May 31, 2018
The ICJ together with ECRE, the AIRE Center and the Dutch Council for Refugees submitted a third party intervention to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child in case D.D. v Spain 4/2016 pending in front of the Committee.
The case concerns a collective expulsion of a child from a Spanish enclave of Melilla to Morocco. The case has been declared admissible by the Committee in June 2017.
The UN CRC allows for individual complaints since April 2014 for children against countries that ratified its Third Optional Protocol on a Communications Procedure.
The current submission of the ICJ and partner organisations is focusing in particular on State’s jurisdiction (CRC article 2.1), access to the territory and non-refoulement (CRC articles 3.1, 6, 20, 37), specific safeguards for children (CRC articles 3.1, 12 and 22) and collective expulsions (CRC articles 3.1, 20 and 22).
The intervention analyses the legal principles and jurisprudence related to scope and content of States Parties’ obligations, without reference to the particular facts of the case before the Committee.
The submission will also be considered by the Committee when examining the case. It is also now being transmitted to both parties for comments, in accordance with Rule 23.2 of the Committee’s Rules of procedure on the OPIC.
The intervening organisations argue that:
- A State has jurisdiction over children who are subject to its authority or effective control on or at its land border, whether within or outside its territory. When a State Party exercises its jurisdiction over a child, its responsibility is engaged and it is required to comply with its international obligations of human rights protection, including under the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), particularly as regards the assessment of the best interests of the child and the child’s right to be heard. Where a State Party is an EU Member State, it is additionally obliged to ensure the respect of the child’s best interests, protection and care necessary for the child’s well-being as well as the other child-specific guarantees under EU law.
- Children who are subject to the authority or effective control of a State on or at its land border must be granted access to the territory as a prerequisite to the initial assessment process and further afforded the opportunity to meaningfully raise objections to their transfer, as the principle of non-refoulementand the prohibition on collective expulsions require. The prohibition of refoulement on certain grounds is of an absolute nature in international human rights law and entails positive duties on the part of States, including to grant children the possibility to present the reasons against their return, to ensure their access to legal assistance and to a guardian, and to perform an individualized assessment to verify and evaluate the risk of refoulement.
- The prohibition of collective expulsion requires a thorough and rigorous assessment, including the examination of the particular circumstances of those forming part of the group of non-nationals concerned by the measure. This obligation also entails their effective identification and registration as well as information about, and access to applicable protection procedures and remedies where relevant. These safeguards apply whenever the individuals concerned fall within State Parties’ jurisdiction, including in circumstances when jurisdiction is exercised extraterritorially and irrespective of their migration status.
- When children are involved, the prohibition of collective expulsion additionally requires compliance with child-specific rights and corresponding tailored procedural safeguards. Collective expulsion entails a violation of the primary obligation to assess the best interest of the child in each individual case, which must be carried out prior to any decision to return or refuse entry or any other decision affecting children and must be adequately reflected in this decision.
UN-Third-party-intervention-DD-v-Spain-Rights-of-the-Child-May-2018-ENG(full PDF in Eng)
Jun 23, 2016
The ICJ has joined other international NGOs in a joint statement of concern about the severe and worsening repression of civil society in Egypt.
Together with, Amnesty International, CIVICUS, EuroMed Rights, FIDH, Front Line Defenders, Human Rights Watch, IFEX, the International Service for Human Rights, People in Need and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), the ICJ highlights a number of anti-civil society measures and cases in Egypt, ultimately calling on Egyptian authorities to immediately take the following steps to address the severe violations against human rights defenders:
- Abide by their own pledges made in March 2015 at the conclusion of Egypt’s Universal Periodic Review before the United Nations Human Rights Council to “respect the free exercise of the associations defending human rights,” and comply with their obligations under Article 75 of the 2014 Constitution, which protects civil society organizations from interference by the government.
- Close the politically-motivated Case 173 of 2011, known as the “foreign funding case,” and withdraw all measures of harassment and intimidation of human rights defenders taken with reference to that case, including travel bans, the asset freeze order and trumped-up tax investigations.
- Amend penal code Article 78, which in very broad terms penalises the receipt of foreign funding without government approval and imposes a penalty of up to life imprisonment, which in practice in Egypt is 25 years, in addition to a 500,000 Egyptian pound fine (US$56,300).
- Cease all additional forms of legal and other harassment of human rights defenders.
- Repeal the Protest Law (Law 107 of 2013), which severely restricts the right to peaceful assembly, or amend it in order to bring it in line with international human rights law and the Egyptian constitution.
- Repeal the Counter-Terrorism Law (Law 94 of 2015), which effectively criminalizes freedom of expression, association and assembly, or amend it substantially to bring it in line with international human rights law and standards.
- Immediately release all individuals imprisoned solely for the peaceful exercise of their rights to freedom of expression, association and assembly; drop the charges against them and ensure that any who have been convicted have their convictions quashed.
The full statement may be downloaded in PDF format here: Egypt-Advocacy-JointNGOStatement-2016
Dec 14, 2015
The Australian Section of the ICJ, in Victoria, has called for a human rights based approach to countering the threat of violent extremism within the counter-terrorism strategy of the Australian Government.
