Oct 21, 2020 | News
The ICJ calls on the Belarus authorities to revoke the disbarment of lawyer Aleksandr Pylchenko and to end harassment or other interference with the work of lawyers in the country.
His disbarment appears to be arbitrary and in violation of rights to freedom of expression as well as international standards on the role of lawyers.
The decision of 15 October 2020 of the Ministry of Justice to disbar the lawyer is clearly related to his work in defence of human rights and his representation of clients, including, opposition leaders or protesters.
This disbarment is part of a pattern of increasing obstruction of lawyers who represent those associated with recent protests in Belarus, including through arrests and detention of lawyers, and prevention of their access to clients.
Aleksandr Pylchenko represented Viktor Babariko and Maria Kolesnikova, two leaders of the opposition in Belarus.
Disbarment proceedings against Mr Pylchenko started as a result of his public criticism of the response of the law enforcement authorities to claims of ill-treatment of protesters.
On 14 August 2020, in a media interview Mr Pylchenko called on the Prosecutor General’s Office to take action, in particular to launch criminal investigations into the ill-treatment of protesters by the police and to remove the Minister of Interior and other officials from their posts because of their involvement in human rights violations.
According to the Ministry of Justice, Mr Pylchenko called for “illegal actions, including blocking and disarming military units” and his statements “mislead the public about the powers of state bodies and do not comply with procedural norms”.
Belarus has obligations under international law to protect the right to freedom of expression (Article 19 ICCPR). Lawyers have a particular role in publicly raising concerns about violations of the human rights of their clients, or problems in the justice system that lead to violations of human rights.
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers affirm that lawyers, like others, are entitled to freedom of expression and in particular, have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights.
Furthermore, the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provide that governments must ensure that lawyers ‘are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference”. (Principle 23). Lawyers should not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics (Principle 16). They should never be identified with their clients’ causes.
Background:
Following the presidential elections of 9 August 2020 in Belarus, widespread protests across Belarus took place.
On 18 June and 7 September 2020, Victor Babaryka and Maria Kolesnikova, opposition leaders in Belarus, were detained.
There are reports that defence lawyers were denied access to those arrested including in high-profile cases, such as the case of the former presidential candidate Victor Babaryka whose lawyer was not allowed to see his client in the detention centre for significant period of time.
On 9 September 2020, lawyers Ilya Salei and Maxim Znak, were detained allegedly on politically motivated charges.
On 25 September 2020, the Minsk city Oktyabrsky District Court sentenced Luidmila Kazak, lawyer of Maria Kolesnikova, to a fine (220 Euro) for “disobeyance to a lawful order” of a police officer (Article 23.4 of the Code of Administrative Offences). The lawyer stated that the arrest and administrative fine are connected to her legal representation of the opposition leader Maria Kolesnikova.
The ICJ has previously called on Belarus to comply with its international human rights obligations, including by releasing those arbitrarily detained and ceasing abusive prosecutions as well as harassment of lawyers.
Oct 8, 2020 | News
Proposed legislation to regulate the operations and functions of the legal profession in Eswatini does not comply with international and regional standards and would severely undermine the right to an independent lawyer, the ICJ said today.
A Bill that the Government of Eswatini is reportedly seeking to introduce in Parliament would establish a Legal Services Regulatory Authority which would be responsible for issuing practising certificates to lawyers, disciplining lawyers in case of unethical conduct, developing and enforcing performance standards for legal practitioners in Eswatini, the ICJ said.
The proposed Legal Services Regulatory Authority would constitute up to 10 members of which only one would be appointed by the legal bar association (Law Society of Eswatini).
If enacted into law, the bill would severely undermine the independence of lawyers in Eswatini and may set a dangerous precedent for other countries in the SADC region, especially at this time when lawyers in other parts of the region are being persecuted by their governments, the ICJ added.
When discharging their functions, legal practitioners must be independent of control and undue influence in order for them to be able to represent their clients more effectively.
“The Legal Services Regulatory Authority proposed under the Eswatini Bill does not qualify as a self-governing professional body or an independent statutory authority because all but one of its members will be appointed by government,” said ICJ Africa Director Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh.
“The establishment of this regulatory authority is likely to have a chilling effect on the freedom of lawyers to discharge their functions without being afraid of potential retribution through disciplinary proceedings based on frivolous charges,” she added.
The ICJ calls upon the Government of Eswatini to honour its domestic and international legal obligations to respect the independence of lawyers.
In this case, the ICJ urges the government to withdraw this bill and respect the independence of the lawyers to regulate themselves.
