Nov 27, 2019 | Advocacy, News
On 26 November 2019, the ICJ, jointly with the Centre for Civil and Political Rights (CCPR Centre), hosted a round-table discussion on the right to peaceful assembly in Thailand. The discussion was held at the office of Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR).
Fifteen lawyers, members of civil society organizations and academics attended the discussion.
The discussion began with an introduction to the UN Human Rights Committee’s draft General Comment No. 37, which when revised and adopted will constitute an authoritative interpretation of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, as guaranteed under article 21 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Thailand is a State party to the ICCPR.
The UN Human Rights Committee – the body mandated to interpret and supervise the implementation of the ICCPR – made the draft General Comment available for all stakeholders to review between November 2019 and 14 February 2020. The Committee in its draft considers the obligations of States parties in respect of such right to peaceful assembly, including permissible limitations and duties and powers of law enforcement agencies.
During the meeting, participants discussed about Thailand’s existing law governing the exercise of the right to peaceful assembly – including the 2017 Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand and the 2015 Public Assembly Act. The discussion also focused on comments on the draft General Comment that the participants may submit to the UN Human Rights Committee, and advocacy strategies to strengthen Thailand’s legal frameworks once the draft General Comment is adopted by the UN Human Rights Committee.
Participants identified challenges posed by in the implementation of certain domestic laws, particularly the Public Assembly Act, which may result in unnecessary and disproportionate restrictions on the right to freedom of peaceful assembly in Thailand. These included the lack of a clear definition of “an assembly”; identification of “no-go” zones for protestors; problems arising from the use of notification systems where a failure to notify the authorities of an assembly was used as basis to render participation in the assembly unlawful and for dispersing the assembly; and overbroad powers delegated to authorities to impose conditions for assemblies regulating the time, place and manner of assemblies.
At the meeting’s conclusion, participants considered ways of provided input on the draft General Comment to the UN Human Rights Committee. They also strategies to work to bring existing Thai laws in compliance with international laws and standards that regulating the right to freedom of peaceful assembly.
Nov 18, 2019 | News
Authorities in Hong Kong must avoid using excessive force to respond to protesters as the political crisis in the city deteriorates, the ICJ said today.
Media reports today show scenes of spiraling violence as police try to force their way into the campus of Hong Kong Polytechnic University (PolyU) past barricades erected by students and demonstrators.
“Any police who use excessive force, particularly as they surround and attack student protesters inside PolyU, must be sanctioned,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Director.
“The events of the past week mark a further deterioration in the situation in Hong Kong – one that can only be effectively addressed through genuine political dialogue, and a commitment to holding police who use unlawful force accountable,” he added.
This morning, more than 100 people were also arrested in Tsim Sha Tsui, hands zip-tied by police and detained in public.
The ICJ urges the Hong Kong SAR government to:
• Ensure that people are able to exercise their freedom of expression, assembly, association and right to political participation;
• Review the means and methods used for the policing of assemblies, including the use of water cannons, tear gas, batons and shields, to ensure that they are not applied indiscriminately and excessively or against peaceful protesters and that they do not result in an escalation of tension;
• Ensure that all victims of excessive use of force by law enforcement officials are provided with access to medical services;
• Ensure that the detained people’s rights to timely and confidential access to counsel;
• Undertake prompt, independent, impartial and thorough investigation of all allegations of unlawful use of force, with a view to holding accountable any responsible authorities including possibilities of criminal prosecution of police officers, and providing an effective remedy and reparation, including compensation and rehabilitation to victims.
Additional information
- Under the Bill of Rights Ordinance and Basic Law Article 39, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is applicable in Hong Kong. Pursuant to the ICCPR, the Hong Kong SAR government has a duty 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.
- Under the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, “Law enforcement officials shall not use firearms against persons except in self-defence or defence of others against the imminent threat of death or serious injury, to prevent the perpetration of a particularly serious crime involving grave threat to life, to arrest a person presenting such a danger and resisting their authority, or to prevent his or her escape, and only when less extreme means are insufficient to achieve these objectives. In any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life.”
- Since June, large numbers of people have taken to the streets of Hong Kong to protest against the now-withdrawn extradition bill, which would have allowed case-by-case fugitive transfers to mainland China.
