Nov 7, 2023
An opinion piece by Mathuri Thamilmaran, National Legal Advisor – Sri Lanka at the International Commission of Jurists
Recently, the Mauritius Supreme Court ruled that a 185-year-old law criminalizing consensual same-sex sexual conduct was unconstitutional. This latest ruling adds Mauritius to the growing number of States where, in the past few years, consensual same-sex sexual relations have been decriminalized, either through the adoption of specific legislation or as a result of judicial decisions. It is anticipated – and very much hoped – that Sri Lanka will join this global wave of change in the coming months.
Like Sri Lanka, most of these States had laws criminalizing consensual same-sex sexual conduct originally imposed on them as a result of colonial rule. The British introduced the Penal Code in 1833, when Sri Lanka (Ceylon) was still a British colony. The Sri Lankan Penal Code was modeled on the Indian Penal Code of 1860. While three colonial powers – the Portuguese, the Dutch and the British – had ruled Sri Lanka, it was the British who codified the criminalization of consensual same-sex sexual conduct through the introduction of criminal provisions proscribing “unnatural offences”, namely, “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” (section 365) and “gross indecency” (section 365A) in the Sri Lankan Penal Code. None of these terms has been defined in the law but, in practice, they have been interpreted and applied to those who engage in consensual same-sex sexual conduct or are perceived to do so.
Sri Lanka gained independence from the British in 1948. But, 140 years since their enactment, these penal provisions continue to be in place with a few amendments and, while rarely enforced, they have been used as a tool of harassment, blackmail and persecution against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (LGBT) and non-binary persons by State and non-State actors alike. Criminalizing same-sex sexual conduct between two consenting individuals only serves to perpetuate discrimination, violence and stigma motivated in whole or in part by ignorance of, prejudice and hatred against real or imputed same-sex sexual orientation.
Human Rights violations and abuses against LGBT and non-binary persons in Sri Lanka have been documented by many Sri Lankan civil society organizations throughout the years. For example, criminalization of consensual same-sex sexual conduct has been shown to lead to instances of extortion by both public and private actors. Another documented detrimental impact of criminalization relates to the right of access to health care of the individuals concerned, while raising more broadly public health concerns. Branded “criminals” by the law, LGBT and non-binary persons are less likely to access health services due to fear of being outed, discrimination, stigma and opprobrium, thus making it harder for them, for example, to receive vital messages about safe sexual conduct and HIV/ AIDS prevention.
Sri Lanka is a State party to all core international human rights treaties and to some of their protocols and it is thus bound by international human rights law. The latter enshrines the principle of non-discrimination and guarantees to everyone the right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law without discrimination in law and in practice. The UN Human Rights Committee has called upon States to ensure that their domestic law comply with the prohibition against discrimination, including the obligation not to discriminate against a person on prohibited grounds such as “race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status”. In Young v. Australia (2003) the Committee held that the prohibition against discrimination under Article 26 of the ICCPR Covenant comprises also discrimination based on sexual orientation.
In 2022, while addressing the Human Rights Committee, the Sri Lankan government stated that Article 12 of the Constitution of Sri Lanka included non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Such a statement is contradicted by the criminal provisions proscribing consensual same-sex sexual conduct, and by the documented human rights violations and abuses committed against LGBT and non-binary persons over the years. The Committee, in its Concluding Observations published in April 2023, expressed concern that “lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender persons continue to face criminalization under sections 365, 365A and 399 of the Penal Code and discrimination on a daily basis, including in accessing health care, employment and housing” and that they are “victims of arbitrary arrests and detention and are subjected to forced anal examinations in an attempt to gather evidence for prosecutions for same-sex conduct.” The Committee called upon the government to repeal the aforesaid legal provisions, to protect LGBT persons from discrimination of any kind, and to combat negative stereotypes and prejudice against them through training and awareness programmes.
