Sep 14, 2015
The ICJ today called on the members of the Tunisian parliament to amend the draft law on the High Judicial Council (HJC), with a view to ensuring its full compliance with international standards on judicial independence.
In a new position paper, the Geneva-based organization acknowledges that the draft law provides enhanced guarantees for judicial independence, in particular by ending executive control over the HJC, by providing for a majority of the HJC’s members to be judges elected by their peers, and by ensuring that the HJC is the only body competent to manage the career of judges.
But the ICJ remains concerned that in certain key respects, the draft law falls short of international standards.
In particular, it does not provide for specific, concrete measures to ensure women’s full and equal participation and representation in the HJC and the judiciary as a whole, for the HJC to be consulted on, and involved in, the preparation and implementation of the judiciary’s budget, and for adequate financial resources to be available for both the HJC and the judiciary in general.
“The Tunisian Assembly should ensure that the draft law is amended so that the HJC is truly independent, pluralistic and gender-representative and its competencies are expanded to include its involvement in the preparation and implementation of the budget for the entire judiciary, not only that of the HJC,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ MENA Programme.
The ICJ is also concerned that, while the draft law provides enhanced guarantees for the management of the career of judges by the HJC, the provisions relating to the security of tenure of judges and the transfer of judges, as well as certain aspects of the disciplinary system, are not fully in line with international standards.
“The draft law should be amended to ensure that judges may only be removed for reasons of incapacity or behaviour that renders them unfit to discharge their duties, that in all circumstances their consent is sought for any transfer to another jurisdiction, and that all disciplinary proceedings against them are fair and determined in accordance with established standards of judicial conduct,” Benarbia added.
Contact:
Theo Boutruche, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +96 170 888 961, e: theo.boutruche(a)icj.org
Tunisia-Final HJC Draft Law-Advocacy-Position Paper-2015-ENG (full text of position paper in PDF, English)
Tunisia-HJC law-News-2015-ARA (full news text in PDF, Arabic)
Tunisia-Final HJC Draft Law-Advocacy-Position Paper-2015-ARA (full text of position paper in PDF, Arabic)
Aug 17, 2015 | News
The ICJ today condemned the promulgation of the Counter-Terrorism Law by the Egyptian President, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, as a new, repressive move that would erode the rule of law and brush aside fundamental legal and human rights guarantees.
Calls to revise the draft Counter-Terrorism Law by the ICJ and other international and national human rights organizations and stakeholders, including Egypt’s quasi-governmental National Human Rights Council, were disregarded.
“The promulgation of the Counter-Terrorism Law by President el-Sisi expands the list of repressive laws and decrees that aim to stifle dissent and the exercise of fundamental freedoms,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme.
“Egypt’s authorities must ensure the law is not used as a tool of repression and, to this end, comprehensively revise it so that it fully complies with international human rights law and standards,” he added.
In a position paper published on 9 July, the ICJ detailed how the law is inconsistent with, and in numerous ways violates, Egypt’s obligations under international law, including those relating to the right to life, the right to liberty and not to be subjected to arbitrary detention, the right to privacy, and fair trial rights.
Further, the law gives state officials broad immunity from criminal responsibility for the use of force in the course of their duties, including the use of lethal force when it is not strictly necessary to protect lives, grants sweeping surveillance and detention powers to prosecutors, entrenches terrorism circuits within the court system (which have in the past frequently involved fair trial violations), and grants the President far-reaching, discretionary powers to “take the necessary measures” to maintain public security, where there is a “danger of terrorist crimes.”
Contact:
Alice Goodenough, Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +44 7815 570 834; e: alice.goodenough(a)icj.org
Nader Diab, Associate Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 229 793 804; e: nader.diab(a)icj.org
Egypt-Counter-Terrorism Law Promulgated-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text in pdf, ARABIC)
Aug 14, 2015 | News
Today, on the second anniversary of the killing by the armed and security forces of more than 1,000 individuals during the dispersal of the Rabaa’ Al-Adawyia and Al Nahda Square sit-ins, the ICJ calls on the Egyptian authorities to end its policy of impunity for serious human rights violations.
