Apr 15, 2021 | News
The ICJ today condemned the promulgation by President Gotabaya Rajapaksa of new vague and overbroad anti-terrorism regulations, which make the already deeply flawed Prevention of Terrorism Act (PTA) open to further abuse.
The Prevention of Terrorism (Proscription of Extremist Organisations) Regulations No. 2 of 2021, published by way of Gazette notification on the 13 April 2021, outlaw 11 organisations identified as ‘extremist’ and provides criminal penalties for those accused of various kinds of associations with these and other organizations that may be similarly disfavoured.
A person who acts in contravention of the regulations is liable to a term of imprisonment up to twenty years, while any person who “conspires to commit or attempts, abets or engages in conduct in preparation to commit an offence” may be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of up to ten years.
“These ill-defined offences follow a similar pattern of the Sri Lankan executive unilaterally promulgating abusive regulations in the name of fighting terrorism over the years” said Ian Seiderman. “These latest ones come just a month after the decreeing of the ‘de-radicalisation’ regulations which allow for the Government to arbitrary detain people for up to two years without trial.”
Moreover, the listed acts shall amount to an offence not only in relation to the eleven
identified organizations, but also to any other organisation “representing or acting on behalf of such organisation or is connected with or concerned in such organisation or which is reasonably suspected of being connected with or concerned in any of the activities”. This is in violation of the principle of legality as the State may ex post facto identify any organisation as having associated with the eleven banned organisations.
The ICJ said that the Regulations were in contravention of the guarantees under article 13 of the Sri Lankan Constitution and its international legal obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
A key precondition to a fair trial recognized internationally is that criminal offences must be prescribed by law and conform to the principle of legality. Vague laws undermine the rule of law because they leave the door open to selective and arbitrary interpretation and prosecution. The vague wording of a law also has an adverse impact on framing of the charge against the accused.
Following the promulgation of the ‘de-radicalisation’ regulations a number of persons belonging to minority communities were reportedly arrested under the PTA, including for ‘spreading Wahhabism via social media’ and ‘promoting terrorism related activities’.
“While the Sri Lankan Government has an obligation to protect its inhabitants from the threat of terrorism, that protection is a part of, and must not be seen in conflict with, its overall duty to protect human rights; ‘threats to national security’ can never be used as a justification for contravening basic standards in relation to freedom from arbitrary arrest”, said Ian Seiderman.
The ICJ has consistently called for the repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, which has been used to arbitrarily detain suspects for months and often years without charge or trial, facilitating torture and other abuse. The ICJ reiterates its call for the repeal and replacement of this vague and overbroad anti-terror law and all regulations brought under it, in line with Sri Lanka’s international obligations.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights in her most recent report on Sri Lanka has reiterated the call for a moratorium on the use of the Prevention of Terrorism Act for new arrests until it is replaced by legislation that adheres to international best practices.
Contact
Osama Motiwala, ICJ Asia-Pacific Communications Officer, e: osama.motiwala(a)icj.org
Apr 14, 2021 | Новости, Статьи
Сегодня Международная комиссия юристов (МКЮ) призвала Министерство юстиции и иные компетентные органы Беларуси прекратить практику возбуждения дел в отношении адвокатов в отместку за выполнение ими своих профессиональных обязанностей, а также восстановить тех из них, кто уже лишился адвокатского статуса.
За последние месяцы был отмечен беспрецедентный рост случаев лишения статуса адвокатов на фоне массовых нарушений прав человека в отношении лиц, протестующих против широко обсуждаемых результатов президентских выборов 2020 года, – особенно тех адвокатов, которые заявляют о нарушениях прав человека в отношении своих клиентов. В числе последних случаев – лишение лицензии таких адвокатов, как Константин Михель, Максим Конон, Михаил Кирилюк и Юлия Иванчук.
«В последнее время целая волна уголовных и дисциплинарных дел в отношении адвокатов вызывает серьезную обеспокоенность и представляет собой посягательство на независимость адвокатуры. Подобные дела, будь то уголовные, административные или дисциплинарные, должны быть прекращены или пересмотрены как противоречащие международно-правовым стандартам независимости адвокатуры», – отметил Тимур Шакиров, старший правовой советник Региональной программы МКЮ по Европе и Центральной Азии.
