Posted on

On the Revocation of the President of the Istanbul Bar Association.

AED- EDL firmly condemns the revocation of the Istanbul Bar President İbrahim Kaboğlu, and the dissolution of the Board for alleged acts of terrorist propaganda.
 
This dissolution follows the judicial procedure initiated on January 14, 2025 by the Istanbul Prosecutor General in retaliation for the statement issued by the Bar Association on December 21, 2024 condemning the deaths of journalists Nazım Daştan and Cihan Bilgin, who were allegedly killed in a Turkish drone strike in northern Syria.

AED-EDL strongly recalls that professional organisations, including the Bars and Law Societies, have the right and duty to express their views on matters of public interest, in particular when they concern the rule of law and human rights.

This dissolution is an instrumentalization of legal proceedings by the Turkish authorities with the sole aim of preventing the Istanbul Bar Association from exercising its fundamental right to freedom of expression in accordance with international instruments and the principles governing the legal profession.
 
The court decision is a clear attack on the independence and functioning of the Istanbul Bar Association, an institution that plays together with the professional organisation a vital role in safeguarding human rights and defending the rule of law in Turkey.

AED-EDL urges the Turkish authorities not to implement this decision which clearly violates article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers

The AED-EDL express its full support and deepest solidarity to all the member of Istanbul Bar Association and its President who are once again facing these measures, which are a flagrant violation of international human rights law and the principles governing the legal profession.

Posted on

7th anniversary of the 2016 EU-Turkey Statement

March 18 2023 marks the 7th anniversary of the 2016 EU-Turkey Statement. In 2016, Turkey assumed the role of the European Union’s border guard. It received billions of Euros from the
EU on the condition that it held migrants in Turkey and received those who were deported back.


Turkey, however, did not hesitate to exploit this position, using migrants as a threat and, whennecessary, as leverage against the EU.
On February 6 2023, following the earthquakes in Turkey, living conditions for migrants have deteriorated. Increasing racism has led to violent attacks against migrants; for this reason, the earthquake-affected areas can no longer be considered safe for migrants. As aid policies have excluded migrants from the relief system, migrants have difficulties accessing even basic necessities such as drinking water or shelter. Migrants have been labeled as “looters”, and there have been reports that members of Arabic-speaking communities in the region have been the target of racially-motivated mob attacks.

Representatives of the Turkish state publicly use anti-migrant rhetoric and promote racist sentiment. Further, migrants who survive the attacks may be tortured by law enforcement officers, as has been reported by legal and rights-based organizations working in the region.


The February 6 earthquake affected at least 10 cities in Turkey. These cities also host the highest percentage population of migrants compared to the local population. Migrants, who already constitute one of the most vulnerable sectors of society due to their socioeconomic status, are among the most mistreated subjects post-earthquake. As early as the second day of the earthquake, when thousands of people were still struggling to survive while trapped under the rubble, fake news with a racist, anti-migrant agenda was circulated by government agencies and representatives of political parties. This openly threatened migrants who had survived the
earthquake. Not only did state representatives fail to take any precautions to ensure the safety of migrants, they also failed to take the necessary steps to transfer migrants to other cities.


Migrants cannot travel outside their registered cities without travel permits and the lack of issuance of these permits left thousands of people stranded in the aftermath of the disaster. By the beginning of March there were still people in the earthquake zone who could not find a tent, while nightly temperatures dropped below zero. This fact reveals that Turkey has consistently avoided fulfilling its obligation to protect the migrant population.


On the other side of Europe’s border, the Greek Coast Guard and Frontex (the EU’s Border Protection Agency), with bloated budgets increasing further every year, are building up the walls of Fortress Europe, threatening people’s lives by pushing migrants back to Turkey. In Greece, the islands that are close to the Anatolian peninsula are defined as ‘hotspots’ where exceptional procedural rules apply. Here, migrants are portrayed as a threat to the existence of Greece itself. Migrants who do manage to reach these islands after surviving pushback incidents face difficulties in accessing the asylum procedure and health care, and are forced to live in camps that operate as open-air prisons, far from city centers. Many migrants’ applications for international protection are rejected on the grounds that Turkey is a safe third country, citing the EU-Turkey Statement, which also turned the islands into de facto open-air prisons for people
who are not permitted to leave.

Moreover, in the Greek border camps, from the EU-Turkey Statement until today, many people have lost their lives trapped there, with no accountability 1from the Greek state and no change in migration policy. On the contrary, the Greek state with the (political and financial) support of the EU is opening new camps. In Greece, the people are being incited against migrants by media and political networks – just as in Turkey. In Greece, the government criminalizes migrants and people who work or stand in solidarity with migrants, launching absurd criminal investigations and convicting people in trials without evidence. By applying criminal provisions on espionage, smuggling and human trafficking, Greece reproduces yet again the climate of fear, which is already well established in Turkey through the extensive use of ‘anti-terror’ legislation.


We, the undersigned organizations, declare that policies of border externalization, and of turning migrants into a cheap labor force, should be stopped immediately. We are against the use of migrants as leverage in domestic and international politics.

We underline that the externalization statements signed between the EU and Turkey or North African countries are against international law. These externalization statements should be immediately revoked, as they violate the responsibilities of the parties to the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.


We, the undersigned organizations, demand:
– the immediate termination of the application of the EU-Turkey Statement, as codified in Greek national law and regulations or through international agreements with Turkey, as well as all similar externalization statements with other countries, which have been
implemented with a similar motive of preventing migrants from entering the EU;
– that the practice of pushbacks between Turkey and Greece, in which the right to life and the prohibition of torture as enshrined in the European Convention of Human Rights are routinely violated, be stopped and remedy mechanisms for the survivors to be implemented immediately;
– that regulations assuring that migrants’ rights are respected, ensuring decent living conditions and freedom of movement, be implemented.

