Dec 6, 2018 | News
JOHANNESBURG – The ICJ condemns the ongoing violence committed against and intimidation of community members of the Marievale Community Association. Last night a petrol bomb was thrown onto the roof of Chris Koitsioe’s home at approximately 1am while his wife was asleep and alone.
Chris is a community leader and a former SANDF staff sergeant who has consistently opposed the community’s eviction and mistreatment by the SANDF.
The ICJ calls on President Ramaphosa, as Commander in Chief of the SANDF, the Minister of Defence Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula and Lieutenant General Lindile Yam to condemn these outrageous and persistent attacks on members of the community. Furthermore, we call on the SANDF and Minister of Defence and other public officials to comply with and implement all court orders relating to the Marievale community and ensure the safe, expeditious and unimpeded return of community members to their homes. The ICJ further calls for the authorities to openly and transparently investigate this assault on Mr Koitsioe’s home and bring the perpetrators to justice.
The Community was unlawfully evicted from their homes on an abandoned army base near Nigel, Johannesburg South, in late November 2017. They have won repeated court orders from the South and North Gauteng High Courts, ordering the SANDF to return them to their homes and condemning their ill treatment by SANDF members during and after their eviction.
Most recently, with the assistance of Lawyers for Human Rights, the community approached the North Gauteng High Court, seeking the arrest of the Minister of Defence and several army generals involved in the evictions for a failure to comply with orders of the High Court requiring them to be returned to their homes. Though last week, this contempt of court order was denied by the North Gauteng High Court, the court reiterated that the community is to be returned to their homes by Friday 7 December 2018.
Attorney at LHR, Ms. Louise Du Plessis expressed that the “LHR is deeply concerned about the ongoing unlawful conduct taking place at Marievale, especially because of the suspected involvement of the SANDF”. She added: “although, at this stage it is merely an allegation that the SANDF is responsible for the attack on Chris’ family, there is good reason to believe that [Chris] is being targeted for leadership role in the fight to see justice done for the Marievale community, after the appalling and callous eviction at the hands of the SANDF”.
This serious attack on Mr Koitsioe’s home occurred directly in this context.
Mr Koitsioe says “members of the community resisting their eviction in court, feel that the army has encouraged and sown divisions in our midst deliberately”. He adds, “whether this attack was perpetrated with or without the influence and knowledge of the army, it is critical that the SANDF roundly condemn such attacks to prevent further violence against innocent community members seeking only to protect our constitutional rights and internationally recognized human rights”. He concludes “my family and I are traumatised, I have reason to believe that this attack was deliberately perpetrated when it was known that I would be out of town speaking to a group of 25 magistrates in Limpopo about the importance of understanding and protecting communities’ housing rights”.
“While the army should be a source of security for everyone in South Africa, the Marievale community have faced persistent and repetitive violations of their economic, social and cultural rights at the hands of the SANDF. Such conduct is a significant and serious threat to the rule of law” lamented Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Africa Director. “The ICJ is concerned at the pattern of similar attacks against other communities claiming their rights in court such as AbahlaliBaseMjondolo in KwaZulu-Natal and the Amadiba Crisis Committee in Xolobeni who have faced similar harassment, assault and even assassination for claiming their rights” added Tsunga.
Public authorities in South Africa has an obligation under international human rights law and standards to ensure that the bombing of Chris Koitsioe’s home and other such acts of violence and intimidation are promptly, independently and impartially investigated. Those responsible for such attacks must be brought to justice and victims of any human rights violations involved must receive effective redress and remedy.
In October 2018, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights noted that it was “concerned at reports of human rights defenders, particularly those working to promote and defend the rights under the Covenant in the mining and environmental sectors, being threatened and harassed”. Koitsioe advises that the community has long suspected that part of the motivation for its eviction is the recent initiation of coal mining activities near their homes.
