Turkey : Immediately free lawyer and human rights defender Öztürk Türkdoğan

Turkey : Immediately free lawyer and human rights defender Öztürk Türkdoğan

The ICJ called today on the Turkish authorities to immediately release human rights defender and lawyer Öztürk Türkdoğan, who was arrested this morning after an unlawful search of his home.  The charges against him, if any, are unkown and he is currently being held without access to his lawyer.

Öztürk Türkdoğan is the chair of the Human Rights Association and a lawyer and member of the Ankara Bar Association.

“The arrest and search of Öztürk Türkdoğan’s continues a systematic pattern of misuse of the criminal law to harass and persecute human rights defenders and lawyers in Turkey in recent years,” said Roisin Pillay, ICJ’s Europe and Central Asia Programme Director. “Öztürk Türkdoğan must be released immediately. If he remains in detention then he must be ensured immediate and confidential access to a lawyer, and be informed of the nature of any charges against him and brought promptly before a court.”

The arrest occurred during a search of Öztürk Türkdoğan’s home without the presence of a lawyer, which is in direct contravention of Turkish criminal procedural law.

While no information has been made available on the charges against Öztürk Türkdoğan, he is currently being detained without access to a lawyer for 24 hours, which indicates that the charges are likely related to terrorism or to offences against the State. These offences, contrary to obligations under international human rights law, are vaguely and broadly defined and have been long used and abused by prosecutors in Turkey to suppress human rights defenders, lawyers and political opponents.

Under international human rights law, anyone arrested has a right to prompt and confidential access to a lawyer, and to information on the charges against them.  Arrests and searches of homes must not be arbitrary and must be carried out in compliance with international standards and national laws and procedures.

“Hundreds of lawyers, judges and prosecutors have been improperly arrested, harassed and detained in the past few years by Turkish authorities  ” said Roisin Pillay.  “Using the criminal justice system in this way is contrary to the most fundamental principles of the rule of law.”

Background

Systematic violations of human rights in investigation and prosecution of counter-terrorism offences in Turkey have also been documented by the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights while countering terrorism, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders, the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, theWorking Group on Arbitrary Detention, the Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association and the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe.

The ICJ has extensively documented these violations:

 

 

 

 

 

Myanmar: a civilian government and the rule of law must be restored (UN Statement)

Myanmar: a civilian government and the rule of law must be restored (UN Statement)

Today, during a General Debate, the ICJ called on the UN Human Rights Council to condemns a set of laws amendend by the military governmentn in Myanmar and restricting human rights, and to demand the return to of Myanmar civilian rule respecting the rule of law.

 

The statement reads as follows:

“Madame President,

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) condemns the illegitimate attempts to “amend” several laws by the Military appointed Myanmar’s State Administration Council (SAC) following its unlawful seizure of power on 1 February 2021.

The implementation of the Amended Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens (2017) would undermine the democratic process, criminalize peaceful protests and remove various human rights protections. It would provide for broad and unchecked power to the military to arrest anyone without a warrant and aim to remove basic protections, including the rights to be free from arbitrary detention and from warrantless surveillance and search and seizure.

The amendments to the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedural Code have made non-bailable certain offenses, specifically targeting persons criticizing the coup or the military junta, as well as those encouraging others to support the “Civil Disobedience Movement.”

In addition, Amendments made to other existing laws, such as the Ward and Tract Administration Law and Electronic Transactions Law, allow for search and seizure at night without arrest warrant and allow for the silencing of critical voices against the coup and human rights violations of the military, in violation of international standards.

The ICJ calls on the Council to adopt a resolution, which, among other things, univocally condemns and demands the repeal of these laws and the return to of Myanmar civilian rule respecting the rule of law.

Thank you.”

Myanmar: Human rights implications of the crisis, UN Special Session

Myanmar: Human rights implications of the crisis, UN Special Session

The ICJ today addressed an emergency Special Session of the UN Human Rights Council on Myanmar, outlining violations to human rights and the rule of law occurring in the country since the coup d’état of 1 February.

The Special Session is expected to adopt a resolution to address “The human rights implications of the crisis in Myanmar.”

The ICJ statement read as follows:

“Madame President,

The International Commission of Jurists condemns the Myanmar military’s unlawful seizure of authority and the unconstitutional declaration of a state of emergency on 1 February.

These actions defy core rule of law principles and provide an illegitimate basis for the suspension and erosion of human rights.

Nearly 200 people, including human rights defenders, have been arbitrarily detained, some in unknown locations. Security forces have used excessive force against peaceful protesters, causing serious injuries.

