May 6, 2021 | Noticias
La Comisión Colombiana de Juristas (CCJ) y la CIJ solicitan a las autoridades nacionales y locales que respeten el derecho fundamental a la protesta y paren de manera inmediata las acciones violentas en contra de los manifestantes.
Desde el pasado 28 de abril de 2021, en varias ciudades y municipios, miles de personas han salido a las calles a protestar y manifestar su descontento por varias políticas sociales y económicas del actual gobierno. La CCJ y la CIJ expresan su preocupación por las graves violaciones a los derechos humanos cometidas en el marco de estas protestas.
Varios reportes de organizaciones de la sociedad civil muestran que miembros de la Policía han abierto fuego contra personas que estaban protestando. Aunque las autoridades no han entregado información precisa, la Defensoría del Pueblo informó el 5 de mayo que 24 personas habían muerto. En al menos 11 casos, el responsable sería la Policía Nacional. Por su parte, la ONG Temblores ha reportado que al menos 31 personas han sido asesinadas y la ONG Indepaz ha documentado que hay más de 1.200 personas heridas.
También resulta preocupante la cifra de personas cuyo paradero se desconoce. Al respecto, la Defensoría del Pueblo reportó haber recibido información de la desaparición de 89 personas en distintas ciudades como Bogotá, Medellín, Barranquilla y Cali, y varias organizaciones de derechos humanos tienen información de más casos de personas cuyo paradero se desconoce. Adicionalmente, se han denunciado casos de violencia sexual.
De particular gravedad resultan los hechos de violencia ocurridos en el Valle del Cauca, en donde al menos 17 personas han muerto y otras personas han sido gravemente heridas. Asimismo, en Cali, varias organizaciones de derechos humanos y personal de la Oficina de la Alta Comisionada para los Derechos Humanos denunciaron haber sido agredidos física y verbalmente cuando se encontraban verificando la situación de las personas detenidas.
La CCJ y la CIJ instan a las autoridades colombianas a reconocer los abusos y las violaciones de derechos humanos cometidas en el marco de las protestas, así como a llevar a cabo investigaciones independientes, imparciales, prontas, rigurosas, efectivas, creíbles y transparentes por los hechos que constituyen violaciones a los derechos humanos de acuerdo con las obligaciones internacionales del Estado consagradas en el Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos.
Además, estas investigaciones deben ser adelantadas por la jurisdicción ordinaria y no por la jurisdicción penal militar. En ninguna circunstancia puede considerarse que posibles desapariciones forzadas o ejecuciones extrajudiciales o arbitrarias sean actos que guarden conexión con la disciplina o la misión castrense.
Igualmente, hay información acerca de que varios policías han sido heridos y que al menos uno ha fallecido. La CIJ y la CCJ rechazan estos y otros actos de violencia que han ocurrido e instan a las autoridades judiciales a investigar y sancionar estas conductas.
Por otro lado, la CCJ y la CIJ insisten en que el uso de la fuerza por parte de la policía debe ser acorde a los estándares internacionales. En particular, las autoridades deben respetar lo establecido en los “Principios Básicos sobre el Empleo de la Fuerza y de Armas de Fuego por los Funcionarios Encargados de Hacer Cumplir la Ley”, que determinan que el uso de la fuerza deber ser excepcional, necesario y proporcional.
Especialmente, las autoridades deben dar fiel cumplimiento al principio 9 que determina que la fuerza letal solo puede usarse “en defensa propia o de otras personas, en caso de peligro inminente de muerte o lesiones graves”.
Finalmente, la CCJ y la CIJ manifiestan su gran preocupación con la decisión del gobierno nacional de involucrar a las fuerzas militares en la contención de la violencia, a través de la figura de “asistencia militar”. Esta decisión desconoce los estándares internacionales que rigen el uso de la fuerza y el derecho a la protesta.
Debe recordarse que estas fuerzas no están capacitadas ni diseñadas para garantizar la protección y control de civiles en el marco de protestas sociales o de alteración del orden público. Por ello, su intervención debe ser absolutamente excepcional (violencia extrema) y temporal. Así lo han señalado distintas instancias internacionales, como el Comité de Derechos Humanos y la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos.
