International Commission of Jurists

Search results

Laos: 1,000 days on, Sombath’s enforced disappearance remains a clear dereliction of the government’s international obligations

Laos: 1,000 days on, Sombath’s enforced disappearance remains a clear dereliction of the government’s international obligations

11 Sep 2015

Today marks 1,000 days since prominent Lao civil society leader Sombath Somphone “disappeared” at a police checkpoint on a busy street in Vientiane.

We, the undersigned organizations, reiterate our call for the Lao government to intensify its efforts to conduct a prompt, impartial, and effective investigation into Sombath’s apparent enforced disappearance, to determine his fate or whereabouts, and to take the necessary measures to bring those responsible to justice.

At the second Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Laos, held in Geneva on 20 January 2015, 10 states made recommendations to Laos to investigate Sombath’s disappearance. In addition, five states raised questions about the issue.

We are dismayed by the Lao authorities’ failure to provide any specific information on the status and progress of the investigation since 7 June 2013.

This failure has occurred despite the government’s claim in June 2015, during the UPR process, that it was “still thoroughly conducting” an investigation into Sombath’s “whereabouts.”

It is not enough for Laos to simply assert it is still investigating the case. Laos’ international legal obligations require it to carry out a prompt investigation and to keep Sombath’s family informed on the progress and status of the investigation.

We are troubled by the Lao government’s continued refusal to accept external assistance regarding the investigation of Sombath’s enforced disappearance.

The government has ignored important recommendations made by several human rights organizations despite an official statement that it is “ready to receive suggestions from any interested parties” regarding the investigation.

We also decry the Lao government’s refusal to disclose any information concerning all other victims of enforced disappearances in the country.

To this day, the fate or whereabouts of at least 13 individuals, including three student leaders who were arrested on 26 October 1999 for organizing a peaceful pro-democracy protest in Vientiane remain unknown.

On 29 September 2008, Laos signed the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (ICPPED).

However, almost seven years on, the government has made no demonstrable progress towards the ratification of the treaty.

We urge the Lao government to immediately ratify the ICPPED, incorporate its provisions into the country’s legislation, and effectively comply with its treaty obligations.

In January 2016, Laos will assume the Chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

The government’s protracted failure to resolve the case of Sombath’s enforced disappearance is a clear dereliction of its international obligations, which seriously undermines Vientiane’s attempts to gain credibility as a rights-respecting member of the regional bloc.

We call on Laos to undertake prompt, impartial, and effective investigations into Sombath’s case and all other outstanding cases of enforced disappearances and provide effective remedies and reparation to all victims pursuant to its international legal obligations, including under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention against Torture (CAT), and ratify the ICPPED.

Signed:

  1. ALTSEAN-Burma
  2. ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR)
  3. Asian Federation Against Involuntary Disappearances (AFAD)
  4. Civil Rights Defenders
  5. FIDH (International Federation for Human Rights)
  6. Focus on the Global South
  7. Forum-Asia
  8. International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
  9. Justice for Peace Foundation
  10. Lao Movement for Human Rights (LMHR)
  11. Sombath Initiative
Maldives: political crisis erodes rule of law and human rights

Maldives: political crisis erodes rule of law and human rights

25 Aug 2015

The Maldives government must immediately reverse the politicisation of the country’s judiciary and the erosion of rule of law in the country, said the ICJ and South Asians for Human Rights (SAHR) in a joint fact-finding report released today.

The 35-page report, entitled Justice Adrift: Rule of Law and the Political Crisis in the Maldives highlights the breakdown of the rule of law and human rights protections in the Maldives, exemplified by the arrest and trial of former President Mohamed Nasheed.

Nasheed, who had been under house arrest, was unexpectedly imprisoned again on Monday without a clear legal basis.

The ICJ and SAHR called on the Maldives government to immediately release Nasheed from detention and to ensure he receives necessary medical care and access to his family and lawyers.

A joint delegation of the ICJ and SAHR conducted a fact-finding mission to the Maldives in May 2015 to assess the human rights situation since the current government assumed power in 2013.

“We documented a serious erosion of the independence, impartiality and integrity of the judiciary, which has resulted in the deterioration in the rule of law in the Maldives and the stalling of the country’s transition toward a more representative government,” said Hina Jilani, SAHR Chairperson and a Commissioner of the ICJ.

“This current crisis in the rule of law risks turning the country back to the authoritarian days of the past that it had so promisingly broken away from in 2008,” she added.

After decades of authoritarian rule, in 2008 the Maldives promulgated a new Constitution that established independent democratic institutions, the rule of law, human rights protections and the separation of powers.

The new report documents how the institutional and legal reforms needed to consolidate this democratic transition stalled and have endangered a backslide to the country’s authoritarian legacy.

“The political crisis in the Maldives has hurt the country’s human rights situation, and it can only be resolved with the establishment of credible and impartial institutions in the country, particularly the judiciary,” said Nikhil Narayan, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for South Asia.

“The Maldives should take immediate steps to establish effective and independent government institutions in compliance with its international human rights obligations under Commonwealth and UN standards on judicial independence and separation of powers,” he added.

Among the specific problems identified in the report are: judicial proceedings against the national human rights commission and other independent institutions, as well as interference in other spheres, in a manner that raises serious concerns as to judicial independence and accountability; judicial conduct in high-profile criminal cases, including former President Mohamed Nasheed, which are grossly unfair and violate international fair trial standards; arbitrary and undue parliamentary interference in independent constitutional institutions; and, instances of serious violations and abuse of fundamental rights of civil society and human rights defenders, among other concerns raised.

“The Maldives must urgently implement the necessary reforms to strengthen judicial independence, the rule of law and human rights in accordance with international standards,” said Jilani.

The Maldives’ human rights record will be discussed at the UN Human Rights Council later next month as part of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process.

Member states of the UN have already made a range of recommendations to the Maldives, and can make further statements at the Council session.

The government will be expected formally to respond and indicate which of the recommendations it will commit to implement over the coming years.

The ICJ-SAHR report therefore comes at a timely moment, urging Maldives authorities to strengthen human rights protections, judicial independence and the rule of law, including by accepting and implementing key UPR recommendations as well as prior recommendations by UN Special Rapporteurs who have visited the country, and urging the international community to hold the Maldives to its obligations and commitments.

“The Maldivian government must make good on its assurances to the ICJ-SAHR delegation, the UN Human Rights Council, the UN Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers and other outside observers of its commitment to the goal of strengthening judicial independence, the rule of law, fundamental rights and separation of powers, by demonstrating real steps to implement the recommendations set out by the delegation,” said Narayan.

