Lao PDR: government must account for fate of Sombath Somphone

Lao PDR: government must account for fate of Sombath Somphone

The ICJ today urged the Lao PDR government to reverse its inaction in determining the fate of community activist Sombath Somphone, who was allegedly subjected to enforced disappearance a year ago.

In a legal memorandum on the one-year anniversary of Sombath’s enforced disappearance, the ICJ called on the Lao authorities to fulfill their country’s obligations under international law and carry out a thorough and impartial investigation into his whereabouts.

It also said the government must cooperate with regional and international human rights mechanisms, particularly the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) and the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances.

“It is deplorable that one year after Sombath Somphone was abducted after being stopped by traffic police, the public prosecutor has yet to institute formal

or criminal proceedings into his disappearance’’, said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific regional director.

“The government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic must immediately take effective measure to ensure animpartial and thorough investigation and bring justice to those responsible for crimes against Sombath Somphone,” he added.

Sixty-two-year old Sombath Somphone, Lao PDR’s most prominent community development advocate and a Ramon Magsaysay Award winner, was last seen on December 15, 2013, on a road in the capital Vientiane.

Closed circuit Television (CCTV) footage showed him being stopped at a police checkpoint, exiting his vehicle, getting into another vehicle with unidentified men and being driven away. He has not been seen since.

The Lao PDR government has denied any involvement in Sombath Somphone’s abduction. But reports released by police reveal a wholly inadequate investigation that lacks any credible explanation as to his fate or whereabouts.

In January this year, the ICJ called on the AICHR to play a proactive role in the case and to use the opportunity to address issues of enforced and involuntary disappearances in the region. To date, the AICHR has yet to take any meaningful action.

If the AICHR is to have any meaning, it must fulfill its mandate under Article 4, paragraph 1.11 of its Terms of Reference and develop a common position and strategy for tackling the widespread impunity of all acts of enforced disappearances in ASEAN, the legal memorandum said.

“An effective investigation, conducted in accordance with international standards, is essential in order that family members of Sombath Somphone and the public as a whole may discover the truth about his fate and whereabouts, and bring justice and reparation,’’ said Zarifi.

Background

Sombath Somphone is the founder and former director of the Participatory Development Training Center (PADETC), a non-governmental organization that supports holistic education and youth development as well as promoting eco-friendly technologies and micro-enterprises.

In October 2012, Sombath assisted the Lao government and non-governmental organizations convene an Asia-Europe People’s Forum (AEPF).  The event was widely attended, drawing 948 participants from Lao PDR as well as other Asian countries.

It was the first time groups publicly criticized human rights abuses in Lao PDR, a Communist-run Southeast Asian country bordering Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar and China.

The legal memorandum also covers the right of a family member to the right to information in such cases of enforced disappearances pursuant to both international standards as well as domestic laws in Lao PDR.

Recommendations

The key recommendations in the legal memorandum include:

(a) The public prosecutor, to launch a credible, prompt, thorough, impartial and effective investigation into the fate and whereabouts of Sombath Somphone. In the event that the public prosecutor fails to do so, an independent and credible authority should be established to undertake prompt, thorough and impartial investigation, consistent with international standards, into the alleged enforced disappearance as well as allegations of arbitrary detention, torture or ill-treatment;

(b) In furtherance of this investigation, the investigating authority should immediately seek and accept assistance from foreign experts on analysis of forensic evidence; and

(c)  The investigating authority should provide relevant material and conclusions from any investigation to Sombath Somphone’s wife, to the extent compatible with the prosecution of the case.

CONTACT:

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002,  e-mail: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Craig Knowles, ICJ Media & Communications, (Bangkok), t:+66 819077653, e-mail: craig.knowles(a)icj.org

Lao-Legal Memorandum-annex on the case of Sombath Somphone-advocay-2013 (download in pdf)

Bangladesh: stop the execution of Abdul Quader Mollah

Bangladesh: stop the execution of Abdul Quader Mollah

The ICJ urgently calls on Bangladesh President Abdul Hamid to intervene to stop the execution of Abdul Quader Mollah.

The Supreme Court handed down its judgment against Abdul Quader Mollah on 5 December 2013.

The 790-page judgment was sent to the International Crimes Tribunal on 8 December 2013 and a death warrant was issued against Abdul Quader Mollah (photo) on the same day.

It was immediately sent to the Dhaka Central Jail and he may be executed at any time unless President Abdul Hamid or the Supreme Court intervenes.