Signatures

Academics for Peace / Germany (Barış İçin Akademisyenler Almanya)
Adalet İçin Hukukçular / Lawyers for Justice
Agora Association Izmir (Turkey)
ASGI – Association for Juridical Studies on Immigration
Asociación Americana de Juristas
Association for Mutual Support and Solidarity with Migrants (Göçmen Yardımlaşma ve Dayanışma Derneği) (Turkey)
Avukat Dayanışması / Lawyer solidarity
Campaign Against Criminalising Communities (CAMPACC)
Center for Research and Elaboration on Democracy/Group of International Legal Intervention (CRED/GIGI)
Civic Space Studies Association (Sivil Alan Araştırma Derneği – Türkiye)
Community Peacemakers Teams (CPT) (Greece)
Confederation of European Alevi Unions (Avrupa Alevi Birlikleri Konfederasyonu)
Confederation of Lawyers of Asia & Pacific (COLAP)
Confederation of Public Employees’ Trade Unions (Kamu Emekçileri Sendikaları Konfederasyonu – KESK) (Turkey)
de:border | migration justice collective (Netherlands)
Democratic Alevi Associations (Demokratik Alevi Dernekleri – DAD) (Turkey)
Democratic Lawyers Association of Bangladesh (DLAB)
Demokrasi İçin Hukukçular / Lawyers for democracy
Demokratische Jurist*innen Schweiz
Diotima – Centre for Gender Rights & Equality (Greece)
Doug Nicholls, General Secretary, General Federation of Trade Unions
European Democratic Lawyers (AED)
European Lawyers for Democracy and Human Rights (ELDH)
Feminist Autonomous Centre for research (FAC)
Foundation for Society and Legal Studies (Toplum ve Hukuk Araştırmaları Vakfı – TOHAV) (Turkey)
Giuristi Democratici (Italy)
Göç Araştırmaları Derneği (Association for Migration Resarch – Turkey)
Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers
Hubyar Sultan Alevi Cultural Association (Hubyar Sultan Alevi Kültür Derneği) (Turkey)
I Have Rights, Samos (Greece)
International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL)
International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH)
Iran of the World
Iuventa-Crew
İnsan Hakları Derneği – İHD (Human Rights Association) (Turkey)
Kadın Zamanı Derneği (Women’s Time Association / Turkey)
Kadınlar Birlikte Güçlü Platformu – KBG (Women Are Stronger Together Platform – Istanbul) (Turkey)
Kartal hukukçular derneği
La Garriga Societat Civil (Catalunya)
Lawyers Association for Freedom (Özgürlük İçin Hukukçular Derneği – ÖHD) (Turkey)
Legal Center Lesvos (Greece)
Lesvos LGBTQI+ Refugee Collective
MAYA Eğitim Kültür Araştırma Yardımlaşma ve Dayanışma Derneği (Maya Association for Education, Culture, Research, Solidarity and Cooperation)
Media and Law Studies (Medya ve Hukuk Çalışmaları Derneği) (Turkey)
Medya ve Göç Derneği (The Media and Migration Association (MMA) – Turkey
Migrant Solidarity Network / Ankara (GDA / Ankara)
Mültecilerle Dayanışma Derneği (Association for Solidarity with Refugees) (Turkey)
National Union of People’s Lawyers of the Philippines (NULP)
Observatori DESC, Cátedra UNESCO de desarrollo humanos sostenible (Universidad de Girona)(Catalunya)
ÖDAV / Libertarian democrat lawyers
Pembe Hayat LGBTİ+ Dayanışma Derneği (Pink Life LGBTİ+ Solidarity Association-Turkey)
People’s Bridges (Halkların Köprüsü) (Turkey)
Pir Sultan Abdal Cultural Association (Pir Sultan Abdal Kültür Derneği) (Turkey)
Progressive Lawyers Association (Çağdaş Hukukçular Derneği – ÇHD) (Turkey)
Progrssive Lawyers Group (Çağdaş Avukatlar Grubu) (Turkey)
Refugee Legal Support Athens
Refugees in Libya (refugeesinlibya.org)
Republikanischer Anwältinnen- und Anwälteverein e. V (RAV)
Research Institute onTurkey (RIT)
Schweizerischer Friedensrat, Zürich
Sınırsız Kadın Dayanışması (Woman’s Solidarity Without Borders – Istanbul)
Sol Hukuk (Turkey)
Solidarité sans frontières
Sosyal Hukuk
Syndicat des avocats de France (SAF)
Tadamun Antimili (Colombia)
The Catalan association ACDDH
the Socialist Lawyers Association of Ireland
Toplumsal Hukuk (Turkey)
Transnational Migrants Coordination
Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project (TLSP)
Vereinigung demokratischer Juristinnen und Juristen
We Want to Live Together Initiative (Birlikte Yaşamak İstiyoruz İnsiyatifi) (Turkey)
Yoga and Sports with Refugees