Contact:

Nikhil Narayan, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser for South Asia, t: +977 9813187821 ; e: nikhil.narayan(a)icj.org

Deekshya Illangasinghe, Executive Director, SAHR, t: + 941 12695910 ; e: deekshya(a)southasianrights.org

Maldives-Justice-Adrift-Rule of Law-Publications-fact-finding report-2015-ENG (full report in pdf)

Rights groups call on the UN Human Rights Council to address the deteriorating human rights situation in Cambodia

Rights groups call on the UN Human Rights Council to address the deteriorating human rights situation in Cambodia

20 Aug 2015

The UN Human Rights Council should pass a resolution that addresses the deteriorating human rights situation in Cambodia, the ICJ and 10 other international and Cambodian human rights groups said in a letter to the Permanent Representatives of Member and Observer States of the HRC.

The letter urges the Member States to support a resolution at the Human Rights Council’s 30th regular session (14 September to 2 October 2015), that:

  • Raises substantial issues of concern, including violations of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly, association and expression; threats to, and attacks against, human rights defenders; the lack of independence of the judiciary; violations of land and housing rights; the erosion of fundamental democratic principles and institutions; and ongoing impunity for perpetrators of human rights violations and abuses;
  • Calls on the Cambodian Government to put an end to these serious violations, abide by its domestic and international human rights obligations, and implement key legal and institutional reforms that UN bodies and mechanisms have highlighted as priorities;
  • Extends the mandate of the UN Special Rapporteur for a period of at least two years, with monitoring and reporting powers in addition to advisory services;
  • Calls on the Cambodian Government to fully cooperate with the current Special Rapporteur, Ms. Rhona Smith, as well as with other UN human rights bodies and mechanisms; and
  • Calls on the Cambodian Government to establish a time-bound action plan for the implementation of recommendations made by the Special Rapporteur and by previous mandate holders, as well as by UN bodies and mechanisms, including treaty monitoring bodies, thematic special procedures of the Human Rights Council, and the Universal Periodic Review (UPR).

The letter also requests Members States to express support for the renewal of the mandate of the OHCHR country office in Cambodia, and to underline the importance of the complementarities between the work of the Special Rapporteur and the OHCHR country office.

The letter was signed by the ICJ, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (Forum-Asia), Cambodian Center for Human Rights (CCHR), Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (ADHOC), Cambodian League for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights (LICADHO), CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Civil Rights Defenders, International Service for Human Rights (ISHR), Human Rights Watch, and World Organization Against Torture (OMCT).

Cambodia-HRC-Human rights situation-Advocacy-open letters-2015-ENG (full text in PDF)

 

 

Bolivia: Independence of the Judiciary

Bolivia: Independence of the Judiciary

18 Mar 2015

The Colombian Commission of Jurists, an affiliate of the ICJ, made an oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council today, addressing threats to the independence of the judiciary in Bolivia.

The statement came in the discusson of Bolivia’s review by the Council universal periodic review procedure, in which Bolivia accepted recommendations on judicial independence, including to “guarantee the full independence of the judiciary system, in accordance with…international standards.”

In response, the ICJ and Colombian Commission of Jurists highlighted the disciplinary and criminal proceedings brought by the Legislative Assembly against three judges of the Constitutional Court at the end of last year. The proceedings were based solely on the disagreement of the political branches with an interim order issued by the Court in a case challenging the constitutionality of a new law to regulate notaries.

In the so-called “trial” conducted by the Legislative Assembly in December, Assembly Members’ statements demonstrated a manifest lack of impartiality. The Assembly extensively and arbitrarily limited the rights of the judges to present evidence and witnesses in their defence.

In the result, one judge was arbitrarily removed from office in January, and another resigned under the pressure. The Assembly also referred both of these women for criminal prosecution. Proceedings against a third judge were suspended only for health reasons.

As the Government had announced that it will seek radical reform of the judicial system during 2015. In light of recent events, the two organisations asked:

  • How will Bolivia ensure that reforms are consistent with universal and regional standards on the role and independence of the judiciary?
  • What role will Bolivian and international civil society and legal experts have in developing the reforms?
  • Will reforms ensure a judicial selection procedure that is based on objective criteria and truly independent of the executive and legislative branches of government?
  • Will consideration be given to transferring responsibility for discipline and removal procedures to a new independent and impartial body, with real guarantees of fairness, and clearly defined grounds for removal that exclude disagreement with rulings?

Ireland had also raised concern about independence and effectiveness of the judiciary in its oral statement.

The delegation of Bolivia mentioned in its opening statement its intention to convene a forum on judical reforms and put reforms to a referendum, but did not provie any details other than that various sectors of Bolivian society would be involved. During the opportunity given at the end of the session to respond to the questions from states and NGOs, the delegation of Bolivia chose not to address these issues.

Read also Bolivia: ICJ condemns removal and forced resignation of Constitutional Court judges by Legislative Assembly and links therein.

The full written statement may be downloaded in PDF format here: Bolivia-HRC28-UPR-Advocacy-non legal submission-2015-ENG

Singapore: Court of Appeal judgment upholding caning flouts international law prohibiting ill-treatment

Singapore: Court of Appeal judgment upholding caning flouts international law prohibiting ill-treatment

6 Mar 2015

The ICJ today expressed its dismay that the Singapore Court of Appeal, in a judgment issued on 4 March 2015 declined to declare caning, a painful form of corporal punishment, to be unlawful.

The administration of caning violates the absolute prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment under international law.

Despite this prohibition, the Court of Appeal determined that any international legal prohibition had no effect on Singapore, since the legislature had not made it part of the country’s domestic law.

The ICJ emphasized that Singapore’s failure to prohibit caning in its own national law in no way makes caning a lawful act.

Under international law, caning remains wrong and illegal, irrespective of the country’s domestic arrangements.

The Court of Appeal also ruled that caning, administered as a form of judicially imposed punishment in Singapore, does not amount to torture.

The Court of Appeal stated that caning did not “breach the high threshold of severity and brutality that is required for it to be regarded as torture.”

The ICJ notes that the international prohibition against ill-treatment extends not only to torture, but also to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and punishment.

The ICJ considers that caning constitutes both types of ill-treatment.

The ruling was issued by the Singapore Court of Appeals in the case of Yong Vui Kong, a 26-year old man who appealed against his sentence of 15 strokes of the cane and life imprisonment imposed as a punishment for an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act.

Upon his conviction in 2011, Yong Vui Kong had initially been sentenced to death.

Following changes in the law and an application for re-sentencing to the High Court, his sentence was modified in 2013 to life imprisonment and ‘15 strokes of the cane’.

