European Democratic Lawyers
On the 7th, 8th and 9th September, the AED took part in the 2nd International Conference on Law:
The Normalization of the state of emergency and the situation of the judiciary in Turkey.
Here is the complete programme of the event:
And here are some of the contributions:
On the State of Emergency in France
The Foundation DAY OF ENDANGERED LAWYER and the AED (European Democratic Lawyers) denounce the inadmissible treatment inflicted by the Philippine authorities on the Australian law professor Gill Boehringer, a fervent defender of human rights and minorities in the Philippines.
The 8th of August upon arrival in Manila to join his wife of Philippine nationality, he has been refused entry into the territory. He is under detention and retained at the moment, attending repatriation.
According to statements of the immigration office, Gill Boehringer is allegedly on their blacklist of activists because he participated in the rallies of 2015 in support of indigenous people, the Lumads of Mindanao Island (Philippines), who have been fighting for 25 years against the Tampakan mining project.
In the Philippines, participating in such gatherings is illegal for a foreigner and considered a breach of the public order and security of the country.
Gill Boehringer contends the charges against him, but according to his lawyer, he still has not had access to his case or has been in any way able to argue (see ABS-CBS News, 9.08.2918)
His health is matter of concern. The doctor who examined him has recommended he does not fly back so quickly.
On the 13th of August, Gill Boerhinher is still not free.
The Foundation DAY OF ENDENGERED LAWYER and the AED (European Democratic Lawyers) strongly condemn the inhuman and degrading treatment suffered by Professor Boehringer for his fight for the defense of human rights and calls into question a serious violation of freedom of expression and circulation and a clear violation of the rights of the defense.
).
Our colleague Ceren Uysal participated recently in a press conference in Vienna dealing with the current situation in Turkey. We publish here her contribution.
First of all I would like to thank you for the opportunity to describe my point of view on what has been going on in Turkey recently. It means a lot to me to talk about the recent situation as a lawyer and I also accept this as a responsibility.
I would like to start with a general statement: Currently there is no judiciary in Turkey. The institutions in justice system are not working independently and impartially of the demands and priorities of the political power because today more than 2000 judges and prosecutors and around 300 lawyers are still in jail and it directly means that the so called free actors of the legal area are mentally arrested. Even the numbers are still not certain but it’s claimed that in total, more than 200.000 people are in jail.
I would like to briefly describe the current situation of the rule of law 3000 judges and public prosecutors were suspended even before 24 hours had passed after the military coup attempt. It shows that the judges and public prosecutors were blacklisted according to their political opinions and that these lists were already prepared before the coup attempt.
Before the state of emergency, there were no restrictions to the access of lawyers. But in the first 6 months of the state of emergency, the right to access to a lawyer was restricted during the first 5 days of the detention. Now this restriction was removed through a new governmenal decree; however it did not solve the problem because again with a governmental decree, the government had already changed the Criminal Procedure Law and right now, there is an article which restricts the right to access to a lawyer for the first 24 hours.
Also, the interviews between the lawyers and the suspects under detention in jail are recorded. The Decree also gives the prison guards the power to participate at the interview and seize the documents if they think it is necessary.
The right to information about the charges is an important issue these days which, of course, is one of the most important elements of the right of defence. For instance, many judges and prosecutors who are still in jail, defended themselves against the accusation of being a member of Gülen organization but they were arrested with the accusation of threatening to overthrow the constitutional order.
The other subject to be underlined is the presumption of innocence. We are witnessing how the judicial and administrative practices are combined through governmental decrees. As a result it is easy to claim that right now this princible is not valid for at least half of the society. Hundreds of thousands of puclic officers were dismissed with a justification of having a relation with terorist organizations. It is obvious that in a state of law, such a dismission practice definitely needs a judicial sentence. However today, hundreds of thousands of people are facing the results of a judgement without a judicial
process. So, since the state of emergency,the presemption of innocence has been violated more than ever.
In my point of view, in this whole picture the attorney immunity has to be underlined because it is impossible to imagine the existence of the right of defence, when there is no attorney immunity. The repression against lawyers – unfortunately – has a history in Turkey. But it was never like today. Right now, hundreds of lawyers are in prison. When the repression of the past and today’s circumstances are combined, the result turns out to be a disaster for the right of defence. Many victims of the state of emergency, especially who are accused to be a member of Gülen organization, could not find a lawyer because lawyers are afraid to represent them.
Finally, the independance of the judiciary must be accepted as the main subject. As a lawyer, personally I do not remember any period in Turkey when the judiciary was completely independent. On the contrary, for some types of crimes or defendents, the judiciary was only a mechanism that worked for the benefits of the State. However, it is possible to claim that nowadays, there has been a fundemantal change. The arrest of 3000 judges and prosecutors also means that all the judicial mechanisms are working with the threat of arrestment today. In the sense of this reality, it is obvious that the defence of a suspect or the evidences in a file are less important than the benefits and desires of the State‘s power.
Briefly, Turkey never was a rose garden. But the lack of trust in the judicary had never reached this dimension. There was no right of defence for the opponents before the state of emergency. But after the state of emergency, not only for the part of the society who reacts against the reorganization of the state, but also for people who just have concerns, there is not a bit of chance to use the right of defence. Today, in Turkey’s courthouses or prisons there is no bit of justice, not even the hope of justice. We just have stories, explaining us how peoples lifes were ruined under this completly under- control situation. We hope that one day these stories will be told everywhere and will help all of us to remember the importance of the rule of law, like bread, water and air.
I would like to finish my words with one of my beloved colleagues; Selçuk Kozağaçlı. He is still the president of Progressive Lawyers Association and he has been practicing law for nearly 20 years. He is in jail since November 2017 with 20 more members of Progressive Lawyers Association.
He sent this letter to us:
“I spent 60 days in a one-person cell, under a full isolation. On the 60th day of my imprisonment, the guards came and told me that “my demand of participating in “collective events” was accepted”. Wow! Now I have the right to go out of my cell every week once for 2 hours. I asked them the names of the prisoners that I could finally meet. And the answer was extra-ordinary: “For now, you will go out
from your cell but you will be alone!” So, I rejected.
One day after this occasion, my lawyers visited me. And next to our room, there was another
prisoner, Deniz. He called me and told that I should accept to go out from my cell, even I would be alone. He said that he is doing this – alone –for more than 2 months and he shouted at me and said that I need to see the sky at least 2 hours in a week. Deniz is in a cell – alone – for one year already.
We do not have a judiciary in Turkey right now. What we have is just a group of public officers who are following the orders of the government. They are full of fear, because they know that whenever they make a decision which tries to focus on the fundemental human rights, – not a perfect one but for instance one verdict which is better than the avarage of the rest – they know that they will be a prisoner too. Or at least another judge, prosecutor or even the government will announce that they do not accept the verdict and not respect it. Like the last occasion about the Constitutional Court’s verdict…
I should underline that I am not calling myself as a prisoner. When there is no judiciary, the people who are in jail can not be accepted as prisoners. We are just the hostages of this AKP regime. We were imprisoned under force by the power. This is all. As one of our beloved judges said, all these court decisions will only be valid through this government’s life-period.
