The ICJ joined 17 other organizations in calling for robust and human rights compliant international standards to regulate the use of “Unmanned Aerial Vehicles” , developed through fully inclusive and consultative processes.
Universal-DroneStandards-Advocacy-2017-ENG (full PDF)
The 36th Session of the UN Human Rights Council, which commenced today, should adopt a resolution which directly addresses the unfolding human rights crisis in Cambodia, said the ICJ today.
The resolution should also urge the Cambodian government to curb its rights violations, and take steps to ensure that the upcoming elections take place in an environment in which everyone is able fully to exercise relevant human rights.
“It is imperative that the Human Rights Council addresses the rapidly deteriorating human rights situation in Cambodia,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ Regional Director of Asia and the Pacific.
“The international community should strongly urge Cambodia to curb its human rights violations and adopt a course which fosters an environment that ensures respect for human rights as enshrined in the 1991 Paris Peace Agreements,” he added.
On 8 September 2017, the ICJ, together with Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), CIVICUS, Human Rights Watch, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), wrote to the Human Rights Council Member and Observer States.
The letter urged them to speak out against the latest abuses clearly during the Human Rights Council session, and for the Human Rights Council to adopt a resolution that explicitly condemns the current situation of violations and accordingly.
1. The resolution should request a report by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, in consultation with the Special Rapporteur, that would:
2. The resolution should request the High Commissioner to provide an oral update to the Council at its 37th session in March 2018, and present his report at the 38th session in June 2018; and
3. The resolution should provide that at its sessions in March and June, the Council will hold an Enhanced Interactive Dialogue on relevant issues in Cambodia, including stakeholders such as staff from Cambodia’s OHCHR office, the Special Rapporteur on Cambodia, other relevant UN Special Procedures and members of local and international civil society.
The letter sets out a detailed list of examples of human rights violations which form part of a comprehensive campaign of intimidation, violence and misuse of legal mechanisms in the lead-up to next year’s national election.
These include the recent charging of the leader of the opposition, Kem Sokha, with treason in a case that has all the hallmarks of being politically motivated, the expelling of the leading pro-democracy NGO, the National Democratic Institute, and the intimidation and forced closure of several independent media outlets including the Cambodia Daily and Mohanokor Radio.
The 36th Session of the Human Rights Council, which is being held in Geneva from 11-29 September 2017, will address a number of human rights situations and issues from around the world, including the human rights situation in Cambodia.
At 11am on 19 September 2017, the ICJ, Human Rights Watch and other organizations plan to hold a public side event in Geneva to the Human Rights Council at which the rapidly deteriorating human rights situation in the country will be discussed.
On 26 September, the UN Special Rapporteur to Cambodia is scheduled to report to the Human Rights Council on the implementation of her mandate and the Council is likely to adopt a resolution to extend the mandate of the Special Rapporteur.
The Special Rapporteur will present her report and engage in a formal “interactive dialogue” with States, civil society and Cambodia on the human rights situation in the country (currently scheduled for 26 September).
The UN Secretary General is also due to report on the role and achievements of OHCHR in “assisting the Government and the people of Cambodia in the promotion and protection of human rights”. This report will be discussed, together with other country situations, during a General Debate taking place on 27-28 September.
Contact
Frederick Rawski (Bangkok), ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t: +66 94 470 1345 ; e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Cambodia-Joint Civil Society letter-Advocacy-Open letters-2017-ENG (text of letter, in PDF)
The ICJ is deeply concerned by the Constituent Assembly elections held in Venezuela on 31 July and the violence that accompanied the process and left a number of people killed, injured or arbitrarily detained.
The ICJ considers that the election of a National Constituent Assembly (NCA) failed to comply with the Article 347 of the current Constitution, which provides the legal basis for convening of an NCA. In particular, a significant portion of the members of the NCA should be chosen in open and universal elections, but instead are to be selected from restricted social sectors.
Such arrangements undermine the right to direct, free, equal and secret elections recognized under international human rights standards, the Geneva-based organization adds.
“A Constitution which does not guarantee the basic principles of the rule of law and the validity of fundamental human rights and freedoms not only violates the international obligations of the Venezuelan State, but can also be used as a means of undermining the human rights of Venezuelans,” said Sam Zarifi, Secretary General of the ICJ.
The ICJ also calls for a prompt and independent investigation into alleged electoral fraud on the day of the poll.
The ICJ says that irrespective of its legitimacy, the new NCA must respect human rights and rule of law principles.
In particular, until the approval of a new Constitution, the NCA must respect the current Constitution of 1999, especially in terms of judicial independence, and protection of human rights.
Similarly, the new Constitution, which the NCA will draft, must also fully guarantee the basic principles of the rule of law, including the separation of powers, legislative autonomy, the independence of the judiciary, the subordination of military forces to the civil authority and the principle of legality and judicial control of executive actions.
The new Constitution also must fully guarantee the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
It must enshrine the prohibition of trials of civilians by military courts, and ensure that states of emergency respect the requirements and guarantees of the Covenant International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and other international law and standards, the ICJ adds.
The ICJ also considers that the new Constitution, in addition to incorporating the human rights and fundamental freedoms already contained in the current Constitution, should add the express prohibition of extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, torture and ill-treatment, arbitrary detention, and other serious human rights violations.
Una entrevista del Secretario General de la CIJ Sam Zarifi con la periodista de Reuters Stephanie Nebehay.