In his appeal, which was dismissed by the Court of Appeal, Yong Vui Kong challenged this sentence on several grounds, including that caning constitutes torture, which is prohibited under international law.

“The Court of Appeal’s ruling is out of step with Singapore’s obligations to prevent, prohibit and punish all forms of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. International human rights bodies have made clear that caning and other forms of corporal punishment violate the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. As such it must be prohibited,” said Emerlynne Gil, International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia of the ICJ.

Laws in Singapore that permit the imposition of corporal punishment are inconsistent with Singapore’s obligation to prohibit torture and other ill-treatment at all times and in all circumstances.

Consequently, in 2011 the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child asked Singapore to “prohibit unequivocally by law, without any further delay, all forms of corporal punishment, including caning, in all settings”.

In addition, when Singapore went under the Universal Periodic Review of its human rights record before the UN Human Rights Council in 2011, several States recommended that the authorities abolish all corporal punishment, including caning.

The ICJ also emphasizes that all forms of torture and other cruel inhuman or degrading treatment are absolutely prohibited by customary international law and international treaties binding on Singapore, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).

The prohibition against torture is also a peremptory norm of international law, as recognized by numerous legal authorities and by all States in repeated UN General Assembly resolutions.

The peremptory character of the norm means that it overrides all other laws, international or domestic. The Court of Appeal dismissed any effect that the peremptory character of the prohibition might have on its administration in Singapore.

The ICJ calls on the lawmakers in Singapore to act without delay to outlaw corporal punishment.

Contact:

Emerlynne Gil, International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t +66840923575 ; e emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org

 

Lao PDR: properly investigate Sombath’s “disappearance”, ICJ report says

Lao PDR: properly investigate Sombath’s “disappearance”, ICJ report says

11 Dec 2014

Two years after prominent Laotian activist Sombath Somphone was last seen at a police checkpoint, the Laotian government must do more to investigate his suspected enforced disappearance, said the ICJ in a new report released today.

In the report, Missed Opportunities: Recommendations for Investigating the Disappearance of Sombath Somphone, which was co-authored by Michael Taylor QPM, a leading international investigator, the ICJ noted that despite the passage of two years since Sombath Somphone’s apparent enforced disappearance on December 15, 2012, very little information about the progress of investigation has been released to the public or his family.

“The fact that the Lao PDR government’s last report on the progress of the investigation was released over 18 months ago raises serious concerns as to whether the Laotian authorities are in fact carrying out an effective investigation into this case as they are required to do under international law,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.

“It is not enough for the Laotian government simply to assert it is investigating this case. International law obliges Lao PDR authorities to conduct an investigation that is credible and effective, along the lines suggested in ICJ’s report.”

Among other recommendations, the ICJ’s report suggests a range of investigative steps that should be addressed by the authorities of Laos PDR including establishing a relationship with Sombath Somphone’s family, carrying out a proper technical assessment of the Closed circuit Television (CCTV) footage of his abduction, analyzing relevant cell phone information from telephone cells and towers, and mandating an independent expert body to review the results of the investigation to date and make recommendations.

The Lao PDR government has denied any involvement in Sombath Somphone’s abduction.

But reports released by police reveal a wholly inadequate investigation that has not come any closer to a credible explanation as to his fate or whereabouts.

“The ICJ hopes that this report will assist the Laotian authorities to identify potential leads in the case so that the truth as to the whereabouts and fate of Sombath Somphone can finally be established and those who are responsible for criminal conduct and violations of his rights can be brought to justice,” said Zarifi.

“One of the conclusions of the ICJ’s review of the publicly available material regarding this case is that this case remains ‘eminently solvable’ if proper investigative methodology is followed.”

Key recommendations in the report include:

  • Formulate a sensitive family liaison strategy that ensures that their right to be regularly provided with information about the progress and results of the investigation are respected in a manner that also ensures the effectiveness of the investigation.
  • Implement a CCTV strategy that ensures the capture and systematic analysis of all relevant material and the submission of material to accredited independent and expert laboratories that will provide the best opportunity for enhancement of critical detail.
  • Seek the assistance of appropriate agencies in other countries in the forensic examination and analysis of crime scenes, vehicles, phone and CCTV data, and any physical or other evidence.
  • Ensure an independent comprehensive review of the scope, methodology and results of the investigation to date is carried out by a competent, independent and relevantly expert body. Such a body should have the authority to request and receive all relevant information, question individuals and make recommendations. All officials and experts who have been involved in the investigation to date should cooperate and provide information to the independent body carrying out the review.

Contact:

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002,  e-mail: sam.zarif(a)icj.org

Kingsley Abbott, ICJ International Legal Adviser, (Bangkok), t:+66 944701345, e-mail: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

Background:

Sombath Somphone, Lao PDR’s most prominent community development advocate and a Ramon Magsaysay Award winner, was last seen on December 15, 2012, on a road in the capital Vientiane.

Closed circuit Television footage showed him being stopped at a police checkpoint, exiting his vehicle, and after his vehicle was driven away by an unidentified man, getting into another vehicle with unidentified men and being driven away. He has not been seen since.

As a State Party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR and Convention Against Torture and Other, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), the Government of Lao PDR has the duty to carry out independent, impartial and effective investigations into cases of alleged enforced disappearance.

Download the report in PDF:

Lao-Somphone disappearance-Publications-report-2014-ENG  (full report in English, PDF)

Lao-Somphone disappearance-Publications-report-2014-LAO (full report in Laotian, PDF)

Read also:

Lao PDR: government must tackle enforced disappearance case

ICJ submission on the Universal Periodic Review of Lao

 

 

Pakistan: where is the National Commission for Human Rights?

Pakistan: where is the National Commission for Human Rights?

10 Dec 2014

An opinion piece by Reema Omer, ICJ Legal adviser in Pakistan.

The 64th world Human Rights Day held 10 December marked thirty months since Pakistan passed the National Commission for Human Rights Act, providing for the establishment of a National Commission for Human Rights (NCHR) for the promotion and protection of human rights in the country.

The Government’s failure to constitute the legally mandated Commission is another indictment of its commitment to human rights.

A NCHR by itself will not fix all of Pakistan’s serious human rights problems, but if constituted properly, the NCHR can be an important step forward.

In South Asia, Pakistan is the only country that has not established a National Human Rights Institution (NHRI) -India constituted a National Human Rights Commission in 1993, Sri Lanka in 1996, Nepal in 2000, and Bangladesh in 2008.

This deficiency was manifest when Pakistan accepted multiple recommendations during the 2012 review of its human rights record by the Untied Nations (the Universal Periodic Review) that called on Pakistan to speedily operationalize the National Commission for Human Rights.