Further comment:
Chris Koitsioe| Marievale Community Association| C: +27738370265
Louise Du Plessis |Attorney | Lawyers for Human Rights C: +27823460744 E: louise(a)communitylaw.co.za
Timothy Fish Hodgson|Legal Adviser on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights| International Commission of Jurists| C: +27828719905 E; timothy.hodgson(a)icj.org
Further Resources:
The judgment handed down on 30 November 2018 is available here.
The judgment handed down in May 2018 is available here.
The judgment handed down in March 2018 is available here.
The judgment handed down in February 2018 is available here.
The South African Constitution is available here.
Dec 3, 2018 | Advocacy, News, Non-legal submissions
Today, the ICJ joined fifteen other organizations to call on the Thai authorities and Thammakaset Company Limited to ensure that criminal and civil defamation complaints brought by the company against human rights defenders Nan Win and Sutharee Wannasiri do not proceed.
The charges have been leveled in connection with work by the two defenders to bring attention to labour rights violations at a Thammakaset-owned chicken farm in Thailand.
The organizations further called on the Thai authorities to act to ensure that no person is held criminally liable for defamation, including by decriminalizing defamation in Thai law and protecting individuals from abusive litigation aimed at curtailing the rights to freedom of expression and access to information and other activities of human rights defenders.
Today, the Bangkok Criminal Court will hold preliminary hearings on the criminal defamation complaints filed by Thammakaset Co. Ltd. against the two human rights defenders.
“This is the most recent in a series of spurious legal cases brought by companies in Thailand aimed at intimidating human rights defenders and curtailing their important work in defence of human rights,” said Ian Seiderman, ICJ’s Legal and Policy Director.
“Thai authorities must take all necessary measures in law and in practice to ensure that private business entities do not misuse the law to interfere with human rights such as freedom of expression and access to information.”
On 12 and 26 October 2018, Thammakaset Co. Ltd. filed criminal and civil defamation complaints against Nan Win, a migrant worker from Myanmar, and Sutharee Wannasiri, a woman human rights defender and a former Human Rights Specialist with Fortify Rights.
The complaints related to a 107-second film published by non-governmental organization Fortify Rights on 4 October 2017 that called on Thai authorities to drop criminal defamation charges against 14 migrant workers at a Thammakaset-operated chicken farm and to decriminalize defamation in Thailand.
Nan Win was one of the above-mentioned 14 migrant workers and faces a criminal defamation suit for reportedly testifying about alleged labour rights violations he faced in the Thammakaset-operated farm. Sutharee Wannasiri faces criminal and civil defamation suits for reportedly sharing information about the Fortify Rights film on Twitter.
If convicted of criminal defamation, Nan Win faces up to four years’ imprisonment and/or a fine of up to 400,000 Thai Baht (more than US$12,150) and Sutharee Wannasiri faces up to six years’ imprisonment and/or a fine of up to 600,000 Thai Baht (more than US$18,200). Thammakaset Co. Ltd. is also seeking five million Thai Baht (US$151,400) in compensation for alleged damage to the company’s reputation in its civil defamation suit against Sutharee Wannasiri.
“We urge the Thai government not only to uphold their own legal obligations, but also to remind business enterprises in Thailand that they are also responsible for upholding human rights under international standards and domestic law,” said Seiderman.
Thailand-Drop defamation Nan Win Sutharee Wannasiri-Advocacy-Joint Statement-2018-ENG (Joint Statement, English, PDF)
Thailand-Drop defamation Nan Win Sutharee Wannasiri-Advocacy-Joint Statement-2018-THA (Joint Statement, Thai, PDF)
Background
On 12 October 2018, Thammakaset Co. Ltd. filed a criminal defamation suit under sections 326 and 328 of Thailand’s Criminal Code against Sutharee Wannasiri, a former Thailand Human Rights Specialist with Fortify Rights, for three comments she was alleged to have made on Twitter related to the Fortify Rights film.
On 26 October 2018, Thammakaset Co. Ltd. filed a criminal defamation suit under sections 326 and 328 of Thailand’s Criminal Code against Nan Win, one of the 14 migrant workers from Myanmar, for two interviews he gave in a Fortify Rights film and during a Fortify Rights press conference on 6 October 2017.
