Jun 12, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
Speaking at the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ today highlighted judicial corruption and threats to judges and lawyers in Turkey and Azerbaijan, as well as regressive steps on violence against women in the United States of America and Russian Federation.
The statement, delivered during the interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers and the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, was as follows:
“The ICJ warmly welcomes the new Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers. As he has highlighted, ensuring judges are accountable for corruption and human rights violations, while respecting judicial independence, should be a global priority. Our Practitioners’ Guide on Judicial Accountability, published last year, should be of particular use to the Rapporteur and other actors in this regard.
Several situations serve as stark examples of other issues raised in his report. In Turkey, recent constitutional amendments give the President and Parliament control over the judiciary’s governing body. This has undermined the judiciary’s independence, already threatened by the mass dismissal of judges and the state of emergency. Lawyers and legal scholars, among others, are routinely dismissed or threatened by the authorities.
In Azerbaijan, the Bar Association is not independent and does not protect its members against undue interference with the exercise of their professional duties. Rather, it often serves as a tool of retaliation against independent human rights lawyers, including through disbarment proceedings that contravene international standards.
We would ask the Special Rapporteur for his views on the role his mandate can play in these and similar situations.
The ICJ also welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women.
Despite increasing global acknowledgement of the grave and systemic nature of violence against women, some States continue to introduce regressive legislation undermining protections for women. For example, the Russian Federation’s decriminalization of certain forms of domestic violence, and attempts in some parts of the United States of America to restrict availability of sexual and reproductive healthcare, particularly impact on victims of sexual violence. The Philippines’ President’s public statements disregarding the gravity of sexual violence are another example. The ICJ would ask the Special Rapporteur what can be done to prevent such backsliding?”
May 8, 2017 | Advocacy
The following document updates a report issued by the ICJ on 29 May 2012 as part of an on-going trial observation mission concerning the trial of Suriname President Desiré Delano Bouterse, accused of crimes involving unlawful killings.
Download the update below:
Suriname-Justice delayed Bouterse case-Advocacy-2017-ENG (in PDF)
May 5, 2017 | Advocacy, News, Publications
The ICJ has published a set of Principles on the Role of Judges and Lawyers in relation to Refugees and Migrants.
The Principles were developed by the ICJ on the basis of consultations with senior judges, lawyers, and legal scholars working in the field of international refugee and migration law (including at the 2016 Geneva Forum of Judges & Lawyers), as well consultations with States and other stakeholders on a draft version during the March 2017 Human Rights Council session, and other feedback.
The Principles seek to help judges and lawyers, as well as legislators and other government officials, better secure human rights and the rule of law in the context of large movements of refugees and migrants. They are intended to complement existing relevant legal and other international instruments, including the New York Declaration, as well as the Principles and practical guidance on the protection of the human rights of migrants in vulnerable situations within large and/or mixed movements being developed by the OHCHR.
The Principles address the role of judges and lawyers in relation to, among other aspects:
- determinations of entitlement to international protection;
- deprivation of liberty;
- removals;
- effective remedy and access to justice;
- independence, impartiality, and equality before the law;
- conflicts between national and international law.
The Principles, together with commentary, can be downloaded in PDF format by clicking here: ICJ Refugee Migrant Principles 2017.
They are also available in Spanish, French and Arabic.
The ICJ formally launched the published version of the Principles at a side event to the June 2017 session of the Human Rights Council (click here for details), where their importance and utility were recognised by the UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants, as well as representatives of UNHCR and the OHCHR.
The ICJ had earlier released the final text in connection with the Thematic Session on “Human rights of all migrants” for the UN General Assembly Preparatory Process for the Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration to be held in Geneva 8-9 May 2017, where in an oral statement the ICJ was able to highlight the potential utility of the Principles in the development of the Compact.
The ICJ further promoted consideration of the Principle, in an oral statement to the Human Rights Council.
More information about the process of development of the Principles, including the list of participants to the 2016 Geneva Forum, is available here.
The consultations, preparation and publication of the Principles was made possible with the financial support of the Genève Internationale office of the Republic and Canton of Geneva, for which the ICJ is grateful.
For further information, please contact ICJ Senior Legal Adviser Matt Pollard, matt.pollard(a)icj.org
May 5, 2017 | Nouvelles, Plaidoyer
La CIJ a publié une série de principes sur le rôle des magistrats et des avocats en relation avec les réfugiés et les migrants.
Ces Principes ont été élaborés par la CIJ, à la suite de consultations, dont le Forum de Genève 2016 des magistrats et avocats et la session du Conseil des droits de l’Homme de l’ONU en mars 2017, et sur la base des études mondiales, de l’expérience et des compétences de la CIJ.
Bien que la CIJ entende traduire, à travers les Principes, le soutien le plus large possible des personnes consultées, ces Principes ne reflètent pas nécessairement le point de vue de tous les participants à la consultation.
