrality or its commitment to the protection of war victims are based upon international law,” said Professor Sassoli.

Contrary to its title the initiative is not directed against “foreign judges” but against the practice of Swiss judges, those of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, and neglects that the self-determination of peoples leads to their direct submission to international law and that the conclusion of treaties is an expression of and not contrary to the sovereignty of the State.

The text of this initiative if approved could lead to the erosion of primacy of international law among the sources of law in Switzerland.

The ICJ and ICJ-Swiss Section join the several NGOs, trade unions, economic actors, political parties and people of Switzerland that want to secure their rights and those of everyone in Switzerland and appeal to the voters before casting their vote to seriously consider the above arguments and not to decide based upon mere slogans such as “self-determination”, “democracy” or “foreign judges”.

Contact:
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, t: +41 22 979 38 05 ; e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org

PDF available in Italian: Switzerland-25 November Referendum-News-Press Release-2018-ITA

PDF available in German: Switzerland-25 November Referendum-News-Press Release-2018-GER

Translate »