Jun 7, 2018
In a memorandum published today, the ICJ called on the Lebanese authorities to introduce comprehensive legal and institutional reforms with a view to ensuring that the Office of the Public Prosecutor (OPP) is strictly separated from the judiciary and judicial functions.
The reforms must also guarantee that the OPP’s independence and impartiality is fully safeguarded consistent with internationals standards, the ICJ says.
“The structure of the OPP, its role, status and functions are not in compliance with international standards on the independent and impartial functioning of prosecutors,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
“The Lebanese authorities must ensure that the functions of judges and prosecutors are clearly separated and distinct and that prosecutors are not granted any powers to take decisions of a judicial character, including those relating to renewing police custody and ensuring oversight over police custody’s facilities, periods and conditions,” he added.
In the memorandum, the ICJ also formulates recommendations for amendment and reform of law and practice with a view to ensuring the administration of criminal justice in a manner that respects and protects human rights, due process and the rule of law.
The Code of Criminal Procedure and Decree-Law No. 150/83 on the Organization of the Judiciary do not provide for appropriate safeguards and limitations on internal and external instructions to prosecutors, do not adequately limit the power of the Minister of Justice in relation to the conduct of prosecutions, and, therefore, do not safeguard the real and perceived independence of the prosecution services.
If public faith and confidence in the integrity of the justice system is to be restored, the functional independence of prosecutors must be safeguarded from any undue or improper interference, including those emanating from within the OPP itself.
“The Lebanese authorities must ensure that the executive is prohibited from issuing instructions not to prosecute or requiring prosecution in a specific case,” said Benarbia.
“Any instructions to individual prosecutors regarding the conduct of a prosecution must be in writing, exercised transparently, and take into account established prosecution guidelines and the interests of victims and other interested parties,” he added.
Contact
Rola Assi, Associate Legal Adviser, t: 0096170821670 ; e: rola.assi(a)icj.org
Lebanon-Memo re prosecutors-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2018-ENG (full memo in English, PDF)
Lebanon-Prosecutors memo launch-News-2018-ARA (full story in Arabic, PDF)
Lebanon-Memo prosecutors-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2018-ARA (full memo in Arabic, PDF)
May 30, 2018 | News
As Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno filed a motion today to reconsider the Supreme Court’s 11 May 2018 decision to remove her from the Court, the ICJ expressed its grave concern that the proceedings in the case had contributed to an overall deterioration in the rule of law in the country.
Sereno’s removal comes on the heels of a series of public statements by President Rodrigo Duterte attacking the Chief Justice, including direct threats to seek her removal from the Court.
The ICJ and other national and international observers have repeatedly and publicly condemned these attacks.
Her removal, through the contrivance of a judicial ruling by a sharply divided Court, adds to the perception that the government institutions are unable or unwilling to safeguard the rule of law, and will attack the institutions that protect it.
“Preserving the independence of the judiciary in the Philippines is crucial at a time when the government is credibly alleged to have been engaged in widespread and systematic human rights violations, amounting to crimes under international law,” said Frederick Rawski, Asia Pacific Director for the ICJ.
“Given the perception of political interference and the potential impact of this case on the credibility of the judiciary as a whole, it is imperative that the Court swiftly and fairly consider the Chief Justice’s motion for reconsideration,” he added.
The removal decision came in response to a quo warranto petition filed by the Solicitor General, the government’s foremost counsel.
The petition sought to nullify her appointment on the grounds that she had failed to comply with disclosure requirements, despite the fact that her qualifications had already been certified as sufficient by the Judicial and Bar Council when her name was included in the short-list submitted to the president for consideration.
The decision superseded ongoing impeachment proceedings in the Congress.
The ICJ raised concerns that the decision could open the floodgates to similar attacks, not only against members of the Court, but to members of the judiciary and other bodies, such as the Philippine Commission on Human Rights.
It called on the Supreme Court to take care to ensure that any proceedings are conducted in line with the highest standards of judicial ethics, as reflected in the international standards such as the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct.
The ICJ also reminded the government of the Philippines that under international standards – including the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary – the judiciary, including individual judges, must be able to conduct itself without “improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect… for any reason.”
It is a responsibility of both the judiciary and the political branches of government to ensure that this principle is respected.
Contact
Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t: +662 619 8477 (ext. 206) ; e: emerlynne.gil@icj.org
May 30, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today made a submission for an upcoming report by the UN Secretary General on recent developments concerning human rights in the administration of justice.
In 2016, the UN General Assembly requested the Secretary General “to submit to the General Assembly at its seventy-third session a report on the latest developments, challenges and good practices in human rights in the administration of justice, including on efforts to ensure equal access to justice for all through the independent, impartial and effective administration of justice, and on the activities undertaken by the United Nations system as a whole”.
The UN is in the process of preparing the report, which will cover developments during the last two years since the previous report of the Secretary General.
The ICJ’s submission can be downloaded in PDF format here: UN-GA-AdminJustice-2018
May 29, 2018
In a memorandum published today, the ICJ urged the Lebanese authorities to introduce comprehensive legal reforms to ensure the independence and impartiality of military courts and to restrict their jurisdiction to cases involving members of the military for alleged breaches of military discipline.
The country should transfer the competence of military courts to civilian, ordinary courts in all cases involving civilians and all cases involving human rights violations and non-military offences committed by members of security and armed forces, the ICJ added.
