European Union: rule of law report must be followed by action

European Union: rule of law report must be followed by action

The ICJ today welcomed the first annual rule of law report of the European Commission, which analyses the compliance of all EU Member States with rule of law standards, including on judicial independence, freedom of the media and civil society.

The report is a welcome recognition that rule of law guarantees cannot be taken for granted in any European country, and that all EU institutions must be particularly vigilant in their defence.

But the ICJ warns that the report is only valuable if it leads to strengthened EU enforcement action to address the serious rule of law crises in Poland and in Hungary.

“This report is further testimony to the actions of governments of Poland and Hungary, to deliberately and systematically dismantle protections for judicial independence and other essential rule of law protections,” said Róisín Pillay, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme Director.

“We need the EU to use its powers of enforcement promptly and to the full, to defend these fundamental guarantees, including through prompt progression of Article 7 and enforcement proceedings. It is welcome that the European Commission calls on Member States to accelerate the resolution of problems raised under the Article 7 proceedings against Poland and Hungary. This report should lead to renewed efforts of all the institutions to urgently progress these proceedings,” she added.

Additional information

The full text of the European Commission report is available here: https://ec.europa.eu/info/publications/2020-rule-law-report-communication-and-country-chapters_en

The International Commission of Jurists has repeatedly expressed serious concern at the deteriorating rule of law situation in both Poland and Hungary, see for example:

https://www.icj.org/poland-judges-and-lawyers-from-around-the-world-condemn-rapidly-escalating-rule-of-law-crisis/

And here: https://www.icj.org/european-union-icj-joins-call-for-urgent-eu-response-to-hungarys-covid-19-emergency-law/

Contact:

Róisín Pillay, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme Director, t: +32 476 97 42 63; e: roisin.pillay@icj.org

Karolina Babicka, Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +32 475 46 20 67; e: karolina.babicka@icj.org

Peru, Colombia and Guatemala: cases of enforced disappearance and extrajudicial killings documented – Webinar

Peru, Colombia and Guatemala: cases of enforced disappearance and extrajudicial killings documented – Webinar

For decades, victims of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings in Latin America have been demanding justice, truth, and reparations. Despite these efforts, impunity remains rampant. In some cases, victims have been waiting for justice for over four decades.

As a part of its strategy to promote accountability for serious human rights violations around the world, the ICJ, together with partners, is implementing a regional project to address justice for extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Colombia, Guatemala, and Peru, supported by the European Union.

One of the results of the project has been to support the production of three case dossiers by the ICJ’s local partners.

In Colombia, to illustrate one of the patterns of extrajudicial killings, the Asociación de Red Defensores y Defensoras de Derechos Humanos (dhColombia) produced a document concerning three cases of extrajudicial killings committed during 2006 and 2008.

The report Una práctica sistemática ejecuciones extrajudiciales en el eje cafetero (2006-2008) presents the challenges the victims and their lawyers have faced when seeking responsibility for those crimes.

In Peru, the Instituto de Defensa Legal (IDL) documented the enforced disappearances of university students and professors between 1989 to 1993, at the height of the internal conflict. In the report Los desaparecidos de la Universidad Nacional del Centro IDL describes the difficult legal path victims have faced in order to bring state agents suspected of committing crimes to justice.

In Guatemala, to highlight the manner in which enforced disappearances were committed against rural communities during the internal armed conflict, the Asociación de Familiares de Detenidos-Desaparecidos de Guatemala (Famdegua) wrote about the enforced disappearance of more than 500 people in the region of the Veparaces. In the report Las desapariciones forzadas en la región de las Verapaces the story of five cases is presented.

These three reports contribute towards understanding the prevalence of these violations in Latin America, and the available options to tackle impunity.

On 30 September 2020, the ICJ will host a regional webinar to discuss the protection and guarantee of the rights of victims of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial executions in Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Guatemala and Peru.

The webinar will be broadcast live on the ICJ’s Facebook page, at 14 hours (Guatemala time)/15 hours (Colombia and Peru time)/ 17 hours (Chile and Argentina time).

