ICJ comments on Draft Federal Law on selection of judges in Russia

ICJ comments on Draft Federal Law on selection of judges in Russia

The ICJ has published its comments and recommendations regarding the Draft Federal Law № 314591-6.

This Draft Federal Law is “On introduction of amendments to the Law of the Russian Federation on the Status of Judges in the Russian Federation, the Federal Law on the bodies of judicial community in the Russian Federation and the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation”.

It said that while the Draft Law provides an opportunity to address some of the shortcomings of the selection system, provided that it takes account of the systemic defects from which the judicial examination process suffers.

However, the Draft Law in its current form falls short of addressing the existing problems.

The ICJ made recommendations for additional measures to be included in the Draft Law.

More detailed recommendations on other aspects of judicial appointment are included in the 2014 ICJ report.

Russia-Comment on Draft Federal Law No 3145591-Advocacy-Legal submission-2015-ENG (full text in PDF, English version)

Russia-Comment on Draft Federal Law No 3145591-Advocacy-Legal submission-2015-RUS (full text in PDF, Russian version)

Bangladesh: execution of Muhammad Kamaruzzaman undermines justice

Bangladesh: execution of Muhammad Kamaruzzaman undermines justice

The ICJ today condemned the execution of Muhammad Kamaruzzaman following an unfair trial. The ICJ repeated its call for the authorities in Bangladesh to institute an immediate moratorium on executions with a view to abolishing the death penalty in the country.

Muhammad Kamaruzzaman (photo), a senior leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami party, was hanged today in Dhaka Central jail.

He had been sentenced to death by the Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) in 2013 for his role in the atrocities committed during the 1971 war for independence in Bangladesh.

His conviction and sentence were confirmed on appeal in 2014.

The government established the ICT in 2010, after amending the International Crimes (Tribunals) Act 1973.

The ICT has jurisdiction to try crimes against humanity, crimes against peace, genocide, violations of the Geneva conventions and any other crimes under international law.

The ICJ has previously raised concerns that trials before the ICT do not comply with international standards for fair trials.

According to the ICJ, there are serious procedural flaws at all stages: pre-trial release has been routinely and arbitrarily denied; witnesses have been abducted and intimidated; and there have been credible allegations of collusion between the Government, prosecutors and judges.

“This execution constitutes a violation of the right to life and freedom from cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment,” said Sam Zarifi, the ICJ’s Director for Asia and the Pacific. “The fact that this execution was based on a trial that was procedurally and substantively flawed is all the more regrettable and a perversion of justice.”

On 6 April 2015, the Supreme Court rejected Muhammad Kamaruzzaman’s petition for a review of his sentence.

The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights has denounced the death sentence, noting that his review petition was summarily rejected without consideration on merits.

Government officials have reported that Muhammad Kamaruzzaman decided to not seek a presidential pardon for his sentence, following the rejection of his review petition.

After Abdul Qader Mollah in 2013, Kamaruzzaman is the second individual to be executed after being sentenced to death by the ICT.

“The ICJ supports the rights of all victims of the atrocities committed during the 1971 war for independence in Bangladesh to truth and justice. But the death penalty is not the answer,” Zarifi added. “Bangladesh should impose an official moratorium on the death penalty, with a view to abolishing it outright.”

The ICJ opposes capital punishment in all cases without exception. The death penalty constitutes a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

In December 2014, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution, for the fifth time since 2007, emphasizing that that the use of the death penalty undermines human dignity and calling on those countries that maintain the death penalty to establish a moratorium on its use with a view to its abolition.

A majority of 117 UN Member States voted in favor of a worldwide moratorium on executions as a step towards abolition of the death penalty, with only 37 opposed.

Contact:

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Shootings in courthouse in Milan, Italy

Shootings in courthouse in Milan, Italy

Among the victims of a gun attack today at the Palace of Justice of Milan, according to press reports, were Judge Fernando Ciampi and lawyer Lorenzo Alberto Claris Appiani.

Press reports state that the person who opened fire in the Palace of Justice of Milan, killing three persons and injuring several others, was a defendant in a case.

The ICJ calls on relevant authorities immediately to launch a thorough inquiry into the system of security at the Palace of Justice, for judges, lawyers, and prosecutors, as well as witnesses and parties to cases, employees, and others present in the buildings.

The ICJ recalls that the State has a duty under international law to ensure protection for members of the judiciary and others who may be at risk of such attacks.

Hungary: ICJ intervenes in case of dismissal of Supreme Court President

Hungary: ICJ intervenes in case of dismissal of Supreme Court President

The ICJ submitted today a third party intervention before the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Baka v. Hungary, regarding the dismissal of the former Supreme Court President of Hungary.

