Jun 6, 2018 | Artículos, Noticias
Después de más de 30 años de búsqueda de justicia por parte de la familia Molina Theissen, el Tribunal de Mayor Riesgo C emitió sentencia condenatoria , cometida en octubre de 1981, durante el conflicto armado interno.
Por la desaparición forzada del niño Marco Antonio Molina Theissen (de 14 años), así como por la detención ilegal, tortura y violación sexual de su hermana Emma Guadalupe Molina Theissen, fueron condenados el 23 de mayo de 2018, los militares de alto rango (en retiro) General de Brigada Benedicto Lucas García, Coronel Hugo Ramiro Zaldaña Rojas, Coronel Manuel Antonio Callejas y Callejas y Coronel Francisco Luis Gordillo Martínez.
En esa misma sentencia, el Tribunal absolvió al coronel Edilberto Letona Linares.
La CIJ observó todo el desarrollo del juicio público.
Como resultado de esta labor de observación, la CIJ considera que, una vez más, se pudo comprobar, que para lograr romper con la impunidad que existe en estos casos de la llamada “justicia transicional”, se requiere indispensablemente que el Sistema de Justicia esté integrado por jueces independientes, imparciales, competentes, idóneos y de incuestionable integridad moral.
Asimismo, de su observación del juicio y estudio de la Sentencia, la CIJ puede concluir que la defensa de los militares procesados llevó a cabo un litigio de mala fe, que buscó apartar del juicio al Juez Pablo Xitumul, Presidente del Tribunal, por medio de recusaciones abusivas y sin ninguna base legal.
Este tipo de prácticas atentan contra una recta administración de justicia y constituyen una violación de la obligación que tienen los abogados de mantener el honor y la dignidad de su profesión y de actuar de conformidad con las normas éticas reconocidas que rigen su profesión, como lo prescriben los Principios Básicos sobre la Función de los Abogados, de las Naciones Unidas.
La CIJ expresa su rechazo por este tipo de estrategias de defensa, que ya han sido implementadas en otros casos de “justicia transicional” en el pasado y que, además, se están haciendo evidentes en casos recientes vinculados a la lucha contra la corrupción.
Además, durante el juicio, la CIJ pudo constatar las siguientes situaciones:
- Presiones y campañas de difamación de diferente naturaleza, que atacaron y cuestionaron la independencia de las y los juzgadores, su idoneidad e imparcialidad;
- Ataques, estigmatizaciones, difamación y cuestionamientos infundados contra la familia Molina Theissen, por sectores cercanos al Ejército de Guatemala; y
- Ataques y estigmatizaciones contra de las organizaciones de derechos humanos y de los abogados y abogadas de la Familia Molina Theissen, así como en contra del Ministerio Público.
La CIJ se permite recordar que:
- La familia Molina Theissen buscó justicia infructuosamente durante más de 30 años, acudiendo a las autoridades judiciales guatemaltecas;
- Ante la denegación de justicia, la familia Molina Theissen tuvo que recurrir al Sistema Interamericano de Derechos Humanos; y,
- La Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, en Sentencia de 4 de Mayo de 2004, condenó al Estado de Guatemala por violaciones a los derechos humanos y le ordenó investigar, procesar y castigar a los responsables de dichos crímenes.
Ramón Cadena, Director de la CIJ para Centroamérica expresó: “Apoyamos al Presidente del Tribunal Juez Pablo Xitumul, a los otros dos jueces que integran el Tribunal de Mayor Riesgo C y a todos los jueces independientes, imparciales, idóneos e íntegros de Guatemala, que con su trabajo tratan de devolverle la credibilidad al Organismo Judicial.”
“Nos complace esta sentencia, ya que sienta un precedente para que una práctica sistemática tan grave, como la desaparición forzada de personas, no vuelva a repetirse en Guatemala. Existen en Guatemala más de 40,000 personas detenidas desaparecidas y el Ejército de Guatemala debería demostrar voluntad política, proporcionando información veraz, para que los familiares encuentren a sus seres queridos, desaparecidos desde hace más de 30 años, durante el conflicto armado interno,” concluyó Ramón Cadena.
Jun 6, 2018 | News
On 5 June 2018, the ICJ co-organized an academic seminar addressing the right to life under international law and the State’s duty to effectively investigate alleged violations.
The event happened on the eve of the post mortem decision to be delivered by Chiang Mai Provincial Court in the case of Chaiyaphum Pasae.
