Russian Federation: end harassment of lawyer Ivan Pavlov

Russian Federation: end harassment of lawyer Ivan Pavlov

The ICJ today condemned the detention, interrogation and searches of premises of lawyer Ivan Pavlov, a prominent lawyer and head of the human rights legal group Team 29.

Pavlov was detained by Federal Security Service (FSB) agents on 30 April after a raid on his Moscow hotel suite and released later that day. According to the order to initiate criminal proceedings, Pavlov was charged with “disclosing the information of preliminary investigation” under Article 310 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

According to the charging order, Pavlov is accused of transmitting to the Vedomosti Newspaper a copy of a charging order against his client, journalist Ivan Safronov. Furthermore, Pavlov is charged with disclosing the nickname of one of the witnesses in the case.

According to the decision of the Basmanny Court on a preventive measure for Pavlov, he is prohibited from communicating with witnesses in his criminal case, except for close relatives, using the Internet and other means of communication.

“Russian authorities must stop this harassment of Ivan Pavlov and Team 29, which is almost certainly due to their representation of clients in several high profile cases,” said Roisin Pillay, ICJ’s director for Europe and Central Asia.

“These raids clearly interfere with lawyer-client privilege. The case files seized during the search should be returned to the lawyers and Pavlov should be able to continue his work in defence of all his clients free of harassment or fear of retaliation, as required by international standards,” she added.

According to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers governments must ensure that lawyers “ … are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference; […] and (c) shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics” (Principle 16). Furthermore, lawyers cannot “be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions” (Principle 18).

Ivan Pavlov represents clients in a number of high-profile cases, including many who have been the subject of investigation by the FSB. His clients have included the Foundation Against Corruption of the Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny, the case of Russia’s Electric Energy Company (Inter RAO) manager Karina Tsurkan, physicist Victor Kudryavtsev, journalist Ivan Safronov and journalist Grigory Pasko.

Besides the raid on Pavlov’s hotel suite, authorities searched the office of Team 29 in St.Petersburg and the apartment of Pavlov’ wife. As a result of the searches, almost all of the case materials on Pavlov’s client Ivan Safronov were taken by law enforcement officers. These searches cannot be justified by allegations of disclosing information related to the investigation and raise concern that there may be illegitimate reasons for the criminal prosecution of the lawyer.

“While secrecy of a preliminary investigation may be a legitimate procedure, it does not afford justification for interference with the work of lawyers, including by accessing lawyers’ premises and files, and should never be misused as a means of intimidation and retaliation against lawyers”, said Roisin Pillay.

“The ICJ urges the Russian investigative authorities to cease any investigative actions which may breach the rights of the lawyer and to respect lawyer-client privilege in cases where he represents clients no matter how sensitive the cases may be perceived to be”.

Communications and documentation that lawyers maintain in respect of their professional relationship with their clients is legally protected, under international and Russian law, from seizure and disclosure pursuant to the lawyer-client privilege principle. In particular, the rights to a fair trial, and family and private life are guaranteed under the European Convention for Human Rights (articles 6 and 8 respectively) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (articles and 14 and 17 respectively).

As the European Court of Human Rights repeatedly stated “[…] persecution and harassment of members of the legal profession strikes at the very heart of the Convention system. Therefore the searching of lawyers’ premises should be subject to especially strict scrutiny. ” (Kolesnichenko v. Russia (Application no. 19856/04 para 31). This right is equally protected by Russian legislation, in particular Article 8 of the Law on Lawyers’ Activity and Advokatura in the Russian Federation, and as shown by the decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation in the Balayan and Dzhuba case (see below).

The full story with additional information can be downloaded here: 

Russia-end-harassment-of-lawyer-Ivan-Pavlov-2021-ENG

 

Czech Republic & Slovakia: children suspected or accused of violating the law have the right to individual assessment

Czech Republic & Slovakia: children suspected or accused of violating the law have the right to individual assessment

It is important to involve children suspected or accused of breaching the law, in the proceedings in a rights-based way, agreed judges, prosecutors and probation officers during a seminar for Czech and Slovak professionals, organised by the ICJ and Forum for Human Rights on 28 and 29 April.

The individual assessment according to Article 7 EU Directive 2016/800 on procedural safeguards for children suspected or accused in criminal proceedings should serve as a genuine right of the child, rather than as evidence, the seminar was told.

