International Commission of Jurists
Tunisia: ICJ makes a “follow-up” submission to the UN Human Rights Committee

Tunisia: ICJ makes a “follow-up” submission to the UN Human Rights Committee

Dec 21, 2023 | News

On 18 December 2023, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) filed a submission to the Human Rights Committee (the Committee) on Tunisia’s implementation of the Committee’s 2020 concluding observations regarding the Constitutional Court and the use of counter-terrorism provisions in the context of the Committee’s follow-up procedure.

“Since July 2021, President Kais Said has systematically eroded all checks on his authority, including by curtailing the powers of the Constitutional Court under the 2022 Constitution and by instigating arbitrary prosecutions against those suspected of opposing his rule , including judges, journalists, human rights defenders, and political opponents,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA director. “The Tunisian authorities must abide by their obligations under international law, immediately reinstate a democratic constitutional order, and end the use of the criminal process and counter-terrorism measures to crackdown on dissent and free speech.”

In April 2022, pursuant to the Committees’ request to the State party to provide follow-up information on the implementation of its recommendations regarding the Constitutional Court, the state of emergency and counter-terrorism, and freedom of peaceful assembly and excessive use of force by the State’s agents, Tunisia submitted further information regarding its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) as they pertain to the above-mentioned concerns. During the Committee’s 140th session between 4 and 28 March 2024, this information, and Tunisia’s implementation of the Committee’s recommendations on the same, will be reviewed.

The ICJ’s submission to the Committee highlights a number of ongoing human rights concerns with respect to the country’s implementation of and compliance with the provisions of ICCPR, which are not adequately addressed in the State’s submission of further information, including:

  • Article 2(3). By failing to establish a Constitutional Court, and by severely limiting the independence and powers of the Constitutional Court under the new Constitution – should one ever be established – Tunisia has failed to provide recourse to resolve disputes about the constitutionality of the exceptional decrees promulgated by the President under the state of exception, including by removing the power of the legislature to challenge the constitutionality of such decrees in the new Constitution;
    .
  • Article 4(1) and (3). By failing to specify the nature of the public emergency that purportedly necessitated the suspension of the Constitution in July 2021 per article 80 of the 2014 Constitution on state of exception, and the corollary interference with ICCPR rights, and by failing to notify the derogation to these rights, Tunisia has failed to meet its obligations to prove and ensure that the exceptional measures adopted by the President were “strictly required by the exigencies of the situation”;
    .
  • Article 9(1). By arbitrarily detaining perceived political opponents, lawyers or judges under counter-terrorism provisions without reliable evidence, Tunisia is unlawfully interfering with their right to liberty;
    .
  • Article 19 (1) and (3). By arbitrarily investigating and prosecuting members of the judiciary, political opponents and lawyers under counter-terrorism provisions, Tunisia is unlawfully interfering with their right to express their opinions both in their professional and personal capacity; and
    .
  • Article 14(1). Through interference in the appointment, career, disciplining and dismissal of judges, prosecutors and High Judicial Council members, the President has undermined the independence and impartiality of tribunals presiding over criminal investigations and prosecutions, including with respect to counter-terrorism proceedings against perceived political opponents and members of the judiciary.

Contact

Said Benarbia, Director, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3800; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Laos: 11 years of government inaction on Sombath Somphone’s enforced disappearance

Laos: 11 years of government inaction on Sombath Somphone’s enforced disappearance

Dec 15, 2023 | Advocacy, News

On the 11-year anniversary of the enforced disappearance of Lao civil society leader Sombath Somphone, we, the undersigned civil society organizations and individuals, strongly condemn the Lao government’s continued failure to provide necessary information as to his fate and whereabouts and reiterate our calls to the authorities to deliver truth, justice and reparations to his family.

International concerns over Sombath’s case, expressed by international civil society, United Nations (UN) human rights experts, and UN member states on last year’s anniversary of Sombath’s enforced disappearance, have been ignored by the Lao government.

On 25 September 2023, in a submission to the UN Human Rights Committee as part of its follow-up review of Laos under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Lao government repeated previous misleading statements and miserably failed to provide any additional information on the steps it said it had taken to find Sombath. The government claimed it “never stopped trying to find the truth” about Sombath’s fate “in order to bring the offender(s) to justice.” In reality, the Lao authorities have continued to disregard Sombath’s wife, Shui Meng Ng, and have not provided her with any updates on her husband’s case since 2017. The government then made the extraordinary assertion that its Task Force’s investigation had been “carried out on the basis of transparency, impartiality and accountability, including the use of modern investigative techniques consistent with international standards by the capable inquiry officials.” It concluded that the case of Sombath needed “more time for investigation” and added that the Task Force was “still active in the investigation” and had “not yet closed the case.”