It is critical – for at least three reasons – that Pakistan swiftly establishes a NCHR compliant with the UN Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (Paris Principles), which provide the minimum standards required by national human rights institutions to be considered credible and effective.

First, a major function of a national human rights commission is to ensure access to remedies to victims of human rights violations and accountability for perpetrators.

Pakistan has long faced a crisis of impunity, with perpetrators of the gravest human rights violations, especially those belonging to state security agencies, escaping accountability with ease.

Questionable political will, lack of legal aid and a judicial system fraught with delays are some of the reasons why victims have little chance at getting justice.

An independent and effective NCHR, with powers of investigation and quasi-judicial authority, can provide an additional avenue for redress.

In India, for example, the NCHR played an integral role in ensuring compensation for victims of the anti-Muslim Gujarat riots in 2002, and fake “encounter killings” in Manipur in 2014.

Second, another important function of NHRIs is to advise on existing laws, policies and proposed legislation, as well as their implementation, particularly on their compliance with international human rights laws and standards.

In the last couple of years alone, Pakistan has passed multiple laws that violate its international human rights obligations.

The Fair Trial Act, 2013 and the Protection of Pakistan Act, 2014, are just two examples.

In addition, Pakistani is currently debating on a bill that aims to incorporate the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), which Pakistan ratified in 2010, into domestic law.

The proposed bill has many deficiencies, which could benefit from a detailed analysis by a competent body familiar with international human rights law.

And finally, NHRIs have the responsibility to promote human rights, including by organizing public awareness and education programs as well as trainings public officials.

Disturbingly, human rights continue to be thought of as “Western propaganda” in Pakistan, including by some public officials.

NGOs working in the human rights field as often demonized as working on a “foreign agenda” for personal enrichment.

In such a climate, it is essential that a national administrative body counters the negative propaganda, and makes the public and public officials more aware of their rights as well as their human rights obligations.

However, for a NCHR to be effective in all these areas, it must comply with the Paris Principles, which require independence and pluralism, and the capacity to participate in essential human rights work, including engaging with the Government on “any situation of violation of human rights which it decides to take up”.

The NCHR Act, 2012, significantly limits the Commission’s mandate where the armed forces are accused of committing human rights violations.

In such cases, the Commission is only authorized to seek a report from the Government, and make recommendations if it sees fit.

The law further emphasizes that the functions of the Commission “do not include inquiring into the act or practices of the intelligence agencies”.

As the NCHR law stands, it seems questionable that the Commission will get accreditation by the International Coordinating Committee of NHRIs, which is a requirement for an NHRI to be recognized internationally.

Also, unless its mandate is broadened to include intelligence and security agencies –accused of the gravest violations –it risks being toothless, or even worse, a cover for government inaction.

It is therefore paramount that the Pakistani Government meet the commitments made to the people of Pakistan and the international community by swiftly establishing the NCHR after amending the NCHR Act, 2012, to give the Commission mandate to investigate human rights violations committed by the military, including the intelligence agencies.

 

 

Pakistan: promptly constitute an effective National Commission for Human Rights

Pakistan: promptly constitute an effective National Commission for Human Rights

9 Dec 2014

On the eve of the 64th annual world Human Rights Day, the ICJ urges the Pakistani Government to promptly constitute a strong and effective National Human Rights Commission that is compliant with the UN Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (Paris Principles).

“Independent and credible national human rights institutions can be helpful for protecting and promoting human rights,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Director for Asia and the Pacific. “The Pakistan Government has been inexplicably dragging its feet despite repeated promises to constitute the Commission.”

In South Asia, India, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bangladesh have established National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs), making Pakistan a regional exception.

“A properly constituted national human rights commission will not by itself fix any country’s human rights problems, but it can be part of the solution,” said Zarifi. “Pakistan can and should learn from the lessons of failed NHRIs in the region and constitute an institution that can address the real needs of all people in the country.”

Pakistan passed the National Commission for Human Rights Act in 2012. The law provides for an independent commission with broad powers to promote human rights and to investigate human rights violations.

However, the law significantly limits the Commission’s mandate where the armed forces are accused of committing human rights violations.

In such cases, the Commission is only authorized to seek a report from the Government, and make recommendations if it sees fit.

The law further emphasizes that the functions of the Commission “do not include inquiring into the act or practices of the intelligence agencies”.

“The proposed Commission’s restricted mandate over the armed forces, and especially the intelligence agencies, is of grave concern given that Pakistan’s military and intelligence services are accused of perpetrating gross human rights violations, including enforced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, and torture and ill-treatment,” Zarifi added.

“A human rights commission that does not have jurisdiction over abuses by these actors risks being toothless and ineffective—and worst, a cover for continuing government inaction in response to these violations.”

Contact:

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Adviser (London), t: +44 7889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org

Background:

Section 3 (a) (ii) of the Paris Principles, which provide the minimum standards required by national human rights institutions to be considered credible and effective, states that a NHRI should have the power to hear a matter without higher referral over “any situation of violation of human rights which it decides to take up”.

Because of the proposed Commission’s limited mandate over the military, it is questionable whether the proposed National Human Rights Commission is compliant with the Paris Principles.

During its 2012 Universal Periodic Review, Pakistan accepted multiple recommendations to speedily operationalize the National Commission for Human Rights.

Over two years since the Review, there has been little progress in constituting the Commission, let alone amending the law establishing the Commission to ensure that it complies with the Paris Principles.

ICJ-HRCP human rights defenders training in Pakistan

ICJ-HRCP human rights defenders training in Pakistan

23 Nov 2014

In partnership with the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), the ICJ convened and participated in a one-day workshop on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) mechanism of the UN Human Rights Council, held in Lahore on 22 November 2014.

The workshop was convened by the ICJ and HRCP as a follow up to, and in response to requests by participants at, training workshops held in Pakistan in February 2014. Now half way between Pakistan’s second and third periodic reviews under the UPR mechanism, the workshop brought together representatives from civil society from throughout Pakistan working on a wide range of human rights issues. It drew from the experience of national and international advocates and human rights lawyers and defenders to discuss:

  • The importance of international human rights law at the national level;
  • The UPR as a mechanism for human rights protection and how it fits within the broader framework of UN human rights mechanisms;
  • Opportunities for NGO engagement in the UPR, especially in the development of a mid-term civil society evaluation report and in preparation for Pakistan’s third cycle UPR in 2017; and
  • Weaknesses in Pakistan’s engagement with the UPR.
ICJ joins in call for attention to deteriorating human rights situation in Egypt

ICJ joins in call for attention to deteriorating human rights situation in Egypt

22 Oct 2014

The ICJ today joined a call with six other international NGOs for members and observers of the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) to pay special attention to the deteriorating human rights situation in Egypt ahead of and following the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Egypt.

