Cambodia: four years on, no effective investigation into Kem Ley’s unlawful killing

Cambodia: four years on, no effective investigation into Kem Ley’s unlawful killing

Today, in advance of the fourth anniversary of the killing of prominent political commentator and human rights defender Kem Ley, the ICJ and 29 other organizations called on Cambodian authorities to create an independent Commission of Inquiry to conduct an effective and impartial investigation that is long overdue into Kem Ley’s death.

The organizations further urged Cambodian authorities to cease intimidation and harassment of persons peacefully commemorating his passing.

On 10 July 2016, Kem Ley was shot and killed at a petrol station in central Phnom Penh. Without conducting a prompt, thorough, and independent investigation, and following a half-day trial which was widely criticized for failure to meet international fair trial standards, in March 2017, Oeuth Ang was found guilty of the murder of Kem Ley and sentenced to life imprisonment.

Since 2016, many international and domestic human rights organizations have consistently called on the Cambodian government to set up an independent Commission of Inquiry to conduct a prompt, impartial, and effective investigation into this killing, with emphasis on examining the potential criminal responsibility of persons other than the direct perpetrator, in line with international standards set out in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

The UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extralegal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions as well as the revised Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death reinforce the duty of governments to investigate unlawful deaths and to establish an independent commission of inquiry when states, like Cambodia, lack effective procedures to conduct such an investigation in accordance with international standards.

The Cambodian government, has to date, failed to take any steps towards the establishment of such an independent and impartial investigative body. Given the government’s unwillingness to conduct an independent investigation into Kem Ley’s killing, and civil society’s highly warranted lack of trust and confidence in Cambodia’s justice system which lacks the requisite levels of independence to adjudicate cases involving public officials, this body should be established under the auspices of the United Nations and composed of independent experts.

Following the killing of Kem Ley, the Cambodian authorities have continually monitored, harassed, and ultimately disrupted and prohibited planned anniversary memorials of his death. These actions constitute arbitrary restrictions on the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. The organizations condemned such attempts to stifle free speech and reiterated their call to the Cambodian government to stop such harassment.

The joint statement is available here.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia and Pacific Regional Director, frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

See also

ICJ, ‘Cambodia: three years and still no effective investigation into Dr. Kem Ley’s killing’, 9 July 2019

ICJ, ‘Cambodia: Commission of Inquiry into killing of Kem Ley should be established without further delay’, 9 July 2018

ICJ, ‘Cambodia: request to create a commission of inquiry into the killing of Kem Ley’, 7 July 2017

ICJ, ‘Cambodia: Kem Ley’s killing demands immediate credible and impartial investigation’, 13 July 2016

Turkey: conviction of human rights defenders a blow to the rule of law

Turkey: conviction of human rights defenders a blow to the rule of law

The ICJ deplores today’s conviction of former Amnesty International Turkey President Taner Kılıç, and former Chair of Human Rights Agenda Association Günal Kurşun, former Director of Amnesty International Turkey İdil Eser and human rights defender Özlem Dalkıran by the Istanbul 35th Heavy Penal Court, on clearly unfounded terrorism charges.

“These convictions, which were clearly revealed to be baseless during the trial, are an alarming setback to efforts to restore the rule of law in Turkey,” said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser for the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.

“This prosecution and conviction constitute harassment of human rights defenders, in violation of a number of Turkey’s international legal obligations. The Turkish authorities should be protecting human rights and supporting the important work of human rights defenders, but instead we have witnessed a continuing pattern of arrests on human rights defenders in the country,” he added.

Taner Kılıç has been sentenced to six years and three months of imprisonment for “membership of a terrorist organization. Günal Kuşun, İdil Eser and Özlem Dalkıran were sentenced to one year and 13 months of imprisonment for “assisting a terrorist organisation”. This decision was taken by majority, with one dissenting opinion that called for their acquittal.

The Court acquitted the other defendants in the case: Nalan Erkem, İlknur Üstün, Ali Gharavi, Peter Steudtner, Veli Acu, Nejat Taştan et Şeyhmus Özbekli.

On 6 June 2017, Taner Kiliç, then President of Amnesty International Turkey was arrested on spurious terrorism charges. The other human rights defenders were arrested while attending a training in Istanbul on digital security and information management; also reported arrested were two trainers (reportedly a German and a Swedish national) and the owner of the training venue.

In Turkey, anti-terrorism offences are oftentimes abused and are applied in over-extensive terms to charge and prosecute human rights defenders and political dissenters, as it occurred in this case. The ICJ has highlighted this problem in several reports, including in its submission to the UN Human Rights Council on the universal periodic review of Turkey.

