Jun 18, 2014 | News
The ICJ’s Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (CIJL) has launched the first in a series of Country Profiles, a new online tool on the ICJ’s website.
Profiles on Myanmar, the Russian Federation, South Sudan and Swaziland are being published today.
Tunisia, Venezuela and Honduras will be added in the coming months.
By the end of 2014, all five regions in which the ICJ is active will be represented (Asia-Pacific, Africa, Europe, Latin America, MENA). The CIJL plans to add further countries on an on-going basis, and periodically to update existing profiles.
Each profile summarises information about the independence of judges, lawyers and prosecutors in the country, and assesses the situation against relevant international law and standards.
The profiles aim to provide users, including legal professionals, academics, government officials and human rights defenders, with material in an accessible format which can also be used for further analysis.
The profiles reflect the efforts of the CIJL and other ICJ programmes to monitor the independence and accountability of judges, lawyers and prosecutors in certain countries, particularly those where their independence is threatened or under attack.
Moreover, the profiles provide reference points on the laws and the standards applicable to the independence of judges and lawyers and the administration of justice in each country.
The profiles can be accessed from the ICJ webpage for the Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers.
They are available as an interactive database on the ICJ’s website, and can also be downloaded in PDF format.
Mar 8, 2014 | News
The ICJ today condemned as a miscarriage of justice, Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim’s conviction on sodomy charges.
The ICJ said the overturning of his 2012 High Court acquittal — following an appeal by the Malaysian government — by a Court of Appeal panel contravenes international human rights standards and the rule law.
“The ICJ condemns the use of the colonial-era Article 377B of the Malaysian Penal Code, which prohibits consensual same-sex sexual conduct, in conflict with international standards regarding respect for the right to privacy,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.
“This article is seldom used in Malaysia, but this is the second time it has been used to convict Anwar, and both times its use seemed clearly motivated to hobble his ability to challenge the government as a politician.”
The sodomy charges against Anwar, which date back to 2008, were dismissed by the High Court on 9 January 2012, but the Court of Appeal today overturned that acquittal and instead sentenced Anwar to five years’ imprisonment. The Court of Appeal ruling took less than two hours.
The ICJ has been observing the proceedings in what has been called Anwar’s ‘Sodomy 2’ trial. ICJ Commissioner Justice Elizabeth Evatt AC, from the Australian High Court and a former member of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, was at the Court of Appeal today on behalf of the ICJ.
“This decision certainly casts doubts on the independence and impartiality of the Malaysian judiciary and tarnishes the reputation of the country’s legal system,” said Zarifi.
The judgement means Anwar will not be able to run for election in a local state seat later this month.
After sentencing, Anwar’s lawyers were successful in arguing for a stay in execution and bail, pending appeal.
CONTACT
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002, e-mail: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Craig Knowles, ICJ Media & Communications, (Bangkok), t:+66 819077653, e-mail: craig.knowles(a)icj.org
Feb 13, 2014 | News
The ICJ continued its observation of the trial of Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim on sodomy charges under the colonial-era Section 377B of the Penal Code, which criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual relations.
ICJ Commissioner Justice Elizabeth Evatt AC, the first woman judge to be appointed to an Australian Federal Court and a former member of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, observed a hearing on the appeal of Anwar Ibrahim at the Court of Appeal in Putrajaya yesterday.
“The ICJ will continue to monitor this case and evaluate the fairness of the proceedings in light of relevant international standards,” said Emerlynne Gil, ICJ international legal advisor for Southeast Asia. “The ICJ will also assess whether the prosecution under Section 377 is being used in this case to suppress political dissent, contrary to the right to freedom of expression.”
The hearing is an appeal against the High Court’s decision on 9 January 2012, which acquitted Anwar Ibrahim of sodomy.
“The ICJ has previously condemned Malaysia’s continuing use of colonial-era criminal charges of ‘sodomy’ to cover even consensual sexual relations between adults,” Gil said. “The ICJ believes that Article 377B of the Malaysian Penal Code is inconsistent with respect for the right to privacy under international standards.”
The Court of Appeal heard and eventually dismissed an interlocutory application filed by the lawyers of Anwar Ibrahim seeking to recall for testimony Jude Blacious s/o Pereira, the investigating officer and key witness in the sodomy case.
Pereira was recently found unfit to be a practicing lawyer in another case in a High Court decision of 10 January 2014.
In that decision, the High Court relied on a 2009 Human Rights Commission of Malaysia’s (SUHAKAM) report, which determined Pereira to be an unreliable witness in a public inquiry established to investigate the arrest and detention of 5 legal aid lawyers.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the application on the grounds that Anwar Ibrahim had failed to satisfy the court that additional evidence in the appellate stage was necessary in dispensing justice and that it fell in the category of “most exceptional” cases, particularly as the SUHAKAM report had already been available since 2009.
The Court of Appeal postponed the hearing on the appeal itself to allow Anwar Ibrahim’s lawyers to file a notice of appeal with the Federal Court on the dismissal of the interlocutory order.
Anwar Ibrahim’s counsel immediately filed a notice of appeal to the Federal Court on the dismissed interlocutory application.
The case management for the sodomy appeal has been fixed on 28 February 2014.
The appeal proper was initially scheduled on 17 and 18 September 2013 but has faced continuous delays due to a series of interlocutory matters.
Feb 11, 2014 | News
The personal decision of Khil Raj Regmi to resign and not return to his post as Chief Justice safeguards the independence of the judiciary and maintains the rule of law in Nepal, the ICJ says.
