Jul 24, 2018 | News
For many years, human rights defenders in Izabal have been the victims of persecution because of their opposition to the Phoenix nickel mining project.
This project has been operated by the Guatemalan Nickel Company (CGN), formally owned by Hudbay and now owned by the Solway Group.
“The ICJ expresses its deep concern about the persecution of human rights defenders opposing to nickel mining operations that are causing serious environmental damage and irreparable harm to the Lake of Izabal.
The local communities’ peaceful resistance contrasts with the violent repression that they face,” Ramon Cadena, Director of the Central American Office of the ICJ, said today.
Ramon Cadena added: “the Guatemalan government must urgently put an end to the criminalization and persecution of community leaders, journalists and all human rights defenders in the Department of Izabal.
Internal disciplinary measures should be taken against judges who through their acts contribute to the persecution of persons exercising their legitimate rights and freedoms.
The State should provide reparations for the harm and prejudice caused to human rights defenders by the public authorities. Furthermore, the International Commission against Corruption and Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG) should fully investigate these acts.“
Eduardo Bin Poou, Vice-President of the Izabal Fishers’ Association was recently detained and falsely accused without any evidence that he had committed any crime.
Last year, on 27 May 2017, Carlos Maas Coc, a leader of the Fishers’ Association was assassinated, and another fisherman, Alfredo Maquín Cocul, was wounded and these crimes remain in impunity today.
From 18-20 July, 2018, the ICJ carried out a visit to the Department of Izabal. On 19 July, the ICJ observed the hearing when the case against Jerson Xitumul, a community journalist, was dismissed for lack of evidence of any wrongdoing, at the Court for Criminal, Narcotics and Environmental Offences in Puerto Barrios.
The ICJ then held a meeting with the Izabal Fishers’ Association and on 20 July, the ICJ interviewed the Vice President of the same Association, Eduardo Bin Poou, arbitrarily detained in the Puerto Barrios prison.
The ICJ is deeply concerned by the role that judges in the Department of Izabal have played in the criminalization of human rights defenders.
Judge Edgar Aníbal Arteaga López has often abused his office by imposing exemplary punishments against human rights defenders.
This judge has handed down arbitrary sentences against journalists, fishermen, community leaders, land rights’ defenders and all those opposed to the nickel operations or who defend community rights in the Department.
For example, because of the arbitrary actions of Judge Arteaga, the community leader, Abelardo Chub Caal, remains in detention although there is no evidence that he has committed any crime.
There are other cases including that of Maria Magdalena Cuc Choc, from the Chabilchoch community, who was detained on 17 January 2018 in Puerto Barrios.
The single Judge for Criminal Proceedings, Narcotics and Environmental Offences in Puerto Barrios, Ana Leticia Peña Ayala, despite the evidence, absolved the retired Colonel Mynor Ronaldo Padilla González (former chief of security for the CGN nickel company) of all charges and ordered his immediate liberty.
During the court case, the Judge Peña Ayala prohibited the public and journalists from entering the court room for so-called “security reasons”, so that most of the proceedings were carried out behind closed doors. With this ruling, the assassination of Adolfo Ich remains in impunity and those responsible have not been punished.
In this same case, Germán Chub was left quadriplegic and the circumstances of the attack against him have never been resolved.
In the hearing on 19 July in the case of Jerson Xitumul, without any justification, Judge Arteaga also prohibited the presence of journalists and international and national observers in the court room.
Both judges flagrantly violated the principle of public hearings established in the Guatemalan Penal Code. A formal complaint was submitted to the Auxiliary of the Human Rights Attorney of the Department of Izabal concerning the actions of Judge Arteaga on 19 July.
The ICJ has stated on a number of occasions that the Guatemalan authorities have persecuted human rights defenders by charging them with crimes of land appropriation or aggravated land appropriation.
In this way, the Guatemalan authorities seek to criminalize the legitimate right to resist, enshrined in article 45 of the Guatemalan Constitution, accusing environmental human rights defenders and others of crimes such as incitement to crime, illegal detention, threats, damages, illicit meetings and marches and other acts. In practice, the State is penalizing the legitimate exercise of the rights of expression and association.
Jul 22, 2018 | News
The Supreme Court’s election of a person who is not suitable for the position of substitute judge on the Constitutional Court is deeply concerning for the sound administration of justice and the effective application of the rule of law, the ICJ said today.
Ramon Cadena, the Director of the Central American office of the ICJ added: “with this election, the SCJ has contributed to deepening the crisis in the judicial system and it will affect the little credibility that the Guatemalan people still retain in the justice system.”
The position of substitute judge on the Constitutional Court (CC) had become vacant when the former substitute judge was appointed Attorney General by the President, Jimmy Morales.
The eight judges of the SCJ who voted in favour of the substitute judge of the CC did not comply with international norms and standards on the administration of justice.
The Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary state that “Persons selected for judicial office shall be individuals of integrity and ability with appropriate training or qualifications in law.”
The ICJ has been able to verify that the SCJ judges elected a person who:
- in 2010 was dismissed as Attorney General by the CC shortly after assuming office because the person was deemed not suitable;
- openly opposes the International Commission against Corruption and Impunity (ICCIG) despite the good work that the Commission undertakes to address corruption and impunity;
- in 2010, after assuming the office of Attorney General was accused of intervening in cases concerning corruption and impunity and impairing evidence in these cases.
The ICJ recalls that the CC stated that the acts carried out by Congress on 11 September 2017 were susceptible of causing “irreparable harm to the justice system”.
The ICJ considers that the election by the SCJ of the substitute judge to the CC should also be considered an act of irreparable harm to the justice system.
The ICJ therefore urges the CC to once again protect the rule of law in Guatemala.
Jul 18, 2018 | News, Publications, Reports
The ICJ welcomed today the lapse of Turkey’s nearly two-year state of emergency, which is expected to be effective as of midnight, but said that the authorities needed now to take a range of measures to repair the rupture to the rule of law in the country.
The ICJ’s comments came as it released its report Justice Suspended – Access to Justice and State of Emergency in Turkey, outlining how measures undertaken pursuant to a state of emergency, including the mass dismissal of judges and arbitrary arrests and prosecutions of lawyers and human rights defenders had eroded the justice institutions and mechanisms in the country.
The report recommends a number of measures including the repeal of measures enacted under the state of emergency, the restoral of the independence of the judiciary and the reform of the country’s anti-terrorism legislation.
“With the end of the state of emergency we call for the immediate withdrawal of the notifications of derogations to the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,” said Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for the Europe and Central Asia Programme.
“We remain concerned that many of the emergency measures have been given permanent effect in Turkish law and will have pernicious and lasting consequences for the enjoyment of human rights and for the rule of law in Turkey,” he added.
These measures include the dismissals of hundred of thousands of people from their job, including judges and prosecutors.
Constitutional amendments, introduced during the state of emergency, permanently enshrine executive and legislative control of the governing institutions of the judiciary, contrary to international standards on judicial independence, the ICJ says.
Many of those charged with vaguely-defined offences under the state of emergency face trial before courts that are not independent and cannot guarantee the right to a fair trial, the Geneva-based organization adds.
Crucially, most of the people affected by emergency measures, including summary dismissals, have not yet had the opportunity to obtain a remedy before an effective and independent court or tribunal.
The ICJ report illustrates how the mechanisms which should address and remedy human rights violations in Turkey lack effectiveness and independence and that these deficiencies extend both to the courts and the state of emergency complaints commission.
It further finds that the ordinary functions of lawyers and activities civil society, key actors in ensuring access to justice, have been considerably curtailed.
“The Turkish Government says that they want their actions to respect the rule of law. Effective and independent remedies and reparations for human rights violations must be available to all if this principle is to have any reality in practice,” said Massimo Frigo.
Contact
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for the Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +41 22 979 3805, e: massimo.frigo@icj.org
Download
Full ICJ report in PDF in English: Turkey-Access to justice-Publications-Reports-2018-ENG
Full ICJ report in PDF in Turkish: Turkey-Access to justice-Publications-Reports-2018-TUR
Jul 11, 2018 | Advocacy, News, Open letters
Twenty-two senior judges from across the globe wrote today to Polish President Andrzej Duda to condemn the recent attacks on the independence of the judiciary.
The judges, all Commissioners or Honorary Members of the International Commission of Jurists, criticized the forced resignation of 27 of 72 judges of Poland’s Supreme Court as a severe blow to the independence of the Polish judiciary in violation of international standards.
The letter was organized by the ICJ and its Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers in consultation with jurists from 17 countries.
“The Polish government’s assault on the country’s judiciary is a major blow to the rule of law in Poland,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Secretary General.
He added:
“The situation in Poland is of concern to judges in the country, as well as in the European Union and around the world.”
“The ICJ and jurists everywhere will speak out against this surge of attacks on the judiciary that is increasingly a pattern in many countries, including several that until recently were at least rhetorically champions of the rule of law.”
“This letter shows that the commitment to the rule of law and judicial independence is not limited to just one part of the world or one legal system, but rather reflects the views of the global community of jurists.”
In their letter, the ICJ senior judges “condemn the recent forced retirement of 27 out of 72 Polish Supreme Court justices, including its President Małgorzata Gersdorf (photo), and urge President Duda to act immediately to restore the independence of the judiciary by reinstating them in office.”
They express grave concern “that the effective dismissal of one third of the Supreme Court, coupled with the broad discretion given to the President’s office to make exceptions, has taken place in contravention of international human rights law and standards, including the right to a fair hearing, and is contrary to basic principles of the rule of law.”
