Jun 29, 2016
The ICJ has joined a group of 244 civil society organizations, spanning across all regions of the world, to call on States at the UN Human Rights Council to cosponsor the resolution on civil society space.
The groups also call to vote against amendments proposed by the Russian Federation that would weaken it, and to vote in favour of the resolution itself.
The vote is expected to take place later this week.
The draft resolution, presented by a cross-regional group of States comprising of Chile, Ireland, Japan, Sierra Leone, and Tunisia, was developed through broad consultation with States and civil society and in the past was adopted by consensus.
The draft resolution welcomes the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and recognizes the key role of civil society in achieving the goals. Once adopted, the resolution will be a substantive contribution to the Council’s work to protect civil society space.
However, fifteen amendments tabled by the Russian Federation seek to remove these essential elements from the draft resolution, and insert language to justify illegitimate restrictions on civil society that would undermine the protections of international human rights law. Many of the amendments challenge previously agreed HRC or General Assembly language.
If adopted, the amendments would undermine international efforts to safeguard space or civil society, including because they would effectively:
- Reject the expert guidance and practical recommendations made by the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights on civil society space, including to remove substantive recommendations to states on ensuring: a supportive legal framework for civil society and access to justice; public and political environment for civil society; access to information; public participation of civil society actors, and human rights education;
- Remove or otherwise limit commitments to protect and promote the right to freedom of association, in particular civil society’s right to access resources for its vital work, and to be free of arbitrary registration and reporting requirements that seek to hinder the work and safety of civil society;
- Remove references to the gravity of threats civil society faces, including illegitimate restrictions to their rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly, as well as reprisals against those seeking to cooperate or cooperating with the United Nations and other international bodies;
- Narrow the understanding of “minority groups”, by seeking to include only a limited and under-inclusive list of protected characteristics to the exclusion of others recognised under international human rights law;
- Remove reference to the term “human rights defenders”, as well as previous work of the HRC on their protection;
- Remove concerns that restrictions on civil society may limit the United Nations in achieving its purposes and principles, and removing the emphasis on the Universal Periodic Review as an important mechanism to create space for civil society.
The full letter and list of organizations can be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC32-OpenLetter-CivilSocietySpace-2016-EN
Jun 24, 2016 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today made a statement to the UN Human Rights Council concerning the death penalty, and freedom of expression, in Singapore.The statement can be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC32-OralStatement-UPR Singapore-2016-ENG
Jun 9, 2016 | News
The ICJ welcomes the landmark decision issued today by the UN Human Rights Committee in the case of Amanda Mellet v. Ireland under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The Committee found that, by forcing Amanda Mellet to choose either to carry her foetus to term, despite its fatal fœtal abnormality, or to travel abroad to seek an abortion, Ireland had subjected her to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and discrimination, in violation of its obligations under the Covenant.
The ICJ considers that in light of the Committee’s decision Ireland must provide reparation to Amanda Mellet and reform its laws to prevent future violations.
Otherwise, Ireland will be in breach of its legal obligation to provide Amanda Mellet with an effective remedy – including in the terms set out in the Committee’s decision – for the human rights violations she suffered.
Related readings:
Full text of Human Rights Committee’s decision (download in PDF)
Mar 23, 2016 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today joined other NGOs in an oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council on the findings of the report of the OHCHR investigation mission on Libya.
It includes that violations of international law taking place throughout Libya “may amount to war crimes and other international crimes under international law.”
The statement continued as follows:
All sides to the conflict in Libya continue to perpetrate grave human rights violations and abuses. As highlighted by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, these violations continue to take place with “complete impunity” amid the collapse of the domestic justice system.
Unless genuine accountability is provided for these ongoing crimes the cycle of violence in Libya will continue, and the peace process will likely become no more than a well-intentioned piece of paper.
In this context, this Council has a duty to remain seized of the human rights situation in Libya, ensure continued monitoring of the situation and act to strengthen international accountability for crimes committed in Libya if the national system remains incapable of fulfilling this role. We are deeply concerned that the current resolution before this Council falls short of that standard.
Additionally, all UN member states should ensure that the International Criminal Court has the capacity to fulfill the mandate provided to it by the Security Council and begin fully fledged investigations into past and ongoing crimes committed in Libya.
As highlighted by civil society in a letter to this Council: “It is critical that all parties to the conflict are put on notice that their actions are being monitored and that accountability for serious crimes is a real prospect rather than an empty threat. Failure to do so will likely embolden those committing violations of international human rights and humanitarian law and will reinforce the endless cycle of impunity” in Libya.
The statement was on behalf of Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies, CIVICUS, Human Rights Watch, International Commission of Jurists, FIDH, and OMCT.
Mar 23, 2016 | Incidencia
Declaración oral ante el Consejo de Derechos Humanos.
“La Comisión Internacional de Juristas quiere referirse al informe del Alto Comisionado sobre Colombia. Pese a los avances en las negociaciones de paz entre el Gobierno y las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC), creando nuevas instituciones y mecanismos, seguimos preocupados sobre las garantías a los derechos a la justicia y a la verdad de las víctimas y la posibilidad que se consagre la impunidad. Los acuerdos estipulan que las informaciones recabadas por la Comisión de la Verdad y la Unidad Especial de Búsqueda de Personas Desaparecidas, no podrán ser entregadas a la Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz, ni ésta podrá requerirlas. Ello es contrario a los estándares internacionales en la materia y en particular los Principios actualizados para la protección y la promoción de los derechos humanos mediante la lucha contra la impunidad.
Asimismo, el llamado procedimiento de “contraste” establecido para la Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz, para aquellos que tempranamente reconozcan sus crímenes y responsabilidad, no garantiza la realización de investigaciones exhaustivas ni tampoco una participación activa de las víctimas en los procedimientos, socavando sus derechos a un recurso efectivo, a la justicia y a la verdad. Igualmente, los lineamientos sobre la aplicación de la Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz a los agentes del Estado, dado a conocer por el Gobierno en diciembre de 2015, estaría socavando el principio de responsabilidad penal del superior jerárquico.
Mi organización ve con profunda preocupación que la cuestión de las garantías de no repetición, esencial para la justicia de transición, no haya sido considerada durante la negociación. Las reformas institucionales relativas a la separación de la Policía Nacional del Ministerio de Defensa, la desmilitarización de los cuerpos de seguridad del Estado, la depuración administrativa de la Fuerza Pública y la revisión de la doctrina militar – típicas medidas de garantías de no repetición –están ausentes en este proceso de negociación.
La Comisión Internacional de Juristas exhorta al Gobierno y a las FARC a garantizar plenamente en el Acuerdo Final, y en la legislación que lo implementará, los derechos a la justicia y a la verdad de las víctimas y a excluir toda modalidad de impunidad, de conformidad con el Derecho internacional.”
Declaración leída por: Sr Carlos López
