ICJ highlights rights of judges and prosecutors to speak out for rule of law and human rights

ICJ highlights rights of judges and prosecutors to speak out for rule of law and human rights

At the UN, the ICJ today highlighted the rights and duties of judges and prosecutors to exercise their freedoms of expression, assembly and association to defend the rule of law and human rights.

The oral statement was delivered in a Clustered Interactive Dialogue with the Independent Expert on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

It read as follows:

“The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers on freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly of judges and prosecutors.[1]

As the report acknowledges, exercise of these rights can be subject to restrictions arising from the fundamental need for judges and prosecutors to be perceived as independent and impartial. At the same time, as the report also emphasizes, any such restrictions must be provided by law and be demonstrably necessary to such legitimate aims, which in turn crucially requires proportionality.[2] These standards have been recognized both globally and in all regions of the world.[3] Any such restrictions on judges should be adopted and enforced by the judiciary itself.

We particularly welcome the recognition in the report that in situations where democracy and the rule of law are under threat, judges and prosecutors have not only the right, but potentially a duty, to speak out and organize in defence of democracy, the rule of law, and human rights, and that this can include participating in peaceful public demonstrations.[4]

Far too often in the ICJ’s work around the world, we see Executive and Legislative bodies, as well as compromised judicial hierarchies, arbitrarily or selectively targeting judges and prosecutors for removal, demotion or other disciplinary measures, precisely for exercising these rights to defend against threats to the rule of law. Examples highlighted in our submission to your study included Egypt, Morocco, Honduras, Hungary and Bulgaria.[5]

Mr. Rapporteur, how can judiciaries, governments, and civil society organisations (including international or regional legal professional associations) act internationally to support judges and prosecutors who are facing such abuse in another country?

The ICJ also welcomes the reports of the Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. We urge all States to strongly support the renewal of this essential mandate at the current session.

Thank you.”

[1] ICJ’s detailed submission to the Special Rapporteur’s consultation is available at: https://www.icj.org/judgesexpression2019/

[2] Paragraphs 39, 45, 46, 89.

[3] In addition to the global and European, Asian, and American standards cited in the report, see the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa (2005), paras A(4)(s) and (t), and F(d) and (e).

[4] Paragraphs 61, 69, 90, 102.

[5] See for further information: https://www.icj.org/judgesexpression2019/

ICJ commentary on the 2018 “zero draft” of treaty on business and human rights

ICJ commentary on the 2018 “zero draft” of treaty on business and human rights

In July 2018, it was published the “zero draft” of a proposed first universal treaty addressing business and human rights. The document was authored by Ecuador’s Ambassador in Geneva acting as chair of the Intergovernmental Working Group (IGWG) in charge of drafting the instrument.

The draft is strongly focused on issues of legal accountability of business enterprises and access to justice and remedy for those who allege harm by a business enterprise. The draft was presented and discussed in “first reading” by States and observers during the fourth session of the IGWG in October 2018.

In this document, the ICJ presents its comments to the zero draft. This commentary is not intended as a comprehensive assessment of the draft, but it rather addresses select provisions of priority concern to the ICJ on first reading. It contains recommendations on the way to strengthen them in accordance with human rights and rule of law principles.

Universal-Comments Draft Treaty BHR-Advocacy-2019-ENG (full text, in PDF)

ICJ submission to the Working Group on the Use of Mercenaries

ICJ submission to the Working Group on the Use of Mercenaries

The ICJ draws attention to instances of alleged human rights abuses by the private military and security companies in all regions and analyses the challenges related to the accountability frameworks and access to justice.

The ICJ contribution is in response to the call by the UN Working Group on the use of mercenaries, which also has a mandate on private security companies, for written information to assist in its deliberations on “private military and security companies in extractive industries – impact on human rights”.

Private Military and Security Companies (PMSCs) are hired by companies engaged in extractive operations in all geographic regions of the world, but their activities or operations that give rise to allegations of human rights violations and abuses seem to be prevalent regions where abundance of natural resources and the favorable environment for foreign investment are propitious to the establishment of extractive companies in, many times, fragile contexts.

In this regard ICJ suggests the Working group to consider the following recommendations:

  • States should ensure that their domestic legal framework provides for real access to effective remedies for victims of human rights abuse by PMSCs and extractive companies.
  • Provide guidance to States to establish effective legal accountability frameworks of criminal or civil nature that pay due consideration to the inherently dangerous nature of the mining activity and the security services operating in that context.
  • Recommend that States establish legal frameworks that require meaningful reporting/disclosure of company policies and practices in relation to human rights, including their use and effectiveness of grievance mechanisms at the operational level.
  • Both extractive and security companies should respect all human rights in accordance with international standards, including the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights and other sectorial guidance applicable to PMSCs.
  • Security companies, whatever their structure or ownership, should carry out enhanced processes of due diligence consistent with international best practices, and participate in remediation schemes.

Universal-ICJ Submission PSC and extractive industries-Advocacy-non legal submissions-2019-ENG (full text of the report, in PDF)

Translate »