EU: Protecting Judicial Independence: Lawyers’ strategic litigation workshop

EU: Protecting Judicial Independence: Lawyers’ strategic litigation workshop

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), in collaboration with aditus, Human Rights in Practice, Forum for Human Rights, Free Courts organized a workshop for lawyers on judicial independence and strategic litigation in Malta on 23 and 24 November 2023. The event focused on critical issues of judicial independence, including, appointment procedures, administration of justice, and freedom of expression and association of judges.

Judicial independence is essential for democracy and human rights protection, yet it is frequently under attack or pressure. Judicial independence is possible only with independent organisation and governance, and when judges’ human rights are guaranteed. This includes strict selection criteria and transparency in the appointment of judges and prosecutors, and it implies respect of freedom of expression and association of judges.

The participants discussed the challenges in guaranteeing both institutional and individual independence of judges, and in ensuring fairness and transparency in the appointment procedures. The workshop also focused on the possible limitations of the freedom of expression and association of judges. It was noted that judges  often fear repercussions for expressing their opinions and participating in associations or protests.

The workshop brought together experts and practitioners from six EU Member States – the Czech Republic, Hungary, Malta, Poland, Romania and Slovakia – to discuss their experiences. The participants discussed the international legal framework and the possible ways to protect judicial independence focusing on the role of strategic litigation.

The event was the second of a series of workshops, each considering different aspects of judicial independence. These workshops aim to contribute to the development of the Final Mapping Report with recommendations on strategic litigation for practitioners in the EU, as part of the ROLL (Rule of Law for Lawyers) project.

Please see the workshop agenda here.

Please find recordings of some of the workshop presentations here.

EU: NGOs call on the EU Council to defend EU values in Hungary and Poland in the Article 7 procedure

EU: NGOs call on the EU Council to defend EU values in Hungary and Poland in the Article 7 procedure

Today, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and partners have called on the EU General Affairs Council to make full use of procedure under Article 7.1 in addressing concerns about Hungary and Poland. They advocate for strong stance in defending EU values

The International Commission of Jurists, Amnesty International , Human Rights Watch, International Federation of Human Rights, Open Society Foundations, Reclaim, Reporters Without Borders and Transparency International EU are sharing specific points in their letter this time especially on Hungary, expressing a regret that a state of play is being organized instead of a hearing and highlighting some serious recent shortcomings.

Read the full letter here.

The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights’ judgment of 22 September 2022: A clear rebuke of Tunisia’s authoritarian drift

The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights’ judgment of 22 September 2022: A clear rebuke of Tunisia’s authoritarian drift

Today, the African Court of Human and Peoples’ Rights (AfCHPR) opens its 71st Ordinary Session. To mark the occasion, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), in collaboration with inkyfada, looks back at AfCHPR’s September 2022 judgement against Tunisia, in which it ordered the republic to return to constitutional democracy and establish an independent constitutional court. The ICJ examines the impact of the judgement on human rights in Tunisia, and how individuals can operationalize the AfCHPR to challenge the curtailment of fundamental freedoms, judicial independence and rule of law in Tunisia.

ICJ’s questions and answers:

It has been more than a year since the African Court on Human and People’s rights issued its judgment in case No. 017/2021, “Ibrahim Ben Mohamed Ben Brahim Belguith v. Republic of Tunisia”, of 22 September 2022. The case was brought by Mr. Belguith, a national of Tunisia and a lawyer, who complained of violations of his rights under the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and other human rights instruments as a result of the promulgation of several Tunisian presidential decrees adopted under the “state of exception” pursuant to article 80 of the 2014 Constitution since 25 July 2021. In this judgment, the African Court ordered Tunisia to repeal these decrees, to return to constitutional democracy within two years and to ensure the establishment and operation of an independent constitutional court within the same period.

