Posts Tagged ‘Jiang Tianyong’

Human Rights Defenders issues at the 42nd session of the UN Human Rights Council

September 5, 2019

As usual the International Service for Human Rights has come out with an excellent preview of  key issues on the agenda of the 42nd session of the UN Human Rights Council, starting on Monday 9 September 2019. And – also as usual – I provide here an extract of the key elements affecting human rights defenders more directly. The 42nd session will consider issues such as reprisals, indigenous peoples, death penalty, arbitrary detention and enforced disappearances. To stay up-to-date on the whole session: follow @ISHRglobal and #HRC42 on Twitter. Side events will the subject of a separate post.

Reprisals

On 18 September, the ASG for Human Rights will present his annual Reprisals Report  (report on the cooperation with the United Nations) in his capacity as UN senior official on reprisals. [see https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2016/10/05/assistant-secretary-general-andrew-gilmour-appointed-as-the-uns-focal-point-to-combat-reprisals-against-human-rights-defenders/]

It will be interesting to see the difference with the first such interactive dialogue in September 2018 [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2018/10/05/no-naming-and-shaming-on-reprisals-at-39th-human-right-council-session/]. Ghana, Fiji, Hungary, Ireland and Uruguay will present a draft resolution at this session which aims to strengthen the responses by the UN and States to end to acts of intimidation and reprisals.

The ISHR states that reports of cases of reprisals against those cooperating or seeking to cooperate with the UN not only continue, but grow. [see in this context one of my earliest posts, still sadly relevant: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2014/03/13/zero-tolerance-for-states-that-take-reprisals-against-hrds-lets-up-the-ante/]..

Other key thematic reports

The Council will consider on 13 September two reports on the death penalty: the report of the UN Secretary General on capital punishment and the implementation of the safeguards guaranteeing protection of the rights of those facing the death penalty, and the summary report of OHCHR on the biennial high-level panel discussion on human rights violations related to the use of the death penalty, in particular with respect to the rights to non-discrimination and equality. The Council will also consider a resolution on the issue.

The Council will hold dedicated debates and consider the reports of several mandates relating to civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, such as:

  • The Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery will present her report on current and emerging forms of slavery and country visit report to Italy on 9 September.
  • The Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances will present a report on public policies for effective investigation of disappearances, as well as its annual report and country visit report to Ukraine, on 11 September.
  • The Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence will present his report and country visit report to Sri Lanka on 11 September.
  • The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention will present its annual report and country visit report to Bhutan on 13 September.
  • The Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples will present her annual report and country visit reports to Ecuador and Timor-Leste on 18 September. The Council will also consider during the same debate three reports of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Country-specific developments

China: The harassment, surveillance, and mass detention of more than one million Uyghurs and other Turkic Muslims in the People’s Republic of China continues to be the most pressing issue with regards to China for the international community to address.

At the same time, China has continued its crackdown on human rights activists: Jiang Tianyong a victim of reprisals for his engagement with UN experts, has been ‘free’ for six months, but remains under heavy-handed surveillance. Citizen journalist Huang Qi was sentenced to 12 years, despite serious health concerns.[https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/07/30/chinas-cyber-dissident-huang-qi-get-12-years-jail/]. Grassroots activist Ji Sizun died in custody [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/07/15/in-memoriam-chinese-human-rights-defender-ji-sizun/] while Chen Jianfang, recipient of the Cao Shunli award, is being held incommunicado in an unknown location. [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2016/02/12/cao-shunli-a-profile-and-new-award-in-her-name/]

Saudi Arabia: The September session provides an invaluable opportunity for the Council and States to follow up on the joint statement delivered on behalf of 36 States by Iceland [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/07/22/why-iceland-led-the-un-resolution-on-the-philippines/] During the June session, a broad range of cross-regional States called for accountability and guarantees of non-recurrence during the discussion of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions’ report on the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi

ISHR calls on States to advancing a HRC resolution establishing a monitoring mechanism over the human rights violations in the country and calling explicitly for the immediate and unconditional release of the detained Saudi women human rights defenders and to drop all charges against them.

