Nov 16, 2020 | Advocacy
On 15 October 2020, Polish lawyer Roman Giertych was detained by the Central Anticorruption Bureau (CBA) on accusations of money laundering. His house and office were searched and prosecutors imposed preventive measures, including suspension of his right to practice law.
Lawyers for Lawyers, the ICJ and the Amsterdam Bar Association are concerned that the manner in which these measures were taken is inconsistent with international standards on the independence of the legal profession.
Roman Giertych has worked on a series of high-profile cases against the governing Law and Justice party. He has also represented various prominent opposition figures, including Donald Tusk, the former Polish prime minister and head of the Civic Platform opposition party, and former president of the European Council.
Mr. Giertych’s arrest happened one day before the scheduled detention hearing in another politically significant high-profile case, concerning Leszek Czarnecki, in which Roman Giertych was appointed as defence counsel.
According to the information available to Lawyers for Lawyers (L4L), the ICJ and the Amsterdam Bar Association, Mr. Giertych was arrested merely to serve him with charges. He was not given a chance to appear voluntarily.
On 22 October 2020, Mr Giertych’s defense lawyers filed four complaints with the court about the actions of the Poznań prosecutor’s office relating to his arrest and the search of his home and office.
Professional lawyers’ associations such as the National Council of Attorneys-at Law, the Association of Attorneys-At-Law “Defensor Iurius”, the Polish Bar Council and the Council of the Warsaw Bar Association of Advocates have expressed “great concern” about Mr. Giertych’s detention, the search of his house and office, and the preventive measures that were taken against Mr. Giertych.
Lawyers for Lawyers, the ICJ and the Amsterdam Bar Association are concerned about the circumstances of Mr. Giertych’s arrest, in particular the fact that the arrest seems to have only been made in order to present him with charges.
L4L, ICJ and the Amsterdam Bar Association are also concerned by the fact that the searches of his house and office were conducted without proper safeguards of attorney-client privilege and by the suspension of Mr. Giertych’s right to practice his legal profession by a public prosecutor. We will continue to monitor the case of Mr. Giertych closely.
Download
Poland-Roman Giertych-Advocacy-2020-ENG (full statement with additional information, in PDF)
Oct 8, 2020 | News
Proposed legislation to regulate the operations and functions of the legal profession in Eswatini does not comply with international and regional standards and would severely undermine the right to an independent lawyer, the ICJ said today.
A Bill that the Government of Eswatini is reportedly seeking to introduce in Parliament would establish a Legal Services Regulatory Authority which would be responsible for issuing practising certificates to lawyers, disciplining lawyers in case of unethical conduct, developing and enforcing performance standards for legal practitioners in Eswatini, the ICJ said.
The proposed Legal Services Regulatory Authority would constitute up to 10 members of which only one would be appointed by the legal bar association (Law Society of Eswatini).
If enacted into law, the bill would severely undermine the independence of lawyers in Eswatini and may set a dangerous precedent for other countries in the SADC region, especially at this time when lawyers in other parts of the region are being persecuted by their governments, the ICJ added.
When discharging their functions, legal practitioners must be independent of control and undue influence in order for them to be able to represent their clients more effectively.
“The Legal Services Regulatory Authority proposed under the Eswatini Bill does not qualify as a self-governing professional body or an independent statutory authority because all but one of its members will be appointed by government,” said ICJ Africa Director Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh.
“The establishment of this regulatory authority is likely to have a chilling effect on the freedom of lawyers to discharge their functions without being afraid of potential retribution through disciplinary proceedings based on frivolous charges,” she added.
The ICJ calls upon the Government of Eswatini to honour its domestic and international legal obligations to respect the independence of lawyers.
In this case, the ICJ urges the government to withdraw this bill and respect the independence of the lawyers to regulate themselves.
Background:
Eswatini has an obligation, in terms of its domestic constitution as well as regional and international law and standards, to respect and protect the independence of lawyers. Section 21 of the Constitution of Eswatini and regional and international human rights treaties and standards guarantee for every person the right to a fair hearing and the right to legal representation. These rights cannot be enjoyed effectively, unless lawyers are guaranteed the freedom to represent their clients and perform all their other duties without harassment, intimidation and undue interference.
The right of everyone to access to a lawyer as an essential element of a fair trial is recognized in, among other sources, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Eswatini has been a party since 2004. International and regional standards on ensuring the independence of lawyers are set out in the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (UN Basic Principles) and the Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa.
Principle 16 of the United Nations Basic Principles, for instance, enjoins all governments to “ensure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference”.
Principle 24 affirms that, “Lawyers shall be entitled to form and join self-governing professional associations to represent their interests, promote their continuing education and training and protect their professional integrity. The executive body of the professional associations shall be elected by its members and shall exercise its functions without external interference.”
Principle 28 states that “Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers shall be brought before an impartial disciplinary committee established by the legal profession, before an independent statutory authority, or before a court, and shall be subject to an independent judicial review.”
