Mar 15, 2018 | News
The ICJ called on the Government of Singapore to halt the impending execution of Hishamrudin bin Mohd, and take immediate steps to impose a moratorium on executions, with a view towards the abolition of the death penalty in the near future.
Hishamrudin bin Mohd, a Singaporean national, was sentenced to death in 2016, under mandatory sentencing laws, after being convicted of possessing drugs for the purpose of trafficking.
His execution is scheduled to take place on 16 March 2018.
The ICJ opposes the death penalty in all circumstances as a denial of the right to life and a form of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment.
“Singapore, as this year’s Chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, must use this opportunity to lead the way in the region in recognizing that the death penalty is inherently incompatible with human dignity and a violation of human rights,” Sam Zarifi, ICJ Secretary General said.
“Singapore should set an example to other ASEAN Member States in upholding the rule of law and protecting human rights,” he added.
Furthermore, the ICJ expressed serious concern that Singapore still applies the mandatory death penalty, including for drug offenses which, according to international standards does not the meet the threshold of “most serious crimes” to which the death penalty must be confined.
“States that have not yet abolished the death penalty should never apply them for drug offenses nor make them automatic,” Zarifi said.
The UN Special Rapporteurs on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions have stated that under no circumstances should death penalty be mandatory.
International human rights law is undermined when mandatory death penalty is imposed since sentencing must reflect assessment of the factors in each case to ensure that the defendant’s human rights and the narrow limits on the use of death penalty have been respected.
The ICJ notes that the UN General Assembly has adopted repeated resolutions with the support of the overwhelming majority of States, most recently in December 2016 calling for an international moratorium on the use of death penalty with a view to abolition.
Presently, some 170 States around the world have either abolished the death penalty or put a moratorium to its use.
The UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres emphasized that “the death penalty has no place in the 21st century.”
Contact
Emerlynne Gil, Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t: +662 619 8477 (ext. 206); e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
Background
Hishamrudin bin Mohd, a Singaporean national, was found guilty of possessing 34.94 grams of diamorphine, allegedly for the purpose of trafficking. His appeal was rejected on 3 July 2017 and his execution was scheduled on 16 March 2018.
The ICJ received information that Hishamrudin bin Mohd filed a last-minute application for judicial review on 12 March 2018 and a closed-door hearing was set on 14 March 2018. However, on 15 March 2018, the Court of Appeal denied his appeal.
Mar 13, 2018 | Agendas, Events, Human Rights Council, News, Work with the UN
This side event to the 37th Session of the United Nations Human Rights Council takes place on Friday, 16 March 2018, from 12.00 to 13.30, Room XXVII, Palais des Nations, Geneva. It is co-sponsored by the ICJ.
Peruvian and international human rights organizations join forces in international forums such as the UN Human Rights Council to debate the impact of the pardon and grace granted to Alberto Fujimori on the rights to truth, justice and reparation of the victims of grave human rights violations, and full compliance with Peru´s international human rights obligations.
Moderator
- Mr. Carlos Lopez – Senior Legal Adviser, International Commission of Jurists
Panelists
- Mr. Jorge Bracamonte – Executive Secretary, National Humans Rights Coordinator Peru
- Ms. Carmen Rosa Amaro Condor – Human rights activist, sister of Armando Amaro
Condor, student murdered and disappeared in “La Cantuta” massacre
- Mr. Joel Jabiles – Advocacy and Campaigns Coordinator, Amnesty International
Follow the event on Facebook Live at @ridhglobal
Language: English and Spanish – light refreshments will be served as of 11 :50
Mar 12, 2018 | News
As they begin the appointment process, the Tunisian authorities must ensure that selection of members of the Constitutional Court are made in compliance with international standards on the independence of the judiciary, the ICJ said today.
This must happen through an open and transparent process and based on prescribed, objective criteria of merit, integrity, and equality before the law, the ICJ adds.
The 2014 Constitution and the Organic Law no. 50 of 2015 on the establishment of the Constitutional Court provide that three bodies are responsible for appointing the 12 members of the Constitutional Court.
These are the Assembly of People’s Representatives (ARP), the High Judicial Council, and the President of the Republic, which each body appointing four out of the 12 members successively.
The Constitution and the Organic Law also provide that members must have 20 years of professional experience and nine of them should have advanced legal expertise.
Over the past three weeks, the ARP has been reviewing the candidates for the Constitutional Court and the election of first four members is due to take place in a general plenary on Tuesday, 13 March 2018.
“Ensuring that the selection and appointment of all members of the Constitutional Court is made on the basis of their legal qualifications, competence and personal integrity is absolutely necessary to the strengthening of rule of law and the protection of human rights in Tunisia” said Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme.
