THE PHILIPPINES: ATTACKS AGAINST LAWYERS FURTHER ESCALATING

23June2021–Attacks against lawyers in the Philippines continue to take place and killings have reached a record high since the start of President Duterte’s administration five years ago. We, the undersigned organizations,express our deep concern overthe attacksandtheoppressive working environment lawyersstill facein the Philippines. We call again on the Duterte Government to adequately protect the safety and independence of lawyers and end the culture of impunity in which these attacks occur.

Increased extrajudicial killings and harassment of lawyers

In our previous statement of 17 September 2019, we signalled that the number and intensity of attacks against lawyers had increased significantly since President Duterte took office on 30 June 2016. At least 46 jurists were extra-judicially killed between July 2016 and 5 September 2019. Among them at least 41 lawyers and prosecutors, of which 24 practicing lawyers. Eight jurists survived attacks on their life.

It is now reported that more lawyers have been killed in the five years since President Duterte took office than under any other government in Philippine history. The number of deaths of lawyers since 2016 has risen to 61. According to the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) half of the lawyer killings since 2016 were work-related.The National Union of People’s Lawyers (NUPL) reports that at least 54of the 61 killings are likelyto bework-related. Many other lawyers are facing threats and are afraid that they might be the next victims of attacks.

Lawyers at risk

Lawyers involved in high-profileor human rightscases are especially at risk. These are cases in which they represent victims of human rights violations, government critics, political opposition leaders, human rights defenders,environmental activists, and people who are accused of terrorist-or drug-related crimes.Very often, the rights of the eliteor government policiesare at stake. Examples are cases about land rights of farmers and indigenous peoples, anti-drug operations, and the enforcement of measures to combat the Covid-19 pandemic. Lawyers also face reprisals for participatingin the public debate on legal matters and the protection of human rights.

Culture of Impunity

In a June 2020 report, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) concluded that ‘persistent impunity for human rights violations is stark’ and ‘practical obstacles to accessing justice are almost insurmountable’. The NUPL reached a similar conclusion: ‘almost all of the perpetrators have never been brought to the bar of justice’. According to NUPL, this climate of impunity emboldens perpetrators to commit further attacks.

Grave implications of public labelling and worrying new laws

Prior to being attacked, an increasing number of lawyers was labelled as “communist” or “terrorist” by state agentsand officials. This labelling takesplaceregardless of actual political beliefs or 2affiliationsof the targeted individuals and isaimed at making them legitimate targets. Following earlier fact finding missions conducted by independent lawyers and judges, the combination of labelling or ‘red-tagging’ and a culture of impunitywas already identifiedas one of the main root causes of extrajudicial killings in the Philippines. This practice continues unabated. OHCHR noted that alongside the intensified campaign against illegal drugs, the government of the Philippines has scaled up its response forcountering terrorism and conflicts.This also has an acute impact on civil society, including lawyers and judicial actors, “particularly through the phenomenon of “red-tagging”. The OHCHR found that “red-tagging” in de Philippines “has been a persistent and powerful threat to civil societyand freedom of expression”, adding that “[S]uch public labelling has proved extremely dangerous”. OHCHR referred to the example of four human rights defenders, including Attys Benjamin Ramos Jr. and Anthony Trinidad,who appearedon posters and hit lists claiming to depict members of alleged terrorists organizations,and were subsequently murdered. Despite national and international concern, the practice of “red-tagging”continues to take place and has also frequently been used by the Duterte administration itself. In a 7 June 2019 press release, eleven UN human rights experts already expressed their concern over this governmental practice andcalledon the UN Human Rights Council to establish an independentinvestigationinto human rights violations committed in the Philippines. “Instead of [the Government] sending a strong message that these killings and harassment are unacceptable, there is a rising rhetoric against independent voices in the country and ongoing intimidation and attacks against voices who are critical of the government, including independent media, human rights defenders, lawyers and journalists,” the experts said.In a July 2020 report, the Human Rights Commission of the Philippines stated that the ‘[P]president through his pronouncements created a dangerous fiction that it is legitimate to hunt down and commit atrocities against human rights defenders because they are enemies of the State’. All this is strengthened by the recently adopted Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 (ATA 2020). Among its provisions is the creation of a government-appointed Anti-Terrorism Council that is given vast powers, including the power to designate individuals and groups as terrorists without due process. Critics and human rights groups have condemned the law for its overbroad definitions, vagueness, and dilution of human rights safeguards, calling it a weapon to target opponents and stifle free speech. A total of 37 petitions were filed to the Supreme Court after the law was enacted. Also lawyers have questioned the law before the Supreme Court, stating that the legislation could be abused to target administration opponents and suppress peaceful dissent. According to the July 2020 reportof the Human Rights Commission of the Philippines, the law “is prone to misuse”. The Commission worries that “the overbroad definition of terrorism gives the government unbridled power to determine who are “suspected terrorists” –which may include ordinary citizens and human rights defenders”. Once people are designated as terrorist they can be arrested and detained without warrants or charges for up to 24 days.

Consequences

The attacks against and extra-judicial killings of lawyers,the impunity shielding perpetrators, the continuous/increasedpractice of ‘red-tagging’, in combination with new laws and amendmentsthat risk eroding constitutional and other legal protections, such as the ATA 2020,impair the ability of lawyers to provide effective legal representation, make lawyersincreasingly waryof working on sensitive cases, and consequently severely undermine the proper functioning of the rule of law and the adequate protection of rights, including the right to remedies and fair trial.

International obligations

According to the United NationsBasic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (Basic Principles)1, States should ensure that all persons within their jurisdiction have effective and equal access to lawyers of their own choosing, and that lawyers are able to perform their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference3. The Basic Principles require that lawyers are adequately protected when their security is threatened because of carrying out their legitimate professional duties, and not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes. The Basic Principles affirm that lawyers, like other citizens, are entitled to freedom of expression and assembly.6The duty to respect and guarantee these freedoms forms an integral part of the Philippines’ international legal obligations under theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Recommendations

In view of the above, the undersigned organizations and individuals urge the Government of the Philippines to:

  1. Investigate promptly, effectively, thoroughly and independently all extrajudicial killingsand attacks against lawyers, and other jurists, with the aim of identifying those responsible and bringing them to justice in proceedings that respect international fair trial standards;.

2. Take all reasonable measures to guarantee the safety and physical integrity of lawyers, including the provision of adequate protection measures, in consultation with the persons concerned;.

3. Create and fully support an independent, credible and impartial body, i.e. not under the control or the influence of the government, composed of members selected exclusively from nominees from lawyers organizations, civil society, the Church and the like in a transparent way, who are known for their human rights record, independency and integrity; this civilian investigative body must be entrusted with the necessary investigative and prosecutorial powers to investigate promptly, impartially and effectively -under international supervisory mandate -all reports and complaints against state security agents with respect to extrajudicial killings, threats and other forms of harassment; the recommendations of this investigative body should beimmediately followed by the government.

4. Consistently condemn all forms of threats and attacks against lawyers publicly, at all political levels and in strong terms; and,

5. Fully comply with and create awareness about the core values underlying the legal profession, amongst others by bringing the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers to the attention of relevant stakeholders, especially members of the executive, police, and the military.