Egypt: ISHR remains deeply concerned about the situation of human rights defenders in Egypt ..ISHR recalls that defenders who engaged with Egypt’s UPR in 2014 have since then faced travel bans, closure of NGOs, assets freezing, and are facing up to 25 years imprisonment in the ‘NGO Foreign Funding case no. 173.’ ISHR also recalls that individuals and communities who engaged with the Special Rapporteur on the right to housing during her visit in September 2018 faced systematic reprisals. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/08/21/un-pulls-anti-torture-conference-from-egypt-to-seek-other-regional-venue/]

Venezuela: Several Venezuelan human rights organisations and international NGOs think  are calling on States to create an investigation. On 10 September, the High Commissioner is scheduled to provide an update to the Council, as a follow up to her report delivered in July. She is expected to outline further deterioration in the situation in the country.

Burundi: The Commission of Inquiry on Burundi will present its oral briefing on 17 September. Burundi continues to refuse to cooperate with the Council’s mechanisms. ISHR calls on States to renew the mandate of the Commission of Inquiry.

The Burundian Government suspended one of the last remaining independent civil society organisations (PARCEM), suspended the operating license of the Voice of America, revoked the license of the BBC, and forced at least 30 international non-governmental organisations to cease their activities. On 17 July 2019, the Ntahangwa Court of Appeal upheld the 32-year prison sentence against HRD Germain Rukuki. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2019/03/29/ngo-statement-condemns-new-irregularities-in-the-case-of-germain-rukuki-burundi/]

Interactive dialogue with the Special Rapporteur on Myanmar and the international fact-finding mission on the situation of human rights of Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar on 17 September as well as the presentation of the report of the Independent Investigative Mechanism on Myanmar on 10 September. Among other things, the FFM sheds light on the economic interests of Myanmar’s military and the strong connections between the Tatmadaw and businesses and investors.

Enhanced interactive dialogue on the report of the High Commissioner on the human rights situation in Nicaragua on 10 September

Interactive dialogue on the oral update by the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan on 16 September

Interactive dialogue on the updated written report of the Commission of Inquiry on Syria on 17 September

Interactive dialogue with the High Commissioner on the situation of human rights in Ukraine on 24 September

Interactive dialogue with the High Commissioner on the situation of human rights in Libya on 25 September

Adoption of Universal Periodic Review (UPR) reports: During this session, the Council will adopt the UPR working group reports on – inter alia – Albania, Côte d’Ivoire, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Nicaragua, and Qatar.  ISHR supports human rights defenders in their interaction with the UPR. It publishes briefing papers regarding the situation facing human rights defenders in some States under review. This session of the Council will provide an opportunity for the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Côte d’Ivoire to accept recommendations made in relation to human rights defenders, as proposed in ISHR’s briefing papers.

Council programme, appointments and resolutions

The President of the Human Rights Council has proposed a candidate for the mandate of the Independent Expert on the situation of human rights in the Central African Republic.

At the organisational meeting the following resolutions were already announced (States sponsoring the resolution in brackets) which are especially relevant to HRDs :

  1. Arbitrary detention (mandate renewal, France)
  2. Technical assistance and capacity-building for Yemen in the field of human rights (Arab Group)
  3. Contemporary forms of slavery (mandate renewal, United Kingdom)
  4. Cooperation with the United Nations, its representatives and mechanisms in the field of human rights – ‘the reprisals resolution’ (Fiji, Ghana, Hungary, Ireland, Uruguay).
  5. Human rights and indigenous peoples (mandate renewal of the SR, Guatemala, Mexico).
  6. Human rights and indigenous peoples (Guatemala, Mexico).
  7. Promoting international cooperation to support national human rights follow-up systems, processes and related mechanisms (Brazil, Paraguay).
  8. The question of the death penalty (Belgium, Benin, Costa Rica, France, Mexico, Mongolia, Republic of Moldova, Switzerland).
  9. World program on human rights education and training (Slovenia)
  10. Technical cooperation and capacity building in the field of human rights (Brazil, Honduras, Indonesia, Morocco, Norway, Qatar, Singapore, Thailand, Turkey).
  11. Human rights situation in Yemen (Belgium, Canada, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands)
  12. The human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic (France, Germany, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Netherlands, Qatar, Turkey, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)
  13. Situation of human rights in Burundi (European Union)
  14. Advisory services and technical assistance for Cambodia (Japan)
  15. The right to privacy in the digital age (Brazil, Austria, Germany, Lichtenstein, Mexico)
  16. Assistance to Somalia in the field of human rights (Somalia, United Kingdom)
  17. Technical assistance and capacity-building to improve human rights in the Sudan (African Group)
  18. The human rights situation in Venezuela (Argentina, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru)
  19. Situation of human rights of Rohingya Muslims and other minorities in Myanmar (the Organization of Islamic Cooperation)

