Sep 13, 2019 | News
The ICJ, in collaboration with the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) of the Republic of Zimbabwe, has concluded a two-day Judicial Symposium on the theme ‘Core-Skilling: Towards a Human Rights Jurisprudence’, organized to mark the end of the second judicial term in the Zimbabwe judicial calendar.
In his remarks at the opening of the symposium, ICJ’s Africa Regional Director, Mr Arnold Tsunga, noted that the theme of the symposium had been carefully chosen to enhance discourse on national transformation in an atmosphere of respect for the rule of law and international human rights. He noted further that the symposium was to critique the concept of transformative adjudication and explore its relevance to applying the Constitution of Zimbabwe as an instrument and framework for national transformation.
Noting that the ICJ appreciated its on-going partnership with the JSC in Zimbabwe, Mr Tsunga expressed the hope that the training and symposium would enhance the effectiveness of the judiciary with a view to improving access to justice for all, especially victims of human rights violations, women, marginalized and vulnerable groups and contributing to attainment of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals number 16 and 5.
On his part, in his opening remarks the Chief Justice of the Republic of Zimbabwe, the Hon. Chief Justice Malaba, noted that the ICJ-JSC organized symposia have provided a platform for continuous improvement of judicial work and networking amongst judges.
Chief Justice Malaba observed that these meetings have enabled judges to dialogue on how to improve the effectiveness and efficiency in the justice delivery system. He noted that this year’s theme on human rights jurisprudence lies at the heart of an independent and effective judiciary.
He further noted that the current Constitution of Zimbabwe has a better framework and potential for the protection of human rights than previous constitutions. Accordingly, he expressed the view that the judiciary has a more important role to play in protecting and safeguarding human rights.
He highlighted that the judiciary’s commitment to the protection of human rights is evidenced in local jurisprudence in respect to human rights cases, where several important judgments have been given by all the courts.
Chief Justice Malaba used the opportunity to give updates on developments which were taking place within the JSC, particularly in its research centre, in the High Court, in the Fiscal and Tax Appeals Division, amendments to the Judicial Laws which were gazetted on the 9th of September 2019.
Chief Justice Malaba stated that in performance appraisal, the JSC has constituted a Performance and Training Committee led by the Deputy Chief Justice to come up with a system that enables accurate measurement of the performance of judges.
Responding to issues of accountability raised by the Chief Justice, ICJ’s Mr Tsunga urged the JSC to develop and adopt a system to track, monitor, document and communicate results arising from these trainings, as the results would help the ICJ, and international development partners to evaluate the usefulness of the trainings and efforts at justice sector reforms.
This year’s symposium was attended by 16 female and 27 male judges from the Constitutional Court, Supreme Court, High Court, Labour Court and Administrative Court of Zimbabwe.
Sep 11, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today reiterated its call for the UN Human Rights Council to establish an international independent Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in Venezuela.
The statement, delivered in a general debate at the Council following the oral update by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights mandated by the previous Human Rights Council resolution on Venezuela, read as follows:
“Mr. President,
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the High Commissioner for Human Rights’ oral update on the situation in Venezuela.
The update and previous reporting point to a wide range of human rights violations, which continue to occur inside the country. These include arbitrary deprivation of liberty, serious violations of indigenous people’s rights, excessive use of force by security forces and attacks on freedom of expression, among others, as well as the impacts of laws, policies and practices that have adversely affected the independence of the judiciary.
Over the years, the International Commission of Jurists has monitored and documented the lack of judicial independence in Venezuela and the absence of accountability for those responsible for gross human rights violations.
The ICJ urges the Human Rights Council to establish an independent Commission of Inquiry on the human rights situation in Venezuela, given that Venezuelan authorities have been unable or unwilling to pursue effective domestic accountability, and judicial and prosecutorial mechanisms in the country lack independence and impartiality.
The Commission of Inquiry should be mandated to investigate reports of violations of international human rights law in Venezuela, establish the facts and circumstances of violations committed since at least 2014, and identify those responsible with a view to contributing to full accountability for all violations, including those that constitute crimes under international law.
Thank you.”
The oral update of the UN Human Commissioner for Human Rights, on the situation in Venezuela, may be accessed here.
In August 2019, the ICJ joined other NGOs in calling for an international commission of inquiry on Venezuela.
States are expected to discuss a further resolution on Venezuela at the current Human Rights Council session, for adoption on 26 or 27 September.
Aug 5, 2019 | News
The ICJ today raised concerns that the proposed Zambian Constitutional Amendment Bill 2019 may negatively impact the independence of the judiciary in Zambia.
The proposed amendments to provisions regarding disciplinary measures and processes against judges and the composition of the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court are particularly concerning, according to a statement by a group of organisations including the ICJ.
“The ICJ implores the President of Zambia and the Zambian legislature to ensure the alignment of all constitutional amendments with international human rights standards on the independence of the judiciary, the rule of law and the separation of powers,” said Arnold Tsunga, the ICJ’s Africa Director.