Contacto:
Ana María Rodríguez, subdirectora de la Comisión Colombiana de Juristas, anarodriguez(a)coljuristas.org
Rocío Quintero M, Asesora Legal para América Latina de la Comisión Internacional de Juristas, rocio.quintero(a)icj.org
May 5, 2021 | News
The ICJ today condemned the dismissal of all five of the justices serving in El Salvador’s Supreme Court Constitutional Chamber by the country’s newly elected Legislative Assembly, backed by El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele.
The dismissal on 2 May was justified on vague allegations of arbitrariness and dereliction of functions particularly relating to judicial decisions taken striking down government action related to the COVID-19 Pandemic. The Legislative Assembly also dismissed El Salvador’s Attorney General.
The ICJ stressed that the dismissal violated core tenets of the independence of the judiciary, by which judges are subject to dismissal only “for reasons of incapacity or behaviour that renders them unfit to discharge their duties.” (United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary). Any decision must also be subject to a fair hearing of individual judges, with full due process guarantees.
The dismissal process was carried out without any individualized hearings, and without a clear expression of a legitimate basis for the dismissal.
The ICJ is concerned that this summary dismissal will undermine the independence of the judiciary, including by intimidating other judicial authorities in the country.
The dismissal of judges and the Attorney General was followed by the immediate appointment and swearing in office of other judges in replacement. This decision violates the procedural rules of selection and appointment, which are essential to safeguard the independence and impartiality of the judges serving in the Constitutional Chamber.
The decision to dismiss the judges was taken by a qualified majority of legislators, shortly after the new legislative assembly started its functions, in a swift procedure that lasted just a few hours.
The ICJ urges the government of El Salvador to restore respect to fundamental rule of law principles to prevent the arbitrary use of power and impunity.
The country is particularly vulnerable to impunity for human rights violations, where an independent judiciary is not in place to assess the lawfulness of government actions.
The ICJ calls on the responsible authorities of the Inter-American Commission for human rights and the United Nations human rights system to address the situation as a matter of priority.
May 5, 2021 | News
The ICJ condemns the Danish authorities’ practice of revoking residence permits of Syrian refugees, mainly women and older men, on the false premise that Syria is safe for refugees’ return. Partly due to a lack of diplomatic relations with Syria, Denmark cannot forcibly remove refugees and instead detains them.
These practices should end immediately, individual assessments must be carried out in each case, and those detained pending removal should be immediately released, the ICJ said.
“International law requires that before any forcible removal, an individualized assessment of risks for each individual must be made and the principle of non-refoulement must be respected at all times,” said Róisín Pillay, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Director.
The principle of non-refoulement, prohibiting States to transfer anyone to a country where he or she faces a real risk of persecution or other serious human rights abuses, is a fundamental principle of international law and one of the strongest limitations on the right of States to control entry into their territory and to expel aliens as an expression of their sovereignty, as set out in Article 33 of the Geneva Refugee Convention and Article 3 of the Convention against Torture.
“Immigration detention pending removal is permitted only for as long as removal proceedings are in progress, and only if such proceedings are executed with due diligence and there is a realistic prospect that removal will be carried out within a reasonable time. Denmark’s practices fail to meet these standards as set out in international and EU law,” Pillay added.
At least 189 Syrians have had applications for renewal of temporary residency status denied since last summer, a move the Danish authorities said was justified because of a report that found the security situation in some parts of Syria had “improved significantly”. In March, ECRE and the Danish Refugee Council reported that the geographical scope of reassessments of cases of Syrian nationals has been expanded to include cases from greater Damascus with hundreds of cases set to be reassessed by the Appeals Board in 2021.
“The ‘improved situation’ assessment in Syria does not reflect the reality on the ground and runs counter to assessments of the UN, the European Parliament and other countries,” said Róisín Pillay.
On 11 March, the European Parliament adopted a resolution on the conflict in Syria which “(r)eminds all Member States that Syria is not a safe country to return” for refugees, and “calls on all EU Member States to refrain from shifting national policies towards depriving certain categories of Syrians of their protected status, and to reverse this trend if they have already applied such policies.” The EP also opposed any “normalization of diplomatic relations with the Syrian regime as long as there is no fundamental progress on the ground in Syria, with clear, sustained and credible engagement in an inclusive political process.”