Signatories(in alphabetical order):

AIJA -International Association of Young Lawyers

Amsterdam Bar Association (Netherlands)

ASESORÍA JURÍDICA BOADA

Asian Legal Resource Centre (ALRC)

Associació Catalana per a la Defensa dels Drets Humans

Avvocati minacciati

Unione camere penali italiane

Bar HumanRights Committee of England and Wales

Burgas Bar Association

Confederation of Lawyers of Asia and the Pacific (COLAP)

Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE)

Deutscher Anwaltverein

European Association of Lawyers for Democracy andWorld Human Rights (ELDH)

European Criminal Bar Association

European Democratic Lawyers

Foundation Day of the Endangered Lawyer

Human Rights Embassy (Moldova)

Indian Association of Lawyers

International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI)

International Commission of Jurists

International Observatory of Lawyers in Danger

Law Council of Australia

Law Society of England and Wales

Lawyers for Lawyers

Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada

Noord-Nederland Bar Association (Netherlands)

Progressive Lawyers Association(Turkey)

Rotterdam Bar Association (Netherlands)

Southern African Human Rights Defenders Network

The Arrested Lawyers Initiative

UIA-IROL (Institute for the Rule of Law of theInternational Association of Lawyers)

Download the full statement

Day of the Endangered Lawyer 2021 – Azerbaijan – AGENDA

This year, on 24 January 2021 (this year on 22nd – Friday and on 25th – Monday, for France) we will commemorate the 11th anniversary of the Day of the Endangered Lawyer
Due to the Corona pandemic and the associated restrictions in most countries, such protests will only be possible in compliance with the applicable hygiene regulations. In the past, such protests have been carried out in over 40 countries. The petition is supported by over 30 international, European, and national lawyers‘ organizations will be presented to the respective embassies and sent to the Azerbaijan
government.

AGENDA:

21 January 2021

21 Januay 2021

22 January 2021

BRUSSELS: av. de Tervueren 282 à 1150 Woluwe-Saint-Pierre (in front of the Embassy of Azerbaijan

MADRID: Appointment is at 13.00 in front of SMAC (C/Princesa nº 3)

ADANA: press conference: Location: Adana Bar Association, MEB conference room, at 12.00 pm CET

ALANYA: press conference: Location: The conference room of Alanya Bar Association, at 09.00 am CET

ANTALYA: demonstration: Meeting point: in front of the Barohan, at 11.00 am CET

GAZIANTEP, press conference: Location: The conference room of Antep Bar Association, at 10.00 am CET

ISTANBUL: demonstration: Meeting point: in front of the Azerbaijan Consulate, at 11.00 am CET

IZMIR: press conference. Location: The conference room of Izmir Bar Association, at 10.30 am CET

MERSIN, demonstration: Location: in front of the courthouse, at 10.30 am CET

ANKARA: the time and the other details will come today in the evening

Berlin: 3h, Hubertusallee 43. Bitte in Robe u Maske.

25 January 2021

PARIS : meeting in front of the Embassy of Azerbaijan at 11 o’clock

The Italian National Bar Council (Consiglio Nazionale Forense- CNF) is organizing a webinar to celebrate the Day of the Endangered Lawyers 3.00 pm.

18h to 19h30 WEBINAR with the presence of lawyers of Azerbaijan


11th Day of the Endangered Lawyer 2021- Azerbaijan

The struggle to protect Azerbaijani lawyers

Petition

The DAY OF THE ENDANGERED LAWYER is commemorated each year on 24 January.

On that Day, 24 January 1977 four trade union lawyers and an employee were murdered in their office in Madrid, Spain, simply for doing their job. One of the killers escaped on a permit granted by the investigating judge before the trial. Another, sentenced to 193 years, escaped while on parole and is at large. The third one, with the same sentence, escaped while on parole, has been extradited from Brazil and recently released. The fourth, sentenced to 63 years, died in prison. All of them were associated with extreme right-wing parties.

This year, on 24 January 2021 we will commemorate the 11th anniversary of the Day of the Endangered Lawyer.

Check out the events in our agenda.

In past years, the Day has focused on the following countries: China, Colombia, Egypt, Honduras, Iran, Pakistan, The Philippines, Spain/Basque Country, Turkey, and Pakistan.

On this special day, the organizers ask their international colleagues to 1) raise awareness about the number of lawyers who are being harassed, silenced, pressured, threatened, persecuted, and in some countries tortured and murdered for their work as lawyers; and 2) initiate, or further develop a national discussion about ways to protect lawyers.

Download the Report on Azerbaijan

2021 DAY OF THE ENDANGERED LAWYER – AZERBAIJAN Azerbaijan Democratic Republic – endangered lawyers

In the years after gaining independence in 1991, Azerbaijan has ratified the most important international and European human rights treaties. Nonetheless, continuing human rights violations have since been noted by committees of the UN, by the Council of Europe and by non-governmental organizations. Serious human rights violations have also affected the Azerbaijani lawyers who represented the victims of such human rights violations and spoke up about torture and ill-treatment in police custody.

A new law has been abused to prevent lawyers from exercising their profession

Since 1 January 2018 amendments to the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) and the Code of Administrative Procedure (CAP) and the Law on Lawyers and Lawyer Activities (Law No 853-VQD; Law No 854-VQD;Law No 855-VQD) came into force. Practising lawyers who are not members of the Azerbaijan Bar Association (ABA) and other law practitioners were prohibited from practising law, for example appearing before the courts and representing natural persons in proceedings in all cases. It turned out that these new laws were used to prevent such lawyers from becoming members of the ABA and to disbar those who had been admitted.

During public discussions of these draft laws, a group of practising human rights lawyers established the Group of Practicing Lawyers (GPL), with the aim of opposing changes to the legislation that aimed to abolish the opportunity for lawyers who are not member of the ABA to represent people before the courts in Azerbaijan. In 2018 eight out of nine members of the group successfully passed the written test. In the second round – in the oral exam 535 out of 607 candidates successfully passed, however, none of the members of the GPL. Among those who did not pass were five well-known human rights lawyers – Emin Abbasov, Asima Nasirli, Samed Rehimli, Ramil Suleymanov, and Tural Hajibeyli, members of the GPL. These are lawyers who are known for their criticism of the ABA and of the human rights situation in Azerbaijan.

Monitoring and reports by European and international organisations

In the years that followed the independence of Azerbaijan, regular investigations were conducted by European and international institutions and NGOs to monitor the development of the human rights situation in Azerbaijan and to make suggestions for improvement to the government.

The UN Human Rights Council Working Group on Arbitrary Detention also noted in its report on its visit to Azerbaijan (29 September 2017) that lawyers who assisted in bringing the cases of human rights defenders to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) had been disbarred or even detained on various charges.

The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights (CoE-HC) Dunja Mijatović, in her report of 11 December 2019, called on the authorities to take immediate measures to ensure that the right of access to quality legal assistance is effectively guaranteed to all persons as from the very outset of their deprivation of liberty. “The authorities should adopt a law on legal aid in line with Council of Europe standards and ensure that all persons effectively enjoy the right to legal assistance,” she said. The use of disciplinary sanctions – like disbarment – on improper grounds and unclear criteria remains a serious concern. “Most of the lawyers recently disbarred or who had their licenses suspended were working on cases considered as politically sensitive. This suggests that disciplinary proceedings are used as a tool for punishing lawyers who take on sensitive cases. The Bar Association must strengthen the procedural safeguards to ensure that proceedings against lawyers are transparent and fair. It is also crucial to uphold lawyers’ right to express their views on matters of public interest.”

