Nov 7, 2015 | News
The ICJ, Lawyers for Human Rights Swaziland (LHR(S), Lawyers for Human Rights South Africa (LHR), and Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC) organized a training on strategic litigation for lawyers and human rights defenders from 6-7 November 2015 in Ezulwini.
The training was intended to empower Swazi lawyers and human rights defenders with tools for legal empowerment through litigation.
Further the training provided an opportunity for introducing the participants to international, regional and domestic mechanisms for strategic litigation and analysis of strategic litigation cases, opportunities and challenges in Swaziland.
Participants were drawn from different private law firms, human rights organisations, and the office of the Attorney General and women’s rights organisations.
To nurture regional peer learning and approaches the President of the Law Society of Lesotho Advocate Shale gave the key note presentation borrowing on lessons from other regions and Lesotho.
Resources persons included David Cote (LHR), Caroline James (SALC), Otto Saki (ICJ) and Thabiso Mavuso (Swaziland).
The expected impact is that increasingly lawyers and human rights defenders will take up strategic litigation as part of contributing to the achievement of systemic change and positive enforcement of fundamental rights and freedoms.
This training was held with the generous support of the European Union (EU) through the EU Delegation to Swaziland.
Contact:
Arnold Tsunga, ICJ Regional Director for Africa, t: +27 73 131 8411, e: arnold.tsunga(a)icj.org
Mandla Mkhwanazi LHR Swaziland Chairperson, t: +268 7602 6320, e: m.z.mkhwanazi(a)swazi.net
Caroline James, Lawyer, Southern Africa Litigation Centre t: 27 72 200 1813, e: CarolineJ(a)salc.org.za
David Cote, Programme Manager: Strategic Litigation Programme, LHR (South Africa) t: +27 11 339 1960, e: david(a)lhr.org.za
Oct 2, 2015 | News
The ICJ is concerned at the recent disbarment of lawyer Andriy Vishnevsky, Director of the Coordination Centre of Legal Aid of the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.
The ICJ considers that his disbarment, which resulted from his public comments critical of the Ukrainian bar association, interferes with his capacity to freely discharge his professional functions as a lawyer.
Furthermore, it constitutes a violation of his right to freedom of expression, and risks unduly constraining lawyers in legitimate participation in public debate.
The ICJ calls on the Ukrainian bar association to reinstate Andriy Vishnevsky to the bar so that he can resume his status as an accredited lawyer.
Andriy Vishnevky was disbarred on 10 September, following a hearing before the Qualification-Disciplinary Commission of Kiev Region Advokatura. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated based on two separate complaints: one submitted by the Ukrainian national bar association on 24 June 2015; and the other by Ukrainian Parliament Member Rybalka S.V. on 22 June 2015.
The complainants alleged that Andriy Vishnevsky “humiliated the bar, every lawyer, destroyed respect of the society to the bar in the State, in contradiction with the European standards”.
They cited his comments made at a conference on 15 June 2015 at the premises of the Supreme Court of Ukraine, where he presented his report “The bar and free legal aid: approaches to the reform”.
He made a number of comments critical of the legal profession.
These included his assessment that the bar association was “in a dire state”; a reference to “low ethical standards and professional level of the bar”, including that lawyers are “the main corruption element”; and a claim that “the phenomenon of police lawyers is not counteracted by the national bar association and not commented upon in any way”.
The decision quoted him as saying that “if the bar is not reformed as soon as possible in accordance with the principles and standards of the Council of Europe, it can become a hindrance to the implementation of the judicial reform”.
The Disciplinary Chamber came to the decision that the statements of Andriy Vishnevsky were contrary to the law and the Code of Lawyers’ Ethics and that he should therefore be disbarred for the statements made during the conference.
The ICJ considers the Chamber’s decision to contravene fundamental and universal principles on the independence of the legal profession.
If applied generally, this interpretation of the Code of Ethics would effectively prevent lawyers from critically debating the governance of the legal profession.
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provide that while lawyers should “maintain the honour and dignity of their profession as essential agents of justice” they, like other persons, “shall have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights.”
The right to freedom of expression is protected in international human rights law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights and the European Convention on Human Rights, treaties to which Ukraine is a party.
Under the European Convention on Human Rights, where matters of public interest are discussed there is a particularly narrow scope for restriction of freedom of expression.
Disciplinary action against a lawyer, solely on the grounds of comments critical of the bar association, made at a conference convened to debate aspects of the justice system, amounts to an illegitimate interference with freedom of expression.
The ICJ is concerned that such punitive measures are likely to have a chilling effect on freedom of expression of lawyers in Ukraine and in particular on their ability to engage in debate on reform of the justice system.
