Jun 18, 2018 | News
The ICJ today called on the Hungarian National Assembly to reject Bill No. T/333 that, if approved, would risk criminalizing the work of civil society, lawyers and other human rights defenders and lead to violations of the rights of migrants, especially refugees.
The National Assembly of Hungary is considering today Bill No. T/333 tabled by the Hungarian Government that amends immigration and criminal law.
“This draft law would effectively punish activities that aim to apply legal procedures” said Massimo Frigo. “This attack on the work of lawyers and human rights defenders does not constitute a legitimate aim that would allow for a permissible restriction on the rights of freedom of expression, assembly and association consistent with international human rights law.”
The ICJ warned that the draft law, if approved, would, in contravention of international standards, open the way to arrest, prosecute and convict lawyers or representatives of civil society who assist asylum seekers in filing their application for international protection. It would also make funding of such activities a crime.
The law would effectively prevent lawyers and civil society organizations, under threat of criminal punishment, from providing assistance to asylum-seekers unless they can verify that the person is entitled to international protection, even before the person has begun the refugee status determination procedure.
It would further criminalize any activity aimed at regularizing the position of an irregular migrant who had, for example, married a Hungarian citizen or became a parent of Hungarian children.
“This draft law should be rejected because it could in practice deny legal assistance to any asylum seeker, preventing them from defending their rights, ” said Massimo Frigo.
Bill T/333 has been criticized by UNHCR, the Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights and several national and international civil society organisations. An opinion of the Venice Commission on the law is expected to be published shortly.
Background
If approved in the current form, section 11 of the draft law would insert in the Criminal Code the offence of “facilitating illegal immigration”, as new section 353/A. This provision, if approved, would make it a criminal offence to carry out organized activities to facilitate the initiation of an asylum procedure for persons “who are not persecuted” in their country of origin or in a third country that they passed through, or “do not have a well-founded reason to fear direct persecution.”
This provision would also make it a criminal offence to carry out these activities to assist a person entering illegaly or residing illegally in Hungary to obtain a residence permit.
The draft law would also make it a criminal offence to provide financial means to carry out these activities.
Full Document in English (PDF): Hungary-Statement-National-Assembly-Criminalizing-Assistance-to-Migrants-Law-2018-ENG
Jan 8, 2018 | Advocacy, Cases, Legal submissions, News
The ICJ and other organizations have intervened today before the European Court of Human Rights challenging expulsions of asylum seekers from Hungary to Serbia.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and the Dutch Council for Refugees have submitted today a third party intervention before the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary.
The case challenges the systematic practice by the Hungarian authorities to send back to Serbia foreign nationals asking for asylum under the pretention that Serbia is a safe third country in which to ask for international protection.
The intervening organizations have argued before the Court that:
- a removal that exposes an applicant to the risk of refoulement and deprives them of protections under international and EU law, is prohibited regardless of whether the decision was taken on the basis of the safe third country concept or the country was included in a “safe third country” list.
- International law requires, inter alia, a rigorous scrutiny of the applicant’s arguable claim of potential prohibited treatment, access to an effective remedy following a negative decision, and access to the rights under the 1951 Refugee Convention.
- Application of the safe third country concept for EU Member States is contingent on the applicant being admitted to the territory and having effective access to a fair asylum procedure in the safe third country
- An assessment of whether restrictions on the freedom of movement of migrants, imposed in a border or international zone, amount to deprivation of liberty under Article 5 ECHR must be based on the impact of these measures on the individuals concerned.
Hungary-ECtHR-amicusbrief-cases-Ilias&Ahmed-ICJ&others-2018-ENG (download the third party intervention)
Background
Ilias Ilias and Ali Ahmed, both Bangladeshi nationals, fled their home country in arrived at the Hungarian-Serbian border on 15 September 2015 after having briefly crossed through Serbia during their trip.
Having asked immediately for asylum in Hungary, they were confined for days in a transit zone, a ” a confined area of some 110 square metres, part of the transit zone, surrounded by fence and guarded by officers”.
Their applications were rejected on the very same day of their application on the grounds that they could have asked for asylum in Serbia, considered by Hungary a safe third country, and appeals were rejected.
They were removed to Serbia on 8 October 2015.
Jun 23, 2016 | News
The ICJ welcomes today’s judgment of the European Court of Human Rights that the removal from office of Hungarian Supreme Court President András Baka violated the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The Court found that the pre-mature termination of his appointment deprived him of a fair process and was based on public statements he made that were critical of certain justice system reforms.
The ICJ intervened as third party in this case. The judgment is expected to be influential around the world in cases involving judicial independence and expression.
“Today’s judgment is a vindication for the security of tenure and freedom of expression of judges not only in Hungary, but around the world,” said Massimo Frigo, ICJ Europe Programme Legal Adviser.
“Judges should never be precluded from exercising their right and duty to speak out in protection of judicial independence,” he added.
In its ruling, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights ruled that, by ending his prescribed term in office pre-maturely through a targeted legislative reform because of his public criticism, Hungary had violated his right to freedom of expression, under article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Court held that expressing statements on the reform of the judiciary and other legislation was not only Judge Baka’s right, but also his duty.
The Court further ruled that former Supreme Court President András Baka had enjoyed a right to access courts to challenge his dismissal, and that his removal from office by a law that precluded such challenges violated article 6 of the ECHR on the right to a fair hearing.
In its judgment, the European Court cited a wide range of United Nations, European, Inter-American, and other international instruments and standards on judicial independence and freedom of expression.
The International Commission of Jurists anticipates that the Court’s ruling and reasons will have an important influence on cases concerning judicial independence and expression around the world.
Background:
Judge András Baka, former judge of the European Court of Human Rights from 1991 to 2008, had been appointed as President of the Supreme Court of Hungary on 22 June 2009.
His term in office, which was on his appointment guaranteed by law to continue until 22 June 2015, was prematurely terminated on 1 January 2012 following the entry into force of the Transitional Provisions of the new Hungarian Constitution.
This rule modified the eligibility requirements for the position of President of the Supreme Court, effectively excluding judge András Baka from the position.
Judge András Baka was also President of the National Council of Justice, and had publicly expressed criticism concerning various legal reforms brought on by the Hungarian Government that he considered to undermine the independence of the judiciary.
The judgment can be downloaded in PDF format.
Read also:
ICJ third party intervention
The ICJ also recently published a comprehensive analysis of relevant global standards in its Practitioners Guide No. 13 on judicial accountability.
An online compilation of global and regional standards on independence and accountability of judges, lawyers and prosecutors is also available here.
Contact
Massimo Frigo, Legal Adviser, ICJ Europe Programme, t: +41 22 979 38 05 ; e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org
Jun 21, 2012 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ statement draws attention to recent laws that threaten the right to freedom of expression of LGBT persons, noting examples that fail the tests of certainty, necessity and non-discrimination.
