Posted on

8èmes RENCONTRES AUTOUR DE LA JOURNÉE DE L’AVOCAT MENACÉ

Since 2010, the Day of the Lawyer in Danger is held on the 24th of January in different cities and countries around the world. This date was chosen because on January 24, 1977, five people, including three lawyers, were murdered in an office on Atocha Street in Madrid, where their law firm was located. Each year, the International Day is organized by the Coalition for the Endangered Lawyer, a network of national and international organizations and bar associations. The objective of this day is to draw the attention of governments, international institutions, civil society, the media and the general public to the plight of lawyers in a given country, in order to raise awareness of the threats they face in the exercise of their profession.

In previous years, the Day has focused on countries such as Colombia (2022 and 2014), Azerbaijan (2021), Pakistan (2020), Turkey (2019 and 2012), Egypt (2018), China (2017), Honduras (2016), the Philippines (2015), the Netherlands/Spain (2013) and Iran (2010). This year, the Day of the Endangered Lawyer focuses on Afghanistan.

On the 27th of January, AED is participating in an educational initiative. The focus will be on the situation of Afghan lawyers, the bar and the judicial system in Afghanistan, and the responsibility of other states to respond to Afghan lawyers’ calls for help. We will discuss the situation of lawyers and legal professionals in the world through the independence of justice and lawyers.

We will discuss the legal framework for the protection of the profession, in particular the United Nations Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and the European Convention on the Legal Profession which is currently being drafted.

Please find here the programme of the conference

Participation is also possible online. For more information, please see here.

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

AFGHANISTAN Day of the Endangered Lawyer 2023

The Day of the Endangered Lawyer is an initiative started by AED‐EDL in 2010, on behalf of the lawyers of Iran. The date of 24 January was chosen in remembrance of the assassination of 4 trade union lawyers and one employee in Atocha Street of Madrid in 1977 (Massacre of Atocha), during the Spanish transiciòn after the death of the dictator Franco (in 1975).

The countries denounced have been: Iran, Turkey, the Basque country, the Philipines, Colombia, Honduras…

On the 24th of January 2023 our initiative will be dedicated to the plight of Afghan lawyers, especially after the US left the country to the Taliban.

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

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

Massive Espionage on seven Spanish Lawyers using the Pegasus programme

TO THE OBSERVATOIRE INTERNATIONAL DES AVOCATS EN DANGER (OIAD)

INFORMATION ON MASSIVE ESPIONAGE PERPETRATED ON SEVEN SPANISH LAWYERS USING THE PEGASUS PROGRAM

The indiscriminate ‘hacking’ using the PEGASUS spy program that was carried out on pro-independence politicians, has also affected seven lawyers: Gonzalo Boye Tusset, Josep Costa, Jaume Alonso Cuevillas, Andreu Van den Eyden, Joaquim Jubert, Josep Rius and Jordi Domingo, the first one from the Madrid Bar Assotiation (ICAM) and the remaining six from the Bacelona Bar Assotiation (ICAB). This is confirmed ny the information received through the media, and the judicial investigations that are being carried out in a Barcelona court.

The right to defence, the duty of confidentiality between lawyer and client and, ultimately, professional secrecy, are fundamental pillars not only of our profession, but also of the right to effective judicial protection as a guarantee of the rule of law.

The right to defence of our clients and the right to a trial with all the guarantees depend on the duty of secrecy, confidentiality and, ultimately, professional secrecy. Not in vain has it been defined as a right (of the client) and a duty (of the lawyer), and for this reason it is part of our commitment as lawyers to preserve it and guarantee its integrity against any external interference.

The Spanish Supreme Court has already indicated in its ruling 78/2012, of February 9, 2012 (Garzón case), the following:

“ Article 24 of the Spanish Constitution, provides together with other rights that, although different and independent from each other, constituting a battery of

guarantees aimed at ensuring the real effectiveness of one of them: the right to a trial with guarantees, to a fair trial , in terms of the ECHR [European Convention on Human Rights]; ultimately, to a fair trial . So that the legitimate claim of the State regarding the prosecution and punishment of criminal behavior should only be satisfied within the limits imposed on the exercise of power by the rights that correspond to citizens in a rule of law. Nobody seriously disputes in this framework that the search for the truth, even supposing that it is reached, does not justify the use of any means. Justice obtained at any price ends up not being Justice.