——

https://www.ishr.ch/news/hrc42-key-issues-agenda-september-2019-session

 

Lawyers key to the rule of law – even China agrees but only lip service

June 26, 2019

Lawyers have an essential role in upholding the Constitution and realising the rule of law – at the Human Rights Council 41st session this week, even China agreed. So why does the Chinese government continue to harass, intimidate and persecute lawyers who defend human rights ask 4 NGOs on 25 June 2019: Lawyers for Lawyers, International Bar Association, International Service for Human Rights and Lawyer’s Rights Watch Canada. In a joint statement the NGOs call on the UN expert on independence of judges and lawyers, and the Council and its members, to press for accountability.

‘The Chinese delegation recognised the need for balance in regulation between lawyers’ and judges’ rights, on the one hand, and their professional responsibilities, on the other hand’, says Sarah M Brooks, Asia Advocate at ISHR. ‘But it is hard to take this claim seriously, as Chinese authorities continue to adopt  abusive laws and measures, using them as a “sledgehammer” to restrict fundamental freedoms’.

This includes in particular lawyer Jiang Tianyong, who – since his nominal release from prison on 28 February 2019 – has been subject to invasive surveillance, restrictions on his freedom of movement, and refusal of independent medical exams. Worse, he is unnecessarily and inhumanely kept from joining his family in the U.S. [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2017/11/21/jiang-tianyong-chinese-defender-of-defenders-sentenced-to-2-years-jail/]

The statement draws on research conducted by Chinese Human Rights Defenders and other partners into two ‘administrative measures’ that have had far-reaching consequences for lawyers on the ground.  The Measures on the Administration of Law Firms and Administrative Measures for the Practice of Law by Lawyers of Law Firms call on lawyers, law firms and regional bar associations not only to take measures to ensure that lawyers’ freedom of speech, both online and off, in professional and personal capacities, is not critical of the government. Furthermore, language added to one of the measures in 2018 specifically states that  ‘Law firms shall adhere to guidance of Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era, adhere to and strengthen the comprehensive leadership of the Party over the work of lawyers, persist in preserving the authority and uniform leadership of the Party with Comrade Xi Jinping as its core, make support for the Party’s leadership and support for socialist rule of law basic requirements for the profession, and increase the conscientiousness and resoluteness with which lawyers as a group walk the path of socialist rule of law with Chinese characteristics’.

As a result of making comments that were deemed critical of the Chinese Communist Party, from January 2017 to January 2019, groups have documented cases of at least 26 lawyers and three law firms that have been punished for their opinion or expression, or by association with lawyers. This includes well-known rights lawyers such as Yu Wensheng, Wang Yu, Xie Yanyi and, just last week, Liu Xiaoyuan. 

[for the massive crackdown in 2015, see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2015/07/29/the-remarkable-crackdown-on-lawyers-in-china-in-july-2015/]

 

—-

Full statement

Joint statement under Item 3: Interactive Dialogue with Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers and the Independent Expert on SOGI

24 June 2019

Mr. Vice President,

We thank the Special Rapporteur for his report. We wish to highlight that many of the trends of restriction he notes also apply to lawyers. For example, across China, repression of human rights lawyers and legal activists continues. They are disappeared, detained, and denied basic rule of law guarantees.

Lawyer Jiang Tianyong is one example. Although he served his sentence for ‘inciting subversion of the State’, he now lives under constant police surveillance and with a serious medical condition.

What was his so-called ‘crime’? Representing fellow lawyers in court, investigating black jails, speaking out for victims of human rights violations and meeting with UN officials.

Mr Special Rapporteur, we are concerned about Chinese government actions to imprison and disbar lawyers who do not adhere to official ideology. The Chinese delegation raised earlier the need to uphold the Constitution – we couldn’t agree more. But problematic regulations passed in 2016 allow authorities to, inter alia, shut down law firms if they refuse to dismiss lawyers who express critical views, or who advocate for clients or causes unpopular with the Communist Party of China.

