May 7, 2021 | News
The Colombian Commission of Jurists (CCJ) and the ICJ have called upon national and local authorities to respect the right of peaceful assembly and cease all use of unlawful force against protestors immediately.
Beginning 28 April, thousands of people have taken to the streets in towns and cities throughout Colombia to protest and the social and economic policies of the current national government. As of this writing the protests continue.
The CCJ and the ICJ have expressed their concern about widespread and serious human rights violations committed during the protests.
There are multiples reports from civil society organizations that document incidents where police officials have opened fire with live ammunition against protestors.
Although full and precise figures are unavailable, as of 6 May 2021, according to the Ombudspersons’ Office at least 26 people had lost their lives. In at least 11 cases, police officials were allegedly responsible for the killings.
The NGO Temblores has documented 37 killings and the NGO Indepaz has information of more than 1.200 people injured during the protests. In addition, a number of cases of sexual violence have been reported.
The organizations are especially concerned that there are substantial number of people whose whereabouts are unknown. Complete figures on possible disappeared persons are not available. Even more worrisome, there are substantial differences among the figures provided by different sources.
In this regard, for instance, the Ombudspersons’ Office said that it has received information about the possible disappearance of 145 people. The Ombudspersons’ Office has established the whereabout of 55 people.
For its part, the civil society platform Mesa de Trabajo sobre Desaparición Forzada en Colombia has informed that it has information of 471 potential cases of enforced disappearances. According to the platform, the whereabout of 92 people have been determined.
The violent acts committed in Valle del Cauca are particularly serious. In this region, it has been reported that at least 17 people have died, and an undetermined number of people are seriously wounded.
Similarly, in Cali, some members of human rights organizations and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Colombia alleged that they had been subject to verbal attacks and physical assault when there were verifying the situation of detained people.
The CCJ and the ICJ urge Colombian authorities to acknowledge act to address the allegations of human violations committed during the protests. They must conduct, independent, impartial, prompt, thorough, effective, and transparent investigations in accordance with Colombian law and its obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Furthermore, the investigation must take place within the ordinary criminal jurisdiction and under no circumstances should there be resort to military jurisdiction. Under international law and standards, cases that may constitute arbitrary deprivation of life or enforced disappearances cannot be considered to be connected with military duties.
Additionally, there is information that some police officials have been wounded, and at least one was allegedly unlawfully killed. The CCJ and the ICJ condemn these and other violent acts and urge judicial authorities to investigate and sanctions those responsible.
On the other hand, the CCJ and the ICJ recall that the use of force by police officials should must only be deployed in accordance with international standards. In particular, any such action must comply with the UN Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials.
These Principles establish that the use of force should be exceptional, necessary and proportional. Especially, authorities should faithfully comply with principle 9 that sets out that lethal force should be not used “except in self-defence or defence of others against the imminent threat of death or serious injury”.
Finally, the CCJ and the ICJ express their great concern about the national government’s decision to involve the military forces for the contention of the violence under the legal figure of “military assistance” (asistencia militar). The decision does not respect the international human rights law standards on the use of force and the right of peaceful assembly.
It should be remembered that military forces are not trained or designed to protect and control civilians during protests or scenarios of disruption of public order.
Therefore, the participation of military forces should be exceptional in situations of necessity, for example to confront immediate extreme violence and temporally limited, as affirmed by international bodies such as the UN Committee on Human rights and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.
Contacts:
Ana María Rodríguez, Deputy Director of the Colombian Commission of Jurists, anarodriguez(a)coljuristas.org
Rocío Quintero M, Latin American Legal and Policy Adviser, International Commission of Jurists, rocio.quintero(a)icj.org
Aug 11, 2020 | News
The ICJ is concerned at reports that on 8 and 9 August, Lebanese security forces, including Internal Security Force (ISF) units, parliamentary police and the army, employed excessive and unlawful force against hundreds of protestors, resulting in the injury of more than 700 people and dozens of hospitalizations.
