2018 Geneva Forum of Judges & Lawyers – indigenous & other traditional or customary justice systems in Asia

2018 Geneva Forum of Judges & Lawyers – indigenous & other traditional or customary justice systems in Asia

The ICJ convened the 9th annual “Geneva Forum” of Judges and Lawyers in Bangkok, Thailand, 13-14 December 2018, on the topic of indigenous and other traditional or customary justice systems in Asia.

Indigenous and other traditional or customary justice systems play a significant role in many societies around the world, in terms of access to justice for rural communities, indigenous peoples, minorities, and other marginalized populations. At the same time, such systems raise a series of questions in terms of their relationship to international fair trial and rule of law standards, and impacts on human rights including particularly those of women and children.

9th annual Geneva Forum of Judges & Lawyers, 13-14 December 2018, Bangkok, Thailand

Following discussions on these topics at the 2017 ICJ Geneva Forum (an annual global meeting of senior judges, lawyers, prosecutors and other legal and United Nations experts, convened by the ICJ with the support of the Canton and Republic of Geneva (Switzerland) and other partners), the ICJ decided that in order to better engage with customary justice systems, the Geneva Forum would be “on the road” in 2018 and 2019, convening for a regional consultation in the Asia-Pacific in 2018, and in Africa in 2019.

Additional consultations will take place in the Americas. The Forum will return to Geneva for an enlarged session in 2020 to adopt final conclusions and global guidance.

The ninth annual Geneva Forum in Bangkok brought together judges, lawyers, and others engaged with traditional justice systems in the Asia-Pacific region, and practitioners from ordinary justice systems in the region, together with UN Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples Ms. Victoria Tauli Corpuz, as well as ICJ and UN representatives from Geneva, to discuss and develop practical recommendations, in a private small-group setting.

Participants came from a number of countries across the region, including: Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Philippines, Thailand and Timor Leste.

The potential and the risks for equal and effective access to justice and human rights

Many participants re-affirmed that traditional and customary justice systems can make an important contribution to improving access to justice for indigenous, and other rural or otherwise marginalized populations, as a result of such factors as geographic proximity, lower cost, lesser cultural or linguistic barriers, and greater trust by local communities, relative to the official justice system.

Indeed, for these and other reasons, for some marginalized and disadvantaged rural populations, traditional and customary courts may in practical terms be the only form of access they have to any kind of justice.

Furthermore, article 34 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples affirms the right of indigenous peoples “have the right to promote, develop and maintain their institutional structures and their distinctive customs, spirituality, traditions, procedures, practices and, in the cases where they exist, juridical systems or customs, in accordance with international human rights standards”.

Furthermore, official recognition of traditional or customary courts in a country can more generally be a positive reflection of the cultural and other human rights of other ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities.

At the same time, the Forum discussions confirmed that, as with formal justice systems, certain characteristics and processes of some traditional and customary justice systems can conflict with international standards on fair trial and the administration of justice, and human rights, particularly of women and children.

Participants in the 2018 Forum discussed a variety of ways in which the relevant communities, their leaders, and decision-makers in indigenous or other traditional systems, together with government authorities, international actors, development agencies, and civil society, can cooperate and coordinate with a view to seeing both formal and traditional systems operate more consistently with international standards on human rights and the rule of law.

There was a range of views on which forms of engagement or intervention were most appropriate or effective. It was also emphasized that work should continue to build the accessibility and capacity of official justice systems to ensure that individuals seeking justice have a real choice.

The above conclusions were subject to the acknowledgement that traditional and customary justice systems take many different forms across the region, and that they exist in many different contexts.

A full report of the Forum discussions will be published by the ICJ in the first part of 2019.

Development of Guidance by the International Commission of Jurists

The ICJ’s global experience and expertise, together with research and global consultations with judges, lawyers and other relevant experts, including the 2017 Geneva Forum, the 2018 session in Bangkok, and subsequent regional consultations in Africa and the Americas, will provide a foundation for the publication by ICJ in 2020 of legal, policy and practical guidance on the role of traditional and customary justice systems in relation to access to justice, human rights and the rule of law.

The ICJ guidance will focus on the mechanisms and procedures of traditional and customary justice systems, as opposed to tackling all aspects of the substantive law.

The guidance will seek to assist all actors involved in implementation and assessment of relevant targets of Sustainable Development Goal 16 on access to justice for all and effective, accountable and inclusive institutions, as well as Goal 5 on gender equality, including: decision-makers and other participants in traditional and customary justice systems; judges, lawyers and prosecutors operating in official justice systems; other government officials; development agencies; United Nations and other inter-governmental organizations; and civil society.

The guidance will be published and disseminated through activities with ICJ’s regional programmes, and its national sections and affiliates, through a series of regional launch events and workshops, as well as at the global level at the United Nations and in other settings.

The guidance will provide the basis for ICJ strategic advocacy at the national level in the years following the conclusion of this initial phase of this work.

Background Materials

Available for download in PDF format:

A Compilation of selected international sources on traditional and customary courts, is available here.

The Final report of the 2018 Geneva Forum, on traditional and customary justice systems, is available here: Universal-Trad-Custom-Justice-GF-2018-Publications-Thematic-reports-2019-ENG

The Final report of the previous, 2017 Geneva Forum, on traditional and customary justice systems, is available here: Universal-Trad Custom Justice Gva Forum-Publications-Thematic reports-2018-ENG

For more information, please contact matt.pollard(a)icj.org.