The HRC Working Group on the UPR will, on 5 November 2014, be undertaking a review of the human rights situation in Egypt. This comes at a critical time for human rights, freedoms and independent Egyptian civil society, including rights defenders and democracy activists. Noting that the Government of Egypt has reaffirmed a deadline for 10 November 2014 for all civil society organisations to register with the Government under the highly repressive Law on Associations, the ICJ and others called on members and observers of the HRC to, at a minimum, address several key issues, including:

  • Threats against human rights defenders and civil society organisations and activists;
  • The need for new legislation to guarantee freedom of assembly through a transparent and simple notification process;
  • The need for judicial investigations into the ordering and carrying out of unlawful killings in the course of suppressing mainly peaceful protests;
  • Respect for and non-interference with the independence of the judiciary;
  • The need for immediate and unconditional release of persons detained solely for peacefully exercising their rights to freedom of expression, assembly and association; and
  • The need to immediate end the use of torture and other ill-treatment.

Egypt-UPR-OpenLetter-2014-EN (download open letter in PDF)

Philippines strangely silent on Brunei’s draconian new Penal Code

Philippines strangely silent on Brunei’s draconian new Penal Code

10 May 2014

An opinion piece by International Commission of Jurists’ International Legal Advisor for Southeast Asia Emerlynne Gil on the Philippines’ reluctance to speak out about Brunei’s new Penal Code.

Brunei Darussalam recently began implementing its new Penal Code, which includes draconian penalties including death by stoning and the amputation of limbs.

The new Penal Code has been widely criticized, including by the International Commission of Jurists, for contravening international human rights law and standards. Not surprisingly, under international law, these forms of punishment are characterized as cruel and inhuman and therefore absolutely prohibited.

The new Penal Code also criminalizes same-sex relations and extramarital sexual relations. Many of the law’s provisions are ambiguously worded, but could certainly be construed as restricting the practice of other religions, thereby violating the right to freedom of religion.

One of the provisions, for instance, provides that any person who “propagates religion other than the religion of Islam” to a person having no religion shall be guilty of an offence and may be imprisoned for 5 years or fined. This provision could very well apply to Catholic priests who conduct baptisms of babies who do not have any religion.

An estimated 30,000 Filipino migrant workers reside in Brunei, most of whom are non-Muslim. They will have to live under this law, which is applicable to both Muslim and non-Muslim populations.

The Philippine government historically has been outspoken and pro-active when it comes to protecting the rights of its migrant workers. But it has been uncharacteristically silent in its response to the implementation of Brunei’s new law.

Rather than expressing concern to Brunei over the implementation of the law and its impact on its migrant workers there, the only step taken by the Philippines has been to gather the migrant workers living in Brunei to brief them about the new law.

Ambassador Nestor Z. Ochoa, the Philippine’s top diplomat there, was quoted by GMA News saying, “We Filipinos should take responsibility to educate ourselves on this new law and its effect on our everyday lives.”

The Philippines also neglected to mention the new Penal Code when Brunei went through the United Nations Universal Periodic Review in Geneva last week. Instead, the Philippines commended Brunei for ensuring the welfare of migrant workers in the country.

The Philippines’ diffidence on this issue is especially mystifying because Brunei’s new Penal Code runs counter to the spirit of the move toward greater economic integration in the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN). Brunei’s new penal code will materially impact Filipinos and other ASEAN nationals (and other non Brunei citizens) who make up a significant proportion of the small country’s work force.

The Philippines should raise its concerns in the context of ASEAN integration, both in terms of economic impact and human rights.
Because ASEAN is also now tentatively discussing greater protection of human rights for the people in ASEAN, The ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) has been established “to develop strategies for the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms to complement the building of an ASEAN community.”

ASEAN Member States should use the mechanism of the AICHR to address the enactment and prevent the implementation of a law that flies in the face of international human rights standards and is a setback to the efforts in developing regional human rights standards as part of building an ASEAN community.
The Philippines should play a leading role in raising concerns about Brunei’s new law through the AICHR and try to dissuade Brunei from implementing the egregious provisions of the new law.

The principle of non-interference can be no basis to justify a lack of action on this issue. Although the non-interference principle is embodied in the ASEAN Charter and reiterated in the Terms of Reference of the AICHR, it is unacceptable to interpret the principle, as some within ASEAN have, to mean that Member States are prohibited from commenting on each other’s domestic affairs.

Over the years, ASEAN Member States have used this principle inconsistently, but mostly it has been used as a political tool to avoid being made accountable for human rights violations.

It must be made clear that the protection and overall realization of human rights, is not exclusively a matter of internal affairs of States, but the international community has an interest, including a legal interest, in this realization.

This principle has long been accepted by the international community, including by ASEAN member states, notably in the 1993 Vienna Declaration and Program of Action.

Indeed, ASEAN Member States have on occasion discussed extensively another Member State’s domestic affairs. For instance, in 2009, after the summit in Thailand, the ASEAN issued a statement encouraging Myanmar to release political prisoners and allow democracy.

Last year, the ASEAN urged Indonesia to quickly ratify the Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution, essentially commenting on the internal affairs of the country.

ASEAN Member States are also already allowing other countries to comment on their domestic affairs through the various international mechanisms in which they participate.

All ASEAN Member States are parties to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). ASEAN is considering its own convention on violence against women and children—both of which are directly implicated in the problematic provisions of Brunei’s Penal Code.

The Philippines therefore must speak up on Brunei’s Penal Code, not only because the rights of thousands of Filipino migrant workers are at stake, but also because it has an opportunity to take a leading role in advancing human rights standards in the ASEAN.

It should take this issue as an opportunity not only to protect its citizens in Brunei, but also to initiate a discussion within the ASEAN to ensure that a more robust and effective human rights regime prevails in the region.

Israel/OPT: UPR recommendations by the Human Rights Council

Israel/OPT: UPR recommendations by the Human Rights Council

27 Mar 2014

The ICJ made an oral statement on the recommendations made to Israel by the UN Human Rights Council, following Israel’s Universal Periodic Review.

The ICJ statement focussed on recommendations related to:

  • compliance with international humanitarian and international human rights law , including particularly for thorough and impartial investigations into all allegations of human rights and humanitarian law violations committed in the context of the prolonged occupation of the OPT, and accountability of individuals responsible for such violations;
  • Israel’s unlawful settlement policy;
  • the separation wall; and
  • administrative detention.

