Aug 21, 2020 | News
The ICJ today condemned the conviction and imprisonment of human rights defender Jolovan Wham following the dismissal of his appeal by Singapore’s highest court in connection with a conference he had organized in 2016.
The ICJ urged the Singapore’s authorities to take action to quash the conviction and immediately release Wham from prison.
The ICJ further called on the authorities to refrain from targeting human rights defenders for harassment through unwarranted legal proceedings and to amend the country’s Public Order Act which formed the basis for the charges against Wham.
“Wham will now be in jail for organizing an indoor private discussion, in violation of his rights to free expression and freedom of association and peaceful assembly,” said Ian Seiderman, the ICJ’s Legal and Policy Director.
In November 2016, Wham organized a discussion entitled “Civil Disobedience and Social Movements” for approximately 50 participants in an indoor event venue, which included Hong Kong activist Joshua Wong as a speaker who called in via a video call. Prior to the event, Wham had not applied for a police permit to conduct the discussion, which was required under the Public Order Act (POA) as Wong is not a citizen of Singapore.
In 2019, Wham was convicted of violating section 16(1) of the POA and sentenced to a fine of S$2,000 (approx. USD 1,463) or ten days’ imprisonment in default by the District Court, following which his appeal was dismissed by the High Court. Yesterday, his appeal against the High Court decision was dismissed by Singapore’s apex Court of Appeal. Today, Wham began his prison term of ten days.
“The highly flawed Public Order Act was initially adopted to regulate public assemblies and processions, but has now perversely expanded in its scope of application to cover even private discussions,” said Seiderman.
In January 2019, the UN Special Rapporteurs on the right to freedom of opinion and expression, the situation of human rights defenders and the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association issued a joint statement expressing concern that the conviction was “clearly neither a necessary nor a proportional response to the actions of Jolovan Wham.” The Special Rapporteurs noted that the action had wrongly targeted the “legitimate exercise of the right to freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly in Singapore.”
“The conviction and imprisonment of Wham marks a continued trend of abuse of poorly conceived laws to limit free expression, association and peaceful assembly in Singapore and harass individuals who seek to bring human rights violations to light in the country,” said Seiderman.
The ICJ calls on Singapore’s legislators also to act to amend other non-human rights compliant laws, including the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA), Administration of Justice (Protection) Act (AJPA), and criminal defamation provisions under its Penal Code.
Wham was previously convicted in 2018 under the AJPA for alleged contempt of court following a comment on Facebook that “Malaysian judges are more independent than Singapore’s in cases with political implications”. He currently has active charges under the POA relating to the organizing of a vigil for a death row inmate and the holding of a silent protest on an MRT train and is being investigated under the POA for holding signs silently in solidarity with other activists.
See also
In a 2019 regional report, the ICJ found that in Singapore, non-human rights compliant provisions in POFMA, AJPA and other contempt of court provisions, civil and criminal defamation laws have been used to curtail freedom of expression and information online.
ICJ, Dictating the Internet: Curtailing Free Expression, Opinion and Information Online in Southeast Asia, December 2019
Similarly, the ICJ and other human rights organizations have called on Singapore authorities to drop investigations of human rights lawyer M Ravi and others under the contempt of court law and cease their harassment of human rights defenders. On 13 August, in relation to a death penalty case M Ravi is defending, the Court of Appeal opined that a statement made by the Attorney-General’s Chambers against the lawyer could have been “reasonably construed as intimidating”, offering a recent glimpse into the trend of legal harassment faced by human rights defenders in the country.
ICJ, ICJ and other groups call on authorities to drop investigations under abusive contempt of court law, March 2020
Aug 20, 2020 | News
Despite remarkable efforts to recover and identify human remains in Latin America, there are still thousands of cases where remains have not been identified and returned to their family. Crucially, families still struggle to understand and participate in the forensic process.
To address this issue, el Equipo Argentino de Antropología Forense (EAAF) launched today a Forensic Guide which aims at providing practical and accessible information on the investigation, recovery, and analysis of human remains.
Currently, this publication is only available in Spanish but an English version will be provided in the forthcoming months.
The guide will be particularly useful for people who have no previous forensic knowledge and will contribute towards improving the understanding and participation of victims and civil society organizations in the search for disappeared persons.
The Guide was written by Luis Fondebrider, the executive director of the EAAF and takes into account international standards including the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016).
The ICJ, the Equipo Peruano de Antropología Forense (EPAF) and the Fundación de Antropología Forense de Guatemala (FAFG) provided input during the Guide’s development.
The Guide was launched during a Webinar. The key speakers were Luis Fondebrider from the EAAF; Claudia Rivera from the FAFG and Franco Mora from the EPAF. It was moderated by Carolina Villadiego from the ICJ.
At the launch, all the forensic experts emphasized the central role that the families of disappeared persons must play in the process of investigation, recovery, and analysis of human remains. In particular, it was acknowledged that they not only have key information to find the remains but also, they have driven the processes.
