Nov 10, 2017 | News
As Pakistan is set to undergo its third Universal Periodic Review (UPR) on 13 November, the ICJ has urged Pakistani authorities to meaningfully engage with the process to improve the human rights situation in the country.
“Pakistan’s past engagement with the UPR has been characterized by denial and defensive posturing,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Director.
“As a recently-elected member of the UN Human Rights Council, it is more important than ever for the Pakistan to show that it takes its human rights obligations seriously by engaging with the upcoming UPR in its true spirit,” he added.
During its second UPR in 2012, Pakistan received 167 recommendations, of which it rejected seven, noted 34, and accepted 126.
The seven recommendations rejected by Pakistan relate to some of the most serious human rights violations in the country, including recommendations to adopt an official moratorium on the death penalty with a view to abolishing capital punishment in law and practice, repeal blasphemy laws, and decriminalize adultery and non-marital consensual sex.
Even accepted recommendations have been largely ignored in the four years since the previous UPR, the ICJ notes.
Enforced disappearances are still not recognized as a distinct, autonomous crime; perpetrators of gross human rights violations continue to escape justice; there has been complete inaction to prevent abuse of so-called blasphemy laws; and freedom of expression is often restricted on vague grounds such as “national security” and “immorality”.
“Pakistan’s human rights situation has in many ways deteriorated since 2012,” Rawski added.
“Yet – as reflected by Pakistan’s national report for the upcoming UPR – the authorities apparently remain in a state of denial about the dire human rights implications of these new measures,” he said.
These measures include the lifting the informal moratorium on the death penalty and carrying out nearly 500 executions in less than three years – among the highest in the world; passing laws allowing military courts to try civilians for certain terrorism-related offences; and a new wave of crackdowns on NGOs, journalists and human rights defenders, including retaliating against NGOs for presenting “a very bleak picture” of the country’s human rights situation to the UN.
“UN member states on Monday should urge Pakistan to end the dangerous downward spiral on rights by ending repression, respecting fundamental freedoms, and holding perpetrators of violations responsible,” Rawski said.
Contact
Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 64 478 1121, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org
Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Pakistan (London), t: +447889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org
Additional information
The UPR is a unique mechanism of the UN Human Rights Council aimed at improving the human rights situation of each of the 193 UN Member States. Under this mechanism, the human rights record of all UN Member States is peer-reviewed every four to five years by the UPR Working Group, consisting of the 47 UN Member States of the Human Rights Council; however, any UN Member State can take part in the discussions and the dialogue during the UPR of the reviewed States. States then make recommendations to the country under review, which has the option of accepting or noting the recommendations.
Nov 8, 2017 | News
Today, the ICJ addressed an academic seminar on the topic of “Post-mortem Examinations and Inquires”, organized by Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law, in collaboration with the Cross Cultural Foundation, a partner of the ICJ.
Participants in the seminar, which was held at Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law campus, included undergraduate students and lecturers from Chiang Mai University.
The ICJ’s speakers at the workshop were Sanhawan Srisod, ICJ National Legal Adviser, who delivered an introduction to International Human Rights Law, and Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, who addressed the right to life, and the international law and standards as they relate to investigations including the rights of victims and family members.
Other speakers at the Workshop were Preeda Nakphew a lawyer with the Cross Cultural Foundation, and Sarawut Pratoomraj, a Law Reform Officer with the Law Reform Commission of Thailand.
The seminar was part of an ongoing engagement between the ICJ and Chiang Mai University’s Faculty of Law.
Nov 7, 2017 | Agendas, Events, News
The ICJ delivers today and tomorrow a training on asylum, migration and international human rights law, organised by UNHCR-BiH, the Sector for Asylum of the Ministry for Security and Vaša Prava BiH.
The training, that takes place in the capital Sarajevo, will be delivered to officers of the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as of independent State institutions.
It will focus on human rights law related to the entry of migrants, including refugees, to the territory of a State, to the State’s obligations on international protection as well as to the rules applicable to detention of foreign national and their rights, and alternatives to detention.
BiH-Training-DetentionMigration&Asylum-ICJ&others-2017-eng (download the agenda in English and Bosnian)
Nov 2, 2017 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
The ICJ ends its series of profiles of its women Commissioners with an interview with Judge Kalthoum Kennou is currently serving her second term as ICJ Commissioner.
Kalthoum Kennou is a Judge of the Tunisian Cassation Court.
She previously served as an investigating Judge at the Tribunal of Tozeur in Tunisia (2010 – 2012), an investigating Judge at the Tribunal of Kairouan (2005 – 2010) and a Judge at the Court of Appeal of Tunis (2001-2005).
She is a strong advocate of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary in Tunisia, and for women’s rights.
