International Commission of Jurists
Russian Federation: constitutional amendments undermining human rights protection should be withdrawn

Russian Federation: constitutional amendments undermining human rights protection should be withdrawn

Mar 26, 2020 | News

Following the decision to postpone a referendum on amendments to the Russian Constitution, the ICJ calls on the authorities of the Russian Federation to refrain from adoption of the amendments or revise those amendments which are likely to have a detrimental effect on the rule of law and human rights protection.

“Amongst the wide range of amendments proposed, are some that would restrict the implementation of international human rights law, and in particular the decisions of international human rights courts, in the Russian Federation,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the Europe and Central Asia Programme of the ICJ.

“Other amendments would damage the independence of the Russian judiciary through changes to judicial appointments and dismissal procedures.”

The ICJ draws attention to these issues in a briefing paper on certain amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation, published today.

“We urge the Russian authorities to use the opportunity presented by the postponement of the referendum, to reconsider amendments that would damage the ability of the justice system to provide an effective remedy to people whose human rights have been violated,” added Pillay.

Background

On 15 January 2020 the President of the Russian Federation announced a decision to introduce more than forty amendments to the Constitution adopted in 1993. They are to be adopted through an extraordinary procedure which includes public vote, organised specifically for these amendments.

The amendments touch upon a range of issues not necessarily connected with each other. They among other things erode the role of international law and tribunals as well as weaken the independence of the national judiciary.

On 25 March, Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin announced that a planned referendum on the constitutional amendments would be postponed due to COVID-19.

This ICJ briefing paper analyses how these amendments may run contrary to international commitments of the Russian Federation and further impede the judicial independence. The briefing paper addresses three particular changes proposed to the 1993 Constitution:

  • The role of international law and of decisions of international courts or other mechanisms (Article 125 of the Constitution)
  • Appointment of judges (Article 83 of the Constitution)
  • Procedures of appointment and removal for judges (Articles 83, 102 and 128 of the Constitution).

Full Briefing Paper (in PDF): Russia-constitution changes-Advocacy-Analysis Brief-2020-ENG

Turkey: ICJ and IBAHRI urge Turkey’s Council of Judges and Prosecutors to cease probe into Gezi Park trial judges

Turkey: ICJ and IBAHRI urge Turkey’s Council of Judges and Prosecutors to cease probe into Gezi Park trial judges

Feb 28, 2020 | News

The ICJ and the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) urge the Turkish Council of Judges and Prosecutors (CJP) to stop their investigation into the three judges of the Istanbul 30th Heavy Penal Court who, on 18 February 2020, acquitted the defendants in the Gezi Park trial due to a lack of evidence.

According to a statement from 30 Turkish bar associations, the sole reason for the investigation was the acquittal in the Gezi Park trial. The Council of Judges and Prosecutors, the body of self-governance of the judiciary, has the power to launch and take disciplinary action against judges, including disciplinary proceedings leading to removal from office.

“The launch of such an investigation is a further sign of the grave decline of the rule of law in Turkey”, said Massimo Frigo, Senior Legal Adviser for the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme “The disciplinary proceedings against these judges appear to be a direct interference in their decision-making power and will have a chilling effect on the independence of all members of the judiciary.”

“The role of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors should be to protect the independence of the judiciary – not to be an instrument of control and pressure against individual judges” said Massimo Frigo.

IBAHRI Co-Chair, the Hon Michael Kirby AC CMG, commented: “The IBAHRI and the ICJ jointly welcomed the acquittal of Osman Kavala and the other 15 defendants. Now, we condemn the re-arrest of Mr Kavala, continue to stand with the defendants, and call for Mr Kavala’s immediate release. We implore the Turkish Council of Judges and Prosecutors to reconsider the hugely damaging impact their inspection of the judges will have on the principles of judicial independence and the rights of lawyers, and to cease all action in this respect.”

The launch of this investigation occurred immediately after the acquittals in the Gezi trial, spurred by the vehement public protests by President Erdogan against the verdict.

30 Turkish Bar Associations have issued a statement calling for the resignation of the members of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors and considered this investigation as a violation of the principle of judicial independence under the Turkish Constitution.

Background

The defendants in the Gezi trial – with the exception of those not present in Turkey who will be tried separately – were acquitted on 18 February for lack of evidence. The ICJ and IBAHRI welcomed the acquittal after having observed all hearings of the trial. The very evening of the verdict, one of the defendants, Osman Kavala, was re-arrested on suspicion of “attempting to disrupt the constitutional order” connected to the failed coup attempt of 2016.

Osman Kavala has been in detention since 18 October 2017 pending trial on charges connected to the Gezi Park protests. The Gezi Park protests began in May 2013 as an effort by a group of environmentalists to save a park in central Istanbul from being rezoned, but soon grew into nationwide demonstrations. Police quelled the protest in Taksim Square with the use of tear gas and water cannons.