They are now forcing us to wear one single uniform and also try to defeat us with this pure isolation. But we are resisting with all our power and will.
I send my best wishes to all of you with hope and with the strong belief in our solidarity. Please don’t worry and just remember, we are resisting this arbitrariness.”
The AED demands that the Turkish Government stop all hostility against human rights lawyers. The numerous irregular and arbitrary detentions are an authoritarian and repressive response against Turkish lawyers, charged with terrorism or activities against the state. The Republic of Turkey is a member of the Council of Europe and must therefore respect and promote the defence of human rights.
We are asking for the immediate release of lawyers:
– Me. UÇAR Sezin
– Me. GÜMÜŞTAS Özlem
– Me. Gulhan KAYA
The first two were arrested October 19th around 2 o’clock in the morning. The latest news is that they are still held in the anti-terrorist section of Vatan, where they can be held for 7 days. All offices were searched. Even the apartment in which the 3 lawyers live was searched in violation of the Turkish Code of Criminal Procedure (without the presence of the prosecutor, or an official of the Bar, or the mayor and without witnesses). Thus, computers and digital equipment were seized. Four months ago, as part of the same investigation, the lawyers went to testify and submitted an application to the judge. Despite this, the judge found it more appropriate to search the offices and the home.
All three are members of “ezilenlerin hukuk bürosu” (Legal Office of the Opponents). They are active in the HDP and have represented the co-chair of this political formation. They currently defend the families of the dead young people murdered in Suruç and have intervened in the bomb case in Ankara.
These are only a part of the arrests: Nihat Goktas is on hunger strike, Ozgen Sadet (sister of a victim of the Suruç massacre) has been arrested, together with journalists from Etkin Haber, Ajansi Isimaz Temel and Havva Custan and 11 others. There are arrest warrants for more than 10 people.
The AED denounces these political detentions and demands the release of the imprisoned colleagues and all the persons concerned.
Créteil, Barcelona, Harlem, on the 22nd October 2017
AED- EDL (European Democratic Lawyers) & The Foundation of the Endangered Lawyer
L’AED exige du Gouvernement turc l’arrêt de toute hostilité contre les avocats défenseurs des Droits de l’Homme. Continuellement des détentions irrégulières et arbitraires se produisent comme réponse autoritaire et répressive contre les avocats et juristes turcs, moyennant des chefs d’accusations de terrorisme ou activités contre l’État. La République de Turquie est membre du Conseil de l’Europe et doit donc respecter et promouvoir la défense de Droits de l’Homme.
Nous demandons ici, la mise immédiate en liberté des avocats:
– Me. UÇAR Sezin
– Me. GÜMÜŞTAS Özlem
– Me. Gulhan KAYA
Les deus premières ont été arrêtées le 19 octobre vers 2 heures du matin. Aux dernières nouvelles elles sont toujours détenues à la section antiterroriste de Vatan/İstanbul avec possibilité d’être maintenues pendant 7 jours. Tous les bureaux ont été perquisitionnés. L’appartement dans lequel vivent les 3 avocats a également été perquisitionné en violation du code de procédure pénale turque (sans la présence du procureur, ou du fonctionnaire du Barreau, ou du maire et sans témoins). Ainsi, des ordinateurs et du matériel digital ont été saisis. Pourtant, il y a 4 mois de cela, dans le cadre de l’enquête, les avocats étaient allés témoigner et avaient soumis une requête au juge. Malgré cela, ce dernier a trouvé plus adapté de faire des perquisitions dans les cabinets et le domicile.
Tous trois sont membres de “ezilenlerin hukuk bürosu” (Bureau légal des opposants). Ils sont aussi actifs dans le HDP et ont représenté le coprésident de cette formation politique. Ils défendent les familles des jeunes gens morts assassinés à Suruç et interviennent également dans le cas dossier de la Bombe à Ankara.
D’autre part, Nihat Goktas (en grève de la faim), Ozgen Sadet (sœur d’une victime du massacre de Suruç), les journalistes de Etkin Haber, Ajansi Isimaz Temel et Havva Custan ainsi que 11 autres personnes ont été arrêtées. Il y a par ailleurs des mandats d’arrêt à l’encontre de plus de 10 personnes.
L’AED dénonce ces détentions politiques et demande la libération des confrères détenus et de toutes les personnes concernées.
A Créteil, Barcelone, Harlem, le 22 octobre 2017.
AED (Avocats Européens Démocrates) & Fondation de l’Avocat Menacé
Since mid-September, these lawyers are detained in Ankara, Istanbul and Diyarbakır.
The number of lawyers prosecuted in Turkey is 1343 after this last wave of raids against lawyers. 524 of them have been arrested since the staged coup attempt in July 2016.
There are lawyers from France, Germany, the Netherlands, Catalonia, Belgium, Spain, Greece, Italy and Turkey who share the same democratic, modern and humane ideals in Europe.
We are convinced that our colleagues are only exposed to state repression because of their professional activities.
We will not stop until we know they are safe. We demand the release of the lawyers who have been imprisoned!
European Democratic Lawyers (AED-EDL)
We are demonstrating today in front of the Turkish Consulate in Hamburg, The Hague, Brussels and Milan to protest the recent
arrest of 16 of our colleagues from Turkey. Since mid-September, they are detained in Ankara, Istanbul and Diyarbakır.
We are especially concerned about the situation of lawyers Barkın Timtik, Engin Gökoglu and Özgür Yılmaz. We fear that they are (again) suffering torture. These lawyers are members of the “People’s Law Office” (“People’s Law Office”) and have represented two opposers of the regime who are currently in hunger strike after being released from their teaching activities.
We are convinced that our colleagues are only exposed to state repression because of their professional activities.
The number of lawyers prosecuted in Turkey is 1343 after this last wave of raids against lawyers. 524 of them have been arrested since the staged coup attempt in July 2016.
Our protest is not just taking place here in Hamburg.
These demonstration has emerged as a common initiative of the umbrella organization for European Democratic Lawyers (EDL).
There are lawyers from France, Germany, the Netherlands, Catalonia, Belgium, Spain, Greece, Italy and Turkey who share the same democratic, modern and humane ideals in Europe. As a professional organization, as an international organization, it pursues the international purpose of respecting the rights of the defense in particular, the physical integrity and the political and economic freedom of lawyers.
In September, rallies were held in Berlin, Madrid, Paris, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Brussels. Even today, many other cities are to be demonstrated before Turkish interests.
We will not give peace and our colleagues will not be left in the lurch. We demand the release of the lawyers who have been imprisoned!
We thank the organizing associations of this meeting for their work and for their kind invitation. Many lawyers of our association from various European countries are present today to follow our work carefully.
The AED (European Democratic Lawyers Association), in which Italy is present through the association “Legalteam Italia”, has always contained in its structure a Commission called “Defense de la Defense“, which is devoted to defend and practice solidarity with lawyers who are deprived of liberty throughout the world or persecuted for their work of human rights’ advocacy.
For this reason, along with the intervention of lawyers of the association, the Commission has been present in Indonesia, Spain, Tunisia, Kashmir and in many other countries of the world where the role of lawyers has been opposed by dictatorial and / or fake democratic governments.