Further, in 2023, during its Universal Periodic Review (UPR) at the Human Rights Council, Sri Lanka stated that a number of criminal proceedings had been revisited on grounds of non-discrimination based on sexual orientation. The Working Group of the UPR subsequently made recommendations to decriminalize same-sex sexual conduct. Unfortunately, Sri Lanka did not explicitly accept such recommendations and instead only took note of them. The UPR recommendations echo the recommendation made by the UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW Committee) in 2022 that the criminalization of consensual same-sex sexual conduct between women under section 365A of the Penal Code violated their right to non-discrimination and therefore Sri Lanka should decriminalize consensual same-sex sexual conduct between women. In light of this, the continued criminalization of consensual same-sex sexual relations puts Sri Lanka at odds with its international human rights law obligations and erodes its credibility on the global stage.
In May 2023, the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka published its Special Determination on the constitutionality of the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill of 2023, whose stated objective is to repeal “provisions that make sexual orientation a punishable offence”. The recognition, for the first time, by the country’s highest court that the criminalization of homosexuality was an affront to the rights of equality and non-discrimination, dignity and privacy of a person, among others, was a watershed moment for human rights activists who had worked with LGBT persons in pursuit of this outcome. The Supreme Court’s determination also put to rest unsubstantiated rhetoric depicting homosexuality as a threat to society. On the strength of the Supreme Court’s determination that the Bill is constitutional, the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill now requires a simple majority in Parliament to pass and become law.
Parliament is expected to vote on the Bill in the coming months. It is a private member’s Bill tabled in Parliament by parliamentarian Premnath Dolawatte. Under the Bill, section 365 of the Sri Lankan Penal Code of 1883 will be repealed and replaced with reference only to “bestiality” as an “unnatural offence”, while section 365A will be fully repealed.
It is heartening to witness States around the globe reconsider and rectify outdated laws that stigmatize and criminalize consensual same-sex sexual relations. Sri Lanka should not hesitate to follow suit and finally take that vital stride towards a more just and inclusive society. Decriminalization of consensual same-sex sexual conduct would send a powerful message that Sri Lanka recognizes and respects the autonomy of individuals to choose their partners and live their lives authentically. The Supreme Court has taken the first step in that direction, it is now time for the Sri Lankan Parliament to ensure that the Bill is passed.
Nov 7, 2023
Yesterday, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and Amnesty International (AI) jointly submitted an amicus curiae legal brief to the Bangkok South Civil Court in a class-action lawsuit filed by two residents of Cambodian villages, representing at least 23 families out of a potential class of more than 700 affected families in the Oddar Meanchey Province, Cambodia, against Mitr Phol Sugar Corporation Ltd., a Thai company.
This lawsuit, based on Thai and Cambodian tort laws, alleges human rights abuses committed by Mitr Phol’s apparent subsidiary in Cambodia, Angkor Sugar Co. Ltd.
In 2008, Angkor Sugar Co. Ltd. was granted an economic land concession to operate an industrial sugar plant in Oddar Meanchey Province. The complaint alleges that after the concession was granted, Angkor Sugar Co. Ltd. colluded with local authorities to forcibly seize land held by individuals from local communities, resulting in the destruction of their houses, the burning of villages and crops, and physical harm to some villagers.
This marks the first-ever class-action lawsuit filed in Thai courts by plaintiffs from another country for abuses committed by a Thai company outside of Thailand.
Today, the Court held a session to examine the list of evidence submitted by both parties. The next appointment date will be on 27 March 2024 for the examination of evidence, after which the court will set the witness examination date.
The ICJ/AI amicus brief sets out the principal applicable international human rights law and standards, and comparative jurisprudence for the Thai court to consider in resolving this case. The organizations submit that the human rights responsibilities of a parent company, such as Mitr Phol, extend beyond its own conduct to include the activities of subordinate entities. To this end, Mitr Phol has a duty to exercise due diligence in monitoring and controlling their subsidiaries in Cambodia, whose conduct they may influence. Failure to carry out this due diligence should result in liability as a consequence of the actions of their subsidiaries.
The brief also highlights that under international standards, business enterprises have a responsibility to respect all internationally recognized human rights wherever they operate, such as the right to adequate housing.
The Thai court itself also has a duty that extends beyond the national borders of Thailand to ensure access to justice, effective remedy, and reparation for individuals from communities living in proximity to the operations of Thai companies and their subsidiaries in other countries when their rights are violated.
The need to apply international human rights standards is recognized by the government of Thailand, as evidenced in the adoption of its National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights, and is also recognized by Mitr Phol through the company’s Code of Conduct.