Прослеживается четкая закономерность злоупотребления дисциплинарными процедурами в отношении адвокатов, которые защищают политических оппонентов или тех, кто открыто критикует правительство по вопросам общественной значимости. Дисциплинарное производство в отношении белорусских адвокатов не является независимым от исполнительной власти, так как осуществляется Квалификационной комиссией при Министерстве юстиции.
Примечательно, что в отношении адвоката Дмитрия Лаевского дисциплинарное производство было возбуждено предположительно после его публичных комментариев по готовящемуся законопроекту об изменении законодательства об адвокатской деятельности. Дмитрий Лаевский представлял интересы Виктора Бабарико, одного из лидеров белорусской оппозиции, который в настоящее время находится под стражей, и Максима Знака, бывшего представителя Марии Колесниковой, которая является еще одним из задержанных лидеров оппозиции.
Ранее ряд адвокатов, включая Александра Пыльченко, бывшего представителя Виктора Бабарико и Марии Колесниковой, а также Людмилу Казак, бывшего представителя Марии Колесниковой, были привлечены к дисциплинарной ответственности, и Людмиле Казак был назначен административный штраф в связи с выполнением ею своих профессиональных обязанностей.
Квалификационная комиссия вызвала нескольких адвокатов, отстаивающих права человека, для прохождения переаттестации на осуществление адвокатской деятельности, и они не сдали экзамен. Данная процедура, как представляется, предназначена для тех адвокатов, которые занимаются защитой прав человека, как инструмент преследования и возмездия.
Так, после публичных заявлений, сделанных в СМИ адвокатом Сергеем Зикрацким, который часто представлял интересы белорусских журналистов, адвоката вызвали для прохождения внеочередной переаттестации, которую он не прошел. Экзамен проводила Квалификационная комиссия.
Уголовные дела были возбуждены в отношении адвокатов Ильи Салея и Максима Знака, которые, как представляется, столкнулись с последствиями своей профессиональной деятельности, связанной с защитой интересов лидеров оппозиции Марии Колесниковой и Виктора Бабарико.
«Подобные случаи лишения адвокатского статуса оказывают существенное сдерживающее воздействие на работу адвокатов и подрывают способность адвокатуры отстаивать права человека в отношении своих клиентов в соответствии с международными стандартами, касающимися роли юристов», – добавил г-н Шакиров.
Справочная информация
Международное право и стандарты
В соответствии с Основными принципами ООН, касающимися роли юристов, государственные органы обязаны обеспечивать, чтобы юристы могли выполнять свои профессиональные обязанности в обстановке, свободной от угроз, препятствий, преследования и страха возмездия (Принцип 16). Основные принципы закрепляют, что юристы не должны подвергаться «судебному преследованию и судебным, административным, экономическим или другим санкциям за любые действия, совершенные в соответствии с признанными профессиональными обязанностями, нормами и этикой, а также угрозам такого преследования и санкций» (Принцип 16.c) Они также предусматривают, что юристы не должны отождествляться со своими клиентами и их интересами в результате выполнения своих функций (Принцип 18).
Международные нормы также требуют институциональной независимости адвокатуры. Исполнительный орган профессиональной ассоциации юристов должен избираться ее членами и выполнять свои функции без вмешательства извне (Принцип 24 Основных принципов ООН, касающихся роли юристов).
Apr 13, 2021 | News
Today, the ICJ called on the Belarus Ministry of Justice and other relevant authorities to end the recent practice of using legal proceedings against lawyers in retaliation for discharging their professional duties and to reinstate those already disbarred.
In recent months, in the context of widespread violations of the human rights of those protesting against the outcome of the disputed 2020 presidential election, there has been an unprecedented increase of cases of disbarment of lawyers especially those who comment on violations of the human rights of their clients. Among the most recently disbarred lawyers are Konstantin Mikhel, Maxim Konon, Mikhail Kirilyuk and Yulia Ivanchuk.