In its October 2020 country report on Azerbaijan, the ECtHR mentioned the following violations of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which Azerbaijan ratified in 2002: inhumane or degrading treatment (Article 3), arbitrary detention (Article 5), right to a fair trial (Article 6 § 1), freedom of expression cases (Article 10), freedom of assembly and association (Article 11), property rights (Article 1 of Protocol No. 1), right to free elections (Article 3 of Protocol No 1).

Human Rights Watch reported in 2019: “Azerbaijan’s authorities continued to maintain rigid control, severely curtailing freedoms of association, expression, and assembly. The government released over 50 human rights defenders, journalists, opposition activists, religious believers and other perceived critics imprisoned on politically motivated charges. But at least 30 others remained wrongfully imprisoned, while authorities regularly targeted its critics and other dissenting voices. Other human rights problems persisted, including torture and ill-treatment in custody, violations of freedom of assembly, undue interference in the work of lawyers, and restrictions on media freedoms.”

In 2019 the International Bar Association Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) co-signed an open letter which condemned punishment of a human rights lawyer by the Azerbaijani Bar Association. “The undersigned organisations urge the Azerbaijani Bar Association to reinstate Humbatova’s licence and those of other human rights lawyers who have been disbarred on arbitrary grounds, and to protect, rather than undermine the independence of the legal profession in Azerbaijan. We also call on the government of Azerbaijan to comply with international standards on the protection of the legal profession, including those contained in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the ECHR and the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (30th anniversary in 2020).

Law Society and Lawyers for Lawyers – 2020

In preparation of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of Azerbaijan in 2023, Lawyers for Lawyers and the Law Society of England and Wales have written a mid-term report. In this report, they set out to what extent Azerbaijan has implemented the recommendations it accepted during the 2018 UPR process in relation to the role of lawyers.

During the UPR in 2018, Azerbaijan accepted four recommendations with respect to the effective protection of lawyers, including disciplinary measures taken against lawyers, and access to justice. The report concludes that Azerbaijan has not adequately implemented the four recommendations with respect to lawyers.

The Azerbaijani authorities have failed to respect the rights of lawyers by not adequately enabling them to perform their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference. Furthermore, the Azerbaijani authorities have failed to take substantive steps to uphold the right to a fair trial and to guarantee that every citizen has effective access to justice and legal assistance of their choice. CASES OF LAWYERS WHO HAVE BEEN INTIMIDATED, OR SUBJECTED TO DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS AND CRIMINAL PROSECUTION

The persecution of independent lawyers and their subjection to harassment, criminal prosecution and disbarment by the Azerbaijan authorities has intensified in recent years. Such sanctions are intended to restrict their ability to take on high profile and politically ‘sensitive’ cases, especially those concerning human rights violations.

2020
Mr. Elchin Sadigov

On 26 September 2020 the Presidium of ABA issued a decision and deprived Elchin Sadigov of his right to practice the profession as an individual and placed him under surveillance by automatically assigning him as member of law office n° 14 of Baku. (L’Observatoire des Avocats). (See: Interview (Eng) Elchin Sadigov to Turan information agency)

Mr. Javad Javadov

On 9 June 2020 lawyer Javad Javadov shared information on social media about the alleged physical ill-treatment of his client Mr. Kerim Suleymanli in police custody. Following this, the ABA issued Mr. Javadov with a warning. He had previously visited his client in detention. Mr. Suleymanli informed Mr. Javadov about the ill-treatment and showed him injuries on his body. Mr Javadov took photographs and later shared them on social media. In a press release issued on 11 June 2020 the ABA alleged that the distribution of such information caused the public to form an erroneous opinion about the events, and that Mr. Javadov therefore violated the Law on Lawyers and Lawyers’ Activities and the Regulations on the Rules of Conduct of Lawyers. Mr Javadov was also warned by the ABA that serious measures will be taken if such actions continue in the future. (EHRAC has documented disciplinary proceedings against Javad Javadov)

2019

In 2019 the ABA, which is seen as closely tied to the government1, restored the licenses of three lawyers who work on cases involving political persecution. Their licenses had been suspended for one year following complaints filed by the prosecutor’s office. But pressure continued on several other lawyers.

Mr. Nemat Kerimli (disciplinary measures).

On 7 December 2019 Nemat Kerimli was informed by the ABA that a complaint had been lodged against him by the Prosecutor General’s Office. The complaint requested to discipline Mr. Kerimli for discussing allegations of torture and mistreatment of his client Tofiq Yaqublu by the Baku police in an interview with an independent media outlet. With the decision of the presidium of the ABA dated on 26 August 2020, the Bar Association dismissed the complaint of the Prosecutor General’s Office in regard to lawyer, Nemat Kerimli.

In the report (page 41) entitled ‘Azerbaijan: Freedom of Expression on Trial’, released in May 2014, the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute concluded that “It is also apparent that the BAA is not independent of the Azerbaijani government and is therefore unable to act as an effective regulatory body capable of protecting the interests of either its members or the general public. This lack of independence is particularly evident in terms of admission to the BAA (which is effectively controlled by the Qualifications Commission, a majority of whose members are government-appointed) and in terms of its disciplinary proceedings, which appear to the delegation to have been used against defence lawyers in order to discourage BAA members from acting on behalf of clients critical of the government, including journalists and bloggers. ;

Furthermore, in its recent Open Letter to the Presidium of the Azerbaijani Bar Association (4 December 2019) IBAHRI, Lawyers for Lawyers along with other human rights organizations noted serious concerns of a lack of independence of the Bar Association and inappropriate state influence.

Mr. Kerimli has been subjected to disciplinary measures in the past. On October 21, 2019 the Presidium of the ABA considered the appeal of the Penitentiary Service and issued a warning to Mr. Kerimli.

On 28 April 2018 the ABA suspended his license for one year. The decision was made after the Prosecutor General’s Office lodged complaints over public statements Mr. Kerimli made about the case of Afghan Muktharli. Mr. Kerimli is a prominent lawyer in Azerbaijan, known for taking on cases relating to politically motivated prosecutions.

Ms. Shahla Humbatova (licence suspended, disbarment request pending)

On 27 November 2019 the ABA made a decision to suspend the licence of Azerbaijani human rights lawyer Shahla Humbatova and to seek her disbarment from the court on the basis of a complaint from a past client and the alleged failure to pay several months of ABA membership fees. Humbatova dismissed the accusations from her client and considers such ABA measures disproportionate and retaliatory for her human rights defence work. Shahla Humbatova was awarded the International Woman of Courage Award by the United States Department of State on 4 March 2020.

Ms. Humbatova acted as a defence lawyer in the case known as the ‘Ganja case’ relating to an attempted assassination of Ganja’s mayor, which led to arrest and detention of dozens of individuals who alleged being ill-treated in detention. Earlier in 2019, the ABA threatened Humbatova with disciplinary proceedings after the Azerbaijani penitentiary service filed a complaint against her for spreading allegedly false information after she spoke publicly about the hunger strike and the poor health condition of her client, the then-political prisoner and blogger Mehman Huseynov in January 2019.

