Jul 18, 2018 | Communiqués de presse, Nouvelles, Publications, Rapports
La CIJ a salué aujourd’hui la levée de l’état d’urgence en vigueur en Turquie depuis presque deux ans, qui devrait être effective à partir de minuit. La CIJ a toutefois ajouté que les autorités devaient désormais instaurer une série de mesures visant à rétablir l’état de droit dans le pays.
La prise de position de la CIJ coïncide avec la publication de son rapport Justice Suspended – Access to Justice and State of Emergency in Turkey (disponible en anglais seulement) qui décrit comment les mesures prises en vertu de l’état d’urgence, notamment la révocation massive de magistrats et les arrestations et poursuites arbitraires d’avocats et de défenseurs des droits de l’Homme, ont érodé les institutions et les mécanismes judiciaires du pays.
Le rapport préconise, entre autres, l’abrogation de ces mesures, le rétablissement de l’indépendance du système judiciaire et la réforme des lois antiterroristes du pays.
“Avec la fin de l’état d’urgence, nous appelons au retrait immédiat des notifications de dérogations à la Convention européenne des droits de l’homme et au Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques,” a déclaré Massimo Frigo, conseiller juridique principal pour le programme Europe et Asie centrale de la CIJ.
“Nous sommes préoccupés par le fait que la plupart de ces mesures d’exception restent ancrées dans la loi turque, avec des des conséquences pernicieuses à long terme sur la jouissance des droits de l’Homme élémentaires et les bases de l’Etat de droit dans le pays,” a-t-il ajouté.
Jul 18, 2018 | News, Publications, Reports
The ICJ welcomed today the lapse of Turkey’s nearly two-year state of emergency, which is expected to be effective as of midnight, but said that the authorities needed now to take a range of measures to repair the rupture to the rule of law in the country.
The ICJ’s comments came as it released its report Justice Suspended – Access to Justice and State of Emergency in Turkey, outlining how measures undertaken pursuant to a state of emergency, including the mass dismissal of judges and arbitrary arrests and prosecutions of lawyers and human rights defenders had eroded the justice institutions and mechanisms in the country.
The report recommends a number of measures including the repeal of measures enacted under the state of emergency, the restoral of the independence of the judiciary and the reform of the country’s anti-terrorism legislation.
“With the end of the state of emergency we call for the immediate withdrawal of the notifications of derogations to the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,” said Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for the Europe and Central Asia Programme.
“We remain concerned that many of the emergency measures have been given permanent effect in Turkish law and will have pernicious and lasting consequences for the enjoyment of human rights and for the rule of law in Turkey,” he added.
These measures include the dismissals of hundred of thousands of people from their job, including judges and prosecutors.
Constitutional amendments, introduced during the state of emergency, permanently enshrine executive and legislative control of the governing institutions of the judiciary, contrary to international standards on judicial independence, the ICJ says.
Many of those charged with vaguely-defined offences under the state of emergency face trial before courts that are not independent and cannot guarantee the right to a fair trial, the Geneva-based organization adds.
Crucially, most of the people affected by emergency measures, including summary dismissals, have not yet had the opportunity to obtain a remedy before an effective and independent court or tribunal.
The ICJ report illustrates how the mechanisms which should address and remedy human rights violations in Turkey lack effectiveness and independence and that these deficiencies extend both to the courts and the state of emergency complaints commission.
It further finds that the ordinary functions of lawyers and activities civil society, key actors in ensuring access to justice, have been considerably curtailed.
“The Turkish Government says that they want their actions to respect the rule of law. Effective and independent remedies and reparations for human rights violations must be available to all if this principle is to have any reality in practice,” said Massimo Frigo.
Contact
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for the Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +41 22 979 3805, e: massimo.frigo@icj.org
Download
Full ICJ report in PDF in English: Turkey-Access to justice-Publications-Reports-2018-ENG
Full ICJ report in PDF in Turkish: Turkey-Access to justice-Publications-Reports-2018-TUR
Jul 16, 2018 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
Changes within the Commission enhance the organization’s capacity to respond to increased threats to rights protection via erosion of the rule of law, particularly in relation to the independence of the judiciary.