These government statements are unequivocally false in suggesting any degree of transparency. Existing evidence is clear that the Lao government has been engaged in a continuous cover-up of the facts of Sombath’s case since he was forcibly disappeared in 2012, including providing misleading information about its actions to his family, the Lao public, and the international community, as stated above.

We deplore the unmistakable pattern of inaction, negligence, and obfuscation that various Lao authorities have repeatedly engaged in for more than a decade and we continue to resolutely stand in solidarity with Sombath’s family and all other victims of enforced disappearances in Laos.

We reiterate our calls on the Lao authorities to take real and effective measures to establish the fate or whereabouts of Sombath and all other victims of enforced disappearances in the country, identify the perpetrators of such serious crimes, and provide victims with an effective remedy and full reparations. We also urge the government to immediately ratify without reservations the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which it signed in 2008, and to fully implement it into national law, policies, and practices.

As upcoming chair for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Laos will be placed in a strategic position to lead the regional efforts to strengthen, promote, and protect human rights. However, its continued failure to act on Sombath’s enforced disappearance sends a message of inadequacy to head the regional bloc and to fulfill ASEAN’s purpose under Article 1(7) of the ASEAN Charter, which is to strengthen democracy, enhance good governance, and the rule of law and to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms.

We will continue to seek justice and accountability for Sombath. Until the truth is found and justice is delivered to his family, we will not stop demanding answers from the Lao government to the same question we have been asking for the past 11 years: “Where is Sombath?”

Background

Sombath Somphone, a pioneer in community-based development and youth empowerment, was last seen at a police checkpoint on a busy street of Vientiane on the evening of 15 December 2012. Footage from a traffic CCTV camera showed that police stopped Sombath’s vehicle at the checkpoint and that, within minutes, unknown individuals forced him into another vehicle and drove him away in the presence of police officers. CCTV footage also showed an unknown individual arriving and driving Sombath’s vehicle away from the city center. In December 2015, Sombath’s family obtained new CCTV footage from the same area and made it public. The video shows Sombath’s car being driven back towards the city by an unknown individual.

For further information, please visit: https://www.sombath.org/en/

List of Signatories

Organizations:

  1. Alternative ASEAN Network on Burma (ALTSEAN-Burma)
  2. Amnesty International
  3. Armanshahr Foundation | OPEN ASIA
  4. ARTICLE 19
  5. Asia Democracy Network (ADN)
  6. Asia Europe People’s Forum
  7. Asian Cultural Forum on Development (ACFOD)
  8. Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA)
  9. AWAM Pakistan
  10. Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM)
  11. Boat People SOS
  12. Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (ADHOC)
  13. Cambodian League for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights (LICADHO)
  14. Campaign Committee for Human Rights (CCHR)
  15. Campaign for Popular Democracy (CPD)
  16. Center for Prisoners’ Rights (CPR)
  17. Centre for Civil and Political Rights
  18. CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation
  19. Commission for the Disappeared and Victims of Violence (KontraS)
  20. Committee of the Relatives of the May 1992 Heroes
  21. Community Resource Centre (CRC)
  22. Cross Cultural Foundation (CrCF)
  23. Dignity-Kadyr-kassiyet
  24. FIDH – International Federation for Human Rights
  25. Focus on the Global South
  26. Fortify Rights
  27. Fresh Eyes
  28. Front Line Defenders
  29. Hawai’i Institute for Human Rights
  30. Human Rights Alert
  31. Human Rights and Development Foundation (HRDF)
  32. Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP)
  33. Human Rights in China
  34. Human Rights Lawyers Association (HRLA)
  35. Human Rights Watch
  36. Indonesia Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI)
  37. INFORM Human Rights Documentation Centre Sri Lanka
  38. Informal Sector Service Center (INSEC)
  39. International Campaign for Tibet (ICT)
  40. International Coalition Against Enforced Disappearances (ICAED)
  41. International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
  42. International Rivers
  43. Internet Law Reform Dialogue (iLaw)
  44. Judicial System Monitoring Program (JSMP)
  45. Karapatan Alliance Philippines
  46. Kazakhstan International Bureau for Human Rights and Rule of Law (KIBHR)
  47. Korean House for International Solidarity (KHIS)
  48. Lao Movement for Human Rights
  49. Law and Society Trust Sri Lanka
  50. League for the Defence of Human Rights in Iran (LDDHI)
  51. Madaripur Legal Aid Association (MLAA)
  52. Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (MADPET)
  53. Maldivian Democracy Network
  54. Manushya Foundation
  55. MARUAH
  56. National Commission for Justice and Peace (NCJP)
  57. Odhikar
  58. Pakistan Kissan Rabita Committee
  59. People’s Solidarity for Participatory Democracy (PSPD)
  60. People’s Watch
  61. Perhimpunan Bantuan Hukum Indonesia (PBHI)
  62. Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA)
  63. Progressive Voice
  64. Pusat Komas
  65. Refugee and Migratory Movements Research Unit (RRMRU)
  66. Solidarity for People’s Education and Lifelong Learning (SPELL)
  67. Stiftung Asienhaus
  68. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)
  69. Task Force Detainees of the Philippines (TFDP)
  70. Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR)
  71. Think Centre
  72. Transnational Institute
  73. Vietnam Committee on Human Rights (VCHR)
  74. WOREC Nepal
  75. World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT)