The Lahu youth activist was killed by a military official who was attempting to arrest him as an alleged drug suspect in Chiang Dao district of Thailand’s northern Chiang Mai province in March 2017.
Officials claimed Chaiyaphum had resisted arrest and was subsequently shot in “an act of self-defence”.
On 6 June 2018, Chiang Mai Provincial Court ruled that the bullets shot by the military official had caused the death of Chaiyaphum Pasae.
In its decision, the court made no finding of fault and no finding as to whether Chaiyaphum Pasae had resisted arrest before his death.
The decision by Chiang Mai Provincial Court will now be sent on to the Public Prosecutor and inquiry officers, who will in parallel continue criminal investigations into the case.
The Public Prosecutor is expected thereafter to make a decision regarding any indictment of the military official who shot at Chaiyaphum Pasae.
Participants in the seminar, which was held at Chiang Mai University’s Art Center, included Chaiyaphum Pasae’s family members, interested members of the public, media representatives, students and academics.
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, addressed the seminar on the right to life and the international law and standards that apply to investigating potentially unlawful deaths, including the rights of victims and family members, referring to the standards set out in the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which was launched in Thailand on 25 May 2017.
The event follows the ICJ’s first regional workshop on the investigation of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance in Asia, held last week in Bangkok for authorities from Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar and Nepal.
Other speakers at the Workshop included Ratsada Manuratsada and Sumitchai Hattasarn, lawyers from Human Rights Lawyers Association (HRLA) who represented the family of Chaiyaphum Pasae, and Songkran Pongbunchan, a lecturer from Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law.
The Discussion was conducted in collaboration with Legal Research and Development Center Chiang Mai University (LRDC); Center for Protection and Revival of Local Community Rights (CPCR); Center for Ethnic Studies and Development Chiang Mai University (CESD); Human Rights Lawyers Association (HRLA); Protection International (PI); Holding Hands Group; Inter Mountain Peoples’ Education and Culture in Thailand Association (IMPECT); Cross Cultural Foundation (CrCF); Maayimstudio; Save Lahu Group; Lanyim Creative Group; Dinsorsee Creative Group; Northern Activist Community (CAN); and Tonkal Network.
This seminar is part of an ongoing engagement between the ICJ and Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law.
Contact
Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Office, t: +66 94 470 1345, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Jun 1, 2018 | Events, News
Between 30 May and 1 June 2018, the ICJ co-hosted a workshop for authorities from Thailand, Cambodia, Myanmar and Nepal on the investigation of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance in accordance with international human rights law and standards.
The workshop was co-hosted with Thailand’s Ministry of Justice and the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and took place as part of the ICJ’s Global Redress and Accountability Initiative, which has as one of its core objectives, “increasing the knowledge and capacity of lawyers, prosecutors and investigators to deal with challenges of impunity and access to redress.”
The participants included more than 30 criminal investigators, forensic doctors, forensic scientists, prosecutors, police trainers, senior judges and representatives of the Cambodian Ministry of Justice, the Myanmar Attorney General’s Office, the Thai Ministry of Justice and the Nepal Office of the Attorney General.
The event commenced with opening remarks by the Ambassador of Finland, Ms. Satu Suikkari-Kleven; the Ambassador of Germany, Mr. Peter Prügel; Adviser on the Promotion of the Rights and Freedom from Thailand’s Ministry of Justice, Mr. Pitaya Jinawat; and the Asia Director of the ICJ, Frederick Rawski.
Alex Conte, Senior Law and Policy Advisor, ICJ Global Redress and Accountability Initiative, gave an overview of the international human rights legal framework that applies to the investigation of unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance.
Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser at the ICJ, then provided an overview of the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which was launched in Thailand on 25 May 2017 and which formed the core of the materials used at the workshop.
Other speakers included Ms. Jennifer Prestholdt, Deputy Director, the Advocates for Human Rights, who presented on the Rights of Victims and Families and witness interviews; Mr. Glenn Williams, Detective Inspector, Field Crime Manager, New Zealand Police National Headquarters, who presented on the investigation process including crime scene management;
Ms. Shivani Verma and Ms. Pratubjit Neelapaijit, of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights who presented on Witness Protection; and Dr. Pornthip Rojanasunan, Adviser, Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS)/Member of the Advisory Panel who presented on forensic pathology.
This workshop followed two workshops the ICJ co-hosted between 5 to 8 December 2017 in Thailand on the investigation of potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance for lawyers from Thailand and India, academics and the Thai authorities.
