Oct 2, 2014
The ICJ published today the 2014 update of its Practitioners Guide no. 6 on Migration and International Human Rights Law.
The Practitioners Guide on Migration and International Human Rights Law analyses the protection afforded to migrants by international law and the means to implement it at national and international levels.
The Guide synthesises and clarifies international standards on key issues, in particular:
- the rights and procedures connected to the way migrants enter a country and their status in the country of destination;
- human rights and refugee law constraints on expulsion;
- the human rights and refugee law rights linked to expulsion procedures;
- the rights and guarantees for administrative detention of migrants;
- rights connected to work and labour; and
- rights to education, to the highest attainable standard of health, to adequate housing, to water, to food, and to social security.
Universal-MigrationHRlaw-PG no 6-Publications-Practitioners’Guide-2014-eng (full text of the second edition in English, PDF)
universal-pg-6-migration-publications-practitionners-guides-series-2016-rus (full text of the second edition in Russian, PDF)
Universal-migration and international human rights law-practitioners guide-2014-gre (full text of the second edition in Greek, PDF)
Universal-PG 6 Migration-Publications-Practitionners’ Guides Series-2016-ser (full text of the second edition in Serbian, PDF)
Universal-migration and international human rights law-practitioners guide-2011-ita (full text of the first edition in Italian, PDF)
Universal-migration and international human rights law-practitioners guide-2011-eng (full text of the first edition in English, PDF)
Oct 1, 2014
The present publication, no. 1 in the “Geneva Forum Series”, brings together materials related to the 2013 Geneva Forum on women and the judiciary.
Discussions focused on overcoming obstacles to women’s full and equal participation in the judiciary, and possible links to the better protection of women’s human rights by the judiciary.
The publication opens with highlights of the discussions in Geneva.
A second paper integrates the insights of the Geneva discussions together with findings from earlier regional colloquia in Tanzania and Tunisia. Finally, short snapshots are provided of the situation for women and the judiciary in six jurisdictions: Jordan, Kenya, Saudi Arabia, Tanzania, Tunisia and Uganda.
The ICJ has convened the Geneva Forum of Judges and Lawyers each year since 2010.
Organized by the ICJ’s Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, the Forum gathers legal practitioners from around the world for dialogue aimed at identifying and finding practical solutions to the challenges their professions face.
Improved judicial protection of human rights is the underlying motivation and theme for the Forums.
The ICJ plans to publish further entries in the “Geneva Forum Series” following future Forums.
The Series seeks to provide a permanent record of the discussions.
The summaries of the proceedings at the previous Geneva Forums can be consulted here:
1st Geneva Forum
2nd Geneva Forum
3rd Geneva Forum
Download the full text of the Geneva Forum Series no 1:
Universal-Women and Judiciary Gva For 1-Publications-Conference Report-2014-ENG
Sep 25, 2014
El 23 y 24 de septiembre, en Lima (Perú), la Comisión Internacional de Juristas y el Equipo Peruano de Antropología Forense (EPAF) realizaron un seminario sobre la impunidad y las graves violaciones a los derechos humanos.
Con ocasión a este Seminario la CIJ hizo el lanzamiento de su nueva Guía para profesionales No. 7 “Derecho internacional y lucha contra la impunidad”.
El Seminario abordó, desde la perspectiva del Derecho internacional, diferentes aspectos de la cuestión de la impunidad en materia de graves violaciones a los derechos humanos y crímenes internacionales, de relevancia para el Perú.
Para ello, el Seminario contó con la participación, entre otros, de Robert K. Goldman (Vicepresidente de la CIJ), César Landa (Comisionado peruano de la CIJ), Wilder Tayler (Secretario General de la CIJ) y José Pablo Baraybar (Director del EPAF). Al evento asistieron magistrados, jueces, fiscales, representantes de la Defensoría del Pueblo, miembros de las organizaciones no gubernamentales de derechos humanos y de asociaciones de víctimas, representantes de la comunidad diplomática y periodistas.
Universal-Lucha contra la Impunidad PG7-Publications-Practitioners’ guide series-2014-SPA (descargar el pdf)
Sep 24, 2014
The ICJ today joined 42 other NGOs to express deep concern regarding proposed amendments to the draft resolution on civil society space at the UN Human Rights Council.
The draft resolution on civil society space identifies key elements required to ensure that civil society can exercise its critical role in strengthening democracy, providing essential services, and promoting human rights.
It reaffirms States’ existing obligations under international human rights law to guarantee the rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association, and public participation, among other rights, and to protect civil society space and actors from threats, attacks or reprisals. The Resolution, if adopted, would be an important contribution to efforts to bridge implementation gaps and overcome obstacles in protecting civil society space.
However, in the days before the resolution is to be considered for adoption by the Council, some States have presented amendments that seek to undermine the spirit of the resolution and to detract from States’ obligations to protect and promote civil society space.
In a joint open letter, the 43 NGOs explain why each of the proposed amendments is unacceptable, and calls on all member States of the Council to support the draft resolution as tabled, and vote against the proposed amendments should they be brought to a vote.
The joint open letter may be downloaded in PDF format here: Universal-CivilSocietySpaceLetter-Advocacy-OpenLetter-2014-ENG
Sep 24, 2014
The ICJ today joined International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) and other NGOs in emphasising that members of the UN Human Rights Council must reject procedural tactics that prevent the Council from engaging in substantive debates on human rights issues.
The NGOs are particularly concerned about the use of a so-called “no action motion”. A ‘no-action motion’ is a procedural motion by a member of the Council that prevents the discussion of a proposal or matter in the Council.
At the Council’s 26th session in June 2014, a ‘no-action motion’ was used to prevent the consideration of an amendment to the resolution on the ‘Protection of the family and all its members’ that would have added long-agreed UN language on diversity of family forms to the resolution. The “no-action” motion passed, with 22 votes in favour, 20 against, and 4 abstentions (with one member State being absent from the room). A minority of the Council membership was therefore able to prevent substantive debate on the amendment. Delegations were therefore never given the chance to express themselves (whether in terms of support or not) by voting on the proposal.
This was the first time that this stifling procedure was used in the Human Rights Council in connection with a thematic issue. The NGOs are concerned about the prospect of similar tactics at the current session.
The use of procedural tactics such as the “no action motion” to prevent consideration of issues by the Council is inconsistent with the purpose and mandate given to the Council by the General Assembly. (The “no action motion” is available at all in the Council only because the Council uses the generic rules of procedure for Committees of the General Assembly rather than rules of procedure specifically designed for the Council. Whatever its appropriateness in those other very different contexts, the “no action motion” rule should have no role to play in blocking discussion and consideration of any human rights issue of any kind by the Council.) Delegations that oppose a measure have every opportunity to vote against it after a full debate.
The NGOs affirm that a vote in support of a ‘no-action motion’ is censorship tantamount to opposition to the substantive question itself and will be seen that way, and urge all delegations not to support any such motions.
The joint open letter to States members of the UN Human Rights Council can be downloaded in PDF format here: Universal-HRCNoActionMotion-Advocacy-OpenLetter-2014-ENG
