Sep 21, 2018 | Nouvelles, Plaidoyer
La CIJ a écrit aujourd’hui à la Commissaire aux droits de l’Homme du Conseil de l’Europe, Dunja Mijatović, pour demander d’intervenir contre la décision des autorités turques d’interdire l’accès à la place Galatasaray d’Istanbul (Turquie) à un collectif de mères de personnes disparues appelées « les Mères du samedi ».
Le 25 août 2018, le sous-gouvernorat du district de Beyoğlu à Istanbul a prononcé une interdiction de se rassembler pour tout type de manifestation sur la place Galatasaray à Istanbul, la place où ont pris l’habitude de se réunir chaque samedi « les Mères du samedi » d’abord de 1995 à 1998, et ensuite de 2009 jusqu’à 2018.
À la 700ème semaine de leurs manifestations pacifiques, les Mères du samedi et leurs partisans se sont réunis en milieu de journée sur la place Galatasaray pour sensibiliser une fois de plus sur la nécessité pour les responsables des exécutions extrajudiciaires et des disparitions forcées les années 1990 de rendre des comptes.
La police a utilisé des gaz lacrymogènes pour mettre fin à la manifestation et a arrêté 47 personnes. Toutes ont été libérées samedi soir.
Des officiers supérieurs des autorités turques ont même publié des déclarations accusant les Mères du samedi d’avoir été abusées par des organisations terroristes ou d’être en collusion avec elles.
La CIJ a écrit au Commissaire européen aux droits de l’Homme qu’elle « considère que cette situation est contraire aux obligations de la Turquie en vertu du droit international humanitaire, en particulier du droit de réunion pacifique en vertu de l’article 11 de la Convention européenne des droits de l’Homme et 21 du Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques ».
La CIJ a ajouté que « compte tenu de la constance et de la présence des Mères du samedi sur la place Galatasaray au fil des ans, il est difficile de voir comment la restriction de leur droit de réunion pacifique pourrait être nécessaire et proportionnée à un objectif légitime.
Il est clair qu’aucun avertissement préalable pour le rassemblement n’était nécessaire pour des raisons de sécurité compte tenu de son occurrence régulière au moins depuis sa reprise en 2009, c’est-à-dire il y a neuf ans. En outre, la manifestation a eu lieu dans une zone piétonne où les voitures ne sont pas autorisées ».
ICJ-Letter-SaturdayMothers-CoEComm-Turkey-2018-ENG (télécharger la lettre, uniquement disponible en anglais)
Sep 3, 2018 | Communiqués de presse, Nouvelles
La décision du Tribunal de District de Yangon de condamner aujourd’hui les journalistes de Reuters, Wa Lone et Kyaw Soe Oo, à sept ans d’emprisonnement pour violation de la loi sur les secrets officiels porte gravement atteinte aux droits de l’Homme et à l’état de droit au Myanmar.
“La décision de la Cour punit dans les faits ces deux journalistes courageux pour avoir dénoncé des violations des droits de l’Homme, à la suite d’un procès manifestement inéquitable”, a déclaré Frederick Rawski, directeur de la CIJ pour l’Asie-Pacifique.
“La décision est une erreur judiciaire qui leur inflige des souffrances inutiles ainsi qu’à leurs familles, menace la liberté d’expression, porte atteinte à la réputation mondiale du Myanmar et sape ses institutions judiciaires en même temps”, a-t-il ajouté.
La CIJ a suivi l’affaire depuis la détention initiale des journalistes en décembre 2017.
Comme indiqué précédemment par la CIJ, la détention et le procès ont violé de nombreuses garanties fondamentales relatives à l’équité des procès.
Les procureurs avaient le devoir d’abandonner les accusations et le juge aurait dû rejeter l’affaire en raison de l’absence de preuves et de l’illégalité de la détention en raison de violations du droit à un procès équitable.
“L’affaire est emblématique de la manière dont le système judiciaire finit par renforcer l’impunité des militaires plutôt que de la remettre en cause”, a déclaré M. Rawski.
“Le résultat sape les affirmations du gouvernement selon lesquelles il peut rendre des comptes par lui-même sur les violations des droits de l’Homme, et ne fait rien pour que le système judiciaire agisse de manière indépendante et impartiale après des décennies de régime militaire”.
Les membres des forces de sécurité jouissent généralement de l’impunité pour la perpétration de violations des droits de l’Homme, notamment pour des crimes en droit international.
La CIJ a déjà rapporté que les victimes et leurs familles, ainsi que les journalistes, font souvent l’objet de représailles pour avoir diffusé des informations sur les violations des droits de l’Homme commises par l’armée.
Wa Lone et Kyaw Soe Oo ont été arrêtés en décembre 2017 et détenus au secret pendant près de deux semaines avant d’être accusés, en vertu de la loi sur les secrets officiels datant de l’époque coloniale, pour avoir prétendument été en possession de documents liés aux opérations des forces de sécurité dans le nord de l’État de Rakhine, lors “d’opérations de nettoyage”.
