Mar 14, 2013 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today called on the Government of Pakistan to reconsider its rejection of UPR recommendations on the death penalty and enforced disappearances.
Expressing deep regret over recent events in Pakistan reversing a de facto moratorium on the imposition of the death penalty in the country, the ICJ called on the Government to accept UPR recommendations to adopt an official moratorium with a view to abolishing the death penalty in law. The ICJ also called on Pakistan to accede to the Second Optional Protocol to the ICCPR and to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances.
The statement was made during an Interactive Dialogue on the adoption of the UPR of Pakistan (Item 6 of the Council’s agenda) during the 22nd regular session of the Human Rights Council (25 February to 22 March 2013).
Pakistan-HRC22-Item6-NonLegalSubmission-2013 (download full statement in PDF)
Pakistan-UPR-StakeholderSubmission-LegalSubmission-2012 (go to webpage on the ICJ’s submission on the UPR of Pakistan)
Feb 25, 2013 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
The ICJ and Amnesty International presented additional observations in the case Al Nashiri v Poland before the European Court of Human Rights.
In their supplementary third party intervention, the ICJ and AI outlined developments in light of the case El-Masri v the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia on enforced disappearances, on diplomatic representations in light of the Grand Chamber’s findings on responsibility for violations outside the jurisdiction, on the gross human rights violations that detainees previously held in the USA’s secret detention and rendition programme are currently enduring, and on relevance of the Grand Chamber’s observations in El-Masri in relation to any potential resort to ex parte materials and procedures.
Poland-ICJAI-SupplAmicusBrief-AlNashiri v Poland-legal submission-2013 (download the third party intervention)
Jan 21, 2013 | News
The ICJ calls on the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) to take an active role in determining the fate and whereabouts of Sombath Somphone, a community leader in Laos.
The ICJ also calls on the AICHR to fulfill its mandate under Article 4, paragraph 1.11 of its Terms of Reference, and develop a common position and strategy for tackling the serious problem of enforced and involuntary disappearances in the ASEAN region.
This position must aim towards hastening the resolution of cases of enforced and involuntary disappearances in the region, as well as effectively preventing these violations in the future.
Sombath Somphone is the founder and former director of the Participatory Development Training Center (PDTC) and 2005 recipient of the prestigious Ramon Magsaysay Award for Community Leadership.
He also led Laos’ civil society groups in participating at the Asia-Europe People’s Forum (AEPF) held in October 2012.
He was last seen being stopped by local police at the Thadeau police station on 15 December 2012, at around 5:00pm.
His family has no information on his fate or whereabouts to this day.
“It should be an urgent concern for the AICHR to give sustained priority to this case and it should vigorously encourage the government of Laos to make every effort to locate him,” said Sam Zarifi, Regional Director of the ICJ for Asia and the Pacific.
“The AICHR should seize this case as a chance to address the issue of enforced and involuntary disappearances in the ASEAN,” Zarifi added. “It should use its mandate to formulate a common position on this issue, to push governments to resolve cases of enforced and involuntary disappearances in the region.”
Following his “disappearance”, the AEPF requested ASEAN parliamentarians to conduct a mission to Laos to investigate the case.
To that end, three parliamentarians from the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia traveled to Laos from 13 to 15 January 2013 and spoke to high-level representatives of government about the “disappearance” of Sombath Somphone.
One of the parliamentarians, Mr. Charles Santiago, observed that the government of Laos had evinced no political will to resolve this case.
He noted the half-hearted efforts of police in investigating this case, as illustrated by the fact that they had only called in twice Ng Shui Meng, Sombath Somphone’s wife, since her husband had been missing.
On both occasions, she was asked questions irrelevant to the case, such as how long they had been married, whether or not they had children, and where they reside.
The parliamentarians made it clear that finding Sombath Somphone, a well-known civil society leader, is crucial.
As pointed out in a public statement by Mr. Walden Bello, the parliamentarian from the Philippines, “the immediate surfacing of Mr. Sombath is in the interest of all parties, of Mr. Sombath and his family, of the Lao PDR, and of the ASEAN.”
The ICJ recalls that all States, including Laos, have an obligation to conduct a prompt, thorough and independent investigation wherever there are reasonable suspicions of enforced or involuntary disappearance.
