Jan 18, 2021 | News
Soltan Achilova, Loujain AlHathloul and Yu Wensheng, three outstanding human rights defenders based in authoritarian states are nominated for the 2021 Martin Ennals Award for Human Rights Defenders. The ICJ is member of the MEA Jury.
In isolated Turkmenistan, Soltan Achilova documents human rights violations and abuses through photojournalism.
Imprisoned in Saudi Arabia, Loujain AlHathloul is a leading advocate for gender equality and women’s rights.
A lawyer, Yu Wensheng defended human rights cases and activists before his conviction and imprisonment in China.
The Finalists distinguish themselves by their bravery and deep commitment to the issues they defend, despite the many attempts to silence them by respective governmental authorities.
“Every year thousands of human rights defenders are persecuted, harassed, imprisoned, even killed. The Martin Ennals Foundation is honored to celebrate the 2021 Finalists, who have done so much for others and whose stories of adversity are emblematic of the precarity faced by the human rights movement today,” said Isabel de Sola, Director of the Martin Ennals Foundation.
“Authoritarian states tend to believe that by jailing or censoring human rights defenders, the world will forget about them. During the COVID-pandemic, it seemed like lockdowns would successfully keep people from speaking out. This year’s Finalists are a testament to the fact that nothing could be further from the truth,” added Hans Thoolen, Chair of the Jury.
Nothing can stop us from celebrating human rights defenders
Each year, the Martin Ennals Award honors human rights defenders from around the world who distinguish themselves by their strong commitment to promoting our fundamental rights – often at the risk of their own lives.
The 2021 Martin Ennals Award Ceremony will celebrate their courage on 11 February during an online ceremony hosted jointly with the City of Geneva which, as part of its commitment to human rights, has for many years supported the Award.
The 2021 Finalists
In Turkmenistan, one of the world’s most isolated countries, freedom of speech is inexistant and independent journalists work at their own peril. Soltan Achilova (71), a photojournalist, documents the human rights abuses and social issues affecting Turkmen people in their daily lives. Despite the repressive environment and personal hardships, she is one of the very few reporters in the country daring to sign independent
In Saudi Arabia, women still face several forms of gender discrimination, so much so, that the Kingdom ranks in the bottom 10 places according to the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report 2020. Loujain AlHathloul (31) was one of the leading figures of the Women to drive movement and advocated for the end of the male guardianship system. She was imprisoned in 2018 on charges related to national security together with several other women activists. Tortured, denied medical care, and subjected to solitary confinement, Loujain was sentenced to 5 years and 8 months in prison on 28 December 2020.
In China, more than 300 human rights activists and lawyers disappeared or were arrested in 2015 during the so called 709 Crackdown. A successful business lawyer, Yu Wensheng (54) gave up his career to defend one of these detained lawyers, before being arrested himself. Detained for almost three years now, Yu Wensheng’s right hand was crushed in jail and his health is failing.
Contact
Olivier van Bogaert, Director Media & Communications, ICJ representative in the MEA Jury, t: +41 22 979 38 08 ; e: olivier.vanbogaert(a)icj.org
Chloé Bitton, Communications Manager, Martin Ennals Foundation, t +41 22 809 49 25 e: cbitton(a)martinennalsaward.org
MEA Finalists Bios-2020-ENG (full bios of finalists, in PDF)
MEA Finalists Bios-2020-ARA (full story and bios of finalists in Arabic, PDF)
Jan 18, 2021 | News
The ICJ today condemned the arbitrary arrests in recent days of prominent Zimbabwean human rights defenders Hopewell Chin’ono, Fadzayi Mahere and Job Sikhala, who have been critical of the government led by President Emmerson Mnangagwa.
The ICJ is concerned that their arrests and potential prosecutions are based solely on their exercise of protected human rights, including freedom of expression. The ICJ calls for their immediate release and the dropping of the charges against them.
The three have been charged with contravening section 31 of the Criminal Code which prohibits “publishing or communicating false statements prejudicial to the state”.
The alleged offences arise from posts made on social media and comments issued by all three in connection with an incident at a Harare taxi rank in which a police officer is alleged to have assaulted a mother with a baby on her back.
ICJ’s Africa Director Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh said:
“The use of judicial processes to silence these three human rights defenders constitutes a continuing assault on members of the bar and journalists and is a clear attempt to chill others from carrying out their professional functions when these activities offend government authorities. Of concern is the continued use of criminal defamation (section 31) charges which were declared unconstitutional in 2014 yet continues to be weaponised against human rights defenders.”