It was immediately decided to express our utmost solidarity with the colleagues of neighbouring Turkey even in view of its forthcoming accession to the European Union. During the 1990s protests, we got together in front of the Turkish government to protest for the arrest of the then President of the’ Association of Human Rights and Vice-President, both lawyers of the Diyarbakir Order, Sakar and Tanrikoglu.
On this occasion, a delegation from Germany was sent to organize the presence of trial observers during their trial as well as the presence of lawyers in Istanbul, where solidarity was given to colleague Erin Keskin, of the same Human Rights Association, arrested in Istanbul and prosecuted on the 20th of May 1997.
During the coming years, the AED has always worked to defend our colleagues who have suffered arrests and torture in Turkey. We remember our colleague, the lawyer Sevil Dalkilic, who was tortured and induced to confess falsely that she was a member of a terrorist organization; in this occasion as in other, AED and Amnesty International coordinated the intervention. The Turkish government never responded to the many motions and protest letters sent by our association to the diplomatic representatives of their country. The AED through its commission defense of the defense sent a report to the Human Rights Commission in New York on the case of Sevil Dalkilic.
Several interventions have been organized to ensure the presence of the AED lawyers, as well as other international observers of associations formed during the years, to trials against lawyers who face arrests and torture in Turkey for the work in the defence of citizens unjustly accused of carrying out terrorist activities, especially lawyers and representatives of Kurdish citizens who for years have been claiming their autonomy and freedom, while the Turkish government has always been the expression of military dictatorships and fascist hegemony. The Turkish government have always denied political independence to the Kurdish community, who today is also engaged, militarily, in defending Europe from the attacks of ISIS in the Syrian territories.
For some years now, lawyer’s protests have taken place. Lawyers demonstrate, clothed in their working robes, in front of the Turkish Embassies and Consulates in the countries where members of the AED are present.
Lawyers protest against the numerous arrests and expulsions from Turkish territory of members of delegations who come here to observe the proceedings against lawyers, journalists, teachers and workers subject to the repression that the Turkish government now exercises against all opponents. During the long-term detention of the President of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), President Ocalan; numerous lawyers have been expelled because they were engaged in defense of Ocalan both in Germany and in Italy in the short period of his presence in Europe, where he asked for political asylum (granted in Italy in 1998).
Colleagues are also denied entry to Turkey, when they go to provide legal aid together with Turkish Lawyers and their Associations (CHD, IHD, etc …).
In 2011, the AED dedicated for the first time the day of the 24th of January to the protest in defense of lawyers threatened around the world because of their role in the defense of human and civil rights. The 24th of January commemorates the day were a large group of labour lawyers were assassinated by fascists in Madrid in 1977 for their commitment to defend workers.
In the following years, an increasing number of lawyers have demonstrated on behalf of other lawyers. They have demonstrated in front of the Embassies of Colombia, Honduras, the Philippines, Iran and, above all, in recent years, Turkey, Egypt and China. This initiative has led to the collaboration of many associations, and from 2012 to today, hundreds of lawyers in their robes have demonstrated in front of diplomatic delegations across Europe. This has also determined the entry into our association of a Turkish Lawyers’ Association from 2015. In 2017 the Greek have also joined our association.
The Mediterranean is the scene of numerous political transformations that have emerged from the peoples’ awareness of their right to self-determination; since 2011, with the well-known “Arab Spring”, we have seen the desire for change expressed by peaceful peoples who have immediately suffered repression and violence. The people have confronted this repression with courage and determination, together and with the help of lawyers who have been threatened and tortured for their civil engagement.
To further our political commitment and the cooperation with the Associations of Lawyers as well as the individual lawyers present today, we welcome the proposal to sign a Charter here in Naples, which defines the principles and goals for which we have chosen the commitment all of us try to pursue, with our usual solidarity and the necessary affirmation of the right of all those who call us to defend the conquests of liberty for which they struggle and die.
On this particular occasion, it is time to express our solidarity to the Catalan people who, peacefully, have tried to manifest their political self-determination and have suffered an unheard of repression by the police forces of a country that should deal democratically with the disputes that arise with the citizens. Instead the Spanish state has sparked an unjust and evil force against helpless citizens, causing hundreds of injured in a day, when all they wanted to do is to vote.
Naples, on the 7th and 8th of October 2017
for the AED Simonetta Crisci
Nach dem Putschversuch im Juli 2016 wurde in der Türkei der Ausnahmezustand ausgerufen. Zehntausende Beamte, darunter Richter und Staatsanwälte, wurden entlassen. Zwischen 80.000 und 90.000 Menschen wurden festgenommen. Die Haftbedingungen verletzen internationale Standards. In der Folge wurden auch die in der Türkei begangenen Menschenrechtsverletzungen gegen Rechtsanwälte international thematisiert. In der Türkei selbst ist das Thema jedoch nicht neu.
Die Unzulänglichkeiten der Justiz, die Antiterrorgesetze, die Situation türkischer Rechtsanwälte und die damit einhergehenden Einschränkungen der Verteidigungsrechte stellen seit jeher Probleme dar. Auch vor dem Putschversuch waren türkische Rechtsanwälte bereits das Ziel staatlicher Repression.
Die erste großangelegte Polizeioperation der AKP-Regierung gegen Anwälte richtete sich im Jahr 2011 gegen die Verteidiger des PKK-Vorsitzenden Abdullah Öcalan. 45 kurdische Rechtsanwälte wurden festgenommen und der Mitgliedschaft in der PKK beschuldigt. Die seitens der Staatsanwaltschaft vorgelegten Beweise betreffen einzig die Haftbesuche der Verteidiger bei deren Mandanten Öcalan auf der Gefängnisinsel İmralı. Der Prozess wurde unter der Bezeichnung KCK-Verfahren bekannt.
Im Jänner 2013 kam es zu einer Operation gegen die Anwaltsvereinigung ÇHD (Çağdaş Hukukçular Derneği, deutsch: Progressive Anwaltsvereinigung). Diese besteht – mit einer Unterbrechung während der Militärdiktatur der 1980er Jahre – seit 1974. Ihre mehr als 2.000 Mitglieder sind türkeiweit organisiert. Bekannt wurde die Vereinigung für ihren Einsatz gegen staatliche Repression und ihren Fokus auf die Verteidigung der Grundrechte. Die Durchsuchung der ÇHD-Büros in Ankara und Istanbul erfolgte ohne gerichtliche Genehmigungen. Akten und Korrespondenz mit Mandanten wurden beschlagnahmt, neun Vorstandsmitglieder in Untersuchungshaft genommen, darunter der Vorsitzende der ÇHD, Selçuk Kozağacli. Ihre Haft dauerte zwischen neun und 14 Monaten an.
Das KCK-Verfahren und das ÇHD-Verfahren weisen viele Gemeinsamkeiten auf. Beide sind immer noch in erster Instanz anhängig. In beiden Fällen lautet die Anklage auf “Mitgliedschaft in einer terroristischen Organisation” beziehungsweise auf “Terrorpropaganda”. Die Anklagen beschreiben ausschließlich Tätigkeiten, die international als rechtsanwaltliche Berufsausübung angesehen werden.
