Nov 19, 2020 | News
On 18 November 2020, the ICJ hosted a Facebook Live with four transgender human rights activists from Asia and Africa. It highlighted the stark reality between progressive laws and violent lived realities of transgender people.
The 20th November 2020 marks the Transgender Day of Remembrance (TDOR), the day when transgender and gender diverse people who have lost their lives to hate crime, transphobia and targeted violence are remembered, commemorated and memorialized.
The discussions focused on their individual experiences of Transgender Day of Remembrance in their local contexts, the impact of COVID-19 on transgender communities and whether laws are enough to protect and enforce the human rights of transgender and gender diverse people.
The renowned panelists were from four different countries, Amar Alfikar from Indonesia, Liberty Matthyse from South Africa, Tshepo Ricki Kgositau-Kanza from Botswana and Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli from India. The panel was moderated by the ICJ Africa Regional Director, Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh.
The panel aimed to provide quick glimpses into different regional contexts and a platform for transgender human rights activists’ voices on the meaning of Transgender Day of Remembrance and the varied and devastating impacts of COVID-19 on transgender people.
The speakers discussed the meaning that they individually ascribe to Transgender Day of Remembrance. A common theme running across the conversations was that it is not enough to highlight issues and concerns of the transgender community only on this day. Instead, these discussions should be part of daily conversations about the human rights of transgender people at the local and international level.
Liberty Matthyse discussed the importance of remembering the transgender persons who have lost their lives over the past years, and added:
“South Africa generally is known as a country which has become quite friendly to LGBTI people more broadly and this, of course, stands in stark contradiction to the lived realities of people on the ground as we navigate a society that is excessively violent towards transgender persons and gay people more broadly.”
Amar Alfikar describes his work as “Queering Faiths in Indonesia”. This informs his understanding of what Transgender Day of Remembrance means in his country and he believes that:
“Religion should be a source of humanity and justice. It should be a space where people are safe, not the opposite. When the community and society do not accept queer people, religion should start giving the message, shifting the way of thinking and the way of narrating, to be more accepting, to be more embracing.”
It was clear from the discussions that a lot of the issues that have become prominent during the COVID-19 pandemic, have not arisen due to the pandemic. In fact, the COVID-19 pandemic has had the effect of a magnifying glass, amplifying existing challenges in the way that transgender communities are treated and driven to margins of society. Speaking about the intersectionality of transgender human rights, Vyjayanti Vasanta Mogli said:
“I don’t think LGBT rights or transgender rights exist in isolation, they are part of a larger gamut of climate change, racial equality, gender equality, the elimination of plastics, and all of that.”
The panelists had different opinions on whether it is enough to rely on the law for the recognition and protection of the human rights of transgender individuals.
The common denominator, however, was that the laws as they stand have a long way to go before fully giving effect to the right of equality before the law and equal protection of the law without discrimination of transgender people.
Tshepo Ricki Kgositau-Kanza, who was a litigant in a landmark case in Botswana in which the judiciary upheld the right of transgender persons to have their gender marker changed on national identity documents, explained the challenges with policies which, on their face, seem uniform:
“Uniform policies… are very violent experiences for transgender persons in a Botswana context where the uniform application of laws and policies is binary and arbitrarily assigned based on one’s sex marker on one’s identity document which reflects them either as male or female. Anybody in between or outside of that kind of dichotomy is often rendered invisible and vulnerable to a system that can easily abuse them.”
This conversation can be viewed here.
Contact
Tanveer Jeewa, Communications Officer, African Regional Programme, e: tanveer.jeewa(a)icj.org
Nov 18, 2020 | Événements, Nouvelles, Publications
La CIJ et ses partenaires publient aujourd’hui le Guide d’application de la Directive européenne 2017/541 relative à la lutte contre le terrorisme à l’intention des juges, des procureurs et des avocats (le Guide).
L’ouvrage, intitulé La lutte contre le terrorisme et les droits de l’homme devant les tribunaux et publié par la CIJ en collaboration avec ses partenaires Human Rights in Practice, Nederlands Juristen Comité voor de Mensenrechten (NJCM) et Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna di Pisa, guide l’interprétation et l’application pratique de la Directive Europénne pour les enquêtes, les poursuites et les procès, conformément aux droit et aux normes de droit international et européen des droits de l’homme.
Le Guide a été développé sous le projet JUSTICE de 2018 à 2020. Il s’est construit sur la base et avec l’expertise des participants aux tables rondes organisées en 2019 à travers l’UE (à Pise, La Haye, Madrid , Bruxelles).
Ces participants incluaient juges, procureurs, avocats et autres experts juridique de pays membres de l’Union Européenne; études et consultations ont également été menées au niveau national en Belgique, aux Pays Bas, en Allemagne, en Espagne, en Italie et en France.
