Sep 17, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
Today at the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ emphasised the importance of effective investigations capable of leading to truth and justice, highlighting recent developments in Manipur, India as an example.
The statement read as follows:
“Justice processes in situations of conflict or transition require fighting impunity and re-establishing public trust.[1] An example is the new prospects for justice in relation to 1528 alleged extrajudicial killings cases in Manipur, India, which would make an important contribution to a transition out of the long-standing conflict.
In July 2016, in response to a petition filed on behalf of the victims, the Indian Supreme Court stated that “there is no concept of absolute immunity from trial…”,[2] opening the door to ending impunity. As of August 2018, the Central Bureau of Investigation has registered 29 complaints against security forces.[3] Recent reports suggest that the Government is also considering amending the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) to remove or restrict existing overbroad authorizations for use of lethal force.[4]
These are welcome developments. However, concerns remain, as the investigation status of the majority of the cases is unknown. Two UN Special Rapporteurs in July 2018 also affirmed that justice must be done in all cases.[5]
The ICJ calls on India to ensure independent, impartial and thorough investigations into all cases in Manipur, amend AFSPA, and to uphold the right to truth of victims and society about acts committed and the identity of perpetrators, in line with its international and national legal obligations, including as a party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”
[1] Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, A/HRC/39/53 (25 July, 2018), http://www.undocs.org/A/HRC/39/53.
[2] Para 163, Extra Judicial Execution Victim Families Association (EEVFAM) & Anr. v. Union of India & Anr. Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 129/2012.
[3] TNN, “Army Major named in FIR for killing 12-yr-old in fake Manipur encounter”, Times of India, August 3, 2018, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/imphal/army-major-named-in-fir-for-killing-12-yr-old-in-fake-manipur-encounter/articleshow/65252258.cms.
[4] “In AFSPA, Government Considering Crucial Changes”, NDTV, September 13, 2018, available at https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/in-afspa-government-considering-crucial-change-sources-1915706.
[5] Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions and Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, “India: UN experts call for urgent progress in investigation of hundreds of ‘fake encounter’ killings” (4 July 2018), https://www.ohchr.org/en/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=23323&LangID=E .
Jun 19, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today joined other NGOs in calling for the UN Human Rights Council to establish an international investigation into extrajudicial killings in the ‘war on drugs’ in the Philippines.The call came in a joint oral statement to the Council, delivered by Franciscans International on behalf of the group of NGOs. The statement, part of the general debate on a global update provided to the Council by the High Commissioner for Human Rights, read as follows:
“Mr President, we welcome the High Commissioner’s update. We are pleased to hear about positive developments that several States have made in granting access to Special Procedures. However, we deeply regret that this is not the case for the Philippines, a member of the Human Rights Council, which has refused access to the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, in spite of the thousands of killings in the government’s ongoing ‘war on drugs’, and the lack of independent and impartial investigations in the country.
We are further concerned that the lack of cooperation with Special Procedures has been further compounded by the Philippine President’s threats and verbal attacks against several mandate holders and the High Commissioner himself. In the absence of cooperation with Special Procedures, we call on the Council to establish an independent international investigation into extrajudicial killings in the ‘war on drugs’ in the Philippines.
As this was the last update of the High Commissioner to the Council, we would like to express deep appreciation for his hard work and dedication over his four year term, and the attention he has drawn to threats to human rights defenders and their work in the Philippines. We call on the Council to follow up on this work by mandating the OHCHR to monitor the deterioration in the situation of human rights and attacks on democratic institutions, as well as the Philippine government’s moves toward authoritarianism, and ask the OHCHR to report on this to the Human Rights Council.”
In 2016 the ICJ released a briefing paper on investigation of extrajudicial executions in the Philippines, which among other things called for an independent commission of inquiry, after having earlier written directly to President Duterte.
Aug 29, 2016 | News
Tens of thousands of enforced disappearances in South Asia can only be addressed if all the region’s governments immediately criminalize this serious human rights violation, said today lawyers and activists from Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
The call came at a Conference on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances, organized by the ICJ and Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) on the eve of the International Day of the Victims of Enforced Disappearances.
South Asia has among the highest number of alleged victims of enforced disappearances in the world: tens of thousands of cases have been documented in Sri Lanka, Nepal, Pakistan and India, and since 2009, there has also been a surge in enforced disappearances in Bangladesh.
“Sri Lanka’s ratification of the Convention on Enforced Disappearance and its pledge to criminalize the practice is a welcome step,” said I. A. Rehman, Secretary General for the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.
“Other States in the region should now follow suit and show that they are serious about their commitment to human rights by making enforced disappearance a specific crime in their domestic law,” he added.
