Jan 18, 2024 | News
Lawyers for Lawyers, the International Observatory for Lawyers (OIAD), The Law Society of England and Wales (LSEW), the European Association of Lawyers for Democracy & Human Rights (ELDH), the Union of International Lawyers’ Institute for The Rule of Law (UIA-IROL), the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI), and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) condemn the continued harassment against human rights lawyer Aleksey Ladin.
On 24 January 2024, the International Day of the Endangered Lawyer, human rights defender and lawyer Aleksey Ladin will face a disciplinary hearing by the Council of the Tyumen Regional Bar Association. The action was initiated by a motion issued by the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. Mr. Ladin has been working since 2015 to provide legal aid to Ukrainians who are alleged to have been subject to criminal prosecution by Russia on politically motivated charges. Since 2017, he has been based in Russian-occupied Crimea, mostly representing Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar political prisoners.
This is the latest in series of instances of harassment and prosecution from the authorities against Mr. Ladin. On 13 October 2023, the Kyivskyi District Court of Simferopol sentenced him to 14 days of administrative detention for allegedly displaying prohibited symbols on his social media pages. The Facebook post in question, a photo of a drawing made by one of his clients, displayed elements of Ukrainian and Crimean Tatar national emblems with the slogan “We are not the terrorists and we are not the extremists.” The court found the “taraq tamga” (the emblem on the Crimean Tatars’ flag) in the picture to be a symbol of a known Crimean volunteer paramilitary unit, Noman Çelebicihan Crimean Tatar Volunteer Battalion. The drawing had no relation to the battalion. Mr. Ladin was prosecuted for the exercise of his right to freedom expression, protected under international and Russian law.
The upcoming disciplinary hearing is based on the sentence of administrative detention handed down on 13 October 2023, as the Ministry of Justice alleges that Mr. Ladin violated the Code of Ethics of the Russian Bar Association, which is based on the Federal Law “On the Bar Association and its activities in the Russian Federation.” The Ministry of Justice affirms that they received this information from the Centre to Counteract Extremism in Crimea on 3 November 2023.
Lawyers play a vital role in upholding the rule of law and the protection of human rights guaranteed under international law, including the rights to an effective remedy and fair trial guarantees, and the right of freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. Their work is indispensable for public confidence in the administration of justice by safeguarding due process rights and ensuring access to justice for all. To fulfil their professional duties effectively, lawyers should be able to practice their profession safely and should be free from improper interference, fear of reprisals, and illegitimate restrictions, in compliance with international standards.
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers states that ‘Governments shall ensure that lawyers (a) are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference; (…) and (c) shall 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’ [16]. They also hold that ‘lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions’ [18] and that ‘lawyers, like any other citizens, are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly’ [23].
In view of the above, the undersigned organisations call on the Tyumen Regional Bar Association, the Russian Federal Bar Association and the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation to:
- Immediately drop the disciplinary proceedings against human rights lawyer Aleksey Lapin, as he is being targeted as a result of his peaceful and legitimate activities;
- Ensure that any legitimate disciplinary proceedings against lawyers shall be conducted fairly and independently, in accordance with international standards;
- Refrain from any actions that may constitute harassment, persecution, or undue interference in the work of lawyers, including disciplinary or criminal proceedings on improper grounds, such as the nature of the cases in which the lawyer is involved;
- Guarantee that all lawyers in Russia and Russian-occupied Crimea are able to carry out their legitimate professional activities without fear of reprisals and free of all restrictions including judicial harassment, arbitrary arrest, deprivation of liberty, or other arbitrary sanctions.
Jan 12, 2024 | News
The ICJ is concerned about attempts by powerful actors in Guatemala, including the Office of the Attorney General, to subvert the transfer of executive presidential authority to President-elect Bernardo Arévalo de León, who is due take office on 14 January 2024.
The ICJ calls on all State authorities and private parties to respect the Rule of Law and desist from interference in the process of transition and to cease efforts to revoke or make ineffective the results of the 2023 presidential elections.
“The democratic system in Guatemala is at stake. It is shocking that the attempts against the electoral process come from representatives of State institutions that have a legal duty to uphold democracy and human rights,” said Santiago Canton, ICJ Secretary General. “Members of the Office of the Attorney General, Congress, and the judiciary have acted in total disregard of Guatemala’s international obligations. In particular, Article 1 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter establishes the right of the peoples of the Americas to democracy and the duty of governments to promote and defend democracy,” added Canton.
