States agree to develop an international regulatory framework on private military and security companies

States agree to develop an international regulatory framework on private military and security companies

On 24 May 2017, States at the UN reached an agreement to prepare an “international regulatory framework” to protect human rights and ensure accountability for violations and abuses relating to the activities of private military and private security companies (PMSCs).

The agreement, reached at Working Group level, has still to be ratified by the full UN Human Rights Council.

It would be the first universal international instrument on human rights and private security companies negotiated and adopted at the UN.

This could pave the way to further developments towards increased monitoring and accountability of the private security industry.

The agreement constitutes a landmark achievement. The intergovernmental Working Group over the past six years have been mired in circular debates as to whether or not it is desirable to develop a legally binding instrument on PMSCs.

Last’s week agreement leaves aside for the moment the decision about the nature of the instrument and will instead allow for a constructive focus on the contents of the future instrument.

Activities of private and military security companies became the object of heightened international scrutiny particularly after events in the context of the armed conflict in Iraq over the past decade.

These include unlawful killings at Nisoor Square and torture and ill-treatment at Abu Graib prison.

A Working Group of experts on mercenary activity appointed by the UN Human Rights Council started to look at the issues in 2007, generating proposals for international instruments to fill perceived regulatory gaps.

Many States have now accepted that the absence of an international regulatory framework combined with limited or non-existent regulation at national level offers a “breeding ground” for human rights abuses committed by PMSCs.

The main clients of these companies are governments that contract them to carry out specific functions, including some that many believe should remain firmly in the hands of public officials.

One key issue that the future instrument should address is the circumstances under which PMSCs can be considered to act on behalf of the State when they are contracted to perform functions that are typically State functions.

International law already governs some aspects of PMSC activity. International human rights law provides for a general obligation of States to protect against the adverse consequences of PMSC activity.

There has also been other international regulatory activity outside of UN auspices in this area.

In 2008 a select group of mostly Western States led by the Government of Switzerland and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) elaborated the Montreux Document on pertinent obligations for States regarding PMSCs.

Other initiatives such as a Code of Conduct for the PMSCs themselves followed suit. But many States and civil society organizations regard these initiatives as insufficient and lacking the universality afforded by UN processes.

One notable weakness in current approaches is the dearth of standards and mechanisms squarely addressing accountability of private security industry and to ensure access to remedy for those victims of abuse.

Experience shows that States legal frameworks have limited effectiveness when abuses occur at the cross-border level, involving more than one company in more than one jurisdiction, especially in conflict or post-conflict environments.

The prospective international regulatory framework should surely build on existing initiatives, research and findings.

To that end, broad participation by all stakeholders should be ensured.

In this regard, participation of civil society and NGOs specialized in human rights has not been optimal so far.

States leading this new process should make all and every effort to fill that gap, ensuring that international and national civil society receive timely information and facilities for meaningful participation.

Philippines: stop politically-motivated persecution of Senator De Lima

Philippines: stop politically-motivated persecution of Senator De Lima

 The ICJ condemns the arrest and detention of Senator Leila De Lima and calls for her immediate release.

The ICJ believes that the charges brought against Senator De Lima are fabricated and thus considers her prosecution to be politically motivated and amounting to judicial persecution.

Senator De Lima is a staunch critic of President Rodrigo Duterte.

“This is clearly meant to silence for good a vocal critic of President Rodrigo Duterte,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Regional Director for Asia and the Pacific.

In August 2016, Senator De Lima led an investigation by the Senate Committee on Justice and Human Rights into hundreds of cases of extrajudicial killings occurring after President Duterte assumed power.

On 19 September 2016, however, she was removed by her colleagues from her position as chairperson of the said committee due to their concerns towards her “continuous efforts to destroy the President”.

Weeks before her removal, on 25 August 2016, President Duterte had accused Senator De Lima of running a drug trafficking ring inside New Bilibid Prison during her stint as Justice Secretary.

Subsequently, on 20 September 2016, led by the President’s allies in the Congress, the House Committee on Justice began a probe into these allegations against De Lima and in turn, on 17 February 2017, the Department of Justice filed three charges against her under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002 (Republic Act 9165): Section 5 specifically with “trading” in illegal drugs, Section 26(b), and Section 28. If found guilty, she may face the penalty or a prison sentence ranging between twelve years to life imprisonment.

Senator De Lima was then arrested on 23 February 2017.

“If the government really wants to defeat the illegal drug trade, there should be more prosecutions before domestic courts. We do not see this, however. We only see active persecution of those who are critical of the President’s ‘war on drugs’,” Zarifi added.

The ICJ also noted with profound concern the statements of officials from the Philippine government, including the Secretary of Justice, alluding to the Senator’s guilt which – apart from being inconsistent with the right to the presumption of innocence – constitute additional evidence that the charges against her are a blatant attempt not only to silence her for good but also to discredit her in the eyes of the public.

The right to presumption of innocence is an absolute right. According to the UN Human Rights Committee, public authorities and officials have a duty to restrain from prejudging the outcome of a trial, by refraining from making public statements appearing to affirm the guilt of the accused.

The ICJ believes that public authorities and officials, including prosecutors, may inform the public about criminal investigations or charges but should not express a view as to the guilt of any defendant.

