Syria Justice and Accountability Centre: ECtHR as an Avenue for Accountability – Possibilities and Constraints

May 14, 2017

SJAC Update | May 9, 2017

European Court of Human Rights building in Strasbourg, France | Photo Credit: Flikr, Dominik Kreutz

ECtHR as an Avenue for Accountability: Possibilities and Constraints

As Russia has, for the time being, closed the door on all available means for international accountability against the Assad government’s atrocities in Syria, human rights groups and lawyers have pursued alternative avenues for justice, including through national prosecutions in European jurisdictions. Although the complaints that target high-level government officials are hugely symbolic, it remains unlikely that authorities in Europe would be able to apprehend the named defendants even if a court issued an arrest warrant or a guilty verdict in absentia. State-sponsored violence, however, does not begin and end with Syria alone. Other countries have contributed to illicit arms sales, indiscriminate attacks, and other prosecutable offenses during the course of the war. While President Bashar al-Assad’s inner circle remain out of reach, are there other means for achieving justice for victims of atrocities in Syria?

As a member of the Council of Europe, Russia is subject to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), a human rights instrument that is upheld and adjudicated by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Any national or resident of a Member State can petition the Court for redress if they have a claim that their rights under the Convention were violated by the Member State. The Court’s judgments are in the form of fines to compensate victims of violations and are binding upon the state in question. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe monitors the execution of fines, and any Member State that repeatedly fails to abide by ECtHR judgements could theoretically be ejected from the Council. Russia isgenerally compliant – as a Member State, it sends its lawyers to defend against claims and, for the most part, respects judgements to pay compensation to victims (although, it rarely makes structural changes to laws/procedures ordered by the Court).

Since Russia entered the Syrian conflict in 2015, the intensity of indiscriminate aerial attacks has increased. Under the mantra of counter-terrorism operations, Russia has used lethal force, resulting in strikes on medical facilities, humanitarian missions, schools, and other civilian infrastructure. While there is plenty of documentation that Russia violated provisions of the ECHR, the primary obstacle for any claim against Russia in the Syrian context will be one of jurisdiction.

The Syria Justice and Accountability Centre (SJAC) is a Syrian-led and multilaterally supported nonprofit that envisions a Syria where people live in a state defined by justice, respect for human rights, and rule of law. SJAC collects, analyzes, and preserves human rights law violations by all parties in the conflict — creating a central repository to strengthen accountability and support transitional justice and peace-building efforts. SJAC also conducts research to better understand Syrian opinions and perspectives, provides expertise and resources, conducts awareness-raising activities, and contributes to the development of locally appropriate transitional justice and accountability mechanisms. Contact us at info@syriaaccountability.org.

U nsubscribe | Preferences

This email was sent to dmcrane@law.syr.edu
why did I get this? unsubscribe from this list update subscription preferences
Syria Justice and Accountability Centre · Laan Van Meerdervoort 70 · Den Haag, 2517 AN · Netherlands

Thai Lawyer Faces Up To 150 Years in Prison for Insulting Royal Family

May 10, 2017

By: Nicole Hoerold
Impunity Watch Reporter, Asia

BANGKOK, Thailand – A Thai human rights lawyer appeared in court on May 3 where he was charged with 10 counts of royal defamation. If convicted, Prawet Prapanukul faces up to 150 years in prison. His case is the most number of charges for the crime brought against an individual in recent history.

A portrait of the late Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej is see on the building of the Bangkok Art and Culture Centre. Photo courtesy of EPA.

Thailand’s strict lèse-majesté law makes it a crime to threaten, insult, or defame the king, queen, heir-apparent, or the regent, as enshrined in Article 112 of the country’s criminal code. There is no definition of what constitutes such an insult to the monarchy, and lèse-majesté complaints can be brought by anyone, against anyone, and are always required to be formally investigated by the police.

In addition to 10 counts of insulting the monarchy, Prawet is accused on three counts of breaking section 116 of Thailand’s criminal code, which covers sedition. Human Rights Watch has warned that the laws are being used by military authorities to curb the opposition.

It is still not known what Prawet might have written or said that led to his arrest and charges. A spokesperson for the military government declined to comment on the case. Thailand’s military seized power from an elected civilian government in a spring 2014 coup. Since the government was overthrown, the junta has detained hundreds of journalists, activists, and politicians for alleged protests and anti-junta activities.

It is unclear what will happen in Prawet’s case, but the Thai junta have made it clear that it is unaccepting of any acts in violation of Thailand’s lèse-majesté laws.