On 20 August 2023, Bernardo Arévalo de León and Karin Herrera Aguilar of the “Movimiento Semilla” party were elected President and Vice-President respectively for the 2024-2028 presidential term. Their victory was certified by the Guatemalan Supreme Electoral Tribunal. Prior to and after the election, there were multiple attempts by the Office of the Attorney General and other authorities to disrupt the presidential election process. The European Parliament and the Organization of American States (OAS) have condemned and characterized certain of these efforts as an “attempted coup d’état”.
The Office of the Attorney General, led by María Consuelo Porras Argueta, has played a leading role in these attempts through the arbitrary use of its prosecutorial powers. Among other actions, the Office of the Attorney General has opened unwarranted and spurious criminal investigations and issued of arrest warrants and search warrants against justices and staff members of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, President-elect Arévalo, Vice-President-elect Herrera, members of the “Movimiento Semilla” party, members of civil society organizations, academicians, and students.
The Office of the Attorney General has also expressly cast doubt on the legitimacy of the 2023 presidential election process. At a press conference on 8 December 2023 a chief prosecutor, José Rafael Curruchiche Cucul, claimed that the Supreme Electoral Tribunal “made a mockery of Guatemalans” and was involved in “violating the country’s democracy”. He also affirmed that the Attorney General’s Office’s view was that the 2023 elections should be annulled.
A number of judges have contributed to the arbitrary use of the criminal law to the detriment of the rule of law in Guatemala. On 8 January 2024, the Seventh Criminal Court Judge, Fredy Raul Orellana Letona, filed a petition before the Supreme Electoral Tribunal to execute an order for the provisional suspension of the legal personality of the “Movimiento Semilla” party. Orellana has also demanded a criminal investigation against staff members of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal.
In November and December 2023, the Guatemalan Congress and the Supreme Court of Justice engaged in legal proceedings aimed at waiving immunity from criminal prosecution of some justices of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal.
The lawful transfer of power is intrinsically linked to the respect for the rule of law and the exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to participate in political and public life, including through voting and standing for elections. These rights are guaranteed by international instruments to which Guatemala is a State party, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the American Convention on Human Rights, and the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Consequently, the ICJ recalls that the Guatemalan authorities are bound by international obligations under these instruments.
The ICJ also calls on engaged States and the international community to act to ensure that the Guatemalan authorities uphold of the rule of law, human rights, and the democratic system. If necessary, Member States of the OAS should trigger the application of Article 20 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter in the event that President-elect Arévalo is obstructed from assuming office.
Background information
The 2023 presidential election took place in a context of widespread impunity for serious human rights violations over the course of decades, reliable allegations of co-option of judicial bodies, widespread institutional corruption, and attacks against members of civil society organizations and political parties, as documented by multiple instances, including the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). In the case of justice officials (judges and prosecutors), the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has expressed his concern about “the growing number of criminal cases brought against justice officials” and the “intimidation, harassment, prosecution and persecution of those fighting for accountability for human rights violations, including work on corruption cases”.
There have been numerous actions apparently aimed at undermining the integrity of the presidential election process by the Attorney General and prosecutorial authorities. In addition to the incidents mentioned above, on 16 November 2023, the Office of the Attorney General issued 31 search warrants and 27 arrest warrants against activists, students, academics, a member of the Semilla Movement, and human rights defenders. Among those targeted was the human rights lawyer Ramón Cadena, who had previously denounced irregularities committed by the Office of the Attorney General. The charges were related to their participation in the 2022 protests against the election of the rector of the San Carlos University. On the same day, the Attorney General’s Office also alleged that President-elect Arévalo and Vice-president elect Herrera were involved in the “violent” protests seeking political advantage. For the purported participation in the protests, the Attorney General’s Office announced that it would request that President-elect Arévalo, Vice-President elect Herrera, and other members of their party be stripped of their immunity from prosecution.
On 14 December 2023, the Constitutional Court handed down an amparo action in which it exhorted Congress to preserve the democratic regime and to take all measures to ensure the peaceful transfer of power on 14 January 2024. In addition, the Court enjoined all Guatemalan authorities to “act in accordance with their functions for the effectiveness and proper completion of the final stage of the electoral process”. On 11 January 2024, the Constitutional Court also granted a “protection order” in favour of the Vice-President-elect Herrera. The Court ordered all judicial authorities not to issue or grant any arrest warrant against Herrera without waiving immunity from prosecution.