“This recent wave of criminal and disciplinary proceedings against lawyers is highly worrying and it constitutes an attack on the independence of the legal profession. These proceedings, be they of criminal, administrative or disciplinary nature, should be discontinued or reconsidered as being contrary to the international human rights law concerning the independence of the legal profession,” said Temur Shakirov, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.
There is a clear pattern of the misuse of disciplinary proceedings against lawyers who represent political opponents of the government or those who openly criticize the government on issues of public significance.
Disciplinary proceedings in Belarus are not independent of the executive, since they are conducted by the Qualification Commission which operates under the Ministry of Justice.
Notably, disciplinary proceedings are pending against lawyer Dmitry Layevski, allegedly following his public comments on a pending Draft Law on advocates’ activities.
Dmitry Layevski is a lawyer representing Victor Babaryko, an opposition leader in Belarus currently in detention, and Maxim Znak, former legal representative of Maria Kolesnikova, another detained opposition leader.
Earlier, a number of lawyers, including Aleksandr Pylchenko, former legal representative of Viktor Babaryko and Maria Kolesnikova, and Lyudmila Kazak, former legal representative of Maria Kolesnikova, faced disciplinary sanctions, and Lyudmila Kazak incurred an administrative fine, as a result of discharging their professional functions.
Several lawyers involved in human rights cases have been called by the Qualification Commission to undergo an examination to re-certify their qualification to practice law and have failed the exam. This procedure appears to target lawyers working to defend human rights, as a means of harassment or reprisal.
For example, following comments in mass media, Sergey Zikraskiy, a lawyer who often represented Belarusian journalists, was called to pass extraordinary re-examination which he failed. The certification is carried out by the Qualification Commission.
Criminal cases are still pending against lawyers Ilya Saley and Maxim Znak, who appear to have suffered consequences as a result of their representation of opposition leaders Maria Kolesnikova and Victor Babaryko.
“These disbarments have a significant chilling effect on work of the legal profession and undermine the ability of lawyers to defend human rights of their clients in accordance with international standards on the role of lawyers,” Shakirov said.
Background
International law and standards
According to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, the State authorities must guarantee that lawyers are able carry out their professional functions without hindrance, intimidation, harassment or fear of retaliation (Principle 16). The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers affirm that lawyers “shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics.” (Principle 16.c) They further stipulate that lawyers must not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions (Principle 18).
International standards also require the institutional independence of the legal profession. The executive body of the professional associations of lawyers must be elected by its members and must exercise its functions without external interference (Principle 24, The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers).
Apr 9, 2021 | Editorial, Noticias
Una opinión editorial de Carlos Lusverti, Consultor de la CIJ para América Latina
El acceso al agua potable y saneamiento es un derecho humano, sin embargo, millones de personas en Venezuela no tienen este derecho protegido o garantizado.
Una de las más importantes medidas preventivas que la Organización Mundial de la Salud ha recomendado para evitar la trasmisión del virus SARS-CoV2 es el frecuente lavado y desinfección de manos. A pesar de esto, en Venezuela millones de personas no pueden hacerlo.
En 2018, al menos el 82% de la población no recibía servicio continuo de agua y el 75% de los centros de salud públicos informó tener problemas con el suministro de agua. La Comisión Internacional de Juristas (CIJ) ha señalado problemas similares sobre el impacto de la pandemia del COVID-19 en otros lugares del mundo, por ejemplo en India y Sudáfrica, aunque la escasez de agua sigue siendo especialmente aguda en Venezuela.
En 2020, el Observatorio Venezolano de Servicios Públicos informó que el 63.8% de la población consideraba que el servicio de agua era inadecuado para enfrentar la pandemia de COVID-19 y solo el 13.6% de la población en ciudades tenía suministro regular de agua.
La Oficina de la ONU para la Coordinación de Asuntos Humanitarios (OCHA) recientemente informó que varias regiones en Venezuela tenían un acceso limitado al agua, señalando que “existía una necesidad urgente de asegurar una necesidad crítica de garantizar servicios adecuados de agua, saneamiento e higiene en salud, nutrición, instalaciones de educación y protección” (Traducción propia).