Auch ist beiden Fällen gemein, dass sich jene Staatsanwälte, welche die Operationen angeordnet hatten, und jene Polizeibeamten, welche die Razzien geleitet hatten, nun unter dem Vorwurf der Mitgliedschaft in der Terrororganisation FETÖ (Fethullahçı Terör Örgütü, deutsch: Fethullah-Gülen-Terror-Organisation) und der Beweismittelfälschung in Untersuchungshaft befinden.
Eine Analyse der Anklage im ÇHD-Verfahren zeigt, dass den 22 angeklagten Anwälten im Grunde die engagierte Verteidigung ihrer Mandanten zum Vorwurf gemacht wird. So bezieht sich die Staatsanwaltschaft auf eine statistische Auswertung, wonach etwa die Hälfte aller Festgenommenen gegenüber der Polizei die Aussage verweigere, während die andere Hälfte der Festgenommenen eine Aussage mache. Demgegenüber verweigerten beinahe alle der Mitgliedschaft in der linksgerichteten DHKP/C verdächtigten Festgenommenen, welche durch ÇHD-Anwälte verteidigt würden, bei polizeilichen Vernehmungen die Aussage. Die Anklage zieht daraus den Schluss, dass die ÇHD-Anwälte Befehle der DHKP/C an die Festgenommenen weitergäben und daher Teil der Organisation seien.
Tatsächlich raten ÇHD-Anwälte ihren festgenommenen Mandanten regelmäßig zur Aussageverweigerung, wie dies Verteidiger weltweit tun. Dass dies als Beweis für die Mitgliedschaft in einer Terrororganisation gewertet wird, ist allerdings ein Spezifikum der Türkei. Andere “Beweise” betreffen die Teilnahme von ÇHD-Anwälten an den Beerdigungen ihrer des Terrorismus verdächtigten Mandanten. Zuletzt stützt sich die Anklage auf anonyme Zeugen, wobei diese bisher im Verfahren nicht in Erscheinung getreten sind und eine Überprüfung ihrer Existenz und ihrer angeblichen Aussagen nach dem angewandten Verfahrensrecht unmöglich ist.
Laut Staatsanwaltschaft war der Razzia eine zwei Jahre andauernde verdeckte Ermittlung vorangegangen, in deren Rahmen die Kanzleien, E-Mails und Telefonate der Rechtsanwälte mit ihren Mandanten überwacht worden waren.
Die beschriebenen Vorgänge fanden noch vor der Ausrufung des Ausnahmezustandes statt und können als gängige Praxis der türkischen Behörden im Rahmen der Antiterrorgesetze angesehen werden, welche sowohl gegen türkisches, als auch gegen internationales Recht verstößt. Umso dramatischer ist die Situation nun, nach der drastischen Einschränkung des – zuvor theoretisch bestehenden – Rechtsschutzes der Betroffenen. Aktuell kann von einem fairen Verfahren keine Rede mehr sein.
Der Prozessauftakt im ÇHD-Verfahren fand am 24. Dezember 2013 statt, neun Monate nach den Durchsuchungen der Kanzleien und der Festnahme der Angeklagten. Das damals zuständige Sondergericht war am Stadtrand von Istanbul in einem Hochsicherheitsgefängniskomplex angesiedelt, was den Zugang der Öffentlichkeit und der Angehörigen erschwerte.
Die erste Anhörung dauerte drei Tage und war insofern von historischer Bedeutung, als die 22 angeklagten Anwälte, von welchen sich neun noch immer in Haft befanden, von mehr als 700 türkischen und kurdischen Verteidigern vertreten wurden. Repräsentanten zahlreicher Anwaltskammern waren angereist, um Solidarität mit den Angeklagten zu demonstrieren und das Recht auf effektive Verteidigung geltend zu machen. 50 Rechtsanwälte aus Belgien, Deutschland, Frankreich, dem Vereinigten Königreich, der Schweiz, Italien, den Niederlanden und Österreich verfolgten als Prozessbeobachter mithilfe von Simultandolmetschern den Vortrag der Anklage und die Plädoyers der Angeklagten und ihrer Verteidiger. Ihre Namen wurden zu Protokoll gegeben, um zu verdeutlichen, dass das Verfahren international wahrgenommen wurde.
Seither reisen regelmäßig Delegationen zur weiteren Beobachtung des ÇHD-Verfahrens nach Istanbul. Das anfangs zuständige Sondergericht wurde inzwischen per Gesetz aufgelöst, der Prozess wird vor dem Schweren Strafgericht Istanbul Cağlayan fortgesetzt, wobei auch hier der Vorsitzende bereits einmal ausgetauscht wurde. Die Anträge der Verteidigung, das Verfahren von Beginn an neu durchzuführen, um dem Unmittelbarkeitsprinzip Rechnung zu tragen, wurden abgewiesen. Zwar befinden sich die angeklagten ÇHD-Anwälte nicht mehr in Haft. Eines der neuen Notstandsdekrete erlaubt es aber, sie aufgrund ihrer Eigenschaft als Angeklagte nach dem Terrorgesetz von der Verteidigung in anderen Verfahren nach diesem Gesetz auszuschließen.
Seit dem Putschversuch am 15. Juli 2016 kam es zu zahlreichen weiteren Festnahmen von Anwälten. Offiziell greift die Regierung hart gegen Putschisten und Terrorismus durch. Tatsächlich scheint sich die Repression eher gegen die Verteidiger kurdischer Politiker und Aktivisten zu richten, ebenso wie gegen die Vertreter von Journalisten, Gewerkschaften und Regierungskritikern. Die Notstandsgesetze sehen eine richterliche Entscheidung erst 30 Tage nach der Festnahme vor, ein Recht auf ein Gespräch mit einem Rechtsanwalt/einer Rechtsanwältin besteht erst nach fünf Tagen, wobei selbst dies nur unter Überwachung möglich ist. Die Festgenommenen sind dadurch Folter und Polizeiwillkür schutzlos ausgeliefert, ein faires Verfahren wird unmöglich.
Das Recht auf ein faires Verfahren ist eines der bedeutungsvollsten Grundrechte; ohne faires Verfahren bleibt die Geltendmachung anderer Grundrechte bloße Theorie. Autoritäre Regierungen streben danach, Kritiker im eigenen Land mundtot zu machen, und versuchen, die internationale öffentliche Meinung zu beeinflussen, um Kritik zu vermeiden und ihren Machtmissbrauch ungestört fortsetzen zu können.
Der Prozessbeobachtung kommt daher hohe Bedeutung zu. Sie dient der Verteidigung des Rechtsstaates und dem Schutz jener Menschenrechtsverteidiger, die wegen ihres Einsatzes in Gefahr geraten. Mediale Berichterstattung über Gerichtsverfahren ist unverzichtbar, doch Prozessbeobachter können sich selbst ein unmittelbareres Bild von den Fakten machen, ohne auf die Objektivität der Journalisten vertrauen zu müssen (die oft selbst unter Druck stehen).
