May 29, 2018 | News
The ICJ is deeply concerned about the recent attacks against Judge Erika Aifán that put judicial independence in Guatemala at imminent risk. Judge Aifán has always been upright and honest in her rulings, which she bases on sound principles of the rule of law.
Ramon Cadena, Director of the Central American office of the ICJ stated today: “We must support Judge Aifán because the guarantee of judicial independence is under serious threat.”
“Judge Aifán is an honest and brave Judge presiding over emblematic cases, which could be put in jeopardy if the legal actions against her proceed,” he said.
“It is totally unacceptable that a Court imposes a fine against a professional carrying out their duty. The Judges of the Third Court who imposed this fine should be investigated by the Public Ministry on account of their actions, which constitute an attack on judicial independence,” he added.
The ICJ firmly believes that the independence of judges is essential to uphold the rule of law so that public officials can effectively guarantee access to justice for victims of human rights violations.
The Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (IACHR) has established that “the independence of the judicial power has been recognized as a general principle of law and enshrined in many international treaties”.
For that reason, and with reference to the Guatemalan Constitution and international human rights standards, the ICJ considers that the Guatemalan Supreme Court should take an active role in the defence of judicial independence and in this specific case concerning Judge Aifán.
The ICJ also urges the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers to visit the country.
The ICJ also considers that the Guatemalan Prosecutor for Human Rights should submit the case to the IACHR so that that Commission can grant preventive measures to Judge Aifán and investigate this flagrant violation of judicial independence.
The ICJ also requests that the IACHR intervenes in the present situation.
The ICJ considers that the motives for the attacks against Judge Aifán are because she is currently presiding over emblematic cases in the fight against impunity and corruption.
Groups who are interested in maintaining a situation of impunity wish to see her removed from her position.
The ICJ recalls that a judge can only be removed from office for reasons established by law, following a disciplinary process that complies with the basic guarantees of a fair trial; or when a judicial officer has completed the term of their mandate.
Neither of these conditions is met in the case of Judge Aifán. Therefore, the ICJ can only conclude that the attacks against her are attacks on the independence and impartiality of the judiciary as a whole.
It is self-evident that the independence of every judicial body is indispensable for the fulfilment of fair trial standards without which the right of access to justice is undermined.
Furthermore, without judicial independence, people lack confidence in the courts or are fearful and therefore refrain from taking cases to justice.
May 15, 2018 | News
The Africa Judges and Jurists Forum (AJJF) and the ICJ today called on the authorities in Lesotho to guarantee the independence of the judiciary and to immediately take all legal and administrative measures necessary to make the Court of Appeal function independently and impartially.
The call came as the AJJF and ICJ concluded a 5-day Fact Finding Mission to Lesotho (7-12 May 2018).
The mission emphasized the importance of the Lesotho authorities ensuring that the constitutional and legal framework on the selection, appointment and tenure of judges and the actual practices conform to the international obligations of Lesotho pursuant the international human rights treaties to which it is party, as well as other applicable international standards.
“During our mission we were troubled to discovered that the Court of Appeal has not sat in the past two of its scheduled sessions and with the current impasse we are concerned that it may not convene anytime soon,” said Retired Chief Justice Othman Chande of Tanzania who led the AJJF/ICJ mission.
“We also found that the Prime Minister had initiated a process that may result in the impeachment of the Chief Justice under controversial circumstances,” he added.
The AJJF and the ICJ have been concerned for a number of years about threats to judicial independence in Lesotho.
The ICJ carried out a fact finding mission in 2013 exposing and evaluating some of these concerns. The report of the mission contained specific recommendations.
The AJJF and the ICJ are concerned that most of the recommendations that were made to address structural issues to do with guaranteeing the independence of the judiciary at law and in practice have not been implemented or otherwise addressed.
The appointment of the Chief Justice and the President of Court of Appeal is made by the King on the singular advice of the Prime Minister.
Any impeachment of the Chief Justice and the President of the Court of Appeal is also initiated by the Prime Minister.
These arrangements do not comport with international standards and give rise to the perception that the appointment of judicial officials and any impeachment action against them will be politically motivated.
This has also lead to friction or strong perception of friction between the Executive and the Judiciary in a deeply polarized society.
The appointment process of the President of the Court of Appeal has been subject to prolonged political dispute and litigation that has resulted in a leadership vacuum at the appex court that has made it dysfunctional.
The result is that all litigants who expect justice from the Court of Appeal have years of waiting before they can get their matters resolved.
While the case challenging the appointment of an acting President of the Court of Appeal is presently set down for hearing at the High Court in the coming weeks, it is not clear that this adjucation will conclude the legal process and pave way for the appointment of the acting President of the Court of Appeal.