Background:
Eswatini has an obligation, in terms of its domestic constitution as well as regional and international law and standards, to respect and protect the independence of lawyers. Section 21 of the Constitution of Eswatini and regional and international human rights treaties and standards guarantee for every person the right to a fair hearing and the right to legal representation. These rights cannot be enjoyed effectively, unless lawyers are guaranteed the freedom to represent their clients and perform all their other duties without harassment, intimidation and undue interference.
The right of everyone to access to a lawyer as an essential element of a fair trial is recognized in, among other sources, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Eswatini has been a party since 2004. International and regional standards on ensuring the independence of lawyers are set out in the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (UN Basic Principles) and the Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa.
Principle 16 of the United Nations Basic Principles, for instance, enjoins all governments to “ensure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference”.
Principle 24 affirms that, “Lawyers shall be entitled to form and join self-governing professional associations to represent their interests, promote their continuing education and training and protect their professional integrity. The executive body of the professional associations shall be elected by its members and shall exercise its functions without external interference.”
Principle 28 states that “Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers shall be brought before an impartial disciplinary committee established by the legal profession, before an independent statutory authority, or before a court, and shall be subject to an independent judicial review.”
In a recent unanimous resolution, the UN Human Rights Council recognized that “an independent legal profession” is among the “prerequisites for the protection of human rights and the application of the rule of law and for ensuring fair trials and the administration of justice without any discrimination”.
The Human Rights Council specifically expressed its concern “about situations where the entry into or continued practice within the legal profession is controlled or arbitrarily interfered with by the executive branch, with particular regard to abuse of systems for the licensing of lawyers.” It recommended that any domestic legislation should “provide for independent and self-governing professional associations of lawyers” and should “recognize the vital role played by lawyers in upholding the rule of law and promoting and protecting human rights”.
Contact:
Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Director of ICJ’s Africa Regional Programme, c: +27845148039, e: Kaajal kaajal.keogh(a)icj.org
Oct 8, 2020 | News
The ICJ today called for reinstatement of Tanzania lawyer Fatma Karume, characterizing a permanent prohibition from her practicing law as a violation of her rights and the independence of the legal profession.
In September 2019, the High Court of Tanzania issued an order suspending senior lawyer Fatma Karume from practising law in mainland Tanzania.
The High Court directed the Advocates’ Disciplinary Committee of Tanzania to conduct a disciplinary hearing and make a final determination on whether Fatma Karume, a former president of Tanganyika Law Society, which is the Bar association of mainland Tanzania, should be allowed to practice law.
Allegations of misconduct against Fatma Karume arose from her written submissions in a constitutional challenge to President Magufuli’s appointment of Professor Adelardus Kilangi as the Attorney General of Tanzania.
The State’s counsel complained that the language used by Fatma Karume in her submissions was unprofessional and disrespectful of the Attorney General, who was the subject of the constitutional challenge.
A year later, on 23 September 2020, the Advocates’ Disciplinary Committee found Fatma Karume guilty of the alleged misconduct and directed that she be permanently disbarred from practising law in Tanzania.
“The ICJ views the decision to permanently disbar Fatma Karume from legal practice, as a grave violation of Tanzania’s domestic, regional and international legal obligations relating to Fatma Karume’s right to be heard, her right to work and a violation of the independence of lawyers,” said ICJ Africa Director, Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh.
“Fatma Karume’s right to be heard was violated in many ways. First, the complaint of misconduct was made in the State’s rejoinder submissions and Ms Karume was not afforded an opportunity to respond on record, before the High Court made the decision to temporarily suspend her from practice. Secondly, her right to a speedy hearing was violated because it took the Advocate’s Disciplinary Committee of Tanzania a year to make a final determination in her case,” she added.
The ICJ also considers that the substance of the charges of misconduct against Fatma Karume was inconsistent with international and regional standards, in so far as they were based on written submissions made in good faith as part of the due discharge of her professional functions.
The ICJ urges the authorities in Tanzania to rescind the decision to disbar Fatma Karume from legal practice and restore her right to work and in particular, her right to practice law.
In the meantime, ICJ welcomes the decision of the Tanganyika Law Society to support Fatma Karume to appeal against her disbarment.
Background
Articles 21 and 13 (6) (a) of the Constitution of Tanzania guarantee every person with the right to work and the right to a fair hearing respectively. In terms of regional law, Article 7(1) of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights obliges governments to respect and protect the right of every individual to be presumed innocent until proven guilty by a competent court or tribunal; the right to present a defense; and, the right to be tried within a reasonable time by an impartial court or tribunal. Similar rights are recognised in Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In addition, Principle 27 of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (UN Basic Principles) states that “Charges or complaints made against lawyers in their professional capacity shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under appropriate procedures. Lawyers shall have the right to a fair hearing, including the right to be assisted by a lawyer of their choice.”
