МКЮ присоединяется к призыву к правам человека и гражданскому обществу в рамках контртеррористической стратегии ООН

МКЮ присоединяется к призыву к правам человека и гражданскому обществу в рамках контртеррористической стратегии ООН

Сегодня МКЮ присоединилась к другим организациям гражданского общества, призывая к тому, чтобы уважение прав человека, защита гражданского общества и участие в нем,  играли более активную роль в Глобальной контртеррористической стратегии ООН.

Совместное заявление организаций последовало за принятием Генеральной Ассамблеей ООН 26 июня 2018 года резолюции 72/284, посвященной рассмотрению Глобальной контртеррористической стратегии Организации Объединенных Наций. Глобальная контртеррористическая стратегия ООН, впервые принятая в 2006 году, содержит план действий для ООН и государств-членов на глобальном, региональном и национальном уровнях для борьбы с терроризмом.

Организации подчеркивают ценность глобальной контртеррористической стратегии, в которой права человека являются важным компонентом. Они отмечают, что резолюция Генеральной Ассамблеи в значительной степени подтверждает обязательства государств соблюдать международное право, в том числе международные права человека в условиях борьбы с терроризмом, и что права человека являются «существенной основой борьбы с терроризмом».

В совместном заявлении выражается обеспокоенность в связи с тем, что государства не смогли адекватно устранить нарушения прав человека в отношении мер по борьбе с терроризмом. В нем также выражается обеспокоенность по поводу того, что государства не предоставили благоприятные условия для организаций гражданского общества, в том числе тех, которые касаются женщин, для значительного участия в обзоре Стратегии.

Полное заявление и список присоединяющихся к нему организаций можно скачать на английском в формате PDF здесь: UN-Advocacy-JointStatement-CounterTerrorismStrategy-2018

Poland: ICJ sitting and former judges call for immediate reinstatement of Supreme Court Justices

Poland: ICJ sitting and former judges call for immediate reinstatement of Supreme Court Justices

Twenty-two senior judges from across the globe wrote today to Polish President Andrzej Duda to condemn the recent attacks on the independence of the judiciary.

The judges, all Commissioners or Honorary Members of the International Commission of Jurists, criticized the forced resignation of 27 of 72 judges of Poland’s Supreme Court as a severe blow to the independence of the Polish judiciary in violation of international standards.

The letter was organized by the ICJ and its Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers in consultation with jurists from 17 countries.

“The Polish government’s assault on the country’s judiciary is a major blow to the rule of law in Poland,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Secretary General.

He added:

“The situation in Poland is of concern to judges in the country, as well as in the European Union and around the world.”

“The ICJ and jurists everywhere will speak out against this surge of attacks on the judiciary that is increasingly a pattern in many countries, including several that until recently were at least rhetorically champions of the rule of law.”

“This letter shows that the commitment to the rule of law and judicial independence is not limited to just one part of the world or one legal system, but rather reflects the views of the global community of jurists.”

In their letter, the ICJ senior judges “condemn the recent forced retirement of 27 out of 72 Polish Supreme Court justices, including its President Małgorzata Gersdorf (photo), and urge President Duda to act immediately to restore the independence of the judiciary by reinstating them in office.”

They express grave concern “that the effective dismissal of one third of the Supreme Court, coupled with the broad discretion given to the President’s office to make exceptions, has taken place in contravention of international human rights law and standards, including the right to a fair hearing, and is contrary to basic principles of the rule of law.”

Finally, the “undersigned jurists urge the President of the Republic of Poland to act immediately to restore the independence of the judiciary by reinstating the Supreme Court justices forced into retirement, follow the recommendations of the European Commission on judicial reform, and take action to repeal the law on the Supreme Court that strikes at the very core of judicial independence.”