Background
Victims of corporate human rights abuses face multiple barriers in holding companies to account and securing access to justice.
Although this case is the first of its kind in Thai courts, in recent years, other cases involving human rights abuses committed by Thai state-owned enterprises abroad were brought to Thai courts by Thai citizens, but they ended with limited success. These cases included an unsuccessful lawsuit brought by Thai villagers against Thai governmental agencies regarding the construction of the Xayaburi Dam in Lao PDR and its transboundary environmental destruction affecting communities in Thailand.
The limitations identified encompass the legal nature of corporations, evidentiary challenges, conflict of laws, and statutes of limitation.
Despite calls from CSOs to initially address the weak implementation of the first NAP, Thailand’s Second National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights (2023-2027) was endorsed by the Thai Cabinet on 25 July 2023.
The NAP identifies ‘cross-border investment and multinational enterprises’ as one of the four key priority issues in the NAP. The Second NAP includes an action point that requests the Ministry of Justice to “study and recommend amendments to the laws or propose measures to ensure access to justice and effective civil, criminal and administrative remedies for local and overseas communities within the areas where companies or Thai state-owned enterprises operate and are affected by such operations.”
The submission in English can be downloaded here
The submission in Thai can be downloaded here
Further reading
Thailand: Barriers persist in access to justice for victims of human rights abuses involving Thai transnational corporations abroad – ICJ report
Contact
Sanhawan Srisod, ICJ Associate International Legal Adviser, e: sanhawan.srisod@icj.org
Oct 16, 2023 | News
Judges and Prosecutors in Nepal have taken up the challenge to step up their efforts to ensure that victims and survivors of human rights violations are able effectively to access justice.
At a Judicial Dialogue convened by the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and Advocacy Forum Nepal (AFN) in collaboration with Judges Society Nepal (JSN) on 15 – 16 September 2023, judges and prosecutors from district and high courts in Gandaki Province in Nepal attended and assessed the challenges faced by victims and survivors in the context of the stalled transitional justice process which followed from the end of Nepal’s internal armed conflict in 2006.
The Government of Nepal has made repeated commitments to ensure access to justice and the Supreme Court of Nepal has affirmed that the authorities have firm legal obligations to act in the transitional justice process. Participants considered that there had been serious undue delay in the Nepalese TJ process over years, which have included ineffective commissions, non-implementation of court rulings and a failure to take into account the voices of victims of human rights violations. There was therefore a pressing need for judges and public prosecutors to play a more proactive role in order to address conflict-era gross violations delivering justice for the victims of the violations.
ICJ Commissioner and former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Nepal Kalyan Shrestha, emphasized that it was indispensable to adhere to international and domestic human rights law, including the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court. He expressed concern that adjudication of conflict-related cases had been significantly delayed, resulting in a prolonged wait for justice for the victims of human rights violations. Justice Shrestha also underscored the need for Nepal’s judiciary and public prosecutors to effectively fulfill their responsibilities and ensure justice for victims of human rights violations, in accordance with a well-developed body of jurisprudence on justice in the transitional context.
Justice Ishwor Khatiwada of the Supreme Court of Nepal reviewed the status of human rights guaranteed under the Constitution of Nepal. More than a thousand cases related to conflict-era human rights violations have been pending at different courts, and there was no law that restricts courts/judges from deciding the cases of human rights violations from conflict. The Government of Nepal had been refusing victims of conflict access to regular justice system arguing that they will be provided justice by transitional justice mechanisms. However, these promised TJ mechanisms had not been established even more than a decade and a half after signing the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), making commitments to create these mechanisms.
Justice Ananda Mohan Bhattarai, Justice of the Supreme Court of Nepal highlighted that jurisprudence established by the Supreme Court mandated a robust role of the judiciary in assessing the implementation of its jurisprudence.
Mandira Sharma, ICJ Senior Legal Advisor, provided insights into the global context of transitional justice and discussed the challenges, lessons learned, and good practices.
High Court Judge Tek Prasad Dhungana, General Secretary of Judges Society Nepal presented the objectives of the dialogue, which was chaired by Mr. Baburam Regmi, Acting President of Judges Society Nepal and former High Court Judge and facilitated by Kathmandu District Court judge Raju Kumar Khatiwada.
