Jun 28, 2018 | News
The ICJ is deeply concerned with the allegations that the former Chief Justice and other officials infringed the freedom of expression and freedom of association of individual judges in South Korea.
The ICJ urges the Republic of Korea to ensure the individual independence of judges in the country.
The ICJ received information that in 2015, the National Court Administration (NCA), under the term of former Chief Justice Yang Sung-tae, submitted proposals to the government of South Korea to create a ‘second Supreme Court,’ arguing that it would assist in relieving the existing Supreme Court with its caseload.
This proposal was met with numerous criticisms from the general public and several individual judges.
Allegedly, judges who criticized this proposal were placed by the NCA under surveillance, both in their professional and personal dealings.
Moreover, they were prevented from joining international conferences and national professional organizations. Some were also either sidelined for promotions or were not given preference for educational opportunities abroad.
On March 2017, during the term of former Chief Justice Yang, the Supreme Court, through the NCA, created an internal committee to conduct an investigation to look into these allegations.
Two other subsequent separate committees were formed to investigate.
Finally, on Mary 2018, under the term of the current Chief Justice Kim Myeong-soo, the latest committee, without releasing a full report, said that it did not find basis to file criminal charges against the NCA and former Chief Justice Yang.
On 18 June 2018, the Seoul Central District Prosecutor’s Office initiated its own investigation into the allegations, including the possibility of filing criminal charges against former Chief Justice Yang and some NCA judges.
The rights of freedom of expression and association of judges is recognized in the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary and other relevant standards, which also provide for appropriate and fair procedures for holding judges to account for misconduct.
In principle, in matters touching on alleged misconduct by a judge related to the discharge of his or her duties, the ICJ considers that international standards and best practices concerning judicial independence and accountability would require at the minimum that a prosecutor seek permission of a judicial council or current Chief Justice, or other similar superior judicial authority, before commencing a formal criminal investigation or proceedings against a sitting judge.
The ICJ calls on the prosecutors’ office to seek such permission and to take steps to demonstrate that it will remain impartial and independent in the conduct of its own investigation.
The ICJ also calls on the Supreme Court to initiate a new investigation of its own, including to consider the issues from a judicial professional conduct perspective.
Finally, the ICJ urges the Supreme Court to ensure that interferences into the individual independence of judges in South Korea would never happen again.
Contact
Emerlynne Gil, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +662 619 8477 (ext. 206) ; e: emerlynne.gil@icj.org
South Korea-Independence of Judges-News-Web Story-2018-ENG (full story in PDF)
Jun 25, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today spoke at the UN on the role of judicial councils, judicial independence in Turkey and Poland, and on business and human rights in Peru.
The statement was made at the UN Human Rights Council during the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers and the Working Group on Business and Human Rights.
The statement on judicial councils and independence was made jointly with the Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association. The whole statement read as follows:
“Mr President,
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association (CMJA) welcome the report of the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (A/HRC/38/38) on the role of judicial councils and similar bodies.
Based on many decades of relevant experience around the world, we urge that:
All countries should consider establishing an independent judicial council. Reliance on constitutional customs, cultures, and traditions alone often proves insufficient if a crisis arises.
To guarantee independence, a majority of members should be judges elected by their peers. Any other members must also be independent. The Head of State, executive or legislative officials, or political candidates, should not be members. Proactive measures should address under-representation of women or persons from minority or marginalized groups.
Such bodies should be responsible for all decisions relating to the selection, appointment, promotion, transfer, discipline, suspension and removal of judges.
As an example of concern, in Turkey following constitutional reform in 2017 no member of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors is elected by their peers, contributing to a lack of institutional independence of the judiciary. We also share the concerns for lawyers in Turkey already expressed by The Law Society and other colleagues today.
On the report on the visit to Poland (A/HRC/38/38/Add.1), we concur that reforms in the name of efficiency and accountability have undermined the independence of the Constitutional Tribunal, the Supreme Court and the National Council of the Judiciary, and effectively placed the entire judiciary under “control of the executive and legislative branches” (para 74). Mr Special Rapporteur, how can other States assist in securing full implementation of your recommendations on Poland?
The findings of the Working Group on Business and Human Rights report on its mission to Peru (A/HRC/38/48/Add.2) are of great concern, that “large number of human rights defenders and local leaders” were reportedly killed, attacked or threatened for defending the environment and land rights, legitimate social protest is criminalized, and wide use of states of exception and the armed forces have lead to serious abuses. The ICJ urges Peru to implement the recommendations and asks the Working Group what it will do to follow up?
Thank you.”
Jun 24, 2018 | News
“Judges from the High Risk Tribunals in Guatemala, including Ericka Aifán, Yassmín Barrios, Miguel Ángel Gálvez and Pablo Xitumul, are facing unjustified disciplinary hearings,” nine Latin American Commissioners from the ICJ, meeting in Bogotá on 24 June, stated today.
