Philippines: proposed amendments to the Human Security Act of 2007 a license for human rights violations

Philippines: proposed amendments to the Human Security Act of 2007 a license for human rights violations

The proposed amendments to the Philippines’ Human Security Act of 2007 (HSA) would, if adopted, give government authorities a license to commit human rights violations, said the ICJ in its submission today to the House of Representatives.

The ICJ strongly urged the House of Representatives to reconsider these proposed amendments and in the interim to allow more time for full consultation and debate on revisions of the law.

In its submission to the House of Representatives’ joint Technical Working Group (TWG) of the Committees of Public Order and Safety and National Defense and Security, the ICJ stressed that certain proposed amendments to the HSA are clearly incompatible with international human rights.

It is also incompatible with laws and standards that prohibit unfettered surveillance power and arbitrary deprivation of the right to liberty and protect the rights to privacy, information, redress, and freedom of opinion and expression.

The ICJ also expressed deep concern that the law also gives military personnel responsibility in countering terrorism, specifically to conduct surveillance on, arrest, and detain persons who are suspected of acts of terrorism.

“The proposed amendments do not address the existing flaws of the HSA. For instance, the definition of acts of terrorism under the HSA is vague and ambiguous and the proposed changes do not in any way remedy that,” said Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser with the ICJ.

The ICJ also pointed out that the proposed amendments are likely to lead to violations of the right to freedom of opinion and expression.

The proposed amendments would also impermissibly lengthen to thirty (30) days the period within which an individual may be detained without judicial warrant.

“This is clearly incompatible with the Philippines international legal obligations and constitutes arbitrary deprivation of liberty,” said Gil.

The ICJ proposes to reduce the detention period to forty-eight (48) hours or less, in compliance with international human rights laws and standards.

“The Philippine government has the undeniable duty to protect people from acts of terrorism committed by non-State actors, but it cannot use as a pretext the serious nature of terrorist acts to avoid its obligations under international human rights law,” Gil added.

Contact:

Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser, t: +662 619 8477 (ext. 206) e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org.

Cover Letter ENG (PDF): Philippines-Amendments-to-HSA-Advocacy-Cover Letter-June-2018-ENG

Full Submission ENG (PDF): Philippines-Proposed-Amendments-to-HSA-Advocacy-non-legal-Submission-June-2018-ENG

Russian Federation: police actions against a Chechen human rights defender must be investigated

Russian Federation: police actions against a Chechen human rights defender must be investigated

The ICJ is concerned at allegations that the recent arrest and detention of Oyub Titiev, the head of the Chechen branch of the Russian human rights organisation Memorial, were carried out as retaliation for his human rights activity.

The ICJ is particularly concerned at the more recent reports that family members of Oyub Titiev have had to leave Chechnya for security reasons following threats.

The ICJ calls on the Russian federal and local authorities to conduct a prompt, thorough and independent investigation into allegations that criminal charges against Oyub Titiev have been fabricated by police.

Oyub Titiev should be immediately released pending the outcome of this investigation, and measures should be taken to protect his security and that of his family.

On 9 January 2018, at 10.30, according to an official statement of the Ministry of Interior of Chechnya, Oyub Titiev’s car was stopped near Kurchaloy town to check his documents.

During a search of his car, a plastic bag with approximately 180 grams of a substance identified as marijuana was allegedly found.

Titiyev was charged with possession of a large quantity of narcotics under article 228 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. However, he has stated that the narcotics were planted and has filed a complaint with the Prosecutor’s Office to initiate an investigation into these allegations.

Oyub Titiev, the head of Memorial in Chechnya, is one of very few human rights defenders who continue their work in Chechnya despite significant obstacles and threats.

He took over this position following the murder of the former head of Memorial in Chechnya, Natalya Estemirova in 2009.

In accordance with Article 2(a) of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders (Declaration on the Right and Responsibility of Individuals, Groups and Organs of Society to Promote and Protect Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms), human rights defenders have a right to conduct human rights work individually and in association with others.

Under the same Declaration, States have a duty to take all necessary measures to ensure the protection of everyone against any violence, threats, retaliation, adverse discrimination, pressure or any other arbitrary action as a consequence of his or her legitimate activities as a human rights defender.

Threats of violence and the falsification of evidence by public officials constitute crimes under the Russian Criminal Code. Reliance in criminal proceedings on evidence falsely planted by the police or other State actors would violate international human rights law including fair trial guarantees under the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the European Convention of Human Rights.

Attacks on human rights defenders working in an extremely difficult human rights environment such as that of Chechnya, or attacks on their family members, have a chilling effect on work to defend human rights there. If further such attacks are to be prevented, individuals responsible for them must be brought to justice through a fair procedure, the ICJ stressed.

Tanzania: ICJ condemns the arbitrary detention of lawyers and human rights defenders

Tanzania: ICJ condemns the arbitrary detention of lawyers and human rights defenders

Today the ICJ expressed its grave concern at the arrest and arbitrary detention of 13 Tanzanian human rights defenders and lawyers on charges that are incompatible with international legal obligations binding on Tanzania. The ICJ has called for their immediate release.

On 17 October 2017 13 human rights defenders, some of whom are lawyers, were arrested and detained in Tanzania after participating in a legal consultation aimed at considering legal challenges to the Tanzanian government’s ban on drop-in centres serving people at risk of HIV and a ban on the importation of water-based lubricants that are an essential HIV prevention tool.