“In electing the four members, the ARP should ensure that these criteria are fully met, and that the process safeguards against appointments for improper motives, including political considerations and arrangements between political groups,” he added.
The Tunisian authorities should also ensure that the composition of the Constitutional Court reflects the diversity of the community it serves, including by ensuring the equal representation of women in the Court, as well as a significant representation of minority groups.
In a previous memorandum, the ICJ has also urged the authorities to ensure that the selection process guarantees the independence of the institution and of the individual judges in compliance with international standards.
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director of the ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, tel: +41798783546, email: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Background
Article 11 and 12 of Law no. 50 of 2015 provides that the election of candidates by the Parliament and the High Judicial Council shall take place through a secret ballot with the vote of a majority of two-thirds of their members. Article 13 provides that the President of the Republic appoints the last four members of the Constitutional Court.
The 2014 Constitution requires the establishment of the Constitutional Court within a year after the legislative elections. Four years later, and despite the entry into force of Law no. 50 in 2015, the Constitutional Court has not yet been established.
Tunisia-PR-Constitutional-Court-2018-ARA (Full Text in Arabic, PDF)
Mar 2, 2018 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ today delivered an oral statement to the UN Human Rights Council urging it to take action on the situation in Eastern Ghouta in the Syrian Arab Republic.
The statement, which was made during an urgent debate at the UN Human Rights Council convened with a view to adoption of a resolution, read as follows:
“The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) urges the Council to adopt a strong resolution today. The resolution should fully reflect the gravity, magnitude and character of the violations and abuses taking place, demand their immediate cessation, and set out specific measures for accountability of those responsible.
The ICJ highlighted these concerns in a statement one week ago. Every further day of delay costs lives. It is imperative that the Council act immediately and that the relevant forces move quickly to implement Security Council resolution 2401 and any resolution of the Human Rights Council. An immediate end to all attacks on civilians and civilian objects is paramount.
We welcome references to accountability, and urge the Council to explicitly call on States to make use of all means available in this regard, including in their national legal systems, as well as at the regional and international level.
All forces on the ground must respect international humanitarian law and human rights law and standards and be held accountable for failures in this regard. In particular, the Syrian Arab Republic and Russian Federation must comply with Security Council resolutions, ensure the effective protection of civilians, and create conditions in which rapid and unimpeded passage of humanitarian relief can actually take place.”
The Council did not complete the adoption of the resolution on 2 March, but ultimately did so on 5 March.
Feb 20, 2018 | News
In a memo published today, the ICJ called on the Moroccan authorities to refrain from signing into Law Draft Organic Law No. 86.15 on access to the Constitutional Court with a view to amending it and ensuring its full compliance with international standards.
On 8 August 2017, the House of Representatives approved the Draft Law.
The Second Chamber of the Parliament, the House of Counselors, approved the Draft Law on 16 January 2018.
Before its promulgation, the Draft Law is due to be reviewed by the Constitutional Court to assess its compliance with the Constitution.
“The Draft Law is a missed opportunity to facilitate individuals’ access to the Constitutional Court and to remedy Morocco’s history of inadequate procedures of constitutional review,” said Said Benarbia, ICJ MENA Director.
“By providing for a two-layered admissibility system that includes vague and subjective criteria, and by omitting to extend free and competent legal assistance to those unable to pay when challenging the constitutionality of laws, the Draft Law puts undue burden on the litigants and curtails their access to the Court,” he added.
Under the Draft Law, a request to challenge the constitutionality of a law can only be introduced in the context of a litigation.
Lower courts are to refer the request to the Cassation Court after reviewing it and confirming that the formal and legal requirements set out in the Draft Law are met.
The Cassation Court shall then assess the challenge and refer it to the Constitutional Court if deemed “serious.”
The ICJ is concerned that this proposed procedure increases the likelihood that some laws and provisions may never be subjected to constitutional review, and that litigants may be blocked in their efforts to ensure the review of the constitutionality of the laws.
Moroccan authorities should provide for lower courts to immediately refer constitutionality challenges to the Constitutional Court, as well for other avenues of access, including for individuals and NGOs to be enabled to join proceedings as interested parties or to submit information as amicus curiae or through expert opinions, the ICJ says.
Under international law, anyone who alleges they have been the victim of a human rights violation has the right to access to an effective remedy, including a judicial remedy.
In Morocco, ensuring that alleged victims have access to constitutional review is of key importance to fulfilling this right within the national legal system.
Morocco-Access Const Ct-News-web story-2018-ARA (full story in Arabic, PDF)
Morocco-Access Const Ct-Advocacy-Position paper-2018-ENG (Memo in English, PDF)
Morocco-Access Const Ct-Advocacy-Position paper-2018-ARA (Memo in Arabic, PDF)