Principle 20 of the UN Basic Principles provides that “Lawyers shall enjoy civil and penal immunity for relevant statements made in good faith in written or oral pleadings or in their professional appearances before a court, tribunal or other legal or administrative authority.” Similar provisions are included in Part I of the African Principles and Guidelines.
Contact
Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Director of ICJ’s Africa Regional Programme, c: +27845148039, e: Kaajal kaajal.keogh@icj.org
Sep 30, 2020 | News
The ICJ today welcomed the first annual rule of law report of the European Commission, which analyses the compliance of all EU Member States with rule of law standards, including on judicial independence, freedom of the media and civil society.
The report is a welcome recognition that rule of law guarantees cannot be taken for granted in any European country, and that all EU institutions must be particularly vigilant in their defence.
But the ICJ warns that the report is only valuable if it leads to strengthened EU enforcement action to address the serious rule of law crises in Poland and in Hungary.
“This report is further testimony to the actions of governments of Poland and Hungary, to deliberately and systematically dismantle protections for judicial independence and other essential rule of law protections,” said Róisín Pillay, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme Director.
“We need the EU to use its powers of enforcement promptly and to the full, to defend these fundamental guarantees, including through prompt progression of Article 7 and enforcement proceedings. It is welcome that the European Commission calls on Member States to accelerate the resolution of problems raised under the Article 7 proceedings against Poland and Hungary. This report should lead to renewed efforts of all the institutions to urgently progress these proceedings,” she added.
Additional information
The full text of the European Commission report is available here: https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2020-rule-law-report-communication-and-country-chapters_en
The International Commission of Jurists has repeatedly expressed serious concern at the deteriorating rule of law situation in both Poland and Hungary, see for example:
https://www.icj.org/poland-judges-and-lawyers-from-around-the-world-condemn-rapidly-escalating-rule-of-law-crisis/
And here: https://www.icj.org/european-union-icj-joins-call-for-urgent-eu-response-to-hungarys-covid-19-emergency-law/
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme Director, t: +32 476 97 42 63; e: roisin.pillay@icj.org
Karolina Babicka, Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +32 475 46 20 67; e: karolina.babicka@icj.org
Sep 29, 2020 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ and IHOP today put the spotlight the lack of independence of the judiciary and the abuse of criminal and anti-terrorism laws in Turkey, speaking at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The statement, made during the consideration of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Turkey, reads as follows:
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and the Human Rights Joint Platform (IHOP) welcome the acceptance by Turkey of recommendations to ensure the independence of the judiciary (recommendations 45.112, 45.113, 45.114, 45.115, 45.118, 45.120, 45.121, 45.124, 45.125, 45.126, 45.127, 45.128, 45.129, 45.132, 45.133).
The ICJ and IHOP however regret to report that, based on their research and experience, the statements by the Turkish Government that the recommendations on the independence of the judiciary have already been implemented is simply not correct.
On the contrary, during the state of emergency more than 4000 judges and prosecutors were dismissed, more than 2000 judges and prosecutors were detained, through arbitrary processes that did not meet international standards.
The judiciary in Turkey does not enjoy basic guarantees of institutional independence because its Council of Judges and Prosecutors is fully appointed by the Legislative and Executive powers contrary to international standards on judicial independence.
The ICJ and IHOP further regret that Turkey only noted and did not explicitly support the recommendations to reform its penal and counter-terrorism legislation in line with international standards on freedom of expression (recommendations 45.90, 45.91, 45.92, 45.93, 45.94, 45.95, 45.96, 45.97, 45.98, 45.99, 45.100, 45.101, 45.102, 45.103, 45.104, 45.148, 45.158).
The statement by the Government that “legal amendments have already been adopted” and that these laws are in line with international standards is also fundamentally incorrect.
Anti-terrorism laws and other criminal offences continue to be abused to unjustifiably prosecute political opposition members, judges, lawyers, prosecutors and human rights defenders.
To actually implement the recommendations accepted by Turkey, ICJ calls on Turkish authorities to
- radically reform the governance of the judiciary to restore its independence in line with international standards;
- promptly finalize all criminal and administrative cases concerning former judges and prosecutors, respecting international standards of judicial independence;
- truly reform the country’s anti-terrorism law, and
- stop all arbitrary prosecution of human rights defenders, lawyers, judges, prosecutors and academics.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org, t: +41797499949