What does this judgment mean and why is it important for the rule of law and human rights in Tunisia? The ICJ provides answers in the Q&A below:

    1. What is the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights?
      * The African Union 
      * The African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights
      * The African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights
      * The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights
      * Tunisia’s adherence to the African Human Rights System
    1. Why was the African Court seized of the situation in Tunisia? Contextual overview
      * President Kais Saied’s power grab of 25 July 2021
      * The absence of a Constitutional Court
    1. What did the 22 September 2022 judgment rule?
      * How the African Court came to rule on the matter: the application
      * What the judgment ruled:
    1. What are the next steps?
      * Implementation
      * Other complaints against Tunisia pending before the African Court
Download the full Q&A in English here
Download the full Q&A in French here
Download the full Q&A in Arabic here

 

 

 

 

Tajikistan: Round Table on the Application of International Law in Judicial Systems

Tajikistan: Round Table on the Application of International Law in Judicial Systems

Today, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), in collaboration with the Supreme Court of the Republic of Tajikistan the Office of the High Commission of Human Rights (OHCHR) Regional Office for Central Asia (ROCA), and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)in Dushanbe, has convened a round to discuss the application of international law by national courts. The event aimed to enhance the capacity of the judiciary to apply international standards in Tajikistan.

The discussions at the round table were focused on international human rights mechanisms and instruments, the binding nature of international treaties, and the current use of international law in Tajik courts. The participants examined these standards in relation to Tajikistan’s international treaty obligations, with the objective of improving the judiciary’s ability to effectively apply international jurisprudence and principles.

The event provided a platform for participants to discuss the practical implementation of international legal norms in the adjudication process in other national contexts and to share strategies to address the challenges of such integration. The round table also facilitated a critical analysis of the reforms necessary for effective use of international standards in national legal procedures.

The event addressed the broader implications of applying international law, considering its impact on the rule of law and public trust in the justice system. There was a clear consensus on the need to draft recommendations that could guide the judiciary in applying international law.

The round table discussions were notably informed by a recent ICJ report calling for comprehensive judicial reform in Tajikistan. Published in December 2020, the report titled “Neither Check nor Balance: the Judiciary in Tajikistan,” provided an in-depth analysis of the organisation and functioning of the judiciary in Tajikistan and its capacity to administer justice and uphold human rights.

The ICJ report’s conclusion that acquittals in criminal trials are exceedingly rare underscored a systemic failure to ensure judicial independence, thereby highlighting the urgency of the reform. It was recognized that for Tajikistan to fulfil its international legal obligations and to provide effective remedies for human rights violations, reforms must be initiated and practically implemented to safeguard against practices that undermine the independence of the judiciary.

Attachment: Briefing paper on RT for judges on Oct 27 2023 in Dushanbe

Lesotho: Magistrates and judges unpack their role in protecting and promoting the human rights of marginalized individuals and groups

Lesotho: Magistrates and judges unpack their role in protecting and promoting the human rights of marginalized individuals and groups

On 11 and 12 October 2023, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), People’s Matrix Association and Seinoli Legal Centre (SLC) jointly held a workshop for magistrates and judges in Maseru, Lesotho’s capital. Drawing on ICJ’s 8 March Principles for a Human Rights-Based Approach to Criminal Law Proscribing Conduct Associated with Sex, Reproduction, Drug Use, HIV, Homelessness and Poverty, the workshop was aimed at enhancing the Lesotho judiciary’s ability to apply a human rights-based approach in the application and enforcement of domestic criminal law.

The central theme explored by participants throughout the workshop was the profoundly negative human rights impact of unjustified criminalization, especially for marginalized individuals and communities. At the workshop, the Acting Chief Justice of Lesotho, Tšeliso Monapathi, emphasized the importance of the judiciary as the last line of defence for ensuring the protection of human rights.

