ICJ holds Seminar in Tunisia on the Investigation and Prosecution of Gross Human Rights Violations

ICJ holds Seminar in Tunisia on the Investigation and Prosecution of Gross Human Rights Violations

Between 28 and 29 April 2018, the ICJ co-hosted a Seminar for judges and prosecutors from Tunisia and Libya on the international law and standards that apply to the investigation and prosecution of gross human rights violations.

The participants included more than 30 judges and prosecutors from different regions in Tunisia and Libya.

The Seminar was co-hosted with the Associations des Magistrats Tunisiens (AMT) and the Libyan Network for Legal Aid.

The event commenced with opening remarks by ICJ Commissioner, Justice Kalthoum Kennou of Tunisia.

Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser at the ICJ, delivered a comprehensive overview of the international human rights law and standards that apply to the duty to investigate gross human rights violations.

He noted in particular that investigations of potentially unlawful deaths play a key role in accountability by upholding the right to life, which is guaranteed by Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

He then introduced the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which sets out a common standard of performance in investigating potentially unlawful deaths or suspected enforced disappearance and a shared set of principles and guidelines for States, as well as for institutions and individuals who play a role in the investigation.

The revised Minnesota Protocol formed part of the core materials referred to at the Seminar, together with the ICJ Practitioners Guide No 9 – Enforced Disappearance and Extrajudicial Execution: Investigation and Sanction (2015).

The Seminar also covered the collection of evidence, the duty to prosecute, and fair trial rights.

Other speakers at the event included Vito Todeschini, Associate Legal Adviser at the ICJ; Aonghus Kelly, Senior Legal Adviser, EU Border Assistance Mission in Libya (EUBAM); and Martin Hackett, Senior Trial Counsel at the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in the Hague.

Contact

Said Benarbia: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Kingsley Abbott: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

On video: Rule of law, facing global assault, remains crucial for protecting the vulnerable

On video: Rule of law, facing global assault, remains crucial for protecting the vulnerable

International commitment to the rule of law is under assault around the world, said a global panel of eminent academics, diplomats, and jurists.

The panelists, speaking at a public event by the ICJ and the Geneva Graduate Institute, commented that this assault is threatening to reverse the progress made over the last 70 years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights(UDHR) came into force.

The panelists addressed progress in asserting the rule of law since the UDHR, for instance through the development of the International Criminal Court and greater awareness and commitment to rights, but also highlighted current challenges at the national level, such as in Venezuela, and at the global level, with ongoing discrimination and violence against women.

“The rule of law is a principle that helps the world and also helps individuals,” said ICJ Secretary General Saman Zia-Zarifi, in his introductory remarks.

“It is a principle that elevates democracy from mob rule and is necessary to harness the energy of democracy and give it a direction and progression towards the protection and promotion of human rights and sustainable development for the betterment of the lives of people around the world,” he added.

Professor Carlos Ayala, ICJ Vice-President and former President of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, spoke about the importance of having regional rights frameworks that were accessible to individuals when the rule of law has been eradicated at a national level.

Speaking in relation to Venezuela, Professor Ayala explained that the rule of law cannot be simply overturned by a political party, even with a majority, as the erosion of the rule of law puts all human rights at risk and these rights must be safeguarded regionally and internationally.

Next Patricia Schulz, member of the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, pointed out that in many countries, the rule of law has been weak or never even properly existed.

She addressed failings where access to justice is undermined by systems that are gender discriminatory and explained that in almost all countries, even where the rule of law seems strong, there is a lack of will and/or means to fight gender-based violence.

Professor Andrew Clapham, Professor of Public International Law at the Graduate Institute and member of the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, evaluated issues of accountability and the rule of law in the context of international criminal law.

He noted the important role international criminal law and its operational mechanisms have in holding individuals to account, but warned that focusing on prosecution and focusing on issues such as genocide and the use of chemical weapons ran the risk of undermining the universality of ideas enshrined in the UDHR.

His Excellency Luis Gallegos, the Permanent Representative of Ecuador to the United Nations, raised concerns about the politicization of human rights and the capacity of UN mechanisms to address transnational rights issues such as migration.

He said that addressing the rule of law was not a simple question but that states had to come together to consistently and systematically address the rights violations that arose from a break-down in the rule of law.

Final panelist, Sanji Monageng, ICJ Commissioner and Justice of the International Criminal Court, spoke about the need for international organizations to rethink their approach to the rule of law and the way they apply this to cases, to avoid focusing narrowly on singular issues when rights violations need to be addressed homogenously.

Justice Monageng explained that for victims, sexual violence, for instance, is rarely a singular incident but part of broader array of rights violations that have far-reaching impacts.

In his concluding remarks, Professor Robert Goldman, who moderated the event, said that “the rule of law deals with a central tenet of any just society, not only equal protection and equal access but it is something that protects the vulnerable.”

He explained that the treat to the rule of law today is endemic and it is global, but the ICJ is uniquely placed to robustly address these difficult questions and to continue to use the rule of law to defend and advance rights protections.