Le projet JUSTICE a également été soutenu par un nombre de partenaires associés: Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les Libertés (MEDEL), Juezas y Jueces para la Democracia en Espagne, et Neue Richtervereinigung en Allemagne.
Ce Guide pour juges, procureurs et avocats de l’UE fournit un aperçu exhaustif des normes et principes juridiques européens et internationals en matière de droit pénal et d’enquête, de poursuite et de procès, afin de guider et garantir une application de la Directive Européenne en conformité avec les droits de l’homme.
Il donne en sa section II une vue d’ensemble des normes et standards de droit international qui sont d’application. Le Guide couvre les problématiques de normes de countre-terrorisme en Etat d’urgence; de droits de victims de terrorisme; des droits de l’homme impactés par les offenses listées dans la Directive; (principe de légalité, respect de la vie privée et familiale, droit à une opinion politique). La section III fournit une orientation et un commentaire spécifique pour chaque article de la Directive.
La section IV se focalise sur les droits des suspects dans les procedures criminelles – enquêtes, poursuites, procès.
Le Guide a été lance ce 18 novembre lors d’un webinar co-organisé avec la Membre du Parlement Européen Saskia Bricmont (Greens). Parmis les intervenant figuraient juges et avocats nationaux, experts internationaux, représentants de la Commission et du Parlement Européen, d’Eurojust, de la Agence Européenne pour les Droits Fondamentaux.
L’agenda du webinar est disponible ici pour consultation.
Télécharger les guides
Guidance-counterterrorism-FR-2020 (en français)
Guidance-counterterrorism-ENG-2020 (en anglais)
Guidance-counterterrorism-ESP-2020 (en espagnol)
Guidance-counterterrorism-ITA-2020 (en italien)
Guidance-counterterrorism-DE-2020 (en allemand)
Nov 18, 2020 | Eventos, Noticias, Publicaciones
ICJ y sus socios han publicado hoy la Guía “Lucha contra el terrorismo y promoción y protección de derechos humanos ante los tribunales: Orientación a jueces, fiscales y abogados sobre la aplicación de la Directiva (UE) 2017/541 de la Unión Europea relativa a la lucha contra el terrorismo”
La Guía, publicada por la Comisión Internacional de Juristas y sus socios Human Rights in Practice, Nederlands Juristen Comité voor de Mensenrechten (NJCM) y Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, aborda la interpretación y aplicación adecuada de la Directiva de la Unión Europea (UE) en la práctica a lo largo de la investigación, el proceso de juicio y sentencia, de conformidad con conformidad con estándares internacionales y de la UE en cuanto a derechos humanos así como la ley internacional de derechos humanos.
La Guía a jueces, fiscales y abogados sobre la aplicación de la Directiva (UE) 2017/541 de la Unión Europea relativa a la lucha contra el terrorismo se preparó como parte del proyecto JUSTICE, sobre la base y con la experiencia de los participantes en las mesas redondas organizadas en 2019 en toda la UE (en Pisa, Madrid, La Haya, Bruselas). Entre esos participantes figuraron jueces, fiscales, abogados y otros expertos jurídicos de los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea; también se realizaron estudios y consultas a nivel nacional en Bélgica, Alemania, España, Francia, Italia y los Países Bajos. Este proyecto también contó con el apoyo de varios socios: Magistrados Europeos para la Democracia y las Libertades (MEDEL), Juezas y Jueces para la Democracia en España, y Neue Richtervereinigung en Alemania.
La Guía proporciona una visión general de normas jurídicas y principios de derecho penal internacional y de la UE pertinentes sobre la investigación, el proceso de juicio y sentencia de casos de terrorismo, basado en la Directiva de la Unión Europea, para garantizar que la misma se aplique respetando los Derechos Humanos.
En la sección II de la Guía se ofrece una visión general del derecho y las normas internacionales aplicables y abarca las leyes de contra-terrorismo en los Estados de emergencia, los derechos de las víctimas del terrorismo y los derechos humanos implicados en los delitos previstos en la Directiva (principio de legalidad, no-discriminación, restricciones a la libertad de circulación, expresión, asociación, reunión, intimidad, vida privada y familiar y derecho a la participación política). La sección III proporciona orientación específica y comentarios relacionados sobre cada uno de los delitos de la Directiva; y la sección IV abarca los derechos de los sospechosos en el proceso penal: la investigación, el procesamiento y el juicio.
La Guía se presenta hoy en un seminario web en línea coorganizado por la eurodiputada Saskia Bricmont, del Partido Verde Europeo y la Alianza Libre Europea (Greens/EFA), y entre los oradores figuran jueces y abogados nacionales, expertos internacionales, y representantes de la Comisión Europea, Eurojust, la Agencia de Derechos Fundamentales de la UE y miembros del Parlamento Europeo; véase el programa aquí.
