Dec 14, 2013 | News
The ICJ today urged the Lao PDR government to reverse its inaction in determining the fate of community activist Sombath Somphone, who was allegedly subjected to enforced disappearance a year ago.
In a legal memorandum on the one-year anniversary of Sombath’s enforced disappearance, the ICJ called on the Lao authorities to fulfill their country’s obligations under international law and carry out a thorough and impartial investigation into his whereabouts.
It also said the government must cooperate with regional and international human rights mechanisms, particularly the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR) and the UN Working Group on Enforced and Involuntary Disappearances.
“It is deplorable that one year after Sombath Somphone was abducted after being stopped by traffic police, the public prosecutor has yet to institute formal
or criminal proceedings into his disappearance’’, said Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific regional director.
“The government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic must immediately take effective measure to ensure animpartial and thorough investigation and bring justice to those responsible for crimes against Sombath Somphone,” he added.
Sixty-two-year old Sombath Somphone, Lao PDR’s most prominent community development advocate and a Ramon Magsaysay Award winner, was last seen on December 15, 2013, on a road in the capital Vientiane.
Closed circuit Television (CCTV) footage showed him being stopped at a police checkpoint, exiting his vehicle, getting into another vehicle with unidentified men and being driven away. He has not been seen since.
The Lao PDR government has denied any involvement in Sombath Somphone’s abduction. But reports released by police reveal a wholly inadequate investigation that lacks any credible explanation as to his fate or whereabouts.
In January this year, the ICJ called on the AICHR to play a proactive role in the case and to use the opportunity to address issues of enforced and involuntary disappearances in the region. To date, the AICHR has yet to take any meaningful action.
If the AICHR is to have any meaning, it must fulfill its mandate under Article 4, paragraph 1.11 of its Terms of Reference and develop a common position and strategy for tackling the widespread impunity of all acts of enforced disappearances in ASEAN, the legal memorandum said.
“An effective investigation, conducted in accordance with international standards, is essential in order that family members of Sombath Somphone and the public as a whole may discover the truth about his fate and whereabouts, and bring justice and reparation,’’ said Zarifi.
Background
Sombath Somphone is the founder and former director of the Participatory Development Training Center (PADETC), a non-governmental organization that supports holistic education and youth development as well as promoting eco-friendly technologies and micro-enterprises.
In October 2012, Sombath assisted the Lao government and non-governmental organizations convene an Asia-Europe People’s Forum (AEPF). The event was widely attended, drawing 948 participants from Lao PDR as well as other Asian countries.
It was the first time groups publicly criticized human rights abuses in Lao PDR, a Communist-run Southeast Asian country bordering Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar and China.
The legal memorandum also covers the right of a family member to the right to information in such cases of enforced disappearances pursuant to both international standards as well as domestic laws in Lao PDR.
Recommendations
The key recommendations in the legal memorandum include:
(a) The public prosecutor, to launch a credible, prompt, thorough, impartial and effective investigation into the fate and whereabouts of Sombath Somphone. In the event that the public prosecutor fails to do so, an independent and credible authority should be established to undertake prompt, thorough and impartial investigation, consistent with international standards, into the alleged enforced disappearance as well as allegations of arbitrary detention, torture or ill-treatment;
(b) In furtherance of this investigation, the investigating authority should immediately seek and accept assistance from foreign experts on analysis of forensic evidence; and
(c) The investigating authority should provide relevant material and conclusions from any investigation to Sombath Somphone’s wife, to the extent compatible with the prosecution of the case.
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
Lao-Legal Memorandum-annex on the case of Sombath Somphone-advocay-2013 (download in pdf)
Nov 5, 2013 | News
The ICJ condemns Bangladesh’s imposition of the death penalty in contravention of the global trend towards abolition of capital punishment.
It signifies a weakening of the rule of law and respect for human rights standards in the country.