It is important, for any justice system, that such debate take place with the active participation of the legal profession, as lawyers are amongst those best placed to identify and criticize the deficiencies of the justice system and make informed proposals for reform.
The ICJ calls on the Ukrainian bar association to reinstate Andriy Vishnevsky as a lawyer.
Furthermore, the ICJ recommends that the interpretation of the Code of Ethics should be reviewed and guidance should be issued to ensure that the Code of Ethics is not applied to stifle public debate among lawyers on ways to reform the justice system in Ukraine.
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, Europe Programme, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser, Europe Programme, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
The full statement with background information can be downloaded here:
Ukraine-Lawyer Vishnevsky statement-News-web story-2015-ENG (in PDF)
Ukraine-Lawyer Vishnevsky statement-News-web story-2015-UKR (Ukrainian version, in PDF)
Oct 1, 2015 | News
The ICJ is alarmed at the arrest of Buzurgmehr Yorov, a lawyer practicing in Tajikistan.
Mr Yorov’s arrest may be related to his representation of thirteen leaders of the Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan (IRPT).
This is the third recent case of arrest of a lawyer in Tajikistan, and this pattern of arrests raises serious concerns for protection of human rights and compliance with international standards on the role of lawyers.
On 28 September, at 10.00, police officers appeared at the “Sipar” Collegia of lawyers, which is headed by Buzurgmehr Yorov, and seized documents related to the case of the members of the IRPT who Mr Yorov represents. At around 14.00, other police officers apprehended the lawyer at his office, claiming he needed to answer certain questions. The lawyer later made a phone call to say that he had been arrested and detained.
On 29 September, the Ministry of Interior of Tajikistan, in its Press Release, said that Buzurgmehr Yorov “by way of fraud” appropriated “a large amount of money”.
According to the Ministry of the Interior, a resident of Istaravshan named Komiljhon Bozorov paid USD 4000 to help with the case of his son, who was charged with an attempted murder. Mr Bozorov is reported to claim that the lawyer failed to provide legal aid and “abused his trust and his difficult situation”.
Mr Yorov is also charged with forging documents about the technical condition of a car.
The ICJ fears that the decision to arrest lawyer Buzurgmehr Yorov was in fact connected with his representation of members of the IRPT.
The ICJ recalls that according to the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, “Lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions”; they must be able “to perform all their profession functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference”; and lawyers “shall not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards or ethics”.
The ICJ’s concerns in this case are based in part on the particularly worrying pattern of arrests of lawyers , who represent clients in “high profile” cases, that has emerged in the recent past in the Republic of Tajikistan.
It should be recalled that it is lawyers’ role to defend persons charged with alleged crimes. The justice system cannot function in accordance with international standards if lawyers are not able to represent their clients’ interests.
For the right to a fair trial as guaranteed under international human rights law to be protected, defendants must have access to a lawyer who can represent their interests effectively, without harassment or interference.
The ICJ calls on the authorities of Tajikistan to ensure that all lawyers are able to conduct their work without fear of threats or harassment, including arbitrary arrest or prosecution.
It calls on the investigating authorities to ensure that Burzurgmehr Yorov is not prosecuted as a means of harassment or reprisal for his representation of a client, and that any proceedings against him are conducted in accordance with international human rights law, including the right to a fair hearing, and taking into account international standards on the role of lawyers.
Whether or not his arrest is in reality based on his representation of IRPT, or on the basis of the allegations of fraud, Mr Yorov should be immediately released.
Even if the arrest was in fact based on the allegations of fraud, the ICJ is unaware of any evidence or reasons in Mr Yorov’s case that would justify his continued pre-trial detention, under international standards on the right to liberty and the prohibition of arbitrary arrest and detention.
Background information:
Thirteen persons, represented by Burzurgmehr Yorov, were arrested on 16-17 September 2015, following armed attacks earlier this year in Dushanbe and Vakhdat.
Members of the group are accused of “establishment of a criminal community/organization in order to commit grave or particularly grave crimes”, as foreseen under Article 187(1) of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Tajikistan.
The arrest and detention of Mr Yorov is the third case in the last two years of prosecution of a lawyer representing clients in a high profile case in Tajikistan. On 13 January 2015, lawyer Shukhrat Kudratov was convicted to 9 years in prison on charges of fraud and bribery.
In 2014, another lawyer, Fakhriddin Zokirov, was arrested and tried on charges of fraud in banking transactions. He was released as a part of an act of amnesty in November 2014.