In these submissions, the ICJ addressed:

(1) the scope of application of article 6.1 ECHR in cases relating to judicial appointments, the judicial career, and security of tenure including removal from office, in light of the Convention jurisprudence and of principles of the rule of law and of the role and independence of the judiciary;

(2) international standards on security of judicial tenure, freedom of expression of judges, and the role of judges in contributing to debate on questions of judicial independence, which are relevant to protection of article 10 ECHR rights of judges.

The ICJ argued in its third party intervention that the special and fundamental role of the judiciary as an independent branch of State power, in accordance with principles of the separation of powers and the rule of law, is recognised within the ECHR, both explicitly and implicitly.

This special role must accordingly be given significant weight in assessing any restrictions imposed by the executive (and legislative) branches on Convention rights applicable to judges.

Therefore, in order to preserve the special role of the judiciary the ECHR should be interpreted in a manner that limits the scope for the executive- or legislative branch to justify the imposition of restrictions on article 6.1 ECHR rights of judges in employment disputes on grounds of legitimate interest.

Second, for the same reasons, the ECHR should be interpreted to preclude restrictions of freedom of expression applicable to judges and civil servants that would impair the right and the duty of the judiciary to speak out in protection of judicial independence.

ECtHR-AmicusBrief-Baka v Hungary-Advocacy-Legal Submission-2015-ENG (download the third party intervention)

Kyrgyzstan: Searches of lawyers’ premises are contrary to international law and standards

Kyrgyzstan: Searches of lawyers’ premises are contrary to international law and standards

The ICJ today expressed concern at searches of lawyers’ homes and workplace by Kyrgyz investigators in the city of Osh.

The home of lawyer Valerian Vakhitov and the office of the human rights organization “Bir-Duyno-Kyrgyzstan” (photo) where lawyers Valerian Vakhitov and Khusanbay Saliyev worked, were searched and materials of the lawyers’ cases were seized. The ICJ considers that the searches are violations of the right to confidential communication between a lawyer and his or her client.

The confidentiality of lawyer-client communications and lawyers’ files is protected in international human rights law as part of the right to a fair trial, as well as the prohibition of arbitrary interference with correspondence, privacy and (in this case) home.

The searches followed the arrest of Umar Farooq, a US citizen and journalist who reportedly conducted research on inter-ethnic tensions in the Kyrgyz Republic, in particular near the border with Uzbekistan.

On 25 March 2015, he was arrested by officers of the State Committee of National Security (SCNS) and a number of items in his possession were seized including recordings containing “statements on religious topics and clips of military activities”, copies of charges filed against clients of the two lawyers, A.M. Yusupov and I.I. Salibayev, and the business cards of the two lawyers.

On 28 March, Umar Farooq was expelled from the Kyrgyz Republic on grounds of collection of information without accreditation.

The investigator sought a search warrant for the lawyers’ premises on the grounds that they could contain documents “necessary for the investigation” in criminal case No. 082-15-0236.

Warrants to search the NGO premises where the lawyers worked and to search the residence of Valerian Vakhitov, were issued in separate proceedings on 26 and 27 March by judges K.M. Matisakov and B.T. Satybaldiyev.

According to the search warrant issued by the Court, the search of Lawyer Vakhidov’s home was authorized taking into account the “the need for a full, objective, comprehensive resolution of the crime, obtaining evidence necessary for the investigation of the case, inevitability of the punishment for a crime committed and for the purposes of national security”.

The same reasons were given to authorize searches of the office of “Bir-Duyno-Kyrgyzstan” Investigators seized computers, memory sticks, dictaphones and disks with information on cases in which the lawyers represented clients.

Lawyer Vakhitov reported that among other documents, files relating to nine cases in which he represented individuals before the UN Treaty Bodies, including communication with the UN bodies, had been seized.

The ICJ notes that the State Committee of National Security of the Kyrgyz Republic officially stated, on 30 March, that the searches of work and residence places of lawyers were “legal and within the framework of the CPC of the KR [Criminal Procedure Code of the Kyrgyz Republic]”.

On the same day, the Council of Advokatura, its main executive body, issued a statement calling on the Prosecutor General Indira Zholdubayeva “to take the strictest measures provided by law in regard to the officers of the State Committee of National Security which violated the guarantees of the independence of lawyers’ activity and integrity of lawyers”.

The ICJ considers that the searches are a clear violation of the law of the Kyrgyz Republic. According to Article 29 of the Law On Advokatura and Lawyers’ Activity the Kyrgyz Republic “requisitioning, seizure, examination, inspection, copying documents, collection and use of information related to legal assistance in a particular criminal case are allowed only in the case involving a lawyer as a defendant …”.

A criminal case against a lawyer may be initiated only by the Prosecutor General or her deputy (Article 29.3).

According to article 30 of the Law, information related to providing legal aid to clients is protected as lawyer-client privilege (…).

Read the full statement here:

Kyrgyzstan-Searches of lawyers-Advocacy-2015-ENG (full text in PDF)

Kyrgyzstan-Searches of lawyers-Advocacy-2015-RUS (Russian version in PDF)

Translate »