The 2023 electoral situation has been the subject of grave concern of international instances, including the European Union and the Organization of American States. In this connection, the IACHR granted precautionary measures in favour of Arévalo and Herrera on 24 August 2023. The precautionary measures considered Arévalo’s allegations of death threats, harassment, a smear campaign, and illegal surveillance.
On 11 December 2023, the IACHR adopted “Resolution 03/2023, Instrumentalization of the Justice System and Serious Risks for the Rule of Law in Guatemala”. The IACHR stated that Guatemala was experiencing a “serious political and institutional crisis” due to “the unwarranted and arbitrary actions and interference of the Attorney General’s Office, which are endangering the results of this year’s General Election”.
Jan 8, 2024 | Advocacy, Cases, News
For Immediate Release
Gambian Ex-Minister Sonko Faces Crimes Against Humanity Charges
(Geneva, January 5, 2024) – The opening of a Swiss trial on January 8, 2024, for serious crimes committed in The Gambia represents a significant advance for justice for the victims of grave abuses, Gambian and international groups that are part of the Jammeh2Justice campaign said today.
The former Gambian Interior Minister Ousman Sonko is charged with crimes against humanity relating to torture, kidnapping, sexual violence, and unlawful killings between 2000 and 2016 under then-President Yahya Jammeh. Jammeh’s 22-year rule was marked by systematic and widespread human rights violations, such as arbitrary arrests, torture including sexual violence, extrajudicial killings, and enforced disappearances of actual and perceived opponents to his rule.
“The trial of Ousman Sonko is another major step in the search for justice for victims of brutal crimes and their families committed under Jammeh’s rule,” said Sirra Ndow, coordinator of the Jammeh2Justice campaign. “The Sonko case should reinforce efforts back in The Gambia to try crimes under Jammeh’s rule so that perpetrators are held to account for the atrocities committed.”
Sonko was arrested in Bern, Switzerland on January 26, 2017, the day after TRIAL International filed a criminal complaint against him. The Office of the Attorney General of Switzerland filed an indictment against Sonko before the Federal Criminal Court on April 17, 2023. The trial, taking place in the city of Bellinzona, is expected to last about three weeks.
The trial is possible because Swiss law recognizes universal jurisdiction over certain serious international crimes, allowing for the prosecution of these crimes no matter where they were committed and regardless of the nationality of the suspects or victims. Swiss nongovernmental organizations, former federal prosecutors, members of parliament, and others have previously criticized judicial officials in Switzerland for lagging behind other European countries on universal jurisdiction cases despite having solid legislation to address serious crimes.
“With Sonko’s trial, Switzerland appears at last to be gaining momentum on prosecuting atrocity crimes committed abroad,” said Philip Grant, executive director at TRIAL International, which supports plaintiffs in the case. “Sonko is the highest-level former official to be tried under the principle of universal jurisdiction in Europe.”
Sonko is the second person to be tried in Switzerland before a non-military court for serious crimes committed abroad, the second person to be tried in Europe for crimes committed in The Gambia, and the highest ranked official to be prosecuted in Europe on the basis of universal jurisdiction. Gambian activists and survivors, and international advocates will attend the trial’s opening in Bellinzona and are available for comment. The first case addressing crimes committed in The Gambia was in Germany against Bai Lowe, a former member of the paramilitary unit known as the “Junglers,” which Jammeh created. Lowe was convicted and sentenced to life in prison by a German court on November 30, 2023, for two murders and an attempted murder, constituting crimes against humanity.
A major challenge will be to ensure that Gambians, whether in the audience or outside the courtroom, can access, follow, and understand the proceedings, which will be conducted in German. Survivors, victims’ groups, and civil society groups have tried to ensure that information on developments is disseminated within The Gambia to increase their impact.
“Developments in the proceedings of such a significant case should be made accessible to Gambians, victims and non-victims alike, in the English language, which they understand, there by boosting their interest in the trial,” said Fatoumata Sandeng, a plaintiff in the Sonko case who heads the Solo Sandeng Foundation. “Greater action on accountability by the government back home in Gambia is also needed.”