The full statement can be downloaded in PDF: Advocacy-UN-HRC25-IsraelUPR-20032014

Video of the discussion, including the ICJ statement, may be viewed here.

Nepal: Lack of progress on ending impunity

Nepal: Lack of progress on ending impunity

21 Mar 2014

The ICJ spoke at the UN Human Rights Council on the lack of progress in Nepal on ending impunity.The oral statement was delivered during the general debate on the Universal Periodic Review (UPR).

Nepal has failed to take concrete action to implement key UPR recommendations, including those crucial to implementing the right to an effective remedy and reparation, creating effective mechanisms for transitional justice and ending impunity.

The Government continues to try to force through a Truth and Reconciliation Commission that is not human rights complicant and has already been ruled invalid by the Supreme Court of Nepal.

Nepal has also failed to take meaningful measures to investigate human rights violations and abuses that arose during the armed conflict.

The ICJ called on Nepal to take specific measures towards ending impunity.

The full written statement can be downloaded, in PDF format: Advocacy-UN-HRC25-Nepal-OralStatement-2103214

The representative of Nepal exercised the right of reply in response to ICJ’s oral statement.

Video of the oral statement, and Nepal’s statement in reply, via the official UN webcast.

No end in sight: enforced disappearances in Pakistan

No end in sight: enforced disappearances in Pakistan

6 Mar 2014

An opinion piece by International Commission of Jurists’ (ICJ) legal adviser Reema Omer on Pakistan’s lack of willingness to address the serious crime of enforced disappearances.

On 26 February 2013, the United Nations Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances (WGEID) published its report on Pakistan, following the WGEID’s visit to the country in September 2012.

The report expressed concern at the continuing practice of enforced disappearances in Pakistan and made a series of recommendations to the Government.

A year later, despite the growing scale of the practice, Pakistan is further than ever from meaningfully addressing the serious crime of enforced disappearances.

Many of the laws and policies adopted by the Government this past year have made a mockery of the Working Group’s report and Pakistan’s national and international human rights commitments.

A close look at the report, and particularly its recommendations, is essential, especially as Pakistan is in the process of drafting a law on enforced disappearances.

Enforced Disappearance is a serious crime under international law.

An enforced disappearance occurs when State agents or those acting with their authorization, support or acquiescence, abduct or detain a person and then refuse to recognize the detention or conceal the person’s fate or whereabouts, placing such a person outside the protection of the law.

The Working Group acknowledged that Pakistan was facing grave security challenges.

However, it pointed out that under international law and standards, including Article 7 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), enforced disappearances cannot be justified under any circumstances.

In this context, the WGEID was particularly concerned over the extensive powers given to security agencies under Pakistan’s anti-terror regime and recommended that Pakistan amend provisions of the Anti-terrorism Act 1997 and the Actions (in Aid of Civil Power) Regulations 2011, which appeared to facilitate the practice of enforced disappearances.

The Government ignored the WGEID’s recommendation and promulgated perhaps the most draconian anti-terrorism law the country has seen in the form of the Protection of Pakistan Ordinance, 2013 (PPO).

Section 9 of the PPO allows the Government to withhold information regarding the location of detainees, as well as their place and grounds of detention for any “reasonable cause”.

This provision is an affront to the rule of law.

It seeks to place detainees beyond the protection of the law, and denies them legal personality, which is absolutely prohibited under the ICCPR and general rule of law principles. Effectively, it seeks to legalize the practice of enforced disappearance.

The Working Group also emphasized that fighting impunity for perpetrators of human rights violations is essential and expressed concern that no State agent has been convicted in relation to acts of enforced disappearance.

The Supreme Court of Pakistan too reiterated the Working Group’s call to bring perpetrators of enforced disappearance to account.

Quite appallingly, following the Court’s judgment in the Muhabat Shah case delivered in December 2013, the Government filed for a review of the judgment, asking the Court to delete remarks implicating the security agencies in enforced disappearances as such findings could “demoralize the troops”.

The PPO also grants blanket immunity to all State agents for acts done in “good faith” in the performance of their duties.

It provides that any person detained by the armed forces before the coming into force of the Ordinance shall be deemed to have been detained pursuant to the Ordinance.

This retrospective immunity to the armed forces undermines the little progress made in the last few years by the superior courts of Pakistan to bring perpetrators of enforced disappearance to account and is likely to entrench the already pervasive impunity enjoyed by the security forces, particularly related to human rights violations.

Furthermore, the WGEID urged Pakistan to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance (Convention on Enforced Disappearance).

Numerous States made this recommendation during Pakistan’s Universal Periodic Review in 2012 as well.

The Government has so far made no progress toward ratification.

Instead, it has sought to undermine an attempt made by the Supreme Court to apply the principles enshrined in the Convention.

In the Muhabat Shah case referred to above, the Supreme Court held that the principles of the Convention on Enforced Disappearances were applicable in Pakistan as the Convention was inextricably linked with the right to life, guaranteed by the Pakistan’s Constitution.

The right to life is also recognized by the ICCPR, which Pakistan ratified in 2010.

The Government, however, challenged the ruling, arguing that as Pakistan has not ratified the Convention, the Court could not hold it to be applicable in Pakistan.

The WGEID also recommended that the crime of enforced disappearance be included in the Criminal Code of Pakistan in line with the definition given in the Convention on Enforced Disappearances.

Despite hundreds, if not thousands, of people “missing” in Pakistan following apparent abduction by or with the complicity of the State, enforced disappearances are still not specifically criminalized in the country.

This is particularly deplorable as Pakistan accepted recommendation 122.20 made during its 2012 Universal Periodic Review, which called on the Government to criminalize enforced disappearances in the penal code.

One hopes that the proposed law on enforced disappearances -reported to be in its final stages- takes the Working Group’s recommendations more seriously.

Refusal to do so will be a damning indictment of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s Government’s failure to meet its commitment to uphold Pakistan’s international human rights obligations.

 

Nepal: lack of progress on ending impunity

Nepal: lack of progress on ending impunity

5 Mar 2014

The ICJ has submitted a written statement to the Human Rights Council, on lack of progress in Nepal to end impunity.

The written statement, published by the United Nations today, notes that in 2012 the Government of Nepal adopted a plan to implement the recommendations made during its 2011 Universal Periodic Review (UPR) by the Human Rights Council.

However, Nepal has failed to take necessary measures to implement recommendations on ending impunity.