Chin’ono, a journalist, was arrested on 8 January and had his application for bail rejected on 14 January. He has been handcuffed and held in leg irons during court appearances, despite a Magistrate’s ruling on 12 January that forcing Chin’ono to be shackled in leg irons and handcuffing him amounts to inhumane and degrading treatment.
Mahere is a lawyer and spokesperson of the opposition political party Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) Alliance. She was arrested on 11 January. On 15 January Magistrate Trynos Utahwashe failed to hand down his ruling on her application for bail as required.
Bail was however granted today. Mahere did raise concerns about the absence of essential COVID-19 measures in her detention, including the lack of temperature checks or sanitisers at the entrance to the police station; the failure to practice social distancing in the waiting area or holding cells; the unavailability of masks in the cells and use of old masks by cellmates; as well as the failure to provide sanitary materials to female inmates.
Sikhala is a human rights lawyer, the MDC Alliance Vice National Chairperson, and MP for Zengeza West.
He was part of Chin’ono’s legal team. On 15 January Magistrate Ngoni Nduna dismissed his bail application stating that there was overwhelming evidence against him not to grant it. He remains in prison custody while he awaits trial. Sikhala has also been handcuffed and held in leg irons during court appearances.
Ramjathan-Keogh added:
“The courts have unlawfully employed the denial of bail as well as the repeated prolonged bail proceedings as a punitive tool in these cases. Pre-trial detention without the opportunity for bail, with exceptions not applicable here, is a violation of the right to liberty. The government has an obligation to provide safe and humane conditions of detention.”
The ICJ recalls that that Zimbabwe’s Constitution guarantees the rights to freedom of expression and freedom of the media (Article 61); freedom from arbitrary detention (Article 50). Zimbabwe has an international legal obligation to protect these rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 9 and 19) and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (Articles 6 and 9).
Contact:
Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh, Director of ICJ Africa Programme, e: Kaajal.Keogh(a)icj.org ; t: +27845148039
Tanveer Jeewa, Legal and Communications Consultant, e: Tanveer.Jeewa(a)icj.org
Background Information:
Hopewell Chin’ono has been arrested on three separate occasions. He has been denied bail on each occasion and those bail proceedings have been unduly and unfairly prolonged. He was initially arrested in July 2020 after he expressed support on Twitter for an anti-corruption protest, which was planned for 31 July. He was charged with incitement to participate in public violence and breaching anti-corona virus health regulations.
He appeared in court three times to apply for bail and was only granted bail in September 2020, nearly two months after his arrest. On 3 November 2020, he was re-arrested for contempt of court for allegedly violating section 182(1)(a) or (b) of the Criminal Code because of a tweet he posted. His tweet stated: “On day of bail hearing CJ was seen leaving court in light of what has been said by judges what does this say.” The arrest violates Zimbabwe’s constitutional provisions, in particular, section 61, which provides for freedom of expression and the right of a journalist to practice his profession. He was again arrested on 8 January 2021 for allegedly communicating falsehoods by tweeting that police beat a baby to death.
Chin’ono was in 2020 denied access to the legal representative of his choice. The magistrate’s order barring lawyer Beatrice Mtetwa from continuing as defence legal counsel for Chin’ono violated his right to a fair trial and Mtetwa’s right to express her opinions freely. See ICJ’s statement of 21 August 2020.
Nov 16, 2020 | Advocacy, News
Today, the ICJ calls on the Ukrainian authorities to abandon a draft law which would dismiss the judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, as a means of retaliation for a decision adopted by the Court and in order to circumvent the decision.
The authorities should also refrain from any other actions, including harassment of judges, which undermine the independence of the Constitutional Court.
“This draft law constitutes a direct attack on the ability of the judiciary to exercise its functions independently. It is incompatible with basic principles of the rule of law and the separation of powers, and with international standards on the independence of the judiciary,” said Róisín Pillay, Director of the ICJ Europe and Central Asia Programme.
“By the nature of their role, the judiciary, and especially constitutional courts may be required to decide on controversial matters. It is however essential that particularly in such cases, courts are able to operate without fear of retaliation or repression for the decisions they take,” she added.
The draft law on Restoring Public Confidence in the Constitutional Court, submitted by President Zelensky to the Ukrainian Parliament (Verkhovna Rada), aims to pronounce a decision of the Constitutional Court on anti-corruption legislation “void” and without legal consequences.
This runs contrary to the Ukrainian Constitution according to which “[d]ecisions and opinions adopted by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine shall be binding, final and may not be challenged” (Article 151-2).