In der Türkei hat Prozessbeobachtung Tradition. Während der 1990er reisten bereits regelmäßig Journalisten, Politiker und einzelne Rechtsanwälte in die Türkei, um insbesondere Strafverfahren gegen kurdische Politiker und Journalisten beizuwohnen. Anlässlich der Strafverfahren gegen Anwälte wurde diese Tradition fortgesetzt, erfuhr aber eine neue Dimension, da es sich nun um die koordinierte Zusammenarbeit zwischen Menschenrechtsanwälten aus verschiedenen Ländern handelt.
Es ist nicht die Aufgabe der Prozessbeobachter, Druck auf die Gerichte auszuüben oder subjektive Meinungen über ein Verfahren zu veröffentlichen. Ungeachtet der politischen Ansichten der einzelnen Mitglieder der Delegationen bleibt ihre Rolle darauf beschränkt, über die Wahrnehmungen im Gerichtssaal zu berichten, was die Argumente und vorgelegten Beweismittel sowohl der Anklage als auch der Verteidigung betrifft.
Viele Beobachter verfolgten das ÇHD-Verfahren während der letzten drei Jahre. Während dieser Zeit zogen internationale Institutionen und Medien Berichte der Delegationen über die Verhandlungen als Grundlage für die Analyse der Frage heran, ob es sich um ein faires Verfahren handelt.
Auch auf jene, die sich in der Türkei weiterhin der Durchsetzung von Grundrechten widmen, hat internationale Prozessbeobachtung eine Auswirkung: Wer befürchten muss, festgenommen oder mundtot gemacht zu werden, kann darauf hoffen, dass Beobachter über die Fakten berichten werden.
Wer davon ausgeht, dass die Fakten für sich sprechen, der kann kein Problem mit neutraler Beobachtung und Berichterstattung haben. Dies gilt sowohl für Menschenrechtsverteidiger, als auch für die Regierung. Erdoğans Aussagen anlässlich des Prozesses gegen Cumhuriyet-Chefredakteur Can Dündar stehen dazu in krassem Gegensatz: Er stellte die Legitimität der Prozessbeobachtung in Frage und unterstellte den angereisten Beobachtern pauschal, gegen die Interessen der Türkei zu arbeiten. Dass ein Staatschef derart wenig Respekt für die Grundsätze eines fairen Verfahrens zeigt, mutet befremdlich an. Gleichzeitig belegen diese Aussagen die Bedeutung und Notwendigkeit der Prozessbeobachtung.
Die Erfahrung zeigt, dass Prozessbeobachtung ein wirksames Mittel zum Schutz kritischer Journalisten und Anwälte sein kann. Unter den Notstandsgesetzen mag dies schwieriger werden. Doch die Bedeutung der Arbeit türkischer Menschenrechtsverteidiger geht über die Türkei hinaus und sie bedürfen des Schutzes, den internationale Beobachtung bedeutet, heute mehr denn je. Um zu verhindern, dass sie unsichtbar gemacht werden, und um die Fakten ans Licht zu bringen. (Şerife Ceren Uysal, Clemens Lahner, 23.6.2017)
Şerife Ceren Uysal ist Rechtsanwältin in Istanbul und als Vorstandsmitglied der Progressiven Anwaltsvereinigung ÇHD zuständig für die Koordinierung internationaler Beobachter-Delegationen. Derzeit forscht sie am Ludwig Boltzmann Institut für Menschenrechte in Wien.
Clemens Lahner ist Rechtsanwalt in Wien. Als Prozessbeobachter der Rechtsanwaltskammer Wien und Mitglied des europäischen Anwaltsverbandes European Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights (ELDH) verfolgt er das ÇHD-Verfahren seit dessen Beginn, teilweise auch das KCK-Verfahren.
Der Artikel erschien ursprünglich in der Ausgabe 1/2017 des “Juridikum – Zeitschrift für Kritik, Recht, Gesellschaft”.
Arrestation de l’Avocat Turc, Taner Kiliç, président d’Amnesty Turquie.
Les Avocats Européens Démocrates (AED), réunis en Bureau à Amsterdam dénoncent la campagne répressive contraire aux Droits Fondamentaux du gouvernement turc contre les défendeurs des Droits de l’Homme et demandent le remise en liberté immédiate de leur confrère arrêté le 6 juin dernier.
Taner Kiliç est accusé, sans la moindre preuve, d’être membre de l’organisation Fethullah Gülen, qualifiée de terroriste par les autorités turques. Il apparaît clairement que le terrorisme est un argument largement utilisé par le régime de l’AKP de Recep Tayyip Erdogan pour détruire la démocratie et convertir le régime truc en une dictature déguisée en Démocratie formelle.
Le régime turc veut étouffer toutes les voix des opposants et pour cela s’attaque aux personnes qui dénoncent la fragilité de la démocratie existant en Turquie. Taner Kiliç œuvrait pour la défense des droits et libertés bafoués par les autorités. Il n’est ni un terroriste ni un criminel. Nous demandons dès lors aux autorités turques de le libérer et d’abandonner les charges infondées et arbitraires retenues contre lui.
L’AED exprime de graves préoccupations concernant les violations des droits de l’homme commises à l’encontre de membres de la profession d’avocat en Turquie. Les avocats devraient être en mesure d’exercer leurs fonctions légitimes sans crainte pour leur vie, pour leur liberté ou pour leur sécurité. L’AED exhorte le gouvernement turc à se conformer aux lois internationales relatives aux droits de l’homme, y compris les Garanties liées à l’exercice de la profession d’avocat contenues dans Principes de base relatifs au rôle du barreau, adoptés par le huitième Congrès des Nations Unies à La Havane (Cuba) en septembre 1990.
Dans ce contexte et après quelques missions d’observation sur le terrain en Turquie, nous considérons qu’il n’existe pas de «système de justice pénale» actif et efficace en Turquie. Il est jugé impossible pour la police judiciaire, les tribunaux pénaux, les cours d’appel et les autorités de la Cour Constitutionnelle de travailler de manière impartiale et indépendante des exigences et des priorités du pouvoir politique. La déclaration de l’état d’urgence actuel est inutile et illégale, car ses causes n’ont pas été expliquées et les mécanismes de contrôle réguliers sont inexistants. Les conditions de la “violence généralisée et de la détérioration grave de l’ordre public” étaient suffisamment réglées par l’article 120e de la Constitution. En outre, même si les conditions d’état d’urgence étaient présentes, il est évident que les droits fondamentaux garantis par la Convention Européenne des droits de l’homme (articles 2 à 18) restent toujours applicables.
Aussi pour éviter toute forme d’abus et d’atteinte à l’État de Droit, l’AED considère nécessaire d’entreprendre les actions suivantes en Turquie:
– Il est nécessaire de mettre fin à l’état d’urgence (déclaré le 20 juillet 2016) et d’enlever rétroactivement toutes les dispositions légales et les pratiques administratives qui violent largement les droits et libertés fondamentaux.
– Il est essentiel que la Cour européenne des Droits de l’Homme reconnaisse immédiatement et agisse en fonction du fait qu’il n’existe pas de recours interne effectif contre les procédures d’état d’urgence en Turquie.