On the same day, Thammakaset Co. Ltd. also filed a civil defamation suit against Sutharee Wannasiri citing the above mentioned alleged Twitter comments and demanding five million Thai Baht (more than USD 142,000) in compensation for alleged damage to the company’s reputation.
The UN Human Rights Committee has clarified that defamation laws must ensure they do not serve, in practice, to contravene the rights to freedom of expression and information protected under article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and enshrined under articles 34, 35 and 36 of the 2017 Constitution of Thailand. While civil penalties are appropriate to achieve a lawful aim of protection of reputation, the imposition of such penalties must be proportionate and strictly necessary to achieve a legitimate purpose.
Thailand has an obligation under international human rights law, including the ICCPR, to protect persons against the action of businesses that impair the exercise of human rights. The U.N. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights also clarify that business entities have a responsibility to uphold human rights. In August 2018, Thailand launched a revised draft National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights in order to implement the U.N. Guiding Principles.
Contact
Ian Seiderman, ICJ Legal and Policy Director, email: ian.seiderman(a)icj.org
Other reading
For recent ICJ advocacy on similar criminal defamation proceedings launched against labour rights defender Andy Hall, see:
ICJ, Lawyers Rights Watch Canada, ‘Thailand: amicus in criminal defamation proceedings against human rights defender Andy Hall’, 26 July 2016
ICJ, ‘Thailand: verdict in Andy Hall case underscores need for defamation to be decriminalized’, 20 September 2016
For recent ICJ advocacy on the misuse of defamation laws in Thailand against human rights defenders, see:
ICJ, ‘Thailand: immediately stop criminal defamation complaint against torture victim’, 15 February 2018
ICJ, ‘Thailand: ICJ welcomes decision to end proceedings against human rights defenders who raised allegations of torture’, 1 November 2017
ICJ, ‘Thailand: stop use of defamation charges against human rights defenders seeking accountability for torture’, 27 July 2016
Oct 31, 2018 | News
The ICJ and the Swiss Section of the ICJ called today on Swiss people to seriously consider the adverse implications, if adopted, of the popular initiative called the “Swiss law instead of foreign judges – initiative for self-determination” by its proponents. On 25 November 2018, Swiss citizens will be called to vote on this initiative.
The campaign against the initiative has identified it as an “anti-human rights” referendum.
“The initiative, if approved, would have the effect of making it very difficult for people in Switzerland to access Swiss courts to vindicate their human rights,” said Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser.
“Swiss people would lose important defences against abuses by the State or private entities,” he added.
Unlike the title suggests the scope of the initiative is directed against international law in general (except for very few existing peremptory norms) which includes international multilateral treaties or bilateral commercial and administrative agreements.
The initiative would therefore fly in the fact of a fundamental legal principle essential to the rule of law, namely that individual States cannot use their national arrangements as an excuse to avoid their international legal obligations.
“Switzerland, as home to numerous international law-making institutions, has a long and distinguished history of championing international law. Adoption of this initiative would be a blow to the country’s reputation and leadership in this area,” said Massimo Frigo.
“The role accorded to international law by the Swiss Constitution and the jurisprudence of the Swiss Supreme Court is essential to uphold reliability of Switzerland as party to international treaties, its role as central actor and generator in many fields of law including international trade, but also legal certainty in Switzerland”, said Professor Marco Sassoli, board member of the Swiss Section of the ICJ and ICJ Commissioner.
“Much of the economic and diplomatic success of Switzerland is based on its faithful adherence and promotion of international law. Essential Swiss values such as its neutrality or its commitment to the protection of war victims are based upon international law,” said Professor Sassoli.
Contrary to its title the initiative is not directed against “foreign judges” but against the practice of Swiss judges, those of the Swiss Federal Supreme Court, and neglects that the self-determination of peoples leads to their direct submission to international law and that the conclusion of treaties is an expression of and not contrary to the sovereignty of the State.