The event, which took place at the Graduate Institute at the Maison de la Paix, promoted by the Permanent Mission of Germany, was attended by 150 persons including academics, diplomats, lawyers and representatives of civil society and international rights mechanisms. The event was also streamed online by RIDH Global.

You can watch the full event here.

https://www.facebook.com/ridhglobal/videos/10158134493084616/UzpfSTQ3MTQ2NzA4NjIyMTM3MzoxOTk5MjM0NDc2Nzc3OTUy/

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ije_iAegxFs&feature=youtu.be

Tajikistan: ICJ submission to Committee against Torture

Tajikistan: ICJ submission to Committee against Torture

The ICJ today submitted a report to the UN Committee against Torture, calling for recommendations to be made on prevention of and accountability for continued recourse to torture and ill-treatment in Tajikistan.

The ICJ’s submission is made ahead of consideration by the Committee against Torture in April to May 2018 of Tajikistan’s third periodic report on the implementation of its obligations under the Convention against Torture and Other Forms of Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

The ICJ’s report draws from an earlier study on Achieving Justice for Gross Human Rights Violations in Tajikistan and calls on the Committee against Torture to make recommendations concerning:

  • The obligation to adequately sanction torture;
  • The obligation to prevent torture and other forms of ill-treatment, including in places of detention;
  • The obligation to investigate allegations of torture and ill-treatment;
  • The use of amnesties and pardons for torture;
  • The prohibition against the use of evidence obtained by torture;
  • The right to complain about torture and ill-treatment; and
  • The right of victims to effective remedies and reparation.

Tajikistan-CAT-Advocacy-AlternativeReport-2018ENG (download the ICJ’s submission, in PDF)

Philippines: the Government should reconsider withdrawal from ICC

Philippines: the Government should reconsider withdrawal from ICC

The Government of the Philippines should reconsider and reverse its hasty and ill-conceived decision to withdraw as a State Party to the Rome Statute to the International Criminal Court, the ICJ said today.

In a letter transmitted to Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, the ICJ questioned the stated basis for the decision to withdraw from the Rome statute, to which it has been party since 2011, and to commit itself to effectively investigate the numerous allegations of widespread and systematic extrajudicial killings and bring to justice those responsible.

The ICC has jurisdiction over certain serious crimes under international law including genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.

“The Philippine government’s submitted justifications for withdrawing from the ICC are a litany of poorly thought out pseudo-legal arguments and self-serving statements that focus on President Duterte’s fear and resentment at facing questions for the horrific campaign of extrajudicial executions that his government has explicitly condoned,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Secretary General.

“At any rate, despite what the Philippine president may wish, withdrawal from the ICC will not prevent the Prosecutor from conducting a preliminary examination because the acts complained of were committed prior to the date when the withdrawal becomes effective,” he added.

Under the Rome Statute, withdrawal as a State Party takes effect only after one year from notification of the UN Secretary General, unless a later date is specified.

The ICJ’s letter to President Duterte highlights some of the legal and factual errors contained in the Philippine government’s official submission of the justifications for the withdrawal.

The letter points out that the launch of a preliminary examination does not violate the principle of presumption of innocence or due process.

In order to proceed with a full investigation, if the Prosecutor determines it is warranted, a pre-trial chamber of judges would still have to give approval.

The letter notes the Philippine government will have the opportunity to argue that it is willing to investigate and prosecute, and that its domestic processes are sufficient to address the crimes alleged.

Since President Rodrigo Duterte assumed office in June 2016, there has been a notable increase in the number of killings of persons allegedly involved in the trade and sale of illegal drugs.

It has been alleged that the number of persons killed has reached to the thousands, and that many of these killings were unlawful, amounting to extrajudicial executions.

“President Duterte has very publicly stated that he will block investigations into the conduct of his government and its role in the killings of thousands of people; he has insulted and threatened United Nations officials; he has bullied and belittled domestic critics and civil society. He’s now trying to avoid accountability under international law, too,” Zarifi said.

“There is no indication so far of a genuine, thorough, prompt, impartial, and independent investigations of these crimes in the Philippines, and the apparent unwillingness of the authorities to do so is one of the grounds on which the ICC can and should assert jurisdiction to undertake its own investigation,” he further said.

“Instead of engaging in legal maneuvers to facilitate impunity, President Duterte must unequivocally denounce extrajudicial killings, whether of alleged criminals or of any person in the Philippines, and allow a proper investigation of these crimes,” he added.

The ICJ calls on the Government to take immediate and effective measures to address the thousands of cases of extrajudicial killings in observance of its domestic laws and to respect its obligations under human rights law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

Investigations of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary killings should be geared towards establishing the crime and bringing perpetrators to justice.

Contact

Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t +662 619 8499 (ext. 206) ; e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org

Philippines-ICJ Letter ICC Withdrawal-Advocacy-Open letters-2018-ENG (full letter, in PDF)

Translate »