May 26, 2017 | News
The ICJ has launched the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016) in Thailand, together with the Thai Ministry of Justice, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights and the German Embassy in Bangkok.
The launch on Thursday coincided with a parallel launch of the revised Minnesota Protocol by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights in Geneva.
The Minnesota Protocol is a companion document to the UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (1989), and sets a common standard of performance in investigating potentially unlawful death and a shared set of principles and guidelines for States, as well as for institutions and individuals who play a role in death investigations.
The launch was attended by representatives of the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Royal Thai Police, the Office of the Attorney General, the Ministry of Defence, and the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand.
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia and member of the Forensics and Legal Working Groups which assisted with the revision the Minnesota Protocol, opened the event for the ICJ by commending Thailand for hosting the first national launch of the revised Minnesota Protocol.
“Investigations play a key role in accountability by upholding the right to life which is guaranteed by Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Thailand is a State Party,” said Abbott. “All over the world we witness impunity in cases of unlawful death because either investigations do not take place or are inadequate and non-compliant with international law and standards.”
“The Minnesota Protocol makes it clear that investigations must be prompt, effective and thorough, as well as independent, impartial and transparent, and we expect that the revised Minnesota Protocol will help Thailand and other States to meet that obligation,” added Abbott. “The ICJ wishes to take this opportunity to reaffirm our long-standing commitment to the Thai authorities to assist them in efforts to implement Thailand’s international human rights obligations.”
The other speakers at the launch were:
- Ms Pitikarn Sitthidech, Director General, Rights and Liberties Protection Department, Ministry of Justice
- Ms Katia Chirizzi, Deputy Head, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Regional Office for Southeast Asia
- Prof. Stuart Casey-Maslen, Project Manager of the revision of the Minnesota Protocol, University of Pretoria
- Dr Pornthip Rojanasunan, Adviser, Central Institute for Forensic Science (CIFC) and member of the Expert Advisory Panel of the revision of the Minnesota Protocol
- Ms Angkhana Neelapaijit, Commissioner, National Human Rights Commission of Thailand and Victim Representative
- Mr Kittinan Thatpramuk, Deputy Director General, Department of Investigation, Office of the Attorney General
- Pol.Lt.Col. Payao Thongsen, Commander, the Special Criminal Cases Office 1, Department of Special Investigation (DSI)
Contact
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t: +66 94 470 1345; e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Universal-Minnesota Protocol-Advocacy-2017-ENG (PDF, English)
Universal-Minnesota-Protocol-Advocacy-2017-THA (PDF, Thai)
Universal-Minnesota Protocol-Advocacy-2017-BUR (PDF, Burmese)
Nov 5, 2015 | News
On the 15th anniversary of Irom Sharmila’s hunger strike, the International Commission of Jurists calls on the Indian government to repeal the Armed Forces Special Powers Act without further delay.
Irom Sharmila began a hunger strike in November 2000, calling for the repeal of the AFSPA, following the unlawful killing of 10 civilians by security forces purportedly acting under it in Malom.
“The AFSPA has facilitated gross human rights violations by the armed forces in the areas in which it is operational,” Sam Zarifi, Asia-Pacific Director of the ICJ said. “It is a repressive and draconian law that should have no place in today’s India”.
Once an area is declared “disturbed” under the AFSPA, armed forces are given a range of “special powers”. These include the power to arrest without warrant, to enter and search any premises, and in certain circumstances, “fire upon or otherwise use force, even to the causing of death”. These and other vaguely framed provisions give armed forces broad powers that are inconsistent with the government’s obligations to respect the right to life.
In addition to leading to many unlawful killings in the areas in which it has been in effect, the provisions of the AFSPA have also facilitated torture, rape and enforced disappearances.
“The AFSPA has created a culture of impunity, shielding security forces from accountability in India for crimes under international law, and making it impossible for victims of human rights violations to access justice”, Sam Zarifi said.
Under the AFSPA, governmental permission, or sanction, is required before any member of the armed forces can be prosecuted for crimes in a civilian court. Decisions regarding sanction take many years, and as yet, no member of the armed forces has been prosecuted in a civilian court.
The Indian government has often justified the need for the AFSPA as necessary to address terrorism and militancy in “disturbed areas”. “International law requires and experience shows that effective counter- terrorism measures must reinforce human rights, and not undermine and violate them,” said Sam Zarifi.
Calls for the repeal or amendment of the AFSPA –including from official bodies – have come from near and far for a number of years.
Several UN human rights bodies have recommended that the AFSPA be repealed or significantly amended. These include the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (2014), the Special Rapporteur on violence against women (2014), the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (in 2013 and again in 2015), the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders (2012), the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (2007), and the UN Human Rights Committee (1997).
In recent years, prominent Indian bodies have recognized the brutality of the AFSPA and echoed demands for repeal or amendment. The Justice Jeevan Reddy Committee set up by the Government of India to review the working of the AFSPA, has advocated its repeal. The Fifth Report of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission seconded this recommendation.
