Libya: all parties to the conflict must abide by international law and ensure civilian protection

Libya: all parties to the conflict must abide by international law and ensure civilian protection

Today, the ICJ called on the parties to the conflict in Libya to comply with their obligations under international humanitarian law (IHL) and international human rights law to protect affected people, particularly the civilian population.

The ICJ also called on the UN Security Council to urge the parties to respect international law.

The gravity of hostilities led UNSMIL to postpone the UN-sponsored Libyan National Conference aimed at finding a solution to the ongoing political deadlock late yesterday. The Conference was planned to commence on 14 April in Ghadames.

“The postponement of the political dialogue is a major setback for peace and the rule of law in Libya, and for the Libyan population,” said Kate Vigneswaran, the ICJ’s Senior Legal Advisor for the Middle East and North Africa Programme.

“Civilians taking no part in the fighting have already suffered the brunt of hostilities between the warring parties in Libya. Those who remain, including the thousands of migrants held in arbitrary detention, are at grave risk,” she added.

IHL requires parties to the conflict to respect the principles of distinction and proportionality and take precautionary measures to avoid, or in any event minimize, incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians and damage to civilian objects.

“The parties must ensure that not only civilians but civilian objects are protected, and that measures are taken to ensure they don’t become collateral casualties,” said Kate Vigneswaran.

“International actors should continue to push for a political solution to the situation in Libya based on the rule of law and incorporating human rights protections to avoid further suffering,” she added.

On April 7, the UN Security Council reportedly discussed the situation in Libya but could not find the necessary consensus to issue an official statement.

According to the AFP, the Russian Federation blocked a statement that would have called on Field Marshall Khalifa Haftar, head of the House of Representatives backed Libyan National Army, to stop military operations, on all the parties to de-escalate and for “those who undermine Libya’s peace and security to be held to account.”

“The Security Council should adopt a resolution calling for the protection of civilians and accountability for serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law. Member States should desist from exercising their veto powers to block resolutions intended to ensure compliance with international law,” said Vigneswaran.

Reportedly, at least 27 people have been killed, including two doctors and two other civilians, 80 have been injured, and more than 2,800 persons have been displaced as a result of the fighting. The only functioning airport in Tripoli (above photo), the hub of the fighting, was closed Monday after being hit by an airstrike by the Libyan National Army (LNA).

Read this article in Arabic

Contact:

Kate Vigneswaran, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, t: +31624894664, e: kate.vigneswaran(a)icj.org

ICJ promotes international standards on the conduct of investigations with Myanmar police and prosecutors

ICJ promotes international standards on the conduct of investigations with Myanmar police and prosecutors

On 28 February and 1 March, the ICJ met with senior officials of the Myanmar Police Force (MPF) and the Union Attorney General’s Office (UAGO) in Nay Pyi Taw.

The purpose of these talks was to promote the conduct of effective investigations into potentially unlawful deaths and enforced disappearance in accordance with international human rights law and standards, particularly the Minnesota Protocol on the Investigation of Potentially Unlawful Deaths (“Minnesota Protocol”).

Under customary international law, the right to life, and the right to be free from torture and other ill treatment, is not to be restricted even during an armed conflict or declared public emergency. All States are obliged to investigate, prosecute and punish acts that constitute violations of the right to life, and to provide effective remedies and reparations to victims.

Published by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Minnesota Protocol provides guidance to authorities on investigating acts amounting to human rights violations, including when State actors may have been involved. Drawing upon international law and standards, including in relation to the rights of victims and their families, the Protocol includes detailed guidelines on crime scene investigation, interviews, exhumations and autopsies.

Since December 2017, the ICJ has co-hosted four regional workshops in Thailand focused on this topic. Attendees have included lawyers, academics and State authorities from Thailand, Cambodia, Nepal, India and Myanmar.

Frederick Rawski, Director for Asia and the Pacific, Sean Bain, Legal Adviser, and Ja Seng Ing, Legal Researcher, composed the ICJ delegation in Myanmar’s capital.

Frederick Rawski proposed opportunities to continue these discussions on international standards into investigative procedures and processes. The ICJ Team also provided updates about related activities undertaken regionally and in Myanmar.