The ICJ is pleased to announce new leadership at the ICJ as Professor Robert K. Goldman (US) has been elected President of the organization and Justice Radmila Dragicevic-Dicic (Serbia) has been elected Vice-President, a role she will undertake jointly with Professor Carlos Ayala (Venezuela) who was also appointed Vice-President earlier in the year.
Professor Robert K. Goldman served as Acting President of the ICJ following the sad passing of former President Professor Sir Nigel Rodley in 2017.
The President and Vice-Presidents are supported by the Executive Committee, which has also been bolstered by new members Justice Sir Nicolas Bratza (UK), former President of the European Court of Human Rights; Dame Silvia Cartwright (New Zealand), former Governor-General of New Zealand; and Shawan Jabarin (Palestine), prominent human rights activist and Director General of Al-Haq, an independent Palestinian non-governmental human rights organization.
“I am honoured to have been elected President of the ICJ and to be able to work with such proficient and inspiring jurists amongst ICJ leadership and in the wider Commission itself, without whom the ICJ could not provide the expertise and leadership it does on such a wide range of human rights issues,” said Professor Robert K. Goldman, ICJ President.
“Those that have taken on a new role in ICJ leadership will help guide the organization in augmenting efforts to defend the rule of law amidst the current political backdrop of increasing antipathy and hostility towards rights protections,” he added.
In addition to these changes in the senior leadership of the ICJ, the organization is also pleased to welcome five new members:
Justice Chinara Aidarbekova (Kyrgyzstan), judge of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Kyrgyzstan; Gamal Eid (Egypt), prominent lawyer and human rights defender; Jamesina Essie L. King (Sierra Leone), Commissioner of the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights; Michael Sfard (Israel), prominent human rights lawyer who has represented many Israeli and Palestinian individuals and organizations; and Ambiga Sreenevasan, former President of the Malaysian Bar Council.
“The ICJ is alarmed by the increasing volume of worldwide attacks on the institutions that uphold human rights both at an international level, where UN mechanisms are constantly condemned rather than supported and enhanced to maximize their efficacy; and also on the local level, for example when we see the independence of the judiciary, an essential element of maintaining rights protections, coming under attack in places like Guatemala, Poland and South Korea,” said Saman Zia-Zarifi, ICJ Secretary-General.
“The ICJ relies on its global advocates of human rights to advance and defend the rights of others through the culmination of their vast and varied expertise and I am pleased to welcome our newest Commissioners to help in this regard, ” said Zia-Zarifi.
A further nine Commissioners were elected to serve additional terms on the Commission:
Professor Roberto Garreton (Chile), Professor Robert K. Goldman, Hina Jilani (Pakistan), Professor Jose Antonio Martin Pallin (Spain), Justice Sanji Monageng (Botswana), Tamara Morschakova (Russia), Dr Jarna Petman (Finland), Belisario dos Santos Jr (Brazil) and Justice Philippe Texier (France).
Hina jilani (Pakistan) and Belisario dos Santos Jr (Brazil) were both also re-elected to the Exectuive Committee and Professor Marco Sassoli (Italy/Switzerland) and Justice Stefan Trechsel (Switzerland) were re-elected as Alternates to the Executive Committee.
On video: Bob Goldman talks about the ICJ and the Rule of Law
Jul 15, 2018 | News
On 14 July 2018, the ICJ co-organized a discussion on extrajudicial killings in Thailand, focusing on the cases of Chaiyaphum Pasae and Abe Saemu.
The discussion was held at the Student Christian Centre in Bangkok.
Chaiyaphum Pasae, a Lahu youth activist, was killed by a military officer in the Chiang Dao district of Thailand’s northern Chiang Mai province in March 2017. The killing took place during an attempt to arrest him as an alleged drug suspect. Officials claimed Chaiyaphum Pasae had resisted arrest and was subsequently shot in “an act of self-defence”.
Abe Saemu, from the Lisu hill tribe, was killed by a military officer in February 2017 in the Chiang Dao district of Chiang Mai province in an attempt to arrest him on allegations of drug coffences. Officials claimed Abe Saemu had resisted arrest and was killed in “self-defence”.