– Le climat de domination et d’oppression créé par l’exécutif sur le pouvoir judiciaire devrait immédiatement être arrêté.
– Les enquêtes lancées contre les avocats, les journalistes et les magistrats dans le but de les faire taire et d’intimider l’opposition politique devraient immédiatement être retirées et la tentative de pousser les représentants élus en dehors de l’arène politique devrait être abandonnée.
– Toutes sortes de normes et de pratiques de fait qui abolissent ou restreignent le droit à la défense devraient être résiliés.
– Tous les obstacles juridiques et physiques contre le pouvoir judiciaire indépendant et impartial et contre les garanties et les droits de la défense devraient être éliminés afin de contrôler effectivement la Police et le Parquet.
– Il est nécessaire d’éliminer toutes les restrictions qui entravent la communication verbale et écrite entre les avocats et leurs clients dans les centres de détention et les prisons.
– Les entraves aux activités conformes au Protocole d’Istanbul, au Protocole de Minnesota et à d’autres documents internationaux devraient être supprimées.
Juin 2017.
A Background Paper for the Pan African Lawyers Union Conference, Nairobi, October 12-15, 2016
Introduction
The authors of this paper are Gill H. Boehringer and Stuart Russell of the International Association of People’s Lawyers. The IAPL was created in 2000 to gather lawyers involved in the legal support of collective struggles for people’s rights and in situations of gross rights violations. The IAPL Monitoring Committee on Attacks on Lawyers was created in 2014 and maintains a very extensive blog documenting such attacks.
This paper is endorsed by:
the International Observatory for Lawyers in Danger (OIAD for its French acronym), was relaunched in 2015 by the Paris Bar, the French National Bar Association, as well as the Italian and Spanish National Bar Associations, and also aims to bring any kind of support a lawyer under threat may need.
Endangered Lawyers | Avvocati Minacciati was started in 2015, and later officially presented in 2016 to the Italian Criminal Lawyers Association (Unione Camere Penali Italiane or UCPI). It is coordinated by Italian lawyers Nicola Canestrini and Ezio Menzione.
Created in 2001, the European Bar Human Rights Institute (IDHAE) monitors human rights protection, the training of lawyers in international human rights law, interventions, regardless of the limitations of borders, in favour of freedom and the fundamental rights of lawyers, organizes the World Observatory for Defence Rights and attacks against lawyers, workshops, symposia and seminars related to publications on international human rights law.
Created in 2010, the purpose of the Day of the Endangered Lawyer Foundation is to “call attention on that day to threatened human rights lawyers with special attention to one designated country.”
Avocats Européens Démocrates/European Democratic Lawyers (AED/EDL), founded in 1987, is a professional confederation of lawyer unions and organizations. On the international level it promotes the rights of defence and especially seeks to preserve the physical integrity, as well as the political and economic freedoms of lawyers.
Current situation
Today, in many countries of the world, it is dangerous to be a lawyer. This is especially true if the lawyer is attempting to protect the rights of the people against corporate or government interests or is uncovering corruption. Attacks on lawyers include both physical and non-physical interference with a lawyer’s capacity to perform his/her professional duty to the client or the court. Examples of the former could be assassination or extra judicial killing (EJKs), involuntary disappearance or wrongful detention, often accompanied by torture. Non-physical attacks are many and various e.g. threats, intimidation and harassment, unjustified professional disciplinary proceedings, illegal failure by the prosecution to make material evidence available to the lawyer, non-provision of legal aid, SLAPP suits such as libel actions. These examples are only the tip of the iceberg as we have been surprised at the extent to which lawyers are under attack and the innovative methods used to prevent lawyers from fulfilling their professional duties.
Many organisations around the globe are working to defend and protect lawyers by 1) monitoring the attacks, 2) publicizing the phenomenon, and 3) providing support for the lawyers under attack (for example, rapid response to attend and observe trials of lawyers). Our paper is a joint effort by members of some of the most prominent of such organisations. It is our hope that out of the PALU conference will come ideas and recommendations that will contribute to the worldwide movement for defending and protecting lawyers. In particular, of course, we would look to the development of a Pan African initiative tailored to your specific circumstances, which would deal with what appears to be an upward trend in attacks against lawyers in the African continent. Participants in the conference will be better equipped than we to specify what form such an initiative(s) should take. One of the purposes of this background paper is to provide information about what is (and is not) happening around the world in order to assist participants in designing a strategy for the protection and defence of African lawyers.
To provide an initial empirical basis for your discussion, we indicate the basic results of the data collection activity of the IAPL Monitoring Committee, we list below the number of countries by region where the Committee has received credible reports of attacks on lawyers:
AFRICA: 35 (36 if the self-declared Republic of Somaliland is included), ASIA: 20, CARIBBEAN: 4 (includes Puerto Rico), CENTRAL AMERICA: 7, EUROPE: 15, MIDDLE EAST : 12 (includes Israel and Turkey), NORTH AMERICA: 2 (USA, Canada), PACIFIC: 7 (includes Australia and New Zealand), SOUTH AMERICA: 8.
As for African countries, we have recorded attacks from: Algeria; Angola; Botswana; Burkina Faso; Burundi; Cameroun; Comoros; Congo; Republic of (Congo-Brazzaville); Democratic Republic of Congo; Egypt; Equatorial Guinea; Eritrea; Guinea-Bissau; Kenya; Lesotho; Liberia; Libya; Mauritania; Morocco; Mozambique; Niger; Nigeria; Rwanda; Senegal; Somalia; Somaliland; Republic of South Africa; South Sudan; Sudan; Swaziland; Tanzania; The Gambia; Tunisia; Uganda; Zambia; and Zimbabwe.
There are several comments to be made on these figures. First, countries have differing degrees of “intensity” of attacks. Thus a country may be on the IAPL list because of a single credible report of an attack, as is the case in many of the African countries. Alternatively, a number of our listed countries have a high degree of intensity. Countries such as Egypt, Honduras, Pakistan, Philippines, Turkey and China would be in the high intensity category as there have been many reported attacks in these countries, and they are continuing often with impunity for the perpetrators of human rights abuses.
Second, we believe it is certainly the case that there are many more countries where attacks on lawyers have occurred. We just have not received information on attacks in those countries. That is a gap in our monitoring that we are seeking to improve through broadening our network of informants. Another factor that makes the data incomplete is what criminologists call “the dark figure of crime”. According to this well-established concept, there are many crimes that are never reported at the country level and therefore cannot be reported even if there is a reliable source. Crimes go unreported for many reasons and, surely, the same is true of the attacks on lawyers e.g. with regard to physical attacks there may be threats of retribution. In the case of non-physical attacks it may be the lawyer-victim does not even realize the attack has occurred, e.g. prosecutor’s tricks to prevent the lawyer from fulfilling his/her duty unbeknownst to the lawyer.
Egypt : a test case of repression against lawyers and international solidarity
Since President Sisi came to power in 2014 Egyptian lawyers have suffered waves of repression amidst a human rights crisis resulting from his campaign against Islamists. Lawyers have repeatedly been arrested and persecuted to force them to avoid political cases. At its peak in November 2015 more than 200 lawyers were behind bars.