The draft law would terminate the mandate of the judges of the Constitutional Court, in contravention of the Constitution of Ukraine as well as basic principles of independence of the judiciary, governing appointments, dismissal and security of tenure of judges.
The draft law provides that the powers of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine in force at the time of the decision on the anti-corruption law would be terminated from the date of entry into force of the law.
According to the explanatory note to the Draft Law, one reason the adoption of the law would be justified is because there had not been a “proper substantiation” of its judgment on the anti-corruption law. The note alleges that Court’s decision was adopted in the private interests of judges of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, that its proper substantiation was not provided and that it contradicts the principle of the rule of law and denies the European and Euro-Atlantic choice of the Ukrainian people. The ICJ considers these allegations are inappropriate as they directly interfere with the judicial function of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine, contrary to the national legislation and international law on the independence of the judiciary.
On 2 November 2020, Oleksandr Tupitsky, the President of the Constitutional Court was summoned for interrogation by the State Investigation Bureau in connection with allegations against him of committing crimes as part of an organized group. The ICJ fears that this may be a form of pressure in relation to the Constitution Court’s decision.
Following these incidents, the Constitutional Court has stopped working as four of the judges refuse to take part in its sessions. The Court therefore lacks the necessary quorum to operate.
The ICJ calls on Ukraine to withdraw the draft law, and to refrain from any further reprisals against judges for their decisions.
Download
Ukraine-draft law constitutional court-News-ENG-2020 (full statement with background information)
Oct 21, 2020 | News
The ICJ calls on the Belarus authorities to revoke the disbarment of lawyer Aleksandr Pylchenko and to end harassment or other interference with the work of lawyers in the country.
His disbarment appears to be arbitrary and in violation of rights to freedom of expression as well as international standards on the role of lawyers.
The decision of 15 October 2020 of the Ministry of Justice to disbar the lawyer is clearly related to his work in defence of human rights and his representation of clients, including, opposition leaders or protesters.
This disbarment is part of a pattern of increasing obstruction of lawyers who represent those associated with recent protests in Belarus, including through arrests and detention of lawyers, and prevention of their access to clients.
Aleksandr Pylchenko represented Viktor Babariko and Maria Kolesnikova, two leaders of the opposition in Belarus.
Disbarment proceedings against Mr Pylchenko started as a result of his public criticism of the response of the law enforcement authorities to claims of ill-treatment of protesters.
On 14 August 2020, in a media interview Mr Pylchenko called on the Prosecutor General’s Office to take action, in particular to launch criminal investigations into the ill-treatment of protesters by the police and to remove the Minister of Interior and other officials from their posts because of their involvement in human rights violations.
According to the Ministry of Justice, Mr Pylchenko called for “illegal actions, including blocking and disarming military units” and his statements “mislead the public about the powers of state bodies and do not comply with procedural norms”.
Belarus has obligations under international law to protect the right to freedom of expression (Article 19 ICCPR). Lawyers have a particular role in publicly raising concerns about violations of the human rights of their clients, or problems in the justice system that lead to violations of human rights.
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers affirm that lawyers, like others, are entitled to freedom of expression and in particular, have the right to take part in public discussion of matters concerning the law, the administration of justice and the promotion and protection of human rights.
Furthermore, the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers provide that governments must ensure that lawyers ‘are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference”. (Principle 23). Lawyers should not suffer, or be threatened with, prosecution or administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics (Principle 16). They should never be identified with their clients’ causes.
Background:
Following the presidential elections of 9 August 2020 in Belarus, widespread protests across Belarus took place.
On 18 June and 7 September 2020, Victor Babaryka and Maria Kolesnikova, opposition leaders in Belarus, were detained.
There are reports that defence lawyers were denied access to those arrested including in 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 significant period of time.
On 9 September 2020, lawyers Ilya Salei and Maxim Znak, were detained allegedly on politically motivated charges.
On 25 September 2020, the Minsk city Oktyabrsky District Court sentenced Luidmila Kazak, lawyer of Maria Kolesnikova, to a fine (220 Euro) for “disobeyance to a lawful order” of a police officer (Article 23.4 of the Code of Administrative Offences). The lawyer stated that the arrest and administrative fine are connected to her legal representation of the opposition leader Maria Kolesnikova.
The ICJ has previously called on Belarus to comply with its international human rights obligations, including by releasing those arbitrarily detained and ceasing abusive prosecutions as well as harassment of lawyers.
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
