Dec 17, 2018 | Communiqués de presse, Nouvelles
A l’occasion de la Conférence de clôture de l’Instance Vérité Dignité (IVD), les organisations de la société civile félicitent l’Instance qui a abouti à l’achèvement de ses travaux, malgré un contexte politique manifestement hostile au processus.
Aussi, les organisations signataires dénoncent fermement l’absence des trois Présidences au pouvoir à ce rendez-vous historique pour le pays.
Lire la totalité de l’article ci-dessous:
Tunisia-Truth and Dignity Commission Tunisia-News-Press Release-2018-FRE (version française, PDF)
Tunisia-Truth and Dignity Commission Tunisia-News-Press Release-2018-ARA (version arabe, PDF)
Dec 14, 2018 | News
Today, on the sixth anniversary of the disappearance of Lao civil society leader Sombath Somphone, the ICJ joined 106 organizations and 37 individuals in a joint statement calling for an independent, impartial and effective investigation to reveal his fate and whereabouts.
The statement read as follows:
14 December 2018: On the eve of the sixth anniversary of the enforced disappearance of Lao civil society leader Sombath Somphone, we, the undersigned organizations, reiterate our calls for the Lao government to conduct an independent, impartial and effective investigation to reveal his fate and whereabouts.
Sombath was last seen at a police checkpoint on a busy street of the Lao capital, Vientiane, on the evening of 15 December 2012.
Footage from a CCTV camera showed that Sombath’s vehicle was stopped at the police checkpoint and, within minutes, individuals forced him into another vehicle and drove him away in the presence of police officers. CCTV footage also showed an unknown individual driving Sombath’s vehicle away from the city center.
The fact that police officers were present at and witnessed Sombath’s abduction and failed to intervene strongly indicates state agents’ involvement in, or acquiescence to, human rights violations committed against Sombath, which include the crime of enforced disappearance.
Later that evening, witnesses reportedly saw Sombath at a police holding facility in Vientiane yet to date officials have provided no information about what he was doing there and subsequently what happened to him.
For the last six years, the Lao government has failed to provide any credible answers with regard to the disappearance of Sombath Somphone.
In its most recent pronouncements, made during the review of Laos’ initial report by the Human Rights Committee (CCPR) in July 2018, the Lao government said it had been “trying very hard” to investigate Sombath’s fate and whereabouts.
However, this statement has been contradicted by the government’s refusal to accept international assistance in conducting the investigation and to provide any details about the progress of its investigation.
Lao authorities have failed to disclose any new findings from their investigation of Sombath’s case to the public since 8 June 2013 and have met with his wife, Shui Meng Ng, only twice since January 2013.
Despite the government’s recent claim that police had the “capacity and techniques” to reveal Sombath’s fate and whereabouts, we remain extremely concerned by the lack of progress in the investigation by Lao authorities into his case and reiterate our call for Vientiane to allow international assistance towards conducting an independent, impartial and thorough investigation according to international law and standards.
The Lao authorities have international legal obligations to conduct such investigations and to bring persons responsible for serious violations to justice under treaties to which they are party, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture.
We also urge the Lao government to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, which Laos signed in September 2008, to incorporate the Convention’s provisions into the country’s domestic legislation, and implement it in practice.
Until Sombath Somphone’s fate and whereabouts are revealed, we will not stop demanding that Sombath be safely returned to his family and we will continue to ask the Lao government: “Where is Sombath?”
Laos-SombathSomphoneDisappearance-Advocacy-JointStatement-ENG-2018 (full statement, including list of signatories, PDF in English)
Dec 12, 2018 | Events, News
On 12 December 2018, the ICJ co-organized a panel discussion at Bangkok Art and Culture Center (BACC) in Thailand marking the 6th anniversary of the evident enforced disappearance of prominent Lao civil society leader Sombath Somphone.
The panel discussion was co-organized with the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR) and Forum Asia.
On 15 December 2012, Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) footage taken by police cameras near a police checkpoint in Vientiane, Lao PDR, appeared to show that Sombath Somphone was abducted at the checkpoint by, or with the consent or acquiescence of, agents of the State. He has not been seen since.
Six years after his abduction, Laotian authorities have repeatedly failed to provide meaningful information as to his fate or whereabouts, or conduct an independent, impartial and effective investigation towards determining his fate. The last police report on his case was issued on 8 June 2013.
In light of the 6th anniversary, the panel discussion considered what further steps could be taken to continue advocacy on his case and spoke about regional implications and responses.
The panelists were:
- Ng Shui-Meng, Wife of Sombath Somphone;
- Edmund Bon, Lawyer, Malaysia’s Representative to the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights;
- Premrudee Daoroung, Project SEVANA’s South-East Asia Coordinator;
- Charles Santiago, Malaysian Member of Parliament.
The panel was moderated by the Andrea Giorgetta from the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH).