Since Jammeh’s fall, The Gambia has moved forward with only two prosecutions for Jammeh-era crimes. In December 24, 2021, the final report of Gambia’s Truth Reconciliation and Reparations Commission (TRRC) found that Jammeh and 69 of his associates committed crimes against humanity, and called for their prosecution. On May 25, 2022, the Gambian government accepted the TRRC’s recommendation for accountability, but without an action plan.
On May 12, 2023, the government presented a long-awaited detailed implementation plan calling for the creation of a Special Prosecutor’s Office to complete the investigations initiated by the TRRC and to prepare case-ready dossiers. A hybrid tribunal of Gambia and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) would be created to carry out prosecutions of the most serious offenses. The Gambia and ECOWAS have created a joint technical committee to develop the hybrid court.
“The Gambian government and ECOWAS should move without delay to create the hybrid court,” said Elise Keppler, associate international justice director at Human Rights Watch. “Victims and the Gambian public have waited a very long time to have the chance to see justice done.”
Groups involved with the campaign include: Africa Center for International Law and Accountability (ACILA), African Network Against Extrajudicial Killings and Enforced Disappearances (ANEKED), Amnesty International–Ghana, Center for Justice and Accountability, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI), Gambia Center for Victims of Human Rights Violations, Ghana Center for Democratic Development (CDD-GHANA), Human Rights Advocacy Center, Human Rights Watch, International Commission of Jurists, Institute for Human Rights and Development in Africa (IHRDA), Media Foundation for West Africa (MFWA), POS Foundation, Right 2 Know–Gambia, Solo Sandeng Foundation, The Toufah Foundation, TRIAL International, and Women’s Association for Victims’ Empowerment (WAVE).
For more information on the trial, please visit:
https://trialinternational.org/latest-post/ousman-sonko-case-the-second-trial-for-crimes-against-humanity-in-switzerland-to-take-place-in-january-2024/
or, https://trialinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/The-Ousman-Sonko-Case_QA.pdf
For more information, please contact:
For Human Rights Watch, in New York, Elise Keppler (English, French): +1-917-687-8576 (mobile); or kepplee@hrw.org. Twitter: @EliseKeppler
For TRIAL International, in Geneva, Vony Rambolamanana (English, French, German): +33-66 -48-80-305 (mobile); or media@trialinternational.org. Twitter: @trial
For ANEKED, in New York, Nana-Jo Ndow (English, French, Spanish, Portuguese): +1-929-684-5734 (mobile); or nanajo.ndow@aneked.org. @theANEKED
For International Commission of Jurists, in Barcelona, Reed Brody (English, Spanish, French, Portuguese): +1-917-388-6745 (mobile); or reedbrody@gmail.com. Twitter: @reedbrody
For Solo Sandeng Foundation, in Germany, Fatoumatta Sandeng (English, German, Mandinka, Wollof) +49-16-31-74-75-19 (mobile); or solosandengfoundation@gmail.com. Twitter: @solosandengfound
Dec 21, 2023 | News
On 18 December 2023, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) filed a submission to the Human Rights Committee (the Committee) on Tunisia’s implementation of the Committee’s 2020 concluding observations regarding the Constitutional Court and the use of counter-terrorism provisions in the context of the Committee’s follow-up procedure.
“Since July 2021, President Kais Said has systematically eroded all checks on his authority, including by curtailing the powers of the Constitutional Court under the 2022 Constitution and by instigating arbitrary prosecutions against those suspected of opposing his rule , including judges, journalists, human rights defenders, and political opponents,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA director. “The Tunisian authorities must abide by their obligations under international law, immediately reinstate a democratic constitutional order, and end the use of the criminal process and counter-terrorism measures to crackdown on dissent and free speech.”
In April 2022, pursuant to the Committees’ request to the State party to provide follow-up information on the implementation of its recommendations regarding the Constitutional Court, the state of emergency and counter-terrorism, and freedom of peaceful assembly and excessive use of force by the State’s agents, Tunisia submitted further information regarding its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as they pertain to the above-mentioned concerns. During the Committee’s 140th session between 4 and 28 March 2024, this information, and Tunisia’s implementation of the Committee’s recommendations on the same, will be reviewed.
The ICJ’s submission to the Committee highlights a number of ongoing human rights concerns with respect to the country’s implementation of and compliance with the provisions of ICCPR, which are not adequately addressed in the State’s submission of further information, including:
- Article 2(3). By failing to establish a Constitutional Court, and by severely limiting the independence and powers of the Constitutional Court under the new Constitution – should one ever be established – Tunisia has failed to provide recourse to resolve disputes about the constitutionality of the exceptional decrees promulgated by the President under the state of exception, including by removing the power of the legislature to challenge the constitutionality of such decrees in the new Constitution;
.