Contact:
Dr Mandira Sharma, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +9779851048475, e: mandira.sharma@icj.org
Kashiram Dhungana, ICJ Legal Adviser, Nepal, t: +9779851226964, e: kashiram.dhungana@icj.org
Oct 12, 2023
On 11 October 2023, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) made two submissions to the UN Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in advance of its review of Cambodia’s human rights record in April – May next year.
In its first submission, the ICJ draws the attention of the Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the UPR to a number of serious human rights concerns in Cambodia in connection with:
- Freedom of expression; and
- The independence of the judiciary and the right to a fair trial.
In addition, in its first submission, the ICJ calls upon the Working Group and the Human Rights Council to make the following recommendations to the Cambodian authorities:
On freedom of expression
- The legislature should repeal or substantially amend legal provisions that unduly restrict the right to freedom of expression – including article 443, 453, 494 and 495 of the Penal Code and the NIG Sub-Decree – to bring them in line with international human rights law and general principles of criminal law; the proposed draft Cybercrime Law and Cybersecurity Law should be withdrawn;
- The prosecuting authorities and the judiciary should immediately cease ongoing criminal investigations, drop all existing charges and revoke or otherwise reverse criminal penalties imposed against individuals for “offences” under domestic provisions that are inconsistent with Cambodia’s obligations under international human rights law guaranteeing the rights to freedom of expression and information and under general principles of criminal law; and
- Rescind the revocation of licences and access-blocking of independent media outlets that have been carried out arbitrarily without a thorough and transparent process, and refrain from imposing any further restrictions unless the revocation or blocking decision has been undertaken following a full analysis that applies international standards concerning legality, legitimate purpose, necessity, proportionality and non-discrimination, and has been authorized pursuant to an order by an independent and impartial judicial authority, in accordance with due process, and ensuring that there is a right to appeal against it.
On the independence of the judiciary and fair trial
- Safeguard, in law and in practice, the full independence and impartiality of judges and prosecutors from any form of political pressure and undue influence, including by amending the Law on the Organization of the Courts, the Law on the Statute of Judges and Prosecutors, and the Law on the Organization and Functioning of the Supreme Council of the Magistracy, with the aim to eliminating executive influence on the administration and functioning of the judiciary; and
- Ensure that fair trial rights are fully respected at both the investigation and trial stages in compliance with international law and standards, including the right to a public hearing, the right to defend themselves, the right to equality of arms, the presumption of innocence and the right to a public and reasoned judgment, all of which are rights guaranteed, inter alia, under the ICCPR.
The first submission on freedom of expression, independence of the judiciary and fair trial can be downloaded here.
In its second submission, made jointly with Land Watch Thai, the ICJ draws the attention of the Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the UPR to human rights violations and abuses in the context of and resulting from the establishment and development of Special Economic Zones (SEZs) in Cambodia.
In its second submission, the ICJ and Land Watch Thai call upon the Working Group and the Human Rights Council to make the following recommendations to the Cambodian authorities:
- Adopt a human rights-based approach to development projects, such as SEZs, grounded in processes and safeguards to ensure that decisions about those projects are made with adequate and meaningful consultations and genuine participation of the individuals and communities concerned, including the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples, in compliance with the requirements of international law and standards;
- Ensure that business entities operating in or domiciled in Cambodia systematically conduct consultations and carry out human rights due diligence, including independent environmental impact assessments, to prevent and/or mitigate the risks of negative impacts of their operations on the exercise of human rights;
- Adopt a national action plan on business and human rights while ensuring that both the formulation and implementation processes involve all interested parties, including representatives of businesses, CSOs, indigenous peoples and the most affected communities;
- Ensure transparency by making information and documents related to large development projects, such as the SEZs, publicly available;
- Ensure that legislation protecting labour rights is effectively applied to all sectors and all workers, including by addressing the practice of engaging in short-term employment contracts as a means of bypassing various social protection laws or restricting union activities by employers;
- Ensure that workers, including in the context of SEZs, enjoy the right to just and favourable conditions of work as guaranteed by international law, and urgently investigate, prosecute, and address reports of human trafficking and forced labour in SEZs;
- Ensure that the minimum wage is applied to all sectors of the labour market and that all workers receive a minimum wage that enables them to enjoy a decent standard of living for themselves and their families;
- Ensure that all workers are able to exercise their right to freedom of association and collective bargaining without undue restrictions, intimidation, violence, harassment, or risk to their personal security or lives, as well as address barriers to registering and joining unions. To this end, revise the 2016 Trade Union Law to ensure compliance with international labour law and standards;
- Ensure that evictions are only carried out as a last resort after all other feasible alternatives have been explored, including in the context of SEZs. Procedural protections required under international human rights law should be in place before any evictions are carried out, in particular, requirements on genuine consultation, due process safeguards, provision of legal remedies, compensation and adequate alternative housing. Such protections should also be explicitly guaranteed in the Land Law and the Anukret (Sub-Degree) No. 148, as well as other domestic legal and institutional frameworks to prevent forced evictions; and
- Ensure that effective, prompt and accessible judicial and non-judicial remedies are provided to those who are affected by the implementation of large development projects, including SEZs.