The authorities must conduct thorough, effective, independent and impartial investigations into protestor deaths with a view to holding to account all those responsible for unlawful killings and other human rights violations committed in the course of the demonstrations, the ICJ says.
“It is a measure of the total disregard for victims’ rights and the absolute impunity of the armed and security services that in the two years that have passed, no effective investigations in line with international standards have taken place and not a single person has been brought to justice for the mass killings of protestors,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme.
“The victims of human rights violations and their family members have been left without any effective remedies or reparation, including an acknowledgment by the Egyptian authorities of their responsibility for the hundreds of killings and injuries that day,” he added.
Although fact-finding initiatives were conducted by Egypt’s quasi-governmental National Human Rights Council and by a government-appointed commission, the ICJ considers these investigations to be deeply flawed and ineffective.
The ICJ says both had inadequate access to first hand or physical evidence from the scene, because they did not begin their work until weeks or months after the events took place; lacked the ability to compel State authorities to testify and provide evidence; failed to document the full extent of human rights violations that took place; and neither led to any form of criminal investigation, much less prosecution of those responsible for these violations.
Further, while the government-appointed commission found that over 700 people had been killed during the Rabaa’ and Nahda dispersals, the shambolic report it issued dedicated just 9 pages to these two dispersals, concluding summarily and without substantiation that the police had been justified in violently dispersing the protest and blaming primarily the organizers of the sit-ins as well as the protestors for the high death toll.
There are credible allegations that in dispersing these demonstrations the armed and security forces unlawfully resorted to excessive and disproportionate use of force, the ICJ adds.
“By turning a blind eye to gross human rights violations committed by the armed and security forces, and by shielding their members from any form of criminal accountability, the Egyptian authorities are fostering the structural impunity that prevails in Egypt instead of combatting it,” said Benarbia.
“To meet their obligations under international law, the authorities must dismantle such policies and practices and establish the truth about the sit-ins’ dispersal,” he added.
Under international law lethal force may never be used unless strictly necessary to protect life.
States are obliged to provide access to an effective remedy and reparation to victims of human right violations.
They are also required to conduct prompt, thorough and impartial investigations, with a view to holding criminally accountable persons responsible for serious human rights violations, particularly those involving a denial of the right to life.
Contact:
Alice Goodenough, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +44 7815 570 834; e: alice.goodenough(a)icj.org
Nader Diab, Associate Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41 229 793 804; e: nader.diab(a)icj.org
Egypt-Impunity Rabaa Sq-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text in pdf, ARABIC)
Aug 6, 2015
In a position paper published today, the ICJ called on the Tunisian President to refrain from promulgating the flawed Counter-Terrorism Law that was adopted by the Assembly of the People’s Representatives on 25 July 2015.
The ICJ also urged the Tunisian authorities to amend this Law through a transparent and inclusive process, including with a view to ensuring its full compliance with international human rights and rule of law standards.
The adoption of the Law follows a series of attacks against members of the security forces and the army and two deadly attacks in the Bardo Museum and Sousse.
“Legitimate security concerns by Tunisian authorities should not lead to the adoption and the enforcement of repressive laws and other measures that erode the rule of law and curtail fundamental rights and freedoms,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at the ICJ.
Overly broad and imprecise definitions in many offences created under the Law extend its reach far beyond truly terrorist acts such as hostage-taking, killings or causing serious injuries, and other such violence.
In some aspects, such as offences of glorification and incitement to terrorism, the provisions are so broadly drafted that they have the potential to criminalize the peaceful exercise of fundamental freedoms, including the right to freedom of expression. Some provisions could result in the wrongful prosecution of journalists and whistleblowers.
The ICJ is also deeply concerned at article 68 of the Law, which provides immunity from criminal prosecution for security forces when using force in the course of their duties.
The article could potentially allow law enforcement officers who use force in violation of international standards and the right to life, such as intentional use of lethal force when it is not strictly unavoidable in order to protect life, to escape justice.
Other provisions of the Law raise serious concerns for the right to a fair trial, the right to liberty, and the right to privacy.
In particular, provisions allowing a person to be held in police custody for up to 15 days without access to a lawyer or a judge are inconsistent with the right to liberty, fair trial guarantees, and guarantees for the prevention of torture and other abuses in detention.
