Mar 22, 2013 | News
The ICJ and other legal groups have expressed their outrage at the continued detention of Zimbabwean lawyer and human rights activist, Beatrice Mtetwa, after she was denied bail.
This was despite the fact that Mtetwa was improperly held before the court after the police had refused to comply with a High Court order to release her, the Pan African Lawyers Union (PALU), SADC Lawyers Association (SADC LA) and Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC) and the ICJ said.
It is perturbing that the Police would use a lower Court, to undermine a standing decision of a higher Court, and that the lower Court would allow itself to be so used, they also said.
Moreover, it is absurd that Mtetwa, a lawyer of 30 years’ standing in Zimbabwe, could be denied bail on the basis that she would interfere with police investigations, they added.
While the ICJ, PALU, SADC LA and SALC have learnt with disappointment of the postponement of Mtetwa’s bail appeal hearing from the 22nd of March 2013 to the 25th of March 2013, they have faith that Mtetwa will be vindicated and released by the High Court.
The concerted efforts to keep Mtetwa behind bars represent a calculated attempt by sections of the Zimbabwean Government to break her spirit and deter her from representing the many Zimbabweans who daily face harassment and intimidation from the state’s security services.
Over the years, Mtetwa has stood by these victims of government and police repression and is regarded as a hindrance by the police and security sector to their illegal activities.
The action against Mtetwa is a threat to the legal profession in Zimbabwe – intended to alarm lawyers and intimidate them from providing independent representation.
As the country edges towards elections, the persecution of lawyers and other actors can only be expected to escalate, judging from the number of civil society representatives and human rights defenders who have fallen victim to police harassment in the past few weeks.
The police’s actions stand in marked contrast to calls by the most senior political authorities in Zimbabwe for peace and tolerance as the country moves towards elections.
That no heed is paid to these calls by the police force is indicative of the widespread and endemic impunity enjoyed by the security sector. It is the clearest indication that, as matters stand, there exists little prospect for free and fair elections.
The ICJ, PALU, SADC LA and SALC urge the Southern African Development Community (SADC) as the Guarantor of Zimbabwe’s Global Political Agreement and President Jacob Zuma as the mediator in Zimbabwe’s political crisis to take action and urge the Government of Zimbabwe to release Mtetwa from prison and end the politically-motivated persecution of her.
The legal groups also urge the African Union and the international community to prevail upon the Zimbabwean Government to release Mtetwa.
They also call on the police and the judiciary in Zimbabwe to discharge their duties in an independent and impartial manner if the people of Zimbabwe are to have confidence in the judicial system as the country moves towards elections.
Contact:
Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Africa Director, +27 73 131 8411; e-mail: arnold.tsunga(at)icj.org
Mar 18, 2013 | News
The ICJ and other legal groups express their deepest concern at the unlawful arrest and detention of prominent Zimbabwean human rights lawyer, Beatrice Mtetwa and officials of the MDC-T party.
Beatrice Mtetwa was arrested after attempting to come to the aid of her clients, Thabani Mpofu, Felix Matsinde, Anna Muzvidziwa and Worship Dumba. Mtetwa had sought to ensure that the search of the communications office of the MDC-T and the arrest of the four complied with legal requirements, demanding that the police produce a search warrant. She was instead arrested and charged with “obstructing the course of justice.”
Thereafter, she and the four MDC-T officials were taken to Rhodesville police station in Harare. Lawyers from Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights (ZLHR) worked late into the night of Sunday, 17 March, urgently petitioning the High Court of Zimbabwe to secure Mtetwa’s release. The order was granted just before midnight.
At present it appears that police are seeking to elude compliance with the order as reports indicate that Mtetwa is being transferred from one Harare police station to another as lawyers for Mtetwa seek to serve the court order on different police stations.
The arrest of Mtetwa and the four MDC-T officials is in itself alarming, but that it comes on the heels of a referendum to endorse a new constitution which, whatever its other limitations, contains strong protection of the rights of those arrested and detained, is more distressing still.
Without a clear and unambiguous departure from a past characterized by harassment and intimidation of human rights defenders and of impunity for Zimbabwe’s police and security sector, the promise of the new Constitution will be laid to waste.
The ICJ, Pan African Lawyers Union (PALU), SADC Lawyers Association (SADC LA) and Southern Africa Ligitation Centre (SALC) urge the Zimbabwean police and authorities to respect the Zimbabwean High Court order, to release Mtetwa from detention and to allow her and other human rights defenders to conduct their work unhindered.
Contact:
Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Africa Director, +27 73 131 8411; e-mail: arnold.tsunga(at)icj.org
Mar 18, 2013 | News
The ICJ strongly condemns today’s suicide attack on the Peshawar court complex in Pakistan.
“An independent judiciary, free from violence, threats of violence or intimidation is a basic precondition to a functioning democracy under the rule of law,” said Alex Conte, Director of ICJ’s International Law and Protection Programmes.
“The suicide attack drives home the failure of the Pakistani government to fulfill its obligation to protect the right to personal security of the millions of people living in northwest Pakistan who have to face the daily threat of suicide bombings or unlawful killings,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia & Pacific Regional Director.
Under the United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of Judges, the State must take steps to protect the judiciary from threats, violence or any other interference from any quarter for any reason.
Under international law, notably the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Pakistan must take active steps to ensure the safety of all persons within its territories.
Under the Beijing Statement of Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary in the LAWASIA Region, the executive authorities must at all times ensure the security and physical protection of judges and their families.
“Insurgent groups in northwest Pakistan have a long record of human rights abuses, including the use of suicide bombers to commit unlawful killings,” Zarifi added. “If this bombing was perpetrated by militants as part of a widespread or systematic attack against civilians, it constitutes a crime against humanity and must be treated as such.”