Posted on

Turkey’s terror list: An attack on lawyers and human rights

The undersigned organisations deplore the recent arbitrary designation of Günay Dağ as a “terrorist”. Günay Dağ is a lawyer at the International Bureau of the People’s Law Office and a member of the Progressive Lawyers’ Association (ÇHD). On 30 December 2022, he was added to the list called “list of wanted terrorists” published on the official website of the Ministry of Interior. For the past three years, Günay Dağ has been a political refugee.
Although Günay Dağ has never been convicted of a criminal act of terrorism by a court, he is now being labelled as a “wanted terrorist” and member of a terrorist organisation.
We fear that Günay Dağ is being identified with his clients or his clients’ causes as a result of discharging his professional functions, in contravention of international and universal law and standards relating to the role of lawyers.
Alleged “terrorists” placed on the official list are subdivided into five categories: red, blue, green, orange and grey, according to the ascribed level of threat and/or importance. Günay Dağ has been included in the “green category,” with a reward of two million Turkish Liras offered for information leading directly to his arrest. This list published by the Ministry of Interior is solely based on the provisions of the “Regulation on Rewards to be Offered to Those Who Help in Exposing Terrorist Crimes or Seizing Evidence or Arresting Criminal Perpetrators”, which is known as the “rewards regulation”. However, this regulation does not provide any authorisation to the executive power to establish such a list, nor does it explain how the categories are to be determined or administered. Since the five colours have different amounts of monetary award, it is only known that the green category represents the medium level. This list has become an important tool for persecuting and prosecuting those who are considered as political opponents to the government. Critically, the list contains not only those accused of being directly involved with “terrorism”, but also lawyers that are representing them.
With such financial incentives for tips leading to an arrest, which can go up to almost five hundred thousand EURO, it appears that the authorities are trying to reach even persons who have fled and are no longer on Turkish territory.
The list includes a total of 971 people accused of being members of 19 different alleged “terrorist organisations”. The well-known journalist Can Dündar, who lives in exile, was also put on the list on 30 December 2022, thesame day as lawyer Günay Dağ,
Over the course of several years, a number of legal actions have been initiated by State authorities in Turkey against lawyers in violation of the prohibition of identifying lawyers with their clients. (See Article 18 of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers: Lawyers shall not be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions).
One of the well-known cases of this type concerns the prosecution of 22 lawyers from the Progressive Lawyers’ Association (ÇHD), which has been ongoing for more than 10 years. Many of the accused ÇHD lawyers have been imprisoned for years, although they have yet to be irrevocably convicted of a criminal offense. Among them are Selçuk Kozağaçlı, the Chair of ÇHD and other colleagues working in the People’s Law Office. Most of them have been acting as lawyers in politically sensitive cases. However, despite the heavy pressure against them, our colleagues who are not yet detained are still trying to pursue their legitimate professional activities as lawyers.
Arbitrary listing:
The listing entails serious consequences for the person concerned who faces serious risks of imprisonment, stigmatization and other human rights violations. Yet the list lacks a proper legal basis for its implementation. So far, only a decree of the Ministry of the Interior regulates the remuneration for informants. There is no legal provision that regulates who can be put on the list, how persons may be removed from the list nor how the executive authorities may decide establishing such a list, nor how it is managed. The initiation and administration of the list is therefore arbitrary, contravening the principles of legality.
Violation of the presumption of innocence, right to a fair trial and right to private and family life:
The listing authority does not provide expressly for judicial review, nor does it spell out any procedures for review a judicial authority, despite the fact that listing necessarily results in a serious impairment of the exercise of the rights of those who have been listed. The designation of a person as a terrorist without having been sentenced by a court or tribunal and without due process violates the presumption of innocence and the right to a fair trial. These human rights established under customary international and guaranteed by treaties to which Turkey is a party, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, articles 9 and 14) and the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR, articles 5 and 6). In this regard, the European Parliament recently strongly condemned the Turkish government’s disregard for the right to a fair trial in the context of the ECtHR’s 2019 case Kavala v. Turkey.
Likewise, sharing personal information openly and illegally on the internet is a violation of the right to private and family life (ICCPR, article 17; ECHR, article 8).
INTERPOL blocking Turkey’s list:
A Red Notice is a request to law enforcement worldwide to locate and provisionally arrest a person pending extradition, surrender, or similar legal action. It is based on an arrest warrant or a court order issued by the judicial authorities in the requesting country. Member countries apply their own laws in deciding whether to arrest a person. Red Notices are published by INTERPOL at the request of a member country, and must comply with INTERPOL’s Constitution and Rules.
In this context, we understand that INTERPOL has rejected most of the requests made by Turkey on the basis of this list, on the grounds that they lacked persuasive evidence and were politically motivated and therefore did not comply with binding INTERPOL regulations. In this regard, the Red Notice request for Can Dündar was rejected by INTERPOL.
Conclusion and recommendations:
In view of the above, the undersigned organisations call on the Turkish authorities to stop identifying lawyers with their clients or the causes they defend, including by putting an end to their listing as terrorists without due process and a fair trial. Additionally, we urge the Turkish authorities to remove lawyer Günay Dağ and all other lawyers from the “list of wanted terrorists” since their inclusion to this list is based on their legitimate activities as lawyers. Finally, the undersigned organisations call on the Turkish authorities to take all necessary measures to guarantee that all lawyers in Turkey are able to carry out their professional duties without fear of reprisal, hindrance, intimidation or harassment, in order to preserve the independence, integrity of the administration of justice and the rule of law.


This statement was endorsed by
Alternative Intervention of Athens’ Lawyers.
Asociación Americana de Juristas (AAJ)
Association of Lawyers for Freedom (ÖHD)
Avocats Sans Frontières (ASF)
Center for Research amd Elaboration on Democracy/Group of International Legal Intervention
Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE)
Défense Sans Frontières – Avocats Solidaires (DSF-AS)
European Association of Lawyers for Democracy & World Human Rights (ELDH)
European Criminal Bar Association (ECBA)
European Democratic Lawyers (AED)
Giuristi Democratici Italia
Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers
Indian Association of Lawyers
Institut des droits de l’homme du barreau de Bruxelles
International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL)
International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI)
International Commission of Jurists
Judicial Reform Foundation
Lawyers for Lawyers (L4L, the Netherlands)
Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada
National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NULP, the Philippines)
Progressive Lawyers’ Association (ÇHD, Turkey)
Republikanischer Anwältinnen und Anwälteverein (RAV, Germany)
The National Association of Democratic Lawyers [South Africa]
Vereinigung Demokratischer Juristinnen und Juristen eV (VDJ)

Posted on

Turkey: Closure case against political party looms

Trial is an assault on political opposition and democratic norms before elections

[Istanbul: January 9, 2023] Current efforts to dissolve the second-largest opposition party in Turkey’s parliament ahead of parliamentary and presidential elections are the latest in a deeply problematic practice in Turkey of forcing the closure of political parties, a group of 10 international and local non-governmental organizations, including European Democratic Lawyers said today. Previous efforts have violated the rights to freedom of association, assembly, and expression, and to free and fair elections including the rights of voters to elect their chosen representatives.

The Constitutional Court is currently being asked to order the closure of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), a political party with 56 deputies in Turkey’s parliament. An indictment against the party seeks to ban 451 politicians and party members from organized political activity or membership of political parties for a period of five years and forfeiture of the party’s assets. On January 5, the Constitutional Court agreed to a request by the chief prosecutor of the Court of Cassation for the interim measure of freezing the party’s bank accounts containing treasury support which political party groups in parliament are entitled to receive. On January 10, the chief prosecutor is due to give an oral presentation of the case against the party to the Constitutional Court, which the HDP will respond to at a later date before the court convenes to deliberate and then issue a final ruling.  

The 10 organizations on October 11, 2022 submitted a third-party intervention to the Constitutional Court arguing that arbitrary closure of political parties violates multiple rights.

“International law guarantees the rights of political parties within the frame of freedom of association,expression, peaceful assembly, and views the rights of every citizen to take part in the conduct of public affairs, to vote and to stand for election as core principles of democracy,” said Philip Leach of the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project. “The case before Turkey’s Constitutional Court concerning the possible closure of the Peoples’ Democratic Party is a fundamental test of whether the court will abide by international law and respect democratic norms. Closing down a political party without compelling grounds violates multiple rights and is an attack on democracy.”