Last week, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay issued a statement, expressing her deep concern over the rising levels of political violence in Bangladesh, calling on both sides to ‘’halt their destructive brinkmanship.’’

‘‘In an increasingly volatile situation, executing Abdul Quader Mollah risks pushing the Government towards a state of emergency, placing democracy and rule of law in peril,’’ said Ben Schonveld, ICJ South Asia Director. ‘‘The timing of the Supreme Court’s decision and the Tribunal’s subsequent death warrant raise serious questions about the political motivations behind the ICT process as well as the independence and impartiality of the judiciary.’’

The ICJ is concerned that the International Crimes Tribunal has not adhered to international standards.

As a State party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Bangladesh is obligated to guarantee the right to a fair trial to all suspects, which includes special protections for those facing the death penalty.

The ICJ considers the death penalty to constitute a violation of the right to life and the right to be free from cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

It calls on the government of Bangladesh to impose a moratorium on the carrying out death sentences with a view to abolition, in compliance with repeated United Nations General Assembly resolutions on the question.

“The use of the capital punishment is particularly egregious in the Abdul Quader Mollah case, given that Parliament retroactively changed the law to enable the Supreme Court to impose a sentence of death on appeal,’’ added Schonveld. ‘‘Retroactively changing laws to influence the outcome in a case not only goes against the prohibition on retroactivity, it undermines the independence of the judiciary and the judicial function.’’

The ICJ urges President Abdul Hamid to intervene to stop the execution of Abdul Quader Mollah.

CONTACT:

Ben Schonveld, ICJ South Asia Director (Kathmandu), t:+97714432651 ; email: ben.schonveld(a)icj.org

Sheila Varadan, ICJ International Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme (Bangkok), t: +66857200723; email: sheila.varadan(a)icj.org

BACKGROUND:

Political violence has continued to escalate in Bangladesh

Abdul Quader Mollah was indicted on six counts of crimes against humanity before the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT).  On 5 February 2013, the ICT rendered its verdict, finding him guilty on five counts and acquitting him on the sixth count.  The ICT sentenced him to life imprisonment on two counts for his involvement in the Alubdi mass murder and the murder and rape of a family.  He was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment on the remaining three counts.

At the time of the verdict, section 21(2) of the International Crimes (Tribunal) Act 1973 did not permit the Prosecution to appeal a sentence to obtain a heavier sentence.

The ICT verdict in the Mollah case sparked widespread protests, drawing tens of thousands of protesters to Shabagh Square, demanding that Mollah be sentenced to death.

Responding to public outcry, on 14 February 2013, the Parliament of Bangladesh drafted an amendment to change Section 21(2) of the International (Crimes) Tribunal Act 1973 to allow Prosecution to appeal a sentence in a conviction to seek a heavier sentence.  The amendment was passed on 17 February and deemed to apply retroactively from 14 July 2009.

Acting on the basis of the Amendment to Section 21(2), the prosecution appealed the life sentences given to Mollah, seeking the death penalty.  The prosecution also appealed the acquittal handed down.  The defence in turn appealed the convictions on the five counts.

On 17 September 2013, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court issued an oral decision with no reasons overturning the acquittal and entering a conviction; overturning one of the life sentences and imposing a sentence of death; dismissing the appeal made by the defence.

On 5 December 2013, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court issued its 790-page judgment giving its reasons for overturning the life sentence and handing down the death penalty.  The 790-page judgment was forwarded to the ICT-2 on 8 December 2013.  The ICT-2 then issued a warrant of death against Abdul Quader Mollah and sent it to the Central Dhaka jail to be executed.

 

 

Algeria: torture allegations taint trial over political activist’s killing

Algeria: torture allegations taint trial over political activist’s killing

The ICJ and Amnesty International expressed concern over the trial of Mohamed Belbouri before the criminal court of Oran in Algeria. The next hearing of the trial is held on Monday 9 December.

Belbouri, aged 29, stands as the sole accused in the murder of Professor Ahmed Kerroumi, an Algerian political activist. Kerroumi was killed in April 2011, shortly after meeting with the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of expression, Frank La Rue, in Algeria.

The ICJ and Amnesty International call on the Algerian authorities to ensure the right of Kerroumi’s family members to know the truth about his killing and to criminally hold the perpetrator(s) to account in line with international fair trial standards.

The two organizations are concerned that the Belbouri trial has failed to meet these standards, including the right of the accused to be presumed innocent and to defence.