Participants at the workshop noted some positive legal developments in Lesotho that are consistent with international human rights law, including the repeal of vagrancy laws through the introduction of the 2010 Penal Code. Most recently, in October 2022, the High Court of Lesotho, sitting as a Constitutional Court, declared section 32(a)(vii) of the 2003 Sexual Offences Act unconstitutional. The Court ruled that the provision, which imposes the death penalty on HIV-infected persons who commit sexual offences, was unconstitutional to the extent that it violated the rights to equality before the law and equal protection of the law, freedom from discrimination, and freedom from inhuman treatment as guaranteed by the Lesotho Constitution. However, in June this year, in their joint submission to the UN Human Rights Committee, the ICJ, People’s Matrix and Seinoli Legal Centre noted with concern that the Sexual Offences Act left the common law offence of “sodomy” intact.

“Despite some progressive milestones in the protection and promotion of fundamental human rights and freedoms of all persons, it is deeply concerning that there remain a number of criminal laws that disproportionately impact sex workers, LGBTQI+ persons, those seeking sexual and reproductive health care services, such as abortion care, and other marginalized groups,” said Mosa Lestie, Programme Lawyer at Seinoli Legal Centre.

The participants, the majority of whom were magistrates, discussed measures the courts have employed to promote and protect the human rights of marginalized groups. This includes sensitization on the human rights of persons with disabilities, LGBTQI+ persons and other marginalized groups, particularly their right to access to justice and the implementation and continual development of court rules to ensure that all persons can participate in court proceedings on an equal basis as complainants, witnesses, accused persons or experts. For instance, in July 2023, the Lesotho National Federation hosted a training workshop with some magistrates and prosecutors on access to justice for persons with disabilities and the 2023 Disability Equity (Procedure) Rules.

Despite these efforts, participants expressed concern that limitations continue to exist in relation to: the provision of accommodations for accused and witnesses at court; worrying trends of discrimination within the wider criminal justice system, especially among the police. They also identified the need for ongoing human rights training for magistrates and other actors in the criminal justice system.

“The unjustified or arbitrary over-criminalization of conduct associated with LGBTQI+ individuals in Lesotho continues to result in discrimination and stigmatization. In turn, this has significantly impeded access to justice for the communities the People’s Matrix supports,” said Giselle Ratalane, Programme Manager at the People’s Matrix Association.

“As the ICJ’s 8 March Principles underscore, these criminal laws have discriminatory effects on marginalized groups and violate Lesotho’s obligations under international human rights law, including with respect to the rights to equality, non-discrimination, dignity, privacy, freedom of expression and more,” concluded Mulesa Lumina, ICJ Africa’s Legal and Communications Associate Officer.

Contact

Mulesa Lumina, Legal and Communications Associate Officer (Africa Regional Programme), e: mulesa.lumina@icj.org

Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Director (Africa Regional Programme), e: kaajal.keogh@icj.org

Background

While Lesotho has made some strides in recognizing and safeguarding the human rights of all persons, including through the introduction of various laws and policies, certain conduct continues to be targeted by criminal laws notwithstanding the fact that under general principles of criminal law and international human rights law and standards, such conduct should not be criminalized in the first place.

As a State Party to a number of international human rights instruments, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights on the Rights of Women in Africa, Lesotho must ensure that its criminal laws do not directly or indirectly discriminate against anyone on grounds prohibited by international human rights law.

The 8 March Principles for a Human Rights-Based Approach to Criminal Law Proscribing Conduct Associated with Sex, Reproduction, Drug Use, HIV, Homelessness and Poverty, recently published by the ICJ, offer a clear, accessible, and operational legal framework and practical legal guidance for a variety of stakeholders, including judges and magistrates, on the application of criminal law to conduct associated with consensual sexual activities, such as consensual same-sex sexual relations and sex work (Principles 16 and 17); the criminalization of sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression (Principle 18); drug use (Principle 20); as well as homelessness and poverty (Principle 21). As stated in Principles 7 and 8, criminal law “must be interpreted consistently with international human rights law” and “…may not, on its face or as applied, in substance or in form, directly or indirectly discriminate on any, including multiple and intersecting, grounds prohibited by international human rights law”.

Translate »