Fortunately that number has decreased to a handful of reported cases as of September 2016. The best-known case is that of Malek Adly, a prominent human rights lawyer, founder of the Front for the Defence of Egyptian Protesters and Director of the Lawyers Network at the Egyptian Center for Social and Economic Rights (ECESR). Arrested on 5 May 2016 he endured solitary confinement until 28 August, when he was released despite a prosecution appeal. Adly has represented countless peaceful protesters and civil society organizations, and is leading a group of lawyers who launched a legal action against Egypt’s decision to transfer two Red Sea islands to Saudi Arabia. The State Administrative Court upheld the complainants’ case, thereby annulling the transfer of the islands. The government appealed.
He was accused of attempting to overthrow the ruling régime, affiliation to a banned organization, and broadcasting false news, inter alia, all of which he denied, although formal charges have not been laid. However, these serious charges could still be brought against him, resulting in a re-arrest. Adly was admitted to the prison hospital several times, and suffers severe health conditions. Lengthy pretrial detention – in some cases lasting between one to three years – has been used by the Sisi régime against dissidents, exceeding international legal standards.
In July the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Center in the U.S. submitted an urgent action and petition to the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention and an urgent action to the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture on behalf of Adly. Similarly, a number of international human rights organizations have taken up Adly’s cause, including the Observatory for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders, a partnership of the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH) and the World Organisation Against Torture (OMCT), the International Observatory of Lawyers in Danger (OIAD) and the European Human Rights Institute (IDHAE). They called for his immediate release and all charges to be dropped. A very high-profile Facebook-based support group has also been campaigning on his behalf : Free Malek Adly مالك عدلي حر More recently a number of international lawyers signed a petition calling for his release and for the charges to be dropped. It is now available online for additional signatures : https://www.change.org/p/egyptian-minister-of-the-interior-release-egyptian-lawyer-malek-adly
Adly’s wife and defence team filed a lawsuit against prison authorities and the Minister of Interior to end his solitary confinement. However, in a surprise move a court ordered his release on 25 August.
There has been other good news for Egyptian lawyers recently. On 13 August human rights lawyer Mahienour El-Massry who was jailed for “storming” an Alexandria police station in 2013 but has recently been released. She was initially sentenced to a two year sentence along with eight others on charges of “protesting without authorisation, damaging property” and “injuring policemen”. However a retrial in May 2015 saw the defendants’ sentence decreased to 15 months. While imprisoned, El-Massry was awarded the prestigious lawyers’ 2014 Ludovic Trarieux International Human Rights Award for her contributions to the defence of human rights. She was the second lawyer to be awarded the international award while in prison since Nelson Mandela in 1985.
We believe that the strong display of international solidarity in these cases has had a significant impact on the Sisi government and exemplifies the possibilities for the lawyers of the world to defend their foreign colleagues under attack.
The situation facing Egyptian lawyers remains very dangerous and alarming. It is important that in the case of Egypt (and other countries in Africa where similar government repression exists), that African lawyers, their organizations, Bar associations and human rights groups demonstrate their solidarity for their Egyptian colleagues, support the immediate release of those lawyers behind bars, and call for all charges to be dropped.
Has enough been done to defend lawyers?
The work done by the advocacy groups such as those which have authored this paper can cover a wide range of activities, in advocacy, support and solidarity. A great deal of time and energy is spent on recording and reporting attacks, passing resolutions at meetings of lawyers’ associations and writing to government ministers and international bodies about the situation of their foreign colleagues; attempting to pressure political parties, individual legislators and even governments to act positively in the matter; making visits to the country concerned, especially if lawyers are on trial, then publishing an account. These are not the only solidarity activities being carried out, as a visit to a number of groups’ websites would reveal various other programmes and activities, commissions, and research projects, but we believe that, in the main, short-term reactive initiatives are undertaken.
Is this enough? Have efforts to support lawyers been adequately coordinated? Have they been successful? With all due respect to those who have thrown themselves into the effort wholeheartedly, our answer to all three questions must be, we think probably not as successful as we would like. More needs to be done, more effectively. We say this with hesitancy as much has been done but, sadly, the killings continue and there appears to be a trend of increasing violence towards our colleagues. That certainly appears to be the case in Africa. We believe some new thinking, new methods and some new strategies should be developed.
Towards a strategic agenda
The basic question remains: what can be done to combat the onslaught on lawyers? Our research has highlighted a major gap. While there are many groups taking actions to support lawyers under threat, there is insufficient coordination of these efforts. Thus we suggest, as a first and urgent step, an International Summit Conference be called to bring together groups from around the world who are involved in actions to defend the lawyers. It would be expected to develop a strategic plan, emphasising coordination, planning and funding of an agenda to protect lawyers but, importantly, to develop strategies — short and long term — to reduce the dangers they face. The Conference would feature structured practical workshops to share our knowledge and experience in order to develop a collective capacity to support those who are at risk.
Such a Conference, (or perhaps initially a regional African Conference) bringing together a wide cross section of people and support groups, including but not limited to, lawyers, victims, and activists, would also have significant spin-offs, and would surely catch the attention of the major media and social media. Such publicity as we expect would follow, would bring before the world, in a focused way, the seriousness of the problem. It would put international pressure from a newly informed public opinion on governments and lawyers’ professional associations in countries where lawyers are at serious risk and, thus far, have not been given adequate protection.
In order to develop an agenda for discussion at such an event, we offer some ideas of how we in the movement to protect and defend lawyers, can express in a practical way our solidarity with lawyers threatened with attacks. Our suggestions are in addition to the usual legal approaches in dealing with human rights violations, national and international, that will be familiar to the lawyers of PALU and their practicing colleagues inside government institutions and in private practice. Some of the elements of a comprehensive programme of support could include:
1. One of the most effective ways to defend and protect lawyers being tried for their legal work is to have a “first responder” legal team of observers from another country, or region, travel immediately to the site of the trial in order to provide on the ground support and, where useful, legal/political advice and/or pressure on the prosecution. Such teams could be organised through PALU. There are models for this operating, for example in Europe and in The Philippines.
2. Establishment of an international network specifically dedicated to the defence of lawyers would be an important step. As indicated above, we lack information from many countries, therefore we lack accurate and comprehensive macro data on the killings and disappearances of lawyers, let alone other attacks. In order to encourage the public and governments to take the problem seriously and consistently, they need to know the extent of the carnage out there.
3. The establishment of a network of regional Centres for the Support of Lawyers Under Attack (to get the Centres started, perhaps they could be organized on a country basis.) PALU would be the obvious organisation to take the lead in getting the Centres operational. The purpose of the Centres: to monitor attacks on lawyers: collect, record, and analyse information specifically on attacks on lawyers. As the Centres develop they could provide commentary and publicity on the issue; such Centres could assist in organising, publicising and coordinating support activities in the region, such as country visits and reports back. These Centres might be organised by Bar Associations, NGOs, in an academic institution, or an alliance of such institutions.