On 5 November 2013, a special court sentenced 152 persons to death, most of them former officers of the Bangladesh Rifles (BDR), for participating in the 2009 mutiny in which 74 people were killed.
Two days earlier, the International Crimes Tribunal (ICT) had convicted Chowdhury Mueen Uddin and Ashrafuzzaman Khan in absentia for abduction and murder during Bangladesh’s liberation war in 1971 and sentenced them to death.
The ICT, set up by the Government of Bangladesh in 2010 to prosecute persons accused of committing genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other serious crimes during the 1971 war, has so far convicted nine accused. Seven have been given death sentences.
“The numbers of death sentences issued by special courts in Bangladesh is alarming,” said Ben Schonveld, ICJ’s South Asia Director. “There seems little interest in seeking justice; this looks more like revenge.”
“Those responsible for committing atrocities during the Bangladeshi war of liberation and the 2009 mutiny must be prosecuted and brought to justice,” he added. “But the death penalty is a perversion of justice, even more so when imposed after trials that violate due process.”
The ICJ considers the death penalty to constitute a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment. The United Nations General Assembly has repeatedly called on all States to establish a moratorium on the death penalty with a view to abolition.
Under international law and standards, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Bangladesh is required to scrupulously and strictly to observe all relevant fair trial guarantees.
This includes the right to effective legal assistance at all stages of the proceedings including the appeal.
The International Crimes Tribunal as well the Special Court set up by Bangladesh to try those accused of committing atrocities in the 2009 mutiny do not meet international standards and Bangladesh’s legal obligations concerning the right to a fair trial.
The 846 suspects tried by the special court in Dhaka for the 2009 mutiny had limited access to lawyers; did not have sufficient knowledge of the charges and evidence against them; and at least 47 suspects died while in custody, allegedly after being subjected to torture.
There are also serious procedural flaws at all stages in the ICT.
Pre-trial release has been routinely and arbitrarily denied; witnesses have been abducted and intimidated; and there have been credible allegations of collusion between the Government, prosecutors and judges.
The ICJ calls on Bangladesh to join the great majority of States around the world in rejecting the death penalty.
To that end, Bangladesh should impose a moratorium on the practice and take steps towards its abolition, as prescribed by repeated United Nations General Assembly Resolutions.
In addition, Bangladeshi authorities must order a retrial of all persons accused of participating in the 2009 mutiny and ensure that their fresh trials meet international law standards on fair trial.
Bangladesh-Death penalty statement-news-web story-2013 (full text in pdf)
Nov 5, 2013 | News
The ICJ welcomes the release on 1 November of lawyer Zinaida Mukhotorova, from a psychiatric facility in Astana, Kazakhstan.
The lawyer was forcibly detained in the psychiatric facility, the “Medical Centre of the Problems of Psychiatric Health”, for almost three months.
Despite her release, the results of the psychiatric examination were said to be pending.
“While this release is welcome, the ICJ remains concerned that Zinaida Mukhotorova’s detention represented a reprisal for her legitimate exercise of her professional duties as a lawyer, in violation of her right to liberty as well as the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe Regional Programme. “It must now be ensured that Zinaida Mukhotorova can challenge the legality of her detention through fair procedures, and receive appropriate measures of reparation for any violation of her human rights” she added.
Zinaida Mukhtorova was placed in the psychiatric facility on 9 August after she was forcibly taken from her house by several police officers and medical personnel.
Among the reasons given for her detention were her “possibly querulous” and “litigious” activity.
The ICJ previously raised concern that her psychiatric detention was being justified on grounds consisting in the exercise of her legitimate professional functions as a lawyer.
The ICJ continues to monitor the case, including ongoing legal challenges in the Kazakhstan courts to the lawfulness of Zinaida Mukhtorova’s detention in psychiatric facilities on this and another previous occasion.
In this regard, the ICJ calls on the government to ensure fairness of the proceedings challenging her detention.
