Military Courts and Human Rights: oral statement to UN Human Rights Council

Military Courts and Human Rights: oral statement to UN Human Rights Council

The Colombian Commission of Jurists, an affiliate of the ICJ, today called for the UN Human Rights Council to uphold the use of civilian courts, rather than military tribunals, to try civilians and to adjudicate claims for human rights violations.

An oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council highlighted that:

  • military tribunals should as a matter of principle have no jurisdiction to try civilians or to adjudicate claims of serious human rights violations;
  • These matters should be the domain of civilian courts; and
  • The jurisdiction of military tribunals should be restricted to specifically military offenses committed by military personnel.

The oral statement emphasised to the global reach of the issue, referring by way of example to the military commissions established by the United States of America at Guantánamo Bay, as well as recent negative developments in Colombia, Egypt, Thailand and Pakistan.

The statement noted that the Principles Governing the Administration of Justice Through Military Tribunals presented to the Commission on Human Rights by Emmanuel Decaux in 2006 (UN Doc E/CN.4/2006/58), are widely referenced, but have yet to receive full recognition by the Human Rights Council. The statement added its support to the calls by the Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers, the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, and others, for the Council to endorse and seek implementation of the Principles without further delay.

The statement responds to an expert consultation on the administration of justice through military tribunals convened by the Council (UN Doc A/HRC/28/32).

The full oral statement can be downloaded in pdf format here: Advocacy-HRC28-MilitaryCourts-OralStatement-2015

Said Benarbia, Director of ICJ’s Middle East North Africa Programme participated in the expert consultation.

His statement can be found here: MENA-Military Courts HRC28-Advocacy-2015-ENG (full text in PDF).

Thailand exercised its right of reply, which can be viewed in the UN webcast archive, here.

La independencia del poder judicial en Guatemala bajo asedio

La independencia del poder judicial en Guatemala bajo asedio

La CIJ urge a las autoridades a tomar las medidas para investigar y corregir esta situación.

Entre el 23 de febrero y el 4 de marzo visitaron Guatemala miembros de la Asociación de Jueces de Noruega; el Presidente del Foro Democrático de Jueces de El Salvador y la ex Presidenta de la Asociación de Jueces por la Democracia de Honduras.

Dicha visita se llevó a cabo en el marco del trabajo de la CIJ sobre el fortalecimiento del Estado de Derecho en Guatemala.

La oportunidad fue propicia para realizar reuniones y debates con miembros del Poder Judicial de Guatemala y con otros operadores de justicia.

Además se mantuvieron reuniones con el Presidente de la Corte Suprema de Justicia y otras magistradas de dicha corte; con la Fiscal General; con el Procurador de los Derechos Humanos; con el Comisionado de la Comisión Internacional contra la Impunidad; con el representante de la Oficina del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos, así como con otros actores relevantes de la sociedad guatemalteca, abogados y abogadas; dirigentes de Pueblos Indígenas y representantes de Organizaciones No Gubernamentales.

Al concluir su trabajo, la CIJ se encuentra alarmada por las presiones que existen en contra de jueces y juezas independientes que debido al cumplimiento de su función son frecuentemente objeto de denuncias y amenazas.

Entre las acciones que se están implementando en contra de jueces y juezas independientes, lo constituyen los traslados selectivos e injustificados que tienen como principal objetivo afectar y castigar a aquellos jueces que cumplen su función en forma independiente e imparcial.

Por otro lado, se suman denuncias infundadas en contra de los mismos, al tiempo que se configura un patrón de represión en contra de ellos, que tiene como objetivo que los jueces y juezas renuncien a su independencia judicial y “ajustar cuentas” por los casos que han juzgado.

Por otro lado, el caso relacionado con las sanciones impuestas el año 2014 en forma arbitraria por el Tribunal de Honor del Colegio de Abogados y Notarios de Guatemala en contra de la Jueza Iris Yassmín Barrios Aguilar, aún se encuentra pendiente de resolución final, sin que la Corte de Constitucionalidad de Guatemala resuelva el amparo presentado por dicha jueza.

Desde el año pasado, la CIJ expresó que dichas sanciones son arbitrarias e ilegales y que los jueces y juezas no pueden ser sancionados por un órgano como el Tribunal de Honor del Colegio de Abogados, que carece de competencia para ello; además, manifestó que de conformidad con los estándares internacionales y la legislación interna, los jueces y juezas sólo pueden ser objeto de sanciones por parte de los órganos del Poder Judicial establecidos para tal fin (Juntas de Disciplina y Supervisión General de Tribunales).

Ramón Cadena, Director de la CIJ para Centroamérica expresó: “La situación es grave y urgimos a la Corte Suprema de Justicia a suspender cualquier medida que afecte la independencia de jueces y juezas y a implementar las reformas que se necesitan para promover y proteger la independencia del poder judicial como garantía para la ciudadanía y el fortalecimiento del Estado de Derecho.”

