Aug 31, 2017
Today, the ICJ intervened in the case Anatoliy Oleksiyovych Denisov v Ukraine, Application no. 76639/11.
In its submission, the ICJ provided the Court with an analysis in relation to:
(a) The role of court presidents in the self-governance of the courts and in maintaining judicial independence;
(b) International standards in relation to security of tenure of judges and court presidents;
(c) The importance of procedural safeguards, including under Article 6.1 ECHR, in decisions affecting the career and tenure of court presidents; and
(d) In light of international standards and principles, the extent to which a disciplinary measure such as removal from the position of president of a court may interfere with the right to respect for private life as protected by Article 8 ECHR.
The ICJ argued that court presidents, in many European jurisdictions, play an important role in the self-governance and impartiality of the judiciary.
Upholding the independence of the judiciary requires, inter alia, that court presidents should, in the discharge of these functions, enjoy independence from the executive, as well as from other powerful interests.
The intervener will argue that the nature of court presidents’ role has consequences for the application of Convention rights to measures affecting their judicial career, including removal from the role of court president, even in cases where they retain judicial office.
Ukraine-Denisov v Ukraine -Advocacy-legal submission-2017-ENG (full text in PDF)
Aug 30, 2017 | News
On 30 August, the ICJ co-hosted an event in Bangkok, Thailand, named “International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearance: Human Rights Defenders & the Disappeared Justice”.
The event began with opening remarks by South-East Asia’s Regional Representative of the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Cynthia Veliko.
Thereafter, Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, spoke in a panel discussion about enforced disappearances in Thailand, highlighting the need for Thailand to comply with its human rights obligations under international law.
This panel discussion also included Ms. Oranuch Phonpinyo, Community Representative, forensics expert Dr. Pornthip Rojanasunan and former National Human Rights Commissioner Dr. Niran Pitakwatchara.
In a second panel discussion held during the event, speakers included Ms. Phinnapha Phrueksaphan, Victim Representative, Ms. Angkhana Neelapaijit, National Human Rights Commissioner and Victim Representative, Ms. Nareeluc Pairchaiyapoom from Thailand’s Ministry of Justice and prominent human rights lawyer Mr. Somchai Homlaor.
The event focused on the lack of progress in Thailand with regard to investigating cases of apparent enforced disappearance and called for the Royal Thai government to amend and pass legislation criminalizing torture, ill-treatment and enforced disappearance without further delay.
Thailand is a State party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) and has signed, but not yet ratified, the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED).
The other organizers of the event were OHCHR’s South-East Asia Regional Office, the Cross Cultural Foundation (CrCF), Human Rights Lawyers Association (HRLA), the Esaan Land Reform Network, Amnesty International Thailand, Thailand’s Ministry of Justice and the Association for the Prevention of Torture (APT).
Copies of an open letter sent by the ICJ and other human rights groups to the Royal Thai government on 30 August were distributed to the event’s participants.
Contact
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
See the full open letter here in English and Thai
Read also
Ten Years Without Truth: Somchai Neelapaijit and Enforced Disappearances in Thailand
Aug 30, 2017 | Comunicados de prensa, Noticias
La CIJ considera que la crisis institucional que se vive en Guatemala requiere la intervención directa del Secretario General de Naciones Unidas Sr. Antonio Guterres.
La CIJ a la comunidad nacional e internacional expresa:
1. El Acuerdo entre La Organización de las Naciones Unidas y el Gobierno de Guatemala, relativo al establecimiento de una Comisión Internacional contra la Impunidad en Guatemala (CICIG), en su punto 10 numeral 4. , establece el compromiso del Gobierno, de proporcionar a la CICIG y a su personal, en todo el territorio, “la seguridad necesaria para el cumplimiento eficaz de sus actividades”. Además, el punto 10 citado anteriormente, compromete al Gobierno de Guatemala a velar por que el personal de la CICIG, nacional o internacional, no sea objeto de abusos, amenazas, represalias o intimidaciones, por el desempeño de su trabajo.
