Oct 27, 2020 | Agendas, Events, News
The International Commission of Jurists and the Human Rights Joint Platform (IHOP) invite you to a conversation on the past and current situation of the fight against impunity in Turkey with eminent international and Turkish expert.
Registation is on a first come first served basis by writing to: ihop@ihop.org.tr
Join our speakers:
– Juan Mendez, former UN Special Rapporteur on Torture
– Wilder Taylor, Former Secretary-General of ICJ and chair of Uruguary NPM
– Luciano A. Hazan, Member of the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearance
– Melis Gebeş, Lawyer, Truth Justice and Memory Center:
– Feray Salman, General Coordinator of Human Rights Joint Platform
IHOPICJ-ZoomConference-ImpunityTurkey-Agenda-2020-ENG (download the agenda in English)
IHOPICJ-ZoomConference-ImpunityTurkey-Agenda-2020-TUR (download the agenda in Turkish)
The event is part of the REACT project: implemented jointly by ICJ and IHOP, this project seeks to support the role of civil society actors in turkey in ensuring effective access to justice for the protection of human rights. This project is funded by the European Union. The views expressed in the event do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the EU.
Oct 26, 2020 | News
The ICJ and Lawyers Alert today called on the Nigerian authorities to undertake immediate independent and thorough investigations into credible allegations of extrajudicial killings by the military responding to mass protests against the SARS police unit.
Those responsible for criminal conduct must be brought to justice and held to account, the two organizations said.
The authorities must respect their international legal obligations under international law and cease the unlawful, unnecessary and disproportionate use of force in response to Nigerians’ lawful protest actions.
Protest actions have escalated over the last two weeks as Nigerians have staged a series of protests under the #EndSARS movement. Thousands of people joined the demonstrations, demanding an end to police brutality and corruption.
Reports confirm that more than 56 people have died over the two weeks of protest actions, including 38 protesters who were killed, on the 20 October alone, as a result of the Nigerian military opening fire on thousands of peaceful protesters.
“The right to peaceful assembly is guaranteed under international law, including the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) which Nigeria has acceded to. Nigeria’s brutal responses to the peaceful demonstrations, including the use of lethal force on force protestors, not only violates this right but also their right to life,” said Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, ICJ Africa Regional Programme Director.
Lawyers Alert Executive Director Rommy Mom said: “The Nigerian government’s responses to the protests have undermined the rule of law. Groups and persons should not be afraid to approach the Judicial Panels of Inquiry to lay their grievance towards identification of culpable SARS officers for appropriate sanctions and the compensation of victims.” The organizations recall that under international law, the use of lethal force by law enforcement officials is permissible only when strictly necessary to protect life.
Police in the SARS unit are credibly alleged to be responsible for a widespread practice of torture and other serious human rights violations.
In addition to ending these violent attacks on protestors, the ICJ and Lawyers Alert call on the Nigerian government to address the demands of protestors and embark on comprehensive reform of the police, with emphasis on oversight functions, tethering oversight to civil society groups, the National Human Rights Commission and the constitutional oversight body of the Nigeria police.
“These protests have gained momentum outside Nigeria and have extended beyond the local borders to Ghana, United Kingdom and South Africa. The world’s attention is currently on Nigeria, as the global support for protestors rise amidst further police brutality. The Nigerian government must ensure that it respects and protects the human rights of all in accordance with its obligations under international law,” added Ramjathan-Keogh.
Background
Founded in 1992, the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) was mandated to “investigate cases involving armed robbery and kidnapping”. However, since its inception, there have been widespread complaints by Nigerians about the conduct of SARS This year Amnesty International issued a report, documenting at least 82 cases of torture, ill treatment and extra-judicial execution by SARS during the period of January 2017 and May 2020
In addition to the ICCPR, Nigeria is party to the UN Convention against Torture and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (African Charter), which guarantees the right to life under Article 4 and the right to assemble freely with others under Article 11. These rights are also respectively protected under sections 33(1) and 40 of the Nigerian Constitution.
Article 6 of the ICCPR prohibits the arbitrary deprivation of life.
Principle 9 of the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials affirm that:
Law enforcement officials shall not use firearms against persons except in self-defence or defence of others against the imminent threat of death or serious injury, to prevent the perpetration of a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life, to arrest a person presenting such a danger and resisting their authority, or to prevent his or her escape, and only when less extreme means are insufficient to achieve these objectives. In any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life.
Contact
Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Director of ICJ’s Africa Regional Programme, c: +27845148039, e: kaajal.keogh(a)icj.org
Tanveer Jeewa, Communications Officer, tanveer.jeewa(a)icj.org
Homepage photo credit: Tshwanelo Mathwai
Oct 6, 2020 | News
The Tunisian Parliament should amend or reject the revised Draft Organic Law No. 25-2015 on the protection of security forces scheduled for discussion in Parliament today, said the ICJ. The Law if adopted would reinforce impunity for violations committed by security forces and undermine the rule of law and human rights.
The revised Draft Law was approved by the Parliamentary Commission in July 2020, following unsuccessful attempts to adopt it in 2015 and 2017.
Article 7 of the Draft Law provides for the exoneration of security forces from criminal responsibility for using lethal force to repel attacks on a security building, when the force is necessary and proportional to the danger posed to the building. In 2017, the ICJ and other organizations urged Parliament to reject a prior draft which included the same provision.
“More than 10 years after the uprising, Tunisia’s security forces continue to enjoy impunity for decades of serious human rights violations,” said Said Benarbia, the ICJ’s MENA Programme Director.
“The Parliament should adopt all the effective measures at its disposal to end such impunity, not entrench it by allowing the use of lethal force when it’s not strictly necessary to protect lives.”