Caretaker Council of Minister Chairman Khil Raj Regmi announced this afternoon that he would not return to his former post of Chief Justice after acting as the Chairman of the Council of Ministers since March 2013.
“Khil Raj Regmi’s decision is one that will help to preserve the Supreme Court’s hard-earned reputation as an independent institution,” said Ben Schonveld, ICJ’s South Asia Regional Director.
International standards, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, clarify that all governmental officials and institutions as well as judges must respect and preserve the independence and integrity of the judiciary.
The 2007 Interim Constitution of Nepal enshrines guarantees for the independence of the judiciary and contains safeguards for the separation of executive, legislative and judicial powers.
Article 106 of the 2007 Interim Constitution explicitly bans sitting and retired judges from assuming any appointment in government service apart from a role in the national human rights commission.
To enable former Chief Justice Regmi to act as caretaker Prime Minister, the President amended several provisions of the Interim Constitution, including Article 106.
These amendments were made in contravention of the Constitution, which required a two-thirds majority of a sitting Parliament.
“The return of Khil Raj Regmi to the post of Chief Justice would have significantly undermined the appearance of independence of the Supreme Court and the judiciary as a whole,” Schonveld added.
The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct clarify that judges must not only be free from any inappropriate connections with the executive and legislative branches of government but also must appear to a reasonable observer to be free therefrom.
The ICJ applauds the personal decision of Chairman Khil Raj Regmi to resign as Chief Justice.
The ICJ calls on the new Government under the leadership of the Nepali Congress Chairperson, Sushil Koirala as well as the other elected political parties of the Constituent Assembly to honour the commitments made during the election and work to end impunity for gross violations of human rights.
Contact:
Ben Schonveld, ICJ South Asia Director, (Kathmandu); t: 977 9804596661; email: ben.schonveld(a)icj.org
Govinda Bandi Sharma, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser, Nepal (Kathmandu), t: +977 9851061167; email: govinda.sharma(a)icj.org
Sheila Varadan, ICJ Legal Adviser, South Asia Programme (Bangkok), t: +66 857200723; email: sheila.varadan(a)icj.org
Sep 19, 2013 | News
The ongoing involvement of the lead prosecutor in the hearing on the appeal against the acquittal of opposition leader, Anwar Ibrahim, raises concerns about prosecutorial impartiality, the ICJ said today.
The ICJ is particularly concerned at the failure of the lead prosecutor, Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, who was said to have some prior knowledge of the facts of the case, to remove himself from involvement in the proceedings and so maintain an appearance of prosecutorial integrity and impartiality.
“This case is a significant test of the integrity of the judicial system in Malaysia, which for so long has been the subject of concern to human rights proponents, bodies and organizations,” said Justice Elizabeth Evatt, a Commissioner of the ICJ who was observing the proceedings.
The hearing on the appeal was postponed to allow the preliminary objection raised on the first day, 17 September, by the lawyers of Anwar Ibrahim against Judge Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat’s selection as a member of the three-person panel to hear the appeal.
The defense lawyers argued that there was a perception of bias due to Judge Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat’s former ruling in a libel suit involving Anwar Ibrahim and the then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad in 2007.
Judge Tengku Maimum Tuan Mat thereafter recused herself from the proceedings.
The Court of Appeal therefore reconvened on the second day, 18 September, with a new judge, Dato’ Rohana Binti Yusuf, to hear the motion objecting to the appointment of Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah as lead prosecutor in the case.
The motion was based partly on the fact that that Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah was present at Deputy Prime Minister Najib’s home at the same time as the complainant two days before the incidents leading to the filing of charges against Anwar Ibrahim.
At the very beginning of the case, Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah filed an affidavit concerning this fact, although he was not called as a witness in the proceedings.
The Court later denied the motion objecting to his appointment as lead prosecutor in this appeal, saying that there was no conflict of interest or apparent unfairness.
Justice Evatt, however, expressed concern that Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah had taken on the role of lead prosecutor in the appeal.
“We expect higher standards of prosecutorial conduct,” she said. “Considering the political overtones in this case, Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah should be especially sensitive to any appearance that might lead to a perception of bias and partiality that might arise from his earlier knowledge of facts of the case.”
The UN Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors provide that in the performance of their duties, prosecutors shall carry out their duties with impartiality.
The ICJ also acknowledged Judge Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat’s recusal as a sign that the Court of Appeal recognized the need to appear impartial. Under the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, “judges shall always conduct themselves in a manner as to preserve the dignity of their office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.”
The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, state that to ensure such impartiality “a judge shall disqualify himself or herself from participating in any proceedings in which it may appear to a reasonable observer that the judge is unable to decide the matter impartially.”
The Court did not indicate new dates on when the hearing on the appeal would take place. The ICJ will continue to monitor this case.
The ICJ has previously condemned Malaysia’s continuing use of colonial-era criminal charges of ‘sodomy’ to cover even consensual sexual relations between adults.
The ICJ believes that Article 377B of the Malaysian Penal Code is inconsistent with respect for the right to privacy under international standards.
Justice Evatt, the first female judge to be appointed to an Australian Federal Court, a former member of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, and a commissioner of the ICJ, traveled to Malaysia to observe the appeal hearing from 17 to 18 September 2013, at the Court of Appeal in Putrajaya.
Contact:
Emerlynne Gil, International Legal Adviser, t +662 6198477 ext. 206 ; email: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org