China’s claims to ‘faithfully uphold the rule of law’ are true only in relation to national laws created to authorize such government action. Chairman Xi has stressed the Communist Party’s control over the legal system, and has used the law to repress and punish those mandated to uphold and protect rights.

Yu Wensheng, Sui Muqing, Zhou Shifeng, Xie Yanyi, Li Heping, Wang Yu, Liu Zhengqing and Liu Xiaoyuan are only 8 out of at least 27 documented cases of human rights lawyers whose licenses have been invalidated or revoked since 2016, simply for fulfilling their professional duties.

In her UPR follow-up letter to the government, the High Commissioner identified key areas for improvement, including ‘guaranteeing an independent judiciary, fair trials, and access to legal counsel, releasing all human rights defenders, including lawyers’.

We call on you, Mr Special Rapporteur, and on this Council, to insist that China immediately stop all forms of harassment and persecution of human rights lawyers, including through administrative means, and unconditionally release those arbitrarily deprived of their liberty.

Thank you.

Jiang Tianyong, Chinese defender of defenders, sentenced to 2 years jail

November 21, 2017

Jiang Tianyong, 46, who had taken on many high-profile cases including those of Falun Gong practitioners, Tibetan protesters and victims of the 2008 contaminated milk powder scandal, before being disbarred in 2009, received a two year jail sentence. He was convicted on the spurious grounds of “inciting subversion” on Tuesday. Jiang’s sentence is the most high-profile jailing since Xi confirmed his status as China’s most powerful leader in a generation at a Communist Party congress last month. Jiang’s family has been unable to contact him since his sudden disappearance last November en route from Beijing to Changsha, where he had gone to inquire about detained human rights lawyer Xie Yang.

Jiang Tianyong has long been infiltrated and influenced by anti-China forces and gradually formed the idea of overthrowing the existing political system of the country,” the judge said. The court said he had gone abroad for training on how to accomplish the goal and “applied for financial support from foreign anti-China forces”.

German Ambassador to China Michael Clauss expressed “serious concerns about the lawfulness of the legal proceedings”, saying in a statement the trial’s circumstances “certainly called into question the fairness of the verdict”. Germany will “continue to take an active interest in his fate,” he added.

The United Nations special rapporteur on human rights, Michel Forst, has said he feared Jiang’s previous disappearance was in part retaliation for the lawyer’s assistance to UN experts.

Jiang’s sentence was “a textbook example of the Chinese authorities’ systematic persecution of those who are brave enough to defend human rights in China today,” said Amnesty International China researcher William Nee. It was likely to have a “chilling effect” on other activists, since the evidence used against him was so minimal: critical social media comments, attendance of overseas trainings, and showing moral support to other human rights defenders facing trials.

Jiang’s wife, Jin Bianling, said none of the lawyers she had hired were allowed to see him and she only learned in August that the court had appointed one. “I contacted him continuously, but as soon as he heard I was Jiang Tianyong’s wife, he would immediately hang up the phone,” Jin, who fled to the US in 2013, told AFP by telephone. Four wives of lawyers detained in the 709 crackdown who came to show support were harassed by plainclothes agents and also denied entry in Changsha. “When I heard all the charges they listed against him, I felt my husband was very righteous. They made me greatly admire him,” she said. “I think history will remember what my husband has done.”

http://www.digitaljournal.com/news/world/chinese-human-rights-lawyers-jailed-for-two-years/article/508131

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/aug/22/chinese-activist-jiang-tianyong-subversion-trial-dismissed-as-sham

Liu Xiaobo: a giant human rights defender leaves a lasting legacy for China and the rest of the world

July 13, 2017

USA AI then mentions some of the many other HRDs who under the leadership of President Xi Jinping have suffered persecution:

Ilham Tohti, an economics professor at Minzu University of China in Beijing, was sentenced to life imprisonment for “separatism”. Amnesty International believes that he is in prison for writings posted on the Internet.[https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2016/10/11/hot-news-ilham-tohti-chinas-mandela-wins-2016-martin-ennals-award/]