The signatories

  • Justice Adolfo Azcuna, former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines
  • Justice Solomy Balungi Bossa, Ugandan Judge on the International Criminal Court
  • Justice Ian Binnie, retired Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada
  • Justice Azhar Cachalia, Judge of the Supreme Court of Appeal of South Africa
  • Dame Silvia Cartwright, former Judge of the High Court in New Zealand and of the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia
  • Justice Moses Chinhengo, Judge of the High Court of Botswana
  • Justice Martine Comte, former President of the Orleans Court of Appeal, France
  • Justice Radmila Dracigevic-Dicic, Acting President of the Supreme Court of Appeals, Judge of the Supreme Court of Serbia
  • Justice Elizabeth Evatt, former Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia
  • Justice Claire L’Heureux-Dubé, former Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada
  • Justice Paul J. G. Kapteyn, former Judge of the European Court of Justice
  • Justice Michael Kirby, former Justice of the High Court of Australia and former President of the International Commission of Jurists
  • Justice Kalthoum Kennou, Judge of the Tunisian Cassation Court
  • Justice Ketil Lund, former Justice of the Norwegian Supreme Court
  • Justice Qinisile Mabuza, Judge of the High Court of Swaziland
  • Justice Egbert Myjer, former Judge of the European Court of Human Rights
  • Justice Michèle Rivet, former President of the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal
  • Justice Kalyan Shrestha, former Chief Justice of the Nepalese Supreme Court
  • Justice Philippe Texier, Judge of the French Court of Cassation
  • Justice Lillian Tibatemwa-Ekirikubinza, Justice of the Supreme Court of Uganda
  • Justice Stefan Trechsel, former ad litem Judge at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
  • Dr Rodrigo Uprimny Yepes, former Assistant Justice of the Constitutional Court of Colombia

Poland-Reinstate forcibly retired judges-Advocacy-Open letters-2018-ENG (full text of letter in PDF)

Kazakhstan: ICJ deplores new law restricting independence of lawyers

Kazakhstan: ICJ deplores new law restricting independence of lawyers

Today, the ICJ expressed concern at the adoption of a new law on lawyers in Kazakhstan.

The Law ‘On the Professional Activities of Advocates and Legal Assistance’, signed into law on 10 July 2018, contradicts international law and standards on the independence of the legal profession, by enabling the executive to influence or to have control over who is allowed to practice law and substantial influence on disciplinary proceedings against lawyers.

The law will have negative repercussions for protection of human rights and the rule of law in the Republic of Kazakhstan.

“Some of the key provisions of the adopted law undermine the independence of the legal profession, a cornerstone of the rule of law,” Temur Shakirov, ICJ Europe Program Senior Legal Adviser said today.

“Not only does the law weaken the legal profession, it sends an unfortunate message to the public that, as a result, their human rights, including their right to a fair trial, may be harder to uphold within the legal system,” he added.

More specifically, the ICJ is concerned that, under the new law, the role of the independent Bar Association in the composition of the disciplinary commissions is reduced.

Besides lawyers, the Disciplinary Commission will now include ‘representatives of the public’ designated by the Ministry of Justice. While the law does not specify how these members of the Disciplinary Commission would be selected, the selection is to be made by the Ministry of Justice.

The same procedure is not excluded to select members who are retired judges, which the Law requires also be part of disciplinary commissions.

While many of the specific procedures are unclear, it is apparent that these provisions would give the Ministry extensive influence over the Disciplinary Commission, especially as the law does not explicitly require these members perform their duties independently from the instructions of the Ministry of Justice.

The influence of the executive over the disciplinary proceedings of the Bar Association is contrary to the principles of independence of lawyers.

The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provide that disciplinary proceedings against lawyers are to be brought before an impartial disciplinary committee established by the legal profession, before an independent statutory authority, or before a court, and shall be subject to an independent judicial review.

Furthermore, the law continues to give the Ministry of Justice control over admission to the practice of law.

It stipulates that prospective lawyers who have completed their professional training are to be assessed by the Commission for admission to practice established by territorial bodies of the Ministry of Justice.

