Feb 7, 2014 | News
La actual Fiscal General y Jefa del Ministerio Público, Claudia Paz y Paz, fue nombrada el 10 de diciembre de 2010 para dirigir la institución por un período de 4 años, que legalmente vence el 9 de diciembre de 2014.
Su nombramiento ocurrió, hasta dicha fecha, como resultado de la repetición del proceso de selección debido a acusaciones que cuestionaban la honorabilidad e idoneidad de la persona previamente electa.
La actual Fiscal General y Jefa del Ministerio Público se ha constituido por sus resultados de gestión ante el Ministerio Público, como una figura democrática e independiente que ha realizado una importante labor en la protección y defensa de derechos humanos y en el desmantelamiento de estructuras criminales importantes. Esta figura contraviene los intereses de oscuros grupos que buscan interrumpir la continuidad del trabajo de la Fiscal.
Por ello, un abogado, ha puesto en marcha acciones jurídicas promoviendo que la Corte de Constitucionalidad acceda a reducir el período de gestión de la actual Fiscal.
El 05 de febrero del presente año, la Corte de Constitucionalidad emitió una resolución en que concede un amparo provisional y ordena al Congreso de la República convocar a la conformación de un nuevo proceso de elección para cambio de Fiscal General.
De confirmarse este amparo provisional por parte de la Corte de Constitucionalidad, se tendría como resultado que la fiscal sea removida de su cargo y se estaría violentando el Estado de Derecho.
Guatemala-Commuicado en defensa del estado de derecho-news-web story-2014-spa (full text in pdf)
Photo credit: ICTJ
Feb 6, 2014 | News
The ICJ calls on the Government of Malaysia to stop the execution of death row prisoner Chandran, apparently scheduled to take place on Friday 7 February.
Chandran was convicted for murder and sentenced to death on 16 April 2008.
While the Government of Malaysia has not publicly released the date, according to the Malaysian Bar Council, his execution is planned to take place on 7 February 2014.
Despite the prohibition of mandatory death sentences under international human rights law, the laws in Malaysia maintain the mandatory death sentence for offences such as murder, treason and drug trafficking.
The Malaysian Bar Council, a partner organization of the ICJ, has noted that there have been several instances in the past when the Government of Malaysia indicated that it would review the mandatory death penalty, with a view to its possible abolition or the possible reintroduction of a discretionary death penalty. It has also indicated its intention of reviewing the penalty of death for drug-related offenses.
“Considering prohibition of the mandatory death penalty in international human rights law and the past indications made by the Government of Malaysia that it intends to review the imposition of mandatory death penalty, it is deeply concerning that it still aims to proceed with the execution of Chandran on Friday,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
In October 2013, Malaysia underwent their second Universal Periodic Review where it was urged by several countries to review the mandatory nature of death penalty, maintain a moratorium, and ultimately move to abolish the death penalty.
Malaysia is set to respond to these recommendations in March 2014.
The Malaysian Bar Council estimates that there are approximately 900 prisoners in death row in Malaysia awaiting execution.
The ICJ considers that the use of the death penalty constitutes a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
In addition to calling a halt to the execution of Chandran, the ICJ urges the Government of Malaysia to amend its laws and take steps towards the abolition of the death penalty in the country, including the implementation of a moratorium.
Contact:
Emerlynne Gil, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t +66 2 619 8477; email: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
Craig Knowles, ICJ Media Consultant, t +66 81 9077653; email: craig.knowles(a)icj.org
Jan 21, 2014 | News
The ICJ is deeply concerned by reports that the President of Nauru has prevented the island nation’s Chief Justice from returning to the country and expelled the sole Resident Magistrate in violation of international standards on the independence of the judiciary.
According to media reports, Nauru President Baron Waqa on January 19 removed Resident Magistrate Peter Law in violation of an injunction issued by Chief Justice Geoffrey Eames. Subsequently, Chief Justice Eames, who was in Australia at the time, had his visa cancelled. Both judicial officials are Australian citizens.
Australia administered Nauru as a dependent territory until 1968 and the two countries retain strong bilateral relations. Australian judges and magistrates often serve on Nauru Courts.
“Removing judges from office, without any process whatsoever, breaches clear international standards on the independence of the judiciary,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific. “It also jeopardizes the right of people in Nauru, especially those currently engaged in legal proceedings, to have a fair trial.”
Nauru is an island state in Micronesia in the South Pacific.
The ICJ’s Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (CIJL) is monitoring developments.
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
Dec 11, 2013 | News
The ICJ has now published a translation of its Practitioner’s Guide, International Principles on the Independence and Accountability of Judges, Lawyers and Prosecutors in both traditional and simplified Chinese.
This is the first comprehensive analysis of the existing standards and compilation of universal and regional instruments published in Chinese.
The Guide outlines the roles to be played by a strong legal profession, an independent judiciary and an impartial and objective prosecuting authority.
References to international decisions, reports, texts of treaties and other international standards allow the Guide to be used as a reference book by legal practitioners and policy makers.
To access and download it please click here.
Dec 6, 2013 | News
On 6 December, the ICJ concluded a trial observation mission to Kazakhstan on the case of the disbarment of lawyer Polina Zhukova.
Lawyers Lyubov Agushevich and Polina Zhukova were disbarred following disciplinary proceedings initiated by the Ministry of Justice regarding their defence of a client in court proceedings.
The alleged misconduct, which lead to the disbarment of the lawyers, included inter alia a statement of innocence of their client, submitting motions to the court, submitting requests for recusals, one lawyer “putting a question which she knew the answer to”, reading a page out of the case file, and filing a motion for an examination of the witnesses who attended the hearing.
These actions were interpreted by the presiding judge in the criminal case in which the lawyers represented the defendant as violations of professional ethics, and were later used as grounds for the termination of their licenses to practice law.
ICJ observers, Justice Ketil Lund, an ICJ Commissioner and a former Justice of the Supreme Court of Norway, and Zulfikor Zamonov, a lawyer from Tajikistan, observed the Supreme Court appeal hearing in the case on 5 December.
The Supreme Court upheld the motion of lawyer Zhukova to resume proceedings in her case and reconsider the issue of the lawfulness of her disbarment.
“The ICJ welcomes the decision to review the case against the lawyer and will continue following the case,” said Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe Programme.
Read also:
Disbarment proceedings against lawyers in Kazakhstan
Disciplinary action against lawyers in CIS countries: analysis of international law and standards
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, ICJ Europe Programme, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, LegalAdviser, ICJ Europe Programme, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