Contact

Kingsley Abbott, Coordinator of the Global Accountability Initiative, e: kingsley.abbott@icj.org

Carolina Villadiego Burbano, Legal and Policy Adviser, Latin America and Regional Coordinator of the Project, e: carolina.villadiego@icj.org

Rocío Quintero M, Legal Adviser, Latin America, e: rocio.quintero@icj.org

 

India: Amnesty International forced to halt work – Government increasingly targeting rights groups

India: Amnesty International forced to halt work – Government increasingly targeting rights groups

Today, the ICJ joined fourteen other human rights organizations in condemning the Indian government’s actions against Amnesty India and pledged to continue support for local human rights defenders and organizations against the recent crackdown.

Amnesty International India announced that it is halting its work in the country after the Indian government froze its bank accounts in an act of reprisal for the organization’s human rights work.

The Indian government’s actions against Amnesty India are part of increasingly repressive tactics to shut down critical voices and groups working to promote, protect, and uphold fundamental rights, said the Association for Progressive Communications, Global Indian Progressive Alliance, International Commission of Jurists, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Front Line Defenders, FORUM-ASIA, Foundation the London Story, Hindus for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, International Service for Human Rights, Minority Rights Group, Odhikar, South Asians for Human Rights (SAHR), and World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) in the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders.

The Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government has accused Amnesty India of violating laws on foreign funding, a charge the group says is politically motivated and constitutes evidence “that the overbroad legal framework is maliciously activated when human rights defenders and groups challenge the government’s grave inactions and excesses.”

The BJP government has increasingly cracked down on civil society, harassing and bringing politically motivated cases against human rights defenders, academics, student activists, journalists, and others critical of the government under sedition, terrorism, and other repressive laws.

These actions increasingly mimic that of authoritarian regimes, which do not tolerate any criticism and shamelessly target those who dare to speak out. With growing criticism of the government’s discriminatory policies and attacks on the rule of law, the authorities seem more interested in shooting the messenger than addressing the grievances. Women’s rights activists and indigenous and minority human rights defenders have been especially vulnerable. The recent action against Amnesty India highlights the stepped-up pressure and violence felt by local defenders on the ground, regardless of their profile.

The authorities have repeatedly used foreign funding regulations under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), a law broadly condemned for violating international human rights law and standards, to target outspoken groups. United Nations experts on human rights defenders, on freedom of expression, and on freedom of association have urged the government to repeal the law, saying it is “being used more and more to silence organisations involved in advocating civil, political, economic, social, environmental or cultural priorities, which may differ from those backed by the Government.”

Yet, the Indian parliament amended the FCRA this month, adding further onerous governmental oversight, additional regulations and certification processes, and operational requirements that would adversely affect civil society groups and effectively restrict access to foreign funding for small nongovernmental organizations.

A robust, independent, and vocal civil society is indispensable in any democracy to ensure a check on government and to hold it accountable, pushing it to do better. Instead of treating human rights groups as its enemies, the government should work with them to protect the rights of all people and ensure accountability at all levels of government.

Contact

Ian Seiderman, ICJ Law and Policy Director: ian.seiderman@icj.org

ICJ webinar highlights States’ international human rights obligations to decriminalize abortion and ensure access to safe and legal abortion

ICJ webinar highlights States’ international human rights obligations to decriminalize abortion and ensure access to safe and legal abortion

On the International Safe Abortion Day, the ICJ held a webinar on the decriminalization of abortion in the Philippines and the Republic of Korea.

The webinar focused on the legal provisions criminalizing abortion and on women human rights defenders’ struggle to decriminalize abortion in the Philippines and in the Republic of Korea. In addition, the participants highlighted States’ legal obligation to guarantee access to legal, safe and affordable abortion and post abortion care for all persons under international human rights law and standards.

Ms. Clara Rita A. Padilla from the Philippines’ Safe Abortion Advocacy Network; Ms. Minhee Ryu, Co-counsel in the 2019 Korean Constitutional Court case on the country’s criminal ban on abortion; and Dr. Heisoo Shin, member of the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) participated as speakers.