In a recent unanimous resolution, the UN Human Rights Council recognized that “an independent legal profession” is among the “prerequisites for the protection of human rights and the application of the rule of law and for ensuring fair trials and the administration of justice without any discrimination”.
The Human Rights Council specifically expressed its concern “about situations where the entry into or continued practice within the legal profession is controlled or arbitrarily interfered with by the executive branch, with particular regard to abuse of systems for the licensing of lawyers.” It recommended that any domestic legislation should “provide for independent and self-governing professional associations of lawyers” and should “recognize the vital role played by lawyers in upholding the rule of law and promoting and protecting human rights”.
Contact:
Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Director of ICJ’s Africa Regional Programme, c: +27845148039, e: Kaajal kaajal.keogh(a)icj.org
Oct 8, 2020 | News
The ICJ today called for reinstatement of Tanzania lawyer Fatma Karume, characterizing a permanent prohibition from her practicing law as a violation of her rights and the independence of the legal profession.
In September 2019, the High Court of Tanzania issued an order suspending senior lawyer Fatma Karume from practising law in mainland Tanzania.
The High Court directed the Advocates’ Disciplinary Committee of Tanzania to conduct a disciplinary hearing and make a final determination on whether Fatma Karume, a former president of Tanganyika Law Society, which is the Bar association of mainland Tanzania, should be allowed to practice law.
Allegations of misconduct against Fatma Karume arose from her written submissions in a constitutional challenge to President Magufuli’s appointment of Professor Adelardus Kilangi as the Attorney General of Tanzania.
The State’s counsel complained that the language used by Fatma Karume in her submissions was unprofessional and disrespectful of the Attorney General, who was the subject of the constitutional challenge.
A year later, on 23 September 2020, the Advocates’ Disciplinary Committee found Fatma Karume guilty of the alleged misconduct and directed that she be permanently disbarred from practising law in Tanzania.
“The ICJ views the decision to permanently disbar Fatma Karume from legal practice, as a grave violation of Tanzania’s domestic, regional and international legal obligations relating to Fatma Karume’s right to be heard, her right to work and a violation of the independence of lawyers,” said ICJ Africa Director, Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh.
“Fatma Karume’s right to be heard was violated in many ways. First, the complaint of misconduct was made in the State’s rejoinder submissions and Ms Karume was not afforded an opportunity to respond on record, before the High Court made the decision to temporarily suspend her from practice. Secondly, her right to a speedy hearing was violated because it took the Advocate’s Disciplinary Committee of Tanzania a year to make a final determination in her case,” she added.
The ICJ also considers that the substance of the charges of misconduct against Fatma Karume was inconsistent with international and regional standards, in so far as they were based on written submissions made in good faith as part of the due discharge of her professional functions.
The ICJ urges the authorities in Tanzania to rescind the decision to disbar Fatma Karume from legal practice and restore her right to work and in particular, her right to practice law.
In the meantime, ICJ welcomes the decision of the Tanganyika Law Society to support Fatma Karume to appeal against her disbarment.
Background
Articles 21 and 13 (6) (a) of the Constitution of Tanzania guarantee every person with the right to work and the right to a fair hearing respectively. In terms of regional law, Article 7(1) of the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights obliges governments to respect and protect the right of every individual to be presumed innocent until proven guilty by a competent court or tribunal; the right to present a defense; and, the right to be tried within a reasonable time by an impartial court or tribunal. Similar rights are recognised in Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In addition, Principle 27 of the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (UN Basic Principles) states that “Charges or complaints made against lawyers in their professional capacity shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under appropriate procedures. Lawyers shall have the right to a fair hearing, including the right to be assisted by a lawyer of their choice.”
Principle 20 of the UN Basic Principles provides that “Lawyers shall enjoy civil and penal immunity for relevant statements made in good faith in written or oral pleadings or in their professional appearances before a court, tribunal or other legal or administrative authority.” Similar provisions are included in Part I of the African Principles and Guidelines.
Contact
Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Director of ICJ’s Africa Regional Programme, c: +27845148039, e: Kaajal [email protected]
Sep 30, 2020 | News
Today, the ICJ joined fourteen other human rights organizations in condemning the Indian government’s actions against Amnesty India and pledged to continue support for local human rights defenders and organizations against the recent crackdown.
Amnesty International India announced that it is halting its work in the country after the Indian government froze its bank accounts in an act of reprisal for the organization’s human rights work.
The Indian government’s actions against Amnesty India are part of increasingly repressive tactics to shut down critical voices and groups working to promote, protect, and uphold fundamental rights, said the Association for Progressive Communications, Global Indian Progressive Alliance, International Commission of Jurists, International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), CIVICUS: World Alliance for Citizen Participation, Front Line Defenders, FORUM-ASIA, Foundation the London Story, Hindus for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, International Service for Human Rights, Minority Rights Group, Odhikar, South Asians for Human Rights (SAHR), and World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT) in the framework of the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders.
The Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government has accused Amnesty India of violating laws on foreign funding, a charge the group says is politically motivated and constitutes evidence “that the overbroad legal framework is maliciously activated when human rights defenders and groups challenge the government’s grave inactions and excesses.”