For more information, please see:

Al Jazeera – Thai lawyer faces 150 years in jail for royal insult – 4 May, 2017

The Telegraph – Thai rights lawyer faces up to 150 years in prison for royal insult – 4 May, 2017

Jurist – Thailand human rights lawyer charged for insulting royal family – 4 May, 2017

Asian Correspondent – Thailand: ‘Missing’ lawyer appears in court, faces 150 years’ jail for royal insult – 4 May, 2017

RT News – Top Thai human rights lawyer faces 150 years in prison for ‘royal insult’ – 4 May, 2017

BBC News – Thailand’s lese-majeste laws explained – 3 December, 2016

International Center for Transitional Justice: In Focus

May 9, 2017

View this email in your web browser.

ICTJ InFocus 68
May 2017

In Focus

Dutch Court Convicts Arms Dealer for Role in Liberian Atrocities. What Does It Say About Justice for Economic Crime?In the Netherlands, a court sentenced an arms dealer to 19 years in prison for his role in war crimes in Liberia. What does his case tell us about pursuing justice for economic crimes in Liberia and beyond?

Publications

Education and Transitional Justice: Opportunities and Challenges for PeacebuildingThis report, part of a joint research project by ICTJ and UNICEF on the intersections of education, transitional justice, and peacebuilding, explores how a transitional justice framework can help to identify educational deficits relating to the logic of past conflict and/or repression and inform the reconstruction of the education sector.

View Report

Beyond the Truth and Reconciliation Commission: Transitional Justice Options in LiberiaThe Liberia Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) released its final report in December 2009 after more than three years of operations. The report offers valuable insights into Liberia’s turbulent history, including the gross human rights violations committed during the country’s 14-year conflict.

View Report

More Publications

Upcoming Events

May 18, 2017

The Destruction of Memory: Cultural Crimes and the National and International Efforts to Combat Them Location: 42 W 44 Street, New York, NY View Details

June 25 – 29, 2017

Large-Scale Violence and Its Aftermaths The United States and the World Location: Kean University, New Jersey View Details

More Events

Unsubcribe from this newsletter.

You are receiving this email because you subscribed to our mailing list.
ICTJ | 40 Fulton Street. Floor 20 | New York, NY USA 10038 | Tel: +1 917 637 3800

German Parliament Passes Partial Burqa Ban

May 9, 2017

By Sarah Lafen

Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Europe

BERLIN, Germany — On April 27, German lawmakers passed a bill that partially bans face coverings such as the burqa and niqab. The lower house of parliament approved a draft law that, if passed, would prevent civil servants, judges, and soldiers from wearing full face veils at work. The law, which still needs to be approved by the upper house of parliament, might also require Germans to remove face coverings for identity checks when voting, as well as at universities and public demonstrations.

A woman wears a burqa in Afghanistan (Photo Courtesy of Telegraph)

Supporting its law, the German government released a statement saying that the “religious or ideological covering of the face contradicts the neutrality required of state functionaries.” According to German Interior Minister Thomas de Maiziere, “[i]ntegration also means that we make our values clear and express the limits of our tolerance to other cultures.” Maiziere believes that the draft law is important step towards that integration. Maiziere also commented that “[w]e are an open society. We show our faces. We do not [wear] burqa.”

Some see the law as symbolic, as the burqa is not overly abundant in Germany. Hamed Abdel-Samed, Egyptian-German political scientist, estimated in 2016 that only about 200-300 people wear a burqa in Germany.

The new law proposes a partial ban, which falls short of the right wing’s call for a blanket ban on the burqa similar to the one recently enacted in France, as well as German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s call for a burqa ban “wherever legally possible.”

Legal experts claim that a blanket ban is impossible to enact under the German constitution, and would be struck down by the courts. In 1 2014 parliamentary research document, Germany’s constitutional court established that “in a society that gives space to different religious beliefs, individuals do not have the right to be shielded from professions of faith by others.”

Critics addressed Maiziere’s ideas on the new law, believing that a “dominant culture” would become a source of social tension and would hinder multicultural development. Chair of the Free Democratic Party in Germany, Christian Lindner, accused Maiziere of distracting voters from real issues before elections. Lindner accuses Maiziere’s and Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union party of being unable to develop a sufficient immigration policy, and is “[re-igniting] old debates instead.”

For more information, please see:

RT — ‘We do not Wear Burqa:’ Germany’s Interior Minister Favors Introduction of ‘Dominant’ Culture — 30 April 2017

EuroNews — Germany Approves Partial Burqa Ban — 28 April 2017

Newsweek — German Parliament Passes Partial Burqa Ban — 28 April 2017

The Telegraph News — Limited Burka Ban Approved by German Parliament — 28 April 2017