ICJ Victoria’s Position Paper addresses the current approach of the Australian Government, proposing that this risks aggravating, rather than mitigating, the social causes of violent extremism; and that an effective counter-terrorism strategy must include prevention, deradicalisation and rehabilitation programmes in order to be effective and just. It concludes with recommendations to those ends.
Australia-DeradicalisationRehabilitationPrevention-ICJVictoria-2015-EN (download Position Paper in PDF)
Sep 14, 2015
The ICJ today called on the members of the Tunisian parliament to amend the draft law on the High Judicial Council (HJC), with a view to ensuring its full compliance with international standards on judicial independence.
In a new position paper, the Geneva-based organization acknowledges that the draft law provides enhanced guarantees for judicial independence, in particular by ending executive control over the HJC, by providing for a majority of the HJC’s members to be judges elected by their peers, and by ensuring that the HJC is the only body competent to manage the career of judges.
But the ICJ remains concerned that in certain key respects, the draft law falls short of international standards.
In particular, it does not provide for specific, concrete measures to ensure women’s full and equal participation and representation in the HJC and the judiciary as a whole, for the HJC to be consulted on, and involved in, the preparation and implementation of the judiciary’s budget, and for adequate financial resources to be available for both the HJC and the judiciary in general.
“The Tunisian Assembly should ensure that the draft law is amended so that the HJC is truly independent, pluralistic and gender-representative and its competencies are expanded to include its involvement in the preparation and implementation of the budget for the entire judiciary, not only that of the HJC,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ MENA Programme.
The ICJ is also concerned that, while the draft law provides enhanced guarantees for the management of the career of judges by the HJC, the provisions relating to the security of tenure of judges and the transfer of judges, as well as certain aspects of the disciplinary system, are not fully in line with international standards.
“The draft law should be amended to ensure that judges may only be removed for reasons of incapacity or behaviour that renders them unfit to discharge their duties, that in all circumstances their consent is sought for any transfer to another jurisdiction, and that all disciplinary proceedings against them are fair and determined in accordance with established standards of judicial conduct,” Benarbia added.
Contact:
Theo Boutruche, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +96 170 888 961, e: theo.boutruche(a)icj.org
Tunisia-Final HJC Draft Law-Advocacy-Position Paper-2015-ENG (full text of position paper in PDF, English)
Tunisia-HJC law-News-2015-ARA (full news text in PDF, Arabic)
Tunisia-Final HJC Draft Law-Advocacy-Position Paper-2015-ARA (full text of position paper in PDF, Arabic)
Aug 6, 2015
In a position paper published today, the ICJ called on the Tunisian President to refrain from promulgating the flawed Counter-Terrorism Law that was adopted by the Assembly of the People’s Representatives on 25 July 2015.
The ICJ also urged the Tunisian authorities to amend this Law through a transparent and inclusive process, including with a view to ensuring its full compliance with international human rights and rule of law standards.
The adoption of the Law follows a series of attacks against members of the security forces and the army and two deadly attacks in the Bardo Museum and Sousse.
“Legitimate security concerns by Tunisian authorities should not lead to the adoption and the enforcement of repressive laws and other measures that erode the rule of law and curtail fundamental rights and freedoms,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at the ICJ.
Overly broad and imprecise definitions in many offences created under the Law extend its reach far beyond truly terrorist acts such as hostage-taking, killings or causing serious injuries, and other such violence.
In some aspects, such as offences of glorification and incitement to terrorism, the provisions are so broadly drafted that they have the potential to criminalize the peaceful exercise of fundamental freedoms, including the right to freedom of expression. Some provisions could result in the wrongful prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers.
The ICJ is also deeply concerned at article 68 of the Law, which provides immunity from criminal prosecution for security forces when using force in the course of their duties.
The article could potentially allow law enforcement officers who use force in violation of international standards and the right to life, such as intentional use of lethal force when it is not strictly unavoidable in order to protect life, to escape justice.
Other provisions of the Law raise serious concerns for the right to a fair trial, the right to liberty, and the right to privacy.
In particular, provisions allowing a person to be held in police custody for up to 15 days without access to a lawyer or a judge are inconsistent with the right to liberty, fair trial guarantees, and guarantees for the prevention of torture and other abuses in detention.
“By shielding security forces from accountability and eroding procedural and other fair trial guarantees of terrorism suspects, the Law contradicts Tunisia’s obligations under international law, and its own Constitution,” added Benarbia. “ Tunisian authorities must ensure the Law is revised to fully respect its human rights obligations, including those relating to the right to liberty, to a fair trial, and to effective remedies and reparation in cases of human rights violations.”
Contact
Theo Boutruche, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme; t: +96 170 888 961; e: theo.boutruche(a)icj.org
Tunisia-CT position paper-Advocacy-Position Paper-2015-ENG (full text of the position paper in English)
Tunisia-PR CT position paper-News-Press release-2015-ARA (full text of the press release in Arabic)
Tunisia-CT position paper-Advocacy-Position paper-2015-ARA- (full text of the position paper in Arabic)