The ICJ called on the Lebanese authorities to protect the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and expression and refrain from using excessive and unlawful force against protestors demanding justice for the 4 August explosions in Beirut’s port district.
The explosions devastated the city’s infrastructure and resulted in the death, injury and internal displacement of large numbers of its inhabitants.
The ICJ stressed that credible allegations of excessive and unlawful use of force in the context of the protests must be promptly, thoroughly and impartially investigated and those responsible must be held to account.
According to information available to the ICJ, at least 14 journalists and media personnel covering the protests were among the wounded.
According to reports, a policeman also died after falling down an elevator shaft while being chased by protesters. While there were reports that some demonstrators threw rocks and firecrackers at security forces, reports also indicate that the security forces’ response was indiscriminate and, in some instances, excessive.
“Many protestors in Lebanon continue to be met with excessive and unlawful force by security agencies, telling the same grim story of how the Lebanese authorities habitually respond to unwelcome political expression and the grievances of the Lebanese public,” said Kate Vigneswaran, the ICJ’s Middle East and North Africa Programme Senior Legal Adviser.
“The people of Beirut have the right to peacefully express their outrage, at alleged official malfeasance that apparently contributed to last week’s tragic devastation, and to expect security forces will comply with the law,” she added.
Information from ICJ interviews with three protestors, and substantiated by reports by multiple media and news agencies, reveal that security forces fired large quantities of tear gas, in addition to rubber bullets, at protestors in several locations in central Beirut, including a gathering of at least 10,000 people including children at Martyr’s Square and those who occupied Parliamentary and ministerial buildings.
Reports also indicate that live ammunition was fired by security forces during the protests, namely birdshot.
A protestor interviewed by the ICJ stated that he was shot in the arm by a rubber bullet and in the leg by a pellet gun, the latter lodging shrapnel into various parts of his body.
Social media reports reveal that some protestors were shot in the face and eyes with rubber bullets. The ISF has denied using rubber bullets.
According to another protestor, government loyalists attacked her in the presence of ISF officers and the army as she filmed scenes outside the American University Hospital, threatening her with violence and by breaking her mobile phone.
Similar reports of security forces indiscriminately beating and harassing protesters have surfaced on social media platforms.
International law, governing the use of force by law enforcement officers, which is binding on Lebanon, mandates that force is only permissible as a last resort for the sole purpose of protecting life or preventing serious injury from an imminent threat, if strictly necessary and only to the extent necessary for the performance of their duty.
All use of force must be discriminate and proportionate to the threat of harm.
The ICJ has called for a prompt, transparent, independent and impartial investigation into the 4 August explosions by a special, independent mechanism, given the documented lack of independence in certain parts of the Lebanese judiciary, which was echoed by other human rights organizations and members of the international community.
Lebanon’s President dismissed the call as “a waste of time” and instead urged the Lebanese judiciary to act swiftly to probe the incident.
Prime Minister Hassan Diab announced his cabinet’s resignation on Monday following widespread calls for the political establishment to resign from their posts following the explosion. Nine members of Parliament, two government Ministers and the Lebanese Ambassador to Jordan had also resigned from their posts over the weekend.
“The explosions were devastating for the people of Beirut, resulting not only in the loss of life and massive injuries, but severe curtailment of their rights to housing and health and their other socio-economic rights,” said Vigneswaran.
“Based on the response of the Lebanese authorities thus far, and given their poor track record in pursuing and realizing accountability, it is clear that there is an urgent need for a proper accountability mechanism to investigate the explosions and respond to victims’ demands and calls for justice. A change in government is not enough,” she added.
Contact
Kate Vigneswaran, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +31-62-489-4664; e: kate.vigneswaran(a)icj.org
Download
Full story with additional information: Lebanon-Protests-News-Press releases-2020-ENG
Arabic version: Lebanon-Protests-News-Press releases-2020-ARA
Photo Credit: Aya Nehme
Feb 18, 2020 | News
The ICJ and IBAHRI welcome today’s ruling by the Istanbul 30th Assize Court that acquitted all defendants in the Gezi Park case for lack of evidence. The ICJ and IBAHRI have been observing all hearings of the trial.
