Nov 26, 2013 | News
The ICJ is calling on the Malaysian Government to immediately drop the criminal charge against human rights defender Lena Hendry for screening the film ‘No Fire Zone: the Killing Fields of Sri Lanka.’
The case has been fixed for case management and the defence lawyers filed an application to set aside, permanently stay or quash the charges against Lena Hendry.
“Subjecting Lena Hendry to criminal prosecution simply for screening a documentary violates her rights and contravenes Malaysia’s obligations to uphold freedom of expression,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia-Pacific Regional Director.
On 3 July 2013, Pusat Komas, a Malaysian human rights advocacy organization where Lena Hendry works, and Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall Civil Right Committee (KLSCAH CRC) screened the film “No Fire Zone”, a documentary on the war crimes and human rights abuses allegedly committed at the end of the Sri Lankan civil war in 2009.
Immediately following the screening, 30 officers from the Malaysian Ministry of Home Affairs and the police entered the hall and recorded the identity of all persons who attended the event.
The authorities then arrested Lena Hendry and two colleagues, Anna Har and Arul Prakash, and interrogated them for three hours at Dang Wangi police station.
On 19 September 2013, Lena Hendry was charged under section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Act 2002 for showing a film that had not been approved by the Board of Censors.
If found guilty, she could be fined up to RM30,000 (approximately USD 9,322) and sentenced to up to three years imprisonment.
“The Malaysian government told the UN Human Rights Council during its universal periodic review that it maintains a ‘strong commitment to the rule of law, to upholding respect for human rights, and…widening the democratic space”, said Sam Zarifi. “That commitment is inconsistent with prosecuting human rights defenders for disseminating documentary human rights information.”
Under international law and standards, Malaysia must respect the right to freedom of expression of all persons, including the right to seek and impart information of all kinds.
In the case of human rights defenders, the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders imposes a special duty on States not only to respect this right, but also to protect those who exercise this right through their exposure of human rights violations.
The ICJ calls on the Malaysian Government to safeguard freedom of expression and uphold the right of individuals to expose and disseminate information on human rights questions, including the documentation of human rights abuses.
Nov 20, 2013
The Bangladesh Government must repeal or amend the newly amended Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Act because it is being used to assault freedom of expression and freedom from arbitrary detention, the ICJ says.
The ICT Act, as amended on 6 October 2013, has been used to arbitrarily detain Nasiruddin Elan, Director of prominent human rights organization Odhikar, who was denied bail by the cyber crimes tribunal on 6 November 2013.
His appeal to the High Court division of the Supreme Court has been set for 24 November 2013.
Adilur Rahman Khan, Odhikar’s Secretary, has also been charged under the ICT Act.
The Government has accused the two of deliberately distorting the number of protestors killed in a police crackdown on the Islamist party, Hefazat-i-Islam, in May this year.
“The original ICT Act already served to undermine human rights, but the new amendments make the law nothing short of draconian”, said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia director. “The Government has used the newly amended Act to try to silence peaceful critics and civil society like Odhikar, in clear violation of international law.”
In a briefing paper issued today (see below), the ICJ analyzes the Information and Communication Technology (amendment) Act, 2013, and points out its serious deviations from international law, including: the amendments make many offences under the Act non-bailable; they allow the police to make arrests without a warrant; they impose a severe minimum prison sentence of seven years for offences under the Act; and they increase the maximum penalty for offences under the law from ten to 14 years’ imprisonment.
Provisions of the original ICT Act, particularly section 57, are also incompatible with Bangladesh’s obligations under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Bangladesh ratified on 6 September 2000: the offences prescribed are vague and overbroad; the restrictions imposed on freedom of opinion and expression go beyond what is permissible under Article 19(3) of the ICCPR; and the restrictions are not necessary and proportional to achieve a legitimate purpose.
“The overbroad, vaguely defined offences combined with disproportionate penalties stifle public discourse, especially any criticism of the Government,” Zarifi added. “With elections coming up, it is crucial to defend the right to freely express opinions and exchange views—something the ICT Act seeks to restrict.”
Mahmudur Rahman, acting editor of a Bengali newspaper critical of the Government, has also been arbitrarily detained under the Act for publishing transcripts of a Skype conversation between former International Crimes Tribunal Chairman, Justice Muhammad Nizamul Huq, and a Bangladeshi legal expert, Ahmed Ziauddin.
The records revealed information casting doubt on the independence of the International Crimes Tribunal.