Background
The Guide was produced as part of a regional project addressing justice for extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Colombia, Guatemala, and Peru, which is coordinated by the ICJ.
The aim of the project is to promote the accountability of perpetrators and access to effective remedies and reparation for victims and their families in cases of extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Colombia, Guatemala and Peru – and Latin America more broadly – through effective, accountable and inclusive laws, institutions and practices that also reduce the risk of future violations. The project is supported by the EU European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR).
The ICJ’s partners include the Asociación de Familiares de Detenidos-Desaparecidos de Guatemala (FAMDEGUA), Asociación Red de Defensores y Defensoras de Derechos Humanos (dhColombia), Equipo Argentino de Antropología Forense (EAAF), Equipo Peruano de Antropología Forense (EPAF), Fundación de Antropología Forense de Guatemala (FAFG), and the Instituto de Defensa Legal (IDL).
Contacts:
Kingsley Abbott, Coordinator of the Global Accountability Initiative, e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Carolina Villadiego, Legal and Policy Adviser, Latin America, and Regional Coordinator of the Project, e: carolina.villadiego(a)icj.org
Aug 20, 2020 | Artículos, Noticias
A pesar de esfuerzos significativos para recuperar e identificar restos óseos en América Latina, todavía hay miles de casos donde los restos no han sido identificados y entregados a los familiares. Asimismo, se debe destacar el hecho de que los familiares todavía tienen problemas para entender y participar en el proceso forense.
Con el fin de contribuir a la solución de este problema, el Equipo Argentino de Antropología Forense (EAAF) lanzó hoy una guía forense con información práctica y accesible sobre la investigación, recuperación y análisis de restos óseos.
La guía es particularmente útil para las personas que no tienen previos conocimientos forenses. Además, contribuirá para mejorar el entendimiento y la participación de las víctimas y organizaciones de la sociedad civil en la búsqueda de personas desaparecidas.
La guía fue escrita por Luis Fondebrider, director ejecutivo del EAAF y para su elaboración se tuvo en cuenta los estándares internacionales en la materia, incluyendo el Protocolo de Minnesota sobre la Investigación de Muertes Potencialmente Ilícitas (2016). La Comisión Internacional de Juristas (ICJ), el Equipo Peruano de Antropología Forense (EPAF) y la Fundación de Antropología Forense de Guatemala (FAFG) contribuyeron con insumos para la elaboración de la guía.
La guía fue lanzada durante un webinar. Los panelistas del evento fueron Luis Fondebrider del EAAF; Claudia Rivera de la FAFG y Franco Mora del EPAF. Contó con la moderación de Carolina Villadiego de la CIJ.
En el lanzamiento, todos los expertos forenses enfatizaron en el rol central que los familiares de las personas desaparecidas deben tener en el proceso de investigación, recuperación y análisis de restos óseos. En particular, se resaltó que los familiares no solo tienen información clave para encontrar los restos, sino que también, son los que impulsan estos procesos.
Actualmente, la guía está disponible en español y en los próximos meses estará disponible en inglés.
Contexto:
La guía fue producida como parte de un proyecto regional para promover justicia para ejecuciones extrajudiciales y desapariciones forzadas en Colombia, Guatemala y Perú, que es coordinado por la CIJ.
El objetivo principal del proyecto es mejorar la rendición de cuentas en casos de ejecuciones extrajudiciales y desapariciones forzadas, a través del fortalecimiento de capacidades de jueces, fiscales, investigadores, víctimas, abogados, forenses, y organizaciones de la sociedad civil. El proyecto cuenta con el apoyo del Instrumento Europeo para la Democracia y los Derechos Humanos (IEDDH).
Además, se implementa en conjunto con la Asociación Red de Defensores y Defensoras de Derechos Humanos de Colombia (dhColombia), el Equipo Argentino de Antropología Forense (EAAF), la Asociación de Familiares de Detenidos-Desaparecidos de Guatemala (FAMDEGUA), el Equipo Peruano de Antropología Forense (EPAF), la Fundación de Antropología Forense de Guatemala (FAFG), y el Instituto de Defensa Legal de Perú (IDL).
Contactos:
Kingsley Abbott, Coordinador de la iniciativa global de rendición de cuentas de la CIJ. Correo electrónico: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Carolina Villadiego, Asesora Legal, América Latina y coordinadora regional del proyecto. Correo Electrónico: carolina.villadiego(a)icj.org
Aug 19, 2020 | Artículos, Noticias
Hoy la CIJ llamó a las autoridades públicas a abstenerse de realizar comentarios o acciones que puedan socavar la integridad del proceso judicial y la independencia de la Rama Judicial.
El 4 de agosto la Sala Especial de Instrucción de la Sala Penal de la Corte Suprema de Justicia resolvió la situación jurídica del expresidente Álvaro Uribe Vélez, y ordenó su detención preventiva, sustituyéndola por detención domiciliaria, en relación con el caso que se sigue en su contra por los presuntos delitos de soborno a testigo y fraude procesal.