Individuals:

  1. Anne-Sophie Gindroz
  2. David JH Blake
  3. Nico Bakker
  4. Randall Arnst
  5. Shui Meng and Sombath’s family, Vientiane
Libya: Marking 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence, the ICJ calls for an end to violence against women human rights defenders

Libya: Marking 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence, the ICJ calls for an end to violence against women human rights defenders

Dec 11, 2023 | Advocacy, News

On the occasion of the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence, from 25 November to 10 December, the 25th anniversary of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders on 9 December, and the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, on 10 December, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) condemns gender-based violence against women human rights defenders (HRDs) in Libya and calls for an immediate end to such violence. In recent years, the authorities in the West and the East of Libya have consistently attacked prominent women HRDs and let non-State actors threaten, assault and kill them with impunity.

.هذا البيان الصحفي متوفر باللغة العربية أيضاً

The situation of women human rights defenders in Libya

In the years that have followed the 2011 uprising and the ouster of Muammar Gadhafi, women HRDs in Libya have been killed and subjected to enforced disappearances. For example, in June 2014 five armed men killed Salwa Bugaighis, a woman HRD and lawyer advocating for women’s human rights, in her home in Benghazi, eastern Libya. In July 2019, Siham Sergiwa, a woman HRD and member of the House of Representatives (HoR) – the 2014 elected legislative body based in the East of the country –  was abducted and there is reasonable grounds to believe that she was subjected to an enforced disappearance by men believed to be affiliated with the Libyan National Army (LNA), a group of militias led by Khalifa Haftar, a top military officer under Gadhafi who was officially appointed Field Marshall of the LNA by the HoR in 2015. Her abduction occurred after she criticized the April 2019 offensive by the LNA on Tripoli and called for a ceasefire. Her fate and whereabouts remain unknown to this day. In November 2020, Hanan Al Barassi, a lawyer, political activist and woman HRD critical of the LNA, was shot dead by a group of armed men in Benghazi’s city centre, in broad daylight. No one has yet been held accountable for these violations or for the killing of other women HRDs, including Fariha El Berkawi and Intissar Al Hasairi, in 2014.

In April 2021, the Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) issued its decision relating to the first communication against Libya under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. The case concerned Magdulein Abaida, a woman human rights defender who, in 2012, was abducted three times by members of the Martyrs of 17 February Brigade, a militia affiliated with the Ministry of Interior, beaten, called a “whore” and a “bitch”, and threatened with death. A man identified as a Ministry of Defence official questioned her. After her release, she received death threats online.

The CEDAW found that Libya had breached the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, finding that the gender-specific abuse inflicted on Magdulein Abaida had occurred with the consent or acquiescence of public officials and, therefore, amounted to torture. In addition, the Committed highlighted that Magdulein Abaida had been abducted during a women’s rights workshop, and that, immediately after being tortured, she had been interrogated about her women’s rights organization, and that the Deputy Interior Minister had criticized her organization’s “chanting for women’s freedom”.

The Committee recommended to the Libyan authorities to carry out a prompt, thorough and independent investigation into Magdulein Abaida’s discrimination, arrest, detention and torture and to provide her with appropriate reparation. It also made the following general recommendations: (1) to “adopt comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation”, (2) to “put in place measures to ensure a safe and favorable environment for women’s human rights defenders”, and (3) to “recognize publicly the specific place and role of women HRDs and their legitimacy in the public debate”. The Libyan authorities have not responded to or implemented CEDAW’s recommendations.