Incluso antes del inicio de la pandemia por COVID-19, el país ya estaba enfrentando una “emergencia humanitaria compleja” (una crisis humanitaria donde existe un considerable colapso de la autoridad que en Venezuela no es resultado de un desastre ambiental ni un conflicto armado), donde la falta de acceso al agua afecta al menos 4.3 millones de personas.
Impactos de la falta de agua en un sistema de salud en crisis
El agua es indispensable para el consumo doméstico, para cocinar y limpiar; también es necesaria para la protección efectiva del derecho a la salud, que ocupa un lugar central para frenar la pandemia de COVID-19. Los hospitales y otros establecimientos de salud en Venezuela tienen un acceso limitado al agua y sufren cortes del servicio eléctrico, lo cual afecta a la mayoría de los servicios de salud incluyendo las pruebas sobre COVID-19 y su tratamiento.
De acuerdo con el índice Global de Seguridad Sanitaria que evalúa las capacidades de seguridad sanitaria mundial, Venezuela ocupó el puesto 176 entre 195 países en 2019. Esto evidencia el inmenso problema que tenía el sistema de salud para abordar la devastadora emergencia de salud causada por la pandemia de COVID-19; este problema solo se exacerba por el limitado acceso limitado al agua en los establecimientos de salud.
La escasez de agua en establecimientos de salud contribuye a crear un ambiente insalubre y antihigiénico. Los centros de salud, al igual que los hogares, no pueden ser adecuadamente higienizados debido a la falta de agua y a la carencia de artículos de limpieza.
Esto incrementa drásticamente los riesgos para los trabajadores de la salud, los pacientes y, en consecuencia, para sus familias, así como para la comunidad y el público en general. Algunos servicios de salud críticos, como las instalaciones de diálisis y la cirugía en hospitales públicos, han sido cerrados o restringidos debido a condiciones insalubres, lo que ha venido limitando el acceso a los servicios de salud y ha amenazado el derecho a la salud de las personas en el país.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) ha descrito cómo las restricciones en el acceso al agua en los hospitales se han convertido en un problema creciente desde 2014. Estas restricciones pueden variar desde “fin[es] de semana y, en otras ocasiones, directamente no llega por cinco días”. HRW también encontró que “[l]a negativa a publicar datos epidemiológicos por parte de las autoridades debilita significativamente su capacidad de respuesta ante la pandemia.”
Bajo estas condiciones, los trabajadores sanitarios no pueden atender de forma segura a los pacientes de COVID-19 o disfrutar de su derecho a condiciones seguras e higiénicas de trabajo. De acuerdo con la organización Programa Venezolano de Educación Acción en Derechos Humanos (PROVEA), al menos 332 trabajadores de la salud en Venezuela han fallecido desde el comienzo de la pandemia de COVID-19 debido a la falta de equipos de protección personal y otras medidas sanitarias.
Protestas Públicas
Las compañías estatales encargadas del servicio de agua no publican ninguna clase de informes relacionados con la calidad del agua, a pesar de que las ONG locales les han requerido esa información. A través de los años se han realizado varios proyectos para mejorar la calidad del acceso al agua, algunos con financiamiento de entes internacionales como el Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo, pero las autoridades del país no han dispuesto información pública al respecto. Según Transparencia Venezuela ninguno de estos proyectos está actualmente operativo en el país.
La Alta Comisionada para los Derechos Humanos de Naciones Unidas dijo el 11 de marzo de 2021 que “el acceso a los servicios básicos, como la asistencia médica, el agua, el gas, los alimentos y la gasolina, ya escaseando, se ha visto aún más limitado por el efecto de la pandemia. Esto ha generado protestas sociales y ha agravado la situación humanitaria.”
En 2020, según el Observatorio Venezolano de Conflictividad Social, en medio de la pandemia de COVID-19 y las restricciones de encierro obligatorio, al menos 1833 protestas se realizaron en todo el país reclamando por agua potable. Frecuentemente, las autoridades resolvían estas demandas enviando agua en camiones cisterna.