Desde hace días, varios políticos han hecho declaraciones inapropiadas e incendiarias respecto de la justicia, incluidas algunas que sugieren que los jueces toman sus decisiones basándose en prejuicios ideológicos o políticos en lugar de basarse en la Constitución y la ley.
El presidente de Colombia, Iván Duque, expresó en una declaración trasmitida por televisión que le “duele como colombiano que muchos de los que han lacerado al país con barbarie se defiendan en libertad o inclusive tengan garantizado jamás ir a prisión, y que a un servidor público ejemplar que ha ocupado la más alta dignidad del Estado no se le permita defenderse en libertad con la presunción de inocencia. Soy y seré siempre un creyente en la inocencia y en la honorabilidad de quien con su ejemplo se ha ganado un lugar en la historia de Colombia”.
La CIJ enfatiza que es inapropiado que un jefe de Estado u otro funcionario del poder ejecutivo intervenga de esta manera en un caso que está siendo objeto de estudio en la Rama Judicial. Los Principios Básicos relativos a la independencia de la judicatura de las Naciones Unidas dejan claro que “[t]odas las instituciones gubernamentales y de otra índole respetarán y acatarán la independencia de la judicatura”, y esto implica que deben abstenerse de “influencias, alicientes, presiones, amenazas o intromisiones indebidas, sean directas o indirectas”.
Adicionalmente, y como reacción a la detención del expresidente Uribe, el partido político “Centro Democrático” del cual son miembros el presidente Duque y el expresidente Uribe, emitió un comunicado de prensa en el que dijo que planeaban proponer una Asamblea Nacional Constituyente “con el propósito de despolitizar la justicia”. Y el expresidente Uribe mencionó el 16 de agosto que esperaba que su partido político iniciara una reforma judicial a través de referendo para acabar con la “politización” de la Corte.
La CIJ considera que las acciones de reforma a la justicia no deben basarse en reacciones políticas a un caso o una decisión judicial determinada. Las reformas al sector justicia deben basarse en las buenas prácticas y en los estándares que permitan reforzar la independencia judicial y contar con una pronta, oportuna y justa administración de justicia.
Por último, el vicepresidente de Estados Unidos, Mike Pence, también hizo comentarios inapropiados frente a la justicia colombiana, al tuitear el 14 de agosto que se unía a las voces que pedían a las autoridades colombianas que permitieran que Álvaro Uribe “se defendiera como un hombre libre”.
Contacto: Carolina Villadiego Burbano, Asesora Legal para América Latina de la CIJ, e: carolina.villadiego(a)icj.org
Aug 19, 2020 | News
Today the ICJ called on the public authorities to refrain from comments or actions that could undermine the integrity of the judicial process and the independence of the judiciary.
On August 4, the Instruction Special Chamber of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice ordered the pretrial detention, substituted for house arrest, of the former President Álvaro Uribe Velez, relating to allegations of bribery of witnesses and procedural fraud.
In recent days, a number of politicians have made highly inappropriate and inflammatory statements, including some suggesting that judges are making their decisions based on ideological or political biases rather than based on the Constitution and the law.
Colombian president Ivan Duque said in remarks broadcast on television on the 4 of August: “it hurts as a Colombian that many of those who have lacerated the country with barbarism defend themselves at liberty or are even guaranteed to never go to prison, and that an exemplary public servant who has held the highest dignity of the State is not allowed to defend himself in freedom with the presumption of innocence. I am and will always be a believer in the innocence and in the honor of him who, with his example, have earned a place in the history of Colombia.” (unofficial translation).
The ICJ stresses that it is inappropriate for a head-of-State or other executive official to intervene in this manner in a case that is under active judicial proceedings. The UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary make clear that “it is the duty of all governmental and other institutions to respect and observe the independence of the judiciary” and this includes refraining from any “improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect.”
In reaction to Senator Uribe’s arrest, the political party “Centro Democrático”, of which both President Duque and former President Uribe are members, released a press statement saying that they were planning to propose a National Constituent Assembly with the purpose of “depoliticizing justice”. Also, former President Uribe mentioned on 16 of August that he hoped his political party would initiate a reform of the justice system through a “referendum” to end the “politicization” of the Court.
The ICJ considers that any actions concerning reforms of the justice sector must be based on the standards and best practices that reinforce the independence of the judiciary and the prompt, timely and fair administration of justice, and not on a political reaction based on a single active case.
Lastly, United States Vice President Mike Pence has also made inappropriate remarks related to the Colombian justice system, tweeting on August 14 that he joined the voices that called Colombian authorities to let Alvaro Uribe “defend himself as a free man”.
Contact
Carolina Villadiego Burbano, ICJ Latin America legal and policy adviser, e: carolina.villadiego(a)icj.org