The case before the Constitutional Court is based on a June 7, 2021 834-page indictment that mainly asserts the HDP’s activities are carried out in line with the aims of the armed outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party/Kurdistan Communities Union (PKK/KCK). According to the indictment, there is an “organic” link between the PKK/KCK and the HDP’s activities which the prosecutor claims support separatism by being “in conflict with… the indivisible integrity of the State with its territory and nation,” a violation of article 68/4 of Turkey’s Constitution and provisions in the Law on Political Parties. The indictment accuses the party’s members and sub-bodies and organs of having taken part in the commission of crimes of this nature or encouraged them to be committed or praised these crimes and those who committed them.

The NGOs argued in their third-party intervention that the case against the HDP should be seen in the context of Turkey’s long history of party closures which contrasts starkly with the practice in other Council of Europe member states and has repeatedly been found to violate the European Convention on Human Rights.  

Since 1982, Turkey’s  Constitutional Court has ordered the dissolution of 19 political parties out of the 40 cases it has reviewed. The majority of these have been parties representing the interests of Kurds in Turkey or leftist parties. The vague and widely drawn prohibition of acting “in conflict with …  the indivisible integrity of the State with its territory and nation” has been the principal charge. Three parties have been closed down on the equally vague grounds of acting “in conflict with… the principles of the democratic and secular republic.” In 2008, President Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party itself narrowly escaped party closure on the latter grounds.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) has found that party closure decisions violated the European Convention on Human Rights in six out of seven of the cases from Turkey it has examined.

In its case law essentially developed out of its rulings on those cases, the ECtHR deems restrictions or closure of political parties to be exceptional and extreme measures. The court’s criteria for examining the compliance of a party closure decision with the European Convention on Human Rights is based on three tenets. The court assesses whether the closure is prescribed by law, whether it pursues a legitimate aim, and whether it is necessary in a democratic society and proportionate.

The NGOs emphasized in their submission that in all the cases of parties representing the interests of Kurds submitted to the ECtHR, the court found that peacefully advocating the right to self-determination and recognition of Kurdish language rights or Kurdish identity were not themselves contrary to the fundamental principles of democracy, and that party closure violated the right to association.  The ECtHR determined that in most cases the dissolution of those parties could not reasonably be said to have met “a pressing social need”.

“The Constitutional Court should view the present case against the HDP in light of the repeated rulings of the European Court of Human Rights finding that closure of political parties in Turkey – in particular those representing the interests of Kurdish voters – violates fundamental rights. The extreme measure of closing down a political party serves to stifle pluralism and limit freedom of political debate, which is at the very core of the concept of a democratic society.”

The NGOs also examine the ECtHR’s recent findings in cases concerning HDP members, a pattern of abuse of criminal proceedings to silence perceived opponents and critics of the government and the evidence that the Turkish government systematically interferes with the judiciary.

The NGOs submitting the third-party intervention to the Constitutional Court are: ARTICLE 19, the Association of Lawyers for Liberty (ÖHD), the European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and Human Rights (ELDH), European Democratic Lawyers (AED), the Human Rights Association (İHD), Human Rights Watch (HRW), the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ), the International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH), Rights Initiative Association, and the Turkey Human Rights Litigation Support Project (TLSP).  

Posted on

Joint Statement: Bar Associations and International Lawyers’ Organisations Call for Protection of Lawyers in Iran

The undersigned bar associations and international lawyers’ organisations call for the Islamic Republic of Iran and its agencies to protect, promote, and support the following basic rights:

1) the independence of the legal profession;

2) the principle of lawyer-client confidentiality;

3) the right to have access to a legal representative;

4) the right to prepare a defence.

This joint statement has been issued to help secure immediate, coordinated, multi-sectoral action on legal independence in Iran to guarantee lawyers practice their profession without fear of repression or persecution.

Since the 1979 Islamic Revolution and increasingly over the years, the legal profession in Iran has lost its independence and lawyers have been subjected to detentions, harassments, and persecutions.

  • Policies and practices have been established by the regime that restrict and violate the independence of lawyers and judges, which leave the hands of the state open to convict those that “deviate” on charges such as “conspiracy against national security”, “propaganda activities against the Islamic Republic of Iran” and “cooperation with hostile states”.
  • Note to Article 48 of Iran’s Code of Criminal Procedure among others[1] is particularly problematic.
  • Note to Article 48 of the Code of Criminal Procedure states: “In cases of crimes against internal or external security, and in cases involving organized crime, where Article 302 of this code is applicable, during the investigation phase, the parties to the dispute are to select their attorneys from a list approved by the head of the judiciary.” In this note, lawyers are divided into two categories: lawyers who are trusted by the head of the judiciary and those who are not. The criteria on the basis of which trusted lawyers are appointed are set by the head of the judiciary. It is noteworthy that Article 48 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that: “When a suspect is arrested, he or she can request the presence of an attorney. The attorney, observing the secret nature of the investigation and the negotiations between the parties, should meet with the suspect. At the end of the meeting, which should not last more than one hour, the attorney may submit his or her written notes to be included in the case file.” However, the Revolutionary Courts, where “security-related” cases such as those involving human rights, political, and civil activists, are much less transparent than Public Courts. The judges at the Revolutionary Courts are known to abuse their legal powers. They deny access to legal representation during the investigation phase and prevent lawyers from accessing client files on the basis of confidentiality or that lawyers have insufficient “qualifications” to review certain files.
  • Systematic pressure: Lawyers in Iran are systematically pressured and harassed in various ways. Lawyers who undertake cases despite such restrictions are often threatened, intimidated, and ultimately imprisoned. Bureaucratic requirements, and even reprisals against lawyers (usually depending on the nature of their case) often make it extremely difficult for legal professionals to supply their clients access to adequate defence, and thereby restricts the ability of defendants to receive and access a fair trial.
  • Threats and arrests Over the years, restrictions and threats against lawyers in Iran have caused many in the profession to avoid defending the people that need it most, including minorities and other marginalized defendants as these are often the most politicized cases. Since the death of Mahsa Amini, a 22-year-old Kurdish girl who died in a hospital in Tehran due to injuries sustained by authorities after she was arrested by the “morality police” for wearing an “improper hijab”, and start of the nation-wide unrest, more than 430 human rights defenders[2] have been arrested, including at least 22 lawyers.