Mr. Yalchin Imanov (disbarred)

A member of the ABA since 2007, Yalchin Imanov is a human rights lawyer in Azerbaijan, who has taken on high-profile and politically-sensitive cases, especially those involving human rights defenders and political prisoners. On 8 August 2017, after having visited his client Abbas Huseynov who informed him about having being tortured by the prison officials for several days, and having witnessed injuries to the client’s body himself, Mr. Imanov provided information about the torture allegations to the local media and appealed to the relevant state institutions for investigation. The next day, the Penitentiary Service appealed to the ABA asking for Mr. Imanov to be disbarred, claiming that he had defamed the prison officials and damaged the reputation of the law enforcement agencies. On 20 November 2017, the ABA adopted a decision to seek his disbarment from a court. On 22 February 2019, Mr. Imanov was indefinitely disbarred by the Ganja Administrative Economic Court. In July 2019, he submitted a complaint to the ECtHR .

Mr. Elchin Sadigov (punished with a reprimand)

On 5 September 2018 the Prosecutor General’s Office discharged Elchin Sadigov from the criminal proceedings in which he was the defence counsel for Yunus Safarov and complained to the ABA, claiming that he proposed that his client falsely complain that the investigative authorities tortured him.

On 25 February 2019 the ABA decided to punish Mr. Sadigov with a reprimand. It did not consider the photos and videos published online after Mr. Safarov’s arrest, which revealed clear and multiple signs of severe beatings and torture, or his mother’s claim that her son was tortured for more than 25 days in detention.

2018

Ms. Irada Javadova

Irada Javadova is a human rights lawyer who was involved in numerous cases involving violations of citizens’ property rights and protection of political activists and human rights defenders. She is the former head of NGO “Human Rights Education” and has been a member of the ABA for the last 13 years and served as a member of the ABA Presidium from 2012 to 2017. In 2017, Ms. Javadova was the only member of the ABA Presidium to vote against the disbarment of human rights lawyer Yalchin Imanov (see his case description above).

On 11 June 2018 the ABA Presidium made a decision to seek her disbarment on the basis of a complaint from her client who allegedly stated that Ms. Javadova wrote a public letter about her case without her consent and without having a notarised power of attorney and requested that the ABA take action against the human rights defender. Ms. Javadova has denied the allegations, stating that she had an agreement with her client and that she had legitimately defended her and acted within the law. On 14 June 2018, Ms. Javadova appealed the Presidium`s decision to disbar her. Her case is still pending before the first instance court.

Mr. Nemat Kerimli and Mr. Asabali Mustafayev (licences suspended for one year)

On 23 April 2018 the ABA issued a decision to suspend the licences of Nemat Kerimli and Asabali Mustafayev for one year. Both lawyers are known for taking cases relating to politically-motivated prosecutions. The move came after the prosecutor’s office lodged complaints about the lawyers’ public statements concerning the politically motivated cases on which they were working.

Fakhraddin Mehdiyev (licence suspended for one year)

On 22 January 2018 the ABA issued a decision to suspend Fakhraddin Mehdiyev’s licence for one year. Mr. Mehdiyev is a known prominent defender of the rights of political prisoners in Azerbaijan. His licence was suspended for allegedly disclosing prosecution material when he provided information about his client, Jahangir Hajiyev (former Chairman of the Board of the International Bank of Azerbaijan), to media representatives. Mr. Mehdiyev argued that the disclosure was legal as the case had already been decided at the time the interview was given.

Mr. Agil Layic (licence suspended for 6 months)

In January 2018 a disciplinary investigation was launched into the actions of lawyer Agil Layic, because a petition submitted to court on behalf of Mr. Layic’s client was signed by Mr. Layic and not the client himself. The investigation eventually concluded with Mr. Layic’s licence being suspended for 6 months by the ABA. Mr. Layic and his client signed a written agreement in June 2017. Hence, Mr. Layic had the authority to sign and file motions without the client’s signature. Moreover, the client himself had no complaint about the petition or the lawyer’s signature on it.

2017
Mr. Yalchin Imanov

In February 2017 a court approved the disbarment of Mr. Yalchin Imanov, whom the ABA expelled after he publicly reported about his client’s torture in prison

2016
Mr. Farhad Mehdiyev (disbarred)

On 15 September 2016 Farhad Mehdiyev, a well-known law professor and advocate in Azerbaijan, was disbarred by the ABA on allegations that his membership payments to the ABA were overdue.

On 15 September 2016, following an appeal by the Prosecutor’s Office for Grave Crimes on the basis that Mr. Mehdiyev was subjected to criminal investigation, the ABA decided to disbar him. In 2017 he was dismissed from his work in the University by the authorities. Mr. Mehdiyev believes his disbarment and dismissal are related to his critical statements on corruption and the legal profession
in the country. His disbarment case was communicated to Azerbaijan on 20 October 2020 by the ECtHR (App. No. 36057/18).

Muzaffar Bakhishov (disbarred)

On 1 April 2016 lawyer Muzaffar Bakhishov’s licence was suspended by a decision of the ABA Presidium on the basis of the complaint of Supreme Court Judge Tatiana Goldman. His disbarment was confirmed by the Narimanov District Court in May 2016. It was alleged that Mr. Bakhishov had demonstrated “disrespect” to the judge and court staff by comments he made at a Supreme Court hearing and thereby violated professional ethics. Mr. Bakhishov denied the allegations, relating the reason for the decision to an interview he gave to a news website moderator on 17 November in which he pointed out irregularities in the justice system and criticized the chairman of the Supreme Court Ramiz Rzayev. Mr. Bakhishov alleges that he was not properly informed of his rights at the Disciplinary Commission hearing. He said that he had access to the minutes of the relevant Supreme Court hearing for the first time only at the hearing of the Disciplinary Commission.

Khalid Baghirov (suspended for one year in 2011 and disbarred in 2015)

Khalid Bagirov is a prominent human rights lawyer in Azerbaijan. On 24 August 2011 Mr. Baghirov’s licence was suspended for one year following his comments about the suspicious death of his client in police custody and his intentions to protest it.

Since the 2014 crackdown on civil society he has represented human rights defenders, activists and lawyers. Disciplinary proceedings were instituted against him following comments he made during a trial in September 2014 concerning a domestic court’s failure to implement the ECtHR judgment in the case of Ilgar Mammadov, an opposition activist whose arrest the Court found to be politically motivated. The ABA held that he had breached the ethical rules of conduct by making a remark at the court hearing about the judicial system. The ABA lodged a request for Mr. Bagirov’s disbarment on 18 December 2014, and he was disbarred in a decision by the Nizami District Court on 10 July 2015, which was upheld on appeal.

The ECtHR drew attention to the domestic courts’ failure to assess the proportionality and pattern against human rights lawyers and noted that “applicant’s disbarment were not relevant and sufficient, and that the sanction imposed on the applicant was disproportionate to the legitimate aim pursued (Para., 102).

On 25 June 2020 the ECtHR found in its judgement that Art. 8 and 10 of the ECHR had been violated and that the respondent state is to pay the applicant, EUR 18,000 (eighteen thousand euros) in respect of pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage.