The ICJ calls on the Philippine government to immediately release Senator De Lima and immediately stop any further acts of harassment against her and other public critics of the government.

Contact

Emerlynne Gil, ICJ’s Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia,  t: +66 2 619 8477 ext. 206 or +66 840923575 ; e: emerlynne.gil(a)icj.org

Pakistan: ICJ condemns attack on lawyers and others in Quetta

Pakistan: ICJ condemns attack on lawyers and others in Quetta

The ICJ has deplored a suicide attack at a hospital in Quetta, which killed dozens of people today, in the deadliest attack ever on lawyers in Pakistan and among the worst anywhere.

Many of those killed were lawyers, who had been gathered at a hospital in Quetta following the killing of former president of the Balochistan Bar Association, Bilal Anwar Kasi, in a shooting incident earlier in the day.

“This attack targeted mostly lawyers and intellectuals (many of them from the Pashtun community) who had gathered at the hospital to mourn the loss of one of their own,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia Director.

“As such, it constituted a serious loss for the legal community and increases existing pressure on the independence of the bar.”

The ICJ calls on the Pakistani Government to conduct an immediate, impartial and thorough investigation into the attack and to bring those responsible to justice, including anyone who ordered or was otherwise complicit the crime.

The ICJ also urges the Government to take urgent measures to guarantee the security of lawyers, which should include effective measures of protection against attempts on their lives and lives of their family members.

The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers affirm that“[w]here the security of lawyers is threatened as a result of discharging their functions, they shall be adequately safeguarded by the authorities.”

“If lawyers are under constant fear of violence, they cannot ensure the functioning of an independent and impartial legal profession – an indispensible requirement for rule of law,” Zarifi added.

Contact:

Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; e: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Reema Omer, ICJ International Legal Adviser for Pakistan (London), t: +44 7889565691; e: reema.omer(a)icj.org

 

Cambodia: Kem Ley’s killing demands immediate credible and impartial investigation

Cambodia: Kem Ley’s killing demands immediate credible and impartial investigation

The ICJ deplores the killing of Kem Ley, an outspoken human rights defender, political analyst and organizer of grassroots community activists, and calls on the Government to carry out a prompt, impartial and effective investigation to identify and bring to justice those responsible.

Shortly after the killing, Cambodian police arrested a suspect approximately two kilometers from the crime scene who “confessed” on a leaked video to killing Kem Ley for failing to repay a personal loan.

“Kem Ley, a prominent political commentator and human rights defender, was killed against a backdrop of escalating attacks on civil society and the political opposition,” said Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser.

“In the context of Cambodia’s long history of impunity in cases of allegedly politically motivated killings, and even though a suspect is already in custody, the authorities must continue the investigation in a transparent and methodical manner until all potential lines of inquiry have been exhausted,” he added.

There are already concerns about certain events that took place immediately after the killing which may have harmed the investigation.

For example, shortly after news spread of Kem Ley’s death, the authorities observed a large crowd gather in and around the courtyard of the petrol station in which he was killed, potentially compromising important sources of evidence from this wider area and the vehicles within it.

The large gathering effectively served to block medical vehicles from removing Kem Ley’s body from the scene, which may have prevented a forensic autopsy from taking place.

Later the same afternoon a large procession accompanied his body from the crime scene through the streets of Phnom Penh to Wat Chas pagoda, where his body remains lying in wake.

“Where it lacks capacity, Cambodia should seek technical assistance from States and international organizations particularly in the specialized areas of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) and telecommunication data analysis which may assist in establishing the identification and movements of the perpetrator and whether he or she acted alone or with others,” Abbott said.

The ICJ calls on the Cambodian authorities to:

1. Ensure that the investigating judge and investigators are – and are seen to be – impartial and independent of undue influence, and are free to perform their professional functions objectively without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference.

2. Ensure that the investigation process and its outcome are transparent and open to scrutiny by the victims and the general public.

3. Protect the rights of the victims including by ensuring Kem Ley’s family:

  • receive regular information about the progress of the investigation and their rights;
  • receive all necessary support and assistance; and
  • are protected from any ill-treatment, intimidation, or sanction as a result of their participation in the investigation.

4. Protect anyone who provides information to the authorities from ill-treatment, intimidation or sanction.

5. Actively seek out and accept offers of assistance from States and international organizations including in the areas of:

  • the analysis of any CCTV and telecommunication data; and
  • the forensic examination of Kem Ley’s body, crime scenes and vehicles.

 Background

At approximately 0830 on 10 July 2016, Kem Ley was shot and killed at a petrol station cafe on Phnom Penh’s Monivong Boulevard. Shortly afterwards, the authorities apprehended a man nearby in connection with the killing who identified himself as “Chuob Samlab”.

On a leaked video, the man reportedly “confessed” to the killing claiming he shot Kem Ley over a debt the political commentator allegedly owed him, a fact reportedly disputed by Kem Ley’s widow and the suspect’s wife.

Under Article 12 of the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, States are required to take all necessary measures to ensure the protection of human rights defenders against any violence, threats, and retaliation.

Contact:

Kingsley Abbott, ICJ Senior International Legal Adviser for Southeast Asia, t: +66 94 470 1345 ; email: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org

Translate »