Under international law, an enforced disappearance is the arrest, abduction or detention by State agents, or by people acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the detention or by concealing the fate or whereabouts of the “disappeared” person which places the person outside the protection of the law.
The UN General Assembly has repeatedly described enforced disappearance as “an offence to human dignity”.
At present, enforced disappearance is not a distinct crime in any South Asian country, which is one of the major hurdles to bringing perpetrators to justice.
In the absence of a legal framework on enforced disappearance, unacknowledged detentions by law enforcement agencies are considered “missing persons” cases.
On the rare occasions where criminal complaints are registered against alleged perpetrators, complainants are forced to categorize the crime as “abduction” or “kidnapping”.
These categories do not recognize the complexity and the particularly serious nature of enforced disappearance, and often do not provide for penalties commensurate to the gravity of the crime.
They also fail to recognize as victims relatives of the “disappeared” person and others suffering harm as a result of the enforced disappearance, as required under international law.
“Despite thousands of cases of enforced disappearance across South Asia, the governments have failed to follow their legal obligation to treat these crimes as the serious human rights violation they are,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia Director.
“South Asian governments have done very little to support the victims and survivors of enforced disappearance, or to ensure the rights of their family members to truth, justice and reparation,” he added.
Other barriers to bringing perpetrators to account are also similar in South Asian countries: military and intelligence agencies have extensive and unaccountable powers, including for arrest and detention; members of law enforcement and security forces enjoy broad legal immunities, shielding them from prosecution; and military courts have jurisdiction over crimes committed by members of the military, even where these crimes are human rights violations.
Victims’ groups, lawyers, and activists who work on enforced disappearance also face security risks including attacks, harassment, surveillance, and intimidation.
A comprehensive set of reforms, both in law and policy, is required to end the entrenched impunity for enforced disappearances in the region – criminalizing the practice would be a significant first step, said ICJ and the HRCP.
Contact
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Read also
ICJ Practitioners’ Guides No. 9 Enforced Disappearance and Extrajudicial Execution: Investigation and Sanction and No. 10 Enforced Disappearance and Extrajudicial Execution: the Right of Family Members, which provide legal practitioners, activists and policy-makers with detailed and practical references on international standards on enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings.
South Asia-International disappearances day statement-News-2016-ENG (full text in PDF)
Nov 5, 2014 | Events, News
On 6 and 7 November 2014, judges and representatives of judicial training institutions from most ASEAN Member States will gather in Manila to discuss recent developments in international human rights law on questions relating to the right to life.
Among the areas of consideration will be custodial deaths and other extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances.
The two-day event, entitled Judicial Dialogue on Deciding Cases Involving Human Rights Violations in the ASEAN, is organized by the ICJ in collaboration with the Working Group for an ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism.
This initiative is also part of ICJ’s continuous efforts to support Southeast Asian judiciaries through the facilitation of colloquia and dialogues.
Among the event’s participants are Honourable Dato Seri Paduka Hj Kifrawi bin Dato Paduka Hj Kifli, Chief Justice of Brunei Darussalam; ICJ Commissioners Justice Adolfo S. Azcuna and Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn; and Dato’ Param Cumaraswamy, Co-Chairperson of the Working Group for an ASEAN Human Rights Mechanism and Former UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of Judges and Lawyers.
This Judicial Dialogue is aimed to be a platform for peer-to-peer sharing of experiences among judges, representatives from judicial training institutions, and lawyers and other jurists in the ASEAN.
Some of the discussions expected to take place include the international legal framework on the right to life, including custodial deaths and other extrajudicial executions; landmark cases that have previously found state authorities accountable for serious violations of human rights; and challenges faced by judges in cases involving serious violations of human rights and practical solutions to overcome them.
ASEAN-Programme Judicial Dialoghe-News-Events-2014-ENG (full text PDF)
Jun 13, 2014 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today delivered an oral statement on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, expressing concerns about recent and pending legislation in Pakistan on the use of firearms and other force by law enforcement officials.
The joint statement, delivered at the UN Human Rights Council during the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur and on behalf also of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP), expressed appreciation for the Special Rapporteur’s emphasis in his study on the issue, on the need for states to bring domestic laws on the use of force by law enforcement agencies, into line with international standards.
The statement noted that it was not clear whether the Protection of Pakistan Ordinance (PPO) 2013, which is currently in force, and the proposed Protection of Pakistan Bill (PPB) 2014 currently being debated in Parliament, were provided for review.
The statement explained how the PPO and PPB contain provisions that give law enforcement agencies overbroad powers to use firearms without independent accountability, in contravention of international standards. They increase the risk of use of excessive and lethal force and arbitrary deprivation of life.
The full statement may be downloaded in PDF form: Advocacy-HRC26-SREJEs-12062014.
The Report of the Special Rapporteur is available here.