The Verma Commission, set up by the government following the gang rape in Delhi in 2012, called for the repeal of sanction provisions under the AFSPA as they relate to sexual offences. In 2015, a High Level Committee on the Status of Women also reportedly advocated its repeal.
In 2012, the Extra Judicial Execution Victims Family Association, Manipur (EEVFAM) filed a petition at the Supreme Court of India, alleging that between 1979 and 2012, 1528 people were extra-judicially executed by security forces in Manipur.
A court-appointed fact-finding commission – popularly known as the Santosh Hegde Commission – studied 6 of these cases, and found that the deaths were not lawful.
In its report, the Hegde Commission agreed with the observation of the Jeevan Reddy Commission, that the AFSPA had become “a symbol of oppression, an object of hate, and an instrument of discrimination and high-handedness.”
The case is still pending in the Supreme Court.
Contact:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Sanhita Ambast, ICJ International Legal Advisor (Delhi), t: +91 9810962193; email: Sanhita.ambast(a)icj.org
Jul 9, 2013 | News
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) today called on the Government of Malta to refrain from forcibly transferring a number of Somali nationals to Libya, where they are alleged to be at real risk of human rights violations and further transfer to Somalia.
According to media reports, the persons at risk of transfer are part of a group of some 102 persons, including 41 women and two babies, who arrived in Malta this morning.
The ICJ expresses its grave concern at the possibility that Somali nationals, who are alleged to be considered at risk of being subject to ill-treatment or persecution if sent back to Somalia, would first be sent back to Libya. According to the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, in Libya, migrants face a “constant risk of exploitation, arrest and indefinite detention”.
The ICJ stresses that the European Court of Human Rights has ruled, in the judgment Hirsi Jamaa and others v. Italy, that sending back potential asylum seekers, including of Somali origin, to Libya, without individual assessment of their situation and access to asylum procedures, violates the European Convention on Human Rights, in particular the principle of non-refoulement, the prohibition of collective expulsion and the right to an effective remedy for violations of human rights.
The ICJ therefore calls on the Maltese Government to refrain from expelling or otherwise transferring to Libya any of the Somali citizens who arrived on Maltese shores today. The migrants must be fully informed of their right to apply for international or humanitarian protection under EU and Maltese law; and each of their cases must be examined on its individual merits.
Statement-ExpulsionSomalis-2013-Malta (download the statement)
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Legal Adviser of the Europe Programme, tel: 41 22 979 38 05, e-mail: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Róisín Pillay, ICJ Director of the Europe Programme, e-mail : roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Apr 8, 2013 | News
The ICJ today expressed its deep concern at the decision of the President of the Republic of Italy to pardon Colonel Joseph L. Romano III, following his conviction by an Italian court for complicity in the rendition of Osama Moustafa Hassan Nasr, also known as Abu Omar (photo).
“This pardon deals a serious blow to the rule of law and to accountability for CIA renditions and secret detentions, a system which involved torture, enforced disappearances, arbitrary and secret detention and other serious crimes under international law,” said Massimo Frigo, Legal Adviser with the ICJ Europe Programme. “Italy stood honourably as the only country where an effective prosecution had been brought against CIA and Italian agents responsible for crimes under international law committed through the CIA rendition programme. This pardon deletes, in a single stroke of the pen, years of relentless efforts of prosecutors, investigators and lawyers to assure accountability for these crimes under international law.”
The ICJ emphasized that the pardon granted by the Italian President of the Republic, Giorgio Napolitano, in his last weeks of office, defeats the efforts of the judiciary to uphold the State’s international law obligations to investigate, prosecute and bring to justice those responsible for gross violations of human rights.
“By nullifying the effects of years of efforts of the Italian judicial system, this pardon seriously undermines Italy’s action against impunity and weakens the very foundations of the rule of law,” Frigo added. “The fact that the President of the Republic justified this action by raising the “peculiarity of the historical moment” of 9/11, thus suggesting that a kind of state of exception for the rule of law could have existed, is an unacceptable position under international law.”
The ICJ deeply regrets this decision of the President of the Republic to use his prerogative of pardon to prevent accountability for such an egregious violation of the rule of law in name of US-Italian diplomatic relations.
The ICJ condemns this pardon and stresses that it must not constitute a precedent and that other convictions in this case must not be nullified by pardons or amnesties. All European countries must uphold their duty fight against impunity for gross violations of human rights.
Any further circumvention of accountability for perpetrators of renditions or other gross human rights violations would only extend the cloak of impunity over the rule of law in Europe.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe Programme, massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
PR-Italy-RenditionPardon-2013-eng (english version)
PR-Italy-RenditionPardon-2013-ita (italian version)
Apr 27, 2012 | News
The ICJ welcomes the resolution of the Human Rights Council adopted today on promoting reconciliation and accountability in Sri Lanka.
Sri Lanka-ICJ welcomes HRC resolution-press release-2012 (full text in English, PDF)