 

ICJ calls for the thorough investigation of the killing of Gilles Cistac in Mozambique

ICJ calls for the thorough investigation of the killing of Gilles Cistac in Mozambique

The ICJ calls for the prompt and thorough investigation into the killing of Gilles Cistac, a prominent academic and human rights defender.

Gilles Cistac served as a Professor of Law at the Faculty of Law, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane in Mozambique.

His death, at the hands as of yet un-indentified gunmen in Maputo, Mozambique, on Tuesday 3 March 2015, follows his involvement in the debates on the sensitive issues of decentralization of power and establishment of autonomous provinces in Mozambique.

It is also reported that he was the subject of recent attacks on social media by a person who used a pseudonym and called Gilles Cistac a spy and a traitor, and accused him, along with others, of subverting the country.

“Demonstrating its commitment to the rule of law and respect for human rights, which were central to Gilles Cistac’s work, the government must fulfill its obligation to investigate the killing of Professor Cistac, promptly and effectively, and to ensure that those responsible are brought to justice in fair proceedings,” said Arnold Tsunga the Africa Director of the ICJ.

These obligations arise as part of the government’s duty to protect the right to life including under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, international human rights treaties to which Mozambique is a party.

The government must also take steps to ensure protection of those, including human rights defenders, who exercise their right to freedom of expression.

Arnold Tsunga also called on the authorities in Mozambique to heed the message of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights: “Human rights defenders are not violent seditionists, criminals, nor bloody revolutionaries, as so many governments like to portray them. They are the best of us, all of us. And they have a message. (…) Understand the message, talk to them about it, be persuaded or persuade, without violence, instead of silencing them, punishing them, their families, and their communities.”

The ICJ will continue to monitor is the investigation of this deadly attack as part work to promote enhanced respect for human rights and in defence of human rights defenders.

Contact:

Arnold Tsunga, t +27 716 405 926 ; e arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org

United Arab Emirates: stop the charade and release activists convicted at the mass UAE 94 trial

United Arab Emirates: stop the charade and release activists convicted at the mass UAE 94 trial

Thirteen human rights organizations, including the ICJ, call on the United Arabe Emirates government to release the activists jailed following the UAE 94 trial.

On the second anniversary of the start of the mass “UAE 94” trial that imprisoned dozens of government critics and reform activists in the United Arab Emirates (UAE), including prominent human rights defenders, judges, academics, and student leaders, a coalition of 13 organizations calls on the UAE government to release immediately and unconditionally all those imprisoned solely for peacefully exercising their rights to freedom of expression and association following this grossly unfair trial, as well as those who remain detained or imprisoned for publicizing concerns about it.

The organizations also call on the authorities to ensure that the allegations of torture and other ill-treatment that the individuals were subjected to prior to and following their trial are promptly, independently, impartially and thoroughly investigated, that those responsible are held to account, and that the victims have access to effective remedies and to reparation.

The organizations share the serious concerns raised since 2011 by several UN human rights bodies and human rights organizations regarding the UAE government’s continuing pattern of harassment, secret, arbitrary and prolonged incommunicado detention, torture and other ill-treatment, enforced disappearances, and unfair trials targeting activists and those critical of the authorities, as well as its increasing use of national security as a pretext to clamp down on peaceful activism and to stifle calls for reform.

The space for dissent in the UAE is increasingly shrinking. The repression has been entrenched with the enactment in 2012 of the cybercrimes law, which the government has used to silence social media activists and others who support and defend freedom of expression online, and the enactment of the 2014 counter-terror law.

The vague and overly broad definition of terrorism in the 2014 law, which treats a wide range of activities, including those protected by human rights standards, as amounting to terrorism, may be used to sentence human rights defenders or critics of the government to lengthy prison terms or even death.

The organizations call on the UAE government, which currently is a member of the UN Human Rights Council, to adhere to its obligations to uphold human rights at home, including respecting the rights to freedom of opinion and expression, and to freedom of association and peaceful assembly.

The full statement can be found here in English and Arabic:

United Arab Emirates-Release activists convicted at the UAE94 trial-Advocacy-2015-ENG (full text in PDF)

United Arab Emirates -Release activists convicted at the UAE94 trial-Advocacy-2015-ARA (full text in PDF)

Read also:

UAE: Fear that Anti-Terrorism Law will be used to curtail human rights and target human rights defenders, Gulf Centre for Human Rights, Front Line Defenders, Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, Arabic Network for Human Rights Information, 13 December 2014,

Mass convictions following an unfair trial: The UAE 94 case, an ICJ report, October 2013,

United Arab Emirates: ICJ condemns blatant disregard of the right to a fair and public trial, ICJ, 12 March 2013

Tunisia: Accountability of the prosecutorial services

Tunisia: Accountability of the prosecutorial services

Prosecutors at all levels, like other public officials must accountable when they have been involved in violations of human rights or other breaches of professional standards, including in proceedings based on complaints brought by individuals.{{1}}  Disciplinary...
Translate »