Contact: 

Massimo Frigo, ICJ Senior Legal Adviser – e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org – t: +41229793805

 

Poland: judges and lawyers from around the world condemn rapidly escalating rule of law crisis

Poland: judges and lawyers from around the world condemn rapidly escalating rule of law crisis

Feb 5, 2020 | Advocacy, News, Open letters

ICJ Commissioners and Honorary Members today denounced the rapidly escalating rule of law crisis in Poland, after a new law was passed that would result in harassment of judges upholding the independence of the judiciary.

A group of 44 ICJ Commissioners and Honorary Members, including senior judges, lawyers and legal scholars from around the world said in their statement “it is clear that the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary, and the capacity of Polish judges to uphold the rule of law are now severely compromised. Judges’ freedom of expression, association and assembly are under immediate threat.”

The statement

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), its Centre for the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (CIJL) and the undersigned Commissioners and Honorary Members of the ICJ are alarmed at the rapidly escalating rule of law crisis in Poland.

It is clear that the separation of powers, the independence of the judiciary, and the capacity of Polish judges to uphold the rule of law are now severely compromised.  Judges’ freedom of expression, association and assembly are under immediate threat.

The passing by the Sejm on 23 January of the amendments to the laws on the judiciary, and their signing into law on 4 February, means that judges will be prohibited from questioning the legitimacy or institutional independence of any Polish court, even where its members have been appointed through a politically controlled process, in violation of EU and international law.  Judges will face disciplinary action for denying the validity of any judicial appointment.

This law is an attempt to prevent any Polish court from upholding the independence of the judiciary, in the face of repeated legislative and government attacks on judicial independence in recent years.

This is directly contrary to the obligations of judges under the EU treaties to apply EU law, and would therefore lead to violations of Poland’s EU law obligations. It would also lead to violations of Poland’s obligations under international human rights law, since it would require judges to act contrary to their duty to uphold the right to a fair hearing before an independent and impartial tribunal.

As the Venice Commission noted in its recent opinion on the amendments, they are clearly “designed to have a nullifying effect” on recent judgments and resolutions of the Court of Justice of the EU and the Polish Supreme Court, which have called into question the validity of recent judicial appointments.  As such, they do severe damage to the rule of law in Poland.

These developments follow recent legislation which has politicised the National Council of the Judiciary (NCJ) and imposed executive control of the appointment process for judges of the Supreme Court, court presidents and other judges.  A powerful new Extraordinary Chamber as well as a Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Court, appointed under this new system, has further entrenched political control of the judiciary.

The ICJ, its undersigned Commissioners and Honorary Members, applaud the continued resolute defence of the rule of law by sections of the Polish judiciary. This has been evident in the resolution of the Supreme Court (Civil, Criminal, Labour and Social Security Divisions) of 23 January which found that recent judicial appointments meant that some Polish courts were not sufficiently independent to be legitimately constituted.

We deplore the response by President Adrzej Duda in which he suggested that judges opposing the judicial reforms on the judiciary acted out of improper self-interest.

The undersigned ICJ Commissioners and Honorary Members affirm their solidarity with Polish judges, in particular those who are currently facing abusive disciplinary or criminal proceedings for carrying out their judicial functions in accordance with the principle of judicial independence, or for exercising their freedom of expression, association or assembly as a means to defend the rule of law.

We recall that international human rights law and international standards on the judiciary require all branches of government to respect the independence of the judiciary. Furthermore, they recognise that judges have rights to freedom of expression and association and that they have a particularly important role in contributing to discussions on issues of the functioning of the judicial system and the rule of law, especially in defending the independence of the judiciary.

We call on the international community to respond to the Polish rule of law crisis in a manner appropriate to the gravity of the situation, before the damage to the Polish legal system becomes further entrenched.

In particular, we call on the European Union to urgently advance proceedings concerning Poland under Article 7 TEU, in light of the clear breach of EU law and EU fundamental values entailed by the new law, in conjunction with previous reforms, and by the government’s open defiance of decisions of the Court of Justice of the EU and the Polish Supreme Court.

Poland-Commissioners-Statement-Advocacy-Open-Letter-2020-ENG, (full text with all signatories, PDF)

 

 

Turkey: workshop “Towards an alternative Justice Reform Strategy”

Turkey: workshop “Towards an alternative Justice Reform Strategy”

Dec 16, 2019 | Agendas, Events, News

Today begins in Ankara (Turkey) a one-day workshop for lawyers and CSO practitioners to discuss and brainstorm on an alternative Justice Reform Strategy.

This event is organized by ICJ, in cooperation with its partners Kapasite Geliştirme Derneği and Human Rights Joint Platform, as part of a EU co-financed project Rebuilding and Ensuring Access to justice with civil society in Turkey.

The workshop aims at discussing the key reforms proposed by the Government of Turkey in its Judicial Reform Strategy and provide with an assessment and an alternative plan for reform based on international standards and jurisprudence on access to justice and the independence of the judiciary.

The workshop will provide presentations on international standards on the judiciary as well as on access to justice for human rights violations. It will produce a ten point strategy document to propose reforms that will uphold the independence of the judiciary and access to justice in Turkey.

The project is funded by the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) of the European Union.

Turkey-Workshop-Agenda-AltJRS-Ankara-2019-eng (download the agenda)

Translate »