Calls of interest

In line with the basic principles on the role of lawyers, and in consideration of the above, we signatories of this statement call on the Islamic Republic of Iran and all its related agencies to take immediate steps aimed at protecting and supporting the independence of the legal profession and lawyers in Iran.

  • Considering some members of the Judiciary including its head are appointed by the Supreme Leader, both the state and the Judiciary must dissociate themselves from independent lawyers. The state must ensure all persons are entitled to call upon the assistance of a lawyer of their choice to protect and establish their rights and to defend them in all stages of criminal proceedings. This includes the lawyers, who are now themselves, incarcerated.
  • Laws and regulations must be amended, and state practice must be changed to ensure the following:
    • Lawyers are able to perform all their professional functions without intimidation, hinderance, harassment, or improper interference. The state must also ensure that lawyers do 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.
    • Lawyers are adequately safeguard by authorities where their security is threatened as a result of discharging their functions.
    • Lawyers are not identified with their clients or their clients’ causes as a result of discharging their functions.
    • The right of an attorney to appear before a court or a public authority shall not be restricted.
    • Lawyers must have access to appropriate information, files and documents in their possession or control in sufficient time to enable lawyers to provide effective legal assistance to their clients. Such access should be provided at the earliest appropriate time.

In the 43 years of the ruling of the Islamic Republic of Iran, lawyers have been systematically pressured and harassed in various ways. One of the things that restricts lawyers in the field of defence is the establishment of rules and regulations that ignore the matter of defence and deprive lawyers of the freedom to defend their clients. When they do represent their clients despite such restrictions, they are often threatened, intimidated, and ultimately imprisoned. Threats against lawyers in Iran continue to grow and lawyers find themselves under increased surveillance. We, the undersigned, demand that the Islamic Republic and its agencies respect and support the following:

  1. Immediate release of all lawyers arrested for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics.
  2. Immediate cease of prosecution of all lawyers prosecuted for any action taken in accordance with recognized professional duties, standards and ethics.
  3. Complete preservation of the independence of the legal profession.
  4. Right of individuals, lawyers included, under the rule of law.
  5. Right of the accused to be accorded a fair trial.
  6. Right of the lawyers to undertake the representation of clients (including other lawyers) or causes without fear of repression or persecution.

Signed by:

  1. International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute
  2. German Federal Bar
  3. European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and Human Rights
  4. Association of Lawyers for Freedom (Özgürlük için Hukukçular Derneği)
  5. Defence Commission of the Barcelona Bar Association
  6. European Democratic Lawyers
  7. Association of Berlin Defence Lawyers (Vereinigung Berliner Strafverteidiger)
  8. Republican Lawyers Association (Republikanischer Anwältinnen- und Anwälteverein)
  9. Montpellier Bar association
  10. Human Rights Institution of Montpellier 
  11. Progressive Lawyers’ Association (Çağdaş Hukukçular Derneği)
  12. Hanseatic Bar Hamburg, Germany (Hanseatische Rechtsanwaltskammer Hamburg)

[1] Article 191, Article 346, Note to Article 346, Article 385, Note to Article 297

[2] Between 16 September – 6 October, at least 300 human rights defenders were arrested (https://www.iranintl.com/202210065096); between 30 October – 3 November, at least 150 human rights defenders were arrested (https://www.radiofarda.com/a/32120083.html).

Posted on

Le monde entier regarde

Une délégation de plus de 60 observateurs internationaux condamne le jugement de la Cour dans le cadre des poursuites pénales engagées depuis une décennie contre 21 avocats de ÇHD (Progressive Lawyers’ Association) et HHB (People’s Law Office) : La délégation prévient que “le monde entier regarde”.

 

Cette semaine, nous – plus de 60 avocats de 9 pays représentant plus de 30 barreaux, ONG et associations professionnelles d’avocats – avons observé les dernières audiences du procès de masse qui a débuté en 2013 contre 22 avocats du ÇHD (Association des avocats progressistes) et du HHB (Bureau du droit du peuple). Il n’en reste désormais plus que 21, Ebru Timtik étant décédé – en grève de la faim pour un procès équitable – au cours de ces procédures.

Aujourd’hui, ces avocats ont été condamnés pour appartenance à une organisation terroriste et participation à la propagande terroriste, et de longues peines de prison ont été prononcées.

Ces condamnations et ces peines constituent une violation intégrale du droit à un procès équitable, des Principes de base des Nations unies relatifs au rôle du barreau et de l’État de droit.

Les seuls faits matériels portés à la connaissance de la Cour étaient strictement liés aux activités professionnelles des accusés en tant qu’avocats dans le domaine des droits de l’homme : participation à une conférence de presse, présence dans ou à proximité d’une manifestation, conseil à des clients sur leur droit de garder le silence, défense de suspects accusés de terrorisme, etc. Au cours de l’enquête, certains des avocats accusés ont été soumis à des écoutes téléphoniques pendant plus d’un an, dans une violation apparente du caractère absolu du secret professionnel des avocats.

Les Principes de base de l’ONU garantissent spécifiquement le droit des avocats à participer au débat public et à s’associer entre eux et stipulent en outre que les avocats ne doivent jamais être identifiés à leurs clients ou aux causes de leurs clients, ni faire l’objet de poursuites pour une action conforme à leurs devoirs professionnels.

De plus, nos collègues ont été privés de leur droit à un procès équitable. Leur demande de temps suffisant pour présenter leur défense a été rejetée par la Cour, qui n’a accordé que cinq petits jours d’audience pour 21 défendeurs, et a rejeté la demande des défendeurs de reporter l’audience afin de permettre un examen adéquat des preuves, en particulier des documents électroniques dont l’authenticité est sérieusement mise en doute.

Le procès s’est tenu dans une salle d’audience de la prison de Silivri, avec une forte présence policière. Les accusés ont été séparés de leurs avocats par deux rangées de policiers, ce qui a empêché les accusés et leurs avocats de communiquer en toute confidentialité.

Les droits des accusés ont également été violés par le fait que la procédure n’a pas été menée à son terme dans un délai raisonnable, le procès étant en cours depuis dix ans sans qu’il y ait de justification appropriée à la prolongation de la procédure.

