Nov 2, 2017 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
The ICJ ends its series of profiles of its women Commissioners with an interview with Judge Kalthoum Kennou is currently serving her second term as ICJ Commissioner.
Kalthoum Kennou is a Judge of the Tunisian Cassation Court.
She previously served as an investigating Judge at the Tribunal of Tozeur in Tunisia (2010 – 2012), an investigating Judge at the Tribunal of Kairouan (2005 – 2010) and a Judge at the Court of Appeal of Tunis (2001-2005).
She is a strong advocate of the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary in Tunisia, and for women’s rights.
She was active in opposition to the dictatorship of President Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali.
As a consequence of her work, she was subjected to politically motivated personal attacks including arbitrary transfers to remote parts of the country.
After the political revolution in January 2011, she became President of the Association of Tunisian Judges.
She has worked on the new Tunisian Constitution and was the first female candidate in the November 2014 Presidential elections.
In this interview, Judge Kennou speaks about the reasons that prompted her to take up a legal career.
Her father was wrongly accused of high treason and imprisoned and she wanted to show people that there could be fair judges who worked independently.
On his release, her father also supported her decision to study the law.
She was appointed a judge in 1989 but said that other women had been appointed before her so it was not that difficult.
The main problems were that male judges were reluctant to discuss certain issues in front of her and she had to stand up for herself.
“However what was a bit troublesome was with the police when I gave them instructions and I think they would have preferred it was a man and not a woman. But I stood up for myself and I became an investigating judge and I was there to give orders to the police, to the clerk of court, as a judge and as a woman judge.”
Under the dictatorship of Ben Ali, she explains in the interview that there were a quite an important number of judges who resisted and defended the independence of the judiciary.
“… I think our resistance had some results. The proof was that just after the revolution, the question of the independence of the judiciary became a demand of the people, not just the judiciary.”
She explains in the interview that now 43% of the judiciary in Tunisia are women.
This is because there are more women studying law, more women than men, and because the government is promoting women’s equality.
However, many women may take up a legal career without wishing to become a judge.
This is because of family reasons, as they don’t wish to be appointed to a court away from home and in some families, parents might feel that women should be protected from some of the real problems of society.
“But actually I think this kind of thinking is less common now and will disappear bit by bit. Judges have shown that they can have an impact and society accepts female judges more than male judges. They consider that female judges are less corrupt, that they are more serious and are making more efforts to deliver justice.”
The main problems for women in accessing justice in Tunisia are related to pressure from the family not to file complaint in cases of domestic violence.
Also there is a problem with the attitudes of the police who do not take physical aggression against a woman seriously.
The third issue is the mentality of some judges, including some women judges, who are not really convinced that a husband does not have the right to beat his wife.
“The law exists but we should also work on people’s mentalities so that the law is correctly applied.”
Judge Kennou concludes the interview with some advice for young women considering a legal career. She said that a young woman must learn to “stand up for herself and for her rights at home because you cannot be free, you cannot give to others, if your own rights are not realized… I think that a woman who wants to be a judge should be really convinced and well trained about human rights so she can apply the law in a correct manner. “
Watch the interview:
The series of profiles introducing the work of ICJ Commissioners and Honorary Members on women’s rights was launched on 25 November 2016 to coincide with the International Day to Eliminate Violence against Women and the first day of the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence Campaign.
Jul 18, 2017 | Advocacy, Analysis briefs, News
The ICJ today called on the Tunisian authorities to adopt and apply procedures for the Specialized Criminal Chambers (SCC) that are clear and comply with international human rights law and standards.
The statement came following a high-level mission to Tunisia from 12 to 15 July 2017 in which the ICJ engaged with senior judicial officials, including the President of the Cassation Court, members of the High Judicial Council, SCC judges, and other stakeholders.
An ICJ analysis, Procedures of the Specialized Criminal Chambers in light of international standards, was published at the end of the mission.
“While the Specialized Criminal Chambers have the potential to contribute to addressing impunity and deliver justice for victims in Tunisia, ambiguity about the procedures to be followed by these Chambers risks undermining their effectiveness,” warned Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme.
As detailed in the ICJ analysis, the lack of clarity comes in part from the 2013 transitional justice Law, which is seen by many stakeholders as setting up a special regime, separate from the existing criminal justice system.
There is fear that the SCC may decide not to apply the existing ordinary criminal procedures, while at the same time no detailed procedures specific to the SCC have yet been adopted.
The creation of such a gap would risk serious breaches of international standards of fairness and justice.