The second submission on SEZs can be downloaded here.
Oct 12, 2023
On 11 October 2023, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) made a submission to the UN Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in advance of its review of Vietnam’s human rights record in April – May next year.
In its submission, the ICJ draws the attention of the Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the UPR to a number of serious human rights concerns in Viet Nam in connection with:
- Freedom of expression;
- The death penalty; and
- The independence of the judiciary and the right to a fair trial.
In addition, in its submission the ICJ calls upon the Working Group and the Human Rights Council to make the following recommendations to the Vietnamese authorities:
On freedom of expression
- The legislature should repeal or substantially amend legal provisions that unduly restrict the right to freedom of expression – including articles 117 and 331 of the Penal Code, Law on Cybersecurity, Decree 53, and Decree 72 – to bring them in line with international human rights law; and the proposed enactment of a new Decree 72 should be shelved;
- The prosecuting authorities and the judiciary should immediately cease ongoing criminal investigations, drop all existing charges and revoke or otherwise rescind criminal penalties imposed against individuals for alleged violations of domestic provisions, particularly with respect to domestic criminal provisions that are inconsistent with general principles of criminal law and Viet Nam’s obligations under international human rights law, including those guaranteeing the rights to freedom of expression and information;
- The government should refrain from restricting or blocking online content unless the blocking decision has been undertaken following a full analysis that applies international standards concerning legality, legitimate purpose, necessity, proportionality and non-discrimination, and has been authorized pursuant to an order by an independent and impartial judicial authority, in accordance with due process with the express guarantee of the right to appeal.
On the death penalty
- Halt all impending executions of individuals and commute their sentences; impose an immediate moratorium on the use of the death penalty with a view to abolishing capital punishment;
- Ensure that there is sufficient transparency with respect to the death penalty, including through making sure that essential information relevant to a specific planned execution be promptly provided to death row prisoners and their families, and making publicly available information regarding death sentences, notifications and executions.
On the independence of the judiciary and fair trial
- Take immediate steps to safeguard, in law and in practice, the full independence and impartiality of the judiciary from any form of political pressure and influence, and ensure transparent and impartial processes for appointments to the judiciary;
- Ensure that the right to a fair trial be fully respected at the investigation and trial stages in compliance with international law and standards, including through guaranteeing the right to legal assistance pending trial, the right to adequate time and facilities for the preparation of a defence, the right to a public hearing, the presumption of innocence, the right to defence, and the right to equality of arms;
- In relation to cases where there have been allegations of ill-treatment, initiate prompt, impartial and effective investigations into all credible allegations of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and, when warranted by the evidence, bring the perpetrators to justice; provide victims with access to an effective remedy and reparation; and
- Cease the use of arbitrary criminal investigations against lawyers aimed at impairing their legitimate work as human rights lawyers and their right to freedom of expression. In addition, consistent with the ICCPR and UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, take all necessary measures to ensure the free exercise of the legal profession, in all circumstances, so that lawyers may exercise their legitimate professional rights and discharge their duties towards their clients and the courts without fear of reprisals and free from all undue restrictions, including harassment through abusive legal proceedings.
The submission can be downloaded here.