The text of this initiative if approved could lead to the erosion of primacy of international law among the sources of law in Switzerland.
The ICJ and ICJ-Swiss Section join the several NGOs, trade unions, economic actors, political parties and people of Switzerland that want to secure their rights and those of everyone in Switzerland and appeal to the voters before casting their vote to seriously consider the above arguments and not to decide based upon mere slogans such as “self-determination”, “democracy” or “foreign judges”.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, t: +41 22 979 38 05 ; e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
PDF available in Italian: Switzerland-25 November Referendum-News-Press Release-2018-ITA
PDF available in German: Switzerland-25 November Referendum-News-Press Release-2018-GER
Oct 26, 2018 | News
At a media event in Bangkok, Thailand, today, the ICJ reiterated its call for Turkey to work with the United Nations to establish a special independent mechanism to carry out an investigation into the killing of Khashoggi with a view to identifying the perpetrators.
The Foreign Correspondents Club of Thailand (FFCT) in Bangkok hosted a special panel discussion entitled Death of a journalist – Fallout from the killing of Jamal Khashoggi, which was attended by approximately eighty journalists, diplomats and club members.
On the panel, Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior Legal Advisor for Global Accountability, began by making two positive observations, namely that there exists a clear international legal framework which applies to cases of suspected unlawful deaths including extra-judicial executions and enforced disappearance; and that a considerable amount of information about Khashoggi’s fate appears to be available.
He set out the international legal framework that applies to violations of the right to life noting the state duty to conduct a prompt independent, impartial, effective and transparent investigation consistent with the UN Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions and the revised 2016 Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Death.
Kingsley Abbott noted that in nearly all cases where there is reasonable suspicion of unlawful death, an autopsy should be performed and called for Khashoggi’s body or remains to be produced.
Kate Vigneswaran, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, Middle East and North Africa (MENA) Programme, discussed options for accountability in the MENA region, in particular in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates.
She noted that Saudi Arabia provided little to no opportunity for meaningful justice given executive and Royal Court control over the judiciary and prosecutors. She further highlighted Saudi Arabia’s targeting of critics exercising their right to freedom of expression through criminal prosecutions, abductions and enforced disappearances, and egregious fair trial rights violations in the criminal justice system. She went on to state that similar human rights violations in Egypt and the United Arab Emirates make them unlikely credible options for accountability.
She also noted some concerns about aspects of the justice system in Turkey and in that regard said it was too early to determine whether the conduct of investigation and prosecution of the perpetrators in that country would meet international standards.
Other speakers included Nadia abou el Magd, who has 30 years’ experience as a journalist and commentator covering the Middle East, working mainly for the Associated Press, and Dr. Muhammad Ilyas Yahprung from the Faculty of Political Science, Ramkhamheang University, who focuses on Muslim World Issues.
The panel was moderated by Anneliese Mcauliffe who has worked as a journalist across Asia and the Middle East for over two decades.
Contact:
Kingsley Abbott
Kate Vigneswaran
Senior Legal Adviser
Middle East and North Africa Programme
Phone: +31624894664
Email: kate.vigneswaran(a)icj.org
Twitter: @KateVigneswaran
Oct 24, 2018 | News
The three finalists who will compete for this prestigious award given to human rights defenders having shown deep commitment and facing great personal risk are: Eren Keskin (Turkey), Marino Córdoba Berrio (Colombia) and Abdul Aziz Muhamat (Papua New Guinea/Australia). The ICJ is member of the MEA Jury.
The finalists were selected by the International Human Rights Community (members of the jury are the ICJ, Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Human Rights First, International Federation for Human Rights, World Organisation Against Torture, Front Line Defenders, EWDE Germany, International Service for Human Rights and HURIDOCS).
Nominees and laureates of the Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders (MEA) are human rights defenders that have demonstrated a deep commitment to human rights, often working under threat of imprisonment, torture, or worse.
The international recognition provided by the Award, on top of raising their profile and their work, often provides significant protection.