Tajikistan-Lawyer Yorov statement-News-web stories-2015-RUS (full text in Russian, PDF)
For further infromation see previous ICJ statements:
Tajikistan: ICJ concerned at conviction of lawyer Shukhrat Kudratov
Tajikistan: Arrest of lawzer is a threat to the independence of the profession
Jul 14, 2015 | News
The Royal Government of Cambodia must immediately end the legal harassment of human rights defender, Ny Chakrya, Head of the Human Rights and Legal Aid Section of the Cambodian Human Rights and Development Association (ADHOC), the ICJ said today.
On 13 July 2015, a Deputy Prosecutor at the Phnom Penh Municipal Court questioned Ny Chakrya for two hours in relation to statements he had made at two press conferences in May 2015.
The summons and questioning were, according to information provided to the ICJ, pursuant to a complaint by an Investigating Judge and another prosecutor.
The proceedings appear to be based on the fact that at the press conferences Ny Chakrya alleged that two clients of ADHOC had been arbitrarily arrested and detained in Siem Reap province and were facing an unfair trial.
“The legal harassment of Ny Chakrya for merely raising allegations of human rights violations is itself a clear violation of human rights,” said Kingsley Abbott, ICJ’s International Legal Adviser.
“Human rights defenders play a vital role in promoting and protecting human rights and the State has a duty to create the conditions for them to be able to carry out their work effectively and without fear of retaliation,” he added.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Cambodia is a State Party, guarantees the right to freedom of expression; the prohibition of arbitrary arrest or detention and the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law; and the right to seek effective remedies for alleged violations of human rights.
The UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, adopted by a consensus of States including Cambodia, affirms the right of everyone to peacefully oppose human rights violations.
It reaffirms the prohibition of retaliation, threats and other harassment against anyone who takes peaceful action against human rights violations, both within and beyond the exercise of their professional duties.
It also protects the right of persons to file formal complaints about alleged violations of rights.
The UN Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors provide that prosecutors have the duty to uphold human rights and that states must ensure they have the power and discretion to fulfill this and other duties. Prosecutors should not proceed with a case they know to be unfounded.
“The complaint against Ny Chakrya was clearly without foundation and he should never have been summoned for questioning in the first place,” Abbott said. “To continue to proceed with this case would be a violation of Ny Chakrya’s rights as a human rights defender.”
The ICJ reiterates its call for the end of the legal harassment of Ny Chakrya and that his case should be closed definitively by whatever means or to whatever extent is available to the Deputy Prosecutor and other state officials.
Background:
According to information provided to the ICJ, on 22 June 2015 the Phnom Penh Municipal Court issued a summons for Ny Chakrya to appear before it for questioning pursuant to a complaint filed by the Investigating Judge and the Deputy Prosecutor of the Siem Reap Provincial Court alleging public defamation (Art. 305 of the Cambodian Criminal Code), acts of slanderous denunciation (Art. 311 of the Cambodian Criminal Code), and the publication of comments to put pressure on the jurisdiction (Art. 522 of the Cambodian Criminal Code).
On 13 July 2015 at the Phnom Penh Municipal Court, the Deputy Prosecutor questioned Ny Chakrya about statements he made at two press conferences organized by ADHOC.
At a press conference on 12 May 2015 in Siem Reap, Ny Chakrya and a lawyer from ADHOC alleged that two clients of ADHOC had been arbitrary arrested and detained in the context of a high profile land dispute in Siem Reap province.
Ny Chakrya alleged that their arrest and detention was a violation of Cambodian law and international human rights law.
At a press conference on 20 May 2015 in Phnom Penh, Ny Chakrya sought to raise public awareness about a complaint that he had filed the same day to the President of the Disciplinary Council of the Supreme Council of Magistracy.
In the complaint, Ny Chakrya alleged that the Deputy Prosecutor and Investigating Judge of the Siem Reap Provincial Court lacked independence and that the two villagers would not receive a fair trial as a result.
On 17 June 2015, the Siem Reap Provincial Court found ADHOC’s clients guilty of inciting a group of villagers to trespass on, use and destroy the property of Community Takhmao Development Agricultural & Industrial, an agricultural development company.
They were sentenced respectively to six months’ and eight months’ imprisonment.
The criminal proceedings arose in the context of a dispute between Community Takhmao Development Agricultural & Industrial and villagers in Chup Romdeng Village in Siem Reap province regarding the alleged illegal clearing of land in Siem Reap province.
Contact:
Kingsley Abbott, ICJ International Legal Adviser, t: +668 4092 3575 ; e: kingsley.abbott(a)icj.org
Jul 13, 2015 | News
The ICJ expresses concern at the recent decision of the Nizami District Court of Baku to disbar Khalid Baghirov, a prominent lawyer who litigates before national and international jurisdictions including the European Court of Human Rights.
