At the launch of a report on companies’ practices to address complaints relating to their negative impacts on human rights, the ICJ said that many companies have failed to establish and implement effective operational-level grievance mechanisms (OGMs).
Nepal has made no real progress on questions of justice, truth and reparations for victims of gross human rights violations and abuses during its 10-year conflict, the ICJ, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch (HRW) and TRIAL International said today.
The Comprehensive Peace Agreement to end the war was signed on November 21, 2006.
While two commissions have been set up to address conflict-era atrocities, they have not been effective and impunity and denial of access to justice to victims remain prevalent. The four human rights organizations are particularly concerned about the recent moves that suggest that the government will go forward with the appointing of commissioners without making necessary reforms to the legal framework.
“Last week marked the 13th anniversary of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement that ended the conflict in Nepal. It is astonishing that so little progress has been made in responding to the clearly articulated concerns and demands of conflict victims,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia-Pacific Director. “These demands have included a transparent and consultative process for the appointment of commissioners, and a genuine good-faith effort by political leaders and lawmakers to address serious weaknesses in the existing legal framework.”
On November 18, a five-member committee formed by the government to recommend names for commissioners to be appointed to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Commission on the Investigation of Enforced Disappearances published a list of candidates. Concerns have been raised by victims and civil society that the government will simply re-appoint past commissioners or make political appointments that will not be adequately impartial and independent.
“It is deeply disappointing that the government has repeatedly attempted to appoint the commissioners without adequate consultation and transparency . The commissions will not gain the trust of the victims and the international community if the political parties continue to interfere in the appointment process,” said Biraj Patnaik, South Asia Director at Amnesty International.
Importantly, the move suggests that the commissions will be re-constituted without amending the legal framework governing the transitional justice process and ensuring its compliance with Nepal’s international human rights law obligations, as directed by Nepal’s Supreme Court and demanded by civil society and victims.
Victims and civil society organizations have issued public statement making it clear that they oppose any appointments prior to the amendment of the legal framework. Notably, the National Human Rights Commission, in its statement commemorating 13th Anniversary of CPA, stated that “…the commission will not support any decision, work or activities that might hurt the sensitivity of the conflict victims…”.
“The government’s move has not only undermined victims’ role in the transitional justice process, but has also once again brought into question its commitment to uphold its international law obligations and ensuring justice for conflict-era crimes,” said Tomás Ananía, TRIAL International’s Nepal Program Manager.
The ICJ, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and TRIAL International have repeatedly expressed concern that effective transitional justice mechanisms require strong legal foundations consistent with international law and good practices, and the political will to address the concerns of victims of the conflict. All four organisations reiterated their calls to amend the the 2014 Transitional Justice Act to make it consistent with the Supreme Court’s rulings and international human rights standards, as well as for the initiation of a genuine consultative and transparent process for the appointment of commissioners.
Concerns raised about the existing, and proposed, legal frameworks include: disparities between the definitions of specific crimes under international law and human rights obligations and violations under national, and international law; inadequate provisions to ensure that serious crimes under international law are subject to criminal accountability (including punishment proportionate to the seriousness of the crimes); and a reliance on compensation at the expense of other forms of reparation and remedy for conflict survivors and their families.
Under the principle of universal jurisdiction states may make it possible for their domestic criminal justice system to investigate and prosecute crimes such as torture, committed by any person, anywhere in the world.
This means that a citizen of any country, including Nepal, suspected of such crimes faces the risk of arrest and prosecution for these crimes in countries that apply universal jurisdiction. This is more likely if the Nepali authorities do not appear able and willing to prosecute those responsible for such crimes, the organizations said.
“After initial pledges to ensure truth, justice, and reparations for conflict victims, it appears that the government is once again determined to protect those responsible for the crimes,” said Meenakshi Ganguly, South Asia director at Human Rights Watch. “The international community should remind Nepal that whitewashing egregious crimes will not help to dodge universal jurisdiction.”
Contact:
Download the complete press-release in English and Nepali. (PDF)
On 29-30 October the ICJ, in partnership with dhColombia and the Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team (EAAF), hosted a two-day training workshop in Bogotá on the legal framework around enforced disappearance and extrajudicial killings.
The training aimed to improve the understanding of victims and human rights lawyers of the domestic law on extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Colombia. It included an analysis of both the ordinary justice system, as well as transitional justice mechanisms. It also explored the role of the forensic sciences in tackling impunity for those crimes.
The ICJ in furtherance of its objective to promote accountability, justice and the rule of law in Colombia, has been continuously monitoring the investigation and prosecution of serious human rights violations and abuses, particularly extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances. Perpetrators of such violations, which constitute crimes under international law, have enjoyed a high level of impunity. While there are numerous unresolved cases dating back to the 1970s, violations have continued even after a comprehensive peace agreement was signed in 2016 following decades of armed conflict.
In Colombia, achieving accountability for those crimes has proven difficult for several reasons, including the ineffective functioning of the justice system. Victims and their lawyers have faced serious obstacles in gaining access to effective remedies. In addition, the creation of new institutions by the Peace Agreement has changed some basic rules and procedures for the investigation and prosecution of those crimes. Consequently, the Colombian justice system is more complicated to understand not only for victims but for lawyers.