Nov 30, 2018 | News
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) together with the Council of Europe and the Azerbaijan Bar Association held the international conference on the independence of the legal profession in Azerbaijan on 15-16 November 2018.
The conference on the Role and Independence of Lawyers brought together comparative perspectives from countries of the Council of Europe region and Central Asia as well as from international organizations. Representatives of bar associations and individual lawyers from Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, the Netherlands, the Russian Federation, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Kingdom and Uzbekistan shared their experiences and best practices in addressing challenges to the independence of lawyers.
The ICJ considers the conference to be a landmark event which has created much-needed space for further dialogue on the issue of independence of lawyers in Azerbaijan both with the national and international stakeholders.
The ICJ appreciates the engagement of the Azerbaijan Bar Association and the open debate on these issues at the conference, as a step towards implementation of its previous recommendations that the Bar Association “should initiate, through a consultative process, an internal reform based on the principles of independence of the profession, high standards of legal practice, the protection of lawyers from threats, harassment and hindrance in their work, and the democratic participation of its members.” Defenseless Defenders: Systemic Problems in the Legal Profession of Azerbaijan
The ICJ stresses the need for the Azerbaijan authorities to respect both the institutional independence of the legal profession, and the individual independence of lawyers, in accordance with the international standards outlined at the conference and in the above-mentioned report. Decisions of competent international human rights authorities, including the European Court of the Human Rights, in cases concerning the rights of lawyers, must be implemented in full.
The ICJ looks forward to future dialogue and co-operation with the Azerbaijan Bar Association and other concerned stakeholders in Azerbaijan on the essential elements of an independent legal profession, including as regards lawyers’ professional ethics, qualification of lawyers and the disciplinary system. The new impetus for international engagement on these issues creates room for discussing the most acute institutional challenges and individual cases where the independence of the legal profession may be at stake.
Speaking at the Conference, Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme said that “the requirement of independence places responsibilities not only on the bar association itself but also on the executive and legislative powers to respect this independence, refrain from interference, and put in place – and respect in practice – appropriate legislative and institutional safeguards.”
Participants underscored problems relating to the ethical responsibilities of lawyers and their enforcement in disciplinary proceedings, in particular as regards potential friction with the exercise of freedom of expression of lawyers.
Temur Shakirov, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, focused on the independence of lawyers as an ethical requirement of individual lawyers, saying that “Independence is an essential principle both for the bar association as an institution and for an individual lawyer. It is known that the institutional independence of the legal profession should be ensured, in accordance with international standards, both in law and in practice. However, the independence of lawyers is also an ethical requirement for each lawyer.”
Henry Reznik, Vice-President of the Federal Chamber of Lawyers of the Russian Federation, stressed in his presentation that “the primary role of the association of lawyers is to protect their [lawyers’] independence and freedom.” He added that “Advokatura is an institute of the civil society. Advokatura is not part of the State and municipal bodies. And Advokatura must have the trust of the society.”
Yuri Pilipenko, President of the Federal Chamber of Lawyers of the Russian Federation, highlighted the natural tensions between the legal profession and government, noting that “… the government and an independent self-regulating professional organization, which has goals to protect rights and freedoms and access to justice, are by definition opponents in a certain sense.”
In his concluding remarks at the Conference, Anar Baghirov, President of the Azerbaijan Bar Association, highlighted that the most crucial mission of the Bar Association was “to protect interests of lawyers and the institutionalized legal profession.”
In that regard he mentioned the need for modification of the Law on Advocates and Advocates’ Activity, stating that the most important role of the Bar Association should be reflected in the law. In addition, among other things he mentioned that issues to be addressed included the number of lawyers, increasing availability of pro bono legal aid, enhancing lawyers’ professional capacity, and cooperation with other countries’ bar associations and international organizations.
In his closing remarks at the Conference, ICJ Secretary General Sam Zarifi stressed the importance of lawyers in the protection of human rights and the rule of law. He stressed that around the world, lawyers were attacked because of their role in defence of their clients: for what they say, what the individuals they represent say, and that such attacks violate the clear prohibition of identifying lawyers with their clients.
He stressed the key role of the bar association in this regard: “To maintain the role of lawyers we have heard again and again how important it is that lawyers have the independence and an association that can pretend this independence. It is part of international law and standards and we would like that standard to be implemented around the world and of course here [in Azerbaijan]. We need bar associations, which are independent and strong to defend the independence of lawyers.”
The ICJ will continue to closely follow issues of the independence and role of lawyers in Azerbaijan. It will continue its international engagement on such matters including with UN and Council of Europe institutions, as well as with lawyers and civil society in Azerbaijan in order to facilitate the independence of lawyers, their protection from harassment and reprisals, and other key principles in line with the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.