Contactos:
Róisín Pillay, Directora del Programa de Europa y Asia Central; roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Karolína Babická, Asesora jurídica del Programa de Europa y Asia Central; karolina.babicka(a)icj.org
Descargar:
Guidance-counterterrorism-ESP-2020 (Guía en español)
Guidance-counterterrorism-ENG-2020 (Guía en inglés)
Guidance-counterterrorism-FR-2020 (Guía en francés)
Guidance-counterterrorism-ITA-2020 (Guía en italiano)
Guidance-counterterrorism-DE-2020 (Guía en alemán)
Nov 18, 2020
The ICJ and partners published today Counter-terrorism and human rights in the courts: guidance for judges, prosecutors and lawyers on application of EU Directive 2017/541 on combatting terrorism (the Guidance).
The Guidance, published by the ICJ together with its partners Human Rights in Practice, Nederlands Juristen Comité voor de Mensenrechten (NJCM) and Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna di Pisa, addresses the appropriate interpretation and application of the EU Directive in practice throughout investigation, prosecution and trial, consistently with international and EU human rights law and standards.
The Guidance (Counter-terrorism and human rights in the courts: guidance for judges, prosecutors and lawyers on application of EU Directive 2017/541 on combatting terrorism) was prepared as part of the JUSTICE project, building on expert roundtables held in 2019 across the EU (in Pisa, the Hague, Madrid and Brussels) with judges, lawyers, prosecutors and other relevant experts from a number of EU Member States, as well as national studies and consultations with judges, lawyers and prosecutors in Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, Spain, Italy and France. The project was further supported by associate partners: Magistrats Européens pour la Démocratie et les Libertés (MEDEL), Juezas y Jueces para la Democracia in Spain and Neue Richtervereinigung in Germany.
It gives a comprehensive overview of the relevant international and EU legal standards and criminal law principles on investigation, prosecution and trial of terrorism cases, based on the EU Directive, to ensure that the Directive is applied in a human rights compliant manner.
The Guidance provides in its section II an overview of applicable international law and standards in law and practice. It covers counter-terrorism law in states of emergency, rights of victims of terrorism and human rights implicated by the Directive offences (principle of legality, non-discrimination, restrictions on freedom of movement, expression, association, assembly, privacy, private and family life and the right to political participation). Section III provides specific guidance and related commentary on each of the Directive offences and section IV covers the rights of suspects in the criminal process – investigation, prosecution and trial.
The Guidance is being launched today in an on-line webinar co-hosted by MEP Saskia Bricmont the Greens from the European Parliament and the speakers include national judges and lawyers, international experts, and representatives of the European Commission, Eurojust, the EU Fundamental Rights Agency and Members of the European Parliament, see the agenda here.
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director Europe and Central Asia Programme; roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Karolína Babická, Legal adviser Europe and Central Asia Programme; karolina.babicka(a)icj.org
Download:
Guidance-counterterrorism-ENG-2020 (Guidance in English)
Guidance-counterterrorism-FR-2020 (Guidance in French)
Guidance-counterterrorism-ITA-2020 (Guidance in Italian)
Guidance-counterterrorism-DE-2020 (Guidance in German)
Guidance-counterterrorism-ESP-2020 (Guidance in Spanish)
Background research documents:
The summary of baseline studies related to national legal frameworks in Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, Germany and Spain
The summary of research on national legislation in France, Greece, Cyprus, Poland, Portugal, the Czech Republic and Romania
Reports from four expert Roundtables held in April-November 2019 in Pisa (Italy), the Hague (the Netherlands), Madrid (Spain) and Brussels (Belgium)
Articles/blogs published within the Justice project:
Adélaïde Jacquin: Religious discrimination in counterterrorism in France, Opinio Juris, 28.5.2020
Mohamed Rafik: Using Administrative Powers in Order to Combat Terrorism Brings Down the Democratic Constitutional State, Opinio Juris, 22.10.2020
Simon Bekaert: The Spanish Rapper Extradition Case Before a Belgian Court Fires up the Legal Discussion on Freedom of Expression and Other Fundamental Rights, Opinio Juris, 13.11.2020
Karolina Babicka: EU Counter-terrorism Directive 2017/541: impact on human rights and way forward at EU level, Opinio Juris, 20.11.2020
Sizaire, Vincent, On a proper application of the European Union directive on combating terrorism / Vincent Sizaire. – In: European human rights law review, issue 3 (2020), p. 205-210
Duffy, Helen, “The EU Directive and the Expansive Criminalisation of Terrorism” in Paulussen and Capone, “Returning Foreign Fighters: Responses, Challenges and Ways Forward” (2nd ed), to be published in 2021
DAUSTER, Manfred , Nationality at Stake: Repatriation of German Foreign Fighters and their Families under German Law / Manfred Dauster. – In: European Human Rights Law Review, issue 6 (2020).
