Mar 18, 2016 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today joined an oral statement on the role of judges, lawyers, and prosecutors, as well as the threats they face, and the Universal Periodic Review of the UN Human Rights Council.
The statement, delivered by the Director of the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute, Dr Phillip Tahmindjis, read as follows:
“The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) released this week its report on the ‘Role of the UPR in advancing human rights in the administration of justice’. The report assesses more than 38,000 recommendations made between 2008 and 2014 for references to the legal profession.
The report’s key findings include:
UPR recommendations still insufficiently address the role of judges, lawyers and prosecutors, or the threats they face, as extensively documented by the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers. Significantly, these recommendations often make no reference to relevant UN standards.
Recommendations relating to the independence of judges are often too vague to be an effective response to the shortcomings of any given jurisdiction. Serious issues in the appointment and removal of judges are mostly ignored.
The independence of lawyers was considered in fewer than 100 of the 38,000 UPR recommendations.
Prosecutorial independence is addressed in less than 10 per cent of the recommendations calling upon States to effectively investigate or prosecute rights violations.
Guarantees for legal professionals’ rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association are barely addressed. This fails to reflect the key role that self-governing organisations of legal professionals should play in upholding human rights and the rule of law, the independence of the legal profession and law reform processes.
As international organisations of legal professionals, we foster the engagement of the legal profession in UN human rights mechanisms and in monitoring the implementation of UPR recommendations.
We call upon the Human Rights Council, as well as States, to ensure that in the third cycle of the UPR, the role of judges, lawyers, and prosecutors receives the heightened attention that it is due, as recognised by the UN Basic Principles on the independence of the judiciary, the UN Basic Principles on the role of lawyers and the UN Guidelines on the role of prosecutors.”
The following organisations endorsed the statement:
- Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association
- Commonwealth Lawyers Association
- International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute
- International Commission of Jurists
- Judges for Judges
- Lawyers for Lawyers
- Southern Africa Litigation Centre
The statement can be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC31-JointOralStatement-UPRLegalProfessions-2016
The IBAHRI report on ‘The role of the UPR in advancing human rights in the administration of justice’ is available at : http://tinyurl.com/gr525sq
Mar 17, 2016 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today joined with the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute to make an oral statement on judges & lawyers in Myanmar, during the consideration of its Universal Periodic Review outcome by the UN Human Rights Council.
The statement:
“The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) and the International Commission of Jurists welcome Myanmar’s decision to accept recommendations made at the Universal Periodic Review relating to the administration of justice and the independence of the legal profession and call on the Government of Myanmar to implement the recommendations which it has accepted ‘in principle’ to reform the Bar Council Act to allow for the Bar Council to become a truly independent and self-governing association.
In order to ‘guarantee in law and practice that lawyers and judges can perform their professional functions without improper interference and legally form and join self-governing associations’, we call for the right to join such associations to be enshrined in law, and that the right of the first Independent Lawyers’ Association of Myanmar (ILAM) to register as an association be respected;
In order to ‘define professional legal standards and disciplinary procedures in conformity with the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers’, we call upon the government of Myanmar to engage in a consultation process with the legal profession and other stakeholders in relation to the revision of the Bar Council Act. The government should also commit sufficient funds to allow for the funding of the system created by the new Legal Aid Law.
We are encouraged by and support efforts by the Office of the Supreme Court of the Union to draft and implement a Code of Judicial Ethics.
Finally, we urge the Government to improve legal education and continue legal professional development including with regard to international human rights law and the UN human rights mechanisms.
We are glad to provide support in the realisation of these recommendations and will look for collaboration with the Government to that end.”
Mar 14, 2016 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today joined the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute in an oral statement during the interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation for human rights in Myanmar.The statement focussed on the situation of the legal profession and judiciary.
It is available to download in PDF format here: HRC31-Advocacy-OralStatement-SRMyanmar-2016
Feb 24, 2016
The ICJ published today a briefing paper providing a first assessment of the process of transition of the judicial system in Northern Kosovo from the Serbian to the Kosovo legal system.
The briefing paper, which follows a visit of a delegation of the ICJ in Kosovo from 1 to 4 November 2015, preliminarily identifies key issues for access to justice and the protection of human rights through the justice system, which need to be addressed and monitored during the transition process.
The paper documents an ongoing process of transition of the judicial system in Kosovo.
It concludes that a key determinant of the success of this transition must be the effective protection of access to justice for all in Kosovo that must be provided by an independent, impartial and effective judicial system, assisted by independent, impartial and effective legal profession and prosecution service.
In its conclusion, the ICJ found that the Kosovo legal system does not yet meet the requirements of the Kosovo Constitution to respect international human rights law and standards and, in particular, the right of minorities, including under the Council of Europe’s Framework Convention. Its shortcomings include:
- the reported lack of security for Kosovo Serb and Kosovo Albanians to access courts in areas dominated by the other ethnicity, with a clear obstructive effect on access to justice;
- the dramatic incapacity of the Kosovo legal and education system to ensure generational continuity for the Serb community in the legal profession with future stark consequences for the ethnic composition and competence of the judiciary, prosecution service and legal profession;
- the lack of equality in practice between Albanian and Serbian languages in judicial proceedings and unreliable quality of the drafting and translation of its legislation; and
- the existence of a deep divide between the laws as written, which often recall or refer to international standards, and the implementation of the laws on the ground.
Finally, the ICJ stressed that the respect, protection and fulfillment of all conditions of access to justice of the non-Albanian minorities is therefore a key benchmark against which the success of this transition or “integration” must be assessed.
The ICJ mission team was composed of Ketil Lund (ICJ Commissioner and former Supreme Court Justice of Norway), Róisín Pillay (Director of the ICJ Europe Programme), and Massimo Frigo (Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe Programme).
Kosovo-Integration of the justice system-Publications-Reports-Fact Finding mission reports-2016-ENG (full paper, in PDF)
Feb 18, 2016
Today the ICJ launched a new report that makes several findings and recommendations regarding the independence and accountability of the judiciary in the country.
The report is a result of the International Fact Finding Mission in Swaziland (IFFM-SZ) held in 2015 by the ICJ, in collaboration with the Africa Judges and Jurists Forum (AJJF), Judges for Judges Netherlands (J4J) and the Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association (CMJA).
The mission was conducted at the backdrop of a number developments of concern for the independence and accountability of the judiciary in Swaziland.
The report observes that:
- The Kingdom of Swaziland has a constitutional and legislative framework that does not respect the separation of powers or provide the necessary legal and institutional framework and safeguards to ensure the independence of the judiciary;
- The former Chief Justice Ramodibedi failed to protect and defend the institutional independence of the judiciary;
- The Executive failed to respect the independence of the judiciary; and
- The failure to respect the independence of the judiciary by the Executive and the failure by the Chief Justice to defend the institutional independence of the judiciary created conditions conducive to abuse of the legal system for personal gain
Presenting the Mission’s findings, the ICJ Africa Regional Programme Director, Arnold Tsunga urged the Crown, Judiciary, civil society and international community to collectively work towards the implementation of the recommendations to strengthen the institutional and structural independence of the judiciary thereby restoring citizen’s and stakeholders confidence in the judiciary and the rule of law.
Contact
Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Regional Director for Africa, t: +27 73 131 8411, e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org
Swaziland-Justice locked out RoL crisis-Publications-Fact Finding Mission Report-2016-ENG (full report, in PDF)