La frágil situación contribuyó y agravó la falta de acceso al agua potable en el país y las condiciones de vulnerabilidad en las que viven las personas las ha obligado a salir a las calles a reclamar sus derechos en medio de la pandemia. Las protestas públicas en tiempos de pandemia crean riesgos de contraer COVID-19.
Además, en la actual situación de derechos humanos de Venezuela también plantea riesgos de detención arbitraria y uso excesivo de fuerza, que se han vuelto prácticas comunes por parte de las autoridades.
Defendiendo del derecho al agua y al saneamiento en Venezuela
Venezuela es parte del Pacto Internacional de Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales y de la Convención Internacional sobre los Derechos del Niño. Ambos tratados establecen obligaciones relacionadas con el derecho al agua y al saneamiento. El Comité de Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales ha descrito el derecho al agua como “una de las condiciones fundamentales para la supervivencia” y ha aclarado que los Estados deben priorizar el acceso a los recursos hídricos para prevenir “el hambre y las enfermedades“. No cualquier suministro de agua cumple con este estándar: el acceso al agua debe ser “suficiente, salubre, aceptable, accesible y asequible“.
En el contexto de la pandemia de COVID-19, el Comité ha recordado a los Estados que el derecho al agua debe incluir agua, jabón y desinfectante para todos, de forma continua. Por lo tanto, los Estados deben hacer inversiones adecuadas en los sistemas de agua y saneamiento, incluyendo el uso de la cooperación internacional para ese fin, para contrarrestar efectivamente las pandemias mundiales y mitigar el impacto de la pandemia sobre personas que viven en condiciones vulnerables.
La falta de acceso al agua es un problema de larga data en Venezuela. Las autoridades deben combinar la acción de asistencia inmediata con políticas de largo plazo para garantizar el derecho al agua potable y al saneamiento en el país, de acuerdo con estándares internacionales. Esto incluye la existencia de un mecanismo de monitoreo independiente sobre el suministro de agua en el país.
Durante la pandemia de COVID-19, las autoridades venezolanas deben implementar urgentemente políticas de emergencia para suministrar agua potable en todas las áreas con escasez de agua, sin ningún tipo de discriminación. Se debe dar prioridad a la garantía del acceso al agua en los centros de salud y al suministro de jabón, materiales de limpieza y desinfectante para manos.
Finalmente, las autoridades venezolanas deben adoptar políticas transparentes de acceso a la información pública, de manera completa y oportuna, que permitan comprender la situación epidemiológica y los datos sobre la calidad y accesibilidad del agua.
Esta opinión editorial fue originalmente publicada en el Blog de la Fundación para el Debido Proceso “JUSTICIA EN LAS AMÉRICAS”.
Apr 9, 2021
An opinion piece by Carlos Lusverti, ICJ Latin America consultant.
Access to safe water and sanitation is a human right, yet millions of persons in Venezuela do not have this right protected or guaranteed in the country.
One of the most important preventive measures that the World Health Organization recommends to avoid the transmission of the SARS-CoV2 virus is for people to constantly wash and sanitize hands. Despite this, millions of people cannot do this in Venezuela.
In 2018, at least 82% of the population did not receive continuous water service and 75% of public healthcare centers reported problems accessing the water supply. Similar issues have been raised by the ICJ with respect to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic elsewhere, for example in India and South Africa.
Yet water scarcity remains particularly acute in Venezuela. In 2020, the Venezuelan Observatory of Public Services reported that 63.8% of the population considered the water service to be inadequate in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic, and a mere 13.6% of the population in cities had a regular water supply.
The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) has recently reported that several regions inside Venezuela had limited access to water, indicating that “there [was] a critical need to ensure adequate water, sanitation and hygiene services in health, nutrition, education and protection facilities”.
Even before the COVID-19 pandemic arrived, the country already was facing a “complex humanitarian emergency” (a humanitarian crisis where there is a considerable breakdown of authority that in Venezuela is not due to an environmental disaster or armed conflict), and the lack of access to water affected at least 4.3 million persons.