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, ICJ Europe Programme, roisin.pillay(a)icj.org
Temur Shakirov, Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe Programme, temur.shakirov(a)icj.org
Kazakhstan-Mukhtorova statement-news-webstory-2013-Rus (full text in pdf)
Oct 21, 2013 | News
The ICJ welcomes today’s ruling by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Inés Del Rio Prada, affirming that changes made retroactively to the remission of her sentence violated her rights.
The ICJ, which intervened as third-party in the case, says the judgment reinforces and makes effective the principle of non-retroactivity of criminal law, an essential element of the rule of law.
“This is a highly significant judgment that affirms and strengthens the rule of law in criminal sentencing,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe Programme. “Rules and practices that have a significant impact on the calculation and remission of sentences must not be applied retroactively to the detriment of a convicted person.”
“The key principle that the Grand Chamber has upheld today is that the rules that apply to the calculation of the sentence to be served, must be clear and foreseeable under the law at the time of conviction. Subsequent re-interpretation by the courts cannot fundamentally revise the principles that apply to a sentence already handed down. While States have the responsibility for setting sentencing rules for crimes, any changes to those rules which would result in an increased penalty must not applied retroactively in breach of (Article 7 of) the European Convention on Human Rights,” she added.
BACKGROUND:
Inés Del Rio Prada had been convicted of terrorism offences and sentenced to a total of over 3,000 years of imprisonment.
According to Spanish sentencing rules in force at the time, this theoretical sentence was tantamount to an effective sentence of 30 years imprisonment.
While at that time, the benefit of sentence reduction for work performed in prison was applied to the 30-year period, in 2008 the Spanish courts decided to deduct such benefits from the 3,000 years of nominal imprisonment instead, thereby significantly reducing their impact, and leading to a considerably longer sentence in the case of the applicant.
In its judgment, the Grand Chamber held that the application of changes to Spanish sentencing rules as applied to applicant Inés Del Rio Prada had violated the prohibition on retroactive penalties guaranteed in Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
It held that a 2006 decision of the Spanish Supreme Court, which altered the system of calculation of maximum terms of sentences, leading to reduced remission of sentences for work done in prison, constituted a retroactive redefinition of the sentence previously imposed, which could not have been foreseen.
As such, the Court held that Spain had violated its obligations under article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The Court also found that the applicant’s continued detention violated the right to liberty under Article 5(1) ECHR, and required her release at the earliest possible date.
Contact:
Róisín Pillay, Director, ICJ Europe Programme, t +32 2 734 8446; e-mail : roísín.pillay(a)icj.org
Read also:
Third Party Intervention in Del Rio Prada v. Spain
Oct 3, 2013 | News
Following Pakistan’s reinstation of its moratorium on the death penalty, the ICJ calls on the Government to make the moratorium permanent and to move to abolish the death penalty in national law.
“This is a step forward for human rights in Pakistan,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia-Pacific Director. “It brings Pakistan closer to the regional and worldwide trend towards abolishment of the death penalty.”
Pakistan has had a moratorium on the death penalty in place since June 2008, with only the exception of Muhammad Hussain’s execution in November 2012 following a court martial.
The newly elected Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) Government decided not to renew the moratorium when it expired in June 2013.
The ICJ and other human rights groups denounced the move and urged Pakistan to immediately adopt a moratorium on the death penalty, prompting the Government to reconsider its decision.
According to the Interior Ministry spokesperson, today’s decision was taken to meet Pakistan’s international human rights obligations.
Pakistani Taliban also warned the Government that they would launch retaliatory attacks if any of their members were executed.
“This brave move by the government should be the first step toward reestablishing the rule of law and providing accountability in Pakistan,” Zarifi added. “The Government should now ensure that members of armed groups like the Taliban who have carried out serious human rights abuses like extrajudicial executions and attacks on civilians are held to account.”
The ICJ considers the death penalty in all cases to constitute a violation of the right to life and the right not to be subjected to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment.
Contact:
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia-Pacific Regional Director, (Bangkok), t:+66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