Women’s rights activist Su Changlan was sentenced in March 2017 to three years in prison for “inciting subversion of state power.”[https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2017/03/08/amnesty-international-campaigns-with-7-women-who-refuse-to-wait-for-their-rights/]

Human rights lawyers like Jiang Tianyong have been detained, arrested and harassed by government authorities in the last several years. He was formally arrested for “subverting state power” after being detained in an unofficial detention facility for over six months. [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2017/06/01/human-rights-defenders-issues-on-the-agenda-of-the-next-35th-human-rights-council/]

The reaction of the Chinese government to criticism from abroad over Liu Xiaobo’s treatment is by the way typical. See e.g. in the Strait Times of 14 July: “Foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang also said China had lodged protests with “certain countries” for interfering in its “judicial sovereignty”…….”Conferring the prize to such a person goes against the purposes of this award. It’s a blasphemy of the peace prize”. [https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2012/12/06/china-and-its-amazing-sensitivity-on-human-rights-defenders/]

Source: Liu Xiaobo: A giant of human rights who leaves a lasting legacy for China and the world – Amnesty International USA

http://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/china-says-awarding-nobel-peace-prize-to-liu-xiaobo-was-blasphemy

Human Rights Defenders issues on the agenda of the next 35th Human Rights Council

June 1, 2017

The International Service for Human Rights (ISHR) in Geneva has published again its timely alert to the next Session of the UN Human Rights Council, from 6 to 23 June 2017. 

It is a rich document [https://www.ishr.ch/news/human-rights-council-key-issues-agenda-35th-session-june] and I list here only the items most directly related to Human Rights Defenders:

Thematic areas of interest:

Sexual orientation and gender identity

The first annual report of the Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity will be presented between 9:00 and 12:00am on Tuesday 6 June. Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Uruguay will organise an event on Advancing human rights protection and ending violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity on 9 June from 11:30-13:00 in Room IX.

Reprisals

In a recent letter to the President of the Human Rights Council, ISHR called for urgent attention to be given to cases of reprisals which have not been followed up by the Human Rights Council. One of the most serious instances of reprisal is against Chinese human rights defender Cao Shunli, who died in detention on 14 March 2014 after being detained for her engagement in UN human rights mechanisms. Despite her case being communicated with the Bureau during the three years following her death, there has been no independent investigation or adequate response. ISHR looks forward to consolidating the advances made by the recent appointment of Assistant Secretary General Andrew Gilmour to receive, consider and respond to allegations of reprisals. Acts of intimidation and reprisal against human rights defenders seeking to cooperate with the UN constitute violations of international human rights law and undermine the human rights system. The Human Rights Council should respond with appropriate gravity to reprisals and follow-up past cases during its 35th session. [for my many posts on reprisals see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/reprisals/]

Business and human rights

The mandate of the Working Group on human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises will be up for renewal during the session. The report of the Working Group will be considered by the Council, in addition to reports of country missions to Mexico and the Republic of Korea.

The Working Group will also present a study on best practices and how to improve the effectiveness of cross-border cooperation between States with respect to law enforcement on the issue of business and human rights, and a report on public procurement (not yet available at time of writing). Over the past three years, the Working Group has increasingly recognised the role of human rights defenders in ensuring business respect for human rights, and the specific challenges faced by defenders working on business and human rights issues, as exemplified by a dedicated workshop on this topic during its last session in May 2017. Since the last renewal of the mandate in 2014, the Working Group has also made increasing use of its ability to confront States and companies with allegations of human rights violations. From just 16 such communications in 2014 the Working Group has increased to 21 in 2015 and 42 in 2016. Both of these trends should be recognised and encouraged by the resolution renewing the mandate of the Working Group.

Women human rights defenders and women’s rights

The annual full day discussion on the human rights of women will take place on Tuesday 13 June from 9:00 to 12:00 and from 15:00 to 18:00. It will focus on engaging men and boys in responding to and preventing violence against women and girls. Engaging with men and boys to combat violence and discrimination against women and girls is essential to efforts to prevent and eliminate all forms of discrimination and violence against them. This should include challenging the harmful gender stereotypes and negative social norms, attitudes and behaviours that underlie and perpetuate such violence.  Equally, it is important that the Council’s discussions and resolutions in this area  recognise the critical role of women human rights defenders (WHRDs) and organisations led by women and girls as rights holders and agents of change. They should be involved and consulted in the planning, design, implementation and monitoring of legislation, policies and programmes, including programs aimed at engaging men and boys.