El presidente estadounidense Donald Trump es parte de una nueva estirpe de líderes en el mundo que, como el venezolano Nicolás Maduro, quieren utilizar su mandato democrático para socavar el estado de derecho, dijo el miércoles el jefe de una ONG de derechos humanos y asuntos jurídicos.
Saman Zia-Zarifi, secretario general de la Comisión Internacional de Juristas (ICJ por sus siglas en inglés), que tiene su sede en Ginebra, llama a Trump un “populista autoritario” y lo compara a los líderes de países como Venezuela, Turquía, Filipinas o Hungría.
Zarifi, que nació en Irán y se mudó a Estados Unidos cuando era adolescente, citó como ejemplo la restricción a los viajes impuesta por el gobierno de Trump a los ciudadanos de seis países de mayoría musulmana.
“Lo que es diferente ahora es que se usa un cierto tipo de populismo para contrarrestar la noción del estado de derecho”, dijo Zarifi en una entrevista en la sede de la ICJ, que está conformada por 60 jueces y abogados destacados del mundo que buscan proteger los derechos humanos y el imperio de la ley.
“El nuevo populismo tiene un cierto descaro que es nuevo. No es que están negando que están violando derechos, lo que dicen es que pueden violar derechos porque de alguna manera están empoderados por el pueblo”, señaló.
Zarifi, que encabeza la ICJ desde abril, dijo que esta nueva generación de populistas incluye a Nicolás Maduro de Venezuela, Tayyip Erdogan de Turquía y Rodrigo Duterte de Filipinas; al primer ministro Viktor Orban de Hungría y al líder del partido oficialista de Polonia, Jaroslaw Kaczynski.
“Yo diría que en Estados Unidos Trump es un populista autoritario. Tiene tendencias autoritarias pero aún hay mecanismos de control y equilibrio”, estimó Zarifi. “Así es que no es una figura totalmente autoritaria”.
La Corte Suprema revisó partes del decreto del gobierno de Trump que establecía restricciones al ingreso de viajeros de Irán, Libia, Somalia, Sudán, Siria y Yemen, una normativa que según Trump busca combatir el terrorismo.
La decisión del tribunal, de acuerdo a Zarifi, pondría a prueba “la salud del sistema de equilibrios” de los poderes en Estados Unidos.
En Venezuela, Maduro busca establecer una Asamblea Constituyente con autoridad para reformar a Constitución y cerrar el Congreso dominado por la oposición, con una votación prevista para el 30 de julio.
Foto: Reuters / Pierre Albouy
An interview of ICJ Secretary General Sam Zarifi with Reuters journalist Stephanie Nebehay.
GENEVA (Reuters) – Donald Trump is one of a new breed of leaders around the world who seek to use their democratic mandate to undermine the rule of law, the head of a legal and human rights watchdog said on Wednesday.
Branding the U.S. president an “authoritarian populist”, Saman Zia-Zarifi, secretary-general of the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), compared him to the leaders of Turkey, the Philippines, Hungary and Venezuela.
Zarifi cited as an example Trump’s travel ban on nationals from six Muslim-majority countries, a policy that he called “highly problematic” under the U.S. constitution and international law.
“What is different now is that a certain kind of populism is being used to actually counter the notion of the rule of law,” Zarifi said in an interview at the headquarters of the ICJ, which is composed of 60 eminent judges and lawyers from all regions who seek to protect human rights and the rule of law.
“The new populism has a certain shamelessness about it that is new. It’s not that people are denying that they are violating rights, what they are saying is they can violate rights because somehow they are empowered by the people,” he said.
Zarifi, who took over at the ICJ in April, said the new breed of populists included Turkey’s President Tayyip Erdogan, Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro, the Philippines’ Rodrigo Duterte, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Jaroslaw Kaczynski, head of Poland’s ruling party.
“I would say that in the U.S., Trump is an authoritarian populist. He has authoritarian tendencies but he still is facing checks and balances,” Zarifi said. “So he is not a full-blown authoritarian figure.”
The U.S. Supreme Court revised parts of Trump’s executive order banning travellers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, a policy Trump says is aimed at tackling terrorism.
“Looking at it again from the point of view of U.S. law – I’m an American lawyer – it seems highly problematic,” said the Iranian-born Zarifi, who moved to the United States as a teenager and holds a law degree from Cornell University.
Supreme Court rulings would be, he said, “a test for the health of the system of checks and balances in the U.S.”
Turkish Judiciary “Politically Compromised”
A crackdown by Erdogan’s government has led to the arrest of 50,000 people and the suspension of 150,000 in the year since a failed military coup in Turkey where the judiciary is “now politically compromised”, Zarifi said.
The Turkish government has said the action is justified by the gravity of the threat to the state from the coup attempt.
On Monday, the state prosecutor asked a court to remand the local Amnesty International director and nine other activists in custody pending trial for membership of a terrorist organisation.
But Zarifi said the judiciary should have thrown the case out.
“The handling of the case highlights the very serious concerns – and alarm in fact at this point – that we have raised about the independence of the judiciary and the legal system in Turkey over the last few years.”
Photo Credit: Reuters / Pierre Albouy
South Africa: Constitutional Court’s affirmation that principles of judicial independence are fully applicable to military courts is a welcome step forward
EU: Lawyers and civil society call for mandatory humanitarian clause in anti-smuggling directive
EU: Access to a lawyer in juvenile justice proceedings remains a key concern in several EU Member States