Finally, the “undersigned jurists urge the President of the Republic of Poland to act immediately to restore the independence of the judiciary by reinstating the Supreme Court justices forced into retirement, follow the recommendations of the European Commission on judicial reform, and take action to repeal the law on the Supreme Court that strikes at the very core of judicial independence.”
The signatories
- Justice Adolfo Azcuna, former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines
- Justice Solomy Balungi Bossa, Ugandan Judge on the International Criminal Court
- Justice Ian Binnie, retired Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada
- Justice Azhar Cachalia, Judge of the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
- Dame Silvia Cartwright, former Judge of the High Court in New Zealand and of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia
- Justice Moses Chinhengo, Judge of the High Court of Botswana
- Justice Martine Comte, former President of the Orleans Court of Appeal, France
- Justice Radmila Dracigevic-Dicic, Acting President of the Supreme Court of Appeals, Judge of the Supreme Court of Serbia
- Justice Elizabeth Evatt, former Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia
- Justice Claire L’Heureux-Dubé, former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada
- Justice Paul J. G. Kapteyn, former Judge of the European Court of Justice
- Justice Michael Kirby, former Justice of the High Court of Australia and former President of the International Commission of Jurists
- Justice Kalthoum Kennou, Judge of the Tunisian Cassation Court
- Justice Ketil Lund, former Justice of the Norwegian Supreme Court
- Justice Qinisile Mabuza, Judge of the High Court of Swaziland
- Justice Egbert Myjer, former Judge of the European Court of Human Rights
- Justice Michèle Rivet, former President of the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal
- Justice Kalyan Shrestha, former Chief Justice of the Nepalese Supreme Court
- Justice Philippe Texier, Judge of the French Court of Cassation
- Justice Lillian Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza, Justice of the Supreme Court of Uganda
- Justice Stefan Trechsel, former ad litem Judge at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
- Dr Rodrigo Uprimny Yepes, former Assistant Justice of the Constitutional Court of Colombia
Poland-Reinstate forcibly retired judges-Advocacy-Open letters-2018-ENG (full text of letter in PDF)
Jul 11, 2018 | News
Today, the ICJ expressed concern at the adoption of a new law on lawyers in Kazakhstan.
The Law ‘On the Professional Activities of Advocates and Legal Assistance’, signed into law on 10 July 2018, contradicts international law and standards on the independence of the legal profession, by enabling the executive to influence or to have control over who is allowed to practice law and substantial influence on disciplinary proceedings against lawyers.
The law will have negative repercussions for protection of human rights and the rule of law in the Republic of Kazakhstan.
“Some of the key provisions of the adopted law undermine the independence of the legal profession, a cornerstone of the rule of law,” Temur Shakirov, ICJ Europe Program Senior Legal Adviser said today.
“Not only does the law weaken the legal profession, it sends an unfortunate message to the public that, as a result, their human rights, including their right to a fair trial, may be harder to uphold within the legal system,” he added.
More specifically, the ICJ is concerned that, under the new law, the role of the independent Bar Association in the composition of the disciplinary commissions is reduced.
Besides lawyers, the Disciplinary Commission will now include ‘representatives of the public’ designated by the Ministry of Justice. While the law does not specify how these members of the Disciplinary Commission would be selected, the selection is to be made by the Ministry of Justice.
The same procedure is not excluded to select members who are retired judges, which the Law requires also be part of disciplinary commissions.
While many of the specific procedures are unclear, it is apparent that these provisions would give the Ministry extensive influence over the Disciplinary Commission, especially as the law does not explicitly require these members perform their duties independently from the instructions of the Ministry of Justice.
The influence of the executive over the disciplinary proceedings of the Bar Association is contrary to the principles of independence of lawyers.
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provide that disciplinary proceedings against lawyers are to 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.
Furthermore, the law continues to give the Ministry of Justice control over admission to the practice of law.
It stipulates that prospective lawyers who have completed their professional training are to be assessed by the Commission for admission to practice established by territorial bodies of the Ministry of Justice.
The commissions consist of seven members, of which only three are members of the Bar Association. The composition of the commissions and the principles of their work are to be approved by the orders of the Minister of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
The Law therefore preserves the previous procedure on admission to the profession criticized by the ICJ earlier, according to which the attestation of applicants for obtaining the membership to the Bar Association and issuing a license were within the exclusive competence of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan.
At the same time, many defense rights listed in the Law are curtailed or compromised by the wording that would allow for enactment of restrictions by secondary legislation, including that the adopted Law would not allow lawyers to freely and without interference collect evidence in defense of their clients or that lawyer’s inquiries can be subject to limitation where they seek to obtain “restricted information”.
The ICJ notes that according to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, States must ensure lawyers have access to appropriate information, files and documents in their possession or control in sufficient time to enable lawyers to provide effective legal assistance to their clients. Such access should be provided at the earliest appropriate time (Principle 21).
Read the full text in English here
Read the full text in Russian here
