Aug 10, 2020 | News
Today, the ICJ published the recommendations from a workshop on strengthening the work of the specialized bodies of the Bar Association on the protection of the rights of lawyers in Tajikistan, held in December 2019.
The event was held on 16 and 17 December 2019 in the city of Gulistan in the North of Tajikistan for members of the Commission for the Protection of the Rights of Lawyers (CPRL) of the Union of Lawyers of the Republic of Tajikistan.The ICJ organized this seminar in cooperation with the Union of Lawyers of Tajikistan and the Legal Policy Research Centre, Kazakhstan.
The President of the Tajikistan Union of Lawyers, heads of regional departments of the Union of Lawyers, who are members of the Commission on the protection of the rights of lawyers, and other lawyers took part in the two-day discussion.
Based on the outcome of this discussion, the participants elaborated the recommendations to strengthen the work of the Commission. Those recommendations are provided below.
The recommendations have been formulated on the basis of the views expressed by members of the Tajikistan Union of Lawyers addressing the situation in Tajikistan, and are not intended necessarily to reflect the legal or policy positions or other views of the ICJ or to be applicable to other contexts.
This set of recommendations deals with key challenges faced by the CPRL in upholding the independence, security and effective work of lawyers in Tajikistan. However, the list of these issues is not exhaustive nor comprehensive and should be further reviewed in light of ongoing developments in the legal profession and the justice system as a whole.
The recommendations should be read in light of the international law obligations of Tajikistan to protect the right of access to a lawyer, to a fair trial and to effective remedies for violations of human rights, including under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and international standards on the role of lawyers, including the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
Recommendations in English (PDF)
Recommendations in Russian (PDF)
Aug 10, 2020 | Новости
Сегодня Международная комиссия юристов (МКЮ)_опубликовала рекомендации по итогам семинара по усилению работы специализированных органов Коллегии адвокатов по защите прав адвокатов в Таджикистане, проведенного в декабре 2019 года.
Данное мероприятие было проведено 16-17 декабря 2019 года в городе Гулистан на севере Таджикистана и было организовано для членов Комиссии по защите прав адвокатов («Комиссия») Союза адвокатов Республики Таджикистан. Семинар проводился МКЮ совместно с Союзом адвокатов Таджикистана и Центром исследования правовой политики (Казахстан).
За два дня в обсуждении приняли участие председатель Союза адвокатов Таджикистана, руководители региональных подразделений Союза адвокатов, которые являются членами Комитета по защите прав адвокатов, и другие адвокаты. По итогам обсуждения участники подготовили рекомендации по усилению деятельности Комиссии, которые приведены ниже.
Рекомендации были разработаны на основе мнения членов Союза адвокатов Таджикистана относительно ситуации в Таджикистане и не обязательно отражают правовую или политическую позицию и иные взгляды МКЮ, а также могут не быть применимыми в других контекстах.
Данный перечень рекомендаций касается основных проблем, с которыми сталкивается Комиссия при обеспечении независимости адвокатов, их безопасности и эффективной работы в Таджикистане. При этом перечень рассматриваемых вопросов не является исчерпывающим и всеобъемлющим, но подлежит дальнейшему редактированию в свете происходящих процессов в адвокатуре и системе правосудия в целом.
Рекомендации подлежат прочтению в свете международно-правовых обязательств Таджикистана по защите права на доступ к адвокату, справедливое судебное разбирательство и эффективные средства правовой защиты от нарушения прав человека, в том числе в соответствии с Международным пактом о гражданских и политических правах, а также международными нормами в отношении роли адвокатов, включая Основные принципы ООН, касающиеся роли юристов.
Рекомендации на русском языке (PDF)
Рекомендации на английском языке (PDF)
Aug 7, 2020 | News
The ICJ deplores the explosion at Beirut’s port district on 4 August 2020 that caused a large number of fatalities and casualties and calls for the prompt establishment of a special, independent, impartial and transparent mechanism to investigate the devastating blast with a view to ensuring accountability and redress for the victims.