Intigam Aliyev (convicted on 2015 and conditionally released in April 2016, travel ban imposed)

Intigam Aliyev, a prominent human rights lawyer who has submitted more than 200 applications to the ECtHR in cases of election rigging, violations of free speech and right to fair trial. He was refused membership of the ABA in 2009. In 2015, he was convicted for tax evasion and abuse of power and sentenced to 7 years in prison.

He is the head of the NGO Legal Education Society. His NGO was de facto shut down as a result of the criminal case. Mr. Aliyev was conditionally released by the Supreme Court on 28 March 2016 after spending more than 19 months in detention. A travel ban imposed on him following his release remains in place to date, subject to examination by the ECtHR (Aliyev v Azerbaijan, App. No. 22365/18). A second travel ban was imposed upon Aliyev in December 2019 on the basis of the alleged failure of his NGO to pay a tax debt (from the period 2011-2014), which he considers to be a continuation of the authorities’ persecution of him for his human rights work.

Following his detention and imprisonment, Intigam Aliyev was recognised as a political prisoner by Amnesty International. He received a number of international awards: the Homo Homini
Award (2012); the Andrei Sakharov Freedom Award of the Norwegian Helsinki Committee, together with Leyla Yunus, Rasul Jafarov and other political prisoners in Azerbaijan (2014); the Human Rights Award of the International Bar Association for outstanding contribution to human rights (2015); the Human Rights Award of the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) for devoting “his life to protecting the rights of individuals against the repressive system of the Azerbaijani government” and providing for decades a “legal assistance and representation to the politically persecuted” (2016) and the Civil Rights Defender of the Year Award, Civil Rights Defenders (2016).

In a Chamber judgment1 (20 Sept 2018) the ECtHR unanimously held that there had been violations of Article 3 (prohibition of torture), of Article 5 § 1 (right to liberty and security), of Article 5 § 4 (review of detention), of Article 8 (right to respect for private life and communications), of Article 18 (limitation on use of restrictions on rights). The Court held that Azerbaijan was to pay the applicant 20,000 euros (EUR) in respect of nonpecuniary damage and EUR 6,150 for costs and expenses for the proceedings before the Court.

OLDER CASES

Prior to 2015 there were also regular reports of cases in which lawyers’ rights were disbarred or even detained for political reasons. Among the lawyers affected by this policy were: Alayif Hasanov (convicted), Gurban Mammadov (convicted and disbarred), Aslan Ismayilov (disbarred), Afgan Mammadov (disbarred), Elchin Namazov (disbarred), Osman Kazimov (disbarred), Namizad Safarov, Hidayat Suleymanov and Latifa Aliyeva (disbarred), Intigam Aliyev and Annagi Hajibeyli (denied admission to reorganised Bar).

SYSTEMATIC FAILURE OF IMPLEMENTATION OF ECTHR JUDGMENTS ON DISBARMENT/ DENIAL OF ADMISSION TO ABA

Azerbaijan has the worst record among the countries that do not implement decisions of the ECtHR. According to recent statistics Azerbaijan has implemented only 16 percent of the decisions adopted by the Court.2

The systematic failure to implement the decisions of the ECtHR also makes it impossible for lawyers whose rights have been violated to return to their profession.

This is illustrated by Azerbaijan’s failure to implement the 2018 ECtHR decision in the case of Hajibeyli and Aliyev v. Azerbaijan (6477/08 10414/08). Applicants in this case several times applied to the Supreme Court without receiving a response for over one and half years since the date of judgment. In October 2020 both applicants, Intigam Aliyev and Annaghi Hajibeyli, have applied to the Supreme Court requesting the implementation of the ECtHR judgment in their case, but no response has been received.

The same problem has arisen in the disbarment cases of Baghirov v. Azerbaijan (81024/12 – 28198/15) and Namazov v. Azerbaijan (74354/13). In both cases, the three-month time limit for considering the judgment of the ECtHR expired for the Supreme Court of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

In the case of Namazov v. Azerbaijan the ECtHR found violations of Article 8 (respect for private life) due to disbarment of a lawyer for breach of professional ethics following verbal altercations with a judge, lack of procedural safeguards in the disciplinary proceedings and Courts’ failure to assess proportionality of the sanction.

2 10 November 2020, joint statement regarding the non-implementation of ECHR judgments against Azerbaijan in politically motivated prosecution cases signed by Amnesty International, the Baku Human Rights Club, the Election Monitoring and Democracy Studies Centre, the European Human Rights Advocacy Centre, the European Implementation Network, the Human Rights House Foundation, the International Partnership for Human Rights, the Legal Education Society and the Netherlands Helsinki Committee.

In the case of Bagirov v. Azerbaijan the ECtHR found violations of Articles 10 and Art 8 (Freedom of expression and Respect for private life) as the lawyer was suspended for public criticism of police brutality and later disbarred for disrespectful remarks about a judge made in courtroom while representing Ilgar Mammadov.

According to local lawyers, there are more than 10 cases related to disbarment or abusive application of disciplinary proceedings against lawyers pending before the ECtHR at this time.

RECOMMENDATIONS

  • Judgments of the ECtHR concerning human rights defenders, including lawyers, must be fully implemented.
  • The European Convention on Human Rights must be fully implemented.
  • UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers should be fully implemented.
  • Lawyers who have suffered damages through unjustified, illegal measures such as disbarment or imprisonment must be fully compensated.
  • Lawyers must not be prevented from exercising their civil and political rights.
  • The independence and role of lawyers must be respected by all institutions of the government.
  • The Code of Ethics which limits the freedom of expression of lawyers must be amended to ensure that it complies with the standards of the ECtHR case law with regard to freedom of expression of lawyers.
  • All governmental authorities, in cooperation and consultation with the Bar Association and with lawyers themselves, must take steps to ensure that lawyers are protected from intimidation and harassment or other improper interference in their work.
  • No executive or judicial authority should initiate or threaten lawyers with criminal, administrative, economic or other sanctions for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics.
  • The role and duty of lawyers to represent their clients must be respected; lawyers should never be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of representing clients whose political positions are opposed to those of the government.
  • The ABA should reconsider the role it plays in the governance of the legal profession. It should initiate, through a consultative process, an internal reform based on the principles of independence of the profession, high standards of legal practice, the protection of lawyers from threats, harassment and hindrance in their work, and the democratic participation of its members.
  • The legislative framework for the ABA Qualification Commission should be reformed to ensure its institutional independence.
  • The ABA disciplinary procedure must be fair, objective, transparent and support the independence of lawyers in Azerbaijan. It must be in conformity with the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and Recommendation No. R(2000)21of the Council of Europe on the freedom of exercise of the profession of lawyer. The government and the ABA should ensure that the Disciplinary Commission is free from any pressure or improper influence in its decision making and that lawyers are not subject to disciplinary penalties for action consistent with their professional duties including advocacy pursued in zealous representation of the client’s interests or otherwise in the promotion of the cause of justice or promotion of human rights, including public denouncement of violations of human rights of their clients or other persons.
  • All Disciplinary Commission decisions should be subject to independent judicial review.
  • To amend the Law on Advocates and Advocates’ Activities and to ensure transparent criteria and procedures for admission.