Key concerns include:

  • the failure to implement recommendations for strengthening the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC),
  • failure to draft constitutional provisions consistent with international legal principles on the protection of human rights, rule of law and the right to effective remedy,
  • failure to establishment of credible transitional justice measures,
  • failure to take the necessary practical steps in relation to individual cases, towards ending impunity

Nepal-WrittenStatement-HRC25-Advocacy-2014 (download PDF)

ICJ delivers training to human rights defenders in Pakistan

ICJ delivers training to human rights defenders in Pakistan

24 Feb 2014

In partnership with the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), the ICJ conducted two-day workshops on NGO engagement with the United Nations, held in Pakistan on 18-19 and 21-22 February 2014.

The workshops, held in Lahore and Islamabad, focused on enhancing the meaningful participation of national NGOs with the UN human rights system. Participants included representatives from civil society working on a wide range of human rights issues, including enforced disappearances, education, violence against women and child rights.

Drawing from experiences of ICJ staff and participants, the workshops considered how international advocacy and engagement with the UN can benefit NGOs and addressed:

  • The nature of international human rights law;
  • State obligations under international human rights law;
  • The UN human rights system;
  • The Universal Periodic Review mechanism;
  • The UN Special Procedures and the making of individual complaints to them;
  • The UN Treaty Bodies, individual complaints and periodic reporting; and
  • Documenting human rights violations.

Background materials on the Universal Periodic Review: (ENG) and (URDU)
Background materials on the UN Special Procedures: (ENG) and (URDU)
Background materials on the core functions of the UN Treaty Bodies: (ENG) and (URDU)
BAckground materials on periodic reporting to the UN Treaty Bodies: (ENG) and (URDU)

Malaysia must stop execution of death row prisoner Chandran

Malaysia must stop execution of death row prisoner Chandran

6 Feb 2014

The ICJ calls on the Government of Malaysia to stop the execution of death row prisoner Chandran, apparently scheduled to take place on Friday 7 February.

Chandran was convicted for murder and sentenced to death on 16 April 2008.

While the Government of Malaysia has not publicly released the date, according to the Malaysian Bar Council, his execution is planned to take place on 7 February 2014.

Despite the prohibition of mandatory death sentences under international human rights law, the laws in Malaysia maintain the mandatory death sentence for offences such as murder, treason and drug trafficking.

The Malaysian Bar Council, a partner organization of the ICJ, has noted that there have been several instances in the past when the Government of Malaysia indicated that it would review the mandatory death penalty, with a view to its possible abolition or the possible reintroduction of a discretionary death penalty. It has also indicated its intention of reviewing the penalty of death for drug-related offenses.

“Considering prohibition of the mandatory death penalty in international human rights law and the past indications made by the Government of Malaysia that it intends to review the imposition of mandatory death penalty, it is deeply concerning that it still aims to proceed with the execution of Chandran on Friday,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.

In October 2013, Malaysia underwent their second Universal Periodic Review where it was urged by several countries to review the mandatory nature of death penalty, maintain a moratorium, and ultimately move to abolish the death penalty.

Malaysia is set to respond to these recommendations in March 2014.

The Malaysian Bar Council estimates that there are approximately 900 prisoners in death row in Malaysia awaiting execution.

The ICJ considers that the use of the death penalty constitutes a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

In addition to calling a halt to the execution of Chandran, the ICJ urges the Government of Malaysia to amend its laws and take steps towards the abolition of the death penalty in the country, including the implementation of a moratorium.

Contact:

Emerlynne Gil, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t +66 2 619 8477; email: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org

Craig Knowles, ICJ Media Consultant, t +66 81 9077653; email: craig.knowles(a)icj.org

 

 

 

Viet Nam: latest death sentences a setback to human rights progress

Viet Nam: latest death sentences a setback to human rights progress

19 Dec 2013

The ICJ deplores the death sentences handed down by the People’s Court of Hanoi on December 17 to two former shipping executives and urges the government of Viet Nam to desist from carrying out the planned executions.

Viet Nam National Shipping Lines (Vinalines) former chairman Duong Chi Dung and former general director Mai Van Phuc were found guilty of embezzling nearly USD $1 million from the state-owned company and sentenced to death.

“The announced death sentences fly in the face of encouraging human rights developments in Viet Nam, such as the State’s signing the Convention Against Torture and other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment in November,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s regional director for Asia and the Pacific. “This is a major setback at a time when it appeared Viet Nam was making progress towards ending capital punishment.”

The ICJ considers the death penalty to constitute a violation of the right to life and the right to be free from cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

Following the Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review in 2009, Viet Nam agreed to revise its legislation on the death penalty in line with the country’s international obligations.

Since then it has reduced the number of crimes punishable by death, and changed its method of administering the sentence from firing squad to injection by lethal substance.

It is estimated that more than 600 people remain on death row in the country. Most were convicted on drug-related offences.

“At present, approximately two thirds of the world’s countries have already either abolished capital punishment or have moratoriums on executions,” said Zarifi. “It is regrettable that Viet Nam has chosen to exclude itself from this global trend.”

The ICJ calls on the Government of Viet Nam to immediately put in place a moratorium on its practice, with a view to abolishing the death penalty, as demanded by the United Nations General Assembly in repeated resolutions on the question.

CONTACT:

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002, e-mail: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Craig Knowles, ICJ Media & Communications, (Bangkok), t:+66 819077653, e-mail: craig.knowles(a)icj.org

 

Malaysia: drop criminal charges against human rights defender Lena Hendry for screening “No Fire Zone” film

Malaysia: drop criminal charges against human rights defender Lena Hendry for screening “No Fire Zone” film

26 Nov 2013

The ICJ is calling on the Malaysian Government to immediately drop the criminal charge against human rights defender Lena Hendry for screening the film ‘No Fire Zone: the Killing Fields of Sri Lanka.’

The case has been fixed for case management and the defence lawyers filed an application to set aside, permanently stay or quash the charges against Lena Hendry.

“Subjecting Lena Hendry to criminal prosecution simply for screening a documentary violates her rights and contravenes Malaysia’s obligations to uphold freedom of expression,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia-Pacific Regional Director.

On 3 July 2013, Pusat Komas, a Malaysian human rights advocacy organization where Lena Hendry works, and Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall Civil Right Committee (KLSCAH CRC) screened the film “No Fire Zone”, a documentary on the war crimes and human rights abuses allegedly committed at the end of the Sri Lankan civil war in 2009.

Immediately following the screening, 30 officers from the Malaysian Ministry of Home Affairs and the police entered the hall and recorded the identity of all persons who attended the event.

The authorities then arrested Lena Hendry and two colleagues, Anna Har and Arul Prakash, and interrogated them for three hours at Dang Wangi police station.

On 19 September 2013, Lena Hendry was charged under section 6(1)(b) of the Film Censorship Act 2002 for showing a film that had not been approved by the Board of Censors.