The shockwave from the blast rippled across Lebanon’s capital, killing at least 157 people and injuring some 5,000 others, according to latest figures. The death toll is expected to rise as emergency services continue to search for dozens of missing persons under the debris of destroyed buildings. The Governor of Beirut estimates that the widespread destruction caused by the explosion has left some 300,000 people without shelter after their homes were rendered uninhabitable.
“Tuesday’s explosion has immeasurably compounded the suffering of a society already reeling from political unrest, prolonged economic mismanagement and a surge in COVID-19 cases,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme.
“Given the Lebanese legal system’s politicization and lack of independence and accountability, Lebanon should work with the United Nations to establish a special, independent mechanism to carry out the investigation in line with international law and standards with a view to establishing the facts, making recommendations for appropriate accountability measures, including criminal prosecutions if warranted, and for preventing such a catastrophe from happening again.”
According to international human rights law and standards, and specifically the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death, the probe into the explosion must be prompt, thorough, independent, impartial and transparent.
While the Lebanese authorities have pledged to conduct a “transparent investigation” into the blast and mete out “severe punishment” to those responsible, given the Lebanese justice system’s systemic flaws and shortcomings, the persistent allegations of corruption, and a long-entrenched culture of impunity and de facto immunity of the country’s political leadership, the ICJ considers that the Lebanese authorities would not be capable of conducting such an investigation in a manner compatible with international human rights law and standards. The organization has extensively documented how improper executive influence and interference have continued to undermine the independence of the Office of the Public Prosecutor and of Lebanon’s judiciary. As a result, allegations of political corruption, chronic mismanagement and systematic abuses of power have not been investigated and have therefore gone unpunished over the years, eventually fuelling the 2019-2020 popular uprising against the government and the political system.
The ICJ has called on the Lebanese authorities to introduce and implement extensive legal and policy reforms to strengthen judicial independence and accountability in the country. None of these reforms have materialized.
“The independent mechanism should have a mandate to establish the truth, provide adequate, effective and prompt redress and reparation to the victims for the harm suffered, including through the award of compensation, and by ensuring that those responsible are held to account,” Benarbia concluded.
The ICJ further calls on the international community to support the establishment of such a mechanism.
The international community should also provide humanitarian aid and facilitate its delivery within the country ensuring that it reaches first the most in need and vulnerable among the population as they struggle to access healthcare, shelter, food and water.
The Lebanese authorities must be transparent and ensure the right of each individual to receive the necessary information on the potential health risks in the aftermath of the explosion, including as result of exposure to toxic fumes. Consistent with their obligations under international human rights law and standards to guarantee the rights to life and health, the Lebanese authorities must also take all necessary measures to prevent people from suffering additional harm.
Thus far, a number of Beirut port officials have been placed under house arrest pending the Lebanese authorities’ investigation into the explosion. With respect to this, the ICJ calls on the authorities to ensure due process and fair trial guarantees to persons deprived of their liberty who may eventually be charged with criminal offences.
Background information
President Michel Aoun and Prime Minister Hassan Diab have linked the blast to a stockpile of approximately 2,750 tons of ammonium nitrate, which had been stored in a waterfront warehouse at Beirut’s Port district for at least six years. The circumstances surrounding the ignition of the highly combustible material, however, remain unclear.
Furthermore, reports indicate that customs officials overseeing the ammonium nitrate’s storage at the warehouse contacted Lebanese officials, including members of the judiciary, on multiple occasions to alert them to the danger posed by such storage and to seek guidance on how to deal with it, but their repeated calls were ignored.
The explosion strikes Lebanon as it grapples with multiple crises, including the COVID-19 pandemic, and against the backdrop of an ongoing popular protest movement against rampant corruption, dysfunctional institutions and sectarian power structures, in addition to an acute State-induced socio-economic crisis that has eroded living standards and left many destitute and literally hunger-stricken. Successive governments and legislative authorities have consistently failed to effectively address these hardships and institute comprehensive and necessary reforms.
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 22 979 38 17; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org.