Four bloggers (photo), Asif Mohiuddin, Subrata Adhikari Shuvo, Moshiur Rahman Biplob and Rasel Parvez, are also facing trial under section 57 of the ICT Act for allegedly making derogatory comments about Islam and ‘hurting’ religious sentiment.
“The amended ICT Act reflects a further attack on the rule of law and respect for human rights in Bangladesh,” said Zarifi. “The Government must immediately take steps to either repeal the Act or to modify it in line with international law and standards.”
Contact:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Ben Schonveld, ICJ South Asia Director, (Kathmandu), t: +977 14432651; email: ben.schonveld(a)icj.org
Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Advisor, (Lahore), t: +923214968434; email: reema.omer(a)icj.org
Bangladesh-ICT Brief -Advocacy-Analysis brief-2013 (full text in pdf)
Nov 15, 2013 | News
The ICJ and Amnesty International urge the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to increase efforts to protect the rights of women and children.
ASEAN must act in light of the newly adopted Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women and Elimination of Violence against Children, which was recently adopted at the 23rd ASEAN Summit in Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei Darussalam, the rights groups said.
The Declaration states the commitment of all 10 ASEAN member states to further “prevent and protect [women and children] from and respond to all forms of violence, abuse and exploitation of women and children particularly for those who are in vulnerable situations”.
AI and ICJ welcome this commitment, which allows for no exceptions or discrimination, while expressing concern that no explicit mention was made of lesbian, bisexual, transgender and intersex women and children in the non-exhaustive list of those requiring particular protection from discrimination and violence that follows this general statement.
The Declaration details a wide array of measures that Member States should take, within “a holistic, multi-disciplinary approach”, in order to eliminate violence against women and children.
These include changes to legislation, policies and practices; training and education; investigation, prosecution, punishment and where appropriate rehabilitation of perpetrators; creating an enabling environment for the participation of women and children; and the development of strategies for the elimination of harmful practices.
AI and ICJ pointed out that the Declaration suffers from some serious deficiencies in substance, as well as in the process of its adoption.
In terms of process, most ASEAN Member states failed to meaningfully consult with national civil society in the elaboration of the Declaration.
Only Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam held consultations, which in some of these states were limited.
This problem was compounded once the ACWC had finalised its draft, as the discussions and approval processes thereafter were completely shrouded in secrecy.
This final draft was never circulated to women’s and children’s groups in the region, despite written requests from several civil society groups calling for its release.
This unacceptable lack of transparency violates international guidelines on consultation with civil society, the ICJ and AI stressed.
AI and ICJ also deplore the fact that the Declaration reaffirms the General Principles of the discredited ASEAN Human Rights Declaration (AHRD), some of which are wholly incompatible with international law and allow for impermissible restrictions on human rights.
The two organizations reiterate their call to revise the AHRD, particularly by repealing or substantially amending General Principles 6-8, so as to bring it into line with international human rights law and standards.
AI and the ICJ further underline that international law allows no justification for violence against women and children and requires States to comply with their obligations to prohibit, prevent, investigate, punish and ensure reparations for victims of such violence in all circumstances.
Nothing in the Declaration may be construed to circumvent ASEAN Member States’ obligation to eliminate “prejudices and customary and all other practices” as well as “harmful and discriminatory traditional practices” that amount to, result in or perpetuate violence against women and children.
In addition, a significant omission of the Declaration is the lack of a reference to economic barriers to protection, assistance and justice faced by women and children in situations of violence.
ASEAN Member States should ensure that financial means do not impede access to justice, particularly of those living in poverty.
The rights groups also highlighted that ACWC rejected the proposal from women and children groups to have two separate declarations.
Although both women and children share similar vulnerabilities necessitating for additional protection, there remains certain rights, approaches and differing needs that are specific to each groups that could only be adequately addressed by having two separate declarations.
AI and the ICJ stated that ASEAN’s determination to end violence against women and children will ultimately be measured only by effective implementation of the Declaration in a manner which complies with their international obligations.
The Declaration tasks the ACWC to promote the implementation of the Declaration and review its progress.
AI and the ICJ call on the ACWC to actively implement this mandate, and for ASEAN Member States to cooperate with the ACWC in fulfilling this role.
Nov 14, 2013 | News
The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) and the ICJ urge the Commonwealth Heads of States meeting in Colombo this week to make Sri Lanka accountable to Commonwealth values.
The IBAHRI and the ICJ recall that the Commonwealth Charter, passed in March 2012, sets out 16 core values, which include safeguarding the independence of the judiciary, protecting the rule of law, respecting the separation of powers and promoting democratic rule.
But the two organizations point out numerous examples where these values have not been respected by the Government of Sri Lanka.