Khalid Baghirov had been accused of the use of improper expressions and inappropriate behaviour, following statements he made in a hearing before Sheki Appeal Court, alleging that the judge in the case was biased.
On 2 February 2015, the ICJ observed the disciplinary hearing in the case of Khalid Baghirov before the Nizami District Court of Baku.
The Court’s decision, on 10 July 2015, follows the disbarment earlier this month of lawyer Alaif Ghasanov, for making a public statement about the conditions of detention of one of his clients, Leyla Yunus, a prominent human rights defender currently held in detention.
There are grounds to believe that Khalid Baghirov’s disbarment is in retaliation for his representation of clients in high profile cases, including prominent human rights defenders.
“Disbarments such as this have a chilling effect on the work of other lawyers, sending a signal that they may be penalized for discharging their functions independently and in accordance with international standards on the role and duties of the legal profession,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe Programme.
“Without independent legal representation, those who come before the courts cannot receive a fair trial and the system’s capacity to fairly administer justice under the rule of law is undermined,” she added.
Access to effective and independent legal assistance is an indispensable element of the right to a fair trial, guaranteed under the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights, to which Azerbaijan is a party.
The ICJ affirms that freedom of expression of lawyers constitutes an essential requirement for the proper functioning of the legal profession.
Article 23 of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers states that lawyers: “[…] have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights and to join or form local, national or international organizations and attend their meetings, without suffering professional restrictions by reason of their lawful action or their membership in a lawful organization.”
The European Court of Human Rights commented in its recent decision in Moris v France that where a lawyer makes statements regarding the functioning the judiciary, a matter of public interest, little room is left for restrictions on such comments which are protected pursuant to the right to freedom of expression.
In particular, the Court held that “[…] a lawyer should be able to draw the public’s attention to potential shortcomings in the justice system; the judiciary may benefit from constructive criticism”.
The ICJ calls on the public authorities of Azerbaijan as well as the Azerbaijan Collegium of Lawyers to ensure that lawyers, including those representing opposition leaders or human rights defenders, are not identified with their clients’ causes and are able to discharge their functions freely without any fear of persecution, harassment or improper interference.
Background:
Khalid Baghirov, an Azerbaijani lawyer, has represented a number of clients in high-profile cases, including Ilgar Mammadov, Leyla and Arif Yunus and Rasul Djafarov.
He has filed over 40 applications to the European Court of Human Rights, thirteen of which are pending communication.
On 17 March, 2014, Sheki Court convicted Ilgar Mammadov, leader of the “Republican Alternative” movement and former presidential candidate, and sentenced him to seven years of imprisonment.
The case was appealed to Sheki Appeal Court, and a hearing in the appeal was held on 12 August 2014.
On 25 September 2014, judge of Sheki Appeal Court Rashid Huseynov filed a complaint (1 (107)-90/2014) before the Collegium of Advocates requesting disciplinary measures against Khalid Baghirov for a breach of the Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan “On Advocates and Advocates’ Activity”, which included a failure to wear “lawyers’ outfit” in the court room, and use of improper expressions and behaviour incompatible with standards of lawyer’s conduct.
According to the complaint, on 12 August 2014, at the appeal hearing of Mammadov’s case by the Sheki Appeal Court, Khalid Baghivov was alleged to have said: “… like a state, like a court… If there were justice in Azerbaijan, neither the judge Rashid Huseynov would make unjust and biased decision, nor the person like him would be a judge”. He allegedly did not wear a lawyer’s gown during the appeal herrings on 12 and 13 August as well as on 3 and 4 September 2014 hearings.
On 19 November 2014, the Disciplinary Commission of the Advocates’ Collegium issued an opinion, finding that the applicant’s speech aimed to defame the State and was in breach of lawyer’s ethical standards.
On 10 December 2014, the Presidium of the Collegium of Lawyers suspended Khalid Baghirov’s practice, stating inter alia as follows: “The fact that advocate Khalid Baghirov stated the expression ‘like a state, like a court’ in the open court session casts a shadow not only on judiciary branch of Azerbaijan, more importantly, on our state that is considered to be holy for each citizen of Azerbaijan. […] Moreover, by using expression ‘If there were justice in Azerbaijan, neither the judge Rashid Huseynov would make unjust and preconceived decision, nor the person like him would be a judge’ Khalid Baghirov humiliated authority of the whole Justice System of Azerbaijan”.
At the same time, the Presidium applied to the Nizami District Court seeking complete termination of his right to practice law.
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, Europe Programme, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser, Europe Programme, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
