Zimbabwe:  the Human Rights Commission must be reconstituted to allow it carry out its work

Zimbabwe:  the Human Rights Commission must be reconstituted to allow it carry out its work

The ICJ today urged the country’s authorities to take immediate measures to fully reconstitute the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission (ZHRC) after its operations were effectively suspended following the expiry of the terms of office of four of its Commissioners on 7 May 2020.

One Commissioner had already resigned in 2018 meaning that the ZHRC no longer has the constitutionally required quorum for it to make certain decisions that are fundamental to the protection of human rights in Zimbabwe.

“The inability by the ZHRC to fully execute its constitutional mandate has serious implications on the ability of individuals -in particular victims of human rights violations -to access justice,” said Arnold Tsunga, Director of the ICJ Africa Programme.

“The role of ZHRC, as Zimbabwe’s national human rights institution is critical in providing an avenue for redress to victims of human rights violations and the general public,” he added.

Zimbabwe has been witnessing an escalation of human rights violations requiring investigation by a fully functioning and effective Commission.

This spate of human rights violations has had a disproportionate impact on the poor and economically vulnerable in the context of the Covid-19 lockdown measures.

There have been an increase in targeting of human rights defenders, civil society leaders and political opposition, which have included acts of enforced disappearance and torture and other ill-treatment.

The ICJ underlined that while redress for such violations required strong and independent judiciary as a guarantor of human rights, the role of fully functional ZHRC was critical to complement that of the judiciary.

The ICJ  called upon the authorities in Zimbabwe, and in particular the Parliamentary Committee on Standing Rules and Orders, to act expeditiously to ensure that the vacant positions are filled without any further delay to enable the ZHRC effectively perform and discharge its constitutional mandate.

The ICJ said that failure by the responsible authorities to act expeditiously to fill the vacant positions violated the core values and principles the Constitution of  Zimbabwe, in particular  section 324 of the Constitution which provides that “all constitutional obligations must be performed diligently and without delay”.

In addition, the President to fill in any vacant position within three months of death or resignation of a Commissioner. The position of Commissioner Khombe became vacant on the 30 October 2018, and has not been filled to date.

Additional Information

The ZHRC is established as an independent institution under Chapter 12 of the Zimbabwe constitution with the general objective to “support and entrench human rights and democracy; to promote constitutionalism; to promote transparency and accountability in public institutions; to secure the observance of democratic values and principles by the State and all institutions and agencies of government, and government-controlled entities;  and to ensure that injustices are remedied.”

On 26 May  the Chairperson of the ZHRC, Dr. E.H Mugwadi, wrote a letter notifying “partners and stakeholders” of the retirement of four Commissioners, namely Dr Ellen Sithole (former Deputy Chairperson), Dr Joseph Kurebwa, Kwanele M. Jirira and Japhet Ndabeni-Ncube with effect from 7 May.  The Chairperson noted that the retirement had left the Commission lacking the quorum to fulfil its constitutional obligations, particularly with respect to make policy resolutions and the adoption of monitoring and investigation reports. The Commission had also been unable to adopt Commission reports its activities.

International standards for effective and credible National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) are contained in the United Nations Principles relating to the Status of National Institutions (Paris Principles), which provide that NHRIs must be adequately resourced with sufficient institutional capacity to perform and discharge their responsibilities.

Contact:

Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Africa Director, t: +263 777 283 249; e-mail: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org

Blessing Gorejena, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, t: +263 772 151 989, e-mail: Blessing.Gorejena(a)icj.org

 

Thailand: Six Years after Billy’s enforced disappearance, there has been no real progress towards accountability

Thailand: Six Years after Billy’s enforced disappearance, there has been no real progress towards accountability

On the sixth anniversary of the apparent enforced disappearance of Karen activist, Pholachi “Billy” Rakchongcharoen, the ICJ repeated its calls for Thailand to bring those responsible to justice and apply appropriate penalties that take into account the extreme seriousness of the crime.

On 23 December 2019, after the Thai Ministry of Justice’s Department of Special Investigation (DSI) in September had located bone fragments which they identified as likely belonging to Billy, eight charges, including premeditated murder and concealing the body, were brought against four officials of Kaeng Krachan National Park, with whom Billy was last seen. However, in January 2020, public prosecutors suddenly dropped seven murder-related charges against the four accused on the basis that there was insufficient evidence to take the cases to trial.

“It is disturbing that after six years the prosecutors could not move forward with the prosecution because the authorities failed to gather evidence to identify the perpetrator for Billy’s murder despite the discovery of bone fragments,” said Frederick Rawski, Asia Regional Director of the ICJ. “Thai authorities should, pursuant to its international legal obligations, continue to gather other direct and circumstantial evidence to prosecute and punish perpetrator with appropriate penalties.”

The four suspects are now facing only a minor charge for failing to exercise their official functions because they released Billy instead of handing him over to the police after they took him into custody in April 2014 for collecting wild honey in the park.

“Thailand needs to implement legislation criminalizing enforced disappearance without delay so that prosecutors have the appropriate tools to prosecute those responsible, and are not forced to bring charges for crimes of lesser gravity,” he added.

Download the statement with detailed background information in English and Thai.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia-Pacific Director, t: +66 64 478 1121; e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

Further reading

Thailand: discovery of “Billy’s” remains should reinvigorate efforts to identify perpetrator(s)

Thailand: continuing delay in the enactment of the draft law on torture and enforced disappearance undermines access to justice and accountability

Accountability and Myanmar: dialogue with UN Special Rapporteur

Accountability and Myanmar: dialogue with UN Special Rapporteur

The ICJ today spoke in the final interactive dialogue with the current UN Special Rapporteur on human rights in Myanmar, at the Human Rights Council in Geneva.