The 2019 Martin Ennals Award will be presented on 13 February 2019 at a ceremony hosted by the City of Geneva, which for many years has strongly supported the Award.
Eren Keskin (Turkey)
Eren Keskin (upper left corner of the picture) is a lawyer and human rights activist.
For more than thirty years, she has struggled for fundamental rights and freedoms in Turkey, especially for the Kurds, women and the LGBTI+ community.
Within the context of the worsening human rights situation in Turkey, Keskin is once again at the centre of intimidation attempts.
As part of a solidarity campaign to support the Özgür Gündem newspaper, Keskin held the title of “editor-in-chief” of the newspaper from 2013 to 2016, when it was closed by the authorities.
On 30 March 2018, she was convicted and sentenced to 12.5 years in jail for having published articles deemed to have “degraded” the Turkish nation and “insulted” the Turkish president.
She is currently free while the case is appealed.
She said: “To defend human rights is not easy in our territory. I am being prosecuted with 143 charges for my solidarity with an opposition newspaper in the context of freedom of expression. International awards and solidarity have “protective” characteristics and reassure those of us in repressive societies. It also it gives us a morale boost and helps our motivation for the struggle. Thank you for not forgetting us. Your solidarity and protection mean so much.”
Marino Córdoba Berrio (Colombia)
A member of the Afro-Colombian ethnic group, Marino Córdoba Berrio (bottom left corner of the picture) led his community as they faced the loss of their land to powerful commercial interests, notably in logging and mining.
After successfully working towards the legal recognition of their community’s land rights, much of his community was driven out by force in 1996.
Constant threats and attacks drove him to seek asylum in the United States in 2002 where he built a network of supporters.
He returned to Colombia in 2012 and worked to ensure a role for ethnic communities in the peace agreement, notably as a member of “Ethnic Commission for Peace and the Defense of Territorial Rights ” that provides input as the peace agreement is implemented.
He has regularly received death threats and is under constant armed guard.
He said: “We have historically been excluded politically, socially and economically, also affected by war, providing measures of overcoming is a primary responsibility of the State. I believe in the power of my mind and my hands as a determinant to do what is right, therefore the justice that is applied to my people is crucial for their survival. It is also in our hands to promote those changes so this effort involves exposing my own life.”
Abdul Aziz Muhamat (Papua New Guinea/Australia)
Abdul Aziz Muhamat (Aziz, on the right-hand side of the picture), from Sudan, is a compelling and tireless advocate for refugee rights.
Seeking asylum, he has been held in Australian immigration detention on Manus Island, Papua New Guinea since October 2013, when his boat was intercepted by the Australian authorities.
Aziz has seen friends die. He has been shot at by local police. He was also sent to a local prison for refusing to eat in protest at the cruelty and suffering being inflicted on others.
Aziz is one of the primary public voices among the men held on Manus Island. Despite the isolated location, he has exposed the harsh conditions there through podcasts and media interviews.
He has paid a price for this as he is seen as a “ring leader” by both the PNG and Australian authorities.
He stated: “My work to expose this cruel system helps preserve my self-respect and inherent human dignity. It helps me fight for the rights of every refugee around the universe, which I’ll do until my last breath. It is not always easy when living under conditions of fear and persecution. Yet even under the most crushing state machinery, courage rises up again and again, for fear is not the natural state and I will do everything to keep going.”
Contact
Olivier van Bogaert, Director Media & Communications, ICJ representative in the MEA Jury, t: +41 22 979 38 08 ; e: olivier.vanbogaert(a)icj.org
Michael Khambatta, Director, Martin Ennals Foundation, t: +41 79 474 8208 ; e: khambatta(a)martinennalsaward.org
TUR-Eren Keskin_Bio-News-2018-ENG (Eren Keskin full bio in PDF)
COL-Marino Cordoba Bio-News-2018-ENG (Marino Córdoba Berrio full bio in PDF)
AUS-Abdul Aziz Muhamat Bio-News-2018-ENG (Abdul Aziz Muhamat full bio in PDF)