The Commissioners understand that these judges are facing unjustified disciplinary hearings instigated by groups or persons who are displeased with judicial rulings in high-impact cases involving transitional justice or corruption.
They expressed serious concern about the precarious state of the independence of the judiciary in Guatemala. Judges are subjected to on-going attacks that seek to impact their work as honourable and impartial justice operators.
According to international standards, judges should exercise their functions free of any extraneous influence and with total impartiality; without any limitations, inducements, pressures, threats or interference, direct or indirect, from any quarter or any reason.
The Commissioners also expressed their complete support for Commissioner Iván Velásquez, head of the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG), who because of the exercise of his functions, has also suffered from a series of hostile acts and smear campaigns.
The ICJ Commissioners extend their full support to the CICIG in its struggle against impunity and corruption.
The Commissioners request that the international community continues to support the CICIG with sufficient human and financial resources.
At the same time, the Commissioners call upon the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights, the Sub-Committee of Human Rights of the European Parliament and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, to visit Guatemala and to verify “in situ” the precarious state of judicial independence in the country.
The nine ICJ commissioners who issued the statement
Carlos Ayala, Vice-President of the International Commission of Jurists (Venezuela)
Mónica Pinto, Commissioner (Argentina)
Miguel Carbonnel, Commissioner (Mexico)
Victor Rodriguez Rescia Commissioner (Costa Rica)
Wilder Tayler, Commissioner (Uruguay)
Belisário dos Santos, Commissioner Brazil
Juan Mendez, Commissioner (Argentina)
Roberto Garretón, Commissioner (Chile)
Jun 22, 2018 | Events, News
This side event at the Human Rights Council takes place on Tuesday, 26 June, 14:00-15:00, room XXVII of the Palais des Nations. It is organized by the ICJ and the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI).
In recent years, lawyers have increasingly been targeted across the world including Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Attempts to impede the work of lawyers through arbitrary disbarments and other disciplinary procedures, criminal or administrative proceedings, physical attacks or intimidation have become an unfortunate new normality in many lawyers’ work.
Lawyers are too often identified with their clients’ cause or specifically targeted in violation of their right to freedom of expression. This side event will discuss challenges faced by lawyers in defending human rights in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Ukraine.
Moderator: Róisín Pillay, ICJ Europe and CIS Programme Director
Speakers:
- Helene Santos, Senior Fellow–UN Liaison Officer in Geneva for the IBAHRI
- Fariz Namazov, Lawyer, Member of the Azerbaijan Bar Association
- Hanna Boryak, Lawyer, Chair of the Committee for the Protection of Advocates’ Rights and advocacy at the Ukrainian National Bar Association
- Iurii Grygorenko, Lawyer, member of the Committee for the Protection of Advocates’ Rights and Advocacy at the Ukrainian National Bar Association
- Temur Shakirov, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser Europe and CIS Programme
Jun 22, 2018 | News
Conclusions of the Conference on Judicial Independence, Guatemala City, 18-19 June 2018
The ICJ is deeply concerned about the increase in the abuse of disciplinary measures against independent and impartial judges and about crimes committed against human rights defenders. These attacks are putting the rule of law at risk in Guatemala.
The ICJ therefore urges the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the Subcommittee on Human Rights of the European Parliament and the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers to carry out visits to the country so as to verify the situation.
Judges facing malicious disciplinary proceedings
From 18-19 June 2018, the ICJ hosted a conference on the independence of judges with participants from different Central American judges’ associations.
The conference was able to verify that impartial and honourable judges face on-going disciplinary actions that seek to have then recused from trials or have them removed from office on account of their judicial decisions.
Judges are facing the malicious use of the judicial disciplinary system by groups or persons who disapprove of judicial rulings in high-impact cases.
The meeting was an opportunity for different justice sector institutions and judges, victims of attacks, to analyse fundamental concepts and international standards on the judiciary.
The conference concluded, the judicial career system must guarantee that a higher judicial authority can only sanction judges for legally established reasons as set down by international standards.
There was a full agenda of discussions with the participation of the Association of Guatemala Judges for Integrity (AGJI), the President of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, the Supervisor General of Courts, judges from the Penal Chamber of the Supreme Court, the Commissioner of the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG) and the plenary of the Council of the Judicial Career.
The conference examined attacks against judges and their impact, case by case, in the light of international standards. The conference concluded that judges including Ericka Aifán, Yassmín Barrios, Miguel Ángel Gálvez, Carlos Ruano and Pablo Xitumul are facing disciplinary measures because they have acted independently and impartially.
The spurious complaints presented against them before the judicial disciplinary system or other State institutions should be excluded “in limine”.
Read the full Article in English (PDF): Guatemala-Conference-of-Judges-News-Web-stories-June-2018-ENG