Speakers at the seminar emphasized that the actions of children often only reflect how they were treated by adults – including by parents, teachers, or public authorities, who have failed to address systemic inequalities and situations of discrimination. The contact of the child with the justice system provides an opportunity to help the child, to show them that they have rights and an important role in the society, and involve them actively in the proceedings, experts said. The environment in which the child grows up may have an important impact on the child’s behaviour.

During the seminar, professionals and experts discussed a number of practical questions, such as how to work with information in a child’s case: how sources in reports and assessments for the court should be as objective as possible, up to date, and how sources should be verified, so that information is not doubled or amplified in the individual assessments.

A considerable part of discussion in the seminar was dedicated to restorative justice principles and how these can serve professionals in contact with children in the justice system, in order to ensure the rights-based approach.

Restorative justice experts pointed out that most children grow out of crime without any intervention, and so minimum intervention is usually the best approach to prevent crime in the future. They explained the benefits of giving the child the feeling of control and involving them in the search for solutions, so they will feel respected, and are more likely to see the process as fair and are more likely to follow the decision made.

Practical exercises were part of the seminar and participants actively engaged and shared their concerns and challenges they encounter in their work.

The two seminars gathered over 50 judges, public prosecutors, probation officers and experts from the Ministry of Justice from both countries working in the field of child justice or family law. Experts included Mikiko Otani, ICJ Commissioner and member of the Committee on the Rights of the Child, Dainius Puras, former UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, as well as judges and academics other EU Member States and from the European Forum on Restorative Justice, FORUM and the ICJ.

See the full agenda here:

In English
In Czech

The PRACTICE project is implemented by the ICJ-EI and Forum for Human Rigths aims at building the capacity of judges and other relevant professionals to ensure effective individual assessments of children in criminal proceedings in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. It supports the implementation of EU Directive 2016/800, as well as international human rights law obligations of the states concerned. In the second part of the project the ICJ-EI will draft and publish recommendations on individual assessments of children with specific vulnerabilities, to support an EU-wide interpretation and application of Article 7 of Directive 2016/800, in light of international human rights law.

This project was funded by the European Union’s Rights, Equality, and Citizenship Programme (2014-2020). The content of this publication represents the views of ICJ only and is its sole responsibility. The European Commission does not accept any responsibility for use that may be made of the information it contains.

 

 

 

Беларусь: необходимо прекратить политически мотивированное уголовное преследование адвокатов и лишение их статуса

Беларусь: необходимо прекратить политически мотивированное уголовное преследование адвокатов и лишение их статуса

Сегодня Международная комиссия юристов (МКЮ) призвала Министерство юстиции и иные компетентные органы Беларуси прекратить практику возбуждения дел в отношении адвокатов в отместку за выполнение ими своих профессиональных обязанностей, а также восстановить тех из них, кто уже лишился адвокатского статуса.

За последние месяцы был отмечен беспрецедентный рост случаев лишения статуса адвокатов на фоне массовых нарушений прав человека в отношении лиц, протестующих против широко обсуждаемых результатов президентских выборов 2020 года, – особенно тех адвокатов, которые заявляют о нарушениях прав человека в отношении своих клиентов. В числе последних случаев – лишение лицензии таких адвокатов, как Константин Михель, Максим Конон, Михаил Кирилюк и Юлия Иванчук.

«В последнее время целая волна уголовных и дисциплинарных дел в отношении адвокатов вызывает серьезную обеспокоенность и представляет собой посягательство на независимость адвокатуры. Подобные дела, будь то уголовные, административные или дисциплинарные, должны быть прекращены или пересмотрены как противоречащие международно-правовым стандартам независимости адвокатуры», – отметил Тимур Шакиров, старший правовой советник Региональной программы МКЮ по Европе и Центральной Азии.

Прослеживается четкая закономерность злоупотребления дисциплинарными процедурами в отношении адвокатов, которые защищают политических оппонентов или тех, кто открыто критикует правительство по вопросам общественной значимости. Дисциплинарное производство в отношении белорусских адвокатов не является независимым от исполнительной власти, так как осуществляется Квалификационной комиссией при Министерстве юстиции.

Примечательно, что в отношении адвоката Дмитрия Лаевского дисциплинарное производство было возбуждено предположительно после его публичных комментариев по готовящемуся законопроекту об изменении законодательства об адвокатской деятельности. Дмитрий Лаевский представлял интересы Виктора Бабарико, одного из лидеров белорусской оппозиции, который в настоящее время находится под стражей, и Максима Знака, бывшего представителя Марии Колесниковой, которая является еще одним из задержанных лидеров оппозиции.