The ICJ has worked with the UAGO since 2014 to provide assistance on prosecutorial independence and human rights in the context of Myanmar’s broader democratic and legal reforms. This was the third meeting with the MPF over the last twelve months to discuss the conduct of investigations inline with international human rights law and standards.

Members of UAGO and MPF received copies of the Minnesota Protocol and indicated these would be shared with officials involved in the conduct of investigations or in setting the standards for them under national law in Myanmar.

 

On Video: At 70 Years, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights remains “a common standard of achievement for all”

On Video: At 70 Years, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights remains “a common standard of achievement for all”

Today, 10 December 2018 marks the 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Developed as a universal standard setting out the rights to be enjoyed by everyone, the elaboration of the UDHR was one of the first actions undertaken by the newly established UN in carrying out its human rights mandate.

The UN Charter, forged after the ravages of the Second World War, places advancement of human rights as a core purpose and principle of the UN.

Over the past 70 years, the UN and regional human rights systems have taken the UDHR as the benchmark in developing the impressive normative architecture that constitutes the present day basis of international human rights law and standards.

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) was founded in 1952, only four years after the UDHR, with a mission to advance the rule of law and legal protection of human rights. Most of the international legal human framework at that time had still not yet been developed. The founding members of the ICJ believed that the lofty human rights principles enunciated in the UDHR needed to be transformed into hard and enforceable legal obligations incumbent on all States. From its founding, the ICJ worked to develop treaties and other standards aimed to make the enjoyment of human rights real for people, and not merely aspirational.

According to Sam Zarifi, Secretary General of the ICJ, “The ICJ’s biggest contribution to the international legal framework is still to bring together jurists from around the world to defend the rule of law and the universality of human rights at the global and local level.”

“Many now established global legal instruments have the fingerprints of the ICJ all over them. Crucial regional frameworks in the African, European, and American regions were developed with the deep and sustained involvement of the ICJ, as were the creation of the post of UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the International Criminal Court,” said Sam Zarifi.

The UDHR has not only inspired the work of human rights defenders, but has also been foundational for the general acceptance of the notion of human rights around the world.

From 1948 until the end of the twentieth century, there has generally been a continuous upward trajectory towards the advancement of human rights, even if there have been many pitfalls along the way.

The notion that people have rights is now universally accepted and known by people. At the Vienna Conference on Human Rights in 1993, all States of the world not only reaffirmed their commitment to the UDHR, but also agreed that “the universal nature of these rights and freedoms is beyond question.”

Over the years, there have certainly been major shortcomings in the push to achieve the realization of the human rights for all.

Some of the extreme examples include armed conflicts replete with crimes against humanity, war crimes and even genocide, followed by a failure to hold perpetrators accountable.

And there remains extreme poverty in parts of the world marked by a thorough neglect of economic and social rights.

Despite these shortfalls in implementation, it remains the case that human rights have been accepted as a key component in addressing humanity’s problems in the 70 years since the adoption of the UDHR.

“Over the years, more and more States have ratified human rights treaties, more States have incorporated human rights in their domestic law, and more courts have started to enforce human rights. At the grass roots law level, more organizations have demanded human rights as an entitlement and not just as an aspiration,” explains Ian Seiderman, Legal and Policy Director of the ICJ.

Despite, this long term trend in advancement of human rights, there are warning signs that progress is slowing and in some places has even reversed particularly in the past decade.

“We are now seeing a very strong pushback against human rights proclaimed in the UDHR from countries around the world,” says Ian Seiderman.

“Some of the pressures have come from the security angle, where even States that previously championed rights insist that rights protection must cede to security interest. More recently there has been a rise in populist authoritarian governments that don’t even pay lip service to human rights anymore. And many States have also turned their backs on the commitment to protect the most marginalized and vulnerable, such as refugees and migrants,” he adds.

Roberta Clarke, Chair of the ICJ Executive Committee:

At the normative level, there remains the notable gap in the international legal protection from transnational corporations and other business that abuse human rights and the reticence of many States to participate in good faith in the efforts at the UN to close this gap with a new business and human rights treaty.

