Libya: ICJ calls for accountability for crimes under international law at UN Human Rights Council

Libya: ICJ calls for accountability for crimes under international law at UN Human Rights Council

Today, during a debate on the outcome of the Universal Periodic Review of Libya, the ICJ called on Lybian authorities to bring the country’s criminal legislation in line with international law, in particular by defining clearly crimes under international law.

The statement reads as follows:
“Madame President,

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes Libya’s acceptance of the recommendation to cooperate fully with the Independent Fact-Finding Mission on Libya and ensure that it has unfettered access throughout the country’s territory (148.7-8, 148.11-17).

The ICJ regrets that Libya has only taken note of – as opposed to accepting ‒ Estonia’s recommendation (148.80) to bring the Penal Code in line with international standards, and Libya’s rejection of Zambia’s recommendation (148.70) to define crimes under international law in Libya’s domestic legal system clearly.

Libyan domestic law fails to criminalize: arbitrary deprivation of life; torture and other ill-treatment; enforced disappearance; rape and other forms of sexual and gender-based violence; slavery; war crimes; and crimes against humanity, in line with international law and standards.

The ICJ further welcomes Libya’s acceptance of the recommendations (148.144-146, 148-149, 151-161, 165-166) to investigate effectively crimes under international law and bring perpetrators to justice.

The ICJ expresses concern, however, at the prevailing impunity in the country. Crimes under international law are not being effectively investigated and prosecuted, largely because of the absence of political will, inadequate resources, and the frequent threats against justice actors, particularly by armed groups.

The ICJ also regrets that Libya failed to accept the recommendations of: Ukraine (148.25); Costa Rica (148.31); Cyprus (148.32); France (148.33); the Holy See (148.34); Liechtenstein (148.35); Namibia (148.36); Portugal (148.37); Rwanda, Croatia and Slovakia (148.37); Argentina (148.38); Australia (148.39); Honduras (148.40); Iceland (148.41); Italy (148.42); and Latvia (148.43). These recommendations call on Libya to establish a moratorium on executions, and to accede to the Second Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights with a view to abolishing the death penalty. The death penalty constitutes a violation of the right to life and of the absolute prohibition of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

I thank you.”

Contact:

Massimo Frigo, ICJ UN Representative, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org, t: +41797499949

Vito Todeschini, Legal Adviser, ICJ MENA Programme, e: vito.todeschini(a)icj.org

Sri Lanka: Presidential pardon of former Army officer for killing of Tamil civilians is unacceptable

Sri Lanka: Presidential pardon of former Army officer for killing of Tamil civilians is unacceptable

The ICJ today condemned the Presidential pardon granted to murder convict Sunil Ratnayake, Former Staff Sergeant of the Sri Lankan Army.

Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa pardoned Former Staff Sergeant Sunil Ratnayake who was convicted in 2015 for the murder of eight Tamil civilians, including three children, in Mirusuvil in April 2000. The conviction and death sentence was affirmed by the Supreme Court of Sri Lanka in 2019.

The ICJ said that the pardon cast serious doubt upon the Government’s commitment to accountability and the rule of law in Sri Lanka.

While the ICJ welcomes the lifting of the death sentence, the full pardon and extinguishment of serious punishment constitutes a blow to the victims of these violations.

“The prosecution of Staff Sergeant Ratnayake for his involvement in the killing of civilians, including children, at Mirusuvil was a rare exception to the usual lack of accountability for human rights violations committed during the conflict,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific. “Such a pardon is incompatible with international standards relating to impunity and access to justice, and reinforces the well-founded public perception that the military is exempt from any form of accountability, even for the most heinous crimes”.

The ICJ stressed that for serious crimes such as unlawful killing of civilians, there should be no amnesties or pardons that are inconsistent with the right to victims of such violations to reparation.

“It is particularly distressing that a presidential pardon of this nature has been issued at a time when the nation is dealing with the potentially devastating impacts of the COVID-19 outbreak,” said Rawski. “The government would be advised to focus on responding to legitimate calls to release prisoners of minor offences, and take measures to address prison congestion, rather than taking cynical advantage of the crisis to free convicted war criminals.”

It is noteworthy that during his presidential campaign, Gotabaya Rajapaksa had made repeated pledges to release “war heroes languishing in prison over false charges and cases”. The ICJ is deeply concerned that this presidential pardon may be the first of the many to come.

The ICJ has consistently raised concerns about the severe lack of accountability regarding crimes perpetrated by the Sri Lankan armed forces – most recently before the Human Rights Council in February 2020.

The ICJ opposes capital punishment in all cases without exception as a violation of right to life and to freedom from cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Pacific Regional Director, t: +66 2 619 84 77; e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

India: Execution of perpetrators of Delhi gang rape is an affront to rule of law and does not improve access to justice for women

India: Execution of perpetrators of Delhi gang rape is an affront to rule of law and does not improve access to justice for women

The ICJ condemned the execution today of four men who were convicted of raping and murdering a 23-year-old student in December 2012.