The two organizations are further concerned by allegations that acts of torture and other ill-treatment were inflicted on Belbouri during his interrogation in police facilities between 12 and 17 May 2011, apparently aiming to make him “confess” to the killing of Kerroumi.

Belbouri says he was beaten on the head, face, stomach and feet, electrocuted, made to sit on his knees for hours with a chair on his head, and threatened that his relatives would be ill-treated if he did not “confess”.

“Algerian authorities must respect and ensure the right of Belbouri to a fair hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal and in full compliance with international fair trial standards,” said Wilder Tayler, ICJ Secretary General.

“The authorities must also ensure that all reports of torture and other ill-treatment of Belbouri are thoroughly and impartially investigated, and that any statement alleged to have been obtained as a result of torture or other ill-treatment is not admitted as evidence by the court,” Tayler added.

Lawyers representing the accused and the family of Professor Kerroumi have both said that the trial was marred by irregularities.

These include the court’s refusal to allow the defence to call and cross-examine witnesses, including the forensic expert who performed the autopsy on Ahmed Kerroumi’s body, and to challenge and test evidence put forward by the prosecution.

“Justice would not be served by sentencing – possibly to death – a man who has claimed his innocence all along when they are so many doubts about the seriousness of the investigation,” said Philip Luther, Middle East and North Africa Director at Amnesty International.

Contact:

Said Benarbia, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser of the Middle East and North Africa Programme, tel: 41 22 979 38 1, e-mail: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

 

ICJ welcomes OSCE/FBA Handbook for Monitoring Administrative Justice

ICJ welcomes OSCE/FBA Handbook for Monitoring Administrative Justice

The ICJ today welcomed the launch of the OSCE/FBA Handbook for Monitoring Administrative Justice as a tool able to contribute to the open administration of justice.

Noting that trends throughout the world see administrative cases dealt with in a manner that lacks transparency and fails to comport with the open administration of justice, the ICJ expressed the hope that the tool will be used by practitioners and officials to make an impact on the ground. The ICJ pointed to several reasons why the open administration of justice, in all forms of proceedings, is important to human rights and the rule of law:

  • As a starting point, it is widely recognised, including by the UN Human Rights Committee in its General Comment on the right to a fair trial, that the open and transparent administration of justice is an important safeguard for the interests of both the individual and society at large.
  • The conduct of administrative and other proceeds in an open and transparent manner helps to ensure the integrity of such proceedings and protect against potential abuse.
  • Publicly accessible documentation, including timely and reasoned decisions, protects individuals from being subject to arbitrary decisions.
  • Transparency and openness contributes to accountability by enabling parties to determine the viability of any appeal or review, including the possibility of taking a case to regional or international mechanisms.
  • In all these ways, the open administration of justice also helps guarantee the right of individuals and society to access justice, including remedies and reparation.

The Handbook is a publication arising from a joint initiative of the Folke Bernadotte Academy (FBA) Rule of Law Unit and the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. Work began on the Handbook in May 2011. The ICJ participated in expert meetings on the development of the Handbook in 2011 and 2012.

OSCE/FBA Handbook for Monitoring Administrative Justice

Side event: promoting accountability through human rights mechanisms in Geneva

Side event: promoting accountability through human rights mechanisms in Geneva

Yesterday, during the 24th session of the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ and TRIAL (Swiss Association against Impunity) jointly held a parallel event on promoting accountability through human rights mechanisms in Geneva.

The event was co-sponsored by the Permanent Missions of Switzerland, Estonia and Costa Rica to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

A corresponding report produced by ICJ and TRIAL was also launched at this event in two versions, one aimed at civil society and another aimed at States.

Panellists at this event included Ian Seiderman of the ICJ, Gabriella Citroni of TRIAL and Theo van Boven, former Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and ICJ Honorary Commissioner.

Mona Rishmawi of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) chaired the event.

The main topic of this event was the ICJ-TRIAL report, which reviews the legal framework for promoting accountability and suggests possible action by civil society and States to engage with the human rights mechanisms in Geneva to better promote and achieve accountability for human rights violations.

The role of national mechanisms, such as national human rights institutions, working in cooperation with the UN mechanisms was also highlighted.

The report focuses specifically on the Human Rights Council and its subsidiary bodies, such as the Universal Periodic Review and the special procedures mechanisms.

OHCHR’s role was further emphasised in regards to sharing best practices as well as ensuring follow-up to issues of accountability as they come to the attention to the UN.

 

Translate »