2. Los actos unilaterales del Presidente Jimmy Morales constituyen una violación a dichas garantías y pueden interpretarse como un mecanismo para afectar el eficiente trabajo que viene realizando el Comisionado Iván Velásquez al frente de la CICIG; para obstaculizar la justicia, para interferir en la Independencia del Poder Judicial y promover así, más impunidad en el país.
3. La decisión de la Corte de Constitucionalidad de dejar en suspenso en forma definitiva el acto reclamado por el Procurador de los Derechos Humanos y de esa forma, dejar sin efecto el acto unilateral por medio del cual el Presidente Jimmy Morales declaró “persona non grata” al Comisionado Velásquez, viene a reforzar el Estado de Derecho en Guatemala y fortalece al máximo Tribunal Constitucional.
Sam Zarifi, Secretario General de la Comisión Internacional de Juristas expresó:
“Ante la crisis institucional que se vive en Guatemala, la Comisión Internacional de Juristas considera que es necesaria la intervención directa del Secretario General de Naciones Unidas Sr. Antonio Guterres mediante una Misión de Alto Nivel, que permita evaluar “in loco”, si el Gobierno de Guatemala está dispuesto a honrar el Acuerdo firmado en la ciudad de Nueva York el 12 de diciembre de 2006.”
“El Gobierno de Guatemala debe dar a la Organización de las Naciones Unidas, garantías convincentes de que la CICIG, el Comisionado Iván Velásquez y todo su personal nacional e internacional, podrán cumplir en el futuro con sus funciones, sin abusos, amenazas, represalias o intimidaciones de ningún tipo,” concluyó.
Aug 30, 2017
The ICJ and other human rights groups sent an open letter to the Royal Thai Government on the 2017 International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances.
The ICJ, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), Thai Lawyers for Human Rights and the Cross Cultural Foundation express concern at the continuing delay in the amendment and enactment of the Draft Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act (‘Draft Act’) and the lack of progress in investigating cases of apparent enforced disappearance in Thailand.
The letter urged the Royal Thai government to amend the Draft Act to comply with Thailand’s international human rights obligations and pass it without further delay.
The joint open letter also highlighted the apparent enforced disappearances of Somchai Neelapaijit and Porlajee “Billy” Rakchongcharoen and called for the effective, impartial and independent investigation of these cases and all other cases of enforced disappearance, torture and other ill-treatment in Thailand.
The letter concluded by making seven recommendations to the Royal Thai Government, including to:
1. Ratify the ICPPED and accede to the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture;
2. Prioritize the amendment of the Draft Act to bring it in line with international law and thereafter enact it without further delay;
3. Ensure that the DSI effectively implements its obligation to independently, impartially and effectively investigate all reported cases of enforced disappearance, including the alleged enforced disappearance of Somchai Neelapaijit until such time as his fate or whereabouts is established; any individual who has knowledge of the fate or whereabouts of Somchai Neelapaijit or any other alleged victim of enforced disappearance must divulge it immediately;
4. Ensure that the DSI investigates the case of the apparent enforced disappearance of Porlajee “Billy” Rakchongcharoen independently, impartially and effectively until such time as his fate or whereabouts is established;
5. Provide the family victims in both cases with access to effective remedies and reparations, including regular updates on the status of the investigations;
6. Ensure, in the cases of Somchai Neelapaijit and Porlajee “Billy” Rakchongcharoen, that if investigations result in sufficient admissible evidence, those who are reasonably suspected of responsibility are prosecuted in fair proceedings without resort to the death penalty; and
7. Implement the recommendations of the Human Rights Committee as stated in its Concluding Observations on Thailand in 2017, to “bring its legislation and practices into compliance with article 9” of the ICCPR, by ending the practice of arbitrarily detaining persons incommunicado, and to ensure “guarantees against incommunicado detention enumerated in the Committee’s general comment No. 35 (2014) on liberty and security of person”.
Background
Thailand has ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention against Torture (CAT). In January 2012, Thailand also signed the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED), reflecting a commitment to prevent and prohibit the crime of enforced disappearance.
On 10 March 2017, Thailand’s National Legislative Assembly approved the ratification of the ICPPED.
However, the Royal Thai Government has not yet set a clear time frame for depositing the treaty with the United Nations Secretary-General as required.