4. Regional seminars and workshops on the problem, based on research and experience of combating the attacks. These could be organised by national or regional Centres mentioned above, but also through independent Human Rights Centres such as the Gulf Centre for Human Rights and the Asian Centre for Human Rights, or a university Human Rights Centre which may be connected with a Law Faculty. Many of the latter exist around the globe and there are various models that could be adopted.
5. An annual international lecture, widely publicised, by an outstanding human rights defender, not necessarily a lawyer, on the threats to lawyers, perhaps focusing on a different country each year, and perhaps to take place in a different country each year.
6. There has emerged in recent years an annual Day of the Endangered Lawyer (organized by the Day of the Endangered Lawyer Foundation), with activities in many countries on 24 January, especially protests of lawyers in robes in front of the designated country’s embassies and consulates. It would be an opportunity for African lawyers and their professional associations to commemorate the deaths and other attacks on lawyers in their countries and across the continent. With public events and media briefings, the problem could be brought to the attention of civil society and NGOs, religious institutions and other concerned groups and individuals, thus bringing pressure on governments to respond in a positive manner. In 2016 Honduras, with several hundred lawyers assassinated in recent years, was the country focused on. In 2017 it will be China, due to the severe and continuing crackdown on the entire community of human rights lawyers which involves lengthy detentions and serious human rights violations to the lawyers, their staff and families.
7. Support for speaking tours and visits of lawyers and other human rights defenders who have first-hand knowledge/experience of dealing with attacks on lawyers. Such visits could be to professional associations, academic campuses and other venues in the countries facing serious attacks/threats on lawyers (hereafter CFALs).
8. Visits by lawyers and human rights activists from CFALs to countries where they can have discussions with government officials, professional associations and other legal and activist groups, as well as access to the media. The purpose, to exchange information and experience, and also to build solidarity links with appropriate institutions, national and international.
9. Legal assistance whereby foreign lawyers work with local lawyers to try to get prosecutions and convictions, especially in countries where impunity exists for the perpetrators. This is not so much because locals need legal help, but because the involvement of a foreign lawyer might make government officials “try harder” under the gaze of the international legal community. There might be value in a programme of internships for law students and young lawyers as a part of such a legal assistance scheme. These suggestions, and others we are canvassing would, of course, have to be worked out with local lawyers.
10. Educational work with journalists is important. Killings of lawyers get far less publicity than those of journalists, although in some countries more lawyers are killed. Many journalists would be sympathetic given what is happening to their colleagues; we just need to give them accurate information in an easy-to-use format. We recognise that the major media is not free nor objective, and journalists operate within restrictions, nevertheless on this issue they may be able to assist in our project, even by using alternative forms of media.
11. Educational work with NGOs and civil society organisations is also important. These are organisations with the power to affect public opinion. They have an interest in the safety of lawyers in CFALs with whom they sometimes work and with whom they share the dangers of confronting human rights abuse.
12. Educational work with university law faculties, and others, could include the development of units in the curriculum (either undergraduate or postgraduate) on lawyers as heroes and victims of political systems and social structures, perhaps with the award of prizes for outstanding theses or publications arising from their study. In this way building awareness and solidarity with our future professional colleagues.
13. The creation, possibly under PALU leadership, of a monthly e-newsletter with information about the current attacks on lawyers across the continent, and other material relevant to the defence and protection of lawyers. There might also be interest in a series of working papers or reports on these phenomena.
14. Political work should be undertaken in all countries to convince political parties and governments to apply sanctions against countries where the attacks on lawyers are continuing without arrests, prosecutions and convictions. Statements of concern are not sufficient. The USA has laws restricting the supply of war materiel to countries where human rights violations are persistent and systemic. Such a policy, if enforced, could be effective in convincing governments that they need to take action to protect their lawyers and find and punish the guilty.
15. Through political work, making legislation which specifically protects lawyers. Brazil has legislation that provides a comprehensive range of rights specifically for lawyers. It would also be important, at least symbolically, to adopt in specific legislation the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers and to ensure that it is studied in law curricula. We would also see value in strengthening the understanding of the UN adopted Algiers Universal Declaration of Peoples’ Rights which culturally has great resonance to the African people. Many lawyers are attacked because they are defending peoples’ rights laid down in the Algiers Declaration.
16. A campaign should be developed for universal national “human rights budgets” with specific allocations for the protection of defenders (lawyers, journalists and others), with, of course, annual reports on the impact of such budget allocations.
17. Political work to seek governmental and/or parliamentary resolutions condemning the lack of protection of lawyers, but also requesting the institution of parliamentary hearings to expose the “protection gap” in CFALs especially. This could be an important step vis-à-vis countries vulnerable to a change in public opinion and government policy, e.g. in regard to aid and/or trade.
18. Juridical work which would see violating countries, and individuals, arraigned in the appropriate international tribunals, or in countries such as Spain which allows prosecution for extra-territorial offences.
19. An international People’s Tribunal would be an excellent vehicle for an investigation to deal comprehensively with attacks on lawyers as a major threat to a humane existence for those millions who often must rely on courageous lawyers to defend them from state power and the greed of those who employ, or are responsible for, assassins who attack lawyers. The Permanent People’s Tribunal has indicated a willingness to hold such a session. It has already been in discussions with several organisations on the possibility of such a project. African lawyers’ participation at this stage would be welcomed.
We are aware that the above programme, or even any part of it, would require considerable resources, financial and otherwise. One of the issues that needs to be considered urgently, and certainly at the suggested Conference, is the funding of the programmes and institutions we hope will be launched. Should a sound programme be developed, we expect that the lawyers of the wealthy countries will be able to find the money necessary. After all, with the global spread of lawyers from the USA and Europe, they have good reason to spend some of their profits seeking to ensure that they and their colleagues will be safe when working abroad.
Conclusion
We have abstained from a critical analysis of the fundamental causes of killings and other attacks on lawyers in Africa. That is a task for those who are working in the countries of that continent. Each country’s specific history, economic profile, cultural traditions, governmental institutions and policies, along with other factors, will have to be addressed in order to explain why the lawyers are being attacked and why at this juncture.
We regret we cannot be with you at the PALU Conference, but we stand in solidarity with you in your endeavours.
We wish you good luck in developing successful strategies for the defence of your professional colleagues in the future.
FOR MORE INFORMATION :
International Association of People’s Lawyers (IAPL)
Monitoring Committee on Attacks on Lawyers blog : https://defendlawyers.wordpress.com/
Blog email : jsrussell301254@gmail.com
Facebook : IAPL – International Association of People’s Lawyers
Website : http://iapl.net/
Avvocati minacciati / Endangered Lawyers
Website : http://www.endangeredlawyers.org/
Facebook : Avvocati minacciati / endangered Lawyers
Twitter : https://twitter.com/EndangeredL
International Observatory of Lawyers in Danger (OIAD)
Website: http://cnb.avocat.fr
Email : sedillot.avocat@gmail.com
European Bar Human Rights Institute (IDHAE)
Website : http://www.idhae.org/
Facebook : IDHAE
Day of the Endangered Lawyer Foundation
Website: http://dayoftheendangeredlawyer.eu/
Avocats Européens Démocrates/European Democratic Lawyers (AED/EDL)
Website: www.aeud.org
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aed.edl1987/