De plus, pour plusieurs des accusés, ce procès repose sur des faits et des preuves qui ont déjà été utilisés dans le procès de 2017 contre sept des mêmes accusés, en violation du principe selon lequel personne ne doit être jugé deux fois pour la même infraction.

Enfin, nous sommes profondément préoccupés par l’indépendance du pouvoir judiciaire et l’état de droit. En attaquant ces avocats pour leur défense des droits de l’homme, ce sont les droits de l’homme, la démocratie et l’État de droit qui sont assiégés.

Nous sommes toujours fiers d’être solidaires de nos courageux collègues, et nous demandons une fois de plus leur libération immédiate.

Le monde entier regarde

.

Signatures:

  • Barreau d’Amsterdam
  • Asociación Libre de Abogadas y Abogados, Madrid (ALA)
  • AVOCATS.BE – Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophones de Belgique
  • Barreau de Berlin
  • Barreau de Bologne
  • Barreau de Bordeaux
  • Barreau de Bruxelles
  • Conférence Régionale des Bâtonniers de l Ouest
  • Criminal Committee of the International Association of Lawyers
  • Défense sans frontières – Avocats solidaires, France (DSF-AS)
  • Dutch League for Human Rights
  • Barreau d’Épinal
  • European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights, ELDH
  • European Democratic Lawyer – Avocats européens démocrates (AED)
  • Fair Trial Watch
  • Foundation Day of the Endangered Lawyer
  • européens  Hauts-de-Seine
  • Institut des droits de l’homme de Montpellier
  • La Conférence des Bâtonniers de France
  • Lawyers for Lawyers
  • Barreau de Liege-Huy
  • Barreau de Lyon
  • Barreau de Marseille
  • Barreau de Montpellier Bar
  • National Association of Democratic Jurists, Italy (GD)
  • National Lawyers Guild, US
  • Republikanischer Anwältinnen – und Anwälteverein e.V. (RAV)
  • Syndicat des Avocats de France
  • Syndicat des Avocats Pour la Démocratie, Belgium
  • The Association for the Support of Fundamental Rights Athens, Greece
  • The Center of Research and Elaboration on Democracy/ Legal International Intervention Group
  • Le Barreau fédéral allemande
  • L’Observatoire international des avocats en danger (OIAD), composé de 47 barreaux d’Espagne, de France, d’Italie, d’Allemagne, de Suisse, de Belgique, de Turquie, du Cameroun et de la République démocratique du Congo.
  • Barreau de Toulouse
  • UIA-IROL (l’Institut pour l’État de droit de l’Association internationale des juristes)

 

Posted on

The world is watching

Delegation of 60+ International Trial Observers Condemns Court Judgment in Decade-Long Criminal Prosecution of 21 Lawyers from ÇHD (Progressive Lawyers Association) and HHB (People’s Law Office): Delegation Warns That “The World is Watching”

This week, we – more than 60 lawyers from 9 countries representing more than 30 bar associations, NGOs and professional lawyers’ associations – have been observing the final hearings in the mass trial that started in 2013 against 22 lawyers from the ÇHD (Progressive Lawyers Association) and the HHB (People’s Law Office). There are now only 21 left, as Ebru Timtik died – hunger-striking for a fair trial – in the course of these proceedings.

Today, these lawyers have been convicted on charges of membership in a terrorist organization and participating in terrorist propaganda, and lengthy prison sentences have been imposed.

These convictions and sentences are in total violation of the right to a fair trial, the U.N. Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and the rule of law.

The only material facts brought to the Court were strictly linked to the defendants’ professional activities as lawyers in the field of human rights: taking part in a press conference, being present in or near a protest, advising clients of their right to remain silent, defending suspects charged with terrorism, etc. During the inquiry, some of the accused lawyers were subjected to wiretapping for over a year, in an apparent violation of the sanctity of legal professional privilege.

The U.N. Basic Principles specifically guarantee the right of lawyers to participate in public debate and to associate with each other and, further, state that lawyers must never be identified with their clients or their clients’ causes, nor suffer prosecution for any action in accordance with their professional duties.

Moreover, our colleagues were deprived of their right to a fair trial. Their request for sufficient time to present their defence was denied by the Court, which allowed only five short days of hearings for 21 defendants, and rejected the defendants’ request to postpone the hearing in order to permit a proper examination of the evidence, in particular electronic documents the authenticity of which is seriously questioned.

The trial was held in a courtroom at Silivri prison, with heavy police presence. The defendants were separated from their lawyers by two lines of police officers, hindering the ability of the defendants and their lawyers to communicate with confidentiality.

The defendants’ rights were also violated by the failure to complete proceedings within a reasonable time, as the trial has been ongoing for ten years without a proper justification for the protracted proceedings.

In addition, for several of the defendants, this trial relies on facts and evidence that have already been used in the 2017 trial against seven of the same defendants, in violation of the principle that no one should be tried twice for the same offense.

Finally, we are deeply concerned about the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law. In attacking these lawyers for their defense of human rights, it is human rights, democracy and the rule of law that are under siege.

We are always proud to stand in solidarity with our courageous colleagues, and we once again demand their immediate release.

The world is watching.

Signatures:

  • Amsterdam Bar Association
  • Asociación Libre de Abogadas y Abogados, Madrid (ALA)
  • AVOCATS.BE – Order of French- and German-speaking bar associations of Belgium
  • Berlin Bar Association
  • Bologna Bar Association
  • Bordeaux Bar Association
  • Brussels Bar Associaton
  • Conférence Régionale des Bâtonniers de l Ouest
  • Criminal Committee of the International Association of Lawyers
  • Defense Without Borders – Solidarity Lawyers, France (DSF-AS)
  • Dutch League for Human Rights
  • Épinal Bar Association
  • European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights, ELDH
  • European Democratic Lawyer (AED)
  • Fair Trial Watch
  • Foundation Day of the Endangered Lawyer
  • Hauts-de-Seine Bar Association
  • Human Right Institution of Montpellier
  • La Conférence des Bâtonniers de France
  • Lawyers for Lawyers
  • Liege-Huy Bar Association
  • Lyon Bar Association
  • Marseille Bar Association
  • Montpellier Bar Association
  • National Association of Democratic Jurists, Italy (GD)
  • National Lawyers Guild, US
  • Republikanischer Anwältinnen – und Anwälteverein e.V. (RAV)
  • Syndicat des Avocats de France
  • Syndicat des Avocats Pour la Démocratie, Belgium
  • The Association for the Support of Fundamental Rights Athens, Greece
  • The Center of Research and Elaboration on Democracy/ Legal International Intervention Group
  • The German Federal Bar
  • The International Observatory for Lawyers in Danger (OIAD) composed by 47 bar associations from Spain, France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, Turkey, Cameroon and Democratic Republic of Congo
  • Toulouse Bar
  • UIA-IROL (the Institute for the Rule of Law of the International Association of Lawyers)
Posted on