“The law imposing penalties on women who have an abortion and those assisting them only endangered the lives of women forced to seek unsafe abortion,” said Ms. Padilla. “Today, the Philippine Safe Abortion Advocacy Network introduced a draft bill, An Act Decriminalizing Induced Abortion to Save the Lives of Women, Girls, and Persons of Diverse Gender Identities, and we will continue advocating the repeal of the current discriminatory law against women and eliminate harmful stigma against women due to the restrictive abortion law and imposition of judgmental religious beliefs.”

Ms. Minhee Ryu talked about the women human rights defender’s movement in the Republic of Korea, including the work of the Joint Action for Reproductive Justice. She also highlighted the legal strategy to draw the Constitutional Court’s attention to the experience of girls, migrant women and women with disabilities in the context of the case that resulted in the Court holding that the criminalization of abortion was unconstitutional in April 2019.

“It is the core obligations of States to ensure the repeal of laws, policies and practices that criminalize, obstruct or undermine access by individuals or a particular group to sexual and reproductive health facilities and services,” said Dr. Heisoo Shin. “Denial of abortion often leads to maternal mortality and morbidity, which, in turn, constitute violations of the rights to life, dignity, autonomy, security, equality and non-discrimination, equality before the law and equal protection of the law without discrimination, privacy, physical and mental health, and the right to freedom from ill-treatment.”

The participants agreed that international human rights law and standards, such as the Human Rights Committee’s General Comment 36 on the right to life, and the CESCR’s General Comment 22 on the right to sexual and reproductive health, are instrumental in worldwide efforts to ensure access to legal, safe and affordable abortion and in advocating for its complete decriminalization.

Contact

Boram Jang, International Legal Adviser, e: boram.jang(a)icj.org

NGOs defend independence of UN human rights experts

NGOs defend independence of UN human rights experts

At the Human Rights Council, the ICJ and other NGOs highlighted with concern renewed attacks against the Council’s independent experts, aimed at interfering with their independence.

The oral statement was delivered by Amnesty International, in the general debate on human rights bodies, on on behalf of 14 NGOs. It read as follows:

“It is with great concern that we note the renewed attacks against the Special Procedures of this Council, through which certain states seek to interfere with their independence and impose political oversight over individual experts. While we welcome the outcome of the informal discussions, we would like to raise a few issues of concern.

As we noted in our letter to you Madame President, the states signatories of the letters rely on PRST 8/2 of 18 June 2008 on the Terms of office of special procedure mandate-holders, which was originally adopted in the specific context of Council discussions on the extension of the terms of mandate holders, and should not be regarded as a wider framework for assessing the performance of mandate holders. Furthermore, the groups of states appear to have ignored the existing Internal Advisory Procedure, instead proceeding directly to attempts to impose political oversight by this Council.

We also note with great concern that several of the signatory states launched wholly inappropriate attacks of a personal nature against Special Procedure mandate holders in the past.1

The allegations presented against the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, in particular, seem little more than objecting to her being especially effective and proactive in doing exactly what this Council has tasked her to do, including monitoring and reporting on violations of the right to life and bringing these to the attention of the Council, and promoting respect for the right to life more generally.

We appreciate the efforts by the Coordination Committee to address broader issues related to the working methods of the Special Procedures, and welcome its willingness to work with the Special Rapporteur on the right to privacy on issues related to methodology and programming of the six outstanding country reports.

The independence of the Special Procedures is absolute in nature, and any attempts to erode that status threatens the credibility and integrity of this Council.

Thank you.”

Amnesty International
ARTICLE 19
Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
Center for Reproductive Rights
Child Rights Connect
CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
DefendDefenders (East and Horn of Africa Human Rights Defenders Project)
Geneva for Human Rights
International Commission of Jurists
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (IMADR)
International Service for Human Rights
Privacy International
Women’s International League for Peace and Freedom (WILPF)

1 Amnesty International and ISHR: HRC 37: Item 5: Human rights bodies and mechanisms, 14 March 2018, Index number: IOR 40/8032/2018, https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/ior40/8032/2018/en/

Translate »