The ICJ denounced the executions, and urged the Indian Government to abolish the death penalty. It called on the Government to introduce systemic changes to the legal system that would deter violence and improve access to justice for women.

“State-sanctioned executions are little more than public theatre that risk celebrating and perpetuating violence at the expense of the rule of law,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia-Pacific Director. “As heinous as these crimes were, the imposition of the death penalty – the deterrent effect of which has been widely debunked – does nothing to improve the lives of women.”

According to senior lawyer Vrinda Grover, a renowned Indian human rights defender, “In 2013, the criminal laws were amended; however seven years later the graph of rapes has not diminished.”

Instead of compelling the state to invest in plugging the gaps in the investigation, prosecution and adjudication of sexual crimes and formulating victim oriented processes, the clamour for execution of the convicts has hijacked the discourse. Seven years later, the power of the state to extinguish life stands entrenched, while women and girls in India continue to struggle to live a life of freedom, safety and dignity, as equal persons, ” said Vrinda Grover.

The UN Human Rights Committee has stated that “[t]he death penalty cannot be reconciled with full respect for the right to life, and abolition of the death penalty is both desirable and necessary for the enhancement of human dignity and progressive development of human rights.”

The ICJ opposes capital punishment in all cases without exception as a violation of right to life and to freedom from cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.

The ICJ called upon the Indian Government to join the large majority of States and take immediate steps to end the practice of capital punishment, as prescribed by repeated United Nations General Assembly Resolutions.

To download the full statement with background information, click here.

Contact

Maitreyi Gupta, ICJ India Legal Adviser, t: +91 77 560 28369 e: maitreyi.gupta(a)icj.org

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

Read Also

ICJ, Press Release, September 2013 – India: Executing perpetrators of Delhi Gang Rape Case ‘counterproductive to preventing sexual violence’

India: “Encounter killings” are not justice for sexual violence and murder

India: “Encounter killings” are not justice for sexual violence and murder

The ICJ called on the Indian government to conduct an independent and impartial investigation into the apparently unlawful killings by Telangana Police of the four men accused of raping and killing of Dr. Priyanka Reddy on November 27, 2019.

The men had been in police custody for over a week at the time of the killings.

“The rape and killing of Dr. Reddy is a heinous crime, and sadly only the latest in a pattern of rampant sexual violence that plagues India. The perpetrators of such acts must be held accountable,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia-Pacific Director.  “However, the unlawful killing of suspects in custody helps no-one. It denies victims true justice, rewards unlawful behavior by the police, and generally undermines the rule of law.”

On November 27, Dr. Priyanka Reddy, a veterinarian, was returning home when she was gangraped. Her body was subsequently burned by the perpetrators. The next day, four suspects were arrested. According to the police, they remained in custody until Friday, 6 December, when all four were shot and killed after they allegedly attempted to take weapons from the police and tried to escape during a re-enactment at the crime scene. Details of the incident remain unclear, though it has the appearance of a custodial execution.

“The suspicious circumstances of these deaths in custody, and the history of the use of extrajudicial killings in India, demands a thorough, independent and impartial investigation,” said Rawski. “The nationwide alarm at the trend of sexual violence is completely warranted. However, celebrating the unlawful behavior of police will not ultimately protect women from sexual violence or address their lack of access to justice.”

Several Indian women’s rights activist groups have also condemned the killings. A statement by the All India Progressive Women’s Association’s statement pointed out that “This is not justice. This is a ploy to shut down our demand for accountability from the police, judiciary, governments, and justice and dignity for women.”  The National Human Rights Commission of India has also called for an investigation into the circumstances of the killing.

According to international standards including the International Convention of Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which India is a party, States have a duty to investigate allegations of extrajudicial executions with due diligence and good faith, regardless of whether or not there is a formal complaint. The investigation of extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions must be thorough prompt, impartial and independent, towards establishing the crime committed and prosecuting those responsible for the crimes. This has been reiterated by the Supreme Court of India, which has condemned encounter killings, and set out guidelines for their investigation.

The ICJ urges the Indian Government to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation into the killings by the police, in line with the Supreme Court’s decisions, and India’s constitution and international obligations. The ICJ calls upon the courts to ensure that police officials who conduct unlawful killings are held accountable. It also calls upon the Government to take immediate steps to address the lack of an effective response from police personnel to allegations of rape and sexual violence, and to take effective lawful measures to prevent the unacceptable attacks upon victims of rape and other sexual violence seeking a remedy in the courts.

Contact

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

Maitreyi Gupta, ICJ India Legal Adviser, t: +91 77 560 28369 e: maitreyi.gupta(a)icj.org

Translate »