Judicial Councils and Judicial Independence (UN Statement)

Judicial Councils and Judicial Independence (UN Statement)

The ICJ today spoke at the UN on the role of judicial councils, judicial independence in Turkey and Poland, and on business and human rights in Peru.

The statement was made at the UN Human Rights Council during the interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers and the Working Group on Business and Human Rights.

The statement on judicial councils and independence was made jointly with the Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association. The whole statement read as follows:

“Mr President,

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) and Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association (CMJA) welcome the report of the Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers (A/HRC/38/38) on the role of judicial councils and similar bodies.

Based on many decades of relevant experience around the world, we urge that:

All countries should consider establishing an independent judicial council. Reliance on constitutional customs, cultures, and traditions alone often proves insufficient if a crisis arises.

To guarantee independence, a majority of members should be judges elected by their peers. Any other members must also be independent. The Head of State, executive or legislative officials, or political candidates, should not be members. Proactive measures should address under-representation of women or persons from minority or marginalized groups.

Such bodies should be responsible for all decisions relating to the selection, appointment, promotion, transfer, discipline, suspension and removal of judges.

As an example of concern, in Turkey following constitutional reform in 2017 no member of the Council of Judges and Prosecutors is elected by their peers, contributing to a lack of institutional independence of the judiciary. We also share the concerns for lawyers in Turkey already expressed by The Law Society and other colleagues today.

On the report on the visit to Poland (A/HRC/38/38/Add.1), we concur that reforms in the name of efficiency and accountability have undermined the independence of the Constitutional Tribunal, the Supreme Court and the National Council of the Judiciary, and effectively placed the entire judiciary under “control of the executive and legislative branches” (para 74). Mr Special Rapporteur, how can other States assist in securing full implementation of your recommendations on Poland?

The findings of the Working Group on Business and Human Rights report on its mission to Peru (A/HRC/38/48/Add.2) are of great concern, that “large number of human rights defenders and local leaders” were reportedly killed, attacked or threatened for defending the environment and land rights, legitimate social protest is criminalized, and wide use of states of exception and the armed forces have lead to serious abuses. The ICJ urges Peru to implement the recommendations and asks the Working Group what it will do to follow up?

Thank you.”

Judicial councils and similar oversight mechanisms: UN submission

Judicial councils and similar oversight mechanisms: UN submission

The ICJ has set out key principles and sources on judicial councils and other national mechanisms for selecting, appointing, promoting, transferring, suspending or removing judges, in a submission to the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers.The submission was made in response to a call by the Special Rapporteur for input to a report he will present at the June 2018 session of the Human Rights Council.

The ICJ submission highlights that judicial councils are a proven means of safeguarding judicial independence and ensuring judicial accountability. It recommends that, even in countries where judicial independence and accountability have traditionally been secured by other means, consideration should be given to the establishment of a judicial council.
The submission stresses that judicial councils must be fully independent of the executive and legislative branches of government, and notes several key safeguards to help secure such independence.

The ICJ recommends that such judicial councils should in principle be responsible for all decisions relating to the selection, appointment, promotion, transfer, discipline, suspension and removal of judges.

The submission also highlights the need for diversity of membership of such councils to ensure its representativeness of the society the judiciary is to serve, that it reflects a cross-section of the judiciary as a whole, and that it has the experience and expertise needed to be effective.

The full submission can be downloaded in PDF format here:  Global-UN-SRIJL-JudicialCouncils-2018

Most of the sources cited in the submission are available here.

Related and more detailed guidance is available in the ICJ’s 2016 Practitioners’ Guide no. 13 on Judicial Accountability, as well as the 2007 Practitioners’ Guide no. 1 on Independence and Accountability of Judges, Lawyers and Prosecutors.

More information about the Special Rapporteur is available here.

For more information about the ICJ and judicial councils and similar mechanisms, contact Matt Pollard (matt.pollard(at)icj.org)

UN Human Rights Council adopts resolutions on independence of judges & lawyers

UN Human Rights Council adopts resolutions on independence of judges & lawyers

The ICJ welcomes the adoption today, by consensus, of two UN Human Rights Council resolutions on the independence of judges & lawyers.