If found guilty, she could be fined up to RM30,000 (approximately USD 9,322) and sentenced to up to three years imprisonment.

“The Malaysian government told the UN Human Rights Council during its universal periodic review that it maintains a ‘strong commitment to the rule of law, to upholding respect for human rights, and…widening the democratic space”,  said Sam Zarifi. “That commitment is inconsistent with prosecuting human rights defenders for disseminating documentary human rights information.”

Under international law and standards, Malaysia must respect the right to freedom of expression of all persons, including the right to seek and impart information of all kinds.

In the case of human rights defenders, the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders imposes a special duty on States not only to respect this right, but also to protect those who exercise this right through their exposure of human rights violations.

The ICJ calls on the Malaysian Government to safeguard freedom of expression and uphold the right of individuals to expose and disseminate information on human rights questions, including the documentation of human rights abuses.

 

Nepal must take urgent steps to implement UPR recommendations on ending impunity

Nepal must take urgent steps to implement UPR recommendations on ending impunity

23 Sep 2013

The ICJ today called on Nepal to take urgent steps to implement recommendations on ending impunity accepted by the country during its first cycle Universal Periodic Review (UPR) in 2011.

In a General Debate under Item 6 of the Human Rights Council’s agenda (UPR), the ICJ pointed to Nepal’s failure to take concrete action to implement recommendations accepted by the country during its 2011 UPR as now visibly destabilising the country. It called on Nepal to take urgent measures to:

  • Ensure that the truth and reconciliation commission, and a separate ‘disappearances’ commission to be established, conform fully with international standards including by precluding amnesty for gross human rights violations;
  • Ensure that human rights violations constituting crimes under international law are recognised as distinct criminal offences under Nepali law; and
  • Immediately commit to implement relevant Supreme Court rulings within a clearly stipulated time.

Nepal’s first cycle UPR took place in 2011. The Government of Nepal adopted a UPR implementation plan in 2012. The implementation plan failed, however, to set out timeframes for implementation or establish means to measure progress.

The General Debate took place during the 24th regular session of the Human Rights Council (9 to 27 September 2013).

Nepal-HRC24-Item6-OralStatementGD-LegalSubmission-2013 (download full statement in PDF)

ICJ calls on the Russian Federation to act on human rights and rule of law recommendations

ICJ calls on the Russian Federation to act on human rights and rule of law recommendations

20 Sep 2013

The ICJ today called on the Russian Federation to reconsider its position on rejected UPR recommendations and take measures for effective implementation of accepted recommendations concerning human rights and the rule of law in the country.

In an Interactive Dialogue on the adoption of the second cycle Universal Periodic Review of the Russian Federation (Item 6 of the Human Rights Council’s agenda), the ICJ called on the Russian Government to:

  • Establish, in legislation, clear and predictable grounds for disciplinary action against judges, and ensure impartial arbitration;
  • Ensure the right of all detainees to prompt and regular access to a lawyer;
  • Amend the law on NGO activities to protect against its arbitrary application; and
  • Adopt comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation that includes sexual orientation and gender identity as protected grounds.

The Interactive Dialogue took place during the 24th regular session of the Human Rights Council (9 to 27 September 2013).

Russia-HRC24-Item6-OralStatement-LegalSubmission-2013 (download full statement in English)

ICJ submission and advocacy on the Universal Periodic Review of the Russian Federation

Canada’s need for a legal framework for accountability of Canadian extractive industries operating abroad

Canada’s need for a legal framework for accountability of Canadian extractive industries operating abroad

19 Sep 2013

The ICJ today called on Canada to enact an effective legal framework for accountability of Canadian extractive industries and to reconsider its rejection of other UPR recommendations.

In an Interactive Dialogue on the adoption of the second cycle Universal Periodic Review of Canada (Item 6 of the Human Rights Council’s agenda), the ICJ reiterated its concern regarding the human rights impacts of Canadian business enterprises, in particular mining, gas and oil companies, in countries where they operate. It also called on Canada to reconsider its position not to accept UPR recommendations to become party to several key international human rights instruments.

The Interactive Dialogue took place during the 24th regular session of the Human Rights Council (9 to 27 September 2013).

Canada-HRC24-Item6-OralStatement-LegalSubmission-2013 (download full statement in PDF)

ICJ submission and advocacy on the Universal Periodic Review of Canada

Colombia’s need to ensure accountability and access to justice

Colombia’s need to ensure accountability and access to justice

19 Sep 2013

The ICJ today called on Colombia to ensure accountability at the national and international levels through effective implementation of UPR recommendations and by reconsidering its rejection of other UPR recommendations.

In an Interactive Dialogue on the adoption of the second cycle Universal Periodic Review of Colombia (Item 6 of the Human Rights Council’s agenda), the ICJ stressed the importance for Colombia to implement in an effective manner recommendations accepted by it and called on Colombia to reconsider its rejection of recommendations for the Government to ratify international human rights treaties key to ensuring accountability and access to justice.

The Interactive Dialogue took place during the 24th regular session of the Human Rights Council (9 to 27 September 2013).

Colombia-HRC24-Item6-OralStatement-LegalSubmission-2013 (download full statement in PDF)

ICJ submission and advocacy on the Universal Periodic Review of Colombia

Side event: promoting accountability through human rights mechanisms in Geneva

Side event: promoting accountability through human rights mechanisms in Geneva

12 Sep 2013

Yesterday, during the 24th session of the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ and TRIAL (Swiss Association against Impunity) jointly held a parallel event on promoting accountability through human rights mechanisms in Geneva.

The event was co-sponsored by the Permanent Missions of Switzerland, Estonia and Costa Rica to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

A corresponding report produced by ICJ and TRIAL was also launched at this event in two versions, one aimed at civil society and another aimed at States.

Panellists at this event included Ian Seiderman of the ICJ, Gabriella Citroni of TRIAL and Theo van Boven, former Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and ICJ Honorary Commissioner.

Mona Rishmawi of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) chaired the event.

The main topic of this event was the ICJ-TRIAL report, which reviews the legal framework for promoting accountability and suggests possible action by civil society and States to engage with the human rights mechanisms in Geneva to better promote and achieve accountability for human rights violations.

The role of national mechanisms, such as national human rights institutions, working in cooperation with the UN mechanisms was also highlighted.

The report focuses specifically on the Human Rights Council and its subsidiary bodies, such as the Universal Periodic Review and the special procedures mechanisms.

OHCHR’s role was further emphasised in regards to sharing best practices as well as ensuring follow-up to issues of accountability as they come to the attention to the UN.

 

Translate »