Les deux reporters avaient dénoncé des violations des droits de l’Homme dans l’État de Rakhine, notamment l’assassinat de Rohingyas par l’armée dans le village d’Inn Dinn.
Dans un rapport publié la semaine dernière (uniquement disponible en anglais), la mission d’enquête internationale indépendante des Nations Unies a constaté que les forces de sécurité avaient commis des crimes en droit international au cours de ces opérations, notamment des crimes contre l’humanité et peut-être un crime de génocide.
La détention et la mise en accusation de quiconque, y compris de journalistes, se basant uniquement sur la collecte et la publication de preuves pertinentes en matière de violations graves des droits de l’Homme constituent une violation du droit international et des normes relatives à la liberté d’expression, au droit de participer à la conduite des affaires publiques et au rôle des défenseurs des droits de l’Homme.
Les options légales disponibles pour les journalistes incluent de requérir à la décision d’aujourd’hui et demander une grâce présidentielle.
Sep 3, 2018
Today, the ICJ called on the President of the Council of Ministers, Giuseppe Conte, to remove the legal obstacles that for over a decade have frustrated justice in the case of Abu Omar, a victim of gross human rights violations during the so-called war on terror launched by the US in the 2000s.
Specifically, the organization said that the doctrine of “secret of state” , which shields from public and judicial disclosure information purported to affect national security interests, should be lifted in any case pertaining to the rendition of Abu Omar.
In a letter to President Conte, the President of the ICJ, Robert K. Goldman, recalls that Italy has been condemned by the European Court of Human Rights for its complicity in the unlawful rendition and enforced disappearance of Abu Omar and that Italy has a duty under international law to do all that is possible to unveil the truth to the victims and the general public about such crimes under international law.
“The Italian public has a right to know the truth about a gross violation of human rights that occurred in its country and about the role its own secret services and institutions played in it”, said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Advisor for the ICJ’s Europe Program.
“President Conte should lift state secrecy on this case right away, to demonstrate that he holds true to Italy’s obligations under international law and transparency and accountability of Government before its people.”
The ICJ noted that the European Court of Human Rights has determined, in Nasr and Ghali v. Italy, that Italian government violated human rights, including by allowing for effective impunity for such crimes despite the laudable efforts of the Italian judiciary to prosecute and try those responsible,” said Massimo Frigo.
“It is time for Italy to live up to its international obligations and show to the world and its people that gross violations of human rights and crimes under international law will not be tolerated and that accountability must be upheld at all times and without hesitation,” he added.
Background
Hassan Mustafa Osama Nasr (also known as Abu Omar) is an Egyptian national who was kidnapped in the streets of Milan in 2003 by CIA operatives, with the collaboration of Italian agents, while he was living in Italy with refugee status.
He was then subjected to torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment during his travel to Egypt and in Egypt, where he endured several years in arbitrary detention.
The rendition of Abu Omar, that also constituted an enforced disappearance under international law, was investigated and prosecuted by the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Milan and tried in the criminal tribunal, court of appeal of Milan and Court of Cassation.
This has been the only known prosecution and trial anywhere in the world against State agents alleged to be responsible for human rights violations in the context of the US-led rendition and secret detention system.
While 23 US agents and three Italian citizens were convicted – though without serving their sentences – the apex of the Italian military secret service (then SISMI) could not be tried because the Government invoked the doctrine of state secrecy in the proceedings.
The European Court of Human Rights found unanimously that that Italy had been complicit in the operation and had breached its obligations to prohibit and investigate torture and inhuman of degrading treatment of punishment (article 3 ECHR); the right to liberty of Abu Omar (article 5 ECHR); the right of his wife, Nabila Ghali, not to be subject to inhuman or degrading treatment caused by the suffering of not knowing the whereabouts of her husband (article 3 ECHR); their right to family life, and their right to an effective remedy for human rights violations (article 13 ECHR).
The judgment is still awaiting full execution by the Italian authorities, although there have been payments to the victims.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Advisor for the ICJ’s Europe Program
E-mail: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Italy-justice for Abu Omar-advoacy-open letters-2018-eng [Open Letter in English PDF]
Italy-justice for Abu Omar-news-press releases-2018-ita [Press Release in Italian PDF]
Italy-justice for Abu Omar-advocacy-open letters-2018-ita [Open Letter in Italian PDF]
Jul 24, 2018 | Advocacy, Analysis briefs, News
In a briefing paper published today, the ICJ called on the parties to the conflict in Yemen to take immediate and effective measures to ensure the protection of the civilian population, including against human rights abuses and international humanitarian law violations.
Serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in Yemen include direct and indiscriminate attacks against civilians and the impediment of access to humanitarian relief of the civilian population.