Download
English (PDF)
Arabic (PDF)
Aug 7, 2020 | Advocacy, Agendas, News
On 6-7 August the ICJ co-hosted a symposium on threats to judicial independence in East and Southern Africa.
The event was held with the collaboration of the Africa Judges and Jurists Forum, the Kenyan Section of the International Commission of Jurists Kenya Section, Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa, Southern Africa Development Community Lawyers Association, Malawi Law Society, Pan African Lawyers Association, East Africa Lawyers Association and the American Bar Association.
Recent actions taken to undermine judicial independence in East and Southern Africa include proposed constitutional amendments, executive interference with the functioning of the Judicial Service Commissions and verbal as well as physical threats against judges.
Participants in the symposium included judges, lawyers, academics and civil society representative. ICJ Commissioner and former Chief Justice of Kenya Dr Willy Mutunga, and Professor Jill Ghai of Katiba Institute delivered the key note addresses.
Dr Willy Mutunga speaking to challenges of judicial independence in the political context of Kenya in his keynote address, said “I believe that the independence of the judiciary… is about the integrity of the judicial officers… Building peoples’ confidence in the judiciary and the judicial officers depends on the integrity of the institution and its judicial officers and staff.”
In her address, Professor Jill Ghai evaluated various ways in which independence of the judiciary is undermined, taking into account examples from various countries.
“We must not relent in letting the Executive know that we are watching whenever there are attempts to undermine the judiciary,” Ghai said in closing.
ICJ Secretary General Sam Zarifi that judicial independence was facing genuine threats, not just in Africa but throughout the world.
“The issue of judicial independence has been at the heart of the ICJ’s work for the last 70 years almost… We have been defending the rule of law and human rights. For both of those the independence of the judiciary is absolutely essential,” Zarifi said.
On the second day of the symposium, participants into four groups discussed the nature of challenges and weaknesses in the Executive-Judiciary relations, litigation as a strategy for protecting judicial independence, strategies for increasing social and political activism in defence of judicial independence, and the prospects and strategies for regional and international advocacy in the age of COVID-19 respectively.
In his closing remarks, outgoing ICJ Regional Director Arnold Tsunga flagged Malawi as a recent case study where the judiciary had demonstrated its independence when the Constitutional Court nullified the 2019 presidential election results, citing widespread irregularities.
Watch the proceedings of the symposium here:
Welcome and keynote address
Closing remarks
Contact:
Justice Mavedzenge (ICJ Legal Advisor) t: +27793889990 e: justice.mavedzenge(a)icj.org
Shaazia Ebrahim (ICJ Media Officer) t: +27716706719 e: shaazia.ebrahim(a)icj.org
Aug 6, 2020
In a report published today, the ICJ called on the Government of Nepal to undertake substantial reforms in order to ensure that the wide-ranging constitutional and political restructuring of recent years will allow the country to deliver on human rights accountability and access to justice for all Nepalis.
The Report on Human Rights and the Rule of Law in a Federal Nepal incorporates the findings of a High-Level Mission undertaken by the ICJ in December 2019.
The Report offers more than 50 recommendations, including that the Nepali authorities act to remove obstacles to access to justice for those seeking a remedy and reparation for human rights violations and abuses, both from the conflict era and contemporary times. The ICJ also called upon the authorities to end political interference in the enforcement of the law and administration of justice, including in respect to directives from the courts and the National Human Rights Commission.
“In the face of the challenges of federal decentralization, it is vital that all Nepalis are able to trust in their fair and equal treatment under the law,” said ICJ Commissioner and former Nepal Supreme Court Justice Kalyan Shrestha. “This report is a guide to how that public trust can be strengthened in Nepal.”
The ICJ Mission found that despite strides in the development of human rights law, policy and jurisprudence, many long-standing obstacles to accountability and access to justice persisted and remained largely unaddressed.