Ранее ряд адвокатов, включая Александра Пыльченко, бывшего представителя Виктора Бабарико и Марии Колесниковой, а также Людмилу Казак, бывшего представителя Марии Колесниковой, были привлечены к дисциплинарной ответственности, и Людмиле Казак был назначен административный штраф в связи с выполнением ею своих профессиональных обязанностей.

Квалификационная комиссия вызвала нескольких адвокатов, отстаивающих права человека, для прохождения переаттестации на осуществление адвокатской деятельности, и они не сдали экзамен. Данная процедура, как представляется, предназначена для тех адвокатов, которые занимаются защитой прав человека, как инструмент преследования и возмездия.

Так, после публичных заявлений, сделанных в СМИ адвокатом Сергеем Зикрацким, который часто представлял интересы белорусских журналистов, адвоката вызвали для прохождения внеочередной переаттестации, которую он не прошел. Экзамен проводила Квалификационная комиссия.

Уголовные дела были возбуждены в отношении адвокатов Ильи Салея и Максима Знака, которые, как представляется, столкнулись с последствиями своей профессиональной деятельности, связанной с защитой интересов лидеров оппозиции Марии Колесниковой и Виктора Бабарико.

«Подобные случаи лишения адвокатского статуса оказывают существенное сдерживающее воздействие на работу адвокатов и подрывают способность адвокатуры отстаивать права человека в отношении своих клиентов в соответствии с международными стандартами, касающимися роли юристов», – добавил г-н Шакиров.

Справочная информация

Международное право и стандарты

В соответствии с Основными принципами ООН, касающимися роли юристов, государственные органы обязаны обеспечивать, чтобы юристы могли выполнять свои профессиональные обязанности в обстановке, свободной от угроз, препятствий, преследования и страха возмездия (Принцип 16). Основные принципы закрепляют, что юристы не должны подвергаться «судебному преследованию и судебным, административным, экономическим или другим санкциям за любые действия, совершенные в соответствии с признанными профессиональными обязанностями, нормами и этикой, а также угрозам такого преследования и санкций» (Принцип 16.c) Они также предусматривают, что юристы не должны отождествляться со своими клиентами и их интересами в результате выполнения своих функций (Принцип 18).

Международные нормы также требуют институциональной независимости адвокатуры. Исполнительный орган профессиональной ассоциации юристов должен избираться ее членами и выполнять свои функции без вмешательства извне (Принцип 24 Основных принципов ООН, касающихся роли юристов).

Belarus: stop politically motivated prosecution and disbarment of lawyers

Belarus: stop politically motivated prosecution and disbarment of lawyers

Today, the ICJ called on the Belarus Ministry of Justice and other relevant authorities to end the recent practice of using legal proceedings against lawyers in retaliation for discharging their professional duties and to reinstate those already disbarred.

In recent months, in the context of widespread violations of the human rights of those protesting against the outcome of the disputed 2020 presidential election, there has been an unprecedented increase of cases of disbarment of lawyers especially those who comment on violations of the human rights of their clients. Among the most recently disbarred lawyers are Konstantin Mikhel, Maxim Konon, Mikhail Kirilyuk and Yulia Ivanchuk.

“This recent wave of criminal and disciplinary proceedings against lawyers is highly worrying and it constitutes an attack on the independence of the legal profession. These proceedings, be they of criminal, administrative or disciplinary nature, should be discontinued or reconsidered as being contrary to the international human rights law concerning the independence of the legal profession,” said Temur Shakirov, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.

There is a clear pattern of the misuse of disciplinary proceedings against lawyers who represent political opponents of the government or those who openly criticize the government on issues of public significance.

Disciplinary proceedings in Belarus are not independent of the executive, since they are conducted by the Qualification Commission which operates under the Ministry of Justice.

Notably, disciplinary proceedings are pending against lawyer Dmitry Layevski, allegedly following his public comments on a pending Draft Law on advocates’ activities.

Dmitry Layevski is a lawyer representing Victor Babaryko, an opposition leader in Belarus currently in detention, and Maxim Znak, former legal representative of Maria Kolesnikova, another detained opposition leader.

Earlier, a number of lawyers, including Aleksandr Pylchenko, former legal representative of Viktor Babaryko and Maria Kolesnikova, and Lyudmila Kazak, former legal representative of Maria Kolesnikova, faced disciplinary sanctions, and Lyudmila Kazak incurred an administrative fine, as a result of discharging their professional functions.

Several lawyers involved in human rights cases have been called by the Qualification Commission to undergo an examination to re-certify their qualification to practice law and have failed the exam. This procedure appears to target lawyers working to defend human rights, as a means of harassment or reprisal.