“By shielding security forces from accountability and eroding procedural and other fair trial guarantees of terrorism suspects, the Law contradicts Tunisia’s obligations under international law, and its own Constitution,” added Benarbia. “ Tunisian authorities must ensure the Law is revised to fully respect its human rights obligations, including those relating to the right to liberty, to a fair trial, and to effective remedies and reparation in cases of human rights violations.”
Contact
Theo Boutruche, Legal Adviser of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme; t: +96 170 888 961; e: theo.boutruche(a)icj.org
Tunisia-CT position paper-Advocacy-Position Paper-2015-ENG (full text of the position paper in English)
Tunisia-PR CT position paper-News-Press release-2015-ARA (full text of the press release in Arabic)
Tunisia-CT position paper-Advocacy-Position paper-2015-ARA- (full text of the position paper in Arabic)
Jul 28, 2015 | News
The ICJ today expressed its serious concerns about the trial, conviction and sentencing to death of Saif al Islam Gadhafi, Abdallah al Senussi, as well as seven officials of the Gadhafi regime by the Tripoli Criminal Court.
The ICJ is deeply concerned that the trial of the officials of the Gadhafi regime failed to scrupulously respect the guarantees of fair trial as required by Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Libya is a state party.
The imposition of the death penalty following such an unfair trial violates the right to life.
The ICJ opposes the death penalty in all circumstances as a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
“Libyan authorities must comply with their obligations under international law, refrain from implementing the death sentences against Saif al Islam and 8 former Libyan officials, and ensure that all defendants are retried before an independent and impartial tribunal and in full compliance with international fair trial standards,” said Said Benarbia, Director of the MENA programme at the ICJ.
“The trial is a lost opportunity to make a break from decades of unfair trials in Libya. It is also a missed opportunity to establish the truth about the legacy of alleged gross human rights violations committed during the 40-year reign of Moammar Gadhafi, including summary executions, enforced disappearances, torture and other ill-treatment, and arbitrary detention,” Benarbia added.
Fair trial violations included severe limitations on the defendants’ rights to access a lawyer, to adequate time and facilities to prepare a defence, and to be represented and communicate with a lawyer of their own choosing, the ICJ says.
23 other defendants were sentenced to prison terms ranging from life imprisonment to 5 years.
The charges against the officials included: “murdering and bombarding civilians during the 2011 revolution,” “inciting, participating and assisting in the murder of Libyans,” “recruiting mercenaries and establishing brigades and then providing them with weapons, uniforms and money to fight the protesters.”
Some defendants, including Saif al Islam Gadhafi, who continues to be held in militia custody in Zintan, were not present during the trial, though were connected by video link at times.
The ICJ is also concerned that the defendants’ rights to appeal are limited in numerous ways.
Convictions by the Tripoli Criminal Court will be reviewed before the cassation chamber of the Supreme Court.
The chamber only examines the proper application of the law by the lower courts and does not review the merits of the case.
In accordance with Libya’s obligations under international law, including the ICCPR, the defendants have the right to have their convictions and sentences reviewed by an independent higher tribunal.
Such review must concern both the legal and material aspects of the defendants’ convictions and sentences.
The ICJ is concerned that political and security instability in Libya continues to undermine the ability of the judiciary to function and administer justice independently and impartially.
In reviewing the situation in the context of the Saif al Islam Gadhafi case, the International Criminal Court (ICC), expressed concern about the inability of the judicial and governmental authorities to obtain testimony or to provide witness protection.
It found that Libya was unable to conduct a fair prosecution and trial of Gadhafi.
The ICC issued a warrant for his arrest to answer allegation of crimes against humanity.
The ICJ calls on the Libyan authorities to annul the unfair proceedings; to fully cooperate with, and surrender Saif al Islam Gadhafi to the ICC; and to ensure the fair re-trial of the other accused.
Contact:
Doireann Ansbro, Associate Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +216 71 841 701, e: doireann.ansbro(a)icj.org
Libya-Saif Gadhafi sentence-News-Press releases-2015-ARA (full text of press releases in Arabic, PDF)
Photo: Ahmed Jadallah / Reuters