- Police have used excessive and indiscriminate force against protesters, in contravention of international standards, as well as arrested, harassed and attacked journalists. Police have regularly deployed tear gas against crowds and using water cannons, rubber bullets, pepper spray, and batons on protesters. On 15 November, hundreds of riot police fired more than 1,500 canisters of tear gas on the grounds of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK). On November 11, a police officer shot a protester with live ammunition.
Contact
Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Asia Director, t +66 644781121 ; e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org
Boram Jang, ICJ Legal Adviser, Asia & the Pacific Programme, e: boram.jang(a)icj.org
Oct 14, 2019 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
The conviction today of Catalan separatist leaders of broadly defined offences of sedition unduly restricts rights of freedom of expression, assembly and association, the ICJ said today.
“These convictions represent a serious interference with the exercise of freedom of expression, association and assembly of the leaders. The resort to the law of sedition to restrict the exercise of these rights is unnecessary, disproportionate and ultimately unjustifiable” said Massimo Frigo, ICJ Europe and Central Asia Senior Legal Adviser.
The ICJ also stressed that the overly broad definition of the crime of sedition applied in this case creates a high risk of arbitrariness.
“We are concerned that the Supreme Court does not comply with Spain’s obligations under international human rights law in the consideration of the charges against these defendants and this seriously undermines these convictions,” he added.
Nine of the twelve leaders on trial – including high-ranking Catalan government officials –were convicted of sedition in connection with their part in the administration on 1 October 2017 of a referendum on Catalonian independence. The referendum was conducted despite having been declared illegal by the Constitutional Court.
The voting process during the referendum was forcibly suppressed in many locations by the police, with credible reports of the use of unnecessary and disproportionate force in breach of Spain’s international law obligations.
“Interference with peaceful political expression and protest is not acceptable, save in limited circumstances where it is strictly necessary and proportionate for compelling purposes such as national security .” Frigo said.
Contact
Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe Programme, t: +41 22 979 38 05 ; e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Background
The 12 people convicted in connection with the October 2017 referendum include Oriol Junqueras (13 years of imprisonment for sedition and abuse of power), former Catalan vice-president; Carme Forcadell, former Catalan parliament speaker (11 years and six months of imprisonment for sedition); eight former ministers in the Catalan government – Jordi Turull (12 years of imprisonment for sedition and abuse of power), Raül Romeva (12 years of imprisonment for sedition and abuse of power), Joaquim Forn (10 years and six months of imprisonment for sedition), Santiago Vila (10 months for disobedience), Meritxel Borràs (10 months for disobedience), Dolors Bassa (12 years of imprisonment for sedition and abuse of power), Josep Rull (10 years and six months of imprisonment for sedition), Carles Mundó (10 months for disobedience); Jordi Sànchez (9 years of imprisonment for sedition) the former leader of the Catalan National Assembly (ANC); and Jordi Cuixart (9 years of imprisonment for sedition), former head of the independence organisation Òmnium Cultural.
Spain has obligations to protect freedom of expression, including political expression, under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); and freedom of peaceful assembly and association under Article 11 ECHR and Article 21 and 22 ICCPR.
The Human Rights Committee in its General Comment on freedom of expression has affirmed that: “extreme care must be taken by States parties to ensure that treason laws and similar provisions relating to national security, whether described as official secrets or sedition laws or otherwise, are crafted and applied in a manner that conforms to the strict requirements of paragraph 3” of article 19 ICCPR, which requires that restrictions on freedom of expression be provided for by law and must be necessary for a legitimate purpose, such as national security or public order .) Rights to participate in public life are protected under Article 25 ICCPR.
Sep 27, 2019 | News
The ICJ today called on the Egyptian authorities to respect and protect the right of Egyptians to the freedom of expression, association and assembly, and ensure that all those arbitrarily detained over the past week in the context of recent protests against President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi’s rule are immediately and unconditionally released.
On 26 September, the Office of the Public Prosecutor issued a statement confirming the detention of more than 1000 people following their “participation in protests” and “confessions” that their participation is related to “their dissatisfaction with the economic situation in the country,” and “opposition to the regime.”
Documentation by local NGOs indicates that as many as 2000 people may have been arrested, and that most of them were charged with “belonging to a ‘terrorist group’ and “distributing false information through social media aiming at disturbing the public order and opinion.”
