Aug 7, 2024 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions, News
As the Constitutional Court begins deliberations in a highly consequential case concerning sexual abuse in the South African Military, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has submitted argument that South Africa bears obligations under international law to ensure that courts and tribunals, including military courts, are competent, independent, impartial and allow for a fair and public hearing.
Mar 16, 2021 | News
On the first day of the trial before the eastern Cairo criminal military court of those accused in connection with the 2016 explosion in the Haram district of Giza, the ICJ calls on the Egyptian authorities to: investigate allegations of torture and other ill-treatment; ensure reparation for those arbitrarily detained; and end the trials of civilians before military courts.
“The case has been under investigation by the State Security Prosecution for more than five years, involving prolonged pre-trial detention and severe restriction on the right to legal counsel, in a flagrant violation of Egyptian and international law,” said Said Benarbia, the ICJ’s MENA Programme Director. “Detaining people pending trial for that length of time makes this case yet another example of how the authorities are using pre-trial detention as a tool of repression and to punish, in violation of Egypt’s obligations under international human rights law”.
In January 2016, hundreds of people were arrested, and some forcibly disappeared in connection with an explosion in the Haram district of Giza that killed seven police officers and four civilians, and injured 15 others.
A number of those detained have reportedly been subjected to ill-treatment and denied fair trial rights guaranteed by Egyptian and international law, including the right to receive family visits. In addition, to the ICJ’s knowledge, while all the accused may have briefly met their lawyers in highly restrictive circumstances at the state prosecution office each time they have been remanded into custody, over the years, they have been denied their right to legal counsel before trial as their lawyers have not been allowed to visit them in prison.
The ICJ calls on the Egyptian authorities to investigate the incidents of enforced disappearance, ill-treatment and other human rights violations with a view to bring those responsible to justice.
“Notwithstanding the gravity of the charges involved, civilians should not be brought before military courts,” said Benarbia. “the jurisdiction of military courts should be limited to trials of military personnel in cases of strictly military offences; it should not extend to crimes over which civilian courts have jurisdiction, human rights violations or crimes under international law,” he added.
Contact
Said Benarbia, Director, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, t: +41-22-979-3817; e: said.benarbia(a)icj.org
Asser Khattab, Research and Communications’ Officer, ICJ Middle East and North Africa Programme, e: asser.khattab(a)icj.org
Download
Press release in English and Arabic.
Feb 2, 2021 | News
The ICJ today denounced the decision by Pakistani authorities to conduct the trial of Idrees Khattak, a leading human rights defender, in a military court.
Idrees Khattak is charged with “spying” among other offenses, related to his monitoring of violations by military forces in 2009. He was forcibly disappeared by the Pakistani Military Intelligence in November 2019. His whereabouts remained unknown until June 2020, when military authorities informed the Commission of Inquiry on Enforced Disappearances that he was being tried under the Official Secrets Act, 1923.
The Peshawar High Court yesterday dismissed a petition challenging the jurisdiction of the military courts in this case. Under international standards, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights to which Pakistan is a party, civilians such as Idrees Khattak must not be subject to the jurisdiction of military tribunals.
“Idrees Khattak was subjected to the serious crime of enforced disappearance and instead of bringing the perpetrators of this violation to account, the Pakistani military has kept him arbitrarily detained and is now violating his rights further by subjecting him to a military court,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Secretary General.
“The Pakistan government must immediately release Idrees Khattak. If there is real and credible evidence implicating him in a cognizable crime, he should be tried by a civilian court and his right to a fair trial should be fully respected,” said Zarifi
The ICJ has found proceedings before Pakistani military courts fall well short of national and international laws requiring fair trials before independent and impartial courts:
- Judges are part of the executive branch of the State and continue to be subjected to military command;
- The right to appeal to civilian courts is not available;
- The right to a public hearing is not guaranteed;
- A duly reasoned, written judgment, including the essential findings, evidence and legal reasoning, is denied; and
- The death penalty may be implemented after unfair trials.
Idrees Khattak has been charged on multiple counts related to spying and other conduct “prejudicial to the safety or the interests of the State” under Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act as well as section 59 of the Pakistan Army Act, 1952. The Pakistan Army Act gives military courts jurisdiction to try civilians for certain offences under the Official Secrets Act.
The alleged conduct for which Idrees Khattak has been charged dates back to July 2009 – ten years before his enforced disappearance.
A group of 10 independent experts appointed by the UN Human Rights Council have characterized Idreek Khattak’s case as “emblematic of a series of documented enforced disappearances in Pakistan, where many human rights defenders are similarly silenced for their legitimate work of monitoring, documenting and advocating against a range of human rights violations and attacks against minorities.”
The ICJ calls on Pakistani authorities to immediately release Idrees Khattak.
The ICJ also calls on Pakistani authorities to ensure military courts only have jurisdiction to try military personnel for military offences and to bring procedures of military courts in conformity with international standards.
Contact
Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Secretary General, sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Reema Omer, ICJ’s Senior International Legal Advisor (South Asia), reema.omer(a)icj.org
Additional information
In July 2017, in its Concluding Observations after Pakistan’s first periodic review under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the UN Human Rights Committee stated that it was concerned by the jurisdiction of military courts over civilians and allegations of fair trial violations in military courts’ proceedings.
The Human Rights Committee recommended that Pakistan “review the legislation relating to the military courts with a view to abrogating their jurisdiction over civilians and their authority to impose the death penalty” and “reform the military courts to bring their proceedings into full conformity with articles 14 and 15 of the Covenant in order to ensure a fair trial.”