Gross human rights violations and abuses include widespread instances of arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and ill-treatment, and enforced disappearances.
The ICJ has called for persons responsible for such violations to be held to account.
“All parties to the conflict in Yemen have acted in blatant disregard of the most basic rules of international humanitarian law and human rights law,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
“The top priority is to end these violations and in particular to protect the civilian population,” he added.
In its briefing paper, the ICJ analyses international law violations committed in the conduct of hostilities and against persons deprived of their liberty.
The Saudi Arabia-led coalition and the Houthis are allegedly responsible for direct, indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks against civilians and civilian objects, including local markets, food storage sites, water installations and medical facilities.
The United Arab Emirates, the internationally recognized government of Yemen and the Houthis have allegedly engaged in arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and ill-treatment, and enforced disappearances.
The ICJ briefing paper also examines the potential legal implications of the blockade imposed by the Saudi Arabia-led coalition on Yemen and the sieges laid by the Houthis against several towns and localities, which impede the civilian population to access humanitarian relief.
The ICJ briefing paper further assesses the potential responsibility of third States for transferring arms to the parties to the conflict.
Under numerous instruments, including the Arms Trade Treaty, States are prohibited from selling arms to the parties to an armed conflict whenever a risk exists that the end-user could commit international law violations.
Arms transfers may even engage the exporting States’ international responsibility for aiding or assisting in the commission of such violations.
“Victims must have access to effective legal remedies and be provided with adequate reparation,” Benarbia said.
“The international community must state loud and clear that impunity is not an option. The Security Council should refer the situation in Yemen to the International Criminal Court and third States should consider, where feasible, the exercise of universal jurisdiction to prosecute relevant crimes under international law,” he added.
Contact
Vito Todeschini, Associate Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +216-71-962-287; e: vito.todeschini(a)icj.org
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Yemen-War briefing-News-web story-2018-ENG (full story with background information, English, PDF)
Yemen-War impact on populations-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2018-ENG (Analysis Brief in English, PDF)
Yemen-War briefing-News-web story-2018-ARA (full story with background information, Arabic, PDF)
Yemen-War impact on populations-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2018-ARA (Analysis Brief in Arabic, PDF)
Apr 10, 2018 | News
The ICJ today condemned a threatening statement made by Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte attacking Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno of the Philippines Supreme Court.
The ICJ said that the President’s remarks constituted an assault not just on the Chief Justice, but on the independence of the judiciary in the country.
The ICJ urged President Duterte to respect judicial independence and not to exert political pressure on any government official or agency to undermine the independence of the judiciary.
In a press conference on 9 April 2018, President Duterte told reporters: “I’m putting you on notice that I’m your enemy and you have to be out of the Supreme Court.”
He also called on the House of Representatives to expedite impeachment proceedings presently underway against Chief Justice Sereno.
“It is absolutely unacceptable for President Duterte to make such a statement not only because it constitutes direct intimidation of the Chief Justice, but the chilling effect it may have on other independent judges who carry out their professional duties,” said Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser of ICJ.
“By expressing his personal feelings against the Chief Justice and by directing the House of Representatives to accelerate the impeachment proceedings, the President is actively influencing and interfering with the functions of other co-equal branches of government,” Gil added.
The ICJ reminds President Duterte that as enunciated in the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, “[i]t is the duty of all governmental and other institutions to respect and observe the independence of the judiciary.”
The Principles affirm that the judiciary must be able to carry out its work “without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.”
The ICJ strongly urges President Duterte to retract his comments and to refrain in the future from making any statements attacking individual judges or in any way interfering with the independence of the judiciary.
Contact
Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +662 619 8477 (ext. 206) ; e: emerlynne.gil@icj.org.
Background
In September 2017, two impeachment complaints against the Chief Justice were filed before the Committee of Justice of the House of Representatives, the Lower House of Congress.
The Committee of Justice approved only one of the complaints, which is scheduled to be put before the plenary of the House of Representatives in May 2018 when Congress resumes its session.
If it obtains one-third vote of all members in the House of Representatives, the articles of impeachment will be transmitted to the Senate, which is the Upper House of Congress.
Any impeachable officer may be removed from office by a vote of two-thirds of all the members of the Senate sitting as the impeachment court.
Some of the points raised in the approved impeachment complaint are the Chief Justice’s failure to report certain income in her statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN), allegations of use of public funds to finance her extravagant and lavish lifestyle, and manipulation of judicial appointments for personal and political reasons, among others.
The Chief Justice maintains she correctly filed her SALNs. She also further claims that the other allegations in the impeachment complaint are baseless or mere fabrications.
In March 2018, the Philippines’ Solicitor General Jose Calida filed a petition before the Supreme Court questioning the Chief Justice’s appointment due to her alleged failure to fully disclose her wealth. Oral arguments on this petition were made on 10 April 2018.