“Egyptians taking to the street in protest are defying six years of Sisi’s government rampant corruption, relentless repression, and systematic dismantling of the rule of law and accountability safeguards,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
Benarbia added, “By filling prisons with those purportedly dissatisfied with the situation in the country, Egypt’s prosecutors and judges are acting, yet again, as a docile tool of repression rather than a shield against the military’s crackdown on human rights and fundamental freedoms.”
As the country braces for new protests today, the ICJ is deeply concerned that Egyptian laws place overly restrictive limitations on the exercise of the right to freedom of assembly and give security forces sweeping powers to disperse protests, including by using lethal force when it is not strictly necessary to protect lives.
Six years after the killing by the armed and security forces of more than 1,000 individuals in the context of the dispersal of the Rabaa’ Al-Adawyia and Al Nahda Square sit-ins, the ICJ notes that not a single person has been brought to justice for the mass killings of protestors.
“Egyptian security and armed forces have a long history of recourse to unlawful and disproportionate use of force, including firing with live ammunition into crowds,” said Benarbia.
“They must comply with Egypt’s obligations under international law and guarantee the rights of protesters to life, to be free from torture and other ill-treatment, and to freedom of assembly, association and expression,” added Benarbia.
Contact:
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Download:
Egypt-free detainees-News-Press releases-2019-ARA (press release in Arabic, PDF)
Sep 3, 2019 | Advocacy, News
From 1 and 2 September 2019, the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of association and assembly, Clément Nyaletsossi VOULE, and lawyers and trade union representatives met and discussed challenges faced in Southeast Asia on exercising the right to freedom of association of workers.
The event was organized by the ICJ together with Business & Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC), and supported by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
At the meeting’s conclusion, the participants reached a consensus to work for the development regional guidelines on freedom of association of workers in the ASEAN and agreed to form a Working Group that would be tasked to develop these guidelines. The Working Group nominated by the participants is composed of trade union representatives at the national level, lawyers, among other experts.
In his keynote speech, the Special Rapporteur emphasized that freedom of association is a fundamental right for all workers without which they lack the power to fight discrimination and injustice in the workplace. He also explained the link between the rights to freedom of association and expression, “Freedom of association is closely related to freedom of expression as they both represent opening up of space for dialogue and an enabling environment where unions can participate freely.”
The participants at the meeting were practicing lawyers from Southeast Asia focusing on labor and employment and trade unions leaders and representatives. Other participants included representatives from human rights organizations addressing business and human rights and the right to freedom of association; the ASEAN Secretariat; the International Labor Organization (ILO), the ASEAN Trade Union Council (ATUC), and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC).
“Shrinking political and civic space combined with inequality and social marginalization are key challenges at the heart of business-related human rights violations in Southeast Asia,” said Katia Chirizzi, Deputy Regional Representative for UN Human Rights. “Governments must implement their obligations to respect, protect and promote human rights in relation to business activities. It is equally critical to ensure that businesses meet their responsibilities to respect human rights.”
During the meeting, the participants also discussed the role of women in labour organizing and the additional challenges women face when they exercise the right to freedom of association in the workplace. Betty Yolanda, Asia Regional Manager of the Business and Human Rights Resource Center (BHRRC) said: “Women workers face multiple forms of discrimination and challenges. They are fighting for their rights as workers in the company and at the same time they are also fighting the patriarchy.”
The participants identified common challenges confronted in the region where workers’ rights to freedom of association face legal and physical limitations. Migrant workers, women workers and workers in Special Economic Zones (SEZs) were identified as being particularly at risk in exercising their rights.
“It is crucial that we discuss these challenges openly and with all stakeholders, particularly issues that affect those who work in the informal sector, and other vulnerable communities such as migrant workers. Special investment frameworks, special economic zones and other government-led initiatives meant to attract foreign investment potentially create new opportunities to increase transparency and accountability. Unfortunately, they are more often used to justify lowering human rights standards, or impose new restrictions that act to limit workers and communities abilities to express their grievances or exercise their rights to association,” said Frederick Rawski, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
Contact:
Boram Jang, International Legal Adviser, Asia & the Pacific Programme, e: boram.jang(a)icj.org