Regulations imposed pursuant to the state of emergency grant military forces nearly complete impunity. Furthermore, these regulations suspend crucial judicial remedies for violations of rights, such as the writ of habeas corpus.

Judges, including from the Supreme Court, have been illegally removed and replaced, undermining the independence of an already embattled judiciary.

The military takeover further endangers the already grave situation of the Rohingya community.

The ICJ calls on the Human Rights Council to urge the military to immediately return authority to the civilian government and allow immediate access to the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar and other special procedures, the OHCHR, and the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar, whose mandate includes investigating all serious human rights violations.

Member States should take necessary measures to ensure truth, justice and accountability for crimes under international law, including by supporting all relevant accountability mechanisms.

Thank you.”

Myanmar: Military Coup d’état violates principles of rule of law, international law and Myanmar’s Constitution

Myanmar: Military Coup d’état violates principles of rule of law, international law and Myanmar’s Constitution

The Myanmar military’s coup d’etat of 1 February is unconstitutional and fails to comply with basic rule of law principles, said the ICJ today.

“The Myanmar military’s actions violate even the flawed Constitution that the military itself imposed in 2008,” said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Secretary General. “The irregularities alleged by the military in the recent elections do not justify declaring a state of emergency and shattering the already weak rule of law in the country.”

The coup d’etat does not comply with the Constitution of the Republic of the Union of Myanmar 2008, which suffers from multiple shortcomings in basic respect for the rule of law and international human rights standards.

Article 417 of the Constitution requires the President to declare a state of emergency when there is a risk to the sovereignty of the country.

Article 418 requires the President to hand over all power to the Commander-in-Chief of the Army. Contrary to this provision, the state of emergency was declared by the Vice-President, after the military detained President Win Myint.

“The accountability of the military to the civilian authorities is a core rule of law principle”, said Sam Zarifi “Myanmar’s military leaders have turned this principle on its head by usurping total authority again.”

The ICJ is concerned that Myanmar’s Constitution provides for the possibility of suspending protections for a number of human rights, such as freedom of expression and association and the right to habeas corpus.  Under international human rights law, derogations from certain rights are permissible only when strictly necessary to meet a specific threat to the life of the nation, conditions not met under the current emergency.

The right to habeas corpus is among those rights that may never be suspended. The writ of habeas corpus allows any person detained by any State agent, including during emergencies, to challenge the lawfulness of the detention.

“The right to test the lawfulness of any detention needs to be restored and the judiciary must be able to independently examine the legality of any arrests and detentions and order to release of those it finds are detained illegally” said Sam Zarifi.

Of particular concern to the ICJ is the near-total impunity provided to the military after the declaration of the State of Emergency, and the proliferation of arbitrary detention without recourse to legal review.

Article 432 of the Constitution effectively shields the military and security forces from any review of ’legitimate measures’ pursuant to the declaration of a state of emergency, which the ICJ notes also flies in the face of the rule of law.

“After the shock of the coup d’etat, we are now seeing brave lawyers and civil society activists trying to use peaceful means at their disposal to demand their rights,” Zarifi said. “This movement is not focused around an icon or even one party, but on the notion that the people of Myanmar should be able to government themselves and decide their future.”

Contact

Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Secretary General, sam.zarifi(a)icj.org

Poland: ICJ and Amnesty International intervene before European Court against arbitrary disciplinary proceedings of Judge Igor Tuleya

Poland: ICJ and Amnesty International intervene before European Court against arbitrary disciplinary proceedings of Judge Igor Tuleya

The ICJ and Amnesty International have submitted today to the European Court of Human Rights their intervention in the case of Judge Igor Tuleya who alleges that the seven disciplinary proceedings brought against him have affected his reputation as a judge and undermine the authority of the judiciary.

Judge Igor Tuleya contests that the disciplinary proceedings brought against him were in violation of his right to respect for private life and of his right to an effective remedy against violation of human rights.

The case takes place in the context of the “reform” of the judiciary in Poland, involving policy measures and legislative changes approved between late 2015 and 2020, which have seriously compromised the independence of the judiciary.

The intervention focuses on three main issues:

  • The scope of application of Article 8 and Article 13 in cases relating to disciplinary proceedings against judges, in light of international standards on disciplinary proceedings and measures and effective domestic remedies; of the Court’s Convention jurisprudence; and of general principles on the rule of law and the role and independence of the judiciary.
  • The situation of the independence of the judiciary in Poland as the context in which to assess the application of Articles 8 and 13.
  • The scope of Article 10 as applied to judges, including those engaged in the administration of the judiciary.

ECtHR-AmicusBrief-Tuleya_v_Poland-Advocacy-Legal-Submission-2020-ENG (download the third party intervention)

Translate »