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)
Nov 3, 2015 | News
The ICJ and 26 other civil society organizations called today upon the Vietnamese government to comprehensively revise the draft Law on Religion to conform with the country’s obligations under international human rights law.
The groups are concerned that Vietnam’s draft Law on Belief and Religion is inconsistent with the right to freedom of religion or belief.
In its current form, the draft Law places limitations on freedom of religion or belief that extend beyond those permitted under international human rights law that is binding on Vietnam, they say.
Article 18(3) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Vietnam is a state party, requires the authorities to ensure that the freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief is subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary and proportionate to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.
While the draft Law purports to acknowledge “the right to freedom of religion and belief” and proclaims that the “government respects and protects the freedom of religion and belief of everyone,” the provisions of the draft Law, if passed, would act as a powerful instrument of control placing sweeping, overly broad limitations on the practice of religion or belief within Vietnam, perpetuating the already repressive situation.
Contact:
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ International Legal Adviser, (Bangkok), t:+66 944701345, e-mail: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Vietnam-Draft Law on Religion-Advocacy-2015-ENG (full statement, in PDF)
Nov 2, 2015
In a letter to Prime Minister Najib Razak, the ICJ today called on the Government of Malaysia to discontinue investigations of the organizers of Bersih 4.0 (photo) and drop all charges against Maria Chin Abdullah and Jannie Lasimbang.
The ICJ also called on the Government of Malaysia to amend the Peaceful Assembly Act of 2012 to ensure conformity with international standards, and to protect the right of Malaysians to organize and participate in peaceful assemblies.
Malaysia-Bersih letter-Advocacy-open letters-2015-ENG (full text in PDF)
Oct 29, 2015 | News
The Singaporean government should halt the imminent execution of Kho Jabing and commute his death sentence, said the ICJ today.
In 2010, Kho Jabing was convicted and sentenced to death, after having been found guilty of murder.
Amendments made to its laws on the death penalty in 2012 allowed for persons who had been subjected to the death penalty the option to elect to be considered for re-sentencing under the new rules.
Kho Jabing, under this process, was re-sentenced to life imprisonment and 24 strokes of the cane.
The prosecution, however, appealed the re-sentencing, and the case was brought to the Court of Appeal.
On 14 January 2015, the Court of Appeal decided to reinstate the death penalty in the case.
Kho Jabing filed a clemency appeal and the Court of Appeal rejected this on 19 October 2015.
The authorities have not released the date of Kho Jabing’s execution, but it is believed that he is likely to be executed during the first week of November 2015.
“Singapore has obscured the extent and nature of its execution practices and its record on respect for the right to life”, said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
“Failure to be transparent about its use of the death penalty, flies in the face of international human rights standards,” he added.
The ICJ opposes the death penalty in all circumstances and considers the imposition of the death penalty to constitute a denial of the right to life and a form of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.
The view that the death penalty is never justifiable is shared by the overwhelming majority of States, United Nations institutions, and numerous civil society organizations.
In December 2014, the UN General Assembly, by a very wide majority, adopted a Resolution repeating its call for all States retaining the death penalty to institute a moratorium on the practice, with a view to abolition.
The ICJ has also received information that Singapore carried out two executions in October 2015. The authorities, however, have not issued an official statement regarding these executions.
To date, the Singapore government has not released the exact number of executions undertaken in the country.
In 2004, UN Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary executions emphasized the importance of transparency wherever the death penalty is applied.
According to the UN Special Rapporteur, “Secrecy as to those executed violates human rights standards.”
In addition, a “full and accurate reporting of all executions should be published, and a consolidated version prepared on at least an annual basis.”
The ICJ calls on the Singapore government:
- to stop the execution of Kho Jabing and commute his sentence, to one that does not include caning, which constitutes a form of cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment
- to institute an immediate moratorium on executions
- to take all necessary measures to abolish the death penalty in law
- to make public a full and accurate report of all executions in the country
Contact:
Emerlynne Gil, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, (Bangkok), t: +66840923575, e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
Oct 26, 2015 | News
Myanmar’s human rights record for the past four and a half years will be under scrutiny at the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Council (HRC), as the country goes up for its Universal Periodic Review (UPR) review on 6 November 2015.
Myanmar will be assessed on developments based on information provided by the government, UN human rights experts, institutions and treaty bodies; and stakeholders including Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs).
The eleventh round of Pre-Sessions to discuss the human rights situations in Myanmar was held on 8 October 2015 and was organized by UPR-Info.
The event brought together various permanent missions and various Myanmar civil society organizations (CSOs) that presented their respective UPR recommendations.
This event also provided NGOs, including the ICJ, with an opportunity to contribute to the UPR process by informing several delegations at once about specific, actionable recommendations to the government to effectively address human rights violations and provide redress.
In its UPR stakeholder submission, the ICJ drew the attention of the HRC Working Group on the UPR, and that of the HRC itself, to the ICJ’s concerns about the independence of the judiciary and legal profession, the lack of legislation adequately protecting human rights and the environment, discriminatory laws targeting women and minorities, and the writ of habeas corpus in Myanmar.
The Office of the Commissioner for Human Rights referred to these issues in its summary to the HRC Working group on the UPR.
UPR discussions in Geneva led by NGOs reiterated that despite reforms, significant human rights challenges remain in Myanmar. These include, but are not limited to, the following:
- During its first UPR in 2011, Myanmar had supported recommendations to consider signing and ratifying core human rights treaties, but has made no significant progress;
- A recent parliament veto reserves the 25% of the seats in the legislative bodies for the military, thus continuing military impunity and preserving their hold over any constitutional or legislative amendment;
- The Myanmar National Human Rights Commission suffers from low credibility due to its lack of autonomy from the government and failure to investigate egregious human rights violations;
- The package of “race and religion protection” laws comes at a time of increasing ethnic and religious tension, and discriminates on grounds of gender and religion. Discrimination against religious minorities has led to mass displacement, deaths and rights violations;
- Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender rights are routinely violated;
- The Environmental Conservation Law allowed government departments and private business abroad exemptions from environmental protection obligations;
- Judicial independence is compromised as judges in some instances still render decisions based on orders coming from military and the government.
Contact:
Vani Sathisan, ICJ International Legal Adviser, Myanmar, t: +95-09250800301; e: vani.sathisan(a)icj.org
The ICJ’s UPR stakeholder submission for Myanmar can be found here
The OHCHR summary to the UN Working Group for the UPR can be found here
