Dec 18, 2017 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
Raquel Yrigoyen Fajardo, Karabo Ozah and Charles Dinda talk about traditional justice systems in video interviews recorded at the 2017 ICJ Geneva Forum.
Dr. Raquel Yrigoyen Fajardo, Lawyer and Professor at the Law Faculty of the Pontifical Catholic University of Peru, and founding member of the International Institute on Law and Society (IIDS), describes the survival and contemporary recognition of justice systems of indigenous peoples in the Americas, despite the history of colonial domination.
She argues that indigenous justice systems often already reflect many international human rights standards, and where there may be discrepancies change should be sought through respectful engagement and consultation rather than coercive imposition.
In contrast, Ms Karabo Ozah, Deputy Director of the Centre for Child Law at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, argues that it is crucially important to ensure that customary and traditional courts respect domestic legislation and international standards on human rights.
Otherwise she warns, based on her experience, customary courts too frequently fail to protect the rights of marginalized groups, children, LGBTI, and women.
Charles Dinda, Senior Legal Adviser with the Danish Institute for Human Rights in Zambia, points out that while traditional and customary justice institutions are the most easily accessible and in many respects most credible institutions for some populations, their decisions are too often inconsistent or unfair.
To avoid this, he insists on the importance of understanding and studying the way these systems operate and on the need to engage with them to learn about their practices and to build their capacities so that they have better knowledge of international human rights standards and indeed of the national laws in the countries where they operate.
Watch the interview with Dr. Raquel Yrigoyen Fajardo
Watch the interview with Karabo Ozah
Watch the interview with Charles Dinda
NOTE:
The views expressed by the participants do not necessarily reflect those of the ICJ.
For more information about the 2017 Geneva Forum on Customary and Traditional Justice Systems, click here or contact matt.pollard(a)icj.org .
Dec 9, 2017 | Artículos, Multimedia, Noticias
Los dirigentes de comunidades indígenas que buscan proteger sus tierras y recursos naturales contra los impactos negativos de operaciones industriales y proyectos de infraestructura, han sido acusados de actividades criminales y en algunos casos detenidos de manera arbitraria.
Esta respuesta tiene como objetivo silenciar las voces de protesta y las demandas legítimas de consentimiento libre, previo e informado relativas a obras de infraestructura y otros proyectos en las comunidades indígenas.
Este video incluye entrevistas con Ramón Cadena, director de la CIJ para Centroamérica, dos dirigentes indígenas, que fueron víctimas de detención arbitraria, así como una dirigente comunitaria, explicando el impacto de la detención en la familia y toda la comunidad.
La criminalización del trabajo en defensa de los derechos humanos es un fenómeno por el cual se acusan a las y los dirigentes comunitarios de diferentes actividades criminales a causa de su oposición a un modelo de desarrollo basado en las industrias extractivas o la privatización de servicios sociales esenciales.
Este modelo de desarrollo afecta a los recursos naturales (el agua, la tierra y el medio ambiente) en los territorios de los pueblos indígenas.
Se trata de un fenómeno global que es particularmente agudo en Guatemala.
La explotación de los recursos naturales, tales como la minería a cielo abierto y las operaciones de industrias extractivas en los territorios de los pueblos indígenas, es una razón principal que explica los ataques a las protestas sociales y las acciones de defensa de los derechos humanos.
Las diferentes comunidades afectadas buscan defender sus territorios y oponerse a las diferentes formas de explotación de los recursos naturales que se hallan en sus territorios o en áreas vecinas porque puede afectar el abastecimiento en agua, la tierra y el medio ambiente.
Varios dirigentes han sido asesinados a causa de su oposición a estos proyectos.
Algunos miembros de las familias de los asesinados han asumido a su vez la tarea de oponerse a estos proyectos, y también han sido acusados de actividades criminales.
También, en Guatemala existe un conflicto social intenso por la manera de abastecimiento de electricidad.
Como resultado de la privatización del servicio en 1996, el Estado de Guatemala ha consentido concesiones a compañías nacionales e internacionales para proveer servicios de electricidad.
Durante los años, muchas y muchos usuarios se han quejado de la mala calidad y el alto coste de los servicios de estas compañías privadas.