“Nepal remains caught in a cycle of impunity that threatens to undermine the rule of law, as evidenced by a stalled transitional justice process, compromised justice sector institutions, a fragmented civil society, and the persistence of systemic discrimination,” said ICJ Commissioner Dame Silvia Cartwright. “Despite notable efforts by provincial policymakers, a robust judiciary and the relentless advocacy of civil society, authorities representing the ‘new’ Nepal are in danger of repeating the mistakes of the past in failing to truly listen and respond to the demands of Nepalis for justice.”
The Report considers the human rights impacts of recent changes in the political and legal context, such as the implementation of provisions of the 2015 Constitution that operationalize elements of a new federal system of governance, long-awaited amendments to the Penal Code and other laws affecting the criminal justice system, and a lack of progress in the transitional justice process, as well as the de-stabilizing effects of recent political developments and COVID19.
The Mission was undertaken by ICJ Commissioners Justice Sanji Monageng (Botswana), Dame Silvia Cartwright (New Zealand) and Justice Kalyan Shrestha (Nepal), as well as ICJ Legal and Policy Director Ian Seiderman and ICJ Asia-Pacific Director Frederick Rawski.
The Report, building on a 2017 ICJ baseline study, offers findings in three main areas:
- Non-Implementation. Nepal has made notable strides in the progressive development of law and jurisprudence that incorporates significant elements of the international human rights law framework, such as the fundamental rights provisions of the 2015 Constitution. However, constitutional mandates, legislation and judicial decisions have in many cases gone unimplemented or been actively undermined at the expense of public trust in government, and access to justice for victims.
- Independent and Impartial Institutions. Nepal has made progress in establishing and building the capacity of justice institutions including police, prosecutors, the judiciary, transitional justice mechanisms and national human rights bodies. However, these institutions suffer from weaknesses in capacity and independence, and are vulnerable to political influence and manipulation.
- Accountability and Access to Justice. Despite improvements in the law and progress in institution-building, Nepalis still face the same barriers to accessing the justice system. Frontline institutions, particularly the police and prosecutors, lack the political will and capacity to effectively interface with communities. Individual Nepalis, especially those from ethnic minority communities or without proof of citizenship, typically face overwhelming obstacles when pursing a remedy in the courts.
Safeguarding the independence of the judiciary was a central theme of the Mission. The Mission found that the Supreme Court continues to effectively carry out its responsibilities under Nepal’s constitution and international law to protect human rights. However, it also concluded that persistent non-implementation of judicial decisions constituted a serious abdication of responsibility on the part of the executive authorities.
“The Mission was impressed by the role that the judiciary, and particularly the Supreme Court, has played in protecting human rights,” said ICJ Commissioner Justice Sanji Monageng. “However, we repeatedly heard concerns that officials routinely ignore judicial decisions – to such a degree that non-implementation threatens to diminish the credibility of the judiciary in the eyes of the public.”
The Mission found that the failure to respect judicial decisions was exacerbated by political interference in the appointment processes of key institutions, such as the Supreme Court, Nepal Police, National Human Rights Commission and transitional justice bodies. Among its recommendations, the report calls for the adoption of more fair and transparent appointment processes, and other measures to prevent political interference in the application of the law.
“Political interference in the appointments of high public officials erodes public trust, degrades the effectiveness of governance, and creates conditions for corruption,” added Justice Shrestha. “This includes the current system of judicial appointments, which is vulnerable to political influence, and must be reformed.”
Drawing on these findings and observations, the report offers extensive recommendations directed to the Office of the Prime Minister, federal and provincial legislatures, the Nepal Police, the Office of the Attorney General, the judiciary including the Supreme Court and National Judicial Academy, the National Human Rights Commission, civil society and the diplomatic community.
Download
Human Rights and the Rule of Law in a Federal Nepal: Recommendations from an ICJ High-Level Mission in English and Nepali.
Executive Summary and Recommendations in Nepali.
Story in English and Nepali
Contact
Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia-Pacific Director, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org
Ian Seiderman: ICJ Legal and Policy Director, e: ian.seiderman(a)icj.org
Mandira Sharma: ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, e: mandira.sharma(a)icj.org