The BJP government has increasingly cracked down on civil society, harassing and bringing politically motivated cases against human rights defenders, academics, student activists, journalists, and others critical of the government under sedition, terrorism, and other repressive laws.
These actions increasingly mimic that of authoritarian regimes, which do not tolerate any criticism and shamelessly target those who dare to speak out. With growing criticism of the government’s discriminatory policies and attacks on the rule of law, the authorities seem more interested in shooting the messenger than addressing the grievances. Women’s rights activists and indigenous and minority human rights defenders have been especially vulnerable. The recent action against Amnesty India highlights the stepped-up pressure and violence felt by local defenders on the ground, regardless of their profile.
The authorities have repeatedly used foreign funding regulations under the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), a law broadly condemned for violating international human rights law and standards, to target outspoken groups. United Nations experts on human rights defenders, on freedom of expression, and on freedom of association have urged the government to repeal the law, saying it is “being used more and more to silence organisations involved in advocating civil, political, economic, social, environmental or cultural priorities, which may differ from those backed by the Government.”
Yet, the Indian parliament amended the FCRA this month, adding further onerous governmental oversight, additional regulations and certification processes, and operational requirements that would adversely affect civil society groups and effectively restrict access to foreign funding for small nongovernmental organizations.
A robust, independent, and vocal civil society is indispensable in any democracy to ensure a check on government and to hold it accountable, pushing it to do better. Instead of treating human rights groups as its enemies, the government should work with them to protect the rights of all people and ensure accountability at all levels of government.
Contact
Ian Seiderman, ICJ Law and Policy Director: [email protected]
Aug 31, 2020 | Advocacy, News
Today, the ICJ called on Belarus to comply with its international human rights law obligations in its response to the protests taking place in the aftermath of the presidential elections and in the treatment of those detained.
This includes immediately releasing persons arbitrarily detained, providing prompt access to lawyers for those still detained, accounting for the fate and whereabouts of missing protestors and promptly and effectively investigating torture and other ill-treatment.
The widespread arbitrary arrests of peaceful protesters, and credible allegations of torture and ill-treatment and enforced disappearances of detainees, are particularly alarming in light of obstacles faced by detainees in accessing lawyers, the ICJ said.
The ICJ recalls that under international human rights law, all persons have the right to peaceful assembly, and any restriction of this right must be provided in law be strictly necessary and proportionate to a specified legitimate purpose. The mass arrest of protesters does not appear to meet these requirements.
Belarus has obligations, including under treaties to which it is party, to respect the right to liberty and refrain from arbitrary arrests or other unwarranted interferences with the freedom of assembly, or freedom of expression, of protesters, protected under international law.
Law enforcement authorities must respect the right to life and the prohibition on torture or other ill-treatment at all times. Allegations of arbitrary killing, enforced disappearances and torture and other ill-treatment must be promptly, thoroughly and independently investigated, and those responsible brought to justice.
Effective remedies must be provided to victims of such serious human rights violations.
The ICJ is concerned about reports of the widespread denial of access to a lawyer and further obstacles that lawyers face while carrying out their professional duties in the current context in Belarus.
Reportedly, lawyers are not provided with access to the case file or further information necessary for the provision of effective legal assistance to their clients. This is of particular concern in light of multiple reports of torture or other ill-treatment of those detained following the election.
The ICJ stresses that the right of access to qualified legal representation is crucial for the protection of the human rights of those arrested in connection with the current political upheaval in Belarus.
The right of access to a lawyer is recognized as an essential element of the right to a fair trial and the right to liberty, protected under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Belarus is a party.
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provide that governments should ensure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference and should be able to consult with their clients freely and have access to appropriate information, files and documents in their possession or control in sufficient time to provide effective legal assistance to their clients.
It is essential that lawyers and other human rights defenders can carry out protection of human rights of their clients especially in times of emergency.
The ICJ also calls on the Belarus Republic Bar Association to bolster its efforts in protecting its members who provide legal representation in cases related to the ongoing protests.
Background:
The Republic of Belarus ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in 1973
Following the presidential elections of 9 August 2020 in Belarus, widespread protests across Belarus took place following the discredited result, which were recognized as neither free nor by the European Union and other observers. Following the initial dispersal of these protests by the authorities, more than 6000 people were arrested and detained, many arbitrarily. There is credible evidence that many of those arrested or detained have been subjected to torture or other ill-treatment and that decisions regarding their arrest and detention have been made by courts temporarily established in detention centres.
While estimates of numbers differ, the whereabouts of at least tens of those who took part in the protest have not been established to date. One of the missing persons, Nikita Krivtsov, was recently found dead in a forest near Minsk.
The reports that defence lawyers were denied access to those arrested include high-profile cases, such as the case of the former presidential candidate Victor Babaryka whose lawyer was not allowed to see his client in the detention centre for more than a week.
According to the Belarusian Republican Bar Association, lawyers face problems with meeting their clients held in the detention centres and access to the case files and further information necessary to carry out their professional duties.