La Comisión Nacional de Electricidad ha fallado en su deber legal de “asegurar que los concesionarios y contratistas cumplan con sus obligaciones, y proteger los derechos de los usuarios,” lo que ha sido reclamado por muchos usuarios descontentos.
Las protestas sociales conciernen las tres fases diferentes de la producción de electricidad: la generación de electricidad que incluye la construcción de presas hidroeléctricas por compañías multinacionales que causan impactos sobre los territorios de los pueblos indígenas; redes de transmisión de electricidad; y los servicios de electricidad.
Debido a esta situación, muchos usuarios de electricidad han declarado que están en resistencia citando el Artículo 45 de la Constitución de Guatemala que dice: “Es legítimo que el pueblo resista para proteger y defender los derechos y las garantías establecidos en la Constitución.”
Las acciones realizadas bajo esta protección constitucional han causado muchos ataques a los derechos humanos de muchos dirigentes comunitarios, abogados y defensores de derechos humanos.
La CIJ apoya el acceso a la justicia para las personas víctimas de tales violaciones de sus derechos humanos.
La CIJ brinda su apoyo a los abogados que defienden a estas víctimas de la criminalización de protestas sociales; actúa como observador de procesos en casos emblemáticos; promueve dialogo entre las comunidades y las autoridades estatales pertinentes, así como los alcaldes locales; y en algunos casos, apoya sumisiones de casos ante la Corte Constitucional.
Dec 5, 2017 | News
Guatemalan indigenous and peasant communities are finally finding a measure of justice and recovering lands and territories that had previously been seized by authorities or private economic actors, including during the internal armed conflict that took place from 1960 to 1996.
The ICJ learned of these encouraging developments at a workshop it held jointly with the UN Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights (OHCHR) at an International Workshop on strategic litigation in the defense of land and territory, in Guatemala City, between 9 and 10 November.
One of the successful stories, told by Don Pedro Herrera, a community leader from Tzalbal community, municipality of Nebaj, Department of Quiché (Northern Guatemala), concerns a favourable decision by a first instance judge in Nebaj, in August 2016, ordering the restitution of some 1485 hectares (33 caballerias in the old measurement system still in use in Central America) to the Tzalbal communities.
The decision is under appeal before Guatemala’s Constitutional Court, but the Workshop heard that it had already boosted morale and hope among members of local communities on prospects for restitution for violations of their land rights.
The 33 caballerias had been segregated from the rest of municipal and community land in around 1984, in the midst of the Guatemalan civil war and as part of the counter-insurgency plans drawn by the military rulers purportedly to create loyal villages in the frontline to combat insurgency.
Most members of the community at the time had fled their homes, fearing for their lives that were threatened by both the armed insurgency and State military forces.
The de facto local authorities were coerced into signing documents agreeing to the separation of the land, but much of the population had remained unconcerned with the operation.
However, in 2011 FONTIERRAS, the government land authority, revealed to the community that their land had in fact been registered as State property following the forced separation in 1984.
Since then, Tzalbal communities started to take concerted action to recover the lands that they considered to be lawfully theirs and were the places where they maintained their homes and livelihood.
Tzalbal communities have some 70 families with some 500 people of all ages. When they learned that the land they traditionally possessed was “legally” the property of the State of Guatemala, they approached the ICJ- to provide legal assistance.
An Amparo constitutional writ was filed on behalf of the Tzalbal communities requesting the court to protect the rights of property and due process under the Guatemalan Constitution and declare the entry of land property in favour of the State in the land register invalid.
In August 2016, the first instance judge ruled in favour of the communities and ordered the register to amend the entry into the land registry. However, the State representatives have appealed against the ruling and a public hearing on the case took place the first week of November 2017. A final decision on the case by the Constitutional Court is now awaited.
Land, territory and resources are crucial assets for the survival and well being of indigenous and other local communities in Guatemala and other countries. For indigenous peoples, there is also an inherent and special relationship with land and territory which many times acquires religious and cultural significance. At the Workshop on Strategic Litigation, several other groups explained how they carry on their fight for justice and in defense of their land and territory.
Several of those groups recognized the instrumental assistance from the Guatemala office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, which through its Maya Programme provides advice and support to local communities in their defense of land and territory.