This backlash has only redoubled the ICJ’s commitment to fight for the values originally imagined by the writers of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The ICJ and its individual Commissioners remain heavily involved in the development of human rights standards and their implementation based on the UDHR and a part of the larger human rights movement.

The ICJ continues to work to adopt human rights law to changing conditions in the modern world, develops the human rights capacities of lawyers and judges in all parts of the world, undertakes legal advocacy internationally and in many countries, and provides legal tools for human rights practitioners.

Robert Goldman, ICJ President:

On the 70th anniversary of the UDHR, it is critically important to recall why the UDHR was established in the first place, especially in light of the current regression of human rights development around the world.

The preamble of the UDHR reminds us that “ disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind.”

But more critically, it also insists that addressing these and other acts of inhuman rights require that human rights be protected by the rule of law.

This will be the ICJ’s continuing mission.

 

 

 

Business and Human Rights: Situation in Izabal, Guatemala

Business and Human Rights: Situation in Izabal, Guatemala

A conference on the situation of business and human rights in Izabal, Guatemala will be held on 29 November 2018 at UNIMAIL University of Geneva at 6:30 pm.

THIS CONFERENCE IS IN FRENCH AND SPANISH ONLY

The conference is co-organised by the International Commission of Jurists, the Department of International Public Law and International Organisation, Faculty of Law, University of Geneva and the Town of Geneva.

Speakers at the conference include Ramon Cadena, the Director of the ICJ Central America Office, Amalia Caal Coc, a local community leader from the Guilermo Torielo Foundation, Maynor Alvarez, Director of Community Relations from the Guatemalan Nickel Company, Solway Group, and Sandra Ratjen, Franciscans International.  The panel moderator is Dr Antonella Angelini from the Department of International Public Law and International Organisation.

The meeting room is R070 at UNIMAIL,  There will be a discussion after the panel. Entrance is free and there will be interpretation in French and Spanish.

Flyer in Spanish (PDF) 

Flyer in French (PDF) 

Gambia: Declaration allowing access to African Court a major advance for access to justice

Gambia: Declaration allowing access to African Court a major advance for access to justice

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the formal declaration of the Gambia to allow individuals and certain non-governmental organizations with observer status access to complain of human rights violations against the Gambian State at the African Court on Human and Peoples Rights.  

Gambia became the ninth African State to make the declaration to allow individual access the African Court on Human and Peoples Rights. The ICJ called on other States to follow suit rapidly.

“The Gambian government should be applauded, but more African States need to step up to reinforce their international human rights obligations by allowing victims of violations direct access to the Court and to empower the African Human Rights Court to do the work for which it was set up.” said Arnold Tsunga, Director of the ICJ African Regional Progamme. “It is only through extensive depositing of article 34(6) by the majority of African states that the court can be truly an African Court”.

In addition to granting access to individuals, the Declaration made under article 34(6) of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights triggers the courts jurisdictional competency under article 5(3) to allow for a limited number of NGOS access.

“The promise of human rights protection under the African human rights system can only be realized when political leaders match rhetoric with such action as allowing individuals to seek an effective remedy by direct access to regional human rights mechanisms like the African Court,” added Arnold Tsunga.

The ICJ emphasized that despite the significant human and material resources invested in the Court since its establishment in 2006, the African Court has been unavailable to great majority of Africans, since very few States had so far entered the declaration recognizing its competency.

Other States that have previously made declarations include Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d´Ivoire, Ghana, Malawi, Mali, Tanzania and Tunisia.

Although, complaints of human rights violation can only be brought directly before the Court against the nine States that have made the declaration, victims of human rights violation of almost all African States can already bring claims against other states through the non-judicial communication procedure available at the African Commission on Human and Peoples´ Rights.

The ICJ stressed while access to the Commission’s procedures is important, it was not an adequate substitute for the kind of binding legal remedy that can be only ordered by a Court. The ICJ noted poor rate of compliance with decisions of the African Commission.

Contacts:

Arnold Tsunga, Director of the Africa Regional Programme, International Commission of Jurists C: +263 77 728 3248, E: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org

Solomon Ebobrah, Senior Legal Advisor, Africa Regional Programme, International Commission of Jurists.C: +234 803492 7549, E: solomon.ebobrah(a)icj.org 

Translate »