ISHR will support joint advocacy on the resolutions on violence against women and discrimination against women, and on the ‘protection of the family’. The latter resolution will focus on ‘the rights of older persons in the context of family.’ States must ensure that this resolution upholds universal principles of human rights based on equality and non-discrimination. Many household structures and family forms exist across the world, facing particular situations and challenges that require tailored policy responses…

Cooperation of States with Special Procedures

There remains a consistent lack of State cooperation with Special Procedures, as demonstrated by the number of communications sent by the experts that have not received a State response, recorded in the Joint Communications Report published at every session of the Human Rights Council. ISHR welcomes recent developments in making communications more accessible, including the searchable database of communications, but continues to express concern that access to information regarding specific cases and State replies is still hard to find for victims and authors. [see my post from many years ago: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20140603192912-22083774–crime-should-not-pay-in-the-area-of-international-human-rights]

Country specific developments

China: The Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Prof Philip Alston, will present the report from his country visit to China. Prof Alston was tailed by State security and was prevented from meeting with civil society during his visit. As a result, the country report stresses the necessity of civil society in holding the Chinese Government accountable to human rights standards. The country visit was further undermined by reprisals. Following a meeting with Prof Alston, disbarred human rights lawyer Jiang Tianyong disappeared. His family was informed of his detention nearly one month later. Despite UN experts calling for an investigation into his disappearance, Jiang remains in ‘residential surveillance in a designated location’. Prof Alston’s report will be a key opportunity to discuss the ongoing crackdown on human rights defenders and concerns the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights for civil society in China.  [see also: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/tag/jiang-tianyong/]

Burundi The commission of inquiry on Burundi will present an oral update on 14 and 15 June. ISHR remains concerned by consistent and deliberate lack of cooperation with human rights mechanisms in Burundi. The country continues to refuse to cooperate with UN Human Rights Council’s Independent Experts and despite the international community’s efforts to mitigate a human rights crisis, the situation continues to deteriorate. ISHR calls on the Burundian authorities to cease attacks against journalists and defenders and to cooperate with the UN commission of inquiry and implement the recommendations from both UN and African Commission reports.  [see inter alia: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2016/02/08/what-is-burundi-doing-in-the-un-human-rights-council/]

Other country situations where human rights defenders will surely come up: 

  • The interactive dialogue on the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), from 12:00 to 15:00 on Tuesday 20 June.
  • The interactive dialogue with the Independent Expert on Côte d’Ivoire will take place from 9:00 to 12:00 on Tuesday 20 June.
  • ISHR has joined a coalition of civil society organisations in urging State delegations to the Human Rights Council to express concern about the ongoing human rights crisis in Ethiopia.

Council programme, appointments and resolutions

Organisational meeting. The President of the Human Rights Council once again urged States to combat reprisals during the session. ‘As part of a constructive working atmosphere, it is in our common interest to have a climate of trust and security, whereby States ensure the appropriate protection against any acts of intimidation or reprisals against individuals and groups that cooperate or have cooperated with the United Nations, their representative and human rights mechanisms,’ he stated.

Appointment of mandate holders The President of the Human Rights Council has proposed candidates for the following four vacancies of mandate holders to be filled at this session:

  1. Independent Expert on human rights and international solidarity [HRC resolution 26/6]
  2. Special Rapporteur on minority issues [HRC resolutions 25/5 and 34/6]
  3. Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants [HRC resolution 26/19]
  4. Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism [HRC resolution 31/3]

Panel discussions

During each Council session, panel discussions are held to provide member States and NGOs opportunities to hear from subject-matter experts and raise questions. Among the 4 panel discussions scheduled for this session:

Resolutions to be presented to the Council’s 35th session

At the organisational meeting on 22 May 2017 the following resolutions were announced (States sponsoring the resolution in brackets):