She was active in opposition to the dictatorship of President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali.
As a consequence of her work, she was subjected to politically motivated personal attacks including arbitrary transfers to remote parts of the country.
After the political revolution in January 2011, she became President of the Association of Tunisian Judges.
She has worked on the new Tunisian Constitution and was the first female candidate in the November 2014 Presidential elections.
In this interview, Judge Kennou speaks about the reasons that prompted her to take up a legal career.
Her father was wrongly accused of high treason and imprisoned and she wanted to show people that there could be fair judges who worked independently.
On his release, her father also supported her decision to study the law.
She was appointed a judge in 1989 but said that other women had been appointed before her so it was not that difficult.
The main problems were that male judges were reluctant to discuss certain issues in front of her and she had to stand up for herself.
“However what was a bit troublesome was with the police when I gave them instructions and I think they would have preferred it was a man and not a woman. But I stood up for myself and I became an investigating judge and I was there to give orders to the police, to the clerk of court, as a judge and as a woman judge.”
Under the dictatorship of Ben Ali, she explains in the interview that there were a quite an important number of judges who resisted and defended the independence of the judiciary.
“… I think our resistance had some results. The proof was that just after the revolution, the question of the independence of the judiciary became a demand of the people, not just the judiciary.”
She explains in the interview that now 43% of the judiciary in Tunisia are women.
This is because there are more women studying law, more women than men, and because the government is promoting women’s equality.
However, many women may take up a legal career without wishing to become a judge.
This is because of family reasons, as they don’t wish to be appointed to a court away from home and in some families, parents might feel that women should be protected from some of the real problems of society.
“But actually I think this kind of thinking is less common now and will disappear bit by bit. Judges have shown that they can have an impact and society accepts female judges more than male judges. They consider that female judges are less corrupt, that they are more serious and are making more efforts to deliver justice.”
The main problems for women in accessing justice in Tunisia are related to pressure from the family not to file complaint in cases of domestic violence.
Also there is a problem with the attitudes of the police who do not take physical aggression against a woman seriously.
The third issue is the mentality of some judges, including some women judges, who are not really convinced that a husband does not have the right to beat his wife.
“The law exists but we should also work on people’s mentalities so that the law is correctly applied.”
Judge Kennou concludes the interview with some advice for young women considering a legal career. She said that a young woman must learn to “stand up for herself and for her rights at home because you cannot be free, you cannot give to others, if your own rights are not realized… I think that a woman who wants to be a judge should be really convinced and well trained about human rights so she can apply the law in a correct manner. “
Watch the interview:
The series of profiles introducing the work of ICJ Commissioners and Honorary Members on women’s rights was launched on 25 November 2016 to coincide with the International Day to Eliminate Violence against Women and the first day of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence Campaign.
Nov 2, 2017 | News
The ICJ notes that a number of threats and intimidating statements aimed at members of the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, were made during the election campaign period in Kenya.
Now that the elections ordered by the Supreme Court after nullification of the initial elections in Kenya have been concluded, it is important for Kenyan authorities to reaffirm commitment to separation of powers and guarantee the security of judges and the independence of the judiciary in the country, the ICJ says.
On Monday, 30 October 2017, the Indepedent Electoral Boundaries Commission (IEBC) in Kenya declared President Uhuru Kenyatta as the winner of the October 26 repeat polls.
President Uhuru Kenyatta is widely reported to have been heavily critical of the Supreme Court for annulling the 8 August 2017 presidential election on a “technicality”.
It is also reported that he promised to “fix” the bench if re-elected.
The President is also reported to have said he would deal with Chief Justice Maraga, but did not however define the form of action he would take.
Similar sentiments have been attributed to Deputy President William Ruto. It’s unclear at this stage whether these statements should be dismissed as political rhetoric on the campaign trail or warrant further consideration.
However such utterances and threats on the judiciary by senior government officials may be inferred as an attempt to intimidate or unduly influence the bench.
“These threats coming from the highest authorities hinder the ability of the courts to perform their duties, which are indispensable for the rule of law and fair administration of justice in the country,” said Arnold Tsunga, ICJ’s Africa Regional Programme Director.
“Judges must be able to exercise their duties freely, independently and impartially, or else the rule of law in the country will be eroded, and with it, effective protection of the human rights of the Kenyan people,” he added.
The ICJ recalls that the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary provide that judges must be able to perform their professional duties “without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason” and that governments have a responsibility to secure this guarantee.
Article 26 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights also imposes an obligation on Kenya to establish an independent judiciary.
Contact
Arnold Tsunga, Director of ICJ’s Africa Regional Programme, t: +27716405926, e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org