For example, following comments in mass media, Sergey Zikraskiy, a lawyer who often represented Belarusian journalists, was called to pass extraordinary re-examination which he failed. The certification is carried out by the Qualification Commission.

Criminal cases are still pending against lawyers Ilya Saley and Maxim Znak, who appear to have suffered consequences as a result of their representation of opposition leaders Maria Kolesnikova and Victor Babaryko.

 “These disbarments have a significant chilling effect on work of the legal profession and undermine the ability of lawyers to defend human rights of their clients in accordance with international standards on the role of lawyers,” Shakirov said.

Background

International law and standards 

According to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, the State authorities must guarantee that lawyers are able carry out their professional functions without hindrance, intimidation, harassment or fear of retaliation (Principle 16). The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers affirm that lawyers “shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics.” (Principle 16.c)  They further stipulate that lawyers must not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions (Principle 18).

International standards also require the institutional independence of the legal profession.  The executive body of the professional associations of lawyers must be elected by its members and must exercise its functions without external interference (Principle 24, The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers).

Greece and Italy: judges highlight the need for procedural guarantees for migrants and asylum seekers

Greece and Italy: judges highlight the need for procedural guarantees for migrants and asylum seekers

Migrants and asylum seekers must be provided adequate procedural guarantees in asylum procedures and in immigration detention, a group of experts and judges asserted during a seminar for Greek and Italian judges held by the ICJ, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna (SSSA), and Greek Council for Refugees (GCR) on 29-31 March.

Asylum applicants should have access to adequate information about the procedure and their entitlements in a language they understand, access to a reliable communication system with the authorities, the availability of interpreters, access to legal aid, and reasoned decisions, experts said during the seminar, held in the framework of the FAIR plus project. Speakers further emphasized that immigration detention must be subject to automatic review by an independent body with a power to release detainees, especially when removal is no more an option.

More than 30 judges from Italy and Greece came together for this event to discuss procedural guarantees for migrants and asylum seekers, related to the safe third country concept, the access to legal assistance and interpretation, safeguards related to immigration detention, and procedural guarantees in the asylum procedure, especially in the accelerated procedures.

A summary of the discussions

On the first day, the judges exchanged overviews of national systems and presented some specific questions regarding the Italian and the Greek systems. Following the discussion on the safe third country concept and its implementation in Greece, an Italian judge presented recent developments in the Italian case-law, and the role of the judge, country of origin information, accelerated procedures, the length of procedures and the question of credibility assessment.

On the second day, the discussion related to the impact of Covid-19 pandemic on the rights of migrants and asylum seekers took place. The situation in Greece and in Italy was described by judges, in particular in relation to the access to the asylum procedure, the lawfulness of detention, the right to health and the question of access to a personal hearing when some of the hearings take place electronically.

An overview of the situation of immigration detention in Italy and Greece was presented by an Italian lawyer and an expert from UNHCR Greece. Speakers highlighted that in cases when people cannot be returned, they should not be kept in detention without a legal basis.

Accelerated procedures in law and in practice in both countries have been introduced by UNHCR Greece and Italy were addressed through a case-study and discussion, covering mainly the specific needs in accelerated procedures, automatic suspensive effect of appeals, and time limits in the accelerated procedures.

Finally on the last day, two lectures were delivered by Ledi Bianku, a former judge of the European Court for Human Rights, and an Associate Professor at the University of Strasbourg. First, looking into the guarantees in asylum and migration proceedings, Ledi Bianku stressed the need to always provide asylum applicants adequate information about the procedure and their entitlements in a language they understand, access to a reliable communication system with the authorities, the availability of interpreters, access to legal aid, and reasoned decisions in order to provide access to an effective remedy. In the second part of his intervention, Mr. Bianku discussed the detention of migrants, where he stressed the need for automatic review of detention, especially when removal is no more an option, by an independent body with a power to release.

The FAIR plus project is a judicial training and cooperation project supported by the European Union’s Justice programme, focusing on four countries Ireland, Greece, Italy and the Czech Republic. The aim of the project is to contribute to better judicial protection of the fundamental rights of migrants across the EU. Within the project the ICJ and partners are drafting of training materials and relevant legal briefings, implement training of the existing judicial trainers in the target countries, conduct four national trainings, two transnational seminars, and an international roundtable. The project is implemented in collaboration with national partners: Immigrant Council of Ireland (ICI), Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna (SSSA), Greek Council for Refugees (GCR) and Forum for Human Rights (Czech Republic).

Please find the agenda here.

Translate »