The commissions consist of seven members, of which only three are members of the Bar Association. The composition of the commissions and the principles of their work are to be approved by the orders of the Minister of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

The Law therefore preserves the previous procedure on admission to the profession criticized by the ICJ earlier, according to which the attestation of applicants for obtaining the membership to the Bar Association and issuing a license were within the exclusive competence of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

At the same time, many defense rights listed in the Law are curtailed or compromised by the wording that would allow for enactment of restrictions by secondary legislation, including that the adopted Law would not allow lawyers to freely and without interference collect evidence in defense of their clients or that lawyer’s inquiries can be subject to limitation where they seek to obtain “restricted information”.

The ICJ notes that according to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, States must ensure lawyers have access to appropriate information, files and documents in their possession or control in sufficient time to enable lawyers to provide effective legal assistance to their clients. Such access should be provided at the earliest appropriate time (Principle 21).

Read the full text in English here

Read the full text in Russian here

UN Committee against Torture: ICJ and IHOP’s joint submission on Turkey

UN Committee against Torture: ICJ and IHOP’s joint submission on Turkey

On 25 June, the ICJ and Human Rights Joint Platform (IHOP) filed their joint submission to the UN Committee against Torture (Committee).

The Committee will consider it during the adoption of a list of issues prior to reporting (LOIPR) for the examination of the Fifth Periodic Report of Turkey under Article 19 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT).

During its 65th session, from 12 November to 7 December 2018, the Committee will prepare and adopt a LOIPR on Turkey.

Once adopted, the LOIPR will be transmitted to the State party. Turkey’s formal response to the LOIPR will then constitute its Fifth Periodic Report under article 19 of the Convention.

The ICJ and IHOP’s joint submission to the Committee highlights a number of ongoing concerns with respect to the country’s implementation of and compliance with the provisions of the CAT.

In addition, the joint submissions formulates certain questions and recommends that the Committee should include them in its LOIPR and address them to the Government of Turkey, including on the following pressing issues:

  • allegations of abduction;
  • immunity from prosecution for torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment;
  • remedies and reparations for victims of torture;
  • fundamental legal safeguards and access to a lawyer;
  • conditions of detention;
  • civil society organizations; and
  • national human rights institution and national preventive mechanism.

Turkey-LOIPR-ICJ&IHOP-June2018-final (download the submission)

Turkey-LOIPR-ICJ&IHOP-June2018-statement-ENG

 This project is funded by the European Union

* This article does not necessarily reflect the view of the European Union

Poland: ICJ calls for immediate reinstatement of forcibly retired Supreme Court justices

Poland: ICJ calls for immediate reinstatement of forcibly retired Supreme Court justices

The ICJ condemned today the forced retirement of 27 out of 72 judges of the Supreme Court of Poland in defiance of the most basic principles on the independence of the judiciary.

“The forced retirement of a third of the Supreme Court under the new law on the judiciary amounts to an arbitrary dismissal of judges” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme, “It is a flagrant breach of a basic tenet of the independence of the judiciary, the security of tenure of judges.”

The government claims the law and its implementing measure of forced retirements are aimed at improving the administration of justice. However, the ICJ considers them to be a deliberate attempt to destroy judicial independence and install executive control.

“We call on the Polish authorities to follow the EU’s recommendations, abolish this draconian legislation and immediately reinstate the Supreme Court justices. Not to do so strikes at the very core of judicial independence”, said Róisín Pillay.

“Universal principles of judicial independence guaranteeing security of tenure were developed long ago exactly to safeguard the kind of abuse of political authority driving this forced retirement measure, whereby judges would serve at the pleasure of the government of the day,” she added.

The ICJ considers that the implementation of the new law on the Supreme Court and the dismissal of the 27 Supreme Court Justices directly contravenes the security of tenure of judges and, hence, the principle of judicial independence, as expressed in the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, Council of Europe standards, the European Court of Human Rights’ jurisprudence and the rule of law principle of the EU Treaties.

Poland-Attacks on judiciary-News-web stories-2018-ENG (full story – with additional background information – in PDF)

Translate »