Cambodia and the Rule of Law: UN Statement

Cambodia and the Rule of Law: UN Statement

The ICJ today highlighted a sharp deterioration in the situation for human rights and the rule of law, in a statement to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

The statement was delivered during the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Cambodia, and read as follows:

“The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur (UN Doc A/HRC/36/61) and strongly supports the renewal of her mandate.

Monitoring and action by the international community has seldom been more important for Cambodia since the Paris Peace Accords were signed in 1991.

Civil society, independent media and the political opposition are under sustained attack in what appears to be a carefully orchestrated effort to silence dissenting voices in the lead up to national elections in July 2018. Vague legal provisions in for instance the Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations (LANGO) and the Law on Political Parties, are being weaponized to this end.

Human rights defenders and others, including the “ADHOC 4”, Ny Chakrya, Tep Vanny, Hun Vannak, Doem Kundy, and the President of the opposition party, Kem Sokha, face criminal charges with all the hallmarks of being politically motivated.

Prosecutors and judges lack independence and impartiality, and investigations routinely fall short of international standards, as in the case of the killing of political commentator Kem Ley.

Seeking to justify its actions, Cambodia frequently invokes the principle of the rule of law.

The ICJ, a global organisation of judges and lawyers, has worked for the rule of law for more than sixty years. The rule of law does not simply mean that laws exist and are enforced, but requires among other things: equal application of the law without discrimination, including due to political or other opinion, and ensuring that laws are only adopted and applied consistent with international human rights law.

What is happening in Cambodia today has nothing to do with the rule of law.

The ICJ would therefore ask the Special Rapporteur what further recommendations she has towards seeing the rule of law, as properly understood, truly reign in Cambodia.”

 

The Human Rights Council is expected to adopt a new resolution on Cambodia later this week. The ICJ and other non-governmental organisations have called for it to include additional monitoring and additional opportunities to discussion the situation at the Human Rights Council, before national elections scheduled for July 2018.

Thailand: immediately drop sedition case and all proceedings against human rights lawyer Sirikan Charoensiri

Thailand: immediately drop sedition case and all proceedings against human rights lawyer Sirikan Charoensiri

The government should drop all proceedings against human rights lawyer, Sirikan Charoensiri, including the specious accusation of sedition, which apparently relate to her organization’s representation of 14 student activists peacefully protesting in June 2015, the ICJ and other groups said today.

On 27 September 2016, Sirikan Charoensiri (photo), a lawyer and documentation specialist at Thai Lawyers for Human Rights (TLHR), received a summons from the Thai Police following accusations that she violated Article 12 of the Head of National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) Order 3/2015, prohibiting the gathering of five or more people for political purposes, and Article 116 of the Thai Criminal Code, a ‘sedition’-type offence.

According to the summons, the accusations are made by an army officer, Lieutenant Colonel Pongsarit Pawangkanan.

Sirikan Charoensiri received the summons, dated 20 September 2016, when she returned to Thailand after attending the 33rd Session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva where she conducted advocacy on the human rights situation in Thailand on behalf of FORUM-ASIA and the ICJ.

Sirikan Charoensiri did not receive an earlier summons, dated 14 September 2016, the police claimed had been sent to her apartment, as she was not home at the time.

Sirikan Charoensiri has already been charged with two offences under the Criminal Code of Thailand: “giving false information regarding a criminal offence” and “refusing to comply with the order of an official” in relation to TLHR’s provision of legal aid to 14 student activists – the new summons appears to relate to the same case.

The army’s accusation that Sirikan Charoensiri has violated the frequently abused sedition law with its extremely serious penalties and risk of a military trial is indefensible and must be withdrawn immediately,” said Wilder Tayler, Secretary General of the ICJ.

“The fact that the authorities have made these accusations more than one year after TLHR’s clients were charged with sedition in the same case suggest the accusations have been made in retaliation for her high-profile national and international human rights advocacy since the military coup,” he added.

The other groups who signed the statement are: Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA), the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders (an FIDH–OMCT partnership), Protection International (PI), Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada (LRWC), Fortify Rights, and the International Service for Human Rights (ISHR).

thailand-sirikan-charoensiri-conviction-news-press-releases-2016-eng (full text in PDF)

thailand-sirikan-charoensiri-conviction-news-press-releases-2016-tha (Thai version, in PDF)

 

 

Thailand: statement to UN on situation for human rights

Thailand: statement to UN on situation for human rights

The ICJ, speaking at the UN Human Rights Council, highlighted concerns with criminalization of political gatherings, arbitrary detention, use of military for law enforcement, and trials of civilians before military courts, in Thailand.