“Lebanese military courts have a long history of prosecuting civilians, including those critical of the military and the government, in trials that fall short of international standards,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
“Lebanese authorities must prohibit military courts from exercising jurisdiction over civilians, even where the target or victim of the offence is military, as well as over all persons under the age of 18, with no exceptions,” he added.
The ICJ also called for legal and institutional reforms to be introduced with a view to ensuring the independence and impartially of military courts and the fairness of their procedures, including by ensuring that the selection, appointment, transfer and evaluation of military judges are based on transparent procedures and objective criteria, and that any disciplinary action against them is only pursuant to well-defined standards and respectful of all due process guarantees.
In the memorandum, the ICJ formulates recommendations for amending the Code of Military Justice with a view to enhancing due process guarantees, including by providing that individuals convicted by military courts have the right to appeal their conviction and sentence to the civilian courts of the ordinary court system, and that the nature of the review is to be substantive and based both on sufficiency of the evidence and of the law and to allow for due consideration of the nature of the case.
“Limiting the jurisdiction of the military courts and enhancing their independence and impartiality and the fairness of their procedures is required not only to establish and uphold judicial independence, but also to restore public faith and confidence in the integrity of the Lebanese justice system,” said Benarbia.
Contact
Rola Assi, Associate Legal Adviser, ICJ MENA Programme, t: +96170821670 ; e: rola.assi(a)icj.org
Lebanon-Memo re army courts-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2018-ENG (full memo in English)
Lebanon-military courts memo launch-News-2018-ARA (full story in Arabic)
Lebanon-Memo army courts-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2018-ARA (full memo in Arabic)
May 29, 2018 | Comunicados de prensa, Noticias
La CIJ expresa su profunda preocupación, por las diferentes acciones que se vienen dando en contra de la Jueza Erika Aifán.
La Jueza Erika Aifán se ha caracterizado siempre por ser recta en sus decisiones; honesta y apegada al Derecho en todos los casos que ha conocido; independiente, objetiva e imparcial en todas sus decisiones.
Para la CIJ, en los casos contra la Jueza Erika Aifán, existe un riesgo inminente de afectar la Independencia Judicial.
La CIJ considera que la independencia de jueces y juezas, es imprescindible en un Estado de Derecho, para que dichos funcionarios públicos puedan garantizar efectivamente, mediante una recta administración de justicia, el acceso a la justicia de las víctimas de violaciones a los derechos humanos.
Por tal razón y con base en la Constitución Política de la República de Guatemala y Convenios y Tratados en materia de Derechos Humanos, la Corte Suprema de Justicia de Guatemala debería intervenir en la defensa de la independencia judicial.
Tal y como lo establece la misma Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, “el principio de independencia del Poder Judicial ha sido reconocido como costumbre internacional y principio general de derecho y ha sido consagrado en numerosos tratados internacionales”.
En tal sentido, la CIJ considera que la Corte Suprema de Justicia debe asumir un papel activo en la defensa de la independencia judicial en general y específicamente, en el caso de la Jueza Erika Aifán.
La Jueza Erika Aifán tiene a su cargo casos paradigmáticos en la lucha contra la impunidad y la corrupción y la CIJ considera que ese es el verdadero motivo de los ataques y cuestionamientos en su contra.
Grupos interesados en promover la impunidad desean apartarla o separarla del cargo.
La CIJ se permite recordar que la separación del cargo de un juez o jueza, debe obedecer exclusivamente a las causales permitidas por la ley, mediante un proceso disciplinario que reuna las básicas garantías inherentes al debido proceso, o cuando el funcionario judicial ha cumplido el término o período de su mandato.
En el caso de la jueza Erika Aifán, no existe ninguno de estos presupuestos, razón por la cual la CIJ concluye que se trata de un ataque contra la independencia e imparcialidad e independencia de la funcionaria judicial.
Ante el hostigamiento que sufren jueces y juezas independientes en Guatemala, la CIJ urge la presencia en el país del Relator de Naciones Unidas sobre la Independencia de Jueces y Abogados.
La CIJ considera, además, que el Procurador de los Derechos Humanos de Guatemala debería presentar este caso ante la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos, no sólo para que dicha Comisión otorgue medidas cautelares a favor de la Jueza Aifán, sino para que dicha Comisión verifique la violación flagrante a la independencia judicial en el país.
Desde ya, la CIJ solicita a la Comisión Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH), que invenga en el presente asunto.
Demás está decir, que la independencia de todo órgano que realice funciones de carácter jurisdiccional es un presupuesto indispensable para el cumplimiento de las normas del debido proceso en tanto derecho humano y su ausencia afecta el ejercicio del derecho de acceder a la justicia, aparte de generar desconfianza y hasta temor, que provoca que las personas no recurran a los tribunales de justicia por falta de credibilidad.
Ramón Cadena, Director de la CIJ para Centro América expresó: “Debemos apoyar a la Jueza Erika Aifán, ya que la garantía de la independencia judicial está siendo seriamente afectada. La Jueza Aifán es una de las más honestas y valientes y está llevando casos paradigmáticos que podrían ser afectados, en caso procedan las acciones legales en su contra.”
“Es una vergüenza que un Tribunal del Poder Judicial mismo, imponga una multa de Q.1000.oo a una profesional que está cumpliendo con su deber. Los magistrados de la Sala Tercera, son los que deberían de ser investigados por el Ministerio Público, debido a sus actuaciones en contra de la Independencia Judicial.”