The training workshop was part of a broader regional project addressing justice for extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances in Colombia, Guatemala and Peru. Participants were victims and human rights lawyers from different regions of the country, especially those where that is less opportunity to access legal and forensic training. Considering that capacity building activities are essential to the effective achievement of accountability, it is expected that participants of the training will obtain valuable tools to demand justice and remedy and reparations for serious human rights violations.
Contacts:
Rocío Quintero M, Legal Adviser, Latin America. Email: rocio.quintero(a)icj.org
Carolina Villadiego, ICJ Legal and Policy Adviser, Latin America, and Regional Coordinator of the Project. Email: carolina.villadiego(a)icj.org
Today, ICJ called on Turkey to comply with its obligations under the UN Charter, international humanitarian law and international human rights law, immediately end its military operations in Syria, and protect and ensure the protection of the Syrian civilian population.
The ICJ also reiterated its call on all parties to the Syrian conflict to respect and comply with international humanitarian law and international human rights law.
On October 9, Turkey initiated operation “Peace Spring” in Rojava, the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF)-held territory in north-east Syria, with the stated aim of securing Turkey’s border, “fighting terrorism” and facilitating the return of refugees to Syria. Turkey claimed to be acting pursuant to its right to self-defence under article 51 of the UN Charter, as well as UN Security Council resolutions on the fight against terrorism.
The ICJ recalled that none of these UN Security Council resolutions authorizes the use of armed force in violation of international law, and that the UN Charter prohibits the use of armed force by States, save when authorized by the UN Security Council or in self-defence.
Use of force in self-defence is lawful only when necessary to repel an armed attack and when proportionate to such attack. Military operations failing to abide by such requirements are in breach of the UN Charter.
“Turkey’s military operations violate the UN Charter and exemplify how the banalization of the illegal use of armed force continues to erode and dismantle the very fabric of the international legal order,” said Said Benarbia, the ICJ MENA Programme Director.
He added, “Instead of standing by while international law is being violated, the UN Security Council must take swift, appropriate measures to address the situation and to restore and maintain international peace and security.”
While UN Security Council member States have failed to find an agreement on even a statement on Turkey’s military operations in Syria, Turkish military operations continue to have a devastating impact on the general population, including multiple civilian casualties, attacks against civilian objects, including medical facilities and water supplies and infrastructure, and the displacement of more than 150,000 people, mainly civilians.
Turkish forces and the Turkish-backed armed groups have allegedly been responsible for violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law. Members of one of these groups, the Ahrar Al-Sharqiya, have been accused of the extrajudicial execution of at least nine civilians, among whom is Kurdish politician and women’s rights activist Harvin Khalaf; torture and other ill-treatment; kidnapping; and looting and seizure of private property.
Turkey’s Defence Ministry said 595 “terrorists” were “neutralized” since the start of “Peace Spring.”
Under international humanitarian law, parties to an armed conflict must respect and protect the civilian population, and refrain from any direct, indiscriminate or disproportionate attack against civilians and civilian objects. International human rights law also continues to apply during the conflict.
“Turkish authorities must investigate and prosecute unlawful killings committed in the context of operation “Peace Spring,” including extrajudicial executions amounting to war crimes,” Benarbia said.
He added, “If no action is taken by these authorities, States must act, collectively and individually, to hold to account all those responsible for such crimes.”
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Syria-Turkey operations-News-Press releases-2019-ARA (Arabic version, in PDF)
Syria-Turkey operations-News-Press releases-2019-TUR (Turkish version, in PDF)
Today begins in Izmir (Turkey) a one-day workshop for lawyers and CSO practitioners on the use and strategies of UN mechanisms and of their decisions in domestic courts.
This event is organized by ICJ, in cooperation with its partners Kapasite Geliştirme Derneği and Human Rights Joint Platform, as part a/the EU co-financed project Rebuilding and Ensuring Access to justice with civil society in Turkey.
30 lawyers and civil society practitioners are taking part in the workshop on 12 October in Izmir.
The workshop aims at discussing the functioning of the UN human rights mechiansms (treaty bodies and charter-based bodies) as well as their follow up procedures and the implementation of their decisions in the domestic legal framework in Turkey.
The workshop will provide presentations on the functioning of UN mechanisms by international expert, including from OHCHR, on the value of UN decisions under Turkish law, as well as discussions and brainstorming on how to use UN decisions in Turkey.
The project is funded by the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) of the European Union.
Turkey-Workshop-Agenda-UNmechanisms-Izmir-2019-eng (download the agenda in English)
Turkey-Workshop-Agenda-UNmechanisms-Izmir-2019-tur (download the agenda in Turkish)
The International Commission of Jurists Welcomes Our New Commissioners
Lebanon: Ensure draft media law upholds free expression
Nepal: Protesters Demand Integrity, Rights, Rule of Law
India: Joint statement urging Indian authorities to immediately and unconditionally release human rights defender and student activist Umar Khalid