Une délégation d’avocates et avocats d’Europe et des États-Unis observe le procès CHD à Silivri Le procès qui dure déjà depuis 10 ans

En 2013, il y a dix ans, un procès de masse a débuté contre 22 avocates et avocats, tous membres de l’organisation d’avocats Progressive Lawyers’ Association (ÇHD, Turquie) et du People’s Law Office (HHB). Depuis, jusqu’à trois audiences ont eu lieu chaque année – d’abord devant la “Cour d’assises spéciale” (la Haute Cour pénale), puis, en 2014, après un changement dans la loi de procédure pénale de la Turquie, devant la Haute Cour penale ordinaire.

Tous les avocats en question ont été condamnés ou font l’objet de poursuites pour leurs activités professionnelles. En violation des Principes de base des Nations unies relatifs au rôle du barreau, ils sont, d’une part, identifiés aux causes de leurs clients et, d’autre part, limités dans leur liberté d’expression, qui inclut le droit de prendre part à des débats publics sur les droits de l’homme.

Plusieurs des accusés, dont le président du ÇHD, Selçuk KOZAGAÇLI, ont déjà été soumis à des années de détention provisoire. L’une des accusées de ce procès, Ebru Timtik, est mort pendant sa grève de la faim pour obtenir des procès équitables devant les tribunaux turcs.

Des avocats d’Europe et d’autres continents ont observé toutes les audiences. Cette semaine, les observateurs internationaux comprennent plus de 60 avocats de huit pays européens et des États-Unis : Autriche, Belgique, France, Allemagne, Grèce, Italie, Pays-Bas, Espagne/Catalogne et États-Unis. Les avocats représentent divers barreaux locaux, des confédérations européennes et internationales de barreaux et d’autres organisations d’avocats.

L’article 10 de la Déclaration universelle des droits de l’homme et l’article 14 du Pacte international relatif aux droits civils et politiques imposent à la Turquie de garantir à tous les prévenus un procès équitable et public devant un tribunal compétent, indépendant et impartial.

Auparavant, en 2021, à l’occasion de la Journée internationale du procès équitable, dédiée la Turquie cette année-là, le jury est arrivé à la conclusion que ces normes internationales pour un procès équitable sont fréquemment violées en Turquie.

Cette semaine, les observateurs internationaux suivent de très près le procès de ÇHD afin de déterminer si le tribunal respectera les normes internationales en matière de procès équitable et si les violations antérieures de ces principes au cours de ce procès seront corrigées par le tribunal.

Les procès contre les avocats de ÇHD s’inscrivent dans un schéma plus large d’attaque contre les avocats en Turquie et d’identification de ceux-ci avec leurs clients. Les avocats sont injustement criminalisés et poursuivis pour avoir rempli leurs obligations professionnelles. Cette situation est intolérable et constitue une violation manifeste du droit international. De plus, les observateurs internationaux ont conclu que les normes internationales du procès équitable n’ont pas été respectées lors des audiences qu’ils ont observées précédemment.

Nous demandons donc la libération immédiate de tous les avocats incarcérés en raison de leur travail sur des affaires politiques. Ce n’est pas un crime d’être un avocat. Nous continuerons d’insister pour mettre fin à la criminalisation du simple exercice de la profession d’avocat et pour faire respecter les principes fondamentaux de l’État de droit, y compris le droit à un procès équitable pour tous, en Turquie et ailleurs dans le monde.

Signataires:

  • European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights, ELDH
  • La Conférence des bâtonniers
  • L’association Défense Sans frontière – Avocats Solidaires (Defense Without Borders – Solidarity Lawyers, France (DSF-AS)
  • Giuristi Democratici – Association nationale des juristes démocrates, Italie
  • UIA-IROL (the Institute for the Rule of Law of the International Association of Lawyers)
  • Lawyers for Lawyers, Pays Bas
  • Le Barreau fédéral allemand
  • Union of Italian Penal Chambers (UCPI)
  • Republikanischer Anwältinnen – und Anwälteverein e.V. (RAV)
  • L’Observatoire International des Avocats en Danger (OIAD)
  • The Center of Research and Elaboration on Democracy/ Legal International Intervention Group
  • L’association catalane pour la Défense de droits de l’homme
  • La commission de défense de l’association du Barreau de Barcelona
  • Le Barreau de New York City
  • The Foundation of the Day of the Endangered Lawyer
  • The Dutch League for Human Rights
  • Avocats Européens Démocrates / European Democratic Lawyers
  • The Association for the Support of Fundamental Rights Athens, Greece
  • L’association du Barreau de Marseille
  • Fair Trial Watch
  • L’association du Barreau de Berlin
  • L’association du Barreau de Bordeaux
  • Conférence Régionale des Bâtonniers de l Ouest
  • L’association du Barreau de Epinal
  • The International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL)
  • National Union of People’s Lawyers, the Philippines (NULP)
  • Asociación Americana de Juristas
  • Confederation of Lawyers of Asia and the Pacific (COLAP)
  • L’association du Barreau de Bruxelles
  • AVOCATS.BE – l’Ordre des associations des barreaus germanophones et francophones de Belgique
  • Syndicat des Avocats Pour la Démocratie
  • OBFG Association de l’Ordre des avocats germanophones et francophones de Belgique
  • L’association du Barreau de Liège-Huy
  • L’association du Barreau de Montpellier
  • L’association du Barreau de Lyon
  • L’association du Barreau de Amsterdam
  • L’association du Barreau de Hauts-de-Seine
  • L’association du Barreau de Grenoble
  • Institut des Droits de l’homme de Grenoble
Posted on

Lawyers delegation from Europe and the USA observe the CHD trial in Silivri – The trial which already has lasted for 10 years

In 2013, ten years ago, a mass trial started against 22 lawyers, all of them members of the lawyers organisation Progressive Lawyers’ Association (ÇHD, Turkey) and of the Peoples Law Office (HHB). Since then up to three hearings have taken place each year – first before the “Special Assize Court” (the Heavy Penal Court), then, in 2014, after a change in penal procedural law of Turkey, before the ordinary Heavy Penal Court.