2018 Southeast Asia Regional Judicial Dialogue

2018 Southeast Asia Regional Judicial Dialogue

On 1-2 December 2018, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) held its 2018 Southeast Asia Regional Judicial Dialogue on enhancing access to justice for women in the region.

Participants included judges from Cambodia, Indonesia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Thailand.

The discussions, held in Bangkok, were focused around resources important for judges to aid in enhancing the capacity of their peers in eliminating gender discriminatory attitudes and behaviours towards women in their work. These resources include a training manual on the use of the Bangkok General Guidance for Judges in Applying a Gender Perspective, and a draft reference manual on women’s human rights and the right to a clean, healthy, safe and sustainable environment.

Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Director of the Asia and the Pacific Programme, opened the dialogue by emphasizing how important it is for judges to be gender sensitive in their delivery of justice. This could only be done by applying a framework that gives primary attention on ensuring recognition of the applicable human rights, institutional support for the promotion of these rights, and accountability mechanisms for their implementation.

Roberta Clarke, Commissioner of the ICJ and Chair of the organization’s Executive Committee, noted that this judicial dialogue demonstrates the ICJ’s commitment to have a sustainable contribution to the implementation of international human rights standards at the domestic level. She hoped that the judges could contextualize the resources presented and bring these back to their countries for trainings of their peers.

This judicial dialogue is part of a joint project on access to justice for women that ICJ is implementing with UN Women.

Anna Karin Jatfors, UN Women-Asia Pacific’s Interim Regional Director shared that gender stereotypes and social norms which discriminate women are not unique in each country. She pointed out the importance of the ICJ and UN Women collaborating in this project to deconstruct this image to bring better access to justice to women in the region.

Overall, the dialogue was rich and substantive, with the full and active participation from all participating judges who shared their views and experiences on countering gender discrimination in cases before them. At the end of the judicial dialogue, the participating judges expressed strong interest to use the resources for capacity building initiatives of their peers in their own countries.

Contact

Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +662 619 8477 (ext. 206), email: Emelynne.gil(a)icj.org

Pakistan: ICJ welcomes Asia bibi’s acquittal in blasphemy case

Pakistan: ICJ welcomes Asia bibi’s acquittal in blasphemy case

The ICJ today welcomed the Pakistani Supreme Court’s decision to acquit Asia Noreen (Asia Bibi) of blasphemy charges under section 295-C of the Pakistan Penal Code.

Asia bibi had been on death row since 2010, when a trial court convicted her of “defaming the Prophet Muhammad” and sentenced her to death. The Lahore High Court had upheld her conviction and confirmed her death sentence in 2014.

“All eyes were on the Supreme Court to respond to Asia bibi’s final plea for justice and undo the blatant wrongs done to her and her family for eight long years,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Director.

“It is heartening to see that despite threats and external pressures, the SC fulfilled its role to protect human rights in this case.”

Certain Islamist groups have frequently held demonstrations calling for Asia bibi and other blasphemy accused to be hanged. After the Supreme Court announced its decision to acquit Asia bibi, the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan took to the streets condemning the decision.

“The Government should take notice of this pattern of threats and reprisals in blasphemy cases and ensure that judges and lawyers are given adequate security to perform their duties independently, impartially and without any external influence,” said Rawski.

Reasons for Asia bibi’s acquittal include an unexplained delay in the registration of the criminal complaint; material inconsistencies in the testimonies of prosecution witnesses; wrongful reliance on Asia bibi’s extra-judicial “confession”; and failure to take into account the circumstances of the blasphemy allegations, including a “quarrel”, possibly about Asia bibi’s faith.

The Supreme Court also noted that the context indicates the charges could have arisen from a “false allegation” of blasphemy, echoing concerns also raised by the ICJ that the blasphemy laws in Pakistan have typcially become an instrument of personal vendettas and malicious motivations.

Asia bibi’s appeal was the first blasphemy case being heard by the Supreme Court since 2002. The Court has so far not upheld any convictions for blasphemy under section 295-C of the Penal Code (defamation of the Prophet Muhammad), though dozens of people have been convicted by trial courts and a number of appeals are pending before various appellate forums.

The ICJ has documented in detail systematic and widespread fair trial violations in proceedings related to blasphemy offences in Pakistan.

Courts in Pakistan have noted on multiple occasions that people accused of blasphemy suffer ‘beyond proportion or repair’ in the absence of adequate safeguards against misapplication or misuse of such blasphemy laws.

The ICJ underscores that laws that criminalize the exercise of freedom of expression  are non-compliant with international law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Pakistan is a party.  This includes the criminalization of expression in relation to religion.

The ICJ opposed the death penalty  in all circumstances and considers that it constitutes a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

Contact:

Frederick Rawski (Bangkok), ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Advisor (South Asia) t: +447889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org

Additional information 

In November 2015, the ICJ published a report documenting in detail systematic and widespread violations of the right to a fair trial in proceedings related to blasphemy offences in Pakistan, particularly in trial courts. The report confirmed concerns raised by the Supreme Court of Pakistan that individuals accused of blasphemy ‘suffer beyond proportion or repair’ in the absence of adequate safeguards.

The ICJ also made a number of recommendations to the Pakistani executive, legislative and judicial branches to address violations caused by application of the blasphemy laws, whether due to the legislative provisions themselves or at the investigative, prosecutorial, procedural, administrative and judicial levels highlighted in the report, including to ensure that those accused of blasphemy have a fair chance at defending themselves.

In a briefing paper published in October 2016, the ICJ assessed the fair trial violations in Asia bibi’s trial and appellate hearing. The ICJ found glaring omissions both in the appraisal of evidence as well as the application of laws that brought her conviction into question.

Translate »