The statement read as follows:

“The ICJ salutes what the current Special Rapporteur has achieved in the mandate despite withdrawal of cooperation by the Government, and shares the concerns expressed in this final report (A/HRC/43/59), particularly the urgent need to establish peace and security in Rakhine State without compromising human rights law and international criminal accountability for gross human rights violations.

The ICJ recalls the obligations of Myanmar under international human rights law. The Government must ensure that human rights are not violated in the context of conflict with the Arakan Army. The longstanding internet shutdown in Rakhine and Chin States must be ended. Due process rights of persons arrested must be respected.

The ICJ also welcomes the Order of provisional measures in the case brought by The Gambia at the International Court of Justice. Myanmar must comply and prevent further acts of genocide.

The Myanmar Government must also ensure accountability for mass atrocities. In a briefing paper last year, the ICJ proposed Constitutional, legislative and institutional reform of Myanmar’s National Human Rights Commission to enable it to independently and effectively investigate allegations of human rights violations. The Myanmar Government should also cooperate with the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar and the International Criminal Court.

The ICJ would like to ask: based on your experience in the mandate, how can States best strengthen support for the mandate and the various international accountability initiatives underway?”

Justice & accountability for crimes under international law in Sri Lanka

Justice & accountability for crimes under international law in Sri Lanka

At the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ today urged renewed international action to ensure justice and accountability for crimes under international law in Sri Lanka.

The statement, delivered during a discussion of updates and reports from the High Commissioner for Human Rights, read as follows:

“The ICJ deeply regrets the Sri Lankan Government’s withdrawal of support for the process under resolutions 30/1 and 40/1. ICJ supports the joint statement read by IMADR.

The Sri Lankan legal system and judicial institutions have for decades demonstrated a chronic inability to address systemic and entrenched impunity for crimes under international law perpetrated by the military and security forces.[1] The new President’s promises to protect the military from accountability, and senior command appointments of individuals credibly accused of crimes under international law, only deepen the concern.

As the High Commissioner notes,[2] the failure to deal comprehensively with impunity and to reform institutions may lead to more human rights violations.

The Tamil population have consistently and rightly rejected any reconciliation process that ignores justice and accountability, and it is obvious that no justice or accountability process that is left to domestic Sri Lankan institutions alone can be credible. The compromise national-international “hybrid” judicial accountability mechanism foreseen by resolution 30/1 already fell far short of what the situation actually warrants.

If the Government seeks now to abandon even that compromise, purely international processes, whether before the ICC or through creation of another international accountability mechanism by the Council, and the exercise of universal jurisdiction by other States, are the only remaining options for securing the justice required by international law and indispensable to any credible reconciliation process for Sri Lanka.”

[1] International Commission of Jurists, Authority without Accountability: The Crisis of Impunity in Sri Lanka, 2012, https://www.icj.org/sri-lanka-new-icj-report-documents-crisis-of-impunity/; Human Rights Council must respond to ongoing failure of Sri Lankan justice system to ensure accountability for human rights violations, 2014, https://www.icj.org/human-rights-council-must-respond-to-ongoing-failure-of-sri-lankan-justice-system-to-ensure-accountability-for-human-rights-violations/; Sri Lanka: the need for an international inquiry, 2014, https://www.icj.org/sri-lanka-the-need-for-an-international-inquiry/; Sri Lanka: Joint Open Letter to the Ambassadors of UN Human Rights Council Member States, 2015, https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/SriLanka-JointOpenLetter-Accountability-Advocacy-2015.pdf; Sri Lanka’s victims demand and deserve credible justice, 2016, https://www.icj.org/sri-lankas-victims-demand-and-deserve-credible-justice/.

[2] UN Doc A/HRC/43/19, para 36.

Myanmar: Why law reform is urgent and possible (UN statement)

Myanmar: Why law reform is urgent and possible (UN statement)

The ICJ today urged law reforms to address discrimination against minorities in Myanmar, during an interactive dialogue with the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights on her report on Rohingya and other minorities in Myanmar, at the Human Rights Council in Geneva.

The statement read as follows:

“The ICJ welcomes the report of the High Commissioner,[1] delivered against the background of continuing ethnic armed conflict in Myanmar.

With over 50 years’ experience monitoring and documenting Myanmar’s human rights situation, the ICJ concurs with the High Commissioner’s conclusions and recommendations.

While the root causes of violations and abuses against the Rohingya and other persecuted minorities in Myanmar may be complex, as the Fact-Finding Mission already reported to the Council in September 2018, the steps required to address them are by now “well known”.[2]

One essential step is comprehensive legal and justice sector reform within the country.

In a briefing paper last year, the ICJ recommended three immediately achievable, concrete areas of law reform available to the Government: 1) legislative reform, including most urgently of the 1982 Citizenship Law; 2) Constitutional reform, to protect the right of citizens to full political participation; and 3) interim measures to address discrimination on the basis of race or ethnicity.

At the same time, it is imperative the international community continues to support the various international accountability efforts underway, including the work of the International Criminal Court and Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar.

The ICJ would like to ask: what role do you see for States and civil society in relation to monitoring and implementation of your recommendations, particularly with respect to law and justice sector reform?”

[1] UN Doc A/HRC/43/18

[2] UN Doc A/HRC/39/64 (12 September 2018), para 102.

Translate »