“Today’s decision is welcome,” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser of the ICJ. “The factual and legal circumstances surrounding the case make clear that these defendants should have never been put to trial to begin with.”
Baroness Helena Kennedy QC, IBAHRI Director, commented: “We have watched this trial closely, with senior lawyers attending the process as observers. It is a case that should never have been brought, for those who faced trial suffered untold anguish. But such injustice has become all too common in Turkey, where the rule of law and human rights have lost meaning. We live in hope this augurs a return to sanity and due process.”
These protests, commencing in May 2013, were an effort by a group of environmentalists to save a park in central Istanbul from being re-zoned, but soon grew into nationwide demonstrations.
Police quelled the protests in Taksim Square through the use of tear gas and water cannons.
The sixteen defendants in the present trial were charged under the following articles of the Turkish Criminal Code: Article 312 (an attempt to overthrow the Turkish government or an attempt to prevent it from fulfilling its duties), Article 151 (damage to property), Article 152 (qualified damage to property), Article 174 (possession or exchange of hazardous substances without permission), Article 153 (damaging places of worship and cemeteries), Article 149 (qualified robbery), Article 86 (intentional injury), crimes under the Law on Firearms, Knives and Other Tools no. 6136 and crimes under the Law on Protection of Cultural and Natural Assets no. 2863.
The ruling follows a 2019 decision of the European Court of Human Rights brought by Turkish human rights defender Osman Kavala, one of the defendants in the present case.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ’s Europe and Central Asia Programme, t: +41 22 979 3805; e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Additional information
The defendants in the case are Osman Kavala, Ali Hakan Altinay, Ayse Mücella Yapici, Ayse Pinar Alabora, Can Dündar, Çigdem Mater Utku, Gökçe Yilmaz, Handan Meltem Arikan, Hanzade Hikmet Germiyanoglu, Inanç Ekmekci, Memet Ali Alabora, Mine Özerden, Serafettin Can Atalay, Tayfun Kahraman, Yigit Aksakoglu and Yigit Ali Ekmekçi.
Oct 25, 2019 | News
Today the ICJ condemned the response of Lebanese security forces to predominantly peaceful protests that erupted across Lebanon on 17 October following the government’s attempt to introduce a daily tariff on voice calls made through applications such as WhatsApp.
The ICJ called on the Lebanese authorities to respect and protect the right of protestors to peaceful assembly and freedom of expression; to refrain from using unlawful force to disperse protests and ill-treatment of protestors and; to effectively investigate and ensure accountability for any abuses committed in connection with the protests.
Security forces in Lebanon have employed excessive and unlawful force against protestors, amid nationwide dissent over Lebanon’s worsening economic crisis.
NGOs and video footage circulating on news and social media platforms document a number of disproportionate measures used to disperse crowds and quell the unprecedented protests, including by firing tear gas, beating protestors and forcefully removing them from their peaceful sit-ins.
“The Lebanese authorities must ensure the effective investigation and prosecution of all abuses committed in the context of these protests by State or Non-state actors, including the arbitrary use of force, arrests and ill-treatment,” said Said Benarbia.
With respect to the use of force, the Lebanese authorities are bound by international law and standards, which stipulate that the use of force by law enforcement officials is only permissible when it is a last resort, is strictly necessary and is used to the extent required for the performance of their duty.
Attacks by armed groups affiliated with the Amal Movement and Hezbollah have also been reported by local organizations and media.
At least 15 protesters were injured in Nabatieh and six persons in Riad al-Solh and admitted to hospital. Additional violent attacks on protesters, allegedly attributed to the Amal Movement, also took place in the city of Soor.
Background
The protests purportedly broke out in response to years of rampant corruption, unemployment and poverty.