For more information, contact one of the following contact persons; Hans Gaasbeek, International coordinator Day of the Endangered Lawyer Foundation Nieuwe Gracht 5a NL 2011 NB Haarlem, Netherlands Telephone: +31 (023) 531 86 57 Email: hgaasbeek@gaasbeekengaasbeek.nl Web: http://dayoftheendangeredlawyer.eu/

Thomas Schmidt (lawyer), Secretary General of ELDH European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights (ELDH) Platanenstrasse 13, 40233 – Düsseldorf, Deutschland. PHONE +49 – 211 – 444 001, MOBILEPHONE +49 – 172 – 6810888. Email thomas.schmidt@eldh.eu Web www.eldh.eu

Robert Sabata Gripekoven (Lawyer – Avocat), Co-President of AED-EDL AED-EDL (Avocat.e.s Européen.ne.s Démocrates / European Democratic Lawyers) C/ Provença, 332, 3r 08037 Barcelona
Tel. (+34 619 304 377) www.aeud.org https://www.facebook.com/aed.edl1987/

Catherine Morris, LRWC Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada
3220 West 13th Avenue Vancouver, BC Canada, V6K2V5 Phone; +1 604 736-1175 Email: lrwc@lrwc.org Web: www.lrwc.org

Stuart Russell, Co-coordinator

Monitoring Committee on Attacks on Lawyers International Association of People’s Lawyers (IAPL) Bordeaux, France
Email: jsrussell301254@gmail.com Blog: https://defendlawyers.wordpress.com/

***

The Coalition for the Endangered

On June 13, 2019, in the international lawyers meeting in Brussels, a new network was formed, called “the Coalition for the Endangered Lawyer“ with the goal to further intensify cooperation for endangered colleagues.

The coalition is formed by the following lawyer organizations and bar associations:

AAJ – Asociación Americana de Juristas contact: Vanessa Ramos vanessa.ramos.pr2019@gmail.com

AED-EDL – Avocat.e.s Européen.ne.s Démocrates / European Democratic Lawyers contact: Robert Sabata Y Gripekoven – robertsabata@icab.cat

AIJA (International Association of Young Lawyers) contact: Martijn BURGERS burgers@pactadvocaten.nl

ASF – Avocats Sans Frontières Belgique Contact: Patrick Henry – p.henry@elegis.be

Avocats Sans Frontières France contact : Vincent Fillola – vf@fillola-avocats.com, Julien Pourquie Kessas – jpk@avocatssansfrontieres-france.org

Avocats.be – L’Ordre des Barreaux francophones et germanophone de Belgique Contact: Stéphane Boonen s.boonen@skynet.be

Avvocati Minacciati – Osservatorio dell’Unione delle Camere Penali Italiane Contact: Nicola Canestrini – info@endangeredlawyers.org


CCBE, Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe – Conseil des Barreaux Européens Contact: Nathan Roosbeek – roosbeek@ccbe.eu


CIB (Conférence Internationale des Barreaux de tradition juridique commune) Contact : Yves Oschinsky – oschinsky@lexlitis.eu

CNB – Conseil National des Barreaux – Les Avocats Conact : Josquin LEGRAND – J.LEGRAND@cnb.avocat.fr

Czech Bar Association Contact: Alžběta Recová – recova@cak.cz

DSF – AS – Défense Sans Frontière-Avocats Solidaires Contact: Ghislaine Seze – ghislaineseze@gmail.com

ELDH, European Association of Lawyers for Democracy & Human Rights Contact: Thomas Schmidt – thomas.schmidt@eldh.eu

FBE – Fédération des Barreaux d’Europe Contact:
Monique Stengel – me.monique.stengel@wanadoo.fr Dominique Attias – dominique.attias@wanadoo.fr

Foundation Day of the Endangered Lawyer Contact: Hans Gaasbeek – hgaasbeek@gaasbeekengaasbeek.nl

Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers Contact: Bill Bowring – b.bowring@bbk.ac.uk

Joint Letter on Oya Aslan

To the president of
Istanbul 37. Heavy Penal Court No: 2020/247

Düsseldorf, Barcelona, Vienna, Brussels. 11.01.2020

LAWYERS’ ASSOCIATIONS DEMAND THE IMMEDIATE RELEASE OF TURKISH LAWYER OYA ASLAN

We, the undersigned international lawyers’ associations, have for many years condemned the criminal prosecutions and investigations targeted against lawyers in Turkey and internationally for performing the duties of their profession and representing people opposed or allegedly opposed to government policies.

Ten lawyers from the Peoples’ Law Office and other members of the Progressive Lawyers Association have been in prison for more than three and half years. Eighteen lawyers from the Progressive Lawyers Association were sentenced to a total of 159 years and 2 months imprisonment following an unjust trial. Their right to defense and right to a fair trial were violated from the beginning to the end. The Turkish Supreme Court affirmed the unlawful convictions for fifteen of the accused lawyers. We have already published a detailed report on this ongoing prosecution and in this report we underlined that there are significant and unacceptable violations of the European Convention. Our report can be accessed via: http://www.aeud.org/2020/06/fact-finding-mission-on-chd-trials-in-turkey/

During their incarceration, lawyers Ebru Timtik and Aytac Ünsal mounted a hunger strike to protest the unlawfulness of their convictions and demanded a fair trial for themselves and for every other person arrested. Tragically, Ebru Timtik died on the 238th day of her hunger strike. On the other hand, Aytac Ünsal, who was conditionally released by the Supreme Court due to his critical health condition, was arrested once again while his medical treatment was still going on. His mother, Nermin Ünsal – who is a former judge and a lawyer – reported that he is not able to access his medicines or consult with his doctors. Together with the threat posed by the covid-19 epidemic, his health is under a serious risk.

Oya Aslan is one of the defendants in this very same case. She is a member of Progressive Lawyers Association and worked in the Peoples` Law Office. She was arrested on December 27, 2019. She was subjected to torture during her detention and this appalling and outrageous situation was observed and reported upon by the international trial observers. The trial observers also reported that she demanded the court to make a complaint about the torture, however the court rejected her demand and did not take any action.

It is obvious that the Turkish government does not follow its domestic law, and it also systematically violates the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (known as the Havana Principles). Under these principles, “Governments shall ensure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference.” In addition, “Where the security of lawyers is threatened as a result of discharging their functions, they shall be adequately safeguarded by the authorities.” But it is the Turkish government that is threatening the security of these lawyers for discharging their functions. The principles further provide, “Lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions.”

Governments are obliged to remove obstacles to the professional activity of lawyers and they should prevent any kind of harassment or unlawful interference against lawyers. However, in Turkey the harassment of the legal profession has become the policy of the government itself.

We demand once again from your respected court to live up to its obligations under the law. We also demand the immediate release of Oya Aslan and all the other detained lawyers. Turkey must stop harassing lawyers and bar associations who are on the front lines of providing the right to defense. The hearing that is scheduled to be held on 12.01.2021 should open the window to reverse the ongoing unlawful implementation of the law. Your respected court has the chance to take a step forward for the rule of law, fair trial rights and the protection of lawyers. It is apparent that such a decision will be remembered as a natural, yet courageous, act of the court.