The confidentiality of the relationship between the accused and his defence lawyer, which naturally must be governed by trust, is an essential element (ECHR Castravet v. Moldova, March 13, 2007, p. 49; and ECHR Foxley v. United Kingdom , of June 20, 2000, page 43) In the ECHR of October 5, 2006, case Viola against Italy (61), it was stated that “…the right, for the accused, to communicate with his lawyer without being heard by third parties is among the elementary requirements of the fair trial in a democratic society and derives from article 6.3 c) of the Convention. If a lawyer could not meet with his client without such surveillance and receive confidential instructions from him, his assistance would lose much of its usefulness (Judgment S. against Switzerland of November 2, 1991, series A no. 220, pg. 16, app. 48)”.

The events that we are hearing about through the media are especially serious, and require clear explanations about the perpetrators of these acts of espionage, by whom or by whom they were authorized, and whether there has been any type of judicial authorization , or whether this espionage has occurred without any type of control and in a massive and indiscriminate manner.

In this context, the Barcelona Bar Association (ICAB) and the Council of Catalan Bars (CICAC) have issued a joint statement at the end of which they denounced the use of Pegasus against lawyers and requested explanations from the Spanish Government on what could be a serious violation of fundamental rights, the rights of defence and professional secrecy, compromising the rule of law and the peaceful coexistence of society in Spain.

On the other hand, the Madrid Bar Association (ICAM) has not yet reacted and the General Council of Spanish Lawyers (CGAE) only reacted on April 29, 2022, following the request addressed to it to this effect by the Free Lawyers Association (Asociación Libre de Abogadas y Abogados – ALA), in consideration of the seriousness of these acts of espionage against the aforementioned lawyers.

For this reason, and because these are serious facts that directly attack our profession, the right of defence as a fundamental aspect in the functioning of justice and the effective development of the right to a trial with all the

guarantees, we request the Observatoire International des Avocats en Danger (OIAD) to demand all the explanations from the Spanish Government and uncover all the responsibilities regarding these events, acting in defence of this group of lawyers, and to issue a press release to denounce this attack on the rights of the defence, on professional secrecy, as well as on private life; and also afford your protection to these lawyers against future interference in the exercise of their professional activity. You must give your unequivocal support for the Catalan and Madrid lawyers who were victims of the espionage perpetrated by means of the Pegasus software by the Spanish authorities.

Naples, 30th of June 2022

Posted on

Day of the Endangered Lawyer 2022- Activities

On the 24th of January, all over Europe and the whole world, lawyers show their solidarity with their fellow colleagues. This year the Day of the Endangered Lawyer is dedicated to Colombia, who suffer manifold repression for their professional work.

BELGIUM :

CCBE with the Association of European Democratic Lawyers (AED, of which the Lawyers’ Union for Democracy (SAD) is a member), Avocats.be, the F.I.D.H., the Institute of Human Rights of the Brussels Bar, and A.S.F. call for a demonstration on 24 January 2022 at 1pm in front of the Colombian Embassy (avenue Franklin Roosevelt, 96 A in Ixelles) in defence of the defence. Wearing a toga is recommended, wearing a mask is mandatory.

CANADA :

The Law Society of Ontario (LSO) and Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada (LRWC) will be organizing a webinar on the 24th of January from 17h to 18h Eastern (2-4 Pacific)

FRANCE:

The SAF is organising on January 21st the 7th Meeting with the Montpellier Bar Association around this day.

The Paris Bar is participating in the online conference organised on January 21st by the International obsevatory of lawyers from 5:00 pm to 6:30 pm (CET) translated into English, French, Italian and Spanish.

On the 24th of January a rally is organized in Lyon in front of the Colombian Consulate.

GERMANY:

On the 20.01.2022, at 19h00 in Berlin, the RAV, DAV, VDJ, ELDH, BRAK Berlin are organizing an online seminar with the presence of Colombian human rights lawyers Zoraida Pedraza und German Romero

On the 24th of January, the protest will take place in front of the Colombian Embassy in Berlin at 13h00 CET, and organised by RAV, VDJ, BRAK Berlin

ITALY:

On the 24th of January, from 14.30-16.30, the UCPI is organizing a Webinar on the International Day of Endangered Lawyers 2022. You can register here.