Gaetana Morgante: From the perspective of the national partner to the project in Italy.
Nov 17, 2020 | News
The ICJ today denounced the renewed threat of criminal proceedings by prosecutorial authorities against Judge Igor Tuleya on charges arising from the judge’s independent exercise of his judicial functions, as his case is appealed before a panel of the Supreme Court Disciplinary Chamber.
Judge Tuleya faces prosecution for having allowed the presence of media in a sensitive case concerning the investigations on the 2017 budget vote in the Polish House of Representatives (Sejm) that took place without the presence of the opposition.
He has been charged with ‘failing to comply with his official duties and overstepping his powers’ for having allegedly disclosed a secret of the investigation to ‘unauthorized parties’.
The accusations stem from the initiative of the judge to allow media and the public in the courtroom while issuing his ruling. Usually rulings on investigations are issued behind closed doors in Poland, but the criminal procedure code allows judges to make the hearing public “in the interest of justice”.
“Judge Tuleya’s immunity should be maintained. Actually he should not face any criminal proceedings to begin with as its decisions were in accordance with the law and the principles of transparency and public trials,” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser for the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.
“His case is a further demonstration of the relentless attacks against the independence of judges ongoing in Poland.”
The Disciplinary Chamber, in a single-judge formation, upheld Judge Tuleya’s immunity on 9 July but the prosecution appealed the ruling that will be now decided by the same Chamber before a three-judge panel, Tomasz Przelawski, Slawomis Niedzielak and Jaroslaw Sobutka.
These proceedings are the first case of implementation the draconian Act amending the Law on the Common Courts, the Law on the Supreme Court and Some Other Laws, signed into law on 4 February and widely known as the ‘Muzzle Act’, which has given competence to waive judicial immunity to the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court.
“Immunity claims against a judge should be decided only by an independent body,” Massimo Frigo added.
“As EU Court of Justice held, the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court is not independent and is open to undue influence or interference by political authorities. It should therefore not rule on this case.”
Background
On 19 November, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) delivered a ruling in the case A.K. and others (C-585/18, C-624/18, C-625/18), on a preliminary question by the Supreme Court of Poland. The preliminary question asked whether the recently established Disciplinary and Extraordinary Chambers of the Supreme Court could be considered to be independent.
The CJEU ruled that a court cannot be considered independent “where the objective circumstances in which that court was formed, its characteristics and the means by which its members have been appointed are capable of giving rise to legitimate doubts, in the minds of subjects of the law, as to the imperviousness of that court to external factors, in particular, as to the direct or indirect influence of the legislature and the executive and its neutrality with respect to the interests before it and, thus, may lead to that court not being seen to be independent or impartial with the consequence of prejudicing the trust which justice in a democratic society must inspire in subjects of the law.”
Based on this ruling, the Labour, Criminal and Civil Chambers of the Supreme Court declared that the Disciplinary and Extraordinary Chambers of the Supreme Court were not properly constituted and independent.
According to the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, judges are entitled to a fair hearing in all disciplinary proceedings (principle 17). In order for such a hearing to be fair, the decision-maker must be independent and impartial.
International and European standards on the independence of the judiciary provide that judges should have immunity from criminal prosecution for decisions taken in connection with their judicial functions in the absence of proof of malice, and any procedure for removing immunity must itself be independent (see for instance, UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, paras 65-67 and 98; Council of Europe Committee of Ministers, para 68; Consultative Council of European Judges, para 20; ICJ Practitioners Guide no 13, pp. 27-30).
On 26 February 2020, the Polish Prosecutor’s Office requested a waiver of Judge Tuleya’s immunity in order to press criminal charges which might lead to imprisonment. The waiver was rejected on 9 June 2020 by the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court appointed by the government, in a single-judge formation. The Prosecutor’s Office appealed the ruling. The case will be now considered by the same Disciplinary Chamber in a three-judge formation. A first hearing was scheduled for 5 October 2020 but was postponed. It will take place on 18 November.
In an open letter of 5 February 2020, 44 ICJ Commissioners and Honorary Members denounced the recent legislative changes adopted by the Polish government threatening the role and the rights of judges and denouncing the risks faced by legal practitioners when fighting for the rule of law. Two weeks later, the risks highlighted by the letter have become reality for an increasing number of Polish judges, including Judge Tuleya.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser, Europe and Central Asia Programme, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org, t: +41 797499949