  • Resolution for the extension of the mandate on the Working Group on business and human rights (Norway and core group of Russia, Argentina and Ghana)
  • Resolution on accelerating efforts to eliminate all forms of violence against women (Canada)
  • Resolution on discrimination against women (Colombia, Mexico)
  • Resolution on the protection of the human rights of migrants (Mexico)
  • Resolution on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism (Mexico)
  • Resolution on the human rights situation in the Syrian Arab Republic (France, Germany, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UK and USA )
  • Resolution on the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, jurors and assessors, and the independence of lawyers (Australia, Botswana, the Maldives, Mexico, Thailand, Hungary)
  • Resolution for renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on Independence and impartiality of the judiciary, jurors and assessors, and the independence of lawyers (Hungary)
  • Resolution for the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions (Sweden)
  • Resolution for the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Belarus(EU)
  • Resolution for the renewal of the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights (France, Albania, Chile, Morocco, Senegal, Romania, Philippines, Peru)

For the the guide to the 34th session see: https://humanrightsdefenders.blog/2017/02/24/34th-human-rights-council-ishr-guide-to-key-issues-for-human-rights-defenders/

 

CSM piece on lawyers as HRDs in China gives a fuller picture

May 22, 2012

With all the attention now focussed on Chen Guangcheng, the blind legal activist, this article of 21 May by Peter Ford, staff writer at the CSM, is most welcome. It describes the extremely difficult circumstances under which lawyers and legal activists have to work, explaining the difference between the two categories. It starts with describing the case of  Jiang Tianyong, who went to visit his friend Chen Guangcheng, soon after he had emerged from the US embassy.

Last year, as authorities cracked down on lawyers in the wake of the Arab Spring, Jiang “disappeared” for two months. He was “taken to some secret places, beaten, criticized, and brainwashed” by police officers, he recalls. Landlords have bowed to official pressure and evicted him five times from different homes, Jiang says. He has been subjected to several periods of house arrest; his wife and children have been harassed; guards have sealed his front door shut; and once, in a particularly petty act, they locked his wife’s bicycle, he says. And he lost his license to practice law in 2009.

“Human rights lawyers face a perilous life in China,” says John Kamm, a human rights activist who heads Duihua, which works on behalf of political prisoners in China. “They face many barriers.”

When lawyers are beaten, “disappeared,” or jailed, their plight generally attracts wide attention. Far more often, though, says Wang Songlian, a researcher with the Hong Kong based China Human Rights Defenders, it is “unqualified” legal advocates – such as Chen – who are abused for taking cases the government regards as sensitive. “There are probably dozens of them in jail, most of whom are not well known,” she says.

Qualified lawyer’s status gives them a measure of protection, but they are vulnerable to all kinds of official pressure. Crucially, they are obliged to renew their licenses with their local bar association each year – a hurdle Jiang failed to surmount in 2009. This means most lawyers pay attention when the Justice Ministry or the bar association issues “guidance” or “opinions” that they do not take sensitive cases, or that they handle them in a certain way, says Eva Pils, a legal expert at the Centre for Rights and Justice at the Chinese University of Hong Kong.

If they don’t, she says, the authorities often warn the head of a recalcitrant lawyer’s firm that his business risks trouble. “At the point when it is felt that neither the Ministry of Justice nor the bar association nor a lawyer’s firm can control him, the security apparatus gets involved,” Professor Pils says.

Human rights lawyer Pu Zhiqiang says that “99 percent of lawyers will be affected by this sort of pressure.” He adds, “There is no organization in China supporting lawyers doing pro bono work, so very few will take it on because of all the trouble it gets you in.” The pressure on lawyers has been mounting for several years, says Pils, amid “fears that the [ruling Communist] Party might lose control over lawyers, who are not oriented to upholding party rule, but toward working for clients.”

In 2008, the judicial authorities proclaimed the “Three Supremes” doctrine, according to which judges were told to uphold the cause of the Communist Party, the interests of the people, and the Constitution and the law, in that order. Earlier this year, the Justice Ministry published a regulation requiring newly licensed lawyers to swear an oath of loyalty to the party. Despite the difficulties he and his colleagues face, Pu is optimistic. “Though the authorities would like to control the situation, society is getting more open, and I think it will continue to do so,” he says.

Twenty years ago, Mr. Kamm says, “there was no such thing as a [human] rights defender in China. Now we have a very different situation. Nothing encourages anyone to take on a human rights case, but the fact that there are people doing it is tremendously heartening.”

RELATED 6 famous dissidents in China