By 18 October, protests were characterized by calls to oust governmental authorities perceived as Lebanon’s ruling elite, including the president, government and legislative authority, and fundamental change to the sectarian political system.
In an attempt to diffuse the increasingly tense situation and appease protestors, Prime Minister Saad Hariri announced the adoption of a raft of economic reforms on 21 October.
Anti-government protests however, which have now entered their ninth consecutive day, have gained considerable momentum.
Lebanon is a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Arab Charter on Human Rights. Both of these treaties require the State to guarantee and protect the rights to freedom expression and freedom of assembly and freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, including through the unlawful use of force.
Lebanon-Protests-News-web story (story in Arabic, PDF)
Nov 13, 2015 | News
The Peruvian authorities must revise a number of its laws and policies to better protect economic, social and cultural rights (ESCR) in the country, the ICJ says.
The call comes at the end of a one-week mission by the ICJ to gather information on and assess the impact of extractive industries on the economic, social and cultural rights of local populations, especially peasant and indigenous communities.
In particular, the ICJ is concerned at the adverse human rights impact of “Ley 30230” that aims at facilitating investment.
While investment can make an important contribution to the realization of human rights, the ICJ considers that this particular law effectively leads to a degradation of human rights by lowering social and environmental protection standards.
The ICJ does welcome the enactment of protective legislation by Peru, including that protecting and implementing the right to free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples or regulating the use of force by the police.
However, the ICJ notes these laws are often not effectively implemented in practice.
During the mission the ICJ verified information on the increasing number of violent conflict and social protests relating to mining projects.
“A large proportion of current social conflicts in the country is taking place in areas of extractive industrial activities. With a trend to lower the protection of economic and social rights and the environment in order to facilitate investment, there is a high risk that violent conflict will increase even more,” said Sandra Ratjen, Senior Legal Adviser for ICJ’s Programme on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
“There is a gap between Peru’s international law obligations to respect and protect human rights and the systematic threats to the enjoyment of rights, such as the right to water, to health or to housing, or to free and prior, informed consent that communities in mining areas are facing,” she added.
The ICJ is particularly concerned at the alleged unlawful use of lethal force to suppress demonstrations and social protests in mining areas such as in the recent case of Las Bambas.
The ICJ received information from various sources that in some instances the security forces had used such force in contravention of the principles of necessity and proportionality.
The ICJ urges the Peruvian authorities to take the following measures to strengthen the protection of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the country:
- maintain and strengthen the national laws and policies protecting human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights and the environment;
- accordingly revise legislation that obstructs the State to comply with its international human rights obligations, including those related to the realization of rights such as the right to decent work the rights to health and safe water or the right to be protected against forced evictions;
- fully ensure the free exercise of the right to peaceful assembly and of freedom of expression of individuals and peoples, including human rights defenders.
Additional information:
The ICJ mission included: María Clara Galvis, a Colombian lawyer specialized in international human rights law and Professor at Universidad Externado de Colombia ; Rafael Uzcátegui, a Venezuelan sociologist and Coordinator General of the Venezuelan Programme of Education and Action on Human Rights (PROVEA); Sandra Ratjen, Senior Legal Adviser for ICJ’s Programme on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights; and Olivier van Bogaert, ICJ Director of Media and Communications.
The delegation met with authorities from various Peruvian Ministries, representatives from extractive companies, cooperation agencies, human rights non governmental organizations, trade unions and community-based organizations.
In December, the ICJ will release a final report containing its findings and recommendations on the situation of economic, cultural and social rights in the context of extractive activities and the rise of social conflicts in Peru.
Contact:
Sandra Ratjen, Senior Legal Adviser for ICJ’s Programme on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, t: +55 96 48 13 628; e: sandra.ratjen(a)icj.org
Peru-ESCR mission-News-Press release-2015-SPA (full press release in PDF, Spanish)
Photo credit: Jonas Hulsens