The IBAHRI and the ICJ were holding a press conference in Bangkok Thailand today after a high-level IBAHRI delegation was blocked from entering Sri Lanka late last week to attend a conference on the rule of law and independence of the legal profession hosted by the Bar Association of Sri Lanka.
Giving a statement remotely, Gabriela Knaul, UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, expressed “serious concerns about acts of reprisals against judges, prosecutors, lawyers and other actors of the judicial system who cooperate, or seek to cooperate, with UN and regional human rights mechanisms.”
“Reprisals against judicial actors and legal professionals are a kind of attack to their institutional and functional independence,” she added.
Earlier this year, the IBAHRI conducted a remote fact-finding mission on the politically motivated impeachment of Chief Justice Banadranayake in January 2013, after being denied entry into Sri Lanka.
The IBAHRI Mission concluded that the Chief Justice’s removal was unlawful, undermined public confidence in the rule of law and threatened to eviscerate the country’s judiciary as an independent guarantor of constitutional rights.
In an open letter signed by 56 eminent jurists and senior judges from around the world, the ICJ also expressed its grave concern over the disregard for international standards on the independence of the judiciary and the removal of judges.
“This weakening of rule of law and independence of the judiciary is accompanied by an equally deteriorating human rights situation,” said Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Adviser for South Asia.
The United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights, Navi Pillay, in her recent visit to Sri Lanka expressed concern over the curtailment or denial of personal freedoms and human rights, the persistent impunity and the failure of rule of law.
“The state of affairs in Sri Lanka sits uneasily with the aspirations set out in the Commonwealth Charter,” said Human Rights Barrister and IBAHRI Sri Lanka Mission Rapporteur, Sadakat Kadri. “The Government of Sri Lanka has spent years undermining the values and principles of the Commonwealth.”
“If the Commonwealth is to remain a relevant and effective international organization, it is paramount that those heads of State who have chosen to attend this week’s summit take measures to make Sri Lanka accountable to the core values and principles of the Commonwealth,” said IBAHRI Senior Programme Lawyer Alex Wilks.
Contact:
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Advisor, South Asia Programme (Bangkok), t: +66857200723; email: sheila.varadan(a)icj.org
Notes:
- The IBAHRI delegation blocked from entering Sri Lanka included UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Ms Gabriela Knaul, former UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers and ICJ Commissioner Dato’ Param Cumaraswamy, and IBAHRI senior programme lawyer Alex Wilks, had intended to travel to Colombo to attend a conference on the rule of law and independence of the legal profession hosted by the Bar Association of Sri Lanka. IBAHRI Mission Rapporteur Sadakat Kadri was also unable to enter Sri Lanka as he was denied a visa.
- The Bar Association of Sri Lanka with the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute had planned a conference for 13 November 2013 on ‘Making Commonwealth values a reality: the rule of law and independence of the legal profession’. The 13 November 2013 conference was cancelled when the Government of Sri Lanka revoked visas for the UN Special Rapporteur and the IBAHRI delegation on 7 November 2013.
- In March 2013, a delegation of the IBAHRI undertook a remote fact-finding mission to investigate the impeachment proceedings of Chief Justice Bandaranayake, the independence of the legal profession and rule of law in Sri Lanka. The mission was conducted remotely following the cancellation of visas by the Government of Sri Lanka for the IBAHRI delegation. A report was released in April 2013 A Crisis of Legitimacy: The Impeachment of Chief Justice Bandaranayake and the Erosion of the Rule of Law in Sri Lanka.
- The ICJ released a report, Authority without Accountability: The crisis of impunity in Sri Lanka in November 2012 documenting the systemic erosion of rule of law and accountability mechanisms in Sri Lanka. The ICJ report described how decades of Emergency rule and legal immunities granted to the President and other government officials weakened the checks and balances in the Sri Lankan government, while political interference has increasingly led to attacks on the independence of the judiciary and rule of law.
Nov 14, 2013 | Events, News
The International Bar Association Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) and the ICJ urge Commonwealth Heads of States meeting in Colombo this week to make Sri Lanka accountable to Commonwealth values.
The IBAHRI and the ICJ are holding a press conference in Bangkok, Thailand, this morning after a high-level IBAHRI delegation was blocked from entering Sri Lanka late last week.
You can watch the event here: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/40754120
Further reading:
Sri Lanka-Muttur killings-ICJ-ACF Q&A-briefing paper-2013 (full text in pdf)
ICJ open letter signed by 56 eminent jurists and senior judges from around the world
ICJ report Authority without Accountability: The crisis of impunity in Sri Lanka