International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL)
Avocat.e.s Européen.nes Démocrates / European Democratic Lawyers (AED / EDL) European Association of Lawyers for Democracy & World Human Rights (ELDH)

AYTAÇ ÜNSAL has to be released

Berlin, Barcelona, Madrid, Utrecht, Paris, Rome, Brussels, Athens, 16th December 2020

It is unacceptable that lawyer Aytaç Ünsal, convicted in an unfair trial, has been tortured and sent to prison despite his health conditions. Our colleague has to be released immediately.

People’s Lawyer Aytaç Ünsal, was taken into custody in Edirne in the evening of the 9th of December 2020. Previously, on the 3rd of September 2020, he had been released by the Court of Cassation, which postponed the execution of his sentence due to the deterioration of his health as a result of his long hunger strike (213 days) demanding the right to a fair trial. The other lawyer who went on hunger strike with him, Ebru Timtik, died from her prolonged fast.  

Recently, on the 23rd of November, police raided the house where Aytaç Ünsal was being treated. The raid put him on high risk of infection due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the collapse of his already weak immune system. Furthermore, Aytaç Ünsal’s colleagues, who were present in the house during the police raid, were also detained and their belongings plundered.

Aytaç Ünsal, in very fragile health conditions as a result of the hunger strike, was tortured by the political police when he was taken into custody in Edirne. Our colleague was taken off the vehicle and laid on the ground, stepped on, and his head hit the asphalt ground. Due to this fall, Aytaç Ünsal’s face and various parts of his body were injured.

AED/EDL calls on the Turkish authorities to restore the rule of law and stop the practice of targeting lawyers. By aggressing the Defence, personified in this case by Aytaç Ünsal, Turkish authorities are in fact attacking the rule of law and human rights in Turkey.

It must be highlighted that Aytaç Ünsal has been attacked in his role as a human rights defender and we therefore call on the Turkish authorities to let him, as well as all other lawyers, to work freely and safely.

The international community is alarmed by the way Turkish judiciary displays, especially in terrorism-related cases, unprecedented levels of disregard for even the most basic principles of law, such as presumption of innocence, the necessity of a crime to justify a punishment, the non-retroactivity of crimes and the principle of non bis in idem (that is, not being judged for the same facts twice, as is the case in two ÇHD trials). At the same time, procedural guarantees such as adversarial proceedings, equality of arms and the right to a lawyer, are clearly and permanently eroded in these trials against lawyers.

Therefore, we call on the Turkish authorities to guarantee the independence of lawyers, and to protect procedural fair-trial guarantees. Furthermore, we raise concerns about recent developments jeopardising the effectiveness of the defense of human rights in Turkey. We stress the importance of civil society organisations and human rights defenders in a democratic society, as a vital and fundamental body for the defence of fundamental rights.

Finally, AED/EDL would like to draw attention to the worrying information we have received concerning the arrest and detention of human rights lawyers working for the non-governmental organization People’s Law Office (HALKIN HUKUK BÜROSU) under accusations of membership in a terrorist organization.

According to the information received:

We express grave concern regarding the allegations of arrest and prosecution under accusation of membership in a terrorist organization of the above-mentioned lawyers of the People’s Law Office. Moreover, serious concern is expressed at the mounting number of human rights defenders and lawyers under investigation for alleged links to terrorist organizations in Turkey, which seems to evidence a pattern of using this type of offence to target individuals and organizations legitimately expressing dissent with the policies of the current Turkish Government.

We declare the detention of this Human Rights defendants arbitrary, and we demand the Turkish Government to take all necessary measures to guarantee their right not to be deprived arbitrarily of their liberty and to ensure fair proceedings before an independent and impartial court, in accordance with articles 9, 10 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), ratified by Turkey on 23 September 2003.

We would also like to draw attention to the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, which stipulate that governments have the duty to ensure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference, and that lawyers shall 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).

We would lastly like to highlight the fundamental principles set forth in articles 1 and 2 of the UN Declaration on Human Rights Defenders, which provide for the right to promote and to strive for the protection and realization of human rights and fundamental freedoms.

In view of the urgency of the matter, we urge the Turkish authorities to safeguard the rights and life of lawyer Aytaç Ünsal, in compliance with international instruments and to free him immediately.

We urge the Turkish authorities to provide clear information on the measures adopted to respect the fundamental rights and life of Aytaç Ünsal.

Founded in 1987, the Association of European Democratic Lawyers (AED) is a confederation of trade unions and lawyers’ organizations with the same democratic, modern and humane ideals in Europe. The AED intends to defend the rights of citizens by preserving the independence of lawyers with regard to any political, social, economic or ordinal power. As a professional organization, its international purpose is to ensure respect for the rights of the defense and, in particular, to safeguard the physical integrity and political and economic freedom of lawyers. The association also works to ensure that all individuals have access to national and international judicial appeals, particularly those who are in the most precarious situations and whose basic rights are not recognized or poorly recognized.

MEMBER ASSOCIATIONS:

– Syndicat des Avocats de France (S.A.F.- France)

– Republikanischer Anwältinnen und Anwälteverein (RAV – Germany)

– Associació Catalana per a la Defensa dels Drets Humans (A.C.D.D.H- Catalonia)

– De Vereniging Sociale Advokatuur Nederland (VSAN – Holland)

– Syndicat des Avocats pour la Démocratie (S.A D. – Belgium)

– Asociación Libre de Abogados y Abogadas (ALA – Madrid)

– Legal Team Italia (L.T.I. – Italy)

– Çağdaş Hukukçular Derneği (ÇHD – Turkey)

– ΕΝΩΣΗ ΔΙΚΗΓΟΡΩΝ ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ ΥΠΕΡΑΣΠΙΣΗ ΤΩΝ ΘΕΜΕΛΙΩΔΩΝ ΔΙΚΑΙΩΜΑΤΩΝ (Greece)

– Komaleye Hıquqnasên ji bo azadiyê (ÖHD – Kurdish)

http://www.aeud.org

https://www.facebook.com/aed.edl1987/

twitter: @AED_EDL

telegram: https://t.me/AED_EDL

The judicial scandal has to come to an end – the imprisoned lawyers must be released

On November 11, the ÇHD I criminal case, which started in 2013, will continue at the 1st instance, before the 18th Heavy Penal Court in Istanbul. The victims of this long lasting trial are the accused 22 lawyers, all members of the Turkish Lawyers’ Organization ÇHD (Progressive Lawyers of Turkey) and all working in one of the two offices of the People’s Law Office. At the opening of the trial, 9 of the accused had already served 11 months in pre-trial detention. However, in order not to put a disproportionate burden on the defendants, the court released the last defendants from pre-trial detention 14 months after their arrest in January 2013.

The trial could have ended long ago if the prosecution had not initiated a second criminal case (ÇHD II trial) in 2018, with the approval of the 37th Heavy Penal Court, also against lawyers of the ÇHD and the People’s Law Office. 8 of the 20 lawyers accused in this case were also accused in the ÇHD I trial. In both proceedings, the defendants are accused of supporting, being members of, or directing a terrorist organization, on the same evidence. In September 2017, pre-trial detention was ordered for the defendants. One year later, the proceedings were opened. After the first week of hearings, the court ordered the release of all defendants from pre-trial detention. After an appeal by the public prosecutor’s office, 13 lawyers were again remanded in custody.

What the 18th Criminal Chamber failed to achieve in 4 years, the 37th Heavy Penal Court achieved in half a year after the opening of the proceedings. The accused were sentenced to prison terms between 2 and over 18 years. The sentences were largely confirmed in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court.