For example, the 2013 Law seems to give the Truth and Dignity Commission (Instance Vérité et Dignité, IVD) exclusive power to refer cases to the SCC.
However, no procedures specific to the SCC implement the rights of an accused to examine witnesses interviewed by the IVD or to access all documents and evidence collected by the IVD in order to prepare his or her defence, as required by international standards and the ordinary code of criminal procedure.
The 2013 Law also fails to clarify the role of prosecutors and investigating judges in addressing such cases, including by making their own determination in relation to charges, standard of proof, and whether these cases should be brought before the SCC.
“Clarifying the procedures to be applied by the Specialized Criminal Chambers and ensuring their full compliance with international standards, including those relating to fair trial, are a prerequisite to fully establish the truth about human rights violations, hold those responsible to account, and ensure that the proceedings are fair to the victims and accused,” added Benarbia.
The ICJ set out a list of recommendations with a view to assisting the Tunisian authorities in their efforts in achieving these objectives, including by:
- Amending article 42 of the 2013 Law and related provisions to clearly provide victims of gross human rights violations with direct access to the SCC, including when victims did not submit a file to the IVD;
- Amending provisions of the IVD Guides to ensure that the review process and the possibility to challenge IVD’s decisions will apply to decisions not to transfer a case to the SCC and that such review be based on objective criteria for considering gross human rights violations in line with international standards;
- Establishing specialized prosecution services, investigating judges, and judicial police in line with international standards and with adequate resources to work in coordination with the SCC;
- Clarifying the relationship between the SCC and other ordinary criminal chambers and civil and other courts;
- Amending the legal framework to clearly provide that cases investigated by the IVD are to be transferred to specialized prosecutors who are to carry out their functions as defined in the CCP and in line with international standards;
- Ensuring that the IVD’s investigative function complements the role of the specialized judicial institutions in charge of the investigation and prosecution; and
- Amending the CCP and ensuring that any related provision of any other procedures adopted for the SCC fully respect fair trial guarantees.
Contact
Theo Boutruche, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, tel: +33 642837354, e-mail: theo.boutruche(a)icj.org
Tunisia-Memo on SCC Procedures-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2017-ENG (full memo in English, PDF)
Tunisia-SCC procedures memo-News-2017-ARA (full story in Arabic, PDF)
Tunisia-Memo on SCC Procedures-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2017-ARA (full memo in Arabic, PDF)
Jun 20, 2017 | News
The Martin Ennals Foundation and the ten human rights organizations that make up the jury of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders (MEA), including the ICJ, today renewed their appeal to the UAE government to release immediately and unconditionally Ahmed Mansoor.
Ahmed Mansoor is the last remaining human rights defender in the UAE who had previously been able to criticize the authorities publicly, they say.
Ahmed Mansoor received the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders in 2015.
Three months ago today, in the pre-dawn hours of 20 March about a dozen security officers arrested Ahmed Mansoor at his home in Ajman, about 150 kilometres northeast of Abu Dhabi, the capital of the UAE.
“We urge the UAE government to end the incomprehensible three-month imprisonment of Ahmed Mansoor. This is really about the UAE failing to respect basic principles of justice,” said Dick Oosting, Chairperson of the MEA Board.
“The purported case against Ahmed Mansoor beggars belief. States have the duty to bring to justice those whom they suspect of having committed criminal offenses,” he added.
“Yet what is clear is that the UAE authorities have arbitrarily deprived him of liberty and taken him away from his family for peacefully exercising his human right to freedom of expression. The three-month lapse and total lack of transparency indicates, likewise, that the authorities merely wanted to silence him,” he further said.
On 20 March, the UAE authorities stated that Ahmed Mansoor was accused of using social media websites, including to “publish false and misleading information that harm national unity and social harmony and damage the country’s reputation,” under the UAE’s repressive 2012 Cybercrime Law, which authorities have used to imprison numerous human rights activists and which provides for long prison sentences and severe financial penalties.
On 28 March, a group of United Nations human rights experts called on the UAE government to release him immediately, describing his arrest as “a direct attack on the legitimate work of human rights defenders in the UAE.” They expressed their fear that his arrest “may constitute an act of reprisal for his engagement with UN human rights mechanisms, for the views he expressed on social media, including Twitter, as well as for being an active member of organizations such as the Gulf Centre for Human Rights, and an active supporter of others, including Human Rights Watch.”
The next day, the UAE authorities responded directly to the statement, disputing the allegation that Ahmed Mansoor’s detention was arbitrary, and stating that he “has the freedom to hire a lawyer and that his family has full access to the place of confinement and is allowed to visit him.”