The appointment of ordinary judges of the High Court is done by the King on the advice of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), which is chaired by the Chief Justice chairing a panel of only four people comprising the Chief Justice herself, Chairperson of the Public Service Commission, the Attorney General and one Judge.
All these officials are effectively appointed by the Prime Minister or closely work with the Chief Justice, resulting in an appointment process of judges of the High Court that lacks transparency and is perceived as open to cronyism.
“It is important that the legal profession and the judiciary speak strongly in defence of independence of the judiciary, but currently the legal profession is deeply divided, distrustful and polarized,” said Retired Chief Justice Sakala (Zambia).
“It is therefore important that a practice of regular bar-bench dialogue be initiated to reduce toxic relations that are being exploited to undermine judicial independence,” he added.
The broader reforms that were recommended by the SADC Commission of Inquiry to strengthen governance in Lesotho have not been wholly implemented.
The country needs broad reforms including in the judicial sector, but these reforms have been threatened or at least slowed down significantly by the instability in the successive coalition governments that make it impossible for the reforms to be carried out when the country is in a constant electoral mode.
The AJJF/ICJ mission hopes that the ongoing efforts to impeach the Chief Justice will fully respect her right to a fair hearing as stipulated in international obligations binding on Lesotho and that such efforts will strengthen rather than weaken the rule of law in an already fragile environment.
A report of the mission will be published and made publicly available.
Lesotho-End of Mission statement-News-2018-ENG (full story, in PDF)
May 7, 2018 | News
The ICJ today denounced the decision of the Presidium of the Azerbaijan Bar Association, of 23 April 2018, to suspend the licences of two Azerbaijan human rights lawyers Asabali Mustafayev (photo, on the left) and Nemat Karimli (photo, on the right).
The ICJ called on the Presidium to reverse their decision and allow the lawyers to resume their practice.
It stressed that disciplinary proceedings pending against the lawyers should be immediately terminated.
The ICJ said that the decision of the Presidium was contrary to international standards on the role of lawyers including the right to freedom of expression as guaranteed under international law.
The ICJ understands that the proceedings against the two lawyers, initiated following a submission of the Deputy Prosecutor General, were related to the critical statements made by the lawyers in the media, regarding high profile criminal cases.
Nemat Karimli, had stated in media interviews that his client Afgan Mukhtarli, an opposition activist convicted on charges of smuggling, had been illegally and forcibly transferred from Georgia to Azerbaijan and that his life could be at risk if he was returned to Azerbaijan.
The lawyer also complained of excessive searches and being prevented from communicating in private while visiting his client in detention.
The disciplinary proceedings against Asabali Mustafayev relate to allegations he made on social media that the prosecution of politician Gozal Bayramli, on a charge of smuggling, was politically motivated.
Both lawyers were charged with spreading false statements and slanderous information about investigative authorities.
The submission of the Prosecutor to the Bar Association, on 25 October 2017, alleged that lawyers Nemat Karimli and Asabali Mustafayev in their interviews to the media had “politicized” the criminal cases of Bayramli and Mukhtarli, tried to mislead the public and slandered investigative authorities. According to the information provided by the lawyers, no evidence had been attached to this submission.
Instead, the Disciplinary Commission collected evidence to submit to the Presidium of the Bar Association, which subsequently suspended the licence of the lawyers.
Furthermore, the lawyers state that, contrary to what is required by the Law on Lawyers and Advocates Activities, they have not received a copy of the opinion of the Disciplinary Commission submitted to the Presidium of the Bar Association.
The ICJ is concerned that the suspension of the lawyers’ licences, for comments which drew attention to possible violations of human rights, may violate the lawyers’ right to freedom of expression.
These comments appear to be within the bounds of lawyers professional responsibility to protect their clients in every appropriate way (UN Basic Principles, principle 13(b)).
The right to freedom of expression is protected under international treaties to which Azerbaijan is a party, including by Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers specify that lawyers “…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 …”.
The European Court of Human Rights has emphasized that lawyers are entitled to comment in public on the administration of justice, provided that their criticism does not overstep certain bounds, based on principles of dignity, honor, integrity, and respect for the fair administration of justice.
The ICJ emphasizes that protection of lawyers’ freedom of expression, in particular as regards issues of the rule of law and the administration of justice, is not only important to the individuals in question, it also serves as an important safeguard for the protection of human rights.
Where lawyers are subject to disciplinary sanctions for such statements, the role of lawyers in upholding the rule of law in the administration of justice is undermined.
The ICJ therefore calls on the Azerbaijan Bar Association to lift the disciplinary sanctions that would unjustifiably interfere with lawyers’ freedom of expression.
The ICJ also calls on the Azerbaijan Bar Association to ensure that the lawyers subject to disciplinary proceedings obtain a copy of the opinion to be able to prepare their arguments and defence.