Jul 14, 2020 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
At the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ today highlighted the need for a range of measures to effectively address the continuing impunity for gross violations of human rights in Myanmar.
The oral statement, which was delivered in an interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, read as follows:
“The ICJ welcomes and shares the concerns of the final report of the previous Special Rapporteur Ms Yanghee Lee, particularly with the lack of accountability for gross human rights violations against Myanmar’s ethnic minorities.
The ICJ recalls Myanmar’s international human rights obligations, including under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and the provisional measures ordered by the International Court of Justice in The Gambia v. Myanmar case.
The ICJ underscores that directives enjoining government officials from engaging in further acts of genocide are not sufficient without comprehensive legal and constitutional reform to end impunity. This includes the amendment of laws such as the 1959 Defence Services Act and the 2014 Myanmar National Human Rights Commission Law.
National institutions continue to fail to conduct credible investigations into allegations of widespread human rights violations by the military against ethnic minorities. The final report of the Independent Commission of Enquiry, which was not made public, was transmitted to the Attorney General and the Commander-in-Chief of Myanmar’s Armed Forces, implying that military courts will take jurisdiction over at least some of the cases, inconsistent with Principle 29 of the UN Principles for the protection and promotion of human rights through action to combat impunity (UN doc E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.1/).
Mr Andrews, as the new mandate-holder, the ICJ would like to invite you to elaborate on your priorities and strategies for addressing the continuing impunity for such violations in Myanmar.”
Jul 9, 2020 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ filed a submission to the Human Rights Council’s Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review in advance of its review of Lebanon’s human rights record between January and February 2021.
Information provided in the submission was based on a number of recent ICJ publications, including on the independence of the judiciary; military courts; gender-based violence; and a forthcoming publication on the human rights of refugees and migrants in Lebanon.
In the submission, the ICJ drew the attention of the Working Group to the following concerns with respect to Lebanon:
- The independence of the judiciary and the use and jurisdiction of military courts;
- The obstacles that continue to impede women’s and girls’ access to justice for sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV); and
- The inadequate framework and practices undermining migrants’ and refugees’ rights.
The ICJ called on the Working Group and Human Rights Council to urge the Lebanese authorities to take the following actions:
With regard to the independence of the judiciary and the use and jurisdiction of military courts:
- End executive control and undue influence over the judiciary, including by divesting the Minister of Justice of any role in the selection, appointment, promotion, transfer, secondment or any other aspects of the management of the career of judges;
- Ensure that the High Judicial Council is independent from the executive, including by amending its composition to ensure that the majority of members are judges elected by their peers, and that it is pluralistic, gender and minority representative, competent to decide on all issues relating to the career of judges, and empowered to uphold the independence of the judiciary;
- Ensure that military courts have no jurisdiction to try civilians, and that such jurisdiction is restricted to military personnel over alleged breaches of military discipline or ordinary crimes not involving the commission of human rights violations, to the exclusion of human rights violations and crimes under international law.
With regard to women’s access to justice for SGBV:
- Repeal all discriminatory provisions against women, particularly those in the Criminal Code, the Nationality Code and Personal Status Laws;
- Adopt a unified civil Personal Status Law for all religious groups, where all customs discriminating against women and girls are overridden in accordance with article 2(f) of CEDAW; and ensure that issues related to divorce, inheritance and custody are adjudicated before ordinary courts consistent with international standards;
- Amend Law No. 293/2014 on the protection of women and other family members from domestic violence (Law No. 293/14) and the Criminal Code to ensure that it criminalizes all forms of SGBV, including by properly defining rape as a type of sexual assault characterized by a physical invasion of a sexual nature without consent or under coercive circumstances, and ensure that marital and all other acts of rape be criminalized; and, to this end, abolish provisions of Law No. 293/14 providing for a religion-based claim to marital rights;
- Amend the Criminal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure and Law No. 293/14 to include gender-sensitive investigations and evidence-gathering procedures in order to enable women to report violence against them, and take effective steps to address the social and practical factors that continue to impede women’s access to justice, such as gender-based stereotypes and prejudices that operate in society and in the justice system;
- Remove obstacles related to gender stereotypes, economic and social realities that continue to impede access to justice in SGBV cases, including by ensuring that where law enforcement officers fail to ensure an effective investigation into an incident of SGBV, their omissions be actionable as a breach of their duties and subject to disciplinary measures as appropriate;
- Provide routine capacity building training to justice sector actors on the application of international human rights law, including CEDAW and related jurisprudence.
With regard to the treatment of refugees and migrants:
- Become a party to the 1951 UN Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, and pass legislation to adequately protect the human rights of refugees, asylum seekers, stateless people and migrants, in compliance with Lebanon’s international obligations;
- Amend the 1962 Law on the Entry, Stay in and Exit from Lebanon (Law 1962) to ensure full compliance with these obligations, and that people entitled to international protection, chiefly refugees, asylum seekers, and stateless individuals, are not penalized, automatically arrested or deported for their “illegal” entry and stay in the country;
- Ensure that no individual is deprived of their liberty solely on the grounds of their immigration status, and, to this end, amend articles 32 and 36 of Law 1962; until then, provide automatic, periodic judicial review of the lawfulness, necessity and proportionality of any immigration-related detention;
- Strictly comply with Lebanon’s non-refoulement obligations, including by ensuring that no individual is transferred to a country where they face a real risk of persecution or other forms of serious harm; that nobody is forcibly returned without an individualized, fair and effective procedure guaranteeing due process; and by establishing a moratorium on all removals to Syria.
Lebanon-UPR Submission-Advocacy-Non Legal submission-2020-ENG (full submission, in PDF)
