Nov 4, 2015
People accused of violating Pakistan’s draconian “blasphemy laws” face proceedings that are glaringly flawed, said the ICJ in a new report published today.
“Pakistan’s blasphemy laws fly in the face of Pakistan’s international legal obligations, including the duties to respect the rights of freedom of expression and freedom of religion and belief,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia Director. “But even worse, those facing accusations of blasphemy suffer through trials that are often fundamentally unfair.”
In the 60-page report On Trial: the Implementation of Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws, the ICJ has documented in detail systematic and widespread fair trial violations in proceedings related to blasphemy offences in Pakistan, particularly in trial courts.
Some of the problems documented in the report include:
- Intimidation and harassment of judges and lawyers that impede on the independence of the judiciary and the right to a defense;
- Demonstrable bias and prejudice against defendants by judges during the course of blasphemy proceedings and in judgments;
- Violations of the right to effective assistance of counsel;
- Rejection of bail and prolonged pre-trial detention;
- Incompetent investigation and prosecution that do not meet due diligence requirements under the law;
- The prosecution and detention of people living with mental disabilities;
- Inhumane conditions of detention and imprisonment, including prolonged solitary confinement.
Pakistan’s laws on “offences related to religion” – sections 295-298-C of the Penal Code that are commonly known as “blasphemy laws” – include a variety of crimes including misusing religious epithets, “defiling” the Holy Quran, deliberately outraging religious sentiment, and using derogatory remarks in respect of the Prophet Muhammad.
Sentences for these offences range from fines to long terms of imprisonment, and in the case of defamation of the Prophet Muhammad (section 295-C), a mandatory death sentence.
“Section 295 is a relic of the British colonial system that lends itself to human rights violations, including in Pakistan, India, Myanmar, and elsewhere,” Zarifi said. “In Pakistan, General Zia-ul-Haq made additions to the laws that made them truly draconian.”
Based on the analysis of over 100 judgments of the high courts and courts of first instance from 1986-2015 as well as interviews with defendants in blasphemy cases, their families, and defense counsel; judges, lawyers and police officials; and human rights activists, the report found:
- In 19 out of 25 cases under section 295-C (defamation of the Prophet Muhammad) studied by the ICJ, high courts have acquitted individuals convicted for blasphemy by trial courts. Glaring procedural irregularities and mala fide complaints are the grounds for acquittal on appeal in over 80 per cent of cases;
- Even in cases that ultimately result in acquittal, blasphemy proceedings suffer from undue delay – proceedings in trial courts can take on average three years, and appeals can take even longer, more than five years on average;
- Individuals accused of blasphemy under section 295-C are frequently denied bail even though they meet requirements under the law;
- Individuals detained pending trial or convicted for blasphemy are often kept in prolonged solitary confinement, at times, over a number of years.
The report also confirms concerns recently raised by the Supreme Court of Pakistan that individuals accused of blasphemy ‘suffer beyond proportion or repair’, in the absence of adequate safeguards against misapplication or misuse of such blasphemy laws, the Geneva-based organization says.
The ICJ has also made a number of recommendations to the Pakistani executive, legislative and judicial branches to address the defects in the framing of the blasphemy laws as well as of the shortcomings at the investigative, prosecutorial, procedural, administrative and judicial levels highlighted in the report to minimize the misuse of the blasphemy laws and ensure that those accused of blasphemy have a fair chance at defending themselves.
“It’s time Pakistan and other countries got rid of these noxious laws, which continue to stifle freedom of expression and freedom of religion or belief, and instead promote extremism and intolerance,” Zarifi added.
Contact:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Pakistan-On Trial Blasphemy Laws-Publications-Thematic Reports-2015-ENG (full report in PDF)
Sep 2, 2015
Jointly elaborated by the ICJ and UNICEF, at the request of the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, this Guide offers to States practical examples and best practices on how to protect and ensure the realization of the rights of the child in the context of business operations.
More than ever before, business enterprises have an impact on children’s lives.
Children are consumers of businesses’ products and services, workers in their factories and fields, family members of their employees, and residents of the communities that host their operations.
Some of these interactions can benefit children. Companies have, for instance, created new technologies that enrich children’s education, enhance medical care, and connect families around the world. Yet at the same time, businesses can also have detrimental impacts.
Companies can make and sell unhealthy and unsafe goods to children, pollute the environments in which children live and play, and expose them to serious dangers in the workplace.
As children are still growing and developing, they are especially vulnerable to negative business impacts and can be severely and permanently affected by infringements of their rights.
Child consumers can be more easily convinced to buy and use inappropriate or unsuitable products, and children are much more susceptible than adults to the harmful physical effects of toxic chemicals, manual labour and poor diets.
Young workers can never fully make up for time spent out of education, and missed opportunities are rarely restored.
Many of these impacts remain unnoticed, and businesses rarely involve or seek the input of children on decisions that will profoundly affect them.
Children may not understand that their rights are in jeopardy, and, even when they do, often face tremendous challenges in making their voices heard.
All too frequently, child victims lack the confidence, resources and legal authority to demand accountability from those who violate their rights.
For these reasons, it is imperative that governments take action to protect and promote children’s rights in the context of business operations.
Recognizing this need, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has for many years drawn States’ attention to business impacts on children, both within and outside their borders.