Impacts of the lack of water on a healthcare system in critical condition
While water is needed for home consumption, cooking and cleaning, it is also required for effective protection of the right to health, which is at the very core of halting the COVID-19 pandemic. Hospitals and other healthcare facilities in Venezuela have limited access to water and suffer from electricity shortages, which affects the provision of most health services including COVID-19 testing and treatment.
According to the Global Health Security Index on the assessment of global health security capabilities, Venezuela was ranked 176th out of 195 countries in 2019.
This evidences the immense problem the healthcare system has had in addressing the devastating health emergency caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, a problem which is only exacerbated by limited access to water in health facilities.
Water shortages in health facilities contribute to an unsanitary and unhygienic environment. Healthcare centers, like homes, cannot be properly sanitized due to the lack of water and the lack of cleaning supplies. This dramatically increases the health risk for healthcare workers, patients and, consequently, their families, communities and the general public.
Some critical health services such as dialysis and surgery facilities in public hospitals have been closed or restricted due to unsanitary conditions limiting the general access to health services and threatening the right to health of persons in the country.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) has described how the restriction on access to water in hospitals has been a growing problem since 2014. This situation could vary from “an entire weekend and at other times lasting as long as five days”. HRW also found that the response of the Venezuelan authorities to COVID-19 “is severely undermined by [the authorities’] failure to publish epidemiological data, which is critical to address a pandemic.”
Under these conditions, healthcare workers cannot safely attend to COVID-19 patients, or enjoy their own rights to safe and healthy working conditions. According to Programa Venezolano de Educación Acción en Derechos Humanos (PROVEA), at least 332 health workers in Venezuela have died since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic due to lack of personal protective equipment and other health measures.
Public Protests
State owned companies in charge of water services do not publish any kind of reports related to water quality, even though local NGOs have requested such information.
Throughout the years, several projects, including some with international funding such as from the Inter-American Development Bank, have been established to improve the quality of access to water, but no information about it is publicly available by the country authorities. Transparencia Venezuela has reported that none of these projects are currently active in the country.
The UN High Commissioner for Human Rights said on 11 March 2021 that “access to basic services like medical assistance, water, gas, food, petrol, has continued to be scarcer, and [that] [t]his contributed to sparking social protests, and severely compounded the humanitarian situation”.
In 2020, in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown restrictions, at least 1,833 different protests have taken place around the country demanding potable water, according to the Venezuelan Observatory of Social Conflict. Usually authorities resolve the demands by sending water in trucks.
The fragile situation – contributed to and worsened by the lack of access to safe water in the country and the vulnerable conditions in which people live – has compelled them to go into the streets to demand their rights in the middle of a pandemic. Public protests in the time of pandemic create risks of contracting COVID-19. And in the present human rights climate of Venezuela it also poses risks of arbitrary detention and excessive use of force, which are now common practices by the authorities.
Upholding the right to water and sanitation in Venezuela
Venezuela is party to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Both treaties establish obligations related to the right to water and sanitation. The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has described the right to water as “one of the most fundamental conditions for survival” and has clarified that States must prioritize access to water resources for preventing “starvation and disease”. Not just any water provision meets this standard: water must be “sufficient, safe, acceptable, physically accessible and affordable”.
In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Committee has reminded States that the right to water must be understood to include water, soap and sanitizer for all, on a continuous basis. Thus, States must make adequate investment in water and sanitation systems, including utilizing international cooperation to that end, to effectively counter global pandemics and to mitigate the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on persons living under vulnerable conditions.
Lack of access to water is a long-standing issue in Venezuela. The authorities should combine immediate relief action and long-term policies to guarantee the right to safe water and sanitation in the country in accordance with international standards. There should be an independent monitoring mechanism of water supply in the country.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, Venezuelan authorities must urgently implement emergency policies to provide safe water in all water-scarce areas without any type of discrimination. Priority should be given to ensuring water access in healthcare facilities and the provision of soap, cleaning materials and hand sanitizer.
Finally, Venezuelan authorities should adopt transparent policies that allow for access to public information, in a complete and timely manner, to facilitate the understanding of issues such as the epidemiological situation and data on water quality and accessibility.
This op-ed was originally published in the blog “JUSTICIA EN LAS AMÉRICAS” of the Due Process Law Foundation