Those 13 human rights defenders are all affiliated with the Initiative for Strategic Litigation in Southern Africa (ISLA) and Tanzanian organisation Community Health Services and Advocacy (CHESA).

Though they have not been charged, they appear to be under investigation for promoting homosexuality and in terms of section 154 of the Penal Code, which prohibits having ‘carnal knowledge of any person against the order of nature’.

To date 12 of the 13 remain in custody. After initially being granted bail by the Tanzanian police services, their bail was revoked without specified reason on 20 October 2017 and the 13 continue to face the real threat of criminal prosecution.

Instead of releasing the detained on bail, on 24 October the Tanzanian police services approached a Tanzanian court seeking an order granting them permission to perform ‘medical tests’ in the form of ‘forced anal tests’.

The police sought to perform these tests on the nine men who remain in detention. These invasive and demeaning tests appear to have been aimed at obtaining evidence for their criminal prosecution for performing sexual acts with other men.

If carried out non-consensually such exams violate the prohibition against torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.

The 13 charged under archaic colonial-era criminal laws that prohibit ‘carnal knowledge against the order of nature’, and which criminalize consensual sexual conduct between consenting males a sentence of ‘imprisonment for life and … for a term of not less than thirty years’, in contravention of international standards.

The laws, which are inherently abusive under any circumstance, do not even appear to be in any way applicable the 13 persons who were meeting for purposes of HIV prevention and promoting the right to health and the right to life.

The ICJ is concerned that arrests have been undertaken in contravention of rights protected under the Tanzanian Constitution and international law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights, treaties to which Tanzania is party.

The protected rights include freedom of expression, the right to liberty, including freedom from arbitrary deprivation of liberty and the right to equal protection of the law; and the right to non-discrimination.

If they are carried out, any ‘forced anal tests’ would violate the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

In addition, the ICJ has previously denounced such tests as evidentially and medically worthless.

Tanzanian authorities also appear to be attempting to use this prosecution to clamp down on the activities of civil society organizations.

The registration of CHESA has been suspended in what appears to be an attempt to halt its operations.

This amounts to a violation of the right to freedom of association, which is protected by the Tanzanian Constitution, the African Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

The ICJ urges the authorities to drop the charges against these 13 human rights defenders. Pending revocation or dismissal of the charges, the 12 remaining detainees should in any event be immediately released.

The ICJ condemns the attempts of the Tanzanian police services to perform forced anal tests on male detainees, which constitute ill-treatment under international law, and urges the authorities to immediately desist from this course of action.

Contact:

Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Director of the Africa Regional Programme, t: +27716405926, e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org

Tanzania-Statement illegal detention-News-Web Stories-2017-ENG (full statement with additional information, in PDF)

Trump is new breed of ‘authoritarian populist’

Trump is new breed of ‘authoritarian populist’

An interview of ICJ Secretary General Sam Zarifi with Reuters journalist Stephanie Nebehay.

GENEVA (Reuters) – Donald Trump is one of a new breed of leaders around the world who seek to use their democratic mandate to undermine the rule of law, the head of a legal and human rights watchdog said on Wednesday.

Branding the U.S. president an “authoritarian populist”, Saman Zia-Zarifi, secretary-general of the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), compared him to the leaders of Turkey, the Philippines, Hungary and Venezuela.

Zarifi cited as an example Trump’s travel ban on nationals from six Muslim-majority countries, a policy that he called “highly problematic” under the U.S. constitution and international law.

“What is different now is that a certain kind of populism is being used to actually counter the notion of the rule of law,” Zarifi said in an interview at the headquarters of the ICJ, which is composed of 60 eminent judges and lawyers from all regions who seek to protect human rights and the rule of law.

“The new populism has a certain shamelessness about it that is new. It’s not that people are denying that they are violating rights, what they are saying is they can violate rights because somehow they are empowered by the people,” he said.

Zarifi, who took over at the ICJ in April, said the new breed of populists included Turkey’s President Tayyip Erdogan, Venezuela’s Nicolas Maduro, the Philippines’ Rodrigo Duterte, Hungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Jaroslaw Kaczynski, head of Poland’s ruling party.

“I would say that in the U.S., Trump is an authoritarian populist. He has authoritarian tendencies but he still is facing checks and balances,” Zarifi said. “So he is not a full-blown authoritarian figure.”

The U.S. Supreme Court revised parts of Trump’s executive order banning travellers from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen, a policy Trump says is aimed at tackling terrorism.

“Looking at it again from the point of view of U.S. law – I’m an American lawyer – it seems highly problematic,” said the Iranian-born Zarifi, who moved to the United States as a teenager and holds a law degree from Cornell University.

Supreme Court rulings would be, he said, “a test for the health of the system of checks and balances in the U.S.”

Turkish Judiciary “Politically Compromised”

A crackdown by Erdogan’s government has led to the arrest of 50,000 people and the suspension of 150,000 in the year since a failed military coup in Turkey where the judiciary is “now politically compromised”, Zarifi said.

The Turkish government has said the action is justified by the gravity of the threat to the state from the coup attempt.

On Monday, the state prosecutor asked a court to remand the local Amnesty International director and nine other activists in custody pending trial for membership of a terrorist organisation.

But Zarifi said the judiciary should have thrown the case out.

“The handling of the case highlights the very serious concerns – and alarm in fact at this point – that we have raised about the independence of the judiciary and the legal system in Turkey over the last few years.”

Photo Credit: Reuters / Pierre Albouy

Translate »