The Human Rights Council adopted the biannual resolution on independence of judges and lawyers, including a number of new elements on the theme of independence of lawyers and the legal profession. In particular, the resolution highlights the ongoing threats against and interference with the independence of lawyers and the ability of lawyers to fulfil their professional functions, including in relation to human rights.

The resolution reaffirms and builds on the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers.

The Human Rights Council also unanimously renewed the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers for a further period of three years.

The unofficial text of the two resolutions are available in PDF format below:

Official versions will eventually appear on the UN website, at this location.

Threats to independence of judges and lawyers; backsliding on violence against women (UN statements)

Threats to independence of judges and lawyers; backsliding on violence against women (UN statements)

Speaking at the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ today highlighted judicial corruption and threats to judges and lawyers in Turkey and Azerbaijan, as well as regressive steps on violence against women in the United States of America and Russian Federation.

The statement, delivered during the interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers and the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, was as follows:

“The ICJ warmly welcomes the new Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers. As he has highlighted, ensuring judges are accountable for corruption and human rights violations, while respecting judicial independence, should be a global priority. Our Practitioners’ Guide on Judicial Accountability, published last year, should be of particular use to the Rapporteur and other actors in this regard.

Several situations serve as stark examples of other issues raised in his report. In Turkey, recent constitutional amendments give the President and Parliament control over the judiciary’s governing body. This has undermined the judiciary’s independence, already threatened by the mass dismissal of judges and the state of emergency. Lawyers and legal scholars, among others, are routinely dismissed or threatened by the authorities.

In Azerbaijan, the Bar Association is not independent and does not protect its members against undue interference with the exercise of their professional duties. Rather, it often serves as a tool of retaliation against independent human rights lawyers, including through disbarment proceedings that contravene international standards.

We would ask the Special Rapporteur for his views on the role his mandate can play in these and similar situations.

The ICJ also welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women.

Despite increasing global acknowledgement of the grave and systemic nature of violence against women, some States continue to introduce regressive legislation undermining protections for women. For example, the Russian Federation’s decriminalization of certain forms of domestic violence, and attempts in some parts of the United States of America to restrict availability of sexual and reproductive healthcare, particularly impact on victims of sexual violence. The Philippines’ President’s public statements disregarding the gravity of sexual violence are another example. The ICJ would ask the Special Rapporteur what can be done to prevent such backsliding?”

UN Statement: indicators of independence of justice systems

UN Statement: indicators of independence of justice systems

The ICJ today joined a statement delivered by the International Bar Association on indicators of independence of justice systems.The statement came during the interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers.

It read as follows:

As international organisations of legal professionals, we endorse the recommendation made by the Special Rapporteur to develop a set of international indicators to assess the independence of justice systems.

The Special Rapporteur has previously stated: ‘No ideal justice system exists; rather, there are universal principles that must be respected in the structure and functioning of any judicial system, so that it can duly fulfil its purpose’. (Report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, (2014) UN Doc A/69/294, para 92.)

Achieving Sustainable Development Goal 16 – that is, providing access to justice for all and building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions – will require respect for the universal principles of independence and impartiality of justice systems and the independence of the legal profession.

In 2015, the International Bar Association (IBA) and the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) proposed two indicators under SDG16, regarding the independence of the judiciary and an independent and self-governing legal profession. The IBA is currently developing ‘indicia of independence’ that can be used to assess the state of independence of the legal profession in a given jurisdiction. The Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA) and the Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association (CMJA) continue to monitor judicial and legal independence through the Commonwealth Latimer House Working Group.

We therefore, Madam Special Rapporteur, fully support your endeavour to develop universal indicators that complete the UN Rule of Law Indicators, and build on the UN Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, and the Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors.

We further call upon States to ensure that national targets and indicators duly align with international indicators and international principles.

Thank you, Mr President

The following organisations endorsed the statement:

  • Avocats Sans Frontières -Suisse
  • Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association
  • Commonwealth Lawyers Association
  • International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute
  • International Commission of Jurists
  • Judges for Judges
  • Lawyers for Lawyers
  • Southern Africa Litigation Centre

The statement can be downloaded in PDF format here: HRC 32- Joint Oral Statement Item 3 SR IJL_FINAL

Translate »