MEXICO

The Mexican chapter of the International Association of People’s Lawyers (IAPL), Asociación Mexicana de Abogados del Pueblo (AMAP), will hold a protest in front of the Colombian Embassy in Mexico City (CDMX) on January 22nd at 4pm local time.

THE NETHERLANDS

The Vsan / Aed is organising on the 24th of January, a lawyer manifestation at the Colombian Embassy in The Hague between 1500 and 1700 ,where a petition will be given about the difficult situation of the lawyers in Colombia .

At 16.30 pm – Audience at the Embassy of Columbia: 6 lawyers of the VSAN will be presenting the report on Colombia to the Columbian ambassador Mr. Fernando Grillo

At 17.00 pm – Online-reading organised by Lawyers for Lawyers. Colombian humanrights lawyer Jorge Molano

TURKEY

There will be a demonstration in Istanbul and İzmir.

There will be events inside the courthouses of Antalya and Alanya.
In Antep, the human rights committee of the bar association will publish a statement.

In Adana, together with Adana Bar Association, there will be a press conference.T

SPAIN:

On the 24th January, at 12 pm a demonstration will take place in front of the Social Court (C/ Princesa 3) in Madrid in commemoration of the Massacre of the Atocha Labor Lawyers 45 years ago.

On the 24 January, at 1 pm the demonstration will follow in front of the Colombian Embassy in Madrid (Pº General Martínez Campos, 48) in defense of the defense.

On the 24 January, at 6:30 pm a conference will take place at the General Council of Spanish Lawyers (CGAE – Pº Recoletos 13), with the presence of

  • José Manuel Santos: Colombian Lawyer of the Indigenous Movement, suffering persecutions.
  • Leonardo Jaimes: Colombian Lawyer suffering persecutions.
  • Ángeles Chinarro: President of ALA
  • José Luis Muga: Co-President of AED

SWITZERLAND:

The Geneva Bar Association will be co-organising an event with the IBA and other professional associations from 13:30- 15:00 CET dedicated to the Guidelines for lawyers in support of peaceful assemblies

TAIWAN :

The Judicial Reform Foundation of Taiwan is organizing a seminar on Colombia on Saturday 22 January (Taipei time 18:00-20:00) with a short documentary on the situation of HRDs, and pre-recorded video interviews of 2 rights lawyers from the country. A professor from a Taiwan university familiar with the politics of Colombia will also be joining us to share her observations.

UNITED KINGDOM

On the 20th of January 2021 from 15h00- 16h30, the Law Society of England is organizing a webinar with Dr. Marina Brilman, Dora Lucy Arias, Ana María Rodríguez, Germán Romero Sánchez.

UNITED STATES

The New York City Bar is organizing on the 24th of January at 12:30 pm (EST (Washington D.C./New York time) a webinar.



Posted on

COLOMBIA- Day of the Endangered Lawyer

Since 2009, the Day of the Endangered Lawyer has taken place on 24 January in multiple cities, countries, and continents around the globe. 24 January was chosen as the annual International Day of the Endangered Lawyer because on this day in 1977, four lawyers and a co-worker were murdered at their address at Calle Atocha 55 in Madrid, an event that came to be known as the Massacre of Atocha.

The purpose of this international Day is to draw the attention of government officials, international institutions, civil society, the media, and the general public to the situation of lawyers in a particular country, in order to raise awareness about the threats that they face in the exercise of their profession. In past years, this Day has been dedicated to countries including Azerbaijan (2021), Pakistan (2020), Turkey (2019 & 2012), Egypt (2018), China (2017), Honduras (2016), the Philippines (2015), Basque Country/Spain (2013), and Iran (2010).

This year, for the second time, the Day of the Endangered Lawyer focuses on Colombia, where the persecution of human rights lawyers continues, preventing them from freely, independently, and safely practising their profession.

Download the report in English, Spanish, French or Turkish.

Follow the activities on the Day.

See our photo post.

Posted on

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