Background
Asabali Mustafayev represented Gozal Bayramli who was found guilty and sentenced to three years in prison for smuggling €12,000 ($13,400) in cash. Mustafayev had expressed his opinion about the arrest of Gozal Bayramli in his social media profile, alleging that it was politically motivated. He stated that when he shared this opinion he was not yet engaged as Gozal Bayramli’s lawyer.
Nemat Karimli represented Afgan Mukhtarli, an opposition activist based in Tbilisi, who was convicted of smuggling € 10,000, illegally crossing the border and resisting police arrest and was sentenced to six years in prison. Karimli in an interview stated that Mukhtarli was taken to Azerbaijan illegally and called on the Georgian authorities not to hand him to Azerbaijan authorities since it might endanger Mukhtarli’s life.
May 3, 2018 | News
The UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) today published a Declaration on Judicial Integrity, adopted by Chief Justices and other judges and stakeholders at the launch of a new Global Judicial Integrity Network in Vienna.
ICJ actively participated in the launch event, which took place 9-10 April at the UN offices in Vienna, Austria. It was one of the largest-ever gatherings of Chief Justices and other senior judges, together with other experts and stakeholders.
In addition to organising a panel discussion on judicial selection and appointment procedures in Southern and East Africa, the ICJ made the following statement to the plenary session of the launch event:
Throughout the decades since its inception in 1952, the primary and most effective means by which the International Commission of Jurists has worked to promote the rule of law around the world is precisely by bringing judges from different countries together to share experience and expertise with one another, and together to seek solutions to the common challenges they face. The Judicial Integrity Network should make a huge contribution by creating a platform for this kind of judge-to-judge engagement to take place on a global scale and a continuous basis. The sessions today and yesterday have truly illustrated the very great potential of the Network. The ICJ strongly supports the efforts of UNODC, Chief Justices, and other stakeholders to bring the Network into being, and we look forward to participating in it, promoting it, and using it in our own work with judiciaries around the world, in the years ahead.
The plenary session also accepted, by consensus, the ICJ’s proposal to include key language from the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, in the Declaration.
The Declaration, Terms of Reference, and Participants List is available on the UNODC website here or can be downloaded from the following links:
Declaration on Judicial Integrity (UNODC event 2018)
UNODC GJIN Terms of Reference 2018
ICJ Practitioners Guide no 13, on Judicial Accountability, can be downloaded here: Universal-PG 13 Judicial Accountability-Publications-Reports-Practitioners Guide-2016-ENG
Apr 10, 2018 | News
The ICJ and its partner the Democracy Governance and Rights Unit (DGRU) of the University of Cape Town are holding a panel discussion on selection and appointment of judges within the auspices of the Launch of the Global Judicial Integrity Network.
This new Network is being launched by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) in Vienna, Austria on today.
The panel is aimed at discussing the implementation and monitoring of guidelines on the best practice for the appointment of judges (“guidelines”).
The Southern Africa Chief Justices’ Forum (SACJF) mandated the development of these guidelines through its Concluding Communiqué during the 2015 Annual Conference of East and Southern Africa Chief Justices, held at Victoria Falls in Zimbabwe.
The ICJ and the DGRU have been working on developing the guidelines, together with a subcommittee of the SACJF, with the aim of seeing them adopted at the SACJF’s annual general meeting to be held this year between August and September in Malawi.
“The UNODC Judicial Integrity Network launch in Vienna, Austria 9-10 April 2018 gives us an excellent opportunity to start thinking a bit further down the line, and identify, anticipate and develop responses to problems that may be experienced in implementing the guidelines at a national level,” said Arnold Tsunga, Africa Director of the ICJ.
While many very good standards have been developed and adopted in Africa in the field of human rights, rule of law, and good governance, a major challenge has been to see the standards implemented in practice.
“In addition to highlighting relevant global standards, the ICJ will also present its experiences from around the world in monitoring and overcoming obstacles to implementation of such guidelines,” said Matt Pollard the Director of the Centre for Independence of Judges and Lawyers at the ICJ.
“This should contribute to planning for effective implementation of the Southern African guidelines, and be of interest to the broader audience at the launch of the UNODC global network on judicial integrity.”
The panel to be moderated by Arnold Tsunga includes Hon. Sanji Monageng, ICJ Commissioner and Justice, International Criminal Court; Mr. Jan van Zyl Smit, Associate Senior Research Fellow, Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law; Mr. Christopher Oxtoby, Senior Researcher, Democratic Governance and Rights Unit, University of Cape Town; Mr Matt Pollard, Senior Legal Adviser and Director, CIJL, ICJ.
Fore more information contact Arnold Tsunga on arnold.tsunga@icj.org (+27716405926) or Matt Pollard on <matt.pollard@icj.org> (+41 79 246 54 75)
Universal – Vienna Panel on Selection – News – Webstory – ENG – 2018 (Further information in PDF)