In February 2013, the Committee adopted General Comment 16 on “State obligations regarding the impact of the business sector on children’s rights”, providing an international framework for States to ensure that businesses respect children’s rights as envisioned in the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
The Guide can be downloaded in PDF format here:
Universal-UNICEFChildrenBusiness-Publications-Reports-2015-ENG
Jul 30, 2015
The ICJ today released its trial observation report of the trial in 2014 before the High Court in Mbabane, Swaziland, in The King v The Nation Magazine, Bheki Makhubu, Swaziland Independent Publishers (Pty) Ltd, and Thulani Maseko.
In February 2014, Thulani Maseko and Bheki Makhubu wrote an article entitled “Speaking my mind”, published in the Nation Magazine, which is owned by Swaziland Independent Publishers (Pty) Ltd. In March 2014, Thulani Maseko wrote a second article entitled ‘Where the law has no place’, also published in the Nation Magazine.
The articles criticized the manner in which the former Chief Justice of Swaziland, Justice Michael Ramodibedi, had handled an allegation of contempt of court against Bansthana Vincent Gwebu in January 2014.
The charges against the four defendants arose from the fact that the articles were published before the case against Bansthana Vincent Gwebu had been disposed of.
The defendants were accused of unlawfully and intentionally issuing statements contemptuous of the court.
The ICJ’s report The Failure of Justice: Unfair Trial, Arbitrary Detention and Judicial Impropriety in Swaziland concludes that the arrest and detention, trial, conviction and sentencing of the defendants involved multiple violations of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Swaziland, the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights, the Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial in Africa and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Thulani Maseko and Bheki Makhubu were subjected to unlawful and arbitrary arrest and detention, including violation of their right to legal counsel and their right to a public hearing with respect to their initial appearance before the Chief Justice in his chambers.
All aspects of the trial, including pre-trial proceedings before the Chief Justice and the trial judge, involved violation of the right of all defendants to a hearing by an impartial tribunal.
The defendants were improperly convicted, in violation of the right to freedom of expression. Even had the convictions been proper, they were sentenced to disproportionately severe sentences, particularly in the case of the sentences of two years’ imprisonment of Thulani Maseko and Bheki Makhubu.
Although the improper convictions and disproportionate sentences have been ‘self-corrected’, through the Supreme Court of Swaziland’s unopposed setting aside of convictions and sentences, it remains the case that Thulani Maseko and Bheki Makhubu were arbitrarily deprived of their liberty, including because this resulted from the legitimate exercise of their freedom of expression.
Swaziland-Maseko Trial Observation-Publications-Trial observation report-2015-ENG (download full report, in PDF)
Apr 14, 2015
Today the ICJ published a briefing paper addressing harmful gender stereotypes and assumptions in law and practice and highlighting efforts in a number of countries to reform such law and practice.
The briefing paper is intended to assist legal practitioners and human rights defenders working to ensure effective criminal justice response to sexual violence against women.
“Around the world harmful stereotypes have the effect of denying many victims of sexual violence effective access to justice and redress for violations. This briefing paper demonstrates the onerous and unfair burdens placed upon victims arising from their gender when they seek to access justice,” said Ian Seiderman, ICJ Legal and Policy Director.
The paper highlights the importance of upholding a suspect’s right to a fair trial, including the presumption of evidence and rights to examine witnesses and challenge evidence while at the same time ensuring victims and witnesses also maintain equality before the law.
The publication addresses common assumptions that women are inherently untruthful; that credibility is premised on chastity; that women will fight back and therefore should demonstrate evidence of physical force or a struggle; that women’s passive sexuality opens up room for debate in defining consent; that women should obey their husbands; and that sexual violence is a matter of dishonor to the victims and their families.
In identifying these underlying harmful gender stereotypes and assumptions the paper also identifies a number of reform measures and examples of good legislative practice that can help states to enhance protection against sexual violence of women in accordance with their international obligations.
Download the report here:
Universal-GenderStereotypes-Publications-Thematic report-2015-ENG (full text in PDF)
Mar 20, 2015
The Court Proceedings in “Foreign Agents” cases report on trial observations analyses four cases concerning the implementation of the 2012 Amendments to the Russian NGO Law.
It is based on court hearings observed by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) in 2013-2014 in each of these cases, as well as information provided by lawyers and NGOs in Russia.
The report assesses the compliance of the hearings the ICJ observed with the right to a fair hearing as guaranteed under international human rights instruments including the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (European Convention on Human Rights or ECHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), treaties to which Russia is a party, and with which it is thus bound to comply.
The report focuses, in particular on some aspects in the proceedings which gave rise to concern that the right to a fair hearing was being breached.
Russian Federation-NGO Foreign Agents-Publications-Trial Observation Report-2015-ENG (full text in PDF)
Russian Federation-NGO Foreign Agents-Publications-Trial Observation Report-2015-RUS (full text in PDF)
Read also:
Russian Federation: report on the Constitutional Court proceedings and judgment on the “Foreign Agent” amendments to the NGO Law
Russian Federation: ICJ expresses concern at court judgment ordering registration as a foreign agent
Russia: amendments to the NGO Law on Foreign Agents violate rights to freedom of association and expression