The ICJ also emphasizes that resolving the case of Sombath Somphone is important not only for Laos, but also for the ASEAN as a region.
His citation for the Ramon Magsaysay Award for Community Leadership indicates he is recognized for “his hopeful efforts to promote sustainable development in Laos by training and motivating its young people to become a generation of leaders.”
His work not only benefits the people of Laos, but also contributes to the aspiration of ASEAN as expressed in its Charter, which is that of ensuring “sustainable development for the benefit of present and future generations and to place the well-being, livelihood and welfare of the peoples at the center of the ASEAN community building process.”
Sombath Somphone is the kind of leader integral to the realization of this vision of the ASEAN.
Contact:
Emerlynne Gil, International Legal Advisor, International Commission of Jurists, Bangkok; m: +66 840923575, email: emerlynne.gil@icj.org
Dec 13, 2012 | News
Today’s ruling on the CIA’s detention and rendition of Khaled El-Masri is a historic moment because for the first time it holds a European state accountable for its involvement in the secret US-led programmes.
It is also a milestone in the fight against impunity, Amnesty International and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) said.
The European Court of Human Rights held unanimously that the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Macedonia) was responsible for the German national Khaled El-Masri’s unlawful detention, enforced disappearance, torture and other ill-treatment, and for his transfer out of Macedonia to locations where he suffered further serious violations of his human rights.
Further, that Macedonia did not satisfy its obligation to carry out an effective investigation.
“This judgment confirms the role Macedonia played in the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) rendition and secret detention programmes, and is an important step towards accountability for European complicity in rendition and torture,” said Julia Hall, Amnesty International’s expert on counter-terrorism and human rights.
“Macedonia is not alone. Many other European governments colluded with the USA to abduct, transfer, ‘disappear’ and torture people in the course of rendition operations. This judgment represents progress, but much more needs to be done to ensure accountability across Europe.”
“This ruling is historic. It recognises that the CIA rendition and secret detention system involved torture and enforced disappearances. It emphasises that both the victims and the public have the right to know the truth about these serious violations. It affirms without doubt that Europe cannot be an area of impunity but it must be a place of redress and accountability where international human rights law obligations are not bypassed but fulfilled,” said Wilder Tayler, Secretary General of the ICJ.
“Other European governments – such as Poland, Lithuania, and Romania, against which cases are also pending with the Court – should note today’s European Court judgment and take measures to ensure that the truth is told, thorough, effective, independent and impartial investigations are carried out and those responsible are held accountable.”
The Court’s ruling also serves to highlight the absence of accountability and remedy in the USA, noting that the claim filed against the CIA by Khaled El-Masri was dismissed by the US courts after the US administration invoked the “state secrets privilege”.
On 31 December 2003, the Macedonian authorities arrested El-Masri, who is of Lebanese descent, after he entered Macedonia from Serbia.
They held him incommunicado, subjecting him to enforced disappearance, repeated interrogations and to ill-treatment, until 23 January 2004 when they handed him over to Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) agents.
As part of the covert, US-led rendition and secret detention programme, the CIA transferred El-Masri to a secret detention facility in Afghanistan.
There he was held unlawfully in secret, not charged with any crime and his detention was not subject to judicial review. He did not have access to a lawyer. His whereabouts were not acknowledged and he was held incommunicado.
As a result he was subjected to enforced disappearance for over four months. While in Afghanistan, he was subjected to torture and other ill-treatment.
On 28 May 2004, El-Masri was put on a plane and flown to Albania where he was released.
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, ICJ Europe Programme, t +41 22 979 38 30; e-mail: roisin.pillay(at)icj.org
For the ICJ/AI third party intervention, click here
Europe-Joint public statement El Masri-2012
Nov 5, 2012 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions
The ICJ and Amnesty International presented a third party intervention in the case Al Nashiri v Poland before the European Court of Human Rights.
In the third party intervention, the ICJ and AI outlined developments on the principle of non-refoulement, on the human rights obligations in breach in the practice of “renditions” and “secret detention”, on enforced disappearances, on the international law of state responsibility both for human rights violations occuring on the territory of a High Contracting Party committed by another State and following return of a person to a third State, and the right to a remedy and to reparation.
ECtHR-ICJAI-AmicusBrief-AlNashiri_v_ Poland-2012 (download the third party intervention)