Contact:
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser (Bangkok), e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Olivier van Bogaert, ICJ Director Media & Communications (Geneva), e: olivier.vanbogaert(a)icj.org
Download:
Thailand-ED Day letter-Advocacy-open letters-2017-ENG (full letter in Englsih, PDF)
Thailand-ED Day letter-Advocacy-open letters-2017-THA (full letter in Thai, PDF)
Read also:
ICJ new report No more ‘missing persons’: the criminalization of enforced disappearance in South Asia
Aug 29, 2017 | News, Publications, Reports, Thematic reports
South Asian states can only address the tens of thousands of cases of enforced disappearances by recognizing enforced disappearance as a serious crime in domestic law, said the ICJ today.
On the eve of the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances, the ICJ 58-page report No more ‘missing persons’: the criminalization of enforced disappearance in South Asia analyzes States’ obligations to ensure that enforced disappearance constitutes a distinct, autonomous crime under national law.
It also provides an overview of the practice of enforced disappearance, focusing specifically on the status of the criminalization of the practice, in five South Asian countries: India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal.
For each State, the report briefly examines the national context in which enforced disappearances are reported, the existing legal framework, the role of the courts; and the international commitments and responses to recommendations concerning criminalization.
“It is alarming that despite the region having some of the highest numbers of reported cases of disappearances in the world, enforced disappearance is not presently a distinct crime in any South Asian country,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Director.
“This shows the lack of political will to hold perpetrators to account and complete apathy towards victims and their right to truth, justice and reparation,” he added.
In Nepal and Sri Lanka, draft legislation to criminalize enforced disappearance is under consideration.
Though the initiatives are welcome, the draft bills in both countries are flawed and require substantial improvements to meet international standards.
In the absence of a clear national legal framework specifically criminalizing enforced disappearance, unacknowledged detentions by law enforcement agencies are often treated by national authorities as “missing persons” cases.
On the rare occasions where criminal complaints are registered against alleged perpetrators, complainants are forced to categorize the crime as “abduction”, “kidnapping” or “unlawful confinement”.
These categories do not recognize the complexity and the particularly serious nature of enforced disappearance, and often do not provide for penalties commensurate to the gravity of the crime.
They also fail to recognize as victims relatives of the “disappeared” person and others suffering harm as a result of the enforced disappearance, as required under international law.
“Like torture and extrajudicial execution, enforced disappearance is a gross human rights violation and a crime under international law,” said Rawski.
“South Asian States must recognize that they have an obligation to criminalize the practice with penalties commensurate with the seriousness of the crime–filing “missing” person” complaints in cases of disappearance is not enough, and in fact, it trivializes the gravity of the crime,” he added.
Other barriers to bringing perpetrators to account are also similar across South Asian countries: military and intelligence agencies have extensive and unaccountable powers, including for arrest and detention, often in the name of “national security”; members of law enforcement and security forces enjoy broad legal immunities, shielding them from prosecution; and military courts have jurisdiction over crimes committed by members of the military, even where these crimes are human rights violations, and proceedings before such courts are compromised by their lack of independence and impartiality.
Victims’ groups, lawyers, and activists who work on enforced disappearance also face security risks including attacks, harassment, surveillance, and intimidation.
A comprehensive set of reforms, both in law and policy, is required to end the entrenched impunity for enforced disappearances in the region – criminalizing the practice would be a significant first step, said the ICJ.
Contacts:
Frederick Rawski (Bangkok), ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org
Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Advisor (South Asia) t: +923214968434; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org
Thyagi Ruwanpathirana, ICJ National Legal Advisor (Sri Lanka), e: thyagi.ruwanpathirana(a)icj.org
Background
Under international law, an enforced disappearance is the arrest, abduction or detention by State agents, or by people acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the detention or by concealing the fate or whereabouts of the “disappeared” person which places the person outside the protection of the law.
The UN General Assembly has repeatedly described enforced disappearance as “an offence to human dignity”.
South Asia-Enforced Disappearance-Publications-Reports-Thematic Reports-2017-ENG (full report in PDF)