The public prosecutor’s office and the 37th Heavy Penal Court were aware of the proceedings pending before the 18th Criminal Chamber when the new proceedings were opened. They were also aware that 8 defendants in the ÇHD II trial had already been charged in the ÇHD I trial. They likewise knew that the principle “ne bis in idem” prohibits sentencing defendants twice for the same crime. The prosecutors and the 37th Heavy Penal Court must answer as to why they interfered in the current ÇHD I trial by opening a second trial. The convictions by the 37 Heavy Penal Court prevent the 18th Heavy Penal Court from pronouncing sentences on identical defendants. The 18th Heavy Penal Court is therefore also prevented from pronouncing lesser sentences, stopping the proceedings against the accused, or acquitting the accused. This situation currently affects the following defendants: Att. Selçuk Kozağaçlı , Att. Barkin Timtik, Att. Oya Aslan and Att.Günay Dag.

The Commission of Inquiry conducted in October 2019 by 23 lawyers’ organizations and bar associations from all over the world in Istanbul pointed out violations of the `principles of fair trial in the two ÇHD trials in its analysis and report “Fact-finding mission on CHD’s trials, Breach of Fair Trial, Independence of the Judiciary and Principles, on the Role of Lawyers, October 2019, Istanbul”

One of the lawyers accused in both trials, Att. Ebru Timtik, paid with her life for her struggle for fair trials. She went on hunger strike. The court refused to release her temporarily from detention in order to recover from the consequences of the hunger strike. Her colleague Att. Aytac Ünsal, who also went on hunger strike, only survived because the Court of Appeal, aware of the worldwide protests following the death of Ebru Timtik, did not want to be responsible for another victim of its intransigence.

If the 18th Heavy Penal Court is to avoid further damage to the reputation of the Turkish judiciary, the only option left to it is to acquit the accused, or to close the case.

Supported by

▪ European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights (ELDH)
▪ Avocats Européens Démocrates (AED-EDL)
▪ International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL) representative at the UN Vienna
▪ Confederation of Lawyers of Asia and the Pacific (COLAP)
▪ Asociación Americana de Juristas (AAJ)
▪ Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE)
▪ L’ORDRE DES BARREAUX FRANCOPHONES ET GERMANOPHONE DE BELGIQUE, (AVOCATS.BE) ▪ Ordre des avocats de Paris
▪ Lawyers for Lawyers
▪ Associazione Nazionale Giuristi Democratici (Italy)
▪ Défense sans frontière – Avocats solidaires (DSF–AS)
▪ Democratic Lawyers Association of Bangladesh (DLAB)
▪ Dutch League for Human Rights
▪ Foundation Day of the Endangered Lawyer

Another lawyer from Turkey has been arrested! Free Seda Saraldı

LAWYERS’ ASSOCIATIONS PROTEST ARREST OF TURKISH LAWYER SEDA SARALDI

 

We, the undersigned international lawyers’ associations, have for many years condemned the Turkish government’s systematic attacks on lawyers and bar associations for representing people allegedly opposed to government policies.

 

Ten lawyers from the Peoples’ Law Office and other members of the Progressive Lawyers Association have been in prison for more than three years. Eighteen lawyers from the Progressive Lawyers Association were sentenced to a total of 159 years and 2 months imprisonment following an unjust trial. Their right to defense and right to a fair trial were violated from the beginning to the end. The Turkish Supreme Court recently affirmed the unlawful convictions for fifteen of the accused lawyers.

 

During their incarceration, lawyers Ebru Timtik and Aytac Ünsal mounted a hunger strike to protest the unlawfulness of their convictions and demanded a fair trial for themselves and for every other person arrested. Tragically, Ebru Timtik died on the 238th of the day of her hunger strike.

 

Seda Saraldi, another lawyer who is a member of Progressive Lawyers Association and worked in the Peoples` Law Office as the intern of Ebru Timtik, was detained on 28 October, together with 101 clients of her office. Saraldi was arrested at her family’s home at midnight. According to her defense lawyers, the police broke the door of the house and Saraldi was subjected to violence during her arrest.

 

After finishing her internship, Saraldi began working as an attorney in the Peoples` Law Office. She was one of the lawyers campaigning for the freedom of Ebru Timtik and Aytac Ünsal. During the one year she has practiced law, Saraldi has represented hundreds of vulnerable people, including the imprisoned lawyers.

The Turkish government does not follow its domestic law, and it also systematically violates the Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers (known as the Havana Principles). Under these principles,

“Governments shall ensure that lawyers are able to perform all of their professional functions without intimidation, hindrance, harassment or improper interference.” In addition, “Where the security of lawyers is threatened as a result of discharging their functions, they shall be adequately safeguarded by the authorities.” But it is the Turkish government that is threatening the security of these lawyers for discharging their functions. And, the principles provide, “Lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions.”

Governments are obliged to remove the obstacles to the professional activity of lawyers and they should prevent any kind of harrasment or unlawful interference against lawyers. However, in Turkey the harrasment of the legal profession has become the policy of the government itself.

 

We demand again that the Turkish government live up to its obligations under the law. We also demand the immediate release of Seda Saraldi and all the other detained lawyers. Turkey must stop harrasing lawyers and bar associations who are on the front lines of providing the right to defense.

 

International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL)

European Democratic Lawyers (EDL – AED)

European Association of Lawyers for Democracy & World Human Rights (ELDH)

AED/EDL IN SUPPORT OF THE SPANISH LAWYERS ISABEL ELBAL AND GONZALO BOYE

AED/EDL would like to proclaim its support for our colleagues, the Spanish lawyers Gonzalo Boye and Isabel Elbal, concerning the suspicious attacks they have suffered in their offices, which have been burglarized twice in 9 months, stating the following:

1.- First and foremost, we must recall that lawyers should not be identified with their clients, or with the causes they defend, since such confusion is detrimental to the independence and dignity of lawyers and the whole legal profession, and ultimately affects the right of defense itself as a fundamental right.

This circumstance was already acknowledged in The Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, approved at the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders, held in Havana (Cuba), from the 27th of August to the 7th of September 1990, which establishes in its guarantee n° 18 that “Lawyers will not be identified with their clients or with the causes of their clients as a consequence of the performance of their duties”. Furthermore Resolution 26/7 (10th july 2014) of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC- A/HRC/RES/26/7) (2) provides in its point n° 104 that “It must be prohibited to assimilate lawyers and their clients or their causes and to express anticipation for the adoption of measures aimed at preventing such assimilation“.

 

2.- Regardless of the foregoing, we express our most outright rejection of all the intimidating, threatening or humiliating messages that lawyers have been receiving in recent times due to their practice of the legal profession, and specifically in the case of our colleagues because of their work as defense lawyers of clients linked to the so-called Catalonian “procés”. Likewise, we strongly reject such illegitimate attacks, and show our solidarity and support to the recipients.

 

3.- We reiterate the need for legal professionals, and specifically lawyers, to be able to develop their constitutional function with the most absolute freedom and autonomy, without which, it is impossible to speak of the rule of law and of the existence of fair trials without discrimination.

 

 

Madrid, Barcelona, Paris, Rome, Berlin, Brussels, Amsterdam

3rd of October 2020