The statement was made during discussion of the outcome of the Second Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Thailand.

While congratulating Thailand on completion of the UPR, the ICJ oral statement continued as follows:

However, the ICJ is disappointed that several key recommendations concerning restrictions of civil and political rights in the country did not enjoy the support of Thailand.

The interim Constitution, put in place by the military government after the May 2014 coup, remains in force. Article 44 gives the government sweeping, unchecked powers inconsistent with the fundamental pillars of the rule of law and human rights.

The military government has issued numerous orders and announcements under the interim Constitution, including some that criminalize political gatherings, allow arbitrary detention for up to seven days without charge, and provide military officers broad powers of law enforcement.

At least 1,811 civilians have faced proceedings in military courts contrary to international law and standards, many merely for exercising their rights to free expression and peaceful assembly.

Thailand did not accept any of the recommendations to remove these restrictions on the rule of law and human rights.

While the ICJ welcomes the Order of 12 September 2016 ending the practice of prosecuting civilians in military courts for crimes committed after that date, approximately 500 civilian cases remain in military courts.

The ICJ is also concerned that in July the government charged three human rights defenders with criminal defamation for raising allegations of torture in the deep South.

The ICJ urges Thailand to accept and implement recommendations relevant to:

  • revoking the interim Constitution and all NCPO orders and announcements that are contrary to the rule of law and respect for human rights;
  • transferring all pending civilian cases to civilian courts and set aside the convictions of all civilians prosecuted in military courts since the 2014 coup; and
  • ending all harassment of human rights defenders in Thailand.

The statement may be downloaded in English and in Thai in PDF here:

thailand-hrc33-upr-advocacy-non-legal submission-2016-eng

thailand-hrc33-upr-advocacy-non-legal-submission-2016-tha

 

 

Situation of Human Rights Defenders in Malaysia

Situation of Human Rights Defenders in Malaysia

The ICJ prepared an oral statement on the situation of human rights defenders in Malaysia, for today’s interactive dialogue at the Human Rights Council with the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders.

The statement could not be delivered in the limited time available for civil society statements; its text is set out below:

ICJ Oral Statement in the Interactive Dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, Mr. Michel Forst

SITUATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS DEFENDERS IN MALAYSIA

3 March 2016

“The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders.

The work of human rights defenders is particularly under challenge in States where governments have conferred on themselves sweeping powers to restrict human rights on grounds of national security. One example, as reflected in the Special Rapporteur’s “Observations on communications” (UN Doc A/HRC/31/55/Add.1), is the situation of human rights defenders in Malaysia.

The ICJ welcomes the Attorney General’s decision to drop sedition charges against law lecturer Dr. Azmi Sharom; however, the Sedition Act and the Peaceful Assembly Act are still being abused to harass human rights defenders and others. Most recently, the High Court of Malaysia sentenced activist Hishamuddin Rais to nine months in jail for sedition, for calling for peaceful protest against the results of the 2013 general election on the basis that it was not transparent. Maria Chin Abdullah and Jannie Lasimbang, organizers of the Bersih 4.0 peaceful assembly calling for good governance, were charged under the Peaceful Assembly Act for allegedly omitting to inform the police about the assembly. There have reportedly been at least 91 cases of arrests, charges or investigations for sedition during 2015, and more than 30 cases of arrests under the Peaceful Assembly Act since 2013. Most, if not all, of these people are human rights defenders, including Eric Paulsen, the Director of Lawyers for Liberty, Adam Adli, a human rights activist, and Mandeep Singh, the Secretariat Manager of Bersih.

Unless repealed or drastically revised, these laws will continue to facilitate sweeping and arbitrary repression of freedoms of expression, assembly and association of human rights defenders, under the flag of national security. This contravenes the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders and numerous other resolutions of the Human Rights Council and General Assembly, including General Assembly resolution 70/161, adopted by the General Assembly in December with Malaysia voting in favor. Among other things, resolution 70/161 urged States ensure that human rights defenders are able to exercise the rights to freedom of opinion, expression, peaceful assembly and association, which are essential for the promotion and protection of human rights; and it emphasized that national security measures must not hinder the work and safety of individuals engaged in promoting and defending human rights.

In this context, the ICJ would like to ask the Special Rapporteur to comment on the obligations of governments to repeal or amend legislation that allows for abusive arrest or prosecution of human rights defenders on grounds such as “national security”, “sedition” or for not giving prior notice of assemblies.”

Translate »