The UNHCR considers that “changes in the objective circumstances in Syria, including relative security improvements in parts of the territory, are not of a fundamental, stable and durable character so as to warrant cessation of refugee status on the basis of Article 1C(5) of the 1951 Convention.” Furthermore, “in light of continued conflict, insecurity, and contamination with explosive remnants of war (ERW); severe concerns about the rule of law and widespread human rights violations and abuses, including against returnees; fragmented community relations and a lack of genuine reconciliation efforts; massive destruction and damage to homes, critical infrastructure and agricultural lands; and deepening economic and humanitarian crises, which are compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic, UNHCR continues to call on states not to forcibly return Syrian nationals and former habitual residents of Syria, including Palestinians previously residing in Syria, to any part of Syria, regardless of whether the area is under control of the Government or under control of another state or non-state entity. ”
“The Danish authorities’ assessment of the situation in Syria refers solely to the situation of wide-spread violence and bombing in some parts of Syria, in total disregard of the continuing hostilities in other parts of the country, as well as Syria’s abysmal human rights record, including widespread and systematic use of torture and other ill-treatment, arbitrary detention and enforced disappearances,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
Read the full statement here.
May 5, 2021 | Agendas, Events, News
On 7 May, the ICJ will hold a public consultation, together with the UN Office of the High Commissioner of Human Rights and Equinet on Access to Justice for Housing Discrimination and Spacial Segregation.
Featured speakers include Special Rapporteur on the right to housing Balakrishnan Rajagopal; retired Justice Zak Yacoob of the South African Constitutional Court; Supreme Court of India Advocate Vrinda Grover; and Equinet human rights defender Valérie Fontaine
More info here.
May 4, 2021 | News
The removal of Lebanese public prosecutor Ghada Aoun from financial cases she had been overseeing constitutes a further attack on the independence of an already enfeebled judiciary, the International Commission of Jurists said today.
On 15 April 2021, Lebanon’s General Prosecutor removed Ghada Aoun, Mount Lebanon Public Prosecutor, from the financial cases she had been overseeing, including high-profile corruption and illegitimate gains cases. Aoun had charged Riad Salameh, the Governor of Lebanon’s Central Bank, with dereliction of duty and breach of trust, and had charged former Prime Minister Najib Mikati with illegitimate gains. She had also been overseeing and issuing arrest warrants in other high-profile cases.
“The Lebanese judiciary has a long history of utter subordination to the ruling political class in Lebanon,” said Said Benarbia, the Director of the ICJ MENA Programme.
“Removing prosecutors and investigating judges from cases solely because they carry out their legitimate functions flies in the face of the independence of the judiciary and sends a chilling message to others who might dare challenging the authorities.”
Aoun’s ouster followed the removal of investigative judge Fadi Sawan from the 2020 Beirut port blast case. Sawan was removed on 18 February 2021 by the Court of Cassation after bringing criminal negligence charges against the acting President of the Cabinet and former ministers in relation to the devastating explosion on 4 August 2020, in which nearly 200 people died and thousands more were injured. His removal by the Court of Cassation came after two former Ministers who were facing criminal charges filed a complaint against Fadi Sawan before the General Prosecutor, requesting his removal from the case.
The Lebanese authorities, including judicial authorities, should comply with their obligations under international law and ensure that judges and prosecutors be able to exercise their functions independently, free of any influences, pressures, threats or interference from any quarter or for any reason.
In August 2020, the ICJ urged the Lebanese authorities to work with the United Nations to establish a special, independent mechanism to probe the Beirut blast in line with international law and standards with a view to establishing the facts and making recommendations for appropriate accountability measures, including criminal prosecutions.
The call was informed by the ICJ publications and findings on the independence and functioning of the judiciary in Lebanon, including recommendations to ensure that the judiciary is not subject to any form of undue influence by political actors and confessional communities, and that it is able to fulfill its responsibility to uphold the rule of law and human rights.
This press release is also available in Arabic.
Contact:
Said Benarbia, Director, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Asser Khattab, Research and Communications Officer, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, e: asser.khattab(a)icj.org