The government has detained Ahmed Mansoor in Abu Dhabi.
It is too far from his home for regular visits from his family, who have only been able to see him once in the last three months.
The authorities appear determined to isolate Ahmed Mansoor from his own family.
Despite government assertions that he is able to do so, it appears that he has not been able to appoint an independent lawyer of his own choosing.
This is a necessary component of the right to a fair trial.
The right to see a lawyer is a basic right of anyone detained as outlined in article 16 of the Arab Charter on Human Rights, which the UAE has ratified.
The ten human rights organizations that make up the jury of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders reiterate their call to the UAE authorities to release Ahmed Mansoor immediately and unconditionally, since the charges against him relate solely to his human rights work and his right to freedom of expression.
In the meantime, he should be granted immediate and regular access to his family and a lawyer of his choosing. The UAE must end their harassment of human rights defenders and critics of the authorities.
Signatories
Organizations forming the jury of the Martin Ennals Award:
Agency for Diakonia and Development, Germany
Amnesty International
FIDH
Front Line Defenders
Human Rights First
Human Rights Watch
International Commission of Jurists
International Service for Human Rights
HURIDOCS
World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT)
Jun 15, 2017
The ICJ and nine other human rights organizations decry the human rights crises taking place in Egypt in a letter published today. Repression of human rights defenders, journalists and political opposition has reached a level not seen in decades.
It require effective action including by the UN Human Rights Council.
The full letter is available here (in PDF).
The ICJ is also co-sponsoring a side event, Egypt: the Price of Silence, on Monday 19 June at 14:30 (pdf): HRC35-SideEvent-Egypt-2017
May 31, 2017 | News
The ICJ today called on the Egyptian authorities to act immediately to repeal the law on civic associations.
The law was adopted by Egypt’s Parliament on 15 November 2016 and signed into law by President El-Sisi on 29 May 2017.
Until the law is repealed, the authorities should desist from enforcing it, the ICJ says.
The law effectively prohibits most Egyptian human rights non-governmental organizations (NGOs) from registering and working in Egypt, stipulating that civic associations’ work shall take place in the fields of development and social welfare consistent with “the State’s plans and its developmental needs and priorities.”
Egyptian and international NGOs are also forbidden to advocate against any law or its implementation, as well as to carry out “political activities” or any that “harm national security, public order, public morals or public health.”
They are prohibited from conducting public surveys, research or reports without permission and approval of the results of such work must be given by the authorities prior to publication (articles 14, 87).
The law also provides for an entity to be formed by presidential decree from representatives of three security bodies, which will decide on all matters related to NGO funding, the registration and issues relating to the work of international NGOs, and cooperation between Egyptian associations and any foreign body.
“The law on civic associations, if implemented in its present form, would be tantamount to an official death certificate of independent civil society in Egypt,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Director.
“By signing it into law, President El-Sisi is silencing the very organizations that could act as a check on the abusive and arbitrary exercise of his power,” he added.
The adoption of this repressive law is just the latest measure in a sustained, relentless campaign by Egypt’s military and executive authorities aimed at dismantling Egyptian civil society through highly politicized judicial proceedings and arbitrary travel bans against NGOs and human rights defenders.
For instance, the foreign funding case taken against NGOs (no. 173/2011) saw leading Egyptian human rights organizations, such as the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies (CIHRS), the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information (ANHRI) and the Hicham Mubrak Law Center (HMLC), subject to arbitrary investigations.
The grounds included “receiving funds to harm national interests and destroy the basic foundations of the state (the army, police, and judiciary),” “establishing an entity operating as a civic association without official registration,” and “income tax evasion.”
Four of these organizations and six NGO directors/board members have been subjected to asset freezes.
In the last two months, many NGO staff and directors have been summoned for interrogation by investigative judges, including ICJ partners Mustapha El-Hassan, Director of HMLC, Gamel Eid, Founder and Director of ANHRI, and Mohamed Zaree, CIHRS’ Programme Director and short-listed candidate for the Martin Ennals Award 2017.
The ICJ has previously documented how the Egyptian authorities have used the justice system as a repressive tool in their efforts to silence many of those suspected of opposing them.
“Egyptian authorities must comply with their obligations under international law and put an immediate end to their campaign to silence human rights defenders and NGOs. A first step in that direction would be the immediate repeal of the law on civic associations,” Benarbia said.
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 22 979 38 17: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Egypt-NGO Law-News-Press release-ARA (Press release in Arabic, PDF)