Article 7 of the Draft Law would preserve the operation of Law No. 69-04, which permits the use of firearms to defend property, “mitigate” a resistance, or stop a vehicle or other form of transport in the context of public meetings, processions, parades, public gatherings, and assemblies. It allows for the use of lethal force to disperse an unlawful gathering where other means of dispersal have failed.
Under international law, including the United Nations Basic Principles on the Use of Force, the intentional use of lethal force must be reasonable, necessary and proportional, and is only permissible if strictly necessary to protect life from an imminent threat to life, not a threat to property.
In the context of non-violent assemblies, the use of force should be avoided and, where unavoidable, restricted to the minimum extent necessary against only those individuals posing an imminent threat of death or serious injury.
The Draft Law appears to preserve an exemption under article 42 of the Criminal Code and Article 46 of Law No. 82-70 on the Statute of Internal Security Forces of 6 August 1982. Article 42 of the Criminal Code provides that a person is not liable for crimes under the Criminal Code, including homicide, if their acts were carried out pursuant to other laws or orders from a competent authority. Article 46 of Law No. 82-70 limits this immunity in relation to orders given to officers of the Internal Security Forces by requiring the orders be given “by their superior in the framework of legality.” Under international law, superior orders cannot serve as a ground of defence to a crime of unlawful killing by a State agent, such as a member of a security force.
“The Tunisian Parliament should reject the Draft Law and conduct a complete review of all laws regulating the conduct of the security forces to ensure they meet standards necessary to protect the population from the excesses demonstrated in the past,” said Kate Vigneswaran, the ICJ’s MENA Programme Senior Legal Adviser.
“Members of the Parliament should send a clear, unequivocal message that the impunity of the security forces can no longer be tolerated.”
Contact:
Said Benarbia, Director, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Kate Vigneswaran, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +31-62-489-4664; e: kate.vigneswaran(a)icj.org
Tunisia-draft law security forces-News-2020-ARA (story in Arabic, PDF)
Sep 30, 2020 | Events, News
For decades, victims of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings in Latin America have been demanding justice, truth, and reparations. Despite these efforts, impunity remains rampant. In some cases, victims have been waiting for justice for over four decades.
As a part of its strategy to promote accountability for serious human rights violations around the world, the ICJ, together with partners, is implementing a regional project to address justice for extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Colombia, Guatemala, and Peru, supported by the European Union.
One of the results of the project has been to support the production of three case dossiers by the ICJ’s local partners.
In Colombia, to illustrate one of the patterns of extrajudicial killings, the Asociación de Red Defensores y Defensoras de Derechos Humanos (dhColombia) produced a document concerning three cases of extrajudicial killings committed during 2006 and 2008.
The report Una práctica sistemática ejecuciones extrajudiciales en el eje cafetero (2006-2008) presents the challenges the victims and their lawyers have faced when seeking responsibility for those crimes.
In Peru, the Instituto de Defensa Legal (IDL) documented the enforced disappearances of university students and professors between 1989 to 1993, at the height of the internal conflict. In the report Los desaparecidos de la Universidad Nacional del Centro IDL describes the difficult legal path victims have faced in order to bring state agents suspected of committing crimes to justice.
In Guatemala, to highlight the manner in which enforced disappearances were committed against rural communities during the internal armed conflict, the Asociación de Familiares de Detenidos-Desaparecidos de Guatemala (Famdegua) wrote about the enforced disappearance of more than 500 people in the region of the Veparaces. In the report Las desapariciones forzadas en la región de las Verapaces the story of five cases is presented.
These three reports contribute towards understanding the prevalence of these violations in Latin America, and the available options to tackle impunity.
On 30 September 2020, the ICJ will host a regional webinar to discuss the protection and guarantee of the rights of victims of enforced disappearances and extrajudicial executions in Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Guatemala and Peru.
The webinar will be broadcast live on the ICJ’s Facebook page, at 14 hours (Guatemala time)/15 hours (Colombia and Peru time)/ 17 hours (Chile and Argentina time).
Contact
Kingsley Abbott, Coordinator of the Global Accountability Initiative, e: kingsley.abbott@icj.org
Carolina Villadiego Burbano, Legal and Policy Adviser, Latin America and Regional Coordinator of the Project, e: carolina.villadiego@icj.org
Rocío Quintero M, Legal Adviser, Latin America, e: rocio.quintero@icj.org
Sep 14, 2020 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
In a statement to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva, the ICJ has welcomed the report of the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar (IIMM)
The oral statement was delivered in an interactive dialogue with the IIMM, and read as follows:
“The ICJ salutes the Mechanism in setting up the necessary infrastructure for its operation despite the challenges brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the lack of genuine and independent domestic investigation and prosecution of serious human rights violations in Myanmar, the efficient establishment of the Mechanism is welcomed.
The ICJ shares its concern over the Government of Myanmar’s lack of cooperation with the Mechanism. The ICJ recalls Myanmar’s obligation to ensure accountability for serious human rights violations occurring in Myanmar, including, but not limited to, the acts against ethnic Rohingya that were the subject of the report of the Government-appointed Independent Commission of Enquiry.
Given the Mechanism’s mandate to gather and preserve evidence of any serious human rights violations committed in Myanmar from 2011 to the present, the ICJ underscores the need to investigate the widely reported accounts of killings, serious physical injury, mass displacement and destruction of property in various parts of Rakhine and Chin states in the context of the ongoing conflict between Myanmar and the Arakan Army. The Myanmar Government still refuses to hold a ceasefire despite the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in Rakhine. The parties to the conflict must be held accountable for any violation of international human rights and humanitarian law.
The ICJ would like to ask: how can States and inter-governmental organizations strengthen support for the mandate?”
For more information, contact: Kingsley Abbott, kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