During the discussion, ICJ’s National Legal Adviser Sanhawan Srisod addressed the audience to set out the international law and standards that apply to investigating potentially unlawful deaths, including the rights of victims and family members, referring to the standards set out in the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death (2016), which was launched in Thailand on 25 May 2017.
Participants in the event included members of the families of Chaiyaphum Pasae and Abe Saemu, the lawyers in both of their cases, interested members of the public, media representatives, students and academics.
The discussion opened with an art exhibition and Lahu dance show by the Save Lahu group. Human Rights Commissioner Angkhana Neelapaijit then made a presentation on challenges in seeking accountability for extrajudicial killings in Thailand.
A panel discussion on the latest updates in the cases of Chaiyaphum Pasae and Abe Saemu followed, moderated by Pranom Somwong from Protection International.
The panel included relatives of Chaiyaphum Pasae and Abe Saemu; Ratsada Manuratsada, a lawyer representing the families in both cases and Krissada Ngamsiljamras, a representative from the National Human Rights Commission of Thailand.
A second panel considered challenges on the administration of criminal justice in the context of unlawful deaths.
Moderated by Pratubjit Neelapaijit of UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the panel included Malee Sittikreangkrai (Chiang Mai University); Sumitchai Hattasan (Human Rights Lawyers’ Association); Namtae Meeboonsalang (Provincial Chief Public Prosecutor, Office of the Attorney-General); Kritin Meewutsom (Forensic doctor, Ranong Hospital); and Sanhawan Srisod (ICJ).
The event was conducted in collaboration with Cross Cultural Foundation (CrCF); Protection International (PI); UN OHCHR; Human Rights Lawyers’ Association (HRLA); Thai Volunteer Services (TVS); Dinsorsee Creative Group; Center for Ethnic Studies and Development, Chiang Mai University (CESD); Legal Research and Development Center, Chiang Mai University (LRDC) and Network of Indigenous Peoples in Thailand (NIPT).
Contact
Kingsley Abbott, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Office, kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Jul 13, 2018 | News
The Sri Lankan Government should reconsider and reverse its decision to bring back the death penalty for drug related offences, the ICJ said today.
On 10 July, the Sri Lankan Cabinet unanimously approved an action plan to implement the death penalty for “drug smugglers”.
According to the spokesperson of the Cabinet, 19 people convicted for “large scale drug offences” who “are still involved in drug trafficking…from within prisons” would initially be those initially designated for execution.
Sri Lanka has had a moratorium on the death penalty for over four decades.
The last execution carried out in the country was in 1976.
“The resumption of executions of convicted drug offenders would constitute a violation of the right to life under international law,” said Ian Seiderman, ICJ’s Legal and Policy Director.
”And, based on experience around the globe, it will not in any way serve the purported objective of tackling the problems of drug-related crime in Sri Lanka,” he added.
Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Sri Lanka acceded to in 1980, guarantees the right to life and requires that states that have not yet abolished the death penalty must restrict capital punishment to only the “most serious crimes”.
The UN Human Rights Committee, the supervisory body for the ICCPR, considers that the death penalty may never be used for drug offences.
The extraordinarily retrograde measure of resuming executions following a 42-year moratorium would also constitute a violation of article 6, which contemplates at least progressive movement towards abolition.
The UN General Assembly has repeatedly adopted resolutions emphasizing that that the use of the death penalty undermines human dignity and calling on those countries that maintain the death penalty to establish a moratorium on its use with a view to its abolition.
In 2016, an overwhelming majority of 117 UN Member States – including Sri Lanka – voted in favor of a worldwide moratorium on executions as a step towards abolition of the death penalty.
“At least 150 countries have now either abolished the death penalty in law or practice,” added Seiderman.
The ICJ considers the death penalty to be a violation to the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
The ICJ urges Sri Lanka to reinstate its moratorium on executions and take steps towards taking all necessary measures to abolish the death penalty.
Contact:
Ian Seiderman, ICJ’s Legal and Policy Director, email: ian.seiderman(a)icj.org
Reema Omer, ICJ’s International Legal Advisor, South Asia, email: reema.omer(a)icj.org