 

 

Singapore: In lead up to elections, all political parties and parliamentary candidates urged to commit to respecting and protecting human rights

Singapore: In lead up to elections, all political parties and parliamentary candidates urged to commit to respecting and protecting human rights

In the lead-up to general elections on 10 July, today, the ICJ, Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) and CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation (CIVICUS) urged all political parties and parliamentary candidates in Singapore to commit to respecting and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms as part of their mandate.

The organizations noted the ongoing abuse of legal frameworks by the State to limit the rights to freedom of expression, information, association and peaceful assembly in Singapore. These included the use of civil defamation suits and criminal defamation charges; contempt of court provisions including under the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act; the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act; and the Public Order Act to penalize and harass individuals for mere exercise of their fundamental freedoms.

The organizations urged all political parties and parliamentary candidates to address concerns raised by these laws and ensure fundamental freedoms – including the rights to expression, information, association and peaceful assembly – remain at the forefront of the debate in Singapore.

The open letter is available here.

In a 2019 ICJ report on freedom of expression and information online across Southeast Asia, the ICJ highlighted how defamation provisions, the AJPA and POFMA had been wielded by the State to curtail free speech and access to information online by targeting critical dissent of the regime by human rights defenders, lawyers, independent media outlets and members of the political opposition. The report detailed problematic provisions in the laws and selected case studies detailing this trend.

Contact

Frederick Rawski, ICJ Asia and Pacific Regional Director, e: frederick.rawski(a)icj.org

See also

ICJ, ‘Dictating the Internet: Curtailing Free Expression, Opinion and Information Online in Southeast Asia’, December 2019

Myanmar: ICJ sets out legal deficiencies in Ministry of Transport and Communications Order to block access to specific websites

Myanmar: ICJ sets out legal deficiencies in Ministry of Transport and Communications Order to block access to specific websites

The ICJ published a legal memorandum concluding that the Ministry of Transport and Communications (MOTC) Order to block access to specific websites is not compliant with international human rights law.

The legal memorandum also sets out various remedial options under Myanmar law to question the lawfulness of the Order.

The ICJ focused its human rights analysis on the rights to freedom of expression and access to information and the right to health, which includes access to health information. These rights are well established under general and customary international law. The right to health is guaranteed under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to which Myanmar is a party.

The MOTC, presumably invoking Section 77 of the Telecommunications Law, ordered telecommunication service providers in March 2020 to take down 2,147 websites found by it to have disseminated “fake news,” adult content, and child sexual abuse content. It is not clear if any of the information under sanction relates to COVID-19, although the pandemic was mentioned elsewhere in one mobile service provider’s press release. Immediately after the release of the MOTC Order, it was discovered that the ban included ethnic news media websites, such as Rakhine-based Development Media Group and Narinjara News, thereby prompting speculation as to the true reasons behind the ban.

The ICJ emphasized the following in the legal memorandum:

  • Blocking access to specific websites engages a wide range of human rights concerns, including but not limited to the person’s right to freedom of expression and right of access to information protected under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and customary international law. While lack of transparency about the State rationale and evidence was an obstacle to a full analysis, the permissible conditions that would justify sweeping limitations on this right do not appear to have been met.
  • In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the MOTC Order also undermines the right to health of all persons in Myanmar. The right to health guaranteed under the ICESCR is reserved to all persons without discrimination and includes access to health information. The MOTC Order effectively hinders access to health information by blocking legitimate sources of information.
  • To challenge the MOTC Order, the following domestic legal remedies are available: (i) filing a complaint with the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission; (ii) filing an application for a constitutional writ before the Union Supreme Court and/or (iii) filing a declaration suit under the Specific Relief Act.

Download

Myanmar-Memo-on-MOTC-Order-Legal-Memorandum-2020-ENG (PDF)

Contact

Jenny Domino, ICJ Associate Legal Adviser, e: jenny.domino(a)icj.org

Hnin Win Aung, ICJ Legal Adviser, e: hninwin.aung(a)icj.org

Related work

Publication: Myanmar’s ongoing Internet shutdown and hostilities threaten right to health during COVID-19

Statement: Government must lift online restrictions in conflict-affected areas to ensure access to information during COVID-19 pandemic

Report: Curtailing the Right to Freedom of Expression and Information in Myanmar

Publication: Four Immediate Reforms to Strengthen the Myanmar National Human Rights Commission

Publication: Strategic Litigation Handbook for Myanmar

Translate »