Contact
Alex Conte, ICJ Global Redress and Accountability Initiative, t: +41 79 957 2733; e: alex.conte(a)icj.org
Kingsley Abbott, Senior International Legal Adviser, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Office, t: +66 94 470 1345, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
May 9, 2018 | News
The ICJ said today that Gina Haspel, nominated by Donald Trump to be Director of the CIA, should be subject to a full criminal investigation for her alleged involvement torture and other serious crimes, rather than elevated to serve as the country’s highest intelligence office.
The ICJ statement came as the United States Senate Intelligence was poised to beginning hearings on her confirmation to the position.
“If Gina Haspel becomes CIA Director, the United States will be sending a signal to the world that it has dropped the pretence of caring about even the most serious human rights violations,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Secretary General.
“It will show that torturing and disappearing people by US officials will not only be met with impunity, but will be no bar to career advancement.”
Following the terror attacks against the United States of 11 September 2001 until 2007, the CIA held at least 119 terror suspects or persons it suspected to have intelligence value in places of secret detention outside of US territory.
The black sites were situated in several countries, including Afghanistan, Lithuania, Poland Romania, and Thailand.
The detainees, who had no contact with the outside world, were placed beyond the protection of the law and subjected to torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.
The torture included near drowning (“waterboarding”), prolonged sleep deprivation, placement in painful stress positions for extended periods, forced rectal feedings, and slamming against walls.
Gina Hapel oversaw at least one “black site” detention centre in Thailand in 2002, while detainee Abd al-Rahim al Nashiri was being tortured there.
She is credibly alleged to have played a significant role in destroying video evidence of interrogations that were carried out under torture.
“The European Court of Human Rights has already condemned Poland for violating the rights of Abd al-Rahim al Nashiri, after he was transferred to secret CIA detention facility in Poland, yet nobody directly responsible CIA has ever been held accountable for these serious crimes,” said Sam Zarifi.
Contact
Ian Seiderman, ICJ Legal and Policy Director, t +41 22 979 3837 ; e: ian.seiderman(a)icj.org
May 3, 2018
On 2 and 3 May 2018, the ICJ is holding a conference on the role of Tunisia’s Specialized Criminal Chambers (SCC) in addressing the legacy of gross human rights violations. The ICJ’s report, Achieving justice for gross human rights violations in Tunisia, was launched during the event.
The conference, held in cooperation with the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ) and The National Independent Coordination for Transitional Justice (NICTJ), and organized in coordination with the Tunisia’s Ministry of Justice, High Judicial Council and Bar Association, aims to:
- Discuss the legal and factual requirements on the referral of cases by the Truth and Dignity Commission (IVD) to the SCC;
- Analyze and discuss the legal and practical obstacles that might impede the SCC’s work;
- Discuss the role of victims in criminal proceedings before the SCC;
- Identify recommendations to relevant authorities (including the High Judicial Council, the Ministry of Justice and the Bar Association) with a view to ensuring the effective administration of justice by the SCC in accordance with Tunisian domestic law and relevant international law and standards.
Four years after its establishment, the IVD transferred a first case on 2 March 2018, concerning 14 suspects and the crime of enforced disappearance, to the SCC. Three other cases were transferred since then.
While such referrals are a first step towards redress and accountability, numerous legal and practical obstacles may hinder the SCC’s capacity to deliver meaningful justice. In two memos addressing the jurisdiction and the procedures to be applied by the SCC, the ICJ identified such obstacles and formulated recommendations for amendments and reform.
Download the ICJ’s reports
Tunisia-GRA Baseline Study-Publications-Reports-Thematic reports-2018-ENG (full report in English, PDF)
Tunisia-GRA Baseline Study-Publications-Reports-Thematic reports-2018-ARA (full report in Arabic, PDF)
Further readings
Tunisia-Memo-on-SCC-Procedures-Advocacy-Analysis-Brief-2017-ENG-1 (Briefing Paper in English, July 2017)
Tunisia-Memo-on-SCC-Advocacy-Analysis-Brief-2016-ENG (Briefing Paper in English, November 2016)
Tunisia-Memo-on-SCC-Advocacy-Analysis-Brief-2016-ARA (Briefing paper in Arabic, November 2016)
Further references
Tunisia: appointment of constitutional court members must meet international standards (ICJ press release, 12 March 2018)
Tunisia: Specialized Criminal Chambers to hear enforced disappearance case, a first step towards accountability (ICJ press release, 6 March 2018)