The joint statement calls upon the President of Zambia and the Zambian legislature to ensure that the proposed constitutional changes are in line with international human rights standards.
According to such standards, individual judges ‘may be dismissed only on serious grounds of misconduct or incompetence, in accordance with fair procedures ensuring objectivity and impartiality set out in the constitution or the law’. Examples include ‘incapacity or behaviour that renders them unfit to discharge their duties’ and ‘physical or mental incapacity that prevents them from undertaking their judicial duties.’
Moreover, disciplinary proceedings regarding judicial officers must be held by an institution independent of the executive and the legislature to secure the independence of the judiciary.
Article 143 (a) of the Zambia Constitution currently provides that ‘a judge shall be removed from office on the following grounds: (a) a mental or physical disability that makes the judge incapable of performing judicial functions; (b) incompetence; (c) gross misconduct; or (d) bankruptcy.’
However, the Amendment Bill worryingly replaces subsection (a) and allows for removal when a judicial officer is ‘legally disqualified from performing judicial functions.’
Furthermore, the proposed amendment does not set out the circumstances or infractions that could lead to the ‘legal disqualification’ leaving the provision open to abuse and in violation of the principle of legal certainty and the rule of law.
“The amendment introduces unnecessary obscurity and vagueness to the Constitution, which, in turn, increases the risk of judges being removed on politically motivated grounds and threatens the rule of law,” Tsunga added.
Another worrying aspect of the proposed amendment is the suggested changes to Article 144 of the Constitution transferring the authority to determine whether judicial officers are removed from the Judicial Complaints Commission to a Tribunal Appointed by the President.
The amendment allows for the possibility of a Tribunal staffed by members of the executive and the legislature, further heightening concerns about threats to judicial independence.
“It is vital that the processes and procedures for the removal of judicial officers in Zambia are constrained in terms of tightly defined constitutional provisions, overseen by independent decision makers without improper influence by the executive and the legislature,” said Tsunga.
The full statement is available here.
The statement is signed by:
Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA)
Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association (CMJA)
International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI)
International Commission of Jurists (ICJ)
Judges for Judges (J4J)
Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada (LRWC)
Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC)
Jul 17, 2019 | Advocacy, News, Non-legal submissions
Today, the ICJ filed a submission to the Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review in advance of its review of Turkey’s human rights record in January 2020.
In its submission, the ICJ considered:
- the situation with the independence of the judiciary in Turkey, during and after the state of emergency of 2016-2018;
- the lack of effective remedies for the mass dismissals in the public sector occurred in that period;
- the shortcomings in fair trial rights in the criminal justice system:
- the obstacles to the action of civil society;
- the lack of accountability for torture and enforced disappeareances; and
- provided information on the status of international human rights treaties ratified by Turkey.
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Full submission in English (PDF) : Turkey-UPR-Advocacy-non-legal submissions-2019-ENG
Jul 5, 2019 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today highlighted the role of the “National Constituent Assembly” in Venezuela in contributing to the destruction of the rule of law in the country, in an oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council.
The statement, delivered during an Enhanced Interactive Dialogue on the situation for human rights in Venezuela, in the presence of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, read as follows:
“Madame High Commissioner,
Next week the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) will publish a detailed report on the “National Constituent Assembly” of Venezuela (NCA) mentioned briefly in your report (A/HRC/41/18, para 34).
The NCA was created unilaterally by the President, without popular endorsement through a referendum, in blatant violation of the Constitution.
As your report notes (footnote 26), the NCA has purported to act as a de facto Parliament. In this it has unlawfully usurped legislative powers clearly assigned by the Constitution to the already-existing National Assembly. Among other things, it has called early presidential elections and removed the Attorney General. It was the NCA that actually rescinded legislative immunity for National Assembly representatives, enabling their arrest and prosecution, after the Supreme Court purported to authorize it to do so (para 37).
Furthermore, as ICJ has extensively documented and your report recognizes, the Venezuelan judiciary has been deprived of its independence and impartiality (paras 56 and 76).[1] Lack of access to justice for widespread gross human rights violations by security forces is pervasive (paras 39 to 59, 77 to 79).
In this context, the NCA essentially operates as an unchecked instrument of the President, unilaterally modifying the legal system, declaring itself above the Constitution, and contributing to the destruction of the rule of law.
We therefore particularly welcome the recommendations in your report to restore the independence of the justice system and impartiality of the Attorney General (81(j)), to bring perpetrators of gross human rights violations to justice (81(c)), and for a renewed focus by the Council on accountability (para 83).
The ICJ further urges that the NCA must be abolished and the National Assembly allowed to operate normally with its full powers, if the rule of law is to have any chance of being restored in Venezuela.
We support calls for the Human Rights Council to establish a Commission of Inquiry or similar mechanism.
Thank you.”
[1] See, among other ICJ reports: Venezuela: The Sunset of the Rule of Law (2015); The Supreme Court of Justice of Venezuela: an Instrument of the Executive Branch (2017); and Achieving Justice for Gross Human Rights Violations in Venezuela (2017).