- Article 4(1) and (3). By failing to specify the nature of the public emergency that purportedly necessitated the suspension of the Constitution in July 2021 per article 80 of the 2014 Constitution on state of exception, and the corollary interference with ICCPR rights, and by failing to notify the derogation to these rights, Tunisia has failed to meet its obligations to prove and ensure that the exceptional measures adopted by the President were “strictly required by the exigencies of the situation”;
.
- Article 9(1). By arbitrarily detaining perceived political opponents, lawyers or judges under counter-terrorism provisions without reliable evidence, Tunisia is unlawfully interfering with their right to liberty;
.
- Article 19 (1) and (3). By arbitrarily investigating and prosecuting members of the judiciary, political opponents and lawyers under counter-terrorism provisions, Tunisia is unlawfully interfering with their right to express their opinions both in their professional and personal capacity; and
.
- Article 14(1). Through interference in the appointment, career, disciplining and dismissal of judges, prosecutors and High Judicial Council members, the President has undermined the independence and impartiality of tribunals presiding over criminal investigations and prosecutions, including with respect to counter-terrorism proceedings against perceived political opponents and members of the judiciary.
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3800; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Dec 20, 2023 | Advocacy, News
Today, the ICJ condemned aspects of the agreement reached by the EU Member States and the European Parliament on the last five instruments from the EU Pact on Migration and Asylum, stressing that it will effectively strip away core human rights and refugee protections for persons from vulnerable populations.
The ICJ calls on the EU and its Member States to adhere strictly to their international legal obligations, particularly under human rights law and refugee law, in implementing any new legislative measures.
The Pact, a major set of legislative proposals on the EU’s migration policy initially proposed by the European Commission in September 2020, aims to update the existing rules of the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), which was renegotiated just a few years prior to this proposal.
« The agreement reached today between the co-legislators, the Council of the EU and the European Parliament sends a worrying signal on the state of EU’s commitment to human rights protection, » said Karolína Babická, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme. « Although a final text of the legislative instruments is yet to be seen, the agreement waters down protection and safeguards for the rights of migrants and refugees, that oblige the EU Member States under international law. »
Based on the agreement reached today on the Asylum Procedures Regulation, applicants will not have access to free legal assistance, including in border procedures, as it will only be available for certain persons at the appeals stage, where for many it will be too late. Other points agreed include more fast-track procedures with fewer individual safeguards for the migrants and refugees in question. The Council and the European Parliament also agreed with the proposal of a fiction of “non-entry” to the territory, which is intended have the effect of removing migrants and refugees from the protective of spheres of the state on the grounds that they are not really in the country.
« These are in breach of international human rights standards and rules on jurisdiction and will lead to more administrative detention, which effectively punishes those in most need of protection, » said Babická, « It appears that the instruments are intended to allow for border procedures with nearly no procedural safeguards, resulting in quick deportations. However, even in border zones or transit zones, the State’s human rights law obligations remain fully applicable. »
The asylum border procedure as agreed would apply to asylum seekers who are either “unlikely to be granted asylum”, whose claim is fraudulent or abusive, or who are considered a security risk. This provision undermines the key principle of refugee protection, ensuring an individual assessment of one’s asylum claim. Regardless of the general recognition rate, many individuals are still refugees in need of protection status due to circumstances of their individual case. Equally in assessing whether the application is fraudulent, abusive or potentially a security risk, an individualised assessment must be in place.
Indeed, it is difficult to assess any of the purported criteria without fair hearing based on equal protection and the rule of law.
A further problematic aspect includes the disparate treatment and safeguards for available for children below the age of twelve and those twelve and older. Under the Convention on the Rights of the Child, a child is considered a person under the age of 18 must be afforded the protections due to them. Under these rules, older children would for instance not be exempted from border procedures.
The ICJ has previously warned about harmful provisions in the proposals regarding detention in the Screening and Asylum Procedures Regulation.
The Regulation on Asylum and Migration Management, replacing the current Dublin Regulation, will now exclude the possibility for applicants to be transferred to the Member State where they have a sibling or other family member with a legal residence. This provision seriously worsens the situation of asylum applicants in the EU CEAS so far, in breach of international legal standards, especially the right to family life.