One case under discussion, still underway, concerns the legal challenge to the Environmental Impact Assessment carried out by the Island Oil Company pursuant an oil exploration and exploitation contract with the government involving five municipalities of El Petén department. El Petén is the location of the largest biosphere reserve in Guatemala, where, curiously, human settlements are not allowed but some oil companies are authorized to carry out operations.
The legal battle has been led by Qeqchi, Mopan and Itza peoples and supported by the Maya Programme. An administrative remedy known as opposition was filed before MARN, the national authority for the preservation of the environment, alleging the violation of rights such as lack of consultation and consent from local communities. The administrative authority ruled in favour of the plaintiffs and ordered the exploration to stop until regulatory requirements are fully complied with.
Over time, the work of the ICJ and other groups, taken in coordination with the UN human rights office in Guatemala, has begun to show results.
More and more communities are taking concrete steps to legally challenge the actions or laws that cause or perpetuate their dispossession of their traditional land and territory.
Oct 4, 2017 | Agendas, Events, News
Today starts a five-day Strategic Litigation Retreat for lawyers in Ferney-Voltaire, France organized by the ICJ-EI as part of the EU and OSI funded FAIR project.
Twenty lawyers from Bulgaria, Germany, Greece, Italy, Ireland, Malta and Spain will be meeting with experts and among themselves in order to strategize about their cases of access to justice for migrant children and on accessing international human rights mechanisms.
The retreat is taking place from 4 to 8 October in a close proximity to Geneva, which allows for access to UN treaty bodies experts.
The group will meet with Members of the UN Committee on the rights of the child and the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and experts from the treaty bodies’ secretariat on individual complaints and on inquiries.
The participants will also have a chance to discuss litigation strategies with experts from the European Court for Human Rights, experts from civil society organizations with long-standing experience in strategic litigation, such as the AIRE Center, ICJ, DCI Belgium or Child Rights Connect.
All the participating lawyers took part in the national trainings organized, through 2016 and 2017, by the ICJ and its national partners.
The trainings were focused on the right to be heard and procedural rights of migrant children, the right to family life, economic, social and cultural rights, detention and on how to access international human rights mechanisms in order to allow for effective access to justice for migrant children.
Out of all the participants, this Strategic Litigation Retreat, brings together three selected lawyers from each of the national trainings.
In the same time, the project management group of the FAIR project, composed of national partners and Child Rights Connect will meet and will contribute to some parts of the Retreat.
The Retreat will use as a basis the draft training materials prepared by the ICJ (to be published an the end of 2017) and the ICJ Practitioners Guide no. 6: Migration and International Human Rights Law.
The FAIR project co-funded by the Rights, Equality and Citizenship Programme of the European Union and OSIFE.
See more information about the national trainings on the rights of migrant children within the FAIR project here: Spain, Italy, Bulgaria, Malta, Greece, Ireland, Germany (photo)
Download the agenda here: Universal-StrategicLitigationRetreat-News-Events-Agendas-2017-ENG
Oct 3, 2017 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
On 2 October, the ICJ and Amnesty International submitted an intervention before the European Court of Human Rights in the case Ecodefence and others v the Russian Federation, Application no. 9988/13 and 48 other applications, which concern labeling NGOs as foreign agents.
In this submission, the applicants provided the Court with an analysis, based on international law sources, of:
a) the scope of application of rights to freedom of expression and association guaranteed under Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR or the Convention) to restrictions on the activity of non-governmental organisations (NGOs);
b) application of the principle of legality to such restrictions;
c) the legitimacy of the aim, necessity and proportionality of measures regulating NGOs, including restrictions on funding, burdensome reporting requirements, sanctions and the stigmatizing effect of labelling NGOs as “foreign agents”; and
d) the scope of permissible restrictions under Article 18 of the ECHR, particularly the question of interferences used for purposes other than those which fall under Articles 10 and 11 of the Convention.
The submission addresses the obligations of State parties to the ECHR with account taken of the other international law obligations, such as those under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as well as other relevant standards under international law.
Russia-ECtHR-AmicusBrief-Ecodefence-legalsubmissions-2017-ENG (download the third party intervention)