Ils traitent essentiellement du rôle des magistrats et des avocats, y compris des procureurs. Toutefois, la CIJ exhorte les législateurs, les représentants de l’exécutif et toutes les autres personnes exerçant d’autorité publique de jure ou de facto (en tant que fonctionnaire, par mandat de l’État ou par contrat), à mettre en œuvre, à maintenir et à respecter le rôle des magistrats et des avocats dans la protection des droits des réfugiés et des migrants, notamment ceux énoncés ci-après.
Les Principes devraient être renforcés par un cadre juridique, des politiques et des pratiques plus larges qui garantissent et appliquent les droits de l’Homme et l’état de droit au sein des États ainsi qu’à l’échelle régionale et nationale.
Dans ces principes, l’expression « réfugiés et migrants » doit être interprétée au sens large et prise dans son ensemble. Elle inclut, sans s’y limiter, les demandeurs d’asile, les apatrides, les victimes de trafics d’êtres humains, les enfants non accompagnés ou séparés ainsi que toute autre personne en situation de migration.
Elle s’applique même si l’arrivée, la présence ou la résidence d’une personne est considérée comme irrégulière par le droit national.
Les Principes visent à compléter et orienter l’application d’instruments internationaux existants relatifs à la protection des réfugiés et des migrants, y compris et sans limitation :
- la Déclaration universelle des droits de l’Homme,
- la Convention relative au statut des réfugiés et son protocole,
- le Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques et le Pacte international relatif aux droits économiques, sociaux et culturels,
- la Convention internationale sur la protection des droits de tous les travailleurs migrants et des membres de leur famille,
- la Déclaration de New York pour les réfugiés et les migrants ainsi que l’ensemble des traités et des normes régionales en la matière.
Les Principes traitent du rôle des juges et des avocats en lien avec les aspects suivants, parmi d’autres:
- Détermination du droit en protection internationale;
- Privation de liberté
- Expulsions
- Recours effectifs et accès à la justice
- Indépendance, impartialité et égalité devant la loi;
- Conflits entre droit national et international;
Les Principes, avec commentaires, peuvent être téléchargés en français et au format PDF: Principes sur le rôle des magistrats et avocats en relation avec les réfugiés et les migrants
May 2, 2017 | News
The Nepali legislature should immediately reject the unprecedented motion filed on 30 April 2017 to impeach Chief Justice Sushila Karki because it threatens the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law, said the ICJ today.
“This impeachment motion, the first against a sitting Chief Justice in Nepal’s history, raises very serious concerns about the independence of Nepal’s Supreme Court and the separation of powers in the country,” said Matt Pollard, who heads the ICJ’s Center for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers.
“The impeachment motion seems timed to suspend Chief Justice Karki just as she was scheduled to hear a politically controversial case,” he added.
The impeachment motion comes in the wake of the decision of the full bench of the Supreme Court, chaired by Justice Karki, to revoke the Cabinet’s 12 February decision to appoint a new Inspector General of Nepal Police evidently in violation of existing processes and regulations.
The motion to impeach Chief Justice was sponsored by two ruling parties, Nepali Congress and Nepal Communist Party (Maoist Center), pursuant to Article 101(2) of Nepal’s 2015 Constitution.
This provision allows for an impeachment motion against the chief justice to be moved by one-fourth of the members of the Legislature–Parliament on the grounds of “serious violation of the Constitution and law, his or her incompetence, misbehavior or failure to discharge the duties of his or her office in good faith or serious violation of code of conduct.”
Justice Karki is scheduled to retire on 7 Jun 2017, when she reaches the mandatory retirement age.
“The timing of the impeachment action, so close to the Chief Justice’s scheduled retirement, gives credence to suspicions that it is aimed at preventing her participation in judicial activity during the next few weeks,” Pollard said.
Filing the impeachment motion immediately resulted in the suspension of the Chief Justice from her duties, pursuant to Article 101(6).
“The impeachment process under Article 101 does not comply with international standards on the independence of the judiciary, as the ICJ has pointed out repeatedly in its analysis of the 2015 Constitution,” Pollard added, referring to the ICJ’s Briefing Paper on the Constitutional Draft. “This recent motion starkly demonstrates the problems with the Constitutional provision.”
Nepal’s judiciary, including the Supreme Court, had also recently been criticized by officials in the ruling parties and the military in relation to a number of high profile human rights cases.
“Nepal’s Judiciary has been instrumental protecting human rights, rule of law and enforcement of the Nepal’s obligation under international law,” Pollard said.
“The Nepali judiciary as an institution has strengthened and has gained international respect for its independence, so it should be celebrated and strengthened, instead of being subject to this kind of legislative attack,” he added.
The ICJ calls on the Government of Nepal and ruling parties to withdraw the impeachment motion against the Chief Justice in order to ensure judicial independence and the appropriate separation of powers under the rule of law in the country.