In its June 2022 report, the UN Independent Fact-Finding Mission on Libya (FFM) – which investigated violations and abuses of international human rights law and international humanitarian law since the beginning of 2016 until March 2023 – documented the case of an unnamed woman HRD who was summoned by the eastern Internal Security Agency (ISA) in 2020. The ISA interrogated her about the human rights organization she established, its activities, including on women’s rights, and funding. During her questioning, she was insulted, called “damaged”, beaten, was forced to remove her shirt, burnt with a metal rod and sexually harassed. In 2023, the UN Support Mission in Libya documented further intimidation and assaults against women HRDs.

In the same June 2022 report, the FFM also found that “tactics used to terrify and silence activists” included online threats of sexual violence, in particular against women HRDs. It noted that, in December 2021, Meta, Facebook’s parent company, said it removed pages “purporting to be run by female public figures to make inflammatory statements on their behalf”. The FFM considered that, in the polarized context of Libya, the publication of provocative political statement could “endanger the lives” of the impersonated woman HRDs, as they could become the target of further online and offline violence. In 2021, the NGO Lawyers for Justice in Libya found that online violence against women “is overwhelmingly directed against […] women human rights defenders […] with the aim of silencing their voices and, increasingly, spreading misinformation”.

The failure of the Libyan authorities to effectively investigate crimes of gender-based violence against women HRDs has occurred in a context in which complete impunity for human rights violations and abuses prevails. Such a climate, in turn, has enabled even further violence against women HRDs, and women and girls more generally, forcing them out of public life. According to a study referred to by the UN Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences in her report following her official visit to Libya, 60 per cent of consulted women declared that they had been deterred from participating in the public sphere because of the attacks against women.

Ill-equipped legal framework

As noted by the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of HRDs in her 2023 report on women HRDs in conflict, post-conflict and crisis-affected settings, to ensure that women HRDs can safely do their work, concrete measures need to be put in place to prevent attacks against them. However, the Libyan legal framework is ill-equipped to address gender-based violence against women and girls. The Benghazi and Tripoli specialized courts – which were established in 2020 to hear criminal cases arising from violence against women and children – have so far only been dealing with civil cases relating to family law, rather than trying crimes of gender-based violence committed against women.

The General National Congress, the first post-revolution legislative body, and its successor, the HoR, discussed in 2013 and 2016-2017 two draft laws on combating violence against women, but they were never adopted into law. In 2020, a committee of experts supported by the western Government of National Unity’s Minister for Women’s Affairs started preparing a third draft. The draft has recently been submitted for consideration to the HoR by 20 members of parliament.

Recommendations

Considering the plight of women HRDs, the ICJ calls on the Libyan authorities to:

  • Adopt and implement the draft law on combatting violence against women, and amend the Libyan Penal Code, in accordance with international human rights law and standards with respect to violence against women;
  • Protect women HRDs from harassment, intimidation and acts of violence, both online and offline;
  • Investigate and prosecute the crimes, including online violence, committed against women and women HRDs, including with respect to the cases of Fariha El Berkawi, Hanan Al Barassi, Intissar Al Hasairi, Salwa Bugaighis and Siham Sergiwa, and hold perpetrators to account;
  • Equip the specialized courts on violence against women and children with resources and funding to ensure the fulfillment of their mandate to prosecute criminal offences of gender-based violence committed against women and children;
  • Protect and promote the human rights of women and women HRDs, and promote as legitimate and encourage their participation in political and public life, including elections; and
  • Publicly condemn any acts of gender-based violence against women HRDs.

 

Contact

Said Benarbia, Director, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, said.benarbia(a)icj.org

Katherine Iliopoulos, Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, katherine.iliopoulos@icj.org

Mohamed Hanafy, Legal Researcher, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme; mh(a)icj.org

Juliette Rémond Tiedrez, Legal Researcher, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, juliette.remond-tiedrez(a)icj.org

Indonesia: ICJ asks court to ensure that defamation and “false information” laws not be used to silence and criminalize human rights defenders

Indonesia: ICJ asks court to ensure that defamation and “false information” laws not be used to silence and criminalize human rights defenders

Nov 30, 2023 | Advocacy, Analysis briefs, News

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), in an amicus curiae brief submitted today, has requested the East Jakarta District Court to give effect to Indonesia’s international legal obligations concerning freedom of expression and information in their adjudication of a case concerning criminal charges against two human rights defenders, Haris Azhar and Fatia Maulidiyanti.

Translate »