All lawyers in question were convicted or face charges for their professional activities. In violation of the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, they are, firstly, identified with their clients’ causes, and, secondly, limited in their freedom of expression, which includes the right to take part in public discussions about human rights.

Several of the defendants, among them the ÇHD president Selçuk KOZAGAÇLI, have already been subject to years of pretrial detention. One of the defendants in this trial, Ebru Timtik, died during her hunger strike seeking fair trials in the courts of Turkey.

Lawyers from Europe and other continents have observed all hearings. This week the International Observers include more than 60 lawyers from 8 European countries and the USA: Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, The Netherlands, Spain/Catalonia, and the US. The lawyers represent various local Bar Associations, European and International Bar confederations, and other lawyers’ organisations.

Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights require Turkey to provide all defendants with a fair and public trial by a competent, independent, and impartial court.

Previously, in 2021, on the occasion of the International Fair Trial Day, which focused on Turkey that year, the jury came to the conclusion that these international standards for a fair trial are frequently violated in Turkey.

This week, the International Observers are monitoring the ÇHD trial very closely to determine whether the court will adhere to international fair trial standards and whether prior violations of these principles in the course of this trial will be remedied by the court.

The trials against the lawyers of ÇHD are part of a larger pattern of attacking lawyers in Turkey and identifying them with their clients. Lawyers are unjustly criminalized and prosecuted for fulfilling their professional duties. This is intolerable and in clear violation of international law. Further, the International Observers have concluded that international fair trial standards have not been respected in the hearings they have previously observed.

Therefore we demand the immediate release of all lawyers incarcerated based on their work on political cases. It is not a crime to be a lawyer. We will continue to insist on ending the criminalization of merely exercising the profession of lawyers and on upholding the fundamental principles of the rule of law, including the right to a fair trial for all people in Turkey and elsewhere throughout the world.

Signatories:

  • European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights, ELDH
  • La Conférence des bâtonniers
  • L’association Défense Sans frontière – Avocats Solidaires (Defense Without Borders – Solidarity Lawyers, France (DSF-AS)
  • Giuristi Democratici – National Association of Democratic Jurists, Italy
  • UIA-IROL (the Institute for the Rule of Law of the International Association of Lawyers)
  • Lawyers for Lawyers, the Netherlands
  • The German Federal Bar
  • Union of Italian Penal Chambers (UCPI)
  • Republikanischer Anwältinnen – und Anwälteverein e.V. (RAV)
  • The International Observatory for Lawyers in Danger (OIAD)
  • The Center of Research and Elaboration on Democracy/ Legal International Intervention Group
  • The Catalan Association for the Defense of Human Rights
  • The Barcelona Bar Association’s Defence Commission
  • The New York City Bar Association
  • The Foundation of the Day of the Endangered Lawyer
  • The Dutch League for Human Rights
  • Avocats Européens Démocrates / European Democratic Lawyer
  • The Association for the Support of Fundamental Rights Athens, Greece
  • Marseille Bar Association
  • Fair Trial Watch
  • Berlin Bar Association
  • Bordeaux Bar Association
  • Conférence Régionale des Bâtonniers de l Ouest
  • Epinal Bar Association
  • The International Association of Democratic Lawyers (IADL)
  • National Union of People’s Lawyers, the Philippines (NULP)
  • Asociación Americana de Juristas
  • Confederation of Lawyers of Asia and the Pacific (COLAP)
  • Brussels Bar Associaton
  • AVOCATS.BE – Order of French- and German-speaking bar associations of Belgium
  • Syndicat des Avocats Pour la Démocratie
  • OBFG German and French speaking Bar Association of Belgium
  • Liège-Huy Bar Associaton
  • Bar Association
  • Montpellier Bar Association
  • Lyon Bar Association
  • Amsterdam Bar Association
  • Hauts-de-Seine Bar Association
  • Grenoble Bar Association
  • Institut des Droits de l’homme de Grenoble
Posted on

“OBJECT WAR CAMPAIGN” LAUNCH : Petition to support Conscientious Objectors and Deserters from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine

On the occasion of the International Day of Peace, 21st September, Connection e.V., the International Fellowship of Reconciliation, the European Office for Conscientious Objection and War Resisters’ International are calling for a signature campaign for deserters and conscientious objectors from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine. The #ObjectWarCampaign calls on all citizens from everywhere to join the global effort to ensure protection and asylum to conscientious objectors and deserters from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine involved in the current war in the region. They are our hope to refuse war and let peace prevail!

On April 6, 2022, the President of the European Council, Charles Michel, had called on Russian soldiers to desert and promised them protection under refugee law. So far, this promise has not been fulfilled.

Within the scope of #ObjectWarCampaign, a petition has been prepared for everyone to sign in. The petition is addressed to the President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Council Charles Michel and the President of the European Parliament Roberta Metsola. The petition emphasizes the need to uphold the right to asylum to conscientious objectors and deserters from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine by hosting states. The petition launched on the WeMove.eu website can now be signed in German, English, French, Italian and Greek.

There are an estimated 100,000 Russian military draftees and deserters refusing the war of aggression. An estimated 22,000 Belarusian military draftees have left their country because they don’t want to participate in the war in Ukraine. Everyone who has refused service risks several years of prosecution because of their stand against the war. They are hoping for protection in various countries.

Ukraine suspended the right to conscientious objection and closed the border for men between 18 and 60. Over 100,000 men have evaded war involvement in Ukraine and fled abroad. Currently, Ukrainian citizens have temporary residence in the European Union. The #ObjectWarCampaign petition demands that the right to conscientious objection to military service is fully guaranteed in Ukraine.

The petition signatures  are a crucial sign of support for conscientious objectors and deserters. This campaign highlights the importance of opening borders to those who oppose the war at great personal risk in their countries, and calls on everyone around the world to support those who refuse to fight and kill.

Every recruit can be a conscientious objector, every soldier a deserter. Let’s support those who refuse to kill and end war together!