Background information
Problems regarding independence of the legal profession in Azerbaijan were outlined in the ICJ report “Defenseless Defenders: Systemic Problems in the Legal Profession of Azerbaijan” https://www.icj.org/azerbaijan-the-independence-and-role-of-lawyers-must-be-respected-icj-report-says/
The ICJ has raised concerns regarding cases of abusive disciplinary proceedings and other threats to the independence of lawyers, including:
Cases of Democracy and Human Rights Resource Centre v. Azerbaijan and Mustafayev and Democracy and Human Rights Resource Centre v. Azerbaijan: https://www.icj.org/azerbaijan-icj-intervenes-before-european-court-of-human-rights-in-defence-of-harassed-lawyers-and-civil-society/
Azerbaijan: Lawyer Irada Javadova disbarment decided in unfair proceedings, https://www.icj.org/azerbaijan-lawyer-irada-javadova-disbarment-decided-in-unfair-proceedings/
Alayif Hasan oglu Hasanov v. Azerbaijan case: https://www.icj.org/azerbaijan-icj-intervenes-before-the-european-court-of-human-rights-in-a-case-concerning-restrictions-of-lawyers-rights/
Cases of Annagi Hajibeyli, Khalid Bagirovand Intigam Aliyev v Azerbaijan, https://www.icj.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/ICJ-Bagirovothers-AmicusBrief-Azerbaijan-2016-Final.pdf
Oct 31, 2018 | Communiqués de presse, Nouvelles
Le 25 novembre 2018, les citoyens suisses seront appelés à voter sur l’initiative populaire dite “le droit suisse au lieu de juges étrangers (initiative pour l’autodétermination)”. La Commission Internationale de Juristes (CIJ) et la Section suisse de la CIJ ont appelé aujourd’hui le peuple suisse à considérer attentivement les conséquences néfastes que pourrait avoir cette initiative si elle était adoptée.
La campagne contre l’initiative la considère en effet comme une initiative “anti-droits de l’Homme”.
“Si elle était approuvée, cette initiative rendrait plus difficile l’accès aux tribunaux suisses pour toute personne revendiquant ses droits humains”, affirme Massimo Frigo, conseiller juridique principal de la CIJ. “Le peuple suisse perdrait une défense importante contre les abus qui pourraient être commis par l’Etat ou par des privés.”
Contrairement à ce que son titre suggère, cette initiative est dirigée contre le droit international en général (à l’exception des rares règles impératives du droit international), qui inclut les traités multilatéraux internationaux ou les accords administratifs et commerciaux bilatéraux.
Ainsi, l’initiative irait manifestement à l’encontre du principe juridique fondamental de l’Etat de droit, lequel stipule que les Etats ne peuvent pas invoquer une disposition de leur droit interne pour justifier la non exécution de leurs obligations de droit international.
“La Suisse, qui accueille nombreuses institutions responsables de l’élaboration du droit international, a une longue et prestigieuse histoire en tant que promoteur du droit international. L’adoption de cette initiative nuirait gravement à la réputation de ce pays et à son leadership dans ce domaine”, ajoute Massimo Frigo.
“Le rôle accordé au droit international par la constitution suisse et la jurisprudence du Tribunal fédéral suisse est essentiel pour assurer non seulement la fidélité de la Suisse en tant qu’Etat partie des traités internationaux, mais aussi son rôle d’acteur central et de promoteur dans plusieurs domaines du droit international, comme le commerce international, ainsi que la sécurité juridique en Suisse,” déclare le professeur Marco Sassòli, Commissaire de la CIJ et membre du Comité exécutif de sa section suisse.
“Une grande partie du succès économique et diplomatique de la Suisse résulte de son adhésion et de son soutien sans faille au droit international. Des valeurs suisses essentielles telles que la neutralité ou son engagement en faveur de la protection des victimes de la guerre trouvent leurs fondement dans le droit international,” ajoute le professeur Sassòli.
Bien que son titre le laisse entendre, cette initiative n’est pas dirigée contre les “juges étrangers” mais contre la pratique des juges suisses, ceux du Tribunal fédéral, estiment la CIJ et sa Section suisse.
Selon elles, l’initiative ignore que l’auto-détermination des peuples les soumet au droit international et que la conclusion des traités n’est pas contraire à la souveraineté de l’Etat, mais en est l’expression.
Le texte de cette initiative, si approuvé, pourrait amener à l’érosion de la primauté du droit international parmi les sources du droit en Suisse, disent encore la CIJ et sa Section suisse.
Elles rejoignent les multiples ONGs, syndicats, acteurs économiques, partis politiques, Suissesses et Suisses qui veulent assurer leurs droits et ceux de toutes les personnes en Suisse, et appellent les électeurs à prendre sérieusement en considération les arguments développés ci-dessus avant d’exprimer leur vote et de ne pas baser leur décision sur la base de slogans tels que “auto-détermination”, “démocratie” ou “juges étrangers”.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, conseiller juridique pricipal, t: +41 22 979 38 05 ; e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