Earlier today, two suicide bombers detonated heavy explosives inside a Peshawar courthouse killing four people and injuring thirty others, including lawyers, police officers and civilians.
One of the bombers detonated the explosives in the courtroom of Judge Kulsoom Nawaz.
The Peshawar courthouse complex was attacked in November 2009, killing 19 people.
CONTACTS:
Laurens Hueting, ICJ Associate Legal Adviser, Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (Geneva), t: +41 229793848, email: laurens.hueting(a)icj.org
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok); t:+66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme (Bangkok), t: +66 857200723; email: sheila.varadan(a)icj.org
Mar 14, 2013 | News
Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi should not keep his position on the Supreme Court after he was appointed today as the country’s interim prime minister so as to preserve the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law.
“The Supreme Court under the leadership of Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi, has demonstrated a strong commitment to upholding the rule of law and protecting human rights in Nepal,” said Ben Schonveld, ICJ’s South Asia Director in Kathmandu. “To preserve the Nepali judiciary’s hard-won independence, the Chief Justice should step down from his post as soon as he assumes his position at the top of the Executive Branch.”
The Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi was appointed as Chairperson of the Council of Ministers – effectively the country’s Prime Minister – today.
The country’s four key political parties agreed on an arrangement whereby Chief Justice Khil Raj Regmi will refrain from participating in his duties as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court while exercising powers of the Prime Minister conferred by the Interim Constitution, in brokering an election of the Constituent Assembly.
After the election is held, the agreement provides that the Chief Justice will resume his power and regular duties as Chief Justice.
In the interim, the senior-most judge of the Supreme Court will act as Chief Justice.
“Appointing the serving Chief Justice to act as Chairperson of the Council of Ministers throws the country into uncharted constitutional waters,” Schonveld added. “This agreement obliterates the line between the executive and the judiciary.”
A petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Agreement is currently before the Supreme Court.
The interim Constitution of Nepal guarantees the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers.
Article 106 bans sitting and retired judges from assuming any appointment in government service apart from a role in the national human rights commission.
To enable the Chief Justice’s appointment as Prime Minister, the President under the recommendation of the Council of the Ministers amended several provisions of the Interim Constitution, including Article 106.
These amendments were made in contravention of the requirements of the Interim Constitution, which calls for a mandatory two-thirds majority of Parliament.
Under international law and standards, including the United Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, States are required to ensure an independent judiciary at all times.
Under the Bangalore Principles on Judicial Conduct, judges must be free, and be seen to be free, from inappropriate connections with the executive and legislative branches of government.
The Beijing Statement of Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary stresses the importance of the independence of the judiciary in a free society observing the rule of law.
Judges must uphold the integrity and independence of the Judiciary by avoiding impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of their activities.
CONTACTS:
Ben Schonveld, ICJ South Asia Director, (Kathmandu); t: 977 9804596661; email: ben.schonveld(at)icj.org
Govinda Bandi Sharma, ICJ Senior Legal Advisor, Nepal (Kathmandu), t: +977 9851061167; email: govinda.sharma(at)icj.org
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme (Bangkok), t: +66 857200723; email: Sheila.varadan(at)icj.org
Photo by Bikash Dware
Mar 12, 2013 | News
The ICJ today condemned the blatant disregard by the UAE of the right to a fair and public trial, after its international observers were prohibited from attending the first two hearings of criminal proceedings against 94 individuals.
The detainees include judges, lawyers and human rights defenders. The hearings took place before the State Security Chamber of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) Federal Supreme Court.
The ICJ observers were turned away on 4 and 11 March 2013 by police officers before they reached the court.
“The ICJ deplores the decision of the UAE authorities to conduct the trial of the 94 detainees behind closed doors and to deny access to all international observers for both the opening and second hearing of this trial”, said Ketil Lund, ICJ Commissioner, former Supreme Court Judge of Norway and one of the two ICJ observers who was denied access to the court.
“This denial, combined with consistent and credible reports that detainees have been subjected to torture and other ill-treatment, including prolonged solitary confinement, and denied full access to defence counsel, both during questioning and in preparation for the trial, are inconsistent with fair trial standards and cast serious doubts about the fairness and the outcome of the process.”
Under international law and standards and UAE law, all criminal trials must be open to the public, subject to narrow exceptions not apparently applicable in this trial.
The denial of access to international observers itself constitutes a serious violation of the right to a fair trial.
The ICJ calls on the UAE authorities to fully investigate reports of torture and ill-treatment of the detainees and ensure that information obtained through such practices are not used as evidence in the criminal proceedings.
The UAE authorities must also ensure that as long as the accused remain in detention, their right to have full and unrestricted access to lawyers, including the right to consult in private, medical personnel and family members are fully guaranteed.
The ICJ notes that the accused are charged with “establishing, founding and administering an organization, Da’wat Al Islah, with the aim of challenging the basic principles upon which the government of the State is based, taking control of the government and establishing a secret structure for the organization” (Decision of referral No.79 of 2012 (State Security) of 27 January 2013).
“These ill-defined charges, which fail to meet international law requirements of legal certainty, criminalise the enjoyment and exercise of the rights of all UAE citizens to freedom of expression and association, and to fully take part in the conduct of public affairs. The UAE authorities must therefore drop these charges and put an immediate end to this unfair judicial process,” Lund added.
Contact:
Said Benarbia, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser of the Middle East and North Africa Programme, tel: 41 22 979 38 17, e-mail: said.benarbia(at)icj.org
UAE-right to a fair trial-press release-2013-Arabic (full text, pdf)
